Bridgestone 2002 Annual Report Download - page 47

45
(c) Overseas sales
Overseas sales by area and percentage of overseas sales over consolidated net sales for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000
are as follows:
Amount Percentage
Thousands of
Millions of yen U.S. dollars %
2002 2001 2000 2002 2002 2001 2000
Areas:
The Americas ¥976,863 ¥914,856 ¥ 821,304 $8,147,315 43.5% 42.9% 40.9%
Europe 248,228 227,328 205,805 2,070,292 11.0 10.7 10.3
Other 283,021 235,249 221,076 2,360,475 12.6 11.0 11.0
Overseas sales ¥1,508,112 ¥1,377,433 ¥1,248,185 $12,578,082 67.1% 64.6% 62.2%
Net sales ¥2,247,769 ¥2,133,825 ¥2,006,902 $18,747,031 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Major countries and areas included in each geographic area are as follows:
The Americas: United States, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, etc.
Europe: Germany, United Kingdom, France, Italy, Spain, etc.
Other: Asia Pacific, Middle East, Africa, etc.
BFAH (renamed BSA on January 1, 2003) and/or certain of its
subsidiaries (collectively “BFA”) are defendants in numerous prod-
uct liability suits and claims seeking compensatory and, in some
cases, punitive damages based on allegations that death, personal
injury, property damage and/or other loss resulted from accidents
caused by tire tread separations, and the Company has been named
as a defendant in some of those cases. Many of these cases involve
certain Firestone Radial ATX, ATX II, and Wilderness AT tires
that either were part of BFA’s voluntary safety recall that was
announced in August 2000 (and completed in August 2001) or
were under investigation by the U.S. National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (“NHTSA”), which has now closed all inves-
tigations of BFA’s products. Many cases also name the Ford Motor
Company (“Ford”) as a co-defendant, based on various allegations
related to the Ford Explorer (the vehicle involved in many of the
alleged accidents). Some of the cases filed in U.S. courts involve
accidents that occurred outside the U.S., and during 2002, BFA
and Ford sustained several adverse rulings in their efforts to
require that the resolution of certain such cases take place in the
countries in which the accidents took place. However, both compa-
nies continue to seek such relief, including reversals, in appropriate
cases. In product liability personal injury cases, BFA intends to
continue offering reasonable settlements and defending its position
aggressively where such settlements are not possible.
Various purported class action lawsuits have also been filed
against BFA, generally seeking expansion of the August 2000
recall or relief for alleged economic losses sustained because of
tires either recalled or investigated by the NHTSA or the manner of
the recall’s implementation, and the Company has been named as a
defendant in some of those cases. Many also seek punitive damages
or injunctive relief. Most of these lawsuits were filed on behalf of
individuals who have never been in an accident related to such tires.
In May 2002, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
overturned a trial court ruling certifying classes against BFA, the
Company and Ford in the consolidated federal cases and, in
January 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the plain-
tiffs’ appeal. Plaintiffs have also filed purported class actions in
several state jurisdictions. In addition, state courts in Illinois and
South Carolina have certified state-wide classes against BFA and
the Company. BFA and the Company intend to vigorously defend
each of the certified and purported class action lawsuits in the
absence of reasonable settlement opportunities.
In fiscal years 2002 and 2001, BFA has paid $245 million and
$479 million, respectively, for the direct costs of voluntary tire
recall and for product liability suits and claims, class actions and
the Attorneys General settlements, net of proceeds from product
liability insurance recoveries. As a result of the payments, as of
December 31, 2002 and 2001, BFA has recorded liabilities for
matters related to the voluntary tire recall and resulting litigation
amounting to $285 million and $530 million, respectively.
There can be no assurance that product liability suits and claims
and class action lawsuits will be resolved as currently envisioned
and, accordingly, the ultimate liability could be higher than the
recorded liability. However, in the opinion of BFA management,
the ultimate disposition of these product liability suits and claims
and class action lawsuits could possibly be material to the results of
operations in any one accounting period but will not have a materi-
al adverse effect on the financial position or liquidity of the
Company’s Americas operation.
In November 2001, the Attorneys General of the fifty states,
the District of Columbia, the Virgin Islands, and the Common-
wealth of Puerto Rico completed their investigations of possible
violations by BFA of their respective state consumer protection
and/or other laws relating to the sale of tires that were the
subject of the August 2000 recall and related issues. Pursuant
to a settlement in 2001, BFA paid the Attorneys General the
NOTE 16—VOLUNTARY TIRE RECALL COSTS AND LEGAL LIABILITIES