Note 4—Marketable securities:


	Market value		Cost basis		Unrealized gains/ (losses), net
	(In millions)
December 31, 2011:
Current assets:
Mutual funds	$	20.9	$	21.1	$	(.2	)
Other		1.6		1.6		—

Total	$	22.5	$	22.7	$	(.2	)

Noncurrent assets:
The Amalgamated Sugar Company LLC	$	250.0	$	250.0	$	—
TIMET common stock		97.7		86.0		11.7
Other		6.4		6.5		(.1	)

Total	$	354.1	$	342.5	$	11.6

December 31, 2012:
Current assets	$	.9	$	.9	$	—

Noncurrent assets:
The Amalgamated Sugar Company LLC	$	250.0	$	250.0	$	—
Other		6.8		6.7		.1

Total	$	256.8	$	256.7	$	.1


	Fair Value Measurements
	Total		Quoted Prices in Active Markets (Level 1)		Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level 2)		Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
	(In millions)
December 31, 2011:
Current assets:
Mutual funds	$	20.9	$	20.9	$	—	$	—
Other		1.6		—		1.6		—

Total	$	22.5	$	20.9	$	1.6	$	—

Noncurrent assets:
The Amalgamated Sugar Company LLC	$	250.0	$	—	$	—	$	250.0
TIMET common stock		97.7		97.7		—		—
Mutual funds and other common stocks		6.4		2.6		3.8		—

Total	$	354.1	$	100.3	$	3.8	$	250.0

December 31, 2012:
Current assets	$	.9	$	—	$	.9	$	—

Noncurrent assets:
The Amalgamated Sugar Company LLC	$	250.0	$	—	$	—	$	250.0
Mutual funds and common stocks		6.8		3.5		3.3		—

Total	$	256.8	$	3.5	$	3.3	$	250.0

Amalgamated Sugar. Prior to 2010, we transferred control of the refined sugar operations previously conducted by our wholly-owned subsidiary, The Amalgamated Sugar Company, to Snake River Sugar Company, an Oregon agricultural cooperative formed by certain sugar beet growers in Amalgamated’s areas of operations. Pursuant to the transaction, we contributed substantially all of the net assets of our refined sugar operations to The Amalgamated Sugar Company LLC, a limited liability company controlled by Snake River, on a tax-deferred basis in exchange for a non-voting ownership interest in the LLC. The cost basis of the net assets we transferred to the LLC was approximately $34 million. When we transferred control of our operations to Snake River in return for our interest in the LLC, we recognized a gain in earnings equal to the difference between $250 million (the fair value of our investment in the LLC as evidenced by its $250 million redemption price, as discussed below) and the $34 million cost basis of the net assets we contributed to the LLC, net of applicable deferred income taxes. Therefore, the cost basis of our investment in the LLC is $250 million. As part of this transaction, Snake River made certain loans to us aggregating $250 million. These loans are collateralized by our interest in the LLC. See Notes 9 and 15.

We and Snake River share in distributions from the LLC up to an aggregate of $26.7 million per year (the “base” level), with a preferential 95% share going to us. To the extent the LLC’s distributions are below this base level in any given year, we are entitled to an additional 95% preferential share of any future annual LLC distributions in excess of the base level until the shortfall is recovered. Under certain conditions, we are entitled to receive additional cash distributions from the LLC. At our option, we may require the LLC to redeem our interest in the LLC, and the LLC has the right to redeem, at their option, our interest in the LLC beginning in 2027. The redemption price is generally $250 million plus the amount of certain undistributed income allocable to us. If we require the LLC to redeem our interest in the LLC, Snake River has the right to accelerate the maturity of and call our $250 million loans from Snake River.

The LLC Company Agreement contains certain restrictive covenants intended to protect our interest in the LLC, including limitations on capital expenditures and additional indebtedness of the LLC. We also have the ability to temporarily take control of the LLC if our cumulative distributions from the LLC fall below specified levels, subject to satisfaction of certain conditions imposed by Snake River’s current third-party senior lenders.

Prior to 2010, Snake River agreed that the annual amount of distributions we receive from the LLC would exceed the annual amount of interest payments we owe to Snake River on our $250 million in loans from Snake River by at least $1.8 million. If we receive less than the required minimum amount, certain agreements we previously made with Snake River and the LLC, including a reduction in the amount of cumulative distributions that we must receive from the LLC in order to prevent us from becoming able to temporarily take control of the LLC, would retroactively become null and void and we would be able to temporarily take control of the LLC if we so desired. Through December 31, 2012, Snake River and the LLC maintained the applicable minimum required levels of cash flows to us.

We report the cash distributions received from the LLC as dividend income. We recognize distributions when they are declared by the LLC, which is generally the same month we receive them, although in certain cases distributions may be paid on the first business day of the following month. See Note 15. The amount of such future distributions we will receive from the LLC is dependent upon, among other things, the future performance of the LLC’s operations. Because we receive preferential distributions from the LLC and we have the right to require the LLC to redeem our interest for a fixed and determinable amount beginning at a fixed and determinable date, we account for our investment in the LLC as a marketable security carried at its cost basis of $250 million. The cost basis is also the fair value of our investment determined using Level 3 inputs as the $250 million redemption price of our investment in the LLC as well as the amount of our debt owed to Snake River Company that is collateralized by our investment in the LLC. There has been no change to the fair value of our Amalgamated Sugar investment during 2010, 2011 or 2012. We do not expect to report a gain on the redemption at the time our LLC interest is redeemed, as the redemption price of $250 million is expected to equal the carrying value of our investment in the LLC at the time of redemption.

TIMET. At December 31, 2011, we, directly and through our ownership in NL and Kronos, held approximately 6.5 million, or 3.7%, of the outstanding common stock of TIMET, and Contran, Mr. Harold Simmons and persons and other entities related to Mr. Simmons (including us) owned a majority of TIMET’s outstanding common stock. We accounted for our investment in TIMET common stock as available-for-sale marketable securities, the fair value of which is determined using Level 1 inputs because TIMET is actively traded on the NYSE. At December 31, 2011, the quoted market price of TIMET common stock was $14.98. In December 2012, we sold all of our shares of TIMET common stock for $107.6 million ($16.50 per share) pursuant to a cash tender offer by a third party, and all of our affiliates also sold their shares of TIMET common stock for the same price. Securities transactions in 2012 consist of a $21.6 million pre-tax gain we recognized on the sale of these TIMET shares.

Mutual funds. During 2011, we held investments in various mutual funds which have a primary investment objective of holding corporate and government debt securities from U.S. and other markets. These funds had daily liquidity and were held for the temporary investment of cash available for our operations in order to generate a higher return than would have been available if such funds were invested in an asset qualifying for classification as a cash equivalent, and accordingly we classified our investments in these mutual funds as a current asset. The fair value of these securities was generally determined using Level 1 inputs because the mutual funds were actively traded. These funds were liquidated for cash proceeds in the first quarter of 2012.

Other. The fair value of our other marketable securities are either determined using Level 1 inputs (because the securities are actively traded) or determined using Level 2 inputs (because although these securities are traded, in many cases the market is not active and the year-end valuation is generally based on the last trade of the year, which may be several days prior to December 31).