SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
Quarterly report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2003
Commission File Number: 0-27008
Schlotzskys, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
Texas |
|
74-2654208 |
|
|
(State or other jurisdiction of |
|
(IRS Employer |
|
203 Colorado Street, Suite 600, Austin, Texas 78701
(Address of principal executive offices)
(512) 236-3800
(Registrants telephone number)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ý No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o No ý
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuers classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.
Class |
|
Shares Outstanding at August 6, 2003 |
Common Stock, no par value |
|
7,331,999 |
SCHLOTZSKYS, INC.
Index to Form 10-Q
Quarter Ended June 30, 2003
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
SCHLOTZSKYS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
June 30, |
|
December 31, |
|
||
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
|
|
||
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
||
Current Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
||
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
780,227 |
|
$ |
678,895 |
|
Accounts receivable, net: |
|
|
|
|
|
||
Royalties |
|
828,866 |
|
650,376 |
|
||
Brands |
|
1,072,845 |
|
1,269,759 |
|
||
Other |
|
1,416,015 |
|
1,332,990 |
|
||
Refundable income taxes |
|
170,180 |
|
1,837,628 |
|
||
Prepaids, inventories and other assets |
|
1,282,396 |
|
1,356,516 |
|
||
Real estate held for sale |
|
3,963,230 |
|
5,167,563 |
|
||
Current portion of notes receivable |
|
782,192 |
|
582,926 |
|
||
Deferred tax asset |
|
2,557,027 |
|
2,275,941 |
|
||
Total current assets |
|
12,852,978 |
|
15,152,594 |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Property, equipment and leasehold improvements, net |
|
41,009,134 |
|
39,709,461 |
|
||
Notes receivable, net, less current portion |
|
8,654,581 |
|
11,349,705 |
|
||
Investments |
|
1,701,922 |
|
1,852,765 |
|
||
Intangible assets, net |
|
65,332,296 |
|
65,308,249 |
|
||
Goodwill, net |
|
3,192,342 |
|
2,985,679 |
|
||
Deferred tax asset |
|
165,739 |
|
|
|
||
Other noncurrent assets |
|
918,051 |
|
1,168,029 |
|
||
Total assets |
|
$ |
133,827,043 |
|
$ |
137,526,482 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
||
Current Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
||
Short-term debt |
|
$ |
1,375,000 |
|
$ |
|
|
Current maturities of long-term debt |
|
8,630,571 |
|
7,441,120 |
|
||
Accounts payable |
|
4,407,075 |
|
2,841,607 |
|
||
Accrued liabilities |
|
5,955,883 |
|
3,812,727 |
|
||
Deferred revenue, current portion |
|
224,584 |
|
234,552 |
|
||
Total current liabilities |
|
20,593,113 |
|
14,330,006 |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Long-term debt, less current portion |
|
40,669,395 |
|
46,063,599 |
|
||
Deferred revenue, less current portion |
|
1,530,524 |
|
1,597,443 |
|
||
Deferred tax liability |
|
|
|
1,216,109 |
|
||
Total liabilities |
|
62,793,032 |
|
63,207,157 |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Commitments and contingencies |
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Stockholders Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
||
Preferred stock, Class C, no par value, 1,000,000 shares authorized, none issued |
|
|
|
|
|
||
Common stock, no par value, 30,000,000 shares authorized, 7,509,412 shares and 7,496,778 shares issued at June 30, 2003 and December 31, 2002, respectively |
|
63,952 |
|
63,826 |
|
||
Additional paid-in capital |
|
58,170,617 |
|
58,122,469 |
|
||
Retained earnings |
|
13,642,598 |
|
16,976,186 |
|
||
Treasury stock (189,525 shares at June 30, 2003 and December 31, 2002, respectively), at cost |
|
(843,156 |
) |
(843,156 |
) |
||
Total stockholders equity |
|
71,034,011 |
|
74,319,325 |
|
||
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
133,827,043 |
|
$ |
137,526,482 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the condensed consolidated financial statements.
1
SCHLOTZSKYS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(Unaudited)
|
|
Three months ended |
|
Six months ended |
|
||||||||
|
|
June 30, |
|
June 30, |
|
June 30, |
|
June 30, |
|
||||
Revenue: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Royalties |
|
$ |
4,285,230 |
|
$ |
5,264,312 |
|
$ |
8,589,118 |
|
$ |
10,383,799 |
|
Franchise fees |
|
3,333 |
|
42,000 |
|
3,333 |
|
62,000 |
|
||||
Developer fees |
|
44,228 |
|
60,034 |
|
94,387 |
|
120,067 |
|
||||
Restaurant sales |
|
8,000,609 |
|
8,269,362 |
|
15,612,838 |
|
16,140,254 |
|
||||
Brand contribution |
|
1,708,957 |
|
1,991,130 |
|
3,360,062 |
|
3,874,157 |
|
||||
Other fees and revenue |
|
219,390 |
|
276,294 |
|
432,039 |
|
568,679 |
|
||||
Total revenue |
|
14,261,747 |
|
15,903,132 |
|
28,091,777 |
|
31,148,956 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Service costs: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Royalties |
|
667,118 |
|
1,106,100 |
|
1,330,910 |
|
2,241,368 |
|
||||
Franchise fees |
|
|
|
15,955 |
|
|
|
25,955 |
|
||||
|
|
667,118 |
|
1,122,055 |
|
1,330,910 |
|
2,267,323 |
|
||||
Restaurant operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Cost of sales |
|
2,348,501 |
|
2,311,986 |
|
4,520,121 |
|
4,508,120 |
|
||||
Personnel and benefits |
|
3,445,067 |
|
3,292,578 |
|
6,810,228 |
|
6,461,889 |
|
||||
Operating expenses |
|
2,202,095 |
|
1,869,095 |
|
4,104,342 |
|
3,635,994 |
|
||||
|
|
7,995,663 |
|
7,473,659 |
|
15,434,691 |
|
14,606,003 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Equity loss on investments |
|
83,693 |
|
48,074 |
|
150,843 |
|
78,294 |
|
||||
General and administrative |
|
6,712,589 |
|
4,835,390 |
|
11,783,304 |
|
9,315,277 |
|
||||
Depreciation and amortization |
|
1,282,595 |
|
1,086,438 |
|
2,532,001 |
|
2,169,731 |
|
||||
Total expenses |
|
16,741,658 |
|
14,565,616 |
|
31,231,749 |
|
28,436,628 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Income (loss) from operations |
|
(2,479,911 |
) |
1,337,516 |
|
(3,139,972 |
) |
2,712,328 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Other: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Interest income |
|
103,609 |
|
94,618 |
|
207,257 |
|
312,061 |
|
||||
Interest expense |
|
(1,009,968 |
) |
(655,436 |
) |
(2,025,873 |
) |
(1,257,962 |
) |
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Income (loss) before provision (credit) for income taxes |
|
(3,386,270 |
) |
776,698 |
|
(4,958,588 |
) |
1,766,427 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Provision (credit) for income taxes |
|
(1,119,000 |
) |
288,000 |
|
(1,625,000 |
) |
650,000 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(2,267,270 |
) |
$ |
488,698 |
|
$ |
(3,333,588 |
) |
$ |
1,116,427 |
|
Earnings per share-basic |
|
$ |
(0.31 |
) |
$ |
0.07 |
|
$ |
(0.46 |
) |
$ |
0.15 |
|
Earnings per share-diluted |
|
$ |
(0.31 |
) |
$ |
0.07 |
|
$ |
(0.46 |
) |
$ |
0.15 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the condensed consolidated financial statements.
2
SCHLOTZSKYS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
(Unaudited)
|
|
Common Stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
Number of |
|
Stated Capital |
|
Additional |
|
Retained |
|
Treasury |
|
Total |
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
Balance, January 1, 2002 |
|
7,463,990 |
|
$ |
63,498 |
|
$ |
57,986,546 |
|
$ |
17,175,234 |
|
$ |
(823,242 |
) |
$ |
74,402,036 |
|
Issuance of common stock in connection with employee stock purchase plan |
|
16,467 |
|
165 |
|
66,726 |
|
|
|
|
|
66,891 |
|
|||||
Treasury stock purchases (3,225 shares) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(19,914 |
) |
(19,914 |
) |
|||||
Options exercised |
|
16,321 |
|
163 |
|
61,889 |
|
|
|
|
|
62,052 |
|
|||||
Tax benefit from employee stock transactions |
|
|
|
|
|
7,308 |
|
|
|
|
|
7,308 |
|
|||||
Net loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(199,048 |
) |
|
|
(199,048 |
) |
|||||
Balance, December 31, 2002 |
|
7,496,778 |
|
63,826 |
|
58,122,469 |
|
16,976,186 |
|
(843,156 |
) |
74,319,325 |
|
|||||
Issuance of common stock in connection with employee stock purchase plan |
|
12,634 |
|
126 |
|
35,956 |
|
|
|
|
|
36,082 |
|
|||||
Issuance of employee stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
12,192 |
|
|
|
|
|
12,192 |
|
|||||
Net loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,333,588 |
) |
|
|
(3,333,588 |
) |
|||||
Balance, June 30, 2003 |
|
7,509,412 |
|
$ |
63,952 |
|
$ |
58,170,617 |
|
$ |
13,642,598 |
|
$ |
(843,156 |
) |
$ |
71,034,011 |
|
PREFERRED STOCK
Authorized 1,000,000 Class C shares, no par value; no shares outstanding at June 30, 2002, December 31, 2001, or January 1, 2001.
COMMON STOCK
Authorized 30,000,000 shares, no par value; 7,509,412 shares issued at June 30, 2003, 7,496,778 shares issued at December 31, 2002, and 7,463,990 shares issued at January 1, 2002. Shares issued include 189,525, 189,525 and 186,300 shares in treasury at June 30, 2003, December 31, 2002, and January 1, 2002, respectively.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the condensed consolidated financial statements.
3
SCHLOTZSKYS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
|
|
For the six months ended |
|
||||
|
|
June 30, |
|
June 30, |
|
||
Cash flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
||
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(3,333,588 |
) |
$ |
1,116,427 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
||
Depreciation and amortization |
|
2,532,001 |
|
2,169,731 |
|
||
Provision for deferred taxes |
|
(1,683,020 |
) |
|
|
||
Provision for stock option compensation |
|
12,192 |
|
|
|
||
Provision for uncollectible accounts |
|
1,539,563 |
|
425,779 |
|
||
Amortization of deferred revenue |
|
(91,064 |
) |
(158,217 |
) |
||
Equity loss on investments |
|
150,844 |
|
78,294 |
|
||
Changes in: |
|
|
|
|
|
||
Accounts receivable |
|
1,058,418 |
|
129,515 |
|
||
Prepaid expenses and other assets |
|
341,617 |
|
(415,847 |
) |
||
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities |
|
3,728,710 |
|
179,357 |
|
||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
4,255,673 |
|
3,525,039 |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Cash flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
||
Purchase of property, equipment and real estate held for sale |
|
(3,025,961 |
) |
(1,356,779 |
) |
||
Sale of property, equipment and real estate held for sale |
|
1,195,824 |
|
814,403 |
|
||
Acquisition of investments and intangible assets |
|
(236,692 |
) |
(478,468 |
) |
||
Issuance of notes receivable |
|
(198,740 |
) |
(16,260 |
) |
||
Repayments on notes receivable |
|
2,378,643 |
|
42,912 |
|
||
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities |
|
113,074 |
|
(994,192 |
) |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Cash flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
||
Sale of stock |
|
36,082 |
|
85,191 |
|
||
Acquisition of treasury stock |
|
|
|
(19,914 |
) |
||
Proceeds from issuance of debt |
|
710,000 |
|
|
|
||
Debt issuance costs |
|
(858,745 |
) |
(253,789 |
) |
||
Repayment of debt |
|
(4,154,752 |
) |
(3,928,504 |
) |
||
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
(4,267,415 |
) |
(4,117,016 |
) |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
101,332 |
|
(1,586,169 |
) |
||
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
|
678,895 |
|
2,567,904 |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
780,227 |
|
$ |
981,735 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the condensed consolidated financial statements.
4
SCHLOTZSKYS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
Note 1. Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring accruals, considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2003, are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ended December 31, 2003. This information should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and footnotes thereto included in the Schlotzskys, Inc. Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002.
Corporate Organization
During the quarter ended June 30, 2003, Schlotzskys, Inc. (Schlotzskys) formed several new wholly-owned Delaware limited liability companies: Schlotzskys Franchisor, LLC (Franchisor); Schlotzskys Brand Products, LLC (Brand Products); and Schlotzskys Franchise Operations, LLC (Franchise Operations). On June 7, 2003, Schlotzskys contributed to Franchisor, subject to a pledge as collateral under a $1 million credit facility, all of its intellectual property, including trademarks and service marks, and related economic interests in the payments to be received pursuant to the franchise agreements and brand licensing agreements for the Schlotzskys® Deli restaurant concept and brand, which had previously been executed by Schlotzskys and certain of Schlotzskys other subsidiaries. Franchisor thus became the franchisor of the Schlotzskys Deli restaurant concept and licensor of the Schlotzskys Deli brand. Franchisor concurrently contributed the brand licensing agreements to Brand Products. Franchisor and Brand Products entered into a management agreement with Franchise Operations to manage the intellectual property, administer the franchise and brand license agreements and enter into new franchise and brand agreements
Schlotzskys and its subsidiaries are referred to as the Company.
Reclassifications
Certain reclassifications have been made to the condensed consolidated financial statements for the periods ended June 30, 2002, to correspond with the presentation used at June 30, 2003, and for the periods then ended.
Note 2. Stock-Based Compensation
Effective January 1, 2003, the Company adopted the cost recognition provisions for stock-based compensation of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 123 under the prospective method of adoption authorized by SFAS No. 148. The amount charged to expense during the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2003 were approximately $6,000 and $12,000, respectively. Had the Company adopted the cost recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 in 1995, the Companys net income and earnings per share would have been reduced to the pro forma amounts shown (in thousands, except per share amounts):
|
|
For the three months ended |
|
For the six months ended |
|
||||||||
|
|
June 30, 2003 |
|
June 30, 2002 |
|
June 30, 2003 |
|
June 30, 2002 |
|
||||
Net income (loss), as reported |
|
$ |
(2,267 |
) |
$ |
489 |
|
$ |
(3,334 |
) |
$ |
1,116 |
|
Add: Stock-based employee compensation expense included in net income, net of related tax effects |
|
4 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
||||
Deduct: Total stock-based employee compensation expense determined under fair value based method for all awards, net of related tax effects |
|
(45 |
) |
(87 |
) |
(114 |
) |
(164 |
) |
||||
Pro forma net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(2,308 |
) |
$ |
402 |
|
$ |
(3,440 |
) |
$ |
952 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Basic-as reported |
|
$ |
(0.31 |
) |
$ |
0.07 |
|
$ |
(0.46 |
) |
$ |
0.15 |
|
Basic-pro forma |
|
$ |
(0.32 |
) |
$ |
0.06 |
|
$ |
(0.47 |
) |
$ |
0.13 |
|
Diluted-as reported |
|
$ |
(0.31 |
) |
$ |
0.07 |
|
$ |
(0.46 |
) |
$ |
0.15 |
|
Diluted-pro forma |
|
$ |
(0.32 |
) |
$ |
0.05 |
|
$ |
(0.47 |
) |
$ |
0.13 |
|
5
Note 3. Restaurant Operations
A summary of certain operating information for Company-operated restaurants is presented below for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2003 and 2002 (dollars in thousands).
|
|
Long-term Portfolio Restaurants |
|
Available |
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
Schlotzskys |
|
Marketplaces |
|
Schlotzskys |
|
Total |
|
||||
Three months ended June 30, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Restaurant sales |
|
$ |
3,589 |
|
$ |
1,293 |
|
$ |
3,119 |
|
$ |
8,001 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Restaurant operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Cost of sales |
|
1,039 |
|
424 |
|
886 |
|
2,349 |
|
||||
Personnel and benefits |
|
1,292 |
|
697 |
|
1,456 |
|
3,445 |
|
||||
Operating expenses |
|
669 |
|
382 |
|
1,151 |
|
2,202 |
|
||||
|
|
3,000 |
|
1,503 |
|
3,493 |
|
7,996 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Operating income (loss) before depreciation and amortization |
|
$ |
589 |
|
$ |
(210 |
) |
$ |
(374 |
) |
$ |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Three months ended June 30, 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Restaurant sales |
|
$ |
4,031 |
|
$ |
1,317 |
|
$ |
2,921 |
|
$ |
8,269 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Restaurant operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Cost of sales |
|
1,101 |
|
400 |
|
812 |
|
2,313 |
|
||||
Personnel and benefits |
|
1,384 |
|
630 |
|
1,278 |
|
3,292 |
|
||||
Operating expenses |
|
685 |
|
320 |
|
864 |
|
1,931 |
|
||||
|
|
3,170 |
|
1,350 |
|
2,954 |
|
7,474 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Operating income (loss) before depreciation and amortization |
|
$ |
861 |
|
$ |
(33 |
) |
$ |
(33 |
) |
$ |
795 |
|
|
|
Long-term Portfolio Restaurants |
|
Available |
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
Schlotzskys |
|
Marketplaces |
|
Schlotzskys |
|
Total |
|
||||
Six months ended June 30, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Restaurant sales |
|
$ |
7,079 |
|
$ |
2,455 |
|
$ |
6,079 |
|
$ |
15,613 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Restaurant operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Cost of sales |
|
2,006 |
|
794 |
|
1,721 |
|
4,521 |
|
||||
Personnel and benefits |
|
2,587 |
|
1,312 |
|
2,911 |
|
6,810 |
|
||||
Operating expenses |
|
1,300 |
|
696 |
|
2,108 |
|
4,104 |
|
||||
|
|
5,893 |
|
2,802 |
|
6,740 |
|
15,435 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Operating income (loss) before depreciation and amortization |
|
$ |
1,186 |
|
$ |
(347 |
) |
$ |
(661 |
) |
$ |
178 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Six months ended June 30, 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Restaurant sales |
|
$ |
8,007 |
|
$ |
2,592 |
|
$ |
5,541 |
|
$ |
16,140 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Restaurant operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Cost of sales |
|
2,174 |
|
790 |
|
1,544 |
|
4,508 |
|
||||
Personnel and benefits |
|
2,754 |
|
1,244 |
|
2,464 |
|
6,462 |
|
||||
Operating expenses |
|
1,364 |
|
614 |
|
1,658 |
|
3,636 |
|
||||
|
|
6,292 |
|
2,648 |
|
5,666 |
|
14,606 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Operating income (loss) before depreciation and amortization |
|
$ |
1,715 |
|
$ |
(56 |
) |
$ |
(125 |
) |
$ |
1,534 |
|
6
As of June 30, 2003 and 2002, the net book value of property and equipment and intangible assets related to each of the above categories was as follows (dollars in thousands):
|
|
June 30, 2003 |
|
June 30, 2002 |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Long-term Portfolio Restaurants |
|
|
|
|
|
||
Schlotzskys Delis |
|
$ |
14,837 |
|
$ |
15,630 |
|
Marketplaces |
|
10,050 |
|
7,543 |
|
||
Available for Sale Restaurants |
|
12,596 |
|
11,844 |
|
||
|
|
$ |
37,483 |
|
$ |
35,017 |
|
Note 4. Segments
The Company and its subsidiaries are principally engaged in franchising and operating restaurants in the fast casual sector under the Schlotzskys Deli brand. Schlotzskys Deli restaurants offer a menu of distinctive, high quality foods featuring our proprietary breads, complemented by excellent customer service in a visually appealing setting. Our current menu includes upscale made-to-order hot sandwiches and pizza served on our proprietary buns and crusts, wraps, chips, salads, soups, fresh baked cookies and other desserts, and beverages. At June 30, 2003, the Schlotzskys Deli system included 597 Company-operated and franchised restaurants in 37 states, the District of Columbia and six foreign countries. The Company operated 38 restaurants as of June 30, 2003.
The Company identifies segments based on management responsibility within the corporate structure. The Restaurant Operations segment includes restaurants operated for the purposes of market leadership and redevelopment of certain markets, demonstrating sales potential and key operating metrics, operational leadership of the franchise system, product development, concept refinement, product and process testing, and training and building brand awareness. The Restaurant Operations segment also includes restaurants developed for or acquired from franchisees which are available for sale to franchisees. The Franchise Operations segment encompasses the franchising of restaurants, assisting franchisees in the development of restaurants, providing franchisee training and operating the national training center, communicating with franchisees, conducting regional and national franchisee meetings, developing and monitoring supplier and distributor relationships, planning and coordinating advertising and marketing programs, and the licensing of brand products for sale to the franchise system and retailers. The Company measures segment profit as operating income, which is defined as income before interest and income taxes. Segment information and a reconciliation to income before interest and income taxes are as follows (dollars in thousands):
Three months ended June 30, 2003 |
|
Restaurant |
|
Franchise |
|
Consolidated |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Revenue from external customers |
|
$ |
8,001 |
|
$ |
6,261 |
|
$ |
14,262 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
559 |
|
724 |
|
1,283 |
|
|||
Operating income (loss) |
|
5 |
|
(2,485 |
) |
(2,480 |
) |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Total assets |
|
$ |
37,483 |
|
$ |
96,344 |
|
$ |
133,827 |
|
Three months ended June 30, 2002 |
|
Restaurant |
|
Franchise |
|
Consolidated |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Revenue from external customers |
|
$ |
8,269 |
|
$ |
7,634 |
|
$ |
15,903 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
531 |
|
555 |
|
1,086 |
|
|||
Operating income |
|
264 |
|
1,074 |
|
1,338 |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Total assets |
|
$ |
37,292 |
|
$ |
75,576 |
|
$ |
112,868 |
|
7
Of the Restaurant Operations depreciation and amortization for the three months ended June 30, 2003, $367,000 was allocated to the long-term portfolio of restaurants ($153,000 for Marketplaces and $214,000 for Schlotzskys Delis) and $192,000 to restaurants available for sale. For the three months ended June 30, 2002, $359,000 of depreciation and amortization was allocated to the long-term portfolio of restaurants ($149,000 for Marketplaces and $210,000 for Schlotzskys Delis) and $172,000 to restaurants available for sale.
Six months ended June 30, 2003 |
|
Restaurant |
|
Franchise |
|
Consolidated |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Revenue from external customers |
|
$ |
15,613 |
|
$ |
12,479 |
|
$ |
28,092 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
1,080 |
|
1,452 |
|
2,532 |
|
|||
Operating income (loss) |
|
179 |
|
(3,319 |
) |
(3,140 |
) |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Total assets |
|
$ |
37,483 |
|
$ |
96,344 |
|
$ |
133,827 |
|
Six months ended June 30, 2002 |
|
Restaurant |
|
Franchise |
|
Consolidated |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Revenue from external customers |
|
$ |
16,140 |
|
$ |
15,009 |
|
$ |
31,149 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
1,036 |
|
1,134 |
|
2,170 |
|
|||
Operating income |
|
498 |
|
2,214 |
|
2,712 |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Total assets |
|
$ |
37,292 |
|
$ |
75,576 |
|
$ |
112,868 |
|
Of the Restaurant Operations depreciation and amortization for the six months ended June 30, 2003, $709,000 was allocated to the long-term portfolio of restaurants ($290,000 for Marketplaces and $419,000 for Schlotzskys Delis) and $371,000 to restaurants available for sale. For the six months ended June 30, 2002, $720,000 of depreciation and amortization was allocated to the long-term portfolio of restaurants ($297,000 for Marketplaces and $423,000 for Schlotzskys Delis) and $316,000 to restaurants available for sale.
All general and administrative expenses are included in Franchise Operations for the periods presented.
8
Note 5. Debt
The Companys debt structure as of June 30, 2003, and December 31, 2002, is as follows (dollars in thousands):
|
|
June 30, 2003 |
|
December 31, 2002 |
|
||
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Short-term debt: |
|
$ |
1,375 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Long-term debt: |
|
|
|
|
|
||
Notes payable to former area developers |
|
$ |
23,909 |
|
$ |
26,306 |
|
Mortgages on Company-operated restaurants and equipment |
|
22,060 |
|
23,839 |
|
||
Capital leases |
|
2,848 |
|
3,029 |
|
||
Other obligations |
|
484 |
|
331 |
|
||
|
|
49,301 |
|
53,505 |
|
||
Less current maturities of long-term debt |
|
(8,631 |
) |
(7,441 |
) |
||
Long-term debt |
|
$ |
40,670 |
|
$ |
46,064 |
|
Short-term debt as of June 30, 2003 was comprised of a $150,000 note to a bank with interest at 5.2%, due August 25, 2003 collateralized by a certificate of deposit pledged by an officer and director of the Company; $560,000 outstanding under a $1,000,000 facility with two officers and directors of the Company with interest at 6.0%, due October 31, 2003 and secured by our intellectual property, contract rights and certain intangibles; and a $665,000 note payable to a bank with interest at the prime rate plus 1%, due August 28, 2003.
Certain of our mortgage debt require the maintenance of certain financial ratios, including debt-to-equity and working capital. We are currently in compliance with these covenants or have obtained waivers from the lenders.
Note 6. Related Party Receivables
As of June 30, 2003 and December 31, 2002, receivables from related parties were as follows (dollars in thousands):
|
|
June 30, 2003 |
|
December 31, 2002 |
|
||
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Included in accounts receivable other |
|
$ |
889 |
|
$ |
902 |
|
Included in other noncurrent assets |
|
549 |
|
842 |
|
||
Included in notes receivable |
|
3,097 |
|
5,450 |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Total related party receivables |
|
$ |
4,535 |
|
$ |
7,194 |
|
9
Note 7. Earnings Per Share
Basic earnings per share are computed by dividing reported earnings available to common stockholders by weighted average common shares outstanding. Diluted earnings per share give effect to dilutive potential common shares. Earnings per share are calculated as follows (in thousands, except per share data):
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Six Months Ended |
|
||||||||
|
|
June 30, |
|
June 30, |
|
June 30, |
|
June 30, |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Basic earnings per share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(2,267 |
) |
$ |
489 |
|
$ |
(3,334 |
) |
$ |
1,116 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Weighted average common shares outstanding |
|
7,320 |
|
7,288 |
|
7,320 |
|
7,287 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Basic earnings per share |
|
$ |
(0.31 |
) |
$ |
0.07 |
|
$ |
(0.46 |
) |
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Diluted earnings per share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(2,267 |
) |
$ |
489 |
|
$ |
(3,334 |
) |
$ |
1,116 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Weighted average common shares outstanding |
|
7,320 |
|
7,288 |
|
7,320 |
|
7,287 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Dilutive stock options and warrants |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Weighted average common shares outstanding assuming dilution |
|
7,320 |
|
7,442 |
|
7,320 |
|
7,463 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Diluted earnings per share |
|
$ |
(0.31 |
) |
$ |
0.07 |
|
$ |
(0.46 |
) |
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Outstanding options and warrants that were not included in the diluted calculation because their effect would be anti-dilutive |
|
1,142 |
|
687 |
|
1,142 |
|
663 |
|
10
Note 8. Intangible Assets
The Company adopted Statements of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) Nos. 141, 142 and 144, concerning accounting for business combinations, amortization of certain acquired intangible assets, and the impairment or disposal of long-lived assets, respectively, as of January 1, 2002.
Intangible assets consist of the following (dollars in thousands):
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2003 |
|
December 31, 2002 |
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
Amortization |
|
Gross |
|
Accumulated |
|
Gross |
|
Accumulated |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Intangible assets subject to amortization: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Royalty value |
|
20 |
|
$ |
2,474 |
|
$ |
839 |
|
$ |
2,474 |
|
$ |
779 |
|
Developer and franchise rights acquired |
|
20 to 40 |
|
59,374 |
|
3,185 |
|
59,384 |
|
2,492 |
|
||||
Restaurant development rights |
|
13 to 25 |
|
1,619 |
|
451 |
|
1,619 |
|
407 |
|
||||
Debt issue costs |
|
3 to 20 |
|
2,431 |
|
110 |
|
1,561 |
|
77 |
|
||||
Other intangible assets |
|
5 |
|
589 |
|
399 |
|
561 |
|
364 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
66,487 |
|
4,984 |
|
65,599 |
|
4,119 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Intangible assets not subject to amortization: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Original franchise and royalty rights |
|
|
|
5,689 |
|
1,860 |
|
5,689 |
|
1,860 |
|
||||
Goodwill |
|
|
|
3,523 |
|
331 |
|
3,316 |
|
331 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
9,212 |
|
2,191 |
|
9,005 |
|
2,191 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Total intangible assets |
|
|
|
$ |
75,699 |
|
$ |
7,175 |
|
$ |
74,604 |
|
$ |
6,310 |
|
Amortization of intangible assets totaled approximately $439,000 and $260,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2003, and 2002, respectively. For the six months ended June 30, 2003, and 2002, amortization expense totaled $865,000 and $472,000 respectively. Estimated amortization expense through 2007 for intangible assets with determinable lives is as follows (dollars in thousands):
Remainder of 2003 |
|
$ |
912 |
|
2004 |
|
1,808 |
|
|
2005 |
|
1,747 |
|
|
2006 |
|
1,729 |
|
|
2007 |
|
1,720 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
7,916 |
|
The changes in the gross value of goodwill for the six months ended June 30, 2003, are as follows (dollars in thousands):
|
|
Restaurant |
|
Franchise |
|
Total |
|
|||
Balance as of December 31, 2002 |
|
$ |
3,055 |
|
$ |
261 |
|
$ |
3,316 |
|
Goodwill acquired |
|
207 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
|||
Impairment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Balance as of June 30, 2003 |
|
$ |
3,262 |
|
$ |
261 |
|
$ |
3,523 |
|
11
During the first quarter the Company, exercising its right of first refusal, acquired the operating assets of a franchised restaurant located in suburban Atlanta, Georgia. The Company does not intend to operate the acquired restaurant, but acquired these assets primarily in order to facilitate the development of a Company-operated restaurant in the trade area that had been licensed to the franchisee.
The aggregate purchase price paid was $215,000. Of the purchase price, $8,000 was assigned to property, plant and equipment and $207,000 was assigned to goodwill. The goodwill was assigned to the restaurant operations segment, and is expected to be fully deductible for tax purposes.
Note 9. Off-balance Sheet Arrangements
The Company has outstanding guarantees of indebtedness of others, including related parties, of approximately $29.2 million as of June 30, 2003. These guarantees include approximately $6.3 million of lease guarantees for the benefit of franchisees, approximately $14.5 million of mortgage loan guarantees for the benefit of franchisees and approximately $8.4 million of loan guarantees for the benefit of related parties.
The lease guarantees for the benefit of franchisees arose primarily through our former Turnkey program, in which the Company developed the restaurants, leased the restaurants to franchisees, and then sold them to a leasing company. The guarantees range from limited guarantees, either in dollar amount or term, to full guarantees for the life of the lease. The maximum guarantee for a single lease is approximately $1.3 million. Certain guarantees extend through 2018. The Company may be required by the lessor to make monthly rental payments or property tax and common area maintenance payments if the franchisee does not make the required payments in a timely manner. The Company has indemnification agreements with the franchisee under which the franchisee would be obligated to reimburse the Company for any amounts paid under such guarantees. As of June 30, 2003, the Company had accrued a liability of approximately $598,000 related to these guarantees, including a $574,000 provision made in the quarter ended June 30, 2003. The Company also has a net deferred gain related to the sale of these leases in the amount of approximately $342,000 as of June 30, 2003.
The mortgage loan guarantees for the benefit of franchisees also arose primarily through the Companys former Turnkey program, in which we developed the related restaurants, sold the restaurant to a franchisee, and guaranteed all or a portion of the franchisees mortgage loan. The guarantees range from limited guarantees, either in dollar amount or term, to full guarantees of the mortgage. The maximum amount of a single guarantee is approximately $1.0 million. Certain guarantees extend through 2016. The Company may be required by the lender to make monthly mortgage payments if the franchisee does not make the required payments in a timely manner, or the Company may be required to make up any deficiency, up to the amount of the guarantee, if the related restaurant is sold for net proceeds less than the amount of the outstanding mortgage. The Company has indemnification agreements with the franchisees under which the franchisee would be obligated to reimburse the Company for any amount paid under such guarantees. In the event that the Company purchases the loan from the lender in the event of a default, the Company would succeed to the lenders security interest in the related property.
The loan guarantees in favor of related parties primarily arose when the Company guaranteed certain debt of related parties for which the proceeds of the loans were used to repay outstanding debt to the Company. Two of the guarantees, for the benefit of our restaurant venture and our real estate venture, are of mortgage debt totaling approximately $4.1 million. These guarantees extend through 2009 on one note and through 2016 on the other note. A third guarantee, of a bank note in the amount of approximately $4.3 million, is for the benefit of the advertising entity of the Schlotzskys Deli restaurant system, for which the Company had received a portion of the net proceeds of the loan in repayment of outstanding debt to the Company. This guarantee expires in 2004. In connection with the guarantee of the $4.3 million guarantee of the advertising entity bank note, which was made in June 2003, a liability in the amount of $43,000 was accrued under the terms of FASB Interpretation No. 45.
The Company has been called upon, from time to time, to make payments on obligations the Company has guaranteed. During the first six months of 2003, the Company paid approximately $346,000 in various lease guarantees for the benefit of franchisees. In addition, pursuant to a guarantee of a franchisees debt obligation, the Company purchased that obligation from a bank, in the amount of approximately $665,000.
12
Note 10. Commitments and Contingencies
Litigation
The Company is named a defendant in various legal proceedings in the normal course of its business. The ultimate outcome of legal proceedings cannot be projected with certainty. The following are proceedings in which the plaintiffs have alleged significant damages. Based on its knowledge of these matters and its experience to date, the Company does not believe that the outcome of these proceedings will have a material impact on the Companys financial condition and results of operations.
New Florida Markets, Ltd. v. Schlotzskys, Inc., Schlotzskys Franchise Limited Partnership, Schlotzskys Franchisor, LLC, Schlotzskys Franchise Operations, LLC, Schlotzskys NAMF, Inc., and Schlotzskys NAMF Funding, LLC, (Case No. 701140045603) was filed on or about June 23, 2003 with the American Arbitration Association. Claimant is the area developer for the Tampa, Orlando, and West Palm Beach development areas. On July 14, 2003, Deli Keys, Ltd., an area developer for the Miami development area, joined the arbitration as an additional Claimant. They allege that Respondents frustrated their ability to develop, in part, because of the Companys Turnkey program. Claimant also alleges Respondents breached the Area Developer Agreements by failing to provide adequate licensing support, negotiating with license prospects, failing to establish and administer a local advertising group, pledging royalties, changing the area developer manual, refunding franchise fees, and forcing Claimants to purchase errors and omissions insurance. Other claims include breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, constructive termination, and violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Claimants seek actual, compensatory, and punitive damages of an unspecified amount, attorneys fees, and costs. The case is not yet set for hearing.
Comerica Bank vs. James E. Wright, John D. Wright, Lorraine Wright, and Kimberly Wright v. Schlotzskys, Inc. and Schlotzskys Real Estate, Inc., In the Circuit Court for the County of Genessee, State of Michigan (Case No. 02-74931), was filed on or about June 30, 2003 as a Third Party Complaint in a foreclosure action. Third Party Plaintiffs are principals and guarantors of J. Wright Franchise Development, LLC, a former franchisee that had operated a restaurant in Grand Blanc, Michigan and filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy. In January 2003, Schlotzskys Real Estate, Inc. had filed suit against John and James Wright, for collection of $283,872.68 due under a promissory note. In the instant case, Third Party Plaintiffs allege that they were induced into participating in the Turnkey program and that an employee of the Company represented that the restaurant would attain a certain level of sales. Third Party Plaintiffs claims include fraud in the inducement, fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation, and breach of the Michigan Franchise Investment Act. They seek damages of an unspecified amount in excess of $25,000, attorneys fees, and costs. The case is not yet set for trial.
Russell R. Kesterson and Steven P. Schmidt v. Schlotzskys, Inc., Ron Lynch and Jane Doe Lynch, John Does IX, Jane Does IX, ABC Corporations IX, XYZ Companies IX, (Case No. CV2002-021158) was filed on October 31, 2002, in the Superior Court of Maricopa County, Arizona. Plaintiffs were franchisees of the Company and owned and operated a Schlotzskys Deli restaurant in Phoenix, Arizona. The Complaint includes claims of breach of contract, interference with business expectancy, interference with business relationship, unfair competition and negligence. Plaintiffs allege that a superstore owned by Lynch and/or our affiliates encroached on their business and allege that we failed to collect royalties from the superstore, creating unfair competition. Plaintiffs further state that they attempted to relocate their restaurant but that we failed to approve a proposed alternative location and that we induced one of their employees to work for a competing restaurant. Plaintiffs are seeking an unspecified amount of damages, including treble damages, attorneys fees, and costs. On December 3, 2002, we filed a petition styled Schlotzskys, Inc., v. Russell R. Kesterson and Steven P. Schmidt, in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division (Civil Action No. AO2CA 768SS) to compel Plaintiffs to arbitrate their claims in Austin, Texas. The federal court entered an order on December 20, 2002, granting our petition to compel arbitration in the manner provided in the franchise agreement and enjoined Kesterson and Schmidt from pursuing any of their claims in the lawsuit pending in Arizona. To date, we are unaware of any subsequent demand for arbitration filed by either Kesterson or Schmidt.
Kimberly L.E. Garland v. Schlotzskys, Inc., Schenck & Associates, John C. Wooley, Darrell W. Kolinek, Kelly R. Arnold, Joyce Cates, Brian Wieters, David B. Gerstner, and Jeffrey P. Noeldner (Case No. 01-CV-2377) was filed on or about December 26, 2001 in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. Plaintiff, a principal of a former franchisee in Apple Valley, Minnesota, brought suit against the Company and five of its current and former employees (John Wooley, Darrell Kolinek, Kelly Arnold, Joyce Cates, and Brian Wieters, collectively the Schlotzskys Parties), her Area Developer (Jeffrey Noeldner), her accountant (David Gerstner), and his accounting firm (Schenck & Associates). Plaintiff claimed she was fraudulently induced into developing a Schlotzskys Deli restaurant through the Companys Turnkey program, and that Defendants should have advised her
13
that franchisees financial projections were unrealistic. Her claims included fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation and omission and violations of the Minnesota Franchise Act, Minnesota Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act. Defendants filed motions to dismiss or stay the case pending arbitration as required in the Franchise Agreement. Prior to a hearing on the motions, the parties were ordered to appear for a settlement conference on May 19, 2003. Without conceding the facts that formed the basis of any claims, the parties entered into a settlement agreement. Plaintiff agreed to terminate the franchise agreement, exit the system, and pay $5,500 in mediators fees. In exchange, Schenck & Associates and Gerstner agreed to pay $90,000, the Schlotzskys Parties and Noeldner paid $11,525, and their insurer contributed $218,975 in settlement to Plaintiff. The parties agreed to dismiss all of their respective claims, with prejudice.
Robert Coshott v. Schlotzskys, Inc. (Cause No. GN 1-02279), was filed on July 24, 2001, in the 200th Judicial District Court of Travis County, Texas. Plaintiff is the Master Licensee for Australia and New Zealand, and he opened a Schlotzskys Deli restaurant in Melbourne, Australia. Plaintiff brings causes of action for fraud and/or negligent misrepresentation. Plaintiff alleges that he experienced problems with certain equipment specified or approved by the Company, that the Companys system and equipment did not generate enough finished food product to service his potential customers; that the Company misrepresented the level of revenue the restaurant could reasonably be expected to achieve; that the Company delayed his ability to develop restaurants by failing to timely secure certain trademarks and trade names; and that the Company misrepresented whether it would allow Plaintiff to franchise Schlotzskys Deli restaurants in certain gas station or convenience store locations in his territories. Plaintiff requests actual and punitive damages of $3.75 million plus lost profits and incidental and consequential damages of an unspecified amount. The case is not yet set for trial. On July 23, 2003, Coshott also filed a Demand for Arbitration with the International Chamber of Commerce styled Robert Gilbert Coshott v. Schlotzskys, Inc. (Case. No. TBD). The claims in the Demand are similar to those brought in the above-entitled action and include additional allegations that the Company required the purchase of goods and services from certain suppliers in violation of the Trade Practices Act of 1974 that that the Company failed to disclose the existence of a predecessor Master License Agreement, in violation of the Fair Trading Act of 1987 (New South) Wales, breach of contract, and equitable estoppel. Claimant seeks unspecified actual, compensatory and punitive damages, lost profits, attorneys fees, prejudgment interest, and costs. At present, no arbitration hearing date has been set.
Dae Kim, DWK Enterprises, Inc., and Aecon International, Inc. v. John Wooley, Schlotzskys, Inc., Schlotzskys Franchising Limited Partnership, Schlotzskys N.A.M.F., Inc., Schlotzskys National Advertising Association, Inc., and Schlotzskys, Brands, Inc., Schlotzskys Brand Products, L.P., Schlotzskys Real Estate, Inc., and Schlotzskys Restaurants, Inc. (Cause No. 2001-CI-13672) was originally filed in the 73rd Judicial District Court of Bexar County, Texas on or about September 25, 2001 (after a similar lawsuit was filed and later withdrawn in Harris County, Texas) against Schlotzskys, Inc., John Wooley, Schlotzskys Franchising Limited Partnership, and Schlotzskys NAMF, Inc. (collectively, Defendants). Plaintiffs are, or claim to be, franchisees in Houston and San Antonio Texas, and Plaintiff Kim was an area developer for those markets. Plaintiffs bring causes of action for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, civil conspiracy, tortious interference with contract, tortious interference with prospective business relationship, violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act, restraint of trade, detrimental reliance-fraud in the inducement, and defamation-business disparagement. They seek an unspecified amount of money damages plus exemplary damages, attorneys fees, pre-judgment interest, costs, and a jury trial. Defendants, except for Mr. Wooley, who was previously dismissed from the case, answered and asserted counterclaims alleging breach of contract and that Plaintiffs claim under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act is groundless in fact or in law and brought in bad faith or for the purpose of harassment, and seeking money damages, costs of court, penalty fees, costs incurred in performing the accounting, attorneys fees, and pre- and post-judgment interest. Defendants (except for Mr. Wooley) removed the case to federal court. The case was remanded to state court on April 17, 2003. The case is not yet set for trial.
U.S. Restaurant Properties Operating L.P. v. Schlotzskys, Inc. (Cause No. 03-01758) was filed on February 27, 2003, in the District Court of Dallas County, B-44th Judicial District. Plaintiff is a real estate investment company that owns certain Schlotzskys Deli restaurants and leases them to franchisees. It alleges that in 1997 and 1998 we entered into several agreements where we agreed to guarantee certain lease agreements. Plaintiff states that in 1998 the parties entered into an agreement whereby Plaintiff agreed to release Schlotzskys from its guaranty obligations pertaining to six properties in which the tenants had defaulted, in exchange for Schlotzskys agreement to purchase seven other properties. The Company purchased one of the properties located in Texas. Plaintiffs are seeking an order requiring us to purchase the other six properties, two of which are in Texas, and one each in Arizona, Colorado, Indiana, and Tennessee, for a total purchase price of over $4.5 million. In the alternative, Plaintiff is seeking damages or an order reinstating the previously released guaranties. Plaintiffs claims include breach of contract and a request for attorneys fees. A trial date has been set for February 16, 2004.
14
In addition to the matters discussed above, we are defendants in various other legal proceedings arising from our business. The ultimate outcome of these pending proceedings cannot be projected with certainty. However, based on our experience to date, we believe such proceedings will not have a material effect on our business or financial condition.
15
ITEM 2. MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses and related disclosure of contingent liabilities. We base our estimates on historical experience and various other assumptions that we believe are reasonable under the circumstances. Estimates and assumptions are reviewed periodically. Actual results may vary from these estimates.
We believe the following critical accounting policies require estimates about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain and require subjective judgments. Changes in the estimates and judgments could significantly impact our results of operations and financial conditions in future periods.
Determination of the appropriate valuation allowances for accounts and notes receivable.
Our accounts and notes receivable are primarily from franchisees of the Schlotzskys Deli system. We require personal guarantees for all franchise accounts and, for notes receivable, generally obtain a secondary secured interest in the related property and equipment or rights. Many of the notes receivable are fully subordinated to the franchisees senior mortgage debt. In reviewing the adequacy of the valuation allowances for accounts and notes receivable, we consider factors such as historical collection experience, the estimated value of personal guarantees and real property collateral, the franchisees sales and operating trends, including potential for improvement in operations, and general and local economic conditions that may affect the franchisees ability to pay. Actual realization of amounts receivable could differ materially from our estimates.
Determination of appropriate valuation allowances for real estate held for sale.
Our real estate held for sale consists primarily of pad sites. As these sites are being actively marketed, they are periodically assessed for estimated net realizable value. Factors considered in this assessment are offers and letters of intent received on properties, discussions with local real estate brokers, property tax and bank appraisals, sale prices of similar properties and level of activity and interest exhibited by potential buyers. Actual realizeability could differ materially from our estimates.
Determination of appropriate valuation allowance for intangible assets.
Amortizing intangible assets consist primarily of amounts paid to reacquire various developer and franchise rights. Annually, and whenever an event or circumstance indicating impairment may be present, we compare projected undiscounted cash flows to the carrying value of the related assets to determine if impairment has occurred. In estimating future cash flows, we consider such factors as current results, trends, future prospects, and other economic factors. Actual future cash flows could differ materially from our estimates.
16
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
OVERVIEW
The following table reflects the changes in the Schlotzskys Deli system for the three and six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002. Systemwide data reflects both franchised and Company-operated restaurants. Percentage changes in sales-related data are based on comparison to the same period in the previous fiscal year.
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Six Months Ended |
|
||||||||
|
|
June 30, |
|
June 30, |
|
June 30, |
|
June 30, |
|
||||
Restaurants Open Beginning of Period |
|
619 |
|
672 |
|
643 |
|
674 |
|
||||
Openings During Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
New |
|
7 |
|
5 |
|
7 |
|
7 |
|
||||
Reopenings |
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
2 |
|
6 |
|
||||
Total Openings |
|
8 |
|
7 |
|
9 |
|
13 |
|
||||
Closings During Period |
|
(30 |
) |
(8 |
) |
(55 |
) |
(16 |
) |
||||
Restaurants Open End of Period |
|
597 |
|
671 |
|
597 |
|
671 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Systemwide Contractual Sales |
|
$ |
85,263,000 |
|
$ |
102,645,000 |
|
$ |
170,776,000 |
|
$ |
202,848,000 |
|
Decrease in Systemwide Contractual Sales |
|
(16.9 |
)% |
(6.5 |
)% |
(15.8 |
)% |
(6.5 |
)% |
||||
Decrease in Same Store Contractual Sales |
|
(11.9 |
)% |
(5.5 |
)% |
(11.7 |
)% |
(5.4 |
)% |
||||
Average Weekly Contractual Sales |
|
$ |
10,773 |
|
$ |
11,800 |
|
$ |
10,595 |
|
$ |
11,635 |
|
Decrease in Average Weekly Contractual Sales |
|
(8.7 |
)% |
(1.7 |
)% |
(8.9 |
)% |
(1.5 |
)% |
Systemwide contractual sales, same store contractual sales and average weekly contractual sales, all based on contractual sales as defined in our franchise agreements, represent net sales under generally accepted accounting principles, plus the amounts of any discounts for employee or manager meals. Contractual sales are used in this chart, and throughout this report, because these sales are the basis of our royalty income and contractual sales are the only sales amounts reported to us by the franchisees
THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2003 AND 2002
REVENUE. Total revenue decreased 10.3% to $14,261,000 from $15,903,000.
ROYALTIES decreased 18.6% to $4,285,000 from $5,264,000. The decrease was due to a decreased number of franchised restaurants in 2003 compared to 2002, a decrease in same store contractual sales of 11.9%, and an increasing percentage of systemwide sales generated by Company-operated restaurants, which do not pay royalties, partially offset by a continuing shift in restaurant mix towards units with higher volume.
FRANCHISE FEES decreased 92.9% to $3,000 from $42,000. The decrease was principally the result of a lower fee for current quarter openings of franchised restaurants as compared to the same period in the prior year. The decrease in franchise fee per restaurant opening is due to the openings in the current quarter being international restaurants under master license agreements where our franchise fee is lower.
DEVELOPER FEES decreased 26.7% to $44,000 from $60,000. The decrease was primarily due to the expiration of amortization on certain agreements.
RESTAURANT SALES decreased 3.3% to $8,000,000 from $8,269,000. The decrease was primarily due to a 11.9% decrease in same store sales partially offset by an increase in the average number of restaurants operated by the Company during the second quarter of 2003, compared to the second quarter of 2002. As of June 30, 2003, there were 38 Company-operated restaurants, compared to 35 at June 30, 2002, of which 23 and 20, respectively, were available for sale.
SCHLOTZSKYS® DELI BRAND LICENSING FEES (BRAND CONTRIBUTION) decreased 14.2% to $1,709,000 from $1,991,000. The decrease was primarily due to the decrease in systemwide sales for the quarter.
OTHER FEES AND REVENUE decreased 20.7% to $219,000 from $276,000. The decrease was due to a decrease in expired franchise fees.
OPERATING EXPENSES. Total operating expenses increased 14.9% to $16,742,000 from $14,566,000.
17
SERVICE COSTS decreased 40.6% to $667,000 from $1,122,000, and as a percentage of royalties and franchise fees decreased to 15.6% from 21.1%. This decrease was primarily due to the Companys reacquisition of certain area developer territory rights during the third quarter of 2002, as well as a decrease in royalty revenue.
RESTAURANT OPERATIONS EXPENSES increased 7.0% to $7,996,000 from $7,474,000. On an overall basis, expenses, as a percentage of net restaurant sales, are higher at restaurants available for sale, and the proportion of restaurants available for sale to total Company-operated restaurants was higher this year than last year.
RESTAURANT COST OF SALES increased 1.6% to $2,349,000 from $2,312,000 and increased as a percentage of net restaurant sales to 29.4% from 28.0% due primarily to an increase in beverage costs.
RESTAURANT PERSONNEL AND BENEFITS COST increased 4.6% to $3,445,000 from $3,293,000 and increased as a percentage of net restaurant sales to 43.1% from 39.8%. The increase, as a percentage of net restaurant sales, was due to the effect of lower average sales on manager salaries and preopening labor costs.
RESTAURANT OPERATING EXPENSES increased 17.8% to $2,202,000 from $1,869,000 and increased as a percentage of net restaurant sales to 27.5% from 22.6%. The increase in operating costs, as a percentage of net restaurant sales, was primarily due to preopening costs on a restaurant opened during the quarter and a restaurant under development as well as a tax assessment on one restaurant location.
EQUITY LOSS ON INVESTMENTS increased 75.0% to a loss of $84,000 from a loss of $48,000. The equity investment represents the Companys 50% interest in a limited liability company that operates a Schlotzskys Deli restaurant that opened in 2000.
GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES increased 38.8% to $6,713,000 from $4,835,000, and increased to 47.1% from 30.4% as a percentage of total revenue. The increase from the prior year quarter was principally due to increased provisions for uncollectible accounts and debt guarantees, increased franchisee meeting and convention expenses, and increased legal and professional expenses.
DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION increased 18.1% to $1,283,000 from $1,086,000. The increase was primarily due to the amortization of reacquired area developer territory rights and depreciation related to an increase in the average number of Company operated restaurants during the quarter.
INTEREST INCOME increased 9.5% to $104,000 from $95,000.
INTEREST EXPENSE increased 54.2% to $1,010,000 from $655,000 due primarily to the seller-financed debt related to the reacquisition of the territorial rights of the Companys largest area developer.
PROVISION FOR INCOME TAXES reflected a combined federal and state effective tax benefit rate of 33.0% for the second quarter of 2003, which was lower than the effective combined tax rate of 37.1% for the comparable period in 2002 primarily due to certain state taxes being based in part on factors other than income.
NET INCOME decreased to a loss of $2,267,000 from income of $489,000 due to the factors discussed above. Earnings per share, both basic and diluted, were $(0.31) for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 compared to $0.07 in the prior year quarter.
Supplemental Restaurant Operations Information Performance of Long-term Portfolio Deli Restaurants
The following table is presented for the Schlotzskys Delis in the Companys long-term portfolio for the quarter ended June 30, 2003. As of June 30, 2003, this restaurant group included eight restaurants in the Austin area, two in College Station, Texas and one in suburban Atlanta, Georgia. This group includes ten freestanding restaurants, six of which are recently constructed, and one shopping center endcap restaurant. In accordance with the Companys internal management reporting practices for consistent comparisons, line item categories have been expanded and percentages are calculated based on gross sales, instead of net sales as used elsewhere in this report. Facility costs vary by restaurant because some facilities are rented and some are owned. The table provides the average percentage results for each line item for the eleven Schlotzskys Deli restaurants in the long-term portfolio group as a whole, as well as the best and worst percentage performance for each line item for any restaurant in the group.
18
|
|
Three Months |
|
Percentage |
|
Best |
|
Worst |
|
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross sales |
|
$ |
3,784 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
Less-discounts |
|
195 |
|
5.2 |
% |
4.6 |
% |
6.1 |
% |
|
Net sales |
|
3,589 |
|
94.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of sales |
|
1,039 |
|
27.4 |
% |
25.4 |
% |
30.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personnel and benefits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crew costs |
|
874 |
|
23.1 |
% |
21.4 |
% |
25.1 |
% |
|
Management costs |
|
418 |
|
11.0 |
% |
8.9 |
% |
15.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertising |
|
234 |
|
6.2 |
% |
3.8 |
% |
6.3 |
% |
|
Controllable expenses |
|
273 |
|
7.3 |
% |
5.4 |
% |
9.1 |
% |
|
Operating income before facility costs and depreciation and amortization |
|
751 |
|
19.8 |
% |
25.1 |
%* |
13.2 |
%* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facility costs |
|
162 |
|
4.2 |
% |
1.2 |
% |
9.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income before depreciation and amortization |
|
$ |
589 |
|
15.6 |
% |
23.3 |
% |
3.8 |
% |
* Represents the actual best and worst percentage performance for a restaurant in the group. The best and worst performance on a composite basis would be 30.4% and 6.7%, respectively.
SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2003 AND 2002
REVENUE. Total revenue decreased 9.8% to $28,092,000 from $31,149,000.
ROYALTIES decreased 17.3% to $8,589,000 from $10,384,000. The decrease was due to a decreased number of franchised restaurants during the six month period in 2003 compared to 2002 and a decrease in same store contractual sales of 11.7%, partially offset by a continuing shift in restaurant mix towards units with higher volume.
FRANCHISE FEES decreased 95.2% to $3,000 from $62,000. The decrease was principally the result of a lower fee for current year openings of franchised restaurants as compared to the same period in the prior year. The decrease in franchise fee per restaurant opening is due to the openings in the current quarter being international restaurants under master license agreements where our franchise fee is lower.
DEVELOPER FEES decreased 21.7% to $94,000 from $120,000. The decrease was primarily due to the expiration of amortization on certain agreements.
RESTAURANT SALES decreased 3.3% to $15,613,000 from $16,140,000. The decrease was primarily due to a 11.7% decrease in same store sales during the first six months of 2003, partially offset by an increase in the average number of restaurants operated by the Company during the six months ended June 30, 2003, compared to the comparable period of 2002. As of June 30, 2003, there were 38 Company-operated restaurants, compared to 35 at June 30, 2002, of which 23 and 20, respectively, were available for sale.
SCHLOTZSKYS® DELI BRAND LICENSING FEES (BRAND CONTRIBUTION) decreased 13.3% to $3,360,000 from $3,874,000. The decrease was primarily due to the decrease in systemwide sales for the period.
OTHER FEES AND REVENUE decreased 24.1% to $432,000 from $569,000. The decrease was due to a decrease in expired franchise fees.
OPERATING EXPENSES increased 9.8% to $31,232,000 from $28,437,000.
SERVICE COSTS decreased 41.3% to $1,331,000 from $2,267,000, and as a percentage of royalties and franchise fees declined to 15.5% from 21.7%. This decrease was primarily due to the Companys reacquisition of certain area developer territory rights during the third quarter of 2002, as well as a decrease in royalty revenue.
RESTAURANT OPERATIONS EXPENSES increased 5.7% to $15,435,000 from $14,606,000. The use of some Company-operated restaurants in the long-term portfolio for product, process and equipment testing and for systemwide training also adversely
19
impacts their operating performance. On an overall basis, costs, as a percentage of net restaurant sales, are higher at restaurants available for sale, and the proportion of restaurants available for sale to total Company-operated restaurants was higher this year than last year.
RESTAURANT COST OF SALES increased 0.3% to $4,520,000 from $4,508,000 and increased as a percentage of net restaurant sales to 29.0% from 27.9% due primarily to an increase in beverage costs.
RESTAURANT PERSONNEL AND BENEFITS COST increased 5.4% to $6,810,000 from $6,462,000, and increased as a percentage of net restaurant sales to 43.6% from 40.0%. The increase, as a percentage of net restaurant sales, was due to the effect of lower average sales on manager salaries and preopening labor costs.
RESTAURANT OPERATING EXPENSES increased 12.9% to $4,104,000 from $3,636,000 and increased as a percentage of net restaurant sales to 26.3% from 22.5%. The increase in operating costs, as a percentage of net restaurant sales, was primarily due to preopening costs on a restaurant opened during the quarter and a restaurant under development as well as a tax assessment on one restaurant location.
EQUITY LOSS ON INVESTMENTS increased 93.6% to a loss of $151,000 from a loss of $78,000. The equity investment represents the Companys 50% interest in a limited liability company that operates a Schlotzskys Deli restaurant that opened in 2000.
GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES increased 26.5% to $11,783,000 from $9,315,000, and increased to 41.9% from 29.9% as a percentage of total revenue. The increase from the prior year quarter was principally due increased provisions for uncollectible accounts and debt guarantees, increased franchisee meeting and convention expense, and increased legal and professional expenses.
DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION increased 16.7% to $2,532,000 from $2,170,000. The increase was primarily due to the amortization of reacquired area developer territory rights and depreciation related to an increase in the average number of Company-operated restaurants during the first six months of 2003 as compared to the prior year period.
INTEREST INCOME decreased 33.7% to $207,000 from $312,000. The decrease was due to the decrease in the amount of outstanding notes receivable, the nonrecognition of interest income on certain underperforming notes receivable, a decrease in average interest rate the cash receipt of $77,000 in interest on a nonaccruing note receivable in the first six months of 2002.
INTEREST EXPENSE increased 61.0% to $2,026,000 from $1,258,000 due primarily to the seller financed debt related to the reacquisition of the territorial rights the Companys largest area developer.
PROVISION FOR INCOME TAXES reflected a combined federal and state effective tax benefit rate of 32.8% for the six months ended June 30, 2003, which was lower than the effective combined tax rate of 36.8% for the comparable period in 2002 primarily due to certain state taxes being based in part on factors other than income.
NET INCOME decreased to a loss of $3,334,000 from income of $1,116,000 due to the factors discussed above. Earnings per share, both basic and diluted, were ($0.46) for the six months ended June 30, 2003 compared to $0.15 in the comparable period in the prior year.
Supplemental Restaurant Operations Information Performance of Long-term Portfolio Deli Restaurants
The following table is presented for the Schlotzskys Delis in the Companys long-term portfolio for the six months ended June 30, 2003. As of June 30, 2003, this restaurant group included eight restaurants in the Austin area, two in College Station, Texas and one in suburban Atlanta, Georgia. This group includes ten freestanding restaurants, six recently constructed, and one shopping center endcap restaurant. In accordance with the Companys internal management reporting practices for consistent comparisons, line item categories have been expanded and percentages are calculated based on gross sales, instead of net sales as used elsewhere in this report. Facility costs vary by restaurant because some facilities are rented and some are owned. The table provides the average percentage results for each line item for the eleven Schlotzskys Deli restaurants in the long-term portfolio group as a whole, as well as the best and worst percentage performance for each line item for any restaurant in the group.
20
|
|
Six Months |
|
Percentage |
|
Best |
|
Worst |
|
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross sales |
|
$ |
7,473 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
Less-discounts |
|
394 |
|
5.3 |
% |
4.7 |
% |
6.3 |
% |
|
Net sales |
|
7,079 |
|
94.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of sales |
|
2,006 |
|
26.8 |
% |
25.6 |
% |
29.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personnel and benefits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crew costs |
|
1,742 |
|
23.3 |
% |
21.6 |
% |
25.4 |
% |
|
Management costs |
|
845 |
|
11.3 |
% |
9.3 |
% |
17.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertising |
|
442 |
|
5.9 |
% |
3.6 |
% |
6.1 |
% |
|
Controllable expenses |
|
536 |
|
7.2 |
% |
5.8 |
% |
9.1 |
% |
|
Operating income before facility costs and depreciation and amortization |
|
1,508 |
|
20.2 |
% |
24.1 |
%* |
12.3 |
%* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facility costs |
|
322 |
|
4.3 |
% |
1.3 |
% |
9.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income before depreciation and amortization |
|
$ |
1,186 |
|
15.9 |
% |
22.6 |
% |
2.6 |
% |
* Represents the actual best and worst percentage performance for a restaurant in the group. The best and worst performance on a composite basis would be 33.3% and 3.5%, respectively.
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
The Company has outstanding guarantees of indebtedness of others, including related parties, of approximately $29.2 million as of June 30, 2003. These guarantees include approximately $6.3 million of lease guarantees for the benefit of franchisees, approximately $14.5 million of mortgage loan guarantees for the benefit of franchisees and approximately $8.4 million of loan guarantees for the benefit of related parties.
The lease guarantees for the benefit of franchisees arose primarily through our former Turnkey program, in which the Company developed the restaurants, leased the restaurants to franchisees, and then sold them to a leasing company. The guarantees range from limited guarantees, either in dollar amount or term, to full guarantees for the life of the lease. The maximum guarantee for a single lease is approximately $1.3 million. Certain guarantees extend through 2018. The Company may be required by the lessor to make monthly rental payments or property tax and common area maintenance payments if the franchisee does not make the required payments in a timely manner. The Company has indemnification agreements with the franchisee under which the franchisee would be obligated to reimburse the Company for any amounts paid under such guarantees. As of June 30, 2003, the Company had accrued a liability of approximately $598,000 related to these guarantees, including a $574,000 provision made in the quarter ended June 30, 2003. The Company also has a net deferred gain related to the sale of these leases in the amount of approximately $342,000 as of June 30, 2003.
The mortgage loan guarantees for the benefit of franchisees also arose primarily through the Companys former Turnkey program, in which we developed the related restaurants, sold the restaurant to a franchisee, and guaranteed all or a portion of the franchisees mortgage loan. The guarantees range from limited guarantees, either in dollar amount or term, to full guarantees of the mortgage. The maximum amount of a single guarantee is approximately $1.0 million. Certain guarantees extend through 2016. The Company may be required by the lender to make monthly mortgage payments if the franchisee does not make the required payments in a timely manner, or the Company may be required to make up any deficiency, up to the amount of the guarantee, if the related restaurant is sold for net proceeds less than the amount of the outstanding mortgage. The Company has indemnification agreements with the franchisees under which the franchisee would be obligated to reimburse the Company for any amount paid under such guarantees. In the event that the Company purchases the loan from the lender in the event of a default, the Company would succeed to the lenders security interest in the related property.
21
The loan guarantees in favor of related parties primarily arose when the Company guaranteed certain debt of related parties for which the proceeds of the loans were used to repay outstanding debt to the Company. Two of the guarantees, for the benefit of our restaurant venture and our real estate venture, are of mortgage debt totaling approximately $4.1 million. These guarantees extend through 2009 on one note and through 2016 on the other note. A third guarantee, of a bank note in the amount of approximately $4.3 million, is for the benefit of the advertising entity of the Schlotzskys Deli restaurant system, for which the Company had received a portion of the net proceeds of the loan in repayment of outstanding debt to the Company. This guarantee expires in 2004. In connection with the guarantee of the $4.3 million guarantee of the advertising entity bank note, which was made in June 2003, a liability in the amount of $43,000 was accrued under the terms of FASB Interpretation No. 45.
The Company has been called upon, from time to time, to make payments on obligations the Company has guaranteed. During the first six months of 2003, the Company paid approximately $346,000 in various lease guarantees for the benefit of franchisees. In addition, pursuant to a guarantee of a franchisees debt obligation, the Company purchased that obligation from a bank, in the amount of approximately $665,000.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Cash and cash equivalents increased $101,000 in the six months ended June 30, 2003, and decreased $1,586,000 in the six months ended June 30, 2002. Cash flows are impacted by operating, investing and financing activities.
Operating activities provided $4,256,000 of cash in the first six months of 2003 and $3,525,000 of cash in the first six months of 2002. The increase in cash provided was the net result of a decreased use of cash for certain working capital accounts, increased provision for uncollectible accounts and debt guarantees, increased depreciation and amortization and a decrease in the amount of deferred revenue amortized, partially offset by a net loss for the period and provision (credit) for deferred taxes.
Investing activities provided $113,000 and used $994,000 of cash in the first six months of 2003 and 2002, respectively. The decrease in cash used in 2003 compared to 2002 was the net result of an increase in proceeds from the sale of real estate held for sale and increase in collections of notes receivable, partially offset by a decrease in expenditures for intangible assets and new Company-operated restaurants.
Financing activities used $4,267,000 and $4,117,000 of cash in the first six months of 2003 and 2002, respectively. The increase in cash used in the first six months of 2003 compared to the comparable period of 2002 is primarily the net result of increased repayments of debt, partially offset by increased borrowings and reduced sales of common stock.
At June 30, 2003, we had approximately $50,676,000 of total debt outstanding. Scheduled maturities of debt through June 30, 2004 approximate $10,006,000 (including short-term debt). In addition, one of our mortgages requires the application to the mortgage of the net cash proceeds from the sale of certain real estate held for sale.
Certain of our mortgage debt require the maintenance of certain financial ratios, including debt-to-equity and working capital. At June 30, 2003, the Company was in compliance with or had obtained waiver of such covenants. However, any failure to remain in compliance with the restrictive covenants of the Companys mortgages in the future could have material adverse consequences to the Company.
22
The following tables present certain of our obligations to make future payments, excluding interest payments, under contracts and contingent commitments as of June 30, 2003 (dollars in thousands):
|
|
Payments Due by Period |
|
|||||||||||||
Contractual Obligations |
|
Total |
|
Less than 1 |
|
1-3 years |
|
4-5 years |
|
After 5 years |
|
|||||
Short-term Debt |
|
$ |
1,375 |
|
$ |
1,375 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Long-term Debt |
|
49,301 |
|
8,631 |
|
28,913 |
|
4,247 |
|
7,510 |
|
|||||
Operating Leases |
|
20,112 |
|
2,490 |
|
6,454 |
|
3,013 |
|
8,817 |
|
|||||
|
|
Total |
|
Amount of Commitment Expiration Per Period |
|
|||||||||||
Other
Commercial |
|
Amounts |
|
Less than 1 |
|
1-3 years |
|
4-5 years |
|
After 5 years |
|
|||||
Guarantees |
|
$ |
29,233 |
|
$ |
9,555 |
|
$ |
3,188 |
|
$ |
2,530 |
|
$ |
13,960 |
|
We have experienced net reductions in the number of restaurants systemwide quarterly since 2000 and have experienced negative same store contractual sales quarterly since mid-2001. While we have been developing and implementing strategies to reverse these trends, we expect that the number of restaurants will continue to decline in the near term until our renewed efforts to expand our franchising program reverses this trend. Continuation of these trends would have a negative impact on our royalty revenue and brand contribution, which in turn would impact our cash flow and liquidity.
On July 31, 2003 we effected a reduction in force eliminating 39 positions on the corporate staff, reducing the personnel employed at our corporate headquarters or as field personnel to approximately 110. These reductions, along with certain salary adjustments, will begin to impact operating results in the third quarter of 2003, but will be largely offset by separation expenses in that quarter. The full effect of these position reductions will be reflected in the fourth quarter of 2003. We have developed and are implementing plans to significantly reduce non-compensation general and administrative expenses and certain employee benefits, and our goal is to, between the two actions, achieve a reduction in total general and administrative expenses of at least $4 million on an annualized basis.
We plan to develop additional Company-operated restaurants. One restaurant opened in the Austin area in June 2003. We also have acquired building sites for four additional restaurants in the Austin area and entered into a lease for a site in the Houston area. Sites for additional restaurants in Texas and other markets are under consideration. We do not plan to pursue development of these properties until financing arrangements are in place to fund this growth in our Company-operated restaurants.
We are continuing to pursue refinancing of certain seller financed debt which matures in 2005 and higher rate mortgage debt and generate additional working capital. We are pursuing financing alternatives, including asset-backed financing secured by our intellectual property and related royalty rights and agreements, as well as real estate mortgages. There can be no assurances that such financing can be arranged in acceptable amounts and on acceptable terms. Failure to obtain such refinancing or other interim partial financing or restaurant mortgages by the end of 2003 could require us to further modify our operating costs or reduce capital expenditure plans or defer payments.
Our Board of Directors has authorized the repurchase of up to 1,000,000 shares of our outstanding Common Stock. In 1998, 10,000 shares were repurchased for $105,000. In 2001 and 2002, we repurchased an additional 179,525 shares at a total cost of approximately $738,000.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in this Form 10-Q should be read in conjunction with Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and other material included in the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002.
Forward-Looking Statements
This report may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act, Section 21E of the Exchange Act, or the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Any statements that are not statements of historical fact may be deemed forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are not meant to predict or guarantee actual results, performance, events, or circumstances and may not be realized because they are based on our current projections, plans, objectives, beliefs, expectations, estimates, and assumptions and are subject to a number of risk factors and uncertainties, many of which are beyond our control. Actual results and the timing of future events and circumstances may differ materially from those described or implied by the forward-looking statements as a result of these risk factors and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements may
23
include, without limitation, statements concerning earnings or other financial item projections, the plans and objectives of management, future economic performance, new restaurant development, future Schlotzskys Deli brand products, and assumptions underlying or relating to any other forward-looking statement. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements may include, without limitation, an inability of the Company or our franchisees to obtain adequate financing, increased competition within the restaurant industry, the continued viability of restaurants during a weak economy, the results of arbitration and litigation, an inability to sell restaurants, a failure to successfully recruit multi-unit and single-unit franchisees, and stock volatility and illiquidity.
Because of the risks and uncertainties related to these factors and the forward-looking statements, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements. There can be no assurance that any events or results described in any forward-looking statement will actually occur or be achieved. We undertake no obligation to publicly revise the forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that arise after the date of this report or to reflect new information, future events or circumstances, changes in assumptions, or otherwise. Readers should carefully review the risk factors described above and in other documents filed by us with the Commission. Readers are specifically directed to the discussion under Risk Factors in our most recent annual report on Form 10-K.
ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Changes in short-term interest rates on loans from financial institutions could materially affect the Companys earnings because the interest rates charged on certain underlying obligations are variable.
At June 30, 2003, a hypothetical 100 basis point increase in interest rates would result in a decrease of approximately $74,000 in annual pre-tax earnings. The estimated decrease is based upon the increased interest expense of the Companys variable rate debt and assumes no change in the volume or composition of debt at June 30, 2003.
ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
(a) Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures. The term disclosure controls and procedures is defined in Rule 13a-14(c) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act. This term refers to the controls and procedures of a company that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by a company in the reports it files under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the required time periods. Our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer have evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days before the filing of this quarterly report, and they have concluded that as of that date, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective at ensuring that required information will be disclosed on a timely basis in our reports filed under the Exchange Act.
(b) Changes in Internal Controls. We maintain a system of internal controls that are designed to provide reasonable assurance that our books and records accurately reflect, in all material respects, our transactions and that our established policies and procedures are followed. There were no significant changes to our internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect our internal controls subsequent to the date of their evaluation by our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
24
OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
New Florida Markets, Ltd. v. Schlotzskys, Inc., Schlotzskys Franchise Limited Partnership, Schlotzskys Franchisor, LLC, Schlotzskys Franchise Operations, LLC, Schlotzskys NAMF, Inc., and Schlotzskys NAMF Funding, LLC, (Case No. 701140045603) was filed on or about June 23, 2003 with the American Arbitration Association. Claimant is the area developer for the Tampa, Orlando, and West Palm Beach development areas. On July 14, 2003, Deli Keys, Ltd., an area developer for the Miami development area, joined the arbitration as an additional Claimant. They allege that Respondents frustrated their ability to develop, in part, because of the Companys Turnkey program. Claimant also alleges Respondents breached the Area Developer Agreements by failing to provide adequate licensing support, negotiating with license prospects, failing to establish and administer a local advertising group, pledging royalties, changing the area developer manual, refunding franchise fees, and forcing Claimants to purchase errors and omissions insurance. Other claims include breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, constructive termination, and violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Claimants seek actual, compensatory, and punitive damages of an unspecified amount, attorneys fees, and costs. The case is not yet set for hearing.
Comerica Bank vs. James E. Wright, John D. Wright, Lorraine Wright, and Kimberly Wright v. Schlotzskys, Inc. and Schlotzskys Real Estate, Inc., In the Circuit Court for the County of Genessee, State of Michigan (Case No. 02-74931), was filed on or about June 30, 2003 as a Third Party Complaint in a foreclosure action. Third Party Plaintiffs are principals and guarantors of J. Wright Franchise Development, LLC, a former franchisee that had operated a restaurant in Grand Blanc, Michigan and filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy. In January 2003, Schlotzskys Real Estate, Inc. had filed suit against John and James Wright, for collection of $283,872.68 due under a promissory note. In the instant case, Third Party Plaintiffs allege that they were induced into participating in the Turnkey program and that an employee of the Company represented that the restaurant would attain a certain level of sales. Third Party Plaintiffs claims include fraud in the inducement, fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation, and breach of the Michigan Franchise Investment Act. They seek damages of an unspecified amount in excess of $25,000, attorneys fees, and costs. The case is not yet set for trial.
Russell R. Kesterson and Steven P. Schmidt v. Schlotzskys, Inc., Ron Lynch and Jane Doe Lynch, John Does IX, Jane Does IX, ABC Corporations IX, XYZ Companies IX, (Case No. CV2002-021158) was filed on October 31, 2002, in the Superior Court of Maricopa County, Arizona. Plaintiffs were franchisees of the Company and owned and operated a Schlotzskys Deli restaurant in Phoenix, Arizona. The Complaint includes claims of breach of contract, interference with business expectancy, interference with business relationship, unfair competition and negligence. Plaintiffs allege that a superstore owned by Lynch and/or our affiliates encroached on their business and allege that we failed to collect royalties from the superstore, creating unfair competition. Plaintiffs further state that they attempted to relocate their restaurant but that we failed to approve a proposed alternative location and that we induced one of their employees to work for a competing restaurant. Plaintiffs are seeking an unspecified amount of damages, including treble damages, attorneys fees, and costs. On December 3, 2002, we filed a petition styled Schlotzskys, Inc., v. Russell R. Kesterson and Steven P. Schmidt, in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division (Civil Action No. AO2CA 768SS) to compel Plaintiffs to arbitrate their claims in Austin, Texas. The federal court entered an order on December 20, 2002, granting our petition to compel arbitration in the manner provided in the franchise agreement and enjoined Kesterson and Schmidt from pursuing any of their claims in the lawsuit pending in Arizona. To date, we are unaware of any subsequent demand for arbitration filed by either Kesterson or Schmidt.
Kimberly L.E. Garland v. Schlotzskys, Inc., Schenck & Associates, John C. Wooley, Darrell W. Kolinek, Kelly R. Arnold, Joyce Cates, Brian Wieters, David B. Gerstner, and Jeffrey P. Noeldner (Case No. 01-CV-2377) was filed on or about December 26, 2001 in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. Plaintiff, a principal of a former franchisee in Apple Valley, Minnesota, brought suit against the Company and five of its current and former employees (John Wooley, Darrell Kolinek, Kelly Arnold, Joyce Cates, and Brian Wieters, collectively the Schlotzskys Parties), her Area Developer (Jeffrey Noeldner), her accountant (David Gerstner), and his accounting firm (Schenck & Associates). Plaintiff claimed she was fraudulently induced into developing a Schlotzskys Deli restaurant through the Companys Turnkey program, and that Defendants should have advised her that franchisees financial projections were unrealistic. Her claims included fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation and omission and violations of the Minnesota Franchise Act, Minnesota Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act. Defendants filed motions to dismiss or stay the case pending arbitration as required in the Franchise Agreement. Prior to a hearing on the motions, the parties were ordered to appear for a settlement conference on May 19, 2003. Without conceding the facts that formed the basis of any claims, the parties entered into a settlement agreement. Plaintiff agreed to terminate the franchise agreement, exit the system, and pay $5,500 in mediators fees. In exchange, Schenck & Associates and Gerstner agreed to pay $90,000, the Schlotzskys Parties and Noeldner paid $11,525, and their insurer contributed $218,975 in settlement to Plaintiff. The parties agreed to dismiss all of their respective claims, with prejudice.
Robert Coshott v. Schlotzskys, Inc. (Cause No. GN 1-02279), was filed on July 24, 2001, in the 200th Judicial District Court of Travis County, Texas. Plaintiff is the Master Licensee for Australia and New Zealand, and he opened a Schlotzskys Deli restaurant in Melbourne, Australia. Plaintiff brings causes of action for fraud and/or negligent misrepresentation. Plaintiff alleges that he experienced problems with certain equipment specified or approved by the Company, that the Companys system and equipment did not generate enough finished food product to service his potential customers; that the Company misrepresented the level of revenue
25
the restaurant could reasonably be expected to achieve; that the Company delayed his ability to develop restaurants by failing to timely secure certain trademarks and trade names; and that the Company misrepresented whether it would allow Plaintiff to franchise Schlotzskys Deli restaurants in certain gas station or convenience store locations in his territories. Plaintiff requests actual and punitive damages of $3.75 million plus lost profits and incidental and consequential damages of an unspecified amount. The case is not yet set for trial. On July 23, 2003, Coshott also filed a Demand for Arbitration with the International Chamber of Commerce styled Robert Gilbert Coshott v. Schlotzskys, Inc. (Case. No. TBD). The claims in the Demand are similar to those brought in the above-entitled action and include additional allegations that we required the purchase of goods and services from certain suppliers in violation of the Trade Practices Act of 1974 that that we failed to disclose the existence of a predecessor Master License Agreement, in violation of the Fair Trading Act of 1987 (New South) Wales, breach of contract, and equitable estoppel. Claimant seeks unspecified actual, compensatory and punitive damages, lost profits, attorneys fees, prejudgment interest, and costs. At present, no arbitration hearing date has been set.
Dae Kim, DWK Enterprises, Inc., and Aecon International, Inc. v. John Wooley, Schlotzskys, Inc., Schlotzskys Franchising Limited Partnership, Schlotzskys N.A.M.F., Inc., Schlotzskys National Advertising Association, Inc., and Schlotzskys, Brands, Inc., Schlotzskys Brand Products, L.P., Schlotzskys Real Estate, Inc., and Schlotzskys Restaurants, Inc. (Cause No. 2001-CI-13672) was originally filed in the 73rd Judicial District Court of Bexar County, Texas on or about September 25, 2001 (after a similar lawsuit was filed and later withdrawn in Harris County, Texas) against Schlotzskys, Inc., John Wooley, Schlotzskys Franchising Limited Partnership, and Schlotzskys NAMF, Inc. (collectively, Defendants). Plaintiffs are, or claim to be, franchisees in Houston and San Antonio Texas, and Plaintiff Kim was an area developer for those markets. Plaintiffs bring causes of action for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, civil conspiracy, tortious interference with contract, tortious interference with prospective business relationship, violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act, restraint of trade, detrimental reliance-fraud in the inducement, and defamation-business disparagement. They seek an unspecified amount of money damages plus exemplary damages, attorneys fees, pre-judgment interest, costs, and a jury trial. Defendants, except for Mr. Wooley, who was previously dismissed from the case, answered and asserted counterclaims alleging breach of contract and that Plaintiffs claim under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act is groundless in fact or in law and brought in bad faith or for the purpose of harassment, and seeking money damages, costs of court, penalty fees, costs incurred in performing the accounting, attorneys fees, and pre- and post-judgment interest. Defendants (except for Mr. Wooley) removed the case to federal court. The case was remanded to state court on April 17, 2003. The case is not yet set for trial.
U.S. Restaurant Properties Operating L.P. v. Schlotzskys, Inc. (Cause No. 03-01758) was filed on February 27, 2003, in the District Court of Dallas County, B-44th Judicial District. Plaintiff is a real estate investment company that owns certain Schlotzskys Deli restaurants and leases them to franchisees. It alleges that in 1997 and 1998 we entered into several agreements where we agreed to guarantee certain lease agreements. Plaintiff states that in 1998 the parties entered into an agreement whereby Plaintiff agreed to release Schlotzskys from its guaranty obligations pertaining to six properties in which the tenants had defaulted, in exchange for Schlotzskys agreement to purchase seven other properties. The Company purchased one of the properties located in Texas. Plaintiffs are seeking an order requiring us to purchase the other six properties, two of which are in Texas, and one each in Arizona, Colorado, Indiana, and Tennessee, for a total purchase price of over $4.5 million. In the alternative, Plaintiff is seeking damages or an order reinstating the previously released guaranties. Plaintiffs claims include breach of contract and a request for attorneys fees. A trial date has been set for February 16, 2004.
In addition to the matters discussed above, we are defendants in various other legal proceedings arising from our business. The ultimate outcome of these pending proceedings cannot be projected with certainty. However, based on our experience to date, we believe such proceedings will not have a material effect on our business or financial condition.
26
ITEM 2. CHANGES IN SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS
None.
ITEM 3. DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES
None.
ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
The Annual Meeting of the Shareholders of the Company was held on June 23, 2003. At the meeting, the following items were voted on:
Election of a director, whose term expired at the meeting, to a term expiring in 2006.
|
|
FOR |
|
WITHHELD |
|
Floor Mouthaan |
|
5,320,234 |
|
1,550,814 |
|
Election of directors to terms expiring in 2006:
|
|
FOR |
|
WITHHELD |
|
Pike Powers |
|
5,269,202 |
|
1,601,846 |
|
Sarah Weddington |
|
5,280,499 |
|
1,590,549 |
|
Election of a director for a term expiring in 2005:
|
|
FOR |
|
WITHHELD |
|
John Sharp |
|
5,288,690 |
|
1,582,358 |
|
Shareholder proposal to pursue a sale of the Company:
|
|
FOR |
|
AGAINST |
|
ABSTAIN |
|
|
|
1,601,230 |
|
3,283,730 |
|
64,247 |
|
ITEM 5. OTHER INFORMATION
None.
27
ITEM 6. EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K
a) |
|
Exhibits: |
||
|
|
3.1 |
|
Articles of Incorporation of the Company, as amended. (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
Statement of Resolutions Regarding the Designation, Preferences and Rights of Class C Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock of the Company. (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
Bylaws of the Company, as amended. (4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
Specimen stock certificate evidencing the Common Stock of the Company. (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
Rights Agreement dated December 18, 1998 between the Company and Harris Trust and Savings Bank. (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.3 |
|
Warrant Certificate dated February 15, 2001 from the Company to Triad Media Ventures LLC. (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.46 |
|
Guaranty Agreement, dated June 12, 2003 between the Company, as Guarantor, Commerce National Bank, as Lender, and Schlotzskys NAMF Funding, LLC, as Borrower. (4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.47 |
|
Equipment Finance Agreement dated July 24, 2003 between the Company and American Express Business Finance Corporation. (4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.48 |
|
Modification, Extension and Renewal dated August 8, 2003 of that certain Promissory Note dated April 8, 2003, between the Company as borrower and John C. Wooley and Jeffrey J. Wooley as lenders. (4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.1 |
|
Certification pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, signed by John C. Wooley, Chief Executive Officer. (4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.2 |
|
Certification pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, signed by Richard H. Valade, Chief Financial Officer. (4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.1 |
|
Certification pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, signed by John C. Wooley, Chief Executive Officer. (4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.2 |
|
Certification pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, signed by Richard H. Valade, Chief Financial Officer. (4) |
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Incorporated by reference from the Companys Registration Statement on Form S-1 filed on October 12, 1995, as amended. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Incorporated by referenced from the Companys Registration of certain Securities on Form 8-A filed on December 18, 1998. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Incorporated by reference from the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on April 2, 2001. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Filed with this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. |
|
|
|
|
|
b) |
|
Current Reports on Form 8-K: |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Registrant filed a Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 3, 2003, containing a press release dated March 28, 2003, announcing the Companys release of financial results for the quarter and fiscal year ended December 31, 2002. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Registrant filed a Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 15, 2003, containing a press release dated May 15, 2003, announcing the Companys release of financial results for the quarter ended March 31, 2003. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Registrant filed a Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 24, 2003, containing a press release dated June 23, 2003, announcing the results of shareholder voting at the Companys Annual Meeting of Shareholders held on June 23, 2003. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Registrant filed a Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 4, 2003, containing a press release dated July 31, 2003, announcing a realignment and reduction in force effected on July 31, 2003. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Registrant filed a Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 14, 2003, containing a press release dated August 14, 2003, announcing the Companys release of financial results for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 |
28
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
|
SCHLOTZSKYS, INC. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ John C. Wooley |
|
|
|
John C. Wooley |
|
|
|
Chairman of
the Board, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Richard H. Valade |
|
|
|
Richard H. Valade |
|
|
|
Executive
Vice President, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Matthew D. Osburn |
|
|
|
Matthew D.
Osburn |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Austin, Texas |
|
|
29