Attached files
file | filename |
---|---|
EX-32.1 - RUBIOS RESTAURANTS INC | v178853_ex32-1.htm |
EX-31.2 - RUBIOS RESTAURANTS INC | v178853_ex31-2.htm |
EX-31.1 - RUBIOS RESTAURANTS INC | v178853_ex31-1.htm |
EX-21.1 - RUBIOS RESTAURANTS INC | v178853_ex21-1.htm |
EX-32.2 - RUBIOS RESTAURANTS INC | v178853_ex32-2.htm |
EX-23.1 - RUBIOS RESTAURANTS INC | v178853_ex23-1.htm |
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-K
x ANNUAL REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934
FOR THE
FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 27, 2009
COMMISSION
FILE NUMBER: 000-26125
RUBIO’S
RESTAURANTS, INC.
(Exact
Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
DELAWARE
|
33-0100303
|
|
(State
or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification
Number)
|
1902
WRIGHT PLACE, SUITE 300, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
(Address
of Principal Executive Offices)
(760)
929-8226
(Registrant’s
Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title
of Each Class
|
Name
of Each Exchange on Which Registered
|
|
Common
stock, par value $0.001 per share
|
The
NASDAQ Global
Market
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ¨ No þ
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act.
Yes ¨ No þ
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 þ No ¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on
its corporate Website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be
submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 and Regulations S-T
(§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for
such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such
files). Yes ¨ No ¨
Indicate
by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of the registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. þ
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer, as defined in Rule 12b-2 of
the Act.
Large
accelerated filer ¨
|
Accelerated
filer ¨
|
Non-accelerated
filer ¨
|
Smaller
reporting company þ
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in
Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ¨ No þ
The
aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the
registrant based upon the closing sale price of the registrant’s common stock on
June 26, 2009 as reported on the NASDAQ Global Market was approximately
$47,525,064. For purposes of this
calculation, shares of common stock held by each officer and director and by
each person or group who owns 5% or more of the outstanding common stock have
been excluded from the calculation of aggregate market value as such persons or
groups may be deemed to be affiliates.
As of
March 22, 2010, there were 10,035,127 shares of the registrant’s common stock,
par value $0.001 per share, outstanding.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions
of our definitive proxy statement for the 2010 annual meeting of stockholders
are incorporated by reference into Part III of this annual report on Form 10-K.
Our 2010 annual meeting of stockholders is scheduled to be held on July 29,
2010. We intend to file our definitive proxy statement with the Securities and
Exchange Commission not later than 120 days after the conclusion of our fiscal
year ended December 27, 2009.
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Page
|
|||
PART
I
|
3
|
||
Item
1.
|
Business
|
3
|
|
Item
1A.
|
Risk
Factors
|
10
|
|
Item
1B.
|
Unresolved Staff
Comments
|
16
|
|
Item
2.
|
Properties
|
16
|
|
Item
3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
16
|
|
Item
4.
|
Reserved
|
16
|
|
PART
II
|
17
|
||
Item
5.
|
Market
for the Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities
|
17
|
|
Item
6.
|
Selected
Consolidated Financial Data
|
18
|
|
Item
7.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
20
|
|
Item
7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
|
26
|
|
Item
8.
|
Consolidated
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
|
26
|
|
Item
9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial
Disclosures
|
26
|
|
Item
9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
26
|
|
Item
9B.
|
Other
Information
|
27
|
|
PART
III
|
27
|
||
Item
10.
|
Directors
and Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
|
27
|
|
Item
11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
27
|
|
Item
12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related
Stockholder Matters
|
28
|
|
Item
13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions and Director
Independence
|
28
|
|
Item
14.
|
Principal
Accountant Fees and Services
|
28
|
|
PART
IV
|
29
|
||
Item
15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules
|
29
|
|
Signatures
|
31
|
||
Index
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
F-1
|
2
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS
This
report includes statements of our expectations, intentions, plans, and beliefs
that constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A
of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and are intended to come within the safe harbor protection provided by
those sections. These forward-looking statements are principally contained in
the section captioned “Business” under Item 1 below and the section captioned
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations” under Item 7 below. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking
statements by terms such as may, will, should, expect, plan, intend, forecast,
anticipate, believe, estimate, predict, potential and continue, or the negative
of these terms or other comparable terminology. These forward-looking statements
involve a number of risks and uncertainties, including but not limited to, those
factors discussed under “Risk Factors” under Item 1A below and those discussed
in other documents we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission. As a
result of these risks and uncertainties, our actual results or performance may
differ materially from any future results or performance expressed or implied by
the forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements represent
beliefs and assumptions only as of the date of this annual report. Except as
required by applicable law, we undertake no obligation to release publicly the
results of any revisions or updates to these forward-looking statements to
reflect events or circumstances arising after the date of this annual
report.
PART
I.
Item
1. BUSINESS
As of
March 22, 2010, we own and operate 195 fast-casual Mexican restaurants, one
licensed location, and three franchised restaurants that offer high-quality,
fresh and distinctive Mexican cuisine, at attractive prices; including
chargrilled chicken, steak and fresh seafood items such as burritos, tacos and
quesadillas inspired by the Baja, California region of Mexico. We were
incorporated in California in 1985 and re-incorporated in Delaware in October
1997. We have two wholly owned subsidiaries, Rubio’s Restaurants of Nevada,
Inc., which was incorporated in Nevada in 1997, and Rubio’s Incentives, LLC,
which was organized in Arizona in 2008. Our restaurants are located in
California, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado and Utah. As of March 22, 2010, we had
approximately 3,800 employees.
RUBIO’S
FRESH MEXICAN GRILL® CONCEPT
The
Rubio’s Fresh Mexican Grill® concept evolved from the original “Rubio’s, Home of
the Fish Taco®” concept, which our co-founder Ralph Rubio first developed
following his college spring break trips to the Baja peninsula of Mexico in the
mid-1970s. Ralph and his father, Raphael, opened the first Rubio’s® restaurant
25 years ago in the Mission Bay area of San Diego, California and introduced
fish tacos to America. Building on the initial success of the concept, we
expanded our menu and upgraded our restaurant layout over the years to appeal to
a broader customer base, including a concept name change to Rubio’s Baja Grill®
in 1997 to reflect these improvements. In 2002, Rubio’s further evolved,
completing a transformation from Rubio’s original fish taco concept to Rubio’s
Fresh Mexican Grill. The Rubio’s concept now features grilled chicken, steak and
seafood items as well as our original Baja-style World Famous Fish TacosSM. In
2007, we completed a multi-year re-imaging program for our existing restaurants
so that our interiors and exteriors display distinctive designs that match our
high-quality, fresh food. In 2007, we rolled out Rubio’s A-Go-Go, which features
major enhancements in our to-go, delivery and catering program that include
improved packaging, product offerings, order processing and order fulfillment
that we believe makes our program more convenient and attractive for our guests.
Since the end of fiscal 2002 through March 22, 2010, the number of company-owned
restaurants has increased from 135 to 195. We believe Rubio’s Fresh Mexican
Grill is well positioned as an innovator in the fast-casual Mexican cuisine
segment. The critical elements of our market positioning are as
follows:
•
|
FRESHLY
PREPARED HIGH-QUALITY FOOD WITH BOLD, DISTINCTIVE TASTES AND FLAVORS. We
differentiate ourselves from competitive restaurants by offering
high-quality, flavorful, and made-to-order products using Baja-inspired
recipes at attractive prices. Our menu strategy is predicated on
developing unique, distinctive and flavorful products that generate strong
guest loyalty. Rubio’s excels with seafood, and our signature items
include our World Famous Fish Tacos, Grilled Gourmet Tacos, Baja Grill®
Burritos with chargrilled chicken or steak and our authentic Street Tacos.
Rubio’s also offers a number of burritos, tacos and quesadillas prepared
in a variety of ways featuring grilled, marinated chicken, steak, pork,
shrimp and mahi mahi. In addition, we serve freshly prepared salads and
bowls. Our menu also includes HealthMex® offerings that are lower in fat
and calories, and Kid’s Meals designed especially for children. Our
guacamole, chips, beans and rice are prepared fresh daily in our
restaurants. Guests may enhance and customize their meals at our
complimentary salsa bar that features a variety of freshly prepared
salsas. Our menu is served at lunch and dinner, as well as breakfast in a
limited number of our restaurants.
|
|
•
|
CASUAL,
FUN DINING EXPERIENCE. Our restaurants are designed to create a fun and
casual ambiance by capturing the relaxed, comfortable and colorful
atmosphere inspired by the Baja, California region of Mexico. Our design
elements include colorful Mexican tiles, Baja beach photos and tropical
prints, surfboards on the walls and authentic palm-thatched patio
umbrellas, or palapas, in most locations. We believe our restaurants have
broad appeal to a wide range of
guests.
|
3
•
|
EXCELLENT
DINING VALUE. Our restaurants offer high-quality food typically associated
with sit-down, casual dining restaurants, but generally at prices
substantially lower than those found at casual dining restaurants. In
addition to attractive prices, we offer the convenience and service
platform of a traditional fast-casual or quick-service format. We provide
guests a clean and comfortable environment in which to enjoy their meals
on site. We also offer guests the convenience of take-out service for both
individual meals and large party orders. We believe the strong value we
deliver to our guests is critical to generating guest satisfaction, repeat
business, and continued loyalty.
|
OUR
BUSINESS STRATEGIES
Our
business objective is to become a leading fast-casual Mexican restaurant brand.
To achieve this objective, we are pursuing the following
strategies:
•
|
CREATE
A DISTINCTIVE CONCEPT AND BRAND. Our restaurants provide guests with a fun
and casual dining experience that we believe helps to promote frequent
visits and strong guest loyalty. Our key initiatives are designed to
deliver a great guest experience, enhance the performance of our existing
restaurants, and strengthen our brand identity. These initiatives include
developing proprietary menu offerings with bold, intense flavors,
upgrading the ambiance of our restaurants, and delivering best-in-class
service standards. We strive to promote awareness and generate trial
through regional and local media campaigns and neighborhood brand-building
efforts.
|
•
|
ACHIEVE
FAVORABLE RESTAURANT-LEVEL ECONOMICS. We believe we are able to achieve
favorable operating results in our core markets due to the appeal of our
concept, careful site selection, cost-effective development, consistent
application of our management and training programs, and a focus on
continuously improving our economic model. We utilize centralized and
local restaurant information and accounting systems, which allow our
management to monitor and control labor, food and other direct operating
expenses on a real-time basis and provide them with timely access to
financial and operating data. As we expand and optimize our menu, we
continue to focus on creating highly desirable, high-margin items. We also
believe that our culture, emphasis on training and our manager long-term
incentive plan leads to lower employee turnover rates, and higher
productivity, compared with industry
averages.
|
•
|
FOCUS
ON BUILDING SALES AT EXISTING RESTAURANTS. We regularly conduct and
evaluate marketing research to analyze our markets, customer base, product
mix and competition in order to remain relevant in the eyes of our
consumers. Rubio’s marketing mix includes a combination of regional radio,
in-store merchandising, public relations, neighborhood marketing,
e-marketing and print media tactics. We periodically implement new
products and promotions to increase traffic in our
restaurants.
|
•
|
ENSURE
A HIGH-QUALITY GUEST EXPERIENCE. We strive to provide a consistent,
high-quality guest experience in order to generate frequent visits and
customer loyalty. We focus on creating a fun, team-like culture for our
restaurant employees, which we believe fosters a friendly and inviting
atmosphere for our guests. Through extensive training, experienced
restaurant-level management, and rigorous operational controls, we seek to
ensure prompt, friendly and efficient service for our guests. We utilize
an interactive voice response, or IVR, and Web-based guest feedback
program to continually monitor our performance against guest expectations.
We also seek out and respond to direct comments and questions from guests
who utilize our toll-free guest comment line and “contact us” page on our
Web-site.
|
•
|
EXECUTE
FOCUSED REGIONAL EXPANSION STRATEGY. We believe that our restaurant
concept has significant opportunities for expansion in both our existing
and neighboring markets. An expansion strategy focused primarily on
company-owned unit growth will allow us to grow our brand and maintain the
quality of food and service expected by our customers. We generally target
high-traffic, high-visibility end-cap locations in urban and suburban
markets with medium to high family income levels. Our three-year expansion
plan includes an annual unit growth rate of approximately 10% compounded
annually beginning in 2010. We currently plan to open 20
company-owned restaurants in fiscal 2010 in our existing geographic
markets. The current slow down in housing, combined with general economic
climate, has caused us to focus almost exclusively on sites located in
mature trade areas. This narrower focus could limit our growth potential
in 2010 and 2011. In addition, we secured a line of credit in 2008 to
support our planned restaurant growth. We intend to tailor our expansion
plan during fiscal 2010 based on economic conditions, our financial
results and our ability to continue to satisfy the covenants contained in
our credit facility. If our financial results drop below our expectations
or we are unable to comply with the covenants in our credit facility, we
will slow or curtail our expansion
plan.
|
UNIT
ECONOMICS
For
purposes of analyzing our store operating results, and to eliminate the effects
of start-up, training, and other costs associated with new store openings, we
measure comparable store results on only those units that have been open for at
least 15 months. During fiscal 2009, we had 177 units that were open for over 15
months. These units generated average sales of $1,001,000 per unit, average
operating income of $122,000, or 12.2% of sales, and average operating cash
flows of $169,000, or 16.8% of sales. Comparable store sales decreased 0.7% in
fiscal 2009 following a decrease of 2.4% in fiscal 2008 and an increase of 6.2%
in fiscal 2007.
4
These
results are not necessarily indicative of our future results or the results we
may obtain in other units currently open, or those we may open in the
future.
EXISTING
LOCATIONS
The
following table sets forth information about our existing restaurants as of
March 22, 2010. We own and operate 195 restaurants. We also have three
franchised locations in Las Vegas, Nevada and have licensed our concept to
another restaurant operator for a non-traditional location at Petco Park Stadium
in San Diego. The majority of our restaurants are in high-traffic retail centers
and are not stand-alone units.
Company-Owned
and Operated Locations
|
Opened
|
|||
Los
Angeles Area
|
76
|
|||
San
Diego Area
|
48
|
|||
Phoenix/Tucson
Area
|
29
|
|||
Denver
Area
|
4
|
|||
San
Francisco Area
|
15
|
|||
Sacramento
Area
|
11
|
|||
Las
Vegas Area
|
5
|
|||
Salt
Lake City Area
|
7
|
|||
Total
Company-Owned Locations
|
195
|
|||
Franchise
and Licensed Locations
|
||||
San
Diego Area
|
1
|
|||
Las
Vegas Area
|
3
|
|||
Total
Franchised and Licensed Locations
|
4
|
We
currently lease all of our restaurant locations with the exception of one owned
building. We plan to continue to lease substantially all of our future
restaurant locations in high-traffic retail centers where purchasing the
building is not an option.
Historically,
our restaurants have ranged from 1,800 to 3,300 square feet, excluding our
smaller, food court locations. We expect the size of our future sites to range
from 2,000 to 2,800 square feet. We intend to continue to develop restaurants
that will require, on average, a total cash investment of approximately $500,000
to $600,000, net of any tenant improvement allowances and excluding estimated
pre-opening expenses of approximately $50,000 to $60,000 per unit, which
includes approximately $15,000 to $25,000 of non-cash rent expense during the
build-out period.
EXPANSION
AND SITE SELECTION
Our
expansion strategy targets major metropolitan areas that have attractive
demographic characteristics. Once a metropolitan area is selected, we identify
viable trade areas that have high-traffic patterns, strong demographics, such as
medium to high family incomes, high education levels and high density of both
daytime employment and residential developments, limited competition and strong
retail and entertainment developments. Within a desirable trade area, we select
sites that provide specific levels of visibility, accessibility, parking,
co-tenancy and exposure to a large number of potential guests. In response to
the current economic downturn, our current focus is on sites located exclusively
in mature trade areas.
We
believe that the quality of our site selection criteria is critical to our
continuing success. Therefore, our senior management team is actively involved
in the selection of new sites and markets, personally visiting all new markets
and all sites prior to final approval. Each new market and site must be approved
by our Real Estate Site Approval Committee, which consists of members of senior
management. This process allows us to analyze each potential location, taking
into account its effect on all aspects of our business, such as marketing,
personnel, food service and supply chain dynamics.
Our
three-year expansion plan includes an annual unit growth rate of approximately
10% compounded annually beginning in 2010. We currently plan to open 20
company-owned restaurants in fiscal 2010 in our existing geographic markets. The
current slow down in housing, combined with the general economic climate, has
caused us to focus almost exclusively on sites located in mature trade areas.
The uncertain economy could limit our growth potential in 2010 and 2011. In
addition, we secured a line of credit in 2008 to support our planned restaurant
growth. We intend to tailor our expansion plan during fiscal 2010 based on
economic conditions, our financial results and our ability to continue to
satisfy the covenants contained in our credit facility. If our financial results
drop below our expectations or we are unable to comply with the covenants in our
credit facility, we will slow or curtail our expansion plan.
In
connection with our strategy to expand into selected markets, we have and will
continue to consider franchising our restaurant concept. We currently have a
limited franchising program. As of March 22, 2010, we have one signed franchise
development agreement. This agreement represents a commitment to open five
restaurants in five years. The franchisee under this agreement opened its first
restaurant in April 2006, its second restaurant in August 2007 and its third
restaurant in November 2008. We are currently evaluating our options with
respect to the franchising program, and the management and financial resources
that will be required to build the operational infrastructure needed to support
the franchising of our restaurants.
5
MENU
Our
made-to-order menu – including our signature World Famous Fish Tacos® – features
burritos, soft-shell tacos, Grilled Gourmet Tacos™, enchiladas, quesadillas,
nachos and salads. All our products are made with high-quality ingredients
including marinated, chargrilled chicken breast and carne asada steak as well as
seafood such as chargrilled mahi mahi and salmon, sautéed shrimp, and Alaska
Pollock, all inspired by the Baja, California region of Mexico. Complete meals
of two tacos, “no-fried” pinto beans, and tortillas chips are featured. Through
our menu variety, we strive to maintain our heritage of offering distinctive
fish and seafood items, while also including a wide selection of chicken, pork
and beef items. Accompaniments including guacamole, tortilla chips, “no-fried”
pinto beans, black beans and rice are all made fresh daily in our restaurants.
Each of our restaurants also provides self-serve salsa bars where guests may
choose from four different salsas freshly-made in every restaurant. Our prices -
targeted at the consumer willing to spend $5.00 to $10.00 for a meal - range
from about $1.69 for our snack-size Street Tacos to $8.99 for a Cabo Plate – a
Shrimp Burrito, Fish Taco and a side of “no-fried” pinto beans and tortilla
chips. Most of our restaurants offer a selection of imported Mexican and
domestic beers.
Our
HealthMex® menu items, designed to have less than 30% calories from fat, include
burritos served on whole-wheat tortillas, and tacos made with chargrilled
chicken or mahi mahi.
While not
a primary focus for Rubio’s, our Kid’s Meals combine an entrée – choice of
Chicken Taquitos, Cheese Quesadilla or Bean & Cheese Burrito – with a side
of “no-fried” pinto beans, rice, or tortilla chips, a drink, and a
churro.
From time
to time, we introduce limited-time-only products and promotions to provide added
variety and encourage guest frequency. These products and promotions include,
but are not limited to, Langostino lobster tacos and burritos, grilled
chile-lime salmon tacos and burritos, and crispy shrimp tacos and
burritos.
DECOR AND
ATMOSPHERE
We
believe that the decor and ambience of our restaurants are critical factors in
our guests’ overall dining experience and that our restaurant interiors and
exteriors display distinctive designs that match our high-quality, fresh
food.
MARKETING
Our
marketing mix includes a combination of regional radio advertising, in-store
merchandising, public relations, neighborhood marketing, e-marketing and print
media tactics. Where efficient, we use radio advertising as a marketing tool to
increase brand awareness, attract new guests, and encourage existing guests to
visit more frequently. Our advertising is designed to increase sales and
transactions by conveying our brand positioning and creating awareness of new or
limited-time products or promotions.
Local
store marketing, public relations, and e-marketing are used to increase
community awareness and generate traffic on a local level. A variety of programs
are available for our restaurant general managers to target various
business-building opportunities within the local community and trade area
surrounding each restaurant. We believe word-of-mouth advertising is also a key
component in attracting and retaining guests.
As part
of our expansion strategy, we select markets that we believe will support
multiple restaurants and the efficient use of advertising. We sometimes utilize
local public relations initiatives to help establish brand awareness for new
restaurants as we build toward media efficiency. We expect our marketing
expenditures to increase as we add new restaurants and focus on building
awareness to drive new guests to our restaurants and increase repeat visits by
existing customers.
OPERATIONS
UNIT
MANAGEMENT AND EMPLOYEES
We
currently have approximately 3,800 employees. Our typical restaurant employs one
general manager, one or two assistant managers, and 18 to 25 hourly employees,
approximately 40% of whom are full-time employees and approximately 60% of whom
are part-time employees. The general manager is responsible for the day-to-day
operations of the restaurant, including food quality, service, staffing and
product ordering. We seek to train and develop from within, or hire experienced
general managers and staff and to motivate and retain them by providing
opportunities for increased responsibilities and advancement, as well as
performance-based cash incentives. These performance incentives are tied to
sales and profitability. All hourly employees in our restaurants are eligible
for self-funded health benefits 60 days after they are hired. All full-time
restaurant management employees are eligible for health benefits the first day
of the month following their hire date. Full-time corporate employees are
eligible for health benefits on their hire date. Employees over 21 years of age
who have worked for us for more than one year are eligible to participate in our
401(k) plan. Because the members of our executive leadership team are typically
not eligible to participate in our 401(k) plan, we adopted a non-qualified,
unfunded retirement savings plan effective December 1, 2007.
6
We
currently employ one district general manager and 17 district managers, each of
whom reports to one of two regional directors. These two regional directors in
turn report to a Chief Operating Officer. These district managers oversee
restaurant management in all phases of operation, as well as assist in opening
new restaurants. These district managers are eligible to participate in our cash
bonus plan, and the two regional directors are eligible to participate in our
cash bonus and stock incentive plans.
TRAINING
We strive
to maintain quality and consistency in each of our restaurants through the
careful training and supervision of personnel and the establishment of, and
adherence to, high standards of personnel performance, food and beverage
preparation, guest service, and maintenance of facilities. We have implemented a
training program that is designed to teach new managers the technical and
supervisory skills necessary to direct the operations of our restaurants in a
professional and profitable manner. Each manager must successfully complete a
five-week training course, which includes hands-on experience in both the
kitchen and dining areas of our restaurants. They are also required to study our
operations manuals and to view videotapes relating to food and beverage handling
(particularly food safety and sanitation), preparation and service. In addition,
we maintain a continuing education program to provide our restaurant managers
with ongoing training and support. We strive to maintain a team-oriented
atmosphere and attempt to instill enthusiasm and dedication in our employees. We
regularly solicit employee suggestions concerning how we can improve our
operations in order to be responsive to both them and our
guests.
QUALITY
CONTROLS
Our
emphasis on superior guest service is complemented by our Total Quality Control
programs. We utilize an IVR and Web-based guest feedback program to continually
monitor our performance against guest expectations. We also seek out and respond
to direct comments and questions from guests who utilize our toll-free guest
comment line and the “contact us” page on our Web-site. District managers are
directly responsible for ensuring that guest comments are addressed
appropriately to achieve a high level of guest satisfaction. Our Director of
Total Quality Management is responsible for ensuring product consistency,
quality and safety among our restaurants and suppliers.
HOURS OF
OPERATION
Our
restaurants are generally open Sunday through Thursday from 10:00 a.m. until
9:00 p.m., and on Friday and Saturday from 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
MANAGEMENT
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
All of
our restaurants use computerized point-of-sale systems, which are designed to
improve operating efficiency, provide corporate management timely access to
financial and marketing data and reduce restaurant and corporate administrative
time and expense. These systems record each order and display the food requests
on monitors in the kitchen for the cooks to prepare. The data captured for use
by operations and corporate management includes gross and net sales amounts,
cash and credit card receipts and quantities of each menu item sold. Sales and
receipt information is transmitted to the corporate office daily, where it is
reviewed and reconciled by the accounting department before being recorded in
the accounting system. The daily sales information is transmitted nightly to the
corporate office and distributed to management via an intranet Web page each
morning. A Windows-based back office system is used in all restaurants to manage
food cost, labor cost and sales reporting. On a weekly basis, a report of actual
food cost compared with ideal food cost is also generated.
Our
corporate systems provide management with operating reports that show restaurant
performance comparisons with budget and prior-year results both for the current
accounting period and year-to-date, as well as trend formats by both dollars and
percentage of sales. These systems allow us to closely monitor restaurant sales,
cost of sales, labor expense and other restaurant trends on a daily, weekly and
monthly basis. We believe these systems enable both restaurant and corporate
management to supervise the operational and financial performance of our
restaurants on a real-time basis, and will accommodate future
expansion.
PURCHASING
We strive
to obtain consistent high-quality ingredients at competitive prices from
reliable sources. To attain operating efficiencies and to provide fresh
ingredients for our food products while obtaining the lowest possible ingredient
prices for the required quality, employees at the corporate office control the
purchase of food items from a variety of international, national, regional and
local suppliers at negotiated prices. Most food, produce and other products are
shipped from a central distributor directly to the restaurants two to three
times per week. We do not maintain a central food product warehouse or
commissary. Except for our contract with our central distributor, our contract
with Coca-Cola North America FoodService, and several contracts ranging from 6
to 12 months for seafood, chicken and some beef, we do not have any long-term
contracts with our food suppliers. In the past, we have not experienced
significant delays in receiving our food and beverage inventories, restaurant
supplies or equipment.
7
COMPETITION
The
restaurant industry is intensely competitive. There are many different segments
within the restaurant industry that are distinguished by types of service, food
types and price/value relationships. We position our restaurants in the
high-quality, fresh and distinctive, fast-casual Mexican cuisine segment of the
industry. In this segment, our direct competitors include, among others, Baja
Fresh Mexican Grill, Bajio Mexican Grill, Café Rio Mexican Grill, Chipotle
Mexican Grill, La Salsa Fresh Mexican Grill, and Qdoba Mexican Grill. We also
compete indirectly with full-service Mexican restaurants including Chevy’s Fresh
Mex, On The Border Mexican Grill & Cantina, and El Torito as well as other
fast-casual restaurants including Corner Bakery Café, Jason’s Deli, Noodles
& Company, Panera Bread, Paradise Bakery & Café, and Pei Wei Asian
Diner. Competition in the fast-casual Mexican cuisine segment is based primarily
upon food quality, taste, service, location, restaurant ambiance and price.
Although we believe we compete favorably with respect to each of these factors,
many of our direct and indirect competitors are well-established national,
regional or local chains and have substantially greater financial, marketing,
personnel and other resources. We also compete with many other retail
establishments for site locations.
TRADEMARKS
AND SERVICE MARKS
We have
maintained registrations for various trademarks and service marks including, but
not limited to, “Rubio’s,” “Rubio’s Fresh Mexican Grill,” “Rubio’s Baja Grill,
Home of the Fish Taco,” “Home of the Fish Taco,” “World Famous Fish Taco,”
“HealthMex,” “Fish (Pesky) Caricature,” “Baja Grill,” “Best of Baja,” “Rubio’s
Crispy Shrimp,” “Rubio’s Street Tacos,” “Wrapsaladas,” “Beach Mex,” “Rubio’s
a-Go-Go,” “Tacos a-Go-Go,” “Burritos a-Go-Go,” “Wrapsaladas a-Go-Go,” “Beach Mex
Buffet,” “Baja Box,” and “Fiesta Kit” with the United States Patents and
Trademark Office. In addition, we have filed “Cerveza Time,” “Rubio’s Street
Burritos,” “Big Burrito Especial,” “Rubio’s Fish Taco Tuesdays,” “Taquitos
a-Go-Go,” “Quesadillas a-Go-Go,” “Chopped Salad a-Go-Go,” “Sweet Treats
a-Go-Go,” “Long Board Sampler,” and “Grilled Gourmet Tacos.” We believe that our
trademarks, service marks and other proprietary rights have significant value
and are important to the marketing of our restaurant concept.
SEASONALITY
Our
business is subject to seasonal fluctuations. Historically, sales in most of our
restaurants have been higher during the second and third quarters of each fiscal
year, during the warmer spring and summer months, particularly because most of
our restaurants offer patio seating. As a result, our highest earnings generally
occur in the second and third quarters of each fiscal year.
GOVERNMENT
REGULATION
Our
restaurants are subject to licensing and regulation by state and local health,
sanitation, safety, fire and other authorities, including licensing and permit
requirements for the sale of alcoholic beverages and food. To date, we have not
experienced an inability to obtain or maintain any necessary licenses, permits
or approvals. In addition, the development and construction of additional
restaurants are also subject to compliance with applicable zoning, land use and
environmental regulations.
SEC
FILINGS; INTERNET ADDRESS
Our
Internet address is www.rubios.com. We file our
Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on
Form 8-K and amendments to those reports with the SEC and make such filings
available, free of charge, on www.rubios.com , as soon as
reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or
furnish it to, the SEC. The information found on our Web-site shall not be
deemed incorporated by reference by any general statement incorporating by
reference this report into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent we specifically
incorporate the information found on our Web-site by reference, and shall not
otherwise be deemed filed under such Acts.
Our
filings are also available through the SEC Web-site, www.sec.gov, and at the SEC
Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE Washington DC 20549. For more
information about the SEC Public Reference Room, you can call the SEC at
1-800-SEC-0330.
MANAGEMENT
OUR
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
As of
March 22, 2010, our executive officers are as follows:
Name
|
Age
|
Position
with the Company
|
||
Dan
Pittard
|
60
|
President
and Chief Executive Officer
|
||
Frank
Henigman
|
47
|
Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
||
Marc
Simon
|
57
|
Chief
Operating Officer
|
||
Lawrence
Rusinko
|
49
|
Senior
Vice President of Marketing
|
||
Gerry
Leneweaver
|
63
|
Senior
Vice President of People Services
|
||
Ken
Hull
|
54
|
Senior
Vice President of
Development
|
8
DAN
PITTARD has been President and Chief Executive Officer and a member of our Board
of Directors since August 2006. Mr. Pittard’s diverse background brings unique
qualifications for leadership at Rubio’s. He has served in key executive
positions at companies including McKinsey & Company, PepsiCo, Inc. and Amoco
Corp. (now part of BP p.l.c.). Mr. Pittard served a wide range of clients as a
partner at McKinsey & Company from 1980 to 1992, including consumer
companies for whom he helped develop profitable growth strategies and build new
organizational capabilities. During his tenure at PepsiCo, Inc. from 1992 to
1995, he held several senior executive positions including Senior Vice
President, Operations for PepsiCo Foods International, and Senior Vice President
and General Manager, New Ventures for Frito-Lay. In this latter position, he
worked with Taco Bell Corp. to create retail products and introduce them into
supermarkets. At Amoco Corp. from 1995 to 1998, he served as Group Vice
President. As Group Vice President, he had responsibility for several businesses
with over $8 billion in revenues, including Amoco Corp.’s retail business that
had 8,000 locations. During his tenure, he entered into a strategic alliance
with McDonald’s Corporation to build joint locations. From 1998 to 1999, Mr.
Pittard served as Senior Vice President, Strategy and Business Development for
Gateway, Inc. In 1999, Mr. Pittard formed Pittard Investments LLC, and in 2004,
he formed Pittard Partners LLC. Through these entities, Mr. Pittard has invested
in and consulted for private companies. He served on the Board of Novatel
Wireless, a publicly traded company, from 2002 to 2004. Mr. Pittard graduated
from the Georgia Institute of Technology with a Bachelor of Science degree in
Industrial Management and received an MBA from the Harvard Graduate School of
Business Administration.
FRANK
HENIGMAN has been Chief Financial Officer since June 2007, and Senior Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer since November 2007. Prior to joining
Rubio’s in 2006, Mr. Henigman served as Director of Accounting and Risk Control
for Sumitomo Corporation of America/Pacific Summit Energy LLC located in Newport
Beach, California from January 2005 to April 2006. Prior to Sumitomo, Mr.
Henigman served as Director of Finance at Shell Trading Gas & Power Co. from
1998 to 2004. Mr. Henigman holds a Bachelor of Science, Business Administration
and Marketing degree from California State University, Northridge and an MBA,
Finance, from University of Southern California. Mr. Henigman has earned the
designation of a Certified Management Accountant, a globally recognized
certification for managerial accounting and finance professionals.
MARC
SIMON joined Rubio’s in November 2007 as Senior Vice President of Operations and
was promoted to Chief Operating Officer in September 2009. Mr. Simon brings an
extensive business and operations background to the Company. Most recently, he
served as Chief Executive Officer for America’s Incredible Pizza Company in
Tulsa, Oklahoma from October 2006 to August 2007. From 1994 to 1998, Mr. Simon
worked for McDonald’s Corporation as Vice President for Corporate Development.
He led the team that brought Chipotle Mexican Grill into McDonald’s and later
served as Regional Director for Chipotle from 1998 to 2006. Mr. Simon has a
master’s degree in Fine Arts and a master’s degree in Library and Informational
Science from Case Western Reserve University and a Bachelor of Arts degree from
Ohio University.
LAWRENCE
RUSINKO has been Vice President of Marketing since October 2005, and Senior Vice
President of Marketing since November 2007. Prior to joining Rubio’s in 2005,
Mr. Rusinko served as Senior Vice President of Marketing at Friendly’s, a family
dining and ice cream concept, from July 2003 until May 2005. Prior to that, Mr.
Rusinko served for over eight years at Panera Bread as Director of Marketing
from May 1995 until March 1997 and as Vice President of Marketing from April
1997 until July 2003, and spent six and one-half years in various marketing
positions of progressive responsibility at Taco Bell. Mr. Rusinko holds a
Bachelor of Science degree in Industrial Engineering from Northwestern
University and an MBA from the J.L. Kellogg Graduate School of Management at
Northwestern University.
GERRY
LENEWEAVER has been Vice President of People Services since June 2005, and
Senior Vice President of People Services since November 2007. Prior to joining
Rubio’s, Mr. Leneweaver led his own human resources consulting firm, AGL
Associates, in Boston, from February 2004 to May 2005. Prior to that, Mr.
Leneweaver served as Senior Vice President of Human Resources at American
Hospitality Concepts, Inc. (The Ground Round, Inc.) from May 1999 to February
2004. He has also been in senior management roles at TGI Friday’s, Inc., The
Limited, Inc., Atari, Inc., and PepsiCo, Inc. (Pizza Hut and Frito-Lay). He
holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Industrial Relations from LaSalle
University in Philadelphia.
KEN HULL
joined Rubio’s in December 2007 as Senior Vice President of Development. Most
recently, Mr. Hull was Vice President of Development and Franchising for
Frisch’s Restaurants, Inc. in Cincinnati, Ohio from 1999 to 2007. Frisch’s is an
operator of Big Boy and Golden Corral restaurants. Prior to joining Frisch’s in
1999, Mr. Hull served as Director of International Development and Director of
International Real Estate for McDonald’s Corporation. Earlier in his career, Mr.
Hull worked for Hardee’s and KFC in Real Estate management positions. Mr. Hull
has a Bachelor of Science degree in Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning
from Iowa State University.
9
Any
investment in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should
consider carefully the following information about these risks, together with
the other information contained in this annual report, before you decide to buy
our common stock. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only
ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or
that we currently deem immaterial may also impair our operations. If any of the
following risks actually occur, our business would likely suffer and our results
could differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statements
contained in this annual report including those contained in the section
captioned “Business” under Item 1 above and the section captioned “Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” under
Item 7 below. In such case, the trading price of our common stock could decline,
and you may lose all or part of the money you paid to buy our common
stock
WE MAY
NOT ACHIEVE OUR EXPECTED REVENUES, COMPARABLE STORE SALES AND OVERALL FINANCIAL
RESULTS DUE TO VARIOUS RISKS THAT AFFECT THE FOOD SERVICE INDUSTRY.
We and
other companies in the restaurant industry face a variety of risks that may
impact our business and results of operations. Our expected sales levels and
financial results rely heavily on the acceptability and quality of the products
we serve. In addition, our financial results have been and will continue to be
affected by macro economic factors, including changes in national, regional, and
local economic conditions, employment levels and consumer spending patterns. The
current significant downturn in the overall economy and financial markets has
reduced consumer confidence in the economy and negatively affected consumer
spending and dining out frequency, which has had a negative effect on our sales.
If any variances are experienced with respect to the recognition of our brand,
the acceptance of our promotions in the market, the effectiveness of our
advertising campaigns or our ability to manage our ongoing operations in light
of the current adverse economic conditions, including the ability to control and
reduce costs, our revenue and financial results would be adversely affected.
Factors that could have a significant impact on our financial results
include:
·
|
the
adverse economic conditions in our geographic markets continue for a
prolonged period or become more severe;
|
|
·
|
labor
costs for our hourly and management personnel, including increases in
federal or state minimum wage requirements;
|
|
·
|
the
cost, availability and quality of foods and beverages and other
commodities, particularly chicken, beef, fish, cheese and
produce;
|
|
·
|
the
requirement to record impairment charges for stores with poor sales
performance;
|
|
·
|
costs
related to our leases;
|
|
·
|
impact
of weather and national disasters on revenues and commodity
costs;
|
|
·
|
impact
of increased fuel and energy costs;
|
|
·
|
timing
of new restaurant openings and related expenses;
|
|
·
|
the
cost of store closings;
|
|
·
|
the
amount of sales contributed by new and existing
restaurants;
|
|
·
|
the
ability of our marketing initiatives and operating improvement initiatives
to increase sales;
|
|
·
|
negative
publicity relating to food quality, illness, obesity, injury or other
health concerns related to certain foods;
|
|
·
|
changes
in consumer preferences, traffic patterns and
demographics;
|
|
·
|
the
type, number and location of existing or new competitors in the
fast-casual restaurant industry; and
|
|
·
|
insurance
and utility costs.
|
One of
the most important financial measures to investors in restaurant businesses
such as ours is comparable store sales. Investors use this measure
to track our historic performance as well as to compare
our trend results against other restaurant businesses. We expect
that our comparable store sales (which include company-operated
restaurants only and represent the change in period-over-period sales for
restaurants that have had at least 15 full months of
operations) in fiscal 2010 may continue to be adversely impacted by
weak consumer spending resulting from the current adverse economic
conditions. If our comparable store sales are lower than expected
by investors or are otherwise disappointing, our stock
price may be adversely affected.
CHANGES
IN GENERAL ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL CONDITIONS AFFECT CONSUMER SPENDING AND MAY
HARM OUR REVENUES, OPERATING RESULTS OR LIQUIDITY.
Our
country is currently experiencing a significant economic downturn. The ongoing
impacts of the housing crisis, rising unemployment and financial market weakness
may further exacerbate current economic conditions. As the economy struggles,
our customers may become more apprehensive about the economy and reduce their
level of discretionary spending. A decrease in spending due to lower consumer
discretionary income or consumer confidence in the economy could impact the
frequency with which our customers choose to dine out or the amount they spend
on meals while dining out, thereby decreasing our revenues and negatively
affecting our operating results. Additionally, we believe there is a risk that
if the current negative economic conditions persist for a long period of time
and become more pervasive, consumers might make long-lasting changes to their
discretionary spending behavior, including dining out less frequently on a more
permanent basis. Additionally, many of the effects and consequences of the
current economic crisis on our commercial partners are currently unknown. The
adverse economic conditions may cause one or more of our commercial partners to
close their businesses or to refuse or be unable to perform in accordance with
our contracts or past practices with these third parties. If our bank or any of
our suppliers, distributors or warehouse providers do not perform adequately or
if any one or more of such entities seeks to terminate their agreement or fail
to perform as anticipated, it could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows.
10
OUR
ANALYSIS OF OUR STRATEGIC ALTERNATIVES MAY NOT RESULT IN A TRANSACTION ON
FAVORABLE TERMS, OR AT ALL.
On
October 29, 2009, we announced that our Board of Directors had unanimously
rejected an unsolicited proposal from a group consisting of Alex Meruelo and his
affiliates and Levine Leichtman Capital Partners IV, L.P. to acquire all of our
outstanding common stock for $8.00 per share. The Board, after a
thorough review with our management, a Special Committee of the Board and its
financial and legal advisors, determined that the proposal was not in the best
interests of the Company’s stockholders. At the same time, the Board
announced that it had commenced a process to evaluate the Company’s strategic
alternatives to enhance stockholder value, including an evaluation of the
expressions of interest received by the Company. Following the
unsolicited proposal, our stock price increased significantly. There
can be no assurance that the analysis of the Company’s strategic alternatives
will result in a transaction on favorable terms, or at all. If we
decide not to pursue a strategic alternative, our stock price may decrease to
the trade levels we experienced before we received the unsolicited proposal in
October 2009.
IF WE ARE
NOT ABLE TO SUCCESSFULLY PURSUE OUR EXPANSION STRATEGY, OUR BUSINESS AND RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS MAY BE ADVERSELY IMPACTED.
Our
three-year expansion plan includes an annual unit growth rate of approximately
10% compounded annually beginning in 2010. We currently plan to open 20
company-owned restaurants in fiscal 2010 in our existing geographic markets. The
current slow down in housing, combined with the adverse economic climate, has
caused us to focus almost exclusively on sites located in mature trade areas.
This narrower focus could limit our growth potential in 2010 and 2011. In
addition, we secured a credit facility in 2008 to support our planned restaurant
growth plan. We intend to tailor our expansion plan during 2010 based on
economic conditions, our financial results and our ability to continue to
satisfy the covenants contained in our credit facility. If our financial results
drop below our expectations or we are unable to comply with the covenants in our
credit facility as a result of the factors discussed in these risk factors,
including the current adverse economic environment, we will slow or curtail our
expansion plan.
In
addition, the success of our expansion strategy will depend on a variety of
factors, many of which are beyond our control. These factors include, among
others:
·
|
our
ability to operate our new restaurants profitably;
|
|
·
|
our
ability to respond effectively to the intense competition in the
restaurant industry generally, and in the fast-casual restaurant industry
segment;
|
|
·
|
our
ability to locate suitable high-quality restaurant sites or negotiate
acceptable lease terms;
|
|
·
|
our
ability to obtain required local, state and federal governmental approvals
and permits related to construction of the sites, and the sale of food and
alcoholic beverages;
|
|
·
|
our
dependence on contractors to construct new restaurants in a timely
manner;
|
|
·
|
our
ability to attract, train and retain qualified and experienced restaurant
personnel and management; and
|
|
·
|
our
ability to control the construction and other costs associated with
opening new restaurants.
|
If we are
not able to successfully address these factors, we may not be able to expand at
the rate contemplated and may have to adjust our expansion strategy, and our
business and results of operations may be adversely impacted.
WE MAY
NOT PREVAIL IN OUR CURRENT LITIGATION MATTERS.
From time
to time, we have been involved in litigation matters related to the operation of
our restaurants. As discussed in Item 3, Legal Proceedings, we are involved in
two litigation matters arising out of California employment law. The Company has
and intends to continue to vigorously defend itself in each of these actions,
but we cannot assure you of the eventual outcome. In addition to these actions,
we may also be subject to other employee-related claims or claims by our
customers and commercial partners from time to time. Regardless of merit or
eventual outcome, these matters may cause a diversion of our management’s time
and attention, significant damage awards and the expenditure of legal fees and
expenses. In addition, claims asserted against us may result in adverse
publicity. An unfavorable outcome in one or more of these matters or any future
actions brought against the Company could have a material impact on our
financial position and results of operations.
WE ARE
VULNERABLE TO CHANGES IN CONSUMER PREFERENCES AND ECONOMIC AND OTHER CONDITIONS
THAT COULD HARM OUR BUSINESS, FINANCIAL CONDITION, AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS AND
CASH FLOWS.
Our
business, like other restaurant businesses, is affected by changes in consumer
tastes, national, regional and local economic conditions, demographic trends,
consumer confidence in the economy and discretionary spending priorities. The
current significant downturn in the overall economy has reduced consumer
confidence and negatively affected consumer spending and dining out frequency,
which has had a negative impact on our sales. Factors such as traffic patterns,
weather conditions, local demographics and the type, number and location of
competing restaurants may adversely affect the performance of individual
locations. In addition, inflation and increased food and energy costs may harm
the restaurant industry in general and our locations in particular. Adverse
changes in any of these factors could reduce consumer traffic and sales or
impose practical limits on pricing, which could harm our business, financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows. We cannot assure you that
consumers will continue to regard our products favorably or that we will be able
to develop new products that appeal to consumer preferences. Any failure to
satisfy consumer preferences could have a materially adverse affect on our
business. Our continued success will depend in part on our ability to
anticipate, identify and respond to changing consumer preferences and economic
conditions.
11
OUR
BUSINESS MAY BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY FOOD-BORNE ILLNESS INCIDENTS, NEGATIVE
PUBLICITY OR CLAIMS FROM OUR GUESTS.
We cannot
guarantee that our internal controls and training at our restaurants will be
fully effective in preventing all food-borne illnesses. Furthermore, our
reliance on third party suppliers, distributors and warehouse providers makes it
difficult to monitor food safety compliance and increases the risk that
food-borne illness would affect multiple locations rather than a single
restaurant. Third party food suppliers, distributors and warehouse providers
outside of our control could cause some food-borne illness incidents. New
illnesses resistant to our current precautions may develop in the future, or
diseases with long incubation periods could arise, that could give rise to
claims or allegations on a retroactive basis. One or more instances of
food-borne illness in one of our restaurants could negatively affect our
restaurant sales if highly publicized. This risk exists even if it were later
determined that the illness was wrongly attributed to one of our restaurants. A
number of other restaurant chains have experienced incidents related to
food-borne illnesses that have had a material adverse impact on their
operations, and we cannot assure you that we can avoid a similar impact upon the
occurrence of a similar incident at our restaurants. In addition, we may be
subject to liability claims from guests alleging food-related illness, injuries
suffered on our premises or other food quality, health or operational concerns.
Adverse publicity resulting from such allegations may materially affect us and
our restaurants, regardless of whether such allegations are true or whether we
are ultimately held liable.
WE DEPEND
UPON A LIMITED NUMBER OF THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS, DISTRIBUTORS AND WAREHOUSE
PROVIDERS.
Our
ability to maintain consistent quality menu items depends in part upon our
ability to acquire fresh food products and related items, including essential
ingredients used in the Mexican restaurant business from reliable sources in
accordance with our specifications. Shortages or interruptions in the supply of
fresh food products caused by unanticipated demand, problems in production or
distribution, contamination of food products, an outbreak of food-borne
diseases, inclement weather or other conditions could materially affect the
availability, quality and cost of ingredients, which could adversely affect our
business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. We have
contracts with a limited number of suppliers, distributors and warehouse
providers for our food, beverages and other supplies for our restaurants. In
addition, the adverse economic conditions may cause one or more of our
suppliers, distributors or warehouse providers to close their businesses or to
refuse or be unable to perform in accordance with our contracts or past
practices with these third parties. If any of our suppliers, distributors or
warehouse providers do not perform adequately or if any one or more of such
entities seeks to terminate its agreement or fails to perform as anticipated, or
if there is any disruption in any of our supply relationships or distribution
operations for any reason, it could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Our
inability to replace our distribution operations and our suppliers in a short
period of time on acceptable terms could increase our costs and could cause
shortages at our restaurants of food and other items that may cause our
restaurants to remove certain items from a restaurant’s menu or temporarily
close a restaurant. If we temporarily close a restaurant or remove popular items
from a restaurant’s menu, that restaurant may experience a significant reduction
in revenue during the time affected by the shortage.
IF WE ARE
NOT ABLE TO ANTICIPATE AND REACT TO INCREASES IN OUR FOOD AND LABOR COSTS, OUR
FINANCIAL RESULTS COULD BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED.
Our
restaurant operating costs principally consist of food and labor costs. Our
financial results are dependent on our ability to anticipate and react to
changes in these costs. Various factors beyond our control, including increased
food and energy costs, adverse weather conditions, short supply and natural
disasters may affect our food costs. Changes in government regulations could
also affect both our food costs and labor costs. We may be unable to
anticipate and react to changing costs, whether through our purchasing
practices, menu composition or menu price adjustments in the future. In the
event that cost increases cause us to increase our menu prices, we face the risk
that our guests will choose to patronize lower-priced restaurants. Failure to
react in a timely manner to changing food and labor costs, or to retain guests
if we are forced to raise menu prices, could have a material adverse effect on
our business and results of operations.
OUR
RESTAURANTS ARE CONCENTRATED IN THE WESTERN REGION OF THE UNITED STATES, AND
THEREFORE, OUR BUSINESS IS SUBJECT TO FLUCTUATIONS IF ADVERSE CONDITIONS OCCUR
IN THAT REGION.
As of
March 22, 2010, all but 11 of our existing restaurants are located in the
western region of the United States. Accordingly, we are susceptible to
fluctuations in our business caused by adverse economic or other conditions in
this region, including natural disasters, terrorist activities or similar
events. Our significant investment in, and long-term commitment to, each of our
restaurants limits our ability to respond quickly or effectively to changes in
local competitive conditions or other changes that could affect our operations.
In addition, some of our competitors have many more units than we do.
Consequently, adverse economic or other conditions in a region, a decline in the
profitability of several existing restaurants or the introduction of several
unsuccessful new restaurants in a geographic area, could have a more significant
effect on our results of operations than would be the case for a company with a
larger number of restaurants or with more geographically dispersed
restaurants.
12
LABOR AND
EMPLOYMENT LAWS AND REGULATIONS, PARTICULARLY STATE MINIMUM WAGE LAWS, MAY
IMPACT OUR BUSINESS.
A
substantial number of our employees are subject to various federal and state
minimum wage requirements. Many of our employees work in restaurants located in
California and receive salaries equal to or slightly greater than the California
minimum wage. California’s current hourly minimum wage is $8.00. Any increases
in the hourly minimum wage in California or other states or jurisdictions where
we do business may increase the cost of labor and adversely impact our financial
results. Additionally, various federal and state laws govern the relationship
with our employees and affect our operating costs. In addition to minimum wage
laws discussed above, these laws include:
·
|
overtime;
|
|
·
|
paid
leaves of absence;
|
|
·
|
mandatory
employee health insurance;
|
|
·
|
tax
reporting;
|
|
·
|
unemployment
tax rates;
|
|
·
|
workers’
compensation rates; and
|
|
·
|
citizenship
requirements.
|
Significant
additional governmental imposed increases in any of these areas could materially
affect our business, financial condition and operating results.
IF THE
AMOUNTS THAT WE HAVE ACCRUED IN CONNECTION WITH THE CLOSURE OF SELECTED
STORES ARE INADEQUATE OR WE CLOSE MORE STORES THAN ANTICIPATED OR WE ARE
REQUIRED TO TAKE IMPAIRMENT CHARGES FOR UNDERPERFORMING STORES, OUR FINANCIAL
RESULTS WOULD BE ADVERSELY AFFECTED
Our
accruals for expenses related to store closures are estimates. Estimates are
inherently uncertain, and actual results may deviate, perhaps substantially,
from our estimates as a result of the many risks and uncertainties affecting our
business, including, but not limited to, those set forth in these risk factors.
The amounts we have recorded for store closures are based on our current
assessments of the conditions of these locations. The market for, and physical
condition of, these locations may change in the future and materially affect our
future financial results. We review these accruals on a quarterly basis and
may make adjustments that have a material positive or negative impact on our
future financial results. In addition, we may be required to record impairment
charges for store locations that are not performing at adequate levels to
support the operating costs of these stores, and any such impairment charges
would have an adverse impact on our financial results.
THE
RESTAURANT INDUSTRY IS INTENSELY COMPETITIVE AND WE MAY NOT HAVE THE RESOURCES
TO COMPETE ADEQUATELY.
The
restaurant industry is intensely competitive. There are many different segments
within the restaurant industry that are distinguished by types of service, food
types and price/value relationships. We position our restaurants in the
high-quality, fresh and distinctive, fast-casual Mexican restaurant segment of
the industry. In this segment, our direct competitors include, among others,
Baja Fresh, La Salsa, Chipotle and Qdoba. We also compete indirectly with
full-service Mexican restaurants including Chevy’s, On The Border, Chi Chi’s and
El Torito and fast food restaurants, particularly those focused on Mexican food
such as El Pollo Loco, Taco Bell and Del Taco. Competition in our industry
segment is based primarily upon food quality, price, restaurant ambiance,
service and location. Many of our direct and indirect competitors are
well-established national, regional or local chains and have substantially
greater financial, marketing, personnel and other resources than we do. We also
compete with many other retail establishments for site locations. If we are
unable to compete effectively in our industry segment, our business and
operations would be adversely affected.
OUR
FAILURE OR INABILITY TO ENFORCE OUR CURRENT AND FUTURE TRADEMARKS AND TRADE
NAMES COULD ADVERSELY AFFECT OUR EFFORTS TO ESTABLISH BRAND EQUITY.
Our
ability to successfully expand our concept will depend on our ability to
establish and maintain "brand equity" through the use of our current and future
trademarks, service marks, trade dress and other proprietary intellectual
property, including our name and logos. We currently hold two registered
trademarks and have nine service marks relating to our brand and we have filed
applications for 12 additional marks. Some or all of the rights in our
intellectual property may not be enforceable, even if registered against any
prior users of similar intellectual property or our competitors who seek to
utilize similar intellectual property in areas where we operate or intend to
conduct operations. If we fail to enforce any of our intellectual property
rights, we may be unable to capitalize on our efforts to establish brand equity.
It is also possible that we will encounter claims from prior users of similar
intellectual property in areas where we operate or intend to conduct operations,
which could result in additional expenditures and divert management’s time and
attention from our operations.
13
WE MAY
NOT BE SUCCESSFUL IN IMPLEMENTING AND EXECUTING A FRANCHISE
PROGRAM.
In
connection with our strategy to expand into selected markets, we have and will
continue to consider franchising our restaurant concept. We currently have a
limited franchising program. We started a franchise program by entering into
agreements with three franchisee groups between 2001 and 2002. In April 2003,
our relationship with one of the franchisee groups was terminated when the group
defaulted on its franchise agreement and closed its franchised location. We
re-opened this unit as a company-owned restaurant in May 2003, but subsequently
closed it in December 2005. In September 2003, we agreed to acquire a
franchisee’s location and then in December 2006 acquired their other restaurant
and development territory. In addition, in June 2006, we acquired all four
restaurants owned by the third original franchise group. Currently, we have one
franchisee that has a five-year, five-unit development agreement for which they
opened their first restaurant in 2006, their second restaurant in August 2007
and their third restaurant in November 2008. Restaurant companies typically rely
on franchise revenues as a significant source of revenues and potential for
growth. The opening and success of our franchised restaurants depend on a number
of factors, including availability of suitable sites, our ability to obtain
acceptable lease or purchase terms for new locations, permitting and government
regulatory compliance and our ability to meet construction schedules. The
franchisees may not have all of the business abilities or access to financial
resources necessary to open our restaurants or to successfully develop or
operate our restaurants in their franchise areas in a manner consistent with our
standards. Our inability to successfully execute a franchising program could
adversely affect our business and results of operations.
WE MAY BE
LOCKED INTO LONG-TERM AND NON-CANCELABLE LEASES AND MAY BE UNABLE TO RENEW
LEASES AT THE END OF THEIR TERMS.
Many of
our current leases are non-cancelable and typically have an initial term of 10
years and one or more renewal terms of five years that we may exercise at our
option. Leases that we enter into in the future likely will also be long-term
and non-cancelable and have similar renewal options. If we close a restaurant,
we may remain committed to perform our obligations under the applicable lease,
which would include, among other things, payment of the base rent for the
balance of the lease term. Alternatively, at the end of the lease term and any
renewal period for a restaurant, we may be unable to renew the lease without
substantial additional cost, if at all. We may close or relocate the restaurant,
which could subject us to construction and other costs and risks, and could have
a material adverse effect on our business. Additionally, the revenue and profit,
if any, generated at a relocated restaurant, may not equal the revenue and
profit generated at the existing restaurant.
OUR
OPERATING RESULTS MAY FLUCTUATE SIGNIFICANTLY DUE TO SEASONALITY AND OTHER
FACTORS, WHICH COULD HAVE A NEGATIVE EFFECT ON THE PRICE OF OUR COMMON
STOCK.
Our
business is subject to seasonal fluctuations. Historically, sales in most of our
restaurants have been higher during the second and third quarters of each fiscal
year. As a result, we generally find our highest sales occur in the second and
third quarters of each fiscal year. Accordingly, results for any one quarter or
for any year are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for any
other quarter or for any other year and should not be relied upon as the sole
measure of our future performance. Comparable store sales for any particular
future period may increase or decrease versus our previous
performance.
THE
ABILITY TO ATTRACT AND RETAIN HIGHLY QUALIFIED PERSONNEL TO OPERATE, MANAGE AND
SUPPORT OUR RESTAURANTS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT AND OUR FAILURE TO DO SO COULD
ADVERSELY AFFECT US.
Our
success and the success of our individual restaurants depend upon our ability to
attract and retain highly motivated, well-qualified restaurant operators and
management personnel, as well as a sufficient number of qualified employees,
including guest service and kitchen staff, to keep pace with our expansion
schedule. Qualified individuals needed to fill these positions are in short
supply in some geographic areas. Our ability to recruit and retain such
individuals may delay the planned openings of new restaurants or result in
higher employee turnover in existing restaurants, which could have a material
adverse effect on our business or results of operations. We also face
significant competition in the recruitment of qualified employees. In addition,
we are heavily dependent upon the services of our officers and key management
involved in restaurant operations, marketing, product development, finance,
purchasing, real estate development, information technologies, human resources
and administration. The loss of any of these individuals could have a material
adverse effect on our business and results of operations. We generally do not
have long-term employment contracts with key personnel.
VARIOUS
GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS MAY IMPACT OUR BUSINESS.
The
restaurant industry is subject to licensing and regulation by state and local
health, sanitation, safety, fire and other authorities, including licensing
requirements and regulations related to the preparation and sale of food and the
sale of alcoholic beverages, as well as laws governing our relationships with
employees. See “Labor and Employment Laws and Regulations, Particularly State
Minimum Wage Laws May Impact our Business” above. The inability to obtain or
maintain such licenses or to comply with applicable regulations could adversely
affect our results of operations. We are also subject to federal regulation and
certain state laws, governing the offer and sale of franchises. Many state
franchise laws impose substantive requirements on franchise agreements,
including limitations on non-competition provisions and on provisions concerning
the termination or non-renewal of a franchise. The failure to obtain or retain
licenses or approvals to sell franchises could adversely affect us and our
franchisees. Changes in, and the cost of compliance with, government regulations
could also have a material adverse effect on our operations.
14
WE ARE
REQUIRED TO EVALUATE OUR INTERNAL CONTROLS UNDER SECTION 404 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 AND ANY ADVERSE RESULTS FROM SUCH EVALUATION COULD
RESULT IN A LOSS OF INVESTOR CONFIDENCE IN OUR FINANCIAL REPORTS AND HAVE AN
ADVERSE EFFECT ON OUR STOCK PRICE.
Pursuant
to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we are required to furnish a
report by our management on our internal control over financial reporting. Such
report must contain, among other matters, an assessment of the effectiveness of
our internal control over financial reporting and audited consolidated financial
statements as of the end of our fiscal year. This assessment must include
disclosure of any material weaknesses in our internal control over financial
reporting identified by management. This annual report on Form 10-K does not
require an attestation from the Company’s independent registered public
accounting firm, but we will be required to obtain that attestation as early as
the annual report on Form 10-K for our fiscal year ending December 26, 2010.
Performing the system and process documentation and evaluation needed to comply
with Section 404 is both costly and challenging. We have in the past discovered,
and may in the future discover, areas of internal controls that need
improvement. During this process, if our management identifies one or more
material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, we will be
unable to assert such internal control is effective. If we are unable to assert
that our internal control over financial reporting is effective or if our
independent registered public accounting firm is unable to attest that our
management’s report is fairly stated or they are unable to express an
unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of our internal controls, investors
could lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports,
which could have an adverse effect on our stock price.
OUR
FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL TAX RETURNS MAY, FROM TIME TO TIME, BE SELECTED FOR
AUDIT BY THE TAXING AUTHORITIES, WHICH MAY RESULT IN TAX ASSESSMENTS OR
PENALTIES THAT COULD HAVE A MATERIAL ADVERSE IMPACT ON OUR RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
AND FINANCIAL POSITION.
We are
subject to federal, state and local taxes in the U.S. Significant judgment is
required in determining the provision for income taxes. Although we believe our
tax estimates are reasonable, if the IRS or other taxing authority disagrees
with the positions we have taken on our tax returns, we could have additional
tax liability, including interest and penalties. If material, payment of such
additional amounts upon final adjudication of any disputes could have a material
impact on our results of operations and financial position.
OUR
CURRENT INSURANCE MAY NOT PROVIDE ADEQUATE LEVELS OF COVERAGE AGAINST LOSSES,
CLAIMS OR THE EFFECTS OF ADVERSE PUBLICITY.
We may
incur certain losses that are uninsurable or that we believe are not
economically insurable, such as losses due to earthquakes, floods and other
natural disasters. In view of the location of many of our existing and planned
restaurants, our operations are particularly susceptible to damage and
disruption caused by earthquakes. Further, although we maintain insurance
coverage for employee-related litigation, the deductible per incident is high
and because of the high cost, we carry only limited insurance for the effects of
such claims. In addition, punitive damage awards are generally not covered by
insurance. In addition, our insurance does not provide coverage for the type of
claims asserted in the two employee actions discussed in Item 3, Legal
Proceedings. Any insurance we maintain may not be sufficient to provide coverage
against any asserted claims. We also may be unable to maintain our insurance or
obtain insurance in the future on acceptable terms, or at all.
WE MAY
INCUR SIGNIFICANT REAL ESTATE RELATED COSTS AND LIABILITIES THAT COULD ADVERSELY
AFFECT OUR FINANCIAL CONDITION.
The
majority of our restaurants are leased locations in multi-unit retail centers.
The age and condition of the real estate we occupy vary. Some of our locations
may require significant repairs due to normal deterioration or due to sudden and
unanticipated incidents, such as plumbing failures. It is difficult to predict
how many of our restaurant locations will require major repairs or refurbishment
and it is also difficult to predict what portion of these potential costs would
be covered by insurance. Also, as a lessee of real estate, we are subject to and
have received claims that our operations at these locations may have caused
property damage or personal injury to others. The fact that the majority of our
restaurants are located in multi-unit retail buildings means that if there is a
plumbing failure or other event in one of our restaurants, neighboring tenants
may be affected, which can subject us to liability for property damage and
personal injuries. If we were to incur increased real estate costs and
liabilities, it could adversely affect our financial condition and results of
operations.
SALES BY
OUR EXISTING STOCKHOLDERS OF A LARGE NUMBER OF SHARES OF OUR COMMON STOCK COULD
CAUSE OUR STOCK PRICE TO DECLINE.
The
Company has a limited number of institutional stockholders, each of whom holds
more than 5% of the Company’s outstanding stock. The market price of our common
stock could decline as a result of sales by one of these stockholders of a large
number of shares of our common stock in the market or the perception that such
sales could occur. These sales also might make it more difficult for us to sell
equity securities in the future at a time and at a price that we deem
appropriate.
15
THE
INTERESTS OF OUR CONTROLLING STOCKHOLDERS MAY CONFLICT WITH YOUR
INTERESTS.
As of
March 22, 2010, our executive officers, directors and entities affiliated with
them, in the aggregate, beneficially own approximately 31.3% of our outstanding
common stock. These stockholders may be able to influence the outcome of matters
requiring stockholder approval, including the election of directors and approval
of significant corporate transactions. This concentration of ownership may also
have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of our Company and
could also depress our stock price.
None.
Item
2. PROPERTIES
Our
corporate headquarters and the principal executive offices of our two wholly
owned subsidiaries, consisting of approximately 16,500 square feet, are located
in Carlsbad, California. We occupy our headquarters under a lease that was
extended until March 31, 2011, with options to extend the lease for an
additional eight years. As of March 22, 2010, we owned and operated 195
restaurants. These restaurants are located in California, Arizona, Nevada,
Colorado and Utah as described in Item 1. “Business – Existing Locations”
above. We lease each of our restaurant facilities with the exception of one
restaurant in El Cajon, California, where we own the building but lease the
land. The majority of our leases are for 10-year terms and include options to
extend the terms. The majority of the leases also include both fixed rate and
percentage-of-sales rent provisions.
Item
3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
In March
2007, the Company reached an agreement to settle a class action
lawsuit related to how it classified certain employees under California
overtime laws. The lawsuit was similar to numerous lawsuits filed against
restaurant operators, retailers and others with operations in California. The
settlement agreement, which was approved by the
court in June 2007, provides for a settlement payment of $7.5
million payable in three installments. The first $2.5 million installment was
distributed on August 31, 2007 and the second $2.5 million installment was paid
into a qualified settlement fund on December 29, 2008. The third and final
installment of $2.5 million is due on or before June 28, 2010. As of December
27, 2009, the remaining balance of $2.5 million, plus accrued interest of
$274,000, was accrued in “Accrued expenses and other liabilities”. The Company
learned that 140 current and former employees who qualified to participate as
class members in this class action settlement were not included in the
settlement list approved by the court. The Company filed a motion requesting the
court to include these individuals in the approved settlement and to provide
that their claims are payable out of the aggregate settlement payment, as the
Company believes the parties intended when they reached a settlement. The
plaintiffs are opposing this motion. The matter has not yet been finally
resolved and there is no assurance that the Company will be successful. At this
time, it is not possible to reasonably estimate the outcome of or any additional
liability from this case.
On March
24, 2005, a former employee of the Company filed a California state
court action alleging that the Company failed to provide the former employee
with certain meal and rest period breaks and overtime pay. The parties moved the
matter into arbitration, and the former employee amended the complaint
to claim that the former employee represents a class of potential
plaintiffs. The amended complaint alleges that current and former shift leaders
who worked in the Company's California restaurants during specified time
periods worked off the clock and missed meal and rest breaks. This case is still
in the pre-class certification discovery and briefing stage, and
no class has been certified. Holden, a former employee, seeks penalties
under California's Private Attorney General Act of 2004, separate
and apart from her certification of a class of shift leaders. The Company
denies the former employee’s claims, and intends to continue to vigorously
defend this action. A recent decision by the California Court of Appeals in
Brinker
Restaurant Corporation v. Superior Court (Hohnbaum) last year held
that employers do not need to affirmatively ensure employees actually take
their meal and rest breaks but need only make meal and rest breaks “available”
to employees. The Brinker case was recently taken up for review by the
California Supreme Court. At this time, the Company has no assurances of
how the California Supreme Court will rule in the Brinker case. Regardless
of merit or eventual outcome, this arbitration may cause a diversion of the
Company’s management’s time and attention and the expenditure of legal fees and
expenses.
16
PART
II
Item
5. MARKET FOR THE REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND
ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
MARKET
INFORMATION FOR COMMON STOCK
Our
common stock is listed on the NASDAQ Global Market under the symbol “RUBO.” Our
common stock began trading on May 21, 1999. The closing sales price of our
common stock as reported on NASDAQ on March 22, 2009 was $7.97. As of March 22,
2010, there were approximately 3,844 beneficial holders of our common stock,
including 283 holders of record.
The
following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the high and low closing
sales prices for our common stock for each quarter of our two most recent fiscal
years, as regularly reported on NASDAQ.
|
High
|
Low
|
||||||
2008:
|
||||||||
First
Quarter
|
$
|
8.42
|
5.64
|
|||||
Second
Quarter
|
$
|
6.28
|
4.74
|
|||||
Third
Quarter
|
$
|
6.50
|
4.90
|
|||||
Fourth
Quarter
|
$
|
5.85
|
2.21
|
|||||
2009:
|
||||||||
First
Quarter
|
$
|
4.50
|
3.03
|
|||||
Second
Quarter
|
$
|
6.45
|
4.00
|
|||||
Third
Quarter
|
$
|
7.00
|
5.74
|
|||||
Fourth
Quarter
|
$
|
7.84
|
6.00
|
DIVIDEND
POLICY
Since our
initial public offering in May 1999, we have not declared or paid any cash
dividends on our common stock. We currently intend to retain all earnings for
the operation and expansion of our business and do not intend to pay any cash
dividends in the foreseeable future. In addition, our credit facility limits the
payment of cash dividends subject to specified
exceptions.
17
Item
6. SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
Our
fiscal year is 52 or 53 weeks, ending the last Sunday in December. Fiscal 2006
included 53 weeks. All other fiscal years presented include 52
weeks.
The
following selected consolidated financial data should be read in conjunction
with our consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto appearing
elsewhere in this report and with Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations included under Item 7 of this
report. These historical results are not necessarily indicative of the results
to be expected in the future.
Fiscal
Years
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
|||||||||||||||||
(in
thousands, except per share data)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS DATA:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Restaurant
sales
|
$
|
188,749
|
$
|
179,130
|
$
|
169,519
|
$
|
151,995
|
$
|
140,496
|
|||||||||||
Franchise
and licensing revenues
|
129
|
174
|
212
|
273
|
261
|
||||||||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
188,878
|
179,304
|
169,731
|
152,268
|
140,757
|
||||||||||||||||
Costs
and expenses:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Cost
of sales
|
49,688
|
51,348
|
48,369
|
42,079
|
37,997
|
||||||||||||||||
Restaurant
labor
|
61,215
|
56,621
|
54,364
|
48,472
|
45,801
|
||||||||||||||||
Restaurant
occupancy and other
|
46,863
|
42,591
|
39,192
|
35,987
|
33,732
|
||||||||||||||||
General
and administrative expenses
|
18,830
|
17,942
|
16,215
|
23,429
|
15,844
|
||||||||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
9,907
|
9,652
|
8,834
|
8,215
|
7,764
|
||||||||||||||||
Pre-opening
expenses
|
353
|
689
|
572
|
537
|
147
|
||||||||||||||||
Asset
impairment and store closure (reversal) expense
|
1,068
|
(46
|
)
|
274
|
(405
|
)
|
275
|
||||||||||||||
Loss
on disposal/sale of property
|
369
|
295
|
127
|
281
|
520
|
||||||||||||||||
Total
costs and expenses
|
188,293
|
179,092
|
167,947
|
158,595
|
142,080
|
||||||||||||||||
Operating
income (loss)
|
585
|
212
|
1,784
|
(6,327
|
)
|
(1,323
|
)
|
||||||||||||||
Other
(expense) income, net
|
(129
|
)
|
(133
|
)
|
302
|
482
|
444
|
||||||||||||||
Income
(loss) before income taxes
|
456
|
79
|
2,086
|
(5,845
|
)
|
(879
|
)
|
||||||||||||||
Income
tax (expense) benefit
|
(64
|
)
|
5
|
(897
|
)
|
2,384
|
651
|
||||||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
392
|
$
|
84
|
$
|
1,189
|
$
|
(3,461
|
)
|
$
|
(228
|
)
|
|||||||||
Net
income (loss) per share
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Basic
|
$
|
0.04
|
$
|
0.01
|
$
|
0.12
|
$
|
(0.36
|
)
|
$
|
(0.02
|
)
|
|||||||||
Diluted
|
0.04
|
0.01
|
0.12
|
(0.36
|
)
|
(0.02
|
)
|
||||||||||||||
Shares
used in calculating net income (loss) per share
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Basic
|
9,993
|
9,951
|
9,889
|
9,592
|
9,378
|
||||||||||||||||
Diluted
|
10,072
|
10,014
|
9,970
|
9,592
|
9,378
|
||||||||||||||||
SELECTED
OPERATING DATA:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Percentage
change in comparable store sales
|
(1)
|
(0.7
|
)%
|
(2.4
|
)%
|
6.2
|
%
|
2.0
|
%
|
1.2
|
%
|
||||||||||
Percentage
change in number of transactions
|
(2)
|
(5.8
|
)%
|
(5.7
|
)%
|
(2.0
|
)%
|
(1.0
|
)%
|
0.2
|
%
|
||||||||||
Percentage
change in price per transaction
|
(3)
|
5.4
|
%
|
3.5
|
%
|
8.3
|
%
|
3.0
|
%
|
1.0
|
%
|
Fiscal
Years
|
||||||||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||||||||
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEET DATA:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
|
9,544
|
$
|
5,816
|
$
|
3,562
|
$
|
9,946
|
$
|
8,022
|
||||||||||
Total
assets
|
74,701
|
73,149
|
71,068
|
67,505
|
58,591
|
|||||||||||||||
Total
stockholders’ equity
|
47,155
|
45,386
|
44,075
|
40,502
|
40,965
|
18
(1)
|
Comparable
store sales are computed on a daily basis, and then aggregated to
determine comparable store sales on a quarterly or annual basis. A
restaurant is included in this computation after it has been open for 15
months. As a result, a restaurant may be included in this computation for
only a portion of a given quarter or year.
|
(2)
|
Numbers
of transactions are compiled by the Company’s point-of-sales
system.
|
(3)
|
Price
per transaction is derived from the Company’s net sales, which reflects
discounts and coupons.
|
19
You should read the following
discussion and analysis in conjunction with our financial statements and related
notes contained elsewhere in this report. This discussion contains forward-looking
statements that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Our actual results may
differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as
a result of a variety of factors, including those set forth under Item 1A, “Risk
Factors” and elsewhere in this report and those discussed in other documents we file
with the SEC. In light
of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, readers are cautioned not
to place undue reliance
on such forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements represent beliefs and
assumptions only as of the date of this report. Except as required by applicable
law, we do not intend to update or revise forward-looking statements contained
in this report to reflect future events or circumstances.
OVERVIEW
We opened
our first restaurant under the name “Rubio’s, Home of the Fish Taco” in 1983. As
of March 22, 2010, we have grown to 199 restaurants, including 195
company-operated, one licensed and three franchised locations. We position our
restaurants in the high-quality, fresh and distinctive fast-casual Mexican
cuisine segment of the restaurant industry. Our business strategy is to become a
leading brand in this industry segment.
2009
Highlights
During
2009, we continued to focus on ways to improve our economic model. Fiscal 2009
was impacted by the overall challenging macroeconomic environment in the areas
we operate our restaurants, and in particular, rising unemployment and the weak
housing markets in Arizona, Nevada and parts of California. In addition, the
current significant downturn in the overall economy has reduced consumer
confidence in the economy and negatively affected consumer spending and dining
out frequency. Over the past several months, we have undergone a vigorous
assessment of the opportunities to better leverage our resources and gain
efficiencies in our cost structure, while continuing to focus on delivering
unique products and an unsurpassed guest experience.
Revenue Growth.
Total revenues were $188.9 million, $179.3 million and $169.7
million in fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. The increase in revenues in
fiscal 2009 as compared with fiscal 2008 resulted from sales for new stores
opened in fiscal 2008 and 2009, which contributed sales of $12.2 million, offset
by stores closed during fiscal 2009 which decreased sales by $1.3 million and a
decrease in comparable store sales of $1.3 million. Our 2009 average unit
volume, which includes restaurants open for at least 12 months, decreased from
$1,008,000 to $996,000 primarily due to a decrease in comparable
store sales of 0.7%.
Restaurant Development.
We opened 10 company-owned restaurants in fiscal 2009 and had two
more under construction at the end of the year. We currently plan to open 20
company-owned restaurants in fiscal 2010 in our existing geographic markets. The
current slow down in housing, combined with the weak economy, has caused us to
focus almost exclusively on sites located in mature trade areas, where we will
look for attractive long-term opportunities in the softening real estate market.
This narrower focus could limit our growth potential in 2010 and 2011. Our
three-year expansion plan includes an annual unit growth rate of approximately
10% compounded annually beginning in 2010. We intend to tailor our
expansion plan during 2010 based on economic conditions, our financial results
and our ability to continue to satisfy the covenants contained in our credit
facility. If our financial results drop below our expectations or we are unable
to comply with the covenants in our credit facility, we will slow or curtail our
expansion plan.
Restaurant Profitability.
Cost of sales decreased to $49.7 million in fiscal 2009, from $51.3
million in fiscal 2008 and $48.4 million in fiscal 2007, due primarily to lower
costs partially offset by an increase in the number of company-operated
restaurants. As a percentage of restaurant sales, cost of sales decreased to
26.3% in fiscal 2009, as compared with 28.7% in fiscal 2008 and 28.5% in 2007.
Fiscal 2009 was not impacted by the food cost inflation experienced in 2008 and
2007. As a result, the menu price increases we implemented in July 2008
and January 2009 drove average check increases and lower cost of sales as a
percentage of sales. In addition, favorable supply agreements and menu
engineering efforts allowed us to reduce food costs while maintaining quality
and flavor profiles. Restaurant labor costs increased to $61.2 million in fiscal
2009, from $56.6 million in fiscal 2008 and $54.4 million in fiscal 2007. As a
percentage of restaurant sales, these costs increased to 32.4% in fiscal 2009
compared with 31.6% in fiscal 2008 and 32.1% in fiscal 2007. The increase in
restaurant labor in fiscal 2009 was primarily attributable to increased bonus
expense associated with our short and long term incentive plans. In order to
retain the most talented people, we provide our restaurant managers with a
combination of short term and long term incentives that are based on improvement
in restaurant profitability. Restaurant occupancy and other costs increased to
$46.9 million in fiscal 2009, from $42.6 million in fiscal 2008 and $39.2
million in fiscal 2007. As a percentage of restaurant sales, these costs
increased to 24.8% in fiscal 2009, from 23.8% in fiscal 2008 and 23.1% in fiscal
2007. The increase in restaurant occupancy and other costs in dollars and as a
percentage of restaurant sales during fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008 is due
to higher advertising expenditures, including the cost of a segmentation study
designed to help us better understand our target guests, as well as higher
repair and service contracts expense associated with a preventative maintenance
program implemented during the fourth quarter of 2008 that focused on better
maintaining restaurant equipment.
General and Administrative
Expenses. General and administrative costs increased in 2009
primarily due to an increase in wages and wage-related expenses, offset by a
decrease in non-cash share-based compensation costs, legal and professional
fees. As we continue to add new restaurants, we expect to be able to leverage
our general and administrative costs at a better rate than we have
historically.
20
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES
Our
discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are
based upon our consolidated financial statements, which are prepared in
accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The
preparation of these consolidated financial statements in accordance with GAAP
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported
amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingencies at the
date of the consolidated financial statements as well as the reported amounts of
revenues and expenses during the reporting period.
Management
evaluates these estimates and assumptions on an ongoing basis including those
relating to impairment of assets, restructuring charges, contingencies and
litigation. Our estimates and assumptions have been prepared on the basis of the
most current information available, and actual results could differ from these
estimates under different assumptions and conditions.
REVENUE
RECOGNITION - Revenues from the operation of company-owned restaurants are
recognized when sales occur. Franchise revenue is comprised of royalties from
franchised restaurants and is recorded as revenue as earned. We recognize a
liability upon the sale of our gift cards and recognize revenue when these gift
cards are redeemed in our restaurants. The portion of the gift cards that is not
expected to be redeemed (breakage) is recognized ratably over three years based
on historical and expected redemption trends. This adjustment is classified as
revenues in our consolidated statement of operations.
PROPERTY
- Property is stated at cost. A variety of costs are incurred in the leasing and
construction of restaurant facilities. The costs of buildings under development
include specifically identifiable costs. The capitalized costs include
development costs, construction costs, salaries and related costs, and other
costs incurred during the acquisition or construction stage. Salaries and
related costs capitalized totaled $258,000, $334,000 and $323,000 for fiscal
years 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Depreciation and amortization of
buildings, leasehold improvements, and equipment are computed using the
straight-line method over the shorter of the estimated useful lives of the
assets or the initial lease term for certain leased properties (buildings and
improvements range from 1 to 20 years and equipment 3 to 7 years). For leases
with renewal periods at the Company’s option, the Company generally uses the
original lease term, excluding renewal option periods to determine useful lives;
if failure to exercise a renewal option imposes an economic penalty to the
Company, management may determine at the inception of the lease that renewal is
reasonably assured and include the renewal option period in the determination of
appropriate estimated useful lives. The Company’s policy requires lease-term
consistency when calculating the depreciation period, in classifying the lease,
and in computing straight-line rent expense.
IMPAIRMENT
OF GOODWILL - Goodwill, which represents the excess of the cost of acquired
businesses over the fair value of amounts assigned to assets acquired and
liabilities assumed, is not amortized. Instead, goodwill is assessed for
impairment annually at the same time every year, and when an event occurs or
circumstances change, such that it is reasonably possible that an impairment may
exist. We selected our fiscal year-end as our annual date. As a result of our
assessment at December 27, 2009 and December 28, 2008, no impairment of goodwill
was indicated.
IMPAIRMENT
OF LONG-LIVED ASSETS - Long-lived assets, such as property, plant, and
equipment, are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be
recoverable. If circumstances require a long-lived asset or asset group be
tested for possible impairment, the Company first compares undiscounted cash
flows expected to be generated by that asset or asset group to its carrying
value. If the carrying value of the long-lived asset or asset group is not
recoverable on an undiscounted cash flow basis, an impairment is recognized to
the extent that the carrying value exceeds its fair value. Fair value is
determined through various valuation techniques which may include discounted
cash flow models, quoted market values and third-party independent appraisals,
as considered necessary.
Long-lived
asset impairment amounts are estimates that we have recorded based on reasonable
assumptions related to our restaurant locations at this point in time. The
conditions regarding these locations may change in the future and could be
materially affected by factors such as our ability to maintain or improve sales
levels, our ability to secure subleases, our success at negotiating early
termination agreements with lessors, the general health of the economy and
resultant demand for commercial property. Because the factors used to estimate
impairment expenses are subject to change, amounts recorded may not be
sufficient, and adjustments may be necessary.
21
SELF-INSURANCE
LIABILITIES - We are self-insured for a portion of our workers’ compensation
insurance program. Maximum self-insured retention, including defense costs per
occurrence is $150,000 for the claim years ended October 31, 2010 and October
31, 2009, and $350,000 for the claim year ended October 31, 2008. We account for
insurance liabilities based on independent actuarial estimates of the amount of
ultimate losses incurred. These estimates rely on actuarial observations of
industry-wide and Rubio’s specific historical claim loss development. Our actual
loss development may be better or worse than the development estimated by the
actuary. In that event, we will modify the accrual, and our operating expenses
will increase or decrease accordingly.
INCOME
TAXES - Income taxes are accounted for under the asset and liability method.
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax
consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement
carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax
bases and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. Deferred tax assets and
liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable
income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be
recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a
change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the
enactment date. The Company recognizes the effect of income tax positions only
if those positions are more likely than not of being sustained. Recognized
income tax positions are measured at the largest amount that is greater than 50%
likely of being realized. Changes in recognition or measurement are reflected in
the period in which the change in judgment occurs. The Company records interest
and penalties related to unrecognized tax positions in income tax
expense.
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
All
comparisons under this heading between fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007 refer to the
52-week periods ended December 27, 2009, December 28, 2008 and December 30,
2007, respectively.
The
following table sets forth our operating results, expressed as a percentage of
total revenues, with respect to certain items included in our consolidated
statements of operations.
Fiscal
Year Ended
|
||||||||||||
December
27,
2009
|
December
28,
2008
|
December
30,
2007
|
||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
100.0
|
%
|
100.0
|
%
|
100.0
|
%
|
||||||
Costs
and expenses:
|
||||||||||||
Cost
of sales (1)
|
26.3
|
28.7
|
28.5
|
|||||||||
Restaurant
labor (1)
|
32.4
|
31.6
|
32.1
|
|||||||||
Restaurant
occupancy and other (1)
|
24.8
|
23.8
|
23.1
|
|||||||||
General
and administrative expenses
|
10.0
|
10.0
|
9.6
|
|||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
5.2
|
5.4
|
5.2
|
|||||||||
Pre-opening
expenses
|
0.2
|
0.4
|
0.3
|
|||||||||
Asset
impairment and store closure expense (reversal)
|
0.6
|
0.0
|
0.2
|
|||||||||
Loss
on disposal/sale of property
|
0.2
|
0.2
|
0.1
|
|||||||||
Operating
income
|
0.3
|
0.1
|
1.1
|
|||||||||
Other
(expense) income, net
|
(0.1
|
)
|
(0.1
|
)
|
0.2
|
|||||||
Income
before income taxes
|
0.2
|
0.0
|
1.2
|
|||||||||
Income
tax benefit (expense)
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
(0.5
|
)
|
||||||||
Net
income
|
0.2
|
%
|
0.0
|
%
|
0.7
|
%
|
(1) As a
percentage of restaurant sales.
The
following table summarizes the number of restaurants:
December
27,
2009
|
December
28,
2008
|
December
30,
2007
|
||||||||||
Company-operated
|
193
|
186
|
171
|
|||||||||
Franchised
and licensed locations
|
5
|
5
|
5
|
|||||||||
Total
|
198
|
191
|
176
|
Revenues
Total
revenues were $188.9 million, $179.3 million and $169.7 million in fiscal 2009,
2008 and 2007, respectively. The increase in revenues in fiscal 2009 as compared
with fiscal 2008 resulted from the following factors: first, we opened 10 new
stores in fiscal 2009, which contributed sales of $5.5 million; second, stores
opened before fiscal 2009 but not yet in our comparable store base contributed
sales of $3.9 million; and third, an increase in sales for stores that entered
the comparable store base during 2009 of $2.7 million; offset by stores closed
during fiscal 2009 which decreased sales by $1.3 million and a decrease in
comparable store sales of $1.2 million. The 0.7% decrease in comparable store
sales in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008 was primarily due to a decrease in
transactions of 5.8%, which was partially offset by an increase in average check
amount of 5.4%. In calculating comparable store sales, we include a store in the
comparable base once it has been open for 15 months. The increase in revenues in
fiscal 2008 as compared with fiscal 2007 resulted from the following factors:
first, we opened 17 new stores in fiscal 2008, which contributed sales of $8.3
million and second, stores opened before fiscal 2008 but not yet in our
comparable store base contributed sales of $5.2 million; offset by a decrease in
comparable store sales of $3.9 million. The 2.4% decrease in comparable store
sales in fiscal 2008 compared to fiscal 2007 was primarily due to a decrease in
transactions of 5.7%, which was partially offset by an increase in average check
amount of 3.5%. Our average unit volume was $996,000 in fiscal 2009 as compared
with $1,008,000 in fiscal 2008 and $1,034,000 in fiscal 2007.
22
Costs
and Expenses
Cost of sales decreased to $49.7
million in fiscal 2009, from $51.3 million in fiscal 2008 and $48.4 million in
fiscal 2007, due primarily to lower costs partially offset by an increase in the
number of company-operated restaurants. As a percentage of restaurant sales,
cost of sales decreased to 26.3% in fiscal 2009, as compared with 28.7% in
fiscal 2008 and 28.5% in 2007. Fiscal 2009 was not impacted by the food cost
inflation experienced in 2008 and 2007. As a result, the menu price
increases we implemented in July 2008 and January 2009 drove average check
increases and lower cost of sales as a percentage of sales. In addition,
favorable supply agreements and menu engineering efforts allowed us to reduce
food costs while maintaining quality and flavor profiles. Increases in the cost of fish,
tortillas, avocados, cheese and beverage syrup, as well as cost increases
related to our transition to the use of zero trans fat oil during the third
quarter of 2007 contributed to the increase in cost of sales as a percentage of
restaurant sales during fiscal 2007 and fiscal 2008. Our distribution costs also
increased during fiscal 2008 compared to fiscal 2007, driven largely by higher
fuel costs.
Restaurant
labor costs increased to $61.2 million in fiscal 2009, from $56.6 million in
fiscal 2008 and $54.4 million in fiscal 2007. As a percentage of restaurant
sales, these costs increased to 32.4% in fiscal 2009 compared with 31.6% in
fiscal 2008 and 32.1% in fiscal 2007. The increase in restaurant labor in fiscal
2009 was primarily attributable to increased bonus expense associated with our
short and long term incentive plans. In order to retain the most talented
people, we provide our restaurant managers with a combination of short term and
long term incentives that are based on improvement in restaurant profitability.
The decrease in labor cost as a percentage of sales during fiscal 2008 was due
to continued favorable adjustments to our worker’s compensation reserves that
resulted primarily from the closure of a large number of cases during the year
and our continued focus on safety in our restaurants, as well as from
improvements in labor management driven by our new labor scheduling system.
These favorable drivers were partially offset by de-leveraging of the fixed
component of labor due to lower comparable store sales and the increase in the
minimum wage rate in the State of California, which occurred during January
2008.
Restaurant
occupancy and other costs increased to $46.9 million in fiscal 2009, from $42.6
million in fiscal 2008 and $39.2 million in fiscal 2007. As a percentage of
restaurant sales, these costs increased to 24.8% in fiscal 2009, from 23.8% in
fiscal 2008 and 23.1% in fiscal 2007. The increase in restaurant occupancy and
other costs in dollars and as a percentage of restaurant sales during fiscal
2009 compared to fiscal 2008 is due to higher advertising expenditures,
including the cost of a segmentation study designed to help us better understand
our target guests, as well as higher repair and service contracts expense
associated with a preventative maintenance program implemented during the fourth
quarter of 2008 that focused on better maintaining restaurant equipment. The
increase during fiscal 2008 compared to fiscal 2007 is primarily a result of
lower average unit volumes on a partially fixed cost base.
General
and administrative expenses increased to $18.8 million in fiscal 2009, from
$17.9 million in fiscal 2008, and increased from $16.2 million in fiscal 2007.
As a percentage of revenue, these costs were 10.0% in fiscal 2009, 10.0% in
fiscal 2008 and 9.6% in fiscal 2007. The increase in general administrative
expenses in dollars, although a decrease as a percentage of revenue, in fiscal
2009 compared to fiscal 2008 is primarily due to an increase in wages and
wage-related expenses in addition to costs incurred in conjunction with the
evaluation of strategic alternatives for the Company, offset by a decrease in
non-cash share-based compensation costs, legal and professional fees. The
increase in general administrative expenses in fiscal 2008 compared to fiscal
2007 is due to an increase in non-cash share based compensation, higher legal
costs, the addition of senior executives in the fourth quarter of 2007, and
professional fees associated with an income tax method change study that allowed
us to immediately expense for tax purposes previously capitalized repairs and
remodeling expenses.
Depreciation
and amortization increased to $9.9 million in fiscal 2009, from $9.7 million in
fiscal 2008 and $8.8 million in fiscal 2007. The increase is due to our
continued expansion efforts, which included the addition of 10 new restaurants
throughout 2009 and 17 throughout 2008.
Pre-opening
expenses decreased to $353,000 in fiscal 2009, from $689,000 in fiscal 2008 and
$572,000 in fiscal 2007. During fiscal 2009, we opened 10 restaurants compared
with 17 during fiscal 2008 and 10 during fiscal 2007. The increase in
pre-opening expenses in fiscal 2008 compared to fiscal 2007 is due to an
increase in the number of restaurants opened during the fiscal year. The decline
in pre-opening expenses in fiscal 2009 includes an overall decline in
pre-opening expenditures on a per store basis. This per store reduction is
primarily due to the shifting of certain marketing related costs to
post-opening. Pre-opening costs include non-cash rent expense during the
build-out period of $15,000 to $25,000 per location and compensation expense of
approximately $15,000 to $20,000 per location.
Asset
impairment and store closure (reversal) expense comprised a $1,068,000
impairment charge in fiscal 2009, compared to a net $46,000 store closure
reversal in fiscal 2008, and a $274,000 charge in fiscal 2007. The $1,068,000
impairment charge in fiscal 2009 is related to the carrying amount of certain
long-lived assets exceeding the fair value of the assets at eleven
under-performing stores. A store closure reversal of $91,000 was recorded in the
first quarter of fiscal 2008 due to our decision to re-brand a location in the
Fort Collins, Colorado area that was closed in 2001 and was offset by a $45,000
store closure expense related to the closure of our Beverly Center location in
Los Angeles, California during the second quarter of fiscal 2008. The $274,000
charge in fiscal 2007 was the net effect of a decrease to store closure reserve
of $19,000 for the sublease income for a Salt Lake City, Utah location, which
closed in 2001, combined with a charge to impairment of $229,000 for the closure
of our Beverly Center location in Los Angeles, California and a $64,000 decrease
to anticipated sublease income for a restaurant in the Denver, Colorado area
that closed in 2001.
23
Other
(expense) income, net, primarily interest, decreased to expense of $129,000 in
fiscal 2009, compared with expense of $133,000 in fiscal 2008 and income of
$302,000 in fiscal 2007. The interest expense in fiscal 2009 and fiscal 2008
consisted of interest accruals related to our class action settlement in
addition to the amortization of debt issuance costs incurred in conjunction with
the new credit facility we secured during fiscal 2008.
In
calculating the income tax expense or benefit for fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007 we
apply our statutory blended federal and state income tax rate against our
pre-tax book income or loss and increase or decrease the those tax rates for the
impact of various items. Our fiscal 2009 effective tax rate of 14.0% reflected a
decrease from the statutory rate primarily as the result of improved efforts to
generate additional federal employment tax credits. Our fiscal 2008 effective
tax rate reflected an income tax benefit rate of 6.3%. This was primarily a
result of additional federal employment credits and the reversal of
approximately $105,000 of accrued interest expense due to a favorable ruling
from the IRS on our tax accounting method change request. The impact of these
favorable items on our effective tax rate was significantly increased as a
result of our pre-tax book income being so close to zero. Our fiscal 2007 effective
tax rate of 43.0% reflected a net increase from the statutory rate that included
a decrease of 2.5% for federal tax credits, an increase of 1.3% for accrued
interest, and a one-time increase of 3.2% related to the revaluation of the
state deferred tax asset to reflect a revised statutory state tax
rate.
SEASONALITY
Historically,
we have experienced seasonal variability in our quarterly operating results with
higher sales per restaurant in the second and third quarters than in the first
and fourth quarters. The higher sales in the second and third quarters affect
profitability by reducing the impact of our restaurants’ fixed and partially
fixed costs, as a percentage of sales. This seasonal impact on our operating
results is expected to continue.
INFLATION
The
primary areas of our operations affected by inflation are food, supply, labor,
fuel, lease, utility, insurance costs and materials used in the construction of
our restaurants. Substantial increases in costs and expenses, particularly food,
supply, labor, fuel and operating expenses could have a significant impact on
our operating results to the extent that such increases cannot be passed through
to our guests. Our leases require us to pay taxes, maintenance, repairs,
insurance and utilities, all of which are subject to inflationary increases. We
believe inflation with respect to food, labor, insurance and utility expenses
has had a material impact on our results of operations in 2008 and
2007.
Since we
became public in 1999, we have funded our capital requirements through bank debt
and cash flows from operations. We generated $11.3 million in cash flows from
operating activities in fiscal 2009, $12.8 million in fiscal 2008, and $4.2
million in fiscal 2007. The decrease in cash flows from operating activities
during fiscal 2009 is due to the second of three $2.5 million installment
payments associated with the 2007 settlement of a class action lawsuit, changes
in operating assets and liabilities, and non-cash expenses, including
depreciation, amortization and non-cash share-based compensation, offset by
higher net income. The increase in cash flow from operating activities during
fiscal 2008 is primarily due to the following: first, $2.3 million in tax
refunds resulting primarily from the previously mentioned income tax method
change study that allowed us to immediately expense for tax purposes previously
capitalized repairs and remodeling expenses; second, the initial payment of $2.5
million related to a previously settled class action lawsuit at the end of
fiscal 2007 and the payment of $1.5 million in prepaid rent at the end of the
fourth quarter of fiscal 2007; third, other changes in operating assets and
liabilities, and non-cash expenses, including depreciation, amortization and
share-based compensation, partially offset by decreased net income.
Net cash
used in investing activities was $7.9 million in fiscal 2009, compared with
$10.3 million in fiscal 2008 and $12.1 million in fiscal 2007. Net cash used in
investing activities in fiscal 2009 was comprised of $7.9 million in capital
expenditures. Net cash used in investing activities in fiscal 2008 was comprised
primarily of $13.4 million in capital expenditures and $100,000 in purchases of
investments offset by $3.2 million in proceeds from the sale of investments. Net
cash used in investing activities in fiscal 2007 was comprised primarily of
$12.1 million in capital expenditures. The decrease in cash used in investing
activities in 2009 was driven by decreased new store development activity offset
by proceeds from the release of restricted cash that was collateralizing standby
letters of credit during 2008. The increase in cash used in investing activities
for fiscal 2008 for capital expenditures was driven by increased new store
development activity, offset by proceeds from the release of restricted cash
that was collateralizing standby letters of credit.
Net cash
provided by (used in) financing activities was net cash provided of $323,000 in
fiscal 2009 compared with net cash used of $243,000 in fiscal 2008 and net cash
provided of $1.5 million in fiscal 2007. Net cash provided by financing
activities during fiscal 2009 consisted of proceeds from the exercise of common
stock options in addition to excess tax benefits from share-based compensation.
Net cash used in financing activities during fiscal 2008 consisted primarily of
$246,000 in the payment of debt issuance costs. Net cash provided by financing
activities during fiscal 2007 consisted of proceeds received from exercises of
common stock options of $1.2 million and excess tax benefits from share-based
compensation of $284,000.
24
On May
13, 2008, we entered into a $5.0 million revolving line of credit and a $15.0
million non-revolving line of credit (the “Credit Facility”) with Pacific
Western Bank (the “Bank”). The revolving line of credit calls for monthly
interest payments, which began June 5, 2008 at a variable interest rate based on
the prime rate plus 0.25%. All outstanding principal plus accrued unpaid
interest on the revolving line of credit is due May 13, 2010. The non-revolving
line of credit calls for each advance to be evidenced by a separate note. Each
advance shall have a maximum term of 57 months with an interest rate based on
the prime rate plus 0.25%. Payments on advances shall be interest only for the
first nine months, then principal and interest payments monthly. Both lines are
collateralized by all of our assets and guaranteed by our subsidiaries. In
addition, both lines require us to maintain our primary depository relationship
with the Bank and the related accounts are subject to the right of offset for
amounts due under the lines. Both lines are subject to certain financial and
non-financial debt covenants and include a restriction on the payment of
dividends without prior consent of the Bank. As of December 27, 2009, we were in
compliance with all debt covenants. At December 27, 2009, we had $4.9 million of
availability under the revolving line of credit, net of $99,000 of outstanding
letters of credit, and $15.0 million of availability under the non-revolving
line of credit.
In 2003,
we obtained a letter of credit in the amount of $2.0 million related to our
workers’ compensation insurance policy. The letter of credit was subject to
automatic one-year extensions from the expiration date and thereafter, unless
notification was made prior to the expiration date. In December 2004, this
letter of credit was increased to $2.9 million. The letter of credit was
extended in October 2006. We were also required, under the terms of the letters
of credit, to pledge collateral of $3.0 million in 2006. During the second
quarter of 2008, we issued a standby letter of credit under the Credit Facility
we obtained during the second quarter. We were not required to pledge collateral
for this standby letter of credit and, as a result, as of the second quarter of
fiscal 2008, we included the $3.1 million in cash and cash
equivalents. In December 2009, our workers’ compensation insurance company
notified us that our current letter of credit in the amount of $2.5 million was
no longer acceptable. As a result of this, in December 2009, we entered into an
agreement with our workers’ compensation insurance company to replace the letter
of credit with cash collateral in the amount of $1.8 million. At December 27,
2009, the $1.8 million is included in other assets.
We
currently expect total capital expenditures in 2010 to be approximately $9.0
million to $15.0 million for restaurant openings, restaurant re-imaging,
maintenance, and for corporate and information technology. We currently expect
that future locations will generally cost approximately $500,000 to $600,000 per
unit, net of any tenant improvement allowance and excluding pre-opening
expenses. Some units may exceed this range due to the area in which they are
built and the specific requirements of the project. Pre-opening expenses are
expected to average between $50,000 and $60,000 per restaurant, which includes
approximately $15,000 to $25,000 of non-cash rent expense during the build-out
period.
We
believe that the anticipated cash flows from operations and the availability on
our credit facilities, combined with our cash and cash equivalents of $9.5
million as of December 27, 2009 will be sufficient to satisfy our working
capital needs, required capital expenditures and class action settlement
obligations for the next 12 months. We intend to tailor our expansion plan
during 2010 based on economic conditions, our financial results and our ability
to continue to satisfy the covenants contained in the Credit Facility. If our
financial results drop below our expectations or we are unable to comply with
the covenants in the Credit Facility, we will slow or curtail our expansion
plan. Nevertheless, changes in our operating plans, lower than anticipated
sales, increased expenses, potential acquisitions or other events may cause us
to seek additional or alternative financing sooner than anticipated. Additional
or alternative financing may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all.
Failure to obtain additional or alternative financing as needed could have a
material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
CONTRACTUAL
OBLIGATIONS AND COMMITMENTS
The
following represents a comprehensive list of our contractual obligations and
commitments as of December 27, 2009:
Payments
Due by Period (in thousands)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Total
|
Less
than
1
year
|
1
- 3 years
|
3
- 5 years
|
After
5
years
|
||||||||||||||||
Company-operated
retail locations and other operating leases
|
$
|
76,423
|
$
|
15,185
|
$
|
23,380
|
$
|
16,888
|
$
|
20,970
|
||||||||||
Settlement
of class action lawsuit (1)
|
2,811
|
2,811
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||||||||
$
|
79,234
|
$
|
17,996
|
$
|
23,380
|
$
|
16,888
|
$
|
20,970
|
(1)
|
includes
interest at 3% per annum.
|
25
IMPACT OF
RECENTLY ISSUED ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
In June
2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) approved the FASB
Accounting Standards Codification (the “Codification” or “ASC”) and the
hierarchy of U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), which
establishes the Codification (ASC Subtopic 105-10) as the sole source of
authoritative guidance recognized by the FASB to be applied by nongovernmental
entities. All existing accounting standard literature, promulgated by the FASB,
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Emerging Issues Task Force
and other authoritative sources, excluding guidance from the Securities and
Exchange Commission (“SEC”), will be superseded by the Codification. All
non-grandfathered, non-SEC accounting literature not included in the
Codification will become non-authoritative. The Codification does not change
GAAP, but instead introduces a new structure that will combine all authoritative
standards into a comprehensive, topically organized online database. The
Codification became effective for interim and annual periods ending after
September 15, 2009. There is no change to the content of our consolidated
financial statements or disclosures as a result of implementing the
Codification. However, as a result of implementation of the Codification,
previous references to new accounting standards and literature are no longer
applicable. In order to ease the transition to the Codification, we are
providing the Codification cross-reference alongside the references to the
standards issued and adopted prior to the adoption of the Codification. All
future references to authoritative accounting literature in our consolidated
financial statements will be referenced in accordance with the
Codification.
Item
7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Our
market risk exposures are related to our cash and cash equivalents. We invest
our excess cash in highly liquid short-term investments with maturities of less
than one year. The portfolio consists primarily of money market instruments. As
of December 27, 2009, we had no investments with maturities in excess of one
year. These investments are not held for trading or other speculative purposes.
Changes in interest rates affect the investment income we earn on our
investments and, therefore, impact our cash flows and results of operations. Due
to the types of our investments and debt instruments, a 10% change in period-end
interest rates or a hypothetical 100-basis-point adverse change in interest
rates would not have a significant negative effect on our financial
results.
We are
exposed to market risk from changes in interest rates on debt. Our exposure to
interest rate fluctuations is limited to our outstanding bank debt. At December
27, 2009, there were no amounts outstanding under our revolving or non-revolving
lines of credit. The revolving line of credit calls for monthly interest
payments beginning June 5, 2008 at a variable interest rate based on the prime
rate plus 0.25%, resulting in an initial rate of 5.25%. All outstanding
principal plus accrued unpaid interest on the revolving line of credit is due
May 13, 2010. The non-revolving line calls for each advance to be evidenced by a
separate note. Each advance shall have a maximum term of 57 months with an
interest rate based on the prime rate plus 0.25%. Interest expense incurred
during the 52 weeks ended December 27, 2009 was primarily due to interest
accruals related to our class action settlement in addition to the amortization
of debt issuance costs incurred in conjunction with the new credit facility we
secured during fiscal 2008.
Many of
the prices of food products purchased by us are affected by changes in weather,
production, availability, seasonality, fuel and energy costs, and other factors
outside our control. In an effort to control some of this risk, we have entered
into some fixed price purchase commitments with terms of one year or less. We do
not believe that these purchase commitments are material to our operations as a
whole. In addition, we believe that almost all of our food and supplies are
available from several sources.
Impact of
Inflation
The
primary areas of our operations affected by inflation are food, supplies, labor,
fuel, lease, utility, insurance costs and materials used in the construction of
our restaurants. Substantial increases in costs and expenses, particularly food,
supplies, labor, fuel and operating expenses could have a significant impact on
our operating results to the extent that such increases cannot be passed through
to our guests. Our leases require us to pay taxes, maintenance, repairs,
insurance and utilities, all of which are subject to inflationary increases. We
believe inflation with respect to food, labor, insurance and utility expense has
had a material impact on our results of operations in 2009, 2008, and
2007
Item
8. CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
Our
consolidated financial statements as of December 27, 2009 and December 28, 2008
and for each of the three fiscal years in the period ended December 27, 2009 and
the report of our independent registered public accounting firm thereon are
included elsewhere in this report. Supplementary unaudited quarterly financial
data for fiscal 2009 and 2008 are included in this report in Note 14 to the
consolidated financial statements.
Item
9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL
DISCLOSURES
None.
Item
9T. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Conclusion
Regarding the Effectiveness of Disclosure Controls and Procedures:
Based on
an evaluation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Rules 13(a)-15(e) and 15(d)-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended), as of the end of the Company’s fiscal year ended December 27 2009, the
Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer (its principal
executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively) have concluded
that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were
effective.
26
Management’s
Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting:
Management
is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over
financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act). The
Company’s internal control over financial reporting is designed to provide
reasonable assurance to the Company’s management and Board of Directors
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles.
Management
assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting as of December 27, 2009. In making this assessment, our management
used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control - Integrated
Framework. Management has concluded that, as of December 27, 2009, the
Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective based on these
criteria.
This
annual report does not include an attestation report of the Company’s
independent registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over
financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by the
Company’s independent registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary
rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the Company to
provide only management’s report in this annual report.
Changes
in Internal Control over Financial Reporting:
There
have been no significant changes in the Company’s internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the Company’s fiscal quarter ended
December 27, 2009 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting.
Inherent
Limitations on Effectiveness of Controls:
Our
management, including our chief executive officer and our chief financial
officer, do not expect that our disclosure controls or our internal control over
financial reporting will prevent or detect all error and all fraud. A control
system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable,
not absolute, assurance that the control system’s objectives will be met. The
design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource
constraints, and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their
costs. Further, because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no
evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to
error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances of fraud,
if any, have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities
that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns can occur
because of simple error or mistake. Controls can also be circumvented by the
individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by
management override of the controls. The design of any system of controls is
based in part on certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and
there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated
goals under all potential future conditions. Projections of any evaluation of
controls effectiveness to future periods are subject to risks. Over time,
controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or deterioration
in the degree of compliance with policies or procedures.
Item
9B. OTHER INFORMATION
None.
PART
III
Item
10. DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
The
information required by this item relating to our directors and our corporate
governance is incorporated herein by reference to our definitive proxy statement
to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A of the Exchange Act for our 2010
annual meeting of stockholders. The information required by this item relating
to our executive officers is included in Item 1, “Our Executive Officers.”
The information required by this item relating to our executive officers is
included in Item 1, “Our Executive Officers.” We have adopted a written code of
ethics that applies to our principal executive officer, principal financial
officer, and principal accounting officer, and/or persons performing similar
functions.
The
information required by this item is incorporated by reference to our definitive
proxy statement to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A of the Exchange Act for
our 2010 annual meeting of stockholders.
27
The
information required by this item is incorporated by reference to our definitive
proxy statement to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A of the Exchange Act for
our 2010 annual meeting of stockholders.
Item
13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS AND DIRECTOR
INDEPENDENCE
The
information required by this item is incorporated by reference to our definitive
proxy statement to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A of the Exchange Act for
our 2010 annual meeting of stockholders.
Item
14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
The
information required by this item is incorporated by reference to our definitive
proxy statement to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A of the Exchange Act for
our 2010 annual meeting of stockholders.
28
Item
15. EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
(a)
|
Financial
Statements and Financial Statement Schedules:
|
|
The
following documents are filed as part of the
report:
|
(1)
|
See
the index to our consolidated financial statements on page F-1 for a list
of the financial statements being filed
herein.
|
(2)
|
All
financial statement schedules are omitted because they are not applicable
or the required information is shown in the consolidated financial
statements or other notes thereto.
|
(3)
|
See
the Exhibits under Item 15(b) below for all Exhibits being filed or
incorporated by reference herein.
|
(b)
|
Exhibits:
|
Number
|
Description
|
|
3.1(7)
|
Third
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation.
|
|
3.2(1)
|
Restated
Bylaws (Exhibit 3.4).
|
|
3.4(3)
|
Certificate
of Amendment of the Bylaws (Exhibit 3.4).
|
|
3.5(14)
|
Certificate
of Amendment of the Bylaws
|
|
4.1(1)
|
Specimen
common stock certificate (Exhibit 4.1).
|
|
10.1(1)
|
Amended
and Restated Investors’ Rights Agreement, dated November 19, 1997 (Exhibit
10.7).
|
|
10.2(1)
|
Amendment
No. 1 to the Amended and Restated Investors’ Rights Agreement, dated
December 31, 1997 (Exhibit 10.8).
|
|
10.3(1)
|
Amendment
No. 2 to the Amended and Restated Investor’s Rights Agreement, dated May
1998 (Exhibit 10.9).
|
|
10.4
(7)
|
Investors’
Rights Agreement Standstill and Extension Agreement between us and
Rosewood Capital, L.P. dated March 12, 2004 (Exhibit
10.4).
|
|
10.5
(6)
|
Investors’
Rights Agreement Standstill and Extension Agreement between us and Ralph
Rubio, dated April 29, 2004 (Exhibit 10.1).
|
|
10.6
(8)
|
Investors’
Rights Agreement Standstill and Extension Agreement between us and
Rosewood Capital, L.P. dated July 28, 2005 (Exhibit
10.1).
|
|
10.7
(8)
|
Investors’
Rights Agreement Standstill and Extension Agreement between us and Ralph
Rubio, dated July 28, 2005 (Exhibit 10.2).
|
|
10.8(1)
|
Lease
Agreement between us and Macro Plaza Enterprises, dated October 27, 1997
(Exhibit 10.15).
|
|
10.9(1)
|
First
Amendment to Lease Agreement between us and Cornerstone Corporate Centre,
LLC, dated October 16, 1998 (Exhibit 10.16).
|
|
10.17(1)(2)
|
Form
of Indemnification Agreement between us and each of our directors (Exhibit
10.25).
|
|
10.18(1)(2)
|
Form
of Indemnification Agreement between us and each of our officers (Exhibit
10.26).
|
|
10.38(1)(2)
|
Employee
Stock Purchase Plan (Exhibit 10.46).
|
|
10.42(4)†
|
Form
of Franchise Agreement as of March 15, 2001.
|
|
10.51(5)(2)
|
Rubio’s
Restaurants, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors
(Exhibit 10.51).
|
|
10.54(5)(2)
|
1999
Stock Incentive Plan, as amended through March 6, 2003 (Exhibit
10.54).
|
|
10.56(7)(2)
|
1999
Stock Incentive Plan Form of Stock Option Agreement.
|
|
10.57(7)(2)
|
1999
Stock Incentive Plan Form of Addendum to Stock Option
Agreement.
|
|
10.60(7)(2)
|
1999
Stock Incentive Plan Form of Stock Issuance Agreement.
|
|
10.62(9)(2)
|
Letter
Agreement between Gerry Leneweaver and the Company, dated June 1, 2005
(Exhibit 10.2).
|
|
10.63(10)(2)
|
Letter
Agreement between Lawrence Rusinko and the Company, dated October 7, 2005
(Exhibit 10.1).
|
|
10.64(11)(2)
|
Letter
Agreement between Daniel E. Pittard and the Company, dated August 21, 2006
(as corrected).
|
|
10.65(12)(2)
|
Form
of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement under the Rubio’s Restaurants, Inc.
1999 Stock Incentive Plan.
|
|
10.66(12)(2)
|
Rubio’s
Restaurants, Inc. Severance Pay Plan.
|
|
10.67(13)(2)
|
Rubio’s
Restaurants, Inc. 2006 Executive Incentive Plan.
|
|
10.68(12)(2)
|
Form
of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement under the Rubio’s Restaurants, Inc.
2006 Executive Incentive Plan.
|
|
10.69(2)
|
Rubio’s
Restaurants, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan, effective December 1,
2007.
|
|
10.70(14)
|
Investors’
Rights Agreement Standstill and Extension Agreement between us and
Rosewood Capital, L.P., dated May 7, 2007 (Exhibit
10.8)
|
|
10.71(14)
|
Investors’
Rights Agreement Standstill and Extension Agreement between us and Ralph
Rubio, dated May 7, 2007 (Exhibit 10.9)
|
|
10.72(15)†
|
Sponsorship
Agreement between us and the Mighty Ducks Hockey Club, LLC, dated February
28, 2006.
|
29
10.73(15)†
|
Beverage
Marketing Agreement between us and The Coca-Cola Company, dated September
20, 2007.
|
|
10.74(15)†
|
Master
Distributor Agreement between us and U.S. Foodservice, Inc., dated January
28, 2008.
|
|
Sponsorship
Agreement between us and San Diego Ballpark Funding LLC, dated March 21,
2008.
|
||
10.76(2)(16)
|
Rubio’s
Restaurants, Inc. 2008 Equity Incentive Plan.
|
|
10.77†(17)
|
Business
Loan Agreement, dated May 13, 2008, by and between the Company and Pacific
Western Bank ($15 million guidance line) (Exhibit
10.76).
|
|
10.78†(17)
|
Business
Loan Agreement, dated May 13, 2008, by and between the Company and Pacific
Western Bank ($5 million revolving line) (Exhibit
10.77)
|
|
10.79(18)
|
Amendment
to Investors’ Rights Agreement Standstill and Extension Agreement, dated
September 11, 2008, between Rubio’s Restaurants, Inc. and Rosewood
Capital, L.P. (Exhibit 10.1).
|
|
10.80(18)
|
Amendment
to Investors’ Rights Agreement Standstill and Extension Agreement, dated
September 11, 2008, between Rubio’s Restaurants, Inc. and Ralph Rubio
(Exhibit 10.2).
|
|
10.81(2)(19)
|
Amendment
to Employment Offer Letter Agreement, dated December 19, 2008, between the
Company and Daniel E. Pittard (Exhibit 10.76).
|
|
10.82(2)(19)
|
Form
of Change of Control Agreement (Exhibit 10.77).
|
|
10.83(2)(19)
|
Form
of Addendum to Stock Option Agreement (Exhibit 10.78).
|
|
10.84(20)
|
Second
Amendment to Investors’ Rights Agreement Standstill and Extension
Agreement, dated July 29, 2009, between Rubio’s Restaurants, Inc. and
Rosewood Capital, L.P. (Exhibit (10.1).
|
|
10.85(20)
|
Second
Amendment to Investors’ Rights Agreement Standstill and Extension
Agreement, dated July 29, 2009, between Rubio’s Restaurants, Inc. and
Ralph Rubio (Exhibit 10.2).
|
|
10.86(2)(20)
|
Amendment
to 2008 Equity Incentive Plan (Exhibit 10.3).
|
|
10.87(2)(21)
|
Amended
and Restated Change of Control Agreement, dated January 8, 2010, by and
between the Company and Frank Henigman (Exhibit 10.1).
|
|
10.88(2)(21)
|
Amended
and Restated Change of Control Agreement, dated January 8, 2010, by and
between the Company and Ken C. Hull (Exhibit 10.2).
|
|
10.89(2)(21)
|
Amended
and Restated Change of Control Agreement, dated January 8, 2010, by and
between the Company and Marc S. Simon (Exhibit 10.3).
|
|
10.90(2)(21)
|
Form
of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (Exhibit 10.4).
|
|
10.91(2)(21)
|
Form
of Notice of Grant of Restricted Stock Units (Exhibit
10.5).
|
|
10.92(2)(21)
|
Form
of Performance Based Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (Exhibit
10.6).
|
|
10.93(2)(21)
|
Form
of Notice of Grant of Performance Based Restricted Stock Units (Exhibit
10.7).
|
|
21.1
|
Subsidiary
List.
|
|
23.1
|
Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, KPMG
LLP.
|
|
24.1
|
Powers
of Attorney (Included under the caption “Signatures”).
|
|
31.1
|
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|
|
31.2
|
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|
|
32.1
|
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|
|
32.2
|
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|
†
|
The
Commission has granted confidential treatment to us with respect to
certain omitted portions of this exhibit (indicated by asterisks). We have
filed separately with the Commission an unredacted copy of the
exhibit.
|
(1)
|
Incorporated
by reference to the above noted exhibit to our registration statement on
Form S-1 (333-75087) filed with the SEC on March 26, 1999, as
amended.
|
(2)
|
Management
contract or compensation plan.
|
(3)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our annual report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on April
2, 2001.
|
(4)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our annual report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on April
1, 2002.
|
(5)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our annual report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March
24, 2004 and amended on April 6, 2005.
|
(6)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on
May 11, 2004.
|
(7)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our annual report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on April
8, 2005.
|
(8)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our current report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on
August 1, 2005.
|
(9)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on
August 5, 2005.
|
(10)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our current report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on
October 14, 2005.
|
(11)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our current report on Form 8-K/A filed with the SEC on
August 29, 2006.
|
(12)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on
November 6, 2006.
|
(13)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our Definitive Proxy Statement filed with the SEC on June
23, 2006.
|
(14)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our current report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on
December 19, 2007.
|
(15)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our annual report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March
31, 2008.
|
(16)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our Definitive Proxy Statement filed with the SEC on
August 28, 2008.
|
(17)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on
August 8, 2008.
|
(18)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our current report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on
September 16, 2008.
|
(19)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our current report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on
December 22, 2008.
|
(20)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our current report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on
August 3, 2009.
|
(21)
|
Incorporated
by reference to our current report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on
January 14, 2010.
|
|
(c)
|
Financial
Statement Schedules
|
All
financial statement schedules are omitted because they are not applicable or the
required information is shown in the consolidated financial statements or other
notes hereto.
30
Pursuant
to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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.
RUBIO'S
RESTAURANTS, INC.
|
|||
Dated:
March 26, 2010
|
|
By:
|
/s/
DAN PITTARD
|
Name:
|
Dan
Pittard
|
||
Title:
|
President
and Chief Executive
Officer
|
POWER OF
ATTORNEY
Know all
persons by these present, that each person whose signature appears below
constitutes and appoints Dan Pittard or Frank Henigman, his attorney-in-fact,
with full power of substitution in any and all capacities, to sign any
amendments to this annual report on Form 10-K, and to file the same with
exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the SEC,
hereby ratifying and confirming all that the attorney-in-fact or his or her
substitute or substitutes may do or cause to be done by virtue
hereof.
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been
signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the
capacities and on the dates indicated.
Signature
|
Title
|
Date
|
||
/s/
Dan Pittard
|
President
and Chief Executive Officer
|
March
26, 2010
|
||
Dan
Pittard
|
(Principal
Executive Officer)
|
|||
/s/
Frank Henigman
|
Chief
Financial Officer
|
March
26, 2010
|
||
Frank
Henigman
|
(Principal
Financial and Accounting Officer)
|
|||
/s/
Ralph Rubio
|
Chairman
of the Board of Directors
|
March
26, 2010
|
||
Ralph
Rubio
|
||||
/s/
Kyle A. Anderson
|
Director
|
March
26, 2010
|
||
Kyle
A. Anderson
|
||||
/s/
Craig S. Andrews
|
Director
|
March
26, 2010
|
||
Craig
S. Andrews
|
||||
/s/
William R. Bensyl
|
Director
|
March
26, 2010
|
||
William
R. Bensyl
|
||||
/s/
Loren C. Pannier
|
Director
|
March
26, 2010
|
||
Loren
C. Pannier
|
||||
/s/
Timothy J. Ryan
|
Director
|
March
26, 2010
|
||
Timothy
J. Ryan
|
31
RUBIO’S
RESTAURANTS, INC.
INDEX
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Page
|
||
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
F-2
|
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of December 27, 2009 and December 28,
2008
|
F-3
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations for Fiscal Years Ended 2009, 2008 and
2007
|
F-4
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Stockholders’ Equity for Fiscal Years Ended 2009, 2007 and
2007
|
F-5
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for Fiscal Years Ended 2009, 2008 and
2007
|
F-6
|
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
F-8
|
Schedules
not filed: All schedules have been omitted as the required information is
inapplicable or the information is presented in the consolidated financial
statements or related notes.
F-1
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board
of Directors and Stockholders
Rubio’s
Restaurants, Inc.:
We have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Rubio’s Restaurants,
Inc. and subsidiaries (the Company) as of December 27, 2009 and
December 28, 2008, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year
period ended December 27, 2009. These consolidated financial statements are
the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express
an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our
audits.
We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan
and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial
statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall
financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our
opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly,
in all material respects, the financial position of Rubio’s Restaurants, Inc.
and subsidiaries as of December 27, 2009 and December 28, 2008, and
the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years in
the three-year period ended December 27, 2009, in conformity with U.S.
generally accepted accounting principles.
/s/ KPMG
LLP
San
Diego, California
March 26,
2010
F-2
RUBIO’S
RESTAURANTS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
(In
thousands, except share data)
December 27,
2009
|
December 28,
2008
|
|||||||
ASSETS
|
||||||||
CURRENT
ASSETS:
|
||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
|
9,544
|
$
|
5,816
|
||||
Other
receivables
|
3,097
|
3,983
|
||||||
Inventory
|
1,574
|
2,389
|
||||||
Prepaid
expenses
|
1,751
|
2,777
|
||||||
Deferred
income taxes
|
3,083
|
1,764
|
||||||
Total
current assets
|
19,049
|
16,729
|
||||||
PROPERTY,
net
|
43,086
|
45,947
|
||||||
GOODWILL
|
519
|
519
|
||||||
OTHER
ASSETS
|
3,132
|
694
|
||||||
DEFERRED
INCOME TAXES
|
8,915
|
9,260
|
||||||
TOTAL
|
$
|
74,701
|
$
|
73,149
|
||||
CURRENT
LIABILITIES:
|
||||||||
Accounts
payable
|
$
|
4,118
|
$
|
4,182
|
||||
Accrued
expenses and other liabilities
|
16,829
|
14,990
|
||||||
Total
current liabilities
|
20,947
|
19,172
|
||||||
DEFERRED
INCOME
|
179
|
272
|
||||||
DEFERRED
RENT AND OTHER LIABILITIES
|
6,420
|
8,319
|
||||||
Total
liabilities
|
27,546
|
27,763
|
||||||
STOCKHOLDERS’
EQUITY:
|
||||||||
Preferred
stock, $.001 par value, 5,000,000 shares authorized, no shares issued or
outstanding
|
—
|
—
|
||||||
Common
stock, $.001 par value, 35,000,000 shares authorized, 10,035,077 shares
issued and outstanding in 2009 and 9,951,077 shares issued and outstanding
in 2008
|
10
|
10
|
||||||
Paid-in
capital
|
53,926
|
52,549
|
||||||
Accumulated
deficit
|
(6,781
|
)
|
(7,173
|
)
|
||||
Total
stockholders’ equity
|
47,155
|
45,386
|
||||||
TOTAL
|
$
|
74,701
|
$
|
73,149
|
See notes
to consolidated financial statements.
F-3
RUBIO’S
RESTAURANTS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In
thousands, except per share data)
Years Ended
|
||||||||||||
December 27,
2009
|
December 28,
2008
|
December 30,
2007
|
||||||||||
REVENUES:
|
||||||||||||
Restaurant
sales
|
$
|
188,749
|
$
|
179,130
|
$
|
169,519
|
||||||
Franchise
and licensing revenues
|
129
|
174
|
212
|
|||||||||
TOTAL
REVENUES
|
188,878
|
179,304
|
169,731
|
|||||||||
COSTS
AND EXPENSES:
|
||||||||||||
Cost
of sales
|
49,688
|
51,348
|
48,369
|
|||||||||
Restaurant
labor
|
61,215
|
56,621
|
54,364
|
|||||||||
Restaurant
occupancy and other
|
46,863
|
42,591
|
39,192
|
|||||||||
General
and administrative expenses
|
18,830
|
17,942
|
16,215
|
|||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
9,907
|
9,652
|
8,834
|
|||||||||
Pre-opening
expenses
|
353
|
689
|
572
|
|||||||||
Asset
impairment and store closure (reversal) expense
|
1,068
|
(46
|
)
|
274
|
||||||||
Loss
on disposal/sale of property
|
369
|
295
|
127
|
|||||||||
TOTAL
COSTS AND EXPENSES
|
188,293
|
179,092
|
167,947
|
|||||||||
OPERATING
INCOME
|
585
|
212
|
1,784
|
|||||||||
OTHER
INCOME (EXPENSE):
|
||||||||||||
Interest
(expense) income and investment income, net
|
(129
|
)
|
(133
|
)
|
302
|
|||||||
INCOME
BEFORE INCOME TAXES
|
456
|
79
|
2,086
|
|||||||||
INCOME
TAX (EXPENSE) BENEFIT
|
(64
|
)
|
5
|
(897
|
)
|
|||||||
NET
INCOME
|
$
|
392
|
$
|
84
|
$
|
1,189
|
||||||
NET
INCOME PER SHARE:
|
||||||||||||
Basic
and diluted
|
$
|
0.04
|
$
|
0.01
|
$
|
0.12
|
||||||
SHARES
USED IN CALCULATING NET INCOME PER SHARE:
|
||||||||||||
Basic
|
9,993
|
9,951
|
9,889
|
|||||||||
Diluted
|
10,072
|
10,014
|
9,970
|
See notes
to consolidated financial statements.
F-4
RUBIO’S
RESTAURANTS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
(In
thousands, except share data)
Common Stock
|
Total
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Shares
|
Amount
|
Paid-in-Capital
|
Accumulated
Deficit
|
Stockholders’
Equity
|
||||||||||||||||
Balance,
December 31, 2006
|
9,793,491 | $ | 10 | $ | 48,637 | $ | (8,359 | ) | $ | 40,288 | ||||||||||
Cumulative
effect of adopting the pronouncement related to uncertain tax positions
(Note 7)
|
— | — | — | (87 | ) | (87 | ) | |||||||||||||
Exercise
of common stock options, including related tax benefit of
$329
|
156,986 | — | 1,228 | — | 1,228 | |||||||||||||||
Compensation
expense - share-based awards
|
— | — | 1,243 | — | 1,243 | |||||||||||||||
Net
income
|
— | — | — | 1,189 | 1,189 | |||||||||||||||
Balance,
December 30, 2007
|
9,950,477 | 10 | 51,108 | (7,257 | ) | 43,861 | ||||||||||||||
Exercise
of common stock options, including related tax effects
|
600 | — | (77 | ) | — | (77 | ) | |||||||||||||
Compensation
expense - share-based awards
|
— | — | 1,518 | — | 1,518 | |||||||||||||||
Net
income
|
— | — | — | 84 | 84 | |||||||||||||||
Balance,
December 28, 2008
|
9,951,077 | 10 | 52,549 | (7,173 | ) | 45,386 | ||||||||||||||
Exercise
of common stock options, including related tax effects
|
84,000 | — | 218 | — | 218 | |||||||||||||||
Compensation
expense - share-based awards
|
— | — | 1,159 | — | 1,159 | |||||||||||||||
Net
income
|
— | — | — | 392 | 392 | |||||||||||||||
Balance,
December 27, 2009
|
10,035,077 | $ | 10 | $ | 53,926 | $ | (6,781 | ) | $ | 47,155 |
See notes
to consolidated financial statements.
F-5
RUBIO’S
RESTAURANTS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In
thousands)
Years Ended
|
||||||||||||
December 27,
2009
|
December 28,
2008
|
December 30,
2007
|
||||||||||
OPERATING
ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
392
|
$
|
84
|
$
|
1,189
|
||||||
Adjustments
to reconcile net income to net
|
||||||||||||
cash
provided by operating activities:
|
||||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
9,907
|
9,652
|
8,834
|
|||||||||
Share-based
compensation expense
|
1,159
|
1,518
|
1,243
|
|||||||||
Amortization
of debt issuance costs
|
70
|
47
|
—
|
|||||||||
Tax
benefit from share-based compensation
|
(86
|
)
|
—
|
(284
|
)
|
|||||||
Asset
impairment and store closure expense (reversal)
|
1,068
|
(46
|
)
|
274
|
||||||||
Loss
on disposal/sale of property
|
369
|
295
|
127
|
|||||||||
(Benefits)
provision for deferred income taxes
|
(679
|
)
|
1,848
|
(174
|
)
|
|||||||
Changes
in assets and liabilities:
|
||||||||||||
Other
receivables
|
886
|
393
|
(2,479
|
)
|
||||||||
Inventory
|
815
|
(616
|
)
|
(393
|
)
|
|||||||
Prepaid
expenses
|
956
|
159
|
(1,902
|
)
|
||||||||
Other
assets
|
(2,438
|
)
|
(198
|
)
|
41
|
|||||||
Accounts
payable
|
(64
|
)
|
363
|
1,536
|
||||||||
Accrued
expenses and other liabilities
|
944
|
(585
|
)
|
(1,892
|
)
|
|||||||
Deferred
income
|
(93
|
)
|
115
|
(43
|
)
|
|||||||
Deferred
rent and other liabilities
|
(1,899
|
)
|
(231
|
)
|
(1,853
|
)
|
||||||
Deferred
franchise revenue
|
—
|
—
|
(35
|
)
|
||||||||
Net
cash provided by operating activities
|
11,307
|
12,798
|
4,189
|
|||||||||
INVESTING
ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||||||||
Purchases
of property
|
(3,431
|
)
|
(5,033
|
)
|
(7,338
|
)
|
||||||
Purchases
of leasehold improvements
|
(4,471
|
)
|
(8,337
|
)
|
(4,726
|
)
|
||||||
Purchases
of investments
|
—
|
(96
|
)
|
(193
|
)
|
|||||||
Maturities
of investments
|
—
|
—
|
172
|
|||||||||
Proceeds
from the sales of investments
|
—
|
3,165
|
—
|
|||||||||
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
(7,902
|
)
|
(10,301
|
)
|
(12,085
|
)
|
||||||
FINANCING
ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||||||||
Proceeds
from exercise of common stock options
|
237
|
3
|
1,228
|
|||||||||
Excess
tax benefits from shared-based compensation
|
86
|
—
|
284
|
|||||||||
Payment
of debt issuance costs
|
—
|
(246
|
)
|
—
|
||||||||
Net
cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
323
|
(243
|
)
|
1,512
|
||||||||
INCREASE
(DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
|
3,728
|
2,254
|
(6,384
|
)
|
||||||||
CASH
AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT BEGINNING OF YEAR
|
5,816
|
3,562
|
9,946
|
|||||||||
CASH
AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT END OF YEAR
|
$
|
9,544
|
$
|
5,816
|
$
|
3,562
|
(continued)
F-6
RUBIO’S
RESTAURANTS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS, continued
(In
thousands)
Years Ended
|
||||||||||||
December 27,
2009
|
December 28,
2008
|
December 30,
2007
|
||||||||||
SUPPLEMENTAL
DISCLOSURES OF CASH FLOWS INFORMATION:
|
||||||||||||
Cash
paid for interest
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
11
|
$
|
—
|
||||||
Cash
paid for income taxes, net of refunds
|
$
|
267
|
$
|
1,141
|
$
|
1,351
|
||||||
SUPPLEMENTAL
DISCLOSURES OF NON-CASH INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||||||||
Property,
net, purchased and included in accrued expenses and other
liabilities
|
$
|
581
|
$
|
1,608
|
$
|
904
|
See notes
to consolidated financial statements.
F-7
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEARS
ENDED DECEMBER 27, 2009, DECEMBER 28, 2008 AND DECEMBER 30, 2007
1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING
POLICIES
NATURE OF
OPERATIONS - Rubio’s Restaurants, Inc. was incorporated in California in 1985
and reincorporated in Delaware in 1997. Rubio’s Restaurants, Inc. has two wholly
owned subsidiaries, Rubio’s Restaurants of Nevada, Inc. and Rubio’s Incentives,
LLC (collectively, the Company). As of December 27, 2009, the Company owns and
operates a chain of 193 restaurants in California, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado,
and Utah, including two licensed and three franchise locations.
The
Company’s 193 restaurants are located more specifically as follows: 76 in the
greater Los Angeles, California area, 47 in the San Diego, California area, 15
in the San Francisco, California area, 11 in the Sacramento, California area, 29
in Phoenix/Tucson, Arizona, 5 in Las Vegas, Nevada, 4 in the Denver, Colorado
area and 6 in Salt Lake City, Utah.
BASIS OF
PRESENTATION AND FISCAL YEAR - The consolidated financial statements include the
accounts of the Company. All significant intercompany transactions and accounts
have been eliminated in consolidation. The Company operates and reports on a 52-
or 53-week fiscal year ending on the last Sunday of December. Fiscal years 2009,
2008 and 2007, which ended on December 27, 2009, December 28, 2008 and December
30, 2007, respectively, included 52 weeks.
RECLASSIFICATIONS
– The Company has reclassified certain items in the accompanying
Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto for prior periods to be
comparable with the classification for the fiscal year ended December 27,
2009.
ACCOUNTING
ESTIMATES - The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity
with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities and contingencies at the date of the consolidated financial
statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the year.
Actual results may differ from those estimates.
ACCOUNTING
STANDARDS CODIFICATION – In June 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) approved the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (the “Codification”
or “ASC”) and the hierarchy of U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
(GAAP), which establishes the Codification (ASC Subtopic 105-10) as the sole
source of authoritative guidance recognized by the FASB to be applied by
nongovernmental entities. All existing accounting standard literature,
promulgated by the FASB, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants,
Emerging Issues Task Force and other authoritative sources, excluding guidance
from the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), will be superseded by the
Codification. All non-grandfathered, non-SEC accounting literature not included
in the Codification will become non-authoritative. The Codification does not
change GAAP, but instead introduces a new structure that will combine all
authoritative standards into a comprehensive, topically organized online
database. The Codification became effective for interim and annual periods
ending after September 15, 2009. There is no change to the content of our
consolidated financial statements or disclosures as a result of implementing the
Codification. However, as a result of implementation of the Codification,
previous references to new accounting standards and literature are no longer
applicable. In order to ease the transition to the Codification, we are
providing the Codification cross-reference alongside the references to the
standards issued and adopted prior to the adoption of the Codification. All
future references to authoritative accounting literature in our consolidated
financial statements will be referenced in accordance with the
Codification.
CASH
EQUIVALENTS - Cash equivalents consist of money market instruments purchased
with an original maturity of three months or less.
OTHER
RECEIVABLES – Other receivables primarily comprise receivables from
tenant improvement allowances due from landlords, delivery companies, income
taxes and credit card processors. The allowance for doubtful accounts is based
on historical experience, a review of existing receivables and existing economic
conditions. The allowance for doubtful accounts at December 27, 2009 and
December 28, 2008 was $126,000 and $239,000, respectively. Changes in
other receivables are classified as operating activity in the consolidated
statements of cash flows.
INVENTORY
- Inventory consists of food, beverage, paper and restaurant supplies, and is
stated at the lower of cost (first-in, first-out method) or market
value. Changes in inventories are classified as operating activities in the
consolidated statements of cash flows.
PROPERTY
- Property is stated at cost. A variety of costs are incurred in the leasing and
construction of restaurant facilities. The costs of buildings under development
include specifically identifiable costs. The capitalized costs include
development costs, construction costs, salaries and related costs, and other
costs incurred during the acquisition or construction stage. Salaries and
related costs capitalized totaled $258,000, $334,000 and $323,000 for fiscal
years 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Depreciation and amortization of
buildings, leasehold improvements and equipment are computed using the
straight-line method over the shorter of the estimated useful lives of the
assets or the initial lease term for certain leased properties (buildings and
improvements range from 1 to 20 years and equipment 3 to 7 years). For leases
with renewal periods at the Company’s option, the Company generally uses the
original lease term, excluding renewal option periods to determine useful lives;
if failure to exercise a renewal option imposes an economic penalty to the
Company, management may determine at the inception of the lease that renewal is
reasonably assured and include the renewal option period in the determination of
appropriate estimated useful lives. The Company’s policy requires lease-term
consistency when calculating the depreciation period, in classifying the lease
and in computing straight-line rent expense.
F-8
IMPAIRMENT
OF GOODWILL - Goodwill, which represents the excess of the cost of acquired
businesses over the fair value of amounts assigned to assets acquired and
liabilities assumed, is not amortized. Instead, goodwill is assessed for
impairment annually at the same time every year, and when an event occurs or
circumstances change, such that it is reasonably possible that an impairment may
exist. We selected our fiscal year-end as our annual date. As a result of our
assessment at December 27, 2009 and December 28, 2008, no impairment of goodwill
was indicated.
IMPAIRMENT
OF LONG-LIVED ASSETS - Long-lived assets, such as property, plant, and
equipment, are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be
recoverable. If circumstances require a long-lived asset or asset group be
tested for possible impairment, the Company first compares undiscounted cash
flows expected to be generated by that asset or asset group to its carrying
value. If the carrying value of the long-lived asset or asset group is not
recoverable on an undiscounted cash flow basis, an impairment is recognized to
the extent that the carrying value exceeds its fair value. Fair value is
determined through various valuation techniques which may include discounted
cash flow models, quoted market values and third-party independent appraisals,
as considered necessary.
Long-lived
asset impairment amounts are estimates that we have recorded based on reasonable
assumptions related to our restaurant locations at this point in time. The
conditions regarding these locations may change in the future and could be
materially affected by factors such as our ability to maintain or improve sales
levels, our ability to secure subleases, our success at negotiating early
termination agreements with lessors, the general health of the economy and
resultant demand for commercial property. Because the factors used to estimate
impairment expenses are subject to change, amounts recorded may not be
sufficient, and adjustments may be necessary.
SELF-INSURANCE
LIABILITIES - We are self-insured for a portion of our workers’ compensation
insurance program. Maximum self-insured retention, including defense costs per
occurrence is $150,000 for the claim years ended October 31, 2010 and October
31, 2009, and $350,000 for the claim year ended October 31, 2008. We account for
insurance liabilities based on independent actuarial estimates of the amount of
ultimate losses incurred. These estimates rely on actuarial observations of
industry-wide and Rubio’s specific historical claim loss development. Our actual
loss development may be better or worse than the development estimated by the
actuary. In that event, we will modify the accrual, and our operating expenses
will increase or decrease accordingly.
DEFERRED
RENT AND OTHER LIABILITIES - Rent expense on operating leases with scheduled or
minimum rent increases is expensed on the straight-line basis over the initial
lease term, which includes the period of time from when the Company takes
possession of the leased space until the store opening date (the build-out
period). Deferred rent represents the excess of rent charged to expense over
rent payable under the lease agreement. In connection with certain of the
Company’s leases, the landlord has provided the Company with tenant improvement
allowances. These lease incentives, as well as rent holidays, are recorded in
“Accrued expenses and other liabilities” and “Deferred rent and other
liabilities” and are amortized over the initial lease term as reductions to rent
expense.
FINANCIAL
INSTRUMENTS - The carrying values of cash and cash equivalents, receivables,
accounts payable and accrued expenses approximate fair values due to the
short-term nature of these instruments. At December 27, 2009 and December 28,
2008, the Company had no material financial instruments subject to significant
market exposure.
REVENUE
RECOGNITION - Revenues from the operation of company-owned restaurants are
recognized when sales occur. Franchise revenue is comprised of royalties from
franchised restaurants and is recorded as revenue as earned. The Company
recognizes a liability upon the sale of its gift cards and recognizes revenue
when these gift cards are redeemed in its restaurants. The portion of the gift
cards that is not expected to be redeemed (breakage) is recognized ratably over
three years based on historical and expected redemption trends. This adjustment
is classified as revenues in the Company’s consolidated statements of
operations. Revenue recognized on unredeemed gift card balances was $110,000 in
fiscal 2009, $106,000 in fiscal 2008, and $382,000 in fiscal 2007.
Sales
from Company-owned restaurant revenues are recognized as revenue at the point of
the delivery of meals. All sales taxes are presented on a net basis and are
excluded from revenue.
STORE
PRE-OPENING EXPENSES - Costs incurred in connection with the training of
personnel, occupancy during the build-out period, and promotion of new store
openings are expensed as incurred.
ADVERTISING
- Advertising costs incurred to produce media advertising for new campaigns are
expensed in the year in which the advertising first takes place. Other
advertising costs are expensed when incurred. Advertising costs are included in
restaurant occupancy and other expenses and totaled $5.2 million for the fiscal
year 2009, $4.7 million for fiscal year 2008 and $5.0 million for fiscal year
2007.
F-9
INCOME
TAXES - Income taxes are accounted for under the asset and liability method.
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax
consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement
carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax
bases and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. Deferred tax assets and
liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable
income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be
recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a
change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the
enactment date. The Company recognizes the effect of income tax positions only
if those positions are more likely than not of being sustained. Recognized
income tax positions are measured at the largest amount that is greater than 50%
likely of being realized. Changes in recognition or measurement are reflected in
the period in which the change in judgment occurs. The Company records interest
and penalties related to unrecognized tax positions in income tax
expense.
SHARE-BASED
PAYMENT - Employee stock-based compensation is recognized as a cost in the
financial statements over the requisite service period. Cost is measured using
the grant date fair value of the award. We estimate grant date fair value using
the Black-Scholes-Merton option-pricing model.
ASC Topic
718 also requires that excess tax benefits recognized in equity related to stock
option exercises are reflected as financing cash inflows. Stock-based
compensation cost that has been included in income from continuing operations
amounted to $1,159,000, $1,518,000 and $1,243,000 for the fiscal years 2009,
2008 and 2007, respectively. The total income tax benefit recognized in the
statement of operations for stock-based compensation arrangements was $464,000,
$607,000 and $491,000 for the fiscal years 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively.
Refer to
Note 8, Share-Based
Compensation Plans, for information regarding the assumptions used by the
Company in valuing its stock options.
COMMON
STOCK AND EARNINGS PER SHARE - Basic earnings per share are computed by dividing
net income or loss by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding
during the period. Diluted earnings per share are computed similar to basic
earnings per share, except that the weighted average number of shares of common
stock outstanding is increased to include the effect of potentially dilutive
common shares, which are comprised of stock options and restricted stock awards
granted to employees under equity-based compensation plans that were outstanding
during the period. Potentially dilutive common shares are excluded from the
diluted earnings per share computation when their effect would be anti-dilutive
(see Note 12).
CONCENTRATION
OF CREDIT RISK - The Company invests its excess cash in money market accounts
with third party financial institutions. These balances may exceed the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insurance limits. While the Company
monitors the cash balances in its operating accounts on a daily basis and
adjusts the cash balances as appropriate, these cash balances could be impacted
if the underlying financial institutions fail or are subject to other adverse
conditions in the financial markets. The Company has not experienced any
material losses on its cash or cash equivalent accounts.
FAIR
VALUE MEASUREMENT - On January 1, 2008, the Company adopted the
authoritative guidance for fair value measurements of financial assets and
financial liabilities and for fair value measurements of non-financial items
that are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a
recurring basis. The guidance defines fair value as the price that would be
received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly
transaction between market participants at the measurement date. It also
establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands disclosures about
fair value measurements.
On
January 1, 2009, the Company adopted the authoritative guidance for fair
value measurements of non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities that
are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a
nonrecurring basis.
See Note
10, Fair Value Measurement for
additional information.
SUBSEQUENT
EVENTS - The Company has evaluated subsequent events through the time of filing
this Form 10-K with the SEC, and determined there were no other items to
disclose.
2. IMMATERIAL
CORRECTION OF AN ERROR IN PRIOR PERIODS
During
the second quarter of fiscal 2009 but prior to the filing of the Company’s Form
10-Q for the first quarter, the Company identified errors related to its payroll
tax accrual balance. As a result, the Company’s historical payroll tax expense,
in addition to penalties and interest, and the related accrued liability
balances were misstated. In addition, income tax expense and income tax
receivable balances were impacted by these adjustments. In accordance with Staff
Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 99, Materiality, and SAB
No. 108, Considering the
Effects of Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current
Year Financial Statements, management evaluated the materiality of the
errors from qualitative and quantitative perspectives, and concluded that the
errors were immaterial to the prior periods. Consequently, the Company has
revised its historical financial statements for fiscal 2007 and fiscal 2008
within this report. The Company has recognized the cumulative effect of the
error on periods prior to those that will be presented by increasing other
receivables, increasing other current liabilities and increasing accumulated
deficit by $49,000, $263,000 and $214,000, respectively, as of January 1, 2007.
The errors had no impact on the consolidated statement of operations for the
year ended December 30, 2007. In addition, the Company reclassified store
closure accrual of $45,000 into accrued expenses and other current
liabilities.
F-10
As of December 28, 2008
|
||||||||||||
As previously
Reported
|
Adjustments
|
Adjusted
|
||||||||||
Other
receivables
|
$
|
3,866
|
$
|
117
|
$
|
3,983
|
||||||
Total
current assets
|
$
|
16,612
|
$
|
117
|
$
|
16,729
|
||||||
Total
assets
|
$
|
73,032
|
$
|
117
|
$
|
73,149
|
||||||
Accrued
expenses and other liabilities
|
$
|
14,509
|
$
|
481
|
$
|
14,990
|
||||||
Store
closure accrual
|
$
|
45
|
$
|
(45
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|||||
Total
current liabilities
|
$
|
18,736
|
$
|
436
|
$
|
19,172
|
||||||
Total
liabilities
|
$
|
27,327
|
$
|
436
|
$
|
27,763
|
||||||
Accumulated
deficit
|
$
|
(6,854
|
)
|
$
|
(319
|
)
|
$
|
(7,173
|
)
|
|||
Total
stockholders’ equity
|
$
|
45,705
|
$
|
(319
|
)
|
$
|
45,386
|
|||||
Total
liabilities and stockholders’ equity
|
$
|
73,032
|
$
|
117
|
$
|
73,149
|
The
following table represent a summary of the effects of the immaterial error
correction on the consolidated statements of operations for the period indicated
(in thousands, except per share amounts):
Twelve Months Ended
December 28, 2008
|
||||||||||||
As
previously
Reported
|
Adjustments
|
Adjusted
|
||||||||||
Restaurant
labor
|
$
|
56,470
|
$
|
151
|
$
|
56,621
|
||||||
General
and administrative expenses
|
$
|
17,920
|
$
|
22
|
$
|
17,942
|
||||||
Total
costs and expenses
|
$
|
178,919
|
$
|
173
|
$
|
179,092
|
||||||
Operating
income (loss)
|
$
|
385
|
$
|
(173
|
)
|
$
|
212
|
|||||
Other
expense
|
$
|
(133
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
(133
|
)
|
||||
Income
(loss) before income taxes
|
$
|
252
|
$
|
(173
|
)
|
$
|
79
|
|||||
Income
tax (expense) benefit
|
$
|
(63
|
)
|
$
|
68
|
$
|
5
|
|||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
189
|
$
|
(105
|
)
|
$
|
84
|
|||||
Net
income (loss) per common share:
|
||||||||||||
Basic
|
$
|
0.02
|
$
|
(0.01
|
)
|
$
|
0.01
|
|||||
Diluted
|
$
|
0.02
|
$
|
(0.01
|
)
|
$
|
0.01
|
Cash
flows from operating, investing and financing activities for the above periods
were not impacted by this immaterial correction of an error. However, net income
(loss) was revised as shown above with an offset to the other receivables and
accrued expenses and other liabilities captions within operating activities on
the consolidated statement of cash flows.
Consolidated
balance sheet details as of December 27, 2009 and December 28, 2008,
respectively (in thousands):
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
OTHER
RECEIVABLES:
|
||||||||
Tenant
improvement receivables
|
$
|
424
|
$
|
747
|
||||
Beverage
usage receivables
|
314
|
285
|
||||||
Credit
cards
|
1,417
|
1,289
|
||||||
Income
taxes
|
486
|
967
|
||||||
Food
supplier receivable
|
—
|
141
|
||||||
Other
|
582
|
793
|
||||||
Allowance
for doubtful accounts
|
(126
|
)
|
(239
|
)
|
||||
Total
|
$
|
3,097
|
$
|
3,983
|
||||
PROPERTY
- at cost:
|
||||||||
Building
and leasehold improvements
|
$
|
70,845
|
$
|
66,458
|
||||
Equipment
and furniture
|
48,559
|
47,491
|
||||||
Construction
in process
|
1,488
|
2,975
|
||||||
120,892
|
116,924
|
|||||||
Less:
accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
(77,806
|
)
|
(70,977
|
)
|
||||
Total
|
$
|
43,086
|
$
|
45,947
|
||||
ACCRUED
EXPENSES AND OTHER LIABILITIES:
|
||||||||
Compensation
|
$
|
5,141
|
$
|
3,441
|
||||
Workers’
compensation
|
1,443
|
1,453
|
||||||
Sales
taxes
|
1,468
|
1,208
|
||||||
Vacation
pay
|
1,168
|
1,031
|
||||||
Advertising
|
202
|
319
|
||||||
Gift
cards
|
805
|
859
|
||||||
Occupancy
|
736
|
975
|
||||||
Legal
and settlement fees regarding class action litigation (Note
6)
|
2,774
|
2,600
|
||||||
Construction
in process
|
581
|
1,608
|
||||||
Store
closure accrual
|
32
|
45
|
||||||
Other
|
2,479
|
1,451
|
||||||
Total
|
$
|
16,829
|
$
|
14,990
|
||||
DEFERRED
RENT AND OTHER LIABILITIES:
|
||||||||
Deferred
rent
|
$
|
2,722
|
$
|
2,600
|
||||
Deferred
tenant improvement allowances
|
2,704
|
2,389
|
||||||
Uncertain
income tax position liability (Note 7)
|
446
|
263
|
||||||
Legal
and settlement fees regarding class action litigation (Note
6)
|
—
|
2,600
|
||||||
Store
closure accrual
|
—
|
17
|
||||||
Other
|
548
|
450
|
||||||
Total
|
$
|
6,420
|
$
|
8,319
|
F-11
4. ASSET IMPAIRMENT AND STORE CLOSURE
ACCRUAL
For the
fiscal year ended December 27, 2009, the Company recorded impairment charges of
$1,068,000 related to eleven under-performing stores.
The
Company recorded a net store closure reversal of $46,000 during fiscal 2008. A
store closure reversal of $91,000 was recorded in the first quarter of fiscal
2008 due to the Company’s decision to re-brand a location in the Fort Collins,
Colorado area that was closed in 2001 and was offset by a $45,000 store closure
expense related to the closure of the Beverly Center location in Los Angeles,
California during the second quarter of fiscal 2008.
The
Company recorded a net asset impairment and store closure accrual of $274,000
during fiscal 2007. This charge was the net effect of a reduction to store
closure of $19,000 for the sublease income for a Salt Lake City, Utah location,
which closed in 2001, combined with a charge to impairment of $229,000, for the
closure of a Los Angeles, California area restaurant and a $64,000 adjustment to
anticipated sublease income for a restaurant in the Denver, Colorado area that
closed in 2001.
The
components of the store closure accrual in fiscal 2007, 2008 and 2009 are
as follows (in thousands):
Accrual
Balance at
December 30,
2007
|
Store Closure
Expense
|
Store Closure
Reversal
|
Usage
|
Accrual
Balance at
December 28,
2008
|
||||||||||||||||
Accrual for
stores closed in 2001
|
$
|
187
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
(91
|
)
|
$
|
(67
|
)
|
$
|
29
|
||||||||
Accrual
for stores closed in 2002
|
79
|
—
|
—
|
(27
|
)
|
52
|
||||||||||||||
Accrual for
stores closed in 2005
|
(21
|
)
|
—
|
—
|
2
|
(19
|
)
|
|||||||||||||
Accrual for
stores closed in 2008
|
229
|
45
|
—
|
(274
|
)
|
—
|
||||||||||||||
Total
store closure accrual
|
474
|
$
|
45
|
$
|
(91
|
)
|
$
|
(366
|
)
|
62
|
||||||||||
Less:
current portion
|
(370
|
)
|
(45
|
)
|
||||||||||||||||
Non-current
|
$
|
104
|
$
|
17
|
Accrual
Balance at
December 28,
2008
|
Store Closure
Expense
|
Store Closure
Reversal
|
Usage
|
Accrual
Balance at
December 27,
2009
|
||||||||||||||||
Accrual for
stores closed in 2001
|
$ | 29 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | (23 | ) | $ | 6 | |||||||||
Accrual
for stores closed in 2002
|
52 | — | — | (28 | ) | 24 | ||||||||||||||
Accrual for
stores closed in 2005
|
(19 | ) | — | — | 21 | 2 | ||||||||||||||
Total
store closure accrual
|
62 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | (30 | ) | 32 | |||||||||||
Less:
current portion
|
(45 | ) | (32 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Non-current
|
$ | 17 | $ | — |
F-12
5. CREDIT FACILITIES
LETTER OF
CREDIT - On May 13, 2008, the Company entered into a $5.0 million revolving line
of credit and a $15.0 million non-revolving line of credit (the “Credit
Facility”) with Pacific Western Bank (the “Bank”). The revolving line of credit
calls for monthly interest payments beginning June 5, 2008 at a variable
interest rate based on the prime rate plus 0.25%, resulting in an initial rate
of 5.25%. All outstanding principal plus accrued unpaid interest on the
revolving line of credit is due May 13, 2010. The non-revolving line of credit
calls for each advance to be evidenced by a separate note. Each advance shall
have a maximum term of 57 months with an interest rate based on the prime rate
plus 0.25%. Payments on advances shall be interest only for the first nine
months, then principal and interest payments monthly. Both lines are
collateralized by all assets of the Company and guaranteed by its subsidiaries.
In addition, both lines require the Company to maintain its primary depository
relationship with the Bank and the related accounts are subject to the right of
offset for amounts due under the lines. Both lines are subject to certain
financial and non-financial debt covenants and include a restriction on the
payment of dividends without prior consent of the Bank. At December 27, 2009,
the Company had $4.9 million of availability under the revolving line of credit,
net of $99,000 of outstanding letters of credit, and $15.0 million of
availability under the non-revolving line of credit. As of December 27, 2009,
there were no funded borrowings outstanding under the Credit
Facility.
6. COMMITMENTS AND
CONTINGENCIES
OPERATING
LEASES - The Company leases restaurant and office facilities, land, vehicles and
office equipment under various operating leases expiring through 2019. The
leases generally provide renewal options of 5 years. Certain leases are subject
to scheduled annual increases or minimum annual increases based upon the
consumer price index, not to exceed specific maximum amounts. Certain leases
require contingent percentage rents based upon sales and other leases pass
through common area charges to the Company. Rental expense under these operating
leases was $22.0 million, $20.0 million, and $17.8 million for fiscal years
2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Contingent percentage rent based on sales
included in rental expense was $494,000, $612,000 and $666,000 for fiscal years
2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
Future
minimum annual lease commitments, including obligations for closed stores and
minimum future sublease rentals expected to be received as of December 27, 2009
are as follows (in thousands):
Company
Operated
Retail
Locations
and
Other
|
Sublease
Income
(A)
|
|||||||
FISCAL YEAR
|
||||||||
2010
|
$
|
15,185
|
$
|
(308
|
)
|
|||
2011
|
12,670
|
(233
|
)
|
|||||
2012
|
10,710
|
(165
|
)
|
|||||
2013
|
9,009
|
(131
|
)
|
|||||
2014
|
7,879
|
(87
|
)
|
|||||
Thereafter
|
20,970
|
—
|
||||||
$
|
76,423
|
$
|
(924
|
)
|
The Company has subleased
buildings to others, primarily as a result of closing certain
underperforming company-operated locations. These leases provide for fixed
payments with contingent rents when sales exceed certain levels. Sub
lessees generally bear the cost of maintenance, insurance, and property
taxes. The Company directly pays the rent on these master leases, and then
collects associated sublease rent amounts from its sub lessees. These
obligations are the responsibility of the Company should the sub lessee
not perform under the
sublease.
|
LITIGATION
- In March 2007, the Company reached an agreement to settle a class
action lawsuit related to how it classified certain employees under
California overtime laws. The settlement agreement, which was approved by the
court in June 2007, provides for a settlement payment of $7.5
million payable in three installments. The first $2.5 million installment was
distributed on August 31, 2007 and the second $2.5 million installment was paid
into a qualified settlement fund on December 29, 2008. The third and final
installment of $2.5 million is due on or before June 28, 2010. As of December
27, 2009, the remaining balance of $2.5 million, plus accrued interest of
$274,000, was accrued in “Accrued expenses and other liabilities”. The Company
learned that 140 current and former employees who qualified to participate as
class members in this class action settlement were not included in the
settlement list approved by the court. The Company filed a motion requesting the
court to include these individuals in the approved settlement and to provide
that their claims are payable out of the aggregate settlement payment, as the
Company believes the parties intended when they reached a settlement. The matter
has not yet been finally resolved and there is no assurance that the Company
will be successful. At this time, it is not possible to reasonably estimate the
outcome of or any additional liability from this case.
F-13
On March
24, 2005, a former employee of the Company filed a California state
court action alleging that the Company failed to provide the former employee
with certain meal and rest period breaks and overtime pay. The parties moved the
matter into arbitration, and the former employee amended the complaint
to claim that the former employee represents a class of potential
plaintiffs. The amended complaint alleges that current and former shift leaders
who worked in the Company's California restaurants during specified time
periods worked off the clock and missed meal and rest breaks. This case is still
in the pre-class certification discovery and briefing stage, and
no class has been certified. Holden, a former employee, seeks penalties
under California's Private Attorney General Act of 2004, separate
and apart from her certification of a class of shift leaders. The Company
denies the former employee’s claims, and intends to continue to vigorously
defend this action. A recent decision by the California Court of Appeals in
Brinker
Restaurant Corporation v. Superior Court (Hohnbaum) last year held
that employers do not need to affirmatively ensure employees actually take
their meal and rest breaks but need only make meal and rest breaks “available”
to employees. The Brinker case was recently taken up for review by the
California Supreme Court. At this time, the Company has no assurances of
how the California Supreme Court will rule in the Brinker case. Regardless
of merit or eventual outcome, this arbitration may cause a diversion of the
Company’s management’s time and attention and the expenditure of legal fees and
expenses.
The
Company is involved in various other claims and legal actions arising in the
ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, the ultimate
disposition of these other matters will not have a material adverse effect on
the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, or
liquidity.
7. INCOME TAXES
The
components of the income tax expense for fiscal years 2009, 2008 and 2007 are as
follows (in thousands):
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
||||||||||
Federal
(expense) benefit:
|
||||||||||||
Current
|
$
|
(510
|
)
|
$
|
1,734
|
$
|
(799
|
)
|
||||
Deferred
|
499
|
(1,788
|
)
|
233
|
||||||||
State
(expense) benefit:
|
||||||||||||
Current
|
(218
|
)
|
(16
|
)
|
(222
|
)
|
||||||
Deferred
|
180
|
(60
|
)
|
(59
|
)
|
|||||||
Uncertain
income tax position expense
|
—
|
1
|
—
|
|||||||||
Interest
expense, gross of tax benefits
|
(17
|
)
|
—
|
(50
|
)
|
|||||||
Interest
income, gross of tax benefits
|
2
|
134
|
—
|
|||||||||
Total
income tax (expense) benefit
|
$
|
(64
|
)
|
$
|
5
|
$
|
(897
|
)
|
The
income tax expense differs from the federal statutory rate because of the effect
of the following items for fiscal years 2009, 2008 and 2007:
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
||||||||||
Statutory
rate
|
34.0
|
%
|
34.0
|
%
|
34.0
|
%
|
||||||
State
income taxes, net of federal benefit
|
5.8
|
58.5
|
9.1
|
|||||||||
Interest
expense or benefit, net of tax benefits
|
2.0
|
(103.4
|
)
|
1.4
|
||||||||
Non-deductible
items
|
2.8
|
50.2
|
0.5
|
|||||||||
Credits
|
(27.5
|
)
|
(44.8
|
)
|
(2.7
|
)
|
||||||
Other
|
(3.1
|
)
|
(0.8
|
)
|
0.7
|
|||||||
Effective
tax (expense) benefit rate
|
14.0
|
%
|
(6.3
|
)%
|
43.0
|
%
|
In 2007,
the Company reduced its statutory state tax rate net of federal benefit from
5.8% to 5.6% to reflect the shifting of operations to jurisdictions with no
income tax or low income tax rates. The result of this change was a
one-time, unfavorable adjustment of 3.4% to the Company's state tax rate for the
revaluation of the Company's state deferred tax asset at the lower effective
state tax rate. In 2008, the Company similarly reduced its statutory state tax
rate net of federal benefit to 5.5%, where it remained through 2009. Although
the dollar amount of the one-time, unfavorable adjustment for the revaluation of
the deferred tax asset in 2008 was not significant, the impact of the adjustment
to the 2008 state tax rate was 7.9% due to the Company's pre-tax book income
being closer to $0 than in other years.
For the
years ended December 27, 2009 and December 28, 2008, the Company’s combined
federal and state income tax receivables were $486,000 and $967,000,
respectively.
F-14
Deferred
income taxes are provided to reflect temporary differences in the basis of net
assets for income tax and financial reporting purposes, as well as available tax
credits. The tax-effected temporary differences comprising the Company’s
deferred income taxes as of December 27, 2009 and December 28, 2008 are as
follows (in thousands):
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Accruals currently
not deductible
|
$
|
2,234
|
$
|
810
|
||||
Deferred
rent
|
1,138
|
1,180
|
||||||
Difference
between book and tax basis of property
|
5,455
|
5,163
|
||||||
Net
operating losses
|
160
|
159
|
||||||
State
taxes
|
227
|
231
|
||||||
Deferred
compensation
|
1,799
|
1,457
|
||||||
Deferred
income
|
74
|
72
|
||||||
Accrued
legal settlement
|
988
|
1,976
|
||||||
Inventory
|
163
|
—
|
||||||
Other,
net
|
(240
|
)
|
(24
|
)
|
||||
Net
deferred income tax assets
|
$
|
11,998
|
$
|
11,024
|
||||
Net
current deferred income tax assets
|
$
|
3,083
|
$
|
1,764
|
||||
Net
non-current deferred income tax assets
|
$
|
8,915
|
$
|
9,260
|
The
Company has State Enterprise Zone credit carryforwards as of December 27, 2009
and December 28, 2008 of $227,000 and $228,000, respectively. State income tax
credits will carry forward indefinitely and may be used to offset future state
income tax. The Company also has State net operating loss carryforwards of $3.2
million as of December 27, 2009 and $2.9 million as of December 28, 2008. State
net operating losses will carryforward through 2019 and may be used to offset
future state taxable income. The Company believes that the remaining deferred
tax assets will be realized through future taxable income or alternative tax
strategies.
A
reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits
for the years ended December 27, 2009 and December 28, 2008 is as follows (in
thousands):
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||
Beginning
balance
|
$
|
271
|
$
|
1,044
|
||||
Gross
increases for tax positions taken in prior years
|
267
|
44
|
||||||
Gross
increases for tax positions taken in the current year
|
80
|
147
|
||||||
Consents
for accounting method changes
|
—
|
(953
|
)
|
|||||
Lapse
of statute of limitations
|
(12
|
)
|
(11
|
)
|
||||
Ending
balance
|
$
|
606
|
$
|
271
|
As of
December 27, 2009, the unrecognized tax benefits, net of their state tax
benefits, that would negatively impact the Company’s effective tax rate if
recognized were $6,000.
A
significant portion of the Company's beginning balance of unrecognized tax
benefits for 2008 related to an uncertain tax position for worker's compensation
costs. The Company filed a request to change its accounting method
for workers' compensation costs with the IRS and, during the third quarter of
2008, the IRS approved the Company's request. This approval allowed the Company
to increase its tax liability for the impact of the change over a four-year
period beginning with its 2007 tax return. The Company reduced its
balance of unrecognized tax benefits by $953,000 for the impact of the approval
on this uncertain tax position.
The IRS
is currently examining the Company's 2006 and 2007 tax years. During the second
quarter of fiscal 2009, the IRS proposed an adjustment related to inventory
capitalization with a tax impact of $837,000. After considering restaurant
specific company operations, the IRS issued a revised proposed adjustment with a
tax impact of $321,000. The Company subsequently submitted an additional
revision to the calculation with a tax impact of $161,000. The IRS reviewed the
revised calculation but did not agree with the Company's position. As the
Company feels strongly that its position more accurately reflects existing tax
law, the Company has filed a formal appeal with the IRS.
The
Company has recorded an unrecognized tax benefit of $161,000 related to the IRS
proposed adjustment. It has also recorded unrecognized tax benefits for the
impact of the uncertain tax position on inventory capitalization on other years
following the examination period and on the Company's filings in states where
the Company does business.
The
Company expects to resolve the uncertain tax position on inventory
capitalization with the IRS and other taxing jurisdictions within the next
twelve months. The resolution of this matter and others in the next twelve
months may result in a reduction of unrecognized tax benefits by up to $247,000.
As of the end of 2009, the Company’s 2008 and 2009 federal tax years and 2005
through 2009 state tax years were not under examination but remained open to
potential examination by taxing authorities. Based on the status of the
Company’s current federal examination and the absence of any other open
examinations, the Company is not aware of any other events that might
significantly impact the balance of unrecognized tax benefits during the next
twelve months.
F-15
The
Company classifies interest expense and penalties on income tax liabilities and
interest income on income tax refunds as additional income tax expense or
benefit, respectively. During the 2009 and 2008 years, the Company
accrued net interest expense of $15,000 and net interest income of $134,000,
respectively. The interest income in 2008 was primarily the result of the
Company's reversal of approximately $105,000 of accrued interest expense as a
result of the IRS approval of the Company’s request for method change and the
lapse of the statute of limitations on the Company’s 2004 Federal tax
year. As of December 27, 2009 and December 28, 2008, the Company's
balances of accrued interest expense were $69,000 and $55,000,
respectively.
8. SHARE-BASED COMPENSATION
PLANS
1999
STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN - On March 18, 1999 and March 24, 1999, the Board of
Directors and the stockholders, respectively, of the Company approved the 1999
Stock Incentive Plan (the 1999 Plan). All outstanding options under the 1995
Stock Option/Stock Issuance Plan and the 1998 Stock Option/Stock Issuance Plan
(collectively, the “predecessor plans”) were incorporated into the 1999 Plan.
After the adoption of the 1999 plan, no further grants were made under the
predecessor plans. The 1999 Plan is administered by the Company’s Compensation
Committee with respect to the officers and directors of the Company and by the
Company’s Board of Directors with respect to other eligible employees and
consultants of the Company (the Compensation Committee or the Board of
Directors, as applicable, the “1999 Plan Administrator”).
The stock
issuable under the 1999 Plan consisted of shares of authorized but unissued or
reacquired common stock, including shares repurchased by the Company on the open
market. The number of shares of common stock reserved for issuance under the
1999 Plan automatically increased on the first trading day in January each year.
The increase was equal to 3% of the total number of shares of common stock
outstanding as of the last trading day in December of the preceding year, not to
exceed 450,000 shares in any given year. In addition, no participant in the 1999
Plan may be granted stock options, separately exercisable stock appreciation
rights and direct stock issuances for more than 500,000 shares of common stock
in the aggregate per calendar year. Each option has a maximum term of 10 years,
or 5 years in the case of any greater than 10% stockholder, and is subject to
earlier termination in the event of the optionee’s termination of
service.
The 1999
Plan is divided into five separate components: (1) the discretionary option
grant program, (2) the stock issuance program, (3) the salary investment option
grant program, (4) the automatic option grant program and (5) the director fee
option grant program. The salary investment option grant program was never
implemented, and the automatic option grant program and the director fee option
grant program have been discontinued.
The
discretionary option grant and stock issuance programs provide for the issuance
of incentive and non-statutory options for eligible employees and service
providers, and stock issuances and share right awards, including restricted
stock units, for cash or in consideration for services rendered. The option
exercise price per share is fixed by the 1999 Plan Administrator in accordance
with the following provisions: (1) the exercise price shall not be less than
100% of the fair market value per share of the common stock on the date of grant
and (2) if the person to whom the option is granted is a
greater-than-10%-stockholder, then the exercise price per share shall not be
less than 110% of the fair market value per share of the common stock on the
date of grant. Each option shall be exercisable at such time or times, during
such period and for such number of shares as shall be determined by the 1999
Plan Administrator as set forth in the related individual option agreements.
Generally, options granted under the 1999 Plan have become exercisable and vest
in three equal annual installments over a three-year period. Stock issuances and
share right awards, including restricted stock units, may be issued for past
services rendered to the Company without any cash payment. In addition, the 1999
Plan Administrator can determine a purchase price to be paid in cash or check
that will not be less than the fair market value of the common stock on the
issuance date.
On the
date of each annual stockholders’ meeting after the 2006 annual stockholders’
meeting, each individual who continues to serve as a non-employee board member
will be granted an annual award under the 1999 Plan consisting of restricted
stock units for 4,500 shares of our common stock, which will vest upon the
earlier of the expiration of 12 months of continuous service as a director or
the director’s death, or permanent disability, a change of control or a
corporate transaction, as such terms are defined in the 1999 Plan. In fiscal
2009, 2008 and 2007, each non-employee director received restricted stock units
for 4,500 shares of our common stock.
The 1999
Plan terminated in accordance with its terms on March 17, 2009. At the time of
termination, a total of 4,222,138 shares of common stock were authorized for
issuance under the 1999 Plan, which includes the shares subject to outstanding
options under the predecessor plans. As discussed below, the Company’s Board of
Directors and stockholders approved the 2008 Equity Incentive Plan in connection
with the Company’s annual meeting in 2008 to replace the 1999 Plan. No further
grants or awards will be made under the 1999 Plan.
2008
EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN – In connection with the Company’s annual meeting in 2008,
the Board of Directors and the stockholders of the Company approved the 2008
Equity Incentive Plan (the “2008 Plan”) to replace the 1999 Plan, which
terminated on March 17, 2009. The 2008 Plan permits the Company to issue stock
options (both incentive stock options and non-statutory stock options) and stock
awards (including stock appreciation rights, stock units, stock grants and other
similar equity awards). The 2008 Plan is administered by the Company’s
Compensation Committee and the Company’s Board of Directors.
F-16
The
number of shares of common stock initially reserved for issuance under the 2008
Plan consist of that number of shares that (i) remain available for sale or
issuance under the 1999 Plan and (ii) shares subject to outstanding awards
issued under the 1999 Plan (including the 2006 Executive Incentive Plan);
provided that in the case of (ii) such shares only become available for issuance
under the 2008 Plan if and to the extent such outstanding awards are cancelled,
expire or are forfeited or such shares are repurchased by the Company. The
number of shares available for sale or issuance under the 2008 Plan will
automatically increase on the first trading day of January each calendar year
during the term of the 2008 Plan, beginning with calendar year 2009, by an
amount equal to three percent (3%) of the total number of shares outstanding on
the last trading day in December of the immediately preceding calendar year, but
in no event shall any such annual increase exceed 450,000 shares. As of December
27, 2009, a total of 4,222,138 shares of common stock were authorized for
issuance under the 2008 Plan, which includes the shares subject to outstanding
options under all predecessor plans. During July 2009, the Company’s Board of
Directors suspended the Plan’s evergreen feature for the 2010 and 2011 calendar
years.
The
following is a summary of stock option activity for fiscal years 2007, 2008 and
2009 pursuant to the 1999 Plan and the 2008 Plan:
Weighted
|
||||||||||||
Shares
|
Average
|
|||||||||||
Options
|
Exercise
|
|||||||||||
Available
|
Options
|
Price Per
|
||||||||||
for Grant
|
Outstanding
|
Share
|
||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2006
|
802,860
|
1,577,451
|
$
|
8.25
|
||||||||
Authorized
|
293,805
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Granted
|
(482,519
|
)
|
482,519
|
9.27
|
||||||||
Exercised
|
—
|
(156,986
|
)
|
5.73
|
||||||||
Forfeited
|
203,062
|
(203,062
|
)
|
10.05
|
||||||||
Balance
at December 30, 2007
|
817,208
|
1,699,922
|
8.55
|
|||||||||
Authorized
|
298,493
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Granted
|
(321,698
|
)
|
321,698
|
4.40
|
||||||||
Exercised
|
—
|
(600
|
)
|
4.75
|
||||||||
Forfeited
|
143,749
|
(143,749
|
)
|
9.26
|
||||||||
Expired
|
6,550
|
(6,550
|
)
|
9.00
|
||||||||
Balance
at December 28, 2008
|
944,302
|
1,870,721
|
7.78
|
|||||||||
Authorized
|
298,532
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Granted
|
(32,229
|
)
|
32,229
|
5.59
|
||||||||
Exercised
|
—
|
(75,000
|
)
|
8.39
|
||||||||
Forfeited
|
55,598
|
(55,598
|
)
|
3.17
|
||||||||
Expired
|
67,607
|
(67,607
|
)
|
9.23
|
||||||||
Balance
at December 27, 2009
|
1,333,810
|
1,704,745
|
7.87
|
|||||||||
Exercisable,
December 30, 2007
|
821,927
|
8.23
|
||||||||||
Exercisable,
December 28, 2008
|
1,013,898
|
8.09
|
||||||||||
Exercisable,
December 27, 2009
|
971,081
|
8.48
|
Options Outstanding
|
Options Exercisable
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Range of Exercise Prices
|
Number
Outstanding
|
Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual
Life
(Years)
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
|
Number
Exercisable
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
|
|||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
$
2.90 - $ 4.97
|
335,615
|
7.85
|
$
|
4.23
|
86,616
|
$
|
4.56
|
|||||||||||||
5.00 -
6.50
|
152,964
|
4.70
|
5.93
|
113,964
|
5.99
|
|||||||||||||||
7.00 -
9.87
|
1,104,703
|
6.57
|
8.86
|
660,704
|
8.89
|
|||||||||||||||
10.00 -
11.05
|
32,486
|
6.12
|
10.47
|
30,820
|
10.46
|
|||||||||||||||
12.00 -
12.75
|
78,977
|
4.96
|
12.17
|
78,977
|
12.17
|
|||||||||||||||
|
1,704,745
|
6.57
|
7.87
|
971,081
|
8.48
|
F-17
Options
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise Price
|
Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
|
Weighted
Average
Remaining
Term
|
|||||||||||||
Outstanding
at beginning of period
|
1,870,721
|
$
|
7.78
|
|||||||||||||
Granted
|
32,229
|
5.59
|
||||||||||||||
Exercised
|
(75,000
|
)
|
8.39
|
|||||||||||||
Forfeited
|
(55,598
|
)
|
3.17
|
|||||||||||||
Expired
|
(67,607
|
)
|
9.23
|
|||||||||||||
Outstanding
at end of period
|
1,704,745
|
$
|
7.87
|
$
|
1,238,071
|
6.57
|
||||||||||
Exercisable
at end of period
|
971,081
|
$
|
8.48
|
$
|
386,595
|
5.45
|
In 2009,
2008 and 2007, the aggregate intrinsic value of stock options (the amount by
which the market price of the stock on the date of exercise exceeded the market
price of the stock on the date of grant) exercised was $218,000, $0 and
$900,000, respectively.
Compensation
cost, which was determined using the weighted average fair value at the date of
grant, was $2.57, $1.96 and $4.61 for options granted during 2009, 2008 and
2007, respectively. The fair value of each option grant was estimated on the
date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. For fiscal 2009, the
assumptions used were: an expected dividend of zero; an expected stock price
volatility of 53%; a risk-free interest rate of 2% and expected lives of options
of 4.6 years. For fiscal 2008, the assumptions used were: an expected dividend
of zero; an expected stock price volatility of 49%; a risk-free interest rate of
2% and expected lives of options of 5.0 years. For fiscal 2007, the assumptions
used were: an expected dividend of zero; an expected stock price volatility of
45%; a risk-free interest rate of 3.9% and expected lives of options of 6.4
years. As of December 27, 2009, there was $667,945 of unrecognized compensation
expense related to non-vested option awards that is expected to be recognized
over a weighted average period of 1.39 years. As of December 28, 2008, there was
$1,303,503 of unrecognized compensation expense related to non-vested option
awards that is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 2.1
years. As of December 30, 2007, there was $1,916,452 of unrecognized
compensation expense related to non-vested option awards that is expected to be
recognized over a weighted average period of 2.4 years.
The
estimated fair value of options granted is subject to the assumptions made, and
if the assumptions change, the actual fair value amounts could be significantly
different.
Included
in general and administrative and restaurant labor expenses on the consolidated
statements of operations is stock compensation expense measured and recognized
at $1,159,000 in 2009, $1,518,000 in 2008, and $1,243,000 in 2007.
1999
EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN - On March 18, 1999 and March 24, 1999, the board
and stockholders, respectively, approved the 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan
(the “ESPP”), which became effective upon the completion of the Company’s
initial public offering. The ESPP allows eligible employees, as specified in the
ESPP, to purchase shares of common stock in semi-annual intervals through
payroll deductions under this plan. The accumulated payroll deductions will be
applied to the purchase of shares on the employee’s behalf at a price per share
equal to 85% of the lower of (1) the fair market value of the Company’s common
stock at the date of entry into the current offering period or (2) the fair
market value on the purchase date. An initial reserve of 200,000 shares of
common stock has been authorized for issuance under the ESPP. The board may
alter, suspend or discontinue the ESPP. However, certain amendments to the ESPP
may require stockholder approval. There has been no activity under the ESPP
during 2009. The ESPP terminated pursuant to its terms on July 31,
2009.
2006
EXECUTIVE INCENTIVE PLAN - On July 27, 2006, the stockholders of the Company
approved the Rubio’s Restaurants, Inc. 2006 Executive Incentive Plan (the
“EIP”). The purpose of the EIP is to motivate executive officers and other
members of senior management with the grant of long-term performance based stock
or cash awards.
The EIP
is administered by the compensation committee of the board, which will select
participants eligible to receive awards, usually in the form of restricted stock
units, determine the amount of each award and the measurement periods for
evaluating participant performance, and establish for each measurement period
(i) the performance goals, based on business criteria, and the target levels of
performance for each participant and (ii) a payout formula or matrix for
calculating a participant’s award based on actual performance. Performance goals
may be based on one or more of the following business criteria: return on
equity, assets or invested capital; stockholder return, actual or relative to an
appropriate index (including share price or market capitalization); actual or
growth in revenues, orders, operating income, or net income (with or without
regard to amortization/impairment of goodwill); free cash flow generation,
operational performance, including asset turns, revenues per employee or per
square foot, or comparable store sales; or individually designed goals and
objectives that are consistent with the participant’s specific duties and
responsibilities and that are designed to improve the financial performance of
the Company or a specific division, region or subsidiary.
At the
end of each measurement period, the compensation committee will determine the
extent to which the performance goals for each participant were achieved. Stock
awards and restricted stock units under the EIP are payable from the Company’s
1999 Plan or any stock option, equity incentive or similar plan that may be
adopted by the Company in the future, or in cash, at the option of the Company.
No participant may receive an award of more than 300,000 shares under the EIP in
any one fiscal or calendar year.
F-18
The
Company granted market performance vested stock awards to certain employees
under the EIP in fiscal year 2007. No awards were granted during fiscal 2008 and
2009. The awards granted in fiscal year 2007 represent a right to receive a
certain number of shares of common stock upon achievement of share price
performance goals at the end of one-year, two-year and three-year periods. The
first three performance periods ended on December 20, 2007, 2008 and 2009,
respectively. ASC 718, Compensation – Stock
Compensation (formerly SFAS No. 123R) requires that the valuation of
market condition awards consider the likelihood that the market condition will
be satisfied rather than assuming that the award is vested on the award date.
Because the share-price compounded annual growth rate targets represent a more
difficult threshold to meet before payout, with greater uncertainty that the
market condition will be satisfied, these awards have a lower fair value than
those that vest based solely on the passage of time. However, compensation
expense is required to be recognized under ASC 718 for an award regardless of
when, if ever, the market condition is satisfied. The Company determined the
fair value on the date of grant of $4.27, $4.48 and $4.78 for the awards with
performance periods ending in 2007, 2008 and 2009, respectively. The fair value
of each option grant was estimated on the date of grant using a Stochastic
model, under the following assumptions: an expected dividend of zero; expected
stock price volatility of 25.7%, 32.2% and 37.8% for the awards with performance
periods ending in 2007, 2008 and 2009, respectively, and; risk-free interest
rate of 4.9%, 4.6% and 4.5% for the awards with performance periods ending in
2007, 2008 and 2009, respectively. The compensation associated with these shares
is being expensed over the service period. The amount of compensation expense
recorded was $54,000 $86,000 and $173,000 for fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively. The expected cost for all awards granted is based on the fair
value on the date of grant, as it is the Company’s intent to settle these awards
with shares of common stock. These stock awards are payable under the 1999
Plan.
RESTRICTED
STOCK UNITS - The following table summarizes restricted stock unit activity
during fiscal years 2009, 2008 and 2007:
Restricted Stock Units (# of shares)
|
||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
||||||||||
Outstanding
at beginning of period
|
64,250
|
85,537
|
117,822
|
|||||||||
Awards
granted
|
22,500
|
27,000
|
27,000
|
|||||||||
Awards
forfeited
|
(37,250
|
)
|
(5,332
|
)
|
(14,998
|
)
|
||||||
Shares
vested
|
(27,000
|
)
|
(42,955
|
)
|
(44,287
|
)
|
||||||
Non-vested
shares at end of period
|
22,500
|
64,250
|
85,537
|
|||||||||
Weighted
Average Grant Date Fair Value
|
$
|
6.04
|
$
|
4.94
|
$
|
6.32
|
As of
December 27, 2009, there was $74,442 of unrecognized compensation expense
related to non-vested restricted stock unit awards that is expected to be
recognized over a weighted average period of 0.59 years. For the fiscal year
ended December 28, 2008, there was $120,582 of unrecognized compensation expense
related to non-vested restricted stock unit awards that is expected to be
recognized over a weighted average period of 0.75 years. For the fiscal year
ended December 30, 2007, there was $270,015 of unrecognized compensation expense
related to non-vested restricted stock unit awards that is expected to be
recognized over a weighted average period of 1.16 years.
9. BENEFIT
PLANS
EMPLOYEE
SAVINGS PLAN - The Company has a defined contribution 401(k) plan. This plan
allows eligible employees to contribute a percentage of their salary, subject to
annual limits, to the plan. The Company matches 25% of each eligible employee’s
contributions up to 6% of gross salary. The Company’s contributions vest over a
five-year period. The Company contributed $58,000, $56,000 and $54,000 for
fiscal years 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
EXECUTIVE
DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN - The Company adopted a deferred compensation plan
(the Plan), effective on December 1, 2007. Under the Plan, beginning on December
31, 2007, the Company’s management and other highly compensated employees and
non-employee members of the board who are not eligible to participate in the
Company’s 401(k) plan based on their compensation levels can defer a portion of
their compensation and contribute such amounts to one or more investment funds.
Funds are invested in a combination of mutual funds and corporate owned life
insurance contracts (“COLI”) that are specifically designed to informally fund
savings plans of this nature. The Plan is not intended to meet the qualification
requirements of Section 401(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended,
but is intended to meet the requirements of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue
Code, and to be an unfunded arrangement providing deferred compensation to
eligible employees who are part of a select group of management or highly
compensated employees within the meaning of Sections 201, 301 and 401 of the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended. The maximum
aggregate amount deferrable under the Plan is 80% of base salary and 100% of
cash incentive compensation. The Company makes bi-weekly matching contributions
in an amount equal to 25% of the first 6% of employee compensation contributed,
with a maximum annual Company contribution of 6% of employee compensation per
year (subject to annual dollar maximum limits). The Company’s contributions to
the Plan vest at the rate of 25% each year beginning after the employee’s first
year of service. For the fiscal years ended December 27, 2009 and
December 28, 2008, the Company’s matching contribution expense under the
Plan was $32,000 and $33,000, respectively.
Additionally,
the Company entered into a rabbi trust agreement to protect the assets of the
Plan. Each participant’s account is comprised of their contribution, the
Company’s matching contribution and their share of earnings or losses in the
Plan. In accordance with ASC 710-10-35, Compensation, (formerly EITF 97-14) (Accounting for Deferred Compensation Arrangements
Where Amounts Earned Are Held in a Rabbi Trust and Invested), the accounts of the rabbi
trust are reported in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. The
Company reports these investments within other assets and the related obligation
within other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheet. Such amounts totaled
$452,000 and $460,000 at December 27, 2009, respectively, and $201,000 and
$180,000 at December 28, 2008, respectively. The investments are reported
at fair value with the realized and unrealized holding gains and losses related
to these investments, as well as the offsetting compensation expense, recorded
in general and administrative expenses.
F-19
NON-EMPLOYEE
DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN - The Company adopted a non-employee deferred
compensation plan on March 6, 2003. Under this plan, non-employee directors can
defer fees into either a cash account or into discounted options under the
Company’s 1999 Plan. Any deferrals into cash are credited to a cash account that
will accrue earnings at an annual rate of 2% above the prime lending rate. At
the time of election, a participant must choose the dates on which the cash
benefit will be distributed. In October 2004, Congress enacted Internal Revenue
Code Section 409A governing deferred compensation. The Company operates this
deferred compensation plan in accordance with Section 409A. Because Section 409A
restricts the use of discounted stock options, the Company will evaluate the
extent to which that portion of the non-employee deferred compensation plan will
be implemented in the future. This plan had no impact on the Company’s results
of operations for fiscal 2009, 2008, or 2007.
10. FAIR
VALUE MEASUREMENT
As of
December 27, 2009 and December 28, 2008, the Company's financial assets and
financial liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis are
comprised of an Executive Deferred Compensation Plan of Rubio’s Restaurants,
Inc., (the “Plan”). The Plan is a nonqualified deferred compensation plan which
allows highly compensated employees to defer receipt of a portion of their
compensation and contribute such amounts to one or more investment funds held in
a rabbi trust. The Plan investments are reported at fair value
based on third-party broker statements which represents level 2 in the ASC
820 (formerly SFAS 157) fair value hierarchy (see Note 9). The realized and
unrealized holding gains and losses related to these investments, as well as the
offsetting compensation expense, are recorded in general and administrative
expense on the consolidated statements of operations.
The
Company’s non-financial assets (liabilities) that are measured using fair value
techniques on a nonrecurring basis include valuing potential impairment losses
related to property and equipment. The Company tests for the impairment of
property and equipment when triggering events occur, and such impairment, if
any, is measured at fair value. The inputs for fair value of property and
equipment would be based on Level 3 inputs as data used for such fair value
calculations and would be based on discounted cash flows that are not observable
from the market, directly or indirectly.
The
following table presents the fair values for those assets and liabilities
measured at fair value during fiscal 2009 on a non-recurring basis, and
remaining on our Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 27,
2009. Total losses include losses recognized from all non-recurring
fair value measurements during fiscal 2009 (in thousands):
|
Total
|
Level 1
|
Level 2
|
Level 3
|
Total losses
|
|||||||||||||||
Long-lived
assets held and used
|
$ | 506 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 506 | $ | 1,068 |
The fair
value of long-lived assets held and used, is typically determined using
discounted cash flows to estimate the price that a franchisee would be expected
to pay for a restaurant and its related assets.
11. RELATED PARTIES
The
following is a listing of the Company’s related-party transactions:
Craig
Andrews, a Company director, is a partner at the law firm of DLA Piper LLP (US)
and was a shareholder of Heller Ehrman, LLP through June 2008. During fiscal
2009 and 2008, the Company paid DLA Piper LLP $406,662 and $182,425,
respectively, and during fiscal 2009 and 2008, the Company paid Heller Ehrman,
LLP $0 and $150,955, respectively, for rendering general corporate and other
legal services.
In July
2005, the Company entered into agreements with Rosewood Capital, L.P. or
Rosewood, and Ralph Rubio, who at the time was Chairman of the Board and Chief
Executive Officer, to extend the registration rights held by Rosewood and Mr.
Rubio under an investor’s rights agreement entered into prior to the Company’s
initial public offering. Neither Mr. Rubio nor Mr. Anderson, a Company director,
voted on the approval of the transaction with respect to these extension
agreements. In May 2007, the Company, Rosewood and Mr. Rubio, who at the time
was Chairman of the Board, entered into agreements to further extend the
registration rights held by Rosewood and Mr. Rubio from December 31, 2007 to
June 30, 2009. As part of these extension agreements, Rosewood and Mr. Rubio
agreed that they would not demand that the Company register their stock
prior to June 30, 2009. Neither Mr. Rubio nor Mr. Anderson, a Company director
and affiliated with Rosewood, voted on the approval of the transaction with
respect to these extension agreements. On September 11, 2008, the Company
entered into an agreement with each of Rosewood and Mr. Rubio to extend the time
period in which Rosewood and Mr. Rubio may exercise their registration rights
from June 30, 2009 to December 30, 2010. In consideration for this extension,
Rosewood and Mr. Rubio each agreed not submit a request to register their stock
until December 31, 2008. Neither Mr. Rubio nor Mr. Anderson voted on the
approval of the transaction with respect to these extension agreements. On July
29, 2009, the Company entered into an agreement with each of Rosewood and Mr.
Rubio to extend the time period in which Rosewood and Mr. Rubio may exercise
their registration rights from December 30, 2010 to December 30, 2011. In
consideration for this extension, Rosewood and Mr. Rubio each agreed not submit
a request to register their stock until December 31, 2009. Neither
Mr. Rubio nor Mr. Anderson voted on the approval of the transaction with respect
to these extension agreements.
F-20
12. NET INCOME PER
SHARE
A
reconciliation of basic and diluted net income per share is as follows (in
thousands, except per share data):
Fiscal Years
|
||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
||||||||||
Numerator
|
||||||||||||
Basic:
|
||||||||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
392
|
$
|
84
|
$
|
1,189
|
||||||
Denominator
|
||||||||||||
Basic:
|
||||||||||||
Weighted
average common shares outstanding
|
9,993
|
9,951
|
9,889
|
|||||||||
Diluted:
|
||||||||||||
Effect
of dilutive securities:
|
||||||||||||
Common
stock options
|
79
|
63
|
81
|
|||||||||
Total
weighted average common and potential common shares
outstanding
|
10,072
|
10,014
|
9,970
|
|||||||||
Net
income per share:
|
||||||||||||
Basic
|
$
|
0.04
|
$
|
0.01
|
$
|
0.12
|
||||||
Diluted
|
$
|
0.04
|
$
|
0.01
|
$
|
0.12
|
For the
fiscal years ended December 27, 2009, December 28, 2008, and
December 30, 2007, common stock options of 1.5 million, 1.7 million,
and 511,000 shares, respectively, were excluded in calculating diluted earnings
per share as the exercise price exceeded fair market value and inclusion would
have been anti-dilutive.
13. SEGMENT INFORMATION
The
Company owns and operates high-quality, fast-casual Mexican restaurants under
the name “Rubio’s Fresh Mexican Grill,” with restaurants in California, Arizona,
Nevada, Colorado and Utah. The Company currently considers its business to
consist of one reportable operating segment.
14. SELECTED QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA
(UNAUDITED)
The
following is summarized unaudited quarterly financial data (in thousands, except
per share data) for fiscal 2009 and 2008:
Fiscal 2009
|
||||||||||||||||
First Quarter
|
Second
Quarter
|
Third Quarter
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|||||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
$
|
46,337
|
$
|
48,667
|
$
|
48,431
|
$
|
45,443
|
||||||||
Operating
income (loss)
|
428
|
764
|
659
|
(1,266
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
245
|
512
|
487
|
(852
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Basic
net income (loss) per share
|
0.02
|
0.05
|
0.05
|
(0.08
|
)
|
|||||||||||
Diluted
net income (loss) per share
|
0.02
|
0.05
|
0.05
|
(0.08
|
)
|
|
Fiscal 2008
|
|||||||||||||||
First Quarter
|
Second
Quarter
|
Third Quarter
|
Fourth
Quarter
(restated, see
Note 2)
|
|||||||||||||
Total
revenues
|
$
|
42,161
|
$
|
45,147
|
$
|
47,012
|
$
|
44,984
|
||||||||
Operating
(loss) income
|
(1,243
|
)
|
611
|
1,244
|
(400
|
)
|
||||||||||
Net
(loss) income
|
(745
|
)
|
335
|
789
|
(295
|
)
|
||||||||||
Basic
net (loss) income per share
|
(0.07
|
)
|
0.03
|
0.08
|
(0.03
|
)
|
||||||||||
Diluted
net (loss) income per share
|
(0.07
|
)
|
0.03
|
0.08
|
(0.03
|
)
|
Operating
income (loss) and net income (loss) per share are computed independently for
each of the quarters presented and therefore may not sum to the annual amount
for the year.
F-21