Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-Q

Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)

of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2010

Commission File Number 0-18761

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

550 Monica Circle, Suite 201

Corona, California 92880

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code)

(951) 739 – 6200

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

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 x  No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes o  No o

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company.  See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined by Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o  No x

The Registrant had 88,767,747 shares of common stock, par value $0.005 per share, outstanding as of April 28, 2010.

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

MARCH 31, 2010

INDEX

2

Table of Contents

PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION

ITEM 1. CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (UNAUDITED)

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

AS OF MARCH 31, 2010 AND DECEMBER 31, 2009

See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.

3

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME

FOR THE THREE-MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2010 AND 2009

See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.

4

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

FOR THE THREE-MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2010 AND 2009

SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF NON-CASH ITEMS

The Company entered into capital leases for the acquisition of promotional vehicles of $0.1 million and $0.6 million for the three-months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.

See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.

5

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

1.                                       BASIS OF PRESENTATION

Reference is made to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, in Hansen Natural Corporation and Subsidiaries (“Hansen” or the “Company”) Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 (“Form 10-K”) for a summary of significant accounting policies utilized by the Company and its consolidated subsidiaries and other disclosures, which should be read in conjunction with this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (“Form 10-Q”).

The Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-Q have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) and Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) rules and regulations applicable to interim financial reporting.  They do not include all the information and footnote disclosures normally included in annual financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP.  The information set forth in these interim condensed consolidated financial statements for the three-months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 is unaudited and reflects all adjustments, which include only normal recurring adjustments and which in the opinion of management are necessary to make the interim condensed consolidated financial statements not misleading.  Results of operations for periods covered by this report may not necessarily be indicative of results of operations for the full year.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP necessarily requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods.  Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The Company has reclassified $9.1 million of current deferred revenue from accrued liabilities on the consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2009 in order to conform to the current year presentation as a separate line item.

2.                                       RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS

In January 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-06, “Improving Disclosures about Fair Value Measurements”. ASU 2010-06 requires additional disclosures about fair value measurements including transfers in and out of Levels 1 and 2, and a higher level of disaggregation for the different types of financial instruments. For the reconciliation of Level 3 fair value measurements, information about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements should be presented separately. The guidance also requires disclosure of valuation techniques and inputs used for fair value measurement of the Company’s Level 3 financial assets. The Company adopted the new guidance as of March 31, 2010, except for disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements in the roll forward of activity in Level 3 fair value measurements, which are required for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010.  The new guidance requires expanded disclosures only, and did not and is not expected to have a material effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

6

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

In June 2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 167, “Amendments to FASB Interpretation No. 46(R)” (“SFAS No. 167”), primarily codified into Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 810.  This guidance amends the consolidation guidance applicable to variable interest entities and requires enhanced disclosures about an enterprise’s involvement in a variable interest entity. This statement also requires ongoing assessments of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity. The Company adopted this guidance on January 1, 2010, which had no material effect on its financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

In September 2009, the FASB issued Update No. 2009-13, which updates the existing guidance regarding multiple-element revenue arrangements currently included under ASC 605-25. The revised guidance primarily provides two significant changes: 1) eliminates the need for objective and reliable evidence of the fair value for the undelivered element in order for a delivered item to be treated as a separate unit of accounting, and 2) eliminates the residual method to allocate the arrangement consideration. The guidance also expands the disclosure requirements for revenue recognition and will be effective for the first annual reporting period beginning on or after June 15, 2010, with early adoption permitted provided that the revised guidance is retroactively applied to the beginning of the year of adoption. The Company is currently evaluating the effect of this update on its financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

3.                                       FAIR VALUE OF CERTAIN ASSETS AND LIABILITIES

ASC 820 provides a framework for measuring fair value and requires expanded disclosures regarding fair value measurements. ASC 820 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. ASC 820 also establishes a fair value hierarchy which requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs, where available. The three levels of inputs required by the standard that the Company uses to measure fair value are summarized below.

·                  Level 1: Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.

·                  Level 2: Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the related assets or liabilities.

·                  Level 3: Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities.

ASC 820 requires the use of observable market inputs (quoted market prices) when measuring fair value and requires a Level 1 quoted price to be used to measure fair value whenever possible.

7

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The following tables present the fair value of the Company’s financial assets recorded at fair value on a recurring basis segregated among the appropriate levels within the fair value hierarchy, at March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009:

8

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The following table provides a summary of changes in fair value of the Company’s Level 3 financial assets as of March 31, 2010:

The majority of the Company’s Level 3 assets are comprised of municipal or educational related or other public body notes with an auction reset feature (“auction rate securities”). A large portion of these notes carry an investment grade or better credit rating and are additionally backed by various federal agencies and/or monoline insurance companies. The applicable interest rate is reset at pre-determined intervals, usually every 7 to 35 days. Liquidity for these auction rate securities was typically provided by an auction process which allowed holders to sell their notes at periodic auctions.  During the three-months ended March 31, 2010 and the year ended December 31, 2009, the auctions for these auction rate securities failed. The auction failures have been attributable to inadequate buyers and/or buying demand and/or the lack of support from financial advisors and sponsors. In the event that there is a failed auction, the indenture governing the security in some cases requires the issuer to pay interest at a default rate that may be above market rates for similar instruments. The securities for which auctions have failed will continue to accrue and/or pay interest at their pre-determined rates and be auctioned every 7 to 35 days until their respective auction succeeds, the issuer calls the securities, they mature or the Company is able to sell the securities to third parties. As a result, the Company’s ability to liquidate and fully recover the carrying value of its auction rate securities in the near term may be limited. Consequently, these securities, except those that were redeemed at par after March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, or those that the Company intends to sell prior to March 31, 2011 as a result of the agreement described below, are classified as long-term investments in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets.

In March 2010, the Company entered into an agreement (the “ARS Agreement”), related to $54.2 million in par value auction rate securities (“ARS Securities”).  Under the ARS Agreement, the Company has the right, but not the obligation, to sell these ARS Securities including all accrued but unpaid interest (the “Put Option”) as follows: (i) on or after March 22, 2011, up to $13.6 million aggregate par value; and (ii) semi-annual or annual installments thereafter with full sale rights available on or after March 22, 2013. The ARS Securities will continue to accrue interest until redeemed through the Put Option, or as determined by the auction process or the terms outlined in the prospectus of the ARS Securities when the auction process fails.

9

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The ARS Agreement represents a firm commitment in accordance with ASC 815, which defines a firm commitment with an unrelated party, binding on both parties and usually legally enforceable, with the following characteristics: (i) the commitment specifies all significant terms, including the quantity to be exchanged, the fixed price, and the timing of the transaction; and (ii) the commitment includes a disincentive for nonperformance that is sufficiently large to make performance probable. The enforceability of the ARS Agreement results in a Put Option and should be recognized as a separate freestanding asset and is accounted for separately from the Company’s auction rate securities. The Put Option does not meet the definition of a derivative instrument under ASC 815.  Therefore, the Company elected the fair value option under ASC 825-10 in accounting for the Put Option.  As of March 31, 2010, the Company recorded $5.1 million as the fair market value of the Put Option ($1.8 million current portion included in prepaid expenses and other current assets and $3.3 million long-term portion included in other assets) in the condensed consolidated balance sheet, with a corresponding gain recorded in other income (expense) in the condensed consolidated statement of income for the three-months ended March 31, 2010.  The valuation of the Put Option utilized a mark-to-model approach which included estimates for interest rates, timing and amount of cash flows, adjusted for any bearer risk associated with the put issuer’s ability to repurchase the ARS Securities beginning March 22, 2011, and expected holding periods for the Put Option. These assumptions are typically volatile and subject to change as the underlying data sources and market conditions evolve. The Put Option will continue to be adjusted on each balance sheet date based on its then fair value, with changes in fair value recorded in earnings.

At March 31, 2010, the Company held auction rate securities with a face value of $92.7 million (amortized cost basis of $83.8 million). A Level 3 valuation was performed on the Company’s auction rate securities as of March 31, 2010 resulting in a fair value of $31.4 million for the Company’s available-for-sale auction rate securities (after a $7.0 million impairment) and $49.3 million for the Company’s trading auction rate securities, which are included in short- and long-term investments. This valuation utilized a mark-to-model approach which included estimates for interest rates, timing and amount of cash flows, credit and liquidity premiums, and expected holding periods for the auction rate securities. These assumptions are typically volatile and subject to change as the underlying data sources and market conditions evolve.

ASC 320-10-65 indicates that an other-than-temporary impairment must be recognized through earnings if an investor has the intent to sell the debt security or if it is more likely than not that the investor will be required to sell the debt security before recovery of its amortized cost basis.  However, even if an investor does not expect to sell a debt security, it must evaluate expected cash flows to be received and determine if a Credit Loss has occurred. In the event of a Credit Loss and absent the intent or requirement to sell a debt security before recovery of its amortized cost, only the amount associated with the Credit Loss is recognized as a loss in the income statement. The amount of loss relating to other factors is recorded in accumulated other comprehensive loss. ASC 320-10-65 also requires additional disclosures regarding the calculation of the Credit Loss and the factors considered in reaching a conclusion that an investment is not other-than-temporarily impaired.

In connection with the ARS Agreement, the Company reclassified $54.2 million of auction rate securities from available-for-sale to trading in accordance with ASC 320, as the Company has the ability and intent to exercise the related Put Option beginning March 22, 2011. As a result, the Company immediately recognized a loss on trading securities of $4.9 million through earnings during the three-months ended March 31, 2010.  In addition, the Company determined that of the

10

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

$7.0 million impairment of its available-for-sale auction rate securities at March 31, 2010, $3.0 million was deemed temporary and $4.0 million was deemed other-than-temporary. The other-than-temporary impairment was deemed Credit Loss related.  The Company recorded a net $0.4 million gain through earnings as a result of the redemption, at par, of a previously other-than-temporary impaired security during the three-months ended March 31, 2010 ($3.9 million and $0.5 million had been previously deemed other-than-temporary Credit Loss related and were charged through earnings for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively). At March 31, 2010, $3.0 million of temporary impairment has been recorded, less a tax benefit of $1.2 million, as a component of accumulated other comprehensive loss. The factors evaluated to differentiate between temporary impairment and other-than-temporary impairment included the projected future cash flows, credit ratings actions, and assessment of the credit quality of the underlying collateral, as well as the other factors included in the valuation model for debt securities described above.

The net effect of the acquisition of the Put Option, the transfer from available-for-sale to trading of the ARS Securities and a recognized gain resulting from the redemption at par of a previously other-than-temporary impaired security, was a $0.6 million gain included in other income (expense) for the three-months ended March 31, 2010.

The Company holds additional auction rate securities that do not have a related put option.  These auction rate securities will continue to be held as available-for-sale.  The Company intends to retain its investment in the issuers until the earlier of the anticipated recovery in market value or maturity.

Based on the Company’s ability to access cash and cash equivalents and other short-term investments and based on the Company’s expected operating cash flows, the Company does not anticipate that the current lack of liquidity of these investments will have a material effect on its liquidity or working capital. If uncertainties in the credit and capital markets continue, or uncertainties in the expected performance of the issuer of the Put Option arise, or there are rating downgrades on the auction rate securities held by the Company, the Company may be required to recognize additional impairments on these investments.

11

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

4.                                       INVESTMENTS

The following table summarizes the Company’s investments at March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009:

12

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The following table summarizes the maturities of the Company’s investments at March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009:

5.                                       INVENTORIES

Inventories consist of the following at:

6.                                       PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT, Net

Property and equipment consist of the following at:

13

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

7.                                       INTANGIBLES, Net

Intangibles consist of the following at:

All amortizing trademarks have been assigned an estimated useful life and such trademarks are amortized on a straight-line basis over the number of years that approximate their respective useful lives ranging from one to 25 years (weighted-average life of 20 years).  Amortization expense was $0.01 million and $0.03 million for the three-months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.

8.                                       DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENTS

Amounts received pursuant to distribution agreements entered into with certain distributors have been accounted for as deferred revenue in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets and are recognized as revenue ratably over the anticipated life of the respective distribution agreement, generally 20 years. Revenue recognized was $1.8 million and $1.9 million for the three-months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.

9.                                       COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

The Company has purchase commitments aggregating approximately $30.3 million, which represent commitments made by the Company and its subsidiaries to various suppliers of raw materials for the manufacturing and packaging of its products.  These obligations vary in terms.

In addition to the above purchase obligations, pursuant to a can supply agreement between the Company and Rexam Beverage Can Company (“Rexam”), the Company has undertaken to purchase a minimum volume of 24-ounce re-sealable aluminum beverage cans through December 31, 2010. The Company’s remaining minimum purchase obligation under this agreement is approximately $8.3 million, subject to compliance by Rexam with certain conditions.

The Company has noncancelable contractual obligations aggregating approximately $47.5 million, which are related primarily to sponsorships and other marketing activities.

In 2008, the Company entered into licensing and programming agreements with SAP America, Inc. to use its global enterprise resource planning software initiative to replace the Company’s existing legacy software in North America. The Company also entered into agreements with Axon Solutions, Inc. and Vistex Inc. for the implementation and configuration of the SAP

14

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

software. As of January 2010, the Company had completed its North American transition to the SAP enterprise resource planning system. The Company intends to complete its transition for the Company’s international operations over a multi-year period. The Company estimates the remaining cost for implementation of the initiative will be approximately $0.6 million.

Litigation — In September 2006, Christopher Chavez purporting to act on behalf of himself and a class of consumers yet to be defined filed an action in the Superior Court of the State of California, City and County of San Francisco, against the Company and its subsidiaries for unfair business practices, false advertising, violation of California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, fraud, deceit and/or misrepresentation alleging that the Company misleadingly labels its Blue Sky beverages as manufactured and canned/bottled wholly in Santa Fe, New Mexico.  Defendants removed this Superior Court action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (the “District Court”) under the Class Action Fairness Act, and filed motions for dismissal or transfer.  On June 11, 2007, the District Court granted the Company’s motion to dismiss Chavez’s complaint with prejudice.  On June 23, 2009, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit filed a memorandum opinion reversing the opinion of the District Court and remanded the case to the District Court for further proceedings.  The Company has filed a motion to dismiss the Consumer Legal Remedies Act claims; the plaintiff has filed a motion for a decision on a preemption issue; and the plaintiff filed a motion for class certification on April 22, 2010.  The District Court has set a hearing date for all three motions on May 27, 2010.  The Company believes it has meritorious defenses to the allegations and plans a vigorous defense.  Discovery has just begun.

On July 11, 2008, the Company initiated an action against Citigroup Inc., Citigroup Global Markets, Inc., and Citi Smith Barney, in the United States District Court, Central District of California, for violations of federal securities laws and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended, arising out of the Company’s purchase of auction rate securities.  The Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration before the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”).  The Company and the defendants resolved the matter on terms acceptable to the Company, and as a consequence, the arbitration proceeding before FINRA and the lawsuit initiated by the Company in the United States District Court were subsequently dismissed with prejudice, and the parties have released all of their claims against each other.

On August 28, 2008, the Company initiated an action against Oppenheimer Holdings Inc., Oppenheimer & Co. Inc., and Oppenheimer Asset Management Inc., in the United States District Court, Central District of California, for violations of federal securities laws and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended, arising out of the Company’s purchase of auction rate securities.  The Oppenheimer action was deemed a related case to the Company’s action against Citigroup Inc. (described above).  After the Court granted the defendants’ motion to compel arbitration in the Citigroup Inc. case, the Company stipulated to arbitration before FINRA, where the matter is now proceeding and has been set for hearing in August 2010.  The Company has voluntarily dismissed, without prejudice, its claims against Oppenheimer Asset Management, Inc.  The FINRA panel denied Oppenheimer Holdings, Inc.’s motion to be dismissed from the proceeding.

15

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

In May 2009, Avraham Wellman, purporting to act on behalf of himself and a class of consumers in Canada, filed a putative class action in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, in the City of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, against the Company and its former Canadian distributor, Pepsi-Cola Canada Ltd., as defendants.  The plaintiff alleges that the defendants misleadingly packaged and labeled Monster Energy® products in Canada by not including sufficiently specific statements with respect to contra-indications and/or adverse reactions associated with the consumption of the energy drink products.  The plaintiff’s claims against the defendants are for negligence, unjust enrichment, and making misleading/false representations in violation of the Competition Act (Canada), the Food and Drugs Act (Canada) and the Consumer Protection Act, 2002 (Ontario).  The plaintiff claims general damages on behalf of the putative class in the amount of CDN$20 million, together with punitive damages of CDN$5 million, plus legal costs and interest. The plaintiff’s certification motion materials have not yet been filed.  In accordance with class action practice in Ontario, the Company will not file an answer to the complaint until after the determination of the certification motion.  The Company believes that the plaintiff’s complaint is without merit and plans a vigorous defense.

In addition to the above matters, the Company is subject to litigation from time to time in the normal course of business, including claims from terminated distributors.  Although it is not possible to predict the outcome of such litigation, based on the facts known to the Company and after consultation with counsel, management believes that such litigation in the aggregate will likely not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

Securities Litigation — On September 11, 2008, a federal securities class action complaint styled Cunha v. Hansen Natural Corp., et al. was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (the “District Court”). On September 17, 2008, a second federal securities class action complaint styled Brown v. Hansen Natural Corp., et al. was also filed in the District Court.

On July 14, 2009, the Court entered an order consolidating the actions and appointing lead counsel and the Structural Ironworkers Local Union #1 Pension Fund as lead plaintiff.  On August 28, 2009 lead plaintiff filed a Consolidated Complaint for Violations of Federal Securities Laws (the “Consolidated Class Action Complaint”).  The Consolidated Class Action Complaint purports to be brought on behalf of a class of purchasers of the Company’s stock during the period November 9, 2006 through November 8, 2007 (the “Class Period”).  It names as defendants the Company, Rodney C. Sacks, Hilton H. Schlosberg, and Thomas J. Kelly.  Plaintiff principally alleges that, during the Class Period, the defendants made false and misleading statements relating to the Company’s distribution coordination agreements with Anheuser-Busch, Inc. (“AB”) and its sales of “Allied” energy drink lines, and engaged in sales of shares in the Company on the basis of material non-public information.  Plaintiff also alleges that the Company’s financial statements for the second quarter of 2007 did not include certain promotional expenses.  The Consolidated Class Action Complaint alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and seeks an unspecified amount of damages.

On November 16, 2009, the defendants filed their motion to dismiss the Consolidated Class Action Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 9(b), as well as the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act.  On January 8, 2010, lead plaintiff filed its opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss.  Defendants’ reply brief was filed on February 8, 2010. The Court has scheduled a hearing on defendants’ motion to dismiss for July 12, 2010.

16

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Derivative Litigation — On October 15, 2008, a derivative complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (the “District Court”), styled Merckel v. Sacks, et al.  On November 17, 2008, a second derivative complaint styled Dislevy v. Sacks, et al. was also filed in the District Court.  The derivative suits were each brought, purportedly on behalf of the Company, by a shareholder of the Company who made no prior demand on the Company’s Board of Directors.

On June 29, 2009, the Court entered an order consolidating the Merckel and Dislevy actions.  On July 13, 2009, the Court entered an order re-styling the consolidated actions as In re Hansen Derivative Shareholder Litigation, appointing Raymond Merckel as lead plaintiff and appointing lead counsel, and establishing a schedule for the filing of a consolidated amended complaint and for defendants’ response to such complaint.

On October 13, 2009, a Consolidated Shareholder Derivative Complaint (the “Consolidated Derivative Complaint”) was filed.  The Consolidated Derivative Complaint names as defendants certain current and former officers, directors, and employees of the Company, including Rodney C. Sacks, Hilton H. Schlosberg, Harold C. Taber, Jr., Benjamin M. Polk, Norman C. Epstein, Mark S. Vidergauz, Sydney Selati, Thomas J. Kelly, Mark J. Hall, and Kirk S. Blower, as well as Hilrod Holdings, L.P.  The Company is named as a nominal defendant.  The factual allegations of the Consolidated Derivative Complaint are similar to those set forth in the Consolidated Class Action Complaint described above.  The Consolidated Derivative Complaint alleges that, from November 2006 to the present, the defendants caused the Company to issue false and misleading statements concerning its business prospects and failed to properly disclose problems related to its non-Monster energy drinks, the prospects for the Anheuser-Busch distribution relationship, and alleged “inventory loading” that affected the Company’s results for the second quarter of 2007.  The Consolidated Derivative Complaint further alleges that while the Company’s shares were purportedly artificially inflated because of those improper statements, certain of the defendants sold Company stock while in possession of material non-public information. The Consolidated Derivative Complaint asserts various causes of action, including breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, violation of Cal. Corp. Code §§ 25402 and 25403 for insider selling, and unjust enrichment. The suit seeks an unspecified amount of damages to be paid to the Company and adoption of corporate governance reforms, among other things.

On January 8, 2010, the Company filed its motion to dismiss the Consolidated Derivative Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 23.1.  Plaintiff’s counsel filed an opposition to the motion on February 22, 2010, in which it stated that lead plaintiff Raymond Merckel was no longer communicating with counsel and that it had located another shareholder of the Company who was willing to act as lead plaintiff.   On March 2, 2010, Plaintiff’s counsel filed a motion to amend the Consolidated Derivative Complaint pursuant to Rule 15(a)(2) for the purpose of replacing Mr. Merckel as lead plaintiff.

17

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

On March 15, 2010, the Company filed a reply brief in further support of its motion to dismiss and, on March 17, 2010, certain of the defendants filed a brief in opposition to the motion to amend.  Plaintiff’s counsel filed a reply brief in further support of its motion to amend on March 30, 2010.  The Company is awaiting a decision from the District Court on both motions.  None of the other defendants need answer, move to dismiss, or otherwise respond to the Consolidated Derivative Complaint until or unless the District Court orders the Company to file an answer, in which case the other defendants will have 45 days after the filing of the Company’s answer to move to dismiss or otherwise respond to the Consolidated Derivative Complaint.

Although the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined with certainty, the Company believes that the allegations in the Consolidated Class Action Complaint and the Consolidated Derivative Complaint are without merit. The Company intends to vigorously defend against these lawsuits.

10.                                 COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

The components of comprehensive income are as follows:

The components of accumulated other comprehensive loss are as follows:

18

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

11.                                 STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION

The Company has two stock option plans under which shares were available for grant at March 31, 2010: the Hansen Natural Corporation Amended and Restated 2001 Stock Option Plan (the “2001 Option Plan”) and the 2009 Hansen Natural Corporation Stock Incentive Plan for Non-Employee Directors (the “2009 Directors Plan”).

Under the Company’s stock option plans, all grants are made at prices based on the fair value of the options on the date of grant. The Company recorded $5.0 million and $2.7 million of compensation expense relating to outstanding options during the three-months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.  Refer to “Change in Estimated Forfeiture Rate”  within this Note 11 for additional information.

The Company records compensation expense for employee stock options based on the estimated fair value of the options on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes-Merton option pricing formula with the assumptions included in the table below. The Company records compensation expense for non-employee stock options based on the estimated fair value of the options as of the earlier of (1) the date at which a commitment for performance by the non-employee to earn the stock option is reached and (2) the date at which the non-employee’s performance is complete, using the Black-Scholes-Merton option pricing formula with the assumptions included in the table below. The Company uses historical data to determine the exercise behavior, volatility and forfeiture rate of the options. The following weighted-average assumptions were used to estimate the fair value of options granted during the three-months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively:

Expected Volatility: The Company uses historical volatility as it provides a reasonable estimate of the expected volatility. Historical volatility is based on the most recent volatility of the stock price over a period of time equivalent to the expected term of the option.

Risk-Free Interest Rate: The risk-free interest rate is based on the U.S. Treasury zero coupon yield curve in effect at the time of grant for the expected term of the option.

Expected Term: The Company’s expected term represents the weighted-average period that the Company’s stock options are expected to be outstanding. The expected term is based on expected time to post-vesting exercise of options by employees. The Company uses historical exercise patterns of previously granted options to derive employee behavioral patterns used to forecast expected exercise patterns.

19

Table of Contents

HANSEN NATURAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The following table summarizes the Company’s activities with respect to its stock option plans as follows:

The weighted-average grant-date fair value of options granted during the three-months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 was $22.08 per share and $19.04 per share, respectively. The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the three-months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 was $20.8 million and $7.6 million, respectively.

Cash received from option exercises under all plans for the three-months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 was approximately $4.5 million and $1.0 million, respectively. The excess tax benefit realized for tax deductions from non-qualified stock option exercises and disqualifying dispositions of incentive stock options for the three-months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 was $6.5 million, and $1.2 million, respectively.