Form 10-Q
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934 |
For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2010
or
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission File Number 001-34082
Kona Grill, Inc.
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
20-0216690 |
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
7150 East Camelback Road, Suite 220
Scottsdale, Arizona 85251
(480) 922-8100
(Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of principal executive offices)
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 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 (§ 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 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 the definitions of large
accelerated filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer o
|
|
Accelerated filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer þ
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
Smaller reporting company o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of
the Exchange Act). Yes o No þ
As of April 30, 2010 there were 9,165,174 shares of the registrants common stock outstanding.
KONA GRILL, INC
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Consolidated Financial Statements
KONA GRILL, INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(in thousands, except share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
|
(Note 1) |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
2,422 |
|
|
$ |
2,404 |
|
Investments |
|
|
6,285 |
|
|
|
6,282 |
|
Receivables |
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
308 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
919 |
|
|
|
1,111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
9,920 |
|
|
|
10,105 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
658 |
|
|
|
668 |
|
Property and equipment, net |
|
|
37,854 |
|
|
|
39,190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
48,432 |
|
|
$ |
49,963 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
2,249 |
|
|
$ |
2,922 |
|
Accrued expenses |
|
|
6,115 |
|
|
|
5,753 |
|
Current portion of notes payable |
|
|
653 |
|
|
|
684 |
|
Line of credit |
|
|
5,798 |
|
|
|
5,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
14,815 |
|
|
|
15,159 |
|
Notes payable |
|
|
479 |
|
|
|
636 |
|
Deferred rent |
|
|
15,925 |
|
|
|
16,185 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
31,219 |
|
|
|
31,980 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies (Note 9) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value, 2,000,000 shares authorized, none issued |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.01 par value, 15,000,000 shares authorized, 9,278,624 shares
issued and 9,162,424 shares outstanding at March 31, 2010 and 9,262,895 shares
issued and 9,146,695 shares outstanding at December 31, 2009 |
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
57,786 |
|
|
|
57,649 |
|
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
(39,666 |
) |
|
|
(38,759 |
) |
Treasury stock, at cost, 116,200 shares at March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009 |
|
|
(1,000 |
) |
|
|
(1,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
17,213 |
|
|
|
17,983 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
48,432 |
|
|
$ |
49,963 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to the unaudited consolidated financial statements.
2
KONA GRILL, INC.
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(in thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restaurant sales |
|
$ |
21,052 |
|
|
$ |
19,455 |
|
Costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of sales |
|
|
5,575 |
|
|
|
5,097 |
|
Labor |
|
|
7,583 |
|
|
|
6,749 |
|
Occupancy |
|
|
1,781 |
|
|
|
1,520 |
|
Restaurant operating expenses |
|
|
3,456 |
|
|
|
3,030 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
2,137 |
|
|
|
1,887 |
|
Preopening expense |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
1,399 |
|
|
|
1,741 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs and expenses |
|
|
21,939 |
|
|
|
20,524 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(887 |
) |
|
|
(1,069 |
) |
Nonoperating income (expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income and other, net |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before provision for income taxes |
|
|
(907 |
) |
|
|
(1,053 |
) |
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
|
(907 |
) |
|
|
(1,083 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(907 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,096 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss per sharebasic and diluted (Note 5): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.10 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.14 |
) |
Discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(0.10 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.14 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares used in computation (Note 5): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
9,155 |
|
|
|
8,016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
|
9,155 |
|
|
|
8,016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to the unaudited consolidated financial statements.
3
KONA GRILL, INC.
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(907 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,096 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
1,399 |
|
|
|
1,741 |
|
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
Amortization of debt discount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
Change in operating assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
558 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
192 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
(108 |
) |
|
|
(152 |
) |
Accrued expenses |
|
|
362 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
Deferred rent |
|
|
(260 |
) |
|
|
225 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
793 |
|
|
|
1,506 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of property and equipment |
|
|
(628 |
) |
|
|
(4,283 |
) |
Decrease in other assets |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Net purchases and sales of investments |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(338 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(621 |
) |
|
|
(4,615 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (repayment) borrowings on line of credit |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
2,086 |
|
Proceeds from bridge loan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,200 |
|
Repayments of notes payable |
|
|
(188 |
) |
|
|
(174 |
) |
Proceeds from issuance of common stock under the Employee Stock Purchase Plan and exercise
of stock options and warrants |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities |
|
|
(154 |
) |
|
|
3,125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the period |
|
|
2,404 |
|
|
|
2,477 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the period |
|
$ |
2,422 |
|
|
$ |
2,493 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for interest, net of capitalization |
|
$ |
42 |
|
|
$ |
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncash investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decrease in accounts payable related to property and equipment |
|
$ |
(565 |
) |
|
$ |
(693 |
) |
See accompanying notes to the unaudited consolidated financial statements.
4
KONA GRILL, INC.
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1. Basis of Presentation
Kona Grill, Inc. (referred to herein as the Company or we, us, and our) owns and
operates upscale casual dining restaurants under the name Kona Grill. Our restaurants feature a
diverse selection of mainstream American dishes and award-winning sushi that are prepared fresh
daily. We currently own and operate 24 restaurants in 15 states throughout the United States.
The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance
with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information and with the
rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Accordingly, they do
not include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles for complete financial statements. In our opinion, all adjustments (consisting of normal
recurring accruals) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating
results for the three months ended March 31, 2010 are not necessarily indicative of the results
that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2010.
The consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2009 has been derived from the audited
consolidated financial statements at that date, but does not include all of the information and
footnotes required by U.S. generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial
statements. Accordingly, these financial statements should be read in conjunction with our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In January 2010, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2010-06, Fair Value
Measurements and Disclosures, which adds new disclosure requirements for transfers into and out of
Levels 1 and 2 in the fair value hierarchy and additional disclosures about purchases, sales,
issuances, and settlements relating to Level 3 fair value measurements. This ASU also clarifies
existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation about inputs and valuation
techniques used to measure fair value. The ASU is effective for the first reporting period
beginning after December 15, 2009, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activity on a
gross basis, which is effective for fiscal year ends beginning after December 15, 2010 and interim
periods within those years. The adoption did not have a material effect on our financial condition
or results of operations.
2. Discontinued Operations
Discontinued operations include exit costs associated with our Naples, Florida restaurant that
was closed during the third quarter of 2008. During the second quarter of 2009, we entered into a
settlement agreement for the termination of the lease for $700,000. The lease settlement requires
an initial payment of $350,000 that was paid during July 2009 and the remaining amount, including
interest at a 6% annual rate, is payable in 12 equal monthly installments beginning in August 2009.
Settlement fees of $91,000 are included in accrued expenses on the accompanying consolidated
balance sheet as of March 31, 2010.
Activity associated with the lease termination accrual is summarized below (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
181 |
|
Cash payments |
|
|
(90 |
) |
Non-cash activity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
91 |
|
|
|
|
|
5
3. Investments
The following is a summary of our investments (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Estimated |
|
|
|
Cost |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term investments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certificates of deposit |
|
$ |
173 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
173 |
|
Money market securities |
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
314 |
|
Auction rate securities |
|
|
5,468 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,468 |
|
Put option on auction rate securities |
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investments |
|
$ |
6,285 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
6,285 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term investments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certificates of deposit |
|
$ |
172 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
172 |
|
Money market securities |
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
314 |
|
Auction rate securities |
|
|
5,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,433 |
|
Put option on auction rate securities |
|
|
363 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
363 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investments |
|
$ |
6,282 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
6,282 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 31, 2010, our investment portfolio included six auction rate securities with a par
value of $5,800,000. These securities are AAA rated long term debt obligations secured by student
loans, substantially all of which are guaranteed by the federal government under the Federal Family
Education Loan Program. While the maturity dates of our auction rate securities range from 2029 to
2046, liquidity for these securities has historically been provided by an auction process that
resets the applicable interest rate at pre-determined calendar intervals, generally every 28 days.
Since February 2008, events in the credit markets have adversely affected the auction market for
these types of securities and auctions for our securities have failed to settle on their respective
settlement dates.
Our auction rate securities are classified as trading securities as they are subject to an
agreement we entered into with UBS during October 2008 pursuant to which UBS issued to us Series
C-2 Auction Rate Securities Rights. The agreement allows us the right to sell our auction rate
securities to UBS at full par value between June 30, 2010 and July 2, 2012. In conjunction with
this agreement, we elected to apply the provisions of fair value accounting to this put option
because the put option does not provide for net settlement, and the auction rate securities
themselves are not readily convertible to cash. The put option does not meet the definition of a
derivative, and thus, would not be marked to fair value. We therefore elected to apply fair value
accounting to our put option as the put option acts as an economic hedge against any further price
movement in the auction rate securities and enables us to recognize future changes in the fair
value of the put option as those changes occur to offset fair value movements in the auction rate
securities. Also as part of this agreement, UBS agreed to provide a line of credit through June
30, 2010 that is secured by the auction rate securities held with UBS. Both the put option and
the auction rate securities are marked to market value through the consolidated statements of
operations each period (see Note 4 for discussion of how fair value measurements are determined).
At March 31, 2010, the fair value of the put option was $330,000 and the fair value of the auction
rate securities was $5,468,000. We recorded a net gain of $2,000 for the three months ended March
31, 2010, for the fair value measurement of both the auction rate securities and the put option
that is included in interest income and other, net. We continue to earn interest on our auction
rate securities at the maximum contractual rate. Interest earned on the auction rate securities is
used to reduce the outstanding balance under the line of credit.
6
4. Fair Value Measurements
Fair value is defined 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. As
such, fair value is a market-based measurement that should be determined based on assumptions that
market participants would use in pricing an asset or a liability. As a basis for considering such
assumptions, a three-tier value hierarchy has been established, which prioritizes the inputs used
in the valuation methodologies in measuring fair value.
|
|
|
Level 1:
|
|
Fair values determined by quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or
liabilities that the reporting entity has the ability to access. |
|
|
|
Level 2:
|
|
Fair values utilize inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or
liability, and may include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets,
and inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability. |
|
|
|
Level 3:
|
|
Fair values determined by unobservable inputs that are not corroborated by market data
and may reflect the reporting entitys own assumptions market participants would use in
pricing the asset or liability. |
Our short-term investments in fixed income and money market securities represent
available-for-sale securities that are valued primarily using quoted market prices or alternative
pricing sources and models utilizing market observable inputs. Money market securities represent
collateral for a letter of credit required under certain lease obligations.
Our investment in auction rate securities are classified within Level 3 because they are
valued using a discounted cash flow model. We estimate the fair value of auction rate securities
using valuation models provided by third parties and internal analyses. The valuation models
require numerous assumptions and assessments, including the following: (i) collateralization
underlying each security; (ii) present value of future principal and interest payments discounted
at rates considered to reflect current market conditions; (iii) creditworthiness of the
counterparty; and (iv) current illiquidity of the investments.
The fair value of the put option is determined through comparison of the fair value of each
auction rate security to its par value and then discounted by a rate reflective of the risk of
default by UBS between the valuation date and the expected exercise date of the put option. A
discounted cash flow approach is used to value the difference between the par value and fair value
of each security using a discount rate that considers the credit risk associated with UBS and the
expected timing of when the put option will be exercised. The put option is adjusted on each
balance sheet date based on its then fair value. The fair value of the put option is based on
unobservable inputs and is therefore classified within Level 3 in the hierarchy. The following
table presents information about our assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis at March
31, 2010, and indicates the fair value hierarchy of the valuation techniques utilized to determine
such fair value (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at Reporting Date Using |
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
for Identical |
|
|
Observable |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
|
|
Description |
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
Certificates of deposit |
|
$ |
173 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
173 |
|
Money market securities |
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
314 |
|
Auction rate securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,468 |
|
|
|
5,468 |
|
Put option on auction rate securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
487 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
5,798 |
|
|
$ |
6,285 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
The following table summarizes the changes in fair value of our Level 3 assets (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Put option on |
|
|
|
Auction rate |
|
|
auction rate |
|
|
|
Securities |
|
|
securities |
|
Balance at December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
5,433 |
|
|
$ |
363 |
|
Transfer to Level 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total gains or losses (realized and unrealized) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Included in earnings |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
(33 |
) |
Included in other comprehensive loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net settlements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
5,468 |
|
|
$ |
330 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. Net Loss Per Share
Basic net loss is computed by dividing net loss by the weighted average number of common
shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net loss per share excludes the dilutive effect of
potential stock option and warrant exercises, which are calculated using the treasury stock method,
as these shares are anti-dilutive.
The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted net loss per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data) |
|
Numerator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(907 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,083 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(907 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,096 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares Basic |
|
|
9,155 |
|
|
|
8,016 |
|
Effect of dilutive stock options and warrants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares Diluted |
|
|
9,155 |
|
|
|
8,016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.10 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.14 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(0.10 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.14 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On June 9, 2009, we completed our rights offering for which each holder of common stock as of
the April 17, 2009 record date received one non-transferrable subscription right for every 2.5
shares of common stock. Each subscription right entitled our stockholders to purchase one share of
common stock at a purchase price of $1.35 per share. The market price of our common stock was
$3.93 per share on June 5, 2009, which was the expiration date of the rights offering. Since the
$1.35 per share subscription price of common stock issued under the rights offering was lower than
the $3.93 per share market price on June 5, 2009, the rights offering contained a bonus element.
As a result, we retroactively increased the weighted average common shares outstanding used to
compute basic and diluted earnings (loss) per share by an adjustment factor of 1.2309 for all
periods presented prior to the completion of the rights offering.
For the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, there were 1,031,000 and 1,176,000 stock
options and warrants outstanding, respectively, that were not included in the dilutive earnings per
share calculation because the effect would have been anti-dilutive.
8
6. Accrued Expenses
Accrued expenses consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Accrued payroll |
|
$ |
2,279 |
|
|
$ |
1,875 |
|
Sales taxes |
|
|
738 |
|
|
|
686 |
|
Business and income taxes |
|
|
700 |
|
|
|
739 |
|
Gift cards |
|
|
685 |
|
|
|
859 |
|
Accrued occupancy |
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
192 |
|
Lease termination accrual |
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
Other |
|
|
1,417 |
|
|
|
1,221 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
6,115 |
|
|
$ |
5,753 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7. Debt and Credit Agreements
Credit Facility
During October 2008, as part of the settlement agreement with UBS, our broker from which we
purchased auction rate security instruments, we entered into a line of credit that is secured by
the auction rate security instruments held with UBS. Available borrowings under the line of credit
are based upon terms specified in the agreement and subject to adjustment by UBS after
consideration of various factors. At March 31, 2010, $5,798,000 was outstanding under the line of
credit. Borrowings under the line of credit are callable by UBS at any time. The line of credit
expires on June 30, 2010 at which time we expect to exercise the put option on our auction rate
securities and use the proceeds from the sale of the auction rate securities to repay amounts due
under the line of credit. The cost of the line of credit effectively offsets the interest earned
on the auction rate securities. See Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements for further
information on the auction rate securities and the settlement agreement.
Equipment Loans
As of March 31, 2010, we had five equipment term loans with a lender, each collateralized by
restaurant equipment. The outstanding principal balance under these loans aggregated $1.1 million.
The loans bear interest at rates ranging from 7.0% to 8.5% and require monthly principal and
interest payments aggregating approximately $71,000. The loans mature between June 2010 and June
2012. The loans also require us to maintain certain financial covenants, including a Fixed Charge
Coverage Ratio of 1.25:1.00 calculated at the end of each calendar year, and we were in compliance
with all such financial covenants as of December 31, 2009.
8. Stock-Based Compensation
We have two stock option plans under which we may issue incentive stock options, non-qualified
stock options, restricted stock, and other types of awards to employees, directors, and
consultants. Upon effectiveness of the 2005 Stock Award Plan, the 2002 Stock Award Plan was closed
for purposes of new grants. During the last three years, we have only granted non-qualified stock
options. Stock options issued under these plans are granted with an exercise price at or above the
fair market value of the underlying common stock on the date of grant and generally expire five
years from the date of grant. Employee stock options generally vest 25% each year over a four-year
period, while annual recurring awards for non-employee director options vest 25% each quarter over
a one-year period.
9
The fair value of stock options granted during the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009
was estimated at the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following
weighted average assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Expected volatility |
|
|
64.3 |
% |
|
|
50.2 |
% |
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
1.7 |
% |
|
|
1.7 |
% |
Expected option life (in years) |
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
Dividend yield |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
Weighted average fair value per option granted |
|
$ |
1.64 |
|
|
$ |
0.78 |
|
The following table summarizes activity under our stock award plans for the three months ended
March 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
Weighted Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Under |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Remaining |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
Option |
|
|
Exercise Price |
|
|
Contractual Term |
|
|
Intrinsic Value |
|
Outstanding options at December 31, 2009 |
|
|
854,856 |
|
|
$ |
7.67 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted |
|
|
223,750 |
|
|
|
3.41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited |
|
|
(143,550 |
) |
|
|
9.97 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised |
|
|
(13,750 |
) |
|
|
2.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding options at March 31, 2010 |
|
|
921,306 |
|
|
$ |
6.36 |
|
|
3.8 years |
|
$ |
467,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at March 31, 2010 |
|
|
389,235 |
|
|
$ |
9.25 |
|
|
3.0 years |
|
$ |
109,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We recognized stock-based compensation expense of $101,000 and $127,000 during the three
months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. As of March 31, 2010, there was $793,000 of
unrecognized stock-based compensation expense related to unvested stock-based compensation
arrangements, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 2.4 years.
9. Commitments and Contingencies
We are engaged in various legal actions, which arise in the ordinary course of our business.
Although there can be no assurance as to the ultimate disposition of these matters, it is the
opinion of our management, based upon the information available at this time, that the expected
outcome of these matters, individually or in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect
on the results of operations or financial condition of our company. See discussion of Legal
Proceedings in Item 1 of Part II of this Quarterly Report.
10
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the unaudited
consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in Item 1 of Part I of this Quarterly
Report and the audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto and Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations for the year ended
December 31, 2009 contained in our 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K. This discussion contains
certain forward-looking statements that involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties, such as
statements relating to our future economic performance, plans and objectives for future operations,
and projections of restaurant sales and other financial items that are based on our beliefs as well
as assumptions made by and information currently available to us. Factors that might cause actual
events or results to differ materially from those indicated by these forward-looking statements may
include the matters under Item 1A, Risk Factors in this report, our Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2009 and other reports filed from time to time with the SEC.
Overview
We currently own and operate 24 restaurants located in 15 states. We offer freshly prepared
food, personalized service, and a contemporary ambiance that create a satisfying yet affordable
dining experience that we believe exceeds many traditional casual dining restaurants with whom we
compete. Our high-volume upscale casual restaurants feature a diverse selection of mainstream
American favorites as well as a variety of appetizers and entrees with an international influence,
including an extensive selection of sushi items. Our menu items are freshly prepared and
incorporate over 40 signature sauces and dressings that we make from scratch, creating broad-based
appeal for the lifestyle and taste trends of a diverse group of guests. Our menu is mostly
standardized for all of our restaurants, allowing us to deliver consistent quality meals. We
believe that our vast menu and generous portions, combined with an average check of approximately
$23.90, offers our guests an attractive price-value proposition.
Over the last four years, we have funded development of new restaurants primarily from the
proceeds of our initial public offering, a private offering of common stock completed during
November 2007, the rights offering completed during June 2009, and cash flows from operations. We
opened four restaurants during 2009 in Richmond, Virginia; Woodbridge, New Jersey; Eden Prairie,
Minnesota; and Tampa, Florida. We plan to open one restaurant in Baltimore, Maryland during 2010.
We will pursue additional leases based on significant economic opportunity and subject to the
availability of capital on terms acceptable to us.
As a result of the relatively weak condition of the national economy, our comparable
restaurant sales decreased 2.5% during the first quarter of 2010. We believe improvement in the
job market, coupled with a recovery in consumer confidence and spending in general, will be
important and necessary catalysts to drive guest traffic and higher guest check averages in casual
dining restaurants in general and our restaurants in particular. Recent economic data indicates
the beginning of a recovery in consumer spending as evidenced by an increase in our comparable
restaurant sales for March 2010 of 3.6%. This represents the first month of positive comparable
restaurant sales since February 2008.
We target our restaurants to achieve an average annual unit volume of $4.5 million following
24 months of operations. Recent openings are trending lower than our targeted volume during the
current economic environment. We continue to believe that in a stable economic environment our
typical new restaurants experience gradually increasing unit volumes as guests begin to discover
our concept and we begin to generate market awareness. Our restaurants are also subject to
seasonal fluctuations. Sales in most of our restaurants typically are higher during the spring and
summer months and winter holiday season.
During the fourth quarter of 2009, we recorded non-cash asset impairment charges for six
underperforming restaurants. The asset impairment charges resulted from an evaluation of the
long-term prospects of each of these restaurants that have not been meeting sales, profitability,
and cash flow targets. We have no plans to close any of these restaurants; however, we will
continue to evaluate each of these restaurants to determine whether operating performance can be
improved.
11
We experience various trends in our operating cost structure. Cost of sales, labor, occupancy,
and other operating expenses for our restaurants open at least 12 months generally trend consistent
with restaurant sales, and we analyze those costs as a percentage of restaurant sales. We
anticipate that our new restaurants will take approximately six months to achieve operating
efficiencies as a result of challenges typically associated with opening new restaurants, including
lack of market recognition and the need to hire and sufficiently train employees, as well as other
factors. We expect cost of sales and labor expenses as a percentage of restaurant sales to be
higher when we open a new restaurant, but decrease as a percentage of restaurant sales as the
restaurant matures and as the restaurant management and employees become more efficient operating
that unit. As a result, the volume and timing of newly opened restaurants has had, and is expected
to continue to have, an impact on costs of sales, labor, occupancy, restaurant operating expenses,
and preopening expenses. The majority of our general and administrative costs are fixed costs. We
expect our general and administrative spending to decrease as a percentage of restaurant sales as
we leverage these investments and realize the benefits of higher sales volumes.
Key Measures We Use to Evaluate Our Company
Key measures we use to evaluate and assess our business include the following:
Number of Restaurant Openings. Number of restaurant openings reflects the number of
restaurants opened during a particular reporting period.
Same-Store Sales Percentage Change. Same-store sales percentage change reflects the periodic
change in restaurant sales for the comparable restaurant base. In calculating the percentage change
in same-store sales, we include a restaurant in the comparable restaurant base after it has been in
operation for more than 18 months. Same-store sales growth can be generated by an increase in guest
traffic counts or by increases in the per person average check amount. Menu price changes and the
mix of menu items sold can affect the per person average check amount.
Average Weekly Sales. Average weekly sales represents the average of restaurant sales
measured over consecutive Monday through Sunday time periods.
Average Unit Volume. Average unit volume represents the average restaurant sales for the
comparable restaurant base.
Sales Per Square Foot. Sales per square foot represents the restaurant sales for our
comparable restaurant base, divided by the total leasable square feet for such restaurants.
Restaurant Operating Profit. Restaurant operating profit is defined as restaurant sales minus
cost of sales, labor, occupancy, and restaurant operating expenses. Restaurant operating profit
does not include general and administrative expenses, depreciation and amortization, or preopening
expenses. We believe restaurant operating profit is an important component of financial results
because it is a widely used metric within the restaurant industry to evaluate restaurant-level
productivity, efficiency, and performance prior to application of corporate overhead. We use
restaurant operating profit as a percentage of restaurant sales as a key metric to evaluate our
restaurants financial performance compared with our competitors. This measure provides useful
information regarding our financial condition and results of operations and allows investors to
more easily determine future financial results driven by growth and allows investors to more easily
compare restaurant level profitability.
Key Financial Definitions
Restaurant Sales. Restaurant sales include gross food and beverage sales, net of promotions
and discounts.
Cost of Sales. Cost of sales consists of food and beverage costs.
Labor. Labor includes all direct and indirect labor costs incurred in operations.
12
Occupancy. Occupancy includes all rent payments associated with the leasing of real estate,
including base, percentage and straight-line rent, property taxes, and common area maintenance
expense. We record tenant improvement allowances as a reduction of occupancy expense over the
initial term of the lease.
Restaurant Operating Expenses. Restaurant operating expenses consist of all other
restaurant-level operating costs, the major components of which are utilities, credit card fees,
advertising, supplies, marketing, repair and maintenance, and other expenses. Other operating
expenses contain both variable and fixed components.
General and Administrative. General and administrative includes all corporate and
administrative functions that support operations and provide infrastructure to facilitate our
future growth. Components of this category include management and staff salaries, bonuses,
stock-based compensation and related employee benefits, travel, information systems, human
resources, training, corporate rent, professional and consulting fees, and corporate insurance
costs.
Preopening Expense. Preopening expense consists of costs incurred prior to opening a new
restaurant and is comprised principally of manager salaries and relocation, payroll and related
training costs for new employees, including food and beverage costs associated with practice and
rehearsal of service activities, and rent expense incurred from the date we obtain possession of
the property until opening. We expense restaurant preopening expenses as incurred, and we expect
preopening expenses to be similar for each new restaurant opening, which typically commence six to
eight months prior to a restaurant opening. Our preopening costs will fluctuate from period to
period depending upon the number of restaurants opened, the timing of new restaurant openings, the
location of the restaurants, and the complexity of the staff hiring and training process.
Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and amortization expense consists of the
depreciation of property and equipment and gains and losses on disposal of assets.
Interest Income and Other, Net. Interest income and other, net consists of interest earned on
our cash and investments and any gains or losses on our investments.
Interest Expense. Interest expense includes the cost of servicing our debt obligations, net of
capitalized interest.
Financial Performance Overview
The following table sets forth certain information regarding our financial performance for the
three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Restaurant sales growth |
|
|
8.2 |
% |
|
|
7.5 |
% |
Same-store sales percentage change (1) |
|
|
(2.5 |
)% |
|
|
(9.6 |
)% |
Average weekly sales comparable restaurant base (2) |
|
$ |
70,182 |
|
|
$ |
71,997 |
|
Average weekly sales non-comparable restaurant base (3) |
|
$ |
60,650 |
|
|
$ |
66,331 |
|
Average unit volume (in thousands) (2) |
|
$ |
912 |
|
|
$ |
954 |
|
Sales per square foot (2) |
|
$ |
129 |
|
|
$ |
136 |
|
Restaurant operating profit (in thousands) (4) |
|
$ |
2,657 |
|
|
$ |
3,059 |
|
Restaurant operating profit as a percentage of sales (4) |
|
|
12.6 |
% |
|
|
15.7 |
% |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Same-store sales percentage change reflects the periodic change in restaurant sales for
the comparable restaurant base. In calculating the percentage change for same-store sales,
we include a restaurant in the comparable restaurant base after it has been in operation for
more than 18 months. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes only those restaurants in the comparable restaurant base. |
13
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Includes only those restaurants that are not in the comparable restaurant base
that were open for the entire period. |
|
(4) |
|
Restaurant operating profit is not a financial measurement determined in accordance with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles and should not be considered in isolation or as
an alternative to income (loss) from operations. Restaurant operating profit may not be
comparable to the same or similarly titled measures computed by other companies. |
The following tables set forth our calculation of restaurant operating profit and
reconciliation to loss from operations, the most comparable GAAP measure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Restaurant sales |
|
$ |
21,052 |
|
|
$ |
19,455 |
|
Costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of sales |
|
|
5,575 |
|
|
|
5,097 |
|
Labor |
|
|
7,583 |
|
|
|
6,749 |
|
Occupancy |
|
|
1,781 |
|
|
|
1,520 |
|
Restaurant operating expenses |
|
|
3,456 |
|
|
|
3,030 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restaurant operating profit |
|
|
2,657 |
|
|
|
3,059 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deduct other costs and expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative |
|
|
2,137 |
|
|
|
1,887 |
|
Preopening expense |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
1,399 |
|
|
|
1,741 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from operations |
|
$ |
(887 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,069 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of Restaurant Sales |
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restaurant sales |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of sales |
|
|
26.5 |
|
|
|
26.2 |
|
Labor |
|
|
36.0 |
|
|
|
34.7 |
|
Occupancy |
|
|
8.5 |
|
|
|
7.8 |
|
Restaurant operating expenses |
|
|
16.4 |
|
|
|
15.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restaurant operating profit |
|
|
12.6 |
|
|
|
15.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deduct other costs and expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative |
|
|
10.2 |
|
|
|
9.7 |
|
Preopening expense |
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
6.6 |
|
|
|
8.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(4.2 |
)% |
|
|
(5.5 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table sets forth changes in the number of restaurants opened for the periods
indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
Beginning of period |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Openings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
Closings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of period |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14
Results of Operations
The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the percentage of restaurant sales
of certain items in our financial statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restaurant sales |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of sales |
|
|
26.5 |
|
|
|
26.2 |
|
Labor |
|
|
36.0 |
|
|
|
34.7 |
|
Occupancy |
|
|
8.5 |
|
|
|
7.8 |
|
Restaurant operating expenses |
|
|
16.4 |
|
|
|
15.6 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
10.2 |
|
|
|
9.7 |
|
Preopening expense |
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
6.6 |
|
|
|
8.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs and expenses |
|
|
104.2 |
|
|
|
105.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(4.2 |
) |
|
|
(5.5 |
) |
Nonoperating income (expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income and other, net |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before
provision for income taxes |
|
|
(4.3 |
) |
|
|
(5.5 |
) |
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
|
(4.3 |
) |
|
|
(5.6 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
|
(4.3 |
)% |
|
|
(5.6 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, 2010 Compared with Three Months Ended March 31, 2009
Restaurant Sales. Restaurant sales increased $1.6 million, or 8.2% to $21.1 million during
the first quarter of 2010 from $19.5 million during the prior year period. The sales increase was
primarily the result of restaurant sales associated with the opening of three new restaurants since
April 2009, partially offset by a 2.5% decrease in comparable restaurant sales resulting from
continued weakness in the U.S. economy, high unemployment rates, and reduced consumer spending.
Cost of Sales. Cost of sales increased $0.5 million, or 9.4% to $5.6 million during the first
quarter of 2010 from $5.1 million during the first quarter of 2009. Cost of sales as a percentage
of restaurant sales increased 0.3% to 26.5% during the first quarter of 2010 from 26.2% during the
prior year period. Cost of sales during the first quarter of 2010 reflects unfavorable
year-over-year pricing for certain seafood and produce items.
Labor. Labor costs for our restaurants increased $0.8 million, or 12.4% to $7.6 million
during the first quarter of 2010 from $6.8 million during the prior year period. This increase was
primarily due to the opening of three new restaurants since April 2009. Labor expenses as a
percentage of restaurant sales increased 1.3% to 36.0% during the first quarter of 2010 from 34.7%
during the first quarter of 2009. The increase in labor costs as a percentage of restaurant sales
was primarily due to reduced leverage of fixed labor costs and hourly labor expense resulting from
lower average weekly sales. In addition, high labor costs from restaurants opened within the past
12 months also contributed to the increase in labor expense as labor expenses are typically higher
than normal during the first several months of operations as restaurant management teams become
more accustomed to optimally predicting, managing, and servicing the sales volumes expected at our
new restaurants.
15
Occupancy. Occupancy expense increased $0.3 million, or 17.2% to $1.8 million during the
first quarter of 2010 from $1.5 million during the prior year period. Occupancy expenses as a
percentage of restaurant sales increased 0.7% to 8.5% during the first quarter of 2010 from 7.8%
during the first quarter of 2009. The increase as a percentage of sales reflects decreased
leverage of the fixed portion of these costs from lower average weekly sales and increased common
area maintenance allocations at many locations.
Restaurant Operating Expenses. Restaurant operating expenses increased $0.4 million, or 14.1%
to $3.4 million during the first quarter of 2010 from $3.0 million during the first quarter of
2009. Restaurant operating expenses as a percentage of restaurant sales increased 0.8% to 16.4%
during the first quarter of 2010 from 15.6% during the prior year period. During the first
quarter of 2010, higher repair and maintenance, advertising, and property taxes combined with
reduced leverage of fixed operating costs resulting from lower average sales volume contributed to
the increase in restaurant operating expenses as a percentage of sales.
General and Administrative. General and administrative expenses increased $0.2 million, or
13.3% to $2.1 million during the first quarter of 2010 compared to $1.9 million during the first
quarter of 2009. The first quarter of 2010 includes $0.3 million in special charges for legal and
professional fees associated with the contested proxy solicitation and the ongoing derivative suit.
General and administrative expenses as a percentage of restaurant sales increased 0.5% to 10.2% of
restaurant sales during the first quarter of 2010 compared to 9.7% of restaurant sales during the
prior year period.
Preopening Expense. Preopening expense decreased $0.5 million to essentially zero during the
first quarter of 2010 due to no restaurant openings scheduled for the first half of 2010.
Preopening expense varies each quarter based upon the timing of new restaurant openings as the
majority of preopening expense is incurred during the two months preceding an opening. During the
first quarter of 2009, we opened our Richmond, Virginia restaurant and incurred preopening expenses
for our Woodbridge, New Jersey restaurant that opened during April 2009.
Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and amortization expense decreased $0.3 million,
or 19.7% to $1.4 million during the first quarter of 2010 from $1.7 million during the prior year
period. The decrease is due to a $0.6 million reduction in depreciation expense associated with
the fourth quarter of 2009 impairment of long-lived assets at six of our underperforming
restaurants, partially offset by depreciation expense for three restaurants that opened since April
2009. Depreciation and amortization expense as a percentage of restaurant sales decreased 2.3% to
6.6% during the first quarter of 2010 from 8.9% during the prior year period.
Interest Income and Other, Net. Interest income and other, net decreased during the first
quarter of 2010 due to lower interest earned on our investments as compared to the prior year
period. Please refer to Note 3 to the unaudited consolidated financial statements for discussion
of our investment in auction rate securities.
Interest Expense. Interest expense increased to $42,000 during the first quarter of 2010 from
$32,000 during the first quarter of 2010 due to the capitalization of a portion of interest expense
during the prior year period.
Provision for Income Taxes. During the first quarter of 2010, we did not record any provision
for income taxes compared to $30,000 during the first quarter of 2009. The zero provision for the
first quarter of 2010 reflects the benefit recorded by us for the anticipated refund of prior year
taxes due to a change in tax legislation regarding net operating loss carrybacks, offset by taxes
for certain states in which we operate that do not calculate tax based upon net income.
16
Our quarterly operating results may fluctuate significantly as a result of a variety of
factors, including the following:
|
|
|
timing of new restaurant openings and related expenses; |
|
|
|
|
restaurant operating costs and preopening costs for our newly-opened restaurants, which
are often materially greater during the first several months of operation than thereafter; |
|
|
|
|
labor availability and costs for hourly and management personnel; |
|
|
|
|
profitability of our restaurants, especially in new markets; |
|
|
|
|
increases and decreases in comparable restaurant sales; |
|
|
|
|
impairment of long-lived assets and any loss on restaurant closures; |
|
|
|
|
changes in borrowings and interest rates; |
|
|
|
|
general economic conditions; |
|
|
|
|
weather conditions or natural disasters; |
|
|
|
|
timing of certain holidays; |
|
|
|
|
changes in government regulations; |
|
|
|
|
outside shareholder activities; |
|
|
|
|
settlements, damages and legal costs associated with litigation; |
|
|
|
|
new or revised regulatory requirements and accounting pronouncements; |
|
|
|
|
changes in consumer preferences and competitive conditions; and |
|
|
|
|
fluctuations in commodity prices. |
Our business is also subject to seasonal fluctuations. Historically, sales in most of our
restaurants have been higher during the spring and summer months and winter holiday season.
Consequently, our quarterly and annual operating results and comparable restaurant sales may
fluctuate significantly as a result of seasonality and the factors discussed above. Accordingly,
results for any one quarter are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for any other
quarter or for any year and comparable restaurant sales for any particular future period may
decrease. In the future, operating results may fall below the expectations of our investors. In
that event, the price of our common stock would likely decrease.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our primary capital requirements are for new restaurant development. Subject to availability
of capital on terms acceptable to us, we will pursue additional leases based on significant
economic opportunity. Similar to many restaurant chains, we utilize operating lease arrangements
for all of our restaurant locations. We believe that our operating lease arrangements provide
appropriate leverage for our capital structure in a financially efficient manner. We are typically
required to expend cash to perform site-related work and to construct and equip each restaurant.
The average investment cost for our restaurants depends upon the type of lease entered into, the
amount of tenant improvement allowance we receive from landlords, and whether we assume
responsibility for the construction of the building. We expect the cash investment cost of our
typical restaurant to be approximately $2.5 million, net of landlord tenant improvement allowances
between $0.7 million and $1.2 million, and excluding cash preopening expenses of approximately $0.4
million. We expect these costs will vary from one market to another based on real estate values,
zoning regulations, permitting requirements, labor markets and other variables. Restaurants that
are subject to ground leases and do not receive landlord tenant improvement allowances typically
require a significantly higher cash investment. We also require capital resources to maintain our
existing base of restaurants and to further expand and strengthen the capabilities of our corporate
and information technology infrastructures.
17
The following tables set forth, for the periods indicated, a summary of our key liquidity
measurements (amounts in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Cash and short-term investments(1) |
|
$ |
2,909 |
|
|
$ |
2,890 |
|
Net working capital (deficit)(2) |
|
|
(4,895 |
) |
|
|
(5,054 |
) |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
At March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, cash and short-term investments
exclude $5.8 million in auction rate securities that are used as collateral
for the line of credit. Proceeds from the sale of auction rate securities
are used to reduce the outstanding balance on the line of credit. |
|
(2) |
|
The working capital deficit at March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, is
primarily attributable to accruals for payroll, legal, and professional fees. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Cash provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
793 |
|
|
$ |
1,506 |
|
Capital expenditures |
|
|
628 |
|
|
|
4,283 |
|
Future Capital Requirements
Our capital requirements, including development costs related to the opening of new
restaurants, have historically been significant. Over the last several years, we funded
development of new restaurants primarily from the proceeds of equity financing, debt financing, and
cash flows from operations. Our future cash requirements and the adequacy of available funds will
depend on many factors, including the operating performance of our restaurants, the pace of
expansion, real estate markets, site locations, the nature of the arrangements negotiated with
landlords and the credit market environment.
Our current operations generate sufficient cash flow to fund operations and general and
administrative costs. We believe existing cash and short-term investments of $2.9 million in
addition to cash flow from operations is sufficient to fund development costs required for our
Baltimore restaurant. Any reduction of our cash flow from operations may cause a delay or
cancellation of planned restaurant development or renovation of existing restaurants. As of March
31, 2010, we had a working capital deficit of $4.9 million. We plan to reduce this deficit through
cost containment efforts and cash flow from operations. Financing to construct new restaurants may
not be available on acceptable terms, or at all, and our failure to raise capital when needed could
impact our growth plans, financial condition, and results of operations. Additional equity
financing may result in dilution to current shareholders and debt financing, if available, may
involve significant cash payment obligations or financial covenants and ratios that may restrict
our ability to operate our business.
Equipment Loans
As of March 31, 2010, we had five equipment term loans with a lender, each collateralized by
restaurant equipment. The outstanding principal balance under these loans aggregated $1.1 million.
The loans bear interest at rates ranging from 7.0% to 8.5% and require monthly principal and
interest payments aggregating approximately $71,000. The loans mature between June 2010 and June
2012. The loans also require us to maintain certain financial covenants, including a Fixed Charge
Coverage Ratio of 1.25:1.00 calculated at the end of each calendar year, and we were in compliance
with all such financial covenants as of December 31, 2009.
Credit Facility
During October 2008, as part of the settlement agreement with UBS, our broker from which we
purchased auction rate security instruments, we entered into a line of credit that is secured by
the auction rate security instruments held with UBS. Available borrowings under the line of credit
are based upon terms specified in the agreement and subject to adjustment by UBS after
consideration of various factors. At March 31, 2010, $5,798,000 was outstanding under the line of
credit. Borrowings under the line of credit are callable by UBS at any time. The
line of credit expires on June 30, 2010 at which time we expect to exercise the put option on
our auction rate securities and use the proceeds from the sale of the auction rate securities to
repay amounts due under the line of credit. The cost of the line of credit effectively offsets the
interest earned on the auction rate securities. See Note 3 to the consolidated financial
statements for further information on the auction rate securities and the settlement agreement.
18
Cash Flows
The following table summarizes our primary sources and uses of cash during the periods
presented (in thousands).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Net cash provided by (used in): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities |
|
$ |
793 |
|
|
$ |
1,506 |
|
Investing activities |
|
|
(621 |
) |
|
|
(4,615 |
) |
Financing activities |
|
|
(154 |
) |
|
|
3,125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
18 |
|
|
$ |
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Activities. Our cash flows from operating activities, as detailed in the Unaudited
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, provided $0.8 million of net cash during the first three
months of 2010. The net decrease in cash from operating activities for the first quarter of 2010
in comparison to the first quarter of 2009, is primarily attributable to decreases in tenant
allowance receivables due to timing.
Investing Activities. We fund the development and construction of our new restaurants
primarily with cash flows from operations and proceeds from equity transactions. Our capital
expenditures for the first quarter of 2010 represent contractor payments for our Eden Prairie,
Minnesota and Tampa, Florida restaurants that were opened during the second half of 2009 and
architecture fees for our Baltimore, Maryland restaurant scheduled to open during the fourth
quarter of 2010. Net cash used in investing activities was $4.6 million during the first quarter
of 2009 reflecting $4.3 million primarily to fund construction at our Richmond, Virginia and
Woodbridge, New Jersey restaurants.
Financing Activities. Net cash used in financing activities was $0.2 million during the first
three months of 2010 reflecting principal payments on equipment loans. Net cash provided by
financing activities was $3.1 million during the first quarter of 2009 reflecting $2.1 million in
net borrowings under our line of credit and $1.2 million in proceeds from a bridge loan financing
transaction completed during March 2009, partially offset by $0.2 million in principal payments on
equipment loans.
Critical Accounting Policies
Critical accounting policies are those that we believe are most important to the portrayal of
our financial condition and results of operations and also require our most difficult, subjective,
or complex judgments. Judgments or uncertainties regarding the application of these policies may
result in materially different amounts being reported under various conditions or using different
assumptions. There have been no material changes to the critical accounting policies previously
reported in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
The following discussion of market risks contains forward-looking statements. Actual results
may differ materially from the following discussion based on general conditions in the financial
and commodity markets.
19
Primary Market Risk Exposures
Our primary market risk exposure is commodity costs. Many of the food products purchased by
us can be subject to volatility due to changes in weather, production, availability, seasonality,
and other factors outside our control. Substantially all of our food and supplies are available
from several sources, which helps to diversify our overall commodity cost risk. We also believe
that we have the ability to increase certain menu prices in response to food commodity price
increases.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We have evaluated, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) as of the end of the period
covered by this report. Based on this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer have each concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are effective to ensure
that we record, process, summarize, and report information required to be disclosed by us in our
quarterly reports filed under the Exchange Act within the time periods specified by the SECs rules
and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including
our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions
regarding required disclosure.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
During the quarterly period covered by this report, there have not been any changes in our
internal controls over financial reporting that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely
to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
On February 6, 2009, Samuel Beren (Beren or plaintiff), as trustee for the Samuel Beren
Trust, served a demand on us pursuant to Section 220 of Delawares General Corporation Law (the
DGCL), which requested that we make available for inspection certain books and records. On April
1, 2009, Beren, as trustee for the Samuel Beren Trust, commenced a purported stockholder derivative
action in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. The complaint filed in the derivative
action subsequently was amended by plaintiff. The derivative action purportedly was brought on
behalf of us against our directors and the purchasers of our promissory notes issued on March 5,
2009, for alleged breaches of fiduciary duties by our directors, and for aiding and abetting such
breaches by the purchasers of our promissory notes. We also were named as a nominal defendant in
the derivative action. The derivative action seeks unspecified damages, interest, reasonable
attorneys fees, expert witness fees, and other costs, and any further relief the Court deems just
and proper.
On June 16, 2009, the director defendants filed a motion to dismiss the derivative action. On
August 28, 2009, the director defendants filed an opening brief in support of the motion to
dismiss. Separately, on October 26, 2009, plaintiff served a demand on us pursuant to Section 220
of the DGCL, which requested that we make available for inspection certain books and records. On
November 11, 2009, plaintiff moved to suspend the briefing schedule in connection with the motion
to dismiss the derivative action until the parties resolved the October 26, 2009 books and records
demand. The director defendants opposed the motion to modify the briefing schedule. On January
19, 2010, the Court ordered that plaintiff must either amend his complaint, or file an answering
brief in response to the motion to dismiss by January 26, 2010.
20
On January 20, 2010, we produced books and records in response to the October 26, 2009 demand.
Two days later, on January 22, 2010, plaintiff commenced a separate action against us, which
sought the production of the
books and records requested in plaintiffs February 6, 2009 and October 26, 2009 demand
letters. The complaint filed in the books and records action was served on our registered agent in
Delaware on February 16, 2010.
On January 25, 2010, plaintiff filed a letter with the Court informing the Court of the
newly-filed books and records action, and requested a stay of the derivative action until the
newly-filed books and records action was resolved. After receiving the director defendants
opposition to the request for a stay, the Court instructed plaintiff to file a formal motion to
stay, as opposed to a letter request, if plaintiff is seeking a stay of the derivative action. The
Court also directed plaintiff to advise the Court as to why no action has been taken in conformity
with [the] Courts January 19, 2010 letter decision. Plaintiff filed a formal motion to stay,
which the Court granted on March 11, 2010. The Court stayed the derivative action until further
order of the Court, and ordered that plaintiff complete all books and records inspection efforts
in connection with [the derivative] litigation by June 11, 2010. The Court further ordered that
at the conclusion of such inspection efforts, plaintiff must notify the parties and the Court
whether plaintiff intends to file an answering brief in opposition to the motion to dismiss the
derivative action, or whether plaintiff intends to seek leave to file an amended or supplemental
complaint. We continue to believe that the purported derivative action is without merit, and we
intend to defend ourself vigorously if the Court-ordered stay entered in the derivative action is
lifted.
On March 8, 2010, we filed a motion to dismiss the books and records action. On March 22,
2010, we filed an opening brief in support of the motion to dismiss the books and records action.
On March 26, 2010, during a teleconference requested by the Court, the Court denied our motion to
dismiss and scheduled a one-day trial to be held on May 26, 2010. The Court explained that it
disfavors motions to dismiss in books and records actions, and found it to be more efficient to
forego briefing in connection with our motion to dismiss in favor of a trial, at which the Court
will dispose of all of the issues in the books and records action. Subsequent to the March 26,
2010 teleconference, we agreed to produce books and records in response to the February 6, 2009
demand, and reminded plaintiff that we previously produced books and records in response to the
October 26, 2009 demand. Beren has executed a confidentiality
agreement in connection with the anticipated production by us.
On April 30, 2010, the parties named in the books and records action submitted a stipulation and proposed order to
the Court agreeing (a) that the May 26, 2010 trial in the books and records action should be continued until further
order by the Court, and (b) that the books and records action should be stayed until further order of the Court. The
parties named in the derivative action also submitted a stipulation and proposed agreeing that following inspection by
plaintiff of the documents contemplated by the books and records action, plaintiff will file a second amended complaint
in the derivative action within sixty (60) days of the earlier of (a) the entry of judgment in the books and records
action by the Court, or (b) the dismissal of the books and records action by the Court. Although we agreed to the
filing of a second amended complaint in the derivative action, plaintiff recognized and acknowledged that such
agreement by us and the director defendants did not waive any right of ours or the director defendants to respond to
the second amended complaint as appropriate, which includes the filing of a motion to dismiss the second amended
complaint based upon any appropriate legal ground. The parties also requested that the Court vacate the June 11, 2010
deadline for plaintiff to complete its books and records inspection. We believe that, after books and records are
produced in response to the February 6, 2009 demand, the books and records action will be moot.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
A description of the risk factors associated with our business is contained in Part I, Item
1A, Risk Factors, of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009. These
cautionary statements are to be used as a reference in connection with any forward-looking
statements. The factors, risks, and uncertainties identified in these cautionary statements are in
addition to those contained in any other cautionary statements, written or oral, which may be made
or otherwise addressed in connection with a forward-looking statement or contained in any of our
subsequent filings with the SEC.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
Not applicable.
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
Not applicable.
Item 4. (Removed and Reserved).
Item 5. Other Information
Not applicable.
21
Item 6. Exhibits
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Registrant (1) |
|
3.3 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of Kona Grill, Inc., as of October 30, 2007 (3) |
|
3.4 |
|
|
Certificate of Designations, Preferences, and Rights of Series A Junior Participating
Preferred Stock of Kona Grill, Inc. (4) |
|
4.1 |
|
|
Form of Common Stock Certificate (2) |
|
4.2 |
|
|
Kona Grill, Inc. Stockholders Agreement, dated August 29, 2003 (2) |
|
4.3 |
|
|
Kona Grill, Inc. Series A Investor Rights Agreement, dated August 29, 2003 (2) |
|
4.4 |
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to Kona Grill, Inc. Series A Investor Rights Agreement, dated May 31, 2005 (2) |
|
4.9 |
|
|
Form of First Amended and Restated Promissory Note, dated April 7, 2009, among Kona Grill,
Inc. and the investor parties thereto (5) |
|
4.10 |
|
|
Form of Warrant (6) |
|
31.1 |
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and Rule 15d-14(a),
promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. |
|
31.2 |
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and Rule 15d-14(a),
promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. |
|
32.1 |
|
|
Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
32.2 |
|
|
Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Amendment No. 1 to the Registrants Registration
Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-125506), as filed on July 8, 2005. |
|
(2) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Amendment No. 2 to the Registrants Registration Statement
on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-125506), as filed on July 21, 2005. |
|
(3) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Form 8-K filed on November 5, 2007. |
|
(4) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Form 8-K filed on May 28, 2008. |
|
(5) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Form 8-K filed on April 10, 2009. |
|
(6) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Form 10-K filed on March 4, 2010. |
22
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kona Grill, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Marc A. Buehler
Marc A. Buehler
President and Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Mark S. Robinow
Mark S. Robinow
Executive Vice President, Chief
Financial Officer, and Secretary
|
|
|
|
|
(Principal Accounting and Financial Officer) |
|
|
Date: April 30, 2010
23