form10q_110608.htm
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-Q
(X)
|
QUARTERLY
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
For the
quarterly period ended September 28, 2008
OR
( )
|
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: 1-2207
WENDY’S/ARBY’S
GROUP, INC.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware
|
|
38-0471180
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification No.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1155
Perimeter Center West, Atlanta, GA
|
|
30338
|
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
|
(Zip
Code)
|
(678)
514-4100
(Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code)
TRIARC COMPANIES,
INC.
(Former
name, former address and former fiscal year,
if
changed since last report)
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 [ ]
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of
“accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act.
Large
accelerated
filer [X] Accelerated
filer [ ] Non-accelerated
filer [ ] Smaller
reporting company [ ]
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes [ ] No [X]
There
were 469,769,742 shares of the registrant’s common stock outstanding as of
October 31, 2008.
PART
I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial
Statements.
WENDY’S/ARBY’S
GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
(FORMERLY
TRIARC COMPANIES, INC.)
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
December
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
|
2007(A)
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
(In
Thousands)
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
78,116 |
|
|
$ |
26,032 |
|
Short-term
investments
|
|
|
2,608 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Accounts
and notes receivable
|
|
|
27,610 |
|
|
|
21,489 |
|
Inventories
|
|
|
11,067 |
|
|
|
11,417 |
|
Deferred
income tax benefit
|
|
|
24,921 |
|
|
|
15,046 |
|
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
25,932 |
|
|
|
30,626 |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
170,254 |
|
|
|
104,610 |
|
Restricted
cash equivalents
|
|
|
45,295 |
|
|
|
3,958 |
|
Notes
receivable
|
|
|
46,219 |
|
|
|
46,486 |
|
Investments
|
|
|
141,909 |
|
|
|
70,452 |
|
Properties
|
|
|
504,874 |
|
|
|
513,022 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
468,778 |
|
|
|
477,387 |
|
Other
intangible assets
|
|
|
45,318 |
|
|
|
47,617 |
|
Deferred
income tax benefit
|
|
|
4,050 |
|
|
|
25,746 |
|
Deferred
costs and other assets
|
|
|
27,870 |
|
|
|
32,892 |
|
|
|
$ |
1,454,567 |
|
|
$ |
1,322,170 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
portion of long-term debt
|
|
$ |
27,802 |
|
|
$ |
54,915 |
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
54,297 |
|
|
|
52,684 |
|
Accrued
expenses and other current liabilities
|
|
|
117,785 |
|
|
|
115,499 |
|
Current
liabilities related to discontinued operations
|
|
|
7,279
|
|
|
|
5,651 |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
207,163 |
|
|
|
228,749 |
|
Long-term
debt
|
|
|
711,531 |
|
|
|
666,240 |
|
Deferred
income
|
|
|
10,861 |
|
|
|
14,139 |
|
Other
liabilities
|
|
|
75,180 |
|
|
|
78,653 |
|
Minority
interests in consolidated subsidiaries
|
|
|
958 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
Stockholders’
equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class
A common stock
|
|
|
2,955 |
|
|
|
2,955 |
|
Class
B common stock
|
|
|
6,402 |
|
|
|
6,410 |
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
|
|
291,122 |
|
|
|
291,331 |
|
Retained
earnings
|
|
|
167,267 |
|
|
|
42,715 |
|
Common
stock held in treasury
|
|
|
(16,774 |
) |
|
|
(13,180 |
) |
Accumulated
other comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
|
(2,098 |
) |
|
|
4,004 |
|
Total
stockholders’ equity
|
|
|
448,874 |
|
|
|
334,235 |
|
|
|
$ |
1,454,567 |
|
|
$ |
1,322,170 |
|
(A) Derived
from the audited consolidated financial statements as of December 30,
2007.
See
accompanying notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements.
WENDY’S/ARBY’S
GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
(FORMERLY
TRIARC COMPANIES, INC.)
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(In
Thousands Except Per Share Amounts)
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales
|
|
$ |
285,496 |
|
|
$ |
287,641 |
|
|
$ |
830,566 |
|
|
$ |
860,560 |
|
Franchise
revenues
|
|
|
21,777 |
|
|
|
22,730 |
|
|
|
62,855 |
|
|
|
65,679 |
|
Asset
management and related fees
|
|
|
16,940 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
49,659 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
324,213 |
|
|
|
310,371 |
|
|
|
943,080 |
|
|
|
926,239 |
|
Costs
and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
210,940 |
|
|
|
222,206 |
|
|
|
610,799 |
|
|
|
655,643 |
|
Cost
of services
|
|
|
6,562 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
19,760 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Advertising
|
|
|
20,929 |
|
|
|
17,674 |
|
|
|
59,316 |
|
|
|
62,674 |
|
General
and administrative
|
|
|
42,009 |
|
|
|
36,075 |
|
|
|
155,567 |
|
|
|
123,108 |
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
20,022 |
|
|
|
30,701 |
|
|
|
54,411 |
|
|
|
64,387 |
|
Facilities
relocation and corporate restructuring
|
|
|
1,807 |
|
|
|
(82 |
) |
|
|
81,254 |
|
|
|
812 |
|
Settlement
of preexisting business relationships
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(487 |
) |
|
|
|
302,269 |
|
|
|
306,574 |
|
|
|
981,107 |
|
|
|
906,137 |
|
Operating
profit (loss)
|
|
|
21,944 |
|
|
|
3,797 |
|
|
|
(38,027 |
) |
|
|
20,102 |
|
Interest
expense
|
|
|
(15,489 |
) |
|
|
(13,585 |
) |
|
|
(46,164 |
) |
|
|
(41,020 |
) |
Investment
(loss) income, net
|
|
|
(1,083 |
) |
|
|
(1,376 |
) |
|
|
39,690 |
|
|
|
(76,497 |
) |
Other
income (expense), net
|
|
|
1,101 |
|
|
|
1,062 |
|
|
|
5,866 |
|
|
|
(2,279 |
) |
Income
(loss) from continuing operations before income taxes and minority
interests
|
|
|
6,473 |
|
|
|
(10,102 |
) |
|
|
(38,635 |
) |
|
|
(99,694 |
) |
(Provision
for) benefit from income taxes
|
|
|
(4,174 |
) |
|
|
(2,938 |
) |
|
|
24,385 |
|
|
|
12,292 |
|
Minority
interests in (income) loss of consolidated subsidiaries
|
|
|
1,432 |
|
|
|
(326 |
) |
|
|
(2,832 |
) |
|
|
(340 |
) |
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
3,731 |
|
|
|
(13,366 |
) |
|
|
(17,082 |
) |
|
|
(87,742 |
) |
Income
(loss) from disposal of discontinued operations, net of income
taxes
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,219 |
|
|
|
(149 |
) |
|
|
1,219 |
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
3,731 |
|
|
$ |
(12,147 |
) |
|
$ |
(17,231 |
) |
|
$ |
(86,523 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
and diluted income (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class
A and Class B common stock:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
(0.14 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.19 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.95 |
) |
Discontinued
operations
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
(0.13 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.19 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.94 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See
accompanying notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements.
WENDY’S/ARBY’S
GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
(FORMERLY
TRIARC COMPANIES, INC.)
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(In
Thousands)
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
Cash
flows from continuing operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
|
$ |
(17,231 |
) |
|
$ |
(86,523 |
) |
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by continuing operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
investment adjustments, net (see below)
|
|
|
(24,813 |
) |
|
|
78,259 |
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
54,411 |
|
|
|
64,387 |
|
Write-off
and amortization of deferred financing costs
|
|
|
1,509 |
|
|
|
7,281 |
|
Share-based
compensation provision
|
|
|
8,316 |
|
|
|
3,932 |
|
Receipt
of deferred vendor incentive, net of amount recognized
|
|
|
2,241 |
|
|
|
3,743 |
|
Straight-line
rent accrual
|
|
|
4,746 |
|
|
|
3,233 |
|
Equity
in undistributed (earnings) losses of investees
|
|
|
(873 |
) |
|
|
754 |
|
Minority
interests in income of consolidated subsidiaries
|
|
|
2,832 |
|
|
|
340 |
|
Deferred
income tax benefit
|
|
|
(24,872 |
) |
|
|
(13,466 |
) |
Facilities
relocation and corporate restructuring, net provision
(payments)
|
|
|
78,332 |
|
|
|
(4,353 |
) |
Unfavorable
lease liability recognized
|
|
|
(3,301 |
) |
|
|
(3,372 |
) |
Loss
(income) from discontinued operations
|
|
|
149 |
|
|
|
(1,219 |
) |
Payment
of withholding taxes related to share-based compensation
|
|
|
(4,793 |
) |
|
|
(177 |
) |
Other,
net
|
|
|
(53 |
) |
|
|
1,328 |
|
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
and notes receivable
|
|
|
15,328 |
|
|
|
(2,508 |
) |
Inventories
|
|
|
325 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
(7,137 |
) |
|
|
152 |
|
Accounts
payable, accrued expenses and other current liabilities
|
|
|
(44,946 |
) |
|
|
(9,399 |
) |
Net
cash provided by continuing operating activities
|
|
|
40,170 |
|
|
|
42,456 |
|
Cash
flows from continuing investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital
expenditures
|
|
|
(56,270 |
) |
|
|
(58,401 |
) |
Cost
of business acquisitions, less cash acquired
|
|
|
(1,529 |
) |
|
|
(9,540 |
) |
Capitalized
Wendy’s merger costs
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(7,543 |
) |
Investment
activities, net (see below)
|
|
|
33,013 |
|
|
|
34,205 |
|
Proceeds
from dispositions of assets
|
|
|
2,615 |
|
|
|
690 |
|
Other,
net
|
|
|
457 |
|
|
|
(391 |
) |
Net
cash used in continuing investing activities
|
|
|
(21,714 |
) |
|
|
(40,980 |
) |
Cash
flows from continuing financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds
from issuance of long-term debt
|
|
|
15,908 |
|
|
|
53,668 |
|
Repayments
of notes payable and long-term debt
|
|
|
(15,948 |
) |
|
|
(89,313 |
) |
Dividends
paid
|
|
|
(24,162 |
) |
|
|
(16,101 |
) |
Net
distributions to minority interests
|
|
|
(7,911 |
) |
|
|
(1,144 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Net
cash used in continuing financing activities
|
|
|
(31,906 |
) |
|
|
(52,890 |
) |
Net
cash used in continuing operations
|
|
|
(13,450 |
) |
|
|
(51,414 |
) |
Net
cash used in operating activities of discontinued
operations
|
|
|
(130 |
) |
|
|
(670 |
) |
Net
decrease in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(13,580 |
) |
|
|
(52,084 |
) |
Cash
and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
148,152 |
|
|
|
78,116 |
|
Cash
and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$ |
134,572 |
|
|
$ |
26,032 |
|
WENDY’S/ARBY’S
GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
(FORMERLY
TRIARC COMPANIES, INC.)
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Continued)
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(In
Thousands)
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
Detail
of cash flows related to investments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
investment adjustments, net:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
than temporary losses (a)
|
|
$ |
7,473 |
|
|
$ |
79,686 |
|
Net
recognized (gains) losses from trading securities and derivatives and
securities sold short
|
|
|
(1,842 |
) |
|
|
812 |
|
Other
net recognized gains
|
|
|
(37,188 |
) |
|
|
(2,239 |
) |
Proceeds
from sales of trading securities
|
|
|
6,018 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Other
|
|
|
726 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
$ |
(24,813 |
) |
|
$ |
78,259 |
|
Investing
investment activities, net:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of available-for-sale securities and other investments
purchased
|
|
$ |
(71,484 |
) |
|
$ |
(82,505 |
) |
(Increase)
decrease in restricted cash collateralizing securities obligations or held
for investment
|
|
|
(28,546 |
) |
|
|
40,454 |
|
Proceeds
from sales of available-for-sale securities and other
investments
|
|
|
133,043 |
|
|
|
75,373 |
|
Other
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
883 |
|
|
|
$ |
33,013 |
|
|
$ |
34,205 |
|
Supplemental
disclosures of cash flow information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
paid during the period in continuing operations for:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
$ |
44,771 |
|
|
$ |
37,692 |
|
Income
taxes, net of refunds
|
|
$ |
4,141 |
|
|
$ |
2,944 |
|
Supplemental
schedule of non-cash investing and financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
capital expenditures
|
|
$ |
70,108 |
|
|
$ |
66,039 |
|
Capital
expenditures paid in cash
|
|
|
(56,270 |
) |
|
|
(58,401 |
) |
Non-cash
capitalized lease and certain sales-leaseback obligations
|
|
$ |
13,838 |
|
|
$ |
7,638 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cash
additions to long-term debt
|
|
$ |
3,747 |
|
|
$ |
9,621 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) The
2008 amount relates to other than temporary losses of $68,086 in our investment
in Deerfield Capital Corp. common stock as described in Note 3, $6,500 in our
investment in Jurlique International Pty Ltd. and $5,100 in the value of certain
of our available for sale securities as described in Note 10.
See
accompanying notes to unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements.
WENDY’S/ARBY’S
GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
(FORMERLY
TRIARC COMPANIES, INC.)
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
September
28, 2008
(In
Thousands Except Share Data)
(Unaudited)
(1)
|
Basis
of Presentation
|
Effective
September 29, 2008, in conjunction with the merger with Wendy’s International,
Inc. (“Wendy’s”) (see Note 2) the corporate name of Triarc Companies, Inc.
(“Triarc”) changed to Wendy’s/Arby’s Group, Inc. (“Wendy’s/Arby’s” and, together
with its subsidiaries, the “Company” or “We”). The accompanying
unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements (the “Financial
Statements”) of the Company have been prepared in accordance with Rule 10-01 of
Regulation S-X promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”)
and, therefore, do not include all information and footnotes necessary for a
fair presentation of financial position, results of operations and cash flows in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America (“GAAP”). In our opinion, however, the Financial Statements
contain all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments,
necessary to present fairly our financial position as of the end of the
nine-month period and results of operations for the three-month and nine-month
periods and our cash flows for the nine-month periods set forth in the following
paragraph. Because the merger with Wendy’s did not occur until our
2008 fourth quarter, Wendy’s financial position and results of operations are
not included in our financial statements contained in this
report. Wendy’s financial position as of September 28, 2008 and
results of operations for the three and nine month periods ended September 28,
2008 and September 30, 2007 can be found in our Current Report on Form 8-K being
filed with the SEC on or about the same date that this Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q is filed. The results of operations for the nine-month period
ended September 28, 2008 will not be indicative of the results to be expected
for the full 2008 fiscal year due, in part, to the effect in the nine months
ended September 28, 2008 of the other than temporary losses related to our
investment in Deerfield Capital Corp. (“DFR”) as described in Note 3 and the
effect on our 2008 fourth quarter from the merger with
Wendy’s. These Financial Statements should be read in
conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto
included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December
30, 2007 (the “Form 10-K”).
We report
on a fiscal year consisting of 52 or 53 weeks ending on the Sunday closest to
December 31. Our third quarter of fiscal 2007 commenced on July
2, 2007 and ended on September 30, 2007 (the “three months ended September 30,
2007” or the “2007 third quarter”). Our third quarter of fiscal 2008
commenced on June 30, 2008 and ended on September 28, 2008 (the “three months
ended September 28, 2008” or the “2008 third quarter”). Our first
nine months of fiscal 2007 commenced on January 1, 2007 and ended on September
30, 2007 (the “nine months ended September 30, 2007” or the “2007 first nine
months”). Our first nine months of fiscal 2008 commenced on December
31, 2007 and ended on September 28, 2008 (the “nine months ended September 28,
2008” or the “2008 first nine months”). Each quarter contained 13
weeks and each nine-month period contained 39 weeks. Our 2007 third quarter and
first nine months included the calendar basis reported results of Deerfield
& Company, LLC (“Deerfield”), our former subsidiary which was sold (the
“Deerfield Sale”) on December 21, 2007 (see Note 3). This difference
in reporting basis is not material to our condensed consolidated financials
statements. With the exception of Deerfield, all references to years,
nine-month periods, and quarters relate to fiscal periods rather than calendar
periods.
(2)
|
Merger
with Wendy’s International, Inc.
|
On
September 29, 2008, Triarc and Wendy’s completed their previously announced
merger in an all-stock transaction in which Wendy’s shareholders received a
fixed ratio of 4.25 shares of Wendy’s/Arby’s Class A common stock for each
Wendy’s common share owned.
In the
merger, approximately 377,000,000 shares of Wendy’s/Arby’s common stock were
issued to Wendy’s shareholders. The merger value of approximately
$2.5 billion for financial reporting purposes is based on the 4.25 conversion
factor of the Wendy’s outstanding shares as well as previously issued restricted
stock awards both at a value of $6.57 per share which represents the average
closing market price of Triarc Class A Common Stock two days before and after
the merger announcement date of April 24, 2008. Wendy’s shareholders
held approximately 80%, in the aggregate, of the outstanding Wendy’s/Arby’s
common stock immediately following the merger. In addition, effective
on the date of the Wendy’s merger, our Class B Common Stock was converted into
Class A Common Stock.
The
merger will be accounted for using the purchase method of accounting in
accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 141,
Business Combinations. In accordance with this standard, we have
concluded that Wendy’s/Arby’s will be the acquirer for financial accounting
purposes. The total merger value will be allocated to Wendy’s net
tangible and intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on their
estimated fair values with the excess recognized as goodwill. Wendy’s
operating results will be included in our financial statements beginning on the
merger date.
Outstanding
Wendy’s stock options and other equity awards were converted upon completion of
the merger into stock options and equity awards with respect to Wendy’s/Arby’s
common stock, based on the 4.25:1 exchange ratio. As of the merger
date, all outstanding Wendy’s performance units became fully vested at the
highest level of performance objectives and were settled in cash for $6,150 in
October 2008, based on the fair market value of Wendy’s common shares at the
time of the merger.
As of
September 28, 2008, our deferred costs related to the merger, which will be
included in the total consideration to be allocated to the assets acquired and
liabilities assumed, were $18,529 and are included in “Deferred costs and other
assets” on the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated balance
sheet.
Certain
pre-merger executive and other officers of Wendy’s had employment agreements
which included change in control provisions. The total value of these
provisions at the merger date was $36,665. Prior to the completion of
the merger, the full amount was transferred into a rabbi trust and will be paid
to each executive in accordance with the terms of their respective
agreements.
The
Wendy’s® and Arby’s® brands will continue to operate independently, with
headquarters in Dublin, Ohio and Atlanta, Georgia, respectively. A consolidated
support center will be based in Atlanta, Georgia and will oversee all public
company responsibilities as well as other shared service functions. Upon
completion of the merger on September 29, 2008, the combined company had 10,360
system wide restaurants in 50 states and 21 foreign countries and territories,
of which 2,577 were owned and operated by Wendy’s/Arby’s and 7,783 were owned
and operated by independent franchisees.
(3) Deerfield
Sale and Related Transactions
Deerfield
Sale
As
described in Note 3 to our consolidated financial statements contained in our
Form 10-K, on December 21, 2007, we completed the Deerfield Sale resulting
in non-cash proceeds aggregating $134,608 consisting of 9,629,368 shares of
convertible preferred stock of DFR with a then estimated fair value of $88,398
and $47,986 principal amount of series A senior secured notes of a subsidiary of
DFR due in December 2012 (the “DFR Notes”) with a then estimated fair value of
$46,210. We also retained ownership of 205,642 common shares in DFR
as part of a pro rata distribution to the members of Deerfield prior to the
Deerfield Sale. The Deerfield Sale resulted in a pretax gain of
$40,193 which was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2007.
The DFR
Notes bear interest at the three-month LIBOR (3.76% at September 26, 2008) plus
5% through December 31, 2009, increasing 0.5% each quarter from January 1, 2010
through June 30, 2011 and 0.25% each quarter from July 1, 2011 through their
maturity. The DFR Notes are secured by certain equity interests of
DFR and certain of its subsidiaries. The $1,776 original imputed
discount on the DFR Notes is being accreted to “Other income (expense), net” in
the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statement of operations using
the interest rate method. The DFR Notes, net of unamortized discount,
are reflected as “Notes receivable” in the accompanying unaudited condensed
consolidated balance sheets.
Conversion
of Convertible Preferred Stock and Dividend of DFR Common Stock
On March
11, 2008, DFR stockholders approved the one-for-one conversion of all its
outstanding convertible preferred stock into DFR common stock which converted
the 9,629,368 preferred shares we held into a like number of shares of common
stock. On March 11, 2008, our Board of Directors approved the distribution of
our 9,835,010 shares of DFR common stock, which also included the 205,642 common
shares of DFR discussed above, to our stockholders. The dividend, which was
valued at $14,464, was paid on April 4, 2008 to holders of record of our
class A common stock (the “Class A Common Stock”) and our class B common
stock (the “Class B Common Stock”) on March 29,
2008.
Other
than Temporary Losses and Equity in Losses of DFR
On March
18, 2008, in response to unanticipated credit and liquidity events in the first
quarter of 2008, DFR announced that it was repositioning its investment
portfolio to focus on agency-only residential mortgage-backed securities and
away from its principal investing segment to its asset management segment with
its fee-based revenue streams. In addition, it stated that during the
first quarter of 2008, its portfolio was adversely impacted by deterioration of
the global credit markets and, as a result, it sold $2,800,000 of its agency and
$1,300,000 of its AAA-rated non-agency mortgage-backed securities and reduced
the net notional amount of interest rate swaps used to hedge a portion of its
mortgage-backed securities by $4,200,000, all at a net after-tax loss of
$294,300 to DFR.
Based on
the events described above and their negative effect on the market price of DFR
common stock, we concluded that the fair value and, therefore, the carrying
value of our investment in the 9,629,368 common shares, which were received upon
the conversion of the convertible preferred stock as of March 11, 2008,
as well as the 205,642 common shares which were distributed to us in connection
with the Deerfield Sale, were impaired. As a result, as of March 11, 2008, we
recorded an other than temporary loss which is included in “Investment (loss)
income, net,” in the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statement of
operations for the nine months ended September 28, 2008 of $67,594 (without tax
benefit as described below) which included $11,074 of pre-tax unrealized holding
losses previously recorded as of December 30, 2007 and included in “Accumulated
other comprehensive income (loss)”, a component of stockholder’s equity in the
accompanying 2007 condensed consolidated balance sheet. These common
shares were considered available-for-sale securities due to the limited period
they were to be held as of March 11, 2008 (the “Determination Date”) before the
dividend distribution of the shares to our stockholders on April 4,
2008. We also recorded an additional impairment charge from March 11,
2008 through March 29, 2008 of $492. As a result of the dividend, the income tax
loss that resulted from the decline in value of our investment of $68,086 is not
deductible for income tax purposes and no income tax benefit was recorded
related to this loss.
Additionally,
from December 31, 2007 through the Determination Date, we recorded approximately
$754 of equity in net losses of DFR which are included in “Other income
(expense), net” in the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statement
of operations for the nine months ended September 28, 2008 related to our
investment in the 205,642 common shares of DFR discussed above which were
accounted for on the equity method through the Determination Date.
The dislocation in the
mortgage sector and continuing weakness in the broader financial market has
adversely impacted, and may continue to adversely impact, DFR’s cash flows and
DFR has reported operating losses for the first six months of
2008. However, we have received timely payment of all three quarterly
interest payments on the DFR Notes due to date. Additionally, on
October 15, 2008 we received a $1,070 dividend on the convertible preferred
stock which we previously held. Based on the Deerfield Sale
agreement, payment of a dividend by DFR on this preferred stock was dependent on
DFR’s board of directors declaring and paying a dividend on DFR’s common
stock. The first dividend to be declared on their common stock following the
date of the Deerfield Sale was declared in our 2008 third quarter and paid on
October 15, 2008. Therefore, during the 2008 third quarter, we
recognized the dividend income from DFR. Certain expenses totaling
$6,201 related to the Deerfield Sale, which were a liability of the Company and
for which we had an equal offsetting receivable from DFR as of December 30,
2007, were paid by DFR during 2008. DFR qualified for REIT status in
previous quarters; however, on October 2, 2008, DFR announced, among other
things, its conversion to a C corporation and the termination of its REIT
status. Updated financial information from DFR for their 2008 third
quarter ended September 30, 2008 will not be available until the filing of DFR’s
Form 10-Q. Based on current publicly-available information and the
other factors discussed above, we believe the DFR Notes are fully
collectible.
(4)
|
Fair
Value Measurements
|
In
September 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the “FASB”) issued
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 157, as amended, “Fair
Value Measurements,” (“SFAS 157”). SFAS 157 addresses issues relating
to the definition of fair value, the methods used to measure fair value and
expanded disclosures about fair value measurements. SFAS 157 does not
require any new fair value measurements. The definition of fair value
in SFAS 157 focuses on the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid
to transfer a liability, not the price that would be paid to acquire an asset or
received to assume a liability. The methods used to measure fair
value should be based on the assumptions that market participants would use in
pricing an asset or a liability (“Market Value Approach”). SFAS 157
expands disclosures about the use of fair value to measure assets and
liabilities in interim and annual periods subsequent to adoption.
FASB Staff Position (“FSP”) No. FAS 157-1, “Application of FASB Statement No.
157 to FASB Statement No. 13 and Other Accounting Pronouncements that Address
Fair Value Measurements for Purposes of Lease Classification or Measurement
under Statement 13” (“FSP FAS 157-1”), states that SFAS 157 does not apply under
SFAS No. 13, “Accounting for Leases” (“SFAS 13”), and other accounting
pronouncements that address fair value measurements for purposes of lease
classification or measurement under SFAS 13. In addition, FSP No. FAS
157-2, “Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157” (“FSP FAS 157-2”), defers the
application of SFAS 157 to nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities
until our 2009 fiscal year, except for items recognized or disclosed on a
recurring basis at least annually. FSP No. FAS 157-3, “Determining
the Fair Value of a Financial Asset in a Market that is Not Active,” (“FSP FAS
157-3”) clarifies the application of SFAS 157 when the market for a financial
asset is inactive. This new guidance illustrates the fact that
approaches other than the Market Value Approach to determining fair value may be
appropriate for instruments such as those for which the market is no longer
active. In utilizing these other approaches, however, the guidance
reiterates certain of the measurement principles described in SFAS
157. SFAS 157 was, with some limited exceptions, applied
prospectively and was effective commencing with our first fiscal quarter of
2008, with the exception of the areas mentioned above under which exemptions to
or deferrals of the application of certain aspects of SFAS 157
apply. Our adoption of SFAS 157 and the related staff positions in
2008 did not result in any change in the methods we use to measure the fair
value of our financial assets and liabilities. We are presenting the expanded
fair value disclosures of SFAS 157 below.
SFAS 157
and related staff positions valuation techniques are based on observable and
unobservable inputs. Observable inputs reflect readily obtainable data from
independent sources, while unobservable inputs reflect our market
assumptions. SFAS 157 classifies these inputs into the
following hierarchy:
Level 1 Inputs—Quoted prices
for identical assets or liabilities in active markets.
|
Level 2 Inputs—Quoted
prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets; quoted prices
for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not
active; and model-derived valuations whose inputs are observable or whose
significant value drivers are observable. In some cases,
observable market data may require significant adjustment to meet the
objective of fair value, particularly in cases of markets that are no
longer active. If the adjustment is significant, the
measurement would be considered Level
3.
|
|
Level 3 Inputs— Pricing
inputs are unobservable for the assets and liabilities and include
situations where there is little, if any, market activity for the asset
and liabilities. The inputs into the determination of fair value require
significant management judgment or
estimation.
|
Our
financial assets and liabilities as of September 28, 2008 include
available-for-sale investments, investment derivatives and various investments
in liability positions. The available-for-sale securities, investment
derivatives, and various investments in liability positions include those
managed (the “Equities Account”) by a management company formed by our Chairman
and then Chief Executive Officer and our Vice Chairman and then President and
Chief Operating Officer (the “Former Executives”) and a director who is also our
former Vice Chairman (the “Management Company”). We determine fair
value of our available-for-sale securities and investment derivatives
principally using quoted market prices, broker/dealer prices or statements of
account received from investment managers, which were principally based on
quoted market or broker/dealer prices. We determine fair value of our
interest rate swaps using quotes provided by the respective bank counterparties
that are based on models whose inputs are observable LIBOR forward interest rate
curves. We believe that these fair value determinations still follow
appropriate methodology even given recent changes in the overall financial
markets.
The fair
values of our financial assets or liabilities and the hierarchy of the level of
inputs are summarized below:
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
Fair
Value Measurements at September 28, 2008 Using
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Level
1
|
|
|
Level
2
|
|
|
Level
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-sale
securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equities
Account – restricted (a)
|
|
$ |
55,896 |
|
|
$ |
55,896 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Investment
derivatives in the Equities Account:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Put
options on market index-restricted (a)
|
|
|
6,244 |
|
|
|
6,244 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
return swap on an equity security – restricted (a)
|
|
|
160 |
|
|
|
160 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
62,300 |
|
|
$ |
62,300 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
rate swaps in a liability position (included in “Accrued expenses and
other current liabilities”)
|
|
$ |
165 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
165 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Investment
derivatives in the Equities Account:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Put
and call option combinations on an equity security-restricted
(b)
|
|
|
1,111 |
|
|
|
1,111 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
return swap on equity
securities-restricted
(b)
|
|
|
1,324 |
|
|
|
1,324 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
liabilities
|
|
$ |
2,600 |
|
|
$ |
2,435 |
|
|
$ |
165 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
(a)
|
Included
in “Investments” on the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated
balance sheet as of September 28, 2008. Investments also
include $8,152 of cost basis investments. During the fourth
quarter of 2008, we have experienced additional losses on our available
for sale securities (see Note 10).
|
(b)
|
Included
in “Other liabilities” on the accompanying unaudited condensed
consolidated balance sheet as of September 28,
2008.
|
(5) Other Business
Acquisitions
We
completed the acquisitions of the operating assets, net of liabilities assumed,
of 45 franchised restaurants, including 41 restaurants in the California market,
in two separate transactions during the nine months ended September 28,
2008. The total consideration, before post-closing adjustments, for
the acquisitions was $15,809 consisting of (1) $8,890 of cash (before
consideration of $45 of cash acquired), (2) the assumption of $6,239 of debt and
(3) $680 of related expenses. The aggregate purchase price of $16,296
also included $693 of losses from the settlement of unfavorable franchise rights
and a $1,180 gain on the termination of subleases both included in “Settlement
of preexisting business relationships” in the accompanying unaudited condensed
consolidated statement of operations. Further, we paid an
additional $15 during the nine months ended September 28, 2008 for a finalized
post-closing purchase price adjustment related to other restaurant acquisitions
in 2007. The impact of these acquisitions on our results of
operations for the three and nine months ended September 28, 2008 was not
material. Therefore, no pro forma information has been included
herein.
We
completed the acquisitions of the operating assets, net of liabilities assumed,
of 10 franchised restaurants during the nine months ended September 30,
2007. The total consideration, before post-closing adjustments, for
the acquisitions was $2,217 consisting of (1) $1,141 of cash (before
consideration of $10 of cash acquired), (2) the assumption of $700 of debt and
(3) $376 of related expenses. Further, we paid an additional $12 in
the nine months ended September 30, 2007 for a finalized post-closing purchase
price adjustment related to other restaurant acquisitions in 2006.
(6)
|
Impairment
of Long-lived Assets
|
The
following is a summary of our impairment losses included in “Depreciation and
amortization” in the condensed consolidated statements of
operations:
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restaurants,
primarily properties
|
|
$ |
95 |
|
|
$ |
4,580 |
|
|
$ |
902 |
|
|
$ |
5,997 |
|
Asset
management segment
|
|
|
3,028 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4,137 |
|
|
|
- |
|
General
corporate
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
9,623 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
9,623 |
|
|
|
$ |
3,123 |
|
|
$ |
14,203 |
|
|
$ |
5,039 |
|
|
$ |
15,620 |
|
The restaurant impairment losses
reflect (1) impairment charges resulting from the deterioration in operating
performance of certain restaurants and (2) additional charges for investments in
restaurants impaired in a prior year which did not subsequently
recover.
We account for goodwill under the
guidance set forth in SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets”
(“SFAS 142”), which specifies that goodwill should not be
amortized. Our policy is to evaluate goodwill for impairment at least
annually or more frequently if events or circumstances occur that would indicate
a reduction in the fair value of the Company.
During
2008, the quick service restaurant industry has experienced an adverse change in
business climate which, under SFAS 142, could be an indicator that a reduction
in the fair value of the Company has occurred. Accordingly,
management performed an interim goodwill impairment test in accordance with
SFAS 142. Although we report our Company-owned restaurants and
our franchising of restaurants as one business segment and acquired Sybra, LLP
(“Sybra”) and RTM Restaurant Group (“RTM”) with the expectation of strengthening
and increasing the value of our Arby’s brand, our Company-owned restaurants are
considered to be a separate reporting unit for purposes of measuring goodwill
impairment under SFAS 142. Accordingly, goodwill is tested for
impairment at the Company-owned restaurant level based on its separate cash
flows independent of the Company’s strategic reasons for owning
restaurants. The reporting unit for Company-owned restaurants
includes the restaurants acquired in both the December 2002 acquisition of Sybra
and the July 2005 acquisition of RTM (the “RTM
Acquisition”). Management performed a discounted cash flow analysis
using updated forward looking projections of estimated future operating results
of our Company-owned restaurants. Based on the results, management
has concluded that our fair value of the Company-owned restaurants exceeds their
carrying value at September 28, 2008. Accordingly, goodwill is not
impaired as of September 28, 2008.
We will perform our annual review of
goodwill during the fourth quarter of 2008. As noted above, we
anticipate that the factors which have negatively impacted our Company-owned
restaurant margins through the first nine months of 2008 will continue
to negatively impact Company-owned restaurant margins in the 2008 fourth
quarter. Continued deterioration of Company-owned store
results may result in an impairment of our goodwill.
We intend to dispose of one of our
Company-owned aircraft as soon as practicable. As a result, we have
classified this asset as held-for-sale as of September 28, 2008 and recorded a
general corporate impairment charge during the 2008 third quarter to reflect its
fair value as a result of the recent appraisal related to the potential
sale.
(7)
|
Facilities
Relocation and Corporate
Restructuring
|
The
facilities relocation charges incurred and recognized in our restaurant business
for the nine-month periods ended September 30, 2007 and September 28, 2008 of
$315 and $120, respectively, principally related to changes in the estimated
carrying costs for real estate we purchased under terms of employee relocation
agreements entered into as part of the RTM Acquisition. We do not
currently expect to incur additional facilities relocation charges with respect
to the RTM Acquisition.
The
general corporate charges for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and
September 28, 2008 of $80,939 and $692, respectively, principally relate to the
transfer of substantially all of our senior executive responsibilities to
the executive team of Arby’s Restaurant Group, Inc. (“ARG”), a wholly-owned
subsidiary, (the “Corporate Restructuring”) as further described in Notes 18 and
28 to the consolidated financial statements contained in our Form
10-K. In April 2007, we announced that we would be closing
our New York headquarters and combining our corporate operations with our
restaurant operations in Atlanta, Georgia. This transfer of responsibilities was
completed in early 2008. Accordingly, to facilitate this transition,
we entered into contractual settlements (the “Contractual Settlements”) with the
Former Executives evidencing the termination of their employment agreements
and providing for their resignation as executive officers effective June 29,
2007. The effect of severance arrangements entered into with other New York
headquarters’ executives and employees were recorded based on their
terms. In addition, we sold properties and other assets at our former
New York headquarters in 2007 to an affiliate of the Former Executives. The
additional provision of $692 in 2008 primarily related to current period charges
for the transition severance arrangements of the other New York headquarters’
employees who continued to provide services as employees during the 2008 first
half. We do not currently expect to incur additional charges with
respect to the Corporate Restructuring.
The
components of the facilities relocation and corporate restructuring charges and
an analysis of activity in the facilities relocation and corporate restructuring
accrual during the nine-month periods ended September 30, 2007 and September 28,
2008 are as follows:
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September
30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Provision
|
|
|
Payments
|
|
|
Write-offs
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Restaurant
Business:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee
relocation costs
|
|
$ |
134 |
|
|
$ |
315 |
|
|
$ |
(115 |
) |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
334 |
|
Other
|
|
|
687 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(624 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
63 |
|
Total
restaurant business
|
|
|
821 |
|
|
|
315 |
|
|
|
(739 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
397 |
|
General
Corporate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance
and retention incentive compensation
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
80,104 |
|
|
|
(2,183 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
77,921 |
|
Non-cash
charges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
on sale of properties and other assets
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
835 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(835 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Total
general corporate
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
80,939 |
|
|
|
(2,183 |
) |
|
|
(835 |
) |
|
|
77,921 |
|
|
|
$ |
821 |
|
|
$ |
81,254 |
|
|
$ |
(2,922 |
) |
|
$ |
(835 |
) |
|
$ |
78,318 |
|
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September
28, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected
|
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
December
30,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
Incurred
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Provision
|
|
|
Payments
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
to
Date
|
|
Restaurant
Business:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee
relocation costs
|
|
$ |
591 |
|
|
$ |
120 |
|
|
|
(639 |
) |
|
$ |
72 |
|
|
$ |
4,651 |
|
Other
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
7,471 |
|
|
|
|
591 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
(639 |
) |
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
12,122 |
|
Non-cash
charges
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
719 |
|
Total
restaurant business
|
|
|
591 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
(639 |
) |
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
12,841 |
|
General
Corporate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance
and retention incentive compensation
|
|
|
12,208 |
|
|
|
692 |
|
|
|
(4,526 |
) |
|
|
8,374 |
|
|
|
84,622 |
|
Non-cash
charges
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
835 |
|
Total
general corporate
|
|
|
12,208 |
|
|
|
692 |
|
|
|
(4,526 |
) |
|
|
8,374 |
|
|
|
85,457 |
|
|
|
$ |
12,799 |
|
|
$ |
812 |
|
|
|
(5,165 |
) |
|
$ |
8,446 |
|
|
$ |
98,298 |
|
We expect to incur significant
facilities relocation and corporate restructuring charges in conjunction with
the Wendy’s merger; however we are unable to estimate the amount as of September
28, 2008.
(8)
|
Discontinued
Operations
|
Prior to
2007, we sold the stock of the companies comprising our former premium beverage
and soft drink concentrate business segments (collectively, the “Beverage
Discontinued Operations”) and the stock or the principal assets of the companies
comprising the former utility and municipal services and refrigeration business
segments (the “SEPSCO Discontinued Operations”) and closed two restaurants which
were a component of the restaurant segment (the “Restaurant Discontinued
Operations”). We have accounted for all of these operations as
discontinued operations.
During
the nine months ended September 30, 2007, we recorded an additional net loss of
$149 on the disposal of the Restaurant Discontinued Operations relating to
finalizing the leasing arrangements for the two closed
restaurants. During the three months ended September 28, 2008, we
recorded a net $1,219 benefit principally resulting from the
release of reserves for state income taxes no longer required as a result of a
favorable settlement of certain state income tax liabilities.
Current
liabilities remaining to be liquidated relating to discontinued operations
result from certain obligations not transferred to the respective buyers and
consisted of the following:
|
|
December
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities,
primarily accrued income taxes, relating to the Beverage Discontinued
Operations
|
|
$ |
6,639 |
|
|
$ |
4,998 |
|
Liabilities
relating to the SEPSCO Discontinued Operations
|
|
|
573 |
|
|
|
585 |
|
Liabilities
relating to the Restaurant Discontinued Operations
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
$ |
7,279 |
|
|
$ |
5,651 |
|
We expect that the
liquidation of these remaining liabilities associated with all of these
discontinued operations as of September 28, 2008 will not have any material
adverse impact on our condensed consolidated financial position or results of
operations. To the extent any estimated amounts included in the
current liabilities relating to discontinued operations are determined to be
different from the amount required to liquidate the associated liability, any
such amount will be recorded at that time as a component of gain or loss from
disposal of discontinued operations.
(9) Retirement
Benefit Plans
We
maintain two defined benefit plans, the benefits under which were frozen in 1992
and for which we have no unrecognized prior service cost. The
components of the net periodic pension cost incurred by us with respect to these
plans are as follows.
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service
cost (consisting entirely of plan administrative expenses)
|
|
$ |
22 |
|
|
$ |
24 |
|
|
$ |
67 |
|
|
$ |
72 |
|
Interest
cost
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
Expected
return on the plans’ assets
|
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
(55 |
) |
|
|
(174 |
) |
|
|
(165 |
) |
Amortization
of unrecognized net loss
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Net
periodic pension cost
|
|
$ |
26 |
|
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
78 |
|
|
$ |
90 |
|
(10)
|
Other
than temporary losses on
investments
|
As described in Note 8 to our
consolidated financial statements contained in our Form 10-K, we have a cost
investment in Jurlique International Pty Ltd. (“Jurlique”), an Australian skin
and beauty products company that is not publicly traded. Based on an
evaluation of our investment we determined that its value had declined
and that the decline was
other than temporary. Therefore we recorded other than temporary
losses, which are included in “Investment (loss) income, net” in the
accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statement of operations, of $6,500
(including $3,500 in the 2008 second quarter and $3,000 in the 2008 third
quarter) in the first nine months of 2008. The remaining carrying value of
$2,004 is included in “Investments” in the accompanying unaudited condensed
consolidated balance sheet.
As described in Note 28 to our
consolidated financial statements contained in our Form 10-K, we invested
$75,000 in the Equities Account which generally co-invests on a parallel basis
with the management company’s equity funds. We analyzed our
unrealized losses as of September 28, 2008 and, due to current market conditions
and other factors, we recorded an other than temporary loss, which is
included in “Investment (loss) income, net” in the accompanying unaudited
condensed consolidated statement of operations, of $5,100 during the
third quarter of 2008. Additionally, during the 2008 third quarter
$30,000 of restricted cash in the Equities Account was transferred to
Wendy’s/Arby’s. The remaining carrying value of our
available-for-sale securities of $55,896 as of September 28, 2008 is included in
“Investments” in the unaudited condensed consolidated balance
sheet. As of a result of continuing weakness in the economy during
the fourth quarter of 2008 and its effect on the financial market, our available
for sale securities which are held in the Equities Account have experienced a
decrease, as of October 31, 2008, of approximately $11,000 in their fair value
as compared to their September 28, 2008 carrying and fair values (see Note 4).
Such decreases could result in additional other than temporary losses on our
available for sale securities held in the Equities Account in the fourth quarter
of 2008.
Our
effective tax rate provision on the income from continuing operations before
income taxes and minority interests for the three months ended September 30,
2007 was 64% and our effective tax rate benefit on the loss for the nine months
ended September 30, 2007 was 63%. We had a tax provision of $2,938, despite the
loss from continuing operations before income taxes and minority interests, for
the three months ended September 28, 2008 and an effective tax rate benefit of
12% on the loss for nine months ended September 28, 2008. These rates vary
from the U.S. federal statutory rate of 35% due to (1) the effect of the decline
in value of our DFR investment in the 2008 first quarter and related declared
dividend, (2) the effect of recognizing a previously unrecognized contingent tax
benefit in the 2007 second quarter in connection with the settlement of certain
obligations to the Former Executives, (3) the effect in the 2007 and 2008 third
quarters of changes in our estimated full year tax rates, (4) the effect of
non-deductible compensation and other non-deductible expenses, (5) state income
taxes, net of federal income taxes and (6) adjustments to our uncertain tax
positions.
In the
2008 first quarter, we distributed our investment in the common stock of DFR as
a dividend to our stockholders as described in Note 3. As a result of
the dividend, the tax loss that resulted from the decline in value of our
investment through the record date of the dividend to our stockholders is not
deductible for income tax purposes and no income tax benefit was recorded
related to this loss.
We
adopted the provisions of FASB Interpretation No. 48 “Accounting for
Uncertainties in Income Taxes” (“FIN 48”) on January 1, 2007. At
December 30, 2007 the amount of unrecognized tax benefits was
$12,266. During the three months and nine month periods ended
September 28, 2008, unrecognized tax benefits increased $1,893 and $449
respectively. The third quarter increase is principally the effect on our
unrecognized tax benefits of proposed unfavorable adjustments from a state
examination for our 2005 through 2007 income tax returns partially offset in the
nine months by a decrease in the first quarter related to a favorable settlement
of an examination of 1998 through 2000. We do not anticipate a
significant change in unrecognized tax positions during the next
year.
We
recognize interest related to unrecognized tax benefits in “Interest expense”
and penalties in “General and administrative expenses”. At December
30, 2007 we had accrued interest and penalties of $3,328 and $247,
respectively. During the three months and nine months ended September
28, 2008, we recorded interest increases (decreases) of $56 and ($510) and
penalty increases of $268 and $268, respectively. The changes to
interest and penalties are principally the result of the state examinations
described above.
We
include unrecognized tax benefits and the related interest and penalties for
discontinued operations in “Current liabilities relating to discontinued
operations” in the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated balance
sheets. In the third quarter of 2008, examinations by three
jurisdictions were favorably settled and we recorded a benefit of $1,251 to
“Income (loss) from disposal of
discontinued operations, net of income taxes.” There were no
other significant changes to unrecognized tax benefits recorded in “Current
liabilities relating to discontinued operations” during the first nine months of
2008.
(12)
Income (Loss) per Share
Basic
income (loss) per share has been computed by dividing the allocated income or
loss for our Class A Common Stock and our Class B Common Stock by the weighted
average number of shares of each class. Both factors are presented in
the tables below. Net income for three month period ended September
30, 2007 was allocated between the Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock
based on the actual dividend payment ratio. Net loss for the
three-month period ended September 28, 2008 and the nine-month periods ended
September 30, 2007 and September 28, 2008 was allocated equally among each share
of Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock, resulting in the same loss per
share for each class.
Due to the merger with Wendy’s on
September 29, 2008, the number of outstanding shares has increased by
approximately 377,000,000, which will affect the earnings (loss) per share
computation in future periods (see Note 2). In addition, effective on
the date of the Wendy’s merger, our Class B Common Stock was converted into
Class A Common Stock.
Diluted
income per share for the three-month period ended September 30, 2007 has been
computed by dividing the allocated income for the Class A Common Stock and Class
B Common Stock by the weighted average number of shares of each class plus the
potential common share effects on each class of dilutive stock options and our
Class B restricted shares each computed using the treasury stock method as
presented in the table below. The shares used to calculate diluted
income per share for the three months ended September 30, 2007 exclude any
effect of the Company’s 5% convertible notes due 2023 (the “Convertible Notes”)
which would have been antidilutive since the after-tax interest on the
Convertible Notes per share of Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock
obtainable on conversion exceeded the reported basic income from continuing
operations per share. Diluted loss per share for the three-month
period ended September 28, 2008 and the nine-month periods ended September 30,
2007 and September 28, 2008 from continuing operations is not shown since the
effect of all potentially dilutive securities on the loss from continuing
operations per share would have been antidilutive. The basic and
diluted loss from discontinued operations per share for the nine-month period
ended September 30, 2007 was less than $.01 and, therefore, is not presented on
the condensed consolidated statements of operations.
Our
securities as of September 28, 2008 that could have a dilutive effect on any
future basic income per share calculations for periods subsequent to September
28, 2008 are (1) outstanding stock options which can be exercised into 885,000
shares and 5,322,000 shares of our Class A Common Stock and Class B Common
Stock, respectively, (2) 48,000 and 351,000 non-vested restricted shares of our
Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock, respectively, which principally
vest over three years and (3) $2,100 of Convertible Notes which are convertible
into 53,000 shares and 107,000 shares of our Class A Common Stock and Class B
Common Stock, respectively, as adjusted due to the dividend of the DFR common
stock to our stockholders paid on April 4, 2008. As noted above, in
connection with the merger with Wendy’s, all of our Class B Common Stock was
converted into Class A Common Stock.
Income
(loss) per share has been computed by allocating the income or (loss) as
follows:
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Class
A Common Stock:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
|
$ |
1,072 |
|
|
$ |
(4,170 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,334 |
) |
|
$ |
(27,380 |
) |
Discontinued
operations
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
380 |
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
1,072 |
|
|
$ |
(3,790 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,381 |
) |
|
$ |
(27,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class
B Common Stock:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
|
$ |
2,659 |
|
|
$ |
(9,196 |
) |
|
$ |
(11,748 |
) |
|
$ |
(60,362 |
) |
Discontinued
operations
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
839 |
|
|
|
(102 |
) |
|
|
839 |
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
2,659 |
|
|
$ |
(8,357 |
) |
|
$ |
(11,850 |
) |
|
$ |
(59,523 |
) |
The number of shares used to
calculate basic and diluted income (loss) per share were as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Class
A Common Stock:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
weighted average shares outstanding
|
|
|
28,882 |
|
|
|
28,905 |
|
|
|
28,821 |
|
|
|
28,903 |
|
Dilutive
effect of stock options
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Diluted
shares
|
|
|
28,997 |
|
|
|
28,905 |
|
|
|
28,821 |
|
|
|
28,903 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class
B Common Stock:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
weighted average shares outstanding
|
|
|
63,655 |
|
|
|
63,745 |
|
|
|
63,478 |
|
|
|
63,720 |
|
Dilutive
effect of stock options and restricted shares
|
|
|
707 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Diluted
Shares
|
|
|
64,362 |
|
|
|
63,745 |
|
|
|
63,478 |
|
|
|
63,720 |
|
(13) Other
Comprehensive Loss
The following is a summary of the
components of other comprehensive loss, net of income taxes and minority
interests:
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
3,731 |
|
|
$ |
(12,147 |
) |
|
$ |
(17,231 |
) |
|
$ |
(86,523 |
) |
Net
unrealized gains (losses) on available-for-sale securities
(a)
|
|
|
(1,569 |
) |
|
|
2,520 |
|
|
|
(8,636 |
) |
|
|
6,196 |
|
Net
unrealized gains (losses) on cash flow hedges (b)
|
|
|
(2,543 |
) |
|
|
486 |
|
|
|
(2,409 |
) |
|
|
55 |
|
Net
change in currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
381 |
|
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
651 |
|
|
|
(149 |
) |
Other
comprehensive loss
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
(9,184 |
) |
|
$ |
(27,625 |
) |
|
$ |
(80,421 |
) |
(a)
Net unrealized gains (losses) on available-for-sale
securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
holding gains (losses) arising during the
period
|
|
$ |
(2,145 |
) |
|
$ |
3,091 |
|
|
$ |
3,639 |
|
|
$ |
1,664 |
|
Reclassifications
of prior period unrealized holding (gains) losses into net income or
loss
|
|
|
(426 |
) |
|
|
872 |
|
|
|
(16,782 |
) |
|
|
8,262 |
|
Unrealized
holding gain arising from the reclassification of an investment previously
accounted for under the equity method to an available-for-sale
investment
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Change
in unrealized holding gains and losses arising during the period from
investments under the equity method of accounting
|
|
|
301 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(821 |
) |
|
|
(201 |
) |
|
|
|
(2,270 |
) |
|
|
3,963 |
|
|
|
(13,414 |
) |
|
|
9,725 |
|
Income
tax benefit (provision)
|
|
|
861 |
|
|
|
(1,443 |
) |
|
|
4,860 |
|
|
|
(3,529 |
) |
Minority
interests in change in unrealized holding gains and losses of a
consolidated subsidiary
|
|
|
(160 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(82 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
$ |
(1,569 |
) |
|
$ |
2,520 |
|
|
$ |
(8,636 |
) |
|
$ |
6,196 |
|
(b)
Net unrealized gains (losses) on cash flow hedges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
holding losses arising during the period
|
|
$ |
(1,094 |
) |
|
$ |
(9 |
) |
|
$ |
(296 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,526 |
) |
Reclassifications
of prior period unrealized holding (gains) losses into net income or
loss
|
|
|
(513 |
) |
|
|
804 |
|
|
|
(1,546 |
) |
|
|
1,613 |
|
Change
in unrealized holding gains and losses arising during the period from
investments under the equity method of accounting
|
|
|
(2,440 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(2,006 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
(4,047 |
) |
|
|
795 |
|
|
|
(3,848 |
) |
|
|
90 |
|
Income
tax benefit (provision)
|
|
|
1,504 |
|
|
|
(309 |
) |
|
|
1,439 |
|
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
|
$ |
(2,543 |
) |
|
$ |
486 |
|
|
$ |
(2,409 |
) |
|
$ |
55 |
|
Prior to
the Deerfield Sale (see Note 3) on December 21, 2007, we managed and internally
reported our operations as two business segments: (1) the operation and
franchising of restaurants (“Restaurants”) and (2) asset management (“Asset
Management”). We currently manage and internally report our
operations as one business segment; the operation and franchising of
restaurants. We evaluated segment performance and allocated resources
based on the segment’s earnings (loss) before interest, taxes, depreciation and
amortization (“EBITDA”). EBITDA, a non-GAAP measure, is defined
as operating profit (loss) as adjusted by depreciation and
amortization. In computing EBITDA and operating profit (loss),
interest expense and non-operating income
and expenses were not considered. General corporate assets consist
primarily of cash and cash equivalents, note receivable from related parties,
non-current investments, deferred costs and other assets and
properties.
The following is a summary of our
segment information:
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restaurants
|
|
$ |
307,273 |
|
|
$ |
310,371 |
|
|
$ |
893,421 |
|
|
$ |
926,239 |
|
Asset
Management
|
|
|
16,940 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
49,659 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Consolidated
revenues
|
|
$ |
324,213 |
|
|
$ |
310,371 |
|
|
$ |
943,080 |
|
|
$ |
926,239 |
|
EBITDA:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restaurants
(a)
|
|
$ |
44,507 |
|
|
$ |
44,186 |
|
|
$ |
119,820 |
|
|
$ |
110,319 |
|
Asset
Management
|
|
|
5,551 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
11,880 |
|
|
|
- |
|
General
corporate (a)
|
|
|
(8,092 |
) |
|
|
(9,688 |
) |
|
|
(115,316 |
) |
|
|
(25,830 |
) |
Consolidated
EBITDA
|
|
|
41,966 |
|
|
|
34,498 |
|
|
|
16,384 |
|
|
|
84,489 |
|
Depreciation
and amortization:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restaurants
|
|
|
14,661 |
|
|
|
20,455 |
|
|
|
43,146 |
|
|
|
51,975 |
|
Asset
Management
|
|
|
4,289 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8,003 |
|
|
|
- |
|
General
corporate
|
|
|
1,072 |
|
|
|
10,246 |
|
|
|
3,262 |
|
|
|
12,412 |
|
Consolidated
depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
20,022 |
|
|
|
30,701 |
|
|
|
54,411 |
|
|
|
64,387 |
|
Operating
profit (loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restaurants
(a)
|
|
|
29,846 |
|
|
|
23,731 |
|
|
|
76,674 |
|
|
|
58,344 |
|
Asset
Management
|
|
|
1,262 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3,877 |
|
|
|
- |
|
General
corporate (a)
|
|
|
(9,164 |
) |
|
|
(19,934 |
) |
|
|
(118,578 |
) |
|
|
(38,242 |
) |
Consolidated
operating profit (loss)
|
|
|
21,944 |
|
|
|
3,797 |
|
|
|
(38,027 |
) |
|
|
20,102 |
|
Interest
expense
|
|
|
(15,489 |
) |
|
|
(13,585 |
) |
|
|
(46,164 |
) |
|
|
(41,020 |
) |
Investment
(loss) income, net
|
|
|
(1,083 |
) |
|
|
(1,376 |
) |
|
|
39,690 |
|
|
|
(76,497 |
) |
Other
income (expense), net
|
|
|
1,101 |
|
|
|
1,062 |
|
|
|
5,866 |
|
|
|
(2,279 |
) |
Consolidated
income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes and minority
interests
|
|
$ |
6,473 |
|
|
$ |
(10,102 |
) |
|
$ |
(38,635 |
) |
|
$ |
(99,694 |
) |
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Identifiable
assets:
|
|
|
|
Restaurants
|
|
$ |
1,123,428 |
|
General
corporate
|
|
|
198,742 |
|
Consolidated
total assets
|
|
$ |
1,322,170 |
|
(a)
|
During
the third quarter of 2008, Wendy’s/Arby’s entered into an intercompany
agreement documenting an arrangement under which our restaurant segment
(ARG) is and has been providing management services (including executive,
legal, accounting, financial reporting, treasury, financial planning and
tax) to our corporate segment (Wendy’s/Arby’s) for the 2008 fiscal year.
In consideration for the provision of these services, Wendy’s/Arby’s
agreed to pay an amount equal to the direct costs incurred by ARG plus 5%.
For the first nine months of 2008, $4,854 was charged to and paid by
Wendy’s/ Arby’s to ARG.
|
(15)
|
Transactions
with Related Parties
|
We
continue to have related party transactions of the same nature and general
magnitude as those described in Note 28 to the consolidated financial statements
contained in the Form 10-K, other than those related to the recently completed
Corporate Restructuring (See Note 7) and those mentioned below:
Final
Liquidating Distribution of Triarc Deerfield Holdings, LLC
As defined in an equity arrangement
further described in Note 1 to our consolidated financial statements contained
in our Form 10-K, the Deerfield Sale was an event of dissolution of Triarc
Deerfield Holdings, LLC (“TDH”), a former subsidiary of ours. As of
the date of liquidation, $743 payable to the minority shareholders of TDH (which
included former members of our management) was distributed to them in connection
with its dissolution during April 2008.
Sublease
to affiliate of Former Executives
As described in Note 28 to the
consolidated financial statements contained in our 2007 Form 10-K, the
Management Company had subleased one of the floors of our former New York
Headquarters. As of July 1, 2008, we entered into an agreement under
which this same affiliate is subleasing additional office space in our former
New York headquarters. Under the terms of that agreement, the affiliate
subleased through the remaining approximately four-year term of the prime lease
with annual rent of approximately $397, equal to the rent we incur under the
prime lease.
Equities
Account Transactions
During
the third quarter of 2008, 251,320 shares of Wendy’s stock, which were included
in the Equities Account, were sold to the Management Company at the closing
market value as of the day we decided to sell the shares. The sale resulted in a
loss of $38 and the proceeds of $5,740 were retained in the Equities Account as
“Restricted cash equivalents.”
Additionally,
during the 2008 third quarter $30,000 of restricted cash in the Equities Account
was transferred to Wendy’s/Arby’s. We are obligated to return this
amount to the Equities Account by December 31, 2008.
Distributions
to 280 BT Holdings LLC minority shareholders
As
described in Note 28 to the consolidated financial statements contained in our
2007 Form 10-K, the Company has an 80.1% ownership percentage in 280 BT Holdings
LLC (“280 BT”) with the remainder owned by former Company management. During the
third quarter 2008, we received distributions from certain of the investments
that are owned by 280 BT. The minority portions of these distributions were then
further distributed to 280 BT’s minority shareholders.
Sale
of Helicopter Interest
As
described in Note 28 to the consolidated financial statements contained in our
2007 Form 10-K, the Company previously granted the Management Company the right,
at its option, to assume the Company’s 25% fractional interest in a helicopter
(the “Helicopter Interest”) on October 1, 2008. The Management Company exercised
its option to assume the Helicopter Interest on that date. Therefore, it has
paid the Company $1,860 which is equal to the value, as defined, that the
Company would have received under the related agreement if the Company exercised
its right to sell its Helicopter Interest to the broker on October 1, 2008. At
September 28, 2008, the Helicopter Interest of $1,860 is included in “Prepaid
expenses and other current assets” in the accompanying unaudited condensed
consolidated balance sheet.
(16)
|
Legal
and Environmental Matters
|
In 2001,
a vacant property owned by Adams Packing Association, Inc. (“Adams”), an
inactive subsidiary of ours, was listed by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency on the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Information System (“CERCLIS”) list of known or suspected contaminated
sites. The CERCLIS listing appears to have been based on an
allegation that a former tenant of Adams conducted drum recycling operations at
the site from some time prior to 1971 until the late 1970s. The
business operations of Adams were sold in December 1992. In February
2003, Adams and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (the “FDEP”)
agreed to a consent order that provided for development of a work plan for
further investigation of the site and limited remediation of the identified
contamination. In May 2003, the FDEP approved the work plan submitted
by Adams’ environmental consultant and during 2004 the work under that plan was
completed. Adams submitted its contamination assessment report to the
FDEP in March 2004. In August 2004, the FDEP agreed to a monitoring
plan consisting of two sampling events which occurred in January and June 2005
and the results were submitted to the
FDEP for
its review. In November 2005, Adams received a letter from the FDEP
identifying certain open issues with respect to the property. The
letter did not specify whether any further actions are required to be taken by
Adams. Adams sought clarification from the FDEP in order to attempt
to resolve this matter. On May 1, 2007, the FDEP sent a letter
clarifying their prior correspondence and reiterated the open issues identified
in their November 2005 letter. In addition, the FDEP offered Adams
the option of voluntarily taking part in a recently adopted state program that
could lessen site clean up standards, should such a clean up be required after a
mandatory further study and site assessment report. With our
consultants and outside counsel, we reviewed this option and sent our response
and proposed work plan to FDEP on April 24, 2008 and are awaiting FDEP’s
response. Nonetheless, based on amounts spent prior to 2007 of
approximately $1,667 for all of these costs and after taking into consideration
various legal defenses available to us, including Adams, we expect that the
final resolution of this matter will not have a material effect on our financial
position or results of operations.
On April
25, 2008, a putative class action complaint was filed by Ethel Guiseppone, on
behalf of herself and others similarly situated, against Wendy’s, its directors,
the Company (then known as Triarc Companies, Inc.), and Trian Partners, in the
Franklin County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas. A motion for leave to file an
amended complaint was filed on June 19, 2008. The proposed amended complaint
alleged breach of fiduciary duties arising out of the Wendy’s board of
directors’ search for a merger partner and out of its approval of the merger
agreement on April 23, 2008, and failure to disclose material information
related to the merger in Amendment No. 3 to the Form S-4 under the Securities
Act of 1933 (the “Form S-4”). The proposed amended complaint sought
certification of the proceeding as a class action; preliminary and permanent
injunctions against disenfranchising the purported class and consummating the
merger; a declaration that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties; costs
and attorneys fees; and any other relief the court deems proper and
just.
Also on
April 25, 2008, a putative class action and derivative complaint was filed by
Cindy Henzel, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, and
derivatively on behalf of Wendy’s, against Wendy’s and its directors in the
Franklin County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas. A motion for leave to file an
amended complaint was filed on June 16, 2008. The proposed amended complaint
alleges breach of fiduciary duties arising out of the Wendy’s board of
directors’ search for a merger partner and out of its approval of the
merger agreement on April 23, 2008, and failure to disclose material information
related to the merger in the Form S-4. The proposed amended complaint seeks
certification of the proceeding as a derivative and class action; an injunction
against consummating the merger and requiring the defendants to promptly hold an
annual meeting and to seek another merger partner; rescission of any part of the
merger agreement already implemented; a declaration that the defendants breached
their fiduciary duties; costs and attorneys fees; and any other relief the court
deems proper and just.
On May
22, 2008, a putative class action complaint was filed by Ronald Donald Smith, on
behalf of himself and others similarly situated, against Wendy’s and its
directors in the Franklin County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas. A motion for leave
to file an amended complaint was filed on June 30, 2008. The proposed amended
complaint alleged breach of fiduciary duties arising out of the Wendy’s board of
directors’ search for a merger partner and out of its approval of the merger
agreement on April 23, 2008, and failure to disclose material information
related to the merger in the Form S-4. The proposed amended complaint sought
certification of the proceeding as a derivative and class action; an injunction
against consummating the merger and requiring the defendants to promptly hold an
annual meeting and to seek another merger partner; rescission of any part of the
merger agreement already implemented; a declaration that the defendants breached
their fiduciary duties; costs and attorneys fees; and any other relief the court
deems proper and just.
On June
13, 2008, a putative class action complaint was filed by Peter D. Ravanis and
Dorothea Ravanis, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, against
Wendy’s, its directors, and Triarc Companies, Inc. in the Supreme Court of the
State of New York, New York County. An amended complaint was filed on June 20,
2008. The amended complaint alleges breach of fiduciary duties arising out of
the Wendy’s board of directors’ search for a merger partner and out of its
approval of the merger agreement on April 23, 2008, and failure to disclose
material information related to the merger in the Form S-4. The amended
complaint seeks certification of the proceeding as a class action; preliminary
and permanent injunctions against consummating the merger; other equitable
relief; attorneys’ fees; and any other relief the court deems proper and just.
All parties to this case have jointly requested that the court stay the action
pending resolution of the Ohio cases.
On July
9, 2008, the parties to the three Ohio actions described above filed a
stipulation and proposed order that would consolidate the cases, provide for the
proposed amended complaint in the Henzel case to be the operative complaint in
each of the cases, designate one law firm as lead plaintiffs’ counsel, and
establish an answer date for the defendants in the consolidated case. The court
entered the order as proposed in all three cases on July 9, 2008.
On August
13, 2008, counsel for the parties to the Guiseppone, Henzel, Smith and Ravanis
cases described above entered into a memorandum of understanding in which they
agreed upon the terms of a settlement of all such lawsuits, which would include
the dismissal with prejudice, and release, of all claims against all the
defendants, including Wendy’s, its directors, us and
Trian
Partners. In connection with the settlement, Wendy’s agreed to make certain
additional disclosures to its shareholders, which were contained in the Form S-4
and to pay plaintiffs’ legal fees.
The
memorandum of understanding also contemplates that the parties will enter into a
stipulation of settlement. There can be no assurance that the parties will
ultimately enter into such stipulation of settlement or that the court will
approve the settlement even if the parties were to enter into such stipulation.
In such event, the proposed settlement as contemplated by the memorandum of
understanding may be terminated.
The
defendants believe that the Guiseppone, Henzel, Smith and Ravanis cases
described above are without merit and intend to vigorously defend them in the
event that the parties do not enter in the stipulation of settlement or if court
approval is not obtained. While we do not believe that these actions will have a
material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations,
unfavorable rulings could occur. Were an unfavorable ruling to occur, there
exists the possibility of a material adverse impact on our results of operations
for the period in which the ruling occurs or for future periods.
In
addition to the matters described above, we are involved in other litigation and
claims incidental to our current and prior businesses. We have
reserves for all of our legal and environmental matters aggregating $617 as of
September 28, 2008. Although the outcome of these matters cannot be
predicted with certainty and some of these matters may be disposed of
unfavorably to us, based on currently available information, including legal
defenses available to us, and given the aforementioned reserves and our
insurance coverages, we do not believe that the outcome of these legal and
environmental matters will have a material adverse effect on our condensed
consolidated financial position or results of operations.
(17) Accounting
Standards
Accounting
Standards Adopted during 2008
We
adopted SFAS 157 during 2008. During the 2008 third quarter, FSP FAS
157-3 was issued and adopted which amends SFAS 157 by giving further guidance in
determining fair value of a financial asset when there is no active market for
such assets at the measurement date. See Note 4 for further
discussion regarding these adoptions.
In
February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for
Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities – Including an Amendment of FASB
Statement No. 115” (“SFAS 159”). SFAS 159 does not mandate but
permits the measurement of many financial instruments and certain other items at
fair value in order to provide reporting entities the opportunity to mitigate
volatility in reported earnings, without having to apply complex hedge
accounting provisions, caused by measuring related assets and liabilities
differently. SFAS 159 requires the reporting of unrealized gains and
losses on items for which the fair value option has been elected in earnings at
each subsequent reporting date. SFAS 159 also requires expanded
disclosures related to its application. SFAS 159 was effective
commencing with our first fiscal quarter of 2008 (see Note 8). We did
not elect the fair value option described in SFAS 159 for financial instruments
and certain other items. We did, however, adopt the provisions of SFAS 159 which
relate to the amendment of FASB Statement No. 115, “Accounting for Certain
Investments in Debt and Equity Securities,” which applies to all entities with
available-for-sale and trading securities in the first quarter of 2008 (see Note
4). These provisions of SFAS 159 require separate presentations of
the fair value of available for sale securities and trading
securities. In addition, cash flows from trading security
transactions are classified based on the nature and purpose for which the
securities were acquired. The adoption of these provisions did not
have an impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
Accounting
Standards Not Yet Adopted
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141 (revised 2007), “Business
Combinations” (“SFAS 141(R)”), and SFAS No. 160, “Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements – an amendment of ARB No. 51” (“SFAS
160”). These statements change the way companies account for business
combinations and noncontrolling interests by, among other things, requiring (1)
more assets and liabilities to be measured at fair value as of the acquisition
date, including a valuation of the entire company being acquired where less than
100% of the company is acquired, (2) an acquirer in preacquisition periods to
expense all acquisition-related costs, (3) changes in acquisition related
deferred tax balances after the completion of the purchase price allocation be
recognized in the statement of operations as opposed to goodwill and (4)
noncontrolling interests in subsidiaries initially to be measured at fair value
and classified as a separate component of stockholders’ equity. These
statements are to be applied prospectively beginning with our 2009 fiscal
year. However, SFAS 160 requires entities to apply the presentation
and disclosure requirements retrospectively for all periods
presented. Both standards prohibit early adoption. In
addition, in April 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position No. FAS 142-3,
“Determination of the Useful Life of Intangible Assets” (“FSP FAS
142-3”). In determining the useful life of acquired intangible
assets, FSP FAS 142-3 removes the requirement to consider whether an intangible
asset can be renewed without substantial cost or material modifications to the
existing terms and conditions and,
instead, requires an entity to consider its own historical experience in
renewing similar arrangements. FSP FAS 142-3 also requires expanded
disclosure related to the determination of intangible asset useful
lives. This staff position is effective for financial statements
issued for fiscal years beginning in our 2009 fiscal year and may impact any
intangible assets we acquire. The application of SFAS 160 will
require reclassification of minority interests from a liability to a component
of stockholders’ equity in our consolidated financial statements beginning in
our 2009 fiscal year. Further, all of the statements referred to
above could have a significant impact on the accounting for any future
acquisitions starting with our 2009 fiscal year. The impact will
depend upon the nature and terms of such future acquisitions, if
any. These statements will not have an effect on our accounting for
the Wendy’s merger except for any potential adjustments to deferred taxes
included in the allocation of the purchase price after such allocation has been
finalized.
In March
2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 161, "Disclosures about Derivative Instruments
and Hedging Activities" ("SFAS 161"). SFAS 161 requires companies with
derivative instruments to disclose information that should enable
financial-statement users to understand how and why a company uses derivative
instruments, how derivative instruments and related hedged items are accounted
for under SFAS No. 133, "Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities" (“SFAS 133”) and how these items affect a company's financial
position, results of operations and cash flows. SFAS 161 affects only these
disclosures and does not change the accounting for derivatives. SFAS
161 is to be applied prospectively beginning with the first quarter of our 2009
fiscal year. We are currently evaluating the impact, if any, that SFAS 161 will have on the disclosures in our
consolidated financial statements.
In May 2008, the FASB issued SFAS
No. 162, “Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles” (“SFAS
162”). This statement is intended to improve financial reporting by identifying
a consistent framework, or hierarchy, for selecting accounting principles to be
used in preparing financial statements that are presented in conformity with
GAAP. This statement will become effective during our 2008 fourth
quarter. We do not expect any significant impact on our consolidated
financial statements upon implementation of this pronouncement.
Item
2. Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
Effective
September 29, 2008, in conjunction with the merger with Wendy’s International,
Inc. (“Wendy’s”) described below under “Introduction and Executive Overview –
Merger with Wendy’s International, Inc.”, the corporate name of Triarc
Companies, Inc. (“Triarc”) changed to Wendy’s/Arby’s Group, Inc.
(“Wendy’s/Arby’s” or, together with its subsidiaries, the “Company” or
“We”). This “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations” of the Company should be read in
conjunction with our accompanying unaudited condensed
consolidated financial statements included elsewhere herein and “Item 7.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December
30, 2007 (the “Form 10-K”). Item 7 of our Form 10-K describes the
application of our critical accounting policies for which there have been no
significant changes as of September 28, 2008. Certain statements we
make under this Item 2 constitute “forward-looking statements” under the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. See “Special Note Regarding
Forward-Looking Statements and Projections” in “Part II – Other Information”
preceding “Item 1.” Because the merger with Wendy’s did not occur
until the 2008 fourth quarter, the results of operations of Wendy’s are not
included in this report. The results of operations discussed below
will not be indicative of future results due to the consummation of the merger
transaction with Wendy’s as well as the 2007 sale of our interest in Deerfield
& Company LLC (“Deerfield”) discussed below.
Introduction
and Executive Overview
We
currently operate in one business segment—the restaurant business through our
Company-owned and franchised Arby’s restaurants. Prior to December
21, 2007, we also operated in the asset management business through our 63.6%
capital interest in Deerfield. On December 21, 2007, we sold our
capital interest in Deerfield (the “Deerfield Sale”) to Deerfield Capital Corp.,
a real estate investment trust (“DFR”). As a result of the Deerfield
Sale, our 2008 financial statements include only the financial position, results
of operations and cash flows from the restaurant business.
In April
2007 we announced that we would be closing our New York headquarters and
combining its corporate operations with our restaurant operations in Atlanta,
Georgia (the “Corporate Restructuring”). The Corporate Restructuring included
the transfer of substantially all of our senior executive responsibilities to
the executive team of Arby’s Restaurant Group, Inc. (“ARG”), a wholly-owned
subsidiary of ours, in Atlanta,
Georgia. This transition was completed in early 2008. Accordingly, to
facilitate this transition, the Company entered into negotiated contractual
settlements (the “Contractual Settlements”) with our Chairman, who was also our
then Chief Executive Officer, and our Vice Chairman, who was our then President
and Chief Operating Officer, (collectively, the “Former Executives”) evidencing
the termination of their employment agreements and providing for their
resignation as executive officers as of June 29, 2007 (the “Separation
Date”). In addition, we sold properties and other assets at our
former New York headquarters in 2007 to an affiliate of the Former Executives
and we incurred charges for the transition severance arrangements of other New
York headquarters’ executives and employees who continued to provide services as
employees through the 2008 first quarter.
In our
restaurant business, we derive revenues in the form of sales by our
Company-owned restaurants and franchise revenues which include (1) royalty
income from franchisees, (2) franchise and related fees and (3) rental income
from properties leased to franchisees. Our revenues will
significantly increase in the 2008 fourth quarter due to the merger with Wendy’s
that occurred on September 29, 2008. While approximately 78% of our
existing Arby’s royalty agreements and substantially all of our new domestic
royalty agreements provide for royalties of 4% of franchise revenues, our
average royalty rate was 3.6% for the nine months ended September 28,
2008. In our former asset management business, revenues were
generated through the date of the Deerfield Sale in the form of asset management
and related fees from our management of (1) collateralized debt and
collateralized loan obligation vehicles (“CDOs”), and (2) investment funds and
private investment accounts (“Funds”), including DFR.
In our
discussions of “Sales” and “Franchise Revenues” below, we discuss same-store
sales. Beginning in our 2008 first quarter, we are reporting
same-store sales commencing after a store has been open for fifteen continuous
months (the “Fifteen Month Method”) consistent with the metrics used by our
management for internal reporting and analysis. Prior thereto, and
including the 2007 fiscal year, the calculation of same-store sales commenced
after a store was open for twelve continuous months (the “Twelve Month
Method”). The table summarizing the results of operations for the
current quarter below provides the same-store sales percentage change using the
new Fifteen Month Method, as well as our former Twelve Month
Method.
Our
primary goal is to enhance the value of our Company by increasing the revenues
of our restaurant business, which is expected to include (1) opening additional
Company-owned Arby’s and Wendy’s restaurants through acquisitions and
development, effective national and local advertising initiatives, adding new
menu offerings, expansion of the breakfast daypart to a
majority of our Arby’s restaurants over the next two to three fiscal years and
implementing operational initiatives targeted at improving service levels and
convenience and (2) the possibility of other restaurant brand
acquisitions.
We also
maintain an investment portfolio principally from the investment of our excess
cash with the objective of generating investment income. In December
2005 we invested $75.0 million in an account (the “Equities Account”) which is
managed by a management company (the “Management Company”) formed by the Former
Executives and a director, who was also our former Vice Chairman (collectively,
the “Principals”). The Equities Account is invested principally in
equity securities, including derivative instruments, of a limited number of
publicly-traded companies. In addition, the Equities Account invests
in market put options in order to lessen the impact of significant market
downturns. Investment income (loss) from this account includes
realized investment gains (losses) from marketable security transactions,
realized and unrealized gains (losses) on derivative instruments, other than
temporary losses, interest and dividends. The Equities Account,
including restricted cash equivalents and equity derivatives, had a fair value
of $63.2 million as of September 28, 2008. This amount excludes $30.0
million of restricted cash transferred from the Equities Account to
Wendy’s/Arby’s in the 2008 third quarter, which we currently intend to return to
the Equities Account by December 31, 2008. As of October 31, 2008, as
of a result of continuing weakness in the economy during the fourth quarter of
2008 and its effect on the financial market, there has been a decrease of
approximately $11.0 million in the fair value of the available for sale
securities held in the Equities Account as compared to their value on September
28, 2008.
Our
restaurant business has recently experienced trends in the following
areas:
Revenues
|
·
|
Significant
decreases in general consumer confidence in the economy as well as
decreases in many consumers’ discretionary income caused by factors such
as deteriorating financial markets, high fuel and food costs and a
continuing softening of the economy, including the real estate
market;
|
|
·
|
Continuing
price competition in the quick service restaurant (“QSR”) industry, as
evidenced by (1) value menu concepts, which offer comparatively lower
prices on some menu items, (2) combination meal concepts, which offer a
complete meal at an aggregate price lower than the price of the individual
food and beverage items, (3) the use of coupons and other price
discounting and (4) many recent product promotions focused on the lower
prices of certain menu items;
|
|
·
|
Competitive
pressures due to extended hours of operation by many QSR competitors,
including breakfast and late night
hours;
|
|
·
|
Competitive
pressures from operators outside the QSR industry, such as the deli
sections and in-store cafes of major grocery and other retail store
chains, convenience stores and casual dining outlets offering prepared and
take-out food purchases;
|
|
·
|
Increased
availability to consumers of new product choices, including (1) healthy
products driven by a greater consumer awareness of nutritional issues, (2)
new products that tend to include larger portion sizes and more
ingredients; (3) beverage programs which offer a wider selection of
premium non-carbonated beverages, including coffee and tea products and
(4) sandwiches with perceived higher levels of freshness, quality and
customization; and
|
|
·
|
Competitive
pressures from an increasing number of franchise opportunities seeking to
attract qualified franchisees.
|
|
·
|
Higher
commodity prices which have increased our food
costs;
|
|
·
|
Higher
fuel costs, although recently moderating, which have caused increases in
our utility costs and the cost of goods we purchase under distribution
contracts that became effective in the second quarter of
2007;
|
|
·
|
Federal,
state and local legislative activity, such as minimum wage increases and
mandated health and welfare benefits which have and are expected to
continue to result in increased wages and related fringe benefits,
including health care and other insurance costs;
and
|
|
·
|
Legal
or regulatory activity related to nutritional content or menu labeling
which could result in increased
costs.
|
|
·
|
Increased
competition among QSR competitors and other businesses for available
development sites and higher development costs associated with those
sites.
|
|
Tightening
of the overall credit markets and higher borrowing costs in the lending
markets typically used to finance new unit development and
remodels. These tightened credit conditions could negatively
impact the renewal of franchisee licenses as well as the ability of a
franchisee to meet its commitments under development, rental and franchise
license agreements.
|
We
experience the effects of these trends directly to the extent they affect the
operations of our Company-owned restaurants and indirectly to the extent they
affect sales at our franchised locations and, accordingly, the royalties, rental
income and franchise fees we receive from them.
Merger
with Wendy’s International, Inc.
On
September 29, 2008, Triarc and Wendy’s completed their previously announced
merger in an all-stock transaction in which Wendy’s shareholders received a
fixed ratio of 4.25 shares of Wendy’s/Arby’s class A common stock for each
Wendy’s common share owned.
In the
merger, approximately 377,000,000 shares of Wendy’s/Arby’s common stock were
issued to Wendy’s shareholders. The merger value of approximately
$2.5 billion for financial reporting purposes is based on the 4.25 conversion
factor of the Wendy’s outstanding shares as well as previously issued restricted
stock awards both at a value of $6.57 per share which represents the average
closing market price of Triarc Class A Common Stock two days before and after
the merger announcement date of April 24, 2008. Wendy’s shareholders
held approximately 80%, in the aggregate, of the outstanding Wendy’s/Arby’s
common stock immediately following the merger. In addition, effective
on the date of the Wendy’s merger, our Class B Common Stock was converted into
Class A Common Stock.
The
merger will be accounted for using the purchase method of accounting in
accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 141,
“Business Combinations”. In accordance with this standard, we have
concluded that Wendy’s/Arby’s will be the acquirer for financial accounting
purposes. The total merger value will be allocated to Wendy’s net
tangible and intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on their
estimated fair values with the excess recognized as goodwill. Wendy’s
operating results will be included in our financial statements beginning on the
merger date.
Outstanding
Wendy’s stock options and other equity awards were converted upon completion of
the merger into stock options and equity awards with respect to Wendy’s/Arby’s
common stock, based on the 4.25:1 exchange ratio. As of the merger
date, all outstanding Wendy’s performance units became fully vested at the
highest level of performance objectives and were settled in cash for $6.2
million in October 2008, based on the fair market value of Wendy’s common shares
at the time of the merger.
As of
September 28, 2008, our deferred costs related to the merger, which will be
included in the total consideration to be allocated to the assets acquired and
liabilities assumed, were $18.5 million and are included in “Deferred costs and
other assets” on the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated balance
sheet.
Certain
pre-merger executive and other officers of Wendy’s had employment agreements
which included change in control provisions. The total value of these
provisions at the merger date was $36.7 million. Prior to the
completion of the merger, the full amount was transferred into a rabbi trust and
will be paid to each executive in accordance with the terms of their respective
agreements.
The
Wendy’s and Arby’s brands will continue to operate independently, with
headquarters in Dublin, Ohio and Atlanta, Georgia, respectively. A consolidated
support center will be based in Atlanta, Georgia and will oversee all public
company responsibilities as well as other shared service functions. The combined
company had 10,360 systemwide restaurants in 50 states and 21 foreign countries
and territories as of September 28, 2008, of which 2,577 were owned and operated
by Wendy’s/Arby’s and 7,783 were owned and operated by independent
franchisees.
The
Deerfield Sale
On
December 21, 2007, we completed the sale of our majority capital interest in
Deerfield resulting in non-cash proceeds aggregating $134.6 million consisting
of 9,629,368 shares of convertible preferred stock of DFR with a then estimated
fair value of $88.4 million and $48.0 million principal amount of series A
senior secured notes of a subsidiary of DFR due in December 2012 (the “DFR
Notes”) with a then estimated fair value of $46.2 million. We also
retained ownership of 205,642 common shares in DFR as part of a pro rata
distribution to the members of Deerfield prior to the Deerfield
Sale. The Deerfield Sale resulted in a pretax gain of $40.2 million
which was recorded in the fourth quarter of 2007.
The DFR
Notes bear interest at the three-month LIBOR (3.76% at September 26, 2008) plus
5% through December 31, 2009, increasing 0.5% each quarter from January 1, 2010
through June 30, 2011 and 0.25% each quarter from July 1, 2011 through their
maturity. The DFR Notes are secured by certain equity interests of
DFR and certain of its subsidiaries. The $1.8 million original
imputed discount on the DFR Notes is being accreted to “Other income (expense),
net” using the interest rate method. The DFR Notes, net of
unamortized discount, are reflected as “Notes receivable”.
Conversion
of Convertible Preferred Stock and Dividend of DFR Common Stock
On March
11, 2008, DFR stockholders approved the one-for-one conversion of all its
outstanding convertible preferred stock into DFR common stock which converted
the 9,629,368 preferred shares we held into a like number of shares of common
stock. On March 11, 2008, our Board of Directors approved the distribution of
our 9,835,010 shares of DFR common stock, which also included the 205,642 common
shares of DFR discussed above, to our stockholders. The dividend, which was
valued at $14.5 million, was paid on April 4, 2008 to holders of record of
our class A common stock (the “Class A Common Stock”) and our class B
common stock (the “Class B Common Stock”) on March 29,
2008.
Other
than Temporary Losses and Equity in Losses of DFR
On March
18, 2008, in response to unanticipated credit and liquidity events in the first
quarter of 2008, DFR announced that it was repositioning its investment
portfolio to focus on agency-only residential mortgage-backed securities and
away from its principal investing segment to its asset management segment with
its fee-based revenue streams. In addition, it stated that during the
first quarter of 2008, its portfolio was adversely impacted by deterioration of
the global credit markets and, as a result, it sold $2.8 billion of its agency
and $1.3 billion of its AAA-rated non-agency mortgage-backed securities and
reduced the net notional amount of interest rate swaps used to hedge a portion
of its mortgage-backed securities by $4.2 billion, all at a net after-tax loss
of $294.3 million to DFR.
Based on
the events described above and their negative effect on the market price of DFR
common stock, we concluded that the fair value and, therefore, the carrying
value of our investment in the 9,629,368 common shares, which were received upon
the conversion of the convertible preferred stock as of March 11, 2008, as well
as the 205,642 common shares which were distributed to us in connection with the
Deerfield Sale, were impaired. As a result, as of March 11, 2008, we recorded an
other than temporary loss which is included in “Investment (loss) income, net,”
for the nine months ended September 28, 2008 of $67.6 million (without tax
benefit as described below) which included $11.1 million of pre-tax unrealized
holding losses previously recorded as of December 30, 2007 and included in
“Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)”, a component of stockholder’s
equity. These common shares were considered available-for-sale securities
due to the limited period they were to be held as of March 11, 2008 (the
“Determination Date”) before the dividend distribution of the shares to our
stockholders on April 4, 2008. We also recorded an additional
impairment charge from March 11, 2008 through March 29, 2008 of $0.5 million. As
a result of the dividend, the income tax loss that resulted from the decline in
value of our investment of $68.1 million is not deductible for income tax
purposes and no income tax benefit was recorded related to this
loss.
Additionally,
from December 31, 2007 through the Determination Date, we recorded approximately
$0.8 million of equity in net losses of DFR which are included in “Other income
(expense), net” for the nine months ended September 28, 2008 related to our
investment in the 205,642 common shares of DFR discussed above which were
accounted for on the equity method through the Determination Date.
The
dislocation in the mortgage sector and continuing weakness in the broader
financial market has adversely impacted, and may continue to adversely impact,
DFR’s cash flows and DFR has reported operating losses for the first six months
of 2008. However, we have received timely payment of all three
quarterly interest payments due to date. Additionally, on October 15,
2008 we received a $1.1 million dividend on the convertible preferred stock
which we previously held. Based on the Deerfield Sale agreement,
payment of a dividend by DFR on this preferred stock was dependent on DFR’s
board of directors declaring and paying a dividend on DFR’s common stock. The
first dividend to be declared on their common stock following the date of the
Deerfield Sale was declared in our 2008 third quarter and paid on October 15,
2008. Therefore, during the 2008 third quarter, we recognized the
dividend income from DFR. DFR qualified for REIT status in previous
quarters; however, on October 2, 2008, DFR announced, among other things, its
conversion to a C corporation and the termination of its REIT
status. Updated financial information from DFR for their 2008 third
quarter ended September 30, 2008 will not be available until the filing of DFR’s
Form 10-Q. Based on publicly available information and the other
factors discussed above, we believe the principal amount of the DFR Notes is
fully collectible.
Presentation
of Financial Information
We report
on a fiscal year consisting of 52 or 53 weeks ending on the Sunday closest to
December 31. Our third quarter of fiscal 2007 commenced on July
2, 2007 and ended on September 30, 2007 (the “three months ended September 30,
2007” or the “2007 third quarter”). Our third quarter of fiscal 2008
commenced on June 30, 2008 and ended on September 28, 2008 (the “three months
ended September 28, 2008” or the “2008 third quarter”). Our first
nine months of fiscal 2007 commenced on January 1, 2007 and ended on September
30, 2007 (the “nine months ended September 30, 2007” or the “2007 first nine
months”). Our first nine months of fiscal 2008 commenced on December
31, 2007 and ended on September 28, 2008 (the “nine months ended September 28,
2008” or the “2008 first nine months”). Each quarter contained 13
weeks and each nine-month period contained 39 weeks. Our 2007 third quarter and
first nine months included the calendar basis reported results of
Deerfield. The difference in reporting basis is not material to our
condensed consolidated financials statements. With the exception of
Deerfield, all references to years, nine-month periods, and quarters relate to
fiscal periods rather than calendar periods.
Results
of Operations
Three
Months Ended September 28, 2008 Compared with Three Months Ended September 30,
2007
Presented
below is a table that summarizes our results of operations and compares the
amount and percent of the change between the 2007 third quarter and the 2008
third quarter. Certain percentage changes between these quarters are
considered not measurable or not meaningful (“n/m”).
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
(In
Millions Except Restaurant Count and Percentages)
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales
|
|
$ |
285.5 |
|
|
$ |
287.6 |
|
|
$ |
2.1 |
|
|
|
0.7%
|
|
Franchise
revenues
|
|
|
21.8 |
|
|
|
22.8 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
4.6%
|
|
Asset
management and related fees
|
|
|
16.9 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(16.9 |
) |
|
|
(100.0)%
|
|
|
|
|
324.2 |
|
|
|
310.4 |
|
|
|
(13.8 |
) |
|
|
(4.3)%
|
|
Costs
and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
210.9 |
|
|
|
222.2 |
|
|
|
11.3 |
|
|
|
5.4%
|
|
Cost
of services
|
|
|
6.6 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(6.6 |
) |
|
|
(100.0)%
|
|
Advertising
|
|
|
20.9 |
|
|
|
17.7 |
|
|
|
(3.2 |
) |
|
|
(15.3)%
|
|
General
and administrative
|
|
|
42.0 |
|
|
|
36.1 |
|
|
|
(5.9 |
) |
|
|
(14.0)%
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
20.0 |
|
|
|
30.7 |
|
|
|
10.7 |
|
|
|
53.5%
|
|
Facilities
relocation and corporate restructuring
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(1.9 |
) |
|
|
n/m
|
|
|
|
|
302.2 |
|
|
|
306.6 |
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
|
1.5%
|
|
Operating
profit
|
|
|
22.0 |
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
|
|
(18.2 |
) |
|
|
(82.7)%
|
|
Interest
expense
|
|
|
(15.5 |
) |
|
|
(13.6 |
) |
|
|
(2.1 |
) |
|
|
(13.5)%
|
|
Investment
loss, net
|
|
|
(1.1 |
) |
|
|
(1.4 |
) |
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
(27.3)%
|
|
Other
income, net
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
-
|
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations before income taxes and minority
interests
|
|
|
6.5 |
|
|
|
(10.1 |
) |
|
|
(16.6 |
) |
|
|
n/m
|
|
Provision
for income taxes
|
|
|
(4.2 |
) |
|
|
(2.9 |
) |
|
|
1.3 |
|
|
|
31.0%
|
|
Minority
interests in (income) loss of consolidated subsidiaries
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
(1.7 |
) |
|
|
n/m
|
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
(13.3 |
) |
|
|
(17.0 |
) |
|
|
n/m
|
|
Income
from disposal of discontinued operations, net of income
taxes
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
100.0%
|
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
3.7 |
|
|
$ |
(12.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(15.8 |
) |
|
|
n/m
|
|
Certain
items as a percentage of sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
73.9%
|
|
|
|
77.3%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertising
|
|
|
7.3%
|
|
|
|
6.2%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restaurant
Margin (as defined in “Restaurant Margin” below)
|
|
|
18.8%
|
|
|
|
16.6%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fifteen
Month Method
|
|
Twelve
Month Method
|
|
Same-store
sales:
|
2007
Third Quarter
|
|
2008
Third Quarter
|
|
2007
Third Quarter
|
|
2008
Third Quarter
|
|
Company-owned
restaurants
|
(0.6%)
|
|
(7.2%)
|
|
(0.9%)
|
|
(7.6%)
|
|
Franchised
restaurants
|
1.2%
|
|
(4.0%)
|
|
0.9%
|
|
(4.2%)
|
|
Systemwide
|
0.6%
|
|
(4.9%)
|
|
0.3%
|
|
(5.2%)
|
|
|
|
|
Restaurant
count (Last 12 months):
|
|
Company-Owned
|
|
|
Franchised
|
|
|
Systemwide
|
|
Restaurant
count at September 30, 2007
|
|
|
1,097 |
|
|
|
2,552 |
|
|
|
3,649 |
|
Opened
since September 30, 2007
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
148 |
|
Closed
since September 30, 2007
|
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
(62 |
) |
Net
purchased from (sold by) franchisees since September 30,
2007
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Restaurant
count at September 28, 2008
|
|
|
1,173 |
|
|
|
2,562 |
|
|
|
3,735 |
|
Sales
Our
sales, which were generated entirely from our Company-owned restaurants,
increased $2.1 million, or 0.7%, to $287.6 million for the three months ended
September 28, 2008 from $285.5 million for the three months ended September 30,
2007, primarily due to a $21.9 million increase in sales from the 76 net
Company-owned restaurants we added since September 30, 2007, significantly
offset by a $19.8 million decrease in sales due to a 7.2% decrease in same-store
sales during the 2008 third quarter. Of the 47 net restaurants we
acquired from franchisees, 41 are in the California market (the “California
Restaurants”) and were purchased from a franchisee on January 14, 2008 (the
“California Restaurant Acquisition”). The California Restaurants
generated approximately $9.9 million of sales for us during the 2008 third
quarter. Same store sales of our Company-owned restaurants were
negatively impacted by the continued pressure on discretionary income of
consumers stemming from higher fuel and food prices and the continuing softening
of the economy. As a result of these factors, we have experienced a
decline in customer traffic and lower sales volume. While our sales
were principally impacted by the effects of the economy, current marketing
campaigns also did not generate incremental sales and were not as effective as
compared to the prior year in driving consumers’ perception of our value
position in the QSR marketplace. In addition, we offered fewer
discounted menu options as compared to our competitors.
Franchise
Revenues
Our
franchise revenues, which were generated entirely from the franchised
restaurants, increased $1.0 million, or 4.6%, to $22.8 million for the three
months ended September 28, 2008 from $21.8 million for the three months ended
September 30, 2007. Of this increase, $0.6 million is attributable to
rental income from properties leased to franchisees. The increase is
also affected by a $0.8 million increase in royalties reflecting the net
increase in franchise units; however, that increase was offset by a $0.8 million
decrease related to our 4.0% decrease in same-store sales for the 2008 third
quarter for franchised restaurants.
The
decrease in same-store sales of the franchised restaurants in the 2008 third
quarter was due primarily to the same negative factors discussed above under
“Sales,” but the decrease was less than for Company-owned restaurants due to the
use of incremental national media advertising initiatives which resulted in
increased exposure in the 2008 third quarter in various franchise markets that
did not have similar exposure in the same period in 2007.
Asset
Management and Related Fees
As a
result of the Deerfield Sale on December 21, 2007, we no longer have any revenue
from asset management and related fees.
Restaurant
Margin
We define
restaurant margin as sales less the total of cost of sales and advertising,
divided by sales. Our cost of sales and advertising resulted
entirely from the Company-owned restaurants. Our advertising consists
of local and national media, direct mail and outdoor advertising as well as
point of sale materials and local restaurant marketing. Our
restaurant margin decreased to 16.6% for the three months ended September 28,
2008 from a restaurant margin of 18.8%, for the three months ended September 30,
2007. Restaurant margin was negatively impacted by the increase in our cost of
sales as compared to prior year, which was as a result of higher (1) labor costs
due to the Federal and state minimum wage increases subsequent to the third
quarter of 2007, (2) food costs due to rising prices in beef and other
commodities, and (3) utilities and fuel costs. In addition, our
same-store sales decrease caused an increase in fixed and semi-variable cost
percentages further contributing to a decrease in our 2008 third quarter
restaurant margin when compared to the same period in the prior
year. Restaurant margin for the 2008 third quarter also decreased as
a result of the impact from the sales of discounted menu items. The
decrease in margin due to cost increases was partially offset by a reduction in
our advertising both as a percentage of sales and in the actual expenditure as
we reduced discretionary, more expensive local advertising initiatives in favor
of more cost-efficient national media initiatives.
Cost
of Services
As a
result of the Deerfield Sale, we no longer incur any cost of
services. For the three months ended September 30, 2007, our cost of
services resulted entirely from the management of CDOs and Funds by
Deerfield.
General
and Administrative
Our
general and administrative expenses decreased $5.9 million, or 14.0%,
principally due to (1) $4.8 million of general and administrative expenses
incurred in the 2007 third quarter at our former asset management segment, (2) a
$2.3 million decrease in incentive compensation at our restaurant segment due to
weaker than planned performance, (3) a $2.7 million decrease in corporate
general and administrative expense as a result of the effects of the Corporate
Restructuring, (4) a $1.3 million decrease in the fees for professional and
strategic services provided to us under a transition services
agreement entered into with the Management Company as part of the Corporate
Restructuring (the “Services Agreement”) and (5) a $1.2 million decrease in a
reserve related to the resolution of a sales and use tax audit. These
decreases were partially offset by (1) $1.9 million of costs for professional
fees related to Wendy’s merger integration activities, (2) a $1.5 million
settlement received in the prior year period of a lawsuit related to an
investment that had been included in the deferred compensation trusts (“Deferred
Compensation Trusts”) for the benefit of the Former Executives and (3) a $1.3
million decrease in the reimbursement of general and administrative expenses
from AFA Service Corporation (“AFA”), an independently controlled advertising
cooperative in which we have voting interests of less than 50%, but with respect
to which we are deemed to be the primary beneficiary under GAAP, under a
services agreement which requires them to reimburse us for a portion of general
and administrative expenses incurred on their behalf.
Depreciation
and Amortization
Our
depreciation and amortization, including impairment charges, increased $10.7
million, or 53.5%, principally reflecting (1) a $9.6 million impairment charge
on one of our Company aircraft that we intend to sell, (2) $4.5 million of
restaurant related impairment charges as a result of an increase in
the number of underperforming units and (3) a $1.6 million increase in depreciation related
to the property and equipment for the 76 net Company-owned restaurants added
since September 30, 2007. These increases were partially offset by
(1) $4.3 million of depreciation and amortization expenses, including impairment
charges, incurred in the 2007 third quarter at our former asset management
segment and (2) $0.8 million of depreciation and amortization in the 2007 third
quarter related to assets which were fully depreciated by the end of the 2008
third quarter.
Facilities
Relocation and Corporate Restructuring
The $1.8
million charge for the 2007 third quarter primarily consists of general
corporate severance related to the transfer of substantially all of Triarc’s
senior executive responsibilities to the ARG executive team in Atlanta, Georgia
as part of the Corporate Restructuring as discussed above under “Introduction
and Executive Overview.”
Interest
Expense
Interest
expense decreased $2.0 million, or 12.9%, principally reflecting the effects of
lower interest rates on our variable rate debt, partially offset by higher
average debt outstanding for a significant portion of the 2008 third
quarter.
Investment
Loss, Net
The
following table summarizes and compares the major components of investment loss,
net:
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(In
Millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
than temporary losses
|
|
$ |
(5.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(8.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(3.0 |
) |
Net
gains (losses):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
method investments and limited partnerships
|
|
|
8.6 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
|
(7.0 |
) |
Derivative
instruments
|
|
|
(7.4 |
) |
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
|
11.6 |
|
Other
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
Interest
income
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
(2.2 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
$ |
(1.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.4 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.3 |
) |
|
·
|
For
the third quarter of 2007, the other than temporary losses related to the
decline in the market values of six of our then available-for-sale
investments held by our former asset management segment. The
other than temporary loss in the 2008 third quarter represents a $5.1
million decline in value of certain of our available for sale securities
which are held in
the Equities Account and a $3.0 million decline in the value of our
investment in Jurlique International Pty Ltd., an Australian skin and
beauty products company not publicly traded
(“Jurlique”).
|
|
·
|
Our
recognized net gains (losses) on securities include realized investment
gains (losses) from marketable security transactions and realized and
unrealized gains (losses) on derivative instruments. The $7.0
million decrease in gains on cost method investments and limited
partnerships is primarily due to the sale in the 2007 third quarter of a
specific security that resulted in a $10.1 million gain. The
$11.6 million decrease in losses on derivative instruments is due to the
number and type of derivative instrument transactions in 2008 as compared
to the same period in the prior
year.
|
|
·
|
Our
interest income decreased $2.2 million due to lower average outstanding
balances of our interest-bearing investments principally as a result of
the cash equivalents used in connection with the Corporate Restructuring
and interest income recognized in the 2007 third quarter at our former
asset management segment as well as a decrease in interest
rates.
|
All
recognized gains and losses may vary significantly in future periods depending
upon changes in the value of our investments and the timing of the sales of our
available for sale investments. Any other than temporary losses of
our investments are dependent upon the underlying economics and/or volatility in
their value and may or may not recur in future periods.
As of
September 28, 2008, we had unrealized holding gains and (losses) on
available-for-sale securities of $6.7 million and ($0.3) million, respectively,
before income taxes included in “Accumulated other comprehensive
loss.” Our evaluation of the unrealized losses has determined that
these losses are not other than temporary. Should we decide to sell
any of the investments we hold as of September 28, 2008 on which we have
unrealized gains or losses, or if any of the unrealized losses continue such
that we believe they have become other than temporary, we would recognize their
effect on the related investments at that time. As of October 31,
2008, as of a result of continuing weakness in the economy during the fourth
quarter of 2008 and its effect on the financial market, there has been a
decrease of approximately $11.0 million in the fair value of the available for
sale securities held in the Equities Account as compared to their value on
September 28, 2008. Such decreases could result in additional other than
temporary losses on our available for sale securities held in the Equities
Account in the fourth quarter of 2008.
Other
Income, Net
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(In
Millions)
|
|
Interest
income other than on investments
|
|
$ |
0.1 |
|
|
$ |
1.0 |
|
|
$ |
0.9 |
|
Other
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
|
|
$ |
1.1 |
|
|
$ |
1.1 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Our
interest income other than on investments increased primarily due to the
interest income on the DFR Notes.
Provision
For Income Taxes
The
effective tax rate expense for the third quarter of 2007 was
64%. Despite a loss from continuing operations before income taxes
and minority interests, there was a provision for taxes of $2.9 million for the
2008 third quarter. The provision for taxes for the third quarters of
both 2007 and 2008 were affected by changes in the estimated full year tax rates
for each year.
Minority
Interests in Loss (Income) of Consolidated Subsidiaries
The
minority interests in income of consolidated subsidiaries decreased $1.7 million
primarily as a result of the effect of the Deerfield Sale on our Deerfield
minority interest.
Gain
from disposal of discontinued operations, net of income taxes
The $1.2
million gain from disposal of discontinued operations, net of income taxes,
relates to a release of an accrual for state income taxes no longer required
after the settlement of state income tax liabilities for three
jurisdictions.
Net
Income (Loss)
Our net
income (loss) declined $15.8 million to a loss of ($12.1) million in the 2008
third quarter from income of $3.7 million in the 2007 third
quarter. This decline is attributed principally to the after tax
effects of our decrease in gross margin and impairment charges discussed
above.
Nine
Months Ended September 28, 2008 Compared with Nine Months Ended September 30,
2007
Presented
below is a table that summarizes our results of operations and compares the
amount and percent of the change between the 2007 first nine months and the 2008
first nine months. Certain percentage changes between these quarters
are considered not measurable or not meaningful (“n/m”).
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
(In
Millions Except Restaurant Count and Percents)
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales
|
|
$ |
830.6 |
|
|
$ |
860.5 |
|
|
$ |
29.9 |
|
|
|
3.6%
|
|
Franchise
revenues
|
|
|
62.9 |
|
|
|
65.7 |
|
|
|
2.8 |
|
|
|
4.4%
|
|
Asset
management and related fees
|
|
|
49.6 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(49.6 |
) |
|
|
(100.0)%
|
|
|
|
|
943.1 |
|
|
|
926.2 |
|
|
|
(16.9 |
) |
|
|
(1.8)%
|
|
Costs
and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
610.8 |
|
|
|
655.6 |
|
|
|
44.8 |
|
|
|
7.3%
|
|
Cost
of services
|
|
|
19.8 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(19.8 |
) |
|
|
(100.0)%
|
|
Advertising
|
|
|
59.3 |
|
|
|
62.7 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
5.7%
|
|
General
and administrative
|
|
|
155.6 |
|
|
|
123.1 |
|
|
|
(32.5 |
) |
|
|
(20.9)%
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
54.4 |
|
|
|
64.4 |
|
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
|
18.4%
|
|
Facilities
relocation and corporate restructuring
|
|
|
81.2 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
(80.4 |
) |
|
|
n/m
|
|
Settlement
of preexisting business relationships
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
(100.0)%
|
|
|
|
|
981.1 |
|
|
|
906.1 |
|
|
|
(75.0 |
) |
|
|
(7.6)%
|
|
Operating
(loss) profit
|
|
|
(38.0 |
) |
|
|
20.1 |
|
|
|
58.1 |
|
|
|
n/m
|
|
Interest
expense
|
|
|
(46.2 |
) |
|
|
(41.0 |
) |
|
|
(5.2 |
) |
|
|
(11.3)%
|
|
Investment
income (loss), net
|
|
|
39.7 |
|
|
|
(76.5 |
) |
|
|
(116.2 |
) |
|
|
n/m
|
|
Other
income (expense), net
|
|
|
5.9 |
|
|
|
(2.3 |
) |
|
|
(8.2 |
) |
|
|
n/m
|
|
Loss
from continuing operations before benefit from income taxes and minority
interests
|
|
|
(38.6 |
) |
|
|
(99.7 |
) |
|
|
(61.1 |
) |
|
|
n/m
|
|
Benefit
from income taxes
|
|
|
24.3 |
|
|
|
12.3 |
|
|
|
(12.0 |
) |
|
|
(49.4)%
|
|
Minority
interests in income of consolidated subsidiaries
|
|
|
(2.8 |
) |
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
2.5 |
|
|
|
89.3%
|
|
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
|
(17.1 |
) |
|
|
(87.7 |
) |
|
|
(70.6 |
) |
|
|
n/m
|
|
(Loss)
income from disposal of discontinued operations, net of income
taxes
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
|
|
n/m
|
|
Net
loss
|
|
$ |
(17.2 |
) |
|
$ |
(86.5 |
) |
|
$ |
(69.3 |
) |
|
|
n/m
|
|
Certain
items as a percentage of sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
73.5 |
% |
|
|
76.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertising
|
|
|
7.1 |
% |
|
|
7.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restaurant
margin (as defined in “Restaurant Margin” above)
|
|
|
19.3 |
% |
|
|
16.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fifteen
Month Method
|
|
|
Twelve
Month Method
|
|
Same-store
sales:
|
|
2007
First Nine Months
|
|
|
2008
First Nine Months
|
|
|
2007
First Nine Months
|
|
|
2008
First Nine Months
|
|
Company-owned
restaurants
|
|
|
(1.2)%
|
|
|
|
(4.2)%
|
|
|
|
(1.4)%
|
|
|
|
(4.6)%
|
|
Franchised
restaurants
|
|
|
0.9%
|
|
|
|
(2.1)%
|
|
|
|
0.6%
|
|
|
|
(2.2)%
|
|
Systemwide
|
|
|
0.2%
|
|
|
|
(2.8)%
|
|
|
|
0.0%
|
|
|
|
(3.1)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our sales
increased $29.9 million, or 3.6%, to $860.5 million for the nine months ended
September 28, 2008 from $830.6 million for the nine months ended September 30,
2007, primarily due to a $63.8 million increase in sales from the 76 net
Company-owned restaurants we added since September 30, 2007. Of this
amount, the California Restaurants generated approximately $27.1 million of
sales for us during the 2008 first nine months. The increase in sales
due to the number of Company-owned restaurants added since September 30, 2007
was partially offset by a $33.9 million decrease in sales due to a 4.2% decrease
in same-store sales during the 2008 first nine months. Same store sales of our
Company-owned restaurants decreased principally due to the same factors
discussed under “Sales” in the three month discussion above although these
factors had a lesser effect in the first half of the year.
Franchise
Revenues
Our
franchise revenues, which were generated entirely from the franchised
restaurants, increased $2.8 million, or 4.4%, to $65.7 million for the nine
months ended September 28, 2008 from $62.9 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2007. Of this increase, $1.7 million is attributable to
rental income from properties leased to franchisees that is included in
franchise revenues for the nine months ended September 28, 2008. The
remainder of the increase is due primarily to a $2.1 million increase in
royalties reflecting the net franchise unit activity in the table above,
partially offset by a $1.2 million decrease related to our 2.1% decrease in
same-store sales for the 2008 first nine months for franchised
restaurants.
Same-store
sales of our franchised restaurants decreased primarily due to the negative
factors discussed above under “Sales,” but the decrease was less than for
Company-owned restaurants due to the use of incremental national media
advertising initiatives in the 2008 first and third quarters which had a greater
positive affect on franchised restaurants than Company-owned restaurants due to
the increased exposure in many franchise markets as compared with the
Company-owned restaurants’ markets.
Asset
Management and Related Fees
As a
result of the Deerfield Sale on December 21, 2007, we no longer have any revenue
from asset management and related fees.
Restaurant
Margin
Our
restaurant margin decreased to 16.5% for the nine months ended September 28,
2008 from a restaurant margin of 19.3% for the nine months ended September 30,
2007. The decrease in restaurant margin for the 2008 first nine
months was due to the same factors mentioned above in the three month
discussion.
Cost
of Services
As a
result of the Deerfield Sale, we no longer incur any cost of
services. For the nine months ended September 30, 2007, our cost of
services resulted entirely from the management of CDOs and Funds by
Deerfield.
General
and Administrative
Our
general and administrative expenses decreased $32.5 million, or 20.9%,
principally due to (1) $18.0 million of general and administrative expenses
incurred in the 2007 first nine months at our former asset management segment,
(2) an $18.0 million decrease in corporate general and administrative expenses
as a result of the effects of the Corporate Restructuring, (3) a $5.5 million
decrease in incentive compensation at our restaurant segment due to weaker than
planned performance, (4) a $2.0 million decrease in relocation costs principally
attributable to additional costs in the prior year related to estimated declines
in market value and increased carrying costs for homes we purchased for resale
from relocated employees and (5) a $1.2 million decrease in a reserve related to
the resolution of a sales and use tax audit. These decreases were
partially offset by (1) a $4.8 million increase in the fees for professional and
strategic services provided to us under the Services Agreement which
commenced in the 2007 third quarter, (2) $2.3 million of costs for professional
fees related to Wendy’s merger integration activities, (3) a $1.6 million charge
for an ongoing examination of certain franchise tax returns for fiscal years
1998-2004, (4) a $1.5 million settlement received in the prior year period of a
lawsuit related to an investment that had been included in the Deferred
Compensation Trusts for the benefit of the Former Executives and (5) a $1.0
million increase in our corporate aircraft costs principally incurred in the
2008 first quarter primarily related to an increase in aircraft maintenance
costs for certain engine maintenance, the timing of which is mandated by the
Federal Aviation Administration and is based on the manufacturer’s suggested
maintenance schedule.
Depreciation
and Amortization
Our
depreciation and amortization, including impairment, increased $10.0 million, or
18.4%, principally reflecting (1) a $9.6 million impairment charge on one of our
Company aircraft that we intend to sell, (2) an increase of $5.1 million related
to restaurant impairment charges as a result of an increased number of
underperforming units, (3) a $3.7 million increase in depreciation related
to the property and equipment for the 76 net Company-owned restaurants added
since September 30, 2007 and (4) a $0.8 million increase related to new
restaurant equipment primarily related to our major new product offering in the
third quarter of 2007. These increases were partially offset by
(1) $8.0 million of depreciation and amortization expenses, including impairment
charges, incurred in the 2007 first nine months at our former asset management
segment and (2) $1.9 million of depreciation and amortization in the 2007 first
nine months related to certain assets which are now fully
depreciated.
Facilities
Relocation and Corporate Restructuring
The charge of $81.2 million in the 2007
first nine months consists primarily of general corporate severance costs
principally related to transferring substantially all of Triarc’s senior
executive responsibilities to the ARG executive team in Atlanta, Georgia, as
discussed above in “Introduction and Executive Overview.” The charge
of $0.8 million during the 2008 first nine months consisted principally of
general corporate charges related to severance for the New York headquarters’
employees who continued to provide services as employees during the first
quarter as a part of the Corporate Restructuring.
Settlement
of Preexisting Business Relationships
Under accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”), we are required to evaluate
and account for separately any preexisting business relationships between the
parties to a business combination. Under this accounting guidance, we
reacquired certain leases in the California Restaurant Acquisition with fair
market rentals which are different than the stated lease rental amounts were
required to be valued and which resulted in a $1.2 million net
gain. In addition, we are required to record as an expense and
exclude from the purchase price of acquired restaurants the value of any
franchise agreements that is attributable to royalty rates below the current 4%
royalty rate that we receive on new franchise agreements. The amount
of the settlement losses represents the present value of the estimated amount of
future royalties by which the royalty rate is unfavorable over the remaining
life of the franchise agreement. As a result, we recorded a $0.7 million loss
related to the settlement of unfavorable franchise rights for certain of the
franchised restaurants we acquired in two separate transactions during the 2008
first quarter.
Interest
Expense
Interest
expense decreased $5.2 million, or 11.3%, principally reflecting (1) the effect
of lower interest rates on our variable rate debt and (2) a $1.1 million
reversal in the 2008 first quarter of a portion of our interest accrued under
FASB Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,” (“FIN
48”) relating to a tax position that was settled for less than we previously
anticipated. These items were partially offset by the effect of an
increase in our average debt outstanding.
Investment
Income (Loss), Net
The
following table summarizes and compares the major components of investment
income (loss), net:
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(In
Millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
than temporary losses
|
|
$ |
(7.5 |
) |
|
$ |
(79.7 |
) |
|
$ |
(72.2 |
) |
Net
gains (losses):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-sale
securities
|
|
|
15.5 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
(15.0 |
) |
Derivative
instruments
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
|
|
(0.7 |
) |
|
|
(2.5 |
) |
Cost
method investments and limited partnerships
|
|
|
21.7 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
|
(20.1 |
) |
Interest
income
|
|
|
7.2 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
(6.4 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
$ |
39.7 |
|
|
$ |
(76.5 |
) |
|
$ |
(116.2 |
) |
|
· |
The
$7.5 million other than temporary loss in the 2007 first nine months
related to the recognition of impairment charges for the decline in market
values of six of our then available-for-sale investments held by our
former asset management segment. For the first nine months of
2008, $68.1 million of the other than temporary losses related to the
decline in value of our common stock investment in DFR discussed above
under “Introduction and Executive Overview.” An additional $6.5 million of
the 2008 other than temporary losses related to the $3.0 million decrease
in value of our investment in Jurlique noted in the three month discussion
above as well as an additional $3.5 million other than temporary loss on
Jurlique recorded in the 2008 second quarter. The remaining
$5.1 million other than temporary loss related to the decline in value of
certain of our available for sale securities which are held in the
Equities Account as noted in the three month discussion
above.
|
|
·
|
Our
recognized net gains (losses) on securities include realized investment
gains (losses) from marketable security transactions and realized and
unrealized gains (losses) on derivative instruments. The gains
in the 2007 first nine months related to cost investments and limited
partnerships represent (1) a $10.1 million realized gain on the sale in
the 2007 third quarter of one of our cost method investments and (2) $8.4
million of gains realized in the prior year that did not recur in the
current year related to the transfer of several cost method investments
from the Deferred Compensation Trusts for the benefit of the Former
Executives.
|
|
·
|
Our
interest income decreased $6.4 million due to lower average outstanding
balances of our interest-bearing investments principally as a result of
the cash equivalents used in connection with the Corporate Restructuring
and interest income recognized in the 2007 first nine months at our former
asset management segment.
|
All
recognized gains and losses may vary significantly in future periods depending
upon changes in the value of our investments and the timing of the sales of our
available for sale investments. Any other than temporary losses of
our investments are dependent upon the underlying economics and/or volatility in
their value and may or may not recur in future periods. As of October 31, 2008,
as of a result of continuing weakness in the economy during the fourth quarter
of 2008 and its effect on the financial market, there has been a decrease of
approximately $11.0 million in the fair value of the available for sale
securities held in the Equities Account as compared to their value on September
28, 2008. Such decreases could result in additional other than temporary losses
on our available for sale securities held in the Equities Account in the fourth
quarter of 2008.
Other
Income (Expense), Net
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
September
28,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(In
Millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
cost write-offs
|
|
$ |
(0.4 |
) |
|
$ |
(5.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(4.7 |
) |
Gain
on sale of unconsolidated business
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(2.6 |
) |
Equity
in net earnings (losses) of investees
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
(0.8 |
) |
|
|
(1.7 |
) |
Interest
income other than on investments
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
Other
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
(2.1 |
) |
|
|
$ |
5.9 |
|
|
$ |
(2.3 |
) |
|
$ |
(8.2 |
) |
The
changes in other income (expense), net for the nine month periods ended
September 30, 2007 and September 28, 2008 are as follows:
|
·
|
The
write off of deferred costs in the 2008 first nine months related to a
financing alternative that is no longer being
pursued.
|
|
·
|
The
gain on sale of unconsolidated business in the 2007 first nine
months related to the sale of substantially all of our then remaining
investment in Encore Capital Group, Inc. (“Encore”), a former investee of
ours.
|
|
·
|
Our
equity in net earnings (losses) in DFR’s operations decreased from income
of $0.6 million for the 2007 first nine months to a loss of $0.8 million
for the 2008 first nine months. In addition, during the 2007
first nine months we recorded $0.3 million equity in the earnings of
Encore.
|
|
·
|
Our
interest income other than on investments increased primarily due to the
interest income on the DFR Notes.
|
Benefit
From Income Taxes
The
effective tax rate benefit for the first nine months of 2007 was 63% compared to
12% in the first nine months of 2008. The effective rates vary principally
as a result of (1) the effect in the first quarter of 2008 of a loss which is
not deductible for tax purposes in connection with the decline in value of our
investment in the common stock of DFR and related declared dividend as described
above in “Introduction and Executive Overview—The Deerfield Sale”, (2) the
effect in the first quarter of 2007 of recognizing a previously unrecognized
contingent tax benefit in connection with the settlement of certain obligations
to the Former Executives and (3) the effect of non-deductible compensation and
other non-deductible expenses and their relative relationship to the pre-tax
loss in both years.
Minority
Interests in Income of Consolidated Subsidiaries
The
minority interests in income of consolidated subsidiaries decreased $2.5 million
primarily as a result of the effect of the Deerfield Sale on our Deerfield
minority interest.
Gain
from disposal of discontinued operations, net of income taxes
The $1.2
million gain from disposal of discontinued operations, net of income taxes in
the 2008 first nine months relates to a release of an accrual for state income
taxes no longer required after the settlement of state income tax liabilities in
three jurisdictions.
Net
Loss
Our net
loss increased $69.3 million to $86.5 million in the 2008 first nine months from
$17.2 million in the 2007 first nine months. This increase is
attributed principally to the after tax effect of our other than temporary loss
on our investment in DFR and other investments, the decrease in recognized net
gains on securities in the 2008 first nine months and our significant decrease
in restaurant margin, partially offset by decreases in facilities relocation and
corporate restructuring expenses and related corporate general and
administrative expenses.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Sources
and Uses of Cash for the Nine Months Ended September 28, 2008
Cash and cash equivalents (“Cash”)
totaled $26.0 million at September 28, 2008 compared to $78.1 million at
December 30, 2007. For the nine months ended September 28, 2008, net
cash provided by operating activities totaled $42.5 million, which results from
the following significant items:
|
·
|
Our
net loss of $86.5 million;
|
|
·
|
Net
non-cash operating investment adjustments of $78.3 million which partially
offset our net loss principally reflecting our other than temporary losses
in our investment in the common stock of DFR and, to a lesser extent, in
our investments in Jurlique and certain available for sale equity
securities;
|
|
·
|
Depreciation
and amortization of $64.4 million, including impairment charges of $15.6
million;
|
|
·
|
Our
deferred income tax benefit of $13.5
million
|
|
·
|
The
write off of deferred costs related to a financing alternative that is no
longer being pursued and amortization of deferred financing costs which
totaled $7.3 million;
|
|
·
|
The
receipt of deferred vendor incentives, net of amount recognized, of $3.7
million and |
|
· |
A
decrease in operating assets and liabilities of $11.7 million principally
reflecting a $9.4 million decrease in accounts payable, accrued expenses
and other current liabilities due primarily to the payment of bonuses and
severance paid in connection with the Corporate Restructuring, net of
accrued dividends as of September 28,
2008. |
We expect continued positive cash flows
from continuing operating activities during the remainder of 2008.
Additionally,
for the nine months ended September 28, 2008, we had the following significant
sources and uses of cash:
|
·
|
Cash
capital expenditures totaling $58.4 million principally related to the
construction of new restaurants and the remodeling of existing
restaurants; |
|
·
|
Payment
of cash dividends totaling $16.1
million;
|
|
·
|
Proceeds
of $53.7 million from the issuance of long-term debt;
|
|
·
|
Repayments
of long-term debt of $89.3 million which includes a $45.0 million
principal repayment of our senior secured term loan facility (“Term Loan”)
discussed further below; |
|
·
|
Proceeds
of $30.0 million from the transfer of Equities Account restricted cash
equivalents to cash and cash equivalents discussed
above; |
|
·
|
Cash
paid for business acquisitions totaling $9.5 million, including $7.9
million for the California Restaurant Acquisition and
|
|
·
|
Capitalized
transaction costs related to our merger with Wendy’s of $7.5
million. |
Working
Capital and Capitalization
Working
capital, which equals current assets less current liabilities, was a deficiency
of $124.1 million at September 28, 2008, reflecting a current ratio, which
equals current assets divided by current liabilities, of 0.5:1. The
working capital deficit at September 28, 2008 increased $87.2 million from a
deficit of $36.9 million at December 30, 2007, primarily due to (1) cash capital
expenditures of $58.4 million, (2) a $45.0 million principal prepayment on our
term loan (discussed further below), (3) a $40.0 million reclassification of
debt from long-term to current reflecting an anticipated non-mandatory principal
repayment on our term loan (discussed further below) within the next twelve
months, (4) $16.1 million in dividend payments and (5) the $9.5 million cost of
business acquisitions, exclusive of working capital items. These
items were partially offset by (1) the transfer of $30.0 million of restricted
cash in the Equities Account to Wendy’s/Arby’s as discussed above under
“Introduction and Executive Overview” and (2) proceeds of $53.7 million from the
issuance of long-term debt, including a $20.0 million refinancing of one of our
corporate aircraft (also discussed further below).
Our total
capitalization at September 28, 2008 was $1,055.4 million, consisting of
stockholders’ equity of $334.2 million and long-term debt of $721.2 million,
including current portion. Our total capitalization at September 28,
2008 decreased $132.8 million from $1,188.2 million at December 30, 2007
principally reflecting:
|
·
|
Cash
dividends paid of $16.1 million, accrued dividends of $7.4 million and the
non-cash stock dividend of the DFR shares with a carrying value of $14.5
million;
|
|
·
|
Net
loss of $86.5 million, including the $68.1 million recognized other than
temporary loss on our common stock investment in DFR which is not
deductible for income tax purposes;
|
|
·
|
The
components of “Other comprehensive loss” that are not included in the
calculation of net income of $6.2 million, after a $3.5 million related
tax provision, principally reflecting (1) the reclassification of $8.3
million of pre-tax unrealized holding losses from accumulated other
comprehensive loss to “Investment income (loss), net,” principally as part
of our recognized other than temporary loss on our investment in DFR and
(2) $1.7 million of unrealized holding gains arising during the 2008 first
nine months on our available-for-sale
securities.
|
|
·
|
An
$18.2 million net decrease in long-term debt, including current portion,
which includes the $5.6 million balance of outstanding debt assumed as
part of the California Restaurant
Acquisition.
|
Our total
capitalization increased significantly on September 29, 2008 as a result of the
issuance of approximately 377,000,000 shares of Wendy’s/Arby’s common shares in
connection with the merger with Wendy’s.
Long-term
Debt
We have
the following obligations outstanding as of September 28, 2008:
|
·
|
ARG credit agreement—We have
a credit agreement (the “ARG Credit Agreement”) that includes a senior
secured term loan facility (the “Term Loan”) with a remaining principal
balance of $495.0 million as of September 28, 2008 which expires on July
25, 2012 and a senior secured revolving credit facility (the “Revolver”)
of $100.0 million, which expires on July 25, 2011 and under which there
were no borrowings as of September 28, 2008. During the first
nine months of 2008, we borrowed a total of $20.0 million under the
Revolver; however, no amounts were outstanding at the end of any of the
first three quarters of 2008. The availability under the
Revolver as of September 28, 2008 was $92.2 million, which is net of $7.8
million of outstanding letters of credit. During the 2008 third
quarter, we made a $45.0 million principal prepayment on the Term Loan to
assure compliance with the maximum lease adjusted leverage ratio in the
ARG Credit Agreement. We anticipate additional non-mandatory
principal prepayments on the Term Loan of approximately $40.0 million
within the next twelve months in order to assure such compliance with such
covenants, including
the maximum lease adjusted leverage ratio. The Term Loan also
requires prepayments of principal amounts resulting from certain events
and, on an annual basis, from excess cash flow of the restaurant business
as determined under the ARG Credit Agreement (the “Excess Cash Flow
Payment”). The Excess Cash Flow Payment for fiscal 2007 of approximately
$10.4 million was paid in the second quarter of
2008.
|
|
·
|
Sale-leaseback
obligations—We have $119.9 million of sale-leaseback obligations
outstanding as of September 28, 2008 which are due through
2028.
|
|
·
|
Capitalized lease
obligations—We have $76.9 million of capitalized lease obligations
outstanding as of September 28, 2008 which are due through
2036.
|
|
·
|
Aircraft financing —During the
2008 third quarter we entered into a new $20.0 million financing facility
for one of our existing Company aircraft (the “Aircraft
Financing”). The facility requires regular monthly payments,
including interest, of approximately $0.2 million through August 2013 with
a final balloon payment of approximately $15.2 million due September 5,
2013. The annual interest rate is fixed at 6.54%. As of
September 28, 2008, the entire $20.0 million was
outstanding.
|
|
|
|
|
· |
California Restaurant
Acquisition notes—We have $5.6 million of notes payable assumed as
part of the California Restaurant Acquisition outstanding as of September
28, 2008 which are due through
2014.
|
|
·
|
Leasehold notes—We have
$1.7 million of leasehold notes outstanding as of September 28, 2008 which
are due through 2018.
|
|
·
|
Convertible notes—We
have $2.1 million of convertible notes outstanding as of September 28,
2008 which do not have any scheduled principal repayments prior to 2023
and are convertible into 53,000 shares of our class A common stock and
107,000 shares of our class B common stock, as adjusted due to the
dividend of DFR common stock distributed to our stockholders in April
2008. The convertible notes are redeemable at our option
commencing May 20, 2010 and at the option of the holders on May 15, 2010,
2015 and 2020 or upon the occurrence of a fundamental change, as defined,
relating to us, in each case at a price of 100% of the principal amount of
the convertible notes plus accrued
interest.
|
Treasury
Stock Purchases
Our
management is currently authorized, when and if market conditions warrant and to
the extent legally permissible, to repurchase through December 28, 2008 up to a
total of $50.0 million of our class A common stock. Under this
program, we did not make any treasury stock purchases during the 2008 first nine
months, and we are unable to determine whether we will repurchase any shares
under this program during the fourth quarter of 2008.
Purchase
of Indebtedness
Subject
to market conditions, our capital needs and other factors, we may from time to
time purchase our indebtedness and/or the indebtedness of our subsidiaries,
including indebtedness outstanding under the ARG Credit Agreement, in market
transactions, privately negotiated sales or other transactions. As of
September 28, 2008, we have not purchased any of our or our subsidiaries’
indebtedness.
Sources
and Uses of Cash for the Remainder of 2008
Our anticipated consolidated cash
requirements for continuing operations for the fourth quarter of 2008, exclusive
of operating cash flow requirements, consist principally of:
|
·
|
Cash
capital expenditures, including Wendy’s, of approximately $38.1
million;
|
|
·
|
Quarterly
cash dividends aggregating up to approximately $14.4 million as discussed
below in “Dividends”;
|
|
·
|
Scheduled
debt principal repayments aggregating $3.6 million, which includes $1.3
million for the Term Loan, $1.0 million for capitalized lease obligations,
$0.7 million for sale-leaseback obligations, $0.3 million for the
California Restaurant Acquisition notes, $0.2 million for the Aircraft
Financing and $0.1 million for leasehold notes. In addition,
Wendy’s has scheduled debt principal repayments of approximately $0.4
million;
|
|
·
|
Payments
of approximately $7.4 million related to our facilities relocation and
corporate restructuring accruals;
|
|
·
|
The
costs of any potential business
acquisitions;
|
|
·
|
Any
non-mandatory prepayments under the ARG Credit Agreement, which we
currently estimate will be approximately $40.0 million as described
above;
|
|
·
|
Payment
of $30.0 million which we are obligated to return to the Equities Account
by December 31, 2008 as discussed above;
and |
|
·
|
A
maximum of an aggregate $50.0 million of payments for repurchases, if any,
of our class A common stock for treasury under our current stock
repurchase program as discussed
above.
|
We anticipate meeting all of these
requirements through the following sources of cash:
|
·
|
Our
cash and cash equivalents of approximately $26.0 million plus
approximately $199.8 million of cash and cash equivalents acquired on
September 29, 2008 as part of the Wendy’s
merger;
|
|
·
|
Cash
flows from continuing operating
activities;
|
|
·
|
Available
borrowings under our revolving credit facility discussed above;
and
|
|
·
|
The
potential sale or financing of corporate, non-restaurant
assets.
|
Other
Revolving Credit Facility
In addition to the $100.0 million
revolving credit facility mentioned above, AFA Service Corporation (“AFA”), an
independently controlled advertising cooperative in which we have voting
interests of less than 50%, but with respect to which we are deemed to be the
primary beneficiary under GAAP, has a fully available $3.5 million line of
credit. As of the date of the merger, Wendy’s U.S. advertising fund has a
fully available $25.0 million revolving line of credit for its use.
Wendy’s
is currently negotiating the terms of a new $200.0 million secured revolving
credit facility. We currently anticipate finalizing this facility in
the 2008 fourth quarter. However, there can be no assurance that we will
finalize this new facility.
Debt
Covenants
The ARG
Credit Agreement contains various covenants, as amended during 2007, the most
restrictive of which requires (1) periodic financial reporting and (2) meeting
certain leverage and interest coverage ratio tests and restricts, among other
matters, (a) the incurrence of indebtedness, (b) certain asset dispositions, (c)
certain affiliate transactions, (d) certain investments, (e) certain capital
expenditures and (f) the payment of dividends by ARG indirectly to
Wendy’s/Arby’s. We were in compliance with all of these covenants as
of September 28, 2008 and we expect to remain in compliance with all of these
covenants through the remainder of 2008, including through the effect of
non-mandatory prepayments, if necessary. As of September 28, 2008
there was $12.5 million available for the payment of dividends to Wendy’s/Arby’s
under the covenants of the ARG Credit Agreement.
A
significant number of the underlying leases for our sale-leaseback obligations
and our capitalized lease obligations, as well as our operating leases, require
or required periodic financial reporting of certain subsidiary entities or of
individual restaurants, which in many cases has not been prepared or
reported. We have negotiated waivers and alternative covenants with
our most significant lessors which substitute consolidated financial reporting
of our restaurant business for that of individual subsidiary entities and which
modify restaurant level reporting requirements for more than half of the
affected leases. Nevertheless, as of September 28, 2008, we were not
in compliance, and remain not in compliance, with the reporting requirements
under those leases for which waivers and alternative financial reporting
covenants have not been negotiated. None of the lessors has asserted
that we are in default of any of those lease agreements. We do not
believe that this non-compliance will have a material adverse effect on our
condensed consolidated financial position or results of operations.
Contractual
Obligations
There
were no material changes to our contractual obligations since December 30, 2007,
as disclosed in Item 7 of our 2007 Form 10-K. However, in connection
with the Wendy’s merger, our contractual obligations will
increase. As of December 30, 2007, Wendy’s reported operating lease
obligations of $997.0 million, long-term debt obligations of $811.6 million,
purchase obligations of $170.2 million and capital lease obligations of $35.0
million in their 2007 Form 10-K. We are not aware of any material
changes to these amounts as of September 28, 2008.
Guarantees
and Commitments
There
were no material changes to our guarantees and commitments since December 30,
2007, as disclosed in Item 7 of our 2007 Form 10-K. However, in connection
with the Wendy’s merger, our guarantees and commitments will
increase. As of December 30, 2007, Wendy’s reported $169.0 million
for certain guaranteed lease and debt payments, primarily related to franchisees,
guarantees and commitments of approximately $19.4 million for contingent rent on
certain leases that have been assigned to unrelated third parties and $6.5
million for guarantees on letters of credit with various parties in their 2007
Form 10-K. We are not aware of any material changes to these amounts
as of September 28, 2008. In connection with the accounting for the
purchase price, the fair value of certain of the Wendy’s guarantees and
commitments will be included in our liabilities.
Dividends
On
October 3, 2008, we paid quarterly cash dividends of $0.08 per share on our
Class A common stock and Class B common stock aggregating $7.4 million. On
November 3, 2008 we declared a regular quarterly cash dividend of $0.015 per
share on our Class A common stock payable on December 15, 2008 to holders of
record on December 1, 2008. We currently intend to continue to
declare and pay quarterly cash dividends; however, there can be no assurance
that any quarterly dividends will be declared or paid in the future or of the
amount or timing of such dividends, if any. Our total cash dividends
declared in the 2008 fourth quarter, based on the number of Class A common
shares outstanding as of September 29, 2008, after taking into account the
shares issued in connection with the Wendy’s merger, is approximately $7.0
million. Our total cash requirements for the payment of dividends in
the 2008 fourth quarter are $14.4 million which includes the payment of
dividends declared in the 2008 third quarter.
The
Deerfield Sale
As
further described above under “Introduction and Executive Overview—The Deerfield
Sale”, on December 21, 2007, we completed the Deerfield Sale and a portion of
the proceeds, all of which were non-cash, included the DFR Notes. The
DFR Notes bear interest at the three-month LIBOR (3.76% at September 26, 2008)
plus 5% through December 31, 2009, increase 0.5% each quarter from January 1,
2010 through June 30, 2011 and 0.25% each quarter from July 1, 2011 through
their maturity. The DFR Notes are secured by certain equity interests
of DFR and certain of its subsidiaries.
On March
18, 2008, in response to unanticipated credit and liquidity events in 2008, DFR
announced that it was repositioning its investment portfolio to focus on
agency-only residential mortgage-backed securities and away from its principal
investing segment to its asset management segment with its fee-based revenue
streams. In addition, it stated that during the first quarter of
2008, its portfolio was adversely impacted by deterioration of the global credit
markets and, as a result, it sold $2.8 billion of its agency and $1.3 billion of
its AAA-rated non-agency mortgage-backed securities and reduced the net notional
amount of interest rate swaps used to hedge a portion of its mortgage-backed
securities by $4.2 billion, all at a net after-tax loss of $294.3 million to
DFR.
The
dislocation in the mortgage sector and continuing weakness in the broader
financial market has adversely impacted, and may continue to adversely impact,
DFR’s cash flows and DFR has reported operating losses for the first six months
of 2008. However, we have received all three quarterly interest
payments on the DFR Notes which were due through September 30, 2008 on a timely
basis. Additionally, on October 15, 2008 we received a $1.1 million
dividend on the convertible preferred stock which we previously
held. Based on the Deerfield Sale agreement, payment of a dividend by
DFR on this preferred stock was dependent on DFR’s board of directors declaring
and paying a dividend on DFR’s common stock. The first dividend to be declared
on their common stock following the date of the Deerfield Sale was declared in
our 2008 third quarter and paid on October 15, 2008. Therefore,
during the 2008 third quarter, we recognized the dividend income from
DFR. DFR qualified for REIT status in previous quarters; however, on
October 2, 2008, DFR announced, among other things, its conversion to a C
corporation and the termination of its REIT status. Updated financial
information from DFR for their 2008 third quarter ended September 30, 2008 will
not be available until the filing of DFR’s Form 10-Q. Based on
current publicly available information and the other factors discussed above, we
believe the DFR Notes are fully collectible.
Income
Taxes
Our
Federal income tax returns for years subsequent to December 28, 2003 are not
currently under examination by the IRS, although some of our state income tax
returns are currently under examination. One of these states has
issued a notice of proposed tax adjustments aggregating $2.8 million for which
adequate reserves are included in “Current liabilities related to discontinued
operations.” However, we have disputed the notice and believe
ultimate resolution will not have a material adverse impact on our condensed
consolidated financial position or results of operations.
Legal
and Environmental Matters
In 2001,
a vacant property owned by Adams Packing Association, Inc. (“Adams”), an
inactive subsidiary of ours, was listed by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency on the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Information System (“CERCLIS”) list of known or suspected contaminated
sites. The CERCLIS listing appears to have been based on an
allegation that a former tenant of Adams conducted drum recycling operations at
the site from some time prior to 1971 until the late 1970s. The
business operations of Adams were sold in December 1992. In February
2003, Adams and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (the “FDEP”)
agreed to a consent order that provided for development of a work plan for
further investigation of the site and limited remediation of the identified
contamination. In May 2003, the FDEP approved the work plan submitted
by Adams’ environmental consultant and during 2004 the work under that plan was
completed. Adams submitted its contamination assessment report to the
FDEP in March 2004. In August 2004, the FDEP agreed to a monitoring
plan consisting of two sampling events which occurred in January and June 2005
and the results were submitted to the FDEP for its review. In
November 2005, Adams received a letter from the FDEP identifying certain open
issues with respect to the property. The letter did not specify
whether any further actions are required to be taken by Adams. Adams
sought clarification from the FDEP in order to attempt to resolve this
matter. On May 1, 2007, the FDEP sent a letter clarifying their prior
correspondence and reiterated the open issues identified in their November 2005
letter. In addition, the FDEP offered Adams the option of voluntarily
taking part in a recently adopted state program that could lessen site clean up
standards, should such a clean up be required after a mandatory further study
and site assessment report. With our consultants and outside counsel,
we reviewed this option and sent our response and proposed work plan to FDEP on
April 24, 2008 and are awaiting FDEP’s response. Nonetheless, based
on amounts spent prior to 2007 of approximately $1.7 million for all of these
costs and after taking into consideration various legal defenses available to
us, including Adams, we expect that the final resolution of this matter will not
have a material effect on our financial position or results of
operations.
On April
25, 2008, a putative class action complaint was filed by Ethel Guiseppone, on
behalf of herself and others similarly situated, against Wendy’s, its directors,
the Company (then known as Triarc Companies, Inc.), and Trian Partners, in the
Franklin County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas. A motion for leave to file an
amended complaint was filed on June 19, 2008. The proposed amended complaint
alleged breach of fiduciary duties arising out of the Wendy’s board of
directors’ search for a merger partner and out of its approval of the merger
agreement on April 23, 2008, and failure to disclose material information
related to the merger in Amendment No. 3 to Form S-4 under the Securities Act of
1933 (the “Form S-4”). The proposed amended complaint sought certification of
the proceeding as a class action; preliminary and permanent injunctions against
disenfranchising the purported class and consummating the merger; a declaration
that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties; costs and attorneys fees;
and any other relief the court deems proper and just.
Also on
April 25, 2008, a putative class action and derivative complaint was filed by
Cindy Henzel, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, and
derivatively on behalf of Wendy’s, against Wendy’s and its directors in the
Franklin County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas. A motion for leave to file an
amended complaint was filed on June 16, 2008. The proposed amended complaint
alleges breach of fiduciary duties arising out of the Wendy’s board of
directors’ search for a merger partner and out of its approval of the
merger agreement on April 23, 2008, and failure to disclose material information
related to the merger in the Form S-4. The proposed amended complaint seeks
certification of the proceeding as a derivative and class action; an injunction
against consummating the merger and requiring the defendants to promptly hold an
annual meeting and to seek another merger partner; rescission of any part of the
merger agreement already implemented; a declaration that the defendants breached
their fiduciary duties; costs and attorneys fees; and any other relief the court
deems proper and just.
On May
22, 2008, a putative class action complaint was filed by Ronald Donald Smith, on
behalf of himself and others similarly situated, against Wendy’s and its
directors in the Franklin County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas. A motion for leave
to file an amended complaint was filed on June 30, 2008. The proposed amended
complaint alleged breach of fiduciary duties arising out of the Wendy’s board of
directors’ search for a merger partner and out of its approval of the merger
agreement on April 23, 2008, and failure to disclose material information
related to the merger in the Form S-4. The proposed amended complaint sought
certification of the proceeding as a derivative and class action; an injunction
against consummating the merger and requiring the defendants to promptly hold an
annual meeting and to seek another merger partner; rescission of any part of the
merger agreement already implemented; a declaration that the defendants breached
their fiduciary duties; costs and attorneys fees; and any other relief the court
deems proper and just.
On June 13, 2008, a
putative class action complaint was filed by Peter D. Ravanis and
Dorothea Ravanis, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, against
Wendy’s, its directors, and Triarc Companies, Inc. in the Supreme Court of the
State of New York, New York County. An amended complaint was filed on June 20,
2008. The amended complaint alleges breach of fiduciary duties arising out of
the Wendy’s board of directors’ search for a merger partner and out of its
approval of the merger agreement on April 23, 2008, and failure to disclose
material information related to the merger in the Form S-4. The amended
complaint seeks certification of the proceeding as a class action; preliminary
and permanent injunctions against consummating the merger; other equitable
relief; attorneys’ fees; and any other relief the court deems proper and just.
All parties to this case have jointly requested that the court stay the action
pending resolution of the Ohio cases.
On July
9, 2008, the parties to the three Ohio actions described above filed a
stipulation and proposed order that would consolidate the cases, provide for the
proposed amended complaint in the Henzel case to be the operative complaint in
each of the cases,
designate one law firm as lead plaintiffs’ counsel, and establish an answer date
for the defendants in the consolidated case. The court entered the order as
proposed in all three cases on July 9, 2008.
On August
13, 2008, counsel for the parties to the Guiseppone, Henzel, Smith and Ravanis
cases described above entered into a memorandum of understanding in which they
agreed upon the terms of a settlement of all such lawsuits, which would include
the dismissal with prejudice, and release, of all claims against all the
defendants, including Wendy’s, its directors, us and Trian Partners. In
connection with the settlement, Wendy’s agreed to make certain additional
disclosures to its shareholders, which were contained the Form S-4 and to pay
plaintiffs’ legal fees.
The
memorandum of understanding also contemplates that the parties will enter into a
stipulation of settlement. There can be no assurance that the parties will
ultimately enter into such stipulation of settlement or that the court will
approve the settlement even if the parties were to enter into such stipulation.
In such event, the proposed settlement as contemplated by the memorandum of
understanding may be terminated.
The
defendants believe that the Guiseppone, Henzel, Smith and Ravanis cases
described above are without merit and intend to vigorously defend them in the
event that the parties do not enter in the stipulation of settlement or if court
approval is not obtained. While we do not believe that these actions will have a
material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations,
unfavorable rulings could occur. Were an unfavorable ruling to occur, there
exists the possibility of a material adverse impact on our results of operations
for the period in which the ruling occurs or for future periods.
In
addition to the matters described above, we are involved in other litigation and
claims incidental to our current and prior businesses. We have
reserves for all of our legal and environmental matters aggregating
approximately $0.6 million as of September 28, 2008. Although the
outcome of such matters cannot be predicted with certainty and some of these
matters may be disposed of unfavorably to us, based on currently available
information, including legal defenses available to us, and given the
aforementioned reserves and our insurance coverages, we do not believe that the
outcome of such legal and environmental matters will have a material adverse
effect on our condensed consolidated financial position or results of
operations.
Seasonality
Our
continuing operations are not significantly impacted by
seasonality. However, our restaurant revenues are somewhat lower in
our first quarter. Seasonality may be impacted as a result of the Wendy’s merger
due to the fact that Wendy’s average restaurant sales are normally higher during
the summer months than during the winter months. Because their
business is moderately seasonal, results for any future quarter will not
necessarily be indicative of the results that may be achieved for any other
quarter or for the full fiscal year.
Recently
Issued Accounting Pronouncements Not Yet Adopted
In
December 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the “FASB”) issued SFAS
No. 141 (revised 2007), “Business Combinations” (“SFAS 141(R)”), and SFAS No.
160, “Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements – an
amendment of ARB No. 51” (“SFAS 160”). These statements change the
way companies account for business combinations and noncontrolling interests by,
among other things, requiring (1) more assets and liabilities to be measured at
fair value as of the acquisition date, including a valuation of the entire
company being acquired where less than 100% of the company is acquired, (2) an
acquirer in preacquisition periods to expense all acquisition-related costs, (3)
changes in acquisition related deferred tax balances after the completion of the
purchase price allocation be recognized in the statement of operations as
opposed to through goodwill and (4) noncontrolling interests in subsidiaries
initially to be measured at fair value and classified as a separate component of
stockholders’ equity. These statements are to be applied
prospectively beginning with our 2009 fiscal year. However, SFAS 160
requires entities to apply the presentation and disclosure requirements
retrospectively for all periods presented. Both standards prohibit
early adoption. In addition, in April 2008, the FASB issued FASB
Staff Position No. FAS 142-3, “Determination of the Useful Life of Intangible
Assets” (“FSP FAS 142-3”). In determining the useful life of acquired
intangible assets, FSP FAS 142-3 removes the requirement to consider whether an
intangible asset can be renewed without substantial cost or material
modifications to the existing terms and conditions and, instead, requires an
entity to consider its own historical experience in renewing similar
arrangements. FSP FAS 142-3 also requires expanded disclosure related
to the determination of intangible asset useful lives. This staff
position is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning
in our 2009 fiscal year and may impact any intangible assets we
acquire. The application of SFAS 160 will require reclassification of
minority interests from a liability to a component of stockholders’ equity in
our consolidated financial statements beginning in our 2009 fiscal
year. Further, all of the statements referred to above could have a
significant impact on the accounting for any future acquisitions starting with
our 2009 fiscal year. The impact will depend upon the nature and
terms of such future acquisitions, if any. These statements will not
have an effect on our accounting for the Wendy’s merger except for any
potential adjustments to deferred taxes included in the allocation of the
purchase price after such allocation has been finalized.
In March
2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 161, "Disclosures about Derivative Instruments
and Hedging Activities" ("SFAS 161"). SFAS 161 requires companies with
derivative instruments to disclose information that should enable
financial-statement users to understand how and why a company uses derivative
instruments, how derivative instruments and related hedged items are accounted
for under SFAS No. 133, "Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities" (“SFAS 133”) and how these items affect a company's financial
position, results of operations and cash flows. SFAS 161 affects only these
disclosures and does not change the accounting for derivatives. SFAS
161 is to be applied prospectively beginning with the first quarter of our 2009
fiscal year. We are currently evaluating the impact, if any, that SFAS 161 will
have on the disclosures in our consolidated financial statements.
In May 2008, the FASB issued SFAS
No. 162, “Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles” (“SFAS
162”). This statement is intended to improve financial reporting by identifying
a consistent framework, or hierarchy, for selecting accounting principles to be
used in preparing financial statements that are presented in conformity with
GAAP. This statement will become effective during our 2008 fourth
quarter. We do not expect any significant impact on our consolidated
financial statements upon implementation of this pronouncement.
Outlook
for the Remainder of 2008
Sales
Our net
sales will increase significantly for the remainder of 2008 compared to the same
period in 2007 as a result of the Wendy’s merger. However, despite an
overall increase in sales, the same-store sales trends at Arby’s continue to be
negatively impacted by the factors described in “Results of Operations – Sales”
above and we expect these trends will continue to adversely impact our customer
traffic for the remainder of the 2008 fiscal year. Some of the
negative factors mentioned above, such as the level of discounting we offer
compared to our competitors, are anticipated to continue during the
fourth quarter. In addition, we could be negatively impacted by a
reduction in advertising and by a shorter holiday shopping season in the 2008
fourth quarter compared to the 2007 fourth quarter. We will attempt
to partially offset these negative factors by utilizing a strong product and
promotional calendar for the rest of the year including product enhancements and
value promotions as well as with advertising that we feel offers improved
creative content. We presently plan to open approximately 5 new
Company-owned Arby’s restaurants during the remainder of 2008 and close 2
Company-owned Arby’s restaurants as discussed below. We continually
review the performance of any underperforming Company-owned restaurants and
evaluate whether to close those restaurants, particularly in connection with the
decision to renew or extend their leases. Specifically, we have 4
Arby’s restaurant leases that are scheduled for renewal or expiration during the
remainder of 2008. We currently anticipate the renewal or extension
of 2 of these leases.
Wendy’s
has recently initiated a more aggressive value menu pricing strategy and has
also introduced a premium chicken menu item, both of which are expected to
positively impact traffic and same store sales in the fourth quarter of
2008. However, these increases could be negatively impacted by
general economic conditions. We plan to open 2 Company-owned Wendy’s
restaurants during the remainder of 2008 and close approximately 5 Company-owned
Wendy’s restaurants. In addition, there are 16 Wendy’s
restaurant leases that are scheduled for renewal or expiration during the
remainder of 2008. We anticipate the renewal or extension of all but
approximately 5 of these leases.
Franchise
Revenues
Our
franchise revenues will increase significantly for the remainder of 2008 as a
result of the Wendy’s merger. Franchise revenues will also be
favorably impacted by net new restaurant openings by both Arby’s and Wendy’s
franchisees. Despite an overall increase in franchise revenues, the
same-store sales trends for franchised restaurants at Arby’s and Wendy’s will
continue to be generally impacted by the various factors described above under
“Sales.”
Restaurant
Margin
We expect
that our restaurant margin percentage for the remainder of 2008 will decrease as
a result of the effect of the Wendy’s merger because Wendy’s has historically
lower restaurant margins than Arby’s. In addition to the impact of
the Wendy’s merger, we anticipate that our restaurant margin related to Arby’s
restaurants for the remainder of 2008 will continue to be lower than that for
the comparable period in 2007 as a result of higher (1) labor costs due to the
Federal and state minimum wage increases in 2008, (2) food costs due to rising
prices in beef and other commodities, and (3) utilities costs. We
expect these negative
factors will be partially offset by (1) the favorable impact of product
enhancements through the remainder of 2008, (2) a discretionary
reduction in Arby’s advertising expense planned for the 2008 fourth quarter and
(3) selective price increases to our menu during the fourth quarter of
2008.
Wendy’s
recent shift to a more aggressive value menu pricing strategy and its increased
costs stemming from minimum wage increases, higher commodity and utilities costs
are expected to negatively impact restaurant margin in the fourth quarter,
2008. However, this impact is expected to be partially offset by the
full quarter effect of price increases implemented in September 2008, the higher
margins of the premium chicken menu item described above and the effect on fixed
and semi-variable costs from the increase in same-store sales.
General
and Administrative
We expect
that our general and administrative expense for the fourth quarter of 2008 will
increase compared to the same period in 2007 as a result of the Wendy’s
merger. This increase will be partially offset by a decrease
resulting from the completion of the Corporate Restructuring and the Deerfield
Sale.
Depreciation
and Amortization
We expect
that our depreciation and amortization expense for the fourth quarter of 2008
will increase compared to the same period in 2007 as a result of (1) the Wendy’s
merger, (2) the addition of property and equipment principally for new
restaurants and (3) potential impairment charges, if any, on our long-lived
assets. This increase will be partially offset by a decrease due to
the fact that we had depreciation and amortization and impairment charges at our
former asset management segment in the fourth quarter of 2007 that will not
recur in the 2008 fourth quarter as a result of the Deerfield sale.
Goodwill
Impairment
We will
perform our annual review of goodwill during the fourth quarter of
2008. As noted above, we anticipate that the factors which have
negatively impacted our Company-owned restaurant margins through the first nine
months of 2008 will continue to negatively impact Company-owned restaurant
margins in the 2008 fourth quarter. Further deterioration may result
in an impairment of our goodwill.
Facilities
Relocation and Corporate Restructuring
We expect to incur additional
facilities relocation and corporate restructuring charges in conjunction with
the Wendy’s merger; however, we are unable to estimate the amount as of
September 28, 2008.
Interest
Expense
We expect
that our interest expense for the fourth quarter of 2008 will increase compared
to the same period in 2007 primarily as a result of the increase in debt due to
the Wendy’s merger.
Investment
Income (Loss), Net
As of a
result of continuing weakness in the economy during the fourth quarter of 2008
and its effect on the financial market, our available for sale securities held
in the Equities Account have experienced a decrease, as of October 31, 2008, of
approximately $11.0 million in their fair value as compared to the September 28,
2008 carrying and fair values. Such decreases could result in additional other
than temporary losses on our available for sale securities held in the Equities
Account in the fourth quarter of 2008.
Item
3. Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
This
“Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk” has been presented
in accordance with Item 305 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and should be read in conjunction with “Item 7A.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk” in our annual report
on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 30, 2007 (the “Form
10-K”). Item 7A of our Form 10-K describes in more detail our
objectives in managing our interest rate risk with respect to long-term debt, as
referred to below, our commodity price risk, our equity market risk and our
foreign currency risk.
Certain
statements we make under this Item 3 constitute “forward-looking statements”
under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. See
“Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements and Projections” in “Part II
– Other Information” preceding “Item 1.”
We are
exposed to the impact of interest rate changes, changes in commodity prices,
changes in the market value of our investments and, to a lesser extent, foreign
currency fluctuations. In the normal course of business, we employ
established policies and procedures to manage our exposure to these changes
using financial instruments we deem appropriate. We had no
significant changes in our management of, or our exposure to, commodity price
risk or equity market risk (with the exception of the reduction in our equity
market risk related to our investments in Deerfield Capital Corp, (“DFR”), which
we distributed to our shareholders in April 2008), or foreign currency risk
during the nine months ended September 28, 2008.
Interest
Rate Risk
Our
objective in managing our exposure to interest rate changes is to limit its
impact on our earnings and cash flows. We have historically used
interest rate caps and/or interest rate swap agreements on a portion of our
variable-rate debt to limit our exposure to the effects of increases in
short-term interest rates on our earnings and cash flows. As of
September 28, 2008 our long-term debt, including current portion, aggregated
$721.2 million and consisted of $495.0 million of variable-rate debt, $196.8
million of capitalized lease and sale-leaseback obligations, and $29.4 million
of fixed-rate debt. Our variable interest rate debt consists of
$495.0 million of term loan borrowings under a variable-rate senior secured term
loan facility due through 2012. The term loan bears interest at the
30-day London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) (3.76% at September 26, 2008)
plus 2.25%. In connection with the terms of the related credit
agreement, we had three interest rate swap agreements that fix the interest rate
at 4.12%, 4.56% and 4.64% on $100.0 million, $50.0 million and $55.0 million,
respectively, of the outstanding principal amount until September 30, 2008,
October 30, 2008 and October 30, 2008, respectively. We do not
currently plan to enter into future swap agreements. We cannot
determine the magnitude of this potential impact at this time because it is
dependent on the direction and magnitude of any changes in the interest rate
environment. The interest rate swap agreements related to the term
loans were designated as cash flow hedges and, accordingly, are recorded at fair
value with changes in fair value recorded through the accumulated other
comprehensive income or loss component of stockholders’ equity to the extent of
the effectiveness of these hedges. There was no ineffectiveness from
these hedges through September 28, 2008. If a hedge or portion
thereof is determined to be ineffective, any changes in fair value would be
recognized in our results of operations. The fair value of our
fixed-rate debt will increase if interest rates decrease. The fair
market value of our investments in fixed-rate debt securities will decline if
interest rates increase. See below for a discussion of how we manage
this risk. Our interest rate risk will also be impacted by the merger
with Wendy’s International, Inc. (“Wendy’s”).
Overall
Market Risk
Our
overall market risk as of September 28, 2008 includes the senior secured notes
of DFR (the “DFR Notes”), which we received in late fiscal 2007 in connection
with the sale of our majority capital interest in Deerfield & Company, LLC
(“Deerfield”), which is discussed in more detail below and investments (the
“Equities Account”) that are managed by a management company formed by certain
former executives (the “Management Company”).
At
September 28, 2008, as a result of the Deerfield Sale, we held DFR Notes
with a carrying value of $46.5 million. The collection of the DFR
Notes and related interest are dependent on the cash flows of DFR. DFR disclosed
during the first quarter of 2008 that it had repositioned its investment
portfolio to focus on agency-only residential mortgage backed securities and its
asset management segment with its fee-based revenue streams. We are unable to
determine the effect that these investment changes will have on DFR’s
cash flows nor the potential financial impact of the dislocation in the
mortgage sector and the current weaknesses in the broader financial
market. We have received all three quarterly interest payments on the
DFR Notes which were due through September 30, 2008 on a timely
basis. Certain expenses totaling $6.2 million related to the
Deerfield Sale, which were a liability of the Company and for which we had an
equal offsetting receivable from DFR as of December 30, 2007, were paid by DFR
during 2008. Additionally, on October 15, 2008 we received a $1.1
million dividend on the convertible preferred stock which we previously
held. DFR qualified for REIT status in previous quarters; however, on
October 2, 2008, DFR
announced, among other things, its conversion to a C corporation and the
termination of its REIT status. Updated financial information from
DFR for their 2008 third quarter ended September 30, 2008 will not be available
until the filing of DFR’s Form 10-Q. As of September 28, 2008, based on
publicly available information and the other factors discussed above, we believe
that the principal amount of the DFR Notes is fully
collectible.
We
maintain investment holdings of various issuers, types and
maturities. As of September 28, 2008 these investments were
classified in our condensed consolidated balance sheet as follows (in
millions):
Investment
assets:
|
|
|
|
Cash
equivalents included in “Cash and cash equivalents”
|
|
$ |
15.8 |
|
Investment
settlement receivable
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
Non-current
restricted cash equivalents
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
Non-current
investments
|
|
|
70.4 |
|
|
|
$ |
90.3 |
|
Investment
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
Investment
settlement payable included in “Accrued expenses and other current
liabilities”
|
|
$ |
(0.2 |
) |
Derivatives
in liability positions included in “Other liabilities”
|
|
|
(2.4 |
) |
|
|
$ |
(2.6 |
) |
Included
in our investment assets is our Equities Account, which comprises investments
primarily in underperforming companies, which the Management Company believes
are undervalued and provide opportunity for increases in fair value.
Additionally, the Management Company has and may in the future sell short
certain securities which it believes are overvalued. In order to partially
mitigate the exposure of the portfolio to market risk, the Management Company
employs a hedging program which utilizes a put option on a market
index. In December 2005 we invested $75.0 million in the Equities
Account, and in April 2007, as part of the agreements with the former
executives, we entered into an agreement under which (1) the Management Company
will continue to manage the Equities Account until at least December 31, 2010,
(2) we will not withdraw our investment from the Equities Account prior to
December 31, 2010 and (3) beginning January 1, 2008, we began to pay management
and incentive fees to the Management Company in an amount customary for other
unaffiliated third party investors with similarly sized
investments. The Equities Account is invested principally in the
equity securities of a limited number of publicly-traded companies, cash
equivalents and equity derivatives and had a fair value of $63.2 million as of
September 28, 2008, consisting of $2.9 million in restricted cash equivalents,
$62.6 million in investments, $0.3 million in investment-related receivables
(included in “Deferred costs and other assets”), less $0.2 million in investment
settlement payable (included in “Accrued expenses and other current
liabilities”) and $2.4 million of derivatives in a liability
position (included in “Other liabilities”). As of September 28, 2008,
the derivatives held in our Equities Account investment portfolio consisted of
(1) put options on a market index, (2) total return swaps on equity securities,
and (3) a put and call option combination on an equity security. We did not
designate any of these strategies as hedging instruments and, accordingly all of
these derivative instruments were recorded at fair value with changes in fair
value recorded in our results of operations. The fair value of the
Equities Account of $63.2 million excludes $30.0 million of restricted cash
transferred from the Equities Account to Wendy’s/Arby’s in the 2008 third
quarter. We currently intend to return this amount to the Equities
Account by December 31, 2008.
Our cash
equivalents are short-term, highly liquid investments with maturities of three
months or less when acquired and consisted principally of cash in mutual fund
money market and bank money market accounts and cash in interest-bearing
brokerage and bank accounts with a stable value, $4.0 million of which were
restricted as of September 28, 2008.
At
September 28, 2008 our investments were classified in the following general
types or categories (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
At
Fair
|
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
Type
|
|
At
Cost
|
|
|
Value
(a) (b)
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
equivalents and investment asset positions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
equivalents
|
|
$ |
15.8 |
|
|
$ |
15.8 |
|
|
$ |
15.8 |
|
|
|
17.5%
|
|
Investment
settlement receivable
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
0.1%
|
|
Non-current
restricted cash equivalents
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
4.4%
|
|
Non-current
investments accounted for as available-for-sale securities
|
|
|
49.5 |
|
|
|
55.9 |
|
|
|
55.9 |
|
|
|
61.8%
|
|
Other
non-current investments in investment limited partnerships accounted for
at cost
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
2.3%
|
|
Other
non-current investments accounted for at:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
(c)
|
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
|
6.8%
|
|
Fair
value
|
|
|
2.8 |
|
|
|
6.4 |
|
|
|
6.4 |
|
|
|
7.1%
|
|
|
|
$ |
80.3 |
|
|
$ |
91.5 |
|
|
$ |
90.3 |
|
|
|
100.0%
|
|
Investment
liability positions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment
settlement payable
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
|
7.7%
|
|
Derivatives
in liability positions
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
|
92.3%
|
|
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
2.6 |
|
|
$ |
2.6 |
|
|
|
100.0%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
7.7%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
92.3%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
2.6 |
|
|
$ |
2.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0%
|
|
(a)
There can be no assurance that we would be able to sell certain of these
investments at these amounts.
(b)
|
Includes
$2.9 million of restricted cash equivalents, $55.9 million of non-current
available-for-sale securities, $6.4 million of non-current investment
derivatives, $0.3 million of non-current cost investments less $0.2
million of investment settlement payable and $2.4 million of derivatives
in non-current liability positions that are being managed in the Equities
Account by the Management Company until at least December 31,
2010. As of October 31, 2008, the non-current
available-for-sale securities held in the Equities Account have declined
in value by approximately $11.0 million to $45.0
million.
|
(c)
|
Includes
our investment in Jurlique International Pty Ltd., an Australian skin and
beauty products company not publicly traded (“Jurlique”). This
cost investment declined in value in 2008 and therefore we recorded other
than temporary losses of $6.5 million in the nine months ended September
28, 2008.
|
Our
marketable securities are reported at fair market value and are classified and
accounted for as “available-for-sale” with the resulting net unrealized holding
gains or losses, net of income taxes, reported as a separate component of
comprehensive income or loss bypassing net income or loss. Investment limited
partnerships and other non-current investments in which we do not have
significant influence over the investees are accounted for at
cost. Unrealized holding gains or losses, net of income taxes, for
derivatives and securities sold with an obligation to purchase (“short-sales”)
are reported as a component of net income or loss. Realized gains and
losses on investment limited partnerships and other non-current investments
recorded at cost are reported as income or loss in the period in which the
securities are sold. Investments in which we have significant
influence over the investees are accounted for in accordance with the equity
method of accounting under which our results of operations include our share of
the income or loss of the investees. We review all of our investments
in which we have unrealized losses and recognize investment losses currently for
any unrealized losses we deem to be other than temporary. The
cost-basis component of investments reflected in the tables above and below
represents original cost less a permanent reduction for any unrealized losses
that were deemed to be other than temporary.
Sensitivity
Analysis
Our
estimate of market risk exposure is presented for each class of financial
instruments held by us at September 28, 2008 for which an immediate adverse
market movement causes a potential material impact on our financial position or
results of operations. We believe that the adverse market movements described
below represent the hypothetical loss to future earnings and do not represent
the maximum possible loss nor any expected actual loss, even under adverse
conditions, because actual adverse fluctuations would likely differ. In
addition, since our investment portfolio is subject to changes in our portfolio
management strategy, and general market conditions, these estimates are not
necessarily indicative of the actual results which may occur. As of
September 28, 2008, we did not hold any market-risk sensitive instruments
which were entered into for trading purposes. As such, the table
below reflects the risk for those financial instruments entered into for other
than trading purposes.
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Rate
Risk
|
|
|
Price
Risk
|
|
|
Currency
Risk
|
|
Cash
equivalents
|
|
$ |
15.8 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Restricted
cash equivalents – non-current
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Available-for-sale
securities – restricted (a)
|
|
|
55.9 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(5.6 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Investment
in Jurlique at carrying value, net of other than temporary
loss
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
Put
options on market index – restricted (a)
|
|
|
6.2 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(2.9 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Total
return swap on an equity security – restricted (a)
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(0.6 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Other
investments
|
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(0.6 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
DFR
Notes
|
|
|
46.5 |
|
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Interest
rate swaps in a liability position
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Investment
settlement payable (a)
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Investment
derivatives in liability positions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Put
and call option combination on an equity security – restricted
(a)
|
|
|
(1.1 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Total return swap on equity securities
– restricted (a)
|
|
|
(1.3 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1.5 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
Long-term
debt, excluding capitalized lease and sale-leaseback
obligations
|
|
|
(524.3 |
) |
|
|
(16.4 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
(a)
These
amounts are included in the Equities
Account.
|
|
The
sensitivity analysis of financial instruments held at September 28, 2008 assumes
(1) an instantaneous one percentage point adverse change in market interest
rates, (2) an instantaneous 10% adverse change in the equity markets in which we
are invested and (3) an instantaneous 10% adverse change in the foreign currency
exchange rates versus the United States dollar, each from their levels at
September 28, 2008 and with all other variables held constant. The
equity price risk reflects the impact of a 10% decrease in the carrying value of
our equity securities, including those in “Other investments” in the table
above. The sensitivity analysis also assumes that the decreases in
the equity markets and foreign exchange rates are other than
temporary. We have not reduced the equity price risk for
available-for-sale investments and cost investments to the extent of unrealized
gains on certain of those investments, which would limit or eliminate the effect
of the indicated market risk on our results of operations and, for cost
investments, our financial position.
We have
not included the potential effect of the credit risk associated with the
collectability of the DFR Notes, which is dependent on the cash flows of DFR as
we believe that the principal amount of the DFR Notes is fully
collectible. We also have not included the credit risk associated
with the debt of Wendy’s after the September 29, 2008 merger date.
Our cash
equivalents and restricted cash equivalents included $15.8 million and $4.0
million, respectively, as of September 28, 2008 of mutual fund money market and
bank money market accounts and/or interest-bearing brokerage and bank accounts
which are all investments with a maturity of three months or less when acquired
and are designed to maintain a stable value.
As of
September 28, 2008, a majority of our debt was variable-rate debt and therefore
the interest rate risk presented with respect to our $495.0 million of
variable-rate long-term debt, excluding capitalized lease and sale-leaseback
obligations, represents the potential impact an increase in interest rates of
one percentage point has on our results of operations. Our
variable-rate long-term debt outstanding as of September 28, 2008 had a weighted
average remaining maturity of approximately three years. However, as
discussed above under “Interest Rate Risk,” we had three interest rate swap
agreements, all of which expired by October 30, 2008. The interest
rate risk of our variable-rate debt presented in the table above excludes the
$205.0 million for which we
designated interest rate swap agreements as cash flow hedges for the terms of
the swap agreements. These interest rate swaps expired by October 30,
2008 and we do not currently plan to enter into new swaps. Our
interest rate risk will increase after these swaps expire. As
interest rates decrease, the fair market values of the interest rate swap
agreements decrease. The interest rate risks presented with respect
to the interest rate swap agreements represent the potential impact the
indicated change has on the net fair value of the swap agreements and on our
financial position. Due to the near-term expiration date, such change
is not relevant as the carrying value is indicative of the current market
value. We only have $29.4 million of fixed-rate debt as of September
28, 2008, for which a potential impact of a decrease in interest rates of one
percentage point would have an immaterial impact on the fair value of such debt
and, accordingly, is not reflected in the table above.
For
investments held since December 30, 2007 in investment limited partnerships and
similar investment entities, all of which are accounted for at cost, included in
“Other investments” in the table above, the sensitivity analysis assumes that
the investment mix for each such investment between equity versus debt
securities was unchanged since that date as more current information was not
readily available. To the extent such entities invest in convertible bonds,
which trade primarily on the conversion feature of the securities rather than on
the stated interest rate, this analysis assumed equity price risk but no
interest rate risk.
Item
4. Controls and
Procedures
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Our
management, with the participation of our President and Chief Executive Officer
and our Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, carried out an
evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation 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 (the “Exchange Act”)) as of the end
of the period covered by this Quarterly Report. Based on that
evaluation, our President and Chief Executive Officer and our Senior Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that, as of the end of such
period, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective to provide
reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by us in the
reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act was recorded, processed,
summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms
of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”).
Change
in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There
were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting made during our
most recent fiscal quarter that materially affected, or are reasonably
likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
Inherent
Limitations on Effectiveness of Controls
There are
inherent limitations in the effectiveness of any control system, including the
potential for human error and the circumvention or overriding of the controls
and procedures. Additionally, judgments in decision-making can be
faulty and breakdowns can occur because of simple error or
mistake. An effective control system can provide only reasonable, not
absolute, assurance that the control objectives of the system are adequately
met. Accordingly, our management, including our President and Chief
Executive Officer and our Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer,
does not expect that our control system can prevent or detect all error or
fraud. Finally, projections of any evaluation or assessment of
effectiveness of a control system to future periods are subject to the risks
that, over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in an
entity’s operating environment or deterioration in the degree of compliance with
policies or procedures.
Part
II. OTHER
INFORMATION
SPECIAL
NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS AND PROJECTIONS
Effective
September 29, 2008, in conjunction with the merger with Wendy’s International,
Inc. (“Wendy’s”), the corporate name of Triarc Companies, Inc. (“Triarc”)
changed to Wendy’s/Arby’s Group, Inc. (“Wendy’s/Arby’s” or, together with its
subsidiaries, the “Company” or “We”). This Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q and oral statements made from time to time by representatives of the
Company may contain or incorporate by reference certain statements that are not
historical facts, including, most importantly, information concerning possible
or assumed future results of operations of the Company. Those
statements, as well as statements preceded by, followed by, or that include the
words “may,” “believes,” “plans,” “expects,” “anticipates,” or the negation
thereof, or similar expressions, constitute “forward-looking statements” within
the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the “Reform
Act”). All statements that address future operating, financial or
business performance; strategies or expectations; future synergies, efficiencies
or overhead savings; anticipated costs or charges; future capitalization; and
anticipated financial impacts of recent or pending transactions are
forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Reform Act. The
forward-looking statements are based on our expectations at the time such
statements are made, speak only as of the dates they are made and are
susceptible to a number of risks, uncertainties and other
factors. Our actual results, performance and achievements may differ
materially from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or
implied by our forward-looking statements. For all of our
forward-looking statements, we claim the protection of the safe harbor for
forward-looking statements contained in the Reform Act. Many
important factors could affect our future results and could cause those results
to differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by the forward-looking
statements contained herein. Such factors, all of which are difficult
or impossible to predict accurately, and many of which are beyond our control,
include, but are not limited to, the following:
|
·
|
competition,
including pricing pressures and the potential impact of competitors’ new
units on sales by Wendy’s and Arby’s
restaurants;
|
|
·
|
consumers’
perceptions of the relative quality, variety, affordability and value of
the food products we offer;
|
|
·
|
success
of operating initiatives, including advertising and promotional efforts
and new product and concept development by us and our
competitors;
|
|
·
|
development
costs, including real estate and construction
costs;
|
|
·
|
changes
in consumer tastes and preferences, including changes resulting from
concerns over nutritional or safety aspects of beef, poultry, french fries
or other foods or the effects of food-borne illnesses such as “mad cow
disease” and avian influenza or “bird flu,” and changes in spending
patterns and demographic trends, such as the extent to which consumers eat
meals away from home;
|
|
·
|
certain
factors affecting our franchisees, including the business and financial
viability of key franchisees, the timely payment of such franchisees’
obligations due to us, and the ability of our franchisees to open new
restaurants in accordance with their development commitments, including
their ability to finance restaurant development and
remodels;
|
|
·
|
availability,
location and terms of sites for restaurant development by us and our
franchisees;
|
|
·
|
delays
in opening new restaurants or completing remodels of existing
restaurants;
|
|
·
|
the
timing and impact of acquisitions and dispositions of
restaurants;
|
|
·
|
our
ability to successfully integrate acquired restaurant
operations;
|
|
·
|
anticipated
or unanticipated restaurant closures by us and our
franchisees;
|
|
·
|
our
ability to identify, attract and retain potential franchisees with
sufficient experience and financial resources to develop and operate
Wendy’s and Arby’s restaurants
successfully;
|
|
·
|
availability
of qualified restaurant personnel to us and to our franchisees, and the
ability to retain such
personnel;
|
|
·
|
our
ability, if necessary, to secure alternative distribution of supplies of
food, equipment and other products to Wendy’s and Arby’s restaurants at
competitive rates and in adequate amounts, and the potential financial
impact of any interruptions in such distribution; |
|
|
|
|
·
|
changes
in commodity costs (including beef and chicken), labor, supply, fuel,
utilities, distribution and other operating
costs;
|
|
·
|
availability
and cost of insurance;
|
|
·
|
adverse
weather conditions;
|
|
·
|
availability,
terms (including changes in interest rates) and deployment of
capital;
|
|
·
|
changes
in legal or self-regulatory requirements, including franchising laws,
accounting standards, payment card industry rules, overtime rules, minimum
wage rates, government-mandated health benefits and taxation
rates;
|
|
·
|
the
costs, uncertainties and other effects of legal, environmental and
administrative proceedings;
|
|
·
|
the
impact of general economic conditions on consumer spending, including a
slower consumer economy particularly in geographic regions that contain a
high concentration of Wendy’s or Arby’s restaurants, and the effects of
war or terrorist activities;
|
|
·
|
the
impact of our continuing investment in series A senior secured notes of
DFR following our corporate restructuring;
and
|
|
·
|
other
risks and uncertainties affecting us and our subsidiaries referred to in
our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007
(the “Form 10-K”) (see especially “Item 1A. Risk Factors” and “Item 7.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations”) and in our other current and periodic filings with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
|
All
future written and oral forward-looking statements attributable to us or any
person acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by the
cautionary statements contained or referred to in this section. New
risks and uncertainties arise from time to time, and it is impossible for us to
predict these events or how they may affect us. We assume no
obligation to update any forward-looking statements after the date of this
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q as a result of new information, future events or
developments, except as required by federal securities laws. In
addition, it is our policy generally not to make any specific projections as to
future earnings, and we do not endorse any projections regarding future
performance that may be made by third parties.
Item
1. Legal Proceedings
In 2001,
a vacant property owned by Adams Packing Association, Inc. (“Adams”), an
inactive subsidiary of ours, was listed by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency on the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Information System (“CERCLIS”) list of known or suspected contaminated
sites. The CERCLIS listing appears to have been based on an
allegation that a former tenant of Adams conducted drum recycling operations at
the site from some time prior to 1971 until the late 1970s. The
business operations of Adams were sold in December 1992. In February
2003, Adams and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (the “FDEP”)
agreed to a consent order that provided for development of a work plan for
further investigation of the site and limited remediation of the identified
contamination. In May 2003, the FDEP approved the work plan submitted
by Adams’ environmental consultant and during 2004 the work under that plan was
completed. Adams submitted its contamination assessment report to the
FDEP in March 2004. In August 2004, the FDEP agreed to a monitoring
plan consisting of two sampling events which occurred in January and June 2005
and the results were submitted to the FDEP for its review. In
November 2005, Adams received a letter from the FDEP identifying certain open
issues with respect to the property. The letter did not specify
whether any further actions are required to be taken by Adams. Adams
sought clarification from the FDEP in order to attempt to resolve this
matter. On May 1, 2007, the FDEP sent a letter clarifying their prior
correspondence and reiterated the open issues identified in their November 2005
letter. In addition, the FDEP offered Adams the option of voluntarily
taking part in a recently adopted state program that could lessen site clean up
standards, should such a clean up be required after a mandatory further study
and site assessment report. With our consultants and outside counsel,
we reviewed this option and sent our response and proposed work plan to FDEP on
April 24, 2008 and are awaiting FDEP’s response. Nonetheless, based
on amounts spent prior to 2007 of approximately $1.7 million for all of these
costs and after taking into
consideration various legal defenses available to us, including Adams, we expect
that the final resolution of this matter will not have a material effect on our
financial position or results of operations.
On April
25, 2008, a putative class action complaint was filed by Ethel Guiseppone, on
behalf of herself and others similarly situated, against Wendy’s, its directors,
the Company (then known as Triarc Companies, Inc.), and Trian Partners, in the
Franklin County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas. A motion for leave to file an
amended complaint was filed on June 19, 2008. The proposed amended complaint
alleged breach of fiduciary duties arising out of the Wendy’s board of
directors’ search for a merger partner and out of its approval of the merger
agreement on April 23, 2008, and failure to disclose material information
related to the merger in Amendment No. 3 to Form S-4 under the Securities Act of
1933 (the “Form S-4”). The proposed amended complaint sought certification of
the proceeding as a class action; preliminary and permanent injunctions against
disenfranchising the purported class and consummating the merger; a declaration
that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties; costs and attorneys fees;
and any other relief the court deems proper and just.
Also on
April 25, 2008, a putative class action and derivative complaint was filed by
Cindy Henzel, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, and
derivatively on behalf of Wendy’s, against Wendy’s and its directors in the
Franklin County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas. A motion for leave to file an
amended complaint was filed on June 16, 2008. The proposed amended complaint
alleges breach of fiduciary duties arising out of the Wendy’s board of
directors’ search for a merger partner and out of its approval of the
merger agreement on April 23, 2008, and failure to disclose material information
related to the merger in the Form S-4. The proposed amended complaint seeks
certification of the proceeding as a derivative and class action; an injunction
against consummating the merger and requiring the defendants to promptly hold an
annual meeting and to seek another merger partner; rescission of any part of the
merger agreement already implemented; a declaration that the defendants breached
their fiduciary duties; costs and attorneys fees; and any other relief the court
deems proper and just.
On May
22, 2008, a putative class action complaint was filed by Ronald Donald Smith, on
behalf of himself and others similarly situated, against Wendy’s and its
directors in the Franklin County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas. A motion for leave
to file an amended complaint was filed on June 30, 2008. The proposed amended
complaint alleged breach of fiduciary duties arising out of the Wendy’s board of
directors’ search for a merger partner and out of its approval of the merger
agreement on April 23, 2008, and failure to disclose material information
related to the merger in the Form S-4. The proposed amended complaint sought
certification of the proceeding as a derivative and class action; an injunction
against consummating the merger and requiring the defendants to promptly hold an
annual meeting and to seek another merger partner; rescission of any part of the
merger agreement already implemented; a declaration that the defendants breached
their fiduciary duties; costs and attorneys fees; and any other relief the court
deems proper and just.
On June
13, 2008, a putative class action complaint was filed by Peter D. Ravanis and
Dorothea Ravanis, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, against
Wendy’s, its directors, and Triarc Companies, Inc. in the Supreme Court of the
State of New York, New York County. An amended complaint was filed on June 20,
2008. The amended complaint alleges breach of fiduciary duties arising out of
the Wendy’s board of directors’ search for a merger partner and out of its
approval of the merger agreement on April 23, 2008, and failure to disclose
material information related to the merger in the Form S-4. The amended
complaint seeks certification of the proceeding as a class action; preliminary
and permanent injunctions against consummating the merger; other equitable
relief; attorneys’ fees; and any other relief the court deems proper and just.
All parties to this case have jointly requested that the court stay the action
pending resolution of the Ohio cases.
On July
9, 2008, the parties to the three Ohio actions described above filed a
stipulation and proposed order that would consolidate the cases, provide for the
proposed amended complaint in the Henzel case to be the
operative complaint in each of the cases, designate one law firm as lead
plaintiffs’ counsel, and establish an answer date for the defendants in the
consolidated case. The court entered the order as proposed in all three cases on
July 9, 2008.
On August
13, 2008, counsel for the parties to the Guiseppone, Henzel, Smith and
Ravanis cases described
above entered into a memorandum of understanding in which they agreed upon the
terms of a settlement of all such lawsuits, which would include the dismissal
with prejudice, and release, of all claims against all the defendants, including
Wendy’s, its directors, us and Trian Partners. In connection with the
settlement, Wendy’s agreed to make certain additional disclosures to its
shareholders, which were contained in the Form S-4 and to pay plaintiffs’ legal
fees.
The
memorandum of understanding also contemplates that the parties will enter into a
stipulation of settlement. There can be no assurance that the parties will
ultimately enter into such stipulation of settlement or that the court will
approve the settlement even if the parties were to enter into such stipulation.
In such event, the proposed settlement as contemplated by the memorandum of
understanding may be terminated.
The
defendants believe that the Guiseppone, Henzel, Smith and
Ravanis cases described
above are without merit and intend to vigorously defend them in the event that
the parties do not enter in the stipulation of settlement or if court approval
is not obtained. While we do not believe that these actions will have a material
adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations, unfavorable
rulings could occur. Were an unfavorable ruling to occur, there exists the
possibility of a material adverse impact on our results of operations for the
period in which the ruling occurs or for future periods.
In
addition to the matters described above, we are involved in other litigation and
claims incidental to our current and prior businesses. We have
reserves for all of our legal and environmental matters aggregating $0.6 million
as of September 28, 2008. Although the outcome of these matters
cannot be predicted with certainty and some of these matters may be disposed of
unfavorably to us, based on currently available information, including legal
defenses available to us, and given the aforementioned reserves and our
insurance coverages, we do not believe that the outcome of these legal and
environmental matters will have a material adverse effect on our condensed
consolidated financial position or results of operations.
Item
1A. Risk Factors.
In
addition to the information contained in this report, you should carefully
consider the risk factors disclosed in our Form 10-K, and in our Quarterly
Reports on Form 10-Q for the quarterly periods ended March 30, 2008 and June 29,
2008. Those risk factors could materially affect our business,
financial condition or future results. Except as described in this
report, there have been no material changes from the risk factors previously
disclosed in our Form 10-K and Form 10-Qs.
In our
second quarter Form 10-Q we included a number of risk factors relating to the
then-pending merger with Wendy’s. Those risk factors are updated and
supplemented as follows, reflecting completion of the merger:
Risks
Relating to Wendy’s/Arby’s Group
We
may not be able to successfully consolidate business operations and realize the
anticipated benefits of the merger.
Realization
of the anticipated benefits of the merger, including anticipated synergies and
overhead savings, will depend, in large part, on our ability to successfully
eliminate redundant corporate functions and consolidate public company and
shared service responsibilities. We will be required to devote significant
management attention and resources to the consolidation of business practices
and support functions while maintaining the independence of the Arby’s and
Wendy’s standalone brands. The challenges we may encounter include the
following:
·
|
preserving
franchisee, supplier and other important relationships and resolving
potential conflicts between the standalone brands that may arise as a
result of the merger;
|
·
|
consolidating
redundant operations, including corporate functions;
and
|
·
|
addressing
differences in business cultures between Arby’s and Wendy’s, preserving
employee morale and retaining key employees, maintaining focus on
providing consistent, high quality customer service, meeting the
operational and financial goals of the resulting company and maintaining
the operational goals of each of the standalone
brands.
|
The
process of consolidating corporate level operations could cause an interruption
of, or loss of momentum in, our business and financial performance. The
diversion of management’s attention and any delays or difficulties encountered
in connection with the merger and the development of corporate synergies through
top-level consolidation could have an adverse effect on our business, financial
results, financial condition or stock price. The consolidation process may also
result in additional and unforeseen expenses. There can be no assurance that the
contemplated expense savings, improvements in Wendy’s store-level margins and
synergies anticipated from the merger will be realized.
There
can be no assurance regarding whether or to what extent we will pay dividends on
our common stock in the future.
Holders
of our common stock will only be entitled to receive such dividends as our board
of directors may declare out of funds legally available for such payments. Any
dividends will be made at the discretion of the board of directors and will
depend on our earnings, financial condition, cash requirements and such other
factors as the board of directors may deem relevant from time to
time.
Because
Wendy’s/Arby’s Group is a holding company, our ability to declare and pay
dividends is dependent upon cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments on
hand and cash flows from our subsidiaries. The ability of any of our
subsidiaries to pay
cash dividends and/or make loans or advances to us will be dependent upon their
respective abilities to achieve sufficient cash flows after satisfying their
respective cash requirements, including debt service, to enable the payment of
such dividends or the making of such loans or advances. The ability of any of
our subsidiaries to pay cash dividends or other payments to us will also be
limited by restrictions in debt instruments currently existing or subsequently
entered into by such subsidiaries.
Although
Triarc and Wendy’s have historically declared cash dividends on their shares of
common stock and common shares, respectively, we are not required to do so and
may reduce or eliminate dividends on our common stock in the future. This could
adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
Risks
Relating to Wendy’s
We
completed the merger with Wendy’s on September 29, 2008. Although the
financial results of Wendy’s are not included in the financial statements
included in this Form 10-Q, an investment in Wendy’s/Arby’s Group includes risks
relating to the Wendy’s business. Many of the risks relating to the
Wendy’s business are shared by Arby’s and therefore are similar to the risks
relating to the Arby’s business previously described in our Form
10-K.
The Wendy’s restaurant business is
significantly dependent on new restaurant openings, which may be affected by
factors beyond our control.
The
Wendy’s restaurant business derives earnings from sales at company-owned
restaurants, franchise royalties received from franchised Wendy’s restaurants
and technical assistance fees from restaurant operators for each new unit
opened. Growth in restaurant revenues and earnings is significantly
dependent on new restaurant openings. Numerous factors beyond our
control may affect restaurant openings. These factors include but are
not limited to:
·
|
our
ability to attract new franchisees;
|
·
|
the
availability of site locations for new
restaurants;
|
·
|
the
ability of potential restaurant owners to obtain
financing;
|
·
|
the
ability of restaurant owners to hire, train and retain qualified operating
personnel;
|
·
|
the
availability of construction materials and
labor;
|
·
|
construction
and development costs of new restaurants, particularly in
highly-competitive markets;
|
·
|
the
ability of restaurant owners to secure required governmental approvals and
permits in a timely manner, or at all;
and
|
·
|
adverse
weather conditions.
|
Wendy’s
franchisees could take actions that could harm our business.
Wendy’s
franchisees are contractually obligated to operate their restaurants in
accordance with the standards Wendy’s sets through its agreements with
them. Wendy’s also provides training and support to
franchisees. However, franchisees are independent third parties that
Wendy’s does not control, and the franchisees own, operate and oversee the daily
operations of their restaurants. As a result, the ultimate success
and quality of any franchise restaurant rests with the franchisee. If
franchisees do not successfully operate restaurants in a manner consistent with
required standards, royalty payments to us will be adversely affected, the
Wendy’s image and reputation could be harmed, which in turn could hurt Wendy’s
business and operating results.
Our
success depends on Wendy’s franchisees’ participation in Wendy’s
strategy.
Wendy’s
franchisees are an integral part of the Wendy’s business. Wendy’s may
be unable to successfully implement brand strategies that it believes are
necessary for further growth if Wendy’s franchisees do not participate in that
implementation. The failure of Wendy’s franchisees to focus on the
fundamentals of restaurant operations such as quality, service and cleanliness
would have a negative impact on Wendy’s success.
Our
financial results are affected by the financial results of Wendy’s
franchisees.
We
receive revenue in the form of royalties and fees from Wendy’s franchisees,
which are generally based on a percentage of sales at franchised
restaurants. Accordingly, a substantial portion of our financial
results is to a large extent dependent upon the operational and financial
success of Wendy’s franchisees. If sales trends or economic
conditions worsen for Wendy’s franchisees, their financial results may worsen
and our royalty revenues may decline. When Wendy’s sells
company-owned restaurants, Wendy’s is often required to remain responsible for
lease payments for these restaurants to the extent that the purchasing
franchisees default on their leases. Additionally, if Wendy’s
franchisees fail to renew their franchise agreements, or if Wendy’s
decides to restructure franchise agreements in order to induce franchisees to
renew these agreements, then our royalty revenues may
decrease.
Wendy’s may
be unable to manage effectively its strategy of acquiring and disposing of
Wendy’s restaurants, which could adversely affect Wendy’s business and financial
results.
Wendy’s
strategy of acquiring Wendy’s restaurants from franchisees and eventually
“re-franchising” these restaurants by selling them to new or existing
franchisees is dependent upon the availability of sellers and buyers as well as
Wendy’s ability to negotiate transactions on terms that Wendy’s deems
acceptable. In addition, the operations of restaurants that Wendy’s
acquires may not be integrated successfully, and the intended benefits of such
transactions may not be realized. Acquisitions of Wendy’s restaurants
pose various risks to Wendy’s operations, including:
·
|
diversion
of management attention to the integration of acquired restaurant
operations;
|
·
|
increase
operating expenses and the inability to achieve expected cost savings and
operating efficiencies;
|
·
|
exposure
to liabilities arising out of sellers’ prior operations of acquired
restaurants; and
|
·
|
incurrence
or assumption of debt to finance acquisitions or improvements and/or the
assumption of long-term, non-cancelable
leases.
|
In
addition, engaging in acquisitions and dispositions places increased demands on
Wendy’s operational, financial and management resources and may require Wendy’s
to continue to expand these resources. If Wendy’s is unable to manage
the acquisition and disposition strategy effectively, its business and financial
results could be adversely affected.
Shortages
or interruptions in the supply or delivery of perishable food products could
damage the Wendy’s brand reputation and adversely affect Wendy’s operating
results.
Wendy’s
and Wendy’s franchisees are dependent on frequent deliveries of perishable food
products that meet Wendy’s specifications. Shortages or interruptions in the
supply of perishable food products caused by unanticipated demand, problems in
production or distribution, disease or food-borne illnesses, inclement weather
or other conditions could adversely affect the availability, quality and cost of
ingredients, which could lower Wendy’s revenues, increase Wendy’s operating
costs, damage Wendy’s reputation and otherwise harm Wendy’s business and the
businesses of Wendy’s franchisees.
Additional
instances of mad cow disease or other food-borne illnesses, such as bird flu or
salmonella, could adversely affect the price and availability of beef, poultry
or other meats and create negative publicity, which could result in a decline in
sales.
Additional
instances of mad cow disease or other food-borne illnesses, such as bird flu,
salmonella, e-coli or hepatitis A, could adversely affect the price and
availability of beef, poultry or other meats. Additional incidents
may cause consumers to shift their preferences to other meats. As a result,
Wendy’s restaurants could experience a significant increase in food costs if
there are additional instances of mad cow disease or other food-borne
illnesses.
In
addition to losses associated with higher prices and a lower supply of our food
ingredients, instances of food-borne illnesses could result in negative
publicity for Wendy’s. This negative publicity, as well as any other
negative publicity concerning types of food products Wendy’s serves, may reduce
demand for Wendy’s food and could result in a decrease in guest traffic to
Wendy’s restaurants. A decrease in guest traffic to Wendy’s
restaurants as a result of these health concerns or negative publicity could
result in a decline in sales at company-owned restaurants or in royalties from
sales at franchised restaurants.
Changes
in consumer tastes and preferences and in discretionary consumer spending could
result in a decline in sales at company-owned restaurants and in the royalties
that Wendy’s receives from franchisees.
The quick
service restaurant industry is often affected by changes in consumer tastes,
national, regional and local economic conditions, discretionary spending
priorities, demographic trends, traffic patterns and the type, number and
location of competing restaurants. Wendy’s success depends to a significant
extent on discretionary consumer spending, which is influenced by general
economic conditions and the availability of discretionary
income. Accordingly, Wendy’s may experience declines in sales during
economic downturns. Any material decline in the amount of
discretionary spending or a decline in family food-away-from-home spending could
hurt our revenues, results of operations, business and financial
condition.
In
addition, if company-owned and franchised restaurants are unable to adapt to
changes in consumer preferences and trends, Wendy’s and Wendy’s franchisees may
lose customers and the resulting revenues from company-owned restaurants and the
royalties that Wendy’s receives from its franchisees may
decline.
Changes
in food and supply costs could harm Wendy’s results of operations.
Wendy’s
profitability depends in part on its ability to anticipate and react to changes
in food and supply costs. Any increase in food prices, especially
those of beef or chicken, could harm Wendy’s operating
results. Ethanol production has increased the cost of corn, which has
raised corn oil prices and contributed to higher beef and chicken prices
stemming from increased corn feed pricing. The increase in fuel costs has
also contributed to an increase in distribution costs from the distribution
centers to the restaurants. In addition, Wendy’s is susceptible to
increases in food costs as a result of other factors beyond its control, such as
weather conditions, food safety concerns, product recalls and government
regulations. Additionally, prices for feed ingredients used to
produce beef and chicken could be adversely affected by changes in global
weather patterns, which are inherently unpredictable. Wendy’s cannot
predict whether it will be able to anticipate and react to changing food costs
by adjusting its purchasing practices and menu prices, and a failure to do so
could adversely affect Wendy’s operating results. In addition,
Wendy’s may not seek to or be able to pass along price increases to its
customers.
Competition
from other restaurant companies could hurt Wendy’s.
The
market segments in which company-owned and franchised Wendy’s restaurants
compete are highly competitive with respect to, among other things, price, food
quality and presentation, service, location, and the nature and condition of the
restaurant facility. Wendy’s restaurants compete with a variety of
locally-owned restaurants, as well as competitive regional and national chains
and franchises. Several of these chains compete by offering high
quality sandwiches and/or menu items that are targeted at certain consumer
groups. Additionally, many of Wendy’s competitors have introduced
lower cost, value meal menu options. Wendy’s revenues and those of
Wendy’s franchisees may be hurt by this product and price
competition.
Moreover,
new companies, including operators outside the quick service restaurant
industry, may enter Wendy’s market areas and target Wendy’s customer
base. For example, additional competitive pressures for prepared food
purchases have come from deli sections and in-store cafes of a number of major
grocery store chains, as well as from convenience stores and casual dining
outlets. Such competitors may have, among other things, lower
operating costs, lower debt service requirements, better locations, better
facilities, better management, more effective marketing and more efficient
operations. Many of Wendy’s competitors have substantially greater
financial, marketing, personnel and other resources than we do, which may allow
them to react to changes in pricing and marketing strategies in the quick
service restaurant industry better than Wendy’s can. Many of Wendy’s
competitors spend significantly more on advertising and marketing than we do,
which may give them a competitive advantage over Wendy’s through higher levels
of brand awareness among consumers. All such competition may
adversely affect Wendy’s revenues and profits by reducing revenues of
company-owned restaurants and royalty payments from franchised
restaurants.
Current
Wendy’s restaurant locations may become unattractive, and attractive new
locations may not be available for a reasonable price, if at all.
The
success of any restaurant depends in substantial part on its location. There can
be no assurance that current Wendy’s locations will continue to be attractive as
demographic patterns change. Neighborhood or economic conditions where Wendy’s
restaurants are located could decline in the future, thus resulting in
potentially reduced sales in those locations. In addition, rising real estate
prices may restrict the ability of Wendy’s or Wendy’s franchisees to purchase or
lease new desirable locations. If desirable locations cannot be obtained at
reasonable prices, Wendy’s ability to effect its growth strategies will be
adversely affected.
Wendy’s
business could be hurt by increased labor costs or labor shortages.
Labor is
a primary component in the cost of operating our company-owned
restaurants. Wendy’s devotes significant resources to recruiting and
training its managers and hourly employees. Increased labor costs due
to competition, increased minimum wage or employee benefits costs or other
factors would adversely impact Wendy’s cost of sales and operating
expenses. In addition, Wendy’s success depends on its ability to
attract, motivate and retain qualified employees, including restaurant managers
and staff. If Wendy’s is unable to do so, its results of operations
may be hurt.
Wendy’s
leasing and ownership of significant amounts of real estate exposes it to
possible liabilities and losses, including liabilities associated with
environmental matters.
Wendy’s
is subject to all of the risks associated with leasing and owning real estate.
In particular, the value of real property assets could decrease, and Wendy’s
costs could increase, because of changes in the investment climate for real
estate, demographic trends, supply or demand for the use of the restaurants,
which may result from competition from similar restaurants in the area, and
liability for environmental matters.
Wendy’s
is subject to federal, state and local environmental, health and safety laws and
regulations concerning the discharge, storage, handling, release and disposal of
hazardous or toxic substances. These environmental laws provide for significant
fines, penalties and liabilities, sometimes without regard to whether the owner,
operator or occupant of the property knew of, or was responsible for, the
release or presence of the hazardous or toxic substances. Third parties may also
make claims against owners, operators or occupants of properties for personal
injuries and property damage associated with releases of, or actual or alleged
exposure to, such substances. A number of Wendy’s restaurant sites were
formerly gas stations or are adjacent to current or former gas stations, or were
used for other commercial activities that can create environmental impacts.
Wendy’s may also acquire or lease these types of sites in the future. Wendy’s
may not have identified all of the potential environmental liabilities at its
leased and owned properties, and any such liabilities identified in the future
could cause Wendy’s to incur significant costs, including costs associated with
litigation, fines or clean-up responsibilities.
Wendy’s
leases real property generally for initial terms of 20 years with two
to four additional options to extend the term of the leases in
consecutive five-year increments. Many leases provide that the landlord may
increase the rent over the term of the lease and any renewals thereof. Most
leases require Wendy’s to pay all of the costs of insurance, taxes, maintenance
and utilities. Wendy’s generally cannot cancel these leases. If an existing or
future restaurant is not profitable, and Wendy’s decides to close it, Wendy’s
may nonetheless be committed to perform its obligations under the applicable
lease including, among other things, paying the base rent for the balance of the
lease term. In addition, as each of Wendy’s leases expires, Wendy’s may fail to
negotiate additional renewals or renewal options, either on
commercially acceptable terms or at all, which could cause Wendy’s to close
stores in desirable locations.
Complaints
or litigation may hurt Wendy’s.
Occasionally,
Wendy’s customers file complaints or lawsuits against it alleging that Wendy’s
is responsible for an illness or injury they suffered at or after a visit to an
Wendy’s restaurant, or alleging that there was a problem with food quality or
operations at a Wendy’s restaurant. Wendy’s is also subject to a
variety of other claims arising in the ordinary course of its business,
including personal injury claims, contract claims, claims from franchisees and
claims alleging violations of federal and state law regarding workplace and
employment matters, discrimination and similar matters. Wendy’s could
also become subject to class action lawsuits related to these matters in the
future. Regardless of whether any claims against Wendy’s are valid or
whether Wendy’s is found to be liable, claims may be expensive to defend and may
divert management’s attention away from operations and hurt Wendy’s
performance. A judgment significantly in excess of Wendy’s insurance
coverage for any claims could materially adversely affect our financial
condition or results of operations. Further, adverse publicity
resulting from these allegations may hurt Wendy’s and Wendy’s
franchisees.
Additionally,
the restaurant industry has been subject to a number of claims that the menus
and actions of restaurant chains have led to the obesity of certain of their
customers. Adverse publicity resulting from these allegations may
harm the reputation of Wendy’s restaurants, even if the allegations are not
directed against Wendy’s restaurants or are not valid, and even if Wendy’s is
not found liable or the concerns relate only to a single restaurant or a limited
number of restaurants. Moreover, complaints, litigation or adverse
publicity experienced by one or more of Wendy’s franchisees could also hurt
Wendy’s business as a whole.
Wendy’s current
insurance may not provide adequate levels of coverage against claims it may
file.
Wendy’s
currently maintains insurance it believes is customary for businesses of its
size and type. However, there are types of losses it may incur that
cannot be insured against or that Wendy’s believes are not economically
reasonable to insure, such as losses due to natural disasters or acts of
terrorism. In
addition, Wendy’s currently self-insures a significant portion of expected
losses under its workers compensation, general liability and property insurance
programs. Unanticipated changes in the actuarial assumptions and
management estimates underlying Wendy’s reserves for these losses could result
in materially different amounts of expense under these programs, which could
harm Wendy’s business and adversely affect its results of operations and
financial condition.
Changes
in governmental regulation may hurt Wendy’s ability to open new restaurants or
otherwise hurt Wendy’s existing and future operations and results.
Each
Wendy’s restaurant is subject to licensing and regulation by health, sanitation,
safety and other agencies in the state and/or municipality in which the
restaurant is located. State and local government authorities may
enact laws, rules or regulations that impact restaurant operations and the cost
of conducting those operations. For example, recent efforts to
require the listing of specified nutritional information on menus and menu
boards could adversely affect consumer demand for our products, could make our
menu boards less appealing and could increase our costs of doing
business. There can be no assurance that Wendy’s and/or Wendy’s
franchisees will not experience material difficulties or failures in obtaining
the necessary licenses or approvals for new restaurants, which could delay the
opening of such restaurants in the future. In addition, more
stringent and varied requirements of local governmental bodies with respect to
tax, zoning, land use and environmental factors could delay or prevent
development of new restaurants in particular locations. Wendy’s, and
Wendy’s franchisees, are also subject to the Fair Labor Standards Act, which
governs such matters as minimum wages, overtime and other working conditions,
along with the ADA, family leave mandates and a variety of other laws enacted by
the states that govern these and other employment law
matters. Wendy’s cannot predict the amount of future expenditures
that may be required in order to permit company-owned restaurants to comply with
any changes in existing regulations or to comply with any future regulations
that may become applicable to Wendy’s business.
Wendy’s
operations could be influenced by weather conditions.
Weather,
which is unpredictable, can impact Wendy’s restaurant sales. Harsh
weather conditions that keep customers from dining out result in lost
opportunities for Wendy’s restaurants. A heavy snowstorm in the
Northeast or Midwest or a hurricane in the Southeast can shut down an entire
metropolitan area, resulting in a reduction in sales in that
area. Our first quarter includes winter months and historically has a
lower level of sales at company-owned restaurants. Because a
significant portion of Wendy’s restaurant operating costs is fixed or semi-fixed
in nature, the loss of sales during these periods hurts Wendy’s operating
margins, and can result in restaurant operating losses. For these
reasons, a quarter-to-quarter comparison may not be a good indication of Wendy’s
performance or how it may perform in the future.
Wendy’s may not be able to adequately
protect its intellectual property, which could harm the value of the brand and
hurt its business.
Wendy’s
intellectual property is material to the conduct of its
business. Wendy’s relies on a combination of trademarks, copyrights,
service marks, trade secrets and similar intellectual property rights to protect
the brand and other intellectual property. The success of Wendy’s
business strategy depends, in part, on its continued ability to use existing
trademarks and service marks in order to increase brand awareness and further
develop its branded products in both existing and new markets. If efforts to
protect intellectual property are not adequate, or if any third party
misappropriates or infringes on Wendy’s intellectual property, either in print
or on the Internet, the value of the brand may be harmed, which could have a
material adverse effect on the Wendy’s business, including the failure of the
brand to achieve and maintain market acceptance. This could harm
Wendy’s image, brand or competitive position and, if we commence litigation to
enforce our rights, cause us to incur significant legal fees.
While
Wendy’s tries to ensure that the quality of the brand is maintained by all of
its franchisees, we cannot assure you that these franchisees will not take
actions that hurt the value of our intellectual property or the reputation of
the Wendy’s restaurant system.
Wendy’s
has registered certain trademarks and have other trademark registrations pending
in the United States and certain foreign jurisdictions. We cannot
assure you that all of the steps we have taken to protect our intellectual
property in the United States and foreign countries will be
adequate. The laws of some foreign countries do not protect
intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United
States.
In
addition, we cannot assure you that third parties will not claim infringement by
Wendy’s in the future. Any such claim, whether or not it has merit,
could be time-consuming, result in costly litigation, cause delays in
introducing new menu items or require us to enter into royalty or licensing
agreements. As a result, any such claim could harm our business and
cause a decline in our results of operations and financial
condition.
Wendy’s
continues to expand into the breakfast daypart, where competitive conditions are
challenging, the Wendy’s brand is not well known in the breakfast daypart and
markets may prove difficult to penetrate.
The roll
out and expansion of breakfast has been accompanied by challenging competitive
conditions, varied consumer tastes and discretionary spending patterns that
differ from existing dayparts. In addition, breakfast sales could cannibalize
sales during other parts of the day and may have negative implications on food
and labor costs and restaurant margins. Wendy’s will need to reinvest royalties
earned and other amounts to build breakfast brand awareness through greater
investments in advertising and promotional activities. Capital investments will
also be required at company operated restaurants and franchised restaurants
where breakfast will be served and franchisees could elect not to participate in
the breakfast expansion. As a result of the foregoing, breakfast sales and
resulting profits may take longer to reach expected levels.
Wendy’s’
international operations are subject to various factors of uncertainty and there
is no assurance that international operations will be profitable.
Wendy’s’
business outside of the United States is subject to a number of additional
factors, including international economic and political conditions, differing
cultures and consumer preferences, currency regulations and fluctuations,
diverse government regulations and tax systems, uncertain or differing
interpretations of rights and obligations in connection with international
franchise agreements and the collection of royalties from international
franchisees, the availability and cost of land and construction costs, and the
availability of experienced management, appropriate franchisees, and joint
venture partners. Although Wendy’s believes it has developed the support
structure required for international growth, there is no assurance that such
growth will occur or that international operations will be
profitable.
Wendy’s
relies on computer systems and information technology to run its business. Any
material failure, interruption or security breach of Wendy’s’ computer systems
or information technology may adversely affect the operation of Wendy’s’
business and results of operations.
Wendy’s
is significantly dependent upon its computer systems and information technology
to properly conduct its business. A failure or interruption of Wendy’s’ computer
systems or information technology could result in the loss of data, business
interruptions or delays in Wendy’s’ operations. Also, despite Wendy’s’
considerable efforts and technological resources to secure its computer systems
and information technology, security breaches, such as unauthorized access and
computer viruses, may occur resulting in system disruptions, shutdowns or
unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. Any security breach of
Wendy’s’ computer systems or information technology may result in adverse
publicity, loss of sales and profits, penalties or loss resulting from
misappropriation of information.
Risks
Relating to Our Industry
The
recent disruptions in the national economy and the financial markets may
adversely impact our revenues, results of operations, business and financial
condition.
The
recent disruptions in the national economy and financial markets, and the
related reductions in the availability of credit, have resulted in declines in
consumer confidence and spending and have made it more difficult for businesses
to obtain financing. If such conditions persist, then they may result in
significant declines in family food-away-from-home spending and customer traffic
in our restaurants and those of our franchisees. Such conditions may also
adversely impact the ability of franchisees to build or purchase restaurants,
remodel existing restaurants, renew expiring franchise agreements and make
timely royalty and other payments. There can be no assurance that
government responses to the disruptions in the financial markets will restore
consumer confidence, stabilize the markets or increase liquidity and the
availability of credit. If franchisees are unable to obtain borrowed funds
on acceptable terms, or if conditions in the economy and the financial markets
do not improve, our revenues, results of operations, business and financial
condition could be adversely affected as a result.
Item
2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of
Proceeds.
The
following table provides information with respect to repurchases of shares of
our common stock by us and our “affiliated purchasers” (as defined in Rule
10b-18(a)(3) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) during the
third fiscal quarter of 2008:
Issuer
Repurchases of Equity Securities
Period
|
Total
Number of Shares Purchased (1)
|
Average
Price Paid Per Share
|
|
Total
Number of Shares Purchased As Part of Publicly Announced
Plan (2)
|
Approximate
Dollar Value of Shares That May Yet Be Purchased Under the Plan
(2)
|
June
30, 2008
through
July
27, 2008
|
-
|
-
|
|
---
|
$50,000,000
|
July
28, 2008
through
August
24, 2008
|
2,100
Class B
|
$5.52
Class B
|
|
---
|
$50,000,000
|
August
25, 2008
through
September
28, 2008
|
1,211,000
Class A
2,226,159
Class B
|
$5.18
Class A
$5.24
Class B
|
|
---
|
$50,000,000
|
Total
|
1,211,000
Class A
2,228,259
Class B
|
$5.18
Class A
$5.24
Class B
|
|
---
|
$50,000,000
|
(1)
|
Includes
2,100 restricted shares of Class B Common Stock, Series 1, which had been
granted during 2007 and were cancelled in 2008. Also included
are 1,211,000 and 2,226,159 shares of Class A Common Stock and Class B
Common Stock, respectively, which were purchased by affiliates of the
Company. The shares were valued at the closing prices of our
Class A Common Stock or Class B Common Stock, Series 1, on the respective
dates of activity.
|
(2)
|
As
publicly announced on June 5, 2007, our then existing $50 million stock
repurchase program expired on June 30, 2007, and on July 1, 2007, a new
stock repurchase program became effective pursuant to which we may
repurchase up to $50 million of our Class A Common Stock and/or Class B
Common Stock, Series 1 during the period from July 1, 2007 through and
including December 28, 2008 when and if market conditions warrant and to
the extent legally permissible. No transactions were effected
under our stock repurchase program during the 2008 first nine
months.
|
Item
4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
On
September 15, 2008, we held our 2008 Annual Meeting of
Stockholders. As previously announced, Nelson Peltz, Peter W. May,
Hugh L. Carey, Clive Chajet, Edward P. Garden, Joseph A. Levato, David E. Schwab
II, Roland C. Smith, Raymond S. Troubh, Russell V. Umphenour, Jr. and Jack G.
Wasserman were re-elected as members of the Board of Directors. In
addition, the stockholders approved 11 other proposals, including eight
proposals relating to the Wendy’s merger. A description of each
proposal voted upon at the meeting, and the voting results as to each such
proposal, is set forth below.
Proposal
1, an amendment to Triarc’s Certificate of Incorporation to increase the number
of authorized shares of Class A common stock, was approved by the affirmative
vote of a majority of the total voting power of the outstanding shares of Class
A common stock, voting as a separate class, and the affirmative vote of a
majority of the total voting power of the outstanding shares of Class A common
stock and Class B common stock, voting together as a single
class. There were 29,796,222 votes for, 181,295 votes against and
25,801 abstentions. There were no broker non-votes for this
proposal.
Proposal
2, an amendment to Triarc’s Certificate of Incorporation to convert each issued
and outstanding share of Class B common stock into one share of Class A common
stock and provide that Class A common stock shall be Triarc’s sole class of
authorized common stock was approved by the affirmative vote of a majority of
the total voting power of the outstanding shares of Class B common stock, voting
as a separate class, and the affirmative vote of a majority of the total voting
power of the outstanding shares of Class A common stock and Class B common
stock, voting together as a single class. There were 29,920,940 votes
for, 59,292 votes against and 23,080 abstentions. There were no
broker non-votes for this proposal.
Proposal
3, an amendment to Triarc’s Certificate of Incorporation to change the name of
Triarc to “Wendy’s/Arby’s Group, Inc.,” was approved by the affirmative vote of
a majority of the total voting power of the outstanding shares of Class A common
stock and
Class B common stock, voting together as a single class. There were
29,905,451 votes for, 70,126 votes against and 27,743
abstentions. There were no broker non-votes for this
proposal.
Proposal
4, an amendment to Triarc’s Certificate of Incorporation to prohibit the
issuance of preferred stock to affiliates under certain circumstances, was
approved by the affirmative vote of a majority of the total voting power of the
outstanding shares of Class A common stock and Class B common stock, voting
together as a single class. There were 29,898,576 votes for, 76,554
votes against and 28,188 abstentions. There were no broker non-votes
for this proposal.
Proposal
5, an amendment to Triarc’s Certificate of Incorporation to amend the definition
of “Interested Stockholder,” was approved by the affirmative vote of a majority
of the total voting power of the outstanding shares of Class A common stock and
Class B common stock, voting together as a single class. There were
29,911,631 votes for, 61,790 votes against and 29,896
abstentions. There were no broker non-votes for this
proposal.
Proposal
6, an amendment to Triarc’s Certificate of Incorporation to prohibit the Board
of Directors from amending certain provisions of the By-laws, was approved by
the affirmative vote of a majority of the total voting power of the outstanding
shares of Class A common stock and Class B common stock, voting together as a
single class. There were 29,904,574 votes for, 76,334 votes against
and 22,410 abstentions. There were no broker non-votes for this
proposal.
Proposal
7, an amendment to Triarc’s Certificate of Incorporation to provide that the
purpose of Triarc is to engage in the restaurant business, was approved by the
affirmative vote of a majority of the total voting power of the outstanding
shares of Class A common stock and Class B common stock, voting together as a
single class. There were 29,932,243 votes for, 50,500 votes against
and 20,576 abstentions. There were no broker non-votes for this
proposal.
Proposal
8, the issuance of Wendy’s/Arby’s Group common stock in the merger, was approved
by the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast on the proposal by
holders of shares of Class A common stock and Class B common stock, voting
together as a single class, the total votes cast representing over 50% of the
total voting power of the outstanding shares of Class A common stock and Class B
common stock. There were 29,895,829 votes for, 90,917 votes against
and 16,572 abstentions. There were no broker non-votes for this
proposal.
Proposal
9, to approve an adjournment of the annual meeting, if necessary, was approved
by the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the voting power of the
shares of the Class A common stock and Class B common stock present in person or
represented by proxy and entitled to vote at the meeting, voting together as a
single class. There were 32,815,135 votes for, 406,733 votes against
and 33,163 abstentions. There were no broker non-votes for this
proposal.
Proposal
10, to elect each of the nominees named below to serve as a director, was
approved with the election of each by the affirmative vote of a plurality of the
total voting power of the shares of Class A common stock and Class B common
stock present in person or represented by proxy and entitled to vote at the
meeting, voting together as a single class. Voting results with
respect to each nominee were as follows:
Nominee
|
Votes for
|
Votes Withheld
|
|
|
|
Nelson
Peltz
|
32,970,664
|
284,369
|
Peter
W. May
|
33,041,990
|
213,044
|
Hugh
L. Carey
|
32,890,986
|
364,048
|
Clive
Chajet
|
32,450,928
|
804,106
|
Edward
P. Garden
|
32,865,907
|
389,127
|
Josepha
A. Levato
|
32,452,407
|
802,626
|
David
E. Schwab II
|
32,835,409
|
419,624
|
Roland
C. Smith
|
32,450,878
|
804,155
|
Raymond
S. Troubh
|
32,929,864
|
325,170
|
Russell
V. Umphenour, Jr.
|
33,067,269
|
187,765
|
Jack
G. Wasserman
|
32,466,861
|
788,173
|
Proposal
11, an amendment to Triarc’s Amended and Restated 2002 Equity Participation
Plan, was approved by the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast on
the proposal by holders of shares of Class A common stock and Class B common
stock, voting together as a single class, the total votes cast representing over
50% of the total voting power of the outstanding shares of Class A common stock
and Class B common stock. There were 29,673,376 votes for, 295,530
votes against and 34,412 abstentions. There were no broker non-votes
for this proposal.
Proposal
12, the appointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP as Triarc’s independent
registered public accounting firm, was ratified by the affirmative vote of the
holders of a majority of the voting power of the shares of Class A common stock
and Class B common stock present in person or represented by proxy and entitled
to vote at the meeting, voting together as a single class. There were
33,135,147 votes for, 105,150 votes against and 14,735
abstentions. There were no broker non-votes for this
proposal.
Item
6. Exhibits.
EXHIBIT NO.
|
DESCRIPTION
|
2.1
|
Agreement
and Plan of Merger, dated as of December 17, 2007, by and among Deerfield
Triarc Capital Corp., DFR Merger Company, LLC, Deerfield & Company LLC
and, solely for the purposes set forth therein, Triarc Companies, Inc. (in
such capacity, the Sellers’ Representative, incorporated herein by
reference to Exhibit 2.1 to Triarc's Current Report on Form 8-K dated
December 21, 2007 (SEC file No. 1-2207).
|
2.2
|
Agreement
and Plan of Merger, dated as of April 23, 2008, by and among Triarc
Companies, Inc., Green Merger Sub Inc. and Wendy’s International, Inc.,
incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to Triarc’s Current Report
on Form 8-K dated April 29, 2008 (SEC file no. 1-2207).
|
3.1
|
Certificate
of Incorporation of Triarc Companies, Inc., incorporated herein by
reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Triarc’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated June
9, 2004 (SEC file no. 1-2207).
|
3.2
|
Amendment
to the Certificate of Incorporation of Triarc Companies, Inc.,
incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Wendy’s/Arby’s Group’s
Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 29, 2008 (SEC file no.
1-2207).
|
3.3
|
Amended
and Restated By-laws of Wendy's/Arby's Group, Inc., incorporated herein by
reference to Exhibit 3.2 to Wendy's/Arby's Group’s Current Report on Form
8-K dated September 29, 2008 (SEC file no. 1-2207).
|
31.1
|
|
31.2
|
|
32.1
|
|
_______________________
* Filed
herewith.
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.
|
WENDY’S/ARBY’S
GROUP, INC.
(Registrant)
|
Date: November
6,
2008
|
By:
/s/
Stephen E.
Hare
|
|
Stephen
E. Hare
|
|
Senior
Vice President and
|
|
Chief
Financial Officer
|
|
(On
behalf of the Company)
|
|
|
Date: November
6,
2008
|
By:
/s/
Steven B.
Graham
|
|
Steven
B. Graham
|
|
Senior
Vice President and
|
|
Chief
Accounting Officer
|
|
(Principal
Accounting Officer)
|
Exhibit
Index
EXHIBIT NO.
|
DESCRIPTION
|
2.1
|
Agreement
and Plan of Merger, dated as of December 17, 2007, by and among Deerfield
Triarc Capital Corp., DFR Merger Company, LLC, Deerfield & Company LLC
and, solely for the purposes set forth therein, Triarc Companies, Inc. (in
such capacity, the Sellers’ Representative, incorporated herein by
reference to Exhibit 2.1 to Triarc's Current Report on Form 8-K dated
December 21, 2007 (SEC file No. 1-2207).
|
2.2
|
Agreement
and Plan of Merger, dated as of April 23, 2008, by and among Triarc
Companies, Inc., Green Merger Sub Inc. and Wendy’s International, Inc.,
incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to Triarc’s Current Report
on Form 8-K dated April 29, 2008 (SEC file no. 1-2207).
|
3.1
|
Certificate
of Incorporation of Triarc Companies, Inc., incorporated herein by
reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Triarc’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated June
9, 2004 (SEC file no. 1-2207).
|
3.2
|
Amendment
to the Certificate of Incorporation of Triarc Companies, Inc.,
incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Wendy’s/Arby’s Group’s
Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 29, 2008 (SEC file no.
1-2207).
|
3.3
|
Amended
and Restated By-laws of Wendy's/Arby's Group, Inc., incorporated herein by
reference to Exhibit 3.2 to Wendy's/Arby's Group’s Current Report on Form
8-K dated September 29, 2008 (SEC file no. 1-2207).
|
31.1
|
|
31.2
|
|
32.1
|
|
_______________________