SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
(Mark One)
☒ |
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2017
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: 000-51485
Ruth’s Hospitality Group, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware |
72-1060618 |
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
|
|
1030 W. Canton Avenue, Suite 100, Winter Park, FL |
32789 |
(Address of principal executive offices) |
(Zip code) |
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (407) 333-7440
Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Common stock, par value $0.01 per share
The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC
(Title of Class) |
|
(Name of exchange on which registered) |
Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐ No ☒
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ No ☒
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 ☒ No ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). ☒ Yes ☐ No
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. ☒
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act (check one):
☐ |
Large accelerated filer |
☒ |
Accelerated filer |
☐ |
Non-accelerated filer (do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
☐ |
Smaller reporting company |
☐ |
Emerging growth company |
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ☐ No ☒
As of June 25, 2017, the last day of the registrant’s most recently completed fiscal second quarter, the aggregate market value of the registrant’s outstanding common stock, par value $0.01 per share, held by non-affiliates was $664,369,924.
The number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s common stock as of March 1, 2018, was 30,866,496, which includes 1,215,296 shares of unvested restricted stock.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
The information required by Part III of Annual Report on Form 10-K, to the extent not set forth herein, is incorporated herein by reference to the registrant’s Proxy Statement for the 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A not later than 120 days after the close of the registrant’s fiscal year.
|
|
|
|
Page |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 1. |
|
|
1 |
|
Item 1A. |
|
|
7 |
|
Item 1B. |
|
|
14 |
|
Item 2. |
|
|
14 |
|
Item 3. |
|
|
17 |
|
Item 4. |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 5. |
|
|
18 |
|
Item 6. |
|
|
21 |
|
Item 7. |
|
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Results of Operations and Financial Condition |
|
23 |
Item 7A. |
|
|
35 |
|
Item 8. |
|
|
35 |
|
Item 9. |
|
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure |
|
36 |
Item 9A. |
|
|
36 |
|
Item 9B. |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 10. |
|
|
39 |
|
Item 11. |
|
|
39 |
|
Item 12. |
|
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters |
|
39 |
Item 13. |
|
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence |
|
39 |
Item 14. |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 15. |
|
|
40 |
|
Item 16. |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43 |
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains “forward-looking statements” that reflect, when made, the Company’s expectations or beliefs concerning future events that involve risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements frequently are identified by the words “believe,” “anticipate,” “expect,” “estimate,” “intend,” “project,” “targeting,” “will be,” “will continue,” “will likely result,” or other similar words and phrases. Similarly, statements herein that describe the Company’s objectives, plans or goals, including with respect to new restaurant openings, capital expenditures and the impact of healthcare inflation, tax reform legislation, also are forward-looking statements. Actual results could differ materially from those projected, implied or anticipated by the Company’s forward-looking statements. Some of the factors that could cause actual results to differ include: reductions in the availability of, or increases in the cost of, USDA Prime grade beef, fish and other food items; changes in economic conditions and general trends; the loss of key management personnel; the effect of market volatility on the Company’s stock price; health concerns about beef or other food products; the effect of competition in the restaurant industry; changes in consumer preferences or discretionary spending; labor shortages or increases in labor costs; the impact of federal, state or local government regulations relating to income taxes, unclaimed property, Company employees, the sale or preparation of food, the sale of alcoholic beverages and the opening of new restaurants; harmful actions taken by the Company’s franchisees; a material failure, interruption or security breach of the Company’s information technology network; the Company’s indemnification obligations in connection with its sale of the Mitchell’s Restaurants; the inability to integrate the Hawaiian acquisition into the Company’s business and failure to achieve the cost savings and other benefits the Company expects to be able to realize in the Hawaiian operations; the Company’s ability to protect its name and logo and other proprietary information; an impairment in the financial statement carrying value of our goodwill, other intangible assets or property; the impact of litigation; the restrictions imposed by the Company’s credit agreement; and changes in, or the discontinuation of, the Company’s quarterly cash dividend payments or share repurchase program. For a discussion of these and other risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements, see “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. All forward-looking statements are qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement, and the Company undertakes no obligation to revise or update this Annual Report on Form 10-K to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof. You should not assume that material events subsequent to the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K have not occurred.
Unless the context otherwise indicates, all references in this report to the “Company,” “Ruth’s,” “we,” “us”, “our” or similar words are to Ruth’s Hospitality Group, Inc. and its subsidiaries.
Introduction
Ruth’s Hospitality Group, Inc. develops and operates fine dining restaurants under the trade name Ruth’s Chris Steak House. As of December 31, 2017, there were 155 Ruth’s Chris Steak House restaurants, including 77 Company-owned restaurants, two restaurants operating under contractual agreements and 76 franchisee-owned restaurants, including 21 international franchisee-owned restaurants in Aruba, Canada, China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, Panama, Singapore, Taiwan and the United Arab Emirates.
On December 12, 2017, we completed the acquisition of substantially all of the assets of six franchisee-owned Ruth’s Chris Steak House restaurants located in Hawaii (the “Hawaiian Restaurants”) for a cash purchase price of $35.4 million. The results of operations, financial position and cash flows of the Hawaiian Restaurants are included in our consolidated financial statements as of the date of the acquisition. For additional information, see Note 3 of the consolidated financial statements.
The Company previously operated eighteen Mitchell’s Fish Markets and three Mitchell’s/Cameron’s Steakhouse restaurants (the Mitchell’s Restaurants), located primarily in the Midwest and Florida. On January 21, 2015, the Company sold the Mitchell’s Restaurants to a third party. For financial reporting purposes, the Mitchell’s Restaurants are classified as discontinued operations for all periods presented.
The Company has a 52/53-week fiscal year ending the last Sunday in December. The 2017 fiscal year ended December 31, 2017, the 2016 fiscal year ended December 25, 2016, and the 2015 fiscal year ended December 27, 2015. Fiscal year 2017 had 53 weeks, while fiscal years 2016 and 2015 had 52 weeks.
The following description of the Company’s business should be read in conjunction with the information in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Results of Operations of Financial Condition in Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Results of Operations and Financial Condition of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Background
Ruth’s Hospitality Group, Inc. is a Delaware corporation formerly known as Ruth’s Chris Steak House, Inc. The Company was founded in 1965 when Ruth Fertel mortgaged her home for $22 thousand to purchase “Chris Steak House,” a 60-seat restaurant located near the New Orleans Fair Grounds racetrack. After a fire destroyed the original restaurant, Ruth relocated her restaurant to a new 160-seat facility nearby. As the terms of the original purchase prevented the use of the “Chris Steak House” name at a new restaurant, Ruth added her name to that of the original restaurant—thus creating the “Ruth’s Chris Steak House” brand.
The Company’s expansion began in 1972, when Ruth opened a second restaurant in Metairie, a suburb of New Orleans. In 1976, the first franchisee-owned Ruth’s Chris Steak House opened in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. In 2005, the Company and certain selling shareholders completed an initial public offering of the Company’s common stock, which is currently listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the ticker symbol “RUTH”.
• |
In December 2017, the Company acquired the Hawaiian Restaurants from one of its franchise partners. |
• |
In 2017, the Company opened three new Ruth’s Chris Steak House restaurants in Waltham, MA, Cleveland, OH and Denver, CO and one restaurant operating under a contractual agreement in Tulsa, OK. |
• |
In 2017, franchisees opened two new restaurants in Chengdu, China and Kauai, HI. The Kauai, HI restaurant was acquired by the Company in December 2017. |
• |
The Company currently expects to open two additional Ruth’s Chris Steak House restaurants during 2018. The Company expects that franchisees will open two new Ruth’s Chris Steak House restaurants during 2018. |
Ruth’s Chris Steak House
With 155 restaurants as of December 31, 2017, Ruth’s Chris Steak House is one of the largest upscale steakhouse companies in the world. The menu features a broad selection of high-quality USDA Prime and Choice grade steaks and other premium offerings served in Ruth’s Chris’ signature fashion—“sizzling”—complemented by other traditional menu items inspired by its New Orleans heritage. Ruth’s Chris complements its distinctive food offerings with an award-winning wine list.
1
The Ruth’s Chris brand reflects its 51-year commitment to the core values instilled by its founder, Ruth Fertel, of caring for guests by delivering the highest quality food, beverages and genuine hospitality in a warm and inviting atmosphere.
Mitchell’s Restaurants
The Company acquired the Mitchell’s Restaurants in 2008. Mitchell’s Fish Market was an eighteen-restaurant upscale seafood concept and Mitchell’s/Cameron’s Steakhouse was a modern American steakhouse concept.
In November 2014, the Company and Landry’s, Inc. and Mitchell’s Entertainment, Inc., an affiliate of Landry’s Inc. (together with Landry’s Inc., Landry’s), entered into an asset purchase agreement (the Agreement). Pursuant to the Agreement, the Company agreed to sell the Mitchell’s Restaurants and related assets to Landry’s for $10 million. The sale of the Mitchell’s Restaurants closed on January 21, 2015. The assets sold consisted primarily of leasehold interests, leasehold improvements, restaurant equipment and furnishings, inventory, and related intangible assets, including brand names and trademarks associated with the 21 Mitchell’s Restaurants. Under the terms of the Agreement, Landry’s assumed the Mitchell’s Restaurants’ facility lease obligations and the Company reimbursed Landry’s for gift cards sold prior to the closing date and used at the Mitchell’s Restaurants during the eighteen months following the closing date. Landry’s offered employment to substantially all of the employees of the Mitchell’s Restaurants.
Strengths
The Company believes that the key strengths of its business model are the following:
Premier Upscale Steakhouse Brand
The Ruth’s Chris Steak House brand is one of the strongest in the upscale steakhouse segment of the restaurant industry, with high levels of brand awareness. The Company has been recognized for its award-winning core wine list, for which a majority of its Company-owned restaurants received “Awards of Excellence” from Wine Spectator magazine.
Appealing Dining Experience
At Ruth’s Chris restaurants, the Company seeks to exceed guests’ expectations by offering high-quality food with warm, friendly service. The Company’s entire restaurant staff is dedicated to ensuring that guests enjoy a superior dining experience. The Company’s team-based approach to table service is designed to enhance the frequency of guest contact and speed of service without intruding on the guest experience.
Strategy
The Company’s strategy is to deliver a total return to shareholders by maintaining a healthy core business, growing with a disciplined investment approach and returning excess capital to shareholders. The Company strives to maintain a healthy core business by growing sales through traffic, managing operating margins and leveraging infrastructure. The Company is committed to disciplined growth in markets with attractive sales attributes and solid financial returns. The Company believes that its franchisee program is a point of competitive differentiation and looks to grow its franchisee-owned restaurant locations as well. The Company also will consider acquiring franchisee-owned restaurants at terms that it believes are beneficial to both the Company and the franchisee.
Improve Sales/Profitability
The Company strives to improve sales and profitability by focusing on:
• |
Ensuring consistency of food quality through more streamlined preparation and presentation; |
• |
Expanding its brand appeal through continued menu innovation and facility remodels; |
• |
Increasing brand awareness through enhanced media advertising at the national and local levels; |
• |
Enhancing and/or developing innovative marketing programs through its website (e.g., www.ruthschris.com), social media, digital media and email communication; and |
• |
Creating and/or growing revenue opportunities via Ruth’s Catering, Private Dining, HD Satellite Programs, the sale of Gift Cards and opening for lunch in selected markets. |
2
Expand Relationships with New and Existing Franchisees and Others
The Company intends to grow its franchising business by developing relationships with a limited number of new franchisees and by expanding the rights of existing franchisees to open new restaurants. The Company believes that building relationships with quality franchisees is a cost-effective way to grow and strengthen the Ruth’s Chris brand and generate additional revenues. The Company intends to continue to focus on providing operational guidance to its franchisees, including the sharing of “best practices” from Company-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants.
In fiscal year 2017, franchisees opened two new restaurants in Chengdu, China and Kauai, HI. In fiscal year 2016, franchisees opened two new restaurants in Jakarta, Indonesia and Greenville, SC. In fiscal year 2015, franchisees opened three new restaurants in Ann Arbor, MI, Charleston, SC, and San Antonio, TX. Franchisees are expected to open two new restaurants by the end of fiscal year 2018.
The Company and its franchise and licensing partners will have opened or relocated 18 new Ruth’s Chris Steak Houses worldwide during the three year period ended December 2017.
Menu
The Ruth’s Chris menu features a broad selection of high-quality USDA Prime grade steaks and other premium offerings served in Ruth’s Chris signature fashion—“sizzling” on a 500 degree plate and topped with butter and fresh parsley—complemented by other classic American steakhouse menu items. USDA Prime is the highest meat grade level, which refers to the superior quality and evenly distributed marbling that enhances the flavor of the steak. The Ruth’s Chris menu also includes premium quality lamb chops, fish, shrimp, crab, chicken and lobster. Dinner entrées are generally priced from $32 to $99. Ruth’s Chris is predominantly open dinner hours only with a limited number of restaurants open for lunch. The lunch menu offers entrées generally ranging in price from $13 to $29. The blended guest check average at Ruth’s Chris was approximately $82 during fiscal year 2017. While the Ruth’s Chris core menu is similar at all of its restaurants, the Company seasonally introduces new items such as limited time and prix fixe offerings that allow it to give its guests additional choices while taking advantage of fresh sourcing and advantageous cost opportunities.
The Company’s Ruth’s Chris restaurants offer ten to thirteen standard appetizer items, including New Orleans-style barbequed shrimp, mushrooms stuffed with crabmeat, spicy shrimp, chilled seafood tower and osso bucco ravioli, as well as six to eight different salads. They also offer a variety of potatoes and vegetables as side dishes. For dessert, crème brûlée, white chocolate bread pudding, chocolate duo, cheesecake, fresh seasonal berries with sweet cream and other selections are available.
The Company’s wine list features bottles typically ranging in price from $46 to over $1,000. Individual restaurants may supplement their 250-bottle core wine list with approximately 20 additional selections that reflect local market tastes. Most of the Company’s Ruth’s Chris restaurants also offer approximately 35 wines-by-the-glass, 13-16 handcrafted cocktails and numerous beers, premium liquors and alcoholic dessert drinks. Wine sales account for approximately 53% of the total beverage sales.
Restaurant Operations and Management
The Ruth’s Chris President and Vice President of Operations have primary responsibility for managing Company-owned restaurants and participates in analyzing restaurant-level performance and strategic planning. The Company has ten regional vice presidents that oversee restaurant operations at Company-owned restaurants, one vice president to whom the regional vice presidents report and one vice president that has oversight responsibility for franchisee-owned restaurants. In addition, restaurant education and training is overseen by a regional staff dedicated to the ongoing training and development of customer service employees and kitchen staff.
A typical Company-owned restaurant employs five managers, including a general manager, two front-of-the-house managers, an executive chef and a sous chef. The Company-owned restaurants also typically have approximately 62 hourly employees.
Purchasing
The Company’s ability to maintain consistent quality throughout its restaurants depends in part upon its ability to acquire food and other supplies from reliable sources in accordance with its specifications. Purchasing at the restaurant level is directed primarily by the executive chef, who is trained in the Company’s purchasing philosophy and specifications, and who works with regional and corporate managers to ensure consistent sourcing of fish, produce and other supplies.
3
During fiscal year 2017, the Company purchased substantially all of the beef it used in Company-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants from two vendors, Sysco Specialty Meat Group (a subsidiary of Sysco) and Stock Yards Packing (a subsidiary of US Foods). Each vendor supplied about half of the Company’s beef requirements. In addition, the Company has a distribution arrangement with a national food and restaurant supply distributor, Distribution Market Advantage, Inc. (DMA), which purchases products for the Company from various suppliers and through which all of the Company-owned Ruth’s Chris Steak House restaurants receive a significant portion of their food supplies.
Quality Control
The Company strives to maintain quality and consistency in its Company-owned restaurants through careful training and supervision of personnel and standards established for food and beverage preparation, maintenance of facilities and conduct of personnel. The primary goal of the Company’s training and supervision programs is to ensure that its employees display the characteristics of its brand and values that distinguish it from its competitors. Restaurant managers in Company-owned restaurants must complete a training program that is typically seven to eight weeks long, during which they are instructed in multiple areas of restaurant management, including food quality and preparation, guest service, alcoholic beverage service, liquor regulation compliance and employee relations. Restaurant managers also receive operations manuals relating to food and beverage preparation and restaurant operations. Restaurant managers are certified by the National Restaurant Association Educational Foundation for food safety.
In addition to our internal quality control measures, the Ruth’s Chris Steak House restaurants also employ an independent third-party food safety firm to ensure proper training, food safety and the achievement of the highest standards for cleanliness throughout the restaurant through routine quarterly unannounced inspections. The Company instructs chefs and assistants on safety, sanitation, housekeeping, repair and maintenance, product and service specifications, ordering and receiving food products and quality assurance. At the Ruth’s Chris restaurants, the executive chef, together with the restaurant managers, oversees a line check system of quality control and must complete a quality assurance checklist verifying the flavor, presentation and proper temperature of the food and beverages.
Marketing and Promotions
The goals of the Company’s marketing efforts are to increase restaurant sales by attracting new guests, increasing the frequency of visits by current guests, enhancing the guest experience, driving innovation, improving brand recognition in new markets or markets where it intends to open a restaurant and to communicate the overall uniqueness, value and quality exemplified by our restaurants. The Company uses multiple media channels to accomplish these goals and complements its national advertising with targeted local media such as print, digital media, search engine marketing, radio and outdoor billboards.
Advertising
In fiscal year 2017, the Company spent $12.7 million, or 3.1% of its revenues, in total marketing and advertising expenditures, which included spending on national media, consisting primarily of paid search, online advertising, online initiatives, traditional public relations and consumer research. During fiscal year 2017, the Company continued to optimize its online marketing efforts, using a variety of tactics. The Company’s online strategy also included an emphasis on continued website improvement and targeted emails with special offers and announcements, as well as emails regarding seasonal specials, holiday offers and personalized birthday and anniversary invitations. In the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2017, the Company invested in paid search, digital advertising and paid social media advertising. In fiscal year 2017, Ruth’s Chris Steak House continued its participation in co-branded campaign with American Express Membership Rewards program. Many of the Company’s restaurants also schedule events to strengthen community ties and increase local market presence. The Company’s franchisees also conduct their own local media and advertising plans.
Gift Cards
The Company sells Ruth’s Chris gift cards at most of its Ruth’s Chris Steak House restaurants, including franchises, on its website and through its toll-free number. Ruth’s Chris patrons frequently purchase gift cards for holidays, including Christmas, Hanukkah, Valentine’s Day, Mothers’ Day and Fathers’ Day, and other special occasions. In the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2016, Ruth’s Chris entered into a distribution agreement where Ruth’s Chris gift cards are sold in third-party retail outlets. In 2013, Ruth’s Chris began offering e-gift cards to purchasers on its e-commerce gift card website. The e-gift card is emailed directly to the recipient and is redeemable in the same manner as a plastic gift card. Offering gift cards at third-party retailers and e-gift cards gives Ruth’s Chris the opportunity to maximize last-minute gift-giving and address its patrons’ requests for convenient, immediate purchases. In fiscal year 2017, Company and franchise sales of Ruth’s gift cards aggregated approximately $65.4 million system-wide. Ruth’s Chris gift cards are redeemable at both Company and franchisee owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants.
4
Franchise Program and Relationship
Under the Company’s franchise program, the Company offers certain services and licensing rights to the franchisee to help maintain consistency in system-wide operations. The Company’s services include training of personnel, construction assistance, providing the new franchisee with standardized operating procedures and manuals, business and financial forms, consulting with the new franchisee on purchasing and supplies and performing supervisory quality control services. The Company conducts reviews of its franchisee-owned restaurants on an ongoing basis in order to ensure compliance with its standards.
As of December 31, 2017, the Company’s 76 franchisee-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants are owned by 30 franchisees with the three largest franchisees owning 32 restaurants in total. Currently, franchisees have agreed to open two additional Ruth’s Chris restaurants, which are expected to open by the end of fiscal year 2018.
Under the Company’s current franchise program, each franchise arrangement consists of a development agreement, if multiple restaurants are to be developed, with a separate franchise agreement executed for each restaurant. The Company’s current form of development agreement grants exclusive rights to a franchisee to develop a minimum number of restaurants in a defined area, typically during a three-to-five-year period. Individual franchise agreements govern the operation of each restaurant opened and have a 20-year term with two renewal options each for additional ten-year terms if certain conditions are met. The Company’s current form of franchise agreement requires franchisees to pay a 5% royalty on gross revenues plus up to a 1% advertising fee applied to national advertising expenditures.
Under the Company’s current form of development agreement, and unless agreed otherwise, the Company collects a $50 thousand development fee, which is credited toward the $150 thousand franchise fee, for each restaurant the franchisee has rights to develop. Under the Company’s current form of the franchise agreement, it collects up to $150 thousand of the full franchise fee at the time of executing the franchise agreement for each restaurant. If one restaurant is to be developed, a single unit franchise agreement is executed and the $150 thousand franchise fee is collected at signing.
Information Systems and Restaurant Reporting
All of the Company’s restaurants use computerized point-of-sale systems, which are designed to promote operating efficiency, provide corporate management timely access to financial and marketing data and reduce restaurant and corporate administrative time and expense. These systems record each order and print the food requests in the kitchen for the cooks to prepare. The data captured for use by operations and corporate management includes gross sales amounts, cash and credit card receipts and quantities of each menu item sold. Sales and receipts information is generally transmitted to the corporate office daily.
The Company’s corporate systems provide management with operating reports that show Company-owned restaurant performance comparisons with budget and prior year results. These systems allow the Company to monitor Company-owned restaurant sales, food and beverage costs, labor expense and other restaurant trends on a regular basis.
Service Marks
The Company has registered the main service marks “Ruth’s Chris” and its “Ruth’s Chris Steak House, U.S. Prime & Design” logo, as well as other service marks used by its restaurants, with the United States Patent and Trademark Office and in the foreign countries in which its restaurants operate. The Company has also registered in other foreign countries in anticipation of new store openings within those countries. The Company is not aware of any infringing uses that could materially affect its business. The Company believes that its service marks are valuable to the operation of its restaurants and are important to its marketing strategy.
Seasonality
The Company’s business is subject to seasonal fluctuations. Historically, the percentage of its annual revenues earned during the first and fourth fiscal quarters have been higher due, in large part, to increased restaurant sales during the year-end holiday season and the popularity of dining out in the fall and winter months.
5
Employees
As of December 31, 2017, the Company employed 4,915 persons, of whom 445 were salaried and 4,470 were hourly personnel, who were employed in the positions set forth in the table below. None of the Company’s employees are covered by a collective bargaining agreement.
Functional Area |
|
Number of Employees |
|
|
Senior Officers / Corporate VPs / Operations VPs |
|
|
28 |
|
General Managers |
|
|
71 |
|
Managers |
|
|
192 |
|
Regional Corporate Chefs / Executive Chefs |
|
|
69 |
|
Sous Chefs |
|
|
53 |
|
Non-Salaried Restaurant Staff |
|
|
4,433 |
|
Corporate Salaried |
|
|
50 |
|
Corporate Non-salaried |
|
|
19 |
|
Total number of employees |
|
|
4,915 |
|
Financial Information about Segments
The Company-owned Ruth’s Chris Steak House restaurants in North America are managed as an operating segment. The Ruth’s Chris restaurants operate within the full-service dining industry, providing similar products to similar customers. The franchise operations are also considered to be an operating segment. Financial information concerning the Company’s segments for financial reporting purposes appears in Note 18 of the consolidated financial statements.
Government Regulation
The Company is subject to extensive federal, state and local government regulation, including regulations relating to public health and safety, zoning and fire codes and the sale of alcoholic beverages and food. The Company maintains the necessary restaurant, alcoholic beverage and retail licenses, permits and approvals. Federal and state laws govern the Company’s relationship with its employees, including laws relating to minimum wage requirements, overtime, tips, tip credits and working conditions. A significant number of the Company’s hourly employees are paid at rates related to the federal or state minimum wage. During 2017, governmental entities acted to increase minimum wage rates in several jurisdictions wherein Company-owned restaurants are located. Additionally, the federal government may act to increase the U.S. federal minimum wage rate.
The offer and sale of franchises are subject to regulation by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and many states. The FTC requires that the Company furnish to prospective franchisees a franchise disclosure document containing prescribed information. A number of states also regulate the sale of franchises and require state registration of franchise offerings and the delivery of a franchise disclosure document to prospective franchisees. The Company’s noncompliance could result in governmental enforcement actions seeking a civil or criminal penalty, rescission of a franchise, and loss of its ability to offer and sell franchises in a state, or a private lawsuit seeking rescission, damages and legal fees.
The Company is subject to laws and regulations relating to the preparation and sale of food, including regulations regarding product safety, nutritional content and menu labeling. The Company is, or will become, subject to laws and regulations requiring disclosure of calorie, fat, trans fat, salt and allergen content. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA) requires restaurant companies, such as the Company, to disclose calorie information on their menus beginning in May 2018. The Food and Drug Administration has rules to implement this provision that would require restaurants to post the number of calories for most items on menus or menu boards and to make available more detailed nutrition information upon request. A number of states, counties and cities have also enacted menu labeling laws requiring restaurant companies, such as the Company, to disclose certain nutrition information on their menus, or have enacted legislation restricting the use of certain types of ingredients in restaurants. Although the ACA is intended to preempt conflicting state and local laws regarding nutrition labeling, the Company will be subject to a patchwork of state and local laws and regulations regarding nutritional content disclosure requirements until the Company is required to comply with the federal law. Many of the current requirements are inconsistent or are interpreted differently from one jurisdiction to another. The effect of such labeling requirements on consumer choices, if any, is unclear at this time.
6
The Company maintains an employee benefits program that provides self-insured and insured coverage to employees that meet the applicable requirements under the program. Employees can elect to enroll dependents that meet eligibility criteria. Coverage includes health, dental, vision, short- and long-term disability, life insurance and other voluntary ancillary benefits. Employees share in the cost of other coverage at varying levels. The Company has historically funded a majority of the cost of employee health benefits. The ACA requires that employers offer health care coverage that is qualified and affordable. Coverage must be offered to all “full-time” employees, as defined by the ACA. The Company routinely reviews its health benefit plans to assure conformity with the ACA. The hours of service eligibility criteria the Company requires for health benefits are lower than required under the ACA. Approximately 60% of eligible employees elect to participate in the Company’s health benefit plans.
Competition
The restaurant business is highly competitive and highly fragmented, and the number, size and strength of the Company’s competitors vary widely by region. The Company believes that restaurant competition is based on, among other things, quality of food products, customer service, reputation, restaurant location, atmosphere, name recognition and price. The Company’s restaurants compete with a number of upscale steakhouses and upscale casual seafood restaurants within their markets, both locally owned restaurants and restaurants within regional or national chains. The principal upscale steakhouses with which the Company competes are Fleming’s, The Capital Grille, Smith & Wollensky, The Palm, Del Frisco’s Double Eagle Steakhouse, Fogo de Chão, Morton’s The Steakhouse, Eddie V’s and other local fine dining restaurants. The Company’s competitors may be better established in certain of the Company’s existing markets and/or markets into which the Company intends to expand.
Available Information
The Company maintains a website on the Internet at www.rhgi.com. The Company makes available free of charge, through the investor relations section of its website, its Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports electronically filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Such information is available as soon as reasonably practicable after it files such reports with the SEC. Additionally, the Company’s Code of Ethics may be accessed within the Investor Relations section of its website. Information found on the Company’s website is not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K or any other report filed with the SEC.
In addition to the other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the following risk factors should be considered carefully in evaluating the Company and its business. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that the Company currently deems immaterial may also impair its business operations. If any of these certain risks and uncertainties were to actually occur, the Company’s business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially adversely affected. In such case, the trading price of the Company’s common stock could decline and its investors may lose all or part of their investment. These risks and uncertainties include the following:
We may not be able to compete successfully with other restaurants, which could reduce revenues.
The restaurant industry is intensely competitive with respect to price, service, location, food quality, atmosphere and overall dining experience. Our competitors include a large and diverse group of well-recognized upscale steakhouse and upscale casual restaurant chains, including steakhouse and seafood chains as well as restaurants owned by independent local operators. Some of our competitors have substantially greater financial, marketing and other resources, and may be better established in the markets where our restaurants are or may be located. If we cannot compete effectively in one or more of our markets, we may be unable to maintain recent levels of comparable restaurant sales growth and/or may be required to close existing restaurants.
Economic downturns may adversely impact consumer spending patterns.
Economic downturns could negatively impact consumer spending patterns. Any decrease in consumer spending patterns may result in a decline in our operating performance. Economic downturns may reduce guest traffic and require us to lower our prices, which reduces our revenues and operating income, which may adversely affect the market price for our common stock. In addition, some of our restaurants are located in areas that we consider tourist or vacation destinations. In those locations, we depend in large part on vacation travelers to frequent our Ruth’s Chris Steak House restaurants, and such destinations typically experience a reduction in visitors during economic downturns, thereby reducing the potential guests that could visit our restaurants. This could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations and growth strategy.
7
Negative publicity surrounding our brand or the consumption of beef generally, or shifts in consumer tastes, could reduce sales in one or more of our restaurants and make our brand less valuable.
Our success depends, in large part, upon the reputation of our brand. Negative publicity resulting from poor food quality, illness, injury or other health concerns, or operating problems including disappointing customer experiences related to one or more restaurants, could make our restaurants less appealing to consumers. Further, the influence of social media could make it more difficult for us to respond to negative publicity in a timely or effective manner. Consumers value readily available information and often act on such information without further investigation and without regard to its accuracy. The harm may be immediate without affording us the opportunity for redress or correction. In addition, any shifts in consumer preferences away from the kinds of food we offer, particularly beef, whether because of dietary or other health concerns or otherwise, would make our restaurants less appealing and adversely affect revenues. The ACA will require our restaurants to disclose calorie information on menus in the future. While we cannot predict the changes in guest behavior resulting from the implementation of this portion of the ACA, it could have an adverse effect on our revenues and results of operations.
Food safety and food-borne illness concerns throughout the supply chain may have an adverse effect on our business.
Food safety is a top priority, and we dedicate substantial resources to ensuring that our customers enjoy safe, quality food products. However, food safety risks are common throughout the restaurant industry and cannot be eliminated. Food safety issues could be caused by food suppliers, distributors or franchisees and, as a result, be out of our control. In addition, regardless of the source or cause, any report of food-borne illness such as E. coli, norovirus, hepatitis A, trichinosis or salmonella, and other food safety issues including food tampering or contamination, at one of our restaurants could adversely affect the reputation of our brand and have a negative impact on our sales. Even instances of food-borne illness, food tampering or other food contamination occurring solely at restaurants of our competitors could result in negative publicity about the food service industry generally and adversely impact our sales. The occurrence of food-borne illnesses or food safety issues could also adversely affect the price and availability of affected ingredients, resulting in higher costs and lower margins.
Increases in the prices of, or reductions in the availability of, any of our core food products could reduce our operating margins and revenues.
We purchase large quantities of beef, particularly USDA Prime grade beef, which is subject to significant price fluctuations due to seasonal shifts, climate conditions, industry demand and other factors. Our beef costs represented approximately 45% of our food and beverage costs during fiscal year 2017. We typically buy our beef on the “spot” market and from time to time we will enter into longer term pricing and supply agreements. During fiscal year 2017, we entered into contracts with beef suppliers to establish set pricing on a portion of anticipated beef purchases. As of December 31, 2017, we have not negotiated set pricing for beef requirements in 2018. The market for USDA Prime grade beef is particularly volatile. If prices increase, or the supply of beef is reduced, our operating margins could be materially adversely affected.
In addition, under the Federal Meat Inspection Act and the Poultry Products Inspection Act, the production, processing or interstate distribution of meat and poultry products is prohibited absent federal inspection. If there is a disruption to the meat inspection process, we could experience a reduction in supply and a corresponding increase in meat prices, which could be significant, either of which could materially impact our operating margin and results of operations.
In the recent past, certain types of seafood have experienced fluctuations in availability. Seafood is also subject to fluctuations in price based on availability, which is often seasonal. If certain types of seafood are unavailable, or if our costs increase, our results of operations could be adversely affected.
If our vendors or distributors do not deliver food and beverages in a timely fashion we may experience supply shortages and/or increased food and beverage costs.
Our ability to maintain consistent quality throughout Company-owned restaurants depends in part upon our ability to purchase USDA Prime and Choice grade beef, seafood and other food products in accordance with our rigid specifications. During fiscal year 2017, the Company purchased substantially all of the beef used in Company-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants from two vendors, Sysco Food Services and Stock Yards Packing (a subsidiary of US Foods). Each vendor supplied about half of the Company’s beef requirements.
In addition, we currently have a long-term distribution arrangement with a national food and restaurant supply distributor, DMA, which purchases products for us from various suppliers, and through which all of our Company-owned Ruth’s Chris Steak House restaurants receive a significant portion of their food supplies. Consolidation in our supply chain due to mergers and acquisitions may change the relationships we have with our existing vendors and distributors and/or result in fewer alternative supply sources for purchasing our food supplies which could result in an increase in prices. If for any reason our vendors or distributors cease doing business with us, we could experience supply shortages in certain Company-owned restaurants and could be required to purchase
8
supplies at higher prices until we are able to secure an alternative supply source. Any delay we experience in replacing vendors or distributors on acceptable terms could increase food costs or, in extreme cases, require us to temporarily remove items from the menu of one or more restaurants.
Labor shortages or increases in labor costs could slow our growth or harm our business.
Our success depends in part upon our ability to continue to attract, motivate and retain employees with the qualifications to succeed in our industry and the motivation to apply our core service philosophy, including regional operational managers, restaurant general managers and chefs. If we are unable to continue to recruit and retain sufficiently qualified individuals, our business and growth could be adversely affected. Competition for these employees could require us to pay higher wages, which could result in higher labor costs.
In addition, we have a substantial number of hourly employees who are paid wage rates at or based on the federal or state minimum wage and who rely on tips as a large portion of their income. Governmental entities have acted to increase minimum wage rates in several jurisdictions wherein Company-owned restaurants are located. The federal minimum wage may be increased and there likely will be additional minimum wage increases implemented in other states in which we operate or seek to operate. Likewise, changes to existing tip credit laws (which dictate the amounts an employer is permitted to assume an employee receives in tips when calculating the employee’s hourly wage for minimum wage compliance purposes) continue to be proposed and implemented at both the federal and state government levels. As federal and/or state minimum wage rates increase and allowable tip credits decrease, we may need to increase not only the wage rates of our minimum wage employees but also the wages paid to our employees who are paid above the minimum wage, which will increase our labor costs. None of our employees are represented by a collective bargaining unit. Should some of our employees elect to be represented by a collective bargaining unit, our labor costs may increase due to higher wage rates and / or the implementation of work rules. We may be unable to increase our prices in order to pass these increased labor costs on to our guests, in which case our margins would be negatively affected.
A lack of availability of suitable locations for new restaurants, the inability to renew leases at existing restaurants on similar terms and conditions, or a decline in the quality of the locations of our current restaurants may adversely affect our sales and results of operations.
The success of our restaurants depends in large part on their locations. All, but one, of our Company-owned restaurant premises are leased. If we do not renew leases when the lease terms expire, or if we are unable to renew leases on favorable terms and conditions, our operating results could be negatively impacted. Possible declines in neighborhoods where our restaurants are located or adverse economic conditions in areas surrounding those neighborhoods could also result in reduced sales in those restaurants. In addition, desirable locations for new restaurant openings or for the relocation of existing restaurants may not be available at an acceptable cost when we identify a particular opportunity for a new restaurant or relocation. The occurrence of one or more of these events could have a significant adverse effect on our sales and results of operations.
Regulations affecting the operation of our restaurants could increase operating costs and restrict growth.
Each of our restaurants must obtain licenses from regulatory authorities allowing us to sell liquor, beer and wine, and each restaurant must obtain a food service license from local health authorities. Each restaurant’s liquor license must be renewed annually and may be revoked at any time for cause, including violation by the Company or its employees of any laws and regulations relating to the minimum drinking age, advertising, wholesale purchasing and inventory control. In certain states, including states where we have a large number of restaurants or where we may open restaurants in the future, the number of liquor licenses available is limited and licenses are traded at market prices. If we are unable to maintain existing licenses, or if we choose to open a restaurant in those states, the cost of a new license could be significant. Obtaining and maintaining licenses is an important component of each of our restaurant’s operations, and the failure to obtain or maintain food and liquor licenses and other required licenses, permits and approvals would materially adversely impact existing restaurants or our growth strategy.
We are also subject to a variety of federal and state labor laws, pertaining to matters such as minimum wage and overtime pay requirements, unemployment tax rates, workers’ compensation rates and citizenship requirements. Government-mandated increases in minimum wages, overtime pay, paid leaves of absence and mandated health benefits, or increased tax reporting and tax payment requirements for employees who receive gratuities or a reduction in the number of states that allow tips to be credited toward minimum wage requirements could increase our labor costs and reduce our operating margins. In addition, the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in public accommodations and employment. Although our restaurants are designed to be accessible to the disabled, we could be required to make modifications to our restaurants to provide service to, or make reasonable accommodations for, disabled persons.
9
The cost of our employee health care benefit program may increase in the future.
We maintain an employee benefits program that provides self-insured and insured coverage to employees that meet the applicable requirements under the program. Employees can elect to enroll dependents that meet eligibility criteria. Coverage includes health, dental, vision, short- and long-term disability, life insurance and other voluntary ancillary benefits. Employees share in the cost of other coverage at varying levels. The Company has historically funded a majority of the cost of health benefits.
The ACA requires that employers offer health care coverage that is qualified and affordable. Coverage must be offered to all “full-time” employees, as defined by the ACA. The Company routinely reviews its health benefit plans to assure conformity with the ACA. While we have raised the eligibility requirement thresholds, the hours of service eligibility criteria for health benefits are lower than required under the ACA. Approximately 60% of eligible employees elect to participate in our health benefit plans. In the future, proportionately more employees may elect to participate in our health benefit plans because the ACA includes financial penalties for people who do not have health insurance. We are unable to reliably predict to what extent, if any, the percentage of eligible employees who elect health care coverage will increase in the future. Because we fund a majority of the cost of health benefits, our financial accounting expense will increase to the extent that additional employees elect to participate in the Company’s health benefit plans.
Certain other restaurant companies may curtail the ability of their employees to participate in their health benefit plans by increasing the hours worked eligibility requirement to the minimum required under the ACA. Such restaurant companies may gain a cost advantage compared to us by reducing the cost of their employee health benefit programs.
Also, so-called “medical inflation” has historically tended to outpace general inflation. We are unable to reliably predict the extent to which future medical inflation will outpace general inflation. Additionally, because our medical benefit program is self-insured, an unusual incidence of large claims may cause our costs to unexpectedly increase.
Our strategy to open franchisee-owned restaurants subjects us to extensive government regulation, compliance with which might increase our investment costs and restrict our growth.
We are subject to the rules and regulations of the FTC and various international and state laws regulating the offer and sale of franchises. The FTC requires that we furnish to prospective franchisees a franchise disclosure document containing prescribed information and can restrict our ability to sell franchises. A number of states also regulate the sale of franchises and require the obtaining of a permit and/or registration of the franchise disclosure document with state authorities and the delivery of the franchise disclosure document to prospective franchisees. Non-compliance with those laws could result in governmental enforcement actions seeking a civil or criminal penalty, rescission of a franchise, and loss of our ability to offer and sell franchises in a state, or a private lawsuit seeking rescission, damages and legal fees, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Our franchisees could take actions that harm our reputation and reduce our royalty revenues.
We do not exercise control over the day-to-day operations of our franchisee-owned restaurants. While we strive to ensure that franchisee-owned restaurants maintain the same high operating standards that we demand of Company-owned restaurants, one or more of these restaurants may fail to maintain these standards or provide a customer experience consistent with our brand standards. Any operational or financial shortcomings of the franchisee-owned restaurants are likely to be attributed to our system-wide operations and could adversely affect our reputation and damage our brand as well as have a direct negative impact on the royalty income we receive from those restaurants. Franchisee noncompliance with the operational standards and the terms and conditions of our franchise agreements may reduce the overall goodwill of our brand, whether through the failure to meet health and safety standards, engage in quality control or maintain product consistency, or through the participation in improper or objectionable business practices. Moreover, unauthorized third parties may use our intellectual property to trade on the goodwill of the Company’s brand, resulting in consumer confusion or dilution. Any harm to our brand or goodwill, customer confusion or brand dilution could materially and adversely impact our business and results of operations.
The expansion into international markets by our franchisees also creates additional risks to our brands and reputation.
Our international operations are subject to all of the same risks associated with our domestic operations, as well as a number of additional risks. These include, among other things, international economic and political conditions, foreign currency fluctuations and differing cultures and consumer preferences. We are also subject to governmental regulation in such international markets, including antitrust and tax requirements, anti-boycott regulations, import/export/customs regulations and other international trade regulations, the USA Patriot Act and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Any new regulatory or trade initiatives could impact our operations in certain countries. Failure to comply with any such legal requirements could subject us to monetary liabilities and other sanctions, which could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.
10
We rely on information technology in our operations and a failure to maintain a continuous and secure network, free from material failure, interruption or security breach, could harm our ability to effectively operate our business, damage our reputation and negatively affect our operations and profits.
We rely on information systems across our operations, including for marketing programs, point-of-sale processing systems in our restaurants, online purchases of gift cards and various other processes and transactions. The failure of these systems to operate effectively, problems with transitioning to upgraded or replacement systems, a material network breach in the security of these systems as a result of a cyber-attack, or any other failure to maintain a continuous and secure network could adversely affect our reputation, negatively affect our results of operations and result in substantial harm to us or an individual. As privacy and information security laws and regulations change and cyber risks evolve, we may incur additional costs to ensure we remain in compliance and protect guest, employee and Company information. We currently carry insurance coverage to protect ourselves against some of these risks. However, our inability to continue to obtain such insurance coverage at reasonable costs also could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
We accept electronic payment cards, including credit, debit and gift cards, from our guests for payment in our restaurants and on our websites. We also receive and maintain certain personal information about our customers and employees. A number of retailers and restaurant operators have experienced security breaches in which credit, debit and gift card information may have been stolen. If we experienced a security breach, we could become subject to claims, lawsuits or other proceedings for purportedly fraudulent transactions arising out of the theft of credit or debit card information, theft of gift card information, compromised security and information systems, failure of our employees to comply with applicable laws, the unauthorized acquisition or use of such information by third parties, or other similar claims. Any such incidents or proceedings could negatively affect our reputation and our results of operations, cause delays in guest service, require significant capital investments to remediate the problem, and could result in the imposition of penalties or cause us to incur significant unplanned losses and expenditures, including those necessary to remediate any damage to persons whose personal information may have been compromised. Furthermore, as a result of legislative and regulatory rules, we may be required to notify the owners of the credit and debit card information of any data breaches, which could harm our reputation and financial results, as well as subject us to litigation or other proceedings by regulatory authorities.
Our failure to enforce our service marks or other proprietary rights could adversely affect our competitive position or the value of our brands.
We own certain common law service mark rights and a number of federal and international service mark registrations, most importantly the Ruth’s Chris Steak House names and logos, copyrights relating to text and print uses, and other proprietary intellectual property rights. We believe that our service marks, copyrights and other proprietary rights are important to our success and competitive position. Protective actions we take with respect to these rights may fail to prevent unauthorized usage or imitation by others, which could harm our reputation, brand or competitive position and, if we commence litigation to enforce our rights, cause us to incur significant legal expenses.
Litigation concerning food quality, health, employment practices and other issues could require us to incur additional liabilities and/or cause guests to avoid our restaurants.
Occasionally, our guests file complaints or lawsuits against us alleging that we are responsible for some illness or injury they suffered at or after a visit to our restaurants. We are also subject to a variety of other claims arising in the ordinary course of our business, including personal injury claims, contract claims, claims from franchisees, claims from landlords, claims alleging violations of federal and state law regarding workplace and employment matters and discrimination and similar matters. In addition, we could become subject to class action lawsuits related to these matters in the future. The restaurant industry has also been subject to a growing number of claims that the menus and actions of restaurant chains have led to the obesity of certain of their guests. In addition, we are subject to “dram shop” statutes. These statutes generally permit a person injured by an intoxicated person to recover damages from an establishment that wrongfully served alcoholic beverages to the intoxicated person. The restaurant industry has also faced recent claims related to sexual harassment. Regardless of whether any claims against us are valid or whether we are liable, claims may be expensive to defend and may divert time and money away from our operations and hurt our performance. A judgment significantly in excess of our insurance coverage for any claims or for matters not covered by insurance could materially adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. Our inability to continue to obtain such insurance coverage at reasonable costs also could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. Adverse publicity resulting from these claims may also negatively impact revenues at one or more of our restaurants.
11
The terms of our senior credit agreement may restrict our ability to operate our business and to pursue our business strategies.
Our senior credit agreement contains, and any agreements governing future indebtedness would likely contain, a number of restrictive covenants that impose significant operating and financial restrictions on us. Our senior credit agreement, which was entered into on February 2, 2017, limits our ability, among other things, to:
• |
pay dividends or purchase stock in excess of the limits permitted under the credit facility; |
• |
borrow money or issue guarantees; |
• |
make investments; |
• |
use assets as security in other transactions; |
• |
sell assets or merge with or into other companies; |
• |
enter into transactions with affiliates; and |
• |
create or permit restrictions on our subsidiaries’ ability to make payments to us. |
Our ability to engage in these types of transactions is limited even if we believe that a specific transaction would contribute to our future growth or improve our operating results. Our senior credit agreement also requires us to maintain compliance with certain financial ratios. Our ability to comply with these ratios may be affected by events outside of our control. Any non-compliance would result in a default under our senior credit agreement and could result in our lenders declaring our senior debt immediately due and payable, which would have a material adverse effect on our financial position, consolidated results of operations and liquidity.
We cannot assure our stockholders that we will continue to pay quarterly cash dividends on our common stock or repurchase shares of our common stock under our share repurchase program. Failure to continue to pay quarterly cash dividends to our stockholders or repurchase shares of our common stock under our share repurchase program could cause the market price for our common stock to decline.
During fiscal year 2017, we continued paying quarterly cash dividends to holders of our common stock and repurchased shares of our common stock under our share repurchase program. Our ability to pay future quarterly cash dividends or repurchase shares of our common stock will be subject to, among other things, our results of operations, financial condition, business prospects, capital requirements, contractual restrictions, any indebtedness we may incur, restrictions imposed by applicable law, tax considerations and other factors that our Board of Directors deems relevant. There can be no assurance that we will continue to pay a quarterly cash dividend or repurchase shares of our common stock in the future. Any reduction or discontinuance by us of the payment of quarterly cash dividends or the repurchase of shares of our common stock under our share repurchase program could cause the market price of our common stock to decline. Moreover, in the event our payment of quarterly cash dividends is reduced or discontinued, our failure or inability to resume paying quarterly cash dividends at historical levels could result in a lower market valuation of our common stock.
In the future we could incur unexpected expenses as a result of the sale of the Mitchell’s Restaurants.
Effective January 21, 2015, we sold the Mitchell’s Restaurants and related assets to Landry’s. Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, upon closing of the sale of the Mitchell’s Restaurants, Landry’s assumed the lease obligations of the Mitchell’s Restaurants. However, we have guaranteed Landry’s lease obligations aggregating $29.4 million under seven of the leases. Also, the Agreement includes customary seller representations and warranties. There is a risk that adverse events may occur that require us to defend against or fulfill an indemnity claim, which could result in unexpected expense.
We depend on external sources of capital, which may not be available in the future.
Historically, we have relied upon external sources of capital to fund our working capital and other requirements. Currently, we utilize our senior credit agreement to fund a portion of our working capital and other financing requirements. Any non-compliance with any restrictive or financial covenants in our senior credit agreement could result in a default and could result in our lenders declaring our senior debt immediately due and payable, which would have a material adverse effect on our financial position, consolidated results of operations and liquidity.
If we are required to seek other sources of capital, additional capital may or may not be available on favorable terms or at all. Our access to third-party sources of capital depends on a number of things, including the market’s perception of our current and potential future earnings. Furthermore, additional equity offerings may result in substantial dilution of stockholders’ interests. If we are unable to access sufficient capital or enter into financing arrangements on favorable terms in the future, our financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.
12
Tax assessments by governmental authorities could adversely impact our operating results.
We remit a variety of taxes and fees to various governmental authorities, including federal and state income taxes, excise taxes, property taxes, sales and use taxes, and payroll taxes. The taxes and fees remitted by us are subject to review and audit by the applicable governmental authorities, which could result in liability for additional assessments. In addition, we are subject to unclaimed or abandoned property (escheat) laws which require us to turn over to certain government authorities the property of others held by us that has been unclaimed for a specified period of time. We are subject to audit by individual U.S. states with regard to our escheatment practices. The legislation and regulations related to tax and unclaimed property matters tend to be complex and subject to varying interpretations by both government authorities and taxpayers. Although management believes that the positions are reasonable, various taxing authorities may challenge certain of the positions we have taken, which may also potentially result in additional liabilities for taxes, unclaimed property and interest in excess of accrued liabilities. Our positions are reviewed as events occur such as the availability of new information, the lapsing of applicable statutes of limitations, the conclusion of tax audits, the measurement of additional estimated liability based on current calculations, the identification of new tax contingencies, or the rendering of relevant court decisions. An unfavorable resolution of assessments by a governmental authority could negatively impact our results of operations and cash flows in future periods.
An impairment in the financial statement carrying value of our goodwill, other intangible assets or property could adversely affect our financial condition and consolidated results of operations.
Goodwill and owned franchise rights that have been determined to have indefinite lives must be reviewed for potential impairment annually and when triggering events are detected. During the fourth quarter of each year, we complete an analysis to determine if goodwill and franchise rights are impaired as of the balance sheet date. We performed our annual impairment test of goodwill and franchise rights as of November 26, 2017 using a qualitative assessment. Using the qualitative approach, we evaluated factors, including but not limited to, recent financial performance; forecasts for future cash flows; the Company’s stock price and market capitalization; recent impairment tests; legal factors; the business climate; and the competitive environment.
If the qualitative assessment of goodwill is not performed, or if we determine that it is not more likely than not that the fair values of the intangible assets exceed the carrying values, then we compare the carrying value of a reporting unit, including goodwill, to the fair value of the unit. Carrying value is based on the assets and liabilities associated with the operations of that reporting unit. If the carrying value is less than the fair value, no impairment exists. If the carrying value is higher than the fair value, there is an indication of impairment. A significant amount of judgment is involved in determining if an indication of impairment exists. Factors may include, among others: a significant decline in our expected future cash flows; a sustained, significant decline in our stock price and market capitalization; a significant adverse change in legal factors or in the business climate; unanticipated competition; and slower growth rates. Any adverse change in these factors would have a significant impact on the recoverability of goodwill and negatively affect our financial condition and consolidated results of operations. We compute the amount of impairment by comparing the implied fair value of reporting unit goodwill with the financial statement carrying amount of that goodwill. We are required to record a non-cash impairment charge if the testing performed indicates that goodwill has been impaired.
We evaluate the useful lives of our other intangible assets to determine if they are definite or indefinite-lived. Reaching a determination on useful life requires significant judgments and assumptions regarding the future effects of obsolescence, demand, competition, other economic factors (such as the stability of the industry, legislative action that results in an uncertain or changing regulatory environment, and expected changes in distribution channels), the level of required maintenance expenditures, and the expected lives of other related groups of assets.
As with goodwill, we test our indefinite-lived intangible assets (primarily franchise rights) for impairment annually and whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that their carrying value may not be recoverable. We performed our annual impairment test of franchise rights as of November 26, 2017 using a qualitative assessment. If the qualitative assessment is not performed, or if we determine that it is not more likely than not that the fair values of the intangible assets exceed the carrying values, then we estimate the fair value of the franchise rights based on an excess earnings valuation model, which requires assumptions related to projected revenues and cash flows from our annual strategic plan and a discount rate.
We review property and equipment (which includes leasehold improvements) for impairment when events or circumstances indicate these assets might be impaired. We test impairment using historical cash flow and other relevant facts and circumstances as the primary basis for our estimates of future cash flows. The analysis is performed at the restaurant level for indicators of impairment. In determining future cash flows, we make significant estimates with respect to future operating results of each restaurant over the expected remaining life of the primary asset in the restaurant. If assets are determined to be impaired, the loss on impairment is measured by calculating the amount by which the asset-carrying amount exceeds its fair value. This process requires the use of estimates and assumptions, which are subject to a high degree of judgment. During the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2017, we recognized a $3.9 million impairment due to the decline in the estimated fair value of the long-lived assets (primarily leasehold improvements) of one Ruth’s Chris Steak House restaurant. If these estimates and assumptions change in the future, we may be required to record additional losses on impairment on these assets.
13
We cannot accurately predict the amount and timing of any impairment of assets. Should the financial statement carrying value of goodwill, other intangible assets or property and equipment become impaired, there could be an adverse effect on our financial condition and consolidated results of operations.
Market volatility could adversely affect our stock price.
Many factors affect the trading price of our stock, including factors over which we have no control, such as reports on the economy or the price of commodities, as well as negative or positive announcements by competitors, regardless of whether the report relates directly to our business. In addition to investor expectations, trading activity in our stock can reflect the portfolio strategies and investment allocation changes of institutional holders. Any failure to meet market expectations, whether for sales growth rates, earnings per share or other metrics, could adversely affect our share price.
None.
Company-owned restaurants are generally located in spaces leased by wholly-owned direct or indirect subsidiaries. Seventy-six of the Company-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants operate in leased space, of which the majority currently provide for an option to renew for terms ranging from approximately five years to twenty years. Historically, the Company has not had difficulty in renewing its leases in a timely manner. Restaurant leases provide for a specified annual rent, and some leases call for additional or contingent rent based on sales volumes over specified levels.
All of the Company’s Mitchell’s Fish Market, Mitchell’s Steakhouse and Cameron’s Steakhouse restaurants were in leased spaces and each lease provided for at least one option to renew, with the exception of the lease for one Mitchell’s Steakhouse. Under the terms of the Agreement to sell the Mitchell’s Restaurants, Landry’s assumed the Mitchell’s Restaurants’ facility lease obligations upon closing of the sale in January 2015. However, the Company has guaranteed Landry’s lease obligations aggregating $29.4 million under seven of the leases. Landry’s indemnified the Company in the event of a default under any of the leases.
The Company’s corporate headquarters were relocated in 2011 from Heathrow, Florida. The corporate headquarters now resides in leased space (21,211 square feet) in Winter Park, Florida, with a term set to expire on August 31, 2021.
The Company owns the real estate for one Ruth’s Chris operating restaurant in Ft. Lauderdale, FL (7,800 square feet). We sold our Columbus, OH property in 2016. The Columbus restaurant was closed in February 2016.
14
The following table sets forth information about the Company’s existing Company-owned and franchisee-owned restaurants as of December 31, 2017. As of December 31, 2017, the Company operated 77 Ruth’s Chris restaurants. In addition, franchisees operated 76 restaurants and two restaurants operated under contractual agreements. Company-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants range in size from approximately 4,000 to approximately 13,000 square feet with approximately 180 to 375 seats. The Company expects that future restaurants will range in size from 8,000 to 12,000 square feet with approximately 230 to 250 seats.
Company-Owned Ruth's Chris Restaurants |
|
Franchisee-Owned Ruth's Chris Restaurants |
||||||
Year Opened |
|
Locations |
|
Property Leased or Owned |
|
Year Opened |
|
Locations |
1972 |
|
Metairie, LA |
|
Leased |
|
1976 |
|
Baton Rouge, LA |
1977 |
|
Lafayette, LA |
|
Leased |
|
1985 |
|
Mobile, AL |
1983 |
|
Washington, D.C. |
|
Leased |
|
1986 |
|
Atlanta, GA |
1984 |
|
Beverly Hills, CA |
|
Leased |
|
1987 |
|
Pittsburgh, PA |
1985 |
|
Ft. Lauderdale, FL |
|
Owned |
|
1987 |
|
Hartford, CT |
1985 |
|
Austin, TX |
|
Leased |
|
1988 |
|
Philadelphia, PA |
1986 |
|
Nashville, TN |
|
Leased |
|
1991 |
|
Richmond, VA |
1987 |
|
San Francisco, CA |
|
Leased |
|
1993 |
|
Birmingham, AL |
1987 |
|
N. Palm Beach, FL |
|
Leased |
|
1993 |
|
San Antonio, TX |
1988 |
|
Seattle, WA |
|
Leased |
|
1993 |
|
Taipei, Taiwan |
1989 |
|
Honolulu, HI |
|
Leased |
|
1993 |
|
Cancun, Mexico |
1989 |
|
Memphis, TN |
|
Leased |
|
1994 |
|
Indianapolis, IN |
1990 |
|
Weehawken, NJ |
|
Leased |
|
1995 |
|
Long Island, NY |
1990 |
|
Scottsdale, AZ |
|
Leased |
|
1995 |
|
Toronto, Canada |
1992 |
|
Palm Desert, CA |
|
Leased |
|
1996 |
|
Taichung, Taiwan |
1992 |
|
Minneapolis, MN |
|
Leased |
|
1996 |
|
Indianapolis, IN |
1992 |
|
Chicago, IL |
|
Leased |
|
1997 |
|
Kowloon, Hong Kong |
1993 |
|
Arlington, VA |
|
Leased |
|
1997 |
|
Raleigh (Cary), NC |
1993 |
|
Manhattan, NY |
|
Leased |
|
1998 |
|
Annapolis, MD |
1994 |
|
San Diego, CA |
|
Leased |
|
1999 |
|
Atlanta, GA |
1995 |
|
Westchester, NY |
|
Leased |
|
2000 |
|
Pikesville, MD |
1996 |
|
Dallas, TX |
|
Leased |
|
2000 |
|
San Antonio, TX |
1996 |
|
Troy, MI |
|
Leased |
|
2001 |
|
Kaohsiung, Taiwan |
1996 |
|
Tampa, FL |
|
Leased |
|
2001 |
|
King of Prussia, PA |
1996 |
|
Bethesda, MD |
|
Leased |
|
2001 |
|
Queensway, Hong Kong |
1997 |
|
Irvine, CA |
|
Leased |
|
2001 |
|
Cabo San Lucas, Mexico |
1997 |
|
Jacksonville, FL |
|
Leased |
|
2003 |
|
Toronto, Canada |
1998 |
|
Louisville, KY |
|
Leased |
|
2005 |
|
Virginia Beach, VA |
1998 |
|
Maui, HI |
|
Leased |
|
2005 |
|
Baltimore, MD |
1998 |
|
Parsippany, NJ |
|
Leased |
|
2005 |
|
Atlantic City, NJ |
1998 |
|
Northbrook, IL |
|
Leased |
|
2005 |
|
Charlotte, NC |
1999 |
|
Coral Gables, FL |
|
Leased |
|
2006 |
|
St. Louis, MO |
1999 |
|
Ponte Vedra, FL |
|
Leased |
|
2006 |
|
Ocean City, MD |
1999 |
|
Winter Park, FL |
|
Leased |
|
2006 |
|
Destin, FL |
2000 |
|
Sarasota, FL |
|
Leased |
|
2006 |
|
Huntsville, AL |
2000 |
|
Del Mar, CA |
|
Leased |
|
2006 |
|
Edmonton, Canada |
2000 |
|
Boca Raton, FL |
|
Leased |
|
2007 |
|
Charlotte, NC |
2000 |
|
Wailea, HI |
|
Leased |
|
2007 |
|
Columbia, SC |
2001 |
|
Orlando, FL |
|
Leased |
|
2007 |
|
Mishawaka, IN |
2001 |
|
Greensboro, NC |
|
Leased |
|
2007 |
|
Tokyo, Japan |
2002 |
|
Woodland Hills, CA |
|
Leased |
|
2007 |
|
Madison, WI |
2002 |
|
Fairfax, VA |
|
Leased |
|
2007 |
|
Calgary, Canada |
2002 |
|
Bellevue, WA |
|
Leased |
|
2007 |
|
Rogers, AR |
2002 |
|
Washington, D.C. |
|
Leased |
|
2007 |
|
Park City, UT |
2003 |
|
Walnut Creek, CA |
|
Leased |
|
2008 |
|
Aruba |
2005 |
|
Roseville, CA |
|
Leased |
|
2008 |
|
Myrtle Beach, SC |
15
Company-Owned Ruth's Chris Restaurants |
|
Franchisee-Owned Ruth's Chris Restaurants |
||||||
Year Opened |
|
Locations |
|
Property Leased or Owned |
|
Year Opened |
|
Locations |
2005 |
|
Boston, MA |
|
Leased |
|
2008 |
|
Wilmington, NC |
2005 |
|
Sacramento, CA |
|
Leased |
|
2008 |
|
Ridgeland, MS |
2006 |
|
Bonita Springs, FL |
|
Leased |
|
2008 |
|
Wilkes-Barre, PA |
2006 |
|
Mauna Lani, HI |
|
Leased |
|
2008 |
|
Raleigh, NC |
2006 |
|
Pasadena, CA |
|
Leased |
|
2008 |
|
Savannah, GA |
2007 |
|
Lake Mary, FL* |
|
Land Leased |
|
2009 |
|
Greenville, SC |
2007 |
|
Anaheim, CA* |
|
Land Leased |
|
2009 |
|
St. Louis, MO |
2007 |
|
Biloxi, MS |
|
Leased |
|
2009 |
|
Durham, NC |
2007 |
|
Knoxville, TN |
|
Leased |
|
2009 |
|
Kennesaw, GA |
2007 |
|
Tyson's Corner, VA |
|
Leased |
|
2010 |
|
Salt Lake City, UT |
2007 |
|
Waikiki, HI |
|
Leased |
|
2011 |
|
Grand Rapids, MI |
2007 |
|
West Palm Beach, FL |
|
Leased |
|
2011 |
|
Asheville, NC |
2008 |
|
Ft. Worth, TX |
|
Leased |
|
2012 |
|
Dubai, United Arab Emirates |
2008 |
|
New Orleans, LA |
|
Leased |
|
2012 |
|
Singapore |
2008 |
|
Princeton, NJ* |
|
Land Leased |
|
2012 |
|
Niagara Falls, Canada |
2008 |
|
Fresno, CA |
|
Leased |
|
2013 |
|
Las Vegas, NV |
2008 |
|
South Barrington, IL* |
|
Land Leased |
|
2013 |
|
San Juan, Puerto Rico |
2011 |
|
Portland, OR |
|
Leased |
|
2013 |
|
Chattanooga, TN |
2012 |
|
Cincinnati, OH |
|
Leased |
|
2013 |
|
Shanghai, China |
2013 |
|
Houston, TX |
|
Leased |
|
2014 |
|
Alpharetta, GA |
2014 |
|
Denver, CO |
|
Leased |
|
2014 |
|
Boise, ID |
2014 |
|
Gaithersburg, MD |
|
Leased |
|
2014 |
|
Panama City, Panama |
2014 |
|
Marina del Rey, CA |
|
Leased |
|
2014 |
|
Taipei, Taiwan |
2015 |
|
St. Petersburg, FL |
|
Leased |
|
2015 |
|
Ann Arbor, MI |
2015 |
|
Dallas, TX |
|
Leased |
|
2015 |
|
Charleston, SC |
2016 |
|
Albuquerque, NM |
|
Leased |
|
2015 |
|
San Antonio, TX |
2016 |
|
El Paso, TX |
|
Leased |
|
2016 |
|
Jakarta, Indonesia |
2017 |
|
Waltham, MA |
|
Leased |
|
2016 |
|
Odenton, MD |
2017 |
|
Cleveland, OH |
|
Leased |
|
2016 |
|
Greenville, SC |
2017 |
|
Kauai, HI |
|
Leased |
|
2017 |
|
Chengdu, China |
2017 |
|
Denver, CO |
|
Leased |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ruth's Chris Restaurants Under Management Agreement |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Opened |
|
Locations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Cherokee, NC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017 |
|
Tulsa, OK |
* |
The Company owns the building and leases the land pursuant to a long-term ground lease. |
16
From time to time, the Company is involved in various disputes and litigation matters that arise in the ordinary course of business. While litigation is subject to uncertainties and the outcome of litigated matters is not predictable with assurance, the Company is not aware of any legal proceedings pending or threatened against it that it expects to have a material adverse effect on its financial condition or results of operations.
None.
17
Item 5. |
MARKET FOR THE REGISTRANT’S COMMON STOCK, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES |
The Company’s common stock is listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the trading symbol “RUTH.” As of March 1, 2018, there were 111 holders of record of its common stock.
The following table sets forth, for the period indicated, the highest and lowest sale price for its common stock for each full quarterly period for fiscal years 2017 and 2016, as reported by the Nasdaq Global Select Market:
|
|
High |
|
|
Low |
|
||
Fiscal Year ended December 25, 2016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter |
|
$ |
17.92 |
|
|
$ |
15.32 |
|
Second Quarter |
|
$ |
18.48 |
|
|
$ |
15.88 |
|
Third Quarter |
|
$ |
16.16 |
|
|
$ |
14.85 |
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
$ |
19.50 |
|
|
$ |
13.99 |
|
Fiscal Year ended December 31, 2017 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter |
|
$ |
19.85 |
|
|
$ |
16.70 |
|
Second Quarter |
|
$ |
22.35 |
|
|
$ |
19.60 |
|
Third Quarter |
|
$ |
22.20 |
|
|
$ |
18.35 |
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
$ |
22.20 |
|
|
$ |
19.65 |
|
Dividends and Common Stock Repurchase Program
We commenced paying quarterly cash dividends to holders of our common stock in May 2013. The payment of dividends is within the discretion of our Board of Directors and will depend upon our earnings, capital requirements and operating and financial condition, among other factors. In addition, we may not pay a dividend if there is a default (or if a default would result from such dividend payment) under our senior credit agreement. Under our senior credit facility, restricted junior payments, which include cash dividend payments, repurchases of our equity securities and payment and prepayments of subordinated indebtedness, made subsequent to February 2, 2017 are limited to $100.0 million if our consolidated debt ratio is greater than or equal to 2.00:1.00, and are not limited in amount if our consolidated debt ratio is less than 2.00:1.00. As of the date of this Annual Report $35.4 million of such payments had been made.
The Company’s Board of Directors declared the following dividends during the periods presented (amounts in thousands, except per share amounts):
Declaration Date |
|
Dividend per Share |
|
|
Record Date |
|
Total Amount |
|
|
Payment Date |
||
Fiscal Year 2017 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
February 17, 2017 |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
February 23, 2017 |
|
$ |
2,862 |
|
|
March 9, 2017 |
May 5, 2017 |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
May 18, 2017 |
|
$ |
2,862 |
|
|
June 1, 2017 |
July 28, 2017 |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
August 10, 2017 |
|
$ |
2,844 |
|
|
August 24, 2017 |
November 3, 2017 |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
November 9, 2017 |
|
$ |
2,815 |
|
|
November 22, 2017 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
February 12, 2016 |
|
$ |
0.07 |
|
|
February 25, 2016 |
|
$ |
2,350 |
|
|
March 10, 2016 |
April 28, 2016 |
|
$ |
0.07 |
|
|
May 12, 2016 |
|
$ |
2,338 |
|
|
May 26, 2016 |
July 29, 2016 |
|
$ |
0.07 |
|
|
August 11, 2016 |
|
$ |
2,282 |
|
|
August 25, 2016 |
October 28, 2016 |
|
$ |
0.07 |
|
|
November 10, 2016 |
|
$ |
2,226 |
|
|
November 23, 2016 |
Subsequent to the end of fiscal year 2017, the Company’s Board of Directors declared a $0.11 per share cash dividend ($3.4 million in total) payable on March 22, 2018. Dividends are paid to holders of common stock and restricted stock.
On November 3, 2017, the Company announced that its Board of Directors approved a share repurchase program under which the Company is authorized to repurchase up to $60 million of outstanding common stock from time to time in the open market, through negotiated transactions or otherwise (including, without limitation, the use of Rule 10b5-1 plans), depending on share price, market conditions and other factors. The new share repurchase program replaces the Company’s previous share repurchase program announced in April 2016, which has been terminated. The previous share repurchase program had permitted the repurchase of up to
18
$60 million of outstanding common stock, of which approximately $12.0 million remained unused upon its termination. The Company conducts any open market share repurchase activities in compliance with the safe harbor provisions of Rule 10b-18 of the Exchange Act. The share repurchase program does not obligate the Company to repurchase any dollar amount or number of its shares. The program has no termination date. As of December 31, 2017, $50.7 million remained available for further purchases under the new program.
Stock repurchase activity during the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2017 was as follows:
Period |
|
Total Number of Shares Purchased |
|
|
Average Price Paid per Share |
|
|
Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of a Publicly Announced Program |
|
|
Maximum Dollar Value that May Yet be Purchased under the Program – Amounts in thousands |
|
||||
September 25, 2017 to October 29, 2017 |
|
— |
|
|
— |
|
|
— |
|
|
$ |
60,000 |
|
|||
October 30, 2017 to November 26, 2017 |
|
|
103,600 |
|
|
$ |
20.23 |
|
|
|
103,600 |
|
|
$ |
57,904 |
|
November 27, 2017 to December 31, 2017 |
|
|
346,400 |
|
|
$ |
20.93 |
|
|
|
346,400 |
|
|
$ |
50,655 |
|
Totals for the fiscal quarter |
|
|
450,000 |
|
|
$ |
20.77 |
|
|
|
450,000 |
|
|
$ |
50,655 |
|
Unregistered Recent Sales of Securities
None.
Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans
See Item 12, Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters, of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for information regarding securities authorized for issuance under the Company’s equity compensation plans.
19
Performance Graph
The following table and graph shows the cumulative total stockholder return on the Company’s Common Stock with the S&P 500 Stock Index, the S&P Small Cap 600 Index and the Dow Jones U.S. Restaurants & Bars Index, in each case assuming an initial investment of $100 on December 28, 2012 and full dividend reinvestment.
CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN
Assuming an investment of $100 and reinvestment of dividends
|
|
12/28/12 |
|
|
12/27/13 |
|
|
12/26/14 |
|
|
12/24/15 |
|
|
12/23/16 |
|
|
12/29/17 |
|
||||||
Ruth's Hospitality Group, Inc. |
|
$ |
100 |
|
|
$ |
209 |
|
|
$ |
204 |
|
|
|
231 |
|
|
$ |
267 |
|
|
$ |
323 |
|
S&P 500 |
|
$ |
100 |
|
|
$ |
132 |
|
|
$ |
151 |
|
|
|
153 |
|
|
$ |
171 |
|
|
$ |
208 |
|
S&P Smallcap 600 |
|
$ |
100 |
|
|
$ |
141 |
|
|
$ |
149 |
|
|
|
147 |
|
|
$ |
185 |
|
|
$ |
210 |
|
Dow Jones US Restaurants & Bars |
|
$ |
100 |
|
|
$ |
128 |
|
|
$ |
135 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
$ |
174 |
|
|
$ |
216 |
|
All amounts rounded to the nearest dollar.
**********
The stock performance graph should not be deemed filed or incorporated by reference into any other filing made by us under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate the stock performance graph by reference in another filing.
20
The following table sets forth the Company’s selected financial data for the year indicated and should be read in conjunction with the disclosures in Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Results of Operations and Financial Condition, and Item 8, Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Certain amounts have been revised to reclassify certain operating revenues and expenses to income from discontinued operations.
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended |
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
2017 |
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
|
2014 |
|
|
2013 |
|
|||||
|
|
($ in thousands) |
|
|||||||||||||||||
Income Statement Data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restaurant sales |
|
$ |
390,434 |
|
|
$ |
363,147 |
|
|
$ |
351,875 |
|
|
$ |
325,437 |
|
|
$ |
304,200 |
|
Franchise income |
|
|
17,545 |
|
|
|
17,301 |
|
|
|
16,661 |
|
|
|
15,763 |
|
|
|
15,012 |
|
Other operating income |
|
|
6,844 |
|
|
|
5,499 |
|
|
|
4,897 |
|
|
|
4,897 |
|
|
|
3,142 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
414,823 |
|
|
|
385,947 |
|
|
|
373,433 |
|
|
|
346,097 |
|
|
|
322,354 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Food and beverage costs |
|
|
116,361 |
|
|
|
107,075 |
|
|
|
108,101 |
|
|
|
103,259 |
|
|
|
93,386 |
|
Restaurant operating expenses |
|
|
185,444 |
|
|
|
172,999 |
|
|
|
165,847 |
|
|
|
156,242 |
|
|
|
145,664 |
|
Marketing and advertising |
|
|
12,724 |
|
|
|
11,406 |
|
|
|
10,925 |
|
|
|
10,076 |
|
|
|
9,341 |
|
General and administrative costs |
|
|
32,700 |
|
|
|
31,488 |
|
|
|
30,242 |
|
|
|
24,311 |
|
|
|
27,808 |
|
Depreciation and amortization expenses |
|
|
14,995 |
|
|
|
13,434 |
|
|
|
12,520 |
|
|
|
10,917 |
|
|
|
10,229 |
|
Pre-opening costs |
|
|
2,013 |
|
|
|
1,986 |
|
|
|
1,032 |
|
|
|
1,630 |
|
|
|
691 |
|
Loss on impairments |
|
|
3,904 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Gain on settlements, net |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(1,719 |
) |
Total costs and expenses |
|
|
368,141 |
|
|
|
338,388 |
|
|
|
328,667 |
|
|
|
306,435 |
|
|
|
285,400 |
|
Operating income |
|
|
46,682 |
|
|
|
47,559 |
|
|
|
44,766 |
|
|
|
39,662 |
|
|
|
36,954 |
|
Other income (expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(821 |
) |
|
|
(1,154 |
) |
|
|
(790 |
) |
|
|
(1,159 |
) |
|
|
(1,640 |
) |
Other |
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
358 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
(77 |
) |
Income from continuing operations before income tax expense |
|
|
45,914 |
|
|
|
46,415 |
|
|
|
44,334 |
|
|
|
38,540 |
|
|
|
35,237 |
|
Income tax expense |
|
|
15,669 |
|
|
|
15,660 |
|
|
|
14,168 |
|
|
|
11,830 |
|
|
|
10,744 |
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
|
30,245 |
|
|
|
30,755 |
|
|
|
30,166 |
|
|
|
26,710 |
|
|
|
24,493 |
|
Loss from discontinued operations, net of income taxes |
|
|
(108 |
) |
|
|
(290 |
) |
|
|
(162 |
) |
|
|
(10,255 |
) |
|
|
(2,004 |
) |
Net income |
|
$ |
30,137 |
|
|
$ |
30,465 |
|
|
$ |
30,004 |
|
|
$ |
16,455 |
|
|
$ |
22,489 |
|
21
|
|
2017 |
|
|
2016 |
|
|
2015 |
|
|
2014 |
|
|
2013 |
|
|||||
|
|
($ in thousands, except per share data) |
|
|||||||||||||||||
Basic earnings (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations |
|
$ |
1.00 |
|
|
$ |
0.97 |
|
|
$ |
0.88 |
|
|
$ |
0.76 |
|
|
$ |
0.71 |
|
Discontinued operations |
|
|
(0.01 |
) |
|
|
(0.01 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(0.29 |
) |
|
|
(0.06 |
) |
Basic earnings (loss) per share |
|
$ |
0.99 |
|
|
$ |
0.96 |
|
|
$ |
0.88 |
|
|
$ |
0.47 |
|
|
$ |
0.65 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.98 |
|
|
$ |
0.96 |
|
|
$ |
0.87 |
|
|
$ |
0.75 |
|
|
$ |
0.69 |
|
Discontinued operations |
|
|
(0.01 |
) |
|
|
(0.01 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(0.29 |
) |
|
|
(0.06 |
) |
Diluted earnings (loss) per share |
|
$ |
0.97 |
|
|
$ |
0.95 |
|
|
$ |
0.87 |
|
|
$ |
0.46 |
|
|
$ |
0.63 |
|
Shares used in computing earnings (loss) per common share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
30,346,999 |
|
|
|
31,670,189 |
|
|
|
34,018,582 |
|
|
|
34,955,760 |
|
|
|
34,761,160 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
30,916,364 |
|
|
|
32,108,965 |
|
|
|
34,434,407 |
|
|
|
35,415,483 |
|
|
|
35,784,430 |
|
Dividends declared per common share |
|
$ |
0.36 |
|
|
$ |
0.28 |
|
|
$ |
0.24 |
|
|
$ |
0.20 |
|
|