Annual Reports

 
Quarterly Reports

 
8-K

 
Other

BUCA 10-Q 2005

Documents found in this filing:

  1. 10-Q/A
  2. Ex-31.1
  3. Ex-31.2
  4. Ex-32.1
  5. Ex-32.1
Form 10-Q Amendment No. 1
Table of Contents

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 


 

FORM 10-Q/A

 

Amendment No. 1

 


 

(Mark One)

x Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

 

For the Quarterly Period Ended June 26, 2005

 

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 0-25721.

 


 

BUCA, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its Charter)

 


 

Minnesota   41-1802364

(State or other jurisdiction of

incorporation or organization)

 

(I.R.S. Employer

Identification No.)

 

1300 Nicollet Mall, Suite 5003

Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

 

(612) 225-3400

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

 


 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x    No  ¨

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2).    Yes  x    No  ¨

 

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

 

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common equity, as of the latest practicable date: Common stock, $.01 par value, 20,216,396 shares outstanding as of July 27, 2005.

 



Table of Contents

EXPLANATORY NOTE

 

This Form 10-Q/A of BUCA, Inc. and Subsidiaries (we, us and our) is being filed for the purpose of amending and restating Part I-Items 1, 2 and 4, and Part II-Item 6 of our Form 10-Q for the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005, to reflect the restatement of our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements as of and for the thirteen and twenty-six week periods ended March 27, 2005 to correct certain errors related depreciation of fixed assets, interest expense, lease payments, medical benefits and other prepaid expenses.

 

No attempt has been made in this Form 10-Q/A to modify or update other disclosures presented in the original report on Form 10-Q, except as required to reflect the effects of the restatement. The Form 10-Q/A does not reflect events occurring after the filing of the Form 10-Q or modify or update those disclosures, including the exhibits to the Form 10-Q affected by subsequent events. Information not affected by the restatement is unchanged and reflects the disclosure made at the time of the original filing of the Form 10-Q on July 25, 2005. Accordingly, this Form 10-Q/A should be read in conjunction with Part I, Item 3, and Part II, Items 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, of the original Form 10-Q which were not amended by this Form 10-Q/A and with our filings made with the Securities and Exchange Commission subsequent to the filing of the original Form 10-Q, including any amendments to those filings.

 

INDEX

 

BUCA, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

 

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

    

Item 1.

 

Financial Statements

   3
   

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets – June 26, 2005 (restated) and December 26, 2004

   3
   

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations - Thirteen and Twenty-Six Weeks Ended June 26, 2005 (restated) and June 27, 2004 (restated)

   4
   

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows - Thirteen and Twenty-Six Weeks Ended June 26, 2005 (restated) and June 27, 2004 (restated)

   5
   

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

   6

Item 2.

 

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

   12

Item 4.

 

Controls and Procedures

   22

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

    

Item 6.

 

Exhibits

   23

SIGNATURES

   24

EXHIBITS

   25

 

2


Table of Contents

PART 1. — FINANCIAL INFORMATION

 

Item 1. Financial Statements

 

BUCA, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

(in thousands, except share data)

(Unaudited)

 

     June 26, 2005
(as restated – see
Note 2_)


    December 26, 2004

 
ASSETS                 

Current assets:

                

Cash and cash equivalents

   $ 4,137     $ 4,314  

Accounts receivable

     3,358       2,796  

Inventories

     7,082       7,379  

Prepaid expenses and other

     3,575       4,486  
    


 


Total current assets

     18,152       18,975  

Property, equipment and leasehold improvements, net

     150,482       157,921  

Other assets

     5,784       6,349  
    


 


     $ 174,418     $ 183,245  
    


 


LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY                 

Current liabilities:

                

Accounts payable

   $ 13,519     $ 13,840  

Accrued gift cards and certificates

     1,915       4,747  

Accrued payroll and benefits

     6,445       7,542  

Accrued sales, property and income tax

     2,817       3,590  

Other accrued expenses

     4,409       6,167  

Line of credit borrowings

     5,038       1,986  

Current maturities of long-term debt and capitalized leases

     1,368       1,368  
    


 


Total current liabilities

     35,511       39,240  

Long-term liabilities:

                

Long-term debt and capital leases, less current maturities

     18,885       19,579  

Deferred rent

     18,400       18,236  

Other liabilities, net

     2,897       3,113  
    


 


Total liabilities

     75,693       80,168  

Commitments and contingencies (Note 10)

                

Shareholders’ equity:

                

Undesignated stock, 5,000,000 shares authorized, none issued or outstanding

                

Common stock, $.01 par value per share, 30,000,000 authorized; 20,211,913 and 20,186,059 shares issued and outstanding, respectively

     202       202  

Additional paid-in capital

     169,222       169,112  

Accumulated deficit

     (69,637 )     (65,122 )

Notes receivable from employee shareholders

     (1,062 )     (1,115 )
    


 


Total shareholders’ equity

     98,725       103,077  
    


 


     $ 174,418     $ 183,245  
    


 


 

See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.

 

3


Table of Contents

BUCA, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations

(in thousands, except share and per share data)

(Unaudited)

 

     Thirteen Weeks Ended

    Twenty-Six Weeks Ended

 
     June 26, 2005
(as restated
see Note 2)


    June 27, 2004
(as restated—
see Note 2)


    June 26, 2005
(as restated
see Note 2)


    June 27, 2004
(as restated—
see Note 2)


 

Restaurant sales

   $ 69,176     $ 63,631     $ 139,629     $ 128,320  

Restaurant costs:

                                

Product

     17,884       16,272       36,042       32,754  

Labor

     22,656       21,178       45,910       42,766  

Direct and occupancy

     20,938       20,052       40,592       38,504  

Depreciation and amortization

     3,753       3,791       7,309       7,516  
    


 


 


 


Total restaurant costs

     65,231       61,293       129,853       121,540  

General and administrative expenses

     6,654       4,132       12,127       8,657  

Pre-opening costs

     0       296       244       475  

Loss on impairment of long-lived assets

     0       0       440       0  

Lease termination costs

     0       1,172       74       1,172  
    


 


 


 


Operating loss

     (2,709 )     (3,262 )     (3,109 )     (3,524 )

Interest income

     28       23       52       49  

Interest expense

     (1,010 )     (437 )     (1,468 )     (1,043 )

Loss on early extinguishment of debt

     0       0       0       (524 )
    


 


 


 


Loss before income taxes

     (3,691 )     (3,676 )     (4,525 )     (5,042 )

Income taxes

     0       0       0       0  
    


 


 


 


Net loss

   $ (3,691 )   $ (3,676 )   $ (4,525 )   $ (5,042 )
    


 


 


 


Net loss per share – basic

   $ (0.18 )   $ (0.18 )   $ (0.22 )   $ (0.26 )

Weighted average common shares outstanding - basic

     20,203,204       20,186,059       20,188,944       19,052,293  

Net loss per share – diluted

   $ (0.18 )   $ (0.18 )   $ (0.22 )   $ (0.26 )

Weighted average common shares outstanding diluted

     20,203,204       20,186,059       20,188,944       19,052,293  

 

See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.

 

4


Table of Contents

BUCA, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

(in thousands)

(Unaudited)

 

     Twenty-Six Weeks Ended

 
    

June 26, 2005

(as restated –

see Note 2)


    June 27, 2004
(as restated—
see Note 2)


 

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:

                

Net loss

   $ (4,525 )   $ (5,042 )

Adjustment to reconcile net loss to net cash (used in) provided by operating activities:

                

Depreciation and amortization

     7,309       7,516  

Loss on impairment of long-lived assets

     440          

Loss on early extinguishment of debt

             524  

Tenant allowance proceeds

     331          

Change in assets and liabilities:

                

Accounts receivable

     (562 )     446  

Inventories

     297       172  

Prepaid expenses and other

     910       (371 )

Accounts payable

     (321 )     (2,204 )

Accrued expenses

     (6,460 )     (343 )

Other

     (48 )     (472 )
    


 


Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities

     (2,629 )     226  
    


 


CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:

                

Purchase of property and equipment

     (676 )     (6,332 )

Proceeds from sale of property and equipment

     349       139  

Decrease in other assets

     659       1,508  
    


 


Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities

     332       (4,685 )
    


 


CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:

                

Proceeds from line of credit borrowings

     6,326       23,000  

Principal payments on line of credit borrowings

     (3,986 )     (25,500 )

Proceeds from long-term debt borrowings

             250  

Principal payments on long-term debt and capital leases

     (381 )     (11,801 )

Financing costs

     (3 )     (236 )

Collection on notes receivable from shareholders

     53       74  

Net proceeds from issuance of common stock

     111       17,340  
    


 


Net cash provided by financing activities

     2,120       3,127  
    


 


NET DECREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS

     (177 )     (1,332 )

CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT BEGINNING OF PERIOD

     4,314       3,014  
    


 


CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT END OF PERIOD

     4,137     $ 1,682  
    


 


 

See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.

 

5


Table of Contents

BUCA, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

(Unaudited)

 

1. NATURE OF BUSINESS AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION

 

BUCA, Inc. and Subsidiaries (we, us, or our) develop, own and operate Southern Italian restaurants under the names Buca di Beppo and Vinny T’s of Boston. At June 26, 2005, we had 107 restaurants located in 30 states and the District of Columbia.

 

The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared by us without audit and reflect all adjustments which are, in the opinion of management, necessary for a fair statement of financial position and the results of operations for the interim periods. The statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (generally accepted accounting principles) and with the regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Certain information and footnote disclosures, normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such SEC rules and regulations. Operating results for the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 25, 2005.

 

The balance sheet at December 26, 2004 has been derived from the audited financial statements at that date, but does not include all of the information and notes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. For further information, refer to the consolidated financial statements and notes for the fiscal year ended December 26, 2004 included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

2. RESTATEMENT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

 

Restatement of Financial Statements as of and for the Thirteen and Twenty-Six Weeks Ended June 26,2005

 

Subsequent to the issuance of our condensed consolidated financial statements for the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005, we identified errors in our accounting for depreciation of fixed assets, interest expense, lease payments, medical benefits and other prepaid expenses. We determined that the calculation for depreciation was based on incorrect fixed asset values which had the effect of overstating depreciation expense. In addition we had incorrectly recorded a principal payment on our line of credit as interest expense and we incorrectly recorded lease payments on a closed store as direct and occupancy expense instead of reducing the lease termination liability. Furthermore, we incorrectly recognized expense related to payments on self-insured medical benefits and other prepaids expenses. As a result, the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements have been restated from the amounts previously reported.

 

A summary of the significant effects of the restatement (in thousands, except share and per share data) as follows:

 

    

For the Thirteen Weeks

Ended

June 26, 2005


   

For the Twenty-Six Weeks

Ended

June 26, 2005


 
     (as previously
reported)


    (as restated)

    (as previously
reported)


    (as restated)

 

Costs and expenses

   $ 72,687     $ 72,867     $ 144,765     $ 144,154  

Loss before income taxes

     (3,511 )     (3,691 )     (5,136 )     (4,525 )

Net loss

     (3,511 )     (3,691 )     (5,136 )     (4,525 )

Net loss per common share—basic

   $ (0.17 )   $ (0.18 )   $ (0.25 )   $ (0.22 )

Net loss per common share—diluted

   $ (0.17 )   $ (0.18 )   $ (0.25 )   $ (0.22 )

 

     As of June 26, 2005

 
     (as
previously
reported)
   

(as restated)

 

 

Prepaid expenses and other

   $ 3,663     $ 3,575  

Total current assets

     18,240       18,152  

Property, equipment and leasehold improvements, net

     150,049       150,482  

Total Assets

     174,073       174,418  

Accrued payroll and benefits

     6,259       6,445  

Line of credit borrowings

     5,499       5,038  

Accumulated deficit

     (70,257 )     (69,637 )

Total current liabilities

     35,786       35,511  

Shareholder’s equity

     98,105       98,725  

 

6


Table of Contents

The restatement resulted in a decrease in cash provided by financing activities of $0.5 million and a decrease in cash used in operating activities of $0.5 million.

 

Restatement of Financial Statements as of and for the Thirteen and Twenty-Six Weeks Ended June 27, 2004

 

Subsequent to the issuance of our condensed consolidated financial statements for the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 27, 2004, we identified errors in our accounting for leases, which included errors in the accounting for leasehold improvements, rent commencement dates, lease incentives and certain other leasing matters, and other accounting errors that were identified in connection with our recently completed internal investigation that affected our historical financial statements. These errors are discussed in the following paragraphs.

 

Accounting for Real Estate Leases—Historically, when accounting for leases with renewal options, we have depreciated our buildings, leasehold improvements and other long-lived assets on those properties over a period that included both the initial lease term and all option periods for renewal of the lease which, when combined, generally ranged from 20 to 30 years (or over the useful life of the asset, if shorter). At the same time, we had recognized rent expense on a straight-line basis only over the initial term of the lease. We subsequently determined that we should have recognized rent expense on a straight-line basis over the initial lease term and those cancelable option periods where failure to exercise such options would result in an economic penalty. We also determined that the lease term should commence on the date when we become entitled to the use of the leased property, which precedes the opening date of the restaurant. In addition, we have historically netted tenant improvement allowances against the capitalized cost of leasehold improvements. We have now determined that tenant improvement allowances should have been recorded as a deferred rent credit and amortized over the life of the lease as a reduction in rent expense and that allowances received should be included in cash flows from operating activities.

 

Accounting for certain property, equipment and leasehold improvement transactions—We determined that our policies and practices regarding the capitalization of certain expenditures had not been properly applied. The resulting adjustments recorded to property, equipment and leasehold improvements in prior periods decreased depreciation expense from that previously reported. In addition, we had improperly applied our policies and practices regarding the capitalization of expenditures in the following areas:

 

    Pre-opening Expenses. Historically, we had capitalized as leasehold improvements certain expenditures, such as utility costs, property tax payments and consulting fees, incurred prior to the restaurant opening. We have now determined that we should have recognized these expenditures as pre-opening expenses during the period incurred.

 

    Insufficient Documentation to Support Fixed Asset Additions and Dispositions. Historically, we had capitalized the cost of certain technology services, equipment and maintenance services provided to us. We have now determined that there was insufficient documentation to support the capitalization of consulting labor and maintenance and that these costs should have been recognized as consulting expenses or repairs and maintenance expenses when incurred.

 

7


Table of Contents

Accounting for Employee Meals—We have provided meals at no charge for our restaurant and corporate office employees and in certain other cases for promotional purposes. Historically, these amounts have been included in restaurant sales, with an offsetting charge to either labor costs, direct and occupancy costs, or general and administrative expenses. We have now determined that these amounts should have been eliminated in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements. We had been properly accounting for the costs of the product and labor required to provide the meals in our restaurant costs. This error in accounting for employee and promotional meals had no impact on our net loss.

 

As a result, the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements for the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 27, 2004 have been restated from the amounts previously reported.

 

The following table reconciles the change in net loss due to the restatement (in thousands):

 

     For the
Thirteen Weeks
Ended
June 27, 2004


    For the
Twenty Six Weeks
Ended
June 27, 2004


 

Net loss as previously reported

   $ (3,907 )   $ (5,411 )

Net impact of employee meals adjustment

     0       0  

Lease accounting

     (113 )     (226 )

Property, equipment and leasehold improvement transactions

     336       579  

Other

     8       16  
    


 


Total pretax loss decrease

     231       369  
    


 


Income taxes

     —         —    
    


 


Total net loss increase

   $ 231     $ 369  
    


 


Net loss, as restated

   $ (3,676 )   $ (5,042 )
    


 


 

A summary of the significant effects of the restatement on the consolidated statements of operations (in thousands, except share and per share data) for the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 27, 2004 is as follows:

 

     For the Thirteen Weeks
Ended
June 27, 2004


    For the Twenty-Six Weeks
Ended
June 27, 2004


 
     (as previously
reported)


    (as restated)

    (as previously
reported)


    (as restated)

 

Restaurant sales

   $ 65,241     $ 63,631     $ 131,728     $ 128,320  

Costs and expenses

     69,148       67,307       137,139       133,361  
    


 


 


 


Loss before income taxes

     (3,907 )     (3,676 )     (5,411 )     (5,042 )

Benefit from (provision for) income taxes

     —         —         —         —    
    


 


 


 


Net loss

     (3,907 )     (3,676 )     (5,411 )     (5,042 )
    


 


 


 


Net loss per common share—basic

   $ (0.19 )   $ (0.18 )   $ (0.28 )   $ (0.26 )

Net loss per common share—diluted

   $ (0.19 )   $ (0.18 )   $ (0.28 )   $ (0.26 )

 

The restatement also resulted in a change in the classification of cash flows related to tenant allowance proceeds recovered by landlords and purchases of property and equipment, which resulted in a decrease in cash provided by operating activities and a decrease in cash used in investing activities of $0.3 million for the twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2004. The restatement had no effect on historical cash balances or total cash flows for the twenty-six weeks ended June 27, 2004.

 

3. LOSS ON IMPAIRMENT OF LONG-LIVED ASSETS

 

        We review our long-lived assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying value of an asset or group of assets may not be recoverable. We consider a history of consistent and significant operating losses to be a primary indicator of potential asset impairment. Assets are grouped and evaluated for impairment at the lowest level for which there are identifiable cash flows, primarily the individual restaurants. A restaurant is deemed to be impaired if a forecast of future operating cash flows directly related to the restaurant is less than its carrying amount. If a restaurant is determined to be impaired, the loss is measured as the amount by which the carrying amount of the restaurant exceeds its fair value. Fair value is an estimate based on the best information available, including prices for similar assets or the results of valuation techniques such as discounted estimated future cash flows, as if the decision to continue to use the impaired restaurant was a new investment decision.

 

8


Table of Contents

During the twenty-six weeks ended June 27, 2005, we recorded an approximate $440,000 loss on the impairment of long-lived assets compared to none in the same period of fiscal 2004. The loss on impairment of long-lived assets primarily related to capitalized lease development costs for one restaurant, Long Beach, California, not expected to open due to a reduction in our development plans.

 

We will continue to review our restaurants for potential asset impairment. We believe that all of our restaurants currently have sufficient estimated future cash flows to support the carrying value of their long-lived assets. However, if an individual restaurant’s estimated future cash flows decline below its carrying value of long-lived assets, it could result in additional impairment charges.

 

4. LEASE TERMINATION COSTS

 

For the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005, we did not record any lease termination costs. For certain restaurant locations, we have previously recognized lease termination costs in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No, 146, Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities. The following table summarizes activity related to this liability:

 

Accrued lease termination costs December 26, 2004

   $ 589,000  

Expenses accrued

     0  

Payments

     (237,000 )

Balance June 26, 2005

   $ 352,000  

 

5. NET (LOSS) INCOME PER SHARE

 

Net loss per share is computed in accordance with SFAS No. 128, Earnings per Share. Basic loss per share is computed by dividing net loss by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding. Diluted net loss per share assumes the exercise of stock options using the treasury stock method, if dilutive. Diluted net loss per share for the thirteen and twenty-six week periods ended June 26, 2005 and June 27, 2004 equals basic net loss per share because the effect of stock options to the weighted average shares assumed outstanding would be anti-dilutive. The following table sets forth the calculation of basic and diluted net loss per common share (in thousands, except share and per share data):

 

     Thirteen Weeks Ended

    Twenty-Six Weeks Ended

 
    

June 26,

2005


   

June 27,

2004


   

June 26,

2005


   

June 27,

2004


 

Numerator:

                                

Basic and diluted net loss

   $ (3,691 )   $ (3,676 )   $ (4,525 )   $ (5,042 )

Denominator:

                                

Weighted average shares outstanding – basic and diluted

     20,203,204       20,186,059       20,188,944       19,052,293  

Basic and diluted net loss per common share

   $ (0.18 )   $ (0.18 )   $ (0.22 )   $ (0.26 )

 

Diluted loss per common share excludes 2,152,051 stock options at a weighted average price of $8.37 in the thirteen weeks ended June 26, 2005, 2,130,887 stock options at a weighted average price of $12.13 in the thirteen weeks ended June 27, 2004, 2,107,464 stock options at a weighted average price of $8.41 in the twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005 and 1,814,520 stock options at a weighted average price of $13.47 in the twenty-six weeks ended June 27, 2004 due to their antidilutive effect.

 

6. CREDIT FACILITY

 

As of March 28, 2005, we were in default of the financial covenants regarding minimum EBITDA and fixed charge ratio under our current credit facility. In April 2005, we negotiated waivers of those defaults with our lenders and amended those covenants. The interest rate on the term loan B portion of the credit facility was increased from Wells Fargo’s reference rate plus 4.75 percentage points to Wells Fargo’s reference rate plus 6.75 percentage points. We also paid a waiver fee of $400,000 to our lenders which was accounted for as a debt modification. Costs incurred were recorded as additional loan acquisition costs. We expect to be in compliance with the financial covenants of the credit facility for the next twelve months.

 

9


Table of Contents

7. STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION

 

We have chosen to continue to account for stock-based compensation using the intrinsic value based method prescribed by Accounting Principles Board Option No. 25 and related interpretations. No compensation cost has been recognized for options issued to employees under the plans as the exercise price of the options granted is at least equal to the fair value of the common stock on the date of grant. Had compensation costs for our Employee Stock Purchase Plan, 1996 Stock Incentive Plan and 2000 Stock Incentive Plan been determined using a fair value based method as described in SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, our net loss would have been increased to the following pro-forma amounts (in thousands, except for per share data):

 

     Thirteen Weeks Ended

    Twenty-Six Weeks Ended

 
     June 26,
2005


    June 27,
2004


    June 26,
2005


    June 27,
2004


 

Net loss as reported

   $ (3,691 )   $ (3,676 )   $ (4,525 )   $ (5,042 )

Plus: Stock-based employee compensation expense included in reported net loss, net of related tax effects

     —         —         —         —    

Less: Total stock-based employee compensation awards determined under fair value based method for all awards

     (425 )     (353 )     (850 )     (706 )
    


 


 


 


Pro forma net loss

   $ (4,116 )   $ (4,029 )   $ (5,375 )   $ (5,748 )
    


 


 


 


Net loss per common share, basic and diluted

                                

As reported

   $ (0.18 )   $ (0.18 )   $ (0.22 )   $ (0.26 )
    


 


 


 


Pro forma

   $ (0.20 )   $ (0.20 )   $ (0.27 )   $ (0.30 )
    


 


 


 


 

8. RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS

 

In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued its final statement SFAS No. 123R, “Share Based Payment.” SFAS No. 123R establishes standards for the accounting for transactions in which an entity exchanges its equity instruments for goods or services. This statement focuses primarily on accounting for transactions in which an entity obtains employee services in share-based payment transactions. SFAS No. 123R requires that the fair value of such equity instruments be recognized as expense in the historical financial statements as services are performed. Prior to SFAS No. 123R, only certain pro forma disclosures of fair value were required. SFAS No. 123R is effective as of the beginning of the first annual reporting period that begins after June 15, 2005. The effect of adopting this statement is expected to be comparable to that disclosed on a pro forma basis in Note 7, subject to the level of options granted.

 

In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 153, “Exchanges of Nonmonetary Assets” (FAS 153) which eliminates the exception from fair value measurement for nonmonetary exchanges of similar productive assets and replaces it with a general exception from fair value measurement for exchanges of nonmonetary assets that do not have commercial substance. We are required to adopt FAS 153 for nonmonetary asset exchanges occurring in the second quarter of fiscal 2006 and its adoption is not expected to have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

 

In March 2005, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 47, “Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations – an Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 143” (FIN 47). This Interpretation clarifies that the term conditional asset retirement obligation, as used in SFAS No.143, refers to a legal obligation to perform an asset retirement activity in which the timing and/or method of settlement are conditional on a future event that may or may not be within the control of the entity. Thus, the timing and/or method of settlement may be conditional on a future event. Accordingly, an entity is required to recognize a liability for the fair value of a conditional asset retirement obligation if the fair value of the liability can be reasonably estimated. The fair value of a liability for the conditional asset retirement obligation should be recognized when incurred – generally upon acquisition, construction, or development and/or through the normal operation of the asset. Uncertainty about the timing and/or method of settlement of a conditional asset retirement obligation should be factored into the measurement of the liability when sufficient information exists. SFAS No. 143 acknowledges that in some cases, sufficient information may not be available to reasonably estimate the liability. We are currently reviewing and analyzing the impact that adopting FIN 47 will have on our consolidated financial statements

 

10


Table of Contents

9. SUPPLEMENTAL CASH FLOW INFORMATION

 

The following is supplemental cash flow information for the twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005 and June 27, 2004 (in thousands):

 

     June 26,
2005


    June 27,
2004


 

Cash (paid) received during period for:

                

Interest

   $ (1,617 )   $ (957 )

Income taxes

     (30 )     1,550  

 

10. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

 

Litigation - In March 2004, two of our former hourly employees filed a purported class action suit against us in the Orange County Superior Court, State of California. The action was later transferred to the Los Angeles Superior Court, State of California, where it is currently pending. The complaint alleges causes of action for failure to pay wages/overtime, failure to allow meal breaks, failure to allow rest breaks, failure to pay reporting time pay, violation of California Business & Professions Code Section 17200, and certain statutory damages and penalties. Mediation occurred in February 2005, at which time the parties reached a tentative settlement. The settlement has not yet been approved by the court. The proposed settlement structure is expected to result in an estimated liability between $1.5 and $2.0 million. The actual amount under the proposed settlement structure will be dependent on how many members of the putative class file timely claims, assuming judicial approval. During the fourth quarter of 2004, based on estimates received from external legal counsel, we recorded an estimated settlement expense of $1.8 million associated with this legal action.

 

In February 2005, the SEC informed us that it had issued a formal order of investigation to determine whether there have been violations of the federal securities laws. We understand that the order of investigation relates to our internal controls and compliance with rules governing filings and reports, including public disclosures, required to be filed with the SEC, and the 2002 purchase of an old farmhouse in Italy known as “Villa Sermenino.” We are cooperating and assisting with the SEC’s investigation in order to bring the inquiry to a conclusion as promptly as possible. Any unfavorable finding from the SEC as a result of the investigation could have a material adverse effect on our company.

 

Our company, as nominal defendant, our five directors, and three of our former officers have been named as defendants in purported derivative actions that were filed in April 2005 in the Hennepin County District Court, State of Minnesota. The actions have been consolidated under the title In re Buca, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation. A consolidated complaint has been filed by two shareholders who allege that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties by ignoring, and failing to correct, problems with the company’s financial accounting and internal controls. The plaintiffs seek compensatory damages from the individual defendants for losses allegedly sustained by the company, which include the costs of internal investigations and an SEC investigation. The plaintiffs also seek unspecified equitable relief and an award of attorneys’ fees and costs of litigation.

 

The defendants have not yet responded to the consolidated complaint. We are not able to predict the ultimate outcome of this litigation, but it may be costly and disruptive. The total costs cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. Derivative litigation can result in substantial costs and divert our management’s attention and resources, which may have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations, including cash flows.

 

We are subject to certain other legal actions arising in the normal course of business, none of which is expected to have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.

 

11. SUBSEQUENT EVENT

 

On July 21, 2005, the compensation committee of our board of directors granted to certain of our executives an aggregate of 271,500 shares of restricted stock under the 1996 Stock Incentive Plan of BUCA, Inc. and Affiliated Companies, as amended. All such shares of restricted common stock vest and the related restrictions expire on July 21, 2008. However, each executive’s restricted shares will vest immediately upon the earliest to occur of the executive’s death or disability or a Fundamental Change (as defined in the related agreement) of the company. If the executive’s employment is terminated for any reason (other than death, disability or a Fundamental Change) prior to vesting, the restricted shares will be forfeited.

 

11


Table of Contents

Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

 

Investigations

 

In February 2005, we announced that the SEC had informed us that it had issued a formal order of investigation to determine whether there have been violations of the federal securities laws. We believe that the investigation may have been initiated by the resignation or Joseph P. Micatrotto, our former chairman and chief executive officer, and we understand that the order of investigation relates to our internal controls and compliance with rules governing filings and reports, including public disclosures, required to be filed with the SEC, and the 2002 purchase of an old farmhouse in Italy known as “Villa Sermenino.”

 

In March 2005, we announced that we had terminated the employment of our Vice President, Controller, and Interim Chief Financial Officer, Daniel J. Skrypek, and our Senior Vice President and Chief Information Officer, John J. Motschenbacher. Acting through our audit committee with the assistance of independent counsel, we then commenced an internal investigation of matters relating to the termination of these two executive officers. As part of its investigation, independent counsel to the audit committee, with the assistance of forensic accountants, examined, among other things, manual journal entries in our accounting records, capitalization of fixed assets in connection with new restaurants being developed in prior years, and potential related party transactions with certain vendors.

 

The results of the internal investigation led to the need to make further corrections to our financial statements, including corrections related to the classification of certain consulting fees, certain contributions by vendors to our annual Paisano Partner Conference and certain management expenses, as detailed in the section entitled “Restatement of Prior Financial Information” below. The officers and employees about whom the investigation had concerns are no longer with the company. See “Part II. Other Information. Item 1. Legal Proceedings” for a summary of legal proceedings we have commenced against certain of our former executive officers. We are also cooperating with the SEC and other governmental authorities regarding the matters relating to our internal investigations and our legal proceedings against these former executive officers. See our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 26, 2004 for more information on both of the investigations referred to above.

 

Restatement of Financial Information

 

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with our financial statements and the notes related to those condensed consolidated financial statements contained in “Part I. Financial Information, Item 1. Financial Statements” of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.

 

Restatement of Financial Statements as of and for the Thirteen and Twenty-Six Weeks Ended June 26, 2005

 

Subsequent to the issuance of our condensed consolidated financial statements for the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005, we identified errors in our accounting for depreciation of fixed assets, interest expense, lease payments, medical benefits and other prepaid expenses. The restatement resulted in an increase in our net loss for the thirteen weeks ended June 26, 2005 and resulted in a decrease in our net loss for the twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005 of $0.6 million. The impact of the restatement on the consolidated statement of operations for the quarter and six months ended June 27, 2004 is further discussed in “Note 2. Restatement of Prior Financial Information” appearing in “Part I. Financial Information, Item 1. Financial Statements.”

 

Restatement of Financial Statements as of and for the Thirteen and Twenty-Six Weeks Ended June 27, 2004

 

In February 2005, we announced that we were conducting a review of our accounting policies related to leases, leasehold improvements, rent commencement, deferred rent and other items and that we would be restating our historical financial statements for the fiscal years ended 2000 through 2003 and for the first three quarters of fiscal 2004. Since that time, we have completed a comprehensive review of the application of our accounting policies in connection with our implementation of procedures in compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the SEC rules promulgated thereunder and our recently completed internal investigation described above. As a result, we determined that it was necessary to restate additional financial statement items for the fiscal years ended 2000 through 2003 and the first three quarters of fiscal 2004. For further information on the impact of the restatement on fiscal years ended 2000 through 2003, see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Note 2. Restatement of Financial Statements” included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 26,

 

12


Table of Contents

2004. Not all of the restatement adjustments addressed in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 26, 2004 resulted in restatement adjustments for the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 27, 2004.

 

For the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 27, 2004, the restatement:

 

    corrected the accounting for real estate leases for our restaurants,

 

    corrected errors in the capitalization of certain property, equipment and leasehold improvement transactions which decreased depreciation expense from that previously reported, and

 

    removed the value of employee meals from our sales.

 

The restatement decreased our loss before income taxes for the thirteen weeks ended June 27, 2004 by $0.2 million, primarily as a result of a $0.1 million increase in expense related to the accounting for real estate leases offset by a $0.3 million decrease in expense related to reduction of depreciation and amortization of capitalized leasehold improvements that had been adjusted in prior fiscal years in connection with the restatement. For the twenty-six weeks ended June 27, 2004, the restatement decreased our loss before income taxes by $0.4 million primarily due to a $0.2 million increase in expense related to the accounting for real estate leases offset by a $0.6 million decrease in expense related to reduction of depreciation and amortization of capitalized leasehold improvements that had been adjusted in prior fiscal years in connection with the restatement. By eliminating the value of our employee meals from our sales, we also created an offsetting expense entry, and as a result, there was no net impact on our loss before incomes taxes. The impact of the restatement on the consolidated statement of operations for the quarter and six months ended June 27, 2004 is further discussed in “Note 2. Restatement of Prior Financial Information” appearing in “Part I. Financial Information, Item 1. Financial Statements.”

 

Earnings Adjustments Related to the Restatement

(in thousands)

 

    

For Thirteen

Weeks Ended

June 27, 2004


   

For Twenty-Six

Weeks Ended

June 27, 2004


 

Employee meals removed from revenue

   $ (1,610 )   $ (3,408 )

Lease accounting

     113       226  

Property, equipment and leasehold improvement transactions

     (336 )     (579 )

Employee meals removed from expense

     (1,610 )     (3,408 )

Accrual of costs

     (8 )     (16 )
    


 


Costs and expenses decrease

   $ (1,841 )   $ (3,777 )

Total pretax loss decrease

     231       369  

Income taxes

     —         —    
    


 


Total net loss decrease

   $ 231     $ 369  
    


 


 

The restatement also resulted in a change in the classification of cash flows related to tenant allowance proceeds recovered by landlords and purchases of property and equipment, which resulted in a decrease in cash provided by operating activities and a decrease in cash used in investing activities of $0.3 million for the twenty-six weeks ended June 27, 2004. The restatement had no effect on historical cash balances or total cash flows for the quarter and six months ended June 27, 2004.

 

The discussion that follows gives effect to the restatements discussed above.

 

Nasdaq Listing

 

We announced on March 31, 2005 that we had received notice from the Nasdaq Stock Market that we were not in compliance with the Nasdaq requirements for continued listing as a result of our failure to file with the SEC our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 26, 2004 in a timely fashion, and that our securities were therefore subject to potential delisting from The Nasdaq National Market. We made a timely request for a hearing before the Nasdaq Listing Qualifications Panel where we requested an extension to file both our Annual Report on Form 10-K and our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 27, 2005. On May 5, 2005, we received a letter from the Nasdaq Listing Qualifications Panel stating that the panel had granted the our request for continued listing of our securities on The Nasdaq National Market provided that we met certain conditions, including the filing on or before July 29, 2005 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 26, 2004, and our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 27, 2005. On July 25, 2005, we filed those reports. On July 25, 2005, we received notice from the Nasdaq Stock Market that our common stock would continue to be listed on the Nasdaq National Market. On July 29, 2005, our common stock began trading again under the symbol “BUCA”.

 

13


Table of Contents

General

 

At June 26, 2005, we owned and operated 96 Buca di Beppo and 11 Vinny T’s of Boston restaurants. Our Buca di Beppo restaurants are full service, primarily dinner-only restaurants that offer high quality, immigrant Southern Italian cuisine served family-style in small and large family-sized portions in a fun and energetic atmosphere that parodies the decor and ambiance of post-World War II Italian/American restaurants. Our Vinny T’s of Boston restaurants serve individual and family-style portions for both lunch and dinner. The Vinny T’s of Boston restaurants are based upon re-creations of the neighborhood Italian eateries prominent in the neighborhoods of lower Manhattan, Brooklyn, South Philadelphia and the North End of Boston in the 1940’s.

 

In January 2005, we opened one new Buca di Beppo restaurant in Carlsbad (San Diego), California. During fiscal 2004, we also closed two restaurants. From fiscal 2000 to 2003, we had pursued a rapid expansion strategy, opening 17 restaurants in each of fiscal 2000 and 2001 and 14 in each of fiscal 2002 and 2003. In addition to these new store openings, in January 2002, we purchased the assets of nine Vinny T’s of Boston restaurants. Our recent restaurant development activity has slowed considerably. We are currently focused on the development and implementation of appropriate strategies to improve our operations and improve comparable restaurant sales.

 

Results of Operations

 

Our operating results for the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005 and June 27, 2004 expressed as a percentage of restaurant net sales were as follows:

 

     Thirteen Weeks Ended

   Twenty-Six Weeks Ended

     June 26,
2005


   June 27,
2004


   June 26,
2005


   June 27,
2004


Restaurant net sales (in thousands)

   $ 69,176    $ 63,631    $ 139,629    $ 128,320

Restaurant costs:

                           

Product

     25.9%      25.6%      25.8%      25.5%

Labor

     32.8%      33.3%      32.9%      33.3%

Direct and occupancy

     30.3%      31.5%      29.1%      30.0%

Depreciation and amortization

     5.4%      6.0%      5.2%      5.9%
    

  

  

  

Total restaurant costs

     94.3%      96.4%      93.0%      94.7%

General and administrative expenses

     9.6%      6.5%      8.7%      6.7%

Pre-opening costs

     0.0%      0.5%      0.2%      0.4%

Loss on impairment of long-lived assets

     0.0%      0.0%      0.3%      0.0%

Lease termination costs

     0.0%      1.8%      0.1%      0.9%
    

  

  

  

Operating loss

     (3.9)%      (5.2)%      (2.2)%      (2.7)%

Interest income

     0.0%      0.0%      0.0%      0.0%

Interest expense

     (1.5)%      (0.7)%      (1.1)%      (0.8)%

Loss on early extinguishment of debt

     0.0%      0.0%      0.0%      (0.4)%
    

  

  

  

Loss before income taxes

     (5.3)%      (5.9)%      (3.2)%      (3.9)%

Income taxes

     0.0%      0.0%      0.0%      0.0%
    

  

  

  

Net loss

     (5.3)%      (5.9)%      (3.2)%      (3.9)%
    

  

  

  

 

Thirteen Weeks Ended June 26, 2005 Compared to the Thirteen Weeks Ended June 27, 2004

 

Restaurant Sales. Our restaurant sales are primarily comprised of food and beverages. Restaurant sales increased by approximately $5.6 million, or 8.7%, to $69.2 million in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 from $63.6 million in the second quarter of fiscal 2004. For the second quarter of fiscal 2005, comparable restaurant sales increased 5.8% at Buca di Beppo restaurants, were relatively flat at Vinny T’s of Boston restaurants and increased 5.1% for the Company overall. Buca di Beppo’s restaurant sales increased approximately 8.6% in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 primarily due to an approximate 1% price increase in the first quarter of fiscal 2005, a 6.4% increase in guest count and the opening of a new restaurant in the first quarter of fiscal 2005 and a new restaurant in the second quarter of fiscal 2004. Vinny T’s of Boston’s restaurant sales increased approximately 9.5% in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 primarily due to an approximate 3.3% increase in guest count and the opening of a new restaurant in the second half of fiscal 2004. We expect that our Buca di Beppo comparable restaurant sales will be positive during the third quarter of fiscal 2005. We expect our Vinny T’s of Boston comparable restaurant sales to be flat to slightly negative for the third quarter of fiscal 2005.

 

14


Table of Contents

Product. Product costs increased by approximately $1.6 million, or 9.9%, to $17.9 million in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 from $16.3 million in the second quarter of fiscal 2004. Product costs as a percentage of restaurant sales increased by approximately 0.3% to 25.9% in fiscal 2005 from 25.6% in fiscal 2004. The slight increase in products costs as a percentage of restaurant sales was primarily related to increased costs in poultry, seafood and wine. We expect product costs as a percentage of restaurant sales to remain relatively flat or increase slightly in the third quarter of fiscal 2005 as compared to the same quarter in fiscal 2004.

 

Labor. Labor costs include direct hourly labor and management wages, bonuses, taxes and benefits for restaurant employees. Labor costs increased by approximately $1.5 million, or 7.0%, to $22.7 million in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 from $21.2 million in the second quarter of fiscal 2004. Labor cost as a percentage of restaurant sales decreased by approximately 0.5%, to 32.8%, in the second quarter of fiscal 2005, from 33.3% in the second quarter of fiscal 2004. The decrease in labor costs as a percentage of sales was primarily related to restaurant staffing efficiencies and the increased volume of sales. We expect labor costs in the third quarter of fiscal 2005 to remain relatively flat or increase slightly as a percentage of sales from the third quarter of fiscal 2004.

 

Direct and Occupancy. Direct and occupancy expenses include supplies, marketing, rent, utilities, real estate taxes, repairs and maintenance, and other related restaurant costs. Direct and occupancy costs increased by approximately $0.8 million, or 4.4 %, to $20.9 million in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 from $20.1 million in the second quarter of fiscal 2004. Direct and occupancy costs as a percentage of restaurant sales decreased by approximately 1.2% to 30.3% in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 from 31.5% in the second quarter of fiscal 2004. The increase in direct and occupancy costs in dollars was primarily related to marketing, utility and costs associated with ending the relationship with one of our technology vendors. The decline in direct and occupancy costs as a percentage of sales in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 as compared to the same quarter of fiscal 2004 was due primarily to the higher level of sales in the second quarter of fiscal 2005. We expect operating expenses in the third quarter of fiscal 2005 to remain relatively flat as a percentage of sales from the third quarter of fiscal 2004.

 

Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and amortization includes depreciation on capital expenditures for restaurants and corporate support. Depreciation and amortization expense of $3.8 million remained relatively flat compared to the same period in the prior year. Depreciation and amortization as a percentage of restaurant sales decreased by approximately 0.6%, to 5.4% in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 from 6.0% in the second quarter of fiscal 2004. The primary reason for the decrease as a percentage of restaurant sales was the growth in our sales in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 as compared to the second quarter of fiscal 2004. We expect depreciation and amortization to decrease as a percentage of sales in the third quarter of fiscal 2005 as compared to the same quarter in fiscal 2004.

 

General and Administrative. General and administrative expenses are comprised of expenses associated with all corporate and administrative functions that support existing operations, management and staff salaries, employee benefits, travel, information systems and training and market research. General and administrative expenses increased by approximately $2.5 million, or 61.0% to $6.7 million in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 from $4.1 million in the second quarter of fiscal 2004. General and administrative expenses as a percentage of restaurant sales increased by approximately 3.1% to 9.6% in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 from 6.5% in the second quarter of fiscal 2004. The increase in general and administrative expenses as a percentage of restaurant sales was primarily due to accounting, legal and consulting fees related to the investigation of events that transpired under prior management as well as hiring additional Paisano Support Center staff. We anticipate general and administrative expenses in the third quarter of fiscal 2005 to increase as a percentage of sales as compared to the third quarter of fiscal 2004.

 

Pre-opening Costs. Pre-opening costs consist of direct costs related to hiring and training the initial restaurant workforce and certain other direct costs associated with opening new restaurants. Pre-opening costs decreased approximately $0.3 million from an expense of $0.3 million in the second quarter of fiscal 2004. Pre-opening costs as a percentage of restaurant sales decreased 0.5% in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 from 0.5% in the same quarter of fiscal 2004. The decline was due to no new restaurant openings in second quarter fiscal 2005 versus one during the same period of fiscal 2004. We expect pre-opening costs to decrease in dollars and as a percentage of sales in the remaining quarters of fiscal 2005 as compared to fiscal 2004. We do not expect to open any restaurants in the remaining periods of fiscal 2005.

 

Loss on Impairment of Long-Lived Assets. Loss on impairment of long-lived assets relates to fixed and other long-term asset impairment charges on both open and unopened restaurants. We did not incur asset impairment charges in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 or the second quarter of fiscal 2004. We will continue to review our restaurants for potential asset impairment. We currently believe that all of our restaurants have sufficient estimated future cash flows to support the carrying value of their long-lived assets. However, if an individual restaurant’s estimated future cash flows decline below its carrying value of long-lived assets, it could result in additional impairment charges.

 

15


Table of Contents

Lease Termination Costs. Loss on impairment of long-lived assets primarily relates to fixed and other long-term asset impairment charges on both open and unopened restaurants. We did not incur lease termination costs in the second quarter of fiscal 2005. We incurred lease termination costs of approximately $1.2 million during the second quarter of fiscal 2004 related to the closure of our Lenexa, Kansas Buca di Beppo restaurant and termination of our leases related to undeveloped restaurant properties in Lexington, Kentucky and Springfield, Virginia.

 

Interest Income. Interest income is primarily received on the loans granted to our Paisano Partners for participation in our Paisano Partner Program. Interest income was relatively unchanged from the second quarter of fiscal 2004 to the second quarter of fiscal 2005.

 

Interest Expense. Interest expense includes the cost of interest on debt. Interest expense increased approximately $0.6 million, or 131.1%, to $1.0 million in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 from approximately $0.4 million in the second quarter of fiscal 2004. The increase in interest expense primarily resulted from higher interest rates on our credit facility in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 as compared to the second quarter of fiscal 2004. We expect interest expense to increase in the third quarter of fiscal 2005 from the third quarter of fiscal 2004 because of the higher interest rates charged on our borrowings. See “Liquidity and Capital Resources” below for further information regarding our current credit facility.

 

Benefit from Income Taxes. We did not record a benefit from or provision for income taxes in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 and 2004. We recorded a tax valuation allowance because we concluded that we remained in a position that would not allow realization of the asset. We will continue to record a tax valuation allowance until it becomes more likely than not that we will be able to recover the value of our deferred tax assets.

 

Twenty-Six Weeks Ended June 26, 2005 Compared to the Twenty-Six Weeks Ended June 27, 2004

 

Restaurant Sales. Restaurant sales increased by approximately $11.3 million, or 8.8%, to $139.6 million in the first half of fiscal 2005 from $128.3 million in the first half of fiscal 2004. For the first half of fiscal 2005, comparable restaurant sales increased 6.2% at Buca di Beppo restaurants, decreased 1.0% at Vinny T’s of Boston restaurants and increased 5.3% for the Company overall. Buca di Beppo’s restaurant sales increased approximately 8.8% in the first half of fiscal 2005 primarily due to an approximate 1% price increase in the first quarter of fiscal 2005, a 7.9% increase in guest count and the opening of a new restaurant in the first quarter of fiscal 2005 and a new restaurant in the second quarter of fiscal 2004. Vinny T’s of Boston’s restaurant sales increased approximately 9.3% in the first half of fiscal 2005 primarily due to an approximate 3.9% increase in guest count and the opening of a new restaurant in the second half of fiscal 2004.

 

Product. Product costs increased by approximately $3.2 million, or 10.0%, to $36.0 million in the first half of fiscal 2005 from $32.8 million in the first half of fiscal 2004. Product costs as a percentage of restaurant sales increased by approximately 0.3%, to 25.8% in the first half of fiscal 2005 from 25.5% in the first half of fiscal 2004. The increase in product costs and product costs as a percentage of sales was primarily related to increased costs in poultry, seafood and wine.

 

Labor. Labor costs increased by approximately $3.1 million, or 7.4%, to $45.9 million in the first half of fiscal 2005 from $42.8 million in the first half of fiscal 2004. Labor costs as a percentage of restaurant sales decreased by approximately 0.4%, to 32.9% in the first half of fiscal 2005 from 33.3% in the first half of fiscal 2004. The decrease in labor and benefit costs as a percentage of sales was primarily related to restaurant staffing efficiencies and the increased volume of sales.

 

Direct and Occupancy. Direct and occupancy costs increased by approximately $2.1 million, or 5.4%, to $40.6 million in the first half of fiscal 2005 from $38.5 million in the first half of fiscal 2004. Direct and occupancy costs as a percentage of restaurant sales decreased 0.9% to 29.1% in the first half of fiscal 2005 from 30.0% in the same period of fiscal 2004. The increase in direct and occupancy costs in dollars was primarily related to increases in marketing and utilities costs, costs associated with ending the relationship with one of our technology vendors in the second quarter of fiscal 2005, as well as a sales tax credit received in the first quarter of fiscal 2004. The decline in direct and occupancy costs as a percentage of sales in the first two quarters of fiscal 2005 as compared to the same period in fiscal 2004 is due primarily to the higher level of sales in fiscal 2005.

 

Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and amortization decreased by approximately $0.2 million, or 2.8%, to $7.3 million in the first half of fiscal 2005 from $7.5 million in the same period of fiscal 2004. Depreciation and amortization as a percentage of restaurant sales decreased by approximately 0.7%, to 5.2% in the first half of fiscal 2005 from 5.9% in the same period of fiscal 2004. The primary reason for the decrease as a percentage of restaurant sales was the growth in our sales in the first half of fiscal 2005 as compared to the same period of fiscal 2004.

 

16


Table of Contents

General and Administrative. General and administrative expenses increased by approximately $3.5 million, or 40.1%, to $12.1 million in the first half of fiscal 2005 from $8.7 million in the first half of fiscal 2004. General and administrative expenses as a percentage of restaurant sales increased by approximately 2.0% to 8.7% in the first half of fiscal 2005 from 6.7% in the first half of fiscal 2004. The increase in general and administrative expenses as a percentage of restaurant sales was primarily due to accounting, legal and consulting fees related to the investigation of events that transpired under prior management as well as hiring additional Paisano Support Center staff.

 

Pre-opening Costs. Pre-opening costs decreased approximately $0.3 million, or 48.6%, to $0.2 million in the first half of fiscal 2005 from $0.5 million in the first half of fiscal 2004. Pre-opening costs as a percentage of restaurant sales decreased to 0.2%, or 0.2%, in the first half of fiscal 2005 as compared to 0.4% during the same period of fiscal 2004. We opened one Buca di Beppo restaurant during the first half of fiscal 2005.

 

Loss on Impairment of Long-Lived Assets. During the first half of fiscal 2005, we recorded an approximate $0.4 million loss on the impairment of long-lived assets. The loss on impairment of long-lived assets in the first half of fiscal 2005 primarily related to capitalized lease development costs for a proposed Buca di Beppo restaurant in Long Beach, California, that is not expected to open due to a reduction in our development plans. We will continue to review our restaurants for potential asset impairment.

 

Lease Termination Costs. We incurred no lease termination costs during the first half of fiscal 2005. We incurred lease termination costs of approximately $1.2 million during the first half of fiscal 2004, which was primarily comprised of the costs related to the closure of our Lenexa, Kansas Buca di Beppo restaurant and termination of our leases related to undeveloped restaurant properties in Lexington, Kentucky and Springfield, Virginia.

 

Interest Income. Interest income is primarily received on the loans granted to our Paisano Partners for participation in our Paisano Partner Program. Interest income was relatively unchanged from the first two quarters of fiscal 2004 to the first two quarters of fiscal 2005.

 

Interest Expense. Interest expense increased approximately $0.4 million, or 40.7%, to $1.5 million in the first half of fiscal 2005 from approximately $1.0 million in the first half of fiscal 2004. The increase in interest expense primarily resulted from higher interest rates on our credit facility in the first two quarters of fiscal 2005 as compared to the first two quarters of fiscal 2004.

 

Benefit from Income Taxes. We did not record a benefit from or provision for income taxes in the first half of fiscal 2005 and 2004. We recorded a tax valuation allowance because we concluded that we remained in a position that would not allow realization of the asset. We will continue to record a tax valuation allowance until it becomes more likely than not that we will be able to recover the value of our deferred tax assets.

 

Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

As of June 26, 2005, our balance of cash and cash equivalents was approximately $4.1 million, a decrease of approximately $0.2 million from the fiscal 2004 year-end balance of approximately $4.3 million. The reduction in our cash balance was due primarily to an increased use of cash in our operations primarily driven by increased general and administrative expenses largely related to accounting, legal and consulting fees related to the investigation of events that transpired under prior management.

 

Net cash used by operating activities was approximately $2.6 million for the twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005 as compared to net cash generated of $0.2 million for the same period in fiscal 2004, representing a decrease of $2.8 million in the use of cash for operating activities primarily driven by increased general and administrative expenses related to accounting, legal and consulting fees related to the investigation of events that transpired under prior management.

 

Net cash provided by investing activities was approximately $0.3 million for the twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005, as compared to a use of $4.7 million in the same period of fiscal 2004, representing a decrease of $5.0 million in the use of cash in investing activities. We use cash primarily to fund the development and construction of new restaurants and capital additions to of existing restaurants. Capital expenditures were $0.7 million in the twenty-six weeks of fiscal 2005 as compared to $6.3 in the same period of fiscal 2004. The decrease in capital expenditures in the first two quarters of fiscal 2005 as compared to the first two quarters of fiscal 2004 was related to the reduction in the number of new restaurants we opened this year. We opened one Buca di Beppo in the first quarter of fiscal 2005; however, the majority of the capital expenditures related to that store opening occurred in fiscal 2004. We opened two Buca di Beppo restaurants and one Vinny T’s of Boston restaurant in the first quarter of fiscal 2004 and our capital expenditures in the first quarter of 2004 were largely related to the preparations for those openings. We do not expect to open any additional restaurants during fiscal 2005.

 

17


Table of Contents

Net cash provided by financing activities decreased by approximately $1.0 million to $2.1 million in the first two quarters of fiscal 2005 as compared to $3.1 million in the same period of fiscal 2004. Our primary financing activity in the first two quarters of 2005 was related to $6.3 million of additional borrowings on our line of credit offset by payments of $4.0 million on our line of credit. On February 26, 2004, we completed the sale in a private placement of 3.3 million shares of our common stock at a price of $5.50 per share for total gross proceeds of approximately $18.2 million. After deducting transaction costs of approximately $1.0 million, we received net proceeds from the sale of approximately $17.0 million, $8.5 million of which was used to prepay our term loan facility, $7.5 million of which was used to pay down our line of credit borrowings and the remainder was used for general corporate purposes.

 

In November 2004, we entered into a new credit agreement with Wells Fargo Foothill, Inc. and Ableco Finance LLC, as lenders, and with Wells Fargo Foothill, Inc., as the arranger and administrative agent for the lenders. The credit agreement as amended to date provides for (a) a revolving credit facility in an aggregate amount equal to the lesser of a borrowing base determined in accordance with the terms of the credit agreement and $15 million (including a letter of credit sub-facility of up to an aggregate of $5 million); (b) a term loan A facility of up to an aggregate of $5 million; and (c) a term loan B facility of up to an aggregate of $15 million. The credit agreement expires on November 15, 2008. We are also required under the loan documents to pay certain of our lenders an annual fee, an unused line of credit fee and a prepayment fee in the event of early termination of the agreement. Under the term loan A facility, we paid principal of $312,500 on of January 1, 2005 and we are required to make a similar payment on the first day of each of July, October, January and April of each year thereafter, through and including October 1, 2008.

 

The credit agreement includes various affirmative and negative covenants, including certain financial covenants such as minimum EBITDA, minimum fixed charge coverage ratio and maximum limits on capital expenditures and the acquisition or construction of new restaurants in any fiscal year. Payments under the credit agreement may be accelerated upon the occurrence of an event of default, as defined in the credit agreement that is not otherwise waived or cured. As of March 27, 2005, we were in default of the financial covenants regarding minimum EBITDA and fixed charge coverage ratio. As a result, an amendment and waiver was negotiated and received in April 2005. In exchange for the waiver, we paid our new lenders waiver fees totaling $400,000 and the interest rate on the term loan B portion of the credit facility was increased.

 

The interest rate on the term loan A facility is Wells Fargo’s reference rate plus 0.25 percentage points and the amended interest rate on the term loan B facility is Wells Fargo’s reference rate plus 6.75 percentage points. Under the credit facility, our annual capital expenditures are limited to $13 million and the agreement includes covenants that place restrictions on sales or properties, transactions with affiliates, creation of additional debt, limitations on our ability to sign leases for new restaurants, maintenance of certain financial covenants and other customary covenants.

 

The events leading to our internal investigation and our subsequent failure to timely file our periodic reports with the SEC necessitated that we suspend trading under our Registration Statement on Form S-3. This suspension and subsequent ineligibility to use Form S-3 has subjected us to monthly penalties that must be paid to certain of our investors under the terms of our Securities Purchase Agreement, dated as of February 24, 2004. The payments currently amount to $127,000 per month and will continue until such time as a resale registration statement relating to the securities has been declared effective by the SEC.

 

Amounts borrowed under the credit facility are secured by substantially all of our tangible and intangible assets. As of July 21, 2005, we had outstanding borrowings of approximately $5.4 million under our revolving credit facility, $4.1 million under the term loan A facility and $15 million under the term loan B facility and our availability under the revolving credit facility was approximately $1.9 million. We used such borrowings, together with available cash, to repay the outstanding indebtedness owed under our prior credit facility and to pay certain expenses of the transaction.

 

Our capital requirements, including development costs related to the opening of additional restaurants, have been significant. We have reduced our development for fiscal 2005 and 2006 until we have executed proven strategies to consistently improve our comparable restaurant sales. We may need substantial capital to finance our expansion plans, which require funds for capital expenditures, pre-opening costs and initial operating losses related to new restaurant openings. The adequacy of available funds and our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including the pace of expansion, the costs and capital expenditures for new restaurant development and the nature of contributions, loans and other arrangements negotiated with landlords. Although we can make no assurance, we believe that our available cash, cash flows from operations, and our available borrowings will be sufficient to fund our capital requirements through at least the next twelve months. To fund future operations, we may need to raise additional capital through public or private equity or debt financing to continue our growth. In addition, we have and may continue to consider acquiring the operations of other companies. The sale of additional equity or debt securities could result in additional dilution to our shareholders. We cannot predict whether additional capital will be available on favorable terms, if at all.

 

18


Table of Contents

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

 

We do not have off-balance sheet arrangements.

 

Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

 

Our consolidated financial statements include accounts of BUCA, Inc and all of our wholly owned subsidiaries. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make judgments, assumptions and estimates that affect amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes.

 

Critical accounting policies are those we believe are both most important to the portrayal of our financial condition and operating results, and require our most difficult, subjective or complex judgments, often as a result of the need to make estimates about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain. Judgments and uncertainties affecting the application of those policies may result in materially different amounts being reported under different conditions or using different assumptions. We consider the following policies to be most critical in understanding the judgments that are involved in preparing our consolidated financial statements.

 

Land, Buildings, Leasehold Improvements and Equipment

 

Land, buildings, leasehold improvements, tenant improvements and equipment are recorded at original cost less accumulated depreciation and amortization. These assets are depreciated on a straight-line basis over the lesser of their estimated useful lives or associated lease term, ranging from three to 25 years. Land is not depreciated because we believe that it retains its historical value. Our estimate of the useful life of equipment (three to 10 years) and buildings (25 years) is based upon the historical life of similar assets in our industry. Leasehold improvements are generally depreciated over the term of the lease, including option periods, because we believe a majority of these assets will exist as long as we are tenants of the various properties. Our judgments and estimates regarding the estimated useful lives and fair market value of these assets may produce materially different amounts of depreciation and amortization expense if different assumptions were used. As discussed below, these judgments may also impact the need and amount to recognize as an impairment charge on the carrying amount of these assets.

 

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

 

We review our long-lived assets, such as fixed assets and intangible assets, for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying value amount of an asset or group of assets may not be recoverable. We consider a history of consistent and significant operating losses to be a primary indicator of potential asset impairment. Assets are grouped and evaluated for impairment at the individual restaurant level. A restaurant is deemed to be impaired if a forecast of its estimated future operating cash flows is less than its carrying amount. If a restaurant is determined to be impaired, the loss is measured as the amount by which the carrying amount of the restaurant exceeds its fair value. Fair value is an estimate based on the best information available including the restaurant’s discounted estimated future cash flows, expected growth rate of comparable restaurant sales, remaining lease term and other factors.

 

We will continue to review our restaurants for potential asset impairment. We currently believe that all of our restaurants have sufficient estimated future cash flows to support the carrying value of their long-lived assets. However, if an individual restaurant’s estimated future cash flows decline below its carrying value of long-lived assets, it could result in additional impairment charges.

 

Self-Insurance

 

We are self-insured for a significant portion of our current medical, dental, workers’ compensation and general liability insurance programs. In estimating our self-insurance reserves, we utilize estimates of future losses, based upon our historical loss trends and historical industry data and actuarial estimates of settlement costs for incurred claims. These reserves are monitored and adjusted when warranted by changing circumstances. Any increases or decreases in insurance reserves would be offset by a corresponding increase or decrease in insurance expense.

 

Accounting for Leases

 

In accordance with SFAS No. 13 “Accounting for Leases”, we recognize lease expense for our operating leases over the entire lease term including lease renewal options and build-out periods where the renewal is expected and the build-out period takes place prior to the restaurant opening or lease commencement date. We account for construction allowances by recording a receivable when its collectibility is considered certain, depreciating the leasehold improvements over the lesser of

 

19


Table of Contents

their useful lives or the full term of the lease, including renewal options and build-out periods, amortizing the construction allowance as a credit to rent expense over the full term of the lease, including renewal options and build-out periods, and relieving the receivable once the cash is obtained from the landlord for the construction allowance.

 

Provision for Income Taxes

 

We estimate certain components of our provision for income taxes. The estimates include effective state and local income tax rates, allowable tax credits for items such as FICA taxes paid on reported tip income and the work opportunity tax credit, the tax rate in which deferred taxes are recognized, and the likelihood that we will be able to utilize our deferred tax assets. Our estimates are based on the best available information at the time that we prepare the provision. All tax returns are subject to audit by federal and state governments, usually years after the tax returns are filed, and could be subject to different interpretations of the tax laws. The ultimate amount of income taxes that we pay may be higher or lower than our estimates. We record a tax valuation allowance when it is more likely than not that we will not be able to recover the value of our deferred tax assets. In the first quarter of fiscal 2005, we recorded a full valuation allowance against the deferred tax assets due to continued uncertainty regarding whether we will be able to recover our deferred tax assets due to our recent operating losses.

 

Estimated Liability for Closing Restaurants

 

We make decisions to close restaurants based on prospects for estimated future profitability. We evaluate each restaurant’s performance every quarter. When restaurants continue to perform poorly, we consider the demographics of the location, as well as the likelihood of being able to improve an unprofitable restaurant. If we determine that the restaurant will not, within a reasonable period of time, operate at break-even cash flow or be profitable, we may close the restaurant.

 

The estimated liability for closing restaurants on properties vacated is generally based on the term of the lease and the lease termination fee we expect to pay, as well as estimated maintenance costs until the lease has been abated. The amount of the estimated liability established is generally the present value of these estimated future payments upon exiting the property. The interest rate used to calculate the present value of these liabilities is based on our incremental borrowing rate at the time the liability is established.

 

A significant assumption used in determining the amount of the estimated liability for closing restaurants is the amount of the estimated liability for future lease payments on vacant restaurants, which we determine based on our assessment of our ability to successfully negotiate early terminations of our lease agreements with our landlords or sublease the property. Additionally, we estimate the cost to maintain leased and owned vacant properties until the lease has been abated. If the costs to maintain properties increase, or it takes longer than anticipated to sell properties or sublease or terminate leases, we may need to record additional estimated liabilities. If the leases on the vacant restaurants are not terminated or subleased on the terms we used to estimate the liabilities, we may be required to record losses in future periods. Conversely, if the leases on the vacant restaurants are terminated or subleased on more favorable terms than we used to estimate the liabilities, we reverse previously established estimated liabilities, resulting in an increase in operating income.

 

Loss Contingencies

 

We maintain accrued liabilities and reserves relating to the resolution of certain contingent obligations. Significant contingencies include those related to litigation. We account for contingent obligations in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 5, “Accounting for Contingencies,” as interpreted by FASB Interpretation No. 14 which requires that we assess each contingency to determine estimates of the degree of probability and range of possible settlement. Contingencies that are deemed to be probable and where the amount of such settlement is reasonably estimable are accrued in our financial statements. If only a range of loss can be determined, we accrue to the best estimate within that range; if none of the estimates within that range is better than another, we accrue to the low end of the range.

 

The assessment of loss contingencies is a highly subjective process that requires judgments about future events. Contingencies are reviewed at least quarterly to determine the adequacy of the accruals and related financial statement disclosure. The ultimate settlement of loss contingencies may differ significantly from amounts we have accrued in our financial statements.

 

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

 

In December 2004, the FASB issued its final statement SFAS No. 123R, “Share Based Payment.” SFAS No. 123R establishes standards for the accounting for transactions in which an entity exchanges its equity instruments for goods or services. This statement focuses primarily on accounting for transactions in which an entity obtains employee services in share-based payment transactions. SFAS No. 123R requires that the fair value of such equity instruments be recognized as expense in the historical financial statements as services are performed. Prior to SFAS No. 123R, only certain pro forma

 

20


Table of Contents

disclosures of fair value were required. SFAS No. 123R is effective as of the beginning of the first annual reporting period that begins after June 15, 2005. The effect of adopting this statement is expected to be comparable to that disclosed on a pro forma basis in Note 7 to the condensed consolidated financial statements included as Part I, Item 1, subject to the level of options granted.

 

In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 153, “Exchanges of Nonmonetary Assets” (FAS 153) which eliminates the exception from fair value measurement for nonmonetary exchanges of similar productive assets and replaces it with a general exception from fair value measurement for exchanges of nonmonetary assets that do not have commercial substance. We are required to adopt FAS 153 for nonmonetary asset exchanges occurring in the second quarter of fiscal 2006 and its adoption is not expected to have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

 

In March 2005, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 47 (FIN 47), “Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations – an Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 143.” This Interpretation clarifies that the term conditional asset retirement obligation, as used in SFAS No. 143, refers to a legal obligation to perform an asset retirement activity in which the timing and/or method of settlement are conditional on a future event that may or may not be within the control of the entity. Thus, the timing and/or method of settlement may be conditional on a future event. Accordingly, an entity is required to recognize a liability for the fair value of a conditional asset retirement obligation if the fair value of the liability can be reasonably estimated. The fair value of a liability for the conditional asset retirement obligation should be recognized when incurred – generally upon acquisition, construction, or development and/or through the normal operation of the asset. Uncertainty about the timing and/or method of settlement of a conditional asset retirement obligation should be factored into the measurement of the liability when sufficient information exists. SFAS No. 143 acknowledges that in some cases, sufficient information may not be available to reasonably estimate the liability. We are currently reviewing and analyzing the impact of FIN 47 on our consolidated financial statements.

 

Inflation

 

The primary inflationary factors affecting our operations are food and labor costs. A large number of our restaurant personnel are paid at rates based on the applicable minimum wage, and increases in the minimum wage directly affect our labor costs. To date, inflation has not had a material impact on our operating results.

 

Disclosure Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

 

This Form 10-Q for the second quarter ended June 26, 2005 contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These forward-looking statements are based on the beliefs of our management as well as on assumptions made by and information currently available to us at the time the statements were made. When used in this Form 10-Q, the words “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend” and similar expressions, as they relate to us, are intended to identify the forward-looking statements. Although we believe that these statements are reasonable, you should be aware that actual results could differ materially from those projected by the forward-looking statements. Because actual results may differ, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

 

  The actual number of restaurants opened during any period could be higher or lower than the projected amount based upon the timing and success of locating suitable sites, negotiating acceptable leases, managing construction and recruiting qualified operating personnel.

 

  Our comparable restaurant sales percentage and average weekly sales could fluctuate as a result of general economic conditions, consumer confidence in the economy, changes in consumer preferences, competitive factors, weather conditions, or changes in our historical sales growth pattern.

 

  Product costs could be adversely affected by increased distribution prices by SYSCO Corporation, our principal food supplier, or a failure to perform by SYSCO, as well as the availability of food and supplies from other sources, changes in our menu items, adverse weather conditions, governmental regulation, inflation and general economic conditions.

 

  Labor costs could increase due to increases in the minimum wage as well as competition for qualified employees and the need to pay higher wages to attract a sufficient number of employees.

 

  Direct and occupancy costs could be adversely affected by an inability to negotiate favorable lease terms, an inability to negotiate favorable lease termination terms, increasing supply costs, marketing expenses, property taxes, common area maintenance expenses, utility costs, repairs and maintenance expenses, or general economic conditions.

 

  General and administrative expenses could increase due to competition for qualified employees, the need to pay higher wages to attract sufficient employees, Sarbanes-Oxley compliance costs as well as general economic conditions.

 

21


Table of Contents
  Pre-opening expenses could increase due to additional restaurant openings, acceleration or delays in new restaurant openings or increased expenses in opening new restaurants.

 

  Interest expense could be adversely affected by our need for additional borrowings on our credit facilities and an increase in interest rates.

 

  The actual federal and state income taxes paid could be higher or lower than projected based upon the amount of pre-tax income, changes in income taxes, or other conditions.

 

  Our ability to generate cash from operating activities could be adversely affected by increases in expenses as well as decreases in our average check and guest counts.

 

  Our actual cash investment for building each restaurant could be higher or lower based upon the success of locating suitable sites, the restaurant location and construction costs.

 

  The covenants and restrictions under our current line of credit and term loan facility could have a significant impact on us based upon our ability to meet and maintain the covenants, our capital requirements, our financial performance, our business plan and general economic conditions.

 

  The borrowing availability under our current credit facility could be higher or lower due to increases or decreases in our financial performance, ability to maintain debt covenants, and other debt-related issues.

 

  Our capital requirements through fiscal 2005 could be higher or lower due to increases or decreases in the amount of new restaurants we build or acquire and general economic conditions.

 

  The actual impact of our Buca Small initiative could be affected by changes in consumer preferences, the effectiveness of our Buca Small marketing campaigns, competitive factors and weather conditions.

 

  Additional factors that could cause actual results to differ include: an adverse outcome of the SEC investigation; failure in remediating internal control deficiencies; an adverse outcome of pending legal proceedings; risks associated with restaurants not generating sufficient cash flows to support the carrying value of the restaurants’ assets; risks of incurring additional lease termination expenses; risks associated with terrorism and our country’s war on terrorism, risks associated with actual or alleged food-borne illness, risks associated with future growth; inability to achieve and manage planned expansion; fluctuations in operating results; the need for additional capital; risks associated with discretionary consumer spending; inability to compete with larger, more established competitors; potential labor shortages; our dependence on governmental licenses; weather and natural disasters; and legal actions arising in the normal course of business, including complaints or litigation from guests.

 

Our restaurants feature Southern Italian cuisine served both in individual and family-style portions. Our continued success depends, in part, upon the popularity of this type of Italian cuisine and this style of informal dining. Shifts in consumer preferences away from our cuisine or dining style could materially adversely affect our future profitability. Also, our success depends to a significant extent on numerous factors affecting discretionary consumer spending, including economic conditions, disposable consumer income and consumer confidence. Adverse changes in these factors could reduce guest traffic or impose practical limits on pricing, either of which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, operating results or cash flows.

 

Certain of these risk factors are more fully discussed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 26, 2004. We caution you, however, that the list of factors above may not be exhaustive and that those or other factors, many of which are outside of our control, could have a material adverse effect on us and our results of operations. All forward-looking statements attributable to persons acting on our behalf or us are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements set forth here. We assume no obligation to publicly release the results of any revision or updates to these forward-looking statements to reflect future events or unanticipated occurrences.

 

Item 4. Controls and Procedures

 

Conclusions Regarding the Effectiveness of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

 

As of the end of the period covered by this report, we conducted an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of the principal executive officer and principal financial officer, of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-14(c) and 15d-14(c) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”)). Based upon this evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that as of June 26, 2005, our disclosure controls and procedures were ineffective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission rules and forms due to the material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting as described in Item 9A of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 26, 2004. In fiscal 2004, we began to remediate identified deficiencies and material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. See “Item 9A. Controls and Procedures” of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 26, 2004 for more information about the deficiencies we have identified and the remediation we have taken and expect to take. Remediation completed in the second quarter of fiscal 2005 includes:

 

    We have changed our whistleblower hotline to a new vendor.

 

    We have adopted a new travel and entertainment policy.

 

Subsequent to the filing on August 4, 2005 of our Quarterly Report on 10-Q for the quarter ended June 26, 2005, we discovered additional deficiencies related to the design and operation of accounting procedures and application of GAAP. We identified errors in our accounting for depreciation of fixed assets, interest expense, lease payments, medical benefits and other prepaid expenses. These matters represented material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting and resulted in the restatement of our condensed consolidated financial statements for the quarter ended June 26, 2005, as set forth in this Report on Form 10-Q/A. The impact of the restatement on the consolidated financial statements for the quarter ended June 26, 2005 is further discussed in “Note No. 2 - Restatement of Prior Financial Information” appearing in “Part I. Financial Information, Item 1. Financial Statements.”

 

Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

Other than such actions noted above, there have been no other changes to our internal control over financial reporting during the second quarter of fiscal 2005 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

 

22


Table of Contents

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

 

Item 6. Exhibits

 

Exhibits

 

Exhibit No.

  

Description


   Method of Filing

3.1    Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Registrant (1)    Incorporated By Reference
3.2    Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Registrant (2)    Incorporated By Reference
3.3    Articles of Amendment of Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Registrant (3)    Incorporated By Reference
4.1    Specimen of Common Stock Certificate (4)    Incorporated By Reference
4.2    Securities Purchase Agreement dated as of February 24, 2004 by and among the Registrant and the Investors named therein (5)    Incorporated By Reference
4.3    Schedule of Investors who have executed the Securities Purchase Agreement, dated as of February 24, 2004, by and among the Registrant and the Investors named therein (6)    Incorporated By Reference
10.1    Employment Agreement, dated as of March 30, 2005, by and between BUCA, Inc. and Richard G. Erstad (7)    Incorporated By Reference
10.2    Separation Agreement, dated as of April 20, 2005, by and between the Registrant and Joseph J. Kohaut. * (8)    Incorporated By Reference
10.3    Amendment Number One to Credit Agreement and Waiver, dated as of April 15, 2005, by and among the Registrant and each of its Subsidiaries that are signatories thereto, the Lenders that are signatories thereto, and Wells Fargo Foothill, Inc., as the Arranger and the Administrative Agent. (9)    Incorporated By Reference
31.1    Certification by Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002    Filed Electronically
31.2    Certification by Principal Financial and Accounting Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002    Filed Electronically
32.1    Certification by Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002    Filed Electronically

(1) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.4 to Amendment No. 1 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-72593), filed with the Commission on March 24, 1999.
(2) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.5 to Amendment No. 1 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-72593), filed with the Commission on March 24, 1999.
(3) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-3 (Registration No. 113737), filed with the Commission on March 19, 2004.
(4) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Amendment No. 1 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-72593), filed with the Commission on March 24, 1999.
(5) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the Commission on February 26, 2004.
(6) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.6 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-3 (Registration No. 113737), filed with the Commission on March 19, 2004.
(7) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the Commission on April 5, 2005.
(8) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the Commission on April 21, 2005.
(9) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the Commission on April 21, 2005.

 

23


Table of Contents

SIGNATURES

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

 

           

BUCA, Inc.

       

(Registrant)

         

Date: November 9, 2005

     

by:

 

/s/ Wallace B. Doolin


               

Wallace B. Doolin

Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)

Date: November 9, 2005

     

by:

 

/s/ Kaye R. O’Leary


               

Kaye R. O’Leary

Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

 

24


Table of Contents

EXHIBIT INDEX

 

Exhibit No.

  

Description


   Method of Filing

3.1    Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Registrant (1)    Incorporated By Reference
3.2    Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Registrant (2)    Incorporated By Reference
3.3    Articles of Amendment of Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Registrant (3)    Incorporated By Reference
4.1    Specimen of Common Stock Certificate (4)    Incorporated By Reference
4.2    Securities Purchase Agreement dated as of February 24, 2004 by and among the Registrant and the Investors named therein (5)    Incorporated By Reference
4.3    Schedule of Investors who have executed the Securities Purchase Agreement, dated as of February 24, 2004, by and among the Registrant and the Investors named therein (6)    Incorporated By Reference
10.1    Employment Agreement, dated as of March 30, 2005, by and between BUCA, Inc. and Richard G. Erstad (7)    Incorporated By Reference
10.2    Separation Agreement, dated as of April 20, 2005, by and between the Registrant and Joseph J. Kohaut. * (8)    Incorporated By Reference
10.3    Amendment Number One to Credit Agreement and Waiver, dated as of April 15, 2005, by and among the Registrant and each of its Subsidiaries that are signatories thereto, the Lenders that are signatories thereto, and Wells Fargo Foothill, Inc., as the Arranger and the Administrative Agent. (9)    Incorporated By Reference
31.1    Certification by Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002    Filed Electronically
31.2    Certification by Principal Financial and Accounting Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002    Filed Electronically
32.1    Certification by Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002    Filed Electronically

(1) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.4 to Amendment No. 1 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-72593), filed with the Commission on March 24, 1999.
(2) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.5 to Amendment No. 1 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-72593), filed with the Commission on March 24, 1999.
(3) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-3 (Registration No. 113737), filed with the Commission on March 19, 2004.
(4) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Amendment No. 1 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-72593), filed with the Commission on March 24, 1999.
(5) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the Commission on February 26, 2004.
(6) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.6 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-3 (Registration No. 113737), filed with the Commission on March 19, 2004.
(7) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the Commission on April 5, 2005.
(8) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the Commission on April 21, 2005.
(9) Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed with the Commission on April 21, 2005.

 

25

Wikinvest © 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012. Use of this site is subject to express Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, and Disclaimer. By continuing past this page, you agree to abide by these terms. Any information provided by Wikinvest, including but not limited to company data, competitors, business analysis, market share, sales revenues and other operating metrics, earnings call analysis, conference call transcripts, industry information, or price targets should not be construed as research, trading tips or recommendations, or investment advice and is provided with no warrants as to its accuracy. Stock market data, including US and International equity symbols, stock quotes, share prices, earnings ratios, and other fundamental data is provided by data partners. Stock market quotes delayed at least 15 minutes for NASDAQ, 20 mins for NYSE and AMEX. Market data by Xignite. See data providers for more details. Company names, products, services and branding cited herein may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The use of trademarks or service marks of another is not a representation that the other is affiliated with, sponsors, is sponsored by, endorses, or is endorsed by Wikinvest.
Powered by MediaWiki