I've been looking at different web sites and have'nt found two yet that show the same number for the shares outstanding. I have looked at Thomson, NASDAQ, Multex, Yahoo, etc. The quantity of shares outstanding ranges between 58.53M and 60.28M.
Bottom line is there are about 5M shares held be Insiders and 5% owners. There are about 36M held by institutions. With these numbers, it leaves about 18M shares being traded by the small investor and that being the case, it would look like with KKD 120 day average volume of 1M shares, the small investors are rotating the ownership about every 18 days. With the last 10 day average volume at 700K shares, the stock is rotating ownership about every 24 days. Certainly the small investor is holding the price of the stock up.
With any perception by the institutions on this next CC of any weakness in the financials, we could see large blocks selling without any buyers driving the price down quickly.
Last quarter, 8/3/03 the revenue grew about 9% over the quarter ending 5/4/03. The net income in that same comparison actually lost 1% from the previous quarter. That was with the Dallas acquisition and the balance sheet grew the intangibles by about $55M reflecting the acquisition.
Now we are looking at the MI acquisition which was done with a stock offering. Since this was done at the end of the quarter, there will be no revenue recognition of this acquisition (or operational expenses) but the additional shares will be on the balance sheet along with the acquired assets. It will be interesting to see how much the hard assets grow with respect to the intangables. This acquisition will also have impact on the EPS reported. For KKD to continue with beating projections, they will have to have a stellar quarter just to account for the additional shares outstanding. I'm sure WB will be looking closely at this next earnings announcement.
Tarheel has been a respected member of this board for over 3 years now. Whether one agrees with his premise or not, one thing is for sure, tarheel has credibility with most of us. You do not.
x_5_9, since this is a time for inquisitiveness, I have just 17 questions for you:
1) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
2) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
3) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
4) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
5) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
6) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
7) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
8) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
9) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
10) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
11) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
12) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
13) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
14) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
15) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
16) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
17) Do you have any idea how annoying you are?
Where are those class action lawsuits you promised us??
Since you don't have a position in KKD, why do you post here?
More importantly, please stop talking with your alter ego long enough to answer five
1)Why do you post these first person chicken little tiring epistles?
2) Have you read the "Three Faces of Eve?"
3) Do you liken yourself to di_vur_se_fi as the Erin Brokovich of the donut business
out to save the lives and money of all those who would (gasp!) even consider buying
(or have bought) KKD stock?
4) Are you foolish enough to think your cute schizoid soapboxes will actually convince
someone on this board to sell their KKD stock?
5) Or do you just like to read your posts on a computer screen?
You idiot, now you've gone and sullied Tarheels credibility. You said he defended the accounting treatment of the Dallas looting and he says he did no such thing.
... well what did he do?
He merely explained the income accounting related to the Dallas deal, and other accounting matters more generally relating to KKD. You goofed, and you owe him a retraction and an apology.
... OK. Tarheel, I take it back. I'm sorry.
You also implied he worked for PriceWaterhouse and he says he doesn't.
... OK. I'll take him at his word. But he must work for someone. Maybe Krispy Kreme itself? If he says he doesn't I'd have to think on that.
Maybe its just Pro Bono. You know, for free. Maybe he's just an idle poster with accounting expertise and time on his hands.
... hired by KK? Damage control. Stuffing it into Divursifi's ear.
Idiot. You don't hire Pro Bono.
... Dunno. Take those pro bono demonstrations at the Krispy Kreme openings -- "spontanious outbursts of enthusiasm for the New American Icon -- evidence of the growing public clamour for the HOG" -- I paraphrase. Offered to us as spontanious and pro bono, against the background of KK's traveling circus of Event Organizer teams; the special awards and recognition for the first-in-line idiots; the $100 bribes to the first 200 in line, veiled as charity; free donuts to all in line; donuts showered on the adoring press; promos paid for and planted in the movies and TV.
Easy, you're drifting off the subject. Tarheel says:
"The auditor has ABSOLUTELY NO SAY WHATSOEVER as to whether or not the transaction should have occurred in the first place....
... That's what pissed me off in the first place. The Arthur Anderson - Enron defense. Didn't work, but there you have it. Accounting standards and looking the other way. Krispy Kreme could rob a bank and the accountants would have no concern as long as the numbers squared with GAAP.
The British do it differently.
... Another subject. Another time.........
<<1) Did KKD overpay for the Dallas stores?
2) Was the transaction properly recorded?
The answer to #1 has ZERO to do with the answer to #2, and the auditors have absolutely no involvement in the determination of the answer to #1.>>
--I mostly agree with you there. It is pretty clear as daylight what the deal was. Both the longs and the shorts can see it.
However, Diogenes1234, does indirectly make a point? Why are the longs not "mad as hell" that KK paid a very generous price for this franchise? Furthermore, why are they even more infuriated that KK used up all of their cash on this deal?
If I were a KKD long, I know I would be upset. (Of course, I never fall in love with the stocks that I own...even when they do have a 500% return.)
We entered into a letter agreement with Mr. Scott A. Livengood, our Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, on April 12, 1994. We granted Mr. Livengood the option to develop stores in Alamance, Durham and Orange Counties, North Carolina, and the State of Colorado pursuant to the Kingsmill Plan. Mr. Livengood subsequently relinquished his development rights to the State of Colorado and obtained the rights to develop stores in Northern California, also pursuant to the Kingsmill Plan. Mr. Livengood has released these rights in favor of Krispy Kreme in exchange for the right to purchase a proportionate minority interest (approximately 6.0%) in future joint ventures between Krispy Kreme and area developers, including the Northern California joint venture. Mr. Livengood will not be active in the management of the ventures while employed by Krispy Kreme. Also, he will not receive any financial assistance in any form from the Company under the Kingsmill Plan or any other arrangement. Additionally, the terms of the franchise agreements for these ventures will be consistent with other area developers.
We entered into a letter agreement with Scott A. Livengood, our Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, on April 12, 1994, under which we granted Mr. Livengood the option to develop stores in Alamance, Durham and Orange Counties, North Carolina. Mr. Livengood relinquished these development rights to Krispy Kreme effective March 2003.
While there may be grist for the mill regarding the Kingsmill Plan origination, Scottso clearly had rights under that plan to participate in the No Cal franchise area, whether the area franchisees liked it or not, after returning the right he held to the No Cal area. The fact that instead of obtaining the 6% minority interest he was entitled to in No Cal and all future franchise development areas and instead was compensated in another form does not make any difference for me. The company owed him and they paid him.
I see that I'm dealing with an idiot here. Diogenes1234, you said, "Whadya think of Nctarheel's defense of the Dallas accounting? Pretty slick huh?"
Please show me where I have previously said anything at all regarding the accounting for the Dallas transaction.
Then you said, "And now PriceWaterhouse has the gall to defend the accounting treatment."
First of all, I don't work for PwC, and I haven't seen anyone else claiming to work for PwC post here defending the accounting treatment of the Dallas transaction. However, I will now comment on this situation. The accounting for the transaction was correct. The auditor has ABSOLUTELY NO SAY WHATSOEVER as to whether or not the transaction should have occurred in the first place (i.e., whether KKD overpaid for the stores). You see, there are two separate issues that are totally unrelated.
1) Did KKD overpay for the Dallas stores?
2) Was the transaction properly recorded?
The answer to #1 has ZERO to do with the answer to #2, and the auditors have absolutely no involvement in the determination of the answer to #1.
Whadya think of Nctarheel's defense of the Dallas accounting? Pretty slick huh?
... Slicker'n hell.
PriceWaterhouse sure knows its numbers. GAAP and all.
... Not the accounting, the Deal. The Great Dallas Heist. Here Krispy Kreme management makes a deal with McAleer, bigtime owner and in-effect the Boss, to buy a business from him at what they "objectively" judge to be an "arm's length" price. In the process management determines it's in the best interest of shareholders to pay their pal in cash, not their godforesaken stock. This at a time when cash was short. Hell, they had to borrow the money to swing the deal. And now PriceWaterhouse has the gall to defend the accounting treatment.
... I suppose McAleer is on the Compensation Committee?
I'm not going to bother to look. On the committee or not, he darn well controls the board, controls the company, controls who gets promoted and who doesn't, controls the bonuses. Controls, or at least has the major say.
... Controls the price and whether cash or stock?
Yes. This puts the face on what Conflict of Interest is all about. And PriceWaterhouse smoke-screens the deal with a defense of the accounting.
... Pissed off, aren't you?
Yes. The whole thing stinks, in my opinion.
"Securities laws passed in 1995 have made it virtually
impossible for shareholders to bring suit against
mismanagement by insiders"
Why don't you preach this to the NUMEROUS shorts on this board who foolishly are trying to convince everyone that KKD will get the class action suits (di_vur_se_fi, digenetic, gopherit...you name it, they swear it it will happen)?????
I'm simply mocking them for their desparate attempts to better their hopelessly failing positions.
"Why are you so upset when people who take
the time to read the financial reports and report to those on this board who do not have
the time or know how"
Oh, so you think their agenda is to "report to those on this board who do not have
the time or know how"?????
That's kinda like Carlxxxx's agenda that he stated on this board: no postion, just want to educate the uninformed.