S-1 1 d319863ds1.htm FORM S-1 Form S-1
Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 6, 2012

Registration No. 333-

 

 

 

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

 

FORM S-1

REGISTRATION STATEMENT

UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

 

 

BLOOMIN’ BRANDS, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

 

 

Delaware   5812   20-8023465
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)  

(Primary Standard Industrial

Classification Code Number)

 

(I.R.S. Employer

Identification Number)

 

 

 

2202 North West Shore Boulevard, Suite 500

Tampa, Florida 33607

(813) 282-1225

(Address, Including Zip Code, and Telephone Number, Including Area Code, of Registrant’s Principal Executive Offices)

 

 

 

Joseph J. Kadow

Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer

Bloomin’ Brands, Inc.

2202 North West Shore Boulevard, Suite 500, Tampa, Florida 33607

(813) 282-1225

(Name, Address, Including Zip Code, and Telephone Number, Including Area Code, of Agent For Service)

 

 

Copies to:

John M. Gherlein

Janet A. Spreen

Baker & Hostetler LLP

PNC Center

1900 East 9th Street

Cleveland, Ohio 44114

Telephone: (216) 621-0200

Facsimile: (216) 696-0740

 

Keith F. Higgins

Marko S. Zatylny

Ropes & Gray LLP

Prudential Tower

800 Boylston Street

Boston, Massachusetts 02199-3600

Telephone: (617) 951-7000

Facsimile: (617) 951-7050

 

 

Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the public: As soon as practicable after the effective date of this Registration Statement.

If any of the securities being registered on this Form are to be offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, check the following box.    ¨

If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act, please check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering.    ¨

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462 under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering.    ¨

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering.    ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

 

  Large accelerated filer    ¨   Accelerated filer    ¨   Non-accelerated filer    x   Smaller reporting company    ¨

 

 

CALCULATION OF REGISTRATION FEE

 

 

Title of Each Class of Securities to be Registered   Proposed Maximum
Aggregate Offering
Price (1)(2)
  Amount of
Registration Fee

Common Stock, $.01 par value per share

  $300,000,000   $34,380

 

 

(1) Estimated solely for the purpose of calculating the registration fee in accordance with Rule 457(o) promulgated under the Securities Act.
(2) Includes shares of common stock that may be issuable upon exercise of an option to purchase additional shares granted to the underwriters.

 

 

The Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which specifically states that this Registration Statement shall thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Securities Act or until the Registration Statement shall become effective on such date as the Commission, acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may determine.

 

 

 


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

The information in this prospectus is not complete and may be changed. We may not sell these securities until the registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is effective. This prospectus is not an offer to sell these securities and it is not soliciting an offer to buy these securities in any state where the offer or sale is not permitted.

 

Subject to Completion

Preliminary Prospectus dated April 6, 2012

P R O S P E C T U S

Shares

 

 

LOGO

Common Stock

 

 

This is Bloomin’ Brands, Inc.’s initial public offering. We are selling         shares of our common stock.

We expect the public offering price to be between $         and $        per share. Currently, no public market exists for the shares. After pricing of the offering, we expect that the shares will trade on              the                  under the symbol “BLM.”

Investing in the common stock involves risks that are described in the “Risk Factors” section beginning on page 13 of this prospectus.

 

 

 

    

Per Share

         

Total

 

Public offering price

   $            $     

Underwriting discount

   $            $     

Proceeds, before expenses, to us

   $            $     

The underwriters may also exercise their option to purchase up to an additional              shares from us, at the public offering price, on the same terms and conditions as set forth above, for 30 days after the date of this prospectus.

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or determined if this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

The shares will be ready for delivery on or about                 , 2012.

 

 

 

BofA Merrill Lynch            Morgan Stanley   J.P. Morgan
Deutsche Bank Securities   Goldman, Sachs & Co.

 

 

The date of this prospectus is             , 2012.


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

LOGO


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

LOGO


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

LOGO


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

PROSPECTUS SUMMARY

     1   

SUMMARY CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OTHER DATA

     9   

RISK FACTORS

     13   

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

     31   

USE OF PROCEEDS

     33   

DIVIDEND POLICY

     33   

CAPITALIZATION

     34   

DILUTION

     35   

SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OTHER DATA

     37   

UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

     40   

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

     50   

BUSINESS

     86   

MANAGEMENT

     114   

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

     119   

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

     127   

RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

     144   

DESCRIPTION OF INDEBTEDNESS

     147   

PRINCIPAL STOCKHOLDERS

     155   

DESCRIPTION OF CAPITAL STOCK

     158   

SHARES ELIGIBLE FOR FUTURE SALE

     161   

MATERIAL U.S. FEDERAL INCOME AND ESTATE TAX CONSIDERATIONS FOR NON-U.S. HOLDERS

     163   

UNDERWRITING

     167   

LEGAL MATTERS

     174   

EXPERTS

     174   

WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION

     174   

INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

     F-1   

 

 

You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus or in any free writing prospectus that we authorize be distributed to you. We have not, and the underwriters have not, authorized anyone to provide you with additional or different information. This document may only be used where it is legal to sell these securities. You should assume that the information contained in this prospectus is accurate only as of the date of this prospectus.

No action is being taken in any jurisdiction outside the United States to permit a public offering of the common stock or possession or distribution of this prospectus in that jurisdiction. Persons who come into possession of this prospectus in jurisdictions outside the United States are required to inform themselves about and to observe any restrictions as to this offering and the distribution of the prospectus applicable to that jurisdiction.

Until             , 2012, all dealers that effect transactions in these securities, whether or not participating in this offering, may be required to deliver a prospectus. This is in addition to the dealer’s obligation to deliver a prospectus when acting as underwriters and with respect to their unsold allotments or subscriptions.

 

i


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

MARKET AND OTHER INDUSTRY DATA

In this prospectus, we rely on and refer to information regarding the restaurant industry, sectors within the restaurant industry, such as full-service restaurants, and categories within the full-service sector that are generally defined by price point (e.g., casual or fine dining) and menu type (e.g., steak or Italian), based on information published by industry research firms Technomic, Inc., The NPD Group, Inc. (which prepares and disseminates Consumer Reported Eating Share Trends (“CREST®”) data), Euromonitor International and Knapp-Track, or compiled from market research reports, analyst reports and other publicly available information. Delineations of our competitors by price or menu categories may vary by data source.

Unless otherwise indicated in this prospectus:

 

   

market data relating to the U.S. market positions of Outback Steakhouse, Carrabba’s Italian Grill, Bonefish Grill or Fleming’s Prime Steakhouse and Wine Bar was published by, or derived by us from, Technomic, Inc. and is based on 2011 calendar year sales;

 

   

market data relating to the size of the U.S. full-service restaurant sector’s menu categories of steak, Italian and seafood was published by Technomic, Inc. and is based on 2010 calendar year sales, which is the most recent available data;

 

   

market data relating to the U.S. full-service restaurant sector’s casual dining category was published as CREST® data and is based on sales for the 12 months ended November 30, 2011, as reported by The NPD Group, Inc. as of January 5, 2012; and

 

   

market data relating to a foreign country’s full-service restaurant sector or the market position of Outback Steakhouse restaurants in a particular foreign market was published by, or was derived by us from, Euromonitor International, and such data is as of December 31, 2010, which is the most recent available data.

All other industry and market data included in this prospectus are from internal analyses based upon publicly available data or other proprietary research and analysis. We believe these data to be accurate as of the date of this prospectus. However, this information may prove to be inaccurate because this information cannot always be verified with complete certainty because of the limitations on the availability and reliability of raw data, the voluntary nature of the data gathering process and other limitations and uncertainties. As a result, you should be aware that market and other similar industry data included in this prospectus, and estimates and beliefs based on that data, may not be reliable.

TRADEMARKS, SERVICE MARKS AND COPYRIGHTS

We own or have rights to trademarks, service marks or trade names that we use in connection with the operation of our business, including our corporate names, logos and website names. Solely for convenience, some of the trademarks, service marks, trade names and copyrights referred to in this prospectus are listed without the ©, ® and ™ symbols, but we will assert, to the fullest extent permissible under applicable law, our rights to our copyrights, trademarks, service marks and trade names. All brand names or other trademarks appearing in this prospectus are the property of their respective owners, and their use or display should not be construed to imply a relationship with, or an endorsement or a sponsorship of us by, these other parties.

 

ii


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

PROSPECTUS SUMMARY

This summary highlights information appearing elsewhere in this prospectus. This summary does not contain all of the information that you should consider before investing in our common stock. You should carefully read the entire prospectus, including the financial data and related notes and the section entitled “Risk Factors” before deciding whether to invest in our common stock. Unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise requires, references in this prospectus to the “company,” “Bloomin’ Brands,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Bloomin’ Brands, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries.

Our Company

We are one of the largest casual dining restaurant companies in the world, with a portfolio of leading, differentiated restaurant concepts. We own and operate 1,248 restaurants and have 195 restaurants operating under franchise or joint venture arrangements across 49 states and 21 countries and territories. We have five founder-inspired concepts: Outback Steakhouse, Carrabba’s Italian Grill, Bonefish Grill, Fleming’s Prime Steakhouse and Wine Bar and Roy’s. Outback Steakhouse holds the #1 U.S. market position, and Carrabba’s and Bonefish Grill hold the #2 U.S. market position, in their respective full-service restaurant categories. Fleming’s is the fourth largest fine dining steakhouse brand in the U.S. In 2010, we launched a new strategic plan and operating model leveraging best practices from the consumer products and retail industries to complement our restaurant acumen and enhance our brand competitiveness. This new model keeps the customer at the center of our decision-making and focuses on continuous innovation and productivity to drive sustainable sales and profit growth. We have significantly strengthened our management team and implemented initiatives to accelerate innovation, improve analytics and increase productivity. We have made these changes while preserving our entrepreneurial culture at the operating level. Our restaurant managing partners are a key element of this culture, each of whom shares in the cash flows of his or her restaurant after making a required initial cash investment.

We believe our new strategic plan and operating model have driven our recent market share gains and improved margins while providing a solid foundation for continuing sales and profit growth. In 2011, we had $3.8 billion of revenue, $100.0 million of net income and $361.5 million of Adjusted EBITDA. In the U.S., each of our four core concepts generated positive comparable restaurant sales over the last seven consecutive quarters, and in 2010 and 2011, our combined comparable restaurant sales at our core concepts grew 2.7% and 4.9%, respectively. Additionally, over the last two years, Outback Steakhouse, Carrabba’s and Bonefish Grill have significantly outperformed the Knapp-Track Casual Dining Index on traffic growth by 8.5%, 11.2% and 20.2%, respectively. Over the three years ended December 31, 2011, our net income increased from a net loss of $64.5 million to net income of $100.0 million, and Adjusted EBITDA increased from $319.9 million to $361.5 million. Over the same period, our Adjusted EBITDA margins grew from 8.9% to 9.4%.

Our concepts provide a compelling customer experience combining great food, highly attentive service and lively and contemporary ambience at attractive prices. Each of our concepts maintains a unique, founder-inspired brand identity and entrepreneurial culture, while leveraging our scale and enhanced operating model. Below is an overview of our four core concepts:

 

LOGO    A casual dining steakhouse featuring high quality, freshly prepared food, attentive service and Australian décor at a compelling value. As of December 31, 2011, we owned and operated 669 restaurants and franchised 106 restaurants across 49 states, and we owned and operated 111 restaurants, franchised 47 restaurants and operated 34 restaurants through a joint venture across 21 countries and territories. Outback Steakhouse holds the #1 market position in the U.S. in the full-service steak restaurant category based on 2011 sales. In 2010, Outback Steakhouse also held the #1 position in Brazil in the full-service restaurant sector and in South Korea among western full-service restaurant concepts. The average check per person at our domestic Outback Steakhouse restaurants was approximately $20 in 2011.

 

 

1


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements
LOGO    An authentic Italian casual dining restaurant featuring high quality handcrafted dishes, an exhibition kitchen and warm Italian hospitality. As of December 31, 2011, we owned and operated 231 restaurants and had one franchised restaurant across 32 states. Carrabba’s holds the #2 market position in the full-service Italian restaurant category based on 2011 sales in the U.S. The average check per person at Carrabba’s was approximately $21 in 2011.

LOGO

   A polished casual seafood restaurant featuring market fresh grilled fish, high-end yet approachable service and a lively bar. Bonefish Grill’s bar provides an energetic setting for drinks, dining and socializing with a popular bar menu featuring a large selection of specialty cocktails, wine and beer. As of December 31, 2011, we owned and operated 151 restaurants and franchised seven restaurants across 28 states. Bonefish Grill holds the #2 market position in the U.S. full-service seafood restaurant category based on 2011 sales. Bonefish Grill ranked “Top Overall” across all full-service restaurant chains according to Zagat’s in 2010 and 2011 and was ranked #1 for all casual dining chains according to Nation’s Restaurant News in 2011. The average check per person at Bonefish Grill was approximately $23 in 2011.
LOGO    An upscale, contemporary prime steakhouse for food and wine lovers seeking a stylish, lively and memorable dining experience. Fleming’s features a large selection of wines, including 100 quality wines available by the glass. As of December 31, 2011, we owned and operated 64 restaurants across 28 states. Fleming’s is the fourth largest fine dining steakhouse brand in the U.S based on 2011 sales. The average check per person at Fleming’s was approximately $68 in 2011.

Recent Evolution of Our Business

In November 2009, we hired Elizabeth A. Smith as Chief Executive Officer. Ms. Smith brought close to 20 years of consumer products experience, including five years as a senior executive at Avon Products, Inc. and 14 years at Kraft Foods Inc. Under Ms. Smith’s leadership, we launched our new strategic plan and operating model. The key initiatives we implemented as part of this plan and model, many of which are ongoing, are summarized below:

 

   

Enhanced Our Brand / Concept Competitiveness. Based on extensive consumer research, we have undertaken the following initiatives to enhance our brand relevance and competitiveness:

 

   

Evolved our menus by supplementing our classic items with a greater variety of lighter dishes and lower priced items, such as small plates and handhelds, and enhanced bar and happy hour offerings to broaden appeal, improve our value perception and increase traffic.

 

   

Shifted our marketing strategy away from principally using brand awareness messages to traffic generating messages focused on quality, value and limited-time offers.

 

   

Initiated a remodel program focused on Outback Steakhouse and Carrabba’s to refresh the restaurant base, through which we have remodeled one-third of our domestic Outback Steakhouse restaurants to date; we are testing remodel designs at Carrabba’s.

 

   

Refocused our service to improve execution on aspects of the dining experience that matter most to our customers as indicated through ongoing customer surveys.

 

 

2


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements
   

Strengthened Management Team and Organizational Capabilities. We added senior executives with experience from leading consumer products and retail companies and added resources in key functional support areas to build an organization that maintains deep restaurant industry expertise at the operating level, coupled with a functional corporate support team that drives innovation, productivity and scale efficiencies.

 

   

Accelerated Innovation. We strengthened our innovation capability by increasing our resources focused on a collaborative process to develop, test and roll out new menu, service and marketing initiatives, allowing us to introduce these initiatives faster than we have in the past.

 

   

Improved Analytics and Information Flow. In order to provide our management team with improved visibility regarding consumer trends and a better basis for making product, pricing and marketing decisions, we instituted an enterprise-wide, analytical approach that relies on extensive consumer research and feedback, product testing and data analysis.

 

   

Increased Productivity and Generated Significant Cost Savings. In 2008, we began to focus on increased productivity by leveraging our scale and corporate support infrastructure. From 2008 through 2011, we implemented productivity and cost management initiatives that we estimate allowed us to save over $200 million in the aggregate, while improving our customer ratings on quality and service.

 

   

Invested in Information Technology Infrastructure. In 2010, we launched a multi-year upgrade of our technology infrastructure to support our analytical focus and growth opportunities.

Competitive Strengths

We believe the following competitive strengths, when combined with our strategic plan and operating model, provide a platform to deliver sustainable sales and profit growth:

Strong Market Position With Highly Recognizable Brands. We have market leadership positions in each of our core concepts domestically, as well as in our core international markets. Based on 2011 sales in the U.S., Outback Steakhouse ranked #1 in the full-service steak restaurant category, Carrabba’s ranked #2 in the full-service Italian restaurant category, Bonefish Grill ranked #2 in the full-service seafood restaurant category and Fleming’s is the fourth largest fine dining steakhouse brand. In 2010 Outback Steakhouse ranked #1 in market share in Brazil among full-service restaurants and in South Korea among western full-service restaurant concepts. We believe our market leadership positions and scale will allow us to continue to gain market share in the fragmented restaurant industry.

Compelling 360-Degree Customer Experience. We offer a compelling 360-degree customer experience with superior value by providing great food, highly attentive service and lively and contemporary ambience at attractive prices. We believe our customer experience and value perception are differentiating factors that drive strong customer loyalty.

 

   

Great Food. We deliver consistently executed, freshly prepared meals using high quality ingredients. Our customers have validated our food quality at several of our concepts through recent recognition in Zagat’s surveys.

 

   

Highly Attentive Service. We seek to deliver superior service to each customer at every opportunity. We offer customers prompt, friendly and efficient service, keep wait staff-to-table ratios high and staff each restaurant with experienced managing partners to ensure consistent and attentive customer service.

 

 

3


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements
   

Lively and Contemporary Ambience. Each of our restaurant concepts offers a distinct, energetic atmosphere. We are committed to maintaining a contemporary look and feel at each of our concepts that is consistent with its individual brand positioning.

 

   

Attractive Prices. Since 2009, we have enhanced the value we offer our customers through menu and promotional innovation, rather than aggressive discounting. At each of our concepts, we have increased the mix of lower priced menu items to broaden appeal and increase traffic. We have also expanded our limited-time offers of menu specials in order to offer price points that deliver superior value to customers while maintaining attractive margins.

Diversified Portfolio With Global Presence. Our diversified portfolio of distinct concepts and global presence provide us with a broad growth platform to capture additional market share domestically and internationally. We are diversified by concept, category and geography as follows:

 

   

By Concept and Category. We believe our concepts are differentiated relative to each other by category and to their respective key competitors. Our core concepts target three separate large and highly fragmented menu categories of the full-service restaurant sector: steak ($13.6 billion in 2010 sales), Italian ($14.8 billion in 2010 sales) and seafood ($8.3 billion in 2010 sales). Outback Steakhouse, Carrabba’s and Bonefish Grill target the casual dining price category, and Fleming’s targets the fine dining category.

 

   

By Geography. The system-wide sales of our international Outback Steakhouse restaurants represent 15% of our total system-wide sales. A majority of our international restaurants are company-owned or operated through a joint venture, and we believe this differentiates us relative to our casual dining peers, which primarily operate through franchises internationally. Our restaurants are located across 49 states and 21 countries and territories around the world.

Business Model Focused on Continuous Innovation and Productivity. Our business model keeps the customer at the center of our decision-making and focuses on innovation and productivity to drive sustainable sales and profit growth. We reinvest a portion of productivity savings in innovation to enable us to respond to continuously evolving consumer trends.

 

   

Innovation. We have established an enterprise-wide innovation process to enhance every dimension of the customer experience. Cross-functional innovation teams collaborate across research and development, or R&D, purchasing, operations, marketing, finance and market intelligence to manage a pipeline of new menu, service and marketing ideas.

 

   

Productivity. Without compromising the customer experience, we continuously explore opportunities to increase productivity and reduce costs. Our cost-savings allow us to reinvest in innovation initiatives, enhance our strong value proposition and increase margins. We have a dedicated team that coordinates all productivity initiatives and actively manages a pipeline of ideas from testing through implementation.

Experienced Executive and Field Management Teams. Our organization maintains deep restaurant experience at the operating level coupled with a functional corporate support team that drives innovation, productivity and scale efficiencies. Our management team is led by our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Elizabeth A. Smith, and since she joined us in November 2009, we have further enhanced our senior leadership team by adding executives from best-in-class consumer and retail companies. Our senior team possesses strong brand management and innovation expertise, which facilitates our focus on analytics and customer testing. This complements our field operating and management teams, who have deep experience operating our restaurants and in the restaurant industry. Our core concept presidents have been with us for an average of 20 years and have an average of 30 years of industry experience. Our regional field management team has an average of over 13 years of experience working with us at the managing partner level or above.

 

 

4


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Our Growth Strategy

We believe there are significant opportunities to continue to drive sustainable sales and profit growth through the following three strategies:

Grow Comparable Restaurant Sales. Building on the strong momentum of the business, we believe we have the following opportunities to continue to grow comparable restaurant sales:

 

   

Remodel Our Restaurants. In the near term, we are focused on continuing our successful remodel program at Outback Steakhouse and applying this knowledge as we implement a similar program to update our Carrabba’s restaurants. For Outback Steakhouse, we plan to complete 160 remodels in 2012 and a cumulative total of approximately 450 remodels by the end of 2013.

 

   

Continue to Improve Promotional Marketing to Drive Traffic. We plan to continue to improve our limited-time offers and multimedia marketing campaigns. By promoting continuously evolving, high quality and affordable menu items, we seek to drive traffic and maintain brand relevance without sacrificing margins.

 

   

Expand Share of Occasions and Increase Frequency. We believe we have a strong market share of weekend dinner occasions and a significant opportunity to grow our share of other dining occasions across all concepts. We realized meaningful traffic gains in 2011 through our Sunday lunch expansion at Outback Steakhouse, and in 2012, we are planning to roll out Saturday lunch at most of our Outback Steakhouse locations. We are also evaluating the selective expansion of weekday lunch in markets where demographics support doing so.

 

   

Continue Innovating New Menu Items and Categories. Our R&D team will continue to introduce innovative menu items that match evolving consumer preferences and broaden appeal.

Pursue New Domestic and International Development With Strong Unit Level Economics. We believe that a substantial development opportunity remains for our concepts in the U.S. and internationally. We expect to open 30 company-owned and five joint venture units in 2012 and increase the pace of development thereafter.

 

   

Pursue Domestic Development Focused on Bonefish Grill and Carrabba’s. We believe we have the potential to double the Bonefish Grill concept over time. Bonefish Grill unit growth will be our top domestic development priority in 2012, with 20 or more new restaurants planned. Over the last five years, Bonefish Grill restaurants open for more than a year have averaged a pre-tax return on initial investment of greater than 20%. We also see significant opportunities to expand Carrabba’s. We are developing an updated restaurant design for Carrabba’s, and we plan to test this model in ten to 15 units over the next two years. Based on the results of this test, we plan to accelerate new unit development.

 

   

Accelerate International Growth Focused on Outback Steakhouse. We believe we are well-positioned to expand internationally beyond our 192 restaurants located across 21 countries and territories. In 2012, we plan to open six or more company-owned or joint venture units in existing markets. Our international units have produced attractive returns with an average pre-tax return on initial investment above 30%. In 2011, the system-wide sales of our international Outback Steakhouse restaurants represented 15% of our total system-wide sales. We believe the international business represents a significant growth opportunity. We will approach growth in a disciplined manner, focusing on existing markets such as South Korea, Brazil and Hong Kong, while expanding in strategically selected emerging and high growth developed markets. In the near term, we plan to focus our new market growth in China, Mexico and South America. We plan to utilize company-owned and joint venture arrangements rather than franchises in markets with the most potential for unit growth.

 

 

5


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Drive Margin Improvement. We believe that we have the opportunity to increase our margins through continued productivity and increased fixed-cost leverage as we grow comparable restaurant sales. We have developed a multi-year productivity plan that focuses on high value initiatives across four categories: labor, food cost, supply chain and restaurant facilities. This strategy is expected to yield productivity and cost savings of approximately $50 million in 2012 and additional savings in future years.

Risk Factors

Before you invest in our common stock, you should carefully consider all of the information in this prospectus, including matters set forth under the heading “Risk Factors.” Risks relating to our business include the following, among others:

 

   

we face significant competition for customers, real estate and employees that could affect our profit margins;

 

   

general economic factors and changes in consumer preference may adversely affect our performance;

 

   

our plans depend on initiatives designed to increase sales, reduce costs and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of our operations, and failure to achieve or sustain these plans could affect our performance adversely;

 

   

damage to our reputation or infringement of our intellectual property could harm our business; and

 

   

our substantial leverage could adversely affect our ability to raise additional capital to fund our operations.

Our History

Our predecessor, OSI Restaurant Partners, Inc., was incorporated in August 1987, and we opened our first Outback Steakhouse restaurant in 1988. We became a Delaware corporation in 1991 as part of a corporate reorganization completed in connection with our initial public offering.

Bloomin Brands, Inc., formerly known as Kangaroo Holdings, Inc., was incorporated in Delaware in October 2006 by an investor group comprised of funds advised by Bain Capital Partners, LLC, Catterton Management Company, LLC, and Chris T. Sullivan, Robert D. Basham and J. Timothy Gannon, who we collectively refer to as our Founders, and members of our management. On June 14, 2007, we acquired OSI Restaurant Partners, Inc. by means of a merger and related transactions, referred to in this prospectus as the Merger. At the time of the Merger, OSI Restaurant Partners, Inc. was converted into a Delaware limited liability company named OSI Restaurant Partners, LLC, or OSI. In connection with the Merger, we implemented a new ownership and financing arrangement for our owned restaurant properties, pursuant to which Private Restaurant Properties, LLC, or PRP, our indirect wholly-owned subsidiary, acquired 343 restaurant properties then owned by OSI and leased them back to subsidiaries of OSI. In March 2012, we refinanced the commercial mortgage-backed securities loan that we entered into in 2007 in connection with the Merger with a new $500.0 million commercial mortgage-backed loan. See Note 20 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Following the refinancing, OSI remains our primary operating entity and New Private Restaurant Properties, LLC, another indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of ours, continues to lease 261 of our owned restaurant properties to OSI subsidiaries.

 

 

6


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Our Sponsors

Upon completion of this offering, Bain Capital, LLC and Catterton Management Company, LLC, which we refer to as our Sponsors, will continue to hold a controlling interest in us and will continue to have significant influence over us and decisions made by stockholders and may have interests that differ from yours. See “Risk Factors—Risks Related to this Offering and Our Common Stock.”

Bain Capital Partners, LLC

Bain Capital, LLC, whose affiliates include Bain Capital Partners, LLC, or Bain Capital, is a global private investment firm that manages several pools of capital including private equity, venture capital, public equity, credit products and absolute return investments with approximately $60 billion in assets under management. Since its inception in 1984, Bain Capital has made private equity investments and add-on acquisitions in more than 300 companies in a variety of industries around the world, including such restaurant concepts as Domino’s Pizza, Dunkin’ Brands, Burger King and Skylark Company (Japan), and retail businesses including Toys “R” Us, AMC Entertainment, Michael’s Stores, Staples and Gymboree. Headquartered in Boston, Bain Capital has offices in New York, Palo Alto, Chicago, London, Munich, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Tokyo, and Mumbai.

Catterton Management Company, LLC

Catterton Management Company, LLC, or Catterton, is a leading private equity firm with a focus on providing equity capital in support of small to middle-market consumer companies that are positioned for attractive growth. Since its founding in 1989, Catterton has invested in approximately 80 companies and led equity investments totaling over $3.6 billion. Presently, Catterton is actively managing more than $2.5 billion of equity capital focused on all sectors of the consumer industry.

Company Information

Our principal executive offices are located at 2202 North West Shore Boulevard, Suite 500, Tampa, Florida 33607 and our telephone number at that address is (813) 282-1225.

 

 

7


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

The Offering

 

Common stock offered by us

             shares

 

Common stock to be outstanding

             shares

immediately after completion of this offering

 

Option to purchase additional shares

We have granted the underwriters a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional          shares.

 

Use of proceeds

We expect to receive net proceeds, after deducting estimated offering expenses and underwriting discounts and commissions, of approximately $          million (or $          million if the underwriters exercise their option to purchase additional shares in full), based on an assumed offering price of $          per share (the midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover of this prospectus). We intend to use the net proceeds from this offering to retire all of our outstanding 10% notes due 2015, or Senior Notes. There were approximately $248.1 million in aggregate principal amount of Senior Notes outstanding as of December 31, 2011. We will use any remaining net proceeds for working capital and for general corporate purposes. See “Use of Proceeds” and “Description of Indebtedness.”

 

Dividend policy

We do not currently pay cash dividends on our common stock and do not anticipate paying any dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. Any future determinations relating to our dividend policies will be made at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on various factors. See “Dividend Policy.”

 

Principal stockholders

Upon completion of this offering, investment funds affiliated with our Sponsors will beneficially own a controlling interest in us. As a result, we currently intend to avail ourselves of the controlled company exemption under the corporate governance rules of         . See “Management—Board Structure and Committee Composition.”

 

Risk factors

You should read carefully the “Risk Factors” section of this prospectus for a discussion of factors that you should consider before deciding to invest in shares of our common stock.

 

Proposed                  symbol

“BLM”

The number of shares of our common stock to be outstanding after this offering excludes (1) outstanding options to purchase 11,863,378 shares of our common stock at a weighted average exercise price of $7.52 per share, of which options to purchase 5,673,525 shares were exercisable as of March 15, 2012, and (2) an additional              shares of our common stock issuable pursuant to future awards under our 2012 Incentive Award Plan.

 

 

8


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

SUMMARY CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OTHER DATA

The following table sets forth our summary consolidated financial and other data as of the dates and for the periods indicated. The summary consolidated financial data as of December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2011 and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2011 presented in this table have been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. The summary consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2009 have been derived from our historical unaudited consolidated financial statements for that year, which are not included in this prospectus. The total number of system-wide restaurants in the following table is unaudited for all periods presented. Historical results are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for future periods.

This summary consolidated financial and other data should be read in conjunction with the disclosures set forth under “Capitalization,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Financial Statements” and the consolidated financial statements and the related notes thereto appearing elsewhere in this prospectus.

 

     Years Ended December 31,  
     2009     2010     2011  
     ($ in thousands, except per share
amounts)
 

Statement of Operations Data:

      

Revenues

      

Restaurant sales

   $ 3,573,760      $ 3,594,681      $ 3,803,252   

Other revenues

     27,896        33,606        38,012   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total revenues

     3,601,656        3,628,287        3,841,264   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Costs and expenses

      

Cost of sales

     1,184,074        1,152,028        1,226,098   

Labor and other related

     1,024,063        1,034,393        1,094,117   

Other restaurant operating

     849,696        864,183        890,004   

Depreciation and amortization

     186,074        156,267        153,689   

General and administrative (1)

     252,298        252,793        291,124   

Recovery of note receivable from affiliated entity (2)

     —          —          (33,150

Loss on contingent debt guarantee

     24,500        —          —     

Goodwill impairment

     58,149        —          —     

Provision for impaired assets and restaurant closings (3)

     134,285        5,204        14,039   

Income from operations of unconsolidated affiliates

     (2,196     (5,492     (8,109
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total costs and expenses

     3,710,943        3,459,376        3,627,812   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Income (loss) from operations

     (109,287     168,911        213,452   

Gain on extinguishment of debt (4)

     158,061        —          —     

Other income (expense), net

     (199     2,993        830   

Interest expense, net

     (115,880     (91,428     (83,387
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Income (loss) before provision (benefit) for income taxes

     (67,305     80,476        130,895   

Provision (benefit) for income taxes

     (2,462     21,300        21,716   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net income (loss)

     (64,843     59,176        109,179   

Less: net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests

     (380     6,208        9,174   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net income (loss) attributable to Bloomin’ Brands, Inc.

   $ (64,463   $ 52,968      $ 100,005   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Basic net income (loss) per share (5)

   $ (0.62   $ 0.50      $ 0.94   

Diluted net income (loss) per share (5)

   $ (0.62   $ 0.50      $ 0.94   

Weighted average shares outstanding

      

Basic

     104,442        105,968        106,224   

Diluted

     104,442        105,968        106,689   

 

 

9


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements
     Years Ended December 31,  
     2009     2010      2011  
     ($ in thousands)  

Statement of Cash Flows Data:

       

Net cash provided by (used in):

       

Operating activities

   $ 195,537      $ 275,154       $ 322,450   

Investing activities

     (39,171     (71,721      (113,142

Financing activities

     (137,397     (167,315      (89,300

Other Financial and Operating Data:

       

Number of system-wide restaurants at end of period

     1,477        1,439         1,443   

Comparable domestic restaurant sales (6)

     (8.6 )%      2.7      4.9

Capital expenditures

   $ 57,528      $ 60,476       $ 120,906   

Adjusted EBITDA (7)

     319,925        338,898         361,478   

Adjusted EBITDA margin (7)

     8.9     9.3      9.4

Balance Sheet Data (at period end, 2009 unaudited):

       

Cash and cash equivalents

   $ 330,957      $ 365,536       $ 482,084   

Net working capital (deficit) (8)

     (187,648     (120,135      (248,145

Total assets

     3,340,708        3,243,411         3,353,936   

Total debt (4)(9)

     2,302,233        2,171,524         2,109,290   

Total shareholders’ (deficit) equity

     (116,625     (55,911      40,297   

Pro Forma Balance Sheet Data (9):

       

Cash and cash equivalents

        $     

Net working capital (deficit)

        $     

Total assets

        $     

Total debt

        $     

Total shareholders’ equity

        $     

 

(1) Includes management fees and out-of-pocket and other reimbursable expenses paid to a management company owned by our Sponsors and Founders of $10.7 million, $11.6 million and $9.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2010 and 2011, respectively, under a management agreement that will terminate upon the completion of this offering. See “Related Party Transactions—Arrangements With Our Investors.”
(2) In November 2011, we received a settlement payment from T-Bird Nevada, LLC (together with its affiliates, “T-Bird”), a limited liability company affiliated with our California franchisees of Outback Steakhouse restaurants, in connection with a settlement agreement that satisfied all outstanding litigation with T-Bird.
(3) During 2009, our Provision for impaired assets and restaurant closings primarily included: (i) $46.0 million of impairment charges to reduce the carrying value of the assets of Cheeseburger in Paradise to their estimated fair market value due to our sale of the concept in the third quarter of 2009, (ii) $47.6 million of impairment charges and restaurant closing expense for certain of our other restaurants and (iii) $36.0 million of impairment charges for the domestic Outback Steakhouse and Carrabba’s Italian Grill trade names.
(4) In March 2009, we repurchased $240.1 million of our outstanding Senior Notes for $73.0 million. This resulted in a gain on extinguishment of debt, after the pro rata reduction of unamortized deferred financing fees and other related costs, of $158.1 million in 2009.
(5) Basic and diluted net income (loss) per share are calculated on net income (loss) attributable to Bloomin’ Brands, Inc.
(6) Represents combined comparable restaurant sales of our domestic company-owned restaurants open 18 months or more.
(7) EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization), Adjusted EBITDA (calculated by adjusting EBITDA to exclude stock-based compensation expense, certain non–cash expenses and other significant, unusual items) and Adjusted EBITDA margin (Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of total revenues) are supplemental measures of profitability that are not required by or presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”). They are not measurements of our financial performance under U.S. GAAP and should not be considered as alternatives to our Net income (loss) or any other performance measures derived in accordance with U.S. GAAP.

 

 

10


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements
     Adjusted EBITDA is presented because: (i) we believe it is a useful measure for investors to assess the operating performance of our business without the effect of non-cash charges such as depreciation and amortization expenses and asset impairment expenses and (ii) we use Adjusted EBITDA internally as a benchmark for certain of our cash incentive plans and to evaluate our operating performance or compare our performance to that of our competitors. The use of Adjusted EBITDA as a performance measure permits a comparative assessment of our operating performance relative to our performance based on our GAAP results, while isolating the effects of some items that vary from period to period without any correlation to core operating performance or that vary widely among similar companies. Companies within our industry exhibit significant variations with respect to capital structures and cost of capital (which affect interest expense and income tax rates) and differences in book depreciation of property, plant and equipment (which affect relative depreciation expense), including significant differences in the depreciable lives of similar assets among various companies. Our management believes that Adjusted EBITDA facilitates company-to-company comparisons within our industry by eliminating some of these foregoing variations. Adjusted EBITDA as presented may not be comparable to other similarly-titled measures of other companies, and our presentation of Adjusted EBITDA should not be construed as an inference that our future results will be unaffected by excluded or unusual items.

 

     Our management recognizes that Adjusted EBITDA has limitations as an analytical financial measure, including the following:

 

   

Adjusted EBITDA does not reflect our capital expenditures or future requirements for capital expenditures;

 

   

Adjusted EBITDA does not reflect the cost of stock-based compensation;

 

   

Adjusted EBITDA does not reflect the interest expense, or the cash requirements necessary to service interest or principal payments, associated with our indebtedness;

 

   

Adjusted EBITDA does not reflect depreciation and amortization, which are non-cash charges, although the assets being depreciated and amortized will likely have to be replaced in the future, and it does not reflect cash requirements for such replacements; and

 

   

Adjusted EBITDA does not reflect changes in, or cash requirements for, our working capital needs.

 

 

11


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements
     A reconciliation of EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA to Net income (loss) attributable to Bloomin’ Brands, Inc. is provided below:

 

     Years Ended December 31,  
     2009     2010     2011  
     (in thousands)  

Net income (loss) attributable to Bloomin’ Brands, Inc.

   $ (64,463   $ 52,968      $ 100,005   

(Benefit) provision for income taxes

     (2,462     21,300        21,716   

Interest expense, net

     115,880        91,428        83,387   

Depreciation and amortization

     186,074        156,267        153,689   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

EBITDA

   $ 235,029      $ 321,963      $ 358,797   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Impairments and disposals

     192,572        4,915        15,062   

Stock-based compensation expense

     15,215        3,146        3,907   

Other losses (gains)

     884        (1,833     (90

Deal-related expenses (a)

            1,157        7,582   

Management fees and expenses

     9,786        9,550        9,370   

Gain on extinguishment of debt

     (158,061              

Unusual loss (gain) (b)

     24,500               (33,150
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Adjusted EBITDA

   $ 319,925      $ 338,898      $ 361,478   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

  (a) Deal-related expenses incurred in 2011 primarily include costs associated with the sale of our restaurants in Japan and the sale of properties in the Sale-Leaseback Transaction.
  (b) In March 2009, we recorded a loss related to our guarantee of an uncollateralized line of credit that permits borrowing of up to a maximum of $24.5 million for our joint venture partner in Roy’s. We recorded this loss based on our determination that our performance under the guarantee was probable. See note (2) above.

 

(8) As a result of our current liability for unearned revenue from the sale of gift cards, we have a working capital deficit.
(9) On June 14, 2007, PRP entered into a commercial mortgage-backed securities loan (the “CMBS Loan”) totaling $790.0 million, which had a maturity date of June 9, 2012. Effective March 27, 2012, New Private Restaurant Properties, LLC and two of our other indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries (collectively, “New PRP”) entered into a new commercial mortgage-backed securities loan (the “2012 CMBS Loan”) totaling $500.0 million and used the proceeds, together with the proceeds of a sale-leaseback transaction completed on March 14, 2012 and existing cash, to repay the CMBS Loan. The 2012 CMBS Loan and the repayment of the CMBS Loan are collectively referred to as the “CMBS Refinancing.” The 2012 CMBS Loan is a five-year loan maturing on April 10, 2017. See “Description of Indebtedness” and Note 20 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. As a result of the CMBS Refinancing, the net amount repaid along with scheduled maturities within one year, $281.3 million, was classified as current at December 31, 2011.
(10) The unaudited pro forma consolidated balance sheet data at December 31, 2011 gives effect to (a) the 2012 CMBS Loan and repayment of the original CMBS Loan and the sale-leaseback transaction completed on March 14, 2012 in which we sold 67 restaurant properties to two third-party real estate institutional investors then simultaneously leased them back under nine master leases (the “Sale-Leaseback Transaction”) and (b) the issuance of common stock in this offering and the application of the net proceeds to repay our Senior Notes and the termination of the management agreement with our Sponsors and our Founders in connection with this offering, as if each had occurred on December 31, 2011. See “Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Financial Statements.”

 

 

12


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

RISK FACTORS

An investment in our common stock involves various risks. You should carefully consider the following risks and all of the other information contained in this prospectus before investing in our common stock. The risks described below are those that we believe are the material risks that we face. The trading price of our common stock could decline due to any of these risks, and you may lose all or part of your investment in our common stock.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

We face significant competition for customers, real estate and employees and competitive pressure to adapt to changes in conditions driving customer traffic. Our inability to compete effectively may affect our traffic, sales and profit margins, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The restaurant industry is intensely competitive with a substantial number of restaurant operators that compete directly and indirectly with us in respect to price, service, location and food quality, and there are other well-established competitors with significant financial and other resources. There is also active competition for management personnel as well as attractive suitable real estate sites. Consumer tastes, nutritional and dietary trends, traffic patterns and the type, number and location of competing restaurants often affect the restaurant business, and our competitors may react more efficiently and effectively to those conditions. Further, we face growing competition from the supermarket industry, with the improvement of their “convenient meals” in the deli section, and from quick service and fast casual restaurants, as a result of higher-quality food and beverage offerings by those restaurants. If we are unable to continue to compete effectively, our traffic, sales and margins could decline and our business, financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected.

Challenging economic conditions may have a negative effect on our cash flows through lower consumer confidence and discretionary spending, availability and cost of credit, foreign currency exchange rates and other items.

Challenging economic conditions may negatively impact consumer confidence and discretionary spending and thus cause a decline in our cash flow from operations. For example, during the economic downturn starting in 2008, continuing disruptions in the overall economy, including the ongoing impacts of the housing crisis, high unemployment, and financial market volatility and unpredictability, caused a related reduction in consumer confidence, which negatively affected customer traffic and sales throughout our industry. These factors, as well as national, regional and local regulatory and economic conditions, gasoline prices, disposable consumer income and consumer confidence, affect discretionary consumer spending. If challenging economic conditions persist for an extended period of time or worsen, consumers might make long-lasting changes to their discretionary spending behavior, including dining out less frequently. The ability of the U.S. economy to continue to recover from these challenging economic conditions is likely to be affected by many national and international factors that are beyond our control, including current economic trends in Europe. Continued weakness in or a further worsening of the economy, generally or in a number of our markets, and our customers’ reactions to these trends could adversely affect our business and cause us to, among other things, reduce the number and frequency of new restaurant openings, close restaurants or delay remodeling of our existing restaurant locations.

In addition, as noted in our other risk factors, our high degree of leverage could increase our vulnerability to general economic and industry conditions and require that a substantial portion of cash flow from operations be dedicated to the payment of principal and interest on our indebtedness. Further, the availability of credit already arranged for under our revolving credit facilities and the cost and availability of future credit may be adversely impacted by economic challenges. Foreign currency exchange rates for the countries in which we operate may decline. In addition, we may experience interruptions in supplies and other services from our third-party vendors as a result of market conditions. These disruptions in the economy are beyond our control, and there is no guarantee that any government response will restore consumer confidence, stabilize the economy or increase the availability of credit.

 

13


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Loss of key management personnel could hurt our business and inhibit our ability to operate and grow successfully.

Our success will continue to depend, to a significant extent, on our leadership team and other key management personnel. If we are unable to attract and retain sufficiently experienced and capable management personnel, our business and financial results may suffer. If members of our leadership team or other key management personnel leave, we may have difficulty replacing them, and our business may suffer. There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully attract and retain our leadership team and other key management personnel that we need.

We could face labor shortages that could slow our growth and adversely impact our ability to operate our restaurants.

Our success depends in part upon our ability to attract, motivate and retain a sufficient number of qualified employees, including managing partners, restaurant managers, kitchen staff and servers, necessary to keep pace with our anticipated expansion schedule and meet the needs of our existing restaurants. A sufficient number of qualified individuals of the requisite caliber to fill these positions may be in short supply in some communities. Competition in these communities for qualified staff could require us to pay higher wages and provide greater benefits. Any inability to recruit and retain qualified individuals may also delay the planned openings of new restaurants and could adversely impact our existing restaurants. Any such inability to retain or recruit qualified employees, increased costs of attracting qualified employees or delays in restaurant openings could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Risks associated with our expansion plans may have adverse effects on our ability to increase revenues.

As part of our business strategy, we intend to continue to expand our current portfolio of restaurants. Current development schedules call for the construction of approximately 30 or more new restaurants in 2012. A variety of factors could cause the actual results and outcome of those expansion plans to differ from the anticipated results, including among other things:

 

   

the availability of attractive sites for new restaurants and the ability to obtain appropriate real estate at those sites at acceptable prices;

 

   

the ability to obtain all required governmental permits, including zoning approvals and liquor licenses, on a timely basis;

 

   

the impact of moratoriums or approval processes of state, local or foreign governments, which could result in significant delays;

 

   

the ability to obtain all necessary contractors and sub-contractors;

 

   

union activities such as picketing and hand billing, which could delay construction;

 

   

the ability to negotiate suitable lease terms;

 

   

the ability to recruit and train skilled management and restaurant employees;

 

   

the ability to receive the premises from the landlord’s developer without any delays; and

 

   

weather, natural disasters and disasters beyond our control resulting in construction delays.

Some of our new restaurants may take several months to reach planned operating levels due to lack of market awareness, start-up costs and other factors typically associated with new restaurants. There is also the possibility that new restaurants may attract customers away from other restaurants we own, thereby reducing the revenues of those existing restaurants.

 

14


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Development rates for each concept may differ significantly. The development of each concept may not be as successful as our experience in the past. It is difficult to estimate the performance of newly opened restaurants. Earnings achieved to date by restaurants open for less than two years may not be indicative of future operating results. Should enough of these new restaurants not meet targeted performance, it could have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

Our business is subject to seasonal fluctuations and past results are not indicative of future results.

Historically, customer spending patterns for our established restaurants are generally highest in the first quarter of the year and lowest in the third quarter of the year. Additionally, holidays may affect sales volumes seasonally in some of the markets in which we operate. Our quarterly results have been and will continue to be affected by the timing of new restaurant openings and their associated pre-opening costs, as well as restaurant closures and exit-related costs and impairments of goodwill, intangible assets and property, fixtures and equipment. As a result of these and other factors, our financial results for any quarter may not be indicative of the results that may be achieved for a full fiscal year.

Significant adverse weather conditions and other disasters could negatively impact our results of operations.

Adverse weather conditions and natural disasters, such as regional winter storms, floods, major hurricanes and earthquakes, severe thunderstorms and other disasters, such as oil spills, could negatively impact our results of operations. Temporary and prolonged restaurant closures may occur and customer traffic may decline due to the actual or perceived effects from these events.

We may be required to use cash to pay one of our franchisees in connection with a put right under a settlement agreement, which could have an adverse impact on our development plans and operating results.

In connection with the settlement of litigation with T-Bird, which include the franchisees of 56 Outback Steakhouse restaurants in California, we entered into an agreement with T-Bird pursuant to which T-Bird has the right, referred to as the Put Right, to require us to purchase for cash all of the equity interests in the T-Bird entities that own Outback Steakhouse restaurants. The Put Right will become exercisable by T-Bird for a one-year period beginning on the date of closing of this offering. The Put Right is also exercisable if we sell our Outback Steakhouse concept. If the Put Right is exercised, we will pay a purchase price equal to a multiple of the T-Bird entities’ adjusted EBITDA, net of liabilities, for the trailing 12 months as of the closing of the purchase from T-Bird. The multiple will be equal to 75% of the multiple of our adjusted EBITDA for the same trailing 12-month period as reflected in our stock price in the case of this offering or, in a sale of our Outback Steakhouse concept, 75% of the multiple of adjusted EBITDA that we are receiving in the sale. We have a one-time right to reject the exercise of the Put Right if the transaction would be dilutive to our consolidated earnings per share. In that event, the Put Right is extended until the first anniversary of our notice to the T-Bird entities of that rejection. We have agreed to waive all rights of first refusal in our franchise arrangements with the T-Bird entities in connection with a sale of all, and not less than all, of the assets, or at least 75% of the ownership, of the T-Bird entities. If the Put Right is exercised, we will have to use cash to pay the purchase price that could have been allocated to more profitable development initiatives or other business needs, and we will then own restaurants that may not fit our current expansion criteria. This could have an adverse impact on our operating results.

We have limited control with respect to the operations of our franchisees and joint venture partners, which could have a negative impact on our business.

Our franchisees and joint venture partners are obligated to operate their restaurants according to the specific guidelines we set forth. We provide training opportunities to these franchisees and joint venture partners to fully integrate them into our operating strategy. However, since we do not have control over these restaurants,

 

15


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

we cannot give assurance that there will not be differences in product quality or that there will be adherence to all of our guidelines at these restaurants. The failure of these restaurants to operate effectively could adversely affect our cash flows from those operations or have a negative impact on our reputation or our business.

Our failure to comply with government regulation, and the costs of compliance or non-compliance, could adversely affect our business.

We are subject to various federal, state, local and foreign laws affecting our business. Each of our restaurants is subject to licensing and regulation by a number of governmental authorities, which may include, among others, alcoholic beverage control, health and safety, nutritional menu labeling, health care, environmental and fire agencies in the state, municipality or country in which the restaurant is located. Difficulty in obtaining or failing to obtain the required licenses or approvals could delay or prevent the development of a new restaurant in a particular area. Additionally, difficulties or inabilities to retain or renew licenses, or increased compliance costs due to changed regulations, could adversely affect operations at existing restaurants.

Approximately 15% of our consolidated restaurant sales are attributable to the sale of alcoholic beverages. Alcoholic beverage control regulations require each of our restaurants to apply to a state authority and, in certain locations, county or municipal authorities for a license or permit to sell alcoholic beverages on the premises and to provide service for extended hours and on Sundays. Typically, licenses must be renewed annually and may be revoked or suspended for cause at any time. Alcoholic beverage control regulations relate to numerous aspects of daily operations of our restaurants, including minimum age of patrons and employees, hours of operation, advertising, training, wholesale purchasing, inventory control and handling and storage and dispensing of alcoholic beverages. The failure of a restaurant to obtain or retain liquor or food service licenses would adversely affect the restaurant’s operations. Additionally, we are subject in certain states to “dramshop” statutes, which generally provide a person injured by an intoxicated person the right to recover damages from an establishment that wrongfully served alcoholic beverages to the intoxicated person.

Our restaurant operations are also subject to federal and state labor laws, including the Fair Labor Standards Act, governing such matters as minimum wages, overtime, tip credits and worker conditions. Our employees who receive tips as part of their compensation, such as servers, are paid at a minimum wage rate, after giving effect to applicable tip credits. We rely on our employees to accurately disclose the full amount of their tip income, and we base our FICA tax reporting on the disclosures provided to us by such tipped employees. Our other personnel, such as our kitchen staff, are typically paid in excess of minimum wage. As significant numbers of our food service and preparation personnel are paid at rates related to the applicable minimum wage, further increases in the minimum wage or other changes in these laws could increase our labor costs. Our ability to respond to minimum wage increases by increasing menu prices will depend on the responses of our competitors and customers. Further, we are continuing to assess the impact of federal health care legislation on our health care benefit costs. The imposition of any requirement that we provide health insurance benefits to employees that are more extensive than the health insurance benefits we currently provide, or the imposition of additional employer paid employment taxes on income earned by our employees, could have an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial position. Our distributors and suppliers also may be affected by higher minimum wage and benefit standards, which could result in higher costs for goods and services supplied to us.

The Patient Protection and Affordability Act of 2010 (the “PPACA”) enacted in March 2010 requires chain restaurants with 20 or more locations in the United States to comply with federal nutritional disclosure requirements. The FDA has indicated that it intends to issue final regulations by the middle of 2012 and begin enforcing the regulations by the end of 2012. A number of states, counties and cities have also enacted menu labeling laws requiring multi-unit restaurant operators to disclose certain nutritional information to customers, or have enacted legislation restricting the use of certain types of ingredients in restaurants. Although the federal legislation is intended to preempt conflicting state or local laws on nutrition labeling, until we are required to comply with the federal law we will be subject to a patchwork of state and local laws and regulations regarding nutritional content disclosure requirements. Many of these requirements are inconsistent or are interpreted

 

16


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

differently from one jurisdiction to another. The effect of such labeling requirements on consumer choices, if any, is unclear at this time.

There is also a potential for increased regulation of food in the United States under the recent changes in the HACCP system requirements. HACCP refers to a management system in which food safety is addressed through the analysis and control of potential hazards from production, procurement and handling, to manufacturing, distribution and consumption of the finished product. Many states have required restaurants to develop and implement HACCP Systems and the United States government continues to expand the sectors of the food industry that must adopt and implement HACCP programs. For example, the Food Safety Modernization Act (the “FSMA”), signed into law in January 2011, granted the FDA new authority regarding the safety of the entire food system, including through increased inspections and mandatory food recalls. Although restaurants are specifically exempted from or not directly implicated by some of these new requirements, we anticipate that the new requirements may impact our industry. Additionally, our suppliers may initiate or otherwise be subject to food recalls that may impact the availability of certain products, result in adverse publicity or require us to take actions that could be costly for us or otherwise harm our business.

We are subject to the Americans with Disabilities Act, or the ADA, which, among other things, requires our restaurants to meet federally mandated requirements for the disabled. The ADA prohibits discrimination in employment and public accommodations on the basis of disability. Under the ADA, we could be required to expend funds to modify our restaurants to provide service to, or make reasonable accommodations for the employment of, disabled persons. In addition, our employment practices are subject to the requirements of the Immigration and Naturalization Service relating to citizenship and residency. Government regulations could affect and change the items we procure for resale such as commodities. We may also become subject to legislation or regulation seeking to tax or regulate high fat and high sodium foods, particularly in the United States, which could be costly to comply with. Our results can be impacted by tax legislation and regulation in the jurisdictions in which we operate and by accounting standards or pronouncements.

We are also subject to laws and regulations relating to information security, privacy, cashless payments, gift cards and consumer credit, protection and fraud, and any failure or perceived failure to comply with these laws and regulations could harm our reputation or lead to litigation, which could adversely affect our financial condition.

We face a variety of risks associated with doing business in foreign markets that could have a negative impact on our financial performance.

We have a significant number of franchised, joint venture and company-owned Outback Steakhouse restaurants outside the United States, and we intend to continue our efforts to grow internationally. Although we believe we have developed the support structure for international operations and growth, there is no assurance that international operations will be profitable or international growth will continue.

Our foreign operations are subject to all of the same risks as our domestic restaurants, as well as additional risks including, among others, international economic and political conditions and the possibility of instability and unrest, differing cultures and consumer preferences, diverse government regulations and tax systems, the ability to source high quality ingredients and other commodities in a cost-effective manner, uncertain or differing interpretations of rights and obligations in connection with international franchise agreements and the collection of ongoing royalties from international franchisees, the availability and cost of land and construction costs, and the availability of experienced management, appropriate franchisees and area operating partners.

Currency regulations and fluctuations in exchange rates could also affect our performance. We have direct investments in restaurants in South Korea, Hong Kong and Brazil, as well as international franchises, in a total of 21 countries and territories. As a result, we may experience losses from foreign currency translation, and such losses could adversely affect our overall sales and earnings.

 

17


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

We are subject to governmental regulation throughout the world, including antitrust and tax requirements, anti-boycott regulations, import/export/customs regulations and other international trade regulations, the USA Patriot Act and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Any new regulatory or trade initiatives could impact our operations in certain countries. Failure to comply with any such legal requirements could subject us to monetary liabilities and other sanctions, which could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Increased commodity, energy and other costs could decrease our profit margins or cause us to limit or otherwise modify our menus, which could adversely affect our business.

The performance of our restaurants depends on our ability to anticipate and react to changes in the price and availability of food commodities, including among other things beef, chicken, seafood, butter, cheese and produce. Prices may be affected due to market changes, increased competition, the general risk of inflation, shortages or interruptions in supply due to weather, disease or other conditions beyond our control, or other reasons. Increased prices or shortages could affect the cost and quality of the items we buy or require us to limit our menu options. These events, combined with other more general economic and demographic conditions, could impact our pricing and negatively affect our profit margins.

The performance of our restaurants is also adversely affected by increases in the price of utilities, such as natural gas, whether as a result of inflation, shortages or interruptions in supply, or otherwise. We use derivative instruments to mitigate some of our overall exposure to material increases in natural gas prices. We do not apply hedge accounting to these instruments, and any changes in the fair value of the derivative instruments are marked-to-market through earnings in the period of change. To date, effects of these derivative instruments have been immaterial to our financial statements for all periods presented.

Our business also incurs significant costs for insurance, labor, marketing, taxes, real estate, borrowing and litigation, all of which could increase due to inflation, changes in laws, competition or other events beyond our control.

Our ability to respond to increased costs by increasing menu prices or by implementing alternative processes or products will depend on our ability to anticipate and react to such increases and other more general economic and demographic conditions, as well as the responses of our competitors and customers. All of these things may be difficult to predict and beyond our control. In this manner, increased costs could adversely affect our performance.

Infringement of our intellectual property could diminish the value of our restaurant concepts and harm our business.

We regard our service marks, including “Outback Steakhouse,” “Carrabba’s Italian Grill,” “Bonefish Grill” and “Fleming’s Prime Steakhouse and Wine Bar,” and our “Bloomin’ Onion” trademark as having significant value and as being important factors in the marketing of our restaurants. We have also obtained trademarks for several of our other menu items and for various advertising slogans. In addition, the overall layout, appearance and designs of our restaurants are valuable assets. We believe that these and other intellectual property are valuable assets that are critical to our success. We rely on a combination of protections provided by contracts, copyrights, patents, trademarks, and other common law rights, such as trade secret and unfair competition laws, to protect our restaurants and services from infringement. We have registered certain trademarks and service marks and have other registration applications pending in the United States and foreign jurisdictions. However, not all of the trademarks or service marks that we currently use have been registered in all of the countries in which we do business, and they may never be registered in all of these countries. There may not be adequate protection for certain intellectual property such as the overall appearance of our restaurants. We are aware of names and marks similar to our service marks being used by other persons in certain geographic areas in which we have restaurants. Although we believe such uses will not adversely affect us, further or currently unknown unauthorized uses or other misappropriation of our trademarks or service marks could diminish the value of our brands and restaurant concepts and may adversely affect our business. We may be unable to detect such unauthorized use of, or take appropriate steps to enforce, our intellectual property rights.

 

18


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Effective intellectual property protection may not be available in every country in which we have or intend to open or franchise a restaurant. Failure to adequately protect our intellectual property rights could damage or even destroy our brands and impair our ability to compete effectively. Even where we have effectively secured statutory protection for intellectual property, our competitors may misappropriate our intellectual property and our employees, consultants and suppliers may breach their obligations not to reveal our confidential information, including trade secrets. Although we have taken appropriate measures to protect our intellectual property, there can be no assurance that these protections will be adequate or that our competitors will not independently develop products or concepts that are substantially similar to our restaurants and services. Despite our efforts, it may be possible for third-parties to reverse-engineer, otherwise obtain, copy, and use information that we regard as proprietary. Furthermore, defending or enforcing our trademark rights, branding practices and other intellectual property, and seeking injunctions against and/or compensation for misappropriation of confidential information, could result in the expenditure of significant resources.

Restaurant companies, including ours, have been the target of class action lawsuits and other proceedings alleging, among other things, violations of federal and state workplace and employment laws. Proceedings of this nature are costly, divert management attention and, if successful, could result in our payment of substantial damages or settlement costs.

Our business is subject to the risk of litigation by employees, consumers, suppliers, shareholders or others through private actions, class actions, administrative proceedings, regulatory actions or other litigation. The outcome of litigation, particularly class action and regulatory actions, is difficult to assess or quantify. In recent years, we and other restaurant companies have been subject to lawsuits, including class action lawsuits, alleging violations of federal and state laws regarding workplace and employment matters, discrimination and similar matters. A number of these lawsuits have resulted in the payment of substantial damages by the defendants. Similar lawsuits have been instituted from time to time alleging violations of various federal and state wage and hour laws regarding, among other things, employee meal deductions, the sharing of tips among certain employees, overtime eligibility of assistant managers and failure to pay for all hours worked. If we are required to pay substantial damages and expenses as a result of these or other types of lawsuits our business and results of operations would be adversely affected.

Occasionally, our customers file complaints or lawsuits against us alleging that we are responsible for some illness or injury they suffered at or after a visit to one of our restaurants, including actions seeking damages resulting from food borne illness and relating to notices with respect to chemicals contained in food products required under state law. We are also subject to a variety of other claims from third parties arising in the ordinary course of our business, including personal injury claims, contract claims and claims alleging violations of federal and state laws. In addition, our restaurants are subject to state “dram shop” or similar laws which generally allow a person to sue us if that person was injured by a legally intoxicated person who was wrongfully served alcoholic beverages at one of our restaurants. The restaurant industry has also been subject to a growing number of claims that the menus and actions of restaurant chains have led to the obesity of certain of their customers. We may also be subject to lawsuits from our employees, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or others alleging violations of federal and state laws regarding workplace and employment matters, discrimination and similar matters. For example, in December 2009, we entered into a Consent Decree in settlement of certain litigation brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which required us to make a settlement payment of $19.0 million. In addition, during the four-year term of the Consent Decree, we are required to fulfill certain training, record-keeping and reporting requirements, maintain an open access system for restaurant employees to express interest in promotions, and employ a human resources executive. If we fail to comply with the terms of the Consent Decree, it could have adverse consequences on our business.

Regardless of whether any claims against us are valid or whether we are liable, claims may be expensive to defend and may divert time and money away from our operations. In addition, they may generate negative publicity, which could reduce customer traffic and sales. Although we maintain what we believe to be adequate levels of insurance, insurance may not be available at all or in sufficient amounts to cover any liabilities with respect to these or other matters. A judgment or other liability in excess of our insurance coverage for any claims or any adverse publicity resulting from claims could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

 

19


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Our insurance policies may not provide adequate levels of coverage against all claims, and fluctuating insurance requirements and costs could negatively impact our profitability.

We are self-insured, or carry insurance programs with specific retention levels or deductibles, for a significant portion of our risks and associated liabilities with respect to workers’ compensation, general liability, liquor liability, employment practices liability, property, health benefits and other insurable risks. However, there are types of losses we may incur that cannot be insured against or that we believe are not commercially reasonable to insure. These losses, if they occur, could have a material and adverse effect on our business and results of operations. Additionally, health insurance costs in general have risen significantly over the past few years and are expected to continue to increase. These increases could have a negative impact on our profitability, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully offset the effect of such increases with plan modifications and cost control measures, additional operating efficiencies or the pass-through of such increased costs to our customers or employees.

Conflict or terrorism could negatively affect our business.

We cannot predict the effects of actual or threatened armed conflicts or terrorist attacks, efforts to combat terrorism, military action against any foreign state or group located in a foreign state or heightened security requirements on local, regional, national, or international economies or consumer confidence. Such events could negatively affect our business, including by reducing customer traffic or the availability of commodities.

If our advertising and marketing programs are unsuccessful in maintaining or driving increased customer traffic or are ineffective in comparison to those of our competitors, our results of operations could be adversely affected.

We conduct ongoing promotion-based brand awareness advertising campaigns and customer loyalty programs. If these programs are not successful or conflict with evolving customer preferences, we may not increase or maintain our customer traffic and will incur expenses without the benefit of higher revenues. In addition, if our competitors increase their spending on marketing and advertising programs, or develop more effective campaigns, this could have a negative effect on our brand relevance, customer traffic and results of operations.

Unfavorable publicity could harm our business by reducing demand for our concepts or specific menu offerings.

Our business could be negatively affected by publicity resulting from complaints or litigation, either against us or other restaurant companies, alleging poor food quality, food-borne illness, personal injury, adverse health effects (including obesity) or other concerns. Regardless of the validity of any such allegations, unfavorable publicity relating to any number of restaurants or even a single restaurant could adversely affect public perception of the entire brand.

Additionally, unfavorable publicity towards a food product generally could negatively impact our business. For example, publicity regarding health concerns or outbreaks of disease in a food product could reduce demand for our menu offerings. These factors could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Consumer reaction to public health issues, such as an outbreak of flu viruses or other diseases, could have an adverse effect on our business.

Our business could be harmed if the United States or other countries in which we operate experience an outbreak of flu viruses or other diseases. If a virus is transmitted by human contact, our employees or customers could become infected or could choose or be advised to avoid gathering in public places. This could adversely affect our restaurant traffic, our ability to adequately staff our restaurants, our ability to receive deliveries on a timely basis or our ability to perform functions at the corporate level. Our business could also be negatively affected if mandatory closures, voluntary closures or restrictions on operations are imposed in the jurisdictions in which we operate. Even if such measures are not implemented and a virus or other disease does not spread significantly, the perceived risk of infection or significant health risk may have a material adverse effect on our business.

 

20


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Food safety and food-borne illness concerns throughout the supply chain may have an adverse effect on our business by reducing demand and increasing costs.

Food safety issues could be caused by food suppliers or distributors and, as a result, be out of our control. In addition, regardless of the source or cause, any report of food-borne illnesses and other food safety issues including food tampering or contamination at one of our restaurants could adversely affect the reputation of our brands and have a negative impact on our sales. Even instances of food-borne illness, food tampering or food contamination occurring solely at restaurants of our competitors could result in negative publicity about the food service industry generally and adversely impact our sales. The occurrence of food-borne illnesses or food safety issues could also adversely affect the price and availability of affected ingredients, resulting in higher costs and lower margins.

The food service industry is affected by consumer preferences and perceptions. Changes in these preferences and perceptions may lessen the demand for our products, which would reduce sales and harm our business.

Food service businesses are affected by changes in consumer tastes and demographic trends. For instance, if prevailing health or dietary preferences cause consumers to avoid steak and other products we offer in favor of foods that are perceived as more healthy, our business and operating results would be harmed.

We have a limited number of suppliers for our major products. If our suppliers are unable to fulfill their obligations under their contracts, we could encounter supply shortages and incur higher costs.

We have a limited number of suppliers for our major products, such as beef. In 2011, we purchased more than 90% of our beef raw materials from four beef suppliers who represent approximately 75% of the total beef marketplace in the U.S. Due to the nature of our industry, we expect to continue to purchase a substantial amount of our beef from a small number of suppliers. Although we have not experienced significant problems with our suppliers, if our suppliers are unable to fulfill their obligations under their contracts, we could encounter supply shortages and incur higher costs.

Shortages or interruptions in the supply or delivery of fresh food products could adversely affect our operating results.

We are dependent on frequent deliveries of fresh food products that meet our specifications. Shortages or interruptions in the supply of fresh food products caused by unanticipated demand, problems in production or distribution, inclement weather or other conditions could adversely affect the availability, quality and cost of ingredients, which would adversely affect our operating results.

We outsource certain accounting processes to a third-party vendor, which subjects us to many unforeseen risks that could disrupt our business, increase our costs and negatively impact our internal control processes.

In early 2011, we began to outsource certain accounting processes to a third-party vendor. The third-party vendor may not be able to handle the volume of activity or perform the quality of service that we have currently achieved at a cost-effective rate, which could adversely affect our business. The decision to outsource was made based on cost savings initiatives; however, we may not achieve these savings because of unidentified intangible costs and legal and regulatory matters, which could adversely affect our results of operations or financial condition. In addition, the transition of certain business processes to outsourcing could negatively impact our internal control processes.

 

21


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

We rely heavily on information technology in our operations and any material failure, weakness, interruption or breach of security could prevent us from effectively operating our business.

We rely heavily on information systems across our operations, including for point-of-sale processing in our restaurants, management of our supply chain, payment of obligations, collection of cash, data warehousing to support analytics and other various processes and procedures. Our ability to efficiently and effectively manage our business depends significantly on the reliability and capacity of these systems. The failure of these systems to operate effectively, maintenance problems, upgrading or transitioning to new platforms, or a breach in security of these systems could result delays in customer service and reduce efficiency in our operations. Remediation of such problems could result in significant unplanned capital investments.

Security breaches of confidential customer information in connection with our electronic processing of credit and debit card transactions may adversely affect our business.

The majority of our restaurant sales are by credit or debit cards. Other restaurants and retailers have experienced security breaches in which credit and debit card information of their customers has been stolen. We may in the future become subject to lawsuits or other proceedings for purportedly fraudulent transactions arising out of the actual or alleged theft of our customers’ credit or debit card information. Any such claim or proceeding, or any adverse publicity resulting from these allegations, may have a material adverse effect on our business.

An impairment in the carrying value of our goodwill or other intangible assets could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

We test goodwill for impairment in the second quarter of each fiscal year and whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that impairment may have occurred. A significant amount of judgment is involved in determining if an indication of impairment exists. Factors may include, among others:

 

   

a significant decline in our expected future cash flows;

 

   

a significant adverse change in legal factors or in the business climate;

 

   

unanticipated competition;

 

   

the testing for recoverability of a significant asset group within a reporting unit; and

 

   

slower growth rates.

Any adverse change in these factors would have a significant impact on the recoverability of these assets and negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations. We compare the carrying value of a reporting unit, including goodwill, to the fair value of the reporting unit. Carrying value is based on the assets and liabilities associated with the operations of that reporting unit. If the carrying value is less than the fair value, no impairment exists. If the carrying value is higher than the fair value, there is an indication of impairment and a second step is required to measure a goodwill impairment loss, if any. We are required to record a non-cash impairment charge if the testing performed indicates that goodwill has been impaired.

We evaluate our other intangible assets, primarily the Outback Steakhouse (domestic and international), Carrabba’s Italian Grill, Bonefish Grill, Fleming’s Prime Steakhouse and Wine Bar and Roy’s trademarks or trade names, to determine if they are definite or indefinite-lived. Reaching a determination on useful life requires significant judgments and assumptions regarding the future effects of obsolescence, demand, competition, other economic factors (such as the stability of the industry, legislative action that results in an uncertain or changing regulatory environment, and expected changes in distribution channels), the level of required maintenance expenditures, and the expected lives of other related groups of assets.

 

22


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

As with goodwill, we test our indefinite-lived intangible assets for impairment in the second quarter of each fiscal year and whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that their carrying value may not be recoverable. We estimate the fair value of these indefinite-lived intangible assets based on an income valuation model using the relief from royalty method, which requires assumptions related to projected revenues from our annual long-range plan, assumed royalty rates that could be payable if we did not own the assets and a discount rate.

During the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, we did not record any goodwill or material intangible asset impairment charges. During the year ended December 31, 2009, we recorded goodwill and intangible asset impairment charges of $58.1 million and $43.7 million, respectively. We cannot accurately predict the amount and timing of any impairment of assets. Should the value of goodwill or other intangible assets become further impaired, there could be an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Changes to estimates related to our property, fixtures and equipment and definite-lived intangible assets or operating results that are lower than our current estimates at certain restaurant locations may cause us to incur impairment charges on certain long-lived assets, which may adversely affect our results of operations.

In accordance with accounting guidance as it relates to the impairment of long-lived assets, we make certain estimates and projections with regard to individual restaurant operations, as well as our overall performance, in connection with our impairment analyses for long-lived assets. When impairment triggers are deemed to exist for any location, the estimated undiscounted future cash flows are compared to its carrying value. If the carrying value exceeds the undiscounted cash flows, an impairment charge equal to the difference between the carrying value and the sum of the discounted cash flows is recorded. The projections of future cash flows used in these analyses require the use of judgment and a number of estimates and projections of future operating results. If actual results differ from our estimates, additional charges for asset impairments may be required in the future. If impairment charges are significant, our results of operations could be adversely affected.

The possibility of future misstatement exists due to inherent limitations in our control systems, which could adversely affect our business.

We cannot be certain that our internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures will prevent all possible error and fraud. A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. Because of inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of error or fraud, if any, in our company have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake, which could have an adverse impact on our business.

Our reported financial results may be adversely affected by changes in accounting principles applicable to us.

Generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S. are subject to interpretation by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, the SEC and various bodies formed to promulgate and interpret appropriate accounting principles. A change in these principles or interpretations could have a significant effect on our reported financial results, and could affect the reporting of transactions completed before the announcement of a change, such as standards relating to leasing. In addition, the SEC has announced a multi-year plan that could ultimately lead to the use of International Financial Reporting Standards by U.S. issuers in their SEC filings. Any such change could have a significant effect on our reported financial results.

 

23


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

We are a holding company and rely on dividends, distributions and other payments, advances and transfers of funds from our subsidiaries to fund our operations, which could prevent us from meeting our obligations.

We have no direct operations and derive all of our cash flow from our subsidiaries. Because we conduct our operations through our subsidiaries, we depend on those entities for dividends and other payments or distributions to fund our operations. The deterioration of the earnings from, or other available assets of, our subsidiaries for any reason could limit or impair their ability to pay dividends or other distributions to us.

Risks Related to Our Indebtedness

Our substantial leverage could adversely affect our ability to raise additional capital to fund our operations, limit our ability to react to changes in the economy or our industry and expose us to interest rate risk in connection with our variable-rate debt.

We are highly leveraged. As of December 31, 2011, our total indebtedness was approximately $2.1 billion. See “Description of Indebtedness.” As of December 31, 2011, we also had approximately $82.4 million in available unused borrowing capacity under our working capital revolving credit facility (after giving effect to undrawn letters of credit of approximately $67.6 million) and $67.0 million in available unused borrowing capacity under our pre-funded revolving credit facility that provides financing for capital expenditures only.

Our high degree of leverage could have important consequences, including:

 

   

making it more difficult for us to make payments on indebtedness;

 

   

increasing our vulnerability to general economic, industry and competitive conditions;

 

   

increasing our cost of borrowing;

 

   

requiring a substantial portion of cash flow from operations to be dedicated to the payment of principal and interest on our indebtedness, thereby reducing our ability to use our cash flow to fund our operations, capital expenditures and future business opportunities;

 

   

exposing us to the risk of increased interest rates because certain of our borrowings under our senior secured credit facilities and commercial mortgage-backed securities loans are at variable rates of interest;

 

   

restricting us from making strategic acquisitions or causing us to make non-strategic divestitures;

 

   

limiting our ability to obtain additional financing for working capital, capital expenditures, restaurant development, debt service requirements, acquisitions and general corporate or other purposes; and

 

   

limiting our ability to adjust to changing market conditions and placing us at a competitive disadvantage compared to our competitors who may not be as highly leveraged.

We may incur substantial additional indebtedness in the future, subject to the restrictions contained in our senior secured credit facilities, the 2012 CMBS Loan and the indenture governing our Senior Notes. If new indebtedness is added to our current debt levels, the related risks that we now face could increase.

Approximately $1.0 billion of debt outstanding under our senior secured credit facilities and approximately $49.0 million of our 2012 CMBS Loan bears interest based on a floating rate index. An increase in these floating rates could cause a material increase in our interest expense.

 

24


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Our debt agreements contain restrictions that limit our flexibility in operating our business.

We are a holding company and conduct our operations through our subsidiaries, certain of which have incurred their own indebtedness. Our subsidiaries’ debt agreements contain various covenants that limit our ability to obtain funds from our subsidiaries through dividends, loans or advances. In addition, certain of our debt agreements limit our and our subsidiaries’ ability to, among other things, incur or guarantee additional indebtedness, pay dividends on, redeem or repurchase our capital stock, make certain acquisitions or investments, incur or permit to exist certain liens, enter into transactions with affiliates or sell our assets to, merge or consolidate with or into, another company. Our debt agreements require us to satisfy certain financial tests and ratios and limit our ability to make capital expenditures. Our ability to satisfy such tests and ratios may be affected by events outside of our control.

Upon a breach of the covenants under our debt agreements, the lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding under the agreements to be immediately due and payable and terminate all commitments to extend further credit. If we are unable to repay those amounts, the lenders under the senior secured credit facilities and the 2012 CMBS Loan could proceed against the collateral granted to them to secure that indebtedness. We have pledged a significant portion of our assets as collateral under the senior secured credit facilities and the 2012 CMBS Loan. If the lenders under the senior secured credit facilities and the 2012 CMBS Loan accelerate the repayment of borrowings, we cannot be certain that we will have sufficient assets to repay them and our unsecured indebtedness.

We may not be able to generate sufficient cash to service all of our indebtedness and operating lease obligations, and we may be forced to take other actions to satisfy our obligations under our indebtedness and operating lease obligations, which may not be successful. If we fail to meet these obligations, we would be in default under our debt agreements and the lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding under them to be immediately due and payable and terminate all commitments to extend further credit.

Our ability to make scheduled payments on or to refinance our debt obligations and to satisfy our operating lease obligations depends on our financial condition and operating performance, which is subject to prevailing economic and competitive conditions and to certain financial, business and other factors beyond our control. We cannot be certain that we will maintain a level of cash flow from operating activities sufficient to permit us to pay the principal, premium, if any, and interest on our indebtedness, or to pay our operating lease obligations. If our cash flow and capital resources are insufficient to fund our debt service obligations and operating lease obligations, we may be forced to reduce or delay capital expenditures, sell assets, seek additional capital or restructure or refinance our indebtedness. These alternative measures may not be successful and may not permit us to meet our scheduled debt service obligations. In the absence of sufficient operating results and resources, we could face substantial liquidity problems and might be required to dispose of material assets or operations or take other actions to meet our debt service and other obligations. Our debt agreements restrict our ability to dispose of assets and use the proceeds from the disposition. We may not be able to consummate those dispositions or to obtain the proceeds that we could otherwise realize from such dispositions and any such proceeds that are realized may not be adequate to meet any debt service obligations then due. The failure to meet our debt service obligations or the failure to remain in compliance with the financial covenants under our debt agreements would constitute an event of default under those agreements and the lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding under them to be immediately due and payable and terminate all commitments to extend further credit.

 

25


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Risks Related to this Offering and Our Common Stock

We are a “controlled company” within the meaning of                      rules and, as a result, we will qualify for, and intend to rely on, exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements. You will not have the same protections afforded to stockholders of companies that are subject to such requirements.

After completion of this offering our Sponsors will continue to control a majority of the voting power of our outstanding common stock. As a result, we qualify as a “controlled company” within the meaning of the corporate governance rules of the                     . Under these rules, a company of which more than 50% of the voting power is held by an individual, group or another company is a “controlled company” and may elect not to comply with certain corporate governance requirements, including:

 

   

the requirement that a majority of the board of directors consist of independent directors;

 

   

the requirement that we have a nominating and corporate governance committee that is composed entirely of independent directors with a written charter addressing the committee’s purpose and responsibilities, or otherwise have director nominees selected by vote of a majority of the independent directors;

 

   

the requirement that we have a compensation committee that is composed entirely of independent directors with a written charter addressing the committee’s purpose and responsibilities; and

 

   

the requirement for an annual performance evaluation of the nominating and corporate governance and compensation committees.

Following this offering, we intend to utilize these exemptions. As a result, we will not have a majority of independent directors, our compensation committee and nominating and corporate governance committee will not consist entirely of independent directors and the board committees will not be subject to annual performance evaluations. Accordingly, you will not have the same protections afforded to stockholders of companies that are subject to the                      corporate governance requirements.

Our Sponsors, however, are not subject to any contractual obligation to retain their controlling interest, except that they have agreed, subject to certain exceptions, not to sell or otherwise dispose of any shares of our common stock or other capital stock or other securities exercisable or convertible therefor for a period of at least 180 days after the date of this prospectus without the prior written consent of the underwriters for this offering. Except for this brief period, there can be no assurance as to the period of time during which any of our Sponsors will maintain their ownership of our common stock following the offering.

Our stock price could be extremely volatile and, as a result, you may not be able to resell your shares at or above the price you paid for them.

Volatility in the market price of our common stock may prevent you from being able to sell your shares at or above the price you paid for your shares. The stock market in general has been highly volatile. As a result, the market price of our common stock is likely to be similarly volatile. You may experience a decrease, which could be substantial, in the value of your stock, including decreases unrelated to our operating performance or prospects, and could lose part or all of your investment. The price of our common stock could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to a number of factors, including those described elsewhere in this prospectus and others such as:

 

   

actual or anticipated fluctuations in our quarterly or annual operating results and the performance of our competitors;

 

   

publication of research reports by securities analysts about us, our competitors or our industry;

 

26


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements
   

our failure or the failure of our competitors to meet analysts’ projections or guidance that we or our competitors may give to the market;

 

   

additions and departures of key personnel;

 

   

sales, or anticipated sales, of large blocks of our stock or of shares held by our directors or executive officers;

 

   

strategic decisions by us or our competitors, such as acquisitions, divestitures, spin-offs, joint ventures, strategic investments or changes in business strategy;

 

   

the passage of legislation or other regulatory developments affecting us or our industry;

 

   

speculation in the press or investment community, whether or not correct, involving us, our suppliers or our competitors;

 

   

changes in accounting principles;

 

   

litigation and governmental investigations;

 

   

terrorist acts, acts of war or periods of widespread civil unrest;

 

   

a food borne illness outbreak;

 

   

natural disasters and other calamities; and

 

   

changes in general market and economic conditions.

As we operate in a single industry, we are especially vulnerable to these factors to the extent that they affect our industry or our products. In the past, securities class action litigation has often been initiated against companies following periods of volatility in their stock price. This type of litigation could result in substantial costs and divert our management’s attention and resources, and could also require us to make substantial payments to satisfy judgments or to settle litigation.

There is no existing market for our common stock, and we do not know if one will develop to provide you with adequate liquidity.

Prior to this offering, there has not been a public market for our common stock. An active market for our common stock may not develop following the completion of this offering, or if it does develop, may not be maintained. If an active trading market does not develop, you may have difficulty selling any of our common stock that you buy. The initial public offering price for the shares of our common stock will be determined by negotiations between us and the representatives of the underwriters and may not be indicative of prices that will prevail in the open market following this offering. Consequently, you may not be able to sell shares of our common stock at prices equal to or greater than the price you paid in this offering.

There may be sales of a substantial amount of our common stock after this offering by our current stockholders, and these sales could cause the price of our common stock to fall.

After this offering, there will be                      shares of common stock outstanding. Of our issued and outstanding shares, all the common stock sold in this offering will be freely transferable, except for any shares held by our “affiliates,” as that term is defined in Rule 144 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”). Following completion of this offering, approximately     % of our outstanding common stock will be held by investment funds affiliated with our Sponsors and members of our management and employees.

 

27


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Each of our directors and executive officers and substantially all of our stockholders have entered into a lock-up agreement with the representatives of the underwriters which regulates their sales of our common stock for a period of at least 180 days after the date of this prospectus, subject to certain exceptions and automatic extensions in certain circumstances. See “Related Party Transactions—Arrangements With Our Investors.”

Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market after this offering, or the perception that such sales will occur, could adversely affect the market price of our common stock and make it difficult for us to raise funds through securities offerings in the future. Of the shares to be outstanding after the offering, the shares offered by this prospectus will be eligible for immediate sale in the public market without restriction by persons other than our affiliates. Our remaining outstanding shares will become available for resale in the public market as shown in the chart below, subject to the provisions of Rule 144 and Rule 701.

 

Number of Shares

  

Date Available for Resale

   On the date of this offering (                )
   180 days after this offering (                ), subject to certain exceptions and automatic extensions in certain circumstances.

Beginning 180 days after this offering, subject to certain exceptions and automatic extensions in certain circumstances, holders of shares of our common stock may require us to register their shares for resale under the federal securities laws, and holders of additional shares of our common stock would be entitled to have their shares included in any such registration statement, all subject to reduction upon the request of the underwriter of the offering, if any. See “Related Party Transactions—Arrangements With Our Investors.” Registration of those shares would allow the holders to immediately resell their shares in the public market. Any such sales or anticipation thereof could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

In addition, after this offering, we intend to register shares of common stock that are reserved for issuance under our stock incentive plans. See “Executive Compensation—Equity Incentive Plans.”

Provisions in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws, our 2012 CMBS Loan documents and Delaware law may discourage, delay or prevent a change of control of our company or changes in our management and, therefore, may depress the trading price of our stock.

Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws include certain provisions that could have the effect of discouraging, delaying or preventing a change of control of our company or changes in our management, including, among other things:

 

   

our board is classified into three classes of directors with only one class subject to election each year;

 

   

restrictions on the ability of our stockholders to fill a vacancy on the board of directors;

 

   

our ability to issue preferred stock with terms that the board of directors may determine, without stockholder approval, which could be used to significantly dilute the ownership of a hostile acquirer;

 

   

the inability of our stockholders to call a special meeting of stockholders;

 

   

our directors may only be removed from the board of directors for cause by the affirmative vote of the holders of at least 75% of the voting power of outstanding shares of our capital stock entitled to vote generally in the election of directors;

 

28


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements
   

the absence of cumulative voting in the election of directors, which may limit the ability of minority stockholders to elect directors; and

 

   

advance notice requirements for stockholder proposals and nominations, which may discourage or deter a potential acquirer from soliciting proxies to elect a particular slate of directors or otherwise attempting to obtain control of us.

In addition, the mortgage loan agreement for the 2012 CMBS Loan requires that, following this offering, our Sponsors, our Founders and our management stockholders or other permitted holders either own no less than 51% of our common stock or if they do not, that certain other conditions are satisfied. These provisions in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and the 2012 CMBS Loan documents may discourage, delay or prevent a transaction involving a change in control of our company that is in the best interests of our minority stockholders. Even in the absence of a takeover attempt, the existence of these provisions may adversely affect the prevailing market price of our common stock if they are viewed as discouraging future takeover attempts.

Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law may affect the ability of an “interested stockholder” to engage in certain business combinations, including mergers, consolidations or acquisitions of additional shares, for a period of three years following the time that the stockholder becomes an “interested stockholder.” An “interested stockholder” is defined to include persons owning directly or indirectly 15% or more of the outstanding voting stock of a corporation. We have elected in our certificate of incorporation not to be subject to Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. However, our certificate of incorporation will contain provisions that have the same effect as Section 203, except that they provide that our Sponsors and their respective affiliates will not be deemed to be “interested stockholders,” regardless of the percentage of our voting stock owned by them, and accordingly will not be subject to such restrictions.

If you purchase shares in this offering, you will suffer immediate and substantial dilution.

If you purchase shares of our common stock in this offering, you will incur immediate and substantial dilution in the book value of your stock of $         per share as of                     , 2012, because the price that you pay will be substantially greater than the net tangible book value per share of the shares you acquire. You will experience additional dilution upon the exercise of options and warrants to purchase our common stock, including those options currently outstanding and possibly those granted in the future, and the issuance of restricted stock or other equity awards under our stock incentive plans. To the extent we raise additional capital by issuing equity securities, our stockholders may experience substantial additional dilution. See “Dilution.”

If securities analysts or industry analysts downgrade our stock, publish negative research or reports, or do not publish reports about our business, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

We expect that the trading market for our common stock will be influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts publish about us, our business and our industry. If one or more analysts adversely change their recommendation regarding our stock or our competitors’ stock, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more analysts cease coverage of us or fail to regularly publish reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.

Our Sponsors will continue to have significant influence over us after this offering, including control over decisions that require the approval of stockholders, which could limit your ability to influence the outcome of key transactions, including a change of control.

We are currently controlled, and after this offering is completed will continue to be controlled, by our Sponsors. Upon completion of this offering, investment funds affiliated with our Sponsors will beneficially own approximately     % of our outstanding common stock. For as long as our Sponsors continue to beneficially own shares of common stock representing more than 50% of the voting power of our common stock, they will be able

 

29


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

to direct the election of all of the members of our board of directors and could exercise a controlling influence over our business and affairs, including any determinations with respect to mergers or other business combinations, the acquisition or disposition of assets, the incurrence of indebtedness, the issuance of any additional common stock or other equity securities, the repurchase or redemption of common stock and the payment of dividends. Similarly, these entities will have the power to determine matters submitted to a vote of our stockholders without the consent of our other stockholders, will have the power to prevent or approve a change in our control and could take other actions that might be favorable to them. Even if their ownership falls below 50%, our Sponsors will continue to be able to strongly influence or effectively control our decisions.

Additionally, certain of our directors are also officers or control persons of our Sponsors. Although these directors owe a fiduciary duty to manage us in a manner beneficial to us and our stockholders, these individuals also owe fiduciary duties to these other entities and their stockholders, members and limited partners. Because our Sponsors have such interests in other companies and engage in other business activities, certain of our directors may experience conflicts of interest in allocating their time and resources among our business and these other activities. Furthermore, these individuals could make substantial profits as a result of investment opportunities allocated to entities other than us. As a result, these individuals could pursue transactions that may not be in our best interest, which could have a material adverse effect on our operations and your investment.

Because we have no plans to pay cash dividends on our common stock for the foreseeable future, you may not receive any return on investment unless you sell your common stock for a price greater than that which you paid for it.

We may retain future earnings, if any, for future operations, expansion and debt repayment and have no current plans to pay any cash dividends for the foreseeable future. Any decision to declare and pay dividends in the future will be made at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on, among other things, our results of operations, financial condition, cash requirements, contractual restrictions and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant. In addition, our ability to pay dividends may be limited by covenants of any existing and future outstanding indebtedness we or our subsidiaries incur, including our senior credit facility. As a result, you may not receive any return on an investment in our common stock unless you sell our common stock for a price greater than that which you paid for it. See “Dividend Policy.”

Our ability to raise capital in the future may be limited, which could make us unable to fund our capital requirements.

Our business and operations may consume resources faster than we anticipate. In the future, we may need to raise additional funds through the issuance of new equity securities, debt or a combination of both. Additional financing may not be available on favorable terms or at all. If adequate funds are not available on acceptable terms, we may be unable to fund our capital requirements. If we issue new debt securities, the debt holders would have rights senior to common stockholders to make claims on our assets, and the terms of any debt could restrict our operations, including our ability to pay dividends on our common stock. If we issue additional equity securities, existing stockholders may experience dilution, and the new equity securities could have rights senior to those of our common stock. Because our decision to issue securities in any future offering will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of our future offerings. Thus, our stockholders bear the risk of our future securities offerings reducing the market price of our common stock and diluting their interest.

 

30


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This prospectus includes statements that express our opinions, expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, assumptions or projections regarding future events or future results and therefore are, or may be deemed to be, “forward-looking statements.” These forward-looking statements can generally be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology, including the terms “believes,” “estimates,” “anticipates,” “expects,” “seeks,” “projects,” “intends,” “plans,” “may,” “will” or “should” or, in each case, their negative or other variations or comparable terminology. They appear in a number of places throughout this prospectus and include statements regarding our intentions, beliefs or current expectations concerning, among other things, our results of operations, financial condition, liquidity, prospects, growth, strategies and the industry in which we operate.

By their nature, forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties because they relate to events and depend on circumstances that may or may not occur in the future. We believe that these risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, those described in the “Risk Factors” section of this prospectus, which include, but are not limited to, the following:

 

   

the restaurant industry is a highly competitive industry with many well-established competitors;

 

   

challenging economic conditions may affect our liquidity by adversely impacting numerous items that include, but are not limited to: consumer confidence and discretionary spending; the availability of credit presently arranged from our revolving credit facilities; the future cost and availability of credit; interest rates; foreign currency exchange rates; and the liquidity or operations of our third-party vendors and other service providers;

 

   

our ability to expand is dependent upon various factors such as the availability of attractive sites for new restaurants; ability to obtain appropriate real estate sites at acceptable prices; our ability to obtain all required governmental permits including zoning approvals and liquor licenses on a timely basis; the impact of government moratoriums or approval processes, which could result in significant delays; our ability to obtain all necessary contractors and subcontractors; union activities such as picketing and hand billing that could delay construction; our ability to generate or borrow funds; our ability to negotiate suitable lease terms; our ability to recruit and train skilled management and restaurant employees; and our ability to receive the premises from the landlord’s developer without any delays;

 

   

our results can be impacted by changes in consumer tastes and the level of consumer acceptance of our restaurant concepts (including consumer tolerance of our prices); local, regional, national and international economic and political conditions; the seasonality of our business; demographic trends; traffic patterns and our ability to effectively respond in a timely manner to changes in traffic patterns; changes in consumer dietary habits; employee availability; the cost of advertising and media; government actions and policies; inflation or deflation; unemployment rates; interest rates; exchange rates; and increases in various costs, including construction, real estate and health insurance costs;

 

   

weather, natural disasters and disasters could result in construction delays and also adversely affect the results of one or more restaurants for an indeterminate amount of time;

 

   

our results can be impacted by tax and other legislation and regulation in the jurisdictions in which we operate and by accounting standards or pronouncements;

 

   

minimum wage increases and mandated employee benefits could cause a significant increase in our labor costs;

 

31


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements
   

commodities, including but not limited to such items as beef, chicken, shrimp, pork, seafood, dairy, potatoes, onions and energy supplies, are subject to fluctuation in price and availability and price could increase or decrease more than we expect;

 

   

our results can be affected by consumer reaction to public health issues;

 

   

our results can be affected by consumer perception of food safety;

 

   

inability to protect customer credit and debit card data; and

 

   

our substantial leverage and significant restrictive covenants in our various credit facilities could adversely affect our ability to raise additional capital to fund our operations, limit our ability to make capital expenditures to invest in new or renovate restaurants, limit our ability to react to changes in the economy or our industry, and expose us to interest rate risk in connection with our variable-rate debt.

Those factors should not be construed as exhaustive and should be read with the other cautionary statements in this prospectus.

Although we base these forward-looking statements on assumptions that we believe are reasonable when made, we caution you that forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and that our actual results of operations, financial condition and liquidity, and industry developments may differ materially from statements made in or suggested by the forward-looking statements contained in this prospectus. In addition, even if our results of operations, financial condition and liquidity, and industry developments are consistent with the forward-looking statements contained in this prospectus, those results or developments may not be indicative of results or developments in subsequent periods.

In light of these risks and uncertainties, we caution you not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statement that we make in this prospectus speaks only as of the date of such statement, and we undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement or to publicly announce the results of any revision to any of those statements to reflect future events or developments. Comparisons of results for current and any prior periods are not intended to express any future trends or indications of future performance, unless specifically expressed as such, and should only be viewed as historical data.

 

32


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

USE OF PROCEEDS

We estimate that the net proceeds we will receive from the sale of          shares of our common stock in this offering, after deducting underwriter discounts and commissions and estimated expenses payable by us, will be approximately $         million (or $         million, if the underwriters exercise their option to purchase additional shares in full). This estimate assumes an initial public offering price of $         per share, the midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover page of this prospectus.

We intend to use the net proceeds from this offering to retire all of our outstanding Senior Notes and to use any remaining net proceeds for working capital and for general corporate purposes. The Senior Notes bear interest at 10% per annum and mature on June 15, 2015. There was outstanding approximately $248.1 million in aggregate principal amount of Senior Notes as of December 31, 2011. See “Description of Indebtedness—Senior Notes.”

DIVIDEND POLICY

We do not currently pay cash dividends on our common stock and do not anticipate paying any dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. Any future determinations relating to our dividend policies will be made at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on conditions then existing, including our financial condition, results of operations, contractual restrictions, capital requirements, business prospects and other factors our board of directors may deem relevant. In addition, our ability to obtain funds from our subsidiaries and therefore to declare and pay dividends is restricted by covenants in our debt agreements. For an explanation of these restrictions, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Credit Facilities and Other Indebtedness” and “Description of Indebtedness.”

 

33


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

CAPITALIZATION

The following table sets forth our cash and cash equivalents and our consolidated capitalization as of December 31, 2011 on (i) an actual basis and (ii) an as adjusted basis to give effect to the issuance of common stock in this offering and the application of the net proceeds as described in “Use of Proceeds.”

This table should be read in conjunction with “Use of Proceeds,” “Selected Historical Consolidated Financial and Other Data,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our consolidated financial statements and related notes appearing elsewhere in this prospectus.

 

     As of
December 31, 2011
 
     Actual     As
Adjusted
 
     ($ in thousands)  

Cash and cash equivalents (1)

   $ 482,084      $                    
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Debt, including current portion:

    

Senior secured term loan facility

   $ 1,014,400      $     

Senior secured working capital revolving credit facility (2)

     —       

Senior secured pre-funded revolving credit facility

     33,000     

CMBS Loan (3)

     775,326     

Senior notes, interest rate of 10.00%

     248,075     

Guaranteed debt, sale-leaseback and capital lease obligations and other notes
payable (4)

     38,489     
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total debt, including current portion

     2,109,290     
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Shareholders’ equity:

    

Preferred stock, $.01 par value; no shares authorized, issued and outstanding on an actual basis; 25,000,000 shares authorized and no shares issued and outstanding on an as adjusted basis

     —       

Common stock $.01 par value; 120,000,000 shares authorized and 106,573,193 shares issued and outstanding on an actual basis; 475,000,000 shares authorized and shares issued and outstanding on an as adjusted basis

     1,066     

Additional paid-in capital

     874,753     

Accumulated deficit

     (822,625  

Accumulated other comprehensive income

     (22,344  
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total Bloomin’ Brands, Inc. shareholders’ equity

     30,850     

Noncontrolling interests

     9,447     
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total shareholders’ equity

     40,297     
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total capitalization

   $ 2,149,587      $     
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(1) Excludes $24.3 million of restricted cash.
(2) There were no loans outstanding under the revolving credit facility at December 31, 2011; however, $67.6 million of the credit facility was not available for borrowing. See “Description of Indebtedness” and Note 11 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
(3) On June 14, 2007, PRP entered into a CMBS Loan totaling $790.0 million, which had a maturity date of June 9, 2012. Effective March 27, 2012, New PRP entered into the 2012 CMBS Loan totaling $500.0 million and used the proceeds, together with the proceeds of the Sale-Leaseback Transaction and existing cash, to repay the CMBS Loan. The 2012 CMBS Loan is a five-year loan maturing on April 10, 2017. See “Description of Indebtedness” and Note 20 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
(4) Effective March 14, 2012, we entered into the Sale-Leaseback Transaction. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Transactions” and Note 20 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

34


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

DILUTION

If you invest in our common stock, your ownership interest will experience immediate book value dilution to the extent of the difference between the initial public offering price per share of our common stock and the net tangible book value per share of our common stock after this offering. Dilution results from the fact that the initial public offering price per share of the common stock is substantially in excess of the net tangible book value per share of common stock attributable to the existing stockholders for the presently outstanding shares of common stock. Net tangible book value per share represents the amount of our total tangible assets less our total liabilities, divided by the number of shares of our common stock outstanding.

Our net tangible book value deficiency at              was approximately $            , or $             per share of our common stock before giving effect to this offering. Dilution in net tangible book value deficiency per share represents the difference between the amount per share that you pay in this offering and the net tangible book value deficiency per share immediately after this offering.

After giving effect to our sale of shares in this offering, assuming an initial public offering price of $             per share (the midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover of this prospectus), and the application of the estimated net proceeds as described under “Use of Proceeds,” our as adjusted net tangible book value deficiency at              would have been approximately $            , or $             per share of common stock. This represents an immediate decrease in net tangible book value deficiency per share of $             to existing stockholders and an immediate increase in net tangible book value deficiency per share of $(            ) to you. The following table illustrates this dilution per share.

 

Assumed initial public offering price per share of common stock

     

Net tangible book value per share at December 31, 2011

     

Increase per share attributable to new investors in this offering

     

Pro forma net tangible book value per share of common stock after this offering

     

Dilution per share to new investors

     

If the underwriters were to fully exercise their option to purchase additional shares, the pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value deficiency per share of our common stock after giving effect to this offering would be $             per share of our common stock. This represents a decrease in pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value deficiency of $             per share of our common stock to existing stockholders and dilution in pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value deficiency of $             per share of our common stock to you.

A $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public offering price of $             per share of our common stock would decrease (increase) our pro forma net tangible book value deficiency after giving effect to the offering by $             million, or by $             per share of our common stock, assuming no change to the number of shares of our common stock offered by us as set forth on the cover page of this prospectus, and after deducting the estimated underwriting discounts and estimated expenses payable by us.

The following table sets forth, as of         , 2012, the number of shares of common stock purchased from us, the total consideration paid to us and the average price per share paid by existing stockholders and to be paid by new investors purchasing shares of common stock in this offering, before deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses payable by us.

 

     Shares Purchased     Total Consideration        
      Number    Percent     Amount      Percent     Average
Price
Per Share
 

Existing stockholders

        %      $                      %      $                

New investors

             $     
  

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

Total

        100   $           100   $     
  

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

    

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

35


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

If the underwriters were to exercise in full their option to purchase additional shares of our common stock from us, the percentage of shares of our common stock held by existing stockholders would be         %, and the percentage of shares of our common stock held by new investors would be         %.

To the extent any outstanding options or other equity awards are exercised or become vested or any additional options or other equity awards are granted and exercised or become vested or other issuances of shares of our common stock are made, there may be further economic dilution to new investors.

 

36


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OTHER DATA

The following table sets forth our selected consolidated financial and other data as of the dates and for the periods indicated. The selected financial data as of December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2011 and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2011 presented in this table have been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. The selected financial data as of December 31, 2007, December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2009 and for the periods from January 1 to June 14, 2007 and from June 15 to December 31, 2007 and for the year ended December 31, 2008 have been derived from our unaudited consolidated financial statements for such years and periods, which are not included in this prospectus. Historical results are not necessarily indicative of future results.

This selected consolidated financial and other data should be read in conjunction with the disclosure set forth under “Risk Factors,” “Capitalization,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the Consolidated Financial Statements and the related notes thereto appearing elsewhere in this prospectus.

 

     Predecessor (1)          Successor (1)  
     Period
From
January 1 to
June 14,
          Period
From
June 15 to
December 31,
    Years Ended December 31,  

(in thousands, except per share amounts)

   2007           2007     2008     2009     2010     2011  
     (unaudited)           (unaudited)     (unaudited)                    

Statements of Operations Data:

                 

Revenues

                 

Restaurant sales

   $ 1,916,689           $ 2,229,468      $ 3,937,894      $ 3,573,760      $ 3,594,681      $ 3,803,252   

Other revenues

     9,948             12,015        23,262        27,896        33,606        38,012   
  

 

 

        

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total revenues

     1,926,637             2,241,483        3,961,156        3,601,656        3,628,287        3,841,264   
  

 

 

        

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Costs and expenses

                 

Cost of sales

     681,455             790,749        1,389,365        1,184,074        1,152,028        1,226,098   

Labor and other related

     540,281             623,158        1,094,907        1,024,063        1,034,393        1,094,117   

Other restaurant operating

     440,545             512,236        938,374        849,696        864,183        890,004   

Depreciation and amortization

     74,846             112,693        205,492        186,074        156,267        153,689   

General and administrative (2)

     158,147             141,246        264,021        252,298        252,793        291,124   

Allowance (recovery) of note receivable from affiliated
entity (3)

     —               —          33,150        —          —          (33,150

Loss on contingent debt guarantee

     —               —          —          24,500        —          —     

Goodwill impairment

     —               —          726,486        58,149        —          —     

Provision for impaired assets and restaurant closings (4)

     8,530             23,023        117,699        134,285        5,204        14,039   

Loss (income) from operations of unconsolidated affiliates

     692             (1,260     (2,343     (2,196     (5,492     (8,109
  

 

 

        

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total costs and expenses

     1,904,496             2,201,845        4,767,151        3,710,943        3,459,376        3,627,812   
  

 

 

        

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Income (loss) from operations

     22,141             39,638        (805,995     (109,287     168,911        213,452   

Gain on extinguishment of
debt (5)

     —               —          48,409        158,061                 

Other (expense) income, net

     —               —          (11,122     (199     2,993        830   

Interest expense, net (5)

     (4,651          (132,339     (197,041     (115,880     (91,428     (83,387
  

 

 

        

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Income (loss) before provision (benefit) for income taxes

     17,490             (92,701     (965,749     (67,305     80,476        130,895   

Provision (benefit) for income taxes

     (1,656          (49,427     (99,416     (2,462     21,300        21,716   
  

 

 

        

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net income (loss)

     19,146             (43,274     (866,333     (64,843     59,176        109,179   

Less: net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests

     1,685             871        (3,041     (380     6,208        9,174   
  

 

 

        

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net income (loss) attributable to Bloomin’ Brands, Inc.

   $ 17,461           $ (44,145   $ (863,292   $ (64,463   $ 52,968      $ 100,005   
  

 

 

        

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

37


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements
     Predecessor(1)         Successor(1)  
     Period
From
January 1 to
June 14,
         Period
From
June 15 to
December 31,
    Years Ended December 31,  

(in thousands, except Share and per share amounts)

   2007          2007     2008     2009     2010      2011  
     (unaudited)          (unaudited)     (unaudited)                     

Basic net income (loss) per
share (6)

           $ (0.43   $ (8.43   $ (0.62   $ 0.50       $ 0.94   

Diluted net income (loss) per
share (6)

           $ (0.43   $ (8.43   $ (0.62   $ 0.50       $ 0.94   

Weighted average shares outstanding

                   

Basic

             101,896        102,383        104,442        105,968         106,224   

Diluted

             101,896        102,383        104,442        105,968         106,689   

 

     Successor(1)  
     December 31,  

(in thousands)

   2007     2008     2009     2010     2011  
      (unaudited)     (unaudited)     (unaudited)              

Balance Sheet Data:

          

Cash and cash equivalents (7)

     174,406        311,118        330,957        365,536        482,084   

Net working capital (deficit) (8)

     (197,870     (171,095     (187,648     (120,135     (248,145

Total assets

     4,672,969        3,695,696        3,340,708        3,243,411        3,353,936   

Total debt (5)(9)

     2,648,027        2,562,889        2,302,233        2,171,524        2,109,290   

Total Bloomin’ Brands, Inc. shareholders’ equity (deficit)

     807,957        (93,521     (135,597     (69,234     30,850   

Total shareholders’ equity (deficit)

     842,819        (66,814     (116,625     (55,911     40,297   

 

(1) On June 14, 2007, an investor group formed Bloomin’ Brands, Inc., formerly known as Kangaroo Holdings, Inc., and acquired OSI by means of the Merger. Therefore, the selected historical consolidated financial data is presented for two periods: Predecessor and Successor, which relate to the period preceding the Merger and the period succeeding the Merger, respectively. As a result of the Merger, there are several factors that affect the comparability of the selected historical consolidated financial data for the two periods including, but not limited to: (i) depreciation and amortization are higher in the Successor periods through 2009 due to fair value assessments completed at the time of the Merger, (ii) annual interest expense increased substantially in the Successor period in connection with our financing agreements and (iii) certain professional service costs incurred in connection with the Merger and the management services provided by our management company are included in General and administrative expenses in our Consolidated Statements of Operations in the Successor period.
(2) Includes management fees and out-of-pocket and other reimbursable expenses paid to a management company owned by our Sponsors and Founders of $5.2 million, $9.9 million, $10.7 million, $11.6 million and $9.4 million for the period from June 15 to December 31, 2007 and the years ended December 31, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011, respectively, under a management agreement that will terminate upon the completion of this offering. See “Related Party Transactions—Arrangements With Our Investors.”
(3) In November 2011, we received a settlement payment from T-Bird, a limited liability company affiliated with our California franchisees of Outback Steakhouse restaurants, in connection with a settlement agreement that satisfied all outstanding litigation with T-Bird. This litigation began in early 2009 and therefore, we had recorded an allowance for the note receivable for the year ended December 31, 2008.
(4) During 2008, our Provision for impaired assets and restaurant closings primarily included: (i) $49.0 million of impairment charges for the domestic and international Outback Steakhouse and Carrabba’s Italian Grill trade names, (ii) $3.5 million of impairment charges for the Blue Coral Seafood and Spirits trademark and (iii) $63.9 million of impairment charges and restaurant closing expense for certain of our restaurants. During 2009, our Provision for impaired assets and restaurant closings primarily included: (i) $46.0 million of impairment charges to reduce the carrying value of the assets of Cheeseburger in Paradise to their estimated fair market value due to our sale of the concept in the third quarter of 2009, (ii) $47.6 million of impairment charges and restaurant closing expense for certain of our other restaurants and (iii) $36.0 million of impairment charges for the domestic Outback Steakhouse and Carrabba’s Italian Grill trade names.

 

38


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements
(5) In November 2008 and March 2009, we repurchased $61.8 million and $240.1 million, respectively, of our outstanding Senior Notes for $11.7 million and $73.0 million, respectively. These repurchases resulted in gains on extinguishment of debt, after the pro rata reduction of unamortized deferred financing fees and other related costs, of $48.4 million in 2008 and $158.1 million in 2009. Annualized interest expense savings from these debt extinguishments approximates $30.2 million per year.
(6) Basic and diluted net income (loss) per share are calculated on net income (loss) attributable to Bloomin’ Brands, Inc. As a result of the Merger, our capital structures for periods before and after the Merger are not comparable, and therefore we are presenting our net income (loss) per share and weighted average share information only for periods subsequent to the Merger.
(7) Excludes restricted cash.
(8) As a result of our current liability for unearned revenue from the sale of gift cards, we have a working capital deficit.
(9) On June 14, 2007, PRP entered into the CMBS Loan totaling a $790.0 million, which had a maturity date of June 9, 2012. Effective March 27, 2012, New PRP entered into the 2012 CMBS Loan totaling $500.0 million and repaid the CMBS Loan. The 2012 CMBS Loan is a five-year loan maturing on April 10, 2017. See “Description of Indebtedness” and Note 20 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. As a result of the CMBS Refinancing, the net amount repaid along with scheduled maturities within one year, $281.3 million, was classified as current at December 31, 2011.

 

39


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The following unaudited pro forma consolidated financial statements of Bloomin’ Brands, Inc. as of and for the year ended December 31, 2011 are based on historical consolidated financial statements of Bloomin’ Brands, Inc. included elsewhere in this prospectus and give effect to the following transactions (collectively, the “Transactions”) as if they had occurred on January 1, 2011 or December 31, 2011, as indicated below.

 

   

Sale-Leaseback Transaction. Effective March 14, 2012, we entered into the Sale-Leaseback Transaction with two third-party real estate institutional investors in which we sold 67 restaurant properties at fair market value for $194.9 million and then simultaneously leased these properties back under nine master leases. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Transactions” and Note 20 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a further description of the Sale-Leaseback Transaction.

 

   

2012 CMBS Loan. Effective March 27, 2012, New PRP entered into the 2012 CMBS Loan, which totals $500.0 million and comprises a first mortgage loan in the amount of $324.8 million, collateralized by 261 of our properties, and two mezzanine loans totaling $175.2 million. The proceeds from the 2012 CMBS Loan, together with the proceeds from the Sale-Leaseback Transaction and excess cash, were used to repay our existing CMBS Loan. See “Description of Indebtedness” and Note 20 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a further description of the 2012 CMBS Loan.

 

   

Initial Public Offering. We expect to issue          shares of common stock in this offering and receive net proceeds, after deducting estimated offering expenses and underwriting discounts and commissions of approximately $          million (assuming no exercise by the underwriters of their option to purchase                  additional shares), assuming an initial public offering price of $                  per share, the midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover page of this prospectus. We intend to use these proceeds to retire all of our outstanding Senior Notes, of which an aggregate principal amount of $248.1 million was outstanding as of December 31, 2011, and the remainder for working capital and general corporate purposes.

 

   

Termination of Management Agreement. Upon completion of the Merger, we entered into a management agreement with a management company, whose members are the Founders and entities affiliated with our Sponsors. The management company receives annual management fees and reimbursement for out-of-pocket and other reimbursable expenses incurred by it in connection with the provision of services pursuant to the agreement. The management agreement will terminate automatically upon the completion of this offering.

The unaudited pro forma consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2011 gives effect to the Transactions, as if each had occurred on December 31, 2011.

The unaudited pro forma consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2011 gives effect to the Transactions as if each had occurred on January 1, 2011. The unaudited consolidated statement of operations does not reflect the following charges that we will incur: (1) professional fees associated with the CMBS Refinancing; (2) estimated selling costs associated with the Sale-Leaseback Transaction; (3) loss on debt extinguishment related to the CMBS Refinancing and repayment of the Senior Notes; (4) the compensation expense with respect to the time vested portion of stock options containing a management call option resulting from the automatic termination of the call option upon completion of this offering; and (5) the expense associated with the incentive bonus payable to our Chief Executive Officer as a result of the completion of this offering. We expect these charges will be approximately $          million in the aggregate and will be recorded by us in the period in which these transactions are completed.

 

40


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

The unaudited pro forma consolidated financial statements are presented for informational purposes only and do not purport to represent what the actual financial condition or results of operations of Bloomin’ Brands, Inc. would have been if the Transactions had been completed as of the date or for the period indicated above or that may be achieved as of any future date or for any future period. The unaudited pro forma consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and our historical consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes included elsewhere in this prospectus.

 

41


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Bloomin’ Brands, Inc.

Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Balance Sheet

December 31, 2011

 

          Pro Forma Adjustments      

(in thousands)

  Historical As
Reported
December 31,
2011
    CMBS
Refinancing/
Sale-Leaseback
Transaction
    Initial Public
Offering
    Pro Forma

Assets

       

Current Assets

       

Cash

  $ 482,084          (a)        (l)   

Current portion of restricted cash

    20,640         

Inventories

    69,223         

Deferred income tax assets

    31,959            (m)   

Other current assets, net

    104,373         
 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Total current assets

    708,279         

Restricted cash

    3,641         

Property, fixtures and equipment, net

    1,635,898          (b)     

Investments in and advances to unconsolidated affiliates, net

    35,033         

Goodwill

    268,772         

Intangible assets, net

    566,148         

Other assets, net

    136,165          (c)        (n)   
 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Total assets

  $ 3,353,936         
 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Liabilities and Shareholders’ Deficit

       

Current Liabilities

       

Accounts payable

  $ 97,393          (d)     

Accrued and other current liabilities

    211,486          (e)        (o)   

Current portion of accrued buyout liability

    15,044         

Unearned revenue

    299,596         

Current portion of long-term debt

    332,905          (f)     
 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Total current liabilities

    956,424         

Partner deposit and accrued buyout liability

    98,681         

Deferred rent

    70,135          (g)     

Deferred income tax liabilities

    193,262          (h)        (p)   

Long-term debt

    1,751,885          (i)        (q)   

Guaranteed debt

    24,500         

Other long-term liabilities, net

    218,752          (j)     
 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Total liabilities

    3,313,639         
 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Commitments and contingencies

       

Shareholders’ Equity

       

Bloomin’ Brands, Inc. Shareholder’s Equity

       

Common units

    1,066         

Additional paid-in capital

    874,753          (r  

Accumulated deficit

    (822,625     (k     (s  

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

    (22,344      
 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Total Bloomin’ Brands, Inc. shareholder’s equity

    30,850         

Noncontrolling interests

    9,447         
 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Total shareholders’ equity

    40,297         
 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

  $ 3,353,936         
 

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

42


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Adjustments Related to the CMBS Refinancing and the Sale-Leaseback Transaction

 

(a) To reflect adjustments made to cash for the following:

 

Proceeds from the 2012 CMBS Loan

   $     

Proceeds from the Sale-Leaseback Transaction

  

Less: Repayment of the CMBS Loan

     (775,617

Less: Payment of accrued interest on the CMBS Loan as of December 31, 2011

     (744

Less: Estimated professional fees associated with the CMBS Refinancing, including
$          million of deferred financing fees

  

Less: Estimated fees associated with the Sale-Leaseback Transaction

  
  

 

 

 
   $     

 

(b) To reflect the net decrease in property, fixtures, and equipment of $          million as a result of the sale of 67 properties under the Sale-Leaseback Transaction.

 

(c) To reflect the net increase in deferred financing fees as a result of the 2012 CMBS Loan, offset by a decrease in deferred financing fees as a result of the repayment of the original CMBS Loan. The adjustments made to deferred financing fees are as follows:

 

Deferred financing fees associated with the 2012 CMBS Loan

   $     

Write-off of deferred financing fees associated with the repayment of the CMBS Loan

     (2,003
  

 

 

 
   $     

 

(d) To reflect the payment of $1.5 million historical as reported accrued professional fees associated with the CMBS Refinancing and the Sale-Leaseback Transaction.

 

(e) To reflect the current portion of the deferred gain on sale of $          million resulting from the Sale-Leaseback Transaction, offset by payment of accrued interest of $0.7 million on the CMBS Loan.

 

(f) To reflect the net decrease in the current portion of long-term debt resulting from the CMBS Refinancing and the closing of the Sale-Leaseback Transaction on December 31, 2011. The historical as reported current portion of the CMBS Loan at December 31, 2011 is $281.3 million (net of debt discount of $0.3 million) and the current portion of the 2012 CMBS Loan assuming the borrowing was made on December 31, 2011 is $          million.

 

(g) To reflect the net decrease of $          million in deferred rent liabilities resulting from the deferral of lease related costs incurred in connection with the Sale-Leaseback Transaction.

 

(h) To adjust deferred income tax liabilities, net to reflect the income tax benefit of $          million related to the loss on debt extinguishment and fees that will be expensed in connection with the CMBS Refinancing and the Sale-Leaseback Transaction, as calculated in note (k) below, calculated at an estimated statutory rate of 38.7%.

 

(i) To reflect the net decrease in long-term debt resulting from the CMBS Refinancing and the closing of the Sale-Leaseback Transaction on December 31, 2011. The historical as reported long-term portion of the CMBS Loan at December 31, 2011 is $494.0 million and the long-term portion of the 2012 CMBS Loan assuming the borrowing was made on December 31, 2011 is $          million.

 

43


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements
(j) To reflect the long-term portion of deferred gain on sale from those properties in the Sale-Leaseback Transaction for which proceeds exceed net book value. We will defer recognition of the gain upon sale over the initial 20-year lease term. The adjustment is calculated as follows:

 

Proceeds from properties sold at a gain

   $                

Net book value of properties sold at a gain

  

Less: Current portion of deferred gain

  
  

 

 

 
   $     

 

(k) To reflect the after-tax loss on (1) loss on debt extinguishment to be recorded in connection with the repayment of the CMBS Loan, (2) the professional fees that will be expensed in connection with the 2012 CMBS Loan, and (3) the estimated selling cost associated with the Sale-Leaseback Transaction. The adjustments consist of the following:

 

Write-off of deferred financing fees of $2.0 million and remaining debt discount of $0.3 million related to the CMBS Loan

   $ (2,294

Estimated non-capitalizable professional fees associated with the 2012 CMBS Loan

  

Estimated selling costs associated with the Sale-Leaseback Transaction

  
  

 

 

 

Loss on debt extinguishment, refinancing, and the Sale-Leaseback Transaction before income taxes

  

Tax benefit at an estimated statutory tax rate of 38.7%

  
  

 

 

 

Loss on debt extinguishment, refinancing and the Sale-Leaseback Transaction after income taxes

   $     

Adjustments Related to the Offering

 

(l) To reflect adjustments made to cash for the following:

 

Proceeds from this offering

   $     

Less: estimated fees and expenses related to this offering

  

Less: repayment of Senior Notes

     (248,075

Less: redemption premium resulting from early repayment of the Senior Notes

  

Less: payment of accrued interest on the Senior Notes

     (1,103
  

 

 

 
   $     

 

(m) To adjust deferred income tax assets, net, at an estimated statutory rate of 38.7% to reflect income tax benefits of $          million and $          related to the share-based compensation expense, as calculated in note (s)(2) below, and bonus expense as calculated in note (s)(3) below, respectively.

 

(n) To reflect the write-off of deferred financing fees of $3.0 million associated with the repayment of the Senior Notes.

 

(o) To reflect adjustments made to accrued and other current liabilities for the following:

 

Vesting of chief executive officer incentive bonus (1)

   $                

Payment of accrued interest on Senior Notes (2)

  
  

 

 

 
   $     

 

  (1)

Our Chief Executive Officer is entitled to an incentive bonus divided into four tranches (A-D) of $3.8 million each. Tranche A vests 20% over 5 years and is payable at the earlier of a Qualifying Liquidity Event (“QLE”), as defined in her bonus agreement, or the tenth anniversary of her hire date. Tranches B-D also vest 20% over five years, but are generally only payable in the event of a QLE meeting

 

44


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements
  applicable performance targets for each tranche. This offering qualifies as a QLE, satisfying the requirements of all four tranches, and this adjustment represents the additional bonus due, giving effect to the offering as if it was completed on December 31, 2011, to reflect the vesting of the incentive bonuses.

 

  (2) We may redeem our Senior Notes at specified redemption prices, plus accrued and unpaid interest thereon to the applicable redemption date.

 

(p) To adjust deferred income tax liabilities, net, at an estimated statutory rate of 38.7% to reflect an income tax benefit of $          million related to the loss on debt extinguishment as calculated in note (s)(1).

 

(q) To reflect the decrease in long-term debt resulting from the retirement of the Senior Notes in the amount of $248.1 million.

 

(r) Adjustments to additional paid-in capital are as follows:

 

Proceeds from this offering (1)

   $                

Less: estimated fees and expenses related to this offering

  
  

 

 

 

Net proceeds from this offering

  

Less: Par value of common stock issued in this offering (2)

  
  

 

 

 

Additional paid-in capital on shares issued in this offering

  

Incremental share-based compensation expense (3)

  
  

 

 

 

Total adjustment to additional paid-in capital

   $     

 

  (1) To reflect the issuance of                  shares of our common stock offered hereby at an assumed initial public offering price of $          per share (the midpoint of the range set forth on the cover of this prospectus).

 

  (2) To reflect the reclassification to common stock of the par value of $.01 per share for the                  shares issued in the offering.

 

  (3) To reflect the following:

 

  (i) approximately $          million of share-based compensation expense expected to be recorded upon completion of this offering relating to the vested portion of approximately          million employee stock options. Shares acquired upon the exercise of these stock options are subject to a management call option that allows us to repurchase all shares acquired through exercise of stock options upon termination of employment at any time prior to the earlier of an initial public offering or a change of control. As a result of certain transfer restrictions and the call option, we have not recorded compensation expense for stock options that vested from June 2007 to December 31, 2011 since an employee cannot realize monetary benefit from the options or any shares acquired upon the exercise of the options unless the employee is employed at the time of an initial public offering or change of control. The call option automatically terminates upon completion of this offering. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates—Stock-Based Compensation.” The weighted average grant date fair value of these stock options is approximately $         per share.

 

  (ii) approximately $          million of share-based compensation expense expected to be recorded upon completion of this offering relating to stock options held by our Chief Executive Officer that vest over a five-year period and become exercisable (to the extent then vested) upon the completion of this offering. The weighted average grant date fair value of these stock options is approximately $          per share.

 

45


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements
(s) To reflect a $          million after-tax loss on debt extinguishment, an $          million after-tax share-based compensation expense, and a $          million after-tax bonus expense as shown below:

 

  (1) The $          million after-tax loss on debt extinguishment to be recorded in connection with the redemption of $248.1 million of Senior Notes consists of the following:

 

Write-off of deferred financing costs associated with the Senior Notes

   $ (2,983

Redemption premium resulting from early repayment of the Senior Notes

  
  

 

 

 

Loss on debt extinguishment before income taxes

  

Income tax benefit at an estimated statutory tax rate of 38.7%

  
  

 

 

 

Loss on debt extinguishment after income taxes

   $     

 

  (2) The $          million after-tax share-based compensation expense consists of $          million pre-tax share-based compensation expense as discussed in note (r)(3), net of a deferred tax benefit of $          million calculated at an estimated statutory tax rate of 38.7%.

 

  (3) The $          million after-tax bonus expense consists of $          million of pre-tax bonus expense as discussed in note (o)(1), net of a deferred tax benefit of $          million calculated at an estimated statutory tax rate of 38.7%.

 

46


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Bloomin’ Brands, Inc.

Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Statement of Operations

Year Ended December 31, 2011

 

           Pro Forma Adjustments      

(in thousands)

   Historical As
Reported
December 31,
2011
    CMBS
Refinancing/
Sale-Leaseback
Transaction
    Initial Public
Offering
    Pro Forma

Revenues

        

Restaurant sales

   $ 3,803,252         

Other revenues

     38,012         
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Total revenues

     3,841,264         
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Costs and expenses

        

Cost of sales

     1,226,098         

Labor and other related

     1,094,117         

Other restaurant operating

     890,004          (a)        (e)   

Depreciation and amortization

     153,689          (b)     

General and administrative

     291,124            (f)   

Recovery of note receivable from affiliated entity

     (33,150      

Loss on contingent debt guarantee

     —           

Goodwill impairment

     —           

Provision for impaired assets and restaurant closings

     14,039          (b)     

Allowance for note receivable for affiliated entity

     —           

Income from operations of unconsolidated affiliates

     (8,109      
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Total costs and expenses

     3,627,812         
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Income (loss) from operations

     213,452         

Gain on extinguishment of debt

     —           

Other income, net

     830         

Interest expense, net

     (83,387       (c)        (g)   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Income (loss) before provision (benefit) for income taxes

     130,895         

Provision (benefit) for income taxes

     21,716          (d)        (h)   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Net income (loss)

     109,179         

Less: net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

     9,174         
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Net income (loss) attributable to Bloomin’ Brands, Inc.

   $ 100,005         
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

Pro forma earnings per share:

        

Basic

        

Diluted

        

Pro forma weighted average shares outstanding:

        

Basic

        

Diluted

        

 

47


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Adjustments Related to the CMBS Refinancing and the Sale-Leaseback Transaction

 

(a) To reflect (1) rent expense expected to be incurred on the 67 properties associated with the Sale-Leaseback Transaction, which includes $          million of deferred rent expense associated with the difference between rent expense and rent paid due to escalating rental amounts; (2) one year of annual amortization of deferred lease related costs and recognition of the deferred gain over the 20-year lease term for the properties associated with the Sale-Leaseback Transaction, all offset by; (3) the reversal of historical as reported professional expenses incurred with the CMBS Refinancing and the Sale-Leaseback Transaction. The adjustments consist of the following:

 

Rent expense on properties sold under the Sale-Leaseback Transaction, including deferred rent expense

   $     

Amortization of deferred lease related costs associated with the Sale-Leaseback Transaction

  

Amortization of deferred gain associated with the Sale-Leaseback Transaction (1)

  

Professional fees associated with the CMBS Refinancing and the Sale-Leaseback Transaction (2)

     (2,208
  

 

 

 
   $     

 

  (1) The recognition of the deferred gain on sale of properties associated with the Sale-Leaseback Transaction is determined as follows:

 

Proceeds from properties sold at a gain

   $              

Less: Net book value of properties sold at a gain

  
  

 

 

 

Total deferred gain

  

Divided by: Lease term (in years)

     20   
  

 

 

 

Annual gain recognition

   $     

 

  (2) Professional fees associated with the CMBS Refinancing and the Sale-Leaseback Transaction that are included in the historical as reported year ended December 31, 2011 results that are not our ongoing expenses.

 

(b) To reflect a reduction of depreciation expense of $3.6 million and a reduction of impairment expense of $6.3 million associated with the 67 properties as if the Sale-Leaseback Transaction occurred on January 1, 2011. We recorded impairment expense in the historical as reported amounts for the properties that resulted in a loss upon sale based on expected sales proceeds as compared with remaining net book value at December 31, 2011.

 

(c) The adjustment to historical as reported interest expense consists of the following:

 

CMBS Loan (1)

   $                

Deferred financing fees (2)

  

Debt discount (2)

  
  

 

 

 
   $     

 

  (1) Elimination of historical as reported interest expense on the CMBS Loan that was incurred during the year ended December 31, 2011 in the amount of $15.6 million, offset by pro forma interest expense on the 2012 CMBS Loan in the amount of $          million, using an effective interest rate of          %

 

  (2) Elimination of historical as reported deferred financing fee amortization of $5.1 million and debt discount amortization on the CMBS Loan of $0.7 million that were incurred during the year ended December 31, 2011, offset by pro forma amortization of deferred financing fees on the 2012 CMBS Loan in the amount of $          million.

 

(d) To reflect the tax effect of the pro forma adjustments at an estimated statutory tax rate of 38.7%.

 

48


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Adjustments Related to the Initial Public Offering

 

(e) To reflect the termination of the management agreement upon completion of this offering.

 

(f) To reflect ongoing share-based compensation expense in the aggregate amount of $         million resulting from employee stock options that (i) will continue to vest following removal of the management call option upon completion of this offering and (ii) in the case of our Chief Executive Officer, will become exercisable upon the completion of this offering.

 

(g) To reflect the elimination of historical as reported interest expense of $24.8 million and deferred financing fee amortization of $1.1 million incurred during the year ended December 31, 2011 on the Senior Notes. The pro forma adjustment reflects the use of proceeds of the offering to repay $248.1 million of Senior Notes as if the offering occurred on, and the Senior Notes were repaid, on January 1, 2011. The adjustment to interest expense is calculated at an annual rate of 10%.

 

(h) To reflect the tax effect of the pro forma adjustments at an estimated statutory tax rate of 38.7%.

 

49


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF

FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following discussion of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with the “Selected Historical Consolidated Financial and Other Data” and the audited historical consolidated financial statements and related notes. This discussion contains forward-looking statements about our markets, the demand for our products and services and our future results and involves numerous risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts and generally contain words such as “believes,” expects,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “seeks,” “approximately,” “intends,” “plans,” “estimates,” or “anticipates” or similar expressions. Our forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, which may cause actual results to differ materially from those projected or implied by the forward-looking statement. Forward-looking statements are based on current expectations and assumptions and currently available data and are neither predictions nor guarantees of future events or performance. You should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date hereof. See “Risk Factors” and “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” for a discussion of factors that could cause our actual results to differ from those expressed or implied by forward-looking statements.

Overview

We are one of the largest casual dining restaurant companies in the world with a portfolio of leading, differentiated restaurant concepts. We own and operate 1,248 restaurants and have 195 restaurants operating under a franchise or joint venture arrangement across 49 states and 21 countries and territories. We have five founder-inspired concepts: Outback Steakhouse, Carrabba’s Italian Grill, Bonefish Grill, Fleming’s Prime Steakhouse and Wine Bar and Roy’s. Our concepts provide a compelling customer experience combining great food, highly attentive service and lively and contemporary ambience at attractive prices. Our restaurants attract customers across a variety of occasions, including everyday dining, celebrations and business entertainment. Each of our concepts maintains a unique, founder-inspired brand identity and entrepreneurial culture, while leveraging our scale and enhanced operating model. We consider Outback Steakhouse, Carrabba’s, Bonefish Grill and Fleming’s to be our core concepts.

The restaurant industry is a highly competitive and fragmented industry and is sensitive to changes in the economy, trends in lifestyles, seasonality (customer spending patterns at restaurants are generally highest in the first quarter of the year and lowest in the third quarter of the year) and fluctuating costs. Operating margins for restaurants can vary due to competitive pricing strategies and fluctuations in prices of commodities, including beef, chicken, seafood, butter, cheese, produce and other necessities to operate a restaurant, such as natural gas or other energy supplies. The pace of new unit growth has slowed in the casual dining category over the last few years. Given this dynamic, companies tend to be more focused on increasing market share and comparable restaurant sales growth. Competitive pressure for market share, inflation, foreign currency exchange rates and other market conditions have had and could continue to have an adverse impact our business.

Our industry is characterized by high initial capital investment, coupled with high labor costs, and chain restaurants have been increasingly taking share from independent restaurants over the past several years. We believe that this trend will continue due to increasing barriers that may prevent independent restaurants and/or start-up chains from building scale operations, including menu labeling, burdensome labor regulations and healthcare reforms that will be enforced once chains grow past a certain number of restaurants or number of employees. The combination of these factors underscores our initiative to drive increased sales at existing restaurants in order to raise margins and profits, because the incremental contribution to profits from every additional dollar of sales above the minimum costs required to open, staff and operate a restaurant is relatively high. Historically, we have not focused on growth in the number of restaurants just to generate additional sales. Our expansion and operating strategies have balanced investment and operating cost considerations in order to generate reasonable, sustainable margins and achieve acceptable returns on investment from our restaurant concepts.

 

50


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

In 2010, we launched a new strategic plan and operating model leveraging best practices from the consumer products and retail industries to complement our restaurant acumen and enhance our brand competitiveness. This new model keeps the customer at the center of our decision-making and focuses on continuous innovation and productivity to drive sustainable sales and profit growth. We have significantly strengthened our management team and implemented initiatives to accelerate innovation, improve analytics and increase productivity. As a result of these initiatives, we are recommitted to new unit development after curtailing expansion from 2009 to 2011. We believe that a substantial development opportunity remains for our concepts in the U.S. and internationally.

Key Performance Indicators

Key measures that we use in evaluating our restaurants and assessing our business include the following:

 

   

Average restaurant unit volumes—average sales per restaurant to measure changes in customer traffic, pricing and development of the brand;

 

   

System-wide sales—total restaurant sales volume for all company-owned, franchise and unconsolidated joint venture restaurants, regardless of ownership, to interpret the overall health of our brands;

 

   

Comparable restaurant sales—year-over-year comparison of sales volumes for domestic, company-owned restaurants that are open 18 months or more in order to remove the impact of new restaurant openings in comparing the operations of existing restaurants;

 

   

Adjusted EBITDA—calculated by adjusting EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) to exclude certain stock-based compensation expenses, non-cash expenses and significant, unusual items; and

 

   

Customer satisfaction scores—measurement of our customers’ experiences in a variety of key attributes.

2011 Highlights

Our 2011 financial results include:

 

   

An increase in consolidated revenues of 5.9% to $3.8 billion, driven primarily by 4.9% growth in combined comparable restaurant sales at existing domestic company-owned core restaurants;

 

   

15 system-wide restaurant openings across most brands, and 194 Outback Steakhouse renovations in 2011;

 

   

Productivity and cost management initiatives that we estimate allowed us to save over $50 million in the aggregate in 2011; and

 

   

Generation of income from operations of $213.5 million in 2011 compared to $168.9 million in 2010, primarily attributable to the increase in consolidated revenues described above and the T-Bird settlement described in “—Costs and Expenses—Recovery of Notes Receivable from Affiliated Entity.”

 

51


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

In 2011, we continued to balance near-term growth in share gains with investments to achieve sustainable growth. Our key objectives for 2011 and some of the steps we took to achieve those objectives included:

Continuation of Share Growth by Enhancing Brand Competitiveness in a Challenging Environment. In order to drive share growth, we continued to develop unique promotions throughout our concepts that fit our brand positioning and focus on delivering a superior dining experience. We identified additional opportunities to increase innovation in our menu, service and operations across all of our concepts, such as broadening our Outback Steakhouse menu by adding more salads, seafood and side items and offering the choice between our traditional seared steak and one prepared on a wood-fired grill. In addition, Carrabba’s introduced a Cucina Casuale section to its menu during the third quarter of 2011 to offer consumers a more casual dining experience with salads, sandwiches and other smaller or lighter offerings.

Acceleration of Brand Investment, Including Renovations and New Unit Development. Our brand investments have focused on accelerating our multi-year Outback Steakhouse renovation plan and increasing unit development in higher return, high growth concepts with a focus on Bonefish Grill. We renovated 194 Outback Steakhouse locations and opened six Bonefish Grill restaurants in 2011.

Improvement of Organizational Effectiveness and Infrastructure for Sustainable Growth. We focused on building our competencies in human resources, information technology and real estate, design and construction to support accelerated growth. This is a multi-year effort that includes the implementation of a human resource information system, expanded data warehousing capability, and increased resources and tools to accelerate renovations and new unit site selection. We also implemented a modified managing and chef partner compensation structure that seeks to drive sustainable growth by aligning field incentives and paying higher amounts for growth in restaurant sales and cash flow on an annual basis. See “—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Stock-Based and Deferred Compensation Plans.”

Effective Cost Management by Mitigating Commodity Risk and Accelerating Continuous Productivity Improvement. We leveraged our scale and long-term supply agreements when they were attractive relative to market trends, accelerated productivity improvements and took modest pricing action to maintain value perceptions among consumers.

Our Growth Strategies and Outlook

For the remainder of 2012, our key growth strategies, which are enabled by continued improvements in infrastructure and organizational effectiveness, are:

 

   

Grow Comparable Restaurant Sales. We plan to continue our efforts to remodel our Outback Steakhouse and Carrabba’s restaurants, use limited-time offers and multimedia marketing campaigns to drive traffic, grow beyond our traditional weekend dinner traffic and introduce innovative menu items that match evolving consumer preferences.

 

   

Pursue New Domestic and International Development With Strong Unit Level Economics. We believe that a substantial development opportunity remains for our concepts in the U.S. and internationally. We added significant resources in site selection, construction and design in 2010 and 2011 to support the opening of new restaurants. We expect to open 30 or more restaurants in 2012 and increase the pace thereafter.

 

   

Drive Margin Improvement. We believe we have the opportunity to increase our margins through cost reductions in labor, food cost, supply chain and restaurant facilities.

 

52


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Ownership Structures

Our restaurants are predominantly company-owned or controlled, including through joint ventures, and otherwise operated under franchise arrangements. We generate our revenues primarily from our company-owned or controlled restaurants and secondarily through ongoing royalties from our franchised restaurants and sales of franchise rights.

Company-owned or controlled restaurants include restaurants owned directly by us, by limited partnerships in which we are a general partner and by joint ventures in which we are a member. Our legal ownership interests in these partnerships and joint ventures generally range from 50% to 90%. In the future, we do not expect to use limited partnerships for domestic company-owned restaurants. Instead, new restaurants will be wholly-owned by us and we are transitioning our compensation structure so that the area operating, managing and chef partners will receive their distributions of restaurant cash flow as employee compensation rather than partnership distributions. Company-owned restaurants also include restaurants owned by our Roy’s joint venture and our consolidated financial statements include the accounts and operations of our Roy’s joint venture even though we have less than majority ownership. See Note 18 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Through a joint venture arrangement with PGS Participacoes Ltda., we hold a 50% ownership interest in PGS Consultoria e Serviços Ltda. (the “Brazilian Joint Venture”). The Brazilian Joint Venture was formed in 1998 for the purpose of operating Outback Steakhouse franchise restaurants in Brazil. We account for the Brazilian Joint Venture under the equity method of accounting. We are responsible for 50% of the costs of new restaurants operated by the Brazilian Joint Venture and our joint venture partner is responsible for the other 50% and has operating control. Income and loss derived from the Brazilian Joint Venture is presented in the line item “Income from operations of unconsolidated affiliates” in our Consolidated Statements of Operations. We do not consider restaurants owned by the Brazilian Joint Venture as “company-owned” restaurants.

We derive no direct income from operations of franchised restaurants other than initial and developmental franchise fees and ongoing royalties, which are included in “Other revenues” in our Consolidated Statements of Operations.

Factors Impacting Financial Results

As discussed in more detail below and in addition to the other factors discussed above, under “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this prospectus, the following factors have impacted our 2011 results and will impact our future financial results.

Effective March 14, 2012, we entered into the Sale-Leaseback Transaction with two third-party real estate institutional investors in which we sold 67 restaurant properties at fair market value for $194.9 million and then simultaneously leased these properties back under nine master leases. We will defer the recognition of the $42.7 million gain on the sale of certain of the properties over the initial term of the lease. See “—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Transactions” and Note 20 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a further description of the Sale-Leaseback Transaction.

Effective March 27, 2012, New PRP entered into the 2012 CMBS Loan, which totals $500.0 million and comprises a first mortgage loan in the amount of $324.8 million, collateralized by 261 of our properties, and two mezzanine loans totaling $175.2 million. The loans have a maturity date of April 10, 2017, and a weighted average interest rate as of the closing of 6.12%. The proceeds from the 2012 CMBS Loan, together with the proceeds from the Sale-Leaseback Transaction and excess cash, were used to repay the existing CMBS Loan. As a result of the CMBS Refinancing, the net amount repaid along with scheduled maturities within one year,

 

53


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

$281.3 million, was classified as current at December 31, 2011. During the first quarter of 2012, we recorded a $2.9 million Loss on extinguishment of debt. See “Description of Indebtedness” and Note 20 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a further description of the 2012 CMBS Loan.

Upon completion of this offering, we expect to record approximately $         of non-cash compensation expense with respect to the time vested portion of stock options containing a management call option due to the automatic termination of the call option upon completion of the offering. See “—Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates—Stock-Based Compensation” for a further description of the call option. Additionally, this offering will trigger payment of $         of an incentive bonus due to our Chief Executive Officer.

As our net income increases, we expect our effective income tax rate to increase due to the benefit of U.S. income tax credits becoming a smaller percentage of net income and the fact that the substantial majority of our earnings are generated in the U.S., where we have higher statutory rates. We expect our effective income tax rate for 2012 to range between 20% and 30%. We expect to maintain a full valuation allowance on our net deferred income tax assets until we sustain an appropriate level of profitability that generates taxable income that would enable us to conclude that it is more likely than not that a portion of our deferred income tax assets will be realized. Such a decrease in the valuation allowance could result in a significant decrease in our effective income tax rate for the period in which it occurs.

 

54


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Results of Operations

The following tables set forth, for the periods indicated, (1) percentages that items in our Consolidated Statements of Operations bear to total revenues or restaurant sales, as indicated, and (2) selected operating data:

 

     Years Ended
December 31,
 
     2009     2010     2011  

Revenues

      

Restaurant sales

     99.2     99.1     99.0

Other revenues

     0.8        0.9        1.0   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total revenues

     100.0        100.0        100.0   

Costs and expenses

      

Cost of sales (1)

     33.1        32.0        32.2   

Labor and other related (1)

     28.7        28.8        28.8   

Other restaurant operating (1)

     23.8        24.0        23.4   

Depreciation and amortization

     5.2        4.3        4.0   

General and administrative

     7.0        7.0        7.6   

Recovery of note receivable from affiliated entity

     —          —          (0.9

Loss on contingent debt guarantee

     0.7        —          —     

Goodwill impairment

     1.6        —          —     

Provision for impaired assets and restaurant closings

     3.7        0.1        0.4   

Income from operations of unconsolidated affiliates

     (0.1     (0.2     (0.2

Total costs and expenses

     103.0        95.3        94.4   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Income (loss) from operations

     (3.0     4.7        5.6   

Gain on extinguishment of debt

     4.4        —          —     

Other (expense) income, net

     (*     0.1        *   

Interest expense, net

     (3.3     (2.5     (2.2
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Income (loss) before (benefit) provision for income taxes

     (1.9     2.3        3.4   

(Benefit) provision for income taxes

     (0.1     0.6        0.6   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net income (loss)

     (1.8     1.7        2.8   

Less: net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests

     (*     0.2        0.2   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net income (loss) attributable to Bloomin’ Brands, Inc.

     (1.8 )%      1.5     2.6
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

(1) As a percentage of restaurant sales.
*

Less than 1/10th of one percent of total revenues.

 

55


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

The table below presents the number of our restaurants in operation at the end of the periods indicated:

 

     December 31,  
     2009      2010      2011  

Number of restaurants (at end of the period):

        

Outback Steakhouse

        

Company-owned—domestic

     680         670         669   

Company-owned—international

     119         120         111   

Franchised—domestic

     108         108         106   

Franchised and joint venture—international

     63         70         81   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

Total

     970         968         967   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

Carrabba’s Italian Grill

        

Company-owned

     232         232         231   

Franchised

     1         1         1   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

Total

     233         233         232   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

Bonefish Grill

        

Company-owned

     145         145         151   

Franchised

     7         7         7   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

Total

     152         152         158   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

Fleming’s Prime Steakhouse and Wine Bar

        

Company-owned

     64         64         64   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

Other

        

Company-owned (1)

     58         22         22   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

System-wide total

     1,477         1,439         1,443   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

(1) In September 2009, we sold our Cheeseburger in Paradise concept, which included 34 restaurants, to Paradise Restaurant Group, LLC (“PRG”). Based on the terms of the purchase and sale agreement, we consolidated PRG after the sale transaction. Upon adoption of new accounting guidance for variable interest entities, we deconsolidated PRG on January 1, 2010. As a result, in 2010 and 2011 this category includes only our Roy’s concept.

We operate restaurants under brands that have similar economic characteristics, nature of products and services, class of customer and distribution methods, and as a result, aggregate our operating segments into a single reporting segment.

 

56


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

System-Wide Sales

System-wide sales increased 7.0% in 2011 and 2.2% in 2010. System-wide sales is a non-GAAP financial measure that includes sales of all restaurants operating under our brand names, whether we own them or not. System-wide sales comprises sales of company-owned restaurants and sales of franchised and unconsolidated joint venture restaurants. The table below presents the first component of system-wide sales, which is sales of company-owned restaurants:

 

     Years Ended December 31,  
     2009      2010      2011  

Company-Owned Restaurant Sales (in millions):

        

Outback Steakhouse

        

Domestic

   $ 1,954       $ 1,960       $ 2,027   

International

     260         281         336   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

Total

     2,214         2,241         2,363   

Carrabba’s Italian Grill

     633         653         682   

Bonefish Grill

     375         403         441   

Fleming’s Prime Steakhouse and Wine Bar

     199         223         239   

Other (1)

     153         75         78   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

Total company-owned restaurant sales

   $ 3,574       $ 3,595       $ 3,803   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

(1) In September 2009, we sold our Cheeseburger in Paradise concept, which included 34 restaurants, to PRG. Based on the terms of the purchase and sale agreement, we consolidated PRG after the sale transaction. Upon adoption of new accounting guidance for variable interest entities, we deconsolidated PRG on January 1, 2010. As a result, in 2010 and 2011 this category includes primarily our Roy’s concept.

The following information presents the second component of system-wide sales, which is sales of franchised and unconsolidated joint venture restaurants. These are restaurants that are not consolidated and from which we only receive a franchise royalty or a portion of their total income. Management believes that franchise and unconsolidated joint venture sales information is useful in analyzing our revenues because franchisees and affiliates pay royalties and/or service fees that generally are based on a percentage of sales. Management also uses this information to make decisions about future plans for the development of additional restaurants and new concepts as well as evaluation of current operations.

 

57


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

The following do not represent our sales and are presented only as an indicator of changes in the restaurant system, which management believes is important information regarding the health of our restaurant concepts.

 

     Years Ended
December 31,
 
     2009      2010      2011  

Franchise and Unconsolidated Joint Venture Sales (in millions) (1):

        

Outback Steakhouse

        

Domestic

   $ 294       $ 296       $ 300   

International

     170         234         311   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

Total

     464         530         611   

Carrabba’s Italian Grill

     3         4         4   

Bonefish Grill

     16         16         18   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

Total franchise and unconsolidated joint venture sales (1)

   $ 483       $ 550       $ 633   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

Income from franchise and unconsolidated joint ventures (2)

   $ 26       $ 31       $ 36   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

(1) Franchise and unconsolidated joint venture sales are not included in revenues in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
(2) Represents the franchise royalty and the portion of total income related to restaurant operations included in the Consolidated Statements of Operations in the line items “Other revenues” and “Income from operations of unconsolidated affiliates,” respectively.

Revenues

Restaurant Sales

 

     Years Ended
December 31,
                  Years Ended
December 31,
               
(dollars in millions):    2011      2010      $ Change      % Change     2010      2009      $ Change      % Change  

Restaurant sales

   $ 3,803.3       $ 3,594.7       $ 208.6         5.8   $ 3,594.7       $ 3,573.8       $ 20.9         0.6

The increase in restaurant sales in 2011 as compared to 2010 was primarily attributable to (i) a $195.7 million increase in comparable restaurant sales at our existing restaurants (including a 4.9% combined comparable restaurant sales increase in 2011 at our core domestic restaurants), which was primarily due to increases in customer traffic and general menu prices and (ii) a $15.9 million increase in sales from 17 restaurants not included in our comparable restaurant sales base. The increase in customer traffic was primarily a result of promotions throughout our concepts, innovations in our menu, service and operations and renovations at Outback Steakhouse. The increase in restaurant sales in 2011 as compared to 2010 was partially offset by a $2.0 million decrease from the closing of three restaurants during 2011 and a $1.0 million decrease from the sale (and franchise conversion) of nine of our company-owned Outback Steakhouse restaurants in Japan in October 2011.

The increase in restaurant sales in 2010 as compared to 2009 was primarily attributable to (i) a $90.0 million increase in comparable restaurant sales at our existing restaurants (2.7% combined comparable restaurant sales increase in 2010 at our core domestic restaurants) primarily due to an increase in customer traffic and partially offset by customer selection of lower-priced menu items and (ii) a $23.1 million increase in sales from 32 restaurants not included in our comparable restaurant sales base. The increase in customer traffic was primarily a result of promotions throughout our concepts, innovations in our menu, service and operations and an increase in the overall level of marketing spending. The increase in restaurant sales in 2010 as compared to 2009 was partially offset by a $75.5 million decrease from the sale and de-consolidation of 34 Cheeseburger in Paradise locations and a $16.7 million decrease from the closing of 16 restaurants during 2010.

 

58


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

The following table includes additional information about changes in restaurant sales at domestic company-owned restaurants for our core brands:

 

     Years Ended
December 31,
 
     2009     2010     2011  

Average restaurant unit volumes (in thousands):

      

Outback Steakhouse

     $2,857        $2,906        $3,029   

Carrabba’s Italian Grill

     $2,737        $2,816        $2,946   

Bonefish Grill

     $2,606        $2,781        $3,023   

Fleming’s Prime Steakhouse and Wine Bar

     $3,148        $3,476        $3,730   

Operating weeks:

      

Outback Steakhouse

     35,720        35,200        34,914   

Carrabba’s Italian Grill

     12,065        12,097        12,077   

Bonefish Grill

     7,491        7,553        7,600   

Fleming’s Prime Steakhouse and Wine Bar

     3,292        3,337        3,337   

Year over year percentage change:

      

Menu price increases (decreases):(1)

      

Outback Steakhouse

     1.3     (0.1 )%      1.5

Carrabba’s Italian Grill

     1.6     0.4     1.5

Bonefish Grill

     1.5     0.2     1.9

Fleming’s Prime Steakhouse and Wine Bar

     0.6     0.5     3.0

Comparable restaurant sales (restaurants open 18 months or more):

      

Outback Steakhouse

     (8.8 )%      1.5     4.0

Carrabba’s Italian Grill

     (6.1 )%      2.9     4.6

Bonefish Grill

     (5.9 )%      6.5     8.3

Fleming’s Prime Steakhouse and Wine Bar

     (16.4 )%      10.4     7.4

Combined (concepts above)

     (8.6 )%      2.7     4.9

 

(1) The stated menu price changes exclude the impact of product mix shifts to new menu offerings.

Costs and Expenses

Cost of Sales

 

     Years Ended
December 31,
          Years Ended
December 31,
       
(dollars in millions):    2011     2010     Change     2010     2009     Change  

Cost of sales

   $ 1,226.1      $ 1,152.0        $ 1,152.0      $ 1,184.1     

    % of Restaurant sales

     32.2     32.0     0.2     32.0     33.1     (1.1 )% 

Cost of sales, consisting of food and beverage costs, increased as a percentage of restaurant sales in 2011 as compared to 2010. The increase as a percentage of restaurant sales was primarily 1.4% from increases in seafood, dairy, beef and other commodity costs. The increase was partially offset by decreases as a percentage of restaurant sales of 0.9% from the impact of certain cost savings initiatives and 0.4% from menu price increases.

The decrease as a percentage of restaurant sales in 2010 as compared to 2009 was primarily 1.1% from the impact of certain cost savings initiatives and 0.7% from decreases in beef costs. The decrease was partially offset by increases as a percentage of restaurant sales of the following: (i) 0.3% from increases in produce, dairy and other commodity costs, (ii) 0.2% due to changes in our product mix and (iii) 0.2% from changes in our limited-time offers and other promotions.

 

59


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Labor and Other Related Expenses

 

     Years Ended
December 31,
          Years Ended
December 31,
       
(dollars in millions):    2011     2010     Change     2010     2009     Change  

Labor and other related

   $ 1,094.1      $ 1,034.4        $ 1,034.4      $ 1,024.1     

    % of Restaurant sales

     28.8     28.8     —       28.8     28.7     0.1

Labor and other related expenses include all direct and indirect labor costs incurred in operations, including distribution expense to managing partners, costs related to the Partner Equity Plan and the Partner Ownership Account Plan (see “Liquidity and Capital Resources—Stock-Based and Deferred Compensation Plans”), and other incentive compensation expenses. Labor and other related expenses were flat as a percentage of restaurant sales in 2011 as compared to 2010. Items that contributed to an increase as a percentage of restaurant sales included the following: (i) 0.4% from higher kitchen and service labor costs, (ii) 0.3% from higher field management labor, bonus and distribution expenses, (iii) 0.2% from a settlement of an Internal Revenue Service assessment of employment taxes and (iv) 0.1% from an increase in health insurance costs. These increases were offset by decreases as a percentage of restaurant sales of 0.7% from higher average unit volumes at our restaurants and 0.3% from the impact of certain cost savings initiatives.

Labor and other related expenses increased as a percentage of restaurant sales in 2010 as compared with 2009. The increase as a percentage of restaurant sales was primarily due to the following: (i) 0.4% from higher kitchen, service and field management labor costs, (ii) 0.2% from an increase in health insurance costs and (iii) 0.2% from higher distribution expense to managing partners. The increase was partially offset by decreases as a percentage of restaurant sales of 0.5% from the impact of certain cost savings initiatives and 0.2% from higher average unit volumes at our restaurants.

Other Restaurant Operating Expenses

 

     Years Ended
December 31,
          Years Ended
December 31,
       
(dollars in millions):    2011     2010     Change     2010     2009     Change  

Other restaurant operating

   $ 890.0      $ 864.2        $ 864.2      $ 849.7     

    % of Restaurant sales

     23.4     24.0     (0.6 )%      24.0     23.8     0.2

Other restaurant operating expenses include certain unit-level operating costs such as operating supplies, rent, repairs and maintenance, advertising expenses, utilities, pre-opening costs and other occupancy costs. A substantial portion of these expenses is fixed or indirectly variable. The decrease as a percentage of restaurant sales in 2011 as compared to 2010 was primarily 0.7% from higher average unit volumes at our restaurants and 0.4% from certain cost savings initiatives. The decrease was partially offset by increases as a percentage of restaurant sales of 0.2% in operating supplies expense and 0.2% in advertising costs.

The increase as a percentage of restaurant sales in 2010 as compared to 2009 was primarily due to the following: (i) 0.4% from increases in advertising costs, (ii) 0.2% from increases in the recognition of deferred gift card fees, (iii) 0.2% from increases in repairs and maintenance costs, occupancy costs and operating supplies expense and (iv) 0.2% from higher general liability insurance expense. The increase was partially offset by decreases as a percentage of restaurant sales of 0.5% from higher average unit volumes at our restaurants and 0.2% from certain cost savings initiatives.

 

60


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Depreciation and Amortization

 

     Years Ended
December 31,
          Years Ended
December 31,
       
(dollars in millions):    2011     2010     Change     2010     2009     Change  

Depreciation and amortization

   $ 153.7      $ 156.3        $ 156.3      $ 186.1     

    % of Total revenues

     4.0     4.3     (0.3 )%      4.3     5.2     (0.9 )% 

Depreciation and amortization expense decreased as a percentage of total revenues in 2011 as compared to 2010. This decrease as a percentage of total revenues was primarily 0.2% from certain assets being fully depreciated as of June 2010 as a result of purchase accounting adjustments recorded in conjunction with the Merger and 0.2% from higher average unit volumes at our restaurants. The decrease was partially offset by an increase as a percentage of restaurant sales of 0.1% from depreciation expense on property, fixtures and equipment additions during 2011 primarily due to our Outback Steakhouse renovations.

The decrease as a percentage of total revenues in 2010 as compared to 2009 was primarily 0.7% from certain assets being fully depreciated as of June 2009 and June 2010 as a result of purchase accounting adjustments recorded in conjunction with the Merger and 0.1% from higher average unit volumes at our restaurants.

General and Administrative

 

     Years Ended
December 31,
            Years Ended
December 31,
        
(in millions):    2011      2010      Change      2010      2009      Change  

General and administrative

   $ 291.1       $ 252.8       $ 38.3       $ 252.8       $ 252.3       $ 0.5   

General and administrative costs increased in 2011 as compared to 2010 primarily due to the following: (i) $12.1 million of additional corporate compensation, bonus and relocation expenses primarily as a result of increasing our resources in consumer insights, research and development, productivity and human resources, (ii) $8.2 million of increased general and administrative costs associated with field support, managers-in-training and field compensation, bonus, distribution and buyout expense, (iii) a $6.2 million net decline in the cash surrender value of life insurance investments, (iv) $7.4 million of additional legal and other professional fees, (v) a $4.3 million loss from the sale of nine of our company-owned Outback Steakhouse restaurants in Japan in October 2011, (vi) $3.8 million of additional information technology expense, (vii) $1.7 million of increased corporate business travel and meeting-related expenses and (viii) $0.5 million of expenses incurred in 2011 in connection with the Sale-Leaseback Transaction. This increase was partially offset by $5.3 million of cost savings initiatives and a $2.0 million allowance for the PRG promissory note recorded in the first quarter of 2010.

The increase in 2010 as compared to 2009 was primarily attributable to the following: (i) $10.2 million of increased general and administrative costs associated with field support, managers-in-training and distribution expense, (ii) $10.0 million of additional consulting and legal fees primarily related to our productivity improvement and brand growth strategies, (iii) $4.4 million of additional corporate compensation expense as a result of increasing our resources in consumer insights, research and development, productivity and human resources and (iv) a $4.1 million net decline in the cash surrender value of life insurance investments. This increase was substantially offset by the following: (i) a $14.0 million decrease in restricted stock, deferred compensation and partner buyout expenses that was mostly attributable to accelerated vesting of restricted stock for certain executive officers in 2009, (ii) a $7.1 million reduction of bonus and severance expenses, (iii) a $3.8 million decrease from certain cost savings initiatives and (iv) a $1.3 million decrease in ongoing operating costs at closed locations.

 

61


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Recovery of Note Receivable From Affiliated Entity

In November 2011, we received a settlement payment of $33.3 million from T-Bird in connection with a settlement agreement that satisfied all outstanding litigation with T-Bird.

Loss on Contingent Debt Guarantee

We are the guarantor of an uncollateralized line of credit that permits borrowing of up to $24.5 million for the company’s joint venture partner, RY-8, in the development of Roy’s restaurants (see “—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Debt Guarantees”). We recorded a $24.5 million loss associated with this guarantee in the year ended December 31, 2009.

Goodwill Impairment

We did not record a goodwill impairment charge during the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010. We recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $58.1 million for the domestic Outback Steakhouse concept during the second quarter of 2009 in connection with our annual impairment test.

Our review of the recoverability of goodwill was based primarily upon an analysis of the discounted cash flows of the related reporting units as compared to their carrying values. These goodwill impairment charges occurred due to poor overall economic conditions, declining sales at our restaurants, reductions in our projected results for future periods and a challenging environment for the restaurant industry (see “—Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates”).

Provision for Impaired Assets and Restaurant Closings

 

     Years Ended
December 31,
            Years Ended
December 31,
        
(in millions):     2011        2010       Change       2010        2009       Change  

Provision for impaired assets and restaurant closings

   $ 14.0       $ 5.2       $ 8.8       $ 5.2       $ 134.3       $ (129.1

During the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 and 2009, we recorded a provision for impaired assets and restaurant closings of $14.0 million, $5.2 million and $134.3 million, respectively, for certain of our restaurants, intangible assets and other assets (see “—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Fair Value Measurements”).

During 2009, our provision for impaired assets and restaurant closings primarily included: (i) $46.0 million of impairment charges to reduce the carrying value of the assets of Cheeseburger in Paradise to their estimated fair market value due to our sale of the concept in the third quarter of 2009, (ii) $47.6 million of impairment charges and restaurant closing expense for certain of our other restaurants and (iii) $36.0 million of impairment charges for the domestic Outback Steakhouse and Carrabba’s Italian Grill trade names.

We used the discounted cash flow method to determine the fair value of our intangible assets. The trade name impairment charges occurred due to poor overall economic conditions, declining sales at our restaurants, reductions in our projected results for future periods and a challenging environment for the restaurant industry. Restaurant impairment charges primarily resulted from the carrying value of a restaurant’s assets exceeding its estimated fair market value, primarily due to anticipated closures or declining future cash flows from lower projected future sales at existing locations (see “—Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates”).

 

62


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Income (Loss) From Operations

 

     Years Ended
December 31,
          Years Ended
December 31,
       
(dollars in millions):    2011     2010     Change     2010     2009     Change  

Income (loss) from operations

   $ 213.5      $ 168.9        $ 168.9      $ (109.3  

    % of Total revenues

     5.6     4.7     0.9     4.7     (3.0 )%      7.7

Income (loss) from operations increased in 2011 as compared to 2010 and in 2010 as compared to 2009 primarily as a result of a 9.0% and 5.5% increase in operating margins, respectively, higher average unit volumes at our restaurants and certain other items as described above.

Gain on Extinguishment of Debt

During the first quarter of 2009, OSI purchased $240.1 million in aggregate principal amount of its Senior Notes in a cash tender offer. OSI paid $73.0 million for the Senior Notes purchased and $6.7 million of accrued interest. We recorded a gain from the extinguishment of debt of $158.1 million in 2009. The gain was reduced by $6.1 million for the pro rata portion of unamortized deferred financing fees that related to the extinguished Senior Notes and by $3.0 million for fees related to the tender offer.

Interest Expense, Net

 

     Years Ended
December 31,
           Years Ended
December 31,
        
(in millions):    2011      2010      Change     2010      2009      Change  

Interest expense, net

   $ 83.4       $ 91.4       $ (8.0   $ 91.4       $ 115.9       $ (24.5

The decrease in net interest expense in 2011 as compared to 2010 was primarily due to a $4.6 million decline in interest expense for OSI’s senior secured credit facilities, largely as a result of a decline in the total outstanding balance of those facilities, and to $1.4 million of interest expense on our interest rate collar for OSI’s senior secured credit facilities during 2010 that was not incurred in 2011 (since the collar matured in 2010).

The decrease in net interest expense in 2010 as compared to 2009 was primarily due to a net $14.1 million decrease in interest expense mainly due to mark to market adjustments on our interest rate collar for OSI’s senior secured credit facilities that matured effective September 30, 2010 and a reduction of approximately $5.2 million of interest expense as a result of the $240.1 million decrease in principal outstanding on OSI’s senior notes from its completion of a cash tender offer during March of 2009.

Provision (Benefit) For Income Taxes

 

     Years Ended
December 31,
          Years Ended
December 31
       
     2011     2010     Change     2010     2009     Change  

Effective income tax rate

     16.6     26.5     (9.9 )%      26.5     3.7     22.8

The net decrease in the effective income tax rate in 2011 as compared to the previous year was primarily due to the increase in the domestic pretax book income in which the deferred income tax assets are subject to a valuation allowance and the state and foreign income tax provision being a lower percentage of consolidated pretax income as compared to the prior year. The net increase in the effective income tax rate in 2010 as compared to the previous year was primarily due to the effect of the change in the valuation allowance against deferred income tax assets.

The effective income tax rate for the year ended December 31, 2011 was lower than the combined federal and state statutory rate of 38.7% primarily due to the benefit of the tax credit for excess FICA tax on

 

63


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

employee-reported tips and loss on investments as a result of the sale of assets in Japan together being such a large percentage of pretax income. The effective income tax rate for the year ended December 31, 2010 was lower than the combined federal and state statutory rate of 38.9% primarily due to the benefit of the tax credit for excess FICA tax on employee-reported tips, which was partially offset by the valuation allowance and income taxes in states that only have limited deductions in computing the state current income tax provision. The effective income tax rate for the year ended December 31, 2009 was significantly lower than the combined federal and state statutory rate of 38.9% primarily due to an increase in the valuation allowance on deferred income tax assets, which was partially offset by the benefit of the tax credit for excess FICA tax on employee-reported tips being such a large percentage of pretax loss.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Potential Impacts of Market Conditions on Capital Resources

During 2010 and 2011, we experienced a strengthening of trends in consumer traffic and increases in comparable restaurant sales and operating cash flows, and generated an increase in operating income. However, the restaurant industry continues to be challenged and uncertainty exists as to the sustainability of these favorable trends. We have continued to implement various cost savings initiatives, including food cost decreases through waste reduction and supply chain and labor efficiency initiatives. We developed new menu items to appeal to value-conscious consumers and used marketing campaigns to promote these items.

As of December 31, 2011, we had approximately $82.4 million in available unused borrowing capacity under our working capital revolving credit facility (after giving effect to undrawn letters of credit of approximately $67.6 million) and $67.0 million in available unused borrowing capacity under our pre-funded revolving credit facility that provides financing for capital expenditures only (see “Description of Indebtedness”).

We believe that expected cash flow from operations, planned borrowing capacity, short-term investments and restricted cash balances are adequate to fund debt service requirements, operating lease obligations, capital expenditures and working capital obligations for the next twelve months. At December 31, 2011, we were in compliance with our covenants. However, our ability to continue to meet these requirements and obligations will depend on, among other things, our ability to achieve anticipated levels of revenue and cash flow and our ability to manage costs and working capital successfully.

Summary of Cash Flows

We require capital primarily for principal and interest payments on our debt, prepayment requirements under our term loan facility (see “Description of Indebtedness”), obligations related to our deferred compensation plans, the development of new restaurants, remodeling older restaurants, investments in technology, and acquisitions of franchisees and joint venture partners.

The following table presents a summary of our cash flows provided by (used in) operating, investing and financing activities for the periods indicated (in thousands):

 

     Years Ended
December 31,
 
     2009     2010     2011  

Net cash provided by operating activities

   $ 195,537      $ 275,154      $ 322,450   

Net cash used in investing activities

     (39,171     (71,721     (113,142

Net cash used in financing activities

     (137,397     (167,315     (89,300

Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents

     870        (1,539     (3,460
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net increase in cash and cash equivalents

   $ 19,839      $ 34,579      $ 116,548   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

64


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Operating Activities

Net cash provided by operating activities increased in 2011 as compared to 2010 primarily as a result of the following: (i) an increase in cash generated from restaurant operations due to comparable restaurant sales increases, (ii) certain food, labor and other cost savings initiatives, (iii) an acceleration of certain accounts payable and other related payments prior to the end of 2010 and (iv) a decrease in cash paid for interest, which was $72.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to $96.7 million in 2010. The increase in net cash provided by operating activities was partially offset by an increase in other current assets primarily due to an increase in third-party gift card receivables and an increase in cash paid for income taxes, net of refunds, which was $27.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to $10.8 million in 2010.

Net cash provided by operating activities increased in 2010 as compared to 2009 primarily as a result of the following: (i) an increase in cash generated from restaurant operations due to comparable restaurant sales increases, (ii) certain food, labor and other cost savings initiatives, (iii) a delay in accounts payable and other related payments at December 31, 2008, (iv) a decrease in cash paid for interest, which was $96.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to $109.0 million in 2009 and (v) a decrease in cash paid for income taxes, net of refunds, which was $10.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to $21.3 million in 2009. The increase in net cash provided by operating activities was partially offset by (i) a significant decline in inventory during 2009 as a result of utilization of inventory on hand, (ii) a significant increase in bonuses paid during 2010 as compared to 2009 and (iii) an acceleration of certain accounts payable and other related payments prior to the end of 2010.

Investing Activities

Net cash used in investing activities during the year ended December 31, 2011 consisted primarily of capital expenditures of $120.9 million and a royalty termination fee of $8.5 million. This was partially offset by $10.1 million of proceeds from the sale of nine of our company-owned Outback Steakhouse restaurants in Japan. Net cash used in investing activities during the year ended December 31, 2010 consisted primarily of the following: (i) capital expenditures of $60.5 million, (ii) the $11.3 million net difference between restricted cash received and restricted cash used, which was primarily related to the use of restricted cash for deferred compensation plans and (iii) deconsolidated PRG cash of $4.4 million. This was partially offset by the $4.0 million net difference between the proceeds from the sale and purchases of company-owned life insurance. Net cash used in investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2009 was primarily attributable to capital expenditures of $57.5 million and was partially offset by the $10.3 million net difference between the proceeds from the sale and the purchases of company-owned life insurance.

We estimate that our capital expenditures will total between approximately $180.0 million and $210.0 million in 2012. The amount of actual capital expenditures may be affected by general economic, financial, competitive, legislative and regulatory factors, among other things, including restrictions imposed by our borrowing arrangements. We expect to continue to review the level of capital expenditures throughout 2012.

Financing Activities

Net cash used in financing activities during the year ended December 31, 2011 was primarily attributable to the following: (i) repayments of borrowings on long-term debt and OSI’s revolving credit facilities of $103.3 million, (ii) the net difference between repayments and receipts of partner deposits and other contributions of $36.0 million and (iii) distributions to noncontrolling interests of $13.5 million. This was partially offset by the collection of the note receivable from T-Bird of $33.3 million and proceeds from borrowings on OSI’s revolving credit facilities of $33.0 million. Net cash used in financing activities during the year ended December 31, 2010 was primarily attributable to the following: (i) repayments of borrowings on long-term debt and OSI’s revolving credit facilities of $196.8 million, (ii) the net difference between repayment and receipt of partner deposit and accrued buyout contributions of $18.0 million and (iii) distributions to noncontrolling interests of $11.6 million. This was partially offset by proceeds from borrowings on OSI’s

 

65


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

revolving credit facilities of $61.0 million. Net cash used in financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2009 was primarily attributable to: (i) $76.0 million of cash paid for the extinguishment of a portion of OSI’s Senior Notes and related fees, (ii) repayments of borrowings on long-term debt and OSI’s revolving credit facilities of $37.2 million, (iii) $33.3 million of cash paid for the purchase of the note related to OSI’s guaranteed debt for T-Bird and (iv) distributions to noncontrolling interests of $9.1 million. Net cash used in financing activities in 2009 was partially offset by $23.7 million of proceeds from borrowings on OSI’s revolving credit facilities.

Financial Condition

Current assets increased to $708.3 million at December 31, 2011 as compared with $530.9 million at December 31, 2010 primarily due to an increase in Cash and cash equivalents of $116.5 million. This increase in Cash and cash equivalents was driven by a reduction in net repayments of long-term debt and borrowings on OSI’s revolving credit facilities during 2011 as compared to 2010 of $65.5 million, the receipt of a $33.3 million settlement payment from T-Bird in November 2011 and an increase in cash provided by our restaurant operations. This increase was partially offset by $60.4 million of additional capital expenditures during 2011 as compared to 2010. Other current assets also increased $32.6 million driven primarily by a $36.5 million increase in receivables as a result of third-party gift card and promotional sales.

Working capital (deficit) totaled ($248.1) million and ($120.1) million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and included Unearned revenue from unredeemed gift cards of $299.6 million and $269.1 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. Unearned revenue is a liability that does not require cash settlement.

Current liabilities increased to $956.4 million at December 31, 2011 as compared with $651.0 million at December 31, 2010 primarily due to an increase in the Current portion of long-term debt of $237.6 million as a result of the June 2012 maturity of PRP’s CMBS Loan (see “Description of Indebtedness”). This increase was also due to an increase in unearned revenue of $30.5 million as a result of the increase in third-party gift card and promotional sales. Accounts payable also increased $19.1 million driven by an acceleration of certain accounts payable and other related payments prior to the end of 2010 as well as an increase in our construction in progress accrual in 2011 due to increased remodeling activity and new restaurant development.

Transactions

Effective March 14, 2012, we entered into the Sale-Leaseback Transaction with two third-party real estate institutional investors in which we sold 67 restaurant properties at fair market value for $194.9 million. We then simultaneously leased these properties back under nine master leases (collectively, the “REIT Master Leases”). The initial term of the REIT Master Leases are 20 years with four five-year renewal options. One renewal period is at a fixed rental amount and the last three renewal periods are generally based on then-current fair market values. The sale at fair market value and subsequent leaseback qualified for sale-leaseback accounting treatment, and the REIT Master Leases are classified as operating leases. We will defer the recognition of the $42.7 million gain on the sale of certain of the properties over the initial term of the lease. In accordance with the applicable accounting guidance, the 67 restaurant properties are not classified as held for sale at December 31, 2011 since we will be leasing back the properties.

Credit Facilities and Other Indebtedness

Bloomin’ Brands is a holding company and conducts its operations through its subsidiaries, certain of which have incurred their own indebtedness as described below.

On June 14, 2007, OSI entered into senior secured credit facilities with a syndicate of institutional lenders and financial institutions. These senior secured credit facilities provide for senior secured financing of up

 

66


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

to $1.6 billion, consisting of a $1.3 billion term loan facility, a $150.0 million working capital revolving credit facility, including letter of credit and swing-line loan sub-facilities, and a $100.0 million pre-funded revolving credit facility that provides financing for capital expenditures only.

The senior secured term loan facility matures June 14, 2014. At each rate adjustment, OSI has the option to select a Base Rate plus 125 basis points or a Eurocurrency Rate plus 225 basis points for the borrowings under this facility. The Base Rate option is the higher of the prime rate of Deutsche Bank AG New York Branch and the federal funds effective rate plus 0.5 of 1% (3.25% at December 31, 2011 and 2010). The Eurocurrency Rate option is the 30, 60, 90 or 180-day Eurocurrency Rate (ranging from 0.38% to 0.88% and from 0.31% to 0.50% at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively). The Eurocurrency Rate may have a nine- or twelve-month interest period if agreed upon by the applicable lenders. With either the Base Rate or the Eurocurrency Rate, the interest rate is reduced by 25 basis points if the associated Moody’s Applicable Corporate Rating then most recently published is B1 or higher (the rating was Caa1 at December 31, 2011 and 2010).

OSI is required to prepay outstanding term loans, subject to certain exceptions, with:

 

   

50% of its “annual excess cash flow” (with step-downs to 25% and 0% based upon its rent-adjusted leverage ratio), as defined in the credit agreement and subject to certain exceptions;

 

   

100% of its “annual minimum free cash flow,” as defined in the credit agreement, not to exceed $75.0 million for each fiscal year, if its rent-adjusted leverage ratio exceeds a certain minimum threshold;

 

   

100% of the net proceeds of certain assets sales and insurance and condemnation events, subject to reinvestment rights and certain other exceptions; and

 

   

100% of the net proceeds of any debt incurred, excluding permitted debt issuances.

Additionally, OSI is required, on an annual basis, to first, repay outstanding loans under the pre-funded revolving credit facility and second, fund a capital expenditure account to the extent amounts on deposit are less than $100.0 million, in both cases with 100% of its “annual true cash flow,” as defined in the credit agreement. In accordance with these requirements, in April 2012, OSI is required to repay its pre-funded revolving credit facility outstanding loan balance of $33.0 million and fund $37.6 million to its capital expenditure account using its “annual true cash flow.” In April 2011, OSI repaid its pre-funded revolving credit facility outstanding loan balance of $78.1 million and funded $60.5 million to its capital expenditure account.

OSI’s senior secured credit facilities require scheduled quarterly payments on the term loans equal to 0.25% of the original principal amount of the term loans for the first six years and three quarters following June 14, 2007. These payments are reduced by the application of any prepayments, and any remaining balance will be paid at maturity. The outstanding balance on the term loans was $1.0 billion at December 31, 2011 and 2010. OSI classified $13.1 million of its term loans as current at December 31, 2011 and 2010 due to its required quarterly payments and the results of its covenant calculations, which indicate the additional term loan prepayments, as described above, will not be required. In October 2011, we sold our nine company-owned Outback Steakhouse restaurants in Japan to a subsidiary of S Foods, Inc. and used the net cash proceeds from this sale to pay down $7.5 million of OSI’s outstanding term loans in accordance with the terms of the OSI credit agreement amended in January 2010.

Proceeds of loans and letters of credit under OSI’s $150.0 million working capital revolving credit facility provide financing for working capital and general corporate purposes and, subject to a rent-adjusted leverage condition, for capital expenditures for new restaurant growth. This revolving credit facility matures June 14, 2013 and bears interest at rates ranging from 100 to 150 basis points over the Base Rate or 200 to 250 basis points over the Eurocurrency Rate. There were no loans outstanding under the revolving credit facility at December 31, 2011 and 2010; however, $67.6 million and $70.3 million, respectively, of the credit facility was

 

67


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

committed for the issuance of letters of credit and not available for borrowing. OSI may have to extend additional letters of credit in the future. If the need for letters of credit exceeds the $75.0 million maximum permitted by OSI’s working capital revolving credit facility, OSI may have to use cash to fulfill its collateral requirements. Fees for the letters of credit range from 2.00% to 2.25% and the commitment fees for unused working capital revolving credit commitments range from 0.38% to 0.50%.

Proceeds of loans under OSI’s $100.0 million pre-funded revolving credit facility, which expires on June 14, 2013, are available to provide financing for capital expenditures, if the capital expenditure account described above has a zero balance. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, OSI had $33.0 million and $78.1 million, respectively, outstanding on its pre-funded revolving credit facility. These borrowings were recorded in “Current portion of long-term debt” in our Consolidated Balance Sheets, as OSI is required to repay any outstanding borrowings in April following each fiscal year using its “annual true cash flow,” as defined in the credit agreement. At each rate adjustment, OSI has the option to select the Base Rate plus 125 basis points or a Eurocurrency Rate plus 225 basis points for the borrowings under this facility. In either case, the interest rate is reduced by 25 basis points if the associated Moody’s Applicable Corporate Rating then most recently published is B1 or higher. Fees for the unused portion of the pre-funded revolving credit facility are 2.43%.

At December 31, 2011 and 2010, OSI was in compliance with its debt covenants. See “Description of Indebtedness” for further information about OSI’s debt covenants.

On June 14, 2007, Private Restaurant Properties LLC, or PRP, our indirect wholly owned subsidiary, entered into first mortgage and mezzanine loans (together, the commercial mortgage-backed securities loan, or the “CMBS Loan”) totaling $790.0 million. As part of the CMBS Loan, the lenders had a security interest in PRP’s properties and related improvements located throughout the United States and direct and indirect equity interests in PRP.

The CMBS Loan comprised a note payable and four mezzanine notes. The CMBS Loan had a maturity date of June 9, 2011, subject to one additional one-year extension by PRP to a maximum maturity date of June 9, 2012. During 2011, PRP exercised the one-year extension.

All notes bore interest at the one-month London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) which was 0.28% and 0.27% at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively, plus an applicable spread which ranges from 0.51% to 4.25%. Interest-only payments were made on the ninth calendar day of each month and interest accrued beginning on the fifteenth calendar day of the preceding month.

PRP’s CMBS Loan required it to comply with certain financial covenants, including a lease coverage ratio and a loan to value ratio as defined in the CMBS Loan agreement. The CMBS Loan also contained customary representations, warranties, affirmative covenants and events of default. Upon disposal of any location that collateralizes the CMBS Loan, PRP was required to pay the portion of the CMBS Loan principal that related to each disposed location. During the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, PRP did not dispose of any locations and therefore did not pay any principal on the CMBS Loan for disposed locations. At December 31, 2011 and 2010, the outstanding balance on PRP’s CMBS Loan was $775.3 million and $774.7 million, respectively.

Effective March 27, 2012, New Private Restaurant Properties, LLC and two of our other indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries entered into the 2012 CMBS Loan. The 2012 CMBS Loan totals $500.0 million and comprises a first mortgage loan in the amount of $324.8 million, collateralized by 261 of our properties, and two mezzanine loans totaling $175.2 million. The loans have a maturity date of April 10, 2017. The first mortgage loan has five fixed rate components and a floating rate component. The fixed rate components bear interest at a rate of 2.37% to 6.81% per annum. The floating rate component bears interest at a rate per annum equal to the 30-day LIBOR rate (with a floor of 1%) plus 2.37%. The first mezzanine loan bears interest at a rate of 9.0% per annum, and the second mezzanine loan bears interest at a rate of 11.25% per annum. The proceeds from the 2012 CMBS Loan, together with the proceeds from the Sale-Leaseback Transaction in March 2012 (see “—Liquidity

 

68


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

and Capital Resources—Transactions”) and excess cash held in PRP, were used to repay the existing CMBS Loan. As a result of the 2012 CMBS Loan refinancing, the net amount repaid along with scheduled maturities within one year, $281.3 million, was classified as current at December 31, 2011. During the first quarter of 2012, we recorded a $2.9 million Loss on extinguishment of debt. See “Description of Indebtedness” for a further description of the 2012 CMBS Loan.

On June 14, 2007, OSI issued Senior Notes in an original aggregate principal amount of $550.0 million under an indenture among OSI, as issuer, OSI Co-Issuer, Inc., as co-issuer (“Co-Issuer”), a third-party trustee and the Guarantors. The Senior Notes mature on June 15, 2015. Interest is payable semiannually in arrears, at 10% per annum, in cash on each June 15 and December 15. Interest payments to the holders of record of the Senior Notes occur on the immediately preceding June 1 and December 1. Interest is computed on the basis of a 360-day year consisting of twelve 30-day months. The principal balance of Senior Notes outstanding at December 31, 2011 and 2010 was $248.1 million. See “Description of Indebtedness” for a further description of the Senior Notes.

We may from time to time seek to retire or purchase our outstanding debt through cash purchases in the open market, privately negotiated transactions or otherwise. Such repurchases or exchanges, if any, will depend on prevailing market conditions, our liquidity requirements, contractual restrictions and other factors. The amounts involved may be material.

During the first quarter of 2009, OSI purchased $240.1 million in aggregate principal amount of its Senior Notes in a cash tender offer. OSI paid $73.0 million for the Senior Notes purchased and $6.7 million of accrued interest. We recorded a gain from the extinguishment of debt of $158.1 million in the line item “Gain on extinguishment of debt” in our Consolidated Statement of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2009. The gain was reduced by $6.1 million for the pro rata portion of unamortized deferred financing fees that related to the extinguished Senior Notes and by $3.0 million for fees related to the tender offer. The purpose of the tender offer was to reduce the principal amount of debt outstanding, reduce the related debt service obligations and improve OSI’s financial covenant position under its senior secured credit facilities.

As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, OSI had approximately $9.1 million and $7.6 million, respectively, of notes payable at interest rates ranging from 0.76% to 7.00% and from 1.07% to 7.00%, respectively. These notes have been primarily issued for buyouts of managing and area operating partner interests in the cash flows of their restaurants and generally are payable over a period of two through five years.

Debt Guarantees

OSI is the guarantor of an uncollateralized line of credit that permits borrowing of up to $24.5 million for its joint venture partner, RY-8, in the development of Roy’s restaurants. The line of credit originally expired in December 2004 and was amended for a fourth time on April 1, 2009 to a revised termination date of April 15, 2013. According to the terms of the credit agreement, RY-8 may borrow, repay, re-borrow or prepay advances at any time before the termination date of the agreement. On the termination date of the agreement, the entire outstanding principal amount of the loan then outstanding and any accrued interest is due. At December 31, 2011 and 2010, the outstanding balance on the line of credit was $24.5 million.

RY-8’s obligations under the line of credit are unconditionally guaranteed by OSI and Roy’s Holdings, Inc. (“RHI”). If an event of default occurs, as defined in the agreement, the total outstanding balance, including any accrued interest, is immediately due from the guarantors. At December 31, 2011 and 2010, $24.5 million of OSI’s $150.0 million working capital revolving credit facility was committed for the issuance of a letter of credit for this guarantee.

OSI is not aware of any non-compliance with the underlying terms of the borrowing agreements for which it provides a guarantee that would result in it having to perform in accordance with the terms of the guarantee.

 

69


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

Goodwill and Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets

During the second quarter of 2011, we performed our annual assessment for impairment of goodwill and other indefinite-lived intangible assets. Our review of the recoverability of goodwill was based primarily upon an analysis of the discounted cash flows of the related reporting units as compared to the carrying values. We also used the discounted cash flow method to determine the fair value of our indefinite-lived intangible assets. We did not record any goodwill or indefinite-lived intangible asset impairment charges as a result of this assessment and determined that none of our reporting units are at risk for material goodwill impairment.

Fair Value Measurements

Fair value is the price that would be received upon sale of an asset or paid upon transfer of a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date (exit price) and is a market-based measurement, not an entity-specific measurement. To measure fair value, we incorporate assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, and utilize market data to the maximum extent possible. Measurement of fair value incorporates nonperformance risk (i.e., the risk that an obligation will not be fulfilled). In measuring fair value, we reflect the impact of our own credit risk on our liabilities, as well as any collateral. We also consider the credit standing of our counterparties in measuring the fair value of our assets.

We are highly leveraged and are exposed to interest rate risk to the extent of our variable-rate debt. In September 2007, we entered into an interest rate collar with a notional amount of $1.0 billion as a method to limit the variability of OSI’s senior secured credit facilities. The collar consisted of a LIBOR cap of 5.75% and a LIBOR floor of 2.99%. The collar’s first variable-rate set date was December 31, 2007, and the option pairs expired at the end of each calendar quarter beginning March 31, 2008 and ending September 30, 2010. The quarterly expiration dates corresponded to the scheduled amortization payments of OSI’s term loan. Our interest rate collar matured on September 30, 2010. We expensed $19.9 million and $21.4 million of interest for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, as a result of the quarterly expiration of the collar’s option pairs. We recorded mark-to-market changes in the fair value of the derivative instrument in earnings in the period of change. We included $18.5 million and $5.8 million of net interest income for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, in the line item “Interest expense” in our Consolidated Statements of Operations for the mark-to-market effects of this derivative instrument.

We used an interest rate cap with a notional amount of $775.7 million as a method to limit the volatility of PRP’s variable-rate CMBS Loan. Under this interest rate cap, interest rate payments had a ceiling of 6.31%. If the market rate exceeded the ceiling, the counterparty was required to pay us an amount sufficient to reduce the interest payment to 6.31%. The interest rate cap did not have any fair market value at December 31, 2011 and 2010. If necessary, we would record mark-to-market changes in the fair value of this derivative instrument in earnings in the period of change. The effects of this interest rate cap were immaterial to our consolidated financial statements for all periods presented.

We invested $37.7 million and $51.4 million of our excess cash in money market funds classified as Cash and cash equivalents or restricted cash on our Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2011 and 2010 at a net value of 1:1 for each dollar invested. The fair value of the investment in the money market funds is determined by using quoted prices for identical assets in an active market. As a result, we have determined that the inputs used to value this investment fall within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy.

During the year ended December 31, 2011, we did not have any goodwill and other indefinite-lived intangible asset impairment charges, but we did incur impairment charges on long-lived assets held and used as a result of fair value measurements on a nonrecurring basis. We used a discounted cash flow model (Level 3) and quoted prices from brokers (Level 1) to estimate the fair value of the long-lived assets. Discount rate and growth rate assumptions are derived from current economic conditions, expectations of management and projected

 

70


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

trends of current operating results. We recorded $11.6 million of impairment charges as a result of the fair value measurement on a nonrecurring basis of our long-lived assets held and used during the year ended December 31, 2011. The impaired long-lived assets had $30.8 million of remaining fair value at December 31, 2011.

Sales declines at our restaurants, unplanned increases in health insurance, commodity or labor costs, deterioration in overall economic conditions and challenges in the restaurant industry may result in future impairment charges. It is possible that changes in circumstances or changes in our judgments, assumptions and estimates, could result in a future impairment charge of a portion or all of our goodwill, other intangible assets or long-lived assets held and used.

During the year ended December 31, 2010, we did not incur any goodwill and other indefinite-lived intangible asset impairment charges or any other material impairment charges as a result of fair value measurements on a nonrecurring basis.

We recorded $91.4 million of impairment charges as a result of the fair value measurement on a nonrecurring basis of our long-lived assets held and used during the year ended December 31, 2009. The impaired long-lived assets had $9.3 million of remaining fair value at December 31, 2009.

We performed a separate valuation for five of our closed restaurant sites that collateralize the CMBS Loan using quoted prices from brokers for similar properties. The restaurant sites were written down to fair value resulting in impairment charges of $7.3 million (included in the total above) during the year ended December 31, 2009. We determined that the majority of these inputs are observable inputs that fall within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

Due to the third quarter of 2009 sale of our Cheeseburger in Paradise concept, we recorded a $46.0 million impairment charge (included in the total above) during the second quarter of 2009 to reduce the carrying value of this concept’s long-lived assets to their estimated fair market value. We used a weighted-average probability analysis and estimates of expected future cash flows to determine the fair value of this concept. We have determined that the majority of the inputs used to value this concept are unobservable inputs that fall within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy.

We used a discounted cash flow model to estimate the fair value of the remaining long-lived assets held and used in the total above. Discount rate and growth rate assumptions are derived from current economic conditions, expectations of management and projected trends of current operating results. We have determined that the majority of these inputs are unobservable inputs that fall within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. The long-lived assets were written down to fair value, resulting in impairment charges of $38.1 million (included in the total above) during the year ended December 31, 2009.

We recorded goodwill impairment charges of $58.1 million and indefinite-lived intangible asset impairment charges of $36.0 million during the year ended December 31, 2009 as a result of our annual impairment test. We test both our goodwill and our indefinite-lived intangible assets, which are trade names, for impairment by utilizing discounted cash flow models to estimate their fair values. These cash flow models

 

71


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

involve several assumptions. Changes in our assumptions could materially impact our fair value estimates. Assumptions critical to our fair value estimates are: (i) weighted-average cost of capital rates used to derive the present value factors used in determining the fair value of the reporting units and trade names; (ii) projected annual revenue growth rates used in the reporting unit and trade name models; and (iii) projected long-term growth rates used in the derivation of terminal year values. Other assumptions include estimates of projected capital expenditures and working capital requirements. These and other assumptions are impacted by economic conditions and expectations of management and will change in the future based on period-specific facts and circumstances. As a result, we have determined that the majority of the inputs used to value our goodwill and indefinite-lived intangible assets are unobservable inputs that fall within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy.

The following table presents the range of assumptions we used to derive our fair value estimates among our reporting units, which vary between goodwill and trade names, during the annual impairment test conducted in the second quarter of 2009:

 

     Assumptions  
     Goodwill      Trade Names  

Weighted-average cost of capital

     12.5% -15.0%         13.0% -14.0%   

Long-term growth rates

     3.0%         3.0%   

Annual revenue growth rates

     (6.9)% -12.0%         (3.9)% - 5.0%   

Stock-Based and Deferred Compensation Plans

Managing and Chef Partners

Historically, the managing partner of each company-owned domestic restaurant and the chef partner of each Fleming’s and Roy’s restaurant were required, as a condition of employment, to sign a five-year employment agreement and to purchase a non-transferable ownership interest in a partnership (“Management Partnership”) that provided management and supervisory services to his or her restaurant. The purchase price for a managing partner’s ownership interest was fixed at $25,000, and the purchase price for a chef partner’s ownership interest ranged from $10,000 to $15,000. Managing and chef partners had the right to receive monthly distributions from the Management Partnership based on a percentage of their restaurant’s monthly cash flows for the duration of the agreement, which varied by concept from 6% to 10% for managing partners and 2% to 5% for chef partners. Further, managing and chef partners were eligible to participate in the Partner Equity Plan (“PEP”), a deferred compensation program, upon completion of their five-year employment agreement.

In April 2011, we implemented modifications to our managing and chef partner compensation structure to provide greater incentives for sales and profit growth. Under the revised program, managing and chef partners continue to sign five-year employment agreements and receive monthly distributions of the same percentage of their restaurant’s cash flow as under the prior program. However, under the revised program, in lieu of participation in the PEP, managing partners and chef partners are eligible to receive deferred compensation payments under a new Partner Ownership Account Plan (the “POA”). The POA places greater emphasis on year-over-year growth in cash flow than the PEP. Managing and chef partners will receive a greater value under the POA than they would have received under the PEP if certain levels of year-over-year cash flow growth are achieved and a lesser value than under the PEP if these levels are not achieved.

The POA requires managing and chef partners to make an initial deposit of up to $10,000 into their “Partner Investment Account,” and we will make a bookkeeping contribution to each partner’s “Company Contributions Account” no later than the end of February of each year following the completion of each year (or partial year where applicable) under the partner’s employment agreement. The value of each of our contributions will be equal to a percentage of the partner’s restaurant’s positive distributable cash flow plus, if the restaurant has been open at least 18 calendar months, a percentage of the year-over-year increase in the restaurant’s positive distributable cash flow in accordance with the terms described in the partner’s employment agreement.

 

72


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

The revised program also provides an annual bonus known as the President’s Club, paid in addition to the monthly distributions of cash flow, designed to reward increases in annual sales above the concept sales plan with a required flow-through percentage of the incremental sales to cash flow. Managing and chef partners whose restaurants achieve certain annual sales targets (and the required flow-through percentage) receive a bonus equal to a percentage of the incremental sales, such percentage determined by the sales target achieved.

Amounts credited to each partner’s account under the POA may be allocated by the partner among benchmark funds offered under the POA, and the account balances of the partner will increase or decrease based on the performance of the benchmark funds. Upon termination of employment, all remaining balances in the Company Contributions Account in the POA are forfeited unless the partner has been with us for twenty years or more. Unless previously forfeited under the terms of the POA, 50% of the partner’s total account balances generally will be distributed in the March following the completion of the initial five-year contract term with subsequent distributions varying based on the length of continued employment as a partner. The deferred compensation obligations under the POA are our unsecured obligations.

All managing and chef partners who execute new employment agreements after May 1, 2011 are required to participate in the new partner program, including the POA. Managing and chef partners with a current employment agreement scheduled to expire December 1, 2011 or later had the opportunity (from April 27, 2011 through July 27, 2011) to amend their employment agreements to convert their existing partner program to participation in the new partner program, including the POA, effective June 1, 2011. As a result of this conversion, $2.7 million of our total partner deposit liability was accelerated for the return of partners’ capital that was required under the old program. As of December 31, 2011, our POA liability was $8.0 million which was recorded in the line item “Partner deposits and accrued partner obligations” in our Consolidated Balance Sheet.

Upon the closing of the Merger, certain stock options that had been granted to managing and chef partners under a pre-merger managing partner stock plan (the “MP Stock Plan”) upon completion of a previous employment contract were converted into the right to receive cash in the form of a “Supplemental PEP” contribution. Additionally, all outstanding, unvested partner employment grants of restricted stock under the MP Stock Plan were converted into the right to receive cash on a deferred basis. Additionally, certain members of management were given the option to either convert some or all of their restricted stock granted under the pre-merger stock plan in the same manner as managing partners or convert some or all of it into restricted stock of Kangaroo Holdings, now known as Bloomin’ Brands. Grants of restricted stock under the pre-merger stock plan that converted into the right to receive cash are referred to as “Restricted Stock Contributions.”

As of December 31, 2011, our total vested liability with respect to obligations primarily under the PEP, Supplemental PEP and Restricted Stock Contributions was approximately $107.8 million, of which $11.8 million and $96.0 million was included in the line items “Accrued and other current liabilities” and “Other long-term liabilities,” respectively, in our Consolidated Balance Sheet. As of December 31, 2010, our total vested liability with respect to obligations primarily under the PEP, Supplemental PEP and Restricted Stock Contributions was approximately $101.4 million, of which $14.0 million and $87.5 million was included in the line items “Accrued and other current liabilities” and “Other long-term liabilities,” respectively, in our Consolidated Balance Sheet. Partners and management may allocate the contributions into benchmark investment funds, and these amounts due to participants will fluctuate according to the performance of their allocated investments and may differ materially from the initial contribution and current obligation.

Prior to the Merger, certain partners participating in the PEP were to receive common stock (“Partner Shares”) upon completion of their employment contract. Upon closing of the Merger, these partners were entitled to receive a deferred payment of cash instead of common stock upon completion of their current employment term. Partners will not receive the deferred cash payment if they resign or are terminated for cause prior to completing their current employment terms. There will not be any future earnings or losses on these amounts prior to payment to the partners. The amount accrued for the Partner Shares obligation was approximately $0.7

 

73


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

million as of December 31, 2011 and was included in the line item “Accrued and other current liabilities” in our Consolidated Balance Sheet. The amount accrued for the Partner Shares obligation was approximately $6.6 million as of December 31, 2010, of which $6.5 million and $0.1 million was included in the line items “Accrued and other current liabilities” and “Other long-term liabilities,” respectively, in our Consolidated Balance Sheet.

As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, we had approximately $56.9 million and $58.0 million, respectively, in various corporate owned life insurance policies and another $0.3 million and $1.0 million, respectively, of restricted cash, both of which are held within an irrevocable grantor or “rabbi” trust account for settlement of our obligations under the PEP, Supplemental PEP, Restricted Stock Contributions and POA. We are the sole owner of any assets within the rabbi trust and participants are considered our general creditors with respect to assets within the rabbi trust.

As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, there were $55.6 million and $49.0 million, respectively, of unfunded obligations related to the PEP, Supplemental PEP, Restricted Stock Contributions, Partner Shares liabilities and POA, excluding amounts not yet contributed to the partners’ investment funds, which may require the use of cash resources in the future.

We require the use of capital to fund the PEP and the POA as each managing and chef partner earns a contribution, and currently estimate funding requirements ranging from $21.0 million to $23.0 million for PEP and from $4.0 million to $6.0 million for POA in each of the two years through December 31, 2013. Actual funding of the current PEP and POA obligations and future funding requirements may vary significantly depending on timing of partner contracts, forfeiture rates and numbers of partner participants and may differ materially from estimates.

Area Operating Partners

Area operating partners are required, as a condition of employment and within 30 days of the opening of his or her first restaurant, to make an initial investment of $50,000 in the Management Partnership that provides supervisory services to the restaurants that the area operating partner oversees. This interest gives the area operating partner the right to distributions from the Management Partnership based on a percentage of his or her restaurants’ monthly cash flows for the duration of the agreement, typically ranging from 4% to 9%. We have the option to purchase an area operating partner’s interest in the Management Partnership after the restaurant has been open for a five-year period on the terms specified in the agreement.

For restaurants opened on or after January 1, 2007, the area operating partner’s percentage of cash distributions and buyout percentage is calculated based on the associated restaurant’s return on investment compared to our targeted return on investment and may range from 3.0% to 12.0%. This percentage is determined after the first five full calendar quarters from the date of the associated restaurant’s opening and is adjusted each quarter thereafter based on a trailing 12-month restaurant return on investment. The buy-out percentage is the area operating partner’s average distribution percentage for the 24 months immediately preceding the buy-out. Buyouts are paid in cash within 90 days or paid over a two-year period.

In 2011, we also began a version of the President’s Club annual bonus described above under “—Managing and Chef Partners” for area operating partners to provide additional rewards for achieving sales targets with a required flow-through of the incremental sales to cash flow.

Highly Compensated Employees

We provide a deferred compensation plan for our highly compensated employees who are not eligible to participate in the OSI Restaurant Partners, LLC Salaried Employees 401(k) Plan and Trust. The deferred compensation plan allows these employees to contribute from 5% to 90% of their base salary and up to 100% of their cash bonus on a pre-tax basis to an investment account consisting of various investment fund options. We

 

74


Table of Contents
Index to Financial Statements

do not currently intend to provide any matching or profit-sharing contributions, and participants are fully vested in their deferrals and their related returns. Participants are considered unsecured general creditors in the event of our bankruptcy or insolvency.

Income Taxes

As of December 31, 2011, we had $482.1 million in cash and cash equivalents (excluding restricted cash of $24.3 million), of which approximately $82.2 million was held by foreign affiliates, a portion of which would be subject to additional taxes if repatriated to the United States. Based on domestic cash and working capital projections, we believe we will generate sufficient cash flows from our United States operations to meet our future debt repayment requirements, anticipated working capital needs and planned capital expenditures in the United States, as well as all of our other domestic business needs.

A provision for income taxes has not been recorded for any United States or additional foreign taxes on undistributed earnings related to our foreign affiliates as these earnings were and are expected to continue to be permanently reinvested. If we identify an exception to our general reinvestment policy of undistributed earnings, additional taxes will be posted. It is not practical to determine the amount of unrecognized deferred income tax liabilities on the undistributed earnings. The international jurisdictions in which we operate do not have any known restrictions that would prohibit the repatriation of cash and cash equivalents.

Dividends

Payment of dividends by OSI to Bloomin’ Brands is prohibited under OSI’s credit agreements, except for certain limited circumstances.

Our board of directors does not intend to pay regular dividends on our common stock after the offering. However, we expect to reevaluate our dividend policy on a regular basis following the offering and may, subject to compliance with the covenants contained in our senior credit facility and other considerations, determine to pay dividends in the future.

Other Material Commitments

Our contractual obligations, debt obligations, commitments and debt guarantees as of December 31, 2011 are summarized in the table below (in thousands):

 

     Payments Due By Period  
     Total      Less Than
1 Year
     1-3 Years      3-5 Years      More Than
5 Years
 

Contractual Obligations

              

Long-term debt (including current portion) (1)

   $ 2,084,790       $ 332,905       $ 1,025,357       $ 270,746       $ 455,782   

Interest (2)

     309,580         82,169         148,525         71,667         7,219   

Operating leases (3)

     503,379         106,258         179,945         110,046         107,130   

Purchase obligations (4)

     430,069         365,680         51,809         12,580         —     

Partner deposits and accrued partner obligations (5)

     113,725         15,044         52,659         12,669         33,353   

Other long-term liabilities (6)

     153,840         —           49,202         54,615         50,023   

Other current liabilities (7)

     41,383         41,383         —           —           —     
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

Total contractual obligations

   $ 3,636,766       $ 943,439       $ 1,507,497       $ 532,323       $ 653,507   
  

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

Debt Guarantees

              

Maximum availability of debt guarantees

   $ 25,957       $ —         $ 24,500       $ —         $ 1,457   

Amount outstanding under debt guarantees

     25,957         —           24,500         —           1,457   

Carrying amount of liabilities

     24,500         —