|Bid||0.00 x 0|
|Ask||0.00 x 0|
|Day's range||49.89 - 49.89|
|52-week range||49.89 - 49.89|
|Beta (5Y monthly)||1.83|
|PE ratio (TTM)||121.13|
|Forward dividend & yield||N/A (N/A)|
|1y target est||N/A|
Fast food giant Taco Bell is ramping up hiring and announced today that it will be hiring 30,000 workers this summer.
Small businesses weigh their future, as economies begin to reopen. The economic pressures are magnified for small businesses, which account for 50% of total employment in the U.S. A recent study by Deutsche Bank found that one quarter of small businesses only had enough cash on hand to operate for one to two more months, while 7% said they had no liquidity.
(Bloomberg) -- On March 13, Danny Meyer shut all of his 19 New York restaurants, including Gramercy Tavern and Union Square Café, because of coronavirus safety concerns. A few days later, the chief executive officer of Union Square Hospitality Group laid off 2,000 employees.Now, Meyer says his dining rooms will stay closed for the foreseeable future. “We won’t be welcoming guests into our full-service restaurants for a very long time—probably not until there’s a vaccine,” he says. “There is no interest or excitement on my part to having a half-full dining room while everyone is getting their temperature taken and wearing masks, for not much money.”“It’s very frustrating, but it’s the only safe way to go,” he adds. It’s a caution shared by fellow restaurateur Daniel Humm, who said he may not re-open Eleven Madison Park at all, and by David Chang who just announced the closing of his Chelsea restaurant Nishi and his Washington, DC, Momofuku location.Meyer, in the meantime, is taking the first steps back into business by opening his café Daily Provisions for take out service as early as next week. The storefront, which is next to Union Square Café on East 19th St., was designed for grab-and-go coffee, breakfast sandwiches, and signature crullers. Initially, it will open for curbside pickup of breakfast items, with an expanded menu expected to follow.Next, Meyer expects to open his pizza place Marta in the Flatiron District, for takeout, too. “We had been on the cusp of takeout at Daily Provisions, Marta, and Blue Smoke [the company’s barbecue spot] when we closed. It makes sense now,” he says.The CEO says he is also open to serving people outside his restaurant. “Among the few people left in the company are chefs and [general managers]. Each one is cooking up their own entrepreneurial scheme. Mike Anthony [chef of Gramercy Tavern] has plans to do farmers market meal kits. I’ve just urged all these guys to scare themselves with entrepreneurial skills and take risks.”There is a plan to start shipping a signature dish from each restaurant across the country via gourmet delivery service Goldbelly. (Meyer sits on the company’s advisory board; recently, Shake Shack Inc., the burger company he founded, began shipping nationwide via Goldbelly.)The restaurateur is also considering the possibility of outdoor dining, a topic that has gained momentum with the announcement by Polly Trottenberg, New York’s transportation commissioner, that the city is exploring ways for restaurants to increase al fresco seating space.“I would think about anything that is safe and profitable. If it’s not safe, we won’t do it, we all lose,” says Meyer. “Profitable matters, as well. The only way we can responsibly get back in the business of employing people is to not go out of business. It’s already incredibly hard to survive.”Meyer hopes, but does not guarantee, that he will reopen all his restaurants, especially with projected restrictions like a 50% reduction in capacity. “It does work for fast-casual and fine-casual. They never depended on you sitting in their restaurant, anyway,” he says. But places that have to worry about maître d’s and bartenders and florists and linens are in trouble. “As soon as you start racking up those fixed costs, you can’t do it at 50% revenue.” Still, he’s planning for the future. The Union Square Café team envisions a scenario with a chalkboard menu and a small number of dishes for the day as a way to cut costs by sourcing fewer ingredients.Although without a huge systemic change, he warns, his restaurants are doomed.“A lot of restaurateurs I’ve been speaking with—our underlying business model has been sorely challenged. The biggest fixed costs are rent and talent: places [are] paying more than they can afford, talent is not making the living they need to make, while the restaurant isn’t making margins they need to make,” says Meyer. “The system needs to change, or this crisis is only accelerating what we were heading for, anyway.”For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
With its stock down 32% over the past three months, it is easy to disregard Shake Shack (NYSE:SHAK). However, stock...
Yahoo Finance speaks with Wingstop CEO Charlie Morrison following a bang up first quarter. Here's what drove some savory sales gains.
(Bloomberg) -- A California software company that received a federal Paycheck Protection Program loan of more than $750,000 sued the government over new guidelines attempting to restrict who can get such assistance.Zumasys Inc. said in a suit filed Monday against the Small Business Administration and Treasury Department that it is now concerned it will have to pay back the forgivable loan the company and its two subsidiaries received in mid-April, some of which has already been spent to keep nearly 70 employees on payroll.Facing criticism that much of the money intended to help small businesses weather the economic shock of the coronavirus pandemic was going to larger enterprises, the government said on April 23 that companies applying for PPP loans were required to certify that federal assistance was “necessary,” taking into account their access to other sources of liquidity.But San Clemente-based Zumasys says it is entitled to the money under the original terms, and the company wants an order canceling the April 23 guidance and barring the government from enforcing it.The SBA and Treasury Department didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment on the suit.Several large companies that initially took PPP loans, including Shake Shack Inc. and Ruth’s Chris Steak House Inc., have returned them in response to public criticism.Read More: Resentment Grows on Main Street Over Bailout Winners and LosersThe company, which provides software programming and data security services, says it “has access to other credit facilities, but the uncertainty of current economic conditions, and purpose of the PPP, caused Plaintiffs to request PPP loan funds to support ongoing operations.” Zumasys said enforcing the new guidance would thwart the purpose of the federal stimulus program by putting companies deeper in debt.Mona Hanna, a lawyer for Zumasys with Michelman & Robinson in Irvine, California, said many companies would likely terminate workers or shut down completely rather than take on more debt in the current economic environment.”And that’s why we filed this lawsuit,” she said. “We want the court to tell us whether or not this guidance, given by the SBA and Treasury, is valid, or is it in fact invalid and unenforceable. We need to know.”(Adds comment from plaintiff’s lawyer)For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
Shake Shack Inc. ("Shake Shack" or the "Company") (NYSE: SHAK) today reported its financial results for the first quarter ended March 25, 2020, a period that included 13 weeks.
Here's a look at some of the controversial businesses — from marijuana dispensaries to casinos — that some lawmakers want to be included in the Paycheck Protection Program.
Before the coronavirus-induced lockdowns, Farmgirl Flowers was on track to post a record $50 million in sales this year, but Founder and CEO Christina Stembel says “everything changed” March 16.
McDonald's is testing a new restaurant focusing on social distancing and safety in the Netherlands amid the COVID-19 outbreak.
Yahoo Finance speaks with Dunkin' Brands CEO David Hoffmann about the outlook for the restaurant chain coming out of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The U.S. travel industry wants the Paycheck Protection Program component of the $2 trillion coronavirus relief package to reflect the monthly reality of small business expenses. Industry groups like the U.S. Travel Association and the American Hotel & Lodging Association sent a letter to U.S. House and Senate leadership earlier this month outlining why they […]
Even as a handful of states look to slowly allow businesses to reopen, Raising Cane's Chicken Fingers is in no rush, according to the CEO.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- What were they thinking, those publicly traded companies like Shake Shack Inc., Ruth’s Hospitality Group and dozens of others — companies that could hardly be called small — that grabbed a slice of the Paycheck Protection Program, an act for which they have been duly flogged?Actually, it’s not that hard to figure out: They grabbed the money because it was there to be grabbed. “To the extent we believe we are eligible and parts of the package will benefit the company, then we’ll look to pursue application options,” a Shake Shack representative told the Wall Street Journal soon after the PPP was passed by Congress.Thanks to lobbying by the restaurant and hotel industries, someone slipped a loophole into the bill making it possible for big chains to apply for funds. The companies had banking relationships that all but guaranteed that they would be at the head of the line when it came time to apply. Besides, they had furloughed employees to consider, just like local hair salons.In other words, they acted precisely the way companies always acted before the coronavirus outbreak. They were looking out for themselves, with little regard for anyone else. Yes, the program had been described from the start as aiming to benefit the truly small companies, the ones with no other access to capital. And yes, it was obvious that the initial $349 billion wasn’t nearly enough for the tens of thousands of small companies that needed federal help.But the rules were the rules, right? For instance, the rules allowed holding companies to apply separately for each subsidiary they controlled — and receive multiple multimillion-dollar checks. That’s what President Donald Trump’s pal Monty Bennett did: He got $58.7 million for various hotel properties he owns.And maybe, pre-coronavirus, that would have been the end of it. But the virus has made Americans acutely aware of inequities that had once been easy — or at least easier — to overlook. School closings sharpened awareness of the achievement gap between poor and well-to-do kids. Work-from-home policies helped keep white-collar employees safe while many blue-collar workers had to risk illness and even death because they didn’t have that luxury. It had become obvious that the virus struck the vulnerable harder than people with means.The way that first round of PPP money was distributed seemed like yet another example of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. But this time, the hyperawareness brought on by the coronavirus led to an enormous outcry, which included newspaper exposes and condemnations from lawmakers and even Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin.The publicity wasn’t just bad; it was horrible. Small-business people who had been shut out complained bitterly about how the PPP had been rigged for the bigger companies. Reporters found recipients with ties to Trump, like Bennett. Others looked through federal filings, searching for public companies that had taken PPP loans. (The Wall Street Journal found 124 of them, with a median PPP loan of $2.8 million.) One company that landed a $10 million loan was MiMedx, which had recently paid $6.5 million to settle charges brought by the Justice Department. Critics accused it of using its PPP loan to cover its settlement with the government. (MiMedx denied this.)Immediately, Shake Shack, a company founded by Danny Meyer, a highly respected restaurateur, gave back its $10 million. So did a number of other companies, including AutoNation, the Los Angeles Lakers, and, eventually, Ruth’s Hospitality. It wasn’t just because of the bad publicity, or at least I don’t think it was. It was because executives like Meyer realized that, even though Shake Shack had done nothing wrong, it was unfair that his company, with its $2.3 billion market value and $600 million in annual revenue, was taking money that so many smaller companies needed more.Of course, there are also companies that have not given the money back. In an effort to twist their arm, Mnuchin said that companies that have taken more than $2 million would be audited before the loan could be forgiven. (Loans can be forgiven if the companies keep their employees on the payroll for eight weeks.) He also said that companies that wrongfully took PPP money could face “criminal liability.”As threats go, that’s pretty weak, given that most of the companies simply took advantage of the language in the law. And most of the big companies that took loans can well afford to pay them back, thus avoiding the threatened audit. Nonetheless, they should still give the money back now.They should do so because they have access to capital — in the equity and debt markets, as well as from banks — that is out of the grasp of the ordinary small-business person. They should do it because big companies that run into financial trouble can reorganize under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, while a corner pizza joint simply goes out of business. They should do it because small business is a critical element of American life, a source not just of jobs but of community.They should do it for the simple reason that it’s the right thing to do.There are people who believe that this crisis could lead to a reset of the values that have driven the business world the last quarter-century. One of the few upsides of the crisis has been a surge in caring for our neighbors and our fellow citizens. For their part, corporations have talked about putting their employees first, even at the expense of profits. Many of them raced to supply equipment the country needs to fight the virus.The companies that have given back their PPP loans are showing that they, too, care for more than just their quarterly numbers. They did something to help small companies that will never affect their own bottom lines. The companies that haven’t given the money back? They’re showing that they’re not yet willing to look beyond their narrow self-interest.This is their test. Giving back the PPP money is the only way they can pass.This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Joe Nocera is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering business. He has written business columns for Esquire, GQ and the New York Times, and is the former editorial director of Fortune. His latest project is the Bloomberg-Wondery podcast "The Shrink Next Door."For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
McDonald’s reported revenue and earnings that contracted in the first quarter compared to last year amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
Act III Holdings managing partner and Panera Bread founder Ron Shaich weighs in on food ordering beyond the worst of the coronavirus.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- In the pre-coronavirus days, the Los Angeles Lakers was one of the most valuable and profitable sports franchises on the planet. Forbes estimated last year that the team earned $147 million in 2018 and would fetch about $3.7 billion in a sale. A trust controlled by the children of the late Jerry Buss, a wealthy investor, owns a majority stake in the team. Other co-owners include Philip Anschutz, a billionaire with a broad portfolio of holdings in energy, real estate, media, entertainment and other industries; Edward Roski Jr., a successful commercial real estate developer; and Patrick Soon-Shiong, who owns the Los Angeles Times.The Lakers, as ESPN reported on Monday, received $4.6 million in bailout funds from the federal government as part of the $349 billion Paycheck Protection Program meant to backstop struggling small businesses sideswiped by Covid-19. The Lakers operation has fewer than 500 employees, which qualifies it as a small business under the government’s aid guidelines. But the Lakers hardly seem as immediately vulnerable, or without access to other resources, as, say, your corner grocer, baker, barber or dry cleaner. The Lakers, undoubtedly aware of a wave of recent disclosures about unlikely companies receiving PPP funds, told ESPN it returned the $4.6 million.The Lakers said it decided to disgorge the money after learning the entire $349 billion in federal aid was scooped up in two weeks, thereby leaving out tens of millions of other small businesses the team described as “most in need.” Indeed, only an insignificant percentage — 5% or less — of U.S. small businesses appear to have received funding from the problem-riddled program according to my own take on the data. And much of it, according to Bloomberg News, hasn’t even found its way to small businesses in regions most severely derailed by the coronavirus pandemic.Despite gaping holes in the program’s launch — or perhaps precisely because of them — the government had to approve a second, $380 billion round of funding last week. The doors opened to prospective small-business borrowers on the new round on Monday, and, like the first round, application and administrative problems erupted. Banks also took to social media to complain about all of the snafus they were encountering.The Treasury Department and the Small Business Administration have overseen the PPP program and haven’t provided enough public information about exactly which companies have received money and how they were screened. It bodes poorly for how effectively this new huge pool of funding will be deployed.“It is reckless for the Small Business Administration and Treasury Department to release a second round of funding before clarifying the major gaps and issues with the Paycheck Protection Program. The program still lacks clear terms for forgiveness, rules prohibiting banks from again prioritizing applications of larger clients, and guidance for new lenders to come online to the program,” the Main Street Alliance, an advocacy group for small businesses, said in a statement on Monday. “With funding likely to run out in 48 hours, it is ludicrous that Congress thinks it has done its job supporting small businesses.”Fortunately, a flow of valuable reporting in recent days has identified some questionable recipients of federal aid and offers a window into how haphazard and inequitable the PPP program already appears to be. Consider:NBC reported that its analysis of about 200 PPP recipients revealed at least a dozen examples of firms possibly leveraging relationships, gaming the program or overcoming problematic backgrounds to receive funding. That group includes Cinedigm Corp., an entertainment company controlled by a Chinese investment firm, and MiMedx Group, a skin-graft company repeatedly mired in law enforcement investigations. It also includes Hallador Energy, Crawford United and Flotek Industries, all of which have ties to the Trump administration and which collectively snared $18.3 million in PPP funds. (Hallador and Crawford didn’t respond to queries from NBC; Flotek said it didn’t take advantage of White House relationships to obtain funding.) The Associated Press reported that at least 94 PPP recipients were publicly traded companies with market values greater than $100 million. About a quarter of those companies had warned investors long before the coronavirus arrived that their fortunes had so soured that they might not be able to stay in business. The AP also said that its review “found examples of companies that had foreign owners and that were delisted from U.S. stock exchanges, or threatened with removal, because of their poor stock performance before the coronavirus hit. Other companies have had annual losses for years.” The Washington Post reported that AutoNation Inc., a national network of automobile dealers with 26,000 employees and a $3.2 billion market valuation, received $77 million in PPP funding. “AutoNation used separate tax identification numbers assigned to dozens of its more than 300 locations to apply for at least $266 million in funds for separate dealerships,” the Post reported. I’ve noted in an earlier column that a loophole in the $2.6 trillion federal bailout program would allow large chains and franchises that might not otherwise qualify as small businesses to apply for PPP aid on a store-by-store or location-by-location basis. The Wall Street Journal reported that dozens of publicly traded firms, including Accelerate Diagnostics Inc. and DMC Global Inc., received $500 million in PPP funds. The New York Times and Bloomberg News reported that a group of publicly traded luxury hotel companies controlled by lodging magnate and Trump donor Monty Bennett received more than $50 million in PPP aid. Bloomberg has also reported that IDT Corp., Universal Stainless and Lindblad Expeditions Holdings Inc. — all companies that have more than 500 employees — received nearly $27 million. (IDT said it’s returning the $10 million it received.) I wrote earlier about the complaints targeting Shake Shack Inc., Potbelly Corp. and Ruth’s Hospitality Group Inc. — all large restaurant chains — when they disclosed they had received PPP funding.All of this is just for starters. Much still seems to be amiss with the $729 billion avalanche of federal funds that have cascaded toward banks and small businesses, and we’ll undoubtedly learn of more problems now that we’ve entered the program’s second act. And we still don’t know whether federal aid it will have its desired effect: supporting workers left in the cold by the pandemic while also ensuring that the unprecedented crisis enveloping small businesses doesn’t become an apocalypse.This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Timothy L. O'Brien is a senior columnist for Bloomberg Opinion.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
On April 16, the $349 billion first round of the government’s Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) for small business coronavirus relief loans ran out of money after just 13 days.