Home / Markets / Industries / Industrials
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Darden's 4Q Tops Estimates; Boosted by New Chains
FOXBusiness
Darden Restaurants, operator of the Olive Garden and Red Lobster restaurants, reported an increase in fiscal fourth-quarter profit even as the economy slowed and food prices soared.
Reporting after the market’s close on Tuesday, Darden (DRI) beat the Street by posting adjusted-earnings of 78 cents per share on a 25% jump in sales to $1.83 billion. A year ago, the company earned 67 cents. Analysts polled by Thomson Reuters had been looking for earnings of 75 cents on $1.82 billion in revenue.
Darden, which owns and operates more than 1,300 restaurants in 49 states, was boosted by the addition of recently acquired LongHorn Steakhouse and Capital Grille chains.
While sales from its U.S. Olive Garden locations rose by 5.8% in the fourth quarter, sales at Red Lobster and LongHorn Steakhouse declined.
For the full year, Darden's adjusted-profit rose to $2.74 per share, topping estimates by a penny. Darden's total sales from continuing operations rose by 19% to $6.63 billion.
Darden also upped its quarterly dividend to 20 cents per share, up 11%.
Looking ahead, Darden said it plans to open approximately 75 to 80 new restaurants in fiscal 2009, boosting total sales growth by a range of 14% to 15%.
The market was bullish on Darden’s stock during regular trading on Tuesday, sending the stock up 95 cents, or 3.1%, to $31.60. Shares of Darden have lost almost 30% of their value from a year ago, but are up more than 10% year-to-date.
Darden was also able to beat the Street in its fiscal third-quarter as well, posting an 18% rise in profit.
FOX Translator
No data currently available.
No data currently available.
Some mutual funds want you to pay for the privilege of them (or your investment adviser) taking your money to invest. It's called a load, and it works like a cover charge to get into a nightclub. Luckily, there are such things as no-load funds. As the name implies, shares of these funds are sold without a fee paid to a broker or investment advisor.
The entire amount you invest in no-load funds goes to work for your returns. On the other hand, with load funds, right off the bat you're charged commission (not to mention other fees incurred over the life of the investment). Let's say, for example, you invest $25,000 into a load fund that charges a 5% commission. This costs you $1,250 off the top, bringing your actual investment down to only $23,750.
The often-cited horse race analogy argues against investing in load funds. Here's the logic behind it: Would you place a bet on a horse that had to start a race 200 yards behind the others? Well, maybe you would if you got a tip from a sketchy, trench coat-clad man in a dark alley. However, under most circumstances, it's not smart to put your money on that handicapped horse.
But some argue that at times that man in the trench coat (aka your broker) knows more about the horses than you do, and has a better shot at picking a winner. Also, sometimes these fees are unavoidable because some funds are available only through investment advisers.
Cost-benefit analysis can help determine when a load fund is worth it (in other words, when it will score you a load) and when it is better to "do it yourself" and avoid the fees. Load-fund fees range depending on share class and can cover a variety of costs, such as paper work and fund management.
