SEC Info  
  Home     Search     My Interests     Help     Sign In     Please Sign In  

Uno Restaurant Corp · PRER14A · On 6/27/01

Filed On 6/27/01 1:21pm ET   ·   SEC File 1-09573   ·   Accession Number 912057-1-521405

  in   Show  and 
Help... Wildcards:  ? (any letter),  * (many).  Logic:  for Docs: (and), (or);  for Text: (anywhere),  "(&)" (near).
  As Of               Filer                 Filing     As/For/On Docs:Pgs              Issuer               Agent

 6/27/01  Uno Restaurant Corp               PRER14A                1:215                                    Merrill Corp/FA

Revised Preliminary Proxy Solicitation Material   ·   Schedule 14A
Filing Table of Contents

Document/Exhibit                   Description                      Pages   Size 

 1: PRER14A     Revised Preliminary Proxy Solicitation Material      215  1,206K 


Document Table of Contents

Page (sequential) | (alphabetic) Top
 
11st Page
"Uno Restaurant Corporation
6Table of Contents
8Summary Term Sheet
11Questions and Answers About the Merger
17Cautionary Statement Concerning Forward-Looking Information
18Uno Restaurant Corporation Selected Historical Financial Data
20Market and Market Price
"Market Information
"Number of Stockholders
"Dividends
22The Special Meeting
"General
"Matters to be Considered at the Special Meeting
23Record Date and Voting Information
24Quorum
"Proxies; Revocation
"Expenses of Proxy Solicitation
"Adjournments
"Appraisal Rights
25The Participants
"Uno Restaurant Holdings Corporation
"Uno Acquisition Corp
26The Continuing Stockholders
27Special Factors
"Background of the Merger
39Recommendation of the Board of Directors; Fairness of the Merger
40Reasons for the Special Committee's Determination
44Reasons for the Board of Directors' Determination
45Determination of the Fairness of the Merger by Parent, Newco and the Affiliate Stockholders
47Forward Looking Information; Certain Projections
61Opinion of Financial Advisor to the Special Committee
73Limited Solicitation of Potential Acquirors
"Purpose and Structure of the Merger
74Alternatives to the Merger
75Effects of the Merger
77Risks that the Merger Will Not Be Completed
"Interests of the Continuing Stockholders in the Merger
81Stock Option Plans
84Certain Risks in the Event of Bankruptcy
"Merger Financing
90Estimated Fees and Expenses of the Merger
91Federal Income Tax Consequences
92Anticipated Accounting Treatment of Merger
"Certain Regulatory Matters
96Litigation Challenging the Merger
97The Merger Agreement
"The Merger
"Effective Time of Merger
"Certificate of Incorporation, Bylaws and Directors and Officers of Uno as the Surviving Corporation
"Conversion of Common Stock
98Payment For Shares
"Transfer of Shares
"Treatment of Stock Options
"Uno Stockholder Approval
99Indemnification and Insurance
"Representations and Warranties
101Conduct of Business Pending the Merger
"No Solicitation
102Access to Information
"Conditions to the Merger
103Waiver
104Termination of the Merger Agreement
105Expense Reimbursement
106Amendments
107Common Stock Purchase Information
"Purchases by Uno
"Purchases by the Continuing Stockholders
"Purchases by Parent and Newco and Their Directors and Executive Officers
"Recent Transactions
109Independent Auditors
"Future Stockholder Proposals
"Where Stockholders Can Find More Information
114Article I
119Article Ii
122Article Iii
124Article Iv
126Article V
131Article Vii
133Article Viii
147Item 1. Business
160Executive Officers of the Registrant
161Item 2. Properties
162Item 3. Legal Proceedings
"Item 4. Submission of Matters to A Vote of Security Holders
163Item 5. Market for Registrant's Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters
"Common Stock
164Item 6. Selected Financial Data
166Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
167Restaurant Sales
"Consumer Product Sales
"Franchise Income
"Cost of Food and Beverages
"Labor and Benefits
"Occupancy Costs
"Other Operating Costs
"Pre-Opening Costs
168Operating Income
"Interest and Other Expense
"Provision for Income Taxes
"Net Income
173Item 7a. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure About Market Risks
"Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
"Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
174Item 10. Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant
"Item 11. Executive Compensation
"Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management
"Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions
175Item 14. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules, and Reports on Form 8-K
180Report of Independent Auditors
183Consolidated Statements of Shareholders' Equity
184Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
185Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
199Consolidated Balance Sheets
200Consolidated Statements of Income
204General and administrative
"Depreciation and amortization
209Fair Value
"Item 5. Other Information
210Item 6. Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K
213Item 2. Acquisition or Disposition of Assets
"Item 7. Financial Statements and Exhibits
PRER14A1st Page of 215TOCTopPreviousNextBottomJust 1st
 
Sponsored Ads...

SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Amendment No. 2) [Download Table] Filed by the Registrant /X/ Filed by a Party other than the Registrant / / Check the appropriate box: /X/ Preliminary Proxy Statement / / CONFIDENTIAL, FOR USE OF THE COMMISSION ONLY (AS PERMITTED BY RULE 14A-6(E)(2)) / / Definitive Proxy Statement / / Definitive Additional Materials / / Soliciting Material Pursuant to Section240.14a-12 UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant) Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box): [Download Table] / / No fee required. /X/ Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(4) and 0-11. (1) Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies: Common Stock ---------------------------------------------------------- (2) Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies: 4,560,275 ---------------------------------------------------------- (3) Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined): $9.75 ---------------------------------------------------------- (4) Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction: $44,462,681 ---------------------------------------------------------- (5) Total fee paid: $8,893 ---------------------------------------------------------- / / Fee paid previously with preliminary materials. /X/ Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing. (1) Amount Previously Paid: $8,893 ---------------------------------------------------------- (2) Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.: Schedule 14A (File No. 5-39163) ---------------------------------------------------------- (3) Filing Party: Uno Restaurant Corporation ---------------------------------------------------------- (4) Date Filed: April 27, 2001 and June 6, 2001 ----------------------------------------------------------
PRER14A2nd Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 2nd
[LOGO] UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION 100 CHARLES PARK ROAD WEST ROXBURY, MASSACHUSETTS 02132 June , 2001 DEAR STOCKHOLDERS: You are cordially invited to attend a special meeting of stockholders of Uno Restaurant Corporation ("Uno"), to be held on , 2001, at 10:00 a.m. local time, at the offices of Brown, Rudnick, Freed & Gesmer located at One Financial Center, Boston, MA 02111. At the special meeting, you will be asked to consider and vote upon a proposal to adopt and approve the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of April 19, 2001, among Uno, Uno Restaurant Holdings Corporation ("Parent") and Uno Acquisition Corp. ("Newco"). Aaron D. Spencer, our chairman and majority stockholder, formed and is currently the sole stockholder of Parent. Newco is a wholly owned subsidiary of Parent. Under the merger agreement, Newco will be merged with and into Uno, with Uno as the surviving corporation. Upon completion of the merger, each issued and outstanding share of Uno common stock not owned by Parent will be entitled to receive $9.75 per share in cash, without interest. Prior to the merger, Mr. Spencer, Mr. Spencer's two adult children, Mark Spencer and Lisa Cohen, and Uno Associates, a general partnership owned 80% by Mr. Spencer and 10% by each of Mark Spencer and Lisa Cohen (collectively, the "Spencer Group"), will contribute substantially all their shares of Uno common stock in exchange for shares of capital stock of Parent. Parent will not be entitled to receive the $9.75 per share merger consideration. After the merger, Uno will continue its operations as a privately held company. Parent will be the sole stockholder of Uno as the surviving corporation. Current stockholders of Uno, other than the Spencer Group and four key executive officers of Uno, Craig S. Miller, Paul W. MacPhail, Alan M. Fox and Robert M. Vincent (collectively, the "Management Group"), will not participate in any future earnings and growth of Uno as the surviving corporation. The Spencer Group and the Management Group (collectively referred to as the "Continuing Stockholders") will own all of the equity in Parent. Uno stock option holders will continue as holders of options to purchase shares of common stock of Uno as the surviving corporation. After the merger, Uno may, but has not yet decided to, offer to repurchase and cancel outstanding stock options of Uno as the surviving corporation. NEITHER THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION NOR ANY STATE SECURITIES COMMISSION HAS APPROVED OR DISAPPROVED OF THIS TRANSACTION, PASSED UPON THE FAIRNESS OR MERITS OF THIS TRANSACTION, OR PASSED UPON THE ACCURACY OR ADEQUACY OF THE DISCLOSURE IN THIS DOCUMENT. ANY REPRESENTATION TO THE CONTRARY IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE. Details of the merger and the merger agreement are discussed in the enclosed proxy statement, the forepart of which includes a summary of the terms of the merger and certain questions and answers relating to the proposed transaction. A copy of the merger agreement is attached as Exhibit A to the proxy statement.
PRER14A3rd Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 3rd
The board of directors of Uno formed a special committee of independent directors who are not officers or employees of Uno, to evaluate, negotiate and, if appropriate, recommend the merger and the merger agreement. The board of directors, acting in part on the unanimous recommendation of the special committee of directors, has approved the merger and the merger agreement. The board of directors and special committee believe that the terms of the merger and the merger agreement are fair to, and in the best interest of, Uno stockholders, other than the Continuing Stockholders. In reaching their decision, the board of directors and the special committee considered, among other factors, the written opinion of Adams, Harkness & Hill Inc., the special committee's financial advisor. Based upon and subject to the considerations and limitations set forth in their opinion, Adams, Harkness & Hill concluded that the $9.75 per share cash consideration to be received in the merger by the stockholders of Uno is fair, from a financial point of view, to the stockholders of Uno other than the Continuing Stockholders. Not earlier than five days prior to the stockholders meeting, Adams, Harkness & Hill will deliver an updated opinion to the special committee. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS THAT THE STOCKHOLDERS OF UNO VOTE "FOR" THE ADOPTION AND APPROVAL OF THE MERGER AGREEMENT. The affirmative vote of a majority of the outstanding shares of Uno common stock is required to adopt and approve the merger agreement. While not required by the Delaware General Corporation Law, Uno's restated certificate of incorporation, as amended, or Uno's amended and restated bylaws, the merger also is conditioned upon the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of shares of common stock held by stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders. This condition may be waived with the approval of Parent, Newco, Uno and the special committee of the board of directors. Stockholders of Uno will be entitled to appraisal rights under Delaware law in connection with the merger as described in the accompanying proxy statement. IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO US THAT YOUR SHARES BE REPRESENTED AT THE SPECIAL MEETING, WHETHER OR NOT YOU PLAN TO ATTEND PERSONALLY. THEREFORE, YOU SHOULD COMPLETE AND SIGN THE ENCLOSED PROXY CARD AND RETURN IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE IN THE ENCLOSED POSTAGE PAID ENVELOPE. THIS WILL ENSURE THAT YOUR SHARES ARE REPRESENTED AT THE SPECIAL MEETING. The accompanying notice of meeting and proxy statement explain the merger and the merger agreement and provide specific information concerning the special meeting of stockholders. Please read these materials carefully. Sincerely, /s/ Craig S. Miller Craig S. Miller, President and Chief Executive Officer This proxy statement is dated , 2001 and is first being mailed to stockholders on or about , 2001.
PRER14A4th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 4th
UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION 100 CHARLES PARK ROAD WEST ROXBURY, MASSACHUSETTS 02132 NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS TO BE HELD ON , 2001 Notice is hereby given that a special meeting of the stockholders of Uno Restaurant Corporation ("Uno") will be held on , 2001 at 10:00 a.m. local time at the offices of Brown, Rudnick, Freed & Gesmer located at One Financial Center, Boston, MA 02111 for the following purposes: 1. To consider and vote upon a proposal to adopt and approve the Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of April 19, 2001, among Uno Restaurant Holdings Corporation ("Parent"), Uno Acquisition Corp., ("Newco"), and Uno, pursuant to which Newco will be merged with and into Uno with Uno being the surviving corporation and each stockholder of Uno other than Parent will be entitled to receive $9.75 per share in cash, without interest, for each share of Uno common stock in accordance with and subject to the terms and conditions contained in the merger agreement. The merger agreement is more fully described in the accompanying proxy statement and a copy of the merger agreement is attached as Exhibit A to the accompanying proxy statement. 2. To consider, act upon and transact such other matters as may properly come before the special meeting or any adjournments or postponements thereof. The affirmative vote of a majority of the outstanding shares of Uno common stock is required to adopt and approve the merger agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby, including the merger. While not required by the Delaware General Corporation Law, Uno's restated certificate of incorporation, as amended, or Uno's amended and restated bylaws, unless waived by the parties, the merger also is conditioned upon the affirmative vote of a majority of shares of common stock held by stockholders other than Aaron D. Spencer, Uno Associates, Mark Spencer and Lisa Cohen and four key executive officers of Uno, Craig S. Miller, Paul W. MacPhail, Alan M. Fox and Robert M. Vincent, each of whom will continue to own an indirect equity interest in Uno as the surviving corporation through their ownership of the equity of Parent. YOUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS, BASED IN PART UPON THE UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION OF A SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, RECOMMENDS THAT YOU VOTE "FOR" ADOPTION AND APPROVAL OF THE MERGER AGREEMENT. The board of directors has fixed the close of business on June 19, 2001 as the record date for determining the stockholders entitled to notice of and to vote at the special meeting and any adjournments or postponements thereof. Only holders of record of shares of Uno common stock at the close of business on the record date are entitled to notice of and to vote at the special meeting. If the merger agreement is adopted and approved by the stockholders at the special meeting and the merger is completed, any stockholder (1) who files with Uno before the taking of the vote on the adoption and approval of the merger agreement a written demand stating that he or she intends to seek appraisal for his or her shares of common stock if the merger is completed and (2) whose shares are not voted in favor of the merger agreement will have the right to seek appraisal of his or her shares of common stock within 120 days after the date a certificate of merger is filed with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware. Uno and any stockholder seeking an appraisal shall have the rights and duties and shall follow the procedures set forth in Section 262 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B to the accompanying proxy statement. See the section entitled "Special Factors--Appraisal Rights" in the proxy statement for more information.
PRER14A5th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 5th
YOUR VOTE IS VERY IMPORTANT REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY SHARES OF UNO COMMON STOCK YOU OWN. WHETHER OR NOT YOU PLAN TO ATTEND THE SPECIAL MEETING, YOU ARE REQUESTED TO SIGN, DATE AND RETURN THE ENCLOSED PROXY WITHOUT DELAY IN THE ENCLOSED POSTAGE PAID ENVELOPE. YOU MAY REVOKE YOUR PROXY AT ANY TIME PRIOR TO ITS EXERCISE. IF YOU ARE PRESENT AT THE SPECIAL MEETING OR ANY ADJOURNMENTS THEREOF, YOU MAY REVOKE YOUR PROXY AND VOTE PERSONALLY ON THE MATTERS PROPERLY BROUGHT BEFORE THE SPECIAL MEETING. By Order of the Board of Directors /s/ GEORGE W. HERZ II George W. Herz II Secretary West Roxbury, Massachusetts , 2001
PRER14A6th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 6th
TABLE OF CONTENTS [Download Table] SUMMARY TERM SHEET.......................................... 1 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE MERGER...................... 4 CAUTIONARY STATEMENT CONCERNING FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION............................................... 10 UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION SELECTED HISTORICAL FINANCIAL DATA...................................................... 11 MARKET AND MARKET PRICE..................................... 13 Market Information........................................ 13 Number of Stockholders.................................... 13 Dividends................................................. 13 THE SPECIAL MEETING......................................... 15 General................................................... 15 Matters to be Considered at the Special Meeting........... 15 Record Date and Voting Information........................ 16 Quorum.................................................... 17 Proxies; Revocation....................................... 17 Expenses of Proxy Solicitation............................ 17 Adjournments.............................................. 17 Appraisal Rights.......................................... 17 THE PARTICIPANTS............................................ 18 Uno Restaurant Corporation................................ 18 Uno Restaurant Holdings Corporation....................... 18 Uno Acquisition Corp...................................... 18 The Continuing Stockholders............................... 19 SPECIAL FACTORS............................................. 20 Background of the Merger.................................. 20 Recommendation of the Board of Directors; Fairness of the Merger.................................................. 32 Determination of the Fairness of the Merger by Parent, Newco and the Affiliate Stockholders.................... 38 Forward Looking Information; Certain Projections.......... 40 Opinion of Financial Advisor to the Special Committee..... 54 Purpose and Structure of the Merger....................... 66 Alternatives to the Merger................................ 67 Effects of the Merger..................................... 68 Risks that the Merger Will Not Be Completed............... 70 Interests of the Continuing Stockholders in the Merger.... 70 Certain Risks in the Event of Bankruptcy.................. 77 Merger Financing.......................................... 77 Estimated Fees and Expenses of the Merger................. 83 Federal Income Tax Consequences........................... 84 Anticipated Accounting Treatment of Merger................ 85 Certain Regulatory Matters................................ 85 Appraisal Rights.......................................... 86 Litigation Challenging the Merger......................... 89 THE MERGER AGREEMENT........................................ 90 The Merger................................................ 90 Effective Time of Merger.................................. 90 Certificate of Incorporation, Bylaws and Directors and Officers of Uno as the Surviving Corporation............ 90 i
PRER14A7th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 7th
[Download Table] Conversion of Common Stock................................ 90 Payment For Shares........................................ 91 Transfer of Shares........................................ 91 Treatment of Stock Options................................ 91 Uno Stockholder Approval.................................. 91 Indemnification and Insurance............................. 92 Representations and Warranties............................ 92 Conduct of Business Pending the Merger.................... 94 No Solicitation........................................... 94 Access to Information..................................... 95 Conditions to the Merger.................................. 95 Waiver.................................................... 96 Termination of the Merger Agreement....................... 97 Expense Reimbursement..................................... 98 Amendments................................................ 99 COMMON STOCK PURCHASE INFORMATION........................... 100 Purchases by Uno.......................................... 100 Purchases by the Continuing Stockholders.................. 100 Purchases by Parent and Newco and Their Directors and Executive Officers...................................... 100 Recent Transactions....................................... 100 SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT................................................ 101 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS........................................ 102 FUTURE STOCKHOLDER PROPOSALS................................ 102 WHERE STOCKHOLDERS CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION................ 102 Exhibit A Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of April 19, 2001 among Uno, Parent and Newco..... A-1 Exhibit B Section 262 of Delaware General Corporation Law....................................................... B-1 Exhibit C Fairness Opinion of Adams, Harkness & Hill Inc. dated April 4, 2001............................. C-1 Exhibit D Information relating to the directors and executive officers of Uno, the Continuing Stockholders, Parent and Newco and the principals of Uno Associates................... D-1 Exhibit E Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 1, 2000.......................... E-1 Exhibit F Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended April 1, 2001.................... F-1 Exhibit G Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 29, 2001........................................... G-1 ii
PRER14A8th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 8th
SUMMARY TERM SHEET This summary term sheet briefly describes the material terms of the proposed merger of Uno with Newco and may not contain all of the information that is important to you. We urge you to read this entire proxy statement carefully, including the exhibits. The term "Newco" refers to Uno Acquisition Corp. and the term "Parent" refers to Uno Restaurant Holdings Corporation. - THE MERGER. Uno has entered into a merger agreement that provides for the merger of Uno with a newly formed corporation, Newco, controlled by Aaron D. Spencer, our chairman and majority stockholder. Following the merger, Uno will cease to be a publicly held company. See "The Merger Agreement" beginning on page 90. - PAYMENT. In the merger, all shares of Uno common stock other than those held by Parent will be converted into the right to receive $9.75 in cash, without interest. Only stockholders who do not properly elect to seek appraisal rights under Delaware law will be entitled to receive the merger consideration. See "The Merger Agreement" beginning on page 90. - UNO. Uno Restaurant Corporation owns and operates 113 and franchises 68 casual dining, full-service restaurants operating primarily under the name Pizzeria Uno ... Chicago Bar & Grill. Uno also distributes branded and non-branded, Chicago-style deep-dish pizza, calzones, and other pizza products. Uno's common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol "UNO." The board of directors of Uno, based in part on the unanimous recommendation of the special committee, has unanimously determined that the terms of the merger agreement and the merger are fair to, and in the best interests of, Uno stockholders, other than Aaron D. Spencer, Uno's chairman and majority stockholder, Mr. Spencer's two adult children, Mark Spencer and Lisa Cohen, Uno Associates, a general partnership owned 80% by Mr. Spencer and 10% by each of Mark Spencer and Lisa Cohen, and by four key executive officers of Uno, Craig S. Miller, Paul W. MacPhail, Alan M. Fox and Robert M. Vincent (the "Continuing Stockholders"). The board of directors recommends the adoption and approval of the merger agreement by Uno stockholders. See "The Participants" beginning on page 18 and "Special Factors--Recommendation of the Board of Directors; Fairness of the Merger" beginning on page 32. - PARENT. Uno Restaurant Holdings Corporation is a newly organized Delaware corporation currently owned by Mr. Spencer. Immediately following the merger, Parent will be owned by the Continuing Stockholders. Parent will be the sole stockholder of Uno as the surviving corporation. Parent, Uno Associates and Mr. Spencer, Craig S. Miller, Paul W. MacPhail, Alan M. Fox and Robert M. Vincent, believe that the merger is fair to the stockholders of Uno other than the Continuing Stockholders. See "The Participants" beginning on page 18 and "Special Factors--Determination of the Fairness of the Merger by Parent, Newco and the Affiliate Stockholders" beginning on page 38. - NEWCO. Uno Acquisition Corp. is a newly organized Delaware corporation wholly owned by Uno Restaurant Holdings Corporation, Parent. Newco was formed solely for the purpose of engaging in the merger transaction. Newco believes that the merger is fair to the stockholders of Uno other than the Continuing Stockholders. See "The Participants" beginning on page 18. - SPECIAL COMMITTEE. Uno's board of directors formed a special committee of directors to evaluate, negotiate and, if appropriate, recommend the merger and the terms of the merger agreement with Parent and Newco. The special committee consists solely of independent directors who are not officers or employees of Uno and who have no financial interest in the completion of the merger different from Uno stockholders and option holders generally. The members of the special committee are Tamara P. Davis, chairman of the special committee, John T. Gerlach, Kenneth D. Hill and James J. Kerasiotes. See "Special Factors--Background of the Merger" beginning on page 20 and "--Recommendation of the Board of Directors; Fairness of the Merger" beginning on page 32. 1
PRER14A9th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 9th
- OPINION OF FINANCIAL ADVISOR. In deciding to approve the terms of the merger agreement and the merger, one factor the board of directors and the special committee considered was the opinion of the special committee's financial advisor, Adams, Harkness & Hill Inc. Adams, Harkness & Hill concluded that the consideration to be received pursuant to the merger agreement is fair, from a financial viewpoint, to the Uno stockholders, other than the Continuing Stockholders. The complete Adams, Harkness & Hill opinion, including applicable limitations and assumptions, describes the basis for the opinion and is attached as Exhibit C to this proxy statement. See "Special Factors--Opinion of Financial Advisor to the Special Committee" beginning on page 54. - STOCKHOLDER VOTE. You are being asked to consider and vote upon a proposal to adopt and approve the merger agreement. Under Delaware law, the merger agreement must be adopted and approved by the affirmative vote of a majority of the outstanding shares of our common stock. In addition, the merger is conditioned upon the adoption and approval of the merger agreement by the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of Uno common stock other than those held by Parent and the Continuing Stockholders. This condition to the merger may be waived with the approval of Parent, Newco, Uno and the special committee of the board of directors. A total of 4,195,309 shares of Uno common stock, or approximately 38% of the total number of issued and outstanding shares, are held by stockholders other than Parent and the Continuing Stockholders. See "The Special Meeting--Record Date and Voting Information" beginning on page 16; and "The Merger Agreement--Conditions to the Merger" beginning on page 95. - VOTING AGREEMENT. The Continuing Stockholders have agreed to vote all of their shares of Uno common stock in favor of the adoption and approval of the merger agreement. They hold 6,811,118 shares of common stock or approximately 62% of the total number of issued and outstanding shares of Uno common stock. See "Special Factors--Interests of the Continuing Stockholders in the Merger" beginning on page 70. - ADDITIONAL INTERESTS OF THE CONTINUING STOCKHOLDERS. The Continuing Stockholders, through their ownership of Parent, will continue to have an equity interest in Uno and will participate in any future earnings and growth of Uno. Certain Continuing Stockholders also will receive cash for some of their shares of Uno common stock. Mark Spencer and Lisa Cohen will receive $9.75 per share in cash for 50,000 shares of Uno common stock held by each of them. The four key executive officers of Uno will receive $9.75 per share in cash for an aggregate of 43,948 shares held by them. In addition, the Cheryl Spencer Memorial Foundation, a charitable foundation of which Mr. Spencer is trustee, will receive $9.75 per share in cash for 221,018 shares of Uno common stock held by it. The Continuing Stockholders also will enjoy certain benefits in the merger transaction not enjoyed by Uno's stockholders generally. See "Special Factors--Interests of the Continuing Stockholders in the Merger" beginning on page 70. - TREATMENT OF STOCK OPTIONS. Uno stock option holders, other than the Continuing Stockholders who are officers of Uno, will continue as holders of options to purchase shares of common stock of Uno as the surviving corporation. After the merger, Uno may, but has not decided to, offer to repurchase and cancel outstanding stock options of Uno as the surviving corporation. Most of the options to purchase shares of Uno common stock held by the Continuing Stockholders who are officers of Uno will be cancelled, and the Continuing Stockholders who are officers of Uno will receive options to purchase preferred stock in Parent. See "Special Factors--Interests of the Continuing Stockholders in the Merger" beginning on page 70; and "The Merger Agreement--Treatment of Stock Options" beginning on page 91. - MERGER FINANCING. Uno, Parent and Newco estimate that $47.0 million will be necessary to complete the merger and pay related fees and expenses. Uno, Parent and Newco expect this amount to be funded through a combination of new senior credit facilities in the amount of $75 million with a syndicate of banks led by Fleet National Bank and SunTrust Bank and sales and leasebacks of a 2
PRER14A10th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 10th
portfolio of Pizzeria Uno Chicago Bar & Grill restaurants and related properties in the amount of approximately $37 million. These financings will also be used for working capital and to refinance Uno's existing $55 million senior credit facility. In the sale and leaseback transactions, an unrelated third party has purchased properties from Uno for approximately $25 million, and leased the properties back to Uno, and Mr. Spencer will purchase properties from Uno for approximately $12 million, and will lease the properties back to Uno. Uno is using the proceeds from the sale and leaseback transactions to reduce the outstanding amount under its $55 million senior credit facility. As a result, Uno's senior credit facility will provide most of the funds required to finance the merger. See "Special Factors--Merger Financing" beginning on page 77. Mr. Spencer has guaranteed to Uno the obligations of Parent and Newco under the merger agreement, and the fees payable by Parent and Newco to the banks and a portion of the expense reimbursement and indemnification obligations of Parent, Newco and Uno under the commitment letter for the $75 million senior credit facility. Mr. Spencer's guaranty is limited to $4,875,000 and may be satisfied by Mr. Spencer either in cash or with up to 500,000 shares of his Uno common stock which will be deemed to have a value equal to $9.75 per share. See "Special Factors--Estimated Fees and Expenses of the Merger" beginning on page 83. - CONDITIONS. The merger is subject to the satisfaction of numerous conditions, including the receipt of the financing described above and no material adverse change in Uno or Mr. Spencer's health. See "The Merger Agreement--Conditions to the Merger" beginning on page 95 for a discussion of additional conditions to the merger. - TERMINATION OF THE MERGER AGREEMENT. The parties may agree to terminate the merger agreement at any time before the merger. In addition, the merger agreement may be terminated for a number of other reasons. See "The Merger Agreement--Termination of the Merger Agreement" beginning on page 97. - TAX CONSEQUENCES. Generally, the merger will be taxable for U.S. federal income tax purposes. You will recognize taxable gain or loss in the amount of the difference between $9.75 and your adjusted tax basis for each share of Uno common stock that you own. The Continuing Stockholders will have different tax consequences from the merger. See "Special Factors--Federal Income Tax Consequences" beginning on page 84. - AFTER THE MERGER. Upon completion of the merger, Uno as the surviving corporation will be a privately held corporation, wholly owned by Parent. There will be no public market for shares of Uno common stock and the shares of common stock will cease to be traded on the New York Stock Exchange. See "Special Factors--Effects of the Merger" beginning on page 68 and "--Interests of the Continuing Stockholders in the Merger" beginning on page 70. 3
PRER14A11th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 11th
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE MERGER Q: WHAT AM I BEING ASKED TO VOTE UPON? (see page 15) A: You are being asked to consider and vote upon a proposal to adopt and approve the merger agreement. Under the merger agreement, Newco will be merged with and into Uno, with Uno as the surviving corporation. Newco is a newly formed Delaware corporation, wholly owned by Parent. Parent is a newly formed Delaware corporation currently owned by Aaron D. Spencer. If the merger agreement is adopted and approved by the stockholders and the merger is completed, Uno will no longer be a publicly held corporation. Mr. Spencer, Mark Spencer, Lisa Cohen and Uno Associates (collectively referred to as the "Spencer Group"), and four key executive officers of Uno, Craig S. Miller, Paul W. MacPhail, Alan M. Fox and Robert M. Vincent (collectively referred to as the "Management Group"), will indirectly, through their ownership of Parent, own all of the equity interest in Uno as the surviving corporation. The Spencer Group and the Management Group are collectively referred to in this proxy statement as the "Continuing Stockholders." Q: WHAT WILL I RECEIVE IN THE MERGER? (see page 15) A: Upon completion of the merger, each issued and outstanding share of Uno common stock, other than those shares held by Parent, will be converted into the right to receive $9.75 in cash, without interest. Q: WHAT KIND OF PREMIUM TO THE PRICE OF UNO COMMON STOCK IS IMPLIED BY THE MERGER CONSIDERATION? (see page 34) A: The merger consideration represents a (i) premium of approximately 33.4% over the $7.31 closing sale price for Uno's common stock as traded on the New York Stock Exchange on October 24, 2000, the last trading day before Uno announced the Continuing Stockholders' initial offer to take Uno private by purchasing all of the outstanding shares of common stock at a price of $8.75 per share, (ii) a premium of approximately 52.8% over the average closing sale price per share of $6.38 during the one week preceding the initial announcement to take Uno private, and (iii) a premium of approximately % over the $ closing sale price for Uno's common stock as traded on the New York Stock Exchange on June , 2001. Q: WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO MY STOCK OPTIONS? (see pages 74 and 91) A: The holders of options to purchase shares of Uno common stock held by individuals other than Mr. Spencer and the Management Group will continue as holders of options to purchase shares of common stock of Uno as the surviving corporation. After the merger, Uno may, but has not yet decided to, offer to repurchase and cancel the outstanding stock options of Uno as the surviving corporation. If it does, Mr. Miller intends to sell to Uno options to purchase approximately 82,500 shares of his Uno common stock. In the event that Uno decides not to repurchase the outstanding options, or if Uno does offer to do so, but a holder chooses not to accept the offer, option holders who, after the merger, choose to exercise their options to acquire shares of Uno common stock will be limited as to how they may dispose of their shares. Upon completion of the merger, Uno will apply to terminate the registration of its common stock under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and if such application is accepted, Uno will no longer be subject to the reporting requirements of that Act. Because there will not be current information regarding Uno available to the general public, option holders who exercise their options will be required to hold their shares for a minimum of two years before they may sell them pursuant to Rule 144(k) of the Securities Act of 1933. In addition, because Uno will be a privately held corporation after the merger, and its shares will not be regularly traded in the public market, it will be difficult for any option holder who exercises his or her options to sell the shares acquired. 4
PRER14A12th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 12th
Q: WHY WAS THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE FORMED? (see page 70) A: The Continuing Stockholders will indirectly, through their ownership of Parent, own all of the outstanding shares of Uno common stock immediately following completion of the merger. Accordingly, our board of directors believed that a special committee of independent directors who are not officers or employees of Uno and who have no financial interest in the merger different from Uno stockholders generally, other than as Uno stock option holders, should be formed to evaluate, negotiate and, if appropriate, recommend the merger and the terms of the merger agreement. Q: WHY IS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDING THAT I VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE MERGER AGREEMENT? (see page 32) A: Based in part upon the unanimous recommendation of the special committee, the board of directors of Uno determined that the terms of the merger agreement and the merger are fair to, and in the best interests of, Uno stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders. The board of directors, based in part on the unanimous recommendation of the special committee, recommends that you vote for the adoption and approval of the merger agreement. Mr. Spencer, Craig S. Miller and Paul W. MacPhail abstained from the determination of the board of directors. Q: WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE MERGER TO PRESENT MEMBERS OF MANAGEMENT AND THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS? (see page 71) A: It is expected that, in general, all members of Uno's current management will continue as management of Uno as the surviving corporation. In addition, it is expected that Mr. Spencer, Craig S. Miller, Paul W. MacPhail, Alan M. Fox and Robert M. Vincent will be the only directors of Uno as the surviving corporation. The members of the special committee and James F. Carlin, each of whom is currently a non-employee director of Uno, will not serve as directors or executive officers of Uno as the surviving corporation. Like all other Uno stockholders, members of management and the board of directors will be entitled to receive $9.75 per share in cash for each of their shares of Uno common stock, other than the shares that the Spencer Group will contribute to Parent in exchange for equity interests in Parent. Options held by management and the board of directors of Uno (other than Mr. Spencer and the Management Group) will continue as options to purchase shares of common stock of Uno as the surviving corporation. Options held by Mr. Spencer and members of the Management Group will be cancelled, and Mr. Spencer and the Management Group will receive options to purchase an equity interest in Parent. Immediately following completion of the merger, the Continuing Stockholders will own 100% of the equity interest in Parent and Parent will own 100% of the outstanding common stock of Uno as the surviving corporation. In addition, Parent may, but has not yet decided to, issue options to purchase shares of preferred stock in Parent to additional key employees of Uno upon the cancellation of their options to purchase shares of Uno common stock. Q: IS THE MERGER SUBJECT TO THE SATISFACTION OF ANY CONDITIONS? (see page 95) A: Yes. Before completion of the merger, a number of closing conditions must be satisfied or waived. A condition to the obligations of each party to complete the merger is the requirement that the merger agreement be adopted and approved by a majority of the outstanding shares of Uno common stock held by persons other than the Continuing Stockholders. This condition only can be waived by all parties (requiring, in the case of Uno's waiver, the approval of the special committee). The conditions to the obligations of Parent and Newco to complete the merger, which can only be waived by Parent and Newco, include, among others, obtaining all financing necessary to complete the merger, obtaining necessary governmental and third party consents and approvals, the accuracy of Uno's representations and warranties, Uno's compliance in all material respects with its obligations under the merger agreement, the exercise of appraisal rights by the holders of not more than 5% of the outstanding shares of Uno common stock, the absence of a material adverse change in Uno's business, the absence 5
PRER14A13th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 13th
of claims which would prevent the completion of the merger, and the absence of a material adverse change in the health of Mr. Spencer. The conditions to the obligations of Uno to complete the merger, which can only be waived by Uno with the written approval of the special committee, include the compliance in all material respects by Parent and Newco with its respective obligations under the merger agreement, the receipt of a bring down fairness opinion of Adams, Harkness & Hill and the absence of any claims which would prevent the completion of the merger. Q: WHEN DO YOU EXPECT THE MERGER TO BE COMPLETED? (see page 90) A: Uno, Parent and Newco are working toward completing the merger as quickly as possible. If the merger agreement is adopted and approved and the other conditions to the merger are satisfied or waived, the merger is expected to be completed promptly after the special meeting. Q: CAN THE MERGER AGREEMENT BE TERMINATED PRIOR TO THE COMPLETION OF THE MERGER? (see page 97) A: Yes. The parties may agree to terminate the merger agreement at any time before the merger is completed. In addition, the merger agreement may be terminated: - by either Parent or Uno if the merger is not completed on or before September 30, 2001; - by Parent if the Uno board of directors or the special committee withdraws or modifies its recommendation in a manner adverse to Parent or Newco or publicly takes a position materially inconsistent with its approval or recommendation of the merger, or the Uno board of directors or the special committee approves, endorses or recommends another acquisition proposal; - by the non-breaching party if the other party breaches any of its representations, warranties or covenants in the merger agreement; - by either Parent or Uno in the event a claim, action, suit or investigation is threatened or instituted that could reasonably be expected to prevent or rescind the merger or have a material adverse effect on Uno or Parent; - by either Parent or Uno if a court or governmental authority issues a non-appealable final order, decree or ruling or takes any other action which permanently restrains, enjoins or prohibits the merger; or - by Uno if Uno receives an acquisition proposal that the special committee concludes, based on the advice of a nationally recognized investment banking firm, is a superior proposal and the special committee determines in good faith, in consultation with outside counsel, that it is advisable to accept the new acquisition proposal in order to comply with its fiduciary duties. Q. WHAT HAPPENS IF THE MERGER AGREEMENT IS TERMINATED PRIOR TO THE COMPLETION OF THE MERGER? (see page 98) A. Generally, if the merger agreement is terminated, other than for the reasons described below, there will be no liability on the part of Uno, Parent or Newco or any of their affiliates, directors, officers, employers or stockholders. However, no party will be relieved from liability for willful breaches of the merger agreement. Prior to the execution of the merger agreement, Uno separately agreed to reimburse $100,000 of the expenses of the Continuing Stockholders incurred prior to March 1, 2001 in connection with their going private proposal regardless of whether the merger agreement is terminated. In the event the merger agreement is terminated for one of the reasons described below, Uno will be required to reimburse Parent and Newco for one of the following amounts depending on the reason why the merger agreement is terminated. First, if the reason for the termination of the merger agreement is not within the reasonable control of the stockholders of Parent, Uno must reimburse Parent for up to an additional $500,000 of Parent's and Newco's reasonable expenses. Second, Uno will 6
PRER14A14th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 14th
reimburse up to $1,500,000 of Parent's and Newco's expenses if the merger agreement is terminated because (1) the special committee or the board of directors fails to recommend approval of the merger agreement or modifies its recommendation in a manner adverse to Parent or Newco, (2) a claim or suit is threatened or instituted that could prevent or rescind the merger or have a material adverse effect on Uno or Parent or (3) the special committee discusses a proposal by a third party to acquire more than 10% and less than 50% of the outstanding common stock of Uno, the third party acquires shares of Uno's common stock and the merger agreement is not approved by the holders of a majority of the shares of common stock held by stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders at the special meeting. Finally, in the event that the merger agreement is terminated by Uno because the special committee accepts a superior proposal, Uno will pay Parent a termination fee of $1,500,000 and will reimburse up to $1,500,000 of Parent's and Newco's expenses. Q: WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE MARKET FOR UNO'S COMMON STOCK AFTER THE MERGER? (see page 68) A: At the effective time of the merger, trading in Uno's common stock on the New York Stock Exchange will cease and there will no longer be a public market for Uno's common stock. Price quotations for Uno's common stock will no longer be available and the registration of Uno's common stock under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, will be terminated. Q: WHAT ARE THE U.S. FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSEQUENCES OF THE MERGER? (see page 84) A: The receipt of cash for shares of Uno common stock in the merger will be a taxable transaction for U.S. federal income tax purposes and also may be a taxable transaction under applicable state, local, foreign or other tax laws. Generally, you will recognize gain or loss equal to the difference between $9.75 per share and your tax basis for the shares of common stock that you owned immediately before completion of the merger. For U.S. federal income tax purposes, this gain or loss generally will be a capital gain or loss if you held the shares of common stock as a capital asset. TAX MATTERS ARE VERY COMPLICATED AND THE TAX CONSEQUENCES OF THE MERGER TO YOU WILL DEPEND ON THE FACTS OF YOUR OWN SITUATION. YOU ARE URGED TO CONSULT YOUR OWN TAX ADVISOR WITH RESPECT TO YOUR OWN INDIVIDUAL TAX CONSEQUENCES AS A RESULT OF THE MERGER. Q: WHEN AND WHERE IS THE SPECIAL MEETING? (see page 15) A: The special meeting of Uno stockholders will be held at 10:00 a.m. local time on , 2001, at the offices of Brown, Rudnick, Freed & Gesmer located at One Financial Center, Boston, MA 02111. Q: WHO CAN VOTE ON THE MERGER AGREEMENT? (see page 16) A: Holders of Uno common stock at the close of business on June 19, 2001, the record date for the special meeting, may vote in person or by proxy at the special meeting. Q: WHAT VOTE IS REQUIRED TO ADOPT AND APPROVE THE MERGER AGREEMENT? (see page 16) A: The merger agreement must be adopted and approved by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the outstanding shares of Uno common stock. The Continuing Stockholders have agreed to vote their shares of Uno common stock in favor of the adoption and approval of the merger agreement unless the board of directors or the special committee withdraws its recommendation of the merger or if the merger agreement is terminated. The Continuing Stockholders hold 6,811,118 shares of Uno common stock, constituting 62% of the total number of issued and outstanding shares. The affirmative vote of the shares held by the Continuing Stockholders is sufficient under Delaware law to adopt and approve the merger agreement. In order to give the unaffiliated stockholders a vote on the merger agreement, although not required by the Delaware General Corporation Law, Uno's restated certificate of incorporation, as amended, or Uno's amended and restated bylaws, the merger agreement requires 7
PRER14A15th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 15th
that a majority of the shares held by stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders adopt and approve the merger agreement. This requirement may be waived with the approval of Parent, Newco, Uno and the special committee of the board of directors. In the event a majority of the shares held by stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders do not adopt and approve the merger agreement and this requirement is not waived, the merger will not be completed and the merger agreement will be terminated. The stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders hold a total of 4,195,309 shares of Uno common stock. Q: WHAT DO I NEED TO DO NOW? (see page 15) A: You should read this proxy statement carefully, including the exhibits accompanying this proxy statement and the documents incorporated by reference into this proxy statement, and consider how the merger affects you. Then, please mark your vote on your proxy card and date, sign and mail it in the enclosed, postage paid return envelope as soon as possible so that your shares can be voted at the special meeting. Q: WHAT HAPPENS IF I DO NOT RETURN A PROXY CARD? (see page 16) A: The failure to return your proxy card will have the same effect as voting against the merger agreement. Q: MAY I VOTE IN PERSON? (see page 17) A: Yes. You may attend the special meeting of Uno stockholders and vote your shares in person whether or not you sign and return your proxy card. If your shares are held of record by a broker, bank or other nominee and you wish to vote at the meeting, you must obtain a proxy from the broker, bank or other nominee. Q: MAY I CHANGE MY VOTE AFTER I HAVE MAILED MY SIGNED PROXY CARD? (see page 17) A: Yes. You may change your vote at any time before your proxy card is voted at the special meeting. You can do this in one of three ways. First, you can send a written notice to the Secretary of Uno at Uno's executive offices located at 100 Charles Park Road, West Roxbury, MA 02132, stating that you would like to revoke your proxy. Second, you can complete and submit a new proxy card. Third, you can attend the meeting and vote in person. Your attendance alone will not revoke your proxy. If you have instructed a broker to vote your shares, you must follow the directions you receive from your broker to change those instructions. Q: IF MY SHARES ARE HELD IN "STREET NAME" BY MY BROKER, WILL MY BROKER VOTE MY SHARES FOR ME? (see page 16) A: No. Your broker will not be able to vote your shares without instructions from you. You should instruct your broker to vote your shares by following the procedures provided to you by your broker. Q: SHOULD I SEND IN MY STOCK CERTIFICATES NOW? (see page 17) A: No. After the merger is completed, you will receive written instructions for exchanging your shares of Uno common stock for a cash payment of $9.75 per share, without interest. Q: DO I HAVE A RIGHT TO SEEK AN APPRAISAL OF MY SHARES? (see pages 17 and 86-88) A: Yes. If you wish, you may seek an appraisal of the fair value of your shares, but only if you comply with all requirements of Delaware law as described on pages 86 through 88 and in Exhibit B of this proxy statement. Based on the determination of the Delaware Court of Chancery, the appraised fair 8
PRER14A16th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 16th
value of your shares of Uno common stock, which will be paid to you if you seek an appraisal, may be more than, less than or equal to the $9.75 per share to be paid in the merger. Q: IS THERE ANY LITIGATION CHALLENGING THE MERGER? (see page 89) A: Yes. On October 25, 2000, Bruce Cox filed a class action complaint in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware for New Castle County against Uno, Mr. Spencer and each of the current directors of Uno. The complaint alleges that the directors breached their fiduciary duties to the plaintiff because Mr. Spencer and certain members of senior management of Uno timed a proposed acquisition of the outstanding shares of Uno in order to freeze out Uno's public stockholders and to capture for themselves Uno's future potential without paying an adequate or fair price to Uno's public stockholders. The plaintiff seeks to have the action maintained as a class action, to have the defendants enjoined from proceeding with or closing the proposed transaction and to recover unspecified costs of the action. The class is alleged to include all public shareholders of Uno, excluding the defendants and their affiliates. Uno has filed a motion to dismiss on the basis of ripeness and intends to defend vigorously against the complaint. Q: WHO CAN HELP ANSWER MY QUESTIONS? (see page 102) A: The information provided above in question and answer format is for your convenience only and is merely a summary of the information contained in this proxy statement. You should carefully read this entire proxy statement, including the exhibits and the documents incorporated by reference. If you would like additional copies, without charge, of this proxy statement or if you have questions about the merger, including the procedures for voting your shares, you should contact: Uno Restaurant Corporation 100 Charles Park Road West Roxbury, MA 02132 Telephone: (617) 323-9200 Attn: George W. Herz II, Secretary 9
PRER14A17th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 17th
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT CONCERNING FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION This proxy statement includes and incorporates by reference statements that are not historical facts. These forward-looking statements are based on Uno's current estimates and assumptions and, as such, involve uncertainty and risk. Forward-looking statements include the information concerning Uno's possible or assumed future results of operations and also include those preceded or followed by the words "anticipates," "believes," "could," "estimates," "expects," "intends," "may," "should," "plans," "targets" and/or similar expressions. The forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance, and actual results may differ materially from those contemplated by these forward-looking statements. In addition to the factors discussed elsewhere in this proxy statement, other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially include changes in the cost of food and labor, the performance of any restaurants, particularly new restaurants, adverse weather conditions, the effect of health and regulatory developments, the loss of key personnel, competitive factors, potential liabilities associated with long-term leases, changes in consumer tastes and eating habits, Uno's ability to execute its business strategy, fluctuations in inventory and general and administrative expenses, and general economic conditions, especially economic conditions in the areas in which Uno's restaurants are concentrated. In addition, Uno's plans for new restaurant locations and timing of openings depend upon, among other things, the negotiation of acceptable lease or purchase terms, timely project development and restaurant construction, obtaining appropriate regulatory and governmental permits and approvals, management of costs, and the hiring, training and retraining of skilled management. These and other factors are discussed in the documents that are incorporated by reference into this proxy statement. Except to the extent required under the federal securities laws, Uno does not intend to update or revise the forward-looking statements to reflect circumstances arising after the date of the preparation of the forward-looking statements. Uno is not entitled to rely on the safe harbor protection of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 with respect to the forward-looking statements contained in this proxy statement. 10
PRER14A18th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 18th
UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION SELECTED HISTORICAL FINANCIAL DATA Uno's selected historical financial data presented below as of and for the five fiscal years ended October 1, 2000 are derived from the audited consolidated financial statements of Uno and its subsidiaries. Data as of and for the twenty-six week periods ended April 2, 2000 and April 1, 2001 have been derived from unaudited consolidated financial statements of Uno. Interim operating results are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be achieved for the entire year. The following selected historical financial data should be read in conjunction with Uno's most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, which are incorporated by reference in, and are included in, this proxy statement as Exhibit E and Exhibit F, respectively. [Enlarge/Download Table] TWENTY-SIX FISCAL YEAR ENDED WEEKS ENDED ---------------------------------------------------- ------------------- SEPT. 29 SEPT. 28 SEPT. 27 OCT. 3 OCT. 1 APRIL 2 APRIL 1 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2000 2001 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- (53 WEEKS) (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA) INCOME STATEMENT DATA: REVENUES Restaurant sales.................................. $159,581 $164,389 $177,343 $198,560 $213,715 $99,529 $113,711 Consumer product sales............................ 8,351 9,115 9,384 10,568 11,772 5,630 6,086 Franchise income.................................. 4,209 4,516 4,549 5,105 5,683 2,648 2,907 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ------- -------- 172,141 178,020 191,276 214,233 231,170 107,807 122,704 COSTS AND EXPENSES Cost of food and beverages........................ 44,064 43,994 48,567 54,683 57,679 26,971 31,004 Labor and benefits................................ 51,868 54,183 58,139 64,700 70,922 33,296 39,363 Occupancy costs................................... 26,339 27,045 27,988 29,199 30,974 14,962 17,484 Other operating costs............................. 14,323 15,244 17,148 17,739 19,468 8,928 10,408 General and administrative........................ 12,155 13,384 13,661 16,629 19,521 8,510 9,983 Depreciation and amortization..................... 12,964 12,469 12,183 12,702 13,098 6,494 6,888 Pre-opening costs................................. 1,567 823 938 594 2,137 868 587 Special charges................................... 3,937 4,000 -- -- 8,588 -- -- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ------- -------- 167,217 171,142 178,624 196,246 222,387 100,029 115,717 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ------- -------- OPERATING INCOME.................................... 4,924 6,878 12,652 17,987 8,783 7,778 6,987 INTEREST AND OTHER EXPENSE.......................... 2,481 2,827 3,661 3,139 3,019 1,382 2,097 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ------- -------- INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES.......................... 2,443 4,051 8,991 14,848 5,764 6,396 4,890 Provision for income taxes.......................... 757 1,378 2,968 5,048 1,729 2,175 1,675 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ------- -------- INCOME BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE.............................. 1,686 2,673 6,023 9,800 4,035 4,221 3,215 Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle for pre-opening costs, net of income tax benefit of $313........................................... -- -- 636 -- -- -- -- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ------- -------- NET INCOME.......................................... $ 1,686 $ 2,673 $ 5,387 $ 9,800 $ 4,035 $ 4,221 $ 3,215 ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======= ======== NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE: Income before cumulative effect of change in accounting principle.............................. $ 0.12 $ 0.20 $ 0.50 $ 0.87 $ 0.36 $ 0.37 $ 0.29 Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle......................................... -- -- (0.05) -- -- -- -- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ------- -------- Basic net income per common share................... $ 0.12 $ 0.20 $ 0.45 $ 0.87 $ 0.36 $ 0.37 $ 0.29 ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======= ======== Diluted net income per common share................. $ 0.12 $ 0.20 $ 0.45 $ 0.84 $ 0.34 $ 0.35 $ 0.28 ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======= ======== WEIGHTED-AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING Basic............................................. 13,963 13,146 11,960 11,313 11,162 11,303 10,987 ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======= ======== Diluted........................................... 14,032 13,209 12,025 11,610 11,844 12,077 11,286 ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======= ======== Certain amounts in prior fiscal years have been reclassified to permit comparison. 11
PRER14A19th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 19th
Franchised restaurants that have been upgraded and redesigned to conform with, or opened as, Uno's Pizzeria Uno ... Chicago Bar & Grill concept are included in the table below for all periods presented. Franchised restaurants that have not been upgraded and redesigned are included under the caption "Other" for all periods presented. The information under average annual restaurant sales and comparable restaurant sales change, under the caption "Other", only includes those franchised restaurants that have not been upgraded and redesigned. The table does not include quick-service units, Uno's Su Casa Mexican restaurant in Chicago or Uno's former Bay Street Grill restaurants. [Enlarge/Download Table] TWENTY-SIX FISCAL YEAR ENDED WEEKS ENDED ------------------------------------------------------ ------------------- SEPT. 29 SEPT. 28 SEPT. 27 OCT. 3 OCT. 1 APRIL 2 APRIL 1 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2000 2001 -------- -------- -------- ---------- -------- -------- -------- (53 WEEKS) (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT NUMBER OF RESTAURANTS AND PER SHARE DATA) OPERATING DATA: NUMBER OF RESTAURANTS FULL-SERVICE PIZZERIA UNO ... CHICAGO BAR & GRILL Company-owned............................... 86 92 94 98 110 103 112 Franchised.................................. 35 39 42 47 55 52 61 OTHER Company-owned............................... 6 5 3 1 1 1 1 Franchised.................................. 32 30 24 18 13 16 12 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- TOTAL AT END OF PERIOD...................... 159 166 163 164 179 172 186 ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== SYSTEM-WIDE RESTAURANT SALES FULL-SERVICE PIZZERIA UNO ... CHICAGO BAR & GRILL Company-owned............................... $151,178 $160,045 $174,716 $196,353 $211,626 $ 50,039 $ 57,890 Franchised.................................. 60,816 68,861 75,338 92,447 104,564 25,305 30,285 OTHER Company-owned............................... 8,403 4,344 2,627 2,207 1,723 343 347 Franchised.................................. 35,273 33,986 30,212 25,687 16,648 4,070 3,105 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- TOTAL....................................... $255,670 $267,236 $282,893 $316,694 $334,561 $ 79,757 $ 91,627 ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== AVERAGE ANNUAL RESTAURANT SALES FULL-SERVICE PIZZERIA UNO ... CHICAGO BAR & GRILL Company-owned............................... $ 1,846 $ 1,818 $ 1,854 $ 1,972 $ 2,052 -- -- Franchised.................................. 1,819 1,858 1,881 2,002 2,071 -- -- OTHER Franchised.................................. 1,223 1,199 1,207 1,132 1,297 -- -- COMPARABLE RESTAURANT SALES CHANGE FULL-SERVICE PIZZERIA UNO ... CHICAGO BAR & GRILL Company-owned............................... (1.3)% (1.7)% 1.3% 6.1% 3.0% 3.5% 3.8% Franchised.................................. (1.1)% 0.7% 1.8% 5.0% 1.9% 2.1% 0.4% OTHER Franchised.................................. (1.0)% (2.9)% (5.1)% (5.5)% (1.8)% (3.9)% (3.1)% BALANCE SHEET DATA: Total assets................................ $135,065 $143,732 $143,195 $149,612 $168,476 $159,729 $172,391 Long-term debt, net of current portion...... 37,085 42,516 38,676 31,612 50,900 41,774 51,773 Capital lease obligations, net of current portion................................... 1,056 867 666 489 453 454 451 Treasury stock.............................. 10,653 19,877 22,616 26,826 33,237 31,002 33,237 Total shareholders' equity.................. 77,136 70,880 73,669 80,979 81,714 82,786 85,148 The book value per share of Uno common stock as of April 1, 2001 was $7.63 per share. The ratio of earnings to fixed charges for the fiscal years ended October 3, 1999 and October 1, 2000 and for the fiscal quarter ended April 1, 2001 was 5.25, 2.43 and 3.28, respectively. 12
PRER14A20th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 20th
MARKET AND MARKET PRICE MARKET INFORMATION Uno's common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol "UNO." The table below sets forth the range of high and low sales prices on the New York Stock Exchange for the period from September 28, 1998 to June 26, 2001, adjusted for a 10% stock dividend declared on November 30, 1999 and paid on December 23, 1999 to stockholders of record on December 13, 1999: [Download Table] COMMON STOCK PRICE ------------------- HIGH LOW -------- -------- FISCAL YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 3, 1999 First Quarter........................................... $ 6.648 $5.284 Second Quarter.......................................... $ 7.614 $6.136 Third Quarter........................................... $ 7.955 $6.250 Fourth Quarter.......................................... $13.466 $8.011 FISCAL YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 1, 2000 First Quarter........................................... $11.125 $9.602 Second Quarter.......................................... $12.563 $9.563 Third Quarter........................................... $12.438 $9.875 Fourth Quarter.......................................... $12.625 $6.625 FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2001 First Quarter........................................... $ 8.500 $6.063 Second Quarter.......................................... $ 9.450 $8.000 Third Quarter (through June 26, 2001)................... $ 9.500 $8.800 ------- ------ The closing sale price for shares of Uno's common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on October 24, 2000, the last trading day before Uno announced the Continuing Stockholders' initial offer to take Uno private by purchasing all of the outstanding shares of common stock at a price of $8.75 per share, was $7.31 per share. The average closing sale price per share of Uno common stock was $6.38 during the one week preceding the initial announcement to take Uno private. The closing sale price per share of Uno common stock on February 27, 2001, the last trading day before Uno announced the agreement with the Continuing Stockholders to take Uno private at $9.75 per share, was $8.00 per share. On April 19, 2001, the last full trading day before the public announcement of the signing of the merger agreement, the high and low sales prices of Uno common stock as reported on the New York Stock Exchange were $9.42 and $9.38 per share, respectively, and the closing sale price on that date was $9.38 per share. On June , 2001, the last practicable trading day for which information was available prior to the date of the first mailing of this proxy statement, the closing price per share of Uno common stock as reported on the New York Stock Exchange was $ . Stockholders should obtain a current market quotation for Uno common stock before making any decision with respect to the merger. NUMBER OF STOCKHOLDERS As of June 4, 2001, there were issued and outstanding 11,006,427 shares of Uno common stock and approximately 1,511 beneficial owners of Uno's common stock. DIVIDENDS Uno has never declared or paid cash dividends on its common stock and does not plan to pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. Uno's current policy is to retain all of its earnings to finance its future development and growth. Uno may reconsider this policy from time to time in light of 13
PRER14A21st Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 21st
conditions then existing, including its earnings performance, financial condition and capital requirements. Uno is subject to various financial and operating covenants, including limitations on the payment of cash dividends under its $55 million credit facility. Uno will be subject to financial and operating covenants, including limitations on the payment of cash dividends, under the proposed $75 million credit facility anticipated to provide part of the financing for the merger and refinancing of Uno's current $55 million credit facility. See "Special Factors--Merger Financing" beginning on page 77. On November 30, 1999, Uno's board of directors declared a 10% stock dividend on the outstanding shares of common stock. The stock dividend was paid on December 23, 1999 to stockholders of records as of December 13, 1999. 14
PRER14A22nd Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 22nd
THE SPECIAL MEETING GENERAL This proxy statement is being furnished to Uno stockholders as part of the solicitation of proxies by the Uno board of directors for use at the special meeting of stockholders to be held at the offices of Brown, Rudnick, Freed & Gesmer located at One Financial Center, Boston, MA 02111 on , 2001, beginning at 10:00 a.m. local time, and at any adjournments or postponements thereof. This proxy statement is accompanied by a form of proxy for use at the special meeting. At the special meeting, the stockholders will be asked to consider and vote upon a proposal to adopt and approve the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of April 19, 2001, among Uno, Uno Restaurant Holdings Corporation, a Delaware corporation ("Parent") and Uno Acquisition Corp., a Delaware corporation ("Newco"), pursuant to which Newco will be merged with and into Uno, with Uno being the surviving corporation. This proxy statement and the accompanying form of proxy are being mailed to stockholders on or about June , 2001. MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED AT THE SPECIAL MEETING At the special meeting, the stockholders will be asked to consider and vote upon a proposal to adopt and approve the merger agreement. If the requisite votes in favor of the proposal are obtained and certain other conditions are satisfied or, where permissible, waived, Newco will be merged with and into Uno with Uno being the surviving corporation. At the effective time of the merger, each share of common stock of Uno issued and outstanding immediately prior to the filing of a certificate of merger with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware will be converted into the right to receive $9.75 in cash, without interest, except for: - shares of Uno common stock held by Parent, which will be converted into an equal number of shares of the surviving corporation; - shares for which appraisal rights have been perfected properly under Section 262 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which will be entitled to receive the consideration provided for by the Delaware General Corporation Law; and - shares held by Uno in treasury, which will be canceled without payment. Like all other Uno stockholders, members of management (including the Management Group) and the board of directors will be entitled to receive $9.75 per share in cash for each of their shares of Uno common stock held by them at the time of the merger. Options to purchase shares of Uno common stock, other than options held by Mr. Spencer and the Management Group, will continue as options to purchase shares of common stock of Uno as the surviving corporation. After the merger, Uno may, but has not yet decided to, offer to repurchase and cancel outstanding stock options of Uno as the surviving corporation. If it does, Mr. Miller intends to sell to Uno options to purchase approximately 82,500 shares of his Uno common stock. Options held by Mr. Spencer and the remaining options held by the Management Group will be cancelled and Mr. Spencer and the Management Group will receive options to purchase shares of preferred stock of Parent. In addition, Parent may, but has not yet decided to, issue options to purchase shares of preferred stock of Parent to additional key employees of Uno upon the cancellation of their options to purchase shares of Uno common stock. Immediately prior to the merger, Mr. Spencer, Mark Spencer, Lisa Cohen and Uno Associates will contribute substantially all of their shares of Uno common stock to Parent in exchange for shares of preferred stock of Parent. Mark Spencer and Lisa Cohen will each retain 50,000 shares of Uno common stock and will be entitled to receive $9.75 per share in cash for the 50,000 shares of Uno common stock retained by each of them. The Management Group will be entitled to receive $9.75 per share in cash for an aggregate of 43,948 shares held by them. In addition, 221,018 shares held by the Cheryl Spencer Memorial Foundation, a charitable foundation of which Mr. Spencer is trustee, will not be exchanged for an equity interest in Parent and will be entitled to receive $9.75 per share. 15
PRER14A23rd Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 23rd
Uno does not expect a vote to be taken at the special meeting on any matter other than the proposal to adopt and approve the merger agreement and, if necessary, a vote to adjourn or postpone the meeting. However, if any other matters are properly presented at the special meeting for consideration, the holders of the proxies will have discretion to vote on these matters in accordance with their best judgment. Uno is soliciting proxies to grant discretionary authority to vote in favor of adjournment or postponement of the special meeting. RECORD DATE AND VOTING INFORMATION Only holders of record of common stock at the close of business on June 19, 2001 will be entitled to notice of and to vote at the special meeting. At the close of business on June 19, 2001, there were outstanding and entitled to vote 11,006,693 shares of Uno common stock. A list of the Uno stockholders will be available for review at Uno's executive offices during regular business hours for a period of 10 days before the special meeting. Each holder of record of common stock on the record date will be entitled to one vote for each share held. All votes will be tabulated by the inspector of elections appointed for the special meeting, who will separately tabulate affirmative and negative votes, abstentions and broker non-votes. Brokers who hold shares in street name for clients typically have the authority to vote on "routine" proposals when they have not received instructions from beneficial owners. However, absent specific instructions from the beneficial owner of the shares, brokers are not allowed to exercise their voting discretion with respect to the adoption and approval of non-routine matters, such as the merger agreement. Proxies submitted without a vote by the brokers on these matters are referred to as "broker non-votes." Abstentions and broker non-votes are counted for purposes of determining whether a quorum exists at the special meeting. The affirmative vote of a majority of the outstanding shares of common stock entitled to vote at the special meeting is required to adopt and approve the merger agreement. The Continuing Stockholders have agreed to vote all of the shares of Uno common stock held by them, aggregating 6,811,118 shares, for adoption and approval of the merger agreement. The shares of Uno common stock held by the Continuing Stockholders constituted 62% of the total number of shares outstanding on the record date. In addition, although not required by the Delaware General Corporation Law, Uno's restated certificate of incorporation, as amended, or Uno's amended and restated bylaws, the merger agreement requires the affirmative vote of a majority of shares of common stock held by stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders. This requirement may be waived with the approval of Parent, Newco, Uno and the special committee of the board of directors. The stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders held 4,195,309 shares of Uno common stock as of the record date. Because the affirmative vote of a majority of all outstanding shares of Uno common stock as well as a majority of the outstanding shares of Uno common stock held by stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders is required in order to approve the merger agreement, abstentions and broker non-votes will have the same effect as votes "AGAINST" adoption and approval of the merger agreement. With the exception of broker non-votes, the treatment of which is discussed above, each share of Uno common stock represented by a proxy properly executed and received by Uno in time to be voted at the special meeting and not revoked will be voted in accordance with the instructions indicated on such proxy and, if no instructions are indicated, will be voted "FOR" the proposal to adopt and approve the merger agreement. All proxies "FOR" such matter, including proxies on which no instructions are indicated, other than broker non-votes, may, at the discretion of the proxy holder, be voted "FOR" discretionary authority to vote in favor of any motion to adjourn or postpone the special meeting to another time and/or place for the purpose of soliciting additional proxies or otherwise. Any proxy that is voted against discretionary authority to vote in favor of any motion to adjourn or postpone the special meeting will not be voted in favor of any such adjournment or postponement. 16
PRER14A24th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 24th
QUORUM The presence, in person or by proxy, of the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of Uno common stock entitled to vote at the special meeting is necessary to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at the special meeting. PROXIES; REVOCATION Any person giving a proxy pursuant to this solicitation has the power to revoke it at any time before it is voted. It may be revoked by filing with the Secretary of Uno at Uno's executive offices located at 100 Charles Park Road, West Roxbury, MA 02132, a written notice of revocation or a duly executed proxy bearing a later date, or it may be revoked by attending the special meeting and voting in person. Attendance at the special meeting will not, by itself, revoke a proxy. Furthermore, if a stockholder's shares are held of record by a broker, bank or other nominee and the stockholder wishes to vote at the meeting, the stockholder must obtain a proxy from the record holder. EXPENSES OF PROXY SOLICITATION Uno will bear the entire cost of solicitation of proxies, including preparation, assembly, printing and mailing of this proxy statement, the proxy and any additional information furnished to stockholders. Copies of solicitation materials will be furnished to banks, brokerage houses, fiduciaries and custodians holding in their names shares of common stock beneficially owned by others for forwarding to these beneficial owners. Uno may reimburse persons representing beneficial owners of common stock for their costs of forwarding solicitation materials to such beneficial owners. Original solicitation of proxies by mail may be supplemented by telephone, telegram or personal solicitation by directors, officers or other regular employees of Uno. No additional compensation will be paid to directors, officers or other regular employees for their services. ADJOURNMENTS Although it is not expected, the special meeting may be adjourned for the purpose of soliciting additional proxies. Any adjournment of the special meeting may be made without notice, other than by an announcement made at the special meeting, by approval of the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of Uno common stock present in person or represented by proxy at the special meeting, whether or not a quorum exists. Uno is soliciting proxies to grant discretionary authority in favor of adjournment or postponement of the special meeting. In particular, discretionary authority may be exercised if the purpose of the adjournment or postponement is to provide additional time to solicit additional votes to adopt and approve the merger agreement and the merger. The Continuing Stockholders who hold a majority of the shares of Uno will be entitled to control a vote to adjourn or postpone the meeting for the purpose of soliciting additional proxies from the other stockholders of Uno to obtain majority approval to adopt and approve the merger agreement. The Continuing Stockholders will vote to adjourn or postpone the meeting depending upon the circumstances at the time. It is likely that the Continuing Stockholders will vote to adjourn or postpone the meeting if they believe that they will be able to obtain the additional votes necessary to obtain approval by the holders of a majority of the shares of Uno common stock held by persons other than the Continuing Stockholders to adopt and approve the merger agreement. It is unlikely that the Continuing Stockholders will vote to adjourn or postpone the meeting if they do not believe that they will be able to obtain the additional necessary votes. APPRAISAL RIGHTS Stockholders who do not vote in favor of adoption and approval of the merger agreement, and who otherwise comply with the applicable statutory procedures of the Delaware General Corporation Law summarized elsewhere in this proxy statement, will be entitled to seek appraisal of the value of their Uno common stock as set forth in Section 262 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. See "Special Factors--Appraisal Rights." PLEASE DO NOT SEND IN STOCK CERTIFICATES AT THIS TIME. IN THE EVENT THE MERGER IS COMPLETED, UNO WILL DISTRIBUTE INSTRUCTIONS REGARDING THE PROCEDURES FOR EXCHANGING UNO STOCK CERTIFICATES FOR THE $9.75 PER SHARE CASH PAYMENT. 17
PRER14A25th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 25th
THE PARTICIPANTS UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION 100 Charles Park Road West Roxbury, Massachusetts 02132 (617) 323-9200 Uno Restaurant Corporation owns and operates 113 and franchises 68 casual dining, full-service restaurants operating primarily under the name Pizzeria Uno ... Chicago Bar & Grill. The restaurants feature Uno's signature Chicago-style, deep-dish pizza and a selection of baked, grilled and sauteed entrees, including gourmet thin crust pizza, pasta, fajitas, ribs, steak and chicken, as well as a variety of appetizers, salads, sandwiches and desserts. Company-owned restaurants are located primarily in major metropolitan markets from New England to Virginia, as well as Florida, Chicago and Denver, and franchised restaurants are located throughout the United States and Puerto Rico as well as Seoul, South Korea, Lahor, Pakistan and Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Uno also operates a consumer products business that distributes Uno's branded and non-branded, Chicago-style deep-dish pizza, calzones, and other pizza products in hotels, movie theater chains, supermarkets, food courts and airports. A more detailed description of Uno's business and financial results is contained in Uno's most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 1, 2000 and Uno's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended April 1, 2001, each of which is incorporated by reference into and is included with this proxy statement as Exhibit E and Exhibit F, respectively. See also "Where Stockholders Can Find More Information." Information about the directors and executive officers of Uno is set forth in Exhibit D to this proxy statement. UNO RESTAURANT HOLDINGS CORPORATION 100 Charles Park Road West Roxbury, Massachusetts 02132 (617) 323-9200 Parent is Uno Restaurant Holdings Corporation, a newly organized Delaware corporation formed and currently owned by Aaron D. Spencer. The stockholders of Parent immediately following the merger will be Mr. Spencer, Mr. Spencer's two adult children, Mark Spencer and Lisa Cohen, Uno Associates, a general partnership owned 80% by Mr. Spencer and 10% by each of Mark Spencer and Lisa Cohen (collectively, the "Spencer Group"), and four key executive officers of Uno, Craig S. Miller, Paul W. MacPhail, Alan M. Fox and Robert M. Vincent (collectively, the "Management Group"). The Spencer Group and the Management Group are collectively referred to in this proxy statement as the "Continuing Stockholders." The Spencer Group will own preferred stock of Parent. The Management Group will own shares of common stock of Parent or options to purchase shares of common stock of Parent. Mr. Spencer and Management Group will hold options to purchase shares of preferred stock of Parent. Information about the directors and executive officers of Parent is set forth in Exhibit D to this proxy statement. UNO ACQUISITION CORP. 100 Charles Park Road West Roxbury, Massachusetts 02132 (617) 323-9200 Newco is Uno Acquisition Corp., a newly organized Delaware corporation formed and wholly owned by Uno Restaurant Holdings Corporation. Newco was formed solely for the purpose of engaging in the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement. Information about the directors and executive officers of Newco is set forth in Exhibit D to this proxy statement. 18
PRER14A26th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 26th
THE CONTINUING STOCKHOLDERS Immediately prior to the merger, Aaron D. Spencer and Uno Associates will contribute their shares of Uno common stock to Parent in exchange for shares of preferred stock of Parent. Immediately prior to the merger, Mark Spencer and Lisa Cohen will contribute all of their shares of Uno common stock in exchange for shares of preferred stock of Parent other than an aggregate of 50,000 shares of Uno common stock held by each of them, which will be converted into the right to receive $9.75 per share in cash, without interest. In addition, the Management Group will purchase shares of common stock of Parent for nominal consideration or will receive options to purchase shares of common stock of Parent and, with Mr. Spencer, will cancel their options to purchase shares of Uno common stock and receive options to purchase shares of preferred stock of Parent, with the exception of Mr. Miller, who intends to sell to Uno as the surviving corporation options to purchase approximately 82,500 shares of Uno common stock in the event that Uno as the surviving corporation offers to repurchase and cancel outstanding options of Uno. Immediately following the merger, the Continuing Stockholders will hold, indirectly through their ownership of Parent, 100% of the outstanding shares of common stock of Uno as the surviving corporation. The Continuing Stockholders have interests that are different from, or in addition to, your interests as an Uno stockholder generally. See "Special Factors--Interests of the Continuing Stockholders in the Merger." Information about the Continuing Stockholders is set forth in Exhibit D to this proxy statement. 19
PRER14A27th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 27th
SPECIAL FACTORS BACKGROUND OF THE MERGER In the opinion of Uno's board of directors and management, Uno's public market valuation has been constrained due to Uno's small market capitalization, limited public float, relatively low trading volume, limited research coverage from securities analysts, and inability to generate the type of rapid revenue and unit growth generally expected by the public equity markets. During the last several years, various other external factors emerged that the board of directors and management believe have further constrained Uno's share price within a very narrow range. These factors included a general weakness in valuations for public restaurant companies and a dramatic investor shift toward Internet-related and other high technology companies. In response to factors limiting Uno's market valuation, the board of directors authorized Uno to conduct a Dutch Auction tender offer in July 1997, under which it purchased 1,207,624 shares at a price of $7.00 per share, and authorized a second Dutch Auction tender offer in September 1998, under which it purchased 274,721 shares at a price of $7.00 per share. From July 1997 through June 2000, Uno purchased in the two Dutch Auction tender offers, in open market and in privately negotiated transactions an aggregate of 3,089,465 shares of common stock of Uno at prices ranging from $5.875 per share to $10.00 per share, or a weighted average price of $7.39 per share (all purchases subsequent to November 30, 1999 reflect the 10% stock dividend discussed below). Uno has not purchased any shares of its common stock since June 29, 2000. At a meeting held on February 23, 1999, the board of directors of Uno received at its request a report from BancBoston Robertson Stephens, an investment banking firm, analyzing possible strategic options to maximize stockholder value. Among the options discussed were acquiring other restaurant concepts and companies to increase the size of Uno, selling Uno, continuing as a public company and pursuing a going private transaction. After the presentation, the board of directors discussed the advantages and disadvantages of each option presented. Mr. Spencer, chairman of Uno, emphasized to the board of directors that the process of seeking to sell Uno could have a serious detrimental effect on Uno if the sale was not completed. Also, based upon the information provided by BancBoston Robertson Stephens, Mr. Spencer emphasized that in his capacity as the majority stockholder of Uno he would not anticipate the range of prices likely to be offered for Uno to be acceptable to him. He suggested, instead, that the board of directors entertain a proposal from Mr. Spencer and unspecified members of management to take Uno private at a price of $10.00 per share ($9.09 after giving effect to a subsequent 10% stock dividend). Mr. Spencer concluded that a going private transaction would benefit the public stockholders and would address the issues that Uno had to deal with as a public entity. After being advised by Uno's outside counsel of its duties and responsibilities, the board of directors advised Mr. Spencer that it would consider a formal proposal from a management group led by Mr. Spencer and formed a special committee of the board of directors to consider and respond to any such proposal. The management group consisted of Mr. Spencer, Craig S. Miller, Paul W. MacPhail, Alan M. Fox, Robert M. Vincent and Robert M. Brown. On April 14, 1999, Uno announced that a special committee of independent directors, composed of James F. Carlin, John T. Gerlach and Stephen J. Sweeney had been formed to consider available options for enhancing stockholder value and that the special committee had engaged BancBoston Robertson Stephens to assist it. Mr. Gerlach was appointed chairman of the special committee. On April 20, 1999, Mr. Spencer and his management group retained BNY Capital Markets, Inc. as a financial adviser to assist them with respect to the proposed going private transaction. In late April 1999, Mr. Spencer received an unsolicited communication from a third party expressing an interest in discussing a possible acquisition of Uno at a price of approximately $14.00 ($12.75 after giving effect to a subsequent 10% stock dividend) per share in cash, subject to due diligence, execution of a definitive agreement and securing financing. The third party was a direct 20
PRER14A28th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 28th
competitor of Uno. The communication also set forth that the potential price per share was predicated upon certain stated financial assumptions as of March 31, 1999. The financial assumptions were EBITDA of $30 million, net debt of $31 million and real estate that could be readily sold for $40 million and leased back for approximately $3.2 million annually. Each of these assumptions about Uno were inaccurate. Management believed that if and when the third party was apprised of its inaccurate assumptions, it would lower its potential price. Management also did not believe that the third party would be able to finance successfully the possible transaction. Management reached this conclusion on the basis of its understanding that the third party already had a significant amount of debt from a recent acquisition and the assumption identified in the inquiry relating to the capacity of Uno's real estate to support financing, suggesting that the third party would finance the acquisition with Uno's real estate. Management did not believe that Uno's real estate alone could support the financing necessary for the acquisition. Mr. Spencer discussed the communication from the third party with Mr. Gerlach. Based upon management's view that the third party would be unlikely to finance and complete successfully the transaction as proposed, Mr. Spencer and the special committee decided not to pursue discussions with the third party. This decision also was based on the fact that the third party was a direct competitor of Uno, and therefore, management believed it would be unwise to allow the third party to conduct a due diligence investigation of Uno when the likelihood of a successful transaction at $14 ($12.75 after giving effect to a subsequent stock dividend) per share was suspect. In late May 1999, Mr. Spencer concluded and advised the board of directors that Mr. Spencer and his management group did not want to proceed with a going private transaction and decided to turn their efforts toward maximizing stockholder value by remaining a public company and refocusing Uno's efforts on accelerating expansion of new restaurants. The special committee then terminated the engagement of its financial advisor and Mr. Spencer and his management group terminated the engagement of their financial advisor. In May 1999, Uno's business fundamentals were strong. Based upon activities of other restaurant companies, Mr. Spencer and his management group believed that the capital markets might be receptive to an equity offering by Uno. Additionally, several institutional research analysts suggested to management that they would commence research coverage of Uno. Consequently, Mr. Spencer and his management group decided not to proceed with a going private transaction, but rather to pursue a growth strategy which included raising capital in a public offering of common stock. On September 9, 1999, Uno filed a registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the underwritten public offering of two million shares of common stock of Uno, of which one million shares were to be sold by Uno, 900,000 shares were to be sold by Mr. Spencer and 100,000 shares were to be sold by the Cheryl Spencer Memorial Foundation, a charitable foundation of which Mr. Spencer is the trustee. Uno could not complete the public offering because of a deterioration in the public markets generally. Subsequently, on October 18, 1999, Uno announced that it was withdrawing this offering. On November 30, 1999, Uno declared a 10% stock dividend on shares of Uno common stock. The stock dividend was paid on December 23, 1999 to stockholders of record as of December 13, 1999. On August 31, 2000, Uno announced earnings below analyst expectations and recorded a pre-tax charge of $8.6 million related to asset impairment and store closing costs. Following these announcements the public trading price of Uno's common stock declined. Specifically, on August 31, 2000, the closing sale price of Uno's common stock was $9.688 per share and on September 1, 2000, the closing sale price of Uno's common stock was $8.125 per share. At a meeting of the board of directors on October 6, 2000, Mr. Spencer advised the board of directors that he and members of management consisting of Craig S. Miller, Robert M. Brown, Alan M. Fox and Robert M. Vincent again wanted to pursue a going private transaction. Mr. Brown ceased to be a member of this management group in March 2001 and Paul W. MacPhail joined the 21
PRER14A29th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 29th
Management Group on October 20, 2000. Mr. Spencer expressed the view that because of Uno's size and liquidity, Uno's intrinsic value would never be fully recognized by the public trading markets, citing as support that prior to the September 2000 earnings announcement Uno's common stock price had not reflected Uno's strong operating performance. He also briefly described his plans to finance the transaction and the unsuccessful public offering in September and October of 1999. After receiving advice from Uno's outside counsel as to its duties and responsibilities, the board of directors appointed a special committee, composed of five independent directors, Tamara P. Davis, James J. Kerasiotes, John T. Gerlach, Kenneth D. Hill and James F. Carlin (Mr. Carlin later resigned from the special committee because scheduling conflicts prevented his attendance at meetings), and authorized it to engage a financial advisor and separate counsel. The special committee appointed Ms. Davis chairman of the special committee. On October 17, 2000, the special committee retained the law firm of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP ("Skadden, Arps") to act as its legal advisor. On October 16, 2000, Mr. Spencer, on behalf of the Continuing Stockholders, stated in writing to Tamara P. Davis, on behalf of the special committee, the intention of the Continuing Stockholders to make a tender offer, subject to receipt of financing, for all of the outstanding shares of Uno common stock not owned by the Continuing Stockholders at a price which represented a premium to the current market price for the shares. The closing price of Uno's common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on October 13, 2000 (the previous trading day) was $6.375. Because the Continuing Stockholders believed that their efforts would result in the ability of Uno's public stockholders to receive an attractive price for their shares but that there could be no assurance that a transaction could be completed, the Continuing Stockholders requested, as a condition of making any proposal, that Uno reimburse under all circumstances their out-of-pocket expenses in connection with formulating and implementing the contemplated offer. On October 18, 2000, the special committee proposed that it would reimburse $100,000 of expenses only if a transaction approved by the special committee was successfully completed. The Continuing Stockholders replied to the special committee on October 20, 2000 reiterating their desire to proceed with a transaction that would offer the public stockholders a price for their shares that the Continuing Stockholders believed would be fair. The Continuing Stockholders stated again that they would require reimbursement of their expenses as a condition to proceeding with a transaction but proposed that reimbursement at this point could be capped at $100,000 and should be limited to those expenses incurred with respect to discussions with the special committee to determine a fair price. A telephonic meeting of the board of directors was held on October 24, 2000. In addition to the members of the board of directors, attending the meeting were Robert M. Vincent, Chief Financial Officer of Uno; Constantine Alexander, Esq., of Nutter, McClennen & Fish, LLP ("Nutter, McClennen"), counsel to the Continuing Stockholders; and representatives of Skadden, Arps. Mr. Spencer gave a preliminary status report regarding the continued interest of the Continuing Stockholders in pursuing a going private transaction. He reviewed the status of his discussions with the various possible sources of financing being considered for the going private transaction. Mr. Spencer then distributed a letter and a draft press release containing a description of the Continuing Stockholders' proposal and reported that he believed financing could be obtained. The proposal stated that an entity to be funded by the Continuing Stockholders would make a cash tender offer for all shares of Uno common stock not owned by the Continuing Stockholders at a price of $8.75 per share. The offer was conditioned upon receipt of financing, ownership of at least 90% of Uno's outstanding shares of common stock upon completion of the tender offer and other conditions. At this board meeting, the board of directors approved new indemnification agreements for all directors and certain officers who are not also directors, as well as the compensation to be paid to members of the special committee for their service on the special committee. The terms of the indemnification agreements, which are not materially different from the indemnification agreements 22
PRER14A30th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 30th
previously executed by the directors and executive officers, are described under the heading "--Interests of the Continuing Stockholders in the Merger; Indemnification." The board of directors determined that each member of the special committee would receive $1,000 for each special committee meeting attended, regardless of whether any proposed transaction was entered into or completed. The board of directors also determined that Ms. Tamara P. Davis, chairman of the special committee, would receive an additional $15,000 fee for the first 100 hours of her time spent in connection with the performance of her responsibilities and duties as chairman of the special committee. Thereafter, Ms. Davis would receive $150 per hour. Immediately following the meeting of the board of directors, the special committee met with its legal counsel and Messrs. Spencer, Miller, Vincent and Alexander at the offices of Skadden, Arps in Boston. After discussing the Continuing Stockholders' proposal, Messrs. Spencer, Miller, Vincent and Alexander left the meeting and the special committee discussed the Continuing Stockholders' proposal in detail. After full consideration, the special committee approved the Continuing Stockholders' request for reimbursement of up to $100,000 of expenses in order to increase the likelihood that the Continuing Stockholders would submit a definitive proposal that would be beneficial to stockholders. The special committee also approved a press release announcing the formation of the special committee and the Continuing Stockholders' proposal for a management led buyout of Uno's public stockholders at a price of $8.75 per share in cash. On October 25, 2000, Uno issued a press release announcing the Continuing Stockholders' proposed $8.75 per share tender offer. It read, in part, as follows: Boston, Massachusetts, October 25, 2000--Uno Restaurant Corporation (NYSE:UNO) announced today that Aaron D. Spencer, chairman and principal stockholder, and certain members of senior management have submitted a proposal to Uno's board of directors to acquire all of the outstanding shares of common stock currently not owned by them, which represents approximately 38% of Uno's outstanding shares of common stock. This proposal contemplates a cash tender offer price of $8.75 per share. The proposal states that any offer will be subject to a number of conditions, including receipt of financing on terms satisfactory to the offeror and ownership by the offeror of at least 90% of the company's outstanding shares following the purchase of shares pursuant to the tender offer. The board has appointed a special committee of outside directors led by Tamara P. Davis to conduct a review of the proposal. Uno does not plan to make any further public comment regarding the proposal other than to announce whether or not a transaction will proceed. There can be no assurance that the proposal will lead to the commencement of any tender offer. During the following week, the special committee interviewed several investment banking firms to act as its independent financial advisor. After full consideration of relevant factors, including the advisor's (i) experience and knowledge of Uno's industry and the markets it operates in, (ii) experience with transactions of the type being contemplated, (iii) the lack of any previous business relationship with Uno or Mr. Spencer and (iv) the structure and amount of compensation to be paid to the advisor, the special committee selected Adams, Harkness & Hill, Inc. and authorized Adams, Harkness & Hill to begin a financial review of Uno. On November 29, 2000, the special committee met with its financial advisor at the offices of Uno in West Roxbury. Also present by telephone were representatives of Skadden, Arps. At the request of the special committee, representatives of Adams, Harkness & Hill reviewed their firm's preliminary work and financial analysis of the proposal by the Continuing Stockholders. That work included a review of historical and projected operating results and related business and financial information of Uno as developed by management, and the application of several analytical methodologies to that data. The representatives of Adams, Harkness & Hill then reviewed with the special committee their 23
PRER14A31st Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 31st
summary of preliminary work and analysis and, responded to numerous questions by the special committee. Adams, Harkness & Hill also informed the special committee that at this early point in the discussion of a transaction, its work was preliminary and it was not yet in a position to deliver a written report to the special committee. See "--Opinion of Financial Advisor to the Special Committee" for a detailed description of the final analysis performed. Upon the completion of the Adams, Harkness & Hill presentation and following a full discussion, the special committee concluded that Ms. Davis should report to the board of directors that, based on a review of information received to date, the special committee had determined that it would need more information from Uno, including any and all financial information that had been provided to other third parties and Mr. Spencer's financing sources, in order to evaluate fully the proposal and that such information should be delivered to the special committee and its financial and legal advisors. While the special committee expected that it would seek to negotiate for a substantially higher price, it also determined that it did not want to discourage an offer at $8.75 per share, or foreclose the possibility of the special committee recommending to the public stockholders an offer at $8.75 per share, because the tender offer proposed by the Continuing Stockholders at $8.75 per share might ultimately prove to be the best option available to Uno. Adams, Harkness & Hill met with members of the Management Group and Mr. Spencer on November 30, 2000 and on December 7, 2000. Ms. Davis attended the meeting with management on November 30, 2000, but did not attend the meeting with management on December 7, 2000. At the meeting on November 30, 2000, Ms. Davis reported to Mr. Spencer and the Management Group that the special committee wanted to solicit the interest of a limited number of strategic and financial parties to make a competing acquisition proposal. Ms. Davis encouraged Mr. Spencer to consider such a potential third party transaction. Mr. Spencer indicated that he would consider transactions involving a third party sale of Uno and approved of the proposed solicitation of interest as long as the special committee and its advisors conducted their discussions in a confidential manner. Adams, Harkness & Hill recommended that the special committee perform a market test to elicit interest in Uno beyond the interest expressed by Mr. Spencer and the Management Group. The special committee approached Mr. Spencer with the concept of a market test and he agreed that it was appropriate with certain conditions. He urged the special committee to limit the market test to ten potential acquirors to be identified by Adams, Harkness & Hill so that management and employees would not be distracted by numerous inquiries and potential press coverage that might have a negative impact on the operations of Uno. Adams, Harkness & Hill submitted to the special committee a list of potential strategic and financial acquirors that it deemed potentially would have the most interest in and ability to complete a transaction with Uno. The special committee advised Mr. Spencer that it would be contacting ten entities (six potential strategic buyers and four potential financial buyers). Adams, Harkness & Hill selected the entities to contact based on their ability to complete a transaction of this size and their expertise and experience in the restaurant industry. On December 1, 2000, the board of directors met by telephone and authorized the special committee to conduct a confidential market test. Later that day, the special committee met by telephone with its legal counsel and financial advisors and authorized Adams, Harkness & Hill to conduct a confidential market test. On December 18, 2000, Adams, Harkness & Hill commenced a confidential market test to determine whether there was any third-party interest in acquiring all the shares of Uno common stock at a price higher than that proposed by the Continuing Stockholders. Between December 18, 2000 and January 4, 2001, Adams, Harkness & Hill contacted six national restaurant chains as potential strategic buyers and four financial investors as potential financial buyers. When contacted, these parties were informed that Adams, Harkness & Hill was acting on behalf of the special committee of a publicly traded restaurant company that was contacting a limited list of potential buyers and that if they were interested in pursuing a transaction, a non-disclosure agreement would be 24
PRER14A32nd Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 32nd
sent naming and describing Uno. Of the six strategic investors contacted, none had an interest in pursuing the opportunity and no information was sent. Of the four financial investors, three expressed an interest in a transaction with Mr. Spencer. These interested parties signed the non-disclosure agreement and were sent an information package. The information package contained only publicly available information. This information consisted of Securities and Exchange Commission filings, press releases and other publicly available information. None of these parties expressed further interest at a price higher than $8.75 per share. However, the three potential financial buyers separately stated they would only consider being an additional equity participant with the Continuing Stockholders in the proposed going private transaction and would not make independent offers. On January 4, 2001, the special committee met by telephone with its legal counsel and financial advisors. At the outset of the meeting, Mr. Carlin resigned from the special committee due to scheduling conflicts that had prevented him from attending all of the meetings of the special committee. Mr. Carlin excused himself from the remainder of the meeting. The special committee's financial advisors then reviewed the substance of their meetings with Mr. Spencer and members of the Management Group and the results of their confidential market test. Representatives of Adams, Harkness & Hill reviewed the state of the capital markets since November 29, 2000 and updated their financial analysis of the Continuing Stockholders' proposal. Adams, Harkness & Hill informed the special committee that the availability of financing for going private transactions was becoming more limited. However, Mr. Spencer's financing ability appeared strong. In addition, Adams, Harkness & Hill informed the special committee that Uno's projected EBITDA and cash flow appeared to continue to support a higher valuation for Uno. Adams, Harkness & Hill concluded that based upon their financial analysis, the special committee should seek to increase the per share price offered by the Continuing Stockholders. The special committee then authorized Ms. Davis, to meet later that day with Adams, Harkness & Hill, Mr. Spencer and members of the Management Group for the purpose of negotiating a higher price. As authorized, later that day, Ms. Davis and the representatives of Adams, Harkness & Hill met with Mr. Spencer, Mr. Miller, Mr. Vincent and their counsel, Nutter McClennen. They discussed the results of Adams Harkness & Hill's due diligence investigation of Uno, Adams Harkness & Hill's analysis of the restaurant industry, the Continuing Stockholders' offer, the preliminary financing terms being considered by the Continuing Stockholders and presentations by Mr. Spencer and the Management Group regarding Uno's operations and prospects. Ms. Davis and Adams, Harkness & Hill summarized the results of Adams, Harkness & Hill's market test. Ms. Davis and Adams, Harkness & Hill explained the view of Adams, Harkness & Hill that the $8.75 per share price offered by the Continuing Stockholders was not fair to Uno's stockholders from a financial point of view and that a price in excess of $10.00 per share would be appropriate. Mr. Spencer asked for time to develop a response. On January 12, 2001, Ms. Davis and Adams, Harkness & Hill met again with Mr. Spencer, Mr. Miller, Mr. Vincent and Nutter McClennen. At that meeting, Mr. Miller made a formal presentation regarding current industry operating fundamentals, including declining consumer confidence and increased energy and labor costs, Uno's historical enterprise value and comparable store sales performance, and transactions involving the acquisition of minority interests. Mr. Spencer then indicated that capital market uncertainties and the state of Uno's business would justify a price of less than $8.75 per share if the Continuing Stockholders were making a new proposal and if the Continuing Stockholders were making an initial proposal at this time, the Continuing Stockholders would offer a price of less than $8.75 per share. Nevertheless, Mr. Spencer stated that the Continuing Stockholders were willing to increase their offer price to $9.00 per share, and he indicated that they were unwilling to raise their price higher. Mr. Spencer also stated that the Continuing Stockholders now desired to proceed by means of a cash merger rather than a cash tender offer so that most financing commitment fees would be paid upon completion of the merger and not in advance of a 25
PRER14A33rd Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 33rd
tender offer. Ms. Davis and Adams, Harkness & Hill reiterated that a higher price was warranted. Furthermore, Ms. Davis reported that the special committee would require that any proposal would have to be approved by the affirmative vote of a majority of disinterested stockholders. On January 15, 2001, the special committee met by telephone with Skadden, Arps and Adams, Harkness & Hill. Ms. Davis, reported the results of her meetings with Mr. Spencer and the Management Group. Following this report, the special committee discussed Uno's latest operating results and various factors indicating that future operating results might deteriorate, including the increasing cost of electricity in many of the markets in which Uno operates, as well as increasing labor costs in tight labor markets. The special committee also considered declines in the prices of certain restaurant stocks and the effect on Uno's common stock price if the Continuing Stockholders' proposal were withdrawn or rejected by the special committee. Adams, Harkness & Hill representatives reiterated that, on a preliminary study, their financial analysis still supported a valuation in excess of $9.00 per share. The Adams, Harkness & Hill representatives then left the meeting and the special committee's legal counsel answered questions for the special committee about its fiduciary duties and the applicable fair price, fair process standards. After further discussion by the special committee and its advisors of Uno's circumstances and valuation parameters by the special committee and its advisors, the special committee authorized Ms. Davis to meet with Mr. Spencer to emphasize that the special committee required a further increase in the proposed price. On January 16, 2001, at a meeting with Ms. Davis, the Continuing Stockholders submitted a revised written offer to the special committee increasing the offer price to $9.00 per share and changing the structure of the transaction from a cash tender offer to a cash merger. Further, the revised proposal required the merger to be approved not only by the holders of a majority of the outstanding Uno common stock, as required by Delaware law, but also by the holders of a majority of the shares not owned or controlled by the Continuing Stockholders. This stockholder approval requirement could be waived only with the consent of the Continuing Stockholders and the special committee. The revised offer was also subject to receipt of financing and other conditions which the Continuing Stockholders regarded as customary. Finally, the revised offer was subject to the requirement that Uno reimburse the Continuing Stockholders' expenses in the transaction if the transaction was not completed for any reason other than a breach of the merger agreement by the entity to be formed by the Continuing Stockholders for purposes of effecting the merger. At the January 16, 2001 meeting, Ms. Davis strongly suggested that the Continuing Stockholders consider additional financing sources for the proposed going private transaction. The special committee understood at that time that the Continuing Stockholders had only considered obtaining financing from Fleet National Bank and SunTrust Bank, Uno's existing senior lenders. The special committee considered the possibility that debt financing might be available to the Continuing Stockholders on more favorable terms from another party. The special committee believed that if the Continuing Stockholders were able to obtain financing on more favorable terms, the Continuing Stockholders might offer a higher price for Uno's common stock. Conversely, Mr. Spencer and the Management Group believed that they had available sufficient financing for the transaction on favorable terms. Mr. Spencer then reviewed several topics with Ms. Davis, including Mr. Spencer's desire to retain and improve current management. Mr. Spencer also noted that while Uno's current five-year projections could imply a valuation higher than $9.00 per share, as a result of recent developments in the economy, there was considerable uncertainty about whether those projections could be met. Mr. Spencer then stated that the Continuing Stockholders would not increase the $9.00 per share offer price. Ms. Davis urged the Continuing Stockholders to increase the price, noting that the public stockholders include employees. She also emphasized that the special committee firmly believed that a higher price was justified. Mr. Spencer then indicated that the Continuing Stockholders' $9.00 per share offer price was not negotiable. 26
PRER14A34th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 34th
On January 17, 2001, the special committee met by telephone with its legal counsel and financial advisors. The special committee first considered the information received from the Continuing Stockholders detailing the terms of their proposed financing for the transaction. Ms. Davis then reported on her meeting with Mr. Spencer and the Continuing Stockholders' revised offer stipulating a cash merger at $9.00 per share. Next, the special committee discussed at length the present circumstances surrounding the Continuing Stockholders' offer, including indications of a deterioration of the capital markets, indications that Uno's performance might be less than earlier anticipated and the fact that the confidential market test conducted by Adams, Harkness & Hill did not generate any third-party interest in pursuing an acquisition of Uno. The special committee then asked Adams, Harkness & Hill to assess the Continuing Stockholders' offer at $9.00 per share and asked Adams, Harkness & Hill whether the proposed financial terms were fair to Uno's public stockholders. The special committee then asked Skadden, Arps to assess the proposed closing conditions contained in Mr. Spencer's letter. Based on the information provided by Adams, Harkness & Hill and Skadden, Arps, the special committee could then assess all the facts, circumstances, proposed terms and conditions and decide how to proceed. From January 16 to January 30, 2001, members of the special committee and the Continuing Stockholders discussed the revised offer several times by telephone. During these discussions, the special committee refused to accept the revised offer and asked that the price be raised to at least $10.00 per share. During the period of these discussions, Mr. Spencer reported to the special committee that he had been contacted by a financial buyout firm, which was one of the four potential financial buyers contacted by Adams, Harkness & Hill during its confidential market test. In a letter addressed to Mr. Spencer, the financial buyout firm expressed a willingness only to join in the Continuing Stockholders' offer and if the price to be paid for the public stockholders' shares was in the range of $8.75 per share to $9.25 per share. Mr. Spencer immediately delivered a copy of the letter to the special committee. Because this party was only interested in participating in Mr. Spencer's offer, the special committee did not have additional contact with this financial buyout firm. (Following the February 28, 2001 board meeting, the day on which the Continuing Stockholders tentatively agreed to take Uno private at $9.75 per share, the financial buyout firm indicated to Mr. Spencer that it was not interested in participating in a transaction at $9.75 per share.) On January 29, 2001, the special committee met with its financial advisors and legal counsel at the offices of Adams, Harkness & Hill in Boston. The special committee discussed with Skadden, Arps the fact that Adams, Harkness & Hill could not opine that the proposed $9.00 per share cash merger price would be fair to the public stockholders from a financial point of view. Skadden, Arps then advised the special committee as to the legal implications of this fact. After full discussion, the special committee concluded that it would not proceed with the Continuing Stockholders' proposal if Adams, Harkness & Hill did not consider $9.00 per share to be fair to the public stockholders. Representatives of Adams, Harkness & Hill then joined the meeting. 27
PRER14A35th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 35th
Representatives of Adams, Harkness & Hill presented and reviewed in detail their analysis of the Continuing Stockholders' proposed $9.00 per share cash merger price. Their analysis included a review of the trading prices and volume of shares traded of Uno common stock during the period commencing from January 1, 1999 through January 26, 2001. The analysis then compared the stock performance of Uno with the S&P SmallCap Index and the Peer Group for the period commencing January 1, 2000 through January 26, 2001. Adams, Harkness & Hill also compared various financial information of the Peer Group with Uno, including market capitalization, enterprise value, revenues, gross profit, EBITDA, EBIT, net income and earnings per share. Adams, Harkness & Hill then analyzed precedent transactions, the premiums paid in such transactions and the multiples implied by such precedent transactions. The analysis concluded with a review of discounted cash flow for Uno for the period 2001 through 2005. See "--Opinion of the Financial Advisor to the Special Committee" for a more detailed description of the final analysis performed. Representatives of Adams, Harkness & Hill also responded to many questions from the special committee throughout the presentation and discussion. The special committee agreed to inform the Continuing Stockholders that Adams, Harkness & Hill was unable to opine that the proposed $9.00 per share cash price was fair to Uno's public stockholders from a financial point of view and, therefore, the special committee would not recommend the Continuing Stockholders' offer to the board of directors in its current form. Later that afternoon on January 29, 2001, Ms. Davis informed Mr. Spencer by telephone that Adams, Harkness & Hill was not able to opine that the proposed $9.00 per share cash price was fair to the public stockholders from a financial point of view. With the Management Group present on the telephone, Mr. Spencer responded that the Continuing Stockholders were ready to issue a press release announcing that they were withdrawing their proposed offer. In the alternative, he was prepared to ask the special committee and Adams, Harkness & Hill if a $9.50 per share price would be fair to the public stockholders from a financial point of view. Ms. Davis reported to the special committee that the rejection of the $9.00 per share price had led to the possibility of a proposed price increase. On January 30, 2001, Mr. Vincent telephoned Ms. Davis to inform her that Uno's management would be revising its projections downward in light of Uno's first quarter performance and invited her to meet to review such projections with the Management Group. After conferring with Skadden, Arps, Ms. Davis responded to Mr. Vincent on January 30, 2001 that if the Continuing Stockholders had a formal offer to make, they should submit it to the special committee along with supporting information. The special committee would then consider any such offers and information. By letter dated February 1, 2001, Mr. Spencer sent the special committee and its legal and financial advisors 22 pages of additional material, including revised projections. In his letter, Mr. Spencer advised the special committee of certain recent developments that would affect the Continuing Stockholders' ability to increase their offer price, including changes in the financial credit markets, a failure in a major franchise relationship, revised franchise development forecasts and revised financial projections that suggested more modest performance than previously forecast. The Continuing Stockholders did not increase the $9.00 per share offer at this time. On February 5, 2001, the special committee met by telephone with its legal counsel and financial advisors to consider Mr. Spencer's letter and the events since the special committee's last meeting on January 29, 2001. Skadden, Arps first advised the committee as to its duties and responsibilities in light of the new information from the Continuing Stockholders, and answered questions from the special committee. After full discussion of its duties and responsibilities and the new materials from the Continuing Stockholders, the special committee agreed that Mr. Spencer's February 2, 2001 letter did not present any meaningful change of circumstance that warranted consideration. Adams, Harkness & Hill then joined the meeting and informed the special committee that the new material received with Mr. Spencer's February 2, 2001 letter, when considered in connection with Adams, Harkness & Hill's financial analysis, increased their confidence that a $9.00 per share price was 28
PRER14A36th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 36th
not in the range of values supported by their financial methodology and did not provide a basis for a change in opinion. Ms. Davis then noted that according to Mr. Spencer, the Continuing Stockholders were prepared to engage Tucker Anthony Incorporated ("Tucker Anthony") to review the Continuing Stockholders' offer, to assist the Continuing Stockholders in their discussions and negotiations with the special committee by preparing financial and industry background information and to assist them in their analysis of whether or not to revise their offer. Ms. Davis also reported that the Continuing Stockholders were not going to solicit financial buyers to join the Continuing Stockholders. The special committee discussed these developments and determined that if the Continuing Stockholders chose to add Tucker Anthony as an additional financial resource to improve the offer price, then that would be welcome; but if Tucker Anthony were merely to add financial analytical capability, such additional financial analysis was not needed by the special committee. The special committee authorized Ms. Davis to inform Mr. Spencer that the February 2, 2001 materials did not change its conclusion regarding the fairness of the $9.00 per share price and that additional financial resources would be welcome, but additional analysis of the $9.00 per share price was not needed or useful. The Continuing Stockholders retained Tucker Anthony to assist them in their analysis of whether or not to revise their offer. Following the meeting, Ms. Davis informed Mr. Spencer of the special committee's position. Mr. Spencer responded that the Continuing Stockholders were inclined to issue a press release withdrawing their offer, but that they would, for the moment, continue evaluating the current situation and consider whether or not the Continuing Stockholders could revise their offer. From February 1 through February 24, 2001, there were numerous communications among the Continuing Stockholders and their representatives and the special committee and its legal and financial advisors. During this period, Mr. Spencer orally advised the special committee that the highest price the Continuing Stockholders were prepared to pay was $9.50 per share. Tucker Anthony provided Adams, Harkness & Hill with analyses involving direct comparisons with other minority interest transactions and discussed discounted cash flow and leveraged buy-out analyses of value. Tucker Anthony believed that these analyses demonstrated that a price of $9.50 per share would be fair to the public stockholders from a financial point of view. The special committee responded to Tucker Anthony because Tucker Anthony had been engaged by the Continuing Stockholders to provide them with financial advice and, therefore, the special committee determined that the best way to advance negotiations towards a beneficial transaction would be to respond to Tucker Anthony's statements. The special committee's position during this period continued to be that it could not recommend a price of less than $10.00 per share. On February 24, 2001, the special committee met by telephone with its legal counsel and financial advisors. Skadden, Arps informed the special committee that in separate telephone calls to each of the committee members, Skadden, Arps had relayed messages from Adams, Harkness & Hill that Adams, Harkness & Hill was in the process of continuing its financial assessment of the Continuing Stockholders' stated intent to offer up to $9.50 per share. Adams, Harkness & Hill reported to the special committee that it had spoken with Tucker Anthony regarding the fairness of an offer of $9.50 per share. Skadden, Arps reported that it had discussed with the Continuing Stockholders' counsel Delaware law concerning the determination of a fair price. The special committee then discussed the need for Adams, Harkness & Hill to inform the special committee of its current opinion of whether a $9.50 cash price was fair to the public stockholders. Adams, Harkness & Hill then joined the meeting and reviewed their recent activity. Under their current financial analysis, Adams, Harkness & Hill could not recommend a $9.50 per share price, but the deterioration in capital markets and questions about Uno's current store performance required 29
PRER14A37th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 37th
further assessment. Adams, Harkness & Hill informed the special committee that it would update its analysis for developments in Uno's same store sales growth figures for the weeks since December 31, 2000 over the upcoming weekend and respond to the special committee's request for an updated analysis at that time. Adams, Harkness & Hill did not deliver a written report to the special committee at this meeting. The special committee agreed to reconvene by telephone on February 26, 2001. On February 26, 2001, the special committee met by telephone with its legal counsel and financial advisors. Adams, Harkness & Hill began by reviewing same store sales results for the period January 1, 2001 to the present, stating that they were consistent with management's model. The special committee asked various questions of Adams, Harkness & Hill, including how Uno's results compared with those of its competitors during the same period. The special committee resumed its meeting later that day, and Adams, Harkness & Hill reported that Uno's recent same store sales growth figures were consistent with their historic relationship and with comparable companies' same store sales growth. See "--Opinion of the Financial Advisor to the Special Committee" for a more detailed description of the final analysis performed. Adams, Harkness & Hill then responded to additional questions from the special committee. After a full discussion of the Adams, Harkness & Hill financial analysis, the special committee asked Adams, Harkness & Hill to inform it whether, in light of the updated circumstances, Adams, Harkness & Hill could opine that $9.50 per share was a fair price. Based on all its work and in light of current circumstances, Adams, Harkness & Hill reported that a $9.75 per share price would be fair to the public stockholders, and that, in light of recent same store sales figures, Adams, Harkness & Hill still could not conclude that $9.50 per share was fair. Adams, Harkness & Hill also noted that the Continuing Stockholders' term sheet from their prospective lenders continued to limit the financing to a price not to exceed $10.00 per share, which supported an offer price higher than $9.50 per share. After further discussion, the special committee determined to request to meet with Mr. Spencer in person and as the full special committee prior to Uno's annual meeting of the board of directors and annual meeting of stockholders on February 28, 2001. At that meeting, the special committee would inform Mr. Spencer that it could not recommend a $9.50 per share price. On February 28, 2001, the special committee met with Mr. Spencer before Uno's board of directors meeting and before Uno's annual meeting of stockholders. The special committee informed him that it could not recommend a $9.50 per share price, that Adams, Harkness & Hill did not consider it fair to the public stockholders, and that the Continuing Stockholders should raise the price or end discussions. Mr. Spencer stated that the Continuing Stockholders did not want to propose more than $9.50 per share and excused himself from the meeting to discuss the special committee's position with the Management Group. During the board of directors meeting, Mr. Spencer separately asked Ms. Davis whether the special committee would likely change its mind if the Continuing Stockholders were to increase their offer. Ms. Davis, without informing Mr. Spencer whether the special committee would respond favorably to any lesser price, informed Mr. Spencer that the special committee would not support any price less than $9.75 per share. Mr. Spencer responded that the Continuing Stockholders would increase their proposed offer price to $9.75 per share in cash, subject to certain conditions, including that Uno agree to reimburse the Continuing Stockholders' expenses in the event that the proposed transaction did not close. The special committee accepted the Continuing Stockholders' price of $9.75 per share, but not the expense reimbursement proposal. The special committee responded with a counter proposal that the Continuing Stockholders' reimbursable expenses would be capped at $350,000 if the transaction was not completed and that reimbursement would be made only if the transaction failed to close for reasons that were outside the control or influence of the Continuing Stockholders. After further discussion, the special committee increased the amount of the expense reimbursement to $500,000 and reached 30
PRER14A38th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 38th
agreement with Mr. Spencer on the other conditions of the Continuing Stockholders' offer. These conditions included the receipt of sufficient financing and that there be no material adverse change in Uno or any litigation arising in connection with the transaction. On February 28, 2001, Uno announced at its annual meeting of stockholders and issued a press release that the special committee and the Continuing Stockholders had reached tentative agreement on a going private transaction at a price of $9.75 per share in cash for all shares of Uno common stock not already owned by the Continuing Stockholders. The press release stated that the transaction would proceed as a merger and would be subject to execution of a definitive merger agreement, approval by Uno's board of directors and stockholders, including approval by the holders of a majority of the shares not owned or controlled by the Continuing Stockholders, receipt of financing, and customary closing conditions. During the negotiations taking place between Mr. Spencer and the special committee from January 17, 2001 through the end of February 2001, Mr. Spencer and the Continuing Stockholders realized that, given the unyielding negotiating position taken by the special committee, the Continuing Stockholders would have to make concessions to the special committee in an effort to complete the transaction. Although there was no change in circumstances in Uno's business, operations or prospects which led to the offer of a higher price, Mr. Spencer and the Continuing Stockholders decided to raise the price offered to the public stockholders in an effort to reach agreement with the special committee. As described above, the negotiations ultimately led to the $9.75 per share price offered to the Uno public stockholders. During March and early April 2001, Mr. Spencer, the Management Group and Nutter, McClennen, counsel to the Continuing Stockholders, and members of the special committee and Skadden, Arps, counsel to the special committee, had lengthy negotiations concerning the definitive merger agreement and related documents and exchanged numerous drafts of the merger agreement reflecting their negotiations. During this period, the special committee met with its advisors to discuss the various drafts in detail and to formulate responses. On April 2, 2001, the special committee and Skadden, Arps met with Mr. Spencer, the Management Group and Nutter McClennen to negotiate several remaining issues in the merger agreement. On April 3, 2001, numerous issues remained unresolved after further negotiations, however, the Continuing Stockholders instructed Nutter McClennen to accept virtually all of the special committees' terms, leaving only three remaining issues: (i) the capitalization of Parent, (ii) the responsibility for payment of bank commitment fees for Uno's proposed credit agreement (a portion of which would be used to fund the merger consideration) and (iii) the circumstances under which the Continuing Stockholders' expenses would be reimbursed in the event the merger did not close and the maximum amount to be reimbursed. On April 4, 2001, prior to a special meeting of the board of directors, the special committee met with Skadden, Arps and Adams, Harkness & Hill to review the latest draft of the merger agreement reflecting the Continuing Stockholders' proposals to resolve all remaining issues with respect to the proposed merger transaction and to receive the opinion of Adams, Harkness & Hill. At this meeting Adams, Harkness & Hill gave a detailed presentation regarding the financial aspects of the proposed merger agreement. A summary of the presentation appears under the heading "--Opinion of the Financial Advisor to the Special Committee." Adams, Harkness & Hill delivered its opinion to the special committee that the consideration to be received by the stockholders was fair from a financial point of view. The special committee separately determined that in return for the agreement that Mr. Spencer would personally fund one-third of the bank commitment fees, the special committee would accept the Continuing Stockholders' proposals on capitalization of Parent and the circumstances under which the Continuing Stockholders' expenses would be reimbursed in the event the merger did 31
PRER14A39th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 39th
not close and the maximum amount to be reimbursed. If Mr. Spencer accepted this offer, the special committee determined that it would approve the draft merger agreement and recommend that the full board of directors of Uno approve the merger agreement. The special committee then invited Mr. Spencer to join the meeting and informed him that it would require him to personally fund one-third of the bank commitment fees required in connection with the refinancing of Uno's existing credit facility and the financing for the going private transaction. Mr. Spencer agreed to the special committee's proposal and the special committee resolved to approve the draft merger agreement and recommend that the full board of directors of Uno approve the merger agreement. Following the special committee meeting, the board of directors of Uno met. Counsel to the special committee, counsel to the Continuing Stockholders and counsel to Uno were also present. Ms. Davis gave a report of the special committee and concluded with the special committee's recommendation that the board of directors approve the merger agreement. Adams, Harkness & Hill then made a presentation regarding the financial aspects of the proposed merger agreement. Adams, Harkness & Hill summarized its opinion to the special committee with respect to the fairness, from a financial point of view, of the consideration to be received by the public stockholders described under "Opinion of Financial Advisor to the Special Committee." Skadden, Arps, counsel to the special committee, and Brown, Rudnick, Freed & Gesmer, counsel to Uno, gave presentations regarding the legal terms and conditions of the merger agreement. Lengthy discussion followed each presentation and the financial and legal advisors answered questions raised by the board of directors. Following that discussion, the board of directors, based on the presentation by Adams, Harkness & Hill regarding its opinion to the special committee, the recommendation of the special committee and on the other factors described herein under "--Recommendation of the Board of Directors; Fairness of the Merger," and "Reasons for the Board of Directors Determination" approved the merger agreement in substantially the form submitted to the board of directors and authorized the appropriate officers of Uno to execute and deliver final documents on behalf of Uno. The board of directors also approved the sale and leaseback transaction with U.S. Realty Advisors, LLC, the sale and leaseback transactions with Mr. Spencer, amendments to Uno's $55 million credit facility with Fleet National Bank and SunTrust Bank to permit the sale and leaseback transactions, and the $75 million credit facility with Fleet National Bank and SunTrust Bank to replace the existing $55 million credit facility. Mr. Spencer, Mr. Miller and Mr. MacPhail abstained from the vote approving the merger agreement and the related matters because they have interests in the merger that are different from Uno stockholders generally. From April 4, 2001 to April 19, 2001, Uno completed the schedules to the merger agreement, and on April 19, 2001, the merger agreement, was executed by the parties, and Uno issued a press release announcing the signing of the merger agreement. RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS; FAIRNESS OF THE MERGER The special committee of the board of directors has unanimously determined that the terms of the merger agreement and the merger are fair to, and in the best interests of, Uno stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders. The special committee unanimously recommended to the board of directors that the merger agreement be adopted and approved. The special committee considered a number of factors, as more fully described above under "--Background of the Merger" and as described below under "--Reasons for the Special Committee's Determination," in making its recommendation. The board of directors, acting in part upon the recommendation of the special committee, unanimously determined, with Mr. Spencer, Mr. Miller and Mr. MacPhail abstaining, that the terms of the merger agreement and the proposed merger are fair to, and in the best interests of, Uno stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders. The board of directors, based in part on the 32
PRER14A40th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 40th
unanimous recommendation of the special committee, recommends that Uno stockholders vote FOR the adoption and approval of the merger agreement. REASONS FOR THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE'S DETERMINATION In recommending adoption and approval of the merger agreement and the merger to the board of directors, the special committee considered a number of factors that they believe supported their recommendation, including: - the merger will provide Uno stockholders a premium for their shares compared to the market price of Uno's common stock, as set forth in the analysis of Adams, Harkness & Hill; the special committee accepted the analysis of Adams, Harkness & Hill with respect to current and historical prices of Uno's common stock and considered the premium paid in relation to the current and historical prices, as set forth in the analysis of Adams, Harkness & Hill; the special committee concluded that the substantial premium over the price of Uno's common stock prior to the announcement of the transaction of $6.25 on October 23, 2000 supported its determination to recommend the transaction; - the special committee drew on its knowledge of the business, financial results and prospects of Uno, as well as the special committee's knowledge of the restaurant industry generally that committee members had developed in their time as members of the full board of directors of Uno as well as their outside business experiences; specifically, the special committee considered the potential for growth through new store openings, and the views expressed by Adams, Harkness & Hill and management of Uno regarding the financial condition, results of operations, business and prospects of Uno, including the prospects of Uno if it were to remain publicly owned; the special committee did not consider the improvement in Uno's cash position and cash generated from operations as disclosed in Uno's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended April 2, 2001 because this information was not available at the time of the special committee's determination, but Adams, Harkness & Hill will take that information into account in considering whether it can provide a bring down fairness opinion to the special committee prior to the closing of the transaction; the special committee considered the fact that Uno's projections that forecast earnings per share increasing significantly over the next several years when assessing such improvements in revenue and earnings as incorporated in the discounted cash flow analysis done by Adams, Harkness & Hill and discussed such projections as one factor that affected the evaluation of the transaction by the special committee; the special committee concluded that these collective insights about Uno's prospects supported its determination to recommend the transaction; - Mr. Spencer's controlling equity interest in Uno would likely deter potential strategic and financial third party buyers in light of Mr. Spencer's stated intention that he is not interested in selling his interest without a premium substantially higher than implied by the $9.75 per share price; the special committee concluded that this deterrent effect supported its determination to recommend the transaction; - the special committee's conclusion that because the transaction had been publicly announced for a long period of time and no additional buyers had indicated an interest in an alternate transaction and none of the parties contacted by the special committee had indicated an interest in an alternate transaction, it was unlikely that any party other than the Continuing Stockholders, Parent and Newco would propose and complete a transaction that was more favorable than the merger to Uno and its stockholders; the special committee concluded that the lack of additional buyers at a higher price supported its determination to recommend the transaction; 33
PRER14A41st Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 41st
- the limitations Uno suffered and would likely continue to suffer as a public company, including its limited trading volume resulting from the significant ownership interest held by Mr. Spencer and the other Continuing Stockholders, the lack of institutional sponsorship and coverage by institutional research analysts, the inability to raise capital in the public markets to finance further growth and increase the public float resulting from Uno's inability to generate the type of rapid revenue and unit growth expected by the public markets, and the expenses of compliance with the reporting requirements of a public company, all of which adversely affect the trading market in, and the value of, Uno's common stock; the special committee concluded that these limitations imposed on Uno as a public company supported its determination to recommend the transaction; - the negotiations with respect to the merger consideration that, among other things, led to an increase in the Continuing Stockholders' offer from $8.75 per share of Uno common stock to $9.75 per share of Uno common stock, and the belief of the members of the special committee that $9.75 per share was the highest price that the Continuing Stockholders would agree to pay; the opinion of Adams, Harkness & Hill, as discussed below, provides that, as of the date of such opinion, the $9.75 per share consideration to be received in the merger is fair from a financial point of view to the stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders; the special committee concluded that its ability to increase the offer and Adams, Harkness & Hill's opinion both supported its determination to recommend the transaction; - the $9.75 per share to be paid to stockholders other than Parent in the merger represents (i) a premium of approximately 33.4% over the $7.13 closing sale price for the shares of common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on October 24, 2000, the last trading day before Uno announced the Continuing Stockholders' initial offer to take Uno private by purchasing all of the outstanding shares of common stock at a price of $8.75 per share and (ii) a premium of approximately 52.8% over the average closing sale price per share of $6.38 during the one week preceding the Continuing Stockholders' initial announcement to take Uno private; the special committee concluded that the size of the premium supported its determination to recommend the transaction; - the presentations of Adams, Harkness & Hill at various special committee meetings and its final presentation at the April 4, 2001 meeting, including the opinion of Adams, Harkness & Hill, based on and subject to the limitations, assumptions and qualifications set forth in its opinion, as to the fairness, from a financial point of view, of the merger consideration to the holders of Uno common stock (other than the Continuing Stockholders); see "Opinion of Financial Advisor to the Special Committee", and a copy of the opinion of Adams, Harkness & Hill attached as Exhibit C to the proxy statement; the special committee concluded that the financial analysis of Adams, Harkness & Hill supported its determination to recommend the transaction; - the presentations by Adams, Harkness & Hill regarding management's earnings projections; Adams, Harkness & Hill advised the special committee that its discounted cash flow analysis of such projections indicated a valuation range of $4.57 to $11.54 per share, that the $9.75 price per share to be paid in the merger is within that range, and that the discounted cash flow analysis was one of the factors relied upon by Adams, Harkness & Hill in rendering its fairness opinion; see "--Opinion of Financial Advisor to the Special Committee"; the special committee concluded that the financial analysis of Adams, Harkness & Hill supported its determination to recommend the transaction; - the financing proposal received by the Continuing Stockholders, Parent and Newco for the merger from Fleet National Bank and SunTrust Bank, as well as the planned sales and leaseback transactions with U.S. Realty Advisors, LLC and with Mr. Spencer, which the special committee believes reasonably supports the Continuing Stockholders', Parent's and Newco's ability to meet their financing obligations pursuant to the merger agreement; the special committee concluded that the viability of Mr. Spencer's financing for the transaction supported its determination to recommend the transaction; 34
PRER14A42nd Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 42nd
- cash will be paid to the Uno stockholders (other than Parent) in the merger, eliminating any uncertainties in valuing the merger consideration to be received by the Uno stockholders (other than Parent); the special committee concluded that the certainty of value provided by the use of cash consideration supported its determination to recommend the transaction; - the merger agreement permits the board of directors to consider unsolicited competing acquisition proposals that are, or are reasonably likely to lead to, proposals superior to the merger, as described in "The Merger Agreement--No Solicitation"; the special committee concluded that its ability to consider other proposals supported its determination to recommend the transaction; - Delaware law entitles Uno stockholders who do not vote in favor of the merger who file a written objection with Uno to obtain the "fair value" of their shares and otherwise follow the procedures prescribed by Delaware law, as determined by a court, if the merger is completed; See "--Appraisal Rights;" the special committee concluded that the availability of other remedies for dissatisfied stockholders supported its determination to recommend the transaction; - the special committee's judgment that it was unlikely for Uno stockholders to realize in excess of $9.75 per share due to the current and prospective environment in which Uno operates, and more particularly, the difficulty that Uno would have in the future competing against larger, more aggressive competitors with greater capital resources; the special committee concluded that the unlikely prospects for a higher trading price for Uno shares if it remained a public company supported its determination to recommend the transaction; and - the special committee's judgment, in view of Uno's prospects, as well as Adams, Harkness & Hill's discussions with a number of possible acquirors, none of whom expressed an interest to acquire Uno at a price higher than $9.75 per share, that it was unlikely that one or more strategic or financial buyers would be willing to pay a price for Uno equal to or greater than $9.75 per share in cash and that the Continuing Stockholders, whose approval would be essential to a proposed sale of Uno, might not be prepared to support a sale of Uno at any price unless substantially higher than $9.75 per share; the special committee concluded that the lack of likely higher offers supported its determination to recommend the transaction. The special committee also determined that the merger is procedurally fair because among other things: - the Uno board of directors established a special committee to consider and negotiate the merger agreement; - the special committee was composed of independent directors who are not officers or employees of Uno and have no financial interest in the merger different from Uno stockholders generally other than their ownership of stock options; - the special committee was given exclusive and unlimited authority to, among other things, evaluate, negotiate and recommend the terms of any proposed transactions; - the special committee retained and received advice from its own independent legal counsel and financial advisors in evaluating, negotiating and recommending the terms of the merger agreement; - Adams, Harkness & Hill rendered an opinion concerning the fairness, from a financial point of view, of the consideration to be received by the stockholders (other than the Continuing Stockholders) in the merger; - the price of $9.75 per share and the other terms and conditions of the merger agreement resulted from active and lengthy negotiations between the special committee and its 35
PRER14A43rd Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 43rd
representatives, on the one hand, and the Continuing Stockholders and their representatives on the other hand; - under Delaware law, Uno stockholders have a right to demand appraisal of their shares; - the special committee and the board of directors required that the merger agreement be approved by the affirmative vote of the holders of at least a majority of the shares of Uno common stock held by stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders; this requirement is waivable, but only with the consent of the special committee; the special committee specifically negotiated its right to approve the waiver of this requirement; and - neither after public disclosure of the Continuing Stockholders' initial $8.75 per share proposal on October 25, 2000 nor during the course of Uno's efforts to find a potential acquiror throughout the month of December 2000 did any other party express any interest in acquiring Uno at a valuation exceeding $9.75. The special committee also considered a variety of risks and other potentially negative factors concerning the merger. All of the material risks and potentially negative factors considered by the special committee were as follows: - the obligation of the Continuing Stockholders, Parent and Newco to complete the merger is conditioned upon financing being made available to Parent and Newco, as discussed in "--Merger Financing," and Parent and Newco may not secure financing for a variety of reasons, including reasons beyond the control of Uno; - if the merger is not completed under circumstances further discussed in "The Merger Agreement--Termination of the Merger Agreement," Uno may be required to reimburse Parent specified expenses; - the cash consideration received by a stockholder generally will be taxable to the stockholder in an amount equal to the excess of $9.75 over the stockholder's tax basis in the stockholder's shares of Uno common stock; - the Continuing Stockholders have potential conflicts of interest, including equity interests and continued employment in Uno as the surviving corporation; see "--Interests of the Continuing Stockholders in the Merger"; and - following the merger, Uno stockholders, other than the Continuing Stockholders and holders of stock options of Uno as the surviving corporation will cease to participate in any future earnings growth of Uno or benefit from any increase in the value of Uno. The special committee did not consider the 21.9% premium that the merger consideration represents over the $8.00 per share closing sale price for Uno's common stock on February 27, 2001, the last trading day prior to the announcement that the parties had agreed to take Uno private at $9.75 per share, to be relevant in its determination. The special committee believed that the price of Uno's common stock on February 27, 2001 already reflected the October 25, 2000 announcement to take Uno private at $8.75 per share. The special committee did not ask Uno to attempt to determine the liquidation value of Uno and gave little consideration to the book value of Uno's assets of $83,738,000, or $7.63 per share, as of December 31, 2000, because it believed that those measures of asset value would be considerably less than the merger consideration of $9.75 per Uno share and Uno's going concern value. The special committee's belief regarding liquidation value was based upon their understanding of the restaurant industry and their general business knowledge that liquidation sales generally result in proceeds substantially less than the sale of a going concern business. Based upon the various analyses of value by Adams, Harkness & Hill, the special committee concluded that the liquidation value and book value 36
PRER14A44th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 44th
were not materially relevant to the market value of Uno's business. While the special committee reviewed with Adams, Harkness & Hill its various financial analyses and reviewed with officers of Uno its historical and projected results, the special committee did not independently generate its own separate financial analysis of the merger. In reaching its determination, the special committee did not consider the purchases made by Uno in the past two years. No Continuing Stockholder made any purchases of Uno common stock during the last two years other than by way of exercise of stock options. The special committee did not view the purchases by Uno during the past two years as relevant to a determination of fairness. The special committee also did not consider any firm offers of which Uno was aware during the preceding two years in connection with any proposed transaction to acquire Uno because, to Uno's knowledge, no such offers had been received. The special committee was aware that in late April 1999, Mr. Spencer received an unsolicited communication from a third party expressing an interest in discussing a possible acquisition of Uno at a price of approximately $14.00 ($12.75 after giving effect to a subsequent 10% stock dividend) per share in cash. The inquiry was subject to due diligence, execution of a definitive agreement and securing financing. The communication also set forth that the potential price per share was predicated on certain financial assumptions. As described above in the section entitled "--Background of the Merger," these assumptions about Uno were inaccurate. The special committee agreed with management's conclusion at that time that the third party would be unable to finance the potential transaction and that it would lower its potential price upon learning of its inaccurate assumptions. Consequently, the special committee did not consider this as a firm offer. See "--Background of the Merger." After considering these factors, the special committee concluded that the positive factors relating to the merger outweighed the negative factors. Because of the variety of factors considered, the special committee did not find it practicable to quantify or otherwise assign relative weights to, and did not make specific assessments of, the specific factors considered in reaching its determination. However, individual members of the special committee may have assigned different weights to various factors. The determination of the special committee was made after consideration of all of the factors together. REASONS FOR THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS' DETERMINATION The board of directors of Uno consists of eight directors, four of whom serve on the special committee. At the April 4, 2001 meeting of the board of directors, the special committee, with its legal and financial advisers participating, reported to the other members of the board of directors on the course of its negotiations with the Continuing Stockholders, Parent, Newco and their legal counsel, its review of the merger agreement and the related financing requirements and the factors it took into account in reaching its determination that the merger is fair to, and in the best interests of, Uno stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders. In view of the wide variety of factors considered in its evaluation of the merger, the board of directors did not find it practicable to quantify or otherwise assign relative weights to, and did not make specific assessments of, the specific factors considered in reaching its determination. Rather, the board of directors based its position on the totality of the information presented and considered. In considering the determination of the special committee, the board of directors believed that the analysis of the special committee was reasonable and adopted the special committee's conclusion and the analysis underlying the conclusion. The board of directors also considered the financial and managerial resources and future prospects of Parent and Newco. It considered the financial projections delivered to Adams, Harkness & Hill, Uno's historic ability to access equity and debt capital, and the ability to continue to attract and retain management with equity incentives which historically have not proven to be valuable for Uno's management. The board of directors also considered the possible effects on the business of Uno and its subsidiaries and on the employees, customers, suppliers and creditors of Uno and its subsidiaries and the effects on the community in which Uno's facilities are located. 37
PRER14A45th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 45th
FAIRNESS OF THE MERGER TO STOCKHOLDERS OTHER THAN THE CONTINUING STOCKHOLDERS The board of directors believes that the merger agreement and the merger are substantively and procedurally fair to, and in the best interests of, Uno stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders for all of the reasons set forth above under "--Recommendation of the Board of Directors; Fairness of the Merger--Reasons for the Special Committee's Determination" and "--Reasons for the Board of Directors' Determination." In addition, with respect to procedural fairness, the board of directors established a special committee, consisting of four independent directors of Uno, none of whom is an officer or employee of Uno or has an interest in the merger different from that of Uno stockholders generally other than as holders of Uno stock options. The merger consideration of $9.75 in cash per share was the highest price the Continuing Stockholders indicated they were willing to pay following extensive negotiations between the special committee and the Continuing Stockholders and their representatives. In reaching these conclusions, the board of directors considered it significant that: - no member of the special committee has an interest in the merger different from that of Uno stockholders generally other than as holders of Uno stock options; and - the special committee retained its own financial and legal advisors who have extensive experience with transactions similar to the merger and who assisted the special committee in evaluating the merger and in negotiating with the Continuing Stockholders. Adams, Harkness & Hill was retained to advise the special committee as to the fairness, from a financial point of view, of the proposal received from the Continuing Stockholders, Parent and Newco. Adams, Harkness & Hill reached the conclusion expressed in its written opinion dated April 4, 2001 that, subject to the considerations and limitations set forth in the opinion, the merger is fair, from a financial point of view, to the stockholders of Uno other than the Continuing Stockholders. THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, BASED IN PART ON THE UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE, RECOMMENDS THAT UNO STOCKHOLDERS VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSAL TO ADOPT AND APPROVE THE MERGER AGREEMENT. The recommendation of the board of directors was made after consideration of all the material factors, both positive and negative, as described above. Mr. Spencer, Mr. Miller and Mr. MacPhail, each of whom is a Continuing Stockholder and a current director of Uno, each abstained from voting on the proposal to adopt and approve the merger agreement. The remaining five directors voted unanimously to adopt and approve the merger agreement. DETERMINATION OF THE FAIRNESS OF THE MERGER BY PARENT, NEWCO AND THE AFFILIATE STOCKHOLDERS The rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission require Parent, Newco, and Mr. Spencer, Uno Associates and the Management Group (the "Affiliate Stockholders") to express their belief as to the fairness of the merger to the stockholders (other than the Continuing Stockholders). Parent, Newco and the Affiliate Stockholders did not participate in the deliberations of the special committee regarding or receive advice from Adams, Harkness & Hill as to the fairness to the stockholders of the merger. Parent, Newco, and the Affiliate Stockholders believe that the merger is substantively fair to the stockholders of Uno other than the Continuing Stockholders. Parent, Newco and the Affiliate Stockholders based their belief on the following factors: - the current and historical market prices for shares of Uno common stock; - the fact that the $9.75 per share to be paid to stockholders other than Parent in the merger represents (i) a premium of approximately 33.4% over the $7.31 closing sale price for the shares 38
PRER14A46th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 46th
of common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on October 24, 2000, the last trading day before Uno announced the Continuing Stockholders' initial offer to take Uno private by purchasing all of the outstanding shares of common stock at a price of $8.75 per share, and (ii) a premium of approximately 52.8% over the average closing sale price per share of $6.38 during the one week preceding the Continuing Stockholders' initial announcement to take Uno private; - the fact that the special committee determined that the merger is fair to, and in the best interests of, Uno and the stockholders (other than the Continuing Stockholders) and the special committee's recommendation that the stockholders vote to adopt and approve the merger agreement; while Parent, Newco and the Affiliate Stockholders considered the special committee's determination and recommendation, they did not rely upon the special committee's analysis; - the fact that the special committee received the Adams, Harkness & Hill fairness opinion; Parent, Newco and the Affiliate Stockholders, however, did not rely upon the analysis of Adams, Harkness & Hill; - the Affiliate Stockholders' knowledge of the business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects of Uno, and knowledge of the restaurant industry generally; - the extensive negotiations between the special committee and the Continuing Stockholders, Parent and Newco; - the measures taken by the board of directors to ensure the procedural fairness of the transaction, including the formation of the special committee; - advice received by the Affiliate Stockholders, Parent and Newco, from Tucker Anthony, a financial advisor retained by Mr. Spencer that a price of $9.50 per share would be fair to the public stockholders of Uno from a financial point of view; this advice was based upon financial analyses performed by Tucker Anthony that involved direct comparisons with other transactions, and discounted cash flow and leveraged buy-out analyses; the direct comparisons included analyses of historical stock trading, comparable minority buy-out transactions, comparable companies trading and precedent acquisitions; and - their own knowledge of Uno's business and prospects, the financial information and projections available in Uno's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission or otherwise included in this proxy statement, and the condition of the restaurant industry. Parent, Newco, and the Affiliate Stockholders did not assign relative weights to these factors. Rather, they viewed their position as being based on the totality of the information presented to and considered by them, except that particular emphasis was placed on the receipt and acceptance by the special committee of the Adams, Harkness & Hill fairness opinion. During the price negotiations between the Continuing Stockholders and the special committee, Mr. Spencer indicated that he would not be interested in selling all of his shares of Uno common stock unless he received a price per share substantially greater than $9.75 a share. Mr. Spencer made this statement because as the founding and majority stockholder of Uno, he believed that he should be able to receive a control premium for the sale of all of his shares. Notwithstanding this belief, Mr. Spencer believes that the merger consideration of $9.75 per share is fair to the stockholders of Uno other than the Continuing Stockholders. Parent, Newco, and the Affiliate Stockholders believe that the merger is procedurally fair to the stockholders of Uno other than the Continuing Stockholders because of the measures taken by the special committee and the board of directors to ensure the procedural fairness of the transaction, including the formation of the special committee, the retention of legal and financial advisors by the 39
PRER14A47th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 47th
special committee and the extensive nature of the negotiations between special committee and the Continuing Stockholders, Parent and Newco. The foregoing constitute all the material factors considered by the Affiliate Stockholders, Parent and Newco in making their respective fairness determination. The Affiliate Stockholders, Parent and Newco did not consider whether the merger consideration constitutes fair value in relation to the liquidation value of Uno and gave little consideration to the book value of Uno because they believed that those measures of asset value were not relevant to the market value of Uno's business. In reaching their determination, Parent, Newco, and the Affiliate Stockholders also did not consider the purchases made by Uno in the past two years. No Affiliate Stockholder made any purchases of Uno common stock during the last two years other than by way of stock option exercises. The special committee did not, and Parent, Newco and the Affiliate Stockholders also did not, view these purchases by Uno in the past two years as material or relevant to a determination of fairness. Uno did not receive any firm offers to acquire Uno during the past two years. Uno did receive a communication from a third party in April 1999, but for the reasons described under "Special Factors--Background of the Merger", Uno did not consider this inquiry a firm offer. See also, "Recommendation of the Board of Directors; Fairness of the Merger--Reasons for the Special Committee's Determination." Consequently, Parent, Newco and the Affiliate Stockholders also did not consider any firm offers. Other than the recommendations of the special committee and the board of directors that the stockholders vote in favor of the adoption and approval of the merger agreement, no other person filing the Schedule 13E-3 with the Securities and Exchange Commission has made any recommendation with respect to the merger. Uno, Parent, Newco and the Affiliate Stockholders have not made any provision in connection with the merger to grant unaffiliated stockholders of Uno access to Uno's corporate records, or to obtain counsel or appraisal services at the expense of Uno, Parent, Newco or the Affiliate Stockholders. FORWARD LOOKING INFORMATION; CERTAIN PROJECTIONS Uno does not, as a matter of course, make public projections as to future sales, earnings or other results. However, in connection with the merger, Uno's management prepared and provided to the special committee, Adams, Harkness & Hill and Fleet National Bank N.A., the projections, which are summarized below under the caption "Projections Prepared by Uno" for the five fiscal years ending October 2, 2005. In the view of Uno's management, the projections were prepared on a reasonable basis, reflect the best currently available estimates and judgments, and present, to the best of the knowledge and belief of Uno's management, the expected course of action and the expected future performance of Uno. Neither Uno's independent accountants, nor any other independent accountants have compiled, examined or reviewed these projections. No independent accountants have expressed any opinion or other form of assurance with respect to these projections or their achievability, and Uno's independent accountants assume no responsibility for, and disclaim any association with, these projections. The projections included herein in one case assume that the merger has occurred (the "Merger Projections"), and in the other case assume that the merger does not occur (the "Going Concern Projections"). The projections were initially prepared by management as of November 21, 2000 and November 22, 2000. On January 31, 2001 and February 2, 2001, management revised the projections in light of Uno's performance in the first quarter of fiscal 2001. The primary difference between the assumptions used in the Merger Projections and those used in the Going Concern Projections is the incurrence of a $75 million senior credit facility that will be used to finance a portion of the merger consideration, to refinance Uno's existing indebtedness to Fleet National Bank and SunTrust Bank, and for working capital. Management does not intend at this time to update the projections. 40
PRER14A48th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 48th
The projections below are or involve forward-looking statements and are based upon a variety of assumptions, including Uno's ability to achieve strategic goals, objectives and targets over the applicable periods. These assumptions involve judgments with respect to future economic, competitive and regulatory conditions, financial market conditions and future business decisions, all of which are difficult or impossible to predict accurately and many of which are beyond Uno's control. Many important factors, in addition to those discussed elsewhere in this proxy statement, could cause Uno's results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. These factors include Uno's competitive environment, Uno's ability to open new restaurants on a timely basis and the performance of those restaurants, economic and other market conditions in which Uno operates and matters affecting business generally, all of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond Uno's control. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that the projections are indicative of Uno's future performance or that actual results will not differ materially from those in the projections set forth below. See "Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements." Uno is not entitled to rely on the safe harbor protection of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 with respect to the forward looking statements contained in these projections. In light of the uncertainties inherent in projections of any kind, the inclusion of these projections in this proxy statement should not be regarded as a representation by Uno, the board of directors of Uno, the special committee, or any of their advisors, agents or representatives that these projections will prove to be correct. 41
PRER14A49th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 49th
UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION GOING CONCERN PROJECTIONS PREPARED AS OF NOVEMBER 22, 2000 INCOME STATEMENT (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA) [Enlarge/Download Table] 53 WKS -------- ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL FORECAST 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- REVENUES Restaurant sales................. 159,581 164,389 177,343 198,560 213,715 246,854 Consumer product sales........... 8,351 9,115 9,384 10,568 11,772 13,796 Franchise income................. 4,209 4,516 4,549 5,105 5,683 6,377 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 172,141 178,020 191,276 214,233 231,170 267,027 COSTS AND EXPENSES Cost of food and beverages....... 44,064 43,994 48,567 54,683 57,679 67,077 Labor and benefits............... 51,868 54,183 58,139 64,700 70,922 84,275 Occupancy costs.................. 26,339 27,045 27,988 29,199 30,974 36,391 Other operating costs............ 14,323 15,244 17,148 17,739 19,468 23,198 General and administrative....... 12,155 13,384 13,661 16,629 19,521 20,862 Depreciation and amortization.... 12,964 12,469 12,183 12,702 13,098 14,161 Pre-opening costs................ 1,567 823 938 594 2,137 1,440 Special charges.................. 3,937 4,000 0 0 8,588 0 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 167,217 171,142 178,624 196,246 222,387 247,404 OPERATING INCOME................... 4,924 6,878 12,652 17,987 8,783 19,623 INTEREST AND OTHER EXPENSE......... 2,481 2,827 3,661 3,139 3,019 2,938 INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES......... 2,443 4,051 8,991 14,848 5,764 16,684 Provision for income taxes....... 757 1,378 2,968 5,048 1,729 5,748 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- INCOME BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT.... 1,686 2,673 6,023 9,800 4,035 10,937 Cumulative effect................ 636 -------- NET INCOME......................... 1,686 2,673 5,387 9,800 4,035 10,937 ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== WEIGHTED-AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING...................... 14,032 13,209 12,025 11,610 11,844 11,516 Earnings Per Share................. $ 0.12 $ 0.20 $ 0.45 $ 0.84 $ 0.34 $ 0.95 ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======== PROJECTIONS ----------------------------------------- 2002 2003 2004 2005 -------- -------- -------- -------- REVENUES Restaurant sales................. 268,356 287,302 306,598 327,523 Consumer product sales........... 15,176 16,693 18,363 20,199 Franchise income................. 7,614 9,461 11,164 13,399 -------- -------- -------- -------- 291,146 313,457 336,125 361,121 COSTS AND EXPENSES Cost of food and beverages....... 73,048 78,346 83,841 89,746 Labor and benefits............... 91,389 98,307 105,425 113,171 Occupancy costs.................. 40,062 42,766 45,596 48,695 Other operating costs............ 25,236 27,083 29,253 31,475 General and administrative....... 21,500 22,616 24,089 25,901 Depreciation and amortization.... 15,443 16,617 17,818 19,124 Pre-opening costs................ 900 900 900 1,050 Special charges.................. 0 0 0 0 -------- -------- -------- -------- 267,579 286,634 306,923 329,161 OPERATING INCOME................... 23,566 26,823 29,202 31,961 INTEREST AND OTHER EXPENSE......... 1,640 642 (569) (1,599) INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES......... 21,926 26,181 29,771 33,560 Provision for income taxes....... 7,554 9,019 10,256 11,561 -------- -------- -------- -------- INCOME BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT.... 14,373 17,162 19,515 21,999 Cumulative effect................ NET INCOME......................... 14,373 17,162 19,515 21,999 ======== ======== ======== ======== WEIGHTED-AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING...................... 11,516 11,516 11,516 11,516 Earnings Per Share................. $ 1.25 $ 1.49 $ 1.69 $ 1.91 ======== ======== ======== ======== ASSUMPTIONS APPLICABLE TO INCOME STATEMENT, BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS: - the completion of a $26.0 million sale and leaseback transaction, the proceeds of which are used to repay term loans and fund, in conjunction with internally generated cash flow, a company growth rate of six to nine new restaurants per year; - a franchise growth rate of 12 to 20 new restaurants per year, based on existing development agreements and letters of intent with current and potential franchisees; - a growth rate in consumer product sales of ten percent per year, based on an analysis of the historical growth over the past ten years; and - no new indebtedness. 42
PRER14A50th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 50th
UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION GOING CONCERN PROJECTIONS PREPARED AS OF NOVEMBER 22, 2000 BALANCE SHEET (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA) [Enlarge/Download Table] 53 WKS -------- PROJECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL FORECAST -------------------- 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- Cash 1,828 1,486 2,030 752 788 724 844 3,963 Accounts receivable, net........... 2,032 2,823 1,784 2,398 3,530 3,245 3,291 3,661 Inventories........................ 2,333 2,326 2,296 2,436 2,497 2,935 3,135 3,357 Prepaid expenses................... 1,857 1,758 815 1,757 1,999 2,461 3,130 3,422 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- Total current assets............... 8,050 8,393 6,925 7,343 8,814 9,365 10,400 14,404 Property, equipment and leaseholds, net.............................. 120,510 125,357 125,323 128,746 141,992 125,159 129,426 131,154 Deferred income taxes.............. 3,613 6,599 7,450 10,020 14,132 16,117 16,923 17,769 Liquor licenses and other assets... 2,892 3,383 3,497 3,503 3,538 4,571 4,615 4,636 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- 135,065 143,732 143,195 149,612 168,476 155,213 161,364 167,964 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======== ======== ======== Accounts payable................... 6,009 6,966 6,589 7,798 9,851 10,312 10,659 11,089 Accrued expenses................... 5,033 7,563 7,949 8,668 8,459 7,740 8,430 9,028 Accrued compensation and taxes..... 2,187 2,641 2,666 3,369 2,889 3,039 3,480 3,727 Income taxes payable............... 1,581 2,076 995 2,914 558 1,680 2,799 3,608 Current portion of long-term debt............................. 178 3,132 4,081 4,075 3,953 263 287 313 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- Total current liabilities.......... 14,988 22,378 22,280 26,824 25,710 23,034 25,655 27,764 Long-term debt, net of current portion.......................... 37,085 42,516 38,676 31,612 50,900 27,883 16,470 3,287 Capital lease obligations, net of current.......................... 1,056 867 666 489 453 449 446 442 Other liabilities.................. 4,800 7,091 7,904 9,708 9,699 11,196 11,769 12,286 Shareholders equity: Common Stock....................... 137 138 138 154 158 157 157 157 Additional paid-in capital......... 53,509 53,803 53,944 55,648 58,755 58,755 58,755 58,755 Retained earnings.................. 34,143 36,816 42,203 52,003 56,038 66,975 81,347 98,509 Treasury Stock..................... (10,653) (19,877) (22,616) (26,826) (33,237) (33,237) (33,237) (33,237) ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- Total shareholders' equity......... 77,136 70,880 73,669 80,979 81,714 92,651 107,023 124,185 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- 135,065 143,732 143,195 149,612 168,476 155,213 161,364 167,964 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======== ======== ======== PROJECTIONS -------------------- 2004 2005 -------- -------- Cash 22,728 42,770 Accounts receivable, net........... 4,022 4,465 Inventories........................ 3,582 3,827 Prepaid expenses................... 3,735 4,078 -------- -------- Total current assets............... 34,067 55,139 Property, equipment and leaseholds, net.............................. 131,919 133,821 Deferred income taxes.............. 18,657 19,590 Liquor licenses and other assets... 4,657 4,681 -------- -------- 189,301 213,232 ======== ======== Accounts payable................... 11,294 11,492 Accrued expenses................... 9,666 10,366 Accrued compensation and taxes..... 3,990 4,279 Income taxes payable............... 4,102 4,625 Current portion of long-term debt............................. 341 373 -------- -------- Total current liabilities.......... 29,395 31,135 Long-term debt, net of current portion.......................... 2,950 2,582 Capital lease obligations, net of current.......................... 437 432 Other liabilities.................. 12,818 13,385 Shareholders equity: Common Stock....................... 157 157 Additional paid-in capital......... 58,755 58,755 Retained earnings.................. 118,024 140,023 Treasury Stock..................... (33,237) (33,237) -------- -------- Total shareholders' equity......... 143,700 165,699 -------- -------- 189,301 213,232 ======== ======== 43
PRER14A51st Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 51st
UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION GOING CONCERN PROJECTIONS PREPARED AS OF NOVEMBER 22, 2000 STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) [Enlarge/Download Table] 53 WKS -------- PROJECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL FORECAST -------------------- 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- OPERATIONS: NET INCOME......................... 1,686 2,673 5,387 9,800 4,035 10,937 14,373 17,162 DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION...... 13,064 12,573 12,292 12,823 13,233 14,161 15,443 16,617 DEFERRED TAXES..................... (2,462) (2,986) (851) (2,570) (4,112) (1,985) (806) (846) DEFERRED RENT/OTHER................ 4,625 4,612 849 559 9,545 (525) 431 386 WORKING CAPITAL.................... 1,617 3,216 764 4,414 (2,304) 1,386 1,782 1,306 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- OPERATIONS................... 18,530 20,088 18,441 25,026 20,397 23,974 31,223 34,625 INVESTING: CAPITAL EXPENDITURES (Net of dispositions).................... (22,746) (19,697) (12,141) (16,192) (35,954) (23,043) (19,468) (18,108) INVESTMENT IN JOINT VENTURE........ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OTHER (capitalized interest)....... 0 0 0 0 0 (285) (242) (238) ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- INVESTING.................... (22,746) (19,697) (12,141) (16,192) (35,954) (23,328) (19,710) (18,346) FINANCING: EQUITY............................. 76 295 127 1,556 2,523 (0) 0 (0) TERM/SECURED NOTES................. (3,404) 0 25,640 (3,680) (3,680) (18,280) 0 0 MET LIFE MORTGAGE NOTES............ 0 4,979 (183) (200) (218) (238) (260) (283) NEW SENIOR DEBT.................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NOTE PAYABLE--BANK, NET............ 15,513 3,217 (28,360) (3,165) 23,205 (8,158) (11,129) (12,874) CAPITAL LEASE OBLIGATIONS.......... 0 0 (189) (202) (177) (36) (3) (4) SALE/LEASEBACK FUNDING............. 0 0 0 0 0 26,000 0 0 TREASURY STOCK..................... (7,753) (9,224) (2,791) (4,421) (6,060) 0 0 0 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- FINANCING.................... 4,739 (733) (5,756) (10,112) 15,593 (711) (11,392) (13,161) CASH CHANGE........................ 523 (342) 544 (1,278) 36 (65) 121 3,119 BEGINNING CASH..................... 1,305 1,828 1,486 2,030 752 788 724 845 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ENDING CASH........................ 1,828 1,486 2,030 752 788 724 845 3,963 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= PROJECTIONS -------------------- 2004 2005 -------- -------- OPERATIONS: NET INCOME......................... 19,515 21,999 DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION...... 17,818 19,124 DEFERRED TAXES..................... (888) (933) DEFERRED RENT/OTHER................ 393 409 WORKING CAPITAL.................... 823 810 ------- ------- OPERATIONS................... 37,661 41,409 INVESTING: CAPITAL EXPENDITURES (Net of dispositions).................... (18,342) (20,753) INVESTMENT IN JOINT VENTURE........ 0 0 OTHER (capitalized interest)....... (241) (272) ------- ------- INVESTING.................... (18,582) (21,026) FINANCING: EQUITY............................. (0) 0 TERM/SECURED NOTES................. 0 0 MET LIFE MORTGAGE NOTES............ (309) (337) NEW SENIOR DEBT.................... 0 0 NOTE PAYABLE--BANK, NET............ (0) 0 CAPITAL LEASE OBLIGATIONS.......... (4) (4) SALE/LEASEBACK FUNDING............. 0 0 TREASURY STOCK..................... 0 0 ------- ------- FINANCING.................... (314) (342) CASH CHANGE........................ 18,765 20,042 BEGINNING CASH..................... 3,963 22,728 ------- ------- ENDING CASH........................ 22,728 42,770 ======= ======= 44
PRER14A52nd Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 52nd
UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION GOING CONCERN PROJECTIONS PREPARED AS OF JANUARY 31, 2001 INCOME STATEMENT (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA) [Enlarge/Download Table] ACTUAL 1996 -------- REVENUES Restaurant sales................. 159,581 Consumer product sales........... 8,351 Franchise income................. 4,209 ------- 172,141 COSTS AND EXPENSES Cost of food and beverages....... 44,064 Labor and benefits............... 51,868 Occupancy costs.................. 26,339 Other operating costs............ 14,323 General and administrative....... 12,155 Depreciation and amortization.... 12,964 Pre-opening costs................ 1,567 Special charges.................. 3,937 ------- 167,217 OPERATING INCOME................... 4,924 INTEREST AND OTHER EXPENSE......... 2,481 INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES......... 2,443 Provision for income taxes....... 757 ------- INCOME BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT.... 1,686 Cumulative effect................ NET INCOME......................... 1,686 ======= WEIGHTED-AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING...................... 14,032 Earnings Per Share................. $ 0.12 ======= 53 WKS ------ ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL FORECAST 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- REVENUES Restaurant sales................. 164,389 177,343 198,560 213,715 241,099 Consumer product sales........... 9,115 9,384 10,568 11,772 13,051 Franchise income................. 4,516 4,549 5,105 5,683 5,954 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- 178,020 191,276 214,233 231,170 260,104 COSTS AND EXPENSES Cost of food and beverages....... 43,994 48,567 54,683 57,679 65,375 Labor and benefits............... 54,183 58,139 64,700 70,922 82,688 Occupancy costs.................. 27,045 27,988 29,199 30,974 36,424 Other operating costs............ 15,244 17,148 17,739 19,468 22,984 General and administrative....... 13,384 13,661 16,629 19,521 20,645 Depreciation and amortization.... 12,469 12,183 12,702 13,098 13,645 Pre-opening costs................ 823 938 594 2,137 1,122 Special charges.................. 4,000 0 0 8,588 0 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- 171,142 178,624 196,246 222,387 242,884 OPERATING INCOME................... 6,878 12,652 17,987 8,783 17,220 INTEREST AND OTHER EXPENSE......... 2,827 3,661 3,139 3,019 2,708 INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES......... 4,051 8,991 14,848 5,764 14,512 Provision for income taxes....... 1,378 2,968 5,048 1,729 4,934 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- INCOME BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT.... 2,673 6,023 9,800 4,035 9,578 Cumulative effect................ 636 ------- NET INCOME......................... 2,673 5,387 9,800 4,035 9,578 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= WEIGHTED-AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING...................... 13,209 12,025 11,610 11,844 11,285 Earnings Per Share................. $ 0.20 $ 0.45 $ 0.84 $ 0.34 $ 0.85 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= PROJECTIONS ----------------------------------------- 2002 2003 2004 2005 -------- -------- -------- -------- REVENUES Restaurant sales................. 262,633 281,464 300,642 321,452 Consumer product sales........... 14,356 15,792 17,371 19,108 Franchise income................. 7,210 8,897 10,187 11,751 ------- ------- ------- ------- 284,199 306,153 328,200 352,311 COSTS AND EXPENSES Cost of food and beverages....... 71,334 76,576 82,011 87,856 Labor and benefits............... 89,844 96,737 103,829 111,551 Occupancy costs.................. 41,382 44,227 47,200 50,453 Other operating costs............ 25,042 26,896 29,068 31,294 General and administrative....... 21,500 22,598 24,031 25,779 Depreciation and amortization.... 14,790 15,951 17,139 18,431 Pre-opening costs................ 900 900 900 1,050 Special charges.................. 0 0 0 0 ------- ------- ------- ------- 264,791 283,885 304,178 326,414 OPERATING INCOME................... 19,408 22,268 24,022 25,897 INTEREST AND OTHER EXPENSE......... 718 272 (750) (1,576) INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES......... 18,690 21,996 24,772 27,474 Provision for income taxes....... 6,355 7,479 8,422 9,341 ------- ------- ------- ------- INCOME BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT.... 12,335 14,518 16,350 18,133 Cumulative effect................ NET INCOME......................... 12,335 14,518 16,350 18,133 ======= ======= ======= ======= WEIGHTED-AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING...................... 11,285 11,285 11,285 11,285 Earnings Per Share................. $ 1.09 $ 1.29 $ 1.45 $ 1.61 ======= ======= ======= ======= ASSUMPTIONS APPLICABLE TO INCOME STATEMENT, BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS: - a company growth rate of six to eight new restaurants per year; - a franchise growth rate of ten to 14 new restaurants per year, based on existing development agreements and letters of intent with current and potential franchisees; - a growth rate in consumer product sales of ten percent per year based on an analysis of the historical growth over the past ten years; - the completion of $35.0 million in sale and leaseback transactions, the proceeds of which are used to repay term loans; and - no new indebtedness. 45
PRER14A53rd Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 53rd
UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION GOING CONCERN PROJECTIONS PREPARED AS OF JANUARY 31, 2001 BALANCE SHEET (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA) [Enlarge/Download Table] 53 WKS -------- PROJECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL FORECAST ------------------- 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- Cash............................... 1,828 1,486 2,030 752 788 724 824 9,463 Accounts receivable, net........... 2,032 2,823 1,784 2,398 3,530 3,045 3,166 3,522 Inventories........................ 2,333 2,326 2,296 2,436 2,497 2,935 3,068 3,288 Prepaid expenses................... 1,857 1,758 815 1,757 1,999 2,111 3,095 3,388 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- Total current assets............... 8,050 8,393 6,925 7,343 8,814 8,815 10,153 19,661 Property, equipment and leaseholds, net.............................. 120,510 125,357 125,323 128,746 141,992 114,471 119,334 121,677 Deferred income taxes.............. 3,613 6,599 7,450 10,020 14,132 14,565 15,293 16,058 Liquor licenses and other assets... 2,892 3,383 3,497 3,503 3,538 4,571 4,616 4,638 135,065 143,732 143,195 149,612 168,476 142,423 149,396 162,035 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======== ======== ======== Accounts payable................... 6,009 6,966 6,589 7,798 9,851 10,312 10,567 11,003 Accrued expenses................... 5,033 7,563 7,949 8,668 8,459 8,140 8,359 8,958 Accrued compensation and taxes..... 2,187 2,641 2,666 3,369 2,889 3,039 3,451 3,698 Income taxes payable............... 1,581 2,076 995 2,914 558 1,680 2,260 2,991 Current portion of long-term debt............................. 178 3,132 4,081 4,075 3,953 263 287 313 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- Total current liabilities.......... 14,988 22,378 22,280 26,824 25,710 23,433 24,923 26,964 Long-term debt, net of current portion.......................... 37,085 42,516 38,676 31,612 50,900 15,211 7,755 3,287 Capital lease obligations, net of current.......................... 1,056 867 666 489 453 449 446 442 Other liabilities.................. 4,800 7,091 7,904 9,708 9,699 11,846 12,455 13,008 Shareholders' equity: Common Stock....................... 137 138 138 154 158 157 157 157 Additional paid-in capital......... 53,509 53,803 53,944 55,648 58,755 58,945 58,945 58,945 Retained earnings.................. 34,143 36,816 42,203 52,003 56,038 65,616 77,952 92,469 Treasury Stock..................... (10,653) (19,877) (22,616) (26,826) (33,237) (33,237) (33,237) (33,237) ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- Total shareholders' equity......... 77,136 70,880 73,669 80,979 81,714 91,482 103,818 118,335 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- 135,065 143,732 143,195 149,612 168,476 142,423 149,396 162,035 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======== ======== ======== PROJECTIONS ------------------- 2004 2005 -------- -------- Cash............................... 24,507 40,108 Accounts receivable, net........... 3,821 4,176 Inventories........................ 3,512 3,756 Prepaid expenses................... 3,701 4,044 -------- -------- Total current assets............... 35,542 52,085 Property, equipment and leaseholds, net.............................. 123,070 125,614 Deferred income taxes.............. 16,861 17,704 Liquor licenses and other assets... 4,659 4,683 180,132 200,086 ======== ======== Accounts payable................... 11,214 11,416 Accrued expenses................... 9,597 10,297 Accrued compensation and taxes..... 3,962 4,251 Income taxes payable............... 3,369 3,736 Current portion of long-term debt............................. 341 373 -------- -------- Total current liabilities.......... 28,482 30,074 Long-term debt, net of current portion.......................... 2,950 2,582 Capital lease obligations, net of current.......................... 437 432 Other liabilities.................. 13,577 14,182 Shareholders' equity: Common Stock....................... 157 157 Additional paid-in capital......... 58,945 58,945 Retained earnings.................. 108,819 126,951 Treasury Stock..................... (33,237) (33,237) -------- -------- Total shareholders' equity......... 134,685 152,817 -------- -------- 180,132 200,086 ======== ======== 46
PRER14A54th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 54th
UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION GOING CONCERN PROJECTIONS PREPARED AS OF JANUARY 31, 2001 STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) [Enlarge/Download Table] 53 WKS ------ PROJECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL FORECAST ------------------- 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- OPERATIONS: NET INCOME......................... 1,686 2,673 5,387 9,800 4,035 9,578 12,335 14,518 DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION...... 13,064 12,573 12,292 12,823 13,233 13,645 14,790 15,951 DEFERRED TAXES..................... (2,462) (2,986) (851) (2,570) (4,112) (197) (566) (603) DEFERRED RENT/OTHER................ 4,625 4,612 849 559 9,545 (110) 303 259 WORKING CAPITAL.................... 1,617 3,216 764 4,414 (2,304) 2,336 327 1,254 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- OPERATIONS....................... 18,530 20,088 18,441 25,026 20,397 25,252 27,189 31,380 INVESTING: CAPITAL EXPENDITURES (Net of dispositions).................... (22,746) (19,697) (12,141) (16,192) (35,954) (20,864) (19,418) (18,058) INVESTMENT IN JOINT VENTURE........ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OTHER (capitalized interest)....... 0 0 0 0 0 (260) (235) (237) ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- INVESTING........................ (22,746) (19,697) (12,141) (16,192) (35,954) (21,124) (19,652) (18,295) FINANCING: EQUITY............................. 76 295 127 1,556 2,523 190 0 (0) TERM/SECURED NOTES................. (3,404) 0 25,640 (3,680) (3,680) (18,280) 0 0 MET LIFE MORTGAGE NOTES............ 0 4,979 (183) (200) (218) (238) (260) (283) NEW SENIOR DEBT.................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NOTE PAYABLE--BANK, NET............ 15,513 3,217 (28,360) (3,165) 23,205 (20,829) (7,172) (4,159) CAPITAL LEASE OBLIGATIONS.......... 0 (189) (202) (177) (36) (3) (4) SALE/LEASEBACK FUNDING............. 0 0 0 0 0 35,000 0 0 TREASURY STOCK..................... (7,753) (9,224) (2,791) (4,421) (6,060) 0 0 0 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- FINANCING........................ 4,739 (733) (5,756) (10,112) 15,593 (4,193) (7,436) (4,446) CASH CHANGE........................ 523 (342) 544 (1,278) 36 (65) 101 8,639 BEGINNING CASH..................... 1,305 1,828 1,486 2,030 752 788 724 824 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ENDING CASH........................ 1,828 1,486 2,030 752 788 724 824 9,463 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= PROJECTIONS ------------------- 2004 2005 -------- -------- OPERATIONS: NET INCOME......................... 16,350 18,133 DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION...... 17,139 18,431 DEFERRED TAXES..................... (641) (681) DEFERRED RENT/OTHER................ 268 287 WORKING CAPITAL.................... 773 749 ------- ------- OPERATIONS....................... 33,889 36,918 INVESTING: CAPITAL EXPENDITURES (Net of dispositions).................... (18,292) (20,703) INVESTMENT IN JOINT VENTURE........ 0 0 OTHER (capitalized interest)....... (240) (272) ------- ------- INVESTING........................ (18,532) (20,975) FINANCING: EQUITY............................. 0 (0) TERM/SECURED NOTES................. 0 0 MET LIFE MORTGAGE NOTES............ (309) (337) NEW SENIOR DEBT.................... 0 0 NOTE PAYABLE--BANK, NET............ (0) (0) CAPITAL LEASE OBLIGATIONS.......... (4) (4) SALE/LEASEBACK FUNDING............. 0 0 TREASURY STOCK..................... 0 0 ------- ------- FINANCING........................ (313) (342) CASH CHANGE........................ 15,044 15,601 BEGINNING CASH..................... 9,463 24,508 ------- ------- ENDING CASH........................ 24,508 40,109 ======= ======= 47
PRER14A55th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 55th
UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION MERGER PROJECTIONS PREPARED AS OF NOVEMBER 21, 2000 INCOME STATEMENT (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA) [Enlarge/Download Table] 53 WKS -------- PROJECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL FORECAST ------------------- 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- REVENUES Restaurant Sales................. 159,581 164,389 177,343 198,560 213,715 246,854 266,117 280,486 Consumer product sales........... 8,351 9,115 9,384 10,568 11,772 13,796 15,176 16,693 Franchise income................. 4,209 4,516 4,549 5,105 5,683 6,377 7,614 9,461 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- 172,141 178,020 191,276 214,233 231,170 267,027 288,907 306,641 COSTS AND EXPENSES Cost of food and beverages....... 44,064 43,994 48,567 54,683 57,679 67,077 72,479 76,612 Labor and benefits............... 51,868 54,183 58,139 64,700 70,922 84,275 90,660 96,076 Occupancy costs.................. 26,339 27,045 27,988 29,199 30,974 37,651 41,516 43,643 Other operating costs............ 14,323 15,244 17,148 17,739 19,468 23,198 25,049 26,512 General and administrative....... 12,155 13,384 13,661 16,629 19,521 20,862 21,500 22,698 Depreciation and amortization.... 12,964 12,469 12,183 12,702 13,098 13,696 14,850 15,761 Pre-opening costs................ 1,567 823 938 594 2,137 1,440 600 600 Special charges.................. 3,937 4,000 0 0 8,588 0 0 0 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- 167,217 171,142 178,624 196,246 222,387 248,199 266,654 281,903 OPERATING INCOME................... 4,924 6,878 12,652 17,987 8,783 18,828 22,253 24,738 INTEREST AND OTHER EXPENSE......... 2,481 2,827 3,661 3,139 3,019 9,029 5,926 4,780 INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES......... 2,443 4,051 8,991 14,848 5,764 9,799 16,327 19,958 Provision for income taxes......... 757 1,378 2,968 5,048 1,729 3,375 5,625 6,876 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- INCOME BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT.... 1,686 2,673 6,023 9,800 4,035 6,423 10,702 13,083 Cumulative effect.................. 636 ------- NET INCOME......................... 1,686 2,673 5,387 9,800 4,035 6,423 10,702 13,083 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- WEIGHTED-AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING...................... 14,032 13,209 12,025 11,610 11,844 7,159 7,159 7,159 Earnings Per Share................. $ 0.12 $ 0.20 $ 0.45 $ 0.84 $ 0.34 $ 0.90 $ 1.49 $ 1.83 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- PROJECTIONS ------------------------------ 2004 2005 2006 -------- -------- -------- REVENUES Restaurant Sales................. 295,121 311,265 332,226 Consumer product sales........... 18,363 20,199 22,219 Franchise income................. 11,164 13,399 15,667 ------- ------- ------- 324,648 344,863 370,112 COSTS AND EXPENSES Cost of food and beverages....... 80,919 85,607 91,678 Labor and benefits............... 101,655 107,810 115,606 Occupancy costs.................. 45,888 48,394 51,709 Other operating costs............ 28,283 30,093 32,322 General and administrative....... 23,778 25,228 27,273 Depreciation and amortization.... 16,696 17,727 19,045 Pre-opening costs................ 600 750 1,200 Special charges.................. 0 0 0 ------- ------- ------- 297,819 315,609 338,832 OPERATING INCOME................... 26,829 29,254 31,279 INTEREST AND OTHER EXPENSE......... 3,149 1,516 (145) INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES......... 23,680 27,738 31,424 Provision for income taxes......... 8,158 9,556 10,825 ------- ------- ------- INCOME BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT.... 15,522 18,182 20,599 Cumulative effect.................. NET INCOME......................... 15,522 18,182 20,599 ------- ------- ------- WEIGHTED-AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING...................... 7,159 7,159 7,159 Earnings Per Share................. $ 2.17 $ 2.54 $ 2.88 ------- ------- ------- ASSUMPTIONS APPLICABLE TO INCOME STATEMENT, BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS: - a company growth rate of six to nine new restaurants per year; - a franchise growth rate of 12 to 20 new restaurants per year, based on existing development agreements and letters of intent with current and potential franchisees; - a growth rate in consumer product sales of ten percent per year based on an analysis of the historical growth over the past ten years; - the incurrence of indebtedness of $60.0 million in term loans and a $20.0 million revolving line of credit, replacing Uno's current credit facility and the completion of a $47.9 million equity buyback transaction; and - the completion of $41.0 million in sale and leaseback transactions. 48
PRER14A56th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 56th
UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION MERGER PROJECTIONS PREPARED AS OF NOVEMBER 21, 2000 BALANCE SHEET (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA) [Enlarge/Download Table] 53 WKS -------- PROJECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL FORECAST ------------------- 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- Cash............................... 1,828 1,486 2,030 752 788 724 838 5,179 Accounts receivable, net........... 2,032 2,823 1,784 2,398 3,530 2,795 3,291 3,661 Inventories........................ 2,333 2,326 2,296 2,436 2,497 2,935 3,109 3,277 Prepaid expenses................... 1,857 1,758 815 1,757 1,999 2,111 3,124 3,359 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- Total current assets............... 8,050 8,393 6,925 7,343 8,814 8,565 10,362 15,477 Property, equipment and leaseholds, net.............................. 120,510 125,357 125,323 128,746 141,992 110,657 108,402 105,132 Deferred income taxes.............. 3,613 6,599 7,450 10,020 14,132 16,117 16,923 17,769 Liquor licenses and other assets... 2,892 3,383 3,497 3,503 3,538 4,571 4,598 4,611 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- 135,065 143,732 143,195 149,612 168,476 139,911 140,284 142,990 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======== ======== ======== Accounts payable................... 6,009 6,966 6,589 7,798 9,851 10,312 10,844 10,930 Accrued expenses................... 5,033 7,563 7,949 8,668 8,459 9,240 8,419 8,898 Accrued compensation and taxes..... 2,187 2,641 2,666 3,369 2,889 3,339 3,475 3,673 Income taxes payable............... 1,581 2,076 995 2,914 558 2,180 2,531 2,750 Current portion of long-term debt............................. 178 3,132 4,081 4,075 3,953 9,863 11,137 12,163 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- Total current liabilities.......... 14,988 22,378 22,280 26,824 25,710 34,934 36,407 38,415 Long-term debt, net of current portion.......................... 37,085 42,516 38,676 31,612 50,900 54,095 41,781 28,912 Capital lease obligations, net of current.......................... 1,056 867 666 489 453 449 446 442 Other liabilities.................. 4,800 7,091 7,904 9,708 9,699 11,196 11,711 12,200 Shareholders' equity: Common Stock....................... 137 138 138 154 158 157 157 157 Additional paid-in capital......... 53,509 53,803 53,944 55,648 58,755 58,755 58,755 58,755 Retained earnings.................. 34,143 36,816 42,203 52,003 56,038 62,461 73,163 86,246 Treasury Stock..................... (10,653) (19,877) (22,616) (26,826) (33,237) (82,137) (82,137) (82,137) ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- Total shareholders' equity......... 77,136 70,880 73,669 80,979 81,714 39,237 49,939 63,022 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- 135,065 143,732 143,195 149,612 168,476 139,911 140,284 142,990 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======== ======== ======== PROJECTIONS ------------------------------ 2004 2005 2006 -------- -------- -------- Cash............................... 11,877 18,030 30,192 Accounts receivable, net........... 4,022 4,465 4,929 Inventories........................ 3,448 3,637 3,881 Prepaid expenses................... 3,604 3,879 4,238 -------- -------- -------- Total current assets............... 22,952 30,010 43,240 Property, equipment and leaseholds, net.............................. 101,897 100,830 105,775 Deferred income taxes.............. 18,657 19,590 20,570 Liquor licenses and other assets... 4,623 4,640 4,664 -------- -------- -------- 148,130 155,070 174,250 ======== ======== ======== Accounts payable................... 10,983 11,042 11,214 Accrued expenses................... 9,399 9,960 10,692 Accrued compensation and taxes..... 3,880 4,111 4,414 Income taxes payable............... 3,263 3,822 4,330 Current portion of long-term debt............................. 13,191 3,723 9,832 -------- -------- -------- Total current liabilities.......... 40,717 32,658 40,482 Long-term debt, net of current portion.......................... 15,725 12,007 2,180 Capital lease obligations, net of current.......................... 437 432 427 Other liabilities.................. 12,706 13,248 13,836 Shareholders' equity: Common Stock....................... 157 157 157 Additional paid-in capital......... 58,755 58,755 58,755 Retained earnings.................. 101,769 119,951 140,549 Treasury Stock..................... (82,137) (82,137) (82,137) -------- -------- -------- Total shareholders' equity......... 78,545 96,727 117,325 -------- -------- -------- 148,130 155,070 174,250 ======== ======== ======== 49
PRER14A57th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 57th
UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION MERGER PROJECTIONS PREPARED AS OF NOVEMBER 21, 2000 STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) [Enlarge/Download Table] 53 WKS -------- PROJECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL FORECAST ------------------- 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- OPERATIONS: NET INCOME......................... 1,686 2,673 5,387 9,800 4,035 6,423 10,703 13,083 DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION...... 13,064 12,573 12,292 12,823 13,233 13,696 14,850 15,761 DEFERRED TAXES..................... (2,462) (2,986) (851) (2,570) (4,112) (1,749) (644) (684) DEFERRED RENT/OTHER................ 4,625 4,612 849 559 9,545 (760) 227 205 WORKING CAPITAL.................... 1,617 3,216 764 4,414 (2,304) 4,486 (1,384) 316 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- OPERATIONS....................... 18,530 20,088 18,441 25,026 20,397 22,095 23,752 28,681 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- INVESTING: CAPITAL EXPENDITURES (Net of dispositions).................... (22,746) (11,697) (12,141) (16,192) (35,954) (23,043) (12,428) (12,330) INVESTMENT IN JOINT VENTURE........ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OTHER (capitalized interest)....... 0 0 0 0 0 (318) (167) (162) ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- INVESTING........................ (22,746) (11,697) (12,141) (16,192) (35,954) (23,360) (12,595) (12,492) ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- FINANCING: EQUITY............................. 76 295 127 1,556 2,523 0 (0) 0 TERM/SECURED NOTES................. (3,404) 0 25,640 (3,680) (3,680) (18,280) 0 0 MET LIFE MORTGAGE NOTES............ 0 4,979 (183) (200) (218) (238) (260) (283) NEW SENIOR DEBT.................... 0 0 0 0 0 57,925 (9,600) (10,850) NOTE PAYABLE--BANK, NET............ 15,513 3,217 (28,360) (3,165) 23,205 (30,271) (1,180) (710) CAPITAL LEASE OBLIGATIONS.......... -- (189) (202) (177) (36) (3) (4) SALE/LEASEBACK FUNDING............. 0 0 0 0 0 41,000 0 0 TREASURY STOCK..................... (7,753) (9,224) (2,791) (4,421) (6,060) (48,900) 0 0 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- FINANCING........................ 4,739 (733) (5,756) (10,112) 15,593 1,200 (11,043) (11,847) ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- CASH CHANGE........................ 523 (342) 544 (1,278) 36 (65) 114 4,342 BEGINNING CASH..................... 1,305 1,828 1,486 2,030 752 788 724 838 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- ENDING CASH........................ 1,828 1,486 2,030 752 788 724 838 5,180 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======== ======== PROJECTIONS ------------------------------ 2004 2005 2006 -------- -------- -------- OPERATIONS: NET INCOME......................... 15,522 18,182 20,598 DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION...... 16,696 17,727 19,045 DEFERRED TAXES..................... (726) (771) (818) DEFERRED RENT/OTHER................ 213 231 258 WORKING CAPITAL.................... 616 635 792 -------- -------- ------- OPERATIONS....................... 32,321 36,004 39,876 -------- -------- ------- INVESTING: CAPITAL EXPENDITURES (Net of dispositions).................... (13,286) (16,444) (23,680) INVESTMENT IN JOINT VENTURE........ 0 0 0 OTHER (capitalized interest)....... (174) (216) (311) -------- -------- ------- INVESTING........................ (13,460) (16,660) (23,990) -------- -------- ------- FINANCING: EQUITY............................. (0) (0) (0) TERM/SECURED NOTES................. 0 0 0 MET LIFE MORTGAGE NOTES............ (309) (337) (368) NEW SENIOR DEBT.................... (11,850) (12,850) (3,350) NOTE PAYABLE--BANK, NET............ 0 (0) (0) CAPITAL LEASE OBLIGATIONS.......... (4) (4) (5) SALE/LEASEBACK FUNDING............. 0 0 0 TREASURY STOCK..................... 0 0 0 -------- -------- ------- FINANCING........................ (12,163) (13,192) (3,723) -------- -------- ------- CASH CHANGE........................ 6,697 6,152 12,163 BEGINNING CASH..................... 5,180 11,877 18,030 -------- -------- ------- ENDING CASH........................ 11,877 18,030 30,192 ======== ======== ======= 50
PRER14A58th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 58th
UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION MERGER PROJECTIONS PREPARED AS OF FEBRUARY 2, 2001 INCOME STATEMENT (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA) [Enlarge/Download Table] 53 WKS PROJECTIONS -------- ------------------- ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL FORECAST 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- REVENUES Restaurant sales................. 159,581 164,389 177,343 198,560 213,715 241,099 263,757 279,118 Consumer product sales........... 8,351 9,115 9,384 10,568 11,772 13,051 14,356 15,792 Franchise income................. 4,209 4,516 4,549 5,105 5,683 5,954 7,210 8,897 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- 172,141 178,020 191,276 214,233 231,170 260,104 285,323 303,807 COSTS AND EXPENSES Cost of food and beverages....... 44,064 43,994 48,567 54,683 57,679 65,375 71,620 75,979 Labor and benefits............... 51,868 54,183 58,139 64,700 70,922 82,688 90,212 95,965 Occupancy costs.................. 26,339 27,045 27,988 29,199 30,974 36,424 41,550 43,852 Other operating costs............ 14,323 15,244 17,148 17,739 19,468 22,984 25,138 26,696 General and administrative....... 12,155 13,384 13,661 16,629 19,521 20,645 21,500 22,424 Depreciation and amortization.... 12,964 12,469 12,183 12,702 13,098 13,645 14,854 15,817 Pre-opening costs................ 1,567 823 938 594 2,137 1,122 1,050 300 Special charges.................. 3,937 4,000 0 0 8,588 0 0 0 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- 167,217 171,142 178,624 196,246 222,387 242,884 265,923 281,034 OPERATING INCOME................... 4,924 6,878 12,652 17,987 8,783 17,220 19,400 22,773 INTEREST AND OTHER EXPENSE......... 2,481 2,827 3,661 3,139 3,019 8,458 6,558 5,726 INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES......... 2,443 4,051 8,991 14,848 5,764 8,762 12,842 17,047 Provision for income taxes......... 757 1,378 2,968 5,048 1,729 2,979 4,366 5,796 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- INCOME BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT.... 1,686 2,673 6,023 9,800 4,035 5,783 8,476 11,251 Cumulative effect.................. 636 ------- NET INCOME......................... 1,686 2,673 5,387 9,800 4,035 5,783 8,476 11,251 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= WEIGHTED-AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING...................... 14,032 13,209 12,025 11,610 11,844 7,159 7,159 7,159 Earnings Per Share................. $ 0.12 $ 0.20 $ 0.45 $ 0.84 $ 0.34 $ 0.81 $ 1.18 $ 1.57 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= PROJECTIONS ------------------------------ 2004 2005 2006 -------- -------- -------- REVENUES Restaurant sales................. 291,447 307,506 328,381 Consumer product sales........... 17,371 19,108 21,019 Franchise income................. 10,187 11,751 13,254 ------- ------- ------- 319,005 338,365 362,654 COSTS AND EXPENSES Cost of food and beverages....... 79,671 84,306 90,320 Labor and benefits............... 100,794 106,930 114,714 Occupancy costs.................. 45,759 48,276 51,607 Other operating costs............ 28,276 30,087 32,325 General and administrative....... 23,412 24,816 26,637 Depreciation and amortization.... 16,613 17,632 18,935 Pre-opening costs................ 600 750 1,200 Special charges.................. 0 0 0 ------- ------- ------- 295,125 312,797 335,738 OPERATING INCOME................... 23,880 25,569 26,916 INTEREST AND OTHER EXPENSE......... 4,103 2,636 1,231 INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES......... 19,777 22,932 25,685 Provision for income taxes......... 6,724 7,797 8,733 ------- ------- ------- INCOME BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT.... 13,053 15,135 16,952 Cumulative effect.................. NET INCOME......................... 13,053 15,135 16,952 ======= ======= ======= WEIGHTED-AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING...................... 7,159 7,159 7,159 Earnings Per Share................. $ 1.82 $ 2.11 $ 2.37 ======= ======= ======= ASSUMPTIONS APPLICABLE TO INCOME STATEMENT, BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS: - a company growth rate of four to six new restaurants per year; - a franchise growth rate of ten to 14 new restaurants per year based on existing development agreements and letters of intent with current and potential franchisees; - a growth rate in consumer product sales of ten percent per year based on an analysis of the historical growth over the past ten years; and - the completion of $35.0 million in sale and leaseback transactions, the incurrence of $75.0 million in new senior indebtedness and the completion of a $47.9 million equity buyback transaction. 51
PRER14A59th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 59th
UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION MERGER PROJECTIONS PREPARED AS OF FEBRUARY 2, 2001 BALANCE SHEET (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA) [Enlarge/Download Table] 53 WKS -------- PROJECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL FORECAST ------------------- 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- Cash............................... 1,828 1,486 2,030 752 788 724 827 790 Accounts receivable, net........... 2,032 2,823 1,784 2,398 3,530 3,045 3,166 3,522 Inventories........................ 2,333 2,326 2,296 2,436 2,497 2,935 3,082 3,261 Prepaid expenses................... 1,857 1,758 815 1,757 1,999 2,111 3,112 3,344 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- Total current assets............... 8,050 8,393 6,925 7,343 8,814 8,815 10,187 10,916 Property, equipment and leaseholds, net.............................. 120,510 125,357 125,323 128,746 141,992 114,472 119,677 115,027 Deferred income taxes.............. 3,613 6,599 7,450 10,020 14,132 14,565 15,293 16,058 Liquor licenses and other assets... 2,892 3,383 3,497 3,503 3,538 4,571 4,625 4,634 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- 135,065 143,732 143,195 149,612 168,476 142,424 149,782 146,636 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======== ======== ======== Accounts payable................... 6,009 6,966 6,589 7,798 9,851 10,312 10,613 10,892 Accrued expenses................... 5,033 7,563 7,949 8,668 8,459 8,140 8,394 8,867 Accrued compensation and taxes..... 2,187 2,641 2,666 3,369 2,889 3,039 3,465 3,661 Income taxes payable............... 1,581 2,076 995 2,914 558 1,680 1,365 2,318 Current portion of long-term debt............................. 178 3,132 4,081 4,075 3,953 6,812 8,452 9,478 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- Total current liabilities.......... 14,988 22,378 22,280 26,824 25,710 29,983 32,289 35,216 Long-term debt, net of current portion.......................... 37,085 42,516 38,676 31,612 50,900 60,358 56,299 38,471 Capital lease obligations, net of current.......................... 1,056 867 666 489 453 449 446 442 Other liabilities.................. 4,800 7,091 7,904 9,708 9,699 11,846 12,485 12,994 Shareholders' equity: Common Stock....................... 137 138 138 154 158 157 157 157 Additional paid-in capital......... 53,509 53,803 53,944 55,648 58,755 58,945 58,945 58,945 Retained earnings.................. 34,143 36,816 42,203 52,003 56,038 61,821 70,297 81,548 Treasury Stock..................... (10,653) (19,877) (22,616) (26,826) (33,237) (81,137) (81,137) (81,137) ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- Total shareholders' equity......... 77,136 70,880 73,669 80,979 81,714 39,787 48,263 59,514 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------- 135,065 143,732 143,195 149,612 168,476 142,424 149,782 146,636 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======== ======== ======== PROJECTIONS ------------------------------ 2004 2005 2006 -------- -------- -------- Cash............................... 765 6,064 12,016 Accounts receivable, net........... 3,821 4,176 4,539 Inventories........................ 3,405 3,593 3,837 Prepaid expenses................... 3,562 3,834 4,190 -------- -------- -------- Total current assets............... 11,553 17,667 24,582 Property, equipment and leaseholds, net.............................. 113,218 112,727 118,263 Deferred income taxes.............. 16,861 17,704 18,589 Liquor licenses and other assets... 4,646 4,663 4,687 -------- -------- -------- 146,279 152,762 166,121 ======== ======== ======== Accounts payable................... 10,881 10,941 11,109 Accrued expenses................... 9,312 9,869 10,592 Accrued compensation and taxes..... 3,844 4,074 4,373 Income taxes payable............... 2,690 3,119 3,493 Current portion of long-term debt............................. 10,506 5,788 14,548 -------- -------- -------- Total current liabilities.......... 37,233 33,790 44,115 Long-term debt, net of current portion.......................... 22,506 16,723 2,180 Capital lease obligations, net of current.......................... 437 432 427 Other liabilities.................. 13,536 14,116 14,745 Shareholders' equity: Common Stock....................... 157 157 157 Additional paid-in capital......... 58,945 58,945 58,945 Retained earnings.................. 94,601 109,736 126,688 Treasury Stock..................... (81,137) (81,137) (81,137) -------- -------- -------- Total shareholders' equity......... 72,566 87,702 104,654 -------- -------- -------- 146,279 152,762 166,121 ======== ======== ======== 52
PRER14A60th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 60th
UNO RESTAURANT CORPORATION MERGER PROJECTIONS PREPARED AS OF FEBRUARY 2, 2001 STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS (AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) [Enlarge/Download Table] 53 WKS -------- PROJECTIONS ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL FORECAST ------------------- 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- OPERATIONS: NET INCOME......................... 1,686 2,673 5,387 9,800 4,035 5,783 8,476 11,251 DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION...... 13,064 12,573 12,292 12,823 13,233 13,645 14,854 15,817 DEFERRED TAXES..................... (2,462) (2,986) (851) (2,570) (4,112) (197) (566) (603) DEFERRED RENT/OTHER................ 4,625 4,612 849 559 9,545 (110) 324 229 WORKING CAPITAL.................... 1,617 3,216 764 4,414 (2,304) 2,336 (502) 1,242 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- OPERATIONS..................... 18,530 20,088 18,441 25,026 20,397 21,457 22,585 27,936 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- INVESTING: CAPITAL EXPENDITURES (Net of dispositions).................... (22,746) (11,697) (12,141) (16,192) (35,954) (20,864) (19,767) (11,009) INVESTMENT IN JOINT VENTURE........ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OTHER (capitalized interest)....... 0 0 0 0 0 (261) (292) (158) ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- INVESTING...................... (22,746) (11,697) (12,141) (16,192) (35,954) (21,125) (20,059) (11,168) ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- FINANCING: EQUITY............................. 76 295 127 1,556 2,523 190 (0) 0 TERM/SECURED NOTES................. (3,404) 0 25,640 (3,680) (3,680) (18,280) 0 0 MET LIFE MORTGAGE NOTES............ 0 4,979 (183) (200) (218) (238) (260) (283) NEW SENIOR DEBT.................... 0 0 0 0 0 53,643 (6,492) (8,265) NOTE PAYABLE--BANK, NET............ 15,513 3,217 (28,360) (3,165) 23,205 (22,776) 4,333 (8,254) CAPITAL LEASE OBLIGATIONS.......... (0) (0) (189) (202) (177) (36) (3) (4) SALE/LEASEBACK FUNDING............. 0 0 0 0 0 35,000 0 0 TREASURY STOCK..................... (7,753) (9,224) (2,791) (4,421) (6,060) (47,900) 0 0 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- FINANCING...................... 4,739 (733) (5,756) (10,112) 15,593 (397) (2,422) (16,806) ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- CASH CHANGE........................ 523 (342) 544 (1,278) 36 (65) 104 (38) BEGINNING CASH..................... 1,305 1,828 1,486 2,030 752 788 724 828 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ENDING CASH........................ 1,828 1,486 2,030 752 788 724 828 790 ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= PROJECTIONS ------------------------------ 2004 2005 2006 -------- -------- -------- OPERATIONS: NET INCOME......................... 13,053 15,135 16,952 DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION...... 16,613 17,632 18,935 DEFERRED TAXES..................... (641) (681) (723) DEFERRED RENT/OTHER................ 249 269 298 WORKING CAPITAL.................... 446 592 748 ------- ------- ------- OPERATIONS..................... 29,720 32,947 36,211 ------- ------- ------- INVESTING: CAPITAL EXPENDITURES (Net of dispositions).................... (14,611) (16,919) (24,155) INVESTMENT IN JOINT VENTURE........ 0 0 0 OTHER (capitalized interest)....... (192) (222) (317) ------- ------- ------- INVESTING...................... (14,803) (17,141) (24,472) ------- ------- ------- FINANCING: EQUITY............................. (0) 0 0 TERM/SECURED NOTES................. 0 0 0 MET LIFE MORTGAGE NOTES............ (309) (337) (368) NEW SENIOR DEBT.................... (9,165) (10,165) (5,415) NOTE PAYABLE--BANK, NET............ (5,463) 0 0 CAPITAL LEASE OBLIGATIONS.......... (4) (4) (5) SALE/LEASEBACK FUNDING............. 0 0 0 TREASURY STOCK..................... 0 0 0 ------- ------- ------- FINANCING...................... (14,942) (10,507) (5,788) ------- ------- ------- CASH CHANGE........................ (25) 5,299 5,952 BEGINNING CASH..................... 790 765 6,064 ------- ------- ------- ENDING CASH........................ 765 6,064 12,016 ======= ======= ======= 53
PRER14A61st Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 61st
OPINION OF FINANCIAL ADVISOR TO THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE Pursuant to a letter agreement dated November 6, 2000 (the "Engagement Letter"), Adams, Harkness & Hill was retained by the special committee to render a fairness opinion as to the fairness, from a financial point of view, of the consideration to be received by Uno stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders in connection with the merger. Adams, Harkness & Hill is a nationally recognized investment banking firm and is regularly engaged in the valuation of businesses and their securities in connection with mergers and acquisitions, negotiated underwritings, private placements and valuations for corporate and other purposes. Pursuant to the terms of the Engagement Letter, Uno paid Adams, Harkness & Hill a retainer fee of $25,000 and a fee of $250,000 upon the delivery of its written fairness opinion dated April 4, 2001 (which fee was payable regardless of the conclusions expressed therein). Uno also agreed to reimburse Adams, Harkness & Hill for all reasonable fees and disbursements of its counsel and all of its reasonable travel and other out-of-pocket expenses arising in connection with its engagement. In addition, Uno agreed to indemnify Adams, Harkness & Hill and its affiliates to the full extent permitted by law against liabilities relating to or arising out of its engagement, except for liabilities found to have resulted from the bad faith, willful misconduct or gross negligence of Adams, Harkness & Hill. The merger agreement provides that a condition to the obligations of Uno to complete the merger is the affirmation of Adams, Harkness & Hill's opinion on or within five days prior to the special meeting of stockholders. Prior to the delivery of its fairness opinion dated April 4, 2001, Adams, Harkness & Hill reviewed a copy of the latest draft of the merger agreement. Subsequently, Adams, Harkness & Hill also reviewed a copy of the executed merger agreement dated April 19, 2001. OPINION OF ADAMS, HARKNESS & HILL At the meeting of the special committee on April 4, 2001, Adams, Harkness & Hill rendered its opinion, in writing, that, as of that date, based upon and subject to the various considerations set forth in the opinion, the consideration to be received pursuant to the merger agreement was fair, from a financial point of view, to the holders of shares of Uno common stock other than the Continuing Stockholders. THE FULL TEXT OF THE OPINION OF ADAMS, HARKNESS & HILL DATED APRIL 4, 2001, WHICH SETS FORTH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE ASSUMPTIONS MADE, PROCEDURES FOLLOWED, MATTERS CONSIDERED AND LIMITATIONS ON THE SCOPE OF THE REVIEW UNDERTAKEN BY ADAMS, HARKNESS & HILL IN RENDERING ITS OPINION, IS ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT C TO THIS PROXY STATEMENT AND IS INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE. STOCKHOLDERS ARE URGED TO, AND SHOULD, READ THE OPINION CAREFULLY AND IN ITS ENTIRETY. THE OPINION AND PRESENTATIONS OF ADAMS, HARKNESS & HILL ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AND COPYING AT UNO'S EXECUTIVE OFFICES DURING REGULAR BUSINESS HOURS. ADAMS, HARKNESS & HILL'S OPINION IS DIRECTED TO THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE AND ADDRESSES ONLY THE FAIRNESS OF THE CONSIDERATION TO BE RECEIVED BY THE UNO STOCKHOLDERS OTHER THAN THE CONTINUING STOCKHOLDERS, PURSUANT TO THE MERGER AGREEMENT, FROM A FINANCIAL POINT OF VIEW AS OF APRIL 4, 2001, AND DOES NOT ADDRESS ANY OTHER ASPECT OF THE MERGER OR CONSTITUTE A RECOMMENDATION TO ANY HOLDER OF COMMON STOCK AS TO HOW TO VOTE AT THE SPECIAL MEETING. THE SUMMARY OF THE OPINION OF ADAMS, HARKNESS & HILL SET FORTH IN THIS PROXY STATEMENT IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO THE FULL TEXT OF SUCH OPINION. The following is a summary of the various sources of information and valuation methodologies used by Adams, Harkness & Hill in arriving at its opinion. To assess the fairness of the transaction, 54
PRER14A62nd Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 62nd
Adams, Harkness & Hill employed analyses based on the following standard assessments of financial performance: - The financial performance and relative valuations of public company peers, chosen for metric-based implied public trading values for companies possessing similar strategic and operating characteristics; - Relative valuation and transaction premiums associated with selected precedent acquisitions, chosen for metric-based implied transaction values for companies possessing similar strategic and operating characteristics; - Absolute and relative stock price performance, chosen for an absolute and relative comparison with companies possessing similar strategic and operating characteristics; and - Discounted cash flow analysis, chosen for assessment of forecasts based on prior performance and industry variable at various discount rates. In conducting its investigation and analysis and in arriving at its opinion, Adams, Harkness & Hill reviewed the information and took into account the investment, financial and economic factors it deemed relevant and material under the circumstances. The material actions undertaken by Adams, Harkness & Hill in its capacity as financial advisor to the special committee were as follows: - Reviewed publicly-available information, including but not limited to Uno's recent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission; - Reviewed internal financial information prepared by Uno's management concerning the current status of Uno's business and historical financial performance, including interim financial performance data (including monthly same store sales trends) not yet disclosed to the public; - Reviewed internal financial information prepared by Uno's management concerning the projected performance of Uno assuming the merger is not completed (and assuming the current public ownership and capital structure) (the "Going Concern Projections"); - Reviewed internal financial information prepared by Uno's management concerning the projected performance of Uno assuming the merger is completed (the "Merger Projections"); - Held discussions with members of Uno's senior management concerning Uno's historical and current financial condition and operating results, as well as its future prospects (as reflected by both the Going Concern Projections and the Merger Projections); - Held discussions with Aaron D. Spencer concerning the merger and his intentions and objectives regarding his majority ownership position and Uno's future; - Held discussions with the special committee concerning the evaluation by the board of directors of various means of enhancing stockholder value, including the unsuccessful public offering of Uno's common stock in 1999 and prior informal proposals by Mr. Spencer to acquire Uno in a leveraged transaction; - Compared the historical stock market prices and trading activity of Uno's common stock with those of other publicly traded companies that Adams, Harkness & Hill deemed relevant; - Compared the financial position and operating results of Uno with those of other publicly traded companies that Adams, Harkness & Hill deemed relevant; - Compared the proposed financial terms of the merger with the terms of other change of control transactions that Adams, Harkness & Hill deemed relevant, including certain transactions involving controlling shareholders; 55
PRER14A63rd Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 63rd
- Reviewed the terms of the financing proposal for the merger made to the Continuing Stockholders by Fleet National Bank (noting that the proposal allowed for up to $10.00 per share cash consideration to the minority stockholders); - Reviewed the merger agreement in its draft form, as dated March 14, 2001; - Reviewed relevant industry market research studies, investment research reports for Uno's competitors, and key economic and market indicators, including interest rates, commodities prices and general stock market performance; and - Contacted, with the permission of and under limitations set by the special committee, six national restaurant chains and four financial investors to solicit and qualify their interest in a negotiated acquisition of Uno. See "--Limited Solicitation of Potential Acquirors." Other than as set forth above, Adams, Harkness & Hill did not review any additional information in preparing its opinion that, independently, was material to its analysis. The special committee did not place any limitation, other than those associated with the solicitation of potential acquirors, upon Adams, Harkness & Hill with respect to the procedures followed or factors considered by Adams, Harkness & Hill in rendering its opinion. In rendering its opinion, Adams, Harkness & Hill assumed and relied upon the accuracy and completeness of all of the financial and other information that was publicly available or provided to Adams, Harkness & Hill by, or on behalf of, Uno, and did not independently verify such information. Adams, Harkness & Hill assumed, with the special committee's consent, that: - All material assets and liabilities (contingent or otherwise, known or unknown) of Uno as set forth in its financial statements are accurate; - Obtaining any regulatory and other approvals and third party consents required for completion of the merger would not have a material effect on the anticipated benefits of the merger; and - The draft of the merger agreement reviewed by Adams, Harkness & Hill would conform in all material respects to the merger agreement in its final form, and that the merger would be completed in accordance with the terms set forth in the merger agreement in its final form, without any amendment thereto and without waiver by Uno of any of the conditions to their respective obligations thereunder. Adams, Harkness & Hill also assumed, with the special committee's consent, that both the Going Concern Projections and the Merger Projections were reasonably prepared and based upon the best available estimates and good faith judgments of Uno's management as to the future performance of Uno under either scenario. The Going Concern Projections and the Merger Projections were substantively similar, reflecting the same operating assumptions and general competitive and market conditions, with the primary exception being the significantly higher debt level assumed in the Merger Projections, and the subsequent redirection of free cash flow for debt service. Given the use of cash in the Merger Projections for debt service, new store openings are curtailed and, accordingly, year to year revenue growth is lower in the Merger Projections. In conducting its review, Adams, Harkness & Hill did not obtain an independent evaluation or appraisal of any of the assets or liabilities (contingent or otherwise) of Uno. The valuation analyses conducted by Adams, Harkness & Hill in rendering its opinion (specifically, the discounted cash flow analysis, the historical stock price performance analysis, the transaction premiums paid analysis, and the peer group analysis) constituted a "going concern" analysis of Uno. Adams, Harkness & Hill's opinion did not predict or take into account any possible economic, monetary or other changes which may occur, or information which may come available, after the date of its written opinion. 56
PRER14A64th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 64th
PUBLIC COMPANY PEER ANALYSIS Uno owns and operates 113 and franchises 68 casual dining, full-service restaurants operating primarily under the name Pizzeria Uno ... Chicago Bar & Grill. The restaurants feature Uno's signature Chicago-style, deep-dish pizza and a selection of baked, grilled and sauteed entrees, including gourmet thin crust pizza, pasta, fajitas, ribs, steak and chicken, as well as a variety of appetizers, salads, sandwiches and desserts. Company-owned restaurants are located primarily in major metropolitan markets from New England to Virginia, as well as Florida, Chicago and Denver, and franchised restaurants are located throughout the United States and Puerto Rico as well as Seoul, Korea, Lahor, Pakistan and Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Uno also operates a consumer products business that distributes Uno's branded and non-branded, Chicago-style deep-dish pizza, calzones, and other pizza products in hotels, movie theater chains, supermarkets, food courts and airports. Adams, Harkness & Hill identified a group of publicly traded companies in the restaurant industry that it deemed comparable to Uno based on their similar full-service, casual dining strategy, the markets served, and their financial performance (collectively, the "Peer Group Companies" or "Peer Group"). Adams, Harkness & Hill identified and evaluated 25 public companies in the casual dining segment that it considered to be relatively similar to Uno, but acknowledging Uno's relatively small public market capitalization (i.e., the value of all common shares outstanding) and the relative valuation discount generally associated with companies possessing small public market capitalization, focused its analysis on the 10 companies with a market capitalization of less than $250 million. Adams, Harkness & Hill noted that Uno's market capitalization had never exceeded $250 million since becoming a public company in March of 1987. Adams, Harkness & Hill also noted the generally lower profitability (as defined by the last 12 months operating margin) of these 10 companies, primarily reflecting the impact of their smaller size on their ability to achieve economies of scale. Adams, Harkness & Hill compared certain financial measures and metrics of Uno with those of the Peer Group Companies. Such information included: - Market Capitalization ("MC"); - Enterprise Value ("EV"); - Last Twelve Months ("LTM") Revenue; - LTM Operating Margin; - Enterprise Value / LTM Revenue; - Price / Historical LTM Earnings Per Share Ratio ("Trailing LTM P/E"); - Price / Projected Calendar 2001 Earnings Per Share Ratio ("Forward 2001 P/E"); and - Price / Book Value Per Share Ratio ("Trailing LTM P/E"). All financial measures and metrics involving Peer Group Companies' common stock prices per share are as of the close of trading of April 3, 2001, one day prior to the date of Adams, Harkness & 57
PRER14A65th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 65th
Hill opinion. In addition, all data is in millions unless otherwise labeled or noted. The Peer Group, made up of companies possessing public market capitalization of less than $250 million, consists of: [Enlarge/Download Table] MARKET ENTERPRISE LTM LTM OPERATING COMPANY CAPITALIZATION(A) VALUE(A) REVENUE(B) MARGIN(B) ------- ----------------- ---------- ---------- ------------- Avado Brands, Inc........................... $ 18.6 $324.7 $685.8 NM(e) Champps Entertainment, Inc.................. $ 89.3 $ 98.7 $122.8 5.9% Chart House Enterprises, Inc................ $ 30.1 $ 59.6 $141.7 1.2% Chicago Pizza & Brewery, Inc................ $ 19.0 $ 23.6 $ 52.3 2.0% Dave & Busters, Inc......................... $109.1 $209.8 $332.3 8.4% Famous Dave's of America, Inc............... $ 35.4 $ 43.4 $ 70.2 3.7% Lone Star Steakhouse & Saloon............... $229.0 $199.9 $575.9 3.7% Max & Erma's, Inc........................... $ 22.2 $ 59.1 $131.0 3.7% Morton's Restaurant Group, Inc.............. $ 89.8 $177.3 $248.4 8.4% Roadhouse Grill, Inc........................ $ 15.4 $ 53.3 $167.4 NM(e) Mean(c)..................................... $ 65.8 $124.9 $252.8 4.6% Median(c)................................... $ 32.7 $ 79.1 $154.6 3.7% Uno Restaurant Corporation(d)............... $109.2 $165.1 $238.3 7.3% ------------------------ (a) Market Capitalization and Enterprise Value derived from share prices as of the close of trading on April 3, 2001 and fully diluted shares outstanding and debt figures taken from each respective company's most recent Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q or Annual Report on Form 10-K filed prior to April 3, 2001. (b) LTM Revenue and Operating Margin data obtained from each respective company's most recent Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q or Annual Report on 10-K filed prior to April 3, 2001. (c) Mean and median calculations are based on Peer Group Companies and do not include Uno. (d) All data presented reflects the consideration offered in the merger. (e) NM = Not meaningful. Avado Brands and Roadhouse Grill have negative operating margins and are not included in calculating the mean and median. Adams, Harkness & Hill concluded that publicly-traded companies in the casual dining segment of the restaurant industry are valued primarily on the bases of historical and projected revenue growth, profitability and overall size, all of which are reflected in the individual company's ratio of Enterprise Value to LTM Revenue ("EV / LTM Revenue") and the multiple of Price to Earnings ("P/E"). Adams, Harkness & Hill employed an EV-based valuation in this analysis because this methodology implies value based on a company's operations, regardless of how the company finances those operations. To determine EV, MC is calculated as the product of a company's common stock price per share (Adams, Harkness & Hill used the closing price on April 3, 2001 for all public company comparative analyses) multiplied by the number of diluted shares outstanding. The MC is then adjusted for a company's debt and cash positions by adding the debt balance and subtracting the cash balance to arrive at an EV. Unlike EV-based valuation methodologies, P/E-based valuation methodologies imply a value based on net after-tax earnings inclusive of the earnings impact of how the company finances its operations. The following equation illustrates the manner in which EV has been calculated: EV = ((market value of equity) + (debt)) - (cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments) 58
PRER14A66th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 66th
In descending order of EV / LTM Revenue, the Peer Group Companies, inclusive of Uno, ranked as follows: [Download Table] COMPANY EV / LTM REVENUE (A),(B) ------- ------------------------ Champps Entertainment, Inc............................. 0.8x Morton's Restaurant Group, Inc......................... 0.7x Dave & Busters, Inc.................................... 0.6x Famous Dave's of America, Inc.......................... 0.6x Avado Brands, Inc...................................... 0.5x Chicago Pizza & Brewery, Inc........................... 0.5x Max & Erma's, Inc...................................... 0.5x Chart House Enterprises, Inc........................... 0.4x Lone Star Steakhouse & Saloon.......................... 0.3x Roadhouse Grill, Inc................................... 0.3x Mean................................................... 0.5x Median................................................. 0.5x Uno Restaurant Corporation (c)......................... 0.7x ------------------------ (a) Enterprise Value derived from share prices as of close of trading on April 3, 2001 and fully diluted shares outstanding and debt figures taken from each company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed prior to April 3, 2001. (b) LTM data obtained from each respective company's most recent Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed prior to April 3, 2001. (c) All data presented reflects the consideration offered in the merger. Adams, Harkness & Hill noted Uno's EV / LTM Revenue multiple implied in the merger proposal exceeded both the mean and the median of the Peer Group. Adams, Harkness & Hill also noted Uno's EV/LTM Revenue multiple had historically lagged behind the mean and median multiple of the Peer Group. This reflects Uno's historically lower revenue and earnings growth, as well as the variability of revenue and earnings. Adams, Harkness & Hill noted Uno's EV/LTM Revenue multiple was .58 on October 23, 2000, two days prior to the public announcement of the Continuing Stockholders' initial offer to take Uno private at a per share purchase price of $8.75. Adams, Harkness & Hill considered October 23, 2000 the appropriate date for the comparison of financial metrics and implied premiums paid in its analysis, because there was a disproportionately high trading volume and a material increase in Uno's share price on October 24, 2000, reflecting what Adams, Harkness & Hill believes to be speculative trading based on rumors of the initial offer. 59
PRER14A67th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 67th
In descending order of Trailing LTM P/E (where earnings per share estimates were available), the Peer Group, inclusive of Uno, is ranked as follows: [Download Table] COMPANY TRAILING LTM P/E (A),(B) ------- ------------------------ Famous Dave's of America, Inc........................... 16.8x Lone Star Steakhouse & Saloon........................... 14.2x Champps Entertainment, Inc.............................. 13.7x Max & Erma's, Inc....................................... 12.1x Chicago Pizza & Brewery, Inc............................ 9.8x Dave & Busters, Inc..................................... 8.9x Morton's Restaurant Group, Inc.......................... 8.9x Avado Brands, Inc....................................... NM Chart House Enterprises, Inc............................ NM Roadhouse Grill, Inc.................................... NM Mean (c)................................................ 12.1x Median (c).............................................. 12.1x Uno Restaurant Corporation (d).......................... 11.3x ------------------------ (a) Share prices as of close of trading on April 3, 2001. Trailing LTM P/E data obtained from each respective company's most recent Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed prior to April 3, 2001. (b) NM = Not meaningful. In the case of Price/Earnings ratios, the companies noted as NM did not have earnings and were not included in calculating the mean and median. (c) Mean and median calculations are based on Peer Group Companies and do not include Uno. (d) All data presented reflects the consideration offered in the merger. In descending order of Forward 2001 P/E (where earnings per share estimates were available), the Peer Group Companies, inclusive of Uno, are ranked as follows: [Download Table] COMPANY FORWARD 2001E P/E(A) ------- -------------------- Max & Erma's, Inc......................................... 12.5x Champps Entertainment, Inc................................ 10.1x Lone Star Steakhouse & Saloon............................. 10.1x Famous Dave's of America, Inc............................. 8.6x Morton's Restaurant Group, Inc............................ 8.6x Dave & Busters, Inc....................................... 5.2x Avado Brands, Inc......................................... NA Chart House Enterprises, Inc.............................. NA Chicago Pizza & Brewery, Inc.............................. NA Roadhouse Grill, Inc...................................... NA Mean (b).................................................. 9.2x Median (b)................................................ 9.4x Uno Restaurant Corporation (c)(d)......................... 11.5x ------------------------ (a) Forward earnings estimates obtained from I/B/E/S International, Inc. and Zacks Investment Research, Inc. where available, if not available then "NA." Those companies without available forward earnings estimates are marked NA and not included in the calculation of the mean and median. Share prices as of close of trading on April 3, 2001. (b) Mean and median calculations are based on Peer Group Companies and do not include Uno. (c) All data presented reflects the consideration offered in the merger. (d) Based on estimates provided by Uno management. 60
PRER14A68th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 68th
Adams, Harkness & Hill noted Uno's Trailing LTM P/E as reflected in the merger proposal was below both the mean and median of the Peer Group. Adams, Harkness & Hill noted that Uno's Forward 2001 P/E as reflected in the merger proposal was above both the mean and median of the Peer Group. Adams, Harkness & Hill noted the mean and median ratio generally compared favorably to P/E ratios achieved by Uno's in the past, reflecting Uno's historically lower earnings growth, as well as the variability of earnings. To arrive at Uno's Trailing LTM P/E and Forward 2001 P/E, Adams, Harkness & Hill used Uno's internal management projections, as Uno is no longer covered by independent institutional research analysts, and, as such, externally developed projections are not available. Adams, Harkness & Hill noted the absence of such institutional research coverage likely increases the difficulty for investors to perform analyses, because investors have no sources of third-party analysis upon which to base investment decisions. In descending order of Price / Book Value Per Share, the Peer Group Companies, inclusive of Uno, ranked as follows: [Enlarge/Download Table] COMPANY PRICE / BOOK VALUE PER SHARE (A),(B) ------- ------------------------------------ Max & Erma's, Inc............................... 1.00x Champps Entertainment, Inc...................... .22x Chicago Pizza & Brewery, Inc.................... .16x Famous Dave's of America, Inc................... .12x Chart House Enterprises, Inc.................... .06x Dave & Busters, Inc............................. .05x Roadhouse Grill, Inc............................ .03x Lone Star Steakhouse & Saloon................... .02x Avado Brands, Inc............................... .01x Morton's Restaurant Group, Inc.................. NM Mean(c)......................................... .19x Median(c)....................................... .06x Uno Restaurant Corporation(d)................... .12x ------------------------ (a) Share prices as of close of trading on April 3, 2001. Book Value calculated from and as of each respective company's most recent Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q or Annual Report on Form 10-K filed prior to April 3, 2000. (b) NM = Not meaningful. In the case of Price/Book Value Per Share ratios, the companies with NM did not have positive book value. (c) Mean and median calculations are based on Peer Group Companies and do not include Uno. (d) All data presented reflects the consideration offered in the merger. Adams, Harkness & Hill noted Uno's multiple of Price to Book Value Per Share is just below the mean value of the Peer Group and is above the median of the Peer Group. Because companies in the restaurant industry utilize various methods of financing their restaurant operations, both on balance sheet and off balance sheet, Adams, Harkness & Hill advised the special committee that it did not believe the multiple of Price to Book Value Per Share was relevant to its analysis. Further, Adams, Harkness & Hill noted Uno's intention to sell and leaseback certain restaurants that would generate approximately $25 million in proceeds to be used for debt reduction. 61
PRER14A69th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 69th
PRECEDENT TRANSACTION ANALYSIS Adams, Harkness & Hill assessed the transaction premiums and relative valuation associated with selected precedent publicly disclosed acquisitions it deemed relevant to its inquiry. In particular, Adams, Harkness & Hill reviewed 29 precedent transactions (the "Precedent Transactions") involving selected restaurant companies from November 1995 to November 2000 and involving the acquisition of the equity shares of publicly-traded companies for which share price data was available. The precedent transaction analysis includes companies that possess similar strategic and operating characteristics. In addition, the transactions that were assessed represented change in control transactions. These transactions involve restaurants, which meet the strategic and operating characteristics threshold, involve public companies that are/were going-private to meet the change in control criteria, and a number of these transactions involved the purchase by controlling owners effecting a going-private transaction. Premiums paid in precedent public company change of control transactions typically imply the range of consideration acquirors are willing to pay above a seller's stock price prior to the announcement of the relevant transaction. In descending order of premiums paid based on the seller's stock price one trading day prior to the announcement of the transaction, the selected transactions analyzed by Adams, Harkness & Hill were: [Enlarge/Download Table] ANNOUNCEMENT TRANSACTION ONE DAY ONE WEEK FOUR WEEK TARGET ACQUIROR DATE VALUE(A) PREMIUM(A) PREMIUM(A) PREMIUM(A) ------ ----------------------- ------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- Taco Cabana, Inc............. Carrols Corp. 10/26/00 $151.4 118% 110% 100% Spaghetti Warehouse, Inc..... Consolidated Restaurant Companies, Inc. 9/18/98 $ 54.3 79% 70% 47% Timber Lodge Steakhouse...... Santa Barbara Restaurant Group 12/12/97 $ 30.4 74% 74% 81% Rainforest Cafe, Inc.(b)..... Landry's Seafood Restaurants 9/26/00 $ 70.8 60% 58% 14% Rudy's Restaurant Group...... Benihana, Inc. 7/23/97 $ 18.8 51% 70% 72% Il Fornaio America Corp.*.... Bruckmann Rosser Sherrill & Co. 11/16/00 $ 91.2 50% 45% 68% DavCo Restaurants(c)......... Investor Group 9/5/97 $133.6 50% 50% 50% NPC International, Inc....... Investor Group 12/13/00 $ 94.5 44% 44% 33% VICORP Restaurants, Inc.*.... Investor Group 2/15/01 $174.2 36% 35% 51% Bertucci's, Inc.............. NE Restaurant Co Inc 4/3/98 $ 96.5 35% 35% 35% Mike's Restaurants, Inc.(d).................... Pizza Delight Corp. 10/30/00 $ 14.5 30% 24% 16% Perkins Family Restaurant, LP......................... The Restaurant Company 8/4/97 $ 76.3 29% 27% 32% El Chico Restaurants......... Investor Group 9/23/97 $ 49.2 21% 17% 26% PJ America, Inc.*(e)......... Investor Group 3/23/01 $ 22.7 21% 43% 16% Quizno's Corp.*.............. Quizno's Corp. 11/13/00 $ 11.7 19% 19% 24% Sagebrush, Inc............... WSMP, Inc. 9/26/97 $ 39.4 16% 13% 21% Buffets, Inc................. Caxton-Iseman Capital 6/5/00 $ 643 14% 26% 23% Logans Roadhouse, Inc........ Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc. 12/11/98 $178.3 14% 10% 34% Back Bay Restaurants......... SRC Holdings 12/3/98 $ 38.9 12% 14% 28% International Dairy Queen, Berkshire Hathaway, Inc........................ Inc. 10/21/97 $596.9 12% 9% 9% Bayport Restaurant Group..... Landry's Seafood Restaurants 4/20/96 $ 74.1 11% 29% 20% Pollo Tropical, Inc.......... Carrols Corp. 6/4/98 $ 94.6 10% 7% 18% Bugaboo Creek Steak House, Inc........................ Longhorn Steaks, Inc. 6/14/96 $ 48.5 9% 16% 11% Sbarro, Inc.(f).............. Investor Group 11/25/98 $386.4 8% 10% 8% NPC International, Inc.*..... Investor Group 12/13/00 $ 88.3 7% 9% 31% BFX Hospitality Group, Hospitality Concepts, Inc........................ LLC 8/12/00 $ 8.9 6% 6% 6% 62
PRER14A70th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 70th
[Enlarge/Download Table] ANNOUNCEMENT TRANSACTION ONE DAY ONE WEEK FOUR WEEK TARGET ACQUIROR DATE VALUE(A) PREMIUM(A) PREMIUM(A) PREMIUM(A) ------ ----------------------- ------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- HomeTown Buffet, Inc......... Buffets, Inc. 6/4/96 $174.0 -3% 7% 3% Koo Koo Roo, Inc.(g)......... Family Restaurants, Inc. 6/10/98 $158.0 -15% -7% -3% ------------------------------ * Denotes transactions announced, but not yet closed. (a) All Transaction Values are in millions and all Transaction Value statistics and premia information are from Securities Data Company, Inc., or each of the respective company's most recent Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q or Annual Report on Form 10-K filed prior to the respective acquisition. (b) Excludes a one-time impairment charge of $101.5 million incurred in the quarter ended July 2, 2000. (c) Insider purchased 45% of company not already owned. (d) Amount of debt used to calculate data is taken from the company's Annual Report on Form 10-K. The company's most recent Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q does not provide debt data. Converted into US dollars from Canadian dollars at a rate of .66 Canadian dollars to 1 US dollar. (e) Excludes one time expenses of $9.5 million. (f) An offer from the Sbarro family to purchase 65% of the company they did not own. (g) Excludes one time charges for store closings and $11.8 million in restructuring charges. Based upon Adams, Harkness & Hill's analysis of premiums paid in selected precedent transactions, the mean and median premiums (discounts) paid in relation to sellers' share prices (using the buyer's share price on the day prior to the announcement date of the transaction to calculate consideration in stock transactions) along with the implied premium offered by the merger consideration in relation to Uno's share price for the day, week and month prior are listed below: [Download Table] ONE ONE FOUR DAY WEEK WEEK PREMIUM(A) PREMIUM(A) PREMIUM(A) ---------- ---------- ---------- Mean....................................... 29% 30% 31% Median..................................... 20% 24% 25% Uno(b)..................................... 44% 38% 22% ------------------------ (a) All premia information is from Securities Data Company, Inc. or calculated from trading statistics and deal value on a price per share basis. (b) Based on the price of Uno's common stock on October 23, 2000 rather than October 24, 2000 because of unusual trading activity in Uno common stock on October 24, 2000. Adams, Harkness & Hill noted the premium reflected in the merger proposal was above the one day mean and median premium, and the one week mean and median premium implied by the Precedent Transactions. Adams, Harkness & Hill also noted that the four week premium reflected in the merger proposal was below the mean and median implied by the Precedent Transactions. 63
PRER14A71st Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 71st
The following table sets forth a summary of the ranges of financial multiples and ratios associated with the Precedent Transactions compared to the corresponding multiple or ratio implied by the proposed merger consideration: [Enlarge/Download Table] HIGH MEAN MEDIAN UNO VALUE VALUE VALUE LOW VALUE OFFER (A) -------- -------- -------- --------- --------- Transaction Value(b).............................. $643.0 $124.9 $76.3 $8.8 $97.7 Transaction Value / LTM Revenue(c)................ 2.0x 0.9x 0.8x 0.2x 0.4x Target EV / LTM Operating Income(c,d)............. 77.3x 18.6x 14.8x 4.9x 9.5x Target EV / LTM EBITDA(c,d)....................... 37.3x 9.9x 7.4x 2.5x 5.4x Target MC / LTM Net Income(c,d)................... 255.4x 30.5x 15.9x 5.4x 11.3x ------------------------ (a) Transaction Value for Uno offer is estimated at 38% of the total number of shares outstanding at $9.75 per share plus $56.2 million in outstanding debt. (b) Transaction Values are in millions. (c) All data obtained from Securities Data Company, Inc. or each of the respective company's most recent Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q or Annual Report on Form 10-K filed prior to the respective acquisition. (d) Price per share data used to calculate each company's MC and EV for the respective multiples are the companies' share prices one day prior to the announcement, or in the case of Uno, October 23, 2000 because of the unusual trading activity in Uno common stock on October 24, 2000. Adams, Harkness & Hill noted that the financial ratios reflected in the merger proposal fall below the mean and median values for the Precedent Transactions. STOCK PRICE PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS Adams, Harkness & Hill examined the following common stock closing price data for Uno: 1) Price performance from Uno's initial public offering on March 30, 1997 through October 23, 2000 and April 3, 2001, compared to the performance of the NASDAQ Composite and S&P 500 index, and; 2) Price performance from January 1, 1999, through October 23, 2000 and April 3, 2001, compared to the S&P Small Cap Restaurant index and the Peer Group Companies index. Based on the above analyses, Adams, Harkness & Hill observed that, from Uno's initial public offering on March 30, 1987 through October 23, 2000, Uno's per share price had decreased 28.6%. During the same time period, the NASDAQ composite increased 712.1% and the S&P 500 index increased 382.6%. Adams, Harkness & Hill also observed that, from Uno's initial public offering on March 30, 1987 through April 3, 2001, Uno's per share price had increased 8.0%. During that same period, the NASDAQ composite increased 291.8% and the S&P 500 index increased 282.6%. On July 16, 1999, Uno's share price reached an all-time high at $12.67 per share, which represents an annual growth rate since the initial public offering of 3.7%. Further, Adams, Harkness & Hill observed that Uno's per share price had decreased 13% from January 1, 1999 through October 23, 2000, compared to an increase of 14% in the S&P Small Cap Restaurant Index and a 45% decrease in the Peer Group Companies index over the same time period. Adams, Harkness & Hill also observed that Uno's per share price had increased 33% from January 1, 1999, through April 3, 2001, compared to an increase of 30% in the S&P Small Cap Restaurant Index and a 41% decrease in the Peer Group Companies index over the same time period. 64
PRER14A72nd Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 72nd
Adams, Harkness & Hill used price information on October 23, 2000 in these calculations rather than October 24, 2000, the day before the public announcement, because of the unusual trading activity in Uno common stock on October 24, 2000, reflecting what Adams, Harkness & Hill believes to be speculative trading based on rumors of the initial offer. DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW ANALYSIS Adams, Harkness & Hill performed a discounted cash flow analysis to estimate the present value of the stand-alone unlevered (i.e., before interest expense) after-tax cash flows of Uno. To perform this analysis, Adams, Harkness & Hill used the following assumptions and the following sources for data: - Uno Management's financial projections, assuming the merger is completed, for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2001 through the year ended October 2, 2005. - Uno's unlevered after-tax cash flows were calculated as the after-tax operating earnings of Uno adjusted for the addition of non-cash expenses and the deduction of uses of cash not reflected in the income statement. - Uno's weighted-average cost of capital ranging from 13.0% to 15.0%. - Terminal value based on Uno's earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization ("EBITDA") for the fiscal year ended October 2, 2005 multiplied by EBITDA multiples ranging from 4.0 to 6.0. - Terminal value based on Uno's cash flow for the fiscal year ended October 2, 2005 multiplied by a perpetual growth rate ranging from 4.0% to 6.0%. - In order to calculate an appropriate range of terminal values, Adams, Harkness & Hill also calculated an EV/EBITDA multiple for each of the Peer Group Companies and arrived at a range of 3.9x to 21.3x with an average of 7.8x. Adams, Harkness & Hill noted that Uno has historically traded near the bottom of the range. Adams, Harkness & Hill also noted that the EV/EBITDA multiple reflected in the merger proposal is 5.4x. Adams, Harkness & Hill combined (i) the calculated present value of Uno's cash flows for the five fiscal years ending October 2, 2005, with (ii) Uno's EBITDA terminal value, to arrive at a range of EVs based on the above assumptions. These EVs were then adjusted by adding Uno's current cash balance and subtracting its current funded debt balance to arrive at implied MCs (i.e., equity values). Adams, Harkness & Hill divided the computed equity values by the number of shares of common stock outstanding and arrived at a range of implied per share values of $6.34 to $11.54, with a median implied value of $8.84. Adams, Harkness & Hill combined (i) the calculated present value of Uno's cash flows for the fiscal years ended September 30, 2001 through October 2, 2005, with (ii) Uno's perpetual growth rate terminal value, to arrive at a range of EVs based on the above assumptions. These EVs were then adjusted by adding Uno's current cash balance and subtracting its current funded debt balance to arrive at implied MCs (i.e., equity values). Adams, Harkness & Hill divided the computed equity values by the number of shares of common stock outstanding and arrived at a range of implied per share values of $4.57 to $9.13, with a median implied value of $6.35. 65
PRER14A73rd Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 73rd
LIMITED SOLICITATION OF POTENTIAL ACQUIRORS The special committee instructed Adams, Harkness & Hill to contact only the parties approved by Mr. Spencer and to provide only publicly available information to such parties. Because of his concern about the possibility of management distraction and negative impact from potential press coverage, Mr. Spencer indicated that he would like to limit the number of potential buyers to ten. The special committee placed these limitations on Adams, Harkness & Hill because Mr. Spencer controls a majority of Uno's common stock and, therefore, any transaction involving a sale of Uno would require Mr. Spencer's approval. Adams, Harkness & Hill contacted, with the permission of and under the limitations set by the special committee, six national restaurant chains and four financial investors to solicit and qualify their interest in a negotiated acquisition of Uno. Initial contact with potential acquirors was made without specifically revealing Uno until the potential acquiror signed a non-disclosure agreement. Potential acquirors which indicated they were interested in pursuing a transaction, received a non-disclosure agreement from Adams, Harkness & Hill. Upon receipt by Adams, Harkness & Hill of an executed non-disclosure agreement, Adams, Harkness & Hill provided each potential acquiror with a packet of publicly disclosed materials and engaged in additional discussions with each of the parties to ascertain their potential interest in acquiring Uno. None of the six national restaurant chains indicated any interest. Three of the four financial investors indicated preliminary interest conditioned upon Mr. Spencer's willingness to act in concert with them in acquiring Uno. Mr. Spencer indicated to Adams, Harkness & Hill that he had no interest in pursuing these discussions. Adams, Harkness & Hill noted that without Mr. Spencer's participation, this alternative to the merger was not feasible. SUMMARY OF VALUATION ANALYSES The foregoing summary describes the material analyses performed by Adams, Harkness & Hill. The preparation of a fairness opinion is a complex process. Adams, Harkness & Hill believes that its analyses must be considered as a whole, and that selecting portions of such analyses, or portions of the factors considered by it, without considering all analyses and factors would create an incomplete view of the evaluation processes underlying its opinion. Adams, Harkness & Hill did not attempt to assign specific weights to particular analyses. Any estimates contained in Adams, Harkness & Hill's analyses are not necessarily indicative of actual values, which may be significantly more or less favorable than suggested by the analyses. In addition, estimates of the values of companies do not purport to be appraisals or necessarily to reflect the prices at which companies may actually be sold. Because such estimates are inherently subject to uncertainty, Adams, Harkness & Hill does not assume responsibility for their accuracy. Taken together, the information and analyses employed by Adams, Harkness & Hill led to Adams, Harkness & Hill's overall opinion that the consideration to be received in the merger is fair, from a financial point of view, to the stockholders of Uno other than the Continuing Stockholders. PURPOSE AND STRUCTURE OF THE MERGER For Uno, the purpose of the merger is to allow Uno stockholders to realize the value of their investment in Uno in cash at a price that represents a premium over the market price of Uno common stock before the public announcement of the Continuing Stockholders' initial offer to take Uno private by purchasing all of the outstanding shares of common stock at a price of $8.75 per share. The board of directors believes that Uno has not been able to realize fully the benefits of public company status. The reasons for their belief include the limited ability of Uno stockholders to sell their stock quickly at the current market price due to the low trading volume and the significant percentage of outstanding stock held by Mr. Spencer and the Continuing Stockholders, and the undervaluation of the common stock in the public market due to Uno's small market capitalization, limited public float, limited research coverage from securities analysts and the inability to generate the type of rapid revenue and unit growth generally expected by the public markets. At the same time, the public company status has 66
PRER14A74th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 74th
imposed a number of limitations on Uno and its management in conducting Uno's operations. These limitations include the costs and time associated with public company reporting obligations and the short term focus on quarter to quarter performance goals to meet expectations of the public markets. Accordingly, one of the purposes of the merger is to afford greater operating flexibility, allowing management to concentrate on long-term growth and to reduce its attention to the quarter-to-quarter performance and to be able to pursue opportunities that Uno could not previously pursue because of its duties to the public stockholders. Further, the merger is intended to enable Uno to use in its operations those funds that would otherwise be expended in complying with requirements applicable to public companies. For the Affiliate Stockholders, Parent and Newco, the purpose of the merger is to allow the Continuing Stockholders to acquire complete ownership of Uno and to increase the amount of Uno owned by the Continuing Stockholders indirectly through their ownership of Parent. As described in the "--Background of the Merger" section, the Affiliate Stockholders, Parent and Newco believe that Uno has strong business prospects for the future, based upon publicly available information regarding Uno and based upon their knowledge of the restaurant industry. The Affiliate Stockholders, Parent and Newco believe that Uno will have greater operating flexibility to focus on its long-term value by emphasizing growth and operating cash flow without the constraint of the public market's emphasis on quarterly earnings. The transaction has been structured as a merger of Newco into Uno in order to preserve Uno's identity and existing contractual arrangements with third parties. The Affiliate Stockholders, Parent and Newco chose to make the offer for Uno common stock now for a variety of reasons, including: the lack of interest in Uno's proposed public offering in 1999, a lack of continuing investor interest in Uno's common stock, a recognition by the Affiliate Stockholders, Parent and Newco that Uno has not been able to generate the growth in revenues and earnings that would attract the interest and following of institutional investors and research analysts, as well as for the other reasons more fully described above in the "--Background of the Merger" section. The transaction has been structured as a cash merger in which Parent, Newco and Uno as the surviving corporation will incur indebtedness to acquire all shares of Uno common stock for cash, other than shares held by Parent. Uno's purpose in submitting the merger to the vote of its stockholders with a favorable recommendation at this time is to allow the stockholders other than the Parent an opportunity to receive a cash payment at a fair price to provide a prompt and orderly transfer of ownership of Uno to the Parent and to provide the stockholders (other than the Parent) with cash for all of their shares of Uno common stock. ALTERNATIVES TO THE MERGER On October 16, 2000, the Continuing Stockholders stated in writing their intention to make a tender offer, subject to the receipt of financing, for all of the outstanding shares of Uno common stock not owned by the Continuing Stockholders. The tender offer price of $8.75 per share represented a premium of 33.4% over the market price of Uno common stock on October 24, 2000, the day before Uno announced the Continuing Stockholders' intent to engage in a tender offer. If the tender offer was completed, Uno would have become a privately held corporation. From October 2000 through mid-January 2001, the Continuing Stockholders and the special committee of the board of directors continued to discuss the terms of the proposed tender offer, including the price per share, conditions to the transaction and the payment of transaction fees and expenses. On January 16, 2001, a revised written offer was submitted by the Continuing Stockholders to the special committee in which they increased their offer price to $9.00 per share and changed the structure of the transaction from a cash tender offer to a cash merger. The Continuing Stockholders and their advisors indicated that they changed the structure of the transaction from a cash tender offer to a cash merger because most of the financing commitment fees would be paid upon completion of the merger and not in advance of a tender offer. Other than the initially proposed tender offer, none 67
PRER14A75th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 75th
of Uno, the Affiliate Stockholders, Parent and Newco, considered any transaction which would have the effect of taking Uno private. EFFECTS OF THE MERGER Upon completion of the merger, Uno will be a privately held corporation, wholly owned by Parent. The current stockholders of Uno, other than the Continuing Stockholders and the holders of options to purchase shares of Uno common stock as discussed below, will cease to have ownership interests in Uno or rights as Uno stockholders and will not benefit from any continuing operations or growth of Uno, or any transactions in which Uno may be involved in the future. They will be entitled to receive $9.75 in cash for each of their shares of Uno common stock. The Continuing Stockholders will indirectly, through their ownership of Parent, own 100% of the outstanding shares of common stock in Uno as the surviving corporation. The holders of options to purchase shares of Uno common stock, other than Mr. Spencer and the Management Group, will continue as holders of options to purchase shares of common stock of Uno as the surviving corporation. After the merger, Uno as the surviving corporation may, but has not yet decided to, offer to repurchase and cancel outstanding stock options of Uno as the surviving corporation. If it does, Mr. Miller intends to sell to Uno as the surviving corporation options to purchase approximately 82,500 shares of his Uno common stock. Options to purchase shares of Uno common stock held by Mr. Spencer and the remaining options held by the Management Group will be cancelled and they will receive options to purchase shares of preferred stock of Parent. After the merger, Parent may but has not yet decided to, issue options to purchase shares of preferred stock in Parent to additional key employees of Uno upon the cancellation of their options to purchase shares of Uno common stock. As a result of the merger, Uno will be a privately held corporation, and there will be no public market for its common stock. After the merger, the shares of common stock will cease to be traded on the New York Stock Exchange, and price quotations of sales of shares of common stock in the public market will no longer be available. In addition, registration of the common stock under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, will be terminated. This termination will make most provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, such as the short-swing profit recovery provisions of Section 16(b) and the requirement of furnishing a proxy or information statement in connection with stockholders' meetings, no longer applicable to Uno. After the effective time of the merger, Uno will no longer be required to file periodic reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission. At the effective time of the merger, the directors of Newco, consisting of Aaron D. Spencer, Craig S. Miller, Paul W. MacPhail, Alan M. Fox and Robert M. Vincent, will become the directors of Uno as the surviving corporation. In addition, the current management of Uno, consisting of Aaron D. Spencer, Craig S. Miller, Paul W. MacPhail, Alan M. Fox, Robert M. Vincent, Mark A. Jones, George W. Herz II and M. Heywood Whetsell, Jr., is expected, in general, to remain the management of Uno as the surviving corporation. At the effective time of the merger, Newco's certificate of incorporation and bylaws will become Uno's certificate of incorporation and the bylaws. It is expected that, following completion of the merger, the operations of Uno will be conducted substantially as they are currently being conducted. Uno, Parent, Newco and the Continuing Stockholders do not have any present plans or proposals that relate to or would result in an extraordinary corporate transaction following completion of the merger involving Uno's corporate structure, business or management, such as a merger, reorganization, liquidation, relocation of any operations or sale or transfer of a material amount of assets. However, Uno, Parent, Newco, and the Affiliate Stockholders will continue to evaluate Uno's business and operations after the merger and may develop new plans and proposals that Uno, Parent, Newco, and the Affiliate Stockholders consider to be in the best interests of Uno and its then current stockholders. 68
PRER14A76th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 76th
After the completion of the merger, Parent may seek to obtain additional or replacement financing involving debt, equity or a combination of debt and equity. To facilitate such financing, Mr. Spencer may sell to the party or parties providing the financing, shares of Parent that he holds immediately after the merger. Alternatively, Mr. Spencer may sell such shares of Parent independent of any such financing. There presently are no proposals, negotiations or plans to obtain such financing or to make any such sales. Whether such financing or sales are sought or concluded will depend upon business needs, personal financial objectives, market conditions and other factors which Parent and Mr. Spencer deem relevant at the time. See "Summary Term Sheet," "Questions and Answers About the Merger," "Special Factors--Interests of the Continuing Stockholders," "Special Factors--Risks That The Merger Will Not Be Completed" and "Special Factors --Estimated Fees and Expenses of The Merger." The following table sets forth for each Continuing Stockholder his or her interest in the net book value and net income of Uno as of April 1, 2001, based upon the percentage of his or her beneficial ownership of Uno common stock as of April 1, 2001: [Enlarge/Download Table] OWNERSHIP PERCENT NET BOOK VALUE (1) NET INCOME (2) ----------------- ------------------ -------------- Aaron D. Spencer............................... 40.20% $34,229,764 $1,292,509 Uno Associates................................. 16.93 14,412,924 544,229 Mark Spencer................................... 2.41 2,050,631 77,431 Lisa Cohen..................................... 2.12 1,807,884 68,265 Craig S. Miller................................ 4.40 3,747,324 141,498 Paul W. MacPhail............................... * 9,010 340 Alan M. Fox.................................... 1.77 1,511,036 57,056 Robert M. Vincent.............................. 1.24 1,052,187 39,730 ------------------------ * Less than one percent. (1) Based on Uno's stockholders' equity as of April 1, 2001 (unaudited). (2) Based on Uno's net income for the two quarters ended April 1, 2001. The following table sets forth for each Continuing Stockholder, his or her interest in the net book value and net income of Uno after the merger, based upon the percentage of his or her expected beneficial ownership of capital stock of Uno as the surviving corporation on a fully diluted basis: [Enlarge/Download Table] OWNERSHIP PERCENT (1) NET BOOK VALUE (1)(2) NET INCOME (1)(2)(3) ----------------- --------------------- -------------------- Aaron D. Spencer(4).................... 58.38% $49,709,791 $1,877,031 Uno Associates......................... 25.48 21,695,880 819,232 Mark Spencer(5)........................ 2.94 2,503,371 94,527 Lisa Cohen(5).......................... 2.51 2,137,232 80,701 Craig S. Miller(6)..................... 5.71 4,861,989 183,588 Paul W. MacPhail....................... -- -- -- Alan M. Fox............................ 2.85 2,426,737 91,633 Robert M. Vincent...................... 2.13 1,813,667 68,484 ------------------------ (1) Assumes that each member of the Management Group converts all of his shares of Uno common stock into the right to receive $9.75 per share in cash in the merger. (2) Based on Uno's stockholders' equity as of April 1, 2001. (3) Based on Uno's net income for the two quarters ended April 1, 2001. (4) Assumes that the Cheryl Spencer Memorial Foundation converts all of its 221,018 shares of Uno common stock into the right to receive $9.75 per share in cash in the merger. 69
PRER14A77th Page of 215TOC1stPreviousNextBottomJust 77th
(5) Assumes that Mark Spencer and Lisa Cohen each convert 50,000 of their shares of Uno common stock into the right to receive $9.75 per share in cash in the merger. (6) Assumes Mr. Miller sells to Uno as the surviving corporation options to purchase 82,500 shares of Uno common stock. RISKS THAT THE MERGER WILL NOT BE COMPLETED Completion of the merger is subject to various risks, including, but not limited to, the following: - that the merger agreement will not be adopted and approved by the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of Uno common stock held by stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders and there is no waiver of this condition by Parent, Newco, Uno and the special committee of the board of directors; - that Parent and Newco will not secure the financing necessary to complete the merger on the terms and conditions set forth in the financing proposal, as further described in "--Merger Financing"; - that the holders of more than 5% of the outstanding shares of Uno common stock exercise their appraisal rights; - that Uno, Parent or Newco will not have performed in all material respects their obligations contained in the merger agreement before the effective time of the merger; - that the representations and warranties made by Uno, Parent or Newco in the merger agreement will not be true and correct at the closing date of the merger; - that there may be new litigation that could prevent the merger, cause the merger to be rescinded following completion of the merger or that could have a material adverse effect on Uno; - that there may be a material adverse change in Mr. Spencer's health; and - that Uno will not secure required third-party consents to the merger, including consents of liquor license authorities. As a result of various risks to the completion of the merger, there can be no assurance that the merger will be completed even if the requisite stockholder approval is obtained. It is expected that, if Uno stockholders do not adopt and approve the merger agreement or if the merger is not completed for any other reason, the current management of Uno, under the direction of the board of directors, will continue to manage Uno as an ongoing business. If the merger is not completed, depending upon the circumstances, Uno may be required to reimburse certain expenses of the Continuing Stockholders. See "Special Factors--Estimated Fees and Expenses of the Merger." INTERESTS OF THE CONTINUING STOCKHOLDERS IN THE MERGER In considering the recommendation of the board of directors, Uno stockholders should be aware that the Continuing Stockholders have interests different from Uno stockholders generally. As a result of the conflict of interest, the board of directors appointed the special committee, consisting of four independent directors who are not officers or employees of Uno and who have no financial interest in the merger different from Uno stockholders generally (other than as holders of options to purchase shares of common stock of Uno). The special committee was appointed to evaluate, negotiate and, if appropriate, recommend the merger agreement and to evaluate whether the merger is in the best interests of Uno stockholders other than the Continuing Stockholders. The special committee was aware of these differing interests and considered them, among other matters, in evaluating and 70