Is Darden as Good as Dead?

After reporting revenue and earnings that fell short of estimates, shares of Darden shot up 3%. Is this a sign that good times are ahead or is the company on its way out for good?

Mar 26, 2014 at 6:00PM


Source: Wikimedia Commons

After reporting revenue and earnings for the third quarter of its 2014 fiscal year, shares of Darden Restaurants (NYSE:DRI) rose nearly 3% to close at $50.66. Even though the company's performance fell short of expectations and management relayed to shareholders that this would likely be the case, the rise in its shares suggest that the business's jump on high volume might be a sign of better times ahead. Is this truly the case, or is Darden's picture nowhere near as good as some shareholders believe it to be?

Darden's results were worse than expected
For the quarter, Darden reported revenue of $2.23 billion. This represents a 1% drop compared to the $2.26 billion the restaurant chain reported a year earlier and fell shy of analyst estimates by the same amount. In its release, the company's management team attributed the decline to a drop in comparable store sales across the board. The most severe case involved Red Lobster, which saw its comparable-store sales plummet 8.8%.

In terms of profits, Darden reported profits that matched management's revised forecast but fell shy of the $0.93 per share initially forecasted by analysts. For the quarter, the company's earnings per share came in at $0.82, 20% lower than the $1.02 the business reported the same quarter a year earlier. On top of being harmed by less revenue, the company was negatively affected by soaring costs.

Compared to the same period a year earlier, Darden's food and beverage expenses rose from 30.8% of sales to 31.2%. This was driven by rising costs in the company's Red Lobster operations, but was partially offset by a drop in costs in its LongHorn Steakhouse chain.

Selling, general and administrative expenses also rose for the quarter, from 8.8% of sales to 9.4%, while its miscellaneous restaurant expenses rose from 15.4% of sales to 16.2%. At face value, these changes may not look severe but, when aggregated, the company's pre-tax income would have been $40 million higher had these changes not taken place.

Is Darden the best, or are there better opportunities out there?
Despite its recent troubles, Darden has had a fairly good run over the past five years. Between 2009 and 2013, the company's revenue has risen 18.5% from $7.2 billion to $8.6 billion, while its net income ticked up 11% from $372.2 million to $411.9 million. While this is a decent improvement, it falls far short of other restaurants like Chipotle Mexican Grill (NYSE:CMG) and Panera Bread Company (NASDAQ:PNRA).

  Darden Chipotle Mexican Grill Panera Bread
Revenue Growth 18.5% 76.2% 117.1%

Source: Darden, Chipotle, and Panera

Over the same timeframe, Panera saw its top line rise a whopping 76% from $1.4 billion to $2.4 billion. This rise in sales was due in part to an increase in the number of locations in operation, but it was also due to a substantial rise in the business's comparable-store sales (something Darden is lacking.) Based on the 12% increase in sales the company reported between 2012 and 2013, it appears as though its growth prospects are becoming more limited, but its situation looks more attractive than Darden's.

  Darden Chipotle Mexican Grill Panera Bread
Net Income Growth 10.7% 158.2% 127.9%

Source: Darden, Chipotle, and Panera

In terms of profits, Panera's position looks even more attractive. During the past five years, the company's net income rose 128% from $86.1 million to $196.2 million. To make things even tastier, the company's 2013 net profit margin of 8% is significantly higher than the 5% posted by Darden.

While Panera makes Darden look subpar, Chipotle makes everything appear in a dull light. Over the same timeframe as its peers, Chipotle grew its revenue 117% from $1.5 billion to $3.2 billion. Just as in the case of Panera, the company's revenue growth stemmed from a rise in store count and an increase in comparable store sales, both of which were more extreme than Panera's.

From a profitability perspective, Chipotle continued to impress. Between 2009 and 2013, the fast-casual chain grew its bottom line by 158% from $126.8 million to $327.4 million. At 10%, the company's net profit margin makes even Panera look a bit disappointing, but it should be noted that the chain's profitability is only half the 20% seen by larger, more established rival McDonald's.

Foolish takeaway
Based on Darden's quarterly performance, it's evident that the business has some problems, but its long-term results make it look like the company's shortfalls may be nothing more than a bump in the road. Either way, there is considerable risk to the Foolish investor if management can't turn its business around, even after spinning off its Red Lobster assets. Under that type of scenario, the Foolish investor might feel more comfortable looking at either Panera or especially Chipotle for a nice mixture of growth and profitability.

In spite of trouble, could Darden become a big winner?

Even though the restaurant chain isn't performing terribly well, shareholders are optimistic about its future.  Is it likely that Darden could become the best stock to hold on to during 2014 or is there something better out there for the Foolish investor?

There's a huge difference between a good stock and a stock that can make you rich. The Motley Fool's chief investment officer has selected his No. 1 stock for 2014, and it's one of those stocks that could make you rich. You can find out which stock it is in the special free report "The Motley Fool's Top Stock for 2014." Just click here to access the report and find out the name of this under-the-radar company.

Daniel Jones has no position in any stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Chipotle Mexican Grill and Panera Bread. The Motley Fool owns shares of Chipotle Mexican Grill and Panera Bread. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

A Financial Plan on an Index Card

Keeping it simple.

Aug 7, 2015 at 11:26AM

Two years ago, University of Chicago professor Harold Pollack wrote his entire financial plan on an index card.

It blew up. People loved the idea. Financial advice is often intentionally complicated. Obscurity lets advisors charge higher fees. But the most important parts are painfully simple. Here's how Pollack put it:

The card came out of chat I had regarding what I view as the financial industry's basic dilemma: The best investment advice fits on an index card. A commenter asked for the actual index card. Although I was originally speaking in metaphor, I grabbed a pen and one of my daughter's note cards, scribbled this out in maybe three minutes, snapped a picture with my iPhone, and the rest was history.

More advisors and investors caught onto the idea and started writing their own financial plans on a single index card.

I love the exercise, because it makes you think about what's important and forces you to be succinct.

So, here's my index-card financial plan:


Everything else is details. 

Something big just happened

I don't know about you, but I always pay attention when one of the best growth investors in the world gives me a stock tip. Motley Fool co-founder David Gardner (whose growth-stock newsletter was rated #1 in the world by The Wall Street Journal)* and his brother, Motley Fool CEO Tom Gardner, just revealed two brand new stock recommendations moments ago. Together, they've tripled the stock market's return over 12+ years. And while timing isn't everything, the history of Tom and David's stock picks shows that it pays to get in early on their ideas.

Click here to be among the first people to hear about David and Tom's newest stock recommendations.

*"Look Who's on Top Now" appeared in The Wall Street Journal which references Hulbert's rankings of the best performing stock picking newsletters over a 5-year period from 2008-2013.

Compare Brokers