In the first six months of fiscal 2010, the Company charged to interest expense approximately $925,000 of fees and expenses associated with the April 2009 amendments to the Company’s secured credit facilities and expensed approximately $100,000 of unamortized debt issuance costs associated with the reduction in the size of the Company’s revolving credit facility from $30 million to $25 million, as described in Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere herein. In the first six months of fiscal 2009, the Company charged to interest expense approximately $260,000 of fees and expenses associated with the April 2008 amendments to the Company’s credit facilities, and wrote off to interest expense approximately $290,000 of unamortized debt issuance costs associated with the reduction in the size of the Company’s revolving credit facility from $50 million to $30 million.
Interest expense for the first six months of fiscal 2010 reflects a charge of approximately $419,000 compared to a credit of approximately $644,000 for the first six months of fiscal 2009 resulting from marking to market the Company’s liabilities related to interest rate derivatives. As more fully described in Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere herein, effective April 9, 2008, the Company discontinued hedge accounting for these derivatives as a result of amendments to its credit facilities. As a consequence of the discontinuance of hedge accounting, changes in the fair value of the derivative contracts subsequent to April 8, 2008 are reflected in earnings as they occur. Amounts included in accumulated other comprehensive income related to changes in the fair value of the derivative contracts for periods prior to April 9, 2008 are being charged to earnings in the period in which the forecasted transaction (interest expense on long-term debt) affect earnings, or earlier upon determination that some or all of the forecasted transaction will not occur. Such charges totaled approximately $665,000 and $335,000 for the six months ended August 2, 2009 and August 3, 2008, respectively.
Equity in losses of equity method franchisees totaled $113,000 in the first six months of fiscal 2010 compared to $350,000 in the first six months of fiscal 2009. This caption represents the Company’s share of operating results of unconsolidated franchisees which develop and operate Krispy Kreme stores.
Other non-operating income and expense in the first six months of fiscal 2010 includes a charge of approximately $500,000 to reflect a decline in the value of an investment in an Equity Method Franchisee that management concluded is other than temporary, as described in Note 9 to the consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere herein. Other non-operating income and expense in the first six months of fiscal 2009 includes a non-cash gain of $931,000 on the disposal of an investment in a franchisee, which also is described in Note 9.
The provision for income taxes was $296,000 in the first six months of fiscal 2010 compared to a benefit of $1.0 million in the first six months of fiscal 2009. Each of these amounts includes adjustments to the valuation allowance for deferred income tax assets to maintain such allowance at an amount sufficient to reduce the Company’s aggregate net deferred income tax assets to zero, as well as a provision for income taxes estimated to be payable currently. In addition, as a result of the dissolution of one of the Company’s foreign subsidiaries and the resolution of related income tax uncertainties during the first six months of fiscal 2009, the Company recorded a credit of approximately $1.6 million to the provision for income taxes to reduce the Company’s accruals for uncertain tax positions.
The Company reported net income of $1.7 million and $2.1 million for the six months ended August 2, 2009 and August 3, 2008, respectively.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
The following table presents a summary of the Company’s cash flows from operating, investing and financing activities for the first six months of fiscal 2010 and 2009.
| | Six Months Ended |
| | Aug. 2, | | Aug. 3, |
| | 2009 | | 2008 |
| | (In thousands) |
Net cash provided by operating activities | | $ | 10,069 | | | $ | 9,485 | |
Net cash used for investing activities | | | (4,371 | ) | | | (1,234 | ) |
Net cash provided by (used for) financing activities | | | (21,616 | ) | | | 237 | |
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash | | | — | | | | (8 | ) |
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents | | $ | (15,918 | ) | | $ | 8,480 | |
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
Net cash provided by operating activities was $10.1 million and $9.5 million in the first six months fiscal 2010 and 2009, respectively. The increase in fiscal 2010 resulted primarily from improved financial results in ongoing operations, partially offset by an increase in payments to landlords related to leases on closed stores, which increased from approximately $960,000 in the first six months of fiscal 2009 to approximately $2.8 million in the first six months of fiscal 2010; the increase in fiscal 2010 resulted principally from terminations of two leases having rental rates substantially above current market levels.
Cash Flows from Investing Activities
Net cash used for investing activities was approximately $4.4 million in the first six months of fiscal 2010 and $1.2 million in the first six months of fiscal 2009. An increase in capital expenditures from $1.5 million to $4.4 million, reflecting the construction of new stores and increased store refurbishment efforts in the first six months of fiscal 2010, drove the increase in cash used for investing activities. The Company currently plans to open a modest number of new Company-operated small retail concept stores in the remainder of fiscal 2010 and, accordingly, the Company expects that capital expenditures in fiscal 2010 will range from $10 million to $13 million. During the quarter ended August 2, 2009, the Company decided to market for sale certain real estate, principally stores closed or to be closed. These assets had a carrying value of approximately $2.7 million, which is included in other current assets in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet at that date.
Cash Flows from Financing Activities
Net cash used for financing activities was $21.6 million in the first six months of fiscal 2010, compared to net cash provided by financing activities of $237,000 in the first six months of fiscal 2009. During the first six months of fiscal 2010, the Company repaid approximately $20.6 million of outstanding term loan and capitalized lease indebtedness, consisting of approximately $600,000 of scheduled amortization and a prepayment of approximately $20 million in connection with amendments to the Company’s credit facilities in April 2009 as described in Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere herein. During the first six months of fiscal 2009, the Company repaid approximately $1.4 million of outstanding term loan and capitalized lease indebtedness, consisting of approximately $600,000 of scheduled amortization and a prepayment of approximately $750,000 from the proceeds of the assignment of a lease related to a closed store. Additionally, the Company paid approximately $1.9 million and $695,000 in fees to its lenders in the first six months of fiscal 2010 and 2009, respectively, to amend its credit facilities. Of such aggregate amounts, $954,000 and $434,000, respectively, was capitalized as deferred financing costs, and the balance of approximately $925,000 and $260,000, respectively, was charged to interest expense.
Business Conditions, Uncertainties and Liquidity
The Company experienced a decline in revenues and incurred net losses in each of the last three fiscal years. The revenue decline reflects fewer Company stores in operation resulting principally from the closure of lower performing locations, a decline in domestic royalty revenues and lower sales of mixes and other ingredients resulting from lower sales by the Company’s domestic franchisees. Lower revenues have adversely affected operating margins because of the fixed or semi-fixed nature of many of the Company’s direct operating expenses. In addition, price increases in the Company Stores segment were not sufficient to fully offset steep rises in agricultural commodity costs in fiscal 2009, although recent economic conditions have led to significant reductions in the market prices of these commodities, which has had a positive effect on the Company’s results of operations in fiscal 2010, and which the Company believes will positively affect results for the remainder of the fiscal year. Sales volumes and changes in the cost of major ingredients and fuel can have a material effect on the Company’s results of operations and cash flows. In addition, royalty revenues and most of KK Supply Chain revenues are directly related to sales by franchise stores and, accordingly, the success of franchisees’ operations has a direct effect on the Company’s revenues, results of operations and cash flows.
41
The Company generated net cash from operating activities of $10.1 million in the first six months of fiscal 2010 and $9.5 million in the first six months of fiscal 2009.
The Company’s Secured Credit Facilities described in Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere herein are the Company’s principal source of external financing. These facilities consist of a term loan having an outstanding principal balance of $53.9 million as of August 2, 2009 which matures in February 2014 and a $25 million revolving credit facility maturing in February 2013.
The Secured Credit Facilities contain significant financial covenants as described in Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere herein. Effective April 15, 2009, the Company executed amendments to the Secured Credit Facilities which, among other things, relaxed the interest coverage ratio covenant contained therein through fiscal 2012. In connection with the amendments, the Company prepaid $20 million of the principal balance outstanding under the term loan, paid fees of approximately $1.9 million, and agreed to increase the rate of interest on outstanding loans by 200 basis points annually. Any future amendments or waivers could result in additional fees or rate increases.
Based on the Company’s current working capital and its operating plans, management believes the Company can comply with the amended financial covenants and that the Company can meet its projected operating, investing and financing cash requirements.
Failure to comply with the financial covenants contained in the Secured Credit Facilities, or the occurrence or failure to occur of certain events, would cause the Company to default under the facilities. The Company would attempt to negotiate waivers of any such default, should one occur. There can be no assurance that the Company would be able to negotiate any such waivers, and the costs or conditions associated with any such waivers could be significant. In the absence of a waiver of, or forbearance with respect to, any such default, the Company’s lenders would be able to exercise their rights under the credit agreement including, but not limited to, accelerating maturity of outstanding indebtedness and asserting their rights with respect to the collateral. Acceleration of the maturity of indebtedness under the Secured Credit Facilities could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations and cash flows. In the event that credit under the Secured Credit Facilities were not available to the Company, there can be no assurance that alternative sources of credit would be available to the Company or, if they are available, under what terms or at what cost.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In March 2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued FASB Statement No. 161, “Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” (“FAS 161”). The new standard is intended to improve financial reporting about derivative instruments and hedging activities by requiring enhanced disclosures to enable investors to better understand their effects on an entity’s financial position, financial performance, and cash flows. The Company adopted FAS 161 as of February 2, 2009 on a prospective basis; accordingly, disclosures related to interim periods prior to the date of adoption have not been presented. Adoption of FAS 161 did not have any effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations. See Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere herein for additional information about derivative financial instruments owned by the Company.
In the first quarter of fiscal 2009, the Company adopted FASB Statement No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (“FAS 157”) with respect to financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on both a recurring and non-recurring basis and with respect to nonfinancial assets and liabilities measured on a recurring basis. In the first quarter of fiscal 2010, the Company adopted FAS 157 with respect to nonrecurring measurements of nonfinancial assets and liabilities. Adoption of FAS 157 did not have any material effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations. See Note 11 to the consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere herein for additional information regarding fair value measurements.
In May 2009, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 165, “Subsequent Events” (“FAS 165”), which establishes general standards of accounting for and disclosure of events that occur after the balance sheet date but before the financial statements are issued or are available to be issued. The Company adopted FAS 165 prospectively during the quarter ended August 2, 2009. The Company performed an evaluation of events through September 3, 2009, the date which the financial statements were issued, for the purpose of identifying events which required adjustment to, or disclosure in, the Company’s financial statements as of and for the period ended August 2, 2009.
42
In June 2009, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 167, “Amendments to FASB Interpretation No. 46(R)” (“FAS 167”), which requires ongoing assessments to determine whether an entity is a variable interest entity and requires qualitative analysis to determine whether an enterprise’s variable interest(s) give it a controlling financial interest in a variable interest entity. In addition, FAS 167 requires enhanced disclosures about an enterprise’s involvement in a variable interest entity. FAS 167 is effective for the Company in fiscal 2011. The Company currently is evaluating the effect, if any, of adoption of FAS 167 on its financial position, results of operations and disclosures.
Item 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK.
Interest Rate Risk
The Company is exposed to market risk from increases in interest rates on its outstanding debt. All of the borrowings under the Company’s secured credit facilities bear interest at variable rates based upon either the Fed funds rate or LIBOR. The interest cost of the Company’s debt is affected by changes in these short-term interest rates and increases in those rates adversely affect the Company’s results of operations. On May 16, 2007, the Company entered into interest rate derivative contracts having an aggregate notional principal amount of $60 million. The derivative contracts entitle the Company to receive from the counterparties the excess, if any, of three-month LIBOR over 5.40%, and require the Company to pay to the counterparties the excess, if any, of 4.48% over three-month LIBOR, in each case multiplied by the notional amount of the contracts. The contracts expire in April 2010.
As of August 2, 2009, the Company had approximately $54.2 million in borrowings outstanding. A hypothetical increase of 100 basis points in short-term interest rates would result in a decrease in the Company’s annual interest expense of approximately $600,000. The hypothetical rate increase would reduce amounts payable by the Company on the $60 million outstanding notional balance of interest rate derivatives, while resulting in no increase in interest expense on the Company’s term debt due to the operation of an interest rate floor provision in the Company’s credit agreement. The Company’s credit facilities and the related interest rate derivatives are described in Note 5 and 12, respectively, to the consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere herein.
Currency Risk
The substantial majority of the Company’s revenue, expense and capital purchasing activities are transacted in U.S. dollars. The Company’s investment in its franchisee operating in Mexico exposes the Company to exchange rate risk. In addition, although royalties from international franchisees are payable to the Company in U.S. dollars, changes in the rate of exchange between the U.S. dollar and the foreign currencies used in the countries in which the international franchisees operate affect the Company’s royalty revenues. In recent quarters, the U.S. dollar generally has strengthened relative to many other currencies, which has adversely affected International Franchise revenue. Because royalty revenues are derived from a relatively large number of foreign countries, and royalty revenues are not highly concentrated in a small number of such countries, the Company believes that the relatively small size of any currency hedging activities would adversely affect the economics of hedging strategies and, accordingly, the Company historically has not attempted to hedge these exchange rate risks.
Commodity Price Risk
The Company is exposed to the effects of commodity price fluctuations on the cost of ingredients of its products, of which flour, sugar and shortening are the most significant. In order to secure adequate supplies of materials and bring greater stability to the cost of ingredients, the Company routinely enters into forward purchase contracts and other purchase arrangements with suppliers. Under the forward purchase contracts, the Company commits to purchasing agreed-upon quantities of ingredients at agreed-upon prices at specified future dates. The outstanding purchase commitment for these commodities at any point in time typically ranges from one month’s to two years’ anticipated requirements, depending on the ingredient. Other purchase arrangements typically are contractual arrangements with vendors (for example, with respect to certain beverages and ingredients) under which the Company is not required to purchase any minimum quantity of goods, but must purchase minimum percentages of its requirements for such goods from these vendors with whom it has executed these contracts.
In addition to entering into forward purchase contracts, from time to time the Company purchases exchange-traded commodity futures contracts, and options on such contracts, for raw materials which are ingredients of its products or which are components of such ingredients, including wheat and soybean oil. The Company typically assigns the futures contract to a supplier in connection with entering into a forward purchase contract for the related ingredient.
43
The Company operates a large fleet of delivery vehicles and is exposed to the effects of changes in gasoline prices. In the first six months of fiscal 2010, the Company began periodically using futures and options on futures to hedge a portion of its exposure to rising gasoline prices.
Commodity Derivatives Outstanding at August 2, 2009
Quantitative information about the Company’s unassigned option contracts and futures contracts and options on such contracts as of August 2, 2009, all of which mature in fiscal 2010, is set forth in the table below.
| | | | Weighted | | Aggregate | | Aggregate |
| | | | Average Contract Price | | Contract Price | | Fair |
| | Contract Volume | | or Strike Price | | or Strike Price | | Value |
| | (Dollars in thousands, except average prices) |
Futures contracts: | | | | | | | | | | | |
Wheat | | 310,000 bu. | | $ 6.17/bu. | | $ | 1,914 | | $ | (51 | ) |
Gasoline | | 126,000 gal. | | $ 1.28/gal. | | $ | 161 | | | 83 | |
| | | | | | | | | $ | 32 | |
Although the Company utilizes forward purchase contracts and futures contracts and options on such contracts to mitigate the risks related to commodity price fluctuations, such contracts do not fully mitigate price risk. In addition, the portion of the Company’s anticipated future commodity requirements that are subject to such contracts vary from time to time. Prices for wheat and soybean oil have been volatile in the past two years and traded at record high prices during fiscal 2009, although recent economic conditions have led to significant reductions in the market prices of agricultural and other commodities during the first six months of fiscal 2010, including wheat and soybean oil. Adverse changes in commodity prices could adversely affect the Company’s profitability and liquidity.
Sensitivity to Price Changes in Agricultural Commodities
The following table illustrates the potential effect on the Company’s costs resulting from hypothetical changes in the cost of the Company’s three most significant ingredients.
| | Approximate | | Approximate Range | | | | Approximate Annual |
| | Anticipated Fiscal 2010 | | of Prices Paid In | | Hypothetical Price | | Effect Of Hypothetical |
Ingredient | | Purchases | | Fiscal 2009 | | Increase | | Price Increase |
| | | | | | | | (In thousands) |
Flour | | 74.0 million lbs. | | $0.179 – $0.268/lb. | | $ 0.01/lb. | | $ 740 |
Shortening | | 34.4 million lbs. | | $0.466 – $0.746/lb. | | $ 0.01/lb. | | 344 |
Sugar | | 60.6 million lbs. | | $0.280 – $0.295/lb. | | $ 0.01/lb. | | 606 |
The range of prices paid for fiscal 2009 set forth in the table above reflect the effects of any forward purchase contracts entered into at various times prior to delivery of the goods and, accordingly, do not necessarily reflect the range of prices of these ingredients prevailing in the market during the fiscal year.
44
Item 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES.
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As of August 2, 2009, the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, management performed, under the supervision and with the participation of the Company’s chief executive officer and chief financial officer, an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Exchange Act. The Company’s disclosure controls and procedures are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in the reports the Company files or submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to management, including the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures. Based on this evaluation, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that, as of August 2, 2009, the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
During the quarter ended August 2, 2009, there were no changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting that materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
45
PART II - OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.
Pending Legal Matters
Except as disclosed below, the Company currently is not a party to any material legal proceedings. Except as described below with respect to the TAG litigation, the Company cannot predict the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome with respect to the these matters, or the amount or range of potential loss with respect to them and, accordingly, no provision for loss with respect to these matters has been reflected in the consolidated financial statements.
TAG Litigation
In February 2008, the Company filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina against The Advantage Group Enterprise, Inc. (“TAG”), alleging that TAG failed to properly account for and pay the Company for sales of equipment that the Company consigned to TAG. Based on these allegations, the Company asserted various claims including breach of fiduciary duty and conversion, and it seeks an accounting and constructive trust. In addition, the Company seeks a declaration that it does not owe TAG approximately $1 million for storage fees and alleged lost profits. In March 2008, TAG answered the complaint, denying liability and asserting counterclaims against the Company. TAG alleges that the Company acted improperly by failing to execute a written contract between the companies and claims damages for breach of contract, services rendered, unjust enrichment, violation of the North Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act and fraud in the inducement. TAG seeks approximately $1 million in actual damages as well as punitive and treble damages. The Court has stayed this matter because the parties are engaged in settlement negotiations. During the three months ended August 2, 2009, the Company accrued a liability of approximately $150,000 for potential settlement of this matter.
Fairfax County, Virginia Environmental Litigation
Since 2004, the Company has operated a commissary in the Gunston Commerce Center in Fairfax County, Virginia (the“County”). The County has investigated alleged damage to its sewer system near the commissary. The Company has cooperated with the County's investigation and has conducted its own investigation of the sewer system and the causes of any alleged damage. On February 12, 2009, the County notified the Company that it believed the Company's wastewater discharge from the commissary was the cause of the alleged damage, and demanded payment from the Company of approximately $2.0 million. On May 8, 2009, the County filed a lawsuit in Fairfax County Circuit Court alleging that the Company caused damage to the sewer system and violated the County’s Sewer Use Ordinance and the Company’s Wastewater Discharge Permit. The County seeks repair and replacement costs as well as approximately $18 million in civil penalties from the Company. The Company disputes that it is the cause of any alleged damage to the sewer system and intends to vigorously defend the lawsuit. On August 28, 2009, the Company filed counterclaims against the County under the citizen’s suit provisions of the Clean Water Act and state law, alleging that the County failed to properly design, construct, operate and maintain the sewer system. The Company seeks an injunction compelling the County to repair and reconnect the Company’s commissary to the sewer system, civil penalties, damages and attorneys’ fees. The Company also joined Prince William County, Virginia in its Clean Water Act claims because the sewer system flows into a treatment works operated by Prince William County.
K2 Asia Litigation
On April 7, 2009, a Cayman Islands corporation, K2 Asia Ventures, and its owners filed a lawsuit in Forsyth County, North Carolina Superior Court against the Company, its franchisee in the Philippines, and other persons associated with the franchisee. The suit alleges that the Company and the other defendants conspired to deprive the plaintiffs of claimed “exclusive rights” to negotiate franchise and development agreements with prospective franchisees in the Philippines, and seeks unspecified damages. The Company believes that these allegations are false and intends to vigorously defend against the lawsuit.
Other Legal Matters
We are engaged in various legal proceedings arising in the normal course of business. We maintain customary insurance policies against certain kinds of such claims and suits, including insurance policies for workers’ compensation and personal injury, some of which provide for relatively large deductible amounts.
46
Item 1A. RISK FACTORS.
There have been no material changes from the risk factors disclosed in Part I, Item 1A, “Risk Factors,” in the 2009 Form 10-K.
Item 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS.
None.
Item 3. DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES.
None.
Item 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.
An annual meeting of shareholders of the Company was held on June 16, 2009 for the purpose of electing three Class I directors, voting on a proposed amendment to the Company’s 2000 Stock Incentive Plan to increase the number of shares issuable under the Plan and voting on ratification of the selection of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm. The tables below show the results of the shareholders’ voting:
| | Votes in | | |
| | Favor | | Withheld |
Election of Directors | | | | |
James H. Morgan | | 58,769,301 | | 1,130,869 |
Andrew J. Schindler | | 57,770,185 | | 2,129,985 |
Togo D. West, Jr. | | 57,359,906 | | 2,540,264 |
As a result, each of the listed individuals was duly elected.
The proposed amendment to the Company’s 2000 Stock Incentive Plan to increase the number of shares of common stock issuable over the term of the 2000 Stock Incentive Plan by 3 million shares received the following results and was approved:
| 22,017,231 | | Votes for approval |
| 9,235,758 | | Votes against |
| 3,620,071 | | Abstentions |
The proposal to ratify the selection of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal 2010 received the following results and was approved:
| 59,298,035 | | Votes for approval |
| 430,754 | | Votes against |
| 171,380 | | Abstentions |
Item 5. OTHER INFORMATION.
None.
47
Item 6. EXHIBITS.
Exhibit | | | | |
Number | | | | Description of Exhibits |
| 3.1 | | | — | | Amended Articles of Incorporation of the Registrant (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 of the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Commission File No. 333-97787)) |
| |
| 3.2 | | | — | | Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Registrant (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed December 15, 2008) |
| |
| 10.1 | | | — | | 2000 Stock Incentive Plan (amended as of June 16, 2009) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 22, 2009) |
| |
| 31.1 | | | — | | Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and Rule 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended |
| |
| 31.2 | | | — | | Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and Rule 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended |
| |
| 32.1 | | | — | | Certification by Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
| |
| 32.2 | | | — | | Certification by Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
48
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
| Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Inc. |
|
|
Date: September 3, 2009 | By: | /s/ James H. Morgan | | |
| Name: | James H. Morgan |
| Title: | Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
Date: September 3, 2009 | By: | /s/ Douglas R. Muir | | |
| Name: | Douglas R. Muir |
| Title: | Chief Financial Officer |
49