On how men and women differ…
While footnoted tends to focus pretty exclusively on public companies and the things they bury in SEC filings, we can’t pass up interesting tidbits buried in the SEC filings of now-private companies.
Take the 10-K that Neiman Marcus filed earlier this week: Karen Katz, president and CEO of the Neiman Marcus stores division was the only top executive to receive a clothing allowance. Katz received $25,000, which based on my occasional forays into Neiman’s (I tend to prefer Nordstrom’s (JWN), myself) probably doesn’t buy an awful lot, especially on the designer floors, where I imagine Katz favors. After all, the CEO of stores can’t really be seen shopping off the sale racks!
Meanwhile, CEO Burton Tansky didn’t receive any clothing allowance. But he did get $12,000 for a car. And, Bergdorf Goodman President James J. Gold, who apparently relocated from Texas to New York, received a $167K “cost of living adjustment” and another $296K to reimburse him for New York state taxes.
Could this mean that women are more focused on clothes, while men are more focused on cars and taxes? After all, Gold probably needs to be well-attired too. And, perhaps more importantly, does anyone know why Neiman is still filing with the SEC since they went private two years ago?
Advertisement
|
Posted in |
 4 Comments » |
September 28th, 2007 at 11:25 am
It’s kind of quirky, but because Neiman Marcus has publicly-traded debentures registered with the SEC pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1933, they are required to file periodic reports as a non-accelerated filer. Cingular Wireless (before it became AT&T Wireless) used to be in a similar situation — it was a joint venture between AT&T and Bell South, but it had publicly-traded debt and thus had to file periodic reports even though it did not have publicly-traded stock.
P.S. The new site looks great! I’m so happy 10-K Wizard and InsiderScore agreed to be sponsors.
September 28th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
The debt is the issue. The nice thing about the private company filings are the proxy statements tend to be in the 10K’s so you have one stop shopping.
There are a number of interesting companies in this status such as Levi Strauss, and other companies who may be held by a VC who may want to flip them after they file an S-1 or S-1A. They still essentially fall under Sarbanes and have the continued experience of working with the SEC docs so going back public can be a much easier process. Having worked with Public, historically private, and just recently private companies the skill sets in the beancounting departments can be vastly different.
September 28th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
Echoing what the prior two commenters noted, issuers of public debt (i.e. debt that has been registered under the Securities Act of 1933) have an obligation to file a 10-K for at least one year after the sale of the debt (this requirement is under Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934).
In addition, it’s possible that the debenture covenants requires that the debt issuer provide reports that are on par with 10-Q’s and 10-K’s.
Lastly, (though this doesn’t seem like too good of a reason given the liabilities that attach to each report), having current reports will make facilitate filing subsequent registration statements.
September 30th, 2007 at 10:14 am
Shopping discounts are not only provided to women….per page 116 of the Neiman bond prospectus…the private equity concerns negotiated to have the following included.
“In connection with the Transactions, Neiman Marcus, Inc. agreed to cause the Company to provide to a limited number of these persons, including each of our directors at the time of the consummation of the Transactions, a lifetime discount on purchases at our stores”
The private equity directors include 7 men and 1 woman…