Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : RAINFOREST CAFE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dennis Vail who wrote (4123)	4/1/1998 1:29:00 AM
From: Dennis Vail	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4704

The Def 14a is out announcing the date and venue of the annual meeting. That means when you get you proxies it's time to JUST SAY NO to the six nominees for the board of directors. All the nominees are associates and underlings of Mr. Berman. So if you don't want a board that's a rubber stamp for Mr. Berman's questionable wheeling and dealing this is you opportunity to try and vote them down. I wonder what the institutions feel about this. Maybe we should give them a call and ask. Of course after January 7th it's hard to say whose holding what but the institutions should be beginning their quarterly filing as of today. Of course they have 45 days to file but some to file fairly promptly. Here's the option compensation listed in the 14a. lets not forget that at GND after the shareprice fell from the 30s to 11, Berman had the strike price of managements options lowered from the 30s to $11 as well. That doesn't mean he will do that here but it doesn't mean he wont either. And where is that Pres RAIN has been looking for close to a year now. Could it be that no viable candidate wants to deal with a board that's in Beramn's hip pocket. Just a thought. ENSATION TABLE LONG-TERM COMPENSATION ANNUAL COMPENSATION ------------ ---------------------------------- SECURITIES FISCAL SALARY OTHER ANNUAL UNDERLYING NAME AND PRINCIPAL POSITION YEAR $ COMPENSATION $ OPTIONS(1) --------------------------- ------ ------ -------------- ---------- Lyle Berman... 1997 $ 0 $ 0 450,000 1996 0 0 0 1995 0 0 0 Steven W. Schussler.. 1997 149,231 26,877 112,500 1996 129,231 28,000 0 1995 110,769 22,514 112,500 Ercu Ucan.......... 1997 149,231 27,068 112,500 1996 129,231 28,000 0 1995 115,000 23,000 112,500 Gregory C. Carey(2). 1997 142,500 54,737(3) 75,000 1996 109,116 19,106 30,000 1995 94,458 0 90,000 Mark S. Robinow(4). 1997 125,846 22,572 60,000 1996 113,692 23,600 0 1995 6,346 4,231 135,000 Regards, Dennis

To: Dennis Vail who wrote (4123)	4/1/1998 2:34:00 AM
From: Dennis Vail	Respond to of 4704

Two last items. In the 10K RAIN states that the first 5 mall units had an averaged cost of $5.1 million net of landlord contributions to open while last year the average cost of the mall units was $7.1 million. I believe that is one iof RAIN's stated goals this year to lower the cost of opening a unit. Finally here is the description of the new accounting practices that RAIN (and by 1998 everybody else) will be instituting: In April 1997, the Accounting Standards Executive Committee of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) issued an exposure draft entitled "Reporting on the Costs of Start-Up Activities." The proposed accounting standard contained in this draft would require entities to expense as incurred all start-up and preopening costs that are not otherwise capitalizable as long-lived assets. If adopted by the AICPA, this new accounting standard would be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 1998 with earlier application encouraged. The comment period for the exposure draft ended in July 1997, and the AICPA is expected to issue a final pronouncement on this standard during the second quarter of 1998. If the new accounting principle is adopted by the AICPA, the Company will choose early implementation during fiscal 1998. This implementation will involve the recognition of the cumulative effect of the change in accounting principle required by the new standard as a one-time charge against earnings, net of any related income tax effect, retroactive to the beginning of fiscal 1998 the effect would be a change of earnings of approximately $4.0 million. Regards, Dennis

To: Dennis Vail who wrote (4123)	4/1/1998 8:42:00 PM
From: dougjn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4704

This stock is a very good example of a mid/small cap fast grower that is beaten down and poised for a strong move. Exactly when is I think impossible to know. But it could occur any time. Its very cheap on the fundamentals. The haircut it took a few months ago on concerns about same store sales declines was way, way overdone. First because first year declines are absolutely part and parcel of the category, except perhaps in hyper tourist locals. It is hard to go up from two hour wait times. That has very little to do with the durability of the concept or the durability of the growth of the stock. It it were to turn out that future comparable openings did sig. less well than past ones, that would worry me. I.e., if environmentalism for kids and et. al. were to look to be going out of fashion. I don't see it. I'm quite long. Doug