Text/HTML
Text/HTML
If you are a registered user please log in to see more postings.
 

The AAO Weblog covers accounting issues and current events as they relate the practice of investment analysis.

 
 
May 25

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
5/25/2006 6:32 AM 

It's been a while since we visited the restatement zoo...

Today's trip is brought to you by retailer Coldwater Creek, who filed a non-reliance 8-K yesterday covering last year's financials.

Coldwater Creek had co-marketed a credit card with an unnamed card issuer; it received an upfront fee from the issuer when a customer signed on for a card and activated. Coldwater had been accounting for the "marketing fee" in its entirety upon activation in 2005 - but it should have been deferring the fee and recognizing it as revenue over a longer stretch. (The 8-K didn't say what stretch.)

The restatement will slice $.06 from the 2005 earnings of $.32, making it a lucrative arrangement.

The 8-K didn't go into details about the nature of the accounting involved, but it sounds a lot like a SFAS 91 issue. That standard calls for "origination fees" tied to loans to be spread over the life of a loan rather than recognized up front. A "marketing fee" charged by Coldwater Creek for procuring a credit card customer - a borrower who's being extended credit by the card issuer - sounds much like an origination fee. So perhaps CC is now going to recognize the revenue over the average outstanding balance of the customers procured.


If SFAS 91 sounds familiar, it's because Fannie Mae had her problems with it, as announced yesterday. Do not jump to the conclusion that this is the beginning of a new restatement wave. Calling it a coincidence makes much more sense for now.

Tags:
 

Pension & Other Benefit Plans: A Look Ahead


    Investors in firms with defined benefit pension plans always face the risk of suddenly being pushed farther back in line when it comes to being served their returns. Variability in plan assets and variability in benefit plan obligations are the reason: poor asset returns coupled with sinking interest rates always spell tough times for defined benefit plan funding. In that regard, this year’s asset returns combined with the Fed’s “Operation Twist” add up to “Operation Agony” for defined benefit pension plans. If trends continue along their current path, firms that may have anticipated moving to more realistic pension accounting - like Honeywell, AT&T and Verizon already have done - might forego that decision. It could be just too painful. 

    Pensions aren’t the only kind of benefit plan affected by Operation Twist. Other postemployment benefit (OPEB) plans share much the same accounting model as pensions, including the calculation of a projected benefit obligation that similarly incorporates a discount rate - one that will also be affected by Operation Twist. The net OPEB obligations were slightly less than pension obligations at the end of 2010, but also promise to grow in 2011. Investors perceive them as less threatening than pension obligations because they don’t require funding. Strangely, there are a number of firms that are recognizing income from these benefit plans - without ever creating a dime of cash for investors.

A recent edition of The Analyst’s Accounting Observer dissects these issues, and is available only to paid subscribers. A condensed version is available for free upon request. To receive it, send an e-mail to Brenda Rappold at brappold@accountingobserver.com, with “PENSIONS” in the subject line.

For information about subscribing to The Analyst’s Accounting Observer, click here.