Skip to main content

Can Green Mountain Coffee Roasters explain those missing beans?

Green Mountain Coffee Roasters (NASDAQ: GMCR) can't seem to get its act together. It appears to have made a significant error in a recent revision of its segment numbers. Specifically, $15.2 million of purported revenue adjustments for a twenty-six period in 2011 are unaccounted for. Its revenue adjustments do not match revenue numbers disclosed in other financial reports.


Green Mountain Coffee Roasters operates its business under three segments: Specialty Coffee business unit (“SCBU”), Keurig business unit (“KBU”) and a Canadian business unit (“CBU”). Starting in fiscal year 2012, GMCR moved its Timothy’s subsidiary out of the SCBU segment and into the CBU segment. At the same time it moved a portion of the At Home ("AH") single cup business from its KBU segment to its CBU segment.

In subsequent 10-Q reports issued during fiscal year 2012, Green Mountain Coffee revised its previous fiscal year 2011 segment numbers to show Timothy’s as part of the CBU segment. Likewise, it revised its fiscal year 2011 segment numbers to show the AH single cup business as part of the CBU segment. The company revised its previous fiscal year segment numbers to make them comparable on a year-to-year basis. Therefore, items such as revenues, expenses, income, assets and liabilities that had been previously included in the SCBU segment for Timothy’s and the KBU segment for the AH single cup business should have been included in the CBU segment numbers when it reported its revised fiscal year 2011 numbers.

Those revisions reveal discrepancies in Green Mountain Coffee’s segment numbers. Specifically, Timothy’s sales to unaffiliated customers (outside customers) that were subtracted from the SCBU segment and added to the CBU segment should have matched its contribution to consolidated revenues that were disclosed in previous financial reports. Those revenue numbers don’t match up. $15.2 million of those revenue adjustments are unaccounted for.

Green Mountain Coffee's revised segment numbers compared to originally reported segment numbers

In the 10-Q report (page 12) for the period ended March 24, 2012, Green Mountain Coffee described its revision of the previous fiscal year 2011 segment numbers:

Effective at the beginning of fiscal year 2012, the Company changed its organizational structure to align certain portions of its business by geography. Prior to fiscal 2012, sales and operations associated with the Timothy’s brand were included in the SCBU segment and a portion of the AH single cup business with retailers in Canada was included in the KBU segment. Under the new structure, Timothy’s and all of the AH single cup business with retailers in Canada are included in the CBU segment.

Furthermore, it disclosed:

The following tables summarize selected financial data for segment disclosures for the thirteen and twenty-six week periods ended March 24, 2012 and March 26, 2011. Selected financial data for segment disclosures for the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended March 26, 2011 have been recast to reflect Timothy’s and the AH single cup business with retailers in Canada in the CBU segment. [Emphasis added.]

In that same March 24, 2012 10-Q report (page 14), Green Mountain Coffee presented the following revised segment revenue numbers for the previous fiscal year twenty-six weeks ended March 26, 2011. (Click on image to enlarge.)

Originally, Green Mountain Coffee had reported the following segment numbers in the previous fiscal year 2011 10-Q report (page 14) for the same twenty-six weeks ended March 26, 2011. (Click on image to enlarge.)

In the March 24, 2012 10-Q report, the SCBU segment’s sales to unaffiliated customers for the previous year's twenty-six week period ended March 26, 2011 was revised $42.424 million lower. The revision should have reflected the removal of Timothy’s sales to unaffiliated customers from the SCBU segment into the CBU segment. However, in the March 26, 2011 10-Q report (page 20) Green Mountain Coffee reported only $27.2 million of sales to unaffiliated customers for Timothy’s. (Click on image to enlarge.)

The "additional $27.2 million of revenue" were sales to unaffiliated customers because it "contributed" to consolidated revenues. Timothy's sold product to both unaffiliated customers (outside customers) and affiliated customers (units within Green Mountain Coffee). Its sales to unaffiliated customers are an addition to consolidated revenues. 

The company subtracted $42.4 million of Timothy’s sales to unaffiliated customers from the SCBU segment for the twenty-six weeks ended March 26, 2011 to reflect its removal from that segment even though it previously reported that such sales were only $27.2 million. How could Green Mountain Coffee remove $15.2 million in sales to unaffiliated customers from the SCBU segment that it did not have?

Back in September 2010, the Securities and Exchange Commission started a probe of Green Mountain Coffee’s accounting practices. Afterwards, the company reported that it found material weaknesses in internal controls over financial reporting. It restated its financial reports from fiscal year 2006 to fiscal year 2010 to correct certain violations of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) that helped it overstate its reported earnings in previous fiscal years. In its most recent 10-K report (page 57), the company maintained that it has "effective internal controls over financial reporting." I doubt it.

Written by,

Sam E. Antar

Recommended reading

NACD Directorship - Freudian Thinking to Prevent Fraud by NACD Editors

Financial Executives International - Sam E. Antar, Jonathan Marks, Address Anti-Fraud Collaboration by Edith Orenstein

The LongShortTrader: Green Mountain Coffee Roasters' Profits: Overstated or Misunderstood

The LongShortTrader: GMCR Refuses to Explain Exactly How the LongShortTrader's Report is Flawed


I am a convicted felon and a former CPA. As the criminal CFO of Crazy Eddie, I helped my cousin Eddie Antar and other members of his family mastermind one of the largest securities frauds uncovered during the 1980's. I committed my crimes in cold-blood for fun and profit, and simply because I could. If it weren't for the heroic efforts of the FBI, SEC, Postal Inspector's Office, US Attorney's Office, and class action plaintiff's lawyers who investigated, prosecuted, and sued me, I would still be the criminal CFO of Crazy Eddie today.

There is a saying, "It takes one to know one." Today, I work very closely with the FBI, IRS, SEC, Justice Department, and other federal and state law enforcement agencies in training them to identify and catch white-collar criminals. Often, I refer cases to them as an independent whistleblower. I teach white-collar crime classes for various government entities, professional organizations, businesses, and colleges and universities. I do not want or seek forgiveness for my vicious crimes from my victims. My past sins are unforgivable.

I do not own any Green Mountain Coffee Roasters securities long or short. My ongoing investigation of Green Mountain Coffee Roasters documented in this blog is a freebie for the Securities and Exchange Commission. Hopefully, they will put in a good word for me on judgment day.


Popular Posts

Did a Clever SEC Bait Goldman Sachs into Compounding Its Legal Problems With the "Kiss of Death" Message?

Updated: At 3:48 AM ET 04/20/2010 on bottom

The Kiss of Death

In filing its lawsuit against Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) on a Friday, the Securities and Exchange Commission sent what I call the "kiss of death" message to the embattled company. In other words, the SEC wanted to stick it to Goldman Sachs and Fabrice Tourre, the Executive Director of Goldman Sachs International, who is also a defendant in the complaint. While the SEC as a practice does inform target companies and individuals of an impending enforcement action, it does not always tell them exactly when such an action will be filed.

Apparently, the SEC filed its lawsuit without giving Goldman Sachs the heads up that it was planning to file it that day. Business Insider observed that Goldman Sachs was clearly unprepared to respond to the complaint as news of the lawsuit dominated the headlines all day. Goldman issued a short denial around noon and issued an extensive denial late in the afternoon, after most people had … CEO Patrick Byrne Sleeps With a Gun

In numerous blog posts in the past, and in widespread media coverage, evidence has accumulated for years that CEO (NASDAQ: OSTK) Patrick Byrne has shown signs of being mentally unbalanced and paranoid.

Byrne has blamed his company's financial woes on an unnamed "Sith Lord." He hired paid goons to stalk his real and imagined adversaries and to write lengthy conspiracy theories on the Internet. Byrne has close ties with Bo Gritz. The Anti-Defamation League lists Bo Gritz as a far-right extremist with “extensive connections to both white supremacists and anti-government groups and leaders.”

Patrick Byrne's infamous temper tantrums when he doesn’t get want he wants are well documented too. He made obscene and misogynistic comments to a female reporter. He suggested that she gave “blowjobs” to Goldman Sachs traders. He suggested that a male reporter “Sucks It Likes He’s Paying the Rent.” An independent research analyst was told that “You deserve to be whippe…

Nature's Sunshine Products, Willbros Group, Cal Dive International, and BSQUARE Violate S.E.C. Rules on Calculating EBITDA

Nature’s Sunshine Products (NASDAQ: NATR), Willbros Group (NYSE: WG), Cal Dive International (NYSE: DVR), and BSQUARE (NASDAQ: BSQR) have recently issued earnings reports which include a calculation of EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization) that apparently does not comply with Securities and Exchange Commission interpretations for Regulation G governing such non-GAAP financial measures. In each case, their erroneous EBITDA calculations have enabled them to significantly distort their financial performance by erroneously reporting a positive EBITDA, when they should have reported a negative EBITDA in the latest quarter.

How EBITDA is supposed to be calculated under Regulation G

According to the S.E.C. Compliance & Disclosure Interpretations, EBITDA is defined under Regulation G as net income (not operating income) before net interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization. See below:

Question 103.01Question: Exchange Act Release No. 47226 describes E…

InterOil, John Thomas Financial, and Clarion Finanz: Anatomy of a Stock Market Manipulation Scheme

In this blog post, I will provide evidence of what I believe is a stock market manipulation scheme involving InterOil (NYSE: IOC), John Thomas Financial, and Clarion Finanz AG. I believe that InterOil with the assistance of Clarion Finanz concealed John Thomas Financial’s involvement in helping it raise $95 million through a private placement of convertible debt securities.

Clarion Finanz acted as a buffer between InterOil and John Thomas Financial to help InterOil hide John Thomas Financial's role in raising funds. Afterwards, InterOil filed false and misleading reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission in an effort to conceal John Thomas Financial’s role in helping the company raise $95 million in convertible debt.

Carl Caserta, who in 1991 was barred by the Securities and Exchange Commission from “association with any broker, dealer, or investment advisor” played a role in helping InterOil use John Thomas Financial to obtain funds from investors. InterOil, John Thoma…

Class Action Complaint against Amedisys uses Sarbanes-Oxley Act Corporate Governance Provisions to Battle Alleged Corporate Malfeasance

Updated at bottom of article

Last week, Pomerantz Haudek Grossman & Gross LLP filed a class action lawsuit against Amedisys (NASDAQ: AMED) charging the company, its CEO William F. Borne and its CFO Dale E. Redman with securities fraud.  In the next few days, Bernstein Liebhard LLP and Finkelstein Thompson LLP filed similar class action lawsuits against the company. The lawsuits allege that Amedisys abused Medicare's reimbursement system for at-home therapy care based on a compelling analysis of company revenues in an April 27 Wall Street Journal article.

In addition, the lawsuits innovatively utilize a provision under Section 406 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002 which provides a back-door way for investors to force ethical corporate governance and sue public companies for malfeasance. That provision requires Senior Financial Officers, such as the CEO and CFO of public companies, to abide by a strict code of ethics which broadly defines corporate malfeasance and effectively makes…