Fastenal Co., the Winona-based nuts and bolts seller, nailed down its 4Q and year-end today betaing both IBM and Obama to the punch.
Remember, beside the well-known thrifty state senator Bob Kierlin, one of the co-founders of this workman-like juggernaut is Rochester's Jack Remick.
He is, of course, the owner of the Rochester Athletic Club and, as of the end of December, Clements Chevrolet.
Anyway, here's some raw snippets from the report:
Net sales for the three-month period ended December 31, 2008 totaled $544,959, an increase of 5.0% over net sales of $519,206 in the fourth quarter of 2007. Net earnings increased from $56,191 in the fourth quarter of 2007 to $62,536 in the fourth quarter of 2008, an increase of 11.3%. Basic and diluted earnings per share increased from $.38 to $.42 for the comparable periods.
Net sales for the year ended December 31, 2008 totaled $2,340,425, an increase of 13.5% over net sales of $2,061,819 in 2007. Net earnings increased from $232,622 in 2007 to $279,705 in 2008, an increase of 20.2%. Basic and diluted earnings per share increased from $1.55 to $1.88 for the comparable periods. The third quarter of 2008 included a $10,000 legal settlement. This is discussed in greater detail later in this release. This settlement lowered our basic and diluted earnings per share by just over $0.03 for the year.
During 2008, Fastenal opened 161 new stores (Fastenal opened 161 new stores in 2007). The 161 new stores in 2008 represent an increase in stores of 7.5% from December 31, 2007. On December 31, 2008, Fastenal had 13,634 total employees, an increase of 13.5% from December 31, 2007.
On August 29, 2008 e announced that we had reached a preliminary agreement to settle a purported class action lawsuit relating to the classification of our Assistant General Managers as exempt for purposes of the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and California, Oregon, and Pennsylvania state statutes. This suit also alleged that Assistant General Managers in California did not receive sufficient meal breaks and paid rest periods under the California Labor Code. (Note: This case was originally reported on our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, filed on October 31, 2007.
While we deny the allegations underlying the lawsuit, we decided to enter into the settlement agreement in order to avoid significant legal fees, the uncertainty of a jury trial, distractions to our operations, and other expenses and management time that would have to be devoted to protracted litigation. The settlement, which is still subject to court approval, fully resolves all claims brought by the plaintiffs in this lawsuit. Pursuant to the settlement, we will make a cash payment of $10 million to cover claims by eligible class members, plaintiff attorneys’ fees and costs, and payments to the named plaintiffs. The expense for this settlement was recorded in the results for the third quarter ending September 30, 20088. We do not expect the settlement to have any material impact on our operating results going forward.