Bobrick Washroom Equipment Debuts New Products
Bobrick Washroom Equipment, Inc. has introduced their TrimLine Series Surface-Mounted Warm-Air Hand Dryers featuring a four-inch projection for ADA and barrier-free compliance and low-profile, architectural styling. Seventy percent recycled satin-finish stainless steel (B-7128) or white-coated steel (B-7120) covers with black trim and side panels are available. Features include an optimum balance of fast-drying time and a moderate sound level (73 dBA).
Dual parallax air flow delivers a broad warm air pattern for a comfortable hand dry. Paper towels are eliminated reducing costs by 95%, operation is energy-efficient. Motor and brushes are warranted for three years, all other parts for 10 years.
The company has also introduced their new TowelMate dispenser retainer accessory, which installs in existing towel dispensers and dispenses one towel at a time resulting in a reduction of paper towel usage by more than 20%, eliminating multiple towel dispensing, and towels falling to the floor.
Additional savings can be achieved by changing from C-fold to more economical Multifold paper towels including wide variety of non-proprietary folded paper towel sizes and weights and 100% recycled paper. Design also prevents towels from falling forward when the door is open for refilling.
For more information, visit Bobrick.com.
Stein Mart to restate prior period financial results
Jacksonville, Fla. — Stein Mart Inc. announced Friday that it will restate its financial statements for fiscal years 2009, 2010 and 2011, its quarterly data for the first quarter of 2012 and for all quarters in 2010 and 2011, as well as its selected financial data for the relevant periods due to merchandising accounting errors.
The accounting mistakes came about because it accounted for some markdowns as temporary discounts rather than permanent ones, affecting how it valued its unsold clothing, the Associated Press said. As a result, inventories were overstated by about $3 million through July 28, while the costs of sold merchandise were understated by the same amount.
In addition, Stein Mart is reviewing how it accounts for store improvement costs that are reimbursed by its landlords, because it now believes that changes to stores did not increase the value of its landlords’ properties. It had previously believed the opposite, the Associated Press reported.
It said that its accounting methods had understated write-downs the company took on the value of its stores by about $11 million from 2006 to 2009, and overstated rent expense by about $6 million.
NRF asks judge to reject proposed swipe fee settlement
Washington — Lawyers representing the National Retail Federation and many of the nation’s most prominent retail companies are set to appear in court today to ask a federal judge to reject a proposed class-action settlement of an antitrust lawsuit over the $30 billion a year in credit card swipe fees charged by Visa and MasterCard.
“This proposal benefits no one but lawyers and credit card companies, and should not be forced on the retail industry or retailers’ customers,” NRF senior VP and general counsel Mallory Duncan said. “It’s a morass of legal flaws, and rather than bringing about reform it would only entrench the anticompetitive behavior of the card companies while putting them beyond the reach of the law. It should be rejected on its face.”
A hearing on a motion for preliminary approval of the proposed settlement is scheduled for 11:30 a.m. before U.S. District Court Judge John Gleeson in Brooklyn, N.Y. Gleeson will hear arguments on a brief filed last week by NRF, 17 retail and restaurant companies and two other trade associations. NRF is not a party to the lawsuit, but its members and the companies named in the brief would be affected if the case is approved as a class action. Arguments will also be heard on briefs filed by other opponents, including retailers and associations who were parties to the suit but who have rejected the proposal.
NRF argued in its brief that the settlement cannot legally be certified as a class action because it attempts to force a one-size-fits-all solution onto a wildly diverse group of merchants. It also argued that a provision barring all retailers – including those who opt out of the settlement and even those who do not yet exist – from filing future lawsuits over swipe fees is impermissibly broad under federal law.
In addition, the proposal allows retailers to reject payments offered as compensation for past price-fixing but gives no mechanism to opt out of flawed injunctive relief that would allow card companies to continuing price fixing and fee increases in the future.
NRF opposes the settlement because it fails to reform the cartel-like system where Visa and MasterCard set a rigid schedule of swipe fees that all banks follow. It does nothing to disclose the hidden fees or otherwise create transparency that would encourage competition that would lead to lower fees. Merchant bargaining groups could be recognized, but that is no change from current law. And while some merchants would theoretically be given the right to surcharge as a bargaining chip to hold down fees, the provision is subject to a wide variety of card company restrictions, would be illegal in 10 states, and ignores the goal of merchants to reduce prices paid by their customers.