Macy's 2008 Annual Report Download - page 18

Download and view the complete annual report

Please find page 18 of the 2008 Macy's annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.

Page out of 109

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
  • 105
  • 106
  • 107
  • 108
  • 109

Additional information about the Company’s stores and warehouses and distribution and fulfillment centers
(“DC’s”) as of January 31, 2009 is as follows:
Geographic Region
Total
Stores
Owned
Stores
Leased
Stores
Stores
Subject to
a Ground
Lease
Total
DC’s
Owned
DC’s
Mid-Atlantic ....................................... 107 56 32 19 3 2
North ............................................. 68 51 14 3 1 1
Northeast .......................................... 118 62 47 9 2 2
Northwest ......................................... 139 54 68 17 4 1
Southeast .......................................... 119 80 17 22 4 3
Southwest ......................................... 129 55 48 26 4 4
Midwest .......................................... 105 59 29 17 3 2
South Central ...................................... 62 50 8 4 1 1
847 467 263 117 22 16
The eight geographic regions detailed in the foregoing table are based on the Company’s Macy’s branded
operational structure which include headquarters in the Chicago, Houston, Miami, Los Angeles, New York,
Pittsburgh, San Francisco and Washington, D.C. areas.
The Company’s retail stores are located at urban or suburban sites, principally in densely populated areas
across the United States. Store count activity was as follows:
2008 2007 2006
Store count at beginning of fiscal year ............................................ 853 858 868
New stores opened and other expansions .......................................... 11 13 7
Stores closed ................................................................ (17) (18) (17)
Store count at end of fiscal year ................................................. 847 853 858
Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
On January 11, 2006, Edward Decristofaro, an alleged former May stockholder, filed a purported class action
lawsuit in the Circuit Court of St. Louis, Missouri on behalf of all former May stockholders against May and the
former members of the board of directors of May. The complaint generally alleges that the directors of May
breached their fiduciary duties of loyalty, due care, good faith and candor to May stockholders in connection with
the Merger. The plaintiffs seek rescission of the Merger or an unspecified amount of rescissory damages and costs
including attorneys’ fees and experts’ fees. In July 2007, the court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the
case. The Company believes the lawsuit is without merit and intends to contest it vigorously.
On October 3, 2007, Ebrahim Shanehchian, an alleged participant in the Macy’s, Inc. Profit Sharing 401(k)
Investment Plan (the “401(k) Plan”), filed a purported class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of Ohio on behalf of persons who participated in the 401(k) Plan and The May Department
Stores Company Profit Sharing Plan (the “May Plan”) between February 27, 2005 and the present. The complaint
charges the Company, as well as members of the Company’s board of directors and certain members of senior
management, with breach of fiduciary duties owed under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act
(“ERISA”) to participants in the 401(k) Plan and the May Plan, alleging that the defendants made false and
misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operations and prospects in relation to the integration
of the acquired May operations, resulting in supposed “artificial inflation” of the Company’s stock price between
August 30, 2005 and May 15, 2007. The plaintiff seeks an unspecified amount of compensatory damages and
costs. The Company believes the lawsuit is without merit and intends to contest it vigorously.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security-Holders.
None.
12