<PAGE> 1
SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION
PROXY STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 14(a) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
(AMENDMENT NO. 2)
Filed by the Registrant [ ]
Filed by a Party other than the Registrant [x]
Check the appropriate box:
[ ] Preliminary Proxy Statement
[ ] Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by
Rule 14a-6(e)(2))
[x] Definitive Proxy Statement
[ ] Definitive Additional Materials
[ ] Soliciting Material Pursuant to Section 240.14a-11(C) or
Section 240.14a-12
FURR'S/BISHOP'S, INCORPORATED
(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)
TEACHERS INSURANCE AND ANNUITY ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA
(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement if other than the Registrant)
Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):
[x] No fee required.
[ ] Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11.
1) Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies:
------------------------------------------------------------------
2) Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies:
------------------------------------------------------------------
3) Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed
pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11:
------------------------------------------------------------------
4) Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction:
------------------------------------------------------------------
5) Total fee paid:
------------------------------------------------------------------
[ ] Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.
[ ] Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act
Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was
paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement
number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.
1) Amount Previously Paid:
-----------------------------------------
2) Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:
-------------------
3) Filing Party:
---------------------------------------------------
4) Date Filed:
-----------------------------------------------------
<PAGE> 2
PROXY STATEMENT OF TEACHERS
INSURANCE AND ANNUITY ASSOCIATION
OF AMERICA IN OPPOSITION TO THE CURRENT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF FURR'S/BISHOP'S,
INCORPORATED
1998 ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS
SCHEDULED FOR MAY 28, 1998
DEAR FELLOW STOCKHOLDERS OF FURR'S/BISHOP'S, INCORPORATED:
This Proxy Statement and the accompanying BLUE proxy card are being
furnished by Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America, a New York
corporation ("Teachers"), to holders of the common stock (the "Stockholders"),
par value $.01 per share (the "Common Stock"), of Furr's/Bishop's, Incorporated,
a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), in connection with the solicitation of
proxies (the "Proxy Solicitation") to be used at the 1998 Annual Meeting of
Stockholders to be held on Thursday, May 28, 1998, at 10:00 o'clock a.m., local
time, at the Holiday Inn Civic Center at 801 Avenue Q, Lubbock, Texas, or at any
adjournment or postponement thereof (collectively, the "Annual Meeting"). As of
April 22, 1998, the record date for the Annual Meeting (the "Annual Meeting
Record Date"), Teachers beneficially owned an aggregate of 8,607,637 shares, or
approximately 17.7% of the Company's outstanding Common Stock.
The Company has indicated, as set forth in its proxy materials dated April
28, 1998 (the "Company Proxy Materials"), that it intends to nominate at the
Annual Meeting a slate of nine candidates (the "Company Nominees") for the
Company's Board of Directors. Teachers is opposed to that slate and is
soliciting your proxy in support of the following seven nominees: Jacob C. Baum,
Ben Evans, Suzanne Hopgood, Damien W. Kovary, William J. Nightingale, Gilbert C.
Osnos and Barry W. Ridings (the "Teachers Nominees") to the Company's Board of
Directors in opposition to the Company's slate. Teachers is not soliciting
proxies for the other two positions on the Board of Directors because Teachers
believes that a seven member Board of Directors would function more efficiently
and cooperatively. Teachers does not see the need to have a nine member Board of
Directors for a company of this size and believes a large Board would not be
able to work as cooperatively, openly and efficiently as a seven member board.
As a result, Teachers is also proposing that the Stockholders adopt an amendment
to the Bylaws or otherwise authorize and recommend the reduction in the size of
the Board of Directors to seven members (the "Teachers Bylaw Proposal"). See
"Teachers Bylaw Proposal."
The election of the Teachers Nominees and the reduction in the size of the
Board of Directors will allow the Teachers Nominees, to the extent they vote in
the same manner on matters presented to the Board, to make decisions consistent
with maximizing Stockholder value. Teachers is seeking a change on the Company's
Board of Directors because of its disappointment with the current poor
performance of the Company as evidenced by the overall decline in share price
while the current Board has been in office, and its belief that the current
Board of Directors has been unable to implement an effective strategic plan (or
plans) to maximize Stockholder value. Teachers also believes that a change is
necessary to restore confidence in the Board and ensure its ability to act
effectively, cooperatively and appropriately to accomplish this goal. If
elected, the Teachers Nominees, acting independently of Teachers in accordance
with their fiduciary duties, would work effectively and cooperatively to
maximize Stockholder value. Maximizing Stockholder value may include, but is not
limited to, a sale of the Company, exploration of merger and acquisition
opportunities, a change in the senior management and/or a successful
implementation of a well structured strategic plan. However, the Teachers
Nominees are open to considering all alternatives. See "Reasons for Electing a
New Board."
This Proxy Statement and BLUE proxy card are first being mailed or
furnished to Stockholders on or about May 18, 1998.
<PAGE> 3
YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT, NO MATTER HOW MANY OR HOW FEW SHARES YOU HOLD. WE
HOPE YOU WILL AGREE WITH TEACHERS' GOAL OF ELECTING MEMBERS TO THE COMPANY'S
BOARD WHO WILL WORK TO MAXIMIZE STOCKHOLDER VALUE, AND THAT THE ELECTION OF THE
TEACHERS NOMINEES CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND BENEFIT ALL OF THE STOCKHOLDERS. IF
YOU AGREE, WE URGE YOU TO COMPLETE, SIGN, DATE AND RETURN THE ENCLOSED BLUE
PROXY CARD(S) IN THE POSTAGE PRE-PAID ENVELOPE PROVIDED. BY SO DOING, YOU WILL
GRANT TEACHERS YOUR PROXY TO VOTE YOUR SHARES FOR THE ELECTION OF THE TEACHERS
NOMINEES AND FOR THE TEACHERS BYLAW PROPOSAL.
TEACHERS IS NOT SOLICITING YOUR PROXY TO VOTE FOR ANY COMPANY NOMINEES
(EXCEPT FOR SUZANNE HOPGOOD WHO IS A TEACHERS NOMINEE AND A COMPANY NOMINEE) AND
YOU CANNOT USE TEACHERS' PROXY CARD TO VOTE FOR ANY OF THE COMPANY'S NOMINEES.
WE URGE THAT YOU DO NOT SIGN AND RETURN ANY PROXY CARD PROVIDED BY THE COMPANY.
REMEMBER: YOUR LAST DATED PROXY IS THE ONE THAT COUNTS. IF YOU HAVE ALREADY
RETURNED THE COMPANY'S WHITE PROXY CARD AND WANT TO CHANGE YOUR VOTE YOU CAN NOW
VOTE FOR THE TEACHERS NOMINEES AND FOR THE TEACHERS BYLAW PROPOSAL BY
COMPLETING, SIGNING, DATING AND RETURNING YOUR BLUE PROXY CARD.
If your shares are held in the name of a brokerage firm, bank or nominee,
only they can vote your shares and only upon receipt of your specific
instructions. Accordingly, please return the BLUE proxy card in the envelope
provided by your bank or broker or contact the person responsible for your
account and give instructions for such shares to be voted for the Teachers
Nominees and the Teachers Bylaw Proposal.
If your shares are registered in more than one name, the BLUE proxy card
must be signed by all such persons to ensure that all shares are voted for the
Teachers Nominees.
Holders of record of shares of Common Stock as of the Annual Meeting Record
Date, are urged to submit a proxy even if such shares have been sold after that
date. The number of shares of Common Stock outstanding as of the Annual Meeting
Record Date is stated in the Company's Proxy Materials. Each share of Common
Stock is entitled to one vote at the Annual Meeting. Directors are elected by a
plurality of the votes cast with a quorum present. The person who receives the
greatest number of votes represented in person or by proxy at the Annual Meeting
will be elected a Director of the Company. The vote required for the adoption of
the Teachers Bylaw Proposal is a majority of the issued and outstanding shares
of Common Stock as of the Annual Meeting Record Date.
If you have any questions or need assistance in voting your shares, please
call Beacon Hill Partners, Inc., Teachers' proxy solicitor, at 1-800-755-5001.
2
<PAGE> 4
REASONS FOR ELECTING A NEW BOARD
POOR PERFORMANCE OF THE CURRENT BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Teachers is soliciting your proxy to enable the Company to have a highly
qualified and cohesive Board of Directors, which will work independently of
Teachers in a constructive manner for the benefit of all Stockholders. Teachers
seeks your help to elect these seven Directors, who have substantial experience
either with the Company (two of the Teachers Nominees are current Directors), in
the restaurant industry or in the turnaround of troubled companies, such as the
Company. Teachers believes that the Teachers Nominees will work effectively,
cooperatively and proactively together to maximize Stockholder value. Teachers
believes the Teachers Nominees will also be responsive to Stockholder concerns
and will implement Board and management direction for the benefit of all of the
Stockholders.
Of the Company's current Board of Directors, members either were elected by
Stockholder vote in May 1997 or later selected by the Board of Directors.
Teachers did not select any person who had been proposed by management for the
May 1997 election or who were otherwise nominated and were elected at that time.
Prior to an election of the Board of Directors in January 1996, certain
noteholders, including Teachers, in connection with an exchange offering by
which they were later to convert their notes into equity in the Company,
collectively nominated five persons for election to the Board of Directors of
the Company. In January 1996, the existing stockholders (of whom Teachers was
not included) voted and elected such nominees. Teachers cast no votes in such
1996 election. Following that election, in January 1996 two of the nominees who
had been collectively agreed upon by the noteholders, including Teachers,
resigned from the Board. Since that time, Teachers has not nominated any person
for election to the Board, except for the Teachers Nominees for the upcoming
1998 Annual Meeting.
Although the current Board of Directors (in what Teachers believes to be a
recognition of the dissatisfaction of certain Stockholders) has proposed a
management slate which consists of three new candidates (with no experience with
the Company) and two additional candidates (who were elected in March 1998
without Stockholder vote by existing Board members), Teachers believes there can
be no assurance that these candidates, if elected, would serve together with the
other Company Nominees in an effective and cooperative manner and be responsive
to Stockholder concerns.
Set forth below are a number of significant reasons why Teachers believes a
change is mandated at this time:
- Since the restructuring of the Company in 1996, the market price of the
Company's Common Stock has consistently declined and hit an all time low
in the period prior to the filing of Teachers' Schedule 13D on March 6,
1998. From 1993 to 1997, the S&P 500 Index rose significantly. Even
comparable companies used by the Company in the Company Proxy Materials
have increased their market value for their stockholders by more than
150% from 1993 to 1997. All any Stockholder needs to do is to review the
performance graph on page 15 of the Company's Proxy Materials to see why
a change is necessary to improve Stockholder value.
- Since 1996, in Teachers' view, the current Board of Directors has not
provided tangible evidence of meaningful or sustained growth or positive
change in the Company's financial performance. Overall, sales for fiscal
year 1997 decreased from fiscal year 1996, resulting in a net loss to the
Company. According to the Company's publicly-filed documents, this was
due in part to a decline in restaurant units; however, comparable store
sales were only .31% higher in fiscal 1997. Although the Company recently
indicated an increase in net income for the first quarter of 1998 as
compared to the first quarter of 1997, an analysis of the results reveals
that, after adjusting for extraordinary items (i.e. write downs and a
litigation award) only a small part of this increase was attributable to
actual operating results.
- Notwithstanding the management's arguments that the Company is on the
verge of a turnaround, Kevin Lewis, as Chairman of the Board, recently
completed selling all of the shares he owned in the Company.
3
<PAGE> 5
- Teachers believes that the current Board is not PROACTIVE. The Company's
current Board of Directors has not created or implemented any
well-developed strategic plan to maximize Stockholder value and has not
considered the full range of other alternatives. See "Lack of Full
Consideration of All Alternatives."
- Teachers believes that the current Board is also ineffective and has been
unable to provide DIRECTION, GUIDANCE OR EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP. See "Kmart
Concessions and Related Fees." Teachers believes that the Board has had
significant problems in implementing any meaningful proposals for growth.
Management's efforts to remodel restaurants has only resulted in a few
remodelings to date. The Company needs a Board that will IMPLEMENT
well-developed strategic plans. See "Elimination of Board Dissension and
Management Issues."
- The Company's current Board of Directors has approved high consulting
fees, executive compensation and golden parachutes to certain members,
notwithstanding the Company's poor performance. See "High Executive
Compensation."
THE CURRENT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MAY ARGUE THAT THEIR PROPOSED SLATE OF DIRECTORS
REPRESENTS A "NEW" DIRECTION FOR THE COMPANY. PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW THE MAJORITY
OF THIS CURRENT BOARD OR A SELECTED FEW THEREOF TO NOMINATE REPLACEMENTS THEY
HAVE CHOSEN OR ADDITIONAL NEW MEMBERS IN WHAT TEACHERS BELIEVES IS AN ATTEMPT TO
DISGUISE THEIR PRIOR RESULTS AND POOR PERFORMANCE.
Two of the current Directors, Mr. Osnos and Ms. Hopgood, have recognized
the problems with the current Board of Directors and have agreed to serve as
Teachers Nominees. Teachers believes that these two current Board members, who
have expressed dissatisfaction with prior Board functioning, will provide
continuity that can enhance an effective implementation of a strategic plan to
maximize Stockholder value.
KMART CONCESSIONS AND RELATED FEES
In November 1993, the Company and Kevin Lewis negotiated an agreement with
Kmart to reduce the aggregate monthly rent for the period January 1, 1997
through December 31, 1999 by 20%, an agreement that includes a provision that if
Mr. Lewis ceases to be Chairman of the Board before 1999, the rent reductions
would be subject to termination. In addition, it is Teachers' belief that a
majority of the current Board of Directors agreed in 1997 to pay Mr. Lewis
significant fees to keep Mr. Lewis as Chairman of the Board, thereby retaining
rent concessions from Kmart. On March 9, 1998, Mr. Lewis sold all of his
remaining shares of Common Stock in the Company. Based on the Company's Proxy
Materials, the Company, after letting the situation continue for a number of
years, has now decided, without explanation, not to nominate Mr. Lewis to the
Company's Board of Directors at the Annual Meeting. It is disappointing that the
current Board of Directors has not found a way to maintain the Kmart rent
concessions without having to maintain Kevin Lewis as Chairman of the Board.
Teachers believes that the Teachers Nominees, if elected, will be in a position
to act promptly and directly to address the issue because of their background,
skills and experience, and their commitment to provide a cooperative and
energetic service. Teachers has not directed any required course of action but
believes that the business background and other skills of the Teachers Nominees
will enable them, acting cooperatively as a board, to take appropriate measures
to address this issue.
LACK OF CONSIDERATION OF ALL ALTERNATIVES
Teachers also believes that the Company and its current composition of the
Board of Directors have not promptly or fully considered all alternatives
available to the Company to maximize Stockholder value. As an example, Teachers
understands that a potential acquiror in 1997 made initial acquisition/alliance
overtures to the Company through contact with Ted Papit and Kevin Lewis. It is
Teachers' belief that such members of the Board of Directors of the Company
rebuffed the initial overtures made by such acquiror and delayed in such
consideration as was eventually given by the Board. In addition, although urged
by Stockholders to retain professional assistance to consider all alternatives,
the Board failed to act promptly and delayed retaining an investment banker
until late 1997, and only after Stockholder correspondence.
4
<PAGE> 6
Teachers believes that this failure to give due consideration to
alternatives for the Company and other non-action does not benefit the Company
and its Stockholders. Given what Teachers believes is the Company's refusal to
consider such proposals or seek other alternatives, Teachers is proposing the
election of the Board of Directors which it believes WOULD consider all
strategic alternatives and WOULD aggressively pursue creating alternatives to
maximize Stockholder value, in a manner consistent with the duties owed to the
Stockholders. Maximizing Stockholder value may include, but is not limited to, a
sale of the Company, exploration of merger and acquisition opportunities, a
change in the senior management and/or a successful implementation of a well
structured strategic plan. However, the Teachers Nominees are open to
considering all alternatives.
ELIMINATION OF BOARD DISSENSION AND MANAGEMENT ISSUES
Teachers believes that since 1996 there has been significant dissension on
the Board and a lack of leadership. Teachers believes that the Board has been
slow to install management and implement strategic plans for the Company that
would result in a significant turnaround in operating results or otherwise
maximize Stockholder value. Because of this, there have been a number of
director vacancies and management voids. As a result, the Company has faltered
and has not demonstrated any turnaround, as was initially expected in 1996.
Teachers believes that this is a direct result of the ineffectiveness of the
current composition of the Board of Directors.
On March 6, 1998, Teachers publicly announced that it might seek proxies to
elect candidates nominated by Teachers at the Annual Meeting. In what Teachers
believes was a response to a perceived threat, the Board of Directors was
enlarged effective April 1, 1998 from seven to nine members and the two new
positions were hastily filled with individuals selected by the Board. Following
Teachers' identification in an amendment to its Schedule 13D of five persons it
then had identified as proposed nominees for election to the Board, the current
Board of Directors proposed a separate slate and nominated three, additional,
new candidates to the Board as management's slate. These five individuals who
are on management's slate, if elected, would constitute a new majority for the
Board. Who are these new nominees and what do they stand for? Are the Company
Nominees a committed, cohesive group that have clear ideas about how the Company
should be operated to maximize Stockholder value? In fact, Teachers now believes
(based on the timing of the management's announcement and the Teachers Schedule
13D filing indicating a possibility of a proxy contest) that this "new and
improved" composition of the Board of Directors came only after management's
realization of the actions Teachers might take. Teachers also believes this
decision was primarily made by a select few of the current Directors (Kevin
Lewis, Ken Reimer and E.W. Williams). In what Teachers believes is
all-too-customary operating procedure for this Board, Teachers believes that the
recomposition of the Board, along with the purpose therefore, was not considered
adequately by the whole Board based on the fact that Teachers has been advised
by certain Board members that not all Board members were furnished with complete
information. Based on similar advice, Teachers believes that not all members of
the current Board of Directors had the opportunity to meet or interview the new
nominees on the Company's slate before they were nominated by the Board of
Directors. In any event, this quickly constructed response was too little, too
late. Teachers believes that these unilateral, defensive actions continue to
cost the Company money and time, both of which it cannot afford to lose.
Additionally, even existing management of the Company has also been
sporadic, at best. Although the Board attempted to fill CEO-level management for
the Company with the election of Mr. Papit as President in March 1998, Teachers
believes Mr. Papit's vacillation in making a full commitment to the Company
resulted in leadership voids. As disclosed by the Company, six months later, Mr.
Papit announced his resignation in September 1997, effective October 29, 1997,
but then decided to remain with the Company through the first quarter of 1998.
Teachers believes that such job indecision on the part of senior management has
left the Company in a high state of uncertainty and did not effectively serve
the needs of the Stockholders.
It has belatedly come out that, in what Teachers believes was an attempt to
solve the management void expected in March 1998 and in response to Teachers'
disclosure regarding a potential proxy solicitation, a questionable new
employment agreement was executed by Mr. Papit. See "High Executive
Compensation." That agreement was entered into on March 23, 1998 but not
disclosed until April 28, 1998. Mr. Papit is not even required to spend his full
working time at the Company's headquarters or at Company restaurants.
5
<PAGE> 7
Instead, he is allowed to spend up to half of his working time in Dallas, some
300 miles away from the Company's headquarters, at a new "executive office" to
be established for him at the Company's expense. Teachers does not believe that
this Company can be effectively managed in this manner. The Stockholders need a
better arrangement from the Board, to have an on-site CEO to effectively manage
the Company.
HIGH EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
According to the Company's public filings, the Board paid certain Board
members and senior management over $1,320,561 for fiscal year 1997, including
some $250,000 to Kevin Lewis, just for being Chairman of the Board. In that same
year, the market price of the Company's Common Stock declined significantly.
In addition, the restructuring of Mr. Papit's employment relationship in
March 1998, after Teachers' Schedule 13D was filed, resulted in what Teachers
believes was a questionable decision by the Board to increase Mr. Papit's
compensation to include $30,000 per month base salary ($360,000 per year),
participation in the Company's executive bonus plan and other executive benefit
programs, and a stock option to purchase 500,000 shares of the Company's common
stock at $.75 per share, vesting over five years, with accelerated vesting in
the event of a "change of control", defined as, among other things, a change in
the majority of the current Board of Directors. Under the purported terms of Mr.
Papit's employment agreement, vesting or receipt of certain options is not tied
to improved performance by the Company. In addition, the new agreement reprices
the exercise of such options to Mr. Papit at a lower price than earlier options
available to him. The new agreement also purports to provide options to Mr.
Papit even should Mr. Papit leave the Company and notwithstanding improvements
to the Company's performance that might be achieved by efforts of a new Board of
Directors or new management.
Further, in the face of Teachers' public filings indicating its intent to
go forward with this proxy solicitation, the Board of Directors agreed to
provide Mr. Papit with a "golden parachute" under which, Mr. Papit would receive
in one lump sum an amount equal to eighteen times his monthly base salary then
in effect, which, if enforceable, could be as much as $540,000 (based on Mr.
Papit's present salary), if a "change of control" occurs (which, as defined,
would include election of the Teachers Nominees) and Mr. Papit's unilateral
decision that he does not want to work for the new Board. Obviously, Teachers
believes that the Company was a good investment opportunity for Mr. Papit -- but
not necessarily for the Stockholders.
Teachers believes that effective executives should be well compensated and
that such compensation should be tied directly to reasonable performance
expectations. However, Teachers also believes that it is entirely inappropriate
to reward executives while the Company's business is suffering. And, in Teachers
view, there is absolutely no justification for granting significant severance
benefits when termination is voluntary after a change in control. This Proxy
Solicitation does not directly address the issue of executive compensation.
6
<PAGE> 8
NOMINEES FOR ELECTION AS DIRECTORS
According to the Company's proxy materials, nine Directors are to be
elected at the Annual Meeting. Teachers is proposing the election of the
Teachers Nominees to the Board of Directors who, if elected and if the Teachers
Bylaw Proposal is approved, will constitute the entire Company's Board of
Directors. If elected, each of the Teachers Nominees will hold office until the
1999 Annual Stockholders Meeting and until a successor has been elected and
qualified, or until his earlier death, resignation or removal.
The Certificate of Incorporation of the Company provides that, except as
otherwise provided by law, any vacancies in the Board of Directors resulting
from the removal of Directors or otherwise may be filled by a majority vote of
the Directors then in office, whether or not a quorum is present or by a sole
remaining Director. Each Director so chosen shall hold office until the next
annual meeting and until his successor shall be duly elected and qualified,
unless sooner displaced.
The following information concerning age, principal occupation, business
experience and directorships during the last five years has been furnished to
Teachers by the Teachers Nominees:
Jacob C. Baum
Engles, Urso, Follmer
Capital Corporation
3811 Turtle Creek Blvd.,
Suite 1300
Dallas, Texas 75219 Jacob C. Baum (age 41) has served as President,
Chief Executive Officer and principal stockholder
of Canyon Cafes, Inc. since its formation in 1989
until its acquisition by Apple South, Inc., a
publicly-held company, in July 1997. Since the
acquisition, Mr. Baum has continued to serve as
President of the Canyon Cafes division of Apple
South, Inc. until recently when he became Chairman
of the Board of this division and joined Engles,
Urso, Follmer Capital Corporation, a leveraged buy-
out firm, as a principal. In his various positions,
Mr. Baum was principally responsible for growing
Canyon Cafes to over $50 million in annual sales.
At various times, Mr. Baum has also been the
owner/president of Sam's Cafe, Hampton's Market,
Newport's and Nickel City Grill.
Ben Evans
95 Wake Robin Lane
Stanford, Connecticut
06903 Ben Evans (age 68) has served as a consultant to
Ernst & Young LLP since 1989 in its corporate
financial services group. Prior to becoming a
consultant with Ernst & Young LLP, Mr. Evans was a
partner with Ernst & Young LLP from 1968 to 1989
and worked with many diverse industries, including
a heavy concentration in retail. Mr. Evans is a
CPA. Mr. Evans has served on the board of directors
of Revco D.S., Inc., Jamesway Corporation, Kash 'n
Karry Food Stores, Inc. and Megafoods Stores, Inc.
Suzanne Hopgood
The Hopgood Group
100 Wells Street, Suite
210
Hartford, Connecticut
06103 Suzanne Hopgood (age 49) is currently a director of
the Company and has served as President of the
Hopgood Group since founding the company in 1985.
Such company provides consulting, development and
brokerage services to hotel investors. Prior to
founding the Hopgood Group, she served as Second
Vice President at Aetna Realty Investors where she
oversaw one-third of the corporation's
multi-billion dollar real estate equity portfolio.
Before joining Aetna, she was Vice President and
Senior Loan Officer of the Lowell Institution for
Savings in Lowell, Massachusetts. Ms. Hopgood
currently serves on the Board of Directors of the
Company and has served since 1996. Ms. Hopgood also
serves on the board of directors of the Real Estate
Finance Association, Greater Hartford Arts Council
and is a director emerita of the Connecticut
Business & Industry Association.
7
<PAGE> 9
Damien W. Kovary
Heico Acquisitions
152 West 57th Street
55th Floor
New York, New York 10015 Damien W. Kovary (age 43) has served as a Managing
Director of Heico Acquisitions, a subsidiary of
Heico Companies, LLC, since 1997. Prior to joining
Heico Acquisitions, Mr. Kovary was the Managing
Director of the Special Loan Unit at Teachers from
1986 to 1997. Before joining Teachers, Mr. Kovary
was a Vice President in the Workout Department at
Marine Midland Bank from 1982 to 1986. While at
Marine Midland Bank, Mr. Kovary also served as
President of MarMid Energy Corp. and TOMAR Energy
Corp.
William J. Nightingale
Nightingale & Associates
195 Rowaytan Ave.
Rowaytan, Connecticut
08653 William J. Nightingale (age 68) has been a Senior
Advisor of Nightingale & Associates, LLC since
founding the company in 1975. Such company provides
general management consulting to clients who sell
consumer and industrial products, natural resource
and financial and business services. Prior to
founding Nightingale & Associates, LLC, he served
as President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Bali Company, Inc., a manufacturer of women's
apparel. Before joining Bali, he was Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer of Hanes Corporation.
Mr. Nightingale is a graduate of Harvard
University's Business School.
Gilbert C. Osnos
Osnos and Company
230 Park Avenue, Suite
C-301
New York, New York 10169 Gilbert C. Osnos (age 67) is currently a director
of the Company and has been President of Gilbert C.
Osnos & Co., Inc. since 1981, and a partner in
Grisanti Galef & Osnos Associates since 1981. Mr.
Osnos began with Grisanti Galef in 1979, and became
a partner in 1981. Gilbert C. Osnos & Co., Inc. was
also formed in 1981 doing business as Grisanti
Galef & Osnos Associates. Mr. Osnos was a director
of the Turnaround Management Association from 1988
to 1993 and Chairman in 1990 to 1991 and a director
of Trivest Financial Services Corporation and
Reprise Capital from 1989 to 1991. Mr. Osnos
currently serves on the Board of Directors of the
Company and has served since 1996. Mr. Osnos also
serves on the board of directors of Mrs. Fields,
Inc. and American Mirrex. Mr. Osnos is a graduate
of Harvard University's Business School.
Barry W. Ridings
BT Alex. Brown
Incorporated
1290 Avenue of the
Americas
10th Floor
New York, New York 10104 Barry W. Ridings (age 46) has been a Managing
Director of BT Alex. Brown Incorporated, a major
investment banking firm and wholly-owned subsidiary
of Bankers Trust Corporation, since 1990. Mr.
Ridings manages BT Alex. Brown's Restructuring
Group and is active in such firm's mergers and
acquisitions and public debt activities. Before
joining BT Alex. Brown Incorporated, Mr. Ridings
was a Managing Director at Drexel Burnham Lambert.
Mr. Ridings serves on the board of directors of
Noodle Kidoodle Inc., Norex Industries, Search
Capital Group, SubMicron Systems, Telemundo Group,
American Stock Exchange and TransCor Waste Services
Corp.
The Teachers Nominees have entered into an agreement with Teachers whereby
Teachers has agreed to bear all costs and expenses of, and indemnify against any
and all liability incurred by, the Teachers Nominees in connection with the
Teachers Nominees being a nominee in this Proxy Solicitation. The Teachers
Nominees will receive Directors' fees upon their election as a Director of the
Company in accordance with the Company's then practice.
None of the corporations or organizations in which the Teachers Nominees
have conducted their principal occupation or employment was a parent, subsidiary
or other affiliate of the Company and the Teachers Nominees do not hold any
position or office with the Company, except for Mr. Osnos and Ms. Hopgood who
are currently members of the Board of Directors, have any family relationship
with any
8
<PAGE> 10
executive officer or Director of the Company or each other, or has been involved
in any legal proceedings of the type required to be disclosed by the rules
governing this solicitation.
TEACHERS BYLAW PROPOSAL
The Company's Bylaws, as filed with the SEC, state that the Board of
Directors shall consist of not less than one nor more than fifteen members, the
exact number of which shall initially be fixed by the incorporator and
thereafter from time to time by the Board of Directors. Effective April 1, 1998,
the Board of Directors increased the size of the Board to nine members. Teachers
believes that this action was taken in response to Teachers announcement made on
March 6, 1998 that it intended to solicit proxies to elect the Teachers Nominees
at the Annual Meeting. Teachers also believes that a company of this size does
not need a nine member Board and that the Company and its Stockholders would be
better served by a Board that is a smaller and more cohesive group. Teachers,
therefore, proposes that the Stockholders approve adoption of an amendment to
the Bylaws to the effect that the following sentence replaces the first sentence
of Article III, Section 1 of the Company's Bylaws:
"The Board of Directors shall consist of seven members."
Teachers intends to present the Teachers Bylaw Proposal at the Annual
Meeting before the votes are cast on election of Directors in order to eliminate
any question regarding the size of the Board and the casting of ballots
therefore. Pursuant to the Company's Bylaws, any amendment to the Bylaws must be
approved by holders of a majority of the outstanding capital stock entitled to
vote thereon. Abstentions and broker non-votes will be counted as present and
entitled to vote and will have the same effect as a vote against the Teachers
Bylaw Proposal.
The Company's Charter provides that any Bylaw "may be altered, amended or
repealed by the holders of the capital stock of the [Company] entitled to vote
thereon at any annual meeting or at any special meeting called for that
purpose." This provision establishes that the Stockholders have (i) an
unqualified right to adopt Bylaw amendments at annual meetings and (ii) a
qualified right to adopt Bylaw amendments at special meetings. The Company's
Bylaws, however, provide that Bylaws may be "altered, amended or repealed" by
the Stockholders only if notice of such proposed action is "contained in the
notice of [the] meeting of stockholders . . .." Although the Bylaw restriction
on Bylaw amendments by Stockholders may be effective with respect to special
meetings, Teachers believes that this restriction cannot limit the Stockholders'
right to amend Bylaws at annual meetings, which right is granted to Stockholders
in the Charter. No assurance can be given that Teachers' position on this
restriction will be upheld.
Even if the Bylaw restriction were deemed to effectively require notice to
Stockholders of proposed amendments at annual meetings, Teachers believes that
the Teachers Proxy Statement will serve as effective notice of the Teachers
Bylaw Proposal. No assurance can be given that Teachers' position on this notice
requirement will be upheld. Accordingly, Teachers is not asking the Stockholders
to waive advance notice of the Teachers Bylaw Proposal. To the extent that the
Company's constituent documents require prior notice of a Bylaw change be given
to Stockholders, the foregoing shall be deemed notice of the Teachers Bylaw
Proposal. Likewise, a vote FOR approval of the Bylaw amendment will be deemed an
authorization or recommendation to effect a reduction in the number of Directors
to seven.
9
<PAGE> 11
TEACHERS
Teachers, also known as TIAA, is a nonprofit stock life insurance company
that was founded in 1918 by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching. Its function is to provide a nationwide retirement system for people
who work at colleges, universities, independent schools and other nonprofit
education and research institutions throughout the United States. All of the
stock of Teachers is held by the TIAA Board of Overseers, a nonprofit New York
membership corporation whose main purpose is to hold Teachers' stock. A
companion organization to Teachers is CREF, (College Retirement Equities Fund),
which was first set up in 1952 and is now registered with the SEC as an
open-end, diversified management company under the Investment Company Act of
1940. Teachers owns in the aggregate 8,607,637 shares of Common Stock,
representing approximately 17.7% of the shares outstanding and is a New York
corporation, whose principal and executive offices are located at 730 Third
Avenue, New York, New York 10017. Please also see Appendix B which includes a
description of Teachers' purchases and sales of securities in the Company and a
1996 restructuring of certain notes issued by the Company pursuant to which
certain debt was converted into equity.
SOLICITATION OF PROXIES
Proxies may be solicited by Teachers by mail, advertisement, telephone,
facsimile, telegraph and personal solicitation. Teachers will be principally
responsible for soliciting proxies for the Teachers Nominees and certain of its
employees will perform secretarial work in connection with the solicitation of
proxies, for which no additional compensation will be paid. Banks, brokerage
houses and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries will be requested to
forward Teachers' solicitation material to their customers for whom they hold
shares and Teachers will reimburse them for their reasonable out-of-pocket
expenses.
Teachers has retained Beacon Hill Partners, Inc. to assist in the
solicitation of proxies and for related services. Teachers will pay Beacon Hill
Partners, Inc. a fee of up to $12,500 and has agreed to reimburse it for its
reasonable out-of-pocket expenses. In addition, Teachers has also agreed to
indemnify Beacon Hill Partners, Inc. against certain liabilities and expenses in
connection with services provided to Teachers. Approximately 25 persons will be
used by Beacon Hill Partners, Inc. in its solicitation efforts.
The entire expense of preparing, assembling, printing and mailing this
Proxy Statement and related materials and the cost of soliciting proxies will be
borne by Teachers. Although no precise estimate can be made at the present time,
Teachers currently estimates that the total expenditures relating to the Proxy
Solicitation incurred by Teachers will be approximately $200,000 of which
$140,000 has been incurred to date. Teachers intends to seek reimbursement from
the Company for those expenses incurred by Teachers, if the Teachers Nominees
are elected to the Board of Directors or if the Teachers Bylaw Proposal is
approved, but does not intend to submit the question of such reimbursement to a
vote of the Stockholders.
VOTING AND PROXY PROCEDURES
Stockholders are urged to complete, sign, date and return the enclosed BLUE
proxy card in the postage-paid envelope in time to be voted at the Annual
Meeting. If you wish to vote for the seven Teachers Nominees, you must submit
the enclosed BLUE proxy card. If you have already returned the Company's proxy
card, you have the right to revoke it as to all matters covered thereby and may
do so by subsequently completing, signing, dating and mailing the enclosed BLUE
proxy card. ONLY YOUR LATEST DATED PROXY CARDS WILL COUNT AT THE ANNUAL MEETING.
Execution of a BLUE proxy card will not affect your right to attend the Annual
Meeting and to vote in person. Any proxy may be revoked as to all matters
covered thereby at any time prior to the time a vote is taken by (i) filing with
the Secretary of the Company a later dated written revocation, (ii) submitting a
duly executed proxy bearing a later date to the Company or (iii) attending and
voting at the Annual Meeting in person. Attendance at the Annual Meeting will
not in and of itself constitute a revocation.
Election of the Teachers Nominees requires the affirmative vote of a
plurality of the votes cast with respect to each Director nominee at the Annual
Meeting, assuming a quorum is present or otherwise
10
<PAGE> 12
represented at the Annual Meeting. Consequently, only shares of Common Stock
that are voted in favor of a particular Nominee will be counted toward such
Nominee's attaining a majority of votes. Under applicable Delaware law,
abstentions and broker non-votes are treated as shares that are present and
entitled to vote for purposes of determining the presence of a quorum for the
transaction of business. Abstentions and broker non-votes are tabulated
separately, with abstentions counted in tabulations of the votes cast on a
proposal for purposes of determining whether a proposal has been approved, while
broker non-votes relating to a proposal are not counted as a vote cast with
respect to that proposal.
Adoption of the Teachers Bylaw Proposal requires the affirmative vote of a
majority of the issued and outstanding shares of the Common Stock of the
Company. Abstentions and broker non-votes will be counted as present and
entitled to vote and will have the same effect as a vote against the Teachers
Bylaw Proposal.
Shares of Common Stock represented by a valid, unrevoked BLUE proxy card
will be voted as specified. You may vote FOR the election of the seven Teachers
Nominees or withhold authority to vote for the election of the Teachers Nominees
by marking the proper box on the BLUE proxy card. You may also withhold your
vote from the Teachers Nominees by writing the same name of such nominees in the
space provided on the BLUE proxy card. You may also vote FOR, AGAINST or ABSTAIN
from the Teachers Bylaw Proposal. If no specification is made, such shares will
be voted FOR the election of the Teachers Nominees and FOR the adoption of the
Teachers Bylaw Proposal.
Except as set forth in this Proxy Statement, Teachers is not aware of any
other matter to be considered at the Annual Meeting. The grant of the enclosed
BLUE proxy card to Teachers, however, will authorize Teachers to have
discretionary voting authority regarding any other business that may properly
come before the Annual Meeting.
If your shares are held in the name of a brokerage firm, bank or other
nominee, only they can vote such shares and only upon receipt of your specific
instructions. Accordingly, please contact the person responsible for your
account and instruct that person to execute on your behalf the BLUE proxy card.
Only holders of record of Common Stock on the Annual Meeting Record Date
will be entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting. If you are a Stockholder of
record on the Annual Meeting Record Date, you will retain the voting rights in
connection with the Annual Meeting even if you sell such shares after the Annual
Meeting Record Date. Accordingly, it is important that you vote the shares of
Common Stock held by you on the Annual Meeting Record Date, or grant a proxy to
vote such shares on the BLUE proxy card, even if you sell such shares after such
date.
Teachers believes that it is in your best interest to elect the Teachers
Nominees at the Annual Meeting. TEACHERS STRONGLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE FOR THE
ELECTION OF THE TEACHERS NOMINEES AND A VOTE FOR THE TEACHERS BYLAW PROPOSAL.
CERTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The Company Proxy Materials contain additional information with respect to
the number of shares outstanding at the close of business on the Annual Meeting
Record Date, the Company's Nominees for the election of directors and other
proposals, the beneficial owners of five percent (5%) or more of the shares of
the Common Stock, the share ownership of the Company's officers and directors,
filings made pursuant to Section 16 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, the date by which stockholder proposals intended to be submitted at
the 1999 Annual Stockholders Meeting must be received by the Company for
inclusion in its proxy statement for such meeting, as well as information
relating to other matters. Such information, which the Company has not and will
not independently verify, is incorporated by reference in this Proxy Statement
in reliance on the Company, except to the extent that such information
contradicts information contained in this Proxy Statement or is otherwise
adverse. A copy of the Company's Proxy material will be provided, without
charge, upon written or oral request by first class mail or other equally prompt
means within one business day of receipt of such request.
11
<PAGE> 13
YOUR VOTE IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT
1. PLEASE COMPLETE, SIGN, DATE and MAIL YOUR BLUE proxy card in the enclosed
postage-paid envelope. If you wish to vote FOR the Teachers Nominees and FOR
the Teachers Bylaw Proposal, you must submit the enclosed BLUE proxy card.
2. If you have already voted the Company's proxy card, you have every legal
right to change your mind and vote FOR the Teachers Nominees and FOR the
Teachers Bylaw Proposal on the BLUE proxy card. Only your latest dated proxy
card will count.
3. If your shares are held for you by a bank or brokerage firm, only your bank
or broker can vote your shares and only after receiving your instructions.
Please call your bank or broker and instruct your representative to vote FOR
the Teachers Nominees and FOR the Teachers Bylaw Proposal on the BLUE proxy
card.
4. Time is short. Please vote today!
If you have questions or need assistance in voting your shares or in changing
your vote, please contact Beacon Hill Partners, Inc. at 1-800-755-5001.
May 18, 1998
12
<PAGE> 14
APPENDIX A
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONCERNING
PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROXY SOLICITATION
The following table sets forth the name, business address, and the number
of shares of voting securities of the Company beneficially owned by each of the
participants in this Proxy Solicitation or their associates as of the Annual
Meeting Record Date.
Except as set forth in this Proxy Statement or in the Appendices hereto, to
the best knowledge of Teachers, none of the persons participating in this
solicitation on behalf of Teachers, the Teachers Nominees nor any associates of
any of the foregoing persons (i) owns beneficially, directly or indirectly, or
has the right to acquire, any securities of the Company or any parent or
subsidiary of the Company, (ii) owns any securities of the Company of record but
not beneficially, (iii) has purchased or sold any securities of the Company
within the pat two years, (iv) has incurred indebtedness for the purpose of
acquiring or holding securities of the Company, (v) is or has been a party to
any contract, arrangement of understanding with respect to any securities of the
Company within the past year, (vi) has been indebted to the Company or any of
its subsidiaries since the beginning of the Company's last fiscal year or (vii)
has any arrangement or understanding with respect to future employment by the
Company or with respect to any future transactions to which the Company or any
of its affiliates will or may be a party. In addition, except as set forth in
this Proxy Statement or in the Appendices hereto, to the best knowledge of
Teachers, none of the persons participating in this solicitation on behalf of
Teachers, the Teachers Nominees, nor any associate or immediate family member of
any of the foregoing persons has had or is to have a direct or indirect material
interest in any transaction with the Company since the beginning of the
Company's last fiscal year, or any proposed transaction, to which the Company or
any of its affiliates was or is a party.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
AMOUNT OF APPROXIMATE
NAME AND BUSINESS INFORMATION BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP PERCENTAGE OF CLASS(1)
----------------------------- -------------------- ----------------------
<S> <C> <C>
Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America... 8,607,637 17.7%
Jacob C. Baum........................................... 0 0
Ben Evans............................................... 0 0
Suzanne Hopgood......................................... 4,222(2) *
Damien W. Kovary........................................ 0 0
William J. Nightingale.................................. 0 0
Gilbert C. Osnos........................................ 12,222(2) *
Barry W. Ridings........................................ 0 0
</TABLE>
- ---------------
* Owns Less than 1%
(1) Based on 48,675,168 shares of Common Stock outstanding as of April 27, 1998,
as listed in the Company's Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March
31, 1998.
(2) Includes options to purchase 2,222 shares at $1.00 per share.
13
<PAGE> 15
APPENDIX B
TRANSACTIONS IN SHARES OF FURR'S/BISHOP'S, INCORPORATED
The following table sets forth information with respect to all purchases
and sales of all securities of the Company by Teachers and its affiliates and
the Teachers Nominees during the past two years. No part of the purchase price
of any of the securities purchased by the participants as reflected below was
represented by borrowed funds or otherwise obtained for the purpose of acquiring
or holding such securities.
I. Transactions by Teachers.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
AMOUNT OF 12% SENIOR SECURED
DATE NOTES DUE 2001 SOLD
- ---- ----------------------------
<S> <C>
November 24, 1997................................... $2,750,000
February 19, 1998................................... $1,150,000
March 19, 1998...................................... $4,277,438.44
</TABLE>
II. Transactions by Suzanne Hopgood.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
NUMBER OF SHARES OF
DATE COMMON STOCK PURCHASED
- ---- ----------------------
<S> <C>
April 3, 1997.......................................... 2,000
</TABLE>
III. Transactions by Gilbert Osnos.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
NUMBER OF SHARES OF
DATE COMMON STOCK PURCHASED
- ---- ----------------------
<S> <C>
April 3, 1997.......................................... 10,000
</TABLE>
As part of the restructuring in 1996 of the 11% Notes (pursuant to which
debt was converted into equity), the Company agreed to indemnify certain
parties, including Teachers, which had been named with the Company as defendants
in a complaint filed by Michael J. Levenson (the former Chairman of the Board
and Chief Executive Officer of the Company) and others, from and against any and
all claims, actions, suits and other legal proceedings, damages, costs,
interest, charges, cancel fees and other expenses and penalties which such
parties may sustain or incur by reason or arising out of the Levenson
litigation. In consideration for such indemnification obligations, the Company
delivered to Teachers, as payee, a promissory note dated January 14, 1998 in the
principal amount of $756,392, which promissory note is due and payable on
December 31, 2001.
14
<PAGE> 16
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BLUE PROXY CARD
PROXY SOLICITED ON BEHALF OF TEACHERS
INSURANCE AND ANNUITY ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA ("TEACHERS")
FOR USE AT THE ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS OF
FURR'S/BISHOP'S, INCORPORATED
TO BE HELD ON MAY 28, 1998
The undersigned stockholder of Furr's/Bishop's, Incorporated (the "Company")
hereby appoints Clifford S. Haye and Roi Chandy, and each of them acting alone,
as lawful attorneys and proxies with several power of substitution, for and in
the name of the undersigned to represent, and vote, as designated on the reverse
side, all shares of the Common Stock of the Company which the undersigned is
entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting of the Stockholders of the Company to be
held on May 28, 1998, 10:00 a.m. local time, or at any adjournment, postponement
or rescheduling thereof (collectively, the "Annual Meeting"). The undersigned
hereby revokes any and all previous proxies with respect to the matters covered
by this proxy and the voting of such shares at the Annual Meeting.
TEACHERS RECOMMENDS A VOTE FOR THE FOLLOWING NOMINEES
1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS:
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
<S> <C> <C>
[ ] FOR all nominees listed to the right Jacob C. Baum William J. Nightingale
(except as marked to the contrary below) Ben Evans Gilbert C. Osnos
Suzanne Hopgood Barry W. Ridings
[ ] WITHHOLD AUTHORITY to vote for all Damien W. Kovary
nominees listed to the right
</TABLE>
INSTRUCTION: TO WITHHOLD AUTHORITY TO VOTE FOR ANY
INDIVIDUAL NOMINEE,
PRINT THAT NOMINEE'S NAME IN THE SPACE
PROVIDED BELOW.
--------------------------------------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<PAGE> 17
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TEACHERS RECOMMENDS A VOTE FOR THE FOLLOWING PROPOSAL
2. BYLAW PROPOSAL OF TEACHERS: To adopt the following:
RESOLVED, that it is the best interests of the Company to approve an
amendment to the first sentence of Article III, Section 1 of the Company's
Bylaws as follows:
"The Board of Directors shall consist of seven members."
[ ] For [ ] Against [ ] Abstain
3. DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY:
In their discretion, the proxies are authorized to vote upon such other
business as may properly come before the Annual Meeting.
THIS PROXY, WHEN PROPERLY EXECUTED, WILL BE VOTED AS DIRECTED HEREIN. IF NO
INSTRUCTIONS ARE GIVEN, THE SHARES REPRESENTED BY THIS PROXY WILL BE VOTED "FOR"
ALL OF THE NOMINEES LISTED ABOVE AND "FOR" THE TEACHERS BYLAW PROPOSAL, AND IN
THE DISCRETION OF THE PROXY HOLDERS AS TO OTHER MATTERS.
IF STOCK IS JOINTLY HELD, EACH JOINT
OWNER SHOULD SIGN, WHEN SIGNING AS
ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, EXECUTOR,
ADMINISTRATOR, TRUSTEE, GUARDIAN,
CORPORATE OFFICER OR PARTNER, PLEASE
GIVE FULL TITLE OR CAPACITY. PLEASE
SIGN THIS PROXY EXACTLY AS YOUR NAME
APPEARS HEREIN.
Signature(s):
-------------------------------------
Printed Name:
-------------------------------------
Title:
-------------------------------------
Dated:
-------------------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
