YUM! BRANDS, INC. | Consideration of Proposed Capital Transactions Involving the Brands at YUM! Brands, Inc.

Status
Filed
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
5
Resolution details
Company ticker
YUM
Lead filer
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Governance
ESG sub-theme
  • Corporate purpose
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Consumer Discretionary
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
RESOLVED: Shareholder requests that the Board of Directors prepare a strategic review regarding a proposed spin-off of YUM’s KFC, Pizza Hut, and
Taco Bell franchises into three separate publicly traded companies, and dispose of its Habit Burger chain in a separate, pre-spinoff transaction.
Supporting statement
SUPPORTING STATEMENT: Spinning off YUM’s three main franchises into separate companies would allow distinct CEO’s, managements, and boards
to focus better on each chain’s operations, including each franchise’s unique brand and end-markets. Separate companies would also allow talented
operating heads to remain at each company as CEO, instead of having to depart eventually. For example, Brian Niccol, the highly talented former
president of Taco Bell, left the chain in 2018 to become CEO of Chipotle. If Taco Bell had operated as a separate company, it would have been highly
likely that Mr. Niccol would have continued managing the franchise.
Moreover, it seems apparent that YUM is experiencing serious challenges in concurrently operating three global franchises at optimal levels. For instance,
all three flagship YUM franchises continue to lag meaningfully behind its main competitors in sales performance: From 2016 through 2022, Chick-fil-A’s
system revenues expanded at a six-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 15%, versus 5.3% for KFC; Domino’s Pizza’s system revenues grew at
a six-year CAGR of 8.4%, versus 1.2% for Pizza Hut; and Chipotle, Inc’s system revenues rose at a six-year CAGR of 14%, versus 7.3% for Taco Bell.
On a per-outlet sales basis, YUM, again, lags behind its primary competitors: For example, in 2022, Chipotle posted per-outlet revenues of $2,698,000,
more than 50% higher than those of Taco Bell, which posted per-outlet revenues of $1,783,000. Chick-fil-A’s outperformance was even more stark: In
2022, Chick-fil-A posted per-outlet revenues of $6,714,000, almost 500% greater than those of KFC, which generated per-outlet revenues of $1,121,000.
It seems that YUM’s competitors are also grabbing significant market share away from YUM’s franchises. For example, from 2016 through 2022, U.S.
chicken franchise restaurant industry revenues grew at a six-year CAGR of 11%. During the same period, Chic-fil-A’s and KFC’s U.S. revenues grew at
six-year CAGRs of 15% and 2.2%, respectively. As such, it seems to reason that Chic-fil-A is taking serious U.S. market share away from KFC.
Turning to the Habit Burger (HB) franchise, since YUM’s $408 million acquisition of HB in early 2020, YUM has written off more than 70% of acquisition
goodwill and 35% of YUM’s initial investment in the chain. Given HB’s ongoing lackluster financial performance, the shareholder believes the chain will
generate long-term investment results from between low single-digit returns on invested capital (ROIC), to outright permanent capital losses.
Unfortunately, YUM’s middling operating results have cascaded over to its investment performance: From 2012 and 2017—through 2022, YUM shares
grew at 10- and five-year CAGR’s of 11% and 10%, respectively, approximately matching the S&P 500 Index. For 2023, YUM is on track to underperform
the Index by 20%. These results are particularly disappointing, given that YUM generates “look-through” ROIC of almost 50%.

Filed by the Robert Elliot Friedman Trust

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.