99 Cents Only Stores Company

Would shoppers be willing to pay more than 99 cents for something at the 99 Cents Only Stores chain? Or would breaking a buck induce customer mutiny -- or maybe even cause the Earth to spin off its axis? Squeezed by a higher minimum wage and soaring commodity prices, the City of Commerce-based retailer late Thursday reported its second consecutive quarter of red ink -- a loss of $1.5 million, or 2 cents a share, for the three months that ended June 28.

Discount retailer 99 Cents Only Stores said its fiscal third-quarter profit rose 20% but it would delay filing its final quarterly report with the Securities and Exchange Commission because of an internal stock option probe. In its preliminary results, the City of Commerce-based company said its profit rose to 12 cents a share from 10 cents in the previous third quarter. The company has delayed filing its reports since March 31, 2006, because of the internal stock option investigation.

99 Cents Only Stores, a discount retailer that operates mainly in California, released its preliminary third-quarter earnings and fourth-quarter revenue figures after its auditor resigned in September, delaying the reports. Third-quarter net income fell to $1 million, or 1 cent a share, from $5.5 million, or 8 cents, a year earlier, the City of Commerce-based company said. Net sales rose to $246 million from $238 million.

In this town, where people live and die by who's hot and who's not, the tabloids and blogs aren't the only arbiters. Spotted recently on the shelves of a 99 Cents Only Stores location in L.A.: Celine Dion mouse pad * Britney Spears three-ring binder portfolios * "Phone Booth," starring Colin Farrell * Ben Stiller's "Alex the Lion" Pez dispenser * "American Idol" men's deodorant body spray * Mary-Kate and Ashley deep-cleansing shampoo

99 Cents Only Stores, a discount retailer that has delayed filing 2005 financial results, said its fiscal third-quarter profit dropped 28% as costs rose. Net income for the period ended Dec. 31 was $6.3 million, or 9 cents a share, compared with $8.7 million, or 12 cents, a year earlier, City of Commerce-based 99 Cents Only said. Costs rose 10% to $173 million and revenue increased 4.8% to $278.8 million.

Somebody stole away 99 Cents Only Stores Inc.'s quarterly profit -- literally. The City of Commerce discount retailer said Wednesday that it lost $4.4 million, or 6 cents a share, in the fiscal fourth quarter ended March 29 because of an unexpected jump in thefts at some of its stores. So-called shrink expenses -- losses tied to a drop in product inventories -- were $5.5 million greater than the company had expected for the quarter, Chief Executive Eric Schiffer said in a conference call with analysts and investors.

Discount retailer 99 Cents Only Stores said that its chief financial officer and two company directors resigned. Shares dropped nearly 7%. James Ritter, who took the post of finance chief Dec. 16, told the retailer that he was resigning for personal reasons, 99 Cents Only Stores said in a statement released late Tuesday, one day after it had warned that it might have to restate financial results.

Discount retailer 99 Cents Only Stores said fourth-quarter earnings fell 43% because of weak sales in Texas and a $10.1-million payment to its California workers' compensation reserve. Net income in the fiscal fourth quarter fell to $8.7 million, or 12 cents a share, from $15.3 million, or 21 cents, a year earlier. Sales rose 7.5% to $265.9 million.

When it comes to discount retailing in Los Angeles, there are two main players: the 99 Cents Only Stores chain and rival Big Lots. At Big Lots, with its higher price points, there's more variety. You're offered $10 dish sets, a plethora of small appliances, and lawn furniture so reasonably priced you don't feel so bad when you forget it at the beach. Among the four-quarter bargains at 99 Cents Only Stores, though, you can find something far more valuable: the truth.

99 Cents Only Stores Inc. on Wednesday delayed the release of its earnings after the Securities and Exchange Commission questioned the way the retailer accounted for the sale of a division in 2000. The deep discounter said federal regulators had questions related to the sale of Universal International, a chain the firm had acquired in 1998 for $17 million.