Ruths Hospitality Group, Inc. - Annual Report: 2007 (Form 10-K)

Table of Contents

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 30, 2007

OR

For the transition period from                      to                      .

Commission File Number 000-51485

RUTH’S CHRIS STEAK HOUSE, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code: (407) 333-7440

Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.    ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act (check one):

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ¨    No  x

As of July 1, 2007, the last day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, the aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock, par value $0.01 per share, held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $307,270,300.

The number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s common stock as of March 10, 2008, was 24,267,580.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

The information required by Part III of Form 10-K, to the extent not set forth herein, is incorporated herein by reference to the registrant’s Proxy Statement for the 2008 Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held on May 22, 2008, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A not later than 120 days after the close of the registrant’s fiscal year.

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1

Table of Contents

FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K and the materials incorporated by reference herein contain “forward-looking statements” that reflect, when made, the Company’s expectations or beliefs concerning future events that involve risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements frequently are identified by the words “believe,” “anticipate,” “expect,” “estimate,” “intend,” “project,” “will be,” “will continue,” “will likely result,” or other similar words and phrases. Similarly, statements herein that describe the Company’s objectives, plans or goals also are forward-looking statements. Actual results could differ materially from those projected, implied or anticipated by the Company’s forward-looking statements. Some of the factors that could cause actual results to differ include: changes in economic conditions and general trends; changes in consumer preferences or discretionary spending; the effect of competition in the restaurant industry; the Company’s ability to achieve and manage its planned expansion; the Company’s ability to integrate the restaurants acquired in the Mitchell’s acquisition; the Company’s ability to execute its business strategy effectively; health concerns about beef or other food products; reductions in the availability of, or increases in the cost of, USDA Prime grade beef, fish and other food items; labor shortages or increases in labor costs; the impact of federal, state or local government regulations relating to Company employees, the sale or preparation of food, the sale of alcoholic beverages and the opening of new restaurants; the Company’s ability to achieve market acceptance, particularly in new markets; harmful actions taken by the Company’s franchisees; the Company’s ability to protect its name and logo and other proprietary information; the impact of litigation; and the loss of key management personnel. For a discussion of these and other risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements, please see Item 1A. “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K as well as the Company’s other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), all of which are available on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. All forward-looking statements are qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement, and the Company undertakes no obligation to revise or update this Annual Report on Form 10-K to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof. Stockholders and other security holders or buyers of the Company’s securities or its other creditors should not assume that material events subsequent to the date of this report have not occurred.

Unless the context otherwise indicates, all references in this report to the “Company,” “Ruth’s Chris,” “we,” “us” or “our” or similar words are to Ruth’s Chris Steak House, Inc., and its wholly owned subsidiaries. Ruth’s Chris Steak House, Inc. is a Delaware corporation, and was originally founded in 1965.

2

Table of Contents

PART I

Our Company

The Company believes that it is the largest upscale steakhouse company in the United States, based on total company- and franchisee-owned restaurants as published in the Technomic, Inc. 2007 Top 100 U.S. Chain Reference Guide. The Ruth’s Chris menu features a broad selection of high-quality USDA Prime grade steaks and other premium offerings served in Ruth’s Chris’ signature fashion—“sizzling” and topped with seasoned butter—complemented by other traditional menu items inspired by its New Orleans heritage. The Company’s Ruth’s Chris restaurants reflect its more than 40-year commitment to the core values instilled by its founder, Ruth Fertel, of caring for guests by delivering the highest quality food, beverages and service in a warm and inviting atmosphere. The Company believes that Ruth’s Chris is currently one of the strongest brands in fine dining.

The Company’s restaurants cater to families and special occasion diners, in addition to the business clientele traditionally served by upscale steakhouses, by providing a dining experience designed to appeal to a wide range of guests. The Company believes its focus on creating this broad appeal provides it with opportunities to expand into a wide range of markets, including many markets not traditionally served by upscale steakhouses.

The Company’s Ruth’s Chris restaurant offer USDA Prime grade steaks that are aged and prepared to exacting company standards and cooked in 1,800-degree broilers. The Company also offers veal, lamb, poultry and seafood dishes, and a broad selection of appetizers, including New Orleans-style barbequed shrimp, mushrooms stuffed with crabmeat, shrimp remoulade, Louisiana seafood gumbo, onion soup au gratin, crabtini and seven salad variations. The Company complements its distinctive food offerings with an award-winning core wine list, featuring bottles priced between $28 and $2,000 and many selections offered by the glass.

As of December 30, 2007, there were 118 Ruth’s Chris restaurants, of which 61 were company-owned and 57 were franchisee-owned, including twelve international franchisee-owned restaurants in Mexico, China (Hong Kong), Taiwan, Japan and Canada.

On February 19, 2008, the Company acquired all of the operating assets and intellectual property of Columbus, Ohio based Mitchell’s Fish Market, which operates 19 restaurants operating under the names Mitchell’s Fish Market and Columbus Fish Market, and Cameron’s Steakhouse, which operates three restaurants operating under the names Cameron’s Steakhouse and Mitchell’s Steakhouse from Cameron Mitchell Restaurants, LLC (CMR).

Our History

The Company was founded in 1965 when Ruth Fertel mortgaged her home for $22,000 to purchase the “Chris Steak House,” a 60-seat restaurant located near the New Orleans Fair Grounds racetrack. After a fire destroyed the original restaurant, Ruth relocated her restaurant to a new 160-seat facility nearby. As the terms of the original purchase prevented the use of the “Chris Steak House” name at a new location, Ruth added her name to that of the original restaurant—thus creating the “Ruth’s Chris Steak House” brand. The Company’s expansion began in 1972, when Ruth opened a second restaurant in Metairie, a suburb of New Orleans. In 1976, the first franchisee-owned Ruth’s Chris Steak House opened in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. In July 1999, affiliates of Madison Dearborn Partners LLC (“Madison Dearborn”) and certain unaffiliated investors acquired all of the Company’s outstanding capital stock. On May 19, 2005, the Company reincorporated in Delaware by merging Ruth’s Chris Steak House, Inc., a Louisiana corporation, into a newly formed Delaware subsidiary. In August 2005, the Company and certain selling shareholders completed an initial public offering of the Company’s common stock, which is currently listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market.

1

Table of Contents

Our Strengths

The Company believes that the key strengths of its business model are the following:

Premier Upscale Steakhouse Brand

The Company believes that Ruth’s Chris is currently one of the strongest brands in the fine dining segment of the restaurant industry. The Company’s Ruth’s Chris restaurants continue to receive numerous awards at the local and national level. Many continue to be ranked best steakhouse by local publications in the areas in which they operate. In addition, the Company has been recognized for its award-winning core wine list, for which 72 of its restaurants received “Awards of Excellence” from Wine Spectator magazine in 2007.

Appealing Dining Experience

The Company seeks to exceed guests’ expectations by offering high-quality food with courteous, friendly service in the finest tradition of Southern hospitality. The Company’s entire restaurant staff is dedicated to ensuring that guests enjoy a superior dining experience. The Company’s team-based approach to table service is designed to enhance the frequency of guest contact and speed of service without intruding on the guest experience.

Broad Appeal

The Company believes that the combination of its high quality food offerings, friendly and attentive service and warm and inviting atmosphere creates a dining experience that appeals to a wide range of guests, including families, special occasion diners and business clientele. The Company believes its focus on creating this broad appeal gives it the opportunity to enter into many new markets, including markets not traditionally served by upscale steakhouses. In addition, the Company believes that the diversity of its customer base may reduce its exposure to fluctuations in the spending habits of any particular group of guests.

Attractive Unit Economics

The Company believes that it has successfully operated restaurants in a wide range of markets and achieved attractive rates of return on invested capital. The Company believes that this historical success provides it with negotiating leverage during the initial phase of new restaurant construction, and has permitted it to open new restaurants at what it believes to be favorable levels of investment. The strength of the Ruth’s Chris brand has allowed the Company to generate high unit volumes within one to two years of opening in new markets. The Company’s 13 newest company-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants that opened in 2005, 2006 and 2007 generated average unit volumes in excess of $5.3 million (on an annualized basis of 52 weeks) in fiscal 2007, compared to average unit volumes of approximately $5.6 million in fiscal 2007 for those restaurants, excluding acquired locations, in its existing Ruth’s Chris company-owned restaurant base which have been open for at least fifteen months.

Experienced, Committed Management Team

The members of the Company’s senior management team average nearly 20 years of restaurant industry experience. Craig S. Miller, its President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board, has over 40 years of industry experience, including periods as the head of publicly traded restaurant corporations, most notably as President and Chief Executive Officer of Uno Restaurant Corporation. Mr. Miller served as Chairman of the National Restaurant Association, the leading business association for the restaurant industry, from May 2005 to May 2006. The Company’s management team has a meaningful equity ownership stake in the Company and is committed to growing its business by building on the core strengths of its business model. As of December 30, 2007, the Company’s management team collectively owned, through restricted stock and options subject to vesting, approximately 10.2% of the Company’s common stock on a fully diluted basis.

2

Table of Contents

Our Strategy

The Company believes there are significant opportunities to grow its business, strengthen its competitive position and enhance its brand through the continued implementation of the following strategies:

Improve Profitability

The Company intends to improve profitability by continuing to implement key operating initiatives. These operating initiatives include:

Expand Restaurant Base

The Company believes that the 50 most populous markets in the United States could support an additional 75 to 100 company-owned and franchisee-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants, based on its analysis of current demand and its competitors’ penetration of those markets. Further, the Company believes there is potential for an additional 25 to 50 Ruth’s Chris restaurants in smaller markets in the United States. The Company continues to evaluate opportunities to open new Ruth’s Chris restaurants in both new and existing markets.

Company-owned restaurants: The Company currently expects to open six to eight company-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants per year in each of the next several years. The Company opened eight new Ruth’s Chris restaurants and acquired three Ruth’s Chris restaurants during fiscal 2007. The Company also has outstanding lease commitments for nine new Ruth’s Chris restaurant locations that are scheduled to open in fiscal 2008 and fiscal 2009 and continues to negotiate with potential lessors in several other locations in which the Company plans to open new restaurants.

Franchisee-owned restaurants: Ten new Ruth’s Chris franchisee-owned restaurants opened during fiscal 2007, and the Company expects six to eight new franchisee-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants to open in each of the next several years. The Company’s franchise income, which consists of a 5% royalty fee on all sales from franchisee-owned restaurants and franchise fees, totaled $12.9 million and comprised approximately 4.1% of its total revenues in fiscal 2007.

Expand Relationships with New and Existing Franchisees

The Company intends to grow its franchising business by developing relationships with a limited number of new franchisees and by expanding the rights of existing franchisees to open new restaurants. The Company believes that building relationships with quality franchisees is a cost-effective way to strengthen the Ruth’s Chris brand and generate additional revenues. Franchisees opened twenty-one Ruth’s Chris restaurants from 1999 to the end of 2006 and the Company granted ten new franchisee rights during that period. In fiscal 2007, existing and new franchisees opened seven and three restaurants, respectively. During fiscal 2007, the Company also entered into two development agreements with new franchisees. Overall, there are 26 outstanding franchise locations to be built as of December 30, 2007. The Company intends to continue to focus on providing operational guidance to its franchisees, including the sharing of “best practices” from company-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants.

3

Table of Contents

Site Selection, Development and Design

The Company’s evaluation of prospective restaurant sites includes analysis of population density, potential population growth and demographic characteristics of the surrounding area, as well as research concerning accessibility, visibility, surrounding traffic patterns, the number and proximity of competitive restaurants and the potential return on invested capital.

The costs of opening a new Ruth’s Chris Steak House restaurant depend upon, among other things, the location and size of the site and the extent of any renovation required. While the Company generally leases its company-owned restaurant sites, the Company owns the land and building for seven restaurants. The Company’s future plans include both leasing and owning restaurant locations, depending upon which alternative provides the highest return on capital. For leased restaurants, the Company currently targets an average cash investment of approximately $2.5 million to $4.5 million per restaurant, net of tenant allowances but including pre-opening expenses.

The Company’s designers use standard styles in its restaurant interiors, although each location is tailored to reflect local tastes and preferences. The Company’s restaurants typically consist of an enhanced bar area and public seating, as well as most of the Company’s restaurants also have dining rooms that are available for private dining functions.

Menu

The Ruth’s Chris menu features a broad selection of high-quality USDA Prime grade steaks and other premium offerings served in Ruth’s Chris signature fashion—”sizzling” and topped with seasoned butter—complemented by other traditional menu items inspired by its New Orleans heritage. USDA Prime is a meat grade label, which refers to the evenly distributed marbling that enhances the flavor of the steak. The Ruth’s Chris menu also includes premium quality lamb chops, veal chops, fish, chicken and lobster. Steak and seafood combinations and a vegetable platter are also available at selected restaurants. Dinner entrees are generally priced from $19.95 to $45.95. While Ruth’s Chris is predominantly open dinner hours only, four select locations open for lunch five days a week and an additional eleven locations open for lunch one day per week. The lunch menu offers entrees generally ranging in price from $12.95 to $33.95 and the Ruth’s Chris core menu is similar at all of its restaurants. The Company occasionally introduces new items such as specials that allow it to give its guests additional choices while taking advantage of fresh sourcing and advantageous cost opportunities.

The Company’s Ruth’s Chris restaurants offer eleven to thirteen standard appetizer items, including New Orleans-style barbequed shrimp, mushrooms stuffed with crabmeat, shrimp remoulade, Louisiana seafood gumbo, onion soup au gratin, crabtini, as well as seven different salads. They also offer eight to ten types of potatoes and eight to twelve types of vegetables as side dishes ranging in price from $6.95 to $9.50. For dessert, creme brulee, bread pudding with whiskey sauce, chocolate sin cake, fresh seasonal berries with sweet cream sauce and other selections are available for $6.95 to $9.95 each.

The Company’s core wine list features bottles typically ranging in price from $28 to $2,000. Individual restaurants supplement their 250-bottle core wine list with a minimum of 50 additional selections that reflect local market tastes. Most of the Company’s Ruth’s Chris restaurants also offer approximately 30 to 40 wines-by-the-glass and numerous beers, liquors and alcoholic dessert drinks. Bottled wines account for approximately 70% of total wine sales.

Purchasing

The Company’s ability to maintain consistent quality throughout its Ruth’s Chris restaurants depends in part upon its ability to acquire food and other supplies from reliable sources in accordance with its specifications. Purchasing at the restaurant level is directed primarily by the executive chef, who is trained in the Company’s purchasing philosophy and specifications, and who works with its regional and corporate managers to ensure

4

Table of Contents

consistent sourcing of meat, fish, produce and other supplies. Each of the Company’s restaurants also has an in-store beverage manager who is responsible for purchasing wines based on guest preferences, market availability and menu content and works directly with the Company’s Vice President of Beverage to ensure quality and price efficiency.

During fiscal 2007 the Company purchased more than 82% of the beef it used in its company-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants from one vendor, New City Packing Company, Inc., with which it has no long-term contractual arrangement. In addition, the Company has a long-term distribution arrangement with a national food and restaurant supply distributor, Commissary Operations, Inc., which purchases products for the Company from various suppliers and through which 42 of its company-owned restaurants receive a significant portion of their food supplies.

Restaurant Operations and Management (Ruth’s Chris Steak House)

The Company’s Chief Operating Officer has primary responsibility for managing its company-owned restaurants and participates in analyzing restaurant-level performance and strategic planning. The Company has eight regional vice presidents that oversee restaurant operations at six to eight company-owned restaurants and two regional vice presidents that have oversight responsibility for franchise-owned restaurants.

The Company’s typical company-owned restaurant employs five managers, including a general manager, two front-of-the-house managers, an executive chef and a sous chef. The Company’s company-owned restaurants also typically have approximately 70 hourly employees. The general manager of each restaurant has primary accountability for ensuring compliance with the Company’s operating standards. The front-of-the-house managers assist the general manager in the day-to-day operations of the restaurant and are directly responsible for the supervision of the bar, host, server, runner and service assistant personnel. The executive chef supervises and coordinates all back-of-the-house operations, including ensuring that its quality standards are being met and maintaining a safe, efficient and productive work environment.

The Company believes that the compensation it pays its managers and employees is comparable to that provided by other fine dining steakhouses, and because many of its restaurants are open during dinner hours only, it pays many of its employees hourly wages that exceed those of many of its competitors. The Company offers participation to eligible employees in its health and other benefit plans, including medical, dental, vision and 401(k) with matching. The Company believes that its compensation and benefits policies allow it to attract quality personnel and retain them at turnover rates considerably lower than those generally experienced by full service restaurants.

Quality Control

The Company strives to maintain quality and consistency in its company-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants through careful training and supervision of personnel and standards established for food and beverage preparation, maintenance of facilities and conduct of personnel. The primary goal of the Company’s training and supervision programs is to encourage its employees to display the characteristics of its brand and values that distinguish it from its competitors. Restaurant managers in its company-owned restaurants must complete a training program that is typically seven weeks long, during which they are instructed in multiple areas of restaurant management, including food quality and preparation, guest service, alcoholic beverage service, liquor regulation compliance and employee relations. Restaurant managers also receive operations manuals relating to food and beverage preparation and restaurant operations. The Company instructs chefs and assistants on safety, sanitation, housekeeping, repair and maintenance, product and service specifications, ordering and receiving food products and quality assurance. General managers and certified coaches provide all other employee training at the restaurants. The Company requires that all restaurant-level employees be certified by the Company in order to be able to demonstrate knowledge of its systems, standards and operating philosophy.

On a daily basis at our Ruth’s Chris restaurants, the executive chef, together with the restaurant managers, oversees a line check system of quality control and must complete a quality assurance checklist verifying the

5

Table of Contents

flavor, presentation and proper temperature of the food and beverages. The Company retains outside consultants to perform quality assessments not less than four times per year of the front-of-the-house operations of company-owned and franchisee-owned restaurants. During these assessments, unidentified two-person teams dine in its restaurants and evaluate food quality, customer service and general restaurant operations through alternating weekday and weekend visits. The consultants complete a standard checklist and provide us with a written critique. Outside consultants are also utilized to perform random visits to all company- and franchisee-owned restaurants throughout the year to perform health inspections that are above and beyond local health inspections. In addition, the Company’s regional vice presidents perform system-wide quality assessments of all aspects of restaurant operations, with a focus on back-of-the-house functions, on a regular basis.

Mitchell’s Fish Market

On February 19, 2008, the Company acquired 19 Mitchell’s Fish Market restaurants, located in the Midwest, Northeast, Florida and Connecticut, and three Cameron’s Steakhouse restaurants located in Columbus, Ohio and Birmingham, Michigan.

Mitchell’s Fish Market is an award-winning, upscale, yet comfortable, seafood restaurant and bar recognized for its high quality food, contemporary dining atmosphere, and excellent service. Mitchell’s Fish Market is committed to fresh seafood and all of its seafood is flown in daily. Although the menu changes frequently based on availability and season, it includes more than 80 seafood choices, including fish from all over the world. The current average check is $22 at lunch and $39 at dinner. The Cameron’s Steakhouses are a sophisticated 21st century update of the upscale American steakhouse.

The Company believes that Mitchell’s is an innovative concept that is compatible with Ruth’s Chris. Its focus on upscale casual restaurants with a sophisticated yet comfortable atmosphere and emphasis on fresh seafood is a wonderful complement to our own brand. The Company believes that Mitchell’s Fish Market shares many characteristics of the Ruth’s Chris model, including strong unit economics, broad guest appeal, a focus on banquet sales, and a robust bar business.

Marketing and Promotions

The goals of the Company’s marketing efforts are to increase comparable restaurant sales by attracting new guests, increase the frequency of visits by current guests, improve brand recognition in new markets or markets where it intends to open a restaurant and to communicate the overall uniqueness, value and quality exemplified by the Ruth’s Chris brand. The Company uses multiple media channels to accomplish these goals and complements its national advertising with targeted local media such as outdoor and airport directional posters and tourist publications.

Advertising

In fiscal 2007, the Company spent $8.4 million, or 2.6% of its revenues, in total advertising expenditures compared to $8.3 million in fiscal 2006. Of its total advertising expenditures in fiscal 2007, $6.1 million, or 72%, was spent on local media and events, compared to $5.0 million, or 60%, spent locally in fiscal 2006. This local media and events spending was split between tourist, entertainment and business magazines, outdoor billboards and airport dioramas, radio, internet media and community events such as golf tournaments, arts gatherings and charitable organizations. Direct mail was utilized to highlight specific market incentives. In fiscal 2007, the Company spent approximately $2.3 million, or 28% of total advertising expenditures, on national media, consisting primarily of national radio, national newspapers (USA Today) and online initiatives. In fiscal 2006, the Company spent $3.3 million, or 40% of its total advertising expenditures, on national media.

In fiscal 2007, the Company enhanced its online marketing efforts with online advertisements and banner ads placed on highly visited sites. The Company also utilized sponsored searches through such media as Google,

6

Table of Contents

Ask.com and Yahoo. The Company also used local online advertising for sites targeted to company and franchise geographic locations. The Company’s online strategy also included an increased emphasis on targeted emails with special offers and announcements as well as a promotional e-certificate to its email marketing database. Communication also included seasonal specials, holiday offers, and personalized birthday and anniversary invitations.

The Company’s current advertising campaign is integrated into all marketing communications including radio, print and outdoor advertisement. In addition, the Company uses its website, www.ruthschris.com to help increase brand identity and facilitate online reservations and gift card sales. Many of the Company’s locations also schedule events to strengthen community ties and increase local market presence. The Company’s franchisees also conduct their own local advertising campaigns. The Company will continue the existing advertising for its Mitchell’s restaurants and will review potential enhanced strategies in the future.

Gift Cards

The Company sells Ruth’s Chris gift cards at its restaurants, through its toll-free reservation system and on its website. Ruth’s Chris patrons frequently purchase gift cards for holidays, including Christmas, Hanukkah, Valentine’s Day, Mothers’ Day and Fathers’ Day, and other special occasions such as birthdays, graduations and anniversaries. These gift cards are popular as holiday gifts and among business professionals celebrating promotions. In fiscal 2007, system-wide gift card sales were approximately $36.4 million. Ruth’s Chris gift cards are redeemable at both company- and franchise-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants.

Franchise Program and Relationship

The Company’s 57 franchise-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants are owned by 23 franchisees with the three largest franchisees owning six, six and five restaurants, respectively. Currently, the Company has open agreements with franchisees for an aggregate of 26 additional Ruth’s Chris restaurants. Prior to 2004, each franchisee entered into a ten-year franchise agreement with three ten-year renewal options for each restaurant. Each agreement grants the franchisee territorial protection, with the option to develop a certain number of restaurants in their territory. The Company’s franchise agreements generally include termination clauses in the event of nonperformance by the franchisee and non-compete clauses if the agreement is terminated. To date, only two franchisees have had the Company’s franchise agreement terminated or a restaurant closed as a result of nonperformance.

Under the Company’s franchise program, the Company offers certain services and licensing rights to the franchisee to help maintain consistency in system-wide operations. The Company’s services include training of personnel, site selection and construction assistance, providing the new franchisee with standardized operating procedures and manuals, business and financial forms, consulting with the new franchisee on purchasing and supplies and performing supervisory quality control services. The Company conducts reviews of its franchisee-owned restaurants on an ongoing basis, in order to ensure compliance with its standards.

Under the Company’s franchise program, each franchise arrangement consists of a development agreement and a separate franchise agreement for each restaurant. The Company’s new form of development agreement grants exclusive rights to a franchisee to develop a minimum number of restaurants in a defined area, typically during a five-year period. Individual franchise agreements govern the operation of each restaurant opened and have a 20-year term with two renewal options each for additional 10-year terms if certain conditions are met. The Company’s new form of franchise agreement requires franchisees to pay a 5% royalty on gross revenues plus up to a 1% advertising fee applied to national advertising expenditures. Under the Company’s prior form of franchise agreement, franchisees pay a 5% royalty on gross revenues, of which the Company has applied 1% to national advertising.

Under the Company’s form of development agreement, and unless agreed otherwise, the Company collects a $50,000 development fee for each restaurant the franchisee has rights to develop. Under the Company’s new

7

Table of Contents

form of the franchise agreement, it collects up to $100,000 of the franchise fee at the time of executing the franchise agreement for each restaurant. To date, the Company has used its form of agreement with eleven new franchisees (three of whom are located outside of the United States) and three existing franchisees.

The Company’s existing franchise agreements signed before 2004 generally limit the number of restaurants each franchisee can develop to two. The Company expanded its domestic franchise base in 2004 by first offering existing franchisees the opportunity to open additional restaurants in its existing territories. In order to obtain these new rights, existing franchisees were provided a new Uniform Franchise Offering Circular (“UFOC”) and were required to sign the Company’s new form of development and franchise agreement which commits the franchisee to a store development schedule. New franchise rights will be sold pursuant to the new UFOC and franchise agreement described above, which enables the Company to better manage the growth of its franchise system. The Company anticipates opening six to eight franchise restaurants per year over the next several years.

The Company currently does not have any plans to franchise Mitchell’s Fish Market or Cameron’s Steakhouse restaurants.

Information Systems and Restaurant Reporting

All of the Company’s restaurants use computerized point-of-sale systems, which are designed to improve operating efficiency, provide corporate management timely access to financial and marketing data and reduce restaurant and corporate administrative time and expense. These systems record each order and print the food requests in the kitchen for the cooks to prepare. The data captured for use by operations and corporate management includes gross sales amounts, cash and credit card receipts and quantities of each menu item sold. Sales and receipts information is generally transmitted to the corporate office daily, where it is reviewed and reconciled by the accounting department before being recorded in the accounting system.

The Company’s corporate systems provide management with operating reports that show company-owned restaurant performance comparisons with budget and prior year results. These systems allow the Company to monitor company-owned restaurant sales, food and beverage costs, labor expense and other restaurant trends on a regular basis.

Service Marks

The Company has registered the main service marks “Ruth’s Chris” and its “Ruth’s Chris Steak House, U.S. Prime & Design” logo, as well as other service marks used by its restaurants with the United States Patent and Trademark Office and in the foreign countries in which its restaurants operate. The Company has also registered in other foreign countries on anticipation of new store openings within those countries. The Company is not aware of any infringing uses that could materially affect its business. The Company believes that its service marks are valuable to the operation of its restaurants and are important to its marketing strategy.

As part of the Mitchell’s acquisition, which was completed on February 19, 2008, we acquired the federally registered service mark “Mitchell’s Fish Market” and the common law service marks “Mitchell’s Steakhouse”, “Cameron’s Steakhouse”, “Columbus Fish Market” and “Cameron’s Steakhouse” together with any and all other trade names, common law trade and service marks, state registered trade and service marks, and trade dress owned or used by the seller in connection with the steakhouse and seafood restaurants so acquired.

Seasonality

The Company’s business is subject to seasonal fluctuations. Historically, the percentage of its annual revenues earned during the first and fourth fiscal quarters have been higher due, in part, to increased restaurant sales during the year-end holiday season.

8

Table of Contents

Employees

As of December 30, 2007, the Company employed 4,693 persons, of whom 464 were salaried and 4,229 were hourly personnel, who were employed in the positions set forth in the table below. None of the Company’s employees are covered by a collective bargaining agreement. The Company believes that it has good relations with its employees.

Executive Officers of the Registrant

Certain information regarding our executive officers is provided below:

Craig S. Miller has served as the Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board since September 2006. From March 2004 to September 2006, Mr. Miller served as the President and Chief Executive Officer and as a member of the board of directors. Prior to that, from October 2002 to March 2004, Mr. Miller was the founder and Chairman of Miller Partners Restaurant Solutions, Inc. From October 2001 to October 2002, Mr. Miller served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Furr’s Restaurant Group. In January 2003, Furr’s Restaurant Group filed for bankruptcy protection under chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. From October 1996 to October 2001, Mr. Miller served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Uno Restaurant Corporation. Prior to October 1996, Mr. Miller held various executive level positions with Uno Restaurant Corporation. Mr. Miller is a member of the Board of the National Restaurant Association (the “Association”). Mr. Miller served as Chairman of the Association from May 2005 to May 2006.

Geoffrey D. K. Stiles has served as the Company’s Executive Vice President, Operations and Chief Operating Officer since November 2003. From April 2003 to November 2003, Mr. Stiles was employed as a consultant by one of the Company’s franchisees. Mr. Stiles previously served as the Company’s Director of Operations from January 2001 to April 2003. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Stiles served in executive and senior management positions at several restaurant groups, including Capitol Restaurant Concepts, Inc., Bertolini’s Restaurants Inc., Romano’s Macaroni Grill and the Olive Garden.

David L. Cattell has served as the Company’s Senior Vice President and Chief Development Officer since November 2005. From September 2004 to November 2005, Mr. Cattell served as the Vice President,

9

Table of Contents

Development and Construction and Chief Development Officer. Prior to joining the Company, from January 2000 to January 2004, Mr. Cattell served as Vice President of Restaurant Development at Metromedia Restaurant Group. From 1981 to 1995, Mr. Cattell directed and managed real estate, construction, architecture and engineering functions for Kentucky Fried Chicken as Vice President of Restaurant Development.

Sarah C. Jackson has served as the Company’s Senior Vice President, Human Resources since December 2006. From August 2006 to December 2006, Ms. Jackson served as the Vice President of Human Resources. Prior to joining the Company, from April 2004 to July 2006, Ms. Jackson served as the Vice President of Human Resources and Training for Romacorp, Inc. In November 2005, Romacorp, Inc. filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. From May 1989 to April 2004, Ms. Jackson held various leadership positions with Darden Restaurants, Inc.

Damon M. Liever has served as the Company’s Senior Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer since July 2007. From July 1999 to July 2007, Mr. Liever progressed from the Senior Vice President of Marketing for Wood Dining Services, to the President of the Retail Brand Group of Sodexho USA, when Sodexho USA acquired Wood Dining in January 2002. Prior to that, Mr. Liever held senior leadership positions in marketing with Uno Restaurant Corporation, Black-eyed Pea Restaurants, Taco Bell, Inc. and Frito-Lay, Inc.

Thomas E. O’Keefe has served as the Company’s Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Assistant Secretary since November 2005. From March 2005 to November 2005, Mr. O’Keefe served as the Vice President and General Counsel. Prior to joining the Company, from October 2003 to March 2005, Mr. O’Keefe was engaged in the private practice of law as a sole practitioner practicing in the areas of franchise, product distribution, antitrust and general corporate law. From August 1993 to September 2003, Mr. O’Keefe was Vice President and General Counsel to G.C. & K. B. Investments, Inc. d/b/a “SpeeDee Oil Change & Tune-Up,” an international franchisor of automobile service centers. From 1991 to 1993, Mr. O’Keefe served as Corporate Counsel to AFCE, Inc. d/b/a “Popeyes and Church’s Chicken,” an international franchisor of quick-service restaurants. Mr. O’Keefe relinquished his position as Assistant Secretary effective December 2006 and assumed the position of Secretary for the Company.

Thomas J. Pennison, Jr. has served as the Company’s Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary since November 2005. From April 2004 to November 2005, Mr. Pennison served as Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer, and from February 1998 to April 2004, Mr. Pennison served as Vice President, Finance. From October 1996 to January 1998, Mr. Pennison served as the Director of Finance. Prior to joining the Company, from April 1994 to October 1996, Mr. Pennison served as Assistant Corporate Controller of Casino Magic Corp., with primary responsibilities for corporate finance and SEC reporting. From January 1991 to April 1994, Mr. Pennison was at the public accounting firm KPMG LLP. Mr. Pennison relinquished his position as Secretary effective December 2006 and assumed the position of Assistant Secretary for the Company. In December 2007, Mr. Pennison announced that he will be leaving the Company to pursue other business and personal interests.

Government Regulation

The Company is subject to extensive federal, state and local government regulation, including regulations relating to public health and safety, zoning and fire codes and the sale of alcoholic beverages and food. The Company maintains the necessary restaurant, alcoholic beverage and retail licenses, permits and approvals. The development and construction of additional restaurants will also be subject to compliance with applicable zoning, land use and environmental laws. Federal and state laws govern the Company’s relationship with its employees, including laws relating to minimum wage requirements, overtime, tips, tip credits and working conditions. A significant number of the Company’s hourly employees are paid at rates related to the federal or state minimum wage.

The offer and sale of franchises is subject to regulation by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) and many states. The FTC requires that the Company furnish to prospective franchisees a franchise offering circular containing prescribed information. A number of states also regulate the sale of franchises and require state

10

Table of Contents

registration of franchise offerings and the delivery of a franchise offering circular to prospective franchisees. The Company’s noncompliance could result in governmental enforcement actions seeking a civil or criminal penalty, rescission of a franchise, and loss of its ability to offer and sell franchises in a state, or a private lawsuit seeking rescission, damages and legal fees.

Competition

The restaurant business is highly competitive and highly fragmented, and the number, size and strength of the Company’s competitors vary widely by region. The Company believes that restaurant competition is based on, among other things, quality of food products, customer service, reputation, restaurant location, name recognition and price. The Company’s restaurants compete with a number of fine dining steakhouses and upscale seafood restaurants within their markets, both locally owned restaurants and restaurants within regional or national chains. The principal fine dining steakhouses with which the Company competes are Fleming’s, The Capital Grille, Smith & Wollensky, The Palm, Del Frisco’s and Morton’s of Chicago. The principal upscale seafood restaurants with which the Company competes are McCormick & Schmick’s. Legal Seafood, Bonefish Grill and The Oceanaire Seafood Room. Many of the Company’s competitors are better established in certain of its existing markets and/or markets into which it intends to expand.

Available Information

The Company maintains a website on the Internet at www.ruthschris.com. The Company makes available free of charge, through the investor relations section of its website, its Annual Reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports electronically filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act of 1934. Such information is available as soon as reasonably practicable after it files such reports with the SEC. Additionally, its Code of Ethics may be accessed within the Investor Relations section of its website. Information found on its website is not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K or any other report filed with the SEC.

11

Table of Contents

In addition to the other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the following risk factors should be considered carefully in evaluating the Company and its business. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones the Company faces. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that the Company currently deems immaterial may also impair its business operations. If any of these certain risks and uncertainties were to actually occur, the Company’s business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially adversely affected. In such case, the trading price of the Company’s common stock could decline and its investors may lose all or part of their investment. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the following:

The restaurant industry in general and the fine dining segment in particular are vulnerable to fluctuations in economic conditions, including volatility in levels of consumer discretionary spending.

A significant deterioration in economic conditions in any of the Company’s markets would reduce guest traffic or require its affected restaurants to lower their prices, either of which would reduce the Company’s total revenues and operating income. For example, the Company’s total revenues fell 4.9% and 0.1% in fiscal 2001 and fiscal 2002, respectively, which were years of declining discretionary consumer spending in the United States due in part to the September 11, 2001 attacks. In addition, we cannot predict the length or severity of the current economic downturn. Comparable company-owned restaurant sales decreased 1.0% in fiscal 2007 versus fiscal 2006 due primarily to declining discretionary spending with the economic downturn. In addition, natural disasters, including extreme weather events such as hurricanes, occurring within any of the Company’s market territories could cause reductions in revenues and/or disruptions in operations, such as restaurant closures. Any changes in economic conditions, or a continuation or increase in the severity of the current economic downturn would affect the Company’s ability to attract guests or price its menu items at favorable levels, which would result in significant reductions in revenue and/or operating income.

Competitive conditions, consumer tastes and unexpected operating expenses could adversely affect the profitability of restaurants that the Company opens in new markets.

The Company’s growth strategy includes opening restaurants in markets where it has little or no meaningful operating experience and in which its brand may not be well known. Competitive conditions, consumer tastes and discretionary spending patterns in these new markets may differ from those in its existing markets. The Company may be unable to generate similar acceptance of our brands due to these factors, which may require it to incur significant additional promotion costs in order to increase restaurant sales at these locations. The Company’s ability to operate new restaurants profitably will depend on numerous factors, some of which are beyond its control, including, but not limited to, the following:

Any one of these factors could preclude the Company from operating new restaurants successfully, which could adversely affect growth and profitability.

12

Table of Contents

The Company’s growth may strain its infrastructure and resources, which could delay the opening of new restaurants and adversely affect its ability to manage existing restaurants.

The Company currently plans to continue its accelerated pace of new restaurant growth. This growth will place increased demands on management resources as well as human resources, purchasing and site management teams. The Company’s planned growth in franchisee-owned restaurants will also require additional infrastructure for the development and maintenance of franchise relationships, as well as for the monitoring of those restaurants. In addition, if the Company’s current restaurant management systems, financial and management controls and information systems are insufficient to support this expansion, its ability to open new restaurants and to manage existing restaurants would be adversely affected. If the Company fails to continue to improve its infrastructure, the Company may be unable to implement its growth strategy and/or maintain current levels of operating performance in existing restaurants.

We may not be able to successfully integrate into our business the operations of restaurants that we have acquired, which may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

On February 19, 2008, the Company completed the acquisition of the Mitchell’s Fish Market, operating under the names Mitchell’s Fish Market and Columbus Fish Market, and Cameron’s Steakhouse, operating under the names Cameron’s Steakhouse and Mitchell’s Steakhouse from Cameron Mitchell Restaurants, LLC (CMR). These restaurants will be the first the Company owns that focus primarily of serving seafood and that do not have the “Ruth’s Chris” brand. Achieving the expected benefits of these restaurants and any other restaurants that the Company acquires will depend in a large part on our ability to successfully integrate the operations of the acquired restaurants and personnel in a timely and efficient manner and develop their brands. The risks involved in the integration of this acquisition include:

If Ruth’s Chris cannot overcome the challenges and risks that we face in integrating the operations of newly acquired restaurants, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Negative publicity surrounding the Company’s restaurants or the consumption of beef generally, or shifts in consumer tastes, could reduce sales in one or more of its restaurants and make its brand less valuable.

The Company’s success depends, in large part, upon the popularity of its menu offerings. Negative publicity resulting from poor food quality, illness, injury or other health concerns (including e-coli, Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (mad cow disease), Hepatitis A and foot and mouth disease), whether related to one of the Company’s restaurants or to the beef or seafood industries in general, or operating problems related to one or more restaurants, could make the Company’s menu offerings less appealing to consumers and reduce demand in its restaurants. In addition, any other shifts in consumer preferences away from the kinds of food the Company offers, particularly beef and seafood, whether because of dietary or other health concerns or otherwise, would make its restaurants less appealing and adversely affect revenues.

In addition, some types of seafood have been subject to adverse publicity due to certain levels of contamination at their source, which can adversely affect both supply and market demand. The Company’s Mitchell’s restaurants maintain an in-house inspection program for our seafood purchases and, in the past, have

13

Table of Contents

not experienced any detriment from contaminated seafood. However, in the future seafood contamination or inadequate supplies of seafood could have a significant and materially adverse effect on the Company’s operating results and profitability.

The Company may not be able to compete successfully with other restaurants, which could reduce its revenues.

The restaurant industry is intensely competitive with respect to price, service, location, food quality, atmosphere and overall dining experience. The Company’s competitors include a large and diverse group of well-recognized fine dining and upscale casual restaurant chains, including fine dining steakhouse and seafood chains as well as restaurants owned by independent local operators. Some of the Company’s competitors may have substantially greater financial, marketing and other resources, and may be better established in the markets where its restaurants are or may be located. If the Company cannot compete effectively in one or more of its markets, the Company may be unable to maintain recent levels of comparable restaurant sales growth and/or may be required to close existing restaurants.

If the Company’s vendors or distributors do not deliver food and beverages in a timely fashion it may experience short-term supply shortages and/or increased food and beverage costs.

The Company’s ability to maintain consistent quality throughout company-owned restaurants depends in part upon its ability to purchase USDA Prime and Choice grade beef, seafood and other food products in accordance with its rigid specifications. During fiscal 2007, the Company purchased more than 82% of the beef it used in company-owned restaurants from one vendor, New City Packing Company, Inc., with which the Company has no long-term contractual arrangement. In addition, the Company currently has a long-term arrangement with a distributor, Commissary Operations, Inc., which purchases products for it from various suppliers, and through which 42 of its company-owned restaurants receive a significant portion of their food supplies. If these or other vendors or distributors cease doing business with the Company, it could experience short-term supply shortages in certain company-owned restaurants and could be required to purchase supplies at higher prices until the Company is able to secure an alternative supply source. Any delay the Company experiences in replacing vendors or distributors on acceptable terms could increase food costs or, in extreme cases, require it to temporarily remove items from the menu of one or more restaurants.

Increases in the prices of, or reductions in the availability of, any of our core food products could reduce the Company’s operating margins and revenues.

The Company purchases large quantities of beef, particularly USDA Prime grade beef, which is subject to extreme price fluctuations due to seasonal shifts, climate conditions, industry demand and other factors. The Company’s beef costs represented approximately 51.3% of its food and beverage costs during fiscal 2007 and the Company historically has not had any long-term contractual arrangements, nor does it use future contracts or other financial risk management strategies to reduce exposure to potential price fluctuations. For fiscal 2008, the Company expects to enter into contracts with beef suppliers to establish set pricing on a portion of its anticipated beef purchases. The market for USDA Prime grade beef is particularly volatile. For example, in late 2003, increased demand, together with the impact of supply rationalization during late 2001 and 2002, resulted in shortages of USDA Prime grade beef, requiring the Company to pay significantly higher prices for the USDA Prime grade beef it purchased. If prices for the types of beef the Company uses in its restaurants increase in the future and it chooses not to pass, or cannot pass, these increases on to its guests, the Company’s operating margins would decrease. If certain kinds of beef become unavailable for the Company to purchase, its revenues would decrease as well.

In the recent past, certain types of seafood have experienced fluctuations in availability. Seafood is also subject to fluctuations in price based on availability, which is often seasonal. If certain types of seafood are unavailable, or if our costs increase, our results of operations could be adversely affected.

14

Table of Contents

Labor shortages or increases in labor costs could slow the Company’s growth or harm its business.

The Company’s success depends in part upon its ability to continue to attract, motivate and retain employees with the qualifications to succeed in its industry and the motivation to apply the Company’s core service philosophy, including regional operational managers, restaurant general managers and chefs. If the Company is unable to continue to recruit and retain sufficiently qualified individuals, its business and growth could be adversely affected. Competition for these employees could require the Company to pay higher wages, which could result in higher labor costs. In addition, the Company has a substantial number of hourly employees who are paid wage rates at or based on the federal or state minimum wage and who rely on tips as a large portion of their income. Increases in the minimum wage or decreases in allowable tip credits would increase the Company’s labor costs. The Company may be unable to increase its prices in order to pass these increased labor costs on to its guests, in which case its margins would be negatively affected.

Regulations affecting the operation of the Company’s restaurants could increase operating costs and restrict growth.

Each of the Company’s restaurants must obtain licenses from regulatory authorities allowing it to sell liquor, beer and wine, and each restaurant must obtain a food service license from local health authorities. Each restaurant’s liquor license must be renewed annually and may be revoked at any time for cause, including violation by the Company or its employees of any laws and regulations relating to the minimum drinking age, advertising, wholesale purchasing and inventory control. In certain states, including states where the Company has a large number of restaurants or where it plans to open restaurants in the near term, the number of liquor licenses available is limited and licenses are traded at market prices. If the Company is unable to maintain existing licenses, or if it chooses to open a restaurant in those states, the cost of a new license could be significant. Obtaining and maintaining licenses is an important component of each of the Company’s restaurant’s operations, and the failure to obtain or maintain food and liquor licenses and other required licenses, permits and approvals would materially adversely impact existing restaurants or the Company’s growth strategy.

The Company is also subject to a variety of federal and state labor laws, such as minimum wage and overtime pay requirements, unemployment tax rates, workers’ compensation rates and citizenship requirements. Government-mandated increases in minimum wages, overtime pay, paid leaves of absence and mandated health benefits, or increased tax reporting and tax payment requirements for employees who receive gratuities, or a reduction in the number of states that allow tips to be credited toward minimum wage requirements could increase the Company’s labor costs and reduce its operating margins. In addition, the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in public accommodations and employment. Although the Company’s restaurants are designed to be accessible to the disabled, it could be required to make modifications to its restaurants to provide service to, or make reasonable accommodations for, disabled persons.

The Company’s strategy to open additional company-owned and franchisee-owned restaurants subjects it to extensive government regulation, compliance which might increase its investment costs and restrict its growth.

The Company is subject to the rules and regulations of the FTC, and various state laws regulating the offer and sale of franchises. The FTC requires that the Company furnish to prospective franchisees a franchise offering circular containing prescribed information and can restrict its ability to sell franchises. A number of states also regulate the sale of franchises and require the obtaining of a permit and/or registration of the franchise offering circular with state authorities and the delivery of the franchise offering circular to prospective franchisees. Noncompliance with those laws could result in governmental enforcement actions seeking a civil or criminal penalty, rescission of a franchise, and loss of the Company’s ability to offer and sell franchises in a state, or a private lawsuit seeking rescission, damages and legal fees, which could have a material adverse effect on its business.

The Company’s development and construction of additional restaurants must comply with applicable zoning, land use and environmental regulations. More stringent and varied requirements of local government

15

Table of Contents

bodies with respect to zoning, land use and environmental factors could delay construction of new restaurants and add to their cost in the future which could adversely affect the Company’s future operating results. In addition, difficulties or failure in obtaining the required licenses and approvals could delay, or result in its decision to cancel, the opening of new restaurants.

The Company’s franchisees could take actions that harm its reputation and reduce its royalty revenues.

The Company does not exercise control over the day-to-day operations of its franchisee-owned restaurants. While the Company attempts to ensure that franchisee-owned restaurants maintain the same high operating standards that it demands of company-owned restaurants, one or more of these restaurants may fail to maintain these standards. Any operational shortcomings of the Company’s franchisee-owned restaurants are likely to be attributed to its system-wide operations and could adversely affect its reputation and damage its brand as well as have a direct negative impact on the royalty income it receives from those restaurants.

You should not rely on past increases in the Company’s average unit volumes or its comparable restaurant sales as an indication of future operating results, because they may fluctuate significantly, which could have an adverse effect on the market price of its stock.

For a number of reasons, including but not limited to, those described below and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the Company’s operating results, revenues and expenses have in the past varied and may in the future vary significantly from quarter-to-quarter or year-to-year. These fluctuations could have an adverse effect on the market price of the Company’s common stock. A number of factors historically have affected, and are likely to continue to affect, the Company’s average unit volumes and/or comparable restaurant sales, including, among other factors:

The Company’s average unit volumes and comparable restaurant sales may not increase at rates achieved over recent periods. Changes in its average unit volumes and comparable restaurant sales could cause the price of the Company’s common stock to fluctuate substantially.

The Company’s failure to enforce its service marks or other proprietary rights could adversely affect its competitive position or the value of its brands.

The Company owns certain common law service mark rights and a number of federal and international service mark registrations, most importantly the Ruth’s Chris Steak House, Mitchell’s and Cameron’s names and logos, copyrights relating to text and print uses, and other proprietary intellectual property rights. The Company believes that its service marks, copyrights and other proprietary rights are important to its success and competitive position. Protective actions the Company takes with respect to these rights may fail to prevent unauthorized usage or imitation by others, which could harm the Company’s reputation, brand or competitive position and, if the Company commences litigation to enforce its rights, cause us to incur significant legal expenses.

Contracts with certain of the Company’s franchisees limit its ability to grow the Ruth’s Chris brand in attractive markets.

The Company has granted exclusive development rights for some of the United States’ largest markets, including Atlanta, Philadelphia and Las Vegas, to franchisees. The terms of the Company’s agreements with

16

Table of Contents

these franchisees prevent the Company from opening company-owned restaurants in these markets. While the Company is currently working with these franchisees in order to create additional opportunities for growth, it may be unable to open additional company-owned or franchisee-owned restaurants in these markets. The Company’s failure to grow within these large markets could harm its long-term competitive position in these markets and/or prevent it from sustaining its growth. In addition, the Company’s failure to grow the Ruth’s Chris brand in these markets by opening additional restaurants could limit the visibility of its brand in these large markets, resulting in lower guest traffic in existing restaurants in these markets.

Litigation concerning food quality, health and other issues could require the Company to incur additional liabilities and/or cause guests to avoid its restaurants.

Occasionally, the Company’s guests file complaints or lawsuits against it alleging that the Company is responsible for some illness or injury they suffered at or after a visit to its restaurants. The Company is also subject to a variety of other claims arising in the ordinary course of its business, including personal injury claims, contract claims, claims from franchisees and claims alleging violations of federal and state law regarding workplace and employment matters, discrimination and similar matters. In addition, the Company could become subject to class action lawsuits related to these matters in the future. For example, in fiscal 2005 the Company settled a class-action claim based on violation of wage and hour laws in California. The restaurant industry has also been subject to a growing number of claims that the menus and actions of restaurant chains have led to the obesity of certain of their guests. In addition, the Company is subject to “dram shop” statutes. These statutes generally allow a person injured by an intoxicated person to recover damages from an establishment that wrongfully served alcoholic beverages to the intoxicated person. Recent litigation against restaurant chains has resulted in significant judgments, including punitive damages, under dram shop statutes. Regardless of whether any claims against the Company are valid or whether it is liable, claims may be expensive to defend and may divert time and money away from the Company’s operations and hurt its performance. A judgment significantly in excess of the Company’s insurance coverage for any claims would materially adversely affect its financial condition and results of operations. Adverse publicity resulting from these claims may negatively impact revenues at one or more of the Company’s restaurants.

Continued expansion in the segment of the restaurant industry in which the Company operates could prevent the Company from realizing anticipated benefits from new restaurant growth or continued growth in comparable restaurant sales.

The Company’s competitors have opened many upscale steakhouses and seafood restaurants in recent years, and a key element of its strategy is to continue to accelerate the opening of new company-owned and franchisee-owned restaurants in both new and existing markets. If the Company overestimates demand for its restaurants or underestimates the popularity of competitors’ restaurants in these markets, the Company may be unable to realize anticipated revenues from these new restaurants. Similarly, if one or more of its competitors open new restaurants in any of these new markets, or in markets where the Company already has an established presence, sales in its restaurants may be lower than it expects. Any unanticipated slowdown in demand in any of its restaurants due to this industry growth could reduce the Company’s average unit volumes and comparable restaurant sales, as well as its franchisee royalty revenues.

The terms of the Company’s senior credit agreement may restrict its ability to operate its business and to pursue its business strategies.

The Company’s senior credit agreement contains, and any agreements governing future indebtedness would likely contain, a number of restrictive covenants that impose significant operating and financial restrictions on it. The Company’s senior credit agreement limits its ability, among other things, to:

17

Table of Contents

The Company’s ability to engage in these types of transactions is limited even if it believes that a specific transaction would contribute to its future growth or improve its operating results. The Company’s senior credit agreement also requires it to achieve specified financial and operating results and maintain compliance with certain financial ratios. The Company’s ability to comply with these ratios may be affected by events outside of its control. Any non-compliance would result in a default under its senior credit agreement and could result in its lenders declaring the Company’s senior debt immediately due and payable, which would have a material adverse effect on its ability to operate as a going concern.

Approximately 17.7% of the Company’s voting power is controlled by one principal stockholder whose interests may conflict with those of its other stockholders.

Affiliates of Madison Dearborn hold approximately 17.7% of the Company’s voting power. As a result of this ownership, as well as the fact that a representative of Madison Dearborn serves on the Company’s board of directors, Madison Dearborn has significant influence in the consideration of all matters requiring the approval of its stockholders and/or its board of directors. These matters include the election of directors, the adoption of amendments to the Company’s amended and restated certificate of incorporation and by-laws and approval of mergers or sales of substantially all of its assets. This influence may also have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of the Company or discouraging others from making tender offers for its shares, which could prevent stockholders from receiving a premium for their shares. So long as affiliates of Madison Dearborn continue to own a significant amount of the outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock and a representative of Madison Dearborn continues to serve on its board of directors, they will continue to be able to influence the Company’s decisions and may pursue corporate actions that conflict with the interests of its other stockholders. The Company’s amended and restated certificate of incorporation also provides that affiliates of Madison Dearborn and their representatives are not required to offer any corporate opportunity of which they become aware to the Company and therefore they could take any such opportunity for themselves or offer it to other companies in which they have an investment.

The Company’s amended and restated certificate of incorporation, its by-laws and Delaware law contain provisions that could discourage another company from acquiring it and may prevent attempts by its stockholders to replace or remove its current management.

Provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law (the “DGCL”), the Company’s amended and restated certificate of incorporation and its by-laws may discourage, delay or prevent a merger or acquisition that the Company’s stockholders may consider favorable. In addition, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by its stockholders to replace or remove the Company’s current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace or remove its board of directors. Such provisions in the Company’s amended and restated certificate of incorporation and by-laws include:

18

Table of Contents

The Company is also afforded the protections of Section 203 of the DGCL, which prevents it from engaging in a business combination with a person who acquires at least 15% of its common stock for a period of three years from the date such person acquired such common stock, unless board or stockholder approval is obtained.

None.

The Company’s company-owned restaurants are generally located in spaces leased by wholly-owned direct or indirect subsidiaries of Ruth’s Chris Steak House Inc. Restaurant lease expirations, including renewal options, range from approximately two years to 30 years. Sixty of its leases, including those not yet commenced, provide for an option to renew for terms ranging from approximately five years to 15 years. Historically, the Company has not had difficulty in renewing its leases in a timely manner. Restaurant leases provide for a specified annual rent, and some leases call for additional or contingent rent based on sales volumes over specified levels.

The Company currently owns the real estate for seven operating restaurants: Metairie, Louisiana (8,000 square feet); Ft. Lauderdale (7,800 square feet), Palm Beach (7,200 square feet) and Sarasota (7,400 square feet), Florida; Houston, Texas (7,200 square feet); Columbus, Ohio (8,100 square feet); and Palm Desert, California (6,800 square feet).

In addition to the restaurants set forth in the table below, the Company owns an office building of approximately 75,860 square feet in Heathrow, Florida, which houses its corporate headquarters, and an office building in Metairie, Louisiana of approximately 22,000 square feet.

The following table sets forth information about the Company’s existing company-owned and franchisee-owned restaurants as of December 30, 2007. As of December 30, 2007, the Company operated 61 company-owned restaurants and its franchisees operated 57 restaurants. Company-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants range in size from approximately 6,000 to approximately 13,000 square feet. The Company expects that future restaurants will range in size from 8,000 to 10,000 square feet with approximately 230 to 250 seats.

19

Table of Contents

On July 10, 2006, October 8, 2006 and October 30, 2006, the Company acquired a total of seven franchisee-owned restaurants. The asset purchase agreement governing this transaction also provides that an eighth restaurant, located in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, can be purchased by the Company for an agreed upon price (determined according to a formula set forth in the agreement) from the period commencing January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2012.

On September 11, 2007, the Company acquired a total of three franchisee-owned restaurants located in Bellevue and Seattle, Washington, and Portland, Oregon.

On February 19, 2008, the Company acquired all of the operating assets and intellectual property of Columbus, Ohio based Mitchell’s Fish Market, which operates 19 restaurants operating under the names

20

Table of Contents

Mitchell’s Fish Market and Columbus Fish Market, and Cameron’s Steakhouse, which operates three restaurants operating under the names Cameron’s Steakhouse and Mitchell’s Steakhouse from Cameron Mitchell Restaurants, LLC (CMR).

The 19 Mitchell’s Fish Market restaurants are located at Stamford, CT; Jacksonville, Sandestin and Tampa, FL; Glenview, IL; Carmel, IN; Louisville and Newport, KY; Birmingham, Lansing, Livonia and Rochester Hills, MI; Columbus (Crosswoods) and Columbus (Grandview), OH; Homestead and Pittsburgh, PA; and Brookfield, WI. The three Cameron’s Steakhouse restaurants are located at Columbus (Downtown) and Columbus (Polaris), OH; and Birmingham, MI. Each of these restaurants is leased, other than Columbus (Grandview), which is owned by the Company.

The Company has also entered into lease commitments to develop seven additional company-owned Ruth’s Chris restaurants in Fort Worth, Texas; New Orleans, Louisiana; Princeton, New Jersey; Dedham, Massachusetts; Barrington (Chicago), Illinois; Fresno, California; and Phoenix, Arizona.

In Re: Katherine Bush; In Re: Melia Stopa.

In November 2007, the Company was named as the respondent in two Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charges filed by two former employees wherein each charging party filed a claim of discrimination against the Company on the basis of their sex. Separately, the Company received written demand for both monetary and non-monetary relief from counsel for the two charging parties accompanied by threatened litigation seeking putative, class-wide relief for similarly situated individuals. The Company has responded to the charges, denied liability, considers the claims without merit and will vigorously defend them. The Company is not currently able to determine the outcome of the pending EEOC charges, whether class-wide certification will occur, any possible exposures or whether such exposures would be material. The Company is not currently able to determine the outcome of this pending action, whether class-wide certification will occur, any possible exposures or whether such exposures would be material.

Nikko Rose and Brandon Rose v. Ruth’s Chris Steak House Boston, LLC.

In November 2007 one current and one former employee filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts alleging that one of the Company’s affiliates violated the Fair Standards Labor Act (“FLSA”) by inappropriately taking the “tip credit” set forth in section 203 (m) of the FLSA. Plaintiffs filed the action seeking putative, class-wide relief though no judicial certification has been made. Also, in November 2007, the same plaintiffs filed a complaint in the Massachusetts Superior Court for Suffolk County alleging that the Company violated Massachusetts General Laws, chapter 149, section 152A, by failing to remit to the wait staff the full amount of alleged service tips that the Company includes on its guest checks for private banquets. Plaintiffs also filed this action as a putative class action though no judicial certification has been made. The Company is not currently able to determine the outcome of this pending action, whether class-wide certification will occur, any possible exposures or whether such exposures would be material.

From time to time, the Company has been named as a defendant in other litigation arising in the normal course of business. Claims typically pertain to “slip and fall” accidents at its restaurants, employment claims and claims from guests alleging illness, injury or other food quality, health or operational concerns. Other claims and disputes have arisen in connection with supply contracts, the site development and construction of system restaurants, and with respect to franchise matters. Certain of these claims are not covered by existing insurance policies; however, many are referred to and are covered by insurance, except for deductible amounts, and have not had a material effect on us. As of the date of hereof, we believe that the ultimate resolution of any such claims in the ordinary course of business will not materially affect our financial condition or earnings.

No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2007.

21

Table of Contents

PART II

The Company’s common stock is listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the trading symbol “RUTH.” As of March 10, 2008, there were 82 holders of record of its common stock. The transfer agent and registrar for its common stock is American Stock Transfer & Trust Company, 59 Maiden Lane, New York, NY 10038, telephone (800) 937-5449.

There were no repurchases of the Company’s equity securities by or on behalf of it during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2007 and the Company does not have a formal or publicly announced stock repurchase program.

The Company’s common stock has been listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market (formerly the Nasdaq National Market) since its initial public offering on August 8, 2005. The following table sets forth, for the period indicated, the highest and lowest closing sale price for its common stock for fiscal 2006 and fiscal 2007, as reported by the Nasdaq Global Select Market:

The closing sale price for its common stock on March 10, 2008 was $6.72.

Dividend Policy

The Company currently expects to retain all future earnings to finance the growth of its business. Since its acquisition by affiliates of Madison Dearborn in 1999, the Company has not paid, and has no current plans to pay in the future, cash dividends to holders of its common stock. The payment of dividends is within the discretion of the Company’s board of directors and will depend on its earnings, capital requirements and operating and financial condition, among other factors. In addition, the Company’s senior credit facilities limit its ability to pay dividends. The Company may not pay a dividend if there is a default (or if a default would result from such dividend payment) under its senior credit facilities, and may not pay dividends in excess of an aggregate of $3.0 million in any fiscal year.

Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities

None.

Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans

See Item 12, Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters, of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for information regarding securities authorized for issuance under the Company’s equity compensation plans.

22

Table of Contents

Performance Graph

The following table and graph shows the cumulative total stockholder return on the Company’s Common Stock with the S&P 500 Stock Index, the S&P SmallCap 600 Index and the Dow Jones U.S. Restaurants & Bars Index, in each case assuming an initial investment of $100 on August 8, 2005 and full dividend reinvestment.

CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN

Assuming an investment of $100 and reinvestment of dividends

All amounts rounded to the nearest dollar.

23

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth the Company’s selected financial data for the year indicated and should be read in conjunction with the disclosures in Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Results of Operations and Financial Condition and Item 8, Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, of this report.

24

Table of Contents

Overview

The Company believes that it is the largest upscale steakhouse company in the United States, based on total company- and franchisee-owned restaurants as published in the Technomic, Inc. 2007 Top 100 U.S. Chain Reference Guide. The Ruth’s Chris menu features a broad selection of high-quality USDA Prime and Choice grade steaks and other premium offerings served in Ruth’s Chris’ signature fashion—“sizzling” and topped with seasoned butter—complemented by other traditional menu items inspired by the Company’s New Orleans heritage. The Ruth’s Chris restaurants reflect the more than 40-year commitment to the core values instilled by its founder, Ruth Fertel, of caring for its guests by delivering the highest quality food, beverages and service in a warm and inviting atmosphere. The Company believes that Ruth’s Chris is currently one of the strongest brands in fine dining.

25

Table of Contents

The Company’s restaurants cater to families and special occasion diners, in addition to the business clientele traditionally served by upscale steakhouses, by providing a dining experience designed to appeal to a wide range of guests. The Company believes its focus on creating this broad appeal provides it with opportunities to expand into a wide range of markets, including many markets not traditionally served by upscale steakhouses.

The Company offers USDA Prime and Choice grade steaks that are aged and prepared to exact company standards and cooked in 1,800-degree broilers. The Company also offers veal, lamb, poultry and seafood dishes, and a broad selection of appetizers, including New Orleans-style barbequed shrimp, mushrooms stuffed with crabmeat, shrimp remoulade, Louisiana seafood gumbo, onion soup au gratin, crabtini and seven salad variations. The Company complements its distinctive food offerings with an award-winning core wine list, typically featuring bottles priced at between $28 and $2,000 and many selections offered by the glass.

As of December 30, 2007, there were 118 Ruth’s Chris restaurants, of which 61 were company-owned and 57 were franchisee-owned, including twelve international franchisee-owned restaurants in Mexico, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan and Canada. In fiscal 2007, the Company had total revenues of $319.2 million and operating income (excluding hurricane and relocation costs and loss on impairment) of $35.4 million.

On February 19, 2008, the Company completed the acquisition previously announced on November 6, 2007, that it had entered into a definitive asset purchase agreement to acquire all of the operating assets and intellectual property of Mitchell’s Fish Market, operating under the names Mitchell’s Fish Market and Columbus Fish Market, and Cameron’s Steakhouse, operating under the names Cameron’s Steakhouse and Mitchell’s Steakhouse from Cameron Mitchell Restaurants, LLC (CMR) for approximately $92.0 million. There are currently 19 Mitchell’s Fish Markets and three Cameron’s Steakhouse’s with locations in the Midwest, Northeast, and Florida.

Key Financial Terms and Metrics

The Company evaluates its business using a variety of key financial measures:

Restaurant Sales. Restaurant sales consist of food and beverage sales by company-owned restaurants. Restaurant sales are primarily influenced by total operating weeks in the relevant period and comparable restaurant sales growth. Total operating weeks is the total number of company-owned restaurants multiplied by the number of weeks each is in operation during the relevant period. Total operating weeks is impacted by restaurant openings and closings, as well as changes in the number of weeks included in the relevant period. Comparable restaurant sales growth reflects the change in year-over-year or quarter-over-quarter, as applicable, sales for the comparable restaurant base. The Company defines the comparable restaurant base to be those company-owned restaurants in operation for not less than fifteen months prior to the beginning of the fiscal quarter including the period being measured. Comparable restaurant sales growth is primarily influenced by the number of entrées sold and the average guest check. The number of entrees sold is influenced by the popularity of the Company’s menu items, its guest mix, its ability to deliver a high quality dining experience and overall economic conditions. Average guest check, a measure of total restaurant sales divided by the number of entrées, is driven by menu mix and pricing.

Franchise Income. Franchise income includes (1) franchise and development option fees charged to franchisees and (2) royalty income. Franchise royalties consist of 5.0% of adjusted gross sales from each franchisee-owned restaurant. The Company evaluates the performance of its franchisees by measuring franchisee-owned restaurant operating weeks, which is impacted by franchisee-owned restaurant openings and closings, and comparable franchisee-owned restaurant sales growth, which together with operating weeks, drives its royalty income.

Other Operating Income. Other operating income includes banquet related guarantee and services revenue and other incidental guest fees as well as other licensing fees and income associated with the sale of gift cards. While we always honor gift cards, even beyond any stated expiration dates on the card and as required in several jurisdictions, our historical experience has shown that very few cards are redeemed after 18 months following the issue date. As such, the Company records in other operating income the full remaining value (original issue less

26

Table of Contents

any partial redemptions) of any gift cards unredeemed after 18 months from the date of last activity, subject to limitations in some jurisdictions in which the Company operates.

Food and Beverage Costs. Food and beverage costs include all restaurant-level food and beverage costs of company-owned restaurants. The Company measures food and beverage costs by tracking cost of sales as a percentage of restaurant sales and cost per entrée. Food and beverage costs are generally influenced by the cost of food and beverage items, distribution costs and menu mix.

Restaurant Operating Expenses. The Company measures restaurant-operating expenses for company-owned restaurants as a percentage of restaurant sales. Restaurant operating expenses include the following:

Marketing and Advertising. Marketing and advertising includes all media, production and related costs for both local restaurant advertising and national marketing. The Company measures the efficiency of its marketing and advertising expenditures by tracking these costs as a percentage of total revenues. The Company has historically spent approximately 2.5% to 4.0% of total revenues on marketing and advertising and expects to maintain this level in the near term. All franchise agreements executed based on its new form of franchise agreement include up to a 1.0% advertising fee in addition to the 5.0% royalty fee. The Company spends this designated advertising fee on national advertising and records these fees as liabilities against which specified advertising and marketing costs will be charged.

General and Administrative. General and administrative costs include costs relating to all corporate and administrative functions that support development and restaurant operations and provide an infrastructure to support future company and franchisee growth. General and administrative costs are comprised of management, supervisory and staff salaries and employee benefits, travel, information systems, training, corporate rent, professional and consulting fees, technology and market research. The Company measures its general and administrative expense efficiency by tracking these costs as a percentage of total revenues. These expenses are expected to increase as a result of costs associated with being a public company as well as costs related to its anticipated growth, including substantial training costs and significant investments in infrastructure. As the Company is able to leverage these investments made in its people and systems, the Company expects these expenses to decrease as a percentage of total revenues over time.

Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and amortization includes depreciation of fixed assets. Consistent with SEC guidance, the Company depreciates capitalized leasehold improvements over the shorter of the total expected lease term or their estimated useful life. As the Company accelerates its restaurant openings, depreciation and amortization is expected to increase as a result of its increased capital expenditures.

Pre-Opening Costs. Pre-opening costs consist of costs incurred prior to opening a company-owned restaurant, which are comprised principally of manager salaries and relocation costs, employee payroll and related training costs for new employees, including practice and rehearsal of service activities as well as lease costs incurred prior to opening. The Company expects these costs to increase as it accelerates its company-owned restaurant openings, which may have a material impact on the Company’s operating results in future periods.

Initial Public Offering

In August 2005, the Company and selling shareholders completed an initial public offering of 9,375,000 and 5,575,000 shares of common stock, respectively, at $18.00 per share. The Company received net proceeds of

27

Table of Contents

approximately $154.3 million from the sale of shares of its common stock in the offering after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses payable by it. The Company used the net proceeds of the offering as follows: (1) approximately $11.7 million was used to redeem all of its outstanding mandatorily redeemable Series A senior cumulative preferred stock, (2) approximately $76.2 million to redeem or repurchase all of its outstanding Series B junior cumulative preferred stock, (3) approximately $65.5 million was used to repay a portion of the outstanding indebtedness under its senior credit facilities and (4) $0.8 million was used for general working capital needs of the Company.

Results of Operations

The table below sets forth certain operating data expressed as a percentage of total revenues for the periods indicated. The Company’s historical results are not necessarily indicative of the operating results that may be expected in the future. Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform with the current year presentation of discontinued operations and other income. These reclassifications had no effect on previously reported net income.

Fiscal Year 2007 Compared to Fiscal Year 2006

Restaurant sales. Restaurant sales increased $48.9 million, or 19.2%, to $303.7 million in fiscal 2007 from $254.7 million in fiscal 2006. This increase was due primarily to an additional $31.7 million contributed from 13 restaurants acquired during fiscal 2006 and 2007, and $26.5 million from restaurants opened during fiscal 2006

28

Table of Contents

and 2007. This increase was partially offset by a reduction of $6.7 million from the additional week of operations during fiscal 2006 as well as a $2.6 million decrease in comparable restaurant sales. Comparable restaurants open throughout both fiscal years experienced a sales decrease of 1.0%, consisting of a 4.7% decrease in entrée growth (traffic) partially offset by a 3.7% increase in per entrée spending. The increase in per entrée spending was driven by a shift in sales mix as well as menu price increases of approximately 2.0% and 2.8% taken in January 2007 and October 2007. These factors increased the average per entrée spending to $74.36 for fiscal 2007.

Franchise Income. Franchise income increased $0.5 million, or 4.0%, to $12.9 million in fiscal 2007 from $12.4 million in fiscal 2006 The increase was due primarily to the opening of ten new franchise-owned restaurants in 2007 as well as the full-year impact of seven new franchisee-owned restaurants that opened during fiscal 2006. These increases were partially offset by the acquisition by the Company of seven franchise-owned restaurants during fiscal 2006 and three franchise-owned restaurants in the third quarter of fiscal 2007, as well as a comparable restaurant sales decrease of 0.2%.

Other Operating Income. Other operating income decreased $1.8 million, or 40.9%, to $2.6 million in fiscal 2007 from $4.4 million in fiscal 2006. The decrease is due to the recognition of $2.0 million in gift card related revenues in fiscal 2007 compared to $3.7 million in fiscal 2006.

Food and Beverage Costs. Food and beverage costs increased $15.4 million, or 18.8%, to $97.4 million in fiscal 2007 from $82.0 million in fiscal 2006. The increase was due to higher restaurant sales and partially offset by lower meat costs. As a percentage of restaurant sales, food and beverage costs decreased to 32.1% in fiscal 2007 from 32.2% in fiscal 2006. This decrease in food and beverage costs as a percentage of restaurant sales was due to favorable beef costs and modest price increases, partially offset by higher produce and dairy costs.

Restaurant Operating Expenses. Restaurant operating expenses increased $27.8 million, or 24.5%, to $141.5 million in fiscal 2007 from $113.7 million in fiscal 2006. The increase was due to higher restaurant sales in fiscal 2007, increased hourly labor costs, staffing related to new restaurant openings and increased occupancy costs. Restaurant operating expenses, as a percentage of restaurant sales, increased to 46.6% in fiscal 2007 from 44.7% in fiscal 2006. This increase in restaurant operating expenses as a percentage of restaurant sales was due to increased labor, operating, and occupancy expenses of newly opened restaurants as well as reduced fixed expense leverage experienced from lower comparable restaurant sales and the additional operating week during fiscal 2006.

Marketing and Advertising. Marketing and advertising expenses increased $0.1 million, or 1.2%, to $8.4 million in fiscal 2007 from $8.3 million in fiscal 2006. Marketing and advertising expenses, as a percentage of total revenues, decreased to 2.6% in fiscal 2007 from 3.1% in fiscal 2006. This decrease was primarily due to reduced utilization of television and national radio as well as reduced agency fees during fiscal 2007.

General and Administrative Costs. General and administrative costs increased $2.1 million, or 9.1%, to $25.1 million in fiscal 2007 from $23.0 million in fiscal 2006. General and administrative costs, as a percentage of total revenues, decreased to 7.9% in fiscal 2007 from 8.5% in fiscal 2006. This increase is due to $0.8 million in non-cash compensation expense under FAS123R, $0.6 million of non-recurring severance and Mitchell’s acquisitions costs, and the full year impact of the support personnel hired during 2006 and fiscal 2007. These increases were partially offset by reduced levels of incentive compensation.

Depreciation and Amortization Expenses. Depreciation and amortization expense increased $3.3 million, or 37.9%, to $12.0 million in fiscal 2007 from $8.7 million in fiscal 2006. The increase was due primarily to the addition of new company-owned restaurants and acquired restaurants during 2006 and 2007 as well as investments at the Company’s existing company-owned restaurants and corporate headquarters.

Pre-Opening Costs. Pre-opening costs increased $3.0 million, or 150.0%, to $5.0 million in fiscal 2007 from $2.0 million in fiscal 2006. This increase was due to the opening of eight new company-owned restaurants in fiscal 2007 versus three locations during fiscal 2006.

29

Table of Contents

Hurricane and Relocation costs net of insurance proceeds. The Company recognized income, net of relocation costs, of $3.5 million in fiscal 2007 from $3.9 million in fiscal 2006. These net insurance proceeds related to the Company’s business interruption losses and property losses in New Orleans and Metairie, Louisiana and Biloxi, Mississippi as a result of Hurricane Katrina. The Company finalized its claim in fiscal 2007 and does not expect any significant expenses or proceeds related to the Hurricane Katrina in the future.

Interest Expense. Interest expense, net of interest income, increased $3.1 million, or 106.9%, to $6.0 million in fiscal 2007 from $2.9 million in fiscal 2006. This increase was primarily due to the additional borrowings related to the 2006 and 2007 acquired restaurants as well as higher interest rates on those borrowings. Interest expense during the year included a $1.2 million “mark to market” non-cash charge related to an interest rate swap.

Income Tax Expense. Income tax expense decreased $1.6 million, or 15.8%, to $8.5 million in fiscal 2007 from $10.1 million in fiscal 2006. The decrease was primarily due to a reduced income before income tax and partially offset by an increase in the annual effective tax rate from 29.9% in fiscal 2006 to 32.0% in fiscal 2007.

Income from Continuing Operations. Income from continuing operations decreased $5.5 million, or 23.2%, to $18.2 million in fiscal 2007 from $23.7 million in fiscal 2006.

Discontinued Operations, net of Income Tax Benefit. Discontinued operations resulted in $4,000 of expense in fiscal 2007 compared to $66,000 of income in fiscal 2006. Discontinued operations income and expense relates to former operations in Cleveland, Ohio and Manhattan, NY. On June 25, 2006 the Company closed its Cleveland, Ohio restaurant whose lease term ended in September 2006. The Company determined that the closed restaurant should be accounted for as discontinued operations because the Company does not expect any further direct or indirect cash inflows from the discontinued restaurant as the restaurant has completely ceased operation. During August 2005, the Company entered into an agreement with the Manhattan-UN, New York landlord whereby: (1) the Company made a one-time payment of $0.3 million to the landlord for rent, commission on replacement lease, and attorneys fees; (2) the existing lease was terminated; (3) the Company allowed the landlord to contract with a third party replacement tenant; and (4) the Company and the landlord adjusted the remaining contingent lease term from eleven years to six years. Under the agreement, after the third anniversary, if the replacement tenant defaults on the new lease anytime during the remaining six years, the Company will be required to enter into a new agreement with the landlord for the remaining term. During the third quarter of fiscal 2007, the Company was notified that the replacement tenant was placed in default by the landlord. As a result, the Company may be required to resume lease payments in respect of this property as soon as the third quarter of fiscal 2008, which payments will total $0.2 million in the aggregate per fiscal quarter through September 1, 2014. In the event that the Company becomes required to make these lease payments, it expects to sublease the property for the duration of the lease term in order to recover some or all of the amounts paid in respect of the lease. The Company may, however, be unable to find a sub-lessee for part or all of the remaining lease term. At December 30, 2007, the Company maintained a contingent lease liability of $0.2 million related to this property.

Fiscal Year 2006 Compared to Fiscal Year 2005

Restaurant Sales. Restaurant sales increased $55.1 million, or 27.6%, to $254.7 million in fiscal 2006 from $199.6 million in fiscal 2005. The increase was due to an additional $16.5 million in sales from comparable restaurants, $26.7 million in incremental sales from six new company-owned restaurants opened from September 2005 through December 2006 and the reopened Metairie, Louisiana, restaurant, as well as $15.5 million contributed by the previously franchised restaurants acquired during 2006. All three of these categories received benefit from an addition week of operations during fiscal 2006 versus fiscal 2005. The additional week, in total, contributed restaurant sales of $6.7 million. These increases were partially offset by the closing of the New Orleans, Louisiana, restaurant, due to Hurricane Katrina, which represented a net decrease in restaurant sales of $3.6 million. Comparable restaurants open throughout both fiscal years on a comparable 52-week basis achieved a sales increase of 6.2%, consisting of 0.7% in entrée growth (traffic) and 5.5% in per entrée spending. The increase in per entrée spending was driven by a shift in sales mix as well as menu price increases of

30

Table of Contents

approximately 1.5% and 0.7% taken in January 2006 and August 2006. These factors increased the average per entrée spending to $71.55 in fiscal 2006.

Franchise Income. Franchise income increased $1.0 million, or 8.8%, to $12.4 million in fiscal 2006 from $11.4 million in fiscal 2005. The increase was due primarily to an $8.5 million increase in franchisee-owned restaurant sales from those franchisee-owned restaurants open throughout both periods, representing a comparable franchisee-owned restaurants sales growth of 5.2%, as well as the full-year impact of four new franchisee-owned restaurants that opened during fiscal 2005 and seven new franchisee-owned restaurants that opened during fiscal 2006. These increases were partially offset by the acquisition of seven franchisee-owned restaurants by the Company and the closing of one franchise location during fiscal 2006.

Other Operating Income. Other operating income increased $3.6 million, or 450.0% to $4.4 million in fiscal 2006 from $0.8 million in fiscal 2005. The increase is due to the recognition of gift card revenues of $3.7 million in fiscal 2006, as a result of the Company entering into an agreement with an unrelated third party that assumed the unredeemed liability for gift cards that had not yet reached the statutory term for unclaimed property. As a result of the agreement, certain third-party claims on unredeemed gift cards for certain jurisdictions have been removed, thus allowing the company to recognize additional other income in 2006.

Food and Beverage Costs. Food and beverage costs increased $20.2 million, or 32.7%, to $82.0 million in fiscal 2006 from $61.8 million in fiscal 2005. The increase was due to higher restaurant sales and higher food costs. As a percentage of restaurant sales, food and beverage costs increased to 32.2% in fiscal 2006 from 31.0% in fiscal 2005. This increase in food and beverage costs as a percentage of restaurant sales was primarily due to higher meat costs, primarily tenderloins, and was partially offset by lower dairy costs.

Restaurant Operating Expenses. Restaurant operating expenses increased $22.5 million, or 24.7%, to $113.7 million in fiscal 2006 from $91.2 million in fiscal 2005. The increase was due to higher restaurant sales in fiscal 2006, increased hourly labor costs, staffing related to new restaurant openings, and increased utility costs. Restaurant operating expenses, as a percentage of restaurant sales, decreased to 44.7% in fiscal 2006 from 45.7% in fiscal 2005 as a result of leveraging certain fixed occupancy and labor costs, as well as, the extra week of operations in fiscal 2006.

Marketing and Advertising. Marketing and advertising expenses increased $1.6 million, or 23.9%, to $8.3 million in fiscal 2006 from $6.7 million in fiscal 2005. Marketing and advertising expenses, as a percentage of total revenues, decreased slightly to 3.1% in fiscal 2006 from 3.2% in fiscal 2005.

General and Administrative Costs. General and administrative costs increased $7.8 million, or 51.3%, to $23.0 million in fiscal 2006 from $15.2 million in fiscal 2005. General and administrative costs, as a percentage of total revenues, increased to 8.5% in fiscal 2006 from 7.2% in fiscal 2005. This increase was primarily due to the recruitment and hiring of several key management personnel and staff personnel in all functional areas in the later part of fiscal 2005 and the first half of 2006, the addition of certain public-company expenses, additional costs associated with initiating and maintaining operations at the Company’s Heathrow headquarters and expenses for stock options granted under FAS 123R.

Depreciation and Amortization Expenses. Depreciation and amortization expense increased $2.2 million, or 33.8%, to $8.7 million in fiscal 2006 from $6.5 million in fiscal 2005. The increase was primarily due to the addition of six new company-owned restaurants and seven acquired restaurants from the second quarter of 2005 through the fourth quarter of 2006 as well as investments at the Company’s existing company-owned restaurants and corporate headquarters.

Pre-Opening Costs. Pre-opening costs increased $0.4 million, or 25.0%, to $2.0 million in fiscal 2006 from $1.6 million in fiscal 2005. This increase was due to the opening of four new company-owned restaurants in fiscal 2006 versus three locations during fiscal 2005, as well as certain expenses associated with the acquisition of the seven previously franchised restaurants.

31

Table of Contents

Hurricane and Relocation costs, net of insurance proceeds. During the third quarter of fiscal 2005, the Company’s corporate office building in Metairie, Louisiana was damaged by Hurricane Katrina and the Company subsequently relocated its corporate offices to Heathrow, Florida. The Company’s restaurants in New Orleans and Metairie, Louisiana, also received damage from Hurricane Katrina. The New Orleans restaurant has not reopened and the Metairie restaurant reopened in December 2005. The Company had completed the construction and pre-opening activities for a new restaurant in Biloxi, Mississippi, which was also damaged by Hurricane Katrina. The Company incurred expenses related to these events of $0.6 million and $2.7 million during fiscal 2006 and fiscal 2005, respectively. These expenses include severance and relocation payments to employees and insurance deductibles for the two New Orleans, Louisiana area restaurants, severance payments and insurance deductibles and pre-opening costs associated with the Biloxi, Mississippi location, and temporary living and relocation costs related to the Company’s relocation from Metairie, Louisiana to Heathrow, Florida.

Interest Expense. Interest expense, net of interest income, decreased $5.6 million, or 65.9%, to $2.9 million in fiscal 2006 from $8.5 million in fiscal 2005. This decrease was primarily due to the repayment of debt in connection with the Company’s initial public offering in August 2005, offset by additional borrowings related to the franchise acquisitions.

Accrued Dividends and Accretion on Mandatorily Redeemable Senior Preferred Stock. Dividends and accretion of issuance discount on Senior Preferred Stock are reflected as accrued dividends and accretion on mandatorily redeemable senior preferred stock in the Company’s consolidated financial statements subsequent to the June 30, 2003 implementation date of SFAS No. 150. The Company used a portion of the proceeds from its initial public offering on August 8, 2005 to redeem all of its outstanding Senior Preferred Stock.

Income Tax Expense. Income tax expense increased $5.1 million, or 102.0%, to $10.1 million in fiscal 2006 from $5.0 million in fiscal 2005. This increase was due to a higher income from continuing operations before tax partially offset by a decrease in the annual effective tax rate due in part to tax credits received in fiscal 2006.

Income from Continuing Operations. Income from continuing operations increased $12.9 million, or 119.4%, to $23.7 million in fiscal 2006 from $10.8 million fiscal 2005.

Discontinued Operations, net of Income Tax Benefit. Discontinued operations provided $66,000 in fiscal 2006 compared to $164,000 in fiscal 2005. On June 25, 2006 the company closed its Cleveland, Ohio restaurant whose lease term ended September 2006. The Company determined that the closed restaurant should be accounted for as discontinued operations because the Company does not expect any further direct or indirect cash inflows from the restaurant as it has completely ceased operation. The Company recognized a $221,000 loss on impairment related to this location during fiscal year 2005.

On December 24, 2004, the Company closed its Manhattan-UN, New York restaurant operation, one of its two Ruth’s Chris Steak House locations in Manhattan, New York. Prior to and including 2004, the Company experienced operating losses at its Manhattan-UN, New York restaurant location, which leased the property on which it operated. During August 2005, the Company entered into an agreement with the Manhattan (UN), New York landlord whereby: (1) the Company made a one-time payment of $0.3 million to the landlord for rent, commission on a replacement lease, and attorneys fees; (2) the existing lease was terminated; (3) the Company allowed the landlord to contract with a third party replacement tenant; and (4) adjusted the remaining contingent lease term from eleven years to six years. Under the agreement, after the third anniversary, if the replacement tenant defaults on the new lease anytime during the remaining six years, the Company will be required to enter into a new agreement with landlord for the remaining term. This agreement resulted in a reduction of previously recorded rental liability reflecting the recovery.

32

Table of Contents

Potential Fluctuations in Quarterly Results and Seasonality

The Company’s quarterly operating results may fluctuate significantly as a result of a variety of factors. See “Risk Factors,” which discloses certain material risks that could affect its quarterly operating results.

The Company’s business is also subject to seasonal fluctuations. Historically, the percentages of its annual total revenues during the first and fourth fiscal quarters have been higher due, in part, to the year-end holiday season. Accordingly, results for any one quarter are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for any other quarter or for any year, and comparable restaurant sales for any particular period may decrease. In the future, operating results may fall below the expectations of securities analysts and investors. If this occurs, the price of the Company’s common stock would likely decrease. The following table presents summary quarterly results of operations for fiscal 2006 and fiscal 2007.