1. Real World Scenario
The following is an excerpt from an article that appeared in the August 25, 2002 edition of The Seattle
Times:
When Cutter & Buck revealed two weeks ago that it padded sales figures in
2000 by recording $5.8 million in shipments that were mostly returned, the
news came as a surprise to many investors. But it wasn’t the first time the
Seattle sportswear retailer’s shipping and accounting practices have been called
into question. Shortly before co-founder Joey Rodolfo left in 1997, he accused
the company of shipping orders months before customers were expecting them,
a method of prematurely booking sales.
Some customers and former employees say early shipments persisted for years
after Rodolfo raised the issue. And late last week, Chief Executive Fran Conley
said an internal investigation has found that early shipments were “more
extensive than I had known” and may force the company to further restate sales
figures.
Shipping and booking orders ahead of schedule to meet short-term sales goals
— a practice sometimes called channel stuffing — is not, by definition, illegal.
But by essentially borrowing from future sales to claim bigger current sales and
profit, it can be used to boost a company’s bottom line and create a misleading
appearance of growth for investors.
Suggestions:
This article provides a good way to introduce the topic of channel stuffing. When a company stuffs
the channel, it ships inventory ahead of schedule filling its distribution channels with more product
than is needed. Since companies often record sales as soon as they ship products, channel stuffing can
make it appear that business is booming. Is this practice legal? Is it an acceptable practice according
to GAAP? Is it an ethical practice?
Points to note:
Channel stuffing is not an uncommon practice. There are many examples you can find for your
students. A text case references the Sunbeam incident that occurred in the late 90s. More recent
examples include Microsoft, Novell, Network Associates, and AOL.
GAAP do not address channel stuffing specifically. The key is whether or not the practice
leads to excessive future sales returns that are not adequately provided for by the seller. There may
be an issue with respect to the legality of the practice if it can be shown that the practice resulted in
misleading information to the investing public. And there are ethical dimensions to the practice as
well.