Table of Contents

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20549

FORM 10-Q

Commission File Number 000-29643

GRANITE CITY FOOD & BREWERY LTD.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

5402 Parkdale Drive, Suite 101

Minneapolis, Minnesota  55416

(952) 215-0660

(Address of Principal Executive Offices and Issuer’s

Telephone Number, including Area Code)

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 o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 229.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).   Yes o   No o

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 o   No x

As of August 9, 2010, the issuer had outstanding 7,367,895 shares of common stock.

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

i

Table of Contents

PART I               FINANCIAL INFORMATION

ITEM 1  Financial Statements

GRANITE CITY FOOD & BREWERY LTD.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(Unaudited)

See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.

1

Table of Contents

GRANITE CITY FOOD & BREWERY LTD.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(Unaudited)

See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.

2

Table of Contents

GRANITE CITY FOOD & BREWERY LTD.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(Unaudited)

See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.

3

Table of Contents

GRANITE CITY FOOD & BREWERY LTD.

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(Unaudited)

Thirteen and Twenty-six weeks ended June 29, 2010 and June 30, 2009

1.     Summary of significant accounting policies

Background

Granite City Food & Brewery Ltd. (the “Company”) develops and operates Modern American casual dining restaurants known as Granite City Food & Brewery®.   The restaurant theme is upscale casual dining with a wide variety of menu items that are prepared fresh daily, combined with freshly brewed hand-crafted beers finished on-site.  The Company opened its first Granite City restaurant in St. Cloud, Minnesota in July 1999 and has since expanded to other Midwest markets.  As of June 29, 2010, the Company operated 26 restaurants in 11 states.  The Company also operates a centralized beer production facility which is used to provide raw material support to its restaurants to create consistent quality and operational efficiencies in the production of its proprietary beer.  The Company believes that this brewing process improves the economics of microbrewing as it eliminates the initial stages of brewing and storage at multiple locations.  In 2007, the Company was granted a patent by the United States Patent Office for its brewing process.

Principles of consolidation and basis of presentation

For the twenty-six weeks ended June 29, 2010, the Company operated at a level that allowed it to fund its existing operations.  The Company believes this same level of sales and margins will allow it to fund its obligations for the foreseeable future.  However, the Company’s ability to continue funding its operations and meet its debt service obligations continues to depend upon its operating performance, and more broadly, achieving budgeted revenue and operating margins, both of which will be affected by prevailing economic conditions in the retail and casual dining industries and other factors, which may be beyond the Company’s control.  If revenue or margins, or a combination of both, decrease to levels unsustainable for continuing operations, the Company will require equity or debt financing to meet ongoing obligations.  The amount of any such required funding would depend upon the Company’s ability to generate working capital.  There can be no assurance that the Company will obtain financing on favorable terms or at all.  If the Company raises additional capital through the issuance and sale of equity securities, the securities may be issued at prices below the market price of its stock, and its shareholders may suffer significant dilution.  Debt financing, if available, may involve significant cash payment obligations, covenants and financial ratios that restrict the Company’s ability to operate and grow its business, and would cause it to incur additional interest expense and financing costs.  If cash flow from operations is insufficient to fund expected capital needs, or if the Company’s needs are greater than anticipated and the Company is unable to obtain additional capital, the Company will be required to further restructure its debt obligations.  The failure to reach agreements with creditors to further restructure indebtedness, including lease obligations, would have a material adverse effect upon the Company’s business and results of operations.

The Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts and operations of the Company and its subsidiary corporation under which its four Kansas locations are operated.  By Kansas state law, 50% of the stock of the subsidiary corporation must be owned by a resident of Kansas.  Granite City Restaurant Operations, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, owns the remaining 50% of the stock of the subsidiary corporation.  The resident-owner of the stock of that entity has entered into a buy-sell agreement with the subsidiary corporation providing, among other things, that transfer of the shares is restricted and that the shareholder must sell his shares to the subsidiary corporation upon certain events, or any event that disqualifies the resident-owner from owning the shares under applicable laws and regulations of the state.  The Company has entered into a master agreement with the subsidiary corporation that permits the operation of the restaurants and leases to the subsidiary corporation the Company’s property and facilities.  The subsidiary corporation pays all of its operating expenses and obligations, and the Company retains, as

4

Table of Contents

consideration for the operating arrangements and the lease of property and facilities, all the net profits, as defined, if any, from such operations.  The foregoing ownership structure was set up to comply with the licensing and ownership regulations related to microbreweries within the state of Kansas.  The Company has determined that such ownership structure will cause the subsidiary corporation to be treated as a variable interest entity in which the Company has a controlling financial interest for the purpose of Financial Accounting Standards Board’s (“FASB”) accounting guidance on accounting for variable interest entities.  As such, the subsidiary corporation is consolidated with the Company’s financial statements and the Company’s financial statements do not reflect a minority ownership in the subsidiary corporation.  Also included in the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements are other wholly-owned subsidiaries.  All references to the Company in these notes to the condensed consolidated financial statements relate to the consolidated entity, and all intercompany balances have been eliminated.

In the opinion of management, all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring adjustments, which are necessary for a fair statement of the Company’s financial position as of June 29, 2010, and its results of operations for the interim periods ended June 29, 2010 and June 30, 2009, have been included.

The balance sheet at December 29, 2009 has been derived from the audited financial statements at that date, but does not include all of the information and notes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements.  Certain information and note disclosures normally included in the Company’s annual financial statements have been condensed or omitted.  These condensed financial statements should be read in conjunction with the financial statements and notes thereto included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 29, 2009, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on March 22, 2010.

The results of operations for the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 29, 2010 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the entire year.

Related parties

DHW Leasing, L.L.C. (“DHW”), the beneficial owner of approximately 63.3% of the Company’s common stock, gained control of the Company in October 2009.  The members of DHW are Donald A. Dunham, Jr. and Charles J. Hey.  Mr. Dunham, who is also the sole member of Dunham Capital Management, LLC (“DCM”) and 70% owner of Dunham Equity Management, LLC (“DEM”), became one of the Company’s directors in October 2009.  DHW, DCM and DEM are collectively, with Mr. Dunham, referred to herein as the “Dunham Entities.”  As of June 29, 2010, Mr. Dunham beneficially owned approximately 64.3% of the Company’s common stock, including the shares held by DHW.  DCM and DEM are entities that either are the landlord or the general partner in various limited partnerships that own real estate leased to the Company.  Mr. Dunham, as an individual, also owns a limited partnership interest in one of the limited partnerships that own real estate leased to the Company.

Use of estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America and regulations of the SEC requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expense during the reporting period.  Significant estimates include estimates related to asset lives and gift card liability.  Actual results could differ from these estimates.

Revenue recognition

Revenue is derived from the sale of prepared food and beverage and select retail items.  Revenue is recognized at the time of sale and is reported on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations net of sales taxes collected.  Revenue derived from gift card sales is recognized at the time the gift card is redeemed.  Until the redemption of gift cards occurs, the outstanding balances on such cards are included in accrued expenses in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets.  The Company periodically recognizes gift card breakage which represents the portion of its gift card obligation for which management believes the likelihood

5

Table of Contents

of redemption by the customer is remote, based upon historical redemption patterns.  Such amounts are included as a reduction to general and administrative expense.

Cash and cash equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid instruments with original maturities of three months or less to be cash equivalents.

Stock-based compensation

The Company measures and recognizes all stock-based compensation under the fair value method using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model.  Share-based compensation expense recognized is based on awards ultimately expected to vest, and as such, it is reduced for estimated or actual forfeitures.  Forfeitures are estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates.  The Company used the following assumptions within the Black-Scholes option-pricing model for the first half of 2010 and 2009:

Net loss per share

Basic net loss per share is computed based on the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the fiscal year.  Diluted net loss per share is not presented since the effect would be anti-dilutive due to the losses.  Calculations of the Company’s net loss per common share reflect the Company’s January 2010 one-for-six share combination and are set forth in the following table:

2.     Fair value of financial instruments

At June 29, 2010 and December 29, 2009, the fair value of cash and accounts payable approximates their carrying value due to the short-term nature of the instruments. The fair value of the capital lease obligations and long-term debt is estimated at its carrying value based upon current rates available to the Company.

3.              Reverse stock split

On December 29, 2009, the Company’s board of directors approved a one-for-six share combination of its common stock which became effective on January 13, 2010.  As a result of this reverse stock split, every six shares of the Company’s common stock that were issued and outstanding as of January 13, 2010 were automatically combined into one issued and outstanding share without any change in the par value of such shares, and the number of authorized but unissued shares of the Company’s common stock was proportionally reduced.  A proportionate adjustment was also made to the Company’s outstanding stock options and warrants.  No fractional shares were issued in connection with this reverse stock split, but rather shareholders who were entitled

6

Table of Contents

to fractional shares received cash in lieu of receiving fractional shares.  All references within this document to loss per share reflect this reverse stock split.  Additionally, the number of common shares, stock options and warrants, and the price per common share, stock option and warrant, reflect this reverse stock split.

4.              Restaurant closing and asset impairment charges

Rogers, Arkansas

In August 2008, the Company ceased operations at its Rogers, Arkansas restaurant.  Since opening in October 2007, the restaurant failed to generate positive cash flow and had approximately $1.4 million of net loss.  Management believes the closure of this restaurant has allowed the Company to focus its capital and personnel resources on its other restaurants in order to increase future operating efficiencies and cash flow.  The Company has attempted to find a replacement tenant or negotiate for a lease termination for this location which expires December 31, 2018.  Costs incurred in connection with this closure include one-time benefits to employees who were involuntarily terminated of $57,681, costs incurred for early contract termination of $4,578 and costs to close and maintain the facility of $956,997.  During the third quarter of 2008, the Company recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $135,057 related to the write-off of the carrying value of the restaurant equipment at the Rogers location.  The amount of this write-off is equal to the difference between the net book value of the equipment and the expected future cash flows generated by leasing the equipment to a replacement tenant.  Until the Company is able to find a replacement tenant, it will incur ongoing costs such as utilities, landscape and maintenance and general liability insurance. In accordance with the FASB guidance on accounting for costs associated with exit or disposal activities, the Company recorded a non-cash lease termination liability of $1,762,689 based on management’s estimate of the fair value of these obligations.  This required management to estimate the present value of the future minimum lease obligations offset by the estimated sublease rentals that could be reasonably obtained for the property.  Pursuant to the terms of the lease, the annual lease payments for the Roger’s site were $405,000 as of June 29, 2010, and the ongoing costs to maintain the property were approximately $4,600 per month.  As of June 29, 2010, the Company’s future undiscounted cash payments under the terms of this lease were approximately $3.8 million.

Troy, Michigan

In May 2008, the Company entered into a 20-year net lease agreement relating to the restaurant it had planned to open in Troy, Michigan.  However, in February 2009, the Company decided not to build on that site, and as part of an agreement with the Dunham Entities, the Company will reimburse DCM for any out-of-pocket expenses incurred, including the carrying cost of the related land, less net proceeds from the sale of the real estate or lease income associated with the site.  As of June 29, 2010, the carrying cost of the land approximated $16,000 per month.  Such expenses will be amortized and payable to DCM over a 60-month period commencing January 2011, at a 6% annual interest rate.  The Company’s management has concluded that as of June 29, 2010, it is probable that the Company will need to reimburse DCM approximately $534,000 and has included such amount as “accrued exit or disposal activities” on its balance sheet, pursuant to the FASB guidance on accounting for contingencies.

The costs related to the closing of the Rogers restaurant and the decision not to build the Troy restaurant aggregated $260,392 in the first half of 2010 and are reflected on the Company’s condensed consolidated statements of operations as “exit or disposal activities.”   The following is a reconciliation of the beginning and ending balances of exit or disposal activities:

7

Table of Contents

5.              Non-current assets

Property and equipment

Property and equipment is recorded at cost and depreciated over the estimated useful lives of the assets.  Leasehold improvements are depreciated over the term of the related lease or the estimated useful life, whichever is shorter.  Depreciation and amortization of assets held under capital leases and leasehold improvements are computed on the straight-line method for financial reporting purposes.  The following is a summary of the Company’s property and equipment at June 29, 2010 and December 29, 2009:

*Construction in progress includes the following approximate amounts for items yet to be placed in service:

Intangible and other assets

Intangible and other assets consisted of the following:

6.        Accrued expenses

Accrued expenses consisted of the following:

8

Table of Contents

7.        Deferred rent

Under the terms of the lease agreement the Company entered into regarding its Lincoln, Nebraska property, the Company received a lease incentive of $450,000, net.  This lease incentive was recorded as deferred rent and is being amortized to reduce rent expense over the initial term of the lease using the straight-line method.

Also included in deferred rent is the difference between minimum rent payments and straight-line rent over the initial lease term including the “build out” or “rent-holiday” period.  Additionally, certain of the Company’s landlords have agreed to defer a portion of the payments due them for specified periods of time.  The Company also continues to negotiate with its landlords to reduce rents and has withheld rent to certain of its landlords during rent negotiations.  The deferrals are offset in part by the fair value of the warrants issued to certain landlords in consideration of rent reductions.  Contingent rent expense, which is based on a percentage of revenue, is also recorded to the extent it exceeds minimum base rent per the lease agreement.  Deferred rent consisted of:

*Of this amount, approximately $215,000 was paid to DCM, our primary landlord, in August 2010, $528,000 will be due to DCM in October 2010, and approximately $889,000 is due to General Growth Properties with which we are negotiating reduced lease costs for three of our locations.

8.  Long-term debt

As of June 29, 2010, the Company had three long-term loans outstanding with First National Bank (“FNB”), an independent financial institution in Pierre, South Dakota, the proceeds of which the Company used to purchase assets at its Fargo, North Dakota; Des Moines and Davenport, Iowa restaurants.  These loans are secured by the tangible personal property and fixtures at the respective locations and are guaranteed by Steven J. Wagenheim, the Company’s president, chief executive officer and one of its directors.

In August 2008, the Company issued a promissory note to an Indiana general partnership in the amount of $250,000.  The note was issued to secure the liquor license for the Company’s restaurant located in South Bend, Indiana.

In March 2009, the Company entered into a bridge loan agreement with Harmony Equity Income Fund, L.L.C. and Harmony Equity Income Fund II, L.L.C. (collectively, “Harmony”), a group of accredited investors.  A former director of the Company, Eugene E. McGowan, is a member of, and has a beneficial interest in Harmony.  The bridge loan was funded to the extent of $800,000 on March 30, 2009 and is evidenced by notes bearing interest at 9.0% per annum.  In addition, the Company issued to Harmony warrants for the purchase of an aggregate of 53,332 shares of common stock at a price of $1.52 per share.  The notes are secured by a mortgage

9

Table of Contents

against the lease, and security agreements against personal property and intangibles relating to the Company’s Sioux Falls, South Dakota restaurant, including a grant of the rights to use patents, trademarks and other intangibles associated with that restaurant.  Up to 20% of each bridge note may be converted into common stock at a conversion price equal to $3.00 per share.

As of June 29, 2010 and December 29, 2009, the balances, interest rates and maturity dates of our long-term debt were as follows:

Future maturities of long-term debt, exclusive of interest, are as follows:

10

Table of Contents

9.        Capital leases

As of June 29, 2010, the Company operated 15 restaurants under capital lease agreements, of which one expires in 2019, one in 2020, one in 2021, two in 2022, two in 2023, three in 2024, two in 2026 and three in 2027, all with renewable options for additional periods. Thirteen of these lease agreements originated with Donald A. Dunham, Jr. and entities affiliated with him (collectively, the “Dunham Landlords”). Under certain of the leases, the Company may be required to pay additional contingent rent based upon restaurant sales. At the inception and the amendment date of each of these leases, the Company evaluated the fair value of the land and building separately pursuant to the FASB guidance on accounting for leases. The land portion of these leases is classified as an operating lease while the building portion of these leases is classified as a capital lease because its present value was greater than 90% of the estimated fair value at the beginning or amendment date of the lease and/or the lease term represents 75% or more of the expected life of the property.

On June 30, 2010, the Company’s board of directors approved amendments to five of the Company’s leases with the Dunham Landlords, changing the rental amount and extending the term of each lease (Note 14). The amended terms will cause the classification of four such leases to change from operating to capital. The fifth amended lease was, and will remain, a capital lease.

The Company also has a land and building lease agreement for its beer production facility. This ten-year lease allows the Company to purchase the facility at any time for $1.00 plus the unamortized construction costs. Because the construction costs will be fully amortized through payment of rent during the base term, if the option is exercised at or after the end of the initial ten-year period, the option price will be $1.00. As such, the lease, including land, is classified as a capital lease.

In May 2008, the Company entered into a 20-year net lease agreement relating to the restaurant it had planned to open in Troy, Michigan. However, in February 2009, the Company decided not to build on that site, and as part of an agreement with the Dunham Entities, the Company will reimburse DCM for any out-of-pocket expenses incurred less net proceeds from the sale of the real estate or lease income associated with the site (Note 4).

As of June 29, 2010, the Company leased equipment at three of its restaurants pursuant to a lease agreement with Carlton Financial Corporation (“Carlton”). The value of the equipment financed at each of the three locations ranges from approximately $0.8 million to $1.1 million, the annual interest rate on each ranges from 12.9% to 19.6% and the leases will expire in October 2012. The Company may purchase Carlton’s interest in all, but not less than all, of the equipment for a purchase price equal to 15% of the original cost of the equipment. Steven J. Wagenheim, the Company’s president, chief executive officer and one of its directors, was required to personally guarantee payments to be made to Carlton under the lease financing and the Company’s board of directors agreed to compensate him for such guarantee.

In June 2007, the Company entered into a lease for an energy optimization system at its Maple Grove, Minnesota restaurant for approximately $30,000. This five-year lease carries an annual interest rate of approximately 11.9% and contains a bargain purchase option.

Included in property and equipment are the following assets held under capital leases:

11

Table of Contents

Minimum future lease payments under all capital leases are as follows:

The foregoing table includes changes to lease commitments commencing after June 29, 2010 (Note 14). Amortization expense related to the assets held under capital leases is included with depreciation expense on the Company’s statements of operations.

10.      Commitments and contingencies

Litigation

From time to time, lawsuits are threatened or filed against the Company in the ordinary course of business. Such lawsuits typically involve claims from customers, former or current employees, and others related to issues common to the restaurant industry. A number of such claims may exist at any given time. Although there can be no assurance as to the ultimate disposition of these matters, it is management’s opinion, based upon the information available as of August 9, 2010, that the expected outcome of these matters, individually or in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on the results of operation, liquidity or financial condition of the Company. In addition, some property owners have brought actions against the Company or its landlords arising out of the Company’s withholding of rent during the period in which it is attempting to negotiate the lease terms. Management believes these actions have been stayed and will continue in abeyance while active negotiations are taking place with property owners.

Rent reductions

Along with DCM, the Company continues to seek to lower the cost of its land leases at several locations. In some instances, the Company and DCM have not paid rent during this negotiating period. The Company accrues for any non-paid rent during this period under “deferred rents” on the balance sheet (see Note 7 regarding amounts due landlords). To the extent the parties are unable to reach agreements to reduce lease costs, legal action could be brought by lessors that may result in material adverse consequences to the Company, DCM or both. Such material adverse consequences could include legal actions by land owners or other landlords to terminate leases and recover delinquent and future rents. Additionally, if any of the Company’s landlords or parties from whom the Company’s landlords lease property fail financially, the ramifications upon the Company and the Company’s continued occupancy of the leased restaurants would be uncertain. The Company could lose the future revenue from any such affected locations and lose the value of its investment in improvements thereon, if it is unable to negotiate arrangements with new owners of the leased locations, or creditors or bankruptcy trustees of such landlords.

Employment agreements

The Company has entered into employment agreements with Steven J. Wagenheim, its president and chief executive officer; James G. Gilbertson, its chief financial officer; and Darius H. Gilanfar, its chief operating officer, providing for their employment on an at-will basis. Each agreement, as amended in June 2010,

12

Table of Contents

provides that the executive will have employment through October 6, 2012. Each executive will be entitled to severance benefits that include one year of base compensation if his employment is terminated without cause or for good reason, as defined therein, in addition to the balance of the applicable term, if terminated prior to the end of such term. Each employment agreement is automatically extended for a one-year term unless either the Company or the executive gives at least 60 days’ notice to the other of an intent not to extend. If the Company elects not to extend the executive’s employment beyond October 6, 2012, or beyond the end of any applicable extension, and terminate executive’s employment, such termination will be deemed to be a termination without cause for purposes of severance benefits and the continuation of base compensation through the end of the applicable term. The agreements also provide for a base annual salary which may be increased by the Company’s board of directors, incentive compensation as determined by the Company’s compensation committee from time to time, and participation in the Company’s other employee benefit plans. In addition, each agreement includes change in control provisions that entitle the executive to receive severance pay equal to 12 months of salary if there is a change in control of the Company and his employment is involuntarily terminated for any reason other than for cause, as defined in the agreement, or death or disability. Each executive has also agreed to certain nondisclosure provisions during the term of his employment and any time thereafter, and certain non-competition, non-recruitment and/or non-interference provisions during the term of his employment and for a certain period thereafter. As of August 9, 2010, the current annual base salaries in effect for such executives under the foregoing employment agreements were as follows: Mr. Wagenheim ($300,000), Mr. Gilbertson ($225,000), and Mr. Gilanfar ($202,860).

Development agreement

In April 2008, the Company entered into a development agreement with United Properties Investment LLC (“United Properties”) for the development of up to 22 restaurants to be built between 2009 and 2012. United Properties will be responsible for all costs related to the land and building of each restaurant. The development agreement provides for a cooperative process between United Properties and the Company’s management for the selection of restaurant sites and the development of restaurants on those sites and scheduling for the development and construction of each restaurant once a location is approved. The annual lease rate for fee-simple land and building developments will be 9.5% and the Company will have the right of first offer to purchase these restaurants. Additionally, in the event United Properties sells one of the buildings that it develops for the Company at an amount in excess of the threshold agreed to by the parties in the agreement, then the Company will share in the profits of that sale. The Company assumes no liability in the event United Properties sells a building at a loss. The Company is not bound to authorize the construction of restaurants during that time period, but generally cannot use another developer to develop or own a restaurant as long as the development agreement is in effect. The Company can, however, use another developer if United Properties declines to build a particular restaurant. The Company currently has no sites under development.

Purchase Commitments

The Company has entered into contracts through 2016 with certain suppliers of raw materials (primarily hops) for minimum purchases both in terms of quantity and in pricing.  As of June 29, 2010, the Company’s future obligations under such contracts aggregated approximately $1.2 million.

11.       Stock plans

In July 1997, the Company adopted the 1997 Stock Option Plan for employees and non-employees, including consultants to the Company, to purchase the Company’s common stock at an exercise price that equals or exceeds the fair market value on the date of grant. As of June 29, 2010, no options to purchase common stock were outstanding under the plan, which expired July 28, 2007.

As of June 29, 2010, options to purchase 20,000 shares of common stock were outstanding under the 1997 Director Stock Option Plan, which expired July 29, 2007. All such options are fully vested and exercisable for five years from the date of grant. On May 2, 2007, the Company’s board of directors agreed that until the adoption of any future equity plan for non-employee directors, awards of stock options for the purchase of 2,500 shares of common stock per year, exercisable for a period of ten years, should be made to each non-employee

13

Table of Contents

director on the anniversary of his election to the board under the 2002 Equity Incentive Plan. In May 2010, the Company’s board of directors agreed to increase such annual issuance to non-employee directors from 2,500 to 5,000 shares of common stock.

In August 2002, the Company adopted the 2002 Equity Incentive Plan, now known as the Amended and Restated Equity Incentive Plan, for employees, prospective employees, officers and members of the Company’s board of directors, as well as consultants and advisors to the Company, to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price that equals or exceeds the fair market value on the date of grant. The number of shares authorized for issuance as of June 29, 2010 was 468,290. As of June 29, 2010, there were options outstanding under the plan for the purchase of 906,316 shares including 575,500 shares underlying stock options granted in May 2010 at an exercise price of $2.25 per share, which are subject to shareholder approval of a proposed plan amendment which would increase the number of shares available under the plan to 1,125,000. Although vesting schedules vary, option grants under this plan generally vest over a three or four-year period and options are exercisable for no more than ten years from the date of grant.

A summary of the status of the Company’s stock options as of June 29, 2010 is presented below:

The aggregate intrinsic value in the table above represents the total pretax intrinsic value (the difference between the closing price of the Company’s stock on the last day of the reporting period and the exercise price, multiplied by the number of in-the-money options) that would have been received by the option holders had all option holders exercised their options on the last day of the reporting period. As of June 29, 2010, there was approximately $1,132,169 of total unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested share-based compensation arrangements, of which $479,347 is expected to be recognized during the remainder of fiscal year 2010, $432,480 in fiscal year 2011, $177,701 in fiscal year 2012, $42,478 in fiscal year 2013 and $163 in fiscal year 2014.

14

Table of Contents

The following table summarizes information about stock options outstanding at June 29, 2010:

12.  Common stock warrants

In October 2005, the Company entered into a securities purchase agreement with certain accredited investors for the sale of approximately $5.34 million of common stock and warrants. Under this agreement, the Company issued five-year warrants for the purchase of 36,960 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $39.00 per share to such investors and five-year warrants for the purchase of 9,239 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $39.00 per share to the Company’s placement agent. Such warrant agreements with the investors and placement agent for this transaction contain certain anti-dilution provisions. Pursuant to these provisions, the number of shares purchasable upon exercise of these warrants and the related purchase price both required adjustment upon the issuance of warrants in the first quarter of 2009, at an exercise price less than the thresholds set forth in the security purchase agreement. The exercise price of each existing warrant was multiplied by a fraction, the numerator of which was the sum of the number of shares of common stock outstanding immediately prior to such issuance, plus the number of shares of common stock which the offering price for such shares of common stock would purchase at the closing price of our common stock on the closing date of this securities purchase agreement; and the denominator of which was the sum of the number of shares of common stock outstanding immediately prior to such issuance plus the number of such new securities so issued. As a result of the issuance of common stock in October 2009 at a price per share less than the thresholds set forth in the security purchase agreement, further anti-dilution adjustments were required. As a result of these adjustments, the number of shares purchasable under these warrants at June 29, 2010 was 110,956 and the exercise price was $16.24 per share. As of June 29, 2010, none of such warrants had been exercised.

During the first nine months of 2009, in consideration of rent reduction agreements entered into with certain of its landlords, the Company issued five-year warrants to purchase the Company’s common stock to such landlords. The aggregate number of shares underlying such warrants was 201,028 shares and the weighted average exercise price was $1.60 per share. Pursuant to the provisions of such agreements, the number of shares purchasable upon exercise of these warrants and the related purchase price both required adjustment upon the issuance of warrants in the first quarter of 2009, at an exercise price less than the thresholds set forth in the agreement. The exercise price of each warrant issued prior to such issuance was multiplied by a fraction, the numerator of which was the sum of the number of shares of common stock outstanding immediately prior to such issuance of warrants, plus the number of shares of common stock which the offering price for such shares of common stock would purchase at the warrant exercise price in effect immediately prior to such issuance; and the denominator of which was the sum of the number of shares of common stock outstanding immediately prior to such issuance plus the number of such new securities so issued. As a result of these adjustments, the number of shares purchasable under these warrants came to be 201,125 and the weighted average exercise price was $1.60 per share. In June 2010, a

15

Table of Contents

warrant for the purchase of 1,678 shares was exercised at an exercise price of $1.58 per share. As of June 29, 2010, warrants for the purchase of 199,447 shares remained unexercised.

Pursuant to the Harmony bridge loan agreement entered into in March 2009, the Company issued to the investors warrants for the purchase of an aggregate of 53,332 shares of common stock at a price of $1.52 per share. Such warrants became exercisable September 30, 2009, and remained unexercised at June 29, 2010.

As of June 29, 2010, warrants for the purchase of an aggregate of 363,735 shares of common stock were outstanding and exercisable. The weighted average exercise price of such warrants was $6.05 per share.

13.       Retirement plan

The Company sponsors a defined contribution plan under the provisions of section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code. The plan is voluntary and is provided to all employees who meet the eligibility requirements. A participant can elect to contribute up to 100% of his/her compensation subject to IRS limits. Prior to fiscal year 2009, the Company made no contribution to the plan. Beginning in fiscal year 2009, the Company elected to match 10% of such contributions up to 6% of the participant’s compensation. In fiscal year 2009, the Company contributed $12,761 under the plan, and in the first half of 2010, the Company contributed an additional $7,303 under the plan. The Company expects to contribute approximately $7,500 under the plan during the remainder of fiscal year 2010.

14.       Subsequent events

On June 30, 2010, the Company’s board of directors approved amendments to five of the Company’s leases with the Dunham Landlords, changing the rental amount and extending the term of each lease. The amended terms will cause the classification of four such leases to change from operating to capital. The fifth amended lease was, and will remain, a capital lease (Note 9). As a result of these amendments, the Company will record additional assets and capital lease liabilities of approximately $3.6 million each. Such assets and liabilities will each be reduced by a write off of approximately $1.2 million of deferred gain related to these properties.

ITEM 2 Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

This discussion and analysis contains various non-historical forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Exchange Act. Although we believe that, in making any such statement, our expectations are based on reasonable assumptions, any such statement may be influenced by factors that could cause actual outcomes and results to be materially different from those projected. When used in the following discussion, the words “anticipates,” “believes,” “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “estimates” and similar expressions, as they relate to us or our management, are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. You are cautioned not to attribute undue certainty to such forward-looking statements, which are qualified in their entirety by the cautions and risks described herein. Please refer to the “Risk Factors” section of our Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 22, 2010, and the “Risk Factors” section of our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 10, 2010, for additional factors known to us that may cause actual results to vary.

Overview

We are a Modern American upscale casual restaurant chain.     As of June 29, 2010, we operated 26 restaurants in 11 Midwestern states featuring on-premises breweries, substantially all of which operate under the name of Granite City Food & Brewery®. We believe our menu features high quality yet affordable family favorite menu items prepared from made-from-scratch recipes and served in generous portions. We believe that the sophisticated yet unpretentious restaurants, proprietary food and beverage products, attractive price points and high service standards combine for a great dining experience. The location of each restaurant in operation and the month and year of its opening appear in the following chart:

16

Table of Contents

In August 2008, we ceased operations at our restaurant in Rogers, Arkansas (see Note 4 to our condensed consolidated financial statements). However, we are currently bound by the terms of this lease agreement through December 2018.

We operate a centrally-located beer production facility in Ellsworth, Iowa which facilitates the initial stage of our patented brewing process. We believe that this brewing process improves the economics of microbrewing as it eliminates the initial stages of brewing and storage at multiple locations, thereby reducing equipment and development costs at new restaurant locations. Additionally, having a common starting point, the beer production creates consistency of taste for our product from restaurant to restaurant. The initial product produced at our beer production facility is transported by truck to the fermentation vessels at each of our restaurants where the brewing process is completed. In 2007, we were granted a patent by the United States Patent Office for this brewing process. We believe that our current beer production facility, which opened in June 2005, has the capacity to service up to 35 restaurant locations.

DHW Leasing, L.L.C. (“DHW”), the beneficial owner of approximately 63.3% of our common stock, gained control of our company in October 2009. The members of DHW are Donald A. Dunham, Jr. and Charles J. Hey. Mr. Dunham, who is also the sole member of Dunham Capital Management, LLC (“DCM”) and 70% owner of Dunham Equity Management, LLC (“DEM”), became one of our directors in October 2009. DHW, DCM and DEM are collectively, with Mr. Dunham, referred to herein as the “Dunham Entities.” As of June 29, 2010, Mr. Dunham beneficially owned approximately 64.3% of our common stock, including the shares held by DHW. DCM and DEM are entities that either are the landlord or the general partner in various limited partnerships that own real estate leased to our company. Mr. Dunham, as an individual, also owns a limited partnership interest in one of the limited partnerships that own real estate leased to our company.

17

Table of Contents

Our industry can be significantly affected by changes in economic conditions, discretionary spending patterns, consumer tastes, and cost fluctuations.  Over the past two years, consumers have been under increased economic pressures and as a result, many have changed their discretionary spending patterns.  Many consumers are dining out less frequently than in the past and/or have decreased the amount they spend on meals while dining out.  To offset the negative impact of decreased sales, we undertook a series of initiatives to renegotiate the pricing of various aspects of our business, effectively reducing our cost of food, insurance, payroll processing, shipping, supplies and most recently, our property and equipment rent.  We have implemented marketing initiatives designed to increase brand awareness and help drive guest traffic.  We believe these initiatives contributed to the increase in sales and guest traffic in the first half of 2010.

We believe that our operating results will fluctuate significantly because of several factors, including the operating results of our restaurants, changes in food and labor costs, increases or decreases in comparable restaurant sales, general economic conditions, consumer confidence in the economy, changes in consumer preferences, nutritional concerns and discretionary spending patterns, competitive factors, the skill and the experience of our restaurant-level management teams, the maturity of each restaurant, adverse weather conditions in our markets, our ability to recommence our expansion plans, and the timing of any future restaurant openings and related expenses.

We utilize a 52/53-week fiscal year ending the last Tuesday in December for financial reporting purposes.  The first quarter of 2010 and 2009 each included 338 operating weeks, which is the sum of the actual number of weeks each restaurant operated.  The first half of 2010 and 2009 included 676 and 670 operating weeks, respectively.  The six additional operating weeks in the first half of 2010 were related to our Indianapolis, Indiana restaurant which opened in February 2009.  Because we have opened new restaurants at various times throughout the years, we provide this statistical measure to enhance the comparison of revenues from period to period as changes occur in the number of units we are operating.

Our restaurant revenue is comprised almost entirely of the sales of food and beverages.  The sale of retail items typically represents less than one percent of total revenue.  Product costs include the costs of food, beverages and retail items.  Labor costs include direct hourly and management wages, taxes and benefits for restaurant employees.  Direct and occupancy costs include restaurant supplies, marketing costs, rent, utilities, real estate taxes, repairs and maintenance and other related costs.  Pre-opening costs consist of direct costs related to hiring and training the initial restaurant workforce, the salaries and related costs of our dedicated new store opening team, rent expense incurred during the construction period and other direct costs associated with opening new restaurants.  General and administrative expenses are comprised of expenses associated with all corporate and administrative functions that support existing operations, which include management and staff salaries, employee benefits, travel, information systems, training, market research, professional fees, supplies and corporate rent.  Depreciation and amortization includes depreciation on capital expenditures at the restaurant and corporate levels and amortization of intangibles that do not have indefinite lives.  Interest expense represents the cost of interest expense on debt and capital leases net of interest income on invested assets.

Results of operations as a percentage of sales

The following table sets forth results of our operations expressed as a percentage of sales for the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 29, 2010 and June 30, 2009:

18

Table of Contents