Even with the stimulus checks, retail sales numbers for June and July have been nothing to cheer about. And this coming week should provide another look at how things have been shaping up in the apparel and accessories arena. A number of companies are scheduled to release quarterly numbers, from upscale retailer Nordstrom to the parent of discounter TJ Maxx, from hipster Urban Outfitters to global giant Wal-Mart. Here's a look at what Wall Street is anticipating.

Analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial expect the following to report strong earnings growth when compared to the same period of the previous year.

• Urban Outfitters Inc. (NASDAQ: URBN): $0.30 EPS (+36.7%) on revenue of $448.5 million (+28.7%)
• Estée Lauder Cos. Inc. (NYSE: EL): $0.56 EPS (+19.6%) on revenue of $1.9 billion (+9.4%)
• TJX Cos. Inc. (NYSE: TJX): $0.46 EPS (+17.4%) on revenue of $4.6 billion (+6.8%)
• Fossil Inc. (NASDAQ: FOSL): $0.25 EPS (+16%) on revenue of $346.8 million (+13.2%)
• Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (NYSE: WMT): $0.84 EPS (+14.3%) on revenue of $101.7 billion (+9.3%)
• Elizabeth Arden Inc. (NASDAQ: RDEN): $0.22 EPS (+9.1%) on revenue of $237.6 million (-2.1/%)
• Abercrombie & Fitch Co. (NYSE: ANF): $0.93 EPS (+5.4%) on revenue of $872 million (+8.4%)

On Friday morning before the opening bell, American Apparel (AMEX: APP) announced that CFO Ken Cieply -- the main founder and CEO Dov Charney called a "complete loser" -- had resigned. Except they didn't exactly announce that. The headline was American Apparel Announces Hiring of Interim CEO, which is reminiscent of the old joke about NASA needing another seven astronauts. But the market saw through the attempted spin and sent the stock down a few cents.

But American Apparel's spin machine wasn't done. At 2:00 PM ET that same day, the company decided to announce a "$25 Million Share Repurchase Program," which allowed the stock to close up for the day. That press release raised a number of red flags. The reason for its timing was obvious: give investors some good news to go along with the resignation of the CFO. I'm always of skeptical of companies that use buybacks to try to pump up share prices. It's even worse when the company times its announcement of a buyback to pump up its stock price.

Then there's the question of whether Charney and company are really in a position to be buying back stock. American Apparel has a substantial debt load and ambitious expansion plans. I doubt that it's generating enough cash to make a buyback prudent.

Of course American Apparel hasn't committed to buying back stock. It's board of directors has simply said that it can. I'll be surprised if it does but, either way, the company made some PR hay.

On April 12th, I wrote about a Wall Street Journal piece that raised some interesting questions about American Apparel (AMEX: APP): CEO Dov Charney had taken the ambitious step of referring to the company's CFO as a "complete loser", and the company was also dealing with accounting issues, a substantial debt load, and more. The stock took a hit following the Journal piece.

American Apparel didn't issue any public rebuttal but, yesterday afternoon, DealBreaker published a letter sent by to the Wall Street Journal by director Adrian Kowalewski. Kowalewski wrote that "Our lawyers are currently pursuing this matter with News Corporation, so we have not yet issued a public statement." He went on to make the case that the company is in strong financial health and that, furthermore, Mr. Charney doesn't walk around the offices in his underwear, except for that one time, but that was part of a promotional video.

The financial issues and Charney's unconventional personality aside, American Apparel has put up some pretty spectacular growth numbers.

In a related story, Judge Judy is not a fan of American Apparel's racy ads.

Back in December, I wrote about American Apparel (AMEX: APP), which had recently gone public through special purpose acquisition vehicle, and its CEO's checkered reputation -- sexual harassment lawsuits, masturbating in front of a reporter, etc. etc. etc. The stock has taken a beating since then.

This weekend's Wall Street Journal has a lengthy profile of American Apparel and CEO Dov Charney, and it just gets juicier. In an interview, he referred to his company's CFO, Ken Cieply, as a "complete loser," which is pretty ambitious.

The freak show stuff aside, there are some fundamentals-related issues dogging the company as well: the company's former insurer has said it won't cover the sexual harassment lawsuits, "inadequate expertise in the application of U.S. generally accepted accounting principles," a history of accounting woes, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement inquiry seeking citizenship documentation related to its workers, a government tax audit, and a substantial debt load. If you have a lot of time on your hands, flip through the risk factors disclosed in the latest 10-K.

After taking an initial look at American Apparel (AMEX: APP), I cautioned investors that CEO Dov Charney's interesting management style -- which apparently includes public masturbation, sexual relations with employees, and posing nude for magazines -- might present a problem as the company makes the transition from private to public.

Then the company drew some fire for its ad campaign touting immigration reform. I questioned whether it was appropriate for a public company to be using shareholder capital for an ad campaign that advanced the CEO's political views.

Now the strange saga of American Apparel gets a little more bizarre: Director Woody Allen has sued the company for $10 million, alleging that it used a photo of him dressed as a rabbi on billboard ads without his consent. Check out this post from The Jewish newspaper Daily Forward for more background/funny commentary on the picture choice.

Blank-check IPOs have been on the rise recently. There are companies that conduct initial public offerings for the sole purpose of raising capital to acquire other companies. American Apparel (AMEX: APP) recently went public in this manner.

Historically, Nasdaq listing standards have barred these companies from the exchange, which has been a big boon to the otherwise-struggling AMEX. Now the Nasdaq is proposing a new rule to the SEC that would allow SPACs to list on its exchange.

In the press release announcing the plan, Nasdaq Senior Vice President Bob McCooey said that "Acquisition vehicles are an increasingly common capital-raising device. We believe that listing them on Nasdaq, subject to these important investor protections, will benefit investors and issuers alike."

Maybe this is the right move, but it's interesting that Nasdaq was willing to stand by its principled objection to these entities until the amount of money they raise (and fees/trading volume they can generate) grew too big to ignore.

But I still think investors should be very skeptical of investing in these situations. How exactly do you research an investment in a company when you don't yet know what the business model is?

Recently gone-public clothing sensation American Apparel (AMEX: APP) has a new marketing campaign, and it isn't just about selling clothes.

According to the New York Times, "In a new series of ads, American Apparel is moving in a political direction. The cause is immigration reform, and the ads say in part that the status quo "amounts to an apartheid system" and should be overhauled to create a legal path for undocumented workers to gain citizenship in the United States."

American Apparel CEO Dov Charney has never shied away from controversy. In a recent post on BloggingStocks, I discussed some of the more bizarre antics of his career and it isn't just erotic advertising. This is a guy who actually masturbated in front of a reporter during an interview with Jane magazine.

It isn't that I doubt the sincerity of Mr. Charney's beliefs about immigration. As he said, "These people don't have freedom of mobility, they're living in the shadows. This is at the core of my company, at the core of my soul."

The problem is that, now that American Apparel is public, it isn't just Mr. Charney's company. Now he has a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders, and putting his company at the center of divisive issues may not be in their best interests. When a company is private, it gets to make decisions about what's important, and certainly has a right to use its own resources to take a stand for causes that are important to the owner. But as a public company, American Apparel has a responsibility to focus its resources on increasing its profits.

As intriguing as the company's growth is, I do question whether Mr. Charney is well-suited to run a public company. He's a brilliant maverick and an ingenious entrepreneur, but dancing to his own drum may alienate Main Street ... and Wall Street.

in 2007, special purpose acquisition companies, or blank-checks, made up 23% of the total number of IPOs. In other words, nearly a quarter of IPOs this year have been for businesses with no business. A blank check IPO exists to raise money, and then seeks to use that money to acquire another company.

For instance, Endeavor Acquisition went public as a blank-check IPO and then acquired American Apparel. Now the company trades as American Apparel (AMEX: APP), and Kevin Kelly wrote about why he thinks that company is a buy here.

Sometimes companies that go public through this process can be good investments, but there's something investors need to keep in mind: A company that has been acquired by a SPAC has just been put up for sale and is therefore unlikely to be undervalued. If the sellers could have gotten more for it, they would have sold it to someone else.

A piece in the Wall Street Journal discusses (subscription required) blank checks and some of their pitfalls. American Apparel is definitely one of the better/most interesting companies to go public this way (the CEO's alleged perversions aside) in recent years but, in general, I think blank checks are something for investors to avoid.

Fellow writer Zac Bissonnette highlighted the interesting (but somewhat controversial) story in American Apparel (AMEX: APP) about a week ago. He did a good job of explaining the company itself as well as the perverted CEO.

Although I think the questions surrounding the CEO's "lifestyle" are pertinent, I think they should be overlooked in favor of getting a piece of this high growth name at such an opportunistic time to buy. In short, I think the stock makes sense after a recent pullback.

Fundamentally, American Apparel appears very confusing at first. The older generation of readers is probably very baffled as to why a company that sells light-colored, tight fitting clothes is in the middle of a humongous growth cycle, understandably so. However, I'm more aiming this post towards those members of the younger generation who know just how powerful this concept is.

Several friends have asked me for my opinion of American Apparel (AMEX: APP), a clothier that recently became public through its acquisition by Endeavor Acquisition.

First a little bit of background: American Apparel was founded in 1997 by Dov Charney, and is known for its simple, high-quality clothing, and its unique practice of not plastering its logo on everything it sells. Browse through their merchandise on the company's website. The company also avoids outsourcing, manufacturing its clothing in Los Angeles where it is headquartered.

In 2006, the company had revenue of just over $264 million, an increase of 37.7%. The increase was driven by the opening of 41 new stores, but the company still reported a loss just about $1.6 million as SG&A expenses climbed.

Sales are growing quickly and the company turned a profit in its most recent quarter. American Apparel certainly has the potential to turn into a very hot retail growth stock -- it's already up big over the past few months. But there are a couple things to worry about. First, saying that founder and CEO Dov Charney is uninhibited is like saying that Alan Greenspan can ramble a bit. In 2005, the New York Times did a story on Charney's -- er ... unique management style. Here's a quick sampling:

Over the past several years, there has been an interesting trend on Wall Street: special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs). That is, a company raises capital through a public offering and then hunts for acquisitions (it is also known as a "blank check" offering – since the investors do not know what companies that will be purchased).

These deals are easy to setup (after all, there is very little to disclose). Also, the capital is held in escrow.

This week, there was a SPAC deal. Endeavor Acquisition Corp. (AMEX:EDA) agreed to purchase American Apparel for $244 million.

Based in Los Angeles, American Apparel has certainly been an edgy/hip retailer, with 143 stores.

So, why go this route? First of all, American Apparel will have access to more capital. Also, it did not have to go through the grueling IPO process. Finally, the company can use its stock to make acquisitions, as well as incentivize employees with stock options.

Keep in mind: a SPAC has 18 months to find a deal. If none is found, the capital goes back to investors.

And, yes, there are a myriad of SPACs coming up on the deadline. So, going into 2007, it's a good bet to see more of these transactions.

Tom Taulli is the author of various books, including the Complete M&A Handbook and operates DealProfiles.com.