Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
I believe I read the other day that he bought more (I could be wrong, but I think that was part of the filing if I remember correctly.)
I guess a couple of things:
1. Lampert should not be praised for what he did with Sears.
2. Lampert is an intelligent and successful investor, but he is now trying to unlock value in a company that has been made significantly more irrelevant under his watch. Every day, the company is a little more irrelevant and value continues to erode. I don't believe he's really trying to turn the company around - there's some discussion of that, but not a lot of indication based on the stores.
3. SHLD will not be Lampert's Berkshire Hathaway, he will not merge his hedge fund with Sears. If he does, well... that's just absurd of him. Meanwhile, ESL (said hedge fund) has had significant redemptions and giving shareholders stock who have asked for redemptions probably wasn't popular. Also, Lampert buying up stock and causing short squeezes is not going to last forever. The public float has already been taken down to the point where the company was removed from the S & P 500. (as of 8/2012, Lampert's hedge fund and Lampert himself owned 65.7 million, or nearly 62%, of Sears' 106.4 million outstanding shares.)
4. Much discussion of Sears transforming into a more "member-centric" company. Much lol to that. More drops in same store sales, as well. K-Mart stores are being turned into data centers and other non-retail things, so it would not seem that there's the demand for the retail space.
5. Sears debt is at $4.7B as of 11/2. Um, what's the market cap?
Again, I'm not saying there's no value in Sears. I'm just saying that I strongly disagree with the "highly enthusiastic" views on that value. I also think that every day that passes, what is left of Sears has less value.
I agree. I don't know what Lampert has been doing but it doesn't seem like whatever it is has been for the betterment of Sears. Too bad because I think Sears is a good business but they have a lot of problems unsolvable by current management. Heck, I'm not even sure they can ever appeal to today's generation and maybe it's better in the long run for them to just close down. KMart on the other hand, does anybody even go there anymore? They're nothing in my Midwestern neighborhood but maybe they're a force in other parts of the country. Once Walmart moved in here it was bye-bye KMart and unfortunately a whole bunch of mom and pop shops as well.
Anyway, I think for Fairholme the investment was a play on the property (real estate) Sears owns more than anything else. Sears can sell the Lands End and automotive business but at least locally I don't see that putting any more folks on their floors.
Comments
I guess a couple of things:
1. Lampert should not be praised for what he did with Sears.
2. Lampert is an intelligent and successful investor, but he is now trying to unlock value in a company that has been made significantly more irrelevant under his watch. Every day, the company is a little more irrelevant and value continues to erode. I don't believe he's really trying to turn the company around - there's some discussion of that, but not a lot of indication based on the stores.
3. SHLD will not be Lampert's Berkshire Hathaway, he will not merge his hedge fund with Sears. If he does, well... that's just absurd of him. Meanwhile, ESL (said hedge fund) has had significant redemptions and giving shareholders stock who have asked for redemptions probably wasn't popular. Also, Lampert buying up stock and causing short squeezes is not going to last forever. The public float has already been taken down to the point where the company was removed from the S & P 500. (as of 8/2012, Lampert's hedge fund and Lampert himself owned 65.7 million, or nearly 62%, of Sears' 106.4 million outstanding shares.)
4. Much discussion of Sears transforming into a more "member-centric" company. Much lol to that. More drops in same store sales, as well. K-Mart stores are being turned into data centers and other non-retail things, so it would not seem that there's the demand for the retail space.
5. Sears debt is at $4.7B as of 11/2. Um, what's the market cap?
Again, I'm not saying there's no value in Sears. I'm just saying that I strongly disagree with the "highly enthusiastic" views on that value. I also think that every day that passes, what is left of Sears has less value.
Additionally, this:
http://brontecapital.blogspot.com/2011/12/sears-holdings-liquidation-sale.html
Also, for images, this:
http://www.businessinsider.com/photos-that-show-why-sears-is-vanishing-2013-10
Again, I hope it goes well for those who own Fairholme. I just don't agree with the "overly enthusiastic" case and haven't for years now.
Anyway, I think for Fairholme the investment was a play on the property (real estate) Sears owns more than anything else. Sears can sell the Lands End and automotive business but at least locally I don't see that putting any more folks on their floors.