Jeffrey Moore

A Reasonable Look at Steak N' Shake CEO's Raise

For all the fuss over a measly 900K (from a now profitable company), I am saying that people should be concerned with a huge government issuing IOUs instead. Our priorities are screwed up.

Obviously, Biglari is not Buffett- the same way that Buffett was not Ben Graham... Simply because 2 people share similar philosophies doesn't mean that they have to be compensated in the same way. As an owner of SNS, I have no problem giving Biglari the money that he deserves!


On Jul 08 10:44 AM UncleLongHair wrote:

> What do California IOU's have to do with overpaying a CEO?
>
> Biglari now makes about 10x what his hero Buffett does -- and that
> is only considering one of his many jobs. Introduces quite a gap
> between "talk the talk" and "walk the walk".

One of Those Market Days That Makes You Scratch Your Head

When I said the bull trap thing, I wasn't really talking about the fundamentals, or the reactions the markets have had... only prices of securities. I want them to go down so that I can buy more of them at a cheaper price (ZINC for example, has more than doubled).


On Apr 03 10:12 AM Conan the Barbarian wrote:

> Let's revise your quote a tad. Let me substitute Gold for raisins.
>
>
> "Some form of a bull trap", it Is Not Some form of a Bull trap if
> you can't define it. Even making the attempt to pigeonhole what has
> occurred in the last month as Some kind of Bull trap is nonsense.
>
>
> There is no loud "clang, clang, clang" tossing the Bear into the
> ditch. The moves have been worldwide. Bad News is being tossed into
> the ditch alongside the Bear. If you don't see the difference, you
> haven't seen multiple Bears being hacked around the world.
>
> CTB

Five Stocks Traders Are Betting Against (With Good Reason)

are you still considering shorting SNS?

Hoping Shorts Will Drive Sears Down for Me

after some searching, I found what I needed, and did a quite write up on the situation:

ragnarisapirate.blogsp...

Hoping Shorts Will Drive Sears Down for Me

do you have any way to find the old article? email me with any info.

thanks,


On Mar 01 10:38 PM Histo wrote:

> I think the shorts are FOOLS! Please keep shorting SHLD.
>
> This company makes money!!!, and has annual sales of nearly 50 Billion!!
>
>
> I think that makes them relevant in the eyes of consumers. All you
> haters will lose your ass. You don't have the "balls" for a war
> with Eddie and friends. You will be begging to cover when the crunch
> eases even a little bit?
>
> Suckers

Hoping Shorts Will Drive Sears Down for Me

do you have any way to find the old article? email me with any info.

thanks,


On Mar 02 05:29 PM sclarksons wrote:

> I was in fact accused of being an anonymous emailer,
>
> I also replied again to Jeff Macke and "Big Jim" letting them know
> that I own or manage several thousand shares of SHLD, and again,
> asking Macke to describe the "transfer of 5 Billion from Sears to
> his hedge fund"
>
> My final two comments were very straightforward, kind, and were blocked.
>
>
> Okay, I got a little challenging on the earlier comment, telling
> him that he was either short the stock, stupid, or being pimped out
> by a shortseller.
>
> I hold to that scenario.
>

Hoping Shorts Will Drive Sears Down for Me

do you have any way to find the old article? email me with any info.

thanks,


On Mar 03 11:07 AM Kelley wrote:

> That Macke piece was a regurgitation of every other negative commentary
> about SHLD out there. Talk about not doing one's homework.
>
> Sears has done a lot to improve its on-line presence. This is where
> big changes can be made for a smaller amount of dollars. No one seems
> to give that any attention. Moreover, SHLD recently beat estimates,
> and all people can talk about is Eddie's rant in the shareholder
> letter. I read the letter, and it didn't seem like a rant to me.
>
>
> Ah, perception. I forgot. Same thing happened when Ackman showed
> up at the shareholders meeting last May. Journalists wrote how Ackman
> "pressured" and "grilled" Lampert to answer questions relating to
> SHLD. Haha. I was there. Ackman stood up, asked his questions and
> sat down. It was a non-event. He even stood up a second time and
> told Lampert he appreciated the job he was doing.
>
> My other favorite Eddie bashing? I hear often that he doesn't know
> retail. Really, folks? Check out AZO. They just made an historic
> high today.
>
> I cannot guarantee that I won't lose money on my investment in SHLD.
> However, I feel confident in the upside. I feel even more confident
> when I read recycled and incomplete "analysis."
>
> Jeffrey, fcharlie and sclarksons - thanks for calling out the Macke
> spin!

Hoping Shorts Will Drive Sears Down for Me

do you have any way to find the old article? email me with any info.

thanks,


On Mar 02 10:17 AM fcharlie wrote:

> I emailed Macke as well, asking the same question.... No response.
>
>

Hoping Shorts Will Drive Sears Down for Me

Here is a question for all fellow SHLD lovers.

The original article has been edited so that the points that I make are no longer relevant-as in, Jeffrey Macke changed his writing on Minyanville.com! I am trying to find someone that has a screen shot of the original article, or even knows of a way to access the article before the changes were made, so that I can do a "before and after" write up.

Just take a look at the new article, he changed CEO to Chairman and completely got rid of the $5 billion dollar cash out into Eddie's hedge fund!

It is awesome that a bunch of angry SHLD fans got him to go back on what he said!

thanks in advance.

Hoping Shorts Will Drive Sears Down for Me

By the way: writing 'form' instead of 'from' and 'or say things like...' is my way of being 'ironical'. ;-)

Hoping Shorts Will Drive Sears Down for Me

Being told that my points are retarded means a lot... Especially coming form a guy that doesn't capitalize, use punctuation, or say things like "ur".

I think it is pretty apparent that if a store spends little on capex, that they can pass savings along to the customer-Wal-Mart anyone?

Not that insider selling is a good way to analyze a company's performance, but since you brought it up, let's look at it: A director selling $50 million in stock, or two of the better capital allocators of our time sitting on (and adding to) well over 1/2 of the outstanding shares... hmm... who do I side with?

Regardless, your welcome for the laugh. :-)


On Mar 02 11:10 AM ScroogeMcduck wrote:

> oh and buy the way jeffery ur analogy about getting a better prices
> on items becasue the store is dirty is the most retarted thing ive
> herd in a while thanks for the laugh

Hoping Shorts Will Drive Sears Down for Me

So you are the guy he says is an 'anonymous emailer'!

yeah, the guy is a total tool, but as I said in the article, I hope that he can get the price down for me.

at one point in his article commenting, he said something about making a diner bet on SHLD going to the single digits before it doubled-I accepted, and then asked where he got this 5 billion info (because I too have read a ton of filings for SHLD).

No surprise, but I still have no response from him.


On Mar 02 09:59 AM sclarksons wrote:

> I challenged Macke to articulate how the five billion swindle took
> place, and what record he had of it.
> I did so because I have read every SEC filing on sears and kmart
> for the last three years, and most of them for the last ten.
>
> I asked him via email, and twice on the website where his article
> was published.
>
> He challenged me to do my own homework.
>
> It must have been journalistic creative interpretation of the facts,
> and an unwillingness to admit stretching the truth after being called
> out on it.
>
> Or maybe he's basing his article on some shortseller's rumour.<br/>
>
>

Insuring U.S. Government Debt: A Terrific Paradox

As has been stated, we will just print money to pay off our t bills that are payable in USDs, I doubt that we would ever default, unless people started demanding that our debt be payable in Euros or something... Hopefully, we will finally figure out that we NEED to cut spending at a drastic pace.

Notes from Steak 'n Shake's Investor Day

Yes, a lively, but fun discourse. :-)

I used the 1.5 million as a rosy scenario, since I thought it was the one you were operating with... I don't remember exactly what the locations sell foron average, but even if they sell for 1/2 million (in a fire sale) each, there isn't much downside for the common stock. I remember them selling some smaller (in terms of revenue) stores in the middle of Iowa for roughly 850K/ea. I have trouble wrapping my head around how their property plant and equipment can't be worth at least 1/2 what it is on the books for (which is after a Hell of a lot of depreciation). granted, a chunk of the PP&E is in stuff like fixtures that are not worth anything, but I still think I am being pretty conservative.

Personally, I would have a problem with them saying "location x is making this much money, z this much, and y is loosing this much"-too much info on operations that is not necessary to come up with a value for the company. The company is closing restaurants that are/have been under preforming (which will do a lot for cash flow and earnings), and guest count is no longer eroding as precipitously as before.

Their franchisees do quite well in terms of revenue, and I would imagine run their operations better than the company has historically, so re franchising is being done, and helps to up the overall value of the company.

this shareholder letter might help shed some light on things to come.
yahoo.brand.edgar-onli...

Please understand, that while 'propaganda' may not be numbers, that doesn't mean that it isn't true- after all, under good management, they will be quite profitable! The main part of the upside potential to this company is the capital allocation of Sardar Biglari.

On Jan 13 08:24 PM 123 wrote:

> correction at to #3: I meant to say that the stock is not trading
> below its (best case, for reasons above) "liquidation value", rather
> it's trading about equal to it

Notes from Steak 'n Shake's Investor Day

Well, if they sell all the properties for 240 million, then they can essentially pay off all of their debt, and buy back all of their stock... As you mentioned, this would leave them with a bunch of leased properties, and a good number of franchised units, which are quite profitable for both the company, and the franchisees.

The problems with their operations (and to a greater extent, profitability) are due to the management that was in control when they went from something like 150 units, to the 475+ that they currently have- there is just one hitch... THEY MAKE LESS NOW WITH 475+ UNITS THAN THEY DID WITH 150!!!

Obviously, they were allocating capital terribly-which is now stopping with Biglari and Co. in control of the company... Obviously, eroding same store sales suck, but that is being fixed, as is highlighted in this article. Plus, they are doing a ton of stuff to reduce costs and improve profitability. Their new offerings like 1/2 price shakes from 2-4 PM on weekdays should get store traffic up.

Something to remember is that SNS started in the midst of the Great Depression-and was profitable during their start. In addition, fast food is something that will be popular forever in America (well, as long as we are the fattest nation in the world). It is cheap, and is one of the last things to be trimmed out of the budget (unlike TVs).

Bottom line: provided that there is no out break of Salmonella or something like that, SNS can liquidate above the current stock price, and if it continues to operate, it is intrinsically worth a few times what it is presently trading at.


On Jan 10 12:38 PM 123 wrote:

> Also: (from 10k)
> pg 4
>
> We own the land and buildings of 164 properties and 20 parcels of
> land. The other 260 or whatever are leased.
>
> At the end of fiscal year 2008, we have $25.4 million in assets held
> for sale which includes the 14 improved properties and 20 parcels
> of land which were previously purchased for development.
>
> 14 properties + 20 parcels = 34 unimproved and improved parcels.
> They are held for sale at less than $1M each, about 700K each for
> $25M
>
> Say they sell all 160 properties for (an optimistic, best case scenario
> of) 1.5M each - that is $240M. OK. That's ignoring taxes, selling
> costs, etc. So what's left? A bunch of leased burger restaurants,
> their operating success is pretty much up in the air.
>
> I think that his really has to be a successful operating business
> for this to work out and that's not at all clearly the case right
> now.
>
>
>