clownface

While Street Yells 'Sell!' Lampert Buys Back 4% of Sears

"Makes no difference what Lampert does; he can't save Sears,he can't save K-Mart, nobody is buying big-box commercial space so the "real estate play" aspect of SHLD is nil as well."

The real estate is nil?
Here is a little math for you:
Even if one assumes that commercial real estate is leasing at 8$ sq ft and assuming a cap rate at 9% (which is overly conservative), puts comm real estate values at $88/sq ft.
SHLD has about 200mm sq ft of owned commercial real estate. Or almost 18bb in real estate assets.
SHLD could liquidate its inventory, service its remaining debt, have a staff of 5 at corp headquarters and spend its days signing up tenants.

While Street Yells 'Sell!' Lampert Buys Back 4% of Sears

I would just also like to add, you really shouldn't be idolizing people on that list of shh. A few of them are mere plagiarizers. Whiney Tilson may be one of biggest plagiarizers on Wall Street in my view. He parrots but doesnt have the self respect to footnote the work product done by others.
I would hazard to guess that quite a few people would support this view.

While Street Yells 'Sell!' Lampert Buys Back 4% of Sears

SHLD is quite simple, it is self liquidating (of course the parrot Whiney Tilson can read this post and then claim for himself any insights this blog might produce for the investing public). Here is a simple example of what SHLD is:
Lets say you and your partner (as in business partner) are each 50% owners of a partnership which is the sole owner of a grocery store. Assume further the store generates 1mm per year in operating income. Assume that operating income will decline to 0 in the not too distant future. Assume the grocery store operates out of a building that is wholly owned by the partnership and is appraised at 20mm.
Now, you and your partner each receive your 500K at the end of the year (lets ignore taxes for this example) from the store. Now your partner comes to you and says, "I would love to sell you a larger interest in the partnership because this business stinks and its income is going to zero, so I will sell you a portion of my interest where I value the partnership at 8mm (8 x operating income)." You decide to take your 500K and pay your partner for his pro rata share at that valuation.

So, was that a dumb move on your part? Shouldnt you use the cash to invest in your business? Answers: No, and No.
The building alone is worth 20mm. And the business, although a melting ice cube has some modicum of value, assume the business is worth zero. So your partner valued the enterprise at 8mm when in fact it was worth 20mm. You just bought a dollar for 40c. Far better deal then putting more cash in buying a business that is a melting ice cube. Thats SHLD. ESL buying shares 75 or 140 should tell you about ESL conservative valuations of the buildings.


Also, the share count, if you were to read the balance sheet, is actually 126mm outstanding. The number you cite is the avg shares outstanding which is not the actual shares outstanding.