% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Tuesday Morning Corporation Message Board

  • microcaptrader microcaptrader Dec 27, 2013 12:35 PM Flag

    TUES has substandard stores in low rent locations, filled with average at best merchandise...

    Why would anybody want to buy the name? Where's the value? Perhaps there might be interest below tangible book as a liquidation play, but as an ongoing business, it would be easier and less expensive to start from scratch and build something new. Unless there is a boiler room somewhere pumping out shares of TUES to the unsuspecting public, I don't understand who would be buying its shares at current levels.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • beetleruss Dec 28, 2013 6:54 AM Flag

      I have to agree with you, micro. Many Tuesday Morning locations are spots that the Salvation Army wouldn't take. TUES doesn't have the sceamin' door buster deals that used to draw in the shoppers to the second-rate location. I don't see TUES going bankrupt soon due to their relatively low debt levels but it will be a perennial under performer. Most investors I know want to grow their money, not watch it stagnate or slowly decline.

      . Tuesday Morning is a broken business model. There's much better places to park your money.

    • Well, I'm short, so your screed has a certain emotional appeal.....but it is obviously FALSE to say it would be cheaper to build the company from scratch. And it is also false to say that a boiler room "pumping out shares" would drive up the stock price. (Increased supply equals a LOWER stock price, not higher.) I prefer rational arguments to why TUES is overvalued. There are plenty of the, out there...especially the last few Seeking Alpha pieces.

      • 1 Reply to longtimefollower
      • Wow. Some people really do see exactly what they want to see don't they? Who would want to build the same company from scratch? I said it would be cheaper to start from scratch and build a new company, than it would be to pay $16/share for TUES and rebuild it into a new company. What about that is "obviously" false? At $16/share, after subtracting tangible assets, what would a buyer be getting for his money that he couldn't duplicate for less? As for "pumping out shares", perhaps that was a poor choice of words on my part, but I'm reasonably sure you know that I meant "pumping shares".

6.39+0.14(+2.24%)Oct 9 4:00 PMEDT