the restructuring package is part of the chapter 11... they will only file if the parties agree to the package.. they have 55% committed they need 66%.. they will now go to the remaining stakeholders and get them on board.. It's not final yet..
JCP has about $400 mln a year they depreciate from their property assets.. non cash depreciation on an asset that does not have to be reinvested in unlike say Sprint's cellular network.. Thus, the $400 mln a year can be easily removed to fined the true financial measure of JCP..
one must separate cash flows from earnings... cash and cash flow determine the working capital needs of the company..
what does the current ratio have to do with the value of the nat gas assets?? possibly most stupid comment yet..
when someone loses an argument, they resort to such comments... but, if ye must know, I am buying back my position sold back in the mid $11s
Oh.. one more thing.. If the market value is based simply on per share earnings and an applicable PE ratio, the common shares of JCP would be worth NEGATIVE - $15... So, it seems the market agrees with my EBITDA assessment..
With a multi billion dollar annual property depreciation of JCP, it is pertinent to use EBITDA as a better means of accurately determining the value of the enterprise.. If, say, we were dealing with a wireless carrier that had to upgrade their network every several years, yes, the amount of future capital needed to generate cash flow becomes a very important variable.. Last time I checked, JCP is closing stores; not opening them.... Thus, the depreciation is an after-tax gift from the accounting gods...
Land has a 2.5% annual depreciation... That is how assets (just on the books) lost value.. Its not as if $1 bln was lost or got up and left .... You are a fool, by the way..
So.... If the tangible book value as per JCP's balance sheet is about $1.3 bln and the bulk of the book value is based on cost accounting property values at the time of purchase LESS the depreciated value of the building... JCP would stand to gain a much greater amount should they be forced to sell/liquidate or monetize their property...
I gave an example of such value disproportion when highlighting the amount JCP can receive from selling their corporate office campus versus what the book value of that campus showed on their balance sheet.. I all hope we can agree that the value of their land has doubled since they broke ground in 1992 on their office...
they fully own over 400 stores and they have varying portions of equity in the remaining 700.. duh.... again.... fool... yes, $4.7 bln is pledged to GS... Their book value on of the property on their balance sheet is just under $5 bln.... Did you miss my ENTIRE ARGUMENT that the market value of their real estate is considerably higher than the stated book value????????????????
the market value for JCP's corporate campus..... campus bought and built almost 25 yrs ago.. The value of that property (dirt and land) remains accounted for at the cost of purchase.. The building is depreciated (usually 2.5% annually over 40 yrs).. So, their balance sheet shows the value of the cost of the land and the depreciated value of the building..
You are aware that real estate assets (ground/dirt) are never marked to market? and that building assets allow for depreciation? You do know that $600 mln in depreciation loss per year is applied to their income statement of which a large chunk is the allowed for depreciation on their buildings.. The buildings which we know appreciate at the market..
The market value that JCP received was literally twice the book value of the property...
You really have no clue.. do you?
The market value of their tangible assets are much higher than stated book value.. Their debt has been upgraded.. They will refinance and or retire the debt.. They just did a sale lease back on their office property.. (several hundred million $$) On track for $1 bln in EBITDA 2016 (You do know what cash flow is versus earnings?)
credibility??!! NY Post article?? Slow two weeks in April?? I should base my investing money on a NY Post article about pertinent cost cutting during a few slow weeks?