FB bottomed the day before its biggest lockup expiration date. It actually rallied huge the day the most shares were unlocked -- Nov 14, 2012.
To say the retail sector is $2.5T really doesn't mean anything.
I could open a lemonade stand and then claim my business is worth a lot because food and beverages is a trillion dollar business.
JCPs decrepit old business model, worn out over priced brands and dilapidated
stores have fared if they didn't give Ullman the boot?"
They would not have grown, they would have underperformed Macys and others, but they would have been profitable and they would never have had a liquidity problem. Maybe Ullman isn't that good but RJ was maybe the worst CEO of all time. Stores could have been upgraded slowly and more upscale trendy products could have been tested at JCP and that would have been a much better strategy.
Despite being able to compare prices at the click of a mouse, online shoppers tend to stick to one or two online retailers. They are even more loyal to brand than brick and mortar shoppers. Go figure.
And BTW, JCP's online sales were up over 26% in the last quarter. JCP may be the ugly kid on the block but I believe they're in better shape brand-wise than Sears -- along with a much better value. The bottom line is that JCP is not going BK, will eventually get back to profitability (quicker than people think, unlike SHLD) and is therefore an extremely cheap stock. The only risk is the chance of a capital raise to shore up the balance sheet -- it's not something they need unless suppliers demand it. I also believe a bad May quarter is priced in.
Using my "measuring stick" -- ie, reading the actual financials with a little bit of knowledge about how to read financials -- the number of shares, fully diluted, at the end of the year 2013 (ie, NOT weighted average shares) DECREASED by 7.1M shares compared to 2012. That takes into account warrants, preferred share conversions and stock compensation. If you don't like the stock, sell it. Just stop posting inaccurate garbage all over the board.
There's nothing different. Probably a big seller. Once it clears up, the stock will reverse. You have to handle the volatility if you want to make money in this stock. Ignore the trolls. Buy more when the stock tanks but not so much that you can't sleep at night. And then don't look at it day to day.
He's just a dude on a message board who doesn't know how to spell gynecologist. I'm pretty sure there was no exercise of deep thinking of any kind.
Ullman became CEO in 2004. JCP was in the 30s. He then presided over the stock rising to the 80s and then the financial crisis happened. He was fired when the whole market was way down in November 2011 -- the stock price was in the 30s. Then he was given a house on fire in 2013 -- when the stock was in the teens but dropping fast. He cannot be blamed at all for the stock dropping more after RJ was fired. Your points are ridiculous and stupid.
First of all, RJ is the one who almost destroyed JCP, not Ullman. RJ took the reins when this company was a ~$30 stock, so I'm not sure your point is all that valid. You can't blame Ullman for the stock cratering to single digits.
Second, no one is saying Ullman is the second coming of anything. He's an okay CEO who is not going to sink the company. And if it doesn't sink, it's worth much more than $9.
JCP was in a slight downtrend before RJ took over. Sales were flat or trending down in the low single digits percentage-wise. They were clearly not doing as well as the competition -- from the high end (Macys) and the low end (TGT, KSS) -- but their lackluster performance was also related to the lackluster retail environment. They were not "losing ground fast" at all. A good, modest renovation and revitalization plan with a good marketing effort would have gotten the job done to get them back to growth, but hedge funds wanted results FAST, so RJ went all out and gambled the company's future on some expensive and terrible ideas, without any regard for JCP's existing customer base. There is no reason why JCP can't win back much of their customer base and attract more. The only question is expense. They will probably need more capital next year if they want to implement a growth strategy, so that's an issue, but bk is off the table. It's a big fat buy under $9. I'm long from $7.50.
At the end of 2012, the total fully diluted share count was 490.1M.
At the end of 2013, the total fully diluted share count was 483M.
Both of these numbers are end of period total counts and they take into account stock compensation, convertible preferred shares, and warrants.
The source is the 2013 Fourth Quarter Investor Financial Supplement -- find it on their web site -- but you can get these numbers from the 10k as well as some numbers about how many shares were repurchased in 2013. There is also discussion about total return for shareholders.
This should eliminate any confusion about share repurchases.
You are looking at annual weighted average shares. Shares are averaged from beginning to end of a period. That's why quarterly and annual numbers give different share counts. You need to see the financial supplements or dig further into the 10k to find the end of period totals. Regardless, even the weighted average quarterly shows that the q4 2013 share count is lower than the q4 2012 count.
There is doubt about their ability to pay the distribution. By their own inflated metric, they will cover the dividend by only a cat's whisker in 2014. What if there's a supply disruption? What if hedges don't perform? Are they hedged against interest rates? What about the balance sheet? And you do know that they are paying out capital every month, not earnings, right? Not cash flow or free cash flow either. They pay out some MLP-specific idea called Distributable Cash Flow which basically means that any expense that is capitalized doesn't really count as cash for some reason. Why not? Because !!!
They will need to issue new units or add to debt in order to pay the distribution. That's what they've been doing for a long time. That's what the BRY acquisition was all about. The share price is very important to the payment of future distributions -- because that's where the future cash will come from. Units increase and debt increases endlessly. When interest rates rise -- and someday they will be substantially higher than they are today -- or when the street no longer buys into it, this financing model will no longer work.