RadMan24 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 Were there spin-offs or big dividends? The stock is down ~91% on a price basis from peak over 5 years. Recognizing that investment is forward looking, i’d say those calling for the company’s demise have been correct, no? I am confused why you say that the comparisons to defunct retaileres aren’t working. If anything GME is exhibiting far greater fundamental deterioration than CC did with its -6% comps pre BK (I know people are deferring console purchases, but it illustrates GME’s fundamental cyclicality) I actually have no opinion on how things shake out, just think it’s dumb to lend to this company to get through another holiday season to make 7-8%, particularly with the company on a mission to distribute its cash to equity holders If I were long stock, I’d still short the bonds. Why is the comparison to a secularly challenged retailer that went bankrupt despite little financial debt not relevant? Right, let's play your game. Where was everyone expecting Gamestop's demise when the stock was in its 40s, 30s? They were all over gamestop when it was in its 20s and high-teens in 2012 only to get burned like a crisp. Same folks, different people, are predicting the same at the end of a console cycle. Good luck! Here are two GME short theses from 2013 and 2014, one with the stock at $33 and the other at $37. https://www.valueinvestorsclub.com/idea/GAMESTOP_CORP/3191613313 https://www.valueinvestorsclub.com/idea/GAMESTOP_CORP/3808584834 Thanks for sharing. The short in 2013 was burned, as I mentioned. The one in 2014, you'd have to short and cover dividends until 2016 to breakeven on that trade. Even then, you didn't bank any real profits unless you held that short trade all the way until recently. Let's also not forget the board/CEO attempted to diversify, incorrectly, into ATT reseller stores. They had put the cash to work to diversify but failed. Today, the bull thesis is simple - consoles continue to have discs. The bear case, going to zero, presumes that this isn't the case. The odds are not in the shorts favor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foreign Tuffett Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 Were there spin-offs or big dividends? The stock is down ~91% on a price basis from peak over 5 years. Recognizing that investment is forward looking, i’d say those calling for the company’s demise have been correct, no? I am confused why you say that the comparisons to defunct retaileres aren’t working. If anything GME is exhibiting far greater fundamental deterioration than CC did with its -6% comps pre BK (I know people are deferring console purchases, but it illustrates GME’s fundamental cyclicality) I actually have no opinion on how things shake out, just think it’s dumb to lend to this company to get through another holiday season to make 7-8%, particularly with the company on a mission to distribute its cash to equity holders If I were long stock, I’d still short the bonds. Why is the comparison to a secularly challenged retailer that went bankrupt despite little financial debt not relevant? Right, let's play your game. Where was everyone expecting Gamestop's demise when the stock was in its 40s, 30s? They were all over gamestop when it was in its 20s and high-teens in 2012 only to get burned like a crisp. Same folks, different people, are predicting the same at the end of a console cycle. Good luck! Here are two GME short theses from 2013 and 2014, one with the stock at $33 and the other at $37. https://www.valueinvestorsclub.com/idea/GAMESTOP_CORP/3191613313 https://www.valueinvestorsclub.com/idea/GAMESTOP_CORP/3808584834 Thanks for sharing. The short in 2013 was burned, as I mentioned. The one in 2014, you'd have to short and cover dividends until 2016 to breakeven on that trade. Even then, you didn't bank any real profits unless you held that short trade all the way until recently. Let's also not forget the board/CEO attempted to diversify, incorrectly, into ATT reseller stores. They had put the cash to work to diversify but failed. Today, the bull thesis is simple - consoles continue to have discs. The bear case, going to zero, presumes that this isn't the case. The odds are not in the shorts favor. That's a straw man. I've read lots of bearish comments on GME, but don't recall anyone arguing that the next generation consoles would not have disc drives. Certainly not recently anyway, since it's all but confirmed that they both will, although it's rumored that Microsoft will release a lower price next gen device that lacks a disc drive. The basic bear case is that digital is taking 5% plus share of the console game market each year. This is gradually decimating GME's new software and used and value software segments. The inherent operating leverage means that a tipping point will be reached where the retailer is structurally unprofitable. The basic bull case is that the high short interest + management's willingness to repurchase lots of shares may create a short squeeze. Additionally, inventory liquidations from the huge # of stores they plan on closing early in calendar 2020 will generate sufficient liquidity for the company to survive until the new console cycle begins in Q4 calendar 2020. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadMan24 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 Were there spin-offs or big dividends? The stock is down ~91% on a price basis from peak over 5 years. Recognizing that investment is forward looking, i’d say those calling for the company’s demise have been correct, no? I am confused why you say that the comparisons to defunct retaileres aren’t working. If anything GME is exhibiting far greater fundamental deterioration than CC did with its -6% comps pre BK (I know people are deferring console purchases, but it illustrates GME’s fundamental cyclicality) I actually have no opinion on how things shake out, just think it’s dumb to lend to this company to get through another holiday season to make 7-8%, particularly with the company on a mission to distribute its cash to equity holders If I were long stock, I’d still short the bonds. Why is the comparison to a secularly challenged retailer that went bankrupt despite little financial debt not relevant? Right, let's play your game. Where was everyone expecting Gamestop's demise when the stock was in its 40s, 30s? They were all over gamestop when it was in its 20s and high-teens in 2012 only to get burned like a crisp. Same folks, different people, are predicting the same at the end of a console cycle. Good luck! Here are two GME short theses from 2013 and 2014, one with the stock at $33 and the other at $37. https://www.valueinvestorsclub.com/idea/GAMESTOP_CORP/3191613313 https://www.valueinvestorsclub.com/idea/GAMESTOP_CORP/3808584834 Thanks for sharing. The short in 2013 was burned, as I mentioned. The one in 2014, you'd have to short and cover dividends until 2016 to breakeven on that trade. Even then, you didn't bank any real profits unless you held that short trade all the way until recently. Let's also not forget the board/CEO attempted to diversify, incorrectly, into ATT reseller stores. They had put the cash to work to diversify but failed. Today, the bull thesis is simple - consoles continue to have discs. The bear case, going to zero, presumes that this isn't the case. The odds are not in the shorts favor. That's a straw man. I've read lots of bearish comments on GME, but don't recall anyone arguing that the next generation consoles would not have disc drives. Certainly not recently anyway, since it's all but confirmed that they both will, although it's rumored that Microsoft will release a lower price next gen device that lacks a disc drive. The basic bear case is that digital is taking 5% plus share of the console game market each year. This is gradually decimating GME's new software and used and value software segments. The inherent operating leverage means that a tipping point will be reached where the retailer is structurally unprofitable. The basic bull case is that the high short interest + management's willingness to repurchase lots of shares may create a short squeeze. Additionally, inventory liquidations from the huge # of stores they plan on closing early in calendar 2020 will generate sufficient liquidity for the company to survive until the new console cycle begins in Q4 calendar 2020. For anyone wanting to give kids a console or for a second console in their house, great option. Playstation is unknown if they follow suit. https://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/ps5-release-date-specs-price-news/ Many believe this industry is ultimately going to go Cloud streaming. The hiccup at the moment: loss of net neutrality and data caps in place at many internet service providers. Physical media remains strong. But this implies digital downloads are a hybrid option between the switch from disc to cloud. Further, with PS5 going to SSD and bluray data discs at 100gb, owning just 10 games saves you 1TB of SSD storage. 1TB of SSD hard drive is not cheap relative to overall cost of console. Hence, the highest performing consoles will continue to have a hard disc with integrated SSD. With cloud gaming at least 5 years away, if not longer, Gamestop has room to redfine itself, or to just throw cash back to shareholders. What we know: Next Gen consoles out 2020 - high-demand versions all disc based Big PS4 games to hit market in 2020 (GT6 is also in the weeds, could be PS5 tho) Uplift in used games/consoles possible, albeit moderate. What we don't know When cloud gaming will take off How big of market all-digital consoles will cannibalize, or if they will simply be "add-on" sales (i.e. expanding overall market). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foreign Tuffett Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 I continue to believe you are oversimplifying some of the issues at play here. You said: "Further, with PS5 going to SSD and bluray data discs at 100gb, owning just 10 games saves you 1TB of SSD storage." Media Reports say: "The Wired interview also confirms that the PS5 will use standard 100GB Blu-ray discs — Sony had previously confirmed that the console will offer a disc drive — but all games will have to be installed to the internal SSD this time around." https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/8/20904351/sony-ps5-playstation-5-confirmed-haptic-feedback-features-release-date-2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadMan24 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 I continue to believe you are oversimplifying some of the issues at play here. You said: "Further, with PS5 going to SSD and bluray data discs at 100gb, owning just 10 games saves you 1TB of SSD storage." Media Reports say: "The Wired interview also confirms that the PS5 will use standard 100GB Blu-ray discs — Sony had previously confirmed that the console will offer a disc drive — but all games will have to be installed to the internal SSD this time around." https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/8/20904351/sony-ps5-playstation-5-confirmed-haptic-feedback-features-release-date-2020 Ah yes, the games have to be installed to disc drive, I forgot about that. Anyway, there was an update to the PS4 to allow for external hard drives. Looks like that won't be the case anymore for the PS5. Therefore, you're looking at 1.) one expensive console and 2.) valuable real estate on the early versions of consoles for game data and downloads. Ultimately boils down to user preference if they want the resale/hard copy value of a disc, or convenience of downloading a game to hard drive. SSD upload speeds from disc or digital download will be the same. I have no dog in this fight so I will leave it at this and let the chips fall as they may. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foreign Tuffett Posted January 13, 2020 Share Posted January 13, 2020 Horrible results for the nine-week holiday period. Despite just lowering guidance in a big way with Q3 results, they they "now expect fiscal 2019 earnings to be below guidance" https://gamestop.gcs-web.com/news-releases/news-release-details/gamestop-reports-2019-holiday-sales-results Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5xEBITDA Posted January 13, 2020 Share Posted January 13, 2020 The fine print is that they did not lower EPS guidance despite revising adj. net income downward...this means the Company has been buying back more stock. I suspect they were the ones responsible for the rally shares have had between their last earnings call and now. They also mentioned that liquidity will be $900 million vs. $1 billion, and I suspect the difference being cash they had but now spent. Very interested to see 4Q19 / FY19 results...I suspect they will be in a precarious cash situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foreign Tuffett Posted January 13, 2020 Share Posted January 13, 2020 The fine print is that they did not lower EPS guidance despite revising adj. net income downward...this means the Company has been buying back more stock. I suspect they were the ones responsible for the rally shares have had between their last earnings call and now. They also mentioned that liquidity will be $900 million vs. $1 billion, and I suspect the difference being cash they had but now spent. Very interested to see 4Q19 / FY19 results...I suspect they will be in a precarious cash situation. Those are all smart thoughts I think (and this is very much just my opinion since management has not openly said this) the plan is to close a bunch of stores in Q1 of FY 2020 and use the liquidity from inventory liquidations to buttress the balance sheet until the start of the next console cycle. I don't think this is a particularly smart plan, but I suspect it is more-or-less how management is thinking about the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
given2invest Posted January 13, 2020 Share Posted January 13, 2020 The fine print is that they did not lower EPS guidance despite revising adj. net income downward...this means the Company has been buying back more stock. I suspect they were the ones responsible for the rally shares have had between their last earnings call and now. They also mentioned that liquidity will be $900 million vs. $1 billion, and I suspect the difference being cash they had but now spent. Very interested to see 4Q19 / FY19 results...I suspect they will be in a precarious cash situation. Huh? I don't read that *at all*. First, it's a LOSS now so of course they won't hit the previous per share "profit" guidance. If they have a net loss, no matter how many shares outstanding it's a per share net loss. In fact, the less shares outstanding, the higher the per share net loss! "The Company, while not updating earnings per share guidance at this time, now expects an adjusted net loss for the fiscal year, with adjusted earnings per diluted share impacted by the further deceleration in sales in December. " It's very poorly worded but I wouldn't read into it as you have. I don't have a position in this (never have) but continue to be fascinated by the amount of shares they bought back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5xEBITDA Posted January 13, 2020 Share Posted January 13, 2020 The fine print is that they did not lower EPS guidance despite revising adj. net income downward...this means the Company has been buying back more stock. I suspect they were the ones responsible for the rally shares have had between their last earnings call and now. They also mentioned that liquidity will be $900 million vs. $1 billion, and I suspect the difference being cash they had but now spent. Very interested to see 4Q19 / FY19 results...I suspect they will be in a precarious cash situation. Huh? I don't read that *at all*. First, it's a LOSS now so of course they won't hit the previous per share "profit" guidance. If they have a net loss, no matter how many shares outstanding it's a per share net loss. In fact, the less shares outstanding, the higher the per share net loss! "The Company, while not updating earnings per share guidance at this time, now expects an adjusted net loss for the fiscal year, with adjusted earnings per diluted share impacted by the further deceleration in sales in December. " It's very poorly worded but I wouldn't read into it as you have. I don't have a position in this (never have) but continue to be fascinated by the amount of shares they bought back. Hm, you're actually most likely correct and it was me who read the release too quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanS Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 The fine print is that they did not lower EPS guidance despite revising adj. net income downward...this means the Company has been buying back more stock. I suspect they were the ones responsible for the rally shares have had between their last earnings call and now. They also mentioned that liquidity will be $900 million vs. $1 billion, and I suspect the difference being cash they had but now spent. Very interested to see 4Q19 / FY19 results...I suspect they will be in a precarious cash situation. Those are all smart thoughts I think (and this is very much just my opinion since management has not openly said this) the plan is to close a bunch of stores in Q1 of FY 2020 and use the liquidity from inventory liquidations to buttress the balance sheet until the start of the next console cycle. I don't think this is a particularly smart plan, but I suspect it is more-or-less how management is thinking about the situation. Foreign Tuffett, Just seeking your views, what would be a smart plan in this situation ? Judging from a cash preservation point of view, they should close down unprofitable stores and improve margins. This would dramatically decrease net sales but improve cashflow and margins and ultimately survivability. About 90% of Gamestops 5,000+ outlets are cashflow positive , and I dont really see an issue if you close down the remaining non-profitable ones. Though based on the recent updates, this 90% would have dropped as video game sales suffer overall. On the other hand, instead of conserving cash and paying down debt they did a huge buyback, as a vote of confidence that the shares are undervalued, confident of their ability to weather the year till the next console cycle. Agreed that with a net loss and sharebuyback , the EPS would be terrible. And it is ironic in Burry's letter to management that he said "Depending on the timing and quality of execution, such a repurchase would increase earnings per share dramatically - far more than any other possible action on a per share basis....shareholders do not have faith in current management, and have not been inspired by new leadership policies.... All of this creates the opportunity to enter 2020 with a dramatically reduced share count along with multi-fold greater impact per share for every single other achievement of management." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanS Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 The fine print is that they did not lower EPS guidance despite revising adj. net income downward...this means the Company has been buying back more stock. I suspect they were the ones responsible for the rally shares have had between their last earnings call and now. They also mentioned that liquidity will be $900 million vs. $1 billion, and I suspect the difference being cash they had but now spent. Very interested to see 4Q19 / FY19 results...I suspect they will be in a precarious cash situation. Those are all smart thoughts I think (and this is very much just my opinion since management has not openly said this) the plan is to close a bunch of stores in Q1 of FY 2020 and use the liquidity from inventory liquidations to buttress the balance sheet until the start of the next console cycle. I don't think this is a particularly smart plan, but I suspect it is more-or-less how management is thinking about the situation. Foreign Tuffett, Just seeking your views, what would be a smart plan in this situation ? Judging from a cash preservation point of view, they should close down unprofitable stores and improve margins. This would dramatically decrease net sales but improve cashflow and margins and ultimately survivability. About 90% of Gamestops 5,000+ outlets are cashflow positive , and I dont really see an issue if you close down the remaining non-profitable ones. Though based on the recent updates, this 90% would have dropped as video game sales suffer overall. On the other hand, instead of conserving cash and paying down debt they did a huge buyback, as a vote of confidence that the shares are undervalued, confident of their ability to weather the year till the next console cycle. Agreed that with a net loss and sharebuyback , the EPS would be terrible. And it is ironic in Burry's letter to management that he said "Depending on the timing and quality of execution, such a repurchase would increase earnings per share dramatically - far more than any other possible action on a per share basis....shareholders do not have faith in current management, and have not been inspired by new leadership policies.... All of this creates the opportunity to enter 2020 with a dramatically reduced share count along with multi-fold greater impact per share for every single other achievement of management." The impact per share part is correct, but its a negative impact per share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foreign Tuffett Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 The fine print is that they did not lower EPS guidance despite revising adj. net income downward...this means the Company has been buying back more stock. I suspect they were the ones responsible for the rally shares have had between their last earnings call and now. They also mentioned that liquidity will be $900 million vs. $1 billion, and I suspect the difference being cash they had but now spent. Very interested to see 4Q19 / FY19 results...I suspect they will be in a precarious cash situation. Those are all smart thoughts I think (and this is very much just my opinion since management has not openly said this) the plan is to close a bunch of stores in Q1 of FY 2020 and use the liquidity from inventory liquidations to buttress the balance sheet until the start of the next console cycle. I don't think this is a particularly smart plan, but I suspect it is more-or-less how management is thinking about the situation. Foreign Tuffett, Just seeking your views, what would be a smart plan in this situation ? Judging from a cash preservation point of view, they should close down unprofitable stores and improve margins. This would dramatically decrease net sales but improve cashflow and margins and ultimately survivability. About 90% of Gamestops 5,000+ outlets are cashflow positive , and I dont really see an issue if you close down the remaining non-profitable ones. Though based on the recent updates, this 90% would have dropped as video game sales suffer overall. On the other hand, instead of conserving cash and paying down debt they did a huge buyback, as a vote of confidence that the shares are undervalued, confident of their ability to weather the year till the next console cycle. Agreed that with a net loss and sharebuyback , the EPS would be terrible. And it is ironic in Burry's letter to management that he said "Depending on the timing and quality of execution, such a repurchase would increase earnings per share dramatically - far more than any other possible action on a per share basis....shareholders do not have faith in current management, and have not been inspired by new leadership policies.... All of this creates the opportunity to enter 2020 with a dramatically reduced share count along with multi-fold greater impact per share for every single other achievement of management." The impact per share part is correct, but its a negative impact per share Many four-wall profitable stores are probably just doing a little better than break even. Keep in mind that the stores themselves aren't expensive to operate: Many (most? all?) GME stores only have two full time employees, are very small, are often in B or C type strip malls, etc. Alot of the expenses are not on the store level.....regional managers, corporate executives, marketing, distribution, etc. The management team is right to close stores. I would actually argue that they are a couple years late in doing so. Recall that this company did not, for all practical intents and purposes, have a management team in place for well over a year. It was foolhardy to strain the balance sheet by buying back shares. GNC did the exact same thing several years ago just as its business results deteriorated, but its board fired the CEO before he bankrupted the company. Generally speaking a company shouldn't buy back stock if the terminal value of the business is seriously in doubt. The "smart plan" here, IMHO, would be to accept that the business is in secular decline and manage it accordingly. Rationalize the store fleet, pay down the debt, and focus on the basic "blocking and tackling" of operating the business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanS Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 The fine print is that they did not lower EPS guidance despite revising adj. net income downward...this means the Company has been buying back more stock. I suspect they were the ones responsible for the rally shares have had between their last earnings call and now. They also mentioned that liquidity will be $900 million vs. $1 billion, and I suspect the difference being cash they had but now spent. Very interested to see 4Q19 / FY19 results...I suspect they will be in a precarious cash situation. Those are all smart thoughts I think (and this is very much just my opinion since management has not openly said this) the plan is to close a bunch of stores in Q1 of FY 2020 and use the liquidity from inventory liquidations to buttress the balance sheet until the start of the next console cycle. I don't think this is a particularly smart plan, but I suspect it is more-or-less how management is thinking about the situation. Foreign Tuffett, Just seeking your views, what would be a smart plan in this situation ? Judging from a cash preservation point of view, they should close down unprofitable stores and improve margins. This would dramatically decrease net sales but improve cashflow and margins and ultimately survivability. About 90% of Gamestops 5,000+ outlets are cashflow positive , and I dont really see an issue if you close down the remaining non-profitable ones. Though based on the recent updates, this 90% would have dropped as video game sales suffer overall. On the other hand, instead of conserving cash and paying down debt they did a huge buyback, as a vote of confidence that the shares are undervalued, confident of their ability to weather the year till the next console cycle. Agreed that with a net loss and sharebuyback , the EPS would be terrible. And it is ironic in Burry's letter to management that he said "Depending on the timing and quality of execution, such a repurchase would increase earnings per share dramatically - far more than any other possible action on a per share basis....shareholders do not have faith in current management, and have not been inspired by new leadership policies.... All of this creates the opportunity to enter 2020 with a dramatically reduced share count along with multi-fold greater impact per share for every single other achievement of management." The impact per share part is correct, but its a negative impact per share Many four-wall profitable stores are probably just doing a little better than break even. Keep in mind that the stores themselves aren't expensive to operate: Many (most? all?) GME stores only have two full time employees, are very small, are often in B or C type strip malls, etc. Alot of the expenses are not on the store level.....regional managers, corporate executives, marketing, distribution, etc. The management team is right to close stores. I would actually argue that they are a couple years late in doing so. Recall that this company did not, for all practical intents and purposes, have a management team in place for well over a year. It was foolhardy to strain the balance sheet by buying back shares. GNC did the exact same thing several years ago just as its business results deteriorated, but its board fired the CEO before he bankrupted the company. Generally speaking a company shouldn't buy back stock if the terminal value of the business is seriously in doubt. The "smart plan" here, IMHO, would be to accept that the business is in secular decline and manage it accordingly. Rationalize the store fleet, pay down the debt, and focus on the basic "blocking and tackling" of operating the business. Agreed on that front. This can still be a low/negative growth with some terminal value if the management doesn't do something stupid. But I find the part on them refocusing Gamestop as a gathering place of sorts and an experiential gaming hub that I find concerning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikazo Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 GME at 98.8% shares short https://seekingalpha.com/article/4322003-heavily-shorted-stocks-february-2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foreign Tuffett Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 Founder of Credit Acceptance just filed that he owns just over 5% of the company. Odd https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/901185/000110465920030651/tv538831_sc13g.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
compoundvalue Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 Interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest roark33 Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 Hmm, that does seem odd. I bet he could run the company for cash, and do a better job than management Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5xEBITDA Posted March 20, 2020 Share Posted March 20, 2020 The capital structure dynamics here have been interesting. The bonds are down to 70 cents yet the stock has remained range bound between $3.50 - $4.00 basically over the last two weeks, even with everything going on. I suspect the Company may be buying back stock to keep the price propped up, which is the sort of desperate move that foots with reports I'm hearing of management telling stores to remain open against government orders. Value destruction in real time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foreign Tuffett Posted March 24, 2020 Share Posted March 24, 2020 http://news.gamestop.com/news-releases/news-release-details/gamestop-provides-us-store-operations-and-customer-service "Effective Sunday March 22, 2020, for all locations not already closed in accordance with state and local orders, GameStop will temporarily stop customer access to storefronts, processing orders on a digital only basis, moving to curbside pick-up at stores and eCommerce delivery only." If the PS5 and next gen Xbox are both delayed to 2021 (possible), or even just available in extremely limited quantities this holiday season (likely) then GME is a zero Is stores stay quasi closed (like they are now) for an extended period then GME is a zero Even if neither of the immediately above happen, this could still be a zero without some kind of government support package 5xEBITDA, I agree with you. The price action over the last several weeks is....interesting to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
given2invest Posted March 24, 2020 Share Posted March 24, 2020 I am perplexed at why this stock is $4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nspo Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 I was really interested in how the store transformation was going to pan out. Looks like this could stop progress dead in its tracks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foreign Tuffett Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 I was really interested in how the store transformation was going to pan out. Looks like this could stop progress dead in its tracks. IMO there was never a "store transformation" forthcoming. There are a few concept stores in the Tulsa, OK area, but even if successful the company lacks the financial and operational resources to expand the program in any meaningful way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest roark33 Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 They should report earnings next week, will be really interesting to hear what they say on liquidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5xEBITDA Posted March 25, 2020 Share Posted March 25, 2020 They should report earnings next week, will be really interesting to hear what they say on liquidity. Earnings are tomorrow after the close, actually :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now