stahleyp Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 As usual, Eric brings up a good point. I took a look. In Nov of 2010 it was about 5% of assets For the report dated (FAIRX) 11/30/11 SHLD was 10.7% of portfolio. The stock was about $54 then. 11/30/12 8.5% of portfolio. About $42 a share. Now it's about 8% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krazeenyc Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Fairholme letter out... http://www.fairholmefunds.com/show_pdf.php?file=http://www.fairholmefunds.com/sites/default/files/FAIRX%20Letter.pdf#pagemode=bookmarks "Headlines shout of Sears’ disastrous 2013 loss of $12 per share. A longer history shows that since the merger of Sears with Kmart, about 9 years ago, Sears has distributed over $66 of cash per share via buybacks and spin-offs and has paid down $27 per share of a pension liability that is no different, in our view, from debt. Fairholme research estimates that the fair value of Sears’ net assets exceeds $150 per share. If our research is accurate, we expect Sears’ market price of $38 to increase to this value over time." What's stopping him from buying more then? You don't think he's buying enough? Here are the number of Sears shares he's held in his 13Fs.... 11/2013 20,758,173 8/2013 20,392,973 5/2013 19,508,773 2/2013 18,146,573 11/2012 16,934,080 8/2012 16,829,880 5/2012 16,813,480 2/2012 16,108,492 I would be shocked if his 13G/A that he files on 2/14 doesn't show that he bought a bunch more of SHLD. I am fascinated by SHLD, but definitely do not have the same level of conviction as Bruce. No, he should be buying way more if he believes this is trading less than 1/3 of NAV. AND he should be more involved in pushing for a plan to realize the NAV. A) It hasn't been trading at $35-38 most of the time. (You won't see what he's added until he files his 13G/A. B) He claims he's happy with Eddie's actions. He's just not happy with the price. C) It's his 3rd largest position and if it had appreciated at the same pace as BAC in Q4 it'd have been his 2nd largest position. While Sears is plenty liquid to put on a $500K position or $1M position. For him to add significantly to SHLD is not as easy as it seems. For him to add 5-10 million shares to his position quickly without moving the stock in a big way would be very hard. FWIW he's sold down both BAC and AIG (as opposed to adding to SHLD). Look -- i'm not saying b/c Bruce owns SHLD it must be a good investment. But I think questioning his conviction on SHLD is a stretch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke 532 Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 The Fairholme Fund grew in asset size over the last two years. He holds 25% more shares today versus two years ago. Has his Sears position as % of net assets in the fund been getting larger or smaller over these past two years? In other words, let's say his fund grew 100x in size and over that time he bought 25% more SHLD. That wouldn't be too impressive. So I know Fairholme didn't grow 100x in asset size, but did it grow more than 25% over the past two years? It wouldn't be all that bullish if it were getting smaller as a % of the fund. It depends on whether the fund is growing faster than his SHLD position. Take a look... When Berkowitz's fund dropped from roughly $20B to $7B due to market price declines and redemptions, how much SHLD did he sell? Here's his historical ownership of SHLD from 13F filings: Date Number of Shares. Feb 2011: 14,917,873 May 2011: 16,313,973 Aug 2011: 16,380,680 Nov 2011: 16,270,692 Feb 2012: 16,108,492 May 2012: 16,813,480 Aug 2012: 16,829,880 Nov 2012: 16,934,080 Feb 2013: 18,146,573 May 2013: 19,508,773 Thank you, Charlie. So, Berkowitz's fund went from roughly $20B down to $7B due to market prices and redemptions, yet his SHLD holdings either were slightly down (talking a miniscule 1.7% of his share count from AUG 2011 to FEB 2012), flat or up. What does that tell us about his conviction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke 532 Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 No, he should be buying way more if he believes this is trading less than 1/3 of NAV. AND he should be more involved in pushing for a plan to realize the NAV. He is... from December 18, 2013: http://searsholdings.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=16310&item=137259 Sears Holdings Elects Cesar L. Alvarez To Board Mr. Alvarez also serves on the board of directors of Fairholme Funds, Inc.; Intrexon Corporation; Mednax, Inc.; St. Joe Co.; and Watsco, Inc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krazeenyc Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 As usual, Eric brings up a good point. I took a look. In Nov of 2010 it was about 5% of assets For the report dated (FAIRX) 11/30/11 SHLD was 10.7% of portfolio. The stock was about $54 then. 11/30/12 8.5% of portfolio. About $42 a share. Now it's about 8% If you take the actual data .. 11/30/12 8.5% of portfolio 11/2013 filing - it was actually 14.6% of the portfolio. Using today's price (without today's # of shares) is kind of like manipulating the data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alertmeipp Posted February 4, 2014 Author Share Posted February 4, 2014 Fairholme letter out... http://www.fairholmefunds.com/show_pdf.php?file=http://www.fairholmefunds.com/sites/default/files/FAIRX%20Letter.pdf#pagemode=bookmarks "Headlines shout of Sears’ disastrous 2013 loss of $12 per share. A longer history shows that since the merger of Sears with Kmart, about 9 years ago, Sears has distributed over $66 of cash per share via buybacks and spin-offs and has paid down $27 per share of a pension liability that is no different, in our view, from debt. Fairholme research estimates that the fair value of Sears’ net assets exceeds $150 per share. If our research is accurate, we expect Sears’ market price of $38 to increase to this value over time." What's stopping him from buying more then? You don't think he's buying enough? Here are the number of Sears shares he's held in his 13Fs.... 11/2013 20,758,173 8/2013 20,392,973 5/2013 19,508,773 2/2013 18,146,573 11/2012 16,934,080 8/2012 16,829,880 5/2012 16,813,480 2/2012 16,108,492 I would be shocked if his 13G/A that he files on 2/14 doesn't show that he bought a bunch more of SHLD. I am fascinated by SHLD, but definitely do not have the same level of conviction as Bruce. No, he should be buying way more if he believes this is trading less than 1/3 of NAV. AND he should be more involved in pushing for a plan to realize the NAV. A) It hasn't been trading at $35-38 most of the time. (You won't see what he's added until he files his 13G/A. B) He claims he's happy with Eddie's actions. He's just not happy with the price. C) It's his 3rd largest position and if it had appreciated at the same pace as BAC in Q4 it'd have been his 2nd largest position. While Sears is plenty liquid to put on a $500K position or $1M position. For him to add significantly to SHLD is not as easy as it seems. For him to add 5-10 million shares to his position quickly without moving the stock in a big way would be very hard. FWIW he's sold down both BAC and AIG (as opposed to adding to SHLD). Look -- i'm not saying b/c Bruce owns SHLD it must be a good investment. But I think questioning his conviction on SHLD is a stretch. FWIW, I added today. I don't own it because of Bruce but having Bruce and Eddie do make me way more comfortable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krazeenyc Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 http://www.norwalkreflector.com/article/4091226 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stahleyp Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 As usual, Eric brings up a good point. I took a look. In Nov of 2010 it was about 5% of assets For the report dated (FAIRX) 11/30/11 SHLD was 10.7% of portfolio. The stock was about $54 then. 11/30/12 8.5% of portfolio. About $42 a share. Now it's about 8% If you take the actual data .. 11/30/12 8.5% of portfolio 11/2013 filing - it was actually 14.6% of the portfolio. Using today's price (without today's # of shares) is kind of like manipulating the data. I think you're looking at fairholme capital. I was just looking at FAIRX (as noted). I failed to note the Nov 2010 was also FAIRX after I edited though. My bad there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke 532 Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 http://www.norwalkreflector.com/article/4091226 Interesting... “They called me last year and wanted to buy out the lease. Everything was in their court. They have all the options. They asked me If they could buy out the lease. I said no and I never heard from them again. “The lease wasn’t up. They had option upon option to renew the lease. They could have renewed that lease as much as they wanted to.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERICOPOLY Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Using today's price (without today's # of shares) is kind of like manipulating the data. That's precisely why I used the 25% figure (that's the increase in the actual share count of SHLD over the past two years). I was being charitable to him by not taking into account the drop in the price. How did they increase the share count by 25% (and the share price went down) and not have it fall as a percentage of the fund? The fund appreciated 84% over the same period, not counting new capital flows into the fund. Were there net capital outflows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krazeenyc Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Using today's price (without today's # of shares) is kind of like manipulating the data. That's precisely why I used the 25% figure (that's the increase in the actual share count of SHLD over the past two years). I was being charitable to him by not taking into account the drop in the price. How did they increase the share count by 25% (and the share price went down) and not have it fall as a percentage of the fund? The fund appreciated 84% over the same period, not counting new capital flows into the fund. Were there net capital outflows? I think at one point there were $7 billion in outflows, but not sure of the exact number. He went from like $20B to $7B AUM -- but some of that was due to declines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERICOPOLY Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Using today's price (without today's # of shares) is kind of like manipulating the data. That's precisely why I used the 25% figure (that's the increase in the actual share count of SHLD over the past two years). I was being charitable to him by not taking into account the drop in the price. How did they increase the share count by 25% (and the share price went down) and not have it fall as a percentage of the fund? The fund appreciated 84% over the same period, not counting new capital flows into the fund. Were there net capital outflows? I think at one point there were $7 billion in outflows, but not sure of the exact number. He went from like $20B to $7B AUM -- but some of that was due to declines. Sure, there were those big declines in 2011. But these numbers are since early 2012. The fund was doing so well the past two years I can't imagine flight of capital. Maybe funds leaving FAIRX and instead going into his hedge fund? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil_Buffett Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 bruce berkowitz has a Long waiting period already in his sears Holding, it is amazing how Patience he is. someday in the next 1-3years he will be big rewarded. the same as with his bac and aig Holdings. everybody laughed at him, he was Patience and make big money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmichaud Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Fairholme letter out... http://www.fairholmefunds.com/show_pdf.php?file=http://www.fairholmefunds.com/sites/default/files/FAIRX%20Letter.pdf#pagemode=bookmarks "Headlines shout of Sears’ disastrous 2013 loss of $12 per share. A longer history shows that since the merger of Sears with Kmart, about 9 years ago, Sears has distributed over $66 of cash per share via buybacks and spin-offs and has paid down $27 per share of a pension liability that is no different, in our view, from debt. Fairholme research estimates that the fair value of Sears’ net assets exceeds $150 per share. If our research is accurate, we expect Sears’ market price of $38 to increase to this value over time." Luke - we should not take this seriously, as it is merely a sales pitch designed to help Berkowitz dig himself out of the SHLD hole >:( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke 532 Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Fairholme letter out... http://www.fairholmefunds.com/show_pdf.php?file=http://www.fairholmefunds.com/sites/default/files/FAIRX%20Letter.pdf#pagemode=bookmarks "Headlines shout of Sears’ disastrous 2013 loss of $12 per share. A longer history shows that since the merger of Sears with Kmart, about 9 years ago, Sears has distributed over $66 of cash per share via buybacks and spin-offs and has paid down $27 per share of a pension liability that is no different, in our view, from debt. Fairholme research estimates that the fair value of Sears’ net assets exceeds $150 per share. If our research is accurate, we expect Sears’ market price of $38 to increase to this value over time." Luke - we should not take this seriously, as it is merely a sales pitch designed to help Berkowitz dig himself out of the SHLD hole >:( Perhaps, but he's been giving valuations in that range for years now, not just recently. If one thinks he is trying to sell the real estate thesis and believe the valuation to be much, much lower, that investor should consider selling. I think the conservative methods he has used in valuing the properties (via tax records) are a valid approach, and I don't think $150 NAV today is excessive by any stretch. From March 2009 (referring to summer 2008): Last summer, we spent a tremendous amount of time going to all the tax collectors’ offices around the U.S. trying to get the tax value of Sears and Kmart properties — and we came up with numbers that ranged from between $80 and $90 per share. That's just the real estate. I should add that I rarely trust what any one investor says, but if I believe the data used is valid then the conclusion (if properly using 1+1=2) has more merit. I also prefer to look at the actions rather than words of others. Berkowitz's actions speak pretty loud and clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmichaud Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 I was kidding 8) Within the last week Wellmont stated that Berkowitz SHLD presentation was merely a sales pitch and shouldn't be taken seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke 532 Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 I was kidding 8) Within the last week Wellmont stated that Berkowitz SHLD presentation was merely a sales pitch and shouldn't be taken seriously. My bad, sometimes it's tough to pick up on sarcasm. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peridotcapital Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Jan 2011: 2245 - 1307 Kmarts, 894 Sears, 30 SAC, 14 LE. Jan 2012: 2223 - 1305 Kmarts, 867 Sears , 37 SAC, 14 LE. Jan 2013: 2069 - 1221 Kmarts, 798 Sears, 36 SAC, 14 LE. Sep 2013: 2018. I assume they've been "accelerating" since 2012. But the precise number of store closing depends I think on the individual leases -- how much Sears gets paid to leave, how much they have to pay to leave, whether they can leave for $0.00. In one case Sears actually announced a store closing, the mall apparently gave them some kind of incentive to stay and Sears ended up reversing course 1 week later. Re: Lands End. Keep in mind -- if Land's End Ebitda is $125M SHLD actually only loses about $95M of Ebitda since they will now get $30M per year of rent from Lands End. (at least for 5 years when Lands End leaves). Since LE has been paying rent to SHLD all this time, wouldn't they lose the full $125M? SHLD's rental income will be unchanged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke 532 Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 FWIW, from SHCRealty.com (as of 2/3/14), a list of operating stores: 3 BigK 1108 Kmart 752 Sears 3 Sears Essentials 8 Sears Grand 4 Sears Hardlines 27 Super Kmart 370 Auto Center (attached to KMart) 467 Auto Center (attached to Sears) 34 Auto Center (detached from KMart) 293 Auto Center (detached from Sears) 7 Auto Center (freestanding) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krazeenyc Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Jan 2011: 2245 - 1307 Kmarts, 894 Sears, 30 SAC, 14 LE. Jan 2012: 2223 - 1305 Kmarts, 867 Sears , 37 SAC, 14 LE. Jan 2013: 2069 - 1221 Kmarts, 798 Sears, 36 SAC, 14 LE. Sep 2013: 2018. I assume they've been "accelerating" since 2012. But the precise number of store closing depends I think on the individual leases -- how much Sears gets paid to leave, how much they have to pay to leave, whether they can leave for $0.00. In one case Sears actually announced a store closing, the mall apparently gave them some kind of incentive to stay and Sears ended up reversing course 1 week later. Re: Lands End. Keep in mind -- if Land's End Ebitda is $125M SHLD actually only loses about $95M of Ebitda since they will now get $30M per year of rent from Lands End. (at least for 5 years when Lands End leaves). Since LE has been paying rent to SHLD all this time, wouldn't they lose the full $125M? SHLD's rental income will be unchanged. yes - my bad oops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke 532 Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Sears Holdings Names Norman Miller To Lead Automotive Business Unit http://searsholdings.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=16310&item=137266 "Mr. Miller most recently served as president and COO of Dollar Financial Corp." So, perhaps Lampert sees some positive metrics in the auto business (he should know from his involvement with AN and AZO) and perhaps he'll be keeping that division as one of his companies under the SHLD umbrella? Interesting move bringing in Miller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wellmont Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 I was kidding 8) Within the last week Wellmont stated that Berkowitz SHLD presentation was merely a sales pitch and shouldn't be taken seriously. I sure wish he would keep how great this is to himself. every time he reminds us that it's worth over 3 times the current price it goes down more. :-\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krazeenyc Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 I was kidding 8) Within the last week Wellmont stated that Berkowitz SHLD presentation was merely a sales pitch and shouldn't be taken seriously. I sure wish he would keep how great this is to himself. every time he reminds us that it's worth over 3 times the current price it goes down more. :-\ LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmichaud Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Hahahah no argument there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorpRaider Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Yeah I don't see how you can tout buybacks at higher prices as a positive return of capital to s/h, as if its some additional benefit that should be taken into account in analyzing your position. I mean yeah cash was returned to s/h but it was other shareholders. 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