Sufferin' succotash. Just read that Sears and Kmart will merge, an 11 billion
buck deal, with the Kmart head leading the Sears Holding Co. that will emerge,
and the Sears CEO being CEO of the group.
I can see the benefit to Kmart. I cannot see the benefit to Sears.
Oh, yeah. Headquarters to remain at Sears headquarters, with a "significant
presence" at Kmart headquarters.
Predicted to be a $55 billion company, but I've seen claims for larger than
life companies before, including one I recently worked for that claimed $100
million, when balance sheets showed it was about $38-$45 million back then.
Supposed to come in as #3 behind Walmart and Target.
Charlie Self
"Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of
nothing."
Redd Foxx
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 18:00:18 GMT, "patrick conroy"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> Oh, yeah. Headquarters to remain at Sears headquarters, with a
>"significant
>> presence" at Kmart headquarters.
>
>I heard this am - that the new 10 member board is 7 Kmart'ers and 3
>Sears'ers. That caught me off-guard and made me wonder who's eating who
>(whom?)?
>
Read the cover story of this week's (Nov 22 edition) Business
Week. It was written before this sale, but it will give you a pretty
good understanding of what it is about.
"patrick conroy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Oh, yeah. Headquarters to remain at Sears headquarters, with a
> "significant
> > presence" at Kmart headquarters.
>
> I heard this am - that the new 10 member board is 7 Kmart'ers and 3
> Sears'ers. That caught me off-guard and made me wonder who's eating who
> (whom?)?
>
>
It was announced by the business press as "KMart acquires Sears"
The "Depot" family is pretty big, but it's an orange and Target's an apple.
"Todd Fatheree" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Lee Gordon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Charlie ...
> >
> > <<Supposed to come in as #3 behind Walmart and Target.>>
> >
> > This will make them bigger than Target. The number 2 retailer is Home
> > Depot.
> >
> > Lee
>
> Not according to every news report I've heard.
>
> todd
>
>
"Chuck Hoffman" <[email protected]> writes:
>Bottom line (for me anyhow): I don't buy tools or hardware at KMart. I
>probably will stop shopping Sears for similar merchandise.
So, where will you buy tools that are American Made if you don't buy from
Sears?
The only option I can think of right now is Allen tools at the local Fleet
Farm. Lowes and Home Depot are both sourcing sockets and wrenches
overseas now. Home Depot quit selling anything but sets anyhow.
Maybe some of the chiwainese stuff is good these days, but some tools I
boght a long time ago were junk. The plating chipped off if you looked at
the tools, let alone used them.
Brian Elfert
BINGO! Of course, a lot of those assets are probably leveraged a bit now.
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 20:53:20 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Note that the fact KMart can buy Sears only 3 years after bankruptcy
> >says there's something really wrong with the bankruptcy laws.
> >
> >John
>
> I'm not sure that follows. K-Mart was a classic case of a company rich
> in illiquid assets (real estate, in this case) that had dug itself
> into a cash hole with a combination of poor business practices and
> inability to adapt to changing market conditions. It was technically
> bankrupt since it couldn't pay its bills, but it had a lot of stuff it
> could eventually convert to cash.
>
> So in that sense it was an ideal candidate for a Chapter 11
> reorganization. (Which really isn't bankruptcy as we usually think of
> it.) The fact that they ended up with a wad of cash just a couple of
> years later indicates they were successful in converting some of those
> illiquid assets into cash.
>
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 09:48:10 -0700, John DeBoo <[email protected]>
wrote:
>I'm really surprised anyone in this forum gives a rats ass if KMart &
>Sears merged or not given most people constant riddicule of Sears tools
>and the probability they won't shop for tools at KMart for tools either.
> Being that neither chain carries the tools that are so commonly
>mentioned here I'm surprised the curmudgeons care.
>John
I'd have to agree. I wouldn't go into a K-mart if they paid me to
shop there, and while I don't hate Sears, I don't have any interest in
them either. Everytime I've attempted to get a tool I needed at
Sears, it's been something they don't carry, so they quickly became
irrelevant to me.
>Charlie Self wrote:
>
>> Sufferin' succotash. Just read that Sears and Kmart will merge, an 11 billion
>> buck deal, with the Kmart head leading the Sears Holding Co. that will emerge,
>> and the Sears CEO being CEO of the group.
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
"Charlie Self" wrote in message
> Supposed to come in as #3 behind Walmart and Target.
With their 50 cent a day labor force, the Chinese oughta love the increased
efficiency for 'dumping' opportunities. Just where the hell is that "vast
market for American goods" that Clinton was gushing about?
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04
On 17 Nov 2004 13:18:05 GMT, [email protected] (Charlie Self)
wrote:
>Supposed to come in as #3 behind Walmart and Target.
Pretty soon it'll all be one company.
Barry
On 18 Nov 2004 18:10:45 GMT, Brian Elfert <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Chuck Hoffman" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>>Bottom line (for me anyhow): I don't buy tools or hardware at KMart. I
>>probably will stop shopping Sears for similar merchandise.
>
>So, where will you buy tools that are American Made if you don't buy from
>Sears?
>
>The only option I can think of right now is Allen tools at the local Fleet
>Farm. Lowes and Home Depot are both sourcing sockets and wrenches
>overseas now. Home Depot quit selling anything but sets anyhow.
Allen does make nice tools. They call em Farm and Fleet around here,
but that's where I get all my stuff that isn't mail-order. Same
warranty as Craftsman, same quality as Craftsman hand tools, but
without the Sears price. I've got a whole toolbox stocked with them,
and I've never blown a socket or bent a wrench yet (can't say the same
for the tools from other vendors)
>Maybe some of the chiwainese stuff is good these days, but some tools I
>boght a long time ago were junk. The plating chipped off if you looked at
>the tools, let alone used them.
>
>Brian Elfert
Aut inveniam viam aut faciam
John McCoy <[email protected]> wrote:
>Yes, and it would seem that success is encouraging the mgmt to
>try much the same process with Sears. Again you have a company
>"rich in illiquid assets", so the same process of converting them
>to cash should be just as successful.
The primary reason for K-mart buying Sears is that the combined
company would have a large enough loss-carry-forward that it can be
profitable for *years* before paying any taxes. K-mart is not
currently profitable, so there is no advantage in the past losses.
Sears, OTOH, is marginally profitable, and the use of the K-mart
losses on the books goes directly to the bottom line.
The fact that more than half of each company is owned by the same
group of investors made the merger pretty easy.
--
Howard
My opinionated book reviews on sales topics
http://book-reviews.hostpci.com
Check out tele comms....mjh
--
http://members.tripod.com/mikehide2
"Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Charlie Self" wrote in message
>
>> Supposed to come in as #3 behind Walmart and Target.
>
> With their 50 cent a day labor force, the Chinese oughta love the
> increased
> efficiency for 'dumping' opportunities. Just where the hell is that "vast
> market for American goods" that Clinton was gushing about?
>
> --
> www.e-woodshop.net
> Last update: 11/06/04
>
>
On 17 Nov 2004 13:18:05 GMT, [email protected] (Charlie Self)
wrote:
>Sufferin' succotash. Just read that Sears and Kmart will merge, an 11 billion
>buck deal, with the Kmart head leading the Sears Holding Co. that will emerge,
>and the Sears CEO being CEO of the group.
>
>I can see the benefit to Kmart. I cannot see the benefit to Sears.
>
>Oh, yeah. Headquarters to remain at Sears headquarters, with a "significant
>presence" at Kmart headquarters.
>
>Predicted to be a $55 billion company, but I've seen claims for larger than
>life companies before, including one I recently worked for that claimed $100
>million, when balance sheets showed it was about $38-$45 million back then.
>
>Supposed to come in as #3 behind Walmart and Target.
>
>Charlie Self
>"Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of
>nothing."
>Redd Foxx
Very strange strategy!
A few years ago, we had some major gloats when Kmart closed 2 local
stores and had closeout sales to try and pull the company out of
bankruptcy...
Sears has been doing poorly for years and their attempt to compete
with walmart and the borgs by acquiring Orchard Hardware only
increased the bleeding... (the reason that I go to OHS a lot is
because you never have to wait in line.. not a good sign for a retail
outfit)
So, are they figuring that if you put 2 outdated losers together,
they'll become a winner?????
"Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Sufferin' succotash. Just read that Sears and Kmart will merge, an 11
> billion
> buck deal, with the Kmart head leading the Sears Holding Co. that will
> emerge,
> and the Sears CEO being CEO of the group.
>
> I can see the benefit to Kmart. I cannot see the benefit to Sears.
>
Nah, the benefit is to the new store owner. The Sear/K Mart properties
will be divided to 2/3 Wal Mart, 1/3 to Target. Give it three years.
I'm really surprised anyone in this forum gives a rats ass if KMart &
Sears merged or not given most people constant riddicule of Sears tools
and the probability they won't shop for tools at KMart for tools either.
Being that neither chain carries the tools that are so commonly
mentioned here I'm surprised the curmudgeons care.
John
Charlie Self wrote:
> Sufferin' succotash. Just read that Sears and Kmart will merge, an 11 billion
> buck deal, with the Kmart head leading the Sears Holding Co. that will emerge,
> and the Sears CEO being CEO of the group.
It's not like Kmart bought Sears.
Edward Lampert engineered a takeover of Kmart Holdings by converting his
debt holdings to equity when Kmart was emerging from Chapter 11. He sold
off a bunch of Kmart stores...some Home Depot...and with the cash generated
he made the offer for Sears.
According to the paper, the plan is to convert several Kmarts into Sears
stores and kick-start their expansion away from malls, at which Sears is not
doing well.
"John McCoy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] (Charlie Self) wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> > Sufferin' succotash. Just read that Sears and Kmart will merge, an 11
> > billion buck deal, with the Kmart head leading the Sears Holding Co.
> > that will emerge, and the Sears CEO being CEO of the group.
> >
> > I can see the benefit to Kmart. I cannot see the benefit to Sears.
>
> No benefit to Sears at all. They are not really merging, Sears is
> being bought by KMart. KMart wants Sears because the real estate
> Sears owns is worth a bunch of money (plus they get a few brands
> they can maybe make a little off, but that's lagniappe).
>
> Note that the fact KMart can buy Sears only 3 years after bankruptcy
> says there's something really wrong with the bankruptcy laws.
>
> John
Lee Gordon notes:
>
><<Supposed to come in as #3 behind Walmart and Target.>>
>
>This will make them bigger than Target. The number 2 retailer is Home
>Depot.
What the hell. I quoted the story. The writer may have meant general lines
retailer. Who knows?
Charlie Self
"Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of
nothing."
Redd Foxx
Bottom line (for me anyhow): I don't buy tools or hardware at KMart. I
probably will stop shopping Sears for similar merchandise.
I just ordered an aftermarket rip fence from Sears for $159.00. I don't
expect it to be as precise as a Biesemeyer but it was a lot less expensive,
too. When I pick it up on Friday that will probably be it for Sears tools.
I'm old enough to remember when they provided reasonable quality at
reasonable prices. Sadly, one or the other (or both) have been missing for
a long time.
"Bob Schmall" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Sufferin' succotash. Just read that Sears and Kmart will merge, an 11
> > billion
> > buck deal, with the Kmart head leading the Sears Holding Co. that will
> > emerge,
> > and the Sears CEO being CEO of the group.
> >
> > I can see the benefit to Kmart. I cannot see the benefit to Sears.
>
> I'm no retail genius--or any other kind--but it seems to me that Sears
long
> ago conceded the rural market that it was built upon to WalMart. As an
> urban-suburban retailer, Sears needed more street locations than dying
malls
> could provide; enter K-Mart.
> Also, K-Mart can be an outlet for cheaper goods that Sears can buy in
> quantity, maybe even the Lands End stuff that hasn't been doing well in
the
> mainline stores.
> Bob
>
>
"Mike Hide" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:93Jmd.518461$mD.447496@attbi_s02:
> Check out tele comms....mjh
>
Check out the North American and European telecomm companies losing their
backsides on trying to make any money in China. Then look to see where the
new business is going. That China would seek to develop their own industry
is not surprising. That the rest of the world thought that they could make
significant money there first is truly amazing.
The rules are different there. Not worse. Not better. Different.
Significantly, culturally different. PDAMHIKT.
Now back to your original thread...
Patriarch
[email protected] (Charlie Self) wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> Sufferin' succotash. Just read that Sears and Kmart will merge, an 11
> billion buck deal, with the Kmart head leading the Sears Holding Co.
> that will emerge, and the Sears CEO being CEO of the group.
>
> I can see the benefit to Kmart. I cannot see the benefit to Sears.
No benefit to Sears at all. They are not really merging, Sears is
being bought by KMart. KMart wants Sears because the real estate
Sears owns is worth a bunch of money (plus they get a few brands
they can maybe make a little off, but that's lagniappe).
Note that the fact KMart can buy Sears only 3 years after bankruptcy
says there's something really wrong with the bankruptcy laws.
John
[email protected] wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 20:53:20 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>No benefit to Sears at all. They are not really merging, Sears is
>>being bought by KMart. KMart wants Sears because the real estate
>>Sears owns is worth a bunch of money (plus they get a few brands
>>they can maybe make a little off, but that's lagniappe).
>>
>>Note that the fact KMart can buy Sears only 3 years after bankruptcy
>>says there's something really wrong with the bankruptcy laws.
>>
>>John
>
> I'm not sure that follows. K-Mart was a classic case of a company rich
> in illiquid assets (real estate, in this case) that had dug itself
> into a cash hole with a combination of poor business practices and
> inability to adapt to changing market conditions. It was technically
> bankrupt since it couldn't pay its bills, but it had a lot of stuff it
> could eventually convert to cash.
Yeah - Sears is in much the same position, except it's not in such
a bad state cash-flow-wise.
> So in that sense it was an ideal candidate for a Chapter 11
> reorganization. (Which really isn't bankruptcy as we usually think of
> it.) The fact that they ended up with a wad of cash just a couple of
> years later indicates they were successful in converting some of those
> illiquid assets into cash.
Yes, and it would seem that success is encouraging the mgmt to
try much the same process with Sears. Again you have a company
"rich in illiquid assets", so the same process of converting them
to cash should be just as successful.
> What this says about the long-term survival of K-Mart or Sears, the
> wisdom of the merger, or the ethics and tactics of the guy who put the
> thing together are completely different matters.
I'm not saying anything about the ethics of the guys running KMart.
They have played the game according to the rules, and played it
well. The issue I see is that the rules allowed them to abrogate
a lot of debt and committments (e.g. the suppliers who had to eat
inventory when KMart was able to break purchasing contracts); _then_
convert the illiquid assets to cash. Under a traditional bankruptcy
the illiquid assets would have been used to satisfy the existing
committments. I think the rules should be adjusted, not with the
intent of putting a company like KMart out of business, but to at
least ensure obligations can't be written off while large value
assets are sheltered.
John
[email protected] wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>>>>No benefit to Sears at all. They are not really merging, Sears is
>>>>being bought by KMart. KMart wants Sears because the real estate
>>>>Sears owns is worth a bunch of money
How come everything I have seen indicates that Sears was the one buying
Kmart?
On 17 Nov 2004 13:18:05 GMT, [email protected] (Charlie Self)
wrote:
>Sufferin' succotash. Just read that Sears and Kmart will merge, an 11 billion
>buck deal, with the Kmart head leading the Sears Holding Co. that will emerge,
>and the Sears CEO being CEO of the group.
>
>I can see the benefit to Kmart. I cannot see the benefit to Sears.
>
>Oh, yeah. Headquarters to remain at Sears headquarters, with a "significant
>presence" at Kmart headquarters.
>
>Predicted to be a $55 billion company, but I've seen claims for larger than
>life companies before, including one I recently worked for that claimed $100
>million, when balance sheets showed it was about $38-$45 million back then.
>
>Supposed to come in as #3 behind Walmart and Target.
>
What really sucks is looking at Kmart's stock price. It started around
$15 when they emerged from bankruptcy -- I looked at it and thought, "yeah,
right, that'll last" They marched through $25, then up to $50, sometimes
jumping $2 to $3 or more a day. They closed at $109 today, up $7.78 for
the day.
Congratulations to those who were adventurous enough to jump in.
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] wrote:
If I have a choice I would certainly go to Sears. Kmart is pretty
junky. The store layout is chaos. The products on sale are strictly
low end. Sears has a mix of quality.
Dick
>
> Actually, Kmart has had 3 consecutive profitable quarters, while sears
> has
> had losses 13 of the last 16 quarters. Seems kmart has successfully
> re-invented
> itself, perhaps sears can learn from that.
>
> scott
Swingman notes:
>"GregP" wrote in message
>
>>
>> Sears did much the same thing in past decades, tho not to
>> the extreme that Walmart has taken it.
>
>Corporate America and never been all that warm and fuzzy. Either compete ...
>or get you a government contract.
>
True. They project the image for the customers, not the vendors.
Charlie Self
"Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of
nothing."
Redd Foxx
"Lee Gordon" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Charlie ...
>
> <<Supposed to come in as #3 behind Walmart and Target.>>
>
> This will make them bigger than Target. The number 2 retailer is Home
> Depot.
>
> Lee
How come nobody is wondering how soon the layoffs will hit and how
many will be axed? Every time a bank pulls off one of these deals
they always announce the
expected "efficiency" savings by reductions in force. I suppose the
efficiencies will come when they close one store or the other when
both are within 10 miles of each other. That should give them great
coverage compared to the competition ;-}
We have a KMart within three miles and a Sears equally close. Both
stores are truly well run, with high traffic and generally good
quality merchandise. Should be interesting to watch the drama unfold,
although I would hate to be a career employee watching from either
camp ...
anoldsalt asks:
>
>How come nobody is wondering how soon the layoffs will hit and how
>many will be axed? Every time a bank pulls off one of these deals
>they always announce the
>expected "efficiency" savings by reductions in force
You know it's going to happen, in the offices if nowhere else, but speculation
is probably fruitless. I know a bunch of people who work Sears' main office,
and a bunch of people in other companies who depend heavily on Sears in one way
or another. I don't know how things will turn out for any of them. I hope well,
but don't know.
>I suppose the
>efficiencies will come when they close one store or the other when
>both are within 10 miles of each other. That should give them great
>coverage compared to the competition ;-}
Presumably that's not going to happen, but that's today's announcement. What
tomorrow's announcement will be won't be known for a few hours. And so on down
the road.
Charlie Self
"Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of
nothing."
Redd Foxx
"Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Oh, yeah. Headquarters to remain at Sears headquarters, with a
"significant
> presence" at Kmart headquarters.
I heard this am - that the new 10 member board is 7 Kmart'ers and 3
Sears'ers. That caught me off-guard and made me wonder who's eating who
(whom?)?
"Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Sufferin' succotash. Just read that Sears and Kmart will merge, an 11
> billion
> buck deal, with the Kmart head leading the Sears Holding Co. that will
> emerge,
> and the Sears CEO being CEO of the group.
>
> I can see the benefit to Kmart. I cannot see the benefit to Sears.
I'm no retail genius--or any other kind--but it seems to me that Sears long
ago conceded the rural market that it was built upon to WalMart. As an
urban-suburban retailer, Sears needed more street locations than dying malls
could provide; enter K-Mart.
Also, K-Mart can be an outlet for cheaper goods that Sears can buy in
quantity, maybe even the Lands End stuff that hasn't been doing well in the
mainline stores.
Bob
Bob Schmall responds:
>> buck deal, with the Kmart head leading the Sears Holding Co. that will
>> emerge,
>> and the Sears CEO being CEO of the group.
>>
>> I can see the benefit to Kmart. I cannot see the benefit to Sears.
>
>I'm no retail genius--or any other kind--but it seems to me that Sears long
>ago conceded the rural market that it was built upon to WalMart. As an
>urban-suburban retailer, Sears needed more street locations than dying malls
>could provide; enter K-Mart.
>Also, K-Mart can be an outlet for cheaper goods that Sears can buy in
>quantity, maybe even the Lands End stuff that hasn't been doing well in the
>mainline stores.
Obviously, someone there sees some brilliance in the idea, but IIRC, Kmart came
close to going all the way down the tubes a couple years ago, while Sears'
performance hasn't been stellar in recent years (going back to when the hired
the Bloomingdale type as Prez, I think).
My problem with the concept is that I've done some low end shopping at Kmart
(usually to get Coke when it's on sale there and not elsewhere).
The stores are dirty, low ceilinged, stocked poorly and haphazardly, and the
personnel might be desirable in an "ignore the asshole, he's only a customer"
contest, but otherwise, I guess Kmart is OK.
Sears retail stores seem to be understaffed, but the staff I've seen have all
been at least halfway decently trained, are polite and have at least a small
clue as to why they're there.
Hell, my mother was an inveterate bargain shopper--raised during the Great
Depression and had a solid talent for making a dime do a dollar's worth of
buying--but she avoided Kmart (and Caldor in upstate NY). And she died a dozen
years ago, after being away from Kmarts for nearly a decade, so the decline I
see in them is no recent thing.
But maybe it will work out. Nice to think so. I think I still prefer the Sears
of my youth, with no bricks & mortar stores to amount to anything.
Charlie Self
"Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of
nothing."
Redd Foxx
>Obviously, someone there sees some brilliance in the idea, but IIRC, Kmart
>came
>close to going all the way down the tubes a couple years ago, while Sears'
>performance hasn't been stellar in recent years (going back to when the hired
>the Bloomingdale type as Prez, I think).
>
>My problem with the concept is that I've done some low end shopping at Kmart
>(usually to get Coke when it's on sale there and not elsewhere).
>
>The stores are dirty, low ceilinged, stocked poorly and haphazardly, and the
>personnel might be desirable in an "ignore the asshole, he's only a customer"
>contest, but otherwise, I guess Kmart is OK.
>
>Sears retail stores seem to be understaffed, but the staff I've seen have all
>been at least halfway decently trained, are polite and have at least a small
>clue as to why they're there.
>
>Hell, my mother was an inveterate bargain shopper--raised during the Great
>Depression and had a solid talent for making a dime do a dollar's worth of
>buying--but she avoided Kmart (and Caldor in upstate NY). And she died a
>dozen
>years ago, after being away from Kmarts for nearly a decade, so the decline I
>see in them is no recent thing.
>
>But maybe it will work out. Nice to think so. I think I still prefer the
>Sears
>of my youth, with no bricks & mortar stores to amount to anything.
>
>
>Charlie Self
Everything I have read seems to say this was mostly a real estate deal as both
KMart and Sears are owners of vast amounts of prime retail real estate
purchased many years ago and either fully depreciated or at low historical cost
value on their books. The stock prices did not reflect market value of all of
these holdings. The guy that bought KMart out of bankruptcy essentially just
bought Sears (merger? yeah, right). I expect to see some significant real
estate transactions from the combined operation.
Dave Hall
Kohl's got their start here in Wisconsin, and have been extremely
successful, to the point that other chains study their store layout and
operations. They should be a huge step up from K-Mart. The owner of the
Milwaukee Bucks, Senator Herb Kohl, is a son of the chain's founder Max
Kohl.
Bob
"David" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> And dried Slurpies on the floor and sidewalks out front. At night their
> parking lots were dark (K-mart bit the dust in my neighborhood-yeah!)
> because they were too tight to fix the lamps. Time will tell if Kohl's is
> a better tenant. I doubt they could be as shabby.
>
>
> David
>
> Lobby Dosser wrote:
>> [email protected] (Charlie Self) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The stores are dirty, low ceilinged, stocked poorly and haphazardly,
>>>and the personnel might be desirable in an "ignore the asshole, he's
>>>only a customer" contest, but otherwise, I guess Kmart is OK.
>>>
>>
>>
>> You forgot to mention the smell of stale popcorn and rancid hot dogs.
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:19:46 GMT, "Bob Schmall" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>"Lobby Dosser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:NoNmd.6890$m36.3631@trnddc02...
>> [email protected] (Charlie Self) wrote:
>>
>>> The stores are dirty, low ceilinged, stocked poorly and haphazardly,
>>> and the personnel might be desirable in an "ignore the asshole, he's
>>> only a customer" contest, but otherwise, I guess Kmart is OK.
>>>
>>
>> You forgot to mention the smell of stale popcorn and rancid hot dogs.
>
>Aaahh...the memories...
>
blue light specials?
"Lobby Dosser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:NoNmd.6890$m36.3631@trnddc02...
> [email protected] (Charlie Self) wrote:
>
>> The stores are dirty, low ceilinged, stocked poorly and haphazardly,
>> and the personnel might be desirable in an "ignore the asshole, he's
>> only a customer" contest, but otherwise, I guess Kmart is OK.
>>
>
> You forgot to mention the smell of stale popcorn and rancid hot dogs.
Aaahh...the memories...
David <[email protected]> wrote:
> And dried Slurpies on the floor and sidewalks out front. At night
> their parking lots were dark (K-mart bit the dust in my
> neighborhood-yeah!) because they were too tight to fix the lamps.
> Time will tell if Kohl's is a better tenant. I doubt they could be as
> shabby.
Partially dried slurpies. There was always that ripping sound coming
from your feet as you walked around - except, of course, where the stale
popcorn adhered to the slurpie. Say, that kind of gets this back on
topic - slurpie as a glue!
[email protected] (Charlie Self) wrote:
> The stores are dirty, low ceilinged, stocked poorly and haphazardly,
> and the personnel might be desirable in an "ignore the asshole, he's
> only a customer" contest, but otherwise, I guess Kmart is OK.
>
You forgot to mention the smell of stale popcorn and rancid hot dogs.
Lobby Dosser adds:
>[email protected] (Charlie Self) wrote:
>
>> The stores are dirty, low ceilinged, stocked poorly and haphazardly,
>> and the personnel might be desirable in an "ignore the asshole, he's
>> only a customer" contest, but otherwise, I guess Kmart is OK.
>>
>
>You forgot to mention the smell of stale popcorn and rancid hot dogs.
I surely did. Thanks. I think.
Charlie Self
"Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of
nothing."
Redd Foxx
And dried Slurpies on the floor and sidewalks out front. At night their
parking lots were dark (K-mart bit the dust in my neighborhood-yeah!)
because they were too tight to fix the lamps. Time will tell if Kohl's
is a better tenant. I doubt they could be as shabby.
David
Lobby Dosser wrote:
> [email protected] (Charlie Self) wrote:
>
>
>>The stores are dirty, low ceilinged, stocked poorly and haphazardly,
>>and the personnel might be desirable in an "ignore the asshole, he's
>>only a customer" contest, but otherwise, I guess Kmart is OK.
>>
>
>
> You forgot to mention the smell of stale popcorn and rancid hot dogs.
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 18:39:58 -0700, John DeBoo <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Swingman wrote:
>
>> "Charlie Self" wrote in message
>>
>>
>>>Supposed to come in as #3 behind Walmart and Target.
>>
>>
>> With their 50 cent a day labor force, the Chinese oughta love the increased
>> efficiency for 'dumping' opportunities. Just where the hell is that "vast
>> market for American goods" that Clinton was gushing about?
>
>Must be overseas or someplace outsode our borders as it sure doesn't
>exist here.
>John
another of Clinton's half-vast ideas???
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 11:24:01 GMT, Ba r r y
<[email protected]> calmly ranted:
>>>Pretty soon it'll all be one company.
>>
>>Nope. Walmart is far too savvy to gulp KSearz-Mart.
>>They'll just watch it founder and die the slow, painful
>>humiliating death it deserves.
>
>Which leaves us with one company. Tar-Mart.
As long as they don't start stocking bulk feathers we should
be OK.
--
Strong like ox, smart like tractor.
----------------------------------
www.diversify.com Oxen-free Website Design
[email protected] (Charlie Self) writes:
>Sufferin' succotash. Just read that Sears and Kmart will merge, an 11 billion
>buck deal, with the Kmart head leading the Sears Holding Co. that will emerge,
>and the Sears CEO being CEO of the group.
>
>I can see the benefit to Kmart. I cannot see the benefit to Sears.
>
Actually, Kmart has had 3 consecutive profitable quarters, while sears has
had losses 13 of the last 16 quarters. Seems kmart has successfully re-invented
itself, perhaps sears can learn from that.
scott
In article <[email protected]>,
Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote:
> >>Supposed to come in as #3 behind Walmart and Target.
> >
> >Pretty soon it'll all be one company.
>
> Nope. Walmart is far too savvy to gulp KSearz-Mart.
> They'll just watch it founder and die the slow, painful
> humiliating death it deserves.
didja see the Frontline program this week? Titled something like, "Is
Walmart Good for America?" It's a retail behemoth that dictates
manufacturing and if you don't play by their rules, they're so large
they can hurt a company's income to the point of financial hardship.
Rubbermaid was one of the companies' declines illustrated by Walmart's
hardball tactics.
Once Sam died, they really embraced the race to the bottom and abandoned
the "Made in the USA" slogan.
--
Owen Lowe and his Fly-by-Night Copper Company
____
"Sure we'll have fascism in America, but it'll come disguised
as 100% Americanism." -- Huey P. Long
On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 17:09:37 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
<[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 20:53:20 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>No benefit to Sears at all. They are not really merging, Sears is
>>>being bought by KMart. KMart wants Sears because the real estate
>>>Sears owns is worth a bunch of money (plus they get a few brands
>>>they can maybe make a little off, but that's lagniappe).
>>>
>>>Note that the fact KMart can buy Sears only 3 years after bankruptcy
>>>says there's something really wrong with the bankruptcy laws.
>>>
>>>John
>>
>> I'm not sure that follows. K-Mart was a classic case of a company rich
>> in illiquid assets (real estate, in this case) that had dug itself
>> into a cash hole with a combination of poor business practices and
>> inability to adapt to changing market conditions. It was technically
>> bankrupt since it couldn't pay its bills, but it had a lot of stuff it
>> could eventually convert to cash.
>
>Yeah - Sears is in much the same position, except it's not in such
>a bad state cash-flow-wise.
>
>> So in that sense it was an ideal candidate for a Chapter 11
>> reorganization. (Which really isn't bankruptcy as we usually think of
>> it.) The fact that they ended up with a wad of cash just a couple of
>> years later indicates they were successful in converting some of those
>> illiquid assets into cash.
>
>Yes, and it would seem that success is encouraging the mgmt to
>try much the same process with Sears. Again you have a company
>"rich in illiquid assets", so the same process of converting them
>to cash should be just as successful.
>
>> What this says about the long-term survival of K-Mart or Sears, the
>> wisdom of the merger, or the ethics and tactics of the guy who put the
>> thing together are completely different matters.
>
>I'm not saying anything about the ethics of the guys running KMart.
>They have played the game according to the rules, and played it
>well. The issue I see is that the rules allowed them to abrogate
>a lot of debt and committments (e.g. the suppliers who had to eat
>inventory when KMart was able to break purchasing contracts); _then_
>convert the illiquid assets to cash. Under a traditional bankruptcy
>the illiquid assets would have been used to satisfy the existing
>committments. I think the rules should be adjusted, not with the
>intent of putting a company like KMart out of business, but to at
>least ensure obligations can't be written off while large value
>assets are sheltered.
>
>John
The rule in a case like this is that everyone gets to negotiate and at
least the majority of each class of creditors has to approve the reorg
before the court accepts it. In other words those suppliers had a seat
at the table and a chance to be heard, so it's not as unfair as it
seems.
If they'd gone through an actual bankruptcy rather than a reorg the
creditors would have had a shot at getting part of those real estate
assets as they were sold. The problem with that is that it either
takes several years to liquidate everything or you end up selling it
off as fire sale prices.
In a reorg creditors such as suppliers are typically compensated in
part in equity (stock, basically), which means they get something
faster and have a shot at more if the reorganized company prospers.
What it comes down to is a judgement call for the creditors and a
whole lot of heavy duty negotiating among the various interested
parties and their attorneys. Those negotiations are typically pretty
brutal.
--RC
Sleep? Isn't that a totally inadequate substitute for caffine?
"Lee Gordon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Charlie ...
>
> <<Supposed to come in as #3 behind Walmart and Target.>>
>
> This will make them bigger than Target. The number 2 retailer is Home
> Depot.
>
> Lee
Not according to every news report I've heard.
todd
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:33:29 GMT, "Frank Ketchum"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"mac davis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> So, are they figuring that if you put 2 outdated losers together,
>> they'll become a winner?????
>>
>
>I think that was the same idea behind the Kerry/Edwards ticket.
>
*choke*
thanks, frank.. I hear that coffee is good for a keyboard once in a
while..
David Patnaude <[email protected]> wrote:
>How come everything I have seen indicates that Sears was the one buying
>Kmart?
It's either way. The same investor group owns more than half of both
companies. As mentioned elsewhere, it is for tax purposes more than
anything else.
--
Howard
My opinionated book reviews on sales topics
http://book-reviews.hostpci.com
It's about real-estate. Sears has bought 66 existing K-mart and Wal-Mart
stores/buildings over the past 12 months as they pursue their "off mall"
strategy. For a company flush with cash such as Sears, 11 billion was probably
a bargain compared to buying up more individual stores. This merger gives the
new company (Sears Holding Corp.) a total of 3500 locations. I can't speak for
all of the off-mall stores, but the one locally being converted (a former
K-Mart) they will even be carrying groceries. We've heard that stores will be
carrying lumber as well (yes, I work part time at Sears). Sounds to me like
they're trying to go after both Home-Depot and Wal-Mart. I figure if their
lumber and groceries are like that of Home Depot and Wal-Mart I'll continue
buying my groceries at grocery stores and lumber at lumber yards.
Kevin Daly
http://hometown.aol.com/kdaly10475/page1.html
"Howard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> Prediction: Sears/KMart will be merely a footnote in the history books
> under "failed companies" in another decade or so. And I will bid them
> both "Good Riddance."
Don't hold back Howard, let us know how you really think.
[email protected] (Kevin Daly) wrote:
>I figure if their
>lumber and groceries are like that of Home Depot and Wal-Mart I'll continue
>buying my groceries at grocery stores and lumber at lumber yards.
Sears: If I had wanted a roof installed by drunken illegal aliens
(that roof subsequently leaked), by an installer that refused to honor
the warranty, I could have gotten it for less than half the price from
a non-Sears-'authorized' roofer. They haven't gotten any of my money
in over 20 years now, and they won't get any for the next 20. Or ever
how long I manage to live. There is sufficient competition that I
don't need to deal with scum.
KMart: There was a flap in the gun groups that KMart's bankruptcy was
caused by their refusal to stock ammo, and their anti-gun policies.
In reality, that had nothing to do with KMart's problems. KMart ran
dirty, poorly-lit and poorly-maintained stores, staffed by ill-trained
help, and had (still has, AFAIK) piss poor customer service. It
didn't help any that the merchandise was (is?) of uneven quality and
generally overpriced. AFAICT, the upper management of KMart remains
indifferent to those problems, but then again, I haven't set foot in a
KMart in about 5 years. And on *that* occasion, they managed to live
down to my expectations (I had to find their break room to complain
that there were *NO* open checkouts).
Prediction: Sears/KMart will be merely a footnote in the history books
under "failed companies" in another decade or so. And I will bid them
both "Good Riddance."
--
Howard
My opinionated book reviews on sales topics
http://book-reviews.hostpci.com
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:18:46 -0800, Larry Jaques
<novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:47:04 GMT, Ba r r y
><[email protected]> calmly ranted:
>
>>On 17 Nov 2004 13:18:05 GMT, [email protected] (Charlie Self)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Supposed to come in as #3 behind Walmart and Target.
>>
>>Pretty soon it'll all be one company.
>
>Nope. Walmart is far too savvy to gulp KSearz-Mart.
>They'll just watch it founder and die the slow, painful
>humiliating death it deserves.
Which leaves us with one company. Tar-Mart.
Barry
"mac davis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> So, are they figuring that if you put 2 outdated losers together,
> they'll become a winner?????
>
I think that was the same idea behind the Kerry/Edwards ticket.
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 20:53:20 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
<[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] (Charlie Self) wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>> Sufferin' succotash. Just read that Sears and Kmart will merge, an 11
>> billion buck deal, with the Kmart head leading the Sears Holding Co.
>> that will emerge, and the Sears CEO being CEO of the group.
>>
>> I can see the benefit to Kmart. I cannot see the benefit to Sears.
>
>No benefit to Sears at all. They are not really merging, Sears is
>being bought by KMart. KMart wants Sears because the real estate
>Sears owns is worth a bunch of money (plus they get a few brands
>they can maybe make a little off, but that's lagniappe).
>
>Note that the fact KMart can buy Sears only 3 years after bankruptcy
>says there's something really wrong with the bankruptcy laws.
>
>John
I'm not sure that follows. K-Mart was a classic case of a company rich
in illiquid assets (real estate, in this case) that had dug itself
into a cash hole with a combination of poor business practices and
inability to adapt to changing market conditions. It was technically
bankrupt since it couldn't pay its bills, but it had a lot of stuff it
could eventually convert to cash.
So in that sense it was an ideal candidate for a Chapter 11
reorganization. (Which really isn't bankruptcy as we usually think of
it.) The fact that they ended up with a wad of cash just a couple of
years later indicates they were successful in converting some of those
illiquid assets into cash.
What this says about the long-term survival of K-Mart or Sears, the
wisdom of the merger, or the ethics and tactics of the guy who put the
thing together are completely different matters.
--RC
Sleep? Isn't that a totally inadequate substitute for caffine?
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:47:04 GMT, Ba r r y
<[email protected]> calmly ranted:
>On 17 Nov 2004 13:18:05 GMT, [email protected] (Charlie Self)
>wrote:
>
>>Supposed to come in as #3 behind Walmart and Target.
>
>Pretty soon it'll all be one company.
Nope. Walmart is far too savvy to gulp KSearz-Mart.
They'll just watch it founder and die the slow, painful
humiliating death it deserves.
----------------------------------------------------------------
* OPERA: A Latin word * Wondrous Website Design
* meaning * Save your Heirloom Photos
* "death by music" * http://www.diversify.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:41:20 -0800, Fly-by-Night CC
<[email protected]> wrote:
>didja see the Frontline program this week? Titled something like, "Is
>Walmart Good for America?" It's a retail behemoth that dictates
>manufacturing and if you don't play by their rules, they're so large
>they can hurt a company's income to the point of financial hardship.
>Rubbermaid was one of the companies' declines illustrated by Walmart's
>hardball tactics.
Sears did much the same thing in past decades, tho not to
the extreme that Walmart has taken it.
Swingman wrote:
> "Charlie Self" wrote in message
>
>
>>Supposed to come in as #3 behind Walmart and Target.
>
>
> With their 50 cent a day labor force, the Chinese oughta love the increased
> efficiency for 'dumping' opportunities. Just where the hell is that "vast
> market for American goods" that Clinton was gushing about?
Must be overseas or someplace outsode our borders as it sure doesn't
exist here.
John
"Charlie Self" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Sufferin' succotash. Just read that Sears and Kmart will merge, an 11
> billion
> buck deal, with the Kmart head leading the Sears Holding Co. that will
> emerge,
> and the Sears CEO being CEO of the group.
>
> I can see the benefit to Kmart. I cannot see the benefit to Sears.
>
I don't follow it either. Kmart just underwent a major restructuring last
year (or so). I think they declared bankruptcy and issued new stock. In
the meantime, they have been struggling with cash flow and have been selling
off a lot of their buildings and properties to keep the company afloat. I
don't see why Sears would want to hitch it's wagon to Kmart.
Frank
>I don't follow it either. Kmart just underwent a major restructuring last
>year (or so). I think they declared bankruptcy and issued new stock. In
>the meantime, they have been struggling with cash flow and have been selling
>off a lot of their buildings and properties to keep the company afloat. I
>don't see why Sears would want to hitch it's wagon to Kmart.
>
>Frank
KMart bought Sears. There was no "merger" to it. The guy that bought KMart out
of bankruptcy has made a fortune on the deal. KMart was and still is real
estate rich, Sears was and still is real estate rich. In KMart's case that real
estate was not liquid enough to allow it to have an adequate cash flow so it
was forced into bankruptcy due to a negitive short term liqiudity situation
(all the while sitting on vast amounts of highly valuable heavily depreciated
real estate). The new owner has just begun to cash in on that real estate but
had still amassed enough cash to take over Sears. Expect to see a lot of Sears
real estate on the market (remember all the little Sears stores and Sears
Hardware stores not to mention the NTBs and other Sears owned non-Sears named
stores, many of which have closed in the last few years - lots of real estate).
Just because WE think of KMart and Sears as retail store operations, the folks
who buy bankrupt companies or troubled companies don't always do so for the
continuing operations. Sometimes the parts are worth far more than the whole.
Dave Hall
[email protected] (David Hall) writes:
>had still amassed enough cash to take over Sears. Expect to see a lot of Sears
>real estate on the market (remember all the little Sears stores and Sears
>Hardware stores not to mention the NTBs and other Sears owned non-Sears named
>stores, many of which have closed in the last few years - lots of real estate).
Is NTB still in business? All the stores here in Minnesota only lasted a
year or two. The stores were vacant for a while and then Discount Tire
opened at some or all of the locations.
Brian Elfert
>Is NTB still in business? All the stores here in Minnesota only lasted a
>year or two. The stores were vacant for a while and then Discount Tire
>opened at some or all of the locations.
>
>Brian Elfert
The one down the road from me is still operating. Of course it was just built
three or four years ago.
Dave hall
<<KMart bought Sears. There was no "merger" to it. The guy that bought KMart
out
of bankruptcy has made a fortune on the deal. KMart was and still is real
estate rich, Sears was and still is real estate rich. In KMart's case that
real
estate was not liquid enough to allow it to have an adequate cash flow so it
was forced into bankruptcy due to a negitive short term liqiudity situation
(all the while sitting on vast amounts of highly valuable heavily
depreciated
real estate). The new owner has just begun to cash in on that real estate
but
had still amassed enough cash to take over Sears. Expect to see a lot of
Sears
real estate on the market (remember all the little Sears stores and Sears
Hardware stores not to mention the NTBs and other Sears owned non-Sears
named
stores, many of which have closed in the last few years - lots of real
estate).>>
One of the things that helped K-Mart emerge from bankruptcy was that they
raised over a half billion dollars selling a good sized chunk of their real
estate (about 60 stores) to Sears.
Lee
--
To e-mail, replace "bucketofspam" with "dleegordon"