Corner of Berkshire & Fairfax Message Board

General Category => Investment Ideas => Topic started by: Gregmal on September 06, 2019, 07:21:10 PM

Title: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 06, 2019, 07:21:10 PM
I'll just link the thesis. As usual, Rick Pearson nails it.

https://moxreports.com/dillards-upside-perfect-storm/

https://moxreports.com/dillards-rebound-long-dds/

10Q should come out next week. Money says this trade has a pretty solid shot at making at least a buck or two.

DDS IMO is 2012 SHLD, without the debt, and with rather robust FCF. This has previous been a great trading vehicle and I expect it to continue to be one.

Title: Re: Dillard's- The Infinity Squeeze
Post by: Stuart D on September 06, 2019, 11:36:19 PM
This is very interesting. I just started going through the proxy filings.
In 2013 Management owned 9.8% of class A shares (apart from voting rights are A and B shares equal?)

Every year since 2013 management have increased their ownership:
2013: 9.8%
2014: 10.9%
2015: 11.6%
2016: 13.6%
2017: 15.9%
2018: 19.1%
2019: 20.1%
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Stuart D on September 07, 2019, 12:22:14 AM
I've got excel open to add up all the outstanding shares.

In this years proxy, as of 21-Mar-2019, management and large investment companies, e.g. Blackrock, Vanguard, etc. owned 88% of Class A shares combined, leaving 2.7m Class A shares remaining. If management and the large shareholders haven't sold their A-Shares (since March) then as of 3-August-2019, there will only be 1.7m Class A shares left.

1.7m shares x $70/share = $118m (to buy back the remaining shares)

The most recent 8-K says as of 3-Aug-2019 there is still $340m left in the buyback program. That means assuming Management, Blackrock, Vanguard, do not sell, the company has the capacity to buy 1.7m shares for $340m = $200 / share (average price).

This sounds too good to be true... what am I missing here?
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Spekulatius on September 07, 2019, 06:15:37 AM
Just looking at this. The latest operating results have been pretty poor. Also, it seems that over the years, their Capex has been below depreciation for quite some time, which means that their stores are aging. Most stores are in flyover country where and old department store building may not be worth all that much. They sell buildings, but I haven’t seen a large profit. They do own some stores in Florida (39) and Texas (44)  which may be worth far above book.

Accelerated decay in operating results may be the main issue there. The shrinking float is interesting and makes it a very unappealing short, imo.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 07, 2019, 07:16:26 AM
The situation is interesting, but to be clear, I have no interest in this as a long term investment or any of the fundamentals really. It just seems like an opportune setup to make a little money. If the trade doesn't work out, I think you have a margin of safety and history of price swings on your side that make holding at these levels OK. But the objective is to just swing this thing for a quick trade.

Some other commentary...

I spent the past couple weeks watching this trade. My goodness. Lighting a match in an old hay barn is what comes to mind. In late July this jumped 25% in like 30 minutes on nothing but a random Friday squeeze.

Ive been involved in plenty of these retailers with real estate stories. Macy's, Sears, SRG, to name a few. I've only ever made money trading them. I don't think they are good buy and hold investments. That said..... anyone care to take a look at a comparative chart between DDS and all those "retailers"? Or of their favorite investments vs DDS since the GFC? DDS vs AMZN since 1 Jan 2009? It doesn't necessarily change my opinion that I have little interest owning this as a long term buy and hold, but is really impressive nonetheless. Look at the shares outstanding 10 years ago as well.

Perhaps Dillard's is more ALX than SHLD...
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: SHDL on September 07, 2019, 09:22:31 AM
Interesting situation for sure.  It is very nice to see someone do share buybacks right every once in a while.  If their FCF holds up and the stock price stays where it is, they should be able to essentially take the company private in just a few years…

@Stuart D:  I wouldn’t expect Vanguard, BlackRock, and co. to not sell.  The index funds will be forced to sell as the float shrinks, and the actively managed funds (if there are any that own this stock) are also likely to take some chips off the table if the stock were to rally.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: RuleNumberOne on September 07, 2019, 11:59:54 AM
I got excited after reading that moxreport. Then I opened the 10-Qs and latest earnings release and found (numbers in millions):

The net cash has gone from +214 in 2017 to -232 currently. Share repurchases over the last 2 years have come mostly from debt, not FCF.

Cash used in operating and investing activities is 34 over the last 6 months. Their share repurchases are close to the end of the road.

Accounts payable shows suppliers don't want to extend any credit. Contributing to negative cash flow.

Their 4 stores in California that show up on Google are in the middle of nowhere. If that is a pattern, their square footage may not be worth that much. Current EV is > $2 billion.

Their expenses haven't gone down as fast as revenues. Management looks trapped because cash flow is negative.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 10, 2019, 07:26:27 AM
https://seekingalpha.com/instablog/6460311-unemon1/5349958-epic-short-squeeze-dillard-s-inc-nyse-dds-2-days-catalyst-will-surprise-market
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: BG2008 on September 10, 2019, 07:55:00 AM
Looks like it's working already
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 10, 2019, 08:31:10 AM
Looks like it's working already

Yup. Took a bit off at 66 from 59. Not bad for a few days. But I still think if the buybacks numbers are anywhere near what is being projected in the Unemon post, this is a moonshot.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Cardboard on September 10, 2019, 09:25:04 AM
Thanks for the suggestion!

I looked up their financials which were not bad at all for a retailer to my great surprise: sales trend, balance sheet and cheap. I also shopped there before and thought it was fine but, I am old. LOL!

Anyway, bought some calls and already the stock is up over $2.50 since I bought...

Cardboard
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 10, 2019, 12:42:06 PM
Took more off a hair under $70. Locking in like 17 years worth of returns compounding 2% bonds. In 3 days.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Stuart D on September 11, 2019, 12:39:24 AM
By my rough estimates, in less than 1 year DDS will have bought back all shares not owned by Blackrock, Capital International, Dimensional Fund, LSV Asset management and Vanguard.

What happens then? @Gregmal, you were saying these funds will be forced to sell because of the float. Is that done automatically as per an index fund algorithm? or would DDS start calling them up (firm by firm) and asking to buy back shares.

Thanks again for posting, this has been a fun one to follow and learn.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: SHDL on September 11, 2019, 05:08:05 AM
By my rough estimates, in less than 1 year DDS will have bought back all shares not owned by Blackrock, Capital International, Dimensional Fund, LSV Asset management and Vanguard.

What happens then? @Gregmal, you were saying these funds will be forced to sell because of the float. Is that done automatically as per an index fund algorithm? or would DDS start calling them up (firm by firm) and asking to buy back shares.

Thanks again for posting, this has been a fun one to follow and learn.

Let me see if I can help since I was the guy who made the comment about index funds.

The selling by index funds (at least those that use a float-adjusted weighting methodology) is supposed to be automatic and instantaneous.  So each time Dillard’s repurchases some shares, those index funds are supposed to sell some DDS shares in response to the shrinking float.  Whether this happens through a block transaction between the two parties I cannot say.

In practice though there can be a time lag between the share repurchases and the selling by the index funds, and I imagine that could lead to some interesting short term price action.  IIRC something like that happened during the 2008 VW infinity squeeze.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: writser on September 11, 2019, 05:56:57 AM
The selling by index funds (at least those that use a float-adjusted weighting methodology) is supposed to be automatic and instantaneous.  So each time Dillard’s repurchases some shares, those index funds are supposed to sell some DDS shares in response to the shrinking float.  Whether this happens through a block transaction between the two parties I cannot say.

Do you have a source for this? Index funds simply track the index and as far as I know the free float adjustment in the index only happens during the quarterly reviews. At the very least that is the case for the FTSE indices which Vanguard is using (page 27+ (https://research.ftserussell.com/products/downloads/Corporate_Actions_and_Events_Guide.pdf)) and I'm 99.9% sure that that is the case for other indices too.

Quote
In March, September, and December, shares outstanding and free float will be updated to reflect the following:
• Changes greater than 1% for cumulative shares in issue changes
• Changes greater than 3 percentage points for cumulative free float changes*
*A constituent with a free float of 15% or below will not be subject to the 3 percentage points threshold and will instead be updated if the change is greater than 1 percentage point. For example, Company B with a free float of 8% would trigger a change if its free float moved to above 9% or below 7%.

The March, September, and December updates will be triggered by vendor changes and confirmed appropriately with the cut-off for new information occurring on the Friday five weeks prior to the review implementation.

Quote
Outside of the quarterly update cycle, shares and free float will be updated with at least two days’ notice if occasioned by primary or secondary offerings IF:
• There is a USD 1bn investable market cap change related to a primary/secondary offering measured by multiplying the change to index shares by the subscription price;
OR
There is a resultant 5% change in index shares related to a primary or secondary offerings AND a USD 250m investable market cap change measured by multiplying the change to index shares by
the subscription price. These changes will be implemented after the close on the day that the subscription period closes, assuming two days notice can be provided; if two days’ notice cannot be
provided prior to the end of the subscription period, the change will still proceed with two days’ notice and will be implemented at the earliest opportunity.

In principle an index simply represents a basket of stocks and it doesn't change overnight.

Your method doesn't make sense either. It would require all index funds to rebalance all their portfolios daily. A company like DDS isn't even required to disclose on a daily basis how many shares they bought back. How is Vanguard supposed to know how many shares they have to sell every day? Call them daily and hope they pick up the phone? And if an employee exercises stock options, should DDS call Vanguard to say: "hey, you have to buy 10 extra shares for your VT fund today?". Nah.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: SHDL on September 11, 2019, 06:41:42 AM
writser,

Here’s a source for the S&P indexes:

https://us.spindices.com/documents/index-policies/methodology-sp-float-adjustment.pdf

If you go to p. 10 it says:

“Changes in [Investable Weight Factors] resulting from certain corporate actions which exceed five percentage points are implemented as soon as possible or weekly depending on index methodology; changes of less than five percentage points are implemented at the next annual review.”

My reading of this is that “certain corporate actions” includes share buybacks and that by “as soon as possible” they mean “as soon as the relevant numbers are disclosed.”  The latter is one of the things I was alluding to when I said these adjustments can be delayed in practice.

As I understand, the trade off here is between what you mentioned (i.e., they don’t really know what the float is on a daily basis and they don’t want to rebalance too frequently either) and the desire to keep the float adjustments in line with what they know. 
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 11, 2019, 08:02:55 AM
Reduced much of my dollar value exposure and rolled into short dated slightly OTM calls. $70's for instance are a couple bucks. They seem mispriced given that the squeeze largely depends on numbers from 10Q which gets released by tomorrow. The squeeze play is on, and out there, so if it gains traction, it'll happen very soon.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: peridotcapital on September 11, 2019, 10:31:03 AM
Why would DDS disclose their buyback activity during the first 4-5 weeks of Q3 in their Q2 10-Q filing?
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: oscarazocar on September 11, 2019, 10:58:29 AM
The 10-Q shows the number of shares outstanding on the filing date on the cover page, so by comparing that to number of shares outstanding at quarter end, you can back into the share buyback number so far in the current quarter.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: writser on September 11, 2019, 11:08:54 AM
The 10-Q shows the number of shares outstanding on the filing date on the cover page, so by comparing that to number of shares outstanding at quarter end, you can back into the share buyback number so far in the current quarter.

This. Not 100% waterproof in all cases but DDS has no options, RSU's and does not issue shares so yeah, you can pretty much work it out.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 11, 2019, 03:19:16 PM
Looks like they took out a bit over 300K shares. So about 1.5% of class A outstanding and about 3.2% of available float in roughly a month.

Bloomberg's most recent equity float shows 9.2M(now 8.9M) vs 8.6M shares short.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Cardboard on September 11, 2019, 03:46:15 PM
The guy was expecting 1,043,000 shares so 300,000 is a big miss.

Nonetheless thanks for the idea and profits as I cashed out late yesterday as it was already up 30%+ in matter of hours and you never know with options expiring in a few weeks.

I still like the thesis here of a cheap retailer with stable sales shorted to death. Will look into how to play it next.

Cardboard
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 11, 2019, 03:53:00 PM
The guy was expecting 1,043,000 shares so 300,000 is a big miss.

Nonetheless thanks for the idea and profits as I cashed out late yesterday as it was already up 30%+ in matter of hours and you never know with options expiring in a few weeks.

I still like the thesis here of a cheap retailer with stable sales shorted to death. Will look into how to play it next.

Cardboard

No problem, glad you made some money. I took much off and whats left is on the house.

I'd point out too that the 300K+ is what Pearson projected in his writeup. Unemon's 1M figure from a day ago would have been hard to pull off, and the stock probably would have went to $100 if they hit that. Either way, a lot can happen. Figures were as of 8/31 so I would project perhaps another 50-100K since then, although typically around $70 is where they tone it down.

"I expect to see a further 300-600k shares bought back during this post-PR window and that the float will drop further to around 9 million shares. See table below."

https://moxreports.com

Rick Pearson continues to be a monster. Definitely worth following if you guys don't already.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: RuleNumberOne on September 11, 2019, 06:45:20 PM
The shorts are right. Dillards owns 248 stores totaling 44 million square feet. The average sale price of stores closed so far has been below what is required to justify the current EV. That moxreport guy is a pump-and-dump artist, he claims the real estate is worth $150-$300 per share but provides no proof. Some anonymous fellow posts on SeekingAlpha with similar tall claims (SeekingAlpha does not review blog posts). If shorts just hold, they will win eventually.
 
Today's 10-Q:

"During the six months ended August 3, 2019, the Company received cash proceeds of $22.0 million and recorded a related gain of $12.3 million for the sale of three store locations in Boardman, Ohio, Boynton Beach, Florida and Cary, North Carolina.

During the six months ended August 4, 2018, the Company received cash proceeds of $1.9 million from the sale of a location classified as an asset held for sale. These proceeds were being held in escrow for the acquisition of replacement property under like-kind exchange agreements. The Company used the proceeds for the acquisition of a replacement property at the Oaks Mall in Gainesville, Florida (104,000 square feet)."

The governance leaves much to be desired. Two-thirds of the board is appointed by the Dillards who own the privately-held Class B shares. The current 74-year-old CEO is the son of the founder. If he is too attached to the company and keeps buying a $40 stock at $70 per share using debt, who is going to stop him? Sales keep going down and the company loses money.

Munger's description of the stock market as a place "full of bullshit and craziness" is spot on.

248 stores x $6 million per store = $1.5 billion.

EV including the debentures is $2.3 billion.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: RuleNumberOne on September 11, 2019, 06:47:49 PM
If the EV were to reset to $1.5 billion, with $550 million of net debt:

    - the price per share would be $38. (25 million Class A and Class B shares).

Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 11, 2019, 07:25:12 PM
With all due respect Rulenumberone, and perhaps because the thread title was changed, but youre focusing on the wrong things. This was basically a math trade. Short interest was nearly 90% of float, on a stock that’s exhibited certain previous patterns, and that setup the move for a short squeeze, taking this from 59/60 to 70 in under 5 days. It was never represented as anything more.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Cardboard on September 11, 2019, 08:03:36 PM
In any case, he is wrong on his math too as sales are not going down, company is not losing money and since when do we value retailers solely based on land or value of non-performing stores real estate?

This ain't SHLD and it only takes 30 seconds by looking at their financial statements to figure that out. Not saying it is a growing retailer but, I see zero material in the posts by Rulenumberone to convince me to take a short position either.

Cardboard

Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: RuleNumberOne on September 11, 2019, 08:16:41 PM
Cardboard,

Your claim that sales are not going down and the company is not losing money is as bad as the moxreports claim of real estate value. Evidence in the latest earnings release is very clear.

From the latest earnings release linked below:

Same store sales went down 2% this quarter.

Revenue went from $1468 million to $1427 million YoY.

Compared to the year ago quarter, gross profit went from $483 million to $432 million.

Cost of sales went up to 72.3% of sales from 69.3% of sales.

SG&A expense and rental expense stayed the same. Interest expense went down $ 2 million.

Pre-tax loss of $52 million.

The company is leading a hand to mouth existence or worse (depreciation and amortization + net income = 0.) What about capex, e.g. broken air conditioners or escalators?


https://investor.dillards.com/press-releases/press-release-details/2019/Dillards-Inc-Reports-Second-Quarter-Results/default.aspx

In any case, he is wrong on his math too as sales are not going down, company is not losing money and since when do we value retailers solely based on land or value of non-performing stores real estate?

This ain't SHLD and it only takes 30 seconds by looking at their financial statements to figure that out. Not saying it is a growing retailer but, I see zero material in the posts by Rulenumberone to convince me to take a short position either.

Cardboard
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 12, 2019, 12:03:03 AM
Cardboard don't forget, this is CoBF. The land of make believe. Where MDXG from 2.47-3.90 = ...disqualified!!! You didn't hold it long enough! and 59-70 in 3 days = you're missing something! Them fundamentals are bad!
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: writser on September 12, 2019, 07:04:05 AM
Don't be salty, you made a great trade. Pat on the back!

Serious question: do you actually think the squeeze thesis is any good on a fundamental basis? Because this seems a bit like a 'Burford-trade' in reverse: generate a lot of hype (in this case about a short squeeze in a stock with a very low float) and the desired result will follow, regardless of the fundamentals. But shares are actually down today and the borrow fee is also down since August. I thought the 'mox-report' wasn't very convincing and in fact it looks pretty much like something Muddywaters could have written. Also, the DDS super squeeze story has been around for years - looks like people are starting to anticipate / expect it.

Not that there is anything wrong with making money because of people hyping a possible short squeeze rather than an actual short squeeze occurring. I made some money on the short side in Burford as well despite having no strong view on fundamentals.

I agree with you that DDS is an interesting stock on multiple levels.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 12, 2019, 07:25:29 AM
Don't be salty, you made a great trade. Pat on the back!

Serious question: do you actually think the squeeze thesis is any good on a fundamental basis? Because this seems a bit like a 'Burford-trade' in reverse: generate a lot of hype (in this case about a short squeeze in a stock with a very low float) and the desired result will follow, regardless of the fundamentals. But shares are actually down today and the borrow fee is also down since August. I thought the 'mox-report' wasn't very convincing and in fact it looks pretty much like something Muddywaters could have written. Also, the DDS super squeeze story has been around for years - looks like people are starting to anticipate / expect it.

Not that there is anything wrong with making money because of people hyping a possible short squeeze rather than an actual short squeeze occurring. I made some money on the short side in Burford as well despite having no strong view on fundamentals.

I agree with you that DDS is an interesting stock on multiple levels.

I don't really think they have much in common. MW on Burford was basically loud screaming of things people already knew, egregious misrepresentation, and capitalizing on reputational impact in order to more or less move the market. Mox report was pretty straight forward. Its a math trade. DDS as a retailer is kind of crummy, but not the worst out there. To a certain extent, sure; word getting out about short interest and the stock getting squeezed is a bit of self fulfilling prophecy. But its also a play on understanding market psychology. Ive been on the wrong end of short squeezes before; knowing what that feels like helps understand what drives this(it still may get squeezed more btw). So on that front, Pearson was 100% clear what he was looking to do here and I thought represented things in a fairly straight forward manner. Whereas Muddy Waters on the other hand...

The home run scenario, again just analyzing the math end of this trade, would have been a repurchase number around what Unemon suggested. Free float is now significantly below shares short. Which then points to the obvious fact that some holders of the stock, that arent part of the free float are lending out the stock. Which if that's the case, you better believe once it is public what the difference between short interest and float is, guess what those holders are doing? Pulling the borrow. Thats where the really fireworks would happen.


EDIT: and btw, if you want to see a real short piece. Check out Pearson's Forcefield Energy writeup. Or just check the FNRG chart. Gives new meaning to the term "killing it".
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: writser on September 12, 2019, 08:15:45 AM
Quote
you better believe once it is public what the difference between short interest and float is, guess what those holders are doing? Pulling the borrow. Thats where the really fireworks would happen.

I don't think it is a secret, exactly .. And second, where I think the analysis is flawed: I think it is extremely unlikely that Blackrock, Vanguard, State Street, Northern Trust etc. will pull the borrow in an orchestrated short squeeze. They are in the business of tracking indices and being boring asset managers- not in the business of generating squeezes for short-term profits. Even the founding family is probably happy with the status quo: lend out the shares for a juicy fee while letting others depress the price at which they can buy back shares. What are they gaining from a short-squeeze? Some short term gains (and they'd only be able to sell a small amount of shares), a lot of reputational damage and a pause in their buyback program.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 12, 2019, 08:20:03 AM
Quote
you better believe once it is public what the difference between short interest and float is, guess what those holders are doing? Pulling the borrow. Thats where the really fireworks would happen.

I don't think it is a secret, exactly .. And second, where I think the analysis is flawed: the short interest is 77% of the free float. Yes, that number, or whatever it currently is, is high. However, I think it is unlikely that Blackrock, Vanguard, State Street, Northern Trust etc. will pull the borrow in an orchestrated short squeeze. They are in the business of tracking indices - not in the business of generating squeezes for short-term profits. Even the founding family is probably happy with the status quo: lend out the shares for a juicy fee while letting others depress the price at which they can buy back shares. What are they gaining from a short-squeeze? Some short term gains (and they'd only be able to sell a small amount of shares), a lot of reputational damage and a pause in their buyback program.

You don't think perhaps, lets say a desperate hedge fund manager who's badly in need of some returns and could also benefit from a public "win" wouldn't do such a thing? You dont think David Einhorn(who's long been little more than a trader of the stock) would do such a thing?
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: writser on September 12, 2019, 08:22:32 AM
Sure. I didn't name Einhorn in my post, did I? I was just pointing out who in my opinion will not pull the borrow and these investors happen to own ~13m shares or whatever.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 12, 2019, 08:27:45 AM
Sure. I didn't name Einhorn in my post, did I? I was just pointing out who in my opinion will not pull the borrow and these investors happen to own ~13m shares or whatever.

Got it. Just some fun discussion on a unique name that's worth keeping an eye on.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: writser on September 12, 2019, 08:49:18 AM
Yes. FWIW I do see some potential for some short shenanigans. I just thought that the whole 'look they bought back a lot of shares and nobody knows about it, wait for the 10Q' thesis was a bit overdone. Honestly if you use terms like 'upside perfect storm', 'violent upward price spikes', 'hyper-aggressive buybacks' and 'kitchen sink PR gambit' (wtf..) in your reports you are just as promotional as Muddy Waters. Only on the long side and then nobody cares.

DDS has been buying back shares for ages. Everybody knows about it. The huge short interest isn't exactly a secret either. I think the article contained zero new insights. They simply rehashed their old articles (which both appear both to have been posted around the yearly high?)  but the trade worked out nicely.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: RuleNumberOne on September 12, 2019, 08:54:20 AM
There is no need for any shorts to cover unless the company becomes profitable.

A stock that is guaranteed to go to $0 should have all its shares outstanding shorted at $30.
A stock that is guaranteed to go to $0 + $30 should have all its shares outstanding shorted at $30 + $30.

If you can't turn a profit when the US consumer is super-healthy and in a big spending mood, you are guaranteed to go bust during the next recession. A few days ago Barron's presented a list of retailers that filed for bankruptcy this year. Dillards will eventually join that list.

Shorts should just be patient.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Cardboard on September 12, 2019, 09:11:19 AM
Hey RuleNumberOne, if you wanted to at least properly argue with what I stated, it would be wiser to highlight full year number comparisons instead of what happened in the last quarter which is slowest for a retailer.

Maybe that you are short or whatever and I don't really care but, if you want to spread the truth as you claim to be then please try to do so. Same store sales declining 1 or 2% is not the end of the world and guaranteed bankruptcy in case you didn't know.

Cardboard

Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: RuleNumberOne on September 12, 2019, 09:14:24 AM
If it weren't for gain on asset sales it would look worse.

If it makes you happier, we can look at 5-year comparisons instead of 1-year.

The founder's 74-year-old son is perhaps looking at 50-year comparisons and buying back stock. He joined the company in 1967.

Hey RuleNumberOne, if you wanted to at least properly argue with what I stated, it would be wiser to highlight full year number comparisons instead of what happened in the last quarter which is slowest for a retailer.

Maybe that you are short or whatever and I don't really care but, if you want to spread the truth as you claim to be then please try to do so. Same store sales declining 1 or 2% is not the end of the world and guaranteed bankruptcy in case you didn't know.

Cardboard
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 12, 2019, 09:32:09 AM
On paper, yea just hold the short. In actuality, it’s not that simple. A lot can happen that is out of your control or forces you to change direction. What’s unique about some of these perspectives is that the authors are predominantly short biased. So they have a very deep understanding of the mechanics at play here.

Rulenumberone, question. Theoretical. You’re short, and the stock goes against you 30%. You’re prime informs you that your borrow is gone. You have 3 days to buy in. Next day you’re notified that they have a few shares to borrow but the neg went from 15% to 60%. Meaning to keep the trade on you’re paying 5% a month to borrow. What do you do?
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Cardboard on September 12, 2019, 10:36:03 AM
With the amount of posting that he did and frustration he must have been short European bonds  ???

I would need an emoticon with a hanged man!

Cardboard
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: RuleNumberOne on September 12, 2019, 06:26:24 PM
As more and more people slowly realize that there isn't going to be any short squeeze, this will continue to drift lower.

While people have been waiting for that short squeeze that was supposed to happen after the 10-Q filing, the pump-and-dumpers have been laughing their way to the bank.

They said: "Here, buy this bag from me and stand over there. You are going to get a violent short squeeze half an hour before the market close."

Hence the term 'bagholders.' The next moxreport could be "rare earths discovered in the Dillards parking lot in Oklahoma, oil in the Dillards in Texas, gold mines in the Dillards in Florida and Iowa. The value of this real estate has been estimated generally at a few tens of billions of dollars (ranging from roughly $750-$800 per share). This will be revealed in an SEC filing 2 weeks from now following which there will be a violent short squeeze."


The only squeeze for Dillards is the one that Amazon-Costco-Target-Walmart are collectively putting on.

Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 12, 2019, 06:40:41 PM
As more and more people slowly realize that there isn't going to be any short squeeze, this will continue to drift lower.

While people have been waiting for that short squeeze that was supposed to happen after the 10-Q filing, the pump-and-dumpers have been laughing their way to the bank.

They said: "Here, buy this bag from me and stand over there. You are going to get a violent short squeeze half an hour before the market close."

Hence the term 'bagholders.' The next moxreport could be "rare earths discovered in the Dillards parking lot in Oklahoma, oil in the Dillards in Texas, gold mines in the Dillards in Florida and Iowa. The value of this real estate has been estimated generally at a few tens of billions of dollars (ranging from roughly $750-$800 per share). This will be revealed in an SEC filing 2 weeks from now following which there will be a violent short squeeze."


The only squeeze for Dillards is the one that Amazon-Costco-Target-Walmart are collectively putting on.

Translating much of this and your other comments I get... "if its not a fundamental trade it doesn't count! wah, wah, wah"

If you're short, well Im not sorry there was an opportunity to make money while you paid 2.5% this month to suffer paper losses and borrow your shares. If you're not short, then I don't really get why you are so butthurt.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: RuleNumberOne on September 12, 2019, 07:10:44 PM
It was very dishonorable. moxreport put in a lot of effort formatting his webpages - try making a webpage with tables and graphs as well-designed as he had?

But he never bothered to provide any proof for his repeated claim that the real estate was "generally estimated at" $150-$300 per share. Dillards SEC filings revealed sale prices for stores at an average of only $59 per share. With the net debt of $22 per share, it was overvalued.

Gullible people who fell for the painstakingly-designed webpage with red fonts, tables, graphs got ripped off. Extremely unethical. Some of them are clearly still holding the stock waiting for that "violent" short squeeze.

I am "butthurt" because i don't like honest hardworking people getting ripped off.

As more and more people slowly realize that there isn't going to be any short squeeze, this will continue to drift lower.

While people have been waiting for that short squeeze that was supposed to happen after the 10-Q filing, the pump-and-dumpers have been laughing their way to the bank.

They said: "Here, buy this bag from me and stand over there. You are going to get a violent short squeeze half an hour before the market close."

Hence the term 'bagholders.' The next moxreport could be "rare earths discovered in the Dillards parking lot in Oklahoma, oil in the Dillards in Texas, gold mines in the Dillards in Florida and Iowa. The value of this real estate has been estimated generally at a few tens of billions of dollars (ranging from roughly $750-$800 per share). This will be revealed in an SEC filing 2 weeks from now following which there will be a violent short squeeze."


The only squeeze for Dillards is the one that Amazon-Costco-Target-Walmart are collectively putting on.

Translating much of this and your other comments I get... "if its not a fundamental trade it doesn't count! wah, wah, wah"

If you're short, well Im not sorry there was an opportunity to make money while you paid 2.5% this month to suffer paper losses and borrow your shares. If you're not short, then I don't really get why you are so butthurt.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Gregmal on September 12, 2019, 07:20:28 PM
It was very dishonorable. moxreport put in a lot of effort formatting his webpages - try making a webpage with tables and graphs as well-designed as he had?

But he never bothered to provide any proof for his repeated claim that the real estate was "generally estimated at" $150-$300 per share. Dillards SEC filings revealed sale prices for stores at an average of only $59 per share. With the net debt of $22 per share, it was overvalued.

Gullible people who fell for the painstakingly-designed webpage with red fonts, tables, graphs got ripped off. Extremely unethical. Some of them are clearly still holding the stock waiting for that "violent" short squeeze.

I am "butthurt" because i don't like honest hardworking people getting ripped off.

As more and more people slowly realize that there isn't going to be any short squeeze, this will continue to drift lower.

While people have been waiting for that short squeeze that was supposed to happen after the 10-Q filing, the pump-and-dumpers have been laughing their way to the bank.

They said: "Here, buy this bag from me and stand over there. You are going to get a violent short squeeze half an hour before the market close."

Hence the term 'bagholders.' The next moxreport could be "rare earths discovered in the Dillards parking lot in Oklahoma, oil in the Dillards in Texas, gold mines in the Dillards in Florida and Iowa. The value of this real estate has been estimated generally at a few tens of billions of dollars (ranging from roughly $750-$800 per share). This will be revealed in an SEC filing 2 weeks from now following which there will be a violent short squeeze."


The only squeeze for Dillards is the one that Amazon-Costco-Target-Walmart are collectively putting on.

Translating much of this and your other comments I get... "if its not a fundamental trade it doesn't count! wah, wah, wah"

If you're short, well Im not sorry there was an opportunity to make money while you paid 2.5% this month to suffer paper losses and borrow your shares. If you're not short, then I don't really get why you are so butthurt.

The premise of the investment(one he still apparently held as of the close today), was very straight forward. Sure, as has been mentioned, there was some salesmanship to the verbiage. But it was totally transparent and no different than anything you'll see anywhere else, from Seeking Alpha, to Twitter, to the latest JP Morgan analyst report.

Ultimately, no one was duped as each and every individual who hits the buy and sell buttons is responsible for themselves. If what you are describing truly upset you so much, I can only imagine the constant state of unease and fury you must be in, I don't know, like, 743 times a day when analysts publish bullshit that investors then chose to act on even though generally speaking, much of it is nonsense...
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: Spekulatius on September 12, 2019, 07:23:45 PM
The trade worked, Cashing. Great for those that did it. Equally, going short now or buying puts may work just as well. I personally don’t think DDS reale state is worth that much and it would be quite difficult and expensive to unlock the value.

Some investment are LT bets, some trades are short term bets and both can work.
Title: Re: DDS - Dillard's
Post by: SHDL on September 12, 2019, 08:53:22 PM
Squeeze or no squeeze, I don’t get the sense that this is good short.  The department store business may well be a melting ice cube, but even if it is the evidence so far is that it is a slowly melting one.  The RE may not be worth a ton, but at the current stock price you are getting that for like < $50 per sq foot, which sounds cheap to me — although I admit I am no RE expert.  The management keeps buying back stock and if they keep going the company will be taken private in just a few years.  The cost of borrowing the stock is high and so are the option premiums.

I’ve actually been thinking about selling a few long dated puts given the setup.