Author Topic: SHLDQ - Sears Holdings Corp  (Read 2753974 times)

Value^2

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 244
Re: SHLDQ - Sears Holdings Corp
« Reply #9090 on: November 14, 2017, 10:49:24 AM »
It seems that he's buying JOE simultaneously.

   
Quote
P      2017-11-13   2017-11-13 18:38:10   ST JOE CO   JOE   BERKOWITZ BRUCE R   various various director 10% owner   15,950   $18.48   $294,756.00   75,000      view
P   2017-11-13   2017-11-13 18:38:10   ST JOE CO   JOE   BERKOWITZ BRUCE R   various various director 10% owner   18,050   $18.48   $333,564.00   2.66567E7      view
P   2017-11-10   2017-11-13 18:38:10   ST JOE CO   JOE   BERKOWITZ BRUCE R   various various director 10% owner   1,600   $18.10   $28,960.00   2.66386E7      view
P   2017-11-09   2017-11-13 18:38:10   ST JOE CO   JOE   BERKOWITZ BRUCE R   various various director 10% owner   59,050   $17.84   $1,053,450.00   59,050      view
P   2017-11-09   2017-11-13 18:38:10   ST JOE CO   JOE   BERKOWITZ BRUCE R   various various director 10% owner   59,550   $17.84   $1,062,370.00   2.6637E7      view


Value^2

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 244
Re: SHLDQ - Sears Holdings Corp
« Reply #9091 on: November 14, 2017, 11:18:49 AM »
lampert has been buying other stuff also instead of shld recently...i dont know the specifics but i hear about it every once in a while.
Mainly LE, some SHOS too.

Marve2013

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 33
Re: SHLDQ - Sears Holdings Corp
« Reply #9092 on: November 15, 2017, 05:34:52 AM »
Regarding the forced redemptions, cant Bruce just pay shdrs with the cash buffer ?  Unless he thinks holding on to cash is safer than shld shares at this point. Unless hes also doing then for tax reasons?

frugalchief

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
Re: SHLDQ - Sears Holdings Corp
« Reply #9093 on: November 15, 2017, 07:53:31 AM »
Curious if this is the beginning of the end regarding BB and SHLD....after resigning from board, now a 1% sell off.

Nice to see he bought some JOE for him personally.

doughishere

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1190
Re: SHLDQ - Sears Holdings Corp
« Reply #9094 on: November 17, 2017, 07:11:08 AM »
did any of the '18 holders get the notice for an proposed amendment a week or so ago?

sampr01

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 221
Re: SHLDQ - Sears Holdings Corp
« Reply #9095 on: November 17, 2017, 07:20:24 AM »
did any of the '18 holders get the notice for an proposed amendment a week or so ago?

No. Do you have link for proposed amendment. Thanks

doughishere

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1190
Re: SHLDQ - Sears Holdings Corp
« Reply #9096 on: November 17, 2017, 07:29:42 AM »
plus they got downgraded for the second time this year.

sampr01

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 221
Re: SHLDQ - Sears Holdings Corp
« Reply #9097 on: November 17, 2017, 08:24:18 AM »
plus they got downgraded for the second time this year.

Thanks for the info. do you have an expiration date on this consent?. Thanks

doughishere

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1190
Re: SHLDQ - Sears Holdings Corp
« Reply #9098 on: November 30, 2017, 05:41:28 PM »
what no chatter after that display. wow. hope no one blinked.

i just wanna see if we can get this thread to 1k.

jrydaf

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: SHLDQ - Sears Holdings Corp
« Reply #9099 on: November 30, 2017, 06:51:42 PM »
Looks like they withdrew that consent solicitation:
"Subsequent to the end of our third quarter, we commenced a consent solicitation to amend the borrowing base definition in the indenture. We subsequently terminated the consent solicitation prior to its scheduled expiration. "

They also said their debt exceeded the borrowing base at quarter end:
"As of October 28, 2017, our borrowing base was below the above threshold, and if our borrowing base is below the above threshold at the end of our fiscal year, it will trigger an obligation to repurchase or repay second lien debt, in an amount equal to the excess of our funded debt secured by liens on our inventory as of year-end over the borrowing base. If we fail to make such repurchase or repayment, we would be in violation of our covenants under our Second Lien Credit Agreement. "