The funny thing about SRG is that most people that speak publicly on the company are focusing on the risk of income from SHLD going to zero. Well, in my opinion that's a variable that's only worth $500 million of the SRG value at this point. Call it income from SHLD of $150m this year, $120 next, then $95, etc. the present value of that might be approximated at $500m.
Well, the enterprise value of SRG is around $4 billion. Therefore $500 million shouldn't be the deciding factor in an investment with a value of $ 4 billion.
The other variable is 'what's the reinvestment (redevelopment) opportunity worth?' I won't lay out my answer for that here, but I think that's where one should be looking when trying to decide if SRG is a good investment at an enterprise value of $4 billion
I think trying to isolate or unbundle the SHLD rent payments as a percentage of SRG's enterprise value isn't the ideal way to look at the situation.
Here's the way I'm thinking about SRG's SHLD tenant risk: I don't think anyone really knows what SHLD's remaining assets are worth, or when/how/if they will be monetized. However, Lampert has EVERY incentive to keep SHLD out of bankruptcy, or at least to stave it off as long as possible. If SHLD goes bankrupt not only will he likely lose his entire SHLD equity investment, but his SRG, SHOS, and LE equity positions will also be impaired. Lampert's ability to run a large retailer is very, very questionable, but he has proven adept at navigating the capital markets. He has also shown a willingness to put more of his own personal wealth on the line.
It is in SRG's best interest for all or almost all Sears and Kmart stores to eventually disappear from the face of the earth. I think it's all but inevitable that this happens. It's a question of timing.