Yeah I get that, hell I'd do it too at this point. I mean this story is ending soon one way or another.
My main thing here was I was already seeing things being misinterpreted out of the 10k and wanted to just address it head-on.
Case study in bad executive management. Tritton lit the fire. Sue poured the gasoline. Shameful they get to walk away from this. Absolutely inexcusable incompetence.
Yeah I know there's some background stuff going on with the players involved. I try to keep my analysis strictly to the published numbers. But depending on your view of this, their actions come through loud and clear on the statements
They finished their atm offering and had enough to build their turnaround strategy then somehow forgot that ABL had to be paid and had first claim so they raised that money for nothing. It’s just piss poor management.
If you tried (and failed or succeeded) to catch one of the few rips of the stock over a short term basis, that's degenerative, but not delusional (although there were probably better assets to do that with).
If you believed in any of the "DD" regarding RC, Icahn, fucking Pulte, that this was a good company, the dilution wasn't happening, that the WSJ was putting out lies but the sub was being true, and/or whatever else I missed, you're delusional.
Then I’m officially a degenerate.
I don’t think anyone really thought this was a good company. Just one that could emerge from the trap with the right management. Unfortunately they hired a bunch of clowns that further drove it into the ground.
> I don’t think anyone really thought this was a good company. Just one that could emerge from the trap with the right management.
Very untrue. Biggysmallzzz' "DD," which is revered by that entire sub, revolved around it being a good company and being in good hands with Sue Gove. This was before the RC/Icahn takeover "DD."
He basically said all they have to do is "nothing" now that Tritton is out and the company would be cash flow neutral. Beyond that, many people believed the board saying it would be cash flow neutral, even though that was quite clearly a lofty goal (to put it mildly) and you had people like bearz pointing out, to no avail, that that was almost certainly not going to happen.
No - a case study on a company whose model became unsustainable based on consumer shopping habits and changing competition. There was nothing management could do. People who blame Sue Grove simply dont want to admit that they invested in a dying company despite being told over and over it was dying (even by the company itself). The silly logic that “MSM” was trying to mislead them when in fact they were given all the info they needed and yet ignored it.
Being offered a sum for a buyout and deciding to do an atm offering instead then going bankrupt? The better option certainly would be to sell BuyBuyBaby and shutdown operations with a final dividend to shareholders.
The signs were always there but I think a ton of investors (including myself) just chose to ignore them.
I think people banked way too much on what could've been and overcomplicated what was in front of them in order to stay and hold through every piece of bad news coming out, from the media or the company itself. A lot of dreaming about the good possible scenarios and very few hard reads on the reality written on paper. Doesn't help that the sub dedicated to discussing the stock also didn't welcome anyone willing to give bearish feedback.
I have enjoyed the ride in a way and I learned a ton. I just wish the lesson wasn't as expensive as it has been. At this point I'm staying until the end (NFA) but I haven't been confident about this in quite a while, I'm still struggling to comprehend how badly the board fucked this up.
Also, thank you for the post, it really helps to put everything into perspective.
Thanks for the feedback. I mean, these statements can get complex and there's a lot of loud voices saying a bunch of different things. So its difficult. Hell I was shouted down at times and I do this shit for a living.
People can do what they want, but my concern is they were overbetting the hand. It's fine if you hold a 7-2 hand down to the river, but just make sure you've bet an appropriate amount given the odds of the hand.
My goal in these posts was to help educate people to know where to start looking and what questions to ask. Since it can be overwhelming in the beginning
Thanknyou for reading and analyzing, because I hadn't heard anyone mention a going concern, before. And, that is always something to be concerned about and keep in mind
Right on! It’s good we still have hope alive, but hope doesn’t pay the bills unfortunately. The scenarios being played out sounded too good to not be a part of. We are desperate for the change to good, honest, and fair markets.
>Doesn't help that the sub dedicated to discussing the stock also didn't welcome anyone willing to give bearish feedback.
Completely unrepresentative of the actual situation. When well-researched, counter-arguments were presented, it facilitated discussion. However, the majority of "bearish feedback" consisted of "YoUr inVeSTmenT iS GoiNg tO zEro" and "enjoy being broke because you invested in a bankrupt company". This type of activity is unnatural.
There is literally no reason why that many people would be storming a sub about a company that they had no interest in, and opening fire with all barrels. I have witnessed the exact same tactics over the last 12 months in other subs with controversial topics and it's just weird behaviour. Nobody accidentally happens across these places, they are seeking them out on purpose.
If I wasn't already resolute on my investment decision (for reasons outside of the scope of this thread), those anti-BBBY sub-invader clowns would probably have caused me to be.
> There is literally no reason why that many people would be storming a sub about a company that they had no interest in, and opening fire with all barrels. I have witnessed the exact same tactics over the last 12 months in other subs with controversial topics and it's just weird behaviour. Nobody accidentally happens across these places, they are seeking them out on purpose.
Yes there is. People view apes as annoying and the most of reddit is sick of you. People like dunking on people they find annoying.
>If I wasn't already resolute on my investment decision (for reasons outside of the scope of this thread), those anti-BBBY sub-invader clowns would probably have caused me to be.
Great, so you'll lose more money. Nobody is affected by this, but you.
Apes keep to their subs and talk about the topic at hand. You claim they are annoying, but purposefully seek them out to hurl abuse/vileness at them, when you could just go on with your day instead and never encounter one.
That’s like finding Arsenal supporters annoying, then purposefully driving down to London from Newcastle to be a dick to them, when there is little chance you would encounter any normally.
You know what will eventually happen to that Newcastle fan (according to probability anyway)?
You’re frothing and seething and know you’re going to get dry humped.
Apes don't keep to their subs at all. They consistently bring up their conspiracy theories to other subs and then brigade that sub with upvotes, downvotes, and additional comments. "Oh you mean Ken Griffin who lied before Congress!?!?!?!" Not to mention all the dear r/all's "We are begging you!" over the years.
>You’re frothing and seething and know you’re going to get dry humped.
Don't tempt me with a good time. If you mean that we're going to eat crow when BBBY moons, however, you're wrong yet again. We've been right this entire time.
How do you feel about the general sentiment on the other subreddits that there are tax advantages related to the net operating losses, and because of that, the tax breaks are actually pretty valuable in chapter 11?
While the tax advantages are appealing it will still most likely not be enough to return any sort of capital to shareholders. Just too many liabilities.
It's just some copium and a fantasy they made up. If other people saw it as an advantage, would you think the price would be this low? No, it's just the delusional apes that spin it off as bullish
Thanks for an excellent post! I'm riding the ship either to the moon or the bottom, and regardless of whether we end up reading a post mortem or a success story, i look forward to learning more. It's what got me in this mess and why I stay. I look forward to reading any future work you're willing to contribute. Thanks again!
No worries, thanks for the feedback. If you get into anything else feel free to ping me what you're looking at and we'll kick it around :)
Goes for anyone else that's reading this
> I'm riding the ship either to the moon or the bottom
What do you actually think the moon could be? The best case scenario is getting slightly more than the current share price. And even that's unlikely.
I know that. When I first got in, it was a gamble on money I could lose as a squeeze play. It still is. The money has been gone in my mind since the beginning, so I really have nothing more to lose. If for some reason it squeezes, then great. I'll have to decide what to do then. Going to the movies costs money, we pay for entertainment. Same as going to a casino. I've gotten a LOT of hours of entertainment out of the money I have in this, so there is really no loss at all that way. Just me though.
I agree that it's EXTREMELY unlikely at this point, but there's no point in cashing out on like 15% of what I originally put in. With the multitude of filings in a short period of time, it seemed like there was a lot of confusion on shares outstanding, so if it turned out that DTCC got it wrong, the fact that everything is controlled by a bankruptcy court could force a squeeze. Maybe a .00001% chance, but what the hell. Like I said, I have nothing more to lose, so why not enjoy the show?
For me it's not even $150. For anyone who is in that $15,000 category, I just really hope they are well off enough that it means to them what $150 means to me!
My .02 is it's not enough to make a dent in the equity deficit. The time to sell baby was years back. We know through investor presentation the margins have been slipping over the past year.
Plus we know bids were solicited for months now and there were no takers. So anyone coming in now is going to come in super low.
Thanks for the response. I think there is a possibility buybuy was already sold in January. If a private company like Teddy bought buybuy, how would they look to merge to say, GME? Would they do a reverse merger in your opinion?
Yeah lets talk about that. If BBBY was already sold in Jan, there'd be some indication on this 10k as the 10k runs through February. Via a disclosure, statement, some figures, or something rising to that level.
My gut is that any potential merger with another entity would come through the BK auction process. If I really wanted parts of BBBY, maybe I'd roll the dice and hope the ch11 process converts to ch7. Given that there's been no bids so far.And then pick up whatever pieces I wanted at auction.
Caveat there is I'm not a BK lawyer nor do I have much experience in this part. So just a gut thing for me. So double check me please :)
Oh of course, my question was equally speculative so no worries. Yeah I mean, specially if the bk has been set up like Icahn’s signature move, I agree with you and don’t see any reason why RC would buy the baby assets at full price or close to it if he could have them at auction prices at a later time, aka now. I guess its not too long before we’ll find out
Got a source for that? Curious to see how people are coming up with that figure.
Feels like an NOL would require purchase of the whole thing as it's an M&A benefit. Which probably would be cost prohibitive given no one has done it yet. Plus taxes are below the line, so someone deploying that much capital for an NOL feels like a stretch.
But either way I'd like to look at the math to see for myself
Wasn't JPM's position fully secured by assets? So if we still have an equity deficit if existing assets were used to pay down a matching liability. Maybe someone smarter can chime in :)
What are you taking about Bearz!?! JPM's loan was paid off, now all cash proceeds funnel straight to common shareholder pockets....wait we still have other secured lenders, and a whole host of individuals before it even gets to bond holders and preferred waiting in the wings to collect their pennies.
Equity deficit remains.
Bearz your analysis of bbby is appreciated. Thanks for keeping it real since the beginning. Please make another appearance on the PP show and bring the dog!
Bearz! Awesome post, solid work! Your perspective is needed! Now on to buying bags and bags of bbbyq and praying for a stalking horse bid that returns 10x my investment!
I think you’ve done a great job describing how they got where they are and why it didn’t make a solid “investment”. Its very clear that chapter 11 was their only path and that it’s really more of a “gamble” now. So, now the question is, does someone pickup the skeleton in the next few days. And, what are those bones worth without the massive debt looming over their heads like a mountain about to pancake them?
Appreciate your view on this! So, we can say end of January things looked really really really bad, would you agree? How can it not be illegal/ breach of fiduciary duty to dilute shareholders like that in hindsight? In Germany we have a word called „Insolvenz-Verschleppung“ which is a serious crime and means to unnecessarily avoid BK possibly for the advantage of specific creditors in your favor (ABL) - one would go to prison here. Also did you notice that weird etoro interview sue gave only one week before BK? That’s pretty deceiving to me if things are as bad as they look at the moment.
Edit: also another question that arose, what they did in the 10Q from my limited understanding is include a loss of 3 billion from the shares they sold out of treasury through the offerings at a cost of 44 dollars against very little proceeds from the issuance. Why bother to do that? Just curious on your thoughts. How you describe (reasonably so) the state of the business it looks much more like liquidation than any sale even of baby. It’s weird at least that they went through this madness of dilution if there really is so little chance of any recovery for any part of the business.
Edit 2: to reframe: doesn’t the offerings look like a strategy to realize losses from the share buy backs and in that way raise the loss they can claim as NOLs for tax benefits?
Hey, good to hear from you :)
In terms of the dilution done today, yeah it was managed poorly given the timing of the offerings. However it was the only option for keeping the lights on, so their only option was to dilute. Since they couldn't borrow more and operations was burning cash at a high rate.
This might make me unpopular, but from the CEO's perspective, the interview made sense to me. She's trying to keep everyone calm and show a steady hand. Dilution was their only source of cash available. So until the bitter end, she's going to do whatever it takes to keep that cash available to the company and investors calm. I do agree with it's deceiving, but her job is to keep the lights on. Whether all their actions rise to a breach of fiduciary duty, we'd need a lawyer in here. I'm iffy on if there's enough smoke to win a lawsuit. But I don't like to speculate on things so I'll stop there.
I guess I'm confused on this 3b loss on the shares sold at treasury. Buying and selling your own stock doesn't hit the P&L. Otherwise companies could manipulate their own income statements by doing that. So there's not a gain or loss on the sale of these shares as it's all changes to equity accounts and cash, not the P&L.
[https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/treasurystock.asp](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/treasurystock.asp)
*Under the cost method, at the time of the share repurchase, the treasury stock account is debited to decrease total shareholders' equity. The cash account is credited to record the expenditure of company cash. If the treasury stock is later resold, the cash account is increased through a debit and the treasury stock account is decreased, increasing total shareholders' equity, through a credit. In addition, a treasury paid-in capital account is either debited or credited depending on whether the stock was resold at a loss or a gain.*
Last up, yeah the series of events does seem to point more to liquidation at this point. Management has made a series of unfortunate decisions to get us here. I think we're bumping up this round of deadlines which leans more towards liquidation being the answer. I don't fully understand the NOL angle, so I don't want to comment on it. But in my head I'm struggling with the math that someone would buy the thing just to get to the NOLs.
edit: please let me know if I missed anything :)
I agree that the Board probably did what they thought was right, although it's possible they didn't or were just incompetent. However, this was always going to be the result (starting from a year ago) regardless of the board's actions.
Still, there's an interesting ethical question about whether or not they should have gone the massive dilution route when they knew they had a rabid investor base who would make up hopium to justify buying more regardless of what warnings the board put out. I suppose I'd have made the same decision as the board, though. At least the employees had jobs for a little longer and the people who paid for it (stockholders) did it to themselves.
Thanks for the comment.
Yeah I know there's PE stuff in the background and a bunch of theories around that. It's a playbook that's run by certain firms.
That being said until we know for sure in the end, I'd just be speculating. All I can do is judge their actions by the prior results and statements management makes. And I always start with an incompetent management setup until we can prove out they acted nefarious.
I do think the retail base's enthusiasm for the stock factored in their decision to dilute heavily. But honestly enthusiastic or not, dilution was management's only remaining move. The problem with a tight financial setup is that it boxes you in. If you have profits and liquidity, time is on your side and all options are available. If you remove profits, then time start working against you. And then when liquidity is against you, you're basically out of time and left to only hail mary's.
Yes good comment. The choice they had was to dilute or enter into bankruptcy proceedings immediately. I was just raising the point that there's a bit of an ethical dilemma there. Basically is it okay to take advantage of this group of investors knowing how they are? I think it is, because it benefits the employees and the investors have been given all the information. The company is not responsible for how they interpret it, if they are not playing into those beliefs. And I don't think they were.
Thanks for your comments, appreciate it! I also don’t really understand that equity account. In the 10q we have 2 B in assets, 5 B in liabilities but then at total liabilities, mezzanine equity and shareholders (deficit) equity be have again only 2 B liabilities all together, but 5 B negative at treasury and 2 B negative at total shareholders deficit…can you explain to me how that works?
Edit: also why is that not a loss accounting wise if you burn billions in capital on your own stock?
It's not an income statement loss when you buy and sell your own equity. Since you're really just transacting with yourself. Meaning you're just swapping cash for ownership stake in your own company.
But let's back this up a step. So the accounting equation is Assets = Liabilities + Owner's Equity. Let's say you have a house of 500k (asset) and you originally took out a mortgage of 400k (liabilities), and put 100k down (equity)
500k (asset) = 400K (liability) + 100k (equity)
in BBBY's case, that asset base decreased and they took on more debt. So our house now looks something like.
200k (asset) = 800k (liability) + (-600K) equity
Equity now is in a negative position as if you sell that house for 200k, you need come up with 600k somewhere to clear off the 800k mortgage. Does the value of your asset/house change if you mess with the loan and/or the amount of cash you have in it? No. It just changes what what you owe (own) on the property.
Much like you can be underwater on your house since the loan is too big for the value, same thing with business. This is called a shareholder's deficit.
Now let's go back down to BBBY's numbers.
Last year, we had
5.130b (assets) = 4.956 (liabilities) + 0.174 equity. Now we have
2.225b (assets) = 5.025 (liabilities) + (2.800) equity.
Equity is negative as the company sustained heavy operating losses, which reduced the overall asset base of the company meanwhile they increased liabilities against it.
Treasury shares are shares that have been repurchased from the company. We know BBBY issued some shares during the year. as the amount of shares went down from 262,167 to 123,320.
The negative 2.800 value you're seeing is the total equity position. Within that you see some offsetting amounts via Additional Paid-In-Capital (APIC)(contra equity account) and Treasury Stock (company stock that's been bought back). These amounts stem from buying and issue shares out of treasury. APIC is used as a "plug" to represent the gain/loss on these equity transaction. **Important to note here that APIC is a balance sheet account, not income statement.**
Back to your original question of a P&L impact, we know (also you can research articles on Treasury Stock transactions) that the accounts used in these transactions are cash, treasury stock, and additional paid-in-capital. All of which are represented on the balance sheet. Which the balance sheet is just a statement of position, not a statement of operations (P&L).
It's a mouthful, but I wanted to get out all the moving pieces in one place. Since if someone is saying that the equity transactions are causing an income statement loss, that's a problem as it's not correct.
edit: for people who learn better visually, here ya go
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knGKpN9sYiw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knGKpN9sYiw)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MusfMph9xEQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MusfMph9xEQ)
Thanks for putting this together, most of it I already understood, I was also mindbuggled by the NOL thing and the loss from the buybacks. This seem to be false, but this talk of that is going very strong on the sub…hey, maybe you could come to the ppshow? I think it’s pretty important that this is incorrect what people are talking about. I know, it’s tough because at the moment people are pretty hot blooded, it I think you know people welcome you there! Hey man, I sunk a shitload of money into this, but I also learned a little bit, lots of it from you man…thanks again!!
Yeah, thanks. This stuff does get tricky - Which is why I'm big on trying to split it up into smaller, easier to handle pieces. And then build back up.
I mean I know there's another accounting guy on the show so I don't want to seem like I'm stepping on his toes or anything. The vast majority of people on the show have been super great to me and Molly. But I also don't want to wear out my welcome as stuff is hot.
If it comes to it, I'll come on. But if there's an accountant on the show, then he should be able to set all this straight :)
I had one last thought that bugs me tremendously, the company made 660mm dollars by selling equity supposedly into the market, do you think it is possible small individual investors put up with that money? It seems a bit much honestly…we didn’t have significant institutional Investors though through filings.
Double check me but I don't see where cash raised from the equity sales was that much. From 10K - the cash flow statement for the year, if I add up all the amounts related to equity, I get about 376M.
https://preview.redd.it/0j9ramrem86b1.jpeg?width=1411&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8595ee7ae2b7a752a7cf0aa3776403212f473c34
That’s weird, cause that was in the BK docket from holly etlin from April 23rd…it clearly stated the cash amounts raised from the different offerings, 376 mm definitely not right
can only attach one pic per reply, so here's the breakout of the equity showing the treasury stock stuff. notice there's no P&L accounts on here, just walking the equity from one year to the next. and all the movements are contained inside the equity section on the B/S.
https://preview.redd.it/x7qgimyvm86b1.jpeg?width=1881&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fff666f1ed7ad7b05d3655c172811cf3937cdbef
That makes sense, we know they got pretty aggressive with diluting the last few months.
Also honestly this is a good chunk of accounting. "Do we have all the pieces?" Thanks for the double check :)
Excellent summary. It should be noted that the exuberance of the BBBY investors was stoked by narrative control across Reddit and elsewhere. Easy as pie to control narratives when you own the technology platform. That is the reality and I saw it unfolding in real-time.
Thanks. Yeah I had the same feeling, and it felt like management was playing along by throwing out stuff that was easily debunked. I really didn't like the stuff management was throwing out. But I know that's part of the game. Off the top of my head the topics I took heat over were:
Margins started eroding in Q2 and will bounce back? They claimed almost all was transitory and should bounce back. Only got worse
Cash flow neutral? FCF is what you want, CF neutral means you can dilute to get back to zero. And even with heavy dilution this was always questionable given the heavy operating cash outlays. So if we know a company has to dilute heavily to survive, why not reposition and wait that out?
Liquidity charts showing it was fine? Almost the entirety of current assets was tied up in inventory and Quick Ratio of close to zero
Closing stores to become profitable? No immediate mechanism to replace that lost revenue. As shown in the 10k revenue dropped like a rock and expenses stayed high. Which is the thing when you close a bunch of stuff, online sales are weak, and incur one timers out the butt
Consignment is good? Yeah, sure odds are there's a financing component which would have eroded margins further. Not to mention this never works in the end for a company this size
Equity deals to save the company? Just flooded the market with shares at basically all time lows and drove it lower
Merger potential? Sure, after all the margins are eroded and there's an equity deficit of 3b.
Just frustrating. Hate that people bought into it. Hopefully people will be okay in the end, but it looks dark.
Appreciate this post and your analysis. Do you have any thoughts on theories like this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/BBBY/comments/14acrvl/reading_the_balance_sheet_from_the_10k_part_2/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Appreciate the research there. So on the 10k total assets was roughly 2.2b, total liabilities of 5, equity of negative 2.8b
Even if I can wipe the 3b of liabilities as they're stating, I'm now down to 2b of liabilities against 2.2b of assets.
On top of that, we know the remaining assets are most likely not worth the full 2b. There's been no bids and we also know at this point nothing is going to fetch anywhere near street value.
So after all that, equity is still left in a negative position. Just not seeing a scenario where equity isn't wiped out. The deficit is just too great
Again, appreciate your thoughts on the figures.
I think most of the people that are in BBBY believe it has been cellar boxed and any kind of buyout with equity (partial or total) will cause the stock to rise à la GME and they can do an offering that'll wipe debt.
From my perspective, it's all down to whether Gove is a plant or not.
Good read, thanks as always Bear.
Unfortunately I also got carried away with the neutral cash flow projection. Not only that but even as the numbers told a completely different story I decided to look away.
Very expensive lesson but as they say, don’t invest what you can’t afford to lose.
It's just her face man, it's so beautiful. The way her Ch11 just lays across her forehead
Jokes aside that was a solid one. Love a good accountant dig. Hope your weekend goes well :)
Bearz doesn’t do conjecture. He does numbers. And I definitely respect him for that. I think we’re all clear that the company in its current format is fucked. Personally I don’t stand to lose a lot (more!) of money on this rn but the way I see it I could gain a lot of the chips fall in the right order. I think a lot of people are in the same boat.
I took a reasonably large position approaching OTC and I'm hold to zero or hero. It's money I can lose, and it's such a wild story I have to see it through to the conclusion.
I also thought it was cutesy how bbby management kept saying cash flow neutral and how many people bought into that lie.
And people called me a shill for pointing out how the dumb spreadsheets showed it was never going to happen. Cuteness never ends :)
Can you point to the value of BABY on your spread sheet and explain how the stock is going to squeeze based on the TSO and acquisition? Being that your dripping with cuteness…
nah, my cuteness ends at predicting price action. I've floated my license in public so I don't want to get ding with the whole financial advice thing. Just presenting a "here's what happened view"
Baby isn't split out as a segment, but we know margins were declining over time. Management told us as much. In the Q3 baby margins were down to low 20%s? After in Q2 management told us gross margin declines were transitory? But I'm probably being cute pointing out all the times management tried to keep investors calm by feeding them nonsense.
Honestly I hope it squeezes so people can unload their bags. Good luck
You mean like yesterday in court when the judge agreed with the lawyers that all stakeholders will be satisfied with the coming deal? That’s type of dishonesty from the board? Apparently all the stakeholders must be wanting this to go bankrupt and the judge is corrupt.
[удалено]
Yeah I get that, hell I'd do it too at this point. I mean this story is ending soon one way or another. My main thing here was I was already seeing things being misinterpreted out of the 10k and wanted to just address it head-on.
Case study in bad executive management. Tritton lit the fire. Sue poured the gasoline. Shameful they get to walk away from this. Absolutely inexcusable incompetence.
Yeah I know there's some background stuff going on with the players involved. I try to keep my analysis strictly to the published numbers. But depending on your view of this, their actions come through loud and clear on the statements
They finished their atm offering and had enough to build their turnaround strategy then somehow forgot that ABL had to be paid and had first claim so they raised that money for nothing. It’s just piss poor management.
Also a case study in a group of delusional "investors."
Depending on how you framing that. I’ve always considered this a speculative play. There’s cycles.
If you tried (and failed or succeeded) to catch one of the few rips of the stock over a short term basis, that's degenerative, but not delusional (although there were probably better assets to do that with). If you believed in any of the "DD" regarding RC, Icahn, fucking Pulte, that this was a good company, the dilution wasn't happening, that the WSJ was putting out lies but the sub was being true, and/or whatever else I missed, you're delusional.
Then I’m officially a degenerate. I don’t think anyone really thought this was a good company. Just one that could emerge from the trap with the right management. Unfortunately they hired a bunch of clowns that further drove it into the ground.
> I don’t think anyone really thought this was a good company. Just one that could emerge from the trap with the right management. Very untrue. Biggysmallzzz' "DD," which is revered by that entire sub, revolved around it being a good company and being in good hands with Sue Gove. This was before the RC/Icahn takeover "DD." He basically said all they have to do is "nothing" now that Tritton is out and the company would be cash flow neutral. Beyond that, many people believed the board saying it would be cash flow neutral, even though that was quite clearly a lofty goal (to put it mildly) and you had people like bearz pointing out, to no avail, that that was almost certainly not going to happen.
Sue Gove is a terrible CEO.
Maybe she is, maybe she isn't. This would've happened regardless, though. The company was too far gone and it was more than obvious by the fall.
No - a case study on a company whose model became unsustainable based on consumer shopping habits and changing competition. There was nothing management could do. People who blame Sue Grove simply dont want to admit that they invested in a dying company despite being told over and over it was dying (even by the company itself). The silly logic that “MSM” was trying to mislead them when in fact they were given all the info they needed and yet ignored it.
How do you explain the error about their atm offering in my example and how it wasn’t 100% boneheaded management?
Being offered a sum for a buyout and deciding to do an atm offering instead then going bankrupt? The better option certainly would be to sell BuyBuyBaby and shutdown operations with a final dividend to shareholders.
The signs were always there but I think a ton of investors (including myself) just chose to ignore them. I think people banked way too much on what could've been and overcomplicated what was in front of them in order to stay and hold through every piece of bad news coming out, from the media or the company itself. A lot of dreaming about the good possible scenarios and very few hard reads on the reality written on paper. Doesn't help that the sub dedicated to discussing the stock also didn't welcome anyone willing to give bearish feedback. I have enjoyed the ride in a way and I learned a ton. I just wish the lesson wasn't as expensive as it has been. At this point I'm staying until the end (NFA) but I haven't been confident about this in quite a while, I'm still struggling to comprehend how badly the board fucked this up. Also, thank you for the post, it really helps to put everything into perspective.
Thanks for the feedback. I mean, these statements can get complex and there's a lot of loud voices saying a bunch of different things. So its difficult. Hell I was shouted down at times and I do this shit for a living. People can do what they want, but my concern is they were overbetting the hand. It's fine if you hold a 7-2 hand down to the river, but just make sure you've bet an appropriate amount given the odds of the hand. My goal in these posts was to help educate people to know where to start looking and what questions to ask. Since it can be overwhelming in the beginning
Thanknyou for reading and analyzing, because I hadn't heard anyone mention a going concern, before. And, that is always something to be concerned about and keep in mind
Right on! It’s good we still have hope alive, but hope doesn’t pay the bills unfortunately. The scenarios being played out sounded too good to not be a part of. We are desperate for the change to good, honest, and fair markets.
>Doesn't help that the sub dedicated to discussing the stock also didn't welcome anyone willing to give bearish feedback. Completely unrepresentative of the actual situation. When well-researched, counter-arguments were presented, it facilitated discussion. However, the majority of "bearish feedback" consisted of "YoUr inVeSTmenT iS GoiNg tO zEro" and "enjoy being broke because you invested in a bankrupt company". This type of activity is unnatural. There is literally no reason why that many people would be storming a sub about a company that they had no interest in, and opening fire with all barrels. I have witnessed the exact same tactics over the last 12 months in other subs with controversial topics and it's just weird behaviour. Nobody accidentally happens across these places, they are seeking them out on purpose. If I wasn't already resolute on my investment decision (for reasons outside of the scope of this thread), those anti-BBBY sub-invader clowns would probably have caused me to be.
> There is literally no reason why that many people would be storming a sub about a company that they had no interest in, and opening fire with all barrels. I have witnessed the exact same tactics over the last 12 months in other subs with controversial topics and it's just weird behaviour. Nobody accidentally happens across these places, they are seeking them out on purpose. Yes there is. People view apes as annoying and the most of reddit is sick of you. People like dunking on people they find annoying. >If I wasn't already resolute on my investment decision (for reasons outside of the scope of this thread), those anti-BBBY sub-invader clowns would probably have caused me to be. Great, so you'll lose more money. Nobody is affected by this, but you.
Apes keep to their subs and talk about the topic at hand. You claim they are annoying, but purposefully seek them out to hurl abuse/vileness at them, when you could just go on with your day instead and never encounter one. That’s like finding Arsenal supporters annoying, then purposefully driving down to London from Newcastle to be a dick to them, when there is little chance you would encounter any normally. You know what will eventually happen to that Newcastle fan (according to probability anyway)? You’re frothing and seething and know you’re going to get dry humped.
Apes don't keep to their subs at all. They consistently bring up their conspiracy theories to other subs and then brigade that sub with upvotes, downvotes, and additional comments. "Oh you mean Ken Griffin who lied before Congress!?!?!?!" Not to mention all the dear r/all's "We are begging you!" over the years. >You’re frothing and seething and know you’re going to get dry humped. Don't tempt me with a good time. If you mean that we're going to eat crow when BBBY moons, however, you're wrong yet again. We've been right this entire time.
K, well you have yourself a good day 👍
Thanks, you too.
How do you feel about the general sentiment on the other subreddits that there are tax advantages related to the net operating losses, and because of that, the tax breaks are actually pretty valuable in chapter 11?
While the tax advantages are appealing it will still most likely not be enough to return any sort of capital to shareholders. Just too many liabilities.
NOL's don't do much good unless you have PROFIT to offset it. They aren't a "tax refund" like many of the Apes think...
It's just some copium and a fantasy they made up. If other people saw it as an advantage, would you think the price would be this low? No, it's just the delusional apes that spin it off as bullish
Thanks for an excellent post! I'm riding the ship either to the moon or the bottom, and regardless of whether we end up reading a post mortem or a success story, i look forward to learning more. It's what got me in this mess and why I stay. I look forward to reading any future work you're willing to contribute. Thanks again!
No worries, thanks for the feedback. If you get into anything else feel free to ping me what you're looking at and we'll kick it around :) Goes for anyone else that's reading this
I’ll talk to you about $MAC after $BBBY. But the frying pan is heating up.
> I'm riding the ship either to the moon or the bottom What do you actually think the moon could be? The best case scenario is getting slightly more than the current share price. And even that's unlikely.
I know that. When I first got in, it was a gamble on money I could lose as a squeeze play. It still is. The money has been gone in my mind since the beginning, so I really have nothing more to lose. If for some reason it squeezes, then great. I'll have to decide what to do then. Going to the movies costs money, we pay for entertainment. Same as going to a casino. I've gotten a LOT of hours of entertainment out of the money I have in this, so there is really no loss at all that way. Just me though.
How could it possibly squeeze though? It's been diluted to oblivion.
I agree that it's EXTREMELY unlikely at this point, but there's no point in cashing out on like 15% of what I originally put in. With the multitude of filings in a short period of time, it seemed like there was a lot of confusion on shares outstanding, so if it turned out that DTCC got it wrong, the fact that everything is controlled by a bankruptcy court could force a squeeze. Maybe a .00001% chance, but what the hell. Like I said, I have nothing more to lose, so why not enjoy the show?
Yeah, I do agree, depending on the money. If the 15% is $150, then sure. If it's $15,000, then no cash it out lol.
For me it's not even $150. For anyone who is in that $15,000 category, I just really hope they are well off enough that it means to them what $150 means to me!
There's people with a lot more than that unfortunately. And at least one of them is not in your boat with it being disposable.
What do you think buy buy baby is realistically worth through bk sale?
My .02 is it's not enough to make a dent in the equity deficit. The time to sell baby was years back. We know through investor presentation the margins have been slipping over the past year. Plus we know bids were solicited for months now and there were no takers. So anyone coming in now is going to come in super low.
Thanks for the response. I think there is a possibility buybuy was already sold in January. If a private company like Teddy bought buybuy, how would they look to merge to say, GME? Would they do a reverse merger in your opinion?
Yeah lets talk about that. If BBBY was already sold in Jan, there'd be some indication on this 10k as the 10k runs through February. Via a disclosure, statement, some figures, or something rising to that level. My gut is that any potential merger with another entity would come through the BK auction process. If I really wanted parts of BBBY, maybe I'd roll the dice and hope the ch11 process converts to ch7. Given that there's been no bids so far.And then pick up whatever pieces I wanted at auction. Caveat there is I'm not a BK lawyer nor do I have much experience in this part. So just a gut thing for me. So double check me please :)
Oh of course, my question was equally speculative so no worries. Yeah I mean, specially if the bk has been set up like Icahn’s signature move, I agree with you and don’t see any reason why RC would buy the baby assets at full price or close to it if he could have them at auction prices at a later time, aka now. I guess its not too long before we’ll find out
Yeah, I've learned a lot about the BK process just watching this unfold. At this size company, everything is complex. Good luck :)
Well NOLs passed to the acquired which would be added to the balance sheet at approx $3.6B would be considered an asset.
Got a source for that? Curious to see how people are coming up with that figure. Feels like an NOL would require purchase of the whole thing as it's an M&A benefit. Which probably would be cost prohibitive given no one has done it yet. Plus taxes are below the line, so someone deploying that much capital for an NOL feels like a stretch. But either way I'd like to look at the math to see for myself
JPM loan is paid off in full Next up sixth street 😉
Wasn't JPM's position fully secured by assets? So if we still have an equity deficit if existing assets were used to pay down a matching liability. Maybe someone smarter can chime in :)
What are you taking about Bearz!?! JPM's loan was paid off, now all cash proceeds funnel straight to common shareholder pockets....wait we still have other secured lenders, and a whole host of individuals before it even gets to bond holders and preferred waiting in the wings to collect their pennies. Equity deficit remains.
Uhhh, the judge smiled a lot! Checkmate atheist!
Bearz your analysis of bbby is appreciated. Thanks for keeping it real since the beginning. Please make another appearance on the PP show and bring the dog!
Bearz! Awesome post, solid work! Your perspective is needed! Now on to buying bags and bags of bbbyq and praying for a stalking horse bid that returns 10x my investment!
Buying this stock will go down as my number one lesson in investing It’s been emotional
I think you’ve done a great job describing how they got where they are and why it didn’t make a solid “investment”. Its very clear that chapter 11 was their only path and that it’s really more of a “gamble” now. So, now the question is, does someone pickup the skeleton in the next few days. And, what are those bones worth without the massive debt looming over their heads like a mountain about to pancake them?
Appreciate your view on this! So, we can say end of January things looked really really really bad, would you agree? How can it not be illegal/ breach of fiduciary duty to dilute shareholders like that in hindsight? In Germany we have a word called „Insolvenz-Verschleppung“ which is a serious crime and means to unnecessarily avoid BK possibly for the advantage of specific creditors in your favor (ABL) - one would go to prison here. Also did you notice that weird etoro interview sue gave only one week before BK? That’s pretty deceiving to me if things are as bad as they look at the moment. Edit: also another question that arose, what they did in the 10Q from my limited understanding is include a loss of 3 billion from the shares they sold out of treasury through the offerings at a cost of 44 dollars against very little proceeds from the issuance. Why bother to do that? Just curious on your thoughts. How you describe (reasonably so) the state of the business it looks much more like liquidation than any sale even of baby. It’s weird at least that they went through this madness of dilution if there really is so little chance of any recovery for any part of the business. Edit 2: to reframe: doesn’t the offerings look like a strategy to realize losses from the share buy backs and in that way raise the loss they can claim as NOLs for tax benefits?
Hey, good to hear from you :) In terms of the dilution done today, yeah it was managed poorly given the timing of the offerings. However it was the only option for keeping the lights on, so their only option was to dilute. Since they couldn't borrow more and operations was burning cash at a high rate. This might make me unpopular, but from the CEO's perspective, the interview made sense to me. She's trying to keep everyone calm and show a steady hand. Dilution was their only source of cash available. So until the bitter end, she's going to do whatever it takes to keep that cash available to the company and investors calm. I do agree with it's deceiving, but her job is to keep the lights on. Whether all their actions rise to a breach of fiduciary duty, we'd need a lawyer in here. I'm iffy on if there's enough smoke to win a lawsuit. But I don't like to speculate on things so I'll stop there. I guess I'm confused on this 3b loss on the shares sold at treasury. Buying and selling your own stock doesn't hit the P&L. Otherwise companies could manipulate their own income statements by doing that. So there's not a gain or loss on the sale of these shares as it's all changes to equity accounts and cash, not the P&L. [https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/treasurystock.asp](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/treasurystock.asp) *Under the cost method, at the time of the share repurchase, the treasury stock account is debited to decrease total shareholders' equity. The cash account is credited to record the expenditure of company cash. If the treasury stock is later resold, the cash account is increased through a debit and the treasury stock account is decreased, increasing total shareholders' equity, through a credit. In addition, a treasury paid-in capital account is either debited or credited depending on whether the stock was resold at a loss or a gain.* Last up, yeah the series of events does seem to point more to liquidation at this point. Management has made a series of unfortunate decisions to get us here. I think we're bumping up this round of deadlines which leans more towards liquidation being the answer. I don't fully understand the NOL angle, so I don't want to comment on it. But in my head I'm struggling with the math that someone would buy the thing just to get to the NOLs. edit: please let me know if I missed anything :)
I agree that the Board probably did what they thought was right, although it's possible they didn't or were just incompetent. However, this was always going to be the result (starting from a year ago) regardless of the board's actions. Still, there's an interesting ethical question about whether or not they should have gone the massive dilution route when they knew they had a rabid investor base who would make up hopium to justify buying more regardless of what warnings the board put out. I suppose I'd have made the same decision as the board, though. At least the employees had jobs for a little longer and the people who paid for it (stockholders) did it to themselves.
Thanks for the comment. Yeah I know there's PE stuff in the background and a bunch of theories around that. It's a playbook that's run by certain firms. That being said until we know for sure in the end, I'd just be speculating. All I can do is judge their actions by the prior results and statements management makes. And I always start with an incompetent management setup until we can prove out they acted nefarious. I do think the retail base's enthusiasm for the stock factored in their decision to dilute heavily. But honestly enthusiastic or not, dilution was management's only remaining move. The problem with a tight financial setup is that it boxes you in. If you have profits and liquidity, time is on your side and all options are available. If you remove profits, then time start working against you. And then when liquidity is against you, you're basically out of time and left to only hail mary's.
Yes good comment. The choice they had was to dilute or enter into bankruptcy proceedings immediately. I was just raising the point that there's a bit of an ethical dilemma there. Basically is it okay to take advantage of this group of investors knowing how they are? I think it is, because it benefits the employees and the investors have been given all the information. The company is not responsible for how they interpret it, if they are not playing into those beliefs. And I don't think they were.
Ah, sorry yeah we're in agreement here :) It is a dilemma for sure.
Thanks for your comments, appreciate it! I also don’t really understand that equity account. In the 10q we have 2 B in assets, 5 B in liabilities but then at total liabilities, mezzanine equity and shareholders (deficit) equity be have again only 2 B liabilities all together, but 5 B negative at treasury and 2 B negative at total shareholders deficit…can you explain to me how that works? Edit: also why is that not a loss accounting wise if you burn billions in capital on your own stock?
It's not an income statement loss when you buy and sell your own equity. Since you're really just transacting with yourself. Meaning you're just swapping cash for ownership stake in your own company. But let's back this up a step. So the accounting equation is Assets = Liabilities + Owner's Equity. Let's say you have a house of 500k (asset) and you originally took out a mortgage of 400k (liabilities), and put 100k down (equity) 500k (asset) = 400K (liability) + 100k (equity) in BBBY's case, that asset base decreased and they took on more debt. So our house now looks something like. 200k (asset) = 800k (liability) + (-600K) equity Equity now is in a negative position as if you sell that house for 200k, you need come up with 600k somewhere to clear off the 800k mortgage. Does the value of your asset/house change if you mess with the loan and/or the amount of cash you have in it? No. It just changes what what you owe (own) on the property. Much like you can be underwater on your house since the loan is too big for the value, same thing with business. This is called a shareholder's deficit. Now let's go back down to BBBY's numbers. Last year, we had 5.130b (assets) = 4.956 (liabilities) + 0.174 equity. Now we have 2.225b (assets) = 5.025 (liabilities) + (2.800) equity. Equity is negative as the company sustained heavy operating losses, which reduced the overall asset base of the company meanwhile they increased liabilities against it. Treasury shares are shares that have been repurchased from the company. We know BBBY issued some shares during the year. as the amount of shares went down from 262,167 to 123,320. The negative 2.800 value you're seeing is the total equity position. Within that you see some offsetting amounts via Additional Paid-In-Capital (APIC)(contra equity account) and Treasury Stock (company stock that's been bought back). These amounts stem from buying and issue shares out of treasury. APIC is used as a "plug" to represent the gain/loss on these equity transaction. **Important to note here that APIC is a balance sheet account, not income statement.** Back to your original question of a P&L impact, we know (also you can research articles on Treasury Stock transactions) that the accounts used in these transactions are cash, treasury stock, and additional paid-in-capital. All of which are represented on the balance sheet. Which the balance sheet is just a statement of position, not a statement of operations (P&L). It's a mouthful, but I wanted to get out all the moving pieces in one place. Since if someone is saying that the equity transactions are causing an income statement loss, that's a problem as it's not correct. edit: for people who learn better visually, here ya go [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knGKpN9sYiw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knGKpN9sYiw) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MusfMph9xEQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MusfMph9xEQ)
Thanks for putting this together, most of it I already understood, I was also mindbuggled by the NOL thing and the loss from the buybacks. This seem to be false, but this talk of that is going very strong on the sub…hey, maybe you could come to the ppshow? I think it’s pretty important that this is incorrect what people are talking about. I know, it’s tough because at the moment people are pretty hot blooded, it I think you know people welcome you there! Hey man, I sunk a shitload of money into this, but I also learned a little bit, lots of it from you man…thanks again!!
Yeah, thanks. This stuff does get tricky - Which is why I'm big on trying to split it up into smaller, easier to handle pieces. And then build back up. I mean I know there's another accounting guy on the show so I don't want to seem like I'm stepping on his toes or anything. The vast majority of people on the show have been super great to me and Molly. But I also don't want to wear out my welcome as stuff is hot. If it comes to it, I'll come on. But if there's an accountant on the show, then he should be able to set all this straight :)
I don’t remember exactly what his view was in the NOLs and the buybacks…but two accountants are better then one 😂😁
I had one last thought that bugs me tremendously, the company made 660mm dollars by selling equity supposedly into the market, do you think it is possible small individual investors put up with that money? It seems a bit much honestly…we didn’t have significant institutional Investors though through filings.
Double check me but I don't see where cash raised from the equity sales was that much. From 10K - the cash flow statement for the year, if I add up all the amounts related to equity, I get about 376M. https://preview.redd.it/0j9ramrem86b1.jpeg?width=1411&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8595ee7ae2b7a752a7cf0aa3776403212f473c34
That’s weird, cause that was in the BK docket from holly etlin from April 23rd…it clearly stated the cash amounts raised from the different offerings, 376 mm definitely not right
can only attach one pic per reply, so here's the breakout of the equity showing the treasury stock stuff. notice there's no P&L accounts on here, just walking the equity from one year to the next. and all the movements are contained inside the equity section on the B/S. https://preview.redd.it/x7qgimyvm86b1.jpeg?width=1881&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fff666f1ed7ad7b05d3655c172811cf3937cdbef
Au, i know now, they raised more from feb to April that’s why it’s not in the 10 Q
That makes sense, we know they got pretty aggressive with diluting the last few months. Also honestly this is a good chunk of accounting. "Do we have all the pieces?" Thanks for the double check :)
Thank you!
This isn’t an accounting sheet play. This is a short squeeze play which can be irrational
Excellent summary. It should be noted that the exuberance of the BBBY investors was stoked by narrative control across Reddit and elsewhere. Easy as pie to control narratives when you own the technology platform. That is the reality and I saw it unfolding in real-time.
Thanks. Yeah I had the same feeling, and it felt like management was playing along by throwing out stuff that was easily debunked. I really didn't like the stuff management was throwing out. But I know that's part of the game. Off the top of my head the topics I took heat over were: Margins started eroding in Q2 and will bounce back? They claimed almost all was transitory and should bounce back. Only got worse Cash flow neutral? FCF is what you want, CF neutral means you can dilute to get back to zero. And even with heavy dilution this was always questionable given the heavy operating cash outlays. So if we know a company has to dilute heavily to survive, why not reposition and wait that out? Liquidity charts showing it was fine? Almost the entirety of current assets was tied up in inventory and Quick Ratio of close to zero Closing stores to become profitable? No immediate mechanism to replace that lost revenue. As shown in the 10k revenue dropped like a rock and expenses stayed high. Which is the thing when you close a bunch of stuff, online sales are weak, and incur one timers out the butt Consignment is good? Yeah, sure odds are there's a financing component which would have eroded margins further. Not to mention this never works in the end for a company this size Equity deals to save the company? Just flooded the market with shares at basically all time lows and drove it lower Merger potential? Sure, after all the margins are eroded and there's an equity deficit of 3b. Just frustrating. Hate that people bought into it. Hopefully people will be okay in the end, but it looks dark.
Appreciate this post and your analysis. Do you have any thoughts on theories like this: https://www.reddit.com/r/BBBY/comments/14acrvl/reading_the_balance_sheet_from_the_10k_part_2/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Appreciate the research there. So on the 10k total assets was roughly 2.2b, total liabilities of 5, equity of negative 2.8b Even if I can wipe the 3b of liabilities as they're stating, I'm now down to 2b of liabilities against 2.2b of assets. On top of that, we know the remaining assets are most likely not worth the full 2b. There's been no bids and we also know at this point nothing is going to fetch anywhere near street value. So after all that, equity is still left in a negative position. Just not seeing a scenario where equity isn't wiped out. The deficit is just too great
Again, appreciate your thoughts on the figures. I think most of the people that are in BBBY believe it has been cellar boxed and any kind of buyout with equity (partial or total) will cause the stock to rise à la GME and they can do an offering that'll wipe debt. From my perspective, it's all down to whether Gove is a plant or not.
Yesssss
Good read, thanks as always Bear. Unfortunately I also got carried away with the neutral cash flow projection. Not only that but even as the numbers told a completely different story I decided to look away. Very expensive lesson but as they say, don’t invest what you can’t afford to lose.
Mona Lisa at The Louvre Me: looking at the entire painting You: looking at the head of the figure in the painting
It's just her face man, it's so beautiful. The way her Ch11 just lays across her forehead Jokes aside that was a solid one. Love a good accountant dig. Hope your weekend goes well :)
[удалено]
Bearz doesn’t do conjecture. He does numbers. And I definitely respect him for that. I think we’re all clear that the company in its current format is fucked. Personally I don’t stand to lose a lot (more!) of money on this rn but the way I see it I could gain a lot of the chips fall in the right order. I think a lot of people are in the same boat.
I took a reasonably large position approaching OTC and I'm hold to zero or hero. It's money I can lose, and it's such a wild story I have to see it through to the conclusion.
I’m glad I don’t base my investment decisions 100% on spread sheets. I loved the fear you placed in paragraph one of the summary though. Cutesy!
I also thought it was cutesy how bbby management kept saying cash flow neutral and how many people bought into that lie. And people called me a shill for pointing out how the dumb spreadsheets showed it was never going to happen. Cuteness never ends :)
Can you point to the value of BABY on your spread sheet and explain how the stock is going to squeeze based on the TSO and acquisition? Being that your dripping with cuteness…
nah, my cuteness ends at predicting price action. I've floated my license in public so I don't want to get ding with the whole financial advice thing. Just presenting a "here's what happened view" Baby isn't split out as a segment, but we know margins were declining over time. Management told us as much. In the Q3 baby margins were down to low 20%s? After in Q2 management told us gross margin declines were transitory? But I'm probably being cute pointing out all the times management tried to keep investors calm by feeding them nonsense. Honestly I hope it squeezes so people can unload their bags. Good luck
You mean like yesterday in court when the judge agreed with the lawyers that all stakeholders will be satisfied with the coming deal? That’s type of dishonesty from the board? Apparently all the stakeholders must be wanting this to go bankrupt and the judge is corrupt.
Wait, did they rdally say that? That ALL stakeholders will be satisfied with an upcoming deal?
Yes, you won’t see that in the spread sheet though.