Eddie Lampert answers a lot of questions that shareholders are thinking.
"How would Kmart compete against the more profitable and better capitalized Wal-Mart and Target? How would Sears compete with Home Depot and Lowe’s as well as Best Buy, Kohl’s and JC Penney? Why would we believe that we could do something that so many others had tried with mixed results?....
it is not clear that heavy expenditures of capital guarantee either short or long term success. Like any investment of capital, the return on that capital over time will determine its wisdom....
Before the merger,
Kmart earned almost
$1 billion in EBITDA and had approximately
100 million fully diluted shares outstanding while the combined company earned over
$2.5 billion of Adjusted EBITDA in 2007 and today has approximately
132 million fully diluted shares outstanding and
$1.6 billion of cash, after having deployed roughly $9 billion of cash during the past three years. We are proud of the progress we’ve made but do not believe we have played up to our full potential yet...
Finally, our cash flow generation remained strong as we generated $1.6 billion of operating cash flow in 2007, which exceeds the $1.4 billion generated last year. We ended the year with $1.6 billion in cash, as we deployed $4.3 billion in 2007 as follows:
- $2.9 billion for share repurchases;
- $600 million for net reductions of debt;
- $580 million for capital expenditure reinvestments in our business; and
- $220 million contributed to our legacy pension obligations.
Some have wondered why we haven’t invested more money in our stores. This is a legitimate question. In theory, a company can always invest more money in its operations, but, when we make an investment we expect to earn an appropriate return. Since we have invested a significant amount of capital in hundreds of stores, we have some good data to work with to better understand what works and what does not. In some cases, our investments have led to higher earnings in the stores in which we invested and we continue to make investments like those today. In other cases, however, the investment has not led to acceptably improved performance. ...
Let’s look at a hypothetical example. Imagine that we invested $200 million to remodel or improve 100 stores, or $2 million per store. If the store profitability after that investment is exactly the same as before, then the $200 million investment generates 0% in return. By simply keeping our money in cash, we could have earned anywhere from 3-5% over the past several years, which is better than the 0% return in this case. The related question then becomes: why can’t you find ways to invest in your stores that generate an acceptable return? That’s exactly the problem we have been working to solve and we will continue to work until we solve it.
Pressing this point even further, some might ask, if you can’t justify investing in your stores, then how are you going to grow your business? To be clear, we are not saying that we can’t justify investing in our stores. The issue is more about the size and type of investment as well as the timing and sequencing of an investment. There are many things that a retailer can do to improve its business without the significant amounts of capital that a major remodel would require. Improving the assortment of products and services, mix of inventory, visual presentation, recruitment and training of employees, and marketing and communications to customers are all ways to generate improved performance....
Over the past three years, we have contributed approximately
$800 million pre-tax to the Sears and Kmart pension plans and we currently expect to contribute several hundred million more in total over the next few years. However, we (along with the rating agencies) view this pension cost as more akin to a repayment of debt incurred years ago than an ongoing cost....."
Article Link:
http://www.searsholdings.com/invest/Labels: eddie lampert, shld