Depends which creditors you are talking about Randy. The creditors that got stock in exchange for their loans, etc are probably getting more than they were originally owed if they held onto the stock. Not a bad return. I'm not supporting or hammering what they did but consider that we have the "best" bankruptcy system in the world (one that allows companies to reorganize, try to stay in business, keep some people employed, etc)....we could be in Russia where they just create a bunch of supposed bills for back taxes, throw the largest stockholders in jail and start seizing assets without any judicial process beforehand. Patton
I gather the Sears stores in the Northeast where you guys live are a nightmare? My local Sears is first rate. The shelves are always stocked, and neatly organized. In fact, I just recently had to return a 20 year old breaker bar that broke while I was putting the ball on the Jeep's hitch. (Fell on my A**) :grin: Exchanged with no problem. The local K-Mart on the other hand, which at one time had an awsome automotive section with AC filters for cheap, degraded into a dump where the shelves were stocked haphazardly if stocked at all. The checkout lines were horrible. The employees surly. It didn't surprise me when the went bankrupt and closed that store. It scares me to think that K-Mart is going to fool with Sears. :shock:
Kmart + Sears It will be interesting to see if these two can combine and find a niche. Right now I don't go to either. They are both 100+ year old companies (Sears & Roebuck and Kresge) that started up in response to market conditions that existed back then. Sears mailed out catalogs, and Kresge put up "five and dime" stores in many little towns. They were really distribution companies - find products that people want, advertise, sell, and distribute. They both changed over the years and prospered at times. Retail is much different now. WalMart is now the 600 pound Gorilla. They are masters at the distribution model - they find most of the products that people want, advertise them, and sell them cheap. They don't provide much of a shopping "experience" and they don't have everything for everybody, but they are the king of mass marketing and low price. WalMart has problems though. They have driven the market to the bottom, selling only on low price. Their clientele is stereotyped (right or wrong) as toothless trailer dwellers. They treat their workers only as well as they have to. They drive manufacturing offshore to lower their prices. They manipulate and bankrupt their suppliers. I think their current success is a result of the loss of manufacturing jobs in the US leading to poorer people with less income shopping at WalMart and driving more manufacturing out, making more poor people - a cycle that only concerns itself with one segment of the population. They don't have much appeal to the middle/upper class, and their cost driven model is their identity -they can't change it. So if the economy manages to make room in the middle class for the poor folks, there's going to be less demand for Wallyworld and more for the higher end niche stores. Not everybody is going to shop on Rodeo Drive in Hollywood, but there will be a need for upscale alternatives to WalMart. Maybe "Sears Holding Company" will fit that niche.
K-Mart --> Sears Sears is still regarded as a better brand name, I wouldn't be surprised if over time the K-Mart name goes away alltogether. From what I've read so far, there is already a plan to convert some K-Mart stores into Sears.
