Badger

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

@elonmuskTN R

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

Hey David.
On one specific liability item I wanted to ask you about. I saw the Judge “something” guy (a Twitter account) say back then that $1.7B of debt was wiped due to the lease rejections granted from the courts. I wondered where he had that specific $1.7B number from and then looked in the Nov 26 10-Q (latest numbers at the time), and found exactly 1.7 billion under (was it called lease liabilities or something like that).

So I just figured that he was wrong and it was more like half of that or a bit less. Since back in November of course also all other leased stores and warehouse/distribution facilities and what not, also would be listed under that category. And since around half the stores-ish seemed to be planned for closing down, (was it 482 stores listed and 476 still running or something like that).
Then I figured ballpark was around half that amount ish, but subtracting a bit since I found legalese suggesting that on ch 11 rejections the debtor still would have to pay 12 months rent-worth or some other calculation from the current remaining lease binding period but capped at 15 months I think.

But perhaps I overlooked something. It’s probably close to 2 months ago now or maybe 1 and a half.
So the $1.7B number, has that been mentioned somewhere else, or did I overlook something maybe?

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

@HedgehunterGME @Shreddedboi7 @Elling1985 Think you misunderstood.
But anyway haven’t read it yet.

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

@HedgehunterGME @Shreddedboi7 @Elling1985 Saw that yeah but seems to be many changes. And do you know if the cooling off period is all the fx directors stock? Or just the new buy starting the cooldown. The latter would be a pretty transparent and not very creative loophole

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

@pirateportfo 🤣🤣🤣

Okay I got one for you from today.
Not a complete regard this one. makes good work and puts a lot of time in, altho a tendency for very “leapy” deductions.
This one is just more that tendency to disregard anything if it’s not the absolute most bullish “interpretation”…

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

I think we’re pretty much aligned here. Altho I haven’t backtracked it meticulously myself.

There is a n interesting bullish possibility tho. But it’s not on the total outstanding. It’s whether there is something like a 311M-ish shares in the hands of one party (w or w/o affiliates). I can’t really tell myself for sure tbh. But at current time it still seems to be possible tho.
If so, probably the same party as November private debt-to-equity party tho, so probably more like 323 million. (Before ch11 bond conversions)

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

@pulte Probably shouldn’t give it to me. Would literally pile the whole thing into $BBBY …

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

@pirateportfo I don’t see it being Illumina tbh. Too long scope before something happens there as far as I can see.
Chair ousted, but did Icahn only get 1 board seat? Or..

If so it’s gonna take some time I think.

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

@pirateportfo It could still be something else but that scenario seems to narrow by the day.

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

@pirateportfo I think those numbers are from the q3 10-Q. So period ending on Nov 26th..

A lot has happened since then so it’s an interesting project to look into for sure…

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

@VarunDMehta @ramahluwalia Their incentives are quite different Imo.

They’ve been intentionally setting the economy up for a meltdown of proportions followed by a long-term slump for many years after.

Whatever they choose to do in the meantime, it can only postpone. Not “end” anything..

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

@peruvian_bull My old professor in statistics had a saying that he abused like an old shoe (bit annoying at the time I admit).

“𝘐𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘭𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘴.
𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘮𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘴!
…𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘴.”

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

A good example of how ridiculous it all has become, is how it is now “a thing” to just redefine words and concepts that otherwise had a clear and undisputed definition for decades.

Concepts like “inflation” or “recession” being altered, moulded or redefined whenever it doesn’t fit your political agenda (or just need to deceive the public) are the obvious examples that come to mind.

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

The notion of the FED making a “mistake” here, is dilutional imo.

The FED has some of the brightest economic minds at their disposal. The cause and effect relationship between macro economical conditions does not elude them (honestly it shouldn’t even allude an economics freshman).

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

i.e. no one can “control” macro. It’s the wrong word to use imo.

Macro economics is a beast in it’s own right, and cannot be controlled. Not even by the FED imo.
however, with careful attention it can “nudged”.

Meticulous and cautious nudging can keep it in the desired track (such as targeting an annual inflation of 2% for example).

[Badger @badgerinorbit]

@TEIX3IR4 @Malone_Wealth Yeahhh don’t math in public dude 🙃