chest wound

thinking through some of the revelations of the weekend.  how very interesting the cruelness of some people can be.  when money is perceived to be on the table, people unmask their demons.  pathetic, it is, in so many ways.  good-earned money becomes drenched in blood.  i walked for more good reasons than i knew.  new knowledge; new responsibilities.

the numbers on this page amaze me.  the last time i was in a theater was Christmas week 2009.  clearly, other people still go on a regular basis.  i'd like to see data on the demographics.  oh!  here's some data.  they call them popcorn people.  makes sense.  i'm not sure to literally interpret this line - 6.8 movies per person on average - but it's something.  maybe for the person that goes to the movies, they go on average 6.8 times a year.  but how many people don't go?  ah, here we go: More than two-thirds of the U.S./Canada population (68%) – or 225 million people – went to the movies at least once in 2012, consistent with prior years. Ticket sales continue to be driven by frequent moviegoers who attend once a month or more. In 2012, frequent moviegoers represented 13% of the population and 57% of all movie tickets, an increase of 7 percentage points in ticket share from 2011, at the expense of occasional moviegoer ticket share. This suggests that the increase in ticket sales in 2012 was among moviegoers who increased their attendance from less than once a month, to once a month or more.  so, i'm part of the one-third that don't go at all.  out of ten people, about 3 don't go at all, 1 goes at least once a month, and the remaining 6 go anywhere from once to three times a year.  sounds about right.  one person out of ten has issues.  hunh ... there's almost 40,000 screens in america that kicked out almost $11B in ticket sales in 2012.  overseas is more than three times as much revenue.  still, it seems like a lot of effort when most of the product just sucks.

i'm amazed to watch the common stock of sears and jcpenney waste away like a couple of unmedicated cancer patients.  so many stores, so much debt, no growth.  i've often thought that facebook was a silly investment because they've got everything in one place.  if a new social network arises that harnesses the cool factor, facebook could see its user base evaporate in a matter of months.  but now it seems that these two retail dinosaurs have lost their user base.  it's sad, but look at jcp's numbers:   revenue shrank by a third in five years; they lost a BILLION dollars in 2013; their current assets are almost halved in five years; they got almost $3B in long-term debt; and their cash flow is hemorrhaging.  sears lost a billion last year and is selling off assets to make some bottom lines something above anemic.  interesting enough, analysts think sears is going to drop from current $36 a share down to $20, while jcp is going to increase from $6.80 to almost $9.00.  part of that could be ownership - sears is owned by a hedge-fund guy that is going to strip it like a boosted car; jcp is trying to rebuild.  if i were a gambling man, i'd let jcp get beat up a little bit longer then buy.  look at net book value.  yeah, i know, that's been tanking, too, but there just isn't much left to carve away.  sears, on the other hand, has a nbv of $17.60.  both of those charts kinda help the analyst numbers to make sense.  ok, short sears, buy jcp at $6.20 or less.  got it?  of course, before you put any money in, find a hacker that will tap into the companies' email servers so you can learn if they are talking with bankruptcy counsel.  that would be a smart move.  well, from an investment perspective.  not so much from a legal perspective.  i've had a penchant for rite aid for several months ... it's a buy and hold.  two-year run probably.

waiting on a meeting.  yawn ... would like to head home to relax.  didn't sleep well.  was up several times throughout the night.  ahh, here!  post this, meet, gone ...