Summary
Although the WSJ reporter was much too polite to totally trash Mr. Lampert's efforts to revive the ailing SHLD and went overboard in his efforts to find something nice to say in his analysis of Mr. Lampert's "Buffet-like" letter to his stockholders, it should be obvious to even the most faithful GLG believers in the Lampert genius that his luster is worn off and the "king has no clothes". This article and the many others that came out immediately after Eddie's letter hit the wires, clearly demonstrate that Mr. Lampert's self aggrandizing comparisons to Mr. Buffet, (or at least his self appointed role as heir apparent to the title of resident financial genius) has lost all creditability. I for one, would like to see all future comparisons put to rest. I would go so far as to promise never to question Mr. Lampert's genius ever again if Mr. Lampert so much as demonstrates he is capable of producing one quarter of increased sales and profits any time in the next three years!
Analysis
It is my opinion that Mr. Lampert has become the laughingstock of the media and the media is having so much fun trashing his overblown ego and lousy performance that they really do not want to closely examine what is really holding up his stock price. Even after SHLD's profit fell 55% in the 4Q and sales fell 12%, not one of the analysts commented on the stock price still commanding a higher multiple than almost any other comparable retailer such as Nordstrom, Macy or JCP.
Why the "last should be first" continues to puzzle this writer. Is there any GLG reader that might have a plausible explanation for this contradiction of everything I have been taught or learned in 40 years of living with some of the most brilliant retail and financial minds of my generation? How can Eddie continue to write such blatant baloney and insult the intelligence of most readers without some brave analyst calling him out and pointing out just how close to total extinction his leadership has brought this once fine retailer?
