I Really Mean It
Veteran
J Crew deserves to go bankrupt. Prices of their clothing have remained steady or gone higher, while the quality of the clothing is horrible compared to ten years ago.
Take a big shyt at saks fifthNeiman Marcus?
The last two quarters, they been A1.Take a big shyt at saks fifth
Hit neimans, get NASTY
That liquidation might bring me out of clothing retirement
David's BridalDavid's Bridal, Inc. - i don't believe this, this is the biggest mass market bridal retailer, what's the deal here?
ChillDavid's Bridal
GMB got no losses lol, bytch ass Jared's is fukking next
After 8 of being off. Let's see where this goesThe last two quarters, they been A1.
You got stock in David's Bridal? Get out your feelings breh just talking shytChill
In other words, if Bain, KKR, and Vornado had never come along, Toys 'R' Us wouldn't be doing stellar, but it probably could've muddled through. As recently as last year, the company still accounted for 20 percent of all U.S. toy sales.
Instead, the legacy of the leveraged buyout turned this into an existential crisis, and Toys 'R' Us filed for bankruptcy midway through last year. Then, when holiday sales didn't pan out, the company's leadership decided to sell or shutter all its stores. And 33,000 working people could lose their jobs.
Bain, KKR, and Vornado will have to write off their investment, of course. But they did suck around $200 million in fees out of Toys 'R' Us over the course of their ownership.
Basically, the trio took an imperfect-but-functioning company and cannibalized it for cash.
Frustratingly, the story of Toys 'R' Us' debt burden has been a footnote in news coverage, buried under musings on how the company failed to compete with the likes of Amazon. And when the debt is covered, it's often devoid of context: Toys 'R' Us just happened to borrow money, it proved to be a bad decision, and now the retailer is suffering the fate of imprudent borrowers everywhere. Rarely does anyone point out that debt was a deliberate Wall Street strategy.