I dont disagree with your numbers BC but it does appear that they are heading into the negative part of the interest rate cycle and default cycle. So they get a low multiple on trailing. hence why when I looked a couple weeks back I decided to wait it out.

still ill redo the numbers in a couple months when the tender is done and if they manage to reduce the float that much and proforma eps is 2.35 id reconsider.

small negative, the ceo will tender some shares.

What if the CEO is thinking on level two and knows that if he says he will be tendering shares, other shareholders will be more inclined to come along with him, then he turns around and only tenders a small % of his shares and keeps the rest? I don't know if he would be thinking like this but it's possible. I'm pretty sure a hedge fund proposed this idea to management and if they are trying to get the most bang for their buck I wouldn't be surprised if they mentioned the idea to the CEO to have him say he will be participating.

So if you had bought this the day op made this post you would cumulatively be up 46.65% with a higher standard deviation than the S&P, which is up a cumulative 72.82% over the same time frame. Just saying...

Anyone know why this is trading lower than $14.60 ?

just a guess but they said they would do a tender within 30 days and that was Dec 22nd so they missed that deadline.

Yeah, that's probably it. Didn't see the dates on it.

yes thats my thinking as well.

Not true, since my recommendation NICK has actually beaten the S&P.

On the surface the S&P looks better, as on Jan 3rd 2007 NICK closed at $10.52, when S&P was at 1,416.60. NICK closed at $14.33 Friday, while S&P closed at 2,051.82. But this ignores some very important events.

One difference is that NICK did an 11 for 10 split in 2009, so each 2007 share is actually worth $15.76 now. It's also paid $3 in dividends per post split share within the last 4 years, so 2007 shares have received $3.30 in dividends, for a total value of $19.06 (not deducting dividend taxes). So each 2007 share of NICK is worth roughly $18.50 after tax (depending upon your state dividend tax rate).

So NICK is actually up 81%, nicely ahead of the S&P (I'm assuming your 72.8% number includes S&P's own dividends). So despite the horrible timing of my recommendation, NICK has done fine.

And for any good value investor, high standard deviation is one of your best friends. For a guy with patience like Buffett, there were years of opportunities to buy NICK at prices between $2 and $10 after my recommendation, at far more attractive earnings yields. And obviously anyone who bought and held it from that period is absoutley crushing the S&P.

My mistake was I wasn't patient enough, at the time I felt I had to be fully invested or I felt I wasn't making my portfolio work as well as it could. This was a terrible mistake in that era, I got trapped in some good investments but that traded at very good prices when I couldn't buy more, and traded so low for so long I was forced to liquidate many at rock bottom prices, just to cover living expenses.

A good lesson for me, and for any investor. Buffett has spoke about it many times, you are never forced to swing at the stock market's pitches. You can literally wait as long as it takes for good prices, and you should.

Just wanted to come in and say thanks DC for all the advice you have given me. Still remember the day when we sat in your office and you were patient enough to give me all the basic lessons I still use today in investing and in life.

38% of shares repurchased in the tender offer. $70m worth at $14.85/share.