Jump to content

New Steak'n Shake Prototype Store


Parsad
 Share

Recommended Posts

Steak'n Shake's new prototype store will be opening in Rome, Georgia.  It looks like Sardar will be on site to open the store.  From the article, the design looks quite striking...I like it.  Would like to see pictures of the interior though.  Cheers!

 

http://romenews-tribune.com/view/full_story/9527963/article-Steak-%E2%80%98n-Shake-official-coming-for-Rome-store%E2%80%99s-grand-opening-on-Sept--22?instance=home_Most_popular

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Yup, that is a brilliant move!  He's going to get a ton of free advertising too, because Letterman always talks about the restaurant next to the theatre and he'll probably do the occasional skit using the restaurant. 

 

I remember him talking fondly of Steak'n Shake burgers a couple of years ago on his show, and I asked Sardar if he sent him one of those "Gold" cards that Burger King, etc send to celebrity fans who mention their restaurant.  He said it was already in the mail, so Letterman got one.  Nice looking store, and it looks like it's catching the attention of the people walking by. 

 

I guess Rupert G's restaurant was closed...or maybe he's the new franchisee!  ;D  Cheers! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup, that is a brilliant move!  He's going to get a ton of free advertising too, because Letterman always talks about the restaurant next to the theatre and he'll probably do the occasional skit using the restaurant. 

 

I remember him talking fondly of Steak'n Shake burgers a couple of years ago on his show, and I asked Sardar if he sent him one of those "Gold" cards that Burger King, etc send to celebrity fans who mention their restaurant.  He said it was already in the mail, so Letterman got one.  Nice looking store, and it looks like it's catching the attention of the people walking by. 

 

I guess Rupert G's restaurant was closed...or maybe he's the new franchisee!  ;D  Cheers!

 

That's exactly what I was getting at... Rupert's store is around the corner, and I am guessing is still in business.

 

Anyway, how do you know it's catching attention of people walking by? Do you have spies or a stream? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

looks pretty nifty, & at a low cost too, as i recall when i was watching more closely.

sardar, imo, is a much better operator of business than an investor. basically because  he's shown himself to be tone-deaf to the long range implications of that elitist compensation scheme he put in place that pays himself like a hege fund manager vs a common ceo. in the long run this is going to cost him & his shareholders....his shareholders even more so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the a life-size wax statue of Sardar outside?

 

No, but Steak'n Shake got a huge bit of advertising by Letterman in tonight's show.  They did about a 8-10 minute segment on Steak'n Shake with Letterman telling a story about Steak'n Shake and his youth, how the new owners bought Friendly's then sold it, and now he thinks Tony Danza owns it!  Very, very funny!  The cameras then went into the restaurant and Letterman chatted with the staff, and ordered his burger exactly how he wanted it.  It will probably become one of the busiest restaurants in the entire chain.  Cheers! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if Steak 'n Shake is going to get a cult fund manager type of following. Kind of like how a lot of people on this board wear Fairfax hats, or bought jewelry at Borsheim's/Helzberg

 

I did for quite a while...I wore a Western Sizzlin hat...then a Friendly's hat...finally a Steak'n Shake hat.  I stopped at wearing a Biglari Holdings hat, once the CEO took 25% of the long-term intrinsic value away from me.  As such, the only hats I continue to wear are Fairfax and Berkshire, and the CEO's would never dare dream, let alone actually do, the same thing.  Cheers! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if Steak 'n Shake is going to get a cult fund manager type of following. Kind of like how a lot of people on this board wear Fairfax hats, or bought jewelry at Borsheim's/Helzberg

 

I did for quite a while...I wore a Western Sizzlin hat...then a Friendly's hat...finally a Steak'n Shake hat.  I stopped at wearing a Biglari Holdings hat, once the CEO took 25% of the long-term intrinsic value away from me.  As such, the only hats I continue to wear are Fairfax and Berkshire, and the CEO's would never dare dream, let alone actually do, the same thing.  Cheers!

 

It is good to know that we both valued the compensation package at about the same amount of an impairment to IV. I feel in good company. :)

 

I need a new hat. If any fund managers out there want to send me one, I will likely advertise for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

 

It is good to know that we both valued the compensation package at about the same amount of an impairment to IV.

 

ragnarisapirate,

 

Firstly, apologies for the really late response to this. I'd meant to respond earlier.

 

Re. the impairment to IV as a result of Sardar's compensation arrangement, reason dictates that the most fundamental assumption in your (and all the detractors') valuation, albeit implicit, is incorrect. The future will show it.

 

Best,

Ragu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re. the impairment to IV as a result of Sardar's compensation arrangement, reason dictates that the most fundamental assumption in your (and all the detractors') valuation, albeit implicit, is incorrect. The future will show it.

 

Hi Ragu,

 

Do you care to elaborate on your reasoning a little?  Saying simply "reason dictates" is not really a strong argument without sharing the reasoning. 

 

I was a BH shareholder (as well as a WEST shareholder and I invested alongside Biglari a number of times).  I sold all of my BH as a result of the compensation package and its effect on IV.  I'd love to understand why I'm wrong.

 

Thanks,

 

--Eric

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It is good to know that we both valued the compensation package at about the same amount of an impairment to IV.

 

ragnarisapirate,

 

Firstly, apologies for the really late response to this. I'd meant to respond earlier.

 

Re. the impairment to IV as a result of Sardar's compensation arrangement, reason dictates that the most fundamental assumption in your (and all the detractors') valuation, albeit implicit, is incorrect. The future will show it.

 

Best,

Ragu

 

I think you'll find in hindsight ten, twenty years from now that you are incorrect here.  How much do you want to bet that at some point in the future, he's going to lift that $10M cap once he can get enough votes and has done enough to pass it.  Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saying simply "reason dictates" is not really a strong argument without sharing the reasoning. 

 

Hi Eric,

 

Since you ask so nicely :), here goes:

 

Sardar sold something of value to BH - The Lion Fund. He took something of value from BH and, by extension, BH’s shareholders – the new incentive compensation. However, in taking something of value from BH, he also agreed to buy shares of BH with half those proceeds, thereby increasing his stake in the entity that would be paying him. In effect, Sardar was both a buyer and a seller in the Lion Fund transaction. 

 

As far as the transaction goes, there are three possible outcomes:

 

a. It is fair on both parties.

b. It is favourable to the buyer i.e. BH shareholders, Sardar being an increasingly large one of those, at the expense of the seller Sardar, erstwhile owner of the Lion Fund.

c. It is favourable to the seller i.e. Sardar, erstwhile owner of the Lion Fund, at the expense of BH shareholders, Sardar being an increasingly large one of those.

 

If you’d like to make the assessment of what outcome is most probable, the question worth asking is: what outcome would Sardar most prefer? Alternatively, to channel Charlie (or Jacobi if you’d like to give credit where it’s due), we could “Invert, always invert” and ask: what outcome would Sardar least desire?

 

If your subjective assessment of Sardar leads you to conclude that he is on the side of BH shareholders, the answer is obvious. It’s © .

 

If you make the argument (and I don’t) that Sardar works completely in his self-interest, what's the answer?

That’s right. It’s © again. And it’s because of the reinvestment requirement which virtually guarantees that the value of BH’s stock will have the greatest impact on Sardar’s net worth over time.   

 

So, irrespective of which side of the subjective fence you are on, the argument that Sardar, as a result of this transaction, willfully engineered a long-term impairment to IV doesn’t hold, let alone one that’s as high as 25%.

 

And if there wasn’t a material impairment to IV, I can see only one scenario that causes it to be so. And that scenario implies that a fundamental, albeit implicit, assumption that the detractors make about the incentive agreement is invalid.

 

Best,

Ragu

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...