RE:RE:RE:RE:Sam...Undervalue: I think your information is excellent. So thanks for that. I think it 's a combination of the control shareholder in many of these cases that creates the discount, BUT, JUST AS IMPORTANTLY, does the control shareholder and the BOD treat their minority shareholders fairly and exercise good corporate governance.
IMO the answer here and TWC and King George is clearly NO!
IMO you got a shot at those shares because SAM didn't have the CASH$$$$ availalbe at the time the Foundation was looking to sell. He probably put them off for a week or two at least, and maybe longer, with some "I'm working on getting the money in the bank and wired" .
Sam misses a deal on the stock so instead he takes it out a day or week later on the minority.
IF you think the Industrial property is worth $400 a square foot give or take, then BOTH SAM and the company should have sold the property and used the CASH proceeds to buyback shares in the open market or in a SIB, so that ALL shareholders benefit equally who continue to hold shares long term.
You do rightly point out that the company has plenty of liquidity and has the cash and credit available to conduct a share repurchase.
No excuse ot issue voting shares here IMO from this BOD to the majority shareholder..