@Value_Hunter, Apologies, unfortunately I don't know the answer;...

@Value_Hunter,

Apologies, unfortunately I don't know the answer; I have only just this week commenced building a financial model for TRS, and have just commenced researching the company by reading through the past 4 or 5 Annual Reports.

I will certainly attempt to add to this particular aspect of the company if I come to any conclusions during my scratching around in financial entrails of the carcass, because I think the questions you are asking are on the right track when it comes to unearthing the most likely path to restoring the value of the company.

As your question implies, those lease liabilities - about which some people have been blissfully unaware - are key to that value restoration.

I'm not sure it will require as much as $30m to take the required medicine. A number of loss-making stores whose leases might be close to expiring will simply be allowed to continue trading until the leases are up.

I think that $20m will yield a good profit uplift bang for the turnaround buck.

And if TRS management lack the will or the ability [*] to undertake the turnaround exercise, then someone will come along, buy the company, and do it themselves.

And all that someone will do is capitalise the $20m of turnaround capital (or whatever amount it ends up being) into the acquisition cost and end up buying the better part of $20m of Free Cash Flow for a capital outlay of, maybe, $80m

[*] And I have to day, judging by the tone and content of the company's recent announcements, I have my doubts that they have the will or ability to stop the rot. The corporate body language seems to me to be very much a case of "business as usual...we'll simply do nothing and hopefully we'll be lucky and the consumer will return to our stores with fists full of dollars for some reason."