EDITORIAL: Biglari putting Steak n Shake's future at stake

 IBJ Staff
January 9, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
IBJ Editorial

It’s hard to argue with the short-term results Sardar Biglari has produced for Steak n Shake Co. since coming out of nowhere to become CEO in August 2008. The brash, 32-year-old hedge fund manager who muscled his way into the company’s executive suite has engineered a return to profitability and three consecutive quarters of positive same-store sales after a 14-quarter losing streak.

That’s a feather in Steak n Shake’s cap—today. Wall Street rewards the here and now, after all. But we have big concerns about what Biglari will mean in the long run to one of the city’s oldest public companies.

Under Biglari, the 75-year-old company has started hoarding cash at the expense of investing in its restaurants. As reported in IBJ last week, capital expenditures on restaurants has withered from an average of $55 million a year over most of the last decade to a mere $5.8 million in 2009.

Biglari’s strategy of scaling back makes sense in one regard. The period of big investments under previous management allowed Steak n Shake to fatten up on revenue, but very little of it found its way to the bottom line. The company’s return to profitability under Biglari’s approach can’t be overlooked.

But neither can strong signals that Steak n Shake’s CEO is using the venerable restaurant chain as a cash machine to finance his bigger goals. Taking a page from his investing hero, Warren Buffet, Biglari wants to deploy Steak n Shake’s cash to invest in all manner of opportunities—inside and outside the restaurant industry—that he alone considers potentially lucrative. There is no investment committee involved; he doesn’t rely on investment bankers.

Steak n Shake’s first big investment under Biglari—the purchase of Virginia-based Western Sizzlin Corp. last fall for $39 million—made sense because it’s a restaurant chain and one Biglari leads as chairman and CEO.

Then came Steak n Shake’s bid in December for Fremont Michigan Insuracorp Inc. The bid, which was rejected as hostile by the insurance company’s board, confirmed what some Steak n Shake observers had feared: that Biglari would use Steak n Shake’s cash to veer off into directions unrelated to the restaurant business.

“It’s hard to see how burgers and insurance policies go together,” a local portfolio manager told IBJ last month.

Even if Biglari didn’t have an appetite for non-restaurant holdings, his decision to scale back investing in Steak n Shake’s restaurants—a strategy that seems sound now—won’t serve the company well in the long run.

In a restaurant segment as highly competitive as Steak n Shake’s, management can’t take its eye off the ball for long and expect the chain to survive. •


To comment on this editorial, write to ibjedit@ibj.com.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

  2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

  3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

  4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.

  5. http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/duke-energy-customers-angry-about-money-for-nothing