pull down to refresh

I'm curious, though, if this wasn't still caused by Amazon and changing shopping habits, albeit less directly than might have been expected.
If Toys "R" Us had long-term profitability, then selling it for parts shouldn't have even been in the rational self-interest of the new owners.
Something about it's finances and situation made it a target for this sort of thing.
i would imagine amazon would have had some effect for sure, although i don't think it even comes close to the magic of actually going to a toy shop as a kid.
maybe there were some financial skeletons in the closet we didn't hear about
reply
Something about it's finances and situation made it a target for this sort of thing.
I agree. Also, doesn't Toys R Us bear some responsibility for this outcome? You don't have to take a PE firm's offer.
reply
This.
I loved Toys R Us as a kid, I'm sad I won't be able to share the same experiences I had with my kids.
But it seems to me that while everything here is true, there was clearly a change in behavior in consumer shopping habits, and Toys R Us recognized this and took the private equity offer hoping it would be their best chance of long-term survival.
reply
Good point. Perhaps they some the writing on the wall and chose this deal for that reason.
reply
if I was in charge of Toys R Us and thought the wind of change was blowing, I don't know if I would want to sell to private equity because it seems private equity always operates in mercenary, cancer-like fashion.
Private equity destroyed Thames Water too (the UK’s largest water utility)
just seems a bad thing to sell to, and makes the people who took the deal look bad IMO. fuck you, I'm getting my payout and getting mine etc
reply