With its shares currently trading right around the price they fetched in 2004, it's easy to understand why investors have ignored Hastings: the business is boring and dated. Hastings owns 153 entertainment stores averaging 20,000 square feet in size. According to the company's investor relations page, the stores sell "new and used CDs, books, videos and video games, as well as boutique merchandise, with the rental of videos and video games in a superstore format." So this isn't exactly the wave of the future, but it appears to be a profitable cash cow with a strong history of profitability.

With its emphasis on small markets that are ignored by chains like Best Buy (NASDAQ: BBY), the company has performed well. In spite of a tough retail environment, Hastings recently reported record first quarter earnings, and told investors that it expects to earn 95 cents to $1 per share in earnings this year. Not bad for an $8 stock!

On to the balance sheet: Hastings has a market cap of less than $90 million with a book value of more than $103 million. Hastings is not a liquidation play: much of the inventory would likely fetch far less than its stated value in a fire sale and the property, plant, and equipment may be nearly worthless: the company does not own the real estate for its stores.

But here's the thing: for a small company like Hastings, the costs of being public are material, especially given the impact of Sarbanes-Oxley. With an earnings yield well over 12%, substantial equity to serve as collateral, and an ownership stake of 29% already, it's hard for me to understand why Mr. Marmaduke -- and possibly a partner -- don't make an offer to buy out the company's public shareholders. I just don't get why this company is public and, if I were a shareholder, that's the question I'd be asking.