This Stock Used to Be My Largest Investment: Here's Why I Just Sold All My Shares Before the End of 2025

The author sold his remaining stake in Boston Omaha after holding since 2017 (average cost about $17, stock spiked to nearly $50 in 2021) because the original thesis—growth in billboards, broadband cash flow and an asset-management fee business—has not materialized: billboard revenue rose only 2.5% year-over-year, broadband assets are underperforming and the asset-management initiative is being wound down for lack of capital. Compounding the weak results are material governance and execution concerns—an outsized co‑CEO bonus payout, the abrupt exit and above‑market cashing out of co‑CEO Alex Rozek, and poor investor communication—although management has announced an upsized buyback and insiders have bought shares. While the stock appears cheap versus net asset value, the author concludes the discount is justified by the market’s lack of confidence and has redeployed capital to higher‑conviction opportunities.

Analysis

The author, who began accumulating Boston Omaha (BOC) in 2017 at an average cost basis near $17 and saw the stock spike to nearly $50 in 2021, has fully exited the position after concluding the original investment thesis failed to materialize. Key operational shortfalls cited include billboard revenue that grew only 2.5% year‑over‑year in the most recent quarter, broadband assets that are not delivering the expected cash flow, and an asset‑management initiative now being wound down for lack of third‑party capital.

Material governance and execution concerns contributed materially to the decision to sell: co‑CEOs received an outsized bonus award, co‑CEO Alex Rozek abruptly departed and sold his super‑voting stake for millions above market value, and management has provided limited investor communication such as forgoing regular earnings calls. Management has responded with an upsized buyback program and some insider purchases, but the author views these as insufficient without clear operational improvement.

Valuation appears attractive versus net asset value per the author’s back‑of‑the‑envelope calculation (characterized as selling a $100 bill for about $70), yet the market discount reflects a credibility deficit; future upside depends on demonstrable cash‑flow growth and sustained governance improvements before confidence and multiple re‑rating can be expected.

Key Decisions for Investors

• Defer initiating a new position until the company produces sustained cash‑flow improvement from broadband and billboards and provides clear proof points on the asset‑management wind‑down and monetization of assets
• Existing holders should consider trimming exposure or hedging due to governance red flags (outsized executive payouts, rapid insider exit) and weak investor communication that amplify execution risk
• If pursuing a value trade, size positions conservatively and require specific catalysts — sequential improvements in quarterly cash flow, meaningful uptick in billboard revenue growth, transparent buyback execution, and clearer governance disclosures
• Monitor near‑term indicators closely: quarterly billboard revenue growth trends, reported broadband cash‑flow generation, statements on the asset‑management business wind‑down, and any formal changes to executive compensation or investor‑communication practices