UNITED STATES
                                 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549


     DIVISION OF
CORPORATION FINANCE


                                                       May 2, 2019
  Adam D. Wyden
  Sole Manager
  ADW Capital Management, LLC
  1133 Broadway Suite 719
  New York, NY 10010

  Re:     Select Interior Concepts, Inc.
          Schedule 13D/A filed May 1, 2019
          PX14A6G filed April 9, 2019
          Filed by ADW Capital Partners LLC, et al.
          File Nos. 005-90658 and 001-38632, respectively

  Dear Mr. Wyden:

          We have reviewed the above-captioned filings, and have the following
comments.
  In some of our comments, we may ask you to provide us with information so we
may
  better understand your disclosure.

         Please respond to this letter by amending your filings and/or by
providing the
  requested information. If you do not believe our comments apply to your facts
and
  circumstances or do not believe an amendment is appropriate, please tell us
why in your
  response.

         After reviewing any amendment to the filings and any information
provided in
  response to these comments, we may have additional comments.

  Schedule 13D/A filed on May 1, 2019

  1. We have read the reply dated April 30, 2019, sent in response to the
second comment
     in our letter dated April 29, 2019, and do not concur with the analysis
provided or
     conclusion reached. The amended Schedule 13D filed on April 9 included an
     unqualified contention that a "consensus among shareholders" existed. In
the context
     of a solicitation, this contention could be construed as a "[c]laim[ ]
made prior to the
     meeting regarding the results of the solicitation" as described in Note d.
to Rule 14a-
     9. Please revise to remove the implication that all shareholders of Select
Interior
     Concepts reached a uniform conclusion regarding the purported valuation
gap.

  2. We have read the reply dated April 30, 2019, sent in response to the third
comment in
     our letter dated April 29, 2019, and noticed the use of the term
"potential
     capitalization." The assertion in question, however, read: "...SIC today
has
     incredibly coveted assets that we believe are worth multiples of today's
market
 Adam D. Wyden
May 2, 2019
Page 2

   capitalization." Please revise to state that the existing segments do not,
at present,
   have any "capitalization" as that term is commonly understood, and as such,
cannot
   be worth a multiple of a value that does not yet exist. Alternatively,
revise to define
   the term "capitalization" for the context in which the filing person have
elected to us
   it to remove the implication that measurable value for the assets is
publicly available.
3. We have read the reply dated April 30, 2019, sent in response to the fifth
comment in
   our letter dated April 29, 2019, and noticed the characterization of the
efforts to
   conduct an exempt solicitation of proxies as only "encouraging other
stockholders."
   Item 4, by its terms, contemplates that more than one purpose of an
investment may
   exist, and reserving the right to engage in discussions with an issuer's
management
   and/or encouraging other stockholder to withhold proxies is not tantamount
to having
   disclosed an active effort to influence the policies or direction of an
issuer. Please
   revise to state, if true, that a purpose of the investment is/was to
increase the
   likelihood of success of a solicitation, or advise. Refer also to Section
13(d)(2) and
   corresponding Rule 13d-2(a), both of which provisions govern material
changes.

PX14A6G filed on April 9, 2019

4. We have read the reply dated April 30, 2019, sent in response to the eighth
comment
   in our letter dated April 29, 2019, and do not concur with the analysis
offered or
   conclusion reached. The participants have furnished information reasonably
   calculated to result in the procurement, withholding or revocation of a
proxy, and
   consequently have engaged in a solicitation as defined in Rule
14a-1(l)(1)(iii).
   Because the participants also reserved the right to seek representation on
the issuer's
   board, the Rule 14a-2(b)(1) exception is unavailable given the possibility
for
   participation in a "control transaction." For guidance regarding the meaning
of the
   term "control" as used within Rule 14a-2(b)(1)(vi), refer to Rules 14a-1 and
12b-2.
   Please advise us how the participants in the solicitation intend to proceed.

        We remind you that the persons filing the above-referenced Schedule 13D
and
PX14A6G submissions and their respective managements, if applicable, are
responsible
for the accuracy and adequacy of the disclosures contained within the filings
notwithstanding any review, comments, action or absence of action by the staff.

     Please contact me at (202) 551-3266 if you have any questions regarding
our
comments.
                                                 Sincerely,

                                                     /s/ Nicholas P. Panos

                                                     Nicholas P. Panos
                                                     Senior Special Counsel
                                                     Office of Mergers and
Acquisitions

cc: Greg Kramer, Esq. and Rick Werner, Esq.


                                             2