|Bid||239.00 x 0|
|Ask||244.00 x 0|
|Day's range||240.80 - 245.20|
|52-week range||56.99 - 317.35|
|Beta (5Y monthly)||N/A|
|PE ratio (TTM)||N/A|
|Forward dividend & yield||N/A (N/A)|
|1y target est||N/A|
Kim Kardashian's latest deal with beauty conglomerate Coty values her company at $1 billion, but questions loom over her own billionaire status.
Kanye West and Gap have agreed to a multi-year deal to create a clothing line for the entertainers famed Yeezy line.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- When it comes to responding to the current reckoning on racial injustice, a trio of outdoorsy retailers are blazing a trail their industry peers should follow. Patagonia, REI and VF Corp.’s North Face have in recent days committed to temporarily yanking advertising from Facebook and Instagram as part of a campaign to pressure the Silicon Valley social-media titan to do more to curb hate speech and language promoting violence on its platform. A coalition of civil rights groups, including the NAACP and the Anti-Defamation League, are behind the effort, which aims to get businesses to pause their spending on Facebook ads for the month of July. If companies are serious about finding ways to champion the Black Lives Matter movement, then surely they know earnest tweets and carefully-worded corporate statements are not enough. Flexing their corporate muscle to give Facebook a much-needed nudge, though, takes things a step further. After recent events, Facebook has said it is actively considering revising a number of its policies and products, including reviewing how it handles content that violates or partially violates its rules. To this point, though, moral overtures from lawmakers and activists haven’t dramatically changed the compass by which Facebook navigates these issues, even though staying its course, at this point, is itself something of a political act. But maybe it would feel more urgency to change if the pressure were financial, not philosophical. Plus, I like that this particular approach to supporting the Black Lives Matter movement encourages consumer companies to take an action that would be felt outside the walls of their own corporate headquarters. One of the more common ways of responding to the recent social unrest is for companies to make new commitments around diversifying their workforces, with the likes of PepsiCo Inc., Gap Inc. and Adidas AG among the companies that have done so. This is absolutely the right thing to do; maybe making such overhauls earlier would have led Pepsi to dump the obviously offensive Aunt Jemima brand long before last week. With a campaign of financial pressure on Facebook, corporate participants are extending their influence outside in a push for key business partners to embrace the same values. In that way, this effort has something in common with the 15 Percent Pledge, a nascent effort to get retailers to commit to ensuring that 15% of products on their shelves come from Black-owned businesses. This, too, has the potential to catalyze small changes all throughout the consumer goods supply chain. Sephora and Rent The Runway have gotten on board with this initiative, and I’d urge other big names to do the same. I suppose consumer brands might resist a temporary flight from Facebook because they believe that, whatever the politics of the moment, it is irresponsible not to do everything they can to win customers’ dollars right now after Covid-19-related closures have just dealt their revenues a devastating blow. However, they should instead think of a Facebook ad hiatus as a way of being on the right side of history while conserving a bit of cash. If that is not impetus enough, consumer giants should keep in mind that public opinion has shifted dramatically in recent weeks toward supporting the Black Lives Matter movement. That suggests most brands aren’t taking a major reputational risk by asking Facebook to do more. Of course, there are reasons to be skeptical that briefly keeping ad dollars away from Facebook will have much impact. With Facebook’s $71 billion in revenue last year, it would take big names and big numbers for this campaign to have even a tiny impact on the social media company’s income statement. And history doesn’t offer many good analogies to evaluate whether or not something like this might work. Still, it’s worthwhile for big consumer brands to try. Cleaning up Facebook would go a long way toward extinguishing hate speech and racist rhetoric in America, and big advertisers have unique leverage to try to make it happen. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Sarah Halzack is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering the consumer and retail industries. She was previously a national retail reporter for the Washington Post.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
One of Nike’s (NKE) surprise victories this spring was increased interest in the brand sparked by the ESPN documentary “The Last Dance,” about Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls 1997-1998 championship season, according to a recent note by Cowen Equity Research.
After the CrossFit CEO's tweet referencing George Floyd, Reebok, which has been the exclusive apparel sponsor of the CrossFit Games since 2011, ended its sponsorship early.
Nike was the first to speak out among big sports apparel brands, which is in keeping with the brand’s advocacy for social justice reform over the past few years.
The likelihood of tremendous year-over-year stock gains has been reduced. It would take a fairly large initial investment in adidas stock to realistically expect gains to reach a million dollars in a reasonable amount of time (say 10-15 years). Last year was the slowest for earnings growth, with a 12.3% increase in net income to 1.92 billion euros.
The company is seeing recovery in some key markets, but its next quarterly report will likely bring a steep sales decline and an operating loss.
A daily overview of the top business, market, and economic stories to watch in the UK, Europe, and abroad.
Adidas warned of an even bigger hit to second-quarter sales and profits from coronavirus lockdowns, after the German sportswear firm reported first-quarter earnings were almost wiped out and said it had not yet seen a full rebound in China. Adidas said 60% of its business was currently at a standstill, with more than 70% of its stores closed worldwide and all big sporting events - including the Tokyo Olympics and Euro soccer tournament - postponed or cancelled. E-commerce sales, which last year represented 13% of the total, are growing fast, particularly in China, but are not enough to compensate for the loss of in-store sales.
German sportswear firm Adidas <ADSGn.DE> plans a multi-billion euro bond so that it no longer needs the state-backed loan it agreed to take earlier this month to help it get through the coronavirus crisis, Manager Magazine reported on Thursday. Adidas declined to comment. Without citing its sources, the magazine said Adidas first had to get a credit rating from a large ratings agency.
A group of employers' organisations, unions and major brands in the garment industry are working with the International Labour Organisation (ILO) to support manufacturers affected by the coronavirus outbreak, the ILO said on Wednesday. Under the agreement, brands and retailers commit to paying manufacturers for finished goods and goods in production, the organisation said in a statement.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Companies are dividing into dividend cutters and dividend holders. Why wouldn’t a board cut shareholder payouts as the world contends with the indeterminate costs of a pandemic? One reason is that directors are fearful of being criticized for depriving investors of income, and the wider economy of fuel. That argument is not good enough when companies need maximum financial flexibility.U.S. companies generally shed excess cash through share buybacks, but dividends form a bigger contribution to investment returns in Europe and especially the U.K. Recent cuts have been significant. Bank of America Corp. analysts have reduced their dividend-per-share expectations for the Euro Stoxx 50 by 21% for payouts relating to 2019. This is being driven mainly by the financial, discretionary consumer and industrial sectors.Financial regulators in the U.K. and Europe are forcing or nudging dividend cuts. Even if boards think their businesses can afford to maintain dividends, going against even a non-binding regulatory preference usually carries a cost of some sort. Wall Street banks aren’t under such pressure yet — hence Goldman Sachs Group Inc. on Wednesday indicated it would hold its dividend.Some companies are cutting payouts as an implicit or explicit condition of government support. Adidas AG this week announced a dividend cut alongside 3 billion euros ($3.3 billion) of loans, mainly from Germany’s state lender.But there are good reasons to suspend dividends voluntarily. It’s wise to conserve cash when revenue is under pressure and the equity market might be hard to rely on as a source of funds. A company risks losing the support of society if it pays out cash to shareholders while forcing pain on staff, or while benefiting from taxpayer-funded crisis measures.The idea that dividend cuts could exacerbate economic woe is unpersuasive. Reduced dividend income shouldn’t imperil pensions. Monthly payments to retirees in a defined-benefit pension plan won’t necessarily be a direct feed of dividend income. Rather, dividends from portfolio companies will typically get reinvested in the fund. Existing cash holdings, supplemented by the ad hoc sale of shares and other assets — as well as by dividends — should deliver the plan’s obligations to its members. The overall value of the assets is what counts.The trickier issue is individual shareholders who have chosen to use stock-based portfolios for income even though dividends are discretionary. The marketing hype of the finance industry may be a culprit here, having persuaded investors that stocks are like “magic bonds,” as pensions expert John Ralfe has argued. For many investors, selling shares to generate cash in lieu of dividends feels like giving up some wealth. The psychology is deeply ingrained. Falling share prices make it harder to make the leap. But that’s the nature of shares; they’re risky.Indeed, it looks as if the reliability of dividends is mistakenly baked into share prices. The cash that would have gone out of HSBC Holdings Plc had it not suspended its dividend is still inside the company and may flow to shareholders in better times. When it cut the payout, its shares still fell 10% in shock at what it had done.Companies shouldn’t use the crisis as cover for a dividend cut that isn’t necessary. That would take the pressure off running a tight ship, and could encourage profligate investment. Dividends exist to distribute cash for which the company has no better purpose. There should be no stigma in paying out where it really can be afforded.But a board’s duty is to the overall interest of the company, not to one portion of its shareholder base. And there’s no point in dividends being flexible if that flexibility isn't used in a crisis like this one.This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.Chris Hughes is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering deals. He previously worked for Reuters Breakingviews, as well as the Financial Times and the Independent newspaper.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- As the pandemic keeps huge swathes of the global economy in lockdown, companies are curtailing or suspending their dividend payments. At the same time, longer-dated bonds — issued back in the day when interest rates were still positive — are being repaid as they mature. For pension funds, which have long-term obligations to fund the retirements of their savers, it’s a dreadful combination.Earlier this week, JPMorgan Chase & Co. set aside $8.3 billion to cover the anticipated cost of consumers not paying their credit cards and companies not making their loan payments, its biggest bad-debt provision since the global financial crisis. Its analysts published a separate report estimating that global corporate profits will “crater” by 72% by the middle of the year, and will remain 20% below pre-virus estimates by the end of next year. If companies aren’t making money, they can’t pay dividends to shareholders.So about a quarter of the companies in Europe’s Stoxx 600 benchmark index have scrapped or postponed dividends so far, according to calculations by my Bloomberg News colleagues Lukas Strobl and Kasper Viita. Estimated dividends per share have slumped accordingly.The various state-aid packages available around the world are likely to come with strings attached, including an obligation to suspend payouts. On Tuesday, for example, German sportswear company Adidas AG said it won’t pay any dividends after getting an aid package worth 3 billion euros ($3.3 billion) from its government and a syndicate of banks.The total of canceled payouts across Europe has reached $52 billion, income that won’t be flowing into pension schemes or other savings and investment products. That’s likely to rise further as more companies adjust to their newly straitened circumstances.And it coincides with the end of older fixed-income investments that offered a combination of top quality and an income stream. In 2010, for example, a pension fund could have invested in 5 billion euros of five-year bonds issued by Kreditanstalt fuer Wiederaufbau, the German state-owned development bank also referred to as KfW. Those bonds, with top AAA ratings, paid an annual interest rate of 2.25%, meaning that a bondholder with 1 million euros of the securities would have received 22,500 euros every year.When the borrower repaid those bonds in 2015, the fund could have reinvested in 6 billion euros of new five-year bonds. The interest rate, though, had declined dramatically, to 0.125%. So the new investment would have delivered just 1,250 euros of annual income for every 1 million euros invested.It gets worse. Those bonds are scheduled to mature in June, at which point the fund could reinvest in 5 billion euros of five-year notes KfW sold in January — which pay an interest rate of precisely zero, nada, diddly-squat, nothing. As the chart above shows, even buying longer-dated securities sold by KfW hasn’t offered much protection from the relentless downward momentum of interest rates. The 36,250 euros of annual income a fund could have received by buying 1 million euros of 10-year bonds a decade ago ended when those bonds were repaid in January.Oh, and that five-year issue KfW sold in January that pays zero interest? It trades at about 101.25 for a yield of -0.26%. In other words, a pension fund buying the notes today is absolutely guaranteed to lose money if held through to maturity in 2025. There’s little prospect of yields and interest rates on fixed-income securities heading higher anytime soon what with the world’s central banks restarting and escalating their various bond-buying programs — the Federal Reserve even going so far as to lend support to companies that have recently dropped into the junk rating category.It’s a far worse scenario than what happened in the last financial crisis, as Anthony Peters, an independent market consultant, points out. “In 2008, investment portfolios were still full of legacy fixed-income portions which paid a proper income and which largely covered the dip in dividends,” Peters wrote in his daily email note this week. “They’re gone now and have been replaced with, in the case across Europe, bonds with no to negative coupons.”Retirees, both current and future, need money on an ongoing basis. It’s helpful if the particular funds they’ve invested their nest eggs in beat the relevant benchmark, but absolute returns count for more than relative performance.The current drop in income as companies suspend their dividends comes at an even worse time for pension funds than during the global financial crisis. Our working lives probably just got even longer.This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.Mark Gilbert is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering asset management. He previously was the London bureau chief for Bloomberg News. He is also the author of "Complicit: How Greed and Collusion Made the Credit Crisis Unstoppable."For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
You can share your thoughts with Thyagaraju Adinarayan (email@example.com), Joice Alves (firstname.lastname@example.org) and Julien Ponthus (email@example.com) in London and Stefano Rebaudo (firstname.lastname@example.org) in Milan. Q1 results: you better hold on tight, but in H2 there will be a recovery, probably not yet as safe as many investors would like, but it could be something close to the end of the tunnel. According to IBES estimates, EPS is expected to fall 21% year on year in Europe and 10% in the U.S., and "the final numbers will likely be worse as the global economy has come to a standstill, which might be not be fully factored into consensus," Barclays analysts write in a note.
Wall Street closed higher last night, driven by hopes of some lockdown restrictions being lifted, a fall in New York's total hospitalizations and better earnings from consumer giant Johnson & Johnson. In all, it calculates the loss to the world economy over two years at $9 trillion, more than the combined gross domestic product of Germany and Japan.
German sports retailer Adidas <ADSGn.DE> on Tuesday said it received approval for a syndicated 3 billion-euro ($3.3 billion) government-backed loan to mitigate the financial impact on its business from the spread of the coronavirus. "Today, the company received the approval of the German government for the participation of KfW, Germany's state-owned development bank, in a syndicated revolving loan facility amounting to 3.0 billion euros," Adidas said. The loan, which will be priced in line with market conditions, comprises a loan commitment of 2.4 billion euros from KfW and 600 million euros in loan commitments from a consortium including UniCredit, Bank of America, Citibank, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, Mizuho Bank and Standard Chartered Bank.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- As measures to curb the coronavirus heap pressure on the global retail sector, observers have struggled to quantify the economic ramifications. There are signs that affected companies are offering some useful disclosure that may in turn help sentiment. Adidas AG last week outlined a roughly $1 billion reduction in first quarter sales and $500 million impact on operating profit, but that was before many countries outside Asia started taking aggressive steps in response to the crisis.Now Next Plc has provided more expansive detail about how it sees the months ahead. With shares in most retailers in freefall – Next is down about 40% this year – investors needed to hear something constructive. While the U.K. fashion chain said it could not give guidance for the full year, it has produced a stress test that outlines potential outcomes.In a worst-case scenario, full-price sales would be down by about 1 billion pounds ($1.16 billion), a quarter of its total, which would mean pre-tax profits of just 55 million pounds for the financial year (against 729 million pounds in the year earlier).The company has also set out how it might cope with the crisis financially, given the possibility of extended store closures. It could suspend buy-backs and dividends, delay capital expenditure, sell and lease a warehouse and partly securitize customer debts. Pulling these levers could provide an extra 835 million of cash. Bringing forward its forthcoming sale, and pushing back deliveries of stock would free up another 100 million pounds.These projections exclude any use of government lending or measures to help pay wages, and Next is conservatively assuming no rent reductions from landlords.This disclosure dashboard sets a good example for others to follow. But Next can afford to be upfront with its investors. It is one of the strongest retailers in the U.K. sector.Similarly, Burberry Group Plc provided some near-term clarity, warning that fourth-quarter comparable sales in its stores would be down by 30%, with a 70-80% decline in the final weeks through to its March 31 financial year-end. Like Next, the luxury group has a strong balance sheet, with the company forecasting a cash balance of 600 million pounds before lease obligations.It is understandable why weaker chains may be less willing to quantify the impact on their businesses. But their investors will expect a similar assessment of possible scenarios. And larger, well-resourced chains have no such excuse for not saying more.Take Inditex SA, the world’s biggest clothing retailer. It said the outbreak had cut its sales by 24% between March 1 and March 16. But it didn’t outline the potential full-year impact. This is from a company with record net cash of 8.1 billion euros ($8.7 billion) at January 31.There will be many more tough announcements over coming weeks as retailers and restaurants outline the financial cost of what is happening now. But even if they can’t make exact predictions, they should learn from Next’s example and aim to at least give the market a toolkit for understanding the resilience of their business. Next shares’ strong gain in a falling market on Thursday suggests transparency is rewarded.This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.Andrea Felsted is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering the consumer and retail industries. She previously worked at the Financial Times.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.