|Bid||0.00 x 0|
|Ask||0.00 x 0|
|Day's range||259.89 - 268.30|
|52-week range||172.25 - 357.00|
|Beta (5Y monthly)||0.86|
|PE ratio (TTM)||30.07|
|Forward dividend & yield||N/A (N/A)|
|Ex-dividend date||10 May 2019|
|1y target est||N/A|
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.
Even as coronavirus has shut down the sports world and most retail chains, Nike is having a good week, while Adidas and UA are struggling.
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.
Yahoo Finance talks with Levi's CEO Chip Bergh about the company's latest earnings and the future of retail following the coronavirus outbreak.
(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.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Closeageddon is how analysts at Jefferies are describing the retail store shutterings in the U.S.With chains run by big names such as Nike Inc, Apple Inc and Hennes & Mauritz AB closing doors, and icons including Macy’s and Bloomingdale’s joining them, the challenge facing the sector is worsening.Adidas AG warned last week that the suspension of store trading in China would cost it about $1 billion in lost sales. Add in closures across the U.S. and Europe, and multiply that by the number of household names retreating, and the bill to the retail industry may be astronomical.Stacey Widlitz of SW Retail Advisors estimates first quarter revenue will be down by 50-70% on average for global retailers.While sales are evaporating, overheads still need to be paid. This brings into focus the financial strength of parts of the global sector. Those that have been doing well for a long time, including Nike Inc. in the U.S. and Industria de Diseno Textil SA (Inditex) in Europe should have the resources to cope. H&M has little borrowing.But many retailers were already struggling going into this crisis – think of some of the U.S. department stores. Those trying to implement turnarounds, such as Victoria’s Secret, which parent L Brands Inc. has agreed to partially sell, and Under Armour Inc. now face additional hurdles.Gap Inc. has been trying to revive its namesake brand. At least its balance sheet is in decent shape. The same can’t be said for the likes of JC Penney Co Inc. and J Crew Group Inc., the private-equity owned clothing retailer that plans to spin off its Madewell unit to cut debts. With markets experiencing unprecedented volatility, there must be a question mark over this transaction, and maybe even the Victoria’s Secret deal.Retailers would ideally want to stand by staff for as long as they can. It may be hard to imagine at present, but when the virus eventually recedes and activity picks up stores will need their workforces. Yet the pressures to cut back will be immense. The likely first move will be to reduce the temporary workforce.Self-help measures are limited. Stock can in theory be moved from shuttered markets to those where there is still demand. The trouble is, with large swathes of Europe and increasing numbers of U.S. cities in lock-down, the regions where non-essential shopping is even permissible are dwindling.Speaking to suppliers about delaying orders, or even cancelling them, particularly if Asian manufacturers are experiencing backlogs, may provide some respite.Where businesses operate from leased sites, landlords will have a role to play. Struggling tenants and mall owners need to have a grown-up conversation about whether payments can be deferred or rents reduced. With demand shifting from physical stores to online for the past decade, landlords are already bruised. But they are in this crisis together with retailers. The mall owners can ill afford more vacant lets. It would be wise to take steps to prevent that now.Such measures will only go so far. The case for targeted government support is pretty clear. One possibility is cheap state-backed loans, as the U.K. announced on Tuesday. In practice, such support may end up helping firms that were already uncompetitive. That may be the price to pay.Tax breaks are another. Again, British retailers have long sought a reduction on property-based “business rates”, which they argue unfairly punishes chains with large bricks and mortar estates. They just got a 12-month holiday from the tax.On both sides of the Atlantic, arrangements are needed so that suppliers can still insure themselves against retailers going bust before they have settled for ordered goods. That risk is elevated right now. If insurance companies pull cover, retailers may be forced to pay for stock up front, putting even more pressure on already strained cash flows. Government can help.Retailers, landlords and lenders will have to come to some accord with each other. Even then, they will struggle to get through this on their own.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.
German sportswear maker Adidas <ADSGn.DE> on Tuesday joined rivals in announcing store closures in response to the coronavirus pandemic. Adidas and Reebok-owned stores in Europe, North America and Canada will be closed temporarily, the company said in an emailed statement. "At Adidas, the health and safety of our employees, customers and partners have the highest priority," the group said, adding that affected staff would be paid for their planned working hours despite the closures.
There's been a major selloff in adidas AG (ETR:ADS) shares in the week since it released its annual report, with the...
The sports industry is spurred by the coronavirus pandemic, leading to the banning of sports events and soft demand. How the sporting goods retailers deal with the situation remains to be seen.
Unfortunately for some shareholders, the adidas (ETR:ADS) share price has dived 39% in the last thirty days. Even...
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Adidas AG has become the first big consumer group to put a figure on the impact of the novel coronavirus. It won’t be the last. And the ultimate cost to the maker of Stan Smith sneakers may be much bigger than the about $1 billion hit to revenue outlined on Wednesday.Adidas, which also makes Kanye West’s Yeezy line and Beyonce’s Ivy Park collection, said first-quarter revenue in Greater China would be between 800 million euros ($906 million) and 1 billion euros lower than in 2019 because of the effect of the outbreak. It expects operating profit in the region to decline by as much as 500 million euros in the quarter. This reflects Chinese store closures and a drop in visits to locations that were open. China accounted for 23% of Adidas’s sales in 2019.While Adidas said things have started picking back up in China since the end of February, with stores and factories reopening, the danger is that there is more pain to come as the virus spreads. Just how bad it could get, nobody can say for sure. Underlining the threat, rival Puma SE said it wasn’t possible to quantify the coronavirus’s effect on its full-year results. Consequently, it retracted its Feb. 19 outlook that was based on expectations for a quick recovery from the virus. From Adidas’s perspective, footfall is already declining in its stores in Japan and South Korea, which will hurt first-quarter sales by 100 million euros. Kasper Rorsted, Adidas’s chief executive officer, acknowledged that sneakers and sportswear won’t be high on people’s shopping lists as they emerge from quarantine. But he argued that the company is on solid footing to weather the crisis. The company is forecasting an increase in group sales excluding currency movements of between 6% and 8% for 2020, with the operating margin set to increase from 11.3% in 2019 to between 11.5% and 11.8%. But that does not reflect any impact from the coronavirus outbreak.With the virus spreading to the U.S. and Europe, there is a serious risk that consumers there also take fright.Footfall across the market is already suffering on both sides of the Atlantic. If the illness continues to spread, shoppers’ reluctance to hit the mall will only increase. Governments moving to stem large gatherings, employees increasingly working from home and plunging stock markets could all dent demand. What’s more, avoiding the gym for fear of infection means less need for new workout gear.Meanwhile, the risk of sporting events such as the UEFA Euro 2020 soccer tournament and the Olympic Games, is particularly severe for Adidas. If these events were to be canceled, it would hurt sales by about 50 million to 70 million euros, it said, with the bigger impact from Euro 2020.Shares in Adidas fell as much as 8.8% on Wednesday. Even without the warning on the coronavirus, there may have been some worry about the fourth-quarter performance from 2019. While sales excluding currency movements rose 10% in the final three months of the year, the gross margin declined by 3.2 percentage points, hurt by adverse currency movements and a less favorable mix of products sold. But right now, the illness is the focus of investors’ attention.Rorsted likens the situation to a football match. The company had a great first half. The break has been longer than expected, but the second half will also come.Yet right now, investors don’t know when normal play will resume, and what else might transpire before the kick-off.To contact the author of this story: Andrea Felsted at email@example.comTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Melissa Pozsgay at firstname.lastname@example.orgThis 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.
German sportswear makers Adidas <ADSGn.DE> and Puma <PUMG.DE> warned on Wednesday of a major decline in sales in China due to the coronavirus and said while there were early signs of improvement there the impact had spread to other markets. Shares in Adidas and Puma, already pummelled in the last few weeks, were down 10% and 3.2% respectively at 1509 GMT. Adidas said it expected first-quarter sales to drop by up to 1 billion euros (850.2 million pounds) in greater China, and overall to fall more than 10%, including a drop of about 100 million euros in Japan and South Korea.