|Bid||11.66 x 1000|
|Ask||11.64 x 800|
|Day's range||11.51 - 11.93|
|52-week range||5.26 - 19.86|
|Beta (5Y monthly)||1.51|
|PE ratio (TTM)||N/A|
|Forward dividend & yield||N/A (N/A)|
|Ex-dividend date||06 Apr 2021|
|1y target est||N/A|
Gap’s new partnership with Kanye West’s YEEZY brand could infuse “hype and publicity” into the struggling clothing retailer, but it may not be enough to woo new customers long term, say BofA analysts.
Two businesses whose managements have remained nimble through the coronavirus crisis are Sally Beauty Holdings (NYSE: SBH) and Gap (NYSE: GPS). Sally Beauty Holdings could be one of those gems hiding in the retail sector mess. The company issued a better-than-expected business update on July 6, and it seems the company is on firmer ground than many others.
Gap (GPS) unveils a B2B product program to sell face masks to organizations and companies, which can be given to employees as they return to work.
Gap (NYSE: GPS) has commenced a new business-to-business program supplying companies and organizations with face masks, hoping to add some cash to its coffers. Most recently, Gap announced a partnership with Kanye West through his lifestyle brand Yeezy. The update on Tuesday said that Gap is now using its large-scale capabilities to mass-produce masks for businesses and organizations such as the City of New York, the State of California, and healthcare provider Kaiser-Permanente.
Kim Kardashian's latest deal with beauty conglomerate Coty values her company at $1 billion, but questions loom over her own billionaire status.
Every so often a company does something that just makes so much sense, and the deal that Gap (NYSE: GPS) has signed with Kanye West is one of them. Whether you like him or not (or merely shrug and roll your eyes when you hear his name), West bringing his Yeezy line of clothes to Gap is a really smart move for the retailer. While Nike (NYSE: NKE) didn't really need the assist when his first line of Air Yeezy sneakers was introduced back in 2009, it was still a notable development because it was the footwear maker's first non-athlete-branded sneaker.
What happened Gap (NYSE: GPS) shares easily beat the market last month. The stock soared 41% compared to a 1.8% increase in the S&P 500, according to data provided by S&P Global Market Intelligence. The rally didn't do much to erase longer-term losses, though: The retailer's stock is down 29% through the first half of 2020.
In this episode of MarketFoolery, Chris Hill chats with the Fool's Maria Gallagher about the latest headlines from Wall Street. They've got some news from social media and talk about two partnerships in the athletic and fashion apparel industry and much more.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Rent collection day last Wednesday looked like a disaster for mall landlords in the U.K. Reeling from the coronavirus lockdown, tenants including JD Sports Fashions Plc, Boots drugstores and Primark withheld some payments pending negotiations with landlords. Estimates vary widely as to how much was paid of the 2.5 billion pounds ($3.1 billion) due — from 10% to 50%.This isn’t just bad news for Lakeside mall-owner Intu Properties Plc, which on Friday collapsed into administration. Missing rents affect everyone, including property developers Hammerson Plc and British Land Co.Whatever the final tally, the balance of power between retailers and their landlords has indelibly shifted. The days when well-known retail chains signed 25-year leases dictating that rents only rose were already largely consigned to history. But the retail apocalypse wrought by Covid-19 means that landlords have no choice but to accept even shorter leases and far more flexible terms with a good dose of the right services thrown in. As I have argued, the pain from the pandemic must be shared between retailers and property owners on both sides of the Atlantic. The future of the mall depends on it.Brick-and-mortar outlets were already facing existential questions from the rise of Amazon.com Inc. and other online retailers, and many traditional retailers had started to embrace e-commerce too. Covid-19 is accelerating this shift. At the end of last year, digital accounted for about 30% of U.K. retail sales excluding food. This could increase to more than 40% over the next year or so, according to independent retail analyst Richard Hyman.The trend makes store economics even more challenging. Moving sales online has its own costs, from stock management to processing returns, which can’t be offset with a commensurate reduction in store expenses. And now retailers have to invest to adapt their shops to social-distancing rules.With such pressure on profits, some stores will inevitably have to close. Those that don’t will have to cut costs, and that includes rent. In order to better manage cash flows, it’s imperative they be allowed to move to monthly rent payments from quarterly ones.Another option is for landowners to offer so-called turnover rent deals based on a proportion of in-store sales, usually underpinned by a minimum fee. This model, already common in off-price retail parks, aligns everyone’s interests. It gives mall owners an incentive to make their properties as appealing to customers as possible, with a pleasant environment, concierge services and a good mix of tenants covering retail, food and leisure. And retailers would be more inclined to sign for a longer period.The downside for property companies is more uncertainty because they cannot count on a guaranteed income stream to pay down their debt. Still, this is probably better than an empty unit.As push comes to shove, it’s best relations stay cordial. After all, retailers have promised to pay their landlord, and rent that hasn’t been collected during the pandemic isn’t written off. Yes, there’s a case for leniency when chains are clearly in distress. But it’s harder to justify withholding what’s due when retailers have remained largely open, such as Boots, or are in good shape financially, such as JD Sports. There are good reasons to encourage constructive dialogue. Store chains that take an aggressive stance may be exposing themselves to legal action. In the U.S., Gap Inc. is facing suits from Simon Property Group Inc. and Brookfield Property Partners LP. Plus, now that leases are much shorter, discussions over the proper rent come around much more frequently. When they do, companies that paid in full during the crisis may be able to secure better terms than those that reneged.With no let up in the ferocity of retail competition, it’s smart to strike more favorable deals in the future. But any tense moments should be saved for the contract negotiations, not quarter day. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or 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) -- Kanye West is going to make Gap cool again. At least, that’s what investors hope.The struggling apparel company’s shares soared the most in at least 40 years after it revealed a partnership agreement with the head-turning rapper and designer. West, whose sneaker line with Adidas AG routinely sells out, will work with Gap Inc. on a new line of apparel for men, women and kids called Yeezy Gap, the company said Friday.The deal is a multiyear partnership, according to a Yeezy spokesperson. West has been traveling to Gap’s San Francisco headquarters from his ranch in Wyoming to work on the line, which is still in its design phase, the spokesperson said. The line, which won’t include footwear, is expected to debut in stores and online next year.The move may give Gap some much-needed life as it struggles with changing consumer tastes and a turnaround effort that has been stymied by the coronavirus pandemic. Hitching itself to the sometimes-controversial artist could help Gap reinvigorate the brand, said BMO Capital Markets analyst Simeon Siegel.“At the heart of it, the task of a brand is to figure out how to balance exclusivity and distribution,” he said. Gap has struggled with that, but if West can elevate the brand while taking advantage of the company’s broad reach, “that then allows Gap to sell a lot clothing.”Gap shares surged as much as 42% in New York trading on Friday, the biggest intraday gain in Bloomberg data back to 1980, before paring gains to 19% at 3:30 p.m. The stock had fallen 43% this year through yesterday’s close.Multiyear PartnershipThe arrangement will expose West’s upscale brand to a broader market while letting Gap capitalize on Yeezy’s recent growth. Mark Breitbard, global head of the Gap brand, said in the statement that the new line would build on “the aesthetic and success” of the Yeezy brand.West, who worked at a Gap store as a teenager in Chicago, will also have input on presentation in stores and the e-commerce website.“What will be interesting is how the range is displayed and marketed, both online and in stores,” said Neil Saunders, an analyst with GlobalData Retail. “Gap doesn’t have much flair when it comes to merchandising and is very, very centrally controlled.”West’s compensation will be tied to sales and his business will earn royalties and potential equity under the terms of the deal. And Gap is setting some lofty financial targets.‘Big Things’The company issued warrants for up to 8.5 million shares that would fully vest if the line achieves $700 million in net sales during the fiscal year, according to a regulatory filing. Gap had $16.4 billion in net revenue last year.“They are expecting big things out of this deal,” Siegel said of the targets.Gap could use a lift as it grapples with a difficult turnaround effort. In January, it called off a plan to separate its Old Navy brand from the rest of the business. Last quarter, net sales fell 50% as it struggled to cope with prolonged store closures due to the pandemic. Even before Covid-19, the company was struggling to attract shoppers, especially to its namesake brand.Chief Executive Officer Sonia Syngal took over the company in March -- just as much of the U.S. went into lockdown due to the coronavirus. She arrived with a transformation plan in place, but the pandemic has upended the situation.Syngal, who previously led the company’s Old Navy chain, said Gap is renegotiating its rent agreements and in the meantime is paying “what we consider fair rent.” A number of the company’s landlords are challenging this in court.Rapid GrowthThe new partnership comes amid rapid growth for West’s brand. Last year, Bank of America Corp. valued the sneaker side of the Yeezy’s business alone at as much as $3 billion, Bloomberg has reported. The shoes are made and distributed by Adidas, while West retains creative control and sole ownership of his brand.Yeezy’s agreement with Adidas is in place through 2026. The brand was on track to generate $1.3 billion of shoe revenue in 2019, a 50% increase from a year earlier, according to Bank of America.Gap is betting that the success he had with footwear can translate to mass-market apparel.The deal is “the right move to draw a younger shopper, rebuild lost connections and get people to look at the brand again,” Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Poonam Goyal said. “They still will need to do more to drive a full recovery and be a retailer of the future but this is a promising first step.”For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
Gap Inc has entered into a 10-year deal with rapper and fashion designer Kanye West to create a Yeezy line of clothing, both parties said on Friday, sending shares of the apparel retailer soaring 42%. Aimed at young shoppers, the Yeezy-Gap line, which will offer items such as hoodies, basics, T-shirts and joggers, is expected to appear in Gap stores and on Gap.com in 2021, the two parties said. Financial details were not disclosed, but Gap said Yeezy would receive royalties and potential equity based on sales results.
(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.
What happened Shares of Gap (NYSE: GPS) fell almost 7% in morning trading Thursday as the market braces for the impact from a second wave of COVID-19 cases. So what The retailer has more than doubled in value since hitting a low point in March as the coronavirus outbreak was declared a pandemic, but Gap's stock has given back 26% since hitting a recent high of $13.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Malls have been falling out of favor with Americans for years. But the calculus surrounding which have the best chances of surviving and which are destined for decline was flipped on its head by the coronavirus pandemic. That helps explain the news on Wednesday that mall giant Simon Property Group Inc. wants to call off its planned purchase of Taubman Centers Inc.A portfolio of higher-end malls in urban areas that cater to domestic and international tourism was one reason Simon agreed to pay a 70% premium for rival Taubman in February. Those same outposts are now a liability as the pandemic turns consumers off from crowded indoor venues and grinds travel to a halt. And that may give Simon the argument it needs to successfully walk away from the merger. Simon said Wednesday it’s seeking to terminate the $3.6 billion deal, arguing that Taubman had experienced a “material adverse event” amid the pandemic and had breached its obligations under the merger agreement by failing to make “essential” cuts in expenses to deal with the fallout. While the agreement stipulates that a pandemic doesn’t on its own give Simon the grounds to walk away, there’s an exception if the company can prove Taubman has experienced a “disproportionate adverse effect” relative to others in the industry. That’s where those higher-end, urban malls come into play. While the pandemic is far from over, there appears to be a growing consensus among epidemiologists that outdoor activities are less risky than indoor ones. The owners of the largest open-air strip centers collected 50% to 65% or more of rent due in April, compared to just 10% to 30% for mall and outlet owners, Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Lindsay Dutch observed in a recent note. It also helps that many of those strip centers are anchored by grocery stores or other outlets that were allowed to stay open through the pandemic because they sell essential items. CNBC reported that Taubman intends to contest Simon's termination of the deal and legal claims and will move ahead with a shareholder vote on June 25.Is this short-sighted? Maybe. The idea that we are forever destined to favor strip malls in suburban areas over luxury malls in cities strikes me as debatable. Indeed, Simon shares fell nearly 10% at one point on Wednesday and were still down about 3% in the early afternoon, suggesting shareholders believe something is being lost here. As my colleague Tara Lachapelle wrote in February when the deal was first announced, scale of operations and breadth of balance sheet should be an asset in mall owners’ quest for survival.But it’s still the right move for Simon to get out of the Taubman combination if it can. The all-cash deal and assumption of Taubman’s debt would have significantly inflated Simon’s leverage at the worst possible time, given the company’s own struggles to extract rent from shuttered retailers. Simon earlier this month sued Gap Inc., claiming the company failed to pay $65.9 million in rent for March through June. Including the coronavirus hit to the retail environment, the deal may have boosted Simon’s debt to 7.5 times its Ebitda, SunTrust Robinson Humphrey analyst Ki Bin Kim estimated in a report on Wednesday.Simon’s argument for getting out of the deal is logical “in the court of common sense,” Bin Kim wrote. But in the court of law, “we don’t know.” The second half of Simon’s argument — that Taubman has breached the covenants of the merger agreement by failing to make significant cost-cuts — is arguably trickier. While Simon has said it’s suspended or eliminated more than $1 billion of capital development projects, cut executive salaries and implemented temporary furloughs, Taubman has been more measured, announcing the deferral of as much as $110 million of expenditures. But aggressive job cuts and cost-control measures by Taubman could have given Simon more ground to argue the business was in a disproportionately dire situation, Bin Kim writes. “It could have been one of those things that `you’re damned if you do, and you’re damned if you don’t,’” he said. That should be something of a motto for a mall industry that feels perpetually stuck on the wrong side of trends. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Brooke Sutherland is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering deals and industrial companies. She previously wrote an M&A column for Bloomberg News.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) -- Investors appear to be getting more upbeat about the post-pandemic fates of major clothing retailers. Shares of companies from Gap Inc. to Urban Outfitters Inc. and Kohl’s Corp. have shot up from April lows as shopping centers start to reopen after Covid-19-related closures. Some chains have trumpeted eye-popping numbers about their re-openings, including T.J. Maxx’s parent, which said sales at reopened stores were higher than they were last year. Abercrombie & Fitch Co. has said sales productivity at reopened U.S. locations was at 80% of 2019 levels, while Guess Inc. said on Wednesday that reopened U.S. locations were at 75% productivity compared to last year. Those kinds of tidbits, along with a better-than-expected May jobs report and consumer surveys showing a willingness to spend, offer fresh hope that something close to normal shopping patterns might return sooner than anticipated. Not so fast. Optimism about the clothing business seems misplaced, at least for now. This retailing category will likely end up more scarred by the pandemic and recession than any other, and the bankruptcies and store closures announced so far are just the beginning of the devastation.In part, this is because many players in the segment didn’t enter this tumult in a position of strength. A long list of clothiers, including Victoria’s Secret, Banana Republic, Chico’s and Express have endured years of lackluster sales as they failed to deliver enticing fashions. And the likes of Macy’s Inc. and Nordstrom Inc. have been trying to reimagine the tired department store format with only limited success. If they were already straining to attract shoppers before the Covid-19 crisis, good luck doing so when many are approaching store visits with caution. It also could prove tough for clothing stores to renegotiate with landlords for more favorable lease terms right now if they weren’t a powerful driver of traffic to shopping centers in the first place.Apparel chains have other unique vulnerabilities in the current moment. Social distancing, of course, has turbocharged the shift toward online shopping. Plenty of clothing retailers have invested heavily in their digital experience and infrastructure in recent years and thus are decently positioned to handle the surge in orders. But return rates for online purchases of clothing are estimated to be far higher than for other types of items, and all that return shipping and restocking could crimp profits. Meanwhile, stores are revamping their procedures around trying on clothes. Nordstrom is opening only a small number of fitting rooms and cleaning them between customers. Kohl’s is keeping them closed altogether. They are right to make adaptations in the interest of public health. But “try before you buy” is crucial to the brick-and-mortar clothing model, and these set-ups just make it that much harder to score a sale. Plus, as Moody’s analyst Raya Sokolyanska pointed out to me, even if shoppers generally get more comfortable going to stores in a post-lockdown world, that doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll have the patience for crowd-control measures. Just because someone is willing to wait in line to buy groceries doesn’t mean they’ll do so for swimsuits or sneakers. Then there’s the merchandise itself. Instead of dressing up for vacations, weddings, church services and board meetings, many shoppers are going to spend the rest of 2020 in sweatpants or their comfy, sartorial cousins. Yes, retailers have spent years making their supply chains speedier and more flexible to react more nimbly to trends. But this situation requires a change in assortment far more profound than adding more off-the-shoulder tops or animal prints, and I fear many of them will end up with piles of blazers, dresses and glittery high heels that they can’t sell. That’s all before you consider another particularly cruel reality that the entire retail industry is facing. For about a decade, stores have been obsessively focused on adapting themselves for the so-called “experience economy,” adding nail salons, personal styling services, coding classes, wine bars, Instagram-worthy photo-ops, or anything else that will convince people to linger and socialize. Those investments feel painfully useless at a moment when shopping safely means doing it in a solo, task-oriented way. So forgive me for not feeling much assurance from the lines seen at T.J. Maxx re-openings or from comments from Macy’s that demand its reopened stores was “moderately” better than their expectations. Those store visits came when shoppers might have had stimulus checks in hand and were itching to get out of the house as states had just begun lifting lockdowns. But after that burst of activity, the unemployment rate will remain high and Covid-19 fears and precautions will remain in place; that will make for extremely tough circumstances for selling clothes. Moody’s estimates that Ebitda will decline by at least 50% for most apparel retailers this year, and that even by 2021, earnings will be 15% to 35% below what they were in 2019. It seems inevitable that some chains won’t survive those conditions. Last month, J. Crew Group Inc. filed for bankruptcy protection, becoming the first major coronavirus casualty, and was followed soon after by Neiman Marcus Group Inc. and J.C. Penney Co. In the past week, Bloomberg News has reported that both Ascena Retail Group Inc., the corporate parent of Ann Taylor and other stores, and Tailored Brands Inc., parent of Men’s Wearhouse, are also considering bankruptcy. The clothing business is just beginning to unravel. It may be nearly unrecognizable by the time this crisis fully takes its toll. 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.