LVMH buying Tiffany

TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others

Blow For Billionaire Bernard Arnault As Tiffany Fast-Tracks $16 Billion LVMH Takeover To U.S. Court

Sep 21, 2020, 01:07 pm EDT
By David Dawkins


Update, Sept. 21, 2020: On Monday a Delaware court granted Tiffany & Co.’s motion to fast-track their lawsuit against LVMH. The court set a trial date of January 5, 2021.

“We appreciate the Court’s ruling today to expedite the process,” Tiffany chairman Roger Farah said in a statement. “Despite LVMH’s ongoing efforts to avoid paying the agreed-upon price for Tiffany, a trial on January 5, 2021 will hopefully lead to a ruling prior to the expiration of U.S. antitrust clearance on February 3, 2021 and enable us to protect our company and our shareholders.” LVMH, meanwhile, said in a statement that it “takes note of the decision by the Delaware Court of Chancery, which stated that the trial should begin in January 2021 and not before the November 24, 2020 Outside Date as Tiffany had requested” and said that the luxury giant is “fully confident that it will be able to defeat Tiffany’s accusations and convince the Court that the conditions necessary for the acquisition of Tiffany are no longer met.”

***


The $16 billion battle between Bernard Arnault’s luxury group LVMH and U.S. jewelry giant Tiffany & Co. faces a key court decision today. Lawyers for Tiffany are attempting to fast-track their case and force LVMH to complete the deal to acquire Tiffany, which it agreed to in November.

Tiffany & Co. is fighting to move up the Delaware court’s hearing on the deal to before the November 24 termination date specified by the agreement. If the case isn’t heard before the termination date, Tiffany executives fear any decision would be a moot point since the deal would have already expired. Last week LVMH asked the court to dismiss Tiffany’s request, arguing that it was filed “feverishly and hastily” and that “[t]here are no objective reasons why the upcoming trial should not take place within a normal timeframe.” It asked the court to hold the trial in six or seven months.

On Friday, LVMH—which has been facing charges from Tiffany that it’s attempting to “run out the clock” on the deal—confirmed that it has submitted the transaction for approval by the European Commission, one of several steps it must take before the merger could go through, and a well-timed signal to the U.S. court that the luxury giant is acting in good faith. A source close to LVMH told Forbes that Tiffany can no longer claim that LVMH is dragging its feet. A Tiffany spokesperson, meanwhile, said it is “delighted” the filing has “finally been made,” but, “[t]he speed with which LVMH acted after Tiffany filed its complaint in Delaware only underscores LVMH’s delays and lack of compliance with the Merger Agreement over the prior months.”

What Went Wrong?
The deal was quietly on the rocks until two weeks ago, when LVMH made a major announcement: the company said that it would be putting the deal on hold, citing a letter from French European and Foreign Affairs Minister that arrived “in reaction to the threat of taxes on French products by the U.S.” LVMH claimed it had been “directed” to “defer” the acquisition of Tiffany until after January 6th of next year. Tiffany immediately filed a lawsuit on September 9.

As the relationship between Arnault’s LVMH’s, who is Europe’s richest person, and Tiffany – the brand he once described as an “American icon” – continues to break down, further details have now emerged. A source from inside the U.S. jewelry giant told Forbes that Tiffany is prepared to litigate and sees no case for a price reduction.

A major complaint of LVMH’s is that Tiffany has continued to pay out $70 million in dividends per quarter, even during the pandemic. The Tiffany source says that the $0.58 per share dividend was “very clear” in the deal announcement and proxy statement, and any change to the dividend would have risked shareholder litigation and further delayed the deal (a claim LVMH disputes).

With Tiffany in a strong financial position, holding some $1.1 billion in cash reserves according to a recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the source alleges that LVMH used the pandemic as an “excuse” to attempt to stop the dividend payments, which would result in more cash on the balance sheet for LVMH to inherit when they acquire the company.

LVMH did not respond to a request for further comment on the allegations.

However, the company’s concern over the state of the U.S. market, and of Tiffany & Co.’s response to the pandemic, is well documented. After Tiffany announced a net loss of $32.7 million during the first half of 2020, compared to a $261 million profit over the same period in 2019, LVMH described the results and its forecasts for 2020 as “disappointing” and “significantly inferior to those of comparable brands of the LVMH Group during this period.”


A source from within the LVMH camp told Forbes last week that the dividend payments Tiffany has made to shareholders since the deal was announced, especially those paid out in May and August during the pandemic, which total $140 million, was viewed by LVMH as “literally burning cash” and a cause for genuine concern. Tiffany CEO Alessandro Bogliolo said in last week’s statement, “LVMH’s allegations regarding mismanagement are both untrue and legally irrelevant.”

The first signs that the deal was in trouble came in June, following the publication of a story on fashion industry news site WWD. The article cites concern from the LVMH board in late May over the state of the U.S. market and Tiffany’s ability to cover its debt covenants. Tiffany has since rejected the allegation citing its strong liquidity position and cash reserves. The article does not specifically mention dividends or French political influence, the two key points made in LVMH’s statements since September. However, at this point Tiffany’s dealmakers began preparing to protect the agreed price through litigation, according to a source from Tiffany’s currently involved in the lawsuit.

Tiffany’s argument to fast-track their complaint will be heard at 3pm eastern time today.
 
Tiffany-LVMH Deal Could Still Happen, Analyst Says, Possibly At a Lower Price -- Barrons.com
11:06 am ET September 28, 2020 (Dow Jones) Print


By Teresa Rivas

Tiffany is battling LVMH in court, trying to compel the French luxury conglomerate to go through with its pre-pandemic agreement to buy the jeweler. While a trial might be unlikely, Cowen thinks the deal could still happen -- although it might be at a lower price or with another buyer.

Analyst Oliver Chen spoke with legal experts in the U.S. and Europe about the case, following last week's developments, including Tiffany's (TIF) success in fast-tracking the trial in Delaware and revelations reported by the Wall Street Journal about differences between the French government and LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton (MC.France) on how the effort to delay the transaction came about.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said he was responding to a query from LVMH when he wrote a letter to the luxury conglomerate about delaying the Tiffany acquisition. According to the Journal, the remark called into question earlier statements by LVMH, which had said the letter about postponing the acquisition was unsolicited.

Working with a translation -- as LVMH hasn't given Tiffany the original letter from the French government -- Chen's experts think the "letter could be more characterized as advice than a government mandate," given the use of the word "should," and the fact that it was a response to LVMH.

They also think the French government likely lacks a legal basis to stop the deal, because there aren't major antitrust concerns, the luxury sector isn't in need of tight regulation, and there is no precedent for government involvement.

Chen thinks this could point to a settlement before the January trial date. One possible option would be the acquisition happening, but at a lower price -- between $120 and $130 a share -- although Tiffany shareholders would have to vote again on such a move. The disputed deal was for $135 a share.

By contrast, if the original merger agreement is invalidated, Chen notes that Tiffany could continue to be a stand-alone company, or merge with another luxury player such as Compagnie Financiere Richemont (CFRUY) or Kering (PPRUY). Of the two, he thinks a deal would be more accretive to Richemont.

Tiffany shares were up 0.4% to $116.16 Monday morning, as the Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 1.8%.

The stock has fallen 13% in 2020, hurt by the pandemic -- which has weighed on tourism and demand for high-price baubles -- and questions about the merger. The decline could make shareholders more willing to accept a deal at a reduced per-share price -- from LVMH or a rival.

Write to Teresa Rivas at [email protected]

(END) Dow Jones Newswires

September 28, 2020 11:06 ET (15:06 GMT)

Copyright (c) 2020 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
 
LVMH countersues Tiffany in bid to drop $16 bln acquisition
By Jessica DiNapoli


Sept 28 (Reuters) - LVMH countersued Tiffany & Co on Monday, arguing the latter’s financial mismanagement in the COVID-19 pandemic permits the French luxury goods giant to walk away from its $16 billion acquisition of the iconic U.S. jeweler.

The move comes after Tiffany sued LVMH earlier this month, objecting to the Paris-based company’s decision not to go through with the deal they signed last November because of a French government request and the impact of the coronavirus outbreak.

In its lawsuit filed in Delaware Chancery Court on Monday, LVMH said the agreement with Tiffany had no carve-out for pandemics under the definition of a so-called material adverse effect. As a result, Tiffany assumed the risk of a virus outbreak, LVMH added.

The French company also said that Tiffany breached its agreement to operate as usual by paying out the highest possible dividend.

LVMH said it could not close the deal with Tiffany because it received a letter from the French government asking the conglomerate to delay the transaction until next year, beyond the Nov. 24 contractual deadline that the company agreed with Tiffany for the deal to be completed.

Tiffany did not immediately respond to a request for comment. It has disputed LVMH’s assertion that the French government intervention prevents it from closing the deal and that material adverse effect had occurred. It also defended its ability to pay out dividends under its contract with LVMH. A U.S. judge last week set a four-day trial on the case beginning Jan. 5.

The judge said during a hearing that he hoped Tiffany and LVMH could have “productive discussions to avoid the need for litigation,” referring to a potential settlement.

The letter that LVMH says prevents it from completing the deal was signed by France’s foreign minister, who said his office had received an inquiry from LVMH, and that it was natural for him to respond with advice. (Reporting by Jessica DiNapoli; editing by Jonathan Oatis)
 
Update: LVMH is moving forward to buy Tiffany at a discount of $400 million USD for a total of $15.8 billion, due to close in January 2021.

One wonders if it was worth dragging the Tiffany name through the mud in the interim, let alone involving the highest echelons of the French government to save less than 3% per share of one company, but here we are.

 
Update: LVMH is moving forward to buy Tiffany at a discount of $400 million USD for a total of $15.8 billion, due to close in January 2021.

One wonders if it was worth dragging the Tiffany name through the mud in the interim, let alone involving the highest echelons of the French government to save less than 3% per share of one company, but here we are.

Thank you for the update.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amateurjeweler
Integrating Tiffany & Co. Is A “Challenge,” LVMH Says

By Rob Bates | April 15, 2021

LVMH has found integrating Tiffany & Co. a “challenge,” particularly with most of its employees still working from home, LVMH chief financial officer Jean-Jacques Guiony told analysts on an April 13 conference call.

LMVH completed its purchase of Tiffany in January.

“Integrating Tiffany is very important to us,” Guiony added, which means that LVMH is unlikely to consider future acquisitions in the near term.

“We don’t want to dilute our efforts,” he continued. “[Tiffany is] a big acquisition for us [and] our number one priority.”

Guiony later called Tiffany a “very strong brand” that it’s committed to changing, though he didn’t spell out exactly what those changes would be.

“The potential is tremendous,” he added. “We have said that the issue with Tiffany was their timing with the stock market was not appropriate, and the stock market was not giving them the time to develop the strategies that were needed to develop the brand.

“It will take years to do what we want to do with this brand, from a distribution, merchandising, and marketing viewpoint. It is a lot of work—we are committed to doing it.”

According to WWD, Alexandre Arnault, the brand’s new executive vice president of product and communications (and son of LVMH chairman Bernard), has been crowdsourcing the retailer’s new strategy, asking on his personal Instagram account, using the Stories feature: “What would you like to see us do at Tiffany?”

One person asked if it would do more collaborations. “Oh, we will,” Arnault answered, according to WWD.

Overall, LVMH’s jewelry and watches segment showed 35% organic growth in the first quarter of 2021, compared to the previous year. (The prior year’s number includes March 2020, the first month COVID-19 spread worldwide.) When compared to the first quarter of 2019, organic growth rose 1%.

On the earnings call, Guiony said that jewelry did better than watches during the quarter, though “high jewelry” showed weakness.

He admitted that, with vaccine distribution ramping up, he expected the percentage of LVMH’s sales conducted online to decrease, but that that hasn’t happened yet. His company remains committed to brick-and-mortar, however.

“I don’t feel that people are willing to stay at home and shop just at home,” he added. “As we’ve discussed many times, the experience that you get from a screen or from a store is entirely different. We do believe that nothing replaces the store visit.”

He was noncommittal about whether eased pandemic restrictions would mean a greater shift toward “experiential” purchases.

“It’s a bit early,” he said. “It’s welcome anyway. Staying in a situation where restaurants, hotels, cinema, theaters are closed is not a good thing for people and not for the business.”

He also said that the recently passed stimulus bill has probably helped LVMH’s business in the United States.

“The big impact of the stimulus was to avoid the country being frozen, as would have been the case had such stimulus not been distributed,” he said. “It’s a psychological impact of ‘We will be there for you, so you can continue to go shopping.’ I think we benefited from that.”

(Photo courtesy of Tiffany & Co.)

Mmm... intersting article IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MCBadian07
Top