Capri tumbles 46% after US court blocks $8.5 bln merger with Tapestry
Updates shares, adds offer price in paragraph 3 and analyst comments in paragraphs 7 and 11
By Ananya Mariam Rajesh
Oct 25 (Reuters) -Capri sharesCPRI.N slumped nearly 46% on Friday after a U.S. judge blocked its pending $8.5 billion merger with Coach parentTapestry <TPR.N>, hurting the Michael Kors owner's chances of navigating challenges at the luxury brand.
Tapestry agreed to buy Capri last year to create a U.S. luxury giant that could compete better with larger European rivals bybringing brands Coach, Kate Spade, Stuart Weitzman, Versace, Jimmy Choo and Michael Kors under one roof.
Capri stock was trading at $22.46, well below Tapestry's offer price of $57 per share, and was set to wipe out $2.2 billion from its market cap.
Execution issues across Capri's wide portfolio of brands have led to market share losses at a time when the broader luxury market faces a slowdown in demand, with consumers earmarking their dollars for essential purchases.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) sued to block the deal in April, saying it would eliminate "direct head-to-head competition" between the top two U.S. handbag makers.
Should the deal fall through, "Capri could potentially seek another suitor", said Dana Telsey of Telsey Advisory Group.
"The attractiveness of the acquisition began to moderate", pressured by Capri's weak results and an extension of the deal timeline following the FTC challenge, Dana said.
Tapestry's shares rose nearly 15%. Analysts said the deal would have posed an addedrisk to the Coach parent even though it was well-positioned to revive Capri.
During an eight-day trial in September, the FTC argued the deal would create a massive company with the power to unfairly raise prices.
U.S. District Judge Jennifer Rochon on Thursdayrejected the companies' defense, including their argument that handbags are non-essential items and consumers can control the prices by not buying them if they become too expensive.
"Investors were clearly surprised by the outcome as it seemed like the focus of the deal was to compete at global luxury level and not just the U.S. market," said Brian Jacobsen, chief economist at Annex Wealth Management.
Tapestry said it believes the ruling was incorrect and plans to appeal.
"I think the (defense) parties might try to get an expedited appeal to the second circuit. I think they do have a chance on their timeline to do that," said Mike Keeley, partner and chair of the antitrust group at Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP.
Reporting by Ananya Mariam Rajesh in Bengaluru and Siddharth Cavale in New York; Editing by Devika Syamnath
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
