Luxury Institute News

January 15, 2013

Tiffany Deal Whispers Buoy Value After Earnings: Real M&A

By Tara Lachapelle and Cotten Timberlake
Bloomberg
January 14, 2013

In the eye of the investor, Tiffany & Co. (TIF)’s blue-boxed gifts are so alluring to potential suitors that not even the worst earnings stretch in at least a decade has put a dent in its valuation.

Even though the $7.6 billion company has missed profit estimates in four straight quarters and said last week that analysts’ fiscal 2014 projections were too high, the jewelry seller fetches 18.6 times earnings, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. That’s only 0.4 point lower than the multiple in March, when the shortfalls started, as takeover speculation helps support the shares, Ariel Investments LLC said.

LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA (MC), PPR SA and Cie. Financiere Richemont SA could all boost their earnings by adding the company to their current stable of luxury brands, according to ISI Group and the Luxury Institute. Ariel says a buyer would have leeway to expand Tiffany in the U.S., Asia and Europe. A purchase at current prices would be the biggest of a retailer since Coles Group Ltd. more than five years ago, data compiled by Bloomberg show.

“Sooner or later someone will make a run at Tiffany,” Howard Ward, the chief investment officer for growth equities at Gamco Investors Inc., wrote in an e-mail. Gamco, which oversees about $37 billion, owns shares of the company. “It is a trophy property,” he added. “There are some obvious foreign luxury brand companies that would be interested.”

Swatch Group AG today said it agreed to buy the Harry Winston watch and jewelry brand for about $1 billion, adding a luxury label in the Swiss watchmaker’s biggest acquisition ever. Shares of Tiffany advanced 1.6 percent to $61.25 today.

Takeover Speculation

Mark Aaron, a spokesman for New York-based Tiffany, said the company doesn’t comment on speculation, when asked about the retailer’s takeover prospects. Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Michael Kowalski said in a 2011 interview with the Financial Times that Tiffany has been the subject of deal speculation “probably since we went public in 1987.” He added that his shareholders would be “best served” by the company remaining independent.

Representatives of LVMH, PPR (PP) and Richemont declined to comment.

Tiffany shares plunged 4.5 percent, the biggest drop in six weeks, on Jan. 10 when the company said earnings for the fiscal year ending this month will be at the low end of its forecast after holiday sales growth slowed in the Americas and Asia. Tiffany also projected earnings in the fiscal year ending in January 2014 of about $3.39 to $3.49 a share, compared with the $3.80 average of analysts’ estimates, data compiled by Bloomberg show.

Not Suffering

The company had already missed analysts’ income forecasts for four straight quarters, the longest stretch in at least a decade, the data show. Still, Tiffany’s price-earnings ratio hasn’t suffered much, only falling to 18.6 from 19 on March 19, the last close before its first profit shortfall. The valuation has held up even as Tiffany’s market capitalization dropped from last year’s peak of $9.3 billion.

The Tiffany brand may be alluring to potential acquirers, according to Tim Fidler, a Chicago-based money manager at Ariel Investments, which oversees about $5 billion including the retailer’s shares. In the luxury jewelry industry, Tiffany has the best-known brand among affluent consumers surveyed by the Luxury Institute. Despite falling short of earnings projections since early last year, the company’s fiscal 2013 revenue is forecast to be $3.8 billion, up $1.1 billion from three years earlier, data compiled by Bloomberg show.

Tiffany’s Consistency

“There aren’t many companies in the public markets today on the retail side that you can argue have all the positive attributes with the consistency that Tiffany has demonstrated,” Fidler said in a phone interview. “A lot of the big, European houses would love to own a brand of this type.”

Tiffany said this month that it signed a 20-year agreement to keep selling jewelry by Elsa Peretti, which accounts for about 10 percent of its sales. The accord lets Tiffany retain exclusive rights to the designs, which include “Diamonds by the Yard” and iconic heart- and bean-shaped pendants.

By renewing the deal, Tiffany removed an impediment that could have deterred suitors from considering a purchase of the company, Omar Saad, a New York-based analyst at ISI, wrote in a Jan. 8 note. He said Tiffany “would be a highly attractive asset to the large luxury conglomerates,” and argued that LVMH, PPR and Richemont could all boost earnings by purchasing it. Milton Pedraza, the CEO of the Luxury Institute, a New York- based research and consulting firm, agreed that those three European companies could fuel growth with Tiffany.

High Ranking

“Tiffany continues to have a high brand ranking and prestige,” Pedraza said. “Is it an interesting acquisition opportunity for somebody? Yes, presuming they will do something better and more interesting with it.”

Francesco Trapani, head of Paris-based LVMH’s watch and jewelry unit, said in November that he expects more consolidation in the industry. While the world’s largest maker of luxury goods always has “a window open on M&A,” the company won’t pay “stupid prices,” Trapani said. LVMH bought Bulgari SpA, the Italian jewelry maker, in 2011, and it also sells products including Louis Vuitton bags and Dom Perignon champagne.

PPR of Paris is reorganizing to focus on luxury, sports and lifestyle brands as it seeks to lift sales to 24 billion euros ($32 billion) by 2020 from 12.2 billion euros in 2011. The owner of the Gucci brand has said acquisitions will account for about 20 percent of that goal.

Coles, Wesfarmers

Richemont, the second-biggest luxury goods company, owns brands including Cartier and Van Cleef & Arpels.

A deal for Tiffany at current prices would be the largest takeover in the retail industry since Wesfarmers Ltd. purchased Coles for $15.8 billion in 2007, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Because Tiffany’s management knows it’s running an “iconic” brand, it may command a takeover price higher than acquirers are willing to pay, said Brian Yarbrough, a St. Louis- based analyst for Edward Jones & Co. Tiffany shares would be trading above $90 if they were meeting their historical relationship to forecast profit, he said. The company, which ended last week at $60.28, may seek something similar in a sale, he said.

“For a public company, it’s going to be hard to pay that kind of a premium and have it not be dilutive,” Yarbrough said in a phone interview. “Management is going to be very hesitant to sell down here when the business is struggling and not firing on all cylinders. There are reasons why buyers could be interested, but it’s all going to come down to price.”

‘Very Few’

The most likely buyers are the global luxury conglomerates that would buy Tiffany for strategic reasons and that “can afford to pay the most,” said Oliver Chen, an analyst at Citigroup Inc. in New York.

Tiffany is “an extremely attractive asset as an American brand,” Chen said. “They are one of the very few,” he added. “There is an opportunity for incremental product innovation, and Tiffany has an extremely attractive global presence and global awareness.”

Ariel’s Fidler estimated that Tiffany’s value to a buyer is in the “high $70s to low $80s,” based on past acquisitions by strategic buyers in the industry, a discounted cash flow analysis and the current valuations of its peers.

“Obviously if someone is interested in the company, much like management, you always want to listen,” Fidler said. “There’s enormous value at this company and it’s not hard to get to a number substantially higher than the current stock price for a potential transaction.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2013-01-14/tiffany-deal-whispers-buoy-value-after-earnings-real-m-a.html

 

October 29, 2010

Exclusive Invitation

The Paris Biennale – an event dedicated to the finest art and antiques in the world – has once again wowed jewellery lovers by playing host to an eye-popping abundance of jewels with price tags in the millions, says Claire Adler

By Claire Adler
Canary Wharf
October 2010

This September, Paris saw jewellery presented to the super-rich and connoisseurs on supremely elaborate exhibition stands. It was all part of the Paris Biennale – the bi-annual invitee-only art and antiques fair – which recently took place for the 25th time, in the palatial setting of the Grand Palais.

The Paris Biennale des Antiquaires is the most prestigious fine art and antiques fair in the world. First held in 1962, the exhibition’s original organisers hoped the beauty of the objects on show would rival the beauty of the women who came along to ogle them.

French jeweller Cartier has been an exhibitor since the show’s beginnings, while this year Chanel, Van Cleef & Arpels showed for the third time, and Dior for the second time. Harry Winston is the only American jeweller at the show, but with a shop in Paris since 1955, it first exhibited at the Paris Biennale in 1974, then again 2000 and has been a regular ever since.

“The Paris Biennale is a rendezvous of all the world’s jewellery connoisseurs,” said CEO of Harry Winston, Frederic de Narp, before the show opened. “As a French person, I’m thrilled to be part of it. We have 20 salons round the world, but this is where we’re launching our newest collection, the Royal Garden collection, and we’ll meet with all our important clients here.”

When it comes to the rarest, most exquisitely crafted and precious jewellery on the planet, it’s all very much a ‘by appointment, guest list only, price on application’ affair.

Behind the scenes information is hard to come by, but at the same event two years ago, jewellery transported by Harry Winston alone was said to be worth £50 million, though it may easily have been more.

This year, Chanel’s most expensive piece on show was the intricate Plume necklace, for sale at a cool €1.6 million, along with the matching brooch – yours for €220,000.

The Plume, or feather, is a variation on a theme originally dreamed up by Mademoiselle Chanel for the launch of her very first fine jewellery collection in 1932. The brooch might be a tad expensive, but it’s certainly versatile. The experts say it can be worn over a shoulder, as a sparkling headdress, or pinned onto a hat or a (inevitably Chanel) skirt suit.

Over at Van Cleef & Arpels, certain individual pieces just skirted the €3 million mark, with some jewels having already been snapped up by July time, based on drawings alone. Dior’s display included pieces designed up to 11 years ago, including delectable, intricate cocktail rings by Dior designer Victoire de Castellane, from her collection Les Incroyables et les Merveilleuses, made in 1999, which went on to spark a trend for enormous, bold and beautiful rings.

Chanel upped the ante this year by filling a booth twice the size of the space it took in 2008, and bringing in New York architect Peter Marino to design it. Marino is the man behind Louis Vuitton’s Bond Street flagship store, which opened early this summer.

Meanwhile, the display of this year’s Van Cleef & Arpels collection, Les Voyages Extraordinaires, inspired by the books of Jules Verne, bore a far greater resemblance to a fantastical art installation than any display you’d expect to see at an antiques fair. But that was hardly surprising, given that Alfredo Arias – the Argentinian artist, actor and director who had created it – has conceived sets for opera houses from La Scala in Milan to the Opera in Paris, and is the proud owner of a five-page CV enumerating his books, films and fantastical theatre productions, as well as the accolades he has received in Italy, Argentina and France. This includes the multiple French honour of being appointed Chevalier, Officier and Commandeur des Arts et des Lettres.

“I would not miss this occasion, which is a high-level artistic event, for anything in the world. Jewellery is an art form,” said Arias.

“The dreamlike world of Jules Verne resonates with that of a Maison whose artistic heritage is built around the beauty of flora and fauna, the sky and the stars, imaginary creatures,” said Nicolas Bos, creative director of Van Cleef & Arpels.

One question remains. Is there a market for this extraordinary and outrageously expensive jewellery? New York-based luxury expert, CEO of the Luxury Institute Milton Pedraza believes there is: “There will always be a market for these products and especially in Greater China, India and the Middle East, where wealth continues to grow. Wealthy people just want the best and they will pay for it. The concept is an old one with new price levels,” he says.

http://issuu.com/runwildmedia/docs/cw_oct_10_combined

August 2, 2010

Mining the Glitter

Janet Whitman, Financial Post · Saturday, Jul. 31, 2010

NEW YORK — About a decade ago, Bob Gannicott, a prospector and geologist by trade, walked in the doors of Harry Winston Inc.’s flagship salon on Manhattan’s Fifth Avenue and made a rare and unexpected discovery: The iconic diamond business known as the “jeweller to the stars” was for sale.

Mr. Gannicott was only hoping to work out a partnership with the ultra-luxury diamond retailer to help glean better price information for the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of rough diamonds his firm, Canada-based Aber Diamond Corp., was about to start hauling from a mine in an Arctic lake 300 kilometres north of Yellowknife.

But with cash set to roll in from the mine – one of the richest diamond finds in the world – the idea of owning the upper-crust jeweller outright was starting to make sense, Mr. Gannicott said.

He was coming to realize, after a previous pact with Tiffany & Co. failed to pan out, that the only way a rough diamond marketer like his company was going to secure price information on finished diamonds would be to own a retailer outright.

An acrimonious two-decade family feud between two brothers – Ron and Bruce Winston, who were heirs to the company’s eponymous founder – had made some sort of sale or investment a necessity.

The deal took a few years to crystallize but by 2004, Aber had closed on an acquisition for a 51% stake in Harry Winston for US$85-million. In 2006, the diamond maverick bought the remaining 49% for US$157-million.

The strategy has paid off in part: Aber, which in 2007 renamed itself Harry Winston Diamond Corp., has transformed itself from a junior prospector into a high-end diamond marketer that fetches some of the richest rough diamond prices in world.

Things haven’t gone so smoothly on the retail end, however.

Some investors and analysts complain that the Harry Winston retail business – which made its name as red-carpet staple for Hollywood A-listers like Gwyneth Paltrow, Madonna and Halle Berry – has done nothing but lose money, dragging down the mining company’s overall bottom line.

While some are hoping the company will cut its losses and spin off the retail business, Mr. Gannicott defended the unlikely acquisition, saying it is performing as expected and would have turned in a robust profit in 2009 were it not for the financial crisis that gripped the world in 2008.

“We never intended to draw earnings out of this early on,” Mr. Gannicott, the 63-year-old chairman and chief executive of Harry Winston Diamond Corp., told the Financial Post. “We could have just said we’ll leave it at five stores, spend a bit of money on marketing and let it throw off a few million a year…. The idea was to grow it into an international business that, in time, would be worth significantly more value and generate significant earnings.”

Mr. Gannicott, who got his start in the business as a miner when he left his native England for Yellowknife at the age of 19, said the Harry Winston business seemed barely touched since the late 1970s, when the company’s namesake founder died. “The company became like a Sleeping Beauty castle. It’s a good thing nothing silly was done with it, like a perfume line.”

Expanding the retail business is not unlike mining, he added. “When you spend money on exploration, it comes straight off your bottom line. What we’re focused on at Harry Winston is not to take profits now, but to grow it in a sound manner.”

When Aber first took a stake in Harry Winston, the jeweller had six salons: two in the United States, two in Europe and two in Japan. Under its new ownership, it expanded to 19 salons, with six new U.S. locations and three more in Japan, as well as four locations in other parts of Asia – a region that’s expected to see a surge in demand in the coming years.

The company plans to nearly double its store count by 2016 to 35.

To revive its stagnant product lines and marketing efforts, Mr. Gannicott in January hired Frederic de Narp, who headed rival luxury jeweller Cartier’s North American division, as the new chief executive of its retail business.

Mr. de Narp proposed a five-year plan for his new boss that puts the business on a path toward turning an annual profit of 10% through the introduction of new products, jewellery collections, brighter lines and additional watches lines.

“The world has come out of a dark place in the last two years,” the Brittany native told Harry Winston investors at the company’s annual meeting at Toronto’s Fairmont Royal York Hotel in June. “And the market conditions today are right for Harry Winston.”

With only an estimated 15% of the US$150-billion in global jewellery sales spent on branded jewellery, the opportunity for Harry Winston, one of the most prestigious names in the business, is huge, he said.

Mr. de Narp also noted that while demand for jewellery and high-end watches is increasing, local jewellers are being forced to close their doors because of the financial crisis. “Where do they go if those local jewellers close every day? They will go to Harry Winston,” he said.

In a move that will help fund its retail expansion, Harry Winston announced last week that it’s buying back a stake in its rich Diavik diamond mine that it was forced to sell in March 2009 to avoid going under amid the financial crisis.

The purchase from Kinross Gold Corp. – which made the Toronto-based gold producer a handsome profit – will restore Harry Winston’s 40% stake in the mine and give its cash flow a nice boost.

Harry Winston owns the development – Canada’s largest diamond mine – with international mining behemoth Rio Tinto.

Part of the draw for investing in retail is that the mine is a depleting asset and could be exhausted in 12 years, while the retail business can keep expanding as world demand grows.

Trying to strike it rich with another mine would be a huge gamble. Mr. Gannicott noted that since 1870, in the history of diamond exploration, 5,000 kimberlites – the volcanic rock best known for carrying diamonds – have been discovered, 850 of which contain diamonds, and only 50 of which were economically viable to mine.

In sharp contrast, the gold industry discovered 1,025 viable mines in the same period.

Still, Mr. Gannicott isn’t ruling out hitting on another mining development.

One potential target, according to some industry analysts, is Toronto-based Mountain Provinces Diamond Inc. It’s main asset is a 44% stake in Gahcho Kue, one of Canada’s largest diamond deposits and the largest diamond mine under development around the world.

“We talk all of the time, but it’s a question of value,” said Mr. Gannicott. “Its share price is already substantial.”

Investing in retail gives the company a chance to participate in the two most lucrative ends of the business: selling rough diamonds and finished jewellery.

Mr. Gannicott originally thought its Diavik diamonds could be sold directly to its Harry Winston salons and made into fine jewellery in the Fifth Avenue townhouse that is home to its flagship store.

But the Canadian government frowns on such transactions, preferring instead that the rough diamonds be sold on the open market to ensure it gets the maximum tax windfall. “They prefer arms-length sales,” said Mr. Gannicott.

Some analysts and investors would prefer the company give up on retail and focus on the part of the diamond business that’s given it the most success and the highest profits.

“If the retail part contributed zero you could ignore that and focus on the mine part of the business, but the fact is, historically, it’s been a negative contributor to earnings,” said John Hughes, a Toronto-based analyst with Desjardins Securities Inc. “It’s taken away from what the mine has done.”

Mr. Hughes had a “buy” rating on Harry Winston’s stock, but downgraded it to “sell” a few months ago after the shares zoomed above $10.

The stock’s had a huge run since, sinking to a low of $2.62 last year before Kinross came to the rescue and took a stake in the company.

It ended regular trading on the Toronto Stock Exchange on Friday at $12.74 a share.

“It’s an expensive stock by all measures unless you assume there’s a sustained turnaround in the retail business,” said Mr. Hughes. “I’m not willing to ask my clients to take that risk, given the history of consistent operating losses. I don’t think there are any quick fixes for the retail business.”

John Kaiser, an independent analyst and editor of the Kaiser Bottom-Fishing Report, said that owning the Harry Winston salons will give the company a longer life beyond when the Diavik mine is depleted. But he’d also like to see the company invest in another mine, such as the Gahcho Kue. “It’s a natural,” he said.

Mr. Kaiser said he advised his readers to buy the stock after Kinross took a stake in the company and he’s now mulling whether to remove that recommendation now that the shares have had such a spectacular run-up.

While Wall Street might be skeptical of the Canadian miner’s retail ambitions, others see strong upside for the brand, which was almost frozen in time as the Winston brothers squabbled over their fortune.

Milton Pedraza, chief executive of the Luxury Institute, a research firm that follows the industry, said that long-term prospects for the Harry Winston brand are very good, based on his surveys of the super rich with individual net worth of US$5-million or more.

“I can say, ‘My dear darling, I just bought you a diamond from 47th Street,’ ” a district in midtown Manhattan well known for its row of diamond wholesalers, Mr. Pedraza said. “Or I can say it came from Harry Winston or Cartier. That will have far higher value psychologically, even if it has the same carats.”

http://www.financialpost.com/news/Mining+glitter/3343862/story.html