or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › J Crew takeover
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

J Crew takeover

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101123/bs_nm/us_jcrew

Looks like J Crew is being taking private for $3 billion. Is this good or bad for the direction of J Crew?
post #2 of 20
CEO Drexler is part of the deal. He made J Crew what it is in recent years. So long as he's' in charge, they should do the same things in the same way.
post #3 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by mack11211 View Post
CEO Drexler is part of the deal. He made J Crew what it is in recent years. So long as he's' in charge, they should do the same things in the same way.

It's good for me because I am a shareholder. They made me some money in the last few years.

I am pro private companies. Issuing public equity is so expensive I can't see why many companies do it.
post #4 of 20
It all depends upon their strategy. If they leave the creative visionaries alone, it will be fine. But if they go and try to bleed every last dollar out of the creative departments to enhance short term profits then the product will be marginalized and eventually fade.

Unfortunately, private equity firms will often do the latter.
post #5 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrickBOOTH View Post
It's good for me because I am a shareholder. They made me some money in the last few years.

I am pro private companies. Issuing public equity is so expensive I can't see why many companies do it.

Access to capital markets and credibility. Private Co.s can have both, but being a public company provides liquidity and growth prospects to "smaller" companies.
post #6 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by pocketsquareguy View Post
It all depends upon their strategy. If they leave the creative visionaries alone, it will be fine. But if they go and try to bleed every last dollar out of the creative departments to enhance short term profits then the product will be marginalized and eventually fade.

Unfortunately, private equity firms will often do the latter.

Yes, it's all about an exit. TPG was the founders' exit, ECM/IPO was TPG's exit, etc.

It's obvious J. Crew will be public again.
post #7 of 20
I believe that several of SF darling brands are owned by PE shops. Filson comes to mind.
post #8 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrickBOOTH View Post
Issuing public equity is so expensive I can't see why many companies do it.
What do you mean by this? Do you mean public company costs (additional reporting, legal costs, etc...)?
post #9 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by gdl203 View Post
What do you mean by this? Do you mean public company costs (additional reporting, legal costs, etc...)?

Most naysayers complain about initial compliance and ongoing costs. Sarbanes-Oxley compliance is not that much more expensive but it has certainly generated a lot of backlash. I guess it has hurt smaller companies trying to get listed in the US since so many are going to Toronto and London for that. Maybe he means the underwriting fees.
post #10 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icarus View Post
Most naysayers complain about initial compliance and ongoing costs. Sarbanes-Oxley compliance is not that much more expensive but it has certainly generated a lot of backlash. I guess it has hurt smaller companies trying to get listed in the US since so many are going to Toronto and London for that. Maybe he means the underwriting fees.

Agree - costs could be heavy for micro-caps but don't move the needle for a large company like J Crew.

Maybe he did mean the fees...

That said, on a more fundamental basis, public investors require lower returns than private equity ones. So on a pure CAPM basis, the cost of equity of a public company is lower than that of a PE owned one.
post #11 of 20
I frequent J Crew often enough, but the only thing I've ever bought was their messenger bag. The rest of their product is just meh for the pricing.
post #12 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icarus View Post
I guess it has hurt smaller companies trying to get listed in the US since so many are going to Toronto and London for that. Maybe he means the underwriting fees.

If you mean miners they've always listed TSE or before that VSE. To a lesser extent London.

It's nothing to do with costs. Cdns always have a certain love of miners. VSE with it's small caps ranged from lottery players to crooks
post #13 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by furo View Post
I frequent J Crew often enough, but the only thing I've ever bought was their messenger bag. The rest of their product is just meh for the pricing.
I'm not as impressed with them as I used to be. Lately I just quickly walk through their stores, and leave underwhelmed and empty-handed.
post #14 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by pocketsquareguy View Post
It all depends upon their strategy. If they leave the creative visionaries alone, it will be fine. But if they go and try to bleed every last dollar out of the creative departments to enhance short term profits then the product will be marginalized and eventually fade.

Unfortunately, private equity firms will often do the latter.

Exactly
post #15 of 20
Quote:
That said, on a more fundamental basis, public investors require lower returns than private equity ones. So on a pure CAPM basis, the cost of equity of a public company is lower than that of a PE owned one.

Or put another way: it's easier to sell the public (or their agents) over-priced garbage. PE guys a bit more discerning.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › J Crew takeover