• I'm happy to introduce the Styleforum Happy Hour, our brand new podcast featuring lively discussion about menswear and the fashion industry. In the inaugural edition, a discussion of what's going on in retail today. Please check it out on the Journal. All episodes will be also be available soon on your favorite podcast platform.

  • STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

    Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

    Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

J Crew takeover

mack11211

Distinguished Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
6,469
Reaction score
79
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.
 

patrickBOOTH

Stylish Dinosaur
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Oct 16, 2006
Messages
35,731
Reaction score
10,645
Originally Posted by mack11211
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.
 

Gus

Stylish Dinosaur
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
20,249
Reaction score
5,355
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.
 

Icarus

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
234
Reaction score
1
Originally Posted by patrickBOOTH
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.
 

Icarus

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
234
Reaction score
1
Originally Posted by pocketsquareguy
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.
 

gdl203

Affiliate Vendor
Affiliate Vendor
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
39,836
Reaction score
28,160
I believe that several of SF darling brands are owned by PE shops. Filson comes to mind.
 

gdl203

Affiliate Vendor
Affiliate Vendor
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
39,836
Reaction score
28,160
Originally Posted by patrickBOOTH
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...)?
 

Icarus

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
234
Reaction score
1
Originally Posted by gdl203
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.
 

gdl203

Affiliate Vendor
Affiliate Vendor
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
39,836
Reaction score
28,160
Originally Posted by Icarus
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.
 

Nicola

Distinguished Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
2,952
Reaction score
44
Originally Posted by Icarus
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
 

JayJay

Stylish Dinosaur
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
24,367
Reaction score
423
Originally Posted by furo
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.
 

madmadigan

Senior Member
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
586
Reaction score
8
Originally Posted by pocketsquareguy
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
 

joneog

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2010
Messages
92
Reaction score
0
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.
 

Featured Sponsor

What's your favorite pair of shoes to wear with jeans? (Choose two)

  • Boots (Chelsea, Chukkas, Balmorals, etc.)

  • Loafers

  • Work boots (Red Wing, Wolverine, etc.)

  • Monk strap shoes

  • Oxford / Derby shoes

  • Sneakers


Results are only viewable after voting.

Related Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
427,179
Messages
9,193,719
Members
193,087
Latest member
calibre7654

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by

Top