The Rise and Fall of Kering: A Three-Year Shareholder Nightmare and Glimmers of Hope
Parisian luxury conglomerate Kering (EPA:KER) has become a cautionary tale in investor circles, with shareholders weathering a brutal -57% total return over three years—a period where sipping espresso on the Champs-Élysées would’ve been more profitable than holding its stock. Even a recent €1.5 billion market cap bounce feels like tossing a couture life vest to passengers of the Titanic. This deep-dive unpacks Kering’s profit nosedive, the Gucci-sized holes in its balance sheet, and whether its recent uptick signals a real turnaround or just luxury’s version of rearranging deck chairs.
Market Meltdown: When Dividends Can’t Bandage the Bleeding
Let’s start with the carnage: Kering’s share price plummeted 61.33% over three years, turning portfolios into discount-rack relics. The Total Shareholder Return (TSR) of -57%—slightly cushioned by dividends—still lagged behind the market’s 6.7% gain in 2023 alone. For context, that’s like watching LVMH sip champagne on a yacht while Kering treads water in the Seine.
What stings more? The brand’s crown jewels faltered. Gucci, which contributes nearly 60% of group revenue, saw growth stall as younger shoppers deemed its double-G belts “dadcore.” Yves Saint Laurent’s operating income dropped 12% in 2024, while Bottega Veneta’s modest 3% uptick was akin to using a leather clutch to bail out a sinking boat.
Earnings Freefall: Margins More Fragile Than a Glass Slipper
Kering’s 2024 financials read like a horror script:
– Revenue: €17.2 billion (down 12% YoY)
– Net income: €1.13 billion (a 62% nosedive)
– Operating margin: Cratered from 24.3% to 14.9%
The profit margin’s collapse to 6.6% reveals operational cracks. While rivals like Hermès maintained 40%+ margins, Kering’s over-reliance on wholesale (vs. direct-to-consumer) left it vulnerable to department store liquidations. Even EPS didn’t escape—plunging from €24.38 to €9.24, making shareholders nostalgic for pre-pandemic stability.
The Culprits: Why Kering’s Engine Sputtered
Creative director Alessandro Michele’s maximalist vision initially revived Gucci, but post-2021, the aesthetic fatigue mirrored in flatlining sales. Rivals like Prada and Loewe stole buzz with quieter luxury, while Gucci’s price hikes (up 15% since 2022) alienated aspirational buyers.
Kering’s supply chain costs ballooned 18% in 2023—blamed on inflation and overstock. Compare that to LVMH’s laser-focused inventory control, and it’s clear why analysts muttered “bloated” during earnings calls.
With Chinese shoppers (35% of global luxury demand) tightening purses, Kering’s Asia-Pacific sales dropped 8%. Meanwhile, Brunello Cucinelli and Moncler thrived by catering to ultra-high-net-worth resilience.
Silver Linings or Mirage? The Road Ahead
The recent €1.5 billion cap jump hints at cautious optimism. Key factors to watch:
– Dividend Lifeline: A proposed €6/share payout suggests Kering’s betting on income investors’ loyalty.
– Private Backing: With 43% ownership by holding companies (like Artemis, the Pinault family’s vehicle), there’s skin in the game for a turnaround.
– Gucci’s Reinvention: New creative director Sabato De Sarno’s “Ancora” collection leans into timeless silhouettes—a pivot toward Hermès-like longevity over viral trends.
Yet risks loom: a recession in Europe, U.S. luxury fatigue, and Kering’s slower e-commerce rollout (only 15% of sales vs. Richemont’s 27%) could stall recovery.
The Verdict: A House Divided, But Not Doomed
Kering’s three-year slump is a masterclass in luxury sector pitfalls: over-indexing on one megabrand, operational rigidity, and missing consumer shifts. While dividends and private backing offer short-term relief, true revival hinges on Gucci’s reboot and supply chain surgery. For investors, the choice is stark—bet on a phoenix rising from the ashes, or concede that even the shiniest logos tarnish. One thing’s certain: in luxury, survival isn’t about the label; it’s about the margins.
发表回复