>>> Disney : Trian statement: Disney Board declines Trian request for Board repr

Trian statement: Disney Board declines Trian request for Board representation, including Nelson Peltz; Will take to shareholders
- Trian Fund Management, L.P. (together with its affiliates, “Trian” or “we”) beneficially owns approximately $3 billion of stock in The Walt Disney Company (NYSE: DIS) (“Disney” or the “Company”). This morning, following conversations with Disney’s CEO, Disney extended an offer to Trian to meet with the Board but informed Trian that the Board is turning down Trian’s recent request for Board representation, including Nelson Peltz. Trian said the following regarding the discussions:
- “Since we gave Disney the opportunity to prove it could ‘right the ship’ last February, up to our re-engagement weeks ago, shareholders lost ~$70 billion of value. Disney's share price has underperformed proxy peers and the broader market over every relevant period during the last decade and over the tenure of each incumbent director. Investor confidence is low, key strategic questions loom, and even Disney's CEO is acknowledging that the Company's challenges are greater than previously believed. While James Gorman and Sir Jeremy Darroch represent an improvement from the status quo, the addition of these directors will not, in our view, restore investor confidence or address the root cause behind the significant value destruction and missteps that this Board has overseen. Trian intends to take our case for change directly to shareholders.”

FT : UAE to launch $30bn investment fund at COP28

UAE to launch $30bn investment fund at COP28
UN climate summit host seeks to bolster credentials via initiative with BlackRock, TPG and Brookfield

The United Arab Emirates is preparing to launch a $30bn climate-related investment fund with BlackRock, TPG and Brookfield, according to people familiar with the matter.

The launch comes as the UAE attempts to bolster its credentials as host of COP28 on the first days of the UN summit.

Lunate Capital, a new Abu Dhabi-based asset manager set up with $50bn in assets, will oversee the fund with at least $5bn earmarked for investment in Global South countries, three people involved in discussions said.

The UAE is drawing on vast resources amassed as one of the world’s biggest oil and gas producers. The nation sits on assets worth $2.5tn across its sovereign wealth fund, pension funds and central bank, according to data provider Global SWF. 

COP28 president Sultan al-Jaber has repeatedly said climate finance would be a key focus for the summit, which kicked off on Thursday in Dubai. Tens of thousands of delegates and up to 180 heads of state or government are expected to attend the event in Expo City over the next two weeks. 

The Financial Times reported this week that the UAE was putting together a multibillion-dollar investment pot. The country has been linked to almost $200bn in investments this year, largely in green energy, according to FT analysis. 

The UAE has come under scrutiny since being chosen as the COP28 host a year ago over questions on whether one of the world’s biggest oil and gas producers should oversee global climate negotiations. 

One leading figure in climate finance called the investment fund a “serious amount” aimed at positioning the UAE as a global centre for climate finance.

Countries, especially in the developing world, are struggling to find the cash to shift their energy systems and economies from fossil fuels to green sources of power. There is also a shortfall in cash to adapt the world’s economies for hotter temperatures. 

UN research in 2021 found that $125tn of climate investment would be needed by 2050 if the world was to slash its emissions and meet its Paris agreement goals. The International Energy Agency has said $4.5tn will be needed each year for clean energy alone by the early 2030s, up from $1.8tn now.

In recent years there has been a big focus on reforming the IMF, World Bank and other multilateral development banks to divert more money to climate change, but there are also growing calls for the private sector to work with public finance to invest in green projects.

Lunate was launched earlier this year under the patronage of UAE national security adviser Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed al-Nahyan, a brother of the Gulf state’s ruler Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan. Lunate is owned by Chimera Investment and its senior management.

In September, Lunate said Khalifa Al Suwaidi, head of Abu Dhabi Growth Fund, would be one of three managing partners, along with Murtaza Hussain, chief investment officer at Abu Dhabi wealth fund ADQ, and private investment company Chimera chief executive Seif Fikry.

Brookfield, BlackRock and TPG declined to comment. COP28 representatives also declined to comment.

The Information : Why Alibaba’s Cloud Ambitions Fell to Earth

Why Alibaba’s Cloud Ambitions Fell to Earth

Several months ago, executives at Alibaba tried to persuade some big investors to take a stake in its cloud unit—which Alibaba was then planning to spin off as a separate company—at a $40 billion valuation. Alibaba’s idea was that the outside investments could signal to the stock market the appeal of the cloud unit ahead of its public debut.

The plan flopped. Investors balked at the valuation Alibaba sought. They were conscious that the cloud business—though the biggest of its kind in China—was barely growing and was also losing money. One international investment firm, for example, was only willing to offer a valuation of less than $25 billion for the unit, according to a person with knowledge of the discussions. The episode underlined for Alibaba executives the fact that the spun-off cloud unit would not be well received by the market, contributing to the company’s decision announced last week to cancel the move.

THE TAKEAWAY
• Investors balked at $40 billion cloud valuation sought by Alibaba
• Many Chinese customers don’t want to pay for public cloud services
• Alibaba’s hopes of emulating Amazon’s diversification were dashed

The plan’s failure also demonstrated that Alibaba’s hope of offsetting slowing growth in commerce with diversification in cloud services has failed. Alibaba had hoped to emulate Amazon, which over the past 20 years has built its cloud unit, Amazon Web Services, into its biggest source of profits. Alibaba, though, is struggling with the reality that businesses in China don’t want to pay much for public cloud services and other software.

Even Alibaba’s own commerce operations pushed back at what the cloud unit wanted to charge for its services after the company spun off the cloud unit, said people familiar with the situation. Alibaba Cloud and the e-commerce business disagreed over the terms on which they would do business after a spinoff, the people said. It has not been reported previously that the failed fundraising attempt and the internal wrangling contributed to the scrapping of Alibaba Cloud’s spinoff.

Alibaba blamed the decision on U.S. export restrictions placed on chips, which will hurt Chinese cloud providers’ ability to offer artificial intelligence–powered services using Nvidia’s specialized AI chips. Alibaba didn’t comment on questions sent by The Information.

While most internet companies in China, and some big corporations such as automakers, have embraced cloud computing to run their own operations, many other domestic enterprises, especially in traditional industries such as manufacturing supply chains, coal, energy and chemicals, have shown little enthusiasm for cloud adoption, analysts say. Many of those companies use their own servers and storage located on their own premises, and it is difficult to convince them that the benefits of cloud computing outweigh the costs of migrating from the current setup.

Alibaba remains the biggest cloud computing service provider in China’s domestic market. In the third quarter, Alibaba’s market share stood at 39%, followed by Huawei’s 19% and Tencent’s 15%, according to research firm Canalys. But the growth of China’s cloud computing market as a whole has slowed sharply, lagging the global market, according to Canalys.

Spooked Investors

The unexpected cancellation of Alibaba Cloud’s spinoff, along with the company’s decision to delay the initial public offering of its grocery chain, Freshippo, spooked Alibaba investors. After falling 10% on the day the spinoff was canceled, Alibaba’s market capitalization of about $200 billion is down more than 75% from an all-time high three years ago. These events threw into question the future of Alibaba’s largest restructuring in its 24-year history, announced earlier this year, which would have split the Chinese internet giant into six parts and rejuvenated its growth.

Alibaba’s top-line growth has flatlined over the past three years. In the last fiscal year through March, the company’s revenue growth slowed to 2%, from 19% in the previous year and 41% the year before that. Revenue from the China commerce business, which accounts for nearly 70% of Alibaba’s total revenue, declined 1%, compared to an 18% increase in the previous year. The company’s e-commerce business has been grappling with intense competition from growing rivals such as Pinduoduo and ByteDance, which has turned its Douyin video app into a major online shopping platform for Chinese consumers.

The expansion of cloud services, once a major driver of the company’s growth, has slowed down dramatically in the past few years. In the last fiscal year through March, the unit’s annual revenue grew 4% to 77.2 billion yuan ($10.9 billion), down from 23% growth in the previous year and 50% the year before that. Meanwhile, the cloud unit lost 5.15 billion yuan ($726 million).

The unit’s pace of growth remains slow. In the September quarter of this year, its revenue rose 2% to 27.6 billion yuan ($3.89 billion). Alibaba said it intentionally reduced the unit’s sales from low-margin contracts in the quarter as part of its efforts to focus on profitability. Alibaba executives have said the proliferation of AI software in China will create a major opportunity for the cloud unit. At the company’s annual tech conference in Hangzhou last month, Joe Tsai, Alibaba co-founder and chair, said about half of China’s conversational AI software, known as large language models, is using Alibaba Cloud.

The flattening growth happened at a tumultuous time for Alibaba’s cloud unit, which hasn’t had a permanent leader since the departure of Daniel Zhang in September. Zhang, then CEO of both Alibaba and the cloud unit, stepped down from both positions. Zhang, who became Alibaba’s CEO in 2015, was facing growing doubts about his leadership from some of Alibaba’s managers as well as investors, The Information reported last year. Since then, Eddie Wu, who replaced Zhang as Alibaba’s CEO, has been serving as interim CEO of the cloud unit. Zhang has moved on to establishing a technology investment fund, which will receive a $1 billion commitment from Alibaba.

Washington’s efforts to limit U.S. semiconductor exports to China, especially the Nvidia chips powering the development of AI, create an additional challenge for China’s cloud service providers, which already are grappling with sluggish growth. In China, all major domestic cloud providers, including Alibaba, Huawei, Tencent and Baidu, are developing their own LLMs, while also helping their cloud customers create new AI applications using those models.

The U.S. chip export control seems to have hit Alibaba harder than its Chinese peers. Tencent said this month that its chip stockpile is large enough for the company to continue developing its LLM “for at least a couple more generations.” Baidu said it has a “substantial reserve” of AI chips that will enable it to keep improving its chatbot for the next year or two. Alibaba didn’t make a similar declaration.

CrunchBase : Web3 Startup Wormhole Locks Up $225M At a $2.5B Valuation

CrunchBase : Web3 Startup Wormhole Locks Up $225M At a $2.5B Valuation

Messaging protocol startup Wormhole raised $225 million at a $2.5 billion valuation — the biggest round this year in the Web3 space.

No investor led the round, which included the likes of Coinbase Ventures, Jump Trading, Multicoin Capital and Arrington XRP Capital. Their stakes will consist of token warrants for a yet-to-be-unveiled cryptocurrency, per Fortune.

The team behind Wormhole — whose platform allows developers to communicate across different blockchains — also announced the launch of Wormhole Labs, an independent company that “specializes in building products, tools, and reference implementations” to help grow cross-chain development.

“Nearly three years ago, Wormhole was launched with the vision of a world resembling the one we see today,” said Saeed Badreg, co-founder and CEO of Wormhole Labs. “We reaffirmed our commitment to this vision by launching Wormhole Labs, dedicated to advancing the technology that makes efficient blockchain-to-blockchain communication possible.”

A brief history
Earlier this month, Bloomberg reported Jump Trading was parting ways with Wormhole, which had been part of its digital-asset unit Jump Crypto.

Jump Trading invested about $320 million into the crypto project almost two years ago following a massive hack, per the report, but has retrenched away from crypto more recently.

The round is exceedingly large when considering how slow funding has been this year in the Web3 sector. Many investors have backed away from the space as the venture market continues to slow and a series of scandals and regulations have affected the crypto industry.

Last year, nearly $26 billion was invested in VC-backed startups in the Web3 ecosystem. However, this year that number has dropped precipitously, as less than $6.5 billion have been raised globally by startups in the space, per Crunchbase data.

FT : Requiem for the American dream

Requiem for the American dream
Has US economic stagnation destroyed the myth of an ever better life for its citizens? David Leonhardt argues that it has

The American dream, a term first used by a Depression-era historian named James Truslow Adams, is all about upward mobility. Any US citizen, if they work hard, should be able to not only succeed, but rise above the station of their parents.

In The Epic of America, published in 1931, Adams acknowledged that the ongoing economic crisis threatened a dream that, for most people through the country’s history, seemed attainable. But he also ended on a note of optimism — quoting a Russian immigrant called Mary Antin, who credited the country’s public library system with elevating her from being a child who knew no English to a writer who published her first book as a teenager. As Antin herself put it, “mine is the shining future”.

But things have changed in America, as New York Times writer David Leonhardt lays out in his important new book. For the last half century, US incomes have stagnated and wealth inequality grown. A typical family in 2019 had a net worth slightly lower than the typical family in 2001. “There has not been such a long period of wealth stagnation since the Great Depression,” Leonhart writes. What’s more, life expectancy is down — a rare and disturbing anomaly for a rich nation — as is social mobility.

He calls this the Great American Stagnation, and for many it has turned the American dream into a myth that is impossible to imagine ever coming true. The Harvard academic Raj Chetty, whom Leonhardt helped popularise, found that while 92 per cent of children born in 1940 had higher household incomes than their parents, babies born in 1980 had only a 50/50 chance of doing better than the previous generation. This decline has come with massive economic, political and social costs, not just for the US, but for the world — everything from less willingness to engage with global crises such as climate change, to “an alarming anti-democratic movement” in the US, to a rise in racism and xenophobia.

There is no longer a mass movement focused on improving economic outcomes for most Americans

Ours Was the Shining Future, Leonhardt’s first book, is an attempt to explain what happened. His take, which I believe is correct, is that democratic capitalism (defined as “a system in which the government recognises its crucial role in guiding the economy”) has since the 1970s given way to a laissez-faire free-for-all in which corporations and short-termism rule. In this world, he writes, “there is no longer a mass movement focused on improving economic outcomes for most Americans. The country’s largest activist groups, on both the left and the right, are focused on other subjects.”

How did we get here? In Leonhardt’s analysis, changes to three things — political power, culture and investment — mean that average, working Americans have been left behind. Since the late 1960s, the “old labor” of the New Deal has been hijacked by a new and more entitled “Brahmin left”, increasingly made up of college-educated elites that talk down to workers rather than with them. In a country that fundamentally skews more socially conservative, the Democratic party has also become too radically progressive on social issues such as abortion, immigration and LGBTQ rights.

Because of this, they have lost the electoral votes needed to push through badly needed economic policies such as long-term public investment, as well as more progressive taxation, plus healthcare and educational reform, that would temper rising inequality. Add in a “greed is good” culture of self-interest and global market forces pushing only what’s good for the quarter, and you get a country in decline.

Leonhardt is at his best when he is doing the sort of data-driven analysis of economic and political trends that you might find on a newspaper opinion page. Storytelling is always harder, and authors of ideas books like this one often struggle to find the single personality-driven narrative that can weave together big trends in a way that keeps the reader moving forward. That’s what the truly great non-fiction books manage to do. I’m thinking of something such as David Halberstam’s The Best and the Brightest, which followed defence secretary Robert McNamara and his “whiz kid” group of policy experts to explain how America lost itself in Vietnam. Ours Was the Shining Future is not that book.

This is not to say that Leonhart fails. Rather than focusing on a single narrative, he tries to isolate the key events that drove the rise and fall of the American dream over 100 years in 10 chapters, many of which could have themselves been standalone book topics. He covers everything from the rise and fall of the industrial labour movement, to the history of progressivism, to the intersection of crime and political turmoil, and of course, the Reagan/Thatcher revolution and all it wrought.

The history of redlining and the institutionalisation of economic racism in the US is fascinating, as is the rise of students and women as bourgeois political forces on the left — African American women, for example, never struggled with the “feminine mystique”, as the writer Betty Friedan dubbed the malaise experienced by some middle-class housewives in the 1960s. They always had to deal with having both kids and jobs.

Much of Leonhardt’s recounting of the Reagan-Thatcher revolution and the rise of big business is predicable. That said, I was surprised and happy to learn that then senator Joe Biden was one of those who in the 1980s questioned the ascent of federal judge Robert Bork, whose rollback of traditional American monopoly policies led to a grotesque concentration of corporate power only now being addressed by president Biden’s antitrust efforts.

What’s fascinating — and far less known — is the way in which Old Labor hastened its own decline. The powerful Teamsters Union, for example, first supported farm workers’ leader Cesar Chavez and his efforts to build a more inclusive labour movement in the 1960s, before deciding to seize power for themselves in a way that only hastened the decline of the industrial labour movement as a whole. The continued fragmentation of the American labour movement has made it harder for unions to increase membership today, even as more and more people claim to support them.

It’s also interesting to see how much the tragic murders of pivotal figures such as Martin Luther King and Robert F Kennedy, both of whom were able to speak across class and colour lines, made it significantly more difficult to create a liberal coalition that would support all working people. Both King and Kennedy had worked to build a broader based coalition of voters who could counter southern racism, trickle-down economics, and a neoliberal fear (on both sides of the political aisle) of any kind of government intervention to guide the invisible hand to a more just outcome.

Their deaths, and the subsequent fragmentation of the New Left into more and more finely divided interest groups, show that the talent of individual leaders can matter as much as demographics when building political power.

Biden, who keeps a bust of Caesar Chavez in his office and has no fear of industrial policy or wealth redistribution, has tried to rebuild the power of working people. But while the US economy is now doing better than it has in a quarter century by many metrics, the polls don’t yet reflect that reality.

Ours Was the Shining Future ends before Bidenomics begins, although a concluding chapter supports many of the ideas that the White House has since advocated. But the US is still a democracy, and next year, there will be a presidential election. Whether America’s future will again shine may hinge on the outcome.

>>> US Research Calls

Research Calls I
  • Upgrades:
    • Ally Financial (ALLY) upgraded to Outperform from Peer Perform at Wolfe Research; tgt $39
    • Duke Energy (DUK) upgraded to Overweight from Equal Weight at Wells Fargo; tgt raised to $103
    • EverQuote (EVER) upgraded to Buy from Neutral at B. Riley Securities; tgt raised to $14
    • Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE) upgraded to Equal-Weight from Underweight at Morgan Stanley; tgt $16
    • Hudson Pacific Properties (HPP) upgraded to Neutral from Sell at Goldman; tgt raised to $6.25
    • Pinterest (PINS) upgraded to Buy from Hold at Jefferies; tgt raised to $41
    • QuinStreet (QNST) upgraded to Buy from Neutral at B. Riley Securities; tgt raised to $19
    • Regency Centers (REG) upgraded to Buy from Neutral at Compass Point; tgt $72
    • Restaurant Brands Int'l (QSR) upgraded to Outperform from Mkt Perform at Bernstein; tgt $85
    • Snap (SNAP) upgraded to Buy from Hold at Jefferies; tgt raised to $16
    • Spirit Aerosystems (SPR) upgraded to Outperform from Neutral at Robert W. Baird; tgt raised to $36
  • Downgrades:
    • Acadia Realty Trust (AKR) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at Compass Point; tgt $16
    • Bilibili (BILI) downgraded to Underweight from Equal Weight at Barclays; tgt lowered to $10
    • Ericsson (ERIC) downgraded to Neutral from Overweight at JP Morgan; tgt lowered to $5.90
    • Farfetch (FTCH) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at BTIG Research; tgt $5.50
    • Nokia (NOK) downgraded to Neutral from Overweight at JP Morgan
    • Nutrien (NTR) downgraded to Neutral from Outperform at Exane BNP Paribas
    • Okta (OKTA) downgraded to Sector Perform from Sector Outperform at Scotiabank; tgt lowered to $70
    • Okta (OKTA) downgraded to Market Perform from Outperform at TD Cowen; tgt lowered to $74
    • Okta (OKTA) downgraded to Equal Weight from Overweight at Wells Fargo; tgt lowered to $70
    • Okta (OKTA) downgraded to Sector Weight from Overweight at KeyBanc Capital Markets
    • Okta (OKTA) downgraded to Hold from Buy at WestPark Capital
    • Petco Health and Wellness (WOOF) downgraded to Neutral from Outperform at Robert W. Baird; tgt lowered to $3
  • Others:
    • Advanced Energy (AEIS) initiated with a Neutral at BofA Securities; tgt $105
    • Aveanna (AVAH) initiated with a Sell at UBS; tgt $1.50
    • Ecolab (ECL) initiated with an Outperform at Raymond James; tgt $210
    • Essential Properties Realty Trust (EPRT) initiated with a Buy at B. Riley Securities; tgt $27.50
    • GE HealthCare (GEHC) initiated with a Hold at Jefferies; tgt $80
    • Lantheus Holdings (LNTH) initiated with a Buy at Brookline Capital; tgt $100
    • Lattice Semi (LSCC) initiated with a Buy at Deutsche Bank; tgt $70
    • LifeMD (LFMD) initiated with a Buy at Craig Hallum; tgt $10
    • Molson Coors Brewing (TAP) initiated with a Hold at HSBC Securities; tgt $68
    • Nuvei Corporation (NVEI) initiated with a Buy at Seaport Research Partners; tgt $25
    • Paysafe (PSFE) initiated with a Hold at Jefferies; tgt $11
    • Service Corp (SCI) initiated with a Buy at UBS; tgt $72
    • Tenaya Therapeutics (TNYA) initiated with an Outperform at Leerink Partners; tgt $7
    • TPG Inc. (TPG) resumed with a Buy at Goldman; tgt $43
    • Veralto (VLTO) initiated with a Buy at Stifel; tgt $82

>>> US Gapping down

Gapping down
In reaction to earnings/guidance
:
  • LIZI -20.5%, PSTG -16.9%, FRO -7.8%, TITN -6.8%, CRDO -5%, DOOO -4.9%, PVH -4.4%, NCNO -3.5%, ARWR -2.9%
Other news:
  • WB -4.2% (files mixed shelf; files $300 mln convertible notes)
  • BWMN -2.2% (files $100 mln mixed shelf secondary stock offering)
  • NOAH -2% (approves new capital management policy)
  • PAX -1.6% (files stock offering)
  • CALT -1% (initiates clinical study to evaluate setanaxib in Alport Syndrome)
Analyst comments:
  • BILI -2.3% (downgraded to Underweight from Equal Weight at Barclays)
  • NOK -1.4% (downgraded to Neutral from Overweight at JP Morgan)
  • AKR -1.1% (downgraded to Neutral from Buy at Compass Point)

>>> US Gapping up

Gapping up
In reaction to earnings/guidance
:
  • CRM +9.5%, NTNX +9.1%, SNOW +7.7%, BIG +4.2%, RY +3.5%, SNPS +2.8%, LZB +1.1%, F +1.1% (reinstates guidance)
Other news:
  • VFS +16.5% (to speak and showcase its latest VF 9 Electric Vehicle (EV) at the annual United Nations summit on climate change COP28)
  • DDD +3.9% (Director bought 50000 shares worth approx. $265K (transaction date 11/28))
  • HOOD +3.5% (launches in the United Kingdom)
  • IMGN +3.1% (AbbVie to acquire ImmunoGen (IMGN) for $31.26 per share in cash a 95% premium - halted)
  • IREN +2.9% (announced the acquisition of 1.3 EH/s of Bitmain T21 miners)
  • GFL +2.8% (pricing upsized private offering of senior secured notes)
  • BRZE +2.7% (achieves the new AWS advertising and marketing technology competency)
  • VSTO +2.2% (rejects unsolicited proposal from Colt CZ)
  • STLA +1.8% (names two execs to support Jeep EV plans)
  • NUS +1.5% (opens new manufacturing facility in China)
  • ERJ +1.4% (Porter Airlines places firm order valued at $2.1 bln)
  • NVAX +1.1% (COVID-19 vaccine receives EUA in South Korea)
Analyst comments:
  • EVER +5.2% (upgraded to Buy from Neutral at B. Riley Securities)
  • HPE +3.7% (upgraded to Equal-Weight from Underweight at Morgan Stanley)
  • ALLY +1.4% (upgraded to Outperform from Peer Perform at Wolfe Research)
  • HPP +1.4% (upgraded to Neutral from Sell at Goldman)

WWD : The School of Gucci

The School of Gucci
Industry observers shared their take on why a group of former Gucci executives and designers have been rising through the ranks and appointed to lead positions in international fashion brands.

MILAN — Call it the School of Gucci.

A group of former Gucci executives and designers have been rising through the ranks and been appointed to lead positions in international fashion brands. Among them:

MILAN — Call it the School of Gucci.
A group of former Gucci executives and designers have been rising through the ranks and been appointed to lead positions in international fashion brands. Among them:
  • Jacopo Venturini, previously executive vice president, merchandising and global markets at Gucci, was named chief executive officer of Valentino in 2020;
  • Gianfilippo Testa, who joined Kering in 2016 as Gucci president Greater China and in 2019 became president of Europe, Middle East and Africa and vice president global retail at the Italian brand, was appointed in 2022 as CEO of Alexander McQueen;
  • Robert Triefus, most recently CEO of Gucci Vault and Metaverse Ventures, senior executive vice president, corporate and brand strategy, has been Stone Island’s CEO since May;
  • Gianluca Borghi, also a Gucci alum, was named CEO of 10 Corso Como last May, tasked with the expansion of the concept store brand worldwide under new owner Tiziana Fausti.
On the design front, Simone Bellotti was named design director of Bally in May after a 16-year tenure at Gucci, working with both former creative directors Frida Giannini and Alessandro Michele while Davide Renne last month was appointed creative director of Moschino after designing women’s collections for two decades at Gucci, eventually becoming head designer of womenswear. Sadly, his premature death earlier this month left the industry shaken and shattered Renne’s opportunity to prove his talent leading the brand.

Simone Bellotti
So what gives? What lies behind the successful trajectory of these professionals, who consistently rose through the ranks to the number-one spot? Of course the talent must be there in the first place, but most observers connecting the dots pointed to former president and CEO Marco Bizzarri’s M.O.
“The companies that work best are those where there is a clear division of roles between creativity and finance — while the vision must be aligned there, there must not be any interference,” said Paola Cillo, associate professor of management and technology at Bocconi University. Cillo credited Bizzarri, who exited Gucci in September, with “allowing to structure the company and grow its human resources with more specialization.”

The executive, she contended, wanted Gucci to become “a learning organization; his idea was to leave behind the idea of luxury companies as super exclusive and controlled with manic perfection, which is the enemy of creativity. He did not want to penalize experimentation, which means taking risks. Repetition, sticking to the path you know, is safe. Experimentation was not seen as a cultural value of luxury, where you want to minimize mistakes, but you can innovate and experiment only if you take acceptable risks and make thoughtful mistakes. Being accountable was integrated in the Gucci values — to learn more, you tackle projects that are out of your comfort zone.”


Problems could be seen from different perspectives, and this autonomy “gave employees confidence, making them grow.”
Cillo believes that creativity at Gucci “was not confined only to the creative department but was endorsed everywhere, from merchandising to CRM.” For example, for a leaner organization, Bizzarri asked Venturini to supervise not only merchandising but also retail, “two sectors that sometimes don’t talk to each other and can be in conflict,” she said.
Bizzarri led a textbook turnaround at the Italian luxury brand. With Michele, who left in November 2022, the size of Gucci tripled since 2015, reaching sales last year of 9.73 billion euros.
Cillo also praised Bizzarri’s “very interesting intuition to create the shadow committee; he was the first to think of this.” This meant the shadow committee, made up of a group of under-age-30 Gucci employees, would be taken to meetings with the executive committee, discussing the same topics or asked for ideas on different processes. “If you want to sell to Gen Z, it’s important to take them into account and not see them from the rear window but looking at the future.”
Marco Bizzarri, former Gucci president and CEO.
PIOTR NIEPSUJ/COURTESY OF GUCCI

Giovanna Brambilla, partner at Milan-based executive search firm Value Search, said Gucci for years has been considered a model to be followed in the relaunch of a brand. “Gucci showed to the world how the courage to innovate, change the rules and present a revolutionary point of view that is also consistent, can lead to exceptional results.”
She credited Michele and Bizzarri for leading the company, but also quoted Michael Jordan, saying that “talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence win championships.”

Gucci’s success depended on the work of a “very dedicated team, aligned with the vision of the creative director but also with the business objectives to reach, which allowed the brand to reach exceptional successes season after season, year after year, winning the championship for several consecutive years. Teamwork, the 360-degree vision on the project, the alignment, which also allowed cross-pollination within the company, all these ingredients worked for the best recipe” and these experiences have allowed the talents involved to grow and move on.
Andrea Bandiera, senior recruitment and creative manager at Lagente, a Milan-based agency representing designers, concurred, saying that since Michele took his bow at the end of the fall 2015 men’s collection with the whole team, “each talent part of the project was fundamental for its success.”
He opined that the women’s fall 2023 collection helmed by the design team did feel like a continuation of Michele’s imprint, confirming how the collective mindset had probably resonated throughout Michele’s tenure at the luxury house.
He also credited Bizzarri for supporting Michele and his vision, giving him time to leave a substantial mark.
Bandiera underscored how second-in-command designers often act as filters between the creative director and other company functions, turning them into skilled interlocutors for management. He views the pragmatism embedded in their role as a valuable asset when they take on the top job elsewhere, as is the case for Renne at Moschino and Bellotti at Bally.
“They are typically able to respond swiftly to sudden changes [in the company’s strategy],” he said. “They certainly have a creative vision but can also bear and handle corporate dynamics, which on the contrary are marked by frictions between creative directors and management. These are professionals very well accustomed to that kind of communication stream,” he argued.
Jacopo Venturini
COURTESY OF VALENTINO
It shouldn’t be omitted that LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton is also widely recognized for raising top-level executives with stellar careers, such as Michael Burke and Pietro Beccari, who have contributed to the global growth of the brands under their tenure, from Dior and Louis Vuitton to Fendi.


Also, it can’t be denied that Gucci has struggled over the last few years with a slower growth than many of its luxury peers. After Michele’s appointment in 2015, Gucci posted growth exceeding 35 percent for five consecutive quarters by the first quarter of 2018, prompting Bizzarri to set a 10 billion euro revenue target for the brand in June that year. Since 2015, the size of Gucci tripled and reached sales last year of 9.73 billion euros.
However, organic sales at Gucci were up 1 percent in the first quarter, compared with a 14 percent drop in the prior three months, still under Bizzarri’s watch. At the time of Michele’s exit, sources said that the designer was asked “to initiate a strong design shift” to light another fire under Gucci — a request he apparently resisted — and that parent company Kering chairman and CEO François-Henri Pinault was set on trying to recover the uber luxury consumer by further elevating the brand.

Among the initiatives conceived to raise the brand’s profile in key markets was the launch of Salon, permanent and temporary spaces where high rollers can order bespoke luggage, exotic leather goods, furniture and high jewelry, with prices ranging from about 40,000 euros to 3 million euros.
The first ultra-luxe Salon store opened in Los Angeles in April, complete with fresh-off-the-red-carpet gowns.
In a serendipitous turn of events, Venturini has also been set on highlighting Valentino as a couture house since his arrival at the brand, and Sabato De Sarno, previously fashion director overseeing both men’s and women’s collections and working with creative director Pierpaolo Piccioli, was named to the top creative post at Gucci last January, succeeding Michele.
No matter, despite Gucci’s slowdown, its textbook turnaround still rings true with observers. Rodgy Guerrera, founder of boutique head hunter Rodgy Guerrera & Partners, believes much of the success of Gucci and of its executives and designers comes from “sharing ideas” and promoting an exchange between the business and design teams. She credited Bizzarri for leaving them much creative freedom, “which allowed the company to grow, but also the individuals to grow. Freedom is fundamental to this end.”
“In recent years, Gucci created a new aesthetic language, making the historical brand accessible to a younger and underrepresented audience, thanks to the support of effective inclusive business strategies, implementing an approach fully immersing to a diverse community, combining the existing and new audience,” said Eva Zimmerman, coordinator business department at Polimoda.


This was “an example of how to perfectly connect artistic and business values through a vast appreciation and an understanding of creative minds. Gucci succeeded in leading the brand into a new positioning and a clear market image, in a new world in which fluidity is central. A business strategy effectively used by niche brands, but highly difficult to scale to a large international fashion house. An approach which required a broad spectrum of international cultural awareness and sensitivity while being perceptive to digitalization, and overall innovation in terms of customer engagement.”
Zimmerman concluded by saying that she “imagine[d] the courage of trust to rely on human ethics, which are no longer values linked to a business approach of an industry relying on trends, must-buy products and immediate turnover.”