WSJ : Sirius Hires Top Builder of Disney+ Streaming Service

Sirius Hires Top Builder of Disney+ Streaming Service
Satellite radio company bets on one of streaming tech’s key designers to help attract listeners beyond the car

Satellite radio broadcaster SiriusXM has tapped a top architect of the Disney + streaming service to help it broaden its appeal to audiences outside the car.

Joe Inzerillo, who as executive vice president and chief technology officer of Walt Disney Co. ’s streaming unit played a key role in the creation and launch of the Disney + platform, is joining Sirius XM Holdings Inc. SIRI 1.95% next month as chief product and technology officer, the company said.

In that role, Mr. Inzerillo is hoping to jump-start innovation at a company that once disrupted the over-the-air radio business and now finds itself being challenged by streaming titans that dominate music and podcast listening on mobile and at home.

Mr. Inzerillo said SiriusXM won’t be afraid to “throw stuff against the wall” and build products that the 150 million collective listeners of its platforms want to use. “It’s better to disrupt yourself than let somebody do it from the outside,” he said.

SiriusXM, whose radios are installed in eight out of every 10 new cars sold, is facing heated competition from tech companies, including Spotify Technology SA, Apple Inc. and Amazon.com Inc., whose on-demand and curated audio streaming options have wrested listeners from radio. Such streaming services have become ubiquitous across devices and follow users from their cellphones to their desktops, voice-activated home speakers and into their cars.

SiriusXM reported 34.1 million total subscribers at the end of the third quarter, down from 34.3 million in the year-earlier period—and down from its peak of 34.9 million subscribers in 2019 when it completed its acquisition of Pandora. Changes in promotional plans with some auto makers and lower vehicle shipments during the pandemic due to supply-chain issues have weighed on the business. Excluding subscribers who get the service free in promotions, self-pay subscriptions reached a record 32 million in the latest quarter.

Sirius’s $3 billion bet on Pandora was meant to help it expand its streaming offerings. The internet radio service known for its customized stations was at one time the largest streaming music provider in the U.S. but has been losing users for years. Pandora rolled out on-demand subscription options, but adoption was slow and it has refocused on its ad-supported business.

SiriusXM has since placed more bets in podcasting—a rapidly growing medium that has become a hotbed of deals for talent and content as Spotify invested hundreds of millions of dollars—buying up E.W. Scripps Co. ’s Stitcher podcasting unit and inking an exclusive deal for Marvel programs.

“The Sirius acquisition of Pandora was really smart, and I think not fully capitalized on yet,” Mr. Inzerillo said, adding that there are more ways to explore bundling up the company’s content. “I don’t think we’ve fully capitalized on how to put that all together.”

Catching up is a tall order: Spotify has 381 million monthly active users and 172 million paying subscribers, and it recently passed Apple to become the top podcast platform in the U.S. by listeners, according to Edison Research.

“Joe brings significant experience building and leading innovative digital platforms, and he will be instrumental as SiriusXM continues to evolve,” said Sirius XM Chief Executive Jennifer Witz.

Eight-year veteran Jim Cady, Sirius XM’s innovation chief who has been serving as interim head of product development, will retire after working with Mr. Inzerillo through the end of February, the company said.

Mr. Inzerillo is viewed as an innovator in streaming. He joined Disney after the company acquired control of BAMTech LLC, the direct-to-consumer platform created by Major League Baseball where he was chief technology officer. BAMTech is considered a pioneer in the streaming of live sports. Its technology also was used as the backbone for several other streaming services, including World Wrestling Entertainment Inc.’s platform and HBO Go, the predecessor to HBO Max.

At Disney, Mr. Inzerillo worked very closely with Kevin Mayer, the executive originally tasked with building Disney+ and making the media giant a player in streaming that could rival Netflix Inc. Mr. Mayer left Disney in 2017.

Mr. Inzerillo said that with nearly 120 million subscribers world-wide, Disney+ has hit its stride and he wanted to move on to new challenges as his role there was becoming more operational.

“I’ve made a career out of building,” he said

Disney is expected to name a successor to Mr. Inzerillo, a person familiar with the matter said.

FT : US Democrats push Fed for tougher action against inflation

US Democrats push Fed for tougher action against inflation
Moderates worry voters could punish Joe Biden’s party over high prices

Moderate Democrats are pushing the Federal Reserve to move more aggressively towards tighter monetary policy to stamp out inflation, in a sign of their mounting concern about the political fallout from high prices.

The pressure on the US central bank from the centrist wing of the Democratic party has increased ahead of next week’s Federal Open Market Committee meeting, during which the Fed is expected to announce a more rapid drawdown of its asset purchases, setting the stage for possible interest rate increases later next year.

It reflects growing unease within Joe Biden’s party that high inflation could prove toxic with voters in the 2022 midterm elections — and will not be reined in soon enough by his $1.75tn childcare and climate change legislation, whose structural reforms to the economy will only have an impact in later years.

“The Fed needs to start tapering immediately and then they need to raise interest rates. Both those things can be done by March,” Jake Auchincloss, a Democrat from Massachusetts and member of the House of Representatives financial services committee, which oversees monetary policy, told the Financial Times.

“I think chair [Jay] Powell would do well to end the decade of easy money,” he added.

The Democratic debate over inflation keeps intensifying at every new data release. In November the consumer price index rose by 6.8 per cent compared to a year earlier, its fastest pace since 1982.

Biden on Friday acknowledged that inflation had been a “real bump in the road”, though White House officials still expect prices to ease and are glad that petrol costs have begun to decline.

When the US president appointed Powell for a second term as Fed chair, Biden suggested he believed he was the best person to tackle inflation, but the White House is not commenting on specific central bank policies.

Vocal support for tighter monetary policy is still relatively rare from Democrats. The party has long emphasised the need for the Fed to maintain as much support for the recovery as possible in order to fully honour its mandate to pursue full employment that would benefit all segments of the population. Some key Democrats still suggest that should be the priority.

“At this moment, when workers are finally gaining bargaining power, we need to continue pushing for full employment and a job market where companies compete for workers by offering higher wages and better benefits,” Sherrod Brown, the chair of the Senate banking committee, and an Ohio Democrat, said in a statement to the FT.

“The Fed should make sure our economy works for workers and their families, not Wall Street,” he added.

But others are calling for the central bank to move faster on inflation.

Joe Manchin, the Democratic senator from West Virginia, is an unabashed critic of the Fed’s bond-buying, and Mark Warner, the Democrat from Virginia, suggested to Powell that he should speed up the “tapering” of asset purchases during a hearing last month.

“I believe that tapering, and frankly accelerating it, can kind of serve as an insurance policy if . . . we see this potential overheating of the economy,” Warner said on November 30.

Ian Katz, an analyst at Capital Alpha Partners, said the shift was not surprising given the political pressures facing Democrats. “If inflation threatens the economy and the prospects of Democrats in elections, there are going to be a lot fewer doves out there,” he said.

One Democratic congressional aide in the Senate said many Democrats, as well as the White House, were taking inflation more seriously as they recognised this was a new “political moment”.

“In prior cycles, we have always talked about more jobs, better paying jobs. We have both of those now. But to many voters it don’t feel [like it]. The money in their pockets isn’t stretching as far.”

The growing Democratic hawkishness is taking a variety of forms — including renewed criticism that loose Fed policies are driving disparity. Jon Ossoff, the Democratic senator from Georgia, pressed Powell about what specific economic purpose the bond-buying programme serves at a time when aggregate demand is “quite strong” and capital markets are “highly liquid”.

“Does it not for example, while it provides additional liquidity to capital markets, worsen inequality by driving up equity and asset valuations and shifting more cash on to the balance sheets of major financial institutions, high net worth individuals and investors?” Ossoff asked.

Auchincloss suggested the Fed was far better equipped than the Biden administration and Congress to tackle inflation. “Fiscal policy is like an aircraft carrier, it takes a long time to get geared up, a long time to move, it takes a long time to deploy. It’s powerful, but it takes a while. Monetary policy is like fighter jets. They’re very nimble,” he said. “When it says it’s gonna do something, it’ll do it, but it can operate on a timeline of weeks and months.”

FT : Private equity pursues investment advisers for returns and fresh capital

Private equity pursues investment advisers for returns and fresh capital
Apollo purchase of Griffin is latest in wave of acquisitions

Private equity firms, among the world’s largest custodians of institutional money, have been buying up companies that advise individuals on their wealth.

The number of private equity deals for registered investment advisers has surged to a record 223 so far in 2021, according to data from investment bank Echelon Partners. The sum is up almost two-thirds from 2020 and more than three times the number of deals five years ago.

The latest came this month, when Apollo agreed to buy the US wealth distribution and asset management arm of Los Angeles-based Griffin Capital, which has more than $5bn in actively managed closed-end funds, including a credit and real estate fund and dozens of staff who distribute investment strategies.

Other private equity firms such as KKR, Hellman & Friedman and TA Associates have been acquiring investment adviser groups.

Wealth management typically has a high degree of recurring revenue, with customer “stickiness” that’s similar to a software company, said Daniel Seivert, chief executive of Echelon Partners.

And in September, the Securities and Exchange Commission’s asset management committee recommended allowing retail investors to invest in private fund strategies, Seivert said — potentially enabling wealth management clients to invest with the firms that back their advisers.

In the Griffin deal, Apollo will not only pick up an asset management company that it can scale, but Griffin also distributes funds to registered investment advisers and brokers, who are a potentially huge new source of private equity assets.

Apollo wants to raise at least $50bn in capital from individual investors within the next five years, the firm said in a presentation in October. This segment accounted for 5 per cent of the capital that Apollo raised on average between 2018 to 2020, and the firm hopes to grow that to at least 30 per cent, Stephanie Drescher, Apollo’s chief client and product development officer, said during the presentation.

“Scaling global wealth is our key bet,” she said. “It’s a market that is two times the size of the institutional market, yet they’re under-allocated by two-to-five times to alternatives.”

Private equity firms are targeting the wealth management industry in part because technology has made it easier for individual investors to access “alternatives,” or more specialised investments than ordinary stock and bond markets.


“Private equity sponsors continue to recognise that solutions exist to help capture what has evolved from a more fractured and less transparent marketplace to one that can deliver more value across broader investor segments,” said Georges Archibald, head of the Americas for financial services provider Apex Group.

Other wealth management deals by private equity this year have included TA Associates’ investment in the advisory group Caprock and KKR buying half of $20bn Beacon Pointe Advisors from Abry Partners last month.

KKR wants to support growth plans for Beacon Pointe, a female-led registered investment adviser, and sees its Women’s Advisory Institute as important to serving women, Chris Harrington, a KKR partner, said. The investment in Beacon Pointe follows KKR’s exit this year from wealth management firm Focus Financial, which it took public in 2018.

Some US-based private equity firms are looking to less competitive markets overseas. This summer, Lightyear Capital funds bought UK-based Wren Sterling Financial Planning, and Flexpoint Ford acquired UK-based AFH Financial Group.

Aside from direct investments, most wealth deals were executed by portfolio companies owned by private equity, such as Leonard Green-backed serial acquirer Mariner Wealth and Oak Hill-backed Mercer Advisors. Mariner Wealth announced its ninth acquisition of the year last month, while Mercer Advisors scooped up 15 RIAs this year.

“Nearly all the most active strategic acquirers in today’s market are backed by prominent private equity firms and are often backed by more than one sponsor,” Seivert said.

FT : French cloth maker becomes touchstone of re-industrialisation

French cloth maker becomes touchstone of re-industrialisation
Presidential election and pandemic heighten political importance of nation’s quest for ‘economic sovereignty’

Last year, as Covid-19 first swept across Europe, a French textiles company tweeted it would start making surgical masks. Within hours, the ministry of health asked how many it could produce; two days later, Les Tissages de Charlieu had made 100,000 masks for French hospitals and public workers.

“Our aim was to onshore a very simple, basic commodity — to prove that it can be done,” said Antoine Saint-Pierre, co-director of the company that is based in Charlieu, a textiles town for more than 500 years. The firm has now also begun making millions of tote shopping bags, generating one-fifth of the emissions of those imported from China, according to the company.

Supply chain disruptions wrought by the pandemic have made “national economic resilience” and “reshoring” of critical manufactured goods — be they vaccines, semiconductors or protective equipment and textiles — industrial policy buzzwords across the western world. But that is especially so in France, where the return of manufacturing production and jobs from overseas has become a hot-button issue ahead of next year’s presidential election.

Candidates across the political spectrum have vied to convince voters of their vision of how to reverse the country’s industrial decline, which has seen industry’s contribution to the French economy halve between 1970 and 2020 to 11 per cent.

Meanwhile, the government of President Emmanuel Macron, who has long believed Europe should reclaim its economic sovereignty, points proudly to the €830m it has handed out to companies since 2020 to support reshoring projects.

“We provided a boost during the crisis to ensure that manufacturers did not stop investing. It was our obsession, and it worked really well,” industry minister Agnès Pannier-Runacher told the Financial Times. She added that over 10,000 industrial companies got financial support from France’s EU recovery package, with more than 620 specifically being helped to reshore their activities.

Yet economists question whether such a wide range of cash injections is the right way to reboot domestic manufacturing. They may bolster small companies such as Les Tissages de Charlieu, but can they change France’s industrial fabric?

The textiles industry provides a vivid example of the issues at stake, as well as some of the reasons why economists are sceptical.

Central to France’s industrial revolution, the sector was savaged in the late 20th century by the offshoring of production to Asia and eastern Europe, where costs are lower and regulations less stringent. Nowadays, 90 per cent of textiles and clothes bought in France are made abroad, according to 2015 data from Insee. Ethically minded consumers also have limited visibility into factory working conditions or the origins of raw materials.

That changed somewhat during the pandemic, as textile imports fell. With the over €1m of state aid that Les Tissages de Charlieu received to help it make tote bags, the company is now also more than doubling its workforce to 180 people — equivalent to 10 per cent of Charlieu’s population. Its tote bags are greener too.

The state has shown a “very good commitment” to onshoring, Saint-Pierre said. “There has been a real shift in the government’s speech and actions.”


However, whether reshoring textiles production can reverse French industrial decline is a moot point, economists argue.

‘Reshoring’ is often a “polite word for protectionism”, Isabelle Mejean, an economist at Sciences Po, said. “It is not clear precisely what it means,” she added, even if it is often presented as being able to “solve everything”, be that more economic sovereignty, jobs or resilience to climate change.


Mejean and Xavier Jaravel, a fellow member of France’s Council of Economic Analysis which provides the government with independent advice, recommended in April the government would do a better job of boosting French industry and protecting supply chains if it prioritised “vulnerable inputs with high technological content”.

They warned that “imperfectly targeted industrial policies would be costly for consumers, without fundamentally enhancing [economic] resilience” and cited priority sectors such as aeronautics, electronics and chemicals. Textiles came a distant second last, before “others”.

Even so, Pannier-Runacher defended Macron’s industrial record. Leaving aside the effectiveness of France’s recovery plan, which will take time to come through, she pointed to a net increase in industrial jobs between 2017 and 2019, when the pandemic reversed the trend.

“We have created the conditions to improve France’s competitiveness,” she said.


Yet while surveys show that France’s business climate has become more attractive thanks to corporate tax cuts and labour market reforms introduced by Macron, manufacturing remains depressed and the trade deficit in industrial products has continued to grow.


Patrick Artus, chief economist at Natixis, argues that France needs to benchmark itself against Germany, which has kept the more lucrative parts of its industrial power base onshore, including its Mittelstand businesses, car manufacturing and research and development initiatives.

Rather than just offering cash handouts, France specifically needs to further reduce business taxes that are €50bn higher than Germany per year, improve technical skills, and put more public money at risk when financing innovation and high technology start-ups.

“You can engage in pretty aggressive offshoring and still protect domestic industry,” agreed Gilles Moec, chief economist at insurer Axa. “As a free-trader, I don’t think we should give up the good fight that in general international trade is good, and is defined by specialisation. You will not do everything better at home.”

Back in Charlieu, Saint-Pierre half agrees. He believes it would be “crazy to say all production should come back to France”. But he also argues that many manufacturing processes can be reshored, creating thousands of jobs while also cutting the environmental impact of production.

“We don’t have to de-globalise, we just need to find an equilibrium,” he said.

FT : KKR co-chiefs could net $1bn each as part of stock incentive scheme

KKR co-chiefs could net $1bn each as part of stock incentive scheme
Private equity group says awards for Joseph Bae and Scott Nuttall are intended to drive shareholder value

Joseph Bae and Scott Nuttall, the recently appointed co-chief executives of KKR, have been granted incentive stock awards that could be worth up to more than $1bn each if the private equity group’s stock continues to soar in the coming years.

Bae and Nuttall were granted 7.5m stock units as part of incentive awards that vest based on the performance of KKR’s equity. They will kick in at a price of $95.80 a share, or a 27 per cent gain from its closing price of $75.34 on Friday.

The awards, which require Bae and Nuttall to be employed by KKR up to the end of 2026, will vest in five increments in ranges from $95.80 to $135.80. They will be forfeited by either executive if they are terminated for cause, or if KKR’s stock fails to meet the price-vesting ranges by the end of 2028.

Assuming KKR shares hit the final price of $135.80 and trade for 20 days above that, the overall award could be worth more than $1bn each to Bae and Nuttall.

“These awards are intended to incentivise the co-chief executive officers to help drive stock price performance in a manner that is aligned with stockholder interests,” KKR said in a Friday evening filing made with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

“KKR currently intends that no additional equity incentive awards will be granted to Messrs Bae and Nuttall during the next five years,” the group added.

KKR’s shares have soared in recent years as assets pour into the private equity industry and buoyant markets help drive record profits. Its shares have gained 88 per cent this year and more than tripled since the beginning of 2019.

In October KKR co-founders Henry Kravis and George Roberts named Bae and Nuttall as co-chief executives, handing over the reins of the eponymous firm they founded in 1976. Both men were long seen as successors after being named co-presidents in 2017, assuming leadership of the private equity group’s daily operations.

In recent years Bae, 49, had overseen much of KKR’s global investment platform, including its private equity operations in the US and Asia-Pacific.

Nuttall, 49, led many of KKR’s big strategic initiatives, such as its 2010 listing on the New York Stock Exchange, its conversion from a partnership to a corporation in 2018, and the building of its more than $25bn balance sheet, which now represents a significant piece of more than $65bn market value.

They earned more than $35m in compensation last year, according to filings, and each own more than $1bn in KKR holdings from previous stock awards that have risen in value alongside the group’s soaring share price.

Bae holds a net worth of $1.2bn, according to the Forbes rich list, while Nuttall’s net worth is $1.4bn.

(ZH) Have Professional Athletes Become The Canary-In-The-COVID-Coalmine?

Have Professional Athletes Become The Canary-In-The-COVID-Coalmine?

The sudden spate of on-field emergencies has raised questions among several seasoned veterans of the game...
Amid studies showing a link between some vaccines and heart problems, professional athletes appear to be collapsing on the field of dreams like never before. Are these incidences normal occurrences, coincidences or symptomatic of mandatory vaccine programs?
As more countries make vaccinations mandatory requirements for participating in many aspects of life, including that of sporting events, stadiums around the world have become something of testing grounds for determining the efficacy of the rollout. Thus far the results do not look particularly promising.
Last month, the world of female rugby was rocked by the news that Scottish sensation Siobhan Cattigan, 26, died suddenly “in non-suspicious circumstances,” as the Daily Mail reported. Yet anytime a young person – not least of all a healthy star athlete – dies unexpectedly there is some inherent element of ‘suspicion’ involved. Perhaps not in the criminal sense, but certainly from a medical point of view.
Moreover, had Cattigan’s premature death, the cause of which has not been disclosed, been an isolated event then it could be chalked up as something of a tragic ‘fluke.’ It appears, however, that Cattigan’s sudden death was not an isolated event, but rather part of a disturbing trend in the world of sports.
Last month, three professional athletes were stricken by health emergencies in the same week. Football player for Wigan Athletic, Charlie Wyke, 28, suffered cardiac arrest during scrimmage and was taken to hospital where he was reported in stable condition. Wyke credited emergency CPR performed by manager Leam Richardson with helping to save his life.
Days later, John Fleck, 30, a player with Sheffield United, was carried off the field on a stretcher during a Championship game against Reading. The Daily Mail, citing an anonymous source, reported rather defensively that “John Fleck’s issue was not vaccination related.” The list doesn’t end there.
In late October, Barcelona player Sergio Aguero, 33, considered one of the best strikers today, had his dazzling career cut short after being diagnosed with cardiac arrhythmia following a match; on November 1st, Icelandic midfielder Emil Palsson, 28, required resuscitation after a cardiac arrest 12 minutes into play; on June 12, Denmark midfielder Christian Eriksen, 29, named Danish Football Player of the Year a record five times, suffered a heart attack at Euro 2020 and given cardiopulmonary resuscitation. He announced his retirement from the sport after being fitted with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator to regulate his heartbeat.
Do any of these health emergencies prove that the mandated Covid vaccines were to blame? Absolutely not. In fact, many medical professionals who have been quoted in the media on these incidences are inclined to blame “coincidence.” The Daily Mail went so far as to say that many scientists have rejected the suggestion that vaccines were suspect “especially as the country braces itself for a possible wave of more cases and deaths from Covid after the discovery of the Omicron variant.”
The conclusion by Reuters, after consulting with a number of medical experts, was nearly identical: “No evidence COVID-19 vaccines are linked to athletes collapsing or dying from myocarditis.”
Nevertheless, the sudden spate of on-field emergencies has raised questions among several seasoned veterans of the game.
“In my 19 years as a pro footballer & and then my 20+ years watching and commenting, I’ve never seen ANY players collapse, pass out, etc either live or during any of the thousands of training sessions and matches I’ve taken part in,” remarked ex pro-footballer Kevin Gage over Twitter.
Former England star Trevor Sinclair speaking about the incident involving Fleck on radio station TalkSport, commented: “I think everyone wants to know if he (Fleck) has had the Covid vaccine.”
Anecdotal evidence aside, is there anything in the medical literature to suggest a cause and effect may be in play? The answer points to the affirmative, with various studies indicating possible health issues associated with the vaccines, yet these risks, albeit rare, are being downplayed by social and mainstream media.
In early November, the American Heart Association, not your average right-wing group of conspiracy theorists, released a report with the lengthy title: ‘Abstract 10712: Mrna COVID Vaccines Dramatically Increase Endothelial Inflammatory Markers and ACS Risk as Measured by the PULS Cardiac Test: a Warning.’
The conclusion from the AHA seems worthy of some attention: “We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.”
Despite the long-standing reputation of the AHA, Twitter actually fixed a warning stamp on the link to the study, claiming it may be “unsafe.”
Meanwhile, the first glimpse of Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine trial data – which is being released at the excruciatingly slow rate of 500 pages per month, meaning that full disclosure will not occur until the year 2076 – does little to instill confidence.
Zerohedge, quoting journalist Kyle Becker, reported “there were a total of 42,086 case reports for adverse reactions (25,379 medically confirmed, 16,707 non-medically confirmed), spanning 158,893 total events.
More than 25,000 of the events were classified as “nervous system disorders.”
Again, none of this proves that the vaccines are to blame for the apparent rise in collapses now happening in various sporting events. Indeed, it has been suggested that Covid-19 itself may be to blame for increasing the frequency of cardiac arrest through “some inflammatory response,” Dr. Satjit Bhusri, a cardiologist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City, told WebMD.
The point is we just don’t know. As the world navigates its way painstakingly through this period of impenetrable darkness, along a coastline riddled with dangerous rock formations, it would seem wise not to discount any possibilities, no matter how unsettling. That is the only way of allowing the science to indiscriminately determine the facts. Ignoring the other side of the debate as ‘conspiracy theorists,’ however, will prevent the necessary discussion from happening in the first place, which may very well be the goal behind such a risky game.

Barrons : Demand Is High for Autos and Appliances. That Helps This Spanish Stain

Demand Is High for Autos and Appliances. That Helps This Spanish Stainless Steelmaker.

The performance of stainless steel manufacturer Acerinox is closely linked to the expansion of global economies, which means the stock was hit hard by slumping demand during the height of the pandemic.

The Madrid-based company, which makes and distributes hot- and cold-rolled stainless steel used in the aerospace and automotive industries and in household goods such as washing machines, was operating at just 65% capacity in the second quarter of 2020. Its shares (ticker: ACX.Spain) fell 32% from December 2019 to October 2020.

The stock has bounced back this year, gaining 14%, to a recent 10.30 euros (about $11.64). Last month, Acerinox, which markets its products in Europe, Asia, and the Americas, flagged a jump in demand for alloys and stainless steel. Acerinox says it’s on course for its strongest annual results in its 51-year history, despite rising energy prices.

The pickup in demand, which analysts predict will be sustained well into 2022, isn’t the only catalyst for growth. The company’s $587 million acquisition of German-based alloy maker VDM Metals two years ago is performing ahead of expectations, which Bastian Synagowitz, an analyst at Deutsche Bank, predicts will lead to a continuation of buybacks or extra dividends. He has a price target of €17 on Acerinox.

Although Acerinox hasn’t announced plans for its loss-making Malaysian unit, there has been speculation about a divestiture. A sale would boost the stock to €20, predicts Franco German broker Oddo BHF. Acerinox declined to comment.

Iñigo Recio Pascual, an analyst at Spain’s GVC Gaesco, tells Barron’s that “order books suggest that, at least in the first part of [2022], the stainless steel market will remain strong. Inventories still remain at reasonable levels.” He adds that another growth driver is price negotiations with customers, particularly in the auto sector, for annual contracts, “with good prospects for 2022, especially in Europe, as during 2021 price increases have not been passed on to them.”

Acerinox has a market value of €2.7 billion, with production sites in the U.S., Germany, Spain, Malaysia, and South Africa. It fetches a low 5.1 times this year’s expected earnings, in line with its peers.

In 2020, Acerinox posted revenue of €4.6 billion, down from €4.7 billion in the prior year. Nonetheless, profit was €49 million, versus a €60 million loss in 2019. The company credited this to cost-cutting. In this year’s first nine months, net profit rose to €373 million from €31 million in the corresponding period a year ago. Revenue climbed 38%, to €4.77 billion.

Steel demand depends on overall GDP growth, with autos and household appliances key. In 2020, companies held steel inventories to a minimum. “Demand has come back with strength,” says analyst Pascual. Despite a fourth wave of Covid-19, major economies such as Germany and the U.S. are resisting a return to growth-sapping restrictions.

Recent developments in China also might help Acerinox. In April, under pressure to create a more level playing field, Beijing agreed to remove a 13% value-added-tax rebate for steel exports, which will increase costs for Chinese producers. Acerinox doesn’t sell directly in China, but that nation accounts for 50% of global steel consumption and production, so its influence on demand and production is important for overall prices, analysts say.

In a quarterly update in November, Acerinox’s chief executive officer, Bernardo Velazquez Herreros, said: “We estimate that Ebitda [earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization] will improve slightly from the third to the fourth quarter, due to strong demand and low inventory levels. If these forecasts prove correct, we will achieve our best results ever.”

Barrons : LVMH Has Thrived During the Pandemic. The Luxury-Goods Group’s Gains C

LVMH Has Thrived During the Pandemic. The Luxury-Goods Group’s Gains Can Continue.

An interesting thing happened this year in the world of mega-billionaires. Jeffrey Bezos, who harnessed the power of the internet to revolutionize modern commerce, was briefly knocked from his perch as the world’s richest man by a Frenchman in the rag trade. OK, not just any Frenchman, or any rags: We’re talking here about French billionaire Bernard Arnault, chairman and CEO of LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton , the world’s largest maker and seller of luxury goods.
Arnault’s leap to No. 1 shined a light on the sprawling LVMH (ticker: MC.France) empire, which encompasses some 75 “houses,” or brands, in product categories ranging from apparel and leather goods to watches and jewelry, perfumes and cosmetics, and wines and spirits. The Paris-based company also operates 5,000 stores. Among its best-known fashion and jewelry brands are Louis Vuitton, Christian Dior, Fendi, Bulgari, and Tiffany. LVMH also owns watchmaker Tag Heuer, the champagne brands Moët & Chandon and Dom Perignon, and winemaker Chateau d’Yquem.

Arnault’s fortune—recently an estimated $195 billion, according to Forbes—derives largely from his controlling stake in LVMH. The Arnault Family Group, the family’s holding company, owns about 47% of LVMH’s shares and 60% of its voting stock, primarily through its ownership of Christian Dior (CDI.France), LVMH’s largest shareholder.
@joemckendry
What made Arnault the world’s richest man, however, isn’t merely his stock holdings—or his formidable business skills and the cachet of his brands. Credit must also go to the explosive growth in luxury-goods demand among the world’s increasingly affluent consumers, in particular the burgeoning middle and upper-middle classes in Asia and a new wave of American millionaires and billionaires.
This year, with travel and socializing curtailed by the Covid pandemic, and equity and real-estate markets on a tear, the wealthy have seen their riches pile up, and business has been tres bien. LVMH is expected to generate revenue of more than 62 billion euros ($69.5 billion) in 2021, up 38% from last year’s depressed results and 15% from 2019’s prepandemic level.
Bernard Arnault during a visit of the Christian Dior store on Paris’ Avenue Montaigne.
Stephan Gladieu/Figarophoto/Redux
The company’s shares have also shot up, along with those of smaller luxury rivals Hermès (RMS.France), Kering (KER.France), and Richemont (CFR.Switzerland). LVMH’s Paris-listed stock has gained about 40% in the past 12 months, to a recent €712, extending in dramatic fashion a rally that began about six years ago. (The U.S.-listed shares trade under the ticker LVMUY.) LVMH sports a multiple of 34 times this year’s expected earnings of €21.08 and a market cap of about $400 billion, the largest on Europe’s Euronext exchange and more than four times that of Kering, whose top brands include Gucci, Saint Laurent, and Balenciaga.
Whether Arnault and his family remain in the topmost ranks of the world’s billionaires will depend on a number of factors, including the spread of affluence and the company’s operating strengths. Even more critical may be the outlook for consumption in China, which has been upended of late by both Covid and a government crackdown on the country’s wealthiest citizens. It is too soon to know how Beijing’s drive toward “common prosperity,” or greater economic equality, will play out, but history suggests it would be unwise to bet against LVMH and its ambitious boss.
Arnault, 72, was born into an industrial family in Roubaix, France, and educated at École Polytechnique, France’s leading engineering school. He joined the family construction company in 1971, and helped shift its focus to real-estate development. In 1984, he teamed up with financial backers to buy a troubled holding company with assets in textiles and retailing. That company, renamed Financiere Agache, owned Christian Dior, which became the springboard for the development of his luxury conglomerate.
Arnault and some of his children at the Dior Homme Menswear show in January 2020
Bertrand Rindoff Petroff/Getty Images
In 1987, Louis Vuitton merged with Moët Hennessy, the champagne and cognac maker. Arnault took a stake in the combined company the following year, and in 1989 became its majority shareholder, chairman, and CEO.
In the decades since, he has fulfilled his goal of building the world’s leading luxury group through a combination of organic growth and strategic investments and acquisitions. “One of the things that makes our company extraordinary is that the boss really is long-term minded,” says an LVMH executive who requested anonymity, as he wasn’t authorized to speak. “The way that the boss thinks about brands is that they should be eternal.”
Indeed, Château d’Yquem traces its roots back to at least the 1500s.
In addition to scale, LVMH has benefited from savvy marketing, leaning in part on celebrities to keep the brands relevant and attract younger customers. Attention to recruitment and training also has helped, along with exacting management. Arnault is known to foster internal competition among his brands, lack patience with underperforming executives, and spend his Saturday mornings examining his stores and those of competitors. The company declined to make Arnault available for comment.

French President Emmanuel Macron, left, and Arnault at La Samaritaine. LVMH bought the troubled Paris department store, refurbished it, and reopened it in June.
CHRISTOPHE ARCHAMBAULT/AFP/Getty Image
The arrival of Covid-19 could have been catastrophic for a company that sells designer handbags, Swiss watches, and some of the world’s most expensive bubbly. Its flagship brand, Louis Vuitton, never goes on sale.
Instead, the pandemic, which prompted business lockdowns around the world, proved a boon to LVMH and other sellers of high-end goods, from Teslas and Lamborghinis to fancy vacation homes. As spending options shrank, cash accounts grew, and the wealthy—including the newly so—splurged on luxury goods.
Global financial wealth increased by 8.3% in 2020, to a record $250 trillion, according to BCG’s Global Wealth 2021 report, published in June. “Behind the boom was a spike in net new savings and strong stock market performance, fueled by highly supportive central banks,” the report states. “Cash and deposits grew by 10.6% over the previous year’s numbers, marking the largest annual increase in 20 years.”
Credit Suisse’s global wealth report, also out in June, measures total household wealth, which it says rose 7.4%, to $418.3 trillion, last year. Citing government transfer payments and the suppression of interest rates, the report notes that “wealth creation in 2020 appears to have been completely detached from the economic woes resulting from Covid-19.”
The distribution of wealth has increasingly favored the richest households, as has been the case for several decades. The number of ultrahigh-net-worth individuals, or those with a net worth of more than $50 billion, rose 24% last year, to 215,030, the biggest increase since 2003, Credit Suisse wrote.
We’ll have to wait until next year’s reports for a full read on 2021, but studies so far point to a continuation of these trends. Using data from the Federal Reserve and International Monetary Fund calculations, two IMF economists recently charted savings and wealth in the U.S. during Covid, compared with the more “normal” period between the fourth quarters of 2014 and 2019. Among their findings: The net wealth of the top 1% of households rose by nearly 35 percentage points of the economy’s disposable income during the six quarters ended in June, and that of the next 9% by just over 30%, compared with a five-percentage-point increase for households in the bottom 50%.
The U.S. accounts for 25% of LVMH sales, below Asia ex-Japan, at 36%, but above Europe, at 21%. (The last calculation includes France, which the company breaks out separately). “Every crisis generates bubbles in wealth, and so, bizarrely, luxury is doing well in the U.S.,” says Erwan Rambourg, an analyst at HSBC . “LVMH has had a lot of first-time purchases, and a lot of recruitment in luxury. We have been writing that the U.S. was an emerging market [in luxury] for years, but that has been a lot more visible for the past 18 months.”
The LVMH executive confirms this. “In the past couple of years, during the pandemic, we observed engagement of American consumers with luxury to increase dramatically,” he says.

Arnault, right, and French politician Jean-Baptiste Lemoyne at a Hennessy bottling plant in Salles-d’Angles.
GEORGES GOBET/AFP/Getty Images
Greater wealth, and a greater propensity to spend it, have lifted results this year for all the big luxury-goods companies. But Arnault has seized the moment in ways that have extended LVMH’s reach and cemented its advantage. Mergers and acquisitions have been a part of the company’s DNA—and the boss’—from the start; HSBC calculates that since 1999, the company has done more deals than the rest of the industry’s players combined, and the pandemic has done nothing to stop it. If anything, LVMH accelerated its acquisition strategy, analysts note, at a time when some competitors retrenched.
In January, after a year of legal wrangling, LVMH completed the purchase of Tiffany, the iconic American jeweler, for about $16 billion, somewhat below the original offering price. Since then, the company has struck deals for at least eight more brands, buying them outright or making investments. In February, it snapped up 50% of Jay-Z’s Champagne brand, Armand de Brignac, and in April, raised its stake in Italian loafer maker Tod’s to 10% from 3.2%.
In June, LVMH took a stake in British designer Phoebe Philo’s new company. In July, it bought 60% of Off-White, the label founded by Virgil Abloh, artistic director of Louis Vuitton’s men’s business. Abloh’s death in November from a rare cancer, at 41, sent shock waves through the fashion world.
Luxury Leaders
The Covid pandemic has been a boon to luxury-goods merchants, as roaring stock and property markets and fewer outlets for spending fueled wealth accumulation.
E=estimate. *For March 2023 fiscal yearend
Source: FactSet
Sometimes LVMH has been both smart and lucky with its strategy. That was surely the case when the company decided, in 2017, to build a Louis Vuitton workshop in Keene, Texas, complementing two workshops in California that have produced Vuitton merchandise for the U.S. market for many years. With the newest facility, called Louis Vuitton Rochambeau Ranch, the company would be able to reach all of its U.S. stores within a day and a half, the executive said. The Texas workshop opened in 2019, with both Arnault and President Donald Trump in attendance at the ribbon-cutting.
As it turned out, LVMH hasn’t suffered many supply-chain issues in the U.S., with one exception: shopping bags, which are shipped from Asia.

A world away from Texas, in China’s rough-and-tumble market, LVMH faces perhaps its biggest challenge—and its greatest opportunity. The Chinese market for luxury goods is enormous, and growing. The latest edition of the Bain-Altagamma Luxury Goods Worldwide Market Study puts the size of that market at about $67 billion, compared with $80 billion for Europe and $100 billion in the Americas.
HSBC estimates that China contributed about 12% of LVMH’s sales in 2019, and that doesn’t include the millions of Chinese who scooped up Louis Vuitton handbags and Dior clothes on their travels abroad. Two things have happened since 2019, however, to alter the luxury landscape: The arrival of Covid has severely curtailed foreign travel, and at times restricted internal movement within China. At the same time, China’s Communist government has sought to rein in the ultrawealthy in its pursuit of greater equality.
Covid changed luxury buying habits, but possibly for the better. For one, it forced more Chinese luxury customers to shop at home, as opposed to window-shopping, or browsing on the mainland, before purchasing goods in Hong Kong, Paris, or New York.
According to the Bain-Altagamma study, Chinese shoppers accounted for an estimated 33% of global spending on personal luxury goods in 2019. That fell to 21%-23% in 2021. But shopping on the mainland nearly doubled in the same span, to an estimated 21% of the market from a previous 11%.
That benefits luxury sellers in several ways. Prices of luxury goods in China typically are more expensive than in the U.S. and Europe, due in part to import duties and shipment costs. The price gap has narrowed in recent years, but still exists; according to the HSBC “luxury pricing barometer” for September, a Louis Vuitton Speedy 30 Damier Ebene Canvas handbag cost the equivalent of $1,442 in China, versus $1,160 in the U.S.
Rambourg, the HSBC analyst, says repatriation to mainland stores began about two years before Covid, as price gaps started to narrow, trust in the local market increased, and mainland stores “became better in terms of staff, product availability, and layout.”
The geographical shift has helped boost LVMH’s profit margins. In the past, says Rambourg, mainland stores had low staff and low rents because they acted more as showrooms than points of purchase. Now, he says, “empty showrooms have become packed destinations, so leverage on staff and rent has been incredible.
“It is quite clear for me that local purchase will remain dominant, even as the world reopens, as sales associates have learned to better cater to local consumer needs,” he says.

Will these advances, and LVMH’s outlook, be clouded by China’s push for common prosperity? That’s the billion-dollar question, and the answer could help determine the company’s fortune and those of the Arnaults.
Despite China’s economic strides, inequality remains a problem. Credit Suisse notes that almost 31% of China’s wealth is concentrated among the country’s richest 1%, up from 21% in 2000. There were 1,058 billionaires living in China last year, compared to 696 in the U.S, according to the Hurun Report, a research platform that tracks wealth around the world. Yet, many Chinese live on very little.
So far, there are few clues as to how the policies of China’s president, Xi Jinping, will affect the luxury sector. And there is little evidence—yet—that they are affecting LVMH.
Says Luca Solca, a senior analyst at Bernstein, “We have yet to observe any adverse effect on Chinese luxury spend from the ‘common prosperity’ initiative. If China decides at one point that luxury consumption is no longer desirable and then pushes away from it, this can be a problem for all of the sector. We haven’t seen that, though.”
In October’s third-quarter update, Jean Jacques Guiony, LVMH’s chief financial officer, appeared to downplay the threat. “We don’t see any reason to believe this could be detrimental to the upper-middle affluent class that forms the bulk of our customer base,” he said.
It is possible, too, that China’s evolving policies might even work to LVMH’s advantage, if wealth truly is driven down from the top and spread more evenly among the middle classes.
“Everywhere in the world it is a fallacy that luxury makes all its money from the ultrawealthy,” says the LVMH executive. ‘The vast majority of luxury sales are to the aspiring consumer, the affluent, the mass affluent, the merely wealthy, as opposed to the ultrawealthy. If the Chinese program is aimed at the super-ultrawealthy, but if [wealth] spreads down and you have more affluent, from a math perspective that is going to be a good thing, not a bad thing.”


LVMH faces other potential risks. Arnault, the architect of the company’s grande strategy, is in his eighth decade, and a succession plan hasn’t been made public. That said, LVMH has a deep bench of seasoned executives, and four of Arnault’s five children hold positions with the company.
A sharp decline in the U.S. stock market would also pose a threat to the company’s prosperity, with the wealth effect running in reverse. It happened in 2008-09, during the financial crisis, although LVMH bounced back stronger than ever—and was just as acquisitive as in the past.
“We went through this in 2008-09, and by definition it will happen again,” the executive says. “One thing about being very focused is everyone pulls back, but we tend to react to the recovery more quickly. We did it in ’08 and will do it whenever the next downturn comes.”
Moreover, greater and more broadly distributed wealth in China suggests that LVMH could compensate elsewhere for a downturn in the U.S. In a recent report, McKinsey & Co. estimatedthat by 2030 China could be home to about 400 million households with upper-middle and higher incomes—roughly as many as in Europe and the U.S. combined. The firm estimates that the number of millionaires in China could double in coming years, to around 10 million in 2025.
“Thanks to their rising incomes, Chinese consumers are punching well above their weight...in several categories,” McKinsey wrote. Luxury goods and premium autos are among the largest of those categories.
In the near term, Solca thinks LVMH stock could trade up to €843. He predicts that the company could earn €14.4 billion next year, helped by expanding profit margins. “Megabrands rule,” he says. “LVMH is highly diversified and prepared to make the most of opportunities, and its high cash flow can fuel [its] M&A [merger and acquisition] ambition.”
This past week, Arnault and his family were No. 3 on the Forbes Real-Time Billionaires list, putting the man and his clan behind Elon Musk, co-founder and CEO of Tesla (TSLA), and Bezos. Third place is nothing to sneeze at, especially in this competition, but given the long-term projections for the spread of wealth, rising demand for luxury goods, and Arnault’s determination to out-mega the competition, he might well revisit No. 1.