FT : Japanese PM Kishida appoints pro-China ally as foreign minister

Japanese PM Kishida appoints pro-China ally as foreign minister
Yoshimasa Hayashi expected to deepen US links and adopt more assertive regional role, analysts say

Fumio Kishida has appointed a pro-China heavyweight to the post of foreign minister as the Japanese prime minister aims to strengthen the country’s national and economic security following his election victory last month.

The selection of Yoshimasa Hayashi, a former defence and education minister, reflects Kishida’s push to strengthen ties with the US while taking on a more assertive role in regional security to address the growing threat from China, say analysts.

The Harvard-educated, English-speaking 60-year-old is seen as a potential future prime minister and heads an association of parliamentarians that promotes relations with China. But experts believe he will adopt a nuanced strategy towards Beijing and Taiwan without disrupting ties with the Biden administration.

“He does have a friendlier stance towards China but he has a precise understanding of the Biden administration’s China strategy and it’s unlikely he will pursue a policy that will create tensions with the US,” said Atsuo Ito, a former staffer for the ruling Liberal Democratic party and now a political analyst.

Ito said the appointment was an indication that Kishida was more confident about his political standing, giving him the freedom to appoint allies into important positions. Hayashi is part of the prime minister’s own political faction, an organised group of parliamentarians who band together and trade their backing for commitments on policy and ministerial jobs.

When Kishida formed his first cabinet in early October after succeeding Yoshihide Suga as LDP leader and prime minister, he rewarded the factions that had supported him during the party leadership race. That resulted in important posts for allies of Shinzo Abe, the former prime minister, including the appointment of Akira Amari, the architect of Japan’s new economic security policy, as the party’s secretary-general.

After Amari became the first person in his position to lose his seat in the Diet’s lower house, Kishida replaced him with Toshimitsu Motegi, who was serving as foreign minister.

In Wednesday’s cabinet reshuffle, Kishida also named Gen Nakatani, former defence minister, as a special adviser on human rights.

“It was Prime Minister Kishida’s own decision to make these appointments,” Ito said.

Kishida faces challenges to sustain that momentum ahead of the upper house election next summer.

After maintaining a comfortable majority in the lower house, Kishida intends to focus on compiling a big stimulus package that will include cash handouts to reboot the pandemic-hit economy.

But some economists have questioned the need to distribute ¥100,000 ($883) to households with children under the age of 18, even though Kishida has sought to deflect the criticism by imposing an income limit.

Another task will be to ensure Japan’s competitiveness in a world of increasing technology nationalism, which has pushed Kishida to create a new role of economic security minister.

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, the world’s largest contract chipmaker, has confirmed plans to partner with Sony to build a $7bn fabrication plant in Japan.

Kishida has said the government would include support for TSMC’s plant in its economic package, stressing the need to build a supply chain resilient enough to survive disruptions such as the Covid-19 pandemic. One person familiar with the plan said the Japanese government would offer several billion dollars worth of subsidies to support the project.

(Makor) Weekly Share Classes Update - 10/11/2021


‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ ‌‌ 

 

November 10, 2021

 

Weekly Share Classes Update

 

Please find attached Makor’s European Weekly Share Class Report.

 

As usual, we focus in Europe on Share Classes with a liquidity for each leg > €3m and a Spread > 2%.

 

We elaborate further in this note and we have additional analysis available on request.

  

Focus list:

1.      RO SW - ROG SW

2.      INDUA SS - INDUC SS

3.      VOW3 GY - VOW GY

4.      EPIB SS - EPIA SS

5.      BMW3 GY - BMW GY

6.      HEN3 GY - HEN GY 

7.      SSABA SS - SSABB SS

8.      TITR IM - TIT IM

9.      SCHA NO - SCHB NO

10.   UHRN SW - UHR SW

11.   RDSA LN - RDSB LN

12.   SRT3 GY - SRT GY

13.   ATCOB SS - ATCOA SS

14.   MAERSKA DC - MAERSKB DC

15.   LISN SW - LISP SW

16.   VOLVA SS - VOLVB SS

 

We are available at your convenience if you need any additional details 

 

 

  

  ​     ​     ​

 

Makor Capital

 

11 Menachem Begin St., 26th FL

Ramat Gan 52681
ISRAEL
Tel         +972 3 5453 762

Fax        +972 3 7162 680

 

   

Research Disclaimer

 

This publication has been prepared by Makor Capital Limited (“Makor Capital”) and is intended for professional or qualified investors only. Makor Securities London Ltd (“Makor Securities”)is distributing this material to its clients who are Eligible Counterparties or Professional Clients under FCA Rules. It may also be disseminated to persons who are Investment Professionals within the meaning of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Financial Promotion Order 2005).  In the United States, Makor Capital only distributes this material to major US institutional investors (as that term is defined in Rule 15a-6 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934) and to SEC-registered broker-dealers or  banks acting in a broker–dealer capacity. This material is not intended for distribution to any other persons and should not be redistributed.  If you do not fall into any of these categories you should disregard it.

 

This material is a marketing communication.  It is not investment research and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research. It is not subject to any prohibition on dealing ahead of the dissemination of investment research under U.K. law. This material is not a research report and is not intended to be a research report as defined under U.S. securities laws and regulations.  This material is not intended to provide information reasonably sufficient upon which to base any investment decision.   

 

This material does not take into account the particular investment objectives, financial situation or needs of individual clients or other recipients. Before acting on this material, clients and other recipients should consider whether it is suitable for their particular circumstances and, if necessary, seek professional advice. 

 

This material should not be construed in any circumstances as an offer to sell or solicitation of any offer to buy any security or other financial instrument, nor shall it, or the fact of its distribution, form the basis of, or be relied upon in connection with, any contract relating to such action. 

 

In the United States, Makor Capital does not offer securities services to U.S. persons except pursuant to SEC Rule 15a-6 only to major US institutional investors and SEC registered broker-dealers or  banks acting in a broker–dealer capacity. Transactions in the United States must be effected through the U.S. broker-dealer, Oscar Gruss & Son Incorporated. Oscar Gruss & Son has not prepared, reviewed or distributed this material.

 

Some of this material is produced by providers which Makor Securities believes to be reliable, but Makor Securities does not warrant or represent (expressly or impliedly) that it is accurate, complete, not misleading or as to its fitness for the purpose intended and it should not be relied upon as such. 

Opinions expressed will be the current opinions of those producing this material as of the date appearing on this material only. We expect those producing the material in  this publication to update it on a timely basis but can give no undertaking that they will do so and regulatory compliance or other reasons may prevent  them from doing so (or us from disseminating updated material).  

 

Members and employees of Makor Securities London Ltd, employees of Makor Capital, Makor Capital Markets may from time to time have long or short positions in securities, warrants, futures, options, derivatives or other financial instruments referred to in this material. For Makor Securities, this information is set out in our Conflicts of Interest Policy which is available on request.  Policies for the production of research from other research providers are available on request.  Unless otherwise stated, share prices provided within this material are as at the close of business on the day prior to the date of the material.

 

Neither the whole nor any part of this material may be duplicated in any form or by any means. Neither should any of this material be redistributed or disclosed to anyone without prior consent. This material is issued for general information and discussion purposes only. None of  Makor Securities, Makor Capital, Makor Capital Markets accepts  liability whatsoever for any direct, indirect or consequential loss or damage of any kind arising out of the use of all or any of this material. 

 

The services, securities and investments discussed in this material may not be available to, nor are suitable for all investors. Investors should make their own investment decisions based upon their own financial objectives and financial resources and it should be noted that investment involves risk, including the risk of capital loss. Past performance is no guide to future performance. In relation to securities denominated in foreign currency, movements in exchange rates will have an effect on the value, either favourable or unfavourable.

 

All investors. Investors should make their own investment decisions based upon their own financial objectives and financial resources and it should be noted that investment involves risk, including the risk of capital loss. Past performance is no guide to future performance. In relation to securities denominated in foreign currency, movements in exchange rates will have an effect on the value, either favourable or unfavourable.

 

Entities

 

Makor Securities London Ltd is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct

Authority (FCA registration number 625054) 

 

Makor Capital, company number 514456466, is incorporated in Israel and is a 100% held

subsidiary of Makor Holdings Pte Ltd incorporated in Singapore. 

 

Makor Capital Markets SA, company number CH-660.2.999.011-0 is incorporated in Switzerland

and is also a 100% held subsidiary of Makor Holdings Pte Ltd.

 

 

Having trouble viewing this email? Click here

Update details | Unsubscribe | Report abuse

 

Powered by 

smoove 

 

 

>>> Goldman 2022 Outlook Latam Europe China Asia...

WSJ : Restaurant-Tech Startup Presto Nearing $1 Billion SPAC Merger to Go Public

Restaurant-Tech Startup Presto Nearing $1 Billion SPAC Merger to Go Public
Presto is known for its pay-at-table kiosks, tablets and artificial-intelligence tools

Presto is close to an agreement to combine with a special-purpose acquisition company and go public in a merger that would value the restaurant-technology startup at about $1 billion, people familiar with the matter said.

Founded in 2008 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Presto offers several different technologies that it says automate restaurants and improve the dining experience. It is known for its kiosks and tablets that let guests order and pay directly at tables and uses speech recognition so customers can order by talking to a device at drive-throughs and other settings. It also uses computer vision and analytics to help eateries optimize operations.

Presto has branded itself as a practical solution for restaurants wanting to minimize human interactions during the coronavirus pandemic. It also says it can help address the human-labor shortage in the industry, with many workers electing not to return to service-sector jobs.

Several restaurants use Presto, including McDonald’s Corp. , Applebee’s and Chili’s.

The Redwood City, Calif., firm is close to a deal with the SPAC Ventoux CCM Acquisition Corp. VTAQ 0.30% , a blank-check company focused on the leisure and hospitality industries, the people said. The merger could be announced as soon as this week.

Presto would join several other technology startups that are working to disrupt industries from manufacturing to advertising in going public by combining with a SPAC. Such mergers have become popular alternatives to traditional initial public offerings, in part because they let the company going public make business projections while raising a large sum of cash.

As part of the deal, Presto is expected to raise a roughly $70 million private investment in public equity, or PIPE, the people said. PIPE investors are expected to include some of the restaurant franchises that use Presto, they said.

The Ventoux CCM SPAC has about $170 million and is led by several former hospitality executives. It also is backed by investment bank Chardan Capital Markets LLC.

Also called a blank-check company, a SPAC is a shell company that raises money, then trades on a stock exchange with the sole intent of merging with a private company to take it public. After a deal is announced, the company going public releases detailed financial information that is reviewed by regulators. Once the deal is approved and closes, the private firm replaces the SPAC in the stock market.

Before deals go through, SPAC investors have the right to withdraw their money. Low share prices often motivate them to do so. High withdrawals can dramatically reduce the amount of cash the company going public generates and have made it harder to complete deals lately.

Still, excitement among investors has returned to some SPACs and the companies they take public in recent weeks following a summer slump. Shares of neighborhood social-media app Nextdoor Holdings Inc. have rallied this week after the firm completed its SPAC deal.

The blank-check firm taking former President Trump’s new social-media venture public also has soared recently. Excitement about electric-vehicle startups such as Lucid Group Inc. that combined with SPACs also has powered shares of many of these firms higher.

Business Of Fashion: Which Luxury Leadership Configuration Works Best?

Which Luxury Leadership Configuration Works Best?
In luxury fashion, the right configuration of creative and commercial leadership is critical to success, writes Pierre Mallevays.

Last month, Jonathan Akeroyd was poached from Versace to replace Marco Gobbetti at Burberry. But the real surprise was Gobbetti’s June decision to walk away from a successful partnership with Burberry designer Riccardo Tisci to join Salvatore Ferragamo.

If companies are only as good as their leaders, there is an additional layer of complexity in luxury, where the magic of creation and the realities of business must come together in the right configuration of creative and commercial leadership to deliver results.

CEO-Designer Duos

The most common configuration is the pairing of a designer and a chief executive, the archetype being Yves Saint Laurent and Pierre Bergé. A generation later, Tom Ford and Domenico de Sole at Gucci gave the fashion industry a lesson in how to transform a brand on the brink into one of the world’s most successful luxury businesses.

Harvard Law School alum De Sole was initially hired by Gucci as a lawyer in 1983 to help Aldo Gucci with a tax evasion case in the US, but made himself so useful that he was asked to run Gucci America on a part-time basis, which is how he met Tom Ford and allegedly rescued him from being fired by a tempestuous Maurizio Gucci. When Investcorp bought out Maurizio Gucci in 1994, the fund appointed (partly out of desperation) De Sole to rescue the company, which at the time was heavily loss-making on a turnover of around $200 million.

With no budget for advertising, De Sole turned to fashion as a spring-board for publicising the new Gucci. This was the beginning of a dream partnership with Ford, whose design talent was complemented by a branding savvy second to none. Ford was given the freedom to push the boundaries of what was considered acceptable in high fashion and advertising, allowing him to churn out bold jet-set collections complemented by erotically charged advertising, thus defining the fashion of the ‘90s and ‘00s.

Within the space of one year, Gucci’s turnover had grown to $500 million and the company was making a profit of $88 million. De Sole ploughed the profits back into the brand, spending on advertising, then the retail network, then upstream integration. By the time the pair exited the company in 2004, Gucci had become a stable of brands, then called Gucci Group, including Yves Saint Laurent, Bottega Veneta, Balenciaga and others, with a total turnover of $3.2 billion.

After the departure of Ford and De Sole, the Gucci brand struggled to find relevance for years until a new match made in heaven came along. Marco Bizzari took the helm as Gucci CEO in 2014, replacing Patrizio di Marco, whose exit prompted then creative director Frida Giannini to walk, meaning Bizzari was faced with a key hiring decision very early in his tenure. It was a chance meeting with Michele, a backroom designer not on Bizzari’s shortlist, that led to the young Michele’s appointment as creative director. “Intuition and instinct are more important than rationality,” said Bizzari of his decision.

Bizzari gave free rein to Michele’s creativity — it is said that he never discusses budgets or sales targets with the designer — and the brand was literally turned on its head away from a minimalist sex-driven aesthetic to a maximalist, more inclusive look. This was a high-risk strategy, and not just aesthetically. It also meant investing in refurbishing Gucci’s vast retail network. Of course, the strategy paid off, sending sales growth into high double digits. In the period since Bizzari took over at Gucci, parent Kering’s market capitalisation outperformed the SLI by 27 percentage points.

Meanwhile, at Burberry, Marco Gobbetti hired Riccardo Tisci in 2018 to repeat the success they had at Givenchy, where the duo breathed new life into the brand. Gobbetti endeavoured to elevate Burberry’s positioning and price points, while Tisci injected a streetwear quotient into the mix so as to make the brand more relevant to today’s young luxury consumer. While it is clear that the British brand is in a better position today in terms of positioning, product mix and geographical exposure, Burberry’s turnaround remains a work in progress. Revenues and profits have flatlined during Gobbetti’s tenure (excluding the impact of the pandemic); Burberry’s market cap increased by about 60 percent from the announcement of Gobbetti’s arrival to that of his departure, but this pales in comparison with the SLI’s growth of 228 percent over the same period.

Dual-Role Leaders

The CEO-designer duo isn’t the only way to configure top luxury leadership, however. Some brands have tried to address the potential conflict of interest between chief executive and creative director by merging the roles, although the jury is out as to whether one individual can ever really have the wherewithal to manage both the commercial and creative sides of a business. Christopher Bailey gave it a try: when CEO Angela Ahrendts left in 2014, Bailey took her place but retained his role as chief creative officer.

But this proved the wrong move for Burberry. For one, the new role seemed to undermine Bailey’s ability to focus on product with predictable consequences on sales and profits. Then, there was the controversy around his pay package, which was rejected in a non-binding vote by shareholders in 2014 but nevertheless maintained by the company, only to suffer a 75 percent cut in 2016 as the company’s profits declined for a second year running. Bailey handed the reins to Marco Gobbetti in 2016 and left Burberry in 2018. From Bailey’s appointment as CEO in October 2013 to his resignation in July 2016, Burberry lost roughly 17 percent of its market value (albeit amid the stock market swings of late 2015 to early 2016).

And yet let’s not forget Giorgio Armani who took over the role of CEO at his namesake label after the death of his partner Sergio Galeotti over 30 years ago and who is still running strong in the dual role of designer and chief executive. Perhaps it helps that Armani, being a private company, is out of the financial limelight and thus immune to quarterly public reporting and the short-term decision-making mindset that can often come with this.

One CEO, Multiple Creative Directors

Some brands install multiple creative directors working under a single CEO. Sydney Toledano used this approach while chairman and CEO of Christian Dior. Following the exit of John Galliano in 2011, he recruited Raf Simons as creative director of womenswear, followed by Maria Grazia Chiuri. Toledano relaunched Dior Monsieur as Dior Homme, appointing Hedi Slimane as creative director in 2001, followed by Kris Van Assche. (Today, the line is designed by Kim Jones). Toledano also developed Dior’s jewellery business, notably appointing Victoire de Castellane as creative director of Dior Fine Jewellery in 1998 and opening dedicated fine jewellery stores shortly thereafter.

The benefit of having separate creative directors across separate product categories is that each category can have its own voice and market segment. One only has to see the difference in style between Dior womenswear and Dior menswear to see the appeal (and risk) of the approach. The strategy also allows for much greater creative output as the task of creating up to six womenswear collections, a minimum of two menswear collections as well as a plethora of money-making accessories each year is challenging for even the most creative and energetic designers.

At Burberry, will the CEO-designer duo of Akeroyd and Tisci deliver results? Only time will tell. Akeroyd is an experienced luxury goods executive who is credited with turning around Alexander McQueen, propelling the brand to profitability and appointing Sarah Burton as creative director following Lee McQueen’s death in 2010. Akeroyd also accelerated growth during his five years at Versace and oversaw the sale of the house, known for its opulent, ostentatious style to Michael Kors owner Capri. He certainly has what it takes to work with creative talent. Stay tuned.

The Savigny Luxury Index (“SLI”) gained over 10 percent in October on the back of strong quarterly results notably with Hermès and LVMH trading above pre-pandemic levels, whilst the MSCI gained 5 percent.

SLI vs. MSCI

WSJ : China Evergrande’s EV Unit Taps Investors Ahead of First Car Sales

China Evergrande’s EV Unit Taps Investors Ahead of First Car Sales
Electric-vehicle maker aspired to overtake Tesla, but has struggled with a cash shortage

SINGAPORE— China Evergrande Group’s EGRNF -2.77% cash-strapped automotive business is raising money to commercially produce its first electric vehicles.

The Hong Kong-listed business, China Evergrande New Energy Vehicle Group Ltd. 708 -0.28% , on Wednesday said it plans to raise the equivalent of around $63 million from stock sales to improve its financial position and fund production as well as research and development.

The amount is far smaller—and at a much lower price per share—than the unit has raised before, reflecting fading euphoria about its prospects in China’s rapidly expanding and highly competitive electric-vehicle market. Still, if the company can steer past its financial squeeze and establish a profitable car-making business, that would be a major boost for its heavily indebted property-developer parent.

Evergrande Auto’s market capitalization topped $80 billion in February—making it briefly worth more than many global auto makers—but it has since plunged below $5 billion.


A few weeks ago, Evergrande founder Hui Ka Yan said the developer plans to gradually shift its focus from real estate to producing electric vehicles.

The latest transactions would involve parent Evergrande first placing some of its shares in the unit—also known as Evergrande Auto—with a group of investors. Then later this month the property giant will purchase a similar amount of shares in Evergrande Auto, according to a stock-exchange filing.

The shares being sold in the placing will make up nearly 1.8% of the company’s enlarged share base. The deal is being done at a nearly 20% discount to Evergrande Auto’s Tuesday closing share price of 3.57 Hong Kong dollars, equivalent to 46 U.S. cents.

The Shenzhen-based developer owns about 63.7% of Evergrande Auto, which dived headlong into electric vehicles in 2019 to capitalize on a world-wide boom in the industry.

Mr. Hui famously predicted that the business would one day rival Tesla Inc. It raised more than $3.3 billion early this year by selling roughly 10% of its shares to outside investors, and said its goal was to become “the world’s largest and most powerful new-energy-vehicle group.”

Evergrande Auto has yet to make any money from selling cars. In April it showcased nine electric-vehicle designs at the Auto Shanghai expo.

In June, the company scaled back ambitious production plans and said it would focus on a plant in Tianjin, so far its only factory qualified to make electric vehicles. That is where it aims to make its first car model, the Hengchi 5, an electric sport-utility vehicle meant to compete with the likes of Mercedes-Benz’s GLB and BMW’s X1.

Evergrande Auto said in late August that the “mass production of Hengchi vehicles has entered the final stretch,” but the company was facing cash-flow challenges and looking for investors to contribute capital.

By September, as its parent’s financial problems worsened, Evergrande Auto said it was also facing a “serious shortage of funds” and had stopped paying some operating expenses and delayed payments to suppliers. It also scrapped a plan to raise funds by adding a second listing on the Shanghai Stock Exchange’s Science and Technology Innovation Board, or STAR Market.

Some Evergrande Auto employees say their salaries have been delayed in recent months.

Evergrande Auto met with major suppliers and local officials in Tianjin last month, according to a post on Evergrande’s website. There the company’s head pledged to fully dedicate its efforts and relocate engineers from other locations in order to release the Hengchi 5 by early next year. It awaits regulatory approval to sell the model.

>>> Europe : Brokers Upgrades & Downgrades - 10th of November 2021 V2(+)

>>> Up
* Bakkafrost Raised to Hold at Pareto Securities; PT 620 kroner
* Bakkafrost Raised to Hold at ABG; PT 675 kroner
* Freenet PT Raised to 27 euros from 25 euros at Barclays (+)
* GE Upgraded as Deutsche Bank Sees Upside to Current Price
* H-Farm Raised to Outperform at EnVent S.p.A.; PT 34 euro cents
* Johnson Service Raised to Buy at HSBC; PT 170 pence (+)
* Lloyds Raised to Buy at AlphaValue/Baader
* Mondi Raised to Buy at Investec; PT 2,000 pence (+)
* Norway Royal Salmon Raised to Buy at SEB Equities; PT 210 kroner
* NRC Raised to Buy at DNB Markets; PT 40 kroner
* Sixt PT Raised to 188 euros from 157 euros at Bankhaus Metzler (+)
* Technotrans Raised to Buy at M.M. Warburg; PT 33.80 euros (+)

>>> Down
* Ambu Cut to Sell at ABG; PT 161 kroner
* Babcock Cut to Equal-Weight at Barclays; PT 352 pence
* Basic-Fit Cut to Neutral at Citi
* Brembo SpA Cut to Neutral at Banca Akros (+)
* Falck Renewables Cut to Neutral at Banca Akros (+)
* OVB Holding Cut to Accumulate at SRC Research; PT 28 euros
* Schibsted Cut to Hold at Arctic Securities; PT 450 kroner (+)
* VK GDRs Cut to Hold at Wood & Company; PT $23.40 (+)

>>> Initiation
* AlzChem Group Rated New Buy at M.M. Warburg; PT 35 euros (+)
* Marshalls Rated New Neutral at Davy; PT 800 pence (+)
* Oxford Nanopore Rated New Neutral at Citi; PT 660 pence
* Oxford Nanopore Rated New Overweight at Barclays; PT 700 pence
* Oxford Nanopore Rated New Buy at Berenberg; PT 662 pence

>>> Call
* Ahold Delhaize’s Raised FY Guidance is Unsurprising: Jefferies (+)
* Allianz Results Look Impressive Across the Board, Citi Says (+)
* Alstom’s 1H Results Should Trigger ‘Broad Relief,’ Citi Says (+)
* Barry Callebaut FY in Line, Free Cash Flow Strong: Vontobel (+)
* Delivery Hero Overweight at Morgan Stanley on Orders Momentum
* EON Results ‘Marginally Positive,’ Net Debt the Highlight: RBC
* Ferragamo 3Q Mixed Amid Concerns on China Covid Resurgence: Citi
* Siemens Energy 4Q Positive, Gas & Power Orders a Beat: Citi
* UBS Sees Japan, European Equities Catching Up With U.S. in 1H22

FT : Bill Ackman tries to win neighbours’ support for divisive glass penthouse

Bill Ackman tries to win neighbours’ support for divisive glass penthouse
Hedge fund manager must convince board of prewar New York building to back modernist addition


For a hedge fund manager known for his supreme self-assurance, Bill Ackman was uncharacteristically solicitous — almost humble — as he addressed the crowd.

The veteran of corporate raids and rancorous short selling campaigns was not speaking to a shareholder meeting or making a public case against an overvalued stock. Rather, he was trying to persuade a more disputatious crowd: the members of community board seven who live on Manhattan’s Upper West Side. Ackman desperately wanted them to support a Norman Foster-designed renovation of his penthouse on West 77th street.

“We love the site. We love the Upper West Side. And my wife and I wanted to raise our new family here. We have a two-and-a-half year-old child,” he explained at a virtual public meeting last week, sounding like any other dad with a primal need to build a nest.

This particular nest requires the demolition of the penthouse atop the 1927 building, which looks on to Central Park and stands beside the New York Historical Society. In its place, Foster would erect two modernist glass boxes, one stacked atop the other.

Depending on who you ask, it is either a sublime work of architectural genius or, as one resident observed: “[It] frankly looks like a flying saucer landed on the roof.”

The dispute, now entering a critical phase after two years of manoeuvrings, is another Manhattan real estate drama pitting the merely affluent against the hyper-rich and raises familiar questions about whether the city’s historic buildings should be preserved like fossils in amber or might be enhanced with thoughtful additions.

Ackman surprised some opponents last month by winning approval from the community board’s preservation subcommittee, with five members voting in favour and three abstaining. “We didn’t get our ducks in a row but Ackman very much had his ducks in a row,” said novelist Mary Breasted, who has lived in the building since 2008 with her husband, Ted. “It’s one of the most beautiful blocks in the city, we think.”

Breasted does not view Foster’s proposed penthouse as a spaceship so much as a “Malibu house on top of our building”.

She and other opponents fear that the renovation could open the way for garish copycats that would erode the character of a historic neighbourhood. They worry that New York may have lost its appetite to resist developers after being hammered by the pandemic, which has made the city fearful of losing more wealthy residents to low-tax Florida.

Last week’s community board meeting was but one hurdle for Ackman to clear. A taller test awaits on November 16 when the city’s powerful Landmarks Preservation Commission takes up the matter. If Ackman wins its blessing — hardly assured — the project would then go to the co-operative building’s secretive board for final approval.

The project has already stirred “an atmosphere of fear and distrust” among the residents of the 16-story building, according to a note circulated by concerned tenants. Some like Ackman’s plan, some hate it, and some wonder why he felt the need to buy a penthouse in a prewar building and turn it into a glass box when the city already features a surplus of off-the-rack glass boxes in the new super-tall towers at Billionaires Row.

Ackman, the founder of Pershing Square Capital, has notched investment wins that relied on big wagers, as well as his ability to persuade the market he was correct. Among them: a successful activist campaign at Canadian Pacific Railway and his bet against the Municipal Bond Insurance Association. He has also had big misses, including an ill-fated investment in Valeant, a drugmaker that imploded, and a years-long short selling campaign against Herbalife.

This is not his first time wading into the muck of New York City’s landmark politics. The Howard Hughes Corporation, which he chairs, bought a parking lot in the South Street Seaport’s historical district for $180m in 2018. Earlier this year, the company won the Landmarks Preservation Commission’s approval to put up a luxury building where other developers had failed. (A $50m gift to the neighbouring South Street Seaport Museum seems to have helped the cause.)

The penthouse is tiny by comparison but arouses no less emotion on the Upper West Side, where it is known as “the Nancy Friday apartment” for the writer on female sexuality who cobbled it together over the years from three separate units. It went on the market for $22.5m after her 2017 death.

Ackman bought it and set about building a dream home with his second wife, MIT scientist and architect Neri Oxman. A first design — with three glass boxes — was deemed too visible. Then came the scaled-down version.

The Ackmans believed they had the board’s support to overhaul the penthouse when they first applied to buy the property, and that their opponents are a cranky minority who fear any change. The penthouse, they note, is a former servants’ quarters that was tweaked by Friday over the years without any official approvals.

Their renovation was the marquee item on the agenda at last week’s Zoom-casted community board meeting, which also featured a lengthy discussion of rising crime and a warning that the homeless might soon take over the neighbourhood’s outdoor dining sheds.

Reverend K Karpen, the co-chair of the community board’s preservation subcommittee, attempted to ease the tensions over the glass box. “In case you were wondering whether the petitioners really do everything out in the open, the answer is ‘no’,” he said, noting that the Ackmans’ property included part of a third, concealed floor beneath the proposed glass quarters.

Then the debate began. It looked ominous for Ackman after Jonathan Weiner, a resident for two decades, said the proposal “crashes through” the building’s genteel norms, and that he believed a majority of residents “strongly” opposed it. A neighbour threw Ackman’s wealth back at him, complaining that his design used the beloved building as a mere “platform for a temple to a titan”. Roberta Brandes Gratz, an author of several books on urban development, snarled about Lord Foster’s arrogance.

But Paul Goldberger came to the rescue. He introduced himself thus: “I’m here as both a resident of 211 Central Park West and as the former architecture critic of both The New York Times and The New Yorker.” Those credentials border on royalty in a cultured enclave that revels in its bookishness.

“I’m in strong support of the design,” Goldberger announced, arguing that it was an inspired blending of old and new. “Though it’s small in scale, it holds the promise of being among this firm’s finest pieces of work.”

Eventually, Ackman, who has said he never practices a presentation, made his case. His blue dress shirt unbuttoned, he began by establishing his ties to the neighbourhood. He has lived on the Upper West Side since 1992. “For years, I looked at this building, this pink penthouse,” he recalled, with Gatsby-esque longing.

It was now crumbling, and nobody would take better care of it than he and his wife, he promised. That is why they had hired the finest architect and builder. He has also offered to pay for a new elevator.

“The reason why people in the building are objecting, in my view, is not because they’re concerned about architectural integrity. It’s because they’d rather that there’s no construction and no project happens on the roof,” Ackman said, adding: “We want to live peacefully with our neighbours. We don’t want them to be upset at us.” Asked about environmental impacts, he enthused about solar panels. “We also love birds!” he promised.

After a virtual show of hands at the end of the community meeting, Ackman’s dream appeared one step closer to reality: 25 members endorsed the renovation; only seven opposed it; and two abstained.

But his hopes for neighbourly bliss seemed more remote. “I think the guy is overplaying his hand, but that’s the way he always is,” said one resident, who has studied the hedge fund manager closely. “He’s nothing if not persistent.”

>>> Stoxx 600 Pre-Market Indications

  • Infineon (IFX TH) +2.1%
    • Infineon Sees ‘Strong’ 2022 With Auto Segment Leading Sales (1)
  • Prosus (1TY TH) +1.7%
    • *TENCENT SHARES JUMP AS MUCH AS 4.6% AHEAD OF EARNINGS
  • Rolls-Royce (RRU TH) +1%
  • Atlas Copco (ACO2 TH) +0.8%
  • Equinor (DNQ TH) +0.8%
  • Shell (R6C TH) +0.7%
    • Brent Near $85 a Barrel Shows Oil Risk Remains Skewed to Upside
  • Allianz (ALV TH) +0.7%
    • Allianz 3Q Operating Profit Beats Estimates
  • Evolution (E3G1 TH) +0.6%
  • Siemens Energy (ENR TH) -0.5%
    • Siemens Energy Vows to Improve on Profit After Losses Narrow
  • Just Eat Takeaway (T5W TH) -0.7%
    • Watch Online Food Delivery Stocks on DoorDash Beat, Wolt Deal
  • Rheinmetall (RHM TH) -0.7%
  • MTU Aero (MTX TH) -0.8%
  • AB InBev (1NBA TH) -1%
  • Puma (PUM TH) -1.7%
  • Adidas (ADS TH) -3.2%
    • Adidas Hit by Supply-Chain Woes as Asia Snags Delay Shoe Sales

(CITI) FERRAGAMO: Mixed 3Q21 performance; focus on Aug/Sep Retail slowdown a


F L A S H | Salvatore Ferragamo SpA (SFER.MI) | Neutral

Mixed performance in a seasonally light quarter; focus on Aug/Sep Retail slowdown and management's worries about China in Nov

dcm-citi-logo-image

CITI'S TAKE

In what is traditionally the smallest quarter of the year for Ferragamo, the marginal 3Q21 sales beat and £5m EBIT beat (£19m vs. cons. £14m and twice 3Q19 level) are unlikely to drive the same enthusiasm seen after 2Q (strong earnings beat and double-digit EPS ugprades). While Ferragamo remains focused on rejuvenating sales while maintaining costs under control, the analyst call highlighted a significant slowdown in Aug/Sep Retail LFL (2Y down double-digit estimated) vs. July (broadly flat vs. 2019), with an improvement in October but renewed concerns at the beginning of November on China/Asia's COVID resurgence. All in all, we expect low-single-digit percentage increase in cons. FY21E EBIT and unchanged FY22E. This should lead to a muted share price reaction, yet we see potential support from continued share price underperformance (+26% YTD vs. luxury sector +40%) and the imminent arrival of high-calibre CEO Marco Gobbetti. Neutral rating maintained, TP €20.0.

Key 3Q21 numbers — 1) Sales of €261m, ~2% above VA consensus (€256m), up 17% YoY in constant FX (cons. +11%). On a 2Y stacked basis, sales were down only 4% (cons. -9%) including Retail -5% (cons. -3%, 2Q21 -9%) with sequential MoM deterioration in August and early Sep (vs. July flat) and improvements at the end of the quarter; and Wholesale -2% (cons. -22%, 2Q21 -41%); 2) EBIT of €19m (consensus €14m), with an EBIT margin of 7.1% (cons. 5.5%) compared to ~4% in 3Q19. This reflects: i) gross margin of 65.4% (cons. 66.0%) or 70bp above 3Q19 (64.7%) from higher full-price sales, lower provision for obsolescence and favourable channel mix; and ii) continued cost reduction (-14% vs. 3Q19 and +13% YoY) driven by headcount reduction, rents renegotiation, and lower consulting fees; 3) Net income of €7m (consensus €4m); and 4) Net cash position (ex-IFRS 16) of €265m (vs. €75m in 3Q20 and €139m at the end of FY20) largely reflecting improved earnings, a ~20% YoY decrease in inventories (constant FX, excluding fragrances), and limited capex (€26m).

2Q21 segment reporting (2-year stack, constant FX) — By regionEurope -26% (cons. -26%, 2Q21 -39%); strong beat in North America +26% (cons. +1%, 2Q21 -3%); Asia ex-Japan -4% (cons. -10%, 2Q21 -22%) reflecting August softness in China and weak travel retail; Japan -20% (cons. -14%, 2Q21 -31%) impacted by August lockdowns and travel restrictions; and LatAm +12% (cons. -11%, 2Q21 +38%). By product: Footwear -4% (cons. -9%, 2Q21 -23%); Leather Goods flat (cons. -7%, 2Q21 -15%); Clothing -1% (cons. -12%, 2Q21 -7%); and Silk/Other Accessories -12% (cons. -20%, 2Q21 -21%).

Waiting for Mr Gobbetti — There will be legitimate ambitions for a turnaround from impending CEO Marco Gobbetti (starting Jan22) and following recent senior appointments (COO and heads of US and Europe). At 61 years old, this will likely be Mr Gobbetti’s last senior executive role and we believe he will be highly energised to wake the Ferragamo sleeping beauty, while prior attempts have produced mixed results. We see the return of a strong creative director function as very likely under Mr Gobbetti.

Implications — Latest VA consensus includes: 1) FY21E sales of €1.13bn (2Y constant FX -15%) implying 4Q21E sales of €344m (-10% constant FX vs 2019); and 2) FY21E EBIT of €111m (-26% vs 2019, 9.8% margin broadly flat vs 2019) implying 4Q21E EBIT of €27m (~40% below 4Q19) implying margin of 7.7% (-400bp vs. 2019). Given the slight 3Q21 sales and EBIT beat, cons. 4Q21E/FY21E revenue and EBIT look conservative, however management’s expressed concerns on China at the start of November which could limit earnings momentum following strong earnings upgrades post 1H21. We expect low-single-digit percentage increase in cons. FY21E EBIT and unchanged FY22E. We expect muted share price reaction yet acknowledge potential support from continued share price underperformance (+26% YTD vs. luxury sector +40%) and the arrival of high-calibre CEO Marco Gobbetti. Shares trade on a ~45x FY23E P/E close to twice sector average ex-Hermes. Neutral rating maintained, TP €20.0.

 

 

Neutral

Price (09 Nov 21 17:30)

€19.98

Expected share price return

0.1%

Target price

€20.00

Expected dividend yield

1.0%

Market Cap

€3,372M

US$3,908M

Expected total return

1.1%

 

Salvatore Ferragamo SpA (EUR)

Year to 31 Dec

2019A

2020A

2021E

2022E

2023E

Sales (€M)

1,377.3

915.8

1,147.9

1,270.4

1,364.8

Net Income (€M)

87.3

-31.8

13.0

50.0

73.7

Diluted EPS (€)

0.52

-0.19

0.08

0.30

0.44

Diluted EPS (Old) (€)

0.52

-0.19

0.08

0.30

0.44

PE (x)

38.7

-106.2

259.1

67.5

45.7

EV/EBITDA (x)

10.5

19.3

15.6

12.4

10.7

DPS (€)

0.00

0.00

0.06

0.20

0.25

Net Div Yield (%)

na

na

0.3

1.0

1.3

Source: Company Reports and dataCentral, Citi Research.