Barrons : Disney Stock Should Keep Climbing, Despite Earnings Setback

Disney Stock Should Keep Climbing, Despite Earnings Setback

Yes, Walt Disney just reported a bad quarter. Yes, the miss was almost entirely due to worse-than-expected performance at Disney ’s newly acquired 21st Century Fox properties.

But nothing has changed in the part of Disney ’s future that matters most for investors: its direct-to-consumer streaming potential. The outlook there is still upbeat, and so is our view on the stock. Barron’s has long been bullish. (See “Working More Magic at Disney,” Dec. 28, 2018; the shares have returned 30.5% since then, versus 19.6% for the broad market.)

On Tuesday evening, Disney posted fiscal third-quarter earnings and revenue below analysts’ expectations, sending its stock (ticker: DIS) down nearly 5% the following day. The biggest shortfall to estimates came from poor performance at the newly incorporated TV networks, film studios, and international brands that Disney acquired from 21st Century Fox in late March. ( Fox [FOXA] and Barron’s parent company, News Corp [NWSA], have common ownership.)

The addition pushed Disney’s third-quarter sales up 33% from the same period a year ago, to $20.2 billion, but the new assets didn’t earn as much as Wall Street had expected. They cost Disney 60 cents per share in its third quarter, versus guidance of a 35-cent drag. Disney’s overall earnings came in 22% below consensus at $1.35 per share.

But 21st Century Fox is just one part of the Disney story, and there’s no new reason to doubt the long-term bullish case for the stock. Disney’s deep and valuable content library, its global brand, and its ambitious approach to direct-to-consumer streaming have set it up for continued success in both its legacy and new businesses. And Disney management repeated its prior forecast that the 21st Century Fox deal would add to Disney’s earnings per share in fiscal 2021 when big cost savings kick in.

“In our view, the investment thesis is the same, and if we liked the stock before earnings, we love it on any weakness,” J.P. Morgan analyst Alexia Quadrani wrote after Disney’s earnings. “With so many moving pieces between the newly acquired Fox and Disney+ launch, there are bound to be some hits and misses each quarter.”

She sees November’s launch of the Disney+ streaming service as a catalyst for the stock and reiterated her Overweight rating and $150 price target—about 8% above the recent $139.20.

Credit Suisse’s Douglas Mitchelson also thinks Disney+ could have a hugely successful launch in November. He upgraded Disney shares to Outperform with a $150 target, from Neutral and $130, following the earnings miss.

Disney begins a gargantuan marketing campaign for the service later this month. Disney+ will be priced at just $6.99 per month—about half the cost of Netflix (NFLX)—and include new and library titles from Disney, Pixar, Marvel, Star Wars, National Geographic, and other Fox content like The Simpsons. An international rollout will follow.

On Tuesday’s earnings call, CEO Bob Iger called it the “most important product that the company has launched” in his nearly 20 years at Disney.

Mitchelson, meanwhile, expects the former Fox assets that dragged on Disney’s earnings in its third quarter to rebound over the coming year. Restructuring and other acquisition-related expenses will fall, while Disney will begin to work its magic on films and TV shows in production. Its legacy businesses should do well, too: the holiday-season film slate includes Frozen 2 and a new Star Wars installment.

Don’t count the House of Mouse out just yet.

Barrons : Arconic Looks to Unlock Value in a Potential Split. Alcoa May Get Left

Arconic Looks to Unlock Value in a Potential Split. Alcoa May Get Left Behind.

The tale of Arconic and Alcoa , separated into two companies three years ago, may be set to come full circle.

Arconic stock (ticker: ARNC) has gained 7.1% so far this week—a surprisingly large amount, considering the turmoil that took the stock market on a wild ride. Arconic, after all, makes airplane and auto parts, products that wouldn’t be in much demand if the U.S. slipped into recession.

The company, however, has something else going for it. Arconic, which was originally spun off from aluminum producer Alcoa (AA) in 2016, now plans to split in two, with one company focusing on aerospace and the other on autos. The potential value created by the deal has helped boost its shares by 52% in 2019, and there could be more gains ahead.

Arconic was spun off, partly at the behest of activist hedge fund Elliott Management, in an effort to unlock hidden shareholder value. Sure enough, some value was created. Arconic shares have returned just over 12% a year on average since November 2016, the month the spinoff was completed. That’s not quite as good as the Dow Jones Industrial Average ’s 17% annualized return over the same period, but far better than the 5% annualized loss in Alcoa’s stock.

Most of those gains came over the past seven months. Arconic stock is up big year to date, rising from $18.56 a share to more than $25. The stock was just above $17 in November 2016 when shares began trading. And while we’d like to attribute the 2019 rise to Arconic’s increased earnings guidance, corporate drama seems to be the big reason for its outperformance this year.

Earlier in 2019, Arconic rejected a go-private offer from Apollo Global Management (APO), instead announcing plans to break up into more pieces—this time separating the aerospace business from the rest of the company, which makes products for buildings and cars.

Aerospace is an attractive end market, and Arconic’s board—which includes representatives from Elliott—believes it’s a smart move. Aerospace suppliers Barron’s tracks are up more than 30% year to date because demand for commercial air travel continues to grow despite weakness in other areas of the global economy. Auto-part makers have risen just 3% this year.

Aerospace & defense components of the S&P 500 trade for more than 15 times estimated 2020 earnings, higher than the 11 times Arconic shares are awarded by the market. Arconic’s board is hoping the aerospace business—called Howmet—will trade like an aerospace supplier. It’s unclear where the automotive business supplier will trade, but Alcoa shares trade for about 12 times estimated 2020 earnings.

It’s unlikely the rest of Arconic would trade at a discount to an aluminum producer. The automotive business is downstream from commodity producer Alcoa, so, at least in theory, its earnings should be less volatile and not dependent on the price of aluminum.

The looming split was enough for Barclays analyst David Strauss to upgrade Arconic shares to Overweight from Equal Weight and take his price target up by more than 50%, to $31 a share from $20 a share. He believes the split will force investors or look more closely at valuation multiples.

Meanwhile, good old Alcoa, founded in 1888, has dropped 24% this year. It’s worth only $6.7 billion including net debt, while Arconic is worth more than $16 billion. And who knows? If it get cheap enough, maybe Arconic will decide it’s time to consume its former parent company.

Stranger things have occurred when it’s all about financial engineering.

>>> US Close Dow -0.34% S&P -0.66% Nasdaq -1% Russell -1.25%

Closing Stock Market Summary

The stock market wrapped up a volatile week on lower note, leaving the S&P 500 down 0.7% on Friday. Familiar trade concerns appeared to hinder buying conviction after a three-day advance in the benchmark index.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 0.3%, the Nasdaq Composite lost 1.0%, and the Russell 2000 lost 1.3%. 

President Trump seemingly fed into the nagging trade angst when he told reporters that the U.S. will not be doing business with Huawei and that September trade talks could get canceled. None of these statements really surprised the market, but the prospect of U.S.-China relations further deteriorating kept some buyers sidelined on Friday.

Eight of the 11 S&P 500 sectors finished lower, led by the energy (-1.3%) and information technology (-1.3%) sectors. Energy stocks fell despite the sharp increase in oil prices ($54.61/bbl, +$2.09, +4.0%), while the tech sector was pressured by shares of semiconductor companies, many of which derive substantial revenue from China. The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index fell 1.8%. 

Conversely, the defensive-oriented health care (+0.2%), real estate (+0.1%), and utilities (+0.04%) sectors were the lone sectors that finished higher. 

Uber (UBER 40.05, -2.92) shares fell 6.8% after the company reported a wider-than-expected $5.2 billion quarterly loss. Revenue also came up short of estimates, but today's decline simply retraced much of yesterday's 8% rally. 

In other corporate news, Amgen (AMGN 196.25, +11.02) shares spiked 6.0% following a positive ruling regarding its Enbrel business. DXC Technology (DXC 35.91, -15.74, -30.5%) plunged over 30% after it cut its FY20 outlook, while Dropbox (DBX 18.71, -2.75) fell 12.8% despite providing decent results and guidance.

U.S. Treasuries finished slightly lower, pushing yields higher across the curve. The 2-yr yield and the 10-yr yield increased two basis points each to 1.63% and 1.73%, respectively. The U.S. Dollar Index declined 0.1% to 97.54.

Reviewing Friday's lone economic report, the Producer Price Index for July:

  • The index for final demand increased 0.2% m/m in July (consensus +0.2%) while the index for final demand, excluding food and energy, decreased 0.1% m/m (consensus +0.2%). The m/m readings left the index for final demand up 1.7% yr/yr, unchanged from June. The index remains at its lowest level since January 2017. Core PPI was up 2.1% yr/yr, down from 2.3% in June.
    • The key takeaway from the report is that inflationary pressure remains muted.

Looking ahead, Monday's economic data will be limited to the Treasury Budget for July. 

  • Nasdaq Composite +20.0% YTD
  • S&P 500 +16.4% YTD
  • Dow Jones Industrial Average +12.7% YTD
  • Russell 2000 +12.2% YTD

FT : Czech billionaire fails to win enough backing for Metro takeover

Czech billionaire fails to win enough backing for Metro takeover

Czech billionaire Daniel Kretinsky has failed in his high-profile effort to buy Metro AG, after shareholders in the German food group declined to take up his €5.8bn offer.

EP Global Commerce, the investment vehicle of Mr Kretinsky and his Slovak business partner Patrik Tkac, confirmed on Friday evening that at the end of the tender period it owned or had been tendered only 41.7 per cent of Metro’s shares, well short of the minimum acceptance threshold of 67.5 per cent.

EP Global Commerce’s move for Metro, announced in June, was the latest episode in a buying spree that has turned Mr Kretinsky, dubbed the “Czech Sphinx” for his inscrutability, into one of Europe’s most prominent dealmakers.

Having made built his fortune with a string of deals in the European energy sector, Mr Kretinsky has more recently bid for various retail and media assets, including France’s most famous newspaper, Le Monde.

EP Global Commerce, which already owned 17.5 per cent of Metro, offered €16 for each Metro share it did not already own, and €13.80 for each preference share.

However, the German food group’s management, led by long-serving chief executive Olaf Koch, advised shareholders not to accept the deal, arguing that it undervalued the company and would burden it with too much debt.

(Bus. Of Fash.) Rebooting Barneys New York

Rebooting Barneys New York
The troubled retailer could once again be reborn. But this time, it’s going to take a drastic overhaul to get the business back on track.

What a week it’s been for Barneys New York. After filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the early morning of August 6, the luxury retailer, which owed brands millions of dollars in back payments, announced that it had secured $218 million in financing that would allow it to keep operating while searching for a buyer. (It has until October 24 to find a partner or face liquidation.)

All week, Chief Executive Daniella Vitale has been issuing messages reassuring employees, updating them on new developments and thanking them for their patience during the uncertainty. “Please know that we understand the personal impact the closing will have on some of you and your families, and we are working hard to make the transition as smooth as possible by giving you as much advance notice as we can,” Vitale wrote in an August 7 memo. “I appreciate your continued support, commitment and tenacity. I am personally extremely grateful.”
If Barneys does find a buyer, it’s clear that the company will need to evolve. Yes, Barneys has a great brand and a still-devoted customer base. But depending on what kind of company gains control, a “reboot” could mean anything from a complete management turnover to an entirely new business model.
A licensing firm, for instance, may want to reduce the inventory of luxury goods Barneys actually sells, opting to shill branded merch at airport kiosks and boost its presence overseas à la Fred Segal or Harrods. However, if the new owner is eager to bring back the Barneys magic and make the retailer a fashion leader once again, it will have to make serious changes to the company’s approach.
Here’s what Barneys needs to consider:
Step 1: Shrink to Grow
As part of its financing deal, Barneys already has plans to shutter eight mainline stores as well as seven outlets, leaving open five physical “flagships” and two off-price locations, as well as its two e-commerce sites. There are clear advantages to having a tighter retail network: it keeps both focus and productivity high. Instead of opening a new store at the American Dream Mall in New Jersey — which is still in the retailer’s current plan — it should focus on these five locations and consider shrinking its footprint even further while it recalibrates and figures out a new value proposition.

Step 2: Reimagine the Floor Plan
While reducing its number of doors is critical, what Barneys does with its remaining square footage is equally important. Does Barneys really need all the floor space in its nine-story, 230,000-square-foot Madison Avenue flagship? Surely downsizing is critical to both reducing the burden of high rent and improving retail productivity. That said, small doesn’t always mean beautiful. Barneys’ 9,266-square-foot unit at The Grove, a popular outdoor mall in Los Angeles, is a tenth of the size of its 108,000-square-foot flagship in Beverly Hills. But the Grove location is boring — bad merchandising, awkward layout — while the much larger Barneys Beverly Hills is the second-highest-grossing store in the group (after Madison), and probably its most productive per square foot. It’s a fun store: there’s the restaurant Fred’s, but also a beautifully laid out shoe floor and an easy-to-navigate ready-to-wear department. It’s also a little more crowded than Barneys’ other locations, making for a buzzier shopping experience. Selfridges, Le Bon Marché, Dover Street Market: these successful retailers have large stores, but they are not spare; they’re genuine destinations, filled with things to keep the eye busy.
Step 3: Double Down on Digital
Physical retail isn’t dead. But online touchpoints are increasingly the beginning and end of the customer journey. Barneys may have missed its opportunity to become the American equivalent to MatchesFashion, the London-based retailer which went all-in on digital more than a decade ago. It certainly can’t get back the $200 million it’s poured into physical retail in recent years. But Barneys clearly needs to allocate greater funds to boosting its e-commerce presence and turning this channel into a more significant revenue driver for the business.
Step 4: Better Integrate Physical and Digital
Retailers like Nordstrom and MatchesFashion might not be opening new stores, but they are opening new service- and experience-focused spaces linked to online inventory. Last year, MatchesFashion, which placed far less focus on its physical footprint as its digital business took off, opened the widely lauded 5 Carlos Place, a five-storey townhouse in London’s Mayfair area, to host events, offer personal shopping services and showcase an incredibly tight edit of its overall offering, with the ability to order from the full catalogue with the flick of a finger. The Los Angeles iteration of Nordstrom’s zero-inventory “Local” concept — part events space, part “click-and-collect” centre for online orders — has been so successful that the department store plans to open two in New York City this fall. Barneys already has a leg-up on experiences: its events, from a recent Chanel pop-up in Manhattan to The Drop, a streetwear-driven concept, often generate significant sales. The Drop LA — a weekend-long event hosted in May 2018 with streetwear site Highsnobiety that included a surprise musical performance from Wu-Tang Clan as well as several designer appearances — generated $1.2 million in retail sales along with $440,000 in online sales.

Step 5: Make Men’s a Bigger Focus
Barneys started out, in 1923, as a 500-square-foot men’s suiting store and was the first to bring Giorgio Armani’s big-shouldered blazers to America in 1976. To this day, it remains a leader in luxury menswear, a market that is growing and diversifying thanks to the rise of millennials and the changing tastes and looser gender boundaries they have embraced. (The men’s designer fashion and footwear market continues to expand and is projected to reach $46 billion by 2023, according to data from Euromonitor International.) Barneys should run with this, championing young designers by offering favourable contract terms and increasing its marketing moments dedicated to men’s fashion.
Step 6: Shake-up the Creative Team
Barneys has had multiple heydays: Fred Pressman took it upscale in the 1960s and 1970s. The late Glenn O'Brien, who joined in 1988 to run advertising, brought his signature irreverence to luxury. As fashion director from 1992 until 2010, Julie Gilhart made sure the best, newest brands were sold at Barneys, and former creative director Simon Doonan devised the most inventive holiday windows imaginable. In order for Barneys to rise up again, it will need a confident creative team with a strong sense of the current zeitgeist, how to generate cultural relevance and what the retailer needs to be now, from its buys to its windows to its digital marketing.
How this all plays out remains to be seen. Even with the right buyer, strategy and management team, Barneys New York has a lot of catching up to do. And unlike its 1996 bankruptcy, which was covered in print, this time around, consumers have been following the fall of Barneys online, play by play, eroding its once shiny brand. But everyone loves an underdog; especially one with good taste. Don’t count Barneys out just yet.

(Bus. Of Fash) Op-Ed | New York Fashion Week Has a Donald Trump Problem The prot

Op-Ed | New York Fashion Week Has a Donald Trump Problem
The protests against Stephen Ross have so far targeted Equinox and SoulCycle — but the billionaire’s reach also extends into the upper echelons of the American fashion industry.

NEW YORK, United States — On Friday in Southampton, New York, many of the city’s elite will arrive for a private luncheon at the home of billionaire Stephen Ross and his wife, the jewellery designer and CFDA board member Kara Ross. Summer parties for the 1% are hardly a rarity on the Hamptons circuit, and yet, this particular fête has sparked a spectacular kind of outrage. That’s because, as The Washington Post revealed earlier this week, this party has the ultimate guest of (dis) honour: President Donald Trump.

Access to Ross’ fundraiser comes with impressive price tags, boasting the possibility of earning Trump a high seven-figure campaign contribution by its end: For a photo opportunity with the president and lunch, tickets start at $100,000. If you’re willing to fork over $250,000, you’re entitled to a “roundtable discussion” with Trump. Ultimately, the affair will help to bolster the already well-funded Trump re-election bid, which recently announced it had raised $105 million in the second quarter. (By contrast, the leading Democratic fundraiser is Senator Bernie Sanders, who clocks in at $38.7 million in contributions for the first half of 2019.)

The news of the event prompted swift backlash, and even a boycott of properties owned by Related Companies, of which Ross is chairman and founder. Among his investments are brands like Equinox, SoulCycle, Pure Yoga and Momofuku — all of which attract a distinctly fashionable (and fashion industry) clientele. #BoycottEquinox started trending on Twitter Wednesday, with members calling in to cancel their memberships. Both Equinox and SoulCycle issued statements claiming that Related has nothing to do with their day-to-day operations and that they do not endorse the fundraiser. Neither statement mentions Ross or Trump by name, and both point out that neither company allows profits to be used for campaign contributions.

But while many in the fashion flock have already cancelled their gym memberships — or worse, are guiltily going to SoulCycle this weekend in disguise — avoiding Ross’ empire may prove impossible for the countless industry folks who flock to the city for Fashion Week next month. (The CFDA declined to comment.)

Ross and Related are behind the $25 billion “city-within-a-city” known as Hudson Yards, which is reportedly the most expensive real-estate project in American history. It has long been speculated that the “Shed,” a $500 million events space located within Hudson Yards, will be the future home of the shows at New York Fashion Week. While next season’s shows are still being housed at Spring Place, IMG (which oversees production for many of the collections) has remained mum on whether designers will migrate uptown.

And yet, it appears Hudson Yards’ team has already begun to orchestrate events for this upcoming season of New York Fashion Week. The designer Prabal Gurung was approached to host his 10-year anniversary show at the Vessel, the Ross-funded $150 million “sculpture,” memorably described in New York Magazine as “large, shiny, and extravagantly pointless.” Upon hearing news of Ross’ fundraiser, Gurung condemned the billionaire on Twitter and said he was pulling out of the proposed Vessel show.

“To read that Stephen Ross ... is hosting a fundraiser for President Trump in the Hamptons is appalling, shocking, [and] an indication of their integrity and values,” he wrote.

He added that deciding whether to work with Ross and Related is “no longer about party lines … this is about choosing between two sides, the right or the wrong side of history.”

The truth is, Mr Ross’ “integrity” was already on full display earlier this year during the opening of Hudson Yards — but the various fashion folks who took part in the festivities and published party photos from the evening seem to have missed some key details.

Journalist Kriston Capps of CityLab has been tracking down the investments and finances for the billionaire’s development, revealing that the project actually weaselled its way into acquiring $1.2 billion of financing that was meant for economic development and public housing in Central and East Harlem. Additionally, a report published by Bridget Fisher and Flávia Leite of The New School concluded that Hudson Yards cost New York taxpayers a whopping $2.2 billion, even after receiving $6 billion in tax breaks and government assistance.

In short, any Fashion Week event heading to Hudson Yards is bound to be tainted by the corporate greed of a billionaire who took from the poor, manipulated city funds and is now using the profits of his expansive empire to pad the pockets of the most overtly racist, anti-LGBTQ+ President in modern history.

In a statement, Mr Ross addressed the fundraiser controversy, calling himself “an outspoken champion of racial equality, inclusion, diversity, public education, and environmental sustainability.” A brief glance at his wife’s Instagram account, on which comments have been disabled since Wednesday, shows that she considers herself a supporter of LGBTQ+ equality and abortion rights. (Kara Ross did not respond to a request for comment.)

Herein lies the great hypocrisy of the elite: One can call oneself a champion of racial equality while helping to raise millions of dollars for a president whose rhetoric was invoked in the manifesto of a white supremacist who slaughtered 22 innocent people last week in a spree targeting Mexican immigrants.

One can attend a luncheon for President Trump hosted by their billionaire husband, and then post a rainbow-hued photo on Instagram endorsing #inclusivity, all while the Trump administration has rolled back employment discrimination protections for LGBTQ+ individuals and barred transgender people from serving in the military.

One can shake hands with President Trump on a Friday in the Hamptons after serving an organisation such as the CFDA, which just hosted the Love Ball in support of eradicating HIV/AIDS, and never draw the connection that the president has made it more expensive and difficult for people living with HIV to access life-saving medication.

One can partake in the CFDA’s efforts around endorsing immigration equality, all while funding a man who has trapped asylum-seeking migrants escaping poverty and torture in conditions at our border that can only be described as squalid, and where children are going without showers or hot meals for days on end.

One can have the audacity to say in a statement that they stand for access to public education, when Trump has appointed a woman who is dismantling the quality of public schools by the day, making things worse for our nation’s middle and lower class, while working to place more guns in our classrooms.

One can feign concern about our world’s ecosystem from the safety of their Hamptons home or penthouse in Hudson Yards, while giving directly to an administration that has denied the reality of climate change and has dismantled protections for our environment, incentivising oil drilling and destroying protected lands.

One can go to bed with a man who gives to Trump one day and post her support for reproductive rights, all while never acknowledging that, just last week, taxpayer-funded clinics all over the country were ordered by his administration to stop referring women for abortions.

In essence, one can be so wealthy as to completely insulate oneself from the actual effects of Trump’s disastrous administration — and then use that wealth to further fuel his machine.

In the years after the 2016 election, the fashion industry formed ourselves in opposition to Trump’s rhetoric. With our international flights, our front row seats and our celebration of arts and beauty, we pride ourselves on being an antidote to Trump — to providing relief from his hatred, and promoting values that champion women, queer people, people of colour, immigrants and everyone who lives at the intersections of these identities. Our most famous publications, from Vogue to Elle to Harper’s Bazaar to GQ, have established themselves as standing on the side of progress and condemn Trump on their websites on a near-daily basis. Our most influential designers in New York — from Gurung to Michael Kors to Tom Ford to Tory Burch — have all voiced and materialised their support for causes that Trump aims to bury each and every week. So how could the future home of New York Fashion Week be in bed with the financial underwriting of President Donald Trump?

What many of our upper class and fashion elite fail to grasp is that life happens beyond headlines and Instagram posts. That true allyship and activism isn’t performative — in fact, it’s absolutely and utterly inconvenient. And your worth and integrity will not be measured by what you dare to say behind an iPhone screen: It is measured by the difficult decisions we make when we are forced to choose a side — and that includes who we double-kiss at fashion shows, and with whom we’re willing to avoid confrontation in order to keep the peace at catered lunches and fundraiser meetings.

As the body count rises, as our rights are rolled back on the daily, as our democracy continues its slow and onerous crumble, we have to redefine what it means to be “the bigger person.” The Bigger Person, in this case, doesn’t rise above by turning the other cheek. In moments like these, it’s the Bigger Person who needs to qualify how and when to fight back.

So it seems the fashion industry — our editors, critics, creative directors, stylists, designers, publicists, executives — have a choice to make: Which side of history do we want to be on?

(Bus. Of FAsh.) Barneys New York: What Happens Now? After filing for bankruptcy

Barneys New York: What Happens Now?
After filing for bankruptcy protection, the luxury retailer aims to restructure its business and find a new owner. But where does that leave the brands it sells?

NEW YORK, United States — Barneys New York has bought itself some time after securing $218 million in financing, enough to keep the storied department store open while it works its way through Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings.

But the retailer’s fate remains very much up in the air. While Barneys is hopeful that it will find a buyer — long a goal of its current owner, hedge fund manager Richard Perry — industry sources point to the possibility of liquidation.

The $218 million comes from Brigade Capital Management, a global investment management firm, and B. Riley Financial, a financial services firm that includes an investment banking arm. This financing, which Barneys announced Tuesday night, replaces a previous $75 million arrangement with Gordon Brothers Group and Hilco Global. The company added that the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York granted the retailer approval to immediately access $75 million of the total $218 million to help "meet its go-forward financial commitments and continue operations."

As part of the deal, Barneys will close eight stores — including its Seattle and Chicago locations — and seven off-price locations, keeping five full-line stores open, including its Madison Avenue flagship, as well as two outlet stores and e-commerce sites Barneys.com and BarneysWarehouse.com. The inventory from the closed stores will be shipped to other locations, according to an FAQ sent to vendors on the morning of August 6, and employee wages and benefits will continue to be paid under court approval.

"The competition to provide Barneys New York with fresh capital reinforces our confidence in achieving a value enhancing transaction," Chief Executive Daniella Vitale said in a statement Tuesday.

Barneys has a long road ahead to secure its future, however. The retailer will almost certainly need to reduce the rent on its nine-story Madison Avenue store, analysts say. That location drives a significant portion of sales, but a 72 percent rent increase in January by building owner Ben Ashkenazy, to $27.9 million a month, was a major factor in the company's decision to file for bankruptcy protection.

Under bankruptcy protection, tenants are granted legal protection to reject an existing lease.

“I look at this bankruptcy as a leverage play to bring Ashkenazy to the table again,” said Richard Johnson, co-founder of retail real estate firm Odyssey Retail Advisors. “We see it as a way for Barneys to fix their books and push themselves back to profitability.”

Johnson and other real estate experts predict that Barneys will need to downsize its current 275,000-square-foot space.

“They could keep the ground floor and then part of the second floor and give back the rest of the space to the landlord,” said Robin Abrams, a retail broker at Compass. “They could also maintain half of the ground floor for what they were paying before.”

If negotiating a smaller space doesn’t work out with Ashkenazy, Barneys could feasibly move to another space in the neighbourhood, where vacancy rates are high, Johnson said.

“There are a number of large spaces they can relocate to. Would it be as iconic? Maybe not, but if they’re nimble, Barneys could find a new home and be able to recreate their magic somewhere else,” he said.

But paying rent is only the start of Barneys’ problems.

Barneys also owes money to numerous fashion brands, including The Row and Celine, which are respectively owed $3.7 million and $2.7 million, according to court filings. The list of creditors also includes Yves Saint Laurent, owed $2.2 million, Balenciaga, owed $2.1 million, $1.9 million to Givenchy and $1.8 million to Gucci.

Barneys plans to use its $75 million in new financing to “pay vendors and factors in full for goods and services provided on or after August 6,” the date of the bankruptcy filing, according to a note sent to vendors.

Tensions between retailers like Barneys and major luxury brands have increased in recent years as top labels shift toward selling through their own stores, where profit margins are typically higher.

Meanwhile, Barneys — once seen as the edgy, fresh alternative to uptown mainstays Bergdorf Goodman and Saks Fifth Avenue — has struggled to adapt to the shifting tides of retail, investing in brick-and-mortar at a time when e-commerce competitors like Net-a-Porter and MatchesFashion were winning customers. These upstarts took a page from Barneys’ playbook, offering exclusive collections from emerging designers.

Given larger trends in fashion, some observers speculate that Barneys’ best chance of survival would be as a subsidiary to a larger, better-capitalised retailer. Barneys had held unsuccessful talks with a number of possible acquirers, according to media reports. Multiple parties have expressed interest in acquiring Barneys, but none are department stores, The New York Times reported Tuesday.

Large retailers that lack a strong presence in luxury might see Barneys as a good fit, said David Tawil, president of Maglan Capital, a hedge fund specialising in distressed assets.

“If it was an Amazon type, I could buy it,” he said. “I could put a couple-hundred-million dollars into luxury to see if I could make it work. Maybe also Target or T.J. Maxx. None of these guys have a niche in luxury and it could be a start for them.”

Amazon declined to comment. Target and T.J. Maxx did not respond to requests for comment.

However, Tawil added that such a sale immediately following restructuring is unlikely.

“The real question is how much more capital needs to be injected to fix the business,” he said.

Another possible outcome is liquidation. But even if its retail operations are eventually perceived in the market as unsalvageable, the Barneys brand itself may still be worth plenty to the right buyer.

“The name ‘Barneys New York’ will survive in one shape or form,” said Gary Wassner, the founder of factoring company Hilldun, which helps designers and vendors finance the production of large wholesale orders.

During liquidation, the intellectual property of a brand often ends up in the hands of a licensing company. Marquee Brands bought Bruno Magli and Ben Sherman. Authentic Brands Group owns Nine West, Hervé Léger and Juicy Couture, among others. These firms make a business out of resurrecting distressed but well-known brands through licensing deals.

Multi-brand retailers rarely enter into such deals, though licensing company Global Icons recently bought a majority stake in Los Angeles-based Fred Segal.

The path Barneys chooses — or is forced to choose — could determine the livelihood of the many small and independent vendors that depend on it as a source of revenue, said Wassner, who has 86 clients that do business with the store.

“Particularly those who are young and small and undercapitalised, in this situation, they’re quite desperate,” he said. “Barneys has always supported young brands with exclusive relationships. When you lose your main wholesaler, there’s a big hole to fill and it’s not easy to turn a ship like that around.”

For now, Wassner has advised his clients to put Barneys orders on hold until more details come to light about payments.

This isn’t Barneys’ first brush with bankruptcy. The Pressman family, the store’s original owners, filed for Chapter 11 in 1996; the company was sold in a leveraged buyout in 2000. In 2012, current owner Perry’s hedge fund gained control in a debt-for-equity deal.

Monday’s filing, however, is as different from its 1996 bankruptcy as “night and day,” Tawil said.

“We’re talking 20 years on, the rise of e-tailing in a massive way, and also of other luxury goods retailers,” he said.