TheChek News Flow

DAX:

MDAX:

SDAX:

Industry insiders have warned the process could take years — and cost tens of billions of dollars

Venezuela’s opposition leader had a simple message for the US energy industry last March: Come and get our oil.

Speaking by video to executives at CERAWeek in Houston, María Corina Machado promised that Venezuela’s oil sector, nationalised in the 1970s and further expropriated under Hugo Chávez in the 2000s, would be thrown open to private capital.

Production would be “fully driven by the private sector”, the assets of state-owned oil company Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) would be auctioned and investors would be protected by new contracts as well as international arbitration and oversight from the IMF and World Bank.

Machado took the same message to financiers last October in Washington, according to Luisa Palacios, the former chair of Citgo, the US refining arm of PDVSA, who is now at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy. “I’ve seen the numbers, I have seen the plan,” Palacios said. 

While Machado now appears to have been sidelined, the prize she offered of Venezuela’s “unimaginably vast” oil wealth is fully in play after the US ousted Nicolás Maduro from power last weekend.

But restoring Venezuela’s oil industry after years of corruption, mismanagement and decay will be neither quick nor cheap. Industry insiders warned it could take years, and tens or even hundreds of billions of dollars, at a time when US oil majors are under pressure from weaker crude prices.

Donald Trump said a US takeover of Venezuela’s oil industry would generate “tremendous amount of wealth” that could support a new government and compensate US oil companies who had their assets seized under Chávez.

Venezuela holds about 17 per cent of global crude reserves, but production collapsed by more than 75 per cent between 2013 and 2020. The US now pumps more than 10 times as much oil.

Even so, access to Venezuela’s fields would help US majors replenish reserves and provide heavy crude for Gulf Coast refineries that were designed decades ago to process oil from Venezuela, Canada and Mexico, rather than the lighter shale grades produced domestically.

US imports of Venezuelan crude sat at just 135,000 barrels a day (b/d) at the end of last year, down from 1.4mn b/d in 1998. Energy Aspects, a consultancy, estimated US refineries could readily absorb an additional 1mn b/d. Increased flows would also reduce reliance on Canada, whose exports to the US have tripled over the same period.

Control over Venezuelan supply would also allow Washington to squeeze China, currently Caracas’ largest buyer. “We’re not going to allow the western hemisphere to be a base of operations for adversaries, competitors, and rivals of the United States, simple as that,” Marco Rubio, US secretary of state, told NBC’s Meet the Press on Sunday. 

Palacios argued the primary beneficiaries should be Venezuelans themselves. “Oil is central to this story, but not necessarily because the US wants to secure oil resources,” she said. 

“The way this country makes its living in international markets is by selling oil. With the destruction of the oil industry came the destruction of the economy.” 

Reviving exports is essential to restoring fiscal revenues, reinvigorating the economy and slowing the exodus of migrants across Latin America and into the US, an argument likely to resonate within a Trump administration focused on immigration. 

Selling oil to the US rather than China would also improve cash flow: much of the exports to Beijing are used to service at least $10bn in outstanding loans.

The rest of the China-bound oil is snapped up by smaller, independent “teapot” refineries, which have benefited from cut price deals and stand to lose out if shipments are diverted elsewhere.

“China’s teapots have been slurping up discounted oil. Good for them. It’s over,” said Bob McNally, president of Rapidan Energy. “Are they going to be happy? No. Do I think it threatens their oil supply? Absolutely not . . . They can get the heavy sour oil from other places.”

Among American companies, Chevron is uniquely positioned. It employs about 3,000 people in Venezuela and operates under a special licence allowing it to export heavy crude to US Gulf Coast refineries. 

“There was always a view within Chevron that it would stay in Venezuela because at some point this exact scenario is going to happen,” said a former executive. “They have a very deep knowledge of the patch. They have always got that plan on the shelf, they don’t even really need to dust it down,” the person added. 

The appeal is clear: Venezuela’s reserves are large, mapped and carry no exploration risk. Advances in technology have lowered the cost of producing heavy crude, making it competitive with US shale. Analysts say output could rise by up to 500,000 b/d relatively quickly.

Meanwhile, ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips are seeking a total of $10bn in compensation following the seizure of their assets in the early 2000s. 

“It would be premature to speculate on any future business activities or investments,” said a ConocoPhillips spokesman. “We will continue with our collection efforts, which are made in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations.” 

Exxon did not respond to a request for comment.

When Darren Woods, Exxon’s chief executive, was asked by Bloomberg in November if he would be interested in returning to Venezuela, the CEO said: “We’ve been expropriated from Venezuela two different times. We have our history there.”

“We’d have to see what the economics look like. So I wouldn’t put it on the list or take it off the list”.

Several other western firms, including Spain’s Repsol, France’s Maurel & Prom, and Italy’s Eni, may also be interested. Repsol and Eni have been lobbying the Trump administration for a special licence to enable them to receive payment in Venezuelan oil for the gas they provide to the country.    

The industry’s past weighs heavily. “Assurances on contracts are critical,” Palacios said, noting repeated discrepancies between promises and practice.

Companies will be reluctant to commit capital without clarity on what a new regime in Caracas looks like and that it will not be tempted by expropriations even in the far future.

“It’s just 20 to 25 years ago they were kicked out. So, once burned twice shy. They’ll be cautious,” said McNally. “Nothing’s going to happen overnight. It’s a long and winding road.”

Palacios added that international oil companies would also struggle to partner with PDVSA because of its poor safety and environmental record. “They need to be able to operate in an independent way so they can control their procurement and their operations,” she said. 

Finally, she said Venezuela would have to find a route back to sources of international finance after being cut off when US sanctions were imposed in 2017. Venezuela’s high risk might mean “a significant increase” in the cost of borrowing, she added. 

The scale of decay is uncertain. Since a 2002-2003 oil workers’ strike, PDVSA has been used as a cash machine for the military, leading to an exodus of skilled staff and crumbling infrastructure, wrote Helima Croft, RBC Capital Markets analyst. Untangling Chinese and Russian interests will also be fraught.

Croft told the FT that “snatching and grabbing Maduro may have been the easy part. The harder challenge is how do you build this country back. Our record on nation-building is anything but spectacular”. 

Donald Trump’s toppling of President Nicolás Maduro opens door to US investors eyeing world’s largest crude reserve

former top Chevron executive is raising $2bn for Venezuelan oil projects as investors race to answer Donald Trump’s call to pour “billions of dollars” into the country after the US toppled its president Nicolás Maduro.

Ali Moshiri, Chevron’s former head of Latin American operations, told the Financial Times his Amos Global Energy Management fund had identified multiple Venezuelan assets and was talking to institutional investors about a private placement to kick-start investment.

US special forces’ capture of Maduro on Saturday and Trump’s call for US companies to revive Venezuela’s oil industry had created a sudden opportunity, Moshiri said.

“We have been anticipating this breakthrough for a while and our $2bn private placement memorandum is ready to go with several investment targets identified,” he said in an interview.

“I’ve had a dozen calls over the past 24 hours from potential investors. Interest in Venezuela has gone from zero to 99 per cent.”

The US assault on Caracas and Trump’s warning that Washington would dictate terms to Venezuela’s new leaders has raised the prospect of a corporate rush into a country boasting the world’s largest oil reserves.

It marks a potential new era for the companies. The last major opening of a country’s reserves was in 2009 in Iraq, where auctions for oilfields drew multibillion-dollar bids six years after the US invasion.

But the three US oil majors have cautiously greeted Trump’s call for investment due to concerns about political instability, a history of expropriated assets in Venezuela and the vast sums required to boost production.

One industry insider said the chief executives of ExxonMobil, Chevron and ConocoPhillips were blindsided by the US military action.

“None of the industry players that have the capital and the expertise to invest in Venezuela were advised or consulted prior to either the removal of Maduro or the president making his statements yesterday,” said the insider.

Amos’s fundraising effort will mark an early test of Wall Street’s appetite to bankroll the rebuilding of Venezuela’s decrepit oil infrastructure, which has been degraded after years of mismanagement and sanctions.

The memorandum for investors prepared by Amos, which has been seen by the FT, is dated December 2025. It shows the fund intends to acquire 20,000-50,000 barrels a day of oil production and 500,000 barrels of reserves from the state oil company Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA). It anticipates an exit within five to seven years and a return on investment of two and a half times.

Other private investors have also signalled their potential interest in Venezuela following the US intervention.

Harold Hamm, the US shale tycoon and a prominent donor to Trump, told the FT his company Continental Resources would consider investing in Venezuela under the right circumstances.   

“While we do not have any immediate plans with respect to Venezuela, we believe the country has significant resource potential and with improved regulatory and governmental stability we would definitely consider future investment,” he said. 

While private investors are expected to move quickest in heeding Trump’s call, industry analysts said only US majors would have the heft and expertise to rebuild the nation’s vast and complex heavy oil sector.

Chevron, which is already operating in the country under a special licence provided by the Trump administration, is considered the best placed producer to step up investments. But it said it was focused on employee safety and integrity of its assets.  

Its rival ExxonMobil has not responded to requests for comment about its intentions in Venezuela. It is still seeking payment of a $1.6bn arbitration award linked to the expropriation of assets almost two decades ago by Hugo Chávez, Maduro’s predecessor.

ConocoPhillips, which won an $8.4bn arbitration award over the expropriation of its Venezuelan assets, said it would continue efforts to collect its award and it was “premature” to speculate on future activities.

While Trump was explicit in calling for US companies to invest, his secretary of state Marco Rubio left the door open to producers from allied countries — but not those from America’s enemies.

China is Venezuela’s biggest oil customer and its companies, as well as Russian companies, have been investors in its upstream.

“What we’re not going to allow is for the oil industry in Venezuela to be controlled by adversaries of the United States,” he told NBC News’ Meet the Press. “Why does China need their oil, why does Russia need their oil, why does Iran need their oil? . . . This is the western hemisphere, this is where we live.”

Some European companies with operations in Venezuela — Spain’s Repsol and Italy’s Eni — could invest if US sanctions were lifted, said analysts. But they would wait to see whether the fiscal terms for non-US companies were favourable.

Moshiri has attempted to buy Venezuelan assets in the past. In 2022 he signed a joint venture with Gramercy Funds Management to invest in the offshore Gulf of Paria. Amos later agreed to buy some Venezuelan oil and gas assets owned by China’s Sinopec.

Moshiri said the deals fell through because the investment fund was not able to obtain a licence from the Biden administration.

“Now with Trump administration, which is more commercially friendly and economically driven, we are starting a new fund and are very confident.”

The dynamic M&A scene is telegraphing significant shifts, redefining the future of brands, their creative direction, and market strategies.

The M&A scene in Italy was particularly brisk up until the end of the year, and other potential deals may be on the horizon. Perhaps even more interesting, the acquisitions have observers wondering about the future of the brands as the new investors may veer from the well-trodden path, forge alliances, install another C-suite or new designers, and cater to a different customer.

For example, Etro is entering another phase with a new pool of investors, including the Turkish Rams Global; Mathias Facchini, who helms Swinger International, and SRI Group, which are buying the minority stake owned by the Etro family. This will lead to the exit of the founding family. L Catterton remains the majority shareholder, after acquiring the stake in July 2021.

While Fabrizio Cardinali remains chief executive officer and there is no indication that Etro would ever want to close its fashion division, under the lead of Marco De Vincenzo, sources believe the arrival of Rams Global signals the owners’ increased interest in the brand’s residential projects. Last year, Etro and Rams Global unveiled plans to design the interiors of the Tower Rams Beyond in Istanbul. It was followed by another residential project in Phuket, by Amal Development in collaboration with The One Atelier.

Speaking of Swinger International, which owns the Genny brand, it has also been especially active, taking control in December of Philippe Model Paris from Alessandro Benetton’s 21 Invest, pointing to a new focus for the Italian fashion group on the footwear division.

This is a segment that continues to interest investors. Before Christmas, international venture capital and private equity firm HSG said they were acquiring a majority stake in Golden Goose, with investment company Temasek and True Light Capital joining as minority investors.

Funds advised by Permira, as well as other existing shareholders including Carlyle, retain a minority stake in the footwear brand.

Silvio Campara remains CEO, while former Gucci executive Marco Bizzarri has been named non-executive chairman. Since HSG has backed more than 160 companies in its portfolio that have listed on public stock exchanges, an IPO could once again be in the cards for Golden Goose, after it pulled the plug on its listing in June 2024. Speaking with WWD after the new investor structure was revealed, Campara said “the international and diverse pool of investors” would be an asset in any potential future IPO.

There’s been a lot of activity in the eyewear segment as well, with giant EssilorLuxottica’s increased investments in the med-tech segment.

While rumors swirl around the company, which could potentially take a stake in the Giorgio Armani group, as per the late designer’s will, EssilorLuxottica in December acquired Signifeye, a Belgian ophthalmology platform that operates 15 eye care centers and clinics in the Flanders region. Before that, it took over ophthalmology platform Optegra, just the latest in a string of such deals.

In addition to frames, lenses, medical instruments and science-backed eye care solutions, the group’s offer includes AI-powered innovative technologies and wearables, teaming with Meta to create performance AI glasses. In addition to its own brands ranging from Ray-Ban and Oakley to Persol, the group produces and distributes eyewear for companies spanning from Giorgio Armani, Brunello Cucinelli and Burberry to Chanel, Michael Kors, Moncler, Prada and Ralph Lauren, to name a few.

Consolidating two major players in the eyewear industry, and creating yet another dominant force in luxury and lifestyle eyewear, in September, VSP Vision, parent company of Marchon, entered into an agreement to acquire Marcolin from PAI Partners and other minority shareholders. Marchon produces for brands ranging from Calvin Klein and Donna Karan to Ferragamo and Karl Lagerfeld, while Marcolin has a perpetual license with Tom Ford and produces for brands including Zegna, Christian Louboutin, and Max Mara to name a few.

In December, Safilo Group, which produces for brands including Boss, Carolina Herrera, David Beckham and Tommy Hilfiger, among others, said it had acquired 25 percent of U.K. eyewear firm Inspecs Group, providing the Italian eyewear company with a new strategic opportunity.

BasicNet Group is also moving into a new segment by acquiring beachwear specialist Sundek, a deal unveiled in December, a month after the group inked a deal to buy Woolrich from L-Gam.The deals follow the appointment of Alessandro and Lorenzo Boglione, the sons of the company’s founder and president Marco Boglione, as co-CEOs. The publicly traded, Turin-based company already comprises brands like Kappa, Robe di Kappa, K-Way, Superga, Sebago and Briko.

The sale of Twinset last June to Borletti Group and Quadrivio & Pambianco, manager of the Made in Italy Fund II, by The Carlyle Group led to the exit of CEO Alessandro Varisco and the appointment of Gabriele Maggio as his successor in December.

While Lorenzo Bertelli has taken on the role of executive chairman of Versace and Emmanuel Gintzburger at the moment remains CEO of the brand, eyes are on the future of its creative direction. Since the exit of Dario Vitale and the closing of the acquisition by Prada Group in December, sources say Pieter Mulier, creative director of Maison Azzedine Alaïa, is expected to be joining the Milan-based brand — unless Alaïa parent Compagnie Financière Richemont puts the brake on the designer’s move.

It will also be interesting to see how LuisaViaRoma CEO Tommaso Maria Andorlini will stabilize the business and retool the strategy of the troubled e-tailer following the exit of investor Style Capital last month.

There are still a few brands that sources say are being shopped around, from Sergio Rossi and Caruso, both under the Lanvin Group, to Missoni. In November, sources said Authentic Brands Group, the owner of Reebok, Champion and other high-profile brands, was in exclusive negotiations to purchase the Italian label. The Missoni family owns 58.8 percent of the shares of the company while an investor, Fondo Strategico Italiano, bought a 41.2 percent stake in 2018. WHP Global was said to also be looking at Missoni, but its interest has reportedly waned.

Observers also wonder about the Roberto Cavalli brand since owner Hussain Sajwani is shifting his attention to a project that is aiming to support the growing demand for data storage and processing related to AI and other technologies. In June, the company issued a statement that it is “working to find the best path to growth, which includes exploring strategic partnerships.”

What will happen to Aeffe is another open question. The financially troubled fashion group, which controls the Alberta Ferretti, Moschino and Pollini brands, in October filed an application for access to the negotiated settlement of the group business crisis (CNS). Sources believe executive chairman Massimo Ferretti, who has been rationalizing the group’s retail network and embarked on a cost-cutting strategy, may be eyeing a delisting. In addition, former Burberry and Ferragamo CEO Marco Gobbetti, who joined Aeffe’s board in August, has been working to find new growth avenues that could even lead to a sale.

Having remedied the debt crisis, the former automotive executive must turn his talents to swift brand turnarounds.

Automotive executive Luca de Meo has brought his high-octane personality, fresh perspectives and a few decisive maneuvers since becoming chief executive officer of ailing French luxury group Kering last September.

This spring — date still TBD — the turnaround expert will unveil a strategic plan engineered to transform Kering into a serious challenger in a lackluster luxury market grappling with consumer fatigue, so-called “greedflation” and economic woes.

Equity analysts applaud what they’ve seen so far from the Italian executive.

“Energy, speed, clarity, focus seem to have improved materially,” said Luca Solca, managing director of luxury goods at Bernstein. “Yet the issue of making Gucci, Saint Laurent, Balenciaga, McQueen and Brioni relevant again is a major work in progress.

“Before even looking at whether the right designers are in place, I would wonder if the right visions and strategies have been identified,” Solca mused.

In his estimation, Gucci “has gone nowhere” during its attempt at being a quieter luxury brand. “At the same time, moving Saint Laurent closer to aspirational consumers is causing a major backlash, not to mention the dominant focus of McQueen on sneakers, which has left the brand as the Wile E. Coyote once the road is no longer beneath it. What are the plans to make these brands relevant again?

When HSBC upgraded Kering last September, it said the group would need to deliver short term on processes, people and portfolio, “and de Meo has convincingly started to deliver on all three,” said HSBC luxury analyst Erwan Rambourg. “Processes implies greater speed, rewarding competence rather than tenure or ‘friends and family’ and has come with a very visible sense of urgency, ambition and hunger.

“The group has quickly addressed the stress on debt and started to fix some problematic assets,” Rambourg continued. “The little we have seen from the new management team gives an impression of drive, focus and common-sensical approaches.”

To be sure, de Meo entered Kering and hit the ground running.

“He has fixed the balance sheet problems by postponing the Valentino deal and moving beauty to a first-class license with L’Oréal,” Solca enumerated. “I think his decision to streamline senior responsibilities — eliminating the two [deputy] CEO roles and making [Francesca] Bellettini responsible for Gucci — were timely and appropriate. Now the task of reigniting consumer interest for the core brands may take a bit longer.”

According to HSBC’s Rambourg, de Meo’s strategic plan is “essential,” especially given “years of missteps.”

“But at the end of the day, the only thing that counts is detailing a credible plan for Gucci’s revival,” he said.

Previously CEO of French car giant Renault Group, de Meo has already recruited several of his former coworkers, including HR specialist Thomas Cuntz as global talent development and people engagement head and Giovanni Perosino as senior vice president, marketing, at Gucci.

It is understood de Meo turned to the automotive talent pool partly because C-suite executives are more readily available there than ones from fashion and luxury, who typically have lengthy noncompete clauses, and they come from functions that are probably more advanced in the car industry than fashion.

What’s more, he knows the executives and their abilities from close proximity and over years — not gleaned from a one-hour job interview. It is understood he also values their outsider perspectives as a kind of “diversity,” given that the fashion industry mostly recruits from within.

De Meo spent five years leading Renault and boasts a total of 30 years in the sector at brands including Fiat, Alfa Romeo, Toyota, Volkswagen and Seat.

While he may be new to fashion, he’s dealt with luxury before since an estimated 63 percent of all luxury spending is ploughed into luxury cars. De Meo has been a board member of Lamborghini, and helped it create the Urus, its first SUV, by employing mass-market standards of production to create a reliable, comfortable and yet still dynamic vehicle.

To be sure, de Meo brings industrial insights galore, given that car manufacturing is among the most complex of all consumer products, involving some 30,000 components per vehicle.

He’s also accustomed to crises, and could bring to Kering new processes, integrated technologies and innovations that will give it a leg up in a slow-growth period for fashion and luxury.

In November, de Meo dispatched a memo to all Kering employees, details of which were leaked to the press and reported in several newspapers and wire services, including a timeline giving the group 18 months to resize operations and return all brands to growth. The “ReconKering” plan also calls for a resizing of its retail network.

It is understood the executive saw the missive as a statement of intent, a way to instill urgency and achieve a “collective conscience” around the enormous task ahead.

Behind the scenes, he has been clarifying the positioning of each brand, anointing Balenciaga with the shorthand of “urban cool,” for example, and bringing together creative directors and C-suite executives from logistics, finance and supply chain for informal get-togethers and more structured powwows.

While de Meo spied an immediate need to rein in fixed costs and review capital allocations at the luxury conglomerate, he is said to have discovered a lot of potential to transform Kering from being a laggard into a serious challenger to its rivals LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton, Richemont and Prada Group.

He is said to relish being in “attack mode” and motivated to make Kering a super-creative company.

Among items on his to-do list are making its marquee houses less dependent on fashion cycles, diversifying its categories to make the group more resilient, and ramping up innovation, integrating cutting-edge technologies like AI as a tool.

According to Oliver Chen, senior research analyst at TD Cowen, key focus areas for investors include “margin outlook, Gucci/YSL strategy, store rationalization, inventory discipline, the L’Oréal beauty partnership, and plans to reengage aspirational customers amid shifting industry trends and a softer Chinese consumer behavior, the leverage ratio of the company, and portfolio opportunities and rationalization.”

Among Chen’s main concerns for Kering are “execution risk given slowing Gucci growth and the challenge of revitalizing aspirational demand, balancing execution across all price points at Gucci including entry, middle and higher price points; negative trends at Gucci, the existing financial leverage ratio” and questions about the brand portfolio.

“Favorable factors to consider with new management include new management’s fresh perspective, history of operational discipline and added flexibility/speed,” he added.

Rambourg cited three areas that give him pause.

“First, the retail footprint is too big both in terms of number of units, but importantly in terms of selling surface in existing units and there is no quick fix as leases run for a number of years,” he said. “Second, we see evidence of change coming at Gucci, but it’s not as if the sector was standing still and the creative frenzy elsewhere can make the rebirth of Gucci more complicated.”

Finally, Rambourg questioned how the corporate culture might evolve, and how long it will take to stabilize.

“We think it is likely a good idea to poach execs from the autos sector and others, but there might be a choppy transition from old to next,” he said.

Luxury consultancy MAD analyzed data from research firm Atliant which revealed dynamism in the U.S., but caution across many regions and categories.

Even as luxury brands intensify their focus on wealthy clients, there are signs of pullback on several fronts.

Twenty percent of affluent and high-net-worth individuals (HNWIs) intend to spend less on designer fashions over the next 12 months. The percentage of non-purchasers rises to 30 percent for leather goods, 32 percent for jewelry and 44 percent for watches, according to findings gathered in the third quarter of 2025 by research firm Altiant and interpreted by Paris-based luxury consultancy MAD.

What’s more, the number of wealthy buyers sitting on the sidelines is growing year by year: Whereas only 15 percent made no purchases of designer fashions in 2019, the proportion grew to 25 percent in the third quarter.

For leather goods, the “no-purchase” segment swelled from 23 percent to 31 percent over the same period.

“The data signals a structural slowdown in luxury discretionary spending by affluent and HNWI consumers worldwide, marked by declining purchase frequency, rising non-buyers, and erosion of category penetration, especially in leather goods,” said Veronique Le Bansais, senior partner and managing director at MAD, flashing a bar chart of comparative data from the past six years. “Consumers remain engaged but are increasingly selective, cautious, and value-driven.

“The trend is not going in the right direction,” she remarked.

Only 32 percent of wealthy clients had no intention of purchasing watches in the third quarter of 2024, which eroded by 12 points within a year. According to MAD, the declines in the watch category are driven by weakness in Europe and Asia, among consumers over age 40, and among less wealthy, yet still affluent cohorts.

Intent to purchase only improved for travel over the past year, according to the Atliant data, which is based on regular surveys of affluents and HNWIs, nearly 500 for the third-quarter study.

“The shift from consumer goods to experiential luxury is confirmed,” MAD cofounder Jean Revis added in an interview.

The reasons behind changes in purchase habits differ by category, with mostly clients over age 40 retreating from designer fashions, and affluents shunning leather goods while HNWIs maintain a quite high frequency of purchase, Le Bansais said.

The implications? Fashion houses should capitalize on healthy appetite among 18- to 39-year-olds, and question how they can entice others back, while there’s clearly an issue of accessibility with leather goods, given steep price increases in the post-COVID luxury boom, she said.

Cosmetics, fragrance and jewelry categories remained broadly resilient, though a closer look at the numbers for jewelry reveals another polarization, with 40-plus males retreating, but women demonstrating a higher frequency of purchase.

Half of female HNWIs reported a median spend of more than $13,000 over the past year, according to the survey.

The data also pointed to North America as the most promising region for luxury firms with rich clients reporting the highest level of multiple purchases and the lowest level of non-purchases. Europe emerged as the most cautious region.

In jewelry, for example, only 29 percent of North American big spenders didn’t buy any in the past year, versus 43 percent in Asia and 52 percent in Europe. For designer fashions, only 16 percent of North American respondents didn’t purchase versus 33 percent for Europe.

Revis described a “moment of insecurity in the luxury industry,” and a hunger for insights into how its wealthiest clients behave from a statistical point of view.

The caution that emerged across the survey reflects a lack of confidence in the financial system, with 61 percent of respondents considering it somewhat or very unstable, and 30 percent expecting the stock market to perform worse over the next 12 months.

(Atliant’s pool of affluent and high-net-worth individuals are split equally between North America, Europe and Asia, with a median household income of $270,000 and median investable assets of $883,000.)

According to MAD’s interpretation of 2025 data, the downturn “seems to reinforce traditional views,” meaning wealthy consumers — asked which words represent themselves when it comes to wealth — prefer “tradition” over “modern” — and “local” is gaining ground over “international.”

Le Bensais noted there are still things to cheer about. “The number of people who purchased either multiple or single is always higher than the number of people who did not purchase, which means the segment overall is quite penetrated, which is a good thing,” she said.

Meanwhile, the study revealed some surprising sentiments about sustainable luxury, with only 56 percent of affluents and HNWIs considering it important, but 74 percent will pay more for sustainable luxury products.

Le Bansais said one possible explanation is that wealthy consumers are OK “to pay more to make sure that they have safe products for themselves,” especially for categories like beauty.