TheChek News Flow

The store, former home of the vintage jeweler S.J. Phillips, will span 6,000 square feet over three floors, and is down the street from Chloé which, like Alaïa, is owned by Compagnie Financière Richemont. The Chloé store is set to open at 143 New Bond Street later this summer.

The building is owned by Trophaeum, the property owner and developer that’s been stocking nearby Albemarle Street, and other parts of Mayfair, with luxury brands, flagship stores and restaurants, including Amanda Wakeley, Aquazzura and Alexander Wang.

Alaïa is thought to be paying about 1,500 pounds, or $1,924, per square foot, according to sources.

Trophaeum has also recently signed with Thom Browne, Moncler and Casadei for stores in Mayfair. Casadei opened last November. On Albemarle Street, Trophaeum brought in the restaurant Isabel earlier this year, and has brokered a deal with Robin Birley, who will open a new private members club later this year.

Spokespeople for Trophaeum and Richemont declined to comment.

Alaïa has two stand-alone stores in Paris, and is stocked at a variety of retailers including Galeries Lafayette in Paris and 10 Corso Como in Milan. In London, the brand is sold at Dover Street Market, Harrods, Harvey Nichols and Selfridges.

Year-to-Date, M&A Activity Slows

According to the S&P, transaction values have declined 16 percent.

To date, there have been just over 6,400 total transactions in the 11 sectors covered by the S&P, which reflects a 4.3 percent decline in deal volume from the same period last year. Transaction values are off double digits, the firm said in its report.

Richard Peterson, principal analyst at the firm, said that “with announced U.S. M&A dollar proceeds in 2017 off 16 percent from year-ago activity, the slump in several sectors’ deal [counts] represents another cautionary sign for deal making this year.”

The analyst noted that real estate remains the top sector, followed by consumer discretionary — which includes retail and fashion apparel deals. Peterson said real estate M&A activity garnered 32 percent of the total number of deals so far this year. “While that percentage approximates real estate deals share of announced M&A shares at this time last year, the sector has experienced the second-biggest single drop in deal count year-over-year with a decline of 99 transactions,” Peterson added.

The firm also said that the second “most frequently targeted sector for U.S. M&A deals to date” is the consumer discretionary market. “However, this sector has suffered the biggest year-over-year drop in number of deals as deal count is 114 lower than a year ago,” Peterson said. “Contributing to this result has been a drop in the number of retail industry deals as to date this year there have been 159 announced M&A transactions. That represents the lowest deal count at this point in time for the retail industry since 2009 when 121 M&A transactions were announced.”

In the consumer staples market, the S&P said dealmaking was robust. The energy sector is also faring well with the number of deals outpacing last year. “As for areas seeing a notable slowdown in M&A deals, the information technology has reported 854 announced U.S. M&A deals to date this year, the slowest pace of deals since 2013,” Peterson said. “Similarly, this year’s financial sector M&A deal count of 422 is the most sluggish since the 2013 period when 406 transactions took place.”

The analyst also said the pace of dealmaking in the industrial sector is also down.

The country is in near revolt and has barely enough ready cash to feed its people, much less pay the billions of dollars in debt that the government owes to its foreign lenders.

Yet bonds issued by Venezuela’s national oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, or Pdvsa, have attracted some of world’s most sophisticated investors. They are betting that the government will use its dwindling supply of dollars to pay bondholders instead of importing food and medicine for its people.

Now, Goldman Sachs’ decision to snap up $2.8 billion worth of Pdvsa bonds maturing in 2022, at a 70 percent discount to the market price, has struck a nerve.

The investment has caused a political uproar in Venezuela, where opposition forces have taken to the streets to protest the autocratic rule of the nation’s unpopular president, Nicolás Maduro. Nearly 60 people have died in clashes, mainly between protesters and the police, in Caracas and other cities in recent months.

Julio Borges, the opposition lawmaker who heads the National Assembly, wrote a letter of protest to Lloyd C. Blankfein, the chief executive of Goldman Sachs, accusing the Wall Street firm of looking to make a “quick buck off the suffering of the Venezuelan people.”

Goldman Sachs has defended the deal, saying that many other investors, including mutual funds and exchange-traded funds, own the bonds and that its asset management division bought the securities on the secondary market, without interacting with the Venezuelan government.

Nevertheless, the transaction highlights the extent to which investors are willing to take on increasing levels of political and economic risk as they seek high-yielding investments when interest rates still hover near zero.

“There is a lot of interest in this trade,” said Carlos de Sousa, an economist at Oxford Economics, a research company based in London. “We are in a low-rate environment, and these are dollar bonds with really high yields.”

Among the large holders of Pdvsa bonds are BlackRock, T. Rowe Price, Fidelity, JPMorgan Chase and Ashmore, an emerging market specialist based in London.

But none of those firms carry Goldman’s reputation for being politically influential and financially opportunistic — a combination that has made it an easy global punching bag.

At the root of what makes the bonds so attractive to investors, beyond their more than 20 percent returns, is the crucial role played by the Venezuelan oil company in providing foreign exchange to the embattled Maduro government.

While Venezuela has been in economic crisis for more than two years, the surge of people to the streets began after its Supreme Court, which is loyal to Mr. Maduro, tried to dissolve the country’s National Assembly in late March. The group of lawmakers, controlled by opposition parties, is considered the only government institution independent of the president.

Mr. Maduro’s growing authoritarianism is only the beginning of mounting grievances against Venezuela’s ruling leftists, who have governed since President Hugo Chávez took control of the country in 1999.

Falling petroleum prices and years of economic mismanagement when oil revenues were high, have led to triple-digit inflation and left a majority of Venezuelans hardly able to buy sufficient food and other necessities. Even those who can afford meals most days have trouble finding basics like bread, eggs and sugar because of rampant shortages.

Pdvsa brings in about 95 percent of the economy’s dollars, so foreign investors believe that the government, even in a worst case, will do all it can to keep the company functioning.

Mr. de Sousa also points out that unlike pure sovereign bonds issued by the government, Pdvsa securities lack legal mechanisms, like collective action clauses, which can help a government negotiate favorable terms with foreign bond holders if it defaults on its debt.

Moreover, investors have noted that in the last year, as Venezuela’s economic situation has deteriorated sharply, the government has paid out billions of dollars to foreign investors holding the oil company bonds.

The Pdvsa trade is the latest sign that foreign investors are becoming bolder in investing in the bonds of governments in far-flung locales.

In recent months, higher risk countries such as Turkey, Russia and Brazil have been at the forefront of this trend.

Driving the bet, analysts say, is a view that emerging market economies, regardless of their political and economic challenges, are no longer willing to face the wrath of bond investors by defaulting on their debts.

That is because global investment giants like BlackRock and Goldman have become ready sources of financing, quick to lend billions in dollars or even local currencies, to governments in Africa, Latin America and Asia that in the past relied on banks.

Perhaps no country is as reliant on the kindness of risk-happy foreign bond investors as Venezuela. According to the research firm Exotix, Venezuela has a financing requirement of $17 billion in 2017, yet its central bank reserves are a paltry $10 billion.

As investors see it, if you can buy a Pdvsa bond at 30 cents on the dollar, which also provides a double-digit yield, even if this government — or another for than matter — has to default, the gains made on the investment would be enough to overcome any loss.

While Goldman Sachs defended its trade by saying that it bought the bonds on the open market from a broker, bankers and traders say the money ultimately ended up in Venezuela’s treasury because the seller was an institution with ties to the government.

Nonetheless, the threat by Mr. Borges, the opposition leader, that a new government would not make good on these bonds seems unlikely.

That is because these bonds carry covenants aimed at preventing an issuer from favoring one bond holder over another. So paying BlackRock or JP Morgan and not Goldman would open Venezuela to lawsuits.

All of which suggests that, despite the controversy over the Goldman trade, foreign investors will keep lining up to buy Pdvsa bonds.

“This is the only source of foreign currency the government has,” said Mr. de Sousa, the Venezuelan expert at Oxford. “So I think the government will continue to sell more of these types of bonds to foreign investors.”

Investors should hold their noses and revisit Spanish and Italian bank shares

In this column last month, I covered non-US stocks’ historical leadership in US presidents’ inaugural years. History shows us that the party really gets going in the second half, making this your buying window. But what to own? For answers, look at sector and country winners from the first quarter of this year.

Since 1970 — when good sector data begin — non-US sectors that led in the first quarter of inaugural years led for the rest of the year. The first quarter’s top three non-US sectors led the MSCI EAFE Index (Europe, Australasia, Far East) 61 per cent of the time, by a median 3.4 per cent. Meanwhile, the three worst sectors trailed the rest of the year 76 per cent of the time by -4.8 per cent.

Country leadership also persists. Similarly, the first quarter’s top country or region led the rest of the year 80 per cent of the time, by a median 5.6 per cent. The second best kept leading 60 per cent of the time, with a 2.2 per cent spread. The worst kept lagging 60 per cent of the time, and by 6.2 per cent.

“No correlation without causation” is one of my pet rules. “No heat chasing” is another. But I see fundamental reasons why many first quarter trends continue. The drivers don’t suddenly shift when the calendar flips from March to April. With America’s new administration in place, falling political uncertainty had already given its bullish impact on US stocks, hence first-quarter growth has favoured non-US stocks. And when non-US stocks lead early in inaugural years, the outperformance usually grows with time.

Outside America, many nations are very sector heavy. So if you expect non-US stocks to lead, that impacts sectors too.

On a regional basis, the first quarter’s best were Australia and continental Europe, while Canada lagged behind badly. Of the 10 eurozone nations in the MSCI World Index, seven outperformed. So buy Europe — not just core stalwarts like Germany, the Netherlands and France, but also the periphery.

Spain was the single best-performing country in the first quarter, and midway through May, its lead has widened. Australia, however, has sagged, and I see it as part of the 20 per cent that reverses first quarter success historically. Aussie stocks are a heavy bet on materials, whose early-year bounce petered out as folks fathomed metals’ enduring supply glut.

As for sectors, in the first quarter, non-US’s best sectors were technology, healthcare, industrials, consumer staples and utilities. The worst were energy — hence commodity-heavy Canada’s lag — plus telecoms and discretionary consumer stocks.

I’ve long liked healthcare and tech and expect greatness from here. Global demand for drugs, gadgets and software likely stays sky-high through this cycle’s close. Buy industrials, but avoid those dependent on commodity prices — aerospace, diversified conglomerates and consumer-goods manufacturers have better potential. As for staples and utilities, own some but don’t go crazy. Both tend to lag during strong expansions. Maybe they’ll be part of the 39 per cent that flip-flops.

Financials are a special case. Globally, financials lagged behind in the first quarter and kept trailing. But eurozone financials led in the first quarter, and have sped up since. Buy them.

US loan growth is slowing, but eurozone lending is ramping up, and banks there are loosening. Based on senior loan officer opinion surveys from the Federal Reserve and ECB, eurozone credit availability has improved since early 2016, while US loan supply has tightened.

In America, more banks tightened than loosened in three of the last four quarters. In Europe, banks net loosened in three of four quarters. In the one quarter that more banks tightened (the fourth quarter of 2016) the difference was only 0.2 per cent — so basically even. Lending trends tend to follow changes in credit standards, so Europe’s looser stance argues for ever-faster loan growth.

Historically, relative credit availability has correlated with outperformance. For most of the 2002-07 bull market, eurozone banks lent more eagerly than US banks, and eurozone stocks outperformed US — by 182 per cent to 61 per cent over the whole bull run.

For this bull market’s first few years, we had the opposite — looser lending in America and US outperformance. Yet for the past year, there has been a fairly big disconnect between relative credit access and relative returns.

Even as eurozone credit improved, US markets outperformed — until just recently. Investors were too distracted by politics to fathom faster loan growth’s implications. The French election’s conclusion should help folks refocus.

Eurozone leadership is only just starting. Europe’s credit cycle is young. Banks have ample room to expand balance sheets and improve non-performing loan ratios.

America’s cycle is older. US banks have been expanding balance sheets for five years, and non-performing loan ratios are about as good as can be. US banks are healthy, stocks already reflect that. Yet investors still broadly hate eurozone banks. Their relatively brighter future isn’t priced yet. That goes double for Spanish and Italian banks — hated currently for no good reason, just bitter memories. Hold your nose and buy now.

Ken Fisher is the founder and Chairman of Fisher Investments

Akzo Nobel concerns about an agreed deal with PPG are understandable, but wouldn’t materially impact the merged business in a negative way if managed carefully, Citi (buy) says in note.

German energy group E.ON (EONGn.DE) has hired Goldman Sachs (GS.N) to explore options for a sale of the group's remaining stake in Uniper (UN01.DE), the power plant and trading business it spun off last year, two sources close to the matter said.

Following the listing of Uniper in September, E.ON kept a 46.65 percent stake - currently valued at about 2.83 billion euros ($3.16 billion) - and has said it aims to sell the rest soon but not before 2018 due to potentially negative tax effects.

A sale could happen in several ways, including an outright sale to a third party or placements on the market, the sources said, adding it was less likely that peers would want to acquire the stake due to Uniper's eclectic business structure.

E.ON's exploration of options is at an early stage and no deal is imminent, the sources said.

Uniper has a range of operations from hydroelectric, coal- and gas-fired plants to storage assets and trading floors, and holds stakes in gas pipelines, LNG terminals and nuclear plants across Europe.

"Most power firms would want a part of Uniper, but there is hardly anyone with a profile that would accommodate all of the group's activities," one of the sources said.

Ever since their restructuring moves last year, German power firms are back on the M&A radar, with RWE (RWEG.DE) exploring an asset swap with Engie (ENGIE.PA) involving its majority stake in Innogy (IGY.DE).

One source said E.ON's Uniper stake could draw interest from private equity groups with a track record in the energy industry, including KKR (KKR.N), which in January agreed to buy assets from U.S. oil and gas producer SM Energy Co (SM.N) for $800 million.

This was one of a number of recent private equity-backed deals in the energy sector, which included Carlyle-backed (CG.O) Neptune Oil & Gas buying a stake Engie's exploration and production business for $3.9 billion.

E.ON, Goldman Sachs and KKR all declined to comment.

The win gives Horizon Chief Executive Bill Koenigsberg another feather in his cap as he expands his independent media operation. Last year, he joined forces with Hyundai-backed agency Innocean to launch another media agency called Canvas Worldwide. As part of the deal, Canvas also won the media account for Hyundai Motor Group ’s U.S. brands, including Kia Motors America and Hyundai Motor America.

“Horizon Media’s innovative ideas and dynamic approach using traditional and emerging channels is a perfect fit for Sprint as we continue on our transformation,” said Sprint’s marketing chief, Roger Solé, in a statement. “The agency’s unique and fresh perspective will support Sprint in an extremely competitive and continually evolving industry.”

Wireless companies have been locked in a fierce price war that only threatens to get more competitive as cable companies like Comcast and Charter Communications prepare to enter the cutthroat business.

Sprint spent just under $700 million on U.S. media in 2016, compared with spending by AT&T Inc. of $1.62 billion and Verizon at $1.3 billion, according to Kantar Media. The spending figure doesn’t include some forms of digital advertising. All three spent less on U.S. media in 2016 than in 2015.

Sprint, the No. 4 U.S. carrier by subscribers, has aggressively gone after its larger telecom rivals in recent years with offerings like unlimited data. But AT&T and Verizon recently launched unlimited data plans, forcing Sprint to end its longtime offer to charge customers half the price of other rival plans.

The intense competition has been clear even in the companies’ creative approach to their advertising. Last year Sprint tapped Paul Marcarelli, Verizon’s longtime “Can you hear me now?” pitchman, to star in ads in which he boasts about switching to Sprint.

Sprint’s move to independent media shop Horizon is also in line with the phone company’s recent creative agency shift from Interpublic Group of Co s.-owned Deutsch to Droga5, also an independent agency.

For Publicis Groupe, the departure of the Sprint account is another blow after a string of large account losses in recent years, including Wal-Mart, Procter & Gamble, Coca-Cola and Honda. Publicis also recently won some business, including H&R Block, KFC and P&G in the U.K.

“We are proud of the work we’ve delivered for Sprint during our partnership with them and our team’s dedication to the client,” according to a statement from Mediavest Spark. “We wish Sprint all the best in the future and will approach this transition with the utmost commitment and collaboration.”