|Bid||0.00 x 800|
|Ask||35.86 x 900|
|Day's Range||32.06 - 33.79|
|52 Week Range||25.43 - 46.55|
|Beta (5Y Monthly)||0.80|
|PE Ratio (TTM)||N/A|
|Earnings Date||May 06, 2020 - May 10, 2020|
|Forward Dividend & Yield||N/A (N/A)|
|Ex-Dividend Date||May 17, 2015|
|1y Target Est||40.91|
Moody's Investors Service ("Moody's") upgraded Edgewell Personal Care Co.'s ('Edgewell') Corporate Family Rating (CFR) to Ba3 from B1 and Probability of Default Rating to Ba3-PD from B1-PD. Concurrently, Moody's upgraded the ratings on Edgewell's senior unsecured notes to Ba3 from B3. Moody's also withdrew the ratings on the company's proposed senior secured credit facility, including the secured revolver and term loans, that were part of the funding for the now cancelled acquisition of Harry's. The rating outlook is stable.
It turns out, the craze was indeed real – but with Popeye’s a relatively small part of their portfolio, Restaurant Brands stock only rose a few percentage points on the news. The owner of Schick razors, (EPC) retracted their offer after the Federal Trade Commission sued to block the deal.
(Bloomberg) -- Edgewell Personal Care Co. is ditching its bid to acquire shaving-supply maker Harry’s -- and the broader takeaway is that big consumer companies may have to think twice before snapping up feisty upstarts that are nibbling away at their market share.The company said it’s abandoning the proposed $1.37 billion deal a week after the Federal Trade Commission sued to block the merger on antitrust grounds. Its shares climbed as much as 27% on Monday -- the most on record -- after the announcement, which accompanied quarterly earnings, cheered on by investors who felt the company was overpaying.Edgewell had planned to reinvigorate its Schick razor line by putting Harry’s co-founders, Jeff Raider and Andy Katz-Mayfield, in charge. Now it will have to formulate a new path forward for the 100-year-old brand.On a call Monday, Chief Executive Officer Rod Little said the company remains “energized” in its mission to turn Schick around, but acknowledged that “it’s going to take us longer to get there” without the injection of expertise from Harry’s, which was a pioneer of the direct-to-consumer subscription model for shaving goods.The FTC lawsuit could complicate future deals by big consumer-goods companies that hold sway in certain industries and want to grow via acquisitions. The FTC’s opposition to the deal may be a bad sign for Juul Labs Inc., the e-cigarette company whose sale of a stake to an established rival -- Marlboro maker Altria Inc. -- is still under review by the agency.Other companies that roiled their industries in Harry’s-like fashion are seeing valuations plummet. Casper Sleep Inc., the mattress-in-the-mail maker that went public this month, fell as much as 9.5% in trading Monday, valuing the company at just over $400 million.Acquiring EarlyThe lesson may be to acquire young, potentially disruptive startups before they get too big. Harry’s had gained market share behind Procter & Gamble Co. and Edgewell, and the FTC couldn’t allow consolidation at that level, said Peter Carstensen, a law professor at the University of Wisconsin who specializes in antitrust matters.Further consolidation by one of the biggest players in a market with few competitors “is not going to be allowed,” he said. “This merger was not going to do anybody any good, probably not even the shareholders.”Last week’s FTC complaint said that Harry’s was a “uniquely disruptive competitor” in the shaving market that “forced its rivals to offer lower prices, and more options, to consumers across the country.”Other DealsP&G last month agreed to buy Billie, which makes shaving products for women and the company has made a series of similar acquisitions in recent years. Unilever purchased Dollar Shave Club in 2016.“We believe we would have prevailed in litigation, and are disappointed by the decision by Edgewell’s board not to see this process to its conclusion,” Raider and Katz-Mayfield said in a statement, adding they were “perplexed” by the FTC action.The Harry’s deal stands out because of its size, with Harry’s and Edgewell trailing only P&G in U.S. shaving market share, according to Carstensen.“This merger was so far over the line that it was a no-brainer,” he said.To contact the reporter on this story: Gerald Porter Jr. in New York at email@example.comTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Sally Bakewell at firstname.lastname@example.org, Jonathan RoederFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
One of Procter & Gamble Co.’s top competitors in the shaving business, Schick razor parent Edgewell Personal Care Co., disclosed today that it has backed off a $1.37 billion proposal to acquire upstart razor company Harry’s Inc. because of opposition by the Federal Trade Commission. The Cincinnati-based maker of consumer goods such as Gillette razors (NYSE: PG) competes with the Schick and Wilkinson Sword men’s and women’s razor brands made by Shelton, Conn.-based Edgewell (NYSE: EPC) as well as razors made by privately held Harry’s, which includes the Flamingo brand for women. Edgewell (NYSE: EPC) stated that it had terminated its merger agreement with Harry’s, and that Harry’s subsequently informed Edgewell that it intends to pursue litigation.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Harry's Inc. billed itself as an alternative to overpriced razors, and the sales pitch worked — too well, in fact.The shaving company’s planned sale to Schick razor maker Edgewell Personal Care Co. officially collapsed on Monday after the Federal Trade Commission sued to block the $1.37 billion deal on anti-competitive grounds.There had been some thought that Edgewell would fight for the Harry’s deal in court, but the company said Monday it’s instead walking away, “given the inherent uncertainty of a potential trial, the required investment of resources and time and the distraction that a continuing court battle would entail.” Shareholders are fine with that: The stock rose more than 20% on Monday after climbing 13% on Feb. 3, when the FTC’s opposition was announced. While investors may be happy to say goodbye to an acquisition that was arguably overpriced, regulators’ opposition to the takeover has wide-ranging ramifications. Among other things, this threatens to close the door on one of the more sure-fire exit strategies for would-be direct to consumer unicorns.In advertisements, Harry's pitched itself as "the shaving company that's fixing shaving." In its complaint, the FTC argues that Harry’s successfully disrupted an effective duopoly between Edgewell and Gillette-maker Procter & Gamble Co. and forced the incumbents to start lowering their prices for razors. Curiously, it argues that this only happened once Harry’s products migrated out of the e-commerce-only environment in which they launched and started appearing on shelves at Target Corp. and Walmart Inc. stores. Using similar logic, the FTC dismisses Dollar Shave Club – acquired by Unilever NV in 2016 for $1 billion – as a full-blown competitor capable of making up for the loss of an independent Harry's in part because it still mainly sells razors via an online direct-to-consumer model.The idea that firm lines exist between the online and brick-and-mortar worlds — and that pricing dynamics in one don’t affect the other — feels rather silly in this day and age. Most consumers wouldn’t distinguish between the two marketplaces, and increasingly, neither would businesses. The FTC’s decision to block the Harry’s purchase is reminiscent of pushback to the merger of Staples and Office Depot in 2016, where the regulator ignored the stream of sales defecting to Amazon and declined to view it as a strong enough competitor in commercial office supplies. Amazon’s 2017 acquisition of Whole Foods Market Inc., by contrast, was waved through without a second glance and closed in just two months.Notably, without Harry’s and without the sales from an infant and pet-care business Edgewell sold in December, the company now expects total revenue to decline as much as 5% this year. When Edgewell had announced the Harry’s purchase last year, it projected a $20 million increase to Ebitda by 2023 from annual cost savings and an additional $20 million boost from revenue benefits, including new brand launches and international expansion opportunities. Antitrust regulation isn’t a forward-looking industry and I don’t think anyone would want to task the FTC or the Department of Justice with picking out the winners and losers of the future. But the result is a system that seems ill-suited to navigating the changes to the economy from e-commerce and direct-to-consumer business models. And while regulators may not want to predict the future, their actions will have a significant impact on what unfolds from here.One of the odd messages being sent by this decision is that it may be better for upstart consumer brands to avoid brick-and-mortar stores if they want to sell themselves to a more-established organization down the road. That’s not going to be helpful for Target, Walmart or the bevy of aging department stores trying to compete with Amazon and make themselves relevant to today’s consumer. Another alternative is for startups to sell out before they get big enough to matter, which raises the odds that smaller brands get swallowed up and killed off rather than nourished into viable competitors. The IPO route looks increasingly closed, at least at the valuations many had enjoyed in the private markets. Some brands will still succeed as independent entities – Glossier, Allbirds and Warby Parker come to mind – but the road to making it big arguably just got tougher.To contact the author of this story: Brooke Sutherland at email@example.comTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Beth Williams at firstname.lastname@example.orgThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.Brooke Sutherland is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering deals and industrial companies. She previously wrote an M&A column for Bloomberg News.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
The parent of Schick razor blades has called off its $1.37 billion acquisition of shaving rival Harry's Inc. Edgewell Personal Care Co. (Nasdaq: EPC) of Stamford, Connecticut called off the deal on Monday morning, a week after the Federal Trade Commission sued to prevent the deal from going through.
Edgewell will continue operating as a standalone company following the FTC's opposition to its $1.37 billion acquisition of Harry's Inc.
Shares of Edgewell Personal Care Co. rocketed 21% toward a 3-month high in premarket trading Monday, after the consumer products company, which brands include Schick, said it was calling off its deal to buy subscription shaving service Harry's Inc. The company also reported a fiscal first-quarter profit and sales that beat expectations, according to FactSet, while lowering its sales growth outlook. Edgewell said its decision to terminate the Harry's deal comes after the U.S. Federal Trade Commission filed suit last week to block the merger, citing concerns over the loss of a competitor. Edgewell said Harry's plans to pursue litigation, but Edgewell said it believes such litigation "has not merit." Edgewell's stock rose 13.4% on Feb. 3 after the FTC's suit was announced. Since Edgewell announced the deal to buy Harry's on May 9, 2019, the stock had lost 23.5% through Friday, while the S&P 500 has rallied 15.6% over the same time.
A deal to combine two of America’s biggest shaving companies collapsed in acrimony on Monday after opposition from antitrust officials prompted Edgewell Personal Care to abandon its pursuit of upstart rival Harry’s. in court meant it was no longer worth pursuing, a decision that led Harry’s to threaten legal action of its own against its erstwhile suitor. The scrapping of the deal comes a week after the Federal Trade Commission filed a lawsuit to prevent the tie-up, arguing that the proposed combination would “eliminate one of the most important competitive forces” in the shaving business.
Edgewell Personal Care Company (NYSE: EPC) today announced that following the U.S. Federal Trade Commission's ("FTC") filing of a lawsuit seeking to block the proposed transaction, Edgewell terminated its merger agreement with Harry's, Inc. Harry's has informed the Company that it intends to pursue litigation. The Company believes that such litigation has no merit.
One of Procter & Gamble's top competitors in the shaving business shouldn’t be allowed to acquire another razor company, the Federal Trade Commission stated in authorizing a lawsuit to block the proposed deal.
Edgewell Personal (EPC) doesn't possess the right combination of the two key ingredients for a likely earnings beat in its upcoming report. Get prepared with the key expectations.
Shares of Edgewell Personal Care Co. ran up 8.7%, to bounce off a more-than 11-year low, after the U.S. Federal Trade Commission filed suit to block the Schick parent's proposed buyout of Harry's Inc., a provider of a subscription shaving service. In May 2019, Edgewell announced a deal to buy Harry's in a cash and stock deal valued at $1.4 billion. FTC said it believes the loss of Harry's as an independent competitor would remove "a critical disruptive rival" has has driven down prices and spurred innovation in an industry previously dominated by two main suppliers, including Edgewell. Edgewell Chief Executive Rod Little said of the FTC's suit: "We continue to believe the combination of our two companies would bring together complementary capabilities for the benefit of all stakeholders, including customers." Harry's co-founders Jeff Raider and Andy Katz-Mayfield stated: "We are disappointed that the FTC is attempting to block our combination with Edgewell and are evaluating the best path forward." Edgewell's stock, which closed Friday at the lowest level since November 2008, has tumbled 21.4% over the past three months, while the S&P 500 has gained 6.3%.
Edgewell Personal Care Company (NYSE: EPC) and Harry's, Inc. today issued the following statements regarding the decision by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") authorizing a challenge to the proposed combination of Edgewell and Harry's:
Edgewell Personal Care Company [NYSE: EPC] will report its financial results for the first quarter and fiscal year 2020 before the market opens on February 10, 2020. Edgewell will discuss its results during an investor conference call that will be webcast on February 10, 2020, beginning at 8:00 a.m. Eastern Time. The call will be hosted by President and Chief Executive Officer Rod Little and Chief Financial Officer Dan Sullivan.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Amid the grim march of the retail apocalypse, the industry has derived some hope in recent years from the rise of scores of digital-centric startups. There is cause for optimism, but there’s also reason to be skeptical of the hype surrounding these brands — not just because their business models aren’t proving durable, but also because many of them are now intertwined with the companies they are ostensibly disrupting.Consider, for example, the November announcement from supermarket behemoth Albertsons Cos. about the future of meal-kit maker Plated, which the grocer paid $200 million for only two years ago. The company said it was ending the subscription model for Plated and that its products would now simply be part of its private-label business. It’s hard to see that as anything other than a concession that the format is a dud.And that’s not the only meal-kit business that’s gone cold: Blue Apron Holdings Inc. had only 386,000 paid customers in its latest quarter, down from 646,000 in the same quarter a year earlier and 856,000 the year before that. The decline partly reflects a deliberate shift to focus on its best customers, but it’s also an indication that the long-term market for online meal-kits is just not that big.Dollar Shave Club’s low-priced, subscription-based model for grooming gear was similarly seen as a disruptive game-changer when it captured attention with a viral YouTube video in 2012. Unilever NV acquired it for $1 billion in 2016, a testament to its growing market share. But the Wall Street Journal recently reported that the digital brand is still not profitable and the consumer-products giant “has concluded that selling staples as online subscriptions doesn’t make financial sense.”Still other 2010s wunderkinds are pursuing growth in ways that don’t look so different than the playbooks embraced by their predecessors. Quip toothbrushes, Native deodorant, Bark pet toys, and Harry’s razors can all now be found in the aisles of Target stores. Men’s clothing from Bonobos and Mizzen + Main is sold at Nordstrom Inc., while beauty brand Glossier recently launched pop-ups at the department store. Everlane has brick-and-mortar stores, as does bedding brand Parachute.The result is that the term “digital-native brand” is all but meaningless. How could a startup not be digital-native in the year 2019? How are their hybrid online-and-store selling models any different from what mature brands are doing? This is not to write off this crop of retailers entirely. They have collectively snatched billions of dollars of market share from incumbents and have made some genuinely alluring products, such as the Allbirds sneakers that have spawned copycats. Mall landlords have been forced to rethink their leasing models and floor plans to accommodate their needs. But, so far, these startups are no more than spoilers for legacy brands. They’re not replacing them.The constellation of insurgents collectively is poised to open 850 physical stores over five years, according to a 2018 analysis by JLL. In other words, the entire group will add roughly as many stores as are in the Macy’s Inc. portfolio. That means their growth doesn’t come anywhere close to offsetting the massive shakeout of established chains. In 2019 alone, Coresight Research estimates, there have been 9,302 store closures.Also, if these digital brands were finding easy paths to profitability and customer growth, many more of them would probably be going public or agreeing to be acquired for dizzying sums. But IPO hopefuls such as Casper remain on the public market sidelines, and the aforementioned Dollar Shave acquisition and Edgewell Personal Care Co.’s $1.4 billion deal for Harry’s are exceptions, not the rule.Meanwhile, Bonobos founder Andy Dunn is set to exit a companywide role at Walmart Inc. a little more than two years after the big-box chain acquired his clothing brand, a change that may turn out to be a cautionary tale about the ability of these scrappy virtuosos to apply their skills within retail’s old guard.All of this leads to a bracing conclusion: The transformative power of the digitally oriented swashbucklers has been overestimated. Would-be investors and entrepreneurs, consider yourselves warned.To contact the author of this story: Sarah Halzack at email@example.comTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Newman at firstname.lastname@example.orgThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Sarah Halzack is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering the consumer and retail industries. She was previously a national retail reporter for the Washington Post.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
Edgewell Personal Care Company (NYSE: EPC) today announced that it has completed the sale of its Infant and Pet Care business to Le Holding Angelcare Inc. ("Angelcare") for $122.5 million in cash. Edgewell will use the net proceeds from the sale to strengthen its balance sheet.
Out of thousands of stocks that are currently traded on the market, it is difficult to identify those that will really generate strong returns. Hedge funds and institutional investors spend millions of dollars on analysts with MBAs and PhDs, who are industry experts and well connected to other industry and media insiders on top of that. Individual investors can piggyback […]
German battery maker Varta secured EU antitrust approval on Tuesday to buy U.S rival Energizer's Varta branded consumer batteries business after pledging to supply its products to wholesalers globally. Energizer announced the deal in May to address the European Commission's concerns about its $1.25 billion bid for U.S. consumer products company Spectrum's global auto care business last year. "In order to address these concerns, Varta AG proposed to globally supply hearing aid batteries to any company currently or potentially active in the wholesale supply of hearing aid batteries under their own brand under certain conditions for a set period of time," the Commission said.
SHELTON, Conn. , Nov. 22, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Edgewell Personal Care Company (NYSE: EPC) today announced its participation in the following upcoming investor conferences. The events will include webcast ...
SHELTON, Conn., Nov. 19, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- As part of a ground-breaking collaborative project, Bulldog Skincare For Men is set to become the first international skincare brand to maintain its Leaping Bunny approved status, while on sale in mainland China. The Leaping Bunny, awarded by Cruelty Free International, is the globally recognisable gold standard for cruelty free products. The project – launched by Cruelty Free International in cooperation with Knudsen&CRC, Shanghai Fengpu Industrial Park and Oriental Beauty Valley – means that Bulldog's products will not face animal testing in China at any point during their lifecycle.