Nike should put Converse up for sale to get back in the sportswear race
Got Chucks on with Saint Laurent,” declared Mark Ronson and Bruno Mars in their 2014 hit Uptown Funk. Yves Saint Laurent held its fashion show in Paris a few weeks ago. But where were the Chucks? Likely stuck on a retailer’s discount rack.
Elliott Hill, Nike’s chief executive officer, revealed a day after the Saint Laurent show that sales at Converse, maker of the Chuck Taylor All Star sneaker, had fallen 28% in the sportswear company’s first quarter, excluding the effects of currency movements. Rather than suffer the distraction of trying to put the minor brand on a stronger footing, Hill should sell Converse—or at least be open to offers.
As the heat from Adidas’ Samba sneaker fades, consumers are looking for alternatives. Converse tends to go in and out of style. It was hot in the early aughts and so should be getting a lift from the adoption of other fashion favourites from that era, such as skinny jeans and khaki jackets. But so far, consumers [in the West] don’t seem to be swapping the three stripes of Adidas for the starred ankle logo of Chucks.
Hill is trying to change that. He told analysts when he announced first-quarter earnings that he had installed new management at Converse, and that the Chuck Taylor shoe was in the “early stages of a global market reset.”
Nike would take “aggressive actions to better position the brand for profitable growth in the future.” He didn’t specify what that meant, but it likely involves clearing out stale shoes before introducing new ones, as Nike has been doing with its Air Force 1s, Air Jordan 1s and Dunks. Given the task of turning the Nike juggernaut, Converse is a distraction that Hill doesn’t need.
The footwear brand is expected to generate revenue of $1.4 billion this year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg, and could achieve a sales multiple of 1-2 times according to David Swartz, an analyst at Morningstar. Given that Nike bought Converse for just $305 million back in 2003, it’s unlikely a sale at $1.4 billion to $2.8 billion would trigger any write-down.
For a company with expected revenue of almost $47 billion this year, those sale proceeds won’t move the needle financially for Nike. The real value in offloading Converse would be allowing Hill to focus on his two most pressing tasks: addressing nimble upstarts such as On, a Swiss sports accessories company, and Deckers’ Hoka, a sportswear company known for its running shoes, in the athletic market, and taking on Adidas in more fashion-forward styles.
Hill would be in good company by disposing of a non-core asset. Last month, VF agreed to sell its workwear division Dickies to Bluestar Alliance for $600 million in cash. Earlier this year, Levi Strauss offloaded Dockers to Authentic Brands Group for as much as $391 million.
Brand management companies such as Bluestar Alliance, which last year also acquired Off-White from LVMH, and Authentic Brands Group, which owns Reebok, would be natural buyers for Converse.
The brand would be a good fit with VF’s portfolio, according to Morningstar’s Swartz. But the owner of Vans and The North Face has been a seller rather than a buyer recently to cut its debt load. As well as disposing of Dickies, it sold streetwear name Supreme to Ray-Ban maker EssilorLuxottica a year earlier for $1.5 billion. Although VF has made something of a dent in its borrowings, buying Converse would be a stretch.
Alternatively, private equity may be interested. After all, 3G Capital agreed to buy Skechers for $9.4 billion in May. Although that deal was a smart play on an ageing population, Converse is just the right size for a financial buyer flush with cash. They might calculate that freed from the shadow of the Nike brand, Converse would unleash a wave of creativity and turbocharge sales. And by the time private equity needs an exit—typically three to five years—VF might be in a position to buy.
A sale of Converse wouldn’t be risk free. First, tariffs have depressed footwear valuations. Neither Foot Locker, which in May agreed to be bought by Dick’s Sporting Goods, nor Skechers achieved knockout prices. The fact that Converse is underperforming doesn’t help either.
Second, there’s a danger that whoever buys Converse turns it into a success—and another competitor to Nike. Authentic Brands has invested heavily in Reebok, and this seems to be paying off, with sales rising to $5 billion in 2023 from $1.6 billion in 2020.But Hill has so much on his plate that a disposal still makes sense.
Faced with tariffs, cautious consumers and a muscular competitor in the form of Adidas CEO Bjorn Gulden, Hill does not have many easy wins within reach. Selling Converse would be one. ©Bloomberg
The author is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering consumer goods and the retail industry.
Post Comment