⚡️Summer Announcement⚡️

https___bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com_public_images_5931f95b-3628-489e-a299-e39a957f4e82_500x374.gif

As we’ve previously announced, we’re a bit more bandwidth constrained now that we’re deep into summer and so we’re going to use this opportunity to, among other things, (a) update some processes on the backend and (b) experiment with content distribution. For instance, we never actually A/B tested whether recurring Wednesday and Sunday a$$-kicking briefings were the right way to deliver our content. What’s an A/B test, you ask?

Consider a scenario where you know you’re going to be pitching juicy retail mandates 20 straight times against XYZ Group, a competitor restructuring advisor. You can go in with the same basic pitch framework each time and roll the dice but, ultimately, you’ll have no data to judge your strategy. You might as well just be throwing darts.


WANT TO READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE? CLICK HERE AND SUBSCRIBE NOW

📦Nerds Lament: Subscription Box Company Goes BK📦

We’re old enough to remember when subscription boxes were all the rage. The e-commerce trend became so explosive that the Washington Post estimated in 2014 that there were anywhere between 400 and 600 different subscription box services out there. We reckon that — given the the arguably-successful-because-it-got-to-an-IPO-but-then-atrocious-public-foray by Blue Apron Inc. ($APRN) — the number today is on the lower end of the range (if not even lower) as many businesses failed to prove out the business model and manage shipping expense.

And so it was only a matter of time before one of them declared bankruptcy.

Earlier this morning, Loot Crate Inc., a Los Angeles-based subscription service which provides monthly boxes of geek- and gaming-related merchandise (“Comic-con in a box,” including toys, clothing, books and comics tied to big pop culture and geek franchises) filed for bankruptcy in the District of Delaware.* According to a press release, the company intends to use the chapter 11 process to effectuate a 363 sale of substantially all of its assets to a newly-formed buyer, Loot Crate Acquisition LLC. The company secured a $10mm DIP credit facility to fund the cases from Money Chest LLC, an investor in the business. The company started in 2012.

Speaking of investors in the business, this one got a $18.5mm round of venture financingfrom the likes of Upfront VenturesSterling.VC (the venture arm of Sterling Equities, the owner of the New York Mets), and Downey Ventures, the venture arm of none other than Iron Man himself, Robert Downey Jr. At one point, this investment appeared to be a smashing success: the company reportedly had over 600k subscribers and more than $100mm in annualized revenue. It delivered to 35 countries. Inc Magazine ranked it #1 on its “Fastest Growing Private Companies” listDeloitte had it listed first in its 2016 Technology Fast 500 Winners list. Loot Crate must have had one kicka$$ PR person!

But life comes at you fast.

By 2018, the wheels were already coming off. Mark Suster, a well-known and prolific VC from Upfront Ventures, stepped off the board along with two other directors. The company hired Dendera Advisory LLC, a boutique merchant bank, for a capital raise.** As we pointed out in early ‘18, apparently nobody was willing to put a new equity check into this thing, despite all of the accolades. Of course, allegations of sexual harassment don’t exactly help. Ultimately, the company had no choice but to go the debt route: in August 2018, it secured $23mm in new financing from Atalaya Capital Management LP. Per the company announcement:

This financing, led by Atalaya Capital Management LP ("Atalaya") and supported by several new investors (including longstanding commercial partners, NECA and Bioworld Merchandising), will enable Loot Crate to bolster its existing subscription lines and improve the overall customer experience, while also enabling new product launches, growth in new product lines and the establishment of new distribution channels.

Shortly thereafter, it began selling its boxes on Amazon Inc. ($AMZN). When a DTC e-commerce business suddenly starts relying on Amazon for distribution and relinquishes control of the customer relationship, one has to start to wonder. 🤔

And, so, now it is basically being sold for parts. Per the company announcement:

"During the sale process we will have the financial resources to purchase the goods and services necessary to fulfill our Looters' needs and continue the high-quality service and support they have come to expect from the Loot Crate team," Mr. Davis said.

That’s a pretty curious statement considering the Better Business Bureau opened an investigation into the company back in late 2018. Per the BBB website:

According to BBB files, consumers allege not receiving the purchases they paid for. Furthermore consumers allege not being able to get a response with the details of their orders or refunds. On September 4, 2018 the BBB contacted the company in regards to our concerns about the amount and pattern of complaints we have received. On October 30, 2018 the company responded stating "Loot Crate implemented a Shipping Status page to resolve any issues with delays here: http://loot.cr/shippingstatus[.]

In fact, go on Twitter and you’ll see a lot of recent complaints:

High quality service, huh? Riiiiiiight. These angry customers are likely to learn the definition of “unsecured creditor.”

Good luck getting those refunds, folks. The purchase price obviously won’t clear the $23mm in debt which means that general unsecured creditors (i.e., customers, among other groups) and equity investors will be wiped out.***

Sadly, this is another tale about a once-high-flying startup that apparently got too close to the sun. And, unfortunately, a number of people will lose their jobs as a result.

Market froth has helped a number of these companies survive. When things do eventually turn, we will, unfortunately, see a lot more companies that once featured prominently in rankings and magazine covers fall by the wayside.

*We previously wrote about Loot Crate here, back in February 2018.

**Dendera, while not a well-known firm in restructuring circles, has been making its presence known in recent chapter 11 filings; it apparently had a role in Eastern Mountain Sports and Energy XXI.

***The full details of the bankruptcy filing aren’t out yet but this seems like a pretty obvious result.

⚡️Here a Sale. There a Sale. Everywhere a Sale Sale! (Long Bankruptcy Code Section 363)⚡️

In a nutshell, bankruptcy code section 363 allows a debtor to sell assets free and clear of liens and encumbrances.

https___bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com_public_images_7d89038a-1e55-452f-a277-4aa20a5c7e8f_245x135.gif

In other words, a company can sell itself and the buyer can leave a bunch of bad sh*t behind. It’s a powerful tool and helps the buyer avoid any sort of “fraudulent conveyance” liability down the road. We’re seeing a proliferation of 363-based bankruptcy cases. In the last week, for instance, Barneys New York Inc., iPic-Gold Class Entertainment LLC, and Perkins & Marie Callender’s LLC all filed with the intent of pursuing sales (PETITION Note: see, also, Jack Cooper Ventures Inc. below).


THIS IS A SUBSCRIBER’S POST, TO READ MORE OF THIS ARTICLE, CLICK HERE AND SUBSCRIBE TO OUR @$$KICKING NEWSLETTER (DISRUPT THE COMPETITION WITH PETITION)

⛽️Halcon Resources Poised to be the Next Oil & Gas Chapter 22 (Long Kerosene)⛽️

https___bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com_public_images_0a757427-209f-4a8e-90dd-5b28c0fed956_450x253.gif

Nearly three years after its last prepackaged plan of reorganization wiped $1.8 billion of debt off of the company’s balance sheet, onshore E&P company, Halcon Resources Corporation ($HKRS), is once again on the bankruptcy courthouse steps with another prepackaged bankruptcy. This company is burning debt like a baaaaaaaaaaaawse.

In the prior bankruptcy, the company eliminated $1b of 13% ‘22 senior secured third lien notes, $316mm of 9.75% ‘20 senior notes, $297mm of 8.875% ‘21 senior notes, $37mm of 9.25% ‘22 senior notes, and $290mm of 8% ‘20 senior convertible notes. The majority of the equity in the reorganized entity went to the third lien noteholders, with other equity going to unsecured holders (15.5%), convertible noteholders (4%) and common stockholders (4%). That equity holds very little value today. The stock traded publicly up until July 23, 2019, when the Nasdaq delisted the company’s shares ($HR) and the stock began trading on OTC pink sheets under the $HKRS symbol.

Meanwhile, here’s what the company’s current debt sitch looked like this as of the most recent 10-Q:


WANT TO READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE? CLICK HERE AND SUBSCRIBE NOW

📽A $5.7mm “Human Error” (Short Bankruptcy Projections)📽

https___bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com_public_images_08c5a02b-83d1-4e75-a7b9-fa68db122ee8_500x262.gif

Never try to cover sh*t up in corporate America. That is f*ck up #1 and a sure-fire way to get yourself pink-slipped. When you screw up in corporate America — and you WILL screw up in corporate America — the right approach is to squelch the temptation to sweep that f*ckup under the rug and, instead, fess up to the mistake with a solution in hand. That last part is key: accepting responsibility isn’t enough. “Responsibility” in corporate America includes having a fix for the issue.

A bit over a week ago, in the Z Gallerie LLC bankruptcy matter, the professionals kinda sorta followed this protocol.

In a statement filed with the bankruptcy court (Docket 464), the company described how it achieved the Herculean feat of selling Z Gallerie’s abysmal business (for ~$20mm) and confirming a plan of confirmation three-months-to-the-day from the petition date.* The company emphasized that it was incentivized to move the cases rapidly to (a) avoid a liquidation trigger under its DIP credit facility, (b) preserve value for the company’s prospective buyer by avoiding a long, drawn-out in-court proceeding that would surely have the effect of leaking value in today’s complex dog-eat-dog retail environment, and (c) “ensure[] that those who provide actual, necessary benefits to the company during its distress are paid in full.” To do this, however, the company had to do a wee bit of forecasting; it had to estimate its administrative claims to ensure that the company would have enough cash at sale closing to satisfy those claims.

The company performed this analysis and, ultimately, the company’s interim CEO declared to the bankruptcy court that, indeed, it, would have enough cash to satisfy priority and administrative claims under the plan (including DIP claims, professional fee claims, and other administrative and priority claims). But, as it turns out — and as PETITION readers know ALL TO WELL from our ongoing review of feasibility projections — forecasts are subject to, from time to time, “significant errors and omissions.” Or, put another way, “human error.” Or put another way, these mathematicians missed their numbers by $5.7mm. Or put ANOTHER way, this case puts the PETITION “Two-Year Rule” in an entirely new light. It’s one thing to realize that your projections are off within two years; it’s an entirely different story to realize you’re off within two months! 😬

So, what happened?

Up until roughly a week ago, the estate had been administered by a “Wind-Down Trust” that had been spearheaded by the company’s CFO. That CFO, however, was apparently too busy auditioning for a new job — uh, serving as DirectBuy’s main “transition” point of contact — to properly administer the trust. In a statement (Docket 465) in which the interim CEO acknowledged that he’s “ultimately responsible” for the estate, he simultaneously goes to great lengths to establish a record of ineptitude on the part of the company’s CFO. He failed to reconcile accounts, he failed to accurately predict invoices from the company’s delivery companies, etc. etc.** This is what the delta looks like:

https___bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com_public_images_22e8a49a-c580-494b-af10-ea46ea473ac5_609x452.png

WANT TO READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE? SUBSCRIBE HERE!

💰How are the Investment Banks Doing?(Long Chapter 15s?)💰

https___bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com_public_images_f1a30565-b443-4c81-abfd-715bc157351d_476x223.gif

On Sunday, we wrote about the stellar earnings reports from Evercore Inc. ($EVR) and Houlihan Lokey ($HLI). Are they outliers?

Apparently…no.

PJT Partners Inc. ($PJT) reported earnings this week and they, too, knocked it out of the park. The firm reported a 28% increase in revenues YOY ($167mm) and a 35% increase in advisory revenue ($133mm). These guys are killing it. Regarding the restructuring team, CEO Paul Taubman said:

Revenues grew significantly in the second quarter compared to the prior year and are ahead of last year’s levels for the six-month period. Our Restructuring business maintained its leadership position, ranking Number One in US and global completed restructurings for the first half of 2019. Our outlook for the full year remains essentially unchanged, notwithstanding near record low interest rates, historically low default rates and extremely benign credit conditions, we expect restructuring revenues for the full year to be flat to only modestly down. Despite this muted macro backdrop, we are working on an increased number of Restructuring mandates, which should serve us well entering 2020.

In addition to pounding his chest, Mr. Taubman provided some market commentary as well — particularly with respect to the notion that all of the “dry powder” in the market will impact M&A and distressed situations and Europe:


TIRED OF GETTING ONLY PART OF THE STORY? US TOO! CLICK HERE AND SUBSCRIBE TO GET UNLIMITED ACCESS TO OUR PREMIUM CONTENT! (YOU WON’T REGRET IT)

⚡️Data, Baby, Data (Long Ambitious Lawyers)⚡️

https___bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com_public_images_490bc98d-8765-479f-915c-fa8617240560_480x266.gif

Man. The hits just keep on coming for retailers. 

First, a callback to 2014. 

Back in 2014, Twilio Inc. ($TWLO) was a lesser known private company that solved a basic problem: it allowed software developers to programmatically make and receive phone calls, send and receive text messages, and perform other communication functions using its web service APIs. In English? It connected businesses to customers. It was the ultimate "be where your customers are" power move: increasingly, customers are writing or reacting to texts. Twilio enables text message blasts to large groups. This was a total game changer for businesses: it gave them an avenue to connect in a more personal way to their customers and rise above the muck of email (PETITION Note: which is not to say that we don't LOVE email). And now Twilio is an a $18b market cap company:


WANT TO SEE THE REST OF THIS KICK@$$ POST? CLICK HERE TO SEE THE REST OF THE ARTICLE AND MORE @$$KICKING POSTS!



🕸Spiderman Can’t Save Everyone (Short iPic Entertainment)🕸

https___bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com_public_images_4a272ccd-a21a-46af-a2dd-f28b3be1a650_640x292.gif

Most moviegoers probably think $17 for a movie ticket is expensive enough and so, more likely than not, they go to the nearby AMC or Regal theater to get their latest shot of Disney-fed superhero drivel. For those who REALLY want to make an event out the movies, however, there is another option: iPic Entertainment Inc’s ($IPIC) “upscale” theater experience. This “experience” includes cocktails, plush pleather couches and waitered food service. All of that pampering can cost upwards of $30/ticket — and that’s just for the movie. Add in the food and this chain probably contributes its fair share to the personal bankruptcy market.

The chain has 123 locations across 16 states, including California, Florida and New York City. How on earth does it make sense to go that route when a month of Netflix costs a fraction of that? Throw in some “chill” and, well, it seems pretty obvious which option has more appeal (insert creepy wink here). Spoiler alert: it ain’t iPIC. 


WANT TO READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE? CLICK HERE AND SUBSCRIBE NOW

😬Securitization Run Amok (Long the ABS Market)😬

https___bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com_public_images_bacfe5c1-a5dd-409c-bf2d-504525f9ff4f_480x351.gif

On Sunday, in “💥Securitize it All, We Say💥,” we continued our ongoing “What to Make of the Credit Cycle” series with discussion of, among several other things, Otis, a new startup that intends to securitize cultural assets and collectables like sneakers, comic books, works of art, watches and more. We quipped, “What isn’t getting securitized these days?” If we do say so ourselves, that is a: GOOD. EFFING. QUESTION. Why is securitization all of the rage these days? EVEN. BETTER. EFFING. QUESTION. The answer: YIELD, BABY, YIELD.

Back in early June, Bloomberg’s Brian Chappatta reported on the rise of “esoteric asset-backed securities known as ‘whole business securitizations.’” Restaurant chains with large swaths of franchisees, long-standing operations, and dependable brands, he wrote, are using these instruments to access cheaper financing in a yield-starved market. He wrote:

The securities are about as straightforward as the name implies — franchise-focused companies sell virtually all of their revenue-generating assets (thus, “whole business”) into bankruptcy-remote, special-purpose entities. Investors then buy pieces of the securitizations, which tend to have credit ratings five or six levels higher than the companies themselves, according to S&P Global Ratings. Creditors take comfort in knowing the cash flows are isolated from bankruptcy.

Cumulative gross issuance of whole-business securitizations reached about $35 billion at the end of 2018, compared with about $13 billion just four years earlier, according to S&P. The past two years have been banner years for the structures, with $7.9 billion offered in 2017 and $6.6 billion last year, according to data from Bloomberg News’s Charles Williams.

These structures are contributing to the deluge of BBB-rated supply.


TIRED OF GETTING ONLY PART OF THE STORY? US TOO! CLICK HERE AND SUBSCRIBE TO GET UNLIMITED ACCESS TO OUR PREMIUM CONTENT! (YOU WON’T REGRET IT)

🍩Forever21 is Forever F*cking Up🍩

On one hand, you have to respect the desire to sure up liquidity by entering into partnerships. On the other hand, well this:


WANT TO READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE? CLICK HERE AND SUBSCRIBE NOW

⚡️What to Make of the Credit Cycle. Part 28. (Long Financial Ingenuity.)⚡️

https___bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com_public_images_8ec5a0af-e4d5-4885-b05b-90fdbd85690b_500x199.gif

Nobody questions that we’re late stage at this point. Lest you have any doubt, consider the following:

1. Enhanced CLOs

Per The Wall Street Journal:

A growing number of money managers are embracing a new strategy designed to benefit from volatility in junk-rated corporate loans, a sign of building worries about riskier borrowers and the market that supports them.

Since November of last year, three different money managers have issued $1.6 billion of so-called enhanced collateralized loan obligations that are set up to hold a much larger amount of loans with extremely low credit ratings than typical CLOs. At least two more managers are expected to follow suit in the coming months.

The emergence of the enhanced CLOs underscores investors’ growing belief the U.S. economy is due for a recession after more than a decade of expansion. It also reflects particular concerns about corporate loans, starting with a decline in their average credit ratings. Since 2011, the amount of loans rated B or B-minus—just above near-rock bottom triple-C ratings—have ballooned to 39% of the market from 17%, according to LCD, a unit of S&P Global Market Intelligence.

CLOs are weird beasts with certain idiosyncratic limitations. As just one example, many CLOs are limited to a portfolio that includes no more than 7.5% of CCC-rated loans. Upon a rash of downgrades during a downturn, this would force these CLOs to sell their holdings, pushing supply into the markets and inevitably driving down loan prices. An opportunistic buyer could stand to benefit from this opportunity. These newly established CLOs won’t have these constraints; they could “stock up to half their portfolios with triple-C debt.

By way of example:

Investors say there is ample evidence that the limited ability of CLOs to hold triple-C loans creates unusual price moves in the $1.2 trillion leveraged loan market.

In one example, the price of a loan issued by the business-services company iQor Holdings Inc. dropped from around 98 cents on the dollar to 85 cents last summer immediately after Moody’s Investors Service and S&P Global Ratings downgraded the loan to triple-C. Data showed CLO holdings of the loan falling sharply at the time.

Ellington Management GroupZ Capital Group and HPS Investment Partners are the funds looking to take advantage of these market moves.

2. Retail CDOs

Ahhhhhh, Wall Street. JP Morgan Chase & Co. ($JPM) apparently wants to expand markets for credit derivatives, including synthetic CDOs. Per the International Financing Review:

The US bank launched its Credit Nexus platform earlier this year, according to a person familiar with the matter. The platform is designed to simplify the cumbersome process investors usually face to trade derivatives, including credit-default swaps, CDS options and synthetic collateralised debt obligations, according to a client presentation obtained by IFR.


WANT TO READ THIS AND PART 29? CLICK HERE AND GET THAT EXTRA EDGE YOU’VE BEEN LOOKING FOR!

💥Higher Interest Rates Eff Mortgage Originator (Long FED Fear of POTUS). New Chapter 11 Filing - Stearns Holdings LLC💥

https___bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com_public_images_d9faebda-dfc8-4367-aabd-9d5607386313_480x196.gif

Hallelujah! Something is going on out in the world aside from the #retailapocalypse and distressed oil and gas. Here, Blackstone Capital Partners-owned Stearns Holdings LLCand six affiliated debtors (the “debtors”) have filed for bankruptcy in the Southern District of New York because of…drumroll please…rising interest rates. That’s right: the FED has claimed a victim. Stephen Moore and Judy Shelton must be smirking their faces off.

The debtors are a private mortgage company in the business of originating residential mortgages; it is the 20th largest mortgage lender in the US, operating in 50 states. The debtors generate revenue by producing mortgages and then selling them to government-sponsored enterprises such as Ginnie MaeFannie Mae and Freddie Mac. To originate loans, the debtors require a lot of debt; they also require favorable interest rates. Favorable interest rates = lower cost of residential home purchases = increased market demand and sales activity for homes = higher rate or origination.

Except, there’s been an itsy bitsy teeny weeny problem. Interest rates have been going up. Per the debtors:

The mortgage origination business is significantly impacted by interest rate trends. In mid-2016, the 10-year Treasury was 1.60%. Following the U.S. presidential election, it rose to a range of 2.30% to 2.45% and maintained that range throughout 2017. The 10-year Treasury rate increased to over 3.0% for most of 2018. The rise in rates during this time period reduced the overall size of the mortgage market, increasing competition and significantly reducing market revenues.

Said another way: mortgage rates are pegged off the 10-year treasury rate and rising rates chilled the housing market. With buyers running for the hills, originators can’t pump supply. Hence, diminished revenues. And diminished revenues are particularly problematic when you have high-interest debt with an impending maturity.

This is where the business model really comes into play. Here’s a diagram illustrating how this all works:


LIKE WHAT YOU SEE? SUBSCRIBE HERE TO GET THE REST OF THIS KICK@$$ POST! (AND @$$KICKING INSIGHTS TWICE A WEEK AFTER)

Retail: DTC Disrupting DTC (Short the Notion of Long-Lasting Iconic Brands)

catnissss.gif

First, as we've harped on time and time again, enough with the "iconic" nonsense. Charlotte Russe is NOT an iconic brand. Read "Shoe Dog" by Phil Knight and then you'll get a sense of a truly iconic brand. 

But speaking of brands, here is a feature by Noah Brier and Colin Nagy about Tracksmith, an upstart fitness apparel brand geared towards serious-but-still-amateur runners. They take the general view that other players in the space have watered down running apparel with the hope of appealing more broadly to the masses; these folks are more old school, a bit snobby about running, and unapologetic about it. 

We found this bit particularly interesting (check links — 100% spot on):

With the gold rush of direct-to-consumer brands, you get the sense that everyone is trying to quickly slap something together using the same agencies, the same colors, and the same paid Instagram strategy. But building strong core muscles and doing something that can stand for a long period of time requires taking some deliberately contrarian positions.

It's true. The ease with which one can start a business today with virtually no infrastructure (PETITION Note: yes, we get that this comment is mildly meta), has created a deluge of purported “brands” all seeking to leech hard-earned dollars out of your pockets as you have a fleeting moment of insecurity-inducing scroll-based FOMO upon the umpteenth picture of your ex-boyfriend with his goddess new girlfriend tanning on a yacht off the coast of Costa Rica clanking bottles with f*cking Jennifer Lawrence as you dive into the misplaced hope that retail therapy will help you feel better(!) about how you're "living the dream" -- but, like, not, really -- because your existence is literally accounted for in six minute increments while you're red-lining changes to the memo that you submitted when it was due two weeks ago and the partner only just now got around to reviewing it despite it being oh-such-an-emergency when it forced you to miss your bestie's birthday party, all the while wondering “what’s the f*cking point” considering you have no clue how you’re possibly going to compete to make partner against that trust-fund broheim who rowed crew at Princeton, with whom the Department Head (who is on his fifth wife) isn’t #MeToo-afraid to go out to drinks and dinner with, who needn’t worry, five years from now, about going through IVF while also working bone-crushing hours or, if successful, ducking off into a dark dank closet to pump while on a conference call leaning up against a bucket and mop set with a stronger personality than the junior partner who is still single, still living in his one bedroom West Village apartment he had in law school, and has an empathy quotient on par with a bowling ball, all while it's 75 degrees outside, there's not a cloud in the sky, and there are people far worse-paid-but-far-happier enjoying their life out in Madison Square Park. Damn Instagram feeds with those damn shiny photos of DTC brands. There goes $4,279. 🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕

But we digress.

Back to DTC...

The first wave of DTC were disruptive and interesting. The Caspers and Warbys of the world. The second wave were perhaps a bit more opportunistic, chasing the gold rush of capital and seemingly less interested in the intangible magic that makes a long-standing and iconic brand. (See: the inherent contradiction with things like Brandless.) But perhaps a third wave of these types of brands can balance a heartbeat with the spirit that goes into a category disruptor.

And as more and more of these zombie, grown-in-a-lab DTC brands pile up (and subsequently drive up the CPMs of social advertising even more), those companies that actually have a vision will be the ones around to be handed down.

We have no crystal ball and cannot predict what will be handed down but the "drive up the CPMs of social advertising even more" bit is on point and potentially devastating to all of those retailers out there whose stated strategy is to deploy more resources to social marketing. The cover charge for that is getting far more onerous as Facebook Inc. ($FB) limits supply amidst fervent demand. Indeed, the over-saturation of social is leading to a dramatic shift in customer-acquistion-strategies, with DTCs spentding $3.8b on TV ads last year — an increase of 60% over 2017. It's gotten so hard to stick out……..


SATISFIED? HOPEFULLY NOT! READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE THROUGH SUBSCRIBING TO OUR PREMIUM KICK@$$ NEWSLETTER HERE.

🚗Auto is Effed (Short the Supply Chain)🚗

AlixPartners LLP cautions, “Auto Suppliers Have a Critical Window to Take Action Before the Slowdown.” The preface:

It may be spring in North America, but for the automotive industry, winter is coming. The industry is on the cusp of a potential cyclical slowdown, which is compounded by changes in technology and evolving consumer preferences. For automotive players—particularly suppliers—it’s critical to start examining worst-case scenarios in their planning and taking decisive action today to ensure that they can ride out the storm.

Storm? What makes Alix think one is imminent? For starters, we’re due. We’re due for a recession and when it comes, it’ll hit the cyclical auto industry hard. Second, technology. You’re either dumb or living in a cave if you haven’t noticed that every OEM is focused on what Alix dubs the “C.A.S.E.” ecosystem — connected, autonomous, shared mobility and electric cars. IHS Markit recently projected that fully electric vehicles will account for 7.6% of US vehicle sales in 2026. Per Axios:

"By 2023, IHS Markit forecasts 43 brands will offer at least one EV option — this will include nearly all existing brands as well as new brands entering the market — compared to 14 brands offering EVs in 2018.”

As we’ve discussed previously, that will have a devastating effect on the supply chain as parts critical to the combustion engine are no longer necessary. EVs require a fraction of the parts that combustion engine-based vehicles do. And, then, finally, Alix predicts this:

Overall, leverage among suppliers is still low compared to the financial crisis, but 2018 saw an increase, with a few large suppliers piling debt on top of weaker EBITDA. Several have already seen credit downgrades, earnings misses, or revisions to their earnings projections for 2019. The coming volume declines may leave some vulnerable suppliers unable to cover their debt—leading either to balance-sheet restructurings or more chapter 11 filings. Strong demand covers up a lot of issues, but in the current market, even a small drop in demand will have a dramatic impact on a capital intensive sector like automotive.

Coming volume declines? What is Alix referring to?


WANT TO FIND OUT WHAT ALIX IS REFERRING TO? FIND OUT BY SUBSCRIBING HERE, DISRUPT THE COMPETITION WITH PETITION.

President Trump Kills More Guns (Long Unintended Consequences).

Callback to four previous PETITION pieces:

The first one — which was a tongue-in-cheek mock First Day Declaration we wrote in advance of Remington Outdoor Company’s chapter 11 bankruptcy — is, if we do say so ourselves, AN ABSOLUTE MUST READ. The same basic narrative could apply to the recent chapter 11 bankruptcy filing of Sportco Holdings Inc., a marketer and distributor of products and accessories for hunting, which filed for bankruptcy on Monday, June 10, 2019. Sportco’s customer base consists of 20k independent retailers covering all 50 states. But back to the “MUST READ.” There are some choice bits there:

Murica!! F*#& Yeah!! 

Remington (f/k/a Freedom Group) is "Freedom Built, American Made." Because nothing says freedom like blowing sh*t up. Cue Lynyrd Skynyrd's "Free Bird." Hell, we may even sing it in court now that Toys R Ushas made that a thing. 

Our company traces its current travails to 2007 when Cerberus Capital Management LP bought Remington for $370mm (cash + assumption of debt) and immediately "loaded" the North Carolina-based company with even more debt. As of today, the company has $950mm of said debt on its balance sheet, including a $150mm asset-backed loan due June '19, a $550mm term loan B due April '19, and 7.875% $250mm 3rd lien notes due '20. Suffice it to say, the capital structure is pretty "jammed." Nothing says America like guns...and leverage

Indeed, this is true of Sportco too. Sportco “sports” $23mm in prepetition ABL obligations and $249.8mm in the form of a term loan. Not too shabby on the debt side, you gun nuts!


WANT TO READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE? CLICK HERE AND SUBSCRIBE NOW!

😷Scumbaggery, Litigation and Decreased Liquidity Force Opioid Manufacturer into Bankruptcy (Long Soap on a Rope)😷

Within a week of entering into a massive settlement with the United States Department of JusticeInsys Therapeutics Inc. ($INSY) and six affiliates filed for bankruptcy in the District of Delaware.* The company is a specialty pharmaceutical company that commercializes drugs and drug delivery systems for targeted therapies (read: it manufactures opioids); it has two marked products. These products, if prescribed and used in the right way, aren’t in and of themselves evil (though former management is another story). In fact, one drug, Subsys, is used for cancer patients and is delivered in the (non-invasive) form of an under-the-tongue spray. The company’s other main drug, Syndros, is used to treat loss of appetite and anorexia associated with weight loss in people with AIDS as well as nausea and vomiting caused by anti-cancer medicine. Not one to miss out on all the latest fads, the company also apparently has cannabinoid-based formulations in its pipeline. Because, like, to the extent the company wants to pursue a sale, nothing will get investor juices flowing like cannabinoid! Will its marketing get done via Snapchat and its sales conducted via the blockchain? Maybe it ought to package its formulations with non-meat meat. Lit!!

All in, the company owns 94 worldwide patents and 62 patent applications with expiration dates ranging between 2022 and 2039. In other words, it does have some potentially valuable intellectual property.

The company’s synopsis of why it is now in bankruptcy court reflects the world of opioid producers today:

…the Debtors are facing extensive litigation relating to their SUBSYS® product (“Subsys”), which is a prescription opioid. As of the Petition Date, one or more of the Debtors have been named in approximately one thousand lawsuits, and the Debtors anticipate that additional lawsuits may be commenced in the future. Some of the litigation they are facing is common to all opioid manufacturers, while other claims are based on particular alleged activities of the Debtors’ former executives, many of whom either pleaded guilty to or were convicted after trial of federal criminal activity relating to such activities. The expenses and settlement costs resulting from such litigation have been substantial, consuming large portions of the Debtors’ revenue and liquidity.

At the same time, over the last few years, the Debtors’ revenues from Subsys have been declining rapidly as a result of the increased national scrutiny of prescription of opioids by healthcare professionals, the resulting high-profile political and legal actions taken against manufacturers and distributors of opioids, and the specific news relating to the former executives’ criminal activity. Moreover, although the Debtors have promising products in the pipeline, those products are not yet approved for production, require significant additional investment to bring to market, and are not expected to generate revenue in the near term. As a smaller company than some other opioid manufacturers, with over 90% of its current revenue coming from the sale of opioids, Insys could not withstand the concurrent negative impact of massive litigation costs and significant opioid revenue deterioration. These factors have caused a substantial cash drain on the company to the point where, despite the Debtors’ best efforts, they risk running out of cash in 2019. (emphasis added)

We quoted that bit at length because it captures the risk that a lot opioid manufacturers face today given what appears to be pervasive sales and prescription practices across the country, subsuming countless companies all seeking sales and profits often….


THIS IS A SUBSCRIBER’S POST, TO READ MORE OF THIS ARTICLE, CLICK HERE AND SUBSCRIBE TO OUR @$$KICKING NEWSLETTER (DISRUPT THE COMPETITION WITH PETITION)

Retail Roundup (Long Tourniquets, Long Headwinds).

The retail bloodbath continues.

Earlier this week, Abercrombie & Fitch Co. ($ANF) joined Ralph Lauren Corp. ($RL)Gap Inc. ($GPS), and Calvin Klein ($PVH) by ditching “flagship” stores situated in expensive parts of town. The stock got crushed on earnings. But the “Peace Out Flagship Square Footage” club didn’t stop growing there. To the contrary, it is expanding. Rapidly.

On Wednesday, J. Crew announced that it plans to shutter 20 flagship and outlet stores. “Why might it be trying to shrink its footprint,” you ask? Good question. And the comps give you all the answers you need. While total revenue rose 7% across the enterprise, J.Crew sales fell 4% with comps down 1%. In contrast, Madewell sales rose 15% and comps rose 10%. 


WANT TO READ THE REST OF OUR INSIGHTS? CLICK HERE TO SUBSCRIBE TO OUR KICK@$$ PREMIUM NEWSLETTER, AND YOU WILL READ ALL OF THAT AND MORE.

💰The United States Trustee (Long Perverse Incentives).💰

The Wall Street Journal reports that the UST fund is approximately 75% short of its funding goal for the year.* Currently, the fund gets fed by quarterly fees paid by bankrupt companies with over $1mm in operating expenses. As with all things bankruptcy, the new federal law mandating the fee increase has a number of holes in it. Consequently, various cases implicating the law are winding their way through the courts.


THIS IS A MEMBERS-ONLY ARTICLE, TO READ THE REST, CLICK HERE. (YOU AND YOUR BOSS WON’T REGRET IT)

🏦How are the Investment Banks Doing? Part II.🏦

You didn’t think we’d just stop at Evercore and Greenhill, did you?

Moelis & Company ($MC) recently reported “disappointing” financial results reflecting a dramatic decline in M&A activity in Q1, which affected revenues significantly. Reported revenue was $138mm, down 37%. “This compares to the overall M&A market in which the number of global M&A completions greater than $100 million declined 18% during the same period. The decline in revenues was primarily driven by fewer transaction completions.” Restructuring activity “declined slightly.” MC guided towards softness in the first half of the year with a relatively stronger second half.

Some key takeaways:

  • Brexit and a number of shaky elections in Europe are having some effect on M&A activity in Europe.

  • Expected continued chill of cross-border M&A that involves China due to “underlying weariness” of “significant Chinese ownership of American companies.”

  • The melt down in late Q4 certainly affected M&A chatter in the C-suite as people are cautious about price volatility.

Asked what happens at MC if the M&A volume remains down, Moelis unabashedly indicated that costs would have to come out of the business, i.e., travel expense and headcount. That must’ve been a bit chilling for MC employees. Sheesh.


FIND OUT WHAT PJT PARTNERS HAS TO SAY ABOUT M&A + RX FEES THROUGH SUBSCRIBING TO OUR KICKA$$ NEWSLETTER HERE.

🚴 Peloton = Gympocalypse? 🚴

The Rise of Peloton, Tonal, Mirror and Other DTC Home Fitness Products (Long Seclusion)

Source: Mirror

Source: Mirror

Back in January we wrote a longform piece about the rise of Peloton. It’s worth revisiting. Subsequently, the at-home fitness space has only gotten more interesting with (i) Peloton’s soon-to-be-released treadmill and (ii) a couple more well-funded startups going after the gym crowd with high-priced at-home apparatuses that give one further incentive to just stay home, never talk to anyone and never do anything outside. Because that's just what we need in today's hyper-polarized environment: more people just scurrying off into their own corners and refusing to deal with and compromise with anyone or anything. And that apparently includes the use of gym equipment.

The New York TimesErin Griffith recently wrote that Tonal and Mirror, two new on-the-wall connected fitness platforms, are…

"…among the first start-ups to pounce on the success of Peloton, a stationary bike start-up that investors recently valued at $4 billion. Peloton blends the hardware of a bike with the software of a video streaming subscription and the content of spin classes. Its skyrocketing growth has made investors wary of missing the next big thing in fitness." 

The next big thing in fitness appears to be a flashy screen, a solid wifi connection, expensive hardware and streaming fitness instruction brought to you by a recurring revenue subscription model. 

Web Smith frames it another way

He writes:

Silicon Valley wants to redefine the fitness membership. Through the adoption of connected devices like the Peloton bike, there’s been an inflection point as consumers seem to be trickling away from the current model. No longer do you have to drive to a place to be in a community. As Americans become more health conscious and driven to maximize performance, the DTC equipment industry is a timely bet on the next generation of  fitness data-driven IoT (internet of things).

He continues:

Whereas the Fitbit-phase of wearables emphasized individual fitness, the next generation of connected devices seem to be incorporating community in ways that could emerge as a challenge to the status quo: community-driven fitness facilities.

And:

By building systems that allow community to be gained outside of physical retail outlets, these tools are aiming to become the new medium for instruction and training.  These internet-enabled equipment manufacturers aren’t just selling plastic and metal, they’re selling virtual community.

He finished by saying:

"...it could spell trouble for your gym. Spin franchises are already beginning to adjust to the threat of Peloton and as the threat of connected cycles continues to grow as also-has brands rise up in the wake of Peloton’s premium pricing."

That sound you may have just heard was the collective moan of mall owners who are increasingly dependent upon gyms to fill space:

Okay, okay, let's dial it down. Peloton has created a luxury brand experience that, it is argued, makes economic sense relative to the long-term economics of attending Flywheel or SoulCycle classes. We're not so sure that translates to other non-niche forms of fitness. Especially at the price-points these companies are touting. 

Apropos, some of the comments to the NYT piece are amusing:

Obviously, these machines are for a niche market where money is irrelevant and style is paramount. Best of luck to them, but I'll stick to the free version...my own body. 

So far the comments are 22-0 against. I wonder if the Tonal can automatically adjust that resistance.

Or, you know, you could just go outside, feel the sun and wind on your back, do some pushups and chinups to feel your own weight against the pull of the Earth, hear nature all around you, talk to a person (gasp!)... 

But then again it's so nice to stare at a screen all day long, so what do I know.

Look for these items in the free piles left curbside after garage sales in about 6 years. 

While we're not necessarily convinced that Tonal and Mirror are the future of fitness, it seems to us that gyms ought to start thinking "omnichannel" like retailers and figure out way to drive more value to customers both in and outside of the gym, during on and off hours. How is it, for instance, that Equinox doesn't have any streaming classes that you can do at home or in your office? 

Whatever happens, expect the area to get more heated as more and more money chases this burgeoning at-home community-based exercise market. Bloomberg already notes that “the treadmill wars are here.” And, Peloton, for instance, is now suing Flywheel for patent infringement. It knows that the at-home fitness opportunity is now. If it can slow down a rival (in advance of an IPO?), all the better.

We asked in January whether Peloton could thrive in a downturn. Now the question is broader: will any of these companies with high-priced hardware be able to survive a downturn?