Markets
Coach And Michael Kors Parent Companies Go To Court In Anti-Trust Case
A Coach bag is seen on display (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)
bagholders

Tapestry, parent company of Coach, soars to 11-year high after ending embattled quest to acquire Michael Kors, Jimmy Choo

Luke Kawa

It sure looks like investors are enthralled by the prospect of a more corporate-friendly, laissez-faire M&A regime once President-elect Donald Trump returns to the Oval Office.

US banks — in particular, regional banks — have been on fire since the November 5 vote on the outlook for higher fees in their advisory businesses. Discover and Capital One, for instance, are each up double digits since the election on increased confidence that their deal will close.

But in the here and now, there are still deals falling apart as the Biden administration winds down.

Tapestry, the parent company of the Coach luxury brand, came to a mutual agreement with Capri, the parent of Michael Kors, to call off their planned acquisition.

The agreement had been put in serious jeopardy after a US District Court in New York blocked the deal last month for antitrust concerns, pending a ruling by the Federal Trade Commission. Shares of Capri, the target company, crumbled in the wake in that ruling. On Thursday, the companies said it was unlikely that any of their appeals would bear fruit before the deadline to close the deal, which is less than three months from now.

The court’s decision was billed as a big win for FTC Chair Lina Khan, but it turns out it might have been a big one for Tapestry as well: it’s the best-performing S&P 500 constituent on Thursday, up 12.2% as of 10:38 a.m. ET, hitting its highest level since 2013.

What’s better than buying other luxury brands? Buying back the bonds you would’ve used to acquire that company, and generating enough cash to buy back your own stock, too. Those are Tapesty’s plans in the wake of the scuttled deal.

More Markets

See all Markets
markets

Trump’s “impossible trinity” on AI and energy

Everyone loves a good trilemma.

In economics, the most famous of the genre was developed by Fleming and Mundell, which posits that you can only successfully achieve two of the following three objectives: the free flow of capital, a fixed exchange rate, and independent sovereign monetary policy.

George Pollack, senior US policy analyst at Signum Global Advisors, proposed a trilemma of his own to describe the Trump administration’s competing policy aims as a red-hot AI boom devours power and leaves households miffed by rising electricity bills.

He wrote:

“This note flags what we believe to be a simple reality whose salience will continue growing in US politics in coming months: the Trump administration, in its remaining three years will face a trilemma as the nation waits for its energy bet to play out — proving able to achieve two, but not all three, of the following objectives:

-Fulfill AI’s energy-appetite.
-Keep repressing renewable sources of energy.
-Appease American electricity consumers.”

Trump AI trilemma

As for evidence that the Trump administration is taking a fossil fuels-first approach while stunting renewables, Pollack pointed to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which shrinks access to tax credits for green energy, as well as the end to the federal pause on liquefied natural gas export permits. However, it would be “inaccurate and unfair” to blame President Trump’s policies for surging electricity prices in recent months, he added.

While the government has pursued the expansion of nuclear power as a way to solve this trilemma, the long lead times involved are incongruent with a short-term fix.

Palantir reports Q3 earnings results

Palantir climbs toward a fresh record high ahead of earnings report

Traders and Wall Street are waiting to see whether Palantir’s latest numbers after market close today will continue to beat expectations.

Latest Stories

Sherwood Media, LLC produces fresh and unique perspectives on topical financial news and is a fully owned subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, Inc., and any views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of any other Robinhood affiliate, including Robinhood Markets, Inc., Robinhood Financial LLC, Robinhood Securities, LLC, Robinhood Crypto, LLC, or Robinhood Money, LLC.