LB - L Brands

[Castanza]

Anyone else have L Brands on their watch list? Stock has been beaten down for a few years now. Potentially could see the spin-off of Bath & Body Works from Victoria Secret.

 

https://thefly.com/landingPageNews.php?id=2874500&headline=LB

 

 

[johnny]

Hard to figure out what where the bottom is for VS.

 

On the positive side, I don't think the past few years are quite the disaster the numbers might suggest without context. A totally new space for underwear opened up and its defining feature is that it's explicitly counter-programmed to VS. If you think that this reaction is going to totally sweep the culture, then it's a problem. But I think it's more likely that we just saw somebody develop 7-Up, and all of this marketing about how it is the 'unCola' will only serve to reinforce the fact that there is something called Cola, and we all know what The Cola actually is, and when somebody asks for cola, we know what they really want.

 

But what is the steady-state of this? How many girls will become VS loyalists v. anti-Victorian progressive purists? Of the non-partisans, what will their individual closet mix look like? If the median $50 bra buyer decides that VS gear is really a "weekend-only" thing, that could be a serious problem (VS is actually 100% underwear-share for a lot of women, and not necessarily because they're Va-Va-Vooming around 24/7).

 

Anyway, VS currently owns what I'll call the MaleGaze segment, and that's still very valuable so long as males are gazing the way the Good Lord intended. Hyperlibs might think that the enlightened men of 2040 are going to be Respecting-Off to pictures of RealWomen with stretch marks or whatever, but I'll take the other side of that bet.

 

The real threat for VS is that, concurrent with the AllBodiesAreBeautiful pressure from the bottom, new MaleGaze brands could come in at the top and start contesting their lock on the market. My fear is that, for a corporation of their size, the path of least resistance will be to try to adopt a Middle Position, and like all moderates in the midst of revolution, they're going to end up with an ice-pick in their skull.

 

The other very real possibility I fear (and something that I think could lead to the disaster scenario above) is that they're not going to be able to take another two years of SSS pain, and they're going to start coming up with SOLUTIONS that will be very bad, like showing the "other side" of VS and hiring plus-size trans models with colostomy bags or whatever. I think there may be some temptation to look at Dove, Nike, Starbucks, and try to pattern match the "SJW tailwind" thing to lingerie, and that's just going to be brand suicide.

 

I'm going to buy one share today because I'm starting to get a lot of heat from Mrs. johnny for spending too much time researching lingerie brands.

[TwoCitiesCapital]

Hard to figure out what where the bottom is for VS.

 

On the positive side, I don't think the past few years are quite the disaster the numbers might suggest without context. A totally new space for underwear opened up and its defining feature is that it's explicitly counter-programmed to VS. If you think that this reaction is going to totally sweep the culture, then it's a problem. But I think it's more likely that we just saw somebody develop 7-Up, and all of this marketing about how it is the 'unCola' will only serve to reinforce the fact that there is something called Cola, and we all know what The Cola actually is, and when somebody asks for cola, we know what they really want.

 

But what is the steady-state of this? How many girls will become VS loyalists v. anti-Victorian progressive purists? Of the non-partisans, what will their individual closet mix look like? If the median $50 bra buyer decides that VS gear is really a "weekend-only" thing, that could be a serious problem (VS is actually 100% underwear-share for a lot of women, and not necessarily because they're Va-Va-Vooming around 24/7).

 

Anyway, VS currently owns what I'll call the MaleGaze segment, and that's still very valuable so long as males are gazing the way the Good Lord intended. Hyperlibs might think that the enlightened men of 2040 are going to be Respecting-Off to pictures of RealWomen with stretch marks or whatever, but I'll take the other side of that bet.

 

The real threat for VS is that, concurrent with the AllBodiesAreBeautiful pressure from the bottom, new MaleGaze brands could come in at the top and start contesting their lock on the market. My fear is that, for a corporation of their size, the path of least resistance will be to try to adopt a Middle Position, and like all moderates in the midst of revolution, they're going to end up with an ice-pick in their skull.

 

The other very real possibility I fear (and something that I think could lead to the disaster scenario above) is that they're not going to be able to take another two years of SSS pain, and they're going to start coming up with SOLUTIONS that will be very bad, like showing the "other side" of VS and hiring plus-size trans models with colostomy bags or whatever. I think there may be some temptation to look at Dove, Nike, Starbucks, and try to pattern match the "SJW tailwind" thing to lingerie, and that's just going to be brand suicide.

 

I'm going to buy one share today because I'm starting to get a lot of heat from Mrs. johnny for spending too much time researching lingerie brands.

 

+1

 

The "anti-VS" movement is real, but agree that's it's the defining of a new segment and NOT a redefinition of the market. My GF still loves VS for their bathing suits and athleisure and doesn't see them as evil even though she also shops at Arie.

 

And as you pointed out, as far as men go, VS would still be my one-stop shop if I was in the market for lingerie. In a few years, this whole thing will have blown over and VS will likely remain the standard bearer for the industry - temporary missteps notwithstanding.

 

 

[rb]

Wow Johnny, seems like you have this whole thing figured out eh.  ::)

 

Anyway, I did have this thing on my watch list a couple of years ago  after it took a drop as I thought that the brands were really solid and that they're experiencing some temporary weakness (classical stuff). But for one reason (the women I talked to weren't all that impressed with it) or another I didn't pull the trigger back then. Since then the business deteriorated more than I thought possible so I decided that I probably don't understand the business all that well and left it alone. That has saved me a lot of money.

[rkbabang]

Wow Johnny, seems like you have this whole thing figured out eh.  ::)

 

Anyway, I did have this thing on my watch list a couple of years ago  after it took a drop as I thought that the brands were really solid and that they're experiencing some temporary weakness (classical stuff). But for one reason (the women I talked to weren't all that impressed with it) or another I didn't pull the trigger back then. Since then the business deteriorated more than I thought possible so I decided that I probably don't understand the business all that well and left it alone. That has saved me a lot of money.

Wow Johnny, seems like you have this whole thing figured out eh.  ::)

 

Anyway, I did have this thing on my watch list a couple of years ago  after it took a drop as I thought that the brands were really solid and that they're experiencing some temporary weakness (classical stuff). But for one reason (the women I talked to weren't all that impressed with it) or another I didn't pull the trigger back then. Since then the business deteriorated more than I thought possible so I decided that I probably don't understand the business all that well and left it alone. That has saved me a lot of money.

 

I had the same experience. My wife talked me out of investing in it a couple of years ago after a drop in price.  Looking back now I'm glad I listened.

 

[Castanza]

Hard to figure out what where the bottom is for VS.

 

On the positive side, I don't think the past few years are quite the disaster the numbers might suggest without context. A totally new space for underwear opened up and its defining feature is that it's explicitly counter-programmed to VS. If you think that this reaction is going to totally sweep the culture, then it's a problem. But I think it's more likely that we just saw somebody develop 7-Up, and all of this marketing about how it is the 'unCola' will only serve to reinforce the fact that there is something called Cola, and we all know what The Cola actually is, and when somebody asks for cola, we know what they really want.

 

But what is the steady-state of this? How many girls will become VS loyalists v. anti-Victorian progressive purists? Of the non-partisans, what will their individual closet mix look like? If the median $50 bra buyer decides that VS gear is really a "weekend-only" thing, that could be a serious problem (VS is actually 100% underwear-share for a lot of women, and not necessarily because they're Va-Va-Vooming around 24/7).

 

Anyway, VS currently owns what I'll call the MaleGaze segment, and that's still very valuable so long as males are gazing the way the Good Lord intended. Hyperlibs might think that the enlightened men of 2040 are going to be Respecting-Off to pictures of RealWomen with stretch marks or whatever, but I'll take the other side of that bet.

 

The real threat for VS is that, concurrent with the AllBodiesAreBeautiful pressure from the bottom, new MaleGaze brands could come in at the top and start contesting their lock on the market. My fear is that, for a corporation of their size, the path of least resistance will be to try to adopt a Middle Position, and like all moderates in the midst of revolution, they're going to end up with an ice-pick in their skull.

 

The other very real possibility I fear (and something that I think could lead to the disaster scenario above) is that they're not going to be able to take another two years of SSS pain, and they're going to start coming up with SOLUTIONS that will be very bad, like showing the "other side" of VS and hiring plus-size trans models with colostomy bags or whatever. I think there may be some temptation to look at Dove, Nike, Starbucks, and try to pattern match the "SJW tailwind" thing to lingerie, and that's just going to be brand suicide.

 

I'm going to buy one share today because I'm starting to get a lot of heat from Mrs. johnny for spending too much time researching lingerie brands.

 

I've had pretty much all these same thoughts. I've talked with my wife extensively about this. I don't think it makes sense to market to the trans movement. The demographic isn't large enough to make a real difference on the bottom line. maybe some good publicity, but in the current attention span of our culture that doesn't mean anything.

 

I think you've highlighted the main issue at play and that is their current product style, maybe price, and who the market is. Their current model is still the "bombshell" model style (push-up bras, all that wonderful jazz.) But the current fashion trend seems to be this more "free" "hippy type" stigma. More specifically, bralettes and the ability to make a girl or woman feel more comfortable with their individual differences.

 

This IS a market that they can penetrate, but it will take a lot of leg work on their part, because they have to change their current perception and then play catch-up. American Eagle has done a great job at that and they have done really well this past year. That's pretty much all they sell. I believe my wife has even bought stuff from there recently and I asked her if it was strange because I thought that store was more geared towards the 15-20ish age range. But turns out her and a lot of her friend (granted we are late 20's) have been going there too, because they have a better selection of those products.

 

I think that women's beauty products really go in cycles. Granted i'm not old enough to verify this with first hand knowledge, but it seems this current "millennial generation." mimics very closely the ideals, style, culture, etc of the people from the 70's. I think that will eventually change again and in some time (a generation maybe?) we will see the whole "bombshell" look come back. Once society kind of solidifies and comes to terms with this whole social movement of "equality", being heard, being recognized for who you are, etc. People will then begin to search for things to set them apart after a bit of time. If human nature and history tell us anything about women, this will probably be facilitated through looks and beauty products.

[HJ]

I'm not sure the changing bra business is all driven by the political narratives.  VS 1) has no answer to the popularity of bralettes, which are cheaper to make than push ups and more comfort.  Teenage brands like Urban Outfitter and American Eagle had rebirths riding on that business.  2) On the athleisure front, they don't have an answer to the popularity of Nike / Lululemon sports bras.  It's also interesting to note that VS is a very domestic brand.  They haven't been very successful pushing it in Europe or Asia over the years.  Does that say something about the nature of the brand and its relevance into the future?

[Castanza]

I'm not sure the changing bra business is all driven by the political narratives.  VS 1) has no answer to the popularity of bralettes, which are cheaper to make than push ups and more comfort.  Teenage brands like Urban Outfitter and American Eagle had rebirths riding on that business.  2) On the athleisure front, they don't have an answer to the popularity of Nike / Lululemon sports bras.  It's also interesting to note that VS is a very domestic brand.  They haven't been very successful pushing it in Europe or Asia over the years.  Does that say something about the nature of the brand and its relevance into the future?

 

I don't think its necessarily a hard political stance against VS. But I think it's a sub-conscience reaction to our current political/cultural movements. This has to undoubtedly have a large affect on what products are successful etc.

 

I don't think LULU has saturated that market. However, one thing I will say affects women far more than men is life style creep. Once someone buys LULU I believe they feel they are buying a better/trendy product and will continue to stick with that brand. There have been dozens of studies that show this. Women are much more likely to buy a product specifically because of brand than men (I do think this is changing a bit though). LULU also is now marketing towards men which could end up being an advantage.

 

Nike seems to have a price range between the two with extremes on either end. The thing about Nike is they continually pump out new product. Constantly shifting styles etc. all of which affect the competition and the styles they also bring to the table as it constantly keeps pressure on them.

 

You're right in saying that VS doesn't have competitive items in the specific areas you mentioned. The question is can they?

[mbreject]

I don't know about other brands or design but the quality of VS products has been going down for a couple of years. The material isn't as nice as it used to be and it's just not durable.

[johnny]

My position on this has changed substantially after having done a little more research. I think that there is some much deeper cause for concern with VS, and having reviewed the Barington letter, I'm even more concerned about the pressures on them to do the absolute incorrect thing to try and right the ship.

 

I'm going to give Barginton the benefit of the doubt and assume that they're motivation is simple: they want BBW split off, and want to capture a quick gain on the re-rating. I'm going to assume everything else they say about fixing VS is just mumbling bullshit to insulate them from charges that they have no idea about the market and are just pushing for some quick financial engineering profits. Because what they propose is asinine delusional bullshit. But it's the sort of bullshit that might get Mister Barington a guest slot on CNBC, so maybe there's that incentive too.

 

Anyway, that's enough making fun of Barington. Here's my current thinking on the company:

 

1. Victoria's Secret has had problems for quite a while. There would have been clear internal signs (visible to management) as far back as 2012, maybe even a bit earlier. Given this fact, we're forced to confront two possibilities: either they were completely oblivious to what should have been obvious to them for several years, or they have spent the past 7 years actually trying (and failing) to remedy the problems. Neither of these is particularly bullish, I think management is a huge huge problem here.

 

2. I oversimplified the competitive threat to VS when I said that they were explicitly counter-programming. They are, but this is a branding exercise that is happening in conjunction with genuine structural changes in the industry that VS has betrayed no awareness of. The CEO of the company is an 80 year old dude, and I sincerely think the burden is now on him and his entire team to demonstrate that they should be considered credible here.

 

3. On credibility, they were proudly boasting about their dividend increases as recently as a few months before completely slashing their dividend. Maybe this is the sort of embarassing thing I tend to fixate on irrationally, but to me it's consistent with the broader theme that I've been developing in my research: that this management team absolutely has to go.

 

4. Similar sign of no long-term strategy: exiting swimwear and re-entering swimwear a year later, and in each case boasting about how the decision demonstrated their strategic dynamism. Self-explanatory.

 

5. They have spent years touting their highly rational and lucrative store capex. They claim IRRs > 20% for capex. They've been making the claim for five years. Over that five years they've done $3B in capex. The return from the past five years of capex alone should be about $600 million. What was the net income for the entire company this year? About $600 million. Weird!

 

That said, Barington's letter demonstrates zero understanding of the actual structural issues here (no, it's not a failure to be "inclusive"), and I'm also skeptical about the economics of separating the two businesses. I've no experience here, but it seems to me that having VS and BBW implicitly coalition-bargain for deals with real estate owners provides some strategic value, and I also imagine there is some supplier/best practices sharing along their overlapping product lines. Finally, since the target demographic for VS and BBW overlaps almost perfectly, there's a nice delusion-challenging control dynamic in the fact that you have another store in almost every mall where theres a VS; in other words you should be much more empowered to dismiss excuses for poor performance at the individual store level, since you have another store targetting the exact same demo in the exact same geography with the exact same income one story above. They don't seem to have taken advantage of this intel advantage, but it's there for anybody who isn't stupid.

 

The basic underlying claim of Barington seems true: BBW is being seriously undervalued because of the VS issues, and VS is seriously underperforming relative to their potential. The problem is that I don't see current management as solving either problem, and I don't see Barginton as a savior either.

 

But I will continue doing the very hard work of researching this extensively, because I feel like I owe a debt to this great board.

[johnny]

Oh, this is worth noting: viewership for the famous Victoria's Secret Fashion Show

 

2012: 9.5 million

2013: 9.7 million

2014: 9.3 million

2015: 6.6 million

2016: 6.7 million

2017: 5.0 million

2018: 3.3 million

 

This can be taken out of context and used to express excessive bearishness about the brand, but it still illustrates that there are very real structural changes happening that VS has no plan to address.

 

Like I said in my first (substantially revised) post: it's hard to figure out where the bottom is.

[Spekulatius]

Oh, this is worth noting: viewership for the famous Victoria's Secret Fashion Show

 

2012: 9.5 million

2013: 9.7 million

2014: 9.3 million

2015: 6.6 million

2016: 6.7 million

2017: 5.0 million

2018: 3.3 million

 

This can be taken out of context and used to express excessive bearishness about the brand, but it still illustrates that there are very real structural changes happening that VS has no plan to address.

 

Like I said in my first (substantially revised) post: it's hard to figure out where the bottom is.

 

LOL, the table explains LBrands problem better than a lengthy writup could do.

[TwoCitiesCapital]

While the drop in viewership is concerning, it's hard for me to extrapolate that as damage to the brand.

 

1) 2018's was on a new network and a new night of the week (Sunday vs Tuesday) - I have to imagine the Sunday night viewership is FAR more competitive than Tuesday night's.

 

2) The cable industry itself is in secular decline. The reason we didn't watch this year was because we no longer have cable and thus are no longer aware of what shows come on when. Had VS had a streaming deal with Hulu/Netflix/HBO/Sling, there's a good chance we'd have watched it.

 

These aren't non-issue. The drop in viewership matters, but I don't know if it all can be attributed to the decline of the brand. I don't even know if MOST of it can be attributed to that.

 

I still tend to think this is an overreaction. The management has had missteps. The market is developing a new segment. Both of these impact the valuation of the company, but neither leads me to believe that there's an existential crisis for the VS brand.

 

If that's the case, this is probably worthwhile to own for BBW alone while VS works it out to catch their stride again.

[johnny]

I suspect the secular decline in linear TV viewership is actually analogous to what's going on with Victoria's Secret: a product engineered to appeal to the mode of the distribution will gobble up huge share in the old media context, and be doomed to decreasing share in the new media context.

 

There will never be another show as successful as Friends. The proliferation of a broad spectrum of narrowly-tailored and taste-specific content will soak up attention from more and more of the available eyeballs. The pool of people who are content to consume generic content is simply smaller now. This isn't to say another show like Friends couldn't be made today, just that it couldn't achieve the same "cultural sweep" that was possible in the past.

 

Likewise, VS's brand isn't necessarily impaired: they still "own" consensus American idealized female beauty. But since there are other more specific and taste-matched offerings that have been made available, the question is how many women are going to feel like they have to compromise and sign up for what they might regard as a sort of blande and generic product. Women who, 20 years ago, would have been choosing between VS (sexy) and Sears (granny) are now going to be choosing between VS (generic sexy), LULU (athletic sexy), la perla (euro sexy), coco de mer (euro slutty), savage x fenty (curvy slutty), aerie (curvy comfy), and so on. VS might be viewed by many of these women as a perfectly suitable fallback option. But it is now a fallback option. This is a big difference.

 

My big mistake in my first analysis was getting distracted by the marketing gimmicks (weaponizing the politics/ideology for social media hits). There is an actual, meaningful underlying business model change here, and I can observe nothing but miserable failure on L Brand's part in failing to recognize and respond to it.

[johnny]

Feels like a good options play, though.

[Spekulatius]

I suspect the secular decline in linear TV viewership is actually analogous to what's going on with Victoria's Secret: a product engineered to appeal to the mode of the distribution will gobble up huge share in the old media context, and be doomed to decreasing share in the new media context.

 

There will never be another show as successful as Friends. The proliferation of a broad spectrum of narrowly-tailored and taste-specific content will soak up attention from more and more of the available eyeballs. The pool of people who are content to consume generic content is simply smaller now. This isn't to say another show like Friends couldn't be made today, just that it couldn't achieve the same "cultural sweep" that was possible in the past.

 

Likewise, VS's brand isn't necessarily impaired: they still "own" consensus American idealized female beauty. But since there are other more specific and taste-matched offerings that have been made available, the question is how many women are going to feel like they have to compromise and sign up for what they might regard as a sort of blande and generic product. Women who, 20 years ago, would have been choosing between VS (sexy) and Sears (granny) are now going to be choosing between VS (generic sexy), LULU (athletic sexy), la perla (euro sexy), coco de mer (euro slutty), savage x fenty (curvy slutty), aerie (curvy comfy), and so on. VS might be viewed by many of these women as a perfectly suitable fallback option. But it is now a fallback option. This is a big difference.

 

My big mistake in my first analysis was getting distracted by the marketing gimmicks (weaponizing the politics/ideology for social media hits). There is an actual, meaningful underlying business model change here, and I can observe nothing but miserable failure on L Brand's part in failing to recognize and respond to it.

 

Yes I think this hit the nail on the head. Segmentation causes the decline of major brands. I don’t know the bra business well (never been to a VC store either), but it’s analogous what happens with Main Street beer brands and craft beers etc. Declining exposure via their distribution channels (less Tv and print ads viewers and less mall traffic) don’t help either. Maybe they can stabilize it, but the business unlikely will go back to where it once was.

[johnny]

Just updating to say that I'm long.

 

1. If BBW doesn't collapse, it is probably in fact worth very close to the market quote for LB. For some reason I suspect that if BBW's SSS begin to crest, the market response isn't going to be to drive the stock down another 50%. Maybe I'm wrong here, but I just think I'll be able to duck out of the company without getting too hurt in this scenario.

 

2. Similarly, while I've articulated my disaster scenario for VS (an attempted brand pivot to Capture The Moment), it's another scenario that I think I can ditch before the market figures it out. In fact, I'm guessing the immediate market response to this would be enthusiasm.

 

3. Another long-term disaster that might generate short-term profits: the spinoff idea. I don't put a high probability on this; I don't think management has any interest. But it would probably produce a nice trading gain at today's price.

 

Bottom line, if VS is being priced for death, any sign of life (even if a last gasp) has the potential to get spun into a new bull-ride. A recovery in comps, some sort of numerical substantiation of the Chinese market opportunity, whatever. And as VS' target demo would say, I'm here for it.

[stahleyp]

Morningstar isn't the best but its related.

 

https://www.morningstar.com/videos/925632/a-breakup-may-be-just-what-l-brands-needs.html

[stahleyp]

This is looking interesting. I've seen estimates that Bath and Body Works is worth $25 per share and Victoria's Secret is worth $15. So even if you chop those in half, you're looking at some potential here.

[Castanza]

This is looking interesting. I've seen estimates that Bath and Body Works is worth $25 per share and Victoria's Secret is worth $15. So even if you chop those in half, you're looking at some potential here.

 

The question is will they ever do it? Shareholders seem to be getting a bit antsy with the class actions. But there still seems to be very little talk about a spin-off.

 

https://www.retaildive.com/news/l-brands-hit-with-class-action-over-financial-disclosures/561763/

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-21/victoria-s-secret-sags-again-as-bath-body-works-keeps-growing

[stahleyp]

This is looking interesting. I've seen estimates that Bath and Body Works is worth $25 per share and Victoria's Secret is worth $15. So even if you chop those in half, you're looking at some potential here.

 

The question is will they ever do it? Shareholders seem to be getting a bit antsy with the class actions. But there still seems to be very little talk about a spin-off.

 

https://www.retaildive.com/news/l-brands-hit-with-class-action-over-financial-disclosures/561763/

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-21/victoria-s-secret-sags-again-as-bath-body-works-keeps-growing

 

Yeah but the value of the business is still there regardless of the actual spin off (though it would take longer for the market to price it as such).

 

One of my concerns is with the quality of the products. I was looking on the website and a number of the products have less than stellar reviews. Short term, I wouldn't be surprised if the stock got another dividend cut (a 7%+ yield seems pretty high for a retailer with declining sales for its flagship line), in which case the stock would drop a bit more, I would imagine.

 

I'm guessing the Epstein stuff is probably also weighing on the stock. I don't think the brand is dead as what people seem to think. It has a ton of fans on social media (more than many competitors), the store reviews are positive. Though, part of me is like "you know nothing about fashion and should stay away." haha

[BG2008]

I think a bunch of middle aged guys trying to decipher L Brands is a disaster in the making

 

Maybe ask the opinion of some 20 year old women to weigh in.  I may ask my intern to comment on this thread.  If you are not talking about inclusivity, body positivity and etc, you shouldn't be touching this stock.  Rhianna made a cosmetic line that offer over 20 skin tones and one specific for albinos.  Apparently that decision created a ton of positive PR.  L Brands with its connection to Epstein and its overly focus on the VS show feels very demeaning to women, especially the early 20s who are raised on social justice and body positivity.  It just feels that L Brands are very out of touch.  But what do I know?  I'm a late 30s dude who never bought women's underwear.  Ask some young women for their opinion. 

[merkhet]

I think a bunch of middle aged guys trying to decipher L Brands is a disaster in the making

 

Maybe ask the opinion of some 20 year old women to weigh in.  I may ask my intern to comment on this thread.  If you are not talking about inclusivity, body positivity and etc, you shouldn't be touching this stock.  Rhianna made a cosmetic line that offer over 20 skin tones and one specific for albinos.  Apparently that decision created a ton of positive PR.  L Brands with its connection to Epstein and its overly focus on the VS show feels very demeaning to women, especially the early 20s who are raised on social justice and body positivity.  It just feels that L Brands are very out of touch.  But what do I know?  I'm a late 30s dude who never bought women's underwear.  Ask some young women for their opinion.

 

+1

[Gregmal]

LOL So true.

 

I get some help; my little brother is in grad school out in liberalville Long Island. Occasionally provides some useful insight and perspective.

 

You know what almost every girl in that demographic owns? Elephant pants.... a far cry from when I was in school and VS was mandatory(from the girl's perspective) if you wanted to be sexy...

[Castanza]

I think a bunch of middle aged guys trying to decipher L Brands is a disaster in the making

 

Maybe ask the opinion of some 20 year old women to weigh in.  I may ask my intern to comment on this thread.  If you are not talking about inclusivity, body positivity and etc, you shouldn't be touching this stock.  Rhianna made a cosmetic line that offer over 20 skin tones and one specific for albinos.  Apparently that decision created a ton of positive PR.  L Brands with its connection to Epstein and its overly focus on the VS show feels very demeaning to women, especially the early 20s who are raised on social justice and body positivity.  It just feels that L Brands are very out of touch.  But what do I know?  I'm a late 30s dude who never bought women's underwear.  Ask some young women for their opinion.

 

I agree with this to an extent. But at the end of the day VS was created by a man. Yoga pants were created by men. How women dress is also heavily influenced by men. Sure women primarily dress to compete against each other, but it all comes back to attracting a mate lol. As crass as that is it's true. So to say men shouldn't try to evaluate the market they helped create is a bit inaccurate. Both opinions certainly add value. Women have had many cultural and cosmetic shifts throughout history (see link). Yet at the end of the day most cosmetic choices have been partially driven by their "effectiveness" on men and partially driven by what makes women feel "sexy."

 

 

VS cancelled their fashion show this year so they are beginning to get a clue as to what shifting in the industry.