
Q1 2025 Bitcoin Depot Inc Earnings Call
Brandon Mintz; Chairman of the Board, President, Chief Executive Officer; Bitcoin Depot Inc
David Gray; Chief Financial Officer; Bitcoin Depot Inc
Scott Buchanan; Chief Operating Officer, Director and Principal Financial Officer; Bitcoin Depot Inc
Mike Grondahl; Analyst; Northland Securities
Mike Colonnese; Analyst; H.C. Wainwright & Co., LLC
Hal Goetsch; Analyst; B. Riley Securities
Pat McCann; Analyst; Noble Financial Capital Markets
Operator
Thank you for standing by. My name is Janice, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the Bitcoin Depot first-quarter 2025 earnings conference call. (Operator Instructions) I would now like to turn the call over to Mr. Cody Slach, Senior Managing Director. Please go ahead.
Cody Slach
Thank you, operator. Good morning, everyone. Before management begins their formal remarks, we'd like to remind everyone that some statements we're making today may be considered forward-looking statements under securities laws and involve a number of risks and uncertainties. As a result, we caution you that there are a few factors, many of which are beyond our control, which could cause actual results and events to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements. For more detailed risks, uncertainties and assumptions relating to our forward-looking statements, please see the disclosures in our earnings release and public filings with the SEC. We disclaim any obligation or undertaking to update forward-looking statements to reflect circumstances or events that occur after the date the forward-looking statements are made, except as required by law. We will also discuss non-GAAP financial measures. I encourage you to read our disclosures and the reconciliations to applicable GAAP measures in our earnings release carefully as you consider these metrics. We refer you to our filings with the SEC for detailed disclosures and descriptions of our business as well as uncertainties and other variable circumstances, including, but not limited to, risks and uncertainties identified under the caption Risk Factors in our recent filings. You may get Bitcoin Depot's SEC filings for free by visiting the SEC website at sec.gov. I'd like to remind everyone this call is being recorded, and will be available for replay via a link in the Investor Relations section of Bitcoin Depot's website. A supplemental earnings presentation highlighting our performance has also been made available on our IR website. Now, I will turn the call over to Bitcoin Depot's CEO, Brandon Mintz. Brandon?
Brandon Mintz
Thanks, Cody, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for attending our first quarter conference call. Bitcoin Depot delivered a remarkable first quarter with 19% year-over-year revenue growth and record net income of $12.2 million. Consumer demand was quite strong with median transaction size up 46% year over year to $300 and total transaction volume moving steadily higher to $163.8 million. These results produced strong free cash flow, which we used to build cash and purchase more Bitcoin. This performance demonstrates the strength of our operating model, the success of our kiosk optimization strategy and the powerful cash flow we can generate once fixed costs are covered. Let me provide more details on this performance. Our kiosk growth and optimization plan are showing the intended results. Q1 adjusted gross profit was up 92% year-over-year and adjusted EBITDA was up over threefold to a record $20.3 million. These results should continue as this strategy unfolds. We ended Q1 with approximately 8,483 active machines and expect to see continued growth in kiosks for the remainder of the year. Now on to our BTM relocation strategy. Today, 3,200 of our kiosks have been installed for less than one year. As these machines ramp up, we expect to drive further cash flow as our Bitcoin ATMs typically see payback periods of less than eight months, regardless of Bitcoin price. As the largest BTM operator in North America, our scale, compliance-first approach and long-standing retail partnerships continue to set us apart in a highly fragmented market. We remain focused on expanding market share and growing profitability. Now turning to an update on our growth strategy. First, international expansion. We have now deployed over 100 kiosks to support our ongoing launch in Australia this year. Australia is quickly emerging as a global hotspot for Bitcoin adoption currently ranking third worldwide and total Bitcoin ATMs. We believe this represents a significant opportunity to establish a strong presence outside North America. While it's still early, we are encouraged by the retail partnerships and expansion opportunities we have identified so far. Beyond Australia, we are actively evaluating entry into at least two additional countries in 2025. Second, scaling our domestic footprint. We continue to deploy kiosk from the large inventory we secured last year. Once fully deployed, these units could bring our total active fleet to approximately 10,000 kiosks. This will enhance our reach and support further efficiencies across the business. Third, regulatory expansion into new markets. New York State remains one of the largest untapped markets for Bitcoin ATMs. We are in ongoing discussions with regulators and remain optimistic about obtaining a license to operate in the state in 2025. While there is no definitive timeline yet, we are encouraged by the progress and engagement so far. On a broader note, we continue to closely monitor the evolving regulatory environment at both the federal and state levels. Our strong compliance infrastructure, including rigorous KYC and AML protocols continues to serve as a competitive advantage. We are actively engaging with regulators, including [Vincent] and various state agencies to help shape a responsible future for the industry. More broadly, the recent establishment of a US strategic Bitcoin reserve highlights the growing institutional recognition of Bitcoin's role in the financial system. As a national leader in Bitcoin ATM deployment, we are prepared to support the shift by expanding access to digital assets for everyday consumers. We have also strengthened our leadership team with the appointment of David Gray as our Chief Financial Officer; and Chris Ryan as our Chief Legal Officer. David brings more than 20 years of financial leadership experience, Chris brings deep expertise in legal and regulatory matters within Fintech. Their combined experience will be essential as we continue to grow. With that, I will turn it over to our CFO, David Gray, who will walk through our financial results in more detail. David?
David Gray
Thanks, Brandon, and good morning, everyone. It's great to be here, and I look forward to meeting many of our shareholders over the coming months. Jumping right into our first-quarter performance. Revenue was $164.2 million compared to $138.5 million for last year's first quarter, an increase of 19% driven by growth in deployed kiosks and higher median transaction size. Sequentially, revenue was up 20% as compared to Q4 2024 as a result of strong consumer demand underpinned by growing median transaction size, along with our continued process of relocating underperforming kiosks to optimize fleet profitability. Adjusted gross margin in the first quarter of 2025 increased 92% to $33.1 million compared to $17.3 million in the first quarter of 2024. Adjusted gross margin in the first quarter of 2025 increased 770 basis points to 20.2% compared to 12.5% in the first quarter of 2024. This margin increase was largely driven by leverage on the significant revenue outperformance and the continued pricing strength. Total operating expenses declined 7% to $15.3 million compared to $16.6 million in last year's first quarter. The improvement was attributable to lower depreciation expense and our company moving farther away from the DSBAC transaction to optimize expenses for life as a public company. Specifically, we have saved multiple million dollars on an annual basis by reducing costs related to our third-party legal costs, audit services and insurance. GAAP net income for the first quarter of 2025 increased significantly to $12.2 million compared to a net loss of $4.2 million for the first quarter of 2025. GAAP net income attributable to common shareholders increased to $4.2 million or $0.20 per share compared to a net loss of $1.5 million in last year's first quarter. The significant increase was due to higher revenue and gross profit and to a lesser extent, lower expenses. Adjusted EBITDA, a non-GAAP measure, increased 315% to $20.3 million in the first quarter of 2025, compared to $4.9 million in the first quarter of 2024. This increase was primarily due to revenue outperformance and margin expansion. Now turning to our balance sheet and cash flow. Cash and cash equivalents in cryptocurrencies as of March 31, 2025, increased to $43.3 million compared to $31.0 million at the end of 2024. The company acquired 83 more Bitcoin in the quarter, bringing our investment holdings up to 94.4 BTC valued at approximately $7.8 million as of March 31. We generated a record $16.3 million of cash from operating activities in the first quarter, up significantly from $1.3 million in the year ago quarter. Debt at quarter end was $60 million compared to $60.9 million at the end of 2024. This balance includes term loans, finance leases and profit share arrangements. Of the total debt balance, $30 million is our term loan on which we paid down $6 million during the quarter, and we plan to pay down at least an additional $3.5 million by year-end. The paydown of the term loan balance was largely offset by the expansion of our profit share franchise agreements in the quarter. These agreements entail an upfront lump sum payments to the company by our partners in exchange for a portion of the future profits generated from a specified group of kiosks for a specified period of time. Because we continue to operate and typically retain title to the kiosks, you must account for the upfront payments as debt under US GAAP. As we think about our capital allocation strategy going forward, we will focus our attention on other ways of driving shareholder value, including paying down our term loan or potential dividends as we do not expect significant CapEx in 2025. Now turning to our outlook. Given the improved visibility we have in our business that Brandon mentioned, we are continuing with near-term financial guidance. We anticipate Q2 revenues to grow in the low to mid-single digits both sequentially and as compared to Q2 of 2024. This growth, while modest, is against very strong comps of $164 million and $163 million for Q1 of 2025 and Q2 of 2024, respectively. We remain committed to additional operational enhancements to drive profitable growth going forward, including improved vendor pricing, lowering professional service costs and optimizing customer markups. We are focused on optimizing the business for profitability and positive cash flow ahead. With that, we are happy now to take your questions. Operator?
Operator
Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session at this time. (Operator Instructions) Mike Grondahl, Northland Capital Markets.
Mike Grondahl
Hey guys. Congrats on a solid quarter, couple of questions. One, do you have a year-end '25, year-end '26 rough kiosk goal and then what would you think of, I don't know, rough CapEx for '25 and '26?
Brandon Mintz
Mike, it's Brandon. No, we haven't announced to the public kiosk in terms of our total installed fleet. You can see we're moving a little bit slower in terms of additional net new installations than last year. But our goal is still to get the remainder installed as soon as possible. We mentioned in the earnings script that we're expanding, hopefully into an additional country or two this year, and we definitely want to reserve some of the kiosks that we used for that international expansion effort. One thing to note is we have about 150 kiosks installed in Australia today, but we shipped about 350 there. So there will be some installation expansion just as Australia ramps up, not even including the US. And then in terms of CapEx for 2025 and 2026, with close to 2,000 kiosks still available for us to deploy. There's not a need to purchase additional kiosks this year at least. Obviously, things could change very quickly, if all of a sudden, we signed a large retail chain, then maybe we don't have enough kiosks. But for now, I couldn't really say that you should anticipate CapEx this year beyond just small things like parts costs and such, but nothing significant.
Mike Grondahl
Got it. Got it. That's kind of what I thought, but I wanted to make sure for '25. You have roughly 3,200 kiosks that have been in place less than a year is those 3,200 ramp to be average kiosks. What incremental lift to revenue would that be?
Brandon Mintz
Let me think about that for a second. I don't have ability to calculate an exact number right now. But what I can say is we're always going to have probably 1000 kiosk minimum within that one-year installed bucket just from deploying new kiosks and relocating existing kiosks. And the kiosks in year two versus year one, typically see at least 50% growth in terms of revenue versus year one. Maybe just look at year-over-year, but we can evaluate that a little bit further and get back to you.
Mike Grondahl
Cool. I mean, clearly, those are still ramping and they're not mature yet. Just trying to kind of understand how much is there. But, thank you.
Operator
Mike Colonnese, H.C. Wainwright.
Mike Colonnese
Hey, good morning guys, and congrats on a really strong quarter here. First one for me, obviously, Bitcoin Depot is generating really strong cash flows. So it'd be great to get some more color around your capital management priorities for the rest of the year. I can appreciate some of the debt repayment comments. But how are you thinking about balancing maybe M&A, Bitcoin purchases? And again, this potential quarter dividend?
Brandon Mintz
Good question, Mike. It's Brandon again. So when we look at uses of cash with the Bitcoin purchases, we would like to be opportunistic with us getting back close to all-time highs right now. I don't anticipate much buying. In terms of paying down debt, we did sign an amendment to our term loan agreement that requires us to have a little bit quicker amortization schedule. And with our strong balance sheet right now, the preferred dividend being paid off and without a drag on potential cash uses like the preferred dividend had, I could see us potentially paying down debt maybe even quicker than what's in the schedule. In terms of M&A, there's still not a lot of opportunities that make sense for us, at least in the US or Canada or Australia, primarily because we've just been able to purchase kiosks prices that are less expensive than brand-new kiosks. And when we run the numbers, it's hard to justify those M&A opportunities when we can just grow organically ourselves and have higher returns there. However, we're evaluating M&A opportunities internationally because if someone can speed up our time line to deployment, whether they have a license or some strategic vendor relationships or a strategic retailer relationship that has really additional value than just us buying more kiosks in finding locations. And we're evaluating if there's an opportunity that makes sense. But I don't think at this time we're in a place where that's a very near-term situation.
Mike Colonnese
Very helpful, Brandon. I appreciate the color there. And regarding the 2Q revenue guide, I can appreciate the tough comp from the year ago quarter. But are there any other factors causing such a significant deceleration in revenue growth for this quarter here?
Brandon Mintz
I think just as time has gone on, we've noticed the seasonality in the business we've talked about previously and how this business seems to be somewhat correlated with the seasonality with tax return season. And I think as there are more and more tools for people to get refunds earlier that some of that volume is starting to shift more into Q1.
Mike Colonnese
Right. Thank you for taking my questions.
Brandon Mintz
And that's just a theory.
Operator
Hal Goetsch, B. Riley Securities.
Hal Goetsch
Hey there, hey, Congrats on a great quarter. Just wanted to get your thoughts on the reason for maybe the extremely steep increase over the last four quarters in median transaction it was like rock solid around 200. And then for the last four quarters, it's really -- it's really moved up. And I wanted to get your thoughts. And then because it's up about 50%. (inaudible)
Brandon Mintz
I didn't hear the second question.
Scott Buchanan
I got it, this is Scott. So it's just a function of where the transaction tiers are for KYC. So we've had a tier at $200 for a long time. And that means customers will frequently do $200 transactions. And so when you look at the median, even as the average has been going up every month, every quarter, every year, when you take the median, $200 just has a lot of transactions that are at exactly that level. So even if we're moving up to higher points within that $200 median, it was still $200. And once we cross that level, we're seeing move up appears a more quick pace because it hasn't hit another tier or is it just a ton of common transactions at that specific size, if that makes sense. Just a function of like where we see a lot of exact size transactions.
Hal Goetsch
Okay. Okay. And could you comment on just like overall transaction count growth by economic cohort. I mean what are like some of the machines that are like in place over two years that having been moved in a year? Like what kind of transaction counts are they doing per month sort of KPIs you could share with us if it's a more qualitative basis?
Scott Buchanan
Yeah. See, trying to do some quick math for you. So I mean a kiosk that's ramped up. I mean, we still see a lot of variability even after the two years of what transaction sizes mixed with transaction counts. But we're seeing transaction counts that mature kiosks in the mid-double-digit range. So in the, let's say, 10 to 20 transactions a month at a mature kiosk.
Hal Goetsch
Okay. And are those mature kiosks? Are they trending towards like the median transaction size? Is it kind of -- that's a fair then because they've been there a while, people know they're frequent users?
Scott Buchanan
Well, they would -- it would trend more toward the average transaction size, which is higher than the median. But yes --
Hal Goetsch
The average is higher than the median.
Scott Buchanan
For sure. Yes, because outlier large transactions pull off the average more than you can pull up the median.
Hal Goetsch
Okay. And last from me before I can get back in the queue. You've lapped California's impact of their change. What have you seen in California a year later with what is -- how is that either bounce back or not bounce back or what's happened in California?
Scott Buchanan
So California, can you ask that again, you ask a California has bounced back?
Hal Goetsch
No, it's like California made a rule change impact at all of 2024, right? And you've now lapped give us some comment -- could you please share some commentary on what California looks like a full almost five quarters after that change? How are trends in California?
Scott Buchanan
Yeah. I mean California is still lower than other states because of the rural changes that happened there. It just has less of an impact on the business now that we've got many, many fewer kiosks in the state. We've probably reduced our count of kiosks in California by about 80% from where we were when the rule first went into effect.
Hal Goetsch
Okay. So usually one of your top states, it's your moving our kiosks and you're growing double digit right now, Q1 I mean, that's pretty. That's helpful. Thank you.
Operator
Pat McCann, Noble Capital Markets.
Pat McCann
Hey guys, thanks for taking my questions, and congrats on the quarter. I would like, if you don't mind talking a little bit more about the spreads of the machines this quarter and the gross margins and the drivers behind that. And what maybe we should expect moving forward there?
David Gray
Yeah, I'll take that one. It's David. Yeah, the gross margin expansion really was attributable to pricing strength. We did increase our margins on Bitcoin transactions through the kiosks as well as leveraging higher revenue across kind of the fixed and semi-fixed costs that we have in our cost structure. So those were two key drivers of the margin expansion, and we expect that to continue to be strong going forward.
Pat McCann
And then the other question was regarding additional kiosk acquisition. I know that's not a need right now, but I was just wondering what the landscape looks like as far as opportunities to pick up more kiosks on the cheap kind of like you did recently in the last year or so?
Brandon Mintz
Brandon, I'll take that one. If you look at data from coinatmradar.com, which have the listings of all the Bitcoins ATMs around the world, for the most part, it looks like competition, at least in the US is shrinking if you remove our kiosk growth over the past year and just looking at their data, it looks like maybe there's over 3,000 competitor kiosks that have disappeared from the market. So I think as some of the smaller operators struggle to survive in this environment that requires more sophistication and more resources from operators that there could be additional kiosks that pop up on the market per sale.
Pat McCann
Thanks. That's all I had. Congrats again.
Brandon Mintz
Thank you.
Operator
I will now turn the call back over to Brandon Mintz, CEO for closing remarks. Please go ahead.
Brandon Mintz
Thank you, everyone for joining the call today. We're very happy about the results we delivered, and we plan to continue to perform next quarter.
Operator
Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes today's call. Thank you all for joining. You may now disconnect.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Indianapolis Star
28 minutes ago
- Indianapolis Star
New metrics favor IU football scheduling over SEC's playoff bubble teams. Hoosiers must fight their CFP debate
BLOOMINGTON — Indiana football needs to start fighting its own corner on this one, because it's becoming increasingly apparent no one else will. The political convention season that has become football media days is over. Platforms were presented. Agendas were set. And from one of college football's hot-button issues of the day — the question of scheduling parity and College Football Playoff selection — IU unexpectedly emerged as the proverbial straw man. Here, critics (many of them SEC-aligned), have said is proof that the system is flawed, that the Big Ten is fraudulent. Just look at this nonconference schedule. At issue is Indiana's decision to buy its way out of every remaining Power Four nonconference game short of a visit to Notre Dame in 2030, and replace opponents like Louisville and Virginia with games the athletic department will pay a king's shilling to win comfortably. Wins being currency in the modern playoff landscape. Of course, that's not really the issue at all. But criticism in bad faith is still criticism, and unanswered, it becomes damaging. The SEC plays eight conference games. The Big Ten plays nine. The two conferences with the most wealth, agency and power in college football do not agree on how many is enough, and they're waging a cold war over it. The SEC is attuned to the cultural desire to preserve out-of-conference rivalries like South Carolina-Clemson, Georgia-Georgia Tech and Florida-Florida State. Even in its hyperexpanded form, the Big Ten doesn't tend to have that concern. What the Big Ten does have is a conference that touches both coasts and feeds three separate television partners, all of whom are aware of the immense brand strength of a collection of mostly (still) land-grant and large state institutions will massive endowments and sprawling fan bases. Big Ten football is big business, and the Big Ten is happy to provide more of it. But it is wary, in a world where most College Football Playoff berths are selected at large, of challenging itself too much. Of playing games just to satisfy perception without, as Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti put it at his conference's media days last month, 'incentive.' The Big Ten has a solution to this: Automatic qualifiers for the two biggest conferences. Four of them, to be exact, protecting (in effect) teams from being over-penalized for a nonconference loss. Again using Indiana as an example, say the Hoosiers struggle early in a season, lose at Virgina — in recent years a mid-table ACC team most of the time — but pull their season together and go 7-2 in conference play. The Big Ten would argue automatic qualifiers protect IU in that scenario, providing incentive (Petitti's word) for the Hoosiers to seek out such games. Critics of the Big Ten's proposal argue, rightly, that automatic qualifiers further unbalance an already unfair playing field, handing the Big Ten and SEC unearned power. Because make no mistake, CFP access is power in modern college athletics. No one's approach is inherently wrong. Just in disagreement. The legitimacy of the argument falls down when the SEC holds Indiana — in this example — to a standard its own teams do not have to meet. Popular talk-show host Paul Finebaum reignited this debate Wednesday, using Alabama for comparison. The Crimson Tide, Finebaum pointed out, play Florida State and Wisconsin, while Indiana schedules a soft nonconference. Setting aside FSU, which finished last season 2-10 and at the foot of the ACC, when Finebaum used Wisconsin to make his point, he gave up the game. Because Indiana plays Wisconsin too. Also at home, like Alabama. The only major difference on paper? It's a conference game, because the Big Ten plays one more. There are other examples. Auburn's only power-conference opponent is Baylor, Georgia's is Georgia Tech. Ole Miss' most difficult nonconference game will be Washington State or Tulane, depending upon your pleasure. The SEC plays eight conference games plus, on average, about one Power Four nonconference game, while the Big Ten plays nine conference games and is increasingly selective out of conference. Suggesting the Big Ten should add the further challenge of a more difficult nonconference across the board — that its teams should play 10 Power Four opponents per year just to measure up to the SEC's nine — essentially says the Big Ten has to work harder to prove itself, which is little more than SEC hubris. As a son of the South, trust me, we have that in barrelfuls. None of this is specific to Indiana, but it is Indiana's problem now. Because if, as Curt Cignetti declared last fall, the Hoosiers are the emerging superpower of college football (or anything resembling it), they need to act like a serious contender every minute of every day. Reasonable people can acknowledge that, yes, these nonconference schedules are intentionally easy. That doesn't mean Indiana should apologize for itself. And that shouldn't stop the Hoosiers beating their chest so long as there's reason to. It's increasingly clear no one else is going to step in and do it for them. Perception is almost entirely political in college football. The idea that we'd even entertain a 9-3 Alabama over an 11-1 Indiana for an at-large playoff berth would have been completely anathema 10 years ago, much less 20 or more. If you want to argue wins alone shouldn't be the currency of college football, that's fine. But they have been for generations, and they are right now. But maybe not forever. On Wednesday, the College Football Playoff selection committee announced it would add 'record strength' — a metric meant to reward teams based on how they perform against their schedule — to its list of consideration criteria. It also suggested schedule strength would be weighted toward playing better opponents moving forward. The addition of record strength was framed immediately and ubiquitously as a reaction to the SEC's manufactured outrage over the exclusion of one of its clutch of nine-win teams on last season's bubble. A headline on the website Awful Announcing went so far as to tie the move to IU, saying the metric was added 'following Indiana, SMU complaints.' Most or all of it ignored the fact that ESPN — the network that carries the CFP and trumpets its own internal formulas in the process — was tracking strength of record last year. Two Big Ten teams led the way on SOR, Ohio State and Oregon at Nos. 1 and 2 respectively. Alabama, the team whose snub supposedly prompted this, finished 17th nationally in strength of record. Indiana landed No. 8, one-spot ahead of 10-win Tennessee and four spots north of the nearest nine-win SEC team. You wouldn't have known it by the framing of Wednesday's news. That's Indiana's problem, and it only gets solved one way. Politics is perception, and until IU starts playing the former, it is going to keep fighting the latter. For their own sake, the Hoosiers should start punching back.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Target Corp (TGT) Q2 2025 Earnings Call Highlights: Navigating Challenges with Strategic Growth ...
This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Comparable Sales: Down 1.9% in Q2, a nearly 2-percentage-point improvement from Q1. Digital Sales Growth: Comparable sales grew 4.3%, with same-day delivery powered by Target Circle 360 growing more than 25%. Fun 101 Category Growth: More than 5% growth in Q2, the strongest quarterly comp since 2021. Trading Card Sales: Up nearly 70% year-to-date, on track to deliver more than $1 billion in sales this year. Net Sales: Down 0.9% from a year ago. Gross Margin Rate: 1-percentage-point lower than a year ago, primarily due to inventory adjustment costs and tariff-related pressures. SG&A Expenses: 0.1% lower than a year ago, driven by strong expense control. EPS: GAAP and adjusted EPS of $2.05 in Q2, compared with $2.57 a year ago. Capital Expenditures: Approximately $1.9 billion invested so far this year, with full-year CapEx expected to be in the $4 billion range. Dividend: Over $500 million returned to shareholders in Q2, with a 2% increase in the upcoming Q3 per share dividend. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 5 Warning Signs with TGT. Is TGT fairly valued? Test your thesis with our free DCF calculator. Release Date: August 20, 2025 For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript. Positive Points Target Corp (NYSE:TGT) announced a CEO succession plan with Michael Fiddelke set to take over, indicating a strategic focus on leadership continuity and growth. The company saw a nearly 2-percentage-point improvement in comparable sales from Q1 to Q2, driven by stronger store traffic trends. Digital sales grew by 4.3% in Q2, with same-day delivery services powered by Target Circle 360 growing more than 25%. Target Corp (NYSE:TGT) reported strong performance in specific categories like trading cards, which saw a 70% increase in sales year-to-date. The company is focusing on leveraging technology, including deploying over 10,000 new AI licenses, to improve speed, guest experience, and efficiency. Negative Points Target Corp (NYSE:TGT) reported a 1.9% decline in comparable sales for Q2, indicating ongoing challenges in meeting growth expectations. The gross margin rate declined by 1 percentage point year-over-year, primarily due to inventory adjustment costs and tariff-related pressures. The company is facing a volatile and uncertain tariff environment, which has impacted financial and operational performance. Despite improvements, Target Corp (NYSE:TGT) is not satisfied with its current performance and acknowledges the need for better execution and growth. The partnership with Ulta Beauty will not be renewed after August 2026, indicating potential challenges in the beauty segment. Q & A Highlights Q: What price increases were taken during the second quarter due to tariffs, and what are the expectations for the second half? A: Rick Gomez, Chief Commercial Officer, explained that Target has been working hard to mitigate the impact of tariffs through strategies like diversifying production countries and evolving assortments. Price increases are a last resort, and the focus remains on offering everyday good value. Value is top of mind for consumers, and Target will continue to offer great value through deals, promotions, and leveraging owned brands. Q: How does the CEO succession plan bring about change to improve the business trajectory, and does it involve cultural changes? A: Michael Fiddelke, Chief Operating Officer, emphasized the importance of drawing on his 20 years of experience at Target to focus on style and design as a path to growth. He plans to operate with urgency and candor, making necessary changes to transform categories like Hardlines and Home, and ensuring merchandising authority across all categories. Q: What are the key operational and strategic levers to achieve the $15 billion sales growth target over the next five years? A: Michael Fiddelke highlighted that growth is the primary goal, focusing on three priorities: recapturing merchandising authority, elevating the guest experience, and leveraging technology. The aim is to build on the momentum seen in Q2 and continue to drive growth through style and design leadership. Q: What specific merchandising or pricing strategies are being implemented to drive frequency and basket size, given the current environment? A: Rick Gomez noted that the focus is on delivering newness that is on-trend and stylish at an affordable price point. Categories like Hardlines, Apparel, and Food & Beverage have shown growth through innovation and new product offerings, and this strategy will continue in the back half of the year. Q: How does Target plan to stimulate change in merchandising given the existing team? A: Rick Gomez explained that style and design are core to Target's DNA. The focus is on building momentum by leaning into bright spots and making changes across assortments and in-store experiences to facilitate discovery and inspiration, particularly in categories like Home. For the complete transcript of the earnings call, please refer to the full earnings call transcript.


Forbes
3 hours ago
- Forbes
Private Equity In Your 401(k)? What Trump's Order Opens—And Doesn't
Earlier this month, President Donald Trump signed an executive order titled 'Democratizing Access to Alternative Assets for 401(k) Investors,' directing the Department of Labor (DOL) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to explore ways to include private market investments and crypto in retirement plans. The order argues that American workers should have access to the same alternative investment opportunities long available to institutions and the wealthy. What what does this all mean for holding private equity in your 401(k)? What Trump's Executive Order Sets in Motion With its bold framing, the order has already prompted some regulatory policy shifts. The SEC was asked to revisit accredited investor and qualified purchaser rules that currently limit retail participation. And indeed, earlier this week, the SEC issued guidance in ADI 2025-16 ending the 15% private investment limit in registered closed-end funds and related practices in place since 2002. The DOL, meanwhile, must reconsider past guidance on fiduciary duties under ERISA, including whether to establish safe harbors for fiduciaries who add private assets to 401(k) menus. The private equity (PE) industry has been preparing for this opening. With more than $12 trillion in defined-contribution retirement accounts, the 401(k) market is an enormous opportunity. And Trump's executive order comes at a moment when private capital firms face a liquidity crunch: since 2018, capital calls have outpaced distributions by $1.5 trillion, according to Morgan Stanley. That imbalance is pushing managers to look toward retail dollars. Measuring Private Equity's Appeal and Trade-Offs Still, access is not the same as advantage. Ludovic Phalippou, professor at Oxford's Said Business School, warns that private equity's favored performance metric—the internal rate of return (IRR)—is a 'mathematical artifact' that flatters results. If IRR claims were taken literally, he notes, modest 1970s funds would today be worth trillions—numbers that defy reality. Even when presented cleanly, PE performance may be more incremental than transformational. Of course, the time period of observation is key. Hamilton Lane, a leading private markets investor, calculates that $1 invested in private equity over the past decade would now be worth $3.96. That solid return edges out the S&P 500 ($3.51). Yet the gains come with trade-offs—illiquidity, opaque valuations, and higher fees—that can matter more to individuals than to large institutions. Diversification claims also deserve a second look. Private equity is still equity. While PE managers stress operational improvements and active ownership, today's higher interest rates and thinner IPO pipelines expose the limits of the model. The easy returns of the 2010s may not repeat. Another hurdle lies in fiduciary duty. ERISA requires plan sponsors to act solely in the interests of participants, leaving them vulnerable to lawsuits if high-fee, illiquid assets are added without clear justification. This litigation risk has kept most fiduciaries away from alternatives. As the Financial Times reported, firms like Apollo and BlackRock lobbied aggressively for the order, but ultimately the DOL—and the courts—will decide whether these products can withstand scrutiny. How the Industry is Adapting to Retail Access So the question lingers: will PE firms offer some of their best opportunities to retail investors—or their leftovers? Some skepticism is warranted, but there are already signs of good faith. Take KKR. The firm recently renegotiated terms with some institutional investors, increasing the carve-out share from the traditional 7.5% to as much as 20%. The change helps KKR deploy the increasing amounts of cash they are raising from individuals in perpetual vehicles. While controversial, the shift shows a willingness to integrate retail investors on a more equity footing. Even with such examples, executive action alone won't deliver democratization. Regulators must craft rules that are protective yet practical--safe harbors for fiduciaries, updated investor eligibility standards, and far greater transparency on fees and liquidity. Access is Not Alignment Private equity now faces a crossroads. It can broaden access responsibly, building trust with retail investors, or reinforce perceptions that it serves others first. For 401(k) plan sponsors and participants, the prudent course is cautious engagement—welcoming innovation in expansion of access to private markets while maintaining investor protections through disclosure and oversight. Access, after all, is not alignment. Done thoughtfully, private equity investment in 401(k)s provides broader investment solutions for retirement savers. Done poorly, it risks harming individuals and eroding confidence in the retirement system itself.