Latest news with #BGH
News.com.au
16-05-2025
- Business
- News.com.au
Criterion: As the travel sector loses altitude, acquirers fly in for the kill
Recent sector downgrades highlight consumer concerns about tariffs and cost of living pressures Webjet Group's depressed valuation has attracted a private equity bidder with a lowball offer Despite the pressures, the key travel stocks are better placed financially than in previous downturns Like a rapidly fading post-holiday suntan, the post-pandemic travel boom has been abruptly curtailed. Tariff and cost-of-living concerns have crimped travel budgets, while there's evidence that haphazard US customs policies are deterring visitors there. As sure as night follows day – although not necessarily on an overseas flight – acquirers are sniffing out unloved stocks. This week, private equity group BGH lobbed a non-binding for flight booking portal Webjet Group (ASX:WJL) which demerged from its business-to-business hotel arm Web Travel Group (ASX:WEB) last October. BGH's offer came after the group built a 10.76% relevant stake in Webjet. On a nostalgic note, that was with the help of 1980s corporate raiders Ariadne Australia and Gary Weiss. Adding to the intrigue, Helloworld Travel (ASX:HLO) has accrued a surprise 5% Webjet Group stake. In the meantime, the out-of-sorts Kelsian Group (ASX:KLS) is in the process of selling its legacy Kangaroo Island ferry business and other tourism assets, in favour of focusing on commuter transport. Losing altitude The corporate manoeverings come amid earnings downgrades from the key operators. Early this month, Flight Centre cited 'short term results volatility brought about by uncertain (cyclical) trading conditions, including the recent changes to US trade and entry policies.' Things were going OK until March, when US 'policy changes' started to impact both corporate and leisure sales. Corporate Travel Management (ASX:CTD) then said full year revenue was likely to be 4% softer than forecast, with underlying earnings likely to be down $30 million relative to expectations at the half year results. The company cites 'broad economic and tariff uncertainty in North America and Asiahas led to reductions in client activity resulting in slower growth than expected during what is traditionally the busiest period of the year.' Helloworld last week trimmed its full year guidance to underlying earnings of $52-56 million, down from the previously indicated $56-62 million. Helloworld's outbound US bookings are only marginally down, while there's strong demand for premium seats across the board. Not everyone is sharing the cost-of-living pain, evidently. Tapering airfares tell the story According to UBS, as of March domestic airfares had fallen an average 9%, reversing the momentum of 2024. International fares fell an average 4%, or 11% in the case of Virgin. At face value, cheaper airfares are positive for demand, but not if folk are unwilling to travel because of geopolitical and economies uncertainties. The trends suggest that travellers are eschewing long-haul trips, in favour of destinations such as Bali, Fiji, Hawaii and Japan. This is consistent with cost-of-living pressures as well as reports of chronic overtourism in favourite European spots. Merger mania If last year's Webjet bifurcation was aimed at making the businesses easier to take over, it has succeeded in its objective. While BGH's 80-cents-per-share tilt was at a 40% premium to Webjet's 'undisturbed' share price, the stock has traded above that level. RBC Capital markets notes Webjet has $100 million of net cash worth 26.7 cents a share – one-third of BGH's offer price of 80 cents per share. The firm opines that even without a takeover premium, Webjet shares are worth $1.05 to $1.30 a share. With a suitable control premium, the board would start talking turkey at $1.26 to $1.50 a share. Not even close! Don't panic, we're not going down The downturn doesn't mean that that travel stocks should be avoided. On the contrary, they tend to overreact to both good and bad conditions. Insofar as Australians are more likely to take a domestic break, the conditions are amenable to local plays such as Experience Co (ASX:EXP), which runs skydiving venues and tree walks. Experience Co this week reported soggy trading because of soggy weather, but notes an 'opportunity to capitalise on sentiment generated by recent US tariff changes'. Helloworld benefits from the enduring strength of cruising, with bookings expected to be 40% higher this year. Like a tired hotel room, there's room for a lick of paint. As part of a much-needed 'brand refresh', Webjet Group plans to double its ticket turnover to $3.2 billion by 2030, including a push into hotel and package offerings. The players are more resilient financially than during the 2007 GFC, or pandemic. In the early days of the plague, Flight Centre executed a $700 million emergency capital raising. Now the company is buying back $200 million of its own shares. There's no need to assume the brace position - but expect some more turbulence and keep the seat belt buckled just in case.
Yahoo
18-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Germany's top court to rule on Apple's market dominance
Germany's Federal Court of Justice (BGH) is set to rule on whether Apple holds outstanding significance across markets on Tuesday, a classification that could subject the company to stricter competition control. The US company is contesting a decision by Germany's Federal Cartel Office that it had an "noteworthy, cross-market significance for competition" in 2023. If the Karlsruhe-based court upholds the competition regulator's assessment, Apple would face stricter monitoring for market abuse. The BGH is ruling on Apple's appeal as the first and only instance in the case. Since a change in the law in 2021, the German regulator has been able to take action more easily against large digital companies. The process consists of two steps. First, the authority determines whether a company holds significant influence across markets, regardless of a specific violation. If that is confirmed, it can then prohibit practices it considers harmful to competition. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
21-02-2025
- General
- Yahoo
What is a hedge? Neighbourly dispute occupies German high court
A dispute between two German neighbours over the height of a bamboo hedge occupied the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) on Friday. Two neighbouring property owners in the western German state of Hesse have been locked in a dispute about the hedge. First planted in 2018, the bamboo has since reached a height of 6 metres. The plaintiff in the case is demanding that his neighbour trim her hedge below 3 metres in height, even though it currently complies with all rules laid out in local law, which require that hedges over 2 metres in height must be set back at least 0.75 metres from neighbouring property. At the heart of the case is the existential question: What is a hedge? That's because stricter distance rules apply to trees and shrubs, raising a fundamental question about the nature of the garden bamboo. The plaintiff argued that a hedge is characterized by the fact that it is maintained and regularly trimmed - so if it exceeded a certain height, it could therefore no longer be considered a hedge. The defendant's side, on the other hand, did not consider the height of the hedge to be the determining factor, but emphasized the many advantages the bamboo hedge offers. It was a "living element of horticulture" and also offered ecological value, the woman's lawyers contended. Whether the hedge is a source of pleasure or a nuisance is "a matter of perspective," Peter Wassermann, the plaintiff's lawyer, retorted after the hearing. For his client, the hedge was an inconvenience, he said, adding that the plaintiff's view is blocked by a bamboo wall when looking out the window. "When it rains or snows, the precipitation weighs additionally on the leaves, causing the bamboo plants to bend over onto his property," Wassermann said, adding that the bamboo made the man feel "stifled." If the woman must cut back her hedge, the judges are also being asked to decide the proper height, since the man's property is lower than his neighbour's. He wants the height of the hedge to be measured from the lower elevation on his side of the property line. A decision from the BGH is expected on March 28.
New York Times
20-02-2025
- Business
- New York Times
Are Birkenstocks a Work of Art? A German Court Says No.
Depending on whom you ask, Birkenstock's wide-set, corky sandals might be frumpy, or chic, or gauche or the ultimate comfort shoe. What they cannot be called though, at least according to the German high court, is a work of art. On Thursday, the federal court of justice in Karlsruhe, Germany, ruled that Birkenstocks were not 'copyrighted works of applied art,' making it harder for the 251-year-old German shoemaker to combat the widespread sale of duplicates of its sandals across the internet. 'For copyright protection to apply, there must be such a degree of design that the product displays some individuality,' the court wrote in its decision. Birkenstock's sandals may be iconic enough for a 'Barbie' movie cameo, but they do not display enough individuality for the German judiciary. The case has been winding its way through the court system for years, as Birkenstock sought to copyright four of its orthopedic-rooted slip-ons: the Madrid, Arizona, Boston and Gizeh, which have inspired cheaper imitations. 'The decisions by the BGH constitute a missed opportunity for copyright protection in Germany,' Jochen Gutzy, Birkenstock's chief communications officer, wrote in a statement, using the German acronym for the court. In spite of the ruling, he continued, the company would 'continue to take tough action against copycats who think they can make money from other people's creative ideas and inventions.' In legal filings, Birkenstock singled out the German retailers Tchibo and as well as the Danish company Bestseller, as purveyors of Birkenstock look-alikes. Yet the network of copycat clogs is vast. On Amazon, shoppers can find convincing dupes of the brand's two-strap Arizona model and potato-shaped closed-toe Boston clogs. These shoes — clones to the naked eye — sell for as low as $22, far less than $135, the cost of a pair of suede Arizona Birkenstocks. At the heart of the ruling, according to legal experts, was the initial spark that led to the formation of Birkenstock's easy-on-the-arches shoes. 'In this case, the court found that while Birkenstock's sandals are undeniably iconic, their design is largely driven by ergonomic and orthopedic needs, not creative expression,' said Jared Goldstein, a lawyer and expert in footwear legal entanglements who coauthored the book 'Sneaker Law.' To be sure, Birkenstock has never shied away from its podiatric roots. Its website recounts how when Birkenstock introduced the single-strapped 'Original Birkenstock-Footbed Sandal' (later renamed the Madrid and still in the brand's product line) in the 1960s, Karl Birkenstock 'made doctors his partners in spreading the word about the shoe.' Today, the company's public image has evolved past its orthopedic origins. Over the last decade in particular, its sandals and clogs, once associated with patchouli-drenched hippies, have been recast as fetching objects of desire. Fashion houses like Valentino, Jil Sander and Dior have paired with the German cobbler, resulting in high-price collaborative designs. Along the way, the brand has rocketed from a family-run enterprise to a publicly listed corporation. In 2021, L Catterton, a private equity group with ties to the French luxury magnate Bernard Arnault, became the majority owner of Birkenstock. Two years later, Birkenstock went public on the New York Stock Exchange, raising $1.48 billion in its initial public offering. Legal experts say the case will have implications not just for Birkenstock but for the German footwear market overall. Matthias Wurm, the head of corporate law at the German firm Schlun & Elseven, who was not involved in the case, said the ruling 'opened the floodgate for imitators,' who now have legal cover to pump out their own cork-and-latex footbed shoes. 'The federal court's ruling has the tragic result that Birkenstock sandals can be imitated by copycats on German soil,' Dr. Wurm said. 'Birkenstock is likely to face a lot of competition in the future.'
Yahoo
20-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Birkenstock sandals not works of art, German court rules
Iconic German sandal manufacturer Birkenstock has lost a copyright battle against imitators, with Germany's Federal Court of Justice (BGH) ruling on Thursday that the Birkenstock design does not amount to a work of art. The decision means Birkenstock's sandal design does not qualify for the same copyright protections as artworks, a blow to the company's efforts to block similar sandals from three different competitors from the market. The court ruled that Birkenstock failed to demonstrate the required degree of artistic achievement and vision in the design of the shoes to qualify as legally protected works of art. A purely technical creation with formal design elements are not sufficient for copyright protection under German law, the court noted. The well-known Birkenstock sandals, made of leather with buckles and cork soles, are currently enjoying a trendy renaissance of global popularity. Thursday's decision upheld a ruling last year by the Cologne Higher Regional Court. Copyright gives the creator exclusive rights of use to his work, and those protections remain in force for 70 years after the death of the creator. Karl Birkenstock - the inventor of the Birkenstock sandal - is still alive. Unlike design rights, copyright protection does not require a formal entry in a register.
