Recently, Walgreens Boots Alliance struck a deal with private-equity group Sycamore Partners that will “bring the struggling pharmacy chain’s century-long run as a public company to an end”, says the Financial Times. Sycamore agreed to pay $11.45 a share, a premium of almost 30% to the price before news of a possible deal emerged in December. Sycamore is valuing the business, including its debt, at $23.7 billion. Billionaire Stefano Pessina, Walgreens’ executive chairman and largest shareholder, will maintain a “sizeable minority shareholding” in the business.
Despite retaining a stake, the deal is a blow for Pessina. He “spent half a century building a pharmacy behemoth that stretches almost three times further than the Roman empire ever did”, says Benjamin Katz in The Wall Street Journal. After turning around and expanding his father’s “fledgling and failing pharmaceutical wholesaler”, he merged it with UniChem in 1997 and bought Boots in 2006. That combination was in turn acquired by Walgreens in 2014, creating a conglomerate with a peak market value in excess of $100 billion. However, it struggled with Amazon “quickly eating into drugstores’ non-medical revenues”. This forced it to cancel its dividend and slash the store’s portfolio.
What does the Walgreens sale mean for Boots?
Walgreens proved unable to deal with the challenges posed by both Amazon and “big-box retailers, such as Walmart and Target”, says Chris Isidore on CNN; “lower reimbursement rates for prescription drugs” in the United States hardly helped matters. However, despite claims that Sycamore’s “strong... record of successful retail turnarounds” will help turn Walgreens around, “retail’s graveyard is full of the bones of many once-dominant retailers who closed up shop after being bought by private-equity firms”. At the very least, “the fundamental problems leading to the private-equity purchase” won’t go away after this deal.
Subscribe to MoneyWeek
Subscribe to MoneyWeek today and get your first six magazine issues absolutely FREE
Sign up to Money Morning
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
The fact that Sycamore is using up to $12 billion of leverage to push through the deal will make it even harder for Walgreen’s “miserable decade” to be reversed, says Robert Cyran for Breakingviews. The added debt (assuming a 10% interest rate) will more than double Walgreen’s interest payments, eating into the $1.8 billion in operating profit it is currently making – sharply down from $7 billion in 2018. Far from buying the company to turn it around, Sycamore seems to be aiming at “dismantling it further by splitting out units [such as] Boots”.
The sale “could lay the groundwork for Boots to be relisted or sold out from under its parent”, says Laith Al-Khalaf in The Sunday Times. It makes “little commercial sense” for a US retailer to “retain a UK-centric pharmacy”, especially since there is a feeling that the parent company “has chronically underinvested in Boots”. Still, with 8.1% like-for-like sales growth in the latest quarter, and 15 quarters of rising market share, Boots “is very important for Walgreens”. Sycamore may decide that the best bet is for Boots to remain part of the overall group.
This article was first published in MoneyWeek's magazine. Enjoy exclusive early access to news, opinion and analysis from our team of financial experts with a MoneyWeek subscription.
-
Five steps to maximise your mid-life financial primeEarnings often peak in your mid-30s and 40s – and you can make your money go further by putting it to work.
-
How to get travel insurance for over 70sGetting affordable travel insurance becomes harder as you get older. We explain how to get travel insurance in your 70s
-
Earnings estimates are a rigged game – especially in the USThe number of US stocks beating earnings estimates tells us only that guidance has deliberately been set too low
-
Why is Britain's industrial base crumbling?Opinion More and more factories in the UK are closing, and the government doesn’t seem to care. What’s going on?
-
Scotland's former first minister Nicola Sturgeon leaves behind a toxic legacyOn the left, Nicola Sturgeon is seen as something of a political hero. That makes sense… but only if you exclude her actual record in office
-
It’s time to start backing Britain – the best investments to buy nowThe UK stock market has been languishing for decades. But the tide is turning and smart investors should buy in now
-
Car finance mis-selling judgment could be a big blow for the banksOpinion The car finance mis-selling judgment could still be disastrous for big finance even though banks dodged the worst possible outcome
-
'Rachel Reeves has run out of options'Opinion The political and fiscal constraints on Rachel Reeves have combined to leave the chancellor at a disadvantaged position
-
Philip Coggan: 'Donald Trump means business on tariffs'Interview What could Trump's tariffs mean for the US and global economies? Philip Coggan, former columnist at the Financial Times and The Economist, explains
-
UK equities: where to find a great British bargainUK equities are staging a comeback, but there’s still plenty of value out there, says Rupert Hargreaves
