It’s Nice To Own Stocks
If you were wondering, the final read on University of Michigan sentiment for July (released on Friday) was virtually unchanged from the preliminary print.
Recall that the headline reading on the country's marquee gauge of consumer moods was predisposed lately to large revisions. Not this month.
At 66.4, the headline indicates American consumers remain generally dissatisfied, although you wouldn't know it from still-robust spending.
Part of that ostensible disconnect (i.e., between above-cons
Thanks for the pro tip, hopefully someday I can use it
I use it. I don’t buy LVMH houses except on special occasions when I find an excuse to treat myself. The comparison’s an interesting case study in how pricing power in luxury goods depends very much on perceptions and how that can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. So, for example, you can get 30% to 50% off Kering brands (even Bottega) pretty much all year around, and in my experience, the availability of the items at discounts reduces demand for them among higher-end clients because nobody wants to wear something that someone else got for half off. That’s a doom loop: When you can’t sell it at full price, you have to discount it, but the discounts mean even less demand at full price, both because of the perception among high-end clients that people with less money might own it too and because people will simply wait, knowing the new season will go on sale eventually. So, if you look at Gucci, Balenciaga, Bottega, McQueen and even Saint Laurent, you can find it all on sale somewhere. Those are Kering houses. Celine, Louis, Dior and Loewe are very difficult to find at discounts, or at least new, from authorized stockists. I don’t even know if there are authorized stockists for Dior. If you go back and read a year’s worth of Bloomberg articles on Kering vs LVMH, you can see how this has impacted the trajectory of the companies. It really is pretty interesting.
Definitely not me Googling LVMH houses and Kering houses right now
Saint Mxxxxxx and Enfants Richés Deprimes if you really want to get edgy with it. I’ve been on that lately.
Capitalism’s end game is competition until only one is left standing. As a society, we don’t debate if capitalism needs some checks on it, before it goes to it’s natural conclusion, we debate whether we should set those safety rails at one-percent, 10-percent, etc..
Most of the individuals with a voice, of significance, in that debate are from near the top of the asset/income spectrum, so we tend to disenfranchise a lot of Americans in the debate.
Don’t think I own anything from Kering, never mind LVMH etc…..not sure I even know what one might get for spending stupid amounts of money on consumer such baubles and beads. And I already knew I was nowhere near 1%….but my partner and I are fortunate enough to still own some stocks and bonds and real estate and more stuff than we need, including more toys than we have time to use to the extent we’d like. Maybe that puts us only within the 10%….but plenty happy. And, in early and late 60s both healthy enough to pedal and sail and slide on those toys. THAT makes us really happy consumers!
TGIF- so a couple of thoughts: I am definitely not in the top 1%, but I do own stocks and this week wasn’t fun, as I ended down for the week. Having said that, I just returned from the grocery store with one bag of groceries (no alcohol) that cost me $92- so I realize I am very fortunate.
My second thought, which I know you won’t like, H; but keep in mind- I am just having some fun making this next comment: I have absolutely no problem at all giving some of my stock to people in the lower 50%- however, I would like to decide when I give that to my children (all in the lower 50%).
Finally, I remembered reading this article that is a fun read on serious wealth, luxury brands and succession plans, which I am posting in case you want something fun to read this weekend!
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/14/business/bernard-arnault-lvmh-family-succession.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c-cb