Page 21
Globally Diversified Investment Institution Specializing In Alternative Investment Strategies
Summary: The Case For Change
n The Company has no CEO: the most critical decision now facing the Company is picking the right leader
– Current Board has made a series of costly mistakes (many of which they recognized only later and reversed), including mistakes in hiring
– Company needs a Board with extensive specialty retail expertise and professional networks to pick the right leader next
– A talented CEO will likely only work for an experienced Board that can mentor and provide substantive input to strategy
– Current Board summarily fired the last CEO just ten months after she arrived in California; who will take that risk?
n Overseeing the business with insight and constructive input is required to ensure a successful turnaround in performance
– Current Board has demonstrated it lacks the specialty retail experience to identify problems early and improve operations
– Examples include: repeated and continuing failures in merchandising, eCommerce, social media, loyalty programs, store operations
– For 60 months, the business has been comp’ing negative too frequently; lack of effective change and response is obvious
– A Board of specialty retail experts could solve this problem for stockholders
n Ensuring the Company selects the right strategy and is nimble against fierce competition requires incisive leadership, which has been lacking
– The Company has lost market share to H&M and Forever 21, despite its first-mover advantage
– The right strategy has remained elusive for this Board: just 18 months ago it picked one direction and has now reversed course
– No demonstration by this Board that it has a good compass for strategy; no reason to have confidence in current direction
n This Board has allowed an over-equitized balance sheet to persist for too long
– Cash is a big drag on ROIC and stockholder value, yet the Board has largely avoided the issue
n The Board has failed to take decisive action with respect to Arden B, which has cost stockholders more than $40 million in the last six years
– The failure to deal with this money-losing division demonstrates indecisiveness of the Board in the face of value destruction
n Inexplicable track record of reversing prior decisions, an admission of poor decision making and bad process
– Nearly every major decision made in last 18 months has subsequently been reversed: hiring the last CEO, changing the strategy, nominating
only incumbents, adopting a pill, raising Board pay, and setting up a special committee
n Latest, belated, attempt to correct prior poor judgment is not sufficient to undo years of missteps or generate confidence in the Board’s judgment