This account is pending registration confirmation. Please click on the link within the confirmation email previously sent you to complete registration. Need a new registration confirmation email? Click here
In the wake of company founder Richard Schulze's failed effort to take Best Buy private, which ended
without a bid in late February, many stock analysts are taking the company's declining losses and a commitment to a new pricing strategy as reason to believe the company can survive competition from online retailer
Amazon(AMZN - Get Report) and pressure from the likes of
Wal-Mart(WMT - Get Report) and
Costco(COST - Get Report).
That's not necessarily the case at Standard & Poor's and Fitch Ratings, however.
The credit ratings agencies seem to have moved on from downgrades of Best Buy's bonds to "junk" status in early August when Schulze unveiled a
thin proposal to take the company private for up to $8.8 billion, with little explanation.
As it turns out, S&P now says in a few sentences Best Buy's junk rating has nothing to do with Schulze's buyout plan, meaning the lack of a formal offer is immaterial to the company's current rating.
But the agency's August cut explicitly focused on Best Buy's debt-fueled takeover
proposal as cause for the company's move from investment grade to junk.
"The rating action is a result of founder and largest shareholder, Richard Schulze's proposal to acquire the company for a purchase price in the range of $24.00 to $26.00 per share," wrote S&P in its
Aug. 6 downgrade of Best Buy from investment grade.
Fitch also referenced Schulze's proposal as a part of
its Aug. 6 downgrade of Best Buy to a sub investment grade rating. The ratings agency's analysts cited "the possibility of a leveraging transaction" following Schulze's proposal.
Still, Fitch noted the takeover deal was a secondary factor to its "assessment that Best Buy's business profile, including its weakening [comparable] store sales, recent margin pressure that Fitch believes will continue, and heightened event risk, is no longer consistent with an investment grade rating."
Both agencies also wrote that if a takeover were to occur, it would trigger further downgrades.
However, when the agencies moved lockstep once more on Nov. 21 in cutting Best Buy further into junk territory, they scarcely made reference to Schulze's outstanding takeover proposal, despite ongoing reports that he was arranging a deal with large private equity firms.
Instead, S&P and Fitch focused almost exclusively on
disastrous third quarter earnings report and weak holiday season guidance.
Since the Nov. 21 cuts, which put Best Buy ratings at BB and BB- at S&P and Fitch, respectively, neither agency sees reason to reassess the company's financial picture.
Best Buy's ratings remain on 'negative' watch at both agencies, indicating that a lot has to be done for the company to pull itself from junk territory.
But a lot has changed for the Minnesota based big box-electronics retailer.
Most notably, a formal takeover offer from Schulze never materialized.
Meanwhile the company beat fourth quarter earnings expectations and its own guidance on declining losses. Further, tight management of working capital led to an improving cash flow profile.
The genesis of Best Buy's junk rating raises the question of whether S&P and Fitch used Schulze's takeover proposal as cause to rejigger their opinions of the company's finances.
Such a scenario might have been unfair to Best Buy given that no formal offer takeover was ever proposed and
Schulze never made a bid.
Consider how S&P and Fitch responded to a comparably risky
takeover offer that Carl Icahn proposed for household products giant
Clorox(CLX) in July of 2011. While Icahn came to the table with a formal offer and a near $8 billion financing commitment from investment bank
Jefferies(JEF), neither agency saw reason to cut Clorox's bond ratings. Instead, they simply put the company on review for a downgrade.
In a March 4 ratings bulletin, S&P indicated that its November downgrade of Best Buy superseded the August ratings cut to junk, meaning that its most recent rating did not reflect any of the debt or financial strains from a prospective buyout offer from Schulze.
The lack of a takeover offer "does not affect the 'BB' corporate credit rating and negative outlook on the company," said S&P, in what appears to be a major, if little explained, change in opinion.
A January ratings report by Fitch highlights sales and gross margin declines as risks for a further downgrade, while noting a bottoming could lead to a stabilization of Best Buy's ratings. The company's proposed takeover wasn't referenced as a factor for ratings actions.
Moody's, on the other hand, may be the most consistent of the big three agencies in its rating of Best Buy's debt during a tumultuous six months of takeover reports and seesaw earnings.
After Schulze's proposal was first announced, Moody's maintained a low-investment grade rating for Best Buy -- Baa2 -- while characterizing what turned out to be a
phantom takeover as a developing situation given a lack of firm financial commitments.
"The stable rating outlook reflects Moody's expectation that Best Buy will continue to profitably defend its market share, and as a result credit metrics will not change materially despite the still-difficult consumer environment," Moody's analysts wrote.