Tiffany, LVMH take shots at each other

Press enter to search
Close search
Open Menu

Tiffany, LVMH take shots at each other

By Marianne Wilson - 09/17/2020

The battle between Tiffany & Co. and French global luxury giant LVMH continues to heat up.

LVMH responded to Tiffany’s quest to expedite court proceedings over LVMH’s $16.2 billion deal to buy the American retailer, saying “there is no objective reason why the upcoming trial should not take place within a normal time frame.” LVMH also accused Tiffany of “meritless allegations and aggressive misdirection campaign tactics.”

“Given the legal and financial issues at stake — in the context of a pandemic that obviously weighs on the ability of a European group to organize its defense in the U.S. — it seems to LVMH that sound justice requires a reasonable time be granted to rule on the matter,” LVMH said in a statement.

The statement came after Tiffany accused LMVH of opposing its efforts to hold an expedited trial, preferring the court to hold off for six or seven months, reported WWD.

Tiffany sued LVMH in a Delaware court last week after LVMH stated that it likely would not be able to complete its planned $16.2 billion acquisition of the company.

On Wednesday, Sept. 16, Tiffany fired off a salvo in which chairman and retail veteran Roger Farah accused the French group of “grasping at any opportunity to delay and avoid its obligations.”

“LVMH’s opposition to our motion to expedite is the latest attempt to run out the clock to avoid fulfilling its obligations under the merger agreement,” he stated. 

Farah also said that LVMH is trying to avoid paying the agreed-upon price for the company.

“Tiffany was not for sale, and agreed to be acquired only after LVMH increased its unsolicited bid five times to the ultimate $135 per share and agreed to an ironclad contract,” he stated. “For many months, LVMH has been grasping at any opportunity to delay and avoid its obligations. This includes excuses for failing to make standard antitrust filings, complaints about the pandemic, and protests that LVMH previously agreed could not be considered as a valid reason to question the transaction.”

Related Topics