Vista Outdoor Agrees to Buy Fox Racing for $540M

Jul 6, 2022
by Alicia Leggett  
photo

Vista Outdoor Inc. announced today that it will acquire clothing and lifestyle brand Fox Racing for $540 million, with the possibility of another $50 million earnout based on the brand's achievement of financial targets.

The deal is expected to close in the second quarter of 2023, and current Fox CEO Jeffrey McGuane is expected to lead the company through the acquisition alongside the rest of the existing leadership within the California-based brand, which specializes in clothing and protective gear for mountain biking and motorsports.

Fox Racing says it grew net sales by a compound annual growth rate of roughly 20% from 2019 to 2021, and it expects to exceed that growth in calendar year 2022. The company expects an annual net sales and adjusted EBITDA of about $350 million and $55 million, respectively, for the 2022 calendar year.

The purchase will be financed using a combination of Vista Outdoor's existing asset-based revolving credit facility and a new $350 million secured term loan.

Vista Outdoor currently owns 39 brands throughout the outdoor industry including Giro, Blackburn, QuietKat, and a number of shooting brands. Earlier this year, the company announced plans to split into two distinct companies to separate its shooting and non-shooting categories. In that announcement, Vista Outdoors said it would redistribute stock from its non-shooting so-called Outdoor Products brand to shareholders in 2023 as the company moves into its next phase.

In the release, the company did not mention the controversy that surrounded it in 2018, when the outdoor industry reckoned with its relationship to gun violence and several major retailers boycotted the company.

Still, like the rest of the outdoor industry, Vista Outdoor has grown substantially in the last few years and in the 2021 fiscal year reported a 37% sales growth.

bigquotesOver the last four years, we have built a diversified portfolio of iconic outdoor brands led by a proven leadership team that continues to execute well and drive strong results for our shareholders. With the acquisition of Fox Racing, we are continuing the successful implementation of our strategy to use accretive acquisitions to expand our leadership position and ability to capitalize on long-term growth opportunities in outdoor recreation. The Fox Racing acquisition meets all of our financial and strategic acquisition criteria, even before taking into account potential benefits from combining Fox Racing with our existing business. I am pleased that we have been able to continue to add category-leading brands like Fox Racing to our portfolio while maintaining a strong balance sheet and reinvesting in our existing business to drive organic growth."—Vista Outdoor CEO Chris Metz

bigquotesWe're excited to join the Vista Outdoor family. Together we can leverage the heritage of our leading brands, enjoy new supply chain synergies, expand our deep and established channels, and target an expanded customer base. Combined with enhanced access to capital for innovation and scale, we believe this transaction is a win-win for all involved. Vista Outdoor's leadership team has proven they have an effective, repeatable acquisition model, making Vista Outdoor the clear acquirer of choice for Fox Racing. It is not often that an acquired company can remain true to its culture and customer base, while also tapping into the benefits of Vista Outdoor's Centers of Excellence, vast retail partnerships, innovation engines, and a leadership team that enables a founder's mentality and results-driven culture. Needless to say, we are thrilled about this next chapter for Fox Racing.—Fox Racing CEO Jeffrey McGuane


Posted In:
Industry News Industry Insider Fox Clothing


Author Info:
alicialeggett avatar

Member since Jun 19, 2015
745 articles
Report
Must Read This Week
Thank You For Everything, Pinkbike
72696 views
How to Watch the 2024 Mountain Bike World Cup [Update: Staylive Offering Access in New Zealand, South Africa & More]
60251 views
First Ride: The 2024 Giant Trance X Advanced
50475 views
[UPDATED] Final Elite XC Results & Overall Standings from the Mairiporã XC World Cup 2024
41180 views
Staff Ride: Matt Beer's NZ MTB Rally-Spec Ibis HD6
38612 views
First Ride: 2024 Yeti SB165 - Now With Mixed Wheels
37072 views
Tree Root Pierces Harriet Harnden's Foot at Round 1 of the British National Downhill Series
36227 views
First Ride: The Sub-$600 RockShox Domain and Psylo Forks
35348 views
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup

190 Comments
  • 247 5
 Seems to be the way of the world these days. Throw out a garbage press release with flashy terms like SYNERGY, LEVERAGE, TRUE TO ITS CULTURE, and CAPITALIZE ON LONG TERM GROWTH OPPORTUNITIES. I see it as less options for the consumer and more consolidation in the bike industry. Pretty soon there will be one PE firm that owns every single bike company/brand and only then will PEAK SYNERGY be achieved.

Sorry, feeling grump today.
  • 68 0
 You're not wrong.

My catch phrase of the post was "asset-based revolving credit facility"

Someone other than the Assistant to the Regional Manager on here that can tell me what that means?
  • 47 1
 Feels like it's all just copied off this site: www.atrixnet.com/bs-generator.html
  • 15 0
 @blowmyfuse: Lines of credit secured against company assets
  • 13 0
 @DylanH93: oooh this is fun: "assertively plagiarize an expanded array of potentialities"
  • 57 0
 @blowmyfuse: basically it is a line of credit secured by either stock or other physical assets. This ensures a lower interest rate than a non secured line of credit which is important in this interest rate environment.

Fox is selling at the peak so good for them. It would be shocking not to see a major contraction in the cycling market over the next 24 months.

For those questioning the wording of these press releases, we are not the intended market. They do not care about the riders or users of anything they sell. They are talking to investors and banks. That's it, nothing more and nothing less, it is all about dollars, growth and profitability.

It is very interesting to see Vista pay such a large price for a company that is growing SLOWER than their current overall growth. Fox will act as a drag on their growth going forward so I assume they are expecting to see a major deceleration in their business over the next few years and an opportunity to grow Fox.
  • 63 3
 Who wouldn't want to buy a company that sells $4 trousers for $140?
  • 18 0
 "PEAK SINERGY" would be a great bike brand
  • 17 0
 @salespunk: username checks out
  • 7 0
 @salespunk: I’m curious that they think the total addressable market is. Fox got a huge Covid bump from the past two years. Where are they going to find new sales?
  • 6 0
 @salespunk: Imo this price is pretty cheap? less than 2x 2022 revenue and ~10x EBITDA, this deal would have been twice the price last year at least.

I agree with you re growth dragging them down but I would guess a) Fox's revenue isn't material enough to be a real drag and b) investors are valuing profitability over growth a lot more these days.
  • 1 0
 This comment really moves the needle for me.
  • 8 0
 @salespunk: I think Vistas main motive is to build up their sporting business as they spin off guns and ammo due to growing liability risk. Anyway, it’s fully debt financed so it’s nothing but equity accretive, unless peeps start worrying about balance sheet risk, an almost forgotten risk in the modern era of free money.
  • 10 0
 @blowmyfuse: Your car loan is an asset based loan. Think of your credit card as a revolving credit facility. Combine the two, and you use the assets you own free and clear as collateral for a line of credit (credit card). The amount of credit is dependent on the amount of assets you have and the value of those assets. Now go buy another business with that credit card.
  • 5 1
 @mattddrchs: only 20% average growth over the last few years in a very hot market. It does point to them building their non firearms business since that has become a third rail vertical viewed even worse than smoking and big oil.
  • 7 0
 @grumbly: hugely fragmented market so there is an opportunity there if someone can figure out a way to unlock it. As an example look at the surf brands like Quiksilver. The actual number participants in the sport are very small, but they market a lifestyle so the brands are bigger than the sport. Cycling is significantly larger on a participation basis, but the marketing has not caught on yet.
  • 9 0
 @blowmyfuse: You obliviously didn't read last quarter's TPS reports
  • 1 0
 @Dopepedaler: love the sarcasm
  • 8 0
 @salespunk: Considering Fox apparel used to be sold heavily in the malls all across America when Carmichael was at his peak popularity, it's possible they want the brand for just that...the logo.
Owning those rights allows them to pursue retail partners across the entire clothing industry.

Man...makes me cringe thinking about the first time I saw a pair of Airwalks in Target. It's always a sad day when a brand hits the mainstream. R.I.P. if they do.
  • 4 0
 @blowmyfuse: It means they can borrow more from the bank based on how much inventory and accounts receivable they have. Pretty common type of lending for companies that are scrapped for cash but want to grow. #nerd
  • 3 0
 @blowmyfuse: Gonna leverage the F$@& out of those assets
  • 4 1
 @blowmyfuse: worse when they sell at costco or REI/MEC
  • 3 0
 @fabwizard: they already sell Fox gear at REI
  • 1 1
 @wutamclan: too funny, beginning of the end. Look at North Face. And likely Arcteryx since they are sold at MEC.
  • 8 0
 @grumbly: I was at Universal Studios Hollywood this weekend. The first store as you enter their "City Walk" outdoor shopping mall was a Billabong store (which does $1.5b revenue - 5x Fox Racing). Quicksilver does similar numbers. The market for retail clothing for these old sport-specific brands is pretty much endless if you do it right.
  • 1 0
 @jaame: probably the one who can find a company that sells 3 dollar pants for 140
  • 4 0
 @mattddrchs: I don't think it's really cheap. 10x seems like fair value. I think 7x would be a good deal.
  • 1 0
 @salespunk: It's asset based so it might not be stock (equity based) which would be classified as convertible debt.
  • 2 1
 @fabwizard: Why is this bad? I don't understand... Other than being overpriced at those locations, why does this bother you? Not niche enough?
  • 2 1
 @blowmyfuse:
“Explain it to me like I’m a 5 year old”
  • 1 0
 @blowmyfuse: I think that ship has already sailed. Like you, I lost interest in wearing Fox gear when you could buy it at the mall and not exclusively at moto and bike shops. You guys remember going to the mall, right?
My sons have recently gotten some of the bike pants/trousers, and jerseys, and they are nicely fitted and good enough quality, but I still have that “Sellout Stigma” attached to wearing Fox gear.
  • 1 0
 edit: nevermind. vertical integration and downstream synergies.
  • 3 0
 So buy from companies like NF. Small. Local. Let the owners sell to big places if they want but then move on to the next small local company or business. WeAreOne for bikes/frames/wheels, there are lots of options if you are concerned about consolidation.
  • 2 0
 @blowmyfuse:
Am I the only person whi is blown away by the fact that clif bars was worth almost 4 or 5 times what fox is worrth?
  • 1 1
 @Lemmyschild: I could be wrong but I believe Fox has multiple divisions and this is there apparel division that was sold and not the suspension side of things.
  • 1 0
 @jamps-dwarps: Not just could be wrong, but are completely wrong.
  • 1 0
 @ACree: You are actually completely totally wrong Smile I just confirmed via the lovely google and there is a fox factory and there is a fox racing. Fox factory is a separate entity that does the suspension and owns the subsidiaries such as Marzocchi, Raceface, Easton. Any business sense would quickly understand that those brands alone exceed a $500M annual revenue.

Lick my loam off my tires please Smile
  • 1 0
 @salespunk: You ain’t wrong!
  • 1 0
 @jamps-dwarps: Yes, they are not separate divisions, they are completely different companies. The only relation is the similar name and that the founders were related.
  • 70 0
 Am I the only one that would have thought that FOX had WAY higher net sales than $350M/year, and that is across motocross and MTB. Makes you realize how small the pond is when, what I would say is arguably the most iconic action sports brand over the last 30 years, sells in a year what Under Armour does in about 3 weeks, and what Nike does in 3 days.
  • 6 58
flag COVID-19 (Jul 6, 2022 at 11:36) (Below Threshold)
 I thought the same thing, but I'm wondering if the racing division is somehow separate from the Fox Shocks side where MX and MTB have more of the engineering side?
  • 63 0
 @COVID-19:

They are completely different companies.
  • 7 1
 @COVID-19: yes, they're separate. FOX Racing is the apparel and protection business, FOX Factory is the shocks business. I believe they have some shared lineage, but they're now separate enterprises entirely and have been for some time IMU.
  • 6 23
flag blowmyfuse (Jul 6, 2022 at 11:43) (Below Threshold)
 @COVID-19: what @Tallboy97 said. Completely separate companies, not even started by the same folks. Irony is all they have in common.
  • 18 0
 @blowmyfuse: why did I think they had some shared history? I thought it was two brothers who each started their own company under a shared last name. Could be a made-up story I believed, who knows.
  • 52 0
 @blowmyfuse: "not even started by the same folks." - Not true. The people who started each (Fox Head - apparel) and Fox Tail - suspension components) were actually brothers. And their last name? Fox.
  • 12 0
 @jaytdubs: From what I've read when they parted ways Fox Racing took the fox's head as their logo while Fox Factory used the tail.
  • 3 0
 Pat Richter (trivia question!) should have negotiated for $.0001 of gross receipts on Fox branded clothing. The "Jeopardy" answer is "Who was the first person to wear Fox branded clothing?"
  • 3 0
 yeah i was surprised by the relatively low sales too, but it kind of make sense, where i live there is only one store that sells Fox Head products and is not even in a legal way and is mainly Dirtbike products, on the other hand both malls and both Outlets have Adidas, Nike and Under Armour proper Stores, packed during the weekends.
  • 3 0
 I feel like they were considerably bigger in the 2000s. Their apparel/lifestyle business used to be massive
  • 46 1
 Hopefully the gloves get better- they’ve gone to crap over the last few years and don’t last, the fingers always split at the seams for me. They used to last a lot longer.
  • 19 0
 Is there a brand right now that has gloves that last more than a month of use? TLD is completely kack, Endura is hit and miss, Dakine is more of a miss, ... Might have to look at the moto shops now..
  • 21 2
 @Ploutre: I've found that 100% gloves tend to last longer than most - however i still cycle a couple pairs that i wear regularly so I don't wear them out as fast
  • 7 0
 So true... My first pair of fox gloves from back around 06/07 lasted for multiple seasons of hard AZ desert riding (with many many falls). Then I relegated them to mechanic/work gloves and used them for another 6-7 years. I threw them out a couple years back because I finally shredded them completely moving cinder blocks for a weekend. I hate to be that guy but they don't make them like they used to!!
  • 11 0
 @Buffsfan3493: 100% on 100%, great quality and decent pricing, my go to brand now after trying Fox, TLD, and Spesh
  • 8 0
 The original staple glove from HandUp gloves is the only one that has any durability that I've owned over the last 5-6 years. Specifically the ones that have 'MERICA on the palms. They were about the only ones I've ridden that velcro didn't find a way to eat through if nearby.

handupgloves.com/collections/most-days-gloves-mountain-bike-gloves
  • 4 0
 My last RaceFace gloves lasted precisely 3 rides. So trash I couldn't even be bothered to waste my time on warranty or return.
I've been using 100% and Dainese, they seem to be doing okay.
  • 7 0
 I've been riding with Handup gloves for a season or two and they've held up really well, super comfortable too.
  • 5 0
 Fox Dirtpaws always last forever. The only time I replace them is when they get gross.
  • 3 0
 @Ploutre: I've been using a pair of Pearl Izumi gloves for well over three years now. Just saw the first evidence of a few stitches in a minor seam giving out. That seems pretty solid to me, given how much use and abuse they've received.
  • 2 0
 @Ploutre: I've used the same pair of ION gloves for the last 3 years, they've been awesome
  • 2 2
 @Ploutre: TASCO has been very good for me
  • 1 1
 @Ploutre: Kitsbow.....but they are $65. lol.....got 2 pair that are going well at 2 years old. ride 4x a week. taken my share of diggers in them. Smile

also they are made by Mechanix, so there is a reason they are tough as f*ck....they are basically just leather palmed work gloves
  • 2 0
 I've given up on Mountain Bike gloves and wear Mechanix Originals. My current pair has 3 years on them, including wearing them while doing trail work. Just starting to wear thin in one of the index fingers. Less expensive than a lot of Mountain Bike gloves too.
  • 1 0
 The Fox MX gloves are fine, it's the MTB gloves that fall apart. I have the Dirtpaw and I've never had a problem with them. Which is funny, because they're under $30 and most of the MTB ones are $35-40, or even higher. Go figure.
  • 2 0
 @Ploutre: motocross gloves is where it's at. I use Klim XC Lite gloves, last pair was 4 years old and still kicking (until i lost one), current pair is a year old and looks like new.
  • 5 0
 @ratedgg13: Strange... my RaceFace gloves have lasted almost 3 months since date of purchase. I mean I never wear them, but they look great on the bench in the garage.
  • 1 0
 @Ploutre: Fuse Protection, specifically their Omega line. I got a pair at a festival last summer and beyond the pink palm becoming discolored from sweat/mud/grip wear, they’re absolutely as good as day 1, even the little silicone touches on the fingers and palms. They don’t sell direct and from what I can find, they’re available from QBP, so most any shop can order them.

I’ve tried Giro (ok, too thin for my liking), Fox (absolute trash that split apart in 4 rides, plus their knee pads and elbow pads aren’t worth anything either), Specialized (split fingers after a month), but Fuse has been my favorite.
  • 3 0
 @Ploutre: Been a big fan of Fist gloves, have had two pairs hanging in well.
  • 2 0
 @Ploutre: I hate to say it but Specialized's gloves last forever. I wear the material out before the seams pop.
I was a Fox fanboy ( and have a friend that reps them) but I've given up on their gloves.
  • 2 0
 Leatt gloves have been the best for me. The palm/finger material is amazing
  • 1 0
 @Dustfarter: no way, on 2 pairs of Specialized Trail gloves the velcro died within a week, the seams on some fingers after about a month.
  • 1 0
 @ksilvey10: agree, 100% and Leatt has been a bit more durable for me lately.
Fox and TLD have been disposable last couple of years
  • 2 0
 @salespunk: another vote for Tasco. Extremely underrated brand. Mine have lasted more than twice as long as any other glove I’ve had in almost 30 years of riding.
  • 1 0
 "Hopefully the gloves get better- they’ve gone to crap over the last few years and don’t last, the fingers always split at the seams for me. They used to last a lot longer."

I have sockguy socks that have lasted longer than any of the fox gloves I have owned.

I now use sherrilltree.com/notch-arborlast-gloves

Also great if you are into digging or trail maintenance. They are bomber
  • 1 0
 @Ploutre: IXS, Tasco and, so far, 7idp have been good for me. 100% ride camp last but the stretchy cuff material wore out where I would pull them on.
  • 2 0
 I have found the more loose the fit, the quicker they wear out. I wear Alpinestars Radar and Giro DND with good longevity. Now as for Fox, I wouldn't buy anything you can pick up in the mall.
  • 1 1
 Presumably they'll take advantage of the materials and manufacturing used by Camelbak for their packs. If Camelbak can make a pack that'll stand up to combat usage... I'm sure they can probably teach Fox how to properly sew a pair of gloves.
  • 1 0
 @Ploutre: buy moto or bmx gloves. so much cheaper and just as good. Hand ups are also fine for the price. I just go on RockyMountainATV and buy whatever is on clearance
  • 1 0
 @Ploutre: My Giros finally gave out on me after 3 years and a good number of crashes
  • 2 0
 @Buffsfan3493: yes I would agree with that. 100% has been the best for me too. Dakine gloves are ok, except the Velcro cuff is garbage and won’t stick after a month. I have had some crooked seams running down the palm side of the fingers instead of the sides too.
  • 1 0
 @Ploutre: ironically (or not, just cause of the designs), FIST gloves have held up extraordinarily well. Way better than any of the last TLD or Fox or Dakine I've had over the last decade. Grippy rubber palm design stuff didn't even come off at all on the last 2 pairs and lasted over a year. Little finger emblem letters all still there, seams finally let go near the thumb after almost 1.5 years on 2 pairs that I alternate each ride. That never used to happen on anything else.
  • 1 0
 @Dustfarter: I have a pair of Specialized that are going strong after more than a year. I just picked up a pair of Tascos so I'll be interested to see how they hold up.
  • 1 0
 @conoat: was staring at a pile of those Kitsbow gloves in their factory store over the weekend and their $85 t shirts. No way I'm doing it. Mercy!
  • 1 0
 @blowmyfuse: The Kitsbow stuff I have has been top notch, and the customer service is fantastic. I have both pairs of their gloves but prefer gloves without padding on the palms.
  • 23 0
 Not a single word with regards how this might benefit customers. Gotta love CEO statements.
  • 9 0
 the press release wasn't written for customers. Most of them will never know it was sold. PB readers are a much smaller, much more passionate group than the mainstream fox buyer/mtber.
  • 2 0
 Well the huge area of concern has been for retailers...fox has screwed many so they're not even carrying fox any longer.
  • 2 0
 @jrocksdh: I doubt they care. Direct sales have higher margin anyway.

I have been happily fox free since the mid 90s.
  • 13 1
 RIP Fox Head. Haven't bought any Fox branded clothing in a long time since they're too expensive for what they are and the fit was off for me.

"tapping into the benefits of Vista Outdoor's Centers of Excellence", this guy just vomited a bunch of corporate-speak and they passed it off as a press release.
  • 12 0
 This is how the sausage gets made. The uninformed opine about how a bike looks or “brand heritage” while a few really big companies sell us stuff made by a few other big companies.

Thanks for continuing to post these articles PB.
  • 4 0
 Illusion of choice
  • 14 0
 New Synergies?! Sweet.
  • 11 0
 They've got a revolving credit facility, so stoked
  • 13 0
 ZERO FOX GIVEN
  • 12 5
 Vista Outdoor has been an ammunition supplier to the armed forces of Ukraine since 2015, and when the russians invaded in Feb, Vista announced they'd be donating ONE MILLION rounds of small arms ammunition to ukraine, and they also started selling t-shirts on their ammunition brands websites to support the ukrainian refugees. So I'm perfectly alright with the company selling bullets to sportspeople and hunters, alongside camelbaks. Its not the manufacturers fault that american politicians have lacked the cajones to enact meaningful gun control legislation since the 1990s. In Canada you have to already have a license to buy firearms, in order to buy the ammunition for them. In the usa... there's no such requirement. Hell in some states its perfectly legal to buy armor piercing ammunition also (because all deer in wisconsin apparently wear body armor) and its only an offence if the AP ammo is used during commission of a crime.

Also for that matter...Camelbak's #1 customer since the second gulf war has been the Military. US troops brought their personal camelbak thermalbaks with them to Saudi Arabia and Kuwait during the first gulf war and they then proved a popular item at american base PX stores around the world afterwards. By the time of 2003 war, the pentagon was ordering camelbaks directly from the company as part of a soldiers standard equipment for the deployment. By 2012 the military sales accounted for 40% of camelbak's sales alone and the reason camelbak can now have such an extensive model collection for their civilian sales side is because the lucrative military sales alone underwrites all their R&D costs. Several of their military models are compatible with the chemical warfare gear worn by soldiers, with hoses that'll interface with gas masks so the wearers of the REALLY hot suits can stay hydrated without needing to remove the masks to drink.
Camelbak was bought in 2015 by Vista for $412.5 million, but that was the fourth time its ownership had changed in twenty years.

The previous parent company to Vista, was Orbital ATK, one of the largest defence manufacturers in the USA at the time, who were acquired by Northrop Grumman in 2018. The majority of Vista's stockholders were, and still are people who held stock in the original company when the outdoor sporting product lines were spun off from the defence product lines (people who held stock in the parent company got 2 shares of vista for every 1 share they held). If the sporting world alone wasn't so unprofitable once a company grows to a certain size...then many brands would have gone bankrupt and closed up years ago without being bought out by someone with more money from other industries. Orbital ATk's themselves were bought for $7.8 BILLION USD in cash and assumption of $1.4 billion in debt.

As to Fox Racing now being bought out... do remember that Fox Racing and Fox Racing Shox are seperate companies, each founded by a different brother. Bob Fox for the suspension components and Geoff Fox for the clothing and protective gear. Fox Racing shox is a brandname of Fox Factory Holdings Corp.
  • 8 18
flag trialsracer (Jul 6, 2022 at 15:14) (Below Threshold)
 You clearly know nothing about firearms. "armor piercing ammunition" lol. Good to see you are perfectly comfortable with a company supplying the global war machine and war for profit, but not comfortable with individuals owning arms. Enjoy your kool aid, pal
  • 9 27
flag carters75 (Jul 6, 2022 at 15:35) (Below Threshold)
 @trialsracer: He also knows F all about the US Constitution. He needs to worry about Canada and what Trudeau and his lackeys are doing up there. Canada is becoming quite dystopian lately. And yea, I've been up there. A lot.
  • 19 7
 @carters75: LOL, are you talking about the part of the constitution that protects the right to a well regulated militia?? Its funny, most 2A people don't even know that portion of the amendment, and choose to only focus on the "right to bear arms" portion even though that's only a fraction of the actual amendment. At no point in the constitution does it grant individuals the right to own any and all types of weapons they want. If you honestly feel that way then should we all have access to rocket launchers and RPGs?
  • 6 3
 @trialsracer: Its in the wisconsin gun regulations. Look it up maybe yourself since you're the one showing a lack of knowledge about firearms if you don't know your own gun laws vary state to state.. california prohibits the stuff outside of the law enforcement community but california's gun regs are absolutely bizarre to begin with.Then again, the BATF treats short barrel rifles and shotguns the same as they do suppressors (with extra paperwork, waiting periods and a $200 tax stamp), and keep flip flopping on arm braces for hand guns. Hell one firearms manufacturing company successfully circumvented the SBR regulation altogether by submitting their gun for review as a "firearm", and ommiting features that would otherwise definite it as a handgun, or a rifle, or shotgun. A bunch of other companies have now gone that way also. Some states have taken it upon themselves to create regulations of their own to plug that loophole in the federal regulations (like california) but its still a case of things that make little sense.

Here in Canada...we have no SBR regulation... we have three principal categories... unrestricted (which is what you have to have for hunting), restricted (which is all semi-auto rifles/shotguns below a particular barrel and overall length, all handguns, and any other long guns deemed by the government to be restricted largely on cosmetic appearance), and prohibited (which includes a whole lot of semi-auto rifles now which were formerly restricted, anything full auto, and handguns in specific calibers or short barrel lengths). We also have prohibited devices related to firearms... any magazine over 10 capacity for semi-auto handguns, or 5 for semi-auto long guns which aren't a rimfire cartridge for example are prohibited. Suppressors are prohibited. Hell regular civilian ownership of body armor is prohibited without a license. Basically anyone who isn't a police officer or security guard (including bank guards, and armored truck crews) cannot possess it unless they have the correct license for their province.

But yeah...tell me I know nothing about firearms...
  • 4 3
 @OCSunDevil: Its generally safe to assume 99% of americans citizens have never read their constitution in its entirety including all the ratified amendments. Hell most couldn't even identify what the ammendments covered in the most basic explanations unless its the 1st or 2nd and as you said...the usually don't understand the actual wording of the 2nd ammendment. There's been 27 total ammendments approved and the 27th took more than 2 centuries to be ratified. Oh that's another thing...ratification... that requires passing votes in the both the house of representatives & the senate of at least 2/3rds majority AS well as approval by 3/4 of the states in the union, which currently means 38 out of the 50.
  • 5 1
 @OCSunDevil: that’s because “the right to bear arms shall not be infringed” is the operative part of the sentence. What exactly constitutes arms can be debated, but handguns and long guns indisputably do.
  • 3 5
 @carters75: Angela Merkel and other European leaders condemned Trudeau and his fascistic, anti democratic response to the trucker protest. Some months ago when Trudeau the Disney prince spoke at the European Parliament MEPs boycotted his speech. He spoke to a largely empty room, much like the space between his ears
  • 2 4
 @VelkePivo: European leaders love to condemn shit they're afraid will happen in their own countries. France's response to such a protest would have been much as ours eventually was, bujt they wouldn't have waited weeks to do it. And the protests were never about truckers... it was an excuse for right wing nutbars to engage in domestic and international terrorism. What does driving trucks to Ottawa, or blocking border crossings into the USA do exactly for a US CUSTOMS AND BORDER regulation that prevented unvaccinated NON-US citizens from driving into the USA ? Our regulation mirrored theirs, blocking NON-Canadian citizens from driving into Canada, and it took effect a week sooner... but the USA announced their regulation before we responded with a similar one, and they had every right to do so. Its THEIR land border with us (and Mexico)... they can block whoever they want from entering, any time they choose to.
  • 4 3
 @VelkePivo: Not correct. It was a few right-wing, populist knob'ead MEPs grandstanding with their usual populist rubbish. The majority of MEPs gave Trudeau a good welcome. You decide if that was good or bad, but at least stick to some semblance of the facts. Thanks.
  • 2 5
 @VelkePivo: Up until the 50's-60's (so almost 200 years of our existence) the general consensus was that it protected a collective right to bear arms (which would mean that a state could have a well regulated militia). And then it started to morph into "everyone can have any and all guns that they want".

Additionally, I know at this point we'll never be able to have a meaningful debate on this, but I think we should absolutely discuss what firearms are protected. When the constitution was written you could fire 1-2 rounds a minute if you were an expert. Now any joker can go pick up a gun and be able to fire off 30 rounds in 10 seconds or less with zero training.
  • 3 0
 @OCSunDevil: So you're saying up until the 50s-60s there was a lot of restriction on gun ownership? I think not. Anyway, I support meaningful, effective regulation of firearm ownership (not sure that exists with the ocean of illegal firearms out there), but not empty feel-good gestures that accomplish nothing. In any event, the operative part of the 2nd Amendment is pretty clear and if people don't like it and if they're so clearly in the right, they should be able to amend the constitution.
  • 3 1
 @shaneybx: The "facts" as stated by you, lol
  • 7 0
 TLD got bought by French investors, now fox, poc is owned by investors, dainese just got bought (for 600m!) Endura got bought by investors, rapha was bought by Walmart kids, smith owned by safilo or some group, Oakley owned by a group…..are there any rad small brands of gear we can support or are we funding investors next yachts?
  • 16 9
 I won’t be buying any more fox merchandise then, giving more money to a company that sells guns in a country that really doesn’t need it!
  • 3 2
 Good
  • 8 0
 Seems cheap.. I'll have two!
  • 9 0
 The fun thing is, with Fox you can
  • 1 0
 10x EBITDA is pretty cheap! Would have been double the price last year at least.
  • 1 0
 @mattddrchs: we finally found something that got cheaper after COVID!
  • 1 0
 I've allways been a sale rail shopper. I guess now billionaire investment groups can be too!
  • 3 0
 Nice. Buckle up for a lot more like this in the next 12-18 months. PE firms are absolutely frothing to do deals like this as market multiples come down – especially attractive co's like Fox that are growing & profitable.

Also... being acquired by a holdco isn't always a net-negative for consumers. They'll have a lot more capital to put behind innovative stuff if they choose. Vista seems like they know what they're doing.
  • 5 0
 Or they can choose to use that capitol for stock buy-backs to juice dividend payments…
  • 4 2
 If you think Vista seems like they know what they're doing then you haven't been paying much attention the last 5 years.
  • 4 2
 Most people I see wearing Fox apparel around here don't ride. I also see the logo in the back of Carolina slammed trucks with 22s and low profile tires...just saying...10 times EBTIDA is killer though! Good for Fox and yes, I assume those m&a dudes don't ride either, otherwise they would've recognized the valuation was heavily inflated by a cyclical event and adjusted that figure
  • 2 0
 Another one bites the dust! This will send ripples through other action sports not just MTB. Sucks. Fox gear IS literally them most iconic symbol for racing bikes/motorsports.

I imagine quality and innovation/creativity will go straight down the shitter, while prices continue to increase.
  • 3 0
 As someone who works for a company that owns multiple brands, I can share that each brand does still maintain a lot of autonomy. It's simply not they all make same things and put different logos on it. At least with our company, each brand still does their own marketing and product development. But they share the boring stuff like accounting, IT, etc.
  • 1 0
 @wutamclan: makes sense. As i understand it fox was already owned by a larger parent company before this
  • 1 0
 There’s a lot of talk about the quality of the product and how hopefully they can change that. Unfortunately in sales like these most likely the quality will be the same or even worse as management is all about the ownership and not about improving the products. If anything the quality could easily go down due to saving more money to make stockholders happy.
  • 3 1
 Mondelez International - the company which owns the well-known British chocolate brand Cadbury - announced the other week that it is buying Clif Bar for $2.9 billion.Lifestyle brand Fox Racing is dead. #Ebike.
  • 1 0
 Well given that much of their (Mondelez International's) cocoa harvest comes from illegal growing in national parks, deforestation in those parks, and on the backs of child slave labour and they continue to do business inside russia, even after the war kicked off.... just means the owner/founders of clif bar want to cash out and become mega-rich and don't much care about who they sell out to so long as they end up being filthy rich as the final result.
  • 1 0
 All for profit businesses eventually become nothing more than a way to generate cash flow, borrow money, hedge to chase more profits or a buyer....

Maybe we need more not for profit companies who are focused on its people/customers and the planet more than a bank.
  • 3 0
 Always interesting to see if changes like this influence the products for good or bad.
  • 8 1
 Either they will continue to milk whatever is left of Fox's brand image and sell it in a few years to the next conglomerate. Quality has been way down for the last 5/6years compared to before and same shit happens in the dirtbike market. Hopefully Vista will make Fox great again ...
  • 2 0
 @Balgaroth: Hopefully, but unlikely.
  • 3 0
 @Balgaroth: I love Troy lee for my helmets and then I mainly wear fly racing for jerseys and pants, just because its relatively inexpensive, and great quality. Also poc makes great protection. Smile
  • 4 0
 I have worked at bike shops for a long time and it's always just confusing to me to think about shops buying "3 different brand helmets" but they're actually from the same company. And how different/diverse can the designs really be if they're all being done in the same house?

It just means that as a consumer you think you're making more choices between companies, but really those different price points and names on the helmet are all paying the same parent company. I dunno if that's inherently bad or anything, but it's certainly weird and I don't think most shoppers realize it when they're choosing stuff.
  • 2 0
 @thepwnstar39: Personally I don't think it's great for the consumer. You have the illusion of choice but in reality all the helmets are probably made on the same line and they're just slapping some different colorways on them or changing the vents.
  • 2 0
 @thepwnstar39: and now imagine if those helmets and the ones from many other companies are made in the same factory ... just imagine ... but some it's just conspi stuff don't you dare lol.
  • 3 0
 @thepwnstar39: Vista owns Bell and Giro, so would be prime example of same factory, different graphic theory. However its a fairly common practice in bike shops to get a customer to try on a Bell and a Giro helmet to work out head shape and fit. Bell is round, Smith Giro, Spes mid oval, Lazer more oval etc. In some ways there'd be less reason to stock Giro and Specialized helmets (different styles/look but same fit) than Bell and Giro (different fit, even they are the same company).
  • 9 5
 Fox clothing is terrible quality wise.
  • 10 0
 Really? I have several jerseys, a rain jacket, and 2 pairs of gloves. All 1-3 years old, still in great shape, no issues.
  • 1 1
 Looks like buckle is going to be getting more cheap made fox racing stuff. Guess I'll be buying my fox stuff from ridefox.com
  • 1 0
 Meh. I switched to other brands after their riding shorts and gloves fell apart way too early. Good luck, Fox.
  • 2 0
 Monopolisation scuks ballz
  • 1 0
 With a financial move like this, you know Vista is trying to outfox the competition. Just saying.
  • 1 0
 How they hell is their ebitda margin so low when their gross margins are just insanely high? They must be poorly managed.
  • 2 0
 What does the fox say?
  • 1 0
 Don't fox with me!
  • 1 0
 Visit costco soon. Sorry not sorry.
  • 3 2
 Also if you know what EBITDA means your bikes rubbish.
  • 3 2
 More like if you know what EBITDA means, your bike is an S-Works, but you ride like shit, and probably wear fox.
  • 5 0
 @ACree: shit... you actually described me pretty well just then.
I need to rethink some of my life choices.
  • 1 0
 Welcome to the oligopoly Fox
  • 1 0
 How does one reach peak synergy as an individual?
  • 1 1
 Vista owns shooting brands? Sorry I don't want to be associated with a company that makes guns. Guns kill people!
  • 1 1
 so ... wait ... Fox helmets and Fox clothes are not afiliated with Fox suspension?
  • 3 0
 Fox clothing/protection and Fox suspension are totally separate companies. Started by two brothers I think.
Fox head logo - clothing. Fox tail - suspension.
  • 1 0
 @rstwosix: Thank you
  • 2 0
 At costco soon!
  • 1 0
 hope this is somehow better, for my favourite brand gear, since the 90´s!
  • 1 0
 mountain biking, owned by 1 of the worlds remaining 5 companies
  • 1 1
 Does this include race face?
  • 5 0
 Fox clothing and fox suspension are entirely different companies.
  • 1 0
 Brands care about you!
  • 1 0
 fuck quietkat
  • 1 1
 Jumped the Shark
  • 5 6
 EBITDA is the greatest bullshit number in financials, change my mind
  • 3 0
 Why?
Do you have a better way of getting a valuation for a company?
  • 4 2
 EBITDA represents the truest measure of go forward earnings. Interest is not core earnings and inflates the numbers. Taxes can be manipulated significantly over the short term and can also inflate earnings. Deductions are influenced by taxes and whatever investments the government it trying to juice. Amortization is a paper write down of assets that has nothing to do with their true lifespan.
  • 9 1
 Tell me you don't understand finance without telling me you don't understand finance
  • 6 0
 @salespunk: close but the D in ebitda is Depreciation which is a noncash expense so it’s added back as the company doesn’t actually “spend” that money in the given period.

Interest is added back because when computing cash available to service debt, you want to see what the company actually has available to pay their interest expense. Taxes are added back because (generally) all peers have to pay the same amount of taxes so you add it back to compare peers like-for-like. Depreciation - see above. Amortization - see depreciation.
  • 1 0
 'expected synergies'
  • 2 0
 @salespunk: kind of close in some places. the d is depreciation, not deductions, and amortization is not just a paper write down of assets, it's a write down of what are usually intangible assets anyway.
  • 2 0
 @sjma: good catch, thanks for the correction. Doing this between Zoom calls and typing too fast.
  • 1 0
 @luckynumber13: from a high level POV, because it doesn't remove from the earnings values that can be subject to a higher degree of manipulation and/or might give a good indication on how the firm is being managed such as depreciation and interest.

There are performance indicators that are seen by many as being more pragmatic, such as Economic Value Added (EVA)
  • 1 0
 @luckynumber13: www.forbes.com/sites/tedgavin/2011/12/28/top-five-reasons-why-ebitda-is-a-great-big-lie/?sh=6379c6bed2da
  • 2 1
 @salespunk: of course, completely understand. It’s day in day out stuff for me so I wanted to give a little further explanation for the engineers in the comments that might not understand some financial stuff
  • 1 2
 Very cool.
  • 2 7
flag rnayel FL (Jul 6, 2022 at 11:13) (Below Threshold)
 Fox's suspension business is part of a different company and is already jointly owned with Easton and Race Face.
  • 11 0
 Fox Racing and Fox Shocks are not the same company.
  • 6 0
 Don’t mind me, I’m just here to say the same exact thing that everyone else has said because I always love to arrive late to parties.
  • 1 2
 Different companies. Fox Racing is the soft gear and Fox Shocks (called Fox Tail I think?!?) is the suspension.
I’m sure that heaps of people could give you more info than me though.
  • 4 0
 Oh snap, nice ninja edit.
  • 4 1
 @wpplayer18: Also Nabisco and Keebler, not the same company but both make cookies and crakers.
  • 1 0
 @wpplayer18: lol thanks
  • 2 0
 @speedy-toast: Yeah, I realized I f'd up right as I posted the comment. Thus the super fast edit.
  • 2 0
 @danielfloyd: I felt like I missed something
  • 10 0
 @NickBit: Yeah Bob and Geoff Fox founded the company in 1974. Bob was making the suspension and Geoff was making the gear. However they split into two separate companies, but I forget which year that was, want to say 1979. Fox Racing Shox, Inc and Fox Racing, Inc. A lot of people thought they were the same company, at one time, they were.

Bob ran the suspension side for many years (moving from San Jose, CA to Watsonville, CA), becoming a major player in the bike business in 2002 when they released the Fox 32 fork, up until then, they were only doing shocks if I remember correctly. Compass Diversified Holdings bought a majority of Fox Shox in 2008. They then IPO'd in 2013. New HQ was in Scotts Valley, CA (now in Georgia).

Geoff and his kids ran the apparel business for a long time, with their HQ and distribution center in Morgan Hill, CA (down the street from Specialized). Sponsoring the world's best motocross, mountain bike, surf, wakeboard...etc athletes in the world! Arguably the most iconic logo in ALL of action sports. At one time, the name changed to Fox Head, Inc, because they realized a majority of their customer base doesn't "race." However that had changed a number of years later and they wanted to get back to their roots. New HQ opened in Irvine, CA in 2013, then Altamont Capital Partners bought a majority stake in 2014. Now they are selling to Vista Outdoors. Not uncommon for a holdings company to hang on for 5+ years to then flip it for a profit. Definitely wish them the best!
  • 3 0
 @DizzyNinja: I had said something snarky about orange forks, and as I was submitting the comment, remembered that they aren't the same company. So I edited my comment, but by the time I submitted my edit, 3 people had already responded.
  • 2 0
 For costco shoppers.
Below threshold threads are hidden







Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.361182
Mobile Version of Website