Michael Kors Holdings posted revenue for the quarter that increased close to 11%, its strongest growth in revenue in nearly a year, as the demand for the designers’ handbags as well as accessories increased across the Americas while the company said it would by repurchasing as much as $1 billion of its shares.
Stock at Michael Kors, which said as well, that it acquired its licensee in Greater China, surged 11% in Wednesday premarket trading.
Michael Kors has refreshed its product lines much faster, managing very tightly its distribution at the wholesale level to keep the exclusivity in its products while pushing into retailing online to give a boost to its growth in sales.
The company said as well that it purchased the Michael Kors HK Ltd exclusive licensee located in China and some regions across Asia at a price in cash of $500 million.
John Idol the CEO at Kors said that the company believes its brand it gaining great momentum across Greater China, which makes it an ideal time to integrate the territory into the business.
Sales at locations opened a minimum of 13 months increased 0.3%, analysts were expecting an increase of just 0.1%.
The attributable net income for Michael Kors dropped 3% to just over $177 million equal to 98 cents a share, during its quarter that ended on April 2. Income was hurt due to a strong U.S. dollar.
Revenue at Kors was up ending the quarter at $1.2 billion compared to $1.08 billion for the same quarter one year ago.
Analysts were expecting revenue to reach just $1.15 billion.
Michael Kors has remained quiet about if Nordstrom has dumped its products, but analysts on Wall Street believe that is likely what happened.
Reports have been made that the high-end retailer is carrying fewer bags from Michael Kors due to them not selling that well.
Following one report in early May saying Nordstrom was not carrying many Michael Kors bags, stock at Kors fell 17% the following day.
The reports were neither confirmed nor denied by Nordstrom, but it did insist that its and Kors relationship was not ended and did not agree with the methods of research used by a firm that made the original report.
