gade Capital. Macy’s declined to comment on the offer at the time of this writing. While this may seem like an impressive proposal amount, many experts within the retail industry feel that accepting the offer would be an ill-advised move on Macy’s part.  As Neil Saunders, managing director and retail analyst at GlobalData, noted, “While this would be lucrative for investors, it would not, in our opinion, bode well for the future of Macy’s. As critical as we are of Macy’s current management, they are at least focused on trying to run the business as a retailer.” “An investor group that sells off real estate and perhaps takes other actions such as spinning off the e-commerce business, would certainly make some short-term gains. But unless some of those profits were reinvested in revitalising the core retail business, it would leave Macy’s in the worst of all worlds,” Saunders elaborated. Arkhouse Management is a real estate-focused investing firm, and Brigade Capital is a global asset manager. How did Macy’s get to this point?  The acquisition offer should not have come as a surprise to those paying attention to the changing retail landscape in recent years.  Like many retailers, both in the US and internationally, Macy’s has been impacted by the decline in consumer interest in shopping in traditional department stores amidst the rise of online shopping.  Just last month, Macy’s disclosed its third-quarter net sales declined seven per cent year over year to $7.4 billion, while its net income plunged 60 per cent to $65.2 million. The acquisition offer values the retailer at $32 per share, a 32.4 per cent premium from Macy’s closing price of $24 on November 30. The price marks a far cry from the company’s US$70-a-share peak in 2015, the beginning of its battle with digitally-focused retailers. But it’s notably less than the estimated $9.1 billion value of its real-estate portfolio alone. Should Macy’s accept the acquisition offer? Steve Dennis, president and founder of SageBerry Consulting, a firm that provides strategic advisory services to the retail, fashion, and luxury industries, believes that the current acquisition proposal would be a poor route to go down.  “Private equity’s history with retail takeovers has been mostly about cost-cutting, store closings, and asset spin-offs, and that is not what Macy’s requires for long-term survival,” Dennis told Inside Retail.  “Given they [Arkhouse Management and Brigade Capital] are real estate investors they are likely in it for real estate value not to create a new strategy for Macy’s. And there’s no reason to think they have additive insight on how to ‘fix the retailer.’” One potential reason to lean toward the acquisition, Dennis pointed out, is that it would enable Macy’s to avoid the public market’s scrutiny.  However, he believes that, ultimately “Macy’s needs to articulate a plan to become meaningful and more remarkable and the means to fund it. Otherwise, the vultures will continue to circle it.” Marie Driscoll, an expert on luxury retail and founder and chief analyst at Driscoll Advisors, agreed that taking investment from a real-estate firm would be a poor choice. “A strategic investor would have expertise in store operations, merchandising, labour, marketing, and more. Real estate professionals do not necessarily have business acumen to run a retail operation,” Driscoll told Inside Retail. “A strategic investor with retail experience would be the best investor for Macy’s.” An offer from a more knowledgeable investor wouldn’t necessarily be a bad idea for Macy’s to consider moving forward, according to Driscoll.  “The shares have underperformed for years and this would provide an exit for existing shareholders and allow Macy’s to execute its business strategy of closing selected locations and opening smaller stores that are closer to the customer with more targeted merchandise offerings of localised assortments,” she said.  “Tony Spring, CEO of Bloomingdales is transitioning into the CEO role at Macy’s and is a strong merchant leader who could operate Macy’s as either a private or public company.” “As a privately-held company, Macy’s could execute its growth strategy without the pressure of shareholders and their demand for rapid growth, a difficult feat for this mature retail sector in the prevailing macro environment,” Driscoll mused.