More stories

  • in

    Peloton posts surprise profit, announces yet another round of layoffs impacting 6% of staff

    Peloton beat Wall Street’s expectations on the top and bottom lines, delivering a surprise profit that came in well ahead of forecasts.
    The connected fitness company said it’s introducing another cost cutting plan to save $100 million in expenses, half of which will come from laying off 6% of staff.
    In a letter to shareholders, CEO Peter Stern outlined his vision for growth, which includes working more closely with Precor and expanding internationally.

    Clothing inside a Peloton store in Palo Alto, California, US, on Monday, Aug. 5, 2024.
    David Paul Morris | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    Peloton posted a surprise profit for its fiscal fourth quarter on Thursday and outlined its strategy to return to growth under new CEO Peter Stern. Shares rose in premarketing trading, swinging between gains of between 5% and 15%.
    The connected fitness company, known for its stationary bikes and treadmills, posted a net income of $21.6 million, compared with a loss of $30.5 million in the year-earlier period. That’s thanks to better than expected sales but also, Peloton’s efforts to cut its operating expenses, which Stern said in a letter to shareholders remain too high. 

    In fiscal year 2026, which began in July, the company plans to reduce run-rate expenses by another $100 million, on top of the $200 million it cut in fiscal 2025. Half of those cuts will come from indirect costs, like renegotiating contracts with suppliers, but the other half will come from cutting 6% of its staff, the company said. 
    “Our operating expenses remain too high, which hinders our ability to invest in our future,” Stern wrote in the letter to shareholders. “We are launching a cost restructuring plan intended to achieve at least $100 million of run-rate savings by the end of FY26 by reducing the size of our global team, paring back indirect spend, and relocating some of our work. This is not a decision we came to lightly, as it impacts many talented team members, but we believe it is necessary for the long-term health of our business.”
    The latest round of layoffs comes just over a year after the company announced plans to cut 15% of its staff.
    For the most recent quarter, Peloton beat Wall Street expectations on the top and bottom lines. Here’s how the company did in its fourth fiscal quarter compared with what Wall Street was anticipating, based on a survey of analysts by LSEG:

    Earnings per share: 5 cents vs. a loss of 6 cents expected
    Revenue: $607 million vs. $580 million expected

    The company’s reported net income for the three-month period that ended June 30 was $21.6 million, or 5 cents per share, compared with a loss of $30.5 million, or 8 cents per share, a year earlier. 

    Sales dropped to $607 million, down about 6% from a year earlier.
    Ever since its pandemic heyday, Peloton has been working to cut costs, stabilize its business and generate free cash flow to ensure its business can survive. Eight months into Stern’s tenure as Peloton’s latest top executive, those efforts are starting to bear fruit. 
    For the full year, the company generated $320 million in free cash flow, ahead of its own internal expectations, and its guidance implies a path to revenue growth in the back half of the year. Overall, operating expenses were down 25% in fiscal 2025, with meaningful cuts to sales and marketing as well as research and development, metrics investors and analysts have long said were too high for the size of Peloton’s business.
    For the fiscal fourth quarter, operating expenses were down 20% compared to the same quarter a year prior, led by a 28% decline in sales and marketing expenses, a 20% drop in research and development costs and a 33% decline in general and administrative costs.
    Peloton has also made strides in reducing its debt, which it restructured last year to stave off an imminent liquidity crunch. In fiscal 2025, its net debt declined 43%, or by $343 million, compared to the year-earlier period, bringing net debt to $459 million when cash and cash equivalents are subtracted from its total debt of about $1.5 billion.

    Road to profitability

    For Peloton’s current quarter, it’s expecting sales to be between $525 million and $545 million, weaker than the $560 million than analysts had forecast, according to LSEG. However, for the full year, its expecting sales of between $2.4 billion and $2.5 billion, in line with expectations of $2.41 billion, according to LSEG. 
    The current quarter is forecast to be worse than expected, largely because it falls during the summer months when people tend to pause their subscriptions and pull back on new workout gear. But the remainder of the year implies improving sales patterns in the quarters ahead. 
    During the most recent quarter, Peloton sold more bikes and treadmills than Wall Street expected, posting connected fitness revenue of $198.6 million, well ahead of the $170.3 million analysts had expected, according to StreetAccount. Subscription revenue came in a bit light at $408.3 million, behind forecasts of $411 million, according to StreetAccount. 
    Improving top-line metrics, which allows Peloton to better leverage its fixed costs, led to a 5.6 percentage point increase to its gross margin, which was 54.1% during the quarter, compared to 48.5% in the year ago period. 
    Notably, its hardware segment, which has long been a drain on Peloton’s performance, is steadily getting more profitable. Peloton’s gross margin for hardware was 17.3%, a 9 percentage point increase from the year-ago period, driven by a shift toward more profitable products and decreases in service and repair, warehousing and transportation costs.
    The company’s subscription gross margin grew by 3.7 percentage points to 71.9% but was helped by a one-time balance sheet adjustment related to music royalties costs. Excluding that benefit, subscription gross margin would have been 69.2%.
    The gains that Peloton has made in improving its profits are expected to continue, but will be hampered by new 50% tariffs imposed by the Trump administration on products made with aluminum, as well as other duties that touch parts of the company’s supply chain. The company is expecting tariffs to impact free cash flow by $65 million in the year ahead and as a result, is expecting to generate $200 million in free cash flow in fiscal 2026, below what it achieved in fiscal 2025. 
    In Stern’s letter to shareholders, there were no explicit plans to raise prices on subscriptions or hardware, but he said the company will rework its use of promotions and “adjust prices” to reflect its high costs. 
    “For example, we will introduce optional expert assembly fees to reflect the real costs of installing our equipment, while extending free self-install to include our Tread and Row, thereby preserving Member choice and control,” Stern wrote. 
    Now that cash flow and some metrics are starting to stabilize, Stern is ready to talk about growth and outlined his vision to get there in his letter to shareholders. To offset the high costs of acquiring customers online, Peloton is returning to physical retail but this time, it’ll open up micro-stores, rather than the sprawling showrooms it had in its early days. In fiscal 2025, it closed 24 retail showrooms, reducing its footprint of larger stores from 37 to 13 by the end of the fourth quarter.
    Peloton plans to expand its micro-stores, from a count of one to 10, as well as grow its secondary marketplace for pre-owned hardware, Stern said. It also plans to increase the presence of its instructors at in-person events by three times this year, with the goal of increasing it by 10 times in fiscal 2027, he added.
    Stern said the company will also work more closely with Precor, the fitness company it acquired under founder John Foley, by creating a “unified commercial business unit.” He also said the company will start building a plan to expand internationally – a goal that Peloton has long had but has failed to execute profitably. 
    “Internationally, we plan to deliver local, in-language experiences using a mix of native instruction, AI dubbing, and more flexible approaches to music for thousands of classes,” Stern wrote. “Through partnerships, we aim to introduce the Peloton brand and experiences to millions of people around the world. Together, we believe these actions lay the groundwork for future, cost-effective launches of the full Peloton offering in new geographies.” More

  • in

    The Giving Pledge was meant to turbocharge philanthropy. Few billionaires got on board.

    Fifteen years ago this week, 40 of America’s richest families and individuals pledged to give away most of their wealth.
    In the years since, the Giving Pledge has lost steam even as billionaire wealth and headcount has soared.
    The Giving Pledge has shaped how the wealthy think about philanthropy, but its material impact is harder to measure.

    Warren Buffett, Bill and Melinda Gates, in an interview on May 5, 2015

    A version of this article first appeared in CNBC’s Inside Wealth newsletter with Robert Frank, a weekly guide to the high-net-worth investor and consumer. Sign up to receive future editions, straight to your inbox.
    In June 2010, Bill Gates, Melinda French Gates and Warren Buffett started what could be described as the world’s most ambitious fundraising drive. After promising to give away the vast majority of their wealth, the trio asked their ultra-wealthy peers to pledge at least half of their assets to charity during their lifetimes or in their estates.

    In two months, the Giving Pledge garnered signatures from 40 of America’s richest families and individuals to sign up. That first batch of pledgers, including Michael Bloomberg and David Rockefeller, was announced 15 years ago this week.
    In the years since, the Giving Pledge has lost steam when it comes to enrollment. By the end of 2010, 57 signatories representing an estimated 14% of America’s billionaires had made the nonbinding commitment, according to a recent report by the Institute for Policy Studies. Currently, the pledge has commitments from 256 individuals, couples and families, including 110 American billionaires, per the progressive think tank. This group makes up 12% of the U.S. billionaire population as estimated by Forbes.
    The annual number of sign-ups has also flagged since that first year. Even in 2020 when the pandemic spurred wealthy donors to give more, the Giving Pledge only earned 12 new signatories. This past May, the pledge welcomed 11 new members, a marked improvement over 2024’s record low of four.
    Meanwhile, over the past 10 years, the number of billionaires worldwide has increased by more than half to 2,891, according to UBS. Their wealth also doubled by more than half to an estimated $15.7 trillion, UBS said.
    “It’s disappointing in that you would hope more people would step up,” said Chuck Collins, program director at the IPS and great-grandson of the meatpacker Oscar Mayer.

    Collins, a co-author of the report, said the rapid increase in wealth may be partly to blame. This surge in wealth has also made it challenging for the pledgers to give away their money fast enough.
    “Some of this is fairly sudden, the wealth growth,” he said, “so you got to give people … a decade of slack, if you just land in the billionaire class to figure it out.”
    Whether the Giving Pledge has been successful depends on whom you ask. The IPS report described the Giving Pledge as “unfulfilled, unfulfillable, and not our ticket to a fairer, better future” and identified only one living couple to have fulfilled the pledge, John and Laura Arnold.
    A spokesperson for the Giving Pledge described the IPS report as “misleading,” and said the IPS used incomplete data and excluded “significant forms of charitable giving,” including gifts to foundations.
    “For fifteen years, the Giving Pledge has helped create new norms of generosity and grown into a connected and active global learning community,” a spokesperson wrote in a statement to Inside Wealth.
    Collins said the Giving Pledge has some merit, describing it as a “community of peers among a group who don’t have a lot of peers.”
    Amir Pasic, dean of the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, said it has had a lasting impact on how the wealthy think about their giving.
    “I still think that it was really important attempt to socialize the new wealth that was emerging early on in this century,” he said. “We can interestingly debate how successful it has or hasn’t been, but it’s become a feature of the high-net-worth philanthropic landscape.”
    Though Giving Pledge enrollment has stagnated, other efforts to accelerate giving have emerged, said Pasic, citing the collective Blue Meridian Partners.
    And while some billionaires, particularly younger ones, may be reluctant to associate themselves with the Gateses and Buffett, it doesn’t mean they aren’t contributing in their own way, Pasic said.
    “Buffett is the senior representative of new wealth at the beginning of this century. New representatives have emerged since then,” he said.

    Get Inside Wealth directly to your inbox

    According to Collins, impact investing and other alternatives to traditional philanthropy have gained traction, especially among the new class of tech billionaires. He gave the example of Oracle’s Larry Ellison amending his pledge to focus his resources on technology research instead of traditional nonprofit organizations.
    “I think there’s a little more blurring between for profit and nonprofit, charity versus impact investing,” Collins said.
    Venture capital billionaire Marc Andreessen has gone so far as to declare that innovating technology — and amassing personal riches in the process — is philanthropic in and of itself.
    “Who gets more value from a new technology, the single company that makes it, or the millions or billions of people who use it to improve their lives? QED,” he wrote in 2023.
    Pasic said it is possible that Bill Gates’ recent commitment to give away virtually all of his wealth over the next 20 years may bring new urgency to the Giving Pledge.
    “I think that remains to be seen,” he said, “whether it’s going to end up being more of a kind of a private club that becomes less relevant or if it’ll be the beginning of something broader, gaining new energy in this turbulent time and or spawning other kinds of groups … or other collectives.” More

  • in

    Xi Jinping’s city of the future is coming to life

    Xiongan, China’s “city of the future” and a pet project of Xi Jinping, the country’s supreme leader, has become a byword for costly vanity projects. Central-government and provincial planners have spent at least 835bn yuan ($116bn) on the city since 2017, when they broke ground in what had been marshy farmland 125km south of Beijing. It has been touted as a solution to China’s urban maladies, with residents promised short commutes through leafy parks instead of cough-inducing traffic jams. The city is part, officials say, of a “one-thousand-year plan” in civilisation-building. A book about Xiongan from a state publisher lists its creation alongside the works of mythical emperors who supposedly lived 5,000 years ago. More

  • in

    An economist’s guide to big life decisions

    Time for your annual check-up. After what feels like an eternity in the waiting room, flicking through dog-eared copies of the world’s finest publications (did you know Indonesia is at a crossroads?), your name is called at last. A smiling professional awaits you, only this time the room smells not of disinfectant, but of the solvents used in whiteboard markers. Instead of a fold-out bed, there is a Bloomberg terminal behind the modesty curtain in the corner, flashing green or red with every tick of the market. The economist will see you now. More

  • in

    E.l.f. Beauty’s profits fall 30% as China tariffs weigh on bottom line

    E.l.f. Beauty beat Wall Street’s expectations on the top and bottom lines in its fiscal first quarter, but new China tariffs are weighing on its profits, which were down 30% from the year-ago period.
    The cosmetics company’s sales grew 9%, marking the second quarter in a row in which revenue growth slowed to the single digits.
    E.l.f. just closed its acquisition of Hailey Bieber’s beauty brand Rhode, and the effect that will have on its performance won’t be seen until later in the year.

    E.l.f. cosmetic products are seen for sale in a store in Manhattan, New York City, on June 29, 2022.
    Andrew Kelly | Reuters

    E.l.f. Beauty’s profits fell 30% in its fiscal first quarter as new tariffs on Chinese imports begin to affect the cosmetic company’s bottom line.
    In the three months that ended on June 30, E.l.f.’s net income fell to $33.3 million, down 30% from $47.6 million a year ago. The company, which sources about 75% of its products from China, also declined to provide a full-year revenue guide, citing the “wide range of potential outcomes” related to the new duties. 

    Instead, the company only issued guidance for the first half of the fiscal year. E.l.f. said it is expecting sales growth to be above 9% in the first half of the year and adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, or EBITDA, margins to be 20%, compared with 23% in the first half of the previous fiscal year.
    “We’re operating in a very volatile macro environment, obviously a great deal of uncertainty on tariffs, so until we have greater resolution on what the tariff picture looks like, we didn’t think it made sense to issue guidance,” CEO Tarang Amin told CNBC in an interview. “It’s the uncertainty around the tariffs that make things more difficult.” 
    The company has already raised prices by $1 to offset tariff costs and is working to expand its business outside of the U.S. and diversify its supply chain. 
    “We’re under 55% tariffs on goods coming from China, and we’ve planned against that,” Amin said. “So I’m just waiting for that other shoe to drop to see OK, where do they really settle out? I never thought I would see a day that I’m happy to see 55% tariffs, but it’s a lot better than 170%, so I think once we have that resolution, we’ll be in a better spot.”
    Beyond profits, E.l.f. beat expectations on the top and bottom lines. 

    Here’s how the cosmetics company performed compared with what Wall Street was anticipating, based on a survey of analysts by LSEG:

    Earnings per share: 89 cents adjusted vs. 84 cents expected
    Revenue: $354 million vs. $350 million expected

    The company’s reported net income for the three-month period that ended June 30 was $33.3 million, or 58 cents per share, compared with $47.6 million, or 81 cents per share, a year earlier. Excluding one-time items related to stock-based compensation and other nonrecurring charges, E.l.f. saw adjusted net income of $51.3 million, or 89 cents per share.
    Sales rose to $354 million, up 9% from $324 million a year earlier. That marks the second quarter in a row in which revenue growth slowed to the single digits, a pattern the company hasn’t seen since 2020. 
    Over the past four years, E.l.f.’s sales have consistently grown in the high double digits, but that momentum has started to slow as the beauty category overall cools off following several years of outsized growth. 
    Amin said growth is expected to improve in the current quarter. He pointed out that the quarter’s 9% sales growth is on top of 50% growth in the year-ago period but acknowledged the category at large — and the state of consumer spending — has been soft. 
    “Sometimes people forget just how much we’ve been growing,” Amin said. “The category, the state of the consumer, is still challenged. There’s a lot of uncertainty with tariffs, inflation.” 
    While the fiscal first quarter was slower than quarters past, Amin said Nielsen data shows the company is still taking market share and outperforming the overall category. 
    A key aspect of the company’s growth comes from buzzy product launches, which are often “dupes” of higher-priced prestige products. It recently launched its Bright Icon Vitamin C + E Ferulic Serum at $17, which is thought to have been inspired by a similar product from SkinCeuticals, which retails for $185.
    It also released a new sunscreen and just closed on its acquisition of Hailey Bieber’s beauty brand Rhode, which will launch in all Sephora stores in the U.S. and Canada in September. The effect Rhode will have on E.l.f.’s sales, and especially its launch in Sephora, won’t be seen in its results until later this year.

    Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

  • in

    Trump faces a variety of choices as he seeks to fill Fed vacancies

    With the open seat on the influential Federal Reserve Board of Governors, President Donald Trump now has a number of strategic options at the central bank.
    Will Trump use the position to nominate a gadfly to torment Chair Jerome Powell or pursue a different strategy focused more on the long-term direction of the Fed?
    While Trump could be tempted to go the shadow-chair route — Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent in the past has advocated for that course — it might be an unappetizing choice for the nominee.

    U.S. President Donald Trump points towards Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell holding a document during a tour of the Federal Reserve Board building, which is currently undergoing renovations, in Washington, D.C., U.S., July 24, 2025.
    Kent Nishimura | Reuters

    Federal Reserve Governor Adriana Kugler’s surprise resignation last week brought back a scenario that seemed to be fading but could have important ramifications for how the central bank conducts policy.
    With the open seat on the influential central bank board, President Donald Trump now has a number of strategic options, including one where he could appoint a so-called shadow chair whose job would be largely to serve as an instigator until a successor to current Chair Jerome Powell could be named.

    This in turn raises the tantalizing possibility that an institution historically known for collegiality and an ivory-toweresque approach to policy now will have to deal with a sudden dose of political intrigue.
    Will Trump use the position to nominate a gadfly to torment Powell, a frequent target of blistering criticism from the president, or pursue a different strategy focused more on the long-term direction of the Fed?
    “The president has two options. One is he can put a stop-gap appointment to fill the Kugler seat for the remaining four months of the unexpired term,” Krishna Guha, head of global policy and central bank strategy at Evercore ISI, said Wednesday on CNBC. “Or he could just decide to compress the entire process and pick the person he wants to be the Fed chair now.”

    Kugler’s decision to leave the Fed with little notice would be important under normal circumstances, but the nature of her situation on the board raises the ante.
    Former President Joe Biden in 2023 named Kugler to the position, succeeding Lael Brainard, who moved over to the White House to serve as a senior economic advisor. Kugler served less than two years of Brainard’s unexpired term and left with only about six months remaining, accounting for the couple of months it will take for her replacement to be confirmed.

    Taking into account the Senate calendar, the new governor would serve at best three or four months, then have to undergo yet another confirmation hearing should Trump decide to reappoint the person.
    While Trump could be tempted to go the shadow-chair route — Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent in the past has advocated for that course — it might be an unappetizing choice for the nominee.
    The shadow chair “is still just going to be one person among many, not enjoying the powers of the office of chairman,” Guha said.

    ‘Apprentice’ Fed-style

    For Trump, though, selecting a shadow chair would be in keeping with his affinity for conflict and making people prove themselves, Guha added.
    “He likes to run things like ‘Celebrity Apprentice,'” Trump’s former reality show on NBC, Guha said. “He likes to have people trialing, dueling it out with each other. So he might be tempted with the idea of putting somebody in the seat for a few months, see how they do, if they pass the audition, then be given the nod for the next Fed chair. So I suspect he’s probably pulled in both directions here.”
    The time span that came with Kugler’s announcement carries added risk. If she had stayed in the seat, the appointment wouldn’t have come at least until her term expired in January and would have been for a full 14-year term on the board. The window between now and then created by the resignation carries both opportunity and peril.
    Accepting such an appointment also is a dicey proposition.
    Trump has made it clear he will only appoint governors who are in favor of cutting rates. The president has stated that he not only wants reductions, but is looking for dramatic moves, along the lines of 3 percentage points. Former Fed Chair and past Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said on CNBC that Trump’s rate demands “should be frightening to markets.”
    “A shadow chairman with only four months to go has some risk,” said Brian Gardner, chief Washington policy strategist at Stifel. “Someone can say something that annoys Trump. Maybe there they have to take a position that Trump doesn’t like. Just the time that we’re talking about increases the chances of that happening so it becomes a more difficult option. That being said, I think the administration thinks it’s an attractive idea, and does give them some flexibility.”

    The next chair

    The alternative to a shadow chair, at least regarding the Kugler vacancy, is to appoint the actual person who Trump wants to serve as chair, with the understanding that they would be nominated when Powell exits.
    In that case, it would present a more conventional approach and not push the new governor into a potentially adversarial relationship with colleagues with whom he or she will serve for potentially the next 14 years.
    “Maybe they do this as kind of a backup plan to make sure that they have the person they want in place when the Powell chairmanship ends in in May,” Gardner says.
    White House officials did not respond to a request for comment.
    Trump told CNBC on Tuesday that he has the choice for Kugler’s seat down to four finalists — former Governor Kevin Warsh, National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett and two unnamed candidates. One of those in contention is thought to be current Governor Christopher Waller. Other names mentioned included economist and former World Bank President David Malpass as well as economist Judy Shelton, whom Trump tried to appoint during his first term but failed to clear Senate approval.
    Betting markets are split between Warsh and Hassett as the favorite, with Shelton also drawing some interest. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has taken himself out of contention, Trump told CNBC.
    Assuming Powell leaves the board after his tenure as chair ends, Trump has the chance to hold a majority of his appointees on the seven-member group. However, he would not have a majority on the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee, which entails the seven governors plus a rotating cast of five regional presidents. His current appointees are Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman, who also is the vice chair in charge of bank supervision.
    Trump has promised a decision in the next few days. However, he also said he would name a Powell successor weeks ago and has not done so yet.
    Yellen and others have criticized Trump for leaning so hard against the Fed for lower rates, something that previous presidents have done but in a much less public manner.
    The concern is that Trump is treading on the Fed’s independence, something officials feel is vital for proper monetary policy free of political influence.
    “There is going to be a bit of an institutional pushback from the Fed,” Gardner said, noting that Powell was at the Treasury Department in the early 1990s when President George H.W. Bush was pressuring then-Fed Chair Alan Greenspan for lower rates. “I think it’s in a secure enough place for now, but things can change. So I don’t think it’s existential now, but of course, it’s a fluid situation.” More

  • in

    Want better returns? Forget risk. Focus on fear

    An investor will take on more risk only if they expect higher returns in compensation. The idea is a cornerstone of financial theory. Yet look around today and you have to wonder. Risks to growth—whether from fraught geopolitics or vast government borrowing—are becoming ever-more fearsome. Meanwhile, stockmarkets across much of the world are at or within touching distance of record highs. In America and Europe, the extra yield from buying high-risk corporate bonds instead of government debt is close to its narrowest in over a decade. Speculative manias rage around everything from cryptocurrencies and meme stocks to Pokémon cards. More

  • in

    If America goes after India’s oil trade, China will benefit

    WHEN WESTERN countries began boycotting Russian oil in 2022, India saw an opportunity. Some 2.6m barrels a day (b/d) of crude once destined for Europe were available—at a sweet discount. India, which bought next to no oil from Russia in 2021, pounced. It has remained Russia’s biggest customer ever since. Today it imports nearly 2m b/d of Russian “sour”, heavy crude, representing 35-40% of its crude imports. The supply reduces India’s import bill at a time when the world’s fastest-growing big economy burns ever more petroleum. Local refiners make a killing by processing the stuff into fuels that they then export at full cost. More