Analysis of JNY and LIZ Financial Data Essay -- GCSE Business Marketin

Analysis of JNY and LIZ Financial Data The following paper will compare the five-year performance of two apparel manufacturers utilizing the DuPont Framework and Return on Equity. Then a three- year analysis of common-size income statements will be undertaken to explain changes in income and expenses within each company. Jones Apparel Group (JNY) and Liz Claiborne (LIZ) are the industry leaders in the manufacturing of better clothing, footwear, fragrances, and costume jewelry, and the subject of this analysis. Jones Apparel Group’s recognized brands include: Jones New York, Polo Jeans Company, Nine West, Napier, and costume jewelry licensed under the Tommy Hilfiger brand. Jones aims to gain stability in the apparel industry as well as retail markets through building â€Å"complete lifestyle brands serving a wide breadth of consumers in a wide range of income levels and shopping destination preferences.† (PR Newswire, 2/7/01). Liz Claiborne’s brands include: Claiborne, Curve, Lucky Brand, Monet, and licenses to produce DKNY Jeans and DKNY Active. The company’s success can be attributed to its â€Å"multi-brand, multi-channel strategy† of diversification in the apparel marketplace. (PR Newswire, 2/23/01). The apparel industry is among the most volatile sectors in the market today. Subject to overnight changes in trends and fashion, the industry leaders must be accurate with their predictions and quick to accommodate changes. Because of these fluctuations, it is very hard to assign a competitive advantage to one company over another. While Jones Apparel Group seems to have a comparative advantage in profitability and leverage, Liz Claiborne has been historically more effective at generating revenue from its assets. While Liz is surging to eclipse Jones’ ROE numbers as of late, Jones Apparel Group holds a historical comparative advantage in return on equity and overall financial health. One look at the common-size income statements for these companies can tell a story. While Jones Apparel Group was lagging at year ended 1998, even with a restructuring charge on Liz Claiborne’s income statement, 1999 was a different story. Huge growth at Jones lead to revenues double of that one year ago while Liz, while increasing, was quickly falling behind. The growth for both of these companies continued into the year ended 2000, but Jones Apparel Grou... ...eaders must be accurate with their predictions and quick to accommodate changes. Because of these fluctuations, it is very hard to assign a competitive advantage to one company over another. While Jones Apparel Group seems to have a comparative advantage in profitability and leverage, Liz Claiborne has been historically more effective at generating revenue from its assets. While Liz is surging to eclipse Jones’ ROE numbers as of late, Jones Apparel Group holds a historical comparative advantage in return on equity and overall financial health. One look at the common-size income statements for these companies can tell a story. While Jones Apparel Group was lagging at year ended 1998, even with a restructuring charge on Liz Claiborne’s income statement, 1999 was a different story. Huge growth at Jones lead to revenues double of that one year ago while Liz, while increasing, was quickly falling behind. The growth for both of these companies continued into the year ended 2000, but Jones Apparel Group’s results were brilliant compared to Liz Claiborne’s. One billion dollar growth in revenues as well as higher net income is making Jones Apparel Group the company of the future.