Acquisition Valuation Dispute Engulfs Former Skechers Shareholders

Skechers USA US8305661055

A significant legal battle is unfolding over the buyout price of footwear company Skechers USA. Former minority shareholders have launched a class action lawsuit, alleging the $63-per-share acquisition by private equity firm 3G Capital substantially undervalued the thriving business.

The plaintiffs' argument hinges on a perceived disconnect between the company's strong market position and the final takeover valuation. Operationally, Skechers continues to demonstrate considerable strength, approaching $10 billion in annual revenue and expanding its global retail footprint to roughly 5,300 stores.

Recent developments further underscore its momentum. On December 3, 2025, company president Michael Greenberg was inducted into the Footwear News Hall of Fame, recognizing his role in building the world’s third-largest shoe brand. The following day, Skechers launched the "SKX JE1," the first signature basketball shoe for NBA MVP Joel Embiid. This move represents a strategic push into the high-performance basketball segment, a market traditionally led by rivals Nike and Adidas.

The Crux of the Legal Challenge

Filed in the Delaware Chancery Court, the lawsuit centers on the timing and justification for reducing the offer price. Initially, in March 2025, 3G Capital presented a bid of $73 per share. However, following the Trump administration's announcement of new tariffs affecting Asian production sites on April 2, 2025, Skechers' stock price declined. The acquirer subsequently lowered its final offer to $63 per share, closing the deal in September 2025.

Shareholders bringing the suit contend the market's reaction to the tariff news was an overreaction. They argue the price reduction was unjust because the company's fundamental health and long-term prospects remained unchanged, making the lowered valuation unfair.

A Case with Potential Wider Implications

The concluded acquisition has not settled the matter of equitable value for former investors. The discrepancy between the robust operational performance and the disputed takeover price defines the ongoing narrative. The Delaware proceedings are being closely monitored by legal and financial observers, as the outcome could establish a meaningful precedent for valuation disputes in other take-private transactions and acquisitions involving temporary market volatility.