18
1 800 FLOWERS COM INC (FLWS)·Q2 2025 Earnings Summary
Executive Summary
- Q2 FY2025 revenue was $775.5 million (-5.7% YoY); diluted EPS was $1.00 as gross margin held at 43.3% amid a highly promotional environment and OMS implementation issues at Harry & David that resulted in ~$20 million lost revenue and ~$6.3 million incremental costs .
- Adjusted EBITDA was $116.3 million (vs. $130.1 million prior year), with gross margin excluding OMS costs at 43.5% (+20 bps) and operating expenses down $19.9 million YoY .
- Guidance cut: FY2025 revenue now seen down mid-single digits; Adjusted EBITDA $65–$75 million; FCF $25–$35 million (from prior flat to low-single-digit decline, $85–$95 million EBITDA, FCF $45–$55 million). The company amended its credit agreement to add flexibility around covenant definitions .
- Key near-term catalysts: OMS remediation; favorable Valentine’s Day placement; wholesale gift baskets recovery; accelerated marketing/AI initiatives to improve efficiency and engagement .
What Went Well and What Went Wrong
What Went Well
- Gross margin resilience: Q2 gross margin 43.3% flat YoY; excluding OMS costs, 43.5% (+20 bps). Gourmet Foods gross margin rose 30 bps to 43.5% on inventory/labor optimization .
- Operating discipline: Operating expenses fell $19.9 million YoY to $244.5 million; adjusted operating expenses down $2.9 million to $239.1 million .
- Strategic focus and technology: Management emphasized accelerating “Work Smarter” efficiencies to fund Relationship Innovation initiatives; AI will be leveraged to deepen personalization and marketing effectiveness (“AI can significantly help us here…deliver highly personalized marketing experiences”) .
What Went Wrong
- OMS implementation issues: New Harry & David OMS escalated during peak, causing bottlenecks and cancellations; estimated ~$20 million e-commerce revenue loss, ~20 bps gross margin impact, ~$6.3 million P&L costs; lost EBITDA estimated at ~$8 million due to lost revenue mix .
- Corporate gifting weakness: Corporate revenue ~$70 million vs. ~$84 million last year (-17.5%), lower AOV/items per order and fewer orders .
- Promotional/macro headwinds: Softer-than-expected and highly promotional consumer environment hurt marketing efficiency; free and lower-cost channels underperformed (search rank changes reduced natural/branded search returns) .
Financial Results
Consolidated Results vs Prior Quarter and Year
Segment Breakdown
Selected KPIs
Guidance Changes
Earnings Call Themes & Trends
Management Commentary
- “We are disappointed that our Q2 performance did not meet our expectations…Some of the challenges were self-inflicted…we remain optimistic about our future performance…we are confident that the strategies and the foundational steps we have implemented will significantly improve our trends” — Jim McCann .
- “AI can significantly help us here…accelerate our personalization efforts and present customers with content that is specific and appropriate…deliver highly personalized marketing experiences” — Jim McCann .
- “Our e-commerce business declined 8.3%…OMS related issues reduced Q2 e-commerce revenue by approximately $20 million…gross profit impacted ~20 bps…incremental OMS-related costs ~$6.3 million” — James Langrock .
- “We successfully delivered over 7 million orders this holiday season” — James Langrock .
- “We must accelerate our Work Smarter initiatives to cut costs and in turn increase investment in our growth-oriented relationship innovation initiatives and marketing strategies” — Thomas Hartnett .
Q&A Highlights
- Valentine’s Day placement: Friday placement and Super Bowl timing expected to benefit demand vs prior year; plan for early incentives and flexible marketing .
- Corporate gifting: Down ~17.5% YoY to ~$70 million; retooling offerings and year-round engagement; lower price points saw “hotspots” .
- Marketing efficiency: Election inflated rates; post-election moderation in some channels; bottom-funnel search rank changes hit natural/branded search .
- Tariffs: Colombia tariff scare would be painful; China exposure ~$40–$45 million of COGS; industry depends on Colombia for 50–60% of U.S. fresh flowers .
- Wholesale: Strong tailwind in Q2; shift of ~$3 million orders from Q1 to Q2; broader customer base should keep wholesale stronger .
- OMS remediation: Majority of issues expected to be fixed by Q3; residual issues manageable given lower Food Group volumes outside December peak .
Estimates Context
- Wall Street consensus (S&P Global) could not be retrieved due to access limits; numeric comparisons to estimates are unavailable. Given the guidance reduction (revenue mid-single-digit decline; Adjusted EBITDA $65–$75 million; FCF $25–$35 million), consensus estimates likely need downward revisions for FY2025 revenue, EBITDA, and FCF to reflect OMS disruption, corporate gifting softness, and promotional headwinds .
Key Takeaways for Investors
- Q2 print: Solid gross margin and EPS despite OMS disruption; however, lost revenue and higher customer care/shipping costs weighed on Adjusted EBITDA, prompting a guidance cut .
- Near-term setup: Favorable holiday placement and wholesale basket tailwind should support Q3 trajectories; monitor OMS remediation pace and marketing ROI post-election .
- Execution focus: Accelerate “Work Smarter” savings to fund growth initiatives; AI personalization and same-day expansion across non-floral brands are strategic levers .
- Risk watch: Promotional intensity, corporate gifting weakness, and tariff exposure (Colombia, China) remain headwinds; BloomNet revenue pressure laps mid-year .
- Balance sheet/credit: Amendment adds flexibility to covenant definitions; net cash position improved by Q2 with $247 million cash; term debt at ~$160 million; revolver undrawn at Q2 end .
- Medium-term thesis: If OMS issues are resolved and AI/marketing efficiency improve, margins can sustain low-40s while top-line recovers on price-point breadth and wholesale strength; tuck-ins (e.g., Scharffen Berger) augment assortment .
- Trading implications: Watch for operational updates (OMS fix progress), Q3 Valentine’s execution, and any post-guidance analyst revisions; headline sensitivity around tariffs and corporate demand commentary is high .