Tariffs are shifting. De minimis rules are under pressure. And new enforcement could change how retailers operate overnight. If you sell across borders—through ecommerce, marketplaces, or direct—these changes don’t just impact compliance. They impact your pricing, margins, and conversion rates.

Register for our Trade and Tariff webinar series for regular updates.

A shareholder, Southeastern Asset Management, sent Mattel's CEO an open letter on May 8, urging him to sell the company. Sell it to private equity, sell it to Hasbro, sell it to a media company, but stop pretending the public market is going to wake up one morning and decide Barbie is worth $30 a share.

Here's the part that's hard to argue with. Mattel closed around $15 the day the letter dropped, down more than 20% on the year, and a month later, it's still stuck around $15. Southeastern owns about 4%, roughly $170M, and has held it for eight years. That's not a hedge fund flipping a position. That's a long-term holder who got tired of waiting.

The operating numbers give him cover. Net sales were about $5.3B in 2025, down 1%. Gross margin slipped 210 basis points. EPS fell from $1.58 to $1.24. Then Q1 2026 printed a $70M adjusted operating loss, even with sales technically beating. You can dress that up. You can't make it grow.

Now the other half. Southeastern's pitch is that Mattel throws off cash, doesn't fit the quarterly-earnings grind, and would be better off private, where it can carry more debt and stop apologizing for soft holiday quarters. Fine. But "load it with leverage and take it private" is a financing maneuver, not a turnaround. Toys are seasonal, tariff-exposed, and tied to whether kids want the thing this Christmas. Wrapping that cash flow in a debt stack doesn't make Barbie sell better. It changes who gets paid first when she doesn't.

Mattel's own answer is worse. The company's response to a falling stock has been to buy back its own shares: more than $1.2B since 2023, about 18% of the float, with another $1.5B authorized through 2028. Think about that. They've retired nearly a fifth of the company, and the stock is still down. At some point, buybacks stop being capital return and start being a CEO buying his own approval rating.

So where does that leave it. Jefferies called PE optionality "credible," a media buyer "strategically sound," and a Hasbro takeout "unlikely," and that's about right. Hasbro and Mattel have flirted for decades without closing. A media company buying a toy maker in 2026 is a hard sell after the streaming-everything era already cooled. That leaves private equity as the likely exit, and PE only pays up for businesses it thinks it can fix or strip.

Mattel keeps saying it's focused on its growth strategy. The Masters of the Universe movie, the mobile games, the IP flywheel. Maybe. But growth strategies are supposed to show up in the share price eventually, and this one hasn't.

The activist is right that the status quo isn't working. He's wrong that selling fixes it. The uncomfortable possibility is that nobody has the answer, and a take-private just moves the problem somewhere the rest of us can't see it.

Walmart's first restaurant tie-in isn't about sandwiches; it's about basket density. Adding a Subway order to a van that's already rolling to your door raises the average ticket at almost no incremental cost. That's an economic edge DoorDash and Uber Eats can't match, since they pay for a dedicated driver per order while Walmart spreads one route across groceries, essentials, and now lunch.

Wednesday, June 10