L'Oréal S.A. (OR) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good morning, and thank you very much for joining this call following the announcement this morning that L'Oréal acquires a 10% in Galderma. This call will be hosted by the L'Oréal CEO, Nicolas Hieronimus; and CFO, Christophe Babule. There will be some short opening remarks before we open the line to Q&A. And with that, I would like to hand over to Mr. Hieronimus.

Thank you so much, and good morning or afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us here. And apologies for those who have been forced to interrupt some well-deserved holidays for this call, but we'll try to make it efficient. So we're here to talk about the decision we made with the agreement of our Board of Directors to take a 10% minority stake in Galderma, the world's pure-play dermatology leader and one of the world's largest players in injectable aesthetics. I'm truly convinced that consistent with our mantra, seize what is starting, it is the right time for L'Oréal to explore the growing strategic territory of injectable aesthetics. As you know, for the past 115 years, L'Oréal has been dedicated solely to beauty, but to all of beauty. And throughout this time, we have constantly put our science and innovation at the service of beauty to develop the best products and services for our consumers. In today's world where life expectancy is rising, people of all ages are increasingly starting to adopt more holistic approaches to care for their well-being and their well-aging. As a result, consumers are now incorporating additional elements into their beauty routines, including diagnostic tools, dermocosmetics and, of course, aesthetic treatments. Thanks to our leadership in R&I and Beauty Tech, we have already made great progress in developing high-performance topical products in addition to award-winning diagnostic tools and devices. And of course, we have seen the extraordinary growth of the dermocosmetics sector and of our own LDB division, which demonstrated a plus 29% CAGR between 2020 and '23 alone. This growth has in part been fueled by our unique and long-term partnership with thousands of dermatologists around the world and our complementary portfolio of brands, including 3 of the 4 most dermatologic prescribed brands. But consumers are increasingly tapping into adjacencies to our current portfolio, in particular, injectable aesthetics. However, as an adjacency, it's important to remember that many of these consumers already use L'Oréal brands as part of their beauty routine and that we also have a clear leadership in medical topical skincare with a range of products designed to prolong the effect of aesthetic treatments with brands like SkinCeuticals or skinbetter science. The numbers speak for themselves. The total market in injectable aesthetics has reached EUR 9.3 billion in 2023, having shown a CAGR at 12% in the past 5 years. The penetration rates of these procedures already stand at mid-single digits. And looking at the number of considerers, i.e., people who consider using these procedures, penetration rates could double in the next decade. This clearly demonstrates the large potential for growth in the injectable aesthetics market. Our investments will be complemented by a strategic scientific partnership, which we believe will open up new possibilities for the future as we leverage the world-leading expertise of both companies: Galderma's know-how in the field of injectable aesthetics and therapeutic dermatology and L'Oréal's expertise in skin biology, diagnostic tools and evaluation methods. This partnership will also help us to further explore the synergies between injectables and topical treatments, which have always been at the heart of the business model of a number of our LDB brands, including SkinCeuticals and skinbetter science. So I thank you for your attention, and I'd like to move on to your questions. Thank you.

[Operator Instructions] The first question is from Bruno Monteyne with Bernstein.

[indiscernible], as you rightly outlined, but the 10% stake without a Board seat is still kind of a halfway house. So I'm trying to understand your rationale of doing this transaction a bit better. So is it that you think that L'Oréal is a better owner of that Galderma stake because you'll give them the signs to grow faster? So it's about Galderma growing fast in your stake. Or is it about buying optionality for the future in case this really is more long lasting than you see today? I'm just trying to get my head around why you would just want to take 10% stake in there. And then the second one is you talked a lot about the science that L'Oréal will do with them, but obviously, Galderma is a strong company with a strong track record as well. Which bits of the signs would you say are most unique that L'Oréal can contribute to Galderma?

Okay. So first, on the 10% stake, we are very happy with the long-term minority investment we are making in Galderma. As we say -- as we said, it's a company which model and the vision we believe in. We have strong respect with the management, and it's a good investment. And as I said, it's an opportunity for us to explore and learn this market of injectable aesthetics, which is the part of Galderma that has developed the most over the couple of years. And being in this -- being a shareholder of Galderma and, at the same time, having this scientific partnership allows us to learn, to see the development of this category and to keep our options open for the future. And as far as R&D, it's very important to understand that, of course, we'll continue to maintain 2 independent R&D organizations. But we'll build a bridge between our teams, which have very specific expertise. The MOU around this scientific partnership is currently being worked on. So the -- again, we are still discussing, but there are obvious areas like the synergies between injectables and topicals. As we know, most of the 300,000 derms that use our products, at least those who practice aesthetic procedures systematically complement the injections with topicals and using our science to work -- to discover even further synergies between these products is very important both for both companies. And I think the fact that we have the strong expertise in skin biology, in diagnostic tools, so in the evaluation method, which allow to demonstrate the efficacy of products, is something that is interesting to Galderma. So I think there are strong synergies, and at the same time, the 2 companies will remain very independent as it relates to R&D, as it should be.

And Nicolas, if I can rephrase my first question differently, I'm sure you considered taking out all of Galderma. What would be the biggest reason for not having gone much bigger than the 10%? Is it doubts you have about the size of the injectables? Is it fear about the kind of risk of medical procedures and litigations? What would be the biggest consideration not to be bolder at this stage?

No, there's no fear. No. As you know, it's just we don't do a fiction. We had the opportunity and the agreement of both the equity fund as well as the support of the management for L'Oréal to become a shareholder of this company and, at the same time, allow us, once again, to learn about this adjacency which is indeed very close to our business, but it's a business we do not know. So it seems to us that 10% is a good way to learn and to keep the options open for everyone.

The next question is from Iain Simpson with Barclays.

I'm obviously conscious that you used to have Galderma as a JV. I'd just be interested to hear how much in your view that business has changed since you were last its owners, as I'm guessing you had a pretty good look at it during the sort of due diligence on that 10% decision.

Yes, yes. You're right, it's true that it's a fact that we used to be a co-owner of Galderma, which we sold in around a share transaction with Nestlé back into 2014. And it's today a totally different company, a totally different Galderma, a totally different market and even a totally different L'Oréal. Because when you look at it, since then, if I stick to Galderma, it's more than doubled in size and it's moved from EUR 1.6 billion to EUR 4.1 billion. But more importantly, it has moved from being a primarily therapeutic company where Rx drugs were the #1 category by far to a pure-play dermatology company with a majority of its business derived from both injectable aesthetics and cosmetics and dermatological skincare. Today, it's a -- so in 2014, Galderma was 60% therapeutical prescriptions. And today, there are more than 80%, the sum of injectable aesthetics and dermatological skincare. In the same time, the market itself has increased more than sixfold, the market of procedures increased more than sixfold. And finally -- no, sorry, it's their business. And finally, it's also a different L'Oréal because, as you know, L'Oréal dermatological beauty, which has been renamed a couple of years ago, which is a clear indication that we want to be this #1 partner to all the dermatologists around the world. We have seen this company with a 20% -- 29% CAGR over the last 4 years. It's become today the third division, the fastest-growing, the most profitable. So it also has heightened our interest in this field. So our strong partnership with dermatologists, the transformation of Galderma make this investment very relevant today when it was less strategic 10 years ago.

The next question is from Jeff Stent with BNP.

Could you just explain how the science partnership will work? Because you talked about synergies between injectables and topicals, but obviously, that's something that Galderma is already very active at exploring for its own business. So from a sort of competitive standpoint, how can the science partnership actually work if it's targeted at exploring injectables and topicals?

Well, you have also to ask the same question to Flemming, the CEO of Galderma, because I think they're having a call on his side. But we've been having very interesting discussions between, of course, the 2 CEOs, the 2 Heads of R&D. And we see that we have a depth of knowledge in skin biology of different ethnic groups. As we said, we have 115 years of experience in beauty with a strong focus on skincare. We have invested a lot on evaluation methods, whether it's to test the products or to measure their efficacy. So it's part of the domains that have raised interest in the teams of Galderma. And of course, yes, they do have a research that works around the combination of injectables and dermatological skincare. But today, I would say their R&D is a bit more biased or focused towards the therapeutic dermatological skincare. They have one big drug about to come out. So I think we are pretty complementary, but it's something that's in the making, to be honest. And we are -- right now, our teams are exploring the exact field that we'll be able to work on, of course, in full respect of all the non-compete laws that we have to take particular care of in this situation.

The next question is from James Edwardes Jones with RBC.

I suppose the opposite from Bruno's question really. I mean what do you get from taking this 10% stake that you couldn't get from just a conventional joint venture? And second then, can I come back on that point about the rules that you need to observe about having a shareholding in potentially a competitor, around 30% of their sales is of dermatological skincare. What sort of processes will there be in place to ensure that you're both a collaborator and a competitor and the competition side isn't jeopardized?

Well, I will answer that one and maybe I'll let Christophe jump for the first question. On the non-compete, it's very simple, we have made -- and it was a mutual decision. We've made the decision not to have a seat at the Board, which means that we will not be part of any discussion, whether strategic or tactical, around the development of Cetaphil in the world of dermocosmetics. We have our own brand, they have their own and they compete very healthily. Both are growing, by the way. And so we -- there will be absolutely no discussion or relationship on the businesses on which we compete. And that's why we don't have a seat at the Board, and that's why most of the cooperation will be on the science side, around the understanding of the injectable aesthetics world and as well as its synergies with the topical one. So it's going to be absolutely totally separated. Does that answer your question on at least on the second one?

Yes, it does.

Okay. On my side, regarding the deal and the opportunities that we had, obviously, taking a share of 10% makes something very strong in terms of cooperation with Galderma. And it's proved, first, our commitment to explore these new adjacencies. And that's why I think that taking a share of 10% plus a scientific partnership makes this objective much stronger for the future.

The next question is from Jeremy Fialko with HSBC.

Just one from me. Clearly, you're doing this, you say, to learn more about the market. Maybe you could just talk about what are the sort of milestones or things that you would want to get comfortable with in order for you to say, yes, this is definitely a business that we actually want to be in more fully than where we are at the moment?

Well, we've been, of course, observing this market already from the outside. As I said, we -- with our LDB division, we serve already 300,000 dermatologists around the world. And we see, of course, the rise in the development of these practices. What is very clear when I look at it with a 10 years -- the last 10 years because this is when -- this is where the market has accelerated is that the techniques of injections have evolved very strongly. It's more and more easy to do and also less and less painful. But we have to learn about the science, about the differentiation, the capacity to differentiate in technologies, see what are the rising trends, see the geographical possibilities, the evolution of regulation. All this is something that we have to discover. But the reason why we invest is that overall, we are very confident that this market will continue to grow, will become more and more acceptable and accepted and desired by consumers. There is a number of people that consider using injections, all other types of technologies is increasing. So it will be a progressive process. And in the end, again, we are here to be an investor of -- within Galderma for the long term. So there's no stage-gates or particular elements that we need to check. It's, as I said, it's a supportive investment in a company we believe in. And it's going to be a learning curve for us, and then we'll assess at every moment, we'll assess our options.

The next question is from Fulvio Cazzol with Berenberg.

I just wonder whether there's any other clauses or options on the rest of Galderma's stock. So for example, in a scenario where another industry player was to bid for Galderma, like a Procter & Gamble or Unilever, what agreement do you have with Galderma in respect of that? I mean, do you get an option to participate in there? Is it -- would it become a bidding process? I guess what I'm trying to ask, how protected will be the IP that you develop with Galderma in the event that another industry player wants to come in and basically learn more about the sector as well?

Good question. Christophe?

Yes, of course. So first, more than with Galderma is with equity because we enter into an agreement, a shareholders' agreement with equity. And we have agreed to some, of course, standard provisions to demonstrate our willingness to partner in the long run and give assurance to Galderma shareholders that just participated in the IPO. So just to reassure you that the provisions are well balanced and, of course, protective of L'Oréal's best interest. And as you can understand, I cannot comment further on behalf of equity.

Gentlemen, there are no more questions registered at this time.

Okay.

Okay.

Well, thank you, everyone. And...

I'm sorry, we have one additional follow-up, sorry to interrupt. We have a follow-up from Iain Simpson with Barclays.

Sorry, I couldn't resist to follow up.

No, no, Iain, no problem. No problem. We're here for you anyway, so...

So one of the things I noticed on that was, Nicolas, was you were at pains to stress that you weren't taking a Board seat and you wouldn't be involved in strategic or commercial decision-making. But you also, I think, twice talked about optionality. And what I was wondering is you said we'll assess our options, it gives us optionality for the future. Would there be any potential competition concerns in the event that you were to, down the road, make that stake in Galderma bigger, take Board seats, be involved in the strategic decision-making, maybe in time, even have it back to a JV with you having 50% ownership as it used to be? Just trying to sort of understand the landscape and whether that's something that might be problematic.

No. But you know, it's a nice follow-up, but I don't want to comment on hypothetical scenarios. Right now, we're happy with our current long-term minority investment. We're going to be positive, quiet and observing shareholders. And whatever the future holds, we'll adapt and we'll look into it. But it's a -- I don't want to comment on this hypothesis. You want to add something, Christophe?

Yes. And when it comes on competition, of course, we've been looking at that in case there would be any optionalities. And for the time being, there is nothing to worry about.

Understood. I had to try.

Good try. It was the last pre-holiday question at least for me. So I thank you for being with us in that call. And I think it opens a new adventure for...

A new chapter.

Or a new chapter for L'Oréal. So we're very excited about it. And we are very happy with the exchanges and relationship we've had with the Galderma leadership. So all this should be very positive for both companies. I thank you very much, and wish you a great summer.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining. The conference is now over. You may disconnect your telephones.