Lululemon has lost its way. Its brand and products are good, but its market is saturated. x.com 

Lululemon is a stock to avoid around earnings, good or bad, as apparel names almost always are. Too many investors were fooled by its compounder story coming out of Covid. x.com 

Lululemon trading at about 7x earnings is absurdly cheap, among the most mispriced stocks around. x.com 

Lululemon's problem is its pricing, not a weak consumer. Shoppers are fine but aren't buying its products because the prices no longer make sense, which spells trouble for its margins. x.com 

Lululemon looks headed out of business as its customers move to Alo, and another earnings report hammered the stock. Suburban women now wear Alo, at least until they switch to the next shiny brand in a few years, which is why retail apparel is not a long-term investment. x.com 

Lululemon's sell-off may be overdone, with the stock at about 1x EV/sales, below its 2009 financial crisis lows. It was absurdly overvalued during the Covid consumption binge, but this multiple looks too punitive for an athleisure brand. x.com 

Lululemon is no bargain at $99 and an 8x P/E, with revenue shrinking 4% and guidance slashed in two consecutive quarters. x.com 

Lululemon is losing customers because it stopped innovating and its brand stance alienated buyers, hurting its own stock as happened with Nike. Shoppers are shifting to Alo, Vuori, Hoka, On and others, and its quality no longer looks as strong. Lululemon shares have fallen to their lowest level in nearly 10 years, per Kalshi. x.com 

Lululemon is an 800lb gorilla worth defending despite bad management and the politics around its skin-tight leggings. x.com 

Brands have no moat, only heat cycles, and Lululemon, at new 8-year lows alongside Nike at 12-year lows, is cooling. People will always buy new clothes to look good, but that requires freshness, and another pair of Lululemons no longer delivers it the way it did in 2020. Winning means spotting which stage a brand is in. x.com  x.com