Seven & i Holdings responds to failure of Couche-Tard’s takeover bid
It may be a week now since talks between Alimentation Couche-Tard and Seven & i Holdings were brought to an end, thus ending Couche-Tard bid to buy the parent company of 7-Eleven, but there still seem to be some unfinished business between the two convenience store giants.
When talks ended late on July 16, Couche-Tard’ Board of Directors released a statement outlining what they said were the reasons why the two companies could not come to an agreement. Couche-Tard placed the blame for the failed talks at the feet of Seven & i Holdings, writing, “there has been no sincere or constructive engagement from 7&i that would facilitate the advancement of any proposal, contrary to comments made publicly by 7&i representatives, including in the July 11, 2025 earnings call in which 7&i noted it is "seriously" considering our proposal.”
The Board said no meaningful progress had moved things forward and that Seven & i Holdings had “engaged in a calculated campaign of obfuscation and delay, to the great detriment of 7&i and its shareholders. We believe this approach reinforces our concerns about your approach to governance. Based on this persistent lack of good faith engagement, we are withdrawing our proposal.”
Seven & i Holdings has now responded to that letter and with a letter of their own from the Special Committee of the Board of Directors. In that letter, the company said it had engaged in good faith negotiations and was disappointed that Couche-Tard had walked away from the discussions, and that in walking away have mischaracterized Seven & i Holdings’ engagement in the talks and the “significant hurdles this transaction faced that they were not committed to resolving.”
Seven & i highlighted three key points as to why the talks failed. The first being that in Seven & i view, Couche-Tard did not take the antitrust concerns around such a large deal seriously, one that would have meant a significant divestiture and that Couche-Tard could not identify a viable buyer who would meet the FTC’s approval.
Couche-Tard, it said never “presented a viable plan for how the divested stores could be put together as a standalone, competitive enterprise, including, for example, the necessary IT and other critical systems, as well as the proposed leadership team for the new enterprise.”
Seven & i also took issue with suggestions that its “governance was not up to the task or fell back on a conventional ‘Japan Inc’ mentality,” adding that the team at Seven & i was “ready to go the distance to determine if a solution could be found.”
Finally, Seven & i said Couche-Tard’s supposed unhappiness with its engagement “demonstrates an unfortunate lack of knowledge of the Japanese market.
“Understanding how business is conducted in the other party’s country is important for the successful completion of a cross-border transaction.”
