Back to the archive

The encyclopedia · Strategy & Leadership · Strategic decision · 2015–2019

Oriflame's founding family bought it back off the market for SEK 12.9bn

Europe's direct-selling beauty pioneer stopped growing. In 2019 the af Jochnick family took it private, and the board said it could not see the turn.

Oriflame · Avon · 2019-07

What happened

Oriflame, founded in Stockholm in 1967 by the af Jochnick brothers, was one of Europe's first direct-selling beauty companies. For decades, its model worked: independent 'Brand Partners' sold skincare, cosmetics, and fragrances door-to-door and through personal networks, earning commissions on recruitment and sales. At its peak, Oriflame operated in over 60 countries with more than 3 million Brand Partners and revenue exceeding €1.3 billion.

The direct-selling model eroded as e-commerce and social media changed how people bought beauty products. Oriflame's competitors — Sephora, Ulta, and direct-to-consumer brands — offered the same products without the recruitment overhead. Oriflame tried to pivot online, but the Brand Partner model was structurally unsuited to digital commerce: the value proposition was personal relationships, not convenience.

On 22 May 2019 Walnut Bidco, owned by the founding families and already holding 30.82% of the company, offered SEK 227 a share in cash — a 34.8% premium, valuing the equity at SEK 12.85 billion. The independent bid committee's recommendation is unusually plain about why it accepted: it did not think the offer reflected the company's full intrinsic value, but it was "not confident in assuming that the current negative growth trend will turn positive in the near future," and judged that the long-term upside did not outweigh the near-term risk of refusing. Trading ended on 17 July 2019.

Why it happened

  • The direct-selling model depended on personal networks and recruitment; e-commerce made both obsolete by letting customers buy directly without a middleman.
  • Oriflame's Brand Partner structure was a liability in the digital age — the company could not pivot to online without undermining the 3 million partners who were its distribution.
  • The delisting removed public-market discipline and transparency, making it harder to assess whether the turnaround was working.
  • The Russian exit in 2023 removed a significant revenue source, shrinking the company further.
What it costtaken private at SEK 12.9bn; off the exchange after 4 yearscostly

The lesson

A distribution model built on personal recruitment cannot be rebuilt for a market that buys online — and the honest version of that admission is usually a take-private, not a strategy deck.

Aftermath

Oriflame operates as a private company under the af Jochnick family and still sells in over 60 countries. The case is cited alongside Avon's decline as an example of direct-selling beauty models overtaken by e-commerce and social media.

Sources

spotted an error? The club wants to know.

Comments · 0

    Sign in to join the comments.

    More like this

    Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →