• Northvolt's $15 billion collapse shook the cleantech industry.
• Its bankruptcy highlights risks in ambitious electric vehicle battery production.
• Rival Redwood Materials is taking a different approach. Here are the main distinctions.

When Northvolt went bankrupt, it sent shockwaves through the cleantech industry.

Backed by big names such as Goldman Sachs and BlackRock, the Swedish startup had set out to revolutionize electric vehicle battery production — not just recycling them, but making new ones, too.

Redwood Materials, a US rival run by Tesla cofounder JB Straubel, is trying to tackle the same problem without succumbing to overambition. To do that, it focuses on upstream materials, maintains strategic partnerships, and avoids direct competition with customers.

Why Northvolt failed

Northvolt's vision was as audacious as it was complex. With $15 billion in funding, the company planned to handle everything in-house: sourcing raw materials, recycling batteries into black mass (a powder rich in nickel, lithium, cobalt, and manganese), refining that material via hydrometallurgy, and then producing battery cells at a massive scale.

With that scope came massive risk. Building and scaling cell manufacturing — especially outside Asia — is notoriously difficult. Northvolt struggled to ramp up operations at its Arctic Circle facility and increasingly relied on Chinese equipment, which slowed production and created bottlenecks. Costs ballooned, debts mounted, and the company ultimately couldn't keep up.

"Northvolt went a little too fast," said an investor who has backed startups in this industry. "They tried to commercialize before perfecting the process at scale." This person asked not to be identified discussing sensitive matters.

Northvolt did not respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

Redwood wants to be 'Switzerland'

Redwood Materials, by contrast, focuses on what it sees as the most valuable — and underinvested — piece of the EV battery supply chain: cathode active materials. CAM accounts for roughly 60% of a battery's value and 15% of the cost of an electric vehicle, according to Redwood.

There's no large-scale CAM production in North America, and that's the gap Redwood wants to fill.

"We're not making battery cells. That's never been part of the plan," said Cal Lankton, Redwood's chief commercial officer. "We don't want to compete with our customers."

Instead, Redwood recycles EV battery production scrap and old batteries into usable metals and refines them into CAM, which it sells to cell manufacturers such as Panasonic and Toyota. This strategy keeps the company neutral while generating revenue from multiple points in the supply chain.

"As JB would say, we can be Switzerland," Lankton told me when I met him recently at Redwood's campus in Nevada's high desert.

Unlike Northvolt, which produced its own batteries and used its recycled material internally, Redwood aims to sell its refined materials to a broad range of customers, reducing dependency on any one player and avoiding direct competition with partners that make batteries.

"What Northvolt set out to build is incredibly impressive — the scope, the aspiration of what they tried to do," Lankton said. "I don't want to come across at all as denigrating what happened."

However, he said that by trying to make batteries itself, Northvolt added extra layers of risk, complexity, and expense.

"You're competing with your customers. So you would only produce CAM for your own consumption, which was Northvolt's plan, right?" Lankton added. "So if any piece in there falls apart, the whole thing breaks."

Step-by-step

Redwood has also been more measured in its scaling. While Northvolt attempted to go from lab to commercial production in one giant leap, Redwood moves step-by-step — refining materials, building CAM capacity, and only taking on new challenges when it's ready.

For example, Lankton said that while Redwood initially intended to hold onto intermediate recycled materials until its CAM operations ramped up, the company made a tactical pivot: sell the intermediate products now, generate revenue, and prove its capabilities.

"A dollar today for a company in our position is much more valuable than a dollar to use in the future," Lankton said. "Let's convert that inventory into cash. Let's demonstrate our capability to our investors, to our customers, to the market."

Redwood also used to make copper foil, a main ingredient in batteries. When Chinese companies began churning this out in massive quantities, prices plummeted, so Redwood halted that part of its business.

"We're not dogmatic," Lankton said. "We're not going to take a business plan and just do it until we think it works and run ourselves into the ground."

Lessons from Northvolt

Northvolt's bankruptcy isn't just a cautionary tale — it's a live case study. The company's downfall underscores the perils of over-integration, overreach, and underestimating the difficulty of battery cell manufacturing.

Redwood Materials is learning and taking a different tack by positioning itself not as a battery maker, but as an enabler of the EV battery supply chain.

"I think that's one of the strengths of Redwood, and I again, not to put too fine a point on it, something that Northvolt kind of struggled with, which is finding those pivot points when the original plan perhaps is getting more expensive or further out in the future," Lankton said. 

• Hooters of America filed for bankruptcy at the end of March.
• The chain has struggled with debt and closed some restaurants last year.
• I went to a Hooters restaurant in Virginia to see what dining at the restaurant is like.

Your local Hooters could see some big changes soon.

The restaurant chain is famous for its waitstaff, who wear short shorts and tight tank tops. Starting in the early 1980s, it went from a single restaurant in Florida to hundreds across the US. Hooters even briefly operated an airline in the early 2000s.

But at the end of March, Hooters of America, one of two companies that operates Hooters restaurants in the US, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The company is owned by private equity firms Nord Bay Capital and TriArtisan Capital Advisors.

Hooters of America's restaurants are still open during the bankruptcy process. The company plans to sell some of its locations to some franchisees who also opened the first locations back in the 80s.

Neil Kiefer, chief executive of Hooters' founding group, HMC Hospitality Group, told Bloomberg last month that he wants to make Hooters more family-friendly post-bankruptcy. That includes getting rid of "Bikini Nights" and changing the menu to include better-quality ingredients, he said.

I wanted to see what Kiefer and Hooters have to work with to make that transition. Hooters has a specific reputation — some call it a "breastaurant," after all — so rebranding as a family-friendly establishment would be quite a pivot.

I headed to a Hooters a short drive from my home in Washington, DC, for lunch to see what it's like. Here's what I found:

I visited this Hooters restaurant in Chantilly, Virginia, on a Thursday.

Located about 40 minutes by car outside Washington, DC, this Hooters is near Dulles International Airport as well as several major highways and freeways, including Route 66.

The parking spaces immediately around the restaurant were full, which I found surprising given that it was 11:20 a.m. on a Thursday. This Hooters had opened just 20 minutes earlier.

The entryway looked exactly like I expected.

These photos of women in bikinis and Hooters outfits were in a vestibule as I walked into Hooters. Once I entered the dining room, the hostess seated me right away.

I was surprised by how busy Hooters was in the late morning on a weekday.

While there were plenty of empty tables, the bar was packed, mostly with people who appeared to be men who were middle-aged or older. One person was even dressed in business casual and looking at spreadsheets on a laptop.

Overall, the restaurant was just under half full less than 20 minutes after it had opened.

This Hooters location was a lot more lively than other challenged restaurant chains I've visited.

When I visited a Red Lobster last September at a similar time on a weekday, it was nearly empty.

And last summer, a Cracker Barrel I went to was about half-full during prime breakfast time.

The Hooters in Chantilly, by contrast, was a little busier than expected. My server told me that many were regulars who work at office parks nearby and like to stop by for lunch.

My server left me this personalized napkin with her name on it.

Right after the hostess showed me to my table, a server came over and introduced herself. She also brought over this napkin, on which she had hand-written her name.

All of the waitstaff at this restaurant were wearing the same short shorts and tank tops that I'd seen in ads for Hooters.

My server was very attentive to me, a guy dining alone, stopping by every 5-10 minutes to make sure I had everything I needed or just chat.

If you're a lonely single heterosexual man, that might constitute great service, but it might not appeal to others.

Hiring only "attractive servers that suit the male gaze is really alienating at least 50% of your dining population," Lilly Jan, a lecturer of food and beverage at the Nolan School of Hotel Administration at Cornell University, said in an interview.

My server was great, and at no point did I feel uncomfortable, nor was my wife bothered about me visiting Hooters. My (female) editor, however, was very keen to make sure I was OK dining there.

I picked up the menu to decide what to order for lunch.

The menu had a decent selection of drinks and food, though I had read that the chicken wings were one of the most popular dishes here.

The menu seemed like standard bar food, from three-patty burgers…

The Hooters menu included beef burgers as well as a fried chicken sandwich.

…to chicken wings that come in a variety of sauces.

I ended up ordering 10 breaded wings, half in the honey sriracha sauce and half with Hooters' Daytona Beach sauce, as well as some curly fries and and a peach lemonade.

The server brought me my peach lemonade after a few minutes.

The peach lemonade was served in a plastic orange cup.

As I waited for my food, I noticed all the TVs around me at this Hooters location.

I counted 26 televisions around this Hooters restaurant. I don't spend much time in sports bars, but they made it seem like a decent place to catch a game or a UFC fight.

Big TVs, or a lot of them, aren't as big a draw for restaurants as they used to be.

A few decades ago, having a huge, flat-screen TV at home was a luxury. Now, it's pretty common. And many sports are now broadcast on streaming services or other easily available channels that people can watch from their living rooms.

That has limited the appeal of bars like Hooters that cater to sports fans, Cornell's Jan said.

One exception is UFC fights, which still charge pay-per-view fees. Fans might be more tempted to go to a sports bar if they can watch the fight there and spend the money instead on some drinks and food, Jan said.

"They're paying for the rights to broadcast that in their places so that people don't have to spend the money to buy the game," Jan said.

After about 10 minutes, my food arrived.

My server brought an extra plate for the bones, which I appreciated.

Of the two sauces I tried on wings, I preferred the honey Sriracha.

I liked the slight sweetness of the honey Sriracha wings more than the Daytona Beach sauce. A bit of ranch on the side provided a nice contrast.

Hooters' chicken wings were fine.

Reviews of Hooters' food often mention the chicken wings as one of the best menu items. I thought that the wings were good, though they weren't quite as crispy as ones I've had elsewhere, such as at Buffalo Wild Wings.

Lots of restaurants, from Raising Cane's to Dave's Hot Chicken, have stepped up their fried chicken offerings over the last several years. That makes it difficult for a chain like Hooters to stand out, Jan said.

"The whole category of chicken-heavy menus has just been blowing up a whole lot," she said.

The fries were perfectly average.

I would have preferred them fried a little longer.

My meal at Hooters was fine, but not game-changing.

The wings were not great but also not terrible, and the fries were slightly underdone. The peach lemonade was a little too sweet.

With a 20% tip, I paid just over $34 for my meal.

On my way out, I noticed this selection of Hooters-themed merchandise.

As I walked by the display, I thought about how I couldn't remember the last time I saw anyone wearing a Hooters T-shirt or baseball cap. I have, however, seen people wearing apparel promoting other brands out in public, from convenience store chain Buc-ee's to burger chain In-N-Out.

Jan, who teaches at Cornell, said she never sees any Hooters apparel when she steps into lecture halls filled with Gen Z students. It's rare to find even at vintage or thrift stores, she said.

"There's just not an interest in sustaining that brand," she said. "And this is a generation that has their pretty ironic sense of humor, so that's pretty significant."

This poster near the entrance promoted Hooters catering service.

Hooters offers catering as well as pick-up and delivery.

The restaurant's focus seems narrow for a modern audience.

Many millennial and Gen Z consumers gravitate toward brands that match their own values, including social inclusion across genders and sexualities, Jan said.

"This slightly dated idea of hot women serving you food is not necessarily part of that more inclusive generational narrative," she said.

Overall, I wouldn't rush back to Hooters anytime soon.

The food at Hooters was alright, and the service was friendly.

But once you looked past the scantily clad waitresses, Hooters felt undifferentiated, just like other fast-casual dining chains that had their heyday decades ago. To me, it seemed like Kiefer had a point: Whether it's better food or something else, Hooters needs to give customers a better reason to stop by.

Big turnarounds in the restaurant world aren't unheard of. Chili's, for example, has spent the last few years remaking itself via value deals and a cheeky social media presence to win over younger diners even as inflation made eating out less affordable.

And over a decade ago, Domino's improved sales by revamping its pizza and admitting to customers in ads that its food wasn't so great.

Those are the kinds of moves that Hooters should be considering as it emerges from bankruptcy, Jan said.

"I think that they really need to make some very strategic and decisive actions to modernize the brand," she said.

Do you work in the restaurant industry and have a story idea to share? Reach out to this reporter at [email protected].

• Some older Americans are worried about what announced cuts to the SSA could mean for their benefits.
• Earlier this year, SSA said it would trim staff by 7,000 and close six out of 10 regional offices.
• Some fear that if a check is late, they won't be able to get help due to the cuts.

In the last two months, Moira MacLean has stopped eating out, paused making bigger purchases, and started searching for a part-time job.

MacLean, 69, is one of many older Americans who are scared about what announced cuts to the Social Security Administration could mean for their benefits and access to resources. Several told Business Insider they're making plans and adjusting their spending, just in case.

"All I can do is cross my fingers and hope," MacLean said. The Washington resident added that her savings are dwindling and she relies on her $2,280 monthly in Social Security after Medicare deductions. "It's really nerve-racking."

The SSA said it would cut about 7,000 staff members and close six of its 10 regional offices as the Trump administration and DOGE have announced widespread federal cost-cutting measures. President Donald Trump said that Social Security benefits would not be touched amid these changes, but 11 older Americans told Business Insider they're worried the cuts could result in delayed payments or inadequate assistance.

Since these changes were announced, the SSA website has had lengthy outages that have locked customers out of their accounts, and wait times for the 800 number have skyrocketed. The older Americans BI spoke with said they're concerned that if a payment is late or if they receive the incorrect amount, they won't be able to get the necessary help due to these issues.

"Any American receiving Social Security benefits will continue to receive them," Karoline Leavitt, White House Press Secretary, told Business Insider in a statement. The SSA didn't respond to a request for comment.

Rob Williams, managing director of financial planning, retirement income, and wealth management at Charles Schwab, said older Americans should not make major financial decisions based solely on emotions.

"There are always news events, market dips, concerns about healthcare costs, and other issues that come up and that worry older Americans," Williams said.

Some are reducing spending and looking for more income

MacLean has dealt with Social Security frustrations over the last few months, including being unable to log into her benefits account and struggling to get customer assistance. She retired two years ago but in light of the recent changes to the SSA, she's looking to reenter the workforce.

Dinah Buck, 67, is also casually looking at the job market. She retired seven years ago on disability from a three-decade career as a pharmaceutical sales representative. She receives over $3,000 in Social Security monthly after Medicare deductions and a retirement annuity but isn't panicking.

"I've started to feel more confident in my ability to manage my financial life after going through so many ups and downs the last few years," said Buck, referring to an expensive divorce and selling a home at a loss.

Diana Bill Jordan, 77, said there's little she can do to safeguard her finances other than limiting spending and continuing to work making and selling perfume. She added any shifts to her benefits could be disastrous for her family — she's already at risk of losing her home.

Bill Jordan, who lives in Texas, gets $670 monthly in Social Security, while her husband receives about $1,200.

"We're already in deep trouble, and if our Social Security is delayed, we'd be the faceless homeless folks in the woods," Bill Jordan said.

Some are putting dreams on pause

For some older Americans, the discourse surrounding Social Security is pushing them to delay large purchases or seek family assistance.

Kathy Heller, 67, said her dreams of moving from her studio apartment to a duplex may be crushed. While she's concerned about her Social Security checks, she's also worried that falling stock prices and rising home values could set her back.

"I've been wanting to move for the last couple of years, and I just can't now," said Heller, who works as a real estate agent and lives in Pennsylvania. "Everything's changed."

Heller, who also receives Social Security survivor benefits, added that, in February, she waited four hours to speak with an SSA representative. Last year, she said she barely waited.

"I am worried about May, June, and July," Heller said, referring to her finances if Social Security is disrupted. She doesn't have much in savings, as she used most of her retirement money caring for her sick husband.

Donna Barton Gifford, 79, declared bankruptcy a few weeks ago and is moving in with her daughter.

"That's one reason I'm moving in with family so that I don't have to live in my car," said Barton Gifford, who worked in IT and was the sole breadwinner of her family for many years. "If the checks don't come when they're supposed to, everything in my life is blown."

Barton Gifford, who receives about $3,600 monthly in Social Security benefits, said she's "never been this scared" about her future and doubts she'll have enough for a long-term care facility if she can only stay with her daughter temporarily.

Some aren't worried — and even applauding cuts

Some older Americans feel calm about what the changes to Social Security could mean for them.

Michelle Husberg, 62, said she and her husband aren't panicked — the couple, who live in Utah, have saved over $3 million. Husberg, who retired from nursing two years ago, doesn't plan to draw from Social Security until she's 67 but her husband is collecting Social Security.

"I'm not too worried about it personally, but I do worry that cutting staff could make it difficult for people needing help," Husberg said. "I think that something has to change to Social Security before it goes bankrupt, but I don't think anything should change for those currently receiving it."

Cheryl Wagner, 78, said she's comfortable living on her income and isn't too worried about any potential shifts to Social Security benefits. Wagner backs Trump and is "so glad to see him doing what I agree needs done," she said.

A few weeks ago, she bought a new car and has recently started a new business selling her artwork at craft shows to help fund work on her house.

"The expenses could hurt me but I'm willing to take that chance," Wagner said.

Federal Trade Commission Chairman Andrew Ferguson said he's keeping an eye on 23andMe's bankruptcy proceeding and the company's planned sale because of privacy concerns related to genetic testing data. 23andMe and its future owner must uphold the company's privacy promises, Ferguson said in a letter sent yesterday to representatives of the US Trustee Program, a Justice Department division that oversees administration of bankruptcy proceedings.

"As Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, I write to express the FTC's interests and concerns relating to the potential sale or transfer of millions of American consumers' sensitive personal information," Ferguson wrote. He continued:

As you may know, 23andMe collects and holds sensitive, immutable, identifiable personal information about millions of American consumers who have used the Company's genetic testing and telehealth services. This includes genetic information, biological DNA samples, health information, ancestry and genealogy information, personal contact information, payment and billing information, and other information, such as messages that genetic relatives can send each other through the platform.

23andMe's recent bankruptcy announcement set off a wave of concern about the fate of genetic data for its 15 million customers. The company said that "any buyer of 23andMe will be required to comply with our privacy policy and with all applicable law with respect to the treatment of customer data." Many users reacted to the news by deleting their data, though tech problems apparently related to increased website traffic made that process difficult.

Read full article

Comments

• American fast-food chain Hooters filed for bankruptcy on Monday.
• Hooters is known for its fried chicken wings and scantily dressed wait staff.
• Here's how the brand rose and fell in the 42 years it's been around.

The restaurant apocalypse has claimed another victim: Hooters of America.

The fast-food chain, known for its chicken wings served by waitresses in bright orange booty shorts, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on Monday in the US Bankruptcy Court in the Northern District of Texas.

The news of the filing came one day short of Hooters' 42nd anniversary. The company was incorporated on April Fool's Day in 1983.

The company said in a press release on Monday that its restaurants will remain open to customers and that business will operate as usual.

It added that it would sell some company-owned stores to a franchise group backed by the company's founders. The company said it aims to emerge from bankruptcy in about 90 to 120 days.

The filing comes as restaurant chains face a difficult stretch. Several other eateries, such as Red Lobster, Bar Louie, and TGI Friday's Inc., have filed for bankruptcy in the past year.

Here's a recap of Hooters' 42 years in the business.

The company was founded in 1983 in Florida.

Hooters opened its first outlet on October 4, 1983, in Clearwater, Florida.

It was founded by six men without restaurant experience.

"Back in 1983 in Clearwater, Florida, six businessmen with no restaurant experience whatsoever got together to open a place they couldn't get kicked out of. True story," the Hooters' website reads.

Since then, it has expanded both domestically and abroad.

According to its website, the company now operates more than 420 Hooters restaurants, both company-owned and franchised, in 42 states in the US and 29 countries internationally.

Hooters opened its first international store outside North America in Singapore in 1996, and it continues to operate today.

Apart from Singapore, it also has a presence in Thailand, China, Brazil, and the United Kingdom, among others.

The brand built a distinctive identity as much on its food as on its wait staff's outfits.

On its website, Hooters describes itself as "Delightfully Tacky, Yet Unrefined."

The chain is perhaps best known for its staff's uniforms. Its workforce of largely female servers is dressed in skin-tight white tank tops with plunging necklines paired with bright orange booty shorts.

"Craveable food, cold beer, and all the sports you could possibly watch on wall-to-wall big screen TVs," Hooters proclaims on its website.

"And let's not forget the Hooters Girls," it adds.

Its offerings are distinctly American — chicken wings, burgers, sandwiches, tacos, and cakes.

It has released its Hooters Calendar every year since 1986, which is filled with pictures of swimsuit models. The 2025 calendar, which is sold out on the company's website, was priced at $19.95.

Hooters briefly experimented with the airline business.

In 2003, Hooters launched a low-cost air service that operated domestically within the US. Two Hooters waitresses were on board each flight to tend to and entertain passengers.

The airline's planes were emblazoned with the brand's signature owl logo and painted in its distinctive shade of orange.

Hooters Air shut down three years later in 2006, citing a $40 million loss.

Like the rest of the food industry, Hooters was not spared from the effects of the pandemic.

However, Hooters' CEO, Sal Melilli, said in 2020 that customers had "pent-up demand" during the pandemic, and the company saw them flood back when it opened its restaurants again.

Melilli said the chain reversed its declining sales and achieved flat comparable sales after reopening Hooters restaurants in 2020. The eatery reopened its doors in mid-2020.

The brand has encountered financial woes in recent years.

Hooters took out a five-year $70 million loan in 2022 for "working capital and general corporate purposes," according to a press release.

The bankruptcy filing on Monday said that Hooters suffered from "decreased profitability and substantial debt service payment."

The bankruptcy plan, if approved, would give Hooters $40 million of debtor-in-possession financing.

In a March interview with Bloomberg, Neil Kiefer, the chief executive of Hooters' founding group, HMC Hospitality Group, said the chain suffered when it deviated from its roots as a family-friendly restaurant.

"You go to some parts of the country and people say, 'Oh I could never go to Hooters, my wife would kill me,'" Kiefer said to Bloomberg. "That's depressing to us. We want to change that."

• 23andMe cofounder Linda Avey discussed the company in a LinkedIn post on Wednesday.
• Avey said the biotech company "lost its way" without product development and "proper governance."
• 23andMe filed for bankruptcy, and CEO Anne Wojcicki resigned this week.

23andMe cofounder Linda Avey is mourning what the biotech company could have become.

Avey reflected on 23andMe — and criticized former CEO Anne Wojcicki — in a LinkedIn post on Wednesday, saying that "it was time to express my views on the company, after witnessing the downfall of an idea and brand that could have become the world's leading digital health platform."

On Sunday, 23andMe filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and announced Wojcicki's resignation. Avey worked alongside Wojcicki and Paul Cusenza to launch the biotech company in Silicon Valley nearly twenty years ago. The company makes direct-to-consumer DNA test kits and explores genetic research. Avey served as co-president from 2006 to 2009 and remained a company board member until 2011.

In the post, Avey said the idea for 23andMe sparked after working in life science research for years.

"A lightbulb went on — if I was interested in accessing my own data, wouldn't others feel the same way? Getting deeply personalized information about what makes us 'us' seemed undeniable. It didn't take long for the concept to unfold," she said.

Avey said she pursued this goal under 23andMe until 2009, when her time at the company was "cut short."

"My time at the company was cut short in 2009, when my co-founder Anne convinced the board that she should run the company. And I must be honest, I was frustrated with the direction the company took after that point," Avey said. "After my departure, she architected a majority vote for herself that eliminated board governance, even as the board expanded over the following funding rounds. For better or worse, the buck stopped with her. It came as no surprise when the board resigned last year."

Avey said that 23andMe "was in a unique position" initially, and it's "painful to think what could have been."

"The company has amassed one of the largest genetic data collections in the world, and to Anne's credit, created a terrific consumer brand. We can only imagine the importance of the dataset that could have been built, combining blood work, deeper gene sequencing, wearable data, and providing actionable insights," Avey said. "Now, the market is fragmented with data siloed in many different companies."

Avey said 23andMe "lost its way" without "consumer-focused product development" and "proper governance."

"The 14+ million people who bought into the concept deserve to see their data moved to a secure platform with new leadership and vision," Avey said.

Avey rounded out her statement by emphasizing the importance of a balanced C-Suite.

"There are many cautionary tales buried in the 23andMe story. Striking a balance between the desire for founder control and board oversight is essential; otherwise, why have a board at all?' Avey said. "It's a familiar trope in Silicon Valley that wealth translates into unquestionable business savvy. But no matter how great an idea, the importance of the dynamics of the founding team and their ability to listen to feedback is key."

Avey, Wojcicki, and representatives for 23andMe did not respond to requests for comment from Business Insider.

23andMe struggled before filing for bankruptcy

23andMe has weathered several storms since 2023.

Although privacy concerns have bogged down the company for years, criticism spiked that October over news that some user data had been compromised. Hackers claiming access to the data, including birth details and names, were selling it on the dark web. 23andMe told BI the ancestry data for almost 7 million users were accessed. Following a class action lawsuit, the company agreed to a $30 million settlement last September.

That same month, the independent directors of 23andMe's board resigned in a letter addressed to Wojcicki, saying it's "clear that we differ on the strategic direction for the Company going forward."

23andMe announced three new independent board members in October 2024 and added another member this month.

Wojcicki landed in the hot seat in 2024 when an SEC filing said she "would be open to considering third-party takeover proposals." After consumers expressed concerns over what could happen to their personal data, Wojcicki reversed course.

The cracks at 23andMe deepened last November when the company announced it was restructuring its business, laying off roughly 40% of its staff, and ending further development of its therapeutics program.

Most recently, 23andMe said it will continue to operate while seeking a buyer.

"After a thorough evaluation of strategic alternatives, we have determined that a court-supervised sale process is the best path forward to maximize the value of the business," chair Mark Jensen said in a press release. "We expect the court-supervised process will advance our efforts to address the operational and financial challenges we face, including further cost reductions and the resolution of legal and leasehold liabilities."

• 23andMe has found a buyer in biotech company Regeneron Pharmaceuticals.
• Its business floundered after a data hack, lawsuit, and tumbling stock prices.
• For those concerned about their dataset transferring ownership, here is how to delete it.

Your 23andMe data is getting a new owner — so what are your options moving forward?

The DNA testing company announced on Monday that its assets are being acquired by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. The sale renewed concerns from some customers online about their data and how its new owner plans to use it.

As part of the court-supervised sale, Regeneron agreed to comply with the current privacy policies and terms of services in effect and maintain "critical protections around customer privacy, choice and consent with respect to their genetic data," Mark Jensen, member of the special committee of the board of directors of 23andMe, said in a press release.

Data hacks, a class action lawsuit, and leadership tension between former CEO Anne Wojcicki and the board left 23andMe's fate in the balance as it searched for a buyer.

Wojcicki resigned as CEO and 23andMe filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in March, roughly six months after its board resigned, citing disagreements on the company's strategic direction.

Regeneron, a publicly traded biotech firm, specializes in developing therapeutics based on antibodies — engineered proteins designed to combat viruses and other harmful invaders. It made headlines in 2020 for its experimental COVID-19 treatment that President Donald Trump lauded at the time.

Prior to the acquisition news, many 23andMe customers expressed concern over what a sale could mean for their user data. The director of cybersecurity at Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit focused on digital privacy, previously urged their 186,000 X followers to delete their data from 23andMe, with their post garnering more than 531,000 views in three days.

23andMe says the personal data it collects includes registration information like birth date, genetic information like a user's genotype, sample information like saliva, and self-reported information.

Yet "beyond our contracted laboratory, with which we work to process a customer's sample and deliver their results, customer information will not be shared with any other entity unless they provide us with consent to do so," a 23andMe spokesperson previously told Business Insider.

The spokesperson said the company doesn't share data with "employers, insurance companies, law enforcement agencies or any public databases."

Users are still concerned, however, about their information.

"Data is data — once it's out there, it's very hard to control," James Hazel, a biomedical researcher, previously told Business Insider.

How to ask 23andMe to delete your data

Users who want their personal information removed from 23andMe can opt out in the "23andMe Data" section in Account Settings. But 23andMe says it is legally required to retain some information.

"While we will delete the majority of your Personal Information, we are required to retain some information to comply with our legal obligation," the company's website says.

"23andMe and/or our contracted genotyping laboratory will retain your Genetic Information, date of birth, and sex as required for compliance with applicable legal obligations... even if you chose to delete your account," the company's privacy statement says.

The privacy statement says 23andMe will also retain some information associated with user accounts, like email addresses.

For users who participated in 23andMe Research, their genetic data and self-reported information won't be used in future research projects.

"Customers always have the option to delete their account at any time, and once the request is confirmed, we will immediately and automatically begin the deletion process," the spokesperson said. "Deleting an account and associated data will permanently delete the data associated with all profiles within the account. If a customer asks us to store their genetic samples, they will be discarded."

• A class action lawsuit, resignations, and layoffs plagued 23andMe, which filed for Chapter 11 in March.
• Biotech company Regeneron is buying the DNA testing startup's assets for $256 million.
• Here's a look at the rise and fall of 23andMe.

23andMe, the startup that helped usher in the era of consumer DNA test kits nearly two decades ago, filed for bankruptcy protection in March after setbacks including a class action lawsuit and data breach.

Now, Regeneron is buying its for $256 million two months after the Chapter 11 filing and resignation of founder and CEO Anne Wojcicki.

Mark Jensen, chair of 23andMe's special committee of directors, said on May 19 the deal "maximizes the value of the business and enables the mission of 23andMe to live on, while maintaining critical protections around customer privacy, choice and consent with respect to their genetic data."

A 23andMe spokesperson said after the Chapter 11 filing that its "mission of helping people live longer, healthier lives through a preventive approach to health, and providing access to potentially life-changing genetic information, hasn't changed."

The company did not immediately respond to a request for comment following the deal announcement.

Here is a timeline of 23andMe's rise and fall:

2006: 23andMe is founded in Silicon Valley

23andMe CEO Anne Wojcicki co-founded the company in 2006 with biologist Linda Avey and Paul Cusenza, who previously worked at the now-defunct Perlegen Sciences, a biotech startup that studied human genomes.

The company planted roots in Silicon Valley, where other startups like Twitter and YouTube were taking shape at the time.

"The team of three worked out of a small office in Palo Alto, complete with an overcrowded, hardworking computer server room," a company blog post says. "Scientific rigor was top of mind; the co-founders spent their early days meeting with regulators, building a robust advisory committee, and figuring out how to give people direct access to their genetic information."

Avey stepped down as co-president in 2009 and officially left the company in 2011. Cusenza departed in 2007.

2007: 23andMe secures millions in funding from Google

23andMe quickly secured funding from several companies, including Google.

A May 2007 SEC filing said Google invested $3.9 million into 23andMe, taking a minority interest. The filing also said Google cofounder Sergey Brin provided millions in interim debt financing to 23andMe.

"Prior to Google's investment in 23andMe, Sergey provided approximately $2.6 million in interim debt financing to 23andMe, which was repaid as part of this financing transaction," the filing said.

The funding coincided with Brin's marriage to Wojcicki that May. The pair, who share two children, divorced in 2015.

2007: 23andMe launched its first product for $999

23andMe launched its first product — a DNA saliva test — for sale in the United States in November 2007.

The company priced the product at $999.

Users could access information about their risk for certain diseases, their ancestry, and their inherited traits. 23andMe provides data to users through a private online account.

"We believe this information provides intriguing insights into an individual's genetics, with the goal of expanding the collective knowledge base by enabling active participation in research," Wojcicki told Reuters at the time.

However, 23andMe's growing popularity didn't come without criticism. Some consumers were concerned about privacy related to their data and whether insurers could access it to deny coverage or discriminate against certain individuals.

A 23andMe spokesperson previously told BI that user data is not shared with other entities unless given consent.

"Beyond our contracted laboratory, with which we work to process a customer's sample and deliver their results, customer information will not be shared with any other entity unless they provide us with consent to do so," a statement said.

The spokesperson added that 23andMe did not share user data with "employers, insurance companies, law enforcement agencies or any public databases."

2008: Time Magazine named 23andMe's Personal Genome Service its Invention of the Year

Despite the privacy concerns, 23andMe began to gain recognition for the work of its researchers. Time Magazine named 23andMe's Personal Genome Service its Invention of the Year in 2008.

"Although 23andMe isn't the only company selling DNA tests to the public, it does the best job of making them accessible and affordable," Time Magazine wrote.

"We are at the beginning of a personal-genomics revolution that will transform not only how we take care of ourselves but also what we mean by personal information," Time wrote. "In the past, only élite researchers had access to their genetic fingerprints, but now personal genotyping is available to anyone who orders the service online and mails in a spit sample."

The company slashed the price of its service from $999 to $399 that same year.

2009: Google makes another multimillion-dollar investment in 23andMe

Google invested $2.6 million in 23andMe again in June 2009, according to an SEC filing.

The filing mentions Brin, who was still married to Wojcicki at the time.

"Prior to Google's investment in 23andMe's Series B preferred stock financing, Sergey also invested approximately $10 million in 23andMe's convertible debt financing, which was converted into Series B preferred stock as part of this financing transaction," the filing said.

2010: 23andMe gets its first National Health Institute-funded grant

23andMe launched its first National Health Institute-funded study in 2010 after securing a grant, the company announced at the time. Specifically, the company secured an NIH Small Business Innovative Research Grant to "validate our web-based approach to pharmacogenomics research."

"The purpose of this first phase is similar to that of our first research publication: to demonstrate that we can replicate known genetic associations using the web-based survey data volunteered by our customers," 23andMe said in its announcement.

The company would later receive more grants from the NIH, including about $1.4 million in 2014.

That year, 23andMe published its first peer-reviewed study.

2011: 23andMe secures almost $31 million in its third round of funding

The company announced in January 2011 that it raised $31 million during its third round of funding after securing an additional $9 million.

MPM Capital and Johnson & Johnson Development Corporation became the newest investors in 23andMe.

2012: 23andMe lowers its price to $99, making the product more accessible

The company reduced the cost of its service to $299 in May 2012 and again to $99 later that year.

23andMe said in December 2012 that it raised more than $50 million in another round of financing, which would help the company reach its goal of 1 million customers. Investors included Israeli entrepreneur Yuri Milner, Google Ventures, MPM Capital, Brin, and Wojcicki.

At the time, the company only had about 180,000 customers.

"The Series D investment, combined with rapidly decreasing costs associated with genetic testing technologies, enables 23andMe to reduce the price of its Personal Genome Service to $99, effective immediately," the company said.

2013: FDA orders 23andMe to stop marketing its genetic health screening service

23andMe found itself in trouble with the US Food and Drug Administration in 2013.

The FDA instructed 23andMe to stop marketing its genetic health screening service in the United States until it completed the agency's regulatory review process. The company could continue selling its ancestry service.

23andMe complied with the FDA's request, meaning it only provided users with Ancestry reports and raw data.

Wojcicki discussed the FDA's regulation during an appearance at the SXSW festival in 2014.

"It has slowed up the number of people signing up," Wojcicki said, according to The Guardian.

She added: "We are pioneers. We've had a lot of ups and downs but we have lots of tenacity to push on through. It will take time, money, and effort to figure out the path forward."

The company met the FDA's standard in 2015.

"The new 23andMe experience reflected almost two years of work with regulators, our scientists, medical experts, and product designers," the company said. "The result is the first direct-to-consumer test available directly to individuals in the United States that includes reports that meet FDA requirements for being scientifically and clinically valid."

2015: The FDA authorizes 23andMe to market the Bloom syndrome carrier status report

23andMe continued to evolve its services, and in 2015, the FDA granted authorization to market its screening for Bloom syndrome, a rare genetic disorder, the company said at the time.

"This is also the first time the FDA has granted authorization to market a direct-to-consumer genetic test, and it gives 23andMe a regulatory framework for future submissions," 23andMe said in a blog post.

The FDA authorized additional reports following 2015, including BRCA1 and BRCA2 Select Variants.

2019: 23andMe slashes its workforce as consumers lose interest in DNA test kits

The company had millions of users by 2019, showing significant growth since its launch.

But demand began to wane that year as the 23andMe business model — which relied on one-time tests — faltered.

Wojcicki echoed that sentiment in a comment to Business Insider, saying, "It's a new technology, and I think it's hit a lull."

Wojcicki remained optimistic that the industry would bounce back, but 23andMe announced it was laying off 100 employees in January 2020 as sales were still down.

The CEO told CNBC at the time that factors like privacy could remain a sore point. Another reason could be consumers' fear of an economic downturn, meaning the somewhat pricey test is less of a priority.

Despite the downturn, 23andMe continued to collect investments.

In December 2020, 23andMe raised almost $82.5 million in equity funding.

2021: 23andMe goes public and reaches a valuation of over $6 billion

23andMe went public in June 2021 at $11.13 a share, marking a victory for the company after struggling with sales. Before going public, the company completed a reverse merger with Richard Branson's VG Acquisition.

Wojcicki told Business Insider at the time that her "priority is really the long term."

"The short term is obviously important for a lot of people, but everything that I do is focused on the long term. I've only looked at my stock price because I've been doing the news articles and people keep showing it to me," she said.

The company's valuation peaked at $6 billion.

2023: Some 23andMe user accounts are compromised

Concerns about privacy always plagued 23andMe, but those concerns grew after news broke in 2023 that some user data had been compromised.

The data — including birth details and names — was sold on the dark web by hackers.

23andMe confirmed that ancestry data for nearly 7 million users were accessed that December. A data breach notification filing in January 2024 said it took 23andMe five months to realize the data had been accessed.

The incident led to a class action lawsuit, which 23andMe settled for $30 million in September, according to Reuters.

The company also said in SEC filings it laid off more employees in 2023, including that June when it reduced its workforce by 9%. 23andMe laid off another 71 employees in August 2023, according to filings.

2024: 23andMe's board of independent directors resigns

Independent directors on 23andMe's board announced their resignations in a September letter addressed to Wojcicki.

Although the independent directors said they "wholeheartedly support" the company's mission, they took issue with the current business strategy.

"It is also clear that we differ on the strategic direction for the Company going forward," the letter said. "Because of that difference and because of your concentrated voting power, we believe that it is in the best interests of the Company's shareholders that we resign from the Board rather than have a protracted and distracting difference of view with you as to the direction of the Company."

2024: Wojcicki responds to consumer concerns

The company's reputation took another hit in September when an SEC filing said Wojcicki "would be open to considering third-party takeover proposals."

Wojcicki walked back that consideration in a filing later that month.

"Based on subsequent developments, it has become even clearer to me that the best path forward for the Issuer is for me to take the company private," she said.

"Accordingly, in order to update my prior statement and avoid any confusion in the market, I am no longer open to considering third-party takeover proposals for the Issuer."

However, Wojcicki's remarks about selling the company to a third-party issuer raised consumer concerns about what could happen to their data if a sale did take place.

The Atlantic reported that the sale of 23andMe could also mean the potential sale of user data. The director of cybersecurity at Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit focused on digital privacy, urged users to delete their data in a post that garnered 547,000 views.

A 23andMe spokesperson previously told BI that Wojcicki "has publicly shared she intends to take the company private, and is not open to considering third-party takeover proposals."

The statement added: "Anne has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to the company's mission and values, and to its customers, pledging to maintain 23andMe's strong security and privacy policies, including following the intended completion of the acquisition she is pursuing."

2024: The company announces a reverse stock split

In October, the company announced a 1-for-20 reverse stock split of its Class A and Class B common stock. Reverse stock splits are commonly considered signs of trouble for a company.

2024: restructuring and layoffs

23andMe in November announced it was restructuring and laying off more than 200 employees, or roughly 40% of its workforce. It also said it was ending further development of all of its therapeutics programs and "evaluating strategic alternatives" for its clinical and preclinical assets.

"We are taking these difficult but necessary actions as we restructure 23andMe and focus on the long-term success of our core consumer business and research partnerships," Wojcicki said in the announcement.

2025: Bankruptcy filing and Regeneron deal

In March 2025, 23andMe filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, announcing it would continue operating while seeking a buyer.

"After a thorough evaluation of strategic alternatives, we have determined that a court-supervised sale process is the best path forward to maximize the value of the business," chair Mark Jensen said in a press release. It will "advance our efforts to address the operational and financial challenges we face, including further cost reductions and the resolution of legal and leasehold liabilities."

Wojcicki resigned as CEO, effective immediately, but remained on the board. CFO Joe Selsavage took over as interim CEO. The company's stock fell about 50% on the news.

"While I am disappointed that we have come to this conclusion and my bid was rejected, I am supportive of the company and I intend to be a bidder," Wojcicki wrote on X. "I have resigned as CEO of the company so I can be in the best position to pursue the company as an independent bidder."

"We have had many successes but I equally take accountability for the challenges we have today," her post continued. "There is no doubt that the challenges faced by 23andMe through an evolving business model have been real, but my belief in the company and its future is unwavering."

In May 2025, Regeneron announced it was buying 23andMe's assets after winning a bankruptcy auction for $256 million.

"We believe we can help 23andMe deliver and build upon its mission to help people learn about their own DNA and how to improve their personal health, while furthering Regeneron's efforts to improve the health and wellness of many," said Regeneron cofounder and president George Yancopoulos in a press release.

The company promised to "process all customer personal data in accordance with the consents, privacy policies and statements, terms of service, and notices currently in effect and have security controls in place designed to protect such data."

On Sunday, the genetic testing and heritage company 23andMe announced that it had entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy and was asking a court to arrange its sale. The company has been losing money for years, and a conflict between its board and CEO about future directions led to the entire board resigning back in September. Said CEO, Anne Wojcicki, has now resigned and will be pursuing an attempt to purchase the company and take it private.

At stake is the fate of genetic data from the company's 15 million customers. The company has secured enough funding to continue operations while a buyer is found, and even though US law limits how genetic data can be used, the pending sale has raised significant privacy concerns.

Risky business

The company launched around the time that "gene chips" first allowed people to broadly scan the human genome for sites where variations were common. A few of these variants are associated with diseases, and 23andMe received approval to test for a number of these. But its big selling point for many people was the opportunity to explore their heritage. This relied on looking broadly at the patterns of variation and comparing those to the patterns typically found in different geographic regions. It's an imperfect analysis, but it can often provide a decent big-picture resolution of a person's ancestry.

Read full article

Comments

23andMe, once a high-flying DNA testing startup with a nearly $6 billion valuation, has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. The filing landed Sunday night in a Missouri federal court. Along with it came another major move: Anne Wojcicki, co-founder […]

The post 23andMe files for bankruptcy, founder and CEO Anne Wojcicki resigns first appeared on Tech Startups.

• 23andMe filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and CEO Anne Wojcicki has stepped down.
• The DNA testing company faced challenges including a failed privatization attempt and a data breach.
• 23andMe will continue operating while a buyer is sought.

DNA testing company 23andMe filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and CEO Anne Wojcicki resigned on Sunday.

The San Fransisco-based firm, which became popular for its service where customers provide a saliva sample to analyze their ancestry and health risks, said it started the voluntary proceedings in the US Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.

It will continue operating while a buyer is sought.

"After a thorough evaluation of strategic alternatives, we have determined that a court-supervised sale process is the best path forward to maximize the value of the business," chair Mark Jensen said in a press release.

"We expect the court-supervised process will advance our efforts to address the operational and financial challenges we face, including further cost reductions and the resolution of legal and leasehold liabilities."

It also announced that Wojcicki had resigned with immediate effect. She co-founded 23andMe in 2006 after a Wall Street career. Wojcicki was married to Google cofounder Sergey Brin from 2007 to 2015, and the company invested millions in the business.

Her late sister Susan Wojcicki was Google's first marketing manager and went on to become CEO of YouTube before stepping down in 2023. Susan died from cancer the following year.

23andMe went public in June 2021 and was once valued at more than $6 billion. It never turned a profit and faced major hurdles in recent months.

In July 2024, Wojcicki tried to take the company private, but a special committee rejected the proposal. She made another attempt earlier this month that was also rejected.

In September, 23andMe agreed to a $30 million settlement in a class-action suit after hackers compromised the data of some users. A week later, all seven independent board directors resigned. 23andMe laid off about 40% of its staff in November to cut costs.

In an SEC filing the same month, the company said it had debts of $2.3 billion, about $126 million in cash and cash equivalents and would need additional liquidity.

Joe Selsavage, the chief financial officer, has taken over as interim CEO. Matt Kvarda of Alvarez & Marsal was appointed chief restructuring officer.

Wojcicki will remain on the board.

23andMe declined to comment beyond the statement.

• The CEO of The Container Store is stepping down weeks after the company exited bankruptcy.
• In a memo obtained by BI, the board told employees Wednesday that chairman Joe Bines would lead a new "Office of the CEO."
• After a pandemic bump, sales have struggled and the company previously disclosed $230 million in debt.

The Container Store's CEO, Satish Malhotra, is leaving the company weeks after it exited bankruptcy, according to internal communications viewed by Business Insider.

Malhotra's exit is effective immediately as he moves on to "pursue other opportunities," the company said in a memo to employees.

Malhotra joined the housewares retailer in 2021 after more than 20 years with Sephora, where he was the chief revenue officer and the chief operating officer.

The Container Store's board of directors told employees on Wednesday that it is forming the Office of the CEO, which would be led by board chairman Joe Bines and include chief transformation officer Martin Schumacher. Employees will report to the same managers, while Malhotra's direct reports will work with the Office of the CEO.

Wednesday's memo said that the company is "stronger and healthier" after its restructuring and is ready to "recapture a dominant position."

Neither the company nor Malhotra responded to Business Insider's requests for comment. The Dallas Morning News first reported the changes.

Sales at The Container Store, which sells home organization supplies, saw a pandemic bump but struggled in subsequent years as US retail spending slowed. The company disclosed $230 million in debt in its bankruptcy filings in December.

In January, a US bankruptcy judge approved a restructuring agreement that allowed the company to cut $88 million in debt and go private under the ownership of Golub Capital and Glendon Capital Management.

"With our restructuring process now behind us, we have renewed energy and excitement to deliver for our customers," Malhotra said at the time.

Prior to the bankruptcy filings, the company announced a $40 million deal with former rival Bed Bath and Beyond, but that ultimately fell through.

The Texas-based company has around 100 physical stores in the US and an online presence.

• Forever 21 is now navigating its second bankruptcy in five years.
• The brand was known for limited-run collections that turned the typical apparel cycle on its head.
• It also laid the groundwork for brands like Temu and Shein, which won over much of its business.

Forever 21, the once iconic fast fashion mainstay of shopping malls, is now navigating its second bankruptcy in five years, as rising costs and new competition have led to several years of financial losses.

For decades, the brand was a popular choice for budget-minded shoppers, offering limited-run collections that turned the typical apparel cycle on its head.

Forever 21 was once one of the fastest-growing fashion retailers in the world, laying the groundwork for brands like Temu and Shein, which the company later cited as threats to its existence.

Here's a look back at the rise and fall of Forever 21.

The company was founded in 1984 by married couple Jin Sook and Do Won "Don" Chang in Los Angeles.

The couple arrived three years earlier from South Korea with basically no money, no degrees, and nearly no English.

Jin Sook worked as a hairdresser while Don worked as a janitor, pumped gas, and served coffee.

Don said he noticed that the nicest cars were driven by people in the garment business.

Originally called Fashion 21, the Changs' first location in 1984 was a 900-square-foot clothing store they opened with $11,000 in savings.

The store made $700,000 in sales in its first year.

Soon the Changs were opening a new location every six months.

They also rebranded as Forever 21, saying that he store was "for anyone who wants to be trendy, fresh and young in spirit."

The company pioneered the concept of "fast fashion" to stay on-trend.

Jin Sook eventually approved more than 400 designs a day, some of which got the company into trouble with other brands.

By 2015, Forever 21 had 480 US stores and $4.4 billion in global sales.

The Changs became one of America's wealthiest couples, with a combined net worth reaching an estimated $5.9 billion in March 2015.

A goal of 600 worldwide stores and $8 billion in sales by 2017 proved too lofty.

As the company focused on growth, some of its styles became more predictable, while competitors like H&M and Zara gained market share. An executive later said that opening stores in 47 countries in less than six years introduced a lot of "complexity" to the business.

Competition from e-commerce brands also started to eat away at sales.

Brands like Fashion Nova began churning out styles, not to mention the rising influence of Amazon.

Some designs and partnerships didn't exactly help the brand stay relevant with young shoppers, either.

Some social media users have mocked some of its recent designs over the last 6 years, including some from Cheetos, Top Ramen, and the United States Postal Service, as driving Forever 21's financial troubles.

Burdened by $500 million in debt, the company filed for bankruptcy for the first time in 2019.

"Filing for bankruptcy protection is a deliberate and decisive step to put us on a successful track for the future," the company said at the time.

In 2020 — just before the pandemic — Forever 21 reached a deal.

A strategic partnership between Authentic Brands Group and two shopping center owners, Simon and Brookfield, was intended to revitalize the mall-rat-favorite brand.

Brookfield later sold its stake.

The pandemic brought a litany of new headaches — namely inflation and supply chain challenges.

Although the company enjoyed a period of success following the bankruptcy sale, it later said things have deteriorated since 2021.

New competitors, like Shein and Temu, also turbocharged the fast fashion game.

Under a trade rule known as the "de minimis" exemption, e-commerce retailers can ship packages worth less than $800 to the US from overseas without paying a tariff, passing some of the savings along in the form of lower prices.

In March, Forever 21 once again filed for bankruptcy.

The company blamed the "de minimis" rule for partly undercutting its ability to compete on price with "non-US online retailers."

The financial hole has gotten steep, with more than $550 million in losses over the past four years, per the company's filings.

The company now plans to close several underperforming stores as it looks for a buyer to keep the brand alive, albeit likely at a fraction of its peak scale and cultural influence.

Forever 21's future is far from certain, but one possibility is that it could live on as an e-commerce brand.

"This would make Forever 21 a shadow of its former self, but a sale is possible as e-commerce and brand groups may show some interest," GlobalData retail analyst Neil Saunders said in a note.

Other former titans of 20th Century retail, like Bed Bath & Beyond, have previously shed their prior physical presence for an online-only brand that capitalizes on the loyalty and recognition of the original.

• Forever 21 filed for bankruptcy for the second time on Sunday.
• I visited a Manhattan location to see what had happened to it since I was a frequent shopper.
• I think the store lost track of its roots and hasn't found a way to attract new shoppers.

Forever 21 filed for bankruptcy — again.

Sunday's filing marked the brand's second bankruptcy, as it previously filed in 2019. The company, which is expected to shut down all of its US stores unless it finds a buyer, pointed to competitors such as Shein and Temu as part of its reason for closing.

I was a frequent flyer at Forever 21 in my late teens and early 20s during its heyday, but I'm 30 now and haven't shopped there in years.

In light of the bankruptcy news, I revisited Forever 21 to see what happened.

I visited Forever 21 after it filed for bankruptcy

Only two Forever 21s are left in Manhattan — my former go-to location at Union Square shuttered a few years ago — so I visited the 34th Street Herald Square store.

When I walked in, I couldn't miss the dozens of signs announcing the store's closing and the blowout sale it was having as a result. It was pretty quiet as I wandered through the space, though a handful of other shoppers were browsing the discounted items, too.

In my early 20s, I liked Forever 21 primarily because of its going-out clothes. My friends and I would descend on the store whenever there was a big house party or new bar we wanted to go to, as we knew we'd find plenty of affordable options for crop tops or minidresses that were perfect for a night out.

My visits to Forever 21 fell off as my social life went from being filled with big parties and nights spent dancing to intimate dinners and bar crawls, as seemed to be the case for many millennial shoppers. Gen Z didn't replace us as its prime demographic as Forever 21 might have hoped, as the generation below me prefers online retailers for fast fashion or opts to shop secondhand instead.

I still have a more party-focused night every now and then, though, so I was excited to potentially find a few new shirts or dresses for coming events when I hit up Forever 21 on Monday. I walked into the store expecting to find a plethora of cropped shirts, low-cut tanks, and tube tops, but the store seems to have changed its offerings in the years I've been away.

The front of the store displayed a few flirty dresses and bikini-style shirts, but most of the merchandise surrounding it was more general.

On the first floor alone, an entire wall was covered in graphic sweatshirts, and a corner was dedicated to athletic attire. Another room seemed to be full almost entirely of a line made in collaboration with Hello Kitty, which was set up next to floor-length, sparkly dresses that one might wear to prom.

On the second floor, I found more athletic clothes, as well as swimwear, basic tops, dresses, jeans, and even trousers.

The store's tone felt different than when I used to shop there, and though some of the sweatshirts and tees were cute, Forever 21 isn't where I'd think to buy those items.

I'm much more likely to get staples from American Eagle or Abercrombie & Fitch. Over the past few years, both have found ways to reengage millennial shoppers and attract new Gen Z customers.

I missed the going-out top

I finally found a few classic going-out tops on the top floor of Forever 21, breathing a sigh of relief when I spotted shirts I could easily picture myself wearing to a girls' night.

That newfound hope deflated once I took a closer look at the offerings. Most of the shirts I liked were available in only one or two sizes, so I couldn't try them on even if I liked them. Likewise, several pieces in the store didn't seem to be in the best condition, including a shirt with visible deodorant stains on display.

I found a few things I liked enough to try on, but they were a bust, too. I grabbed two going-out tops, an exercise shirt, and a dress in my usual size. One top was too big, while the dress and the other top were too small. The exercise shirt fit, but it was too low-cut and unsupportive for me to actually wear for a workout.

The offerings at other physical locations may be more robust than those at the store I visited. I also know Forever 21's website has more clothes in more inclusive sizes than the brick-and-mortar location where I was. (The company has said its website will remain open as it winds down its US operations.)

Still, I was bummed out that nothing I found in-store worked for me. One of the things I loved most about Forever 21 when I shopped there was how easy it was to run in and grab a top or two quickly before an event. It had so many affordable options that it was almost impossible not to find a new shirt to show off and share with your friends after wearing it.

That magic wasn't there anymore for me. Forever 21 didn't find a way to grow with millennials, nor did it charm Gen Z shoppers away from easy-to-access online retailers. If my visit was any indication, Forever 21 couldn't figure out how to be the fast-fashion destination shoppers were craving anymore.

Forever 21 didn't respond to a request for comment.

Though the Swedish startup has raised over $14 billion, it has been running short on cash recently.

© 2024 TechCrunch. All rights reserved. For personal use only.