The Nordstrom family’s decision to take their namesake department store private, a move finalized in a $6.25 billion deal last year, appears to be yielding tangible results. Nearly a year removed from the pressures of public markets, the founding family, now holding a 50.1% majority stake alongside Mexico’s El Puerto de Liverpool department store, indicates a renewed focus on long-term strategy over quarterly earnings. This shift has allowed for significant internal investments, which co-CEOs Peter and Erik Nordstrom suggest would have been far more challenging under the scrutiny of Wall Street.
Revenue figures from 2025 underscore the impact of this strategic pivot. The company reported a 7% increase, reaching $15.9 billion. This marks a notable recovery, surpassing 2019 figures and indicating a rebound from the combined pressures of the COVID-19 pandemic and a turbulent luxury market. While competitors like Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus have faced their own challenges, Nordstrom has been actively upgrading its physical stores, investing substantially in database integration, and broadening its inventory. Such initiatives, while crucial for modernization, typically require substantial capital outlays that public shareholders, often prioritizing immediate profits, might view unfavorably.
Peter Nordstrom articulated this challenge, noting that for a public entity, the stock price often serves as the primary scorecard. He observed that the investment community generally holds a dim view of department stores, leading to lower valuations. This dynamic, he explained, diverts leadership attention towards managing investor expectations rather than concentrating on the core business operations. The family had, in fact, attempted to go private in 2017 but only succeeded in 2025, ending a 54-year run on the stock market. This prolonged effort highlights their conviction that private ownership was essential for the company’s future trajectory.
Despite the advantages of privacy, the company is not without its obligations. The privatization deal involved taking on new debt, which necessitates meeting specific financial milestones. Erik Nordstrom acknowledged that while being private “on the edges helps us with improved focus,” he maintained that he had “never complained about being a public company,” suggesting that public scrutiny also served as a “forcing mechanism to get our story very clear.” This perspective underscores a nuanced understanding of both environments.
The conversation naturally turns to the prospect of Nordstrom eventually returning to the public market. Historically, public companies benefit from easier access to capital and the ability to offer readily tradable shares as employee incentives. Should Nordstrom continue its strong performance, investment bankers are likely to approach the family, touting the potential for a lucrative IPO. Stacey Widlitz, president of SW Retail Advisers, suggests that a future IPO is a “real possibility” if the company successfully addresses its current challenges under private ownership.
However, Peter Nordstrom himself expressed skepticism about a swift return to public trading. When asked about the possibility, his response was direct: “I doubt it.” He quickly added the caveat, “never say never,” but emphasized that the fundamental question for the family is “to what end?” He clarified that their goal is not “financial engineering” but rather “to serve customers well in an enduring and compelling way.” This long-term vision is deeply rooted in the family’s legacy, with Peter Nordstrom repeatedly stressing the responsibility to avoid being “the generation of Nordstroms that screwed it up.” This sentiment suggests that any future decisions will be guided by stewardship of the brand, rather than short-term market opportunities.
