JD.com, the Chinese e-commerce giant controlled by billionaire Richard Liu, has proposed to acquire Ceconomy in a deal that values the German electronics retailer at €2.2 billion ($2.5 billion).
JD.com said on Wednesday it has made a cash offer of €4.6 per Ceconomy share. The bid represents a premium of 23% over Ceconomy’s traded price of €3.75 on July 23, before media reports said JD.com was in talks to acquire the company, Ceconomy said in a separate statement.
Shares of Ceconomy on the Frankfurt stock exchange soared almost 7% to €4.35 on Wednesday. JD.com’s Hong Kong-listed shares, meanwhile, dropped 3% on Thursday.
Ceconomy operates MediaMarkt and Saturn, two of Europe’s largest electronics retail chains with online shops and more than 1,000 brick-and-mortar stores across 11 European markets. Under the deal, JD.com will support Ceconomy’s store digitalization, as well as help the German company strengthen its logistics networks and supply chain management. The transaction, which will be subject to regulatory clearances, is set to be completed in the first half of 2026.
“This partnership with Ceconomy will build Europe’s leading next-generation consumer electronics platform,” said JD.com CEO Sandy Xu in a statement. “We will work with the team to strengthen the capabilities, while applying our advanced technology capabilities to accelerate Ceconomy’s ongoing transformation.”
The buyout offer comes as JD.com is looking beyond China for growth opportunities amid weak consumer sentiment at home and increasingly intense competition with local e-commerce rivals, including Taobao-operator Alibaba and Pinduoduo-owner PDD Holdings. JD.com had considered a takeover bid for U.K. electronics retailer Currys, but backed away in March 2024 without giving a reason.
Meanwhile, JD.com is said to have bought a 70% stake in Hong Kong grocery chain Kai Bo Food Supermarket for HK$4 billion ($510 million), local media outlet HK01 reported in July, citing unnamed sources. JD.com told Hong Kong newspaper South China Morning Post that the report is inaccurate and that the acquisition price was much lower. The company didn’t respond to a Forbes comment request.