Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Business

Stefano Gabbana Sold His Stake, But Not His Share: Why the D&G Founder Quietly Left in December

Stefano Gabbana's resignation as head of Dolce & Gabbana occurred in December — and was kept quiet for four months. Now it's clear why: the brand is in negotiations to refinance €300 million in debt, while Gabbana himself is seeking a buyer for his 40% stake.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

April 10, 2026 · 2 min read

Stefano Gabbana Sold His Stake, But Not His Share: Why the D&G Founder Quietly Left in December
Стефано Габбана (ліворуч) та Доменіко Дольче (Фото: EPA / MATTEO BAZZI)

Stefano Gabbana stepped down as chairman of the board of Dolce & Gabbana in December 2025. This only became public in April — after Bloomberg gained access to registration documents of the Milan Chamber of Commerce. The company called the change a "natural evolution of organizational structure," but the chronology of events paints a different picture.

A quiet exit amid debt negotiations

Dolce & Gabbana is currently in talks with creditor banks about refinancing approximately €300 million in debt until 2030 and securing an additional €150 million — to expand the beauty segment and real estate. This is already the second attempt: last year the company went through a similar round and received temporary relief from some debt requirements, according to Time News.

According to Bloomberg, the brand's revenue for 2024–2025 totaled €1.9 billion, but the pressure of bank debt has become the top priority for management. It was at this moment that Gabbana, according to Bloomberg, is considering options to exit his 40% stake.

"His departure from the board chairmanship represents the first formal rupture between the creative identity of the brand and its management structure since the company's founding."

Business Upturn

Who's in charge now

Following Gabbana's resignation, Alfonso Dolce became chairman of the board in January 2026 — the brother of co-founder Domenico Dolce and current CEO of the company. This means control of the brand remained within the Dolce family. As Hypebeast reports, discussions are also underway about a possible appointment of Stefano Cantino — former Gucci CEO — to a top management role, although there is no official confirmation yet.

Why this is more than just a personnel rotation

For forty years, Gabbana and Dolce built the brand as an inseparable pair — creativity and business in one set of hands. Now a separation is occurring: Gabbana remains in a "creative role," but without a place in management and, potentially, without ownership. This is not a unique situation in the luxury market — Kering, LVMH, and Chanel have also revisited ownership structures of family brands in recent years. But for D&G, whose marketing has always been built on the personalities of the founders, Gabbana's exit from ownership would mean a fundamental change in what is being sold along with a dress or perfume.

  • €300 million — debt to be refinanced by 2030
  • 40% — Gabbana's stake that he is considering selling
  • €1.9 billion — revenue for 2024–2025
  • December 2025 — the actual resignation date that was not announced

If Gabbana does sell his stake to a strategic investor or one of the luxury conglomerates — D&G will cease to be an independent family brand. The question is whether the company can refinance on acceptable terms without such a sale, or whether debt pressure will make this choice for the founders.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026