Browning West Contends That Gildan Activewear’s Reactionary Sale Process Underscores Why Immediate Board Reconstitution is Required

Browning West, LP (together with its affiliates, “Browning West” or “we”), which is a long-term shareholder of Gildan Activewear Inc. (NYSE: GIL) (TSX: GIL) (“Gildan” or the “Company”) and beneficially owns approximately 5.0% of the Company’s outstanding shares, today issued the below statement regarding Gildan’s confirmation that it has initiated a sale process.

“Since the onset of our campaign, we have maintained that Gildan is a high-quality business with significant latent earnings power and strong value creation potential under the right Board and management. We are naturally concerned that the Board has initiated a sale process in order to avoid accountability following continuous and growing support for Browning West’s calls for significant Board reconstitution. Based on unsolicited feedback we have received from fellow shareholders, we believe that the Company’s owners would be dismayed at the rumored $42 USD per share indication from a potential buyer, which effectively represents no premium. To put this low price in context, if Glenn Chamandy had not been terminated and the stock had simply performed in line with the most relevant index, it would be worth approximately $42 USD per share today. We believe that the stock will recover to at least this level after our experienced and credible slate is elected in May, and it could, in our view, be worth multiples of that level over the long term.

The Board’s reactionary sale process underscores our message to shareholders last week that a meaningful reconstitution of the Board is immediately required, even before the Annual Meeting in May. Our slate clearly has substantial shareholder backing and is focused on maximizing long-term shareholder value, compared to the current ‘lame duck’ Board which is poorly positioned to evaluate any offers for the Company because: (i) it has already revealed its lack of competence due to its botched CEO succession process, (ii) its standalone plan under weak leadership is likely substantially inferior to any plan executed by our highly qualified slate, and (iii) the Board is entirely focused on avoiding personal accountability at the May 28^th meeting rather than strong shareholder outcomes. Under no circumstances can the current Board be trusted to oversee a sale process.”