Major Retailers Closing

Sun

don't worry, Next shares shoot up 12.5% today.

Kez100

emweaver wrote: »

I heard on the news that next havent met their sales, not sure what that means but hope it doesnt mean they will soon follow as i love their childrens clothes.

You didn't listen correctly. Actualy, sorry, the media probably reported it wrong! They are pretty useless.

Next actually predicted a downturn of between (I think) -4 and -7 percent. The results met the predictions at the lower end of those predictions. That is pretty good going if you think of what a shock it seemed to be to other operators.

The other power to their elbow was by predicting the downturn they were better prepared stock wise to ride that pre christmas problem and didn't discount, sticking to their normal sale dates.

That's why their shares rose, and well done them I say!

opaque

I find it funny they seem to think like for like sales is so important, which of course it has it's palce for comparison but the complete sales including new or closed shops is the bottom line and surely a better indication of how things are going? Maybe opening a new store in a new shopping centre in August gave them the highest sales figures ever?

sydneybean

is like for like just the same as year on year? i think it is and surely then the majority of business's will be reporting their sales are down, we all thought we had money last year. Where i work its no longer dog eat dog, its the fast eats the slow. Retail is certainly not a nice place to work at the moment thats for sure, hence me finally joining this site rather than mooching, i need to be in a position where i have some money behind me and little debts in case i get made redundant.

funkyfreddy9k

Yorkshireparkin wrote: »

I dread hearing Debenhams have gone, but it will happen

will it really with profits increasing, sales far beating expectations and stock prices surging (proving strong confidence)?

If anyones going, keep an eye on M&S. Results are expected to be pretty poor tomorrow - hence why the job losses are needed so they're seen as doing something. That collosal £3bil debt mountain is looking more dangerous by the day.

Kez100

sydneybean wrote: »

is like for like just the same as year on year? i think it is and surely then the majority of business's will be reporting their sales are down, we all thought we had money last year. Where i work its no longer dog eat dog, its the fast eats the slow. Retail is certainly not a nice place to work at the moment thats for sure, hence me finally joining this site rather than mooching, i need to be in a position where i have some money behind me and little debts in case i get made redundant.

like for like is, I think, the sales achieved for all stores open for more than one year. It's good in that it strips out new stores, but not good in that it ignores margin - without margin you have no profit!

So, for example, M and S could possibly double like for like sales tomorrow by dropping prices to 30% but then not make a bean in profit (probably a stonking loss). If you only look at like for like you may well miss something pretty nasty going on!

I would doubt like for like is very useful in the market we have seen, for the big discounting retailers anyway.

GracieP

opaque wrote: »

Ah but was it a good quality mop?

It would have to mop the floor all by itself before I'd consider paying £17 on a mop.

marvin

silverchair wrote: »

I think stead & simpson shoes may go

I also think that Debenhams will probably go under. It will be a shame as they were useful, but I would never order online from them again after all the hassle I had during last year's sales. The sales assistants in the call centre are polite, but dont have a clue & give out wrong info.
Just hope they stay open long enough for me to return the two left handed gloves I received for my xmas pressie from OH.

Some of what is below is fact the vast majority is IMHO.

Stead and Simpson was bought 12 months ago by Shoe Zone or it would have already gone. Shoe Zone also own Shoe Fair, Shoe Express and others and trade in over 1000 stores under their various names. If you have a look at Shoe Zone it is adept at change and started out as Benson shoes in 1917 so should survive as it does not have a large debt profile.

As should Debenhams but then my track record is not good I bought shares in Woolworths just in time for the stores to be put into receivership. (to be clear here Woolworths Group PLC the quoted company still exists and is not yet in receivership although it probably will be wound up any time now once all of its assets are sold and all the dust has settled. Woolworths Group PLC was the sole shareholder in Woolworths PLC the stores that were put into receivership). I bought shares as a gamble on the basis they were cheap I believed in the new CEO and the team he was building and after all the money belonging to us the govt had poured into the banking system I did not believe the banks would be allowed to do what they did. Close a viable business in order to bolster their cash account at the expense of all of us who will now have to pick up the tab for their large profits in higher benefits payments and lower income tax receipts.

For those of you looking for likely failures look for 4 things
1. Large dept profile, a business that owes little or nothing will probably survive.
2. Removal of supplier credit insurence, without this it tends to eat up the cash in the business and means covering the debt payments is harder.
3. Declining market due to the current financial crisis, the things we would like but don't actually need.
4. Poor customer relations and reputation, does not matter so much when times are good but becomes more of value when the customer is looking for value.

Match any 2 or 3 of those (in the case of DSGI all 4) and you will have a business in real trouble.

You can also look for a share price falling through the floor (although at the moment not a good guide as most shares have fallen through the floor recently although Sainsbury's is up about a £ on where it was in October but that is on speculation on what will happen with the largest shareholder Quatar Investment fund and will a new bid be made in the region of £4.50.) which ads a 5th to DSGI.

The only other national firm I can come up with in real trouble if it does nothing (assuming there is something it can do) is Jessops.

Idle speculation is not good anywhere always look for the facts to back up the theory.

Many of the weaklings have already gone there may be a few to follow and I have no doubt we will see a reduction in the number of stores that the chains hold. Its never good to ditch under performing stores when times are good. Why not use the mother of all recessions to do a bit of surgery which in times of boom looks like management failure in times of recession is seen as good management. Its a very strange world.

MCGONIS

Gees, I wish I had spoke to you before you bought Wooloworth shares. To be honest, Woolworths writing was on the wall when KINGFISHER sold lots of the Woolies freehold property to private landlords. Making millions for KINGFISHER. They then went on to expand B & Q into HUGE warehouses and then close the B & Q DIY Supercentres (you know the place you could find what you were looking for and there not be 12 different types of pure brilliant white emulsion and you could maybe go to the garden centre pantry and have a burger to finish the afternoon of!!!!) plus buying up other DIY stores within europe. They then de-merged Woolworths with 800 odd stores, lots on popular (and expensive) high streets with landlords keen to get their rent money. Three years ago Wooolworths could have made profits similar to ASDA..... but they now had rent bills to pay. This wiped out any profit their stores made. Previously they owned every store they operated from (with the exception of some, like Big W edge of town stores and the newer Woolworths stores located within shopping centres- these sites were rented) So in my opinion, Woolworths were stripped of their assets. People go on about it not moving with the times. Load of crap. Their stores had sales of 1.4 billion pounds- so lots of people were shopping there. Profit couldn't happen beacause of the huge rent payments they had to make. So to Sir Geoff Mulcahy who at KINFISHER started the whole sorry start of the end of WW. Hope you are happy - and I am glad you never got the 200 odd stores you wanted once the company colapsed. You are responisble for the end in my opinion, you were obsessed with B & Q and the booming housing market. We will see what happens to it in the economic slowdown. However. A wee bit of irony in that it was Wooloworths who bought B & Q way back when DIY stores were just starting out. I bet it is one piece of un-neccesery crap they wished they had never bought! That's me off the soapbox and Jobcentre Plus here I come.

marvin

MCGONIS wrote: »

Gees, I wish I had spoke to you before you bought Wooloworth shares. To be honest, Woolworths writing was on the wall when KINGFISHER sold lots of the Woolies freehold property to private landlords. Making millions for KINGFISHER. They then went on to expand B & Q into HUGE warehouses and then close the B & Q DIY Supercentres (you know the place you could find what you were looking for and there not be 12 different types of pure brilliant white emulsion and you could maybe go to the garden centre pantry and have a burger to finish the afternoon of!!!!) plus buying up other DIY stores within europe. They then de-merged Woolworths with 800 odd stores, lots on popular (and expensive) high streets with landlords keen to get their rent money. Three years ago Wooolworths could have made profits similar to ASDA..... but they now had rent bills to pay. This wiped out any profit their stores made. Previously they owned every store they operated from (with the exception of some, like Big W edge of town stores and the newer Woolworths stores located within shopping centres- these sites were rented) So in my opinion, Woolworths were stripped of their assets. People go on about it not moving with the times. Load of crap. Their stores had sales of 1.4 billion pounds- so lots of people were shopping there. Profit couldn't happen beacause of the huge rent payments they had to make. So to Sir Geoff Mulcahy who at KINFISHER started the whole sorry start of the end of WW. Hope you are happy - and I am glad you never got the 200 odd stores you wanted once the company colapsed. You are responisble for the end in my opinion, you were obsessed with B & Q and the booming housing market. We will see what happens to it in the economic slowdown. However. A wee bit of irony in that it was Wooloworths who bought B & Q way back when DIY stores were just starting out. I bet it is one piece of un-neccesery crap they wished they had never bought! That's me off the soapbox and Jobcentre Plus here I come.

TBH knew all that and as I said it was a caluculated punt on them being able to turn it around enough but sadly the banks were allowed to close a solvent business because they wanted their money back and wanted to make a huge profit. That is the part of the gamble that never came off. The Govt are as much to blame in this as anyone else.