Barratts to shed 2.500 jobs

chris_spackman

I heard that there was a meeting with their landlords regarding the rent and they wanted to up it or not reduce it so Stylo said if they don't look at it we will have to close stores and lay people off. One remark by the landlords to this was ' That is not our problem' (regarding the job cuts)

I would of thought that landlords would be doing all they can to help those rennting off them, it must be betterto reduce / hold the rent and keep people in there? I understand that landlords have to make a profit but why the greed or lack of understanding now, it's this sort of thing that has caused this situation is it not?

Cleaver

chris_spackman wrote: »

I would of thought that landlords would be doing all they can to help those rennting off them, it must be betterto reduce / hold the rent and keep people in there? I understand that landlords have to make a profit but why the greed or lack of understanding now, it's this sort of thing that has caused this situation is it not?

No. Barretts have caused this by not selling enough shoes. The landlord set the rent, the shop agreed, they now can't pay, lanlord turfs them out. Seems fairly straightforward and correct to me.

Yet another shop I don't think I've ever been in goes to the wall.

fc123

chris_spackman wrote: »

I heard that there was a meeting with their landlords regarding the rent and they wanted to up it or not reduce it so Stylo said if they don't look at it we will have to close stores and lay people off. One remark by the landlords to this was ' That is not our problem' (regarding the job cuts)

I would of thought that landlords would be doing all they can to help those rennting off them, it must be betterto reduce / hold the rent and keep people in there? I understand that landlords have to make a profit but why the greed or lack of understanding now, it's this sort of thing that has caused this situation is it not?

They can't reduce it for the odd tenant as it will re-set the value (that is, lower) for everyone else (that includes Starbucks and the like).

I will try and find a trade press quote later which stated that the reason their CVA proposal was turned down was due to the fact that another major chain would then request the same deal. I am betting £1 on it being Mosaic...but 'only allegedly' of course.

lostinrates

Who are Barratts? I can't picture what it is?

ETA: This must be them, link for anyone else who was in the dark:http://www.barratts.co.uk/?cm_mmc=Affiliates-_-Banner-_-Launch-_-120%20wide

techno12

I remember Stylo from when I was little in the 70s - it was the main shoe shop in town. I'm guessing they thought that brand was pants and branched out into Barratts etc..

fc123

lostinrates wrote: »

Who are Barratts? I can't picture what it is?

ETA: This must be them, link for anyone else who was in the dark:http://www.barratts.co.uk/?cm_mmc=Affiliates-_-Banner-_-Launch-_-120%20wide

Pretty shoddy chain....feed off the innovation of others, churn it out of the lowest cost factories they can find (some of whom, will now be nursing losses on invoices not paid for stock manufactured) and have left a legacy of deformed feet, bunions, athletes foot and the like on people who thought they were buying half decent shoes.

It's no old wives tale....always buy the best quality shoes you possibly can....even if it means only owning one pair for years and years.

olly300

Town centres have enough empty shops as it is.

The landlords now have the choice of having an empty shop unit plus having to pay the business rates for it.

toca_me

Cheap, shoddy, knock off stock... yeah whatever. The fact of the matter is not everyone can afford to pay for expensive shoes and despite the fact that Barratts and Priceless went b**ls up theres a hell of alot of money to be made in that area of the market. The problem here is that Stylo doesn't know how to manage itself.

I've worked for the company for a good number of years now and it has amazed me how they've justified keeping certain shops and concessions open when all they do is wipe out the profit that the rest of the shops make. Also why some people in the company (I'm talking head office big boys here) still have jobs is beyond me when they do little to nothing and are well known to have bad track records with other companys.

I was one of the lucky ones today who kept my job and while I am relieved that Ziff bought out the company and basically saved my job I am still bitter about it. The way in which the company has gone about its business and treated us employees is appalling to say the least. Since the initial announcement in January they have told us practially nothing. Even today when they were walking into shops all around us and pulling the shutters they couldnt even put out so much as an email to say this was happening. Once again we were left completely in the dark and just watching the doors for them walking in. It's a situation I hope never to be in again but I fear it will come again with the company being under the exact same management as before.

Apologies for the rant, I've had a rough day today and no-one to vent to! I just feel for some of my friends and colleages who've had a far worse day despite the expectionally hard work and loyalty they've showed for absolutely nothing.

fc123

toca_me wrote: »

I It's a situation I hope never to be in again but I fear it will come again with the company being under the exact same management as before.

.

Do you think the same thing will happen again? Like Mark1.
Sorry to hear about your rough day......I had a PM conversation with a manager from Atlantic and Mark1 (Husband and wife) and they were treated appallingly...no pay (for previous month) for Atlantic staff but they were expected to pack up the shop contents in readiness for the closure.

What I meant about knock offs was that many of these High St chains just rely on feeding off others. All companies need to have a bit of innovation...esp during times like these. Those that just feed off others are then at a disadvantage.

fc123

olly300 wrote: »

Town centres have enough empty shops as it is.

The landlords now have the choice of having an empty shop unit plus having to pay the business rates for it.

Many of them have their minds stuck in 1986. They just don't get it.

The ignorance of the whole retail scene amongst those that I am dealing with borders on criminal......I mean, they are investing millions of pounds worth pension money and haven't got a clue about how retailing is evolving.

They haven't even worked out that the high rents were only achievable as many chains (esp vertically integrated ones) were getting massive margins that were unheard of a decade back, nor that he boom in sales volumes came from the easy credit.

They will reduce rents in time....some are already, but it's a slow process....same as 'Old ladies' and their house prices.

toca_me

fc123 wrote: »

Do you think the same thing will happen again? Like Mark1.
Sorry to hear about your rough day......I had a PM conversation with a manager from Atlantic and Mark1 (Husband and wife) and they were treated appallingly...no pay (for previous month) for Atlantic staff but they were expected to pack up the shop contents in readiness for the closure.

What I meant about knock offs was that many of these High St chains just rely on feeding off others. All companies need to have a bit of innovation...esp during times like these. Those that just feed off others are then at a disadvantage.

Unfortunatley I do think it will happen again unless this has given those in charge a long delayed kick up the behind and they realise things have to change. Yes shedding off the stores today will help but it still doesn't make total sense. Take Ireland for example, there are far more Barratts stores than Priceless, it's the Priceless stores that make the most profits, and yet from what we've heard (which is shops ringing shops and passing on news...hopefully well hear officially tomorrow) there were far less Barratts closures than Priceless. Just because Barratts was their original company they have some sort of attachment to it and wont face up to the fact that it's losing them money, big time. A trip to business school is much needed I'm thinking!

And on the innovation thing...I don't think Stylo know the meaning of the word. In the past they would do things like ask us who are out there with the customers and know what they want what we think we need to do, what we think we've missed out, what we think will be big and we'd like to see but as of late its as if they've just gave up and its the same stock, same ideas, same promotions over and over again. Sometimes I really do wonder what they're playing at...