We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Not everyone is on here everyday. Some just visit irregularly. If you look through all the post - you will find repeating news. Not all I posted is old news. EY is still in the running. Get over it.
Yeah, yeah, so what, old news.
The Telegraph has now reported that Deloitte, KPMG, BDO and Grant Thornton have all ruled themselves out to replace PwC with EY the only one of the top six auditors in the running and it is not clear whether it is interested in taking on the account. KPMG is prevented from acting as Boohoo’s auditor for a year due to a conflict of interest, having carried out recent consulting work for the company.
https://www.theindustry.fashion/leading-auditors-rule-themselves-out-from-acting-for-boohoo/
Changing an auditor is like changing supplier. Just get a new one, plenty of them arounnd.
"Deloitte, KPMG, BDO and Grant Thornton have ruled themselves out of the race to replace PwC, while EY is still in the running, media reports said."
source: https://www.easterneye.biz/auditor-crisis-wipes-out-775m-from-boohoos-market-value/
Kando for all you or I know grant thornton who were appointed by levitt during her inquiry could have identified something that pwc were not doing or were doing incorrectly and highlighted this in their report which to my knowledge was not published. That might have been the catalyst for boohoo wanting to change auditers and both parties might have agreed to say nothing other than the agreed prepared statement issued by boohoo!
Well its not that uncommon. How about iinfibeams Avenue, Reliance Capital,, i IL & FS Engineering and Allsec Tech
The auditors have said nothing other than they are not tendering. .Its third party quotes that the press have published... fact
They may have decided to quit, Probably have but they havent said it themselves.. they have had a lot of their own issues and were fined £6mil over a miss audit (twice) and accused of serious incompetence so cant afford any more negative attention
https://www.ft.com/content/8e13a416-8dcb-11e9-a24d-b42f641eca37
There is some law on auditor rotation every 5-10 years worth looking at.
And a change of auditor is indeed common practice, for the company being audited, but it's not common for auditors to dump the company they're auditing... An important and telling distinction you're failing to acknowledge.
I thought the auditors cited Boohoo's corporate governance? Does that not suggest they had a problem with the way the company was being run? Doesn't it look more like they were distancing themselves from potential fallout than amicably stepping aside to give someone else a go? Why else would they turn down revenue like that, unless the perceived cost of continuing to work with them was greater than the remuneration?
Folk are clearly worried that there will be more press bullcarp but if you actually analyse it there is really nothing much in it.
Change of auditor is common practice and encouraged every 5 years. The auditor Nor boo have commented on it. Just sh1 T journalism quoting no marks who have no vested interest.
The Leicester suppliers own issues have been put to bed by the independent enq exonerating boo of Guilty knowledge.
Are you seeing a setup on the charts to support this statement or is this your gut instinct?
Yeah I would agree but there is nothing to suggest there is more bad news on the horizon. Investors wait for the volatility to subside and for the price to settle before making their move - which I think will come tomorrow.
Is that what the market's doing? Digesting the fact that it's oversold? Is that why it only rose 4% from director buys and hasn't made any further gains? Seems more like the market is digesting the fact that there may yet be more bad news.
That's not true. This crashed on relatively insignificant news (auditor stepping down after six years) based on the fear that more shocking allegations were about to be revealed. The market is beginning to digest the fact that this is oversold...
Except the majority of this board seems to be greedy right now...
Thanks both. Hopefully that cliché kept the buyers from last Friday warm and cosy on Monday.
As Buffett would say just the time to invest
Buy when others are fearful, sell when others are greedy.
I can’t imagine that anyone will be wanting to pile into this company, ahead of the weekend, when the ‘journalistic’ pitchforks are still sharp and torches still lit...
When it hit 270p yesterday and someone called it a false bull rally I said this:
That's my feeling too but who really knows?
I'm expecting the big push Friday or next week...
Still do. I reckon they'll be another respectable attempt forward today with it inevitably fizzling out somewhat. Tomorrow comes the rise with investors loading up for news next week.
Ragtrade - at last a useful post. Thanks for info.
@Wyndrum quote
Do you think that there will be now, extra costs on boo once all the extra governance costs and presumably higher costs of production through higher wages?
Wyndrum not sure if you have read the many many posts i have out on here re this, if not please go on my thread, there will not be any higher production costs, already they produce 60/70% depending on the season out side the UK, and as im sure you will agree CMT costs are cheaper in Asia than UK. eg min/living wage for UK over 25 is £8.21 p/h in India a min wage depending on the State can be as low and in some cases lower than £0.50p p/h , a living wage which some sectors do pay can be double that, also these are gross amounts. Hopefully this answers your question re costs.
Wyndrum, will boohoo have extra costs in the future? Oh yes I am very confident that they will be required to spend a lot of money in the coming months.
No one is going to gift them a new distribution centre and I’m pretty sure the next brand they add to their stable won’t be free either. The new factory they talked about is bound to cost them money as well.
I’m sure there will be costs associated with the things you’ve mentioned too.
So I guess the real question is does kk (or anyone else) think boohoo are capable of bringing their corporate governance in line, addressing factory supply chain issues, acquiring new brands, build a factory, open new distribution centre and so on and so on whilst maintaining their growth and profitability?
I understand what you are getting at with covid and world economic stress affecting growth and impacting on share price given relatively high P/E ratio and I understand where you are coming from regarding impact to overhead or margins.
However what if boohoo growth comes from simply being available in more countries and with more brands? Let’s say the PLT crowd in the U.K. buy less because they have less disposable income but this is off set because they increase their presence in Australia and US and Middle East. All areas might be going through Economic turmoil with consumers who have less to spend but if boohoo can get more of the available spend, maybe at the expense of other companies whose product is more expensive then surely they can continue to grow?
Likewise what if they find they have to produce less in the U.K. because all of a sudden U.K. factories cannot supply at the low cost they currently do? Of course that assumes that every single supplier to boohoo is only able to supply currently because they pay less than minimum wage or are on a tax fiddle (not likely I would argue). What’s to stop boohoo following the test and repeat model, paying more for U.K. produced product to get it into the supply chain immediately and less for product produceD abroad that can hit the supply chain in time to meet the follow up demand? Maybe the net effect of split production of this type will be the same or even less than current so maybe margins increase?
And what if margins are affected and go down slightly but the company grows beyond market expectations and the improved growth is forecast to continue at said lower margins? Will the market be somewhat forgiving of such success or will they demand less growth at a higher margin?
The fact is for the private investor there is a good deal of unknowns when investing in a company. Sure you can do your daily research research research as advised by people power but at some point you have to take a personal decision as to what you believe about the data your research has provided.
Some people believe in boohoos future and some don’t.
Bert: beginning of july EVE was about 1.5p current 4.5p now having been 7p in between. Conservative epectation of 7-10p plus in 6-12 months. I no loner have an interest (sold out at 6p)
Currently valued at just above the £9m cash in the bank. so great room for re-rating. But hey, stick to the one horse in town and keep flogging it until its dead.
Because there largely are no problems Wyn, it's been blown out of all proportion. I'll wager if you were to take a microscope to any of Boo's competitors, any listed Company, you'd find the same or similar sort of thing going on and very possibly much worse, although perhaps hypocritically concealed under the cloak of "virtue". I mean, ask yourself, Asos and that anti-slavery thing when they are having their garments manufactured in countries where slavery is the name of the game. I wonder how much the workers in China, Bangladesh, Vietnam etc are getting paid per hour. It won't be £3.50, that's for sure. But hey, come on, it's over there, not over here. Oh, so that's okay then? I suppose one life isn't as valuable as another, after all. Capitalism produces as much as it can for as little as it can and sells as much as it can for as much as it can get. Always has been, always will be, until man truly WAKES UP, and I mean that in the true sense of waking up, not pontificating on probity and virtue. Of course, you can dress it up and try to ease your conscience with platitudes towards ESG etc, etc, but it's all BS. The only reason companies are jumping on the ESG bandwagon is again, essentially a marketing thing, ooo look at us, aren't we goodie goodies doing our bit and so buy from us so you can claim the same. It's all rot and patently dishonest and no one would do it unless they thought they could make a buck from it or were forced (by legislation aka more money for the govt through fines and compliance etc - yep, they're at it too, riding on the back of it), not to mention all the ESG consultancy firms etc. Just sayin'