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.
Oh SCB - resorting to outright lies just because you got caught out posting something you clearly didn’t understand what it related to.
I should really filter you but then I’d miss out on the (unintentional) comedy value that you provide.
How dare anyone post anything without authorisation from Hexam....
I suppose another good thing with the bans being dished out is there's one less person for Hexam to blindly defend.... Like when he stated a rights issue didn't dilute lloyds
Except you didn't respond to my point Hexam, you waffled on about revenue. And resorted to cheap name calling.
Anyway, let's move on
"Amazing how you sulk Hexam when you have no better response"
The self projection continues.
Who's sulking? You have your view on the cause of the impairments and I've explained why I disagree but rather than have the usual back and forth that bores the board and gets absolutely nowhere I thought it best just to leave it at that.
More bizarrely, any idea why SCB has suddenly introduced US stats into the discussion?
It was also a pretty poor month for online too (but not quite so bad as the high street) and the Times article I think was referring to the high street hence my comment about recovering from the soggy April.
Nonstore sales grew 1.18% month over month in April. Year over year, though, they grew 13.88%, according to the NRF's Retail Monitor.
https://www.digitalcommerce360.com/article/monthly-online-retail-sales/
OK T4G you've made your case and I respectfully disagree.
It also probably in part just reflects a recovery from a dismal April.
For the high st yes, but as Lyttle said on the investor call a bit of sun benefits all retailers
April website views were really strong for Boo brands
"Im not sure anyone knows the figures from boohoo for march, april or may so your statement seems to be a lie."
I presume that is aimed at T4G as I agree we don't know if revenue has grown or not.
Is it possible the company could lease off some of that 4 billion capacity of infrastructure??
Milestone around your neck when you only need circa a third of it
Every little helps..
Hexam, i'm not attributing revenue fall to the Ukraine war, although it has played its part with the cost of living crisis
What I am saying is that the two warehouses have been closed and the labels impaired because market growth hasn't happened in the way forecast before Russia invaded Ukraine. The strategy has had to change due to the war, simple as that, and the impairment costs are a fall out.
The change in trajectory from H1 TO H2 IN core brands gives me confidence the revenue picture is improving, as do the website visits. It also looks like sales of labels have fallen to about as low as they can, so they should stop being such a drag going forward.
Im not sure anyone knows the figures from boohoo for march, april or may so your statement seems to be a lie.
"Retail sales expanded at their quickest pace in a year and a half this month, signalling that consumers returned to the high street amid improving economic conditions and calmer weather. "
It also probably in part just reflects a recovery from a dismal April.
Just not sure how you can attribute reduced revenue primarily to a war as not sure how that significantly affects consumer demand for BOO's products? It certainly had an impact of costs but as we know BOO held prices. It also helped contribute to the general COL crisis but was not the only factor. Plus other companies have down well in the last year and sales across the board are up (total, online. sector).
As for the rest of your paragraph it contained the dubious phrase "Revenue growth underway". They've slowed the rate of revenue decline but I think it is too early to claim that they are now growing especially as they haven't committed to that in their outlook (though they have tentatively targeted GMV growth in the year).
"Retail sales expanded at their quickest pace in a year and a half this month, signalling that consumers returned to the high street amid improving economic conditions and calmer weather. "
Spot on coasty. So, bricks and mortar are doing great, and generally the market is growing. While Boohoo's revenue contracts.
The tragedy in Ukraine effects boohoo more than others? Such as Next and M&S??
That is bad luck
And maybe you should have copied and pasted my entire paragraph which gave context...
Ok so I got my words a little wrong. There will always be one offs
What's your reading of what caused the impairments then
"I never said one offs would fall by £100m."
Er...yes you did:
"Sam perhaps it's more reasonable to say how much will the loss automatically reduce next year when one offs fall by c100m"
Hexam, I never said one offs would fall by £100m. This year's won't be repeated and the figure should fall rapidly. There will undoubtedly still be some one offs.
The impairment costs are primarily around warehouse closures and deprioritisation of labels and the associated intangible values. Both the labels and warehouses were part of a strategy that was based on growth continuing post COVID. Something that was scuppered by the Ukraine invasion.
So yes, I believe the impairment this year is due to a changed strategy predicated by a totally unforeseeable event.
What is your alternative view
Surprised this isn't being discussed a bit more....
Retail sales expanded at their quickest pace in a year and a half this month, signalling that consumers returned to the high street amid improving economic conditions and calmer weather.
https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/economics/article/high-street-enjoys-sharp-sales-uplift-in-may-gpczvt2wh
"Revenue growth underway"
I do hope, and profitable at that.
Have been thinking that when reporting in May 25, the revenue could have fallen further still
See what transpires
Thank-you tradey for what is your opinion, cunningly dressed up to look like fact. I look forward to reminding you of this when next year's results feature subbornly high double-digit millions of exceptionals. You have a year to prepare your excuses.
I can pretty much guarantee that one-offs won't fall by £100m next year and to attribute this year's figure to the war in Ukraine is just disingenuous to say the least.
I was referring to the capex in the last year when talking about future white elephants as should have been obvious, not least from my comment afterwards acknowledging that capex will come such a lot if they do as they say.