Member Info for DC2007

I doubt equity investments in another listed company would be defined as an unencumbered asset -- the way a freehold building might be classified -- either. Any accountants / someone qualified in IFRS able to tidy this up?

Some things never change!

Thanks for your reply Reardon. I'm aware both have made comments about a change in their financial priorities.

Question is, when did they first mention it? Only after revenues began to decrease, and not before. This makes it more of an ad-hoc explanation ‐ perhaps an excuse - than the planned effect, caused by enacting some new plan.

In other words, without employing imagination and some wishful thinking, their stories are just not credible. That looks the view of the market too.

For contrariness to really rebut the market view, you'd need to have thought hard, asked very searching questions, and then found solid answers for why the market is wrong. But there's no evidence here of anyone having done that.

Surprised that the ASOS update hasn't caused more of a drop there and here. Perhaps that will come this afternoon. It's a lame update and indicates the online model for this sector of consumer is no longer a viable business proposition. That has to apply to Boo too.

These companies are no longer investable, but they'll throw up many trading opportunities as the slow-mo train wreck continues. One or the other ends up bust within a few years. Maybe one will get cannibalised to keep the other going that bit longer.

Revenue decline of that amount vs inflation is an absolute canary in the coal mine. There are no excuses - other retailers are still prospering; keeping steady or growing revenues; and not blaming the weather!

Which fails first? Place your bets.

Market sentiment for Boo remains predominantly fragile. It puts them an unenviable position for results next week in that they have to be good everywhere just to stay here. A sniff of weakness, like continued revenue decline, won't be tolerated and a visit to the 20s the likely result.

"Can any (sensible) poster explain to me why Boohoo was nearly 4% down while the rest of retail was slightly flat or a tad negative"...

Yep. Sampling error (sample too small) & misguided assumption that every data point has to be signal rather than noise.

In other words, SP movements over short intervals won't necessarily be rational or explicable. Attempting to do so is mistaken and akin to asking why a cast die landed on x.

Reasoning from such premises is implicitly faulty; it's akin to insisting there's faces in the clouds.

There's posters here who commit this fallacy again and again, piling error atop error, without any awareness of the flawed logic. It's a real bad basis for making money decisions.

Yeah, my manager reckons its a dead cat bounce too, ready for shorting again. Rinse, repeat & the gullible longs that promise this'll go somewhere get cleaned out. Easy!

If he does want the lot though, he'll not care less about LTH who are in the red. His usual MO is to takeover stuff when it's cheap or distressed. He'll sweat out the LTHs until they cave to a low-ball offer. And PIs don't get much say in this sort of thing; it's the IIs who'll be steering how things go whilst we get dragged along with the tide. It's what usually happens.

It's looking vulnerable to a trip to the 20s again. It might then be cheap enough to make it worth taking a small position again.

I seen that Gaz – typical of world police!

Turned Pinocchio shortly after by fabricating something they claimed I'd said. Had no evidence when asked, but refused to backtrack and instead went on the attack by answering a reasonable question with aggressive questions. Full of the usual straw men and embellishments.

It's the way they are, just like they won't be able to resist replying to this message.

Wasn't there RNS that implied suspension would be delayed because the meeting to vote on it got pushed back?

According to a poster here, Poly could still be traded on XO on Friday. Significance of that is XO's emai to me in June said Thursday 6th July would be the last day for trading on their platform, because of the impending suspension.

The UK housing market is a distorted mess anyway. A crash is probably what's needed to restore more sensible sustainable prices. Let people on normal wages buy something more than a shoebox. Bring on 7% and more!

I don't know if it's the same source as Gaz, but there was an FT article (28 June) about Boo's poor performance . It said they're expected to lose money through to 2025, whilst trying to increase US business.

Lex columns in the FT are good sources and worth taking notice of.

That's the problem - there really isn't a moat or a valuable brand. It's cheap, transient fashion delivered as quickly as possible that people want. That has a low barrier to entry, with lots of retailers easily able to provide the same.

'US DC will be a complete white elephant!'

That really is looking a possibility with US revenues already going sharply the wrong way. They make a lot of saying capacity will soon be built up to £4bn for sales, but it could be moot if they never get sales anywhere near that. All that capacity is looking like it could be excessive and be one big sunk cost.

Dc2007 were knocking boohoo for buying shares in what they called a "failed business"

Now the failed business is the best thing since sliced bread yet no mention of boohoo doing well on the said investment...

Not even misrepresentation there coasty - that's entirely made up. Just the sorta statement to get the board copper standing on the report button and yapping about libel!

Never claimed RevB is the 'best thing', and not changed my opinion that Boo shouldn't have bought in. Boo should get their own house in order before evening thinking of dabbling in risky investments.

'Volume was never higher on average here through the last few months of 2021 and the majority of 2022, whilst the sp tanked.'

So that'd be a sell off, or when holders are wanting rid of it. But if demand is weak, they're forced to accept a lower price, and the SP slides; still goes with higher volumes & no wacky conspiracies needed.

A SP that's down 90% over a couple of years is probably saying how little demand there is for it, more than anything else.

Price being manipulated upwards -- hard hats on & call the FCA everyone!

The article will have high readership. Make a case that the situation so far has been reputation-enhancing, then there might be something to discuss. Otherwise, it's so obviously detrimental -- it's similar to the way one might observe that water is indeed wet.

20s or less if it drags on.

There's a scathing article in the FT about the RevB/Boo situation (neither are portrayed well). Perhaps Daytrade was thinking along those lines.