I'm keeping my shares only for as long as there's a 'buzz', if you will,around the company. If JD fails, and the CEO seems to be behaving in a way that suggests he will, then the only hope would be PE taking a shot. I guess that any interested PE is querying the value of the 'brand'.They will be rightly concerned that this is a brand that has passed its sell-by date. That aspect, for me, is where the failure has been. Years ago I raised the issue of a bunch of supermarket guys arriving at a successful brand that had its own life and momentum. It was always going to roll on with its existing momentum, but that's where the skill is, evolving it, growing it, keeping its appeal fresh. I'm not denying Sutherland can 'run' a commercial enterprise, he's a 'process' guy, as are those he put around him. The guy running Global Retail, with an army of teen/twenty somethings, was the guy running the bakery at Tescos! He's probably a lovely chap, but what does he know about fashion? About trends? About VM? Does he walk into a store and understand layout? When they're looking at a new store in a new destination, can he see the things the key indicators? I doubt it. Based on hunch, and based on the things I see.
PE would put Sutherland in the ejector seat alongside his grocer buddies.
WW. I commented on SDRY Regent Street not long ago. Did you visit? The state that 'flagship' was in was a horror show. We can talk in wooly terms about 'strategy', but when the store looks like that, none of it matters.
Well cutting costs was of course announced, and the easiest way always is job cuts. Nothing wrong with the idea, per se, but it's everything else associated with it.
I think it was Fidelity who stated that SDRY could no longer be considered a growth stock.
Why these cuts? In a nutshell, failed strategy. Who added all these jobs? Sutherland. Who's cutting them? Sutherland. Whose fault? Sutherland. It makes me really angry when someone that bags 7 million over the last two years, dumps up to 200 staff because of his failed strategy. It was not the weather!
Nice touch to have the newly appointed Creative Director deliver the news. Maybe Danielmeyer didn't fancy it.
Not least of their problems, the product and the marketing. But that's where these cuts are from. Just an observation. I can't say with much authority how many people are needed in that department, but cutting 1 in 5 seems a lot. The product side of the business is a disgrace. Sutherland been there 4 years. There has been zero development of the brand. The same product from 4 years ago could be on the shelf now, you couldn't tell the difference.
As expected https://www.standard.co.uk/business/superdry-set-to-cut-200-jobs-in-drive-to-save-20-million-a4082916.html
It’s a bit of a mess. Clearly JD has been communicating with them right up to this point, and not having persuasive dialogue. I think the threats of resignations are just that, threats to influence the II’s over the possible disruption. I’d be surprised to be honest. Was it £3m that Sutherland earned last year? Is it £200k that Bamford earns as chairman? They won’t give that up readily, and certainly not as a matter of principle. In this regard, I anticipate Sutherland would be hanging on for a pay out. Remember when the COO left abruptly about 4 years ago after being in the role less than 2 years? 12 month garden leave on £400k plus retention of share option LTIPs? One newspaper estimated somewhere around £1.5m I believe. Nice work.
SDRY have to call a meeting within 21 days of the 1.3.19. The date must be within 28 days of the date they announce. So, they could announce a date on 21.3, and hold EGM a max of 28 after that. It’s not been rejected, just JD and everything he says....
Hash. I’ve always said that Sutherland is Bamford’s ‘man’. That means he’s somewhat bulletproof here. Having said that, that glowing review in the AR is typical copy and paste fare, I don’t take any notice of it.
I think a possibility would be that certain individuals might resign ‘in protest ‘ if JD got in. I’d be happy with that, as those that resigned would be the ones that know they aren’t capable as it is. I have to say though, they could have accepted his ‘offer of help’ without forcing him to EGM, which seems to be a newsworthy item. Maybe, maybe, they are confident that he’ll fail?
Wackwack, I do very much welcome the moves by JD. This board and management needs something up them so they don’t just sleepwalk to mediocrity and decline (maybe too late anyway). It’s great theatre, but in all honesty, I just can’t see how this is going to play out.
As a solicitor with over 30 years pqe, I am familiar with boards, thanks, especially in the retail arena. I don’t wish to elaborate on boards in a generic fashion, I raise the question specifically about this particular scenario. We don’t need to discuss the wider issues of boards and their functions or functioning. We could be here for days... I throw out the question, somewhat rhetorically, to see what people are thinking. In this particular instance, I am very aware of the level of hostility to Mr D from the current SDRY Board. I’m aware of just how supportive they are, especially the Chairman, of Mr Sutherland. As an example, Penny Hughes, formerly of Coca Cola, is a strong supporter of Mr Sutherland, formerly of Coca Cola. You state ‘you really have to be on the team, before you can score any goals’. Indeed, JD was on the team until last year, and left because he lost influence over the strategy. His ‘regular and persuasive dialogue’, that he was having up until that point clearly failed. Were you unaware of this, Bandit? Or do you feel that he would be better at it next time around? There was probably less hostility towards him back then. How will it be better now, especially in the context of the written position of the Board as it stands? I would genuinely like to read your experienced thoughts on how it’s going to work.
My outlook as you perceive it is neither here nor there. I ask the question. The current stance from the management is JD can do one. They 100 % refute his strategy, as a board, indeed , they hold him jointly responsible for the current situation. It’s pretty clear they want to press on with the strategy they currently have. He wants it differently, they reject his ideas. They are quite an entwined lot, as is often the case. They do not want him. This is a fact, not a negative outlook. I’m long, and in profit. I’d love this to skyrocket. But I’m a realist, and I see opportunity amongst these shenanigans. But I don’t believe in the current management. ‘Not sure how many boards you’ve sat on’....jeez
It is being resisted however General Meeting Request from Regulatory News | 1st March 2019 18:14 RNS Number : 6673R Superdry PLC 01 March 2019 1 March 2019 General Meeting Request On 1 March 2019 the Company received a request (the 'request') from Julian Dunkerton ('Mr Dunkerton') and James Holder ('Mr Holder') under section 303 of the Companies Act 2006 (the 'Act') that the Company convene a general meeting to consider resolutions to elect Mr Dunkerton and Peter Williams ('Mr Williams') as Directors of the Company (the 'resolutions'). Since his decision to leave the Company in March 2018 the Board has engaged extensively with Mr Dunkerton as well as with Mr Holder to ensure their views have been heard and understood. The Board has also, since Mr Dunkerton commenced a public debate in October 2018, engaged in ongoing consultation with Superdry's other largest shareholders about Mr Dunkerton and Mr Holder's views. Those shareholders have made clear their continued support for Superdry's Global Digital Brand strategy under the current management team and have encouraged the Board to ensure the delivery of that strategy. None of the other shareholders that the Board has engaged with has indicated support for Mr Dunkerton's return to the Company and many have expressed concerns that the continued public debate will cause unnecessary costs and distraction at the expense of all shareholders. Mr Dunkerton and Mr Holder have repeatedly proposed to the Board that Superdry should change its strategy. Their previous proposals have been that Mr Dunkerton should return to the Company as a member of the Board with a full-time executive role responsible for brand, product and marketing. The Board has carefully considered the proposals on each occasion they have been put forward and on each occasion has unanimously rejected them as they would not be in the interests of the Company or shareholders. The resolutions requested today do not include any executive role for Mr Dunkerton. The Board's position remains unchanged; that it would not be in the interests of the Company or shareholders to appoint Mr Dunkerton as a Director of the Company. The Board believes that a number of the current issues facing Superdry stem from Mr Dunkerton's approaches to brand and product strategy. The Board also believes Mr Dunkerton's views on the strategic direction of the Company are directly at odds with the unanimous views of both the management team and the Board. Mr Dunkerton's return as a Director of the Company would be counter-productive, highly disruptive and likely to lead to resignations. The resolutions also seek the appointment of Mr Williams as a member of the Board. Given that he is being proposed by Mr Dunkerton and Mr Holder, the Board has significant reservations that Mr Williams could ever be an independent director and represent the interests of all shareholders equally. In accordance with the timetable provided f
Indeed! They should have done that years ago. It was never the same after Micky Drexker left. He was a solid retailer, and when he left they brought in Paul Pressler. A guy from Disney whose CV was ‘I’m the guy behind the ‘Care Bear’. ...... Not been the same since. Pity they didn’t follow the founders (Don Fisher) advice, ‘Change or fail’, they didn’t, and they slid down the rankings. There’s definitely a lesson there.
Bamford exits. Sutherland on the rack. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/chairman-peter-bamfords-exit-puts-superdry-boss-euan-sutherland-on-rack-9p5v8tzlq
I would add that I differentiate between Mr D and PE approach here. PE will absolutely be consulting experts on ‘brand/lifestyle’ , and they won’t be asking those supermarket interlopers that remain in situ. And they’ll be looking at replacement management because they’ll absolutely remove the dead wood. Which suits me! Mr Dunk doesn’t consider the brand in the same way, because it’s his baby. I figure we’ll have to see Mr D launch his bid for EGM first and see how it plays, if at all, before PE get really busy. Just my thoughts. Have they lost the Digital Director??