Dan - sorry but I was off to drop my youngest to uni today so couldn’t reply any sooner.
I fear once again you have missed the point I was making which was simply that you might have something useful to share but if your only motivation in posting is to drag up old arguments with someone who doesn’t even see your posts then anything useful you do have to share gets lost in the mele.
I’m not defending rags posts or his position I am simply suggesting that you refrain from referencing old arguments with everything and for the love of god please don’t start encouraging kallu to post any more than he already does.
As for the people on here I’m not sure what their professions are but since the late 80’s the number of individuals who invest directly in shares has grown considerably and there are sure to be plumbers and blacksmiths or any number of other professions out there who manage their own pensions and isa’s and I don’t see why that should make them any less qualified to have an opinion about a share they own than you me or anyone else.
I know someone who drives a lot of miles for their job who purchased shares in greggs some time back simply because the noticed the number of motorway service shops that they were opening up and believed that would result in significant growth. They did some basic research prior to purchasing but I can assure you they would be more likely to have known the price of a steak bake on the motorway services and how busy each outlet the observed was at different times of the day than they would to be able to quote the expected revenue for the next three years and what the retained profit would be. Does that make them a bad investor? Certainly a different way of looking at an investment but not necessarily the wrong way given it their money they were investing. And let’s be honest no amount of research or valuation calculations could have led an investor to predict that the Sunday times would run an expose on boohoo and the resulting problems with the share price.
Dan - we are all painfully aware that you constantly want to take every possible opportunity to trounce ragtrade. I have already shared by view (for what it’s worth) that you do have a tendency to take a piece of information out of context sometimes and you insist on bringing up what are essentially old untreated issues in an attempt to score points. Which is unfortunate because I think the good stuff you have to offer is in danger of being lost amongst the petty.
But regardless of whatever battle you think you still need to fight with rag (especially bearing in mind that he doesn’t even see your posts) encouraging kallumama to spout even more of his diatribe in order to try and make a point that let’s be honest only you seem to care about really doesn’t add value to the board (again only my opinion but from the comments of other posters I don’t think I am alone).
Maybe it really is time to prove that you are a grown up and just drop your issues with rag and concentrate on offering your views or opinions about boohoo and related issues?
Kallu so you have performed better than any U.K. fund manager investing in U.K. stocks over the last 15 years because you don’t just read buffet and munger you actually practice what they themselves do?
But by your own admission you purchased pfd prior to them losing a significant amount of value and then held them for many years at the low price point and when they went up in value
you sold (while they were still rising in value I might add). Are you telling me that during the period where you were nursing a significant loss on pfd you were still outperforming any U.K. fund manager? Of course Neil Woodford isn’t quite as popular as he once was but to be fair to him he had a good record at invesco investing in U.K. stocks during a significant proportion of the last 1.5 decades. Did you outperform him? Please share with us what were the other shares that you owned that must have risen by an awful lot in value during the time you held pfd? After all you claimed to have had most of your net worth in pfd and lost equivalent to what was it several years salary or a few houses? So if you were still performing better than any U.K. fund manager at that point whatever you had invested the rest of your net worth in must have been some of the biggest risers of any shares during that 6 year period mustn’t they?
I think we are starting to get a picture of how much bovine excrement you spout aren’t we!!
I agree that being debt free is often a good position for companies and indeed individuals to be in.
Historically any good investment advice would include paying down personal debt prior to investing and let’s be honest there’s little point in putting monies into a diversified portfolio that you expect to grow at the rate of say 7-10% annually if you are running an overdraft or credit card facility that attracts a rate of 15 or 25% .
However if a business is in the position to borrow at circa 4% and can realise a return significantly better than this then the do it now approach would be the obvious one to take.
Danl90 I agree that the likes of us distribution, additional warehousing in us/eu as well as U.K. and the development of brands including Debenhams internationally is key to boohoo’s continued success. However it needs to be done properly and at a pace that the management can cope with. Our excuse for the Leicester supply chain issues was along the lines of how quickly the company had grown and it’s cost us both in terms of the company paying out to fix the issues and the share price. Neither the press or the market would be very forgiving if boohoo were to attempt these projects and fail to deliver.
As long as the board are walking before they attempt to run and as long as they are developing the new brands and such one would expect this to be reflected in the revenue and profits and ultimately the share price. As always for the little shareholders not knowing what’s happening behind the scenes is frustrating and requires one to have faith that the board will deliver what we expect of them. Given the track record of over delivering against can only hope that they will do so once again and that the next financial update will both beat estimates and deliver some clarity on where we are going with Debenhams, Karen millen and Dorothy Perkins as well as how intend to manage our us growth and compete with shein or next or whoever it is we determine as primary competitions for our customers and their cash.
I think you already have the answer but just to confirm when William hill was subject to their takeover there were a couple of employees on the wmh board part way through their share save scheme and they were allowed to buy the shares at the agreed offer price for the value of the fu d’s they had so far saved.
From memory the explanation went along the lines of the shares are issued and earmarked to employee share save scheme at the start of the scheme even though they are not available to savers to purchase until the required 3 or 5 year saving period has been completed. So if the company is subject to a takeover during the scheme period the share save shares (issued and held by the company on behalf of employee savers) need to be purchased by the bidder alongside all the other shares. The company therefore allow savers to buy the proportion of shares they have saved for so far and the remainder are cancelled prior to the takeover.
Dan - like I tried to convey in my earlier post there’s a lot of our own personal interpretation and option influencing our views on here and just because I make an observation or offer a view doesn’t make it correct or mean anyone else would or indeed should see things the same way. So yes in my opinion you can come across at times as the big I am and be at pedantic and argumentative too not to mention that once you get the bit between your teeth you can emulate the Duracell bunny somewhat!
But please remember I have already stated in the past that I enjoy our debates and I shared my opinion not to try and insult or upset you in some way but to highlight that the good stuff you have to say has the potential to be lost as a result. And I see and accept your point that you don’t intend to come across that way but perhaps it’s the determination to prove rag wrong even when replying to other people’s posts that exacerbates this?
I understand what you are saying about what the platform is and how it’s been part of the long term strategy and I don’t disagree with you. However from memory the first time John little uttered the p word was when boo held a video call when we purchased Debenhams. At the time it prompted discussion on here about how all of a sudden everyone claims to have a platform and in fairness prior to this point one would have been forgiven for simply referring to the website and ordering system as our platform rather than the whole process. In fact I think this was a point made by rag himself (amongst others) at the time which was in fact valid in that context.
Likewise I see how you would dismiss the idea that a camera has any significance when compared to the mighty platform but in fairness when you don’t have your goods on display in a shop where it’s possible to distinguish the difference between say sports direct and flannels and their associated stock the right quality photographs are one of the ways it’s possible to demonstrate this difference. It’s why next directory included material swatches in the actual catalogue when they launched to demonstrate the quality of the cloth and differentiate their quality products from the other catalogue boys at the time. Again when taken in context rags hard on over which cameras are being used by boohoo vs asos makes sense and is as valid as your excitement about the platform.
So all I am saying here is, with the exception of some of the stupid stuff observed on here like claims that online is dying or the claims that this will be £2 by the end of next month, a lot of people bring their own experience and insight and if we take the time to understand the context it can be useful stuff. Of course we won’t always agree (your opinion of the flea gate was that it was potentially the straw that was about to stick the camel in a wheelchair compared to others that saw it as tomorrow’s chip paper) but in the main all the opinions are of some worth.
Dan - the board havent exactly come out and informed us exactly how they envisage the platform to work or quite how they will develop the Debenhams marketplace.
Maybe they will aim to eat everyone’s lunch as you like to put it but for my money the whole Debenhams announcement amounted to not a lot more than a bit of buzz and a suggestion as to what the future might hold and since then there’s been not a lot of substantial update from them to paint the full picture for us.
There’s no getting away from the fact that every man and his dog claims to have a platform these days and whilst it’s easy to assume what that means we don’t actually know for sure what it means in boohoo speak.
I don’t much care if you want to pick on every point rag makes and turn it into a, dare I say it, platform to show us all how clever you are but much of what you state as fact is merely your own personal interpretation of what little info the bod have given us thus far.
Personally I trust that boohoo will make a success of Debenhams and the ex top shop brands but I would not put it past them to do it by allowing certain brands within the stable to be sold wholesale if they decide it’s the right thing to do and likewise buying certain items in on a wholesale basis if they determine that’s the most appropriate way to ensure they can offer home or beauty products to customers. I definitely see an opportunity for boohoo to allow 3rd party suppliers to appear on the Debenhams site with all fulfilment and customer service being looked after by the supplier but given boohoo’s expertise in fulfilment and returns management I see no reason why they wouldn’t also offer a full service at the right price for the right product where boo carry the stock, manage the order, payment, pick pack and deliver and return etc without taking the risk on the stock itself.
In short I can see any number of ways boohoo could make the whole Debenhams and marketplace product work that is very different to the current test and repeat model and why not as long as they do it in a profitable way. But until they tell us their plans in detail all we are doing is speculating and my best guess or interpretation of what John little actually meant when he said x is no more or less accurate than yours or rags or anyone else’s.
So please by all means continue to share your insight and ideas but please stop with the big I am attitude because it has a tendency to make people switch off rather than listen and at the end of the day if you are correct in your assumptions there’s no point being able to say ‘I told you so’ if there’s no one listening when you say it.
Kallu - here we go again with another link to another article that you either didn’t read or didn’t understand.
Retail footfall is higher than the corresponding week last year when we were in the midst of the pandemic and lock downs but still lower than during 2019 when things were ‘normal’ and bricks and mortar retail was already in decline.
So yet again all this article confirms is either customers are not buying or are buying online and there’s been an abundance of data suggesting that online is continuing to grow rather than consumer spend is in decline.
And nowhere in the article (from professional jeweller!) is there any suggestion that primark is almost the only shop driving foootfall so I wonder if you could link to the source for that or is it like most of what you spout, made up?
You love to talk about barriers to entry or a moat.
So if a digital tax is indeed on the way and if Amazon are able to mitigate its effect by opening physical stores what are the barriers to entry to stop the likes of asos or boohoo or anyone else from opening physical stores to also mitigate any digital tax? Well according to you not a lot given how cheap retail space is.
Of course any suggestion of a digital tax is merely speculation at this point regardless of how high the salaries of Amazon’s adviser are. On the other hand the trend towards online shopping is a fact and one only has to read the likes of Deutsche Banks comments yesterday to understand that the smart money expects the online trend to continue.
Extract from today’s times on this very subject...
“ Asos, Boohoo, Marks & Spencer and Next were all given “buy” ratings; only Associated British Foods, the Primark owner, missed out on the love-in, with its shares worthy only of a “hold” recommendation.
Unsurprisingly, Adam Cochrane, a retail analyst in Deutsche’s London office, prefers those companies with more of an online presence, which explains his indifference towards AB Foods. “Covid has seen a step-change in online penetration, with five years of online adoption in one year,” Cochrane and his team claimed.”
So what’s to stop offline only businesses from entering the online fray? Well according to you it’s the spiralling cost of warehousing space and your other favourite ‘digital landlords’. ABF have been challenged many times about their refusal to take primark online and have been consistent in their response citing the cost of setting up and managing a direct to consumer delivery and (more importantly) returns would be prohibitive and result in margin pressure or increased cost to consumer which do not fit their chosen business model.
So by all means continue to hold your ABF shares (I hold some myself) but if you are expecting them to go up in value based solely on the fact that primark will benefit from cheap business rates and cheap retail space and the demise of online then you are deluded or indeed “just a bit thick”!
Thanks kallumama another interesting link to a news story from the USA that confirms the following.
Nordstrom Sales up compared to previous year when sales were massively affected by pandemic but are down compared to pre pandemic levels and as a result share price went down.
So Nordstrom are declaring that whilst some customers have returned to shopping in store some clearly have not. So either those customers are simply not buying anything now or are shopping elsewhere. Perhaps they are shopping online given that all of the past links you have sent us from the USA news services have confirmed increase in online sales across the board.
As for Amazon opening both grocery and department stores they have clearly decided that there is a market for some form of offline presence to add to their already ‘somewhat successful’ online offering. You’ll note that they are not introducing department stores to replace online and I am sure you have read the statements from Amazon that outline why they want to have a bricks and mortar presence to facilitate collection and returns and to showcase electrical goods. There are many committed online shoppers who still prefer to be able to compare electrical items against similar products and want the benefit of speaking to an expert. Curry’s p.c world and John Lewis have stated in recent times that they suffer from customers in store browsing and obtaining advice and expertise on such products only to then shop online anyway.
It seems Amazon are of the same opinion as boohoo shareholders in that there is clearly a place for bricks and mortar outlets despite the continued growth of online shopping. As ever it seems the only person who thinks online shopping is declining and being replaced by a resurgence in offline is you kallu. Furthermore you post links to articles that clearly state the opposite of what you are trying to promote which continues calls into question your understanding of the situation or your general level of Intelligence.
I read your posts and frankly I still can’t decide if you are simply a blatant deramper or just a bit thick!
Kallu you feckin eejit nobody said online was the on.y game in town. It’s you who has been trying to tell us bricks and mortar is the only game in town and that online is dead. Furthermore you send us links to some USA today article where Walmart are confirming that they have done specifically well online along with Home Depot or whoever saying the same.
I think you would be far better off concentrating on your abf investor Twitter feed and communicating with your 20 followers rather than wasting your time on here talking to people who already know the risks associated with their boohoo investment but also know, just like next or Walmart or Home Depot or m&s that online shopping is very much here to stay.
Nice try though!
the link you provided to the USA today article was interesting and seems to support what we are seeing with boohoo currently.
“Doug McMillon, Walmart president and CEO, said the company gained more market share in grocery and added thousands of online sellers to its third-party marketplace.”
And in the next paragraph of the article
“ Home Depot, which also announced its quarterly earnings Tuesday, saw a decline of in-store shoppers.
The home improvement store chain’s sales continue to surge, though same-store sales appeared to come back to earth after a year in which the company repeatedly outperformed expectations.”
So strong online sales and a strong 3rd party market place looks good for boohoo.
Piece in the times business section today concerning the £500 million investment reported yesterday.
This from the sister paper who broke the ‘Leicester slavery scandal’ and in which any report that mentioned boohoo since dedicated several paragraphs to regurgitate the investigation by the times and subsequent levitt report.
Is the anti boohoo press tide finally starting to recede?
Boohoo has £500m plan to create 5,000 jobs
Friday August 13 2021, 12.01am, The Times
Boohoo plans to create 5,000 jobs, mostly in the UK, as it invests £500 million in this country over the next five years in an attempt to sustain rapid growth.
The Manchester-based fast fashion retailer, which operates 13 labels including Pretty Little Thing, Warehouse and Oasis, said it would add warehouse space and buy in “smart IT solutions” to improve efficiency.
It aims to meet growing demand for its products in markets such as America and Australia and said about half of its sales are in international markets.
Boohoo, founded in 2006 by Mahmud Kamani and Carol Kane, reported sales of £1.75 billion in the year to the end of February. It sells clothing, shoes, accessories and beauty products.
The company has been heavily criticised over the poor treatment of workers by suppliers in Leicester and is aiming to restore its reputation.
In January, Boohoo employed 3,476 people, mostly in the UK, though this number is understood to stand at 5,500 now.
Numbers have swelled at two new distribution centres in Daventry and Wellingborough and through acquiring the Debenhams brand and Arcadia’s Burton, Wallis and Dorothy Perkins.
“Also, where’s Kallu gone?”
He got his a level results yesterday and failed so he won’t be going to uni now. He is currently at the local primark asking if there’s any chance of a job as a meet and greet with a view to progressing to the tills once he’s experienced enough.
Understandably they are a bit reluctant to give him a job because they had to ask him to stop going to the store once they reopened after lock down as he was constantly in there touching and feeling the organic cotton underwear and it made some of the customers a bit uncomfortable.
I suspect he will be back soon though!
Pjf, I’m not sure it warrants an rns.
Effectively what boohoo are saying is that they expect to continue to grow the business over the next five years and as well as creating a lot of new jobs the growth also has a knock on effect in the communities inn which boohoo operate thus creating even more jobs and contribution to the U.K. economy. In many respects this growth story has already been communicated to share holders.
So the story is essentially a pr release from boohoo and the good news should be along the lines of ‘boohoo not only sorting out supplier issues etc but also creating U.K. jobs and so on’. Let’s see if the times or the guardian pick it up and how they chose to handle it if they do.
N brown is 50% owned by the alliance family. Not sure how David Joshua and Nigel alliance fit into the category of entrepreneurial Asians but one things for sure if anyone is thinking of buying nbrown it’s the alliance shares they will need to acquire.
There is a rumour the Barclays want shut of very though and are considering floating it so if boohoo, and it would be a big if as far as I am concerned, wanted to own a catalogue company and have a few hundred million to spend I would think that very would be a more likely purchase than nbrown.
I’m inclined to agree kindness. There can be a tendency for us to sometimes focus on the ever changing share price and try to make sense of why it’s gone up down or sideways in the short term and to seek solutions whether that’s the chairman or key directors purchasing shares, introduction of a dividend to encourage a broader range of institutional investors or seeking an update to the markets to assure us that we are either on track or beating issued guidance targets.
However whilst the individual fortunes of investors rest on the share price (we only make a profit or loss when we sell after all) the co founders, directors and employees of the business are being paid their respective salaries and only need to worry about hitting their individual and business targets in the timescales set to achieve their associated bonuses.
If Brian levesson were to publicly leave his boohoo role because they were not taking the agenda for change program seriously or if John lyttle were to up sticks and move back to primark citing promised bonuses being unreachable or if the likes of the anti slavery charities or the glaa were to come out in last weeks sky news piece and be critical rather than complimentary about boohoo working with them to eradicate supplier issues (and let’s be clear here the sky piece last week was about supplier issues not boohoo issues) then I think we would have a problem. As it stands the situation is that boohoo have put a robust program in place to deal with the supplier issues and the relevant organisations have commended their approach. Recent articles in trade and investor press are starting to suggest that government bodies need to do more to protect workers from unscrupulous factory owners rather than laying the problem at boohoo’s door (kamani told the commons select committee months ago that fixing Leicester isn’t something boohoo could do alone) so whilst some journos are still dragging up the past the tide is turning.
Sure the usual issues that boohoo face in terms of competition or managing rate of returns or unexpected cost due to raw material or freight cost increases will remain and no doubt be added to but boohoo have already consistently demonstrated that they address such challenges as good anyone else and if the cost of a container from China or Singapore or india is double or even 1” times the cost it used to be that affects everyone in the industry not just boohoo.
So whilst the board might not be focusing on keeping the retail investors up to date with sales returns and profits on a daily basis there’s every reason to expect that they are focusing on doing their usual and beating guidance targets and in time as long as they continue to do so the share price will undoubtedly rise whether that’s because profits are reinvested to grow the business and share price even more or because they want to return profits to shareholders by way of a divvy.
Kallumama - there was a time when Sweden had the highest amount of double glazing per capita in the whole of Europe. At the time they also had the highest rate of suicide. Does it therefore follow that double glazing causes people to commit suicide? It’s obvious that all the existing customers know how to return items so if so many people are searching on the boohoo website how to return an item it just goes to show how many new customers have purchased items does it not!
If you have a theory that online cannot be profitable due to the rate of returns surely the thing to do would be to look at companies that offer clothing online and establish whether they are profitable despite the fact that they have returns? Boohoo certainly is.
One things for sure constantly quoting that online is dead or dying and stating that the future trend will be for high street shopping only isn’t proving anything other than you hold a particular opinion and cannot compute facts that point to an alternative view.
There will be people invested in boohoo who are also invested in abf (I am one) who understand that primark and boohoo serve different customers with different needs and there’s space for both of them, this is not an either or situation for anyone other than you.
There are some investors here who own both boohoo and asos or next or whoever. But you’ll note that whilst discussion regarding asos and their performance or next etc appear on the boohoo board you won’t find anyone constantly putting down asos or next on here or jumping on to the respective shares forum to post that asos is rubbish and boohoo is much better.
Your approach is immature but that’s unsurprising given both the quality of your posts and the outlandish claims you make.
No Aldi no point whatsoever mate. You’re better off buying a different share that will go up around 5 or 6 percent every week regardless of what the market does and will double your money every year or two and pay you a handsome dividend that’s guaranteed to increase yearly at twice the rate of inflation. Be sure to post here and tell us the name of it when you find it.