Member Info for Pmoran1969

Boohoo Group has asked its suppliers for a 10 per cent discount on delivered and undelivered clothing orders as the online fashion retailer takes a tighter control of costs.

One supplier, who spoke to The Times on condition of anonymity, said they had received a call yesterday “demanding” a discount on all outstanding orders. “It turns all orders produced into losses,” the supplier said. “This is major self-harm. They are struggling to find suppliers and now they are screwing the ones they have.”

The Manchester-based group upset suppliers last year when it extended its payment terms from 30 to 60 days.

The group has been focused on reducing its overheads as it struggles with weaker consumer sentiment while the cost of living soars. It has been consulting on more than 100 redundancies at its office in Soho, central London. Most of the roles under threat are in its ecommerce, buying and design unit.

Boohoo thrived through lockdowns, ringing up record sales and buying brands including Karen Millen, Oasis, Warehouse and the Debenhams chain. Its reputation was tarnished by revelations in 2020 of poor working conditions among its suppliers, including low pay at factories in Leicester, which led to a shake-up of supply chains and governance overseen by Sir Brian Leveson, the former judge.

ADVERTISEMENT

The company, founded in 2006 by Mahmud Kamani and Carol Kane, is adjusting to what John Lyttle, 55, its chief executive, described as “the normalisation of the channel shift online over the last 12 months”.

Boohoo had revenue of £637.7 million in the four months to the end of December, down 11 per cent on a year earlier. It expects sales in its financial year to February to be 12 per cent lower as people spend less.

Boohoo declined to comment on its suppliers. A source close to the company said: “Suppliers were quick to put their prices up, but have not brought them down again despite deflation seen in some areas.”

Boohoo’s shares have fallen by about 36 per cent over the past year and yesterday they closed down 1½p, or 3.2 per cent, at 47½p

T4G I think you are confusing this settlement process with the blanket ‘money off your first purchase’type vouchers used as a marketing tool which are known for having a low take up

In this instance 3 individuals brought a class action law suit against 3 boohoo brands suggesting that the company had misled customers with artificial price reductions. Now anyone who purchased between the 2016 and 2022 dates will receive a gift card (by email) to the value of $10. They can only redeem this voucher if they log in using the email address to which it was sent and only for the brand that it was originally for although provision has been made for several individuals to club their vouchers together if they wish. This is a far more targeted scheme than a marketing promo.

I would argue that the vast majority of customers who purchased in the period are savvy enough to assess the value of their purchase based on what they are paying rather than what the item was supposedly sold for last week/month. For example is this dress I am about to buy worth my $15 dollars as opposed to I am getting a $40 dress for $15.

I would also argue that if someone stopped buying from boohoo during the 5 year period it was likely to be because they didn’t like the quality, delivery times, decided shein was cheaper, took a moral stance on fast fashion or any multitude of reasons why customers churn.

I would further suggest that of the 11 million odd emails sent to customers those that are still shopping with boohoo will simply see it as $10 off my next order so will definitely use it, those that migrated to an alternative brand in the period due to delivery timescales or a cheaper alternative will likely have a look and see if there is anything they can actually buy for $10 given it appears delivery is free and one thing we know about boohoo is there’s always something available at a low price point. Anyone who only purchased once and thought the quality was poor or have turned their back on fast fashion will not bother and if by some miracle there are customers out there who stopped purchasing because they felt cheated by the alleged artificial sales prices they will almost certainly find an item to purchase if only to feel justified and punish the company.

In all I believe that will amount to a significantly higher take up than what you are suggesting.

I don’t necessarily view that as a bad thing as it might see some previously lost customers return at a time when delivery lead times have improved and whilst the existing customers will be getting a $10 freebie which is a revenue hit I don’t see it being that significant/noticeable given where us revenue was last year.

I don’t think we are going to see an rns other than the one issued last may.

Settlement was agreed last may and the details have been out there for considerable time. Anyone who purchased from boohoo plt or nasty gal within the state of California between certain dates will get a $10 gift card automatically sent to them unless they specifically opted out of the settlement scheme prior to the deadline at the end of last year.

My understanding was that boohoo denied any wrong doing and the court did not rule one way or the other with both parties agreeing to this settlement to avoid substantial legal costs etc.

Clearly the board don’t think it’s necessary to issue an rns with all of the finite details or they would have done so shortly after the final approval hearing at the end of last year so all we know is that the total cost to the company will be within the already issued guidelines.

Abfinvestor over on twitter! That my friend is the old poster on here kallumama or whatever his moniker was of ‘the high street will be given free rent while boohoo is held to ransom by the digital landlords’ fame. There’s a small mischievous part of me that wishes he was back just so I could observe the interaction between him and T4G!

Broker ratings and associated comments are little more than a grown up version of the comments we see on here.

RBC are down on boohoo and have stated their forecasts and acknowledged that they differ to the consensus. Other brokers hold a different view. If there was a boohoo discussion board for brokers what’s the betting that someone at Bank of America would be telling their counterpart at RBC they are a troll or a scaremongering deramper or vice versa?

As an investor or potential investor in boohoo the fact that Google searches for shein in the US are 30 times higher than for boohoo might have you wondering why boohoo are even bothering to open a US distribution centre!

Then again you might take the view that as boohoo effectively ceased marketing activity in the US they have been actively discouraging people from searching for them and you might also take the view that when they are ready to start pushing their brands in the US again they will be successful enough at it to make the new distribution centre somewhat worthwhile!

Long term investors might remember one of the half year/full year results presentations where the board were asked about the US and the tax breaks available and Lyttle confirming that they would be looking to produce in Mexico and North America to take advantage. You might take the view that that boat has well and truly sailed and boohoo has had its day and will soon be a distant memory to be replaced by shein. Alternatively you might think that the US market is rather large and even if boohoo carve out a small portion of it that will have significant impact on the bottom line for the business.

One thing is absolutely certain though. Whatever your own opinion is it will have absolutely no bearing on the success of otherwise of boohoo asos or shein and you may as well try to convert a Manu fan to supporting Liverpool as try to change someone else opinion about this or any other share by commenting on here.

Moneysponge I am happy to help T4g out and start the list off.

Recently the one of the most negative things about being invested in boohoo is the bovine excrement you post on here!

Golden years.

Is similarweb just simply wrong or is it web hits and the higher figure quoted by the companies include both web and app traffic?

I ask because clearly similarweb’s job is to provide webtraffic data and if it’s so fundamentally wrong I would have thought it would be somewhat less popular/used than it actually is.

Ultimately we have to accept the companies figures given that they will have been audited in some way but why, if similarweb is so vastly different have they not been exposed?

People power

You knew nothing when you were blindly ramping this a couple of years ago and telling everyone it would be 100 bagger and you know nearly that much now.

I’m not a fan of some of the posters on here who seem to see nothing but the negatives about boohoo but at least they are consistent.

Given your total lack of credibility maybe it’s time for you to simply crawl back under the rock you were hiding under until a short time ago?

No doubt you’ll want to respond telling me I am one of the jealous bullies or that I don’t do enough research but frankly I’ll take about as much notice of that as I do your usual irrational posts.

I think you could well be onto something there dogger. I suspect that in the next 12 months we will see the demise of Burger King and Costa coffee given that McDonald’s and Starbucks are operating in the same market and most likely either bp or shell will run the other one out of business.

I don’t want to wildly speculate about the fate of ford versus Vauxhall or bmw versus Mercedes but I’m off to have a serious look at the shares I own and am going to sell everything I own for companies who have competitors and I would urge everyone else to do the same!

Glenda might be lacking in morals but sometimes it’s the girls with no morals that are the most fun!!

To be fair when it comes to owning shares I can’t bring myself to lose sleep over the morality of the companies I invest in. As long as glencore, imperial brands, bae, Diageo, hsbc, astra Zeneca etc operate within the law and provide an appropriate financial return that’s what I am concerned with.

The fact that I own nasty banks who forcibly separate you from your cash or bookmakers who somehow get you to voluntarily give them your cash, or drinks companies whose products (used incorrectly) can kill you, or cigarette or weapons manufacturers whose products (used as intended) will kill you doesn’t keep me awake at night. There are law makers and regulators policing them and when they do my only concern then is how big the fine is compared to the profits made and did the board anticipate and make adequate provision and is my share price or dividend affected!

It’s a totally shellfish attitude but last time I looked nobody was offering to look after my finances or my future so I’ll look after it my way. I’m not one for losing sleep anyway but having got in here ‘cheaply’ after the ‘Leicester slave wages scandal’ I have recently averaged down a little but am currently, not unlike a few others, breathing through a snorkel. So if I’m honest boo has more potential at present to cause insomnia than any of my other holdings!

Fira, yes it’s subsidised by boohoo. The £1.99 isn’t enough to cover the return delivery costs, the inspect and repack/return to stock and refund to customer or inspect and challenge customer costs.

It’s clearly a token amount that is based on what is charged for delivery and what the current ‘industry standard’ is for returning product but if they do charge it it will of course go some way towards off setting the cost of the return.

Of course one has to bear in mind that under the original free returns model returns still cost boohoo but the expected return rate was built into the sale price. Boohoo declared at the last couple of updates that they had seen an increase in returns and they attributed this to product mix (more dresses versus casual/leisure we are) whereas Asos blamed their higher return rates on inflation/ cost of living affecting its customers.

The t&c’s on plt,Karen millen coast and oasis still say U.K. returns are free which would suggest they are either testing this process first on boohoo before rolling it out or maybe boohoo have been affected by increased returns more than any of the other brands?

Perhaps our old friend kallumama went ahead with his threat to order loads of things from boohoo and simply return them to bring the company to it knees. Maybe the depressed share price has nothing to do with inflation, increased transport and distribution costs or ‘shorter scum’ behaviour and it’s kallumama doing his thang after all! Perhaps there will be an rns next week telling us that we expect to save £x million because of charging for returns but we are being forced to spend £x million because our digital landlord is holding us to ransom but the outlook and guidance is unaffected because the Armadale are now actually paying us to rent the single bricks and mortar shop we have!

Jongle the annual subscription to become a premier boohoo customer gives members free next day delivery (standard charge £5.99) and free returns (£1.99) for 12 months. If a customer places an order for a dress in two or three sizes with the intention of returning what doesn’t fit they would pay la total of £7.98 for the privilege.

Now £7.98 doesn’t seem unreasonable for the convenience given how much public transport to or driving and parking up in town would cost. However if a customer is likely to order more than once then the subscription is a no brainier. In fact given that standard delivery (up to 5 days) costs £3.99 the subscription model was already attractive to anyone who was likely to order 3 or more times in a year.

Personally I don’t see what charging for returns is going to achieve other than to encourage people to move to the premier customer package. A first time customer may be put off but given most retailers charge for returns probably not. Existing customers will move to the premier package if they are not already on it and will be able to order and return what they like (subject to fair use policy).

In the grand scheme of things I cannot see the £1.99 fee doing a great deal to either reduce the overall number of items returned or reduce the overall costs associated with handling those returns. I see this new charge as more of a statement to the market that says hey look we are managing/mitigating the high number of returns we told you about at the last update.

Trading for good.

I see pp1 has tried to you that you have the power to resolve this situation by simply not engaging.

Supposedly you filtered those posters that were winding you up and the theory behind you doing so was that you would simply carry on posting as normal and should any of the filtered posters respond to your posts you would not see their reply and not therefore feel the need to respond to their posts.

Right from day one of you being filtered you’ve been posting comments along the lines of ‘I see green boxes so the liars must be posting about me’!

So the board ends up like a school playground with silly bickering arguments back and forth that don’t bring anything of value to the board. Instead of the teacher breaking it up and sending the guilty parties to opposite side of the playground you did the responsible thing and effectively moved yourself out of the argument and stood yourself in the corner.

At this point the rest of the playground were expecting the other parties to either walk away or, maybe, carry on bickering with you despite the fact that you are in the corner which would probably have led to other people in the playground calling them out for continuing the bickering.

However what actually happened was you stood in the corner of the playground making hand gestures to the other kids encouraging the bickering to continue!

You might as well take the posters off filter because frankly if we though this filtering experiment was going to benefit the board its failed and your inability to simply ignore people who by your own admission you don’t even respect has played a part in that.

If it were back in our imaginary playground I fear we would hear an old fashion deputy head from the early 80’s bellowing threats of ‘I’ll bang both your heads together’ or ‘you are both as bad as each other’.

If you really are an investor and you really do care about this board not filling up with unnecessary arguments insults but cannot ignore the posters then please unfilter and carry on arguing. The board will still have to put up with the mindless comments that add no value for the rest of us but at least we won’t have all the additional rubbish that we have been getting since you filtered them with you second guessing what the green boxes are and the filtered few having conversations amongst themselves regarding your second guesses.

I’m not into all this ‘he is being paid to post here’ malarkey but when those discussions have taken place about such things one of the theories around manipulation of boards suggests that a ‘paid deramper’ will engage in different tactics one of which is to post lots of ‘useless’ information posts or start an argument to push a relevant or positive comment further down the page. You do realise that your actions are doing just that don’t you?

Is it time to grow up and walk away properly (filter or ignore) or admit that you are part of the problem rather than part of the solut

Been away for a few days so just been checking out the chatter on a few of the shares I own.

Got nothing insightful to add to the poor state of the markets and in particular where card is but I did Feel the need to post here just to echo Banbury boys comments. I enjoy your posts Roxbury and if you have indeed thrown the kitchen sink at card then if you feel like being enthusiastic in said posts I would say you have earned the right having put your money where your mouth is.

I often see the ramper/deramper phrase thrown around like some form of put down or insult simply because one person has a more bullish/bearish view of a company than someone else. I still find it strange that some poeple think someone being positive about a share is somehow trying to influence people to purchase the share!! On that basis Roxbury has effectively fat shamed the board and encouraged us to go out and run a marathon just because he’s told us he is doing the Ironman in Bolton!!

Roxbury I was actually away to see some friends in Nice for a few days and the ironman took place there last Sunday. The swim course out into the sea looked idyllic but there was some chop in the water on Sunday so I bet that was an additional challenge. The bike course went out up into the hills with one part including a climb worthy of something on the Tour de France according to one local (thankfully there was a downhill bit too). The other local comment that resonated was that whilst it would make for a lovely scenic bike ride I’d only do it on a motorbike! The run course was set out along the promenade des anglais and was effectively a flat run from the end of the promenade in nice old town to the airport and back which they repeat several times. Whilst that meant it was great for spectators to line the route it was probably a bit of a boring track for the athletes and god it was hot on Sunday.

I reckon the weather will be far more suitable in Bolton Roxbury and even if some of the architecture isn’t as pretty as nice, if they’ve chosen the right route the bike ride will definitely have its moments. The very best of luck to you and I hope when you do get to rest afterwards it’s sat outside a pub with a beer in your hand rather than outside card factory with you ‘customer counter clicker’ in your hand!

Aimtitan, well done on predicting the current share price some 6 months ago. I guess doing valuation for a living gives you an advantage when it comes to calling future share prices.

So now that we know your both experienced and accurate could you share your opinion as to what you forecast the share price to be in 6 months time for both boohoo and nbrown.

I see the link to Sourcing Journal also has an article concerning shein being sued for $100 million by some artist now for copyright infringement having previously been sued by stussy, doc martens and Levi’s for the same thing.

I suspect the bigger they get in the USA the more of these are going to pop up given how litigious the Sherman’s are!

Trading4good, I already stated that I understood the whole unfairness of my suggested approach and that it would take some effort on your part. But in answer to your question in all honesty no I don’t think I would ignore something like that I would probably respond and retaliate in some way. However if I am being honest I would also probably have walked away from the situation by too simply because there is nothing to be gained from pursuing the matter further.

Think about it. If the people who you believe to be trolls and to be dishonest and so on continue to insult you or lie about you or whatever then they are exposed for what they truly are without you having to do anything. If on the other hand these individuals believe they are simply replying to a ‘blatant ramp’ or whatever from you or are responding to an insult they believe you have thrown their way well of course if you simply are not engaging their ‘responses’ dry up.

You can control the situation if you choose to.

Trading4good, it’s clear that you believe that jongle, daytrade, goldy and maybe some others lack honesty and integrity and are just trolls or derampers or whatever phrase you care to give them. I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with your assessment of these individuals but merely pointing out what it appears to be from your, not unsubstantial, posts over the last few months.

Given that you know how frustrated many posters on the board are with this constant ongoing battle and given that you believe none of the other individuals involved have it in themselves to ‘do the right thing’ you actually have the power to resolve this problem. If you simply filter or ignore the posts from those posters with whom you have been arguing it all stops.

I appreciate that takes some emotional effort on your part and the imbalance or unjustness of this approach is also not lost on me but you have stated that part of your reason for engaging with certain individuals in the first place is because you care so much about the board. Well here you have a real opportunity to help the board and you don’t actually have to do anything.

Maybe it’s time to just stop engaging T4G? The board will thank you for it.

T4G, unfortunately anytime Leicester garment manufacturing gets a mention it’s an opportunity for an article to mention boohoo’s manufacturing issues of the past and has the potential to introduce a negative spin depending on how the author chooses to write the article.

As for boohoo’s PR I agree it could be improved particularly when it comes to ESG issues or investor relations and courting the city generally but this particular report has been published by the independent trust. Admittedly said trust was set up and funded by boohoo but essentially that’s where boohoo’s input ends and whilst they (boohoo) might well hope or expect to get good PR from their sponsoring of the trust neither the trust or boohoo will look particularly positive from a pr perspective if boohoo were to start issuing an rns relating to the trusts supposed independent research.

Investing101, I understand it is an ordinary quarterly scheduled trading update. We get one every mid June but don’t always get an rns to remind us that it’s happening. Whether we should read anything into that or not who knows?

One could take the view that if the board are aware of anything that would materially affect the share price (good or bad) they are obliged to tell us at the earliest opportunity so we should expect nothing out of the ordinary from the trading update. However we have been here in the past when an update has been ‘as expected’ and the market interpretation/reaction has been unduly negative.

I share your view that expectations are low and set out for the next 12 months and given the amount of uncertainty out there we shouldn’t expect that to change but that will not stop the various interested parties from trying to make a dollar so no doubt any trading update or interim figures will be met with the usual. Lots of Speculating and interpretation by analysts, shorters and reporters (not to mention our usual commenters on here)and we will end up in the same situation as usual with a mix of short term traders, long term holders, general nay sayers and the odd wind up merchant sticking to their own point of view and not really wanting to entertain anyone else’s!!