Member Info for Pmoran1969

Why?

I wouldn’t consider the times to be a far right publication and whilst I agree that the article today had a couple of digs included in it, it certainly didn’t read like a bashing of boohoo given what we have had to endure from both the times and other publications since last July.

The press won’t change their stance overnight but it would have been very easy for the times to rehash all the old slave wages, vat fraud and covid safety issues etc but they didn’t, they concentrated predominantly on the current.

I suspect that it might take the guardian (who we can consider slightly more left than murdoch) a while longer than the times to reach the same place when it comes to reporting on boohoo!

Times article part 2

Boohoo also called on Tim Godwin, a former police officer, KPMG and Verisio and Bureau Veritas, the supply chain auditors, to map the family networks that Leicester’s garment industry is built on. The investigation found that a significant number were linked with failed businesses and often left substantial debt, but poor records meant it was unclear if directors had been disqualified.

Boohoo also published Sir Brian Leveson’s second report on progress on its Agenda for Change strategy to improve conditions in its supply chain. Leveson said: “Very real progress continues to be made even though there remains some way to go.”

Behind the story: Increasing sales ensures there’ll be no change to chain reaction
Sir Brian Leveson, the QC brought in to mark Boohoo’s homework on its supply chain overhaul, has said that he’s not interested in unpicking “who knew what and when” (Ashley Armstrong writes). Perhaps that’s because he knows there’s little point in listening to bosses’ claims that they were “shocked and appalled” at the labour abuses that had been happening under their noses for years. Far better just to move on, like Merian — Boohoo’s biggest institutional investor — has.

Boohoo had a long way to go to reach normal standards in retail supply chains, as its rivals have published supplier lists for years. Now it has to strive to be totally above board to soothe investors who want sustainability. Analysts at Berenberg recently told investors that Boohoo was “not for the faint-hearted” and said that the suppliers’ list was an “important initial level of transparency”. They added that the growth rates Boohoo offered meant that the “risk-reward trade-off is favourable”. In other words, as long as Boohoo keeps boosting sales they can recommend investors swallow the company’s promises.

There’s an argument that Boohoo’s online model, which means it avoids punitive shop rates bills, gives it an advantage over rivals. More importantly, if it continues to sweep up high street wreckages, it should at least be on the same level playing field when it comes to supply chains and paying British workers a legal wage.

Times article today. Considering the times broke the supplier wages story last year this latest piece, not unlike recent times articles, feels like reporting of the facts rather than an attempt to eek out as many negatives about the company as possible.

A bit like Leveson boohoo have come a long way but still have a way to go it seems the sensible press have at least started to move away from looking for the negative angle so perhaps the tide has been stemmed even if it hasn’t turned yet!

Boohoo times article part 1

Boohoo has cut ties with hundreds of clothing suppliers after scrutiny of its supply chain prompted it to enforce a “zero tolerance” policy over concerns about the poor treatment of factory workers.

The online fashion retailer published a list of 78 predominantly Leicester-based suppliers yesterday after promising investors six months ago that it would be more transparent about its suppliers. It comes after an investigation that uncovered workers operating in unsafe factories and being paid below the minimum wage.

Shares in Boohoo rose by 2 per cent in early trading before ending the day largely flat at 332¾p.

An independent report into Boohoo last year by Alison Levitt, a senior lawyer, uncovered “endemic” problems and criticised the company for not having a full list of authorised suppliers or an accurate number of factories it worked with. Owing to widespread subcontracting, Levitt estimated that Boohoo worked with about 500 British factories.

Andrew Reaney, who joined Boohoo as director of responsible sourcing in October, said that unauthorised subcontracting was banned within the retailer’s supply chain and it had asked its factories to bring all garment manufacturing and packing under one roof so that it knew exactly where products were being made.

Reaney said that while the number of suppliers had been reduced, Boohoo was giving more work to bigger factories. “One supplier I met with yesterday has taken on another floor in the building and an extra 50 workers . . . Our UK suppliers are growing in line with the volumes we are seeing,” he said.

Boohoo was founded in 2006 by Mahmud Kamani and Carol Kane. It has grown rapidly as young shoppers switch online and has acquired a string of high street brands, including Dorothy Perkins, Oasis and Warehouse.

The company admitted that its supply chain had lacked sufficient controls or oversight, which meant that there was no warning system that could identify when garments were being bought too cheaply, which would suggest underpaid workers, or when a small factory was producing too many clothes, which would be evidence of subcontracting.

Reaney said that Boohoo had identified weekly production capacity for each factory and that unannounced audits would ensure that it knew how much was being made and where. Boohoo said that if a factory was “exceeding its capacity, it would constitute a red flag in relation to transparent lawful and ethical production

Here kitty you can have more than one view on here. You could be someone who is constantly posting that this will be £4.50 post results, last chance to get on the train and just look at the massive buys coming through on level2. Or you could be someone who is pointing out how well ASOS are doing and how boohoo is being held back by supplier issues and how the press will always constantly be looking to catch them out and look at the massive selling pressure on l2.

We are a very inclusive bunch on here really and welcome all views. In fact we even have people on here that have changed their view from positive to negative and there was even one person that went as far as to change their name as well as their point of view and we still let them comment that’s just the kind of board this is!! ;)

Just had a quick read through the second instalment from leveson and my initial thoughts are that it’s positive.

I would like to think that it goes some way to highlighting that boohoo are taking their commitments following the Levittown report seriously and the acquisition of Debenhams and the Arcadia brands has had no ill effect on maintaining the focus on suppliers and the agenda for change.

This will be reported in the trade and ‘normal’ press so I’m sure we will get a feel for where various editors heads are at concerning boohoo. There will be the inevitable dragging up of last years slave wages reports but will we finally see some of the press telling the ‘boohoo turning the corner’ tale? I hope so.

One thing that is clear is the publication of year end results in May will be accompanied by further information on the supply chain and we have already been promised that it will contain further update on the Debenhams website and the integration of the Arcadia brands. It could well be that the presentation and questions and answers session regarding results are more focused on future plans than whether the results beat estimates and by how much. I wonder if this will be the results presentation that breaks the recent share price cycle of rising pre results to then fall back?

There has been a lot of talk about institutional investors being needed to curb the volatility that this share enjoys and one would think that for the majority of fund managers they look to purchase shares at the right time to take advantage of expected gains. If there are institutions who would invest in boohoo but are held back because of the historic supply chain issues and negative perception of boohoo will they wait until the business has several years of evidence that they are compliant or leading the way within the industry or will they look to invest as soon as they are convinced that the right people and processes are in place but before the results are proven?

I have held here since last July and haven’t been bothered to dip in and out around results/trading updates and I won’t be doing so this time in May. I think that with everything that has happened since the last results update and the lack meaningful updates the results themselves will be same as usual, hit or slightly exceeded revenue growth targets and hit required margin. However I do expect a lot of positive news concerning the Debenhams platform especially the beauty element, what we will be doing with new Arcadia brands, the new factory and the garment workers trust etc etc and for good measure I am hoping that there will be a suggestion that early indications are that the reopening of the high street has had no ill effect on sales so year on year growth of the usual 20% is forecast for the 21/22 financial year rather than a too early to say due to Covid.

I’m not going to stick my neck out and say this will be sure to go up on the back of the results presentation but I am hopeful

Moose the list will mean an investigative reporter doesn’t have to do any work to locate a boohoo supplier as the company has provided a convenient list. But it wasn’t especially hard to find a supplier in Leicester that was supplying boohoo before the list was published. If there were any new news regarding suppliers in Leicester I would think we would have got it with both barrels over the last few months either through levitts report, the work leverson and kpmg are doing or through the press. There has been ample opportunity for whistle blowing, investigation from any official bodies and for the press to do their worst since last July and if the press had anything they would have used it.

I’m sure someone will educate me if I’m wrong but isn’t the supplier list just going to be a list of boohoo suppliers? This shouldn’t really have any bearing on the sp.

Failure to publish the list would be a negative given boohoo’s commitment but the actual list itself isn’t that relevant, sure the papers might use it as an opportunity to dredge up old stories and I’m sure once they know who they are there will be an undercover reporter or three trying to get work there and a bunch of desk researchers looking into the history of each supplier and their directors but I would have thought anything we could learn about boohoo’s suppliers we a,ready have anyway.

So I wouldn’t think the supplier list will have a similar effect as say a trading update in terms of shares rising beforehand and dropping on the publication of the list, just my view.

Ihalliwell - re your question about Dorothy Perkins being on zolando. It’s an interesting one because there is an argument to say that it’s existing business and somewhat guaranteed revenue so why wouldn’t you continue to supply to existing Arcadia customers if the volumes are worthwhile. However there is the argument that this detracts from your own proposition. If Debenhams is a shop window that can house boohoo’s stable of brands alongside other brands then what’s wrong with one or two of the brands that feature on Debenhams featuring on zolando or ASOS etc? If Adidas wanted to be on Debenhams and zolando I’m sure boohoo would be fine as long as it was profitable so why not Dorothy Perkins?

It will be interesting to see what boo do.

Not the whole article but the relevant boohoo bit pasted below. It’s a round up/summary piece but clearly the times wanted to take the opportunity to have a swipe!

We like to think of ourselves as decent people who, when push comes to shove, will take a stand against things that we feel are wrong. Perhaps we are being too optimistic, though.

Boohoo was universally criticised last summer as allegations of “sweatshop conditions” at some of its Leicester suppliers came to light after a Sunday Times investigation. An independent review found that the accusations were “substantially true”.

Media commentators, politicians and Boohoo customers all chipped in to have a go at the online retailer. There were even calls on social media for a boycott of the company.

Some in the City had feared irreparable damage had been done to the brand as socially-conscious twentysomethings, Boohoo’s primary customers, would look elsewhere for their cheap dresses.

Somehow, though, it seems that Boohoo’s reputation has emerged from the scandal unscathed. Analysts at Berenberg, the German bank, noted that Boohoo’s Instagram following — a key metric for trendy businesses — has continued to grow despite the negative press, while there has been “no particular change” in purchase intent among 16- to 34-year-olds.

Michael Benedict, a retail analyst at Berenberg, said: “We think there are no particular signs that the negative publicity has resulted in a meaningful decline in brand sentiment among Boohoo’s addressable customer base.”

Benedict has tipped the shares, partly given his expectation that Boohoo, with its following staying loyal, will be able to maintain its “sector-leading growth”. Boohoo shares closed up 8¾p, or 2.8 per cent, at 325p.

British stocks in general had been in fashion until another rash of European countries announced that they had halted rollouts of the Oxford University-AstraZeneca vaccine after reports of blood clots. The stock market’s winter rally has been based on the premise that a successful vaccination campaign will mean the world will return to something like normal this summer, but the latest developments in Europe may threaten that recovery.

The FTSE 100, having been higher for much of the session, closed 11.77 points, or 0.2 per cent, down at 6,749.70, although the more UK-biased FTSE 250 index managed to hold on to some of its early gains as it edged 15.88 points, or 0.1 per cent, up to 21,522.35.

SPONSORED

Despite the Astra vaccine concerns, domestic travel and leisure stocks remained the day’s stand-out performers as investors continue to bet on a post-lockdown explosion in consumer spending. Hammerson, the shopping centre owner, rose 2p, or 5.4 per cent, to 36¾p. Trainline, the ticket booking app, chugged 19½p, or 4.1 per cent, up to 501½p and SSP, which owns the Upper Crust chain of sandwich shops, advanced 13½p, or 4 per cent.......

People,power, you had no interest in this share or it’s gambling loving investors until Danl90 sold his boohoo shares and starting sharing his less than favourable outlook for boohoos future. I think your sole purpose for looking at card and trying to present the negative viewpoint started as an attempt to get back at Dan by having a go at one of his investments because he had dared to paint a negative view of one of yours.

Sadly you are fast becoming the TCM of the card board which is a shame as my experience is that isn’t who you are. Do the walk in nature thing and check out the excitement over what next are doing (there’s an article in today’s times that’s interesting) and what that’s likely to mean for the Debenhams platform.

There are enough card holders here who believe in the company enough to push back at you on every point you raise and ultimately all that will happen is the usual lengthy side arguments taking over the board, every man and his dog filtering each other and painting the board green and ultimately the share price will do its own thing and kill the argument off in the end anyway.

Do you really need the stress of all that given no upside for you? This is coming from a good place on my part pp, stick with looking after boohoo and the other non share related important stuff in life and the people invested or interested in card to debate the fors and againsts.

Yeah yeah yeah all very exciting stuff, will the results be good? Will there be a divvy? Will Europe ever open up again? I hold so of course all of these things are important to me but come on people let’s all just take a minute to re read and appreciate highflyingmans may the 4th comment!

Not bad for first thing on a Monday!!

People power the top man at Primark owns 54% of the company compared to kamani owning 13% of boohoo. I’m not suggesting there’s anything entrepreneurial about abf or that Primark and boohoo can in any way be realistically compared to each other. But there’s no two ways about it the westons are as heavily invested int their company as the kamanis are invested in theirs. As for the merits of both abf and boohoo, I’m happy to have both in profit in my portfolio.

People power I get that Danl90 upset you because of his stance on boohoo. I understand why you might feel that way but you have deliberately tried to find negative facts or opinions about card factory, a company you are neither invested or interested in, in an attempt to get back at Dan in some way.

I am invested in both boohoo and card factory and can tell you that both companies were in the ‘might easily double my money or more in the next 18months to 3 years but they are not without risk’ category. If your posts were coming from the approach that you are already invested in card or considering it as an investment and have concerns the points you make would surely be up for debate with the card holders/observers who post here. However your motivation for posting appears to be to down play card at all costs simply because Dan is invested in it and to somehow score points with him.

You get frustrated when posters cause trouble or are unduly negative about boohoo on the boohoo board and have in the past accused people of being blatantly negative or selective about facts they quote in an attempt to cause panic or fear amongst holders or to try to in some way manipulate a lower entry point for themselves. What you are engaging in amounts to exactly that.

I do understand your frustration and I can see that Dan has recently sported a rather dim view of boohoo’s future since he sold his shares but just like the day traders or the ‘buy on the run Up and sell before results day’ brigade whose investment style differs to yours Dan is entitled to sell his shares whenever he chooses to and if he chooses to explain why he sold or if he continues to comment about boohoo after offing his shares the best place to challenge his views is surely the boohoo board.

If you come over to card simply to criticise the company and tell the people invested in it why it is such a bad investment you will almost certainly be challenged by those who believe in their investment choice but also you will have simply become that which you yourself are so critical of.

Kallumama, I am invested in abf so am familiar with primark and how valuable it is to the abf stable. I am also familiar with the reasons they have given for primark not going online. In all of the statements regards their refusal to go online never once have abf stated that it is due to digital landlords. They have however consistently stated that to do online properly there are significant costs to setup the distribution and returns process and it is that barrier to entry that stops them from doing it.

By all means have an opinion as to why you believe primark are better set up for future success compared to boohoo but don’t just make stuff up!

People power. I know you like Paul Scott because I’ve heard you quote him before many times on the boohoo board. I also know you like to research research research everything about a company you invest or are considering investing in. So perhaps I could draw your attention to other contributors to the stockopedia service one of whom cited a few months ago that card factory are a potential multi bagger on the basis that they are profitable (outside of covid restrictions), that covid restrictions will end now that a vaccine is available, that the finances will most likely be sorted out given how cash generative the company are and that there is a comparison to be made between moonpig and card factory and we should expect their respective values will likely more closely align in the future.

I’m sure there will be posters here on card who wouldn’t touch boohoo because of the perceived risk and how volatile the share price is but that’s the thing about investors, share experts and financial commentators, if you search hard enough you will always find someone who agrees with you as well as those who don’t.

If you are considering investing in card factory I am sure there will be a wealth of opinions on here that will help you decide whether it’s the right investment for you or not. However if card factory is of no interest to you my suggestion would be stick to the boohoo board, after all you are quick to share your displeasure when non investors post to the boohoo board with negative views suggesting that they are merely trying to somehow reduce the share price to be able to get in at a lower purchase point.

Dan Has there been details concerning a slowdown in boohoo turnover figures?

I don’t know what I am more upset about. That the share price is a bit depressed , that sky news seem to have joined the ranks of ‘those that have got it in for us’ or that eventually, after many many failed attempts, one of TCM’s silly predictions might actually turn out to be correct.

Yeah definitely the latter, if we end today anywhere under 325 the big eejit will be after mooses job!!!

Ollie I am with Halifax and I received email notification on Friday and all the details of how to take up offer and additional shares were sent by way of a corporate action so you’d like think yours from freetrade can’t be far behind. Closing date 4th March I believe so if you haven’t heard from them by tomorrow might be worth a phone call.

Sold out at £10.05 for a nice 55% profit. Good luck with your holdings folks.