Companies That You Expect to Disappear Soon

[Kite159]

City centre retail would evolve if people started living there again. The grocery shops are "convenience" stores mostly for office workers buying their lunches and buying a few odd items to take home that evening - not their full weekly shop. Hence, why they're more expensive and have poorer range of items to sell. If more people lived in the city centre, there'd be more people doing their "proper" shopping and so more stores would open, thus increasing competition. There used to be a good range of grocery shops in town centres before people and shops moved out to the fringes - it will come back again when people move back.

Or people will do their food shopping online and get it delivered at a time suitable to them.

 

[FQTV]

City centre retail would evolve if people started living there again. The grocery shops are "convenience" stores mostly for office workers buying their lunches and buying a few odd items to take home that evening - not their full weekly shop. Hence, why they're more expensive and have poorer range of items to sell. If more people lived in the city centre, there'd be more people doing their "proper" shopping and so more stores would open, thus increasing competition. There used to be a good range of grocery shops in town centres before people and shops moved out to the fringes - it will come back again when people move back.

There's a lot of truth in this. It's also the case that 'studentification' of a lot of town and city centres means that the retail profile can be significantly skewed towards their niche needs.

Or people will do their food shopping online and get it delivered at a time suitable to them.

For a lot of city centre dwellers, this is much less convenient than picking up a daily basket from a convenient shop on the way home from work. Ironically, bricks and mortar stores can be more 'in tune' with the modern pattern of variable working hours/not knowing when you'll get home/going for a pint after work/generally not planning ahead/reducing food and packaging waste.

The internet is too often, I believe, trotted out as the principal reason for the 'demise of the high street'. It's not.

Since 2007, retail sales in the UK have grown from about £300bn to about £400bn. The proportion of online sales has grown from virtually nothing in 2007, to 20% now.

Online sales are therefore now about £80bn annually, and offline sales are about £20bn higher than they were in 2007. Strip out inflation and you're still not looking at a decline in offline sales that reflects the number of high street closures.

The two real reasons for the high street's decline are, surely, that people right at the moment, despite what they say, want to be able to park practically in the knicker department at Next, and not have to walk anywhere, and that landlords have set high street (and some central shopping centre) rents at rapacious levels.

Remember that the likes of Burton, Marks and Spencer and Hepworths used to build and own their shops, letting them simply get on with being shopkeepers. Look up and see their names in stone on what's now empty or a B&M.

Then, an age came when plc boards earned massive bonuses through one-off profit boosts from 'sale and leaseback deals'. Those boards have moved on; the landlords are now in charge and the shops can't manage with the overhead that they never used to have.

Many large landlords have also been complicit in only being interested in the largest retail groups, with good (so-called) covenants that they think will guarantee rents. The high street ends up with a banal selection of chain retailers, replicated usually only a few miles away by exactly the same selection. No differentiation in offer; no loyalty to one nor the other from the consumer and, when the spreadsheets are sharpened, big chains are entirely without sentiment when it comes to which towns get chopped from their portfolio. They're also sometimes apparently without sentiment when it comes to busting a company or using a Company Voluntary Agreement to partially bust it.

The shop goes; the jobs go and everyone mostly blames the internet.

 

[cjp]

The internet is too often, I believe, trotted out as the principal reason for the 'demise of the high street'. It's not.

Since 2007, retail sales in the UK have grown from about £300bn to about £400bn. The proportion of online sales has grown from virtually nothing in 2007, to 20% now.

Online sales are therefore now about £80bn annually, and offline sales are about £20bn higher than they were in 2007. Strip out inflation and you're still not looking at a decline in offline sales that reflects the number of high street closures.

The two real reasons for the high street's decline are, surely, that people right at the moment, despite what they say, want to be able to park practically in the knicker department at Next, and not have to walk anywhere, and that landlords have set high street (and some central shopping centre) rents at rapacious levels.

Remember that the likes of Burton, Marks and Spencer and Hepworths used to build and own their shops, letting them simply get on with being shopkeepers. Look up and see their names in stone on what's now empty or a B&M.

Then, an age came when plc boards earned massive bonuses through one-off profit boosts from 'sale and leaseback deals'. Those boards have moved on; the landlords are now in charge and the shops can't manage with the overhead that they never used to have.

Many large landlords have also been complicit in only being interested in the largest retail groups, with good (so-called) covenants that they think will guarantee rents. The high street ends up with a banal selection of chain retailers, replicated usually only a few miles away by exactly the same selection. No differentiation in offer; no loyalty to one nor the other from the consumer and, when the spreadsheets are sharpened, big chains are entirely without sentiment when it comes to which towns get chopped from their portfolio. They're also sometimes apparently without sentiment when it comes to busting a company or using a Company Voluntary Agreement to partially bust it.

The shop goes; the jobs go and everyone mostly blames the internet.

Whilst I agree with what you have said it also comes down to wanting a particular item and rather than flogging around shops hunting for it a moment or two spent on E-bay can get it through ones letter box in a day or two.
Stock or lack of it in all sizes is where certain stores shoot themselves in the foot. If I have taken the trouble to go to a store an offer of we can get it next day does not work for me.

 

[Modron]

Wales Online recently published a list of 21 companies which may go 'pop' soon, including one that has (Patisserie Valerie):

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-news/famous-high-street-names-bust-14367963

 

[FQTV]

Whilst I agree with what you have said it also comes down to wanting a particular item and rather than flogging around shops hunting for it a moment or two spent on E-bay can get it through ones letter box in a day or two.
Stock or lack of it in all sizes is where certain stores shoot themselves in the foot. If I have taken the trouble to go to a store an offer of we can get it next day does not work for me.

Apologies that I missed your post, and you’re quite right about the likes of eBay, especially when specialist items are sought. I do the very same myself.

The forgotten reality, though, is that for specialist things we used to use Exchange & Mart; we used to use the Yellow Pages and ‘phone shops up (Fly Fishing, by J.R.Hartley); we used to buy magazines for classifieds and sign up to niche companies’ brochures. In the volume market, the mail order catalogue operations of Littlewoods, Great Universal et al were massive.

The internet has, quite predictably, almost completely changed this sector of the retail market, almost to the point of replacing it completely.

But, again, the ‘internet’s’ effect on ‘the high street’ is, I still believe, overstated, as a vague and nebulous bogeyman that diverts responsibility from planning departments, landlords, politicians, plcs and a host of other parties who could be held far more accountable for actions that they have taken which have changed the high street.

 

[underbank]

But, again, the ‘internet’s’ effect on ‘the high street’ is, I still believe, overstated, as a vague and nebulous bogeyman that diverts responsibility from planning departments, landlords, politicians, plcs and a host of other parties who could be held far more accountable for actions that they have taken which have changed the high street.

I have to agree. Blaming the internet is the lazy excuse for retailers who are providing a pretty poor service. My wife phoned our local Clarks to ask if they had a particular style of shoe in a particular size - she was told no, so she asked for a different style and was told yes. So she spent the time, effort and money to travel into town. Once in the store, the shoe she was told was in stock turned out not to be, but it's OK because they could order it in! Then on her way out, she noticed the style she originally wanted on the shelf and asked on the off chance if they had it in her size - turned out, yes they did - couldn't explain why they'd told her they hadn't on the phone.

It's that kind of really poor customer service that is killing off the High Street, not the internet!

Same with M&S - put the stock people want to buy in the shops, not keep it in the warehouse. Compared to other retailers, M&S stores look half empty - they have a single rack when others have 2/3 in the same space. Ask about a size that's not on the rack and you're just directed to the internet. They're driving customers to the internet themselves. It's as if they don't actually want to have shops - perhaps that's their plan.

If retailers want to keep their shops and customers, they have to put the stock people want to buy in their shops. It's not rocket science.

 

[deltic]

There's a lot of truth in this. It's also the case that 'studentification' of a lot of town and city centres means that the retail profile can be significantly skewed towards their niche needs.



For a lot of city centre dwellers, this is much less convenient than picking up a daily basket from a convenient shop on the way home from work. Ironically, bricks and mortar stores can be more 'in tune' with the modern pattern of variable working hours/not knowing when you'll get home/going for a pint after work/generally not planning ahead/reducing food and packaging waste.

The internet is too often, I believe, trotted out as the principal reason for the 'demise of the high street'. It's not.

Since 2007, retail sales in the UK have grown from about £300bn to about £400bn. The proportion of online sales has grown from virtually nothing in 2007, to 20% now.

Online sales are therefore now about £80bn annually, and offline sales are about £20bn higher than they were in 2007. Strip out inflation and you're still not looking at a decline in offline sales that reflects the number of high street closures.

The two real reasons for the high street's decline are, surely, that people right at the moment, despite what they say, want to be able to park practically in the knicker department at Next, and not have to walk anywhere, and that landlords have set high street (and some central shopping centre) rents at rapacious levels.

Remember that the likes of Burton, Marks and Spencer and Hepworths used to build and own their shops, letting them simply get on with being shopkeepers. Look up and see their names in stone on what's now empty or a B&M.

Then, an age came when plc boards earned massive bonuses through one-off profit boosts from 'sale and leaseback deals'. Those boards have moved on; the landlords are now in charge and the shops can't manage with the overhead that they never used to have.

Many large landlords have also been complicit in only being interested in the largest retail groups, with good (so-called) covenants that they think will guarantee rents. The high street ends up with a banal selection of chain retailers, replicated usually only a few miles away by exactly the same selection. No differentiation in offer; no loyalty to one nor the other from the consumer and, when the spreadsheets are sharpened, big chains are entirely without sentiment when it comes to which towns get chopped from their portfolio. They're also sometimes apparently without sentiment when it comes to busting a company or using a Company Voluntary Agreement to partially bust it.

The shop goes; the jobs go and everyone mostly blames the internet.

Since 2007 retail sales have increased by less than 5% after stripping out inflation while bricks and mortar retail has fallen by 13% - not sure we have lost 13% of retail space or retailers since 2007. The national minimum wage that many retail workers are on has also increased in real terms over the same period.

 

[Kite159]

I note that HMV has been rescued by Sunrise Records from Canada.

Also Brighthouse is closing 30 stores according to a BBC article (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47135309), I suspect the first of many due to the new rules coming in which limits interest payments to 100% of the item cost and that cost being the average [so they can't get around the rules by saying the sales price of a Washing machine which would normally set you back £200 in John Lewis costs £400]

------------------

@deltic raises a good point about the minimum wage going up, 5 years ago it was £6.31 [21s and older], from April it will be £8.21 [for 25 year olds and older, £7.70 for 21-24s]. How many shops have simply cut the number of staff employed or cut down on hours new staff are employed for.

 

[underbank]

@deltic raises a good point about the minimum wage going up, 5 years ago it was £6.31 [21s and older], from April it will be £8.21 [for 25 year olds and older, £7.70 for 21-24s]. How many shops have simply cut the number of staff employed or cut down on hours new staff are employed for.

And how many have increased the number of younger workers who they can pay less, but are making things worse because of poor customer service.

 

[cjp]

And how many have increased the number of younger workers who they can pay less, but are making things worse because of poor customer service.

I believe a goodly number.
Companies that are in the hands of bean counters value lower costs over experience. And hope the missing experience is never needed. Often they are right until things go wrong and then on the receiving end we get ignorant poor quality answers ( I used answers rather than service).

 

[underbank]

I believe a goodly number.
Companies that are in the hands of bean counters value lower costs over experience. And hope the missing experience is never needed. Often they are right until things go wrong and then on the receiving end we get ignorant poor quality answers ( I used answers rather than service).

Depends on the beancounter and the quality of the management. I've been an accountant for over 35 years and have seen some truly awful management decisions when junior/poor managers have to manage their budgets. It's often people who don't know what they're doing who cut the wrong things. A decent accountant will look at the bigger picture - I've actually been known to encourage people to spend/invest more to get an improved payback, including recruiting better quality staff at higher costs. But then again, I've always been against the "stack it high, sell it cheap" mentality. It's often the unqualified finance managers who make stupid short term decisions which are then implemented by untrained/inexperienced line managers.

 

[cjp]

Depends on the beancounter and the quality of the management. I've been an accountant for over 35 years and have seen some truly awful management decisions when junior/poor managers have to manage their budgets. It's often people who don't know what they're doing who cut the wrong things. A decent accountant will look at the bigger picture - I've actually been known to encourage people to spend/invest more to get an improved payback, including recruiting better quality staff at higher costs. But then again, I've always been against the "stack it high, sell it cheap" mentality. It's often the unqualified finance managers who make stupid short term decisions which are then implemented by untrained/inexperienced line managers.

I accept that there are two sides sadly I have mostly seen the low cost low paid churn and failure to retain experienced staff.

 

[AndrewE]

I believe a goodly number.
Companies that are in the hands of bean counters value lower costs over experience. And hope the missing experience is never needed. Often they are right until things go wrong and then on the receiving end we get ignorant poor quality answers ( I used answers rather than service).

Unfortunately that is exactly what happened in the aftermath of railway privatisation, compounding the arrogance of Railtrack ("the company will only need 24 accountants" to run it, or something similar.) Astonishingly and alarmingly the same "businessman"/entrepreneur/beancounter heroes did the same in the nuclear industry!

 

[ComUtoR]

More closures :/

Ed's Diner/Giraffe - To close 27/87 stores. Boparan Restaurant Group are entering into a CVA (company voluntary arrangement) Paperchase also entering into a CVA

 

[gazthomas]

Debenhams share price floating just above 3p and constant discounting, can't be long. I'm a shareholder too so not good news!

 

[Kite159]

More closures :/

Ed's Diner/Giraffe - To close 27/87 stores. Boparan Restaurant Group are entering into a CVA (company voluntary arrangement) Paperchase also entering into a CVA

Casual dining is one of the first things which gets dropped/reduced when you have less disposable income (in theory). Too many restaurants in certain areas is unsustainable.

 

[SteveP29]

Debenhams share price floating just above 3p and constant discounting, can't be long. I'm a shareholder too so not good news!

Sell, the next logical step is Mike Ashley aggressively bidding for the rest of Debenhams that he doesn't already own.

They'll be worthless within 3 months!!

 

[underbank]

Casual dining is one of the first things which gets dropped/reduced when you have less disposable income (in theory). Too many restaurants in certain areas is unsustainable.

Equal to that is the poor standards of food and service at the "newish" restaurant chains which is generally awful. Frankie & Benny has massively gone downhill over the years. I've been to a Pizza Express twice and both times the service and food was awful (first time, the pizza was burnt solid, second time, they completely forgot 1 of our main meals which then took 30 minutes to arrive after everyone else had finished). Tried Bella Italia once - never again. Ed's Diner was just plain awful. Used to search out Harry Ramsdens but they've gone the same way now that they're a Venture Capitalist own chain. Family High Street/Chain restaurants have gone to the dogs!

 

[HH]

I use Debenhams, but I only ever buy stuff that is double discounted with my wife's Debenham's Card (they usually give an extra 10% off at the weekend of a sale). Stores are usually three quarters empty; can't see how the business model works. We've been expecting it to go bust for the last few years. Shame, because they do some decent stuff; it's just not focused enough and the stores are too large.

 

[underbank]

I use Debenhams, but I only ever buy stuff that is double discounted with my wife's Debenham's Card (they usually give an extra 10% off at the weekend of a sale). Stores are usually three quarters empty; can't see how the business model works. We've been expecting it to go bust for the last few years. Shame, because they do some decent stuff; it's just not focused enough and the stores are too large.

We buy a few items per year from their website. I really don't like their stores. Far too large and no cohesive organisation. Some of the older stores are really user-unfriendly, i.e. the ones spread over several floors, which are more a series of rooms where you have to spend far too long navigating your way around trying to find things. Even the more modern ones on just 1 or 2 floors in open-plan style are irritating due to poor layout. Last time we went into one, my wife was looking for jeans and spent about an hour trailing around before she gave up - there was a rail of one colour or style on it's own in one section, then another in a different section, so she eventually gave up, then on the way out, she spotted a random rail of assorted jeans in a dark corner behind a pillar from which she bought a couple of pairs. I did the same a few years ago, went in looking for a winter coat, only to be disappointed by the poor choice on the rails, then when looking aimlessly at suits, noticed another rail with some random coats, again in a dark corner, from which I bought one. They're fine if you've got all day to look around, but hopeless for the modern busy person shopping in their lunch hour or dragging bored kids with them.

 

[Howardh]

Debenhams share price floating just above 3p and constant discounting, can't be long. I'm a shareholder too so not good news!

Indeed. Am I right in thinking Mike Ashley is interested - or was that some other shop? But as alluded to above, it's not the greatest store to wander round in.

Wonder if the case is that they have a bit of everything but not a lot of what you want; something along the lines of which is better - walking through four stores to find a pair of pants you want - or one shop which has all the pants (sort of thing) which seemed to happen years ago? Too little spread too thinly?

 

[gswindale]

We buy a few items per year from their website. I really don't like their stores. Far too large and no cohesive organisation. Some of the older stores are really user-unfriendly, i.e. the ones spread over several floors, which are more a series of rooms where you have to spend far too long navigating your way around trying to find things. Even the more modern ones on just 1 or 2 floors in open-plan style are irritating due to poor layout. Last time we went into one, my wife was looking for jeans and spent about an hour trailing around before she gave up - there was a rail of one colour or style on it's own in one section, then another in a different section, so she eventually gave up, then on the way out, she spotted a random rail of assorted jeans in a dark corner behind a pillar from which she bought a couple of pairs. I did the same a few years ago, went in looking for a winter coat, only to be disappointed by the poor choice on the rails, then when looking aimlessly at suits, noticed another rail with some random coats, again in a dark corner, from which I bought one. They're fine if you've got all day to look around, but hopeless for the modern busy person shopping in their lunch hour or dragging bored kids with them.

This is my issue with "Department" stores. In the clothing sections at least, they tend to arrange the clothes by brand rather than by type.

I much prefer walking in and being certain that all the jeans will be together rather than having to think do I want this brand jeans or that brand jeans - hence why I quite often buy from TKMaxx.

 

[Dai Corner]

This is my issue with "Department" stores. In the clothing sections at least, they tend to arrange the clothes by brand rather than by type.

I much prefer walking in and being certain that all the jeans will be together rather than having to think do I want this brand jeans or that brand jeans - hence why I quite often buy from TKMaxx.

I think many of the 'departments' in department stores are actually concessions - shops within a shop with different owners. Hence the organisation by brand rather than type of garment.

 

[ooo]

I've been to a Pizza Express twice and both times the service and food was awful (first time, the pizza was burnt solid, second time, they completely forgot 1 of our main meals which then took 30 minutes to arrive after everyone else had finished). Tried Bella Italia once

Personally, I've only ever had good experiences in these two. The food is normally pretty decent and if it's not Friday or Saturday there's almost always discount codes available to make the prices good value.

 

[SteveP29]

Indeed. Am I right in thinking Mike Ashley is interested - or was that some other shop?

He has an approximately 30% share in Debenhams

 

[telstarbox]

An interesting article in the Guardian today talking to former workers at some of the "disappeared" chains:

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...eels-to-lose-your-job-when-a-big-chain-closes

 

[Iskra]

Amazing how different perceptions can be - reference my earlier comments about Volvo which were off the mark.

Along similar lines, I’d disagree with your analysis above. Supergroup’s revenue and profits went through the roof last year.

Good quality, well cut stuff (albeit always comes up very small for my frame - I’m a size bigger in Superdry stuff than other clothes).

Superdry make clothes people actually want to buy, unlike M&S.

Then again I’m 6”3 with a 34 inch waste. I mean this as politely as possible, their clothes come up tight on me, I’m probably far from the typical measurements on here...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47524589

In trouble now. Sorry can’t do link as per forum rules due to being on my phone.

 

[d9009alycidon]

I like Debenhams, the gents clothes are normally my first choice, however if there is one thing about their discounting policy it is their use of the tiny up to next to the huge 70%OFF (OK other retailers do similar but less extensively), I will walk away from a rack identified in that manner if I quickly find that the majority of items are less than 70% off

 

[swt_passenger]

Remaining Homebase? I had a browse round one a few days ago with time to kill waiting for my car service. Far more staff than customers, only one till open, no one queuing.

 

[Kite159]

Sounds like Boots are looking into store closures

The US owner of pharmacy chain Boots has warned of possible store closures in the UK as it tries to cut costs.

Walgreens Boots Alliance said it would take "decisive steps" to reduce costs as part of a company-wide "significant restructuring".

The move comes after the chain said it had suffered its "most difficult quarter" since the firm's formation, with UK like-for-like sales down 2.3%.

The chain has 2,485 stores across the UK, employing about 56,000 staff.

(More - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47798088)

Although not that surprising considering the prices they charge for everyday items, the only things I tend to use Boots for is lunchtime meal-deals