Page 1 of 3
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:36 am
Well it does not look good for the 11,000 staff. At the time I write this the administrators are getting called in and all the stores could close at 11am today
I always wonder how they are still in business, it really feels like a time wrap when you walk in. At least M&S are trying, Argos has moved with the times and doing ok also. Shame for the staff. The one that is in the town I went to high school in looks just the same as it did in the 90's. All the displays are in the same place, the lighting, store feel etc, hell a lost of the stuff they sell would not have been out of place in 1995
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:50 am
The one in Chelmsford is really nice - modern and recently refurbished (as in last 10 years..).
Never bought much from it but walked through it a lot as it has an outside entrance to a shopping centre.
While it is bad for the staff if it does close, a lot of this sounds like it's down to management. After all, if a store like John Lewis can succeed and flourish why not others?
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:13 am
jdanddiet wrote:After all, if a store like John Lewis can succeed and flourish why not others?
Surely it's the nature of competition though, that shops having more success take business away from the ones that aren't. There's always two sides to things like this, of course it's sad that 11,000 people could be losing their jobs, but as much as that is considered bad news by the media, you don't see the success of their competitors, both in the high street and online, reported as anything other than good news. Also when big chains like BHS and Woolworths grew they likely put lots of smaller shops out of business resulting in hundreds if not thousands of people losing their jobs.
The media always act like they want to have their cake and eat it, that every business ought to be thriving even if they're in direct competition with each other, it's like the football pundits that say they love it when newly promoted teams stay up but also say established top teams going down is a shame/disgrace.
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:18 am
Yeah like rocky says that shops like a timewarp back to the early 80's. I dont know anyone who shops at BHS, surprised it was still going. Hopefully they'll get a buyer but surely they have to revamp a lot to turn things around. Other shops have revamped and have got more 'modern' but BHS always seemed such a throwback and never changed with the times.
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 5:10 am
Well its fficial. Sad times for the staff. I combination of asset stripping, pensions black hole, and not moving with the times I think. We might get a fire sale before all the stores are sold off one by one. The issue being no one wants to take on £571m in pension deficit.
With quotes like
“Phil Dorrell, a retail analyst, told the BBC that going into administration "doesn't mean the stores close today, it means a buyer is sought".
The likelihood is BHS will be sold off "store by store" and "that probably means the name will disappear", said Mr Dorrell, managing partner at Retail Remedy.
"The problem is their trading offer is in the 1980s," he said. "Their stores look a bit dated. They are behind the times."
Last month, the brand was rescued from the brink after creditors voted to accept a cut in the rent bill for about half of its stores”
It does not look good for the staff.
Queue the bargain hunting vultures complaining the staff are keeping the “good stuff” for themselves
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 5:23 am
The problem is that they've pretty much lost their market ever since all the supermarkets started stocking cheap clothes and homewares; there was practically no reason to go there except for niche areas like lighting and school uniforms. Expanding into food retail probably wasn't a bad idea for fighting back, but they should have done it a decade ago rather than waiting until they were up against the wall.
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 5:41 am
Expanding into food retail probably wasn't a bad idea for fighting back, but they should have done it a decade ago rather than waiting until they were up against the wall.
Good point mate, it is working for M&S
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 7:14 am
BHS has done some cool stuff over the years (I've bought a few things from there in the past) but it just hasn't evolved in the last few years which is a shame...
They tended to stick with what they knew, instead of trying to compete with newer fashion chains...
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 10:35 am
BHS as a brand seems dated and old. I think I have bought from there but it was a long time ago - as above, evolve or die it seems.
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:15 pm
The actions of previous owner Phillip Green should be investigated.
Posted: Mon Apr 25, 2016 7:21 pm
I had no idea it was still going but by the sounds of things, it was very out of date and not in touch with the younger generation of shoppers. Even years ago, it always seemed like a "mum's" or "Nan's" kind of store.
Terrible news for the staff though, moreso because their jobs could well be decided by what looks like dodgy ownership, useless management/marketing and the mention in the news of dreaded financial consortiums...why is it that these 'consortiums' buy places out and always end up ruining them?
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 9:57 am
merman wrote:The actions of previous owner Phillip Green should be investigated.
It would be fair enough if BHS went into administration purely due to market conditions and competition, but I think there is probably a lot more to it than that. Green's £80m offer to help plug the pension deficit (of over £500m) seems derisory considering he allegedly diverted up to £800m from BHS revenues into other companies owned by him over the past 15 years (as well as £580m in dividends and rental payments off a £200m investment, not bad for a failing business). Perhaps had he re-invested that money properly into BHS rather than trousering it, and tried to rebrand and modernise it, 11,000 people would still have a secure future career there as well as guarantees of a pension they were paying into and deserved.
Perhaps someone could also investigate the amount of tax BHS also paid under Greens watch. Its easy enough to just dismiss this as capitalism and the free market, and lots of other companies are thriving in the same market, but the only person thriving under the failure of BHS seem to be its eye-wateringly (and pointlessly so) wealthy owners. How much extravagance, super-yachts and homes does one man need meanwhile 11,000 working and middle class people get put on the dole for just doing their jobs.
I believe Sir Phillip Green may have what JRR Tolkein may refer to as "Dragon Sickness".
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:55 pm
How can you be allowed to sell a company for a quid with a 500 million deficit without guarantees? It's bullshit
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 2:19 pm
Menswear retailer Austin Reed into administration today.
The economic recovery is going well, isn't it?
Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2016 2:59 pm
As I alluded to eariler, businesses closing don't necessarily tell the whole picture, surely they have to be squared with the amount of businesses opening and thriving and jobs being created. For example Autin Reed may be on the way down while Jacamo and other retailers like it may be on the way up, it may just signify a change in market/consumer habits that the market is adapting to. Equally a company can falter due to mismangement and not necessarily the economic climate.