economic situation is dire

[tonyh29]

just because I'm walking towards Mila Kunis  doesn't mean I've actually entered her does it  , so  i'm not sure what is so hard for you to understand  .... I merely committed on my confusion that the CBI said we had avoided a triple dip recession , when your good self openly commented some weeks back that we had ENTERED it ..I asked for and am still waiting for you to post this evidence.. once you post it then we can discuss it in more detail

 

 

but for the record and feel free to look back through the thread I've not posted anything to suggest I think the economy IS doing so well  ... it clearly could be better ( and of course it could possibly even be worse )

[snowychap]

CBI estimate 0.3% growth in Q1 of this year, would be interesting to see what their confidence interval is (which would probably point to the possibility of a triple dip).

Their website has stuff about Mr Cridland's comments and says it has published a forecast but it isn't immediately apparent where this publication is (probably me being dim!).

 

Their last quarterly forecast announcement said:

...without the impact of one-off distortions in the fourth quarter, quarter-on-quarter growth is expected to be only marginally positive (+0.2%).

In 2013, the CBI forecasts growth of up to +1.4%, marginally up from +1.2% in August, reflecting improved growth figures in the third quarter. Quarter-on-quarter growth is expected to be modest, however, at around 0.3 to 0.4%.

But the risks around the outlook remain on the downside, from the Eurozone crisis continuing, and concern about the impact of inflation.

[TrentVilla]

Trent thank you but I do.  You may feel you have all of the answers but for this you don't, sorry - apologies of that sounds rude, but your reply seemed to warrant a reply like that IMO

 

How much do you know about Republic? I am interested to see what you base your knowledge on compared to what I do. If you work for them (and I don't think you do) or they are one of your customers etc then great, your knowledge is based on a different set of data and information than I have seen previously and what that whole retail marketplace is looking at especially in relation to it's IT and the market place that will be part of it - or would have been given different circumstances

 

As someone who has a vested interest in things like on-line access and the models and different marketplaces, I find it interesting to see how certain companies are adapting, some are stagnating, some are moving completely in a different way. You are quoting about companies like ASOS I imagine? They present a very interesting model and one that is clearly suited to a particular vision they have for the short / medium term. But they were not really a High street player in any way, whereas companies like Republic certainly were. The point is the High street / retail sector is certainly required not just for the companies themselves but also for the other wealth dispersement that comes from those shops. Also you talk about online shopping as though its a one size fits all model which it certainly isn't and very few companies with the exception of niche players such as Amazon etc fall into.

 

The analytic and info that is out there is a very interesting read, the way the data is used on what is required for a sustainable business is key theory - but like all theories based on speculation rather than fact, because none of us really know what is round the corner. The Gvmt taking away a massive key part of what drives your customer base will down the line seriously impact what companies do to survive

 

As for the rents, there was a whole series of posts recently that covered that off but again that certainly is not helping by the looks of it and there needs to be some safeguards put in place you would imagine. Is this something that a Gvmt of a country dependent of areas like like retail should put in place?

 

As for your last statement, I disagree with you. For you, you are right, for me I am.

 

Yes I have all the answers, I am Mary Portas and you can claim your £5's. If you don't like the tone of my reply perhaps consider that of yours not only to me but other also.

 

I feel no need to justify to you my knowledge in order to air my opinion and do not seek your justification for your opinion but I think it is fairly obvious I don't work for them and in fact I'm almost certain you know what I do for a living. So I will assume it wasn't a genuine question and ignore it. I do though know what I'm talking about when it comes to e-commerce and internet trading I just don't agree with your view that all the companies currently going bust on the high street are doing so because of this government or George Osbourne and frankly I find your claim that they are to be absurd.

 

In regards ASOS yes that is exactly who I was making reference to and I'm fully aware that they aren't a high street retailer, that was kind of the point. People are still spending money they just aren't spending it in the same places or in the same way, ASOS have seen huge growth while Republic have seen a decline yet their target consumers cross over.

 

You say the point is that of wealth dispersement but you have only just raised that point and it isn't one I've disagreed with, obviously large high street shops mean jobs in local areas. Why would I argue that? That wasn't your orgininal point though, your orginal response to my post was to say that you failed to see the link between the online digital age and the decline of companies like Republic. I thought and still think to take such a stance is ludicrous.

 

If you want to shift the argument or your point that is fine but don't pretend that was your point all along when clearly it wasn't.

 

In terms of the dispersement arguement, I agree, shops are better for jobs, communities and spreading wealth than online businesses. What do you want the government to do? Ban the internet? I'm struggling to see what you think the governments role is in this process of people moving to online purchasing rather than on the high street. If anyone is at fault it is the landlords of commercial units who don't realise the damage they are doing by pushing rents up but I don't see that as an issue for the government.

 

As for your claim I'm talking about online retail being a one size fits all model I've literally no idea what you are talking about or what makes you draw that conclusion. I simply highlighted how spending is moving online, ASOS are a direct competitor of Republic regardless of their route to market. Some retailers have found ways to incorporate online retail into their business models within the very sector Republic are in, Next for instance that Republic have failed to keep pace is frankly only their problem and sadly that of those who work for them.

 

You can believe you are right all you want, I'm not trying to change your mind and stop you beating the government with this stick I'm not even someone who votes for them I just think you will attack them on anything regardless of the merit of the situation.

I've provided quotes from someone who knows the industry better than us both I would suspect and they seem to agree it is down the retailers.

 

I'm not arguing that the governments approach to the economy isn't impacting on spending or confidence to spend, clearly it is but that isn't the reason why some retailers are going to the wall. I rather suspect some of them would be struggling even in an era of high consumer confidence because the way people spend money has changed regardless of how much is being spent.

 

The high street retailers or some of them simply have a smaller slice of the pie than they used to have because they now have to share it with the online retailers. Regardless of how big the pie is I rather suspect the percentages or the slices would remain the same or similar.

 

In truth the economice climate of recent years is in all likelyhood masking a trend that would have occurred naturally even in times of boom. Times are changing, some of the high street retailers are a thing of the past a little like local butchers or iron mongers of the past some will survive but only if they adapt and it will be survival of the fittest.

 

You can't fight modernity and you can't blame George Osbourne for it.

[Dr_Pangloss]

CBI estimate 0.3% growth in Q1 of this year, would be interesting to see what their confidence interval is (which would probably point to the possibility of a triple dip).

Their website has stuff about Mr Cridland's comments and says it has published a forecast but it isn't immediately apparent where this publication is (probably me being dim!).

 

Their last quarterly forecast announcement said:

> 

...without the impact of one-off distortions in the fourth quarter, quarter-on-quarter growth is expected to be only marginally positive (+0.2%).

In 2013, the CBI forecasts growth of up to +1.4%, marginally up from +1.2% in August, reflecting improved growth figures in the third quarter. Quarter-on-quarter growth is expected to be modest, however, at around 0.3 to 0.4%.

But the risks around the outlook remain on the downside, from the Eurozone crisis continuing, and concern about the impact of inflation.

 

Yep I took a quick look but couldn't find anything giving the details one would need to make a serious assessment (i.e. confidence intervals, methodology etc). Also lets not forget that the CBI is a lobby as well, so they are unlikely to have the resources that an ONS or other large organisations have.

[peterms]

CBI estimate 0.3% growth in Q1 of this year, would be interesting to see what their confidence interval is (which would probably point to the possibility of a triple dip).

Their website has stuff about Mr Cridland's comments and says it has published a forecast but it isn't immediately apparent where this publication is (probably me being dim!).

 

Their last quarterly forecast announcement said:

> 

...without the impact of one-off distortions in the fourth quarter, quarter-on-quarter growth is expected to be only marginally positive (+0.2%).

In 2013, the CBI forecasts growth of up to +1.4%, marginally up from +1.2% in August, reflecting improved growth figures in the third quarter. Quarter-on-quarter growth is expected to be modest, however, at around 0.3 to 0.4%.

But the risks around the outlook remain on the downside, from the Eurozone crisis continuing, and concern about the impact of inflation.

Yep I took a quick look but couldn't find anything giving the details one would need to make a serious assessment (i.e. confidence intervals, methodology etc). Also lets not forget that the CBI is a lobby as well, so they are unlikely to have the resources that an ONS or other large organisations have.

 

CBI estimates are all over the place, and seem to tend towards the more positive end of the scale among forecasters.  Possibly this is because they are indeed a lobbying organisation, and may feel that their role is to talk up economic prospects; you can easily imagine their members being aggrieved if they felt the CBI was reducing consumer confidence and therefore spending by being unduly pessimistic.

 

This time last year, they predicted 0.6% growth, revised down to 0.3% in May.  By November they had revised that down to -0.3%, but were then revising it up again on the back of the fiddled figures for Q3, saying that 2012 would turn out to have been flat.

 

I don't think we need pay too much attention to what they say.  I expect they just feel they should say something, since everyone else is doing so.

[drat01]

Sorry Trent but again I do not agree with your points.

 

Look at the BBC article on Republic's problems

 

Clothing chain Republic has confirmed widespread fears, announcing that it has called in the administrators.

The Leeds-based retailer, which has 121 stores and about
2,500 staff, said it had appointed accountants from Ernst & Young to
take over running of the firm.

The administrators said they had already made 150 staff at the firm's head office in Leeds redundant.

Republic will continue to be open for business, with administrators hoping to sell it as a going concern.

"The brand Republic is well recognised, particularly in the
North," said Hunter Kelly, one of the newly-appointed administrators.

"It has a powerful website offering, owns well-known brand names, and has some very attractive and profitable stores."

Hard hit demographic
    

Founded in 1986, as men's denim retailer in Leeds under the
name Best Jeans, Republic underwent a rapid expansion 10 years ago, but
has since seen sales slacken off.

"Republic suffered poor trading results in the autumn, and
whilst sales picked up in December there has been a sudden and rapid
decline in sales in late January," said Mr Kelly.

That slump in sales caused a drain in cash that meant the retailer could no longer pay its bills on time.

The company focuses on the youth fashion market, which is
fiercely competitive and under pressure, offering brands such as Jack
& Jones and SoulCal.

"Operating towards the value end of the market should have
placed the retailer in a strong position to take advantage of the
consumer trend towards low-cost fashion," said Anusha Couttigane, from
retail consultancy Conlumino.

"However, its target youth market has been the hardest hit
demographic of the recession and it has struggled to appeal to them as
effectively as rivals such as Primark, Asos or H&M.

"Fashion is a fast-moving industry where brand loyalty is
fickle and Republic has failed to keep up with some pretty fierce
competitors," she said.

'Worst' post-Christmas period
    

Republic is following in the footsteps of a list of High Street stalwarts.

These include the music retailer HMV, the camera group Jessops, and the DVD and games rental company Blockbuster.

"It's the worst post-Christmas period we've seen in a long time," said Matthew Hopkinson from the Local Data Company.

Republic is owned by private equity firm TPG, which bought the company in 2010 in a deal thought to be worth about £300m.

According to Anusha Couttigane, TPG had been trying to sell off some stores and persuade landlords to agree to lower rents.

"News of its administration suggests that attempts to
renegotiate monthly payments have failed, bringing the business to a
complete standstill and landlords facing the prospect of more vacant
units on the High Street," she said.

Matthew Hopkinson said that while some stores may be snapped
up, the vast majority of them are in shopping centres, which would be
difficult to fill.

"HMV and others have also been sitting in shopping centres
and therefore I think the number of units which have gone in the last
few months in shopping centres will make it far harder than 12 months to
refill them," he said.

Its chairman, Andy Bond, who was a former boss of Asda, is said to have left the company last week after two years.

Its current chief executive is the former boss of TK Maxx, Paul Sweetenham.

 

There are some key points that I feel, and you may not but that is your prerogative, back up what I have been saying here

 

""It has a powerful website offering, owns well-known brand names, and has some very attractive and profitable stores."

 

""However, its target youth market has been the hardest hit demographic
of the recession and it has struggled to appeal to them as effectively
as rivals such as Primark, Asos or H&M."

 

""It's the worst post-Christmas period we've seen in a long time," said Matthew Hopkinson from the Local Data Company."

 

Note: Yes I do know what you do, but others may not, hence my comment - apologies if that caused any offense - none meant

 

I actually agree with your last statement to a certain degree that companies who embrace change and understand customers obvious and potential needs are those that will survive and prosper, BUT and that is a lot of the basis for what I am stating is dependent on Gvmt to a massive degree. The cuts, the removal of youth employment, removal of incomes into single and family groups, uncertainty etc basically stifle all of these. Business models and especially infrastructure to support them are based on longer term thinking. Impacts of Gvmt policies see a far more rapid realization. In this case they are / have / and will continue to do so hit a lot of the High Street / Retail very hard at a time when a lot of the basis for any sort of optimism is on Retail / Services etc

 

 

EDIT : Sorry I just re-read this and must take you to task on it

 

You say the point is that of wealth dispersement but you have only
just raised that point and it isn't one I've disagreed with, obviously
large high street shops mean jobs in local areas. Why would I argue
that? That wasn't your orgininal point though, your orginal response to
my post was to say that you failed to see the link between the online
digital age and the decline of companies like Republic. I thought and
still think to take such a stance is ludicrous.

 

If you want to shift the argument or your point that is fine but
don't pretend that was your point all along when clearly it wasn't.

 

As you will know I said I did not see the digital age and Republic - did I say companies like Republic? I am pretty sure I didn't, but my point was that for a company like Republic, one I know quite well as it happens the comment re digital age etc was certainly not applicable to them

 

My post said

The digital age and Republic? I fail to see the link sorry

Edited February 13, 2013 by drat01

[drat01]

just because I'm walking towards Mila Kunis  doesn't mean I've actually entered her does it  , so  i'm not sure what is so hard for you to understand  .... I merely committed on my confusion that the CBI said we had avoided a triple dip recession , when your good self openly commented some weeks back that we had ENTERED it ..I asked for and am still waiting for you to post this evidence.. once you post it then we can discuss it in more detail

 

 

but for the record and feel free to look back through the thread I've not posted anything to suggest I think the economy IS doing so well  ... it clearly could be better ( and of course it could possibly even be worse )

 

Again Tony nothing whatsoever towards the debate only some petty point on semantics - despite all of the evidence that you demanded and was shown from analysts in the media who predicted that the triple dip was upon us. If you feel that this is a great achievement that the CBI is predicting that we will scrape by and miss that criteria then so be it.

 

As said and as you have constantly failed to do, it would be great to understand your logic and thinking as to why the Gvmt policy should not be questioned and challenged. But as predicted nowt from you - ironically one of their biggest supporters on VT at least

[Dr_Pangloss]

 

 

CBI estimate 0.3% growth in Q1 of this year, would be interesting to see what their confidence interval is (which would probably point to the possibility of a triple dip).

Their website has stuff about Mr Cridland's comments and says it has published a forecast but it isn't immediately apparent where this publication is (probably me being dim!).

 

Their last quarterly forecast announcement said:

> 

...without the impact of one-off distortions in the fourth quarter, quarter-on-quarter growth is expected to be only marginally positive (+0.2%).

In 2013, the CBI forecasts growth of up to +1.4%, marginally up from +1.2% in August, reflecting improved growth figures in the third quarter. Quarter-on-quarter growth is expected to be modest, however, at around 0.3 to 0.4%.

But the risks around the outlook remain on the downside, from the Eurozone crisis continuing, and concern about the impact of infl

ation.

 

Yep I took a quick look but couldn't find anything giving the details one would need to make a serious assessment (i.e. confidence intervals, methodology etc). Also lets not forget that the CBI is a lobby as well, so they are unlikely to have the resources that an ONS or other large organisations have.

 

CBI estimates are all over the place, and seem to tend towards the more positive end of the scale among forecasters.  Possibly this is because they are indeed a lobbying organisation, and may feel that their role is to talk up economic prospects; you can easily imagine their members being aggrieved if they felt the CBI was reducing consumer confidence and therefore spending by being unduly pessimistic.

 

This time last year, they predicted 0.6% growth, revised down to 0.3% in May.  By November they had revised that down to -0.3%, but were then revising it up again on the back of the fiddled figures for Q3, saying that 2012 would turn out to have been flat.

 

I don't think we need pay too much attention to what they say.  I expect they just feel they should say something, since everyone else is doing so.

 

[TrentVilla]

I had seen that artical but thanks for raising it in case, others won't have seen it.

 

That article though in my view supports what I've said, it clearly states that they've failed to be as attractive to their consumers as two high street rivals and one online retailer, that is nobodys fault but their own. That it is there worst Christmas period in a long time doesn't really mean anything other than what I've said, people are spending differently and elsewhere.

 

Don't get me wrong, I disagree on a lot of different levels with the actions and what I believe are the motivations of this government I really really do. I think the impact they are having on certain groups within society is horrific and more about ideology than it is economic reasoning, I still don't though lay the blame for the collapse of old fashioned and antiquated retailers at their door, even if they have probably made the economy and consumer confidence worse.

 

As I said previously, even in a time of economic boom I think we would still be seeing a shift from store to online spending and some of the dinosaurs on the high street becoming extinct just probably not so many and not so quickly. I guess the one big factor not mentioned previously is the availability of credit or more accurately cheap credit, in years past some of these retailers would have survived hard times by borrowing but they can't do that any more. If I recall correctly the main reason that Game went to the wall was because they couldn't take stock on credit although the reality was they had already lost much of their market to online offshore retailers.

 

Now offshore tax avoiding retailers are something the government could and should do something about and in fact I believe are in terms of the likes of Play.com but that is a even bigger debate.

[peterms]

Friedman had some interesting ideas (including advocating a basic income guarantee) which many on the left miss mainly because of Naomi Klein's 'Shock Doctrine'.

 

Now John Kay joins in.

 

On Friedman, he was a hate figure on the left long before Melanie Klein's book, because of the way his ideas became the blueprint for both Thatcherism and the fascist Chile regime.

[drat01]

EDIT: Bloody computers - Grrrrrrrr

Edited February 13, 2013 by drat01

[tonyh29]

"However, its target youth market has been the hardest hit demographic

of the recession and it has struggled to appeal to them as effectively

as rivals such as Primark, Asos or H&M."

 

so you killed your own argument  , I've said it once and I'll say it again , don't ever let me appoint you as my defence lawyer

[tonyh29]

just because I'm walking towards Mila Kunis  doesn't mean I've actually entered her does it  , so  i'm not sure what is so hard for you to understand  .... I merely committed on my confusion that the CBI said we had avoided a triple dip recession , when your good self openly commented some weeks back that we had ENTERED it ..I asked for and am still waiting for you to post this evidence.. once you post it then we can discuss it in more detail

 

 

but for the record and feel free to look back through the thread I've not posted anything to suggest I think the economy IS doing so well  ... it clearly could be better ( and of course it could possibly even be worse )

 

Again Tony nothing whatsoever towards the debate only some petty point on semantics -

 

 

it's not petty , it's just you made something up  and got challenged on it  and rather than admit you were wrong and move on  you seem insistent on trying to blame everyone else for your shortcomings

[peterms]

 

 

just because I'm walking towards Mila Kunis  doesn't mean I've actually entered her does it  , so  i'm not sure what is so hard for you to understand  .... I merely committed on my confusion that the CBI said we had avoided a triple dip recession , when your good self openly commented some weeks back that we had ENTERED it ..I asked for and am still waiting for you to post this evidence.. once you post it then we can discuss it in more detail

 

 

but for the record and feel free to look back through the thread I've not posted anything to suggest I think the economy IS doing so well  ... it clearly could be better ( and of course it could possibly even be worse )

 

Again Tony nothing whatsoever towards the debate only some petty point on semantics -

 

 

it's not petty , it's just you made something up  and got challenged on it  and rather than admit you were wrong and move on  you seem insistent on trying to blame everyone else for your shortcomings

 

Of course we're in recession.  You seem to be fastening on the technical definition of recession as being two consecutive quarters of negative growth, rather than the state of the economy.

 

Leave aside the fact that Osborne fiddled the figures for Q3 with the aim of claiming that we aren't really in recession.  Leave aside also the odd definition of economic activity that is GDP (if I grow organic and healthy food for myself, that doesn't count towards GDP; if I buy horse arse burgers, that does.  If I fix minor faults on my car, no contribution to GDP; if I smash my car into a wall, GDP rises).  Look at what's happening in the real economy.

 

Inflation is rising, and will continue to in the coming year.  Firms are sitting on mountains of cash, which they won't invest because of lack of demand.  The rich have got richer, and 90% of the population poorer.

 

This is recession.  We had problems after the finance sector **** up so massively, but the economy was starting to show some improvement.  Osborne has wifully choked that off, and has pushed us into avoidable, self-inflicted, pointless, calamitous recession, to the point where even the CBI and the Torygraph are telling him to reverse his direction.

 

Of course it's not recession for everyone.  The top 1% have doubled their share of income, while the bottom 90% have seen theirs fall as it is redistributed to the wealthiest.  (May need to click on pic to make it easier to read)

 

[peterms]

just because I'm walking towards Mila Kunis  doesn't mean I've actually entered her does it

 

Quite.  But if you had to wait until several months after the alleged event for a bunch of stattos to produce seasonally adjusted figures to advise you whether you had done so, you might wish to reflect on whether other methods of forming a judgement might be suitable.

[markavfc40]

 seem insistent on trying to blame everyone else for your shortcomings

 

 

My feelings every time I've heard a Tory MP or one of their supporters over the last 2 and half years.

Edited February 13, 2013 by markavfc40

[Chindie]

 seem insistent on trying to blame everyone else for your shortcomings

 

 

You've just described every Tory MP I've heard speak over the last 2 and half years.

Every MP in the modern age, more like.

 

Its why all this partisanship is absurd. Absolutely nothing of value is said by either side in any debate because it boils down to 'NO YOU!'.

[PauloBarnesi]

 

 seem insistent on trying to blame everyone else for your shortcomings

 

 

You've just described every Tory MP I've heard speak over the last 2 and half years.

Every MP in the modern age, more like.

 

Its why all this partisanship is absurd. Absolutely nothing of value is said by either side in any debate because it boils down to 'NO YOU!'.

Agreed. 

 

Though can we define the modern age? Is that the age after the mediaeval? 

[Chindie]

I knew someone would pick up on that

 

I think I was thinking 60s onward, basically the point afterwhich a degree of... courtesy died a death in parliament. the petty party politics has been about long before then, of course, but this incredibly tedious 'But you!' stuff is a relatively new thing I think.

Edited February 13, 2013 by Chindie

[CI]

Clothing chain REPUBLIC has gone