What/who will collapse first in 2018

[thehowler]

Maplin - it's a front for an evil but inept megalomaniac electronics genius...

[Barnsey]

Interserve possibly next, for retail I'd agree with Maplin.

[Ash4781]

Debenhams. Cash flow statement doesn’t look good (drawing down on cash reserves). Running down cash assets with a rapidly collapsing margin. A high proportion of intangible assets too on the balance sheet too. Online business is not great too. Highly shorted still looking at the FCA register.

Net debt isn’t that high but need more info on those intangible assets. E.g if it’s the Debenhams brand. Is this consistent with collapsing margins ?

Edited January 17, 2018 by Ash4781

[thewig]

On 16/01/2018 at 2:01 PM, Fence said:

"You're only supposed to blow the bl**dy doors off"!

[SlimJ]

Arcadia telling suppliers it's going to pay them 2% less due to poor sales.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/17/arcadia-poor-sales-blamed-for-squeeze-on-suppliers

Sure the suppliers will be impressed!

[stuckmojo]

30 minutes ago, SlimJ said:

Arcadia telling suppliers it's going to pay them 2% less due to poor sales.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/17/arcadia-poor-sales-blamed-for-squeeze-on-suppliers

Sure the suppliers will be impressed!

I'd imagine this is part of a gain share contract in which Arcadia is entitled to bleed its suppliers when trading goes bad and screw them when trading goes good. I'm very familiar with the format. 

[Fence]

2 hours ago, SlimJ said:

Arcadia telling suppliers it's going to pay them 2% less due to poor sales.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/17/arcadia-poor-sales-blamed-for-squeeze-on-suppliers

Sure the suppliers will be impressed!

Maybe I should forget reading financial statements for my investment due diligence and just ask about their supplier terms!  Carillion - something about pay you in 120 days unless you pay a fee.  Then there was that fuss about Tescos. 

[payoyo]

Looks like the high street is just about to take another big hit:

http://thetimes.co.uk/article/71935d60-fe28-11e7-ba61-5366488da64d

The stake limit is being slashed to £2 on fixed odds betting terminals; one of the main reasons the high street is full of betting shops these days. Bookies have been opening multiple shops to get around the per-shop limit on number of terminals.

This will probably result in large closures as the various businesss move to a completely online model, since the are no stake limits online. The numbers simply don't stack up at £2 a pop.

[spyguy]

7 minutes ago, payoyo said:

Looks like the high street is just about to take another big hit:

http://thetimes.co.uk/article/71935d60-fe28-11e7-ba61-5366488da64d

The stake limit is being slashed to £2 on fixed odds betting terminals; one of the main reasons the high street is full of betting shops these days. Bookies have been opening multiple shops to get around the per-shop limit on number of terminals.

This will probably result in large closures as the various businesss move to a completely online model, since the are no stake limits online. The numbers simply don't stack up at £2 a pop.

Where will I launder my drugs money?

[Toast]

It means each dealer is going to have to employ a whole department of cash-in-hand, minimum-wage junior "finance staff", working 24/7 on the slot machines. They will need middle managers to oversee them, and there could then be more senior management roles, looking at strategy and optimising the usage of the available gambling "plant".

I think this is a clever move to re-build the economy in the South East.

[Calcutta]

Oh.....didn't realise this was public knowledge....next week just got more complicated....

[Calcutta]

1 minute ago, Calcutta said:

Oh.....didn't realise this was public knowledge....next week just got more complicated....

*Joking obviously, I dont launder drug money. I spend it on whores.

[spyguy]

Oh and Capita are falling.

 

[Bear Hug]

10 hours ago, spyguy said:

Oh and Capita are falling.

 

48% down today! 

In hindsight, the company which expanded into TV Licence, private parking enforcers (**********), disability assessors should have always failed.  

I can't imagine their boring admin/software arm being easy to sell when the rest are doing the scummy jobs that are hated by the majority of people.

[chronyx]

So there's less chance I'll be able to tear strips off of a TV licencing enforcement droid? Dang. 

I imagine the letters will keep coming  

[douggggy]

31 minutes ago, chronyx said:

So there's less chance I'll be able to tear strips off of a TV licencing enforcement droid? Dang. 

I imagine the letters will keep coming  

actually physically delivered by G4S,  outsourcing the outsourcing, like re-insuring, only shit...

[Bear Hug]

32 minutes ago, douggggy said:

actually physically delivered by G4S,  outsourcing the outsourcing, like re-insuring, only shit...

Thanks, I didn't know that.  Googling immediately found quite interesting (to me anyway) details of this:

http://tv-licensing.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/the-role-of-g4s-in-tv-licensing-sales.html

So why do G4S goons sell far fewer TV licences than their Capita counterparts? Well, in our opinion there are three main reasons:
 

Firstly, and very significantly, Capita-employed goons are expected, as a basic condition of employment, to drum up as many TV licence sales as humanly possible. Indeed they can earn lucrative commission payments by doing so, which we suggest results in them hard-selling TV licences to people who don't legally need them.
 

Secondly, G4S goons only engage in passive TV Licensing visits. This means they sneak up to the front door of the unlicensed property, surrepticiously slide a calling card through the letter box and then immediately slink away in retreat. They do not engage with the occupier in the same way Capita-employed goons do, so are far less likely to scare the occupier into buying a TV licence they don't legally need.
 

Finally, a Capita-employed goon is able to generate a sale immediately at the time of visit, whereas a G4S goon cannot do that. A TV licence sale can only be attributed to G4S if the occupier, having received a G4S dropped calling card, subsequently buys a TV licence as a result of that card. For obvious reasons people are far less likely to act on the receipt of a calling card than they are the aggressive threats of a TV Licensing goon on their doorstep.
 

Supposing a G4S goon does visit your unlicensed property, then rest assured they are only there to drop off a calling card. They are not in a position to gather evidence for TV Licensing.

[chronyx]

I don't care where they're from, they can come back with a police officer and a warrant

I have nothing to fear as I have nothing to hide. You couldn't pay me to watch the drivel box

[spyguy]

8 hours ago, chronyx said:

I don't care where they're from, they can come back with a police officer and a warrant

I have nothing to fear as I have nothing to hide. You couldn't pay me to watch the drivel box

Oh oddle to get out of now.

Sorry. Your company went bust this morning. Come back when you are out of insolvency.

[Ash4781]

22 hours ago, spyguy said:

Oh and Capita are falling.

 

I don’t know anyone who works or worked for them but I have only heard the usual names and jokes - Crapita. 

I haven’t yet read the details of the share issue. There is talk of a systemic issue for outsourcing  - probably margins  and debt related. Carillion and Capita management both talked about short term and a business too complex to understand. I don’t like it. It smacks of big holes in the balance sheets?

[stop_the_craziness]

This may be me putting together different pieces of a jigsaw and creating something that doesn't exist but........

Say the outsourcing model is unworkable.  These two enormous companies go down, the public services they need are still required, so they get "nationalised" again, the QE machine cranks up another 500 million to spend on the wages and infrastructure to deliver these projects and keep the people involved in them employed.   A handful of fat-cat bastards get cut out of the loop and maybe the odd one goes up on trial, just to look like "something got done".  And then, business as usual.  A tax-payer bailout that isn't a bailout.  Only it is.

Is that possible?  Is there some knock-on to the economy that I am missing or could it really be as simple as that?

[zugzwang]

8 minutes ago, stop_the_craziness said:

This may be me putting together different pieces of a jigsaw and creating something that doesn't exist but........

Say the outsourcing model is unworkable.  These two enormous companies go down, the public services they need are still required, so they get "nationalised" again, the QE machine cranks up another 500 million to spend on the wages and infrastructure to deliver these projects and keep the people involved in them employed.   A handful of fat-cat bastards get cut out of the loop and maybe the odd one goes up on trial, just to look like "something got done".  And then, business as usual.  A tax-payer bailout that isn't a bailout.  Only it is.

Is that possible?  Is there some knock-on to the economy that I am missing or could it really be as simple as that?

Sterling would get hit. The ratings agencies would downgrade UK sovereign debt another notch (from AA to A). Public opinion would be outraged.

Hard to see Mother Theresa and Spreadshit surviving that given their current predicament.

[spyguy]

38 minutes ago, stop_the_craziness said:

This may be me putting together different pieces of a jigsaw and creating something that doesn't exist but........

Say the outsourcing model is unworkable.  These two enormous companies go down, the public services they need are still required, so they get "nationalised" again, the QE machine cranks up another 500 million to spend on the wages and infrastructure to deliver these projects and keep the people involved in them employed.   A handful of fat-cat bastards get cut out of the loop and maybe the odd one goes up on trial, just to look like "something got done".  And then, business as usual.  A tax-payer bailout that isn't a bailout.  Only it is.

Is that possible?  Is there some knock-on to the economy that I am missing or could it really be as simple as that?

They are not enormous companies.

 

[NoGo]

11 hours ago, Bear Hug said:

Secondly, G4S goons only engage in passive TV Licensing visits. This means they sneak up to the front door of the unlicensed property, surrepticiously slide a calling card through the letter box and then immediately slink away in retreat. They do not engage with the occupier in the same way Capita-employed goons do, so are far less likely to scare the occupier into buying a TV licence they don't legally need.
 

This happened to me. I was at home, with a dog, that would have barked at any noise. I found one of these cards saying they had called but i was not in...

This happened because I filled out the form online to say I no longer needed a TV license - and even requested a refund, which you can do. Of coarse, my request was ignored and I was immediately placed on the stealing television list. Giving up TV was the third best thing I ever did. The first two were stopping smoking and getting divorced. 

Eventually after another 8 months of threats and accusations, I rang up to tear strips of somebody, went down the route of asking to make a complaint. Didn't like the accusations, and threats they were sending. "Please send somebody round, I will let you in etc etc.". The guy apologised and said the records were not updated. Subsequently I received a certificate from the TV licensing that  states no license required. Worth the persistence for anyone else in this position.

Also for anyone not informed, the license is for watching live broadcast TV. Even ITV for example. However, you do not need a license to watch catch up TV as long as it is not BBC. So even if you like TV, you can give up your license, buy a Fire stick and still watch the other channels on catch up. They will go after you if you use the BBC Iplayer, as your internet records will be enough evidence.. 

I just use Youtube as a mixture of cats stuck in boxes and learning skills and education. Sorry to go off topic but this info needs to be spread.

 

 

[ccc]

12 minutes ago, NoGo said:

This happened to me. I was at home, with a dog, that would have barked at any noise. I found one of these cards saying they had called but i was not in...

This happened because I filled out the form online to say I no longer needed a TV license - and even requested a refund, which you can do. Of coarse, my request was ignored and I was immediately placed on the stealing television list. Giving up TV was the third best thing I ever did. The first two were stopping smoking and getting divorced. 

Eventually after another 8 months of threats and accusations, I rang up to tear strips of somebody, went down the route of asking to make a complaint. Didn't like the accusations, and threats they were sending. "Please send somebody round, I will let you in etc etc.". The guy apologised and said the records were not updated. Subsequently I received a certificate from the TV licensing that  states no license required. Worth the persistence for anyone else in this position.

Also for anyone not informed, the license is for watching live broadcast TV. Even ITV for example. However, you do not need a license to watch catch up TV as long as it is not BBC. So even if you like TV, you can give up your license, buy a Fire stick and still watch the other channels on catch up. They will go after you if you use the BBC Iplayer, as your internet records will be enough evidence.. 

I just use Youtube as a mixture of cats stuck in boxes and learning skills and education. Sorry to go off topic but this info needs to be spread.

 

 

You could have a sky dish outside your house - pay for their full package - yet only choose to watch catch up / box sets so don't require a TV licence.