Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Boris is having a bad day as his incompetence snd lies are revealed. Wonder when the PPE robbery will be exposed by DC. M&S had a bad day too. 5% of their international turnover was spent on additional Brexit costs so far. Total £47m Full year will be a higher percentage. EY accountants noted a lot of other retailers are experiencing similar additional costs. There will be costs to pass on to customers and international stores won’t be supplied so much by U.K. manufacturers. So when posters on here claimed I was talking nonsense and didn’t know how to run a business because I complained of costs, please can you explain how M&S became equally as incompetent with their massive logistics capability? As a footnote 30 additional M&S stores earmarked for closure while their online increases. No problems in the high street or jobs being lost then??? Look at an Ocado warehouse full of robots snd tell me again how they create more jobs than a large retail store. " . Marks and Spencers are simply adopting to changing circumstances by closing stores in the wrong locations. However they are also opening new stores in other locations so it is a question of swings and roundabouts. Any product in an Ocado warehouse has to be delivered to an end customer. I cannot see any delivery drivers complaining about customers using the on line offering. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M and S plans to open new stores as well as closing some more. Retail has changed and will continue to evolve. Online is the way forward and unlike Debengams, M and S has recognised this and continues to drive forward with restructure. My M and S shares rose nearly 8% yesterday, so investors seem to like what they are seeing. I'm in the Automation business, and haven't stopped in years, frequently turning work away. As robotics and AI evolve, then they will replace jobs. Thats a fact I warned about on here, years ago. The pace is accelerating, and into places where you might not expect. " M&S turnaround plan is going well. Sadly share increases doesn’t relate to job creation in this case. I agree automation is the way forward. Unfortunately by it’s nature it costs more jobs than it creates. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Boris is having a bad day as his incompetence snd lies are revealed. Wonder when the PPE robbery will be exposed by DC. M&S had a bad day too. 5% of their international turnover was spent on additional Brexit costs so far. Total £47m Full year will be a higher percentage. EY accountants noted a lot of other retailers are experiencing similar additional costs. There will be costs to pass on to customers and international stores won’t be supplied so much by U.K. manufacturers. So when posters on here claimed I was talking nonsense and didn’t know how to run a business because I complained of costs, please can you explain how M&S became equally as incompetent with their massive logistics capability? As a footnote 30 additional M&S stores earmarked for closure while their online increases. No problems in the high street or jobs being lost then??? Look at an Ocado warehouse full of robots snd tell me again how they create more jobs than a large retail store. . Marks and Spencers are simply adopting to changing circumstances by closing stores in the wrong locations. However they are also opening new stores in other locations so it is a question of swings and roundabouts. Any product in an Ocado warehouse has to be delivered to an end customer. I cannot see any delivery drivers complaining about customers using the on line offering. " They are closing more shops than they are opening and the stores they are opening are related to food. Which by its nature is a limited market. In that business share of the market is everything so another store will lose out. As I mentioned the share price going up is a reflection of them slowing the rot and changing the profile of the business. Shares are great for shareholders but do not reflect in increases in employment in this case. Delivery drivers having a few extra deliveries . The economy is saved then. No mention of the Brexit costs I see! Maybe that’s been a benefit for them too!!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M and S plans to open new stores as well as closing some more. Retail has changed and will continue to evolve. Online is the way forward and unlike Debengams, M and S has recognised this and continues to drive forward with restructure. My M and S shares rose nearly 8% yesterday, so investors seem to like what they are seeing. I'm in the Automation business, and haven't stopped in years, frequently turning work away. As robotics and AI evolve, then they will replace jobs. Thats a fact I warned about on here, years ago. The pace is accelerating, and into places where you might not expect. M&S turnaround plan is going well. Sadly share increases doesn’t relate to job creation in this case. I agree automation is the way forward. Unfortunately by it’s nature it costs more jobs than it creates. " Then it needs a forward looking policy on work. A robot does not go sick, need holidays, turns up on time... they are getting cheaper, capability is increasing and thats why they are getting more attractive. They are getting into places that you would never think of. On the subject of M and S costs. The decision years ago, to send their outsourcing to Asia, is now hurting them. Covid has sent shipping costs higher and higher. It will right itself in time but for the present, its hurting all importers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M and S plans to open new stores as well as closing some more. Retail has changed and will continue to evolve. Online is the way forward and unlike Debengams, M and S has recognised this and continues to drive forward with restructure. My M and S shares rose nearly 8% yesterday, so investors seem to like what they are seeing. I'm in the Automation business, and haven't stopped in years, frequently turning work away. As robotics and AI evolve, then they will replace jobs. Thats a fact I warned about on here, years ago. The pace is accelerating, and into places where you might not expect. M&S turnaround plan is going well. Sadly share increases doesn’t relate to job creation in this case. I agree automation is the way forward. Unfortunately by it’s nature it costs more jobs than it creates. Then it needs a forward looking policy on work. A robot does not go sick, need holidays, turns up on time... they are getting cheaper, capability is increasing and thats why they are getting more attractive. They are getting into places that you would never think of. On the subject of M and S costs. The decision years ago, to send their outsourcing to Asia, is now hurting them. Covid has sent shipping costs higher and higher. It will right itself in time but for the present, its hurting all importers. " The costs of Brexit were clearly identified in their report and hurt their stores operating abroad and severely hit the bottom line. £47m so far. The further increased supply chain costs were on goods mostly from the Far East. They will settle in a few months when containers are back where they should be. Transport in the U.K. is going to get more expensive due to a lack of drivers. Supply and demand will result in highest bidder wins. Years ago M&S bought British. Then they included Morocco for clothes. After no backlash they went global. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M and S plans to open new stores as well as closing some more. Retail has changed and will continue to evolve. Online is the way forward and unlike Debengams, M and S has recognised this and continues to drive forward with restructure. My M and S shares rose nearly 8% yesterday, so investors seem to like what they are seeing. I'm in the Automation business, and haven't stopped in years, frequently turning work away. As robotics and AI evolve, then they will replace jobs. Thats a fact I warned about on here, years ago. The pace is accelerating, and into places where you might not expect. M&S turnaround plan is going well. Sadly share increases doesn’t relate to job creation in this case. I agree automation is the way forward. Unfortunately by it’s nature it costs more jobs than it creates. Then it needs a forward looking policy on work. A robot does not go sick, need holidays, turns up on time... they are getting cheaper, capability is increasing and thats why they are getting more attractive. They are getting into places that you would never think of. On the subject of M and S costs. The decision years ago, to send their outsourcing to Asia, is now hurting them. Covid has sent shipping costs higher and higher. It will right itself in time but for the present, its hurting all importers. The costs of Brexit were clearly identified in their report and hurt their stores operating abroad and severely hit the bottom line. £47m so far. The further increased supply chain costs were on goods mostly from the Far East. They will settle in a few months when containers are back where they should be. Transport in the U.K. is going to get more expensive due to a lack of drivers. Supply and demand will result in highest bidder wins. Years ago M&S bought British. Then they included Morocco for clothes. After no backlash they went global. " However between 27 million to 32 million of those costs relate to bringing goods into both the North and South of Ireland. Maybe if the EU had taken a more pragmatic approach ,these additional costs have been avoided. I guess the good news for anyone concerned about jobs is that these costs create additional jobs in administration so not all bad news. In any event the share price went up significantly yesterday and the future looks positive. I looks like it is onwards and upwards for Marks and Spencer | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M&S should return to its core roots. Especially in this day and age, it may actually help them in the long term, especially with a lower high street presence if that's how they are going. " M and S has been shockingly badly run, its laughable to suggest there are any true Brexit related costs when it launched in France and then abandoned the stores years before Brexit. The way forward for M and S has always been - regardless of Brexit - to focus on using UK suppliers only, their core customers would love that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M and S plans to open new stores as well as closing some more. Retail has changed and will continue to evolve. Online is the way forward and unlike Debengams, M and S has recognised this and continues to drive forward with restructure. My M and S shares rose nearly 8% yesterday, so investors seem to like what they are seeing. I'm in the Automation business, and haven't stopped in years, frequently turning work away. As robotics and AI evolve, then they will replace jobs. Thats a fact I warned about on here, years ago. The pace is accelerating, and into places where you might not expect. M&S turnaround plan is going well. Sadly share increases doesn’t relate to job creation in this case. I agree automation is the way forward. Unfortunately by it’s nature it costs more jobs than it creates. " and has that got anything to do with brexit then ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Boris is having a bad day as his incompetence snd lies are revealed. Wonder when the PPE robbery will be exposed by DC. M&S had a bad day too. 5% of their international turnover was spent on additional Brexit costs so far. Total £47m Full year will be a higher percentage. EY accountants noted a lot of other retailers are experiencing similar additional costs. There will be costs to pass on to customers and international stores won’t be supplied so much by U.K. manufacturers. So when posters on here claimed I was talking nonsense and didn’t know how to run a business because I complained of costs, please can you explain how M&S became equally as incompetent with their massive logistics capability? As a footnote 30 additional M&S stores earmarked for closure while their online increases. No problems in the high street or jobs being lost then??? Look at an Ocado warehouse full of robots snd tell me again how they create more jobs than a large retail store. " Good, long may it continue. I am and was always sure the clown prince wanted the job, only for the pension. As for M&S despite the fact they have delicious food, i would be more than happy to see them collapse. I would feel bad for the staff though. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M and S plans to open new stores as well as closing some more. Retail has changed and will continue to evolve. Online is the way forward and unlike Debengams, M and S has recognised this and continues to drive forward with restructure. My M and S shares rose nearly 8% yesterday, so investors seem to like what they are seeing. I'm in the Automation business, and haven't stopped in years, frequently turning work away. As robotics and AI evolve, then they will replace jobs. Thats a fact I warned about on here, years ago. The pace is accelerating, and into places where you might not expect. M&S turnaround plan is going well. Sadly share increases doesn’t relate to job creation in this case. I agree automation is the way forward. Unfortunately by it’s nature it costs more jobs than it creates. Then it needs a forward looking policy on work. A robot does not go sick, need holidays, turns up on time... they are getting cheaper, capability is increasing and thats why they are getting more attractive. They are getting into places that you would never think of. On the subject of M and S costs. The decision years ago, to send their outsourcing to Asia, is now hurting them. Covid has sent shipping costs higher and higher. It will right itself in time but for the present, its hurting all importers. The costs of Brexit were clearly identified in their report and hurt their stores operating abroad and severely hit the bottom line. £47m so far. The further increased supply chain costs were on goods mostly from the Far East. They will settle in a few months when containers are back where they should be. Transport in the U.K. is going to get more expensive due to a lack of drivers. Supply and demand will result in highest bidder wins. Years ago M&S bought British. Then they included Morocco for clothes. After no backlash they went global. However between 27 million to 32 million of those costs relate to bringing goods into both the North and South of Ireland. Maybe if the EU had taken a more pragmatic approach ,these additional costs have been avoided. I guess the good news for anyone concerned about jobs is that these costs create additional jobs in administration so not all bad news. In any event the share price went up significantly yesterday and the future looks positive. I looks like it is onwards and upwards for Marks and Spencer " Boris signed off on the deal . Obviously he didn’t do the detail. Great news for M&S shareholders as I said. Jobs not so great but hopefully they will keep most on. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M&S should return to its core roots. Especially in this day and age, it may actually help them in the long term, especially with a lower high street presence if that's how they are going. M and S has been shockingly badly run, its laughable to suggest there are any true Brexit related costs when it launched in France and then abandoned the stores years before Brexit. The way forward for M and S has always been - regardless of Brexit - to focus on using UK suppliers only, their core customers would love that. " EY know how costs are apportioned so don’t talk rubbish they are clearly shown and defined. M&S used U.K. suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland. That’s why they struggled to supply over Brexit . They now will source more in the countries of sale. Again a loss to U.K. producers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M and S plans to open new stores as well as closing some more. Retail has changed and will continue to evolve. Online is the way forward and unlike Debengams, M and S has recognised this and continues to drive forward with restructure. My M and S shares rose nearly 8% yesterday, so investors seem to like what they are seeing. I'm in the Automation business, and haven't stopped in years, frequently turning work away. As robotics and AI evolve, then they will replace jobs. Thats a fact I warned about on here, years ago. The pace is accelerating, and into places where you might not expect. M&S turnaround plan is going well. Sadly share increases doesn’t relate to job creation in this case. I agree automation is the way forward. Unfortunately by it’s nature it costs more jobs than it creates. and has that got anything to do with brexit then ?" The £47 million yes directly related. Automation nothing to do with Brexit. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Boris is having a bad day as his incompetence snd lies are revealed. Wonder when the PPE robbery will be exposed by DC. M&S had a bad day too. 5% of their international turnover was spent on additional Brexit costs so far. Total £47m Full year will be a higher percentage. EY accountants noted a lot of other retailers are experiencing similar additional costs. There will be costs to pass on to customers and international stores won’t be supplied so much by U.K. manufacturers. So when posters on here claimed I was talking nonsense and didn’t know how to run a business because I complained of costs, please can you explain how M&S became equally as incompetent with their massive logistics capability? As a footnote 30 additional M&S stores earmarked for closure while their online increases. No problems in the high street or jobs being lost then??? Look at an Ocado warehouse full of robots snd tell me again how they create more jobs than a large retail store. Good, long may it continue. I am and was always sure the clown prince wanted the job, only for the pension. As for M&S despite the fact they have delicious food, i would be more than happy to see them collapse. I would feel bad for the staff though." Why would you be happy for them to collapse? Strange!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M&S should return to its core roots. Especially in this day and age, it may actually help them in the long term, especially with a lower high street presence if that's how they are going. M and S has been shockingly badly run, its laughable to suggest there are any true Brexit related costs when it launched in France and then abandoned the stores years before Brexit. The way forward for M and S has always been - regardless of Brexit - to focus on using UK suppliers only, their core customers would love that. EY know how costs are apportioned so don’t talk rubbish they are clearly shown and defined. M&S used U.K. suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland. That’s why they struggled to supply over Brexit . They now will source more in the countries of sale. Again a loss to U.K. producers. " I don't know what you're on about, food only? Their main clothing suppliers from their website are in order China, Cambodia, Vietnam, India, Turkey, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Ridiculous. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M&S should return to its core roots. Especially in this day and age, it may actually help them in the long term, especially with a lower high street presence if that's how they are going. M and S has been shockingly badly run, its laughable to suggest there are any true Brexit related costs when it launched in France and then abandoned the stores years before Brexit. The way forward for M and S has always been - regardless of Brexit - to focus on using UK suppliers only, their core customers would love that. EY know how costs are apportioned so don’t talk rubbish they are clearly shown and defined. M&S used U.K. suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland. That’s why they struggled to supply over Brexit . They now will source more in the countries of sale. Again a loss to U.K. producers. " Could you please clarify what you mean by “ M&S used UK suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland”? Which goods is it that you are referring to? M&S moved away from UK suppliers for their clothing division some 20 years ago. China has the largest number of factories supplying M&S, over 300 compared to less than 40 in the UK. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M&S should return to its core roots. Especially in this day and age, it may actually help them in the long term, especially with a lower high street presence if that's how they are going. M and S has been shockingly badly run, its laughable to suggest there are any true Brexit related costs when it launched in France and then abandoned the stores years before Brexit. The way forward for M and S has always been - regardless of Brexit - to focus on using UK suppliers only, their core customers would love that. EY know how costs are apportioned so don’t talk rubbish they are clearly shown and defined. M&S used U.K. suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland. That’s why they struggled to supply over Brexit . They now will source more in the countries of sale. Again a loss to U.K. producers. I don't know what you're on about, food only? Their main clothing suppliers from their website are in order China, Cambodia, Vietnam, India, Turkey, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Ridiculous. " Stop deflecting Chris I worked with M&S for years so know their clothing development well. They started nearer to home and then realised they had to go cheaper to compete . Food wise their shops are supplied by a lot of U.K. manufacturers . So Direct Brexit costs so far £47m . If the goods were shipped from China to France or China to Ireland they are not affected by Brexit! Clearly stated as a result of Brexit £47m so far!! Just for clarity ! Works out at 5% of international sales and rising. Smooth trade . Seamless borders. Lying twat Boris is the reality. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M&S should return to its core roots. Especially in this day and age, it may actually help them in the long term, especially with a lower high street presence if that's how they are going. M and S has been shockingly badly run, its laughable to suggest there are any true Brexit related costs when it launched in France and then abandoned the stores years before Brexit. The way forward for M and S has always been - regardless of Brexit - to focus on using UK suppliers only, their core customers would love that. EY know how costs are apportioned so don’t talk rubbish they are clearly shown and defined. M&S used U.K. suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland. That’s why they struggled to supply over Brexit . They now will source more in the countries of sale. Again a loss to U.K. producers. Could you please clarify what you mean by “ M&S used UK suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland”? Which goods is it that you are referring to? M&S moved away from UK suppliers for their clothing division some 20 years ago. China has the largest number of factories supplying M&S, over 300 compared to less than 40 in the UK. " Food which is why they couldn’t get supplies out of U.K. Ireland . I know how their clothing supply works thanks | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M&S should return to its core roots. Especially in this day and age, it may actually help them in the long term, especially with a lower high street presence if that's how they are going. M and S has been shockingly badly run, its laughable to suggest there are any true Brexit related costs when it launched in France and then abandoned the stores years before Brexit. The way forward for M and S has always been - regardless of Brexit - to focus on using UK suppliers only, their core customers would love that. EY know how costs are apportioned so don’t talk rubbish they are clearly shown and defined. M&S used U.K. suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland. That’s why they struggled to supply over Brexit . They now will source more in the countries of sale. Again a loss to U.K. producers. Could you please clarify what you mean by “ M&S used UK suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland”? Which goods is it that you are referring to? M&S moved away from UK suppliers for their clothing division some 20 years ago. China has the largest number of factories supplying M&S, over 300 compared to less than 40 in the UK. " sounds like M&S like to sell to brits but not to happy to by of them typical lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M&S should return to its core roots. Especially in this day and age, it may actually help them in the long term, especially with a lower high street presence if that's how they are going. M and S has been shockingly badly run, its laughable to suggest there are any true Brexit related costs when it launched in France and then abandoned the stores years before Brexit. The way forward for M and S has always been - regardless of Brexit - to focus on using UK suppliers only, their core customers would love that. EY know how costs are apportioned so don’t talk rubbish they are clearly shown and defined. M&S used U.K. suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland. That’s why they struggled to supply over Brexit . They now will source more in the countries of sale. Again a loss to U.K. producers. Could you please clarify what you mean by “ M&S used UK suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland”? Which goods is it that you are referring to? M&S moved away from UK suppliers for their clothing division some 20 years ago. China has the largest number of factories supplying M&S, over 300 compared to less than 40 in the UK. sounds like M&S like to sell to brits but not to happy to by of them typical lol" But but but shares are doing fine !! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As for any other side step questions please I’m not answering just explain £47m additional costs due to Brexit! That was my point and no one seems to be able to answer why this has occurred with such a great deal sorted and pulled out of the big lying oven!! Teething at 5% of sales (not costs) wow . Those are some teeth!! " . However the costs to which you refer may not necessary be permanent or steps can be taken to mitigate them. They are only mentioned at the end of a long and detailed report which discusses historical performance and the strategy for the future. I cannot see any shareholder being too concerned about a few extra costs due to Brexit . That is history and nothing can be done about it. The key issue is whether the long term strategy will work and can the dividend be restored. Fingers crossed. It will be long climb to reach the £7 a share which Marks and Spencer were in 2007 .. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M&S should return to its core roots. Especially in this day and age, it may actually help them in the long term, especially with a lower high street presence if that's how they are going. M and S has been shockingly badly run, its laughable to suggest there are any true Brexit related costs when it launched in France and then abandoned the stores years before Brexit. The way forward for M and S has always been - regardless of Brexit - to focus on using UK suppliers only, their core customers would love that. EY know how costs are apportioned so don’t talk rubbish they are clearly shown and defined. M&S used U.K. suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland. That’s why they struggled to supply over Brexit . They now will source more in the countries of sale. Again a loss to U.K. producers. Could you please clarify what you mean by “ M&S used UK suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland”? Which goods is it that you are referring to? M&S moved away from UK suppliers for their clothing division some 20 years ago. China has the largest number of factories supplying M&S, over 300 compared to less than 40 in the UK. sounds like M&S like to sell to brits but not to happy to by of them typical lol But but but shares are doing fine !! "I’ll sleep tnite then lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As for any other side step questions please I’m not answering just explain £47m additional costs due to Brexit! That was my point and no one seems to be able to answer why this has occurred with such a great deal sorted and pulled out of the big lying oven!! Teething at 5% of sales (not costs) wow . Those are some teeth!! . However the costs to which you refer may not necessary be permanent or steps can be taken to mitigate them. They are only mentioned at the end of a long and detailed report which discusses historical performance and the strategy for the future. I cannot see any shareholder being too concerned about a few extra costs due to Brexit . That is history and nothing can be done about it. The key issue is whether the long term strategy will work and can the dividend be restored. Fingers crossed. It will be long climb to reach the £7 a share which Marks and Spencer were in 2007 .." So 5% of full year sales after a third of the year is not an issue. Really??? Full year could be double figures. M&S have a broad range of business interests and they felt the need to highlight it! They will survive but smaller less adaptable companies will be hurting . EY commenting confirms there will be ongoing costs that won’t go away. To recoup losses selling prices will rise. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M&S should return to its core roots. Especially in this day and age, it may actually help them in the long term, especially with a lower high street presence if that's how they are going. M and S has been shockingly badly run, its laughable to suggest there are any true Brexit related costs when it launched in France and then abandoned the stores years before Brexit. The way forward for M and S has always been - regardless of Brexit - to focus on using UK suppliers only, their core customers would love that. EY know how costs are apportioned so don’t talk rubbish they are clearly shown and defined. M&S used U.K. suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland. That’s why they struggled to supply over Brexit . They now will source more in the countries of sale. Again a loss to U.K. producers. I don't know what you're on about, food only? Their main clothing suppliers from their website are in order China, Cambodia, Vietnam, India, Turkey, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Ridiculous. Stop deflecting Chris I worked with M&S for years so know their clothing development well. They started nearer to home and then realised they had to go cheaper to compete . Food wise their shops are supplied by a lot of U.K. manufacturers . So Direct Brexit costs so far £47m . If the goods were shipped from China to France or China to Ireland they are not affected by Brexit! Clearly stated as a result of Brexit £47m so far!! Just for clarity ! Works out at 5% of international sales and rising. Smooth trade . Seamless borders. Lying twat Boris is the reality. " I do beg your pardon for not reading your mind and knowing that you were rambling on about food only. Silly me. Haven't changed my view. It's a badly run business and hardly surprising they are tripping up now as they have routinely done over the years regardless of brexit. For me, in a better run business that exports, business has never been better.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As for any other side step questions please I’m not answering just explain £47m additional costs due to Brexit! That was my point and no one seems to be able to answer why this has occurred with such a great deal sorted and pulled out of the big lying oven!! Teething at 5% of sales (not costs) wow . Those are some teeth!! . However the costs to which you refer may not necessary be permanent or steps can be taken to mitigate them. They are only mentioned at the end of a long and detailed report which discusses historical performance and the strategy for the future. I cannot see any shareholder being too concerned about a few extra costs due to Brexit . That is history and nothing can be done about it. The key issue is whether the long term strategy will work and can the dividend be restored. Fingers crossed. It will be long climb to reach the £7 a share which Marks and Spencer were in 2007 .. So 5% of full year sales after a third of the year is not an issue. Really??? Full year could be double figures. M&S have a broad range of business interests and they felt the need to highlight it! They will survive but smaller less adaptable companies will be hurting . EY commenting confirms there will be ongoing costs that won’t go away. To recoup losses selling prices will rise. " remainers claiming price rises is nothing new been going on for yrs but to be honest I can’t t remember a year when prices haven’t gone up it’s called inflation thank god for Aldi and lidle lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M&S should return to its core roots. Especially in this day and age, it may actually help them in the long term, especially with a lower high street presence if that's how they are going. M and S has been shockingly badly run, its laughable to suggest there are any true Brexit related costs when it launched in France and then abandoned the stores years before Brexit. The way forward for M and S has always been - regardless of Brexit - to focus on using UK suppliers only, their core customers would love that. EY know how costs are apportioned so don’t talk rubbish they are clearly shown and defined. M&S used U.K. suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland. That’s why they struggled to supply over Brexit . They now will source more in the countries of sale. Again a loss to U.K. producers. I don't know what you're on about, food only? Their main clothing suppliers from their website are in order China, Cambodia, Vietnam, India, Turkey, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Ridiculous. Stop deflecting Chris I worked with M&S for years so know their clothing development well. They started nearer to home and then realised they had to go cheaper to compete . Food wise their shops are supplied by a lot of U.K. manufacturers . So Direct Brexit costs so far £47m . If the goods were shipped from China to France or China to Ireland they are not affected by Brexit! Clearly stated as a result of Brexit £47m so far!! Just for clarity ! Works out at 5% of international sales and rising. Smooth trade . Seamless borders. Lying twat Boris is the reality. I do beg your pardon for not reading your mind and knowing that you were rambling on about food only. Silly me. Haven't changed my view. It's a badly run business and hardly surprising they are tripping up now as they have routinely done over the years regardless of brexit. For me, in a better run business that exports, business has never been better. "And so speaks a captain of industry 
And I do of course forgive you, so no need to beg for a pardon !
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As for any other side step questions please I’m not answering just explain £47m additional costs due to Brexit! That was my point and no one seems to be able to answer why this has occurred with such a great deal sorted and pulled out of the big lying oven!! Teething at 5% of sales (not costs) wow . Those are some teeth!! . However the costs to which you refer may not necessary be permanent or steps can be taken to mitigate them. They are only mentioned at the end of a long and detailed report which discusses historical performance and the strategy for the future. I cannot see any shareholder being too concerned about a few extra costs due to Brexit . That is history and nothing can be done about it. The key issue is whether the long term strategy will work and can the dividend be restored. Fingers crossed. It will be long climb to reach the £7 a share which Marks and Spencer were in 2007 .. So 5% of full year sales after a third of the year is not an issue. Really??? Full year could be double figures. M&S have a broad range of business interests and they felt the need to highlight it! They will survive but smaller less adaptable companies will be hurting . EY commenting confirms there will be ongoing costs that won’t go away. To recoup losses selling prices will rise. remainers claiming price rises is nothing new been going on for yrs but to be honest I can’t t remember a year when prices haven’t gone up it’s called inflation thank god for Aldi and lidle lol" The do and usually linked to RPI or Gate prices but costs equal to over 5% on sales will be a lot higher on the shelves . It’s also unnecessary costs we have self inflicted on shoppers . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M&S should return to its core roots. Especially in this day and age, it may actually help them in the long term, especially with a lower high street presence if that's how they are going. M and S has been shockingly badly run, its laughable to suggest there are any true Brexit related costs when it launched in France and then abandoned the stores years before Brexit. The way forward for M and S has always been - regardless of Brexit - to focus on using UK suppliers only, their core customers would love that. EY know how costs are apportioned so don’t talk rubbish they are clearly shown and defined. M&S used U.K. suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland. That’s why they struggled to supply over Brexit . They now will source more in the countries of sale. Again a loss to U.K. producers. Could you please clarify what you mean by “ M&S used UK suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland”? Which goods is it that you are referring to? M&S moved away from UK suppliers for their clothing division some 20 years ago. China has the largest number of factories supplying M&S, over 300 compared to less than 40 in the UK. Food which is why they couldn’t get supplies out of U.K. Ireland . I know how their clothing supply works thanks " It would help if you could be more specific in your statements. We wouldn’t need to ask for clarification then! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As for any other side step questions please I’m not answering just explain £47m additional costs due to Brexit! That was my point and no one seems to be able to answer why this has occurred with such a great deal sorted and pulled out of the big lying oven!! Teething at 5% of sales (not costs) wow . Those are some teeth!! " . Hello . I would not worry to much about these additional costs . In the short term they can simply be offset against the cost savings of £75 million referred to below . Once we re negotiate the Irish border protocol , many of the issues will disappear in any event . Transformation progress • Food business on track, with positive like-for-like sales and strong volume growth • Acquisition of 50% of Ocado Retail completed and plans for M&S supply progressing well • Improved sales performance in October in Clothing & Home, following a difficult first half • Further action on UK store estate reshaping, with 17 full-line stores closed • Cost savings of c.£75m delivered in the half • Balance sheet strengthened, with £250m bond issue, rights issue and dividend cut Financial performance • Profit before tax & adjusting items down 17.1%, after weak first half Clothing & Home sales • Profit before tax up 51.5% at £153.5m, due to lower net adjusting items in the period compared to prior year • Food like-for-like sales growth 0.9% driven by volume. Gross margin rate slightly down, reflecting investment in trusted value • Clothing & Home like-for-like sales down 5.5%, reflecting first half shape of buy and supply chain issues • Free cash flow before adjusting items of £91.9m affected by timing of working capital and tax payments, partly expected to reverse in the second half • Net debt of £4.13bn, down 3.7% largely due to cash generation over the past year • Interim dividend of 3.9p, as previously indicated Steve Rowe, Chief Executive: “Our transformation plan is now running at a pace and scale not seen before at Marks & Spencer. For the first time we are beginning to see the potential from the far reaching changes we are making. The Food business is outperforming the market. Our deal to create a joint venture with Ocado is complete and plans to transition to the M&S range are on track. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"M&S should return to its core roots. Especially in this day and age, it may actually help them in the long term, especially with a lower high street presence if that's how they are going. M and S has been shockingly badly run, its laughable to suggest there are any true Brexit related costs when it launched in France and then abandoned the stores years before Brexit. The way forward for M and S has always been - regardless of Brexit - to focus on using UK suppliers only, their core customers would love that. EY know how costs are apportioned so don’t talk rubbish they are clearly shown and defined. M&S used U.K. suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland. That’s why they struggled to supply over Brexit . They now will source more in the countries of sale. Again a loss to U.K. producers. Could you please clarify what you mean by “ M&S used UK suppliers in all their continental shops and Ireland”? Which goods is it that you are referring to? M&S moved away from UK suppliers for their clothing division some 20 years ago. China has the largest number of factories supplying M&S, over 300 compared to less than 40 in the UK. Food which is why they couldn’t get supplies out of U.K. Ireland . I know how their clothing supply works thanks It would help if you could be more specific in your statements. We wouldn’t need to ask for clarification then!" Pretty clear but I’ll say it again £47m in Brexit costs so far as stated in the OP and still no Brexiteers saying it’s a good thing. I thought Brexit was easy and companies just need to adapt and me saying it’s costing was bullshit! Blatantly it’s costing. M&S have sophisticated logistics and yet £47m in added costs so far. So when I was told I must be incompetent in business if it’s costing me I would just like to point out clearly I’m not alone. The pain is still there costing millions daily and shipping is still feeling the pain. Just because it’s not on the bbc doesn’t mean it’s not still painful. M&S made a political statement by highlighting Brexit costs. It wasn’t an accident that it’s so prominent in their report. EY played along by backing up the statement. What they are saying is sort this shit out Boris. Boris lied all along. What a surprise. Sad that so many believed his bullshit. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As for any other side step questions please I’m not answering just explain £47m additional costs due to Brexit! That was my point and no one seems to be able to answer why this has occurred with such a great deal sorted and pulled out of the big lying oven!! Teething at 5% of sales (not costs) wow . Those are some teeth!! . Hello . I would not worry to much about these additional costs . In the short term they can simply be offset against the cost savings of £75 million referred to below . Once we re negotiate the Irish border protocol , many of the issues will disappear in any event . Transformation progress • Food business on track, with positive like-for-like sales and strong volume growth • Acquisition of 50% of Ocado Retail completed and plans for M&S supply progressing well • Improved sales performance in October in Clothing & Home, following a difficult first half • Further action on UK store estate reshaping, with 17 full-line stores closed • Cost savings of c.£75m delivered in the half • Balance sheet strengthened, with £250m bond issue, rights issue and dividend cut Financial performance • Profit before tax & adjusting items down 17.1%, after weak first half Clothing & Home sales • Profit before tax up 51.5% at £153.5m, due to lower net adjusting items in the period compared to prior year • Food like-for-like sales growth 0.9% driven by volume. Gross margin rate slightly down, reflecting investment in trusted value • Clothing & Home like-for-like sales down 5.5%, reflecting first half shape of buy and supply chain issues • Free cash flow before adjusting items of £91.9m affected by timing of working capital and tax payments, partly expected to reverse in the second half • Net debt of £4.13bn, down 3.7% largely due to cash generation over the past year • Interim dividend of 3.9p, as previously indicated Steve Rowe, Chief Executive: “Our transformation plan is now running at a pace and scale not seen before at Marks & Spencer. For the first time we are beginning to see the potential from the far reaching changes we are making. The Food business is outperforming the market. Our deal to create a joint venture with Ocado is complete and plans to transition to the M&S range are on track. " Great their turnaround is doing well. Chris says it shit so glad you’re correcting him. But yet again how much better would their numbers be without Brexit? Continental business lost when you extract the figures. Overall group profits before tax would be would be up 33% without Brexit. A figure higher than 5% on export sales lost to Brexit costs. M&S are a U.K. sales business with only 10% of their business abroad. Companies with 100% abroad are losing considerably more money as a percentage of their business. M&S can afford Brexit to a point but they will pass those extra costs on. Feel free to look at the money they used to make before online attacked them. They can’t afford to get any worse. Cutting jobs in stores and increasing online will also help their numbers. You’re confusing their highlighting the impact of Brexit on their international business with their group business. They operate in different units. I’m pleased they are turning around or slowing the decline at least. it’s good for shareholders. Not so great if you’re one of those caught up in store closures. If they had £47m extra in the pot that might have helped protect a few more jobs. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Boris is having a bad day as his incompetence snd lies are revealed. Wonder when the PPE robbery will be exposed by DC. M&S had a bad day too. 5% of their international turnover was spent on additional Brexit costs so far. Total £47m Full year will be a higher percentage. EY accountants noted a lot of other retailers are experiencing similar additional costs. There will be costs to pass on to customers and international stores won’t be supplied so much by U.K. manufacturers. So when posters on here claimed I was talking nonsense and didn’t know how to run a business because I complained of costs, please can you explain how M&S became equally as incompetent with their massive logistics capability? As a footnote 30 additional M&S stores earmarked for closure while their online increases. No problems in the high street or jobs being lost then??? Look at an Ocado warehouse full of robots snd tell me again how they create more jobs than a large retail store. Good, long may it continue. I am and was always sure the clown prince wanted the job, only for the pension. As for M&S despite the fact they have delicious food, i would be more than happy to see them collapse. I would feel bad for the staff though. Why would you be happy for them to collapse? Strange!! " Because they have long usef part of their profits to help fund the evil that is the Tory party. which to me, is very strange and rather suspicious. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Boris is having a bad day as his incompetence snd lies are revealed. Wonder when the PPE robbery will be exposed by DC. M&S had a bad day too. 5% of their international turnover was spent on additional Brexit costs so far. Total £47m Full year will be a higher percentage. EY accountants noted a lot of other retailers are experiencing similar additional costs. There will be costs to pass on to customers and international stores won’t be supplied so much by U.K. manufacturers. So when posters on here claimed I was talking nonsense and didn’t know how to run a business because I complained of costs, please can you explain how M&S became equally as incompetent with their massive logistics capability? As a footnote 30 additional M&S stores earmarked for closure while their online increases. No problems in the high street or jobs being lost then??? Look at an Ocado warehouse full of robots snd tell me again how they create more jobs than a large retail store. Good, long may it continue. I am and was always sure the clown prince wanted the job, only for the pension. As for M&S despite the fact they have delicious food, i would be more than happy to see them collapse. I would feel bad for the staff though. Why would you be happy for them to collapse? Strange!! Because they have long usef part of their profits to help fund the evil that is the Tory party. which to me, is very strange and rather suspicious." Except they don't.! Marks and Spencer do not donate to any political parties. Its in their code of conduct. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Boris is having a bad day as his incompetence snd lies are revealed. Wonder when the PPE robbery will be exposed by DC. M&S had a bad day too. 5% of their international turnover was spent on additional Brexit costs so far. Total £47m Full year will be a higher percentage. EY accountants noted a lot of other retailers are experiencing similar additional costs. There will be costs to pass on to customers and international stores won’t be supplied so much by U.K. manufacturers. So when posters on here claimed I was talking nonsense and didn’t know how to run a business because I complained of costs, please can you explain how M&S became equally as incompetent with their massive logistics capability? As a footnote 30 additional M&S stores earmarked for closure while their online increases. No problems in the high street or jobs being lost then??? Look at an Ocado warehouse full of robots snd tell me again how they create more jobs than a large retail store. Good, long may it continue. I am and was always sure the clown prince wanted the job, only for the pension. As for M&S despite the fact they have delicious food, i would be more than happy to see them collapse. I would feel bad for the staff though. Why would you be happy for them to collapse? Strange!! Because they have long usef part of their profits to help fund the evil that is the Tory party. which to me, is very strange and rather suspicious." Thats incorrect, they don't fund any political party. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Boris is having a bad day as his incompetence snd lies are revealed. Wonder when the PPE robbery will be exposed by DC. M&S had a bad day too. 5% of their international turnover was spent on additional Brexit costs so far. Total £47m Full year will be a higher percentage. EY accountants noted a lot of other retailers are experiencing similar additional costs. There will be costs to pass on to customers and international stores won’t be supplied so much by U.K. manufacturers. So when posters on here claimed I was talking nonsense and didn’t know how to run a business because I complained of costs, please can you explain how M&S became equally as incompetent with their massive logistics capability? As a footnote 30 additional M&S stores earmarked for closure while their online increases. No problems in the high street or jobs being lost then??? Look at an Ocado warehouse full of robots snd tell me again how they create more jobs than a large retail store. Good, long may it continue. I am and was always sure the clown prince wanted the job, only for the pension. As for M&S despite the fact they have delicious food, i would be more than happy to see them collapse. I would feel bad for the staff though. Why would you be happy for them to collapse? Strange!! Because they have long usef part of their profits to help fund the evil that is the Tory party. which to me, is very strange and rather suspicious. Except they don't.! Marks and Spencer do not donate to any political parties. Its in their code of conduct. " Maybe they dont now? but they have previously, and thats enough for me. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Boris is having a bad day as his incompetence snd lies are revealed. Wonder when the PPE robbery will be exposed by DC. M&S had a bad day too. 5% of their international turnover was spent on additional Brexit costs so far. Total £47m Full year will be a higher percentage. EY accountants noted a lot of other retailers are experiencing similar additional costs. There will be costs to pass on to customers and international stores won’t be supplied so much by U.K. manufacturers. So when posters on here claimed I was talking nonsense and didn’t know how to run a business because I complained of costs, please can you explain how M&S became equally as incompetent with their massive logistics capability? As a footnote 30 additional M&S stores earmarked for closure while their online increases. No problems in the high street or jobs being lost then??? Look at an Ocado warehouse full of robots snd tell me again how they create more jobs than a large retail store. Good, long may it continue. I am and was always sure the clown prince wanted the job, only for the pension. As for M&S despite the fact they have delicious food, i would be more than happy to see them collapse. I would feel bad for the staff though. Why would you be happy for them to collapse? Strange!! Because they have long usef part of their profits to help fund the evil that is the Tory party. which to me, is very strange and rather suspicious. Except they don't.! Marks and Spencer do not donate to any political parties. Its in their code of conduct. Maybe they dont now? but they have previously, and thats enough for me." They used to fund a drinks reception at each of the political party's annual conference. Maybe you'd like to provide evidence that M and S have funded the Conservative Party? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Boris is having a bad day as his incompetence snd lies are revealed. Wonder when the PPE robbery will be exposed by DC. M&S had a bad day too. 5% of their international turnover was spent on additional Brexit costs so far. Total £47m Full year will be a higher percentage. EY accountants noted a lot of other retailers are experiencing similar additional costs. There will be costs to pass on to customers and international stores won’t be supplied so much by U.K. manufacturers. So when posters on here claimed I was talking nonsense and didn’t know how to run a business because I complained of costs, please can you explain how M&S became equally as incompetent with their massive logistics capability? As a footnote 30 additional M&S stores earmarked for closure while their online increases. No problems in the high street or jobs being lost then??? Look at an Ocado warehouse full of robots snd tell me again how they create more jobs than a large retail store. Good, long may it continue. I am and was always sure the clown prince wanted the job, only for the pension. As for M&S despite the fact they have delicious food, i would be more than happy to see them collapse. I would feel bad for the staff though. Why would you be happy for them to collapse? Strange!! Because they have long usef part of their profits to help fund the evil that is the Tory party. which to me, is very strange and rather suspicious. Except they don't.! Marks and Spencer do not donate to any political parties. Its in their code of conduct. Maybe they dont now? but they have previously, and thats enough for me. They used to fund a drinks reception at each of the political party's annual conference. Maybe you'd like to provide evidence that M and S have funded the Conservative Party? " Just google it. we cant share web links here, so how donyou propose i do that? The first result i got with a quick online check shows 40000k in 1998. Some may say oh thats years ago. i couldnt care less. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" M&S made a political statement by highlighting Brexit costs. It wasn’t an accident that it’s so prominent in their report. EY played along by backing up the statement. What they are saying is sort this shit out Boris. Boris lied all along. What a surprise. Sad that so many believed his bullshit. " Did M&S make a political statement or did they do what they do ( and every other company does) every year in their annual report in highlighting one off/ exceptional items in order that shareholders, analysts etc can get a proper handle on the numbers? EY, “didn’t play along”, they simply reported the numbers that M&S produced, although I’m sure they subjected the numbers to vigorous audit, after all £48 million is a huge number! It’s not quite as huge however as the $4 billion of undisclosed debts that they missed regarding a company called NMC Health, whose board included former members of EY. You may also care to look up Wirecard and Kaloti Jewellery where their audits/conduct have fallen short. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Boris is having a bad day as his incompetence snd lies are revealed. Wonder when the PPE robbery will be exposed by DC. M&S had a bad day too. 5% of their international turnover was spent on additional Brexit costs so far. Total £47m Full year will be a higher percentage. EY accountants noted a lot of other retailers are experiencing similar additional costs. There will be costs to pass on to customers and international stores won’t be supplied so much by U.K. manufacturers. So when posters on here claimed I was talking nonsense and didn’t know how to run a business because I complained of costs, please can you explain how M&S became equally as incompetent with their massive logistics capability? As a footnote 30 additional M&S stores earmarked for closure while their online increases. No problems in the high street or jobs being lost then??? Look at an Ocado warehouse full of robots snd tell me again how they create more jobs than a large retail store. Good, long may it continue. I am and was always sure the clown prince wanted the job, only for the pension. As for M&S despite the fact they have delicious food, i would be more than happy to see them collapse. I would feel bad for the staff though. Why would you be happy for them to collapse? Strange!! Because they have long usef part of their profits to help fund the evil that is the Tory party. which to me, is very strange and rather suspicious. Except they don't.! Marks and Spencer do not donate to any political parties. Its in their code of conduct. Maybe they dont now? but they have previously, and thats enough for me. They used to fund a drinks reception at each of the political party's annual conference. Maybe you'd like to provide evidence that M and S have funded the Conservative Party? Just google it. we cant share web links here, so how donyou propose i do that? The first result i got with a quick online check shows 40000k in 1998. Some may say oh thats years ago. i couldnt care less." . Maybe you should have reviewed the statutory accounts and the directors reports . You would then be aware that Marks and Spencer do not make donations to political parties. It looks like you are hitting the bottom of the barrel if you quote a donation that was made 23 years ago. Most people would rely on the disclosures in the statutory accounts. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Boris is having a bad day as his incompetence snd lies are revealed. Wonder when the PPE robbery will be exposed by DC. M&S had a bad day too. 5% of their international turnover was spent on additional Brexit costs so far. Total £47m Full year will be a higher percentage. EY accountants noted a lot of other retailers are experiencing similar additional costs. There will be costs to pass on to customers and international stores won’t be supplied so much by U.K. manufacturers. So when posters on here claimed I was talking nonsense and didn’t know how to run a business because I complained of costs, please can you explain how M&S became equally as incompetent with their massive logistics capability? As a footnote 30 additional M&S stores earmarked for closure while their online increases. No problems in the high street or jobs being lost then??? Look at an Ocado warehouse full of robots snd tell me again how they create more jobs than a large retail store. Good, long may it continue. I am and was always sure the clown prince wanted the job, only for the pension. As for M&S despite the fact they have delicious food, i would be more than happy to see them collapse. I would feel bad for the staff though. Why would you be happy for them to collapse? Strange!! Because they have long usef part of their profits to help fund the evil that is the Tory party. which to me, is very strange and rather suspicious. Except they don't.! Marks and Spencer do not donate to any political parties. Its in their code of conduct. Maybe they dont now? but they have previously, and thats enough for me. They used to fund a drinks reception at each of the political party's annual conference. Maybe you'd like to provide evidence that M and S have funded the Conservative Party? Just google it. we cant share web links here, so how donyou propose i do that? The first result i got with a quick online check shows 40000k in 1998. Some may say oh thats years ago. i couldnt care less.. Maybe you should have reviewed the statutory accounts and the directors reports . You would then be aware that Marks and Spencer do not make donations to political parties. It looks like you are hitting the bottom of the barrel if you quote a donation that was made 23 years ago. Most people would rely on the disclosures in the statutory accounts. " Once a Tory always a Tory. I do my best not to give them any custom. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So Boris is having a bad day as his incompetence snd lies are revealed. Wonder when the PPE robbery will be exposed by DC. M&S had a bad day too. 5% of their international turnover was spent on additional Brexit costs so far. Total £47m Full year will be a higher percentage. EY accountants noted a lot of other retailers are experiencing similar additional costs. There will be costs to pass on to customers and international stores won’t be supplied so much by U.K. manufacturers. So when posters on here claimed I was talking nonsense and didn’t know how to run a business because I complained of costs, please can you explain how M&S became equally as incompetent with their massive logistics capability? As a footnote 30 additional M&S stores earmarked for closure while their online increases. No problems in the high street or jobs being lost then??? Look at an Ocado warehouse full of robots snd tell me again how they create more jobs than a large retail store. Good, long may it continue. I am and was always sure the clown prince wanted the job, only for the pension. As for M&S despite the fact they have delicious food, i would be more than happy to see them collapse. I would feel bad for the staff though. Why would you be happy for them to collapse? Strange!! Because they have long usef part of their profits to help fund the evil that is the Tory party. which to me, is very strange and rather suspicious. Except they don't.! Marks and Spencer do not donate to any political parties. Its in their code of conduct. Maybe they dont now? but they have previously, and thats enough for me. They used to fund a drinks reception at each of the political party's annual conference. Maybe you'd like to provide evidence that M and S have funded the Conservative Party? Just google it. we cant share web links here, so how donyou propose i do that? The first result i got with a quick online check shows 40000k in 1998. Some may say oh thats years ago. i couldnt care less.. Maybe you should have reviewed the statutory accounts and the directors reports . You would then be aware that Marks and Spencer do not make donations to political parties. It looks like you are hitting the bottom of the barrel if you quote a donation that was made 23 years ago. Most people would rely on the disclosures in the statutory accounts. Once a Tory always a Tory. I do my best not to give them any custom. " Thats your perogative. Lets just hope there isn't anything more to that decision. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" M&S made a political statement by highlighting Brexit costs. It wasn’t an accident that it’s so prominent in their report. EY played along by backing up the statement. What they are saying is sort this shit out Boris. Boris lied all along. What a surprise. Sad that so many believed his bullshit. Did M&S make a political statement or did they do what they do ( and every other company does) every year in their annual report in highlighting one off/ exceptional items in order that shareholders, analysts etc can get a proper handle on the numbers? EY, “didn’t play along”, they simply reported the numbers that M&S produced, although I’m sure they subjected the numbers to vigorous audit, after all £48 million is a huge number! It’s not quite as huge however as the $4 billion of undisclosed debts that they missed regarding a company called NMC Health, whose board included former members of EY. You may also care to look up Wirecard and Kaloti Jewellery where their audits/conduct have fallen short. " Erm did it say one off?? It’s reported an exceptional increase and specifically referenced Ireland as sales were lost so the number was potentially bigger. EY commented about other companies reporting similar expensive costs was my point. Why would an auditor say something without trying to make a point. They report numbers for their client public ally and usually back away. I’m not a fan of the big four they are thieving bastards. Yes I agree keeping quiet on the £4 billion was obscene . Carillon is another example of major corrupt back scratching . They should be broken up and MP s should not be allowed consultancies or jobs. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" M&S made a political statement by highlighting Brexit costs. It wasn’t an accident that it’s so prominent in their report. EY played along by backing up the statement. What they are saying is sort this shit out Boris. Boris lied all along. What a surprise. Sad that so many believed his bullshit. Did M&S make a political statement or did they do what they do ( and every other company does) every year in their annual report in highlighting one off/ exceptional items in order that shareholders, analysts etc can get a proper handle on the numbers? EY, “didn’t play along”, they simply reported the numbers that M&S produced, although I’m sure they subjected the numbers to vigorous audit, after all £48 million is a huge number! It’s not quite as huge however as the $4 billion of undisclosed debts that they missed regarding a company called NMC Health, whose board included former members of EY. You may also care to look up Wirecard and Kaloti Jewellery where their audits/conduct have fallen short. Erm did it say one off?? It’s reported an exceptional increase and specifically referenced Ireland as sales were lost so the number was potentially bigger. EY commented about other companies reporting similar expensive costs was my point. Why would an auditor say something without trying to make a point. They report numbers for their client public ally and usually back away. I’m not a fan of the big four they are thieving bastards. Yes I agree keeping quiet on the £4 billion was obscene . Carillon is another example of major corrupt back scratching . They should be broken up and MP s should not be allowed consultancies or jobs. " Having now read the accounts, the figure of £47 million is the total expected costs of Brexit, not an actual cost in the years accounts. The costs of Brexit in the accounts to 3 April 2021 are ESTIMATED at being £16 million, so I would imagine that would have been nothing more than a red tick exercise for EY. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" M&S made a political statement by highlighting Brexit costs. It wasn’t an accident that it’s so prominent in their report. EY played along by backing up the statement. What they are saying is sort this shit out Boris. Boris lied all along. What a surprise. Sad that so many believed his bullshit. Did M&S make a political statement or did they do what they do ( and every other company does) every year in their annual report in highlighting one off/ exceptional items in order that shareholders, analysts etc can get a proper handle on the numbers? EY, “didn’t play along”, they simply reported the numbers that M&S produced, although I’m sure they subjected the numbers to vigorous audit, after all £48 million is a huge number! It’s not quite as huge however as the $4 billion of undisclosed debts that they missed regarding a company called NMC Health, whose board included former members of EY. You may also care to look up Wirecard and Kaloti Jewellery where their audits/conduct have fallen short. Erm did it say one off?? It’s reported an exceptional increase and specifically referenced Ireland as sales were lost so the number was potentially bigger. EY commented about other companies reporting similar expensive costs was my point. Why would an auditor say something without trying to make a point. They report numbers for their client public ally and usually back away. I’m not a fan of the big four they are thieving bastards. Yes I agree keeping quiet on the £4 billion was obscene . Carillon is another example of major corrupt back scratching . They should be broken up and MP s should not be allowed consultancies or jobs. Having now read the accounts, the figure of £47 million is the total expected costs of Brexit, not an actual cost in the years accounts. The costs of Brexit in the accounts to 3 April 2021 are ESTIMATED at being £16 million, so I would imagine that would have been nothing more than a red tick exercise for EY." As a percentage of their international sales what is that figure. I’ve only read the published report not the accounts. If the number of £16m continues the number of £64m would be the annual cost but some costs are down to not knowing the systems introduced at the last moment. We incurred heavy costs due to that juicy titbit! . Do the accounts also include lost sales or just cost?? Genuine question, as I’m curious to know what the impact is on their international sales. . With total sales just shy of a Billion, direct costs of £47m then adding the lost sales could in theory end up with a total 10% hit! I’m not claiming that as accurate just a discussion point. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" M&S made a political statement by highlighting Brexit costs. It wasn’t an accident that it’s so prominent in their report. EY played along by backing up the statement. What they are saying is sort this shit out Boris. Boris lied all along. What a surprise. Sad that so many believed his bullshit. Did M&S make a political statement or did they do what they do ( and every other company does) every year in their annual report in highlighting one off/ exceptional items in order that shareholders, analysts etc can get a proper handle on the numbers? EY, “didn’t play along”, they simply reported the numbers that M&S produced, although I’m sure they subjected the numbers to vigorous audit, after all £48 million is a huge number! It’s not quite as huge however as the $4 billion of undisclosed debts that they missed regarding a company called NMC Health, whose board included former members of EY. You may also care to look up Wirecard and Kaloti Jewellery where their audits/conduct have fallen short. Erm did it say one off?? It’s reported an exceptional increase and specifically referenced Ireland as sales were lost so the number was potentially bigger. EY commented about other companies reporting similar expensive costs was my point. Why would an auditor say something without trying to make a point. They report numbers for their client public ally and usually back away. I’m not a fan of the big four they are thieving bastards. Yes I agree keeping quiet on the £4 billion was obscene . Carillon is another example of major corrupt back scratching . They should be broken up and MP s should not be allowed consultancies or jobs. Having now read the accounts, the figure of £47 million is the total expected costs of Brexit, not an actual cost in the years accounts. The costs of Brexit in the accounts to 3 April 2021 are ESTIMATED at being £16 million, so I would imagine that would have been nothing more than a red tick exercise for EY. As a percentage of their international sales what is that figure. I’ve only read the published report not the accounts. If the number of £16m continues the number of £64m would be the annual cost but some costs are down to not knowing the systems introduced at the last moment. We incurred heavy costs due to that juicy titbit! . Do the accounts also include lost sales or just cost?? Genuine question, as I’m curious to know what the impact is on their international sales. . With total sales just shy of a Billion, direct costs of £47m then adding the lost sales could in theory end up with a total 10% hit! I’m not claiming that as accurate just a discussion point. " https://corporate.marksandspencer.com/media/press-releases/5ff7017fc6fe1bc26cb21d12/marks-and-spencer-group-plc-full-year-results-for-52-weeks-ended-3-april-2021 If this is what you’ve read, then the answers to the questions you ask are there. Of the £16m Brexit costs, £10m relates to UK food and £6m to International. International sales were £789m so I expect you can do the maths. I’ve not seen any lost sales due to Brexit being quantified in the report, only a reference to stores being ‘adversely impacted by rolling Covid lockdowns and restrictions’ | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" M&S made a political statement by highlighting Brexit costs. It wasn’t an accident that it’s so prominent in their report. EY played along by backing up the statement. What they are saying is sort this shit out Boris. Boris lied all along. What a surprise. Sad that so many believed his bullshit. Did M&S make a political statement or did they do what they do ( and every other company does) every year in their annual report in highlighting one off/ exceptional items in order that shareholders, analysts etc can get a proper handle on the numbers? EY, “didn’t play along”, they simply reported the numbers that M&S produced, although I’m sure they subjected the numbers to vigorous audit, after all £48 million is a huge number! It’s not quite as huge however as the $4 billion of undisclosed debts that they missed regarding a company called NMC Health, whose board included former members of EY. You may also care to look up Wirecard and Kaloti Jewellery where their audits/conduct have fallen short. Erm did it say one off?? It’s reported an exceptional increase and specifically referenced Ireland as sales were lost so the number was potentially bigger. EY commented about other companies reporting similar expensive costs was my point. Why would an auditor say something without trying to make a point. They report numbers for their client public ally and usually back away. I’m not a fan of the big four they are thieving bastards. Yes I agree keeping quiet on the £4 billion was obscene . Carillon is another example of major corrupt back scratching . They should be broken up and MP s should not be allowed consultancies or jobs. Having now read the accounts, the figure of £47 million is the total expected costs of Brexit, not an actual cost in the years accounts. The costs of Brexit in the accounts to 3 April 2021 are ESTIMATED at being £16 million, so I would imagine that would have been nothing more than a red tick exercise for EY. As a percentage of their international sales what is that figure. I’ve only read the published report not the accounts. If the number of £16m continues the number of £64m would be the annual cost but some costs are down to not knowing the systems introduced at the last moment. We incurred heavy costs due to that juicy titbit! . Do the accounts also include lost sales or just cost?? Genuine question, as I’m curious to know what the impact is on their international sales. . With total sales just shy of a Billion, direct costs of £47m then adding the lost sales could in theory end up with a total 10% hit! I’m not claiming that as accurate just a discussion point. https://corporate.marksandspencer.com/media/press-releases/5ff7017fc6fe1bc26cb21d12/marks-and-spencer-group-plc-full-year-results-for-52-weeks-ended-3-april-2021 If this is what you’ve read, then the answers to the questions you ask are there. Of the £16m Brexit costs, £10m relates to UK food and £6m to International. International sales were £789m so I expect you can do the maths. I’ve not seen any lost sales due to Brexit being quantified in the report, only a reference to stores being ‘adversely impacted by rolling Covid lockdowns and restrictions’ " Thanks for that .Like I said in the earlier post I read the headline not the report. So the U.K. food sales were impacted which suggest export issues and specifically Northern Ireland which had major supply problems. Empty shelves overnight were not caused by Covid. . Interesting how much this is impacting in total and yet we were told seam free trade. I would also keep an eye on logistics costs and related issues as they are starting to bite now the hauliers can see the real costs. They will be passed on. Still maybe a Carrefour or such like could pick up a struggling bargain. I realise the other headline of £3.5 Billion in tariffs is admin related but that’s a huge hole in cash snd a great deal will be lost. Tell me again how Brexit is good for the Uk? Still not seeing anything good. Trade deals so far same or worse for balance of payments . India one will be interesting. The Indians have taken loads of well laid tech jobs off the U.K. ex pats there. Inviting them to the U.K. maybe will be good but it’s a risky strategy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Thanks for that .Like I said in the earlier post I read the headline not the report. So the U.K. food sales were impacted which suggest export issues and specifically Northern Ireland which had major supply problems. Empty shelves overnight were not caused by Covid. . Interesting how much this is impacting in total and yet we were told seam free trade. I would also keep an eye on logistics costs and related issues as they are starting to bite now the hauliers can see the real costs. They will be passed on. Still maybe a Carrefour or such like could pick up a struggling bargain. I realise the other headline of £3.5 Billion in tariffs is admin related but that’s a huge hole in cash snd a great deal will be lost. Tell me again how Brexit is good for the Uk? Still not seeing anything good. Trade deals so far same or worse for balance of payments . India one will be interesting. The Indians have taken loads of well laid tech jobs off the U.K. ex pats there. Inviting them to the U.K. maybe will be good but it’s a risky strategy. " I’m not sure if you’re asking a rhetorical question in “Tell me again how Brexit is good for the UK” or if you’re asking me that under the assumption I’m a Brexiteer? If it’s the latter, I’m not and never have been. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" M&S made a political statement by highlighting Brexit costs. It wasn’t an accident that it’s so prominent in their report. EY played along by backing up the statement. What they are saying is sort this shit out Boris. Boris lied all along. What a surprise. Sad that so many believed his bullshit. Did M&S make a political statement or did they do what they do ( and every other company does) every year in their annual report in highlighting one off/ exceptional items in order that shareholders, analysts etc can get a proper handle on the numbers? EY, “didn’t play along”, they simply reported the numbers that M&S produced, although I’m sure they subjected the numbers to vigorous audit, after all £48 million is a huge number! It’s not quite as huge however as the $4 billion of undisclosed debts that they missed regarding a company called NMC Health, whose board included former members of EY. You may also care to look up Wirecard and Kaloti Jewellery where their audits/conduct have fallen short. Erm did it say one off?? It’s reported an exceptional increase and specifically referenced Ireland as sales were lost so the number was potentially bigger. EY commented about other companies reporting similar expensive costs was my point. Why would an auditor say something without trying to make a point. They report numbers for their client public ally and usually back away. I’m not a fan of the big four they are thieving bastards. Yes I agree keeping quiet on the £4 billion was obscene . Carillon is another example of major corrupt back scratching . They should be broken up and MP s should not be allowed consultancies or jobs. Having now read the accounts, the figure of £47 million is the total expected costs of Brexit, not an actual cost in the years accounts. The costs of Brexit in the accounts to 3 April 2021 are ESTIMATED at being £16 million, so I would imagine that would have been nothing more than a red tick exercise for EY. As a percentage of their international sales what is that figure. I’ve only read the published report not the accounts. If the number of £16m continues the number of £64m would be the annual cost but some costs are down to not knowing the systems introduced at the last moment. We incurred heavy costs due to that juicy titbit! . Do the accounts also include lost sales or just cost?? Genuine question, as I’m curious to know what the impact is on their international sales. . With total sales just shy of a Billion, direct costs of £47m then adding the lost sales could in theory end up with a total 10% hit! I’m not claiming that as accurate just a discussion point. https://corporate.marksandspencer.com/media/press-releases/5ff7017fc6fe1bc26cb21d12/marks-and-spencer-group-plc-full-year-results-for-52-weeks-ended-3-april-2021 If this is what you’ve read, then the answers to the questions you ask are there. Of the £16m Brexit costs, £10m relates to UK food and £6m to International. International sales were £789m so I expect you can do the maths. I’ve not seen any lost sales due to Brexit being quantified in the report, only a reference to stores being ‘adversely impacted by rolling Covid lockdowns and restrictions’ Thanks for that .Like I said in the earlier post I read the headline not the report. So the U.K. food sales were impacted which suggest export issues and specifically Northern Ireland which had major supply problems. Empty shelves overnight were not caused by Covid. . Interesting how much this is impacting in total and yet we were told seam free trade. I would also keep an eye on logistics costs and related issues as they are starting to bite now the hauliers can see the real costs. They will be passed on. Still maybe a Carrefour or such like could pick up a struggling bargain. I realise the other headline of £3.5 Billion in tariffs is admin related but that’s a huge hole in cash snd a great deal will be lost. Tell me again how Brexit is good for the Uk? Still not seeing anything good. Trade deals so far same or worse for balance of payments . India one will be interesting. The Indians have taken loads of well laid tech jobs off the U.K. ex pats there. Inviting them to the U.K. maybe will be good but it’s a risky strategy. " Don’t really see why you keep hammering on about M & S tbh. It’s a terribly badly run business. It was a basket case before Brexit. Have you got any examples of properly run businesses that have had any significant issues? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Thanks for that .Like I said in the earlier post I read the headline not the report. So the U.K. food sales were impacted which suggest export issues and specifically Northern Ireland which had major supply problems. Empty shelves overnight were not caused by Covid. . Interesting how much this is impacting in total and yet we were told seam free trade. I would also keep an eye on logistics costs and related issues as they are starting to bite now the hauliers can see the real costs. They will be passed on. Still maybe a Carrefour or such like could pick up a struggling bargain. I realise the other headline of £3.5 Billion in tariffs is admin related but that’s a huge hole in cash snd a great deal will be lost. Tell me again how Brexit is good for the Uk? Still not seeing anything good. Trade deals so far same or worse for balance of payments . India one will be interesting. The Indians have taken loads of well laid tech jobs off the U.K. ex pats there. Inviting them to the U.K. maybe will be good but it’s a risky strategy. I’m not sure if you’re asking a rhetorical question in “Tell me again how Brexit is good for the UK” or if you’re asking me that under the assumption I’m a Brexiteer? If it’s the latter, I’m not and never have been." Sorry no not accusing you at all. It was Rhetorical. I just find it all sad and so many people have been mislead. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" M&S made a political statement by highlighting Brexit costs. It wasn’t an accident that it’s so prominent in their report. EY played along by backing up the statement. What they are saying is sort this shit out Boris. Boris lied all along. What a surprise. Sad that so many believed his bullshit. Did M&S make a political statement or did they do what they do ( and every other company does) every year in their annual report in highlighting one off/ exceptional items in order that shareholders, analysts etc can get a proper handle on the numbers? EY, “didn’t play along”, they simply reported the numbers that M&S produced, although I’m sure they subjected the numbers to vigorous audit, after all £48 million is a huge number! It’s not quite as huge however as the $4 billion of undisclosed debts that they missed regarding a company called NMC Health, whose board included former members of EY. You may also care to look up Wirecard and Kaloti Jewellery where their audits/conduct have fallen short. Erm did it say one off?? It’s reported an exceptional increase and specifically referenced Ireland as sales were lost so the number was potentially bigger. EY commented about other companies reporting similar expensive costs was my point. Why would an auditor say something without trying to make a point. They report numbers for their client public ally and usually back away. I’m not a fan of the big four they are thieving bastards. Yes I agree keeping quiet on the £4 billion was obscene . Carillon is another example of major corrupt back scratching . They should be broken up and MP s should not be allowed consultancies or jobs. Having now read the accounts, the figure of £47 million is the total expected costs of Brexit, not an actual cost in the years accounts. The costs of Brexit in the accounts to 3 April 2021 are ESTIMATED at being £16 million, so I would imagine that would have been nothing more than a red tick exercise for EY. As a percentage of their international sales what is that figure. I’ve only read the published report not the accounts. If the number of £16m continues the number of £64m would be the annual cost but some costs are down to not knowing the systems introduced at the last moment. We incurred heavy costs due to that juicy titbit! . Do the accounts also include lost sales or just cost?? Genuine question, as I’m curious to know what the impact is on their international sales. . With total sales just shy of a Billion, direct costs of £47m then adding the lost sales could in theory end up with a total 10% hit! I’m not claiming that as accurate just a discussion point. https://corporate.marksandspencer.com/media/press-releases/5ff7017fc6fe1bc26cb21d12/marks-and-spencer-group-plc-full-year-results-for-52-weeks-ended-3-april-2021 If this is what you’ve read, then the answers to the questions you ask are there. Of the £16m Brexit costs, £10m relates to UK food and £6m to International. International sales were £789m so I expect you can do the maths. I’ve not seen any lost sales due to Brexit being quantified in the report, only a reference to stores being ‘adversely impacted by rolling Covid lockdowns and restrictions’ Thanks for that .Like I said in the earlier post I read the headline not the report. So the U.K. food sales were impacted which suggest export issues and specifically Northern Ireland which had major supply problems. Empty shelves overnight were not caused by Covid. . Interesting how much this is impacting in total and yet we were told seam free trade. I would also keep an eye on logistics costs and related issues as they are starting to bite now the hauliers can see the real costs. They will be passed on. Still maybe a Carrefour or such like could pick up a struggling bargain. I realise the other headline of £3.5 Billion in tariffs is admin related but that’s a huge hole in cash snd a great deal will be lost. Tell me again how Brexit is good for the Uk? Still not seeing anything good. Trade deals so far same or worse for balance of payments . India one will be interesting. The Indians have taken loads of well laid tech jobs off the U.K. ex pats there. Inviting them to the U.K. maybe will be good but it’s a risky strategy. Don’t really see why you keep hammering on about M & S tbh. It’s a terribly badly run business. It was a basket case before Brexit. Have you got any examples of properly run businesses that have had any significant issues?" Daniel Lambert Wines as I've posted several times. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" M&S made a political statement by highlighting Brexit costs. It wasn’t an accident that it’s so prominent in their report. EY played along by backing up the statement. What they are saying is sort this shit out Boris. Boris lied all along. What a surprise. Sad that so many believed his bullshit. Did M&S make a political statement or did they do what they do ( and every other company does) every year in their annual report in highlighting one off/ exceptional items in order that shareholders, analysts etc can get a proper handle on the numbers? EY, “didn’t play along”, they simply reported the numbers that M&S produced, although I’m sure they subjected the numbers to vigorous audit, after all £48 million is a huge number! It’s not quite as huge however as the $4 billion of undisclosed debts that they missed regarding a company called NMC Health, whose board included former members of EY. You may also care to look up Wirecard and Kaloti Jewellery where their audits/conduct have fallen short. Erm did it say one off?? It’s reported an exceptional increase and specifically referenced Ireland as sales were lost so the number was potentially bigger. EY commented about other companies reporting similar expensive costs was my point. Why would an auditor say something without trying to make a point. They report numbers for their client public ally and usually back away. I’m not a fan of the big four they are thieving bastards. Yes I agree keeping quiet on the £4 billion was obscene . Carillon is another example of major corrupt back scratching . They should be broken up and MP s should not be allowed consultancies or jobs. Having now read the accounts, the figure of £47 million is the total expected costs of Brexit, not an actual cost in the years accounts. The costs of Brexit in the accounts to 3 April 2021 are ESTIMATED at being £16 million, so I would imagine that would have been nothing more than a red tick exercise for EY. As a percentage of their international sales what is that figure. I’ve only read the published report not the accounts. If the number of £16m continues the number of £64m would be the annual cost but some costs are down to not knowing the systems introduced at the last moment. We incurred heavy costs due to that juicy titbit! . Do the accounts also include lost sales or just cost?? Genuine question, as I’m curious to know what the impact is on their international sales. . With total sales just shy of a Billion, direct costs of £47m then adding the lost sales could in theory end up with a total 10% hit! I’m not claiming that as accurate just a discussion point. https://corporate.marksandspencer.com/media/press-releases/5ff7017fc6fe1bc26cb21d12/marks-and-spencer-group-plc-full-year-results-for-52-weeks-ended-3-april-2021 If this is what you’ve read, then the answers to the questions you ask are there. Of the £16m Brexit costs, £10m relates to UK food and £6m to International. International sales were £789m so I expect you can do the maths. I’ve not seen any lost sales due to Brexit being quantified in the report, only a reference to stores being ‘adversely impacted by rolling Covid lockdowns and restrictions’ Thanks for that .Like I said in the earlier post I read the headline not the report. So the U.K. food sales were impacted which suggest export issues and specifically Northern Ireland which had major supply problems. Empty shelves overnight were not caused by Covid. . Interesting how much this is impacting in total and yet we were told seam free trade. I would also keep an eye on logistics costs and related issues as they are starting to bite now the hauliers can see the real costs. They will be passed on. Still maybe a Carrefour or such like could pick up a struggling bargain. I realise the other headline of £3.5 Billion in tariffs is admin related but that’s a huge hole in cash snd a great deal will be lost. Tell me again how Brexit is good for the Uk? Still not seeing anything good. Trade deals so far same or worse for balance of payments . India one will be interesting. The Indians have taken loads of well laid tech jobs off the U.K. ex pats there. Inviting them to the U.K. maybe will be good but it’s a risky strategy. Don’t really see why you keep hammering on about M & S tbh. It’s a terribly badly run business. It was a basket case before Brexit. Have you got any examples of properly run businesses that have had any significant issues? Daniel Lambert Wines as I've posted several times. " This is Daniel Lambert who is confused at having to use fumigated pallets, which have been standard for many years? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" M&S made a political statement by highlighting Brexit costs. It wasn’t an accident that it’s so prominent in their report. EY played along by backing up the statement. What they are saying is sort this shit out Boris. Boris lied all along. What a surprise. Sad that so many believed his bullshit. Did M&S make a political statement or did they do what they do ( and every other company does) every year in their annual report in highlighting one off/ exceptional items in order that shareholders, analysts etc can get a proper handle on the numbers? EY, “didn’t play along”, they simply reported the numbers that M&S produced, although I’m sure they subjected the numbers to vigorous audit, after all £48 million is a huge number! It’s not quite as huge however as the $4 billion of undisclosed debts that they missed regarding a company called NMC Health, whose board included former members of EY. You may also care to look up Wirecard and Kaloti Jewellery where their audits/conduct have fallen short. Erm did it say one off?? It’s reported an exceptional increase and specifically referenced Ireland as sales were lost so the number was potentially bigger. EY commented about other companies reporting similar expensive costs was my point. Why would an auditor say something without trying to make a point. They report numbers for their client public ally and usually back away. I’m not a fan of the big four they are thieving bastards. Yes I agree keeping quiet on the £4 billion was obscene . Carillon is another example of major corrupt back scratching . They should be broken up and MP s should not be allowed consultancies or jobs. Having now read the accounts, the figure of £47 million is the total expected costs of Brexit, not an actual cost in the years accounts. The costs of Brexit in the accounts to 3 April 2021 are ESTIMATED at being £16 million, so I would imagine that would have been nothing more than a red tick exercise for EY. As a percentage of their international sales what is that figure. I’ve only read the published report not the accounts. If the number of £16m continues the number of £64m would be the annual cost but some costs are down to not knowing the systems introduced at the last moment. We incurred heavy costs due to that juicy titbit! . Do the accounts also include lost sales or just cost?? Genuine question, as I’m curious to know what the impact is on their international sales. . With total sales just shy of a Billion, direct costs of £47m then adding the lost sales could in theory end up with a total 10% hit! I’m not claiming that as accurate just a discussion point. https://corporate.marksandspencer.com/media/press-releases/5ff7017fc6fe1bc26cb21d12/marks-and-spencer-group-plc-full-year-results-for-52-weeks-ended-3-april-2021 If this is what you’ve read, then the answers to the questions you ask are there. Of the £16m Brexit costs, £10m relates to UK food and £6m to International. International sales were £789m so I expect you can do the maths. I’ve not seen any lost sales due to Brexit being quantified in the report, only a reference to stores being ‘adversely impacted by rolling Covid lockdowns and restrictions’ Thanks for that .Like I said in the earlier post I read the headline not the report. So the U.K. food sales were impacted which suggest export issues and specifically Northern Ireland which had major supply problems. Empty shelves overnight were not caused by Covid. . Interesting how much this is impacting in total and yet we were told seam free trade. I would also keep an eye on logistics costs and related issues as they are starting to bite now the hauliers can see the real costs. They will be passed on. Still maybe a Carrefour or such like could pick up a struggling bargain. I realise the other headline of £3.5 Billion in tariffs is admin related but that’s a huge hole in cash snd a great deal will be lost. Tell me again how Brexit is good for the Uk? Still not seeing anything good. Trade deals so far same or worse for balance of payments . India one will be interesting. The Indians have taken loads of well laid tech jobs off the U.K. ex pats there. Inviting them to the U.K. maybe will be good but it’s a risky strategy. Don’t really see why you keep hammering on about M & S tbh. It’s a terribly badly run business. It was a basket case before Brexit. Have you got any examples of properly run businesses that have had any significant issues?" Unilever is that a badly run company too? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" M&S made a political statement by highlighting Brexit costs. It wasn’t an accident that it’s so prominent in their report. EY played along by backing up the statement. What they are saying is sort this shit out Boris. Boris lied all along. What a surprise. Sad that so many believed his bullshit. Did M&S make a political statement or did they do what they do ( and every other company does) every year in their annual report in highlighting one off/ exceptional items in order that shareholders, analysts etc can get a proper handle on the numbers? EY, “didn’t play along”, they simply reported the numbers that M&S produced, although I’m sure they subjected the numbers to vigorous audit, after all £48 million is a huge number! It’s not quite as huge however as the $4 billion of undisclosed debts that they missed regarding a company called NMC Health, whose board included former members of EY. You may also care to look up Wirecard and Kaloti Jewellery where their audits/conduct have fallen short. Erm did it say one off?? It’s reported an exceptional increase and specifically referenced Ireland as sales were lost so the number was potentially bigger. EY commented about other companies reporting similar expensive costs was my point. Why would an auditor say something without trying to make a point. They report numbers for their client public ally and usually back away. I’m not a fan of the big four they are thieving bastards. Yes I agree keeping quiet on the £4 billion was obscene . Carillon is another example of major corrupt back scratching . They should be broken up and MP s should not be allowed consultancies or jobs. Having now read the accounts, the figure of £47 million is the total expected costs of Brexit, not an actual cost in the years accounts. The costs of Brexit in the accounts to 3 April 2021 are ESTIMATED at being £16 million, so I would imagine that would have been nothing more than a red tick exercise for EY. As a percentage of their international sales what is that figure. I’ve only read the published report not the accounts. If the number of £16m continues the number of £64m would be the annual cost but some costs are down to not knowing the systems introduced at the last moment. We incurred heavy costs due to that juicy titbit! . Do the accounts also include lost sales or just cost?? Genuine question, as I’m curious to know what the impact is on their international sales. . With total sales just shy of a Billion, direct costs of £47m then adding the lost sales could in theory end up with a total 10% hit! I’m not claiming that as accurate just a discussion point. https://corporate.marksandspencer.com/media/press-releases/5ff7017fc6fe1bc26cb21d12/marks-and-spencer-group-plc-full-year-results-for-52-weeks-ended-3-april-2021 If this is what you’ve read, then the answers to the questions you ask are there. Of the £16m Brexit costs, £10m relates to UK food and £6m to International. International sales were £789m so I expect you can do the maths. I’ve not seen any lost sales due to Brexit being quantified in the report, only a reference to stores being ‘adversely impacted by rolling Covid lockdowns and restrictions’ Thanks for that .Like I said in the earlier post I read the headline not the report. So the U.K. food sales were impacted which suggest export issues and specifically Northern Ireland which had major supply problems. Empty shelves overnight were not caused by Covid. . Interesting how much this is impacting in total and yet we were told seam free trade. I would also keep an eye on logistics costs and related issues as they are starting to bite now the hauliers can see the real costs. They will be passed on. Still maybe a Carrefour or such like could pick up a struggling bargain. I realise the other headline of £3.5 Billion in tariffs is admin related but that’s a huge hole in cash snd a great deal will be lost. Tell me again how Brexit is good for the Uk? Still not seeing anything good. Trade deals so far same or worse for balance of payments . India one will be interesting. The Indians have taken loads of well laid tech jobs off the U.K. ex pats there. Inviting them to the U.K. maybe will be good but it’s a risky strategy. Don’t really see why you keep hammering on about M & S tbh. It’s a terribly badly run business. It was a basket case before Brexit. Have you got any examples of properly run businesses that have had any significant issues? Unilever is that a badly run company too? " Yes, from memory they’re the folk that employed that moron young conservative leader who bullied someone into committing suicide. And tons of other more consumer related scandals. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" M&S made a political statement by highlighting Brexit costs. It wasn’t an accident that it’s so prominent in their report. EY played along by backing up the statement. What they are saying is sort this shit out Boris. Boris lied all along. What a surprise. Sad that so many believed his bullshit. Did M&S make a political statement or did they do what they do ( and every other company does) every year in their annual report in highlighting one off/ exceptional items in order that shareholders, analysts etc can get a proper handle on the numbers? EY, “didn’t play along”, they simply reported the numbers that M&S produced, although I’m sure they subjected the numbers to vigorous audit, after all £48 million is a huge number! It’s not quite as huge however as the $4 billion of undisclosed debts that they missed regarding a company called NMC Health, whose board included former members of EY. You may also care to look up Wirecard and Kaloti Jewellery where their audits/conduct have fallen short. Erm did it say one off?? It’s reported an exceptional increase and specifically referenced Ireland as sales were lost so the number was potentially bigger. EY commented about other companies reporting similar expensive costs was my point. Why would an auditor say something without trying to make a point. They report numbers for their client public ally and usually back away. I’m not a fan of the big four they are thieving bastards. Yes I agree keeping quiet on the £4 billion was obscene . Carillon is another example of major corrupt back scratching . They should be broken up and MP s should not be allowed consultancies or jobs. Having now read the accounts, the figure of £47 million is the total expected costs of Brexit, not an actual cost in the years accounts. The costs of Brexit in the accounts to 3 April 2021 are ESTIMATED at being £16 million, so I would imagine that would have been nothing more than a red tick exercise for EY. As a percentage of their international sales what is that figure. I’ve only read the published report not the accounts. If the number of £16m continues the number of £64m would be the annual cost but some costs are down to not knowing the systems introduced at the last moment. We incurred heavy costs due to that juicy titbit! . Do the accounts also include lost sales or just cost?? Genuine question, as I’m curious to know what the impact is on their international sales. . With total sales just shy of a Billion, direct costs of £47m then adding the lost sales could in theory end up with a total 10% hit! I’m not claiming that as accurate just a discussion point. https://corporate.marksandspencer.com/media/press-releases/5ff7017fc6fe1bc26cb21d12/marks-and-spencer-group-plc-full-year-results-for-52-weeks-ended-3-april-2021 If this is what you’ve read, then the answers to the questions you ask are there. Of the £16m Brexit costs, £10m relates to UK food and £6m to International. International sales were £789m so I expect you can do the maths. I’ve not seen any lost sales due to Brexit being quantified in the report, only a reference to stores being ‘adversely impacted by rolling Covid lockdowns and restrictions’ Thanks for that .Like I said in the earlier post I read the headline not the report. So the U.K. food sales were impacted which suggest export issues and specifically Northern Ireland which had major supply problems. Empty shelves overnight were not caused by Covid. . Interesting how much this is impacting in total and yet we were told seam free trade. I would also keep an eye on logistics costs and related issues as they are starting to bite now the hauliers can see the real costs. They will be passed on. Still maybe a Carrefour or such like could pick up a struggling bargain. I realise the other headline of £3.5 Billion in tariffs is admin related but that’s a huge hole in cash snd a great deal will be lost. Tell me again how Brexit is good for the Uk? Still not seeing anything good. Trade deals so far same or worse for balance of payments . India one will be interesting. The Indians have taken loads of well laid tech jobs off the U.K. ex pats there. Inviting them to the U.K. maybe will be good but it’s a risky strategy. Don’t really see why you keep hammering on about M & S tbh. It’s a terribly badly run business. It was a basket case before Brexit. Have you got any examples of properly run businesses that have had any significant issues? Unilever is that a badly run company too? Yes, from memory they’re the folk that employed that moron young conservative leader who bullied someone into committing suicide. And tons of other more consumer related scandals. " So you’ve no valid business point . As expected. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" M&S made a political statement by highlighting Brexit costs. It wasn’t an accident that it’s so prominent in their report. EY played along by backing up the statement. What they are saying is sort this shit out Boris. Boris lied all along. What a surprise. Sad that so many believed his bullshit. Did M&S make a political statement or did they do what they do ( and every other company does) every year in their annual report in highlighting one off/ exceptional items in order that shareholders, analysts etc can get a proper handle on the numbers? EY, “didn’t play along”, they simply reported the numbers that M&S produced, although I’m sure they subjected the numbers to vigorous audit, after all £48 million is a huge number! It’s not quite as huge however as the $4 billion of undisclosed debts that they missed regarding a company called NMC Health, whose board included former members of EY. You may also care to look up Wirecard and Kaloti Jewellery where their audits/conduct have fallen short. Erm did it say one off?? It’s reported an exceptional increase and specifically referenced Ireland as sales were lost so the number was potentially bigger. EY commented about other companies reporting similar expensive costs was my point. Why would an auditor say something without trying to make a point. They report numbers for their client public ally and usually back away. I’m not a fan of the big four they are thieving bastards. Yes I agree keeping quiet on the £4 billion was obscene . Carillon is another example of major corrupt back scratching . They should be broken up and MP s should not be allowed consultancies or jobs. Having now read the accounts, the figure of £47 million is the total expected costs of Brexit, not an actual cost in the years accounts. The costs of Brexit in the accounts to 3 April 2021 are ESTIMATED at being £16 million, so I would imagine that would have been nothing more than a red tick exercise for EY. As a percentage of their international sales what is that figure. I’ve only read the published report not the accounts. If the number of £16m continues the number of £64m would be the annual cost but some costs are down to not knowing the systems introduced at the last moment. We incurred heavy costs due to that juicy titbit! . Do the accounts also include lost sales or just cost?? Genuine question, as I’m curious to know what the impact is on their international sales. . With total sales just shy of a Billion, direct costs of £47m then adding the lost sales could in theory end up with a total 10% hit! I’m not claiming that as accurate just a discussion point. https://corporate.marksandspencer.com/media/press-releases/5ff7017fc6fe1bc26cb21d12/marks-and-spencer-group-plc-full-year-results-for-52-weeks-ended-3-april-2021 If this is what you’ve read, then the answers to the questions you ask are there. Of the £16m Brexit costs, £10m relates to UK food and £6m to International. International sales were £789m so I expect you can do the maths. I’ve not seen any lost sales due to Brexit being quantified in the report, only a reference to stores being ‘adversely impacted by rolling Covid lockdowns and restrictions’ Thanks for that .Like I said in the earlier post I read the headline not the report. So the U.K. food sales were impacted which suggest export issues and specifically Northern Ireland which had major supply problems. Empty shelves overnight were not caused by Covid. . Interesting how much this is impacting in total and yet we were told seam free trade. I would also keep an eye on logistics costs and related issues as they are starting to bite now the hauliers can see the real costs. They will be passed on. Still maybe a Carrefour or such like could pick up a struggling bargain. I realise the other headline of £3.5 Billion in tariffs is admin related but that’s a huge hole in cash snd a great deal will be lost. Tell me again how Brexit is good for the Uk? Still not seeing anything good. Trade deals so far same or worse for balance of payments . India one will be interesting. The Indians have taken loads of well laid tech jobs off the U.K. ex pats there. Inviting them to the U.K. maybe will be good but it’s a risky strategy. Don’t really see why you keep hammering on about M & S tbh. It’s a terribly badly run business. It was a basket case before Brexit. Have you got any examples of properly run businesses that have had any significant issues? Unilever is that a badly run company too? Yes, from memory they’re the folk that employed that moron young conservative leader who bullied someone into committing suicide. And tons of other more consumer related scandals. So you’ve no valid business point . As expected. " Eh? What more do you need? Unilever is a cesspit of corruption, including some of the worst palm oil abuses. “In May 2019, Ethical Consumer viewed an article on the Food and Allied Workers Union website. It was titled 'FAWU Condemns Brutal Force Against Striking Unilever Workers' and dated February 22nd 2019. The article described an event between striking Unilever workers and private security forces in South Africa. A section of it read: "The Food and Allied Workers` Union strongly condemns the unprovoked attack on peacefully striking union members by private security guards at Unilever Pty Ltd`s Indosa plant in Durban on Monday, 18 February 2019. More than 600 FAWU members embarked on a legal strike on 11 February this year in demand of a housing allowance and profit-sharing scheme after the parties have been going back and forth over these issues during negotiations over the past five years. "Private securities calling themselves "S.W.A.T.", who were hired by the company two weeks before the strike, invaded the picketing area last Monday and summarily unleashed a torrent of rubber bullets on innocent workers while they were demonstrating peacefully. "When female members questioned why they were shooting at them, the security guards continued blasting them with pepper spray. "Four of our members were seriously injured and two of them have opened criminal cases against the security guards in question. Workers were brutally shot at when simply attempting to go to their cars parked on premises agreed on between the parties. Trigger-happy securities who clearly has no regard for picketing rules proceeded to shoot paintballs and rubber bullets at our members in an attempt to provoke them.” | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" M&S made a political statement by highlighting Brexit costs. It wasn’t an accident that it’s so prominent in their report. EY played along by backing up the statement. What they are saying is sort this shit out Boris. Boris lied all along. What a surprise. Sad that so many believed his bullshit. Did M&S make a political statement or did they do what they do ( and every other company does) every year in their annual report in highlighting one off/ exceptional items in order that shareholders, analysts etc can get a proper handle on the numbers? EY, “didn’t play along”, they simply reported the numbers that M&S produced, although I’m sure they subjected the numbers to vigorous audit, after all £48 million is a huge number! It’s not quite as huge however as the $4 billion of undisclosed debts that they missed regarding a company called NMC Health, whose board included former members of EY. You may also care to look up Wirecard and Kaloti Jewellery where their audits/conduct have fallen short. Erm did it say one off?? It’s reported an exceptional increase and specifically referenced Ireland as sales were lost so the number was potentially bigger. EY commented about other companies reporting similar expensive costs was my point. Why would an auditor say something without trying to make a point. They report numbers for their client public ally and usually back away. I’m not a fan of the big four they are thieving bastards. Yes I agree keeping quiet on the £4 billion was obscene . Carillon is another example of major corrupt back scratching . They should be broken up and MP s should not be allowed consultancies or jobs. Having now read the accounts, the figure of £47 million is the total expected costs of Brexit, not an actual cost in the years accounts. The costs of Brexit in the accounts to 3 April 2021 are ESTIMATED at being £16 million, so I would imagine that would have been nothing more than a red tick exercise for EY. As a percentage of their international sales what is that figure. I’ve only read the published report not the accounts. If the number of £16m continues the number of £64m would be the annual cost but some costs are down to not knowing the systems introduced at the last moment. We incurred heavy costs due to that juicy titbit! . Do the accounts also include lost sales or just cost?? Genuine question, as I’m curious to know what the impact is on their international sales. . With total sales just shy of a Billion, direct costs of £47m then adding the lost sales could in theory end up with a total 10% hit! I’m not claiming that as accurate just a discussion point. https://corporate.marksandspencer.com/media/press-releases/5ff7017fc6fe1bc26cb21d12/marks-and-spencer-group-plc-full-year-results-for-52-weeks-ended-3-april-2021 If this is what you’ve read, then the answers to the questions you ask are there. Of the £16m Brexit costs, £10m relates to UK food and £6m to International. International sales were £789m so I expect you can do the maths. I’ve not seen any lost sales due to Brexit being quantified in the report, only a reference to stores being ‘adversely impacted by rolling Covid lockdowns and restrictions’ Thanks for that .Like I said in the earlier post I read the headline not the report. So the U.K. food sales were impacted which suggest export issues and specifically Northern Ireland which had major supply problems. Empty shelves overnight were not caused by Covid. . Interesting how much this is impacting in total and yet we were told seam free trade. I would also keep an eye on logistics costs and related issues as they are starting to bite now the hauliers can see the real costs. They will be passed on. Still maybe a Carrefour or such like could pick up a struggling bargain. I realise the other headline of £3.5 Billion in tariffs is admin related but that’s a huge hole in cash snd a great deal will be lost. Tell me again how Brexit is good for the Uk? Still not seeing anything good. Trade deals so far same or worse for balance of payments . India one will be interesting. The Indians have taken loads of well laid tech jobs off the U.K. ex pats there. Inviting them to the U.K. maybe will be good but it’s a risky strategy. Don’t really see why you keep hammering on about M & S tbh. It’s a terribly badly run business. It was a basket case before Brexit. Have you got any examples of properly run businesses that have had any significant issues? Unilever is that a badly run company too? Yes, from memory they’re the folk that employed that moron young conservative leader who bullied someone into committing suicide. And tons of other more consumer related scandals. So you’ve no valid business point . As expected. Eh? What more do you need? Unilever is a cesspit of corruption, including some of the worst palm oil abuses. “In May 2019, Ethical Consumer viewed an article on the Food and Allied Workers Union website. It was titled 'FAWU Condemns Brutal Force Against Striking Unilever Workers' and dated February 22nd 2019. The article described an event between striking Unilever workers and private security forces in South Africa. A section of it read: "The Food and Allied Workers` Union strongly condemns the unprovoked attack on peacefully striking union members by private security guards at Unilever Pty Ltd`s Indosa plant in Durban on Monday, 18 February 2019. More than 600 FAWU members embarked on a legal strike on 11 February this year in demand of a housing allowance and profit-sharing scheme after the parties have been going back and forth over these issues during negotiations over the past five years. "Private securities calling themselves "S.W.A.T.", who were hired by the company two weeks before the strike, invaded the picketing area last Monday and summarily unleashed a torrent of rubber bullets on innocent workers while they were demonstrating peacefully. "When female members questioned why they were shooting at them, the security guards continued blasting them with pepper spray. "Four of our members were seriously injured and two of them have opened criminal cases against the security guards in question. Workers were brutally shot at when simply attempting to go to their cars parked on premises agreed on between the parties. Trigger-happy securities who clearly has no regard for picketing rules proceeded to shoot paintballs and rubber bullets at our members in an attempt to provoke them.”" Copy and paste is a wonderful thing. They employ 154000 people in over 400 factories and so they are all those people bad? Sweeping assumptions you’re making. . All my dealings with them have been absolutely fine. Guess it depends on your approach. Being an empire man you will need to suck it up as a huge amount of their production is U.K. I’m basing this on your claims that you are happy for anything that benefits us over our subjects in the dominions. Obviously I’m taking this from your empire drivel. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
