Tesco - another fail
Discussion
The issues surrounding the UK supermarket industry is not dissimilar to the car industry 20 years ago. It's the companies in the middle that are feeling the squeeze. Waitrose is growing as it is a premium product catering for the rich, and Lidl and Aldi are growing as they are a bargain product catering for the motivated rest. Tesco's, Sainsbury's et al, are sat in the middle losing business out of both ends.
Just like Ford/Vauxhall are today v BMW/Audi/MB and Kia/Hyundai.
Just like Ford/Vauxhall are today v BMW/Audi/MB and Kia/Hyundai.
Heppers :So you have not always supported the Binding Voting Rights for shareholders, as you proudly proclaimed, just a swerve to suit your agenda at which you seem very adept.
Time is catching up with the old way of doing Boardroom pay deals and the sooner the last sand grain leaves that timer the better. Nothing lasts forever the Company Owners are demanding change in practices. Sure there is bound to be some ugly fall out along the way, any large changes to the status quo is going to have some unintended consequences. In the longer term that will have to be a price paid.
Time is catching up with the old way of doing Boardroom pay deals and the sooner the last sand grain leaves that timer the better. Nothing lasts forever the Company Owners are demanding change in practices. Sure there is bound to be some ugly fall out along the way, any large changes to the status quo is going to have some unintended consequences. In the longer term that will have to be a price paid.
Edited by crankedup on Wednesday 30th July 10:43
Thankyou4calling said:
Is it cheaper to do your shopping at Lidl or Aldi? On a trolley of mixed goods buying some brands and some own labels or value lines, how much less ( if at all) is it than ASDA or Tesco?
I often go in Aldi but I don't see it as cheaper.
Apparently it is around 20% - 25% cheaper at the moment for the same or like for like products by shopping at Aldi or Lidl. (As reported Channel 4 on 28/6/14 'Supermarket Wars' Dispatches)I often go in Aldi but I don't see it as cheaper.
Thankyou4calling said:
Is it cheaper to do your shopping at Lidl or Aldi? On a trolley of mixed goods buying some brands and some own labels or value lines, how much less ( if at all) is it than ASDA or Tesco?
I often go in Aldi but I don't see it as cheaper.
My experience is from previously working in Lidl and still shopping there or Morrisons.I often go in Aldi but I don't see it as cheaper.
Stuff that is own or un-branded is quite a bit less. Freezer stuff, fresh meat, cooked meat, chilled stuff and produce is cheaper if you stay away from the "recognised" brands. There is no need to go for brands though, products like their Blackberry jam are the best I've ever tasted and win awards, although you do get some s
te like the cheapest Weetabix copies (the 2nd cheapest are fine btw).A trolley will normally be around £70-80 where a similar one in Morrisons would be around a ton.
I'd be interested in the definitive as in their ads Aldi compare major brands eg Kelloggs, McVities, Heinz etc with their own label. I'm not so sure they'd be cheaper if they compared with say Tesco own label or value.
The reason I go is because it's convenient and I can be in and out fairly quickly plus they have the man aisle. Don't think there's much in it price wise.
The reason I go is because it's convenient and I can be in and out fairly quickly plus they have the man aisle. Don't think there's much in it price wise.
crankedup said:
Heppers :So you have not always supported the Binding Voting Rights for shareholders, as you proudly proclaimed, just a swerve to suit your agenda at which you seem very adept.
Time is catching up with the old way of doing Boardroom pay deals and the sooner the last sand grain leaves that timer the better. Nothing lasts forever the Company Owners are demanding change in practices. Sure there is bound to be some ugly fall out along the way, any large changes to the status quo is going to have some unintended consequences. In the longer term that will have to be a price paid.
I have said and I maintain I don't think it is the best idea because of what it really means at the sharp end of how it will in reality work, however if that is what the majority want though then far be it from me not to support said majority. That is what living in a democracy is all about. We now have binding votes on pay based on 50% or more of shareholders, great the fact that the man in the street is never going to for the vast majority of public companies have any real say whatsoever in that clearly has escaped your limited knowledge of how listed companies shares are both held and structured. As you don't clearly understand it even now after two years then I shall not try to educate you further. Time is catching up with the old way of doing Boardroom pay deals and the sooner the last sand grain leaves that timer the better. Nothing lasts forever the Company Owners are demanding change in practices. Sure there is bound to be some ugly fall out along the way, any large changes to the status quo is going to have some unintended consequences. In the longer term that will have to be a price paid.
Edited by crankedup on Wednesday 30th July 10:43
Also just to add you are still not going to answer the other questions then or admit you just made up facts about me personally just for the hell of it to try and further your point or advise of if you have reversed your statement on saying 100% of shareholders should agree on CEO and board pay?
Edited by heppers75 on Wednesday 30th July 10:57
heppers75 said:
crankedup said:
Heppers :So you have not always supported the Binding Voting Rights for shareholders, as you proudly proclaimed, just a swerve to suit your agenda at which you seem very adept.
Time is catching up with the old way of doing Boardroom pay deals and the sooner the last sand grain leaves that timer the better. Nothing lasts forever the Company Owners are demanding change in practices. Sure there is bound to be some ugly fall out along the way, any large changes to the status quo is going to have some unintended consequences. In the longer term that will have to be a price paid.
I have said and I maintain I don't think it is the best idea because of what it really means at the sharp end of how it will in reality work, however if that is what the majority want though then far be it from me not to support said majority. That is what living in a democracy is all about. We now have binding votes on pay based on 50% or more of shareholders, great the fact that the man in the street is never going to for the vast majority of public companies have any real say whatsoever in that clearly has escaped your limited knowledge of how listed companies shares are both held and structured. As you don't clearly understand it even now after two years then I shall not try to educate you further. Time is catching up with the old way of doing Boardroom pay deals and the sooner the last sand grain leaves that timer the better. Nothing lasts forever the Company Owners are demanding change in practices. Sure there is bound to be some ugly fall out along the way, any large changes to the status quo is going to have some unintended consequences. In the longer term that will have to be a price paid.
Edited by crankedup on Wednesday 30th July 10:43
Also just to add you are still not going to answer the other questions then or admit you just made up facts about me personally just for the hell of it to try and further your point or advise of if you have reversed your statement on saying 100% of shareholders should agree on CEO and board pay?
Edited by heppers75 on Wednesday 30th July 10:57
I have never read anything fresh from your posts not anything enlightening, just a constant stream suggesting how clever you are and insulting anybody who disagrees with you. Sorry chum, your a fool.
crankedup said:
heppers75 said:
crankedup said:
Heppers :So you have not always supported the Binding Voting Rights for shareholders, as you proudly proclaimed, just a swerve to suit your agenda at which you seem very adept.
Time is catching up with the old way of doing Boardroom pay deals and the sooner the last sand grain leaves that timer the better. Nothing lasts forever the Company Owners are demanding change in practices. Sure there is bound to be some ugly fall out along the way, any large changes to the status quo is going to have some unintended consequences. In the longer term that will have to be a price paid.
I have said and I maintain I don't think it is the best idea because of what it really means at the sharp end of how it will in reality work, however if that is what the majority want though then far be it from me not to support said majority. That is what living in a democracy is all about. We now have binding votes on pay based on 50% or more of shareholders, great the fact that the man in the street is never going to for the vast majority of public companies have any real say whatsoever in that clearly has escaped your limited knowledge of how listed companies shares are both held and structured. As you don't clearly understand it even now after two years then I shall not try to educate you further. Time is catching up with the old way of doing Boardroom pay deals and the sooner the last sand grain leaves that timer the better. Nothing lasts forever the Company Owners are demanding change in practices. Sure there is bound to be some ugly fall out along the way, any large changes to the status quo is going to have some unintended consequences. In the longer term that will have to be a price paid.
Edited by crankedup on Wednesday 30th July 10:43
Also just to add you are still not going to answer the other questions then or admit you just made up facts about me personally just for the hell of it to try and further your point or advise of if you have reversed your statement on saying 100% of shareholders should agree on CEO and board pay?
Edited by heppers75 on Wednesday 30th July 10:57
I have never read anything fresh from your posts not anything enlightening, just a constant stream suggesting how clever you are and insulting anybody who disagrees with you. Sorry chum, your a fool.
Also just to add once more after now I think four or five times of asking you are STILL not going to acknowledge that you essentially told lies and made things up to try and discredit my arguments, presenting made up statements of a personal nature as facts. Also the fact that you will not answer the question as to whether you have reversed your position on requiring 100% of shareholders to agree, as I am sure you know how absurd that statement was so it is better just to pretend it doesn't exist I suppose. So you are doing neither of those things and in fact utterly ignoring them both then? .
Also apart from two years ago where I mentioned you being a blithering idiot, for which I subsequently apologised as that hurt your feelings I have never once levelled a personal insult at you, whereas you seem to do it twice in one post calling me both a cretin and a fool. FYI I am fine I don't require an apology I think it is far better just to let the fact hang there that you simply cannot form a cogent argument without ignoring anything you don't like, making personal slights and slurs, inventing facts and statements whilst presenting them to further your position and levelling personal insults at people who hold an opposing view.
Not to worry it is the sign of many of your ilk so try not to feel too "special"!
heppers75 said:
Yes I am being flippant d**k... Because so are you by criticising someone who has run a company that has made a £3bn profit and received a tiny fraction of that as reward. You only care about the fact he got a certain number, you have a problem with that because you can't do it and you think it is by some moral compass you hold wrong. You are f**king boring to be honest and you need to just wind your neck in and understand that people do things you neither understand or think are valuable because you don't understand them.
Never insulted me Heppers! You seem to have lost the plot old chap ^^^^^^^^^ Right-now I am busy talking with the grown-ups so wait in your corner and I will get back to you when I have the time.Edited by Big Al. on Sunday 3rd August 09:46
bristolracer said:
Tesco have an image problem.
They are not generally liked as a brand and have the reputation of bullying their suppliers.
Historically they got the bad publicity for building on school playing fields and now they are appearing in every closed pub and local petrol station people see them as too big,uncaring and hell bent on killing off any competitor.
Their problem is going to be changing the public/media perception of them.
However, despite all that, they are NOT killing off competitors. Quite the opposite. New ones have appeared and those are thriving and growing successfully. Morrisons, Sainsburys, Asda and Tesco have had it easy until recent years. Tesco very much so. Now they will have to actually earn their market share and profit rather than simply taking them. They are not generally liked as a brand and have the reputation of bullying their suppliers.
Historically they got the bad publicity for building on school playing fields and now they are appearing in every closed pub and local petrol station people see them as too big,uncaring and hell bent on killing off any competitor.
Their problem is going to be changing the public/media perception of them.
Big difference.
Didn't really need a CEO at all during that time.
My wife now in her sixties has changed her shopping habits over the past decade. So too have some of her circle of friends.
I retired five years ago aged 68 and now am able to shop during the day for the family. I now have time to closely compare and Tesco has slipped well down my preferences. There is still value to be found at Tesco's but becoming fewer and harder to find thus visits far less frequent. I use all the above named supermarkets from time to time and Morrisons is current favourite on value, variety and above all product quality and freshness ( their same price/kg Bananas last far longer than Tescos which can go off next day ).
I rarely visit Aldi or Lidl but my wife and her friends do and both their car parks look busy when I pass. There used to be silly long queues of cars trying to enter the local Asda always full car park say ten years ago. Never see that now.
Yes, Tesco and those with reducing margins are going to have to earn their profits now, not simply rake them in.
The Supermarkets killed off to near extinction the many thousands of corner shops. Now, unless they change the way they do things real competition could render them on the endangered species list.
Despite some negatives, on the whole I see it as a good thing.
We need more genuine competition at all levels and wider ranging in cartel riddled UK. Much more.
heppers75 said:
I am now and have been on another 2 occasions a CTO at both an exec and non-exec level
At the results presentations I attend it would be unusual to see a Chief Technology Officer.heppers75 said:
Also in 2012 I did hold 2 non-exec posts as well as being a partner in a startup which is now a fair bit further along than a startup.
Del or Rodney?Qwert1e said:
heppers75 said:
I am now and have been on another 2 occasions a CTO at both an exec and non-exec level
At the results presentations I attend it would be unusual to see a Chief Technology Officer.heppers75 said:
Also in 2012 I did hold 2 non-exec posts as well as being a partner in a startup which is now a fair bit further along than a startup.
Del or Rodney?
neither and 8/10 for amusing pun factor crankedup said:
Never insulted me Heppers! You seem to have lost the plot old chap ^^^^^^^^^ Right-now I am busy talking with the grown-ups so wait in your corner and I will get back to you when I have the time.
You are quite correct I shall once more I apologise, I do try not to let my frustration show.Edited by Big Al. on Sunday 3rd August 09:47
heppers75 said:
You are quite correct I shall once more I apologise, I do try not to let my frustration show.
Your time could be better spent in the Boardrooms perhaps, I just prey its none of the Boardrooms of Companies that I hold some Company shares.Edited by Big Al. on Sunday 3rd August 09:48
crankedup said:
Your time could be better spent in the Boardrooms perhaps, I just prey its none of the Boardrooms of Companies that I hold some Company shares.
So just to clarify you are still not going to admit your own lies or stupidity then? Edited by Big Al. on Sunday 3rd August 09:48
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff