need to just get rid of them both really eh....
Printable View
.... and from a customer perspective it probably really is. If I look at our personal experience - we spent the last 2 years significantly more money with the market and with Torpedo 7, than with any other Warehouse entity.
But yes, I can see why shareholders would baulk at these 2 business units. Not sure, though what it would mean for the rest of the warehouse group to remove them. Maybe its just losing a loss of $40m pa, which would be good, but maybe its losing as well additional revenue and earnings (particularly through the market).
Tough.
weetbix no longer to be supplied at warehouse .... looks like the supermarket duopoly flexing there muscle ? restricting competition .... weetbix a big draw apparently
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/133...-supply-issues
"During the year, we sold the Royal Oak property which was one of our owned store sites. The sale proceeds were $30.5 million under a sale-and-lease-back arrangement with the proceeds being used to reduce debt"
I wonder how they funded the divie.
Debt increased from $66m to $76m. My only guess is that they are referring to lease interest cost?
They seem to be all in on their strategy. I wonder how long they can maintain it.
Nick took a pay cut this year and only got $3.224m
That’s 57 times what the median employee rem was
Some might say the group got more value out of a ‘median’ employee on $56k than Nick