LATEST results from the Co-operative Wholesale Society show the pitiful financial performance of the movement, which has attracted the attentions of would-be predator Andrew Regan and his company Lanica Trust.
There are some sound businesses within the Co-op, with major presences on the High Street where one thinks immediately of funeral services, the largest such operator, and travel agencies. There is also the Co-operative Bank, a plucky organisation which has successfully carved out a niche for itself.
It is the supermarket side which has the really dire performance record. It simply is no match for major superstore companies, with margins of perhaps a third of theirs. The results of the various independent retail societies are certainly no better than CWS.
Mr Regan is not interested in the food outlets, even though they offer recovery potential long term. He is believed to be prepared to offer #500m for the non-food businesses such as the funeral parlours and travel agents. While both sides have hired top-notch advisers, Mr Regan still lacks credibility and there is naturally enough great antipathy towards him in the movement.
If he succeeded against the odds it would inevitably put a question mark against the whole movement. As a mutual organisation, success of co-op retail societies should not be measured in strictly financial terms but on the services they provide to their members and the public. Here there is considerable variation and some of the Scottish stores in particular compare with the best. But competition on the High Street is not going to lessen and poor financial performance will hinder attempts by the sector to remain competitive.
Mr Regan will have achieved something if he succeeds in concentrating minds because it would be a pity if the co-ops were to dwindle away.
Mutuality still has something to offer as an ideal in retailing as in financial services. This is particularly so in Scotland where the movement maintains shops in outlying areas which other
retailers would dismiss as unprofitable.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article