JJB Sports PLC Discussion Board http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion http://www.iii.co.uk/icons/logos/uk_logo.gif http://www.iii.co.uk tag:iii.co.uk,2003:tst.5554729
heatman
Posts: 30

Opinion: No Opinion
Price: 31.25
BATH STORESat 17:11

Well l what can I say , called into this store today and have got to say it looked great stock levels looked to be 100% but best of all was the store was packed with customers, even had to wait 5 minutes at the tills. The sales assistants working in the shoe department where excellent, in giving customer s advice on footwear. When I asked to try on some new running trainers a gel sole had been put inside the first trainer I tried on, most people seemed to want these after trying them adding £15.00 to the cost of the trainers. All in all really pleased with the way JJB seem to be moving forward and looking forward to next year.

imho + dyor. By flyingscotsmanone ]]> http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion&id=5554729&action=detail Sat, 07 Nov 2009 23:15:00 GMT flyingscotsmanone tag:iii.co.uk,2003:tst.5554611 I will drop you an O/T over on BSLA when i get my shortlist together.
cheers. By popes11 ]]> http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion&id=5554611&action=detail Sat, 07 Nov 2009 20:58:00 GMT popes11 tag:iii.co.uk,2003:tst.5554571
This sporting life
Created: 14 October 2009

And nowhere is the absence of common sense better illustrated than in the stampede of institutional investors to put £100m of new equity into JJB Sports, the longest established of the trio of sportswear companies that dominates the UK's high street. To put that sum into context, before this week's share offer from JJB became a firm fixture, the market value of its equity was about £85m. Now institutions are willing to double that and more.

That looks about as sensible as the decision by Mike Ashley - a key player on the sportswear scene - to buy Newcastle United football club last year. Not just because JJB was close to going bust until a few weeks ago; not just because its sales volumes still look horrible; and not just because it has lacked a chief executive since it suspended its previous one in January then refused to accept his resignation. The chief reason why common sense is missing can be summed up in three words: the long tail.

Let's stop being Delphic and explain. The long tail in question is the tail of a distribution curve. Specifically, in its application to retailing, this curve shows how, for any major category of merchandise, just a small proportion of total sales will be derived from a big proportion of the merchandise available. Put another way, it's the inverse of the famous Pareto principle, which has a wide range of applications but in this instance would say that 80 per cent of sales would come from 20 per cent of the range of merchandise. In the past, the other 80 per cent of the range - the long tail - was rarely worth exploiting. That's because it tied up too much capital; both fixed capital via bigger stores and more warehouse space, and working capital through higher levels of inventory.

However, the internet changed all that. Suddenly - and to exaggerate and simplify - shopping on the web meant that retailers divided into two camps: those at one end of the curve who sold a lot of a little, and those at the other end who sold a little of a lot. The ones that sold a lot of a little were the ones with a major presence on the high street, generating high sales volumes from a comparatively narrow range of products. Not just the obvious ones, such as Marks & Spencer, B&Q, or Next; but the likes of PC World (in computers), Ernest Jones (in jewellery) or Halfords (in auto parts and cycles). Success stories all of them.

The ones that sold a little of a lot were the exploiters of this long tail; the real specialists who could offer a range of merchandise with which bricks-and-mortar retailers could not compete and, if they were sensible, would not want to. The definitive long-tail retailers would be Amazon followed by the iTunes Store, but there are scores of others, known chiefly to their committed customers. However, the point - and don't forget I'm simplifying - is that, to be successful, a retailer had to belong firmly in one category or the other. Being somewhere in between spelt - not necessarily demise - but occupation of a corporate twilight zone where the struggles are many and the rewards are few. The sort of life being experienced by, say, Waterstone 's, HMV or Jessops. Specialists all of them, but not special enough.

So where does JJB fit on this spectrum? Sadly, it has little choice. To sell a lot of a little, it has to pile it high and sell it cheap, or it has to be a fashion retailer masquerading as a sports retailer. The trouble is that both of these slots are taken - by Mike Ashley 's Sports Direct at the cheap-and-cheerful end and by John David at the fashion end. That means JJB has to sell little of lots or - to use its marketing slogan - has to be "Serious about Sport".

In an oblique reference to the stranglehold that Sports Direct and John David h By popes11 ]]> http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion&id=5554571&action=detail Sat, 07 Nov 2009 20:33:00 GMT popes11 tag:iii.co.uk,2003:tst.5554474
Sorry for the re-post but the table did not translate onto 3I.

There has been a lot of Institutional Investor activity on this share over the last week. What I have managed to do was find the last stated Large II stakes as declared in the Placing and Open Offer Prospectus (Page 138?) and have pulled them altogether with the present positions declared in recent RNS's and have also incorporating newspaper article reports on others who should be declaring an interest or still have to declare. This will give you an instant and easily digestible guide on where we are with Institutional shareholders and you can fill in the blanks and update as and when an RNS is released.

JJB Major Institutional Investors Percentage Shareholdings of the Enlarged Share Capital.

Harris Associates: 14.32%
Bill Gates Foundation: 6.4%
Crystal Amber: 11.44%
Blackrock Investments: 5.08%
Prudential: 5.16%
HSBC Global Custody 5.45%
Shroeders Still to declare
Toscafund Still to declare
JD Sports Still to declare
Standard Life. Still to declare

Total: 47.85%

JJB Major Institutional Investors Percentage Shareholdings of the Old / Smaller Share Capital.

Harris Associates: (14.06%)
Bill Gates Foundation: (4.08%)
Crystal Amber (14.10%)
Blackrock Investments: Nil
Prudential: Not Listed
HSBC Global Custody Not Listed
Shroeders Nil
Toscafund Nil
JD Sports (9.99%)
Standard Life. (4.05%)

Total: 46.28%


Forgive me for saying it - but it is looking very healthy presently and there are potential big stakes still to be declared. Hence Strong Buy

imho + dyor.

Happy investing.

FS1. By flyingscotsmanone ]]> http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion&id=5554474&action=detail Sat, 07 Nov 2009 19:11:00 GMT flyingscotsmanone tag:iii.co.uk,2003:tst.5554465
There has been a lot of Institutional Investor activity on this share over the last week. What I have managed to do was find the last stated Large II stakes as declared in the Placing and Open Offer Prospectus (Page 138?) and have pulled them altogether with the present positions declared in recent RNS's and have also incorporating newspaper article reports on others who should be declaring an interest or still have to declare. This will give you an instant and easily digestible guide on where we are with Institutional shareholders and you can fill in the blanks and update as and when an RNS is released.

JJB Major Institutional Investors Percentage Shareholdings.

of of
Enlarged Share Capital Old share capital
Harris Associates: 14.32% (14.06%)
Bill Gates Foundation: 6.4% (4.08%)
Crystal Amber: 11.44% (14.10%)
Blackrock Investments: 5.08% Nil
Prudential: 5.16% Not Listed
HSBC Global Custody 5.45% Not Listed
Shroeders Still to declare Nil
Toscafund Still to declare Nil
JD Sports Still to declare (9.99%)
Standard Life. Still to declare (4.05%)

Total: 47.85% Total: 46.28%

Forgive me for saying it - but it is looking very healthy presently and there are potential big stakes still to be declared. Hence Strong Buy

imho + dyor.

Happy investing.

FS1. By flyingscotsmanone ]]> http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion&id=5554465&action=detail Sat, 07 Nov 2009 19:02:00 GMT flyingscotsmanone tag:iii.co.uk,2003:tst.5554420
Yawn. Yawn.

OK - "incorrigible ramper" is a term that you have accused me of being?

Answer me this question with a simple. YES OR NO in the knowledge that many on this board already know the answer and I can find it and post it.

Have you at any point came on the JJB Board and posted any positive news about any other company that you are holding shares in, say after any form of news / RNS.

(I'll give you a clue - NEOVIO FINANCIAL.)

Secondly can you categorically state that you have not ever posted an Article or RNS on JJB - and added a positive comment during that article or the debate thereafter? Again a simple YES or NO will suffice.

I think you will find that you are no different. Your stance has only changed recently since you sold out. Also it was you yourself on this very board that set a precedent about the acceptability of posting O/T's only if you hold JJB shares. Red flagging those that did not hold JJB shares. That I do, as do many others and when its quiet there is normally a tips roundup on here.

At all times I have O/T'd any other share on here I have held JJB shares and its been within the acceptability of the BB. Furthermore several have profited.

I personally have never changed my spots - you have. Market forces are what I let turn a shareprice around and I will the buy back in when I see fit. I dont post negatively every post that I can lay my hands on - as you did with the prospectus. Another example was the fact you stated the shops were only 60% stocked when 70% stocked was the current status quo - and easily findable. I dont even think you openly acknowledged this fact back once I posted it. Blinkered. Similarly you have posted queries and ambiguities which I, and am sure many of the more avid posters feel certain you actually know the answer to.

If I am as you say a Ramper then you sadly are guilty not only being a Ramper when you are full in, but a blatant Deramper when you are half in or not holding.

You see, where we do differ is that I do not blatantly deramp a share when I have sold out of it and market forces and supply and demand are what I let turn it around. I will then buy back in when I see fit.

You are also completely blinkered in what you say about Devils advocacy. No fool am I and I have already dispelled this very fact with Rupert Raxworthy and yourself previously so will refer you back to previous comments I have made. When it comes to sharedealing and though I have a central core holding in this share, that now fluctuates, I have openly stated on this board that I use other decent pots of daytrade money to average down if I think it fit, and which I also use for short-ternm trading in this share. Similarly I have also stated previously when I have complete faith. CVA outcome dates / World Cup sales that I have gone "all in" on JJB. Thats every penny that I own and can amass. On each of these occasions it has made me substantial 5 figure sums of money. You haved mentioned a sell-out at 38P. I have gone from all-in back to a central core holding at 41P.

Look at it like this. When you have paid for your ticket for the football match and its a penalty shoot out and you are behind your teams goal with your keeper in the net. Its a strange person who tries not only to distract his own goalkeeper and put off his own team players but also to dissuade the fans from enetring at the turnstyles.

I personally am a loyal team supporter, who shouts of his team and am interested in the value of all JJB shareholders shares, not self-interested dependent on my position at any given time.

That is the actual truth of where we differ.

Dont forget to answer the two questions.

imho + dyor.

FS1. By flyingscotsmanone ]]> http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion&id=5554420&action=detail Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:27:00 GMT flyingscotsmanone tag:iii.co.uk,2003:tst.5553975 http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion&id=5553975&action=detail Sat, 07 Nov 2009 12:51:00 GMT No 61727-054 tag:iii.co.uk,2003:tst.5553937
ref DD he blocks all new posters so he will not see your question By WizeeWig ]]> http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion&id=5553937&action=detail Sat, 07 Nov 2009 12:25:00 GMT WizeeWig tag:iii.co.uk,2003:tst.5553761 As a 'newbie' I see both balanced truth & strife on this board, unfortunately responding to people needful of of a scrap gives them oxygen. By the way what does it take to lose the newbie tag? I've looked in 'Terms & Conditions' & can't see it.
Have a relaxed weekend,
meggy By meggy3 ]]> http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion&id=5553761&action=detail Sat, 07 Nov 2009 10:48:00 GMT meggy3 tag:iii.co.uk,2003:tst.5553661 http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion&id=5553661&action=detail Sat, 07 Nov 2009 09:52:00 GMT WizeeWig tag:iii.co.uk,2003:tst.5553652
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00aWtPGX1Vo By So INformed KO ]]> http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion&id=5553652&action=detail Sat, 07 Nov 2009 09:47:00 GMT So INformed KO tag:iii.co.uk,2003:tst.5553552
As you know, I vociferously championed the rights of Newbies here to be treated with respect until/unless they proved that their intentions were subversive. Unfortunately, as the terrorists have multiplied, my stance has been forced to change. But genuine posters will quickly lose their Newbie tags on other boards so not much time is lost by following an ignore-all policy here.

Sadly, you and anyone who engages the subversives isn't going to win any wars or score any points. And the kind of mischievous or insulting posts which stir you into action are anyway going to be dismissed as rubbish by anyone who may read them. It doesn't need a war of words to prove that these people spout rubbish because it is plain to see in the first place.

Those who have a haven of peace to retreat to may not have to endure the fall-out here which results from their commando raids on the terrorists. But there are plenty of people who do have to wade through it when you've gone and I am certain that it doesn't achieve anything other than giving these vermin what they want. By Duck and Dive ]]> http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion&id=5553552&action=detail Sat, 07 Nov 2009 08:37:00 GMT Duck and Dive tag:iii.co.uk,2003:tst.5553522 drama queen, move on
or stay away as it makes this bb a joke
By WizeeWig ]]> http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion&id=5553522&action=detail Sat, 07 Nov 2009 08:18:00 GMT WizeeWig tag:iii.co.uk,2003:tst.5553515 http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion&id=5553515&action=detail Sat, 07 Nov 2009 08:12:00 GMT WizeeWig tag:iii.co.uk,2003:tst.5553505 -----
I presume you are talking about how the POO forced some PIs to sell sme or all of their shares? The only surprising thing is that you should be surprised that some of those people are hoping to find a good re-entry point now that they know how much cash they have left over from the OO and Excess share application.

".....Becos of this I possess the knowledge to challenge any attempts at negativity. Some dont like this."
-----
You are such an incorrigible ramper that you label anyone who dares to discuss actual or possible downsides as negative posters. That problem is yours, not theirs. Whenever you may learn that PIs *need* to consider the negatives along with the positives, you will become a more rational and mature poster. My devil's advocacy on this board has always been a source of annoyance to you, whereas you should be grateful for it. I suspect that you simply don't want any potential investor to be put off by the possible downsides of JJB and you therefore see it as your duty to try to suppress any such discussion. I can see how that might benefit you -- but I can't see how that blinkered policy is in the best interest of anyone contemplating buying JJB shares. Your commitment to the cause is commendable but it comes across as self-serving if you try to diminish or disrespect anyone who plays Devil's Advocate here....

"Make no mistake about it when I am on any board I am there for the positive financial benefit of all onboard, self included."
-----
You can't accept that what serves your best interest (eg ramping) may not be in everyone's best interest. It's a delusion to believe that your opinion, however much research it is based on, is the only correct view when there are others here who spend just as much time on diligent research and have views which embrace shades of grey. You would be doing both existing and potential investors a service if you were able to discuss JJB in a more balanced way. For example, it helps no-one to claim that JJB's last trading results were good when they were obviously awful. Less blinkered investors did the sensible thing and sold at c.38p to buy back in much cheaper a few days later. There are times when loyalty to a share costs people money and I fear that you may have become too emotionally involved to be able to recognise when such times are upon us. So, constant ramping to the point where you seem often to be in denial about the downside, does not benefit all shareholders, as you claim. Sometimes, selling is the right thing to do.

I have always believed in JJB's potential but I have also been a realist, wanting to discuss the downside rather than see it swept under the carpet. The difference between us is that I have never let my own vested interest in JJB prevent me from seeing and discussing matters which might cause the value of my investment to fall. By Duck and Dive ]]> http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/detail?code=cotn:JJB.L&display=discussion&id=5553505&action=detail Sat, 07 Nov 2009 08:07:00 GMT Duck and Dive