![\"Retail](\"https:\/\/dmsretail.com\/RetailNews\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/RETAIL-ONLINE-TRAINING-728-X-90.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Poundland\u2019s improving trading hasn\u2019t kept it out of a fight over its future. Howes Percival partner Katie James explains why its lenders hold the cards, what administration would mean and how far the fallout could spread\u2026<\/em><\/p>\n Poundland\u2019s predicament is hard to square. After a year of restructuring, the chain is showing signs of recovery. Yet administration looms, with some 12,000 jobs at risk.<\/p>\n The problem, says Katie James, partner at law firm Howes Percival, is that a business can become healthier without becoming healthy enough for those financing it.<\/p>\n \u201cProfit is great. It means you can pay your employees and your current debts,\u201d she tells Retail Gazette<\/em>. \u201cBut if it\u2019s not making sufficient profit, it can\u2019t eat into that debt.\u201d<\/p>\n When Pepco sold Poundland to Gordon Brothers for \u00a31 in 2025, restructuring was already part of the plan. Has it secured a future or merely bought time?<\/p>\n James points to the financing underpinning the deal, including a \u00a395 million asset-based lending facility from Gordon Brothers and lending from former owner Pepco. The latest filed accounts do not reveal precisely how much remains outstanding.<\/p>\n \u201cThere has clearly been a lot of work done to restructure and get it into a profitable position on a day-to-day basis,\u201d she says. \u201cBut it may not be quite enough to repay Pepco and Gordon Brothers as they want.\u201d<\/p>\n The result is pressure between management and secured lenders.<\/p>\n \u201cThe directors are saying, \u2018We\u2019re going in the right direction; we want to do this.\u2019 But the secured creditors are saying, \u2018It\u2019s not happening fast enough. We can see more problems on the horizon, and we want to make a change.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n Why the lenders can act<\/strong><\/p>\n Poundland has filed a notice of intention to appoint administrators, but administration has not yet begun. Nor must a qualifying secured lender necessarily wait for formal insolvency to intervene.<\/p>\n \u201cWhen directors appoint administrators, the company needs to be insolvent,\u201d she says. \u201cWhen a secured lender appoints administrators, it doesn\u2019t have to be formally insolvent. There can be a breach of the lending arrangements and a concern that its security is at risk.\u201d<\/p>\n Administration is not, however, simply a mechanism for a shareholder to recover its investment.<\/p>\n \u201cAdministrators are officers of the court. They have a duty to act in the best interests of all creditors, not just the secured creditors.\u201d<\/p>\n The legal objectives are to rescue the company, improve creditors\u2019 return compared with liquidation, or realise assets for secured or preferential creditors where the other objectives cannot reasonably be achieved.<\/p>\n Poundland could trade while seeking a buyer, be sold immediately through a pre-pack administration, or be broken up.<\/p>\n James thinks the costs of trading through administration will loom large in any decision.<\/p>\n \u201cIf they\u2019re trading the business, wages for employees still employed after 14 days become an expense of the administration,\u201d she explains. \u201cAdministrators won\u2019t want to trade without really good visibility on trading profits.\u201d<\/p>\n Christmas stock may already be moving through warehouses, and time to secure a deal is limited.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s still going to be relatively chaotic. It\u2019s still going to be relatively fast-moving,\u201d James says. \u201cSome people can work with that; some people can\u2019t.\u201d<\/p>\n A rescue, and the limits of pressure<\/strong><\/p>\n Potential buyers include Martin Property Group, while Poundland founder Steve Smith has discussed his interest. Interest, however, is not a deal.<\/p>\n James believes political and public scrutiny may have widened the rescue discussion.<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t think anybody wants to see 12,000 redundancies in the lead-up to Christmas,\u201d she says. She welcomes Gordon Brothers\u2019 statement that it will consider solutions aimed at preserving jobs.<\/p>\n \u201cAre there better ways of doing these things?\u201d she asks. \u201cDo they have to result in such an immediate response? Can we have a little bit longer? Can we wait for repayment a little longer?\u201d<\/p>\n She cannot say whether a break-up was ever the intended outcome, selling assets separately can generate greater returns, but the public financial information is insufficient to draw that conclusion.<\/p>\n Multiple bidders could help.<\/p>\n \u201cThat increases competition, which increases value,\u201d James says. \u201cI don\u2019t think the publicity has done any harm in generating interest to acquire the business as a going concern.\u201d<\/p>\n Lenders control whether to appoint administrators; after appointment, decisions rest with the administrators.<\/p>\n Christmas stock and the supplier squeeze<\/strong><\/p>\n James is particularly concerned about what would happen beyond Poundland\u2019s own payroll.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019ve always likened business relationships to a spider\u2019s web,\u201d she says. \u201cYou\u2019ve got the business, employees, landlords, customers and suppliers. All of those little webs are susceptible to insolvency, and the impact can be quite catastrophic.\u201d<\/p>\n Christmas stock may already be manufactured, in transit or warehoused. Smaller suppliers could depend heavily on Poundland.<\/p>\n James has seen suppliers alter terms to limit exposure.<\/p>\n \u201cSome are now saying, \u2018We want cash on delivery.\u2019 Nothing beats cash,\u201d she says. Others may seek to reclaim goods under retention-of-title provisions if they have not been paid.<\/p>\n That could undermine plans to trade through Christmas.<\/p>\n \u201cIf they\u2019ve got too many suppliers doing that, what are they going to have to sell in the lead-up to Christmas?\u201d<\/p>\n James also recalls Woolworths\u2019 disappearance. Other shops lost passing trade when shoppers lost a reason to visit.<\/p>\n \u201cPoundland is a similar prospect,\u201d she says. \u201cYou go to Poundland for something and pop into other shops. If you haven\u2019t got those destination shops on the high street, why will people go?\u201d<\/p>\n The warning signs, and a reason to fight<\/strong><\/p>\n For those within the industry watching events unfold, James\u2019s advice is to treat deteriorating communication as seriously as deteriorating finances.<\/p>\n \u201cSilence is the biggest one,\u201d she says. \u201cIf the finance director or directors of your customer aren\u2019t returning your calls, something is going on.\u201d<\/p>\n Late deliveries and unpaid invoices are other warnings. Long relationships can offer false reassurance.<\/p>\n \u201cWe all want to believe the best in people, especially when you\u2019ve worked with somebody for 10 or 20 years. You think, \u2018He\u2019ll see me right.\u2019 But sometimes the law says he can\u2019t see you right,\u201d she warns. \u201cEarly advice gives you options.\u201d<\/p>\n For Poundland, consumer loyalty remains an asset, but familiarity isn\u2019t enough.<\/p>\n \u201cRetailers have to be very clear about their offering,\u201d she says. \u201cPeople want to know they can get something before they even go into the shop.\u201d<\/p>\n Consumers and financial stakeholders both have a role, she argues.<\/p>\n \u201cThere\u2019s no point going through what will be a very expensive process with something like Poundland if the consumers don\u2019t return.\u201d<\/p>\n The immediate legal question is whether a rescue can satisfy creditors. The longer commercial question is whether Poundland can give shoppers a compelling reason to come back. Neither can be answered by a short spell of improved trading alone.<\/p>\n