GHOST TOWN...
Tuesday, January 6, 2009 at 09:09AM 
UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown boasted last year that our economy, under his management, was amongst the best placed to weather the global economic storm.
Today, the Woolworth chain finally closes and 27,000 people will be unemployed.
Yesterday, the Waterford Wedgewood announced it was on the edge of bankruptcy, with the likely loss of almost 2000 jobs.
Last week, the Adams childrenswear chain went into a form of bankruptcy, with the loss of 850 jobs, and a further 2300 under threat.
The Music chain Zavvi went bust just after Christmas, with the loss of 3200 jobs.
There is speculation this morning that even Marks and Spencers may have to cut 1000 jobs.
Yes, we are truly best placed thanks to Gordon.
I forecast that by the end of this month there will tens of thousands of other job losses as the real impact of the credit crunch bites. Remember also, for every big name company that collapses, there are many smaller companies that will also suffer, with fewer numbers of lost jobs but still very meaningful to those who find themselves out of work.
The unravelling of the British economy continues but meanwhile I hear that tractor production is at an all-time high. This town, is coming like a ghost town...
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (24)
There will be so many shocking unemployment statistics to throw back at Brown by the middle of next year that you just won't know where to start.
Why don't you tell us what David Cameron would have done differently, and provide evidence? The simple fact is that the Conservatives and Labour are unfit to govern.
Did Brown really believe that we were best placed, amongst the European Nations, to weather the coming (already arrived) economic storm or did he tell a deliberate lie? I know what I think but I do not expect him to do the honorable thing.
Europe depends on the UK economy, as we were reminded at a company (multi nat) meeting this morning so I am not sure it all will be such gloom and doom. Though it will be rocky. Clever discussions went on which hinted at just how many countries will have to pull their weight finally to underpin the UK and secure their own economies. Or something. It's complicated! Anyway I understand Zavvi may not be going under quite yet.
Alison
Isn't Zavvi a rubbish brand name?
Isn't Zavvi a rubbish brand name?
It was an atrocious decision to rebrand virgin as Zavvi.. Never understood that.
Kloot
Boy are you right. Virgin is one of the best known and I think best liked brands in the world. If they were able to keep that name after the buyout, they should have.
What does Zavvi mean? Anyone know or is it a non word?
Got me.
Probably one of those phony words that companies pay consultants $200,000 to invent
" Hey "zavvi" sounds like "savvy" so it must be a good name. Here's your invoice, have a nice day"
Yes it is! Awful. I gather Branson poured in some 50 million to keep it all afloat but if that fails he owns the freeholds on most of the stores and intends to rebrand again back to Virgin. Also a soppy name if you ask me.
Course these places suffer more because of copyright theft which people seem to freely inudlge in on line. The controls for that issue are also picking up pace as is the technology! Think I've said before it won't be governments that control the net but corporations. And they are. (And I mean how crap is google and youtube now eh?)
Well, for what its worth, my advice to all is not to get too tightfisted if you can help it.
If everyone stops spending, that will only and unnecessarily make things worse.
Don't go crazy but ...Buy! The job you save may be your own!
Isn't rebranding all the craze at the moment? I read some rubbish recently about Norwich Union and the reasons for rebranding it to Aviva, or something similar. Doesn't it give you a real idea of the product they are selling? - of course it doesn't, it is just another catch penny gimmick, and all those highly paid CEO's are that stupid they fall for it.
The reason for the change, the woman who was selling the new name said, 'it will give employees something to be proud of and will promote cohesion between the different global divisions, and at the same time give employees something to discuss over the dinner table'. - Just where do they get these rubbish ideas from?
The real reason is probably that the original company had got such a bad reputation that a change of name was the only answer to falling sales...
"....back to Virgin. Also a soppy name if you ask me. "
Ah!, but it does at least have the aura of rarity and uniqueness!...and you don't many in a telephone box do you?:-)
Virgin is a crappy name. Virgins can be quite hard to find and very expensive when you do. Not something a huge shop wants to argue it stands for.
I often used to see Zavvi stores and had no idea they were formerly Virgin records. Why on earth change a universally recognised name for a stupid squiggly gimmick one.
Colm,
I walked past Zavvi not knowing what it was.
It shows that Branson can be as big a fool as anyone else, or else he is very smart, after all he does still own the freeholds...although I doubt that he is totally fireproof as regards le crunch, and they may already be spoken for.
Can't speak for over there, but the Virgin brand here is pretty good.
Branson is viewed as someone who is smart and fun and adventurous.
Lots of people here have flown Virgin Atlantic and have a real good opinion of them, even in Economy where they will give you two beers when you ask for one, and not charge you for it like the US chiselers will.
That's a brand that you could still do new things with. I don't know anyone who dislikes Branson or his companies, and I know a lot of people who think they're great
Who would have though. Virgin, the airline who won't screw with you.
And the best thing. Cheery,attractive, well scrubbed and highly efficient English stewardesses ( forget "flight attendant" ), one better than the one before.
That's a recipe for success if there ever was one.
Phantom
Not if they were obliged to live up to the brand name ;)
I use them all the time, simply because they are one of the few airlines that fly to southern USA non-stop.
Yes they are not bad by most standards, but still have a lot to do to catch up with Singapore or Cathay Pacific Airlines...and those jumbos are beginning to show their age.
I have flown twice to Florida with Virgin and was impressed both times.
I've never flown Singapore or Cathay though I hear good things about them.
I tend to stick with Continental and its allies so to properly group my FF miles. You can fly Virgin on a Continental ticket ( or vice versa) , which is really useful when going to NY - London -- I effectively have twice the number of flights to choose from, etc.
I actually love the 747, old as some of them are. I love the way they handle on long flights. Just give me the aisle seat.