Argos. Perhaps Homebase along with them, or HRG may split the two.

Compared to operators who were long exploiting a tax loophole that has recently been closed.

It's amazing how people lament the likes of Starbucks and Vodafone for "immoral" exploitation of tax loopholes and yet let those same morals go out of the window if it means a few cheap DVDs.

Which begs BG's question again.

Given the amount that we depend on retail for the sake of the national economy as a whole, the game of never-ending cutting of prices will actually continue to lose jobs.

How are these going to be replaced? After all, it was the retail sector that wrote an open letter to Gideon in the autumn of 2010 begging him to cut and cut again, promising that they'd make up the jobs.

To repeat: if anyone is interested, Charles Fishman's The Wal-Mart Effect is an excellent illustration of how constant price cutting loses jobs and reduced quality.

It's short-sighted in the extreme.

Apparently the directors of HMV visited the offices of PWC yesterday but then found a cheaper administrator online...

Then again, Wal-Mart are the worlds second biggest employer, after the Chinese army and ahead of the NHS. (Or at least that's what one of the NHS IT providers told me)

And if Wal-Mart wasn't around there would still be stores selling the same goods to the same people.

Wal-Mart and stores like them syphon money out of local areas where local businesses they have put out of business put money into the local area.

About the only thing to laugh about as it is very sad news. This failure though is due more to the public buying on price than anything the Directors or government can do. The public should not complain when jobs are lost as local services are forced to close through lack of support and then prices eventually rise through lack of competition.

Which means what?
It doesn't tell us how good an employer they are, whether they are good for the economy or anything other than the fact that Wal- Mart are enormous.

Would you rather deny the public the choice?

The public have doubtless been attracted by price, i.e. cheaper at the likes of Amazon ... the so-called "perfect market" requires that that the purchaser is in possession of the relevant facts, and I would suggest that the only economic fact that most people knew was the price and not that Amazon were a law unto themselves regarding the tax they pay.