PERSONAL OWNERSHIP OR PUBLIC COMPANY?

Hutt News, Volume 2, Issue 21, 17 October 1929, Page 3

PERSONAL OWNERSHIP OR PUBLIC COMPANY?

'' The tragedy of my life is that instead of going into business for myself I have simply been serving a body of shareholders." This statement made by :Sir' Sydney Skinner, at the last Drapers' Summer School, is provokhrgly suggestive, says tiie "Drapers' Or<ranisor," and brings forward a number of questions of interest to every trader.

Has a drapery house with an ownermanager a p&ill over the establishment in the nominal control of a number of shareholders? With the present tendency towards drapery combines the question is topical and pertinents

To start with two or three initial points have to be cleaTed up. No retail house of any size can be carried on without capital. All development depends on financial support and even if the owner borrows money from a bank he is placing his affairs to a certain extent in the' hands of that bank. If ho has not got fellow directors' of hi 3 business to consider he has to satisfy tho directors of the bank that h.e is conducting his affairs . upon sound commercial lines. The . expression "in business for oneself calls for definition. It can prove very misleading— more freedom of action may, in ; onie cases, be afforded a managing director of a joint stock company than an ownermanager finds it possible to exercise. The matter was put succinctly to a representative of "The Drapers' Organiser by an owner-manager. "Sir Sydney Skinner may serve a body of shareholder but he is free to go-to America for six months. I work for myself and ca nonly go to Yorkshire fox ten days."

Another draper interviewed pointed out that retail distribution must be on a very small scale if a business is not sufficiently important to form the basis of a limited company, and if persons contribute their wealth towards an undertaking they are obviously entitled to have a say in its management. It may in some ways hamper a manager to have to consult with directors who are not so well placed as hims&lf to see exactly what is best for the firm, but at the same time they lift a certain amount of responsibility off the managing director's shoulders. -You cannot have the power without the' anxiety. Some men would father manage a small shop entirely by themselves without reference to anybody else, other traders again prefer to work on a bigger scale with I;he give and take of ideas of between fellow directors. It is a matter of temperament. - • . ■

The real issue appears to be rather between the class of service the small trader can render to the public as compared with the achievement of the big store. Where do they differ in their organisation and their service? To commence with, any retail business must bear a correct relation to its environment. An Oxford Street shop would be an anachronism in a ?mall country 9 town. A shop, even in a village, may be progressive and has every c&anee of being successful without in any way moulding itself on the big establishment. The most successful "shows have been those whoch have grown with the population. Trade has come fcheir way because they have studied local requirements and made a practice o^ meeting local needs. Being in close touch with the tastes and feeling of- the district they can anticipate demands and buying small quantities advantageously, be certain of shifting all their stock in a short space of time. They are able to avail themselves of parcels of merchandise that would be useless for t-he purposes of a bigger business. . In this way they keep in close personal contact with their customers.

When an appeal is made to people's fancy or an attempt is made to influence their mood, as is done when a chance custom is aimed at, results aT© bound to be uncertain and hard to gauge. But when the appeal is made to the common sense of a body of regu; lar cutoniers the demand for a particular description of merchandise can be measuTed with, almost mathematical precision, That is where the small trader scores. It is not an easy matter for a large store to satisfy a small community, as one. provincial draper pointed out,' particularly'in regard to fashions. The lo*eal shop can, by purchasing a few numbers of this design and a few numbers, of that, supply their various customers with <lifferent garments not exactly alike, and so please them all-.' A bigger establishment purchasing in bulk cannot so eas-.lv do this,'.but at the

same time their customers being'far more scattered there is not the objection to a number of the same model being sold. The small shop is in dome ways more of a l 'speciality" shop than a large one can possibly be.

. If Sir Sydney Skinner was .speaking more or less facetiously when he said he served a body of shareholders, he may be allowed to iave been quite seri ous when declaring that "the day of the small trader is not by any means

over. ''

An impartial examination of the evidence goes to show that both the big stores and the ordinary type of draper's shops have important part 3to play in the commercial world of retail distribution. The small siop is indebted to the bigger brother in certain directions. A large organisation is in a position to try experiments and give a lead to the whole drapery trade in a manner that the small retailer cannot afford to do. The attractive tea-room, the modern mannequin displays were all tried out and their usefulness tested by the great fashion houses before the smaller iioues had to decide to adopt such new and rather expensive features. -

There seems little doubt that the extensive publicity of the big draperyshops has stimulated an all-roand interest in dress end fashion amoag women from -which each and every draper has profited.