Skip to main content

Benchmark yourself against Sainsbury

Read through Sainsbury's annual report and you can find some good statistics to use in checking how your shop or shops is/are doing.

One figure I like is measuring sales per square foot. For Sainsbury in 2010/11 it was £20.04 (including VAT, for which is has made adjustments). If you have a 400 square foot shop, then you would need to be selling just more than £8,000 a week to match them. A thousand square feet and it is just more than £20,000.

But Sainsbury also publishes its figures for the past five years that show it has moved from £19.30 up to a peak of £20.42 in 2009/10. Meaning its sales fell by 1.9 per cent in the latest year but are up by 5.8 per cent across five years.

But remember, this is an average across 934 outlets in the latest year and 788 five years ago so its best shops will be doing much better. And its worst...perhaps they will be on the market? At the same time its sales area has risen by 21.6 per cent to just more than 19.1 million square feet.

Obviously, it has invested in a lot of new space and has improved the sales it generates from each extra square foot of space. If you expanded your 400 square foot shop to say 800 square feet then you can use  this benchmark to check is the new products were generating sales in a way that maintains your profitability  in the medium term and your popularity with shoppers.

A second benchmark that Sainsbury publishes is the underlying operating profit margin from its retailing activities, which was 3.5 per cent in the latest year. This has risen from 2.5 per cent in 2006/07, which is a good achievement. On your £8,000 per week that is £14,560 a year. On £20,000 it is £36,400. In the cased of Sainsbury, operating profit is calculated after staff costs.

PS: On the back of a fag packet, the c-stores appear to be operating at around £21.38 per square foot a week. In the report,  Justin King suggests that the market is open for consolidation, which is why it is opening more stores.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Digital disruption in the UK wholesale space

“Twenty years ago I was driving boxes to the post office in my Chevy Blazer and dreaming of a forklift,” says Jeff Bezos in his most recent letter to shareholders. A blink later and he points out that the company has grown from 30,000 employees in 2010 to 230,000 now. But his ambition is the same. “We want to be a large company that’s also an invention machine. We want to combine the extraordinary customer-serving capabilities that are enabled by size with the speed of movement, nimbleness and risk-acceptance mentality that is normally associated with entrepreneurial start-ups.” Amazon is great at disruption because of its customers focus and the fact that the internet means it needs none (or very few) people between its warehouses and the shopper. The threat of Prime, its membership service, is the biggest challenge facing the UK retail market and the wholesale market by extension. It is both a direct threat and an indirect threat in that is inspiring countless numbers of othe...

Traffic lights: a fuss about nothing

I am sure that FT columnist Michael Skapinker has written about traffic lights food labelling before and his latest article is provocatively called: The food companies that make people fat. He criticises Coca-Cola and Unilever for sticking with guideline daily amounts (GDAs) when traffic lights work much better. Former Walmart Europe public affairs head Bernard Hughes wrote in to support Skapinker. He said: "There isn't ever a perfect information system flowing with beautiful logic. But traffic lights give powerful direction to the busy consumer." But in this age of smart phones surely this debate over the labelling on the packaging is easily overcome. The government can simply issue an app that when held over a bar code provides shoppers with a traffic light system. The supermarkets could do this on their websites. Surely the whole point about the future is that the internet and limitless data storage means that the shopper is being empowered with the informatio...

Think before you delist your slowest seller

Retailers need to introduce new products to provide their shoppers with "good news" and to generate interest. But for each new product that you introduce you need to consider delisting an existing line. Easy, you might think. I will just print out the list of products in the category and take off the one with the lowest sales. However, if you do this research from the US suggest you might be wrong. What you need to consider is what sort of demand you have for each product, a white paper by Demand Tec, a US specialist software provider shows. It says that there are two kinds of sales: incremental sales, when products add to the total shopper spend and are not readily substituted by another item transferable sales, where shoppers find an alternative easily when it is not available. Using its software, it shows a category with 50 products from top seller to bottom seller. At the same time it also measures the incremental sales each product provides. The number 50 in ove...