News
DSR Group encounters supplier animosity
DSR Group has experienced a backlash from the suppliers of its predecessor, DSR Print Management, following its pre-pack administration last week.
Former suppliers of DSR Print Management, who were left with substantial debts after the company was put into administration by its directors, have reportedly been contacted by the same directors to see if they will trade with newly formed DSR Group.
Tim Hawkes, managing director of TDH Group, which says it is owed around £24,000, said: "Yes it's hard times, but these people have basically used an opportunity at their suppliers' expense."
Another former supplier commented on printweek.com: "Much of the debt has been wiped off. A couple of other suppliers have contacted us to ask what our exposure is [and] between the three of us we are into [over] £200k and I, for one, will struggle to keep all my staff employed now.
"Without some big changes at the top, I don’t see how they expect any suppliers to trust them in the future."
DSR Group was unavailable for comment.
Advertisement
Comments
Henry Hefner - 05 November 2008
I'm not surprised at this backlash, nor DSR's "unavailabilty" to comment. This seems to be standard operating practise in the print management industry where suppliers take the hit for their client's poor management and weak judgement. DSR should never have exposed themselves to the obvious risk to which they exposed the business with MFI....widely recognised as one of the least stable operations in the retail sector, but for DSR to let their own suppliers down so badly, still trading with them \(and enjoying their credit) knowing full well they were never going to have to clear their debts is beyond commercial incompetence...it borders on criminal negligence. OUTRAGEOUS.
Simon Biltcliffe- Webmart - 05 November 2008
Having the gall to even ask the same printers who they have just been shafted speaks volumes about the integrity of the people at the top of DSR- old and new.
It is a tough time in print at the moment but trading with people like this is in effect supporting what they have done & recommending to others that this is acceptable.
Simon Biltcliffe
MD
WEBMART Ltd
Jordan Moss - 05 November 2008
We introduced a candidate to them whom they regected. Then low and behold one month later they guy we sent to them was answering the phone! they then spent months arguing the toss about the placement. Very Dodgy!
Jon Fennell - 05 November 2008
Agree with Simon on this. Would have thought TPF had the capacity and would fill the gap, perhaps they won't give them the time either.
Suppliers are damned if they do, and damned if they don't, what's the difference between doing nothing and not being paid nothing. Pre pack seems to do nothing for anyone. Perhaps DSR should buy GB.
Disgraceful
Kevin Lynch - 05 November 2008
We are a supplier to DSR and have been taken for thankfully only a small amount but feel for all the companies affected by this. We have a policy not to deal with Phoenix companies within our business,and we will not be doing work for them again.We work for a large number of print managment companies and have fantastic relationships with them and they pay on time.I think more businesses need to become tighter on there credit terms.My finance director warned me this company had financial problems 18 months ago and was bang on,Lesson learnt.
Brian Simms - 07 November 2008
Sympathies to all those suppliers that are out of pocket. Whenever I speak to anyone who has had dealings with DSR directors, I get the same feedback 'arrogant & unpleasant to deal with'. I would stay well clear and let them take the tumble they deserve.
print magnet - 10 November 2008
If Kevin Lunch is the print on plastic man I am thinking of then good luck to him when trading with PM companies, your share of the market is dwindling each year due to green issues so make the most of it while you can. Good luck!
Most of the PM's are very good with paying on time and the main reason is so they get their kick back from suppliers quicker. Although the kick back is usually hidden from the end client there are a few out there that know about the kick backs and seem to think that this is okay and is a healthy trading process. It is the procurement manager that seems to think this way but when you discuss this with the marketing managers they all disagree with it. It just goes to show that there are a few procurement managers out there that do not have the interests of their company at heart but their own gain. WHOOPS wash my mouth out with soap I almost informed you lot of what really goes on between certain a Pm Company and a blue chip company procurement manager. Kick backs have increased over the past few years to make up for the reduced management fee that PM's charge. If a procurement manager thinks a PM company can manage on 5 to 6% fee they must be on another planet. When they see the PM's books it must make them realise that you can't return 30% margins from such small fees. Is it me? Perhaps the procurement manager didn't study maths at uni. If that's the case then why employ them.
The blue chip companies should go back to employing their own print pool and keep the print trade alive. One day the supply chain will turn on PM companies and stop trading with them. Where will they go to then? It will be left for the blue chip to pick up the pieces. Until it is realised by blue chip financial directors that PM companies are ripping the Ass out of them and the supply chain there will be a whole lot more printers going down. The PM's figures are evidence enough to show where the money is being made. What do PM's own? Nothing is the answer, or should it be said that they own the procurement manager? You know who you are!
As soon as a PM asks you to extend their payment terms stop trading with them.
Jon Fennell - 11 November 2008
Print Magnet, you seem to have missed a few points in all of this. A number of printers use PM companies as a source of trade. For some they get to do business that won't come there way and work for clients they wouldn't normally get to shake a stick at.
They also benefit as the need for sales is reduced and accounts can be handled in house, leaving sales to concentrate on new business or just save the sales salary. Some clients also don't see print as core to business and as a result don't want to hire, they just want it off there desks and left to someone they can leave to get on with it.
In a lot of cases the print cost is small against the design and mail elements, it is not the highest costs, why don't you have a bang at the agencies or does it suit you to ignore their margins, especially on handling client print.
Do you also believe that printers don't or havn't ripped the arse out of a client themselves, a lot still do as they feel they are in cosy enough with the marketing staff that loyalty can be pushed, and certain marketeers soak up the attention and listen to the blag.
From a procurement point, if you can buy at an acceptable price a product which you have tested against other suppliers, why would you worry about any extras involved.
You should remember how PM came to power in the first place and also remember that printers were in most cases poor at client communication and service.
On your point on payment, and this is by no way defending the DSR's, how many printers have been paid for business which if they had been direct with the client been exposed to a loss. DSR's failure was down to MFI and DSR's failure to protect its suppliers and itself.
PM's also offer something that most printers can't, by rule of thumb no one printer can do everything, and be everything to everybody, this is where PM scores points, or perhaps you are suggesting you run all your clients business on outwork with no extra charge, for services you don't offer!.
As has been said before in this debate there is a place for everything.
Its also nice to see you are brave enough to use your own name, maybe we should treat your comments as non-existent.
Colin Roberts - 12 November 2008
Seems the new Company already has FSC accreditation. That was quick.
Nick Sadler - 12 November 2008
I used to do nearly £1000,000 worth of turnover with DSR in the old days when Bob Snell first got going and dealt with Derek Taylor and Stan the Man who were always Gentlemen and yes they were slow to pay but Cornelia always gave me my cheques a week or so late. The key was to manage the relationship which some companies clearly dont.
I stopped dealing with them when a new breed of management took the helm and treated suppliers like Sh1te. Derek and Stan left and the heart seemed to go out of the business.
Old adage dont rely on 1 client for 70% of your business because for no apparent reason and not even normally your fault you will lose all clients eventually.
There credit rating was crap for a long time and we now as an industry need to be very dilligent when working with any client PM or direct. If DSR had been credit worthy the vast majority of firms that lost out would have had credit insurance and not been out of pocket. Credit ratings are normally in place for a reason use them they dont lie!
Good luck to some of the good people that were still at DSR when it went under and good luck to all of the suppliers who lost out, lets hope you can all keep your heads above water in these tough times. It is still a great business to be in......
Jon Fennell - 12 November 2008
Evening Nick
To post comments please log in here