Well this issue would make a excellent question to be asked at the next AGM and put management under the spot light as to who pays for stolen stock. I find it unbelievable that the supplier would be on the hook for stolen stock, there is no incentive for the retailer to up their security if they were not liable for misappropriated stock.
There may be some truth to this as hard as it is to believe. Smaller retailers wear the cost for stolen goods, big players use their size to dictate terms. Woolworths is notorious for asking for kickbacks for contracts they sign in the advertising space.
In my previous life in the ATM business one of the major Australian banks took great joy in getting the two final bidders for a Australia wide Atm renewal contract to keep undercutting each other until their was practically no profit in it. Then they had the temerity to add a new clause at the finish line that any winning bidder would be liable for losses the bank incurred due to skimming devices.
Smaller companies would be told to take a hike with such outlandish requests but when you are big fish/Client you are in the position to make such onerous demands because of the size of your product order..
A2M Price at posting:
$11.87 Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)