Topshop owner issues major update on fashion chain returning to UK high street
The boss of online fashion giant Asos has confirmed rumours that Topshop will be returning to the high street - after its 2020 collapse - but not with its own stores, for now at least
Topshop is set for a high street return after demand from shoppers, the firm behind it has confirmed.
Online giant Asos, which bought the business after the collapse of shamed tycoon Sir Philip Green 's Arcadia empire, has given its clearest sign yet that the once beloved brand is making a comeback. A standalone Topshop website is set to be launched this summer. And Asos revealed that it was in talks to introduce Topshop clothing in stores - though through other retailers rather than its own shops at its stage.
Asos boss Jose Antonio Ramos Calamonte said: 'We have listened to our consumers and we understand they want a return to the high street,' adding 'eventually we will come back to have a physical presence'.
He said they had reached agreement with 'some selected wholesale partners', with talks ongoing with others. While not giving details, it could involve Topshop concessions within department stores or elsewhere. Although there are no plans for Topshop standalone stores, Mr Calamonte added: 'We haven't ruled out anything'.
Asos first sparked speculation last month when Topshop posted three teasers on social media, telling online followers: 'WE'VE MISSED YOU TOO' in a series of clips captioned 'WE'VE BEEN LISTENING.'
At its height, Topshop had more than 500 stores worldwide, including 300 in the UK, and legion of young fans who flocked for its fast changing designs. However, it fell on hard times during the pandemic when high street sales plummeted. Arcadia entered administration in 2020 and Topshop, Topman and Miss Selfridge were all acquired by Asos in 2021, moving to purely online sales.
Asos sold a 75% stake in Topshop and Topman to Danish company Bestseller in September last year.
The collapse of Arcadia, which also included famous high street names Topman, Burton and Dorothy Perkins, led to the loss of 13,000 jobs and an estimated £350million hole in its pension fund. Green agreed to inject a substantial sum after talks with the Pensions Regulator. The demise shattered the reputation of Sir Phillip, once seen as the king of the high street.
It came as Asos downplayed the impact of Donald Trump 's US imports tariffs on its shipments to American customers. Alongside the new levies, the White House is closing a tax loophole on deliveries of products under $800, specifically those sent from China and Hong Kong, from May 2. Until now, it has allowed low-value packages to enter the US without incurring any duties.
The removal of the 'de minimis' rule will impact is seen as impacting the likes of the fast-fashion giant Shein and budget retailer Temu the most. Asos insisted that only around 5% of what it sells in the US comes from China, but most shipments to the States come from its UK warehouse, so will be liable to a 10% tariffs.
The company hinted that it could absorb the extra cost rather than pass it on to customers.
Asos reported a fall in half-year sales as it continued to clear a build-up of stock and slash the number of discounted items.Taking fell by 14% to £1.3 billion for the six months to March 2 But the group narrowed its pre-tax losses to £241.5million for the half-year, from £246.8million a year ago.
Mr Calamonte said its customers were 'responding positively to our focus on full-price sales, speed to market, and quality' and that it had seen 'positive momentum with our partner brands. Importantly, these successes have been achieved whilst maintaining strong cost control and improving our inventory health. We look forward to a fantastic pipeline of new products, brands and customer experiences, and remain confident in our ability to deliver sustainable, profitable growth.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wales Online
24 minutes ago
- Wales Online
URC considers shock US expansion as it waits on WRU decision over cutting teams
URC considers shock US expansion as it waits on WRU decision over cutting teams The URC is considering further expansion The United Rugby Championship could look very different in the future (Image: Huw Evans Picture Agency Ltd ) The United Rugby Championship is considering expanding into the US, with Chicago and Miami potential destinations for two new franchises, WalesOnline has learnt. There is a big push to improve rugby in the US given the fact they are hosting the World Cup in 2031, and the URC could include two American sides in the future. The URC is no stranger to expansion having initially started as a Celtic league before inviting Italian and South African teams into the competition. Georgian outfit Black Lion have also been in negotiations with the URC but the US route is being seriously considered. Sign up to Inside Welsh rugby on Substack to get exclusive news stories and insight from behind the scenes in Welsh rugby. Were the URC to allow two US sides into the competition there would have to be a significant financial uplift to its current shareholders, while the cost of travel and player welfare would also have to be taken into consideration. News of the US interest comes as the URC are engaged in ongoing talks with the WRU over how many Welsh teams will participate in the competition going forward. The union is strongly considering cutting down to three or even two professional clubs after serving notice on the current status quo of four equally funded sides. If the WRU does decide to cut teams, a potential expansion into the US could be more attractive to the current URC shareholders. Join WalesOnline Rugby's WhatsApp Channel here to get the breaking news sent straight to your phone for free Article continues below While the quality of the sides competing in the URC cannot be questioned it is often criticised for its excessive travelling, especially since the introduction of teams from South Africa. There is already a professional league in the US called Major League Rugby which was only founded in 2017 with 11 teams in total but it is nowhere near the level required if the US are to compete with tier one nations. 'As the URC, we have always had expansion in DNA," said URC CEO Martin Anayi in a press conference last week. "We have been the Celtic League, and we moved, and we have tried to grow each time. And we have done that. "I think we have genuinely made it a better league. 'I think it is important that we continue to look outwards. But also, the bar is very high because, for every game you add, there is a player welfare issue to engage with. 'And that is something you have to make sure you aren't compromising. "You have logistics, especially when we are transcontinental, and then you have the sporting element, and we want it to be as competitive as ever. 'So I would never say never, but I think the bar is very high to do that. "We play less rugby with the URC model and format. We don't have home and away games in every match. Get the latest breaking Welsh rugby news stories sent straight to your inbox with our FREE daily newsletter. Sign up here. 'And it also allows us to not play across international weekends. "We have almost 320 internationals playing in the league, which is almost double what you have in the Premiership or Super Rugby. Article continues below 'If we do expand in the future, it has to be in the right way, and we don't fall into the traps of those who have done it in the past, and it hasn't been successful."
Daily Mail
33 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Woman is hit with shocking $1,200 tariff bill after ordering clothes online
A woman was left reeling after she received a $1,243 tariff bill from FedEx over an ASOS order, even though she returned the majority of the items. Amanda Ivanelli, a family vlogger from Florida, shared her shock upon receiving the invoice in a now-viral TikTok video. She explained that she had only kept one or two dresses totaling around $150. Amanda said she was unaware of any additional charges until the hefty bill arrived in the mail. 'I got my mail today, and I got this,' she said, holding up a FedEx envelope. 'And I open it, and I'm like, "It's an invoice for $1,243."' The unexpected bill listed her entire ASOS order, leading Ivanelli to speculate that the charge was due to tariffs. 'I would have never ordered from ASOS or anywhere that I know I would be charged for - I'm assuming - the tariffs,' the shocked shopper continued. Amanda said she was unaware of any additional charges until the hefty invoice arrived in the mail (stock image) 'Isn't that something that should have been shown at checkout?' Amanda lamented: 'I had no idea when I checked out, I had no idea. 'Don't know how I got stuck with a $1,200 bill, which is actually more than my order.' And Amanda isn't the only creator having issues with Donald Trump's tariffs. Another TikTok user named Jessica Clark recently found herself in a similar situation after she purchased a dress from the London-based company Odd Muse. 'I ordered this beautiful dress because I'm a 2026 bride,' she explained in a since-deleted video, per Newsweek. 'I checked out, it was $225 dollars so it was already kind of a splurge. 'This morning I woke up seeing that my package has arrived in the United States and that I owe a tariff bill of $325.' She added in a follow-up video: 'I'm amazed by how many people think this is not even real - it is. 'I don't blame the company, I think they're trying to figure it out as we go.' The president used a 1977 federal economic emergency law to justify a range of levies - from duties on Canada, Mexico, and China imposed over fentanyl smuggling to the reciprocal tariffs levied in early April on virtually every U.S. trading partner. Trump later paused the reciprocal tariffs for 90 days to allow for negotiations. His global tariffs were declared illegal and blocked by a federal court in May in a massive blow to his administration. The Trump administration is expected to appeal and the legal battle is likely to end up in the Supreme Court.
NBC News
an hour ago
- NBC News
NATO chief to call for four-fold increase in Europe's air defense spending
LONDON — Washington's European allies must make a 'quantum leap' in military spending to deter Russia, the head of NATO is expected to say Monday, calling for a 400% increase in the continent's air and missile defense budget. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte's comments are set to be among the strongest yet from the organization as it attempts to improve the continent's insufficient defenses against Russi a while also avoiding the political ire of President Donald Trump. 'The fact is, we need a quantum leap in our collective defense,' Rutte is expected to say in a speech to the London-based think tank Chatham House, in remarks released beforehand by the alliance. 'The fact is, we must have more forces and capabilities to implement our defense plans in full. The fact is, danger will not disappear even when the war in Ukraine ends.' Trump's clear signaling that he would like to at least significantly reduce decades of American military support for Europe has sent its nations scrambling to beef up their own arms industries. The American president's suggestion that NATO allies should up their minimum defense spend from 2% to 5% of GDP was once seen as outlandish; but last month Rutte too backed this idea and said he expected it to be adopted at NATO's June 24-25 summit. On Monday he will make a similarly ambitious call, according to NATO's pre-released remarks. He will ask for a '400% increase in air and missile defense' and add that 'militaries also need thousands more armored vehicles and tanks, millions more artillery shells, and we must double our enabling capabilities, such as logistics, supply, transportation, and medical support.' 'Wishful thinking will not keep us safe,' he will say. 'We cannot dream away the danger. Hope is not a strategy. So NATO has to become a stronger, fairer and more lethal alliance.' Rutte's comments would come against the backdrop of European powers vowing to spend more on their military budgets, having relied for decades upon America's protection first against the Soviet Union and now Putin's revanchist Kremlin. NATO's constituents must also maintain a balancing act when it comes to Ukraine — which is not a member. Kyiv's allies want to support a neighbor it sees as a bulwark against Russian aggression, while keeping onside a White House increasingly sympathetic to Moscow's worldview. Trump has previously described his 'very, very good relationship' with Putin, a man considered a pariah by former President Joe Biden and other Western leaders. Many officials and analysts in Europe acknowledge that Trump is right to demand that wealthy nations such as Germany be able to look after themselves without Washington's help. However many of these same commentators have expressed their horror at the tactics used by Trump, who has suggested that the United States would not protect underpaying allies, and openly inviting Russia to 'do whatever the hell' it wants to them. That risks shattering the central premise of NATO: Article 5 of its founding charter — an 'all-for-one and one-for-all' mutual defense promise suggesting that if one ally is attacked, the rest would come to its aid. The scenario the founders had in mind was that the U.S. would join the fight if Russia decided to launch an act of aggression against a smaller European country. In practice however, the only time it has been used in the real world was the other way round, when the alliance lent Washington symbolic defensive help after 9/11. Previous American presidents have always seen this as a good trade off: America underwrites European security, and in return has a huge influence over political, diplomatic and even cultural happenings on the continent and beyond. The soft power return on investment was always seen as a profitable one. However, Trump has repeatedly questioned this logic, not only undermining the promise behind Article 5 but using hostile language against those historically considered Western brethren. The realization among European allies that Washington is no longer committed to its mutual defense has sparked a drive to push up defense budgets and revive the long-since dormant arms industry on the continent.
