标签： Oceania

After months of failed attempts to secure a rescue deal for the struggling outdoor living retailer, Barbecues Galore, one of Australia’s most recognizable home goods brands, is winding down operations permanently, putting approximately 500 workers out of employment.

Founded in 1975 by Max Mason, the family-rooted chain built its reputation over nearly five decades selling barbecues, outdoor furniture and backyard leisure goods, becoming a household name across the country thanks to its iconic bright red branding. But mounting financial pressures pushed the company into voluntary administration in February this year, as leaders sought time to restructure and find a path back to sustainable operations.

Receiver and administrator teams initially held out hope of avoiding full liquidation. They entered negotiations with property landlords and key suppliers to renegotiate more favorable commercial terms that would allow the chain to resume stable operations. However, those talks collapsed in recent weeks after failing to produce a viable rescue agreement, forcing administrators to announce a full wind-down of the business.

Starting next week, all 62 company-owned locations will begin closing processes, while 27 franchise-operated stores will enter transitional arrangements ahead of their eventual shutdown. From June 16, the company will begin selling off all remaining assets to settle outstanding obligations.

In an official statement, administrators confirmed that all employee entitlements, including unpaid wages, superannuation and accrued leave, will be paid in full to affected workers. For customers holding unused gift vouchers, the chain has set new redemption terms that remain in place through the end of June: customers must spend $2 of their own money for every $1 in voucher value to redeem their credits.

Industry analysts have framed the collapse as a stark indicator of the challenges facing brick-and-mortar retailers in Australia’s current economic climate. Roger Montgomery, a prominent retail industry analyst, called the end of Barbecues Galore a “tragic final chapter” for a brand that embedded itself in Australian backyard culture. “If you can’t sell barbecues to Aussies, who can you sell them to?” Montgomery noted, underscoring how severe broader economic headwinds have become for even well-established, culturally resonant local businesses.

Australia’s second-largest grocery retailer Coles will not learn the full legal consequences of its deceptive discounting practices for several more months, after a recent Federal Court hearing laid out the timeline for the ongoing case brought by the country’s top consumer regulator. Last month, Justice Michael O’Bryan of the Federal Court issued a landmark ruling finding Coles had misled Australian consumers through false discount claims on hundreds of everyday household products sold as part of its high-profile ‘Down Down’ national promotional campaign. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), Australia’s independent consumer protection and competition watchdog, first initiated legal proceedings against the supermarket giant over questionable pricing practices across 245 products between February 2022 and May 2023. The ACCC has alleged that Coles deliberately manipulated prices during a period of soaring nationwide inflation, temporarily inflating baseline prices before marketing a subsequent ‘now’ price as a discount to consumers. These false discount claims were prominently displayed on large red in-store stickers that clearly showed a higher ‘was’ price alongside the advertised ‘now’ discounted price. The case returned to the Federal Court on Wednesday morning to lock in procedural next steps for both the ACCC’s enforcement action and a separate class action lawsuit filed on behalf of thousands of consumers who were impacted by the misleading pricing. Justice O’Bryan has ordered all involved parties to collaborate to draft a joint agreed statement of facts covering the majority of the 245 products at the center of the case, aligned with his earlier liability ruling. To streamline the initial trial process earlier this year, legal teams selected 14 representative products to test the arguments, and the remaining 231 products are scheduled to be finalized in advance of an August case management hearing. A two-day penalty hearing has been tentatively scheduled for December 16, where the ACCC and Coles will present legal submissions on what financial and legal penalties are appropriate for Coles’ violation of Australian consumer law. The court confirmed the ACCC is seeking both a significant financial penalty and declaratory relief that formally confirms Coles broke the law. The separate consumer class action, which has proceeded alongside the ACCC’s case to date, may be heard alongside the penalty hearing or split into a separate proceeding at a later date, depending on the court’s final decision. During the main liability trial, the court heard evidence that Coles had previously maintained an internal 12-week policy requiring products to be sold at a new baseline price for three months before the retailer could advertise it as a discount, a rule designed specifically to avoid misleading consumers about the authenticity of price cuts. However, amid intense price competition that witnesses described as a “race to the bottom” between Coles and its primary rival Woolworths, paired with widespread supplier price increases during the inflationary period, Coles cut this required waiting period from 12 weeks to just four weeks. Justice O’Bryan’s ruling confirmed that if Coles had retained the original 12-week waiting policy, ordinary consumers would have viewed the resulting price changes as genuine discounts. Notably, the judge also found that the underlying price increases implemented by Coles reflected actual supplier cost increases rather than artificially inflated baseline prices, a key point of distinction in the ruling. Coles has defended its conduct throughout the case, arguing that all price adjustments were legitimate responses to widespread inflation, and that the ‘Down Down’ campaign was intended to signal to consumers the retailer was working to keep grocery costs low. Following the liability ruling, ACCC Chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb confirmed the watchdog would push for a harsh penalty to act as a deterrent for similar misleading conduct across the retail sector. “While the level of penalty is a matter for the court to determine, the ACCC will be seeking a significant deterrent for such conduct,” Cass-Gottlieb said. “We will certainly make strong submissions on the level of penalty.” Justice O’Bryan has also issued suppression orders for certain commercial figures included in his ruling, to protect Coles’ commercially sensitive information including supplier costs, supplier funding support, and the retailer’s gross margin calculations. The case will next return to court for a case management hearing in August, with the final penalty decision not expected until early 2025 at the earliest.

A cult-favorite Australian ready-to-drink (RTD) alcoholic beverage brand founded by four star Australian Football League (AFL) players is making waves with a groundbreaking crowdfunding campaign that has already pulled in more than $2.2 million, on track to hit its $5 million target by this Wednesday.

Launched in 2023 by AFL standouts Bailey Smith, Nick Daicos, Josh Daicos and Charlie Curnow, Barry carved out a niche in the competitive RTD space with its line of low-sugar, low-carb spirit-based seltzers. The brand has already posted impressive early results, posting $3.68 million in revenue in the last financial year, achieving profitability early, and building a loyal customer base that has driven consistent, massive demand for its products.

Unlike most early-stage beverage brands that turn to traditional private equity for expansion capital, Barry made a deliberate choice to open up investment opportunities to everyday Australian consumers, allowing members of its loyal customer community to become direct stakeholders in the business. The campaign is hosted by Australian investment platform OnMarket, with a minimum investment threshold of just $250. Investors who participate will receive ordinary shares in the company, granting them formal shareholder status.

As of the latest update, Barry’s fundraising drive has already crossed the $2.2 million mark, and is set to close at 11:59 pm Wednesday. Company CEO Chris Pang noted that early response to the campaign has been far more promising than the team anticipated, crediting the brand’s tight-knit community for the groundswell of support. “The groundswell of support has been phenomenal and it’s clear that people can recognise the potential of the business,” Pang said, highlighting the brand’s early profitability and strong market traction. He added that the choice to pursue crowdfunding over private equity was rooted in the brand’s origins: “Our community has built Barry from day one and it’s important to us that they get to share its future.”

The Australian RTD market, which currently has a total valuation of $5 billion, is one of the fastest-growing segments in the domestic alcohol industry, expanding 15% year-on-year driven primarily by shifting consumer preferences among Gen Z drinkers who prioritize lower-sugar, lower-calorie ready-to-drink options. Barry is positioning itself to capture a larger share of this growing market with the capital raised through the campaign, with plans to allocate the new funding toward expanding national distribution and deepening partnerships with commercial stakeholders.

OnMarket Managing Director Tim Eisenhauer called the early response to Barry’s campaign exceptional and record-breaking, noting that the brand set a new platform record for the most single-day expression of interest sign-ups in the platform’s history.

Even amid the enthusiastic response, industry guidelines remind potential investors that crowdfunded investments in early-stage startups carry inherent high risk. Early-stage companies are far less established than mature public or private businesses, and carry a significantly higher failure rate than more traditional investment options. If the company were to collapse, investors would stand to lose their entire contributed capital.

The campaign marks a rare example of a consumer brand leaning into its community for growth capital rather than turning to institutional investors, giving casual consumers and loyal customers a rare opportunity to own a stake in a popular emerging business that aligns with their consumer preferences.