Professional Research and Data GroupThe Professional, Research and Data Group, is a key part of the...

Professional Research and Data Group

COVID 19 Intelligence and Impact

May 2020

Role of the PRDG and the purpose of this pack

The Professional, Research and Data Group, is a key part of the High Streets Task Force. The High Streets Task Force was set up by UK Government in July 2020 to provide support to England's High Streets. Since COVID-19 the HSTF has pivoted to focus on supporting place leaders through COVID-19 crisis. This has meant refocusing the PRDG to a new aim.

We will work collaboratively, using our data, networks, skills and expertise to :• Understand the scale of the crisis and its impact on town centres/high streets• Support government with evidence/data for policy/response• Provide/sense-check the evidence-base for HSTF action and messaging

This slide pack summarises the latest data, research and insight the members of the PRDG have generated in order to inform practice and policy for high streets across England.

PRDG Organisation Members

Organisation Role

Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) PRDG Chair

Institute of Place Management (IPM) Research Lead & team

Manchester Metropolitan University (MMU) Member

Maybe Member

Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) Member

Springboard Member

Office for National Statistics (ONS) Member

Ordnance Survey (OS) Member

PwC HSTF PMO (secretariat)

Contents

Item Page

Springboard footfall data 5

Office for National Statistics Business Impacts data 11

Maybe update on social media monitoring 26

COVID-19 Business Resilience Survey 31

PwC Customer Sentiment 42

Google Mobility Data 54

Springboard footfall data

UK high street footfalldaily index 11th May 2020

Footfall benchmarksprovided by

Presented by

year-on-yearcomparison

-90%

-80%

-70%

-60%

-50%

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

22

/02

23

/02

24

/02

25

/02

26

/02

27

/02

28

/02

29

/02

01

/03

02

/03

03

/03

04

/03

05

/03

06

/03

07

/03

08

/03

09

/03

10

/03

11

/03

12

/03

13

/03

14

/03

15

/03

16

/03

17

/03

18

/03

19

/03

20

/03

21

/03

22

/03

23

/03

24

/03

25

/03

26

/03

27

/03

28

/03

29

/03

30

/03

31

/03

01

/04

02

/04

03

/04

04

/04

05

/04

06

/04

07

/04

08

/04

09

/04

10

/04

11

/04

12

/04

13

/04

14

/04

15

/04

16

/04

17

/04

18

/04

19

/04

20

/04

21

/04

22

/04

23

/04

24

/04

25

/04

26

/04

27

/04

28

/04

29

/04

30

/04

01

/05

02

/05

03

/05

04

/05

05

/05

06

/05

07

/05

08

/05

09

/05

10

/05

-85.6% compared to 2019 -7.0% compared to last week

Footfall Data: Overall

• Footfall in the UK has been falling since the end of February. Footfall today (11th May 2020) is 85.6% down compared to the same figure last year and 7.0% down compared to the same figure last week.

• However, on Wednesday 5th May, there was a spike in overall footfall (+38.3% compared to same figure previous week) that continued for the next two days (+33.7% on 6th May and 35.2% on 7th May compared to the same figures last week). This could potentially be explained by three main reasons:

• The weather improved and people may have enjoyed walks etc.• People preparing and shopping for the upcoming bank holiday.• The rumoured ease of lockdown expected from the PM’s announcement Sunday 10th

May.

UK high street footfalldaily index by signature type

Footfall benchmarksprovided by

Presented by

year-on-yearcomparison

Holiday

Speciality

Multifunctional

Comparison

-100%

-90%

-80%

-70%

-60%

-50%

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

22

/02

23

/02

24

/02

25

/02

26

/02

27

/02

28

/02

29

/02

01

/03

02

/03

03

/03

04

/03

05

/03

06

/03

07

/03

08

/03

09

/03

10

/03

11

/03

12

/03

13

/03

14

/03

15

/03

16

/03

17

/03

18

/03

19

/03

20

/03

21

/03

22

/03

23

/03

24

/03

25

/03

26

/03

27

/03

28

/03

29

/03

30

/03

31

/03

01

/04

02

/04

03

/04

04

/04

05

/04

06

/04

07

/04

08

/04

09

/04

10

/04

11

/04

12

/04

13

/04

14

/04

15

/04

16

/04

17

/04

18

/04

19

/04

20

/04

21

/04

22

/04

23

/04

24

/04

25

/04

26

/04

27

/04

28

/04

29

/04

30

/04

01

/05

02

/05

03

/05

04

/05

05

/05

06

/05

07

/05

08

/05

09

/05

10

/05

Footfall Data: Signature TypesHoliday townsAre busy in the summer and quiet in the winter. They focus on offering a good experience to visitors during the summer peak, ratherthan on their local catchment. They are attractive to tourists but have a relatively weak comparison offer. Footfall was down 86.6%compared to the same figure last year, but up 0.2% compared to the same figure last week.

Speciality townsGet busier after Easter, with the largest peak in footfall occurring in the summer, followed by a smaller peak before Christmas.Anchor(s) are not retail-based, offering something unique and special (e.g. heritage and culture). They attract visitors but serve localpopulation. Footfall was down 84.8% compared to the same figure last year and down 6.5% compared to the same figure last week.

Multifunctional townsHave a relatively flat footfall throughout the year with no noticeable peaks. The retail offer, opening times, events, services and otheruses are focussed on the local community. They have convenience anchors, work, public transport, shopping, markets etc. Theyorganise themselves to be reliable, community hubs. Footfall was down 84.8% compared to the same figure last year and down 7.3%compared to the same figure last week.

Comparison townsHave a noticeable peak in footfall in the lead-up to Christmas. They have a wide range of retail choice, leisure, food and beverage,strong retail anchor(s), and presence of international brands. People travel a considerable distance to visit and they serve a widecatchment area. Footfall was down 89.2% compared to the same figure last year and down 7.3% compared to the same figure lastweek.

Footfall Data: Signature Types

• In relation to the spike in footfall on the 5th May, multifunctional town centres saw the highest increase (+41.8 compared to same figure previous week). This could be due to their important role in serving the needs of their local catchment area. People may have done their bank holiday shopping and/or gone for walks due to improved weather conditions.

• Although also seeing a rise in footfall on the 5th May holiday towns experienced the lowest spike (+12.4% compared to same figure previous week). However, this improved over the next two days (+33.6% on 6th May and 29.9% on 7th May compared to the same figures last week respectively). This could be due to newspapers causing anticipations of lockdown restrictions being eased as the PM was holding an announcement on the 10th May which could allow travelling to locations by e.g. car for unlimited exercise.

Office for National Statistics –Business Impacts data

Business Impacts of COVID-19

6th April to 19th April (Sample: 4,690)Source : ONS

Confidence

72.1%

21.8%

6.1%

Confident Not Sure

Not confident

Workforce

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%30%

35%

40%

45%

Turnover2.7%

29.8%

2.5%

57.5%

6.9%

Turnover Increased

Financial performance unaffected

Affected but within normal range

Turnover Decreased

Not Sure

Business Impacts of COVID-19

• Turnover: Despite an encouraging 29.8% reporting that their financial performance were unaffected, 57.5% stated that their turnover had decreased.

• Workforce: Although 30% of the businesses surveyed had decreased business hours, 41% reported they had laid off staff in the short term.

• Confidence: Nevertheless, 72.1% of the businesses surveyed stated they were “confident”, giving an encouraging indication as it is up 11.7% compared to the previous survey period (23rd March - 5th April).

Less confident business types

6th April to 19th April (Sample 4,690)Source : ONS


• “Accommodation And Food Service Activities” is the least confident business type with 16% reporting they are “not confident”, closely followed by “Arts, Entertainment And Recreation” with 14% reporting they are “not confident”.

• “Human Health And Social Work Activities” is the most confident business type with only 1.5% reporting they are “not confident”.

Change from last survey period (23rd March - 5th April)

0.2%

-1.9%

-2.1%

-1.7%-3.4% -2.8%

0.1%

-0.6%

2.5%

-2.6%

4.9%

-9.6%

-12.0%

-10.0%

-8.0%

-6.0%

-4.0%

-2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

Manufacturing Water Supply,Sewerage,

WasteManagement

AndRemediation

Activities

Construction Wholesale AndRetail Trade;

Repair Of MotorVehicles AndMotorcycles

AccommodationAnd Food

ServiceActivities

TransportationAnd Storage

InformationAnd

Communication

Professional,Scientific And

TechnicalActivities

AdministrativeAnd Support

ServiceActivities

Education Human HealthAnd Social Work

Activities

Arts,EntertainmentAnd Recreation


Increase % = Increased confidence


• An increase in percentage (%) means the business type’s confidence is up compared to previous survey period.

• Confidence is up in the “Human Health and Social Work” industry compared to last survey period (+4.9%), followed by “Administrative and Support Service Activities” (+2.5%)

• “Arts, Entertainment and Recreation” is less confident compared to previous survey period (-9.6%). “Accommodation and Food Service Activities” are also slightly less confident compared to last survey period (-3.4%). Their confidence level could potentially be explained by these industries being impacted by COVID-19 first and due to restrictions, possibly the last to re-open.

Laying off staff in the short term



• “Construction” is the industry where the most businesses are laying off staff in the short term as 59.1% of respondents reported undertaking this measure. This can be expected to change in the next survey period as the PM urged this particular sector to return to work in his announcement 10th May.

• Only 17.0% of businesses in the “Human Health And Social Work Activities” industry reported that they have laid off staff short term. This could be explained by nature of the business type and the need for these businesses in the response to COVID-19.


5.9%

0.2%

-4.5%

0.4%

6.8%

-0.5%

0.8%1.3%

-1.6%

1.6%

-5.0%

3.9%

-6.0%

-4.0%

-2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%


WasteManagement

AndRemediation

Activities

Construction Wholesale AndRetail Trade;


AccommodationAnd Food

ServiceActivities


Information AndCommunication


TechnicalActivities


ServiceActivities


Activities



Increase % = laying off more staff


• An increase in percentage (%) means the sector is laying of more staff short term compared to previous survey period.

• Some businesses are laying off less staff compared to previous survey period, especially the “Human Health and Social Work Activities” with a change of -5.0% and “Construction” (-4.5%).

• However, “Accommodation and Food Service Activities” (change of +6.8%) and “Manufacturing” (change of +5.9%) are laying off more staff compared to last survey period, closely followed by “Arts, Entertainment and Recreation” (change of +3.9%).

Turnover substantially lower than normal*


*Due to a change in wording compared to the previous survey, “substantially lower” is regarded as turnover decreased by more than 50%.

Turnover substantially lower than normal

• The “Accommodation And Food Service Activities” continues to see the greatest financial impact of the pandemic as 57.0% of respondents reported their turnover has decreased by more than 50%. However, this is down 29.8% compared to previous survey period (23rd March - 5th

April).

• Only 10.8% of the “Human Health And Social Work Activities” industry reported a substantially lower turnover compared to the 73.6% of businesses in this sector reporting substantially lower turnover in the previous survey period (23rd March - 5th April).


34.2%

40.6%

33.1%

25.4%

29.8%

43.2%47.5%

41.5%38.7%

41.5%

62.8%

17.7%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%


WasteManagement

AndRemediation

Activities

Wholesale AndRetail Trade;


Construction AccommodationAnd Food

ServiceActivities


InformationAnd

Communication


TechnicalActivities


ServiceActivities


Activities



Increase % = lower decrease turnover


• Increase in percentage (%) means the sector is seeing a lower decrease in turnover.

• Last survey period, all but 3 sectors (“Accommodation And Food Service Activities”, "Information And Communication“ and “Arts, Entertainment And Recreation“) reported substantially lower turnover.

• Now, ALL industries are reporting a lower decrease in turnover. Greatest change is seen in the “Human Health and Social Work Activities” industry with a change of +62.8%.

• This means that whilst sectors are still seeing a decrease in turnover, it is not as substantial.

Maybe update on social media monitoring

• Weekly social media activity from businesses across UK towns have declined due to the COVID-19 induced lockdown.

• This activity has remained relatively low, despite some businesses attempting to move their operations and sales online.

• Cardiff was the town that saw a significant decline in social media activity mid-April. Whilst the other towns’ activity seems to have balanced, there was a drop in activity after the 19th of April for all. This was around the time the education secretary announced that they currently had no plans for schools to re-open open over the summer period.

Weekly social media activity of UK Towns

COVID-19 Business Resilience Survey

Hig

h S

tree

ts T

ask F

orc

e

• Survey conducted by IPM on behalf of the Professionals, Research and Data Group (PRDG).

• The purpose of this survey is to understand more about the impact on business of COVID-19 in particular locations and the current situation of businesses due to the impact of COVID-19 (including impact on finances, trading, loans, rent etc).

• 1016 businesses/organisations responded.

• Top Sectors represented: Retail sale of non-food (23.3%), F&B (17.7%), Arts, Entertainment & Recreation (7%), Other Service Activities (6.5%), Accommodation/Hospitality (5.6%)

• South East England was the top region represented and accounted for 22.20% of the responses.

• 80.1% of respondents were Independent business (1-9 outlets).

• 65.5% of respondents were limited companies.

• 58.8% of respondents had 1-9 employees.

• 55.5% of respondents stated that their premises are closed and the business is not currently operating.

• 26.6% of respondents reported a turnover of under £100,000 and 21.8% between £100,001-£250,000.

1 June 2020 High Streets Task Force 32

Study Context

Hig

h S

tree

ts T

ask F

orc

e

• under £100,000 26.6%

• £100,001-£250,000 21.8%

• £250,001-£500,000 15.4%

• £500,001-£750,000 7.3%

• £750,001-£1,000,000 61 6%

• £1,000,001-£2,000,000 9.1%

• £2,000,001-£5,000,000 4.2%

• £5,000,001-£10,000,000 3.1%

• £10,000,001-£50,000,000 2.7%

• over £50,000,000 0.9%


COVID-19 Impact on Takings

Impact on takings in

comparison with the same period

last year

Frequency Percent

81% - 100% decrease 685 67.4

51% - 80% decrease 113 11.1

26% - 50% decrease 97 9.5

1% - 25% decrease 65 6.4

Same as last year 22 2.2

1% - 25% increase 12 1.2

26% - 50% increase 1 0.1

51% - 80% increase 5 0.5

81% - 100% increase 8 0.8

more than 100% increase 8 0.8

Total 1016 100

Hig

h S

tree

ts T

ask F

orc

e

• 24.5% of businesses reported that they would cease trade in 3-4 months, whilst 19.8% said they estimated it to be more than 6 months.

• Interestingly, 20.3% felt it was out of their hands and stated that they did not know or that it was not their decision.


Estimated time before permanently ceasing trade

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

0-2 weeks

3-4 weeks

1-2 months

3-4 months

4-6 months

more than 6 months

I don't know/not my decision

Hig

h S

tree

ts T

ask F

orc

e

• 70.2% of respondents stated that they had received support for employees' wages through the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (‘Furlough’).

• The survey also identified that 61.1% spent their assistance on utilities, whilst 58.8% used it for paying suppliers.


Business Support measures taken0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Support for your employees' wages through the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (‘Furlough’)

Claiming back Statutory Sick Pay for employees

Deferment of VAT payments

Deferment of self-assessment payments (HMRC time to payarrangement)

Business Rates relief – Retail Hospitality and Leisure Sectors

Small Business Grant (£10,000)

Small Business Grant (£25,000)

Self-employment Income Support Scheme

Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme (CBILS) (£25K-£250K)

Coronavirus Large Business Interruption Loan Scheme (loans above£250K)

COVID-19 Corporate Financing Facility (CCFF)

Universal Credit

I have not received nor intend to apply for Government businessassistance

Don't know/Not my decision

Hig

h S

tree

ts T

ask F

orc

e

• Amount of businesses whose premises are closed and not operating per sector:

• Other service activities (86.6%)

• Food & Beverage (85.6%)

• Accommodation/Hospitality (78%)

• Retail sale of non-food (60.8%)

• Entertainment/Recreation (58%)

• Information & Communication (8%)

• Business Administration & Support (13.5%)

• Finance & Insurance (10.5%)

• Professional, scientific, legal & technical (1.8%)

• Impact on takings (81%-100% decrease compared to last year) per sector:

• Accommodation/Hospitality (88%)

• Food & Beverage (86.2%)

• Other service activities (82.5%)

• Retail sale of non-food (81.4%)

• Human Health & Social Work (71.4%)

• Information & Communication (16%)

• Real Estate (25.7%)

• Finance & Insurance (21.1%)

• Professional, scientific, legal & technical (17.5%)


Sector Analysis

Rather unsurprisingly, personal service providers find offsite strategies less effective than other sectors. In terms of rental payments, retailers, restaurants and pubs, and personal service providers seem to have struggled the most paying last month’s rent, and the majority of those businesses also stated that they will not be able to pay full rent next month. Overall, it is clear from this analysis that all retailers and the majority of personal services and food and beverage providers are mostly affected by the COVID-19 crisis.

Hig

h S

tree

ts T

ask F

orc

e


• Some activities can be performed in some sort of capacity away from the actual premises (professional services and private trade mostly).

• Most vulnerable businesses include personal services, food & beverage, and the majority of retail stores.

• Small businesses show less resilience than sole traders.

• The majority of business with annual turnover less than £2m are in considerable trouble.

• Businesses in the South may have a bit more financial leeway to alleviate the crisis.

Other Key Findings

Hig

h S

tree

ts T

ask F

orc

e

Business Resilience – Composite Score


This Business Resilience Framework shows the likelihood of a business to navigate the COVID-19 crisis based on:

• Financial Resilience (FR) = (Impact on Turnover*Cease Trading estimation*Financial Resources available)

• Assistance (A) = (Government assistance eligibility*Additional Assistance needed)

• Business Operating (B) (Yes/No)

• Renting Premises (RP) (Yes/No)

• Business Resilience Score = FR*(A*B*RP) (the highest the value the safer the business)

Business Operating (B)

(Yes/No)

Financial Resilience (FR)- Impact on Turnover

- Cease Trading estimation- Financial Resources

Assistance (A) - Government assistance eligibility

- Additional Assistance needed

Renting Premises (RP)

(Yes/No)

BUSINESS RESILIENCE

Flow diagram demonstrating how the Business Resilience composite score was calculated

Hig

h S

tree

ts T

ask F

orc

e

1 June 2020 39

Overall Average Resilience Score = 182.9

Minimum Value = 2

Maximum Value = 5184

Less resilient sectors:

1) Food & Beverage

2) Human Health/Social Work

3) Other Service Activities

4) Retail trade (all expect market traders)

More resilient sectors:

1) Finance/Insurance

2) Real Estate

3) Manufacturing

4) Professional, Scientific, Legal & Technical

Sector Mean ValueManufacturing 439.5

Construction 219.2

Motor Trades (including wholesale, retail trade and repair) 194.7

Retail sale of food (including groceries, specialty food) 107.1Retail sale of non-food (communication & household equipment, cultural & recreation, clothing & footwear, except Chemists) 102.8

Retail sale via stalls and markets 188.2

Retail trade not in stores, stalls or markets 83.6Transport & Storage (including Postal) 108.0Accommodation/Hospitality (Hotels, Hostels, Other Accommodation) 279.6

Food & Beverage (restaurants, pubs) 80.8Information & Communication 347.3Finance & Insurance 718.2Real Estate (Property) 430.5Professional, Scientific, Legal & Technical 377.2

Business Administration and Support Services 316.4Education 249.3

Human Health and Social Work 93.9Arts, Entertainment & Recreation (Performing arts, libraries, museums, sports facilities, etc) 200.6Other Service Activities (repair of computers & household goods, personal service activities such as dry-cleaning, hairdressing, physical well-being, etc.) 99.2

Business Resilience Scores Per Sector

Hig

h S

tree

ts T

ask F

orc

e

1 June 2020 40

# (%)

Business Assistance and Grants 255 (54%)

Eligibility 66 (14%)

Recommendations 48 (10%)

Banks and Loans (e.g. CIBIL) 47 (10%)

Timeframe for Payouts 39 (8%)

Directors and Sole Traders 27 (6%)

Information on Recovery Plan to End Lockdown 136 (29%)

Timing of Ending Lockdown 46 (10%)

Continuous Financial Support 43 (9%)

Cease of Trade and Operations 25 (5%)

Exit Strategy 22 (5%)

Less Viable 20 (4%)

Business Impact of Social Distancing 122 (26%)

Opening Post-Lockdown 60 (13%)

Currently Open 35 (7%)

Closed Due to Lockdown 22 (5%)

Context Specific Issues 90 (19%)

Sector or Type of Business 70 (15%)

Location 24 (5%)

Relationship with Landlords 51 (11%)

Personal Anxiety 45 (9%)

Themes and sub-themes

All Comments

(n =475)

• Many businesses feel excluded from grants (especially due to the 51k cap) or that the grants take too long to receive.

• Several call for more information on recovery to end lockdown and highlight the need for continuous financial support as their businesses will either cease trade or be significantly less viable without it.

• The business impact of social distancing, both the current and post-lockdown, is worrying for businesses in terms of cost of practicing it and the practicalities around this.

• Several context specific issues emerged both in terms of business types and location.

• Problematic relationships with landlords.

• Personal anxieties and stress exacerbated by the pandemic.

Issues highlighted by businesses

Hig

h S

tree

ts T

ask F

orc

e


“Businesses with rateable value over £51K should be given a grant just like thebusinesses under £51K vale have been awarded. To leave us out isdiscriminatory”. (Industry: Food & Beverage (restaurants, pubs)).

“Uncertainty regarding "end date" is perhaps the most worrying aspect”.(Industry: Professional, Scientific, Legal & Technical).

“We are very concerned that when we reopen, we will not be in a strongfinancial position”. (Industry: Food & Beverage (restaurants, pubs)).

“We are concerned that when we reopen, clients will be able to move freelyenough so they can visit us? Also due to social distancing, will we be able toaccommodate all clients that want to come in?” (Industry: Hairdressing).

“As a coastal destination business I feel we are already struggling before theCOVID-19 outbreak to sustain profitable business due to our location and thereliance on people travelling to the area. If going forward the landscapechanges and people don't travel outside of their near area we will struggle tomaintain the business”. (Industry: Food & Beverage (restaurants, pubs)).

“Landlord has gone silent and not discussing rent negotiations”. (Industry: Retailtrade not in stores, stalls or markets).

“Mental health issues because of the stress and worry of my businesssurviving”. (Industry: Human Health and Social Work).

Illustrative Quotes from the Open Comments Supporting the Main

Themes of the Survey Analysis

Theme: Business Assistance and Grants

Theme: Information on Recovery Plan to End Lockdown

Theme: Information on Recovery Plan to End Lockdown

Theme: Business Impact of Social Distancing

Theme: Context Specific Issues

Theme: Relationship with Landlords

Theme: Personal Anxiety

PwC Customer Sentiment

Consumer Markets

PwC Consumer SentimentSpring 2020 update

Strictly Private and Confidential

5 May 2020

PwC

5 May 2020Strictly private and confidential

Consumer sentiment has been volatile in recent years…

2PwC Consumer Sentiment

COVID-19 restrictions

27% 26%21%

24%

13%19%

-29%-24%

-28%-22%

-39%-33%

Mar-20Dec-18 Sep-19Apr-19 Dec-19 Apr-20

Balance of opinion

Worse off than last year

Bettter off than last year

1% -7% 3% -26% -14%-3%Net

sentiment

PwC Consumer Sentiment, 2018-20

“Thinking about your disposable income in the next 12 months, do you think your household will be…?”

Live between

20-22 March

Live between

9-11 April

2019 e

lections

Ne

w P

M

Lockd

ow

n

Source: PwC Consumer Sentiment Survey

First B

rexit d

ea

dlin

es

Sch

oo

ls c

losed

PwC


• Consumer sentiment has changed with situations over time, as seen in the graph; e.g. due to the prolonged Brexit process and the political uncertainties.

• As seen in the graph, consumer sentiment also dropped when UK schools closed and lockdown was imposed due to COVID-19.

• Although after some time in lockdown, sentiment had improved slightly throughout the beginning of April.

Consumer sentiment over the past 2 years

PwC


…but sentiment is still better than during the global financial crisis and austerity periods


PwC Consumer Sentiment, 2008-20

“Thinking about your disposable income in the next 12 months, do you think your household will be…?”


-65%

-55%

-45%

-35%

-25%

-15%

-5%

5%

15%

25%

35%

Ap

r 200

8

Jun

2008

Au

g 2

008

Oct 200

8

Nov 2

008

Fe

b 2

009

Ma

y 2

00

9

Oct 200

9

Jan

2010

Ma

y 2

01

0

Jul 2010

Oct 201

0

Dec 2

010

Jan

2011

Ma

y 2

01

1

Se

p 2

011

Dec 2

011

Ma

y 2

01

2

Se

pt 2

01

2

Jan

2013

May 2

013

Se

pt 2

01

3

Jan

2014

Au

g 2

014

Nov 2

014

Jan

2015

Ap

r 201

5

Se

pt 2

01

5

Nov 2

015

Dec 2

015

Ma

r 20

16

Jul 2016

Se

p 2

016

Dec 2

016

Ma

r 20

17

Jun

2017

Se

p 2

017

Dec 2

017

Ap

r 201

8

Se

p 2

018

Dec 2

018

Ap

r 201

9

Se

p 2

019

Dec 2

019

Mar

20

20

Ap

r 202

0

Much better off than last year

Somewhat better off than last year

Much worse off than last year

Somewhat worse off than last year

Balance of opinion

PwC


• Despite sentiment decreasing due to COVID-19, it is not as low as during the global financial crisis in 2007-08.

• This could potentially be due to many now receiving government support and/or saving money by not travelling to and from work as a result of the pandemic.

Consumer sentiment over the years

PwC


PwC’s Consumer Sentiment Index has historically been a good predictor of future consumer spending patterns


PwC Consumer Sentiment vs Consumer Spending, 2008-20

Source: PwC Consumer Sentiment Survey, ONS

-7%

-5%

-3%

-1%

1%

3%

5%

-50%

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

2008Q2

2008Q4

2009Q2

2009Q4

2010Q2

2010Q4

2011Q2

2011Q4

2012Q2

2012Q4

2013Q2

2013Q4

2014Q2

2014Q4

2015Q2

2015Q4

2016Q2

2016Q4

2017Q2

2017Q4

2018Q2

2018Q4

2019Q2

2019Q4

2020Q2

PwC consumer sentiment, balance of opinion (LHS)

Consumer spending, annual change (RHS)

PwC


• As illustrated by the graph, consumer sentiment has correlated well with spending as a decline in sentiment has resulted in declined spending.

• As consumer sentiment has declined during the pandemic – so has spending, potentially even more than what the sentiment predicted.

Consumer Sentiment Index and Spending

PwC


The most recent survey saw improvements across every demographic and region


Source: PwC Consumer Sentiment SurveyNote: regional sample sizes are small, and results are volatile from survey to survey

-26-23

-15

-27-34

-38

-19-14

+15

-7

-14

-23

-35

-16

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

+0

+10

+20

National average 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 plus

Net

co

ns

um

er

sen

tim

en

t

Net consumer sentiment by age

-23

-32

-14-20

-27 -26 -25-27 -27

-40

-30-26

+11

+1

-9 -10 -12 -13 -14 -16 -17-22 -22 -23

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

+0

+10

+20

NorthernIreland

Wales London EastMidlands

North East North West Yorkshireand theHumber

Scotland South East East ofEngland

WestMidlands

South West

Net

co

ns

um

er

sen

tim

en

t

Net consumer sentiment by region

Mar 2020 Apr 2020

PwC


• The graph shows that consumer sentiment went up significantly amongst the age group 18 –24 in April despite the lockdown. This could potentially be due to still being enrolled in full time education and receiving student loans, thus their financial situation may not have changed (unless they have part-time employment they are unable to perform).

• Whilst other age groups also have improved, their sentiment is still low. Sentiment was lowest in the age groups 55 – 64. Perhaps, if finding themselves unemployed due to COVID-19, they believe it will be harder for them to find work after the pandemic has passed, thus feeling the prolonged effects more.

• Consumer sentiment in Northern Ireland and Wales have improved, and despite seeing some improvement too, England and Scotland’s sentiment remains low.

Sentiment across every demographic and region

PwC


Many consumers say they will change their shopping behaviour after the current lockdown



Shopping behaviour since and after the lockdown

“As a result of the current Coronavirus restrictions, and after they are lifted, have you bought or will you buy more from…?”

23%

32%

21%

24% 24%

20%21%22%

27%

17%

19%

23%24%

22%22%

32%

21%21%

18%

22%

19%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Nationalaverage

18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 plus

After lockdown

Small businesses instead of big brands Local high street stores Brands that look after their staff

19%

16%

8%

23%

22% 22%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Smallbusinesses

instead of bigbrands

Local highstreet stores

Brands thatlook after their

staff

Since and after lockdown

Since lockdown After lockdown

PwC


• These graphs clearly show that consumer behaviour could change significantly as a result of the pandemic.

• Consumers feel it is more important to shop local to support local businesses which is good news for the high streets.

• Consumers value brands that look after their staff more as this became crucial during the pandemic.

• As seen in the graph, young people report that they will support small businesses instead of big brands more which again – is good news for the high street.

Consumer behaviour

Google Mobility Data

Germany and Austria - Post Lockdown

Germany and Austria - Post Lockdown● Mobility decreased across the two countries when lockdown and social

distancing measures were imposed, and mobility for retail and recreation (e.g. restaurants, cafes, shopping centres, theme parks, museums, libraries, and movie theatres) were down 46% compared to baseline in Germany and 43% in Austria.

● However, groceries and pharmacies has seen an increase of 3% compared to baseline in Germany and 4% in Austria.

● Despite small shops being re-opened in Germany on 21st April, mobility across places have been steady, with a slight increase in groceries and pharmacies and retail and recreation around 30th April.

● Austria however saw a greater increase in mobility when non-essential retailers re-opened 14th April.

● As also seen, there was a significant drop in mobility in both countries during Easter.

Denmark and Norway - Post Lockdown

Denmark and Norway - Post Lockdown● Mobility decreased across the two countries when lockdown was imposed,

and mobility for retail and recreation (e.g. restaurants, cafes, shopping centres, theme parks, museums, libraries, and movie theatres) were down 34% compared to baseline in Denmark and 16% in Norway.

● When lockdown was imposed in Norway on the 12th March, there was a clear spike in mobility in grocery stores and pharmacies, most likely due to panic buying.

● Despite schools being re-opened in Denmark on 15th April and kinder gardens being re-opened in Norway on 20th April, mobility remained steady.

● As also seen, there was a significant drop in mobility in both countries during Easter.

Some Further InsightsAt a country level it appears that there is a lag of mobility despite formal restrictions being lifted. This varies between the four countries shown but looks to be at least a week before a significant uptick in traffic.

It would be interesting to analyse mobility at a city level, which is possible in the data. Similar cultures, population densities and industries would be useful to get more insight into potential behaviours in the UK. Alongside this if new cases were mapped against mobility it could be an interesting tool to track the transmission of Covid-19, though there would need to be roughly 2 weeks of data following the restrictions being lifted to account for the incubation period.

If you would like to find out more about the High Streets Task Force, please visit

https://www.highstreetstaskforce.org.uk/

https://www.highstreetstaskforce.org.uk/

Professional Research and Data GroupThe Professional, Research and Data Group, is a key part of the...

Documents

Transcript of Professional Research and Data GroupThe Professional, Research and Data Group, is a key part of the...