Chiffre d’affaires en berne, licenciements à venir : comment le groupe LDLC en est-il arrivé là ?
 
Fragilisé, le Groupe LDLC, spécialisé dans la distribution en ligne de matériel informatique et multimédia, envisage le licenciement de 88 salariés pour réduire ses coûts dans le cadre de deux projets de PSE (Plan de Sauvegarde de l’Emploi). On vous explique pourquoi
 
Le groupe LDLC incarne l’une des plus belles success-stories lyonnaises de ces dernières années mais doit se résoudre en ce début d’année « à contrecœur », selon Laurent de la Clergerie, son président fondateur, à faire le dos rond, enrayer la chute vertigineuse de son chiffre d’affaires passé de 720 millions d’euros en 2020/2021 à 571 millions d’euros en 2023/2024.
 
Une dégringolade du groupe coté qui ne s’est pas estompée puisque celui-ci a enregistré sur les neuf premiers mois de l’exercice 2024-2025 un chiffre d’affaires de 396,6 millions d’euros, en baisse de -8,1 % par rapport à la même période de l’exercice précédent.

 
Our understanding is that retailers have been buying and stockpiling RDNA4 cards since January at a price much higher than $550/600 US (or equivalent). The expectation was then a rebate from AMD to enable prices near the MSRP once the price (reduced at the last minute) was announced But of course these rebates are selective and only apply to limited quantities of some models. If the MSRP is (let's say) $100 lower than the lowest price retailers paid to stockpile cards, why doesn't the rebate apply to ALL cards instead of a limited quantity? This would mean -$100 on the MSRP models, but also -$100 on the non MSRP cards, keeping overall pricing down. That clearly hasn't happened, because the 'next up' model in the line is 20%+ over the MSRP. So effectively the real price most consumers have paid for the 9070 XT is at least $730 US, and for the 5070 Ti is at least $900 US. This is a slightly smaller difference between these GPUs than comparing MSRPs, which is bad for AMD. It's also why when discussing prices we didn't assume AMD would be able to supply cards at $600 while the 5070 Ti would always be $900. Comparisons always should be MSRP vs MSRP or real vs real.
 
 
The whole thing is a mess because this "rebate" system means AMD charges AIBs a higher price and works with retailers to bring the price down to the MSRP.
 
This is how the 7900 XT for example eventually works its way down from $900 to $700. The AIB still makes $900 models, retailers get a rebate to hit $700 (usually, there are other methods too)
 
The problem is when you stockpile a ton of models, AMD has to retroactively apply the price. The AIBs have to set a price of $730+ because when they made the card in January, that's what they paid for the GPU (+margin). Retailers have to charge that because they also paid that to obtain the cards. The system all works if EVERY card then gets a rebate worldwide, adjusting everything to be in line with the advertised MSRP. If that's only applied selectively (eg some cards, some regions)...
 
There is hope though, because now that stockpiled inventory is clearing, back end prices can be reset. AMD can charge an amount for the GPU that enables the MSRP before it hits retailers, and no rebates are needed.
 
But they have to do that, and both AMD and AIB need to not be tempted to maintain insane prices

 
Our understanding is that retailers have been buying and stockpiling RDNA4 cards since January at a price much higher than $550/600 US (or equivalent). The expectation was then a rebate from AMD to enable prices near the MSRP once the price (reduced at the last minute) was announced But of course these rebates are selective and only apply to limited quantities of some models. If the MSRP is (let's say) $100 lower than the lowest price retailers paid to stockpile cards, why doesn't the rebate apply to ALL cards instead of a limited quantity? This would mean -$100 on the MSRP models, but also -$100 on the non MSRP cards, keeping overall pricing down. That clearly hasn't happened, because the 'next up' model in the line is 20%+ over the MSRP. So effectively the real price most consumers have paid for the 9070 XT is at least $730 US, and for the 5070 Ti is at least $900 US. This is a slightly smaller difference between these GPUs than comparing MSRPs, which is bad for AMD. It's also why when discussing prices we didn't assume AMD would be able to supply cards at $600 while the 5070 Ti would always be $900. Comparisons always should be MSRP vs MSRP or real vs real.
 
 
The whole thing is a mess because this "rebate" system means AMD charges AIBs a higher price and works with retailers to bring the price down to the MSRP.
 
This is how the 7900 XT for example eventually works its way down from $900 to $700. The AIB still makes $900 models, retailers get a rebate to hit $700 (usually, there are other methods too)
 
The problem is when you stockpile a ton of models, AMD has to retroactively apply the price. The AIBs have to set a price of $730+ because when they made the card in January, that's what they paid for the GPU (+margin). Retailers have to charge that because they also paid that to obtain the cards. The system all works if EVERY card then gets a rebate worldwide, adjusting everything to be in line with the advertised MSRP. If that's only applied selectively (eg some cards, some regions)...
 
There is hope though, because now that stockpiled inventory is clearing, back end prices can be reset. AMD can charge an amount for the GPU that enables the MSRP before it hits retailers, and no rebates are needed.
 
But they have to do that, and both AMD and AIB need to not be tempted to maintain insane prices