According to a review of tomorrow's final, Bianca expects customers to pay £35 a pair for her tights LOL.
Interestingly, "as the final task gains momentum, and Mark is moved by the effort of his team, it is his bland SEO business we root for."
Can't wait.
There are some daft people out there who will pay silly prices for their hosiery......
A few years ago there was a thing for tights with sparkly bits at the ankle - and I stupidly paid around £6 for a pair of them in Harrods (well just to keep things straight - it was in the early 80s and ordinary M&S tights were 3 pairs for £1 or so back then...) well above anything id normally pay......... the tights were gorgeous, very fine (still nylon - not silk though!) and fitted like a dream, but the first time I wore them they laddered in a strange manner from a point just under my heel - and when i say ladder - I mean several wide ladders going right up my leg - and no apparent reason why. there was no rough skin, nothing inside my shoe to catch and i didn't catch it on anything....
A very expensive mistake - and projected forward - I suppose those could be around the £35 mark these days - but they were definitely special occasion wear - not everyday tights.
That's probably Bianca blown out of the water...... the ordinary person just couldnt afford those prices for such an everyday item!
According to a review of tomorrow's final, Bianca expects customers to pay £35 a pair for her tights LOL.
Interestingly, "as the final task gains momentum, and Mark is moved by the effort of his team, it is his bland SEO business we root for."
Can't wait.
It looks to be predictably disappointing.
As boring, as dull and unimaginative as it is, obviously he's going to take up Mark's business proposal.
Even if Bianca blows him out of the water in the task it won't make much difference.
I just can't see AS going into the business of making tights anyway.
If Bianca wants to charge £35 for a pair of tights I genuinely don't understand why he put her in the final over some of the others who left before her.
If Bianca is asking for £35 per pair, she is living in cloud cuckoo land. I will pay good money for good shoes; lovely handbags; well fitting trousers etc. But I would NEVER pay £35 for a pair of tights. I am sure there are people who would, but it must be a limited market at that price.
A bit hypocritical to be honest. "I choose not to spend a lot on tights, but I will spend a lot on handbags". Right...
A bit hypocritical to be honest. "I choose not to spend a lot on tights, but I will spend a lot on handbags". Right...
Not really - a good pair of shoes and in particular a handbag can last for years and years, but certainly for me I only have to look at a pair of tights before they ladder, and it doesn't seem to matter how much they cost
A bit hypocritical to be honest. "I choose not to spend a lot on tights, but I will spend a lot on handbags". Right...
How's it hypocritical? Handbags are designed to last a lot longer than tights are. If a handbag became unusable after using it a couple of times you'd take it back but with tights its normally just chalked up to experience. I buy a lot more tights than I do handbags plus handbags surely cost a lot more to produce so it doesn't make any sense to spend the same amount.
Can I just ask... what is the point in watching the show if you actively look for spoilers?
I'm not here to criticise your way of thinking, or how you enjoy the show, but I just can't get my head around why anyone would come to this thread/contribute to it while the show is going on. Surely it affects your enjoyment of the show massively?
If Bianca wants to charge £35 for a pair of tights I genuinely don't understand why he put her in the final over some of the others who left before her.
Because if she sells 100,000 tights, at a 40% profit they make 1.4 million. At low cost, you need to sell many more, and the profit per tight is tiny. Cheaper may prove better, once you can afford to research the market properly, but she plumped for expensive. Many overhead costs will remain the same, and some - like storage costs - will be lower, for fewer of an expensive product, and you may. get more money back quicker?
Lord Sugar wants a big return on his 250k. So less exciting figures may be fatal.
And if Mark has his wage slaves out there visiting 5 days a week, at two customers a day, at £400 a visit, hes going to pull in £200k from each worker - who cost him 20- 25k and some fuel. Mark can get to similar figures with half a dozen workers, a full timetable, and some bigger customers.
Bianca has to match Mark's offering. Either she suggest a much bigger market exists at a lower price, or there's still an adequate smaller one at a much higher price.
The better contestants who were not there were offering him too little money, or needing far more, and offering much more risk . Katie's restaurant was offering healthy food - which may be relatively cheap .He suggested some figures for how litlle it could earn given the numbers of meals it could sell, and how much it would have to pay out for staff, and food . He was talking tens of thousands of profits - not hundreds of thousands. Equally Roisin needed much more than 250k , and posed bigger risks than Bianca , let alone Mark. Once you take out the unviable ideas ,and the viable ones returning too little, or risking too much, or needing too much effort, he probably ended up with two of the few in his right ballpark?
Because if she sells 100,000 tights, at a 40% profit they make 1.4 million. At low cost, you need to sell many more, and the profit per tight is tiny. Cheaper may prove better, once you can afford to research the market properly, but she plumped for expensive. Many overhead costs will remain the same, and some - like storage costs - will be lower, for fewer of an expensive product, and you may. get more money back quicker?
Lord Sugar wants a big return on his 250k. So less exciting figures may be fatal.
And if Mark has his wage slaves out there visiting 5 days a week, at two customers a day, at £400 a visit, hes going to pull in £200k from each worker - who cost him 20- 25k and some fuel. Mark can get to similar figures with half a dozen workers, a full timetable, and some bigger customers.
Bianca has to match Mark's offering. Either she suggest a much bigger market exists at a lower price, or there's still an adequate smaller one at a much higher price.
The better contestants who were not there were offering him too little money, or needing far more, and offering much more risk . Katie's restaurant was offering healthy food - which may be relatively cheap .He suggested some figures for how litlle it could earn given the numbers of meals it could sell, and how much it would have to pay out for staff, and food . He was talking tens of thousands of profits - not hundreds of thousands. Equally Roisin needed much more than 250k , and posed bigger risks than Bianca , let alone Mark. Once you take out the unviable ideas ,and the viable ones returning too little, or risking too much, or needing too much effort, he probably ended up with two of the few in his right ballpark?
Your principle is fine but the numbers are a bit out of kilter. Remember, Bianca's £35 was the retail selling price (which includes 20% VAT). She would sell to the retailer at much less than £35 because the price includes the retailer margin. (Plus there may be an intermediate distributor involved too, who would also take a margin - big businesses will typically not take deliveries from small suppliers, as it's too fiddly.)
So Bianca would be selling in to the retailer/distributor at, say, £10 per pack. Assume her margin net of manufacturing costs etc is 70% (I'm making that up, but probably ballpark), and she makes a gross profit of £3 per pack - so on 100,000 sales that's a £300,000 gross profit.
Then subtract overhead costs, salary costs, etc, and her net profit will be much lower still.
Of course, the £35 is redundant. By her pitch she was down to £20 and she's now confirmed she's planning to retail at £7.99.
Comments
Suggests that the person they imply should win (as implied by Slouchingthatch) is Mark. Definitely confident that he wins now.
There are some daft people out there who will pay silly prices for their hosiery......
A few years ago there was a thing for tights with sparkly bits at the ankle - and I stupidly paid around £6 for a pair of them in Harrods (well just to keep things straight - it was in the early 80s and ordinary M&S tights were 3 pairs for £1 or so back then...) well above anything id normally pay......... the tights were gorgeous, very fine (still nylon - not silk though!) and fitted like a dream, but the first time I wore them they laddered in a strange manner from a point just under my heel - and when i say ladder - I mean several wide ladders going right up my leg - and no apparent reason why. there was no rough skin, nothing inside my shoe to catch and i didn't catch it on anything....
A very expensive mistake - and projected forward - I suppose those could be around the £35 mark these days - but they were definitely special occasion wear - not everyday tights.
That's probably Bianca blown out of the water...... the ordinary person just couldnt afford those prices for such an everyday item!
Considering the USP is colour matching I'd expect 10 quid to be a fair price which still makes the premium in the mass market.
It looks to be predictably disappointing.
As boring, as dull and unimaginative as it is, obviously he's going to take up Mark's business proposal.
Even if Bianca blows him out of the water in the task it won't make much difference.
I just can't see AS going into the business of making tights anyway.
A bit hypocritical to be honest. "I choose not to spend a lot on tights, but I will spend a lot on handbags". Right...
Not really - a good pair of shoes and in particular a handbag can last for years and years, but certainly for me I only have to look at a pair of tights before they ladder, and it doesn't seem to matter how much they cost
How's it hypocritical? Handbags are designed to last a lot longer than tights are. If a handbag became unusable after using it a couple of times you'd take it back but with tights its normally just chalked up to experience. I buy a lot more tights than I do handbags plus handbags surely cost a lot more to produce so it doesn't make any sense to spend the same amount.
I'm not here to criticise your way of thinking, or how you enjoy the show, but I just can't get my head around why anyone would come to this thread/contribute to it while the show is going on. Surely it affects your enjoyment of the show massively?
Because if she sells 100,000 tights, at a 40% profit they make 1.4 million. At low cost, you need to sell many more, and the profit per tight is tiny. Cheaper may prove better, once you can afford to research the market properly, but she plumped for expensive. Many overhead costs will remain the same, and some - like storage costs - will be lower, for fewer of an expensive product, and you may. get more money back quicker?
Lord Sugar wants a big return on his 250k. So less exciting figures may be fatal.
And if Mark has his wage slaves out there visiting 5 days a week, at two customers a day, at £400 a visit, hes going to pull in £200k from each worker - who cost him 20- 25k and some fuel. Mark can get to similar figures with half a dozen workers, a full timetable, and some bigger customers.
Bianca has to match Mark's offering. Either she suggest a much bigger market exists at a lower price, or there's still an adequate smaller one at a much higher price.
The better contestants who were not there were offering him too little money, or needing far more, and offering much more risk . Katie's restaurant was offering healthy food - which may be relatively cheap .He suggested some figures for how litlle it could earn given the numbers of meals it could sell, and how much it would have to pay out for staff, and food . He was talking tens of thousands of profits - not hundreds of thousands. Equally Roisin needed much more than 250k , and posed bigger risks than Bianca , let alone Mark. Once you take out the unviable ideas ,and the viable ones returning too little, or risking too much, or needing too much effort, he probably ended up with two of the few in his right ballpark?
So Bianca would be selling in to the retailer/distributor at, say, £10 per pack. Assume her margin net of manufacturing costs etc is 70% (I'm making that up, but probably ballpark), and she makes a gross profit of £3 per pack - so on 100,000 sales that's a £300,000 gross profit.
Then subtract overhead costs, salary costs, etc, and her net profit will be much lower still.
Of course, the £35 is redundant. By her pitch she was down to £20 and she's now confirmed she's planning to retail at £7.99.