If leah has lost 50k in a year I don't hold out much hope for mark
DUNDEEBOY
Posts: 109,938 Forum Member
✭✭✭✭
In the papers today that Leah's business has allegedly lost 50k in a year so don't hold out much hope for marks junk business this time next year
0
Comments
The article you referred to was written by a journo with zero knowledge of how business works.
I assume into the ground
Is he limiting his travel radius and therefore his customer base or is this a very localised internet marketing business ? Doesn't sound sustainable.
He was a business advisor for the youth enterprise scheme (I think that's what it was called?), though. I don't know if his observation applies to the usual business world.
True. But the issue would be how that fits in with the Sugar criteria for choosing the investment option in the first place, and the arguments he's used to refuse others.
Obviously if he has spent more than 250k , its difficult to rule out spending more elsewhere. He also can't argue against waiting for profits to grow elsewhere. He also clearly would have been better off so far taking something that offered much lower returns.
Indeed i imagine she has to buy quite expensive clinical facilities upfront, and hire and train staff. But if he accepts that with her he can't really make a point if somone else doesn't offer an early profit.
It's a common mistake to assume that the financial model is the same for different businesses - there are as many variations as there are industries.
2. All business make losses in year 1, the more comlicated businesses tend to have a longer period to profitability, unless you're an ebay business or a market trader where you can make a profit in the first week.
3. Her accounts are made up to June 2014. her p&l is -£49K which is probably because of acquisition of capital assets which is very expensive for a surgery.
https://www.duedil.com/company/08610855/dr-leah-limited
The problem I see is they can't actually deliver what they promise! Why? well what happens when you have 2 businesses that sell/do the same thing, both can't be top and if you have several businesses doing the same thing then they all can't be on page one. The only way it really works is if you constrain them to area/regional search's, so for instance you search "car mechanics, Brixton" etc, but again what if there are 2 or more in Brixton. I notice they cover their tracks by then claiming "we'll get you higher up on the search engine" instead of the original "we'll get you to the top"
I wouldn't be surprised to see Climb Online rebranded either. The domain names haven't been acquired and does an online business really need the word "online" in its title? It just sounds too late 90s dot com. The logo was rubbish too and looked like a piece of Clipart.
As above, it does seem unlikely that they had been working on their business plan for months and yet the brand name is thought up in a few minutes.
It may not be the most original of ideas but it has a good opportunity for making money in the short term at a fairly low risk. Sugar will give it a few years, get bored of it and then sell it to one of the big boys for a good profit. The tights (or "stockings" as Mark insisted on calling them) business was far more risky. £250,000 was nowhere near enough and any of the established manufacturers could bring out a competing product easily. The fact that they haven't already suggests that maybe the market isn't there.
Can you prove otherwise ?
One of the losers is also in a partnership with Sugar and she's making money too.
Prove what otherwise? I said IF the news about Leah is true.