Alan Sugar
..as one door closes. Or so we are led to believe
31/07/07 22:30 Filed in: Personal
So.. despite the BBC telling us the Sir Alan Michael Sugar is Britain's most famous entrepreneur, fingers in pies and all that, he's selling his fledgling company Amstrad.
Now I've commented in the past on the alleged success of Amstrad previously. It was nothing personal, Sir Alan. It was just that the BBC tried to portray Amstrad as a real force within the technology market in the UK. With offices in Canary Wharf. None of which was actually true. Mind you, Sir Alan didn't exactly ingratiate himself to me when he criticised the 'Disney' approach to customer care; "This isn't a Mickey Mouse company!" he shouted. No. They are VERY successful and Amstrad ISN'T.
Anyway, he's sold Amstrad for £125 million to BSkyB. This is rather interesting, because Sky is Amstrad's main client and equated to 80% - 90% of their income. Now in the period year ending 2005 Amstrad made £100 million pounds (with just £19 million profit) the majority of which was from Sky.
In 2006 Sky has increased in customer base and obviously as a result Amstrad made more money. So I presume that Sky would have paid Amstrad approximately £120 million year ending 2006.
So, if you were Sky and wanted to cut costs... wouldn't YOU buy the supplier for your set top boxes for the same amount of money it costs you to buy the equipment from them? Sky have paired their costs down per customer.
Quite why the BBC would imagine this is a good deal for Sir Alan Sugar and a not so good deal for Sky is confusing.
Now I've commented in the past on the alleged success of Amstrad previously. It was nothing personal, Sir Alan. It was just that the BBC tried to portray Amstrad as a real force within the technology market in the UK. With offices in Canary Wharf. None of which was actually true. Mind you, Sir Alan didn't exactly ingratiate himself to me when he criticised the 'Disney' approach to customer care; "This isn't a Mickey Mouse company!" he shouted. No. They are VERY successful and Amstrad ISN'T.
Anyway, he's sold Amstrad for £125 million to BSkyB. This is rather interesting, because Sky is Amstrad's main client and equated to 80% - 90% of their income. Now in the period year ending 2005 Amstrad made £100 million pounds (with just £19 million profit) the majority of which was from Sky.
In 2006 Sky has increased in customer base and obviously as a result Amstrad made more money. So I presume that Sky would have paid Amstrad approximately £120 million year ending 2006.
So, if you were Sky and wanted to cut costs... wouldn't YOU buy the supplier for your set top boxes for the same amount of money it costs you to buy the equipment from them? Sky have paired their costs down per customer.
Quite why the BBC would imagine this is a good deal for Sir Alan Sugar and a not so good deal for Sky is confusing.
