Babestation - General Chat & Discussion

(21-02-2015 13:38 )tony confederate Wrote:  By their own admission their core business (Babestation) is unprofitable, has been subject to cost saving measures and needs more cost savings before it's likely to be profitable.

that's the bit i don't get based on there actions of late, as wages are one off if not the biggest expenses a company has, yet all bs have been doing is signing big names on big wages, wot else can they do follow 66 in not employing cameramen/producers

(21-02-2015 13:57 )winsaw Wrote:  wot else can they do

Here's the answer.

Cellcast are "continually looking at ways of reducing costs further, specifically through the renegotiation of bandwidth commitments."

(21-02-2015 13:38 )tony confederate Wrote:  

(21-02-2015 12:53 )HannahsPet Wrote:  People need to realise that Cellcast losses are not just down to babestation but the whole cellcast group. they cant be that short of cash if they spent 1million pounds on an aquisiition last year

They aren't short of cash. They sold a freeview channel last year and the last accounts show that they have £847,000 in the bank, although their net worth is almost minus 2 million.

(21-02-2015 12:53 )HannahsPet Wrote:  i bet if you really looked at the books Babestation would prob be still the companys main money earner and its the other channels that are dragging it down

By their own admission their core business (Babestation) is unprofitable, has been subject to cost saving measures and needs more cost savings before it's likely to be profitable.

Where is this so called own admission do you have a link for anything from them

(21-02-2015 13:37 )terence Wrote:  i'd laugh if claire actually decided to rock up on babestation. some on here would loose there shit!

Not half they would .
It would be hilarious .
Just to rub it in lets have a 2-4-1 with Dannii and Clare.

Look at what you could have won .

(21-02-2015 14:06 )BarrieBF Wrote:  Cellcast are "continually looking at ways of reducing costs further, specifically through the renegotiation of bandwidth commitments."

ok how much will this save them as i don't know anything about this and is it enough to offset the higher wage bill they now have

(21-02-2015 14:32 )winsaw Wrote:  

(21-02-2015 14:06 )BarrieBF Wrote:  Cellcast are "continually looking at ways of reducing costs further, specifically through the renegotiation of bandwidth commitments."

ok how much will this save them as i don't know anything about this and is it enough to offset the higher wage bill they now have

That quote by BarrieBF seems to be a old Cellcast statement concerning bandwidth cost reduction .
The latest one dated January 16th 2015 says this

"we are delighted to conclude the restructuring of our bandwidth commitments. This marks the final stage in the cost restructuring process under taken by the company over the last 18 months".

The cost cutting exercise was to offset the declining demand for it's core products and services. The Babestation channels were never named specifically from what i can see, but i'm guessing they would be deemed a core product .

info here http://www.cellcast.tv/html/news/archive...01-15.aspx

(edit) I suppose you could actually argue that signing girls such has Dannii could result in a increase in the core demand for Cellcasts services .

thanks mr mystery, so if they have finished all the restructuring and they are still losing money it sounds like the big name higher wage bill is a big punt, with a lot riding on the big names being able to bring in a lot more calls, i guess we will find out if it's working in a few months if they let a lot of girls go the punt did not come off

(21-02-2015 13:37 )terence Wrote:  i'd laugh if claire actually decided to rock up on babestation. some on here would loose there shit!

Think you won't be laughing and people won't be losing their shit because when clare leaves s66 next week, she's leaving the babeshows and the glamour/adult industry altogether.

Agree winsaw, it's a big punt what bs are doing riding on big names bringing in the calls, we'll know if it's not worked as bs will have to let babes go

(21-02-2015 08:46 )dominar rygel xvi Wrote:  Yes he's losing money on a remarkable scale. Give the man an award.

Well he's more likely to win an award unlike a troll like you. Thanks for the neutral you dished me, I really wish I could aspire to your level.

Yes well I see a lot of member's took my comment about the BS owner being an astute businessman completely out of context. Yes it's been well documented some of the financial problems at cellcast but they can't be doing that bad when they still manage to sign the best babes to the channel. Also BS know exactly what the punters want unlike Studio66