Babestation - General Chat & Discussion

(21-02-2015 10:58 )tony confederate Wrote:  Yes it's true, Babestation is losing money at an alarming rate. Given its repeated and accumulated losses Scottishbloke's comment seems foolish to put it mildly. The only good news is that the last 6 months at least saw the benefits of moving to Milton Keynes kicking in. The cost savings there saw the loss of the last 6 months down to £830,000 - substantially less than the £1,250,000 loss of the previous 6 months.

Scottishbloke's comment was certainly foolish, and Babestation is indeed losing money at an alarming rate, but the outlook for Cellcast is not necessarily a gloomy one. They are about to launch a gambling business and have also made money on their dealings with freeview channels, so could well turn in a profit this year even if Babestation continues to lose money at the current alarming rate.

The interesting question is what happens in the longer term. If the gambling is a big success, what happens to Babestation then? Will Cellcast really want to persevere with a loss making business if they are doing well in other areas? Cellcast have sold several 'properties' in the past and you would think the Babestation brand name must be worth something, even if it is currently a loss making business.

As a babeshow fan I find those financial figures worrying as those sort of losses can't be absorbed forever. If this decline continues I wonder how many channels Will be around in five years time.

(21-02-2015 12:31 )Tractor boy Wrote:  I find those financial figures worrying as those sort of losses can't be absorbed forever. If this decline continues I wonder how many channels Will be around in five years time.

You're right to be concerned and you're right to say that those sort of losses can't be absorbed forever. Something has to give somewhere. For babe show fans it is truly worrying, although so far the channels all seem to be hanging on in there. We can only await future developments.

Correct, the current losses of Babestation simply can't be absorbed forever, which is why I raised the question of it possibly being sold. I suppose you could argue that if Cellcast had other profitable businesses they could in fact absorb the Babestation losses, as the profits elsewhere may be enough to cover them, but why would they want to?

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

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

i really don't agree with Scottishbloke's comment's, bd has been losing a lot of money for a good few years now where as in the same time period RLC has made a good profit every year,
the signing of Dannii will not be a fatal blow to RLC all it dose is put an even heaver wage burden onto bs,
bs recent actions in the move and trying 2 new formats shows they know things ain't going right so changes are needed,
now they have gone down the road of trying to sign as many names as they can and the guaranteed minutes they bring, but this comes at a cost of higher wages so although the income from calls my well go it dose not mean more profit is made,
which makes me wonder if they are going to cut the number of girls they have, maybe consecrate on the girls on premier wages and let others go to cut the wage bill

(21-02-2015 11:38 )Rammyrascal Wrote:  Regarding Caty Cole, wouldnt say she was the face of s66 myself

Yes bs probably does have the biggest pool of babes, but they don't use it to it's maximum potential with some babes not getting a look in, especially on bs1. Could possibly say they've got too many nightbabes. Also eurobabes wasn't exactly a "fatal blow" was it?

I believe Caty was not merely the face but the voice of S66.
After all it was her voice heard when trawling through the menu system on calls when she was there .

Regarding use of babes.
I don't think either BS or S66 use their rosters particularly well for different reasons but the S66 failings are infinitely worse mainly because the understanding of the nightshow concept has been clouded at best and lost completely at worst.
In terms of which channel I am more likely to call it is BS right now for sure.
And it is calls that bring in at least some of the dough is it not?
If the objective is to sign a babe because they are high on quality of performance and likely to bring in the calls on the back of it then the acquisition of Dannii is surely wise.
My focus is just on being able to watch the hottest, horniest shows possible that tempt me to part with my money and call.
Anyone for a call stat?
You give me Dannii Harwood on BS1 you will get a call stat alright.
You take a series of quality performers off S66 and replace with daytime content extension.
That is most definitely not a temptation to call thank you very much. So yes BS is offering much the superior product.

BS gain Dannii.
S66 lose Clare.

Hmmmmmmmmm .

i'd laugh if claire actually decided to rock up on babestation. some on here would loose there shit!

(21-02-2015 13:53 )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 13:53 )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.

(21-02-2015 14:16 )winsaw Wrote:  i really don't agree with Scottishbloke's comment's, bd has been losing a lot of money for a good few years now where as in the same time period RLC has made a good profit every year,
the signing of Dannii will not be a fatal blow to RLC all it dose is put an even heaver wage burden onto bs,
bs recent actions in the move and trying 2 new formats shows they know things ain't going right so changes are needed,
now they have gone down the road of trying to sign as many names as they can and the guaranteed minutes they bring, but this comes at a cost of higher wages so although the income from calls my well go it dose not mean more profit is made,
which makes me wonder if they are going to cut the number of girls they have, maybe consecrate on the girls on premier wages and let others go to cut the wage bill

I think bs will cut some babes as they cant keep on signing babes like they have recently including the likes of Dannii Harwood, Lucy Summers and Delia Rose without letting babes go to make room. the wage bill would get too big and not be sustainable.

snookered, I agree with you bs is the best babeshow, no arguments there and can see your points your making in your post, but not true completely to say s66 have replaced babes with daytime content extension. they have signed the likes of Chloe Toy, Kourtney, Candy, Roxanne Leigha recently and in a couple of weeks Tommie-Jo (TJ) joines s66 and Keira Knight is apparently going to be doing nights on s66

don't think youll be laughing Terence as think when clare leaves s66 next Thursday, she's leaving the babeshows and the glamour/adult industry completely...but you never know