What really drove this closure?
Monday 27th October 2008, 2:30PM GMT.
FOR islanders worried about global events and the news that the UK is about to enter a recession of unknown severity and length, Friday’s shock announcement that advertising agency Wallace Barnaby was going into liquidation could not have come at a worse time.
It was proof – if any were needed – that things have already started to slow down and previously secure jobs are now at risk.
Yet jumping to such conclusions would be a mistake because there is more to this than meets the eye. Wallace Barnaby and its team are one of the most highly regarded agencies in the Channel Islands and, over the years, have been responsible for hundreds of thousands of pounds-worth of business and servicing some prestigious clients
Locally, it has seen good and bad times and has proved resilient while under local management.
Now part of the Ekay plc group, however, it and the Jersey office are regarded as expendable.
As the group’s finance director told the Stock Exchange on Friday, ‘the administration process is expected to have a positive impact on the group’s balance sheet as the negative net assets will no longer form part of the consolidated financial balance sheet’. He added that Wallace Barnaby had not been expected to reach profitability in the forthcoming financial year and so the process of liquidation was expected to have a positive impact on the profitability and cash flow of the group in the forthcoming financial year.
What is not known, of course, is where the debts that the local company cannot pay have arisen and whether they have anything to do with Ekay’s UK operations and any borrowings that it might have.
From the outside, and from the accounts given by the local directors, there appears to have been little real enthusiasm from Ekay to maintain its CI operations. In fact, quite the reverse.
Its public utterance gives the impression that it was pleased to get shot of something the local MD says was a strong business and one that certainly had a future.
There is a conflict in these two versions that islanders will find hard to swallow.
Ekay needs to come clean about what really drove the closure.
Island Life
All about Guernsey
Ambassador of the Year 2011
History & Heritage
Visitor Information
Guernsey's government
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
When I started reading this Comment I intended to write a simple response “accounting convenience”
And there it was half way down. Puting a company into liquidation because it “had not been expected to reach profitability in the forthcoming financial year” seems awfully drastic, and I just wonder whether the courts are not asking enough searching questions before agreeing to liquidations and adminstrations.
Is the cut of the parent company balance sheet jib a jutifiable reason for 30 lost jobs?
Report abuse
Stephen – from my reading the company was placed into voluntary liquidation, and was not a forced court liquidation by creditors. In other words, the majority of the directors, ratified by the shareholders, and if so then its not a decision that the courts would have had any say in.
Report abuse
The answer is quite simple. WB has been losing clients and money for years, clinging onto a few major accounts (one in particular) to keep the business from going under.
The majority of the clients detailed in the media had, in fact, been lost years ago.
As for the recent comments in the Press from the management, methinks they doth protest too much, and if they honestly believe what they’re saying, then they too have become victims of their own media spin.
Report abuse
David
You are correct on voluntary winding up procedure.
I still wonder if “Is the cut of the parent company balance sheet jib a jutifiable reason for 30 lost jobs?”
Report abuse
“Puting a company into liquidation because it “had not been expected to reach profitability in the forthcoming financial year” seems awfully drastic”
I disagree. It seems very sensible to avoid large creditors. Better the parent company saw the writing on the wall and (I hope) will manage to cut lose with some dignity? How many times do we see compulsory liquidations and a lot of very aggrieved creditors?
Gosh – could Landsbanki and their ilk not learn from this?
Report abuse