| Kevin H |
22-11-10 02:00 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claude
(Post 3943)
I'm a bit confused about these two points Kevin. Tony Crook clearly did not use his car business to fund other vices, thus the price charged reflected the cost to build the cars plus a bit more to pay Tony a life income.
Are you saying the huge price of the car is too high (implying too much money) or too little (implying the reason you suspect his balance sheet was weak)?
|
I'm saying the business was probably very profitable back in the 1960's, 70's and maybe the 80's, but by that stage sales were dwindling steadliy and by the time Toby came along (circa 2000?) the business was probably struggling.
I think Crook achieved high prices given what was actually being sold, compared say with contemporary Astons. Of course Aston went bust several times, but they did develop their own engines in the 60's and 70's.
Quote:
As an unfair crack... you say your experience with small companies is the opposite. I trust you exclude from that the small company that had your 411 for a decade or so "restoring" it.
|
So because of one example of poor service from a very small company (1 person), all small companies provide poor service. Another generalisation.
Quote:
My experience with small companies is that they are good when their business is not complex. Cars and software are extremely complex with thousands of dependencies that must work together.
|
You weren't so specific originally. Besides, many of the world's most successful software companies started of as very small companies.
Small companies can also be agile and and respond quickly and effectively to customer feedback.
Personally I find many large companies a nightmare to deal with, both as a customer and a supplier, especially Telcos!
Kevin |
