General Discussions

**optic5** · 01-04-2008, 01:33 AM

As UK Big Brother Celebrity hijack kicks off this year.

i was pleased to see that one of the contestants would put most of us to shame with his success of being a internet Entrepreneur.

Quote:

Liam started his own business when he was just eight years old, selling web space.

He is now Managing Director of his own very successful company, providing web hosting and design services.

The company has been responsible for hosting 2 million websites for clients worldwide and Liam has 12 people working for him with a current turn over of £200,000

He owns Oxy UK technologies.

Source

**ADAM Web Design** · 01-04-2008, 01:43 AM

That's an interesting story, optic5. Buuuuut...there are parts to the equation that haven't been considered yet. I just posted a comment to that NewsPik site, and I'd like to see how people respond to it.

**optic5** · 01-04-2008, 03:26 AM

I've just looked at them.

You make some very interesting and valid points.

**Monkey Do** · 04:27 AM

By the way turnover isn't profit it's the total amount of business done. So he's charging these 2 million customers on average about 10p a year and each of his 12 employees is generating on average £16k* business per year. What's highlighted here is less about whether OxyUK is solvent though and more about the lazy media not even noticing when their news stories are broken.

*how much would you pay someone who generated this amount of business once you've paid all your non-salary overheads?

**ADAM Web Design** · 01-04-2008, 10:25 AM

So turn over is revenue, not profit? Man, that's way worse. At least profit would have been semi-justified just because of the "pound amount".

I'm with you on the media thing, too, especially "print" media (and I include so-called internet journalists on this). They've long been known not to bother to fact check or put a little bit of common sense into their stories, and they usually come out looking incredibly stupid as a result. Hell, I looked kind of stupid just for misinterpreting something, and I was giving them the benefit of the doubt.

**Learning Newbie** · 01-04-2008, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADAM Web Design

I'm with you on the media thing, too, especially "print" media (and I include so-called internet journalists on this). They've long been known not to bother to fact check or put a little bit of common sense into their stories, and they usually come out looking incredibly stupid as a result.

Do you know about the Sokal Affair?

Quote:

The Sokal Affair ListSTAR(tm) by
StarNine(r)

Original-Sender: pjk@PJKQM Group Engineering:KINDLMA

Dear Colleagues -

I don't know if you've been following the Sokal affair, but you owe it
to yourself to have a little fun. This is not as large in import as the
Piltdown Man, but even more gratifyingly rapid in its evolution.

Alan Sokal, Professor of Physics at NYU, published in the current issue
of "Social Text," a prestigious journal of cultural studies, a long
article titled "Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative
Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity." In the jargon of advanced thought in
the humanities he pushed all the right buttons, cited all the right
people. A splendid parody.

He revealed the article is a parody in the current issue of "Lingua
Franca", published soon after. There has been much comment in the media
since.

"To test the prevailing intellectual standards," he writes, "I decided
to try a modest (though admittedly uncontrolled) experiment: Would a
leading North American journal of cultural studies -- whose editorial
collective includes such luminaries as Fredric Jameson and Andrew Ross
-- publish an article liberally salted with nonsense if (a) it sounded
good and (b) it flattered the editors' ideological preconceptions? The
answer, unfortunately, is yes."

Source.

**ADAM Web Design** · 01-04-2008, 01:51 PM

No, sir, I have not...although the result doesn't surprise me. This is the prevailing reason why I stopped paying attention to the news: we have now entered a society whereby 99% or more of what is presented to us is a lie that attempts to appeal to people's emotions rather than the ironically missing aspect of common sense.

**JamieLewis** · 01-04-2008, 01:57 PM

I do have to laugh, if I was the head of a successful internet business I would not be on Big Brother, that show was bad in the beginning and has been declining ever since. Also as has been pointed out turnover != profit, far from it, lets work it out shall we

Assuming the 12 staff are full time (9-5)
5.75 * 8 * 5 = 230 / week / staff = 230*52*12 = £143, 520 MINIMUM staff costs.

Now assuming he has to rent out business premises (Minimum really of £5000/month for 12 staff although I am MASSIVELY UNDERestimating) thats another 60,000.

Then there is heating, electric, internet, server costs (either reselling or having own is going to cost), lets under estimate this using my house cost(no where near business levels), thats going to be about £5000.

That is a good 208,000 cost. That is before we go into loan repayments, start up costs (computers, desks etc.)

So at best he is only in 8,000 of debt, not bad a company in its first few years.

Jamie

**OSWebMaster** · 01-04-2008, 10:05 PM

Hi All -

Interesting story Newbie, I hadn't heard it before. Of course, anyone can come on with a misleading statement, and the intention in doing so, is usually to gain power.

In the case of Sokal Affair, Sokal certainly got some coverage. In Liam, the Big Bro. Contestant's case, he gains some notoriety, and publicity for his business.

But... is he duping folks? The arguments presented so far here, have failed to consider:

In addition to Web Hosting, OxyTech (Liam's Company) lists a series of other paid services including Website Design, eCommerce, eMarketing, eBusiness Training, and others, which were not included in the revenue calculations presented.
Looking at a snapshot of the OxyTech website for Dec. '06, you can see that the company offered Hosting Plans with rates of 99p month (cited above), and also plans at 4.99 mo, and 12.99 mo -- all in British pounds.

So... who's duping who? Who gains by making the misleading observation in the first place?

Quote:

"...we have now entered a society whereby 99% or more of what is presented to us is a lie that attempts to appeal to people's emotions rather than the ironically missing aspect of common sense."

Interesting, sir. Is that a fact, or a theory? And if a fact, then exactly how were you able to arrive at that precise percentage?

- Scott

**OSWebMaster** · 01-04-2008, 11:39 PM

Hello -

As you consider a reply, factor in one more thing, gentlemen: no one here knows if Liam, the Big Brother Contestant, has a few really big clients that easily move him into the profits side of the ledger. Hmmmm...

And the more I think about Adam's pronouncement here that "we have now entered a society whereby 99% or more of what is presented to us is a lie," I am wondering how he applies that rule to his own communication?

- Scott