How Huboo Masked Financial Disaster Until It Was Too Late
On the surface, Huboo Technologies Limited appeared to be a rising star in the world of eCommerce fulfilment. Slick branding, well-funded marketing campaigns, and promises of a revolutionary logistics platform lured in customers and investors alike. But behind the scenes, Huboo was bleeding cash at an extraordinary rate — and few were aware of just how close it was to collapse.
This blog post examines how Huboo, with the backing of Baaj Capital and Atalla Capital, managed to mask its financial disaster for years, leading to a collapse that left creditors, staff, and clients in turmoil.
1. The Numbers Never Added Up
Huboo’s filings at Companies House painted a clear picture of disaster:
- 2020: £3.5 million in losses on £4.2 million turnover
- 2021: £13.4 million in losses on £13.7 million turnover
- 2022: £47.1 million in losses on £17.7 million turnover
Despite this, Huboo continued to present itself as a growth-focused, high-performing startup. Even seasoned investors were persuaded — some reports suggest over £118 million in equity and £20 million in secured debt were pumped into the business before its collapse.
2. Investor Hype Over Substance
One of the key techniques used by Huboo was to lean heavily on investor confidence and PR. Tech news articles praised its automation, its market expansion, and its so-called ‘revolutionary’ approach to fulfilment. The reality? Poor unit economics, high client churn, and a dependency on short-term investor cash to stay afloat.
Public narratives focused on growth — but not profitability. There was no viable route to sustainability, yet the company continued hiring and expanding.
3. Concealing Insolvency Risk From Clients
Despite rapidly worsening losses, Huboo never publicly informed its customers of its precarious position. Clients continued sending inventory, paying monthly fulfilment fees, and trusting their business with a company that, internally, was already failing.
When the business was finally sold in a pre-pack for £9 and renamed HUBOO REALISATIONS LIMITED, clients were shocked. Many reported receiving no prior communication. They discovered the administration only after services were interrupted or assets were frozen.
4. Creative Accounting and Delayed Filings
Another tactic used to mask the scale of failure was delayed financial filings. By postponing the release of critical documents, Huboo was able to avoid scrutiny and maintain an image of health. In a market where startups are judged on momentum, not margin, this tactic worked — for a while.
It also helped that many customers, particularly SMEs, never reviewed company filings. Their trust in Huboo was based on surface-level reputation, not financial reality.
5. The Role of Baaj and Atalla Capital
Baaj Capital and Atalla Capital (AB Capital) played a pivotal role in propping up Huboo. Despite glaring financial risks, they continued to back the company and orchestrated its final sale for a token amount. The fact that the same investors allowed Huboo to rack up £70+ million in total losses while taking no meaningful corrective action raises serious questions.
Were they simply misled? Or were they part of a strategy to extract value before the inevitable collapse?
6. A Failure of Oversight
The final blame doesn’t just lie with Huboo. It lies with a system that allows a company to trade while insolvent, mask its losses, and sell itself to a related entity for £9 — all without warning staff, suppliers, or customers. This is not just a business failure. It is a systemic failure.
Conclusion: How Many More?
Huboo is now operating under the name HUBOO TECH LIMITED (Company No. 16143472). The original company is now called HUB REALISATIONS LIMITED (Company No. 09727464) and is in administration. Customers should ask themselves: Can a service born from failure really be trusted to deliver success?
This was not an unpredictable disaster. The signs were there — hidden in plain sight. And the consequences are still being felt by the thousands affected.
Next up: We explore the symbolic nature of the £9 sale — and what it says about the UK’s broken insolvency framework.
