Media Spin vs. Reality — What the Press Isn’t Asking
The collapse of Huboo Technologies Limited — once hailed as a beacon of ecommerce innovation — has received relatively little critical press coverage compared to the scale of the financial disaster it represents.
This silence is concerning. With £47 million in losses in 2022 alone, hundreds of jobs lost, and millions in unpaid debts, one might expect intense scrutiny. Instead, the response has been subdued, with most media outlets either ignoring the collapse or repeating corporate spin.
1. Media Favouritism for Startups
One explanation lies in the nature of tech journalism. Many publications are financially supported by the very VCs that backed companies like Huboo. Advertorials, event sponsorships, and content partnerships all influence what gets covered — and what gets conveniently ignored.
Huboo was often promoted as a “fast-growing disruptor.” Few asked whether it was profitable. Even fewer questioned whether its leadership had the experience to manage the scale it aimed for.
2. The Post-Administration Silence
Since entering administration, the company — now trading as Huboo Tech Limited — has avoided critical headlines. There’s been no investigative follow-up from mainstream outlets.
No one is asking:
- How were investors allowed to lose over £100 million?
- Why were clients not informed of the insolvency?
- Why was a £9 pre-pack sale approved without challenge?
- What due diligence was done by Baaj Capital and Atalla Capital?
3. Shifting Narratives
Press releases from the new entity continue to emphasise “continuity,” “service improvements,” and “leadership transition.” These are PR talking points — not journalism. They mask the reality that a once-funded company collapsed into insolvency and was repurchased by its own backers.
4. Bodycare and Other Missed Investigations
The same lack of scrutiny has been observed in the collapse of Bodycare, where similar restructuring tactics were employed. Baaj Capital’s role in that collapse has not been fully explored either — despite millions lost and hundreds of jobs affected.
The pattern suggests a media blind spot when it comes to private equity accountability.
5. Who Benefits from Silence?
In the absence of investigative coverage, founders and directors can quietly rebrand and restart — often under similar names and structures.
The lack of coverage also protects the reputation of VCs and private equity funds, who would rather not have to explain why they invested in a company that never turned a profit in five years.
6. Time for Investigative Journalism
This story deserves more. Real journalism should ask:
- Were directors negligent in not disclosing financial risk to clients?
- Did investors pressure growth without regard for sustainability?
- Were any conflicts of interest present in the pre-pack sale?
The facts are there. What’s missing is the will to follow them.
Conclusion: Hold the Mic to Power
Huboo’s collapse is not just a failed startup story. It is a lesson in unchecked hype, unchallenged funding, and unregulated pre-packs. But without serious media attention, that lesson will be lost — and repeated.
We must ask better questions. And we must demand better answers.
Next: Rebuilding Trust in Fulfilment — What Real Accountability Looks Like
