Adam Joy, COO of the ANF, has responded to an email I sent him about correspondence relating to Hubbed he sent to a newsagent re Hubbed. In that correspondence Adam inferred that I was on the ANF board when to chose to go with Bill Express. I was not on the board then. I emailed Adam inviting him to revise what he had written. I also asked some questions about Hubbed.
Click here to see a response from the ANF to questions and my complaint about their letter to a newsagent. I’ll post my original email to Adam as a comment to this post.
Here is the response I sent yesterday to Adam’s letter. This response needs to be read in-conjunction with Adam’s letter.
Adam,
Thanks for responding to my email.
You have inferred that I was on the ANF Board when the Bill Express decision was made. I was not. In fact, I joined months later. You need to advise who you have put about this mis-representation to.
In your letter you refer very selectively to the minutes of several ANF Board Meetings where Bill Express was discussed and use to build a narrative supporting your apparent claim that I supported Bill Express. The minutes in my year on the board were an inadequate representation of three days of meetings. Also, these minutes do not cover Executive Meeting discussions and other discussions. My position on Bill Express then and now is on the public record – a record which is counter to the narrative you have sought to pitch. You need to withdraw what you have written.
Now I will turn to the questions I raised and your response. For ease of comparison I will use the same numbering but not repeat my question or your response.
- I see no evidence of what I would call reasonable due diligence in your answer. You should have financial models at the core of this so newsagents can see the full costs and full opportunities. Your response does not indicate a rigorous process.
- The only business plan that matters to newsagents is their business plan. I would have expected the ANF to create business plans for each Hubbed offer so newsagents can see how it can play out.
- You say you have conducted retailed research on bill payment yet you have not published this. It would be useful to the ANF case that you publish this along with details of the newsagents you have worked with over the last six months on this issue. If your process is sound then the evidence will boost newsagent confidence.
- The ANF should have this information. You suggest its similar to a Point of Sale provider. No, it is not similar. Here, the ANF is a promoter. The obligation on the ANF is considerable yet to fails so far to step up. In terms of Point of Sale, each item in a package – which can be leased through any bank, finance company or other party – can be priced back to the individual item. With Hubbed this is not the case for some of the items. This is core due diligence the ANF ought to have undertaken for newsagents.
- I am told that newsagents querying what happens to Hubbed Premium hardware if they decide to not continue then Hubbed will find another location. I would have expected the ANF to require this to be covered in the contract and further that the lease for the equipment and the Hubbed business itself are one in the same.
- Yes there appear to be three different agreements. My view is that there should be one agreement so as to avoid a core issue with the Bill Express model. Further, I would have expected that thorough due diligence would have required that this be the case.
- Thanks for the response but I would have liked to see more detail.
- I am not challenging the integrity of anyone, just asking a question that needs to be asked. Attacking the question is unhelpful as it detracts from your answer.
- I would gave expected the ANF to be paid for the considerable amount of marketing support provided in your various media platforms and the time invested by your staff in promoting Hubbed to newsagents. I am not involved in any company operating in the space occupied by Hubbed.
- I have seen no information provided to demonstrate experience from the people behind Hubbed in the launch and running of a start up business in the consumer-facing services business at the core of the Hubbed offer.
I am happy to discuss Hubbed face to face. A public forum would be appropriate to demonstrate transparency. If the Hubbed model is good as you say it is newsagents will see that and embrace it. Your responses to my questions do not provide the detail and comfort I was seeking.
The ANF and Hubbed appear to not like being asked questions or challenged. If the offer is genuinely good and if the ANF has undertaken thorough due diligence on behalf of its members thorough scrutiny ought to be welcomed and result of good member up-take.
Here is my 30/9 email Adam Joy:
Adam,
I refer you to the following paragraph in your September 4, 2013 email to Jim O’Toole from newsXpress Rutherglen:
I would also like to point out that the current ANF board or staff were not at the ANF when Bill express was in operation. I can understand your frustration to having lost money to this company, but I would suggest you look at the board of the ANF from 2003 to 2008 and ask these Newsagents what kind of due diligence did they do. If you would like a list of these newsagents please let me know and I can forward the names to you, or alternatively you can ask Mark Fletcher as he was on the ANF board during this period.
What evidence do you have that I was part of the ANF board that made the decision to endorse Bill Express? had you done your research you would know the answer is none. The Bill Express decision was made by the ANF Board prior to me joining the Board. I am on the public record and on record in ANF documentation as questioning what due diligence was done.
Please advise who else you published such false and misleading information to.
On due diligence, I have some questions for you:
1. What due diligence has the ANF done on the proposed Hubbed business models (Lite and Premium)?
2. Has the ANF developed a business plan factoring in direct and indirect costs associated with Hubbed?
3. What research has been done by the ANF and or Hubbed on consumer appetite for in-store bill payment?
4. What is the wholesale cost of the Hubbed equipment being financed by newsagents?
5. What is the use of the difference between the wholesale cost of Hubbed equipment and the monies released to Hubbed through the finance agreement newsagents are being asked to commit to?
6. Has the ANF Board considered the situation where newsagents are told they can cancel Hubbed in a matter of months yet they are left with a finance agreement that runs for years?
7. Has the ANF Board looked carefully at the situation of multiple separate agreements for newsagents in the Hubbed package running with different terms?
8. What other bill payment, parcel inbound/outbound services did the ANF assess as part of its due diligence of Hubbed?
9. Does any ANF employee or Director have any commercial relationship or connection with Hubbed including free access to the Hubbed service?
Beyond the 5% shareholding, is the ANF receiving or has the ANF received any other revenue stream from Hubbed?
10. Has the ANF spoken with anyone with good knowledge of Bill Express as part of its due diligence of Hubbed?
11. What is the specific commercial experience of the Hubbed leadership team in rolling out a start-up like Hubbed. I’ve heard David Mclean, for example talk at length about his Microsoft experience. I don’t see that as relevant. Hubbed is a start-up entering a competitive and mature marketplace. This will require considerable skills and capital to gain traction not only with the retail network but with consumers.
12. Please also advise when the ANF surveyed newsagents and came up with the top three wishes / desires of newsagents: Unity, Magazine Management and Bill Payment. At the ANF meeting I attended by invitation in Sydney in late 2011, the ANF Board and state association directors and staff all agreed that the single most important issue for newsagents was fair and equitable magazine supply. A plan of action was explored and agreed at that meeting. To my knowledge, nothing has been done on this by any association since.
Through the community of 1,850 Tower newsagents I get to speak personally with many newsagents regularly. Bill Payment has been raised with me no more than five times in the last three years and even then mainly by regional newsagents. In each case I have outlined how it could work and the costs to the business and the consumer and they have said no. I doubt your claim that Bill Payment is a high priority for many newsagents. That said, if there is evidence to the contrary I would welcome seeing this.
I look forward to your response.
I am a Victorian Newsagent and I am aware through correspondence from VANA that they questioned the integrity of the Hubbed Contract as well. This was after the Hubbed / ANF Contract was in the market place. I applaud VANA for their actions in fact.
I ask myself why is it that VANA had to undertake their due diligence and through their due process seek changes to the Hubbed Contract when the ANF should have placed into the market place a product fully researched both legally and Retail viability wise.
I say this because I would have thought that the ANF would have had undisputed Legal advice where very few questions needed to be raised.
Unfortunately I smell trouble brewing here. Like Bill Express I see no evidence of proven lines of sale and I would have expected that the introduction of trials to interested Newsagents would have been free of Contractual dealings for the first three months so as to gain a professional retail view of its success.
In my view retail proposals such as this need to be proven before Newsagents get involved.
In any case why the ANF should be involved in partnerships of this nature when they have no or little directive control belies me.
David I understand and support start-ups. But there must be thorough, relevant and transparent due diligence appropriate to those the business is being promoted to.
In this model, based on the very limited information out there, it could be argued that newsagents are to be the banker. We can’t even find out if this was looked at and if so the outcome.
Surprised to see what Adam Joy wrote to you Mark. If this is the standard of communication from the ANF and if this is how they craft their arguments heaven help us.
Jeff I thought the letter was poorly written in that it did not face some of the questions head on. It also engaged in some distracting inaccurate commentary that leaves open the opportunity to fuel concerns.
I thought Adams letter read like something you would recieve from a Pollie. It did not even come close to answering your questions Mark and I felt it was written in a way that was supposed to make you look bad, something which he failed at. I just wish Adam and the ANF would be more forthright, open and honest with any questions put to them. I would love to see a representative of the ANF comment on this blog occasionally, not just on the Hubbed concerns but on all topics that concern Newsagents. I am quite sure that if they had a proactive representative that shared his/her insights on the things posted here on the blog then they would probably go a long way in attracting members (new & old). Dare I say it might even go some way in building unity in our industry, wouldnt THAT be something……?
Without sounding too critical of the attempted reply, it is obvious Adam’s ‘spell’ and ‘grammar’ check on his computer is not operable
Ross don’t read any of my post or you will be correcting me all day long .
Shaun – don’t worry mate, your comments always have an end meaning & I look forward to reading them. Sometimes the content is more powerful than the construction
What I find hard to believe about this at present is the differing positions of ANF and NANA. I thought they had amalgamated and joined together as one. This is not the case here. It appears all amalgamation achieved was the elimination of 1 Bank A/C and NANA and ANF now share an account but both are still separate from each other. By the way I prefer NANAs advice on this one.
Peter at least on Hubbed NANA and VANA are applying the processes you’d expect from an association. It is problematic for associations to own a share in any business offered to members.
When an organisation prioritises its own profits over the needs of its members, then there is a big problem.
There should be no 5% ownership. There can be no subjectivity by the ANF if they own 5% of Connect. They can spin it as much as they like by saying it’s for “members”, but the fact remains that it looks very bad for them to be pushing this. MAJOR conflict of interest.
While I’m no expert, I believe the legality of this needs to be investigated. Perhaps the ASIC website can provide some insight.
If they only spent this much energy and money on issues like magazine oversupply, the newspaper distribution disaster, etc.
that should read objectivity*
It seems the bad grammar/spelling is contagious. 🙂
im a member of the ANF, when do I get my first dividend cheque?
Rick, relax and take a big breath mate, but don’t hold it will ya…..:-)
If ya do get a dividend, can I have one of the lollies you buy with it ?
Mark did the ANF respond to you?
No Michael, not yet.