Who can blame suppliers for wariness of Alito Color?

When TPF Group went into administration in February last year, it came as no surprise. Many had predicted that outcome ever since it lost its contract with Sky.

That some 140-plus trade suppliers had their fingers burned when the firm called in the administrators says something.

Whether it says more for the enduring optimism of printers or for the silver tongue of Steve Brundle is open to debate. Either way, it goes without saying that extending credit running into six figures to the firm was asking for trouble.

As evidence of this, last fortnight, a full year after TPF’s administration, C3 Imaging, which was owed a six-figure sum by TPF, became the latest printer to fall victim to the TPF curse. This week, the chalice passes to Alito Color Group, which has blamed a backlash from former TPF suppliers for its declining fortunes.

These suppliers, we are told, took a once-bitten, twice-shy approach to Alito after it "bought" Flair Press (UK), the former manufacturing business of TPF. Having seen the TPF creditors’ report, I can honestly say: who can blame them? Alito – who, incidentally, never did buy Flair Press (see p1) – should have known better.

Alito’s David Collins has pleaded guilty to naivety and stressed the priority now is job preservation. I can only wish Collins the best of luck with his attempt to save the jobs of the 78 staff at Alito’s London site; however, I can only hope that Alito Colour – a new company incorporated on 11 February that lists Collins as its sole director – is not instrumental in that plan. Given his experience of the damage wronged suppliers can do to a business’s survival hopes, any such move – and Collins has said that is not the intention – would be beyond naive.