Norpig wrote:That's just semantics and a way for rich people to pass on the debts and not be liable personally when the shit hits the fan. He owns 94.5% of the shares in the club and has let down every single employee whether player or not with his actions.
It just won't sink in with some people will it?
It is not semantics, it is Company LAW!
Limited companies are LIMITED for a very good reason, and that is that an owners (or more accurately a SHARE holders) personal liability is limited to the value of the paid up shares they hold in that company.
Look at it another way, using your view of things if Anderson was responsible to find 94.5% of the debt outstanding the remaining 5,5% of shareholders of the club would be liable for the remaining 5.5% of the debt.
Say the debt is around £40m and there are say 5,000 small share holders then they would be required to find £2.2m or about £440 each.
Do you think those 5,000 small share holders would be thrilled to tip up £440 each for something they had no control over other than to make a small, probably sentimental, investment in a business in the first place?
That's why the law is such that those investing in a business are not 'punished' if the company fails.
The shareholders appoint the Directors of the company to oversee it is running in accordance of the law and the wishes of its shareholders. If the company fails through illegal practices then the Directors are NOT protected by limited liability and can be personally liable for the total debt.
Anderson is of course a Director and IF the club has failed through something illegal that he's had his fingers in, then he could be made personally liable for all the losses.
Limited liability has been in operation for a century or more and not something invented last week to stop Anderson putting his hand in his pocket and paying the club debts personally!
Christ common sense alone should tell people that apart from the windfall for Madine's transfer we've made a trading loss each and every year for the last twenty years or so and have only been able to get by with Eddie Davies funding the shortfall.
With Eddie no longer here and Anderson not wishing to spend his personal wealth on a business losing money, that we were obviously going to hit the buffers sooner or later this season?
The club spends more than it gets in - it's as simple as that!!!
It's not really rocket science is it?