|
||||||||
Change to the winner's prize next year. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#51 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 149
|
Quote:
Not if you have agreed to do or not to do certain things as a condition of getting finance.
Quote:
Do you honestly believe that finance is given unconditionally?
Quote:
Ummm... no, you can't. Directors are ultimately answerable to the shareholders, who own the company. Apart from that, a company, under English law, is a person. A director who draws money from a company without permission from its owners is stealing - which I believe is a criminal offence - even if the director is also a shareholder. A director who, through his actions - like drawing an overly large salary - causes the company to become insolvent is deemed to have defrauded the company - and that's also a criminal offence.
You don't know much about company law, do you? |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#52 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 9,699
|
I think either the prize needed changing or Sugar as his 'business empire' does not offer a lot of exciting positions. As well as the £250,000 investment the business would also get weeks of free publicity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#53 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 197
|
Reading through the replies. Is it not possible that one would be able to buy an existing business and improve it with the £250. Or is this not allowed. LS also bought Viglen, its not his company.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#54 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Quote:
Reading through the replies. Is it not possible that one would be able to buy an existing business and improve it with the £250. Or is this not allowed. LS also bought Viglen, its not his company.
I actually doubt that that would be disallowed - in fact, it might even be mandatory. I hope not, though, because if it is we'll know that Sugar is just popping off candidates to get to the business he wants. I hope they actually explain the rules relating to this and not just leave it all vague as that will be necessary to properly understanding the programme. |
|
|
|
|
|
#55 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 34,226
|
Quote:
The fact that the idea was dementedly stupid.
The bagginator may have fooled people here into thinking he's technically savvy (and he may well be in one very specialised area) but anyone with the vaguest understanding of RF communication knows that there is no way in the world you can get enough power to the chip in a micro-chipped dog to track it. (At least with today's technology.) Its also political dynamite as the dog following technology would provide the ultimate big brother control system if you applied it to humans. and it would inevitably find corrupt and criminal as well as police state uses. .......... |
|
|
|
|
|
#56 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 11,878
|
Quote:
"The Brand" talked openly in a show about a tracking device for dogs, now unless Baggs has a patent on that idea the fact it is now in the public domain what is legally stopping Sugar from hiring a designer to develop one and maybe make a few million from it ? nothing
Stuart seemed to think he could miniaturise the device and inject it under the dog's skin. It came across as, "wouldn't it be cool if", rather than a proposal which had identified potential problems and ways to solve them. For example, he didn't say how he would power it. As a business proposition, in the form it was broadcast, it was almost worthless. |
|
|
|
|
|
#57 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The-Village-Hall
Posts: 3,839
|
Quote:
Ummm... no, you can't. Directors are ultimately answerable to the shareholders, who own the company. Apart from that, a company, under English law, is a person. A director who draws money from a company without permission from its owners is stealing - which I believe is a criminal offence - even if the director is also a shareholder. A director who, through his actions - like drawing an overly large salary - causes the company to become insolvent is deemed to have defrauded the company - and that's also a criminal offence.
You don't know much about company law, do you? Quote:
>>snip<<
Enough to know that it is sporadically enforced - for example, nobody from RBS has gone to jail. Did anyone sue the RBS directors? Did anyone accuse them of fraudulently appropriating the company's assets? Presumably, at RBS the directors' remuneration packages had been approved by the shareholders (well, their representatives - and since the shareholders are mostly the public, in one way or another, they are about 3 times removed from the decision making process in the actual boardroom). In the case we're discussing, we'll be having LS with 50% of shares and the winner with 50% - in a private, not public company. Do you see LS approving the kind of remuneration you propose (to remind you - the whole of the sum put up by him as capital, in the first year?) Do you see LS not taking action - like attempting to get his money back by whatever means? Do you see him not putting in a complaint for fraud - were the winner to do what you propose? Honestly, your OP was ridiculous - and you've just confirmed my view by getting me to have to spell it out for you. |
|
|
|
|
|
#58 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,325
|
it seems fair enough - LS puts in £250k and takes a 50% stake - so that is giving the winner £125,000. that person can pay themselves a salary from the £250k - providing the board agrees - so if they pay themselves £100k that gives the business 2 1/2 years of their work, but in most cases, LS would be likely to insist that the salary is much lower and that most of the £250k is invested elsewhere. with the contacts that LS has, you'd expect a sensible start up would have access to effective demand - those with the willingness and means to purchase - so there should be a revenue stream.
I can't see that an arrangement like that is worse than possibly being a dogsbody on £100k. there would need to be a greater focus on innovation. |
|
|
|
|
|
#59 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 629
|
Dog tracking devices have been around for years, they are called leads.
In respect of the prize my understanding is that candidates have to have a business plan. I would imagine that the interview stage dynamics will change in that their business plan, as well as their characters will get torn apart. As we go through the process LudAl will dismiss the shysters, liars and incompetents that he can't work with. Again the dynamics change slightly as he will work with them rather than having them work for him. It seems that Tim worked fairly closely with him, but he then got fed up with Michelle and has dumped all the following winners on someone else's doorsteps |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 00:18.


