Err, yes?

“Sir Philip Green’s family accrued incredible wealth during the early, profitable years of BHS ownership,” the report states. “Over the duration of their tenure, significantly more money left the company than was invested in it.”

Isn’t that rather the point?

6 thoughts on “Err, yes?”

  1. Nope. It isn’t the point…

    Decent folk make their personal fortunes by charging huge speaking fees on the liberal lecture circuit and/or taking huge salaries from their own private foundation.

  2. Dennis, don’t forget the important thing, that the huge fees and salaries are paid for by the public sector.

    For some reason making money by providing things that people want is immoral, but money obtained by forcing people earning the minimum wage to pay tax, or charging over-blown fees to students, that’s good.

  3. Weren’t we told that nationalisation would allow the public to benefit from the huge profits that would accrue due to enlightened public ownership?

    I mean we all know that it worked out that the investment needs were ever increasing and the profits soon became losses, but that wasn’t the sales pitch at the beginning.

  4. Bloke in Costa Rica

    It’s amazing how many people think that the function of a company is to provide jobs.

  5. I think the point at issue is that for several years the dividends paid to Ms Green were way in excess of the profits made

  6. Arthur Dent, are you able to back up your point with figures because to pay dividends in excess of accumulated profits is illegal under English law.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *