Return to front page

Newest article: it'll do Grommitt by Unnamed SauceYesterday 19:34Yesterday at 19:34:27view thread

Oldest article: Stuart Elliot's Facebook musings by The_Hullablue2/2/2024 08:40Fri Feb 2 08:40:55 2024view thread

MenuSearch

Next thread: Rich Lavery to Barwell?? by s. tone ragma715/2/2024 23:38Thu Feb 15 23:38:11 2024view thread

Re: Statement from the Supporters Co-Op Steering Group

By Fromage8/2/2024 11:11Thu Feb 8 11:11:59 2024In response to Re: Statement from the Supporters Co-Op Steering Group

Views: 977

They can either be limited by shares, whereby the shareholders are held to account, by the proportion of their shareholding.

...or they can be limited by guarantee, whereby the directors are held to account.

For me, it is not about whether the Directors are paid or not, it is the fact that they will take the corporate responsibility for any financial problems incurred if the CIC fails.

I would be far happier if the CIC was limited by shares because the shareholders would appoint the Directors & would have the power to remove people who were not performing & appoint new Directors.

Thanks for explaining the differences again VoR. I agree that supporters or a supporters led group having more control over who runs the club makes more sense. I don't know if supporters would want the financial burden if things don't go as well as they would have expected. Is there a way to get around this?

I would urge anyone to look and speak to Bury AFC before making decisions about forming a new club.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Next article in this thread: Re: Statement from the Supporters Co-Op Steering Group by VoR8/2/2024 11:15Thu Feb 8 11:15:35 2024

Previous thread: Coop statement by VS Dysfunctional13/2/2024 17:03Tue Feb 13 17:03:13 2024view thread