THE BOAT BUSINESS!

[MaltaBob]

Clearly for those who have losted their hard earnt cash this PETERS demise is tradgic!
At the same time let's not forget the Legal responsibilities company directors have! Which I recall are very , very extensive. Plus a moral and common sense approach to business , whatever transpires day to day?
Whilst it easy to be wise after the event, I cannot help but think, and I'm sure I'm not the only one, when things look iffy directors have their responsibilities to do the right thing. Or is that ' old hat these days' ?

 

[Sneds]

What gets my goat is companies that go under, owing money, then starting up again with a clean slate whille the poor old supplier or other creditor has to bear the loss.
Do you, as a supplier, trade with the new company or not?
If you do you risk loosing again, if you don't you are denying yourself revenue and profit from the trade.

ps not marine related!

 

[Gludy]

Having managed Peters Opal into administration I hope the same management does not do the standard buy out and continue on whilst leaving others to pay the price.

IMHO - I think the way the administrators are acting, its all over. Shedding 130 out of 180 staff. stopping selling mechanisms like the web site, offering stock at cost is reducing the business to the few essentials to deal with the end rather than trying to trade on.

 

[MaltaBob]

Well, that could happen, clearly. But will their business acument and ethics be any better? Hope so !
Personally, and I dare say a lot of the guys on the Forum would agree, businesses are very 'dynamic' , by the hour sometimes, and changes in trade demand a 'managed' response to ensure success and most of all, that customers are considered and valued! From my experience a lot of boat dealers appear quite indifferent to potential customers and do not realise they have an attitude problem. The good one's will ' shine ' regardless of size.
Once they walk it can be a problem getting them back, unless there is clear evidence of change.

 

[rubberduck]

I use a credit insurer. Whenever I take a chance and trade with someone the insurer doesn't like, it costs me money, so nowadays if the insurer say no, i run away /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

[Richard10002]

[ QUOTE ]
At the same time let's not forget the Legal responsibilities company directors have! Which I recall are very , very extensive.

Plus a moral and common sense approach to business , whatever transpires day to day?

Whilst it easy to be wise after the event, I cannot help but think, and I'm sure I'm not the only one, when things look iffy directors have their responsibilities to do the right thing. Or is that ' old hat these days' ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Old Hat I'm afraid...... The directors of large companies, (who have received large salaries and bonuses and/or whatever), seem to be able to mount a legal opposition to any charges that they have acted "illegally".

In general, these days, I dont think morals and ethics come into it when relatively large money is at stake.

As I've said elsewhere, you can bet your bottom dollar that Peters, and any other of the rich directors, will retain their bank balances, big houses, flash cars and boats, (unless owned by the company), and will suffer little other than a loss of pride and position in the community.

Cynical? Moi?

Cheers

Richard