The morality not just of a minimum wage but a living one in year 2013.

[urlhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/21/observer-editorial-living-wage-law?guni=Keyword:news-grid%20main-3%20(comment)%20Pickable%20with%20editable%20overrideicon_razz.gifickable%20with%20editable%20overrideicon_razz.gifosition2[/url

Fair play to Mike Ashley and Sports Direct.
Each of their 2000 staff to receive a £43,000 shares windfall for beating sales and profits targets.

Tesco staff get a free turkey

Tesco staff get shares.

Tesco staff get shares.

Do you care about Tesco staff in any way except using them to bash Tesco?

Reading the article, the board had recommended a scheme where Ashley would have received £26,000,000 in bonuses for the year.

They haven't revealed how much he'll be getting in the new scheme.

I'd be saving the claps TBH. Mike Ashley has got so much money he doesn't need your applause as well. Especially when he was being a greedy **** in the first place but got slapped down.

Why?
Are you rearmed with a load more BS Bombs?

Has he got so much money that if he wanted he could buy a s***e premiership football club?

You offered a round of applause to Mike Ashley and the Sports Direct board after you read the article about them giving their staff bonuses of £43,000.

You missed out the bit about Mike Ashley and the board initially awarding Ashley £26m in bonuses.

Given the fact Ashley was taking £26m off the table, and the fact he's already a billionaire anyway, and the share price will have risen making him even richer, does he really need you to laud him to people?

You are a good example of the BS bomb culture. People read about the 13,000 deaths that have been caused in the NHS and are outraged. They don't bother to actually read the articles and see that the figures are wrong and it's a pathetic political attack. The headlines matter, the facts behind the headlines don't. Control the headline and soundbite and the facts don't matter.

He's already got a pretty good PL club. Why would he want a s***e one?

It's irrelevant to me whether Ashley is a billionaire or not.
If I want to applaud his company paying all his full time employees 43 grand, many of whom are on less than 20k per annum, I'll carry right on thanks.
Irregardless of your BS Bomb utter bull!

Obviously.



And that's the kind of stupidity which means that people can be hoodwinked into receiving less money than they probably should be.

If you're a long term employee and want to stay at SD for life, would you prefer a one off payment of 43k and stay on 20k a year, or would you prefer your wage to be raised to 30 and given fair raises for the rest of your employment based on good work?

If you're an employee and receive the 43k and it ends up damaging the company is it a good thing that the company shelled out those bonuses?



Maybe you understand my points and are completely correct to dismiss it.

Or maybe you just don't have a clue and are just trying to mock me to hide that fact.

It's not for me to judge.

No my point is that Sports Direct are not a listed plc, they have no instutional shareholders demanding ever greater returns on investment, so that the same shareholders can trouser ever greater dividends. Rather than Ashley hand millions over to the taxman (there's no doubt about tax-efficiency driving the scheme), he's sharing it among his staff. Of course it may mean that by the time the shares can be cashed in, they're worth two balloons and a goldfish, but that's a chance they'd take.

Between Tesco and Sports Direct, my opinion is SD is the more acceptable face of capitalism

I'm pretty sure I'd prefer a one off payment than not one at all, what about you?
The rest of your guff is hypothetical BS like most of the rhubarb you type.

[iDavid Cameron today announced that every person in the UK will receive £10,000 as a way to re-start the economy

The details of his new re-starting of the economy also reveal payouts of £1bn each to himself, his three closest party advisers and 10 of the richest and most powerful people in the country.[/i

Fook ten grand.
I'd thank Mike for the 43k.
Tell him to go and flog his own fooking trainers, then fook off abroad whoring and on the p[ii[/iss for a year.

But hey, that's just me.

I am not surprised.

But thanks for illustrating my points. Even though you'll never begin to have a clue how.

Another company that was like this was Phones4U. It was also not a PLC and John Caudwell did the same sort of thing when he owned it. He set up EBT's and while it was (until the law changed) tax efficient he did it to motivate his employees. He adopted some other scheme to do the same once the EBT mechanism was no longer available. He basically shared the profits amongst the employees.

You are a good example of the BS bomb culture.
Do you really need to laud Caudwell to people?

Alas, Mr Cameron does not want us watching pornography, unless we ask our ISP's nicely if we'd like to watch it, and i'm SURRRRE records of people who have asked for porn to be unblocked would definitely NOT be kept on some sort of 'ayup, he's a pervert/peado' database for future use. No siree bob. I hope nobody here has a r*pe kink either, criminals! We may as well all upsticks to China

I'll explain it to you REALLY SLOWLY so you might actually get the point.

Mike Ashley and the SD board put forward a bonus scheme that was rejected, probably because of the fact that Mike Ashley was awarding himself a bonus of 26 million pounds.

Mike Ashley and the board put forward a second bonus scheme that has regular employees pocketing 43 grand each. THE SIZE OF THE BONUS THAT MIKE ASHLEY IS TO RECEIVE IS NOT STATED.

The fact that you then point to that article with a round of applause for Mike Ashley shows that you are precisely the target audience for BS spread in the media.

Anyone with a working brain reads that article knows that the size of the payout to Ashley needs to be known or there will be suspicion that Ashley is just using the bonus award to the staff as a way to get through his award without people noticing.

I then put to you a blatant example of theft by David Cameron and his buddies of 14 billion pounds from the UK taxpayer which was hidden behind a bribe of 10,000 to each person in the UK.

Your reply then was to joke that you're not bothered by that, screw the 10 grand you're taking the 43 grand bonus, quitting your job and ing the year away abroad.

Your quoting of DaveO was completely irrelevant. You are too stupid to even understand the basic examples placed in front of you. You try and divert attention from that fact by farting and then sticking your hand in your armpit and making farting sounds.

No one will come to your defence because you are STUPID. No one will come in and say I'm right because I'm a mean bully and I'm picking on a retard.

Now, your next reply is to fart, burp and do a fart noise with you armpit at the same time.

Even I laugh because I can't believe you can co-ordinate the three noises at the same time.

There a far, far too many questions to ask Cameron on this subject but I wish someone would nail him to achair in a TV studio and start...

Questions like, "The rape scene in "Straw Dogs" or the rape scene in "The Accused", presumably it will be illegal to hold dvd copies of these films or for TV companies to show those films ever again ?"

or,

"Who is the arbitrator of porn, what is porn, how many companies and individuals who sell porn of any description have contributed to your political party in the past, or will do in future ?"

and,

"Why won't you join the campaign to rid tabloids of their page three photos or condemn online newspaper sites with their obsession with underage daughters of celebrities in swimsuits or gym gear whilst describing them as "leggy beauties" (c. Mintball )"



Its just more soundbite politics with not a thought of how its going to happen - a bit like me walking in the house and declaring that we're all going on holiday to Sandy Lane Barbados and then when the family get all excited saying , "erm, hang on a minute..."

It's total garbage, I agree, if people's "kids" are accessing porn then I suggest the parents are failing in their basic duty, he wont put a minimum price on alcohol, nor will he tax fat f'rs for remaining fat, but he wants to control the internet.

I'm probably one of an increasing majority that think all of the current crop of politicians are just useless bags of wind.

You're a paranoid little twerp.
I don't want people coming to my defence, unlike you, you stupid little fookwit moron.
You're making things up, again, about any bodily functions I might, or might not be be carrying out.

Whether I agree or disagree with your perception of why Ashley is awarding a minimum of 43K to his employees is totally irrelevant.
Like Coddy says it properly suits the company for tax efficiency purposes, but I'll applaud him b'cos I don't know of many other companies who give half their employees who earn under 20 k a year a 43 k bonus, do you?

Paranoid? Do you even know what that means?



Sadly, you need them. Pretty much anyone reading this thread can see that you're an idiot and I'm slapping you around.

Now, I don't need people to defend me because I can READ and UNDERSTAND our discussions. You do need someone to tell you that you are stupid. But the problem is that it's kind of awkward to tell people that they're thick. So they just step back and feel bad for you. While also thinking that you should have spent more time in school and less time sniffing glue.









The employees of SD have had a bumper windfall. That's great for them. Right now.

The details of whether that is actually so great are hidden behind the headlines. The fact that Ashley's first concern was his own pocket suggests something might be amiss.

If next month it emerges that Ashley took home a 50m bonus in his scheme I think he'll be very pleased that the people are as stupid as you.