Re: Moving company bank money around...
- From: Peter Saxton <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 14:26:31 +0100
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 13:33:47 +0100, Peter Saxton
<peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 11:52:35 GMT, Ronald Raygun
<no.spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Company B" not "Control B"!That's all very well, but it doesn't explain the *meaning* of ownership.I disagree. Control B shouldn't do what you say unless you have been
It is in essence a right to control. You can't deny that control is
transitive (If I control company A, and company A controls company B,
then I control company B). And if the purpose of ownership is to give
control, then the effect of owning something which owns something else
is similar to that of owning that "something else". So indirect
ownership is in many ways as good as direct ownership.
given authority by the board of company B.
--
Peter Saxton from London
peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
.
- References:
- Re: Moving company bank money around...
- From: Tim
- Re: Moving company bank money around...
- From: Simon
- Re: Moving company bank money around...
- From: Tim
- Re: Moving company bank money around...
- From: Simon
- Re: Moving company bank money around...
- From: Ronald Raygun
- Re: Moving company bank money around...
- From: Peter Saxton
- Re: Moving company bank money around...
- From: Ronald Raygun
- Re: Moving company bank money around...
- From: Peter Saxton
- Re: Moving company bank money around...
- From: Ronald Raygun
- Re: Moving company bank money around...
- From: Peter Saxton
- Re: Moving company bank money around...
- Prev by Date: Re: Moving company bank money around...
- Next by Date: Re: Moving company bank money around...
- Previous by thread: Re: Moving company bank money around...
- Next by thread: Re: Moving company bank money around...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|