Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Thu Dec 08, 2016 7:08 pm

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:37 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 6:25 pm
Posts: 606
Location: New Forest
G4S is akin to a swear word in my household, their incompetent desire to become a private police force is genuinely worrying. Especially when it is driven purely by profit for shareholders! Nobody should be profiting directly from the misfortune of people who are a victim of crime. Grrrrrr :evil:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:52 am 
Special Retro Guru
Special Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 11:34 am
Posts: 5663
Location: Don't mess with monkeys, man
retrocomeback wrote:
G4S is akin to a swear word in my household, their incompetent desire to become a private police force is genuinely worrying. Especially when it is driven purely by profit for shareholders! Nobody should be profiting directly from the misfortune of people who are a victim of crime. Grrrrrr :evil:

I think that's harsh criticism.

As a private sector company, their interest in expansion, profit and growth are all quite normal and expected. And in the assumption you have nothing against capitalism, perfectly laudable.

If the government, or state(s) are using them inappropriately then that is a matter of government policy and control. If you were a shareholder you'd probably expect not much more than they're doing. If they're being used wrongly, that's hardly their call.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:54 am 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 2:36 pm
Posts: 4007
Location: uk
There's only one G4s i trust...........

Image...............G-Force


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 10:02 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 6:25 pm
Posts: 606
Location: New Forest
http://soundcloud.com/user6060683/01-g4s-securing-your-world G4S have a theme tune! Hahahahah!!!!!

Seriously, profiting directly from the misfortune of victims of crime may not be legally wrong but morally it f****** stinks. Who gave G4S the Olympic contract? John Reid former Home Sec! Who's a director of G4S now? John Reid! :shock: G4S's incompetence has meant thousand of soldiers R&R with families whilst kids are off school has been lost, and In some cases wedding cancelled. Some insurance companies are not classifying soldiers use at Olympics as a deployment so are not covering them for the thousands of £'s they face losing. Damn right I don't like G4S
:evil:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 10:32 am 
Special Retro Guru
Special Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 11:34 am
Posts: 5663
Location: Don't mess with monkeys, man
retrocomeback wrote:
http://soundcloud.com/user6060683/01-g4s-securing-your-world G4S have a theme tune! Hahahahah!!!!!

Seriously, profiting directly from the misfortune of victims of crime may not be legally wrong but morally it f****** stinks. Who gave G4S the Olympic contract? John Reid former Home Sec! Who's a director of G4S now? John Reid! :shock: G4S's incompetence has meant thousand of soldiers R&R with families whilst kids are off school has been lost, and In some cases wedding cancelled. Some insurance companies are not classifying soldiers use at Olympics as a deployment so are not covering them for the thousands of £'s they face losing. Damn right I don't like G4S
:evil:

Most of this criticism should probably be more placed at those employing or putting G4S in this position. They're probably doing what any other private sector security company would do.

If they're used inappropriately, that's more down to who's employing them, than the company itself. Companies rarely turn down work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 10:38 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 6:25 pm
Posts: 606
Location: New Forest
I respect your views Neil, but seeing this from a policing and military angle both G4S and indeed the government are seriously taking the p*ss. I'm going to bow out of the thread now for fear of my blood pressure, all the best mate! :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 10:43 am 
Special Retro Guru
Special Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 11:34 am
Posts: 5663
Location: Don't mess with monkeys, man
retrocomeback wrote:
I respect your views Neil, but seeing this from a policing and military angle both G4S and indeed the government are seriously taking the p*ss. I'm going to bow out of the thread now for fear of my blood pressure, all the best mate! :)

Don't get me wrong - I get that some love to hate them - and I get how the fallout can be issues for people.

But mostly, it seems to be because of how they've been employed / commissioned to do things and their suitability.

My fundamental point, though, is that most slag them off in ignorance, persuaded almost entirely by media sensationalising.

As a company they have a staggering record over the last decade, or so - one that many would like to emulate, even if they've had some embarrassments over that time, too.

Personally, I can decouple them being used / selected / employed with a bit too much glibness, and them not always being the best solution, to how they've performed as a company. Big companies do make mistakes - and I'm not going to try and hand-wave those away - but all the same, for everybody who'd comment about how feckless as a company they are, they are fundamentally missing how well, as a company, they've performed in the market.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 4:45 pm 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:33 pm
Posts: 11105
Location: The Home Of Mountain Biking, And All Great Things.
I don't give a fig how 'successful' they are in monetary terms.

They are a terrible company, with a long record of misdoings.

Like most companies whose reason d'etre is purely making money.

Whether that be in oil, banking, arms dealing or anything else, when your primary objective is to satisfy shareholders corners are cut and people are exploited.

Regardless of so called government regulation.

As usual the tax payer will wind up bearing the costs twice over.

Regardless of their promises to cover the price of their blunders over this, which they would readily fail to do were they not thinking of future contracts and the possibility they might be forced out of business in the UK as a result of this.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 4:59 pm 
Special Retro Guru
Special Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 11:34 am
Posts: 5663
Location: Don't mess with monkeys, man
highlandsflyer wrote:
I don't give a fig how 'successful' they are in monetary terms.

Their success isn't just over their balance sheet - their profit / loss, assets vs liabilities, or share price - it's about their growth, all the while most would happily use them as a punchline for their jokes.
highlandsflyer wrote:
They are a terrible company, with a long record of misdoings.

Like most companies whose reason d'etre is purely making money.

Whether that be in oil, banking, arms dealing or anything else, when your primary objective is to satisfy shareholders corners are cut and people are exploited.

They may well be all of those things - just like many other huge companies.

All the same, there's a whole load of ignorant bollocks spouted about them, by people who clearly have no clue whatsoever in terms of how they've actually performed over the last decade or so - and let's not forget, that's what companies are suppose to do, make profit, grow their market share.
highlandsflyer wrote:
Regardless of so called government regulation.

As usual the tax payer will wind up bearing the costs twice over.

Regardless of their promises to cover the price of their blunders over this, which they would readily fail to do were they not thinking of future contracts and the possibility they might be forced out of business in the UK as a result of this.

I seriously doubt that'll happen. They've had worse press, and prevailed in the market.

I understand some of the criticism - even nod my head - but some of that, is not purely their doing. Governments outsourcing or privatising key aspects that companies like G4S have grown into, in recent times, is just how the market reacts.

Perhaps in many of those cases, the market shouldn't have been asked - or more closely monitored / regulated / penalised.

All the same, though, their business model is the envy of many other aspiring business - that's not to say all aspects of their performance are, though.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 7:52 pm 
Gold Trader
Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 11:19 pm
Posts: 7006
Location: Odense, Denmark
I use G4S for my shop security.

When the contract expires - it won't be renewed because of this disgusting situation.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 02gf74, FairfaxPat, Minifreak, mkone, TheGreenRabbit and 46 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group