Carl31 posted this as a comment on a piece earlier this week. Unaccountably I missed it when going through comments and thought others might have done so too.
Carl started by quoting a section from my post, shown in bold below, before adding his own comments.
“One of the perennial issues about penalising football teams relates to what happens after a change in ownership. The argument goes that, if the team is sold off, why should the new owners and the innocent fans pay for the wrongdoing of the incompetents or worse who formerly owned the club?
That however simply ignores the nature of corporate entities. If that interpretation was allowed to prevail, then a football club could commit the most heinous rule breaches, and then have its assets sold to another company before the disciplinary process concluded. Thus the “club” would be innocent and all the fault would lie on the old owners. This would be the case even where the assets were sold by one company to another owned by exactly the same people!”
In the commercial world, this happens and doesn’t seem to be an issue for most. When a company folds, unable to pay its creditors, the new company that takes on the assets is not held responsible for the misdemeanors of the previous owners. If the new owners are the same owners as the old owners they fall foul of laws on ‘phoenixing’. Continue reading