Which could eventually lead to bankruptcy and still stick the taxpayer with the bill and poor service provision.
In any case I agree with your OP that these types of cut and dry presentations are never helpful, and we should be seeking to understand the appropriate context for different solutions instead of generalising.
> Which could eventually lead to bankruptcy and still stick the taxpayer with the bill and poor service provision.
Precisely. Thus G4S have a clear incentive not to let their standards slip elsewhere in the business and face further damage to their finances, or for that matter their reputation.
G4S is a massive multinational with ~£7.5bn annual revenue. They're not going to spiral into bankruptcy over this Olympics debacle.
Comments
Which could eventually lead to bankruptcy and still stick the taxpayer with the bill and poor service provision.
In any case I agree with your OP that these types of cut and dry presentations are never helpful, and we should be seeking to understand the appropriate context for different solutions instead of generalising.
> Which could eventually lead to bankruptcy and still stick the taxpayer with the bill and poor service provision.
Precisely. Thus G4S have a clear incentive not to let their standards slip elsewhere in the business and face further damage to their finances, or for that matter their reputation.
G4S is a massive multinational with ~£7.5bn annual revenue. They're not going to spiral into bankruptcy over this Olympics debacle.
or for that matter their reputation.
That they still have a reputation worth defending is fairly surprising given their history.