Talk:Employee stock ownership/Archives/2010

Copyright violations
I reverted this edit due to coptyright violations from several sources, including:, and. - Akamad 01:36, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Point of view
This article seems to discuss specific levels of tax break as if they were natural law. Judging by spelling and references to "federal income tax", I presume these levels refer to the USA.

Please remember that Wikipedia is an international encyclopaedia, and as such we cannot assume any specific cultural or political context; these must be stated explicitly. Hairy Dude 02:09, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I added an explanation where there was a citation needed request, but did not remove the request. I find the article should be higher on the qulaity scale than shown. It seems someone has edited it to indicate what is US specific. [GioCM} —Preceding unsigned comment added by  (talk • contribs) 19:44, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion
So how about putting the general stuff up top (don't think there is any right now - well maybe the Harvard stuff, and I'm not smart enough to make it up on the fly) then cram the current article into a heading US Employee-Owned Corporations —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.66.120.135 (talk) 17:50, 31 January 2007 (UTC).

Intro
I removed some of the financial details from the intro and added information on the pros and cons of employee ownership, which I thought would be of high general interest. I also broke "advantages" into advantages for employees and advantages to the company as a whole, since they seem to be fairly distinct topics in this context. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Inhumandecency (talk • contribs) 20:50, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Page name wrong
This page is called employee-owned corporations, but then it says it's about companies owned in part by employees. This is just a bit silly. If it's employee owned, that means it's all employee owned. Otherwise it's like just about any company on the planet. Companies almost always have employees owning a small stake, directly or indirectly. I think there needs to be a separate page too for ESOPs, i.e. Employee Share Ownership Plans. This is nothing to do with Employee owned companies. Thoughts?  Wik idea  16:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed - it seems too much of a mish mash, but as of today the pieces seem too short to split out on their own. To add more confusion to the mix, I recall that there was a time when the term ESOP was used in the UK for management-employee buyouts.  However, if you see a need for a split, I think you should just go ahead and do it.  Most of this article could be moved to a generic article called Employee ownership --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:31, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I have read it again, and I think the domoniance of the article is about Employee ownership or Employee stock ownership, not at all about the Employee-owned corporation often called the Employee-owned company. I think it is time for a move, and to start another article at this title.  Wik, I think you should go ahead and move to one of those titles.  --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 08:10, 24 May 2008 (UTC)