An ... interesting response.
An ... interesting response.
As for the financial info you read on companies house, if accounts are late, which they are in many companies, the wording on companies house sounds much more dramatic than the actual truth in the majority of cases, once the accounts are filled, it all looks normal again!
If that is the case then reading this should get them onto it if not already!To be fair they may just have poor/no advisors assisting them but they do need to sort this out or the company will be struck off by the end of June. In any case they will have incurred filing penalties due to the late filing of accounts which will be levied once accounts are filed -which strikes me as an avoidable waste of money.
Who’s ego?
As for the financial info you read on companies house, if accounts are late, which they are in many companies, the wording on companies house sounds much more dramatic than the actual truth in the majority of cases, once the accounts are filled, it all looks normal again!
It may not take off but then again let us hope it is a success rather than try to pick someone’s ambitions it to pieces. All the negative nerdsout there show a bit of can do attitude for a change.
It's not about being a "negative nerd"; it's about being realistic.
I suppose it depends on what you regard as "a zoo". To me it is a collection of exotic species on a fixed site which the public can visit. By that definition there is no "Manchester Zoo" currently.
What there seems to be is a private collection of exotic (and native) species which are available for school visits etc. Nothing wrong with that, but to use "The Manchester Zoo is ..." and "a new species at the Manchester Zoo is ..." seems a bit misleading.
I would be delighted if a Manchester Zoo gets off the ground (or - more accurately - gets on the ground) even though it might impact my beloved Chester. But talking about a "Manchester Zoo" in the present tense when the company behind it has - according to Company House records - only a few hundred pounds in the bank, and is days away from being struck off, seems more than a little presumptuous.
But... The company is called Manchester Zoo? So I don't see an issue with referring to is as such?
A"few days from being struck off" - Not at all (and that's all I shall say on that matter)![]()
Actually the company is called "Manchester Zoo Commercial Ltd".
But... The company is called Manchester Zoo? So I don't see an issue with referring to is as such?
That's a fairly weak argument to be fair, I could name a company Newcastle Zoo Limited but it doesn't mean I've established a zoo in Newcastle (I don't even live there) or justify calling any collection of animals I own Newcastle Zoo. Following your logic I should set up a company called "Owned By Coolest Person In The World Limited" thus making me the coolest person in the world.![]()
I think that using the title "Manchester Zoo" is more than appropriate - whatever you would like to call it now, *will* eventually become a zoo, so there is no harm in using such terminology now when merely reporting news on a forum for fellow enthusiasts.
What else would you like me, or anyone else reporting news to refer to Manchester Zoo as?? I would love to hear any suggestions?
Ahaha my point was to answer my own questionI think you've answered your own question, "Manchester Zoo" (in quotes) seems entirely suitable. Everyone could interpret the quotes in their own personal way and be happy.
Alternatively, Manchester Zoo (under construction), Manchester Zoo (one day) or Manchester Zoo (fingers crossed) would seem suitable, if clunky.
I think you've answered your own question, "Manchester Zoo" (in quotes) seems entirely suitable. Everyone could interpret the quotes in their own personal way and be happy.
Alternatively, Manchester Zoo (under construction), Manchester Zoo (one day) or Manchester Zoo (fingers crossed) would seem suitable, if clunky.
If that were to happen, I think many collections would have to me moved... Heythrop and Wolds to name a fewJust a thought... but if this is the name of a private collection, should it not be listed in the 'Private Collections and Pets' category...?
If that were to happen, I think many collections would have to me moved... Heythrop and Wolds to name a few![]()
If that were to happen, I think many collections would have to me moved... Heythrop and Wolds to name a few![]()
Yeah, but they do have a defined physical location containing animals which can be visited (albeit only occasionally), arguably the definition of a zoo. "Manchester Zoo" does not have those characteristics as far as I know......
That said, I think you have half a point here and Heythrop and Wolds could be argued either way (whereas Park Exotics, or whatever it's currently called, would definitely be a a private collection).