Nicky Borrill - I wasn't implying the company would have been excluded; if was stating a fact the company is still liable for national insurance and pension contributions and f the company doesn't actually have any money - I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have choose a route which ultimately costs them more.
Loans and grants are not right for every business, mine included - it's more cost effective to close and start up again than be in any form of debt.
Point 1. A company actually needs enough money in reserves to actually pay the staff from their own bank account - then the company can claim the money back from the government.
This means the company needs money in the first place and with the estimated amount of staff the park was employing this is easily in excess of £75,000.
Point 2. The company is still liable for their share of the National Insurance and Pension Contributions this adds to funds needed to furlough to probably a minimum of £10,000.
Sorry I must have miss understood your point raised in point 1 then?
Also, specific to M&D’s, and point 2, remember that much of their staff would have been casual, young, seasonal and part time... The furlough scheme covers everything but employer NI. Their employer Ni contributions wouldn’t have been anywhere near as high as mine and yours would be, employing full time adults. It’s fairly difficult to earn £9.5k as a 17yr old seasonal worker on £4.35 - £4.55ph as just one example. My furlough weekly wage bill is £1900, my employers Ni is £21!!! I would hazard a guess that they have a much higher percentage of staff who they don’t pay Ni contributions for than I do.
I just don’t buy into the thinking that their staff and covid had anything to do with them bouncing the company. I think there were significant other debts and lockdown was just an opportunity to do it with the double advantage of saving face / providing an excuse... And not interfering with operations.