Talk:Types of companies

Types of companies and their legal status is very dependent on the country being referring to. This seems to have a mishmash of different countries laws in it so seems useless. I think the country by country detail needs to be stripped into seperate articles for each country or simply deleted. zaius 14:57, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

this is a mish mash, but it is a good starting point. I added some bits on proprietary companies...I could have added more in an article. --Nickdap 09:55, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

One problem is that many people do not understand the differences between entity types and their status. For example, in the U.S., both Corporations and Limited Liability Companies both have limited liability. The difference is how they are internally organized (stockholders vs. members, board of directors vs. a flexible management structure). The way the tables are currently structured, it implies that U.S. Corporations do not have limited liability.

Another problem is that many states and countries use the same term to mean very different things. Some countries' Liability Companies appear to be the same as U.S. Corporations, which also have limited liability.

It might be more useful to organize companies as: Companies types that issue stock, company types that do not, and Partnerships.

--WisTex 02:35, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this entry is a mishmash, however, I do not agree with a statement that it is useless. On the contrary, it is a good starting point for a comparative study of types of businessess that various legal systems provide for. It is not an easy task and my personal research made it abundantly clear. Even in a one-country perspective (taking Russia as an example) legal types of businesses is a total confusion. Partially, it is a mis-adoption of foreign traditions, partially it is remainings of former local concepts, partially it is errors (and the wrong theoretization) made by legislators. However, there is an internal logic behind them and a historical justification (plus a real-life practise of their use). And it is extremely difficult to find any systematic description of them. Why not to let wikipedia give it a try? --217.10.38.37 18:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is inaccurate and misleading. It has obviously been written by a citizen of the United States (an "American").

What about Intl (International)? I'm no expert at company types, so I'm just asking.

Note that Srl stands also for Italian "Società responsabiltà Limitata" : a Ltd Corporation.

--85.18.234.2 15:41, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Split up into each nation

As it more or less impossible to maintain a detailed list of all different international comany-structures that excist, I think it would be a good idea to move this into a more nationally-oriented set of pages. I have no clue about foreign countries, but I'd be able to write a little about Norway. This way we would make the whole project a bit easier to manage.

Later we could rewrite this article to only incorporate the broader lines (public/private, liable/limited, member/stockholder)--Alf 22:02, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Types of corporations

The two lists cover pretty much the same ground. I'm working on tidying up the other list (adding any information from this list which doesn't already appear there); when it's ready I suggest we move it to Types of business entity and redirect this page to it.--Kotniski (talk) 12:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]