B Corp status

That story about having to turn away 70% of business is probably more to do with what industry they are in and the association they have with it. I very much doubt we would have to turn away advertising board sponsors, programme sponsors and kit sponsors because it is impossible and impractical to vet every single sponsor when you consider the amount they pay in relation to our total turnover. Where we do possibly have a duty is in who sponsors our kit because that company gets the most coverage and is associated with us. The same would apply to a stadium sponsor.

If it unlocks funding, investment or sponsorship opportunities then the annual membership would certainly be worth it.

I’d imagine the people who think the B Corp thing isn’t a great idea are the same people crying because they’ve cast a drag Queen in Dr Who…

Of course, it's always possible that having b corps status might open doors to sponsors, who otherwise wouldn't ne in the least bit interested in GTFC.
PS think I'm right in saying that the B corps application is being funded personally by 1878

I don't see why anyone would see this as a negative, to be honest.
Most large companies strive to hold things like ISO accreditation, and I know where I work, it is not only the fancy logo on letterhead where this helps, but also other things like insurance. Insurers know the business is under a strict code to maintain it's status, and this is reflected in our payments for their services. Who knows what additional benefits it could give the Club as a business, away from the things we as fans see.

It will certainly be used to our benefit if and when we do achieve it, and we all know how good it felt to be portrayed as a progressive family friendly club during the cup run, as opposed to the hooligans and thugs other press outlets have tried to sensationalize in the past. When the time comes, I'm sure we'll get extra coverage in whatever areas, and as we've heard from the gaffer, this can be the make or break sort of thing that makes a player decide to sign with us or whoever if we're a credible business to work for.

It would be interesting to think about if we would have been B Corp 3 years ago, would Alex May have even been allowed in the door? This status certainly implies that if he'd have been in discussion to invest, he would have been reviewed, and his shady doings alerted way sooner than they were. If this reduces the chances of anything like that ever happening again, then I'm all for it.

Quoted from mike_d

Given the fact it's about equality, diversity and gender recognition at the heart of the values, couldn't be further from your statement.

It wasn't a statement, it was an opinion based on what I read in the link.
Like most reasonably minded people my opinions can change as I learn more and hear the arguments for and against.

Having been involved in a couple of ISO9002 applications and, having seen the stress that ‘Investors in People’ caused, I can only applaud those that are getting this done. The aforementioned having been a momentous waste of time and mostly out of date by the time they were achieved.

Quoted from aldi_01

I’d imagine the people who think the B Corp thing isn’t a great idea are the same people crying because they’ve cast a drag Queen in Dr Who…

Actually no, well certainly not in my case.  But feel free to compartmentalise if it suits your agenda because that’s all that counts isn’t it?…….your agenda.  Life must be so frustrating for you because people have different opinions to yours….