Running Head: Comparison of Mark & Spencer and The Port Inn

Comparison of Mark & Spencer and The Port Inn

Comparison of Mark & Spencer and The Port Inn

Table of Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................3
Differences between Mark & Spencer and The Port Inn.................................................................3
Benefits of Mark & Spencer and The Port Inn................................................................................3
Risks of Mark & Spencer and The Port Inn.....................................................................................4
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................4
References........................................................................................................................................5

Comparison of Mark & Spencer and The Port Inn

Introduction
Sole traders and Public Limited are two types of companies operating in UK. The sole trader
compnies are owned by an individual or his family. However the public limited compnies are
having numerous directors and shareholders. Shares of Public limited companies could be
purchased by anyone. The basic purpose of report is comparison of both companies (Mark &
Spencer and The Port Inn) along with analysis of risks and benfits associated with them.
Differences between Mark & Spencer and The Port Inn
The Port Inn is a lodging service provider companies operating in Portsmouth. The port Innis
family business of owner and the owner and his family handles every kind of debts which have
significant impact on the revenue and profits of company. The owner and his family the sole
owner of the profits generated by company.Public limited companies are common in
UK which are the most renowned and largest types of the private companies like Mark &
Spencer. Like All public limited companies shares of Mark & Spencer are public too. The
directors of company and shareholder of company are different from each other. The most
important thing for public limited company like Mark & Spencer is the maintenance of sound
and satisfactory financial record..
Benefits of Mark & Spencer and The Port Inn
It is very easy of The Port Inn to operate because of being sole trader they do not have to follow
formal and complex procedures. The Port Inn mainatains direct relationship with their cutoemrs.
The owner of The Port Innis the only decision making making authority that is why all the
business realted decisions are taken quickly becaue of no other stakeholder in business. The

Comparison of Mark & Spencer and The Port Inn

benfits of operating as sole trader for The Port Inn is, owner is the boss and the transaction are
done in cash form and having direct realtion with custoemrs there are no debts. Being sole trader
paperwork at The port Inn is to minimum level.. However the amount of capital
increases in Public limited companies like Mark & Spencer because of presence of many
shareholders.
As Jessica Todd Salon is the sole trading company that is why its easy for it to setup because of
no formal procedure are required to be followed. It is easy to maintain a direct relationship with
the customers. Jessica Todd can take action on its decisions related to business quickly because
of sole decision-making power. The owner of Jessica Todd is her boss. All the transactions are
made in credit form because of having direct relation with the customers, so debts are avoided.
Paperwork is minimum in case of Jessica Todd being a sole trader (Hitt, Harrison & Ireland,
2001). Mark & Spencer PLC has increase capital because of involvement of many shareholders.
The biggest advantage of Mark & Spencer is economies of scale and because of that they can
operate cheaply as compared to small business. The value of companies increase to a greater
extent like Mark & Spencer after its success as Plc Company (Bendrey, Hussey & West, 2004).
Risks of Mark & Spencer and the Port Inn
There are some risks associated with Jessica Todd operating as a sole trader. It has long working
hours. The owner of Jessica Todd cannot generate money if she is sick. Whole business progress
is dependent on skills of one person and less capital generation for expansion (Ebert & Griffin,
2005). There so many regulations that have to be followed by Mark & Spencer and if anything
bad happens then it becomes the headline of newspapers. The decision-making process in Mark
& Spencer is very time-consuming because they have to take the consent of all the directors of

Comparison of Mark & Spencer and The Port Inn

the company for making any decision. Mark & Spencer has to give dividends to shareholders too
(Ebert & Griffin, 2005).
Conclusion
Comprehensive analysis of two organizations was done in this report. One company is Jessa
Todd who is a salon and operating as a sole trader in Portsmouth and Mark & Spencer is a public
limited company. Benefits of both companies were analyzed along with the potential risks
associated with both companies because. Mark & Spencer and Jessica Todd are two different
types of organizations, so both types of organizations have certain benefits and risks associated
with them. In the nutshell basic focus of the report was to compare and contrast both types of
companies.
References
Bendrey, M., Hussey, R., & West, C. (2004). Essentials of financial accounting in business (p.
283). London: Thomson Learning.
Bridge, S., O'Neill, K., & Cromie, S. (2003). Understanding enterprise, entrepreneurship, and
small business. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Campbell, D. (2000). Legitimacy Theory or Managerial Reality Construction? Corporate Social
Disclosure in Marks and Spencer Plc Corporate Reports, 1969-1997. Accounting Forum, 24(1),
80-100. doi:10.1111/1467-6303.00030
Ebert, R., & Griffin, R. (2005). Business essentials. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice
Hall.

Comparison of Mark & Spencer and The Port Inn

Hitt, M., Harrison, J., & Ireland, R. (2001). Mergers and acquisitions (p. 283). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.