Supermarine Aviation Works

I was thinking along similar lines but couldn’t come up with a plausible link. End 1926 would be a bit late for war profit tax problems and PB/Supermarine built very little anyway, nothing like the Sopwith production. I haven’t come across any references to financial trouble prior to the liquidation, but then again something like that would have been kept as quiet as possible. Maybe the clue is back around the time that Scott Paine was bought out by Jimmy Bird late in 1923, it has been suggested that the split was a bit acrimonious, but again I don’t know why.

I was thinking along similar lines but couldn’t come up with a plausible link. End 1926 would be a bit late for war profit tax problems and PB/Supermarine built very little anyway, nothing like the Sopwith production. I haven’t come across any references to financial trouble prior to the liquidation, but then again something like that would have been kept as quiet as possible. Maybe the clue is back around the time that Scott Paine was bought out by Jimmy Bird late in 1923, it has been suggested that the split was a bit acrimonious, but again I don’t know why.

(Don’t know, but suggest: ) unlikely to involve Mitchell; more likely to be tied up in tax. Pemberton-Billing, 1916 Hubert Scott-Paine; 1919 Inland Revenue addressing War Profits – T.O.M.Sopwith’s means of sheltering his earnings was to “re-structure” as Hawker; 1924 H.S-P embarks on severing his interest. All much more to do with tax, inc. planning for Death Duties, than with a Services contract for an employee.

(Don’t know, but suggest: ) unlikely to involve Mitchell; more likely to be tied up in tax. Pemberton-Billing, 1916 Hubert Scott-Paine; 1919 Inland Revenue addressing War Profits – T.O.M.Sopwith’s means of sheltering his earnings was to “re-structure” as Hawker; 1924 H.S-P embarks on severing his interest. All much more to do with tax, inc. planning for Death Duties, than with a Services contract for an employee.

Hi Chumpy,

Mitchell’s contract of employment as chief designer covered the 10 year period from December 1923 and included a clause that tied him to the company in the event of any restructuring, merger or take-over. It also ensured that he would be offered the position as Technical Director in December 1927. The contract was negotiated, or negotiations commenced, around the time that Hubert Scott Paine sold his interest in the company and it took a year to finalise as he only signed it at the end of 1924. So, all in all, I would doubt that the end-26 restructuring was related to Mitchell directly, that all appears to have been tied up pretty tightly.

Cheers

Hi Chumpy,

Mitchell’s contract of employment as chief designer covered the 10 year period from December 1923 and included a clause that tied him to the company in the event of any restructuring, merger or take-over. It also ensured that he would be offered the position as Technical Director in December 1927. The contract was negotiated, or negotiations commenced, around the time that Hubert Scott Paine sold his interest in the company and it took a year to finalise as he only signed it at the end of 1924. So, all in all, I would doubt that the end-26 restructuring was related to Mitchell directly, that all appears to have been tied up pretty tightly.

Cheers

Possibly to do with retaining the services of R.J. Mitchell?

According to various works, around this time he signed an agreement with Supermarine employing him as Chief Engineer and Designer for ten years. Along with this a technical directorship and the proviso that he would serve in this capacity if Supermarine to be taken over by another company.

So it would seem that the liquidation was a bit of ‘internal restructuring’, to make sure R.J. was firmly part and parcel of the concern.

According to ‘Industry and Air Power’ by Sebastian Ritchie, Supermarines were a small but profitable company during this period. Ideal take-over material …along came Vickers..the rest is history etc.

Possibly to do with retaining the services of R.J. Mitchell?

According to various works, around this time he signed an agreement with Supermarine employing him as Chief Engineer and Designer for ten years. Along with this a technical directorship and the proviso that he would serve in this capacity if Supermarine to be taken over by another company.

So it would seem that the liquidation was a bit of ‘internal restructuring’, to make sure R.J. was firmly part and parcel of the concern.

According to ‘Industry and Air Power’ by Sebastian Ritchie, Supermarines were a small but profitable company during this period. Ideal take-over material …along came Vickers..the rest is history etc.

Perhaps I should add that this liquidation and winding-up was a purely book-keeping process, all debts were paid in full. It was to do with company reconstruction, the new company had the same name and so on. But why?

Perhaps I should add that this liquidation and winding-up was a purely book-keeping process, all debts were paid in full. It was to do with company reconstruction, the new company had the same name and so on. But why?