• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mo_Zam_Beek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Worth the read:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-16/hostess-liquidation-curious-cast-characters-twinkie-tumbles</div></div>

That article is indeed worth the read, and should be required for anyone who is tempted to comment in this thread.

As expected, it's a clusterfuck all around. Both labor and management bleed the company dry, but the peanut gallery will divide itself according to preconceived biases and blast away at whichever side they like less.

Having spent the past decade-plus in the auto industry, I saw some good unions, some bad unions, some good management, and some bad management. Depending upon the combination, things will almost always trend towards win-win or lose-lose. Win-win takes a hell of a lot of effort, as well as a long-term mindset. Both are in short supply nowadays.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Inogame</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
BCTGM probably wanted to send a message to any other bakery company that is trying to renegotiate. So they sacrifice 6K members for the rest, that's what unions do.

</div></div>

Yep, it's all about power. The people are just pawns and pretending to care about them is just a guise.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

I grew up in a union house. My Pop is the retired Nor-Cal Pres for The Drywall Lather's. He worked to organize the entirety of Nor-cal successfully, brokered several deals within the northern areas between management and labor, and held the United Brotherhood of Carpenters at bay for over 10 years because they would not offer a comparative package to the Lathers to join into the UBC. His work made solid concessions between management and labor during tough times so everyone who could work, worked, and management could keep people working. The deals between the Nor-Cal construction trades and management NEVER, EVER forsook the few for the many...EVER. He alwasy brokered all or nothing and won.
Somewhere near TIS is a Labor Center. On the wall is a brass plaque with his name on it. I am pretty damn proud of MY Pop for his union work, but these asshats, they fucked over a ton of people AND a company to gain what? making an example? Bullshit.
People are out of work, a company is closed and union officials are none the worse off for it. THAT is wrong
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Switchblade</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
WE are out some damn good fat boy snacks(our favorites)
</div></div>

LOL!!!!
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You guys should calm down and thank a union worker for weekends and an eight hour work shift. Plumbers Local Union #8 here baby!!!

SPM </div></div>

This is like thanking a bitch that burned you with herpes for cooking you a spaghetti dinner once.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You guys should calm down and thank a union worker for weekends and an eight hour work shift. Plumbers Local Union #8 here baby!!!

SPM </div></div>

January 5, 1914 Henry Ford instituted the 8 hour work day/shift. At the same time he more than doubled the day rate bringing it to $5.00. Ford then phased in a shorter (5 day instead of 6) work week.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

hostess.jpg


Cheers,

Sirhr
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

Another perspective:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung/2012/11/18/hostess-twinkie-defense-is-a-management-failure/

The bakery union may have driven the final nail, but management built the coffin long ago by borrowing way too much money after the first bankruptcy filing, by failing to innovate the company's product offerings, and by avoiding a confrontation with the unions until the only alternative was failure.

It should be interesting to see Jim Collins weigh in on this particular disaster.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

What's not to like about unions? They make you pay for them to hopefully keep you employed, but if they are unable to do so they still keep charging you union dues. They also operate on a model of "Seniority" where even though you could be doing twice the amount of work and at a higher level of performance the spoils still go to those that "have the time in"... Hmmm... almost sounds like entitlement?

What's every pro-union persons feelings on the fact that the Union for the Hostess workers is still charging them union dues even though they have no jobs and will have difficulties finding them work in this economy?
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What's every pro-union persons feelings on the fact that the Union for the Hostess workers is still charging them union dues even though they have no jobs and will have difficulties finding them work in this economy? </div></div>

Do you have any sources that the BCTGM continues to charge dues to Hostess workers? I'm certainly not saying you are wrong, I just haven't heard such a thing (nor have I been paying attention).

In the few (aviation-related) unions I am familiar with, union dues are a percentage of income and are deducted from your paycheck (known often as "dues check off"). As you might know, its kinda hard to charge a percentage of zero.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

Greedy upper management killed Hostess, not the union.

No company around today gives a fuck about their employees. The only thing owners/investors are concerned about is the profit margin.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Marcus85</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Greedy upper management killed Hostess, not the union.

No company around today gives a fuck about their employees. The only thing owners/investors are concerned about is the profit margin. </div></div>

Thank you, Mr. Trumka.

I'll be waiting for that extensive list of successful non-for-profit manufacturing companies.

Or... we can understand that companies exist to make money not to employ people.

If they can't make money they close. Breaking even is not and will never be good enough.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BoilerUP</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What's every pro-union persons feelings on the fact that the Union for the Hostess workers is still charging them union dues even though they have no jobs and will have difficulties finding them work in this economy? </div></div>

Do you have any sources that the BCTGM continues to charge dues to Hostess workers? I'm certainly not saying you are wrong, I just haven't heard such a thing (nor have I been paying attention).

In the few (aviation-related) unions I am familiar with, union dues are a percentage of income and are deducted from your paycheck (known often as "dues check off"). As you might know, its kinda hard to charge a percentage of zero. </div></div>

I'm going on the basis of every union I've ever dealt with in the trade community ie welders, carpenters, electricians, etc. Numerous friends who sometimes go months between jobs still pay union dues even when they're not working, and if they don't then they become no longer in "good standing" and receive no benefits.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BoilerUP</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What's every pro-union persons feelings on the fact that the Union for the Hostess workers is still charging them union dues even though they have no jobs and will have difficulties finding them work in this economy? </div></div>

Do you have any sources that the BCTGM continues to charge dues to Hostess workers? I'm certainly not saying you are wrong, I just haven't heard such a thing (nor have I been paying attention).

In the few (aviation-related) unions I am familiar with, union dues are a percentage of income and are deducted from your paycheck (known often as "dues check off"). As you might know, its kinda hard to charge a percentage of zero. </div></div>

I'm going on the basis of every union I've ever dealt with in the trade community ie welders, carpenters, electricians, etc. Numerous friends who sometimes go months between jobs still pay union dues even when they're not working, and if they don't then they become no longer in "good standing" and receive no benefits. </div></div>

BCTGM only requires due collection to keep seniority/benefits during layoff. There might be some pension carryover but our contract doesn't specify. Here if the laid off employee continues to pay dues their benefits continue, but with a bankruptcy Hostess won't be doing that.
I'm not with Hostess but we have the same union represented here.
With the closure of the facilities there is little to gain by continuing to pay dues. Anywhere else the employees get work will start them down on seniority list, there is no work placement structure like a trade union. Seniority is by company first.
It is unlikely any of these production plants will ever reopen. So, no reason to pay dues.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Inogame</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Or... we can understand that companies exist to make money not to employ people.</div></div>

To be precise, companies exist to provide a useful product or service. Profit is how we measure their effectiveness at doing so. Forgetting which of these things comes first is a good way to end up in bankruptcy, which is of course the story here.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

I realized today that my preferred bread, Home Pride, was a Hostess brand.

vader.jpg
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Inogame</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

BCTGM only requires due collection to keep seniority/benefits during layoff. There might be some pension carryover but our contract doesn't specify. Here if the laid off employee continues to pay dues their benefits continue, but with a bankruptcy Hostess won't be doing that.
I'm not with Hostess but we have the same union represented here.
With the closure of the facilities there is little to gain by continuing to pay dues. Anywhere else the employees get work will start them down on seniority list, there is no work placement structure like a trade union. Seniority is by company first.
It is unlikely any of these production plants will ever reopen. So, no reason to pay dues. </div></div>

Ahh... Understood. Thank you for the clarification Ino.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Eric Bryant</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
To be precise, companies exist to provide a useful product or service. Profit is how we measure their effectiveness at doing so. Forgetting which of these things comes first is a good way to end up in bankruptcy, which is of course the story here. </div></div>

I disagree Eric. Companies exist to make a profit. Yes, their profit reflects their efficiency however a well run and efficient company can not be profitable and still be very efficient, i.e. Non-profits. The fact is whether or not the product is useful is almost irrelevant to whether or not a company is successful. A "useful" product or service is objective at best.

Profit is what keeps businesses growing.

 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JelloStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body">HOLY SHIT.

I don't think I've ever had a thread that I, my humble self, have created that went on this long.

Not to mention, with TWO moderators looking/posting in it and they're not here to ban my ass.

Can someone please photoshop me a badge of honor or something?

</div></div>

There you go, check out your avatar. Congrats.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What's not to like about unions? They make you pay for them to hopefully keep you employed, but if they are unable to do so they still keep charging you union dues. They also operate on a model of "Seniority" where even though you could be doing twice the amount of work and at a higher level of performance the spoils still go to those that "have the time in"... Hmmm... almost sounds like entitlement?

What's every pro-union persons feelings on the fact that the Union for the Hostess workers is still charging them union dues even though they have no jobs and will have difficulties finding them work in this economy?</div></div>

Not all unions operate on seniority, I worked in the plumbers & pipefitters union and also in the operators union and neither one of them used seniority. I was one of the last to come on a couple jobs and I was the last to leave. That even happened when I wasn't in my own local.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bradu</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not all unions operate on seniority, I worked in the plumbers & pipefitters union and also in the operators union and neither one of them used seniority. I was one of the last to come on a couple jobs and I was the last to leave. That even happened when I wasn't in my own local. </div></div>

The trade unions out here operate differently.

I have zero respect for unions. Out here I was approached in my younger years my several douche bag Union Reps trying to tell me how I need them to work and bordering on threatening us. They offered me the opportunity to pay them dues and in return start off as an apprentice in a job I was already doing journeyman work with only 1/2 the pay and worse benefits. That didn't work out to well for them...

Unions served their purpose once, but now they've become leaches making money off the back of the people actually doing the work and all under the guise that we need them in order to keep our jobs and that businesses owe money to workers before making a profit. I find that sadly ironic since Unions themselves are a business designed to profit off of who? Oh that's right... workers!
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

You guys should thank us union types for the high pay scale we get. Because the non-union workers wage is based on ours. If we make less so do they. Get rid of unions all together and the wages will plummet. VIVA LA UNIONS!!!

SPM
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You guys should thank us union types for the high pay scale we get. Because the non-union workers wage is based on ours. If we make less so do they. Get rid of unions all together and the wages will plummet. VIVA LA UNIONS!!!

SPM </div></div>

For this to be accurate everyone in a particular industry would have to be currently overpaid.

I'm not saying that's not true... I'm just saying.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You guys should thank us union types for the high pay scale we get. Because the non-union workers wage is based on ours. If we make less so do they. Get rid of unions all together and the wages will plummet. VIVA LA UNIONS!!!

SPM </div></div>

Odd since when I worked in the trade field I literally made double what the Union guys were making and my benefits were far better. Please explain how you can prove that statement as anything more than opinion?
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Inogame</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You guys should thank us union types for the high pay scale we get. Because the non-union workers wage is based on ours. If we make less so do they. Get rid of unions all together and the wages will plummet. VIVA LA UNIONS!!!

SPM </div></div>

For this to be accurate everyone in a particular industry would have to be currently overpaid.


I'm not saying that's not true... I'm just saying. </div></div>

I wonder how an owner puts a price on a mans worth and how many owners wouldn't let greed get in the way. We could all sit here and say blah blah blah blah but we all know greed would win.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You guys should thank us union types for the high pay scale we get. Because the non-union workers wage is based on ours. If we make less so do they. Get rid of unions all together and the wages will plummet. VIVA LA UNIONS!!!

SPM </div></div>

Odd since when I worked in the trade field I literally made double what the Union guys were making and my benefits were far better. Please explain how you can prove that statement as anything more than opinion? </div></div>

Prove your's.

SPM
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wonder how an owner puts a price on a mans worth and how many owners wouldn't let greed get in the way. We could all sit here and say blah blah blah blah but we all know greed would win. </div></div>

An owner puts a price on a man work worth, not the man himself. It's called a business.

Why is it if a company makes money every union worker thinks they're entitled to a cut of the profits? What makes you think because you work for a company you're entitled to share in its profit when you've already been paid for your services at an amount agreed upon when you performed the service? Why is it every Union worker who goes to work for a company always thinks a company should raise their wages based upon the profits even though they're doing the same work as before but somehow they think they're entitled to more? Why is it every Union and their workers think they're entitled to anything when they take ZERO financial risk in a company and they own 0% of a company but they spend a couple years there and they think they own it and get to decide on its financial future?
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You guys should thank us union types for the high pay scale we get. Because the non-union workers wage is based on ours. If we make less so do they. Get rid of unions all together and the wages will plummet. VIVA LA UNIONS!!!

SPM </div></div>

Odd since when I worked in the trade field I literally made double what the Union guys were making and my benefits were far better. Please explain how you can prove that statement as anything more than opinion? </div></div>

Prove your's.

SPM </div></div>

I made $20 per hour plus full benefits including Medical/Dental/ 401K and they paid 100% of my medical. The Union offered me $9.50, told me I had to start as an apprentice, and I had to pay 33% of my benefits.

Your inability to answer with anything other than "Prove your's" when you're the one who made the original statement shows the clear lack of ground you have to stand on.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You guys should thank us union types for the high pay scale we get. Because the non-union workers wage is based on ours. If we make less so do they. Get rid of unions all together and the wages will plummet. VIVA LA UNIONS!!!

SPM </div></div>

Odd since when I worked in the trade field I literally made double what the Union guys were making and my benefits were far better. Please explain how you can prove that statement as anything more than opinion? </div></div>

Prove your's.

SPM </div></div>

I made $20 per hour plus full benefits including Medical/Dental/ 401K and they paid 100% of my medical. The Union offered me $9.50, told me I had to start as an apprentice, and I had to pay 33% of my benefits.

Your inability to answer with anything other than "Prove your's" when you're the one who made the original statement shows the clear lack of ground you have to stand on. </div></div>

You are comparing your wage to an apprentice, way to fluff your point. I said prove yours because I knew your comment was full of it just like you pointed out for everyone on the internet to see. Thank you for making me look smarter than you.

SPM
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You are comparing your wage to an apprentice, way to fluff your point. I said prove yours because I knew your comment was full of it just like you pointed out for everyone on the internet to see. Thank you for making me look smarter than you.

SPM </div></div>

I was technically not a Journeyman in their eyes as I did not have 4 years of experience in just that field. I was also 19 years old. I proved my point, but as I thought you have ZERO to rebute me with. You don't look smarter but in fact sound like a every other Union Rep without a leg to stand on that I've dealt with... Incompetent.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...



I was technically not a Journeyman in their eyes as I did not have 4 years of experience in just that field. I was also 19 years old. I proved my point, but as I thought you have ZERO to rebute me with. You don't look smarter but in fact sound like a every other Union Rep without a leg to stand on that I've dealt with... Incompetent. [/quote]

Here in Kansas City, MO a first year apprentice makes as much as a non union journeyman on the check. A non union journeyman makes about seven dollars more than a first year apprentice. A first year apprentice makes 50% less than a union journeyman. This is for the plumbing industry only. So you can see how I am VERY clear on comparing wages and why I think your hatred or jealousy for unions is making you post untrue facts.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Eric Bryant</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Inogame</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Or... we can understand that companies exist to make money not to employ people.</div></div>

To be precise, companies exist to provide a useful product or service. Profit is how we measure their effectiveness at doing so. Forgetting which of these things comes first is a good way to end up in bankruptcy, which is of course the story here. </div></div>

Sorry Eric, but this is egregiously incorrect. Companies exist primarily to make as much profit as the market will bear. That is why we start them, work our balls off the build them and then guard what we built with extreme prejudice.

No one with a better mouse trap enters the market to provide it for as little as possible for the good of man. In fact, the opposite is in fact the case: The mousetrap is offered at a price point at which it will sell in sufficient volume to capture all costs and a target profit margin. If it is a hit, it sells. Then substitutes begin to enter the market, often pure crap like the shit seen on TV for $9.99. This puts price pressure on the originator to keep or optimize market share.

Costs must be further scrutinized to maintain margins against a growing competition in the mousetrap market.

And so it goes.

No one, nobody, not one business exists for any reason other than to maximize their profit for the goods or services they offer.

The "For the good of man" crap is what the non profit gas bags say. You know, the folks that make six figure salaries, have no meaningful measure of their productivity or performance other than those they create and have perks and pensions as bloated union bosses.

No disrespect intended Eric but I vigorously disagree.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here in Kansas City, MO a first year apprentice makes as much as a non union journeyman on the check. A non union journeyman makes about seven dollars more than a first year apprentice. A first year apprentice makes 50% less than a union journeyman. This is for the plumbing industry only. So you can see how I am VERY clear on comparing wages and why I think your hatred or jealousy for unions is making you post untrue facts. </div></div>

Yeah that's it. It's all lies out of my jealousy and hatred over Union workers for pay in a field that I no longer perform... I'll need a moment for any further response since I've fallen out of my chair hysterically laughing at such a retarded comment...
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mike</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The fact is whether or not the product is useful is almost irrelevant to whether or not a company is successful. A "useful" product or service is objective at best.</div></div>

Without a useful product or service, a company will not exist for long, much less turn a profit.

And while I think you meant to use the word "subjective", I would argue that there is indeed a very objective measure of the usefulness of a product or service. It's called "price". I will pay more for a Nightforce scope than I will for a Bushnell or Leupold because it is more useful to me. I will pay more per unit labor for my new shop to built than I will for my food to be prepared or my laundry to be done, because the former labor is more useful to me. I will pay much more for a heavy-duty truck than I will for a compact truck, because it is more useful.

Capitalism's inherent feedback mechanism, through the market's regulation of price, is what provides the information that entrepreneurs require to make good decisions.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queequeg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No one with a better mouse trap enters the market to provide it for as little as possible for the good of man.</div></div>

I made no such claim, so please do not try to construct such a straw-man argument against me. Profits are important; without them, it is not possible to reinvest in the business or attract new investment. But putting profits first, as some sort of magical goal to be obtained in absence of any other accomplishment, almost always proves to be an exercise in futility. Business literature is filled with good examples.

I'm not going to spend any significant amount of time here attempting to argue against those who are adamantly opposed to this concept, as I can get paid (and have been paid extremely well) to do that in other settings. But as a simple thought exercise, when was the last time that you gave your own hard-earned money to a company for the primary purpose of making them a profit? Doesn't happen often, does it? Then why should any company make profit their <span style="font-style: italic">sole</span> purpose?

As far as Hostess goes, their problems were quite simple - they sold too little product at too low of a price to support their cost structure. Said cost structure was driven not just by excessive wage and benefit costs, but also by some extraordinarily stupid decisions by management with regards to accumulating debt. Borrowing can be a healthy thing for a business, provided that it has some sort of purpose for that capital with a reasonable expectation of achieving return upon the investment in excess of the lending costs. Hostess had no evidence of such planning; it borrowed from banks, it borrowed from hedge funds, and it borrowed from its pension fund, and basically pissed all that money away in pursuit of expanding capacity in a market that already had a glut of capacity. Same shit I saw over the last many years in the auto industry.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wonder how an owner puts a price on a mans worth and how many owners wouldn't let greed get in the way. We could all sit here and say blah blah blah blah but we all know greed would win. </div></div>

An owner puts a price on a man work worth, not the man himself. It's called a business.</div></div>

Actually, in a properly-functioning free market, <span style="font-style: italic">both</span> the owner and the employee have a role in determining the price of labor. If the price is too high, the owner will not create a job opportunity. If the price is too low, the employee will not make himself available for work. Only when both agree upon a price does the transaction of labor for payment take place.

Of course, it's easy to distort this process through any number of means, and both sides have been distorting it for longer than recorded history. I don't see much changing in this regard in my lifetime.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

The fact is whether or not the product is useful is almost irrelevant to whether or not a company is successful. A "useful" product or service is objective at best.

Without a useful product or service, a company will not exist for long, much less turn a profit.

<span style="font-weight: bold">We have to argue what's "useful". Because infomercials are full of junk companies try to convince you is useful. And before you argue that those companies do not stay in business long, I present Ron Popeil who has made the sale of junk profitable for over 40 years.</span>

And while I think you meant to use the word "subjective", <span style="font-weight: bold">(I did, thanks for the correction</span>). I would argue that there is indeed a very objective measure of the usefulness of a product or service. It's called "price". I will pay more for a Nightforce scope than I will for a Bushnell or Leupold because it is more useful to me. I will pay more per unit labor for my new shop to built than I will for my food to be prepared or my laundry to be done, because the former labor is more useful to me. I will pay much more for a heavy-duty truck than I will for a compact truck, because it is more useful.

<span style="font-weight: bold">But the measure of useful for you (the end user) is irrelevant to the manufacturers ability to provide a product at a profit. We would all love brand new Nightforce scopes for $1000 but Nightforce cannot be profitable at $1000. A company will only put out a product, regardless of its usefulness, if it is profitable. A rifle scope is a useful product, but our decision to purchase one not based on its usefulness but it's perceived value. A successful product will only be sold if a profit is made. </span>

Capitalism's inherent feedback mechanism, through the market's regulation of price, is what provides the information that entrepreneurs require to make good decisions.

<span style="font-weight: bold">The markets support of price is required to make a good decision however first and foremost as part of that decision making process is the profitability of said product. A great example is Leupold's new scope. They are charging >$3000 for it. If that price contains the minimum profit margin to maintain production, they have no "wiggle room" to meet the end users usefulness. The ability to make a profit is the highest priority for an manufacturer.</span>
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Eric Bryant</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Broker</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wonder how an owner puts a price on a mans worth and how many owners wouldn't let greed get in the way. We could all sit here and say blah blah blah blah but we all know greed would win. </div></div>

An owner puts a price on a man work worth, not the man himself. It's called a business.</div></div>

Actually, in a properly-functioning free market, <span style="font-style: italic">both</span> the owner and the employee have a role in determining the price of labor. If the price is too high, the owner will not create a job opportunity. If the price is too low, the employee will not make himself available for work. Only when both agree upon a price does the transaction of labor for payment take place.

Of course, it's easy to distort this process through any number of means, and both sides have been distorting it for longer than recorded history. I don't see much changing in this regard in my lifetime. </div></div>

I never said the employee didn't have that right. It's called choice. You can choose to work for the wage offered, or you can choose to work somewhere else. And just because one Laborer does not accept the price given does not mean another laborer won't. Read what I said Eric... a Man's work worth ie his labor, not the man himself.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Eric Bryant</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queequeg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No one with a better mouse trap enters the market to provide it for as little as possible for the good of man.</div></div>

I made no such claim, so please do not try to construct such a straw-man argument against me. Profits are important; without them, it is not possible to reinvest in the business or attract new investment. But putting profits first, as some sort of magical goal to be obtained in absence of any other accomplishment, almost always proves to be an exercise in futility. Business literature is filled with good examples.

</div></div>

But I quoted you. I did not construct a straw man argument. You said plainly,

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="color: #CC0000">To be precise, companies exist to provide a useful product or service.</span> Profit is how we measure their effectiveness at doing so. Forgetting which of these things comes first is a good way to end up in bankruptcy, which is of course the story here.</div></div>

This is Polyanna speak. Market share, return on investment, customer satisfaction, employee loyalty and duration, product loyalty, quality, and on and on and on, are all measures of the effectiveness of a company, as well as profit. Only one is the primary motivation for starting and running a business, All business; that is profit.

Straw man my balls.

I don't speak favorably of Hostess's business practices as it is clear there were many poor decisions that ultimately resulted in the final, Hobson's choice for their labor union to accept or decline.

Trying to distract from the craven, exploitative, stupidity of the union at this critical time in Hostess's struggles could also be fairly argued as a "Straw Man".
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queequeg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is Polyanna speak. Market share, return on investment, customer satisfaction, employee loyalty and duration, product loyalty, quality, and on and on and on, are all measures of the effectiveness of a company, as well as profit. Only one is the primary motivation for starting and running a business, All business; that is profit.</div></div>

3step.jpg


wink.gif


This might be a fun conversation to have with you in person, but I see it going nowhere in this particular discussion medium so I'm done - especially if you are going to accuse me of attempts to distract from the main purpose of the thread, which is apparently to bash on only one of the guilty parties. Enjoy!
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

Sure thing Sonny.

Maybe someday I'll learn a thing or two about business, starting one, running one, working with those who run them and trying to help those who are capable understand why we do it.

Oops, I let the cat out of the bag!


And yes, there is one guilty party here, the union that put a gun to the head of a struggling company whose books were made available to them, where ownership interest and a clear path toward increased wages and benefits for employees was provided and the fucking scumbag teamsters had approved.

TO BE CLEAR: THE UNION IS AT FAULT HERE.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

If you were interested in having a sincere conversation about business, I suspect we could have a lot of fun. I'd probably learn something; with any luck, maybe I could pass along something of use to you as well. But that would require some mutual respect which clearly won't be nurtured in this thread.

I totally misread the purpose of this topic. It's not for a serious discussion on business, but rather an opportunity to bash a certain participant (hence your accusation in a prior post that I am trying to drift it off-subject). My mistake; I'll try not to let it happen again.

I sincerely wish you the best of luck in your business ventures.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

Eric,

I haven't taken anything you have written as an insult to me or my intelligence and I would expect you to do accept what I have written in the same fashion.

Your thoughts are well articulated and I agree with some of them. I further agree that we would likely have much to talk about and I am still capable of learning far more about many things.

In other news, it appears that Hostess and their union are going to take another stab at negotiating. Apparently, the judge presiding in the bankruptcy proceedings has deemed that the union did not legally refuse the offer made by Hostess and thus the possibility exists for a "Do Over".

I hope they work it out.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

Ever wonder why when two homos get married they call it a "union"?
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: queequeg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I haven't taken anything you have written as an insult to me or my intelligence and I would expect you to do accept what I have written in the same fashion.

Your thoughts are well articulated and I agree with some of them. I further agree that we would likely have much to talk about and I am still capable of learning far more about many things.</div></div>

Hopefully we get the opportunity some day to sit down over a couple of beers.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In other news, it appears that Hostess and their union are going to take another stab at negotiating. Apparently, the judge presiding in the bankruptcy proceedings has deemed that the union did not legally refuse the offer made by Hostess and thus the possibility exists for a "Do Over".</div></div>

It was also being reported last night that another firm (Sun Capital) is interested in buying the company as a going concern. How they intend to fix it isn't clear to me, but that's why I don't run hedge funds
wink.gif


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I hope they work it out. </div></div>

Me too - no other bakery does that waxy chocolate quite like Hostess.
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jasonk</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JelloStorm</div><div class="ubbcode-body">HOLY SHIT.

I don't think I've ever had a thread that I, my humble self, have created that went on this long.

Not to mention, with TWO moderators looking/posting in it and they're not here to ban my ass.

Can someone please photoshop me a badge of honor or something?

</div></div>

There you go, check out your avatar. Congrats. </div></div>

I just noticed this today! LOL
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

Arbitration failed. Liquidation moves forward
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: VJJPunisher</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ever wonder why when two homos get married they call it a "union"? </div></div>

thats funny! i'm going to tell my union brothers that tomorrow
 
Re: Hostess is closing. RIP Twinkies...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SPM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You guys should calm down and thank a union worker for weekends and an eight hour work shift. Plumbers Local Union #8 here baby!!!

SPM </div></div>


Those inventions largely came from Endicott-Johnson, a NON-UNION employer and the largest shoe manufacturer in this country for nearly a century. They also were amongst first to have a profit sharing plan for employees.

Pretty ironic you actually think Unions created those benefits.


$(KGrHqF,!qcFBp-pcVrmBQo!+fmjwg~~60_57.JPG




 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

oklahoma_tc
Did BP Outfitters in Tulsa close down?
Replies
0
Views
429
oklahoma_tc
oklahoma_tc
P
Book length or close to lands
Replies
1
Views
89
Taylorbok
Taylorbok
Trent A
SOLD ***** Closed - 05/10/2024 ***** Not currently a supporter ***** WTB - Offset iron sights (Magpul or similar)
Replies
9
Views
138
Trent A
Trent A
Trent A
SOLD ***** Closed - 05/10/2024 ***** Not currently a supporter ***** WTB - Law Tactical AR folder device(s)
Replies
9
Views
252
Trent A
Trent A
PatMiles
Spotify Rips Harry & Meghan as ‘Lazy’ and ‘F*cking Grifters’
Replies
8
Views
967
sirhrmechanic
sirhrmechanic
Top Bottom
Back