Interstate Brand owners kill the Twinkie

[JK/SEA]

just keepin' it real.

[CaptUSA]

JK, I asked this in the other thread, but didn't really get an answer.

Would that management still have killed the company if the union wasn't present? Are they just using the union as an excuse?

From what I've read, the management was pretty bad. I'm just not sure whether they would have been able to sustain if they could have been able to control their labor costs. The labor costs certainly seem to be a big factor in why the company failed.

[JK/SEA]

Tim Collins, CEO of Ripplewood Holdings, LLC and Member of the Board at CitiGroup is also a member of the Bilderberg Group...

maybe we could send him a thankyou note for 'allowing' Hostess workers to have their Union this long.

Thats the best answer i can give you at this time.

[CaptUSA]

Yeah yeah, but was this company folding anyway?

[JK/SEA]

Yeah yeah, but was this company folding anyway?

from the Seattle Times:

Hundreds of Hostess Brands employees in Washington lost their jobs this year as the company fought with unions. Now the company says it will liquidate its assets nationwide.

The company announced it would close its Seattle bakery on Monday, but at least 250 employees have lost their jobs statewide between May and when the company filed a motion for bankruptcy Friday.

In May, Hostess said 111 employees in Seattle, 17 in Kent, and 56 in Pierce County were subject to layoffs. The company also had employees in Everett, Bellingham, Bremerton, Tumwater, Longview, Moses Lake, Yakima and Spokane.

The site of the Seattle bakery that Hostess Brands closed Monday likely won't be abandoned for long. The 1-acre South Lake Union property, located at Dexter Avenue North and Republican Street, is valued at $7.8 million by a county assessor, but it could be worth even more.

Across the street is a slightly smaller property Vulcan Real Estate offered to the city this week in exchange for the right to construct taller buildings near South Lake Union — a property reportedly worth $10 million to $12 million.

Zoning limits the building height on the Hostess property to 85 feet, but a proposed South Lake Union rezone would increase that to 160 feet for commercial buildings and 240 feet for residential towers.

Meanwhile, consumers Friday loaded up shopping carts with Twinkies, Donettes and cupcakes. At a Hostess outlet store in South Everett, Miles Graydon, 29, of Marysville told The (Everett) Herald he planned to sell Hostess goods on the Internet to make extra money for Christmas.

"You've now become too valuable to eat," he told a stack of Twinkie boxes.

[CaptUSA]

I'll probably have to opt out of this thread, too. I'm just not knowledgable enough on the inner workings of this company to know what's going on.

I've been in 3 different unions, been in management, and have been in non-union companies as well. I see all sides of the argument.

From that article, though, it seems the company was liquidating to retain more capital. If it really were labor costs that were killing this company, then the union bosses really hurt their employees. Remember, the union's role isn't to drive management decision-making about how to run the company - their role should be to negotiate working conditions and salaries. If the union (and again, I don't know this is the case) was telling the company they should be spending more on labor and less on other things, they're overstepping their bounds. If the union was right, the company would have folded anyway due to market pressures, but at least the union members could take solice in the fact that it wasn't their fault. And they'd have jobs until they could find new ones. But if labor began taking a larger percentage of the company's dollar, it makes sense the company would look to control that.

[angelatc]

I like the word "Owners" though. It's a reminder that the company is indeed private property, and the people who have cash invested in it have the right to do anything they want with it.

[CaptUSA]

Here's just an example pie chart:
http://www.mmsonline.com/cdn/cms/Sandvik-pie-chart.jpg

1. If the company's pie was getting smaller, and the union wanted the same dollars as in the past, their wedge would have gotten bigger.
2. If the company's pie stayed the same size, but the union wanted a bigger wedge (remember, Obamacare already increases the size of their wedge if nothing else changes) then they are hurting the company and the employees.
3. If the company was insisting that the union take a smaller wedge, then the company was just being greedy. They wanted to put dollars in other places. Whether that be back to investors, in new equipment, or into their own pockets, they would have been hurting the employees for some other goal.
4. If the company's pie was getting bigger and they wanted the union to get a smaller wedge, then the company made this happen.

Again, I don't know the specifics of this company, but the reports lead me to believe it was a combination of 1 and 2, not 3 and 4.

[JK/SEA]

I like the word "Owners" though. It's a reminder that the company is indeed private property, and the people who have cash invested in it have the right to do anything they want with it.

hmmm...well i must agree here.

I wonder if these 'owners' have any mirrors in their homes.

[JK/SEA]

Here's just an example pie chart:
http://www.mmsonline.com/cdn/cms/Sandvik-pie-chart.jpg

1. If the company's pie was getting smaller, and the union wanted the same dollars as in the past, their wedge would have gotten bigger.
2. If the company's pie stayed the same size, but the union wanted a bigger wedge (remember, Obamacare already increases the size of their wedge if nothing else changes) then they are hurting the company and the employees.
3. If the company was insisting that the union take a smaller wedge, then the company was just being greedy. They wanted to put dollars in other places. Whether that be back to investors, in new equipment, or into their own pockets, they would have been hurting the employees for some other goal.
4. If the company's pie was getting bigger and they wanted the union to get a smaller wedge, then the company made this happen.

Again, I don't know the specifics of this company, but the reports lead me to believe it was a combination of 1 and 2, not 3 and 4.

interesting pie chart. Lets not forget that Union Contracts usually run 2-3 years, and everyone comes to the table. I've sat in on contract negotiations, and not once did anyone hold any guns to anyones head.

[CaptUSA]

interesting pie chart. Lets not forget that Union Contracts usually run 2-3 years, and everyone comes to the table. I've sat in on contract negotiations, and not once did anyone hold any guns to anyones head.Yeah, I've negotiated union contracts as well. I'm just asking if you know what the case was here? Was the union asking for a larger slice of the company's labor pie? It seems like the company was saying we can't afford the slice you already have, much less a bigger one.

I don't know, though. They could just be using this as an excuse to their investors. OR... It could be that the union was trying to tell the company they needed to spend more on labor and the company couldn't do it. If that's the case, the union really screwed their members.

[JK/SEA]

Yeah, I've negotiated union contracts as well. I'm just asking if you know what the case was here? Was the union asking for a larger slice of the company's labor pie? It seems like the company was saying we can't afford the slice you already have, much less a bigger one.

I don't know, though. They could just be using this as an excuse to their investors. OR... It could be that the union was trying to tell the company they needed to spend more on labor and the company couldn't do it. If that's the case, the union really screwed their members.

yeah well maybe. I have to admit i'm a little biased here. Like i said in the 'other' flame thread, management screws up so lets blame the union, and the media portrays the little guy as the bad guy...seems about right....right?

The point of IF the Union wanted this or that, and saying the union wanted more money is really inflammatory. The Union had already given concessions, and as for knowing what went on behind closed doors, i suppose you and i can only guess, and let others go about their merry way making up stories as if they know something. But from here it looks like Hostess wanted this divorce 8 years ago when Wonderbread was thrown under the bus....now the property in Seattle this plant sits on is worth...millions. Tie that in to everything else and it looks like the power players will do just fine.

Yep, when it comes to moral integrity in owning your own company, its been clear to me for years that this is a double edge sword. I can't really begrudge a company owner for wanting to make a buck . Thats just the nature of the beast. Reminds of how Ron Paul delegates were screwed. Its their party, and we weren't invited.

[CaptUSA]

yeah well maybe. I have to admit i'm a little biased here. Like i said in the 'other' flame thread, management screws up so lets blame the union, and the media portrays the little guy as the bad guy...seems about right....right?Yeah, I'm not so quick to blame either side. Both sides can screw up. However, the company has an interest in not screwing up. The union bosses just have an interest in not backing down. When they screw up, either the workers take a hit, or they lose their jobs entirely. If the union bosses are doing their jobs right, they will explain to the workers the condition of the company and allow the workers to make the call. In economic conditions such as these, workers should expect there will have to be some concessions.

[presence]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-16/hostess-liquidation-curious-cast-characters-twinkie-tumbles
The Hostess Liquidation: A Curious Cast Of Characters As The Twinkie Tumbles

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/tag/hostess/
Don't worry, Twinkies will survive


http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/16/investing/hostess-twinkies-wonder-bread/
Buyers prepare bids for Hostess assets

http://www.ebay.com/itm/BOX-of-Hostess-Twinkies-Twinkie-FRESH-10-count-/181026662914?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a2607aa02



BOX of Hostess Twinkies~ Twinkie FRESH!! 10 count

Time left:
28d 23h (Dec 16, 2012 07:09:43 PST)
Quantity:
More than 10 available / 1 sold
Price:
US $59.99

[presence]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-16/hostess-liquidation-curious-cast-characters-twinkie-tumbles
The Hostess Liquidation: A Curious Cast Of Characters As The Twinkie Tumbles

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/tag/hostess/
Don't worry, Twinkies will survive


http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/16/investing/hostess-twinkies-wonder-bread/
Buyers prepare bids for Hostess assets

http://www.ebay.com/itm/BOX-of-Hostess-Twinkies-Twinkie-FRESH-10-count-/181026662914?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a2607aa02



BOX of Hostess Twinkies~ Twinkie FRESH!! 10 count

Time left:
28d 23h (Dec 16, 2012 07:09:43 PST)
Quantity:
More than 10 available / 1 sold
Price:
US $59.99


--------------------------

eta

"internal server error, please report to webmaster"

[angelatc]

Yeah, I'm not so quick to blame either side. Both sides can screw up. However, the company has an interest in not screwing up. The union bosses just have an interest in not backing down. When they screw up, either the workers take a hit, or they lose their jobs entirely. If the union bosses are doing their jobs right, they will explain to the workers the condition of the company and allow the workers to make the call. In economic conditions such as these, workers should expect there will have to be some concessions.

I read an article that said that the Baker's union's own finance advisor urged them to take the deal. The other unions also urged them to take the deal. And the Teamsters aren't known for being pushovers.

[angelatc]

hmmm...well i must agree here.

I wonder if these 'owners' have any mirrors in their homes.

Probably some very nice 18th century antiques. Always a good investment.

[Brian4Liberty]

interesting pie chart. Lets not forget that Union Contracts usually run 2-3 years, and everyone comes to the table. I've sat in on contract negotiations, and not once did anyone hold any guns to anyones head.

You know why law enforcement union negotiations are difficult? The guns do occasionally come out...

[JK/SEA]

You know why law enforcement union negotiations are difficult? The guns do occasionally come out...

nice try there trying to lump private unions with public unions.

[kathy88]

nice try there trying to lump private unions with public unions.

It was a joke. Holy shit lighten up :)

[JK/SEA]

It was a joke. Holy shit lighten up :)

hmmm...yeah, i will, just for you. I watched BRAVEHEART a few days ago. I guess i'm still fired up.

[Liberty74]

Why doesn't some goody Left Winger buy the company? Give the Unions everything they want. Comply with all the bullshit regulations, taxes, fines, fees, etc. Pay the workers top wages, give them top healthcare, pay for their housing, etc.

Where are all the good Socialists at? The fact that no good Democrat steps up is a tell tell sign of not only Hostess but other companies that fail or companies that have yet to be built.

Ayn Rand predicted ALL of this...Who is John Galt?

[Brian4Liberty]

Why doesn't some goody Left Winger buy the company? Give the Unions everything they want. Comply with all the bullshit regulations, taxes, fines, fees, etc. Pay the workers top wages, give them top healthcare, pay for their housing, etc.

Where are all the good Socialists at? The fact that no good Democrat steps up is a tell tell sign of not only Hostess but other companies that fail or companies that have yet to be built.

Ayn Rand predicted ALL of this...Who is John Galt?

There was a Democrat who was doing just that. He was the biggest capitol investor in the last re-organization, but other creditors decided they wanted to cash out and take their money.

[JK/SEA]

Why doesn't some goody Left Winger buy the company? Give the Unions everything they want. Comply with all the bullshit regulations, taxes, fines, fees, etc. Pay the workers top wages, give them top healthcare, pay for their housing, etc.

Where are all the good Socialists at? The fact that no good Democrat steps up is a tell tell sign of not only Hostess but other companies that fail or companies that have yet to be built.

Ayn Rand predicted ALL of this...Who is John Galt?

lol...geez...not too hysterical are we?