• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Farewell, Twinkies

Babbylonian said:
Well, that certainly does explain why executives running a failing company should get hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. Wait, no it doesn't.

Simple question: Should a CEO - leaving out those who actually found and own the companies they're running, though that shouldn't matter - be paid millions of dollars for failure?
Click to expand...
Just how do you think you'll attract a talented CEO to a failing company? By offering them reduced pay?

It's quite comon in failing companies for upper management to get raises, because otherwise they'll flee the sinking ship for one that's still afloat. Sometimes they manage to save the company, sometimes not. The alternatve is to fail even sooner.
 
WildCat said:
Just how do you think you'll attract a talented CEO to a failing company? By offering them reduced pay?

It's quite comon in failing companies for upper management to get raises, because otherwise they'll flee the sinking ship for one that's still afloat. Sometimes they manage to save the company, sometimes not. The alternatve is to fail even sooner.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, talent - would be a low golf handicap?
 
StankApe said:
ignorance of reality seems to go hand in hand with union lovers. people who have been brainwashed by propaganda their entire lives.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that is all too true.


StankApe said:
you DO know that most of the value of top level executive people receive is stock options right? so when the company fails, the stock loses it's value and the worth of their holdings drops . Now, since the cmpany went under, they of course will sell the assets and divide the $$$ because they bought the company, they will divide the assets among the stockholders.

When you sell your house do you take the equity out and divvy it out to the carpenters and plumbers who built it?
Click to expand...


In liquidation, all proceeds from selling off the brand and other assets will go to pay the creditors, not the owners, not management. Stockholders are wiped out entirely, stock options are worth zero.

And management is now out of a job just like all the workers.

Yes, management personnel were (fairly) compensated for sticking around and trying to get the failing company back on it's feet; now that that effort has failed it won't exactly look good on their resumes, now will it?
 
Fun story. My mother used to date a man named Earl who had a thick Texan accent. When we told him that the cream inside of twinkies is made from whipped beef fat, Earl exclaimed in an incredulous voice:

"Whooped beef fat!"

We've been laughing about it ever since. We're not the kinds of Texans who have accents, nor did we used to say "whooped" instead of whipped. But we do now, because frankly it sounds hilarious.

All thanks to the power of twinkies.
 
joobie said:
hostess lost $300 million last year. obviously this is the union's fault.
Click to expand...

Labor costs usually represent the biggest part of corporate budgets, and union wages and benefits are usually inflated beyond local non-union averages.

So yes, the union probably plays largely into their losses and demise.


Would it have ultimately been different without the union? We won't know..
 
commandlinegamer said:
Ah yes, talent - would be a low golf handicap?
Click to expand...
The best golfer doesn't win every tournament. The best batter sometimes strikes out with 2 out in the bottom of the 9th with a runner on 3rd. Such is life.

Apparently Hostess has had serious issues since 2004? If you could go back in time, what solution would you have come up with that didn't involve a new CEO, ownership, etc?
 
I've seen and heard about Twinkies in American movies and television shows, so when I was in the US I had to taste one.

It's the blandest thing I've ever eaten.

What's the big deal?
 
WildCat said:
The best golfer doesn't win every tournament. The best batter sometimes strikes out with 2 out in the bottom of the 9th with a runner on 3rd. Such is life.

Apparently Hostess has had serious issues since 2004? If you could go back in time, what solution would you have come up with that didn't involve a new CEO, ownership, etc?
Click to expand...

One of the problems I see with most of the big brands of packaged baked goods is that they are all very bland. I guess they want to appeal to the largest number of people possible with every product, and that makes sense. But...I think they might've avoided some of their troubles if they had offered a few high-end products that tasted better, but might not have had the widest appeal.

Someone also brought up better branding, and I agree. The perception that a company never evolves and that their products will never spoil doesn't put them in a good place in consumer's minds. Younger people have never really wanted to be eating the same things their grandmothers did. Updating, upgrading and upselling might have prevented the whole fiasco.
 
Question for those more familiar with unions: Why was only pay cuts/benefit cuts considered? When my company went through 3 quarters of losses, they cut the headcount. Do the unions prevent the headcount reduction? If so, and if the demand for hostess products has supposedly gone downhill, then wouldn't it make sense to reduce headcount? I didn't see any mention of RIFS in any of the reports I read.
 
balrog666 said:
And management is now out of a job just like all the workers.

Yes, management personnel were (fairly) compensated for sticking around and trying to get the failing company back on it's feet; now that that effort has failed it won't exactly look good on their resumes, now will it?
Click to expand...

Please define "fair compensation" here, thank you.
 
WildCat said:
Just how do you think you'll attract a talented CEO to a failing company? By offering them reduced pay?
Click to expand...

So, the solution for having a good CEO is to bleed a failing company even faster?

Uh huh, gotcha there, I see, the solution is to bleed it dry, give it loans from its parent, and then let it die? That's what your words mean in the real world.
 
jj said:
So, the solution for having a good CEO is to bleed a failing company even faster?

Uh huh, gotcha there, I see, the solution is to bleed it dry, give it loans from its parent, and then let it die? That's what your words mean in the real world.
Click to expand...

sigh.........

a company will not attract a new CEO because he wants to work for free and has joy joy feelings in his heart about bringing at back from the brink. You have to pay them.

any failing company that can't afford to attract a good CEO with a top notch compensation package is already doomed.

like I said before, this anti-executive stuff is based on some sort of weird (and delusional) view of what executives actually do for companies. It's like the viewpoint of a 19 yr old, never had a job, just joined the campus communist workers party in 1967.
 
jj said:
So, the solution for having a good CEO is to bleed a failing company even faster?
Click to expand...
If you think you can find good CEOs on the cheap you should become a headhunter.

jj said:
Uh huh, gotcha there, I see, the solution is to bleed it dry, give it loans from its parent, and then let it die? That's what your words mean in the real world.
Click to expand...
How is that a solution for anyone involved?
 
OnlyTellsTruths said:
I think JJ answered all that better than I could in the other thread:






And then, a few posts after that, Foolmewunz explained quite clearly why the Teamsters union were going along with it.
Click to expand...

Yep, look at this, a complete failure to address issues, simply insinuate.

It's amazing how many people will support the side that is bleeding them dry all the way to the desert.
 
Nosi said:
Twinkies flying into enemy countries exploding in massive amounts of white cream on the populous. Oh my...
Click to expand...

You betcha! Haven't you noticed the word, "Enriched" on the package? I'm pretty sure it's there, someplace. Something involving Vitamins AND Minerals I believe. Minerals for crying out loud!!! And now they're are saying they'll sell the top secret Twinkie technology to the highest bidder? So, we all know what THAT means! :covereyes Weaponized Twinkies. Surely the end is nigh.
 
Last edited:
jj said:
Yep, look at this, a complete failure to address issues, simply insinuate.

It's amazing how many people will support the side that is bleeding them dry all the way to the desert.
Click to expand...
Right, they could have fired all the top management and with the money saved write every unionized worker a check for $400 or so. And then, err, help me out here jj on what comes next.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom