You can’t tell much from a biased timeline and half a balance sheet.
But it’s a safe bet that when a twinkie company goes bankrupt in the middle of an obesity epidemic that everyone involved fucked up.
---------- Post added at 10:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:08 AM ----------
And I am now going to the vending machine for some sort of snack that no human animal should ever ingest.
I laugh at the fact that they went bankrupt because no one wanted to buy them because of health and other reasons. Yet the second the company goes under, everyone jumps on the wagon to “I have to get my hands on these before they are all gone”
I don’t think it was that “nobody wanted to buy them because of health reasons”…they actually did pretty well. What killed them was their overhead.
From Rachel Maddow…
Too bad the CEO and Executives that they’re talking about was already OUSTED during their 2nd bankruptcy filing and has nothing to do with this liquidation.
The one that’s in there now was given 2 options by the VC firm that owns Hostess… Make it work or Liquidate it! We want our Investment back either way.
Did he get away with it though? He should be in prison for theft if he changed his pay from $750000 to $2550000 while the company was failing.lol
Whenever my company is going through bad times I cut my pay. Maybe I am doing it wrong. lol
Depending on the exact organization of the company you can’t just change your pay.
Link to actual article and not to a heavily pixilated facebook post?
Here is her official blog:
http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/11/19/15280973-the-story-behind-the-twinkies-makers-demise
From what I saw, they raised it, and as part of the last Bankruptcy restructure/VC direction they were all fired. So I think they had their raise for a month or 2 at most before they were ejected.
Well, another way to look at it is depending on how the VC that bought them operates… some VCs require quarterly/yearly “fees” which when combined with a highly-leveraged buyout interest charges can take a company that was doing ok or positioned well in a good economy and completely sink it. This allows the VCs to still “Cash out ahead” whether the company makes $$ or looses it. Prime example of how Bain did (and may still) operate, as well as a lot of VC firms.
I haven’t looked at the financial data; but my guess is the VC firm that “bought” them, leveraged them pretty hard; which then layered on the cost of the interest for that loan onto the already tight overhead. The company is worth more to the VC in pieces at this point than as an operating company. The “Twinkie” recipe, branding, and equipment should land a small fortune; yet alone all the other stuff; I’m sure their non-tangible assets were quite high on the balance sheet due to brand recognition/market share/market power.
Right, that is why I said he should be in prison, unless the board of directors thought it was a good idea. There is no law against stupidity though.
Will the unions to the same to Walmart?!?!
They are currently planning a nationwide strike on black Friday.
Unions at WalMart? I was thinking there were none.(?)
Walmart doesn’t have a union?!?!? 
If unions can raise costs for walmart and make american production viable again rock on
Wally world is not Unionized. They were trying but have not gone through and set it up. This is probably the one business I would say needs it. Definitely bs behind Walmart.
Right, twas all the unions fault: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/11/19/hostsess_ceo_multi_million_dollar_payday_amidsty_bankruptcy.html
I’m not saying they’re not partially at fault, but blaming it all on them and no at all on the CEO’s is ridiculous, especially with the multi million dollar paydays they’re setting themselves up for on the contingency that the company fails.
Can you read and choose not to or are you just an idiot?
This was the CEO who I posted about who left previously last time the company went into bankruptcy; along with a bunch of other executives. This leadership team has nothing to do with the current situation. (Unless you’re trying to say the new CEO is pulling an Obama and blaming everything on the previous administration) :picard:
Whoa now, chill the fuck out guy. I haven’t been on this thread since page two, so no I haven’t read whatever it was you posted about this.
Really don’t feel like caught up in a thread that at this rate, will be banished to the desolate wasteland that is politisuck by the end of the day. I guess my point is CEO’s floating down on golden parachutes can’t be good for a company that’s already in dire straits financially. Yes I know that unions for many companies are leeches that contribute nothing but bureacratic bullshit, however acting like these CEO’s are innocent bystanders who had no hand in driving the company into the ditch is also disingenuous.
I don’t disagree! But the CEO everyone keeps bringing up in regards to Hostess left/was kicked out of the company at the start of the year.
The current one (that took over for the one everyone keeps talking about) was given 2 options by the VC that owns Hostess - Make it work or Liquidate the fucker!
Makes sense. Macroeconomics is my speciality, by comparison my knowledge of microeconomics is pretty limited.
That being said, seems like hostess was the product of an older business model that’s no longer viable in today’s market. Any company that wants to base their production in the U.S. needs to be run incredibly efficiently to compete in the global market, and it seems like they were unable to make that transition.