That's a big Twinkie

skullkrusher

Hedge fund. London. I just spoke to one...He's 23 in January.

snocone: Moopy Mac: snocone: Grand_Moff_Joseph: raerae1980: That is BS. Borders Execs tried persuading the judge in our bankruptcy to approve their bonuses. Judge said no. What are the grounds for allowing these bonuses for Hostess execs to be approved?

The grounds are: That's how today's hedge fund/vulture capital model works. Extract profit and bonuses at the expense of all else

This is the economic plan you farkers almost voted into the Presidency.
Be proud, be stupid, be partisan!

Google which Fund owned Hostess. Now Google who runs that Fund.

Thanks, Dr Feelgood, knowing both choices are chit is so comforting.
I was just farking the group that was so proud of this business plan, they made it a party platform.

The point is that not all PE Funds operate the same. And Ripplewood is not known as a vulture fund in the industry.

I really believe that everyone should go back and re-read Ayn Rand.

I know she's become a bit of a Rorschach test to people like Paul Ryan who see what they want to see in objectivism, and use her writing to justify their own sociopathy, but there really is something worthwhile there.

Contrary to her right-wing fanboys, the bad guys in her books are not the poor; they are the financial and managerial class who skim wealth off the top without producing anything or adding any value. The execs in tfa are non-producing parasites who literally stole from the employee's self-funded pension in order to fund these bonuses. The workers, on the other hand, are producers acting in a perfect expression of rational self-interest.

Marcus Aurelius: Weaver95: And remember - this is ALL the union's fault!

How does a cupcake company build up $1 billion in debt? DAMN YOU UNIONS!!!!

Sell cupcakes that cost more to make than your selling them for?

Rinse and repeat?

I think that how economics work - slept through that semester. Yawn.

skullkrusher: chrisco123: skullkrusher

Hedge fund. London. I just spoke to one...He's 23 in January.

well good for those mofos

I think you're supposed to be mad he makes more then someone older then him

chrisco123: skullkrusher

no, seriously, you don't have 22 year old kids with bachelor's degrees working as junior traders expecting $400k bonuses on a trading desk. It's just not true.

It's totally true. The bonus is in addition to a roughly $80,000 salary that would not allow them to even live within 50 miles of the office. Sometimes its smaller, sometimes its bigger but this year its $400K.

They need find a better broker if they can't get a decent place for 50K quid within 50 miles of the river.

1. The Hostess brands still have significant value
2. Bankruptcy and liquidation of assets, as well as the sale of the brands, requires skilled, knowledgeable people
3. Outside of rentention bonuses, these people will have little reason to stick around a company with no future
4. The difference they can make with regards to the value of the companies assets will likely far exceed 1.8 million

I know it is galling to many, but experienced, capable executives with familiarity with companies of this size are not common, and are in high demand. Their impact on companies far exceeds the impact of a common production worker, so they are compensated accordingly. They typically are in high demand, so they do receive attractive compensation and severance packages. And yes, some of the companies they lead will fail (in a zero sum game, some businesses will have to fail if some succeed, though I know business is not exactly zero sum).

This is on Little Debbie's home page.



/MaximumTrolling.jpg

Der Poopflinger: HindiDiscoMonster: was that directed at someone or the article, or perhaps the clouds?

all the whiners in the thread and maybe the one cloud

aaah ok... thanks for the clarification...

/For the record... that one cloud... it did look like it was eying you.

when I spent $17 on 4 huge bags of liquidation goodies Monday at the local bakery, was I helping to pay these bonuses?

/takes bite out of Zinger
//wipes mouth with a Honey Bun

skullkrusher: udhq: People should move their money to a local credit union, and not allow these parasites to skim off the top.

grow up

Or, you know, YOU could take some responsibility for yourself. But that's probably out of the question, isn't it?

Or do you think 0.2% is really all the money in your savings is actually earning your bank? At that rate, your money is better off in a bolted down, fireproof safe in your basement.

Moopy Mac

They need find a better broker if they can't get a decent place for 50K quid within 50 miles of the river.

I was being a bit facetious with the 50-mile figure. It's that they know a bonus is coming an, at such a tender age, want to live a little closer to the, how shall I put it, action?

imtheonlylp: when I spent $17 on 4 huge bags of liquidation goodies Monday at the local bakery, was I helping to pay these bonuses?

/takes bite out of Zinger
//wipes mouth with a Honey Bun

I friggin love those things...

Marcus Aurelius: "How does a cupcake company build up $1 billion in debt?"

They got busted out. Vulture capitalism by the book:
Buy company.
Use their good name to load up on debt.
Pay yourselves *fabulously*.
Cut employee benefits to attempt to make debt payments.

Working out? Add more debt, repeat.
Not working out? File bankruptcy.
Feeling ballsy? Blame the employees for the whole thing, pointing out their compensation is the only thing keeping the books from being balanced.
Company still viable after bankruptcy? Add more debt.

bruegel: fickenchucker: That's just stupid.

But place yourself in those striking employees' shoes. I cannot for the life of me figure out why they would strike and become jobless at the end. I would vote to keep working and look for another job with at least something coming in. Unemployment can't be as much as the reduced pay rate, can it?

I saw a few of them say they thought the company was bluffing. Question - how much are the union bosses getting paid? They still have jobs with the union right? Why no blame on them?



You're right. I thought it was just common-knowledge those union advisors were self-serving morons. Even as someone who never followed the story and hadn't bought a Hostess product in years, it was obvious when the story came to a head the company wasn't bluffing.

Strikes don't work in this employment climate. They should have knuckled under and found different jobs while getting paid.

What would happen if the bonuses were not approved and those 19 executives quit right then and there? How does this affect the liquidation process or the process of selling off of products to other companies? Would the government have to step in and take over all of this? Or does everything just come to a stop?

/Serious questions.
//Know every little about bankruptcy proceedings.

HindiDiscoMonster: imtheonlylp: when I spent $17 on 4 huge bags of liquidation goodies Monday at the local bakery, was I helping to pay these bonuses?

/takes bite out of Zinger
//wipes mouth with a Honey Bun

I friggin love those things...

you should've seen the motherload I hauled off from that place Monday...my kids thought I was running a monosaccharide cartel

And this is what happens when the People refuse to round up and decapitate the rich.

Click Click D'oh: Uh... the bonuses are to retain management members who will be involved in the liquidation process, and who would likely jump ship otherwise. Farkers do realize that qualified executives would flee Hostess without retention bonuses right? Well, that actually could explain a lot around Fark if the average Farker would stay with a dieing company instead of seeking alternative employment...

I'll do it for 50k

moefuggenbrew: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: What will be interesting is when one vulture company buys another

[i290.photobucket.com image 425x316]

unlikely: I am constantly amazed that there hasn't been a torches-and-pitchforks uprising yet.

Wait till they start coming for our Social Security money. People of all political affiliations are sure to go batshiat then.

To all you hostess employees, you paid far more than this in annual union dues and look what it got you.

TV's Vinnie: And this is what happens when the People refuse to round up and decapitate the rich.

[www.herodote.net image 355x367]

Let them eat cake?

Good!
Damn union screwed them up!

Magorn: I'd lay money that everything's gonna get bought up by the Mexican baking giant Bimbo.

Looking forward to the first Mexican Twinkie with a severed finger from a dismembered drug cartel member in it.


"WE HAVE A WINNER!"

raerae1980: That is BS. Borders Execs tried persuading the judge in our bankruptcy to approve their bonuses. Judge said no. What are the grounds for allowing these bonuses for Hostess execs to be approved?

Why would anyone in management stay on though the liquidation otherwise? All the managers would quit.

If Twinkies went the way of the Dodo, wouldn't we be better off in the long run?

Capitalism is trying to help your fat asses, and you don't see it.

Grand_Moff_Joseph: The Vulture Capitalists get their pound of flesh, the executives get their golden parachutes, and the employees get shafted big time.

That's the Bain Way!

The employees shafted everyone.

Getting paid $100/hour to push a button on the assembly line.

udhq: No. It is not "a pittance" to anyone, living anywhere in the country, doing any job, with any level of education.

If you think $100K is "a pittance," than you are clearly one of the inept and out-of-touch plutocrats that caused the financial crisis that created our current recession, and all of our fiscal re-balancing SHOULD be done via increases in your taxation. You've earned it.

Also, anyone who thinks $100K is "a pittance" (like, oh, say Mitt Romney) shouldn't be allowed within 1,000 miles of a government appropriations decision. You clearly know NOTHING about the value of a dollar to the average American.

$100,000 is not a pittance as it stands by itself. That's not what people are saying. They're saying that it's a trivial amount when compared to the expected compensation for an executive of a very large company. It's also a trivial amount when compared to the budget of a large company. It may seem unfair that the executives are getting this bonus when everyone else is losing their jobs, but in the overall scheme of things, the bonus isn't even enough to give the workers who lose their jobs a couple of days' severance. And it IS important to keep the executives on board to finish up the liquidation. Otherwise they would leave as soon as they found a new job since their job security is now zero.

skullkrusher: udhq: skullkrusher: udhq: People should move their money to a local credit union, and not allow these parasites to skim off the top.

grow up

Or, you know, YOU could take some responsibility for yourself. But that's probably out of the question, isn't it?

Or do you think 0.2% is really all the money in your savings is actually earning your bank? At that rate, your money is better off in a bolted down, fireproof safe in your basement.

I meant grow up in terms of calling people "parasites" makes you sound like a child

I apologize. You sound sensitive. You get called "a parasite" a lot?

Djkb: $1,800,000 divided by 16,000 employees = $112.50

Or, a little more than half a day's wages.

BIG FARKIN' DEAL!!!!!

Please send me a check for $112.50.

slayer199: How a company can reward executives for poor performance is beyond me. Then again, the union members would have had 25% of the company and 2 seats on the board so they could have fought this sort of crap.

Poor performance? Paying your workers too much is poor performance?

chrisco123: tricycleracer

+1 for calling $100k a pittance.
+1 for bashing unions.
+1 for brevity.

3/10.

We have junior traders on our desk, all of 22 years-old, who will be seriously pissed if they don't get a $400K bonus. $100K for an executive is a pittance.

I'll play them the worlds Smallest violin

baka-san: What I found truly horrible is that I just went "one point eight mil...is that all?"

Used to them getting 50 mil and up a piece.

1.8M for 19 people, which is $94,000 a person for a year.

fickenchucker: That's just stupid.

But place yourself in those striking employees' shoes. I cannot for the life of me figure out why they would strike and become jobless at the end. I would vote to keep working and look for another job with at least something coming in. Unemployment can't be as much as the reduced pay rate, can it?

Educate yourself.

Link

vernonFL: The bonuses do not include pay for CEO Gregory Rayburn, who was brought on as a restructuring expert earlier this year. Rayburn is being paid $125,000 a month.

Does he shiat out gold twinkies? What could he possibly be doing to earn $125,000 a month?

A hell of a lot more than the former gang members playing with an inflated rubber ball on TV each Sunday who make hundreds of times more.

slayer199: Weaver95: And remember - this is ALL the union's fault!

No, but I have to wonder that if the Baker's Union took the deal and perhaps pushed the Teamsters to take a similar deal (stake in the company and seats on the board) if they couldn't have blocked these bonuses.

Really though, the board and stockholders are to blame for rewarding poor management with bonuses. The union does have some culpability in Hostess' demise...but poor leadership at the top is the root cause.

The teamsters did take the deal. And the union has 100% responsibility, unless paying workers too much money is "poor leadership".

Marcus Aurelius: Weaver95: And remember - this is ALL the union's fault!

How does a cupcake company build up $1 billion in debt? DAMN YOU UNIONS!!!!

Operating with debt is a very standard practice in all companies. The debt is usually linked to your net profit. Often times, debt is needed to fund growth (most businesses have a positive asset intensity, so growth in revenue requires capital). Sometimes, it is used defensively (a company that has debt on its books will not be a target for an LBO). Sometimes, the debt is revolving credit used to bridge the gap between AR and AP. Like at the 10K statements of some major corporations, they are all carrying debt.

wmanning833: To all you hostess employees, you paid far more than this in annual union dues and look what it got you.

As one employee said recently, it will be hard to replace the jobs they had, but not to replace the jobs management had offered them to keep the company in business.

The employees/union had nothing to lose by rejecting the concessions. It will be MUCH easier for them to replace their jobs, then for these executives to find similar ones. Especially when the last thing on your resume is "Ran an internationally beloved brand into the ground."