Recommended Posts
QuoteTheir goal was never to return the company to profitability. Their goal was to break up the company and sell the pieces for a bigger profit than what they bought it for.
that does not make sense. if it was possible to have made money selling off the parts, then the original owners would have done that. why on earth would they deal with the headache of raising money and continuing to run a bunch of plants when they could have sold it off and walked away with a profit. that makes no sense to me.
the only way they could get a return on their investments was to return it to profitabiltiy and THEN take it public or sell it. Staples and Kmart are good examples that come to mind, there are many others. that is what private equity firms do. if was easier to just buy it and chop it up then they would have. that works int he movies but not a real world situation. a working profitable factory iis worth more than a non working vacant factory. again, that makes no sense to me.
John Frusciante
QuoteI sort of agree with you. The unions didn't understand they were being played as pawns. That still doesn't excuse the work of the venture capitalists.
i just noticed you wrote venture capital. i did not say that, nor is it true or does it make sense. i said private equity. venture capital is early stage investors. not the same type of banking investment or structure. seeing this mistake might explain your understanding of banking and also why you think a vacant non functioning factory is worth more than a fully functioning profitable one.
John Frusciante
Quotethe only way they could get a return on their investments was to return it to profitabiltiy and THEN take it public or sell it
True. Bankruptcy sale is not where to get the most money out of anything.
The mere act of going into bankruptcy certainly suggests that profit-selling is not an initial motive.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
billvon 2,435
Pawns? They got what they wanted. They didn't want to work under those conditions/agreements, so now they don't have to.
quade 3
QuoteNext up - US Postal Service.
Good thing you're not a Constitutional lawyer.
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
QuoteQuoteNext up - US Postal Service.
Good thing you're not a Constitutional lawyer.
Nicely put. Turns out the USPS has taxpayer money to bail it out. Sure, it's not going anywhere - it's one of the few services that the Constitution specifically authorizes the government to provide. But it lost $15.9 billion for FY2012. That's with $65 billion in revenues.
And what is it that is driving down USPS? The same thing that is driving the State of California down - pension payments. Payments for retiree benefits. Oh, yeah - unions had a lot to do with that, as well. And Congress is requiring the USPS to pay into those benefits.
Just like Medicare and Social Security, promises made (and frequently on taxpayer dime) end up costing plenty in the future.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
Quote
And what is it that is driving down USPS? The same thing that is driving the State of California down - pension payments. Payments for retiree benefits. Oh, yeah - unions had a lot to do with that, as well. And Congress is requiring the USPS to pay into those benefits.
though pensions no doubt are a huge factor, I tend to look to it's growing irrelevance in an electronic world, killing their most profitable line of business, and the workers' inability to see that providing shitty service will only increase the problem.
quade 3
QuoteBut it lost $15.9 billion for FY2012. That's with $65 billion in revenues.
So . . . What?
You have any idea how much the Department of Defense lost last year and how much revenue they generated?
It's a government service. It always has been. It's not a business.
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
This can then be counted as an increase in employment, since there will be more people with jobs, albeit part-time.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites