TexasCHLforum.com

Keith B wrote:

Chris wrote:I don't get it. You can bailout GM, which was sinking over union demands, but you can't bailout Hostess, which is also sinking over union demands. We need Twinkies a LOT more than we need GM cars.

Michelle Obama would make sure Barrack bailed out a brocolli farm, but not Hostess.

I thought the same thing.

The Hostess and Wonderbread brands have been aroung a long, long time and are worth millions of dollars. I am sure that one of the big food corporations [Kraft, General Mills, Frito-Lay, etc.] will buy the brand name and will continue to manufacture this traditional American health food.

I am also sure the secret recipe for the "creme" filling of Hostess Cupcakes, Sno-Balls and Twinkies is kept in a secure location stored in a sealed mayonaise jar under the porch of one of the company executives.

A workers take on the shutdown:

http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/16/news/co ... s-workers/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

philip964 wrote:
Maybe the union thought they were bluffing.

I'm sure they don't blame themselves.

It was those evil capitalists.

"When a management with a reputation for brilliance tackles a business with a reputation for bad economics, it is the reputation of the business that remains intact." -- Warren Buffett

I heard it was Romney's fault.

Keith B wrote:

PBratton wrote:

Carry-a-Kimber wrote:My 5yo boxer is gonna be so upset, he gets a Twinky every year on his birthday.

Yeah, Mine get SnowBalls...

Chocolate is not good for dogs though.

But, he's a CHOCOLATE Lab!!!

philip964 wrote:I heard it was Romney's fault.

At least Romney is taking the heat off of Bush!

I'll trade a box of ding dongs for a box of twinkies for any other Hostess hoarders who cleared the shelfs today I have the rare want for a twinkie every couple of years so no way I need this extra box. Sweets just don't move fast at my house. Rather have one last true ding dong for the road.

It's a real shame. The only part the company had was not putting their foot down earlier as it relates to the union aspect of this deal. There may have been other financial issues but likely this was the biggest.

Bimbo will surely gain in the end
they make killer penguinios (hostess cup cakes, but with realllllly good devils food and no corn syrup)

18500 folks now without a job.....right before Christmas.....
incredible

powerboatr wrote:Bimbo will surely gain in the end
they make killer penguinios (hostess cup cakes, but with realllllly good devils food and no corn syrup)

This is a classic case of stubbornly standing on principle even to your own detriment. Thanks to the union's stubborn attitude, 18,500 people will lose their jobs and a famous brand will disappear from the scene. I seriously doubt the union will learn anything.

baldeagle wrote:This is a classic case of stubbornly standing on principle even to your own detriment.

Is that an inherently bad thing? Was it a bad thing at Valley Forge? Tarawa? Bastogne?

This Amerruca! Long may we stand on principle even to our own detriment.

Jim

baldeagle wrote:This is a classic case of stubbornly standing on principle even to your own detriment. Thanks to the union's stubborn attitude, 18,500 people will lose their jobs and a famous brand will disappear from the scene. I seriously doubt the union will learn anything.

It's not clear the brands will disappear. The bankruptcy trustee will liquidate the assets which most assuredly includes the brands and trademarks, and perhaps a new operator will be able to make and sell these products satisfactorily, depending. It may be that some of the employees will find work in those new operations, after whatever delay is involved in getting things settled. The hedge funds/private equity investors lose, of course, and potentially some of the creditors will take haircuts, depending on how valuable the assets actually end up being.

This is part of the cycle of life, survival of the fittest, etc. Waste and inefficiency eventually takes its toll, sooner or later.

57Coastie wrote:

baldeagle wrote:This is a classic case of stubbornly standing on principle even to your own detriment.

Is that an inherently bad thing? Was it a bad thing at Valley Forge? Tarawa? Bastogne?

This Amerruca! Long may we stand on principle even to our own detriment.

Jim

No American flag waving for me until the people who voted themselves out of a job are denied unemployment benefits.

If they're getting a handout, they're not standing on their principle, they're trampling on mine.

philip964 wrote:I heard it was Bush's fault.

There. I fixed it for ya.

57Coastie wrote:

baldeagle wrote:This is a classic case of stubbornly standing on principle even to your own detriment.

Is that an inherently bad thing? Was it a bad thing at Valley Forge? Tarawa? Bastogne?

This Amerruca! Long may we stand on principle even to our own detriment.

Jim

That's all well and good, if the principles are worth fighting for.