Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I hope Bimbo gets a lot of the brands. That would mean the price would come down and I might start buying them again.
They were almost twice the price of the Little Debbie products.
Excuse us Mr. Propaganda Minister LordBalfor if facts destroy your best attempt at your most favored award the Paul Joseph Goebbels plaque of honesty and integrity.
Excuse us Mr. Propaganda Minister LordBalfor if facts destroy your best attempt at your most favored award the Paul Joseph Goebbels plaque of honesty and integrity.
Oh give me a break. There are thousands of TINY companies - sometimes with only a single employee who is both the CEO and EVERY OTHER job in the company (and those people make very little - thus bringing the average compensation wayyyyyyy down) - and someone with even half a brain knows that's NOT who we are referring to here. We are referring to heads of LARGE companies - you know, companies like HOSTESS.
And THOSE folks are the ones' who's income has climbed hugely over the last few decades - NOT the heads of little mom & pop corporations. Use a little common sense instead of just trying to play wordgames to deflect people from the facts.
From the explanation of how the data in my link was generated:
""...We use executive compensation data from the ExecuComp database from Compustat, a division of Standard & Poor’s. The ExecuComp database contains data on many forms of compensation for the top five executives at publicly traded U.S. companies in the S&P 1500 Index for 1992–2010. In total, the database includes more than 3,000 companies and 33,000 executives. The information is provided by companies in accordance with SEC rules regarding reporting of executive compensation....
Oh, and by the way, for those crying about how those "poor" top executives were going to loose their jobs and get nothing...
"Hostess Brands Inc. is asking for a judge's approval to give its top executives bonuses totaling up to $1.8 million as part of its wind-down plans.
The maker of Twinkies, Ding Dongs and Ho Hos says the incentive pay is needed to retain the 19 corporate officers and "high-level managers" during the liquidation process, which could take about a year. Two of those executives would be eligible for additional rewards depending on how efficiently they carry out the liquidation. The bonuses would be in addition to their regular pay...."
As previously mentioned, the big shots ALWAYS do fine becaue they run the company for THEMSELVES first - even BEFORE the shareholders. As I said - "looting the company".
Oh, and by the way, for those crying about how those "poor" top executives were going to loose their jobs and get nothing...
"Hostess Brands Inc. is asking for a judge's approval to give its top executives bonuses totaling up to $1.8 million as part of its wind-down plans.
The maker of Twinkies, Ding Dongs and Ho Hos says the incentive pay is needed to retain the 19 corporate officers and "high-level managers" during the liquidation process, which could take about a year. Two of those executives would be eligible for additional rewards depending on how efficiently they carry out the liquidation. The bonuses would be in addition to their regular pay...."
As previously mentioned, the big shots ALWAYS do fine becaue they run the company for THEMSELVES first - even BEFORE the shareholders. As I said - "looting the company".
Ken
Because anyone but the top executives have the skills needed to liquidate a company. Right....
You don't know too much about how businesses run, do you?
Considering that those folks ran the company into the ground, THEY didn't know much about how businesses run either.
Ken
Right. Because running a business day to day is remotely similar to liquidating assets.
What do you propose? Hostess lets those execs quit, has to spend a few more million to bring another team in to liquidate and end up paying double the amount that was paid in the executive bonuses due to an increased liquidation time frame?
Try to think through an issue with more thinking than "execs are always bad!" for once champ.
In the end this was a company in a market that is going downhill like many others.The market sales of all such have been going downhill for years as less is bught and more store brand competition. They only had 2.4% of bakery sales and the next four has not much more from what i saw. Business models die all the time. This is the second bankrupsy they have faced.Perhaps it will allow some of the others to survive.Seems the brand is gettig alot of interest from other bakery competitors accordig to reports.Its was not a bonus per say but a payout the judge granted to have the same people manage the liquidation which has to be done and does matter to anyone a investor.
Right. Because running a business day to day is remotely similar to liquidating assets.
What do you propose? Hostess lets those execs quit, has to spend a few more million to bring another team in to liquidate and end up paying double the amount that was paid in the executive bonuses due to an increased liquidation time frame?
Try to think through an issue with more thinking than "execs are always bad!" for once champ.
Will the last one to leave the Hostess factories ~ please turn out the lights?
Will the last one to leave the Hostess factories ~ please turn out the lights?
How hard was that?
I said 'liquidate', not 'abandon'.
Do you have any clue what the term liquidate means?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.