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.
These are not the same "twinkies". They taste ....
pretty good. I like the smaller size..perfect snacks.
Any way you look at it, 18,000 people made a bad decision..unless, of course, there was incredible demand for folks who could put two puffs of cream into a snack roll..that had never been recognized before.
pretty good. I like the smaller size..perfect snacks.
Any way you look at it, 18,000 people made a bad decision..unless, of course, there was incredible demand for folks who could put two puffs of cream into a snack roll..that had never been recognized before.
They took a calculated risk, and wound up losing. The company was in awful shape and simply couldn't go on with the top heavy debt load. The company wouldn't have survived regardless. I'm sure you know that, so let's not be naive
The classic "employer of last resort" in my neighborhood isn't fast food, but an amusement park. It now operates nearly six months of the year due to a Halloween promotion, and will hire several thousand people over the course of a season -- though very few work start-to-finish.
And the backbone od the labor force is people of retirement age, or near it; when the season ends, they qualify for Unemployment payments, whuch suplement pension and or Social Security checks. The park understands that without that incentive, the most stable portion of their labor force wouldn't have as much of a motive to work
This is just one example of many distortions in the labor market, created. for better or for worse, by the "safety net" common to all industrialized societies. Using the less-disciplined labor pool found on the tagged edge of some parts of the food service industry as a deceptive "poster child" would merely distort the picture even further.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 08-31-2013 at 11:32 AM..
They took a calculated risk, and wound up losing. The company was in awful shape and simply couldn't go on with the top heavy debt load. The company wouldn't have survived regardless.
Actually the company did survive. Just as a home exists when one guy sells it to another, Hostess was sold, and lives on now.
18,000 calculated risk-might as well have bought Powerball tickets. They were using a losing hand, unless, of course-there really is a need for knowing how to insert 2 puffs of cream into a cake roll..to the tune of 18,000 workers.
I do agree the debt load of excessive employee legacy costs was too much to bear. Problem solved, and Twinkies live on.
I work in an office job at a hospital that required three weeks of training and I'm not even making $15 an hour! If they get upped to $15/hr, what should I get? I might as well quit my job and work at McD's!
I think $9/hour would be an okay compromise for them.
I work in an office job at a hospital that required three weeks of training and I'm not even making $15 an hour! If they get upped to $15/hr, what should I get? I might as well quit my job and work at McD's!
I think $9/hour would be an okay compromise for them.
Most make that anyway.Bare minimum is made by less than 3% of Americans. Most retailers, as well as fast food, start folks over at a higher rate.
Actually the company did survive. Just as a home exists when one guy sells it to another, Hostess was sold, and lives on now.
18,000 calculated risk-might as well have bought Powerball tickets. They were using a losing hand, unless, of course-there really is a need for knowing how to insert 2 puffs of cream into a cake roll..to the tune of 18,000 workers.
I do agree the debt load of excessive employee legacy costs was too much to bear. Problem solved, and Twinkies live on.
No, the company did not survive. The BRANDS survived by being sold off to other companies.
No, the company did not survive. The BRANDS survived by being sold off to other companies.
The brands were the company. Eventually, all will be sold, hence the things that made it a company have lived on.
Despite 18,000 fighting to kill it off.They bit off their own noses to spite their face. Wonder how that tasted? Well, they can wash out the bad taste with some Twinkies.
The brands were the company. Eventually, all will be sold, hence the things that made it a company have lived on.
Despite 18,000 fighting to kill it off.They bit off their own noses to spite their face. Wonder how that tasted? Well, they can wash out the bad taste with some Twinkies.
Sounds like someone doesn't know the difference between BRAND and COMPANY. And really, the new versions are not being met with the same fanfare. While you enjoy the extra satisfaction of supporting the death of unionized labor, and the tears of a crushed middle class, most tend to agree that the new "twinkies" are awful.
Hopefully, the new company will have the same access to credit as the old one. It may be the only way they can survive long term.
Sounds
Hopefully, the new company will have the same access to credit as the old one. It may be the only way they can survive long term.
They will be extremely profitable, and sold off in a few years, no doubt. Without the burden of twice the truckers required under the old Hostess (after all-2 distinct products can now be carried on ONE truck-what a concept), the bottom line will no doubt be awesome.
Viva the new Hostess.
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.
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.
