Hostess files for bankruptcy again.

detectiveconan16

CAGiversary!
Feedback
46 (100%)
http://www.businessweek.com/news/20...ess-files-for-bankruptcy-citing-pensions.html

From Business Week:
Hostess in a statement today blamed the latest bankruptcy on a weak economy and costs tied to pension- and medical-benefit obligations. The Irving, Texas-based baker intends to withdraw from pension plans and modify collective-bargaining agreements with unions, according to court documents.

What will happen to the Twinkies?!

It seems these days everybody's blaming worker pensions, even though it's also obviously financial mismanagement. I'd like to see the real reasons on how Hostess got itself into a nearly billion dollar hole.
 
[quote name='detectiveconan16']That would be a dream.[/QUOTE]

Yeah only if your anorexic! Who in the world does not love a delicious Ding Dong, Cup Cakes, or Twinkies every so often...
 
[quote name='iamsobroke']Yeah only if your anorexic! Who in the world does not love a delicious Ding Dong, Cup Cakes, or Twinkies every so often...[/QUOTE]

People who want to live long and healthy lives and look as good as possible!

I rarely eat any junk food. When I do have something unhealthy I'd rather it be a beer or some pizza or a burger etc. than junk food snacks. Never cared much for sweets, potato chips etc.
 
[quote name='iamsobroke']Yeah only if your anorexic! Who in the world does not love a delicious Ding Dong, Cup Cakes, or Twinkies every so often...[/QUOTE]

This is true. Now if you're a fat fuck who can't control him/herself and eats like a swine bastard, then yes, there's a problem with your choices. This applies to everything though, not just Hostess stuffs mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm damn
 
[quote name='GUNNM']if every junk food company would go bankrupt america would be better off[/QUOTE]

How so? Wouldn't America be better off if everyone could intake unhealthy food in moderation rather than cut it off from everyone altogether?
 
[quote name='QiG']How so? Wouldn't America be better off if everyone could intake unhealthy food in moderation rather than cut it off from everyone altogether?[/QUOTE]

That would work too. Either is acceptable, now make it happen.
 
hostess stuff sucks even those chocolate cupcakes taste like oily processed shit but for the life of me i never got the appeal of twinkies they are the nastiest of the processed cakes. now little debbie thats a quality cake those freakin apple dumplings , the zebra cakes and the lovely classic oatmeal creme cookie are the freakin shit.
 
I know this is kinda funny because it cupcakes but this shit is beyond brutal. If you are like me and you own a business constantly hearing how billion dollar business keep going under will fuck with your mind.
 
[quote name='QiG']How so? Wouldn't America be better off if everyone could intake unhealthy food in moderation rather than cut it off from everyone altogether?[/QUOTE]
Because it isn't working? Everyone is fat in this country
 
[quote name='jello44']Tastykakes >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hostes[/QUOTE]

...we're at the point now where we have shitty junk food elitists?
 
[quote name='GUNNM']Because it isn't working? Everyone is fat in this country[/QUOTE]

I'm all for lettin' the fattys be fattys.. we humans tend to fuck up natural selection, why not introduce an element that brings it back to a more even level?
 
Hostess said its going to be "business like normal" and that they will "still make Twinkies".

A lot of fat CAGs just smiled right now after reading this post.
 
[quote name='lokizz']hostess stuff sucks even those chocolate cupcakes taste like oily processed shit but for the life of me i never got the appeal of twinkies they are the nastiest of the processed cakes. now little debbie thats a quality cake those freakin apple dumplings , the zebra cakes and the lovely classic oatmeal creme cookie are the freakin shit.[/QUOTE]

You forgot Nutty Bars! But yes, I agree, Zebra Cakes, Oatmeal Creme Cookies, and Nutty Bars are better than Twinkies, which I haven't been able to stomach since before I finished high school.
 
[quote name='elessar123']You forgot Nutty Bars! But yes, I agree, Zebra Cakes, Oatmeal Creme Cookies, and Nutty Bars are better than Twinkies, which I haven't been able to stomach since before I finished high school.[/QUOTE]


definetly cant forget nutty bars. pulling them apart and eating one layer at a time.
 
[quote name='detectiveconan16']I'd like to see the real reasons on how Hostess got itself into a nearly billion dollar hole.[/QUOTE]

I'd like to see how much creme filling it would take to fill that hole.
 
[quote name='detectiveconan16']Yes! It's happening again. I really blame the management and their golden parachutes.
And they're closing. The employees get fucked, and the execs get off scot free.[/QUOTE]

Honestly, both parties are to blame here. The unions were absolutely stupid to think they had a leg to stand on when Hostess was shutting down striking plants. The corporate raiders are also equally to blame as they've had misstep after misstep in managing the company itself.

Ultimately the management does win here, because they just released themselves from a 2 billion dollar pension liability.
 
fuck the "junk food elitists" who will tell you their stuff was horrible anyway - if I can't drunkenly wander in to a Speedway or 7-11 and get one of those apple pie things at 3 am, this is a less satisfactory world we live in.
 
Yes all fast food companies in the US getting shut down would be amazing :roll:. Let us, of course, completely ignore the fact that millions of jobs would be lost. Who cares if people are fat? That is their problem, not yours. If they want to be fat let them. Its a free country. I personally enjoy being in shape, but that doesn't go for everyone. Lazy people will continue to be lazy regardless of what they eat. If KaneRobot wants to drunkly stumble into 7-11 at 3 am and get himself a snack, then by god, let him.
 
[quote name='mtxbass1']Honestly, both parties are to blame here. The unions were absolutely stupid to think they had a leg to stand on when Hostess was shutting down striking plants. The corporate raiders are also equally to blame as they've had misstep after misstep in managing the company itself.

Ultimately the management does win here, because they just released themselves from a 2 billion dollar pension liability.[/QUOTE]
Bull-fucking-shit they are both to blame. The plan to liquidate the company was already in the works and the executives already wrote themselves a golden parachute. All they needed was an excuse. Disaster capitalism at it's finest.
 
[quote name='dohdough']Bull-fucking-shit they are both to blame. The plan to liquidate the company was already in the works and the executives already wrote themselves a golden parachute. All they needed was an excuse. Disaster capitalism at it's finest.[/QUOTE]

So Unions aren't to blame for not willing to negotiate AT ALL? Do you honest to God believe that these executives had such grand plans to liquidate the entire company? Why not do this months ago when the first signs of troubles existed? Why even attempt to negotiate with the unions at all?

The unions themselves decided to tank the entire company. They could have easily accepted terms and kept people employed while longer term agreements were ironed out. They didn't negotiate and hostess called their bluff.

From WSJ:
Hostess ultimately was brought to its knees by a national strike orchestrated by its second-largest union.
The work stoppage, launched Nov. 9 by the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers Union to protest a fresh labor contract, affected about two-thirds of Hostess's 36 plants. The strike was making it impossible for the Irving, Tex., company to continue producing its baked goods, Chief Executive Gregory Rayburn said.
The long of this is that a shitty company is going out of business. BOTH sides are to blame here.
 
[quote name='slickkill77']Yes all fast food companies in the US getting shut down would be amazing :roll:. Let us, of course, completely ignore the fact that millions of jobs would be lost. Who cares if people are fat? That is their problem, not yours. If they want to be fat let them. Its a free country. I personally enjoy being in shape, but that doesn't go for everyone. Lazy people will continue to be lazy regardless of what they eat. If KaneRobot wants to drunkly stumble into 7-11 at 3 am and get himself a snack, then by god, let him.[/QUOTE]

I care because I pay for them. Through health Insurance, lost wages due to more sickness, etc. I pay more at Buffets to offset the cost of the guys that eat more than me... what about pants? I mean my size 34 cost the same as the next guys 46+, you know there is more material there, so am I being surcharged for their pants as well? Ridiculous.


[quote name='lokizz']guess life's little twinkie gauge is gonna bottom out before the zombies show up.[/QUOTE]

Wow however the appocolypse is close.. remember the hostess truck with twinkies in zombieland.. I now realize how valuable that truck was.
 
[quote name='mtxbass1']So Unions aren't to blame for not willing to negotiate AT ALL? Do you honest to God believe that these executives had such grand plans to liquidate the entire company? Why not do this months ago when the first signs of troubles existed? Why even attempt to negotiate with the unions at all?

The unions themselves decided to tank the entire company. They could have easily accepted terms and kept people employed while longer term agreements were ironed out. They didn't negotiate and hostess called their bluff.

From WSJ:
Hostess ultimately was brought to its knees by a national strike orchestrated by its second-largest union.
The work stoppage, launched Nov. 9 by the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers Union to protest a fresh labor contract, affected about two-thirds of Hostess's 36 plants. The strike was making it impossible for the Irving, Tex., company to continue producing its baked goods, Chief Executive Gregory Rayburn said.
The long of this is that a shitty company is going out of business. BOTH sides are to blame here.[/QUOTE]
ORLY?

"Hostess announced those closings in response to the strike, but the reorganization plan filed in October indicated the company’s intent to close five plants.

Union officials said bankruptcy filings months ago indicated that the company intended to shutter nine plants.

St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay was quoted in an interview Tuesday that he was “told months ago they were planning on closing the site in St. Louis … and there was no indication at that time it had anything to do with the strike the workers were waging.”

http://www.kansascity.com/2012/11/14/3917364/hostess-brands-threatens-twinkie.html

Not to mention that there's a history of the unions giving big concessions and corporate leadership using the extra liquidity to pay themselves an 80% increase in salary after one of the filings. But no, unions are equally to blame for not taking an 8% pay cut and 33% reduction in benefits while the corporate raiders are bleeding the company dry.

edit: And since you like the WSJ so much...

"Creditors of Hostess Brands Inc. said in court papers the company may have "manipulated" its executives' salaries higher in the months leading up to its Chapter 11 filing, in what the creditors called a possible effort by Hostess to "sidestep" Bankruptcy Code compensation provisions. The committee representing Hostess's unsecured creditors alleges that information it has gathered suggests "the possibility" that the company converted a chunk of its top executives' pay from performance-based bonuses to salary, "at least in part to sidestep" rules designed to ensure that companies in bankruptcy aren't enticing their employees to stay on board with the promise ..."


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304072004577323993512506050.html
 
[quote name='dohdough']ORLY?

"Hostess announced those closings in response to the strike, but the reorganization plan filed in October indicated the company’s intent to close five plants.

Union officials said bankruptcy filings months ago indicated that the company intended to shutter nine plants.

St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay was quoted in an interview Tuesday that he was “told months ago they were planning on closing the site in St. Louis … and there was no indication at that time it had anything to do with the strike the workers were waging.”

http://www.kansascity.com/2012/11/14/3917364/hostess-brands-threatens-twinkie.html

Not to mention that there's a history of the unions giving big concessions and corporate leadership using the extra liquidity to pay themselves an 80% increase in salary after one of the filings. But no, unions are equally to blame for not taking an 8% pay cut and 33% reduction in benefits while the corporate raiders are bleeding the company dry.[/QUOTE]

Bud, I live in St Louis, so I'm aware of the local operations here. The company has been in dire straits for a long time now and has had failures across the board for years. Hostess had a plan back in October to stay in business through closing those plants. They knew back then that they had to do this in order to stay viable. This strike by the union completely crippled 2/3rds of the company.

It amazes me that you can sit here and say that the union has absolutely no blame in this. They chose to go on strike across the entire company. They chose not to negotiate further. BOTH parties are to blame here.

I know it's cool to hate on corporations, and in this case the fat cats are very much to blame. It's just completely naive to say that unions are completely innocent here when they were given options and chose not to negotiate. The union workers were told explicitly that they would be fired if they continued to strike. They knew the risks, they took the risks, and they lost.
 
[quote name='mtxbass1']Bud, I live in St Louis, so I'm aware of the local operations here. The company has been in dire straits for a long time now and has had failures across the board for years. Hostess had a plan back in October to stay in business through closing those plants. They knew back then that they had to do this in order to stay viable. This strike by the union completely crippled 2/3rds of the company.[/QUOTE]
So in other words, strikes had nothing to do with those plant closings.

It amazes me that you can sit here and say that the union has absolutely no blame in this. They chose to go on strike across the entire company. They chose not to negotiate further. BOTH parties are to blame here.
Sounds more like victim blaming to me. But no, let's put a disproportionate amount of blame on the unions for making concession after concession while management is still fucking everything up while making bank.

I know it's cool to hate on corporations, and in this case the fat cats are very much to blame. It's just completely naive to say that unions are completely innocent here when they were given options and chose not to negotiate. The union workers were told explicitly that they would be fired if they continued to strike.
And unions are the only ones that need to make concessions? Why is there no blame on management to further negotiate? Why is the onus on the unions?

They knew the risks, they took the risks, and they lost.
Workers are fucked and management walks away with millions. Or maybe I'd just rather be "cool" and hate on corporations because hating on unions is somehow more legit.
 
[quote name='mtxbass1']Honestly, both parties are to blame here. The unions were absolutely stupid to think they had a leg to stand on when Hostess was shutting down striking plants. The corporate raiders are also equally to blame as they've had misstep after misstep in managing the company itself.

Ultimately the management does win here, because they just released themselves from a 2 billion dollar pension liability.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. If there were ever an example of why unions are not needed, it's this. Teamster was smart enough to know that striking would result in what we are seeing now. There are other ways for unions to negotiate. I will never understand why unions think striking will get them what they want.

Now Hostess will be liquidated, things will be sold off and most likely purchased by a new investor and things will resume. But these employees just completely fucked themselves. If they thought their compensation was bad now...just wait and see what they have to concede if/when Hostess products/plants are brought back online.
 
[quote name='dohdough']Sounds more like victim blaming to me. But no, let's put a disproportionate amount of blame on the unions for making concession after concession while management is still fucking everything up while making bank.[/QUOTE]

"making bank"? Seriously? Yes, management has clearly done a poor job with Hostess since it restructured a few years ago, but if they were "making bank" then the plants likely wouldn't have shut down. The issue here is that Hostess didn't have enough money to weather the strike...so yes, the union is absolutely at blame here. Management was terrible, yes, but the union can blame only themselves for being out of a job.
 
Sucks that the unions couldn't make any concessions, striked, and then act shocked that the plants shut down (after being told they would be shut down if they didn't come back from work). Stupid hurts, and now the union striking not only lost all their union members their jobs but countless other non-union workers.
 
[quote name='SynGamer']Exactly. If there were ever an example of why unions are not needed, it's this. Teamster was smart enough to know that striking would result in what we are seeing now. There are other ways for unions to negotiate. I will never understand why unions think striking will get them what they want.

Now Hostess will be liquidated, things will be sold off and most likely purchased by a new investor and things will resume. But these employees just completely fucked themselves. If they thought their compensation was bad now...just wait and see what they have to concede if/when Hostess products/plants are brought back online.[/QUOTE]
How the fuck is it that the people that completely fucked the company are less responsible than unions for the ultimate outcome of this?

[quote name='SynGamer']"making bank"? Seriously? Yes, management has clearly done a poor job with Hostess since it restructured a few years ago, but if they were "making bank" then the plants likely wouldn't have shut down. The issue here is that Hostess didn't have enough money to weather the strike...so yes, the union is absolutely at blame here. Management was terrible, yes, but the union can blame only themselves for being out of a job.[/QUOTE]
You think that making a shit load of money would some how satiate them enough into not trying to make more? Sorry, but I'm not looking to buy a bridge today and I can't do the mental loops to blame the unions for losing jobs that management already put on the chopping block.

Oh and management!=company.
 
[quote name='SynGamer']"making bank"? Seriously? Yes, management has clearly done a poor job with Hostess since it restructured a few years ago, but if they were "making bank" then the plants likely wouldn't have shut down. The issue here is that Hostess didn't have enough money to weather the strike...so yes, the union is absolutely at blame here. Management was terrible, yes, but the union can blame only themselves for being out of a job.[/QUOTE]

Well, I dunno about that. I think poor management is to blame for them being out of a job, they handle the high level stuff.
 
[quote name='dohdough']So in other words, strikes had nothing to do with those plant closings.
[/QUOTE]

Are you really this dense? The strikes had everything to do with the entire operation shutting down. Those plants were scheduled to close unless the company could get things together. The workers went on strike knowing this, and the management pulled the plug. The unions were warned, they chose to ignore these warnings, and they got fired.

[quote name='dohdough']
Sounds more like victim blaming to me. But no, let's put a disproportionate amount of blame on the unions for making concession after concession while management is still fucking everything up while making bank.
[/QUOTE]
No one is putting a disproportionate amount of blame on anyone here but yourself. BOTH parties are to blame here. FYI, the unions didn't make a single concession. There was no agreement met. They flat out didn't negotiate and went on strike. The end.

[quote name='dohdough']
And unions are the only ones that need to make concessions? Why is there no blame on management to further negotiate? Why is the onus on the unions?
[/QUOTE]

Who says there is no blame for the management? Do you not understand what the word BOTH means? BOTH. THE TWO PARTIES INVOLVED. Both are to blame.

[quote name='dohdough']
Workers are fucked and management walks away with millions. Or maybe I'd just rather be "cool" and hate on corporations because hating on unions is somehow more legit.[/QUOTE]

Millions? Get your head out of your ass. Managers working at that company didn't walk away with anything but a pink slip. Currently the investors only stand to gain anything if they can find a buyer. The investors also put up their money initially and they should be entitled to the first cut of the profit of the sale of assets.

[quote name='dohdough']How the fuck is it that the people that completely fucked the company are less responsible than unions for the ultimate outcome of this? [/Quote]
Calm down Betsy. No one is saying that anyone is less responsible here. BOTH parties are to blame. It really doesn't matter who is "more to blame" here. 18,500 people are out of a job now because of this.

[quote name='dohdough']
You think that making a shit load of money would some how satiate them enough into not trying to make more? Sorry, but I'm not looking to buy a bridge today and I can't do the mental loops to blame the unions for losing jobs that management already put on the chopping block.

Oh and management!=company.[/QUOTE]

Where exactly do you think they are making a "shit load of money" in this? The company has been in trouble for years. Investors have lost a lot of capital over this time period. You're cynical as fuck if you think investment managers went into this thing wanting it to fail, just so they could sell off the assets and make "shit tons of money" at the cost of union jobs.
 
Ah....the Sugar Wars have begun....excellent...

That just seemed like the right thing to say. I haven't had a Hostess product in quite a while, but I love me some cupcakes. If there hasn't been a rush on them, I'll probably pick some up so I'll have something sweet to eat when the world comes crashing down in a month. Maybe the Hostess people have inside information and are all retreating to some world-seeding spaceship, closing down just before takeoff? Laugh, laugh all you want. Oh yeah....remember to buy cupcakes...
 
[quote name='elessar123']I eat fast food, and I'm nowhere near fat.[/QUOTE]

Hell yeah. 1/2 my meals are at McD's and I still shed 20 pounds simply watching my intake and exercising a bit each week.

fuck the fast food is making you fat mantra. Not doing anything to counteract those calories is equally, if not more, to blame. And yes, I am going to be a bit sad if this means I can't feed my bi-annual Twinkie fix anymore.
 
[quote name='mtxbass1']Are you really this dense? The strikes had everything to do with the entire operation shutting down. Those plants were scheduled to close unless the company could get things together. The workers went on strike knowing this, and the management pulled the plug. The unions were warned, they chose to ignore these warnings, and they got fired.

No one is putting a disproportionate amount of blame on anyone here but yourself. BOTH parties are to blame here. FYI, the unions didn't make a single concession. There was no agreement met. They flat out didn't negotiate and went on strike. The end.[/QUOTE]
This thread was started in the beginning of this year and the company filed for bankruptcy more than twice over the last few years. The state of the company isn't a result of this one event, but a long string of them. I'm not the one treating this event as if it occurred in a vacuum here. Pensions are gone and and they already took a pay cut.

Who says there is no blame for the management? Do you not understand what the word BOTH means? BOTH. THE TWO PARTIES INVOLVED. Both are to blame.
And are both parties equally responsible for the state of the company? I didn't realize that the average employee on the floor had any input on how to run the company.:roll:

Millions? Get your head out of your ass. Managers working at that company didn't walk away with anything but a pink slip. Currently the investors only stand to gain anything if they can find a buyer. The investors also put up their money initially and they should be entitled to the first cut of the profit of the sale of assets.
The only one giving themself a prostate exam is you. Management!=managers.

How fucked do you think the people that make the real decisions that sunk the company are? You think they give a fuck about some guy on the assembly line? Liquidating the company obviously shows that they don't when these types of situations are already accounted for in becoming a corporate executive. Golden parachutes aren't a myth, but standard business practice.

Calm down Betsy. No one is saying that anyone is less responsible here. BOTH parties are to blame. It really doesn't matter who is "more to blame" here. 18,500 people are out of a job now because of this.
They're not even close to being equally responsible unless you think rape victims are responsible for being raped.

Where exactly do you think they are making a "shit load of money" in this? The company has been in trouble for years. Investors have lost a lot of capital over this time period. You're cynical as fuck if you think investment managers went into this thing wanting it to fail, just so they could sell off the assets and make "shit tons of money" at the cost of union jobs.
This is a joke right?

I'm not going to cry about a company that made their money hocking shitty "food" to kids going under, but to blame unions for it as if they were anything remotely close to equal partners is completely bullshit and devoid of any serious thought.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
bread's done
Back
Top