RIP Twinkies

Here's what gets me: Twinkies went for what, a buck a pack? Twinkie junkies will gladly pay $8 a pack on eBay now. So why the hell didn't they jump the price to, say, $1.50 a pack?

Curmudgeon wrote: Here's what gets me: Twinkies went for what, a buck a pack? Twinkie junkies will gladly pay $8 a pack on eBay now. So why the hell didn't they jump the price to, say, $1.50 a pack?

Because the evil villain capitalists just WANTED the company to fail, and for everyone to lose their jobs. DUH. A SMART business man would've just given everyone raises.

That's right, I didn't even consider that. Thank you for showing me the error of my ways. I need to watch more Jon Stewart.

carguy123 wrote: So for those of you trying to misdirect all the blame for Hostesses demise to some nameless company that purchased it and was stripping it at the expense of the worker, here's a little Financial history. I hardly think owning the company since 1995 and trying to run it to make a profit for years would constitute buying the company just to strip it and try to make themselves a fortune. Financial History Founded in 1930, the Interstate Bakeries Corporation launched and acquired dozens of other brands over several decades, including the 1995 acquisition of Taggart Bakeries, the original creator of Wonder Bread and Hostess snack cakes including Twinkies, Ding Dongs and Ho Hos. After recovering from its first bankruptcy that lasted over five years from 2004 to 2009, the company rebranded itself as Hostess Brands, Inc. However, just over two years later in January 2012, the company filed for a second Chapter 11 bankruptcy. After some executive changes, the company had to reevaluate their employees’ wages and benefits, attempting to make large cuts in their employees’ pay in order to save their pensions.[2] However, these talks did not go well and in November, approximately 6,600 employees who are members of the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers’ International Union went on strike. The moral to this story is you can't get blood out of a turnip.

Conveniently there is no mention of upper management pay increases.

Despite their troubles, Hostess’ CEO got a 300 percent raise, from $750,000 to $2,250,000. Other top executives have also gotten raises worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Hostess workers made numerous concessions, including this year when the company stopped making contributions to their pensions. They went on strike because management offered a contract cutting wages and benefits by 27-32 percent.

wbjones wrote: it's never part of the plan ... just that the union hierarchy never seem to understand that the golden goose can't keep producing more and more golden eggs just 'cause they tell them to

A lesson the CEO making 380x the average worker's salary could learn as well. How many people could remain employed if the leadership hadn't hogged all the rewards for themselves?

Avg CEO makes 380 times the average worker.

poopshovel wrote: Because the evil villain capitalists just WANTED the company to fail, and for everyone to lose their jobs. DUH. A SMART business man would've just given everyone raises.

That or taken a pay cut him/herself instead of giving him/herself a raise. All while asking the workforce to cut back and do with less. All while he/she lives high on the hog thanks to his worthless so-called leadership. Keep in mind this lack of leadership and accountability evidently goes back decades with this particular company.

On a separate note..

I can't understand on this board how we profess to work with common products due to the working class nature of this section of our hobby. But when a situation arises, like this one, it's as if we can't blame the working class enough for this failure. From the articles it's plainly stated that the workers agreed to concessions in the first bankruptcy to save the company. Management rewarded this olive branch by voting themselves pay raises and requesting more concessions from the workforce. Who among you would tolerate that behavior from your employer? What stopped upper management from taking pay cuts and benefit cuts themselves to assist in save the company?

It kills me the amount of people on this board who root against the working class. It's as if you can't idolize the rich enough. It's clear in this case the average worker was tired of sacrificing so the rich would not only maintain their privileged status but benefit even further. How is this acceptable?

Temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

So I managed to find 10 boxes gooey cream filled goodness. They are currently going for about $45 a box on ebay...guess where these are going?

Xceler8x wrote:

carguy123 wrote: So for those of you trying to misdirect all the blame for Hostesses demise to some nameless company that purchased it and was stripping it at the expense of the worker, here's a little Financial history. I hardly think owning the company since 1995 and trying to run it to make a profit for years would constitute buying the company just to strip it and try to make themselves a fortune. Financial History Founded in 1930, the Interstate Bakeries Corporation launched and acquired dozens of other brands over several decades, including the 1995 acquisition of Taggart Bakeries, the original creator of Wonder Bread and Hostess snack cakes including Twinkies, Ding Dongs and Ho Hos. After recovering from its first bankruptcy that lasted over five years from 2004 to 2009, the company rebranded itself as Hostess Brands, Inc. However, just over two years later in January 2012, the company filed for a second Chapter 11 bankruptcy. After some executive changes, the company had to reevaluate their employees’ wages and benefits, attempting to make large cuts in their employees’ pay in order to save their pensions.[2] However, these talks did not go well and in November, approximately 6,600 employees who are members of the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers’ International Union went on strike. The moral to this story is you can't get blood out of a turnip.

Conveniently there is no mention of upper management pay increases. Despite their troubles, Hostess’ CEO got a 300 percent raise, from $750,000 to $2,250,000. Other top executives have also gotten raises worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. Hostess workers made numerous concessions, including this year when the company stopped making contributions to their pensions. They went on strike because management offered a contract cutting wages and benefits by 27-32 percent.

wbjones wrote: it's never part of the plan ... just that the union hierarchy never seem to understand that the golden goose can't keep producing more and more golden eggs just 'cause they tell them to

A lesson the CEO making 380x the average worker's salary could learn as well. How many people could remain employed if the leadership hadn't hogged all the rewards for themselves? Avg CEO makes 380 times the average worker.

poopshovel wrote: Because the evil villain capitalists just WANTED the company to fail, and for everyone to lose their jobs. DUH. A SMART business man would've just given everyone raises.

That or taken a pay cut him/herself instead of giving him/herself a raise. All while asking the workforce to cut back and do with less. All while he/she lives high on the hog thanks to his worthless so-called leadership. Keep in mind this lack of leadership and accountability evidently goes back decades with this particular company.

I see this all the time at work. I mostly work at two casinos here in AC. The Borgata and Harrahs/ Both are top three in profits out of the 12 or casinos here on the Island.

1: Borgata. They give generous raises, feed us well (all casinos feed their employees) and generally do their very best to make us feel like people who can actually do something to make the casino a better place to visit and work at.

2: Harrahs: Bottom of the list for employee food, has cut staff to the bone (and then some), had us take pay cuts, and rather than making the employees part of the solution, do their best to make us feel like part of the problem.

One casino gets it.. and there is a reason the Borgata is THE number one casino in Atlantic City.

I totally agree with you Xceler8x but I'm just trying to stay out of it...

In reply to Xceler8x:

I think some (not all) CEO's are overpaid. The blame, however, should be placed on the boards that decide their compensation packages; and the shareholders, too.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I also think union bosses and their mid-level underlings are more responsible for the perceived failures of organized labor than those who perform the actual work.

Richard Trumka, head of the AFL-CIO, is one of those thugs. He (and the organization he leads) is to be no more trusted than CEO's - IMHO.

<--- former union dues payer and one who hasn't tasted a Hostess product in decades.

Xceler8x wrote: On a separate note.. I can't understand on this board how we profess to work with common products due to the working class nature of this section of our hobby. But when a situation arises, like this one, it's as if we can't blame the working class enough for this failure. From the articles it's plainly stated that the workers agreed to concessions in the first bankruptcy to save the company. Management rewarded this olive branch by voting themselves pay raises and requesting more concessions from the workforce. Who among you would tolerate that behavior from your employer? What stopped upper management from taking pay cuts and benefit cuts themselves to assist in save the company? It kills me the amount of people on this board who root against the working class. It's as if you can't idolize the rich enough. It's clear in this case the average worker was tired of sacrificing so the rich would not only maintain their privileged status but benefit even further. How is this acceptable?

were they tired enough to loose their jobs ... as bad as the job was, I'm betting it was better than the unemployment line ... regardless of the greediness of management I'm not sure I'd vote for giving up my job

wbjones wrote: were they tired enough to loose their jobs ... as bad as the job was, I'm betting it was better than the unemployment line ... regardless of the greediness of management I'm not sure I'd vote for giving up my job

I can answer that. When you go sufficiently overworked and underpaid for long enough, you start to wonder if your job is a form of gainful employment or a self-destructive habit, and become rather apathetic about it. Lose your job? Might be a nice opportunity for change.

Boards of Directors are politically appointed positions. Look closely at events like that Illinois governor trying to sell The O's Senate seat. What was he asking for? Among other things, a seat on a Board of Directors at a company so big that paid about so much. For his wife. Now, what if that had gone through? That board would be berkeleyed. The lesson is that these things DO go through, and those boards are berkeleyed. They say, yeah, every CEO needs 380x the low end for wages, 'cause that's how I get it too, in the big BoD circle jerk.

That story I linked to above also points out the political affiliation of the people who were destroying Hostess. And I ain't talking about the Unions. Not that both sides of the isle don't do it.

The question I have is why are (were?) Hostess products so much more expensive than those from Little Debbie and other snack cake powerhouses? I remember Hostess products having a price tag of about 2x as the same amount, by weight, as LD.

Meh. Vachon takes the cake I'd way rather have a Joe St. Louis, or a Flaky than a Twinkie any day!

Lesley wrote: Meh. Vachon takes the cake I'd way rather have a Joe St. Louis, or a Flaky than a Twinkie any day!

Love the Flaky. Hate the Jos. (no St.) Louis

oldsaw wrote: In reply to Xceler8x: I think some (not all) CEO's are overpaid. The blame, however, should be placed on the boards that decide their compensation packages; and the shareholders, too. I can't speak for anyone else, but I also think union bosses and their mid-level underlings are more responsible for the perceived failures of organized labor than those who perform the actual work. Richard Trumka, head of the AFL-CIO, is one of those thugs. He (and the organization he leads) is to be no more trusted than CEO's - IMHO. <--- former union dues payer and one who hasn't tasted a Hostess product in decades.

I perfectly agree with you... except for the former union part.. I am still part of a union. But the rest is spot on

I stopped at the grocery this morning. There were no more Twinkees, but there were about a dozen Holiday Fruit Cakes left completely untouched.

Zomby Woof wrote:

Lesley wrote: Meh. Vachon takes the cake I'd way rather have a Joe St. Louis, or a Flaky than a Twinkie any day!

Love the Flaky. Hate the Jos. (no St.) Louis

Put em in the freezer! Really, they are soooo good cold. Hmm... so are those chocolate Hostess cupcakes.

[Bobcat Goldthwait] "A Twinkie has a shelf life of 20 years. TWENTY YEARS! Does that mean at twenty years and one day, you'll take a bite and go 'UGGH! Does this taste funny to you?' "[/Bobcat Goldthwait]

Wally wrote: I stopped at the grocery this morning. There were no more Twinkees, but there were about a dozen Holiday Fruit Cakes left completely untouched.

Im one of those wierdos that like fruit cake. I dont really like the Hostess ones but I may have to pick one up anyway

I'm hitting up the local hostess outlet hoping to hit some spongy gold to put on Ebay.

So a company is failing, and all the CEO-type guys who are good at turning companies around are being scarfed up by other companies for millions of dollars.

Do you: -Continue to pay your CEO $100k a year and hope he suddenly becomes someone who can save your business? -Pony up the cash to pay for someone with a proven record of saving companies to come in and maybe do it for you, even if it costs you $5million to get him?

The problem with CEO salaries is how few good people there are at the top compared to how many companies need good leadership. And in both cases the word "good" is meant convey effective, and not at all a reflection on morality.

Hostess died in '04. The people who were investing in it since then hoping to turn it around and make some money gave up because the labor force was not willing to make the changes that were perceived as needed to become competitive. Heck, weren't the twinky drivers not allowed to deliver Wonder bread and vice versa, even if their truck were only part full?

I'd be willing to bet the fall out of this is that all the same people end up working at all the same jobs for all the same managers but with a new name and all with one set of pensions and contracts when it's all said and done.