Varmint Hunters Forum banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,725 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
524 Posts
This is the way of big business

Interesting read and based on my experience working for large corporations, not surprising.

Back in the late 80's working for Weyerhaeuser in Oregon, I listened to a conversation between two higher level managers, one with the Timber Lands division and one with Lumber division. Topic was the cost of logs being sold from the Timber side to the Lumber side. Lumber side was hurting financially and was asking for a better price on logs from the Timber side. Answer was "no, if you don't want to pay the price we can sell them elsewhere".

I was new in the business world and this made no sense to me as I was thinking you both work for the same company. What I figured out is that Weyerhaeuser could make more overall profit by having one business unit make lots of money at the expense of another losing money. Impact to employees was that profit sharing was paid on financial performance and since the Lumber side was losing money, no profit sharing paid to employees even though the company had very strong earnings. Weyerhaeuser could write off the loss on the lumber side resulting in better overall profit.

Next job was with Raytheon in Oregon and then Idaho. Unknown at the time and we figured it out too late, Raytheon was pumping up the commercial side of their business so they could sell it off to focus only on their defense business. They shut down the Oregon operation that built rock crushers and related rock/gravel handling equipment and moved it to Iowa because the State of Iowa was offering huge incentives for manufacturing in the 'Rust Belt'.

Between the financial incentives and consolidation of manufacturing sites (the Idaho site was closed less than 18 months after I started working there) Raytheon was able to consolidate their commercial businesses and sold them off. The company that bought the business group that included the operations I worked for, ended up suing Raytheon for 'cooking the books' on the finances. Raytheon paid out $900 million to settle that.

Worked for USWest/Qwest (telecommunications), CEO and several executives are now felons for their book cooking on revenue to try and drive up stock prices. Company stock value, that was the cornerstone for most employee's 401(k) investments, went from $55 a share down to $1.78 a share in two years. Lots of people delayed retirement and many who had retired had to go back to work because their 401(k)s were almost broke.

Last corporation I worked for, an international semiconductor manufacturer, pits one manufacturing site against another in comparison of costs, quality and on time delivery with the undertone of 'do better or we will move your product line to another location'. The resulting impact to employees is management passing the buck to them saying you are not doing enough, need to work harder and be more efficient doing more with less. Results in high turnover, low morale and even worse performance of the facility which drive the circle of more pressure from corporate to do better.

Bottom line on all of this is companies figure out how to make money for either the executives, high level managers and share holders or if a private entity like Cerberus, money for the original investors. Employees are just a tool to be used as a way to make money and local communities who offer tax incentives are often losers in the long run.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
651 Posts
Interesting article, which brings up the question of ;
1. With all the mergers of large companies being pulled into huge holding companies who implement creative accounting practices to basically launder money and directing a business down a path to bamkruptcy. The holding company profits no matter what happens to the company in play.

They accomplish this without breaking any of the anti- trust laws. If they do break any laws, enforcement is so weak that a stern warning is all they get, because “They are to big to fail.”
I strongly believe that the anti-trust laws need to be updated and have some strong enforcement options added.
The big money companies from Asia and the eastern block countries are just waiting to come here and takeover American companies
I am some what older than a lot of you on this board. So I remember in 1964,That Nikita Kruzchev was touring the US after Russia a bought a huge sale of wheat because they couldn’t grow enough to feed themselves. The price of wheat tripled during harvest. Kruzchev was touring farms in the mid west to see first hand what the difference was between the American farms compared to the communist run government farm.
At a hog farm in Iowa a news man got a chance to ask Kruzchev if The Cold War policies at that time we’re still including preparations for war between us. Kruzchev’s response was no, after what he had saw here in the US, Russia would take over the USA without firing a single shot. That my friends was a very sobering moment for all of us, but was soon forgotten by most all.
This article about Remington may well be the road map of what’s to come. The greed of the people we have put into power may well be our poison that kills us in the end.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
465 Posts
Imo

As far as I'm concerned, it's not what the 'corporation' did, but didn't do! They quit making what I wanted or was interested in and let their quality go to hell! They deserve bankruptcy; they've earned it with poor quality and NOT listening to the customers! SO, we went elsewhere! It IS that plain and simple! ADIOS!
.
Darrel
Peoples' Republic of Illinois
Where you can have your guns confiscated NOW!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
293 Posts
Man, my college professor and my nephew that is a college professor would have a field day with the clown that wrote that bloated article. He could have cut the reading down by 60% and said the same thing. But since the writer has already passed his college days. Cerberus had the opportunity to sell Remington several years ago before the SHTF and they had milked the company for all of the cash. The problem was the US Gov't intervened as the buyer was a Chinese financial group. Uncle Sam didn't want a foreign Gov't owning one of the leading firearms manufacturers. But what the article didn't say is where Feinberg got the money and investors to build this money hog. You won't find many US dollars in the company and that should scare the crap out of you. Some of the words largest scumbags are investors in Cerberus.

To cut to the facts of what the article said in the tens of thousands of fluff words. They did to Remington what Daimler did to Chrysler. They took all of the cash out of the company and loaded it with debt that it didn't incur. Now there's nothing left but debt. But there is a possibility that there MIGHT be a buyer for Remington and restore it to it's rightful glory. I know one investor group here in Texas has inquired about buying just the name Remington, no assets and no debt. The name alone has value yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,433 Posts
building stupid shit....if they would just stay with the basic line of rifle and shotgun they could not have gone wrong....700-40x's 1100/1187-870's done....wait.. speedmaster:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,919 Posts
I pretty much agree that they made some really cheaply done products and made stupid business decisions. They were bought out by more than once by investment bankers after DuPont sold them off. They had to get out of NY to get away from the liberal politics and the unions made them their traditional products too expensive for the old manufacturing equipment/facilities.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,059 Posts
It was said that when Cerberus bough Remington they
had a track record of buying companies then bankrupting them.
I guess its no longer a rumor.

I'm w/George, when they started adding junk models to their
product line thats when obvious trouble began.

When I was selling takedown 700 parts the market was good.
When the wholesale price of these rifles got so high that customers
wouldn't buy the parts. Thats when you know the rifle is over priced.

Maybe someone will step up and bring them back to the top. LDS
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,324 Posts
Notwithstanding bad business practices and politics, I have observed people during sight in days. The majority of deer hunters are hunters, not gun people. They wont pay $500 and up for a deer rifle. The $200 to $500 abound. The don't care the trigger is rough and that you can't see the target clearly with the package scope. The hunt for 2 weeks and get their deer and it goes back to the closet. Remington had to get to this market to make money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,919 Posts
A very good point. If you look at the current prices of "quality" firearms compared to same model price from 10 years ago, they are about double. Compare a Cooper, Kimber, M700, M70, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,725 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
building stupid shit....if they would just stay with the basic line of rifle and shotgun they could not have gone wrong....700-40x's 1100/1187-870's done....wait.. speedmaster:)
Cause and effect. Ye ol' what came first: the chicken or the egg?

Financial under pinning issues from without and within were like a WWF tag team forcing Remington to the "mat". Tragic circumstances with blame enough to go around!

There ought to be a LAW (against what is happened to Remington AND others...)
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top