Say goodbye to Twinkies

UncleTrvlingJim said

It depends on what the overall market place is though... not just that single company. Maybe someone did an analysis of the market and determined that if Hostess folded, X number of assets will be bought, Y number of products will be sold, and the Z number of bakers will be re-employed by the new company(s).

I have no idea - but it's not unreasonable for a group of people to determine that their overall economic well being is better if the company folds.

Click to expand...

I have to think that the union workers gave profound thought to this. Most of us woke up to this news. These employees have been grappling with this for some time. They have watched the decisions the company has made for years. They have seen the writing on the wall. They have the best idea of any of us about whether or not Hostess was going to continue to be viable in the market place. They would know better than all of us, if the company had any chance of righting itself. This wasn't a haphazard decision by greedy employees. The decision to strike isn't reached easily. It isn't sought as a money grab, people. These were skilled Americans with families, much like you and me, deciding that going without for an unknown amount of time was better for their long term health versus working for this company another day. It's not a easy decision to make and no one makes it callously. These people know their worth to this company and to the market. The company could have 1.) hired replacements, 2.) met the employees demands, 3.) reached a compromise with the employees returning them back to work or 4.) closed its doors.

When the company chooses option #4, that tells us a lot. That they couldn't hire replacements, no one would agree to the terms they were offering or they didn't have the money on hand to do so, speaks volumes. This was a company that needed to go. Capitalism will prevail.