Question for the business guru's here

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Velociryx


Ahhh, so you have chosen to block out the great "work camp utopia" debate, then?

I don't blame you.

We can go sifting thru the archives to dredge it back up if you like, or, we can both just have a good chuckle and assume that your views have changed since that time.

I remain hopeful that they have.

-=Vel=-

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx


*shrug* That's not the implication of your own words earlier in this thread, but if you want to adjust your position slightly as the conversation unfolds, I would completely understand. I think it's most likely a case of what you said didn't come out quite right the first time, so that's cool.

-=Vel=-

Ideally expansion is better before the economy starts growing. When the economy is getting a head of steam and businesses expand too much it makes recessions much worse. That's Marxist economic cycle theory, which I strongly believe in. I've implied nothing other than that. No where did I say that you should never expand when the economy is expanding.

I see what you're trying to do though, but it's not going to work.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx


Ahhh, so you have chosen to block out the great "work camp utopia" debate, then?

I don't blame you.

We can go sifting thru the archives to dredge it back up if you like, or, we can both just have a good chuckle and assume that your views have changed since that time.

I remain hopeful that they have.

-=Vel=-

I don't know if you will end up in a work camp or not. That has nothing to do with this.

[Velociryx]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Ideally expansion is better before the economy starts growing. When the economy is getting a head of steam and businesses expand too much it makes recessions much worse. That's Marxist economic cycle theory, which I strongly believe in. I've implied nothing other than that. No where did I say that you should never expand when the economy is expanding.

I see what you're trying to do though, but it's not going to work.

What I was trying to do was to make sure I understood your sometimes colorful logic.

I think I more-or-less have it now tho.

At times, you assume you know that which you do not, and I am too old and too tired tonight to expend energy on another debate with you that'll wind up being another contest in semantics.

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I don't know if you will end up in a work camp or not. That has nothing to do with this.

-=Vel=-

PS: And oh yes, if your vision of the utopia should ever come to pass, I think we both know what my fate would be.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx


What I was trying to do was to make sure I understood your sometimes colorful logic.

I think I more-or-less have it now tho.

At times, you assume you know that which you do not, and I am too old and too tired tonight to expend energy on another debate with you that'll wind up being another contest in semantics.

-=Vel=-

I can't see another one of those debates ever raging again. The last time I talked with Flubber like that it lasted a few pages and died out. Those were good times though.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I can't see another one of those debates ever raging again. The last time I talked with Flubber like that it lasted a few pages and died out. Those were good times though.

As are these

[Saras]

Re: Question for the business guru's here

Originally posted by Grandpa Troll
Im in the Ready Mix Concrete Industry

So as not to violate as anti trust, lets speak in generalities;

Say there are 4 producers with a total of 50 trucks in a market that can handle say 30 trucks.

Now, everyone can comfortably make a living at that level.

But, adding those extra 20 trucks, decreasing the market with residential construction, increase in products and materials F.O.B. as well as variable costs in relationship to employees total package(hourly rate,vacation,insurance,ect.) now greatly reduces the post EBITA bottom line.

So now, companies, in order to keep employees working, cut the selling price by say 13%..but it starts a downward spiral, and before you know it, your facing a very thin R.O.I. as bottom line, so you have to do something, of course you have done all the necessary things up to this point, efficient, staggered start times, cutting off trucks while not loading, minimizing maintenance costs, ect.

Now, i ask you, whose fault is this?

is it the company who is trying to stay afloat by say reducing the workforce by 10 %?

Is it the employees fault for m,aking such wages with no regard to how changing economic times have strapped a company?

or is it the renegade company, who in frantic desperation, tries outrunning the inevitable by slashing deeper price cuts where now it is not making a profit, in hopes of being acquired by another company?

Who wins?

I hear lots of talk by people who bash corporations and companies for not giving raises in these thin times, just asking how would you change these conditions?

Thanks for your input, one and all

Merge them all. Mothball/sell 20 trucks. Pay me 1 million US$ for M&A advice. Life is great.

[Grandpa Troll]

Re: Re: Question for the business guru's here

Originally posted by Saras


Merge them all. Mothball/sell 20 trucks. Pay me 1 million US$ for M&A advice. Life is great.

Shhhhhhh....you get Kidicious to go upside your head with talk like that

By the way, thanks for the advice, do you have somewhere to send the monies?

I am very wealthy, apparently my rich Uncle that I never met was given a huge settlement in Nigeria for his dedicated work in the field of Oil, so just give me your account number and I will have them forward immediatly the requested funds