Romney at Bain: Big gains, some busts

[Soggy in NOLA]

It's hard for the Conservative Brain.

Profit != Public good.

Profit is good for the super rich. For the middle class? Not so much.

If it's limited to the super rich that is.

There was a play written about 60 years ago called the "Matchmaker". In it, the lead woman said, "Money is like manure. It's no good unless it's spread around".

Well, you certainly would be the expert on all things manure Deanie Weenie.

 

[candycorn]

I'd put Romney's record at Bain up against Obama's record on anything, any day, all day.

So should we use Tax money to invest in borderline businesses that may or may not make a ROI?

That is the model you're endorsing.

I hear the comeback already and the typical "Yeah But" response. Just answer the question; should we adopt the Bain capital model on the Federal level?

Private equity firms are not run as if there's an endless supply of money... the U.S. Government has been... no investor wins on every investment... the key is to pick more winners than losers. And of course, when you can trot out the printing presses, that's when you end up with a gazillion dollars lost on pie-in-the sky shit like Solyndra, etc.

I'll take the Bain model any day.

I didn't think you'd give the straight answer. Solyndra...bottomless pit in Iraq....propping up dictatorships around the world....all administrations have done this sort of thing.

So you're saying we should use tax dollars to fund corporate takeovers? Really?

 

[candycorn]

I'd put Romney's record at Bain up against Obama's record on anything, any day, all day.

So should we use Tax money to invest in borderline businesses that may or may not make a ROI?

That is the model you're endorsing.

I hear the comeback already and the typical "Yeah But" response. Just answer the question; should we adopt the Bain capital model on the Federal level?

Find a quote or speech where Romany ever said he will use taxpayer money for bailouts.
He is against bailouts.

I never said he did.

His supporters point to his experience at Bain capital as some sort of indication of his job creation prowess. Well, at Bain they took money, bought controlling interest in companies, leveraged the companies to pay themselves back then rolled the dice to see what happened with the company after that. Apparently 3 out of 4 times it "worked" meaning that the company didn't go bankrupt.

My question would be if you are a fan of this sort of corporate raping; do you want tax monies to be used to take over companies and supposedly make them better?

 

[candycorn]

Solyndra, Solar Power, etc. would have never survived the early stages of due diligence in the private markets and thus would have been passed on by a Bain. Obama however, knowing he can just spend your money, didn't have to worry about the pixie dust and unicorn farts factors of these investments.

In the 1900's, automobiles would have been passed on by people like Bain too. Can't say that I'd blame them. They also would have passed on petroleum companies as well. Most did in fact.

 

[candycorn]

Did the companies that Bain invested in while Romney was there create more jobs than say Solyndra and the other green energy companies the government has sunk money into under Obama?

I would think so.

 

[The T]

Solyndra, Solar Power, etc. would have never survived the early stages of due diligence in the private markets and thus would have been passed on by a Bain. Obama however, knowing he can just spend your money, didn't have to worry about the pixie dust and unicorn farts factors of these investments.

In the 1900's, automobiles would have been passed on by people like Bain too. Can't say that I'd blame them. They also would have passed on petroleum companies as well. Most did in fact.

Proof?

 

[candycorn]

Tony Soprano Explains Bain Capital

It's an uncharitable look but essentially correct if you accept a book's rough draft and outline as the entire text. The business model is designed to make sure Bain makes and the partners make it big. Nothing more, nothing less. Collateral damage/benefit is just a byproduct of the venture.

But while we're piling on Bain, would it be any different if you took out a loan from a local bank or one of the big 4 banks? Or any other group of investors?

At some point, you have to hold the corporate managers accountable; do you not?

The politics of it is that Romeny's assertions that these were white knight ventures is as incorrect as the video's assertion is uncharitable.

Has he said these were white knight ventures?

Not at all. His supporters are tying to paint it as some sort of job creation leviathan when in reality, if any jobs were created, it was a byproduct of the venture itself.

 

[The T]

It's an uncharitable look but essentially correct if you accept a book's rough draft and outline as the entire text. The business model is designed to make sure Bain makes and the partners make it big. Nothing more, nothing less. Collateral damage/benefit is just a byproduct of the venture.

But while we're piling on Bain, would it be any different if you took out a loan from a local bank or one of the big 4 banks? Or any other group of investors?

At some point, you have to hold the corporate managers accountable; do you not?

The politics of it is that Romeny's assertions that these were white knight ventures is as incorrect as the video's assertion is uncharitable.

Has he said these were white knight ventures?

Not at all. His supporters are tying to paint it as some sort of job creation leviathan when in reality, if any jobs were created, it was a byproduct of the venture itself.

Bullshit Candy.

Post proof or SHUT UP.

 

[candycorn]

What underhanded, devious device did Bain use to force the Sale of AmPad by Meade?

AmPad filed bankruptcy in 2000. Bain divested AmPad in 1996.

AmPad was a paper based company. Paper based companies are in trouble right now world wide.

There's this thingy called the the whole world inter web or something like that... You can probably Gargle it.

Most companies are trying to go paperless. Any company that makes paper designed to go into envelopes, envelopes or devices to handle mail are in trouble. Check you portfolios, kids. Don't buy these stocks at home.

One of the things that can be perceived as underhanded and devious comes from the Planet Money podcast itself on the topic:

Ampad moved its hanging-folder manufacturing operation out of Marion, Indiana, to a plant in another state.

By now, Ampad had pads and folders to put them in. Next on the list: an envelope company.

Bain went back to the bank and borrowed a couple hundred million dollars. Most of the money went to buy the envelope company, but about $70 million went to pay Bain and its investors.

Not long after that, Ampad went public. Bain used the money from the IPO to pay off a chunk of debt. In 1996, American Pad and Paper had its best year.

In 1997, Ampad made another purchase: A printer-paper company called Shade Allied.

The company made continuous-form printer paper, for dot-matrix printers — that old kind of computer paper, with the little holes running down the side.

That purchase didn't turn out so well. And Ampad started having other troubles.

Asian companies came on the scene with cheaper products. The price of pulp jumped. Ampad's revenues started to fall. And they have to keep paying interest on all that debt.

In 2000 — four years after the IPO— Ampad declared bankruptcy. Stockholders were wiped out (including Bain, which still owned about a third of the company). Lenders got back a fraction of what they were owed.

"You can't continue to leverage companies up," says Russell Gard. "At some point, there's going to be a breaking point."

Clearly, the story doesn't always end this way. If it did, the banks wouldn't keep lending private equity companies like Bain massive amounts of money.

And Ampad itself? The pad company?

You can still get an Ampad pad today. The company is now being run by another private equity firm. A firm that saw an undervalued company, and bought it at a good price.

How Mitt Romney's Firm Tried

Not saying it is; not saying it isn't. However, when you load a company up with more debt and use that loading-up process to pay yourself back; that probably won't play in Peoria.

Dunkin Donuts went through the same thing and is now heavy in debt.

Bain did not hold a controlling interest in AmPad after 1996 which your article says was the best year for AmPad.

What point are you trying to make? Bain did not control AmPad after the IPO.

That they ran up the debt on a company already up to their eyes in red ink to pay themselves back first and foremost. Politically, that isn't going to play well in Peoria. Then again Peoria is in Illinois so it won't matter there anyway.

 

[candycorn]

Has he said these were white knight ventures?

Not at all. His supporters are tying to paint it as some sort of job creation leviathan when in reality, if any jobs were created, it was a byproduct of the venture itself.

Bullshit Candy.

Post proof or SHUT UP.

Proof of what? You're going to hold that you guys aren't trying to make Romney (the "shitty choice" according to grumps) out as some sort of great job creator?

 

[The T]

Not at all. His supporters are tying to paint it as some sort of job creation leviathan when in reality, if any jobs were created, it was a byproduct of the venture itself.

Bullshit Candy.

Post proof or SHUT UP.

Proof of what? You're going to hold that you guys aren't trying to make Romney (the "shitty choice" according to grumps) out as some sort of great job creator?

Whom is talking about 'GRUMPS' but you?

YOU are a fucking IDIOT.

 

[candycorn]

Solyndra, Solar Power, etc. would have never survived the early stages of due diligence in the private markets and thus would have been passed on by a Bain. Obama however, knowing he can just spend your money, didn't have to worry about the pixie dust and unicorn farts factors of these investments.

In the 1900's, automobiles would have been passed on by people like Bain too. Can't say that I'd blame them. They also would have passed on petroleum companies as well. Most did in fact.

Proof?

There wasn't private equity back in the turn of last century sonny. But when you look at the titans of American industry at the time, few were willing to broaden their investments into the automobile industry. Otherwise, Vanderbilt would have been in the car business, as would have Rockefeller, as would have Morgan (who I think was in cars at one point if I recall but not at the outset).

 

[candycorn]

Bullshit Candy.

Post proof or SHUT UP.

Proof of what? You're going to hold that you guys aren't trying to make Romney (the "shitty choice" according to grumps) out as some sort of great job creator?

Whom is talking about 'GRUMPS' but you?

YOU are a fucking IDIOT.

Guess you didn't get any last night given the level of profanity. Whats the matter, your hand fall asleep on you "tough guy"?

 

[The T]

Proof of what? You're going to hold that you guys aren't trying to make Romney (the "shitty choice" according to grumps) out as some sort of great job creator?

Whom is talking about 'GRUMPS' but you?

YOU are a fucking IDIOT.

Guess you didn't get any last night given the level of profanity. Whats the matter, your hand fall asleep on you "tough guy"?

Get any what? YOU are such a shallow VAPID woman

with no brain except reaction to STIMULI... that operates on what SHE is given. YOU should be more careful Candy Cron...YOU unmasked yourself. YOU should CEASE with your projection.

 

[The T]

In short Candy? YOU are a brainless IDIOT.

 

[candycorn]

Whom is talking about 'GRUMPS' but you?

YOU are a fucking IDIOT.

Guess you didn't get any last night given the level of profanity. Whats the matter, your hand fall asleep on you "tough guy"?

Get any what? YOU are such a shallow VAPID woman

with no brain except reaction to STIMULI... that operates on what SHE is given. YOU should be more careful Candy Cron...YOU unmasked yourself. YOU should CEASE with your projection.

Not sure what any of that meant; not that it matters of course; consider the source, the profane nature, the RINO that you're going to vote for, etc... I can understand why you're frustrated on a Holiday weekend.

I guess you're trying to say that you couldn't provide the stimuli last evening?

 

[code1211]

It probably was.

The purpose of the government is not to turn a profit, though.

It's to provide needed services to the people they can't provide for themselves.

Today on Chris Matthews show, Major Garrett was talking about the interviews the Obama folks did with people who worked for Bain Companies that were raided and looted. He said there's stuff there about suicides and ruined lives that were so incendiary even the Obama folks couldn't put them on TV.

Bain is Willie Horton Riding in on a Swiftboat.

Again, which of the companies acquired by Bain were successful at the time of acquisition?

If they were successful, why were they sold by the ownership?

Again, completely besides the point and irrelevent to this discussion. I'm really sorry you can't see this.

Even if you accept that there were completely valid reasons for Bain to screw over those companies, the fact is, they did screw them over. So the line worker at AmPad or GST who went to work every day was certainly not responsible for the machinations happening way over his head. He just bore the brunt.

And frankly, that's going to resonate with people.

Of course this is relevant to the discussion.

Compare this to an emergency room at a hospital.

If a mother brings in her son with a sliver in his finger, the chances of recovery are pretty good.

If an ambulance brings in a guy who fell out of 30 story window, the survival chances are lower.

The companies that were purchased by Bain were the ones that fell out of the thirty story windows. The folks that lost their jobs after the Bain acquistion were in jobs that were about to go way in any event whether Bain got involved or not.

The record of firms like Bain is about a 30% rate of success in saving the business. Bain's rate was about 75%.

If a batter in the Bigs hits for 300 lifetime, and his lifetime in the Bigs is 15 years, he's probably headed to the HOF.

That's the average guy in this business. Bain was "hitting" for 750 during the lifetime of Romney at the firm.

This is not just good. It's spectacular. Only a very few companies are this good at this.

 

[code1211]

Warren's not running for President...

Since when did being a genius become a qualification for becoming President?

When your boy says, "Hey, I'm a business genius, please ignore my crazy religion, my tendency to flip-flop on every issue, my pathetic tenure in the only elected office I ever held, and only concentrate on the businesses I invested in, where other people actually made most of the decisions and did most of the real work... Oh, but not the ones where I bankrupted the companies and a lot of people lost their jobs..."

Romney's the one who set the rules, he can't complain now that he's getting his ass beat.

Did Obama set any benchmarks by which to judge his success or failure as the POTUS?

I think I might remember him saying something about cutting the deficit in half and getting to 6% unemployment by the end of his first term.

Your comment about setting the rules?

 

[JoeB131]

Of course this is relevant to the discussion.

Compare this to an emergency room at a hospital.

If a mother brings in her son with a sliver in his finger, the chances of recovery are pretty good.

If an ambulance brings in a guy who fell out of 30 story window, the survival chances are lower.

The companies that were purchased by Bain were the ones that fell out of the thirty story windows. The folks that lost their jobs after the Bain acquistion were in jobs that were about to go way in any event whether Bain got involved or not.

This is not just good. It's spectacular. Only a very few companies are this good at this.

And again, I think you aren't seeing it from a voter perspective.

It's one thing if the guy fell out of the 30 story window. The problem is, Mitt Romney pushed him out and then made a fortune selling his organs to transplant banks... which is exactly how those workers will see it and exactly what they will say

In the last 20 years, I've been downsized three times. Once because the company went out of business completely, the others because management made awful decisions and lost business and had to reorganize. Frankly, I do not give a fuck about the two companies and how wonderfully they've reorganized or how profitable they became.

From my perspective, I worked hard, and got the shaft anyway.

And this is the problem with Romney in a nutshell. As Mike Huckabee said, "He looks like the guy who lays you off."

 

[code1211]

One of the things that can be perceived as underhanded and devious comes from the Planet Money podcast itself on the topic:



How Mitt Romney's Firm Tried

Not saying it is; not saying it isn't. However, when you load a company up with more debt and use that loading-up process to pay yourself back; that probably won't play in Peoria.

Dunkin Donuts went through the same thing and is now heavy in debt.

Bain did not hold a controlling interest in AmPad after 1996 which your article says was the best year for AmPad.

What point are you trying to make? Bain did not control AmPad after the IPO.

That they ran up the debt on a company already up to their eyes in red ink to pay themselves back first and foremost. Politically, that isn't going to play well in Peoria. Then again Peoria is in Illinois so it won't matter there anyway.

Did they run up the debt? The article said that 1996b was the best year for AmPad.

Again, why did Meade sell AmPad?