Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Its not just the unions, they are responsible for maybe a third of this, or less.
Its the hedge funds that own all of Hostess debt, they want to collect on their $150M, one way or another.
The best way to do that might be to kill Hostess and sell off parts of the carcass to other companies and investors. Either way someone will make the Twinkie, to much money on the table not to.
What you guys are seeing is a hedge fund make bank on a distressed asset, ie in this case the Twinkie guys. This is how its done. Someone is going to get the profitable parts of the company, the dead weight will be shed, and some hedge fund guys will make so much money this year they won't know what to do with it all, like always. Capitalism at its finest. Oh and they are probably trying to complete the deal before Jan 1st, so this will happen fast.
Not even close. The groups that invested in this company will be losing money.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/hostess-failed-hedge-funds-vs-164815209.html
If these "evil and greedy" investors hadn't put money into the company, it would have closed down in 2004. How good would that have been for the workers?
It simply became not worth their efforts to deal with the unions and they decided to cut their loses.
Lose money? I think not.
This seems like a nice way to screw the subordinate debt holders, shed the expensive unions and cash in on the body of a company.
Either way you cut it this is a pretty good deal, with money to be made. Provided the two main players valued the debt properly and bought in at the right price. That's the question.
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Its not just the unions, they are responsible for maybe a third of this, or less.
Its the hedge funds that own all of Hostess debt, they want to collect on their $150M, one way or another.
The best way to do that might be to kill Hostess and sell off parts of the carcass to other companies and investors. Either way someone will make the Twinkie, to much money on the table not to.
What you guys are seeing is a hedge fund make bank on a distressed asset, ie in this case the Twinkie guys. This is how its done. Someone is going to get the profitable parts of the company, the dead weight will be shed, and some hedge fund guys will make so much money this year they won't know what to do with it all, like always. Capitalism at its finest. Oh and they are probably trying to complete the deal before Jan 1st, so this will happen fast.
Not even close. The groups that invested in this company will be losing money.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/hostess-failed-hedge-funds-vs-164815209.html
If these "evil and greedy" investors hadn't put money into the company, it would have closed down in 2004. How good would that have been for the workers?
It simply became not worth their efforts to deal with the unions and they decided to cut their loses.
Lose money? I think not.
This seems like a nice way to screw the subordinate debt holders, shed the expensive unions and cash in on the body of a company.
Either way you cut it this is a pretty good deal, with money to be made. Provided the two main players valued the debt properly and bought in at the right price. That's the question.
Last edited:
