Jump to content
Coors

No more Twinkies D:

Recommended Posts

So why didn't they simply change their products to suit the change in diets? Seems like they were too proud of their Twinkies to keep their business alive and employees happy. I personally get sick of seeing the vast sea of junk food in the vending machines at my workplace, not a single thing I ever find in them could be considered healthy.

Maybe because Twinkies aren't supposed to be healthy? It is the poster child for junk food so making it something other than junk food would be awkward and really impossible too. No one would ever believe Twinkies are not junk food.

As far as keeping their employees happy, the Teamsters union for the truck drivers was actually trying to get the bakers union to support the deal, so employees were happy to make cuts to keep their jobs. Now though I doubt any of the workers, in any of the associated unions, are happy because now they are going to be out of work because of the decisions of just the one union.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why didn't they simply change their products to suit the change in diets? Seems like they were too proud of their Twinkies to keep their business alive and employees happy. I personally get sick of seeing the vast sea of junk food in the vending machines at my workplace, not a single thing I ever find in them could be considered healthy.

 

I also hate when people have ONE healthy snack and act all righteous because they did it. It's like really shut up, who the hell cares. Good fcking job, you had a low fat cupcake. (Not you, death. :lol:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also hate when people have ONE healthy snack and act all righteous because they did it. It's like really shut up, who the hell cares. Good fcking job, you had a low fat cupcake. (Not you, death. :lol:)

 

Low fat, high sugar, high saccharine, high glucose fructose syrup cheers.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My local pet store sells frosted (it's yogurt) cookie dog treats. There are 5 ingrediants listed on the label (honey,flour,yogurt, something something), and they smelled really good. The damn things taste better than cookies I can buy in the grocery's bakery....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe because Twinkies aren't supposed to be healthy? It is the poster child for junk food so making it something other than junk food would be awkward and really impossible too. No one would ever believe Twinkies are not junk food.

As far as keeping their employees happy, the Teamsters union for the truck drivers was actually trying to get the bakers union to support the deal, so employees were happy to make cuts to keep their jobs. Now though I doubt any of the workers, in any of the associated unions, are happy because now they are going to be out of work because of the decisions of just the one union.

It's true their reputation as a leader in junk food is out there but that doesn't mean they couldn't change. If they had started producing a healthy product at one of their factories and marketed properly, I think it would have been a success. No, I don't mean make Twinkies healthy, that's really not possible, I mean they could have continued producing Twinkies and Zingers but also could have made a start to producing healthy, fast grab, snacks. Like what? I'm not really sure, dark chocolate covered almond bar, still wouldn't be the healthiest thing in the world but it's a big step up from a Twinkie.

 

Just because General Mills is well known for the Lucky Charms cereal, doesn't mean they couldn't make an attempt at healthier products like the Fiber One cereal. This is a good example of trying to appeal to the change in diets and it was a success. Hostess could have done something similar.

 

Employee unhappiness didn't start with the unions, it started with pay cuts, which resulted in strikes. Not saying the unions did it right, just that the strike didn't take place for no reason. Had the company made the attempt at marketing a healthier product, I believe they would have succeeded in selling it and could have paid their employees the desired wage.

 

I also hate when people have ONE healthy snack and act all righteous because they did it. It's like really shut up, who the hell cares. Good fcking job, you had a low fat cupcake. (Not you, death. :lol:)

No, I know exactly what you mean, I know people that eat a bunch of fudge brownies and drink soda all day and night and then have a salad once or twice a week and they think they're "making up for it all". :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Capitalism only works when you let it - Unions are outdated.

 

Oh well, I say we buy Hostess and then go up and down the streets of Boulder and Denver selling Twinkies and Ding Dongs to all those starving from the munchies!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's true their reputation as a leader in junk food is out there but that doesn't mean they couldn't change. If they had started producing a healthy product at one of their factories and marketed properly, I think it would have been a success. No, I don't mean make Twinkies healthy, that's really not possible, I mean they could have continued producing Twinkies and Zingers but also could have made a start to producing healthy, fast grab, snacks. Like what? I'm not really sure, dark chocolate covered almond bar, still wouldn't be the healthiest thing in the world but it's a big step up from a Twinkie.

 

Just because General Mills is well known for the Lucky Charms cereal, doesn't mean they couldn't make an attempt at healthier products like the Fiber One cereal. This is a good example of trying to appeal to the change in diets and it was a success. Hostess could have done something similar.

 

Employee unhappiness didn't start with the unions, it started with pay cuts, which resulted in strikes. Not saying the unions did it right, just that the strike didn't take place for no reason. Had the company made the attempt at marketing a healthier product, I believe they would have succeeded in selling it and could have paid their employees the desired wage.

And where would the money come from to develop and market that healthier product when they cannot afford their current operations? Also not every company wants to be 'big' like General Mills. They have a niche market and try to stay in it. In this case the niche was somewhat disappearing, still existed, but they were not able to downsize properly in part because of the unions refusing to downsize too. Cuts were necessary for survival but union didn't care.

Actually had something similar to this happen to my aunt only in that case the company gave in to the union and didn't move. Yeah, in that case it wasn't the company's survival at stake, it was if they would move to an entirely new facility, lay off everyone at the old one, and hire new people at a better total cost to the company.

 

Capitalism only works when you let it - Unions are outdated.

They are not outdated but some are definitely over-inflated and overpowered. For example, my dad is not part of a union but the union is able to negotiate his contract and take (I'd rather say steal) dues from his paycheck. Sure, we can request that money back, but only after they have had enough time to accumulate interest on it and whatnot. Can't do anything about the contract though.

 

Basically the reason for unions to exist is still valid: to give the workers some kind of representation to the company for different kinds of grievances. The problem is that now unions are not representing the workers but the union and have successfully gotten themselves to be more powerful than the company, instead of just equal to them. The only check on their power is the company being able to liquidate, like in this case, but that 'nuclear option' is hardly what anyone wants, and the unions can take advantage of that. Especially since the union can then just say, 'well, we represent the workers, people like you, so we must have been in the right and the company only shut down because they're greedy and selfish.' What can the company do? Explain basic economics to the public that keeping the company going produces more money, and thus satisfies greed better than shutting down? Who'd care because of the propaganda-created divide that unions are good and companies are bad?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Capitalism only works when you let it - Unions are outdated.

 

Oh well, I say we buy Hostess and then go up and down the streets of Boulder and Denver selling Twinkies and Ding Dongs to all those starving from the munchies!

 

Like a BOSS........!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a box of twinkies in my bug out bag. They last a very long time.

My apologies for leading the thread astray but... what else is in the bug out bag?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My apologies for leading the thread astray but... what else is in the bug out bag?

 

 

Weed... that's why there is Twinkies in there too... and Potato Chips LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw a comment today that somebody should buy Hostess and move all of the factories to a right-to-work state.

Considering that I live in Texas I highly concur.

The union bosses strike again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×