PDA

View Full Version : Papa John...



Qtec
08-09-2012, 04:18 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> During a shareholders conference call last week, "Papa" John Schnatter, founder and CEO of the pizza chain that bears his name, issued a warning to consumers that, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>unless Obamacare is repealed, the company's pizza prices are likely to increase.

"If Obamacare is in fact not repealed, <u>we will find tactics to shallow out any Obamacare costs and core strategies to pass that cost onto consumers in order to protect our shareholders best interests,</u>" Schnatter said, according to Politico.</span>

A major Mitt Romney backer, Schnatter estimates pizzas under Obamacare will cost 11 to 14 cents extra, "or 15 to 20 cents per order from a corporate basis."</div></div>


What an a$$hole! He is passing the cost on to the customer to preserve his profit, not to pay for HC for his employees.

I don't know about you but I would happily pay an extra 11ct to know the person who is preparing my food is healthy and has access to a Doctor when they need one.


Q...... Papa John (http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/oh-noes-not-12-cent-increase-papa-joh)

LWW
08-09-2012, 05:13 AM
Oh my God ... you really are that clueless.

The customer pays for everything ... salaries ... benefits ... rent ... utilities ... EVERYTHING.

Where do you think the business gets the money to pay these things from?

Beyond that ... let's say PJ does it your way. What happens? Another competitor follows what the article describes and PJ ges under, putting thousands out of work.

Gayle in MD
08-09-2012, 05:32 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> During a shareholders conference call last week, "Papa" John Schnatter, founder and CEO of the pizza chain that bears his name, issued a warning to consumers that, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>unless Obamacare is repealed, the company's pizza prices are likely to increase.

"If Obamacare is in fact not repealed, <u>we will find tactics to shallow out any Obamacare costs and core strategies to pass that cost onto consumers in order to protect our shareholders best interests,</u>" Schnatter said, according to Politico.</span>

A major Mitt Romney backer, Schnatter estimates pizzas under Obamacare will cost 11 to 14 cents extra, "or 15 to 20 cents per order from a corporate basis."</div></div>


What an a$$hole! He is passing the cost on to the customer to preserve his profit, not to pay for HC for his employees.

I don't know about you but I would happily pay an extra 11ct to know the person who is preparing my food is healthy and has access to a Doctor when they need one.


Q...... Papa John (http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/oh-noes-not-12-cent-increase-papa-joh) </div></div>

These kinds of American "businessmen" are exactly what is wrong in our country.

If they don't care about their employees lives, or even if those serving their food are healthy people, then why should we think they care about their customers?

No doubt, the guy is a Republican. Wonder if he's a Mormon, as well, as they are known for directing business and other opportunities to other Mormons. I read somewhere that the Mormons is Utah made out like bandits when Mitt got all of that money from the Federal Government for the Olympics. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Another whacky political statement that he may regret having made, at a later date.

I don't eat fast food, ever! The more I learn about the FF CEO's, the happier I am that I don't!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Grapenut
08-09-2012, 05:44 AM
You're right, Gayle.

We should all be drinking free bubble up and eating free rainbow stew.

Nut

Gayle in MD
08-09-2012, 05:48 AM
We should all be eating our own home grown vegetables, homemade soups, loads of salads, and no meat at all, or as littel as possible, and all of it should be organic, with no insecticides and no hormones or antibiotics.

And absolutely NO FAST FOOD! It's all poison.

G.

LWW
08-09-2012, 05:48 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Grapenut</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You're right, Gayle.

We should all be drinking free bubble up and eating free rainbow stew.

Nut </div></div>

We have a leftist business owner here with non union employees, yet they live a life of luxury tooling around in a motor yacht.

Gayle in MD
08-09-2012, 05:53 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Grapenut</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You're right, Gayle.

We should all be drinking free bubble up and eating free rainbow stew.

Nut </div></div>

We have a leftist business owner here with non union employees, yet they live a life of luxury tooling around in a motor yacht. </div></div>


<span style="color: #990000"> <span style='font-size: 20pt'> Gayle and LWW, we all now completely understand that you two don't like each other. No real need to keep belaboring the point.

My suggestion now is to ignore each other.

Any posts from either of you pointing at the other one will result in an immediate (and very long) ban.

Admin

</span> </span>

Soflasnapper
08-09-2012, 07:48 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Oh my God ... you really are that clueless.

The customer pays for everything ... salaries ... benefits ... rent ... utilities ... EVERYTHING.

Where do you think the business gets the money to pay these things from?

Beyond that ... let's say PJ does it your way. What happens? Another competitor follows what the article describes and PJ ges under, putting thousands out of work. </div></div>

Businesses have other methods beyond your coloring book level of understanding.

Businesses can and sometimes do absorb the increased costs of some things without passing them on to the retail customers. How could they possibly do that?

They accept a smaller profit margin on their sales volume.

Why in the world would they do that?

To maintain market share, if the competition keeps their prices low, and if there is a price sensitivity on the demand side. Sometimes, to increase a retail price will cost more in sales and profit than keeping the retail price the same, but losing some profit margin.

Check it out! Absolutely true.

In my business, our health care insurance payment split with our employees costs us more every contract period with the carrier, if not every year. We have not passed along such increased costs by raising our retail prices.

Gayle in MD
08-09-2012, 08:57 AM
Excellent Post Sofla!

G.

sack316
08-09-2012, 10:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> During a shareholders conference call last week, "Papa" John Schnatter, founder and CEO of the pizza chain that bears his name, issued a warning to consumers that, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>unless Obamacare is repealed, the company's pizza prices are likely to increase.

"If Obamacare is in fact not repealed, <u>we will find tactics to shallow out any Obamacare costs and core strategies to pass that cost onto consumers in order to protect our shareholders best interests,</u>" Schnatter said, according to Politico.</span>

A major Mitt Romney backer, Schnatter estimates pizzas under Obamacare will cost 11 to 14 cents extra, "or 15 to 20 cents per order from a corporate basis."</div></div>


What an a$$hole! He is passing the cost on to the customer to preserve his profit, not to pay for HC for his employees.

I don't know about you but I would happily pay an extra 11ct to know the person who is preparing my food is healthy and has access to a Doctor when they need one.


Q...... Papa John (http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/oh-noes-not-12-cent-increase-papa-joh) </div></div>

Every incurred cost is generally passed on to the consumer. Not saying that it is always right, but unfortunately that's generally the way it is.

Now he was less than forthcoming in making his political statement here, though. Certainly the costs will have to rise for him. And perhaps the AHCA is ONE factor in this, but my opinion it is much more than this. For example: Rising food costs (things such as wheat, cheeze, and oil), less disposable income for consumers decreasing demand, rising energy costs, etc are affecting margins negatively and will have just as much to do with the companies need to raise prices as anything else.

With the factors above, and the very dry summer the country is having, be ready for most food prices to rise. Papa John just tried to insert his political opinions into what is inevitable at this point anyway.

Sack

Soflasnapper
08-09-2012, 10:55 AM
Every incurred cost is generally passed on to the consumer. Not saying that it is always right, but unfortunately that's generally the way it is.

Sometimes they are, and sometimes they are not.

You've hit on a bunch of areas in which prices to the company might increase, and yet not result in an increased retail cost.

As the price of gasoline goes up, does the cost of delivery go up, always and in lock step? I think not. I think the company eats that price increase for a while, at least, until it becomes onerous.

When the seasonality of ingredient prices is in an up phase (after being down), are the retail prices of the pizza micro-nudged hither and yon, in lock step? No, not at all.

If the price increases are large and sustained, then sometimes the company will (reluctantly, usually) raise the retail price in defense. Why reluctantly? Because they've already tried to hit the sweet spot of the price that maximizes profit, relative to demand on a price basis.

Key point. Companies charge what the market will bear, and not more. What is meant by what the market will bear? The price at which profit is maximized, above which, the demand falls enough (from price sensitivity) that the extra profit per sale is lost by the decrease in the number of sales. If you get 10% more money per sale, but lose 10% of unit sales, you lose 1% in profit.

This is true of company pricing behavior even before considering the additional costs of printing new menus with the new prices (in the case of PJ's we're discussing), or of having new price stickers put on all items on a shelf.

In general, a real company would prefer to have longer term price contracts for essential production input factors (to prevent unforeseen price hikes). If that's not fully possible, then to hedge out its costs in the future, possibly put the cost of the HEDGE (partially) into the retail price, and then hold the line on the retail price in the short term.

I like the analysis implicit in this headline concerning PJ's:

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Papa John's Founder Warns That Obamacare Will Lead to Imperceptably Small Increase in Pizza Prices</span>

That's even if he's right, and I argue that he's wrong. It's not a large increase, and it's one and done.

Stretch
08-09-2012, 11:58 AM
With the drought this summer in most of the States they are saying that food prices are going way up. Think I'll double the size of my garden next Spring and shoot a Moose.

With food prices set to go up, and extreme weather conditions now the norm i think it's past time for people to get on to more sustainable living arrangements. That includes growing your own food, saving and storing rain water, compost, recycle, and reuse everything you can. St.

sack316
08-09-2012, 01:08 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Every incurred cost is generally passed on to the consumer. Not saying that it is always right, but unfortunately that's generally the way it is.

Sometimes they are, and sometimes they are not.

You've hit on a bunch of areas in which prices to the company might increase, and yet not result in an increased retail cost.

As the price of gasoline goes up, does the cost of delivery go up, always and in lock step? I think not. I think the company eats that price increase for a while, at least, until it becomes onerous. </div></div>

Key phrase, for a little while. And few, if any, companies I'm aware of provide gas for their drivers. I could be mistaken on this now, but a few friends of mine who delivered in the past had to pay for most or all of their gas and provide their own insurance to deliver. Hence this portion has little or no baring on company costs (yet we still find "deliver fees" have indeed risen over the last few years along with gas prices).

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When the seasonality of ingredient prices is in an up phase (after being down), are the retail prices of the pizza micro-nudged hither and yon, in lock step? No, not at all.

If the price increases are large and sustained, then sometimes the company will (reluctantly, usually) raise the retail price in defense. Why reluctantly? Because they've already tried to hit the sweet spot of the price that maximizes profit, relative to demand on a price basis.

Key point. Companies charge what the market will bear, and not more. What is meant by what the market will bear? The price at which profit is maximized, above which, the demand falls enough (from price sensitivity) that the extra profit per sale is lost by the decrease in the number of sales. If you get 10% more money per sale, but lose 10% of unit sales, you lose 1% in profit.</div></div>

As far as pizza goes, the consumer is fortunate to have a very saturated industry with high competition. This will stave off price increases for "a little while" and as well yield some great promotional deals. But putting our theories aside, the factual evidence over the years tends to support my claim. Food, gas, etc costs have gone up... the end cost to consumers over the last few years has gone up right along with it. Clean out some drawers and compare some old advertisements with some current ones and you'll see /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is true of company pricing behavior even before considering the additional costs of printing new menus with the new prices (in the case of PJ's we're discussing), or of having new price stickers put on all items on a shelf.

In general, a real company would prefer to have longer term price contracts for essential production input factors (to prevent unforeseen price hikes). If that's not fully possible, then to hedge out its costs in the future, possibly put the cost of the HEDGE (partially) into the retail price, and then hold the line on the retail price in the short term.</div></div>

Ideally yes. In actuality, be ready for a lot of price increases (remember I'm privy to the happenings of the largest retailer).

It's not so much that I am disagreeing with your comments on economics here, I'm basing this off of what I see and some of my own forecasting (which was frighteningly accurate the last time I warned of rising food costs on this forum).

Sack

Soflasnapper
08-09-2012, 01:28 PM
I understand, and I agree that companies will not indefinitely eat increased expenses at the expense of profits, or worse, to the point that they lose money on sales.

But is PJ's FORCED to raise a $14 pizza by the 12 cents extra per pie, as the CEO claims? Almost certainly not.

Even if he decided to offset the extra cost somehow, there are a couple of dozen ways to do that without changing the top line figure. The pricing IS set with ample research, which is why when many retailers need to hike a price, they keep the same price and simply down-size the package to a smaller amount. Maybe you've noticed that trick in some of the packaged goods your company retails?

Most likely, and you are right about food prices, PJ's will be jacking prices up far more than 12 cents because of the cost of the ingredients perhaps doubling, or whatever they do.

hondo
08-09-2012, 02:14 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Grapenut</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You're right, Gayle.

We should all be drinking free bubble up and eating free rainbow stew.

Nut </div></div>

Okay, Merle. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

LWW
08-09-2012, 02:42 PM
You are aware tht nothing you said disputes anything I said.

Soflasnapper
08-09-2012, 03:38 PM
The customer pays for everything ... salaries ... benefits ... rent ... utilities ... EVERYTHING.

Where do you think the business gets the money to pay these things from?

I didn't dispute that? I thought I did.

Here's the thing. There's this aspect of business called the investment. Businesses start all the time without any customers or any sales. They put a first and last and security deposit payment down on a leasehold. They secure premise liability insurance as the landlord may require. They buy their inventory, hire workers, and train them. They may place advertising, and may buy a several thousand dollar outdoor sign on their premises. All without any customers, or any income.

They may lose money for several years, requiring further investment, or 'donation' of the principle's time without pay to break even. USA Today was one such business, Fox Business Channel is another, and the Washington Times is a third. (Did you notice that USA Today and the WaTimes raised their daily edition pricing to $8 a copy to recoup their operating losses? No you did not.)

Let's say they have gotten over the hump, and now are in the black, making a profit. They may seek out other investors for location expansion or acquiring another business or inventory expansion, or go to the Small Business Administration for a low cost loan, or get a no-interest loan from another government program, as the 'we damn well did build this business ourselves with no help from anyone' poster family business in Romney's ad was discovered to have done.

Some businesses are lucky enough to be able to wrench concessions on price from all their vendors, ala Sam Walton's outfit.

So actually, as a general matter, what you said isn't entirely true. What you were implying is also not true, unless a company sets a profit margin target and will not go below it.

What happens is that as costs creep up over time, eventually a given financial reporting period shows a reduced profit (or margin of profit) which becomes identified as due to increased costs of one kind or another. Factor input prices, employee wages or benefit costs, rent escalators, etc. Those get examined, and then the balance is struck-- perhaps a higher retail price of goods or services vended, OR some scissoring of expenses lower, OR maybe some of both, or maybe, just an acceptance of a lower profit or profit margin.

It's typical that all businesses have increased rent costs, on the basis of the higher of the CPI or a set number. Do ALL business recoup the higher rents by higher retail prices for their goods or services by annually raising prices?

Of course not. At least not if there are competitors who have other cost curves and possibly a lower profit margin business model.

Qtec
08-10-2012, 12:15 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Businesses have other methods beyond your coloring book level of understanding.</div></div>

LMAO.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Businesses can and sometimes do absorb the increased costs of some things without passing them on to the retail customers. How could they possibly do that?

They accept a smaller profit margin on their sales volume. </div></div>


Exactly. Its their choice.

IMO its just another nail in the coffin of the 'trickle down' crap. Here we have a successful company that maximises its profits by paying its 'family' workers low wages and little benefits.

Q

LWW
08-10-2012, 01:56 AM
The way you improve the lot f low wage workers is a return to full employment.

Qtec
08-10-2012, 02:01 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The way you improve the lot f low wage workers is a return to full employment. </div></div>

At what, $5 an hour?

Q /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

LWW
08-10-2012, 02:07 AM
I wish you would actuallt read and comprehend what you reply to.

If not from the end purchaser, where does the money to pay for everything come from?

Your belief in this "ABSORBING " is incredibly naive.

Let's review that. If the cost doesn't go into the price ... where does it go? Fewer workers, or lower paid workers? Perhaps .. which results in poorer service, which is a cost to the consumer.

Perhaps less stre maintenance and imrovements? Perhaps ... and that again is a cost to the consumer.

Or, as the collectivist's wet dream demands, a reduced profit margin? Nw your problem is that you have inflicted both of the above maladies onto the end consumer ... plus drove own the stock price, which has a multiplication factor on both problems.

But, I can tell we are into economic concepts well beyond the understanding of the typical leftist ... so let's return to the question befuddling you.

From here does a business get the money to pay for everything?

Qtec
08-10-2012, 03:30 AM
ABORBING is not a word.


Never,ever call someone up for their spelling mistakes or typos. You are the worst offender.


Q

Qtec
08-10-2012, 03:49 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Let's review that. If the cost doesn't go into the price ... where does it go?</div></div>

It has already been explained to you a 100 times. You still can't wrap your tiny brain around it.


Wait for it...here it comes....you ready....the investor extracts <span style='font-size: 20pt'>LESS</span> profit from the company!!!!

Here is the biggest shock you will here all year........THEY SHARE THE PROFITS WITH THE WORKFORCE!

Isn't that what 'trickle down' is all about?


Q

LWW
08-10-2012, 03:58 AM
Was the question too difficult for you?

LWW
08-10-2012, 04:00 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Let's review that. If the cost doesn't go into the price ... where does it go?</div></div>

It has already been explained to you a 100 times. You still can't wrap your tiny brain around it.


Wait for it...here it comes....you ready....the investor extracts <span style='font-size: 20pt'>LESS</span> profit from the company!!!!

Here is the biggest shock you will here all year........THEY SHARE THE PROFITS WITH THE WORKFORCE!

Isn't that what 'trickle down' is all about?


Q </div></div>

It's a shame you can neither read nor comprehend what you comment upon.

Soflasnapper
08-10-2012, 08:24 AM
I have been in business making 1% level income since 1977.

I have been in south Florida since I moved here from Manhattan in 1983. We have bad weather here at times, including the 2005 hurricane hit from Wilma that left the area without power for 2 weeks.

We and everybody else doing retail business had no business income in that case for weeks, and periodically have had no business for days at a time for similar weather reasons. That happens every hurricane season to some degree, and off-season these days, with how the weather has turned crazy.

According to you, the lost income and actual losses (as expenses continued but we had no sales or profit) must be made up by raising our prices to compensate. But no one did that. We all ATE THE LOSS, BY HAVING LESS A PROFIT AT THE END.

Where did we get the money to carry us over? From retained earnings, and/or capital reinvestments or temporary loans to the business, if we'd already drained the retained earnings as early profit distributions.

Basically, companies can only raise prices (rationally, meaning they end up better off after doing that) if they have pricing power in the marketplace. Most businesses do not enjoy that position, as it would require a monopoly or a cartel arrangement.

Otherwise, they are out-competed on price by lower cost and/or lower profit margin seeking companies, lose market share, and sales volume and profit levels.

LWW
08-10-2012, 08:45 AM
And, of course, that's not what I said.

Let's try again ... when these events happened, where did you get the money to pay expenses?

Soflasnapper
08-10-2012, 09:12 AM
From PAST positive cash flow that was thought to be already profit, accumulated in our 30% gross margins, which we held as a rainy day fund. That was in our case.

Many companies were not so lucky (as many companies have little profit in absolute terms, or a far lower marginal profit rate) and they may very well have had to reach into their pockets to recapitalize the business by further investment.

Typically, in disaster areas, businesses make do and make repairs sufficient to re-begin operating their businesses by obtaining low or no-interest SBA loans, or other federally guaranteed or granted disaster loans.

Consider the massive interruption of business Toyota experienced in the nuclear meltdown situation in Japan after the tsunami and earthquake damage.

Did you notice how they made up the losses incurred by jacking their car prices by 2x? Actually, they did not do that, did they?

They COULD NOT DO THAT. (And sell the same number of cars, at least.) They took a LOSS in that quarter or two, and ate it.

LWW
08-10-2012, 10:25 AM
Nice dodge ... but from your statement we woUld be led to believe that this past positive cash flow was simply found.

Since you paid it with that money, why are you ducking the question of where it came from?

LWW
08-10-2012, 10:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">ABORBING is not a word ...


Q </div></div>

Very good ... perhaps next you can start learning your gazintas.

Soflasnapper
08-10-2012, 03:32 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nice dodge ... but from your statement we woUld be led to believe that this past positive cash flow was simply found.

Since you paid it with that money, why are you ducking the question of where it came from? </div></div>

In our case, we had been in business for a while, and were profitable, and used that profit to fill in for the negative cash flow from having on-going fixed expenses with no sales or income.

If it had been 2 years earlier, it would have been the balance of the $200k capitalization we put into the operating account, less the start-up expenditures. If cash were running low, we'd have sold off the inventory we'd stocked from the start-up money, likely for what we'd paid or at a loss, just to raise money.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>Not Making a Profit in Your Start-Up? You're Not Alone
</span>
<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Most start-ups don't see revenue in their first year of business and more than half show a loss during their first year, </span>according to new data released (pdf) from the Kauffman Foundation.</div></div> Link to article, which links to the study (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/small-business/2008/03/not_making_a_profit_in_your_st.html)

A company that has no revenue, or is booking a loss, cannot pay for everything with sales proceeds, and must resort to using the equity in the business, or take on debt obligations.

Even profitable businesses as they mature typically show lower profitability (net profit divided by gross revenue), as they generally FAIL to pass along all their increased costs, proportionately.

If only they knew what you allege, evidently no business would fail to make a profit (hey, pass on all your costs!), or to maintain its profitability levels. Why don't they? Because in the real world, there is price sensitivity along the demand curve.

eg8r
08-12-2012, 05:43 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What an a$$hole! He is passing the cost on to the customer to preserve his profit, not to pay for HC for his employees.

</div></div>LOL, so you call him names because he is pleasing his employees and shareholders while doing exactly what every non-Obama butt kisser has said would happen. You are the dillhole that acted like this was all talk and would never happen.

eg8r

eg8r
08-12-2012, 05:47 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As the price of gasoline goes up, does the cost of delivery go up, always and in lock step? I think not. I think the company eats that price increase for a while, at least, until it becomes onerous.</div></div>You absolutely love to do this. I don't know if it is because you just love to hear your "voice" or if you think it makes you look smarter but in the end the more you talk the more you put your foot in your mouth. Didn't take you very long this time, a few sentences. You tell sack he is wrong and move along only to tell him he is correct.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's even if he's right, and I argue that he's wrong.</div></div>LOL, can't wait to hear this argument but then again it is kind of a buzzkill knowing that in the end you will prove he is right.

eg8r

LWW
08-12-2012, 06:13 PM
So where did the money come from?

Soflasnapper
08-13-2012, 01:24 PM
In our case, from what would otherwise have been the profits on prior business.

That is, not from future business, by passing on the costs to the retail level customer.

Which was my point all along. We ABSORBED those costs from prior PROFITS, which you said was impossible or a fantasy, whatever.

We did not pass along what were gigantic expenses from weather catastrophes, we ate them, from money on our side of the table already.

sack316
08-17-2012, 03:26 PM
Interesting back and forth between you and LWW.

Just on for a few minutes today before heading back to Birmingham, but figured I'd toss another log on the fire here /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

It has been established that companies, such as yours, can and do choose to absorb increased costs (and/or losses) and at the expense of profit. Not only is this an admirable thing to do, but also quite wise in terms of helping customers as well as maintaining pricing with fellow competition.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The pricing IS set with ample research </div></div>

And here we have the thing: planning! I certainly cannot speak for you personally, but other businesses in similar locations where disaster occurring is more of a question of "when" rather than "if".

They plan. Forgive the oversimplification here, but part of the long term plan will include such variables as a hurricane. It will factor into the selection of what types and how much insurance to purchase to cover such unfortunate incidents (another part of the investment you spoke of). It may occur as how much to set aside from profits into a "rainy day fund" much as you did.

Indeed, planning such as this will allow a business to "absorb" many things without passing along a price hike to the consumer. And kudos for that forethought!

But in that planning, when determining the pricing for goods and services, these factors would already be included and hence already being paid for by the customer.

And again, forgive the oversimplification... I definitely know it is MUCH more than that and there was much more you mentioned yourself in terms of dealing with those situations. But I did want to throw that one point out there with the little time I have for now /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Sack

sack316
08-17-2012, 03:58 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The pricing IS set with ample research, which is why when many retailers need to hike a price, they keep the same price and simply down-size the package to a smaller amount. Maybe you've noticed that trick in some of the packaged goods your company retails?
</div></div>

Another good point, which still bolsters my point as well. If a ten ounce bottle of brand X shampoo retails at $1.00, and they reduce the packaging to an 8 ounce bottle (keeping the retail price the same... or as often is done lowering it a hair) the cost to consumers of 10 ounces of brand X shampoo has still risen.

Sack

eg8r
08-17-2012, 04:42 PM
sofla does this all the time. He will disagree with you only until he has spoken enough and actually shows he agreed with you all along.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
08-17-2012, 04:51 PM
But in that planning, when determining the pricing for goods and services, these factors would already be included and hence already being paid for by the customer.

An excellent true point, in theory.

Not what we do, however, either here in South Florida, or on the west coast, at the outdoor entertainment complex in Tampa.

We've been rained out of a lot of business days recently in Tampa, which we do know will happen, but which we do not put into our pricing.

It's like a farmer. Not all farmers hedge out their pricing and then profit margin in the futures market. Some, like we do, simply take their chances, and have better or worse profit years depending upon weather luck. That's the basis upon which my grandfather ran his fruit tree orchards, pears and cherries.

Why? Well because MOST people do not factor in the every couple of year hit for weather into their pricing, and thus would be considerably undercutting a price that did include them. Nobody buying things now is that concerned that maybe a low price now will make for a closed business in a couple of years. They want the low price now.

sack316
08-17-2012, 05:16 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But in that planning, when determining the pricing for goods and services, these factors would already be included and hence already being paid for by the customer.

An excellent true point, in theory.

Not what we do, however, either here in South Florida, or on the west coast, at the outdoor entertainment complex in Tampa.

We've been rained out of a lot of business days recently in Tampa, which we do know will happen, but which we do not put into our pricing.

It's like a farmer. Not all farmers hedge out their pricing and then profit margin in the futures market. Some, like we do, simply take their chances, and have better or worse profit years depending upon weather luck. That's the basis upon which my grandfather ran his fruit tree orchards, pears and cherries.

Why? Well because MOST people do not factor in the every couple of year hit for weather into their pricing, and thus would be considerably undercutting a price that did include them. Nobody buying things now is that concerned that maybe a low price now will make for a closed business in a couple of years. They want the low price now. </div></div>

From what I know of you, I'm certain you run an excellent business and do so quite honorably.

My curiosity has peaked, though and hope you won't mind me asking how you maintain a rainy day fund without pricing in a way that provides for this fund? Granted this is just my assumption, but I would assume you have a set percentage or goal dollar amount from profits that would go into such a fund. And obviously one cannot plan precisely for an exact amount of rain outs per any given time period (may have more or less any given year) but I'd figure some rough average would be taken into consideration for how much this fund should cover. This set aside cash comes from where?


Sack

sack316
08-17-2012, 05:19 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">sofla does this all the time. He will disagree with you only until he has spoken enough and actually shows he agreed with you all along.

eg8r </div></div>

I'm not around all that much any more, but I've always found Sofla to be one of the better and more reasoned posters on here. I don't necessarily always agree with his thoughts, but he always provides some sound reasoning in my discussions with him that at least allow me to see where he is coming from.

Sack

sack316
08-17-2012, 05:38 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Some businesses are lucky enough to be able to wrench concessions on price from all their vendors, ala Sam Walton's outfit.
</div></div>

And pass it on to customers. Just read my store's July P+L... a whopping 3% margin. Good prices for the masses. Vendors are strong armed into selling to us at a lower cost, sure... but to gain how much volume? We're not exactly killing our vendors overall profitability /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

On a side note as well from years of posts about this... I had no idea how many small businesses/mom and pops we support! All that's ever talked about is how we run the little hardware shop out of town, etc. But there are SO many local companies we buy from that we prop up as well. Pretty interesting, and quite honestly surprising to me!

Sack

Soflasnapper
08-17-2012, 05:48 PM
We enjoy a healthy normal net profit margin, and a large gross business sales volume. The combination makes for a six-figure weekly net profit. We also have internet sales, de minimus relatively speaking, but we hold ALL those net proceeds to start off our rainy day reserves.

We're not so sophisticated, so over time we hold back profit distributions amounting to about a month in operating costs, just in case. That more than accounts for the occasional bad rain-out day(s) in any given week, keeps us from sweating the payroll if it comes on a week rents are due on a down week, and also enough to pay the bills if a week or two is down.

It ends up getting distributed at the end of the year (mainly, with a little cushion), and we are lucky the bad weather really kicks in during summer (hurricane season), giving a couple of months to build back the reserve fund to full strength.

I have no idea how the outdoor entertainment complex does it, as I'm a recent investor and haven't scoped the balance sheets thoroughly yet. As long as they send me my 8-1/2% interest...

eg8r
08-17-2012, 07:28 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm not around all that much any more, but I've always found Sofla to be one of the better and more reasoned posters on here.</div></div>At first he was but he has changed drastically, or maybe we just did not give him enough time for the true colors. I still prefer dialogue with him over the others because he is educated and the other lefties think they are. As far as agreeing with him, there is no need, the more he talks the more he will agree with you. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

eg8r

hondo
08-17-2012, 09:54 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">sofla does this all the time. He will disagree with you only until he has spoken enough and actually shows he agreed with you all along.

eg8r </div></div>

You think so? I haven't noticed that at all. To me it appears that he answers most comments rather competently and usually applies the beatdown to those disagreeing with him.
Funny how you and I can see his responses so differently.

hondo
08-17-2012, 09:59 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm not around all that much any more, but I've always found Sofla to be one of the better and more reasoned posters on here.</div></div>At first he was but he has changed drastically, or maybe we just did not give him enough time for the true colors. I still prefer dialogue with him over the others because he is educated and the other lefties think they are. As far as agreeing with him, there is no need, the more he talks the more he will agree with you. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

eg8r </div></div>

Nice post. You managed to agree with Sack, disagree with Sack, and still get in your little jab that you think you are intellectually superior to the rest of us and equal to Sofla.
I don't see any of that as being even close to accurate but you are certainly entitled to your opinion.

Gayle in MD
08-17-2012, 10:25 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">On a side note as well from years of posts about this... I had no idea how many small businesses/mom and pops we support! All that's ever talked about is how we run the little hardware shop out of town, etc. But there are SO many local companies we buy from that we prop up as well. Pretty interesting, and quite honestly surprising to me!

Sack </div></div>

I'm interested in that take on Walmart, Sack, since it doesn't at all match what I have read from quite a number of sources.

What percentage of your sales would you estimate actually is Mom and Pop, Local, VS. goods from China?

Surely, you're not suggesting that more locally produced goods are supported by Walmart, than those which fail trying to compete with cheaply priced inventory from China, are you?


G.

eg8r
08-18-2012, 08:53 AM
LOL, and in your famously hypocritical way you respond.

eg8r

LWW
08-18-2012, 09:56 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm not around all that much any more, but I've always found Sofla to be one of the better and more reasoned posters on here.</div></div>At first he was but he has changed drastically, or maybe we just did not give him enough time for the true colors. I still prefer dialogue with him over the others because he is educated and the other lefties think they are. As far as agreeing with him, there is no need, the more he talks the more he will agree with you. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

eg8r </div></div>

Nice post. You managed to agree with Sack, disagree with Sack, and still get in your little jab that you think you are intellectually superior to the rest of us and equal to Sofla.
I don't see any of that as being even close to accurate but you are certainly entitled to your opinion. </div></div>

Something that is amazing is the number of pro union bumper stickers you see in WALMART parking lots.

MEIJER, a similar chain, had strike picketers for years before the unin collapsed. One MEIJER store was very close to a GM plant ... and GM employees routiely crossed the picket line to save a few cents by buying from non union scabs.

What has destroyed the union movement in America the idea that voluntary universal soldarity was possible.

Forty years ago unions supported each other and crossing a picket line was asking for a trip to the hospital.

Gayle in MD
08-18-2012, 11:50 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Some businesses are lucky enough to be able to wrench concessions on price from all their vendors, ala Sam Walton's outfit.
</div></div>

And pass it on to customers. Just read my store's July P+L... a whopping 3% margin. Good prices for the masses. Vendors are strong armed into selling to us at a lower cost, sure... but to gain how much volume? We're not exactly killing our vendors overall profitability /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

On a side note as well from years of posts about this... I had no idea how many small businesses/mom and pops we support! All that's ever talked about is how we run the little hardware shop out of town, etc. But there are SO many local companies we buy from that we prop up as well. Pretty interesting, and quite honestly surprising to me!

Sack </div></div>


Excerpt from a Post I made recently: Don't know if you missed it.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">On a side note as well from years of posts about this... I had no idea how many small businesses/mom and pops we support! All that's ever talked about is how we run the little hardware shop out of town, etc. But there are SO many local companies we buy from that we prop up as well. Pretty interesting, and quite honestly surprising to me!

Sack </div></div>

Doesn't square with my studies at all????


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How 'Everyday Low Prices' Are Costing Americans Their Jobs
By Adam J. Wiederman, The Motley Fool
Posted 7:00AM 08/10/12 Posted under: Economy, Wal-Mart Stores, Jobs

As consumers, we welcome Walmart's (WMT) low prices.

But here's the thing about these low prices -- they're doing the U.S. more harm than good.

A new research report has found that low prices have actually caused unemployment to rise, and dealt a massive blow to the manufacturing sector.

Look no further than the 7 million manufacturing jobs the U.S. lost from 1980 to 2011, according to a recent research report from Demos. The report acknowledges this happened because of "a variety of complex factors." But Walmart had a bigger hand in this than most of us realize.Cutting Prices Does Have Its CostThe problem starts with Walmart's selling point: low prices.

These low prices are possible both because Walmart pays its employees low wages and because the bulk of Walmart's products are sourced from foreign factories, where raw materials and labor are cheaper.

What's more, Walmart can -- and does -- use its massive size to bully American companies whose products it sells to do the same. In fact, Levi's jeans and Master Lock "were pressured to shut their U.S. factories and moved manufacturing abroad to meet Walmart's demand for low prices," Demos said.What's more, many well-known companies rely on Walmart for more than 20% of their revenue, according to Business Insider's calculations, including:
</div></div>

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/08/10/how-everyday-low-prices-are-costing-americans-their-jobs/




From another article posted by Q,:






<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Last week, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. announced that they have agreed to pay between $352 million and $640 million to settle 63 wage and hour lawsuits filed against the retailer in 42 different states. The lawsuits accused the company of cheating hourly workers by forcing them to work through breaks and not paying them for overtime.


</div></div>

As you know, I do not and will not ever shop at Walmart.

IMO, as the nationa's largest retailer, they have hurt our country far more than any other retailer, annd that FACT is confirmed by many studies.

Respectfully, to say they are friends of the Mom and Pop folks, is a huge misstatement, according to what I have read.

G.

hondo
08-18-2012, 05:18 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL, and in your famously hypocritical way you respond.

eg8r </div></div>

So, I'm Honduh, the hypocrite, the intellectual inferior to you, the lousy teacher?
I guess we don't need johnny d. on here after all.
You're doing just fine. You must be very proud of yourself.
Question- Does your wife read your comments?
My wife reads mine and doesn't like it when I get personal.
She says it's beneath me and diminishes me. She's right.
One reason I'm trying to tone it down. I wish you would just try to defend your beliefs without the personal jibes.

My nature has always been to defend myself and all we have are words on here.

hondo
08-18-2012, 05:27 PM
Some truth in that. When the teachers in West Virginia went on strike I had a long-time friend in the mines who volunteered the services of UMW workers to assist us and picket with us.
We were afraid to accept for fear of being expected to reciprocate if asked.
I, for one, would have been in deep financial doodoo if we had held out another couple of weeks.
My wife and I were both on strike and had no eggnest to fall back on.

LWW
08-18-2012, 07:10 PM
So where did you get the money to run your business?

You can beat around the bush as long as you want ... we both know the answer.

hondo
08-18-2012, 09:08 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So where did you get the money to run your business?

You can beat around the bush as long as you want ... we both know the answer. </div></div>

"Tush, tush, you'll lose your push, when you beat around the bush"- Captain Beefheart

" Fast goes fast, slow goes slow; you mean to tell me it's that low yo yo yo?"- Also Captain Beefheart, same song.

Soflasnapper
08-18-2012, 09:19 PM
Captain Beefheart? Takes me back...

LWW
08-18-2012, 09:28 PM
Was the question too hard?

Soflasnapper
08-19-2012, 10:55 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So where did you get the money to run your business?

You can beat around the bush as long as you want ... we both know the answer. </div></div>

We capitalized the business with several tranches of investment amounting to a sum of $200k in investment money from the principles, earned and saved apart from this business. It took several years before we were able to rely on the business cash flow and have that investment repaid to where we were actually in the black and no longer out of pocket. In the meantime, I subsidized the business cash flow by taking no salary or income for those years, with another principle grossly underpaid during that time.

We've put in two retail price increases over an 11 year period. When we had shortfalls in cash flow prior to overall profitability, we put more out of pocket into the company, and did not increase our pricing to make up that difference.

That's the same way large companies like the USA Today publisher, the WaTimes publisher, Fox News and Fox Business channel handled their own years of operating losses.

They did not push the street price of the papers up, nor did they try to get higher prices from cable providers. They ate the losses, and financed them from other revenue sources than the business cash flow.

Qtec
08-19-2012, 11:36 AM
You have already given us more info about your business interests than Mitt has given about his!

Q

Soflasnapper
08-19-2012, 12:58 PM
He's running on his record in business, which is none of our damn business! My friends-- they are people too!

hondo
08-19-2012, 03:24 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">He's running on his record in business, which is none of our damn business! My friends-- they are people too! </div></div>


/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

LWW
08-19-2012, 04:43 PM
Why are you dodging so?

You got that money back ... we know that.

Where did you get it back from?

This isn't complicated.

hondo
08-19-2012, 05:29 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why are you dodging so?

You got that money back ... we know that.

Where did you get it back from?

This isn't complicated. </div></div>

It appears to me that you are wanting him to simplify the answer in order to make you appear right, yet he was trying to dispute the claim that the only way of recovery was by raising the price to consumers.
He explained how a company can SURVIVE without making the consumer pay more. Of course true recovery comes with greater consumerism , but it seems that you are splitting hairs with semantics To me, he answered your question.
Am I wrong?

LWW
08-19-2012, 07:35 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why are you dodging so?

You got that money back ... we know that.

Where did you get it back from?

This isn't complicated. </div></div>

It appears to me that you are wanting him to simplify the answer in order to make you appear right, yet he was trying to dispute the claim that the only way of recovery was by raising the price to consumers.
He explained how a company can SURVIVE without making the consumer pay more. Of course true recovery comes with greater consumerism , but it seems that you are splitting hairs with semantics To me, he answered your question.
Am I wrong? </div></div>

Actually ... he is doing exactly what you accuse me of.

Here is my claim, which he disputed:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The customer pays for everything ... salaries ... benefits ... rent ... utilities ... EVERYTHING.

Where do you think the business gets the money to pay these things from?
</div></div>

If he didn't get his operating funds from the customer ... where did he get it from?

Soflasnapper
08-19-2012, 08:15 PM
Assuming no capital investment or reinvestment, no borrowing, no revolving lines of credit at the newspaper or other media or from vendors supplying inventory, no free subsidization of labor cost by the owners doing the work for free or at heavy discounting to fair market value, SBA loans or regional development funding, you'd be closer to correct.

However, as all those things happen as a routine matter in business, which is my point, you are not correct.

Business carry capitalization on the books, debt on the books, and etc., and all serve the purpose of keeping the business afloat even when the customers do not entirely pay the bills.

Entire industries like the airlines and formerly at least, the auto companies, ran with billion dollar plus losses annually. How is that possible? They took on more debt, or liquidated capital assets, or blew out inventories, closed locations, sold off subsidiaries, or didn't replace capital stock on schedule. They didn't hike their prices, because they lacked pricing power in the market AND WOULD HAVE NETTED STILL LESS had they done so.

Put away the classics comic books' storyline on business, and look this up, if you are interested.

Failed companies typically leave creditors holding the bag, which creditors were keeping the business afloat in the absence of adequate gross business to turn a profit or break-even point.

LWW
08-20-2012, 05:07 AM
I am 100% correct ... business gets its funding from the customer. Any business that fails to do so fails.

Yes you can borrow money ... But how is it repaid?

Soflasnapper
08-20-2012, 01:52 PM
You may need sufficient business to pay the carrying cost of the debt, while never actually paying off the debt, ever.

You may roll over the debt into more debt, and keep doing that semi-indefinitely. (Lehman Brothers had about 75% of their balance sheet paid for by overnight repurchase loans.)

You may go to the market to issue additional stock and gain the extra investments from the market or privately placed investment money from venture capitalists.

You may go to the bankruptcy courts to make your way to continuing in business by forcing your many creditors to not receive their monies back by legal force for an indefinite time. (A great business model, if you can be in business and not have to pay your vendors what you owe them for a while!)

You may have in essence a consignment business model, never paying a thing for your stock in trade until and unless it is sold.

Some time back it sounded like you had experience in the car retailing business. Such a car dealer may move volume at discounts (specifically taking LESS from the retail buyers) so as to reach a manufacturer's quota and large money rebate from the manufacturer.

A large enough company may underfund its pension obligations, or take from its reserves accumulated for future payments.

The point is that there are in essence many moving parts to a company's operation, and balloon-like, if cash flow from retail sales isn't covering things, there are ways to press other moving part areas to fill in the void.

One obvious example is when business is flagging badly enough, a sole proprietor may move his business to his house instead of having a separate retail location. In that case, did the business owner put the cost of the retail location onto his customers? No, he stripped that cost.

sack316
08-20-2012, 07:49 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I'm interested in that take on Walmart, Sack, since it doesn't at all match what I have read from quite a number of sources.

What percentage of your sales would you estimate actually is Mom and Pop, Local, VS. goods from China?

Surely, you're not suggesting that more locally produced goods are supported by Walmart, than those which fail trying to compete with cheaply priced inventory from China, are you?


G. </div></div>

I'll have to see if I get a chance to really dig in to try to get you some good solid figures... I deal with many of the vendors and service reps but don't personally deal with much of the invoicing on their goods and services, so I'd rather get some solid numbers for you so I don't mistakenly over or under estimate what we do.

Just off the top of my head, though, I count at least 15 local business we deal with (either through merchandise, merchandising, or services). The actual number will be more, that's just what I counted after a long shift today off the top of my head /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif (ie I started running out of fingers and toes quickly lol).

As far as the settlement suits you mentioned, I can't speak for everyone else, but I do know my store bends over backwards and actually gets abused on breaks (ie the two paid 15 minute breaks generally turn into two paid 25-30 minute breaks). My employees catch more flack from me for NOT taking breaks than they do for taking long breaks.

Again, I can't speak for all stores, but I'd venture any misdeeds as far as breaks/lunches go is poor management at individual stores in various areas. The corporate policy for paid and unpaid breaks exceeds what is required by law in every state. I know if I caught anyone working off the clock or asking someone to work off the clock or anything such as that I'd have a long talk with them and likely terminate them (specifically any management involved).

JM2C

Sack

sack316
08-20-2012, 07:50 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We enjoy a healthy normal net profit margin, and a large gross business sales volume. The combination makes for a six-figure weekly net profit. We also have internet sales, de minimus relatively speaking, but we hold ALL those net proceeds to start off our rainy day reserves.

We're not so sophisticated, so over time we hold back profit distributions amounting to about a month in operating costs, just in case. That more than accounts for the occasional bad rain-out day(s) in any given week, keeps us from sweating the payroll if it comes on a week rents are due on a down week, and also enough to pay the bills if a week or two is down.

It ends up getting distributed at the end of the year (mainly, with a little cushion), and we are lucky the bad weather really kicks in during summer (hurricane season), giving a couple of months to build back the reserve fund to full strength.

I have no idea how the outdoor entertainment complex does it, as I'm a recent investor and haven't scoped the balance sheets thoroughly yet. As long as they send me my 8-1/2% interest... </div></div>

Thanks for answering my questions!

Sack