PDA

View Full Version : New Romney/Bain Video:"We Harvest Co.'s 4 Profit!"



Gayle in MD
09-27-2012, 07:48 AM
NEW ROMNEY VIDEO: In 1985, He Said Bain Would "Harvest" Companies for Profits

Today's Top Stories

Campaigning for the presidency, Mitt Romney has pointed to his stint as the founder and manager of Bain Capital, a private equity firm, as proof he can rev up the US economy and create jobs at a faster clip than President Barack Obama. Last year, while stumping in Florida, Romney declared, "You'd have a president who has spent his life in business—small business, big business—and who knows something about how jobs are created and how we compete around the world." His campaign spokeswoman, Andrea Saul, has said that Romney's Bain days afford him more expertise than Obama to "focus on job creation and turn around our nation's faltering economy." Romney has even claimed that during his tenure at Bain, "we were able to help create over 100,000 jobs." In his acceptance speech at the Republican convention, Romney smacked Obama for having "almost no experience working in a business" and tied that to the sluggish recovery.

But at Bain, Romney's top priority wasn't to boost employment. As the Wall Street Journal recently noted, creating jobs "wasn't the aim of Bain or other private-equity firms, which measure success by returns produced for investors." And, the newspaper reported, Romney's 100,000-jobs claim is tough to evaluate.

Mother Jones has obtained a video from 1985 in which Romney, describing Bain's formation, showed how he viewed the firm's mission. He explained that its goal was to identify potential and hidden value in companies, buy significant stakes in these businesses, and then "harvest them at a significant profit" within five to eight years.

The video was included in a CD-ROM created in 1998 to mark the 25th anniversary of Bain & Company, the consulting firm that gave birth to Bain Capital. Here is the full clip, as it appeared on that CD-ROM (the editing occurred within the original):*


NEW ROMNEY VIDEO: In 1985, He Said Bain Would "Harvest" Companies for Profits

TRANSCRIPT: Bain Capital is an investment partnership which was formed to invest in startup companies and ongoing companies, then to take an active hand in managing them and hopefully, five to eight years later, to harvest them at a significant profit…The fund was formed on September 30th of last year. It's been about 10 months then. It was formed with $37 million in invested cash. An additional $50 million or so of what I'll call a call pool, which is money that we can call upon if the deals are large enough that they require more than a $2 or $3 million dollar initial investment. Why in the world did Bain and Company get involved in this kind of a business? We're not particularly noted for having years and years of experience in financing. Three reasons. We recognized that we had the potential to develop a significant and proprietary flow of business opportunities. Secondly, we had concepts and experience which would allow us to identify potential value and hidden value in a particular investment candidate. And third, we had the consulting resources and management skills and management resources to become actively involved in the companies we invested in to help them realize their potential value.


The CD-ROM was a hip-hip-hooray for Bain & Company—in one video, an employee noted that the operating principle of the firm is "never lose sight of the fact that there is at least a 1 percent chance that you may not know the answer or the answer you have may be wrong"—and it was produced for distribution to the firm's employees and clients. The video did not note where Romney made these remarks about the origins of Bain Capital. But this short clip offers a glimpse of Romney when he was at the start of his private equity career and saw businesses as targets of opportunity that could be harvested for the benefit of his investors, not as long-term job creators or participants in a larger community. His remarks were hardly surprising, but they did encapsulate the mindset of get-in/get-out private equity deal makers.The CD-ROM, which was given to Mother Jones by a former Bain & Company employee, also provides a look at the corporate culture of the consulting firm. Here's how Bainiacs poked fun at themselves, sketch-comedy-style:

This clip shows the young CEO focusing on businesses as targets for his investors, not as job creators or community stakeholders. —David Corn


And here's how the Bain &*Company gang partied at annual meetings, where employees came together to form what was known as the "Bain Band" (note the easy transformation from "Jesus Is Just Alright" to "Working at Bain's Alright"):

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/1985-romney-bain-harvest-firms-profits-video

The CD-ROM contained no footage of Romney singing or cutting up when he was a prominent player at the consulting shop, which was before Bill Bain, its founder, pushed Romney to leave Bain & Company to create and lead Bain Capital. There is only that one video of Romney discussing his private equity firm in its first months. In this clip, Romney mentioned that it would routinely take up to eight years to turn around a firm—though he now slams the president for failing to revive the entire US economy in half that time.

eg8r
09-27-2012, 08:47 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">NEW ROMNEY VIDEO: In 1985, He Said Bain Would "Harvest" Companies for Profits</div></div>That man was incredible at generating profit. Here is tells you what he will do and he did it. Sounds like he is more a man of his word than Obama ever was.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
09-27-2012, 08:56 AM
A man of his word in business, where he has total control, perhaps.

You've complained about Obama's performance with a Congress he had to cajole, where no man has the whip hand.

The proper comparison would be to how Ritt Momney did with his word, in the context of a representative bicameral legislature, meaning his time as governor.

It's hard to tell, since Ritt will simply not discuss his time as governor, to either tout himself or admit partial failures. About all we know is he claims to have not raised taxes, but raised $500 to $750 millions in fees and other charges. And that he did not run for re-election, perhaps because the people of Massachusetts were then giving him a job approval rating in the mid-30%s.

That is a very low job approval rating, and hardly strong evidence that he did everything he said he would to get elected. If he had done everything, or nearly everything, he promised, he's probably have a far stronger job approval rating, and been able to run for re-election, as he was not able, historically.

eg8r
09-27-2012, 09:03 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You've complained about Obama's performance with a Congress he had to cajole, where no man has the whip hand.</div></div>He did in the beginning and blew that opportunity.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The proper comparison would be to how Ritt Momney did with his word, in the context of a representative bicameral legislature, meaning his time as governor.

It's hard to tell, since Ritt will simply not discuss his time as governor</div></div>He doesn't need to discuss it for you to be able to decide if he was able to work across the aisle.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">About all we know is he claims to have not raised taxes, but raised $500 to $750 millions in fees and other charges.</div></div>LOL, yet another example that he is a man of his word, at least by your definition. I would call the increase in fees new taxes but then again Obamacare is the same thing, a new tax.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
09-27-2012, 09:46 AM
Then Romneycare's individual mandate is also a tax.

You see where this leads?

eg8r
09-27-2012, 11:30 AM
I do and it is about freaking time you admit that forcing this type of healthcare on the citizens is a tax. Jeesh that took you forever, but as I have told you before, the longer you keep speaking the closer you come to agreeing with what we have said all along.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
09-27-2012, 03:31 PM
There are plenty of taxes, called taxes, in the ACA. The individual mandate is not one, in my opinion, or in Romney's opinion, nor by the majority of the Supreme Court. (The four dissenters from the majority opinion said it most certainly was not a tax, and if it had been, of course, the Anti-Injunction Act would have made considering a legal challenge to it moot for 2 more years.) I was not admitting that, but showing you the implication of your claim (with which I disagree).

If it is a tax, then Romney's been lying to the GOP voters in the primaries, and now to the electorate as a whole. (You know, kind of the opposite of your claim that he's a stand up guy who says what he does and does what he says?)

In fact, he admitted just a day or so ago that Obama had NOT raised taxes in his first term.

eg8r
09-27-2012, 09:00 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If it is a tax, then Romney's been lying to the GOP voters in the primaries, and now to the electorate as a whole.</div></div>I have never said he was a stand up guy. What I did say was that he had a job to create profit and he was stellar at the job. If he is saying Obamacare is not a tax and Romneycare is not a tax then he is lying.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In fact, he admitted just a day or so ago that Obama had NOT raised taxes in his first term. </div></div>LOL, I totally expected more from you but your intellectual dishonesty at this point is just running rampant. You are well aware that the requirement to purchase healthcare is not a mandate at this moment. That does not go into effect till 2014 (which even you should be able to figure out will not happen during Obama's first term). There are some new taxes to go into effect in January though so that is close enough. I have said all along that Obama lied about hope and change and meant he was going to just be best Bush impersonator he could be.

eg8r

Qtec
09-28-2012, 02:30 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> What I did say was that he had a job to create profit and he was stellar at the job. </div></div>

So was Al Capone! Would you vote for him? LMAO

Q

Qtec
09-28-2012, 03:52 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In fact, he admitted just a day or so ago that <u>Obama had NOT raised taxes in his first term. </u> </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL, I totally expected more from you but your intellectual dishonesty at this point is just running rampant. </div></div>

That is EXACTLY what Mittens said!

40 M are uninsured.
A small percentage of that group are people who CAN afford HC Ins but choose not have it. These are the people who will have to pay a penalty. A HC cover charge so to speak.
The majority of the uninsured are people who can't afford it, or have pre-existing conditions etc etc. They WANT the ability to see a Doctor and all Obama is saying 'I will help you with that'.

Is that so bad? Helping people to better health?

Its seems pretty simple to me,...and everyone who doesn't kiss the feet of Willard...whatever his name is!

Q

Qtec
09-28-2012, 03:57 AM
ultimate Conservatism (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIPynMZuQtI&feature=player_embedded)

Q

Gayle in MD
09-28-2012, 07:47 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A man of his word in business, where he has total control, perhaps.

You've complained about Obama's performance with a Congress he had to cajole, where no man has the whip hand.

The proper comparison would be to how Ritt Momney did with his word, in the context of a representative bicameral legislature, meaning his time as governor.

It's hard to tell, since Ritt will simply not discuss his time as governor, to either tout himself or admit partial failures. About all we know is he claims to have not raised taxes, but raised $500 to $750 millions in fees and other charges. And that he did not run for re-election, perhaps because the people of Massachusetts were then giving him a job approval rating in the mid-30%s.

That is a very low job approval rating, and hardly strong evidence that he did everything he said he would to get elected. If he had done everything, or nearly everything, he promised, he's probably have a far stronger job approval rating, and been able to run for re-election, as he was not able, historically. </div></div>

If I may try overcome the usual RW practice of skewing the main thrust of my post, I wondered what you and Q. think Romney meant when he used the word, "Harvest" in is statements.

What does it mean to "Harvest" companies?

I have my opinion, and am interested to hear the opinion of both you and Q, Diablow and Hondo, and the rest of my Liberal friends here to provide me with your own opinions on the subject, if you will.


G.

Soflasnapper
09-28-2012, 09:36 AM
Agricultural metaphor, certainly.

Typically, you 'grow' them first. Do some value added management, streamline processes, concentrate on core activities or holdings, and make the company more valuable or more attractive to a subsequent holder.

Then, with the improvements in place to make it a sweeter deal for a subsequent buyer, you go to the marketplace, and collect the difference of what you invested vs. what the company now can be sold for.

Or, you can just buy very cheaply, under market, and then reap the benefit of the upside without making it more valuable at all.

Bain Capital did other things as well, as in the pioneering use of just paying themselves management fees in the meantime, and in the pioneering use of going to the equities markets or fixed income markets to load up the company with debt to then pay themselves a lot of money, even without selling the company.

The grow the company and then sell it model is a one-time harvest. The pay yourself big management fees and windfalls from taking on a lot of debt can be perennials with the same company, without a sale.

Soflasnapper
09-28-2012, 09:46 AM
ME: In fact, he admitted just a day or so ago that Obama had NOT raised taxes in his first term.

LOL, I totally expected more from you but your intellectual dishonesty at this point is just running rampant. You are well aware that the requirement to purchase healthcare is not a mandate at this moment.

I'm sorry that my merely quoting Ritt Momney makes you think I'm dishonest. I'm accurately quoting what he said. Before his campaign corrected him to say that Obama has already raised taxes 19 times.

I've never seen a guy have his campaign 'correct' (i.e., totally contradict) him so often as occurs with Ritt. (Reagan's people did a lot of that, but not so much in the campaign, more in his governance in between campaigns.)

You know, maybe he USED to be good at some things, but that's long ago now, and apparently he's quite over the hill. There's no way that this stumble bum performance he's putting on during his campaign could lead to making a lot of money leading an organization.

eg8r
09-28-2012, 11:01 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They WANT the ability to see a Doctor and all Obama is saying 'I will help you with that'.

Is that so bad? Helping people to better health?quote]LOL, if that is what was happening but it isn't. If a person cannot afford "affordable" healthcare today because they don't have the money how will they afford it tomorrow when it is mandated? Now to your question about is helping people so bad, no not at all until it comes at the expense of others who are unwilling.

[quote]Its seems pretty simple to me,...and everyone who doesn't kiss the feet of Willard...whatever his name is!</div></div>So basically everyone who kisses the rearend of Obama.

eg8r

eg8r
09-28-2012, 11:02 AM
What are your thoughts on the video?

eg8r

eg8r
09-28-2012, 11:03 AM
Nope and that is a stupid question considering I have said over and over I will not vote for Romney? Hello McFly, how many more times do I need to say it before it sinks into the cement between your ears?

Nice of you to mention Al Capone, another great reason why we should get rid of unions in this country.

eg8r

Qtec
09-29-2012, 01:07 AM
Its simple. If Mitt can make maximum profit by growing the company and selling it on for a profit, he will do that. If he can make maximum profit by closing it down, he will do that. The people who's lives are affected by his decisions do not enter into his plans. They are expendable.

Q

Qtec
09-29-2012, 01:10 AM
You will not vote for Mitt? Why then do you defend him in every post?

The only reason you have said that Mitt is qualified to be POTUS is that he made a lot of money. So did Al Capone. You should be wanting Warren M or G Soros for Pres, they made a lot more money than Mittens.

Q

Qtec
09-29-2012, 01:14 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What are your thoughts on the video?

eg8r </div></div>

I have told you all this many times before on another thread. Let me dumb it down for you. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

In the video, Mittens actually tells the truth. He says what he believes.

FFW to now. Now he says exactly the opposite.

Q

Gayle in MD
09-29-2012, 06:44 AM
Basically, the only true interest in vulture capitalists corporations is making money for themselves, not creating jobs.

I think most people understand that loads of Americans were thrown off the cliff, by Mitt, in order to put more cash in his own bank accounts, where ever they were hidden.

Romney/Ryan are not trustworthy, and the American people have seen the real Mitt, in this video.

His own excuse said it all. He was talking, 'Off the cuff' which rational folks understand to mean that he was saing exactly how he thinks about Americans who aren't wealthy.

The fact is, Mitt Romney insults everyone. People don't trust him, or Ryan, and he won't win.

Nate Silvers last prediction has the President at over 83% now.

Repiglicans are desperate. They have finally buried themselves in their own hate and greed!

I predict Romney will commit another irreversible gaff during the first debate, lol, true to form. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

eg8r
09-30-2012, 06:25 AM
LOL, so all you have to say is there is video where he says one thing then another? Great job. What exactly did you want to discuss? If nothing then just say that.

eg8r

eg8r
09-30-2012, 06:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You will not vote for Mitt? Why then do you defend him in every post?</div></div>So you really do have a comprehension problem. I have said for quite some time I will not vote for him. I don't defend people because I intend to vote for them. I defend them when you are lying about them.

eg8r