• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

A little reality about Romney and Bain....

Arbo

Arbo

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Messages
10,395
Reaction score
2,744
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Review & Outlook: The Bain Capital Bonfire - WSJ.com

We have our policy differences with Mr. Romney, but by any reasonable measure Bain Capital has been a net job and wealth creator. Founded in 1984 as an offshoot of the Bain consulting company, Bain Capital's business is a combination of private equity and venture capital. The latter means taking a flyer on start-ups that may or may not pan out, something that neither Mr. Gingrich nor Mr. Obama seem to find offensive when those investments are made by Silicon Valley firms in "clean energy."
One Bain investment during Mr. Romney's tenure was to back an entrepreneur named Tom Stemberg, who was convinced he could provide savings for small-business owners if they were willing to shop at a store instead of taking deliveries. Today, the Staples chain of business-supply stores employs 90,000 people.

Bain also backed a start-up called Bright Horizons that now manages child-care centers for more than 700 corporate clients around the world. Many other venture bets failed, but that's capitalism, which is supposed to be a profit and loss system.
Click to expand...

No, not a company that set out to 'destroy' other companies and put people out of work.
 
Arbo said:
No, not a company that set out to 'destroy' other companies and put people out of work.
Click to expand...


Bain is not a company that is set out to help other companies either, it is set up to make a profit. If it can make more profit by screwing others out of a job it will do it. If it can make more profit by helping other companies out, it will.

I'm not saying that is necessarily negative, but let's be honest in that Bain isn't out there to help companies either.
 
This is hilarious. Here's a hint. When making a claim, look for links that will buttress your claim, not shoot it down. From your own link.....

We have our policy differences with Mr. Romney, but by any reasonable measure Bain Capital has been a net job and wealth creator.
Click to expand...

LMAO.
 
TheNextEra said:
Bain is not a company that is set out to help other companies either, it is set up to make a profit. If it can make more profit by screwing others out of a job it will do it. If it can make more profit by helping other companies out, it will.

I'm not saying that is necessarily negative, but let's be honest in that Bain isn't out there to help companies either.
Click to expand...

You just described every business in the world.
 
TheNextEra said:
Bain is not a company that is set out to help other companies either, it is set up to make a profit. If it can make more profit by screwing others out of a job it will do it. If it can make more profit by helping other companies out, it will.
Click to expand...

What it looks to do, is find companies in trouble that it thinks have the potential of turning a profit if turned around. Some fail. And when it is obvious that is going to happen, yes, it is in their best interest, and their investors best interest to get whatever they can out of them before shutting them down. According to WSJ's check into the company, they have had about an 80% success rate at saving failing companies and turning them around into profiting companies.

danarhea said:
This is hilarious. Here's a hint. When making a claim, look for links that will buttress your claim, not shoot it down. From your own link.....
LMAO.
Click to expand...

Here's a hint, the point of the thread was to show that Bain is not the 'evil' company that intentionally destroys companies and kills jobs, like the left wants everyone to believe. So even the line you quoted does in fact 'buttress' the point. So your 'LMAO' and comments seem to show some confusion on your part.
 
Arbo said:
Here's a hint, the point of the thread was to show that Bain is not the 'evil' company that intentionally destroys companies and kills jobs, like the left wants everyone to believe. So even the line you quoted does in fact 'buttress' the point. So your 'LMAO' and comments seem to show some confusion on your part.
Click to expand...


If it will turn a profit, they will indeed intentionally destroy a company. Vice-versa is also true.

Bain is not an evil company, but they sure aren't in it to save companies, they are in it for profit. Let's be honest.
 
TheNextEra said:
If it will turn a profit, they will indeed intentionally destroy a company. Vice-versa is also true.

Bain is not an evil company, but they sure aren't in it to save companies, they are in it for profit. Let's be honest.
Click to expand...

absolute nonsense.. Bain would no exist if they didnt try to help companies.. thats what they do.. turning a profit has to occur or the banks will close the company..thats the problem Bain is brought in to fix.. the lack of profits!!!! lack of profits equals going out of business and no banking line

amazing stuff I read here daily...
 
TheNextEra said:
If it will turn a profit, they will indeed intentionally destroy a company. Vice-versa is also true.
Click to expand...

This doesn't even begin to touch the tip of 'making sense'. No, what you are missing is they have turned around many companies, making a profit, and did not 'destroy' them. In fact, what they did was most likely save them from demise.
 
Arbo said:
No, what you are missing is they have turned around many companies, making a profit, and did not 'destroy' them. In fact, what they did was most likely save them from demise.
Click to expand...

I never said otherwise, however, what is also true is they have destroyed businesses if it will turn a profit for them.

They are not in it for saving businesses they are in it to make a profit and if by destroying a business they will get more profit then saving it, they will indeed destroy a business. Vice-versa they will save a business if it is deemed they would make more profit by it than by destroying it.

I have never claimed that Bain was evil, only that it is self-serving. Which is what most corporations are. The problem I have is with the self-serving part, but that doesn't make them evil.
 
TheNextEra said:
If it will turn a profit, they will indeed intentionally destroy a company. Vice-versa is also true.

Bain is not an evil company, but they sure aren't in it to save companies, they are in it for profit. Let's be honest.
Click to expand...

Then the company was going to die anyway so you might as well get something out of it.
 
Arbo said:
This doesn't even begin to touch the tip of 'making sense'. No, what you are missing is they have turned around many companies, making a profit, and did not 'destroy' them. In fact, what they did was most likely save them from demise.
Click to expand...

Some of their investments didn't work out. Pure and simple. They came in to try to make the business better and make money and it didn't always work out that way.

Anybody who's ever played poker knows that not every hand is a winner.
 
TheNextEra said:
I never said otherwise, however, what is also true is they have destroyed businesses if it will turn a profit for them.

They are not in it for saving businesses they are in it to make a profit and if by destroying a business they will get more profit then saving it, they will indeed destroy a business. Vice-versa they will save a business if it is deemed they would make more profit by it than by destroying it.

I have never claimed that Bain was evil, only that it is self-serving. Which is what most corporations are. The problem I have is with the self-serving part, but that doesn't make them evil.
Click to expand...

again you are 100% wrong.... Bain is a company that prides itself in saving companies..that what they do..if not they would not exist nor be invited in.
 
it is noted that you quit quoting your cite when the negative aspects of romney and bail capitaol were exposed
this little tidbit should be found interesting:
A Wall Street Journal news story this week reported that Bain in the Romney era differed from many equity firms in buying more young and thus riskier companies. This contributed to a higher rate of bankruptcy or closure—22%—for companies held by Bain after eight years.
Click to expand...
22% failure rate

then let's turn to romney's performance as a jobb creator while governor of massachusetts

per chris wallace (of faux news):
Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts for four years, .... And during that time, Massachusetts ranked 47th of the 50 states in job creation. The only reason the unemployment rate went down [was] because so many people left the work force -- more than any other state in the country except Louisiana after Hurricane Katrina. Is that a record to be proud of?
Click to expand...
The Reaction: Romney's lousy record on job creation in Massachusetts
 
justabubba said:
it is noted that you quit quoting your cite when the negative aspects of romney and bail capitaol were exposed
this little tidbit should be found interesting:

22% failure rate

then let's turn to romney's performance as a jobb creator while governor of massachusetts

per chris wallace (of faux news):
The Reaction: Romney's lousy record on job creation in Massachusetts
Click to expand...


wow.. even at his worst Romney can out perform Obama.. good to know...

you do know that that 22% rate is excellent..
 
Last edited:
Travis007 said:
wow.. even at his worst Romney can out perform Obama.. good to know...

you do know that that 22% rate is excellent..
Click to expand...

in your oblique world maybe is a 22% bankruptcy rate found acceptable
in the real world. no
 
justabubba said:
in your oblique world maybe is a 22% bankruptcy rate found acceptable
in the real world. no
Click to expand...

FACEPALM.

so let me get this staight.. he saved 78% of companies that were about to go under, and thats "not good"?..
100% of them would have failed without Bain..

thats pretty dang good.. no wonder Bain was a succesful Co...
 
rocket88 said:
Some of their investments didn't work out. Pure and simple. They came in to try to make the business better and make money and it didn't always work out that way.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is correct.
 
justabubba said:
it is noted that you quit quoting your cite when the negative aspects of romney and bail capitaol were exposed
this little tidbit should be found interesting:

22% failure rate
Click to expand...

Do you not understand that in that field, that's a pretty damn good record. As I said, about an 80% success rate at SAVING companies. So what is your complaint about that?
 
Travis007 said:
absolute nonsense.. Bain would no exist if they didnt try to help companies...
Click to expand...

What! This is crazy! Bain was there to pick off struggling companies, liquidate there assets and get rid of their workers.

I believe some right-wingers here would state that water is dry and dust is wet if the republican leadership (aka Rush Limbaugh) told them to.
 
Texmex said:
What! This is crazy! Bain was there to pick off struggling companies, liquidate there assets and get rid of their workers.

I believe some right-wingers here would state that water is dry and dust is wet if the republican leadership (aka Rush Limbaugh) told them to.
Click to expand...


say huh?... Bain can not help unless invited in ... what are you talking about..? This is not Obama who can take my money and flush it his friends at Solyndra
 
Texmex said:
What! This is crazy! Bain was there to pick off struggling companies, liquidate there assets and get rid of their workers.
Click to expand...

Then please explain to us how ~ 80% of the companies they took over came out bigger and stronger.

BTW, we are still awaiting proof to support your statements.
 
justabubba said:
in your oblique world maybe is a 22% bankruptcy rate found acceptable
in the real world. no
Click to expand...
You do realize an 80% success to 20% failure rate is OUTSTANDING in THE REAL WORLD... nevermind the fact that THE BUSINESSES THEY INVESTED IN WERE ALREADY FAILING!!!

The world you live in is dreamland if you think more than 1 in 5 businesses started become profitable over the long term... i think its more like 1 in 20 businesses starting up arent bankrupt within 5 years... maybe someone can find the hard numbers on that...

NVM... i just did... It seems 50% of start ups fail within the first year, and 70%, 80%, or 95% (depending on who you ask) of startups fail within the first 5 years...

Yet, Romney started Bain, which performed exceedingly well... and then assisted in creating Staples, Bright Horizons, Sports Authority, etc. and helped save companies like Dominos, Totes, Burlington Coat Factory, etc.

http://smallbiztrends.com/2005/07/business-failure-rates-highest-in.html

http://smallbiztrends.com/2008/04/startup-failure-rates.html

http://www.businessknowhow.com/startup/business-failure.htm

http://www.moyak.com/papers/small-business-statistics.html
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom