Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Adam Rubin: Personnel pensions on cutting block

Major League Baseball owners, despite boasting $8 billion in annual revenue and climbing, are moving toward eliminating the pension plans of all personnel not wearing big league uniforms, sources told ESPNNewYork.com.

The first attempt to do so, initiated last year by a small-market owner, never came to a vote after Chicago White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf chastised his brethren for being petty with the lives of ordinary people given the riches produced by the sport. A vote, which was intended to be kept secret, is now scheduled to take place at owners meetings May 8-9 in New York.

A vote, which had intended to be kept secret, is now scheduled to take place at owners meetings May 8-9 in New York. A majority of owners now favor the abolition of the pension plan, a source said.

A majority of owners now favor the abolition of the pension plan, a source said.

The impact would affect much of the Major League Baseball family: front-office executives, trainers, minor league staff and scouts. Some of those personnel, particularly on the minor league level and in amateur scouting, make less than $40,000 a year and rely on pensions in retirement. ...

MLB executive vice president Rob Manfred acknowledged that candid discussions on the topic have gone on for “several years,” but he disputed that pensions will go away entirely.

“No one is suggesting that pension plans are going to be eliminated,” he said. “What the conversation has been about is allowing individual clubs more flexibility as to what exactly their pension plan is going to look like. Nobody is suggesting there is going to be no plan ... for anybody. The issue is in the current arrangement we essentially mandate a particular type of defined benefit pension plan. The question is whether the individual team should have more flexibility to design a program that is effective to them.”

JE (Jason Epstein) Posted: March 19, 2013 at 06:01 PM | 140 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: mlb, retiree, white sox

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2
   101. Greg K Posted: March 20, 2013 at 08:10 AM (#4392240)
so again, human resources is not your friend.


"I hate so much about the things that you choose to be".

Poor Toby Flenderson.

#99
I'm actually in the process of putting together stuff for post-doc applications. I've been a bit lax on getting things published because I really don't feel confident that what I write isn't garbage (might have to work on that!). But thanks to some idiocy on my part (I somehow thought the regs on the thesis called for 200,000 words rather than the actual 80,000) I have a couple cuts from the thesis that I could conceivably turn into articles. Plus, my exciting new project about the importance of hat-wearing in treason trials of the 1640s!

I have to admit this thread has been highly depressing...not necessarily because it provides new information, but just reinforcing how unpromising my chosen career path is. I appreciate the little bit of optimism you bring in your last comment Vaux.
   102. depletion Posted: March 20, 2013 at 08:34 AM (#4392251)
you can't write 'who cares' without hr

truer words were never written

You can't write Claudell Washington without DL.
   103. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: March 20, 2013 at 08:39 AM (#4392253)
since this thread is already got folks glum i might as well heap some more gloom on the discussion by suggesting folks check out labor managed service provider programs, aka 'msp'.

once the haven of just i.t. services it has spread to multiple areas of labor and many large companies have long-term plans to have as much as 60 to 70 percent of their workforce be contract labor versus full-time employees. expect the manpower, adecco, randstadt and staff managements of the world to become the world's largest employers by a signficant margin within the next 10-20 years.

things could derail this path. too many unknowns to be certain

but right now that is where large global organizations are headed

as fast they can make it happen
   104. Misirlou is on hiding to nowhere Posted: March 20, 2013 at 08:42 AM (#4392256)
You can't write Claudell Washington without DL.


I thought that was RonDeLl White.
   105. charityslave is thinking about baseball Posted: March 20, 2013 at 08:48 AM (#4392259)
Reinsdorf long has been a champion of the less visible members of the MLB family. When there was financial anxiety over the stock market crash last decade, he gave many of his employees multiyear contract extensions to ease their distress.


I think I have just found a new favorite owner.
   106. crict Posted: March 20, 2013 at 09:34 AM (#4392287)
I'm in a second-tier Canadian university and I have to say that I've seen many depressing things. Deans, provosts, presidents only care about the bottom line. They don't even pay lip service to academic integrity anymore. Basically, to get new positions you have to promise new bogus graduate programs with high tuition, no academic standards and guaranteed grades for the students.

That being said, if you can avoid administrative tasks, life in academia in still incredible and worth fighting for.
   107. bunyon Posted: March 20, 2013 at 09:50 AM (#4392297)
That being said, if you can avoid administrative tasks, life in academia in still incredible and worth fighting for.

You pretty much have to decide what is most important to you: doing something you really enjoy or making a pile of money. For some lucky few, it will be both. Money is great, and I have no beef with people who choose a profession (or start a business) with the goal of making a lot of it.

The trouble with entrepreneurism, as I understand it, is that so much of it isn't doing the creative end. Law and finance is set up to make lawyers and financial people an absolute necessity. If you hate that crap, you have to find someone who can do it, who you trust, or you can't go into business.

And while that is a good route to get very rich, it is pretty binary - you get rich or you get poor. I have seen lots of kids graduate from college, go into business and I know one who has done well. She has done very, very well. The others muck around for awhile and then, out of desperation, take a crap job with crap pay and crap future. I don't know enough to know why they failed. They seem bright. There is an element of pugnashiness that is necessary in the business world and a lot of very smart people don't have it.

Anyway, I wouldn't be glum. Life is wonderful. It sounds trite but the trick really is to realize you can't have everything, figure out what it is, exactly, you want and value, and then fight like hell for that.

Getting back to the quote, an academic life lets you work with young people and have a good bit of independence in terms of both schedule and what scholarly work you do. It costs you money and, in many cases, security (security ends up binary: tenured/untenured, extremely secure vs. extremely not).

But this has been known for a long while. Anyone who chose academia as a profession hardly gets to claim they were duped about the financial end of it. By the way, academic administration seems to be quite lucrative. It looks to me like a bubble, but I have friends who have moved over. They instantly give up scholarship, the ability to wear jeans and have any control over their schedules. But they get a handsome boost in pay. And hated, of course.
   108. TJ Posted: March 20, 2013 at 10:11 AM (#4392314)
"Proposed by a small market owner?" Am I the only one who immediately suspected Jeff Loria?
   109. GregD Posted: March 20, 2013 at 10:40 AM (#4392342)
I'm actually in the process of putting together stuff for post-doc applications. I've been a bit lax on getting things published because I really don't feel confident that what I write isn't garbage (might have to work on that!). But thanks to some idiocy on my part (I somehow thought the regs on the thesis called for 200,000 words rather than the actual 80,000) I have a couple cuts from the thesis that I could conceivably turn into articles. Plus, my exciting new project about the importance of hat-wearing in treason trials of the 1640s!

I have to admit this thread has been highly depressing...not necessarily because it provides new information, but just reinforcing how unpromising my chosen career path is. I appreciate the little bit of optimism you bring in your last comment Vaux.
Keep your head up! The other side of the previous post was correct in my opinion. Everyone I knew in grad school who 1) finished, 2) applied broadly, and 3) kept at it for at least 3 cycles has a tenure-track job except for one person and that person is interviewing now. Some aren't in their favorite places, but a below-average t-t job is still a dream if you went into it because you like reading, writing, and talking about your subject. I work a lot, but it's like not working on another level. Completion and location are the things that kill people; they don't finish and take themselves out or they get too picky on where they'll live.

More than the money, that's what I tell prospective grad students. You have to decide if you want to control where you'll live. You can do fine as an academic even better than fine if you are productive and get somewhat lucky. But almost no one not even the stars gets to control where she or he lives. If you can be cool with smaller towns or "flyover country," you'll get your foot in the door eventually in many fields in History. (20th century US, I'm not sure about as the production numbers are staggering, and classical/medieval has a major demand problem.)
   110. Greg K Posted: March 20, 2013 at 10:51 AM (#4392355)
If you can be cool with smaller towns or "flyover country," you'll get your foot in the door eventually in many fields in History. (20th century US, I'm not sure about as the production numbers are staggering, and classical/medieval has a major demand problem.)

That's actually the issue I'm facing right now. I'd prefer Canada, but British history is sort of dying out there. Luckily living in the UK is a more than satisfactory plan B. I haven't looked into the US as of yet, (and a lot of the big names in my field work out of the US) but I'm not too picky...I lived in Saskatchewan for six years after all! I've even taken a brief look at Australia, but so far haven't come across any departments that match up well with my stuff.

I'm sure my life priorities will change, but for the last 5-6 years I've been living off of roughly $15,000-20,000 a year reading books and writing. If I'm doing roughly that, and no longer paying tuition, I'd have disposable money that I can possibly imagine spending in a year. Sounds alright to me.

And thanks as well for the optimistic outlook. I'm starting to think that maybe I'm not 100% screwed after all.
   111. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: March 20, 2013 at 10:57 AM (#4392359)
You pretty much have to decide what is most important to you: doing something you really enjoy or making a pile of money. For some lucky few, it will be both. Money is great, and I have no beef with people who choose a profession (or start a business) with the goal of making a lot of it.


I would replace "making a pile of money" with "making any money at all" in this paragraph. After all most people are in jobs that are neither enjoyable nor make them more than enough money to pay the bills. You have to give up THAT sort of low-level security to try to do something you really enjoy.
   112. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: March 20, 2013 at 11:04 AM (#4392370)
"Proposed by a small market owner?" Am I the only one who immediately suspected Jeff Loria?


And you would think nobody would be more supportive of a defined benefit plan than one of baseball's small market owners. Guarantees for me but not for thee, I suppose.
   113. zonk Posted: March 20, 2013 at 11:07 AM (#4392375)
so that is why i had to work hard to not mock zonk directly on his posts. because after several decades of seeing workers accept all forms of reductions to their overall compensation and still cling to their job i will believe someone will leave when they leave. otherwise, it's all talk.


Heh... hey - I get it, I really do... and in a grand sense, I should consider myself lucky because I'm not clinging and while benefits have been reduced, they've largely been benefits I don't take advantage of anyway (for example, they lopped 5 days off our time off package a few years back... There's never been a year where I haven't ended up just eating a dozen+ at the end of the year anyway) and my compensation has risen.

The thing that really bothers me personally right now is that while I don't feel beholden to my employer, I do feel that way to the people that report to me... Up and down my group - they're all hardworking, reliable, creative, and valuable. Perhaps I'm struggling with being integrated into the machine - but I do feel a responsibility to see that they're appropriately rewarded, compensated, and recognized... and it's hard to go to higher ups, make a case for raises, bonuses, etc for 10 other people then add "Oh yeah, and me too".

That's another rant about 'leadership' -- just last week, we wrapped up a pretty substantial and actually, pretty impressive new product effort. The C level champion of this effort sent this glowing, congratulatory note to other execs boasting about the effort's success. He was kind enough to name me personally among a few of the other leads, but what bothered me is that while I definitely played a lead role, I brought in a couple other folks from my team - and didn't bring them in anonymously, either. They were charged with some critical tasks in the effort that were outside of their standard paths, and while I certainly helped steer them on the tasks - they excelled... I know it's sort of considered a professional faus pax to do a 'reply to all', especially with folks at that level (something I was reminded of by my own boss) -- but I did respond to the congrats specifically citing the people from my team and their contributions. Org chart position shouldn't determine who gets the praise -- output should... but I don't know how many times I've been to conferences or company townhalls and listened to presentations about wonderful success stories -- and known full well that the people being congratulated had virtually nothing to do with the success of the effort... they just happened to sit at the top of a piece of paper.
   114. Tom Nawrocki Posted: March 20, 2013 at 11:10 AM (#4392381)
And while that is a good route to get very rich, it is pretty binary - you get rich or you get poor. I have seen lots of kids graduate from college, go into business and I know one who has done well. She has done very, very well. The others muck around for awhile and then, out of desperation, take a crap job with crap pay and crap future. I don't know enough to know why they failed. They seem bright. There is an element of pugnashiness that is necessary in the business world and a lot of very smart people don't have it.


I think a lot of people underestimate how crucial it is to be capable of selling your product. Having a marketable product isn't nearly enough. When you have no customer base and no visibility, as is the case with nearly all startups, you can't survive without a dedicated, talented sales force.

I spent a few years trying to develop a business, and while my existing clients always seemed happy with my services, I could never grow the business enough to support me full-time. I hated sales and had no aptitude for it, but hoped that the strength of what I was selling would be enough to carry me through. It wasn't.

Of course, Harvey would probably not consider me as part of "the best and the brightest."
   115. BrianBrianson Posted: March 20, 2013 at 11:17 AM (#4392387)
101 - I got an excellent post-doc despite a lousy publication record, off reference letters, and otherwise being exactly the person they were looking for. Of course, I'm in a field where a thesis is just a few articles stapled together with an intro that pretends they're related, so I also had a couple drafts to send out. Just like being a lucky son of a ##### is an important part of having a successful start up (talent matters too, but luck in a very significant component), luck can factor into landing a position. Who they're looking for, who applies - that involves luck.
   116. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: March 20, 2013 at 11:19 AM (#4392390)
tom

innovators and/or founders may or may not be good sales people. being good in sales has its own skill set

don't know why you finish your post like that
   117. bunyon Posted: March 20, 2013 at 11:20 AM (#4392391)
I would replace "making a pile of money" with "making any money at all" in this paragraph. After all most people are in jobs that are neither enjoyable nor make them more than enough money to pay the bills.

If it wasn't clear, I was specifically speaking to jobs in academia and people in the pipeline there. Obviously, most people end up in jobs unrewarding in any way.
   118. GregD Posted: March 20, 2013 at 11:24 AM (#4392394)
And thanks as well for the optimistic outlook. I'm starting to think that maybe I'm not 100% screwed after all.
If you've got too much instead of too little in your dissertation and you can discipline yourself to cut it down to size, you'll be way ahead of most people who either don't have anything to say/aren't willing to work hard enough to find stuff or who are too in love with the smell of their own armpits to do the editing that books require.

With friends working in the UK university system, I have to say I thank God I didn't go there. What a clusterf*. Lots of really great universities are getting eviscerated right now but hard, in ways that make the US situation look like Sesame Street. Low-level places in the US that post ads are getting apps from people at what had been top-flight British universities. Australia though seems from afar to be doing well.
   119. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: March 20, 2013 at 11:25 AM (#4392395)
innovators and/or founders may or may not be good sales people. being good in sales has its own skill set

don't know why you finish your post like that


You shouldn't say "the best and the brightest" are all off being entrepreneurs these days instead of trying to earn a salary, if you ADMIT that nobody will succeed as an entrepreneur unless they have a particular extroverted salesman personality.
   120. Tom Nawrocki Posted: March 20, 2013 at 11:27 AM (#4392396)
Harvey, I wrote that because you said, "if you are really smart you are in a startup area and not scr9wing around with corporate america. the best kids are too smart for that bs"

Many of those "best kids" will also end up looking for a job in corporate America when they're 31 and have nothing but failure on their resume.
   121. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: March 20, 2013 at 11:34 AM (#4392405)
the best talent is working to start their own businesses. they aren't mucking around getting hired by someone else who is going to rake in the bulk of the profits at their expense

i looked at my posts in this thread and here i believe is the reference in question.

where did i mention sales skills?

not looking to pick a fight. i am lost at what you guys are posting about
   122. GregD Posted: March 20, 2013 at 11:37 AM (#4392407)
A friend who steers big investors toward start-ups is constantly astounded by how poorly most are managed and how hard it is for the entrepreneurs to realize that they need help.

I don't think the best and the brightest are all going to startups. Goldman still gets a flood of apps. I do think it's true that more people are self-selecting away from places like Goldman because they want to take more risks and have a chance to rise faster. But people who have kept their jobs in finance are doing just fine, better than ever in many ways, and they are having no trouble getting people with whatever qualifications they want.
   123. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: March 20, 2013 at 11:39 AM (#4392408)
I don't think the best and the brightest are all going to startups

feel free to disagree. but finance is cavitating as evidenced by everyone from morgan stanley and the like cutting heads, withholding bonus payment and reducing said payout.
   124. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: March 20, 2013 at 11:48 AM (#4392419)
and was it jp morgan chase or goldman who announced that they would go every other year on annoucing new managing directors? another hit to those aspiring wheel dealers. more sec scrutiny.

and with investment funds avaialable through differetn channels nobody of consequence in silicon valley is relying on the investment banker community anymore. who needs the additional costs?

   125. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: March 20, 2013 at 11:48 AM (#4392420)
and speaking of the drive toward temp labor here is an article from today's cnnmoney

http://money.cnn.com/gallery/smallbusiness/2013/03/20/temp-work/2.html
   126. GregD Posted: March 20, 2013 at 11:51 AM (#4392424)
There is an east/west divide, in that I hear it is tougher to get Stanford kids to finance, but the threat among the East Coast Ivies (I'm not saying this is the right definition of talent) is definitely not startups but, still, hedge funds. the people who kept their jobs are doing better than they were in 2007; there are fewer of them but that hasn't hurt their recruiting. It has wiped out some people in their 30s-50s who thought they were set but that's a different issue.

   127. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: March 20, 2013 at 12:05 PM (#4392441)
cripes, sorry for all the typos. still typing mostly one-handed and with my eyes kind of being shot i don't catch things i should

my apologies if it makes things hard to read

   128. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: March 20, 2013 at 12:22 PM (#4392462)
There is an east/west divide, in that I hear it is tougher to get Stanford kids to finance, but the threat among the East Coast Ivies (I'm not saying this is the right definition of talent) is definitely not startups but, still, hedge funds. the people who kept their jobs are doing better than they were in 2007; there are fewer of them but that hasn't hurt their recruiting


one interesting finance/hedge fund fallout from '08 is seeing the number of hedge fund manager rolling out 'open end' mutual funds and other products for the masses. Five years ago those guys would be laughing at the idea that they would have retail customers, now many are desperate to attract them.
   129. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: March 20, 2013 at 12:29 PM (#4392467)
mrams

excactly.
   130. BFFB Posted: March 20, 2013 at 01:36 PM (#4392580)
It takes a specific set of skills to start up and grow a business and it doesn't require somebody to be bright, well in the academic sense anyway. One of my cousins is on track to have grown his business from a London lock-up to a billion dollar IT services company and flunked out of university.

What he had was a certain level of organisational ability, sales skills and the ability to see both new markets and gaps in the established IT services market which he could exploit (in his case on-line gambling and retail companies while providing a very strong customer support focus, where as traditional IT services companies had focused on the financial industry and kind of "meh" on customer support). The other trait he has, which is crucial, was the ability to recognize the skills he didn't have and hire good people to fill those roles and also to quickly recognize when he had hired the wrong people.

For example I was speaking to him last Christmas and he was saying how he had to fire his COO because, although highly recommended and interviewed well, was a complete and utter disaster after starting the job. Where as in the company I work for there was a VP who turned out to be a complete disaster and committed what was tantamount to fraud to create profits for five years where none existed and instead promoted and shuffled to a "window seat" where, I guess, it was expected he could do no damage.

You can be exceptionally bright, highly competent and have lots of good ideas but if you lack that "business sense" (for want of a better description) to identify opportunities you're not going to be anything more than an employee or failed entrepreneur.
   131. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: March 20, 2013 at 01:50 PM (#4392604)
post 130

agreed (and congrats to your cousin by the way)

my only point early on in this thread is that smart kids with aspirations of making big bucks are swerving away from certain industry segments (for reasons explained previously) and more and more working in the startup culture be it boston or austin or the valley or wherever.

do they have to work insane hours? yup. will most of their ideas go bust? yup.

but as they say, if they get it 'right' it's katy bar the door.

i was on the plane recently flying back from san fran and was next to this 23 year old who had been employee number 5 at a company that makes silly little app games. you guessed it, hit it big. he's their senior engineer and in another year will have a million plus in his account as that was part of the deal once the company was acquired.

those are the stories that drive these kids. (this kid wasn't even looking ofr big bucks. he was just looking for a job. nice kid)
   132. zonk Posted: March 20, 2013 at 02:52 PM (#4392696)
i was on the plane recently flying back from san fran and was next to this 23 year old who had been employee number 5 at a company that makes silly little app games. you guessed it, hit it big. he's their senior engineer and in another year will have a million plus in his account as that was part of the deal once the company was acquired.

those are the stories that drive these kids. (this kid wasn't even looking ofr big bucks. he was just looking for a job. nice kid)


...and sometimes it helps to be in the right place at the right time :-)

One of my good friend's younger sister was on her honeymoon and she and her husband spent the week hanging out with another newlywed couple, with the husband telling them of a potential start-up idea he had and was in fact, just in the process of trying to put a team together and get some very, very small amount of start-up capital. She was intrigued and got in touch immediately when they got home. She quickly joined the company as the #6...

(Insert Paul Harvey voice...)... that little start-up eventually did get going and grew up to be.... Twitter.

This is why I know I'm not a visionary -- I do recall talking with her brother about it via e-mail at one point, before it went public... and the best I could muster was a "Sounds cute... send me a link when it's live".
   133. depletion Posted: March 20, 2013 at 03:30 PM (#4392749)
Many of those "best kids" will also end up looking for a job in corporate America when they're 31 and have nothing but failure on their resume.

Tom, I thinks it's a bit harsh to describe a person who worked for a startup that didn't hit it big as having "nothing but failure on their resume". Most people know that few startups hit the big time. If the person worked hard and accomplished their tasks well they will not be looked upon as associated with failure. You know the old Teddy Roosevelt quote.

Re: being in the right place at the right time. Yes, this is 85% of the startup millionaire (not billionaire) story. I know some millionaires from a "startup" that went belly-up after a few years.
   134. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: March 20, 2013 at 03:35 PM (#4392757)
there are all kinds of folks in the startup culture who have managed to hop from startup to startup. some of them get a stigma of failure and newer startups won't bring them on board. but there are others who finally land with a winner.

takes a whole lot of sacrifice. you have to admimre the gumption. living by a shoestring and working like a fiend
   135. Joe Kehoskie Posted: March 20, 2013 at 03:54 PM (#4392784)
Tom, I thinks it's a bit harsh to describe a person who worked for a startup that didn't hit it big as having "nothing but failure on their resume". Most people know that few startups hit the big time. If the person worked hard and accomplished their tasks well they will not be looked upon as associated with failure. You know the old Teddy Roosevelt quote.

This makes sense and one would hope it's true, but is it actually true in the current job market? From the stories I hear and read, it doesn't seem to be.
   136. Pingu Posted: March 20, 2013 at 04:01 PM (#4392798)
Tom, I thinks it's a bit harsh to describe a person who worked for a startup that didn't hit it big as having "nothing but failure on their resume". Most people know that few startups hit the big time. If the person worked hard and accomplished their tasks well they will not be looked upon as associated with failure. You know the old Teddy Roosevelt quote.

This makes sense and one would hope it's true, but is it actually true in the current job market? From the stories I hear and read, it doesn't seem to be.


We dont discriminate when we hire. In fact, when a startup in our field goes belly up, we try to poach all their best people. One industry, one example. But if a company was only hiring people with no failures on their resume, they'll either choose from people with no startup experience or they'll be looking for a long time.

Maybe if you were looking to hire a CEO or you were a VC looking to fund a company led by someone who made some questionable decisions. I still think (w/in reason of course) that failing is seen as experienced in most circles.
   137. depletion Posted: March 20, 2013 at 04:03 PM (#4392805)
I only have anecdotal evidence of my own experiences and that of friends, Joe. My field is electrical engineering and physics/aerospace computer work in the DC area. It could be radically different elsewhere.
   138. Jay Z Posted: March 20, 2013 at 04:07 PM (#4392810)
One of my good friend's younger sister was on her honeymoon and she and her husband spent the week hanging out with another newlywed couple, with the husband telling them of a potential start-up idea he had and was in fact, just in the process of trying to put a team together and get some very, very small amount of start-up capital. She was intrigued and got in touch immediately when they got home. She quickly joined the company as the #6...

(Insert Paul Harvey voice...)... that little start-up eventually did get going and grew up to be.... Twitter.


But it has to be the VHS version of Twitter, and not the Beta version, or you're screwed.

The economy has become more winner take all. The infrastructure that has been added over the years means that companies need to do a lot less, and employ a lot fewer people, to have a big impact. 100 years ago, if you were in Detroit and wanted to sell something to someone in Seattle, it was a whole different ballgame.
   139. Mark S. is bored Posted: March 20, 2013 at 04:30 PM (#4392841)
One of my good friend's younger sister was on her honeymoon and she and her husband spent the week hanging out with another newlywed couple, with the husband telling them of a potential start-up idea he had and was in fact, just in the process of trying to put a team together and get some very, very small amount of start-up capital. She was intrigued and got in touch immediately when they got home. She quickly joined the company as the #6...

(Insert Paul Harvey voice...)... that little start-up eventually did get going and grew up to be.... Twitter.


Reminds me of a story that one of our Senior VPs told about being courted by two companies, one seemed like a cute little startup and the other seemed to have a more real-world business plan to go along with a startup mentality. So that's why he decided to join Enron instead of Yahoo.
   140. Traderdave Posted: March 20, 2013 at 04:49 PM (#4392887)
I turned down a job at Enron because I didn't want to move to Houston.
Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Downtown Bookie
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP April 2014: BurstNET Sued for Not Making Equipment Lease Payments
(2089 - 10:35am, Apr 23)
Last: BDC

NewsblogJ.R. Gamble: Albert Pujols' 500-Homer Chase Is A Bore, But That's Baseball's Fault
(32 - 10:34am, Apr 23)
Last: Ron J2

NewsblogOMNICHATTER for 4/23/2014
(4 - 10:32am, Apr 23)
Last: Rickey! In a van on 95 south...

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread March, 2014
(1057 - 10:31am, Apr 23)
Last: Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14!

NewsblogJosh Lueke Is A Rapist, You Say? Keep Saying It.
(44 - 10:30am, Apr 23)
Last: Flynn

NewsblogOT: NBA Monthly Thread - April 2014
(469 - 10:26am, Apr 23)
Last: Fear is Moses Taylor's Bacon Bits

NewsblogCameron: Numbers don't lie: The decline of Pujols is stunning
(215 - 10:26am, Apr 23)
Last: Gonfalon B.

NewsblogThe rise and fall of Ike Davis' New York Mets | Capital New York
(9 - 10:25am, Apr 23)
Last: Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play

NewsblogESPN: W. P. Kinsella: Where It Began: “Shoeless Joe”
(92 - 10:22am, Apr 23)
Last: Flynn

NewsblogRoyals G.M. Dayton Moore believes hitting will come around
(14 - 10:17am, Apr 23)
Last: JE (Jason Epstein)

NewsblogDaniel Bryan's 'YES!' chant has spread to the Pirates' dugout
(178 - 9:11am, Apr 23)
Last: You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR)

NewsblogOT: The NHL is finally back thread, part 2
(192 - 8:55am, Apr 23)
Last: zack

NewsblogHigh and outside
(8 - 8:55am, Apr 23)
Last: RMc's desperate, often sordid world

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 4-23-2014
(2 - 8:36am, Apr 23)
Last: RMc's desperate, often sordid world

NewsblogOMNICHATTER for APRIL 22, 2014
(92 - 8:23am, Apr 23)
Last: Sunday silence

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.6619 seconds
52 querie(s) executed