waldo Posted January 7, 2012 Report Posted January 7, 2012 I didn't bother responding to that nonsense. buddy, you went a long way to bring the emphasis back to... the greater Caterpillar! Let's step back prior to your distraction attempt and revisit the challenge you're avoiding in speaking to your "portfolio hit", if workers wages/benefits aren't slashed in half. You read like a real bean-counter... not sure why you won't showcase your numbers prowess and spin some numbers magic. I mean, after all, you were the first to make the CAT reference and speak to the London Electro-Motive workers wages in the context of your... CAT reference! So... ya, ya; the $1.14 3Q profit figure was for... your CAT reference! If I was a CAT investor (and I am indirectly through US market ETFs), I'd be furious if they chose to pay Canadian workers $35/hr instead of paying an American $18/hr. Quote
Topaz Posted January 7, 2012 Report Posted January 7, 2012 I've said this before and I`ll it again, on the news it was reported that if CAT wants to sell in the US, they have to MAKE it in the US. So CAT has built a new plant and is trying to leave Canada. So that being said, the workers should get pensions, benefits, retirement package, everything, plus what he Feds could do is say, you want to sell it here, make it here but they wont, they just back away and say its Ontario's problem. Quote
CPCFTW Posted January 7, 2012 Report Posted January 7, 2012 (edited) buddy, you went a long way to bring the emphasis back to... the greater Caterpillar! Let's step back prior to your distraction attempt and revisit the challenge you're avoiding in speaking to your "portfolio hit", if workers wages/benefits aren't slashed in half. You read like a real bean-counter... not sure why you won't showcase your numbers prowess and spin some numbers magic. I mean, after all, you were the first to make the CAT reference and speak to the London Electro-Motive workers wages in the context of your... CAT reference! So... ya, ya; the $1.14 3Q profit figure was for... your CAT reference! Wtf are you talking about, you clearly said Electro-motive. another related thread's post has identified the Electro-Motive division's recent quarter... quarter... net profit as over $1Billion. You earlier beaked-off about your "portfolio" gains - care to speculate on the impact to your "portfolio" if the London plant wages/benefits were kept at today's status-quo level? C'mon, Mr. Numbers... just how much of a hit would your "portfolio" take, hey? Electro-Motive is a wholly owned subsidiary of CAT, they do not have the same profit numbers as CAT. Do I really have to explain that to you? As for my portfolio "hit"... what relevance does that have? I own market based ETFs, and the hit to my portfolio would be significant if the management of companies constantly acquiesced to whining unions and their hippy backers. I generally have the same beliefs during any company/union argument, it is not unique to CAT. Keep spinning waldo. Edited January 7, 2012 by CPCFTW Quote
waldo Posted January 8, 2012 Report Posted January 8, 2012 Keep spinning waldo no - this is a spin free zone/none required. It's really a branding issue - the same article's content that another MLW member linked to is showing up everywhere now... always stating the 3Q profit number in the context of Electro-Motive, not Progress Rail, not Caterpillar. Your whole premise is to suggest/infer that "Electro-Motive" is so down-trodden, so unprofitable, so destitute, so on it's last legs... that the only way to save it is to cut the London workers wages/benefits in half. So, of course, you niggle away at the article's quote that actually mentions the $1.1 billion profit but doesn't properly register that profit to the parent Caterpillar, versus the subsidiary. Of course, what you won't do, what you apparently can't do, is put up the numbers to show just how profitable, or not, Electro-Motive was prior to the Caterpillar purchase... or just how profitable, or not, Progress Rail has been since the Caterpillar purchase. This is your perfect opportunity to showcase just how bad things are for the subsidiary... so bad, such that the impact of holding the London workers wages/benefits to the status quo could be properly evaluated. So bad as to appreciate that slashing the workers wages/benefits goes beyond Caterpillar/Progress Rail/Electro-Motive slashing for the sake of slashing. So bad as to realize that holding the London workers wages/benefits to the status quo rises above a "mice-nuts" difference... that the slashing would really mean something to the bottom-line... something more than... "mice-nuts"! As for my portfolio "hit"... what relevance does that have? I own market based ETFs, and the hit to my portfolio would be significant if the management of companies constantly acquiesced to whining unions and their hippy backers. I generally have the same beliefs during any company/union argument, it is not unique to CAT. so, you continue... you're fully prepared to showcase your 'portfolio ETF' in the context of Caterpillar protecting your interests, but you can't qualify just how not slashing the London workers wages/benefits in half, would impact your personal bottom-line. You're only prepared to go so far... to suggest... a "significant" hit to your portfolio, should the London workers wages/benefits not be slashed in half. I accept you qualify based on nothing more than your ideological bent... and here I thought you were a numbers guy - go figure! Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 8, 2012 Report Posted January 8, 2012 (edited) EMD has negatively impacted CAT profits ($6 million lower net profit) even with $122 million more in sales revenue for 3Q2011....clearly something is wrong. These may be leftover one time acquisition costs, but CAT is not in the business of making less money on growing sales. http://www.caterpillar.com/cda/files/3102673/7/Caterpillar+Inc.+3Q2011+Final.pdf Are there any good business schools in Canada? Edited January 8, 2012 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
CPCFTW Posted January 8, 2012 Report Posted January 8, 2012 (edited) EMD has negatively impacted CAT profits ($6 million lower net profit) even with $122 million more in sales revenue for 3Q2011....clearly something is wrong. These may be leftover one time acquisition costs, but CAT is not in the business of making less money on growing sales. http://www.caterpillar.com/cda/files/3102673/7/Caterpillar+Inc.+3Q2011+Final.pdf Are there any good business schools in Canada? You stole my thunder! I saw that as well but was saving it for another waldo tirade. Edited January 8, 2012 by CPCFTW Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 8, 2012 Report Posted January 8, 2012 You stole my thunder! I saw that as well but was saving it for another waldo tirade. Sorry...but it seemed you were just not getting through with good business fundamentals. Some people actually think that because CAT had a very profitable year, it should not put the squeeze on an under performing EMD. Maybe they think corporations give each subdivision equalization payments too! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
CPCFTW Posted January 8, 2012 Report Posted January 8, 2012 no - this is a spin free zone/none required. It's really a branding issue - the same article's content that another MLW member linked to is showing up everywhere now... always stating the 3Q profit number in the context of Electro-Motive, not Progress Rail, not Caterpillar. Your whole premise is to suggest/infer that "Electro-Motive" is so down-trodden, so unprofitable, so destitute, so on it's last legs... that the only way to save it is to cut the London workers wages/benefits in half. So, of course, you niggle away at the article's quote that actually mentions the $1.1 billion profit but doesn't properly register that profit to the parent Caterpillar, versus the subsidiary. Of course, what you won't do, what you apparently can't do, is put up the numbers to show just how profitable, or not, Electro-Motive was prior to the Caterpillar purchase... or just how profitable, or not, Progress Rail has been since the Caterpillar purchase. This is your perfect opportunity to showcase just how bad things are for the subsidiary... so bad, such that the impact of holding the London workers wages/benefits to the status quo could be properly evaluated. So bad as to appreciate that slashing the workers wages/benefits goes beyond Caterpillar/Progress Rail/Electro-Motive slashing for the sake of slashing. So bad as to realize that holding the London workers wages/benefits to the status quo rises above a "mice-nuts" difference... that the slashing would really mean something to the bottom-line... something more than... "mice-nuts"! That was never my premise. Learn to read. I stated in the very post that you quoted that I will almost always side with management over greedy unions. Quit making sh*t up. Being verbose while saying something doesn't make it true. so, you continue... you're fully prepared to showcase your 'portfolio ETF' in the context of Caterpillar protecting your interests, but you can't qualify just how not slashing the London workers wages/benefits in half, would impact your personal bottom-line. You're only prepared to go so far... to suggest... a "significant" hit to your portfolio, should the London workers wages/benefits not be slashed in half. I accept you qualify based on nothing more than your ideological bent... and here I thought you were a numbers guy - go figure! Show me where I said my portfolio would take a significant hit if the london workers wages were slashed in half. For someone who types so much, you sure don't have the greatest reading comprehension! Quote
waldo Posted January 8, 2012 Report Posted January 8, 2012 EMD has negatively impacted CAT profits ($6 million lower net profit) even with $122 million more in sales revenue for 3Q2011....clearly something is wrong. These may be leftover one time acquisition costs, but CAT is not in the business of making less money on growing sales.Are there any good business schools in Canada? You stole my thunder! Sorry...but it seemed you were just not getting through with good business fundamentals. Some people actually think that because CAT had a very profitable year, it should not put the squeeze on an under performing EMD. guys, guys... you numbers guys! Does your business wizardry afford you the opportunity to actually examine operational cost impacts, or do you simply choose to wildly speculate on the "under performing" assessment you're so easily/readily throwing about? Sorry to steal your, uhhh... thunder... but, let's see: - you offer up one Quarter report and presume to broadly cast the 'under-performing' announcement... full yearly (by quarter) profit numbers have been referenced earlier... your own under-performance in failing to fully and properly qualify your EMD under-performing labeling is noted! - and, why yes, Caterpillar does advise of an acquisition related, post-closing net working capital adjustment cost, estimated at $108 million - and, why yes, EMD is still constructing and has partially opened an expansive brand new Mexican plant... can you carry your wild speculation over to decipher 2011 portioned manufacturing cost impacts? - and, why yes, additional manufacturing cost impacts in terms of the EMD announcement of a $50 million investment in a plant purchase/renovation in Muncie, Indiana - production stated to begin in 'late 2011' - and, why yes, additional manufacturing cost impacts in terms of the EMD announcement of a significant joint undertaking to undergo extensive biodiesel fuel operating and environmental condition testing - test phase described as 'up to a year'... can you carry your wild speculation over to decipher the 2011 portioned manufacturing cost impacts? - and, why yes, additional manufacturing cost impacts in terms of the design/manufacturing of a new locomotive for a UAE sales contract. - and, why yes, in particular relative to the expressed significant sales volume increases, significant correlated increased currency exchange rate impacts on operating profit... can you carry your wild speculation over to delineate the EMD portion of this cost impact from the broader Caterpillar Q3/yearly statements? - and, why yes, in particular relative to the expressed significant sales volume increases, significant correlated increased SGA cost impacts... can you carry your wild speculation over to delineate the EMD portion of this cost impact from the broader Caterpillar Q3/yearly statements? - and, why yes, the Caterpillar statements reflect significant R&D cost impacts... can you carry your wild speculation over to delineate the EMD portion of this cost impact from the broader Caterpillar Q3/yearly statements? - and, why yes, additional manufacturing cost impacts relative to increased production volume, capacity expansion and incentive compensation... can you carry your wild speculation over to delineate the EMD portion of this cost impact from the broader Caterpillar Q3/yearly statements? - and, why yes, additional manufacturing cost impacts relative to increased material and freight costs, principally higher steel costs... can you carry your wild speculation over to delineate the EMD portion of this cost impact from the broader Caterpillar Q3/yearly statements? if only, if only... those 'under performing' London workers could accept having their wages/benefits slashed in half! Clearly, that 'mice nuts' impact must be the cause of your wizardly determined, 'EMD under performing assessment'... cause, like, clearly nothing else can be seen to be impacting! Quote
waldo Posted January 8, 2012 Report Posted January 8, 2012 Show me where I said my portfolio would take a significant hit if the london workers wages were slashed in half. For someone who types so much, you sure don't have the greatest reading comprehension! huh! Were slashed? Were? Were? No, no, no... Weren't slashed. Weren't. Weren't. About your comprehension difficulty! in any case, you're welcome If I was a CAT investor (and I am indirectly through US market ETFs), I'd be furious if they chose to pay Canadian workers $35/hr instead of paying an American $18/hr. As for my portfolio "hit"... what relevance does that have? I own market based ETFs, and the hit to my portfolio would be significant if the management of companies constantly acquiesced to whining unions and their hippy backers. Quote
CPCFTW Posted January 8, 2012 Report Posted January 8, 2012 huh! Were slashed? Were? Were? No, no, no... Weren't slashed. Weren't. Weren't. About your comprehension difficulty! in any case, you're welcome Yes weren't. I don't see it in those quotes Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 8, 2012 Report Posted January 8, 2012 if only, if only... those 'under performing' London workers could accept having their wages/benefits slashed in half! Clearly, that 'mice nuts' impact must be the cause of your wizardly determined, 'EMD under performing assessment'... cause, like, clearly nothing else can be seen to be impacting! ...and why yes, you have restated the obvious once given the obvious, because the numbers cannot be escaped. EMD is going to have to perform even better to make the acquisition worth while, and that means reigning in higher London plant labor costs. CAT needn't mess around...close the plant now! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted January 9, 2012 Report Posted January 9, 2012 Yes weren't. I don't see it in those quotes wow! Even when you're force-fed you own quotes... you acknowledge being an indirect CAT investor while at the same time (in the same sentence), stating you'd be furious if CAT doesn't slash the London worker's wages in half. If your stated "fury" doesn't correlate directly back to your referenced ETF's, why mention the two together... in the same sentence. If the correlation just isn't there, just what was the basis for your suggested 'fury'... what was the target of your 'fury'? Quote
waldo Posted January 9, 2012 Report Posted January 9, 2012 if only, if only... those 'under performing' London workers could accept having their wages/benefits slashed in half! Clearly, that 'mice nuts' impact must be the cause of your wizardly determined, 'EMD under performing assessment'... cause, like, clearly nothing else can be seen to be impacting!...and why yes, you have restated the obvious once given the obvious, because the numbers cannot be escaped. EMD is going to have to perform even better to make the acquisition worth while, and that means reigning in higher London plant labor costs.CAT needn't mess around...close the plant now! no - the obvious is your standard trolling and foolishness in labeling EMD as "under performing" in the face of the $100+ million after closing acquisition closing costs, new plant expansion costs, plant acquisition/remodeling costs, new design/manufacturing costs, currency exchange costs, SGA costs, R&D costs, costs associated to increased production volume, capacity expansion and incentive compensation and costs associated with increased material and freight charges..... the majority of these operational manufacturing and related costs reflect directly upon the aggressive business expansion this past year... reflects directly upon the record sales. Under performing!!! Wow, just wow! Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 9, 2012 Report Posted January 9, 2012 ...Under performing!!! Wow, just wow! Agreed...CAT should expect more net profit for such outlays. The bean counters are not pleased...close the plant if labor concessions are not forthcoming. Welfare comes from the province, not CAT. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
CPCFTW Posted January 9, 2012 Report Posted January 9, 2012 (edited) wow! Even when you're force-fed you own quotes... you acknowledge being an indirect CAT investor while at the same time (in the same sentence), stating you'd be furious if CAT doesn't slash the London worker's wages in half. If your stated "fury" doesn't correlate directly back to your referenced ETF's, why mention the two together... in the same sentence. If the correlation just isn't there, just what was the basis for your suggested 'fury'... what was the target of your 'fury'? So you're argument is that since I said I "would" be furious as a CAT investor, that must mean that I am furious as a US market etf holder and that since you have assumed I am furious (despite me clearly using "would"), my portfolio would therefore necessarily take a significant hit? Wow those are some wild assumptions, but I guess I could understand them from someone who is clearly uneducated in finance and capital markets. I stated that I am an indirect investor in CAT being a holder of market ETFs. In particular, I own shares of SPY. This is a market ETF which holds a portfolio of S&P500 stocks with the same weighting as the S&P500 index. I'm on my phone right now so I couldn't tell you what % CAT comprises, but I'm sure it is not significant (also considering I only have about 30% exposure to US markets in my portfolio). So, to anyone with any basic understanding of finance, portfolio mgmnt, or stock markets, it would be obvious that I was stating that I WOULD be furious if I was a DIRECT investor in CAT. Clearly you do not have that basic understanding, or the above would have been obvious to you. Perhaps you should try educating yourself on the subject matter rather than basing your opinions on huffingtonpost editorials? Edited January 9, 2012 by CPCFTW Quote
waldo Posted January 9, 2012 Report Posted January 9, 2012 Agreed...CAT should expect more net profit for such outlays. The bean counters are not pleased...close the plant if labor concessions are not forthcoming. Welfare comes from the province, not CAT. it would appear your self-proclaimed U.S. military career has kept you isolated from real world business practice. If we just isolate to the 2010-2011 EMD expansion (Mexican and U.S. plants), I would relish seeing a supporting market analysis that presumed on a positive ROI based upon a, 'within year-to-1 year', period time frame... particularly when the expansions are still in progress. Equally, you yourself mentioned the record 2010 sales numbers, and yet, somehow you feel a want, a need, to negate the impact of the related cost impacts that associate with these particular EMD increased sales (SGA, currency exchange, new design/manufacturing, volume/capacity, incentive compensation, etc.). Equally, you somehow have a want, a need, to negate cost impacts associated with external influences, like increased material/freight charges, post-closing acquisition costs, etc. Instead, you pull out a single quarter report that attributes a $6 million negative profit to the EMD division... in the midst of all the expansion and record sales... and you feel a want, a need, to label that "under performing". Must be some kind of special yankee business acumen to arrive at that assessment! Quote
waldo Posted January 9, 2012 Report Posted January 9, 2012 So you're argument is that since I said I "would" be furious as a CAT investor, that must mean that I am furious as a US market etf holder and that since you have assumed I am furious (despite me clearly using "would"), my portfolio would therefore necessarily take a significant hit? just replaying your own words for ya! If I was a CAT investor (and I am indirectly through US market ETFs), I'd be furious if they chose to pay Canadian workers $35/hr instead of paying an American $18/hr. again, as mentioned in the same sentence, back to back, if your expressed 'fury' doesn't associate to your expressed investment, what then? What then? in any case, you're quite obviously ignoring the other post I put up... you know... the one in response to your chuckle-head, 'stealing your thunder' retort! Is there a problem? Quote
CPCFTW Posted January 9, 2012 Report Posted January 9, 2012 (edited) just replaying your own words for ya! again, as mentioned in the same sentence, back to back, if your expressed 'fury' doesn't associate to your expressed investment, what then? What then? in any case, you're quite obviously ignoring the other post I put up... you know... the one in response to your chuckle-head, 'stealing your thunder' retort! Is there a problem? Like I said, clearly you don't understand even the basics of stock markets, or it would have been obvious to you that I had not expressed any fury. I mentioned in the same quote that you keep repeating that I am indirectly an investor through US stock market ETFs. I can understand how you would jump to your conclusion if you didn't understand what these basic instruments were. Sorry, I thought they were common knowledge by now. Here's some reading material for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exchange-traded_fund Once you finish with your reading assignment, you should hopefully be able to understand that I was saying that if I were a DIRECT investor in CAT common shares, I would be furious. You're welcome. Edited January 9, 2012 by CPCFTW Quote
waldo Posted January 9, 2012 Report Posted January 9, 2012 Once you finish with your reading assignment, you should hopefully be able to understand that I was saying that if I were a DIRECT investor in CAT common shares, I would be furious.You're welcome. so indirect only then, hey? oh wait... I trust you don't hold one of these... one of these ETFs that maintains significant exposure to Caterpillar Inc (CAT)... one of these ETFs that counts CAT among its top ten individual holdings. I trust you don't hold any of them - wouldn't want your expressed fury to be so... exposed! (uhhh, buddy... what's a Morningstar?... is that something you only see in the morning? ) but like I said, why keep ignoring the other post I put up... is there a problem? How's your thunder doing? Quote
CPCFTW Posted January 9, 2012 Report Posted January 9, 2012 (edited) so indirect only then, hey? oh wait... I trust you don't hold one of these... one of these ETFs that maintains significant exposure to Caterpillar Inc (CAT)... one of these ETFs that counts CAT among its top ten individual holdings. I trust you don't hold any of them - wouldn't want your expressed fury to be so... exposed! (uhhh, buddy... what's a Morningstar?... is that something you only see in the morning? ) but like I said, why keep ignoring the other post I put up... is there a problem? How's your thunder doing? Nope I don't hold those. Like I've said multiple times I hold a US market ETF, while those are mostly industrial sector ETFs. I even went so far as to tell you earlier which ETF I hold (SPY), and in what percentage of my portfolio (30%). CAT represents 0.53% of my US market exposure (30%). So CAT accounts for about 0.16% of my portfolio. https://www.spdrs.com/product/fund.seam?ticker=spy You see, when 30% of your portfolio is invested in the 500 biggest US companies, then you can be pretty certain that the mismanagement of one company won't significantly impact your portfolio. It's a little something called diversification. Like I have said from the beginning, I am against any company foregoing investor returns to acquiesce to unions. The only significant impact to my portfolio would be if it became standard practice for management to acquiesce to unions and hippies instead of focusing on shareholder returns (I believe this is a direct quote of myself from earlier in this thread). My position has been pretty straightforward all along. You obviously still have more reading to do! Don't worry, it's a pretty simple concept. I'm sure you'll figure it out! Edited January 9, 2012 by CPCFTW Quote
waldo Posted January 9, 2012 Report Posted January 9, 2012 It's a little something called diversification. so... your expressed fury is a diversified fury then, hey? Way to spread your fury around! (by the by... I was quite disappointed to see your edit wipe out your claim that all US Market ETFs were Industrial Sector - nice recover with the "most" change) (by the by deux... I notice you use the term 'hippies' quite a lot... just how old are you? ) Quote
CPCFTW Posted January 9, 2012 Report Posted January 9, 2012 (edited) so... your expressed fury is a diversified fury then, hey? Way to spread your fury around! (by the by... I was quite disappointed to see your edit wipe out your claim that all US Market ETFs were Industrial Sector - nice recover with the "most" change) I never claimed any such thing, wtf would I say that for when even the edit would be untrue? Once again, stop making sh*t up, or work on that reading comprehension. I previously stated that all of the 10 ETFs you had provided in your link were industrial sector ETFs, then edited it to say most when I noticed that there are some large cap ETFs in your list. FYI your list of 10 ETFs is not a list of "all US Market ETFs". (by the by deux... I notice you use the term 'hippies' quite a lot... just how old are you? ) Probably about the same age as the hippies but with a better degree, career, and work ethic. I know a few hippies personally myself. Edited January 9, 2012 by CPCFTW Quote
waldo Posted January 9, 2012 Report Posted January 9, 2012 FYI your list of 10 ETFs is not a list of "all US Market ETFs". thanks scoop... but, as stated, it was simply a ready list that included CAT within it's top holdings. You know, a benchmark reference to (your) exposed fury should CAT continue to pay the London workers the status quo. how enlightening to read you pump yourself up over claimed degree, career and work ethic. In any case, you've become quite boring in this thread - I relish another of your drive-bys in the KXL pipeline thread. Spank ya, later! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.