[CrashFarmer2]

My wife has a recipe for Twinkie cake.

[gearheadslife]

Twinkie the Kid’s ride into the sunset hit a hurdle Monday when Hostess Brands, unions and lenders agreed to mediation to try to save the company, and its spongy, yellow cake, from liquidation.
The decision staves off, for a couple of days at least, Hostess’ plans to shut down its 33 factories and lay off 18,500 workers after an acrimonious labor dispute that could lead to the end of the 82-year-old company and its well-known brands such as Twinkies, Ho-Hos, Sno-Balls and Wonder bread.
During the hearing, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Robert Drain urged the parties to come to an agreement through mediation rather than through a public, and costly, hearing. The court called a short recess while the lawyer for the baker's union phoned his client to see if the union would agree to a mediation process tomorrow.
Hostess, maker of the iconic Twinkie cake, will have a hearing before a bankruptcy judge on Monday to begin the work of shutting down and selling off its assets. Meanwhile, many loyal customers are rushing to snatch up what may be the last of its products. NBC's Mara Schiavocampo reports.

After the recess, the sides agreed to a mediation session Tuesday at 1 p.m. ET to try to work things out. If they can't resolve it, and come to an understanding of the underlying motives behind the worker strike that the company said crippled its business, the bankruptcy hearing will resume Wednesday at 11 a.m ET.
The sides will probably come to an agreement on Tuesday, John Pottow, a bankruptcy law professor at the University of Michigan, told TODAY. The biggest sign, he said, is that the Teamsters were on board.
"The Teamsters aren't *****cats," said Pottow. "If they're saying 'this is as good as it gets,' that's a pretty strong signal to me."
Wait a moment, so they were playing poker with our childhood memories all along?
"The bakery union probably thought management was bluffing," Pottow said. After Hostess filed for permission to liquidate Friday, it became clear they weren't.
Court filings show that the company is asking for permission to pay $1.75 million in retention bonuses to 19 different managers as an incentive for sticking around during the liquidation process. Hostess Brands CEO Gregory Rayburn has publicly blamed the unions for the company's demise.
The U.S. trustee, Hope Davis, an official appointed by the Justice Department to protect the interest of creditors, objected to this idea, filing a motion this morning which argued that Hostess officials "have failed to demonstrate that the proposed bonuses are true incentive bonuses and not disguised retention payments."
Davis also moved to convert the bankruptcy from a chapter 11 to a chapter 7. That would take control of the winddown proceedings away from Hostess and into the hands of a court-appointed trustee.
Cnbc's Kayla Tausche reports that Hostess and the baker's union have agreed to mediation, putting a temporary hold on a shutdown of the company.

In their joinder filed today, the Bakery, Confectionary, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union said that "blaming the BCTGM for the Company’s liquidation is no more credible than blaming an isolated gust of wind for blowing over a tree, when it was the tree’s shallow, rotted root structure that was actually responsible."
But kids, both young and old, don't care about the blame game. They want to know whether they'll still be able to find their favorite creme-filled yellow cake treat on the shelves.
The decades-old brand is legendary in consumers' minds and evokes strong feelings of nostalgia in every bite. Some still remember the brand's signature character "Twinkie The Kid" lassoing it up on early television commercials and proclaiming "Big Delight in Every Bite!" The foodstuff has even entered the legal canon. "The Twinkie Defense" was famously, and successfully, used to argue that a suspect on trial for murder suffered from depression and that his high-sugar diet was a symptom of this mental state.
In advance of the interim hearing, Hostess Brands spokesman Tom Becker told TODAY he "wasn't going to comment on what could happen" or speculate on the proceeding's outcome.
While today's results are likely to be minimal, in the coming months several different scenarios could play out, depending on who the buyer is, or if there is a buyer at all.
"There's a lot of Goodwill that comes with the brand name," said Pottow, "A lot of companies could buy the name and recipe for Twinkies and make them." They wouldn't have to make them at the Twinkies factories either. They could make them in new facilities not burdened under old worker agreements that, for instance, required employing separate drivers for two different kinds of Hostess products rather than trucking them together.
Twinkies get absorbed by a big American conglomerate
Some of the likely suitors include ConAgra, Tastycakes maker Flowers Food, or McKeeFoods, makers of Little Debbie. These companies would likely seek to attach the Twinkies to a more efficient delivery system. For instance, does it really make sense to deliver Twinkies in their own special Twinkies trucks?
"Twinkie The Kid" trades his cowboy hat for a sombrero...
A Mexican firm, like Grupo Bimbo, which Forbes reports put in a bid for Hostess several years ago, could move production south of the border. A South American company could get access to lower sugar prices and a cheaper non-unionized workforce. Or, they could keep product in the US, but made in a non-unionized factory.
...or develops a Canadian accent.
A Canadian company called Saputo has the Canadian rights to Hostess brand products. They're not affected at all by the Hostess liquidation and they could conceivably arrange it to sell Twinkies in America.
Twinkies dies
Pure speculation: No one buys the Twinkies recipe. Fans are forced to make their own at home. Prices for unopened boxes of Twinkies skyrocket on eBay. An "Occupy Twinkies" movement launches to build an unauthorized Twinkies knockoff factory with no leaders and online-only sales... and is surprisingly profitable.

[geezer69]

all my problems would be solved if i only had my twinkie

[against all odds]

While it's true that people getting put out of work is a negative thing, let's put it into prospective:

1) Because the product is basically not good for you in the first place, then it's almost lucky/on borrowed time that anyone associated with the production of twinkies had a job for this long; i think they should take the fact that they had a job this long as a "free lunch" (no pun intended) and move on if the job is no more.

To extrapolate, anyone involved in the production/sale of cigarettes, i feel should consider their job a luck thing and to not get upset if the job is no more.

So, to me the real issue is twinkies (and other hostess products). They are lucky it lasted this long. It's a bad product.

i don't think it's really a labor/profitability issue.

[poncho62]

You would feel differently if it was your job at stake.

[against all odds]

What i'm saying is that the product was so hokey in the first place that i would feel that my job would only be temporary; When the floor gets pulled out from under, the floor gets pulled out from under and i would need to look for a more stable industry.

The fact that twinkies have sold this long is a testament to the poor choices of american (and other?) consumers.

[poncho62]

Too much of anything is not good for you......Also, a little treat now and then wont hurt anyone. Most people know that and live that way....A few abuse certain foods. Is that the fault of the company making that product or the people abusing them?
Saying that the company should not being in business because some people abuse them sounds to me like what some people in government talk like.....that we cannot make our own decisions and must be guided. Sound familiar?

[NEW INTERIORS]

Originally Posted by against all odds

While it's true that people getting put out of work is a negative thing, let's put it into prospective:

1) Because the product is basically not good for you in the first place, then it's almost lucky/on borrowed time that anyone associated with the production of twinkies had a job for this long; i think they should take the fact that they had a job this long as a "free lunch" (no pun intended) and move on if the job is no more.

To extrapolate, anyone involved in the production/sale of cigarettes, i feel should consider their job a luck thing and to not get upset if the job is no more.

So, to me the real issue is twinkies (and other hostess products). They are lucky it lasted this long. It's a bad product.

i don't think it's really a labor/profitability issue.

Man !!!!! you got to be kidding !!!!!

Where's your heart at man !!!!! PEOPLE ARE LOSING JOB'S !!!! If you do a little digging around you will find a lot of things that isn't good for you... Sometimes it isn't the product that's bad... It's the person that over does it..

Not only do you come up with some wierd stuff.. You also seem heartless now..

Not sure if you even work or not... But becareful,, The wind might just blow your way...

[NEW INTERIORS]

Originally Posted by poncho62

Too much of anything is not good for you......Also, a little treat now and then wont hurt anyone. Most people know that and live that way....A few abuse certain foods. Is that the fault of the company making that product or the people abusing them?
Saying that the company should not being in business because some people abuse them sounds to me like what some people in government talk like.....that we cannot make our own decisions and must be guided. Sound familiar?

You beat me to it Poncho..

[against all odds]

Originally Posted by poncho62

Too much of anything is not good for you......Also, a little treat now and then wont hurt anyone. Most people know that and live that way....A few abuse certain foods. Is that the fault of the company making that product or the people abusing them?
Saying that the company should not being in business because some people abuse them sounds to me like what some people in government talk like.....that we cannot make our own decisions and must be guided. Sound familiar?

i agree that a little treat now and then will not hurt anyone. My point is that when you have a product like this, do not be surprised if it suddenly fails.
b) i'm not sure if most people who do purchase twinkies eat in moderation.
c) i never said the company should not be in business because some people "abuse" them. i'm saying don't be surprised if you make a bad product and suddenly it fails. Because you have been lucky for 75 years does not and should not mean next year will be or should be solid.

Originally Posted by NEW INTERIORS

Man !!!!! you got to be kidding !!!!!

Where's your heart at man !!!!! PEOPLE ARE LOSING JOB'S !!!! If you do a little digging around you will find a lot of things that isn't good for you... Sometimes it isn't the product that's bad... It's the person that over does it..

Not only do you come up with some wierd stuff.. You also seem heartless now..

Not sure if you even work or not... But becareful,, The wind might just blow your way...

i said it is generally a negative thing if people lose their jobs. My point is, if YOU CHOOSE to work in an industry to produces a harmful/not good product, then you assume the risk of loosing that job. i don't think any job is totally secure, but especially so in these industries that produce crap product.

[against all odds]

Jobs for the sake of jobs is not sound thinking in my opinion. What if hostess never existed in the first place----then these jobs would have never existed.


The company must do what it must do.

[NEW INTERIORS]

Originally Posted by against all odds

i agree that a little treat now and then will not hurt anyone. My point is that when you have a product like this, do not be surprised if it suddenly fails.
b) i'm not sure if most people who do purchase twinkies eat in moderation.
c) i never said the company should not be in business because some people "abuse" them. i'm saying don't be surprised if you make a bad product and suddenly it fails. Because you have been lucky for 75 years does not and should not mean next year will be or should be solid.





i said it is generally a negative thing if people lose their jobs. My point is, if YOU CHOOSE to work in an industry to produces a harmful/not good product, then you assume the risk of loosing that job. i don't think any job is totally secure, but especially so in these industries that produce crap product.

I can't stand cigarettes... (And I use to do my share a long time ago)... But I wouldn't want to see people lose their Jobs Just because they are bad for you..As far as twinkies being bad for you... Yeah !!! Ok !!!! You have to have a little control over how much food and snack's you stick in your mouth..

[NEW INTERIORS]

Originally Posted by against all odds

Jobs for the sake of jobs is not sound thinking in my opinion. What if hostess never existed in the first place----then these jobs would have never existed.


The company must do what it must do.

There's a person for ever Job.. Everyone count's.. and EVER job count's..

If you don't think so... Get reid of YOUR garbage man... Let's see if you don't think you need him after a few weeks''

I give my garbage men water everytime I can and thank them for what they do.....

[against all odds]

Originally Posted by NEW INTERIORS

I can't stand cigarettes... (And I use to do my share a long time ago)... But I wouldn't want to see people lose their Jobs Just because they are bad for you..As far as twinkies being bad for you... Yeah !!! Ok !!!! You have to have a little control over how much food and snack's you stick in your mouth..

Originally Posted by NEW INTERIORS

There's a person for ever Job.. Everyone count's.. and EVER job count's..

If you don't think so... Get reid of YOUR garbage man... Let's see if you don't think you need him after a few weeks''

I give my garbage men water everytime I can and thank them for what they do.....

1) i think most people know the effects of cigarettes, therefore if one choose to work in that industry, they should know that this could be a risky business to be involved in-----if cigarette sales plummet due to negative publicity (and rightly so), then the job may not exist anymore. Anyone who works in this industry should realize this and be prepared for it.

2) Garbage removal is a necessary thing---unlike twinkies. So it's not like comparing apples to apples here.

[NEW INTERIORS]

Originally Posted by against all odds

1) i think most people know the effects of cigarettes, therefore if one choose to work in that industry, they should know that this could be a risky business to be involved in-----if cigarette sales plummet due to negative publicity (and rightly so), then the job may not exist anymore. Anyone who works in this industry should realize this and be prepared for it.

2) Garbage removal is a necessary thing---unlike twinkies. So it's not like comparing apples to apples here.

If you go on any job thinking it will last forever your out of your mind..

As far as the garbage man..I think you missed the point...