Comments: 22 Score: [-] 416 [+].
< 1 2 >
Posted: 1 year ago by JoshSF49:
Oops
Score: [-] -15 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by tigertony:
« JoshSF49 : http://www.plime.com/politics/l/79035/1/
Sorry, I posted this a week ago. You posted the additional bailout money - not the latest trip at our expense, which is the point of the story.
Score: [-] 41 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by JoshSF49:
« tigertony : You posted the additional bailout money - not the latest trip at our expense, which is the point of the story. I apologize. I did not read your post correctly.
Score: [-] 42 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by tigertony:
« JoshSF49 : I apologize. I did not read your post correctly. No problem, I edited it some to make it more clear.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by 2manyusernames:
Company officials said the hunting trip in the English countryside was an annual event for customers that had been planned months before the bailout.
If this is true, this is a yearly event that was obviously planned for quite some time and much like the spa trip, it is mainly for their customers. Pissing off your customer base by reneging on promises isn't the best move when times are tough. That $86,000 buys them a lot of good will which brings them more than $86,000 in revenue
Score: [-] 16 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by unzercharlie:
« 2manyusernames:If this is true, this is a yearly event that was obviously planned for quite some time and much like the spa trip, it is mainly for their customers. Pissing off your customer base by reneging on promises isn't the best move when times are tough. That $86,000 buys them a lot of good will which brings them more than $86,000 in revenue You do realize that this is a company who all but went bankrupt? I said it last time they spent a bunch of money, and I'll say it again, who cares when the trip was booked? Should we just turn away because it's for "business?" I don't really trust their business model, and I think we've all got pretty good reason not to.
Score: [-] 105 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by siennablue:
« 2manyusernames:If this is true, this is a yearly event that was obviously planned for quite some time and much like the spa trip, it is mainly for their customers. Pissing off your customer base by reneging on promises isn't the best move when times are tough. That $86,000 buys them a lot of good will which brings them more than $86,000 in revenue lol ... American taxpayers were once again in a most fortunate position of subsidizing a party to go out and slaughter more innocent creatures? Well at least it wasn't us being slaughtered this time ... or was it?
You'd think they would at least film the blood-fest, so we could see what we paid for ... :)
Score: [-] 68 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by DAVEthefish:
He's coming here for a hunting trip? Is he coming as the hunter, or the prey? give me some money and I'll go hunting for him :P
Score: [-] 61 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by 2manyusernames:
« unzercharlie : You do realize that this is a company who all but went bankrupt? I said it last time they spent a bunch of money, and I'll say it again, who cares when the trip was booked? Should we just turn away because it's for "business?" I don't really trust their business model, and I think we've all got pretty good reason not to. So since the company went bankrupt, they should blow off their customers to save a few bucks? $86k is chicken feed compared to their total budget. They can blow much more than that just purchasing a higher grade paper than going with some economy generic kind.
That $86k buys good will with their customers. Shows them that they are still solid and soothes their worries. It helps keep them as customers and helps them continue to sell their product so that they get money from people other than the taxpayers.
Remember we didn't just give them money, we basically purchased the company. We want them to create revenue so that we can profit.
It isn't that hard to understand.
Basic math.
-$86,000 for something that basically amounts to advertisement.
+ $400,000 in increased revenues plus the value in retaining your customers, keeping them loyal.
Score: [-] 25 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by unzercharlie:
« 2manyusernames : Basic math.
-$86,000 for something that basically amounts to advertisement.
+ $400,000 in increased revenues plus the value in retaining your customers, keeping them loyal. It's not that you're the only one who understands business, you're defending a failed company. Yeah in a typical business setting, blowing some cash on an outting with potential clients isn't such a bad idea, but how has it worked out for these guys so far?
Score: [-] 53 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by tragluk:
A common mistake that most companies make when facing cutbacks is to cut Advertising and Promotion budgets. These are things that are easy to cut because they provide no tangible benefit. You can't SEE that your hunting trip brings in $400,000 so it's easy to cut the $80,000 cost and then not worry about it.
And it's also easy to point at a company and say "AHA! That's why it failed! They're spending money!" without knowing all the facts.
I don't know their budget, I couldn't tell you where they are failing and where they are succeeding but I do know enough to know that I don't know enough.
The media will report on any 'excess' which will cause interest and sell papers. They won't report on AIG cutting back on manpower (boooring), they won't talk about how they switch to a lower cost paper supplier (yawn), or that they cut their advertising budget by .5% (snoooze). They will paint a picture of wild parties and (gasp!) killing of animals. These are the things which get people stirred up and excited. This is water-cooler gossip and you read it in Which paper? I want a copy of that!
I can't judge from this article about the whole picture of AIG's finances, so I won't condemn them for it. We know it failed, but we don't know WHY it failed or what is needed to restore it. Without the whole picture, it's just an exciting news story.
Score: [-] 92 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by larknet:
They "regret the event wasn't cancelled" which in all actuality means "we regret you found out about our over the top expenditures at the expense of our shareholders and customers and that we got caught, oops, sorry, we HOPE it won't happen again, but then again it just might". And guess what, it did.
Sure, an 80k trip might bring in the 400k and keep clients loyal. But, the idea of any impropriety on their behalf might seem frivolous and thus may lose them customers who believe they are being betrayed.
Score: [-] 95 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by BrownTrout:
Even with the business aspect, I find this a bit odd...
I work in Insurance and these guys sell direct to the public. This means that they do not have to "pamper" independent agents to entice them to sell more AIG policies. So the customers that the article speaks of must be actual policy holders.
These same customers would have to have been hiding under a rock for the last 6 months to NOT know what is going on with the solvency of AIG.
So with that in mind - if you are a big customer, are you more inclined to keep your business with a failing company that spends it's lifeline money on a European hunting trip or one that demonstrates some fiscal responsibility when it is on its last leg (even if it is a token gesture)?
Personally... I'd go on the trip and then pull every penny of my money out of that company!
Score: [-] 94 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by meggysue:
I vote that we pull their passports, and make them report their business and personal movements to their local newscasters. That would make them think about what they don't want to be caught doing. Sorry b******.
Score: [-] 50 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by tragluk:
Yes, and I hear their CEOs are making 6 figure salaries annually, let's make them all work for minimum wage. And while were at it... Let's get rid of all their health insurance, dental insurance, and 401K. These are all just 'benefits' of working for a company and since the company failed they should all lose ALL benefits.
Score: [-] 46 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by professormurder:
I just love that they are spending all of this money, to rub it in the stupid government's faces.
They are awesome.
Score: [-] 27 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by hilltophoodlum:
« tragluk : A common mistake that most companies make when facing cutbacks is to cut Advertising and Promotion budgets. These are things that are easy to cut because they provide no tangible benefit. You can't SEE that your hunting trip brings in $400,000 so it's easy to cut the $80,000 cost and then not worry about it.
And it's also easy to point at a company and say "AHA! That's why it failed! They're spending money!" without knowing all the facts.
I don't know their budget, I couldn't tell you where they are failing and where they are succeeding but I do know enough to know that I don't know enough.
The media will report on any 'excess' which will cause interest and sell papers. They won't report on AIG cutting back on manpower (boooring), they won't talk about how they switch to a lower cost paper supplier (yawn), or that they cut their advertising budget by .5% (snoooze). They will paint a picture of wild parties and (gasp!) killing of animals. These are the things which get people stirred up and excited. This is water-cooler gossip and you read it in Which paper? I want a copy of that!
I can't judge from this article about the whole picture of AIG's finances, so I won't condemn them for it. We know it failed, but we don't know WHY it failed or what is needed to restore it. Without the whole picture, it's just an exciting news story. no matter what, doesn't justify $86,000 that didn't need to be spent being used on something frivolous and stupid like a hunting trip...
Score: [-] 27 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by drogue:
The idea that the trip was already booked, and that it builds goodwill for their customers, which is good for their business, which is good for taxpayers, because we "bought" the company is ridiculous. Nothing hurts a large firm like AIG more than bad press, and this is bad press writ large.
Customer loyalty is one thing, but not canceling the expedition was a slap in the face to the shareholders, who now happen to be the American people, by proxy, through [little] fault of their own.
"Sorry guys, times are tough--You've all read the news, and it would be pretty bad form for us to spend about twice the US median household income on a trip where you get to shoot some animals."
How hard would that have been?
Score: [-] 71 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by Wingnut:
You're all missing the most important point of the story.
$86,000 for airfare, hotel accommodations, meals, permits, etc. to send several executives (assumed, don't know exactly how many) on a hunting trip? That's one HELL of a good deal! I wanna hook up with their travel agent!
Score: [-] 0 [+].
Posted: 1 year ago by meggysue:
« Wingnut : You're all missing the most important point of the story.
$86,000 for airfare, hotel accommodations, meals, permits, etc. to send several executives (assumed, don't know exactly how many) on a hunting trip? That's one HELL of a good deal! I wanna hook up with their travel agent! You've gotta have money to save money.
Score: [-] 0 [+].
< 1 2 >