Buh-bye twinkies

[pendell]

Hostess (http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/16/news/companies/hostess-closing/index.html?iid=Lead) is closing its doors forever.

Nuts. I had a secret zombie apocalypse survival pan based around those little cakes. They have a shelf life of 50 years and so could keep as survival rations indefinitely. Plus, they could double as ammunition in a pinch.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Dallas-Dakota]

They will be no doubt, be bought by another company. And otherwise :smalleek: It's just a shame that I can't get them here over in the Netherlands.

[RandomNPC]

Theory from my coworkers.
The workers wouldn't take a permanent 8% pay cut. The owners closed the doors, and plan to wait whatever amount of time is legally mandatory, then will open up non-union under a different name.

And even twinkies go bad after a few weeks, it's just Hollywood hullabaloo that they last forever.

[Dr.Epic]

Hostess (http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/16/news/companies/hostess-closing/index.html?iid=Lead) is closing its doors forever.

NO! NO! NNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!:smalleek :

[Starwulf]

Theory from my coworkers.
The workers wouldn't take a permanent 8% pay cut. The owners closed the doors, and plan to wait whatever amount of time is legally mandatory, then will open up non-union under a different name.

And even twinkies go bad after a few weeks, it's just Hollywood hullabaloo that they last forever.

Maybe outside the wrappers/box, but in their wrappers and box, they really do last as long as people say.

[Ravens_cry]

Never really liked them much to be honest, though I've only had them enough times that you could count on one hand of a kid who used to play with fireworks.

[JustPlayItLoud]

Well, I guess there goes my business plan of launching knock off Twinkies onto the market and calling them Twonkies.

Today is the day my dreams died.

But seriously folks, I would be sad if someone didn't buy up Twinkies. I don't eat them all the time (I'm more than fat enough), but I would miss the occasional Twinkie. Everything else I enjoy basically has an analogous product from another company, but Twinkies are just so iconic that it wouldn't feel right to buy the same product but not called Twinkies.

[Morph Bark]

There goes one item on my long list of things I wanted to eat before I turned 50. :smallfrown:

[Winter_Wolf]

There goes one item on my long list of things I wanted to eat before I turned 50. :smallfrown:

Don't feel too bad. You probably wouldn't be living to 50 if you did eat 'em. Twinkies are marketed as "food", but if you've ever had one, you might debate that point.

I used to eat 'em, but they truly are disgusting things.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

I ate a deep fried Twinkie once. And I had another twinkie once normally. The deep-fried one was palatable because when you get a deep-fried thing-on-a-stick you expect it to be horrible anyhow.

[KnightDisciple]

Hostess (http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/16/news/companies/hostess-closing/index.html?iid=Lead) is closing its doors forever.

Nuts. I had a secret zombie apocalypse survival pan based around those little cakes. They have a shelf life of 50 years and so could keep as survival rations indefinitely. Plus, they could double as ammunition in a pinch.

Respectfully,

Brian P.
Kind of been the writing on the wall for a couple years now.

Suffice to say, they had issues all across the board with not controlling spending, so it's not shocking they came to a point they couldn't continue.


Maybe outside the wrappers/box, but in their wrappers and box, they really do last as long as people say.
No. They do not. Speaking as someone who worked as a contractor for tech support at Hostess a couple of years ago (and was thus attendant at a few meetings with major execs present), the shelf life of their various cakes was, at that time, roughly 30 days (on average). This is partially due to a lack of dairy product in their construction, which decreases spoilage rate.
It was seen as a big initiative when they were working to increase shelf life to about 45 days, in an effort to expand the markets in various ways (that would require a longer supply chain, and thus a higher shelf life).
Please stop repeating "Twinkies last for years" as fact, it's an urban legend.

[Gnoman]

The company has been in bankruptcy for >10 years, and has been closing facilities left and right. They're pretty infamous around here for incredibly poor labor practices and have had many, many OSHA violations. (For example, maintenance workers were flatly forbidden to lock out equipment while working on it, despite such procedures being federally mandated.)

[Morph Bark]

Don't feel too bad. You probably wouldn't be living to 50 if you did eat 'em. Twinkies are marketed as "food", but if you've ever had one, you might debate that point.

I used to eat 'em, but they truly are disgusting things.

Eh, I've definitely have had worse things. :smalltongue: If I were afraid of that, I wouldn't have a list of things I want to eat before I turn 50!

[KnightDisciple]

Don't feel too bad. You probably wouldn't be living to 50 if you did eat 'em. Twinkies are marketed as "food", but if you've ever had one, you might debate that point.

I used to eat 'em, but they truly are disgusting things.
They're as much food as any packaged good. They aren't made of plastic or styrofoam or some other nonsense; flour and eggs and such go into them.

They're not healthy, no. But on the flip side, it's all about moderation. Claiming someone who eats Twinkies won't live to 50 is very much hyperbole. Maybe if they ate almost nothing but, sure. But a Twinkie or snack cake now and then won't kill you. Kind of like bacon now and then won't kill you.

And as for them being "disgusting", that's a matter of opinion and taste. I do myself prefer Zingers, though. :smallwink:

[Rawhide]

Huh. I guess you *can* hurt a twinkie.

[Dr.Epic]

Never really liked them much to be honest,

Then you must be a robot! Don't try and deny it! After all, the love and passion one gets from eating a twinkee is the most reliable for of a Turing Test.

[Winter_Wolf]

They're as much food as any packaged good. They aren't made of plastic or styrofoam or some other nonsense; flour and eggs and such go into them.

They're not healthy, no. But on the flip side, it's all about moderation. Claiming someone who eats Twinkies won't live to 50 is very much hyperbole. Maybe if they ate almost nothing but, sure. But a Twinkie or snack cake now and then won't kill you. Kind of like bacon now and then won't kill you.

And as for them being "disgusting", that's a matter of opinion and taste. I do myself prefer Zingers, though. :smallwink:

That part I bolded? That was kind of what I was going for.

But in all honesty, there's a certain kind of flavor that all of those prepackaged cake-like things share, which I do think tastes plastic-like. It could just be the cheap plastic they're wrapped in. Or the preservatives, I dunno.

[Dr.Epic]

They're not healthy, no. But on the flip side, it's all about moderation. Claiming someone who eats Twinkies won't live to 50 is very much hyperbole. Maybe if they ate almost nothing but, sure.

I'm currently running an experiment that will prove or disprove if twinkees will grant one immortality. I've yet to become immortal, but I'll keep trying.

[pffh]

Well I guess I'll go into the control group considering I've never even tasted twinky.

[Kelb_Panthera]

But, but......... snowballs. :smallfrown:

I love snowballs. Cream-filled choclate cake in a marshmallow shell coated in shredded coconut, what's not to love? They even came in different colors for each of the holidays; pink for valentines, green for st patty's day, orange for halloween, etc.

Damn you, hostess, for your shoddy business practices! If you'd been run properly I wouldn't be denied the wonder that is snowballs. *sheds a single manly tear*

(funny thing: I'm not sure just how hyperbolic I'm being in this post. I really do love those things.)

[Gettles]

Maybe outside the wrappers/box, but in their wrappers and box, they really do last as long as people say.

Speaking as someone who has encountered a 10 year old twinkie still wrapped. No they don't last forever.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Maybe they just don't last like they used to? With the big health movement in the US over the last decade or two, a lot more people are looking at their food labels and companies are using a lot less preservatives than they used to as a result, since people tend to over-react to any hint of a potential health-issue related to preservatives and other chemically produced ingredients.

The notion that "processed" food is more bad for you than "non-processed" food alternately amuses and annoys me. The only way you get food that hasn't been processed in some way or other is to buy raw ingredients and do the processing yourself. Even then, it's processed by the time you eat it; you processed it yourself.

[KnightDisciple]

Maybe they just don't last like they used to? With the big health movement in the US over the last decade or two, a lot more people are looking at their food labels and companies are using a lot less preservatives than they used to as a result, since people tend to over-react to any hint of a potential health-issue related to preservatives and other chemically produced ingredients.

The notion that "processed" food is more bad for you than "non-processed" food alternately amuses and annoys me. The only way you get food that hasn't been processed in some way or other is to buy raw ingredients and do the processing yourself. Even then, it's processed by the time you eat it; you processed it yourself.

The basic formula hasn't changed. (http://www.snopes.com/food/ingredient/twinkies.asp)

They last long because there's no dairy products (which spoil rapidly). The sponge cake still has flour, sugar, eggs, and such.

Seriously people there are ingredients on the boxes.

They don't last properly for years and years. Yes, perhaps occasionally some that are 2-3 times past shelf life are edible, but that's not recommended, and it's kind of annoying how this is trumpeted as fact.

And while people are scrambling to hoarde Twinkies, thousands of people in cities across the nation are without work. And while the brands will likely be snapped up, the people are a less sure thing.

[Dr.Epic]

Does this mean twinkees will become an endangered species? Man, this is just another thing that my future children will never have:

"Back in my day, we took pictures with an actual camera not a phone which we had to take to a place to get developed and after that we'd rent movies from Blockbuster all while eating twinkees and only nerds owned computers and 64 bits of graphics and game play was considered state of the art."

[Ravens_cry]

Zombieland just got dated.

[Yora]

NO! NO! NNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!:smalleek :
And all day I was arguing with myself "Do you go out in the cold and restock the fridge over the weekend or wait until monday?". Now I have to go because I'm out of sweets. :smallbiggrin:

[Starbuck_II]

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-long-do-twinkies-last-2012-11
A science teacher in Blue Hill, Maine, kept one in his classroom for 30 years. "It's rather brittle, but if you dusted it off, it's probably still edible,"

So they last up to 30 years :smallbiggrin:

[Blue Ghost]

Think of the orcs! (http://now.msn.com/twinkie-uses-photo-gallery)

[Ravens_cry]

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-long-do-twinkies-last-2012-11
A science teacher in Blue Hill, Maine, kept one in his classroom for 30 years. "It's rather brittle, but if you dusted it off, it's probably still edible,"

So they last up to 30 years :smallbiggrin:
""Probably", he hasn't tested it. What kind of science is that?:smalltongue:

[Pokonic]

Zombieland just got dated.

Life's little twinkie meter just ran out.:smallfrown:

[Haruki-kun]

Cream-filled choclate cake in a marshmallow shell coated in shredded coconut, what's not to love?

Consistency. :smallamused:


Zombieland just got dated.

Interestingly enough, while Twinkies are sold in Mexico, there's an identical alternate brand that's most likely still gonna be made there. You know what it's called? Los Submarinos.

.....yes, I'm being serious.

[Ravens_cry]

Interestingly enough, while Twinkies are sold in Mexico, there's an identical alternate brand that's most likely still gonna be made there. You know what it's called? Los Submarinos.

.....yes, I'm being serious.
Not that weird. Submarine sandwiches, AKA Subs, Heros or Hoagies, among other names and variations, are another somewhat similarly shaped food that takes its name from the Silent Service.

[Haruki-kun]

Well, it was a joke in Zombieland. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-vFRiB7YqU&feature=player_detailpage#t=36s)

[Ravens_cry]

Thank you for the clarification.

[nyjastul69]

I'm not bothered by losing twinkies, I never cared for them much. What bothers me is that Hostess owns Drakes and Drakes makes Funnybones, which are one of the best snack cakes ever made. I'll miss fruit pies as well if nobody buys Hostess and continues production. Sad days.

[pendell]

Well, here's a recipe for homemade twinkie (http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2012/11/16/have-no-fear-the-homemade-twinkie-recipe-is-here/). It's probably not identical to Hostess' recipe, but hey , how many different ways are there to put cream-colored filling in a yellow cake?

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Kelb_Panthera]

The basic formula hasn't changed. (http://www.snopes.com/food/ingredient/twinkies.asp)

They last long because there's no dairy products (which spoil rapidly). The sponge cake still has flour, sugar, eggs, and such.

Seriously people there are ingredients on the boxes.

They don't last properly for years and years. Yes, perhaps occasionally some that are 2-3 times past shelf life are edible, but that's not recommended, and it's kind of annoying how this is trumpeted as fact.

And while people are scrambling to hoarde Twinkies, thousands of people in cities across the nation are without work. And while the brands will likely be snapped up, the people are a less sure thing.

That's true now, but it wasn't always the case that the ingredients were on the label. The FDA hasn't always been a thing either. It's entirely possible that type and amount of preservatives in twinkies has changed dramatically since their introduction in.... what was it, the late 60's or early 70's? or are they older still? Sure, modern twinkies won't be entirely edible after a few months, but a twinkie manufactured in 1969..... who knows?

[Haruki-kun]

Not to mention making your own isn't quite as appealing as seeing one at a store and thinking maybe a Twinkie would be nice right about now.

[DabblerWizard]

Hostess also makes Wonder Bread, among other things.

As far as I'm concerned, it's a "wonder" people eat ate it. It was definitely bread shaped, but whether it had actual nutritional value is debatable. :smalltongue:

I imagine (1) the company will incorporate under a new logo, (2) sell their product / factories / distribution to another company, or (3) someone else will fill the "void" that is "created".

[KnightDisciple]

That's true now, but it wasn't always the case that the ingredients were on the label. The FDA hasn't always been a thing either. It's entirely possible that type and amount of preservatives in twinkies has changed dramatically since their introduction in.... what was it, the late 60's or early 70's? or are they older still? Sure, modern twinkies won't be entirely edible after a few months, but a twinkie manufactured in 1969..... who knows?I think that, considering the bakeries were running on equipment that was about that old (the "servers" that they used to coordinate the day's orders and such were seriously 30 or more years old), yeah, the formula's probably almost exactly the same.
I don't think it's actually possible to make a product like that last "years", and frankly it's annoying how insistent some people are about completely untrue statements. :smallannoyed:


Hostess also makes Wonder Bread, among other things.

As far as I'm concerned, it's a "wonder" people eat ate it. It was definitely bread shaped, but whether it had actual nutritional value is debatable. :smalltongue:

I imagine (1) the company will incorporate under a new logo, (2) sell their product / factories / distribution to another company, or (3) someone else will fill the "void" that is "created".

Hostess Brands (http://www.hostessbrands.com/Brands.aspx) encompassed quite a few brands (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostess_Brands#Brands).
Also consider that at least some stores (as in Price Chopper, Walmart, etc) likely used Hostess to provide "generic" food products (breads, snacks, etc). I mean, do you think Walmart actually runs its own bakeries and such?

Wonder Bread is no worse than any other comparatively cheap shelf brand. It was, in fact, bread.

As for the company's fate, it's actually pretty clear. 18,000 and change people have no jobs. The brand names, and presumably the formulas to go with them, will be sold off to various bidders. The plants themselves will be sold, but it's hard to say if many/any will be re-activated.
In a year or two, Twinkies, Ding Dongs, and so on will be produced by (most likely) Little Debbie or Grupo Bimbo (the latter's apparently actively trying to acquire the brands). This will be done in those companies' plants, meaning most of the fired people will have to look elsewhere.
Twinkies won't go extinct.
People will still make thoughtless jokes about "eternal Twinkies".
And so on. :smallsigh:

[JoshL]

Not really a big fan, but had to go out and buy a box this week. Unsurprisingly, the store was nearly sold out.

[thubby]

this is like if they stopped selling those valentine candies. sure no one likes the horrid little things, but they're an institution!

[Rawhide]

I don't think it's actually possible to make a product like that last "years", and frankly it's annoying how insistent some people are about completely untrue statements. :smallannoyed:

Why are you getting so worked up about this? It's a joke, a long running gag actually, based on the perceived shelf life of a nutritionally dubious foodstuff. It may not be factually correct, but there is absolutely no reason to react the way you have.


People will still make thoughtless jokes about "eternal Twinkies".

They are far from "thoughtless".

[KnightDisciple]

Why are you getting so worked up about this? It's a joke, a long running gag actually, based on the perceived shelf life of a nutritionally dubious foodstuff. It may not be factually correct, but there is absolutely no reason to react the way you have.

They are far from "thoughtless".

I just...I worked there for a year. I got to know people who'd been at that company for 2 decades, or at least several years.
The mother of one of my best, closest friends (a guy who's a brother in all but blood) has worked at that company since like forever.
It was by no means a perfect company, but it was a company, and it was a workplace-home for many people.
They are all, to a one, jobless. I myself have been jobless repeatedly, being a guy in the tech industry who entered the workforce less than a decade ago. I mean, I had another workless period just in the last year. So I know all too well the frustration and pain that comes with that.
Add onto it the fact that I've got the unconscious desire to correct erroneous facts, and that people are repeatedly presenting the "eternal twinkies" thing, not as a joke but as a fact, and it's adding a bit of frustration.
I think some of my irritation springs from seeing what seems to be a lot of half-baked ideas and facts about what was under that company name and so forth. :smallsigh:

[Kelb_Panthera]

I feel your pain, fella. I too have had (and continue to have, unfortunately) periods of non-employment.

If it makes you feel any better, I wasn't putting forth my suggestions as facts, merely as possibilities.

On that note; just because they were using the same machines for 30+ years doesn't mean they never changed the formula. Those machines can be calibrated to add different amounts of various ingredients, pretty much on the fly, and many ingredients come from their producers already mixed. It's not at all outside the realm of possibility that the number and amount of preservatives has changed drastically over 30+ years, even if the amounts of flour, egg, and whatever the cream is made of have remained largely the same.

I'm not saying anyone should just mindlessly chomp on any 20+ year old twinkie they should happen to find, just that the actuall shelf-life of the product may have changed over the years, and that given the general movement towards a "healthier" lifestyle and the demonizing of chemically produced ingredients in food, that change was most likely a decrease.

[Starwulf]

Honestly, the only reason I was putting it forth as truth is because literally just two nights ago when they were talking about it on the news, someone on the news was talking about how it was true that twinkies really could last forever. So I was just repeating what I heard. Obviously you shouldn't always believe what you hear on the television, but when it's the news, you tend to trust that a little bit more. I apologize for making a thoughtless post, but you did(and have been) honestly over-reacting to it just a little bit to much.

[Rawhide]

I just...I worked there for a year. I got to know people who'd been at that company for 2 decades, or at least several years.
The mother of one of my best, closest friends (a guy who's a brother in all but blood) has worked at that company since like forever.
It was by no means a perfect company, but it was a company, and it was a workplace-home for many people.
They are all, to a one, jobless. I myself have been jobless repeatedly, being a guy in the tech industry who entered the workforce less than a decade ago. I mean, I had another workless period just in the last year. So I know all too well the frustration and pain that comes with that.
Add onto it the fact that I've got the unconscious desire to correct erroneous facts, and that people are repeatedly presenting the "eternal twinkies" thing, not as a joke but as a fact, and it's adding a bit of frustration.
I think some of my irritation springs from seeing what seems to be a lot of half-baked ideas and facts about what was under that company name and so forth. :smallsigh:

Jokes or misconceptions about the staff that worked there, that's something to get upset over - about the product... not so much. By all means, correct someone if they make a genuine mistake, but there is no need to get upset over such jokes about an inanimate product.

[Winter_Wolf]

Honestly, the only reason I was putting it forth as truth is because literally just two nights ago when they were talking about it on the news, someone on the news was talking about how it was true that twinkies really could last forever. So I was just repeating what I heard. Obviously you shouldn't always believe what you hear on the television, but when it's the news, you tend to trust that a little bit more. I apologize for making a thoughtless post, but you did(and have been) honestly over-reacting to it just a little bit to much.

Wait, are you talking about American news? I dunno about your area, but I consider the news I see on tv about as reliable a source of facts as the internet (not very). :smalltongue:

I do know for a fact that twinkies are edible (maybe not fresh, certainly not good tasting, but edible) for at least five months after buying from the store and sitting in a fishing vessel pantry* all summer. Considering that everything is shipped by barge to my hometown, that's at least another two months from the factory. "Best by" dates are just a rough guideline as to how long you have until the food stops being enjoyable to consume, not until it becomes poisonous. Expiration dates, on the other hand, often seem overly optimistic about such things.

As to the former Hostess workers, I'm certain they did the best they were allowed to within the confines of company policy.

*This "pantry" is essentially a covered cubby hole with NO climate control or insulation other than the wood and fiberglass of the hull.

[grom the mighty]

I can think of ONE particular zombie slaying, banjo playing, Bill Murray lovin' badass who isn't going to react very well to this whole topic....
http://static3.fjcdn.com/comments/No+more+Twinkies+Tallahassee+sad+_685189b6663c9463 bee8be85e646a3f1.jpg

It's only a matter of time before Woody Harrelson releases a youtube video (as Tallahassee of course) condemning Hostess for letting twinkies be taken off of the shelves :smallamused:

[Dr.Epic]

I can think of ONE particular zombie slaying, banjo playing, Bill Murray lovin' badass who isn't going to react very well to this whole topic....
http://static3.fjcdn.com/comments/No+more+Twinkies+Tallahassee+sad+_685189b6663c9463 bee8be85e646a3f1.jpg

Is it a blank image? 'Cause that's what I see when I click the spoilers: a blank image.

[Coidzor]

Interestingly enough, while Twinkies are sold in Mexico, there's an identical alternate brand that's most likely still gonna be made there. You know what it's called? Los Submarinos.

.....yes, I'm being serious.

Made by Bimbo, no?

[Haruki-kun]

Made by Bimbo, no?

Technically. The Bimbo company owns Marinela, which is the name of the brand they're sold under.

[TheEmerged]

Grupo Bimbo is already being named as one of the likely buyers of the brand, for the record.

RE: Eternal Twinkies. The following anecdote is based on my own experience, and technically involved a similar product from a competitor. Having said that? When my father had to retire for medical purposes, he left the job that day without having eaten his lunch. My mother, being sentimental (I am, for the record, worse) put his lunchbox up with the lunch still in it -- and forgot about it.

A few years later we went searching for an odd smell that had appeared in the basement and found the lunchbox. The sandwich was the culprit and was rapidly thrown out. The bag of chips was left in the box though it was rather obviously stale. The (not exactly) Twinkie, however? Still looked perfect. I went to squeeze it and it did not give -- it was rock hard, despite looking almost identical to a fresh one. It was also left in the box.

Years later, we had another occasion to open the box. The bag of chips had burst and was thrown out. The (not exactly) Twinkie? Still looked fine, but had shrunk visibly. We put it back in the box.

Not two weeks later, we noticed a strong odor in the basement. I didn't even think twice, I went straight for the lunchbox and, you guess it, what used to be a (not exactly) Twinkie was now one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen. Yeah, it was thrown out.

Now, from having dealt with food service in my lifetime, I wouldn't have eaten that (not exactly) Twinkie three months after purchase. I can't emphasize that it might have looked fine but was rock hard when we discovered it.

[pendell]

Well, someone believed the myth (http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2019699980_twinkiesnomore17.html). In 1999 twinkies were added to a time capsule intended to be opened in the year 2100. It was later removed for fear of rodents getting into the capsule.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Haruki-kun]

RE: Eternal Twinkies.

*snip*

I wouldn't eat a Twinkie past expiration date no matter what it looked, smelled or felt like...

[Rawhide]

Well, someone believed the myth (http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2019699980_twinkiesnomore17.html). In 1999 twinkies were added to a time capsule intended to be opened in the year 2100. It was later removed for fear of rodents getting into the capsule.

Silly fool.


...should have put a Big Mac in.

[Haruki-kun]

Silly fool.


...should have put a Big Mac in.

I don't know about years, but a girl I knew did that for a science experiment and the Big Mac did not, in fact, spoil after three weeks. That being said, I would STILL not eat it. Gross. :smallyuk:

[grom the mighty]

Is it a blank image? 'Cause that's what I see when I click the spoilers: a blank image.

It's actually a picture of Woody Harrelson crying.....

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m7s33pAhlU1r7bmylo1_500.jpg

^that :smalltongue:

[oblivion6]

i for one hope Hostess brands continue to get made. i dont know what would happen if Chocadiles went extinct...

[Dr.Epic]

Good news everyone! Twinkees may live after all! Other companies are buying the rights to their snack foods, so we may yet keep the twinkee alive! YAY!:smallbiggrin:

[grom the mighty]

Good news everyone! Twinkees may live after all! Other companies are buying the rights to their snack foods, so we may yet keep the twinkee alive! YAY!:smallbiggrin:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vtNj7fjt0Dg/Tit_yOFV_BI/AAAAAAAADCs/KoUa-IbFnXk/s400/Woody%2BHarrelson%2B2.jpg

[Cikomyr]

Eh, Scre Twinkies. You people really need to get in any Quebec convenience store/grocery, and by a Vachon's May West.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-IHg59F0Z5hY/TjwUx_VZkzI/AAAAAAAAAro/vOfNqdU5lsI/s1600/DSCN2643.JPG

That's the stuff.

Vachon is already producing Twinkies for some part of North America. Maybe they plan to stage a whole US Takeover?!

[Dr.Epic]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-IHg59F0Z5hY/TjwUx_VZkzI/AAAAAAAAAro/vOfNqdU5lsI/s1600/DSCN2643.JPG

That is a very attractive snack food.

[Winter_Wolf]

I don't know about years, but a girl I knew did that for a science experiment and the Big Mac did not, in fact, spoil after three weeks. That being said, I would STILL not eat it. Gross. :smallyuk:

Having recently eaten one of their CBO burgers, I can say that it might not be universal, but every McD's in a 10 mile radius of my home produces food so greasy that it's probably like how duck confit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_confit) is preserved in a layer of fat to keep the oxygen and bacteria away from the meat. In fact having read the wiki on duck confit, I'd say it is exactly the same thing happening.

[tyckspoon]

Good news everyone! Twinkees may live after all! Other companies are buying the rights to their snack foods, so we may yet keep the twinkee alive! YAY!:smallbiggrin:

Not a huge surprise- the Twinkie (and to a lesser extent all the other Hostess Foods brand names) has a huge marketing value, and with the original company going bankrupt there's a chance for other companies to buy that value at potentially much less than its actual market worth. There wasn't ever a question as to whether or not Twinkies would survive, IMO- it's just a matter of whether a single company manages to secure the entire Hostess Foods brand portfolio, or if it gets cut apart and divided among different bidders.

[pendell]

So that means this won't happen (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3Z7gZdiyPTw)?

Warning: Strong language.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[grom the mighty]

Not a huge surprise- the Twinkie (and to a lesser extent all the other Hostess Foods brand names) has a huge marketing value, and with the original company going bankrupt there's a chance for other companies to buy that value at potentially much less than its actual market worth. There wasn't ever a question as to whether or not Twinkies would survive, IMO- it's just a matter of whether a single company manages to secure the entire Hostess Foods brand portfolio, or if it gets cut apart and divided among different bidders.
They were always going to end up back on the shelves, even if it was with a different name.
The problem is whether there was going to be a delay in between :smallfrown:

[Dr.Epic]

Not a huge surprise- the Twinkie (and to a lesser extent all the other Hostess Foods brand names) has a huge marketing value, and with the original company going bankrupt there's a chance for other companies to buy that value at potentially much less than its actual market worth. There wasn't ever a question as to whether or not Twinkies would survive, IMO- it's just a matter of whether a single company manages to secure the entire Hostess Foods brand portfolio, or if it gets cut apart and divided among different bidders.

Maybe Disney will buy it and then we can see Twinkee the Jedi in the new Star Wars trilogy.:smallwink:

[oblivion6]

Maybe Disney will buy it and then we can see Twinkee the Jedi in the new Star Wars trilogy.:smallwink:

dont even go there...

[TheEmerged]

The Latest: the bankruptcy judge has declined the Chapter 7 request, trying to force both sides back to the table.

[KnightDisciple]

So that means this won't happen (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3Z7gZdiyPTw)?

Warning: Strong language.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

Considering those trucks would never, ever have just 1 product like that, no. :smalltongue:

[Gnoman]

Also consider that at least some stores (as in Price Chopper, Walmart, etc) likely used Hostess to provide "generic" food products (breads, snacks, etc). I mean, do you think Walmart actually runs its own bakeries and such?


It's not simply likely. Roughly 80% of the bread on store shelves in NW Ohio came out of the Interstate Brands facility. The single difference between them is the wrapper.

[Starbuck_II]

Having recently eaten one of their CBO burgers, I can say that it might not be universal, but every McD's in a 10 mile radius of my home produces food so greasy that it's probably like how duck confit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_confit) is preserved in a layer of fat to keep the oxygen and bacteria away from the meat. In fact having read the wiki on duck confit, I'd say it is exactly the same thing happening.

You should try Dairy Queen burgers, I've worked there and the at least in the one I worked at, the food was not as greasy.

[Anarion]

Looks like the Bakers' Union is willing to go back into talks. Both sides have agreed to mediation and they're going to try it out.

Maybe Twinkies do Last Forever. (http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/11/19/165500505/maybe-twinkies-do-last-forever-union-hostess-headed-to-mediation?live=1)

[oblivion6]

Looks like the Bakers' Union is willing to go back into talks. Both sides have agreed to mediation and they're going to try it out.

Maybe Twinkies do Last Forever. (http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/11/19/165500505/maybe-twinkies-do-last-forever-union-hostess-headed-to-mediation?live=1)

i cant view the link right now. that means Hostess might survive and not be forced to sell everything?

[Anarion]

i cant view the link right now. that means Hostess might survive and not be forced to sell everything?

It's a link to an NPR article.

It means that they're going to go into talks. If the mediation is successful, they'll negotiate a new contract and everyone can go back to work. Hostess will still be in chapter 11 bankruptcy, but it could potentially reorganize as an ongoing business or sell itself whole hog to a willing buyer that can pay off the debts and get the business at a steep discount.

If they still can't get an agreement, then all the employees will be out of work and they'll have to tear down the factories and sell the business off piece-meal.

[Rockphed]

If they still can't get an agreement, then all the employees will be out of work and they'll have to tear down the factories and sell the business off piece-meal.

While my opinions of the participants in this whole fiasco are too political to repeat (also, too full of salty language), I can say that I don't desire anyone to be out of a job in the current economy. Having spent most of the last 3 months looking for a job for after I graduate, it is both depressing and very un-fun. Also, I doubt the factories would all be torn down. A factory is, after all, a very large capital investment, and someone will eventually want a big box of a building to do industrial activity in. Whether or not they will ever be used as bakeries is a different story.

Did anyone else have a "Day old hostess" store to frequent growing up? My mother pretty much got all the bread and snacks for the family at one. And then we let the twinkies sit in the cupboard for a month, so it wasn't until I was an adult that I ate a good twinkie.

[pendell]

Dang, those things are tough (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51MXkp6XWjo). Someone evidently asked if twinkies can burn and the answer is apparently no, no they can't. At ALL.

So maybe someone can snap up the recipe for use as a building material. It's gotta be better than asbestos.

:smallsmile:

Tongue-in-cheek,

Brian P.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Dang, those things are tough (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51MXkp6XWjo). Someone evidently asked if twinkies can burn and the answer is apparently no, no they can't. At ALL.

So maybe someone can snap up the recipe for use as a building material. It's gotta be better than asbestos.

:smallsmile:

Tongue-in-cheek,

Brian P.

Bah, he just wasn't trying hard enough. If you can make steel burn you can make twinkies burn. Its just a bit more involved than putting a flame near it.

[pendell]

Well, that's the mediation checkbox done (http://lifeinc.today.com/_news/2012/11/20/15312495-hostess-union-mediation-fails-liquidation-next?lite). The speed suggests the company was never serious about this mediation -- the management wants out of business as quickly as possible.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[TheEmerged]

Well, that's the mediation checkbox done (http://lifeinc.today.com/_news/2012/11/20/15312495-hostess-union-mediation-fails-liquidation-next?lite). The speed suggests the company was never serious about this mediation -- the management wants out of business as quickly as possible.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

That statement can go two ways. The company wants this complete while there are still some assets to sell off.

And the company probably wasn't the only one that wasn't serious about the mediation. From reports I've read, I think the only side that was serious about it was the judge.

[pendell]

That statement can go two ways. The company wants this complete while there are still some assets to sell off.

And the company probably wasn't the only one that wasn't serious about the mediation. From reports I've read, I think the only side that was serious about it was the judge.

Any link to those reports? The more data from more locations, the more comprehensive the picture I have.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Starbuck_II]

Bah, he just wasn't trying hard enough. If you can make steel burn you can make twinkies burn. Its just a bit more involved than putting a flame near it.

People had to use a blow torch with lighting fluid I saw on youtube. And even then the Twinkie resisted burning.

Twinkie are hard core.

[Kelb_Panthera]

People had to use a blow torch with lighting fluid I saw on youtube. And even then the Twinkie resisted burning.

Twinkie are hard core.

Set a twinkie atop a 1kg pile of thermite in a clay bowl and see if there's anything but ash left after. :smallbiggrin:

I think my mild pyromania may be showing a bit here......

[Rockphed]

Set a twinkie atop a 1kg pile of thermite in a clay bowl and see if there's anything but ash left after. :smallbiggrin:

I think my mild pyromania may be showing a bit here......

I think you mean UNDER the thermite. Thermite tends to melt its way through things...

[Kelb_Panthera]

I think you mean UNDER the thermite. Thermite tends to melt its way through things...

But if you put it under the thermite you won't get to watch it burn.

Thermite will be throwing off the kind of heat that won't care about over or under, just basic proximity. Gotta love a self-oxidizing fuel.

[Trixie]

Any link to those reports? The more data from more locations, the more comprehensive the picture I have.

Relation of witness who actually worked there (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/18/1162786/-Inside-the-Hostess-Bankery). Also, report by Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/helaineolen/2012/11/16/who-killed-hostess-brands-and-twinkies/). So, yeah, loot, plunder, burn.

[KnightDisciple]

Relation of witness who actually worked there (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/18/1162786/-Inside-the-Hostess-Bankery). Also, report by Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/helaineolen/2012/11/16/who-killed-hostess-brands-and-twinkies/). So, yeah, loot, plunder, burn.

As someone who also worked there, though in IT instead of baking, I can tell you it's not so simple as "evil execs loot and plunder (hehe Captain Planet reference) the company and watch it burn".

One of his final statements is correct, though: it's doubtful the company could have continued working if it wasn't profitable at $2.5bil/year.

But consider that the aggregate total of all the executive pay (for the top 20 guys or so) comes out to a couple tenths of one percent of that company income, and it's not so clear it's "corporate raiding".

Many of those plants (where most/all people involved in running it were union members!) were not only woefully behind in technology, they were often woefully inefficient. Like, millions of dollars of over-production inefficient.

Many of them (especially plant managers) thought they knew better than "the system", and would, when having even a minor technical problem, skip right over the Help Desk's head and call the Chief Information Officer directly. There were times our boss asked "why didn't you guys help so and so", and we'd go "uh we never heard that plant was having any trouble at all, they never even tried calling us".

The plant workers and drivers seemed reluctant to even try adopting new technologies (like the handheld units for tracking inventory, which went from 20-year old bricks with calculator-like output, to much newer, slimmer units that were sort of rough-and-tumble palm computers), often stubborn and/or ignorant when we tried to help them over the phone, and often completely ungrateful. Not to mention the ones who called at 2:00 in the morning for a password reset.

Am I saying every single worker was lazy, resistant to change, ignorant of technology, and ungrateful? By no means. But there were plenty who were, and the company as a whole had a very slow "reaction time" when it came to updating itself. You can't solely pin that on executives.

[Trixie]

Well, yes, I can't, but when one side is called to do nothing but give for 7 years, while other takes huge pay raises while complaining ones actually making money are ungrateful, something is wrong. I wouldn't say no to raises had they tried to address problems you mention, at it is the job of leadership, but they did nothing. Why someone who doesn't produce results is given a raise? He should get the pay cut first, unless he is really doing lootem' plunder policy.

And, to be honest, knowing US executive pay grades I wouldn't bet that top 20 guys are so insignificant, in many companies crew counted in thousands takes home less than top 20 guys. I'd suspect to be the case here, too, especially after all cuts to one side and raises to the other. Yes, it was old, inefficient company, but other companies somehow manage to modernize even without making runs on their worker's money.

[KnightDisciple]

Well, yes, I can't, but when one side is called to do nothing but give for 7 years, while other takes huge pay raises while complaining ones actually making money are ungrateful, something is wrong. I wouldn't say no to raises had they tried to address problems you mention, at it is the job of leadership, but they did nothing. Why someone who doesn't produce results is given a raise? He should get the pay cut first, unless he is really doing lootem' plunder policy.
The bonus to the CEO, Driscoll, was while the company wasn't shutting down, and was likely to try and retain him. He got no stock options or similar items. And the reason to retain him (and I'm not at all convinced he's solely at fault) is so you don't have a sudden change of leadership when your company's about to die. But that's a moot point.

Also, the figures given in the bakery worker's account don't jive with figures given for, say, what the Teamster's union agreed to.


And, to be honest, knowing US executive pay grades I wouldn't bet that top 20 guys are so insignificant, in many companies crew counted in thousands takes home less than top 20 guys. I'd suspect to be the case here, too, especially after all cuts to one side and raises to the other. Yes, it was old, inefficient company, but other companies somehow manage to modernize even without making runs on their worker's money.
The figures I've seen state that, for 9-10 different executives, the combined total of the bonuses (paid to keep them around while the company liquidates, which is by no means an instant process) is less than $2million. So, again, if you double that, it's 4/10 of 1%. And it's the "please stay here and actually help sell this off".

As for why they didn't modernize, I don't know. It's likely that a fair bit was mis-management. But some of it was, perhaps, a struggle with the daily costs of the business vs. the cost of upgrades. I don't have their financial reports, as they aren't a publicly traded company.

[Gnoman]

Also, the figures given in the bakery worker's account don't jive with figures given for, say, what the Teamster's union agreed to.


For years, the company has used the "state of emergency" to nullify large portions of the contract. When my father quit, he had worked 7 12-hour weeks for six straight months, which is forbidden under the contract.

[Anarion]

The New York Times suggested in its print version today that part of the problem is that the bakers' union believes that taking a pay cut would set an industry-wide precedent and therefore refuses to settle. This would mean that the bakers' union is selling out ~6,000 of its own employees for the greater good, which I find troubling, but believable.

[Scowling Dragon]

Meh. When I tried my first and only twinkie I almost gagged.

Those things taste like a truckfull of chemicals right into your mouth (And doesn't disguise its flavor as anything else) that sticks to your tongue.

[Chen]

The New York Times suggested in its print version today that part of the problem is that the bakers' union believes that taking a pay cut would set an industry-wide precedent and therefore refuses to settle. This would mean that the bakers' union is selling out ~6,000 of its own employees for the greater good, which I find troubling, but believable.

Certainly seems like a pretty big conflict of interest since the baker's union supports other companies that compete with Hostess. Screw some of your members so that the rest of your members (at other companies) keep doing well.

[Aliquid]

For those who like these horrible things.... they will still be making them in Canada.

[Traab]

Certainly seems like a pretty big conflict of interest since the baker's union supports other companies that compete with Hostess. Screw some of your members so that the rest of your members (at other companies) keep doing well.

No conflict at all. The union cares about the union, not the members. Its all about keeping as many members as they can, making as much profit as they can. If they have to sacrifice a largish chunk of its members to keep the majority sitting high on the hog, they will do so if it means more money for those who run the union. Its just the way it works. I wont say there arent any decent unions out there that honestly care about keeping the man from stepping on their members necks, but the majority I have dealt with, either directly, or learned about through friends, they dont care about right or wrong, they care about pulling in their dues and making sure nothing effects their bottom line in a bad way. Sure in most cases its a good thing for the union member, but just like signing up for the military, they arent doing good things for you like signing bonuses because they care about you, so dont expect that to continue if they can get a better deal by screwing you over.

[pendell]

Traab's remark sounds like a case of Pournelle's iron law of bureaucracy (http://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/iron.html). Put simply, any agency, company, or organization of any kind , whatever it's intentions, eventually loses sight of that goal. The bureaucracy ceases to be a means to an end and becomes the end in itself. The resources of the agency become devoted to committee meetings and pie charts and feathering nests, while the actual tip of the spear gets shortchanged more and more.

This is because the idealistic people who care about the mission tend to be very absorbed in the mission and care little about administration, while the people who do seize control tend to be the sort for whom any organization is simply a means to an end, allowing them to express their inner PHB (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PointyHairedBoss).


Case in point (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mC_97F2Zn9k)

Mr. Incredible is of the first sort -- he believes his job really is to help people. The founders of the company might have agreed with him. But his boss is of the second sort -- he cares only about the organization and the profits for the shareholders. Plus, it gives him the ability to run his own little fiefdom and treat other people like dirt.

It's because people like him take over every organization that those of us who DO care are constantly having to end run around bureaucracy. Because people like that cause the system to seize up, making it useless.

Throwing money at it doesn't solve the problem. Why? 'Cause people like Mr. Huph (the boss in the clip) are the ones who get to allocate where the money goes. Naturally they use it to feather their own nests and expand their petty empires.

Which is why, in so many organizations, they just get more and more useless the more money you throw at them. Because all that money just goes into fat.

It's because people like him run things that outlaws show up as heros (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RobinHood) as early as 1377.

More constructively, it's also why people run out of their cubes and start their own businesses -- because they want to live their life by their rules, not wile away their time in process meetings doing nothing useful. It's the impetus that causes people to do new things. Meanwhile, creative destruction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction#Later_developments) takes care of old dinosaurs that succumb to the Iron Law.

That's the way it's supposed to work, anyway. It certainly looks like Hostess is getting a dose of the ol' creative destruction. I wonder if the same will happen to the union at some point?

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Anarion]

That's the way it's supposed to work, anyway. It certainly looks like Hostess is getting a dose of the ol' creative destruction. I wonder if the same will happen to the union at some point?

Respectfully,

Brian P.

One interesting thing in the case of modern companies like Hostess, is that the whole profit-maximizing setup is actually enshrined in law. A company can give some of its profits to charity or for other community purposes, but only about 1% usually. If the company is not using the other 99% of its money to obtain maximum possible profits for the shareholders, the shareholders can gain the right to sue the company and force it to pay them off and buy out their stock.

It's also very difficult to reform because every time anyone has tried to form a company with a charter that provides other priorities than the shareholders, stock purchasers tend (unsurprisingly) to avoid buying any stock in the new company and it goes under.

[Trixie]

On the flip side, there are companies (http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2012/03/26/120326ta_talk_surowiecki) dealing in another cutthroat margins business, retail, that hire a lot of people, give them good training (so that customer visiting the store always has someone competent to ask, unlike 'empty superstore with automatic registers' model) and good pay. Surprise, surprise, they are more profitable than competition and both crew and customers are a lot happier. You only need to not make management bonuses #1 goal...

[pendell]

One interesting thing in the case of modern companies like Hostess, is that the whole profit-maximizing setup is actually enshrined in law. A company can give some of its profits to charity or for other community purposes, but only about 1% usually. If the company is not using the other 99% of its money to obtain maximum possible profits for the shareholders, the shareholders can gain the right to sue the company and force it to pay them off and buy out their stock.

It's also very difficult to reform because every time anyone has tried to form a company with a charter that provides other priorities than the shareholders, stock purchasers tend (unsurprisingly) to avoid buying any stock in the new company and it goes under.

What about not-for-profit corporations like, say, Mitre or the World Wildlife Federation? Isn't there provision in the tax code for corporations which don't intend to make a profit?

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Anarion]

On the flip side, there are companies (http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2012/03/26/120326ta_talk_surowiecki) dealing in another cutthroat margins business, retail, that hire a lot of people, give them good training (so that customer visiting the store always has someone competent to ask, unlike 'empty superstore with automatic registers' model) and good pay. Surprise, surprise, they are more profitable than competition and both crew and customers are a lot happier. You only need to not make management bonuses #1 goal...

I don't know how to respond to this. It's breathtakingly cynical, but probably has a grain of truth to it. I think you should go found a company and let us know the results.


What about not-for-profit corporations like, say, Mitre or the World Wildlife Federation? Isn't there provision in the tax code for corporations which don't intend to make a profit?

Respectfully,

Brian P.

These exist, of course. They generally don't sell their stock to the public, however, and they're generally organized for some kind of humanitarian purpose. I don't really know the details here, but founding a non-profit is something you do because you have a mission and you're willing to suffer for it, not because you want to live a comfortable life.

[pendell]

I don't know how to respond to this. It's breathtakingly cynical, but probably has a grain of truth to it. I think you should go found a company and let us know the results.



These exist, of course. They generally don't sell their stock to the public, however, and they're generally organized for some kind of humanitarian purpose. I don't really know the details here, but founding a non-profit is something you do because you have a mission and you're willing to suffer for it, not because you want to live a comfortable life.

*Cough* Consider the United Way, which paid it's executives better than $1 million/year apiece (http://www.wcnc.com/news/business/United-Way-posts-executive-salaries-on-website-93725594.html) before they were caught.

They are by no means the only charity that does that.

I contend that charities are not typically founded by people who want to live a comfortable life. But per the iron law they frequently get taken over and exploited for that purpose by people of the second type.

Cynically, the difference between a for-profit shop and a non-profit shop is that in the first shareholders and bureaucrats make money while exploiting employees and customers. In the second case, there are no shareholders. So only the bureaucrats who take over carve off personal fiefdoms and multi-million dollar salaries and lifestyles and private jets (http://digitaljournal.com/article/74772). It can all keep running smoothly so long as the donations keep rolling in from clueless saps whenever they put some picture of a starving child in Africa on the TV.

ETA: My solution -- probably not a good one -- would be to dissolve any corporation I founded after 10 years, then start again with a new one with brand new staff, the better to get rid of the dead weight.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[willpell]

I don't know if I've ever eaten a Twinkie, but I'm fairly confident I've never wanted to. However I was once fond of their donuts, and even this past year I enjoyed the occasional fruit pie (Cherry was my favorite, Strawberry was a semi-rare treat, Apple was tolerable, and Dutch Apple with Raisins was the holy grail that I only saw once or twice but dreamed about for years afterward). It always saddens me when a product I care about is not cared about by the people that "own" the right to make it, and can thus prohibit other people from cleaning up after their mistakes to ensure the product stays on the market. What will be the next treasure that is lost to our society because of the greed and foolishness of a few petty, short-sighted men, I wonder?

[oblivion6]

What will be the next treasure that is lost to our society because of the greed and foolishness of a few petty, short-sighted men, I wonder?

Someone I know actually pondered what the world would be like if Pepsi or Coke went down...I proclaim that he needs to be imprisoned for such treasonous thoughts.

[Trixie]

I don't know how to respond to this. It's breathtakingly cynical, but probably has a grain of truth to it. I think you should go found a company and let us know the results.

Cynical? :smallconfused:

I'd say after Enron and what followed, especially 2008, it's sad reality. Can you list even one example when top layer and its options, bonuses, shares, stock, etc. weren't last on the list of things to cut, especially in badly performing companies?

Anyway, article lists 7 companies than are successful following this model, and here you can read whole paper (http://www.demos.org/publication/retails-hidden-potential-how-raising-wages-would-benefit-workers-industry-and-overall-ec) on how blind cutting costs and low wages are harmful to the whole national economy, companies, and workers alike. Warning - long.

[pendell]

Someone I know actually pondered what the world would be like if Pepsi or Coke went down...I proclaim that he needs to be imprisoned for such treasonous thoughts.

Certainly sounds like its above his clearance level. Tell him Friend Computer wants a word with him :smallamused:.

Tongue-in-cheek,

Brian P.

[Tyndmyr]

Meh. When I tried my first and only twinkie I almost gagged.

Those things taste like a truckfull of chemicals right into your mouth (And doesn't disguise its flavor as anything else) that sticks to your tongue.

I have good/bad news for you then. The brand name of "twinkies" is almost certainly worth a fair bit, and will surely be sold in bankruptcy. Someone else will pick it up, and be making Twinkies soon enough. Shouldn't actually be a big deal for their popular lines...it's the lesser known stuff that's more likely to be canceled.

That said, not a huge twinkies fan myself.

It is possible that part of the blame rests with the union. That said, Hostess has gone through CEOs remarkably rapidly of late, and the current fellow has a history that, well...let's just say he swaps firms often, and all the previous ones went bankrupt. Also, they've built up rather a pile of debt. And of course, while it's financially doable, it's bad bargaining tactics to give management a raise while demanding everyone else take a cut. I think it's extremely likely that management has also been very problematic.

[oblivion6]

...it's the lesser known stuff that's more likely to be canceled.

Chocadile's better not be canceled...Those are not very common these days, but they are one of the best Hostess treats...