|
Post by Mocha on Jun 14, 2018 19:15:10 GMT -5
You don't need to be nimble if you are unsinkable. Riiiiiight. Tell that to Sears.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jun 14, 2018 19:37:06 GMT -5
I remember when there were three tiers of hand tools.
1) cheap junk 2) Craftsman -- higher price, but if it ever broke you could get a replacement for free from Sears 3) professional tools like Snap-On
Sears sold the Craftsman brand to Stanley Tools last year.
|
|
|
Post by BearClause on Jun 14, 2018 22:36:05 GMT -5
I remember when there were three tiers of hand tools. 1) cheap junk 2) Craftsman -- higher price, but if it ever broke you could get a replacement for free from Sears 3) professional tools like Snap-On Sears sold the Craftsman brand to Stanley Tools last year. Sears never made any products though. I heard that at one time Stanley Works was one of their suppliers. The designs may have been property of Sears though. They used to take pride in most of their tools made by American suppliers, but not any more. My mom used to work for one of Sears suppliers. It was a company called DeSoto and they made paint and laundry/dishwashing detergent for Sears. The company sold that stuff at a steep discount to employees. We had years of that stuff even after my mom took another job.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jun 14, 2018 23:16:11 GMT -5
They can't sell aviation, that is the only division that is making money.
They have reduced staff in the once shining crown jewel, the GE Corporate Research in Schenectady. They closed the CRD offices in Germany and China and leaving the one in India. So they definitely are mortgaging the future to save the present. GE Power is next, they have gutted the company, laying off people, experienced senior people. That's precisely my point. Given the way the company is heading, their days as a conglomerate with fingers in different business sectors may be starting to end anyway. Perhaps GE will in the end be more like Rolls Royce plc (the power generation company, not the luxurious car maker) and Pratt & Whitney, gas turbine manufacturers that specializes in making, well, gas turbines, whether it's turbofans that power commerical aircraft or modfiied to power ships or act as power generation units. Less ambitious in scope and size than their conglomerate days perhaps, but at least it will likely be profitable. After all, GE Aviation does have sweetheart deals with Boeing as the exclusive engine supplier for the 777-300ER and 747-8 with their GE90 and GEnx engines. Not to mentioned the fact the GE9X will also be the exclusive engine for the 777X aircraft.
|
|
|
Post by BearClause on Jun 15, 2018 0:56:08 GMT -5
They can't sell aviation, that is the only division that is making money.
They have reduced staff in the once shining crown jewel, the GE Corporate Research in Schenectady. They closed the CRD offices in Germany and China and leaving the one in India. So they definitely are mortgaging the future to save the present. GE Power is next, they have gutted the company, laying off people, experienced senior people. That's precisely my point. Given the way the company is heading, their days as a conglomerate with fingers in different business sectors may be starting to end anyway. Perhaps GE will in the end be more like Rolls Royce plc (the power generation company, not the luxurious car maker) and Pratt & Whitney, gas turbine manufacturers that specializes in making, well, gas turbines, whether it's turbofans that power commerical aircraft or modfiied to power ships or act as power generation units. Less ambitious in scope and size than their conglomerate days perhaps, but at least it will likely be profitable. After all, GE Aviation does have sweetheart deals with Boeing as the exclusive engine supplier for the 777-300ER and 747-8 with their GE90 and GEnx engines. Not to mentioned the fact the GE9X will also be the exclusive engine for the 777X aircraft. Pratt is part of a conglomerate though.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jun 15, 2018 1:45:47 GMT -5
That's precisely my point. Given the way the company is heading, their days as a conglomerate with fingers in different business sectors may be starting to end anyway. Perhaps GE will in the end be more like Rolls Royce plc (the power generation company, not the luxurious car maker) and Pratt & Whitney, gas turbine manufacturers that specializes in making, well, gas turbines, whether it's turbofans that power commerical aircraft or modfiied to power ships or act as power generation units. Less ambitious in scope and size than their conglomerate days perhaps, but at least it will likely be profitable. After all, GE Aviation does have sweetheart deals with Boeing as the exclusive engine supplier for the 777-300ER and 747-8 with their GE90 and GEnx engines. Not to mentioned the fact the GE9X will also be the exclusive engine for the 777X aircraft. Pratt is part of a conglomerate though. True, although United Technologies , big as it is, is still not on the scale of GE ($53 billion revenue per year of United vs $122 billion for GE). I was only focusing on Pratt as it's own entity, and maybe GE will end up like that, in terms of size.
|
|
|
Post by BearClause on Jun 16, 2018 1:00:06 GMT -5
Pratt is part of a conglomerate though. True, although United Technologies , big as it is, is still not on the scale of GE ($53 billion revenue per year of United vs $122 billion for GE). I was only focusing on Pratt as it's own entity, and maybe GE will end up like that, in terms of size. The name doesn't seem to be dying out. GE always kept a hand in consumer products in one shape or form. Even if it's licensed it's keeping the name out there.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jun 16, 2018 1:26:27 GMT -5
True, although United Technologies , big as it is, is still not on the scale of GE ($53 billion revenue per year of United vs $122 billion for GE). I was only focusing on Pratt as it's own entity, and maybe GE will end up like that, in terms of size. The name doesn't seem to be dying out. GE always kept a hand in consumer products in one shape or form. Even if it's licensed it's keeping the name out there. We'll see. They can license it's name and brand, but existing as a conglomerate, I don't know. They made some poorly-timed deals (buying high and selling low) and that is still burdening their balance sheet. So far GE says it is keeping their healthcare, power generation and aviation business. But if it keeps bleeding red ink then I'm not so sure. I mean, I am not seeing a really strong turnaround-plan apart from selling off it's business. Speaking of licensing names, interesting enough, that is what GE's rival, Rolls Royce, did. Rolls Royce plc the gas turbine builder and Rolls Royce the famous luxurious car marker are actually separate companies with totally different ownership. But you wouldn't know it by looking at their logo, because both companies had the same logo. Rolls Royce plc licensed it's logo to the car maker. They used to be the same company until the 70's. Rolls Royce went into receivership because of problems developing their RB211 engine for the Lockheed Tristar. As a condition of their bailout and takeover by the British government, they had to sell the car division. Today, Rolls Royce cars is owned by BMW.
|
|
|
Post by BearClause on Jun 16, 2018 15:05:53 GMT -5
The name doesn't seem to be dying out. GE always kept a hand in consumer products in one shape or form. Even if it's licensed it's keeping the name out there. We'll see. They can license it's name and brand, but existing as a conglomerate, I don't know. They made some poorly-timed deals (buying high and selling low) and that is still burdening their balance sheet. So far GE says it is keeping their healthcare, power generation and aviation business. But if it keeps bleeding red ink then I'm not so sure. I mean, I am not seeing a really strong turnaround-plan apart from selling off it's business. Speaking of licensing names, interesting enough, that is what GE's rival, Rolls Royce, did. Rolls Royce plc the gas turbine builder and Rolls Royce the famous luxurious car marker are actually separate companies with totally different ownership. But you wouldn't know it by looking at their logo, because both companies had the same logo. Rolls Royce plc licensed it's logo to the car maker. They used to be the same company until the 70's. Rolls Royce went into receivership because of problems developing their RB211 engine for the Lockheed Tristar. As a condition of their bailout and takeover by the British government, they had to sell the car division. Today, Rolls Royce cars is owned by BMW. Yeah - I knew that Rolls-Royce plc (the turbine engine maker) was separate from Rolls-Royce Motorcars. I recall that since they own the trademark and license it for cars, they effectively nixed the Volkswagen AG acquisition. VAG did actually buy the company, but apparently they weren't considered good enough by Rolls-Royce plc, which forced them to eventually divest to BMW by licensing the trademark to BMW. VAG basically got to keep Bentley. www.nytimes.com/1998/07/29/business/international-business-bmw-to-get-rolls-royce-after-all-by-acquiring-the-name.htmluk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/7-100-8290?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true&bhcp=1
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jun 16, 2018 22:50:11 GMT -5
We'll see. They can license it's name and brand, but existing as a conglomerate, I don't know. They made some poorly-timed deals (buying high and selling low) and that is still burdening their balance sheet. So far GE says it is keeping their healthcare, power generation and aviation business. But if it keeps bleeding red ink then I'm not so sure. I mean, I am not seeing a really strong turnaround-plan apart from selling off it's business. Speaking of licensing names, interesting enough, that is what GE's rival, Rolls Royce, did. Rolls Royce plc the gas turbine builder and Rolls Royce the famous luxurious car marker are actually separate companies with totally different ownership. But you wouldn't know it by looking at their logo, because both companies had the same logo. Rolls Royce plc licensed it's logo to the car maker. They used to be the same company until the 70's. Rolls Royce went into receivership because of problems developing their RB211 engine for the Lockheed Tristar. As a condition of their bailout and takeover by the British government, they had to sell the car division. Today, Rolls Royce cars is owned by BMW. Yeah - I knew that Rolls-Royce plc (the turbine engine maker) was separate from Rolls-Royce Motorcars. I recall that since they own the trademark and license it for cars, they effectively nixed the Volkswagen AG acquisition. VAG did actually buy the company, but apparently they weren't considered good enough by Rolls-Royce plc, which forced them to eventually divest to BMW by licensing the trademark to BMW. VAG basically got to keep Bentley. www.nytimes.com/1998/07/29/business/international-business-bmw-to-get-rolls-royce-after-all-by-acquiring-the-name.htmluk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/7-100-8290?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true&bhcp=1Yeah, BMW actually cooperated with Rolls Royce in making smaller jet engines in the 90's, the BR700. BMW subsequently ended their jet production, but their history of cooperation with Rolls probably helped them land the Rolls Royce car maker. Interesting enough, it is of course a historical irony that during WW2, Rolls Royce and BMW were on the opposing side of the war, powering aicraft that was shooting each other down. The BMW 801 for example, was a radial 14 cylinder engine with max power close to 2000 hp, it powered the Focke-Wulf Fw 190, probably the best piston engine fighter plane for the Third Reich. And Rolls Royce's famous V-12 Merlin engines powered the legendary Spitfire for the Royal Air Force and the immortal P-51 Mustang for the US Army Air Force. The even more powerful V-12 37 liter Griffon engine from Rolls Royce powered the later versions of Spitfires as well.
|
|
|
Post by BearClause on Jun 17, 2018 1:08:07 GMT -5
Yeah, BMW actually cooperated with Rolls Royce in making smaller jet engines in the 90's, the BR700. BMW subsequently ended their jet production, but their history of cooperation with Rolls probably helped them land the Rolls Royce car maker. At the time I thought it was more in the line of a preference for BMW and a distaste for Volkswagen (that they would cheapen the name).
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jun 17, 2018 1:14:06 GMT -5
Yeah, BMW actually cooperated with Rolls Royce in making smaller jet engines in the 90's, the BR700. BMW subsequently ended their jet production, but their history of cooperation with Rolls probably helped them land the Rolls Royce car maker. At the time I thought it was more in the line of a preference for BMW and a distaste for Volkswagen (that they would cheapen the name). Well, VW owns several luxurious auto companies like Porsche, Audi and the exotic car brand Lamborghini, so they do have the know how to make top quality and expensive brands. They are one of the largest automaker in the world. But BMW had a presumably fruitful working history with RR, so that helps a lot.
|
|
|
Post by Phaedrus on Jun 17, 2018 10:07:50 GMT -5
The only one that I'd heard about that is untouchable is Aviation. Flannery was the head man at Healthcare so they are probably safe. Digital is where they put all of their eggs so that is safe.
Renewables is making money but the volume is tiny, so it could be kept with the hopes of growing the business.
I see Power being shopped around, although the market is so down that I can't see it as drawing a high price. Energy is what I can't figure out.
The really interesting part is that they own both Renewables and Power, so they have the numbers regarding the growth or non-growth of both business, but it seems like people aren't talking to one another.
|
|
|
Post by BearClause on Jun 17, 2018 17:36:45 GMT -5
At the time I thought it was more in the line of a preference for BMW and a distaste for Volkswagen (that they would cheapen the name). Well, VW owns several luxurious auto companies like Porsche, Audi and the exotic car brand Lamborghini, so they do have the know how to make top quality and expensive brands. They are one of the largest automaker in the world. But BMW had a presumably fruitful working history with RR, so that helps a lot. Porsche is mostly its own island though. I get that there's the occasional joint platform like the Toureg/Cayenne, but it seems more like how Fiat leaves Ferrari and Maserati alone. I know it was kind of complicated - especially with BMW threatening to cut off engine supplies. However, I remember it at the time and I got the impression that Rolls-Royce plc was worried that Volkswagen would reduce the value of the brand via association. Lamborghini was sold at about the same time as the BMW/Rolls-Royce scuffle, so Volswagen didn't have a track record. Also - Lamborghini already went through Chrysler (Lee Iaccoca's pet project). As for Porsche, wasn't the ownership situation kind of convoluted? Something about minority ownership. I thought that Porsche effective bought out Volkswagen a decade ago.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jun 18, 2018 5:46:48 GMT -5
Well, VW owns several luxurious auto companies like Porsche, Audi and the exotic car brand Lamborghini, so they do have the know how to make top quality and expensive brands. They are one of the largest automaker in the world. But BMW had a presumably fruitful working history with RR, so that helps a lot. Porsche is mostly its own island though. I get that there's the occasional joint platform like the Toureg/Cayenne, but it seems more like how Fiat leaves Ferrari and Maserati alone. I know it was kind of complicated - especially with BMW threatening to cut off engine supplies. However, I remember it at the time and I got the impression that Rolls-Royce plc was worried that Volkswagen would reduce the value of the brand via association. Lamborghini was sold at about the same time as the BMW/Rolls-Royce scuffle, so Volswagen didn't have a track record. Also - Lamborghini already went through Chrysler (Lee Iaccoca's pet project). As for Porsche, wasn't the ownership situation kind of convoluted? Something about minority ownership. I thought that Porsche effective bought out Volkswagen a decade ago. VW does have a track record, they owned Audi, an up-market brand that is a rival to BMW and Mercedes. Porsche is it's own brand, but they shared ownership with VW as well as technology with the VW brand. At the end of day, VW are a German automaker, and the Germans are well-known for their engineering prowess and driveability of their cars (Opel being the exception, but that is because they are owned by GM, hence they have a reputation for being cheap and nasty). Their reliaiblity is not at the level of BMW and Mercedes, that is true, but VW still do make good cars. BMW is a smaller and specialized premium brand, they are known for their luxurious yet sporty cars with great handling, presumably, RR licensed it's brand to BMW because of that as well as their previous working relationship.
|
|