Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: pabianice
From a purely management perspective, this would seem like a very foolish move. They are talking about saving $30 million a year, according to news reports. I should think that a lot of negative publicity would cost them far more than that.
3 posted on 05/09/2002 2:47:32 PM PDT by Jolly Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Jolly Green
Perhaps Stanley corporate management is more concerned about their personal tax obligations rather than savings for the company.
4 posted on 05/09/2002 2:50:15 PM PDT by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Jolly Green
I should think that a lot of negative publicity would cost them far more than that.

Most of their competitors are offshore.

It's either move or continue to lose market share.

What "negative publicity?" Do people really care where the headquarters of a company is located? Most of the plants are still here.

5 posted on 05/09/2002 2:51:52 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Jolly Green
From a purely management perspective, this would seem like a very foolish move. They are talking about saving $30 million a year, according to news reports. I should think that a lot of negative publicity would cost them far more than that.

Not on my part. I need a whole house full of tools, and anyone who spurns unions and leaves a socialist northeastern state actually gets GREATER consideration by me than otherwise.

13 posted on 05/09/2002 2:56:43 PM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Jolly Green
$30 mil is 37% of what they pay in the dividend.
16 posted on 05/09/2002 2:58:50 PM PDT by StriperSniper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Jolly Green
This isn't the first company to do this ... Tyco did it (I believe), and I know Ingersoll-Rand did it earlier this year. Stanley, along with other companies I mentioned, don't really sell most of their products to the average consumer. Stanley won't suffer a negative backlash.

I fail to understand why all the union thugs are upset. Their jobs aren't going away ... the CEO of Ingersoll-Rand still works out of New Jersey like he did before they reorganized in Bermuda.

21 posted on 05/09/2002 3:05:40 PM PDT by kemathen7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Jolly Green
They are talking about saving $30 million a year,

And saving 30 million a year gives them bad publicicity how?

23 posted on 05/09/2002 3:09:28 PM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Jolly Green
I should think that a lot of negative publicity would cost them far more than that.

The construction trade (unions) doesn't use Stanley.

Homeowners do, and are interested in price first and quality second.

Stanley will be fine, but CT and the rest of the NE continues to decline.

86 posted on 01/25/2003 8:13:55 PM PST by Rome2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson