You don't really want to go back down that road, do you, Lovey?
So Mitt Didn't Leave Bain in 1999 After All
- Thread starter Bonestorm
- Start date
You don't really want to go back down that road, do you, Lovey?
j-mac
Verified User
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
I would love for you to explain why you think I am wrong... and if you can't, I am going to have Thurston release the hounds.
LOL. if "to be swiftboared" wasn't such a fucked up campaign tactic constantly used,I'd be ROFLMAO.It does get an LOL.
Good one.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Which explains the constant rambling without substance approach of your posts.
LOL, not the hounds!!!
You and I had this discussion a few weeks back already. Remember the Ampad debate? Bain got 20 bucks back for every one dollar they invested, creditors got $0.002, when Ampad went belly-up?
Wanna tell me those are lies again?
Cancel 2016.11
Darla
I already said what I think about this. I would be surprised if you really believe he has been truthful here. He hasn't it's becoming very apparent and I am watching it play out. Not to mention this is only the beginning. This is going to bring more pressure to bear on him releasing his returns. This guy is a liar and watch the hit he starts to take in the polls.
But do I want to sit here and get in a 1000 post back and forth with you on semantics? No sf, it's Friday I'm in too good of a mood.
A challenge from Brad Delong:
http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/...-of-the-washington-post-has-ever-written.html
http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/...-of-the-washington-post-has-ever-written.html
I love how you pretend that all VC firms operate the same way. There's a lot that falls under the umbrella of VC and I think most people understand venture capital to be quite a bit different from some of the stuff Bain was doing. In fact, I'm guessing most people associate VC with startups. Bain wasn't doing startups at the end of the 90s. They were mostly doing leveraged buyouts and the like, which is quite a different ball of wax.
It's better described as a private equity firm rather than a venture capital firm.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
LOL, not the hounds!!!
You and I had this discussion a few weeks back already. Remember the Ampad debate? Bain got 20 bucks back for every one dollar they invested, creditors got $0.002, when Ampad went belly-up?
Wanna tell me those are lies again?
Again... A VC firm like Bain tries to make a go of struggling companies. They are not always successful in doing so. Cherry picking one that didn't make it doesn't change that.
Tell us... what was Ampad's financial condition when Bain took it over?
No, no, no. Quit trying to wiggle out of this. There is nothing to be interpreted as 'helping' that Bain did with Ampad (and many others, and I will list them if you continue to stupidly single out Ampad as a cherry-picked 'exception').
Bain's actions with Ampad are STANDARD vulture-capitalist methods. The point of the method is to extract all value from the company before laying waste to it. That's how vulture capitalism works.
Want some more examples of how Bain 'helped' struggling companies?
Yes, there's a difference between venture capitalist and vulture capitalists.
Everytime I see it I giggle...
Whatever happened to "The buck stops here"?
Gawd...Obama gets the blame when teabaggers outhouses get clogged up!
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
I don't pretend they are all operated the same way. That is what you and your fellow liberals are doing. Pretending that they are all hostile takeover specialists or that they are all just in it to run up debt and run away. Both of which are nonsense.
So you are only looking at what Bain did at the end of the 90's? Rather than the entire time Romney was there? Sorry, I didn't know you were wanting to cherry pick a certain set of years. Next time perhaps you could capitalize it for us... something like "CHERRY PICKING BEGINNING NOW" or something of your choosing that would convey the same message.
A venture capital is a subset of private equity that is correct. Private equity does indeed focus on LBO's and taking over companies entirely. Bain did both and the appropriate term would indeed be private equity firm as that encompasses it all. Does this mean you and your fellow liberals are done referring to it as a vulture capital firm?
The difference between VC and PE is predominantly the way the ownership structure and management is handled. VC tends to be a minority stake with little to no influence on the day to day management of the firm. PE on the other hand is going to typically go into a struggling firm and take over 100% (or close) of the company and it is going to run the company on a day by day basis.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
which again is not what happened. If a firm did that continuously no one would ever loan them money. Do you get that concept? Why would a bank after 20+ years ever loan a Bain takeover any money?
Again... what was the financial condition of Ampad prior to the Bain takeover?
Really? Bain didn't get a 2,000% ROI while creditors of Ampad got .002%? Are you saying that didn't happen?
There is a difference. I was a venture capitalist once. Built motels that CREATED jobs. Vultures like Romney are a different breed...they're in it make money. Period. Fuck the people!
Lovey is pro-Romney, which is why he continues to argue that Romney's misadventures with Bain were venture capitalism. They weren't.
can someone cliff me on the standard arguments in this thread? so i can just pick up right here?