egafd.com

Getting worried about your public sector final salary pension, Argie?

Oh no, it looks like the plant may be saved!!!

Commiserations.

More gullible, unbelievably na?ve stuff from you.

I suspect you have zero experience of business.

I will explain this once to you and that is it.

Companies that make a "loss" may have made a "real" loss. Or they may have made a "loss" for tax purposes.

For example, google the "brand" company scam. Set up your brand company in Switzerland (low tax) and charge your company in the UK a huge, brand fee. The UK company makes a loss and avoids paying any corporation tax. The brand company makes a mint but pays very low tax in Switzerland.

Companies can make a loss and even if it is a "real" loss for all sorts of reasons i.e. how it fits in with their product mix, they may find the "real" loss merited.

Some companies are looking for big profits almost from day one. Some companies are in it for the long term.

What you need to understand and you obviously don't is that the issue is a whole lot more complex than your rather limited, Tea party loving mind seems to grasp i.e. the company is losing x therefore it should close down because that is not what companies are for, innit!

Feel free to reply but that's your lot from me on this one.

On Grangemouth there is a lot going on and nothing nice. This was nothing other than a prearranged fight between Ineos and Unite with only one loser the workers. Ineos claim of a loss of 10 million a month was disputed by all as creative accounting but that the plant was losing money was not, just the amount of the loss.
Ineos was founded on borrowed money, bought Grangemouth from BP and within a month they realised they had been shafted good and proper, they are responsible for the clean up till either 2017 or they give up the plant whichever comes last and that alone will cost them around ?50 Million a year.
The argument that on the petrochemical side they need to cut costs is mainly because other countries can produce their products a lot cheaper, the reason being is energy costs, USA the energy bill is 35 % less and this is an energy intensive process, best example is BASF has told the German government that unless they get an energy subsidy they will move to the USA. The government should consider perhaps an energy subsidy for 5 years.
When Ineos bought Grangemouth they knew 2017 was the balance year when losses turn to profits and on the chemical side a 20% return on capital after costs was achievable, they had their eyes wide open, just did not have the foresight to see what would happen in the short term.
On Newsnight a couple of nights ago it was reported that the workers cost Ineos ?90,000 each, that is bollocks. FYI a graduate chemical engineer with 5 year post uni experience would earn ?50,000 a year with 20% going into his pension and 13 % into employers NI total cost ?66,500 and that person would be in the top 15 % on the payroll, so some form of distortion going on. The average worker in a skilled manual position would be on around ?21,000 with pension and ENI on top and they would be 60 % of the workforce.
The real money in oil is in exploration and they guys who then work with the product get paid less, but in the old days everyone was looked after, I spent most of my career abroad and have been looked after, today it is different the attitude has become a little for a lot and a lot for the little. To emphasise my point when I was exited 10 years ago I went consulting at that time $2,000 a day was achievable, today it is closer to $750 all offshore rates are in US $ yet the companies make increased profit every year.
The products from Grangemouth are plastic based and this also has military applications, for torpedoes the loading equipment is rolled on hard impact plastic so not the sort of thing to buy in from overseas particularly from the Russians.
I feel sorry for the workforce, they deserve better from both their union and their employer, it is apparent that common sense will not prevail so I really hope that the Government steps in, it would be till 2017 when the plant returns to profit and it would be a fairer outcome for all.

Thank you David, you have opened my eyes to reality, now all you have to do is explain to Unite that they have been hoodwinked by the beastly capitalists. Maybe they could call that strike after all, and enjoy the prosperity which will no doubt ensue.

Given that nowhere in my responses have I suggested the union call a strike and I have merely concentrated on your gullibility, naivety and total lack of understanding of business, it is entirely appropriate that I leave you now to argue with yourself.

!wink! !wink!

Promises, promises David, how many times have you said that?