DL asks for $5.9 Million for renovations.

[WorldTraveler]

You can't stand that MN is willing to make forgivable loans to companies that bring jobs to their state.

That is exactly what they did, though.

You can keep beating this horse or admit that you are out of touch with the way business and government work together.

You two have once again acted like you had all wisdom and yet you were shown once again to be wrong in your assessment of the situation.

DL won and you lost.... how many more times do I get to post it?

 

[700UW]

DL won and you lost?
 
Really?
 
You are out of touch, did you stop taking your meds?
 
Kev nor I applied to the state of MN for tax money, or corporate welfare, thats what it is, plain and simple and you cant say anything different.

 

[Kev3188]

You can't stand that MN is willing to make forgivable loans to companies that bring jobs to their state.

That is exactly what they did, though.

Actually, the IRRRB did, but details, details.


 

You two have once again acted like you had all wisdom and yet you were shown once again to be wrong in your assessment of the situation.

I get that you're trying to bait here, but what you're saying is not okay.

I never claimed to have "all the wisdom"- that's your domain. I'll also remind you that my whole argument (or "assessment" if you insist) in the first place is one of ethics- not whether or not this transaction is possible, common, legal, etc.

What I did claim-and stand by- is that just because a company can solicit funds, it doesn't necessarily mean they should.

That is the better question to ask, and that is the direction an interesting discussion would've gone in.




 

DL won and you lost.... how many more times do I get to post it?

You know what, you're right; I did lose. I lost a little bit more faith in my employer to do right by the communities it's in

 

[WorldTraveler]

Given you haven't admitted anything right they have done in five years, I don't think anyone was expecting much from you to begin with.

Alright... I was wrong... you did say that you were posting from their internal website because it was good news that they should be glad to share with the world.

So there... you have said a positive thing.

You run with the whole ethics thing if you want.... but you won't find much support and you certainly won't make a hill of beans worth of a difference in this case.

Speaking of wasting bandwidth, did you really think you would affect the outcome of this or were you and 700 just looking for another opportunity to bash Delta.
Nevermind, we all know the answer to that one....

 

[eolesen]

I believe it to be an issue of corporate ethics. I expect my employer to follow it's stated goal of being a good corporate citizen.

 
Debatable if this is an ethics issue... They're not taking a grant. It's a loan, and the company has an obligation to its shareholders to seek out the lowest cost financing possible.

Since the IRRRB is more or less self-funded by mining production, it's hard to make an argument that the taxpayers are being stiffed. The mining companies, sure, but the purpose of the IRRRB is pretty sound, especially when you look at how other states (i.e. Michigan) weren't able to do something similar and backfill the loss of jobs when decent quality ores ran out. As a result, the UP's economy was pretty well decimated in the 80's, and some sites like Groveland (near Randville) are essentially semi-toxic wastelands that can't support much of anything except ATV use, and the State of Michigan is so broke they can't even offer redevelopment funds. So people left the UP in droves...
 

Great; I'm all for more jobs. Remind us again how many jobs are guaranteed (or "required") to be created as part of this loan.
 
While you're at it, help us understand why DL needs a loan to "create jobs" on the Iron Range. After all, they're committed to the facility/area, right?

For DL, it would have been quite easy to close down the place and move the work elsewhere, and not miss a single call. We've even discussed it before when maintenance and the regional HDQ at MSP was being shut down.

I seriously doubt that the idea for the loan just suddenly materialized one day in Finance. Someone figured out the funds were available, but more likely than not, there were rumblings about closing the place down, and this was offered up by IRRRB as a way to retain jobs.

Something prompted this. Who initiated this isn't really important at this point...

Was it worth it for the IRRRB to guarantee 150 jobs for the next 12 years? Perhaps.

But we know that DL is always going to decide what's best for DL, and if closing down the place winds up to be cheaper than paying back the loans without essentially any penalties, it wouldn't surprise me to see them do so and shutter the place.

Taking redevelopment money, just to back out of the deal? Definitely an ethics issue. But they're not there just yet, at least not in my opinion.

 

[Kev3188]

 

Debatable if this is an ethics issue... They're not taking a grant. It's a loan, and the company has an obligation to its shareholders to seek out the lowest cost financing possible.

I hear ya. I also thought about the advantages of "good debt" and the like before responding to the OP. IMO, if we're talking about seek out the lowest cost financing, then that answer still comes back to self funding.

Was it worth it for the IRRRB to guarantee 150 jobs for the next 12 years? Perhaps.

I still would like to see the "guarantee." So far, all we've seen is the word "potential" thrown around.

Taking redevelopment money, just to back out of the deal? Definitely an ethics issue. But they're not there just yet, at least not in my opinion.

Time'll tell, I suppose...

 

[WorldTraveler]

And as E notes, the loan comes with strings... DL has to perform or it has to pay the loan.

Keep in mind that the reason why DL repaid the MSP loans was because they were some of the highest interest loans that DL had. They happened to gain the freedom to modify their employment levels in MSP as a result of moving the headquarter but if the interest rates on the loans were lower, DL might not have had an incentive to pay off the loans or reduce their employment levels at/in MSP.

 

[Kev3188]

Yes, yes, I get all of that. No one has argued otherwise.

 

[WorldTraveler]

perhaps no... but the lowest cost financing is not necessarily internally generated cash.

The reason why DL is going with the loan is undoubtedly because the cost of upgrading a couple hundred res office work positions is being born by the state of MN - or one of its affiliates - and the cost is less than if DL paid for that work itself.

 

[Glenn Quagmire]

They happened to gain the freedom to modify their employment levels

Put that one in the famous quote book.

"Freedom to modify their employment levels"

Priceless.

 

[WorldTraveler]

glad you enjoyed it... the best part is that DL didn't lay off a single frontline employee when they gained that right.

And no unions were stupid enough to go on strike and bring 5000 jobs to an end either.

Win-WIN.

 

[Kev3188]

The reason why DL is going with the loan is undoubtedly because the cost of upgrading a couple hundred res office work positions is being born by the state of MN - or one of its affiliates - and the cost is less than if DL paid for that work itself.

Source?


 
 

Put that one in the famous quote book.

"Freedom to modify their employment levels"

Priceless.

Indeed.

Just another part of the "superior employment experience."

 

[WorldTraveler]

it's a basic business calculation, Kev.

DL didn't take the loan because it has warm fuzzies for the people of MN... they did it because it makes the best business sense.

They knew the res office needed to be remodeled and factored in the cost of remodeling vs other options.

The loan has performance guarantees that DL has to maintain.

 

[Kev3188]

I understand all of that, and have never argued otherwise. Doesn't change what I wrote 6 pages ago...

Just 'cause DL can do this doesn't mean they should.

 

[WorldTraveler]

of course, they make so much money they should just do it themselves, right?

there is your socialist logic raising its head again.

Cuba or Venezuela, Kev?