Redcar Steel plant

[powerstroke]

dudleybloke said:

KrissKross said:

ruggedscotty said:

You dont make money unless you make something.

This 1000+

Indeed.
After WW2 the slogan was export or die, and it worked and helped pay for the recovery.

Problem is we are run by lawyers, accountants or career politicians (morons like CMD blair and Osborne) and anyone sensible soon gets sidelined
so we have a crock of ste instead .....

[Blayney]

Feel free to shoot me down in flames. I don't pretend to be an expert in economics etc. However I think it's incorrect to think they only way to make money is to manufacture.



This is something that has done the rounds recently and I think it's really interesting. All of these companies offer a service rather than a physical product.

A lot of companies are becoming service orientated now as that is how they make their money. Even traditional engineering firms. Take Rolls Royce for example... they make jet engines. Something like 50% of their business is now "power by the hour". Airlines aren't buying engines they are buying the USE of them.

Unfortunately this isn't a business model that helps the Steel industry I don't think. I'm just pointing out that you don't have to make something to make money.


edit - it is worth pointing out that in all the examples given someone, somewhere did have to make something though! There's just more money in the service than the product.

[vonuber]

Cameron et al don't want to ps off the Chinese as they are putting a lot of investment into infrastructure / property at the moment, which means they can keep it off the books (or shunt the problem down the road when they have gone).
Also, Welsh steel workers are unlikely to vote Tory, so they don't see the problem in fking them over.

[jmorgan]

Ah but, as this Might be a died in the wool better off red than dead area, the out vote is going to get a big boost perhaps.

[RottenIcons]

ruggedscotty said:

everyone that goes on about bailing out the bankers....

Do they realise what was involved ? What it actually meant to let the banks fold. Please look into it and try to understand the background. Yes the banks were stupid in what happened but there was so much more involved. If the government had turned its back then that would of been it.

Do you honestly think that the Government would have stepped in and put that sort of money in if they didnt need to.

The country would of collapsed. It was that serious. This wasnt your local car dealer going down the tubes.

RBS was little more than two hours away from going under. At this time RBS was pretty much the biggest bank around. If that had gone it would have been financial meltdown globally.

It wasnt about keeping the bankers in a job - it was about surviving. as a country.

I'm sorry to tell you this but the further buying into a the Ponzi scheme that is modern fractional banking was a grave error. We could very easily have taken over these Banks at penalty rates, issued a form of Oeffa bills and killed the beast, Iceland used a similar financial vehicle but was too small to really get the ball rolling. Ireland and Iceland combined *might* have done enough to have started the removal of the Crony Banking from Western Europe but sadly the Irish chickened out and so did we. Instead Bank of England set up a financial vehicle based on the Oeffa principle but instead of being to the benefit the creditors (us) who bailed the banks out the Bankers themselves made a further bolster for their greedy ways. That action was the most corrupt bit of chicanery I have ever encountered in my entire life. Not a murmur from the Media anywhere, not a peep. The biggest sell-out in the History of the UK and most of the population is still unaware of the scam perpetrated. Oeffa bills were designed to pay back the holder of the last (saviour) buck. Our sick and perverted Oeffa vehicle gave additional funds to the body that caused the problem, not to those that were cheated.

It is no wonder those "in the know" look down on the average Brit (and to be fair, every other normal person) as little more than wage slaves, the temptation to have fabulous wealth at the expense of stupid consumers must be huge and if I were a cynic I'd be applauding the neat bit of trickery.

It's all there too, it's not in the least bit hidden (except in the convoluted 'Financial Speak') and can be checked by anyone here, just look for the financial loan vehicle used by the BoE immediately after the crash that was used to channel funds to the BoE for the Bail-outs, then see where the notes finally reside. I liked the TV series 'The Wire' because it had one tenet/thread that ran right through it. "Follow the Money".

Edit:- Auto-correct is going to make me very angry one day, bacon sarnie time.

Edited by RottenIcons on Sunday 3rd April 07:39

[RottenIcons]

With regard to a National asset that should be preserved such as Steel and similar core infrastructure the issuance of Oeffa bills to the value of the entire asset chain would cost us (tax payers) almost nothing. Literally just the cost of incorporation, paperwork, letters and bonds. £50k. Even using flash Lawyers it couldn't touch much more than that. Maintaining the FV would be around £250k a year, may be a little more. It would give Port Talbot an entire generation (25 yrs) of additional life for about £5m. more than enough time to either re-structure/ride-out or redevelop the area. It is in effect what we did for the Banks, using the exact same FV but for the effected people and a tiny bit of pay back for us as tax payers.

It will not happen because that is drawing back the curtain on Oz.

Edited by RottenIcons on Sunday 3rd April 07:39

[FiF]

Blayney said:

Feel free to shoot me down in flames. I don't pretend to be an expert in economics etc. However I think it's incorrect to think they only way to make money is to manufacture.



This is something that has done the rounds recently and I think it's really interesting. All of these companies offer a service rather than a physical product.

A lot of companies are becoming service orientated now as that is how they make their money. Even traditional engineering firms. Take Rolls Royce for example... they make jet engines. Something like 50% of their business is now "power by the hour". Airlines aren't buying engines they are buying the USE of them.

Unfortunately this isn't a business model that helps the Steel industry I don't think. I'm just pointing out that you don't have to make something to make money.


edit - it is worth pointing out that in all the examples given someone, somewhere did have to make something though! There's just more money in the service than the product.

Tbh this was a concept that I was involved with in a materials company, part of which was a specialist steel producer, before I decided to ps off and have a complete career change.

It was a move from trying to persuade clients that our product was the solution to their problem, essentially firstly a technical discussion, then a commercial discussion, into one where it's selling a service, which happens to involve supplying and manufacturing material. From the customer perspective it's an interesting one as it removes some of their risk, material performance and availability, as that would have fallen on us, and of course some risk falls on us, are the service parameters as described. Negative for the customer was allowing us to monitor their operations more closely. For us the gain was greater penetration and share, greater tie in with the customer, and as the deal was often linked to improvements in their process and profitability then worked out very well for us.

In the last year before I left my unit operated with an EBIT of 20%+, which is ridiculously high for steel industry.

[herewego]

According the Guardian article about possible purchase by Thyssenkrupp there is a pension liability of 15bn. I thought pension funds were separated from company funds and untouchable by companies since Maxwell?

[Welshbeef]

herewego said:

According the Guardian article about possible purchase by Thyssenkrupp there is a pension liability of 15bn. I thought pension funds were separated from company funds and untouchable by companies since Maxwell?

The scheme is in deficit - assuming by that amount.
Tata took Corus over and at that point there was a deficit (£X billion) they have been underfunding it apparently and are liable for £2billion top up requirement on sale/giving the company away. However that leaves a gap of £10billion.

So if the scheme was ever wound up then all employees would lose x% of their entitled pension (what is £12billion as a % of the total fund?)

Problem arose originally when it was privatised in that the values transferred out of Govt to the fund were not enough so end of the day we are all on the hook for a share of this cost.

[don4l]

ruggedscotty said:

Tory = stupid seek money anywhere and not bothered about the working man.

Labour ? WE have no labour only a new labour which is same as above.

we lost the plot when we took our eyes off the ball - we need to manufacture. they thought the future was in service industry, yep they did then they outsourced that to India.

You dont make money unless you make something.

you dont make money unless you level the playing field.

Bang tariffs on imports - bring them up to similar prices to the local produce. delete the edge on cheap imports through sourcing from countries that dont have to operate under the same legislation as we have to. health and safety pay and all that.

get the economy up and then you make jobs you make jobs you get money flowing into the economy. people go out people spend money people live. if you dont do that you sink. and were sinking as a country.

In the good old days the dead were piled up in a warehouse in Liverpool. We didn't bother with rubbish collections... we simply piled it up in the streets.

In the good old days we only worked three days a week. We didn't need electricity during the other four days.

People who lived in the countryside didn't have to put up with the noise of passing trains.

In the good old days we got statutory 5% pay rises, which was brilliant until you realise that inflation was 17%.

[Digga]

KrissKross said:

ruggedscotty said:

You dont make money unless you make something.

This 1000+

Regrettably, with a welfare economy, pure commercial decisions are not possible.

Furthermore, with strategic industrial infrastructure, pure commercial decisions are not possible.

In regions where the loss of major industrial infrastructure will decimate local productivity for generations, pure commercial decisions are not possible.

That reform - of both workforce, working practices and the infrastructure itself - may be required is a given, but these decisions should never be made without full consideration of all costs involved in each option.

[Willy Nilly]

I am just dipping in and out of this thread and don't really know that much

Anyway, to let all of those people loose their jobs would be terrible for them and the area and lets be honest, they are going to have a hard time finding much new work.

My impression is that regardless of China, the plant is out of date and worn out and that government meddling with markets never works long term. So, why not have the tax payer provide some sort of loan to bring the plant up to date. We probably can't hope to compete with China in bulk, run of the mill steel, but what about higher value, more technical products, if such products exist and have a demand?

[Digga]

Tories are on very dangerous political ground here; they cannot come out of any closure without extremely difficult comparison between both the mines and also banks. I honestly feel they may fumble this and live to regret it.

[hidetheelephants]

Digga said:

Tories are on very dangerous political ground here; they cannot come out of any closure without extremely difficult comparison between both the mines and also banks. I honestly feel they may fumble this and live to regret it.

I don't see it. Labour fked the midlands thrice with Rover; first by awarding it to the Phoenix thieves, by doing nothing while they asset-stripped it then by allowing them to walk away from the smoking wreckage with nothing more onerous than a temporary prohibition from being company directors. It appeared to have no effect on their poll ratings.

[Digga]

hidetheelephants said:

Digga said:

Tories are on very dangerous political ground here; they cannot come out of any closure without extremely difficult comparison between both the mines and also banks. I honestly feel they may fumble this and live to regret it.

I don't see it. Labour fked the midlands thrice with Rover; first by awarding it to the Phoenix thieves, by doing nothing while they asset-stripped it then by allowing them to walk away from the smoking wreckage with nothing more onerous than a temporary prohibition from being company directors. It appeared to have no effect on their poll ratings.

Sorry, but perception is everything, facts don't really cut it for the masses. Certainly there is huge support for the steel works on social media.

[bazza white]

I work in another mill in Wales and the talk of Maggie and the mines is now constant. They had started making gains in Wales but mess this up and Amy gains will be down the pan.



I know they are in a pickle with what to do but still insisting green taxes for the short term is ridiculous. Yes it will be millions unaccounted for in their budget but they will lose it anyway when it goes tits up. Doing the maths our plant would have been profitable last year without this tariff and possible the year before.

[uk_vette]

I don't really understand why the steel workers are moaning
Their steel is too expensive to buy on the world market.
Most of the worlds steel is made and consumed in the far East.
UK are now small players in a world that is shrinking, and steel can be bought from any where, and shipped to any where.

Why would I as a customer, buy steel from UK, only to build ships with it in South Korea, which, is just next door to China.
South Korea is the largest ship builders in the world.

Often the can not keep up with demand, so complete sections of ships are made in China, and brought around to the ship yards in South Korea for welding together and fitting out.

We are well out of it, and we are not ever going to get back in.

[Gogoplata]

Digga said:

hidetheelephants said:

Digga said:

Tories are on very dangerous political ground here; they cannot come out of any closure without extremely difficult comparison between both the mines and also banks. I honestly feel they may fumble this and live to regret it.

I don't see it. Labour fked the midlands thrice with Rover; first by awarding it to the Phoenix thieves, by doing nothing while they asset-stripped it then by allowing them to walk away from the smoking wreckage with nothing more onerous than a temporary prohibition from being company directors. It appeared to have no effect on their poll ratings.

Sorry, but perception is everything, facts don't really cut it for the masses. Certainly there is huge support for the steel works on social media.

Yep, doesn't matter what Labour did in the past because it's nasty Tories innit? And Corbyn's Labour is the proper Labour party, not the Red Tory party that they were previously etc.

[hidetheelephants]

Digga said:

Sorry, but perception is everything, facts don't really cut it for the masses. Certainly there is huge support for the steel works on social media.

There was huge support for Rover in the press when the receiver was called in and the chinese bought the leftovers, but 5 minutes later the media moved on and everyone was distracted by terrorists blowing up buses, a plumber being murdered by the Met, roadside bombs in Iraq, a dead pope and a new Pope, Brian getting wed to a horse, the smiling assassin getting elected again, the IRA promising to be good boys and not blow things up as much, and a relatively unknown and junior MP for an obscure rural Oxfordshire constituency being elected as leader of the tory party. Provided there are what Macmillan probably didn't call 'Events, my dear boy, events', even the redundancy of thousands of workers and the devastation of entire towns can generate nothing more than a brief wringing of hands, a lot of column inches and no significant electoral impact.

[cardigankid]

RottenIcons said:

ruggedscotty said:

everyone that goes on about bailing out the bankers....

Do they realise what was involved ? What it actually meant to let the banks fold. Please look into it and try to understand the background. Yes the banks were stupid in what happened but there was so much more involved. If the government had turned its back then that would of been it.

Do you honestly think that the Government would have stepped in and put that sort of money in if they didnt need to.

The country would of collapsed. It was that serious. This wasnt your local car dealer going down the tubes.

RBS was little more than two hours away from going under. At this time RBS was pretty much the biggest bank around. If that had gone it would have been financial meltdown globally.

It wasnt about keeping the bankers in a job - it was about surviving. as a country.

I'm sorry to tell you this but the further buying into a the Ponzi scheme that is modern fractional banking was a grave error. We could very easily have taken over these Banks at penalty rates, issued a form of Oeffa bills and killed the beast, Iceland used a similar financial vehicle but was too small to really get the ball rolling. Ireland and Iceland combined *might* have done enough to have started the removal of the Crony Banking from Western Europe but sadly the Irish chickened out and so did we. Instead Bank of England set up a financial vehicle based on the Oeffa principle but instead of being to the benefit the creditors (us) who bailed the banks out the Bankers themselves made a further bolster for their greedy ways. That action was the most corrupt bit of chicanery I have ever encountered in my entire life. Not a murmur from the Media anywhere, not a peep. The biggest sell-out in the History of the UK and most of the population is still unaware of the scam perpetrated. Oeffa bills were designed to pay back the holder of the last (saviour) buck. Our sick and perverted Oeffa vehicle gave additional funds to the body that caused the problem, not to those that were cheated.

It is no wonder those "in the know" look down on the average Brit (and to be fair, every other normal person) as little more than wage slaves, the temptation to have fabulous wealth at the expense of stupid consumers must be huge and if I were a cynic I'd be applauding the neat bit of trickery.

It's all there too, it's not in the least bit hidden (except in the convoluted 'Financial Speak') and can be checked by anyone here, just look for the financial loan vehicle used by the BoE immediately after the crash that was used to channel funds to the BoE for the Bail-outs, then see where the notes finally reside. I liked the TV series 'The Wire' because it had one tenet/thread that ran right through it. "Follow the Money".

Edit:- Auto-correct is going to make me very angry one day, bacon sarnie time.

Edited by RottenIcons on Sunday 3rd April 07:39

This x10. Financial system meltdown my fat arse. What Gordon Brown did was to let bankers con him into paying off the fraudsters they were in hock to, using our money.The banks should have been put into receivership.