Smaller Corporations too?
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 14 of 16

Thread:
Smaller Corporations too?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    6,915

    Default Smaller Corporations too?

    If smaller government is a good thing, by the same argument wouldn't smaller corporations be a good thing too? Conversely, if giant corporations are good, then wouldn't giant government be good too ?

    This article graphically shows how a relative few giant octopus like international corporations control so much of what we use.

    BTW, I bet their corporate political donations are impressive too


    This is interesting:


    These 10 Companies Control Enormous Number Of Consumer Brands [GRAPHIC]

  2. Remove Advertisements
    PerformanceBoats.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Senior Member AzMandella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Tucson,Az
    Posts
    5,217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zombie View Post
    If smaller government is a good thing, by the same argument wouldn't smaller corporations be a good thing too? Conversely, if giant corporations are good, then wouldn't giant government be good too ?

    This article graphically shows how a relative few giant octopus like international corporations control so much of what we use.

    BTW, I bet their corporate political donations are impressive too


    This is interesting:


    These 10 Companies Control Enormous Number Of Consumer Brands [GRAPHIC]
    Does larger corperations suck more taxpayer money to opperate Z. What if everyone worked for the gov ? Could you tax everyone enough to cover thier salary and still have enough left over to pay for the operation of the gov. Funny how in one thread you say you can't compare private industry to gov yet now you are doing that very thing. Such a hypacritcal free thinker you are.
    If you voted for Obama to prove you were not racist, then you better find someone else to vote for to prove your not stupid.

  4. #3
    Senior Member Uncle Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zombie View Post
    If smaller government is a good thing, by the same argument wouldn't smaller corporations be a good thing too? Conversely, if giant corporations are good, then wouldn't giant government be good too ?

    This article graphically shows how a relative few giant octopus like international corporations control so much of what we use.

    BTW, I bet their corporate political donations are impressive too


    This is interesting:


    These 10 Companies Control Enormous Number Of Consumer Brands [GRAPHIC]

    Cool chart.

    Mars doesn't belong on that chart though.
    As a privately held company with no stocks to the street, and no shareholders its in a different class than these other titans.
    The fact that they are even on the same charts attest to them being great businessmen.

    I for one prefer working for a smaller private company vs a bigger one. (sure I miss the stock - but I dont miss the bullshit)
    I find the large public entities actually less stable and more subject to the whims of the market or the latest bestselling management book.

    Uncle Dave

  5. #4
    Icy
    Icy is offline
    Boatless Member :( Icy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    AV, CA
    Posts
    3,006

    Default

    Small corporations can not compete as well because they are required to meet the same regulation and do the same paperwork, tracking and reporting as a large corporation. Of course you knew this before you made the post. There are several other reasons as well.

  6. #5
    Senior Member bville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Glasgow, KY
    Posts
    1,688

    Default

    I would prefer to see 10 smaller corps in place of 1 large one, If it were up to me I would not want any more mergers .I don,t think its good for competition.

  7. #6
    Icy
    Icy is offline
    Boatless Member :( Icy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    AV, CA
    Posts
    3,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bville View Post
    I would prefer to see 10 smaller corps in place of 1 large one, If it were up to me I would not want any more mergers .I don,t think its good for competition.
    Are you going to make it where people don't get brand loyalty too? People whine and complain about corporations but I guarantee people will be like "I'm not buying that crap where's my Tide?" on every product they buy. Look how many Soda companies there used to be and look how many there are now. People got loyal to few and bought up the rest that had decent market share.

  8. #7
    Senior Member bville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Glasgow, KY
    Posts
    1,688

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Icy View Post
    Are you going to make it where people don't get brand loyalty too? People whine and complain about corporations but I guarantee people will be like "I'm not buying that crap where's my Tide?" on every product they buy. Look how many Soda companies there used to be and look how many there are now. People got loyal to few and bought up the rest that had decent market share.
    I didn,t say anything about dismantling any corp .people will be loyal to the company that gives them good service and value.have you ever said to your self ,I really like that product but since they were bought by whoever the product is a cheap piece of shit.Smaller corps would offer different choices and thinking.

  9. #8
    Senior Member Uncle Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Icy View Post
    Small corporations can not compete as well because they are required to meet the same regulation and do the same paperwork, tracking and reporting as a large corporation. Of course you knew this before you made the post. There are several other reasons as well.

    Actually I would disagree with that with the provision the company is not so small it has no funds.

    They do NOT have to meet the same regulations- public companies have to deal with revenue recognition issues and a Sarbannes Oxley where private companies can record revenue how they see fit and are free of the shackles and restraints that Sarbox puts in place and forced audits etc.

    I work for a 100M a year private company. You think we cant hire a guy or two to do some paperwork?


    Uncle Dave

  10. #9
    Icy
    Icy is offline
    Boatless Member :( Icy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    AV, CA
    Posts
    3,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Dave View Post
    Actually I would disagree with that with the provision the company is not so small it has no funds.

    They do NOT have to meet the same regulations- public companies have to deal with revenue recognition issues and a Sarbannes Oxley where private companies can record revenue how they see fit and are free of the shackles and restraints that Sarbox puts in place and forced audits etc.

    I work for a 100M a year private company. You think we cant hire a guy or two to do some paperwork?


    Uncle Dave
    We are not talking about companies, we are talking about corporations.

  11. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,383

    Default

    Bigger can be good- economies of scale. better control over a wider supply network, ability to weather a down-turn in one industry.....But a smaller company can change course more quickly, is not beholden to as many, and can better inspire Espirit-de-corp.....the main down side of large Corporations is getting a monopoly, which is one of the biggest threats to a Good Capitolistic system. Competotion is what makes the system work.

    And companies(Or corps) are not the same exactly as Govt'.....a Govt is a monopoly, by definition, and that's why limited govt' is the way to go...There are some things a govt must do, such as Military, and basic laws & legal system......One area where there are both systems is highways; Most highways in the US are oublic, payed for by general taxes, but some are toll roads.....I drove one back east, and didn't appreciate having to stop every 10 miles to pay another quarter...but in daily use you'd have Fastrak.

  12. #11
    Senior Member Uncle Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,989

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Icy View Post
    We are not talking about companies, we are talking about corporations.

    Thats a difference in filing status.
    One either incorporates or one does not. A company can be a corporation.

    semantics

    UD

  13. #12
    Senior Member AzMandella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Tucson,Az
    Posts
    5,217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cvxjet View Post
    Bigger can be good- economies of scale. better control over a wider supply network, ability to weather a down-turn in one industry.....But a smaller company can change course more quickly, is not beholden to as many, and can better inspire Espirit-de-corp.....the main down side of large Corporations is getting a monopoly, which is one of the biggest threats to a Good Capitolistic system. Competotion is what makes the system work.

    And companies(Or corps) are not the same exactly as Govt'.....a Govt is a monopoly, by definition, and that's why limited govt' is the way to go...There are some things a govt must do, such as Military, and basic laws & legal system......One area where there are both systems is highways; Most highways in the US are oublic, payed for by general taxes, but some are toll roads.....I drove one back east, and didn't appreciate having to stop every 10 miles to pay another quarter...but in daily use you'd have Fastrak.
    Did somebody hijack CVX's mind. He's making too much sense.
    If you voted for Obama to prove you were not racist, then you better find someone else to vote for to prove your not stupid.

  14. #13
    Icy
    Icy is offline
    Boatless Member :( Icy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    AV, CA
    Posts
    3,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Dave View Post
    Thats a difference in filing status.
    One either incorporates or one does not. A company can be a corporation.

    semantics

    UD
    Right, and specifically we are talking about those who file as a corporations who are small. They have the same reporting responsibility as one that is large.

  15. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AzMandella View Post
    Did somebody hijack CVX's mind. He's making too much sense.
    Hey.....I'm a federal worker....I don't have a mind! It's actually a requirement of federal employment......

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Tags for this Thread

Digg This Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95