posted 11-16-2008 10:19 PM ET (US)            

nuf said..

posted 11-17-2008 10:25 AM ET (US)            

"Since joining Mercury Marine in 2004, Mark has been an integral member of a management team that has secured Mercury's position as the industry leader in technology, quality and operational excellence," said McCoy.

"Mercury has been at the forefront of marine-engine manufacturing since the company's inception in 1939, and that tradition will carry on under Mark's leadership as Mercury products will continue to meet the evolving demands of discriminating and ecology-minded consumers," McCoy added.

Schwabero will lead a seasoned and successful management team that will include Kevin S. Grodzki and Stephen M. Cramer. This trio had most recently been jointly leading Mercury. "We are fortunate to have had such an experienced and cohesive management team in place at Mercury," explained McCoy. "Mark, Kevin and Steve have each played key roles in shaping and executing the strategies and day-to-day conduct in elevating Mercury's performance. Going forward, we will continue to benefit from their combined and complementary expertise in advancing Mercury's industry leadership position by fostering innovation, introducing new products to the marketplace, and further expanding its growing international presence."

Schwabero joined Mercury in 2004 with 28 years experience as a senior executive in the automotive and commercial vehicle industries. During that time, he had leadership positions in such companies as Hendrickson International, Pilkington Libbey-Owens-Ford, Bosch Braking Systems North America, and Navistar International. Schwabero holds both a bachelor's of science degree and master's of science degree in industrial and systems engineering from Ohio State University, where he was recognized with the University's Distinguished Alumnus Award in 1991 and a Meritorious Service Award in 2008.

posted 11-18-2008 01:47 AM ET (US)            

Look at section titled "United States Bureau of Labor Statistics".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment

posted 11-18-2008 01:55 AM ET (US)            

Let's say my 170 Montauk had a cut-off problem that my Boston Whaler dealer and Mercury Marine could not resolve. Do you think that a politician could solve my problem?

So let's say Wall Street is broken and the Wall Street professionals and PHD's from Harvard Business School can't figure out a solution. Do you think that a politician could solve the problem?

The politician can only throw your money and my money at the problem, hoping that it might go away.

Good luck to all,

posted 11-18-2008 07:19 AM ET (US)            

Is the plant front door padlocked?
Were they given their final notice?

Most of all are you making the situation worse by mis-stating the information.

The plant is closing for a few days. That is not good for anyone there.

Duuh, sales are off and that is expected. They are trying to keep it together so there will be a future.

I would imagine that the employees are not surprised; and though not pleased, are at this point happy that there is still some promise of a job.

There is one area in which you can be sure there will be few if any layoffs!!
Government jobs.. And that is the Fat in the system.

I just hope that the shouting and glee about the slow down will subside and allow the system to stabilize. I am not the least bit happy that boat sports sales are slow. I pray that those folks have their jobs come the new year; however I am not going to shout the supposed news from the hill tops.

posted 11-18-2008 08:55 AM ET (US)            

http:/ / seekingalpha. com/ article/ 104846-the-real-unemployment-number s?source=front_page_most_popular_articles

This article discusses the unemployment rate, and backs up my claim. The jist of it is, that although the official unemployment rate is 6.5%, once people become discouraged and give up looking for work, they magically are no longer considered unemployed in the statistics. Poof. They disappear.

In addition in today's employment statistics, laughably the government feels that in this historic slowdown in building and construction that jobs were created in businesses that "are too small to measure". Amazing.

posted 11-18-2008 02:51 PM ET (US)            

"Brunswick has one section which may carry them thru this period. That is the Exercise equipment division. Life Fitness machines are quality pieces of equipment which have a very good reputation. However, some upstart competitors with good equipment are at this moment moving in on the business."

"For NOW" are the key words.

We (Americans) love "cheap", especially "knock offs". We'll support the Red (China) state as long as we get stuff cheap.

Be damned the patent rights, etc.

It's atrocious what is out there. The blatant copies of American designs produced and distributed, ignoring patent rights.

A great design of a freind of mine was "ripped off" and he has NO say even though he had a so called international patent right. That international patent right cost him $10K. So far, he's SOL. It will take years to go through the courts. It's not worth the $10K to fight it. Let the Chinese have it.

He sees his idea being sold and there is not one damn thing he can do about it. At least not financially.

posted 11-18-2008 03:26 PM ET (US)         

OMC went broke on terrible engine performance and quality, not boats. As a matter of fact, the boats were their strong component, and were quickly picked up by buyers. Only now are those same boat companies, like all boat companies including the SeaDoo stuff, in trouble.

Brunswick, unlike OMC, has a strong engine business.

posted 11-18-2008 04:07 PM ET (US)            

The "level" of expense does not matter. They're here and we LOVE it. Again, we like-CHEAP. Cheap does not necessarily mean the level of build. It looks the same on the outside, thus we buy.

It does open up other questions.

1. Who (Americans) supports it?

2. Who pays for failures?

So,

1. We all do.

2. We all do.

I have actually been asked, by unknowing customers, to pay for repairs for equipment (with our name on it) that WE DID NOT make. It's identical, in appearance. What do we do about that?

This goes a lot deeper than brand protection. It undermines our entire patent process. Not to mention our manufacturing base. This is all about the education system we have here.

We have at least, for two generations, uneducated our offspring as to basic capitalist economics.

What I'm trying to say here as that we've been far to open. We let our secrets/ideas out with no regard as to how they may be used to hurt us.

posted 11-18-2008 07:47 PM ET (US)            

Thanks. I came on a bit strong but it's nice to see that someone, at least, is on the same page.