posted 09-30-2012 10:08 PM ET (US)        

[Apparently directed to me--jimh]

And lets be clear, your beloved BRP also nurses the public teat:
http://mountpleasant.patch.com/articles/ gov-walker-in-sturtevant-to-celebrate-brp-15-million-investment

Holy hell! The coincidences are eerie. BRP Wisconsin poaches jobs from BRP Illinois with the help of state subsidies!

In our rush to the bottom, stealing jobs in a brutal zero sum game, Wisconsin deserves the treatment companies like BRP gives us. When BRP reneges on an agreement and the State backs down, who should be ashamed? When BRP fails to fulfill their end of the bargain, and still sucks the public teat, who is really at fault?

posted 09-30-2012 10:19 PM ET (US)            

The BRP plant expansion consolidated work being done at the old OMC facility in Illinois, as far as I know. I haven't really made a study of it. I do not recall hearing that BRP asked the workers to give back wages, or played one state against the other.

posted 09-30-2012 10:23 PM ET (US)            

BRP moved into that plant after the prior owner or tenant left it vacant. Is there something really sinister that happened five years ago that all of us should know?

Here in Michigan we had a nutty governor and legislature that thought it would be "cool" to get Hollywood to make films here. They passed legislation and funded a pool of money so that any Hollywood movie filmed in Michigan could get 40-percent refund on the money they spent here. Now imagine if you had a business and a state offered to give you back 40-cents on every dollar you spent in that state. That is one great subsidy.

Naturally, it did not take Hollywood long to come to Michigan to make films. With a 40-percent subsidy, why not?

This sort of subsidy is actually common for film production. It seems like state governments have a particular weakness for giving money to film makers, apparently because they think it is really "cool" to have movies made in their state. The movie money is very short term. Once the production ends, the spending stops. There is no long term. And the states compete to see who can give film makers the best deal.

Making outboard motors is not quite as glamorous. BRP could only get a one-time $1-million in support for a $15-million long-term investment. The plant expansion might continue to provide employment for another 100 years--I say that because Evinrude has been in business for over 100 years.

posted 09-30-2012 10:43 PM ET (US)            

Also, I have to thank Patrick for mentioning the BRP plant expansion. I think everyone will be pleased to hear that BRP continues to manufacture their E-TEC engines in the United States of America, is modernizing and expanding their production facilities, and is not cutting their workforce or forcing wage concessions on workers by threatening to close plants.

Considering the kind of financial support Wisconsin has given to other manufacturing centers in the marine business, I think the $1-million they spent on this project will be a good investment.

posted 10-01-2012 12:48 AM ET (US)            

We should compare the cost to Wisconsin to get BRP's plant operating with the cost to BRP itself. I don't know what the figures are, but I would suggest that for a modern manufacturing plant that employes 500 to 600 workers, the capital investment is probably on the order of $300-million to $600-million, or roughly $500,000 to $1,000,000 per worker. Those numbers are just my wild guess, but they're based on what I have seen other modern manufacturing companies invest in new plant facilities in recent years.

posted 10-01-2012 12:52 AM ET (US)            

I'm probably missing something, but northern IL needs to be tilled-under--Chicago included.

posted 10-01-2012 10:15 AM ET (US)            

Massachusetts provides filmmakers with a highly competitive package of tax incentives: a 25% production credit, a 25% payroll credit, and a sales tax exemption.

Adam Sandler filmed yet another movie just outside my development this past summer.

The state recently went after one Hollywood film maker that abused the process.

posted 10-01-2012 11:04 AM ET (US)            

Despite the fact that its gone a bit off the rails, I'll try to tie it back together somewhat.

Hilinercc, I'm not a Brunswick fan, not even a Mercury fan, though I do appreciate that both Mercury and Evinrude manufacture outboards in Wisconsin. And I'm glad that both are expanding said manufacturing capacity here in WI and the US.

David, northern Illinois, basically Chicago Metro, is the largest economic powerhouse between the East and West Coasts. No good will come to our region with your wished-for failure of the most important area in the burgeoning Megalopolis. WI Governor Scott Walker doesn't recognize this, but a major international think tank, the OECD, certainly does:

http:/ / www. oecd. org/ fr/ presse/ governancethechicagotri-statemetroa reaisapowerfulregionpolicymakersmustworktogethertomaintainaglobalpolepos itionandfullyrealisetheregionspotential. htm

So Mercury consolidates workers and Jim condemns them, BRP consolidates workers and Jim congratulates them. No one is surprised by this, I'm certain.

And finally, my math on the BRP to Sturtevant move calculates the following sums of Public Money, aka teat suckling:

$3 million in tax credits, $1.5 million in forgiven loans, $500,000 in training money, $1 million in State Funds and $300,000 in local credits. That looks a hell of a lot more like $6.3 million than the $1 million you cite, Jim. Do you have something that says otherwise or math that eliminates both earlier subsidies and portions of current subsidies? Are you narrowing your view of the BRP subsidies to include only the most recent and only the State's?

posted 10-01-2012 12:04 PM ET (US)            

Economists have labelled the move of jobs back from overseas "re-shoring". It is a growing trend.

posted 10-01-2012 12:42 PM ET (US)            

Jim condemns Mercury for taking public money, and congratulates BRP for taking it, excusing BRP for the low amount they could negotiate per employee while grossly miscalculating said amount. And then attributing the actual and published amount given to what, the building? Or further forgiving BRP for their public teat suckling. I think that method of argument is called rationalization, a debate method I see the emotionally committed E-TEC fans utilize on an increasingly more frequent basis.

posted 10-01-2012 12:52 PM ET (US)            

--five years ago (or longer) BRP moved their major plant into a vacant building in Sturtevant, Wisconsin, created 500 to 600 jobs; they recently expanded the plant further by consolidation of work that was still being done in a second plant nearby (but in Illinois); they got some help from Wisconsin to create the 500 to 600 jobs.

--a few years ago Brunswick threatened to close down their entire operation in Fond du Lac, and to move it out of state, moving 2,600 jobs out of Wisconsin.

--Patrick says BRP received from Wisconsin over the past five to seven years about $10,000,000 in incentives, some of which they have already repaid, to help with the creation of the 500 to 600 new jobs; I can't say if that's right; I don't track BRP's finances or Wisconsin's incentives.

--various sources say Mercury received $123-million in incentives from Wisconsin and other local agencies as an inducement to not leave town. Mercury also used the threat of leaving town to induce their workers to take wage cuts, and to create new pay scales, reducing the cost of doing business for them in Wisconsin. I think that information comes mainly from another newspaper article Patrick linked to.

Patrick likes to equate these as being completely analogous and equal, although he seems to vent his ire most on BRP.

I see this as different situations. BRP resurrected a bankrupt company, OMC, and moved its operation to Wisconsin, building a new plant, and creating new jobs in Wisconsin. I do not hold BRP responsible for the jobs lost in Illinois or other places where OMC operated. The blame for that goes to OMC.

Brunswick used what a lot of people--especially trade unionists and people with a sense of fair play (which are two groups that may not overlap)--consider to be rather unethical tactics to play-off two states against each other, to play-off two sets of workers against each other, in a race to see which state would give Brunswick the most money and which set of workers would cut their own pay the deepest. Wisconsin and the Fond du Lac workers won the contest, although I don't think the workers are entirely over the moon about the new wages and work situation.

I don't know that I have ever called for Brunswick to be condemned for their actions. I think I have offered some information that others have authored about the actions of Brunswick in these matters, but I don't recall ever condemning them for it.

I also find it interesting that the politicians in Wisconsin seem rather OK with what they did for BRP. Read Patrick's newspaper article link and you hear rather positive comments about BRP's outcome with their Sturtevant plant opening, new jobs, and recent expansion.

I think Patrick wants to make the point that BRP took some public money from Wisconsin. That has never been in question. For me the sticking point is the difference between Brunswick and BRP in their actions regarding plant openings or closing in Wisconsin, how much money they got, and the circumstances under which they got it. I don't see those as being all equal or equivalent.

posted 10-01-2012 10:05 PM ET (US)         

"I think everyone will be pleased to hear that BRP continues to manufacture their E-TEC engines in the United States of America, is modernizing and expanding their production facilities, and is not cutting their workforce or forcing wage concessions on workers by threatening to close plants."

I always recommend that US made Mercury and Evinrude be purchased before a Japanese brand.

However, Bain Capital's BRP could use a lesson from Brunswick in lobbying for some supporting Government funds. It seems they are indeed having some serious corporate problems in need of outsourcing, and they do not have any unionized employees.

They recently terminated 350 workers in Illinois as a result of the failing SeaDoo jet boat line. Not even being moved, just shut it down as a loss and discontinued product. Couldn't even sell it. The Democrats love to dump on Bain Capital for these kinds of actions! So far, they have missed this latest one for a TV ad.

Prior to this, BRP announced closing of their 500 worker PWC/SeaDoo manufacturing plant in Montreal, and shipping the whole operation to Mexico, to save labor costs. Now that hurts. I'll bet they're popular in Canada with that one!

That's a total of 850 jobs lost to the US and Canadian labor markets and economies. And they ares shuting down the Candaian plant even after 4 years ago receiving a $50,000,000 bailout from the Canadian Government to keep their bond rating out of Default. Not nice.

So they are really no better, if not worse, than Brunswick, who never needed a bailout. PRJ's comment was really not out of line at all.

posted 10-01-2012 10:33 PM ET (US)            

Source: http://billiards.about.com/od/poolbilliardsnews/a/10_10_01brunswi.htm

Here's another notice of Brunswick closing four boat plants and laying off 1,400 workers:

http://www.manufacturing.net/news/2008/10/ brunswick-closing-4-plants-cuts-1400-jobs

I think a close read of some of their corporate filings will find even more plant closures, layoffs, and exits from established markets.