To: Cumbrian who wrote (1904 ) 9/16/1999 5:19:00 PM From: Marshhawk Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 2769
Geoff, I'm sorry, I have read your post 3 times and I'm not sure I understand your point. 1) You are correct I have no direct union/labor negotiation experience. I have a lot of 2nd hand experience if you want me to go into it. 2) Inco is, I assume, acting in the their self interest as they should be. 3) For whatever reason, INCO has pissed off the union, 99% strike vote, and now a lockout, which is a sensitive issue with the union after 96. 4) Somebody got set up to sell Ni yesterday. It was up 23c or $506 a tonne this am as the shorts were forced to cover. Who set them up? Who knows. Only 1 organization knew there was going to be a lockout at midnight though. 5) If there were a concern that a union walkout would lead to an expensive bottleneck in production, I would argue both that the union guaranteed no work stoppage for two weeks and that there are enough supervisory people still working to complete the process of shutdown at any time. 6) My uncle ran a manufacturing plant for 30 years. He told me that the only people that made the firm money were the manufacturing guys. Everybody else, sales, marketing, accounting, management were expenses and produced no income for the firm. Inco is big, old, overpaid for VB and they are going to go into the new millenium and make everything better by squeezing the last little bit of blood from the union. I don't think the union is going to buy it, and if they can convince the Canadian AFL/CIO that this is what is going on, then INCO could be in big problems, if Teamsters and Railroad Unions refuse to ship/deliver. 8) INCO knows all this, and yet precipitates a lockout. Why? Because keeping the ni price high at this juncture outweighs the above risks. I still think it has something to do with other firms forward sold positions. 9) Market down, N unchanged, CMR up 1 c, Birmingham steel up 3/8 on 2x nl volume.