Just how many jobs did Romney create?

Yea... but... this thread is not about the stimulus and government figures. It is about Romney and his claim that they created 100,000 jobs. Now, personally, I find that an interesting topic without distracting it with irrelevance.

I have to believe that Staples alone was in the tens of thosuands.
That's not 100,000. Even if it were, Staples put a lot of small companies out of business and just rearranged the work force.

That isn't creating jobs.

it was private business.
Beating out the competition is just that...beating out the competition.
He created those jobs within his company.....throwing in "jobs he took from other companies" is a valid point if he was government...he was not.
 
He says 100,000.

I say he's lying.

Anyone know if he created any jobs at all, and if so how many?

If you had any idea of what Bain capital did you would not doubt his answer of 100K.

I know what they do. I'd like to see the numbers. If he's going to go around making such a claim the least he could do is back it up.

I don't disagree. I'd like to see how the numbers add up. I'm very interested in where that figure comes from. Where we differ, I think, is that I see the figure as fairly realistic, given the size of Bains (they are one of the biggest VC companies in the country) whereas you see it with a large degree of cynicism.... which I can understand, given that you are not a fan of the GOP. (I'm not either - and I'd quite like to agree with you about the figure).
 
If you had any idea of what Bain capital did you would not doubt his answer of 100K.

I know what they do. I'd like to see the numbers. If he's going to go around making such a claim the least he could do is back it up.

I don't disagree. I'd like to see how the numbers add up. I'm very interested in where that figure comes from. Where we differ, I think, is that I see the figure as fairly realistic, given the size of Bains (they are one of the biggest VC companies in the country) whereas you see it with a large degree of cynicism.... which I can understand, given that you are not a fan of the GOP. (I'm not either - and I'd quite like to agree with you about the figure).

I have many clients that are venture capitalists.....the 100K jobs created is by no means an outrageous fiugure for a firm like Bain.
 
I know what they do. I'd like to see the numbers. If he's going to go around making such a claim the least he could do is back it up.

I don't disagree. I'd like to see how the numbers add up. I'm very interested in where that figure comes from. Where we differ, I think, is that I see the figure as fairly realistic, given the size of Bains (they are one of the biggest VC companies in the country) whereas you see it with a large degree of cynicism.... which I can understand, given that you are not a fan of the GOP. (I'm not either - and I'd quite like to agree with you about the figure).

I have many clients that are venture capitalists.....the 100K jobs created is by no means an outrageous fiugure for a firm like Bain.

Yea, having researched Bains, I absolutely agree. I'm very used to viewing every word uttered by every politician as bullshit. But, on this, I think Romney may well be right.

Since you're interested in the whole VC thing... I'd be interested in your take on my 'venture capital, in a nutshell' thread.
 
If you had any idea of what Bain capital did you would not doubt his answer of 100K.

I know what they do. I'd like to see the numbers. If he's going to go around making such a claim the least he could do is back it up.

Without Bain capital...Staples was a good idea with a failed business model and it would have gone under.

Now it has hundreds of stores.

I need to believe Staples alone had tens of thousands of jobs created.

Sports Authority is another one. Big business, employs thousands of people. Domino's Pizza, Steel Dynamics.

AmPad was a loser. Of course who could overcome the bird brained AmPad decision to buy a typewriter manufacturer shortly before Bain took over.
 
I don't disagree. I'd like to see how the numbers add up. I'm very interested in where that figure comes from. Where we differ, I think, is that I see the figure as fairly realistic, given the size of Bains (they are one of the biggest VC companies in the country) whereas you see it with a large degree of cynicism.... which I can understand, given that you are not a fan of the GOP. (I'm not either - and I'd quite like to agree with you about the figure).

I have many clients that are venture capitalists.....the 100K jobs created is by no means an outrageous fiugure for a firm like Bain.

Yea, having researched Bains, I absolutely agree. I'm very used to viewing every word uttered by every politician as bullshit. But, on this, I think Romney may well be right.

Since you're interested in the whole VC thing... I'd be interested in your take on my 'venture capital, in a nutshell' thread.
I just read your original post in that thread.
You are accurate to a certain degree...but you left out the most important part...and what separates them from lending institutions...

A VC firm seeks out good ideas with failed business models. It doesnt simply inject capital...it finds what the problem was, makes the necessary adjustments, and then injects capital to allow it to grow in the right direction.

If a bank denies a loan it is likely due to a poor business model...and banks are not in the business of fixing business models...so they deny the loan...>VC firms take it to the next level.
 
I have many clients that are venture capitalists.....the 100K jobs created is by no means an outrageous fiugure for a firm like Bain.

Yea, having researched Bains, I absolutely agree. I'm very used to viewing every word uttered by every politician as bullshit. But, on this, I think Romney may well be right.

Since you're interested in the whole VC thing... I'd be interested in your take on my 'venture capital, in a nutshell' thread.
I just read your original post in that thread.
You are accurate to a certain degree...but you left out the most important part...and what separates them from lending institutions...

A VC firm seeks out good ideas with failed business models. It doesnt simply inject capital...it finds what the problem was, makes the necessary adjustments, and then injects capital to allow it to grow in the right direction.

If a bank denies a loan it is likely due to a poor business model...and banks are not in the business of fixing business models...so they deny the loan...>VC firms take it to the next level.

Damned fine point! Could you post it there?
 
Yea, having researched Bains, I absolutely agree. I'm very used to viewing every word uttered by every politician as bullshit. But, on this, I think Romney may well be right.

Since you're interested in the whole VC thing... I'd be interested in your take on my 'venture capital, in a nutshell' thread.
I just read your original post in that thread.
You are accurate to a certain degree...but you left out the most important part...and what separates them from lending institutions...

A VC firm seeks out good ideas with failed business models. It doesnt simply inject capital...it finds what the problem was, makes the necessary adjustments, and then injects capital to allow it to grow in the right direction.

If a bank denies a loan it is likely due to a poor business model...and banks are not in the business of fixing business models...so they deny the loan...>VC firms take it to the next level.

Damned fine point! Could you post it there?

Done.
So now do I get that kiss from you Ive been waiting for?
 
Second, it has become increasingly hard to understand how Romney’s personal involvement played a role in creating these jobs, especially years later. He clearly is adding up all the jobs now at the companies that are thriving, arguing these numbers far outweigh the job losses at companies that failed. But as the Wall Street Journal reported Monday, the failure rate one can attribute to Bain Capital changes significantly if one counts five years from an investment or eight years from an investment.

Bain, in fact, rejected the Journal’s analysis, saying it “uses a fundamentally flawed methodology that unfairly assigns responsibility to us for many events that occurred in companies when we did not own or control them, and disregards dozens of successful venture capital investments.”

In other words, Bain appears to be rejecting a central premise of Romney’s calculation — that years after the investment ended, one can attribute either good news or bad news about the company to Bain’s involvement.

Mitt Romney and 100,000 jobs: an untenable figure - The Washington Post

No matter how you dissect his claim, there is no way to prove or disprove it.
 
I just read your original post in that thread.
You are accurate to a certain degree...but you left out the most important part...and what separates them from lending institutions...

A VC firm seeks out good ideas with failed business models. It doesnt simply inject capital...it finds what the problem was, makes the necessary adjustments, and then injects capital to allow it to grow in the right direction.

If a bank denies a loan it is likely due to a poor business model...and banks are not in the business of fixing business models...so they deny the loan...>VC firms take it to the next level.

Damned fine point! Could you post it there?

Done.
So now do I get that kiss from you Ive been waiting for?

You certainly may. :lol:
 
Second, it has become increasingly hard to understand how Romney’s personal involvement played a role in creating these jobs, especially years later. He clearly is adding up all the jobs now at the companies that are thriving, arguing these numbers far outweigh the job losses at companies that failed. But as the Wall Street Journal reported Monday, the failure rate one can attribute to Bain Capital changes significantly if one counts five years from an investment or eight years from an investment.

Bain, in fact, rejected the Journal’s analysis, saying it “uses a fundamentally flawed methodology that unfairly assigns responsibility to us for many events that occurred in companies when we did not own or control them, and disregards dozens of successful venture capital investments.”

In other words, Bain appears to be rejecting a central premise of Romney’s calculation — that years after the investment ended, one can attribute either good news or bad news about the company to Bain’s involvement.

Mitt Romney and 100,000 jobs: an untenable figure - The Washington Post

No matter how you dissect his claim, there is no way to prove or disprove it.

So there is no basis to call him a 'liar'.
 
Second, it has become increasingly hard to understand how Romney’s personal involvement played a role in creating these jobs, especially years later. He clearly is adding up all the jobs now at the companies that are thriving, arguing these numbers far outweigh the job losses at companies that failed. But as the Wall Street Journal reported Monday, the failure rate one can attribute to Bain Capital changes significantly if one counts five years from an investment or eight years from an investment.

Bain, in fact, rejected the Journal’s analysis, saying it “uses a fundamentally flawed methodology that unfairly assigns responsibility to us for many events that occurred in companies when we did not own or control them, and disregards dozens of successful venture capital investments.”

In other words, Bain appears to be rejecting a central premise of Romney’s calculation — that years after the investment ended, one can attribute either good news or bad news about the company to Bain’s involvement.

Mitt Romney and 100,000 jobs: an untenable figure - The Washington Post

No matter how you dissect his claim, there is no way to prove or disprove it.

I still think you are confused as to how a VC firm works.

They create a business model.....and for as long as that business model works, whomever created it gets the credit.

If Bain subsequently changed the business model of...say...Staples....then yes, anyone with Bain at the onset of the venture are no longer associated with the success.

But Staples...Sports Authority...their business models have not changed since Bain entered....

So it is the business models devised under the guidence of Romney that continue to create jobs and success for Staples.
 
Second, it has become increasingly hard to understand how Romney’s personal involvement played a role in creating these jobs, especially years later. He clearly is adding up all the jobs now at the companies that are thriving, arguing these numbers far outweigh the job losses at companies that failed. But as the Wall Street Journal reported Monday, the failure rate one can attribute to Bain Capital changes significantly if one counts five years from an investment or eight years from an investment.

Bain, in fact, rejected the Journal’s analysis, saying it “uses a fundamentally flawed methodology that unfairly assigns responsibility to us for many events that occurred in companies when we did not own or control them, and disregards dozens of successful venture capital investments.”

In other words, Bain appears to be rejecting a central premise of Romney’s calculation — that years after the investment ended, one can attribute either good news or bad news about the company to Bain’s involvement.

Mitt Romney and 100,000 jobs: an untenable figure - The Washington Post

No matter how you dissect his claim, there is no way to prove or disprove it.

So there is no basis to call him a 'liar'.
Sure there is. His claim is wishful thinking on his part.
 
Second, it has become increasingly hard to understand how Romney’s personal involvement played a role in creating these jobs, especially years later. He clearly is adding up all the jobs now at the companies that are thriving, arguing these numbers far outweigh the job losses at companies that failed. But as the Wall Street Journal reported Monday, the failure rate one can attribute to Bain Capital changes significantly if one counts five years from an investment or eight years from an investment.

Bain, in fact, rejected the Journal’s analysis, saying it “uses a fundamentally flawed methodology that unfairly assigns responsibility to us for many events that occurred in companies when we did not own or control them, and disregards dozens of successful venture capital investments.”

In other words, Bain appears to be rejecting a central premise of Romney’s calculation — that years after the investment ended, one can attribute either good news or bad news about the company to Bain’s involvement.

Mitt Romney and 100,000 jobs: an untenable figure - The Washington Post

No matter how you dissect his claim, there is no way to prove or disprove it.

I still think you are confused as to how a VC firm works.

They create a business model.....and for as long as that business model works, whomever created it gets the credit.

If Bain subsequently changed the business model of...say...Staples....then yes, anyone with Bain at the onset of the venture are no longer associated with the success.

But Staples...Sports Authority...their business models have not changed since Bain entered....

So it is the business models devised under the guidence of Romney that continue to create jobs and success for Staples.
:lol: Bain disagrees with you.
 
Second, it has become increasingly hard to understand how Romney’s personal involvement played a role in creating these jobs, especially years later. He clearly is adding up all the jobs now at the companies that are thriving, arguing these numbers far outweigh the job losses at companies that failed. But as the Wall Street Journal reported Monday, the failure rate one can attribute to Bain Capital changes significantly if one counts five years from an investment or eight years from an investment.

Bain, in fact, rejected the Journal’s analysis, saying it “uses a fundamentally flawed methodology that unfairly assigns responsibility to us for many events that occurred in companies when we did not own or control them, and disregards dozens of successful venture capital investments.”

In other words, Bain appears to be rejecting a central premise of Romney’s calculation — that years after the investment ended, one can attribute either good news or bad news about the company to Bain’s involvement.

Mitt Romney and 100,000 jobs: an untenable figure - The Washington Post

No matter how you dissect his claim, there is no way to prove or disprove it.

I still think you are confused as to how a VC firm works.

They create a business model.....and for as long as that business model works, whomever created it gets the credit.

If Bain subsequently changed the business model of...say...Staples....then yes, anyone with Bain at the onset of the venture are no longer associated with the success.

But Staples...Sports Authority...their business models have not changed since Bain entered....

So it is the business models devised under the guidence of Romney that continue to create jobs and success for Staples.
:lol: Bain disagrees with you.

I like you...so dont take this an an insult....

If you were in the business world as deep as I am...(but actually retiring as we speak).....you would understand why they are saying what they are saying.

two things...

1) they do not want Romenys political career to define who they are...they would like to keep out of the "negaitve limelight"

2) they do not want their reputation to be based on one that is no longer with the firm. They would like tobe seen as a great firm as they are today...not as they were....for they know that when his political career is over, he will likely be their competition.

It is not uncommon for companies to seaprate themselves form those that left and went into the media eye.
 
He says 100,000.

I say he's lying.

Anyone know if he created any jobs at all, and if so how many?

One of Bain's earliest and most notable venture investments was in Staples, Inc., the office supply retailer. The funding enabled Staples to expand from one store in 1986 to over 2000 stores in 2011. In 1986, Bain provided $4.5 million to two supermarket executives, Leo Kahn and Thomas G. Stemberg, to open an office supply supermarket in Brighton, Massachusetts.[21] The fast-growing retail chain went public in 1989[22] and in 1996 the company had grown to over 1,100 stores.[23]

Bain Capital - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Second, it has become increasingly hard to understand how Romney’s personal involvement played a role in creating these jobs, especially years later. He clearly is adding up all the jobs now at the companies that are thriving, arguing these numbers far outweigh the job losses at companies that failed. But as the Wall Street Journal reported Monday, the failure rate one can attribute to Bain Capital changes significantly if one counts five years from an investment or eight years from an investment.

Bain, in fact, rejected the Journal’s analysis, saying it “uses a fundamentally flawed methodology that unfairly assigns responsibility to us for many events that occurred in companies when we did not own or control them, and disregards dozens of successful venture capital investments.”

In other words, Bain appears to be rejecting a central premise of Romney’s calculation — that years after the investment ended, one can attribute either good news or bad news about the company to Bain’s involvement.

Mitt Romney and 100,000 jobs: an untenable figure - The Washington Post

No matter how you dissect his claim, there is no way to prove or disprove it.

So there is no basis to call him a 'liar'.
Sure there is. His claim is wishful thinking on his part.

you say that right after you said...

"No matter how you dissect his claim, there is no way to prove or disprove it."

I dontget it.
 
He says 100,000.

I say he's lying.

Anyone know if he created any jobs at all, and if so how many?

One of Bain's earliest and most notable venture investments was in Staples, Inc., the office supply retailer. The funding enabled Staples to expand from one store in 1986 to over 2000 stores in 2011. In 1986, Bain provided $4.5 million to two supermarket executives, Leo Kahn and Thomas G. Stemberg, to open an office supply supermarket in Brighton, Massachusetts.[21] The fast-growing retail chain went public in 1989[22] and in 1996 the company had grown to over 1,100 stores.[23]

Bain Capital - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And that is just one of many companies they expanded.
 
In 1991, Mitt Romney temporarily left Bain Capital to rejoin and lead Bain & Co. as interim CEO. Bringing along two executives from Bain Capital, Romney began a traveling campaign to rally employees at all Bain offices globally. Romney also negotiated a complex settlement between the Bain partnership and the firm's lenders, including a $10 million reduction in the $38 million Bain owed the Bank of New England.[30][31] Although in the role for just one year before returning to Bain Capital, Romney’s work had three profound impacts on the firm. First, ownership was officially shifted from the owners to the firm’s 70 general partners. Second, transparency in the firm’s finances increased dramatically (e.g. partners were able to know each other’s salaries). Third, Bill Bain relinquished ownership in the firm that carried his name. Within a year, Bain & Company bounced back to profitability without major partner defections and the groundwork was laid for a period of steady growth.

Other notable Bain investments of the late 1990s included Sealy Corporation, the manufacturer of mattresses[36]; Alliance Laundry Systems[37]; Domino's Pizza[38] and Artisan Entertainment

Romney led the business during the periods 1984 to 1990 and 1992 to 1999.

Bain Capital - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


That last bit is important to note since Gingrich's marxist-flavored half hour ad mixes up timelines to give the impression that Romney had a hand in the acquisition and sale of companies that were bought and sold after Romney had left Bain Capital.
 
Second, it has become increasingly hard to understand how Romney’s personal involvement played a role in creating these jobs, especially years later. He clearly is adding up all the jobs now at the companies that are thriving, arguing these numbers far outweigh the job losses at companies that failed. But as the Wall Street Journal reported Monday, the failure rate one can attribute to Bain Capital changes significantly if one counts five years from an investment or eight years from an investment.

Bain, in fact, rejected the Journal’s analysis, saying it “uses a fundamentally flawed methodology that unfairly assigns responsibility to us for many events that occurred in companies when we did not own or control them, and disregards dozens of successful venture capital investments.”

In other words, Bain appears to be rejecting a central premise of Romney’s calculation — that years after the investment ended, one can attribute either good news or bad news about the company to Bain’s involvement.

Mitt Romney and 100,000 jobs: an untenable figure - The Washington Post

No matter how you dissect his claim, there is no way to prove or disprove it.

So there is no basis to call him a 'liar'.
Sure there is. His claim is wishful thinking on his part.

There is substantial evidence of the value added by Bains to companies. Would that value add up to 100k jobs? Maybe. Maybe not. But most certainly, Bains (and therefore Romney) has had substantial positive input into the US jobs situation. And without using taxpayers money to investigate ants in Africa.
 

Forum List

Back
Top