No More Twinkies: Hostess Brand Closes For Good

November 16, 2012


Goodnight sweet prince.

In heartbreaking news for anyone who deep fries sweets whenever they're drunk, Hostess brand, maker of Twinkies, Ding Dongs and Wonder Bread, is calling it quits after filing for bankruptcy earlier this year. A recent labor strike drove the company over the edge. BRB, visiting every grocery store in the area.

Adam Hanft, a branding strategist behind Hanft Projects, sees the potential for new life in the death of a decades-old company. A fresh owner of the intellectual property, which includes everything from names to recipes to graphics, could revitalize the Hostess brands, which Mr. Hanft sees as weakened but not lacking potential. He raised the prospect of new flavors, limited-edition Twinkies, products co-branded with independent music groups and the potential for an international reach.

"Its nutritional emptiness in the right hands could be its core strength," he said, explaining that a buyer that embraces the brand's "kitschy," "deliciously retro" feel could be rewarded. He foresees a potentially diverse crowd of bidders for the property.

Did you read that? It said LIMITED EDITION TWINKIES. I say you and I pool our money and buy the rights to some of their brands. "Ding Dongs?" Yeah, that's really the only one I care about. I want the new boxes to have a giant loveable smiling pecker on the front. We're gonna be rich!

Thanks to Chaos Infintium (whoa bro -- easy on the chaos!), B. McCool, seth and Nickw22, who agree we're just gonna have to find other ways to get fat. I vote chips and dip.

  • OldandLame

    ding dongs are the only tragic loss here. it should have been deemed criminal to take them away.

  • pseudobob

    but orange cupcakes dingongs chocodiles

  • AmstraD

    RIP 145 calories x 2

  • Guest

    Not too surprised if they're all over or on other bidding sites.

  • Brant_Alan

    .. i have another one.

    Where's the cream filling?
    It's gone.

  • Brant_Alan

    This. THIS.. Is why we can't have nice things.

  • agatha

    Ow I bought a stash, I'm good for the next 20 years! :P. *Nagh not really, never had one in NL but heard it's stay's good for a long time!)

  • asdfadsfadsfd

    to be fair a lot of the blame does lie with the ceos because a company has to be pretty badly off for a union to strangle it to begin with. But it was a retarded thing to see the situation and decide that was the time to throw their weight around because shutting down a bakery puts a gun to their heads and they'd have to agree to any crazy demands the unions made no negotiation if they wanted a hope of getting back on their feet. When your jobs may very well stop existing you don't push, that is the time to give a little and make a few concessions to give the company a little more time to get back on its feet. Even if the company did survive their union leaders should be fired along with the ceo. They saw the company weak and rather than try to help or at least just leave it be they decided to try and take advantage.

  • Shhsh

    They tripled their CEO's pay... And you guys are blaming the unions. HELLO STUPID GENERATION THAT HAS NO IDEA WHAT IT WAS LIKE BEFORE UNIONS. Take the time to look up what it was like to work in the coal mines for instance before unions you idiots.

  • HackTheGibson

    Unions were critical. Safety and pay was horrible. However, that was also before OSHA and labor laws. Unions were needed, the important thing is were. They are as useful as a horse and buggy in the middle of New York City. A few may still be needed, but a handful at most.

  • Shhsh

    The minute you remove them... You will see lobbyists pay their way around Osha standards like they do in non-unionized mines. Enough pay offs and the government overlooks everything and then you end up with miners lost... Sick, Sad realities.

  • Matty Spinny

    fucking ceo for not giving into the demands of their laborers. apparently an american staple isn't good enough for them to give everyone a quarter raise; but you know the ceos wanted porsches this christmas.

  • HackTheGibson

    Receiving clerks were paid $48,000 a year. I know people with college degrees that aren't making near that. We are talking about a receiving clerk. A good job, but not a $48,000 a year job.

    Watching twinkies come and go is not the same as running a company.

  • $18922249

    That is a living wage. The rest of us should be fighting for more as well.

    “Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires."

    ― John Steinbeck

  • HackTheGibson

    Depends on where you live. The average teacher around here with a degree is less than $30k. Most of America that is doing very well for a low skilled job. So someone who is trained as well as a fry cook, making $18k more than a teacher with a degree? I think that after a 40% pay cut from management that the laborers would have been better off sharing some of the cuts than taking all of them.

    You can quote Steinbeck, but Socialism never took hold for 2 main reasons. 1 It can not work and is bound to always fail as has been proven at every attempt. 2. The United States is one of the few places people can actually improve their circumstances. The goal of most isn't to be millionaires, but to improve where they came from.

  • $18922249

    My wife is a public school teacher. The state in which we live has had a pay freeze for the last five years, aka the tenure of her employment. So she effectively makes the rate which you have stated. I make about the same, as a scientist. While this is workable, we have a house and a kid, and it is tough to make ends meet. There is very little room for savings.

    I am at an individual level an Ayn Randian libertarian. I can see and appreciate your points, and they make sense if you are a person thinking only of yourself or your immediate surroundings. At a societal level I am a pretty staunch socialist. These two viewpoints may seem incompatible, but they are very much rooted in a similar 'selfishness'. The only difference is perspective.

    There are simply too many people, too few resources, and no one person (contrary to what he or she may tell you) lives in complete isolation. Too often, the people who scream the loudest about the ills of socialism are the same people who will not have anyone talk badly about the police, fire department or military.

    Also, as a researcher, it drives me crazy when people do this... your first point is supported by 'self-evidence'. This is not how logic works. The second point might be true, at least in some capacity, but there are many other places on earth where people start in much more pleasing circumstances.

  • HackTheGibson

    Glad your wife is a teacher. Thank her for her service.

    My point isn't a selfish thing if I understand what you mean. While I wish no one had to worry about bills and could do very well, it isn't so. Your wife worked hard and went through college. She put in the extra effort, time, expense, and risk. After going through that, she should be compensated more than someone who didn't. A receiving clerk should not be paid as much as your wife. It is a low skilled and low education position. It is a critical position and the company needs it, but it is an entry grade position.

    As to self-evidence, ehh. Even Marx admitted it wouldn't work by the end. If there was a light switch yes, but the transition to socialism will never work. It is human nature. The supporting class will decline as their work is less rewarded and more "shared." Why work hard when someone else will provide it? Why work hard when all your hard work is squandered on those who won't. In a perfect society I think it might work, but in reality, too many abuse the system. You can call that self-evidence, but it is based on my experience of current systems and abuse.

  • HackTheGibson

    You obviously have no clue. The Reorganization specialist they brought in cut CEO pay by almost half and the unions would rather shut down the company then take a 8% greed. It wasn't the CEOs being greedy.

  • rebekahshurman

    But... The SnoBalls...

  • anonymousial

    publicity stunt?

blog comments powered by Disqus
Previous Post
Next Post