…What?
It’s been 2 days since the last response, BigT has an obligation to come along and add something useless and nonsensical. It’s in the user agreement.
You heard him. BigT doesn’t want to be fed so don’t feed him.
The article got this wrong. The cost of giving away a free pizza is not equal to the retail value, it is only equal to the food cost. I don’t know what the food cost of a pizza chain is, but most restaurant’s food costs are around 30%. So, the pizza give-away will likely increase his costs by $8-10 million, not $24-32 million. It will also increase his total sales when people get sodas and sides with their free pizzas, and it will work as advertising when those people want pizza in the future.
Plus, he can just deduct the cost of the health care from the next round of raises. Really, he is just being a dick, and complaining about having to spend some money.
Point: If he’s willing to drop 10 million dollars on food costs, that means he’s got 8 million dollars to pay for employee health care, but he’s too much of a cockmongler to let his employees have health care.
Such a (smaller) burden will immediately put him out of business or (horror of horrors) raise the cost of his pizza by a nickel a pie.
Put it on the bill. Call it the Obamacare tax. When everyone sees how tiny it is, they’ll laugh at him for being such a bleeding cunt.
Are we still talking about his pizza prices?
You are assuming that the people ordering the free pizzas would not otherwise have paid for them, which is only true in some cases.
Granted this is a liberal article from the huffington post, so they’ll be in support of my position regardless.
But check the math. Math doesn’t have a liberal bias, in spite of the meme to the contrary that facts/reality/math has a liberal bias.
According to that liberal bastion of lies, wikipedia, Papa John’s makes 1.126,397 billion dollars per year in the United States alone in revenue.
CITE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papa_John%27s_Pizza
Obviously not all of that is in pizza, some of it is soda, wings, delivery fee, etc. But let’s pretend for the sake of argument all that revenue is in pizza, to simplify it.
Assume for the sake of argument each pizza is sold for 10 dollars, on average. Mediums are less, larges with more toppings are more, and delivery fee added on, etc.
That’s 112,639,700 pizzas per year, to make 1.1 billion in revenue.
Their own estimates say 8 million dollars per year in costs for the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare).
Cite: Their own sources.
That is 14 cents per pizza. Using **their **numbers. Which, given how this hack has been lying to us about how it’s necessary to cut employee hours to pay for this, is stupid to believe.
2,600 US establishments.
Cite: WIkipedia.
8 million dollars.
8.00 per hour if you include payroll taxes. That’s one million hours to cut.
Per establishment, that’s 384 hours per year to cut from their schedules. Assume each place has 10 employees. (Some more, some less). That’s 38, make it 39 hours per year per employee.
Or, less than one hour per week.
So, to “pay” for the Affordable Care Act, Papa Johns must slash employee hours to below 30 PER WEEK. Costing full-time employees between 40 to 50 dollars a week in wages, or 160-200+ dollars per month.
To pay for an additional dime and a nickel per pizza, which customers have said they’d pay.
So let’s recap:
Papa John’s makes 1.126,397 billion dollars per year
That’s 112,639,700 pizzas per year.
Their own estimates say 8 million dollars per year in costs
That is 14 cents per pizza. Using **their **numbers.
2,600 US establishments.
They could cut less than one hour per week for 10 employees to pay for this entirely.
Instead, they’re going to cut 5-10 hours per week for all full-time employees and raise prices.
[ul]
[li]Raise prices by how much? Don’t be surprised if they raise it by 50 [SIZE=4]cents or a dollar[SIZE=4] using Obamacare as an excuse[SIZE=4] to make more profits.[/SIZE][/SIZE][/li][/SIZE]
[/ul]
[ul]
[li] To pay for what? Remember, if they reduce hours so that nobody qualifies for Obamacare, then what expense has Papa John’s actually incurred?[/li][/ul]
[ul]
[li]So, they’re going to cost their employees 5-10 times the number of hours it would actually take to pay for Obamacare in its entirety, to demonstrate their opposition to Obamacare, while raising prices on consumers TO PAY FOR NOTHING.[/li][/ul]
What does the math say? The math says John Schnatter is a flaming asshole full of shards of broken glass and burning hot buffalo sauce.
The math doesn’t lie.
Note also: Less than one hour per week means this thing is costing them approximately 6 dollars per full time employee per week, or 24 bucks a month.
Essentially, a “raise” of 15 cents per hour. For full time employees ONLY.
SHOCKINGLY EXPENSIVE ISN’T IT
But it is accurate that liberals have reality/math bias.
The only thing that explains this guy’s loud public opposition is that he was hoping for a Chick-Fil-A moment out of all his public bluster…
The only problem is that their ingredients are so cheap that the pizza is horrible and there was no major public out-cry for protests (seriously, who buys there if they have any other options available), so no ‘Tea Party’ rushing in with a day of support to patronize the king of tomato slathered cardboard.
This also took attention away from the fact that they’re being sued for text-marketing customers who’d given their phone number for orders (so word of caution, if you pay for text messages!)
No mater how the numbers work out, this is clearly a cheap operation and I’m guessing that their happiest ‘customers’ are the rodents that they can’t be bothered to pay pest control to manage.
if Obamacare means the porn industry has to cut down on making “pizza guy” pornos i for one will be sorely disappointed.
You should do this with our federal budget using pizzas as a frame of reference.
Is it just me, or does Schnatter look more and more like a hobbit as time passes?
A bias toward reality or using accurate math, perhaps.
Actually, Forbes explained it best. The OP has this link, it’s definitely worth reading.
John opposes it primarily because of his 2 million dollar a year stock-based compensation which might be affected.
It’s the textbook example of greedy fuck at the top shitting on everyone else.
Why does John Schnatter get labeled a greedy fuck?
I mean, I guess you can make up any rule you want for “greedy fuckitude,” but it seems to me that calling someone a greedy fuck should denote someone who wants more than what he’s entitled to.
I’m curious if you accept that proposition or if you have another rule.
And if you do accept that proposed rule, then I’m curious how you determined what he was entitled to, in order to then determine he was seeking more than what he was entitled to.
One can also define a greedy fuck as valuing money over lives or livelihoods one is responsible for in one way or another. Examples may be putting your mother or grandmother in a hideously cheap and miserable retirement home so you can pocket the money saved, or denying your employees a benefit in order to put $7 million in your bank account instead of $6 million.
What exactly do you mean by “entitled to”?
He is certainly ABLE TO cut employees hours to avoid paying for their healthcare, and simultaneously raise prices on consumers to pay for nothing.
If he wants to do this because he’s afraid he might lose some of his 2 million/year compensation, then that is a REASON for him to do this.
I think you’d agree that it is entirely LEGAL for him to do this.
But what exactly is he ENTITLED to? And what gives him this entitlement?
Too late to edit…
Defining someone as a “greedy fuck” is an art, not a precise science. It is a matter of opinion.
I believe that if a business owner is using Obmacare as an excuse to cut his employees hours (to avoid having to pay for their healthcare) while simultaneously increasing prices 3 times more than the healthcare (that he’s not actually providing would cost him;
and he’s doing this in order to give himself more millions in yearly compensation than he currently has…
He is a greedy fuck.
Your opinion and beliefs may certainly differ. You may call him a shrewd businessman if you like. You can say he’s brilliant. You may call him a Job-Creator. Whatever. He’s still a greedy fuck to me.