Basically, the company had to pay for its own buyout when private equity firms KKL, Vornado, and Bain bought the company for $6.6 billion, mostly with loans.

Because the company then had to pay off those extreme loans, they were forced to sell off their assets and property, which they leased back from the very private equity firms that now owned them.

The same thing happened more recently with Red Lobster and JoAnn Fabrics.

  • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    it should not be allowed to buy a company “on debt”. If you want to buy somebody, you need cash-on-hand to do that. That’s the only allowed form.

    A company is not somebody, it’s a thing, like a home or a car that you have no problem getting a loan to pay for. Or maybe it’s special because we’re talking about a means of production? C’mon. Say it. Say “means of production.”

      • GnerphBaht@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        The Supreme Court said corporations are people enough to be protected by the first amendment.

        • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          The Supreme Court can say the moon is a person and the sun is God. It can decide what entities it will extend the protection of rights to, but it cannot redefine what a person is outside of its own technical jargon.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      The very first words of US law:

      1 U.S. Code § 1 - Words denoting number, gender, and so forth

      …the words “person” and “whoever” include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;

      • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Okay? That’s a definition that only has scope within that specific document and those it governs. Plus, it’s a definition of two entirely different words.