Jump to content
caulfield12

COVID-19/Coronavirus thread

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, bmags said:

What?

If you have no revenue, and then take out a loan you then pay your staff and liabilities with that loan, and if you do that without layoffs you don't have to pay the loan.

They have an option to hire back people by a certain date to be eligible if they did do furloughs.

I'm not going to spend all day going back and forth on this; businesses needed assistance reopening and etc when the market returned and the demand normalized. People needed assistance holding over until then. 

This bailout will not keep those businesses afloat. I know companies bleeding 2 million a week that generate about 125 million a year in revenues. There margins are small. 

The government is going to pay AP owed from prior to shut down? They're going to pay insurance renewals for the next 12 months for a company? This isn't as simple as we'll leave the lights on for you. Many small businesses in Chicago just paid property taxes and it's already a slow time of year. LOANS are not revenue. This is much more intricate than you are portraying it. Unemployment will approach 20% and it's because theres a demand shock. The government needed to support these businesses when it was time to reopen and assure no one lost their business because of this and support the people until then. They didnt need to tell the businesses to keep their employees to receive assistance; keep them with no business to actually execute.

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Isn't a forgiven loan literally = revenue?

No. It's absolutely not. But they will tax you on it at years end if that wasnt excluded.

Also, if there is no work to do theres no work to go back to. The fact that the only way you can receive any government assistance is by maintaining your payroll makes very little sense. Businesses need help reopening when the demand returns. 

This thing could last another 2 months for all we know. For a decent sized small business that's 2-4+ million in payroll obligations alone

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I'm not going to spend all day going back and forth on this; businesses needed assistance reopening and etc when the market returned and the demand normalized. People needed assistance holding over until then. 

This bailout will not keep those businesses afloat. I know companies bleeding 2 million a week that generate about 125 million a year in revenues. There margins are small. 

The government is going to pay AP owed from prior to shut down? They're going to pay insurance renewals for the next 12 months for a company? This isn't as simple as we'll leave the lights on for you. Many small businesses in Chicago just paid property taxes and it's already a slow time of year. LOANS are not revenue. This is much more intricate than you are portraying it. Unemployment will approach 20% and it's because theres a demand shock. The government needed to support these businesses when it was time to reopen and assure no one lost their business because of this and support the people until then. They didnt need to tell the businesses to keep their employees to receive assistance; keep them with no business to actually execute.

How are you not seeing that by requiring businesses to pay employees...they're supporting the employees?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

No. It's absolutely not. 

Also, if there is no work to do theres no work to go back to. The fact that the only way you can receive any government assistance is by maintaining your payroll makes very little sense. Businesses need help reopening when the demand returns. 

This thing could last another 2 months for all we know. For a decent sized small business that's 2-4+ million in payroll obligations alone

I agree.  So I’m a smaller business with only 4 employees but I have office rent every month, insurances, accounting and lawyer retainers, Lines of credit due, suppliers to pay.  I got customers asking for money back mid-project because their husbands have lost their jobs.   Fucking scary.  I can only imagine bigger businesses with millions in payables a month.  
 

we happened to let the new kid go a few weeks ago not because of the virus, but because it wasn’t a good fit.  Does that disqualify us?  Do I have to rehire the kid for help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Balta1701 said:

How are you not seeing that by requiring businesses to pay employees...they're supporting the employees?

Because there is no work to do. In addition, not every bill will be covered by this despite this portrayal on here that it will be. These businesses will be operating at a loss regardless of the assistance they receive and many of them cant afford that.

Is a restaurant supposed to bring in servers and management if they're closed? Is a catering company supposed to bring in wait staff and event sales reps and etc with no events? Is Sysco supposed to keep all drivers on their payroll despite having 20% as many deliveries? If they do keep those people, is the government going to cover insurance renewals and on and on? Theres certainly stipulations within this bill; it's not "send us all your Bills and we'll give you some money." 

What if the company is already overleveraged on their property or etc, do they still qualify? 

Bailing out the service industry isnt as black and white as bailing out banks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

No. It's absolutely not. But they will tax you on it at years end if that wasnt excluded.

Also, if there is no work to do theres no work to go back to. The fact that the only way you can receive any government assistance is by maintaining your payroll makes very little sense. Businesses need help reopening when the demand returns. 

This thing could last another 2 months for all we know. For a decent sized small business that's 2-4+ million in payroll obligations alone

 

 

Just now, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Because there is no work to do. In addition, not every bill will be covered by this despite this portrayal on here that it will be. These businesses will be operating at a loss regardless of the assistance they receive and many of them cant afford that.

Is a restaurant supposed to bring in servers and management if they're closed? Is a catering company supposed to bring in wait staff and event sales reps and etc with no events? Is Sysco supposed to keep all drivers on their payroll despite having 20% as many deliveries? If they do keep those people, is the government going to cover insurance renewals and on and on? Theres certainly stipulations within this bill; it's not "send us all your Bills and we'll give you some money." 

What if the company is already overleveraged on their property or etc, do they still qualify? 

Bailing out the service industry isnt as black and white as bailing out banks.

The idea is you just keep paying people to sit at home even if your business is closed via this "loan" that you won't actually be expected to pay back

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jerksticks said:

I agree.  So I’m a smaller business with only 4 employees but I have office rent every month, insurances, accounting and lawyer retainers, Lines of credit due, suppliers to pay.  I got customers asking for money back mid-project because their husbands have lost their jobs.   Fucking scary.  I can only imagine bigger businesses with millions in payables a month.  
 

we happened to let the new kid go a few weeks ago not because of the virus, but because it wasn’t a good fit.  Does that disqualify us?  Do I have to rehire the kid for help?

Exactly. Line of credit being a big one as well. So you have lines of credit, is the government paying your loans? How about terms and cap limits; most hospitality companies are running  up against their terms this time of year due to revenue slow downs. They'll have to pay off their reps in full, im guessing, by reopen. Many of those costs are from 30-45 days prior to this bill passing. Who pays that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Because there is no work to do. In addition, not every bill will be covered by this despite this portrayal on here that it will be. These businesses will be operating at a loss regardless of the assistance they receive and many of them cant afford that.

Is a restaurant supposed to bring in servers and management if they're closed? Is a catering company supposed to bring in wait staff and event sales reps and etc with no events? Is Sysco supposed to keep all drivers on their payroll despite having 20% as many deliveries? If they do keep those people, is the government going to cover insurance renewals and on and on? Theres certainly stipulations within this bill; it's not "send us all your Bills and we'll give you some money." 

What if the company is already overleveraged on their property or etc, do they still qualify? 

Bailing out the service industry isnt as black and white as bailing out banks.

No, they're supposed to pay their employees using these funds so that their employees don't lose their homes, cars, health insurance (which may be particularly important). 

And on the others, I said this before about student loans. Who the F*** cares if bailing out an overleveraged company keeps them in business too long and it's terribly unfair? So is throwing 50 employees off their health insurance and having them lose their homes during  a pandemic.

It's this or you suspend all rent payments, all utility payments, shut everything else down. Either you print money so people can pay for those services, or you make them free.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, StrangeSox said:

 

 

The idea is you just keep paying people to sit at home even if your business is closed via this "loan" that you won't actually be expected to pay back

Yea but that amount of money isn’t enough to bail out cook county businesses for more than a few weeks probably.  Let alone all the small businesses in the country.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jerksticks said:

we happened to let the new kid go a few weeks ago not because of the virus, but because it wasn’t a good fit.  Does that disqualify us?  Do I have to rehire the kid for help?

That kid sounds like an ideal candidate for the expanded unemployment benefits. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jerksticks said:

Yea but that amount of money isn’t enough to bail out cook county businesses for more than a few weeks probably.  Let alone all the small businesses in the country.  

Chicago's  full year GDP in 2018 was estimated at $650 billion. $350 billion is half of all business in Chicago.

You're right it's not enough to survive the full year. It's enough for small businesses to survive a month or two. If we don't contain this thing in the first step because we insist on reopening on Easter...then this won't be the last batch of money that needs passed. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Balta1701 said:

No, they're supposed to pay their employees using these funds so that their employees don't lose their homes, cars, health insurance (which may be particularly important). 

And on the others, I said this before about student loans. Who the F*** cares if bailing out an overleveraged company keeps them in business too long and it's terribly unfair? So is throwing 50 employees off their health insurance and having them lose their homes during  a pandemic.

It's this or you suspend all rent payments, all utility payments, shut everything else down. Either you print money so people can pay for those services, or you make them free.

Yes, but you will miss too many companies and small businesses this way imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Yes, but you will miss too many companies and small businesses this way imo.

Don't worry about the larger ones, they're going to get $4 trillion from the federal reserve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

That kid sounds like an ideal candidate for the expanded unemployment benefits. 

? Good for him?  What about the business?   The question was do I have to hire the kid back to try to get the government to give me a few hundred grand to keep the lights on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of expanded UI maybe, just maybe, what we could do is pay people a livable wage that allows them to save for times of hardship. Crazy town thoughts. 

Instead we'll continue to excuse away 4 trillion more in QE because it's not "my money" and bailouts that turned into buybacks, as well as fake trickle down economics, further depressing the wage gap and government dependency. 

The system is broken; throwing trillions at a broken system will likely just break something else. Until there is real change, all your doing is kicking the can down the road to the next bailout.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Truly amazing that there is a provision in the bill that prevents the trump family from accessing the funds.   Just think about that

What is really amazing is that this is something that had to be fought for.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didnt mean to come off snarky either, so apologies if I did. 

It's been a rough couple weeks for all of us and I've literally just been building models pertaining to this shit for about 15 hours a day.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this is the last thing on anyone else's mind but I'm both morbidly fascinated and terrified how the small to mid level music industry is going to come back from this. 

Baseball is going to bounce back. I'm not sure something like the Metro will. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Instead of expanded UI maybe, just maybe, what we could do is pay people a livable wage that allows them to save for times of hardship. Crazy town thoughts. 

Instead we'll continue to excuse away 4 trillion more in QE because it's not "my money" and bailouts that turned into buybacks, as well as fake trickle down economics, further depressing the wage gap and government dependency. 

The system is broken; throwing trillions at a broken system will likely just break something else. Until there is real change, all your doing is kicking the can down the road to the next bailout.

There's one thing to be said for businesses doing a poor job and it leading to 2008, where that was entirely their fault. There's something to be said for limits on stock buybacks and all those other games. But literally no business out there should ever plan for a complete shutdown of everything they do for a period of several months without assistance. You don't want businesses sitting on that many resources, nor do I; if a business in 2014 has a choice between saving 3 months of all their operating expenses and hiring 1000 employees and expanding substantially, wouldn't you want them doing the latter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

potentially good news outta NY

 

 

I'll be pessimist. Are they running out of beds? When supply starts to shrink decisions change. Someone who was hospitalized on Sunday may not have been hospitalized if they came in on Tuesday. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, mqr said:

I know this is the last thing on anyone else's mind but I'm both morbidly fascinated and terrified how the small to mid level music industry is going to come back from this. 

Baseball is going to bounce back. I'm not sure something like the Metro will. 

Great question. My first take is those clubs that are "labors of love" for an owner may not survive. I'm thinking of a couple places I remember where the owners wanted to break even while supporting local musicians. What are you thinking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Texsox said:

I'll be pessimist. Are they running out of beds? When supply starts to shrink decisions change. Someone who was hospitalized on Sunday may not have been hospitalized if they came in on Tuesday. 

Or are they denying more people hospitalizations in general?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, mqr said:

I know this is the last thing on anyone else's mind but I'm both morbidly fascinated and terrified how the small to mid level music industry is going to come back from this. 

Baseball is going to bounce back. I'm not sure something like the Metro will. 

Would be a real shame to see the Metro shut down. Chicago has so many great music venues

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, mqr said:

I know this is the last thing on anyone else's mind but I'm both morbidly fascinated and terrified how the small to mid level music industry is going to come back from this. 

Baseball is going to bounce back. I'm not sure something like the Metro will. 

Unfortunately musicians only make money by touring these days. Streaming has killed revenue. Hopefully some people will be a little more cognizant in the future and actually support musicians by buying their music. www.bandcamp.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×