Debt? Having debt is prudent financial management. Ever hear of leveraging?

 

:shock: :shock: You mean to say...Jerry Moyes didn't have 2.3 billion dollars to buy back his company???


:lol: :lol: Do ya suppose the former shareholders could reposses Swift from Moyes?? :twisted: :twisted:

Another thought...what affect will financial difficulties at Swift have on the other companies he has his fingers in... Central Freight out of Waco and Central Refrigerated Services out of SLC ??

Are we looking at a "Simonizing" here??? :shock: :shock:

 

March 19, 2008 PrintSaveE-mailSize: +/–SPECIAL REPORT: Speed limiter bill introduced in province of Ontario Wednesday, March 19, 2008 – Ontario Transportation Minister Jim Bradley introduced legislation today that, if approved, will make speed limiters mandatory on all heavy trucks doing business in the Canadian province.

Enforcement of the measure would begin sometime in 2009, Ontario government officials stated in a press release. There would be an initial six-month educational enforcement period.

The proposal toes the line of the Ontario Trucking Association, whose officials have been lobbying for the maximum speed of trucks to be capped electronically at 105 km/h, or 65 mph.

Officials with the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association say the legislation is not only flawed, but also premature because a study by Transport Canada on the environmental impact of speed limiters has not yet been completed.

OOIDA’s Government Affairs Counsel Laura O’Neill said Ontario lawmakers are catering to big business.

“It’s a one-sided gift to big business trucking operations disguised as sound science,” O’Neill told Land Line.

If approved, the measure would apply to all trucks doing business in Ontario, including U.S. trucks and trucks from other Canadian provinces, O’Neill said.

“We have presented them with opposing arguments and the studies to reinforce our point. The fact that they are doing this during a strained North American economy raises questions about the integrity of the office,” she said of the Ontario transport minister.

Transport Minister Bradley cited information that mirrors the Ontario Trucking Association’s lobbying materials regarding greenhouse gas emissions and crashes. OOIDA officials say those points are debatable.

“Slowing down big rigs on our highways would make our air cleaner and keep traffic moving at a safe speed,” Bradley stated.

OOIDA officials believe that speed-limited trucks will be stuck in the right lane, cause problems with merging traffic, and result in “elephant races” when trucks cannot pass one another.

OTA President David Bradley – no known relation to the transport minister – began lobbying for mandatory speed limiters in late 2005. OTA’s Bradley knows that the independents and small-business truckers oppose a speed-limiter mandate.

“Truck drivers are the least likely to be excessively speeding, but there are some who need to slow it down. This technology will allow us to do that without putting a further drain on police resources that would be better spent going after reckless motorists and criminals,” the OTA president stated in a press release.

O’Neill, on behalf of owner-operators and small-business truckers, said existing speed laws should be enforced by law officers and not through computer chips.

– By David Tanner, staff writer
[email protected]

www.landlinemag.com

Well this is the most current news item here so there must be nothing to it.

 

A lot of the big companies are in financial trouble right now, with Swift leading the pack. It didn't help that Jerry bought the company back and took it private, including the roughly $350 million in debt they already had. If Swift were to fold, it would actually be a blow to the entire industry, at least in the early going. It would make shippers and customers nervous and that's never a good thing.

 

It sounds as if it isn't a good time to be a company driver. Drivers would be a dime a dozen if a big company such as Swift were to go under.

 

It would be a zoo, that's for certain. With JB's execs selling major stock blocks, and fuel prices and the economy... Nobody wants to project anything beyond next week. It makes it very hard to get a solid contract now.

BTW, where are you guys getting your info? I'm out of the loop, found out about Rush from a PO'd shipper.

 

Swift going under would be a good thing. Taking that many trucks out of the mix would tighten supply. Demand static, supply drops, prices rise.

 

Yes - it would be a good thing eventually for trucking companies. It would be a horrible thing for company drivers.

 

So the Easter Bunny hates me too eh Rev? Tell him to take a number! :lol:

 

Ok maybe I must have missed it, but what two companies with 600+ trucks went under this past week? Also what flatbed company is sliding fast?