I knew it was a "some of my bestfriends are..." thing. ;)

At the same time, people in middle management are sometimes fed more promises of success than retail employees.

Long story short, the economy is complex all around and if observations and solutions were so simple, some companies wouldn't be struggling as they are. I know some companies wish they could find solutions including getting overpaid corporate employees to sacrifice some of their salary so the company can redistribute its wealth and resources.

Companies are also able to pull the wool over their employee's eyes, in terms of the stability of the company. I've heard a lot of "I was completely blindsided when they laid off half the company (or more), but in retrospect, it should have been clear to me" type of stories.

I've found this to be particularly true in the home office of corporations.

Touche.

I think I may have come off a little cold because I do know BBV's financial situation. It's been on a steady decline for years because, as I stated earlier, the company had a "too big to fail" mentality.

While true, BB has pretty well documented problems both at the in the store policy level and at the corporate making profits level. The stuff's in the paper and online.

I think this list is exaggerated though, I don't think BPs going anywhere and I'd be surprised if T-Mobile bows out. (And obviously BB made it another year). I think "The Shack" will be out soon as well unless they manage to actually rebrand themselves and be useful.

This is exactly what I'm talking about, though. Home offices sometimes have a way of dismissing news reports, online reports, etc. that portray the office in a negative light while reassuring employees that it's not that bad, their job is stable, and everything's going to be better next year. Not all employees fall for it, but a surprising number do, and these are educated people.

It's easy for those of us on the outside of the company to say "oh we can see the writing on the wall" but the simple fact that there are people who still work for the company and haven't jumped ship yet speaks to the theory that it's not so clear from the inside.

Possibly, but if you're willingly deluding yourself, isn't it your own fault? The times I've been working for companies at risk of disappearing it was more of a low level worry, where you're looking for other jobs on the side without over-stressing about what you can't change. But no matter how the positive talk came down, when cost-cutting measures were implemented we knew why and what it meant.

I suspect that they'd want to switch jobs but a) are hoping to make it to retirement, b) hoping for a severance package and/or c) can't find anything else right now, or d) retail is retail failing business or not.

I don't know, I just don't think your job should ever have the same amount of affect or spin on your thoughts as like... (bad analogy) an abusive partner.

Exactly and "falling for it" includes the team building (or whatever some companies call it) efforts to get everyone to remain positive and fight until the end.

Even when the company's failure is clear from the inside, most employees can't (shouldn't, won't...) jump ship and be a complete naysayer until their other employment prospects come through.

Maybe she knows something you don't and has faith in her company. Maybe she feels BB can compete over RedBox and NetFlix, maybe BB has a new business model they are rolling out and she's excited for it. Maybe shes a single mother of two who will lose her house if she gets laid off and is in denial of BB's losses. You never know.

P.S. I read your post just fine.

LOL @ the bold

If T-Mobile merges with Sprint, I WILL leave. I've dealt with Sprint before, and will never do it again. I'll go to Verizon before I become a Sprint customer again.

I don't think it's necessarily their own fault... I don't know. I hesitate to think of my coworkers that were blindsided when their subsidiary of the larger company was shut down and they were laid off as people who wouldn't "get it" - I guess it depends on the sector though as it was definitely not retail, and the rest of the subsidiaries were having banner years.

It also depends on the cost-cutting - it happens in good times and in bad. Part of it (I'm sure) also has something to do with whether or not you hate, like, or love your job, and the company that you work for. I'm not saying that Blockbuster is "OMG like the best company EVAR!" but I'm sure there are people there that love their job and the company.

If people are looking for other jobs (which really I think everyone should do whether or not they like their job now just because it helps you to know what you're worth as a worker), and waiting until those come through, that's one thing, but I'd imagine people would be leaving in droves rather than trickles. I don't know what Blockbuster's current workforce looks like, though, so I have little frame of reference.

ETA: FWIW, many of the employees from the different subsidiary of my own company were either moved before the end of their employment or subsequently hired by other subsidiaries of the company. Keeping it in the family, and that. At least 5 of my coworkers were laid off at the other subsidiary, and we're a 20 person department.

"We're not the same guys who didn't spilled the oil. That was our evil twin BP. They're dead. See, we've got an eye-patch. We're green. We're green as hell."


also, Blockbuster will likely turn into a Netflix/Redbox-type company. maintaining kiosks and mailing out movies will save them an obscene amount of money in overhead, financing, taxes, et al. with 6,000+ stores and, say, 11 employees at each, that's a fat knot. "money won't fold, pockets so swoll'..." at the top, and 70,000 people looking for work. give or take 1,000 people. maybe less, 'cause they're gonna need a couple people to make the envelope sleeves, a few dozen to man each distribution center, the vending kiosk stocking/ maintenance people, 1 logistics guy, 2 accountants and a couple suits. oh, and a secretary.

I'm wondering the same thing. Finding a job can be so hard right now, losing one is definitely no laughing matter.

I'm surprised to see T-Mobile on this list. Their parent company is Deutsche Telekom and they are doing quite strongly. So strongly, in fact, that's it's been rumored that they were going to buy out more of the American wireless market.

For a while there, it looked like Sprint would be their next acquisition, now rumors are centering around Cricket and some of the other smaller players. The problem with that is that everyone they've been rumored to buy out are CDMA networks and their network is GSM. They'd have to do some serious rebuilding.

Their options are Virgin Mobile, who already uses their backbone, and AT&T. Personally, I'd see AT&T buying them out first, if they were still serious about playing the wireless game. It would give them the larger 3G network they need to compete against Verizon. It'll be interesting to see how this all pans out.

AT&T had better be serious about the wireless market, because their wired market is shrinking faster than a wool sweater in a clothes dryer.

Readers Digest is a victim of its original foundation, condensing significant magazine articles into a convenient and portable format. That, and the fact that they're trying to go after the 18-34 year old market...while running ads for retirement plans, joint replacements, and handicap-accessible bathtubs.

That would make sense! Callilicious' posts make little sense, too.