frigidaireguy
Well-known member
Was it 1956 or 1957 when Maytag introduced the center dial Maytags???
Bob
Bob
Center Dial Maytag
- Thread starter frigidaireguy
- Start date
Help Support :
Looks like it may be 1956...... Found a photo of an April 1956 Better Homes & Garden with a Maytag "center dial" ad.
What was the first center dial? I remember the A140 was.
The 130/140 were the first center dials in late 1956. AMP drive mechanisms. Beasts.
First Center Dial MTs
I believe they also introduced the first helical drive washers in 1956 [ model 123 and 123S ] which was also a CDW, I don't know whether the 140-130 or the 123 came first.
When MT discontinued the CDWs in 1980 I belive this was MTs first big mistake that led to their having to sell out. The next big mistakes were buying Hardwick, Norge, Adrimal, and Magic Chef. What in the world were they thinking ??? A higher end company buying the dregs of the appliance industry, LOL.
And it got a lot worse as time went on.
I believe they also introduced the first helical drive washers in 1956 [ model 123 and 123S ] which was also a CDW, I don't know whether the 140-130 or the 123 came first.
When MT discontinued the CDWs in 1980 I belive this was MTs first big mistake that led to their having to sell out. The next big mistakes were buying Hardwick, Norge, Adrimal, and Magic Chef. What in the world were they thinking ??? A higher end company buying the dregs of the appliance industry, LOL.
And it got a lot worse as time went on.
Hardwick, Norge, Adrimal, and Magic Chef
I think it was good until they copied those atrocious designs. Just using the names is smart marketing, however putting their name on complete garbage destroyed them. I understand they were trying to increase market sales by offering larger capacity machines at a lower price, but it back fired ruining their image. In fact Id say they made no effort to redesign something they knew was trouble from day one.
FWIW, I read that a former executive that worked for Whirlpool went to work for Maytag. Conspiracies abound, you never know.
I think it was good until they copied those atrocious designs. Just using the names is smart marketing, however putting their name on complete garbage destroyed them. I understand they were trying to increase market sales by offering larger capacity machines at a lower price, but it back fired ruining their image. In fact Id say they made no effort to redesign something they knew was trouble from day one.
FWIW, I read that a former executive that worked for Whirlpool went to work for Maytag. Conspiracies abound, you never know.
I don't know that Maytag's purchase of Norge, Admiral, etc, led to their downfall, as much as the Neptune fiasco. And the Amanatags. If they had left the companies as separate entities, instead of applying the Maytag name to say a Norge, maybe they might still be here as an independent.
stricklybojack
Well-known member
.
Buying up companies like that is known in Wall Street parlance as a "roll-up". It is also known by most persons knowledgeable about such things as generally a bad idea.
Think of Apple Inc, yes they buy tiny companies to gain access to patents and personnel, on occasion, but on balance stay away from anything one might consider roll-up, i.e. buying one of their many foundering competitors like Hewlett Packard stupidly has done, many times, for example.
The ostensible reasons for doing a roll up include generating a larger revenue / per share number, potentially eliminating major competition, greater leverage with retailers etc. None of this is mentioned but rather the term "operational efficiencies" is thrown around a lot.
Moves like roll-ups are sold to management by Wall Street consultants who profit greatly on such deals, think financing, the key ingredient to all leveraged buyouts and mergers. And they couldn't care less about the ultimate results of their financial engineering. Managements, like Maytag in this case, can generate short term excitement which helps sell securities (stocks, bonds etc.) to shore up the failing company until their plan works, or until the CEO and other execs jump ship with their large bonuses and golden parachutes when they too are rolled up...if/when the mergers fail as they so often do.
But as you can see those that decide on this course are covered in any event.
Berkshire Hathaway, a frequent and very visible buyer of major companies, is another matter entirely. First they are a conglomerate, and second their management rarely if ever does something just to please the stock market. [this post was last edited: 5/3/2016-19:14]
Buying up companies like that is known in Wall Street parlance as a "roll-up". It is also known by most persons knowledgeable about such things as generally a bad idea.
Think of Apple Inc, yes they buy tiny companies to gain access to patents and personnel, on occasion, but on balance stay away from anything one might consider roll-up, i.e. buying one of their many foundering competitors like Hewlett Packard stupidly has done, many times, for example.
The ostensible reasons for doing a roll up include generating a larger revenue / per share number, potentially eliminating major competition, greater leverage with retailers etc. None of this is mentioned but rather the term "operational efficiencies" is thrown around a lot.
Moves like roll-ups are sold to management by Wall Street consultants who profit greatly on such deals, think financing, the key ingredient to all leveraged buyouts and mergers. And they couldn't care less about the ultimate results of their financial engineering. Managements, like Maytag in this case, can generate short term excitement which helps sell securities (stocks, bonds etc.) to shore up the failing company until their plan works, or until the CEO and other execs jump ship with their large bonuses and golden parachutes when they too are rolled up...if/when the mergers fail as they so often do.
But as you can see those that decide on this course are covered in any event.
Berkshire Hathaway, a frequent and very visible buyer of major companies, is another matter entirely. First they are a conglomerate, and second their management rarely if ever does something just to please the stock market. [this post was last edited: 5/3/2016-19:14]
Maytag's Acquisitions
Certainly did lead to their demise, MT closed Hardwick themselves And even after putting a 160 million into the Galesburg Ill Admiral Refrigerator factory, MT closed that as well, almost all of the companies MT bought should have just been left to die on their own.
Robert in post # 7 has it right, the real problem was the conservative yahoos at MT did not know how to run a world class company and squandered their reputation of 75 years of building good appliances.
Certainly did lead to their demise, MT closed Hardwick themselves And even after putting a 160 million into the Galesburg Ill Admiral Refrigerator factory, MT closed that as well, almost all of the companies MT bought should have just been left to die on their own.
Robert in post # 7 has it right, the real problem was the conservative yahoos at MT did not know how to run a world class company and squandered their reputation of 75 years of building good appliances.
