TCTI: Too Crazy Too Ignore
Dave Ross
bobmoore_redmill_facebookphoto.jpg
"They're trying to get my face out as much as possible so that they can use it," Moore told Dave Ross, "like they did with Col. Sanders." (Image courtesy Bob's Red Mill Natural Foods Facebook)

Why not give the company to the company

In 2010, Bob Moore, founder of Bob's Red Mill Natural Foods in Milwaukee, Oregon, decided that instead of selling his company when he retired, he'd give it to his employees.

So he just gave all 320 of them stock, depending on seniority. Sounds a little kumbayah-ish, so here it is three years later -- let's check in with Bob and see how much his new co-owners might stand to get when they cash out.

"Oh golly. Partly because of people like yourself keep talking about it, the stock keeps going up. I would guess several hundred thousand dollars."

Several hundred thousand. Plus, the company already provided a regular retirement plan and a 401K. Which makes you think, why couldn't any company do this? It seems like the fair thing to do.

"I don't think there is any reason why people couldn't do this. It's something I feel deeply and profoundly about, but I don't know how to put it into others."

It doesn't seem to mesh with America's current business culture, he says.

"I quit reading Forbes because everything is every dollar you can possibly think of and I decided that that philosophy is not for me," says Moore.

So Bob Moore, at 84, is not quite as wealthy as he could have been, but he seems pretty happy: Busy making videos as the living symbol of Bob's Red Mill Natural foods.

"They're trying to get my face out as much as possible so that they can use it - say, like they did with Col. Sanders."

Although among his employees, he's probably achieved immortality already.

Dave Ross, KIRO Radio Talk Show Host
Dave Ross is co-host of The Ross & Burbank Show on KIRO Radio (weekdays 9-Noon) and never too far from the spotlight.

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (14)


  • Add A Comment

  • SoundDesigner wrote...
    America
    as it ought to be.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Chris Halliday wrote...
    I love this guy!
    It seems so simple. Give back to those who have given you so much. It's a shame this should be such an unusual story, but it is almost unheard of. Whereas a company like Hostess chose to put 18,000 workers out of a job, and still manage to give the execs $2,000,000 in bonuses, this guy gives 320 workers, including the rank and file, the entire company now that he's retired. What corprate America doesn't realize, for some inexplicable reason, is it could probably double the wages of its workers and still be filthy rich. But the bottom line reigns supreme and it's not what you know but who you blow in this disgusting day and age. I do feel the day of reconning is near and the rich who don't choose this guy as a model will be hurting indeed. Come to think of it. This guy, in a way, probably could have done a lot more. Once the company's earnings reports are made available, people are going to wonder why they weren't paid more in the past.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • WAmovesRight wrote...
    ... your last two lines are ridiculous...
    ... good grief, man. What he did wasn't enough???

    See that's the problem with blaming the successful for your failures... or blaming anybody esle for that matter... they can never do enough to placate people like you.

    Yes, there is greed... it's part of human nature whether you're in capitalism or communisim. However, at least with econimc freedom guys like Bob Moore are free to do something as unorthodox as this.

    Why don't you learn to stand on your own two feet instead of expecting thos who have succeeded to give everything they have.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • worhtalook wrote...
    Uh, Halliday
    You failed to mention that this Gentlemans company did NOT have a Union. It was the greed of the Union that caused the loss of their jobs
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Shplunker wrote...
    halladay...
    I'm pretty sure you were supposed to be an abortion.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Enlightened self interest.
    Freedom and free enterprise isn't all about greed. Its about what make you the best for you. ... So, as long as he's comfortable - and is happy the way 'his' company is going - why not? Probably a lot better than selling to someone who'd completely change his life's work.

    And, in a way, isn't this the same thing people have always done with the family farm or the family business? Who says the 'family' need be blood?

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • steel wrote...
    Time will tell.
    This is an interesting experiment. The 35 year mark is the important one. That is when then pension payouts may become a burden.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Chris Halliday wrote...
    WAmove
    I hate it when people like you use exageration and flat out lies to back up their point. I didn't say successful people need to give up everthing they have. I'm saying the filthy rich could easily give a whole lot more. It's the plain truth. There is no justification for an owner, or exec, to be making, for example: $2000/hr, while the low man on the totem pole is making $9/hr. That $9/hr worker is getting ripped off and that's the truth. You have no good arguement to dispute that. I hate that old company line where people say the rich are assuming all the risk so they deserve their millions. They stopped assuming any risk when their company became a multi-million or multi-billion dollar enterprise. But they need those 12 houses, ridiculous contemperary art pieces, loads of cars, and so on, and so on. It disgusts me that that ugly painting went for $120,000,000 when that money could have translated into nice raises for the buyer'emplyoees. But WAmoves, my guess is you don't believe in God. What do you think God would have to say about what I'm saying? I'm quite sure he'd agree with me and not you. It is a crying shame indeed that the wealthy are stuck with the mindset that you have. You can't even fathom what I'm talking about, can you. Oh well. We'll see who's right in the end. In addition, I'm far from a failure. Quit putting words in my quotations that I didn't write. It makes you look foolish even more so than I already have.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • worhtalook wrote...
    why not
    focus more on those oil companies who take advantage of the common worker who depends on that gas to make a living..while they, the oil companies are making obscene profits..how about the Tribes and the BILLIONS they make and DO not share, or those in COngress and the Senate who make huge sums of money work less to nothing, have huge spending accounts, lifetime benefits..like royalty, etc., Hostess, like other large business ans small ftoo, pay out in taxes and employee benefits..the other above mentioned examples just TAKE and give NOTHING
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Shplunker wrote...
    and..
    in typical dem fashion...you're wrong about most things...including the hostess money. Go back and do some homework instead of being one of the obamabot sheep. In a free market..if one guy makes $2000 an hour, there's a reason. And if some poor sap is only capable of making $9 an hour, then that's just too bad- probably should do something more than stand around with your hand out. My guess, you aren't capable of making more than $9 an hour, and wouldn't be making that if someone didn't have a menial labor job for you to do.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • WAmovesRight wrote...
    @ Halliday
    Chris,

    First, I do believe in God... very much so but I fail to see how you tie these together.

    For example, When Jesus pointed out the widow who gave her two mites... he said she gave more than the rich because she gave it out of her substance... not excess. In God's economy how much you give doesn't always mean in actual $$$. Another example. The rich young ruler who came to Jesus wanting to be justfied. Jesus told him to keep the law to which the young ruler answered that he had. Jesus looked at him and said "sell all you have and give it to the poor, then follow me" the rich young ruler went away sorrowful for he was very rich. Here's the moreal. Jesus asked him to give it... not for it to be taken away from him

    Do I think the heads of these multi-billion dollar companies need to be as rich as they are... of course not. I think they could do a lot more to help the poor then they do... but your statement sprecifically was that THIS guy could have done more... man he GAVE his company to his employees... what more should this man do?

    That's what I'm talking about... to people like you a man can never give enough to satisy you unless he makes himself poor... even then, I bet you find something he should do different.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Chris Halliday wrote...
    A necessary evil
    I worked for companies that had unions for a few years and, quite frankly, I detested the unions. I was actually a shop steward at one place I worked. It made me so mad that no matter how hard I worked, or how good I was at my job, senyority reigned supreme. But looking back, at least the benifits and pay were generally better at a union shop. And looking back, that union worker was worth every penny the company had to pay in wages and benifits. A career laborer in a brain dead job is a fate worse than death as far as I'm concerned and I'm glad I've moved on to bigger and better things. At the negotiating table it was always a big secret as to what the company's earnings were. That's a crock. Those numbers should be readily available so a fair package can be put together for all those concerned. But the way things are now, each business is like a kingdom and the class/pay seperation is straight up criminal in most cases.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Chris Halliday wrote...
    Shplunker
    The news flat out stated that the Hostess execs were getting a $2,000,000 bonus. It is you who needs to do some research. I'm not saying a $9/hr guy is worth $2000/hr. But a mere $2/hr more would mean the world to the poor sap you heartless imbecile. Plus that $9/hr guy is probably easily making the company $18/hr. You're just another idiot who ignores the math. Plus you know nothing about me so quit making false claims about things you know nothing about.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Chris Halliday wrote...
    Shplunker
    Do you agree with the upper one percent having as much money as they have? Are you ok with the fact that their wealth has increased some 300+ percent over the past few years? Do you think it was ok for all those banks to be excused of around $700 million (or was it billion?) in debt then given almost $800 million (or was it billion) for a stimulus package? If you said yes to any of those questions you are just a blithering idiot. Actually to call you an idiot is an insult to idiots everywhere.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }