Contributing Member of the Energy & Industrials Councils

GLG News by this Author

GLG News is now G+ Insights

G+ is a community for professionals, academics and entrepreneurs to connect through online discussions and in-person meetings. You will continue to see G+ Insights (formerly GLG News) here as well as on the G+ website, where you can share and discuss the G+ Insights you read.

IRS friend.....or foe?

July 6, 2007

Analysis of:Insurance or not? IRS provides some guidance | www.irs.gov

In regards to Mr. schulzes article, I believe his key points solidifies my prior article, Phenominal move Mr. Zollars. Being the owner of a transportation and litigious consulting company, I deal with 49CFR rules and regulations on a daily basis. The main issue regarding these rules are, these laws are written via interpretation. To  explain, if you were to ask ten people to read a 49CFR laws, you would then be guaranteed  ten different interpretations. Federal laws in regards to IRS and or 49 CFR  rules and regulations,are written under the premise of penalties and fines, This analogy is real simple as a business owner we look at the law one way, and the  government looks at it another. Guess who is going to get penalized or fined. Is it wrong, you be the judge.

Phenominal move Mr. Zollars

July 3, 2007

Analysis of:YRC Worldwide says acquisition to fuel China growth | www.reuters.com

In my last post, I stated that many U.S. corporations were moving too or acquiring businesses in third world countries. As a business owner, it seems the more profitability my company maintains, the larger  my companies expenditures become to maintain that same profit margin.  Business is a very simple equation, your either profitable, or your no longer a corporation. Today's larger corporations, are continual hit with soaring health and welfare benefits,insurance premiums,a rise in fuel cost, an increase in competition,a rise in marketingexpenses, an increase in unemployment tax, state tax, and federal taxes.  Everywhere you turn, someone has their hand in your pocket. I made this statement before, do we blame the C.E.O.'s who want to maintain profitability, or our U.S. Congressman and Senators? Mr. Zollar made a phenomenal move, not only will YRC  have a large presence oversees, but their  profits will skyrocket.

Perkins Transportation, A small carrier with the right idea

June 22, 2007

Analysis of:Big loads, big profits | www.startribune.com

In response to Mr. Schulz's article, Perkins Transportation has found a profitably sound idea. When the Federal government implemented deregulation, it was to insure that larger based carriers maintained profitability, and the smaller based carriers were ultimately forced out of business, due to the fact they couldn't compete in the larger based market, regarding transportation rates. Some key points in regards to a smaller based carriers, not being able to compete in a larger market.   • Sky rocketing insurance premiums. • Sky rocketing fuel prices. • An increase, regarding health and welfare benefits.   • Their transportation rates are uncompetitive. • Their inability to properly maintain their fleet. • The largest problem of all is this, since they've become noncompetitive their ability to maintain a competitive drivers rate per mile, has become impossible. In business terms, a lack of quality drivers.  

Nafta transportation companies should be held to a more stringent regulatory compliance

June 18, 2007

Analysis of:DOT: U.S., Mexico trucks will begin cross-border project at same time | www.etrucker.com

In response to Mr. Thompson opinion,  I realize that many people look at my opinions, as not very politically correct, but we live in a country which allows us the freedom to give our personal opinions.  Mr. Thompson, as a culture what we aren't willing to address are those opinions, that  the immediate public views as nonpolitically correct. If we allow individuals into are country, who cannot read or write are language, then how is the immediate public safe? When the C.D.L. licensing was implemented, it was to insure everyone who drove a truck in the U.S., understood federal and state guidelines, pre-trip reports, log book reports, but most of all understood the rules of the road. I  do respect the individuals and attorneys, who are legally challenging this issue. Do we realize as a society, the implications of this. Very simply put, the transportation industries overall operating expenses will sky rocket due to a larger abundance of accidents, injuries, as well as deaths.

Fuel surcharges, what is illegal about them?

June 11, 2007

Analysis of:Shipper Suit Alleges Price Fixing by Rail Carrires on Fuel Surcharges | www.supplychaindaily.com

In response to Mr. Schulz's article, if we can sue the American railroads, then why not sue the large oil suppliers for their substantial fuel price  increases every summer. We all realize that the railroad community, has always fixed their rates to insure profitability, but  what makes them any different from  the large oil suppliers who supply our fuel. In America we have a choice, if you don't like the rates use another form of transportation. Prior to building a transportation consulting company, I owned and built a very successful logistics company. My company had  the ability to move  freight from Chicago to California via truck, at a rate of $2,300.00 to as high as $2,600.00., or  If I sent my freight via rail, it would run anywhere from $900.00 dollars to $1,500.00 dollars. (A very large difference.) Their fuel surcharges have no bearing, due to their low rates. 

Safe trucks, owners or our government?

April 23, 2007

Analysis of:Activists push for truck safety rules | www.businessweek.com

 In response to Mr. Schulz's article,

I realize that any fatality regarding a tractor trailer is one to many. But who do we blame, the transportation company or our state and federal governments.?

I've had the ability throughout my career, to oversee many tractor trailer accidents, and the one major issue that everyone wants to avoid is this, a large percentage of accidents are caused by non-english speaking drivers.

                                  Key implications


1) Without the ability to read or write, how can these drivers fully understand federal and state laws.

2) A driver with an hazardous endorsement, how can he fully understand an MSDS sheet, or for that matter insure all precautions are taken in case of a spill.

3) If they cannot read or write, then how can they properly pre-trip their trucks, to insure the immediate public is safe..

4) In regards to bill of ladings, if they cannot read, then how would they know their load limit has been exceeded.

5) If they cannot fully understand, state and federal laws, then how would they know not to park a semi with explosives on a bridge, or near a school.

6) How could this driver fully understand street signs, speed limit signs, bridge height requirements, and log book reports.

N.A.F.T.A., does it help the U.S. or dismantle it.

April 11, 2007

Analysis of:Mexico's largest trucking companies balk at U.S. regulations | www.khou.com

 
To whom it may concern,

I recently read an article written by Mr. Thompson, and I  respect his opinion, but they're some grey areas. Yesterday afternoon, I was consulting for a client regarding some federal concerns. As we continued our meeting, my client stated; I can no longer afford to maintain compliance, due to rising cost in fuel and N.A.F.T.A.

Mr. Thompson, Using other transportation outlets, doesn't help our country it destroys it. I've been in the transportation industry for many years, and when we give American shippers the ability to deal with other countries other than the United states, we then dismantle our American carriers and utimatley take American Jobs.

I'm the first one to admit; free trade is good for our country, but we must also understand with  free trade comes unemployment, and a lag in our economy.  If fuel rises and carriers in the U.S. are forced to use others means to maintain profitability, then they will increase the over all  prices of consumer goods.
 

If our government  maintained a balance between the  larger tranportation companies and the mid sized carriers, then the free trade act wouldn't cause such a financial draw on the economy or smaller based carriers. example; if you have two candy bars, one from Mexico and one from the U.S., the candy bar from the U.S. is $1.00 dollar and the candy bar from Mexico is .55 cents  which one would the average person buy? Simple calculation, American jobs, and a slowed economy.


Thank you,

Tony Sottile

  

Previous Page : 12341 to 47 of 47