As a former TR shareholder I still keep the stock on my radar screen. When I read about the Concord acquisition I was very optimistic and asked myself if the time had not come to reinitiate a position on the stock...
Looking at the results after the acquisition, I am puzzled. How a company like Tootsie Roll, growing sales by 15% in the last quarter, could not translate this growth on the bottom-line?
I am a very patient investor. Check out this message board going back to early 2000. I have owned Tootsie Roll a long time. My comments earlier about the Gordon's are merely meant to say that I did not factor in the effects of their comfortableness in their positions and the potential lack of growth of the company when I made my first purchase over 5 years ago.
My money would have been better off in CD's over the same timeframe - including the stock dividends (once again, they are a feel good item only)! It would have been worse off in tech stocks - but Tootsie Roll doesn't carry the same upside or volatility that tech stocks carry.
The Gordons are comfortable in their positions and relatively unthreatened. While I love Tootsie Roll (both the company and the product) and think they have done a good job managing the company, their performance does not warrant receiving 10% of the money that the providers of equity capital receive. They own enough stock that performance of their investment and the ability to control the activities of their holding (which, face it, common shareholders don't have) should be adequate compensation when included with a pay package normal to a company with less than $100 million per year in earnings - much of which rolls in from renewing muni bonds.
If the Gordon's decided to retire but continued holding their stock, do you think they would agree to pay their replacements what they make? I doubt it.