I had lunch today with the owner of a die casting company who expressed an interest in selling his die casting company. He does not want to sell his company but he may need to sell it if his sales continue to drop. His annual sales this year will amount to less than one fourth of his highest annual sales. He is too young to retire and he is concerned about his future. The reason he is talking to me today is that I purchased a few other die casting companies in the last few years. You can read more details from our Kinetic Die Casting Company History page.

In 2004 –
C&D Die Casting Company (C&D)
November 2004, C&D in Chatsworth, CA contacted KDC to help produce parts for customers. C&D produced insert tools for their customers in a special custom mold base. These mold bases were very difficult to replicate. C&D announced that they needed to go out of business and KDC purchased those special mold bases and tooling to make parts for the C&D customer’s.

In 2005 –
Spencer Die Casting Company (SDC)
In 2005, KDC contacted the owner of Spencer Die Casting Company, Tom Jordan, to see if he had a small die casting machine available for sell. Tom suggested that KDC come and look at his equipment and make an offer. Tom was frustrated with how the declining California Die Casting industry was effecting SDC. Tom offered to sell the entire assets of SDC to KDC. KDC purchased all the Spencer Die Casting Company assets. Spencer Die Casting Company closed their business.

In 2009 –
Coast Die Casting Company (CDC)
Richard White, the owner of Coast Die Casting Company contacted KDC to say he was ready to sell CDC. He had ran out of money to keep the doors open. July 2009. KDC purchased all the CDC assets. CDC sent all their mold bases and die casting tooling to KDC to continue to serve the CDC customers. Coast Die Casting Company closed.

Kinetic Die Casting Company is aggressively interested in purchasing other small die casting companies. Contact me if you are a small die casting company owner, and you are interested in getting out of the die casting business.

Bob Thomas, President
Kinetic Die Casting, Inc.
818-982-9200

Dynacast Die Casting Company Acquisition – Charlotte, NC – July 19, 2011 – Dynacast International Inc. (Dynacast) announced the completion of the acquisition of the Dynacast business from Melrose PLC. The company’s acquirers are affiliates of Kenner & Company, Inc., a New York-based investment firm, together with Izurium Capital Management and a number of other institutional investors.

The completion of this acquisition puts Dynacast in a strong position for growth, backed by significant investor support and ample capital. Dynacast will continue to operate as an independent company led by its existing management team.

“On behalf of the executive team and the 3,000 employees of Dynacast worldwide, we are delighted at the prospect of working with Kenner & Company and the other investors,” said Simon J. Newman, CEO. “We believe that we have significant growth opportunities ahead of us and we are excited and confident that we will execute these opportunities over the next few years.”

Jeffrey L. Kenner, President of Kenner & Company, Inc. said he was pleased to complete the transaction and praised management for their enthusiastic support and business discipline. “We look forward to working together with Dynacast management to accomplish their growth objectives,” said Kenner.

Financing for the transaction was provided by JP Morgan, Macquarie Capital, GE Capital, and Bank of Montreal.

To get a price for aluminum die casting parts or die casting tooling, call toll free 800-524-8083 and ask for sales. Or email us at sales@kineticdc.com for a fast response on a price quote.

Tony Capaccio of Bloomberg Business News reported last week that Boeing may end up spending $300 million more than is budgeted under its contract to develop a new Air Force aerial-refueling tanker.

Bad news for taxpayers, right?

Wrong — because the company will have to eat every cent of expenses above the ceiling on the development contract, which means if there actually is an “overrun,” taxpayers will be getting extra value at Boeing’s expense.

The story could be bad news for Boeing shareholders, but something tells me when the contract is completed Boeing will come in right at the ceiling.

Of course, that still could mean a zero rate of return, but the development contract leads to production of 179 planes, where the big aerospace company is likely to do just fine.

Thompson: Obama’s new acquisition practices “reward honesty and realism.”
What some observers don’t seem to get about the Bloomberg story is that the Obama administration really has tightened up on contracting practices, so if companies don’t stay within budgets, they lose money.

That’s a powerful incentive not to run up costs, and helps explain why the administration pushed for an early transition from cost-plus contracts to fixed-price arrangements on the F-35 fighter too.

In both cases, contractors will get the best results if they stay within budgets, which is exactly what policymakers were aiming to achieve.

There’s no advantage in bidding low to win and then trying to raise prices, because contract terms are too tight to allow recovery. So the new acquisition practices reward honesty and realism.

Government Got the Best Deal Possible

If you’re still stuck in the old way of thinking, then the fact that Boeing might have to eat some extra expenses suggests the company didn’t have a good handle on costs when it wrote its proposal.

Not so: It bid the price it needed to bid to beat rival Airbus. Both companies knew they would have to price their proposals aggressively to have any chance of winning, and as one senior Boeing executive put it to me, “We left a lot of shekels on the table.”

In other words, Boeing was willing to break even or maybe even lose money in the development phase in order to preserve its 50-year tanker franchise and keep Airbus out of its home market.

Thus, Tony Capaccio’s story doesn’t signal that anything has gone wrong with the tanker program. Quite the opposite — it shows government negotiators got the best deal possible from the winner.

Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D., is chief operating officer of the Arlington, Va.-based nonprofit Lexington Institute and chief executive officer of Source Associates, a for-profit consultancy. Prior to holding his present positions, he was deputy director of the Security Studies Program at Georgetown University and taught graduate-level courses in strategy, technology and media affairs at Georgetown. He also has taught at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government.

-Industryweek

Scott Paul, the executive director of the Alliance for American Manufacturing (AAM), applauded the direction that the United States is taking with the newly created Advanced Manufacturing Partnership. The group will be led by top engineering universities and several major U.S. manufacturers.

Last week, President Obama also directed the National Economic Council and the Office of Science and Technology Policy to work with the new partnership to implement a number of the recommendations of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.

“We are playing catch-up on initiatives where we have public-private partnerships to try and spur manufacturing,” Scott said during an interview on C-SPAN. One particular area that is well-suited to joint efforts is in bringing new technology to the factory floor, Scott asserted. “That is a perfectly appropriate role for the government,” Scott said. Other countries are currently involved in these efforts and the U.S. was as well during the 80s. “This will help keep good-paying advanced-manufacturing jobs in the U.S.”

The group supports a national manufacturing strategy.

“The idea of a manufacturing strategy or industrial policy is hardly a radical concept,” the group says. “Alexander Hamilton constructed America’s first industrial policy in 1791. Setbacks during the War of 1812 due to a lack of domestic capacity to build naval vessels and military equipment cemented the determination of the federal government to grow manufacturing, a policy that continued until the end of World War II. Today, globalization and such economic approaches as a strong dollar policy favoring domestic consumption have helped to steadily erode manufacturing as a percentage of gross domestic product, as well as private-sector employment and other key measures.”

During the interview, he discussed the “Made in America” movement and other topics including the currency issue with China.

-Industryweek

Why You Should Consider New Aluminum Lighting Fixture Parts. For some time, lighting fixtures for various applications are manufactured with great labor. The parts are carefully welded and shaped in order to make a good fit for the lighting source. Because of the seemingly complicated works that takes place in the manufacture of steel lighting parts, the cost of such pieces is relatively expensive. Those who cannot avail of the steel lighting parts are now considering the use of new aluminum lighting fixture parts for their products.

Aluminum is a kind of metal that is very pliable. It can easily conform to the desired shape and size of the manufacturer. However, even though it is malleable, it is still a durable material for lighting purposes. It is relatively more resistant to rusts and other harmful elements. Aside from this, aluminum also provides a good heating facility for the lighting fixtures that are used for thermal applications. Unlike with plastic, it does not “burn” with constant use.

Aluminum lighting fixture parts are available in various sizes and shapes. You can instantly acquire parts that are suitable for your lighting fixtures. Parts that are manufactured from cast aluminum are considerably lighter than steel. Because of this, you can have the pieces assembled and installed without having any troubles with them.

To get a price for aluminum die casting parts or die casting tooling, call toll free 800-524-8083 and ask for sales. Or email us at sales@kineticdc.com for a fast response on a price quote.