Isn't this the same company whose CEO gave massive (even by coal industry standards) bankrolling of the Romney campaign, and then required their employees to be present for a Romney speech/photo-op without pay (and then explained it to the media that although the mineral appearance was required, it wasn't 'mandatory $hit you not)?
There's no way this was an economic decision rather than a political statement and/or an emotional overreaction than a hardnosed business decision. There is no way to tell if any form of cap and trade or other meaningful environmental legislation will pass (especially with a gop house and cloture-proof senate-proof minority). Even if it did there's no way to tell what forms the law would take, and the regulations even then would take years to implement.
In short, there's absolutely no change in the coal markets on 11/7/12 then there was on 11/6/12.
Isn't it rather telling that no other coal companies are reporting layoffs as a result of Obama's re-election? Businessmen are as prone to emotional overreaction as any other person, and in this case if I were a shareholder I'd be demanding answers from this CEO for his decision rather than blaming Obama.
I'll add the one caveat that the only way this was a legitimately dollars and cents based decision is if the layoffs were planned due to market fluctuations long before Election Day and the CEO decided to use this timing to put it on Obama.
Either way, Rockhound, MBD, and others of their talk radio audience ilk are getting trolled massively here.
EDIT: Oh great. Now even occasionally non-trollish posters who SHOULD know better like Ben Kenobi are drinking the Kool-Aid.
