Do You Favor A Government Loan To The Detroit 3?

1616264666780

Comments

  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    Hey, it wasn't this administration that handed out the checks. It was George W. Bush and friends.
    A structured bankruptcy is the best solution. The majority of people don't like GM, and giving GM more money would have killed Obama's approval ratings (except in Michigan).
    And does anyone else feel that it is unfair that one state expects every us taxpayer to bail out these companies in order to keep that states unemployment low?
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    He's saying that government should have just handed them money and let them decide what to do with it. Because somehow, that's not socialism.
  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    If there was a vote on a new tax to save the auto companies. Lets say 2% until the GM and Chrysler were making a profit again; does anyone think that tax would pass? :lemon:
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Waggoner, Nardelli and Putz...er..Lutz might think it'd pass. I doubt even the current GM CEO thinks it would. Probably why he's not doing the dollar-salary thing. Figures he'll just grab what he can from the sinking ship on his way to the life raft.
  • bultmanbultman Member Posts: 2
    Hey, everyone else involved in receiving bailout money is getting what they can because they not only see but KNOW what the outcome is going to be. The new Prez is not only trying to run the big corps and banks but wants to get his name on the top of the list of the IMF so he can get his claws in that too. His ambition is not 4 more but a dynasty of B.O. or should I say B.S.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Ahhh someone with a memory longer than last Fall.

    I lived and worked in international trade from the 70's onward. It was horrible for most of the 70s because our interest rates were in the 18-22% for top credit business and home mortgages. Talk about a drag on the economy.

    But in the late 70s we went to our trading partners and told them that we were going to devalue the US$. It was done via the Plaza Accords. In the case of Japan the JY/$ rate went from 360 : 1 all the way down to ~ 120 : 1. BINGO!!!! Our businesses and labor and everything here was suddenly 65% cheaper. We could outsell any other developed country. As you noted it was the temporary death of imports from all our competitor trading partners. American businesses loved it with booming employment and windfall profits. We were all blessed.

    But....the unintended consequences were not foreseen. Nothing goes unpunished.

    If our competitor trading partners couldn't import here because of the deteriorating value of the US$.............hey why not just build here and use our cheap labor and cheap land and cheap electricity and cheap everything. Everything denominated in US$ was 65% less expensive in 1986 than in 1979.

    1986???? Oh yeah that was the year that Toyota built Georgetown, KY. Honda had been in Marysville, OH a couple of years earlier. This was the beginning of the death knell for the D3 and especially for the UAW. Transplants from all over Asia and Germany sprung up all over the south simply because our costs here were far cheaper than building in the home market. These new transplants not only used less costly non-union labor but they used the latest state-of-the-art production equipment and methods. Detroit ignored the threat.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,698
    >in LEMON yellow?

    Looks more like gold flash!

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Punny enough for everyone !! ;)
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    He doesn't want to run them, he's got enough to do. He wants them to run THEMSELVES like they want to make a profit. Last I checked that's what businesses are SUPPOSED to do, but these megaconglomerates have turned into CEO retirement providers instead.

    If you take government money you give government a seat at the table. They wanted government money because they couldn't get Joe Taxpayer to give them any more by themselves. They just didn't want to give government a seat at the table. Well, if you don't want Government getting a seat at the table, then be like Ford and tell them "No thanks!" And anyone who argues that they didn't have a choice is forgetting that they have all the choice in the world about how they run their businesses. They got themselves into the messes they're in, and now the rich are asking for a "nanny state" to take care of them. That's right, the "free market" companies who have been crying for deregulation now want a nanny state. Just a different kind.

    Hypocrisy = Hilarity. :shades:
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    By replacing the head of the company and demanding a restructuring of its board in return for further TARP aid, Obama has taken upon himself the responsibility for the future of the company.

    D*mn straight. He better be taking control of this broken down hulk. It's got $13 Billion of our money sunk into it and from its own plans drawn up and presented to Congress there is almost no hope in the future. Not only that it needs more and more of our $$$ just to keep its head above water. The company has no value except what we put into it.

    Get off the irrelevant soap box. This is a step that had to be taken. It's what the former administration should have done with AIG and the banks and then with GM & Chrysler when they came begging the first time. But no the Bushies just gave the money away with no oversight. Paulson will spend his time in Hell right next to Roger Smith ( lemko ;) ). Alan Greenspan will be one level lower.

    Unfortunately yes Obama will be tied to GM's eventual fate. There's no getting around that now. But I think that there is enough bone and muscle still there for GM to revive and come back as a much smaller and more efficient company.

    Actually the Feds have a fantastic record of being turnaround artists going back decades. Here's an interesting read: Washington's Turnaround Artists

    Add to the article the Resolution Trust Corp.

    It's likely that GM will be forced into a government-controlled bankruptcy and will end up with three major owners, the US Govt which will be pumping cash in more and more to keep it afloat, the current bondholders who will be forced to take equity in the new company in exchange for giving up 65% of their debt and also the UAW which will also be forced to take equity in the new GM in exchange for cash funding of the VEBA.

    At some point in the future after the new GM emerges from BK court with prolly Chevy and Cadillac and maybe Buick/GMC it will be about half the size it was last year with a balanced structure that will not weigh down an expected sales rate of 2.0 million units annually. At that time the Feds can 'flip' its ownership for a profit via an IPO or private sale.

    New roof, new siding, tear out the old worn carpets and put in new ones with new appliances and a fresh coat of paint inside, Voila!!!
  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    Obama did not hand GM $13 Billion. George W. Bush did that after congress said no. If Bush would have done the capitalistic thing he would have let the companies go bankrupts. Republicans are the ones who are supposed to be anti-union.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    I know, that's what I was referring to.. $13B and no oversight. In Nov/Dec when the two companies came begging the quid pro quo should have been 'You beg for $$$ you lose your job.'
  • dtownfbdtownfb Member Posts: 2,918
    I'm glad someone else pointed this out. GM would be gone now if Bush didn't give them the money. this is after Congress voted against it!!! I understand why he did it...to save jobs and give GM more time to find a solution. I didn't like it but I'm not the President of the US and people aren't looking to me for help.

    Basically Obama and the auto task force drew a line in the sand and said enough is enough. He wants to save jobs, which is very important even if it is the UAW. Wagoner was incompetent and ineffective. Henderson at least is acting a bit more urgency than Wagoner ever did. he is saying all the right things as well. Obama gave GM and Chrysler a huge dose of reality telling them your companies are not viable and your plan sucks. Come up with a better plan! Isn't this what all of us have been writing about for the past 6 months?!?

    Again this is about saving as many jobs as possible. 30 and 60 days is plenty of time for these companies to do what they have to do. April 30th and may 30th will be interesting days.

    Regarding Michigan, they are trying to save their biggest private employers. They really have no industry to replace it. I understand where they are coming. I'm not paying attention to it but they can talk all they want. I probably would do the same thing if I were in their shoes.
  • chikoochikoo Member Posts: 3,008
    > 'You beg for $$$ you lose your job.'

    Right.

    If begging money so that one can run a company is the CEO's job, then we should hire the panhandler from the streets. He is the best there is :sick:
  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    Great post dtwonfb. I agree 100%. Though I feel for Michiganites, there is only so much the rest of the US can do. Michigan has been going down the tubes for years (see Flint) and Detroit has been the butt of jokes for as long as I can remember.
    The Detroit Lions have been awful for years. Is every other team in the NFL supposed to give up their best player to make the Lions competitive? :shades:
  • colloquorcolloquor Member Posts: 482
    Cupholders? - Most European manufacturers never believed in cup holders. They are very late to the party on that convenience.
  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    I just read that GM was trying to get $2,500,000,000 from the EPA to develop hybrids. Is it just me or does anyone else see this as a thinly vailed attempt to get bailout money. You could give $100 million to MIT students and they would develop better technology that everyone could use.
    Honda and Toyota and Ford have the most advanced Hybrids on the market, why not give them the money.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Doesn't GM have "more hybrids than any other car company" or something like that?
  • dbweaverdbweaver Member Posts: 88
    If GM files bankrupt will they be required to repay rhe 13billion they owe the taxpayers?
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Who knows - all bets are off in a bankruptcy. If they liquidate, lenders holding first position may get paid first (after wages or ... taxes maybe?), and I don't if Uncle Sam has some kind of priority over everyone else. I wouldn't hold my breath.

    That brings up another question - if GM does file for reorganization and has the feds financing a reorg, how quick can they go into bankruptcy, cancel a bunch of contracts with the dealers and the union, renegotiate loans and come back out again?

    It seems like most Chapter 11s take at least a year. GM could miss a whole model year if they can't get suppliers to deliver parts.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    As steve noted maybe / maybe not. We probably will but it may take some time.

    Scenario A... Chp 11 but it doesn't go so well and no agreements can be found so GM is liquidated in Chp 7. In that case the US Govt is one of the only secured creditors so we'd be repaid first as assets were sold off in liquidation. This is highly unlikely.
    Shareholders lose everything
    Bond holders break about even
    UAW is out of work and the pensions are dumped on the PBGC

    Scenario B.. Chp 11 on a fast track like the Government seems to want. In this case there are three main groups that will 'own' the new GM that survives.
    the US Govt ( meaning us ) for all the $Billions we've pumped in. It will be much more than $13 Billion by that time.
    the bondholders who now hold $27 Billion in debt but only about $10 Billion is worthwhile. They will have to swap about $17 Billion in debt for new shares in the new GM
    the UAW's VEBA which is owed about $40 Billion. The plan seems to be that they take $20 Billion in cash over 10 yrs and $20 Billion in shares of the new GM

    All the current shareholders lose everything.

    At some time in the future after we've fixed up this 'flipper' we then put it up for sale to new owners via an IPO or via a private sale and take our profit with interest. But it might be 4 to 8 years down the road for this dump to be flipped.

    This is the most likely scenario.
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    Doesn't GM have "more hybrids than any other car company" or something like that?

    Just as they have "more models with 30mpg than any other manufacturer"! Of course when you rebadge everything 4 times it is easy to have more models. ;)

    GM just couldn't have aimed at a sensible business plan for hybrids. They went "too simple" and "too complex" at the same time, while Honda, Ford, and Toyota aimed at "sensible". The "light hybrid" such as the Vue and Malibu is just a stronger generator that can act like a motor and give then engine a tiny "boost". It's good for about 1mpg and lets GM call it a hybrid. Otherwise it is pretty much worthless.

    The two-mode hybrid is apparently pretty good technology but very expensive. You can get it on the big SUV iron but it costs another $10K. So almost nobody as buying them because a) they're SUVs; and b) the hybrid will never earn it's investment back due to the high cost.

    Then of course there's the Volt, which is an even worse case of complexity and economic disaster, for both GM and the buyer. A car that has been advertised for over two years and still has a over a year before arriving on the market. Even with tax breaks will probably cost $35K or so. Vaporware in advertising for years, at its finest.

    I don't know who thought of the GM hybrid strategy, but they are idiots and should be fired (oh, right, Wagoner and Lutz). Typical of GM, they advertise a lot and then fail to deliver much. Such as V8-6-4. Such as the hot G6 winding through curves on commericals prior to its introduction. Such as the "new kind of car company", Saturn.

    The great thing about the Obama GM plan is

    1 - it gives urgency to GM's decisions in a way they couldn't do themselves
    2 - it gives the UAW a CHANCE to save their contracts if they will make substantial concessions
    3 - it puts a cap on how much/how long the US taxpayer is going to pour money into this failed company
    4 - it provides a real possibility to save the best portions of GM (say, 33%) and dump the rest
    5 - it dumps the CEO and most of the board

    Many of us for months have been saying - dump Wagoner, the Board, strip the company down to the best vehicles, kill off most of the divisions, and void the contracts to make the company competitive and have a chance. This does exactly all those things.
  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    Part of the deal when the last administration, was that the US government would be first in bankruptcy.
    That is also what is holding the Chrysler-Fiat deal up; Fiat wants to get paid back before the US government.
    That being said, in bankruptcy all bets are off. If the greed of the bondholders and UAW have shown anything, they will fight tooth and nail for what they think "they deserve".
    http://www.autoobserver.com/2009/04/chryslers-italian-lifeline-full-of-knots.htm- l#more
  • dtownfbdtownfb Member Posts: 2,918
    Very interesting article. One of her better ones. In her view, it looks like Chrysler may be closing up shop on April 30th.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    From the AutoObserver link:

    "- Sheldon Stone, a partner at Amherst Partners LLC, a Michigan-based restructuring consultant, told Bloomberg News, "It is an impossible goal. The likelihood is that the 30-day period is going to allow Chrysler to get their house in order for a bankruptcy."

    Get their house in order - does that mean cash gathering and bonus payouts by the execs with the hope that the bankruptcy court won't claw the money back?
  • dtownfbdtownfb Member Posts: 2,918
    Pretty much. I bet Jim Press is kicking himself for leaving Toyota.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    He's burned his bridges a year ago so there's no going back:

    Jim Press "Clarifies" Outburst that Japanese Government Paid to Develop Prius (Wired)
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Get their house in order - does that mean cash gathering and bonus payouts by the execs with the hope that the bankruptcy court won't claw the money back?

    You mean "loot the company?" That's probably exactly what it means. Which means my company's going to have to deal with the BK Court to get what they owe us.
  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    Looks like the end of Chrysler. No one wants to bail them out. Jeep and Ram seem to have the only consumer loyalty.
    With no bailout, any idea on who would buy the Jeep and Ram Steve? Any news on Canada writing a check? :lemon:
    Good news is, no Chrysler means more market share for Ford and Chrysler, especially with American brand loyalist. :)
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    There are probably some other potential buyers out there but who has any financing?

    Canada - now there's an idea. You could park new Jeeps and Caravans in Tim Horton parking lots. Le Grand Caravan hockey edition - holds enough duffel for the entire team or the goalie, whoever gets there first.
  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    Love it. Chrysler, the Canadian car company. The tax payers can pay for the company to function, and Canadians can buy the cars.
    As well as the Hockey Edition, they should make the Grizzly Bear proof Dodge Ram. Comes with bare mace and chicken wire over the windows. :)
  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    Really good article on how American's have started steering away from GM and Chrysler since they started begging for tax payer dollars. Ford has benefited from their loss.
    http://www.freep.com/article/20090403/BUSINESS01/90403054
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,242
    This should have been as obvious as it would've been if written in 10-foot high neon letters on every major roadway. Saw this one coming. Our stock club bought 2000 Ford shares less than 2 months ago for $1.93/share. Trading at $3.15 right at the moment. Companies that look more stable (and have cash on hand) are BOUND to be more attractive to consumers.

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
    Review your vehicle

  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    Great point kirstie. The new Fusion and F-150 look like winners too.
    Ford is an updated Focus and car based Explorer (Explorer America maybe?)away from having a top notch line up.
    As much as this publicity has turned me off GM and Chrysler, it has made me more attracted to Ford. And I'm a Honda man.
  • aldwaldw Member Posts: 82
    The new Ford's are definitely looking good, but I do say that there are some GM vehicle's I find quite worthy of purchase, and hope they do pull through. Chrysler on the other hand, looks like their goose is cooked. :sick:
  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    In another startling example of the ineptitude that is GM, the Pontiac G3 (more expensive Aveo/Suzuki) sold only 84 in February and 114 in March. With the cost of rebadging, redesign, and incentives did one of those G3's pull in a profit for GM? :confuse:
    http://blogs.wsj.com/autoshow/2009/04/03/gms-pontiac-g3-headed-for-a-short-ride/-
  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    "But letting a big bank fail can have a bigger and much more immediate effect on the economy, as the collapse of Lehman Brothers proved. GM (GM, Fortune 500) spun the line that its bankruptcy would have similar ramifications - but executives have since dropped that argument. In any event, the government has already taken steps to help alleviate the consequences by guaranteeing warranties and setting up a program to backstop payments to suppliers by Detroit's Big Three.

    Fear of the domino effect of a bank collapse isn't the only factor driving the different approach, though. Financial firms have much more flexible cost structures: they can shed staff and office space quickly to help restore profitability. GM's most recent restructuring plan, on the other hand, had a five-year time frame - and the writing has already been on the wall for Detroit's broken business model for at least five years.

    Also, as liquidity returns, some financial asset prices should recover, meaning banks might recoup some of their losses. Chrysler and GM cannot pull that trick with car sales - in fact, they usually offer discounts to shift any excess inventory, which increases their pain."
    http://money.cnn.com/2009/04/03/news/companies/breaking_views.breakingviews/inde- x.htm?postversion=2009040310
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,242
    At this point, it's not as much about vehicle quality as it is fear. Regardless of the gov't promise to back warranty service, people are going to be less inclined to purchase from a company they fear won't be around.

    So your warranty is gov't backed - great. Where, exactly, do you get to take it for warranty service? The DMV? When given options between quite safe and somewhat unsafe, more people are likely to go for "quite safe."

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
    Review your vehicle

  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    I wish there were poll numbers, but I would argue that all of the bad attention brought on GM by asking for bailout dollars has more to due with people steering clear of their cars. GM has gotten a lot of bad publicity; from criticism of the UAW to old stories of unreliable cars. This woke a lot of the non car lovers up to some of GM's flaws. It also built a new reason to hate GM.
    You could even argue that a government backed warranty gives you more confidence in the car. Even if GM goes bankrupt and loses Saturn, Pontiac, Hummer, etc. the government still has to pay someone to fix you car. Money talks.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,698
    >. GM has gotten a lot of bad publicity; from criticism of the UAW to old stories of unreliable cars

    Good point.

    > It also built a new reason to hate GM.

    Exactly.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Of course Not! Did you really think without bankruptcy and still bleeding money and asking for more bailout money, that they would then be able to repay it???

    Highly unlikely. Similar to the Madoff investors.

    Consider this $20B burned! Oh well! Change costs, now, doesn't it?

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Thing is, I couldn't have done a worse job as C.E.O. I feel better now! :)

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Easy...Jeep RAM and minivans will be allocated to the "New" GM. So, at the end of the day, it will be F and Government Motors. Bye, Bye C.

    Regards,
    OW
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    There's always one more possibility...Tesla could buy Jeep. :shades:
  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    For some reason I think that Jeep and Mercedes would make a great match. Some of those guys at Mercedes must have done work with Jeep. It would also the luxury image Jeep attains for. My friend went to Dubai and said there were Mercedes everywhere. Imagine how many Jeeps they could sell over there. :)
  • dbostondriverdbostondriver Member Posts: 559
    One such advertisement, from Gary Yeomans Ford Lincoln Mercury in Daytona Beach, Fla., says: “I am proud that Ford is doing this on their own and not asked for government loans. Ford has had the courage and integrity to face adversity and choose ethics over convenience. … These are proud times to be a Ford dealer.”

    Yes it is indeed!
  • spoomspoom Member Posts: 85
    I have to question the fact that Chrysler's private owners are unwilling to bail the co. out. They have other profitable companies, and just got some $ fro mselling a paper mill in WI. If they don't think the company's worth investing in then I sure don't want to kick in for it either. These companies should go into bankruptcy-that's what its there for! United Airlines did it twice and folks are still willing to board it's planes....................
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Daimler already had Jeep and disposed of it along with C a few years back...why would they buy it now? To make sure the quality stays low?

    Nah, GM will wind up with the good brands in C.

    Regards,
    OW
  • 05wagon05wagon Member Posts: 9
    Perhaps a few billion could have been directed to buyer's trade-in values as done in Europe. Or extending warranties to longer terms and better coverage. We would trade a 02 Windstar (warranty expired Jan 09) and 05 Taurus tomorrow if Government support was focused directly at us as consumers rather than totally at companies. This way the consumer would have a vote on these corporate giants with their wallets. Winners take all.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    The government have block heads. Look at unemployment and scratch their heads on why people aren't buying cars and homes? Should have done cash for clunkers in December 2008.

    Do you feel safe at your job? THAT is the 10 Trillion Dollar question. Keep giving idiot banks money.

    You would think that these brilliant minds could figure out that the right course would have been to fund NEW BANKS THAT WOULD BE SOLVENT WITH OUR MONEY. Get rid of the failure banks and put them to bed. The new banks could have stimulated the economy ALREADY.

    Is it just me or is the greed (read: politics) even more pronounced now??

    Regards,
    OW
This discussion has been closed.

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.