GM’s sales figure was padded with about one million sales by Chinese automakers SAIC Motor Corp. and Wuling Motors Co. — companies with which GM has joint ventures, but in which the American company does not have a controlling stake
Does seem to cheat a bit. I doubt Toyota includes Subaru sales in their figures.
Because ... they don't have to pay the 35% corporate tax
A company's net profit is BEFORE corporate income tax! So whether GM pays more or less corporate income tax does not affect their annual net profit data.
2) Somone want to remind me if their accounting has to be GAAP yet.
Then find it out. If you find that GM is doing anything illegal in their accounting, sue them. If you don't know anything wrong of their accounting, then you should not use this to go against them.
GM’s sales figure was padded with about one million sales by Chinese automakers SAIC Motor Corp. and Wuling Motors Co. — companies with which GM has joint ventures, but in which the American company does not have a controlling stake
Does seem to cheat a bit. I doubt Toyota includes Subaru sales in their figures.
GM owns half of its Chinese subsidiaries thru joint venture, the only allowed ownership for any foreign companies in China. Of course GM should count those sales volumes.
On the other hand, Toyota only owns 16% of Subaru, so it should not count the Subaru sales.
Um, GM owns (2) out of the eleven subsidiaries, not half.
Shanghai Auto (SAIC) is the one in charge of the Former General, which by the way is a Government run operation.
GM owned 50% of the SAIC from the start in 1997, the highest percentage any foreign company allows to own in China.
In late 2010, SAIC increased its ownership by 1%, so now GM owns 49% of SAIC.
In addition, the foreign automakers like GM still owns the IP of all the products, at least from the beginning to now (China is trying to renegotiate the term so China can have access to the IP).
In all seriousness, the reason for the move is fairly obvious: GM needs money (to supplement its current $43 billion) to pay off its loans to the U.S. government :sick: and it decided to sell the controlling stake (of GM Shanghai) to SAIC for a hefty sum.
LOL
About GM, SAIC, and Wuling
Currently, GM sells the Chevrolet, Opel, Buick, Cadillac, and Saab brands in China. Through a partnership with SAIC and Wuling, it also sells Wuling mini trucks. In fact, it has sold more Wuling trucks than its own products in China.
I don't have F or GM's 4th quarter numbers, but through the first 3 quarters of 2011.
GM had 8.5B in net profit vs Ford with 6.6B. During the 1st 3 quarters of 2011 GM incurred about $500m in interest expenses vs Ford's $3.4B in interest expense.
Looking at the cash flow statement and GM still isn't looking good. Ford's net cash flow through the first 9 months of 2011 is $18.7 B vs $11b for GM.
With GM having their debt cleaned up they don't have many excuses to not be highly profitable
Yep, VW is in another league. Over $17B net income through the 3rd quarter 2011
Through the Sept. of 2011 VW revenue =$150b vs. GM$112b. That should settle who's number 1 in sales.
So now this Chinese designed and built car will actually get a Chevy badge, when it's distributed in India.
But...if you count that, do you count the Chevy Forester? Same deal, GM owned a minority stake in Subaru at the time, and sold Foresters there because Subaru did not have a dealer network.
Please read my post carefully. I said no FOREIGN automaker has controlling stack ever. That's by Chinese government's design. SAIC is not a foreign automaker.
Wrong. I did not miss the point. You were disputing GM's sales volume right? If you think that you can get your dispute accepted by the industry to use your "corrected" number instead GM's number, go right ahead.
2011 was over and GM was No. 1 in the world. Just accept it and hope your beloved company can do better this year. No need to waste so much energy trying to change something you cannot.
VW's figures don't count sales from truckmakers MAN and Scania, which will be added in a few weeks, a Volkswagen spokesman told the newspaper.
The truckmakers might add 200,000 vehicles to VW's sales total.
Rivals and some analysts also argue that GM’s numbers are inflated by sales from its China partnerships with SAIC Motor Corp. and Wuling Motors Co.
Not everybody is naive to believe every thing GM claims.
GM is desperate...for dumping the "Government", re-building Caddy, making competitive cars and now being #1 in sales. Desperation "Runs Deep". It's the "New World Standard"!
A company's net profit is BEFORE corporate income tax! So whether GM pays more or less corporate income tax does not affect their annual net profit data.
Really? Are you talking about accounting in China? Because in the West, and especially the U.S. net profit is "Net profit represents the number of sales dollars remaining after all operating expenses, interest, taxes and preferred stock dividends (but not common stock dividends) have been deducted from a company's total revenue."
If you care to post some other accounting-link, that shows you're not wrong ... I won't hold my breath though. :P
If you don't pay federal income tax, which would be 35% or so, then your net profits are going to be higher. Thus that's partly why GM looks so profitable. A smoke-and-mirrors ploy to the U.S. public, so our politicians don't look so bad. It's a way to hide continuing-aid to GM, and hide the true extent of the bailouts that have gone to GM.
Because in the West, and especially the U.S. net profit is "Net profit represents the number of sales dollars remaining after all operating expenses, interest, taxes and preferred stock dividends (but not common stock dividends) have been deducted from a company's total revenue."
That's why, when comparing financial aspects and performance of one company to another, EBITDA is generally the used number...
Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration also said that it did not identify a safety defect in the Volt.
The agency said it “remains unaware of any real-world crashes that have resulted in a battery-related fire involving the Chevy Volt or any other electric vehicle. NHTSA continues to believe that electric vehicles show great promise as a safe and fuel-efficient option for American drivers.”
It gets worse. Kia RESISTED issuing the recall for this SAFETY item.
"The agency began that investigation in November 2009. Kia had resisted issuing a recall for almost two years,agreeing only after the agency made clear that it would push the issue by sending an unusual, formal demand for a recall."
I guess they really are a "better" car company after all!!! The were "betting."
THEY WERE BETTING THEY COULD BLUFF THEIR WAY OUT OF HAVING THE RECALL TO FIX THE SAFETY PROBLEMS THEY HAD SOLD!
Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization.
Isn't that like someone writing their gross pay in their checkbook, rather than writing what's left after taxes, insurances, social security, and Medicare deductions? My bank used to charge me a fee everytime I told them my check was more than "the Net", that they said it was.
But getting to your point, I wasn't comparing GM's profit to other companies. I was simply stating that the Net Profit that GM is reporting is a result of the Free-pass GM is getting on taxes. There was no company-company comparision involved. To analyze EBIT for various auto companies, would make a good thesis project.
I wasn't disagreeing with your point at all, but simply saying that, if one wants to truly see how GM is performing (without all the smoke and mirrors) he can get a much more accurate picture looking at the EBITDA numbers. If they are in bad shape, things like tax credits, special write-offs, etc. are only keeping it on life-support, and it will eventually die, regardless how much aid it gets.
I was simply stating that the Net Profit that GM is reporting is a result of the Free-pass GM is getting on taxes.
Here are the quotes on GM's profit from GM's annual report of fiscal year 2010:
"Despite depressed industry conditions, GM posted $5.7 billion of earnings before interest and taxes (eBiT) in north America."
"GM recorded adjusted eBiT of $7 billion and positive automotive free cash fl ow of $2.4 billion in 2010."
The word "profit" did not even appear once in the report. So unless specified otherwise, all the "net profit" or "profit" words quoted by the media are actually EBIT.
A corporation reports their "profit" quarterly and again annually. But the corporate income tax is calculated and filed annually by the 15th day of the 3rd month after the end of a fiscal year. This means a corporation does not know their income tax yet when they report their quarterly "profit", or even the annual profit right after 12/31 of each year. So those "profit" data cannot be the profit after income tax! Though they could report quarterly profit after payroll tax because payroll tax is calculated every time a paycheck is generated.
In short, the loosely used "profit" by the media cannot be the net profit after corporate income tax. So your claim of the big tax break of GM does not matter here.
Volkswagen sold 8.16 million vehicles in 2011, an increase of 11 percent.
More than 2.2 million of those sales came from China, where VW holds a 50 percent share of Shanghai Volkswagen Automotive and a share of FAW-Volkswagen Automotive.
That stake is listed on the FAW-VW web site as 40 percent; press reports last year said it is scheduled to rise to 49 percent."
So VW also counted the 2.2 million cars sold by their China JV which they do not have a controlling stack either. What's the difference between the way VW and GM counting their China sales?
VW only owns 30% of the MAN. The total MAN and Scania sales volume is only 0.2 million. GM led VW by 1 million. So even VW counted all MAN and Scania's sales, it would still be a distance No. 2.
A corporation reports their "profit" quarterly and again annually. But the corporate income tax is calculated and filed annually by the 15th day of the 3rd month after the end of a fiscal year. This means a corporation does not know their income tax yet when they report their quarterly "profit", or even the annual profit right after 12/31 of each year. So those "profit" data cannot be the profit after income tax!
Well everyone must be doing something different then. The 1st major GAAP corporation that I went and looked at their quarterly report DOES subtract taxes before reporting their quarterly profit. Is Exxon-Mobil a large enough and established company for you? From P.1 of their News Release: "Fourth quarter earnings were $9.3 billion, an increase of 53%."
Now go to P. 9 of the same report, and you can verify that "Net income attributable to ExxonMobil (U.S. GAAP) = 9,250" (M) and "Income before income taxes = 15,327" (M).
Exxon Mobil is reporting bottom line - Net Profit; not as you state EBIT! Let's see what the press reported on that exact same topic:
"The world's largest publicly traded oil company logged earnings of $9.25 billion, or $1.85 a share in the fourth quarter. That was up 53% from $6.05 billion, or $1.27, a year earlier."
Definition of 'Net Income - NI' 1. A company's total earnings (or profit). Net income is calculated by taking revenues and adjusting for the cost of doing business, depreciation, interest, taxes and other expenses. This number is found on a company's income statement and is an important measure of how profitable the company is over a period of time. The measure is also used to calculate earnings per share.
Most income statements I've looked at, if the company has tax liability it's generally listed and taken out of net income.
I just looked at Apple and the last 4 quarterly reports shows about $2B in income tax expenses.
Looking at GM's income statement. I think they are the first company that I've noticed that net income is actually higher than EBIT earnings.
Naturally taxes are "filed" once per year, but don't estimated taxes have to be paid quarterly.
Comments
I believe VW has the "bragging edge."
Interesting, but does it really matter?
Does seem to cheat a bit. I doubt Toyota includes Subaru sales in their figures.
A company's net profit is BEFORE corporate income tax! So whether GM pays more or less corporate income tax does not affect their annual net profit data.
2) Somone want to remind me if their accounting has to be GAAP yet.
Then find it out. If you find that GM is doing anything illegal in their accounting, sue them. If you don't know anything wrong of their accounting, then you should not use this to go against them.
Does seem to cheat a bit. I doubt Toyota includes Subaru sales in their figures.
GM owns half of its Chinese subsidiaries thru joint venture, the only allowed ownership for any foreign companies in China. Of course GM should count those sales volumes.
On the other hand, Toyota only owns 16% of Subaru, so it should not count the Subaru sales.
Shanghai Auto (SAIC) is the one in charge of the Former General, which by the way is a Government run operation.
So ya, "Government Motors" applies once again. :sick:
GM.com
Shanghai Auto (SAIC) is the one in charge of the Former General, which by the way is a Government run operation.
GM owned 50% of the SAIC from the start in 1997, the highest percentage any foreign company allows to own in China.
In late 2010, SAIC increased its ownership by 1%, so now GM owns 49% of SAIC.
In addition, the foreign automakers like GM still owns the IP of all the products, at least from the beginning to now (China is trying to renegotiate the term so China can have access to the IP).
And by doing so, they forfeit controlling stake.
Dec 6th, 2009
The GM Authority Take
In all seriousness, the reason for the move is fairly obvious: GM needs money (to supplement its current $43 billion) to pay off its loans to the U.S. government :sick: and it decided to sell the controlling stake (of GM Shanghai) to SAIC for a hefty sum.
LOL
About GM, SAIC, and Wuling
Currently, GM sells the Chevrolet, Opel, Buick, Cadillac, and Saab brands in China. Through a partnership with SAIC and Wuling, it also sells Wuling mini trucks. In fact, it has sold more Wuling trucks than its own products in China.
More than half of GM China’s volume comes from small delivery vans, made by a three-way joint venture with SAIC and Wuling
And note that they are counted twice, since the JVs also count those as their own.
Face it, they cheated. Even their own partners think they cheated.
Yet GM is still No. 1 in the world last year in terms of volume AND profit.
How come you missed the very next sentence in that article?
"This share had been recently raised to 44 percent."
No foreign automaker has controlling stake in China, ever. 50% is not a controlling stake.
But they own the full IP.
If you can make YOUR GM sales figure accepted by the industry and the world, go right ahead....
Before that, the GM published number is the only official number.
Rueters
Wrong. Ford = $7Billion profit. VW = ~$17Billion profit.
Regards,
OW
44 percent is still not a majority stake, there's no way no how GM can just count ALL of those sales as their own.
Plus what does "recent" mean? Before 2011 sales started counting? Doubtful.
Look at that van, there's nothing GM about it:
http://image.made-in-china.com/2f0j00ZfuTEQtljasv/Wuling-Mini-Van-Cargo-Van-Mini- - - -Passenger-Car-797cc-.jpg
Wrong.
You missed the whole point.
Wuling counts those sales as their own.
GM counts them a 2nd time.
So not MY sales figures, the manufacturers' sales figures. Which GM then counts a 2nd time.
GM had 8.5B in net profit vs Ford with 6.6B. During the 1st 3 quarters of 2011 GM incurred about $500m in interest expenses vs Ford's $3.4B in interest expense.
Looking at the cash flow statement and GM still isn't looking good. Ford's net cash flow through the first 9 months of 2011 is $18.7 B vs $11b for GM.
With GM having their debt cleaned up they don't have many excuses to not be highly profitable
Yep, VW is in another league. Over $17B net income through the 3rd quarter 2011
Through the Sept. of 2011 VW revenue =$150b vs. GM$112b. That should settle who's number 1 in sales.
http://www.carnewschina.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/wuling-chevrolet-india-ch- ina-1-458x299.jpg
So now this Chinese designed and built car will actually get a Chevy badge, when it's distributed in India.
But...if you count that, do you count the Chevy Forester? Same deal, GM owned a minority stake in Subaru at the time, and sold Foresters there because Subaru did not have a dealer network.
http://www.rpmgo.com/images2009/Chevrolet-Forester_opt.jpg
Please read my post carefully. I said no FOREIGN automaker has controlling stack ever. That's by Chinese government's design. SAIC is not a foreign automaker.
Wrong. I did not miss the point. You were disputing GM's sales volume right? If you think that you can get your dispute accepted by the industry to use your "corrected" number instead GM's number, go right ahead.
2011 was over and GM was No. 1 in the world. Just accept it and hope your beloved company can do better this year. No need to waste so much energy trying to change something you cannot.
I guess that depends on how you define #1.
Look at that van - is anything about it GM? Besides a minority stake in the manufacturer, no. Look how narrow it is.
Sort of looks like an old Mitsubishi van. Maybe they bought the rights (or didn't buy the rights) and still build 'em.
I don't think even you believe those vans are GM.
Already accomplished, and it's not my dispute, it's VW's.
#1: GM's 2011 Sales Top Industry, for Now
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204616504577171031057829416.html?K- EYWORDS=vw+sales+2011+GM
WSJ was skeptical from the beginning, note they wrote "for Now".
#2: Is GM Biggest Carmaker? It May Depend On How You Count
http://blogs.wsj.com/drivers-seat/2012/01/20/is-gm-biggest-carmaker-it-may-depen- d-on-how-you-count/?KEYWORDS=vw+sales+2011+GM
#3: Automotive News:
VW's figures don't count sales from truckmakers MAN and Scania, which will be added in a few weeks, a Volkswagen spokesman told the newspaper.
The truckmakers might add 200,000 vehicles to VW's sales total.
Rivals and some analysts also argue that GM’s numbers are inflated by sales from its China partnerships with SAIC Motor Corp. and Wuling Motors Co.
Read more: http://www.autonews.com/article/20120120/COPY01/301209839#ixzz1k2Eb6vuX
Not everybody is naive to believe every thing GM claims.
GM is desperate...for dumping the "Government", re-building Caddy, making competitive cars and now being #1 in sales. Desperation "Runs Deep". It's the "New World Standard"!
Regards,
OW
Really? Are you talking about accounting in China?
http://www.investinganswers.com/financial-dictionary/financial-statement-analysi- - s/net-profit-2230
If you care to post some other accounting-link, that shows you're not wrong ... I won't hold my breath though. :P
If you don't pay federal income tax, which would be 35% or so, then your net profits are going to be higher. Thus that's partly why GM looks so profitable. A smoke-and-mirrors ploy to the U.S. public, so our politicians don't look so bad. It's a way to hide continuing-aid to GM, and hide the true extent of the bailouts that have gone to GM.
Sorry.... I just couldn't resist the temptation...
That's why, when comparing financial aspects and performance of one company to another, EBITDA is generally the used number...
Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization.
Now that's funny!
ROTFLMAO!!!
Regards,
OW
Good thing because if hadn't I would have...
The agency said it “remains unaware of any real-world crashes that have resulted in a battery-related fire involving the Chevy Volt or any other electric vehicle. NHTSA continues to believe that electric vehicles show great promise as a safe and fuel-efficient option for American drivers.”
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/kia-recalls-146000-optimas-and-rondos- -for-drivers-air-bag-flaw/
"The agency began that investigation in November 2009. Kia had resisted issuing a recall for almost two years, agreeing only after the agency made clear that it would push the issue by sending an unusual, formal demand for a recall."
I guess they really are a "better" car company after all!!! The were "betting."
THEY WERE BETTING THEY COULD BLUFF THEIR WAY OUT OF HAVING THE RECALL TO FIX THE SAFETY PROBLEMS THEY HAD SOLD!
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Of course. But we're only dumb customers, not brilliant marketers like at GM.
So ya, "Government Motors" applies once again.
So what you're really saying is that GM is a US-Chinese government joint venture, masquerading as a public company. :surprise:
They were #1 right before they went bankrupt, too.
This has got to qualify for the post of the month!
Isn't that like someone writing their gross pay in their checkbook, rather than writing what's left after taxes, insurances, social security, and Medicare deductions? My bank used to charge me a fee everytime I told them my check was more than "the Net", that they said it was.
But getting to your point, I wasn't comparing GM's profit to other companies. I was simply stating that the Net Profit that GM is reporting is a result of the Free-pass GM is getting on taxes. There was no company-company comparision involved. To analyze EBIT for various auto companies, would make a good thesis project.
Here are the quotes on GM's profit from GM's annual report of fiscal year 2010:
"Despite depressed industry conditions, GM posted $5.7 billion of earnings before interest and taxes (eBiT) in north America."
"GM recorded adjusted eBiT of $7 billion and positive automotive free cash fl ow of $2.4 billion in 2010."
The word "profit" did not even appear once in the report. So unless specified otherwise, all the "net profit" or "profit" words quoted by the media are actually EBIT.
A corporation reports their "profit" quarterly and again annually. But the corporate income tax is calculated and filed annually by the 15th day of the 3rd month after the end of a fiscal year. This means a corporation does not know their income tax yet when they report their quarterly "profit", or even the annual profit right after 12/31 of each year. So those "profit" data cannot be the profit after income tax! Though they could report quarterly profit after payroll tax because payroll tax is calculated every time a paycheck is generated.
In short, the loosely used "profit" by the media cannot be the net profit after corporate income tax. So your claim of the big tax break of GM does not matter here.
Did you read the article you quoted carefully?
"VW sales
Volkswagen sold 8.16 million vehicles in 2011, an increase of 11 percent.
More than 2.2 million of those sales came from China, where VW holds a 50 percent share of Shanghai Volkswagen Automotive and a share of FAW-Volkswagen Automotive.
That stake is listed on the FAW-VW web site as 40 percent; press reports last year said it is scheduled to rise to 49 percent."
So VW also counted the 2.2 million cars sold by their China JV which they do not have a controlling stack either. What's the difference between the way VW and GM counting their China sales?
VW only owns 30% of the MAN. The total MAN and Scania sales volume is only 0.2 million. GM led VW by 1 million. So even VW counted all MAN and Scania's sales, it would still be a distance No. 2.
Where did you see VW could be No. 1 last year?
Well everyone must be doing something different then. The 1st major GAAP corporation that I went and looked at their quarterly report DOES subtract taxes before reporting their quarterly profit. Is Exxon-Mobil a large enough and established company for you? From P.1 of their News Release: "Fourth quarter earnings were $9.3 billion, an increase of 53%."
Now go to P. 9 of the same report, and you can verify that "Net income attributable to ExxonMobil (U.S. GAAP) = 9,250" (M) and "Income before income taxes = 15,327" (M).
http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/Files/news_release_earnings4q10.pdf
Exxon Mobil is reporting bottom line - Net Profit; not as you state EBIT! Let's see what the press reported on that exact same topic:
"The world's largest publicly traded oil company logged earnings of $9.25 billion, or $1.85 a share in the fourth quarter. That was up 53% from $6.05 billion, or $1.27, a year earlier."
http://money.cnn.com/2011/01/31/news/companies/exxon_mobil_earnings/index.htm
Huh? Same thing! Net profit being reported by Exxon and the press. AFTER taxes.
1. A company's total earnings (or profit). Net income is calculated by taking revenues and adjusting for the cost of doing business, depreciation, interest, taxes and other expenses. This number is found on a company's income statement and is an important measure of how profitable the company is over a period of time. The measure is also used to calculate earnings per share.
Most income statements I've looked at, if the company has tax liability it's generally listed and taken out of net income.
I just looked at Apple and the last 4 quarterly reports shows about $2B in income tax expenses.
Looking at GM's income statement. I think they are the first company that I've noticed that net income is actually higher than EBIT earnings.
Naturally taxes are "filed" once per year, but don't estimated taxes have to be paid quarterly.
FWIW mortgage companies use that number. Financial planners, too.
I own mutual funds that buy some GM stock, so I'm also a minority owner. That means I sold 10+ million cars last year.
Let me tell you, I am EXHAUSTED!