I do not know what GM is thinking. I am sure we will all find out soon.
Posters here have asked why GM has not announced what it is doing to restructure. It is in black and white and released 1 month ago. On Feb 17 we will see what the status is. Well maybe if they would get a car czar to show it to.
Posters have asked when GM plans on being profitable. Again it is in black and white using concrete data points. Now that data may change (sales rate, actual asset sales amounts, etc.) but it is transparent on what they are doing and GM has given the info. We only need to read it. In fact GM released what was, at the time, considered the "worst case scenario" and had plans to work with that data point which they are now working to. If it does go below the "worst case scenario" GM will work with the car czar to come up with a revised plan and if the government does not agree then GM will go under.
Will this years sales be below 10.5 million? Perhaps to Probably would be my answer. But it will not be much below it. Now if we do go to an 8 million year we can all kiss our butts good by and get ready for the food lines. The government can print all the money it wants.
Toyota just announced they lost $4 billion in the 4rth quarter. That could mean a yearly loss of $16billion if things do not improve.
I know this is slightly off topic but it does effect GM and the entire auto market. Per Auto line due to expansion Toyota now has only $18.5 billion in cash, same as Ford. With losing $4 billion a quarter that can be gone quick. They also have $128 billion in debt.
More tellingly, Toyotas total current liabilities (short term) now match its total current assets. In the past, Toyota’s current assets always exceeded its current liabilities. When a company’s liabilities exceed its assets, it has to dip into its cash reserves to make up the difference-unless its operations are generating positive cash flow. But right now Toyota is not generating positive cash flow.
It simply means nothing is given forever to any one - even Toyota. GM was master of universe (at least in America) until 80s. Then it came Toyota. Now they are going through the same thing, as GM did before. The difference is they're doing something about it and don't pretend everything is allright. Whether it's sufficient, or even correct, it remains to be seen - but at least they can't say they didn't try.
The forecasts need to be changed. I will repeat this every time unemployment trends up each successive month. Therefore, the bottom is not here. SAAR will not reach the 10.5 MM in Feb. either.
If sales go to 8 million, GM will be done for...as well as a good many other brands. The only problem with the "Worst Case Scenario" is that, IMO, it was a false bottom or a real bad forecast. I am no economist but you could see things getting worse in November.
In terms of market share, a post-restructures GM should be well below 20%. As you have pointed out, those fleets sales have to be reduced a long way to affect profit to the plus side.
Let's hope things improve soon. It will be interesting to see the restructure plans take shape.
But it will not be much below it. Now if we do go to an 8 million year we can all kiss our butts good by and get ready for the food lines.
Well I'm going to be the optimist this time. An economic downturn this severe does not affect the whole economy equally. It first effects those industries where spending is discretionary. Vehicles along with travel, boats, some construction like new malls or 2nd homes, are all things that get hit disproportionately hard.
Industries like healthcare, pharmaceuticals, food production, utilities, and government are fairly stable. And then there's a group in the middle that are moderately affected.
Even during the worst part of the Great Depression, the unemployment reached 27%. 3 out of 4 had jobs. (Many argue that the government actually made things worse with their policies, especially protectionism).
So yes while I could see the auto industry dropping from 16M to 8M/year, that would not be across the board in the economy. I would think auto makers should have considered (as the Pentagon does war-game scenarios) what they might need to do. What sort of reserves do they need?
If governments don't get involved bailing out their industries, a few of the weaker companies in an industry will fail. The remaining companies are those that had better plans, saved more money, had better quality and happier customers. It would all work itself out, with enough carmakers left, getting customers from those that failed, to provide the market.
You might want to check your numbers on Toyota again. Read this. They lost slightly less than $2B in the last quarter. And they expect to lose about $5B for the year. Bad numbers, but their strategy probably is to outlast competitors that fold, and then those competitors' customers partly become theirs. (Similar to a drought and a herd of animals - some die, which helps the rest survive).
You are right on the numbers. One article I read was kinda misleading. But the $3 billion forecasted loss in the first quarter may be worse.
I think though that Toyota may be in a bit more trouble than some realize. They greatly expanded their capacity the last couple years and now have a lot of brand new, in debt plants sitting around. GM, has a bunch of old paid off plants worth little but a lot of debt to bond holders and lots of legacy cost. Very interesting turn of events. BUT I am not saying Toyota is in some kind of trouble that will cause them to go out of business. Just not the position they were in 3 years ago.
Board Reviews Viability Plan At its regularly scheduled February meeting (February 2-3), the General Motors Board of Directors reviewed in detail the extensive plans and progress to date toward fulfilling the requirements of the Federal loan program which calls for an updated Viability Plan to be delivered on February 17.
“Ambitious and detailed work plans have been established for each of the elements called for by the plan. Significant progress has been made in each area, and much more will be accomplished over the next two weeks,” said George Fisher, lead director GM Board of Directors.
“The Board fully supports the aggressive plans of the management team, is pleased with the progress to date, and will continue to provide counsel and support to management as they make every effort possible to present a comprehensive and complete Viability Plan as required,” Fisher said.
Here is where I got my data. One thing that is confusing is that the 3rd fiscal quarter is the 4rth year qtr.
For the third quarter - October through December - Toyota says it reported an operating loss of $3.97 billion compared to a year earlier profit of about $6.4 billion as a result of rapidly diminishing new car demand.
Can someone explain operating loss vs. net loss? I believe the operating loss is before other cost like restructuring, etc. This is the area where GM shows huge losses (net loss) and a much lower operating loss over the last 5 years as it has been restructuring.
Seems like it, though it's a bit on the expensive side to be considered one (muscle cars tend to be cheaper like Camaro and Mustang...maybe G8 is shooting for luxo-muscle?)
Uh, I somewhat disagree. I think G8 is entering a "new" niche called "muscle sedan", which in the 21st started by Dodge Charger and Chrysler 300 Hemi.
Of course, from a muscle car standpoint it's kinda expensive, but in the muscle sedan category it's most likely the cheapest.
I agree with kernick. Despite our differences you still respect the opposing views and base your posts with some credible logics and I respect that. Unlike some of our pals you know who and you know where.
Anyways, back on GM issue. I've just heard that GM is planning to say bye-bye to all 4 door pontiacs after 2010. Any news on that?
Despite all the slimming down they're doing right now I somehow doubt it'll be enough to survive. At least they gotta do something about the UAW contract first and firing all the upper management. I still think Wagoner should get canned, like, now. Fix the management and UAW and I believe GM will have a much better curvival chance.
I've just heard that GM is planning to say bye-bye to all 4 door pontiacs after 2010. Any news on that?
Makes some sense. The G5 is only available in a 2 door already. The G6 is the only midsize GM available in a 2 door. The Solstice is only a 2 door. 2 doors are considered "sporty" though that definition has really changed from the 60's/70's when 4 doors were considered old man or family vehicles. But selling a 2 door does not make it sporty/performance. To keep Pontiac as more than a niche brand they need more vehicles like the G8 and I doubt that is going to happen.
Seems to me that the C11 crew will move in soon...I'll wager my portion of the bailout that the SAAR will not hit 10MM until the spring...April at best. So, they can throw out the "Worst Case Scenario" numbers now. I guess GM gurus never heard of a rolling forecast pegged to current market trends.
What Does Net Loss Mean? The result that occurs when expenses exceed the income produced.
A person or company with a net loss has not made a profit. Newer businesses often run at a net loss for the first few years while acquiring one-time expenses (equipment, buildings, technology, rights, etc.). However, every business should have a plan to work towards a breakeven point, and then onwards to profit!
What Does Net Operating Loss - NOL Mean? A period in which a company's allowable tax deductions are greater than its taxable income, resulting in a negative taxable income. This generally occurs when a company has incurred more expenses than revenues during the period.
The net operating loss for the company can generally be used to recover past tax payments or reduce future tax payments. The reasoning behind this is that because corporations are required to pay taxes when it earns money, it deserves some form of tax relief when it loses money.
If a company has a net operating loss, it can apply this tax relief in two ways or through a combination of both. The company can apply the net operating loss to their past tax payments and receive a tax credit. It could also apply the net operating loss to future income tax payments, reducing payments they need to make in future periods. The terms of the tax relief and how it can be applied varies by jurisdiction but usually the NOL can be applied to the past few years (2-3) and much more to the future (7-10) years.
This term is really just fancy jargon for the company losing money. It makes sense that you should have to pay tax before you get "out of the hole". For example, say you lose $1 million in your first year of business and make $5 million the next year. It wouldn't be fair for you to have to pay tax on a profit of $5 million, because you are really only ahead by $4 million ($5 million profit - the $1 million loss).
I guess GM gurus never heard of a rolling forecast pegged to current market trends.
If you would look at the restructuring plan you would see that the worst case scenario shows sales of 9.9 million for January/February. When GM said 10.5 million they meant for the entire year. For March it rises to 10 million.
That explains it then. Sounds like they factored the current economic metrics in. That sounds very reasonable. If the tax breaks for autos kicks in and the jobless numbers recede, those numbers can be attainable.
Most I ever heard here was that the board is stupid and should be gotten rid of.
Getting rid of a board whether they are stupid or not is tough. They usually represent the largest stockholders. They have the clout. A guy with a 1000 shares would be lucky to be heard in a meeting. The Board now is looking to survive. If the company goes bankrupt their stock is probably worthless as the debts would be paid first, as I understand it.
From your stand point it is probably difficult to hear people refer to Wagoner and his staff as worthless. Some of them may be your friends. I just find it difficult to give credibility to Wagoner after 14 years of lousy performance. Never made a decent profit in his time on the top. When the Ford board realized what a screw up their cousin was as CEO they got a performer to take his place. The board at GM should have done that a long time ago. I understand they always got a nice dividend check each year. That tends to make you lackadaisical.
I skimmed through their profiles and most of them have impressive backgrounds. There's an interesting mix of Southerners and folks with ties to Chicago in there.
I skimmed through their profiles and most of them have impressive backgrounds. There's an interesting mix of Southerners and folks with ties to Chicago in there.
And that supposed to reflect what? I mean backgrounds are no more than past experiences, doesnt mean current line can still perform as they used to be.
GMs worse case was a 10.5 million year for 2009. Currently, with fleet purposely cut by up to 80% there is a SAAR of ~9.5 for January. IF they had sold the fleet it would have been a SAAR over 10.5. So is it worse than what was forecasted? Yes and no.
Yes because the OEM's chose to shut down and not build the fleet vehicles, but no because the retail customers kept buying. When the plants do come up most of the purposely lost fleet sales will come back and there will be an artificially higher sales month. Looks like for cars it will probably not be February. However GM has opened up some truck plants and there will probably be a lot of fleet sales there.
Can it get worse than what the experts forecasted? Yes. I am actually amazed how good of a January there was.
That board epitomizes what is wrong with Corporate America. Look at where each has his roots. I bet if you were to go to each of those Corporate boards you would find similar names. These people all look out for each other. It is quite simple. Wagoner gets appointed CEO and he may sit on one of the boards represented by other board members. Too many times they make it to the top spot by who they hang out with and not by ability. I would say that is very true of Wagoner. Or he is just a puppet of the Board that has squeezed all the profit out of GM through shady sales and acquisitions. Any CEO that makes a huge bonus or salary when a company loses money is a leach on society, in my opinion.
The only reason I have any faith that Ford will survive is family pride. There is no family pride at GM. It is just a vessel to pour money from and then toss by the wayside. The people that run these corporations have no interest in the little guy sweeping the floor. The impact on the families when they decide in a meeting we have to cut 1000 employees. Or the impact that will have on the business. It is all designed to move the stock in an upward direction. Well GM has come to the end of the line. I would give them a 20% chance of survival if they file for bankruptcy. And call it what you want, that is what Obama has in mind also.
We know that GM is very successful in China. How close are those ties to the country that so many Americans support yet despise. Here is Wagoner's ties to other organizations.
Wagoner is a member of the board of trustees of Duke University, the Tsinghua School of Economics and Management Advisory Board, the Board of Dean's Advisors of the Harvard Business School, and the Mayor of Shanghai's International Business Leaders Advisory Council. He is chairman of the Society of Automotive Engineers A World In Motion Executive Committee, and a member of The Business Council, The Business Roundtable, and the Detroit Renaissance Executive Committee.
I mean backgrounds are no more than past experiences, doesnt mean current line can still perform as they used to be.
I'm reminded of a disclaimer that exists on every ETF and mutual fund out there..."Past performance is no guarantee of future results and current performance may be lower or higher than the performance quoted."
Too many times they make it to the top spot by who they hang out with and not by ability.
Funny, I'd think that situation would be more likely at Ford instead of GM. But you can't tell me that Bill Gates led Microsoft to where it is just because his daddy was a high powered lawyer and his momma was connected with IBM board members. He put in his 10,000 hours programming in BASIC. And Wagoner and most of the board members probably put in similar hours too. (link)
"We know that GM is very successful in China. How close are those ties to the country that so many Americans support yet despise. "
While I have no clue on how closely tied they are in management, I can point out how much GM needs China's market right now. China, which absorbs roughly 500k GM cars per year, is the second largest foreign market for GM products after Australia.
I'm really sure I've seen it somewhere, I believe it was also mentioned in CNN news.
The link isn't working but you can't compare Wagoner to Gates. Gates saw an opportunity, worked like the devil to make it happen, formed his own corporation to make it happen and constantly looked for ways of expanding market.
Wagoner moved up a corporate ladder until he arrived at the upper levels and has presided over a constantly dwindling market share for his entire time at both the North American helm and the world helm. Until absolutely forced to he has shown no interest in improving the product.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
I don't know how Wagoner got to be where he is, but Gate's detractors say he was just lucky. And he was in lots of way - right timing, went to the best private schools with their own computer access, all those family connections. But he, like Wagoner, also put the hours in. If we had not had the oil blip, SUVs might still be selling like hotcakes and GM stock could have doubled instead of fallen through the basement.
Timing?
(try any search for Malcolm Gladwell for work vs timing pop sci stories).
I'll say. Particularly with regard to Erroll Davis. I worked for him when he was CEO of Wisconsin Power and Light Co. - and while being on the GM Board now is about as difficult as it gets for directors, I would have faith in his guidance for the firm.
Definitely some impressive people on the Board but do any of them know about running an car company? Does the CEO of Coca Cola know how to sell a $20k product?
reminds me of the Board of Trustees at Colleges. Lots of CEOs, CFOs and smart investors but no one knows anything about running a college. right now, colleges got smacked by the downturn in the market. Now that everyone is finding out what these "smart" people were investing in, they don't seem so smart.
What happened to the Impala. Fleet sales go away and the Impala drops from the top 20. Looks like the D3 are getting creamed in retail cars sales. Chevy only having one car in the top 20 is a disgrace. Thankfully they still can keep selling lots of trucks.
Exqueeze me? I see the Fusion, Escape, and Focus for Ford. Add in the F150 and that's more models than Honda has up there.
I do notice that GM only has one model up there though (The Silverado and Sierra are badge-clones) and Chrysler has nada. Toyota has the most at 6, which is impressive...but Ford is the next runner-up with 4. Honda with 3, then GM, Mazda, Hyundai, and Nissan each with 1. Who's #21? They really should be #20 since the Silverado/Sierra is listed twice (maybe that's another reason GM likes to have so many brands?).
".....The Impala not in the top 20 with reduced fleet sales is a problem."
True, but should we be surprised, considering it is a warmed up version of a 12 year old platform???
Yet, when you look at them in terms of percentage change, the major players are very close in changes. Camry, Accord and Malibu are close (only .2% between malibu and Camry). F150 and Silverado are similar, yet Tundra was at 40%.
Also, the Cobalt, which was another top 20 car, dropped out. Another rental car with another old platform. Also notice that Civic dropped like a rock too, yet Corolla was quite stable, at a 7% drop
GM has spent the last 7 years cutting salaried with buyouts. Pretty much 1 year salary. Most were voluntary or at least "suggested" but some were laid off.
As General Motors Corp. prepares to cut thousands of white-collar workers, the automaker apparently will not offer voluntary buyout packages, which have been customary in previous rounds of cuts, the Free Press has learned. Advertisement
GM is preparing to reduce its salaried workforce by a double-digit percentage, people familiar with the planning said. GM had about 29,000 salaried U.S. workers last year, according to the company.
The automaker declined to comment beyond a statement by spokeswoman Renee Rashid-Merem: "As GM outlined in its Dec. 2 restructuring plan ... the company said it expects to further reduce its U.S. employment levels through 2012 as it continues to reduce structural cost."
The Detroit automaker has already told Congress that it needs to cut as many as 31,500 salaried and hourly U.S. workers through 2012, as well as streamline its dealer network, reduce its core U.S. brands from eight to four and eliminate eight nameplates. The plan also calls for closing a total of nine powertrain, stamping and assembly facilities.
Buyout packages for the salaried workers appear to be off the table because terms of the U.S. loan agreement prohibit the company from using GM's pension fund to pay for those packages as it has done in the past, people inside the company said.
GM is negotiating now with the bond holders and others to reduce the debt. Their hammer is the possibility of GM going bankrupt and no one getting anything. Hopefully we will see the results of those negotiations soon. Ford has the same hammer but because they keep painting everything as rosy they will not get the same type of negotiations until the end of 2009. When GM gets those concessions their structural cost will be well below Ford.
Ford has $25.8 billion in debt, including about $17 billion in bond debt. Ford Motor Credit, Ford's dealer and consumer lending arm, has about another $28.2 billion in bond debt. Recall that Toyota has $20 billion in cash and ~$120 billion in debt. Ford also has about $20 billion in cash. Toyota does have access to many more billions in credit.
The three largest holders of bonds for Ford and Ford Motor Credit are Franklin Advisors, Dodge & Cox Inc. and Pacific Investment Management Co., or Pimco. A Dodge & Cox spokesman declined to comment, and Pimco did not return a phone call.
GM is struggling to win concessions from its bondholders even with the government's imposed targets. Pimco dropped out of discussions with GM last month.
"GM may get that done, but only because the government is asking for it," said Shelly Lombard, a bond analyst for Gimme Credit. "I think GM has more leverage with bondholders than GMAC had, but it is going to be hard. With Ford, it is going to be even harder." Although Ford is in a better position than GM and Chrysler, it just reported a $14.6-billion loss for 2008, the largest loss in the company's 105-year history.
Also, Ford burned through more than $22 billion in cash and credit during the past year. The company ended 2008 with $24 billion in cash and available credit.
On auto line this weekend there was an excellent interview with Jim Farley, VP of Ford Marketing (ex of Toyota). Great information.
One point was that the average age of the vehicle is 9 years. Cars are getting old. A couple years ago 80% sold their new car by 5 years. Not sure what that data point is today.
Bob Lutz moves to Senior Advisor Role; Will Retire at End of 2009 Tom Stephens Becomes Vice Chairman – Global Product Development DETROIT – GM Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner today announced that Robert A. Lutz, GM Vice Chairman – Global Product Development, will transition to a new role effective April 1, 2009 as Vice Chairman and Senior Advisor. Lutz, 76, will provide strategic input into GM’s global design and key product initiatives until his retirement at the end of 2009. He will continue to report to Wagoner. Wagoner also announced that effective April 1, 2009 the GM Board of Directors elected Thomas G. Stephens, Vice Chairman – Global Product Development, reporting to President and Chief Operating Officer Fritz Henderson. Stephens, 60, is currently Executive Vice President, Global Powertrain and Global Quality. In this new assignment, Stephens will maintain his responsibility for overseeing GM’s global quality activity. Concurrent with this appointment, GM is restructuring its global powertrain group to integrate powertrain functional activities into their respective global GM functions. Accordingly, in his new role, Stephens will have responsibility for global powertrain engineering, in addition to global design, product engineering, product planning and program management. Powertrain manufacturing will report to Gary Cowger, Group Vice President of GM Global Manufacturing and Labor Relations. Other staffs that support the GM Powertrain organization will be integrated into their respective global functions. These moves represent another important step in GM’s restructuring initiative to create a leaner, more efficient organization. “Bob Lutz was already a legendary automotive product guy when he rejoined GM in 2001,” Wagoner said, “and he’s added to that by leading the creation of a string of award-winning vehicles for GM during his time here. His 46 years of experience in the global automotive business have been invaluable to us. I’ve personally learned a great deal from Bob and have very much enjoyed the time we’ve worked together,” Wagoner added. “I’m looking forward to Bob’s continued contributions to GM for the remainder of 2009 – and I know the impact of his efforts leading GM global product development will continue for years to come. “Tom Stephens is the perfect guy to take the reins of GM’s global product development,” Wagoner continued. “He’s had extensive experience in virtually every aspect of our global product development activities. With his 40 years at GM, Tom has an extraordinary understanding of our products and our organization, and is highly respected worldwide. I’m confident that with Tom’s passion for great products and vast knowledge of advanced propulsion, he will continue to raise the bar in executing outstanding GM cars and trucks.
U.S. loan agreement prohibit the company from using GM's pension fund to pay for those packages as it has done in the past, people inside the company said.
Comments
Posters here have asked why GM has not announced what it is doing to restructure. It is in black and white and released 1 month ago. On Feb 17 we will see what the status is. Well maybe if they would get a car czar to show it to.
Posters have asked when GM plans on being profitable. Again it is in black and white using concrete data points. Now that data may change (sales rate, actual asset sales amounts, etc.) but it is transparent on what they are doing and GM has given the info. We only need to read it. In fact GM released what was, at the time, considered the "worst case scenario" and had plans to work with that data point which they are now working to. If it does go below the "worst case scenario" GM will work with the car czar to come up with a revised plan and if the government does not agree then GM will go under.
Will this years sales be below 10.5 million? Perhaps to Probably would be my answer. But it will not be much below it. Now if we do go to an 8 million year we can all kiss our butts good by and get ready for the food lines. The government can print all the money it wants.
Toyota just announced they lost $4 billion in the 4rth quarter. That could mean a yearly loss of $16billion if things do not improve.
With losing $4 billion a quarter that can be gone quick. They also have $128 billion in debt.
What the heck does this mean?
http://www.autolinedetroit.tv/journal/?p=2431#more-2431
More tellingly, Toyotas total current liabilities (short term) now match its total current assets. In the past, Toyota’s current assets always exceeded its current liabilities. When a company’s liabilities exceed its assets, it has to dip into its cash reserves to make up the difference-unless its operations are generating positive cash flow. But right now Toyota is not generating positive cash flow.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
Regards,
OW
In terms of market share, a post-restructures GM should be well below 20%. As you have pointed out, those fleets sales have to be reduced a long way to affect profit to the plus side.
Let's hope things improve soon. It will be interesting to see the restructure plans take shape.
Regards,
OW
Well I'm going to be the optimist this time. An economic downturn this severe does not affect the whole economy equally. It first effects those industries where spending is discretionary. Vehicles along with travel, boats, some construction like new malls or 2nd homes, are all things that get hit disproportionately hard.
Industries like healthcare, pharmaceuticals, food production, utilities, and government are fairly stable. And then there's a group in the middle that are moderately affected.
Even during the worst part of the Great Depression, the unemployment reached 27%. 3 out of 4 had jobs. (Many argue that the government actually made things worse with their policies, especially protectionism).
So yes while I could see the auto industry dropping from 16M to 8M/year, that would not be across the board in the economy. I would think auto makers should have considered (as the Pentagon does war-game scenarios) what they might need to do. What sort of reserves do they need?
If governments don't get involved bailing out their industries, a few of the weaker companies in an industry will fail. The remaining companies are those that had better plans, saved more money, had better quality and happier customers. It would all work itself out, with enough carmakers left, getting customers from those that failed, to provide the market.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Toyota-warns-5-billion-fiscal/story.aspx?g- uid=%7B53DF3673%2DD299%2D4EA3%2D829F%2DC9E8827A2819%7D&dist=SecMostRead
SAAR will not reach the 10.5 MM in Feb. either
Really? Wow
I think though that Toyota may be in a bit more trouble than some realize. They greatly expanded their capacity the last couple years and now have a lot of brand new, in debt plants sitting around. GM, has a bunch of old paid off plants worth little but a lot of debt to bond holders and lots of legacy cost. Very interesting turn of events. BUT I am not saying Toyota is in some kind of trouble that will cause them to go out of business. Just not the position they were in 3 years ago.
At its regularly scheduled February meeting (February 2-3), the General Motors Board of Directors reviewed in detail the extensive plans and progress to date toward fulfilling the requirements of the Federal loan program which calls for an updated Viability Plan to be delivered on February 17.
“Ambitious and detailed work plans have been established for each of the elements called for by the plan. Significant progress has been made in each area, and much more will be accomplished over the next two weeks,” said George Fisher, lead director GM Board of Directors.
“The Board fully supports the aggressive plans of the management team, is pleased with the progress to date, and will continue to provide counsel and support to management as they make every effort possible to present a comprehensive and complete Viability Plan as required,” Fisher said.
For the third quarter - October through December - Toyota says it reported an operating loss of $3.97 billion compared to a year earlier profit of about $6.4 billion as a result of rapidly diminishing new car demand.
Can someone explain operating loss vs. net loss? I believe the operating loss is before other cost like restructuring, etc. This is the area where GM shows huge losses (net loss) and a much lower operating loss over the last 5 years as it has been restructuring.
Seems like it, though it's a bit on the expensive side to be considered one (muscle cars tend to be cheaper like Camaro and Mustang...maybe G8 is shooting for luxo-muscle?)
Uh, I somewhat disagree. I think G8 is entering a "new" niche called "muscle sedan", which in the 21st started by Dodge Charger and Chrysler 300 Hemi.
Of course, from a muscle car standpoint it's kinda expensive, but in the muscle sedan category it's most likely the cheapest.
Despite our differences you still respect the opposing views and base your posts with some credible logics and I respect that. Unlike some of our pals you know who and you know where.
Anyways, back on GM issue. I've just heard that GM is planning to say bye-bye to all 4 door pontiacs after 2010. Any news on that?
Despite all the slimming down they're doing right now I somehow doubt it'll be enough to survive. At least they gotta do something about the UAW contract first and firing all the upper management. I still think Wagoner should get canned, like, now. Fix the management and UAW and I believe GM will have a much better curvival chance.
Makes some sense. The G5 is only available in a 2 door already. The G6 is the only midsize GM available in a 2 door. The Solstice is only a 2 door. 2 doors are considered "sporty" though that definition has really changed from the 60's/70's when 4 doors were considered old man or family vehicles. But selling a 2 door does not make it sporty/performance. To keep Pontiac as more than a niche brand they need more vehicles like the G8 and I doubt that is going to happen.
Seems to me that the C11 crew will move in soon...I'll wager my portion of the bailout that the SAAR will not hit 10MM until the spring...April at best. So, they can throw out the "Worst Case Scenario" numbers now. I guess GM gurus never heard of a rolling forecast pegged to current market trends.
Regards,
OW
The result that occurs when expenses exceed the income produced.
A person or company with a net loss has not made a profit. Newer businesses often run at a net loss for the first few years while acquiring one-time expenses (equipment, buildings, technology, rights, etc.). However, every business should have a plan to work towards a breakeven point, and then onwards to profit!
What Does Net Operating Loss - NOL Mean?
A period in which a company's allowable tax deductions are greater than its taxable income, resulting in a negative taxable income. This generally occurs when a company has incurred more expenses than revenues during the period.
The net operating loss for the company can generally be used to recover past tax payments or reduce future tax payments. The reasoning behind this is that because corporations are required to pay taxes when it earns money, it deserves some form of tax relief when it loses money.
If a company has a net operating loss, it can apply this tax relief in two ways or through a combination of both. The company can apply the net operating loss to their past tax payments and receive a tax credit. It could also apply the net operating loss to future income tax payments, reducing payments they need to make in future periods. The terms of the tax relief and how it can be applied varies by jurisdiction but usually the NOL can be applied to the past few years (2-3) and much more to the future (7-10) years.
This term is really just fancy jargon for the company losing money. It makes sense that you should have to pay tax before you get "out of the hole". For example, say you lose $1 million in your first year of business and make $5 million the next year. It wouldn't be fair for you to have to pay tax on a profit of $5 million, because you are really only ahead by $4 million ($5 million profit - the $1 million loss).
Regards,
OW
If you would look at the restructuring plan you would see that the worst case scenario shows sales of 9.9 million for January/February. When GM said 10.5 million they meant for the entire year. For March it rises to 10 million.
Regards,
OW
Thanks for that. The board doesn't look like a bunch of lightweights.
I guess you saw my comments before I edited them out.
Getting rid of a board whether they are stupid or not is tough. They usually represent the largest stockholders. They have the clout. A guy with a 1000 shares would be lucky to be heard in a meeting. The Board now is looking to survive. If the company goes bankrupt their stock is probably worthless as the debts would be paid first, as I understand it.
From your stand point it is probably difficult to hear people refer to Wagoner and his staff as worthless. Some of them may be your friends. I just find it difficult to give credibility to Wagoner after 14 years of lousy performance. Never made a decent profit in his time on the top. When the Ford board realized what a screw up their cousin was as CEO they got a performer to take his place. The board at GM should have done that a long time ago. I understand they always got a nice dividend check each year. That tends to make you lackadaisical.
Unbelievable!
Regards,
OW
And that supposed to reflect what? I mean backgrounds are no more than past experiences, doesnt mean current line can still perform as they used to be.
Yes because the OEM's chose to shut down and not build the fleet vehicles, but no because the retail customers kept buying. When the plants do come up most of the purposely lost fleet sales will come back and there will be an artificially higher sales month. Looks like for cars it will probably not be February. However GM has opened up some truck plants and there will probably be a lot of fleet sales there.
Can it get worse than what the experts forecasted? Yes. I am actually amazed how good of a January there was.
That board epitomizes what is wrong with Corporate America. Look at where each has his roots. I bet if you were to go to each of those Corporate boards you would find similar names. These people all look out for each other. It is quite simple. Wagoner gets appointed CEO and he may sit on one of the boards represented by other board members. Too many times they make it to the top spot by who they hang out with and not by ability. I would say that is very true of Wagoner. Or he is just a puppet of the Board that has squeezed all the profit out of GM through shady sales and acquisitions. Any CEO that makes a huge bonus or salary when a company loses money is a leach on society, in my opinion.
The only reason I have any faith that Ford will survive is family pride. There is no family pride at GM. It is just a vessel to pour money from and then toss by the wayside. The people that run these corporations have no interest in the little guy sweeping the floor. The impact on the families when they decide in a meeting we have to cut 1000 employees. Or the impact that will have on the business. It is all designed to move the stock in an upward direction. Well GM has come to the end of the line. I would give them a 20% chance of survival if they file for bankruptcy. And call it what you want, that is what Obama has in mind also.
Wagoner is a member of the board of trustees of Duke University, the Tsinghua School of Economics and Management Advisory Board, the Board of Dean's Advisors of the Harvard Business School, and the Mayor of Shanghai's International Business Leaders Advisory Council. He is chairman of the Society of Automotive Engineers A World In Motion Executive Committee, and a member of The Business Council, The Business Roundtable, and the Detroit Renaissance Executive Committee.
I'm reminded of a disclaimer that exists on every ETF and mutual fund out there..."Past performance is no guarantee of future results and current performance may be lower or higher than the performance quoted."
And I bet they wrote that too.
Funny, I'd think that situation would be more likely at Ford instead of GM. But you can't tell me that Bill Gates led Microsoft to where it is just because his daddy was a high powered lawyer and his momma was connected with IBM board members. He put in his 10,000 hours programming in BASIC. And Wagoner and most of the board members probably put in similar hours too. (link)
While I have no clue on how closely tied they are in management, I can point out how much GM needs China's market right now. China, which absorbs roughly 500k GM cars per year, is the second largest foreign market for GM products after Australia.
I'm really sure I've seen it somewhere, I believe it was also mentioned in CNN news.
Wagoner moved up a corporate ladder until he arrived at the upper levels and has presided over a constantly dwindling market share for his entire time at both the North American helm and the world helm. Until absolutely forced to he has shown no interest in improving the product.
Timing?
(try any search for Malcolm Gladwell for work vs timing pop sci stories).
Regards,
OW
reminds me of the Board of Trustees at Colleges. Lots of CEOs, CFOs and smart investors but no one knows anything about running a college. right now, colleges got smacked by the downturn in the market. Now that everyone is finding out what these "smart" people were investing in, they don't seem so smart.
Exqueeze me? I see the Fusion, Escape, and Focus for Ford. Add in the F150 and that's more models than Honda has up there.
I do notice that GM only has one model up there though (The Silverado and Sierra are badge-clones) and Chrysler has nada. Toyota has the most at 6, which is impressive...but Ford is the next runner-up with 4. Honda with 3, then GM, Mazda, Hyundai, and Nissan each with 1. Who's #21? They really should be #20 since the Silverado/Sierra is listed twice (maybe that's another reason GM likes to have so many brands?).
And look at the direction this GM board has led the company...... GM may want to include some car peopel onthe board and forget about prestige.
True, but should we be surprised, considering it is a warmed up version of a 12 year old platform???
Yet, when you look at them in terms of percentage change, the major players are very close in changes. Camry, Accord and Malibu are close (only .2% between malibu and Camry). F150 and Silverado are similar, yet Tundra was at 40%.
Also, the Cobalt, which was another top 20 car, dropped out. Another rental car with another old platform. Also notice that Civic dropped like a rock too, yet Corolla was quite stable, at a 7% drop
As General Motors Corp. prepares to cut thousands of white-collar workers, the automaker apparently will not offer voluntary buyout packages, which have been customary in previous rounds of cuts, the Free Press has learned.
Advertisement
GM is preparing to reduce its salaried workforce by a double-digit percentage, people familiar with the planning said. GM had about 29,000 salaried U.S. workers last year, according to the company.
The automaker declined to comment beyond a statement by spokeswoman Renee Rashid-Merem: "As GM outlined in its Dec. 2 restructuring plan ... the company said it expects to further reduce its U.S. employment levels through 2012 as it continues to reduce structural cost."
The Detroit automaker has already told Congress that it needs to cut as many as 31,500 salaried and hourly U.S. workers through 2012, as well as streamline its dealer network, reduce its core U.S. brands from eight to four and eliminate eight nameplates. The plan also calls for closing a total of nine powertrain, stamping and assembly facilities.
Buyout packages for the salaried workers appear to be off the table because terms of the U.S. loan agreement prohibit the company from using GM's pension fund to pay for those packages as it has done in the past, people inside the company said.
http://www.freep.com/article/20090209/BUSINESS01/902090332/1002/BUSINESS/GM+prep- ares+for+job+cuts++but+no+buyouts
Ford has $25.8 billion in debt, including about $17 billion in bond debt. Ford Motor Credit, Ford's dealer and consumer lending arm, has about another $28.2 billion in bond debt. Recall that Toyota has $20 billion in cash and ~$120 billion in debt. Ford also has about $20 billion in cash. Toyota does have access to many more billions in credit.
The three largest holders of bonds for Ford and Ford Motor Credit are Franklin Advisors, Dodge & Cox Inc. and Pacific Investment Management Co., or Pimco. A Dodge & Cox spokesman declined to comment, and Pimco did not return a phone call.
GM is struggling to win concessions from its bondholders even with the government's imposed targets. Pimco dropped out of discussions with GM last month.
"GM may get that done, but only because the government is asking for it," said Shelly Lombard, a bond analyst for Gimme Credit. "I think GM has more leverage with bondholders than GMAC had, but it is going to be hard. With Ford, it is going to be even harder."
Although Ford is in a better position than GM and Chrysler, it just reported a $14.6-billion loss for 2008, the largest loss in the company's 105-year history.
Also, Ford burned through more than $22 billion in cash and credit during the past year. The company ended 2008 with $24 billion in cash and available credit.
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009902080408
One point was that the average age of the vehicle is 9 years. Cars are getting old. A couple years ago 80% sold their new car by 5 years. Not sure what that data point is today.
http://www.autolinedetroit.tv/show/1306/1?play
http://www.autolinedetroit.tv/show/1306/extra?play
“Tom Stephens is the perfect guy to take the reins of GM’s global product development,” Wagoner continued. “He’s had extensive experience in virtually every aspect of our global product development activities. With his 40 years at GM, Tom has an extraordinary understanding of our products and our organization, and is highly respected worldwide. I’m confident that with Tom’s passion for great products and vast
knowledge of advanced propulsion, he will continue to raise the bar in executing outstanding GM cars and trucks.
Does that apply to the UAW workers as well?