Big Three Bailout?

SGaynor

Well-known member
Dec 6, 2006
7,148
162
52
Bristol, TN
noee said:
Whew, just came across this on Mish:

New Auto Prices Falling
"The industry sees signs of hope even as GM, Ford, Chrysler Sales Collapse. Hope in a bear market is almost never rewarded. The bottom is unlikely to be in until hope is crushed and despair sets in. In the meantime I expect to see many auto dealers go bust.​
I wonder what their ASPs per vehicle model are? This can't be good.

Here in MI a lot of people are really worried.

The Big 3 have written down a lot of the labor buyouts, restructuring, laying out a lot of capital on upgrading (retooling) their manufacturing, and now they are hemoraging cash.

Its a very real possiblity all three could go under....
 

gugubica

Well-known member
Dec 8, 2006
641
0
Middle O' Missouri
Fuck em, let the private sector loan them money (if it is a good bet). Give other manufacturers incentives to build cars here (so there is no net job loss). Don't charge them stupid high taxes, kick the fucking Unions to the curb, make it easer for them to make a profit and they will come here and stay here. If the big three would have made a product worth a shit, they would be competative in a global market. Of coarse, if the big three would have not been burdened with the taxes, unions, etc. they might not be in as bad of shape either.
 

gugubica

Well-known member
Dec 8, 2006
641
0
Middle O' Missouri
Oh, and JT, oil companies are making record profits because of record demand. They don't make any more per gallon of gas then they did a decade ago. The world is just using more, a lot more! So here's an idea, let's tax the shit out of them, that way they will say fuck you and leave, take their oil with them and sell it to the rest of the world that actually appreciates their product.
 

paxton

Well-known member
Nov 13, 2006
1,246
2
Huntsville, AL
gugubica said:
Oh, and JT, oil companies are making record profits because of record demand.

Not quite right. You would see record revenue, sure, but there must be additional reasons for record profits.
 

Mike_Rupp

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2004
3,604
0
Mercer Island, WA
gugubica said:
Oh, and JT, oil companies are making record profits because of record demand. They don't make any more per gallon of gas then they did a decade ago. The world is just using more, a lot more! So here's an idea, let's tax the shit out of them, that way they will say fuck you and leave, take their oil with them and sell it to the rest of the world that actually appreciates their product.

You forgot to mention that oil companies aren't allowed to drill for oil in the US and off of its shores. Oh, I almost forgot that little club of guys called OPEC meeting and determining how much to produce. The market for oil is kept high through artificial means.
 

p m

Administrator
Staff member
Apr 19, 2004
15,651
869
58
La Jolla, CA
www.3rj.org
Personally, I would hate to see most of the Midwest go down like Detroit and Pontiac.
However, I think the condition of the bailout should be - "no UAW, period."

GM makes the best auto parts, but they just can't put them together in a nice package. I was surprised when they shed Delphi - that was the best thing they had!
 

Mike_Rupp

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2004
3,604
0
Mercer Island, WA
p m said:
Personally, I would hate to see most of the Midwest go down like Detroit and Pontiac.
However, I think the condition of the bailout should be - "no UAW, period."

That's some funny shit. The government demanding to get rid of a union? I'm sure the democrats would love that.:rofl:
 

Welcome to Hell A

Well-known member
Feb 7, 2006
130
0
Between the Crips and Chiques
Here's a fake letter from an investment newsletter I subscribe to. The author has penned a few of these over the last 2 years, and while they are obviously not from the chairman of GM, they contain real facts and figures. The author's subscribers made a lot of money shorting and buying put options on GM.
*********************************************************

My Last Letter
By the "Chairman" of General Motors

Apparently $50 billion was the magic number...

As the CEO and chairman of General Motors, I'm now responsible for more than $50 billion in losses ? in only the last three years. I thought they'd fire me after the first $10 billion ? when Kerkorian was trying to force me out. But I survived. Considering what has happened since, it's hardly a victory I can celebrate. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any American executive in history who has lost as much money as I have ? ever.

My legacy will be the bankruptcy of one of America's greatest corporations ? at one time the wealthiest and most powerful in the world. Until the 1970s, GM sold roughly half of the cars built in the world. How could GM have been destroyed so quickly, while its sales volumes are still so large? I'll explain one more time. But this will be my last letter to the subscribers of Stansberry Research.

Privately, the board told me the gig is up. The announcement of my "retirement" won't be made for a few more weeks. Publicly, of course, I keep spouting off the same nonsense I always have ? useless comments about how pleased I am with the way our 'turnaround' is going.

"Our actions over the past several years, and today, position us not only to survive this tough period, but to come out of it as a lean, strong and successful company..."

It's pretty amazing what you can get away with saying as the chairman of a public company. The press actually takes that crap seriously. Not a single newspaper reporter in America can read a financial statement... luckily for me.

Here's what I should have said:

"We don't have a prayer of saving this company and, really, we never did. It is impossible to repair the fatal damage done to our great company by the enormous pension and health care liabilities promised to our workers decades ago. The best we can do now ? by suspending our dividend, cutting health care benefits for all white-collar retirees, and 'postponing' our required union health care funding ? is keep the lights on another two or three quarters."

Of course, these sad facts aren't news to Stansberry readers. About a year and a half ago, (when our stock traded for more than $40), I began writing these letters to you. I wanted you to know the truth ? we had no way to avoid bankruptcy, as I explained in the opening paragraph of my first letter.

We own one of America's proudest companies, whose heritage and reputation far exceeds its operational capabilities today. We have infrastructure and employee obligations that outpace what we can afford given our greatly reduced profit margins and debt load. Our ongoing results reflect these important structure problems, which may be beyond our best efforts to fix...
?"A Letter from GM's Chairman," March 14, 2007

GM suffers from two insurmountable and interconnected problems: rising debts and declining market share.

Even now, in the last innings of this horrible game, GM's overall debt load increased by $1.5 billion last quarter. And our global market share declined by another percentage point, to 12.3%. This is the terrible trap I've been describing to you, quarter after quarter. There is no escape. Our debts make it impossible to invest enough capital to upgrade our manufacturing capabilities. And our inability to upgrade the styling and performance of our cars causes us to lose market share, little by little. Since 1992, our share of global car sales has fallen from 30% to about 12%. Meanwhile, our debt load quadrupled.

Why did this happen? How could GM's executives ignore the noose being laid around our necks? Are we really as stupid, lazy, or greedy as certain newsletter writers have claimed? Why didn't we think to pay down our debts as our market share fell and our pricing power evaporated?

We had no choice.

In the last 15 years, GM has spent $55 billion on pension plans ? compared to only $13 billion in dividends. Cutting our dividend to zero 15 years ago wouldn't have made much of a difference in terms of our solvency today. It would have bought us another year of operations, at most. What bankrupted America's leading manufacturing company wasn't inept or greedy management. What bankrupted GM (and what will soon bankrupt the United States government) are unlimited pension and health care promises whose costs cannot be contained and could not have been estimated at the time they were granted.

As I told you in my last letter, GM is now in a death spiral. In the most recent quarter, we lost more than $15 billion. Our sales volume fell 20% from last year. We even lost $2.4 billion on leases ? which indicates bigger problems to come. We're no longer offering leases on most of our cars, a move that will decrease revenues further. About 10% of our sales volume comes from leases.

We are now down to $21 billion in cash. As I've told you, we must have between $10 billion and $14 billion to keep operating. Given the rapid decline of our operations and revenue, I think we'll be very lucky to survive 2008. There's no way we can last through the end of 2009 without filing for bankruptcy. We're doing everything we can to conserve cash, but it won't make much difference.

We've been steadily losing around $3 billion in cash reserves per quarter since the third quarter of 2007. All of our efforts to staunch the bleeding have ended up being overwhelmed by our deteriorating credit quality, rapidly declining market share, and the losses from our 49% owned financial subsidiary GMAC (which was a major originator of subprime mortgages).

If you remember from my first letter, I warned that as our debt matured it could only be refinanced at much higher rates. This has always been the supreme risk to our shareholders ? our Sword of Damocles. It was only a matter of time before it fell on our head.

In mid-2007, our company was downgraded from an investment-grade credit all the way to "junk" status. Currently, our near-maturity bonds (the 7.2% 2011s) are trading at $0.60 on the dollar, yielding 32%. This implies the credit market expects us to default on these bonds ? to file for bankruptcy. This makes it impossible for us to roll over our existing debts ? we cannot afford to pay 32% a year on our obligations. In 2008 and 2009, we have around $5 billion in debt coming due. We have no way to refinance these obligations and no way to repay them. We will file for bankruptcy. And quite honestly, the sooner we file, the better.

How can we fix GM?

As I told you in my last letter, "A company cannot suffer 40 years of bad decisions, bad ideas, and bad debts and expect to compete with the rest of the world's automakers." In our noble efforts to make the lives of our employees better, we have bankrupted our company and made it impossible for GM to compete in the North American market. Before GM can do good for its workers and pensioners, it must first do well in the car business.

All of GM's stakeholders will pay a price in GM's eventual restructuring. Its shareholders will be wiped out. Its bondholders will suffer defaults and losses. Its employees will face declining wages, and its pensioners will lose benefits.

Yet the greatest risk to America is this restructuring won't be allowed to take place. GM will face enormous political pressure to maintain its pensions and its labor agreements. But if GM's bloated cost basis is simply passed from shareholders to bondholders through bankruptcy, GM will emerge no stronger than it is today. It will simply have a clean balance sheet on which to stack more losses and more bad debt.

Please believe my warning: What has happened to GM will soon happen to America as a whole. How we face these challenges during GM's bankruptcy will be an indication of how we will face them in the future as a nation. Will we go on making promises we cannot afford? The retirement years of many public and private sector workers vastly exceed the number of years spent working. Retirement incomes, when health benefits are added, are now frequently a multiple of current working wages. Far from being a small amount of money to help support workers in their old age, retirement has become a lifestyle choice for millions of Americans. Like it or not, as a nation we simply cannot afford the size of these obligations. Will we squander America's wealth and impoverish our children by giving away unlimited benefits to our retired workers?

Or... will we see that in order to grow the wealth of our nation we must be competitive with the rest of the world? To maintain our standard of living we must find more efficient ways of taking care of our elderly workers and delivering health care. We need to adopt sensible pension guarantees that promote saving and investing, rather than adding an unlimited expense to our largest corporations and public coffers.

There are no easy solutions. But one thing is certain: If we do not take steps to reform our health care and pension guarantees, GM will not be the last great American company to go bankrupt. And in only 15 to 20 years, our entire federal government will be bankrupt as well.

Best regards,

Your chairman
 

Tempest

Well-known member
Mar 11, 2008
393
0
Orlando, FL
gugubica said:
Fuck em, let the private sector loan them money (if it is a good bet). Give other manufacturers incentives to build cars here (so there is no net job loss). Don't charge them stupid high taxes, kick the fucking Unions to the curb, make it easer for them to make a profit and they will come here and stay here. If the big three would have made a product worth a shit, they would be competative in a global market. Of coarse, if the big three would have not been burdened with the taxes, unions, etc. they might not be in as bad of shape either.

Agree w/ you... another reason to not vote for that assclown NObama. NObama supports unions and wants to tax corporations more... he wants to subsidize failure more... that doesn't make the U.S. stronger... these types of policies will and continue to make us weaker.
 

Tempest

Well-known member
Mar 11, 2008
393
0
Orlando, FL
Mike_Rupp said:
You forgot to mention that oil companies aren't allowed to drill for oil in the US and off of its shores. Oh, I almost forgot that little club of guys called OPEC meeting and determining how much to produce. The market for oil is kept high through artificial means.

Yep... exactly why McCain is for drilling, here at home, and to stop sending more $ to OPEC. Oh, I suppose you can say NObama's plan is similar since he's basically "changed" his original energy policy... wonder where is got those ideas? :rolleyes:

Also, oil drilled here has to be consumed here, that is existing legislation... so its not as if the oil/energy companies will be shipping it elsewhere.
 

Welcome to Hell A

Well-known member
Feb 7, 2006
130
0
Between the Crips and Chiques
J. Toronado said:
Wow...interesting read.
So are they advising that a national health care plan would help?

No, definitely not a national health care plan. He just went off on a tangent during the "chairman's letter" and included some ideas that were a bit outside the topic. He did say in the letter that more efficient ways of delivering health care are necessary; at other times he's said the whole health care care needs reform, and not one that includes govt control.
 

p m

Administrator
Staff member
Apr 19, 2004
15,651
869
58
La Jolla, CA
www.3rj.org
Mike_Rupp said:
That's some funny shit. The government demanding to get rid of a union? I'm sure the democrats would love that.:rofl:
That's why no bailout will help them, unfortunately.
I was watching the bailout of Chrysler by Cerberus - even in hands of a private entity, things don't seem to work well.
 

asmith996

Well-known member
Dec 1, 2005
670
0
Rockville, MD
Toranado, did you miss the part where he said what is happening to GM is what will happen to the rest of America? What I took from it was those types of entitlement programs are exactly what is running our businesses and out country as a whole into the ground.
 

toadermcgee

Well-known member
Sep 26, 2007
689
4
Newburgh, IN
J. Toronado said:
Think its a coincidence that the oil industry has made more money in past few years then at any time in history?

Yes,
The projects that are generating the huge profits were designed to make a profit at $20 / barrel. Nobody (political, talking heads, or soccer moms) was asking why aren't oil companies making a profit in the fourth quarter of '98. I don't place all of the blame on Bush but put more on Clinton. Clinton encouraged oil price to be a low as possible so that his tax increases wouldn't be felt as much. With no profits in oil nobody invested in new projects resulting in decreased supply for the future. The same idea is why ANWR need to be opened now for drilling; because it is going to take time to bring it on line. We are always going to need oil; we use it for many other thing besides fuel.
 

SGaynor

Well-known member
Dec 6, 2006
7,148
162
52
Bristol, TN
noee said:
hehe, check this out. Looks like some details will be forthcoming, hopefully they will make this transparent:

Treasury Shakes things up at the corrupt GSEs (fannie/freddie)
"Precise details of Treasury's plan couldn't be learned. The plan is expected to involve a creative use of Treasury's new authority to make a capital injection into the beleaguered giants."​
Hate to say I told ya so. ;)

Good timing. More from the Washington Post:

U.S. Nears Rescue Plan For Fannie And Freddie
 

SGaynor

Well-known member
Dec 6, 2006
7,148
162
52
Bristol, TN
gugubica said:
Oh, and JT, oil companies are making record profits because of record demand. They don't make any more per gallon of gas then they did a decade ago. The world is just using more, a lot more! So here's an idea, let's tax the shit out of them, that way they will say fuck you and leave, take their oil with them and sell it to the rest of the world that actually appreciates their product.

There's no supply/demand problem. It's speculators:

A Few Speculators Dominate Vast Market for Oil Trading

Even more surprising to the commodities markets was the massive size of Vitol's portfolio -- at one point in July, the firm held 11 percent of all the oil contracts on the regulated New York Mercantile Exchange.

The CFTC reported data that shows that financial firms speculating for their clients or themselves accounted for about 81 percent of the oil contracts on the NYMEX.
 

MarkP

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2004
6,672
0
Colorado
Freddie and Fannie both in conservatorship. Big 3 asking for bailouts. US corporate tax rate 2nd highest in world.

And some think we can raise taxes to pay for even more programs that are underfinanced? It feels like we need a massive cut in government programs and spending to get back to a competitive cost structure.
 

noee

Well-known member
Apr 20, 2004
1,887
0
Free Union, VA
I think we're at the precipice of what I'll call "Unsustainable Federalism". It is simply not possible for this level of Federal spending to continue, good intentions or not.

FNM/FRE: Yes, this was obvious to anyone who follows closely the financial markets, especially after the signing of the so-called "Housing Bill" by our lame-duck "leader".

However, this could be an even bigger story in relation: CDS Unwind?