Fifty-Billion Dollars. Muahahahahaha!!!

[Versa-Tech]

More! More! More!

 

Check It

[94bronco]

No more, Not another "economic stimulus" package either!

[TStag]

No more, Not another "economic stimulus" package either!

 

The government shouldn't roll over on this. It should tell both GM and Chrysler that if they want a bailout then they will have to accept temporary nationalisation of all the shares and the likes of Rick Wagoner and his mery men would then be fired. Once nationalised they should be recapitalised and then auctioned off to the highest bidder. In GM's case it should be broken up and sold in bits. Chrysler could simply then be sold to Nissan or whoever.

 

No way should GM be able to hold the tax payer to ransom. Their share holders must get NOTHING and their incompetant boards must be axed. GM is insolvent to the tune of about 55 billion dollars. This is clearly a badly run business.

 

And frankly if Ford want the same deal, then all their shareholder need to get the boot too! If you were dumb enough to buy shares in GM or Chrysler recently that's your problem not the taxpayers.

[Deanh]

The government shouldn't roll over on this. It should tell both GM and Chrysler that if they want a bailout then they will have to accept temporary nationalisation of all the shares and the likes of Rick Wagoner and his mery men would then be fired. Once nationalised they should be recapitalised and then auctioned off to the highest bidder. In GM's case it should be broken up and sold in bits. Chrysler could simply then be sold to Nissan or whoever.

 

No way should GM be able to hold the tax payer to ransom. Their share holders must get NOTHING and their incompetant boards must be axed. GM is insolvent to the tune of about 55 billion dollars. This is clearly a badly run business.

 

And frankly if Ford want the same deal, then all their shareholder need to get the boot too! If you were dumb enough to buy shares in GM or Chrysler recently that's your problem not the taxpayers.

not just shareholders...the domestic auto industry is VITAL to the countrys health...look at all the jobs and associated business's that would be effected....

[jpd80]

There's a long line of banks in front of GM, Ford and Chrysler with even bigger debts.

In isolation Detroit looks bad but on the end of a long chain of businesses wanting money,

they are much smaller fish and easier to control.

 

Loans are much easier to control than nationalisation, governments should never run businesses.

[taxman100]

Government is broke - let's fire up the printing presses.

 

Worked for Germany in the 1920's - got them a socialist in power as well.

[TStag]

not just shareholders...the domestic auto industry is VITAL to the countrys health...look at all the jobs and associated business's that would be effected....

 

Just so I'm clear I'm not saying that the US shouldn't be aiming to save jobs, but I do believe that the shareholder should lose everything if the tax payer has to stump up. Otherwise the risk/ reward arguement for buying and selling shares goes out the window. In addition GM shareholders should have fired Rick's ass long ago. They deserve to lose all their shares.

 

I also think breaking up GM would be good for GM's brands. The likes of Pontiac face closure in any restructing if GM is to be slimmed down with government cash. One of the mistakes we made in the UK with our car industry was not forcing through the break up of BL early on, by selling off brands like Rover, Austin, Mini, Triumph, Austin Healey, Land Rover and MG. The US government should take the opportunity to split GM up and sell it off in bits for as much cash as possible and in doing so may save more brands and more American jobs.

[Deanh]

Government is broke - let's fire up the printing presses.

 

Worked for Germany in the 1920's - got them a socialist in power as well.

( off topic...rent the movie The Counterfeiters...excellent...and based on fact )

[rmc523]

not just shareholders...the domestic auto industry is VITAL to the countrys health...look at all the jobs and associated business's that would be effected....

 

I was watching the news earlier and they were saying 2,000,000+ people would be affected/essentially jobless if the Big 3 went down between each company's employees and their various suppliers' employees. (At least I think that number was for all 3). And that's just in the US.

[snooter]

I was watching the news earlier and they were saying 2,000,000+ people would be affected/essentially jobless if the Big 3 went down between each company's employees and their various suppliers' employees. (At least I think that number was for all 3). And that's just in the US.

[/quote

 

may be its just time they all went away...60 years ago who could have envisioned that offering full medical benefits to retirees would lead to this....gubment control of detroit will produce an end to them just much more slowly..no body will buy that junk that the eco gubment weenies will want on the vehicles...future is not pretty..heard some estimates of 2012 being the earliest any turn around will occur and that was even generous.....handwriting is on the wall..let china produce vehicles and wait until a new auto company is started.......no body wins in this....on the plus side..whoever folds its osamas problem now...oh wait he is anti business.....

[mettech]

How much money would it take to start a new car company using the existing equipment from GM and Chy?

 

What would happen if the government "loans" the American 3 the money and they still fold?

 

Would the Feds appoint an outside source to run the company?

[kpc655]

The government shouldn't roll over on this. It should tell both GM and Chrysler that if they want a bailout then they will have to accept temporary nationalisation of all the shares and the likes of Rick Wagoner and his mery men would then be fired. Once nationalised they should be recapitalised and then auctioned off to the highest bidder. In GM's case it should be broken up and sold in bits. Chrysler could simply then be sold to Nissan or whoever.

 

No way should GM be able to hold the tax payer to ransom. Their share holders must get NOTHING and their incompetant boards must be axed. GM is insolvent to the tune of about 55 billion dollars. This is clearly a badly run business.

 

And frankly if Ford want the same deal, then all their shareholder need to get the boot too! If you were dumb enough to buy shares in GM or Chrysler recently that's your problem not the taxpayers.

 

Great way to screw shareholders and taxpayers.

 

No bailout. The Domestics have already burned billions trying to turn around, is a few billion more gonna make a difference? No, they'll just be back at the trough in another few years.

 

Let them fail. Our national resources are obviously not being well used by the domestics so we shouldn't focus resources there anymore.

[Unknown25]

Sure let them go bankrupt, who cares if the Michigan unemployment rate spikes to 12-15% and drags the rest of the economy further into the ground. Who cares that the majority of the automotive suppliers will file for chapter 13. Who cares that the automotive dealers will have to layoff large portions of their workforce. Who cares about the lost tax revenue. Who cares about the lost knowledge base. Who cares about the jobs, they will be replaced by Wal-mart and Burger King , then we can all service each other. All I care about is my money, so don't mess with my money.

Edited November 7, 2008 by Unknown25

[snooter]

Sure let them go bankrupt, who cares if the Michigan unemployment rate spikes to 12-15% and drags the rest of the economy further into the ground. Who cares that the majority of the automotive suppliers will file for chapter 13. Who cares that the automotive dealers will have to layoff large portions of their workforce. Who cares about the lost tax revenue. Who cares about the lost knowledge base. Who cares about the jobs, they will be replaced by Wal-mart and Burger King , then we can all service each other. All I care about is my money, so don't mess with my money.

[/quote

 

why throw money at them when the same people are in charge..that is a waste..what detroit is doing is not working and they refuse to change...the amount of jobs left in detroit is minimal...they dont matter anymare

[old_fairmont_wagon]

At this point, THIS VERY POINT IN TIME, no amount of change by any of the big 3 will make a NOTICEABLE difference in their bottom lines. They've already cut themselves to the bones, now they are scaling back their workforces to match their current production schedules. They are about as efficient as they can be. LAmbasting GM over having too many brands ignores the rather GIGANTIC PROBLEM they'd face if they got rid of brands, dealer backlash over defunct brand franchise agreements. The financial pain would kill the company in short order. Chrysler is privately held, clearly, there is little that we know about their internal workings for sure, other than to say that their products are barely selling and that their fundamentals are likely morbidly flawed.

 

As for Ford, they have multi-national operations that are currently helping to slow their death. They are continuing to scale back production and dynamically adjust to the market as best they can. There isn't enough revenue to maintain all of the development projects that they'd like to fund, so, they are picking and choosing their battles. About the only real move that they could make to alleviate the pain in the short term is find someone to unload Volvo on. With Volvo loosing half a billion dollars a quarter, that's a crippling hemorage that the company can not afford to sustain. Sell them for a buck and work out supplier agreements with the purchaser that will net what's left of Ford some positive cash flow. Maybe that little bit of extra time that it buys them will be enough to allow them to survive until the economy improves.

 

On topic about the bail-out money, It should be in the form of multi-part package consisting of new technology development grants (10 Billion between GM and Ford) and a 20+ billion operational loan to improve their liquidity further. I want nothing to go to Chrysler as they currently exist because they are privately held. If Cerberus agrees to it, they could sell stock to the US for money. Why am I against privately held Cerberus? Because being privately held means that the owning corporation has to assume the entirety of the risk of the company. For publicly held companies like GM and, to a certain extent Ford, a greater percentage of the population assumes the risk, making it more in the government's interests to work with them. Actually, now that I think about it, the best thing that the government could do for GM is to temporarily enact a law restricting GM's liability for closing down a few us brands Pontiac and GMC non-commercial come to mind first. Letting them have a predictible amount of financial risk from dealers to shut down those brands and realize the cost savings that would come from it. Leave Ford with the same option with Mercury, though, I do believe that it does make them money in the long run to have them around.

[toyboxrv]

There's a reason that none of you run a car company. None of you have a clue.

 

There would be a huge loss of tax revenue and millions in unemployment payments and other costs to the government if any of the Big 3 fail, but the first one down could make the others more able to survive. Ford right now is in the best position of all of them. The government can't afford to let any of them fail, let alone all of them.

 

Who would buy Volvo when it is losing money and needs to share development costs with another company? May as well tell the Swedish government that all the factories need to close for a while and let them take the next step.

 

Cerberus could easily offer partial ownership to the government in exchange for funding. Being private is not a valid excuse to brush them off.

 

Enough with saying GM should close GMC. Why do people insist on that stupid idea? It's their 2nd best selling division. What idiots. Can't reduce the risk of eliminating a brand. We are not a communist nation.

 

Time for the armchair CEOs to step back and let those that can fix things to do it. Jumping on the negatoid banwagons doesn't do anything to help.

[jpd80]

Who would buy Volvo when it is losing money and needs to share development costs with another company?

The same type of people who bought Jaguar/Land Rover?

[mackinaw]

This is from the Center of Automotive Research (11/6 Detroit News) and details the effects of the Detroit Three going out of business:

 

"Should all of the Detroit Three's U.S. operations cease in 2009, the first year total employment impact would be a loss of nearly 3 million jobs in the U.S. economy," the report says. "In economic terms, the rapid termination ... would reduce U.S. personal income by over $150.7 billion in the first year, and generate a total loss of $398.2 billion over the course of three years." Lost tax revenue between 2009 and 2011 would be an estimated $156.4 billion."

 

So yes, by all means, we should teach the Detroit Three a lesson and let them go out of business.

[mettech]

There's a reason that none of you run a car company. None of you have a clue.

 

There would be a huge loss of tax revenue and millions in unemployment payments and other costs to the government if any of the Big 3 fail, but the first one down could make the others more able to survive. Ford right now is in the best position of all of them. The government can't afford to let any of them fail, let alone all of them.

 

Who would buy Volvo when it is losing money and needs to share development costs with another company? May as well tell the Swedish government that all the factories need to close for a while and let them take the next step.

 

Cerberus could easily offer partial ownership to the government in exchange for funding. Being private is not a valid excuse to brush them off.

 

Enough with saying GM should close GMC. Why do people insist on that stupid idea? It's their 2nd best selling division. What idiots. Can't reduce the risk of eliminating a brand. We are not a communist nation.

 

Time for the armchair CEOs to step back and let those that can fix things to do it. Jumping on the negatoid banwagons doesn't do anything to help.

 

You have to make a profit to pay taxes..

 

The fact is: Fewer and fewer people want to buy from the American 3. That trend is not going to change in the near term. Look at the market share for the past 20 years.

 

Even if the American 3 would make the best car in the world..... I don't think the general public will buy enough of them to keep the company in the black.

 

Kind of like Beta and VHS. The people turned their backs on the best product.

 

I really don't think that people prefer foreign car brand..... They just don't want a car from the American 3.

 

 

BTW... I'm speaking only of the Noth American operations. :reading:

Edited November 8, 2008 by mettech

[mettech]

This is from the Center of Automotive Research (11/6 Detroit News) and details the effects of the Detroit Three going out of business:

 

"Should all of the Detroit Three's U.S. operations cease in 2009, the first year total employment impact would be a loss of nearly 3 million jobs in the U.S. economy," the report says. "In economic terms, the rapid termination ... would reduce U.S. personal income by over $150.7 billion in the first year, and generate a total loss of $398.2 billion over the course of three years." Lost tax revenue between 2009 and 2011 would be an estimated $156.4 billion."

 

So yes, by all means, we should teach the Detroit Three a lesson and let them go out of business.

 

This data is skewed.... Toyota, Honda and the others are building plants. :shades:

 

Someone will replace much of the loss because the same amount of cars will be sold.

[RangerM]

There's a reason that none of you run a car company. None of you have a clue.

 

Here is what I know.

 

No longer are TVs, radios, computers, and many other goods manufactured in this country, because the cost of doing business in the country is so high.

 

There are a few ways to solve the problem. You can:

 

Reduce the cost of doing business in this country, thereby inviting manufacturing back, but to do so will require major overhaul of tax and environmental law.

OR

You can use the force of government to isolate the country by preventing trade, raising tariffs, or raising taxes (in all cases, the cost to the consumer relative to income will go up, thereby reducing quality of life)

OR

You can use the force of government to subsidize the losing companies that are still here (rob Peter to pay Paul, and this will raise taxes eventually)

OR

You could nationalize all industry (but that didn't work so well in the Soviet Union.)

 

Anything I missed?

Edited November 8, 2008 by RangerM

[old_fairmont_wagon]

Here's my main point with Chrysler. Of the big three, they are definitely the smallest. They represent the smallest total risk to the economy from failure. That being said, being privately held, the governement has very little place in bailing them out, and, more importantly, Chrysler is owned by a parent company with fairly deep pockets. Its in the hands of the parent company if they want to continually pump money into Chrysler. If they choose not to, and force Chrysler to file bankruptcy, then the government will have the option of taking ownership of them, or, granting them some credit relief and a cash infusion to get going again.

 

Ford and GM are in different positions. Ford's majority control family are, by our standards, wealthy, but do not have enough cash on their own to make a major bailout of the company. The rest of the company is publicly held. GM has an even broader ownership which is even more unlikely to come a calling with a pile of money on hand. Ford and GM arguably are more in need of a government bailout than chrysler, even though chrysler motor company, if viewed as an independent auto manufacturer, is in much worse shape when you look at their products, sales, modernization, revenue, etc.

 

The government needs to go where its needed and where it has a mission to go. Chrysler, at the moment, isn't the place. If cerberus approaches the government and tells them flat out that they are going to cut Chrysler loose and let them fail, then, the governmnet needs to get that in writing and do what it takes to keep them going at that point. It is going to take a whole mountain of cash to fix chrysler. Ford just needs enough to maintain liquidity to maintain operations until the economy recovers some. GM needs an amount somewhere in the middle. They are in more dire liquidity straits, and have suspended development on many platforms, many that are in need of significant investment soon.

[F250]

This data is skewed.... Toyota, Honda and the others are building plants. :shades:

 

Someone will replace much of the loss because the same amount of cars will be sold.

 

Do you have a source for different data? Link?

The plants they are building were projects already underway before the economic crisis. Toyota, like everyone else, is currently facing over-capacity like their new (expensive) Tundra plant in Texas that is currently idle. Their Mississippi plant already under construction was scheduled to build CUVs but has been changed to Prius production sometime after 2010. Honda has announced it will idle their first U.S. plant in Ohio since 1979 and move all Motorcycle production to a new plant in Japan. They had been building the top of the line Goldwing and VTX cruisers in Ohio, priced from $20,999 to $25,599 Goldwings are about as expensive as Accords. Honda's new plant in Indiana just built it's first Civic last month and is running only 1 shift so that was another one that was too far along to cancel this year.

 

How about an idea that has proven to work in Japan and Korea. Limit damaging open access to the U.S. market by foreign companies. Adopt some of the same protectionist policies that Japan has always used to limit access to their market. And it's not just American companies, how many European cars are allowed into Japan, how many outside manufacturers are allowed to build auto plants in Japan? They protect their companies and workers but demand and have mostly been given unobstructed access to America.

[mackinaw]

This data is skewed.... Toyota, Honda and the others are building plants....

Someone will replace much of the loss because the same amount of cars will be sold.

 

Oh yeah? Here's another quote from the CAR report, ""The scale of the contraction of the Detroit Three would overwhelm any attempt by the international producers" like Toyota, Honda and Nissan "to keep their existing suppliers in business or to find alternative suppliers, here or elsewhere," the report says. "U.S. consumers would be forced to rely on only imported vehicles as a source of new vehicle purchases in the first year."

[goinbroke2]

I can't believe the negative bull being spewed by mettech.

 

You hate domestic's, we get it. Go away.

 

 

 

 

Loser