GM will not be able to pay back bailout.

#26
#26
fl0at said:
Think of the children. Won't somebody think of the children?

GM also had terrible financial management and investing. We paid for their poor business practices.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Screw the children. I want my money back.
 
#28
#28
forget the kids, the large shareholders came out money ahead by diluting themselves for the unions. They were the ones begging for this outcome. That's why the president had to step in and shove it down their throats. You know, 'cause large shareholders have no say over goings on.
 
#29
#29

From a May 2005 Business Week article....
​


Why GM's Plan Won't Work
[FONT=arial,helvetica,univers]
But GM, of course, is no ordinary company. With sales of $193 billion, it stands as an icon of fading American industrial might. Size and symbolism dictate that its fate has sweeping implications. After all, GM's payroll pumps $8.7 billion a year into its assembly workers' pockets. Directly or indirectly, it supports nearly 900,000 jobs -- everyone from auto-parts workers to advertising writers, car salespeople, and office-supply vendors. When GM shut down for 54 days during a 1998 labor action, it knocked a full percentage point off the U.S. economic growth rate that quarter. So what's bad for General Motors is still, undeniably, bad for America.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,univers]
Hard Times
How bad could it get? Business Week's analysis is that within five years GM must become a much smaller company, with fewer brands, fewer models, and reduced legacy costs. It's undeniable that getting to that point will require a drastically different course from the one Wagoner has laid out so far. He is going to have to force a radical restructuring on his workers and the rest of the entrenched GM system, or have it forced on him by outsiders or a bankruptcy court. The only question is whether that reckoning comes in the next year, if models developed by Vice-Chairman Robert A. Lutz fall flat; in 2007, when the union contract comes up for negotiation; or perhaps in five years, when GM may have burned through its substantial cash cushion.

Why is it so hard for those inside GM to see the inevitable? Take a step into the Detroit mindset. No active employee was even alive in 1930, the last time a rival sold more cars in the U.S. than GM. The idea of being No. 1 is etched into the company's DNA -- which makes it all but impossible for execs to embrace a strategy of getting smaller. And union leaders have never seen a problem that couldn't be ironed out at the bargaining table. "I think GM and the American auto industry are facing a lot of competition," says United Auto Workers President Ronald Gettelfinger. "But we've always had difficult times."[/FONT]
 
#31
#31
utgibbs said:
Y'all hate unions?

:epic facepalm:

Sigh, I know y'all are on here enough that you DON'T work 80 - 100 hours per week, but perhaps some of you need a year in those "pre-union" days....

The bailout WAS STRICTLY FOR THE LARGE SHAREHOLDERS IN GM.

GMAFB, P.

I truly believe almost 100% of all anti-union rhetoric from anyone outside the investment class is born of JEALOUSY.
Click to expand...

I'm not an economist and hated economics in college,but here is what the Unions have done in America.


When the Unions started out, some of the work conditions were horrible and pay was horrible, but America has since changed. At one time, Unions had their place. Now, on the flip side, this is what Unions did to the American industry.

Forced high, somewhat ridiculous wages and wage hikes. Because of this, manufacturers had to raise the cost of the product. The rate hikes on the products, then forced the seller to raise prices, therefore the bulk of the cost was pushed on to the consumer.

The consumer, not making as much as Union labor, was forced to look for a cheaper alternative. Most of the time, that was products produced overseas by non-unionized labor.

This in turn, over time, caused companies that were heavy unionized, to either shrink their workforce, move overseas, or go under. Some did a little bit of all three.

Therefore, Unions have done more harm to our economy and manufacturing industry that anything else.


BPV of Droski, you may correct me if I am wrong!
 
#32
#32
utgibbs said:
The bailout WAS STRICTLY FOR THE LARGE SHAREHOLDERS IN GM.
Click to expand...


OH MY ****ING GOD

The existing shareholders got NOTHING. The bondholders, the rightful owners of 100% of the company in a bankruptcy, got around 10%. The unions got 1/3 (which btw is illegal and unprecidented) and the govt got the rest.

exhibit Z you don't know CRAP.
 
#33
#33
utvolpj said:
because if they're not around we will return to 5yo kids working 18hrs a day for a dollar in polluted factories. Why don't you care about the kids crazyguy? Why?
Click to expand...

Exactly. Unions are the only thing keeping war orphans from toiling 100hr weeks in the acid mines.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#34
#34
BigPapaVol said:
This is just awesome. Should be posted after every one of your idiotic posts so people well know that you are just talking and have no idea what's coming out or you're fictitious. Either way, not worth much time beyond entertainment.
Click to expand...

Is this the long-winded version of:

I got nuthin.

?

Salaried retirees got shafted in the deal.

The UAW made concession far beyond what was demanded in the original Bush Agreement with the initial 20Bn loan including a two tier salary structure starting at an almost shameful $14/hour.

Canada chipped in to the bailout (since they moved Detroit to Ontario to capitalize on reduced health bill long ago).

Do I need to even go into the supposed "pay-back" when they switched the TARP into another pot of money?

But in the final of your goofball analysis, the taxpayer bought the shares at what, $50+, and sold them at what, $30? Do I need to remind you of the OP title? AND THEN YOU HAVE THE AUDACITY TO TELL ME IT WASN'T FOR THE FORMER "Class B" - the BIG - SHAREHOLDERS???

Many of you are right, it was a con of the highest order. JOB LOSSES! - ignored during the neoliberal agenda of moving jobs away - was screamed in order to funnel a few billion back to the major shareholders in GM to give them liquidity after being over-leveraged. It was a classic case of the Big Lie.

What is good for GM is potently not good for America any longer.

I know what y'all's "facts" (sic) look like. That's why I insist so frequently in being grounded in the real world.
 
#35
#35
droski said:
OH MY ****ING GOD

The existing shareholders got NOTHING. The bondholders, the rightful owners of 100% of the company in a bankruptcy, got around 10%. The unions got 1/3 (which btw is illegal and unprecidented) and the govt got the rest.

exhibit Z you don't know CRAP.
Click to expand...

Z?

I figured we were on at least Exhibit EQIRPENFE at this point.
 
#36
#36
utgibbs said:
Is this the long-winded version of:

I got nuthin.

?

Salaried retirees got shafted in the deal.

The UAW made concession far beyond what was demanded in the original Bush Agreement with the initial 20Bn loan including a two tier salary structure starting at an almost shameful $14/hour.

Canada chipped in to the bailout (since they moved Detroit to Ontario to capitalize on reduced health bill long ago).

Do I need to even go into the supposed "pay-back" when they switched the TARP into another pot of money?

But in the final of your goofball analysis, the taxpayer bought the shares at what, $50+, and sold them at what, $30? Do I need to remind you of the OP title? AND THEN YOU HAVE THE AUDACITY TO TELL ME IT WASN'T FOR THE FORMER "Class B" - the BIG - SHAREHOLDERS???

Many of you are right, it was a con of the highest order. JOB LOSSES! - ignored during the neoliberal agenda of moving jobs away - was screamed in order to funnel a few billion back to the major shareholders in GM to give them liquidity after being over-leveraged. It was a classic case of the Big Lie.

What is good for GM is potently not good for America any longer.

I know what y'all's "facts" (sic) look like. That's why I insist so frequently in being grounded in the real world.
Click to expand...

their retirement and healthcare plans were MADE WHOLE. how teh **** did they get screwed? in what world does a company go bankrupt and the employees get made whole?

what class B shareholders? what the hell are you talking about? do you realize that class B shareholders (if it exists a la Nike and google) are subordinated to class A shareholders? do you realize GM had no such structure?
 
#37
#37
utgibbs said:
Is this the long-winded version of:

I got nuthin.

?

Salaried retirees got shafted in the deal.

The UAW made concession far beyond what was demanded in the original Bush Agreement with the initial 20Bn loan including a two tier salary structure starting at an almost shameful $14/hour.

Canada chipped in to the bailout (since they moved Detroit to Ontario to capitalize on reduced health bill long ago).

Do I need to even go into the supposed "pay-back" when they switched the TARP into another pot of money?

But in the final of your goofball analysis, the taxpayer bought the shares at what, $50+, and sold them at what, $30? Do I need to remind you of the OP title? AND THEN YOU HAVE THE AUDACITY TO TELL ME IT WASN'T FOR THE FORMER "Class B" - the BIG - SHAREHOLDERS???

Many of you are right, it was a con of the highest order. JOB LOSSES! - ignored during the neoliberal agenda of moving jobs away - was screamed in order to funnel a few billion back to the major shareholders in GM to give them liquidity after being over-leveraged. It was a classic case of the Big Lie.

What is good for GM is potently not good for America any longer.

I know what y'all's "facts" (sic) look like. That's why I insist so frequently in being grounded in the real world.
Click to expand...

And there you have it.
 
#39
#39
Exactly. My post was because I got nothing when you're telling me that the gov't bailed out GM's largest shareholders.
 
#41
#41
droski said:
their retirement and healthcare plans were MADE WHOLE. how teh **** did they get screwed? in what world does a company go bankrupt and the employees get made whole?

what class B shareholders? what the hell are you talking about? do you realize that class B shareholders (if it exists a la Nike and google) are subordinated to class A shareholders? do you realize GM had no such structure?
Click to expand...

I admit I didn't know what they call their "upper echelon" stakeholders.

But they have them. Whether they are Class B, or the Ubermich, or Class GM. I have no idea what their accountants call it.

I mean, seriously. You cannot be this far grounded in ideology and so far outside the real world to deny they have preferred stock??????
 
#42
#42
utgibbs said:
I admit I didn't know what they call their "upper echelon" stakeholders.

But they have them. Whether they are Class B, or the Ubermich, or Class GM. I have no idea what their accountants call it.

I mean, seriously. You cannot be this far grounded in ideology and so far outside the real world to deny they have preferred stock??????
Click to expand...

not sure you've ever heard of a 10K, but it will answer all of this silliness.

Do you actually know what preferred shares are? Do you know how they work? Do you know why they exist? Do you know anything that you're talking about.
 
#43
#43
BigPapaVol said:
Exactly. My post was because I got nothing when you're telling me that the gov't bailed out GM's largest shareholders.
Click to expand...

And I got nothing when y'all try to tell me the UAW - with major concession / major plant closings / major health losses / etc made out like bandits.

Hellfire, when we start talking like VEBA is a giveaway and that GM doesn't have preferred stock...

Well, it's about time to put a fork in us.... we're done. It's over, Rock.
 
#44
#44
utgibbs said:
I admit I didn't know what they call their "upper echelon" stakeholders.

But they have them. Whether they are Class B, or the Ubermich, or Class GM. I have no idea what their accountants call it.

I mean, seriously. You cannot be this far grounded in ideology and so far outside the real world to deny they have preferred stock??????
Click to expand...

there is no such thing as upper echelon stakeholders. in a bankruptcy the priority is:

1) Bondholders (got 10% in GM stock)
2) Preferred Shareholders which btw are preferred stock similar to bonds (got nothing)
3) Common Shareholders (got nothing)
4) Employees (got 1/3)
 
#45
#45
BigPapaVol said:
not sure you've ever heard of a 10K, but it will answer all of this silliness.
Click to expand...


the 10K doesn't list the super secret stock holders - the SEC is part of the dominant culture and it sanctions the hiding of the true beneficiaries of the company.
 
#46
#46
utgibbs said:
And I got nothing when y'all try to tell me the UAW - with major concession / major plant closings / major health losses / etc made out like bandits.

Hellfire, when we start talking like VEBA is a giveaway and that GM doesn't have preferred stock...

Well, it's about time to put a fork in us.... we're done. It's over, Rock.
Click to expand...

you don't know what preferred stock is do you? it's primary owned by retired people (though it shouldn't be, but that's another argument). it's essentailly a 40 year bond. some have no maturies. it's marketing. perferred shareholders in bankruptcy rarely get anything.
 
#47
#47
utgibbs said:
And I got nothing when y'all try to tell me the UAW - with major concession / major plant closings / major health losses / etc made out like bandits.

Hellfire, when we start talking like VEBA is a giveaway and that GM doesn't have preferred stock...

Well, it's about time to put a fork in us.... we're done. It's over, Rock.
Click to expand...

Again, do you have any earthly idea what you're talking about? Do you know what preferred shares are and how they are valued? You do know that the union was given a truckload of shares that it didn't otherwise have and that those shares today have a value?

Plant closings? Shouldn't lack of demand dictate such. WTF does that have to do with anything?

HC losses? It's simply a form of pay that can't continue to be covered as is. You should hate their HC as it truly removes cost from the decision making process for the covered. That's the jacked up part of our current system.

It greatly entertains me when you have to move away from ridiculous data interpretation and actually know what you're talking about because it makes my responses dramatically more worthwhile.
 
#48
#48
utgibbs said:
I admit I didn't know what they call their "upper echelon" stakeholders.

But they have them. Whether they are Class B, or the Ubermich, or Class GM. I have no idea what their accountants call it.

I mean, seriously. You cannot be this far grounded in ideology and so far outside the real world to deny they have preferred stock??????
Click to expand...

Please show me where they had preferred stock outstanding prior to the govt takeover.

General Motors 10-K 2008

(I'll help, it's on page 140 of the report and 146/480 of the document.)
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top