UPDATE: More Management Changes At GM

Status
Not open for further replies.
It could be, but when you mix his point and mine together it only serves to cloud the issue. I guess that serves your purpose at this point.

At least we agree, the BK was a sham, just can't understand why GM is to blame for that. They clearly didn't dictate those terms, but they will clearly pay the price of them judging from your posts and many others.

Good night and sorry for the confusion.
 
Except that ignores the recent history of the retail credit markets. I know it was all of almost a year ago, but at that time....NO ONE was lending money to ANYONE. The credit crunch was brought about by the continueing collapse of the housing markets. Remember? Not by GM's poor business practices. Trying to explain why GM couldn't get a loan at that time with that simpleton thought is like saying the Civil War was fought over slavery....it just ignores too many facts to be considered an intelligent opinion.

But keep repeating it often enough and the uninformed such as yourself will swallow it eventually. You did....lol
 
Last edited:
Actualy a banker posting on GMI and blueoval (wescocent) worked on the ford loan - or his firm did - and GM did apply at around the same time(2006),he remarked on the extreme arogance of the GM ex's -no plan- just "we need xxxxx amount of cash.
They were turned down .
No one on GMI has ever challeged his statement,as a fan site they would be the first to jump all over it.
 
Sorry, I defer to the anonymous banker posting on another board....lol. And also remember. You and I are referencing two different time frames. At the end of last year when GM needed quick operating cash, the loan window had already closed. The discussion of what went down in 2006 has nothing to do with the end of 2008 in that the housing market hadn't yet crashed and available cash was still flowing in 2006. Fords decision in 2006 was prescient and I'm sure GM would reconsider that huge gamble given hind sight of what was coming.

As far as 2006-2007 goes. Actually what happened is that GM was seeking other options much more seriously at that timeframe. They were discussing merger opportunities that would provide operating capital, even considered a merger with Ford. They did look into a loan similar to what Ford did and the decision was made to NOT mortgage the name and assets of the company and rather seek other options...like the mergers.

Perhaps your "banker" calls that arrogance, that GM wasn't willing to roll the dice for the whole company. So be it, Ford made a huge gamble and many in town say that Ford is far from being in the clear. Ford made a decision early on that the mergers weren't going to work and decided the loan was the best option. Were they right, we'll see....and I pray they were. GM wasn't willing to make that same gamble, but to some that could be contrued as arrogance I guess.

The question to ask yourself is this......Would you or a private investor be willing to buy GM free of it's debts and liabilities for the price the UAW and the Government ended up spending? GM in the end was sold for a song, the Government and the UAW paid pennies on the dollar and got an unencumbered company in the process.

Again, I'll say it, and I'd love to see anyone here refute it. All the Government and the UAW have done is stolen the company and left it open and very vulnerable to a hostile take over.
 
Last edited:
Easy easy I'am on your side I can find the links no problem but so could you ,It really dont matter ,water under the bridge.
They havwe got some awesome stuff Equniox beats all the comp and stuff about ready to be introduced. I'll find some stuff .
........back in a bit
 
Originally Posted By: artificialist
If GM was viable, the private sector would have given them the loan.


I don't recall there being that kind of money available to lend in the provate sector.

The big banks were broke. A money market fund broke the buck.

There was concern that people would make a run on the banks.

Most of the commerce was cash only. The only people who could get a loan on decent terms didn't need one - they could pay cash.

Ford mortaged the farm in somewhat better times. Hopefully it will work out for them, but when you owe more than you are worth, you don't have a lot of staying power.

That massive debt will be like an anchor dragging behind them, one that their competitors do not have. I would be more circumspect about buying a Ford car, than a GM car, right now.
 
GMI these guys are fanboys through and through ,but will state GM screwed the pooch loan wise.
dont be a blind loyalist they needed a swift kick - they all did GMI
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: hone eagle
GMI these guys are fanboys through and through ,but will state GM screwed the pooch loan wise.
dont be a blind loyalist they needed a swift kick - they all did GMI


I agree, they did screw the pooch. Afforded our perfect 20/20 hind sight we can sit here and proudly proclaim that.

But I dont think your hearing me, they did try to get the loan, they just werent willing to mortgage the company to get it, as Ford did. Was that a mistake, well yeah, looking back it was. But Ford's decision was almost like seeing the future, they made a great call.
Also remember, borrowing cash at the drop of a hat is something that businesses do every day on a daily basis. At least they did before the banking collapse. Gm and Ford borrowed money based on a simple phone call for decades, based on their credit rating and such. All of a sudden, they are asked to put the company up as collateral, thats a big change and they decided the risk was too great. They thought they could get funding elsewhere, and then the market collapsed and cars sales fell through the floor. They got caught short, no doubt!

Like I said, if they knew then what they know now, the story would have been different.
 
Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah


But now that GM went to the devil and did their "bankruptcy" deals its over for LONGTIME CUSTOMERS.



Well which "devil" do you want to be owned by and answer to?

The devil that (in theory) answers to taxpayers as in the case of Government Motors?

Or the devil banks that absolutely have to answer to shareholders and own you lock, stock, and barrel as in the case of Ford?
 
Originally Posted By: Win
Originally Posted By: artificialist
If GM was viable, the private sector would have given them the loan.


I don't recall there being that kind of money available to lend in the provate sector.

The big banks were broke. A money market fund broke the buck.

There was concern that people would make a run on the banks.

Most of the commerce was cash only. The only people who could get a loan on decent terms didn't need one - they could pay cash.

Ford mortaged the farm in somewhat better times. Hopefully it will work out for them, but when you owe more than you are worth, you don't have a lot of staying power.

That massive debt will be like an anchor dragging behind them, one that their competitors do not have. I would be more circumspect about buying a Ford car, than a GM car, right now.


I have respect for ford for not running to the government dogs and begging for a handout. That is why my next vehicle will be a ford not a GM. I also beleive many people across the US will agree with me and have switched over.
 
Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS

GM has work to do, and they know it. People who wish that hundreds of thousands of people should lose their jobs are just bitter angry fools IMO.


No People who KNOW how to run a business and even more FOLLOW the rules that other companies have too are the bitter ones.

GM is DEAD. Face it. It may not die today, this week or next month. But it WILL.

Sorry for the news. But its the "bitter angry fools" who buy the GM products and they are not going to.

If they played by the rules, there was a chance.

Now too late and too bad.

Look through this board. I WAS one of the biggest GM fans (love their trucks, some of their cars) and have owned MANY. But now that GM went to the devil and did their "bankruptcy" deals its over for LONGTIME CUSTOMERS.

I just bought a USED GM truck a few months ago. Love it. But I'll NEVER (and I'm not the only one trust me) buy a new one.

Call me bitter, call me angry, call me a fool. But I know what is right and wrong and what GM did is WRONG.

And they are showing what happens when you do the WRONG things.

Bill








Bill

As bad as I hate to say this, GM is not dead nor will it ever die. The American Taxpayer is going keep this company on life support forever. You have to keep in mind the majority of this company's liabilities and debt disappeared in the bankruptcy. If you look at their balance sheet, this company is actually in pretty good financial shape considering the circumstances.

Dave
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: D.K.
Originally Posted By: Bill in Utah
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS

GM has work to do, and they know it. People who wish that hundreds of thousands of people should lose their jobs are just bitter angry fools IMO.


No People who KNOW how to run a business and even more FOLLOW the rules that other companies have too are the bitter ones.

GM is DEAD. Face it. It may not die today, this week or next month. But it WILL.

Sorry for the news. But its the "bitter angry fools" who buy the GM products and they are not going to.

If they played by the rules, there was a chance.

Now too late and too bad.

Look through this board. I WAS one of the biggest GM fans (love their trucks, some of their cars) and have owned MANY. But now that GM went to the devil and did their "bankruptcy" deals its over for LONGTIME CUSTOMERS.

I just bought a USED GM truck a few months ago. Love it. But I'll NEVER (and I'm not the only one trust me) buy a new one.

Call me bitter, call me angry, call me a fool. But I know what is right and wrong and what GM did is WRONG.

And they are showing what happens when you do the WRONG things.

Bill








Bill

As bad as I hate to say this, GM is not dead nor will it ever die. The American Taxpayer is going keep this company on life support forever. You have to keep in mind the majority of this company's liabilities and debt disappeared in the bankruptcy. If you look at their balance sheet, this company is actually in pretty good financial shape considering the circumstances.

Dave


Oh please. The treasury will sell it's stake in GM eventually. Hopefully to a responsible company that will know what to do with it. Cerberus was starting to do great things for chrysler before the bankruptcy. GM will an owner soon enough. The treasury has stated repeatedly they want to offload it. And by the way, I don't think GM is going to be on "life support" for very much longer. From the sales numbers, I think it is possible GM might start breaking even, if not turning a profit in the next 2-3 years.
 
agreed
and Ford in hindsite was very lucky ,they couldnt of known at the time just how close they would come,many have said they arn't out of the woods yet
 
Originally Posted By: defektes
Originally Posted By: Win
Originally Posted By: artificialist
If GM was viable, the private sector would have given them the loan.


I don't recall there being that kind of money available to lend in the provate sector.

The big banks were broke. A money market fund broke the buck.

There was concern that people would make a run on the banks.

Most of the commerce was cash only. The only people who could get a loan on decent terms didn't need one - they could pay cash.

Ford mortaged the farm in somewhat better times. Hopefully it will work out for them, but when you owe more than you are worth, you don't have a lot of staying power.

That massive debt will be like an anchor dragging behind them, one that their competitors do not have. I would be more circumspect about buying a Ford car, than a GM car, right now.


I have respect for ford for not running to the government dogs and begging for a handout. That is why my next vehicle will be a ford not a GM. I also beleive many people across the US will agree with me and have switched over.



I guess people have very short memory, Ford did go to the feds along with GM and Chrysler to beg for money, that was the first round of bailouts (remember the whole buisness jet fiasco???), and Ford got turned down, also Ford took re-tooling loans, so proclaiming that Ford never begged for money or took Government money is just wrong. I don't mean to put down Ford, but lets not forget the facts, and while Ford is milking the "we did not take bailout money" and is trying to convince people of that, that doesn't change the fact that they did take government money (re-tooling loans that will have to be paid off, but I doubt it will happen, which in turn will make them a "bailout") and they did try to get the bailout money.
 
No ford requested a line of credit, which is a completely different thing. Notice ford never took money from that credit line. The government gave retooling GRANTS, not LOANS.
 
The re tool money is about eco -envro programs avalible to any manufacturer that is not in receivership.
What Rudolphna said

If I have a short memory refresh it with a link?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

wemay
GM to recall more than 461,000 vehicles over transmission issues, NHTSA saysBy Reuters
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
D60
wwillson
GM Super Cruise - 15,000 mile review
2 3 4
Replies
72
Views
8K
MCompact
Hermann
Rental review 2025 Ford Explorer XLT
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
Hermann
buster
GM 8L45 and Octane
Replies
3
Views
879
ragtoplvr
BrokenAudiTT
  • Locked
GM L87 Engine recall 0w20 to 0w40
Replies
8
Views
4K
BrokenAudiTT
Back
Top Bottom