wabmorgan

http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/26/news...ults/index.htm

While not surprising... it is disappointing

kozak

iTrader: (2)

I'm suprised it took some one this long to post this. I can hear Wagoner screaming the chapter 9 war cry. What have these fools done to this company.

CW00BlackTA

iTrader: (31)

They said on the Seattle news that GM lost more than $31 billion last year--that comes out to $983 lost every SECOND for the whole year! Wonder how long they can last at that rate?

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

Due to cost cutting/downsizing, they likely aren't currently still losing at that very same rate...though the bleeding certainly hasn't stopped entirely by any means.

There are likely only two directions things will go now (and this isn't only about GM/Chrysler/Ford), either back up recovering slowly or we, in our lifetimes, will soon know what the Great Depression was like. Unfortunately if it does in fact lean that way what we will experience could actually make the Great Depression look like the '50s by comparison.

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

Why General Motors matters
7:07p ET February 25, 2009 (MarketWatch)
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- The screeching debate in Washington over whether the government -- that is, the taxpayers -- should pony up another $20 billion or so in emergency loans to keep General Motors afloat will have consequences so broad and heavy that they will extend to the far corners of the nation.

If Congress votes down the pleas for aid by GM and Chrysler, those two family names will almost certainly go bankrupt, meaning they will be unable to pay their workers' wages and their suppliers' bills. Hundreds of those supplier companies would sink out of business, as would hundreds of advertising and public relations agencies, law and accounting firms. America's hopes of winning a piece of the $150 billion lithium-ion auto battery business would be dashed.

Yet if Congress approves the loans, the consequences could be equally dire. As New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman wrote last week, the proposal "leaves me feeling that we are subsidizing the losers for only one reason: because they claim that their funerals would cost more than keeping them on life support. Sorry, friends, but this is not the American way. Bailing out the losers is not how we got rich."

Now along comes a book that makes a cogent case for the argument that GM in recent years has downsized itself into a position where it has a strong future. The book is "Why GM Matters," by a first-rate independent business journalist, William J. Holstein.

He writes that GM, over many years of familiar complacency, hubris, arrogance and bloat, had dug itself into its own hole, but that its current management -- eclectic, energetic, imaginative, and internationally trained -- has gone far to dig itself out.

More than that, the company's future as a highly competitive global auto producer -- right up there, able to slug it out with Japan's Toyota, the current global champion -- is quite bright. So much so that it would be tragic to force GM into a bankruptcy that would destroy the jobs of countless workers as well as suppliers and whole communities that depend on GM for their livelihoods.

The present generation of GM management is hitching the company to technology, specifically to battery-powered, electric cars. That will save energy and drastically reduce pollution yet the cars will still be quite robust, able to zoom from zero to 60 miles per hour in less than eight seconds.

The first of these, the Chevrolet Volt, is scheduled to roll out in late 2010 and initially cost consumers about $40,000. Says GM's Tony Posawatz, who has been in charge of the Volt project: "It's our turn to change the world."

Holtein writes that "The way GM has globalized and continues to globalize, is one of the most complete reorganizations of a major corporation in modern history." The company now uses manufacturing, design and merchandizing techniques developed in countries as varied as Germany, Japan, Brazil, Korea and Argentina. "GM in particular has made major strides in improving its cost structure, nearly eliminating the cost gap with Toyota's Georgetown, Ky., utility."

GM borrows ideas from around the world. For example, its warranty improvement program is modeled after the Centers for Disease Control's rapid response to the outbreak of infectious diseases.

"Dealers who participate in the program send emails alerting GM engineering and manufacturing people to any problems they spot in cars," Holstein writes.

But just about all these gains would go down the drain if GM is forced into bankruptcy, Holstein argues. An independent study by CNW Research showed that 80% of prospective car buyers would not purchase a vehicle from a bankrupt company.

Still, some political leaders would benefit from a GM bankruptcy because they have foreign "transplant" factories in their home states, notably in the South and the Midwest. In Sen. Richard C. Shelby's Alabama alone there are four such plants -- Honda, Hyundai, Mercedes and Toyota. If giant GM were shoved out of the way, these producers -- and their workers and managers -- would suddenly face much softer competition.

That would be a shame, for producers and consumers alike. General Motors matters because its potential market it so big, and its core strategy of gutting it out until the company can turn a profit shows some prospect of success.

Blackened2k

iTrader: (4)

"Change the world"... **** that. Something like the Volkswagen or Model T changed the world because it was cheap as dirt. A $40k battery car won't do squat other than make Al Gore tingly inside.

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

Well, Al Gore and about 50 million other tree hugging liberals too ....I don't like the idea of electric vehicles either but it is the future man.

88blackgt

We're a long way from the Great Depression despite what obama says

SIDEWAYS SECRETS

I highly doubt gm will go under. They still have plenty of budget cuts to make.
Electric cars are NOT enjoyable to drive. They need to get off that craze..

This country needs to expand wind and solar energy. Hell the planet needs to..
I personally think its pathetic that we still primarily use oil to heat our buildings and homes. Especially when there is plenty of technology to use alternate methods. If we changed only that, greenhouse gasses would go down, and the liberals would be happy. Including that douchebag AL Gore