RPM WS6

iTrader: (3)

Hmmmm, well, let's review:

Yeah, kinda sounds like you did.

Something tells me MANY people will buy the IPO. Just wait and see. Whether or not there will be a profit on this sale remains to be seen though. But, unlike you, I'm willing to accept that there is hope for the "new" GM to be a strong, profitable company in the near future. The key elements are in place for this possibility. It's not a certainty, but it's also not nearly as impossibile as you seem to beleive.

shoemike

iTrader: (25)

I don't see never in that quote.

What I meant was you need to be drunk off your *** if you think things are getting better for GM.
Less bad maybe but not better.
Who is going to be surprised when GM asks for the money back?

X-ray

iTrader: (6)

So the IPO is the first step in getting rid of the government control, correct? I just don't see how they will every be profitable with that damn union still around though...

RPM WS6

iTrader: (3)

Well, then please explain what you meant by "Even in good times they didn't make a profit"? What "good times" are you referring too? By definition, during their "good times" they were obviously making a profit. So the only thing I can assume you meant was during general "good times" for the nation. In that case, most of the time (during those times), they were also making a profit. So frankly I don't understand what you're getting at then.

But I do think that quote fits perfectly with your entire attitude in this thread - that GM is, was, and will be a total failure in your eyes; that they are a lost cause and should be exposed as such and then written off by the masses. This is your opinion, and you have a right to it, but it's certainly not facts nor can you expect us to drink YOUR Kool-aid.

I'm hoping for the best, because that outcome is in the best interests of everyone here that pays taxes. Why would we want to see them fail? What good would that do? And I beleive that the "best" is a good possibility for the new GM, thanks to the shedding of dead weight and the current product portfolio. Whether or not you like how they got there (government aid, protected/prefabricated bankruptcy) isn't what this is about; the point now is they are here, and they have decent potential.

RevGTO

iTrader: (12)

Sure, most of us on this board would like to be hopeful - despite the fact that Pontiac was sacrificed by these guys and this deal.

But as nice as this announcement may sound, we have to recognize it for what it is - GMspin, designed to restore consumer confidence.

What they're hoping the public will hear is that "GM's revival is so great that they're now free of government obligations and on their own again!".

Consider the statistic, "sales of GM's four core brands are up 36%!!!" The more relevant statistic is total sales volume, and beyond that, net profit on sales. But GMspin won't be trumpeting those figures ...

shoemike

iTrader: (25)

I meant better economic times.
GM has already failed, I didn't say I wanted them to fail.

The government will not break even on GM stock, yeah it's possible but it won't happen.
How much profit was made after they sold the Citi stock?

RPM WS6

iTrader: (3)

Well, then I direct you to my previous post about that.....

....so I still say your original quote is a very inaccurate statement.

Time will tell. We can't argue on the future with any certainty. The only thing I can say is that the possibility exists for a strong and profitable GM in the near future, based on reasons I've already stated.

wannabess00

iTrader: (1)

Theyll be profitable the same way they were in the past. The workers have been organized as long as we've all been alive and they posted profits for decades

88blackgt

You dont have a clue whats going on do you?

The unions were a huge part of the GM fail pie. Period.

Latch

iTrader: (8)

Doesn't Ford employ union workers as well? Why didn't Ford fail if unions were such a huge factor in GM's downfall?

Gaunt

iTrader: (11)

Congratulations on being retarded

GM profits from 1900-2010

proporio

It's great news that GM was able to getting their act together, and starting to repay the loans with interest so quickly.

GM is not a lost cause, they will eventually rebound back to becoming a profitable company.


http://www.google.com/search?q=rush+...rlz=1I7ADBR_en

"Rush Limbaugh tells Dittoheads to boycott GM"

X-ray

iTrader: (6)

ULTIMATEORANGESS

iTrader: (4)

did GM pay back this loan or what?


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...h-advertising/

Blakbird24

iTrader: (24)

?????????????????????????

Are you a politician? Cause you really sound like one. Or maybe you just don't think through what you say.

Oh, wait...that's the same thing.

shoemike

iTrader: (25)

If the government so much as breaks even with GM I'll split all my future lottery winnings with you guys.

wannabess00

iTrader: (1)

Actually I do have a clue considering im a UAW rep. I understand the costs that go into employing workers as well as legacy costs that have existed in my family for years. Actually the workers have taken huge losses in exchange for continued benefits. And if you want to bad mouth the workers because they worked for a company with a poor business model as well as having to exist in an economy where the demands of the shareholders continue to drive the cost to live in this country up by all means knock yourself out...but youre still wrong

Latch

iTrader: (8)

Fox News needs to be in trouble for truth in reporting.

If you read the article carefully, it doesn't say that the FTC is ACTUALLY investigating GM. It says that they COULD, and even that is speculation based on some BS that Grassley is spewing. Utter nonsense.

Just another typical Fox News hit piece. The Republicans hate GM because it employs union workers, pays their working class employees fairly, and was saved by the Obama Administration.

crazboy99

Makes me happy knowing that my purchase of a new truck helped... even though a small contribution

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

Wait, 'better' and 'less bad' aren't really the same thing?

I suppose if a person is dying that it's substantially different than if they're simply not quite alive?