This really stinks! Gm playing dirty!

[Whitehouse]

I don't remember who but someone inhere congratulated GM with their successful repayment of government issued support, five years ahead of schedule. Now it turns out they payed the government back with OTHER SUPPORT MONEY! I'm using my mobile phone right now to type this message so I can't use copy and paste, or at least I didn't figure out yet how to do that. But go to Crooks and Liars to read the full story. They quote a Fox news bulletin no less! See, you, Johnny Taxpayer gets paid back with a sigar from your own box... And to top it off the GM management is beating itself on the chest on how well they managed the situation. Believe me, I don't want GM to fail. Too many people depend on survival of the company and those people are struggling enough to make ends meet, but the result will be that America is being cheated. And of course the bonusses will be flighing across the table at the very top.

The founders of GM will be spinning in their graves!

[pffft]

Great to see that all the teabaggers are on message...

[Jimaz]

I don't think this is any secret. I heard it mentioned when the story first broke.

[313WX]

They quote a Fox news bulletin no less!

Well that immediately dismisses this right-wing bitch moment.

Of course Faux News is the same one who refused to report the Toyota recalls and completely ignored the fact that GM even payed back their money.

You teabaggers must be really desperate to demean Obama by grasping at straws like this...

[Retroit]

The crisis at GM was an orchestrated scam to get concessions from their labor force and to dump their investors and creditors. This deceptive accounting is nothing new. I pointed it out a while back using excerpts from their own financial report.

GM was never in as bad a shape as they portrayed. Remember Ford going to Congress begging for money, then changing their mind? GM could have done the same thing, but why turn down such a great opportunity?

Every businessperson knows that the economy goes in cycles. We have several years of prosperity followed by a couple years of recession. This has been going on for centuries. You mean to tell me that no one at GM had any foresight to put a little money aside during all those years of booming SUV-sales years? Riiight!

To all the GM union workers, pensioners, stockholders, bondholders, and creditors: YOU GOT TAKEN!

[Whitehouse]

I don't get it. Why is the management doing this? This is so clear cut. What made them think that they could get away with this stunt? Where they trying to beef up their personal stock options? Just to show America who is in control? As it turns out they still didn't pay the USA back in full, so technically the taxpayer is holding control. The final insult would be if they have given themselves a big bonus....

[JBMcB]

Why is the management doing this?

Because they are paying interest on loans they don't need anymore.

What made them think that they could get away with this stunt?

Repay the loan? You'd prefer they didn't repay the loan? I don't understand.

As it turns out they still didn't pay the USA back in full, so technically the taxpayer is holding control.

The government owns GM bonds. They can sell them whenever they want. GM probably won't buy them back, but they're free to sell them to whomever they want. If the government didn't think GM would make it, they could dump the bonds right away. As it is, they're waiting for GM to go public so the bond rates float, and they can make their money back.

[313WX]

GM was never in as bad a shape as they portrayed. Remember Ford going to Congress begging for money, then changing their mind? GM could have done the same thing, but why turn down such a great opportunity?

GM didn't have the necessary credit ot turn down the money. Of course, Ford was mortgaged down right to the blue oval during the "oil crisis" that proceeded this recession. GM had [[and still has) NOTHING on their gas-guzzling SUV marketing. And despite their gains lately, they still have a severe amount of debt to contend with [[unlike GM & Chrysler).

BTW, I'm sick of people who continue to lie about Ford not receiving a baliout, when in fact they did receive one [[$5 billion dollars) after all the hoopla with GM & Chrysler relaxed. Their "be the bigger man" stunt was nothing short of a PR move.

[East Detroit]

GM didn't have the necessary credit ot turn down the money. Of course, Ford was mortgaged down right to the blue oval during the "oil crisis" that proceeded this recession. GM had [[and still has) NOTHING on their gas-guzzling SUV marketing. And despite their gains lately, they still have a severe amount of debt to contend with [[unlike GM & Chrysler).

BTW, I'm sick of people who continue to lie about Ford not receiving a baliout, when in fact they did receive one [[$5 billion dollars) after all the hoopla with GM & Chrysler relaxed. Their "be the bigger man" stunt was nothing short of a PR move.

Incorrect, twice, maybe more.

1. Ford mortgaged to rebuild their business including the One Ford concept which meant that global collaboration would pay off in the long run with great products at a reduced regional cost. It was not for some "oil crisis."

2. Ford never received a bailout. [[ Then again neither did GM or Chrysler... they got loans. Wall Street got the bailouts). Auto parts makers got $5B. [[http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/19/news...lout/index.htm Ford, Nissan and Tesla got "green car loans" to concentrate some R&D on building what the US government thinks we need. Ford, Nissan and Tesla did not need the money to run their business. [[http://revengeoftheelectriccar.com/t...th-doe-grants/) FYI... the Japanese Govt, perhaps more intelligent than ours, has routinely given their auto companies grants for R&D work, because they realize their country benefits.

So, sorry, there is no lie about Ford. They have done the right thing, and now they have the best quality and the best vehicles. They did not screw the stockholders and workers, like a bankruptcy would have. Detroit should be proud of them.

[Just Amazed]

The crisis at GM was an orchestrated scam to get concessions from their labor force and to dump their investors and creditors. This deceptive accounting is nothing new. I pointed it out a while back using excerpts from their own financial report.

GM was never in as bad a shape as they portrayed. Remember Ford going to Congress begging for money, then changing their mind? GM could have done the same thing, but why turn down such a great opportunity?

Every businessperson knows that the economy goes in cycles. We have several years of prosperity followed by a couple years of recession. This has been going on for centuries. You mean to tell me that no one at GM had any foresight to put a little money aside during all those years of booming SUV-sales years? Riiight!

To all the GM union workers, pensioners, stockholders, bondholders, and creditors: YOU GOT TAKEN!

OMG I said that all along, and I am a GM person. We got ripped big time.
My big question is how did this help the economy????? We can't afford anything, we are scraping the bottom of the barrel to pay our bills, and we are one of the mediocre ones. GM sold out their workers, pensioners, stockholders, bondholders, and creditors. The Gov"t played into it. AND WALLSTREET IS the winners. When is this going to stop????

[Bearinabox]

Excuse me while I don't give a shit.

[Just Amazed]

This was all done to get a "Monkey off their back", The Uaw, the stockholders, the pensioner's, creditors, bondholdrs. This is as bad if not worse than what Wallstreet is doing

[TheValson]

Retroit...possibly the best detroityes post I have seen in years.

[hudkina]

Judging by many of these comments, it's no wonder that such entities as Fox News and the Tea Party Movement are able to gain so much popularity. An ignorant fool will believe just about anything he reads...

Would Senator Grassley prefer that GM not repay the loans? While I'm sure it would give Republicans extra bonus points if the government ate its hate when it came to the GM loans, I would hope that he ultimately would prefer to see the people get back as much of the money as possible. But then, I'm not sure he [[and most politicians) have the best interest of the people in mind when making such political statements.

[Whitehouse]

Because they are paying interest on loans they don't need anymore.



Repay the loan? You'd prefer they didn't repay the loan? I don't understand.

Perhaps that remark of mine was a bit unclear to some. What happened is that the management made people think they paid everything back. And they even made commercials exploiting that fact, whereas it turns out they plugged one hole with another. That's what I meant by that.

Excuse me while I don't give a shit.

Fair enough. It's your money they're playing with.

[wazootyman]

GM returned [[aka repaid) the $8 billion in fiscal aid [[or loans) from the American & Canadian governments. This was made clear; they "repaid the loans," despite the fact that you find it misleading. The government still has a large stake in GM [[60.1%), with an estimated worth at about $2.1 billion, that they can sell when it reaches the $50 billion mark, equivalent to the value of the equity when they purchased it. It's possible the government can sell it for even more, depending on its value. This can't happen until GM goes public.

I can't imagine it being any clearer. What's so hard to understand?

[Gistok]

Apparently some folks here are misinformed about Whitehouse [[originator of this thread)...

He's from the Netherlands... thus he's 1) not a teabagger.... 2) none of his tax money is involved here....

Up to speed now?

[Whitehouse]

Thanks G!

I was puzzled by some response here.

[artds]

People need to stop re-writing history by pretending like Ford engaged in some huge act of capitalistic morality by refusing to accept money that the government had offered them.

Ford went to Congress and asked the government for a $9 billion line of credit, and they would have tapped it without thinking twice if they needed to. Fortunately, Ford was in slightly better shape than the other 2 Detroit automakers and had enough cash on hand to make it through 2009, and things turned around before it go to the point that Ford needed to accept government money.

So Ford is not on some moral high ground compared to GM and Chrysler. All three had been very poorly run for more than a decade and an all three were in terrible shape; Ford just happened to be in slightly less terrible shape.

[artds]

GM returned [[aka repaid) the $8 billion in fiscal aid [[or loans) from the American & Canadian governments. This was made clear; they "repaid the loans," despite the fact that you find it misleading. The government still has a large stake in GM [[60.1%), with an estimated worth at about $2.1 billion, that they can sell when it reaches the $50 billion mark, equivalent to the value of the equity when they purchased it. It's possible the government can sell it for even more, depending on its value. This can't happen until GM goes public.

I can't imagine it being any clearer. What's so hard to understand?

There's nothing about it that is hard to understand, and you're either being disingenuous or you don't understand the situation.

When Ed Whitacre goes on TV and tells taxpayers who were upset over having to loan money to GM that they shouldn't be mad at GM anymore because it repaid its loans, and then it turns out that the money was simply repaid with other money the taxpayer had to give GM, it should be pretty clear to anyone who gives it a moment's thought why the taxpayers aren't jumping for joy over this.

[kryptonite]

Apparently some folks here are misinformed about Whitehouse [[originator of this thread)...

He's from the Netherlands... thus he's 1) not a teabagger.... 2) none of his tax money is involved here....

Up to speed now?

= Internet Crank??

[Jimaz]

"capitalistic morality"? What's that?

[econ expat]

People need to stop re-writing history by pretending like Ford engaged in some huge act of capitalistic morality by refusing to accept money that the government had offered them.

Ford went to Congress and asked the government for a $9 billion line of credit, and they would have tapped it without thinking twice if they needed to. Fortunately, Ford was in slightly better shape than the other 2 Detroit automakers and had enough cash on hand to make it through 2009, and things turned around before it go to the point that Ford needed to accept government money.

So Ford is not on some moral high ground compared to GM and Chrysler. All three had been very poorly run for more than a decade and an all three were in terrible shape; Ford just happened to be in slightly less terrible shape.

Not to mention members of the Ford family just happened to want to keep their control of the company. A government bailout would not have been engineered that would allow them to keep their controlling interest. Indeed, they did go to Washington and whatever terms were discussed were unacceptable to Ford.

[hudkina]

There's nothing about it that is hard to understand, and you're either being disingenuous or you don't understand the situation.

When Ed Whitacre goes on TV and tells taxpayers who were upset over having to loan money to GM that they shouldn't be mad at GM anymore because it repaid its loans, and then it turns out that the money was simply repaid with other money the taxpayer had to give GM, it should be pretty clear to anyone who gives it a moment's thought why the taxpayers aren't jumping for joy over this.

GM's motivation is to get the highest return on investment for its shareholders. In this case, its largest shareholder happens to be the U.S. Treasury. If you don't think every company uses misleading information to sell their image then you must be relatively new to advertising... GM's image is relatively weak at the moment. Creating this commercial is an attempt to give the company a better image. In a sense it is trying to manipulate public perception, but in the end isn't that what needs to happen?

People need to realize that regardless of who is the majority shareholder in the company, GM is producing some SERIOUSLY good cars. While Ford has been getting all of the positive buzz for not taking the loans, everyone is forgetting the fact that GM's newly released vehicles are just as good as [[and in many cases better than) the stuff coming out of Dearborn and even Japan. If GM needs to manipulate certain consumers into thinking they "repaid" their loans so that those people will finally decide to take a look at their products, then that's probably for the better. Wouldn't you rather GM be a success so the Treasury can get back as much of its investment as possible?

What should be the bigger issue here? GM producing a misleading commercial in an attempt to win over skeptical consumers, or the Treasury [[and in turn the taxpayers of the U.S.) getting back as much of its investment with the eventual GM IPO?

[JBMcB]

People need to stop re-writing history by pretending like Ford engaged in some huge act of capitalistic morality by refusing to accept money that the government had offered them.

Ford took a $5.9 billion loan in 2009, under the DoE's EISA program.