GM Union - Bond holder stake.

[Andy]

Car companies absolutely do fold. They of course sell off any assets they have but the brand folds. When a company sells off everything (sometimes to one buyer but often broken up into pieces) and the new owner does not continue producing THE ORIGINAL BRAND... guess what... come on put that thinking cap on... THE ORIGINAL BRAND IS OUT OF BUSINESS

Ok so you are not completely incompetent.

Now the new company may or may not still stay in that same industry. They may be doing the purchase just to put competition out of business. They may take that market share and sell a new different product that they also own.

So you are admitting that bankruptcy might completely end GM as we know it, yet some how it's not like what happened to all those other car companies that "went out of business" before?

Essentially your entire argument rests on "GM" TM the name General Motors, will stick around, which remains to be seen. Because they are closing plants, just like they would had their not been a bailout. Workers are losing jobs, just like if there hadn't been a bailout. They are filing for bankruptcy, just like there if there had not been a bailout. OOOoooo but the name "General Motors" will still be with us... well yippy skip. About as smart as Obama trying to get in the White House through a window.

And just for kicks since this is somewhat fairly recent... just what AMC model is being offered in 2009. [/COLOR]

Jeep was part of AMC before Chrysler bought it. In fact the AMC plant that built Jeep in Ohio, is still in operation... (until Obama's forced bankruptcy to Fiat I wager)

Other traces of AMC remain within the present-day Chrysler. AMC's Toledo, Ohio plants continue to turn out Jeep Wranglers and Libertys as well as parts and components for Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep vehicles (although Toledo Machining and Forge is slated for closure as of 2005).

Although it was brought to market under Chrysler, the Jeep Grand Cherokee was actually designed and developed by AMC. It's amazing you don't know this stuff.

This was a step plan in during the worst economic downturn since THE GREAT DEPRESSION... THE BUSH RECESSION. The goals being to both keep manufacturing & sales up as much as possible (that means jobs) and guarantee warranties while the company tried to shed divisions and sell brands off to outside buyers. Bankruptcy was always a possibility to finalize everything that legally needed to take place but it would have made a much MUCH worst impact and made GM worth even less to any outside buyers had they just tanked months ago.

In a few short months from now when GM is a completely revitalized lean & mean companies tooled up to produce the new wave of state of the art fuel efficient, less polluting cars. That combined with the confidence in knowing that GM is now here to stay will cause sales will jump and you'll be crying like a little 2 year old...

Right, the Bush reccession that started with Democrat legislation passed in the 90s, and democrat socialist policy passed under Bush, and made worse by democrat legislation passed under Obama. Yeah, got it.

Yeah GM might emerge after dozens of plants close, and thousands lose their jobs, and other companies take over their name plates... just like all those companies you listed before. Brilliant sparky. You don't know jack... so pathetic.

Oh, and just so you don't forget you said American Motors Corporation just "switched over" AND THAT'S NOT OUT OF BUSINESS.

No, I guess there is no simple concept you do not have a hard time understanding. AMC was BOUGHT OUT. Jeep, an AMC name plate, was SWITCHED OVER to Chrysler. Again, why was AMC bought out? Because they were going out of business. And they did go out of business, but that doesn't mean everyone lost their jobs. The AMC line of cars known as Jeep, still exists. The plants that built those cars still exists, the people who worked at the factory are still working there.(assuming they didn't retire or die or whatever)

Why is this so hard for you? Oh right, you don't know jack. Sorry. Why can't I find intelligent people to debate with. Why is the left so full of ignorant idiots that can't understand what "bankruptcy" means, without trying to blame Bush for every toilet that fails to flush? Your whole argument is about as stupid as the "obstructionist republicans" theory, that you can't find a single bill they obstructed that would have made a difference.

 

[laughinatreps]

The fact is the bond holders have an unrealistic view of what their holdings are worth in their current state of decline... and the workers themselves have a very vested interest in building the company back up.

If the company goes completely out of business the bond holders get almost nothing. But if they think they will be treated so much better in a bankruptcy court then they have every right to go that way & see. I bet it will be about the same myself.

I could not have put it any better.

The bond holders are cutting off their nose to spite their face.

It is very similar to the NHL strike a couple years back. They were told by people smarter than themselves "Take this deal, it is the best return you are going to see" and they still refused. Now, when GM goes into bankruptcy, they are going to be lucky to get 20% of what they WERE offered. Too much money has the effect of increasing illogical thinking many times......Ask MC Hammer....

 

[Andy]

I could not have put it any better.

The bond holders are cutting off their nose to spite their face.

Now, when GM goes into bankruptcy, they are going to be lucky to get 20% of what they WERE offered. Too much money has the effect of increasing illogical thinking many times......Ask MC Hammer....

So let me get this straight.... the Unions which are owed $10 billion were offered 39% stake. The Bond Holders which were owed $25 Billion, were offered a 10% stake.

In your world it's possible that they could get a worse deal in Bankruptcy court? How? If $10 Billion is worth 39% of the company, how could they possibly get less than the 10% they were offered when they are owed two and a half times as much?

 

[laughinatreps]

And in your world the gamblers get what they think they deserve. neat how that works eh?

They did not invest as much capital as they are saying they are owed, they believe they should still see a return on their investment and the rest of the world be damned. Unfortunately the real world doesn't operate like that. You can lose money on your 401K, you can lose money on day to day trading, YOU CAN LOSE MONEY ON BONDS. There is no guarantee, they knew the risk they were taking, yet now that the economy has gone south instead of north, they don't want to take the hit.

And yes, it is a verifiable fact, that now that they have declined the offer from GM, they will, in all likelihood see ever smaller returns.

"But the source added that Treasury believed the offer made to GM creditors, which would give them 225 shares of GM stock for every $1,000 they are owed, is fair and equitable, and that it is not likely to be substantially increased. The 225 shares would be worth $324 based on Tuesday's closing price, although the value of these shares could be significantly less after a reorganization.

However, if GM does go into bankruptcy, the source said that Treasury believes the bondholders would likely get even less than what was offered.

"In any kind of liquidation scenario, they would get nothing or something unbelievably small," said the source.

The stock being offered bondholders would be equal to only about 10% of the company. GM's stated plan is for the government and a union-controlled trust fund to own 89% of the company between them."

 

[GenSeneca]

And in your world the gamblers get what they think they deserve. neat how that works eh?

Andy is correct... and you've done nothing to repudiate his point that the Unions (and government) are getting a disproportionate return on their "gamble" compared to the others.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Six or so months ago you were all Pro-Bailout, saying that we had to bail out the auto industry, that bankruptcy would be the end of US auto makers... You were blasting us for saying they should be allowed to fail, that they should skip the bailout and go straight into bankruptcy... We said then the bailouts would fail and you said then that we must have crystal balls to "know" what was going to happen... We don't need crystal balls now, we didn't need one then, we won't need one in the future because we have history to show us such policy suggestions have never worked and are doomed to fail.

Here is Andy from 12/4/08 responding to the typical claim that we needed the bailout because bankruptcy would mean the death of the auto industry:

Andy must be a psychic!

actuly I was all torn about it, but sided pro bail out....with monitoring and making sure that this was not like the banks who just got handed what ever they wanted and no idea for what.

 

[Andy]

actuly I was all torn about it, but sided pro bail out....with monitoring and making sure that this was not like the banks who just got handed what ever they wanted and no idea for what.

But even with oversight under Obama, what's happened? The banks that were failing, still failed. AIG and others were either bought out, or went bankrupt and bought out. In either case, they still failed. GM and Chrysler with oversight, still failed. Chrysler is going the way of the Yugo under Fiat, and GM is going to be broken up. In either case, they failed.

No matter how you slice or dice this situation up, not one single company was spared. Not one bailout saved anyone from anything. Government intervention created the housing bust to begin with, and now they blew through $10 Trillion to "fix" what they broke, and it's still broke.

At least with GM, it was Unions and not government, that caused their problems. But they still fixed nothing at all. It was just a massive waste of money.

 

[top gun]

"Blessed are the young, for they shall inherit the national debt." --President Herbert Hoover (1874-1964)

Andy... THE GREAT DEPRESSION Herbert Hoover and THE GREAT RECESSION George W. Bush.

The TRIAD of misrepresentation, misinterpretation, and missed the boat entirely.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

But even with oversight under Obama, what's happened? The banks that were failing, still failed. AIG and others were either bought out, or went bankrupt and bought out. In either case, they still failed. GM and Chrysler with oversight, still failed. Chrysler is going the way of the Yugo under Fiat, and GM is going to be broken up. In either case, they failed.

No matter how you slice or dice this situation up, not one single company was spared. Not one bailout saved anyone from anything. Government intervention created the housing bust to begin with, and now they blew through $10 Trillion to "fix" what they broke, and it's still broke.

At least with GM, it was Unions and not government, that caused their problems. But they still fixed nothing at all. It was just a massive waste of money.

bla bla bla it was the unions cry cry cry...facts? no never !

you can keep crying unions but will never make it true. Unions actuly have worked with the comapny to keep it going making huge cuts. You know what a manager CEO top dog in a large company is? To fix problems and make the company better....if the Unions where such a big problem, then in fact it was there job to fix that and they did not do that did they? You know what the unions Job is? to protect the workers and make sure they get the best deal they can. somehow in your little mind, workers should not ask to be paid well, or what health care...but the CEO can get paid as much as you want, no matter how bad things get, and not be held to blame for the failing of the company...what a Freaking sweet deal, loads of money and no responsibility...But I can see why you think this way. you are just like some of those old bad leaders....no vison of the future, no understanding of what people realy want, willing to be happy with sales numbers that dont reflect that you had to use huge discounts to sell them while others sold there cars on value, merit, design, quality....did I fail to point out those companys are not asking for bail outs?

and your nonsense about how if we never steped in, they would have just went chapt 11 and nothing would have changed....Bull. Chrysler with no bail out would be liquidated...it would not be still around trying to work out a deal with Fiat to save teh company...it would be done. GM would if they did not have to liquidate, would be stopped right now, no operations, no plants running, ( thus people not working) and trying to save itself based on what a court told them, with out being able to do the deals they have already done with the time needed to sell Hummer, Saturn, and make deals with the Unions...It would be like a company I use to deal with untill few weeks ago...who is now dead in the water, but still not under...but not going anyplace and its workers all not working.

I wonder ,what makes you think you are actuly qualified at all to talk abou t any of this? I find it hard to belive you have any buisness schooling or anything...