The Big Three's Bailout Plan Report Card 11 comments
Rick Newman
About this author:
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
After a disastrous performance before Congress in November, execs from General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler have finally offered some meat to members of Congress wondering if the automakers deserve $34 billion in federal aid. All three automakers have submitted plans to the government showing how they would slash costs, build better cars, become profitable, and pay back the taxpayers. Members of Congress will be able to peruse private plans containing proprietary information on operations and competitive strategy, but each automaker also released a public plan outlining its goals. Here's how the plans rate:
Originality: B- After years of prodding by critics, GM finally stopped defending its bloated lineup of eight brands and said it will focus on Chevrolet, GMC, Cadillac, and Buick, which account for 83 percent of sales. But it didn't say whether it will kill or sell its weaker divisions—Saturn, Pontiac, Saab, and Hummer. It only said it will "explore alternatives."
Honesty: C GM offered profitability projections under a few different scenarios, because it can't say for sure when the economy, and the car market, will rebound. But its worst-case scenario might be too rosy—and credibility is a chronic GM problem. "One of our primary concerns here is that the downside scenario is not much worse than the current run rate of sales," wrote Credit Suisse analyst Chris Ceraso. Beyond the $18 billion GM is asking for now, "the government may have to write another check before the end of 2Q 09," he predicts. GM also pledges to reduce the number of dealers by 27 percent by 2012—but that depends on relaxed state laws and other factors GM may not be able to control.
Thoroughness: B+ GM's 37-page public plan lays bare many of its problems. GMAC, its troubled financing arm, can only finance 6 percent of GM vehicle purchases today, for instance, compared with 50 percent a year ago. There's also surprising detail on things like labor costs, new-model plans, and nuts-and-bolts things GM plans to do to improve fuel economy and make its cars more appealing, like installing 6-speed automatic transmissions in the majority of its fleet by 2012.
Humility. B In congressional testimony, CEO Rick Wagoner finally admitted that "we made mistakes." And the tone of GM's plan is contrite without being defensive. Plus, CEO Rick Wagoner's salary will be sacrificed to the gods of populism: He'll get paid $1 in 2009, as will all board members.
Overall: B- GM's plan has the hallmarks of a good-faith presentation. But it doesn't address what could go wrong. That's unnerving because many GM projections have been wildly wrong in recent years. Still, GM has probably shown the planning—and the humility—it needs to get federal aid.
Originality: C Ford is in better shape than GM and Chrysler, and says that even though it wants a $9 billion credit line, it doesn't need emergency cash right now. So, there's less need to demonstrate desperation or radical changes in the works. Ford's 33-page plan includes a few new details on profitability targets and vehicle plans, but it doesn't offer any major changes beyond what Ford has said it's already doing, like shopping around the Volvo division.
Honesty: B Because Ford is in better shape than GM, its plan exposes fewer vulnerabilities. It also makes fewer risky promises that the automaker might not be able to keep.
Thoroughness: B- There's plenty of detail about steps Ford has already taken, and some new information on how the company plans to make money on small cars, transform its fleet away from big trucks and SUVs, and adopt electric battery technology. But it's not as forthcoming as GM's plan.
Humility: C Like Wagoner, Ford CEO Alan Mulally says he will work for $1 in 2009 if Ford gets federal help. But Ford also rejects the idea of giving government loans "senior status" so that taxpayers will get repaid first if Ford defaults on its debts, —even though it wants a line of credit at low government rates. The plan says that such priority status on government loans could upend the terms of other Ford debt and cause financial havoc. That may be so, but it's cheeky to ask for loans well below market interest rates without making concessions to get them.
Overall: B Ford needs less help, so it's asking for less and holding its cards closer than its Detroit counterparts.
Originality: D Unlike GM and Ford, Chrysler's only public bailout plan is a one-page highlight sheet derived from the private plan submitted to Congress. The highlights mention some electric vehicles Chrysler plans to build, but contain little or nothing that's new. And Chrysler says it needs $7 billion mainly to pay suppliers and just keep the assembly lines rolling. On its own, that's an unconvincing plea.
Honesty: C- Chrysler's owner, the private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management, has practically been flying banners saying Chrysler is up for sale—cheap. That's one reason it tried to arrange for a merger with GM earlier this year. Chrysler is the weakest of the Detroit 3, and a sale or merger may be the only way vestiges of Chrysler can survive. But there's no mention of that in the highlights. Instead, Chrysler offers an unsubstantiated promise that it could repay a $7 billion loan by 2012. But how it will stay in business until then remains a mystery.
Thoroughness: D Maybe the formal plan on file with Congress offers a full look at Chrysler's plan and its balance sheet. The highlights don't provide anything like that.
Humility: C CEO Bob Nardelli is joining the Dollar Club, too—but it's a safe bet he has already banked a huge signing bonus from Chrysler's private-equity parent. And while the highlights include a few factoids about great things Chrysler has accomplished or plans to do, there's no acknowledgement of bad planning or boneheaded decisions, or mention of things Chrysler needs to do differently.
Overall: D Maybe the congressional version is stronger, but the public version of Chrysler's viability plan makes it sound like they're not trying all that hard. But if you're interested in buying a car company . . .
Related Articles
|
Find People on SA
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largest
increase in followers
in the last 7 days-
1
David Fry
-
2
Philip Davis
-
3
Tyler Durden
-
4
Bill Gross
-
5
Peter Schiff
Fastest Climbers » -
1
-
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most activeSee all
Instabloggers.
Top Instabloggers » -
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 11 comments:
I went last year to look for a car, and what I saw, old technology, wrapped in a cheap metal, with poor mileage asking for too much money. And i asked the salesman of Dodge, GM and Ford? When are you going to produce something that really worth spending our money on?
How you cannot be embarrassed selling this junk? And I left and went to Honda.....
Will the automakers survive with the $25 billion that became $35 billion in a couple of weeks? probably they will be back in a month asking for another $50 billion! Better Bankruptcy Chapter 11, wash out all the bad blood...Renew and start over.....Makes more sense....Breal....
You dont really think the U.S. autoworker makes $70 an hour or are you that out of touch. do you know that labor represents ONLY 10% of the cost of a new car. do you understand that the proceeds or profits from Honda go directly to Japan. do you think honda or toyota will take care of their workers in retirement? not a prayer, they will leave that to the us taxpayer. you want real, there it is now get real.............
On Dec 05 02:30 AM Breal wrote:
> The CEOs of the Big Three, need to be punished along with all the
> rest involved in this mess. The government should freeze their assets,
> and all of those who were getting $70/hour should bailout themselves.
>
> I went last year to look for a car, and what I saw, old technology,
> wrapped in a cheap metal, with poor mileage asking for too much money.
> And i asked the salesman of Dodge, GM and Ford? When are you going
> to produce something that really worth spending our money on? <br/>How
> you cannot be embarrassed selling this junk? And I left and went
> to Honda.....
> Will the automakers survive with the $25 billion that became $35
> billion in a couple of weeks? probably they will be back in a month
> asking for another $50 billion! Better Bankruptcy Chapter 11, wash
> out all the bad blood...Renew and start over.....Makes more sense....Breal....
Your shrill post exposes you as very biased towards the UAW.
All you guys say the same things:
1) we don't make that much and
2) japanese cars are bad for you.
Cmon and tell us the truth: you are either an autoworker at a Big-3 plant or you're a retiree from the same.
Do you want a reliable car or truck which you don't have to send to a shop frequently or quit running long before 100,000 miles? Vehicles that don't stall on you when you need to get up and go?
I am sure if Big Three make reliable, quality, good looking, and reasonably priced vehicles, customers will line up to buy them.
On Dec 05 03:52 AM Homer II wrote:
> Hey someone44,
>
> Your shrill post exposes you as very biased towards the UAW.
> All you guys say the same things:
> 1) we don't make that much and
> 2) japanese cars are bad for you.
> Cmon and tell us the truth: you are either an autoworker at a Big-3
> plant or you're a retiree from the same.
Any of you Detroiters want to comment on that? I didn't think so.
And congratulations are in order, as well. You've been the major ingredient in making the Europeans, Japanese and S. Koreans the PREMIER car companies in the world. (What a joke!) Think about that, you bums. And, oh, CONGRATULATIONS.
On Dec 05 02:30 AM Breal wrote:
> The CEOs of the Big Three, need to be punished along with all the
> rest involved in this mess. The government should freeze their assets,
> and all of those who were getting $70/hour should bailout themselves.
>
> I went last year to look for a car, and what I saw, old technology,
> wrapped in a cheap metal, with poor mileage asking for too much money.
> And i asked the salesman of Dodge, GM and Ford? When are you going
> to produce something that really worth spending our money on? <br/>How
> you cannot be embarrassed selling this junk? And I left and went
> to Honda.....
> Will the automakers survive with the $25 billion that became $35
> billion in a couple of weeks? probably they will be back in a month
> asking for another $50 billion! Better Bankruptcy Chapter 11, wash
> out all the bad blood...Renew and start over.....Makes more sense....Breal....