User 373847

A Look at George Soros's Recent Trades

I really love to see Ford doing so well, even though the Gov't is paying the bills of their competitors with taxpayer dollars, refusing to grant Ford Credit Industrial bank status and generally doing everything to stack the deck against them.
Honest capitalism, Great Products at Fair prices kicking government subsidies ass... Go Alan!

Ford Fusion Gets Top Marks, Company Stock Soars

I'm glad to see Ford doing well too, They're the "comeback kid" of Automakers. Practically counted out only 2 years ago...

I don't like the cards stacked against them with all the gov't cash GM and Fiat have and don't need to pay back, holding up the industrial bank status for Ford Credit etc. etc.

Dollar vs. Yuan: Exchange Rates Aren't the Problem. Or the Solution

Your point about the trade imbalance between Japan and the U.S. not changing when the yen was rebalanced to the dollar misses some very important points. Many of the things the Japanese wanted to buy from America, such as cars, (yes cars), and motorcycles, were rendered unavailable due to trade barriers. At the same time the exchange rate was reset, there was huge demand in Japan for Harley Davidson motorcycles. They were outlawed. No bike with an engine larger than 750cc was allowed on their roads. How many Harleys were they likely to sell once it became illegal to ride them on the road? There was also huge demand for American muscle cars and big luxury cars. They made a law forbidding any V-8 engined cars on their roads too, saying they were too big, too fast, and too powerful. That gutted the biggest demand for American goods in Japan. When we offered V-6 engined cars, they weren't allowed to be sold at any existing dealers, and Every Single Car had to be Individually inspected before it could leave the dock, thereby raising the price and reinstalling the trade barriers.

They just switched from currency manipulated economic barriers to practical and legal barriers.

It is exactly the same in China now. They can sell virtually whatever they want here, but for us to sell a car in china, they have to be built in china and a chinese manufacturer must be partnered with the American company. That gives them half ownership for free, access to all technology, profits, just for access to their market.

Edmunds' Unrealistic Forecasts Hurting Auto Industry

Another consideration is the fact that the program was announced long before it was implemented so it likely took sales from months previous to the program. Oct. sales imply there wasn't many forward sales stolen. Edmunds evaluation seems pretty biased to me. I believe they had a conclusion and backed the data into it.

Bailout Nation Mentality: Ford Workers Reject Further Concessions

Such a staggering amount of misinformation over this situation. The CAW you are lauding as playing ball with the company and a shining example of cooperativeness is exactly the opposite. The concessions they recently voted for are a watered down version of the concessions the UAW voted for early this year. They've been dragging their feet and threatening to strike for 8 months and finally voted now. The UAW, on the other hand, Voluntarily voted themselves a pay and benefit cut in Mar. of this year. Without a bankruptcy. That renegotiated contract is the basis of GM and Fiats contract.
Second, the contracts between GM Fiat and Ford are already pattern agreements. Ford does not have any competitive disadvantage compared to the "bankruptcy contracts" GM and Fiat have. Wage rates, benefits, health care, etc. are the same for all of them. The only difference was the no strike clause and the wage freeze on new hires. Ford is allowed to hire 9000 new hires under their current contract. They have laid off and retired almost 50,000 in the last few years and there is a vanishingly small probability they will hire 9000 people in the next 2 years when the contract is up again. It is far more likely they will lay off 9000 than hire them.
The no strike clause is the real and only issue Ford was interested in. The language in the contract doesn't change cost structure or competitiveness or anything at all monetarily. Management simply fears that the UAW would forget how much debt GM and Fiat layed off on the taxpayers or simply defaulted on in bankruptcy. First, Ford hasn't had a strike in 33 years. That means that virtually everyone working at Ford has never had a strike. Why does everyone assume it would happen? Second, how could Ford workers ever get a wage or benefit improvement in the next contract since GM and FIAT have the no strike clause? The answer is they can't. The issue is a non issue. Ford management pressed because they could and because it would simplify a contract negotiation in 2011.

How Auto Bailout Is Punishing Ford

Fiat got Jeep Free, Dodge trucks and minivans Free, a dealer and distribution network Free, assembly plants Free, and 12 Billion Dollars of Taxpayer Money for Free.

We got Shafted.

Buy Ford Shares on the Stock Dilution

Even with all the cards stacked against them, using bankruptcy to eliminate dealers and renege on contracts, using government money to 0% finance their cars, etc. etc... I believe excellent leadership, playing fair in the face of adversity, The powerful forces of true capitalism, and their high quality will allow Ford to win in the end.

Chrysler and Bankruptcy: The Gory Details

If the debtholders didn't want to be junior to the government in repayment, they should not have accepted the bailout money from Bush way back in Dec. How much all this will help is a big question. Chrysler's quality was distinctly inferior to Ford, GM, Honda, and Toyota. How much will this change? Cerberus gutted the company of future product, what will they produce but reskinned current models that are already lower quality than all their competitors? When Fiat/Chrysler models come out in 18-24 months, will there still be a company left to produce them?

Chrysler and Bankruptcy: The Gory Details

When Bush gave Chrysler 4 billion dollars last December, wasn't there a stipulation that the money must be repaid in front of everyone else? Weren't the terms spelled out clearly that Chrysler must repay the 4 billion dollars if they did not successfully complete several restructuring tasks like reducing debt, and renegotiating a new labor agreement? Didn't they fail to do those things which triggered the requirement to immediately repay the loan? What right do the secured debtholders have at all before the government debt is fully repaid?

How Trucks and Tariffs Contributed to GM, Chrysler Failures

I believe the 25% tariff only applies to light trucks made in South Korea, where their own regulations effectively restrict us from selling Anything there.
China only allows selling cars in country, that are made in country, and the plant must be half owned by a Chinese company.
Japan has numerous restrictions designed to stop the sales of any foreign cars, trucks, or motorcycles in their own country.
Several European countries have import duties on American vehicles of 25-30%
Often the reasoning of the countries that place restrictions on imports is that we sell our beef and grain there that is government subsidized, so they place tariffs on cars and trucks in return.

The Day the Capital Structure Died

Over and over people blather on about the "secured debtholders" They conveniently ignore that the debtholders effectively removed their secured status when they allowed the government to give Chrysler bailout money. The government instantly became the Only secured debtholder. No one said a word. They were happy to get the money. They have absolutely no business whining about it now. If Chrysler were liquidated right now, and the government given back all the money it is owed, The secured debtholders would have little or nothing left. They would have the right to complain if they weren't given their share of the remains.
How much do you think would be left after they repaid the billions they were loaned?

Detroit's Face-Off with Bankers

The government required that the TARP money be re payed if the company didn't have a satisfactory restructuring plan. They did not. Given that was the requirement for getting the money in the first place, the argument that it is subordinate debt to the banks falls apart.

Current Popular Argument Against AIG Bonuses Takes the Wrong Viewpoint

10% credit card losses is completely ridiculous. All the math that is derived from that ridiculous assumption is also ridiculous. There are times in history that charging rates similar to what credit card companies charge now would be criminal. They should be criminal now as well.

Ford: Convertible Trust Not Preferred

They can also be converted to common at the rate of 2.82 shares of common for each share of preferred. That is pretty much the price they have fallen to.