Ktulu
Diamond Member
- Dec 16, 2000
- 4,354
- 0
- 0
Originally posted by: MadRat
Originally posted by: Mermaidman
How would a merger be beneficial?
Only one grave to dig rather than two.
Close. GM uses Chrysler to dig the grave and as soon as Chrysler is done GM smacks them in the back of the head with the shovel and buries them while making off with anything they can scavenge from them.
Thump553
Lifer
- Jun 2, 2000
- 12,676
- 2,430
- 126
LOL, excellent way of putting it. I can think of no possible upside to such a merger and plenty of down. Sounds like the dumbest idea since Blockbuster and Circuit City were talking of mergering-two sinking ships can only drag each other down.
However, as shown by the Wachovia situation, there are going to be plenty of mergers and snapping up of excellent companies in the next few months. Their stock prices are so depressed they are extremely tempting targets. A very negative consequence of this economic collapse is the continued concentration of corporations-an acceleration of the "too big to fail" concept.
What's more idiotic, the fact that they will produce them, or the fact that we demand them as a cause?
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
or letting 2 patients in the ICU, one of whom has been hemorrhaging
massive red ink for 4 consecutive quarters, share the same room.
i wonder if Cerberus has given any money to a lobbyist or a political
campaign to ask for a bail-out ?
PingSpike
Lifer
- Feb 25, 2004
- 21,732
- 561
- 126
My opinion? Chysler has nothing of value to GM. Their trucks get terrible mileage in a world where that is increasingly important. Their quality image is the worst of the big 3, hell their entire fleet is mostly gas suckers. Their small car offerings are the worst of the big 3, taking a "the hell with good gas mileage cars" approach at an even worse time then the one GM took in the late 90s early 2000s. And the company has already shown itself to adverse to mergers.
If GM were to merge with some one, they should buy some one that has things they don't...not some one with the same weaknesses, only amplified. About the only thing Chysler is really ok at is giant powerhouse trucks...a declining market that GM already has a dominate position in.
Plus, the last thing that company needs is more brand names. It needs to streamline so it can adapt quicker and cut costs.
If GM were to merge with some one, they should buy some one that has things they don't...not some one with the same weaknesses, only amplified. About the only thing Chysler is really ok at is giant powerhouse trucks...a declining market that GM already has a dominate position in.
Plus, the last thing that company needs is more brand names. It needs to streamline so it can adapt quicker and cut costs.
Ktulu
Diamond Member
- Dec 16, 2000
- 4,354
- 0
- 0
Well what if after GM overtakes Chrysler then they decide to sell off any Chrysler assets that might be of value like plants and equipment. Heck they might even make some money by selling off the Viper. I think all in all they could be able to make a few billion by taking Chrysler then selling them off piece by piece. Anyways just a thought.
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If we turn off our sarcasm meters, I will buy into the contention that dmcowen674
is the single cause of the economic crisis, that Dave caused the New York Times to publish his G.M. and Chrysler Explore Merger link of lies, and we should therefore ignore all of his opinions without the bother of responsibly refuting them with any actual use of logic.
Yes sir ree, we can assume Fox news is not fair and balanced because its been shown so many times that claim is false, but when dmcowen674 can corrupt the NYT, we are talking about a very dangerous man.
Throckmorton
Lifer
- Aug 23, 2007
- 16,830
- 3
- 0
cubeless
Diamond Member
- Sep 17, 2001
- 4,295
- 1
- 81
wow... will my silverado will have to stop sleeping in the same garage with my pt gt ragtop if they become step siblings?
actually they need to declare bankruptcy, clean out the unions, and reorganize as fresh, new companies... they may not get this chance again...
if you have to have a catastrophy, be sure to make something good come out of it...
actually they need to declare bankruptcy, clean out the unions, and reorganize as fresh, new companies... they may not get this chance again...
if you have to have a catastrophy, be sure to make something good come out of it...
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
Anyone who does not understand how the GM stockholder can get totally raped just does not understand economic power plays. Quite logically, GW in aggregate is worthless, poor products, greatly declining sales,
huge pension and debt obligations, and as a stockholder owned company, as all of that aggregate deficits and assets are wholly owned by GM stockholders. Nor are the assets of GM trivial, built up in prior years when GM was the automotive sales leader of the world. Which means GM owns plants, valuable machine tools, patient rights, dealer and sales networks, and all kinds of infrastructure worth mega billions if the company is liquidated.
Were GM to be liquidated in the normal bankruptcy process, an army of lawyers, watchdogs and courts would all add up to some fairness, as the interests of stockholders, pension funds, and all parties concerned
would prevent anyone from getting away with total highway robbery.
But there is where the financial power play comes in and its a multi step process. First some financial entity must buy the stockholders out at firesale prices. Then two losers can be combined into an even bigger loser. Then the next step is to somehow pull another ownership swap, put a group of thieves in charge, and they can systematically sell off all the assets of both GM and Chysler, and as the pack of thieves can then pocket the assets, and then simply declare all the debts should be put into a bankruptcy process without any remaining assets to counterbalance the debts.
The process is not logical or fair, but it sure can be profitable, especially if the GM stockholders do not resist being swindled or are sold down the river by the CEO they put in charge.
huge pension and debt obligations, and as a stockholder owned company, as all of that aggregate deficits and assets are wholly owned by GM stockholders. Nor are the assets of GM trivial, built up in prior years when GM was the automotive sales leader of the world. Which means GM owns plants, valuable machine tools, patient rights, dealer and sales networks, and all kinds of infrastructure worth mega billions if the company is liquidated.
Were GM to be liquidated in the normal bankruptcy process, an army of lawyers, watchdogs and courts would all add up to some fairness, as the interests of stockholders, pension funds, and all parties concerned
would prevent anyone from getting away with total highway robbery.
But there is where the financial power play comes in and its a multi step process. First some financial entity must buy the stockholders out at firesale prices. Then two losers can be combined into an even bigger loser. Then the next step is to somehow pull another ownership swap, put a group of thieves in charge, and they can systematically sell off all the assets of both GM and Chysler, and as the pack of thieves can then pocket the assets, and then simply declare all the debts should be put into a bankruptcy process without any remaining assets to counterbalance the debts.
The process is not logical or fair, but it sure can be profitable, especially if the GM stockholders do not resist being swindled or are sold down the river by the CEO they put in charge.
boomerang
Lifer
- Jun 19, 2000
- 18,890
- 642
- 126
Notwithstanding the mistake in the mileage figure, this is brought up here so many times it's just getting ridiculous. You guys seem to think that it takes 6 months from design to production. These vehicles were given the green light about 4 years ago. When you've got billions of dollars invested in the production a vehicle, you reach a point of no return. You have no real choice but to bring it to market.
Please don't bring up that crystal ball shit about how they should have been able to predict the market. Can you? If so, when will the stock market bottom out?
So take two corporations and put them together? Why not split up the amount of companies within each one. It seems stupid to get so big you can't even run the company right. Quality sucks for both of them.
I don't get this. It's like every company out there is merging. Pretty soon it will be FordChryGM.
I don't get this. It's like every company out there is merging. Pretty soon it will be FordChryGM.
Ktulu
Diamond Member
- Dec 16, 2000
- 4,354
- 0
- 0
Looks like Chrysler might be going the way of AMC
http://jalopnik.com/5064441/re...ler-eliminating-brands
http://jalopnik.com/5064441/re...ler-eliminating-brands
Update:
GM wants $10 billion of taxpayer money to buy Chrysler
10-28-2008GM seeks $10 billion in aid for merger
General Motors Corp has asked the U.S. government for roughly $10 billion in an unprecedented rescue package to support its acquisition of Chrysler LLC from Cerberus Capital Management.
The U.S. Treasury Department is considering a request for direct aid to facilitate the merger and a decision could come this week, sources familiar with the still-developing government response said on Monday.
The request for federal aid is being led by GM. The automaker's chief executive, Rick Wagoner, was in Washington in recent days to lobby administration officials.
Chrysler's U.S. sales have tumbled by 25 percent this year, almost twice the rate of decline for the overall market. GM's sales had dropped almost 18 percent through September.
GM's shares have slumped nearly 80 percent this year and its market value has dropped below what it was in 1929.
GM wants $10 billion of taxpayer money to buy Chrysler
10-28-2008GM seeks $10 billion in aid for merger
General Motors Corp has asked the U.S. government for roughly $10 billion in an unprecedented rescue package to support its acquisition of Chrysler LLC from Cerberus Capital Management.
The U.S. Treasury Department is considering a request for direct aid to facilitate the merger and a decision could come this week, sources familiar with the still-developing government response said on Monday.
The request for federal aid is being led by GM. The automaker's chief executive, Rick Wagoner, was in Washington in recent days to lobby administration officials.
Chrysler's U.S. sales have tumbled by 25 percent this year, almost twice the rate of decline for the overall market. GM's sales had dropped almost 18 percent through September.
GM's shares have slumped nearly 80 percent this year and its market value has dropped below what it was in 1929.
StageLeft
No Lifer
- Sep 29, 2000
- 70,150
- 5
- 0
Terrible waste of taxpayer money. Domestic automakers have been sucking longer than I have been alive. At some point, it's time to let them die. They seem to be cutting their wrists just fine without us bandaging them up just to let them leave the hospital and hack away when they get home anyway.
Wasn't a $25B loan already agreed to? In any case, maybe not, but originally it was going to be a loan at unrealistically positive interest rates. I thought it sounded like a bad loan, like lending to a crack head (you won't get it back). Now they're talking in part about simply giving money, with the credit line just one portion of that.
This is a disgusting idea.
Wasn't a $25B loan already agreed to? In any case, maybe not, but originally it was going to be a loan at unrealistically positive interest rates. I thought it sounded like a bad loan, like lending to a crack head (you won't get it back). Now they're talking in part about simply giving money, with the credit line just one portion of that.
This is a disgusting idea.
What do you expect to do with all those industrys employees when they start sucking on EI/Welfare/Social safety net? Wonder if that would be more than 10B, not to mention the loss of tax revenue on the factories/buisinesses ect....think that would be more than 10B?
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,591
- 5
- 0
StageLeft
No Lifer
- Sep 29, 2000
- 70,150
- 5
- 0
Most will get jobs. How long do you want to prop up a bad company for? What makes them so special? I don't see the government throwing money at movie gallery or realtors or luxury yacht owners? WTF makes these moribund companies so special that they deserve money? Even at the best of times they cannot even make money, why reward their abject failure?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter