Government mulls fresh aid to GMAC

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Text

WASHINGTON (AP) ? The government is close to providing auto lender GMAC with billions of dollars in fresh aid, according to people with familiar with the matter.

The cash infusion is intended to help the company make loans for General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC vehicles. The people spoke on condition of anonymity Thursday because they were not authorized to speak before a formal announcement by the Treasury Department.

The move would come after GMAC failed a bank "stress test" earlier this month, with the Treasury mandating the company raise $11.5 billion within six months.

GMAC Financial Services received $5 billion from the government's $700 billion financial bailout program in December. In return, the government received 5 million shares of GMAC, and told the company it must extend financing services to Chrysler, which filed for bankruptcy protection April 30.

The expected dose of new aid would mark the government's latest attempt to break through credit clogs and spur more lending, a necessary ingredient to lifting the country out of recession. It also would increase the government's role in bailing out the auto industry and give Treasury more control over GMAC.

The Wall Street Journal said the Treasury will lend GMAC more than $7 billion. The Detroit News put the amount at $7.5 billion.

Analysts suggest fresh government aid, along with the merger of Chrysler's financial arm, would make GMAC a lending powerhouse that would give GM and Chrysler a huge advantage over their competitors. A U.S.-controlled GMAC would have the power to offer better loan terms to buyers of GM and Chrysler cars and trucks as a way of steering business to the troubled automakers.

GMAC, which reported a first-quarter loss of $675 million, said earlier this week it has seen rising defaults in its auto finance division. That, combined with soured assets in its Residential Capital LLC mortgage unit, makes it more difficult for the company to raise the additional capital from private investors.

The banking arm of GMAC changed its name to Ally Bank last week in an effort to repair its tarnished image and attract customers.



wait!? GMAC is getting ANOTHER 7.5 BILLION? err is that really a good idea?
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Originally posted by: waggy
Text

WASHINGTON (AP) ? The government is close to providing auto lender GMAC with billions of dollars in fresh aid, according to people with familiar with the matter.

The cash infusion is intended to help the company make loans for General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC vehicles. The people spoke on condition of anonymity Thursday because they were not authorized to speak before a formal announcement by the Treasury Department.

The move would come after GMAC failed a bank "stress test" earlier this month, with the Treasury mandating the company raise $11.5 billion within six months.

GMAC Financial Services received $5 billion from the government's $700 billion financial bailout program in December. In return, the government received 5 million shares of GMAC, and told the company it must extend financing services to Chrysler, which filed for bankruptcy protection April 30.

The expected dose of new aid would mark the government's latest attempt to break through credit clogs and spur more lending, a necessary ingredient to lifting the country out of recession. It also would increase the government's role in bailing out the auto industry and give Treasury more control over GMAC.

The Wall Street Journal said the Treasury will lend GMAC more than $7 billion. The Detroit News put the amount at $7.5 billion.

Analysts suggest fresh government aid, along with the merger of Chrysler's financial arm, would make GMAC a lending powerhouse that would give GM and Chrysler a huge advantage over their competitors. A U.S.-controlled GMAC would have the power to offer better loan terms to buyers of GM and Chrysler cars and trucks as a way of steering business to the troubled automakers.

GMAC, which reported a first-quarter loss of $675 million, said earlier this week it has seen rising defaults in its auto finance division. That, combined with soured assets in its Residential Capital LLC mortgage unit, makes it more difficult for the company to raise the additional capital from private investors.

The banking arm of GMAC changed its name to Ally Bank last week in an effort to repair its tarnished image and attract customers.



wait!? GMAC is getting ANOTHER 7.5 BILLION? err is that really a good idea?




Why not? We can just print whatever we need!
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
and bush couldnt burn our money in iraq fast enough.

Bush isn't president anymore. I know Democrats are slow on the uptake, but try to stay with us.
 

Fear No Evil

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2008
5,922
0
0
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
and bush couldnt burn our money in iraq fast enough.

Bush isn't president anymore. I know Democrats are slow on the uptake, but try to stay with us.

I think most democrats think Bush _IS_ still in office.
 

cubeless

Diamond Member
Sep 17, 2001
4,295
1
81
i was wondering who 'ally' bank is... they are offering 2.5% on plain savings, vs. 1.5 at ing... gov giving them free money sure helps them compete...
 

Andrew1990

Banned
Mar 8, 2008
2,153
0
0
Now guys, the president does not control stuff like this so blaming the democrats right off the bat will get you no where. Congress is to blame so who is the majority as of today?
 

geno

Lifer
Dec 26, 1999
25,074
4
0
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
and bush couldnt burn our money in iraq fast enough.

Is that really a rational argument here? I'm far more pro-Obama than I was pro-Bush and you have to admit there is an awful lot of spending going on... Throwing Bush into the argument doesn't do much since the current spending eclipses Bush's.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: Andrew1990
Now guys, the president does not control stuff like this so blaming the democrats right off the bat will get you no where. Congress is to blame so who is the majority as of today?

cnn link

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The Obama administration announced Thursday that it has invested $7.5 billion in GMAC, aiming to prop up the troubled lender and boost its ability to make loans to Chrysler dealers and customers


you were saying?
 

RyanPaulShaffer

Diamond Member
Jul 13, 2005
3,434
1
0
Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
and bush couldnt burn our money in iraq fast enough.

Bush isn't president anymore. I know Democrats are slow on the uptake, but try to stay with us.

I think most democrats think Bush _IS_ still in office.

"THIS IS ALL BUSH'S FAULT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :|:frown::thumbsdown:"

;)
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
and bush couldnt burn our money in iraq fast enough.

remind me again who has spent more?

Debt went from 6tr to 11tr under Bush. I don't think Obama has spent 5tr yet. Let us not forget that it wasn't Obama who caused this situation in the first place, thus, the measures used to try and fix it aren't 100% his fault either.
 

Pulsar

Diamond Member
Mar 3, 2003
5,224
306
126
I'm surprised no one here has mentioned that GMAC is owned largely by Cerberus capital management. It's no wonder they're getting handed the money.

In addition, GMAC has been declared a 'bank'. This allows them to lend at rates in the range of 2%, where their competitors like Ford Finance cannot, because of their bond rating (they are not a bank).
 

Arcex

Senior member
Mar 23, 2005
722
0
0
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
and bush couldnt burn our money in iraq fast enough.

remind me again who has spent more?

Debt went from 6tr to 11tr under Bush. I don't think Obama has spent 5tr yet. Let us not forget that it wasn't Obama who caused this situation in the first place, thus, the measures used to try and fix it aren't 100% his fault either.

Gotta agree with that. I'm not at all happy about how much money is going out the door, but considering I'm not an expert on financial or economic matters I'd say some of it is necessary.

As an aside, spending money in the HOPE that it will help the economy is one thing, dumping money into a failed war for oil and so that large amounts of that money can be given to business associates and friends is another thing completely.
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
and bush couldnt burn our money in iraq fast enough.

So if Obama kicked puppies, that'd be OK, because Bush probably kicked puppies, too (or at least had Dick Cheney do it).
 

Arcex

Senior member
Mar 23, 2005
722
0
0
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
and bush couldnt burn our money in iraq fast enough.

So if Obama kicked puppies, that'd be OK, because Bush probably kicked puppies, too (or at least had Dick Cheney do it).

Dick Cheney would never kick a puppy, it ruins the flavor.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
"But Bush...!" counter in this thread so far: 3

So, you're willing to let the blame for Bush's actions go unaccounted for?

Let me guess, you're one of those guys in the office that fucks everything up and blames it on everybody else?
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
and bush couldnt burn our money in iraq fast enough.

So if Obama kicked puppies, that'd be OK, because Bush probably kicked puppies, too (or at least had Dick Cheney do it).

*chuckle*

 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Originally posted by: Arcex
Originally posted by: Mursilis
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
and bush couldnt burn our money in iraq fast enough.

So if Obama kicked puppies, that'd be OK, because Bush probably kicked puppies, too (or at least had Dick Cheney do it).

Dick Cheney would never kick a puppy, it ruins the flavor.

:laugh:
Thanks for the chuckles!