Tell me why the taxpayer should be saving GM and Chrysler (and Ford) managers & shareholders at this stage of the game?
Surely it's time to have these assets pass into the hands of people prepared to manage these organizations on a globally competitive basis. Why do we have to prop up these stinking corpses? GM management are useless. The argument that these jobs will dissapear if GM goes bankrupt is rubbish. Most of these jobs will survive as the assets pass to those with the reserves and will to succeed. Management will enter the dustbin of history. The only people assisted by this proposed use of bailout money are the current GM managers and shareholders. Flush them all! They should be damned for inaction over decades...not saved!
Clarification added November 12, 2008:
Sorry, I left out the biggest beneficiary of the bailout for GM...the banks. The banks and their funds have hundreds of billions to lose if the current GM balance sheet is torched. The banks are the shareholders of the 12 private corporations which are the 12 Regional Reserve Banks. The office of the President has appointed Federal Reserve Board members who act as representatives of the Reserve System...not its Directors. They kept rates low for years while the banks loaned habnd over fist. Now they won't take the losses The shareholders have already been gutted. They only have $25B left in the pot. The banks want money for the junk paper they are holding. The only assets left to bridge the gap belong to the US taxpayer.
Clarification added November 16, 2008:
How will it end?
Never fear...the Democrats will buy the argument that the bailout is required to protect jobs and small business. Instead of making funds available to assist diplaced people and businesses in the course of a bankruptcy (where the banks as creditors lose their money...as they should), they will bail out the exisiting shareholders and keep the existing balance sheets on life support for another decade.
Obama will not veto.
The bailouts will go ahead and the banks will be protected against bankruptcy which will see them continue to own GM assets and rake in interest on their massive loans to GM.
The US Treasury will sell more paper and the Fed will print more Reserve Notes. The taxpayer will carry the real cost of the exercise through the hidden tax of expanding the currency (money supply) and devaluing it for everyone.
Its a loser's game. We will hit a wall one day and we will see the mother of all inflationary episodes as the real world of finite assets catches up with the imaginary world of uncontrolled fiat currency.
Regards,
Bill
Good Answers (10)
Richard R.
Secretary Board of Directors at Santa Fe Estate Planning Council - Secretary Board of Directors
Best Answers in: Accounting (3), Economics (3), Government Policy (1), Change Management (1), Enterprise Software (1)
The free market answer is NO, NO, NO. Ford and GM both should initiate a chpter 11 bankruptcy petition immediately and set about to re-organize the companys. These companys will then be able to re-structure their union contracts and gain control over the medical insurance costs for both employed and retired members, adjust the defined benefit plan pension liabilities, gain control over the labor costs. This will go along way toward providing the cash to re-tool the factories to meet the governmentally mandated engineering design changes from Congress and the EPA
New management from outside the company culture will be able to breathe new life and outlooks to the total entity.
Chrysler should enter an orderly liquidation process. This company has been extremely sick since Lee Iacocca left the helm.
No entity should be considered too big to fail, an attutde that has entered the national psyche.
Unemployment benefits terms should be shortened rather than lengthened. It is verfyable that significant numbers iof teh unemployed will stay in that status until forced to look for work by the expiration of their unemployment benefits.
Poetry to my ears.....
Let's say I have a business. I go to Las Vegas all the time and one weekend I gamble away all my money. Now I can't afford the business. Should taxpayers/government or my friends at the Casino give me loads of money to stay afloat? I don't think so. People got complacent and now we have to pay for their stupid mistakes. And it's not like a couple of hundred thousand dollars or something, no, we are talking probably over a trillion dollars once the dust settles. How Sad!~
Jonathan H.
Corporate Relocation & Logistics Professional
Best Answers in: Supply Chain Management (2), Event Marketing and Promotions (1), Economics (1), Graphic Design (1)
We shouldn't be. One of the best things about the free market is that companies that are failures are allowed to fail so their assets can once again be used productively. Propping up failed companies/business models results negative economic distortions that hurt everybody else.
Frank F.
►CEO/Bd Director ►IT Governance Advisor ►Future-Proof Strategy ►Keynotes ►Inno-Change ►Social Media Mktg ►China Advisor
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (276), Organizational Development (102), Change Management (81), Government Policy (48), Economics (30), Staffing and Recruiting (29), Corporate Governance (29), Career Management (28), Ethics (26), Equity Markets (24), Business Development (21), Planning (21), Mentoring (20), Business Analytics (17), Communication and Public Speaking (17), Education and Schools (15), Internationalization and Localization (15), Personnel Policies (14), Web Development (14), Small Business (12), Energy and Development (12), Job Search (11), Internet Marketing (11), Financial Regulation (10), Advertising (10), Professional Networking (10), Project Management (9), E-Commerce (9), Compensation and Benefits (8), Sales Techniques (8), Writing and Editing (8), Manufacturing (8), Computers and Software (8), International Law (7), Starting Up (7), Blogging (7), Accounting (6), Quality Management and Standards (6), Government Services (5), Work-life Balance (5), Offshoring and Outsourcing (5), Lead Generation (5), Software Development (5), Customer Service (4), Health Care (4), Treaties, Agreements and Organizations (4), Search Marketing (4), Nonprofit Management (4), Philanthropy (4), Social Enterpreneurship (4), Branding (4), Market Research and Definition (4), Business Plans (4), Biotech (4), Facilities Management (3), Certification and Licenses (3), Occupational Training (3), Conference Planning (3), Risk Management (3), Public Health and Safety (3), Exporting/Importing (3), Contracts (3), Employment and Labor Law (3), Guerrilla Marketing (3), Viral Marketing (3), Public Relations (3), Customer Relationship Management (3), Labor Relations (3), Currency Markets (3), Derivatives Markets (3), Futures Markets (3), Nonprofit Fundraising (3), Inventory Management (3), Personal Debt Management (3), Wealth Management (3), Product Design (3), Green Products (3), Enterprise Software (3), Telecommunications (3), Regulation and Compliance (2), Car and Train Travel (2), Freelancing and Contracting (2), Event Marketing and Promotions (2), Public Funding (2), Criminal Law (2), Corporate Law (2), Property Law (2), Direct Marketing (2), Graphic Design (2), Bond Markets (2), Commodity Markets (2), Packaging and Labeling (2), Supply Chain Management (2), Personal Investing (2), Personal Real Estate (2), Distribution (2), Professional Books and Resources (2), Incorporation (2), Green Business (2), Air Travel (1), Business Dining and Entertainment (1), Travel Tools (1), Resume Writing (1), Conference Venues (1), Budgeting (1), Foreign Investment (1), Mergers and Acquisitions (1), Government Contracts (1), Environmental Health (1), Antitrust Law (1), Finance and Securities Law (1), Events Marketing (1), Mobile Marketing (1), Hedge Funds (1), Option Markets (1), Individual Insurance (1), Industrial Design (1), Pricing (1), Positioning (1), Information Storage (1)
I agree entirely.
If GM and Ford (forget Chrysler, which should never have been bailed out before, and is a basket case) are unable to compete in the global automobile market, and are only capable of utterly mismanaging their business, then they should be allowed to fail.
The entire global industry is consolidating. And even if they are bailed out, this is only temporary. The Chinese will dominate this industry within 20 years or even 10.
I don't care how ridiculous the claims that 10% of jobs are somehow remotely connected to these dinosaurs. That's the stupid argument that Chrysler made, and Congress fell for it and bailed it out. What good did it do?!
If firms cannot learn to innovate and compete, then those jobs are not better than a welfare check. We are not doing anyone any favors by keeping them employed in companies which are going to fail anyway, unless they change.
Far better to use the funds on education and retraining programs in higher-value jobs.
Bill,
I like where your heads at on this. We now have a sick twisted type of corporate welfare system in place. Time to stop and place the assets back in the hands of the free markets.
Les D.
Software Quality Assurance Lead
Best Answers in: Government Policy (27), Using LinkedIn (16), Energy and Development (14), Change Management (13), Education and Schools (11), Career Management (11), Economics (10), Organizational Development (10), Business Development (9), Web Development (9), Equity Markets (8), Computers and Software (8), Ethics (7), Manufacturing (6), Starting Up (6), Biotech (6), Staffing and Recruiting (5), Environmental Health (5), Internationalization and Localization (5), Personal Investing (5), Market Research and Definition (5), Product Design (5), Computer Networking (5), Health Care (4), International Law (4), Nonprofit Management (4), Quality Management and Standards (4), Engineering (4), Green Business (4), Green Products (4), Job Search (3), Writing and Editing (3), Business Analytics (3), Packaging and Labeling (3), Project Management (3), Supply Chain Management (3), Positioning (3), Professional Networking (3), Small Business (3), Software Development (3), Certification and Licenses (2), Occupational Training (2), Accounting (2), Personnel Policies (2), Public Health and Safety (2), Treaties, Agreements and Organizations (2), Intellectual Property (2), Graphic Design (2), Labor Relations (2), Planning (2), Currency Markets (2), Wealth Management (2), Professional Books and Resources (2), Business Plans (2), E-Commerce (2), Enterprise Software (2), Information Storage (2), Telecommunications (2), Wireless (2), Facilities Management (1), Regulation and Compliance (1), Travel Tools (1), Freelancing and Contracting (1), Mentoring (1), Conference Venues (1), Foreign Investment (1), Venture Capital and Private Equity (1), Financial Regulation (1), Government Services (1), Compensation and Benefits (1), Work-life Balance (1), Exporting/Importing (1), Offshoring and Outsourcing (1), Customs, Tariffs and Taxes (1), Contracts (1), Corporate Law (1), Advertising (1), Guerrilla Marketing (1), Internet Marketing (1), Mobile Marketing (1), Lead Generation (1), Search Marketing (1), Corporate Governance (1), Bond Markets (1), Derivatives Markets (1), Hedge Funds (1), Philanthropy (1), Individual Insurance (1), Personal Taxes (1), Personal Debt Management (1), Personal Real Estate (1), Branding (1), Distribution (1), Industrial Design (1), Communication and Public Speaking (1), Professional Organizations (1), Blogging (1), Information Security (1)
only a bit serious, if we need to do something, perhaps a givaway (bailout) via the market, government coupons, only good on targeted vehicles next year, 25,000$ per taxpayer. Continuing this thought experiment, how much would the firms raise prices, and how little long term good would it do after a year of increased sales.
IMO even if we bail them out for billions, that is not going to solve the entrenched problems.... and economically, we might better use 25 or 50 billion divided into a thousand or two thousand investments in alternates, small electro cars, new fuel production from algi or cellulose wastes.
Hi Bill,
A very valid point raised. In the entire scenario the tax payer is made the scape goat and he never realises the benefit that he is going to get out of it. In India, its a similar situation where tax payers bear all the brunt of the inefficiencies and bureaucracy.
In this economic downturn, all the companies are looking of ways to cut costs and most of the initiatives taken and talked about really makes you wonder why these things are not followed in a boom. Why are things taken for granted till the time things go wrong and tax payers have to bear alal the costs of the mistakes made by the management of such organizations. In such scenarios where a company has gone on the verge of bankruptcy because of the unsound practices of the management, Govt. should not help and bail them out and by doing so will reduce the burden on the common man who is already faced with many uncertainities.
Regards,
Amit
Ray M.
Energy expert, educator, award winning sculptor
Best Answers in: Career Management (16), Ethics (16), Change Management (13), Using LinkedIn (12), Education and Schools (10), Manufacturing (10), Government Policy (7), Business Development (7), Mentoring (6), Personnel Policies (6), Economics (5), Small Business (5), Public Relations (4), Organizational Development (4), Equity Markets (4), Energy and Development (4), Accounting (3), Government Services (3), Exporting/Importing (3), Planning (3), Project Management (3), Engineering (3), Product Design (3), Commercial Real Estate (2), Facilities Management (2), Regulation and Compliance (2), Certification and Licenses (2), Job Search (2), International Law (2), Internationalization and Localization (2), Offshoring and Outsourcing (2), Treaties, Agreements and Organizations (2), Criminal Law (2), Events Marketing (2), Lead Generation (2), Business Analytics (2), Nonprofit Management (2), Personal Investing (2), Professional Networking (2), Starting Up (2), Green Business (2), Blogging (2), E-Commerce (2), Wireless (2), Purchasing (1), Business Dining and Entertainment (1), Event Marketing and Promotions (1), Budgeting (1), Corporate Debt (1), Corporate Taxes (1), Compensation and Benefits (1), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Corporate Law (1), Advertising (1), Graphic Design (1), Sales Techniques (1), Writing and Editing (1), Corporate Governance (1), Labor Relations (1), Bond Markets (1), Commodity Markets (1), Option Markets (1), Nonprofit Fundraising (1), Social Enterpreneurship (1), Inventory Management (1), Quality Management and Standards (1), Supply Chain Management (1), Industrial Design (1), Professional Organizations (1), Enterprise Software (1), Computers and Software (1), Telecommunications (1), Software Development (1)
The US Chapter 11 code should be applied.
GM, Chrysler and Ford are just looking for the gutless greedy way out just to repeat it again.
The "BIG 3" have been sucking eggs for over 20 years losing market share and NOT making the needed changes.
Let them sink or swim on their own.
After a Chapter 11 the surviving firms will be better for it.
Christopher H.
Experienced EMR consultant
Best Answers in: Government Policy (1), Business Analytics (1), Ethics (1), Computers and Software (1)
Good Question Bill,
The premise that people have here of having a bailout to avoid bankruptcy is completely flawed. Bankruptcy does not mean ok last one out turn off the lights. Bankruptcy is protection from creditors allowing time to reorganize. The creditors are the ones who thought it was a good idea to give money to a sinking ship and they bear the brunt of the risk since they were entitled to a reward. If the creditors decide they do not want to shuffle the debt and keep the company afloat they will call for liquidation and the market will speak. They have a basic problem and it's labor. Their labor rate is significantly higher than their competitors due to bloated union contracts. Anyone who has taken a business class understands that failure to control labor costs is a recipe for disaster. There is no amount of bailout money that will make GM, Ford or Chrysler competitive ever again. A bankruptcy may allow them to re-negotiate the union contracts down to reasonable standards at which point they might (and I state MIGHT) be worth saving.
When speaking of Chrysler remember they are 80% owned by Cerebus Capital and run by the amazing CEO, Robert Nardelli (who was given approximately 210 million to LEAVE home depot. So absolutely zero dollars to Cerebus regardless of the other two.
So bailout now is a tax on the children of today. The socialist policies cannot continue for ever and I think we are at the end of that rope. Giving them money to burn right now just makes things worse. Does anyone really think that the government has even the possibility of getting back anything from this? The government didn't start Ford and they shouldn't maintain them. Especially when BMW, Mercedes, Honda, Nissan, Toyota and Subaru (to name a few) aren't asking for any "bailout" money. Why? Because they make something that people want.
The market has spoken and it said goodbye. The government has absolutely no business spending my money on this disaster. Since hard numbers are difficult to come by I'll estimate the size of things here. GM has about 266,000 worldwide employees, Ford has about 245,000 worldwide employees and since Chrysler has no available number I'll give them 240,000 a 50 billion dollar bailout of these companies makes $66,000 per employee. My guess is that would cover welfare for 2 years and re-training/re-location for those employees. Additionally it's good for the economy because we can train them and move them to areas where they will again be profitable and the economy can continue to move forward. We wouldn't have to cover every employee all because some would remain employed at the newly restructured leaner "big 3" or go work for profitable automobile manufacturers. Yes I did say relocation. If Detroit has failed to keep up with the economic times then you are correct it is over. Economic laws must prevail and capitalists must follow them.
We shouldn't shed a tear but embrace change. Change has come to America and it's time that the auto embraced it. If that change means going out of business so be it. There will be jobs, there will be a future but it will be painful. However the pain is real and will be felt no matter what.
Current national debt 10 trillion dollars and growing, Current GDP 13 trillion dollars and falling. I believe it's possible the numbers could change places if this doesn't stop in the very near future. What happens then? I'm not sure but from an economics point of view it's not a pretty sight.
I say goodbye GM, Ford and Chrysler and hello to tomorrow.
The root issue is that if the government continues to manipulate the liquidation of bad debt and bad companies the entire free enterprise system is at risk. Watch for a global crisis response and possibly a global monetary system--very scary stuff.
Links:
More Answers (20)
Frank H.
Engagement Manager at SAP America
Best Answers in: Education and Schools (1), Occupational Training (1)
Well, if they do go bankrupt, and no-one buys the assets, the taxpayer will have to foot the bill though unemployment and welfare payments.
I'd prefer to get a public share. Imagine the following conversation between Mr. Taxpayer and GM Board:
We'll bail you out, and once you do return to profitatblity, here is your payback plan. And by the way, since we now own you, here is what you will do to be profitable...
Gary C.
President and Chief Executive Officer at Hy9 Corporation
Best Answers in: Career Management (8), Ethics (6), Computers and Software (6), Education and Schools (5), Corporate Governance (4), Using LinkedIn (4), Venture Capital and Private Equity (3), Government Policy (3), Change Management (3), Organizational Development (3), Software Development (3), Travel Tools (2), Job Search (2), Mentoring (2), Planning (2), Quality Management and Standards (2), Professional Networking (2), Air Travel (1), Car and Train Travel (1), Occupational Training (1), Corporate Debt (1), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Exporting/Importing (1), Internationalization and Localization (1), Criminal Law (1), Business Development (1), Sales Techniques (1), Writing and Editing (1), Philanthropy (1), Project Management (1), Positioning (1), Communication and Public Speaking (1), Business Plans (1), Small Business (1), Starting Up (1), Biotech (1), Telecommunications (1), Web Development (1)
Give their historical performance on almost every possible managerial measure I can think of, they do not deserve to be bailed out
I do not favor a bailout for them AT ALL. However, if we do extend money to this 'dying corpse', the US taxpayer better make some money off of it. And if we are at risk, stockholders need to be zeroed out.
Actually the problem is much deeper. While I do not believe the people you mentioned should be bailed out, everyone conveniently forgets the "little" people. GM (et.al.) employs more than managers. However the big problem is the money they currently owe to vendors. With companies the size of the automakers, many of their vendors would also go bankrupt from current A/R as well as the loss of business. The domino effect is too great (as it was/is with AIG)
It is annoying to me that we have to do this since many consumers have been requesting products less or non-dependent on fossil fuels for decades. If automakers had been investing in that R&D for 40 years we wouldn't be driving gas dependent vehicles now.
We can only hope that the loans are structured in such a way as to benefit the taxpayer in the long run. My understanding is the money lent to banks gains significant interest increases over time (if not reapaid)
Adrian S. P.
We got here. What's next? Drive/Accelerate Life/Innovation by Systematic Assumptions Q-ing; predict future by making it!
Best Answers in: Change Management (11), Staffing and Recruiting (3), Business Development (3), Organizational Development (3), Mentoring (2), Government Policy (2), Internationalization and Localization (2), Regulation and Compliance (1), Venture Capital and Private Equity (1), Economics (1), Treaties, Agreements and Organizations (1), Planning (1), Philanthropy (1), Manufacturing (1), Quality Management and Standards (1), Career Management (1), Ethics (1), Energy and Development (1)
Bill,
It has been done before, in the 1980s. The "benefit" to US taxpayers has been a stalemate in (not) improving quality of vehicles manufactured in the US until sometime much later (if that), inertia in adapting production models to fit the trends started in the 70s with ever increasing gas prices, (arguably) the same/more layoffs anyway, an imposition upon consumers of big 3 "values" through intensive marketing of ever more polluting and never more fuel efficient vehicles by the logic of "you've worked hard to earn your right to drive this behemoth vehicle--show them all who you are", not looking that what it truly means is that you're consciously declining your own children their and their children's right to breathe clean air, to say nothing about the children elsewhere now!
On the other hand, based on how well those companies are doing, many folks have jobs in support industries and services, local governments tax and communities flourish and schools are funded (or not--if the companies fail)...
So it's really pick your poison. How do we want to pay for these companies' leadership irresponsibility, now or later, less or more, direct or indirect, with a thoroughly defined, monitored and enforced set of conditions for access to the escape pad or not etc.
In the spirit of the last question I'd suggest no blank check be written whatsoever.
Rather, an option for the companies to borrow from the government for new lines of products development only, strategic retooling towards corporate responsible production etc.
In other words, government power if asked to rescue needs to be used to redesign strategic direction as well as corporate responsibility and accountability! To the _true_ shareholders, namely my daughter and all her peers as (a) breather(s) of air!
On the other hand, it is in so many ways just the same as with propping with federal money the folks who breed horses for pulling carriages when the automobile is already there...
My question is why do we fail to see this perspective?
Thank you,
Adrian
Clarification added November 12, 2008:
I meant to say of course "to the true _stakeholders_, who are not just shareholders, but rather my daughter and all her peers as (a) breather(s) of air!"--just to avoid confusion of meaning.
On the banks issue, yes, Bill, that is indeed a problem, similar with the other ones with the sub-prime mortgages crisis. The original question didn't mention it... Indeed, GMAC/ditech.com and GM are so much intertwined that we're probably asked to rescue GMAC, not so much GM.
Therefore the argument that we shall be considerate to broader implications of business failure and think of saving the job of the GM worker is probably so much more political salesmanship rhetoric than truth.
Hence, any influx of government money into the story will actually end up in a black box hidden behind a veil of corporate strategic secrecy and from there on be redirected towards "saving" paper "assets" and still lay off the GM worker, only about three months later this way. Meanwhile, all conditions on changing strategic direction on corporate responsibility would have been forgotten... My problem is that in the middle of the all-Hummer buying universal happiness of Detroit some 4 years ago a suburban Detroit school couldn't come up with money to take/bus the children once a term on a field trip to the Children Museum... Scarier yet is that I was told that on average the/some parents presumably all working in some way dependent on Detroit auto-industry could not afford 6 $/child for the trip. Meaning seemingly workers and/or even middle-higher managers were not truly being paid living wages... in better (or were they?) economic times... Detroit already is Ghost Town USA. Now what next?
Robert P.
QA Engineer at AVST
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (9), Government Policy (6), Ethics (6), Staffing and Recruiting (5), Labor Relations (3), Computers and Software (3), Information Security (3), Job Search (2), Mentoring (2), Personnel Policies (2), Criminal Law (2), Advertising (2), Public Relations (2), Career Management (2), Information Storage (2), Web Development (2), Travel Tools (1), Education and Schools (1), Occupational Training (1), Health Administration (1), Public Health and Safety (1), Work-life Balance (1), Internationalization and Localization (1), Offshoring and Outsourcing (1), Treaties, Agreements and Organizations (1), Contracts (1), Intellectual Property (1), Internet Marketing (1), Business Development (1), Customer Relationship Management (1), Writing and Editing (1), Corporate Governance (1), Change Management (1), Organizational Development (1), Planning (1), Quality Management and Standards (1), Positioning (1), Professional Books and Resources (1), Communication and Public Speaking (1), Enterprise Software (1), Computer Networking (1), Wireless (1)
Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out. The non-participant's creed. Sink the ship to drown the skipper. Is anybody out there reading past the headlines? The "bailout" under consideration isn't just about jobs -- it is to be tied to environmental/ecological issues like, um, producing emissions/fuel efficient vehicles as a first priority, for instance.
IMHO change is NOT doing things shortsightedly, and that includes reacting to headlines.
Think harder. Read deeper. Stop reacting. Start responding.
We want to turn this ship, not scuttle it.
OK. I'm done.
Peace,
Robert
Does anybody actually know how the taxpayer money will be used by the auto industry?
Pablo P.
Terminus Consulting LLC - Owner
Best Answers in: Equity Markets (4), Bond Markets (1), Futures Markets (1), Option Markets (1), Positioning (1)
If that bailout doesnt take place you can kiss detroit goodbye, and with them say hello to a great depression 2
Al M.
Volunteer Consultant at Haiti Earthquake Disaster Relief & News
Best Answers in: Using LinkedIn (26), Government Policy (9), Computers and Software (9), Enterprise Software (6), Information Security (6), Software Development (6), Auditing (5), Property Law (5), Business Development (5), Economics (4), Risk Management (4), Government Services (4), Computer Networking (4), Accounting (3), Financial Regulation (3), Internationalization and Localization (3), Criminal Law (3), Corporate Law (3), Project Management (3), Supply Chain Management (3), Customer Service (2), Regulation and Compliance (2), Education and Schools (2), Occupational Training (2), Compensation and Benefits (2), Environmental Health (2), Employment and Labor Law (2), Tax Law (2), Internet Marketing (2), Manufacturing (2), Distribution (2), Ethics (2), Telecommunications (2), Commercial Real Estate (1), Purchasing (1), Hotels (1), Travel Tools (1), Job Search (1), Foreign Investment (1), Public Funding (1), Mergers and Acquisitions (1), Staffing and Recruiting (1), Public Health and Safety (1), Work-life Balance (1), Exporting/Importing (1), International Law (1), Offshoring and Outsourcing (1), Intellectual Property (1), Advertising (1), Events Marketing (1), Viral Marketing (1), Customer Relationship Management (1), Sales Techniques (1), Corporate Governance (1), Organizational Development (1), Commodity Markets (1), Equity Markets (1), Nonprofit Fundraising (1), Quality Management and Standards (1), Individual Insurance (1), Personal Debt Management (1), Market Research and Definition (1), Positioning (1), Professional Books and Resources (1), Professional Networking (1), Business Plans (1), Small Business (1), Energy and Development (1), E-Commerce (1), Information Storage (1), Wireless (1)
No Win situation, just choice of bad deals.
Are we competent to do a better job through our elected representatives appointed civil servants in a US Gov Auto Manufacturer, run maybe like the Post Office, where regulators are subservient to the lobbyists? I don't think so.
If Big 3 go bankrupt, will they get bought out by foreign auto brands & will those companies do good job, or sabotage US brands to make the foreign cars more competitive? Not a risk I am eager for.
Do we believe in capitalism and responsibility for our actions?
If our government philosophy is that some industries are too big to let them fall, then we have a responsibility not to let them get that big, and must also mandate that all such big organizations be broken into smaller companies like the anti-trust division of Justice Dept used to do in ancient history. This approach could hurt US competitive vs. other nations, but breaking up industry can mean more competition in alternate solution approaches to over-dependence on oil imports from troubled parts of the world, and on non-renewable resources.
Steven B.
Steven Bonacorsi is a Lean Six Sigma Master Black Belt Consultant at Process Excellence Network, a division of IQPC
Best Answers in: Sales Techniques (2), Occupational Training (1), Venture Capital and Private Equity (1), Public Health and Safety (1), Internet Marketing (1), Change Management (1), Quality Management and Standards (1), Supply Chain Management (1), E-Commerce (1)
There are over 2 million jobs related to the auto industry, they will need time to achieve a transformation to compete in the global marketplace. Entire communities will be impacted if they are not helped, but agree they need to change and create a global cometitive product that meets better efficiency. America has always been innovative, but they need to get thru this immediate crisis. Where this bailout stuff ends, no one knows, I don't like it either, but just letting them collapse doesn't sound like a good idea either.
I am against the bailout...However I do realize that it must happen. I say this...All upper management is fired on the spot. They receive no money or benefits. They are locked out of their office, the personal effects to be sent to them. Hire a new management team not to be influenced by the government. Our government is just as inept as the managers of the major auto manufacturers.
I think that a bailout would be temporary and that deeper changes are needed for lasting positive effect.
I also think the challenges are deeper than being confined to management - individual engineers, planners, line workers, etc need to elevate their level of understanding of how to produce high quality products that American consumers will want to buy.
Since 1995 the US Big 3 market share in the domestic US market has fallen from about 72% to somewhere just over 50%, while Japanese automaker market share rose from about 24% to nearly 35 - 40% in the same time period. That's an indication of consumer preference.
So bailout or not, the US auto companies need to learn what their competitors have done to swing consumer sentiment to the favor of Japanese products, and then to duplicate or better, to take explosive action in that direction to accelerate .
What that action is exactly, is probably too lengthy to list here and is an entirely new discussion of its own. Recall that in the 60's, Japanese products of many kinds were considered extremely inferior and of very poor quality. They turned around the situation - why can't the US?
Links:
Jim H.
SaaS (Software as a Service) Sales and Implementation - Intacct, Clarizen, Avectra
Best Answers in: Change Management (2), Mergers and Acquisitions (1), Manufacturing (1)
YEE HAW !!!!!!
No one can give you the answer you are looking for Bill. Because, you aren't looking for a pragmatic answer. Nationalization of industry is EVIL!!! The banks and the government have been plotting with each other for years to force this situation because they know that they can't enslave us with guns! We have them too and WILL fight back. So, they'll just steal all of our assets by controlling the money. Hmm....
All of the bailouts are completely unconstitutional, but then so are the protectionist practices enforced by the government to ensure the longevity of the banking monopoly (Federal Reserve). So, bailout or not, we'll foot the bill, but I would still like to see them crash.
Jeff W.
Engagement Manager at ProSource Solutions LLC
Best Answers in: Government Policy (35), Using LinkedIn (10), Organizational Development (8), Change Management (5), Manufacturing (5), Planning (4), Ethics (4), Staffing and Recruiting (3), Green Business (3), Occupational Training (2), Personnel Policies (2), Internationalization and Localization (2), Business Development (2), Corporate Governance (2), Market Research and Definition (2), Career Management (2), Computers and Software (2), Computer Networking (2), Software Development (2), Commercial Real Estate (1), Purchasing (1), Car and Train Travel (1), Job Search (1), Mentoring (1), Risk Management (1), Government Services (1), Health Care (1), Customer Relationship Management (1), Sales Techniques (1), Business Analytics (1), Nonprofit Management (1), Inventory Management (1), Project Management (1), Quality Management and Standards (1), Personal Investing (1), Personal Real Estate (1), Small Business (1), Energy and Development (1), Enterprise Software (1), Databases (1), Web Development (1)
NO. Let them file chapter 11, restructure and get involved in FORCING the alternative energy plan that produces CNG, Electric and new technology vehicles. The government can spend our money on infrastructure and incentives so that we will be able to afford and use these new products.
We are going to be taxed to death...no BEYOND DEATH here in the US folks. The no strings attached bailout will do not do anything to change the fundamentals of these companies. They will STILL be managed poorly, building products that nobody wants to buy and running under the heavy load of union restrictions, import/export constraints, regulative policies, high wages, pension and health care benefit costs.
It's a BAD deal getting BADDER and heading toward BADDEST. 1 in 10 jobs in the US is tied to the auto industry. I'm not even sure bankruptcy consolidation can pull this out of the dumpster.
What would it take for you and all of your family and friends to trot off to the local dealership and buy a new car?
What kind of car would it be?
How much would you be willing to pay for it?
What would you expect of this new machine?
BTW - My fleet consists of a 1985 VW Golf diesel (project car), a 1998 Chrysler Town & Country and the latest is a 2003 VW Passat that I bought off of a friend. The last NEW car I bought was in 1986!
Surely you dont want them crumbling down like WTC, nor do you want to see it dieing a slow death like Netscape did, nor you would want the VW/BMW/Bentley/Toyota/NISSAN/ emblem perched proudly on its hood, especially when they have weathered the world wars, great depression, Middle East oil crisis, and the Japanese onslaught.
Ask any first generation American parent, what it feels to hear these age old institutions either going under, or taken over and the effect it will have on their American pride....... bailout is symbolic, psychological, and conveys a strong message that the govt is doing its best to contain the recession.
These are not hand-outs, but investments that will protect jobs, not just for the industry but for the full Auto eco-system. Needless to say, gainful employment and trade means growth, tax collections, consumption, less dole pay-outs.....less burden on the Exchequer. Govt. funding will also bring with it much needed corporate governance and accountability into these institutions.
Its a Catch-22 situation, the tax payer is caught in-between, they have to decide which one of the lesser two evils it wants to pay for........the bailout, or the dole for the unemployed if it files for chapter 11.
Domestic vehicle sales are vital to the performance of this economy, regardless of the mistakes that have been made in the past. Yes, the current scenario could have been avoided in my opinion if two actions were taken. 1. GM has too many brands. Saturn/Pontiac are basically the same brand now, with every vehicle sharing chassis and interior components from the same manufacturing facilities. 2. The volt was not brought into production soon enough. GM spent way too much time seeking tax cuts in Michigan for the car's production when they needed to suffer the tax loss up front to make their money back through sales long term. Companies like Toyota and Honda had hybrids on the market years prior, and even had plug-in technology near perfected in Japan for years.
Lynn W.
virtualization since Jan68, online at home since Mar70
Best Answers in: Financial Regulation (5), Information Security (5), Economics (4), Government Policy (3), Equity Markets (3), Risk Management (2), Blogging (2), Enterprise Software (2), Budgeting (1), Mergers and Acquisitions (1), Sales Techniques (1), Planning (1), Bond Markets (1), Derivatives Markets (1), Hedge Funds (1), Career Management (1), Computer Networking (1), Information Storage (1), Telecommunications (1), Web Development (1)
There was an article (I think washington post), 25+yrs ago suggesting 100% unearned profit tax for the automobile industry. The scenario was that the gov. gave the industry billions in breaks ... and the money was suppose to go to remaking the industry more competitive. Instead the money was going to executive bonuses, worker benefits and stockholder dividends ... not the original purpose.
Over the yrs, there have been lots of studies regarding what would it take to make the industry competitive ... but it seemed that actual change was very difficult or impossible. I participated in some of the "C4" meetings circa 1990 that was one such series of studies; this was looking at leveraging IT (i.e. dataprocessing) technology to be able to compete with foreign manufacturers
Links:
- http://www.forbes.com/entrepreneursfinance/2007/11/13/citigroup-suntrust-si...
- http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008p.html#70
- http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=ap8pS2oslvn0&refer=home
Clarification added November 14, 2008:
there are some comments that what was going over nearly 30yrs doesn't have much applicability to current situation
the (post?) article pointed out that the us automobile effectively had billions in gov. benefits ... the stated purpose was to allow breathing room to remake themselves ... but they just continued business as usual and applied the money for executive and worker benefits. however, with history of 30yrs of this ... it isn't likely that additional gov. funds is going to make any significant difference.
(post) article had part of the benefits was import quotas ... eliminating the downward pressure on us car prices (from low priced foreign imports) ... which allowed the us industry to nearly double the price of their products over a short period of time ... w/o any other significant changes (drastically increasing US profits).
the downside was that car prices were now much larger multiple of avg. salary ... which resulted in car loans having to move from 2-3yrs to five (or even six) yrs. this, in turn, really aggravated issue of manufacturing quality.
Turns out there is some overlap with response to this question in Banking and Finance Technologies: "Is there any technology that we are severely lacking in the Financial industry?" ... discussing various mechanisms that got us into current crisis ... also archived here:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008p.html#70
... including playing long/short mismatch ... which as been known for centuries to take down institutions (quote was that bear stearns and & lehman only had marginal chance of surviving playing long/short mismatch). this referenced article discusses long/short mismatch including example of 5yr auto loan for automobile that only last 3yrs:
http://www.forbes.com/entrepreneursfinance/2007/11/13/citigroup-suntrust-siv-ent-fin-cx_bh_1113hamiltonmatch.html
recent business tv new shows have mentioned other downsides of the import quotas, including foreign companies learning to efficiently build cars in the US. they contrasted that with US companies which have number of profitable overseas operations ... but they've failed to apply that in the US. the downside is that all these "overseas" US cars are now subject to those import quotas. eliminating those quotas now ... allowing importing of US "foreign" cars ... wouldn't actually help domestic operations (or the US workers).
Clarification added November 14, 2008:
Dumbest People' Industry Image May Cost Wagoner Job
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=ap8pS2oslvn0&refer=home
a couple quotes from above:
"There's the feeling that next to financial services, automotive execs are the dumbest people in the world"
"It's pretty clear that management has made some pretty bad decisions over the last 20 years"
"Toyota generated pretax profit of $922 per vehicle on North American sales in 2007, while GM lost $729"
... snip ...
maybe closer to 30 (or even more)?
another for another facet regarding the problems ...
There were a number of articles in the 90s related to the downward spiral of the US education system.
One was that foreign auto makers (establishing plants in the US) were requiring junior college degrees in order to get workers with high school education.
From 1990 census information ... there was articles that half of US manufacturing workers were "subsidized" (i.e. worker benefits exceeded the value of their work) and half of 18 yr olds were functionally illiterate. There were calculations at the time ... assuming trends continued ... that by 2020 ... only 3percent of US workers would *not* be subsidized (i.e. value of work at least equivalent to benefits received).
older reference to 94-98 international literacy survey
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004b.html#38
recent reports have US education ranking at or near the bottom of industrial nations ... a couple recent posts:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007u.html#78 Education ranking
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008h.html#3 America's Prophet of Fiscal Doom
Just another sympton of our continued resistance to accept a fundamental shift in economic strength and integrity. The Roman Empire, Persia, and the Greek Empire.....history repeats and flags are passed. Sometimes we just have to let it burn to the ground so the soil is enriched for future growth. I recommend some root reading to pull away from the current fundamental focus, maybe Toffler or Huxley. I think Aldous Huxley put it best when he said, "world order is a continuous flux and any considered claim to permanence is an illusion of the senses". It's easy to apply this to the current situation, and since we know it's easier to give birth than to raise the dead, the taxpayer should not be burdened with "life-support". Just my two cents. Appologies for the tangent but this whole discussion of shifting deck chairs on the Titanic is ridiculous. We need to mandate fundamental courses in economics, law, and history for all members of government.............which would hopefully allow us to talk about more productive concepts in the future.
Thomas P.
Logistics and Supply Chain Consultant, Alloquor Consulting, Los Angeles
Bill,
In this month's Motor Trend, the chief editor wrote an article that makes the arguement that "making stuff matters". In other words, it's still important to our economy, security and long term viability to have manufacturing capability in our country. And if you can make a car, you can pretty much make anything. I tend to agree with that. And for that reason I'm in favor of giving the domestic car companies loans (I think they're asking for loans, not a bailout) so they can continue (despite all of the mismanagement).
Tom
Babu R.
Sr Management professional in Quality Management
Best Answers in: Manufacturing (2), Business Analytics (1), Change Management (1), Organizational Development (1), Planning (1), Quality Management and Standards (1)
Hi Bill,
You struck a chord now, seeing all these answers flowing in.
I can sense that the overwhelming opinion seems to be Ford, GM are going going and maybe gone soon enough. Not much remorse too..... its the way of DINOSAURS. People say that those Big animals failed to react and evolve fast enough to changing environment. So too seems to be way the Big 3 have gone. Its just that the bigger they are, the harder they fall.
But this scenario opens up a lot more doubts and fearful questions of what the future is going to be?
The repercussions of the fall (bankruptcy, if it happens) will be like a tsunami wave again.... going to be truly global impact. What will be the fate of those employed? What about the models in production, those to be launched? I wonder what will happen to the assets these megaliths have built up? Will they be sold to the bidders?
Will some of the path-breaking technologies and good products be lost?
Will Toyota or Nissan or Hyundai move in to gobble up these modern factories and designs?
Or will a new Management creep in and work radically to bring on a new age?
I dont think that anybody has the answers of what the future is going to be? We talk of the new technologies, the green and eco-friendly automobile... I see a new wave shaping up - mass commuting rather than personal transport. Are Automotive manufacturers onto to the trend and figuring out the way which the Consumer will go in the future?
