FederalRepublic
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2010
- Messages
- 2,942
- Reaction score
- 711
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
I don't believe you can dig up anything CREDIBLE.
Obnoxious Obama isnt raising taxes on the middle class. He wants to leave the tax cuts for the middle class, and tax the richest top 2% in America. Please, quit spreading lies and get your facts straight.
An effect? Maybe. But not a positive one. They are incoherent and ignore reality. And have led to some real nutter candidates winning.
gm had its worst august in decades
ipo is principal to recouping taxpayers
aint gonna happen
54% told scott rasmussen (founder of espn) they're less likely to buy gm cuz the federal govt is majority owner
sorry
how many of the 54% who say they won't buy a gm car are gonna buy its stock?
Plenty. Besides, you are ignoring (among a great number of things you either do not like or cannot refute) that the majority of stock held in this nation is held by a relatively small percentage of people. It does not matter if that 54% doesn't buy a car because they aren't the large stock purchasers in the first place. Insitutional money far outweights individuals in most mutual funds and hedge funds by leaps and bounds. What matter is future cash flows. And GM looks like it's seeing large positives. That is what matters. Do some thinking for a change rather then swallowing whatever the pundits tell you.
jkohn51192 said:Obnoxious Obama isnt raising taxes on the middle class. He wants to leave the tax cuts for the middle class, and tax the richest top 2% in America. Please, quit spreading lies and get your facts straight.
Sure he can... he's a liberalbut wait a minute, wasn't it also Obama and liberals that preached that the Bush tax cuts were "only for the rich"? You can't have it both ways there.
j-mac
I am curious-where do you get off telling someone else to do some thinking? it appears that the poster you attacked has done plenty of that
* Treasury to sell first shares below break-even-sources
* 61 pct Treasury sale could take several years-sources
* Taxpayer break-even is around $70 bln GM market value
By Clare Baldwin, Soyoung Kim and Kevin Krolicki
NEW YORK/DETROIT, Sept 3 (Reuters) - The U.S. government is likely to take a loss on General Motors Co in the first offering of the automaker's stock, six people familiar with preparations for the landmark IPO said.
Subsequent offerings of the government's holdings may be profitable depending on how investors trade the newly listed stock, the sources said.
But the question of whether taxpayers are ultimately made whole on GM's $50 billion bailout could be left open for years, the people said.
The Obama administration has pledged to exit its investment in GM as quickly as possible while holding out the prospect that taxpayers could ultimately be paid back in full.
GM in August filed paperwork for an IPO that could potentially be worth as much as $20 billion, making it one of the biggest IPOs of all time.
In order for the United States to recoup all of its $50 billion investment in General Motors, it must sell its ownership stake at $134 a share, according to the special inspector general of the government's bailout programs.
The price needed for a full recovery of the U.S. investment is far higher than shares of the automaker have ever reached, and some analysts and government officials have expressed doubts that the United States will be able to recover the money.
who's gonna buy stock in a company he or she knows won't sell to 54%?
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- General Motors sales jumped 22 percent in September for the company's four remaining brands, driven primarily by big increases in sales of mid-sized crossovers such as the Chevrolet Equinox.
GM has good prospects for generating cash from its operations in China and Brazil and has an improved balance sheet after emerging from bankruptcy in July 2009, he said.
70 billion dollars is a lot of recouping geithner needs from YOU
get BUYING!
hurry up and buy MORE!
do your part, now
Someone who looks at future cash flows and sees profit.
If it nets me a decent return, why not?
you mean like the analysts and govt officials who "expressed doubts that the us will be able to recover" the 70B necessary to make the taxpayer whole?
don't tell me, don't tell the pundits at reuters and wapo
BUY!
The government is likely to face a loss on the bailout because it is trying to get out as fast as possible.
The Obama administration has pledged to exit its investment in GM as quickly as possible while holding out the prospect that taxpayers could ultimately be paid back in full.
It could take more than three years for the Treasury to sell down its remaining stake in GM after the IPO, one person said. That would push a final accounting into the next presidential term.
A decision to price the initial GM shares below the cost to taxpayers would follow the usual Wall Street practice of giving the first investors in a new stock a discount, but it could also help allay investor concern in the face of the slow recovery of the U.S. economy and flat auto sales.
They are doing what YOU want them to do.
Long term cash flows suggest that GM over time does offer fairly decent returns. Investment grade if you will.
The credit service today said it assigned Detroit-based GM a BB- rating with a stable outlook. It had previously given Ford a B+ rating with a positive outlook. GM’s rating is three levels below investment grade.
GM just shed huge amounts of debt and large amounts of Union crap.
At the same time, GM will have to confront a pension shortfall that remains a liability from its pre-bankruptcy operations.
GM eliminated about $40 billion in unsecured debt and other obligations in bankruptcy, but the automaker still needs to address a pension shortfall estimated at about $26 billion.
What made GM total crap in the past is largely gone. And you think it's still a loser.
Tell me, how did Ford's stock price do?
Because it has more problems than GM.
holding out the prospect, huh?
that taxpayers could be ultimately paid back in full?
well, i'm glad the president didn't slam shut THAT door
and those flat auto sales.
i've expressed no preferences, i've merely quoted the pundits (LOL!) from reuters and the post
bloomberg, your link (thanks):
not as much as those analysts and govt officials and pundits (LOL!) at wapo, bloomberg and reuters
nowhere near well enough to recoup 70B
not enough reason for most to invest
If they sell the stock over a significant period of time, there is a possibility, coupled with dividends that tax payers could make a profit like they did on the Visa and Chrysler bailouts.
Didn't you want government out of GM ASAP?
You mean like a 22% increase? Flat you say.
I question your (and everyone else here)'s capacity to do basic math.
You're not fooling anyone here.
Proving what? Do you even understand what that means? I seriously doubt it.
But many of the other problems are gone.
Ford has more problems then GM.
Apparently a massive % increase isn't "a reason for most to invest."
Can you define CASH FLOW for me? I'm betting not.
GM executives expect a slow recovery in the economy and in auto sales, said Don Johnson, GM vice president of U.S. sales operations. He said sales rates will pick up only modestly through the end of the year. He said that GM will not respond to the slow recovery with incentive deals.
“We know it’s going to continue to be bumpy,” Johnson said on a conference call today. “We’re not panicking. We don’t want to get back to putting incentives into the marketplace to keep plants going.”
Compared with a year earlier, GM reduced its incentives and sold vehicles for an average of $5,600 more, Johnson said.
That doesn’t match with TrueCar’s analysis, which found that GM increased sales discounts 18 percent to $3,763 per vehicle in August.
a possibility, huh?
obama calls it, "holding out a prospect"
"the obama administration has pledged to exit its investment in gm as quickly as possible while holding out the prospect that taxpayers could ultimately be paid back in full"
no, that'd be the financial times
who cares, this isn't about you
it's not about me, grow up
3 levels below investment grade, a pension shortfall of 26B, what's to prove?
the pensions remain
as do declines in real estate, increased unemployment, tight credit and depressed consumer confidence, all of which are "continuing to impact sales" (according to gm's prospectus)
Shanghai General Motors saw its auto sales rise 57 percent to 641,351 units in the first eight months of2010, the company said in a statement on Wednesday.
Brazil accounts for 10 percent of GM’s global sales volume and the carmaker has made a profit in the country for five years, Ardila said. Rising income and favorable loan conditions are helping GM accelerate growth from about 9 percent currently.
"ford's senior economist said the carmaker interpreted recent data 'as a moderation of the pace of recovery, but not a collapse"
ford doesn't owe the taxpayer 50B
an increase over the worst august in 30 years isn't much to get excited about
quit personalizing, you're demeaning yourself and everyone who reads this
U.S. auto sales rose last month compared to an unusually weak September 2009 when demand dried up after the federal Cash for Clunker rebates.
Ford reported selling 46 percent more vehicles last month and Chrysler's increase was 61 percent. General Motors saw its sales rise 11 percent while Toyota reported sales rose 17 percent.
Automakers said they were not getting excited about the sales bump.
“I would not read too much into sales increases in September,” Ford Vice President of Marketing Ken Czubay said of disruption from auto-buying incentives. “We are in a tough period to try to make sense of year-to-year comparisons.”
Still, he added the economy appears to be improving slightly.
GM's U.S. sales chief, Don Johnson, agreed.
Jeremy Anwyl, chief executive of Edmunds.com, an auto website, said he's less optimistic, doubting that new-vehicle sales can maintain the current pace.
“Reports of the recovery have been vastly exaggerated,” Anwyl said. “Without Labor Day, September was a weak month — —and because it was so late in the month, it gave an unusually high boost to September because sales did not bleed into August.”
Shanghai General Motors saw its auto sales rise 57 percent to 641,351 units in the first eight months of2010, the company said in a statement on Wednesday.
SAO PAULO, Aug 18 (Reuters) - Industrywide automobile sales in South America should reach a record high this year, buoyed by relatively low interest rates in some countries and strong economic growth in most of the region, the chief executive of General Motors' South American unit said on Wednesday.
This is the other reality.
"But regardless of what any of us think should be, no politician was going to let them fail. And if one did, that politician would be unemployed the next election cycle"
This not allowing any business to fail is a rather new concept to the United States and obviously not a healthy one for the people. It's amazing to me that there are so many who speak out against "Big Business" on the one hand who appear to support their bailouts with the other.
So you are a fan of large multinational corporations then?
The Tea Party is against bailouts while you and many others are for them. The line appears clear enough.
It's not a matter of credibility. It's recent history.
but wait a minute, wasn't it also Obama and liberals that preached that the Bush tax cuts were "only for the rich"? You can't have it both ways there.
j-mac
How many times has the autio industry been bailed out? It's no that new.
And it is not support for bailing them out that I'm arguing. I'm merely noting reality. Our leaders have more to fear from us, the voter, if they don't bail these people out than if they do. We're a fickle bunch. Hard to ever make us happy on these types of issues. there's a real disconnect with the voter.
And no, the tea party is just angry and incoherent. There against bailouts, but want the government to do something; against big government, but don't want their government programs touched. They're a sad sign of our times and the disconnect I speak of.
Mornin' Joe....heh, heh....See that I made a funny! :mrgreen: Anyway, let's go back to the time that GM and Chrysler were bailed out. As well as the other times that Chrysler was on the take from the government.
Was it in the past, or necessary now for the government to own the stock?
j-mac
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?