Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Romney Says He Would Unload GM Stake at Loss
WSJ ^ | June 5, 2012 | Sara Murray

Posted on 06/11/2012 9:46:53 PM PDT by what's up

Mitt Romney plans to shed the government’s stake in General Motors if he wins the presidency, even if it means taking a loss, the presumptive GOP nominee told the Detroit News.

(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bailout; gm; michigan; rinoromney; romney; romney4control; romney4govtcontrol; romney4romney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last
Searched and didn't find this story posted on FR.
1 posted on 06/11/2012 9:47:05 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: what's up

GM should be broken up.


2 posted on 06/11/2012 9:49:28 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: what's up

This is going to be interesting to watch.

Thanks, what’s up.


3 posted on 06/11/2012 9:51:45 PM PDT by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: what's up

Why not just “GET GOVT OUT OF THE WAY” and let them Rise or Fall on their own and HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE for the $ they owe... They have assets

At least Romney knows how to take a failing Company over.

If we can teach him Conservatism on the way it would be a win win

TT


4 posted on 06/11/2012 9:56:13 PM PDT by TexasTransplant (Radical islam is islam. Moderate islam is the Trojan Horse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: what's up
An Obama campaign spokesperson seized on that stance, calling it “a betrayal no UAWMichigander is likely soon to forget.”
5 posted on 06/11/2012 9:56:45 PM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: what's up

Government has NO BUSINESS running a Private Enterprise.

They have even LESS business running that free enterprise as a way to boost the numbers and propaganda of the rulers, in a FREE society.


6 posted on 06/11/2012 10:00:59 PM PDT by tcrlaf (Election 2012: THE RAPTURE OF THE DEMOCRATS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

GM should be left alone, no government involvement, and let the market decide.


7 posted on 06/11/2012 10:01:44 PM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mind-numbed Robot

“Too Big to Fail” to me means it should be broken up.


8 posted on 06/11/2012 10:02:51 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: what's up

By the big government standard, and given the Dept of Energy’s wasted spending, $16 billion is a drop in the bucket if it gets the feds out and GM has to live or die on it’s own.

We can always just list the taxpayers as a creditor and get it back over time or let GM go under.

The best thing the feds can do to help the auto industry is to DUMP the CAFE standards, tell the UAW to get F’ing off, and let them make the cars people want or go out of business.


9 posted on 06/11/2012 10:05:44 PM PDT by Fledermaus (Democrats are dangerous and evil. Republicans are just useless and useful idiots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasTransplant

At least Romney knows how to take a failing Company over.

If we can teach him Conservatism on the way it would be a win win


You agree that he’s doing something conservative and then hope to teach him conservative things.


10 posted on 06/11/2012 10:06:31 PM PDT by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: what's up

He’s on the right track here, imo. Shows signs of good old fashoned American business sense.

I wonder if there would be any further plans to make whole the GM bondholders who got royally scrood as a result of team obama ‘saving’ GM.


11 posted on 06/11/2012 10:07:32 PM PDT by MichaelCorleone (The GOPe has played us like a violin for the last time; high time to build the Constitution Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: what's up

GM’s stock is currently owned by:

1) The US Government
2) Saudi Arabioa
3) Red China

Those three own well something like 60% or more of the stock.

The so called public offering did not pay the taxpayer back and we are still left something like 16 billion dollars behind in the equation.

All of Obama’s and Biden’s talk about GM lives is just a sham. It lives because the US taxpayers are on the lamb, and because Obama allowed what could be sold off to be sold to nations who definitely do not have the US or its citizens best interest in mind.

THE MAN WHO DEPSISES AMERICA
http://www.jeffhead.com/obama-time.htm

AMERICA AT THE CROSSROADS OF HISTORY
http://www.jeffhead.com/crossroads.htm


12 posted on 06/11/2012 10:11:22 PM PDT by Jeff Head (Freedom is not free, never has been, never will be (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf
Government has NO BUSINESS running a Private Enterprise.

The sole role of the federal government should be national defense. Nothing else. Period. Paragraph.

- 30 -

13 posted on 06/11/2012 10:15:49 PM PDT by re_nortex (DP...that's what I like about Texas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: what's up

Good- pass/fail, let the chips fall. Maybe some outfit with a modicum of brains will scoop it up at a bargain and make it work, as should have occurred firstly.


14 posted on 06/11/2012 10:21:38 PM PDT by 4buttons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: what's up

15 posted on 06/11/2012 10:22:48 PM PDT by JohnLongIsland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Exactly! Chop it up and sell it to Ford!


16 posted on 06/11/2012 10:22:48 PM PDT by SgtHooper (The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Come on, get the facts straight. GM ownership is as follows:

61% US Government
17.5% UAW
11.7% Canadian Government
9.8% Bondholders from the old company


17 posted on 06/11/2012 10:29:18 PM PDT by Gabrial (The nightmare will continue as long as the nightmare is in the White House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: 4buttons
A terrible precedent was set by Lee Iacocca and Carter with the Chrysler bailout in 1979.


18 posted on 06/11/2012 10:31:02 PM PDT by re_nortex (DP...that's what I like about Texas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: re_nortex
A terrible precedent was set by Lee Iacocca and Carter with the Chrysler bailout in 1979.

Yep.

19 posted on 06/11/2012 10:32:16 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Gabrial

My bad.

The 61% US Government holding is now down to 33%

28% was sold to the public as an IPO.

Thanks GM dude for the private message.


20 posted on 06/11/2012 10:44:12 PM PDT by Gabrial (The nightmare will continue as long as the nightmare is in the White House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: what's up

The government resold GM stock at 10 dollars less a share after they took over and called that a ‘success’. Good for Romney.


21 posted on 06/11/2012 10:45:13 PM PDT by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fledermaus

I agree the government should get out of GM, but why lose the $16 billion. Why can’t GM just buy back those shares over the next 10 - 15 years?


22 posted on 06/11/2012 10:46:24 PM PDT by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: what's up

The proceeds should be given to the bond holders that were screwed over by Zero.


23 posted on 06/11/2012 10:48:14 PM PDT by Bobalu (It is not obama we are fighting, it is the media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unkus

If Romnets elected, I would short GM stock


24 posted on 06/11/2012 10:50:56 PM PDT by mriguy67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mriguy67

Yep.


25 posted on 06/11/2012 11:13:05 PM PDT by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf
Government has NO BUSINESS running a Private Enterprise.

Not only that, they especially have no BUSINESS **OWNING** a Private Enterprise. When government owns one it is no longer a Private Enterprise at all.
26 posted on 06/11/2012 11:16:14 PM PDT by JSteff ((((It was ALL about SCOTUS. Most forget about that and HAVE DOOMED us for a generation or more.))))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: re_nortex
Iacocca

Yes, but didn't Iacocca pay us back?
We will NEVER see GM or the Unions pay us back.
27 posted on 06/11/2012 11:22:06 PM PDT by JSteff ((((It was ALL about SCOTUS. Most forget about that and HAVE DOOMED us for a generation or more.))))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: JSteff

It doesn’t matter, the fact is the Chrysler bailout set the precedent that the government was now expected to save companies, and decide the winners and losers in the marketplace.


28 posted on 06/11/2012 11:30:36 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: JSteff
Yes, but didn't Iacocca pay us back? <

The mechanism for "bailing-out" was a loan guarantee.

Chrysler paid back the banks without the government (i.e., taxpayers) ever having to pony up a penny.

29 posted on 06/11/2012 11:32:20 PM PDT by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Gabrial

I believe those figures were before the IPO.

Here is the current opwnership:

GM Ownership
http://www.gminthemedia.com/2012/03/21/who-owns-gm-stock/

The US, after the IPO now is at 32%...some quore as low as 26%.

Saudi and China are in that 44.9% individual and institutional owners.

But their numbers are way down from when the IPO was let. The stock has lost something like 25% or more since then and I believe they have been dumping it. However, one Saudi Prince alone still owns 1% of the stock by his lonmesome, Prince Walid bin Talal, who bought 500 million in shares during the IPO and has held onto it.

YThese days it is exceedingly difficult to find out exactly how much Saaudi Arabia and China own.


30 posted on 06/11/2012 11:49:05 PM PDT by Jeff Head (Freedom is not free, never has been, never will be (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Gabrial

I believe those figures were before the IPO.

Here is the current opwnership:

GM Ownership
http://www.gminthemedia.com/2012/03/21/who-owns-gm-stock/

The US, after the IPO now is at 32%...some quote as low as 26%.

Saudi and China are in that 44.9% individual and institutional owners.

But their numbers are way down from when the IPO was let. The stock has lost something like 25% or more since then and I believe they have been dumping it. However, one Saudi Prince alone still owns 1% of the stock by his lonmesome, Prince Walid bin Talal, who bought 500 million in shares during the IPO and has held onto it.

These days it is exceedingly difficult to find out exactly how much Saaudi Arabia and China own.


31 posted on 06/11/2012 11:49:55 PM PDT by Jeff Head (Freedom is not free, never has been, never will be (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

At the time, Chrysler was a critical defense contractor. They were our only manufacturer of main battle tanks, among other things. The ‘bailout’ was in loan guarantees so the taxpayer didn’t have to pay anything out, Chrysler presented a viable recovery plan - and most important, as part of the bailout agreement, Chrysler had to sell off all of their defense industries so that if the plan failed the country wouldn’t lose a critical defense supply.


32 posted on 06/12/2012 1:07:28 AM PDT by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: what's up
Shed GM?

Just a start, how about in the same week shed AMTRAK, Fannie and Freddie and any other GSE that we don't need.

33 posted on 06/12/2012 3:00:09 AM PDT by taildragger (( Palin / Mulally 2012 ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: what's up; All

How is this playing in Michigan? I’m thinking Romney might carry The Wolverine State. Whaddya think FReepers?


34 posted on 06/12/2012 3:57:47 AM PDT by pistolpackinpapa (Why is it that you never see any Obama bumper stickers on cars going to work in the mornings?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pistolpackinpapa
It would be interesting to know how many people decided against buying a GM product specifically because of the connection to Obama and the government. If this connection did not exist, and the unions had been held accountable for their role in decimating this company, I would have strongly considered buying a new GM car.

Personally, I think Romney's plan of disentangling the government from GM presents the best possibility for this company to actually have a chance to recover. If I were running GM, I would pick the best few products I had, push the unions extremely hard, and market the company and its products as ‘Private and Free in America’.

35 posted on 06/12/2012 4:20:12 AM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: okie01
The mechanism for "bailing-out" was a loan guarantee.

A pledge of one's credit is has tangible value. If you co-sign an auto loan for your son, he can borrow on more favorable terms. If the government co-signs, (at least back in the 70's) more favorable still. But when you co-sign, it impairs your credit rating and you must make future loans on less favorable terms.

36 posted on 06/12/2012 4:27:42 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (The Democratic Party strongly supports full civil rights for necro-Americans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: what's up

“Mitt Romney plans to shed the government’s stake in General Motors if he wins the presidency, even if it means taking a loss,”

Spoken like a good liberal. What is wrong with disposing of the stock at cost, or even a profit.

Personally I’ll never buy another GM product.


37 posted on 06/12/2012 4:28:24 AM PDT by chainsaw (Sarah Palin is still my first choice to save the USA. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasTransplant
Zebra's can't change their stripes, R is a RINO SOCIALIST! A dime's difference than the Marxist pair we now have occupying the WH. We've all read the articles FR posted about his nearly destroying Mass with Romneycare...which includes FREE GENOCIDE of the Unborn. And he only plans to TWEAK 0'care, not REPEAL IT! His do nothing about the ILLEGAL INVADERS IN Mass, etc. And when you vote for the lesser of 2 evils you still get EVIL. And he is a member of the small elite set of blue bloods who have been in government TO LONG and think WE owe them a PLATINUM LIFE STYLE!

DO NOT DRINK THE GOP KOOLAIDE or the Dem Koolaide is all I can say. I will NOT vote for him, as I don't drink either parties Koolaide


38 posted on 06/12/2012 4:37:56 AM PDT by GailA (IF U don't/won't keep your promises to the Military, U won't keep them the public)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: what's up

The loss already exists. It’s just a matter of recognizing that fact.


39 posted on 06/12/2012 4:45:33 AM PDT by Bill S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chainsaw

Because you can’t. You invested in a losing stock and when you sell the stock you take the loss. It’s called the free market and Romney is right, get out of the market.

Pray for America


40 posted on 06/12/2012 5:39:42 AM PDT by bray (Power to We the People)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Mind-numbed Robot

As much as I would agree with you there are many companies which cannot, cannot be sold off.

Cannot be.

We’ve already started selling off our critical stake.

It is time for that to stop. Long time past time, in fact.

It is time to start getting them back.


41 posted on 06/12/2012 5:45:06 AM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network (America doesn't need any new laws. America needs freedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: what's up

Does anyone here know if there are any lawsuits pending against the government by GM bondholders who were screwed out of their property by the illegal actions of Zero and his henchmen?


42 posted on 06/12/2012 6:24:28 AM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: re_nortex
The sole role of the federal government should be national defense. Nothing else. Period. Paragraph.

Well, that certainly is the MAIN reason we have a federal government. But there are a few other powers enumerated in the Constitution: a common currency, the post office (ironically enough), regulate interstate commerce--which has been badly abused but which can serve a legitimate purpose (e.g., I don't mind that the FDA makes sure preescription drugs sold nationally are safe).

But the point here of course is that there should be no "Government Motors." Romney is right on this.

43 posted on 06/12/2012 7:33:27 AM PDT by Charles Henrickson (The progs were dense in Providence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
Thanks for the updated chart. A couple of things that really tick me off.

1) In the chart, Government Motors papers over (hides) the fact the original GM bondholders were robbed when their ownership was forcibly taken from them and handed to the UAW by Obama. Their only crime was investing their own savings in the company. The UAW was primarily responsible for causing GM to fail. Calling the UAW an “institutional investor” is a joke. They were given ownership by Obama.

2) Now the UAW is getting huge bonuses while the taxpayers are taking it up the *ss.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/02/uaw-profit-sharing-bonuses-enough-to-buy-two-tatas/

The UAW is sure to funnel the ill-gotten money back into the Obama campaign so they can continue the criminal enterprise.

To me, this is the real story that no one is reporting on.

44 posted on 06/12/2012 7:49:30 AM PDT by Gabrial (The nightmare will continue as long as the nightmare is in the White House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Gabrial

Amen to every bit of that. What Obama did with GM is a classic Marxist action. He is destroying the free market. Taking advantage of the finanical difficulty to stick it to the true investors. Paying off his cronies, and using class warfare and redistribution all in one sickening act.

A Pox on the man and all who hold and push his anti-American and destructive views.

God grant that we can remove him in Novemebr...and not just in a close vote (though I will take any win) but hopefully in a Mondal type route that associates his name forever with failure, anti-Americanism, and destructive policies...so that in the political world, “Obama” becomes a pariah.

As in, “...be careful, or you will pull an, “Obama.” Or, “your policies are laying another “Obama,” on this nation,” or, “what are you thinking? you friggin “Onama.”

That’s the legacy and epitath this incidividual deserves at the least.

If the truth were ever really known, he should spend a good 20-30 in the Federal Grey Rock Hotel.

The Man who Despises America
http://www.jeffhead.com/obama-time.htm

Obama’s Disasterous “Firsts” as President
http://www.jeffhead.com/obama1sts.htm

Who really is BArack Hussein Obama?
http://www.jeffhead.com/whoisobama.htm


45 posted on 06/12/2012 8:00:27 AM PDT by Jeff Head (Freedom is not free, never has been, never will be (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
A pledge of one's credit is has tangible value.

No argument.

But I was responding to a question whether the Chrysler bail-out had cost the taxpayeres any money.

The answer is: none at all.

46 posted on 06/12/2012 9:02:22 AM PDT by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: JohnLongIsland

Should be named La Dee Da


47 posted on 06/12/2012 9:13:06 AM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

There are certain products which cannot be exported for national security reasons. Companies could be designated the same.

The problem is not the laws so much as it is dishonest and unpatriotic people. Bill Clinton sold an entire airplane manufacturing plant, a property of the defunct McDonnald Douglas Co., to China for $5 million. The plant was easily worth several hundred million. It also had critcal airframe bending and shaping equipmrnt necessary for airplane manufacturing. That itself was worth much more than the $5 mil.

Jimmy Carter gave away the Panama Canal and allowed China to control both ends of it. Jimmy Carter also cut our Navy in half. Later Clinton halved it again and recently Obama has again cut it to less than 300 ships total. This is at a time when China is rapidly expanding their navy.

As I said, honesty and patriotism are the keys and we have consistently elected the opposite.


48 posted on 06/12/2012 9:24:58 AM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: okie01
It would have marginally affected the price of U.S. Treasuries at auction — the “tangible cost” — and therefore did cost the taxpayers money.

Regardless of whether you guarantee a loan or make a loan, you are loaning money and paying interest on it. Same for the taxpayers.

49 posted on 06/12/2012 9:46:13 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (The Democratic Party strongly supports full civil rights for necro-Americans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
Regardless of whether you guarantee a loan or make a loan, you are loaning money and paying interest on it.

If, at the time, we were talking about the balance sheet at GM or AT&T, I'd agree with you. The guarantee would've constrained corporate finances...just a little bit.

But we're talking about the federal government's balance sheet here. If the procedure cost any individual taxpayer as much as a penny, I'd be shocked.

Understanding that neither of us can prove it, one way or the other.

50 posted on 06/12/2012 11:37:23 AM PDT by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson