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

Skip to comments.

G.M. Loses $15.5 Billion in Quarter
New York Times ^ | August 2, 2008 | Bill Vlasic

Posted on 08/01/2008 5:08:42 AM PDT by Zakeet

The General Motors Corporation, reeling from the abrupt shift to small cars by consumers, posted a $15.5 billion second-quarter loss on Friday, in results weighed down by restructuring charges and write-downs.

According to the earnings statement, the loss included $9.1 billion in one-time charges, $3.3 billion of which was for employee buyouts.

[Snip]

Excluding one-time charges, G.M. had a loss of $6.3 billion or $11.21 a share, compared with income of $1.3 billion or $2.29 a share in the same period last year.

Included in the results, the statement said, was $1.3 billion in write-offs that reflect the drop in value of trucks and sport utility vehicles in GMAC Financial Services’ portfolio.

[Snip]

While its overseas operations continued to perform well, G.M.’s United States sales dropped. On Friday, in its earnings statement, G.M. said it had sold 2.29 million vehicles worldwide in the second quarter, down 5 percent from the period a year ago. North American sales were down 20 percent, or 236,000 units, while sales outside of North America grew by 10 percent or 116,000 units.

A record 65 percent of G.M.’s sales for the second quarter were outside the United States, the company said, while global market share was 12.3 percent, down 0.9 percent because of the weakness in North America.

[Snip]

And in a move that symbolized the end of the S.U.V. era, Mr. Wagoner said that G.M. had begun a “strategic review” toward a likely sale of its Hummer brand.

[Snip]

Analysts estimated that G.M. was burning through $1 billion in cash a month, and needed more liquidity to survive the sales downturn into 2009.

With G.M.’s stock dropping to $10 a share and analysts suggesting G.M. might file for bankruptcy protection, the company announced another round of cost cuts in mid-July.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: autos; bm; generalmotors; gm; gmjunk; transportation; uaw
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 next last
To: Zakeet

The NWO purposely got oil prices and the resultant gasoline prices to go high enough to do what the Demonrats have been whining for for decades: making America like Europe with everybody driving small cars or riding bicycles.

The NWO planners knew that the Japanese, Koreans and Chinese have had small cars ready all along, and so the decision to raise gasoline prices to an obscene, exorbitant level precisely targets just GM, Ford and Chrysler. The market pie chart yields abruptly now to the sudden further advance of the oriental car companies to take over most of the remaining pie.

It’s just part of the Babelistic planning of the destruction of American exceptionalism. Mankind in general just can’t stand us.


21 posted on 08/01/2008 6:43:34 AM PDT by RoadTest ( Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. But he spake of the temple of his body.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

I own a 2006 Chevy Malibu 4 cyl and I love it
37 - 42 mpg on the highway
affordable (paid less than $16,000 new)

caught the GM enviro ad yesterday
if they would concentrate on making decent, affordable products they wouldn’t be in this mess
no sympathy from me


22 posted on 08/01/2008 6:48:23 AM PDT by mouse1 (DRILL OR GET OFF THE HILL!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

I agree with your comment about smaller vehicles, and those are exactly the kind of cars people want. A few months ago I looked at Ford’s cars, and found the choices very limited. Next car will probably be a Honda.


23 posted on 08/01/2008 7:12:27 AM PDT by pleikumud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
I’ve been reading FR long enough to notice there’s a sizable number of posters who have so bought and drank the “free trade” kool-aid, who won’t be satisfied until there are simply no more jobs in America.

Patently absurd.

No one wants to see all our union jobs go overseas. We won't get too upset if the natural course of economics leads companies to move these jobs overseas in the face of costly and inefficient union demands. But we'd be happier to see the jobs move to largely non-union states like Tennessee, and happier still if Michigan would learn its lesson and kill off the unions so the jobs never have to leave in the first place.

It's pretty clear your biases are leading you to imagine things.

24 posted on 08/01/2008 7:16:18 AM PDT by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: pleikumud

That’s B.S. In recent years, GM has been making some very good cars, and Toyota’s quality is dropping. Honda’s quality is still pretty good, but their designs are horrible.


25 posted on 08/01/2008 7:18:41 AM PDT by B Knotts (Calvin Coolidge Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts

“In recent years, GM has been making some very good cars ...”

Then why aren’t people willing to buy them at prices which allow GM to make a profit?


26 posted on 08/01/2008 7:28:36 AM PDT by riverdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet
G.M. has no one to blame for this crises except for the Union Thugs that designed the Pontiac and the Union Thugs that insisted on building Hummers and Suburbans even though the price of oil was ever increasing.
27 posted on 08/01/2008 7:28:56 AM PDT by trumandogz ("He is erratic. He is hotheaded. He loses his temper and it worries me." Sen Cochran on McCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: riverdawg

Because they still, as you can see here, have an image problem.

Also, people tend to overreact on both ends of the fuel price question. When fuel was perceived to be cheap, there was a big move to medium and large SUVs. Now that it is perceived to be expensive, there has apparently been a big move to small cars.

For most people, the amount of money we’re talking about in fuel cost is relatively small, so such an overcorrection is probably unnecessary. If you run the numbers, trading in a large SUV for a new small car doesn’t make economic sense, especially considering the financial hit you are likely to take on the SUV, unless you drive 50,000 miles per year.

Now, if you’re buying a new car anyhow, I can see the logic of choosing a smaller vehicle, although you have to consider the actual cost of fuel (which is actually not all that much for the average person, even at $4/gal), and weigh it against other considerations (interior space, safety, convenience, etc.).


28 posted on 08/01/2008 7:35:28 AM PDT by B Knotts (Calvin Coolidge Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RoadTest

WTF? What on earth do people like you crawl out of to post that kind of drivel?


29 posted on 08/01/2008 7:41:55 AM PDT by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

In the early 90’s I closely followed what was going on in Congress relative to the ethanol v. methanol debate. From everthing I read at the time, methanol was a superior technology-but ADM and Andreas exerted CON$IDERABLE influence on congress in order to sway the vote and this country’s focus toward ethanol-we’ll now we’re all seeing how well that all worked out. (and ozoneman Al Gore use to brag about breaking the tie vote).


30 posted on 08/01/2008 7:44:01 AM PDT by mrmargaritaville
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
“Because they still ... have an image problem.”

mrs riverdawg drives a Buick Park Avenue Ultra (a hand-me-down from her parents that she owned before we were married; yes, she is the youngest person in town, by about 20 years, who drives one). It's been a very reliable second car, so when we were looking to replace our aging Toyota Avalon a couple of years ago with a crossover-type SUV, we looked at the Buick Rendezvous. The Buick dealer had a half-dozen of them parked on the side lot, all priced at $19,995. Clearly, he was trying to dump them in anticipation of the already announced Enclave. We test-drove the Rendezvous, and it was a piece of junk. We immediately went to the Toyota dealership, saw a two-year-old Highlander with only 15K miles, test-drove it, and bought it two days later.

The Enclave may be the best product Buick has had in years, but the problem is that GM is always playing catch-up with the Japanese. The new Highlander also has third-row seating and appears to match or exceed the Enclave in performance and build quality.

31 posted on 08/01/2008 8:50:09 AM PDT by riverdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo; Cringing Negativism Network

Not to mention, US is still the worldwide leader in manufacturing - we make, in this country, 25% of Global manufacturing output, more than Japan, China and Germany combined. That proportion has been a fact of the world economy since the 70s.

It’s only the inefficient, non-profitable jobs that are leaving. We don’t make toothpicks or cheap stuff we have to pay unions more than we pay software engineers. There’s nothing wrong with free (but fair) trade.


32 posted on 08/01/2008 10:07:21 AM PDT by farlander (Try not to wear milk bone underwear - it's a dog eat dog financial world)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo

“WTF? What on earth do people like you crawl out of to post that kind of drivel?”
Your reasoning ability, language and courtesy all leave much to be desired.


33 posted on 08/01/2008 10:46:24 AM PDT by RoadTest ( Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. But he spake of the temple of his body.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RoadTest

It seems it would be difficult to reason with someone who believes some hegemonic “New World Order” is controlling global energy prices and intentionally undermining the American auto companies.


34 posted on 08/01/2008 12:46:48 PM PDT by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: farlander
“There's nothing wrong with free (but fair) trade.”

I agree with your post, but worry about the caveat at the end concerning “fair” trade. How you define “fair” in this context? The left uses the idea of “fair” trade to push for restrictions on trade with countries that do not pay “fair” wages or have U.S.-style environmental, safety, and health regulations. If we required all trades among individuals to be conducted only among “equals” (defined, say, along income or wealth dimensions), we would quickly descend into autarky.

35 posted on 08/01/2008 12:51:12 PM PDT by riverdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Arguendo

You’re a good national subject.


36 posted on 08/01/2008 1:48:10 PM PDT by RoadTest ( Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. But he spake of the temple of his body.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Where is that 100 mpg carburator of persistent urban legend? In the 1970’s, the conspiracy theorists claimed that the US auto companies were sitting on a 100 MPG carburator in accordance with a secret deal with “big oil.” If there ever was such a deal, it seems that the US auto makers have gotten the short end of that bargain. If so, now would be a time to use it to revive their own fortunes. If it exists, it would kill the Prius sales in a matter of weeks. If is exists, it would be in production.


37 posted on 08/01/2008 2:43:49 PM PDT by Daveinyork
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: riverdawg

To me, fair trade is whatever gets me the lowest prices for what I buy, and the highest prices for what I sell.


38 posted on 08/01/2008 2:50:04 PM PDT by Daveinyork
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Jobs bank programs — 12,000 paid not to work

Big 3 and suppliers pay billions to keep downsized UAW members on payroll in decades-long deal.

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0510/17/A01-351179.htm


39 posted on 08/01/2008 4:50:18 PM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/Ron_Paul_2008.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
substitute china for japan.

It is a mystery to me why... it is regarded as a sign of Japanese strength and American weakness that the Japanese find it more attractive to invest in the U.S. than Japan. Surely it is precisely the reverse - a sign of U.S. strength and Japanese weakness.
Milton Friedman
40 posted on 08/01/2008 4:51:54 PM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/Ron_Paul_2008.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 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