Big 3 - Thumbs Up or Down?

Here is link to an in depth article titled SUPERCAR: THE TANKING OF AN AMERICAN DREAM that is hosted by the Chicago Prius Group. In goes into great detail on the Supercar program from start to end and is an excellent source to see how the Big 3 operate and why they are now groveling for handouts from the US taxpayers. They took the money for the Supercar project, pissed it away and with the help of the current administration basically said FU to the taxpayer, we are going do what we want to do and you are like it and buy it.

 

This is why GM doesn't deserve a Thumbs Up, until they get rid of these guys:

Memo to Automakers: Follow Cisco's Lead - Seeking Alpha

Memo to Automakers: Follow Cisco's Lead

by: Joe Panettieri
November 23, 2008 | about stocks: F / GM
During the dot-com implosion, Cisco Systems (CSCO) CEO John Chambers took an unusual step that set the tone for appropriate, responsible executive leadership during bad economic times. Now, the executive leadership at Ford (F), General Motors (GM) and Chrysler should follow the example Chambers set back in 2002.
Amid the dot-com fallout, Chambers received a $1 salary in 2002. That’s right: One dollar. Chambers also declined his bonus and gave back 2 million in stock options that year, according to CNet.

Alas, auto industry executives haven’t set a similar example.

GM CEO Compensation.
According to the Wall Street Journal:
GM CEO Rick Wagoner got a 33% raise for 2008 and equity compensation of at least $1.68 million for his performance in 2007, a year for which the auto maker reported a loss of $38.7 billion. The salary increase puts Mr. Wagoner’s salary for this year at $2.2 million, compared with $1.65 million in 2007.

Moreover, the Journal says:
Mr. Wagoner was awarded 75,000 restricted stock units valued at $1.68 million, based on GM’s closing stock price in March. He was also given stock options representing 500,000 shares.
GM told the Journal that Wagoner’s total compensation is down sharply from $8.3 million in 2006.

My perspective: Yada, yada, yada. Why is this guy still running GM?


Ford CEO Compensation
According to the Journal, Ford CEO Alan Mulally received $2 million in base salary, a $4 million bonus and more than $11 million of stock and options in 2007. His base salary was unchanged over 2006. Mr. Mulally has earned nearly $50 million in compensation since taking the helm of the auto maker, according to The Wall Street Journal.

My perspective: Sounds like Mulally runs Ford about as well as Ford runs the Detroit Lions. Pathetic.
Somebody sack this guy.


Chrysler CEO Compensation
Less is known about Robert Nardelli’s CEO package at Chrysler LLC because the auto maker is privately held, notes The Journal.

My take: Somebody dial Lee Iacocca. Fast.

The Bottom Line
I cover the high-tech industry for a living on TheVarGuy.com and I don't know much about the auto industry. But the situation in Detroit is pathetic.

According to the Associated Press:
The leaders of the Big Three automakers have painted a grim picture of their financial position.
They burned through nearly $18 billion in cash reserves during the last quarter — about $7 billion at GM, almost $8 billion at Ford and $3 billion at Chrysler. GM and Chrysler have said they could collapse in weeks.

If John Chambers was running one of those companies, he would have declined his paycheck, bonus and new stock options months ago. Instead of asking for government handouts, high-tech companies innovate -- again and again -- to stay in business.
Apparently, Detroit automakers don't know how to do the same.

 

I think we can guess the same thing will happen when the Big 3 receive the latest taxpayer teat. Yes, I'm convinced the Big Three will receive their funding. Unions helped prop up a lot of the election results, so the money will flow

Like anything involving the mafia, this isn't the only payment. It's only a down payment. Give it 3 months, and they'll be demanding twice as much

 

]Ford Scion Looks Beyond Bailout to a Green Agenda

Mr. Ford has been working behind the scenes, meeting one-on-one with Mr. Obama in August, conferring with his senior economic advisers, and teaming up with Gov. Jennifer Granholm of Michigan to push a vision of a leaner, greener auto industry.

With Detroit on the brink of disaster, the great-grandson of Henry Ford could play a critical role in how the Obama administration decides to assist the companies financially and shape broader energy policies.
...
The company has enough cash on hand — $18.9 billion, as well as a $10.7 billion line of credit with private lenders — that will keep it running through 2009 without cutting development of its next generation of more fuel-efficient cars.

While Ford cannot continue to burn cash indefinitely, it is also not on the verge of bankruptcy like G.M. and Chrysler. And the health of the company presents a unique opportunity for Mr. Ford, 51, who has been chairman of the company since 1999 and served five years as its chief executive.
“We have a plan that is high-tech, product-driven, which is a fuel economy plan,” he said. “And we have kept that plan in place under these tough conditions.”

In August, Mr. Ford shared those plans with Mr. Obama, then candidate for president, when he was in Lansing, Mich., for a speech on energy policy.
“We talked about the electrification of our industry and other fuel-economy issues,” Mr. Ford said. “He’s a great listener and he asked all the right questions.”

Mr. Ford said they focused on a few specific, industrywide issues. One was government help to put more electric cars on the road.

“One of the things we need to sort out as a country is batteries,” Mr. Ford said. “We really don’t want to trade one foreign dependency, oil, for another foreign dependency, batteries.” The main producers of batteries are Asian manufacturers.

 

I suspect you just did what the entire US auto industry does, he is knocking the US auto industry,
full of sh*t unamerican he is, put a bigger engine and an extra cup holder in the next model and a flag in the promotional material.

 

I sat in a lot of big 3 vehicles at the SF auto show and asked a few questions.

A Ford specialist / former engineer claimed the Ford Focus 'has a smaller carbon footprint per mile driven than a Toyota Prius'. I have not investigated.
Hank the robot in Ford area was very cool and funny.

The instrument panel gages in even the newest Ford models reminded me of something from 70's cars. Have they not thought about freshening them up .. a lot? Geez.

Corvette? I'm a sucker, that car is too hot. I don't care what gas mileage it gets, I wanna drive one. I'd buy one just to look at it in the garage.

Sign said a Chevy Tahoe Hybrid gets 21 mpg city, nice to sit in for sure. But $54k MSRP !!

Was it Obama's aide, Axelrod that told the Big 3 bigwigs to come back to Washington .. on a commercial flight this time with restructuring plans?

 

Do we have a hybrid snob here? I know how the BAS works, but I'm more interested in the results than the parts list. While you may not like the specs on the BAS it increases the VUE's fuel economy by 31.5% city, 23% hwy for a combined 27% increase in fuel economy. Not bad for inferior technology.

The reason that it hasn't sold well is the same reason other hybrids with conventional versions haven't sold well, price. The VUE hybrid is $4500 more than a base VUE. People look at the hybrid and ask, does the increase mileage justify the increased price.

 

there is only one hybrid that has ever sold in any numbers and you guys are driving it. all of the other hybrids have been sales failures to one degree or another.

I have heard that if the conressional hearings on the 8th of December are not successful, Chrysler will declare bankruptcy on the 15th of December. If you have money in the stock market get it out before the 15th.

 

I got out of the stock market back in 1997. Perhaps way too early, but in hindsight the correct decision.

What business does the government have shoveling money into a privately held corporation? For that matter, what business does the government have shoveling money into *any* company.

I'm incorporated. I sure as s*** don't qualify for any taxpayer bailouts

I fear Obama will take the country in the same direction the Liberals did in Canada: massive government meddling in the private sector. As an example, the creation of massive, complex Crown Corporations legally exempt from audit: Industry Canada, Export Development Corp, Community International Development Agency.

CIDA is completely redundant, as EDC already exists. As far as that goes, all those Crown Corps are nothing more than multi-billion dollar black holes for the taxpayer teat

No government can pick economic winners. If a company succeeds, it does so on its own merit. There are far more losers than "winners" in the Crown Corp portfolio. So if a company succeeds, the Crown Corp freebies are nothing more than perks, and are treated as such

One example is Bombardier in Quebec. Despite the billions received, why are they so reluctant to pay back any of it?

So if a company goes into deep doo-doo, it enters bankruptcy protection. If it renegotiates the various outstanding obligations, and can become focused on end customers, it will probably emerge stronger. Especially if it dumps the deadweight in middle and upper management

A lot of major corporations have hit bad times, entered Chapter 11, and emerged stronger. I really don't get the doom and gloom from whiny crybabies in the automotive sector

It was even on the news that homebuilders now expect a bailout. Well, gee-zus cah-rist, what next? Where the f*** does this end?

If this keeps up, the US will become the same as a Latin American country: worthless currency, hyperinflation, etc

 

We are in uncharted territory, far too much debt, too many promises. In the depression the governments went into debt to try and jump-start things and keep people moving. Today every government entity is already bankrupt, so where do we go from here.

I did not think I would be glad to have my farm so soon, I thought the calamity would not come for another 10 years but I may have been wrong. As a principle I wdo not favor the government being involved with any bailout or loans, but again we are in unchartered territory. My hope is that things will stabilize, we can come out of the current abyss and we can make changes over the next decade so China Japan, and the Middle east do not hold all the cards. Probably wishful thinking at this point.

 

See, that's the problem right there. A lot of folks don't realize that about the single largest line-item on the budget is interest payments on the national debt. That can't go on forever

Again, consider the Latin American countries. They have all gone through this, very recently too. That is our future

Odd how the media doesn't say one thing about Iceland. The EU media is covering it

We fire up the printing presses and crank out more of that s***. I'm just being sarcastic - in case you can't tell - but the reality is that the "bailout" is a huge future debt obligation

Me either. But, world events appear to have set the dominoes falling

Considering the entities you mentioned already hold a bit over 50% of the debt obligation, yes, that is wishful thinking

I've observed the creditor usually has a lot of power. Perhaps this will degrade into indentured servitude, who knows

I have also noticed a slight change in attitude over in countries like Singapore, Hong Kong, and mainland China, over about the past year. Maybe it's nothing, but to me it almost feels as if a predator is sizing you up.

I leave again tomorrow, and will be paying closer attention to this. One thing I have noticed, ever since Prime Minister Harper started sticking up for Tibet and human rights in China, and refused to attend the Beijing games, the Chinese attitude towards Canada and Canadians has really cooled

I don't notice that in Europe. On the contrary, most folks are downright pleasant to me when they see my Canadian flag lapel buton

 

Actually, I was thinking about performance also. Let's look at how much improvement Toyota gets with a 10 year old hybrid design. Prius and Yaris both have 1.5L engines rated at 110/104 hp respectively, and while the Prius is 600 lbs heavier, it gets 61% better city, 28% hwy, and 48% combined.

Out the door pricing on a base Prius is around $10,000 more than the Yaris, and about $8,000 more than a Corolla LE. Gotta wonder how Toyota's sold a million of those overpriced Priuses? No, the Prius/Yaris/Corolla are not totally comparable; that's the point. Toyota decided 15 years ago to invest in a Hybrid model from the ground up.

Anyway, I'm a newb here, so if somehow you thought any of my comments were a put down, please accept my apology. The point of posting is to inform (as well as opine ;-), and I thought some readers might be interested in GM's BAS system. After all, this forum does tend to focus on learning about hybrid technologies; I certainly have.

Personally, I think the BAS reflects an historical lack of comittment on GM's part, and more importantly, a huge missed opportunity from a pure business perspective. However, a 27% fuel economy improvement on the Vue is certainly better than a sharp stick in the eye. Let's see when GM hits the million car mark with any hybrid, meek, mild, or strong!

 

Not completely uncharted...as a percentage of GDP. Came close in the early Clinton years, and far exceeded our current position during WWII and into the early 50's.

The big rackup of debt came not from the depression, but rather the cost of WWII. However, in the long run, the debt was lowered and the economy thrived.

 

Though large, interest payments are no where near our largest federal expenditure. (I assume you are referring to the US government not the Canadian government)

Debt payments are 13% of Federal spending
Military spending is 19%
Social Security is 19%
Medicare / Medicaid is 24%
and that leaves 26% for everything else

Budget

Foreigners only hold 25% of US public debt,



Of the 25% of debt that is foreign owned, Japan owns 21%, China 20%, and 13% is owned by all the oil exporters combined.

 

Only? That scares the hell out of me. Direct relationship, trade deficit and foreign investment.

 

Whoops, should have been more clear about that

 

Last time I checked it was "business as usual" in washington plus a regional conflict in the middle east. We are not financing a world war on multiple fronts.

 

Those colored pie charts are pretty. If I squint my eyes they make me dizzy.

Tom

 

First no apology need, debate is a healthy part of life. Welcome to the club.

Second, you'll find that the here on PriusChat the preferred comparison vehicle for the Prius is the Matrix. Similar size, same body style, similar options available.

Third, I tend to like BAS as a short term solution. It is inexpensive and quick to market. If GM wasn't almost bankrupt they would be wise to offer the option of BAS on all of their vehicles. At volume, BAS would cost less than $1000. Come to think of it, they would be wise to offer it anyway.

 

My fault for mixing up two comparisons. First I was trying to compare mileage on a Toy with the same size engine as the Prius: 1.5L. The Yaris seemed as close as I could get. Then I tried to compare pricing using the same model, although it's obviously not a comparable. Nonetheless, it looks like there's still an $8K spread on the out-the-door price between Prius and Matrix.

"Short term" is the key word here. My beef with GM is their perpetural short term thinking. GM wasn't bankrupt back in 1994 when Toyota started on the Prius project. It took Toy 12+ years to build Prius into a volume product. Typical Japanese persistence!

GM, like everyone, struggles to sustain an adequate supply of NiMH batteries. Their troubles with Cobasys, labor troubles, and the general worldwide shortage of batteries would likely prevent them from slapping the BAS on more vehicles in the short term. It will be interesting to see whether any of the automakers can tame the finicky and short lived Lithium-ion battery.