Posts Tagged ‘Bailouts’

About that GM success story ….

May 2, 2012

Team Obama is touting the rousing success of GM. 

You know, Bin Laden is dead; the UAW is alive.

Oops, Imeant GM is alive.

Hmmm.  Let’s see …

The original GM stockholders — you know, your grandma and the pension funds — got completely wiped out.

The secured creditors got about 65% of their principal wiped out.

And privileged folks got the opportunity to buy stock in the new GM.

Those share have declined by 30% from the $33 IPO price ,,, a 50 point spread vs, the S&P 500 which increased  20% over the same period.

That’s a loss of about $16 Billion in market cap in about 18 months.

Now, that’s what I call a roaring success … many more successes and we really will be bankrupt.

image

>> Latest Posts

How does GM’s tax rate compare to Buffett’s secretary’s?

March 2, 2012

Interesting editorial in the WSJ re: the GM bailout.

Everybody knows the GM’s stock holders were wiped out, that secured debt holders were subordinated to the unsecured UAW claims and  haircut to about 50 cents on the dollar, and that “New GM” stock is trading about 25% below its IPO price — leaving taxpayers with a $15 billion book loss on Treasury holdings.

What most folks don’t know is that GM got a special deal that rolls old GM’s $45 billion in accumulated tax losses into new GM.  That’s usually not allowed when restructuring companies — as a means of stopping companies from just acquiring losses from other companies as a tax dodge.

Bottom line:

In a 2011 working paper, J. Mark Ramseyer of Harvard and Eric Rasmusen of Indiana University argue that by manipulating corporate tax rules by fiat, “Treasury gave the firm (and its owners, including the UAW) $18 billion more in assets.”

The WSJ observed:

Mr. Obama crowed yesterday about GM’s “highest profits in its 100-year history.”

We’d be interested to hear how its effective tax rate compares with Warren Buffett’s secretary’s.

Hmmm ….

>> Latest Posts

To avoid the Gibson Guitars treatment, Ford pulls anti-bailout ad.

September 28, 2011

Punch line: As part of an ad campaign featuring “real people” explaining their decision to buy Fords, a guy named “Chris” says he “wasn’t going to buy another car that was bailed out by our government,”

Team Obama didn’t like the ad, and Ford pulled it so that Team Obama could stay focused on Gibson Guitars, S&P, and the tanning salons.

According to the Detroit News

Ford pulled the ad after individuals inside the White House questioned whether the copy was publicly denigrating the controversial bailout policy.

With President Barack Obama tuning his re-election campaign amid dismal economic conditions and simmering antipathy toward his stimulus spending and associated bailouts, the Ford ad carried the makings of a political liability when Team Obama can least afford yet another one. Can’t have that.

The ad, pulled in response to White House “questions” (and, presumably, carping from rival GM), threatened to rekindle the negative (if accurate) association just when the president wants credit for their positive results and to distance himself from any public downside of his decision.

In other words, where presidential politics and automotive marketing collide — clean, green, politically correct vehicles not included — the president wins and the automaker loses because the benefit of the battle isn’t worth the cost of waging it.

Once again, nothing like the Administration’s Chicago style politics.

Step out of line, and BAM !

>> Latest Posts