GM: One Step Closer to Nationalization
Bloomberg reports the Obama Administration is stepping up pressure on management, unions and creditors to make further concessions, and is considering taking a sizable equity position in the once-proud Detroit firm. The move, which would swap out some of the outstanding $13.4 billion in government loans for stock in a new, slimmed-down, cleaned-up version of GM, is the latest in a series of steps toward outright nationalization.
Analysts say the swap would diminish the rights of creditors, to whom the company offered around 90% ownership in a recent restructuring plan - a plan rejected by government officials. Under the Obama Administration's preferred tact of temporary state ownership, employees owed pension benefits would end up faring better than bondholders.
The government aims to take an ownership interest in GM, then quickly use the cover of bankruptcy courts to hack off the 'bad' parts of the firm. With a fresh start, free of legacy obligations and under performing divisions, Washington says it would quickly divest of it's stake and let the restructuring process continue.
We've by now become almost numb to government-led bailouts of failed companies, most notably American International Group (AIG), Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE). The details are almost an afterthought, as the complexity of each scenario renders casual analysis almost a waste of time. The GM situation, however, could be a blueprint for future intrusion of the federal government into private enterprise.
Secured lenders, as is the government in the case of GM, often prefer a bankruptcy filing when companies get into trouble since it can enable the quickest repayment of their loans in full. Unsecured creditors and equity owners are left holding the bag.
The Bush Administration before him and now Obama have set a precedent: Emergency, secured loans are a likely precursor to state ownership. Notably, the huge bailouts of Citigroup (C) and Bank of America (BAC) were executed through portfolio guarantees and capital injections, not secured loans to the company itself. Not yet, anyway.Despite efforts on the part of officials to play down the government's role in running GM, or AIG, or Citigroup, or Bank of America, we have entered an economic reality where business success, rather than relying on vision, strategy and good practices, is becoming increasingly reliant on political acumen.
By adding layers of red tape and palm-greasing to our already politicized economy, we move closer and closer to an economic system directed not by the collective will of the many, but rather one controlled by an ever-shrinking group of power brokers and political puppeteers.
This, despite loud proclamations of an impending return to economic vibrancy, is not a welcome development.
The information on this website solely reflects the analysis of or opinion about the performance of securities and financial markets by the writers whose articles appear on the site. The views expressed by the writers are not necessarily the views of Minyanville Media, Inc. or members of its management. Nothing contained on the website is intended to constitute a recommendation or advice addressed to an individual investor or category of investors to purchase, sell or hold any security, or to take any action with respect to the prospective movement of the securities markets or to solicit the purchase or sale of any security. Any investment decisions must be made by the reader either individually or in consultation with his or her investment professional. Minyanville writers and staff may trade or hold positions in securities that are discussed in articles appearing on the website. Writers of articles are required to disclose whether they have a position in any stock or fund discussed in an article, but are not permitted to disclose the size or direction of the position. Nothing on this website is intended to solicit business of any kind for a writer's business or fund. Minyanville management and staff as well as contributing writers will not respond to emails or other communications requesting investment advice.
Copyright 2009 Minyanville Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
I wonder how many out there are like myself in that the degree of government involvement is not an issue or maybe welcome.
GM's decades old business model has been failing for quite awhile. Unlike FORD which changed it's business model a few years ago, GM has continued to engage in predetermining the number of vehicles it manufactures, disregarding the actual DEMAND for its product. This required costly year-end price cutting to clear inventory. And imposed a significant burden on used-car prices...whose importance has grown by leaps and bounds because of the great increase in Leasing versus purchasing.
GM's business model has clearly proven to be a disaster in a period of deep economic downturn. Their healthcare and retirement funding obligations has contributed to drying up their internal cash generation.
So far the misguided Geither led Treasury Department has not moved towards nationalization, and indeed I seriously doubt that they'd be stupid enough to want to take that responsibility upon themselves.
moderate Republicans.
P.S. I am a hard core republican. I am just more pragmatic than an average republican.
Anyhow, I think we will have to agree to disagree about nationalization. I think it is a huge mistake and a distortion of the markets....you apparently don't. To each their own :)
As for GM management.....and this is probably true in MANY areas of not only our economic, but social interactions as well, a lot of the blame lies with the people that are supposed to hold their feet to the fire...the stockholders. When people don't care, or outsource their due diligence....management will run amok. WHY was GM management allowed to go into areas they had no business in? The Board. Now, when time have caught up with them.....why did the government run in to save them? They should have faced the consequences of their inaction....as should every publicly held company. If sotckholders cannot and have not held management accountable, they should lose it all in bankruptcy. Period.
I'm rambling....so I'll stop now. But I think we can all agree that government allocating resources in the private sector is a HUGE mistake? <duck>
:)
I don't agree with nationalization in principle, but certainly if it was my money (and we all agree it is OUR money) Management cannot do the same thing and expect different results - especially wiht OUR money.
Perhaps, one day, there will be a political party in `mmmrica that isn't run by scam artists manipulating dumb-azzes, but I doubt it. People in a "democratic" society generally get what they deserve.
Green product design et al will come later.
The worldwide over capacity in auto manufacturing has been obvious since the 1980s - I remember going through the analysis in B-school back then.
















