Bondholders Argue Over GM Assest Sale

[tgagneguam]

Originally Posted by Rocket 88

Because the free market economy theory is crap. The US government can barely get GM to care about fuel economy, safety or environmental responsible manufacturing. You think a bunch of consumer will? These are the same consumer who purchase crapwagons from Korea in the 1980's because they were cheap. You really believe people trying to finanically survive (and regardless of your perception most of the country is poor) are going to use thier buying power to push the auto industry?

If you left the industry to their own devices we'd still be using leaded gas and have major environmental disasters on our hand. Not to mention probably no seatbelts or turn signals.

You might as well still believe in Laissez Faire and the tooth fairy.

"House of Cards" was playing again on CNBC yesterday, and it paints a pretty interesting picture of American business. Specifically, it spoke to the issue of our current global financial crisis. The program concluded with a short interview with Alan Greenspan, who I think nicely summarized the events of the past 12 months or so. I mostly agree with his assessment, even if I do so somewhat reluctantly.

As infuriating as it was to allow banks to wreak havoc on global finances, and in the process display zero contrition with respect to the mess that they helped to create-look no further than the posts from financial types on this very site as evidence of their pure arrogance-I still believe that free markets are our best option.

The problem is simple: people view the theory in one extreme or the other; no rules or too many rules. There's nothing saying that a mostly free market system cannot be in place with proper regulation. Just as we live in a relatively free society, not too many people are suggesting anarchy; there's a difference. We are free people, but our government, when reflective of the people's will, imposes certain restrictions on our lives: we cannot murder people with impunity; we cannot rape people; we cannot drive whatever speed we choose on the highway. But we are still relatively free.

Unfortunately, lax legislation in the past now sees a disturbing swing of the pendulum to greater control by the government. I happen to like neither situation. It's all about balance.

[PeteM143]

Originally Posted by tgagneguam

"House of Cards" was playing again on CNBC yesterday, and it paints a pretty interesting picture of American business. Specifically, it spoke to the issue of our current global financial crisis. The program concluded with a short interview with Alan Greenspan, who I think nicely summarized the events of the past 12 months or so. I mostly agree with his assessment, even if I do so somewhat reluctantly.

As infuriating as it was to allow banks to wreak havoc on global finances, and in the process display zero contrition with respect to the mess that they helped to create-look no further than the posts from financial types on this very site as evidence of their pure arrogance-I still believe that free markets are our best option.

The problem is simple: people view the theory in one extreme or the other; no rules or too many rules. There's nothing saying that a mostly free market system cannot be in place with proper regulation. Just as we live in a relatively free society, not too many people are suggesting anarchy; there's a difference. We are free people, but our government, when reflective of the people's will, imposes certain restrictions on our lives: we cannot murder people with impunity; we cannot rape people; we cannot drive whatever speed we choose on the highway. But we are still relatively free.

Unfortunately, lax legislation in the past now sees a disturbing swing of the pendulum to greater control by the government. I happen to like neither situation. It's all about balance.

Exactly!!!!
People in power look to get more power. Humans hoard and are greedy by nature. No one says capitalism isn't a good system, it works when the winners don't get to completely dominate the losers. There have to be limits, or you get what we got last year, a few winners who walk away with the riches and everyone else.

GM tried very hard to keep all of their commitments. Just about everything worked against them. I'm not saying that they weren't arrogant, just too late to cut where they needed to. The economy cratering killed them.

The good of this situation is we didn't have the voodoo 'free marketers' in charge when this thing really went sideways for GM. They got rescued and it'll prove to be a wise move by some very smart folks in government.

[tkrelston]

Originally Posted by vu2vu

GM's failure was of their own doing. The previous management just didn't know how to run a profitable company.

Here is some food for thought. In every other industry we pay a premium for "Made in America" because we know it was carefully engineered and built to last. How come this is not the case for Automobiles?

Why is it people don't haggle Lowes over the price of a dishwasher?

[page2171]

Originally Posted by tkrelston

Why is it people don't haggle Lowes over the price of a dishwasher?

Because Lowes doesn't do haggle pricing. Duh.

[Rocket 88]

Originally Posted by tgagneguam

"House of Cards" was playing again on CNBC yesterday, and it paints a pretty interesting picture of American business. Specifically, it spoke to the issue of our current global financial crisis. The program concluded with a short interview with Alan Greenspan, who I think nicely summarized the events of the past 12 months or so. I mostly agree with his assessment, even if I do so somewhat reluctantly.

As infuriating as it was to allow banks to wreak havoc on global finances, and in the process display zero contrition with respect to the mess that they helped to create-look no further than the posts from financial types on this very site as evidence of their pure arrogance-I still believe that free markets are our best option.

The problem is simple: people view the theory in one extreme or the other; no rules or too many rules. There's nothing saying that a mostly free market system cannot be in place with proper regulation. Just as we live in a relatively free society, not too many people are suggesting anarchy; there's a difference. We are free people, but our government, when reflective of the people's will, imposes certain restrictions on our lives: we cannot murder people with impunity; we cannot rape people; we cannot drive whatever speed we choose on the highway. But we are still relatively free.

Unfortunately, lax legislation in the past now sees a disturbing swing of the pendulum to greater control by the government. I happen to like neither situation. It's all about balance.

Very well said, and thanks for not calling me a communist.

[funkypunnk]

Originally Posted by tkrelston

Why is it people don't haggle Lowes over the price of a dishwasher?

Yes, we do and when I was done I got 4800.00 worth of appliances for 3200.00. Lowes will compete like any other business, you just have to approach it right. They even have arrangements with home builders for a discounted appliance price so the builders can send their customers to Lowes.

[TruckMan]

Originally Posted by tgagneguam

This post unfortunately reflects a new reality in America, one that I think is the start of a slide toward mediocrity.

Yes, GM failed because of everyone else. It had nothing to do with management or the UAW that represented the workers.

Little Johnny isn't doing well in school because the teacher isn't good enough. It has nothing to do with the parents not providing a home in which education is emphasized. Or better yet it has nothing to do with the fact that Johnny doesn't study.

Yup, Americans are fat because of McDonald's or their parents' genes. It has absolutely nothing to do with people making poor food choices and leading sedentary lifestyles.

Financial institutions failed because borrowers had guns to the heads of Bank of America and Citigroup, forcing them to lend to credit unworthy people. And alternatively, borrowers were forced to buy larger homes that they couldn't afford.

When Americans stop externalizing responsibility, you will see lots more good start happening in America.

Ahhh... Imagine how wonderful the world would be if people actually took responsibility for their actions. But, never fear, the government will bail everybody out. The greedy politicians still need votes, and lawers need somebody to sue.

[2002 Caddy]

Re: Bondholders Argue Over GM Asset Sale

I think I have seen this movie before. It goes like this:

• "A" offers DIP Bridge loan to Car Company "B".
• 9 months later Car Company "B" Declares Chapter 11
• Bond holders "C" complain to BK Judge "D"
• "D" tells "C" to pound salt up their collective XXXes.
• And everyone blames "E"

The first time we'all saw this movie it was "interesting" to watch...
However Like most sequels... This time it is just stupid and boring.

[H3AlphaGuy]

Originally Posted by tgagneguam

When Americans stop externalizing responsibility, you will see lots more good start happening in America.

The other part of the equation is the thought or ideal of stewardship, especially in corporations that seems vacant in recent years. As an executive, being a steward involves making changes that keep the company afloat, making money, providing for its employees. It does not mean perceived growth to solely maximize share price at any cost.

It comes back to the externalizing responsibility, overbearing greed, and the instant-on "I want it and want it now!" society that has been created over the past 15 years or so. When will it get fixed? I have no idea, but hopefully soon for everyone's sake.

[2002 Caddy]

Originally Posted by H3AlphaGuy

The other part of the equation is the thought or ideal of stewardship, especially in corporations that seems vacant in recent years. As an executive, being a steward involves making changes that keep the company afloat, making money, providing for its employees. It does not mean perceived growth to solely maximize share price at any cost.

It comes back to the externalizing responsibility, overbearing greed, and the instant-on "I want it and want it now!" society that has been created over the past 15 years or so. When will it get fixed? I have no idea, but hopefully soon for everyone's sake.

Oh this is soo true... If you look at the inside deals that occured when Bank of America "took over" Merrill Lynch... (technically this was a government mandated merger aka Nationalization)... The terms of the take over took less then 5 hours to complete... They then spent almost that amount of time again to figure out how much the excutive of Merill would get paid. You know, for doing such a great job of Bankrupting the company... The answer? 5.8 Billion in total compensation. Nice money if you can get it! The AVERAGE Merill employee made over a 1/4 of a million the year they went broke.

At the very time that the whole banking industry was on the verge of total colapse it was not, "How are we going to make a great combined company together" but is "How much money can we line John Thain's (Merrill's CEO) pockets with." (In the end, he did not get his "promised" bonus of over 40 Million, but the rest of his executive did)...

Not a lot of this ever got reported...