GM shares fall below $10 for first time since 1954

[Buickman]

Originally Posted by ericmvest

I think General Motors has its best senior management in decades. The product launches over the last three years are second to none and future product appears excellent also. JD Powers and the Harbour Report verfies that General Motors' quality and productivity is right up there with Toyota and Honda. General Motors pension is fully funded. General Motors is handing off responsibility for hourly retiree health care benefits to the UAW. General Motors series hybrid approach (Volt) appears to be superior than Hybrid Synergy Drive. The Volt's development appears to be on track. The Two Mode Hybrid appears better than Hybrid Synergy Drive. General Motors appears to be the leader in fuel cells. General Motors' June sales performance was better than Toyota's. General Motors UAW agreement appears competitive with the transplants. General Motors buyout programs are attracting enough buyouts. General Motors is doing very well in practically every market except the United States.

General Motors has survived rough patches before. General Motors faced insolvency in 1909 and 1920 when they were bailed out by New York banks and the DuPonts, respectfully. General Motors turned itself around and thrived after these experiences.

good points but both customers and the stock market are in disagreement with your analysis. I say it's the marketing that has to change and since Red Ink Rick can't get it done he has to go. besides that take a look at the disclaimers in our financial reports as to material weaknesses still existing year after year and the case for his removal is concrete.

[jlt0x]

I can't say that I'm all so heartbroken over GM's dismal stock values today.

They've made their product options heavy on the truck/SUV side and are now realizing how a lack of the "real" ability to adjust to market demand affects their entire operation. If GM had just as much confidence in its small & mid-sized vehicles as it does with its luxury, truck, and SUV vehicles; consumers would have been purchasing any fuel efficient model they had available.

It was apparent that GM left the "real" business of making smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles to Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, etc. b/c those vehicles were simply "less profitable" than, say a Tahoe or an Escalade. If a GMC Sierra HD can earn $10k+/vehicle, why focus on the Aveo or Cobalt as much? Why has Toyota put money into developing Scion and making the Corolla and Yaris pretty descent economy vehicles? They has Honda continued to fund the Civic, Fit, and CR-V to make them "perceivably" the best small vehicles anybody should own? These companies seem like they believe that they should be just as confident about their econo-boxes as much as they are about their flagship vehicles.

GM, Ford, Chrysler doesn't do that at all. Now that oil prices continue to soar, their small vehicles are now very important...would they have said that 3 yeas ago? No, not really. If these car companies didn't have so much legacy debt, they'd been taken over years ago...probably by foreign firms that could run them much better...or at least made better use of their perspective brands to be readily available globally in markets that could appreciate them more.

[Carver]

With a market capitalization of $6.5 billion, GM is now worth less than a third of Renault ($23.7 billion), the French automaker that was spurned when it sought an alliance with GM in 2006.

The leading U.S. automaker is worth just one-fifteenth of Toyota Motor ($99 billion), which overtook GM this year as the global sales leader by volume.

Once seen as a bellwether for the U.S. economy, GM is also in danger of being eclipsed in value by the likes of India's Tata Motors ($4.4 billion) and Russia's Avtovaz ($4.6 billion), home of the Lada brand.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/...ess/deal30.php

These figures are actually somewhat dated. CNBC reported today that Toyota's market cap is $147 billion!

[2002 Caddy]

Originally Posted by Buick61

I think the real question is, "Why was GM's stock so low in 1954?" The world was an oyster and GM was a knife.

Do the math... Don't you remember gramps telling you stories about nickle candy bars?

$10 in 1954 dollars is worth $125 dollars in 2008 based on simple interest (or ~$90 based on CPI)

If GM was trading between 90 and 125 no-one on this site would be posting any complaints about anything...

BTW if you base growth on the DOW index... a $10 stock in 1955 would be worth ~$300 today...

$10 a share in 1955 was not cheap... that was blue chip royalty.

My parents bought their house in 1965. Paid 13,500 for it... Sold it two years ago for $890,000...
Boy property was cheap in the mid 60's

[wescoent]

Originally Posted by 2002 Caddy

Do the math... Don't you remember gramps telling you stories about nickle candy bars?

$10 in 1954 dollars is worth $125 dollars in 2008 based on simple interest (or ~$90 based on CPI)

If GM was trading between 90 and 125 no-one on this site would be posting any complaints about anything...

BTW if you base growth on the DOW index... a $10 stock in 1955 would be worth ~$300 today...

$10 a share in 1955 was not cheap... that was blue chip royalty.

My parents bought there house in 1965. Paid 13,500 for it... Sold it two years ago for $890,000...
Boy property was cheap in the mid 60's

I use the Mustang index.

In 1965, a new Mustang was $3,000.

Today, a new Mustang is $30,000.

So, in a rough ballpark way, the currency has depreciated by a multiple of ten.

[PA Dweller]

This is really bleak news. Any chance of this improving?

[TriShield]

Originally Posted by PA Dweller

This is really bleak news. Any chance of this improving?

No.

In fact I bet it bottoms out at less than half of today's price.

The writing has been on the wall for many, many years now.

[Pinnacle]

I was also think it hitting ~$5.60 at its lowest, just hard to believe whats goin on

[johnstarnes]

I keep wondering what Wagoner does to actually EARN that monstrous annual salary he enjoys. Sure, he is better than Roger Smith, but that is hardly a stellar point of comparison. The Triplets aren't out and "may" be built in TWO years, "G-8 is car" is now a ute, the G-3 and Aveo make one wince, stock price dropping faster than The Decider's approval ratings.....GM is like an iceberg, a vast bottom heavy blob of giant SUVs no one wants, with the tip of the iceberg a VERY few good new products....CTS, Malibu, Enclave, perhaps a couple more too forgetable to jog my memory. Again, after all these years at the helm with his making many millions, just what is the evidence that GM has benefited from his tenure?

[vcs2600]

Originally Posted by johnstarnes

I keep wondering what Wagoner does to actually EARN that monstrous annual salary he enjoys.

Bah, Wagoner is cheap because he's a company man with no results. Anybody who would replace him would command a much much higher paycheck.

Speaking of which, I can't imagine the board has let the stock run down this far without seriously considering replacements. Wagoner better be interviewing for his own job at this very moment.

[drew770]

Originally Posted by vcs2600

Bah, Wagoner is cheap because he's a company man with no results. Anybody who would replace him would command a much much higher paycheck.

Speaking of which, I can't imagine the board has let the stock run down this far without seriously considering replacements. Wagoner better be interviewing for his own job at this very moment.

I beg to differ!!! Wagoner seems like the teflon CEO!! GM's board has been weak and slow when it comes to influencing Wagoner & Co. to turn this ship around.

Wagoner has had his time and we thank him for the new UAW contracts but the bad outweighs the good.

Wagoner & Co. lack vision and are stuck in the past. Rick has GM playing catch up continuously. Never taking the lead but always the follower.
And without the success of the Prius then the Volt would still be on the cutting room floor.

At this point customers, Wall Street and the industry are looking for GM to do something smart and dramatic.
Maybe dumping Hummer, maybe bring the Chevy Beat to the US and maybe doing this or doing that is not going to cut it.
Back in the late 90s Business Week had a cover story on GM and how GM needed to trim products, plants and brands!! And since then GM has been going down the tubes with little or no changes.
They got rid of Oldsmobile but added Hummer? GM got itself invested in Fiat and then got cold feet and had to pay billions to get out of the partnership.
GM has sold damn near everything under the roof and still has liquidity issues.

Time for a change!!

[2002 Caddy]

Originally Posted by drew770

Wagoner & Co. lack vision and are stuck in the past. Rick has GM playing catch up continuously. Never taking the lead but always the follower.
And without the success of the Prius then the Volt would still be on the cutting room floor.

X2 X2

The new Camaro is another example... Lutz and Rick, stall stall, dither dither, offer goofy trucks as pony car replacements... and when the new Mustang takes off like a rocket they pick some lint out of their navels and say... "Time to play catch up"

But even at catch up they suck... When this first happened in mid 1964... Chevy got a Mustang beater on the road in 29 months... How long has taken Rick and Co. to recognize their mistake on the Camaro and get a car on the road?

Almost 5 freaking years!...

How long did has it taken Chrysler to get a challenger back in the showrooms?
Just over 2 years...
They started AFTER GM committed to the new Camaro and they FINISHED first...

Rick, if your corporate strategy is to just play catchup all of the time...
Could you at least be good at it!

BTW Rick IS NOT CHEAP... he has collected over $100Million... Yes MILLION... during his tenure at GM...

[Buickman]

Originally Posted by 2002 Caddy

X2 X2

The new Camaro is another example... Lutz and Rick, stall stall, dither dither, offer goofy trucks as pony car replacements... and when the new Mustang takes off like a rocket they pick some lint out of their navels and say... "Time to play catch up"

But even at catch up they suck... When this first happened in mid 1964... Chevy got a Mustang beater on the road in 29 months... How long has taken Rick and Co. to recognize their mistake on the Camaro and get a car on the road?

Almost 5 freaking years!...

How long did has it taken Chrysler to get a challenger back in the showrooms?
Just over 2 years...
They started AFTER GM committed to the new Camaro and they FINISHED first...

Rick, if your corporate strategy is to just play catchup all of the time...
Could you at least be good at it!

BTW Rick IS NOT CHEAP... he has collected over $100Million... Yes MILLION... during his tenure at GM...

wish more people had your common sense and could see as clearly why Red Ink Rick must go. guess there's nothing like that first hand experience of investing cash and seeing it literally disappear due to incompetence. easy for some youngsters and casual bystanders to express confidence in someone so undeserving. different when you know better and can tell what true leadership brings.

a grocery store in my home town in NY foresaw the coming impact of a brand new Topps and Walmart Superstore. before these new operations finished construction, the old line family grocier had converted to a Save-A-Lot while retaining many long held traditions of service. they are prospering in light of the onslaught of well heeled competitors and their employees continue working and are able to support their families. that is good management and vision, something Wagoner surely doesn't possess.

[Buick61]

Originally Posted by 2002 Caddy

Do the math... Don't you remember gramps telling you stories about nickle candy bars?

$10 in 1954 dollars is worth $125 dollars in 2008 based on simple interest (or ~$90 based on CPI)

If GM was trading between 90 and 125 no-one on this site would be posting any complaints about anything...

BTW if you base growth on the DOW index... a $10 stock in 1955 would be worth ~$300 today...

$10 a share in 1955 was not cheap... that was blue chip royalty.

My parents bought their house in 1965. Paid 13,500 for it... Sold it two years ago for $890,000...
Boy property was cheap in the mid 60's

I assumed the $10 1954 share price was adjusted for inflation.

[fp115]

Originally Posted by 2002 Caddy

X2 X2

The new Camaro is another example... Lutz and Rick, stall stall, dither dither, offer goofy trucks as pony car replacements... and when the new Mustang takes off like a rocket they pick some lint out of their navels and say... "Time to play catch up"

But even at catch up they suck... When this first happened in mid 1964... Chevy got a Mustang beater on the road in 29 months... How long has taken Rick and Co. to recognize their mistake on the Camaro and get a car on the road?

Almost 5 freaking years!...

How long did has it taken Chrysler to get a challenger back in the showrooms?
Just over 2 years...
They started AFTER GM committed to the new Camaro and they FINISHED first...

Rick, if your corporate strategy is to just play catchup all of the time...
Could you at least be good at it!

BTW Rick IS NOT CHEAP... he has collected over $100Million... Yes MILLION... during his tenure at GM...

I suggest you look up reasons as to which why the car is being released in a few months.
Hint: Look up Oshawa car retooling, look up Ste Therese F-Body contract termination terms. The Camaro has been planned long before Ste Therese was closed, they couldn't keep it under wraps so long. Released early maybe, but this was out for a long time and there wasn't any real way to speed it up.