Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

Can anything save General Motors?

fistfullofsteel

Well-known member
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/13639768/

General Motors’ board of directors has voted to start exploratory discussions with Nissan and Renault on a potential business alliance — a plan first proposed one week ago by Kirk Kerkorian, GM’s largest shareholder. But would a deal with the automakers help boost GM’s flagging fortunes?

GM announced Friday that its board has authorized the company’s management to consider and “weigh the potential benefits of such an alliance in order to assist the board in its decision making.” GM Chairman and Chief Executive Rick Wagoner will lead the talks.

Kerkorian and his Tracinda Corp. first proposed that the U.S. automotive giant join in a business alliance with Nissan and Renault last week, pushing for GM to consider a partnership in an effort to help the world’s biggest automaker stage a turnaround and reverse its declining market share.

Kerkorian’s original proposal may have been little more than a shot across the bow of GM’s management, but it certainly increases the pressure on CEO Wagoner to hurry and fix the company’s internal problems according to John Casesa, automotive analyst and managing partner of Casesa Strategic Advisers.

“This ratchets up the pressure to accelerate change at this company,” Casesa told CNBC in an interview last week. “There may never be a deal with Renault. … It may just catalyze internal change [at GM], and that’s what this shareholder is doing.”

“Time is of the essence at GM, and the longer market share goes down, the weaker this company is going to be and the less valuable it’s going to be to a potential suitor,” he said.

Talk of a three-way alliance already is paying short-term dividends for the Detroit carmaker. GM shares soared the day news broke that Kerkorian said Renault and Nissan were interested in including GM in their alliance. And they rose again Friday after GM said its board had approved exploratory discussions with Nissan and Renault.

The deal being proposed would involve Nissan and Renault, which are closely allied, each buying a 10 percent stake in GM. Even so, a deal would rank among the industry’s most significant of recent years along with the 1998 union of Daimler-Benz and Chrysler, and the business alliance of Renault and Nissan in 1999.

A partnership, which could bring GM a cash injection of $3 billion or more, could prove helpful in an increasingly competitive global environment, in which Japan’s Toyota is rapidly ascending and could soon eclipse GM as the world's biggest automaker, Casesa said.

“I think Rick Wagoner and GM management has to ask itself this question: Is our mission to grow globally, and if it is, are we better together with a partner like Renault-Nissan, or are we better apart?” Casesa said. “I think the answer is yes, it’s better to grow together, and that would be a reason for GM to consider this alliance.”

While GM leads the world automotive market with a 14.2 percent share, its supremacy is under threat from Japan’s Toyota, which has a 13.8 percent market share. The combination of GM, Renault and Nissan would have a world market share of 23.7 percent, according to numbers from automotive forecasting company CSM Worldwide, leaving Toyota a distant second runner.

The main advantage to a three-way alliance among GM, Renault and Nissan would be the ability to merge some of their manufacturing processes, notes Kevin Reale, an automotive analyst at Boston-based AMR Research.

“From an overall cost leverage perspective, these three companies can share components across their manufacturing platforms and brands like never before,” Reale said. “Both companies have huge global supply networks, plus GM gets access to the innovation we’ve seen at Nissan in the last few years — one thing we’ve seen at Nissan is an ability to sense market demand for a product.”

Another advantage would be the inclusion of Carlos Ghosn. Nicknamed “The Icebreaker,” Ghosn was dispatched by Renault to lead Nissan in 1999 and is largely credited with turning around its fortunes. The Brazilian-born Ghosn engineered a cost-cutting and morale-boosting campaign that revived the automaker.

Carlos Ghosn, the chief executive of both Renault and Nissan, has discussed the matter with Kerkorian and is willing to talk to GM according to a separate statement by Nissan and Renault. His turnaround expertise would be even more valuable than the cash infusion, Reale said.


Reale noted that on average Nissan makes $2,200 in pre-tax profit from each of its cars, while GM’s health care and pension liabilities mean it loses $2,490 per vehicle sold, or about $500 when those liabilities are stripped out.

“Ghosn can help them to reverse that loss — he understands how to drive profit margins from cars,” said Reale. “It’s not that GM can’t do it on its own, but the expertise will help them to do this and get on the path to profitability.”

The addition of Ghosn to GM’s strategic team would certainly be a benefit to the U.S. firm, but what an alliance would bring to Nissan and Renault is less clear said Reale. In terms of market share, GM has a presence in Europe, although an association with Renault could bring greater exposure. And Nissan has a presence in Japan that GM doesn’t have.

An alliance makes more sense from a product standpoint notes Reale, as GM and Nissan have complementary product strengths. While GM has a very strong foothold in the truck market, Nissan is struggling in the sector. And GM is struggling in the sedan sector, where Nissan has fared well with its Maxima and Altima models.

Talk of an alliance comes as GM is moving forward on an extensive turnaround plan designed to improve its poorly performing North American division, which is suffering from declining profits, high labor costs and growing competition from Asian automakers, such as Nissan. GM announced plans last year to close 12 plants by 2008 and recently said 35,000 hourly workers had agreed to retire early or accept a buyout offer.

Still, GM is showing marked improvement, Reale said. Recent data show it has closed the productivity gap with its Asian rivals and is able to develop desirable new vehicles. It is also working to develop new hybrid technologies with BMW and DaimlerChrysler and has led the way in pushing for more ethanol-based fuel, like E85.

But some analysts say GM, which lost just over $10 billion in the United States last year, is not moving quickly enough to fix its problems. The company needs to quickly regain its standing in the U.S. automotive market, the world’s biggest, notes Reale.

“They are leading the way in alternative fuel, and they have lots of things in place to make them profitable, but this partnership would help them pull themselves up even faster, and Ghosn has a good track record here,” Reale said.

GM’s wobbly financial footing coupled with Ghosn’s track record as a turnaround specialist has some on Wall Street predicting that a Ghosn-led GM would be a step in the right direction.

Morgan Stanley & Co. analyst Jonathan Steinmetz said Ghosn’s record of cost-cutting and product development would provide much-needed help for GM in those areas.
 
fistfullofsteel said:
Another advantage would be the inclusion of Carlos Ghosn. Nicknamed “The Icebreaker,” Ghosn was dispatched by Renault to lead Nissan in 1999 and is largely credited with turning around its fortunes. The Brazilian-born Ghosn engineered a cost-cutting and morale-boosting campaign that revived the automaker.

Carlos Ghosn, the chief executive of both Renault and Nissan, has discussed the matter with Kerkorian and is willing to talk to GM according to a separate statement by Nissan and Renault. His turnaround expertise would be even more valuable than the cash infusion, Reale said.


Reale noted that on average Nissan makes $2,200 in pre-tax profit from each of its cars, while GM’s health care and pension liabilities mean it loses $2,490 per vehicle sold, or about $500 when those liabilities are stripped out.

“Ghosn can help them to reverse that loss — he understands how to drive profit margins from cars,” said Reale. “It’s not that GM can’t do it on its own, but the expertise will help them to do this and get on the path to profitability.”

The addition of Ghosn to GM’s strategic team would certainly be a benefit to the U.S. firm, but what an alliance would bring to Nissan and Renault is less clear said Reale. In terms of market share, GM has a presence in Europe, although an association with Renault could bring greater exposure. And Nissan has a presence in Japan that GM doesn’t have.

This is the real reason for this deal. Kerkorian wants Ghosn at GM.
 
it would take about 10 years to realize any economies of scale
chrysler-mercedes are still having troubles
 
fistfullofsteel said:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/13639768/

General Motors’ board of directors has voted to start exploratory discussions with Nissan and Renault on a potential business alliance — a plan first proposed one week ago by Kirk Kerkorian, GM’s largest shareholder. But would a deal with the automakers help boost GM’s flagging fortunes?

GM announced Friday that its board has authorized the company’s management to consider and “weigh the potential benefits of such an alliance in order to assist the board in its decision making.” GM Chairman and Chief Executive Rick Wagoner will lead the talks.

Kerkorian and his Tracinda Corp. first proposed that the U.S. automotive giant join in a business alliance with Nissan and Renault last week, pushing for GM to consider a partnership in an effort to help the world’s biggest automaker stage a turnaround and reverse its declining market share.

Kerkorian’s original proposal may have been little more than a shot across the bow of GM’s management, but it certainly increases the pressure on CEO Wagoner to hurry and fix the company’s internal problems according to John Casesa, automotive analyst and managing partner of Casesa Strategic Advisers.

“This ratchets up the pressure to accelerate change at this company,” Casesa told CNBC in an interview last week. “There may never be a deal with Renault. … It may just catalyze internal change [at GM], and that’s what this shareholder is doing.”

“Time is of the essence at GM, and the longer market share goes down, the weaker this company is going to be and the less valuable it’s going to be to a potential suitor,” he said.

Talk of a three-way alliance already is paying short-term dividends for the Detroit carmaker. GM shares soared the day news broke that Kerkorian said Renault and Nissan were interested in including GM in their alliance. And they rose again Friday after GM said its board had approved exploratory discussions with Nissan and Renault.

The deal being proposed would involve Nissan and Renault, which are closely allied, each buying a 10 percent stake in GM. Even so, a deal would rank among the industry’s most significant of recent years along with the 1998 union of Daimler-Benz and Chrysler, and the business alliance of Renault and Nissan in 1999.

A partnership, which could bring GM a cash injection of $3 billion or more, could prove helpful in an increasingly competitive global environment, in which Japan’s Toyota is rapidly ascending and could soon eclipse GM as the world's biggest automaker, Casesa said.

“I think Rick Wagoner and GM management has to ask itself this question: Is our mission to grow globally, and if it is, are we better together with a partner like Renault-Nissan, or are we better apart?” Casesa said. “I think the answer is yes, it’s better to grow together, and that would be a reason for GM to consider this alliance.”

While GM leads the world automotive market with a 14.2 percent share, its supremacy is under threat from Japan’s Toyota, which has a 13.8 percent market share. The combination of GM, Renault and Nissan would have a world market share of 23.7 percent, according to numbers from automotive forecasting company CSM Worldwide, leaving Toyota a distant second runner.

The main advantage to a three-way alliance among GM, Renault and Nissan would be the ability to merge some of their manufacturing processes, notes Kevin Reale, an automotive analyst at Boston-based AMR Research.

“From an overall cost leverage perspective, these three companies can share components across their manufacturing platforms and brands like never before,” Reale said. “Both companies have huge global supply networks, plus GM gets access to the innovation we’ve seen at Nissan in the last few years — one thing we’ve seen at Nissan is an ability to sense market demand for a product.”

Another advantage would be the inclusion of Carlos Ghosn. Nicknamed “The Icebreaker,” Ghosn was dispatched by Renault to lead Nissan in 1999 and is largely credited with turning around its fortunes. The Brazilian-born Ghosn engineered a cost-cutting and morale-boosting campaign that revived the automaker.

Carlos Ghosn, the chief executive of both Renault and Nissan, has discussed the matter with Kerkorian and is willing to talk to GM according to a separate statement by Nissan and Renault. His turnaround expertise would be even more valuable than the cash infusion, Reale said.


Reale noted that on average Nissan makes $2,200 in pre-tax profit from each of its cars, while GM’s health care and pension liabilities mean it loses $2,490 per vehicle sold, or about $500 when those liabilities are stripped out.

“Ghosn can help them to reverse that loss — he understands how to drive profit margins from cars,” said Reale. “It’s not that GM can’t do it on its own, but the expertise will help them to do this and get on the path to profitability.”

The addition of Ghosn to GM’s strategic team would certainly be a benefit to the U.S. firm, but what an alliance would bring to Nissan and Renault is less clear said Reale. In terms of market share, GM has a presence in Europe, although an association with Renault could bring greater exposure. And Nissan has a presence in Japan that GM doesn’t have.

An alliance makes more sense from a product standpoint notes Reale, as GM and Nissan have complementary product strengths. While GM has a very strong foothold in the truck market, Nissan is struggling in the sector. And GM is struggling in the sedan sector, where Nissan has fared well with its Maxima and Altima models.

Talk of an alliance comes as GM is moving forward on an extensive turnaround plan designed to improve its poorly performing North American division, which is suffering from declining profits, high labor costs and growing competition from Asian automakers, such as Nissan. GM announced plans last year to close 12 plants by 2008 and recently said 35,000 hourly workers had agreed to retire early or accept a buyout offer.

Still, GM is showing marked improvement, Reale said. Recent data show it has closed the productivity gap with its Asian rivals and is able to develop desirable new vehicles. It is also working to develop new hybrid technologies with BMW and DaimlerChrysler and has led the way in pushing for more ethanol-based fuel, like E85.

But some analysts say GM, which lost just over $10 billion in the United States last year, is not moving quickly enough to fix its problems. The company needs to quickly regain its standing in the U.S. automotive market, the world’s biggest, notes Reale.

“They are leading the way in alternative fuel, and they have lots of things in place to make them profitable, but this partnership would help them pull themselves up even faster, and Ghosn has a good track record here,” Reale said.

GM’s wobbly financial footing coupled with Ghosn’s track record as a turnaround specialist has some on Wall Street predicting that a Ghosn-led GM would be a step in the right direction.

Morgan Stanley & Co. analyst Jonathan Steinmetz said Ghosn’s record of cost-cutting and product development would provide much-needed help for GM in those areas.

only thing they could do is kill the jap's and their cars :lmao:
 
GM has serious union issues, as does their largest supplier Delphi. If the problems of Delphi are any indicator of GM (Delphi is a GM spinoff), GM is paying out the nose for union contracts that give total compensation to unskilled GM union workers upwards of $75 an hour. A potential Japanese qutomaker would never stand for this sort of bloated, inefficient, Industrial age method.
 
They're the manufacturer that is rumored to be pulling out of NASCAR. Tony Stewart is gonna have to drive a Camry.
 
Nissans are wonderful! I once had a Maxima that went over 200,000 miles with nothing but routine maintenance. I gave it to my brother who drove it for a couple more years and then traded it. Damn thing is probably still running somewhere.

Hope GM doesn't screw up Nissan if they do merge.
 
I could solve GM's health care expense problem overnight. Simply institute a single-payer "socialized" health plan for America, and all that corporate responsibility for pensioners' health vanishes.
 
Well, they really can't come back with Toyota's Camry such a big hit right now. Thank God I work for Toyota, kinda. I work for JCI and I Build the Camry & Camry Solora seat. I make, after top out, 19.25 an hour + .50cent shift premium for 2nd. Toyota, I think the biggest top out there is like 24 or 26 bucks for a floor member. But you typically are a temp for 1year, some even go 6 years as a temp earning 15-16 an hour.

Then I hear GM floor workers making around 32-34 an hour and I about crapped my pants. JCI is a big Toyota supplier and other things, did supply GM but not much so still working A Okay for me. Staying with them until I get all my certifications and papers for Industrial Maintenance/Welder/PLC and what not and stay with them till this factory craps out. From there on out won't be to hard to find a job in a factory area.

Camry just has to sell great for the next 5 years till I get out of school. Well 6, +1 for experience.
 
My last car was a Camry and the engine blew up the month after I made the last payment. MEH!
 
Actually, first time I heard something about a Camry being crappy. Everyone I talk to has bought them from back in the 90's and still driving them with no problems at all out of the car.

I'da been pissed if that happened.
 
Razorguns said:
great. so gm can make nissan cars suck too and blow up after 60k?

thats exactly what im worried about :(

I love my maxima, and I dont want GM to join and have that end up making Nissan cars shittier.

HeatherRae said:
My last car was a Camry and the engine blew up the month after I made the last payment. MEH!

Remember, it helps to change the oil. ;)
 
Rabid_Goose said:
Well, they really can't come back with Toyota's Camry such a big hit right now. Thank God I work for Toyota, kinda. I work for JCI and I Build the Camry & Camry Solora seat. I make, after top out, 19.25 an hour + .50cent shift premium for 2nd. Toyota, I think the biggest top out there is like 24 or 26 bucks for a floor member. But you typically are a temp for 1year, some even go 6 years as a temp earning 15-16 an hour.

Then I hear GM floor workers making around 32-34 an hour and I about crapped my pants. JCI is a big Toyota supplier and other things, did supply GM but not much so still working A Okay for me. Staying with them until I get all my certifications and papers for Industrial Maintenance/Welder/PLC and what not and stay with them till this factory craps out. From there on out won't be to hard to find a job in a factory area.

Camry just has to sell great for the next 5 years till I get out of school. Well 6, +1 for experience.

GM workers think they're like long shoremen. Hillarious.

Can't wait til dockworkers get outsourced, thou it won't be in my lifetime.
 
the japanese will not stand to inferior thinking. they rather blow up their own factories. to the japanese building the best product is an honor and a competition. the gov't gives companies awards for the companies with best products which is a huge endorsement. since renault and nissan merged, both companies have improved.
 
healother said:
let GM die a disasterous death. Who needs them? Their cool cars are long gone.

They are a rather large employer...
 
Mr. dB said:
They are a rather large employer...
So what. Time for these union parasites to learn that it isnt their birthright to forever hold a job that pays them $100,000 a year for doing jack shit.
 
net auto industry jobs has remained about the same over the last decade
 
The only things they do well are the Corvette and win races in NASCAR.

The latter can go--compared to the quality of the product itself, it has little bearing on sales and general corporate success.

They could probably survive as a niche company just making the Corvette, at least for the time being. However, current tides flowing as they are, Nissan will probably just buy them and do the same. Maybe keep some of their light/heavy duty trucks as well.
 
Lumberg said:
The only things they do well are the Corvette and win races in NASCAR.

The latter can go--compared to the quality of the product itself, it has little bearing on sales and general corporate success.

They could probably survive as a niche company just making the Corvette, at least for the time being. However, current tides flowing as they are, Nissan will probably just buy them and do the same. Maybe keep some of their light/heavy duty trucks as well.

Didn't GM already pull out of NASCAR? For 2007 and beyond? I thought I read an announcement somewhere.
 
Whatever happens they will survive.

At worst they'll dump their obligations to the unions, all or in part, in some future bankruptcy proceeding. They need as clean slate at some point.
 
digimon7068 said:
Not the new Camaro. . .fugly. :(

The design has been retooled. They fixed the back....changing the front lights...

chevrolet_camaro_gal.jpg




The Camaro Chevelle SS is ugly as hell
 
superdave said:
So what. Time for these union parasites to learn that it isnt their birthright to forever hold a job that pays them $100,000 a year for doing jack shit.
My father retired from Ford after many years. Some of the employees are pieces of shit, but I can tell you he worked his ass off and for years and years never called in sick even once.

It's pretty f'n lame that some of you people say to let our factories shut down and put thousands of people out of work. Sheesh, that is so shitty I can hardly even comment.
 
HeatherRae said:
It's pretty f'n lame that some of you people say to let our factories shut down and put thousands of people out of work. Sheesh, that is so shitty I can hardly even comment.

about as shitty as Ford trying to move jobs to Mexico.
 
bluepeter said:
Build quality vehicles.

That's it in a nutshell, they need products that people actually want, not transport appliances that people settle for because of buyer incentives.
 
Phenom78 said:
Whatever happens they will survive.

At worst they'll dump their obligations to the unions, all or in part, in some future bankruptcy proceeding. They need as clean slate at some point.



dullboy says just follow the airline model as a way to break the unions.
 
gotmilk said:
The design has been retooled. They fixed the back....changing the front lights...

chevrolet_camaro_gal.jpg




The Camaro Chevelle SS is ugly as hell

They should have gone totally retro. . .like Ford did with the Mustang. . .that would have been bad-ass. Instead, they tried to be a trend-setter. . .didn't work. . .stupid move. . .damn shame. :(
 
HeatherRae said:
My father retired from Ford after many years. Some of the employees are pieces of shit, but I can tell you he worked his ass off and for years and years never called in sick even once.

It's pretty f'n lame that some of you people say to let our factories shut down and put thousands of people out of work. Sheesh, that is so shitty I can hardly even comment.

If they're really that good and deserve to be paid $75k a year for non-qualified work then I guess they will find another job in a matter of days no ?
 
Mr. dB said:
Didn't GM already pull out of NASCAR? For 2007 and beyond? I thought I read an announcement somewhere.


Well, rumors have been circulating of late that one of the manufacturers is "considering" dropping out.

Daimler-Chrysler's chairman went on record last week that it's not his company.

That leaves GM and Ford....and GM is in worse financial shape.

The strange thing is that Chevy is by far the most successful manufacturer currently, and in the history of NASCAR.

N.B. Pontiac pulled out a few years ago.
 
HeatherRae said:
My father retired from Ford after many years. Some of the employees are pieces of shit, but I can tell you he worked his ass off and for years and years never called in sick even once.

It's pretty f'n lame that some of you people say to let our factories shut down and put thousands of people out of work. Sheesh, that is so shitty I can hardly even comment.
The first obligation of any public company is maximization of stock price for their shareholders. All other concerns are secondary, including hanging on to overcompensated, unskilled workers. If a corporation doesnt make any money then the stock price goes down, if all this happens too long or too often then everyone loses their jobs anyway because the company goes out of business. So the only way to keep a company in business and leave any jobs at all (in GM's case) is to cut costs, i.e. bloated innefficient labor overhead. Sorry if you dont agree with this but its the reality for all corporations in the US.
 
dullboy said:
dullboy says just follow the airline model as a way to break the unions.


Which model?

File bankruptcy and let the courts do the dirty work (getting rid of the unions) that your management team was unable/unwilling to do? Then leave the same overpaid management team in place to run what is left?

or...

Have the government fire the air traffic controllers and replace them with scabs using equipment that is 30+ years old?

If GM chooses to keep headquarters in Detroit - do you think they will still be able to operate in a historically union region?
 
mekannik said:
Which model?

File bankruptcy and let the courts do the dirty work (getting rid of the unions) that your management team was unable/unwilling to do? Then leave the same overpaid management team in place to run what is left?

or...

Have the government fire the air traffic controllers and replace them with scabs using equipment that is 30+ years old?

If GM chooses to keep headquarters in Detroit - do you think they will still be able to operate in a historically union region?

Solution #1 is probably the easiest and most Kosher.
 
Lumberg said:
The only things they do well are the Corvette and win races in NASCAR.

The latter can go--compared to the quality of the product itself, it has little bearing on sales and general corporate success.

They could probably survive as a niche company just making the Corvette, at least for the time being. However, current tides flowing as they are, Nissan will probably just buy them and do the same. Maybe keep some of their light/heavy duty trucks as well.
buicks are well made
 
4everhung said:
buicks are well made

They're made exactly the same as Pontiacs and Chevrolets. 'Cause they all come off the same assembly line, assembled by the same hands.
 
Top Bottom