Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: vaskidmark on May 13, 2009, 12:46:18 PM
-
Fox News is repoerting that the Kenosh (Wisc) Engine Plant is being closed and moved to Saltado, Mexico. Per Fox, this took place after
- bailout funds
- workers relocated from closed plants/jobs in Detroit to Kenosha plant
- unions in midst of negotiations on givebacks
- bankrupcy hearing still in progress
So it seems that my investment in Chrysler was actually part of a plan to stem the tide of illegal immigration by creating high-paying jobs (relatively speaking) in Mexico, to intice Mexicans to stay at home.
I'm not sure if I should be outraged at the deception and duplicity of Chrysler in screwing American union workers, or outraged at the duplicity and deception of Chrysler in acting as the means for Obama to address the illegal immigration issue.
Right now all I can figure out is that not only were we all screwed, but we are going to continue getting screwed. (Like that is news?)
stay safe.
skidmark
-
I would be outraged at the administration using strong arm-tactic to force them out of the country. They were told point-blank to cut costs, or else. When manpower is the largest single line-item expense, moving the operation to a place where manpower is cheaper is the single fastest and most cost-effective solution.
Brad
-
Brad -
Wasn't the bailout supposed to save jobs, among all the other hooey? Admittedly not a top priority, but stil ....
I know that a large portion of the autos sold by companies thought to be American are assembled in other countries, from parts made on other countries.
It was just so saddening to see the vacant looks on the faces of the UAW folks in Kenosha when they were saying they felt as if they had been sold out by Chrysler. It was almost as saddening to see the Obama buttons on their tear-stained shirts.
stay safe.
skidmark
-
Anything bad can easily be made much worse by getting the government involved. - Me
-
My 1998 mexican VW 2.0L started burning oil at 25K miles
My 2002 german VW 1.8T doesn't burn any oil at 85K miles
-
I'm still not going to buy any Chrysler products.
-
I'm sorry, but I can only boycott a company once.
The government takeover was all it took.
Add to that the fact that union workers caused this, so I'm not feeling too sympathetic, anyway.
-
Union drones deserve what they get. If they'd done this earlier they might not have needed the fed.gov to steal my money to bail their useless asses out.
-
The problem is that Chrysler did not do this 20 years ago.
-
Ford has a plant in Hermosillo, Mexico. I think it does electrical cabling assembly, but it might do other components. They probably have other mexican plants on top of that.
My big gripe against Chrysler and the bailout is the fact that huge amounts of Chrysler stock were turned over to UAW, who promptly decided to sell it rather than keep it.
Why on earth would they do that?
-
Ford has a plant in Hermosillo, Mexico. I think it does electrical cabling assembly, but it might do other components. They probably have other mexican plants on top of that.
My big gripe against Chrysler and the bailout is the fact that huge amounts of Chrysler stock were turned over to UAW, who promptly decided to sell it rather than keep it.
Why on earth would they do that?
Good investment strategies?
-
Why on earth would they do that?
How could they whine and complain and coerce if they were the owners?
-
Maybe the UAW should go on strike against itself.
This is an incredible story. First Bush and Obama violate the Constitution by appropriating TARP funds that congress had originally designated for financial firms and giving the funds to auto companies. Then Obama illegally inserts himself into bankruptcy proceedings, extorts Chrysler's bond holders, and gives the UAW, a strong campaign supporter and contributor, 55% of the company. Obama then makes public comments that undermine Chrysler's position in negotiations with Fiat.
And the UAW is complaining that Chrysler's management did something wrong?
-
Maybe the UAW should go on strike against itself.
This is an incredible story. First Bush and Obama violate the Constitution by appropriating TARP funds that congress had originally designated for financial firms and giving the funds to auto companies. Then Obama illegally inserts himself into bankruptcy proceedings, extorts Chrysler's bond holders, and gives the UAW, a strong campaign supporter and contributor, 55% of the company. Obama then makes public comments that undermine Chrysler's position in negotiations with Fiat.
And the UAW is complaining that Chrysler's management did something wrong?
Unions are incapable of having villains other than "Management." Wouldn't matter if space aliens came down and vaporized the factory, it'd be Management's fault that people were out of work.
-
Chrysler ceased to exist for me in 1992.
-
My big gripe against Chrysler and the bailout is the fact that huge amounts of Chrysler stock were turned over to UAW, who promptly decided to sell it rather than keep it.
Why on earth would they do that?
Stock turned over to UAW = Free POTENTIAL money
Stock turned over to UAW, who then promtly sells it = Free ACTUAL money
Brad
-
What I want to know is what kind of moron is actually buying Chrysler or GM stock right now?
-
What I want to know is what kind of moron is actually buying Chrysler or GM stock right now?
If no one was willing to buy, GMs price would be $0.00 instead of $1.21
Some people are betting there is a 1/10,000 shot the company can be made solvent, restructured, bankrupted, bailed out, subsidized, or whatever back into profitability. If that happens, then the stock can easily go up by 100, 200, possibly a 1,000%. Nice potential returns; the risk is minimal at $1.21 a share.
-
Ford has a plant in Hermosillo, Mexico. I think it does electrical cabling assembly, but it might do other components. They probably have other mexican plants on top of that.
The Ford plant I went to in Hermosillo in the early '90s assembled the Ford Escort and the Mercury Lynx. I believe it transitioned to assembling the Ford Focus.
-
If no one was willing to buy, GMs price would be $0.00 instead of $1.21
Some people are betting there is a 1/10,000 shot the company can be made solvent, restructured, bankrupted, bailed out, subsidized, or whatever back into profitability. If that happens, then the stock can easily go up by 100, 200, possibly a 1,000%. Nice potential returns; the risk is minimal at $1.21 a share.
It's actually a far worse bet than that.
The current Treasury plan is to have GM magically convince the bondholders to go into restructuring without resorting to bankruptcy. In order to do that, GM would increase the number of authorized shares to some 62B (currently 610M), reduce the par value to $0.01, then effect a 1:100 reverse stock split. GM would then use those newly created, 1:100 reverse split shares to pay off the US Treasury, UAW, and bondholders. Existing common stockholders kinda get screwed...
The more likely scenario is that GM goes into Chapter 11. Existing common stockholders get screwed a bit more than they did before on the theory that a cent on the dollar is better than no cents...
-
If no one was willing to buy, GMs price would be $0.00 instead of $1.21
Some people are betting there is a 1/10,000 shot the company can be made solvent, restructured, bankrupted, bailed out, subsidized, or whatever back into profitability. If that happens, then the stock can easily go up by 100, 200, possibly a 1,000%. Nice potential returns; the risk is minimal at $1.21 a share.
I understand the theory and the math. My point is that with the government running these companies, there is zero chance of a recovery and eventual return on the stock purchase.
Saying the risk is minimal at $1.21 a share is inaccurate. $1.21 can go to $.10 just as easily as $5.00, which means that there's plenty of risk.
-
My big gripe against Chrysler and the bailout is the fact that huge amounts of Chrysler stock were turned over to UAW, who promptly decided to sell it rather than keep it.
Why on earth would they do that?
You can't blame the man for all of your troubles when the man is you.
-
What I want to know is what kind of moron is actually buying Chrysler or GM stock right now?
Speculators. There is a chance that the company could recover. People are willing to bet on that chance.
-
I stopped at a Chrysler/Jeep dealer this very afternoon, to buy a part for my trusty old Jeep. The guys in the parts department were looking rather woebegone. When I asked why, they said they don't know IF their dealership will stay in business. This happens to be one of the larger, and most successful, Chrysler/Jeep dealers in the state. Seems the .gov told Chrysler to cut costs any way they could, and one of the ways they are taking is to force some dealerships to close.
This makes zero sense to me, since the dealerships don't belong to Chrysler, but apparently some of the appurtenances (exterior signage, specialty tools and equipment, etc) does belong to Chrysler rather than to the dealers, so Chrysler may just pull the rug out from under many of the smaller dealerships.
Great way to restore the economy, ain't it? Force otherwise viable, locally-owned, people-employing companies out of business so the parent corporation can have its signs back.
Thank you, President Obama, for rescuing us.
-
Speculators. There is a chance that the company could recover. People are willing to bet on that chance.
I'd buy a hundred shares after the reverse split. Price will probably be well under a buck at that point.
...
Na, I'll probably just short it. ;)
-
I stopped at a Chrysler/Jeep dealer this very afternoon, to buy a part for my trusty old Jeep. The guys in the parts department were looking rather woebegone. When I asked why, they said they don't know IF their dealership will stay in business. This happens to be one of the larger, and most successful, Chrysler/Jeep dealers in the state. Seems the .gov told Chrysler to cut costs any way they could, and one of the ways they are taking is to force some dealerships to close.
This makes zero sense to me, since the dealerships don't belong to Chrysler, but apparently some of the appurtenances (exterior signage, specialty tools and equipment, etc) does belong to Chrysler rather than to the dealers, so Chrysler may just pull the rug out from under many of the smaller dealerships.
Great way to restore the economy, ain't it? Force otherwise viable, locally-owned, people-employing companies out of business so the parent corporation can have its signs back.
Thank you, President Obama, for rescuing us.
My Uncle owns a Chrysler Jeep Dodge dealership. He's also worried that they're going to take away his business. No idea why. The dealerships don't cost Chrysler anything. The dealerships are self-supporting. And the dealerships are the only real customers Chrysler has.
But I suppose stupidity is a forgone conclusion. The goverment has never been able to run any enterprise well, save perhaps the military.
-
.mil runs as well as it does despite all the gooberment baggage due to the (sometimes herculean) efforts of 20% of the personnel to break/bent/mutilate the regs to get the boys on the pointy end of the spear what they need to do their job.
-
Chrysler closing 789 dealerships
Troubled automaker tells court it wants to shutter about a quarter of its dealers.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/14/autos/chrysler_dealer_closings/index.htm?postversion=2009051410 (http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/14/autos/chrysler_dealer_closings/index.htm?postversion=2009051410)
Sawdust
-
In assessing Chrysler's viability, the Treasury Department found the automaker could not survive as a stand-alone company. Chrysler had already been in discussions with Fiat about a partnership. The current plan calls for Fiat to assist Chrysler by providing engineering for small and midsized cars.
This is all such monumental BS it makes me want to puke.
The two reasons Chrysler acquired American Motors in 1987/1988 were:
1) The Jeep brand
2) AMC's expertise in engineering small and mid-size cars -- specifically (at that time) the Eagle line of vehicles.
So now they need small vehicle engineering input from Fiat, whose small cars have never lasted more than about two years on American roads under American drivers? Gimme a break.
-
My Uncle owns a Chrysler Jeep Dodge dealership. He's also worried that they're going to take away his business. No idea why. The dealerships don't cost Chrysler anything. The dealerships are self-supporting. And the dealerships are the only real customers Chrysler has.
But I suppose stupidity is a forgone conclusion. The goverment has never been able to run any enterprise well, save perhaps the military.
GM and Chrysler's business case for closing dealerships is reasonably sound compared to their other schemes.
Both figure that they've saturated the market with dealerships to the point where there's significant intra-brand competition between dealerships. That leads to lower average selling prices as consumers cross shop between intra-brand dealerships for the best deal. By cutting out significant chunks of their dealership network, they figure they can reduce intra-brand cross shopping and increase average selling prices.
In turn, that should allow them to squeeze the remaining dealerships more and extract additional revenue per vehicle sold.
So now they need small vehicle engineering input from Fiat, whose small cars have never lasted more than about two years on American roads under American drivers? Gimme a break.
Yep. Chrysler couldn't get things done with Mercedes' engineering support. Still wondering about how anyone thinks they'll do better with Fiat's.
-
Chrysler's shotgun marriage to Fiat has nothing to do with engineering small cars. It has everything to do with giving European labor unions a toe-hold in the US. Just another step in globalization.
-
GM and Chrysler's business case for closing dealerships is reasonably sound compared to their other schemes.
Both figure that they've saturated the market with dealerships to the point where there's significant intra-brand competition between dealerships. That leads to lower average selling prices as consumers cross shop between intra-brand dealerships for the best deal. By cutting out significant chunks of their dealership network, they figure they can reduce intra-brand cross shopping and increase average selling prices.
In turn, that should allow them to squeeze the remaining dealerships more and extract additional revenue per vehicle sold.
Yep. Chrysler couldn't get things done with Mercedes' engineering support. Still wondering about how anyone thinks they'll do better with Fiat's.
Hmmm, so because the dealerships undercut each other, Chrysler wasn't able to turn a profit by selling more cars cheaply ?? Is that what you're saying ?? And that the way to improve profitablity is to sell fewer at a higher price ?? So the bottom line sales strategy is to raise the price of the product people were NOT buying in the first place ??
That's a winner, if I ever heard one.
;/ ;/ ;/
-
Hmmm, so because the dealerships undercut each other, Chrysler wasn't able to turn a profit by selling more cars cheaply ?? Is that what you're saying ?? And that the way to improve profitablity is to sell fewer at a higher price ?? So the bottom line sales strategy is to raise the price of the product people were NOT buying in the first place ??
That's a winner, if I ever heard one.
;/ ;/ ;/
Don't forget eroding quality by bringing in Fiat. That way they get the trifecta of fail.
Typical government-run business.
-
The reason the military runs so well is that its job is to destroy things, not produce. When something needs to be produced they contract it out to private companies.
[This is not a knock on the military, but an observation about its reason d'etre.]
-
The reason the military runs so well is that its job is to destroy things, not produce. When something needs to be produced they contract it out to private companies.
Hmm, good point.