GM Posts 3rd Worst Quarterly Results Ever

[Dragon]

http://money.canoe.ca/News/Other/2008/08/01/6327421-ap.html Edited August 1, 2008 by Dragon

[bowtie_dude]

You know what they say...its always darkest before the dawn...

[Newbiewar]

i guess they continue to suprise me with one time transactions...

[Dragon]

You know what they say...its always darkest before the dawn...

there are only a finite number of dawns before the sun goes nova as it were

[G. David Felt]

Let's remind everyone here that GM had a HUGE Portfolio of products and has been selling off / slashing non core companies to get back to a lean fighting Auto builder only. As such, these one time charges are totally understandable to rid themselves of the parts companies, etc. Reality is this will hurt everyone but by 2010 we will see a profitable GM with an awesome assortment of vehicles.

As other reports have stated, with gas being cheap, a number of people, approx 1/3 of Truck / SUV purchases bought way to much truck / SUV for their real need. A cross over or Station wagon on Steroids like the SRX style is all these people really needed, but marketing being what it is sold what the people asked for and even Toyota got caught up in this with their Bomb of a Tundra.

So Let's keep everyone focused on the positive future that will come with a host of World Class Leading Hybrids and Newer Diesels. We survived WWII when the Japanease bombed us and won that war. The Japanease then said if they could not beat us by war they would do it Economically.

We can muster our strengths and hopefully get people to stop being selfish instant gratification and Buy American where ever possible to rise up and win the long term Global Economic battle of consumption.

Edited August 1, 2008 by dfelt

[Intrepidation]

The Horror.

Honestly, this kind of pain could have been avoided if they had given equal focus to small and midsize cars and not just trucks and SUVs. This goes for Ford and Chrysler too. Most of the automakers are hurting too, but I doubt anywhere near as much. Now they need small cars but have to develope them for our market, which takees time and money they don't have. That's all it boils down too.

Hopefully they can weather the storm and emerge with a hard learned lesson, so this never happens again.

[cire]

The Horror.

Honestly, this kind of pain could have been avoided if they had given equal focus to small and midsize cars and not just trucks and SUVs. This goes for Ford and Chrysler too. Most of the automakers are hurting too, but I doubt anywhere near as much. Now they need small cars but have to develope them for our market, which takees time and money they don't have. That's all it boils down too.

Hopefully they can weather the storm and emerge with a hard learned lesson, so this never happens again.

I totally agree. To ensure longevity and success, an auto manufacturer must continue to make great products to cover all market segments. Ford, GM, and Chrysler seemed to forget this at the height of truck/SUV mania. Now they are hurting much worse than some of their foreign counterparts.

What's so strange about the situation is that Ford and GM have excellent small cars that they offer in foreign markets, but never considered engineering these cars to comply with U.S. regulations just in case they would need to bring them here. The current Corsa is the most glaring example as far as GM is concerned. I also hope that the domestic automakers have learned their lesson and never get caught as unprepared as they have been since the bottom fell out of the truck/SUV market.

[BuddyP]

every quarter has a large "one time charge"

[prinzSD]

I totally agree. To ensure longevity and success, an auto manufacturer must continue to make great products to cover all market segments. Ford, GM, and Chrysler seemed to forget this at the height of truck/SUV mania. Now they are hurting much worse than some of their foreign counterparts.

What's so strange about the situation is that Ford and GM have excellent small cars that they offer in foreign markets, but never considered engineering these cars to comply with U.S. regulations just in case they would need to bring them here. The current Corsa is the most glaring example as far as GM is concerned. I also hope that the domestic automakers have learned their lesson and never get caught as unprepared as they have been since the bottom fell out of the truck/SUV market.

While I mostly agree, it must be remembered that others were caught as well, but not as dramatically. Both Nissan and Toyota were late too the big truck party. Should have they not forseen the downfall. Now Toyota has cut back on Tundra and Sequoia trucks, may cut the Avalon. Nissan will eliminate the Armada, QX45 or whatever it is called and their next big truck will basically be a rebadged Chrysler product. Hell, I just read this morning that Honda is cutting back production of the Odyssey mini van. The import misteps while not as large, nonetheless have been made as well. Honda is in the best position of all with the Honda/Acura lineup to do well in the forseeable future. I wonder how the niche product V-10 NSX will play out when it comes out. Will the media crucify Honda for bringing out such a car in todays environment.

[enzl]

Let's remind everyone here that GM had a HUGE Portfolio of products and has been selling off / slashing non core companies to get back to a lean fighting Auto builder only. As such, these one time charges are totally understandable to rid themselves of the parts companies, etc. Reality is this will hurt everyone but by 2010 we will see a profitable GM with an awesome assortment of vehicles.

As other reports have stated, with gas being cheap, a number of people, approx 1/3 of Truck / SUV purchases bought way to much truck / SUV for their real need. A cross over or Station wagon on Steroids like the SRX style is all these people really needed, but marketing being what it is sold what the people asked for and even Toyota got caught up in this with their Bomb of a Tundra.

So Let's keep everyone focused on the positive future that will come with a host of World Class Leading Hybrids and Newer Diesels. We survived WWII when the Japanease bombed us and won that war. The Japanease then said if they could not beat us by war they would do it Economically.

We can muster our strengths and hopefully get people to stop being selfish instant gratification and Buy American where ever possible to rise up and win the long term Global Economic battle of consumption.

GM has been selling the corporate equivalent of the family silver, not 'non-core' companies. GMAC, Allison aren't exactly "non-core" when GMAC provided most profits for years and Allison was involved with Hybrid Trannies and Heavy trucks...

You can't avoid the fact that without the profits from SUV/Pick-ups, GM hasn't made money in cars since the 60's...How is this management team (with record losses of market share) and hemoraging money left and right (Delphi $ hasn't stopped leaking, VEBA haven't been fully funded yet and tons of other suppliers are on the ropes --ie looking for a GM handout) going to stop if they don't know how to make money with cars?

What car is going to replace Silverado profit? Which crossover is going to replace Tahoe profits? Where is the $ for developing the Volt from scratch going to come from?--other products NOT being developed!

This management team needs to go. GM needs a Mullally -type that will take a real stab at changing GM. Cause I got news for ya...what they're doing isn't working.

(And before you rail on about gas prices or the economy--keep two things in mind---if you depend upon Gas Guzzlers to make $--wouldn't you have a Plan B developed when War is raging in the Middle East? And...they owned RESCAP (only the largest mortgage co. in the US)--you think they might have had an idea that a meltdown was starting?)

[Croc]

Blah blah blah...excuses excuses excuses...

FOR SEEMINGLY "ONE-TIME CHARGES," THERE HAVE BEEN AN AWFUL LOT OF THEM OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS!!

[Guest aatbloke]

every quarter has a large "one time charge"

These are known as "unusual items" - they can be either singular expected one-off charges, large non-recurring charges pertaining to asset dispositions, or a large unexpected charge to the P&L. They can occur for a host of reasons, and most large corporations have at least one a year. For a company the size of GM, one every quarter or half-year isn't outside the realms of possibility.

[Croc]

These are known as "unusual items" - they can be either singular expected one-off charges, large non-recurring charges pertaining to asset dispositions, or a large unexpected charge to the P&L. They can occur for a host of reasons, and most large corporations have at least one a year. For a company the size of GM, one every quarter or half-year isn't outside the realms of possibility.

No, but when press releases continually state "we'd be doing great on paper except for this ONE TIME charge" and then post these massive "one-time" charges every quarter, the spin doctoring becomes apparent.

[Satty]

The one-time charges are becoming as ubiquitous as the GM fanboys saying "it will get been when the new product arrives." We heard it before the last gen Malibu, before the last gen full-size trucks, before the current full-size trucks, before the Cobals, before the current CTS. And its just getting worse.

[Guest aatbloke]

No, but when press releases continually state "we'd be doing great on paper except for this ONE TIME charge" and then post these massive "one-time" charges every quarter, the spin doctoring becomes apparent.

A one-time charge is a non-recurring charge in the normal course of trading activities. You could have several such charges for different reasons within a couple of years or even the same year. GM's recent deferred tax write-off was a classic example.

It's nothing to do with spin doctors and everything to do with journalists not being accountants.

[daves87rs]

Well, It's not as bad as I expected. I was thinking that it was much worse than that......

As far as the automakers are concerned-you guys haven't seen the worse yet.

I've been preaching all along about the fallout in the ecomony...and it is going to get much worse before it gets better....

Looking at leasing-there is no longer a quick fit to get a car. People are simply going to hold on to their cars for a while. (I plan to)

Wait till you see how bad the credit crunch will be....not pretty.

There is going to be both a cut in car AND truck production soon.....

So now might be a good time to pay off your car, put a few bucks in it, and pick up that classic you've been eyeing...

[Intrepidation]

Ah, but according to McCain, the economy's fine!

[ehaase]

This management team needs to go. GM needs a Mullally -type that will take a real stab at changing GM. Cause I got news for ya...what they're doing isn't working.

What management team could do any better? What is Mullally doing, besides mortgaging almost everything the company owned back in 2006, that is radically different from what Wagoner is doing?

[Intrepidation]

What management team could do any better? What is Mullally doing, besides mortgaging almost everything the company owned back in 2006, that is radically different from what Wagoner is doing?

Making decisive decisions (converting truck plants tobuild Euro Fords for the NA market) VS sitting with their thumbs up their ass (we can build a CTS Turbo 4, but we don't now if customers want something that is better on gas and makes good power)?

[A Horse With No Name]

The Horror.

Honestly, this kind of pain could have been avoided if they had given equal focus to small and midsize cars and not just trucks and SUVs. This goes for Ford and Chrysler too. Most of the automakers are hurting too, but I doubt anywhere near as much. Now they need small cars but have to develope them for our market, which takees time and money they don't have. That's all it boils down too.

Hopefully they can weather the storm and emerge with a hard learned lesson, so this never happens again.

QFT.

Chris

[bowtie_dude]

Ah, but according to McCain, the economy's fine!

The economy is fine unless you were naive (read: stupid) enough to buy a house you couldn't afford or you're in debt up to your eyeballs.

[Satty]

Or if you're living on an income that allowed you to barely scrape by before gas hit $3.50/gallon and the price of milk, eggs, bread and just about everything else vital to sustaining life increased.

[Intrepidation]

Or if you're living on an income that allowed you to barely scrape by before gas hit $3.50/gallon and the price of milk, eggs, bread and just about everything else vital to sustaining life increased.

WHich is no doubt the case for a good junk of the population.

[Newbiewar]

I dont know who is worse...

the guy that allowed GM to float on bad vehciles, or is destroying GM by taking away its volume...

GM can sell much more then it is... it can be the discount automaker again... it can return the market place to its annual sales and reap the benifits... but rather it would idle plants? close them down...?

there are advantages to making things more efficent... but they are taking away the volume so the advantages are wasted and the money spent to take those advantages are wasted too... you cant squeeze the company on two fronts at once and expect things to go well

[smk4565]

I am surprised that $15 billion is only the 3rd worst quarterly loss. How could they have 2 worse than that? Losing $51 billion since 2005 is a staggering number, even if some is accounting and one time charges, that is a ridiculous amount to lose. They may not make it until 2010 when the labor deal kicks in, even when it does, I doubt it will be enough to solve the problem.

GM said, wait til the GMT900s arrived, then wait til gotta have products like the Solstice/Sky, and new Saturn lineup, then the Lambdas, then it was just wait til the CTS and Malibu come out. For 3 years it has been "wait til net year." Well all that new product came out and they are worse off than they were in 2004.

They have to address brand overlap and product mix. Which means less brands and less rebadging, more top of the class cars.

[enzl]

What management team could do any better? What is Mullally doing, besides mortgaging almost everything the company owned back in 2006, that is radically different from what Wagoner is doing?

Anything but the same old song and dance....sell something off, mortgage more stuff and cut staffing hasn't done it when times were good, economically. Why try the same cure when the result has been unsuccessful?

Mulally, IMO, has brought a sense of urgency severely lacking at GM. My question is why is RW still employed? What has he done to earn his keep? He's presided over the largest corporate disaster in US auto history and you think he should be believed now?

[daves87rs]

Or if you're living on an income that allowed you to barely scrape by before gas hit $3.50/gallon and the price of milk, eggs, bread and just about everything else vital to sustaining life increased.

[daves87rs]

The economy is fine unless you were naive (read: stupid) enough to buy a house you couldn't afford or you're in debt up to your eyeballs.

Sadly, for some people, it's not always a choice..(not the housing thing though)

[01LightningGal]

I dont know who is worse...

the guy that allowed GM to float on bad vehciles, or is destroying GM by taking away its volume...

GM can sell much more then it is... it can be the discount automaker again... it can return the market place to its annual sales and reap the benifits... but rather it would idle plants? close them down...?

there are advantages to making things more efficent... but they are taking away the volume so the advantages are wasted and the money spent to take those advantages are wasted too... you cant squeeze the company on two fronts at once and expect things to go well

Yeah !!!! Thats the way to do it !!!!

We will just build a ton more.................. at a loss................ but make it up on the volume !!!!! YEAH !!!!

[Satty]

Yeah !!!! Thats the way to do it !!!!

We will just build a ton more.................. at a loss................ but make it up on the volume !!!!! YEAH !!!!

It worked during the 80's and 90's. Oh, wait.....

[Croc]

A one-time charge is a non-recurring charge in the normal course of trading activities. You could have several such charges for different reasons within a couple of years or even the same year. GM's recent deferred tax write-off was a classic example.

It's nothing to do with spin doctors and everything to do with journalists not being accountants.

You can be a smartass all you want, but successive quarterly losses are ALWAYS successive quarterly losses. "We'd be doing great EXCEPT for this one-time charge" is fine and dandy until you've heard it for like a year and a half and suddenly it starts becoming, "so...when ARE you going to start doing great and knock off the massive losses?"

This isn't a case of journalists not being accountants, but rather accountants making excuses for continued poor financial performance.

GM will be gone if it doesn't stop with the excuse-making about, oh...just about EVERYTHING.

[Guest aatbloke]

You can be a smartass all you want, but successive quarterly losses are ALWAYS successive quarterly losses. "We'd be doing great EXCEPT for this one-time charge" is fine and dandy until you've heard it for like a year and a half and suddenly it starts becoming, "so...when ARE you going to start doing great and knock off the massive losses?"

This isn't a case of journalists not being accountants, but rather accountants making excuses for continued poor financial performance.

GM will be gone if it doesn't stop with the excuse-making about, oh...just about EVERYTHING.

Good grief, Americans ... I'm not being a "smartass." I'm a qualified accountant. I'm telling you that unusual items, or one-time charges, are quite common with large corporations. Usually they're the product of accounting entries, but they can be expenditures caused by unprecedented situations - such as strikes or mergers. An unusually small profit or large loss can be the result of an unusual item, and GAAP/IAS requires that they have separate disclosure in the notes to the financial statements.

I'm not making excuses for GM - they've been running an aimless company now for the past twenty years, and that's why Toyota has been running rings around them. While Toyota has spent the last ten years in North America strategically placing models in virtually every segment from B-segment through to C-segment hybrids to full-size SUVs, GM has concentrated only on larger vehicles which yield the greatest unit profit - a highly risky approach in the event of soaring fuel prices or an economic downturn, and especially so in a country with a relatively small company car market such as the USA. The fact they decided to run up such an enormous deferred tax reserve was one of their accounting mistakes - that particular write-off contributed to a sizeable loss, however it was merely a book entry.

Continual loss-making is grave cause for concern and can only be carried on while the company has a positive balance sheet, since that denotes viability as a going concern. In other words, GM is continuing in business from its accumulated capital reserves. However, stories such as this are a case of journalists not being accountants. The media is out to sell stories - it's that simple. They often thrive on sensationalism to achieve that result. If you don't understand the mechanics of accountancy, you're not going to see the bigger picture.

Edited August 2, 2008 by aatbloke

[Croc]

Maybe I need to make it big and bold to get my point across:

"GM IS DOING GREAT EXCEPT FOR THIS ONE-TIME CHARGE LEADING TO MASSIVE LOSSES" X 8 QUARTERS = GM IS NOT REALLY DOING GREAT

The "one-time charges" may have all the merit in the world. But the fact remains that GM needs to do one of the following: 1) reduce the amount of these one-time charges to a more manageable level i.e. so a profit does not turn into a massive loss, or 2) make enough of a profit so that the one-time charges are absorbed.

GM is a business, the goal of a business is to make money; GM is therefore not accomplishing its raison d'être. And by suspending dividends this past month, it isn't making its shareholders too happy, either.

Edited August 2, 2008 by Croc

[Guest aatbloke]

Maybe I need to make it big and bold to get my point across:

"GM IS DOING GREAT EXCEPT FOR THIS ONE-TIME CHARGE LEADING TO MASSIVE LOSSES" X 8 QUARTERS = GM IS NOT REALLY DOING GREAT

The "one-time charges" may have all the merit in the world. But the fact remains that GM needs to do one of the following: 1) reduce the amount of these one-time charges to a more manageable level i.e. so a profit does not turn into a massive loss, or 2) make enough of a profit so that the one-time charges are absorbed.

GM is a business, the goal of a business is to make money; GM is therefore not accomplishing its raison d'être. And by suspending dividends this past month, it isn't making its shareholders too happy, either.

Your point is the same as everyone's, but you have to remember that net profit does not equal cash. Accumulated profits equal total assets (which includes cash) less total liabilities, less capital introduced/issued - the basic accounting equation. A loss for tax purposes can result from a number of accounting adjustments for which there is no cash entry - and this includes unusual items or "one-time" adjustments (to quote the media and other non-accountants). The write-off of the deferred tax reserve is one such example. So, before you go out and claim that "GM made a $15.5 billion loss, the world is coming to an end" - when that loss includes unusual items - you need to assess what those unusual items are, because they do not necessarily mean less cash in the bank.

GM is a business, and that goal is indeed to make money for its reason to exist. However, it only technically no longer becomes a going concern once the balance sheet falls into negativity, which GM's isn't.

Legally, dividends can only be paid from retained post-tax profits. If there is any degree of continual loss-making, dividends will be the first thing to go.

GM's problems are the result of basic poor decisions regarding its model range in North America. Too many brands, too many models competing with others within GM, and a concentration on high unit profit trucks and SUVs while ignoring having a comprehensive range of economy models to combat Toyota, Nissan and Honda - are floundering GM. Writing off costs associated with union decisions is unfortunately largely out of the company's control.

Like I said, accumulating losses are of grave concern, but you're jumping the gun by crowing over unusual item charges.

Edited August 2, 2008 by aatbloke

[Robert Hall]

I assume these 'one time' charges are just a lot of accounting BS...that they are cooking the books...who knows what the real numbers are.

[Guest aatbloke]

I assume these 'one time' charges are just a lot of accounting BS...that they are cooking the books...who knows what the real numbers are.

Like I said, they can range from actual costs - such as merger and strike costs - to accounting entries, such as large fixed asset write-offs and deferred tax charges and write-offs. But unusual items do require separate disclosure in the notes to a company's financial statements, so that investors and other interested parties can gain a better understanding of the P&L.

[Croc]

GM's problems are the result of basic poor decisions regarding its model range in North America. Too many brands, too many models competing with others within GM, and a concentration on high unit profit trucks and SUVs while ignoring having a comprehensive range of economy models to combat Toyota, Nissan and Honda - are floundering GM. Writing off costs associated with union decisions is unfortunately largely out of the company's control.

GM certainly could have prevented the strikes that occurred recently by having a more iron-clad contract that did not include such easily exploitable loopholes as has been discussed ad nauseum on these boards.

By the way, you are talking to someone with a business degree. I am well aware of all that accounting entails, and I am also very aware of when to call "BS" on a company's spin doctoring.

If a company is in such financial straits that it has to cut the meager dividend it was paying to shareholders, well that really does speak volumes about their financial health. This management team needs to go, like yesterday.

[Guest aatbloke]

By the way, you are talking to someone with a business degree. I am well aware of all that accounting entails, and I am also very aware of when to call "BS" on a company's spin doctoring.

With the greatest respect, a business studies degree doesn't hold a candle to holding a professional qualification with the ICAEW complete with nigh on 25 years in the field. And I know when the media are out to sell stories.

Edited August 3, 2008 by aatbloke

[Guest aatbloke]

If a company is in such financial straits that it has to cut the meager dividend it was paying to shareholders, well that really does speak volumes about their financial health. This management team needs to go, like yesterday.

Cutting a dividend isn't necessarily a sign of a company's financial health - a company's board can forego voting a dividend for the sake of a major reinvestment, for example. If a company makes a loss, it cannot vote a dividend - they can only be paid from distributable post-tax profits.

Edited August 3, 2008 by aatbloke

[Guest aatbloke]

GM certainly could have prevented the strikes that occurred recently by having a more iron-clad contract that did not include such easily exploitable loopholes as has been discussed ad nauseum on these boards.

For an educated person you certainly make union contract discussions sound like child's play. Once costs incurred relating to a striek begin, there's little control the company has over their mitigation in terms of creating an unusual item which would require separate disclosure.

Edited August 3, 2008 by aatbloke

[Croc]

With the greatest respect, a business studies degree doesn't hold a candle to holding a professional qualification with the ICAEW complete with nigh on 25 years in the field.

Fascinating. And what does this have to do with my being familiar with the basic principles of business accounting?

And I know when the media are out to sell stories.

They are always out to sell stories.

For an educated person you certainly make union contract discussions sound like child's play.

Yeah, where did I do that, exactly?

Once costs incurred relating to a striek begin, there's little control the company has over their mitigation in terms of creating an unusual item which would require separate disclosure.

GM could have easily prevented the strike. But as always, it chose to place itself in a situation where it would be caught with its pants down.

Edited August 3, 2008 by Croc

[CARBIZ]

It's the bean counters who ran the company into the ground in the '90s that have caused this mess to pile up. The accounting BS that all big corporations are guilty of is now coming home to roost. It's the guys with the big, fancy degrees in accounting that cook up these wonderful schemes to 'cook the books' so the executives can get their fat pay raises, bonuses, etc.

The reason Japan Inc is thriving in this downturn is because a) their middle class has already paid the price back home and b) Japan Inc probably had their accountants all lined up and shot decades ago.

Personally, I have nothing against accountants as long as they are back in their coffin by sunrise.

[Guest aatbloke]

Fascinating. And what does this have to do with my being familiar with the basic principles of business accounting?

In pretty much the same way that holding an O-level in Physics doesn't make me qualified enough to make me an engineer at NASA. I'm sure you understand a debit from a credit, but your comments aren't exactly what I'd expect to hear from a qualified accountant. Indeed, my own colleagues echoed my own sentiments in this situation - it's important to understand the nature of the unusual items before jumping to conclusions.

They are always out to sell stories.

Yes they are - and they've done a pretty good job on you.

GM could have easily prevented the strike. But as always, it chose to place itself in a situation where it would be caught with its pants down.

Pandering to unions' every whim is probably the quickest way to go out of business.

[Guest aatbloke]

The reason Japan Inc is thriving in this downturn is because a) their middle class has already paid the price back home and b) Japan Inc probably had their accountants all lined up and shot decades ago.

The tripe you spout is sometimes rather incredible.

The reason Japanese manufacturers do so well is twofold: they produce goods the whole world wants and they intrinsically understand every market they sell in. Compare that to some of GM's pearlers, such as trying to flog a left-hand drive 4.3 litre petrol-engined Blazer in the UK at a time when the motorist was paying upwards of $6/gallon. That I'm afraid is sound accounting advice well and truly ignored.

Thank God I was born with common sense and, more importantly, here.

[longtooth]

The tripe you spout is sometimes rather incredible.

The reason Japanese manufacturers do so well is twofold: they produce goods the whole world wants and they intrinsically understand every market they sell in. Compare that to some of GM's pearlers, such as trying to flog a left-hand drive 4.3 litre petrol-engined Blazer in the UK at a time when the motorist was paying upwards of $6/gallon. That I'm afraid is sound accounting advice well and truly ignored.

Thank God I was born with common sense and, more importantly, here.

From the same society and the same strain of mental discipline which authored the Bataan Death March...

http://www.nlcnet.org/article.php?id=586

"The Dark Side of the Toyota Prius," In These Times

By Paul Abowd

July 16, 2008

The National Labor Committee (NLC), a New York-based human rights group, has been investigating working conditions at Toyota Motor Corp., and the labor used to produce its best-selling Prius hybrid cars.

In its 65-page report released in June, NLC includes first-hand testimony of factory conditions in “Toyota City,” outside of Nagoya, Japan — less than 200 miles southwest of Tokyo — where the largest auto company in the world employs some 70,000 people.

The report alleges that Toyota exploits guest workers, mostly shipped in from China and Vietnam. According to the NLC, these workers are “stripped of their passports and often forced to work — including at subcontract plants supplying Toyota — 16 hours a day, seven days a week, while being paid less than half the legal minimum wage.” Workers are forced to live in company dormitories and deported for complaining about poor treatment, the report finds.

Low-wage temporary workers make up one-third of Toyota’s Prius assembly-line workers, mostly in the auto-parts supply chain. They are signed to contracts for periods as short as four months, and are paid only 60 percent of a full-time employee’s wage.

Parts plants run by subcontractors advertise standard, nine-hour, five-day-a-week jobs. But according to the NLC, “the typical shift was 15 to 16.5 hours a day, from 8:30 a.m. to 11:30 p.m. or 1:00 a.m.”

[CARBIZ]

The tripe you spout is sometimes rather incredible.

The reason Japanese manufacturers do so well is twofold: they produce goods the whole world wants and they intrinsically understand every market they sell in. Compare that to some of GM's pearlers, such as trying to flog a left-hand drive 4.3 litre petrol-engined Blazer in the UK at a time when the motorist was paying upwards of $6/gallon. That I'm afraid is sound accounting advice well and truly ignored.

Thank God I was born with common sense and, more importantly, here.

Well, at least we agree on one thing.

[Croc]

In pretty much the same way that holding an O-level in Physics doesn't make me qualified enough to make me an engineer at NASA. I'm sure you understand a debit from a credit, but your comments aren't exactly what I'd expect to hear from a qualified accountant. Indeed, my own colleagues echoed my own sentiments in this situation - it's important to understand the nature of the unusual items before jumping to conclusions.

Again, this has almost nothing to do with what I've been posting about. You may very well be an A+ accountant, but as with previous "debates," your reading comprehension and logic skills seem unusually lacking. I'm not even going to try spelling it out for you again, because if you still think knowing the details of the one-time charges has any relevance whatsoever on the logical argument I have been making, then you are not following it at all.

Yes they are - and they've done a pretty good job on you.

Really? How so? Show me anywhere that I've asserted any of the media narratives. I've never complained about "too many brands," "Pontiac is dead," "Buick is dead," or that "GM is going bankrupt." All I've pointed out is that GM's financial situation is not looking good and has not for a while, and that's something anyone with half a brain can figure out. 55 year historical lows with regards to the stockprice show that. Cutting dividends hint toward that. Selling brands/divisions illustrates that, as well as the massive quarterly losses.

Pandering to unions' every whim is probably the quickest way to go out of business.

OK, you just illustrated in technicolor that you have no knowledge of the situation I am referring to, whatsoever. Pandering to unions? Yeah, not what I was suggesting at all. Maybe you should read up on the strike threads regarding Fairfax, say THIS THREAD.

Here's a good quote:

The Locals can do what they like...there are rumors of some chicanery regarding the more radical plants' votes (keep in mind that Union Leadership get to sit on the multi-Billion $ VEBA and milk it for all it's worth, so their interest is vastly different from the guy on the line.)

MORE IMPORTANTLY GM should have anticipated the backlash and contracted against it--the strike threat was a joke and everyone knew it--instead, we have yet another example of how poorly GM management functions. The one hot product in a volume segment and they're blowing it!

[Guest aatbloke]

Again, this has almost nothing to do with what I've been posting about. You may very well be an A+ accountant, but as with previous "debates," your reading comprehension and logic skills seem unusually lacking. I'm not even going to try spelling it out for you again, because if you still think knowing the details of the one-time charges has any relevance whatsoever on the logical argument I have been making, then you are not following it at all.

Well, I'll leave this thread to the blue-collars who love to chastise those in professions and make their own - often flawed - interpretations of the situation. Why? Because you need the technical ability to understand a set of financial statements because you make an accurate judgement. If you understand the basic accounting equation, you'll exercise the same caution.

The flawed logic unfortunately comes from beliefs such as "GM makes a $15 billion loss, they're out of money." My logic comes from the fact that I've seen GM make piss-poor management decisions when it comes to the products it delivers. That's why it (currently) doesn't hold a candle to the Japanese marques - a sad, but very real, fact. And what behaviour results on here? Blaming the Japanese for running rings around GM - now that's poor logic skills by anyone's standard.

Edited August 3, 2008 by aatbloke

[Guest aatbloke]

From the same society and the same strain of mental discipline which authored the Bataan Death March...

http://www.nlcnet.org/article.php?id=586

"The Dark Side of the Toyota Prius," In These Times

By Paul Abowd

July 16, 2008

The National Labor Committee (NLC), a New York-based human rights group, has been investigating working conditions at Toyota Motor Corp., and the labor used to produce its best-selling Prius hybrid cars.

In its 65-page report released in June, NLC includes first-hand testimony of factory conditions in “Toyota City,” outside of Nagoya, Japan — less than 200 miles southwest of Tokyo — where the largest auto company in the world employs some 70,000 people.

The report alleges that Toyota exploits guest workers, mostly shipped in from China and Vietnam. According to the NLC, these workers are “stripped of their passports and often forced to work — including at subcontract plants supplying Toyota — 16 hours a day, seven days a week, while being paid less than half the legal minimum wage.” Workers are forced to live in company dormitories and deported for complaining about poor treatment, the report finds.

Low-wage temporary workers make up one-third of Toyota’s Prius assembly-line workers, mostly in the auto-parts supply chain. They are signed to contracts for periods as short as four months, and are paid only 60 percent of a full-time employee’s wage.

Parts plants run by subcontractors advertise standard, nine-hour, five-day-a-week jobs. But according to the NLC, “the typical shift was 15 to 16.5 hours a day, from 8:30 a.m. to 11:30 p.m. or 1:00 a.m.”

And in Burnaston they provide every employee with a company car! The callous swines ...

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

I wonder how the niche product V-10 NSX will play out when it comes out. Will the media crucify Honda for bringing out such a car in todays environment.

Did the media crucify Toyota for bringing out their line of gas pigs?

Nope...

So, www.notgonnahappen.com.

It's not about the product, it's about the company (brand, division, model, etc.) that the media wants to eliminate.