The American auto industry is running on fumes. General Motors, the nation's largest automaker, warned Friday that it may run out of money by the end of the year after piling up billions in third-quarter losses and burning through cash at an alarming rate. Ford sustained heavy losses, too.
The situation is so severe, GM has suspended talks to acquire Chrysler and is appealing to the government for help as the slumping economy drags cars sales to their lowest level in a quarter century.
GM Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner said the company will "take every action" possible to avoid bankruptcy.
"We're convinced that the consequences of bankruptcy would be dire," he said, adding that the company would use every source of potential funding. "We need to find a way to get through this, and that's really our focus," he said.
GM also planned more job cuts, including another 5,500 salaried and factory workers. But company officials cautioned that those measures alone would not be enough and that federal aid is essential.
Ford saw its cash supply decline rapidly and announced its own job cuts Friday. But it's in better shape because the company borrowed billions of dollars in 2007 by mortgaging its factories. The Dearborn-based manufacturer said it had enough cash to make it through 2009.
Friday's events called into question the future of Detroit's three automakers and heightened pressure on the government to take action.
President-elect Barack Obama on Friday indicated that help may be on the way. At a Chicago news conference, he said Congress must pass an economic stimulus measure either before or just after he takes office in January, and he mentioned aid for the auto industry.
Top executives of General Motors, Ford, Chrysler LLC and the president of the UAW met with Congressional leaders Thursday to discuss some $50 billion more in loans, participants said. The loans would include $25 billion to help the companies withstand the weak economy and another $25 billion for future. The money would be in addition to the $25 billion in loans that Congress passed in September to help retool auto plants to build more fuel-efficient vehicles.
IHS Global Insight analyst George Magliano said the cash problems reported by GM and Ford were worse than experts had thought. And that raised the risk of bankruptcy.
"It's close," he said about the possibility of one of the U.S. automakers filing for Chapter 11 protection. "Up until now, we knew the cash numbers were tough, but we didn't know how bad."
Companies that run out of cash generally can sell assets, cut costs or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection to keep creditors at bay while they reorganize.
GM had said previously it could fall short of cash needed to operate in the first few months of next year, and Ford has said it has about seven months of money, Magliano noted.
If GM files for bankruptcy, Fitch Ratings analyst Mark Oline said there is "a very high risk" that it would pull in Ford and Chrysler, too, because GM probably would be forced to discount vehicles deeply to generate cash for creditors, and other automakers would be forced to follow.
GM said it lost $2.5 billion in the third quarter, but more important, it spent $6.9 billion more than it took in — nearly double the spending rate of the second quarter.
The news came just hours after Ford announced it had lost $129 million for the quarter. The company burned through $7.7 billion in cash, but said it could keep going through 2009. Ford also said it would cut another 2,260 white-collar workers in North America.
GM called off talks with Chrysler to concentrate on its own business.
Privately held Chrysler wouldn't comment on GM's remarks, but said it remains focused on returning to profitability. It also said it will continue to "explore multiple strategic alliances or partnerships."
GM's cuts included the indefinite layoff of about 3,600 workers beginning early next year as it slows production at 10 assembly plants to match anticipated weaker sales.
"We are cutting to the bone," said Fritz Henderson, GM's president and chief operating officer. "What we want to try to do is size the business for this kind of volume level ... and frankly, put us in much better shape when the industry improves."
GM reported a net loss of $4.45 per share during the quarter, compared with a record-setting loss of $39 billion, or $68.85 per share, a year earlier. Its automotive operations saw an adjusted loss of $2.8 billion.
Revenue fell to $37.9 billion from $43.7 billion.
The results exceeded Wall Street estimates. Analysts surveyed by Thomson Reuters predicted a loss of $3.70 per share on sales of $39.4 billion.
The company announced it would bolster its cash reserves by $5 billion by the end of next year through reduction of sales promotions and further production cuts in the first quarter.
GM will cut capital spending to $4.8 billion from $7.2 billion and delay several vehicle models. But GM said it will continue funding for the Chevrolet Volt electric car and the Chevrolet Cruze, a small fuel-efficient model. Both are due out in 2010.
GM also suspended its matching contribution for employee 401k plans, and suspended tuition reimbursement. In addition, salaried employees will not receive incentive pay next year for their work in 2008, GM said.
GM, which has about 123,000 employees in North America, will also cut another 1,900 salaried jobs on top of the 5,100 announced last summer.
But the cuts and delays may not be enough to keep the company's cash supply from falling dangerously low.
"GM's estimated liquidity during the remainder of 2008 will approach the minimum amount necessary to operate its business," the company said in a news release.
And the company's cash shortage in the first two quarters of 2009 could fall significantly short of the minimum amount unless industry conditions improve or GM gets government funding, GM said.
GM shares fell 44 cents, or 9.2 percent, to $4.36 in Friday trading. Ford shares rose 4 cents, or 2 percent, to $2.02.
___
AP Business writers James Prichard and Jeff Karoub in Detroit and Vinnee Tong and Bree Fowler in New York contributed to this report.
Good enough for 'em! In any other industry, except apparently the mortgage trade, companies are held to a higher standard. Detroit is the only American city I am aware of where you can buy a home for less than $2000.00, total. There are thousands of them (all bank owned) in a city that was abandoned when the automakers took operations out of the United States. Whether you drive an American named car or not, you're driving an automobile that was partially built on foreign soil. Lets just make it honest and buy them direct.
Sacrificing these corporate dinosaurs seems trivial when I look around my rural neighborhood. Construction is at a standstill, consumerism has all but stopped and people are losing their homes. The $700billion bailout we keep hearing about has brought our town hope but so far there's nothing tangible about it. If President Obama wants my vote (again) in 2012 then we need to see jobs and relief, not ridiculous corporate parachutes.
If GM goes under it is due to their own desire. There is no rational reason why this company should walk the road it shows.
By now the market should enjoy their energy efficient car running on H2O combustion instead of whining about losses. That's what GM should be doing. Fire the top and get some serious efficient folks in the driver's seat.
Somebody likes this mess and it is not Joe the Public.
Bingo. People have been predicting this for years... instead of developing for fuel-efficiency, it's been an SUV love-fest. Now the chickens are coming home to roost.
GM and other American automakers were well aware of the upcoming problems regarding the growing shortage of crude oil and the huge imports that would be required to keep American cars on the road.
In the 1990's all-around fuel-efficiency actually went DOWN. Meanwhile, Toyota was developing the Prius.
On the other hand, it would not be a good idea to simply let GM and others fold, throwing hundreds of thousands of people on the unemployement rolls. So what's the answer?
If the government bails out GM, then it must come with certain requirements. One of them is SERIOUS development of automobiles for the 21st century: high efficiency, alternative fuels, electric, etc. No more tanks, no more monster trucks and gas hogs.
Just to chime in here.. part of the villiany goes to Cerberus Capitol Manage(mangle)ment.. As part of their ¨smartest guy in the room¨ plan they have imposed a 700 or more better rating to qualify for financing on both chrysler financial and gmac(51% ownership). This alone has blown at least 1 in four sales deals for them and has cost both companies untold millions in lost sales.
On the other hand, it would not be a good idea to simply let GM and others fold, throwing hundreds of thousands of people on the unemployement rolls. So what's the answer?
And you do not think the CEO's of these companies know they have a gun to the head of the politicians?
let them fold is the answer..we have to take a stand somewhere...this total mis management of US companies is costing us big time...and no penalties to the players for it either.
Let GM and Chrysler die the free market death
the now $65 billion these guys want can be better spent on unemployment while job training and relocation for the employees is underway.
F*** GM as well as any other company which sidles up to the public teat because their past bad financial decisions (and crappy cars) caught up with them.
A market economy is like an ecosystem - a brutal but also beatiful thing. Those companies which offer goods and services that people want at a price they are willing to pay, stay and thrive. Those which don't need to be cleared away like dead underbrush, to make room for better-run upstarts. Let GM die, and let its workers be snapped up by other automakers who will put them to better use building better cars.
I realize there are those who think of GM as an institution, but they should consider that not bailing out GM will either make it stronger, or will make room for NEW institutions to take its place.
I share your anger, but I'm concerned about what this could do to Detroit, a city that is already on the ropes. Governor Granholm has been clear about the impact the failures of these two domestic automakers could have in Michigan.
We have to invest in our future.
We have to invest in our future.
How many times is investing in the autos makers going to fail to help Detroit before the citizens realize that it's throwing good money after bad. Spend that money on helping small business and sustainable economic ventures and quit robbing workers with claims of long term benefits. The pensions and jobs were used as excuses too many times and still it's down the tubes.
What exactly do the automakers plan to do with all that money when the gov't gives it to them? It's not going to make that many consumers - who are worried about the economy, foreclosures, and layoffs - rush out to buy new cars, is it? Why should the American taxpayer be forced to subsidize poor decisions made by the American automakers? Toyota and Honda made prudent decisions years ago but the American auto industry was content maximize its profits on gas-guzzling SUVs and trucks until the bottom fell out of the market. Didn't the auto execs ever hear of peak oil or see the gas prices at the pump rise every year for the past eight years? Did they think the bust-and-boom cycles were over and that the boom would continue indefinitely?
Couldn't just about every American company claim hardship and ask for loans too?
Why dont we hear anything about the unions and possible concessions?
nor do we hear of the high paid CEO's taking a huge pay cut..along with all upper management.
In reality they could care less about the workers or the company. they are only talking to keep themselves in high luxuary..
Amazing how stupid our elected officals are...stepping in to bailout anyone that runs a company or bank into the ground that makes millions of dollars for really doing nothing.
sorry, time to take a stand and let them fall. Michigan will survive..after all states like Iowa, South Dakota etc get along just fine with no auto manufactures...hell of alot less crime there too.
and the union drove themselves down this road with management...you have foriegn auto makers in the US that build a better car..choose better areas to do this in.
Sorry to say they did it smarter and better with less waste than the american auto worker
But, by losing Ford we lose a part of our history of America.....
It'll be a sad to see them go.....
Regardless of your political leanings, I suggest anyone who wants a glimpse into the hat-in-hand situation of the auto industry watch Michael Moore's 1988 documentary "Roger and Me". In the mid-80's, GM and their counterparts were closing plants at historic rates while their CEO(s) were raking-in millions. It is evident nothing has changed.
It's unfortunate that the American auto industry is going down the tubes. It is due to their own greed and lack of foresight. They've spent the last 8 years peddling gas guzzling SUV's for short term dollars, instead of facing long term realities. I think it's pathetic that I can go to the green car company and buy a 10 year old electric Ford pickup... but I can't buy one from Ford.
There really is no 'American auto industry' anymore. Look at who controls the stock for each of the big makers. They're mostly Euro or Asian held. Americans have been subjugated to inferior positions. The power is abroad. I'm fine with that, as long as they don't come back now and hide behind our flag.
Heads up Automakers: Yes, there is a bailout. No, you're not entitled. You're a company, like the company that I had and bankrupted when NAFTA took my career dreams away. Grow a set and take yourself home. This taxpayer is not happy about the notion of bailing out another mismanaged company, while watching my neighbors lose their homes.
The auto giants will go bankrupt and kick their retired people to the curb while the executives will get their golden parachutes. The preferred stock owners and the management people with preferred stock options will share in the remains while us mutual fund owners will continue to get the shaft.
The world economy that was so highly praised was more of a world distribution of wealth at the expense of the American worker while the rich profited.
Mexico to provide multi billion dollar bailout for auto makers. Yea right like that would ever happen.
GM's chickens are coming home to roost. I won't miss them. We should have never loaned them money earlier this year. Hopefully when they are liquidated the taxpayers will get their money back. Maybe Toyota or Honda can take over their facilities so that the employees can stay employed.
Perhaps if GM didn't have to pay for health care for all their employees they would be more competitive.
The auto industry put themselves in this mess. We shouldn't be bailing them out. They saw the competition getting better and better for decades and they did nothing. In the past, they had riches and they had technological superiority. But rather than using those resources to making a better product, they continued to put out cars that break down every 3 months, that were technological dinosaurs and hope that advertising and ubiquity would continue sales. Now that companies (who did put resources into making better cars) like Toyota are dominating. I get enraged when I hear that GM wants to borrow money so that it can buy Chrysler because Crysler has $8 billion dollars. They're buying another company to get its cash! How much of a waste is that???
And now they have to deal with a whole new generation of buyers that grew up on Toyotas, Hondas, BMW's, etc. I don't know anyone that'll ever consider an American car. Like they saw, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.
If we give them this money, we better own these companies in perpetuity. and we better make the CEO's work for $15/hour because that's all they deserve.
POOR GM!! sooob, soob...........what are we gonna do?
OH wait a minute, this is one of Rupert Murdoch's corporations!
No need to bail GM out, let Murdoch bail it out... oh that's right, he has been in bed with the oil companies refusing to put out cars that eliminate the need for gas. If the government gives this Billionaire company ONE dime, this is a heist! Don't do it Obama. Even though his new chief of staff is likely REAL good buddies with fellow Jewish friend Murdoch. I'm nervous...
There has been skeptisism about our economy improving for years, in my opinion there may very well be some things we should take into consideration. One idea I think may be a good one is possably manufacturing hydrogen. Hydrogen powered vechicles are a good idea because hydrogen is a prevailent natural resource and they are cleaner burning than "fossil feul" powered vechicles. By the way, the federal government has been aware of these facts for many years. There are some hydrogen "gas stations" already put in place and operational although sparcely placed. Secondly, the technology in which the "Big three" have utilized in (most of) there vechicles is about a decade behind the times and the manufacturing process(s) the use are "prehistoric" for the 21st century. They plan there models out before they production stage (after testing) many years ahead of their release, which I can see some of the reasoning behind, although in my opinion they should be able to change their production plans much faster and simpler if need be. The way that the current system "its as if they need an act of congress" to make changes on the vechicles they produce. The technology is out there to build better "fossil feuled" vechicles but the automakers are "stubborn and stingy" about mass producing better (higher tech)vechicles at costs that are affordable to the general public. Furthermore, they actually take away the value of the American made vechicles (in my opinion) by "cutting corners" and not being williing to make the needed changes to "keep up" with technology that is available to them and producing cheap and unacceptable "lesser" models to the general public while the "golden parachute jumping" executives ride in more comfortable,better handling and better performing vechicles available. I agree with cyan412000 the "big three" don't need a bailout by the government they all need to make changes in the ways that they do things and the vechicles on the production lines. The "average auto worker" has been bringing in money that the big execs have been pocketing for a long time, maybe they should take a loss on the account of their lack of forsight,planning,and (last but not least) for being downright greedy in my opinion. Zionadams is right about the city and the parts on American automobiles. A simple fact is that we really don't need the foreign automibiles,we are just attempting to share with them while (in my opinion) they are rape and rob us relying on peasants,currency and lawmakers to doso. I strongly suggest that a tariff be placed on all vechicles produced outside of the United States entering the US at the border. This would allievate a portion of the US economy crisis and at the same time perhaps get a few of the companies to work on producing better vechicles and maybe even working together. One example of lower technology being placed into the vechicles of today(in my opinion) is the continuing production of the single overhead valve gas engine. Many newer more powerfull and feul efficient engines utalize double overhead cams and four valves per cylinder. The single camshaft- single overhead valve engine is obsolete in my opinion and the double overhead cam - four valve per cylinder engines should be placed into even the lowest costing vechicles of any type. There are other excellent suggestions I have for automobile manufacturers I have in which inmy opinion should be industry standards "this day in age" I won't delve into writing on for it would perhaps be a book by the time I was finished. The pay standards along with the available health benifits provided the US auto worker need to be industry standards. If it means the discontinued production of some poorly designed, ill equipted, gas guzzlers in order to do it. Many other countries (keep in mind) have some automakers which double as slumlordes and they have no place to even drive the cars which they produce. Counterpoint, I would like to add that the automakers produce the vechicles too fast which leads to lesser quality,less options, and lower market value. The "big three" donot need to be given a bailout and the Americans neeed to realize how good they have it and not worry about "keeping up with the joneses" the quality and technology should be readily available. The home market in my opinion needs a lot of work to, the homes need to be made with better standards and they "did it to themselves".
'A bigger war will bring us out of our money problems. The U.S. needs to sell the weopons to both sides again, that seemed to work in the 80's.'
You talk about tossing people's lives down the tubes like you send potato peelings down the garbage disposal. We already have TWO wars going. Isn't that enough for you?
You talk about tossing people's lives down the tubes like you send potato peelings down the garbage disposal. We already have TWO wars going. Isn't that enough for you?
The US government is notorious for this...fund both sides for double the profit..The government does not care about lives...just profit.
This country has played out so many false flag ops to draw us into war over the decades it isnt funny.
Like the gulf of tonkin incident...total lies to draw us into vietnam...the attacks never took place...they were lies purposly told by the government to go to war.
Does that also remind you of over 937 lies to go into iraq? and shell oil gets a 25 year deal...
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |