evok

So do pass on some more of your insight into Opel. It does make for good entertainment if nothing else by explaining the $2 billion loss in 4th quarter excluding "special items". As of January, continued production cuts of app. 50% for the 1st quarter 2009 compared to last year (260k). And last year was down from 1999-2000 when Opel was producing well over 525k vehicles a quarter. Again, I have just been posting the obvious. 50% reduction in production for 6 months just is not good for revenue. And without money from GM (what is vaporizing really fast), means Opel as an operations is very likely insolvent today. Opel being a regional player as Europe continues to contract will have to face some very serious decisions with regard to what future it may have, inside or outside of GM's reach. I actually enjoyed PMing atabloke. Remember him? OT It is just sad to see what happened to GM's stock. Hard to believe it was trading at 16 back in June/July. I fear with all debt-to-equity exchange and 50% of the UAW healthcare VEBA being rolled into equity, the stock will be depressed for years to come because of all the dilution. Thoughts?

Seems to have more sense than her old man. And boy - 4 years later that thread still strikes a nerve with people. BTW even Wikipedia agrees with my assessment of the Eps Vectra. I highly doubt it was some pesky Toyota fan playing games.

And the Eps Vectra was a sales disappointment since launch.

Yea - It is a big lie that GME's revenue was down 40% and production was down 50% in the last quarter. Must be a big lie that GME lost a cool $1 billion dollars.

To lose money on someone else's balance sheet. Their freedom to become the German FIAT. A ward of the German government? GM owns the designs so they would have to pay.

GME - Opel will have to pay royalties just like Chrysler continues to pay to Daimler.

BO is only as good as his advisors and I personally do not think Larry Summers and Tim Geithner are up to the challenge. The amazing thing is they have had months now since the end of the election to figure out a policy with the help of the transition teams. As far as the banks go, they seem to adopting the Japanese model instead of the Swedish model. Really it irks me that they did not establish a point contact for the auto industry. Tim Geithner can't figure out the banking system much less tackle automotive also.

ZL-1: Thanks Chazman: The first mistake Obama has made with regard to the auto industry is not appointing a czar. Like you I am not filled with "hope" about the economy's prospects and for that reasons a Auto Czar is needed to restructure the whole industry. Global coorddination is also going to be needed at the rest of the industry falls apart. If Chrysler's viability plan is to be believed, JPMorgan and the other banks did not give an inch on Chrysler debt. Considering their bailout they should take a serious haircut. They got stuck with all of that bad debt when they could not sell it to the same suckers that refused to buy anymore mortgage bonds. According to Chrysler's plan they will have over $20billion in debt including the Treasury loans. Maybe Chrysler just needs to go away and just maybe so does Fiat and a bunch of European companies. Maybe GM should just consist of Chevy and Cadillac. Something big is needed if the stimuls does not work and I mean globally. Obama needs to assume the worse and move on the restructuring asap through a point man aka Car Czar.

I figured it was in Swedish - Thanks for the summary. The market for all OEMs is a disaster and soon enough almost all the companies will need a bailout if conditions continue. It is that bad. With no banks lending to support bridge loans the supply chains is next. Hence they are wanting a bailout. The whole industry is on the cusp of collapsing if the economics do not improve in the next 8 months without government intervention. The European manufacturers are going to be in worse shape because of the competition and low cash on hand after the huge cash burn last quarter. In the case of Opel, they will have to license all of their technology from GM if they are spun off. That is just what Daimler did to Chrysler. Opel will be a short lived enterprise without a new owner with deep pockets and no one has deep pockets besides the government. And what does Germany need with BMW, Daimler, Opel and VW? Germany is screwed right now as their exports dry up. It is possible that all four could be nationalized and merged into one company. People better pray the Obama stimulus works??

Do you have a like to the SAAB filing? The Chrysler issues appears to be an ongoing disput that even predates the Daimler merger. But in any case, GM I am sure will consider all the cost. It really depends on how much cach Opel is burning. Fiat, Renault and PSA burned through a ton of it in the 4th quarter. In 3Q 2007, GM wrote off its deferred tax liability in Germany already.

The question that must be answered is, can GM survive if they keep Opel as the European market is looking to be as big a disaster as the US market. Opel sales were down 10% in 2008, but down 24% in the 4th quarter of the year. Chevrolet Europe was up 10% for the year and only down 4% in the last quarter. GM has not posted their 2008 CY finanancial yet but I will bet Opel's are ugly. I would hate to see GM spin off or whatever with Opel, but at the same time it just may not be worth keeping Over the past 10 years Opel has contracted and since GM established Chevrolet in Europe the brand has made significant traction and is selling 1/2 million vehicles. If the numbers make sense and I beleive they do, GM does not need another albotrose around its neck and cutting Opel loose may make sense. Sometimes it makes sense to cut and run like what Daimler did to Chrysler. The numbers are linked at the bottom of this PR. http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet...amp;docid=51538

I do not think I will be going out too far on the limb if I were to characterize a stand alone Opel without GM Europe as Chrysler. The German equivalent of Fiat!

LMAO

Yet I have been saying for a decade - Opel has not made a profit except for the occasional bout of flatulence when it "toots" up a few million dollars in profit only to return to a hundred million dollar loss. Give me a break!

That looks like the numbers I saw. Now - In the early 1980s recession, pick up truck sales picked up with new construction starts earlier than the traditional passenger car fleet. With all the forclosures out there and soon to be out there, does anyone expect that to happen any time soon? There goes the Detroit 3 cash cow. GMs revenue was all about the 900s. Cool site with map function to see how bad it really is. http://www.realtytrac.com/

Yes - and the talk about renegotiating the terms of the mortgages has been shown to be a bust. Somewhere recently I read, the banks that have done this have only delayed the inevitable. The banks pulled owners out of ARMs/Interest Only and put them into 40-50 year fixed and they still could not afford the payments.

If only the Treasury could guarantee the financing. BTW Don't forget the commercial property market - that is about to go boom too.

Yes - What a sage! 30 seconds after it is posted on Auto News - I see the Magic 8-Ball's insight. GM plans 'aggressive steps' to cut costs in Europe John Revill Automotive News February 16, 2009 - 11:56 am ET ... The statement said GM management had shown main elements of Project Renaissance to selected analysts last week. ...

LOL Some of the plants identified in his analysis are already on the hit list. Overall his flawed plan is not that flawed.

LOL Got ya. Based upon what was signed in Dec 2007 (Energy Security Act) I do not think they need to pass anything. It is a good requirement and I beleive a smart bill for the auto industry and the country. BO just needs to get the CAFE rule published so the OEMs can get to work and eliminate the uncertainty.

What are you talking about? I cite real cost estimates and you come back with that. Come on. I am not even arguing what the fuel targets should be - just who has the authority to regulate.

Excuse me. CARB does not want to regulate traditional emissions but CO2 which is fuel economy. CARB may have made sense back in the 1960s to help with the localized SMOG problems in the LA basin but this is not the 1960s any more. Regulating CO2 is not a local issue but a national (energy security) or some may say global issue (global warming). As for cost you are incorrect. Tweaking an engine control calibration to meet CARB emissions targets versus selling advanced powertrain such as hybrids or what have you to meet the CARB's fuel economy targets are two different things. The Bush's CAFE proposal was expected to cost on the order of $40 billion. Yes the cost to the end user could be a wash. GM would sell only the Beat in CA, Honda the fit, Nissan the Versa etc. All the Hollywood types could drive across the border to buy their Benzes and Bimmers.

Toytota relied on the US market and the favorable yen-dollar exchange rates to generate much of their profit. In case you missed it, the US market collapsed. For a company the size of Toyota $18 billion is not a lot of money if the report is accurate. I happened to believe it is. In the current economic conditions, a 6 billion dollar cash drain in a couple quarters is very possible if they do not turn off the product spending. By my estimate Toyota needs $12 to 14 billion on hand at any one time.

It is called a sociatal cost. Someone is picking up the tab for it.

The issue is a tad more complex than that!