Money Beat

From Your Wallet to Wall Street: The Money News That Matters to You From the ABC News Business Team

« Previous | Main | Next »

Dismal News From GM, Ford; GM-Chrysler Combo on the Rocks?

November 07, 2008 11:52 AM

Abc_gomstyn_080812_main ABC News' Alice Gomstyn reports: Third-quarter results for the country’s two largest automakers are in and, as feared, they’re bad: Ailing General Motors lost $2.5 billion in the third quarter and spent $6.9 billion in reserves to stay afloat. Ford fared better, with a loss of $129 million, but it spent even more from its reserves: $7.7 billion.

GM’s increasingly poor health appears to have put at least a temporary stop to talks with Chrysler, the country’s no. 3 automaker, about a possible merger.

To date, neither company has publicly admitted to the widely-reported talks and, in a press release today, GM did not refer to Chrysler by name. The company said instead that it had “set aside” considerations for a “strategic acquisition.”

“While the acquisition could potentially have provided significant benefits, the company has concluded that it is more important at the present time to focus on its immediate liquidity challenges,” GM said.

Concerns about the bankruptcy of a major U.S. automaker -- and, as a result, devastating job losses –- are mounting.

The earnings news comes a day after GM, Ford and Chrysler met with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ostensibly to discuss a government auto industry bailout. In GM’s earnings release today, CEO Rick Wagoner made a not-so-subtle reference to the importance of government help.

“The U.S. government’s actions to help stabilize the credit markets and eventually ease the creditAp_gm_ford_dealerships_081107_main crunch are an essential first step to the economy’s and the auto industry’s recovery, but further strong action is required,” he said.

When it comes to understanding why automakers are in the red, plummeting auto sales tell only part of the story.

GM, Ford and Chrysler have sought to save money by shutting down factories and cutting shifts at others, but they still have bills to pay, including the costs associated with keeping remaining plants running, explained veteran auto industry analyst Ron Harbour of the consulting firm Oliver Wyman.

It’s “a lot of fixed cost that you’re trying to spread over far fewer vehicles and trying to meet profitability is extremely difficult,” Harbour said.

Sometimes it doesn’t make sense to close down a plant completely, he said, because demand for the vehicle or vehicles produced by a particular plant might come back.

Take, for instance, the case of Ford’s F-150 full-size truck: In June, Ford cut one shift at its Dearborn, Mich. plant because of falling demand for trucks. But just last month, Ford announced it would add the shift back –- meaning jobs for 1,000 workers –- because it’s got high expectations for sales of the new 2009 F-150.

November 7, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (158)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

dem mom - I don't mind making risky investments if they are in the right vision and purpose - to take risk and invest for real improvements like efficiency, safety, etc is good, and of course a company has to be profitable to keep in the game. But to invest in risky areas with the sole short sighted purpose of raised profits is unwise in the long term. I always ask my kids - if you are going to set a goal and sacrifice for it - make sure it is a worthy goal - not selfish and short lived - same principle, bigger stakes.

Posted by: california girl | Nov 7, 2008 12:49:22 PM

Let's be serious, GM and Ford are making extreme profits in Austraila, Europe, Asia and few other overseas markets, besides the opening of the new GM plant in Russia. GM for years has built econmomical fuel economy vehicles for use in these markets and they still do, while in the US as long as the public would keep buying gas guzzling expensive vehicles they built them, instead of bringing those products for use in the USA. The fault of the North American failure is the Greed of the Automobile companies. The US does not need to or should have to bail them out when they are making profits in other markets and overseas. They should be forced to use those profits to support the losses they created in the USA. They can bail themself out of this but as long as all they show is is there North American profits and Congress allows this to happen then it just becomes a lie to them and to us.

Posted by: tinmanart | Nov 7, 2008 12:50:09 PM

New definition of IDIOT just came in: It is said of any Republican until 2008. There is a chance that they will learn what American values REALLY are and might eventually distinguish themselves from being so IDIOTS, and who knows, maybe not being idiots at all in the future. For the time being, IDIOT and REPUBLICAN are synonyms.

Posted by: Dictionary | Nov 7, 2008 12:50:41 PM

I will put the quality of any American automobile against any foreign automobile. It has been proven over and over, you take the names and labels off a cars and most people will pick the American auto over the foreign one every time

Posted by: lar | Nov 7, 2008 12:52:57 PM

lar - taking names and labels off cars and people will pick the American ones? Maybe because they're 'prettier' but they lack quality. Now find me a '92 Chevy - if you find one running - against my rather ugly '92 Mazda that will get near the gas mileage I do. My car isn't pretty but I wouldn't give it up if you offered me a NEW American car for free! That's the truth - and I'd further be embarassed to drive any American car.

Posted by: makemyday2day | Nov 7, 2008 12:54:30 PM

Why should taxpayers bailout these big automakers? I own a GM truck and I made sure my payments were on time. If I had failed to make the payments it would have been repossessed. Another thing is quality, I don't believe the quality is there for the bucks you spend
on these vehicles. (By the way I also own a Toyota and have owned others which have gone over 200k miles and have been pretty solid vehicles. The american auto makers can't seem to see why we don't buy american.). It seems pretty crazy to have to pay, say 40 grand for a truck and finance for a minimum of 5 yrs. Something is not right when you consider what an average individual earns and what it costs to survive. And we are not even considering home mortgages. We need some changes in this country. And the big automakers want a bailout, what about the small guy.

Posted by: senormusico | Nov 7, 2008 12:55:37 PM

I agree.. the auto industry made its bed by refusing to spend money on R&D but yet using profits to pad CEO and White collar pay and benefits. Some will blame the unions, but unions make proper middle class wages, and they deserve it, especially when you see that CEO's make 10,000% more then the union workers... If this country has any chance of recovery the financial strength must return to the middle class, otherwise there is no hope. It'
s common snese really something the right wing lacks severly

Posted by: Daryl | Nov 7, 2008 12:56:35 PM

Yeah, i was just waiting for some moron to say the democrats started it when Clinton was in office. And for 8 or more years did the Bushies stop it? Or did they just propel it to new heights?

Posted by: djinni | Nov 7, 2008 12:59:08 PM

lar - you have to be completely blind if you believe your own statement of US quality.

Do you know who has the undisputed highest quality & reliability rating for the past ten years(yes, this is a test)? Let's see if you know more than a mom, ok?

Posted by: california girl | Nov 7, 2008 1:00:28 PM

This is what happens when you build junk and the competition, like Toyota, builds quality vehicles, plain and simple.

Posted by: Dr. Wayne | Nov 7, 2008 1:01:53 PM

Ford and GM should make better cars! Also, if I ran my company the way these two do, would the government bail me out? Hell no! They wouldn't.


Posted by: manutx | Nov 7, 2008 1:05:03 PM

Let the big Oil Corp bail them out with their huge profits. One takes the other to survive. The Gov should only help with the newer technology and energy auto departments the big auto makers. Also the bad thing is all the employees for the auto makers. What about them?

Posted by: CW | Nov 7, 2008 1:05:14 PM

perhaps all executives, say from manager up, of the B3 should go live in boxes and work in soup kitchens while we find some people who know how to run a company, look forward more than a quarter, and build GOOD vehicles. The American love affair with the auto is going through a NASTY divorce, but this is still the USA and we should be able to build the best again. Come on, government and business leaders, get your heads outta the sand and MOVE on this. You've had 30 years or so to think about it! Surely you have some clue?

Posted by: dave | Nov 7, 2008 1:05:15 PM

Dr. wayne - you blew it, and let the answer out.

Ok, good job.

Posted by: california girl | Nov 7, 2008 1:05:37 PM

i wish i made $34/hr and had all of those health benifits. maybe the government can give it to all of us.
let's see, give the dumb bankers $750
billion for bonus' and give the auto
workers $50 billion. china will come to the rescue. if they take over the
detroit auto, the pay drops to minimum wage and no one loses their job.

Posted by: moving33 | Nov 7, 2008 1:07:13 PM

If the Gov does bail out these auto Mfgs. There should be rules as to new researh and developement. I somehow suspect they already have the technology to produce Natural Gas cars and trucks and that is one resource we have here in America.

Posted by: CW | Nov 7, 2008 1:08:42 PM

Abolish all the unions. Trim the unneccesary workers, adjust the remaining employees pay so its based on performance and skill (including the exec's), make quality fuel efficient cars that last, offer better warranty's.

They really don't neccesarily need to reduce selling prices.

Costs will plummet, sales will sky rocket, profits will soar.

There's your bailout. Some consulting agency would probably charge millions for this advice. You just got it for free. (Can you say DUH!!??)

Posted by: mnryegrower | Nov 7, 2008 12:49:20 PM
-------------------------------------

reduce wages of union workers.. that is a recipe for further recession and financial disaster. Sorry we need more unions in this country to combat wallstreet and ceo greed. union worker wages and benefits are what all middle class americans should expect from corproations. Get the waghes and benefits back to respectable middle class union levles and the economy will get better becuase the middle class will have more money to spend. Fact is the middle class is the entire foundation of our capitalistic society, and they have been raped over the last 2 decades. return the financial strength to the middle class and the countries foundation will be stable and the economy will improve. Keep creating McJobs / Walmart jobs and the economy will continue its downward spiral and Americans continue to have less andless to spend. kless money means less consupmtion of goods. Less consumption of goods is a negative thing for a capitalistic society.

Posted by: Daryl | Nov 7, 2008 1:12:36 PM

Daryl - you'd make a good mom. Sounds just like managing a household, albeit a large one.

Posted by: california girl | Nov 7, 2008 1:14:30 PM

As much as I hate was Adolph Hitler did, he did one good thing. The "Peoples Car" the Volkswagen.
My first real car was a 1968 Volkswagen,financing and all 2k. and some are still running arround.

Posted by: senormusico | Nov 7, 2008 1:18:11 PM

California Girl, I agree with you wholeheartedly. No bail out money to pay the big execs their high salaries and bonuses. I suggest a government loan with the explicit caveat (and documented loan terms) that would fund re-tooling for the development and manufacture of fuel efficient and alternate fuel vehicles. By fuel efficient, I suggest a low-end/no-less-than mileage cap of 25 MPG for freeway mileage. I also think funds should be ear-marked for those employees recently discharged, but I mean the factory workers, not management. As for the unions, they are past their prime and need to be abolished. Basically, they've served to price their members right out of the market; how helpful is that? Perhaps some R&D money should be contemplated as well; provided it is focused on alternative fuel technology. I personally think the car manufacturers have the technology to make SUV engines get much higher mileage. However, the Big 3 were so linked to the oil industry that they couldn't make this decision on their own. After the oil industry's unilateral decision to pump gas prices up to $5/gallon, the auto industry was basically collapsed. For the auto manufacturer CEO's, how did that marriage work out for you? Looks like you got a divorce with no alimony or child support to me...

Posted by: RohnertPark1 | Nov 7, 2008 1:18:22 PM

On second thought, perhaps the government can force the big oil companies to fund some of their windfall profits into loans to the Big 3 automakers. While I know the government does not have the power to do so, that is food for thought, since the increase of gas prices to $5/gallon was basically the last coffin nail for US auto companies.

Posted by: RohnertPark1 | Nov 7, 2008 1:23:46 PM

usadcj - nice to know that you are following the lead of President-elect Obama to come together as Americans. Your negative comments do nothing but create separation and support intolerence. Grow up and behave like an adult instead of a spoiled little kid!

Posted by: Lynette | Nov 7, 2008 1:25:07 PM

Daryl - you'd make a good mom. Sounds just like managing a household, albeit a large one.

----------------------------------

whgy thank you california girl... but I'd rather be a father do to my sexual orientation LOL!... take care

Posted by: Daryl | Nov 7, 2008 1:25:38 PM

Califoria Girl is right - no more bail outs. they did not make fuel efficient cars and now they want us to bail them our for bad management/judgment. No way - a free market only exists if the best products at the best prices compete and those who loose out loose. That is it. New companies should start up and make fuel efficient cars - that is how it is supposed to work. NO MORE BAILOUTS FOR ANYONE - NO ONE IS TOO BIG TO FALL!

Posted by: eyeonyou | Nov 7, 2008 1:28:52 PM

No loss if the big three go under....their cars suck anyway.....

Posted by: Eddie | Nov 7, 2008 1:29:24 PM

Post a comment