I can't honestly say that I've been in on billion dollar negotiations before, but it would seem to me that the negoatiations for this size of a transaction would have started quite a while before Wagoner took over.

He may be partially to blame, but I don't know that I'd drop this all on his shoulders.

It's be like blaming Mr. Lutz for a car that came out a few months after he was brought on...

 

forgive a noob.. which agreement? the one to purchase, or to give them the 4.4 bill?


since ive been reading this ENTIRE thread... I figure i'll now ask for a copy of your 20 points.. as my curiosity has gotten the better of me.

please send to mrithrande@aol.com
thanks.

 

The partnership was entered into in 2000. The 'Put' option was exercised last year and that cost GM 2 billion in addition to the first 2 billion to start the partnership.

Lets not forget that GM did get something out of this. It did get an entire deisel engine lineup and manfacturing plant, something someone is neglecting to see.

 

You're defending the Fiat transaction? How about market cap at $66,000,000,000 when Wagoner became CEO. Today it's $15,000,000,000. Who is responsible? The man in charge. Accept the fact that the blame is his. That's the real problem at GM, no accountability. This isn't me talking, it's the record. Facts are facts, the grade is F.

 

You keep throwing the $66B to $15B situation out there.

An important external component in all of this is 09/11/2001.

We can't forget that 9/11 threw the economy into a frenzy, and the President asked GM to help keep the economy moving by ushering in som great incentives at the time to stimulate spending. To me, GM stepped up to the plate.

Out of curiosity... what was/is Ford's value at the same time periods?

 

Good question, but I haven't followed Ford. Toyota was $84,000,000,000 in 2003, now $118,000,000,000, roughly NINE TIMES the value of GM. If you don't believe the man at the top makes a difference, how do you ezplain Ghosn and Nissan?

 

I wouldn't compare a Japanese based manufacturer to an American based one... it's really not "apples to apples", IMO... for tax related reasons, and 09/11 reasons due to your timeframe.

I have no idea what Ford's numbers are today, and on 06/01/2000, but I really wouldn't be surprised if they were at l;east similar as far as percentages.

It might be a great number for you to look up, as I think Ford is the best comparision to GM (domestic to domestic before and after 9/11)


If Ford's numbers are similar... then I think that works in Wagoner's favor.

If Ford's numbers are much better... it would strengthen your case, IMHO.

 

Another thing I'd like to see with the $66B to $15B numbers is how they break down into subsegments:

A) 06/01/2000 to 06/01/2001 (1 year)

B) 06/01/2000 to 09/10/2001 (term to date prior to 9/11)

C) 09/11/2001 to today (to see the 9/11 effect)

D) Yearly numbers (06/01/02 to 03, 03 to 04, 04 to 05, etc (to see exactly when the major losses have occured.

If a lot of the loss happened either right after he took over, or after 09/11, I think that would put a lot of the blame of either the previous regime, or the external events of 09/11 (especially if Ford has similar declines after 09/11)

 

I am simply using FACTS to say that GM did get SOMETHING from the Fiat Fiasco. It wasn't the best thing to have happen but they did get something.

 

The figures re: GM market cap are from May of each year as I was preparing powerpoint presentations for the stockholders. Included in those reports were figures for GE 2003 $289,000,000,000 and 2005 $384,000,000,000. As you can see, we are headed the wrong direction. As to Ford, who's the leader, them or us? Do you think Steinbrenner would keep Wagoner on board of he owned the comany? What do you suppose Kerkorian will do?
Now I've heard Mr. Wagoner is a good family man, and a wonderful father. Those are fine attributes but won't win you any ballgames.This isn't personal. However, we're in danger of losing Buick and Pontiac due to poor business judgement. Worse yet, agree with me or not, my contention is the situation is reversable, even as we wait for new product. You'd suppose based upon the success I've been blessed with moving the metal, GM would have, or should have, at least tried SOME of the ideas. I could understand the concern if a major investment were required, but other than step nineteen, none require much, if any, investment. Humor me for one minute and imagine The Plan works. Billions in return for no investment. If that's not worth at least a shot, something just doesn't make sense.
Lock and roll, Red Tag, March Madness, Lease Pull Ahead, GM Discount for ALL. These programs were costly, and none very successful, or failed. If you want the same results, keep doing what you doing (hear that Mr. L?) Want change, try something new.
Buickman

 

I think if a bunch of internet 'rookies' can make you resort to only one weak point and pointing out that one person was responsible for it all, when most things take 3+ years to happen in GM, that the board and particularly Mr. Wagoner have nothing to fear from Buickman.

 

The investment for them was you, and your approach made that impalitable for them.
Again, you fault the customer. The customer is always right. If GM didn't accept you plan, than there must be at least something wrong with either your plan, or your approach. Your being abrassive and aggressive with them. Do you treat people who walk into your dealer like this? Do you assume that if they don't want to buy a LeSabre from you that there must be something wrong with them? Would you insult this customer and tell them every single thing you think is wrong about them? This is what you've done in your meetings with GM.

 

I don't know where you are getting your information from, but either you are being lied to, or simply imagining things. I was prompt, courteous, professional, and well prepared for each meeting with GM. If telling the truth and pointing out weaknesses is out of line, why did I go there in the first place? None of the meetings were social events. Now, I am calling for accountibilty based upon facts. Analysts today put GM stock at a $20 per share target. If this doesn't indicate failure, what would? There is also serious talk of selling GMAC. How bad does it have to get before you'll agree GM is headed in the wrong direction? Remember the Iraqi foreign minister and his proclamations?

 

Buickman,

How about holding the bean counters accountable for slowing down product or changing to sub-standard materials in new products? GM's problems are not all of Mr. Wagoner's fault.

 

I can see his reasoning..hes the head of the company..so he takes the fault..but also GM should speak up first and say yea we made a boo boo..if not then you take his head for not comming clean..