GM CEO Wagoner to Step Down
Banned
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 213
Not to mention that the government hasn't been getting any taxes from GM, as it's been running a loss for a while now and will carry those forward into the future...and the payroll taxes are nowhere near $16B.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
As I said, the leader will step aside if the powers that be believe there is good reason to replace GM's CEO. That's despite what you and I might otherwise think!
The reason why Wall Street leaders weren't asked to step aside should be obvious. Power.
Last edited by SSbaby; Mar 30, 2009 at 04:43 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
GM Message from Rick Wagoner
On Friday I was in Washington for a meeting with Administration officials. In the course of that meeting, they requested that I “step aside” as CEO of GM, and so I have.
Fritz Henderson is an excellent choice to be the next CEO of GM. Having worked closely with Fritz for many years, I know that he is the ideal person to lead the company through the completion of our restructuring efforts. His knowledge of the global industry and the company are exceptional, and he has the intellect, energy, and support among GM’ers worldwide to succeed. I wish him well, and I stand ready to support him, and interim Non-Executive Chairman Kent Kresa, in every way possible.
I also want to extend my sincerest thanks to everyone who supported GM and me during my time as CEO. I deeply appreciate the excellent counsel and commitment of the GM Board and the strong support of our many partners including our terrific dealers, suppliers, and community leaders. I am grateful as well to the union leaders with whom I have had the chance to work closely to implement numerous tough but necessary restructuring agreements.
Most important of all I want to express my deepest appreciation to the extraordinary team of GM employees around the world. You have been a tremendous source of inspiration and pride to me, and I will be forever grateful for the courage and commitment you have shown as we have confronted the unprecedented challenges of the past few years. GM is a great company with a storied history. Ignore the doubters because I know it is also a company with a great future.
On Friday I was in Washington for a meeting with Administration officials. In the course of that meeting, they requested that I “step aside” as CEO of GM, and so I have.
Fritz Henderson is an excellent choice to be the next CEO of GM. Having worked closely with Fritz for many years, I know that he is the ideal person to lead the company through the completion of our restructuring efforts. His knowledge of the global industry and the company are exceptional, and he has the intellect, energy, and support among GM’ers worldwide to succeed. I wish him well, and I stand ready to support him, and interim Non-Executive Chairman Kent Kresa, in every way possible.
I also want to extend my sincerest thanks to everyone who supported GM and me during my time as CEO. I deeply appreciate the excellent counsel and commitment of the GM Board and the strong support of our many partners including our terrific dealers, suppliers, and community leaders. I am grateful as well to the union leaders with whom I have had the chance to work closely to implement numerous tough but necessary restructuring agreements.
Most important of all I want to express my deepest appreciation to the extraordinary team of GM employees around the world. You have been a tremendous source of inspiration and pride to me, and I will be forever grateful for the courage and commitment you have shown as we have confronted the unprecedented challenges of the past few years. GM is a great company with a storied history. Ignore the doubters because I know it is also a company with a great future.
http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f...-gm-ceo-77255/
That announcement didn't take very long. Is Fritz more worthy of the position than Rick?
Why aren't I feeling all excited over the news?
Last edited by SSbaby; Mar 30, 2009 at 04:45 AM.
Banned
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 213
You understand that those are people - and not the government - right?
"We've got the government taxing and transferring the money to a private company to exist, and deciding who the management will be. I'm not sure what you think socialism is, if not this."
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,449
From: Bentonville, AR
Ding! Ding! Ding! The statement above, plus the fact that they are begging for money to stay alive is MORE than reason enough for why Wagoner AND the board have to go.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,449
From: Bentonville, AR
As for the they needed a "fall guy" statments, it would be one thing if Wagoner was at the helm for one year and this was getting pinned on him. He has had almost a decade as CEO to fix things, and this is what we got??!!?!?
Honestly, I HATE that we're bailing out/loaning these companies money (GM included). However, I understand that its a neccessary evil. With that said, the poor leaders that got these companies to where they are today need to be ushered out, and replaced with those that are a bit more competent.
West South Central Moderator
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,371
From: Kilgore TX 75662
wait, instead of that smiley, how about this one? 
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
I'm asking you what makes the government worse than the entrepreneurs, in your view, given that the aforementioned all tried to overturn GM's then current board... but only the govt has succeeded where the others have previously failed?
As I said before, socialism will be characterized by the influence the government exercises on GM's product decisions (i.e. GM becomes a maker of small, fuel efficient cars only). Merely asking the current CEO to stand down as part of GM's restructure is not a socialist ideal. Whichever way you look at it, it's just business in the context of GM's restructure.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
Would you rather have Japanese colonialism? We need to keep American heavy industry, it is vital to being a first world country. Winning WWII wouldn't have been possible if it wasn't for the auto industry. You think the Chinese are going to help us build heavy equipment in the next big war? not likely.
We are not socialist yet, corporatism is our problem, we have sold our souls to a lot of foreign corporations. Even the foreign auto companies that are building cars here wouldn't be doing it if it wasn't for huge US tax payer subsides.
We are not socialist yet, corporatism is our problem, we have sold our souls to a lot of foreign corporations. Even the foreign auto companies that are building cars here wouldn't be doing it if it wasn't for huge US tax payer subsides.
Thread Starter
Prominent Member
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 2,282
So the automobile sales market collapsing from 17M units to just over 9M units didn't have any effect on the stock price?!?
Would we even be discussing this problem had this not happened? I know GM was bleeding money, but their product has turned around and things were in place to run the company better.
Let's not forget the ALL car manufacturer's are in dire straights and most have asked for government assistance.....it's not like GM and Chrysler are alone in this depression.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
There's no doubt in my mind that this was purely a political move. The current administration has been out for CEO blood since the moment they took residence in the White House. Not saying I loved the job Wagoner did, but the timing of this speaks volumes.
Ultimately I think Branden described my fears to a tee - once loans start flowing again and the industry picks back up, will GM be allowed to build the kinds of cars their consumers want or will it be used as a tool for environmental policy? Now I can't see GM being forced to build nothing but CAFE-positive cars but you never know....
Ultimately I think Branden described my fears to a tee - once loans start flowing again and the industry picks back up, will GM be allowed to build the kinds of cars their consumers want or will it be used as a tool for environmental policy? Now I can't see GM being forced to build nothing but CAFE-positive cars but you never know....
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,958
From: Kansas City, MO
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 176
From: Cleveland, OH
i'm not surprised at this news. I do disagree on principle to the government mandating who retains there jobs. They should have a say when tax payer money is used but i'm uncomfortable with those goofs getting more power and control. They can barely run themselves and honestly can't run GM any better.
He did have many years at the helm and should foot some responsibility. That i don't have any reservation about.
He did have many years at the helm and should foot some responsibility. That i don't have any reservation about.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 669
From: Arcadia, OK
"GM Inside News reports that, possibly as a move to prod bondholders, the Obama administration and the Auto Task Force will announce on Monday a deadline for GM and Chrysler to have their stakeholder agreements in order. If they have not met the terms of the loans after that new, hard deadline, they'll be put into a pre-packaged, government-backed Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
It goes on to say that if GM is placed into Chapter 11 then the government and the UAW would have the most voting power. The government's loans are asset-backed, and although the UAW VEBA obligation debt is unsecured, it forms 60% of GM's total unsecured debt. Bondholders would, in turn, get something close to bupkis, and it is hoped that the thought of "zero return" will earn more concessions."
It goes on to say that if GM is placed into Chapter 11 then the government and the UAW would have the most voting power. The government's loans are asset-backed, and although the UAW VEBA obligation debt is unsecured, it forms 60% of GM's total unsecured debt. Bondholders would, in turn, get something close to bupkis, and it is hoped that the thought of "zero return" will earn more concessions."
