That article doesn't say anything that refutes what El duce said.

 

It does.

The source, who was not cleared to speak with the media and would not be identified, said the U.S. government would pay for the assets by assuming the automaker's $6 billion of secured debt and forgiving the bulk of the $15.4 billion of emergency loans that the U.S. Treasury has provided to GM.


Secured debt was paid back.

 

So all secured debt holders were paid back in full by the US government?

 

No.

 

I'm still lost here. Can somebody provide me with some details one way or another?

 

Here's the last good thread on the topic: https://www.camaroz28.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=696503

Which contains the all important ACTUAL test of the judges ruling http://www.scribd.com/doc/17123143/J...-GMs-Sale-Plan

You decide for yourself if it was a sub-rosa reorg

 

Post #64 pretty much is the conclusion.

 

Quick question - Is it OK to discuss the timing of the IPO vis-a-vis the upcoming November elections?

 

Do so without mentioning (or implying) any specific parties or politicians, and just generally avoid anything that would stir up a political argument, and you're fine.

To be honest, I don't see what more you could say about it without making trouble, but feel free to try within the above guidelines.

 

GM always said the IPO would be mid to late 2010. Tying it to the election is conspiracy theory and basically just trying to make something political that is really not.

The only thing I really see political is that GM wants to get back out on its own ASAP and out from underneath the stigma of being 61% owned by the US Treasury. Also, there are limits on executive pay while the Treasury owns the majority share. I imagine that a lot of the executives would like a bigger pay check and thus can't wait for this IPO. Being able to pay more also helps GM hire better people (in theory).

 

Any potential investors in the IPO will know what happened last time. The shareholders didn't even get so much as a reacharound, they were simply screwed.
The out of control union on the other hand was bailed out and saved. And yes, this was ALL politics. To deny that is to deny the truth.

 

There have been many articles that stated the "pressure was on" GM to go public before Election Day. One of them was posted here not too long ago.

How can I say this without the post being edited/removed.....

If you don't think that certain people are looking for SOMETHING to point to that was controversial, but ultimately could be deemed "successful" before "those" people are up for re-hiring......

.........

 

There's an obvious connection between a successful IPO and public perception of the party in power. There's no way to know definitively that said connection is deliberate. That is about as far as we can safely take this conversation.

Back to the IPO itself, please.

 

You shouldn't believe 90% of the stuff you see in the media.

 

Maybe in Michigan, but in the rest of the country I just don't see people picking their congressman based on the GM IPO being in 2010 or 2011

Even in Michigan, I think a lot of people are happy that GM was saved and that is what matters period. They don't care if the IPO is 2010, 2011, or 2015 as long as those jobs are still around and GM is still making cars and trucks. The rest of the public has bigger things to worry about, and could care less about what is going on at GM. Heck, I bet most Americans don't even know if their car is FWD or RWD. Bottom line, I don't see an October IPO date winning or losing anyone votes.