GM Repaid TARP Loans With TARP Money
04-23-2010, 01:36 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Fargo, ND
Posts: 161
04-23-2010, 03:17 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: South Bend , IN
Posts: 2,801
I dont get why everyone is making such a huge deal( not necessarily on here , but definately elsewhere ) . If it was paid with tarp funds , then they jus gave the government the money back . If I borrow a $1000 from my mom and never use it , then give it back , I still technically repaid her . I think they dis-tastefully chose to claim the loan paid in full , just because they re-paid the direct cash loans, because its misleading and technically incorrect . Yes that portion was paid in full , but creates confusion with many many folks dont understand how the whole bailout thing worked .
04-23-2010, 04:21 PM
#6
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 9,484
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this.
If I take out a home equity loan in order to do some renovation, and I end up not spending it all, can I not use what's left to pay down the loan?
Of course I can.
People who are getting up in arms about this are either parroting stuff other people say without thinking, or they're trying to make trouble where there is none.
If I take out a home equity loan in order to do some renovation, and I end up not spending it all, can I not use what's left to pay down the loan?
Of course I can.
People who are getting up in arms about this are either parroting stuff other people say without thinking, or they're trying to make trouble where there is none.
04-23-2010, 05:10 PM
#9
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 9,484
The act of failure here was committed by the senator who is trying to make GM look bad when they haven't done anything wrong.
04-23-2010, 05:20 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: South Bend , IN
Posts: 2,801
They announced it to a mostly un-informed world , so intead of being viewed in a positive light like it should have, its viewed as BS . By uniformed , I mean most people view the bailout as they got ALL the money in cash .
04-24-2010, 04:49 PM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Elgin,SC
Posts: 604
Threxx technically they don't owe anything more to the government.
They paid the loan part of the deal back. The rest of the money that was given to them was in exchange for equity, or basically stocks.
Time will tell if the stocks are worth the money the government "paid" for them.
They paid the loan part of the deal back. The rest of the money that was given to them was in exchange for equity, or basically stocks.
Time will tell if the stocks are worth the money the government "paid" for them.
04-24-2010, 11:27 PM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Memphis
Posts: 4,338
Threxx technically they don't owe anything more to the government.
They paid the loan part of the deal back. The rest of the money that was given to them was in exchange for equity, or basically stocks.
Time will tell if the stocks are worth the money the government "paid" for them.
They paid the loan part of the deal back. The rest of the money that was given to them was in exchange for equity, or basically stocks.
Time will tell if the stocks are worth the money the government "paid" for them.
Or in other words the government sort of paid themselves back.
This is probably over simplifying it but I'm trying to put this into real world terms. I'm imagining if I had a friend whose business was struggling so I loan him (or technically his business) 10 grand of my own money to allow him to keep afloat, and then a few weeks later I decide to invest 50 grand of my own money to buy half of his business.
I guess the question is when I payed 50 grand for half his business, was that 10 grand of debt considered when his business was valued? In other words if he didn't owe me that 10 grand would buying half his business then have cost me 55 grand?
If so then I guess it all evens out and seems fair.
Although I agree it's stretching the truth a bit to say what they're saying in their ads.
04-25-2010, 12:29 AM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Southern Indiana
Posts: 940
OK so basically GM paid the government's loan money back with the government's investment money.
Or in other words the government sort of paid themselves back.
This is probably over simplifying it but I'm trying to put this into real world terms. I'm imagining if I had a friend whose business was struggling so I loan him (or technically his business) 10 grand of my own money to allow him to keep afloat, and then a few weeks later I decide to invest 50 grand of my own money to buy half of his business.
I guess the question is when I payed 50 grand for half his business, was that 10 grand of debt considered when his business was valued? In other words if he didn't owe me that 10 grand would buying half his business then have cost me 55 grand?
If so then I guess it all evens out and seems fair.
Although I agree it's stretching the truth a bit to say what they're saying in their ads.
Or in other words the government sort of paid themselves back.
This is probably over simplifying it but I'm trying to put this into real world terms. I'm imagining if I had a friend whose business was struggling so I loan him (or technically his business) 10 grand of my own money to allow him to keep afloat, and then a few weeks later I decide to invest 50 grand of my own money to buy half of his business.
I guess the question is when I payed 50 grand for half his business, was that 10 grand of debt considered when his business was valued? In other words if he didn't owe me that 10 grand would buying half his business then have cost me 55 grand?
If so then I guess it all evens out and seems fair.
Although I agree it's stretching the truth a bit to say what they're saying in their ads.
Of course it's now the "company's" money so I really don't know why people would be up in arms over this?
04-25-2010, 01:01 AM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Memphis
Posts: 4,338
In your example it would be like using the 50 grand you gave him to buy part of the business in order to pay back the 10 grand loan you gave him. He's repaying you with you own money in a sense.
Of course it's now the "company's" money so I really don't know why people would be up in arms over this?
Of course it's now the "company's" money so I really don't know why people would be up in arms over this?
But it would be dumb and deceitful of him to proudly proclaim he'd paid off his business loans.