Yes, and the stock price has risen 50% over the last 12 months. Why doesn't anyone mention that?

Fair enough. The finance industry (the world's second-most-cautious industry, the first being insurance), have not yet decided that GM is on the right track. Are you unwilling to be more forward-looking?

GM will do what they have to do. I don't think it will come to that. Ford didn't have something like GMAC to sell. They have reportedly been trying to sell Aston Martin, Jaguar, and Land Rover, but these are simply not as desirable as a healthy finance company like GMAC.

Which means that the turnaround is happening just in time.

The message that's getting through is that you agree that Wagoner deserves the blame he gets, despite clear evidence to the contrary.

Yes, it's quite normal for the current man in charge to get all of the blame and all of the credit for whatever happens during his tenure. And it's also common knowledge that in many cases, prior circumstances had more to do with it.

I have yet to see you acknowledge that GM's current situation could be the fault of anyone other than Rick Wagoner.

 

It was mentioned (in an earlier post). The reason it isn't being made a big deal of is because it’s still very little recovery compared to where it dropped from.


I think the future for GM and Ford is still questionable, not necessarily just because of the actions or lack thereof of their CEOs but also due to other factors that are completely outside of their control…sometimes luck has a much to do with a company’s turnaround as any specific action they take.

Being overly cautious may be a bad thing…being appropriately cautious is not.


No…it means it’s time for the turnaround…whether the turnaround happens or not is a question that has not yet been answered…see above.


Yes it is normal so why you say that and seem to claim that what’s normal shouldn’t apply to Wagoner (as it does to any other CEO of any other company) strikes me as odd. As I said several posts ago, it may not be fair but it is what it is.


Then you must be one of the ones who is superficial in his reading – I have specifically said …

 

Thanks to god that the internet wasnt around when Chrysler went through this in the 80's with Lee. I think he would of had a heart attack.

Right now Rick is the one in the Captains chair..and this is his ship to pilot. So goes the credit, blame and what nots.
Like Nissan if thier turnaround didn't for a lack of a better word "turn around" then you would see Ghosn's head on a platter and the poster boy of the loss.
Hell if they are projecting 2011 for the turn around to be complete?? WOW then talking about the job hes doing now?? it might look like fools move or genius when it comes time to look back at it like we are doing now with Ghosn.

as you said Time will tell..and I think the fat lady has not sung yet.

Truthfully I think Ford is going to be the one that were going to have to look very close to to see what happens..GM I think is nowhere near that bad off or ever was.

 

Nissan's problems in the late 90's are NOTHING like the problems that GM is facing now. Apples to watermelons. Ghosen should be given credit for what he did there, no doubt. But he didn't have to worry about labor unions, mis-managed suppliers, unfavorable foreign marke import tariffs (like RP has mentioned many times here), and rediculous legacy and health care costs like GM has. There is still quite a gap size wise between GM and Nissan. Wagoner is dealing with a totally different animal here.

 

Different animal...absolutely - there is no question. However, I don't thnk you know the condition Nissan was in. Nissan was a few months, perhaps a year from bankruptcy. I suspect that any odds maker in Vegas would give you better odds on GM's potential for recovery than any would have given Nissan at the time.

However, as I've already said two or three times now, that was not at all the point of the comparison!

The comparison was to the hightlight the fact that whoever is in charge gets the blame or the credit for what happens on their watch...Ghosn got the credit for Nissan's turnaround and Wagoner willl too if he turns GM around and he'll get the blame if he deosn't even given that Wagoner didn't create the problems.

 

so as we see it now ..is it still falling or has the ship started turning??
in two years are we going to be seeing GM bankruptcy in the headlines or we going to see the momentum from what started in 2006 be the wave that will crest in 2010 and beyond?

 

Mr. Nashville our beloved Nissan apologist. Do you remeber the stock market in the late 90's and the ecomomy prior to 9/11/01 (some markets showed a decrease in mid 2000, like the ones I was in!) Well in that boom time almost all businesses had great profits and their stocks rose. The car business was no different I remember GM stock in some variances hitting $125 per share. Ford and DCX showed similar gains. All was good as long as the ecomomy powering the boom stayed bullish. Well I think we all know how that turned out. I won't sit here and tell you that GM and other stocks were over valued, its worth what you are willing to pay. But when even blue chips have gains over 20-40% increases its not sustainable. So why is GM stock worth so much less today than it was in 2000 well the ecomomy has quite a bit to do with that. No domestic carmaker has had stock values like they did in 2000. Is GM any better or worse off then they were 6-7 years ago, its hard to say. They had no shortage of problems then and it didn't matter on the stock price. I remember the same doomsday predictions, pension problems, healthcare concerns, and decreasing market share. I even remember reading that Toyota would overtake GM by 2010 it was funny then but not so any more.
So is that Wagoner's fault well again its all in how you look at it. I don't always blame or award the coach for the loss or win nor do I blame or condem the President for the ecomomy. I don't think Wagoner has done a bad job and I don't think anyone could have done any better with the circumstances GM is in.

I'm glad you bring up Mr. Ghosn because Nissan is a great story to illiustrate my point. Like you mentioned Nissan was as profitable as Toyota a few years back. They are not there now. Is that Ghosn's fault well who knows. Has Nissan recovered yet or was this past period of prosperity simply a market adjustment.
I'd like to think the men at the top have some control of the corporations they run like an oil tanker capt. in a storm but not like driving an F1 car.

 

Maybe, maybe not...I haven't said he's done a bad job with what was handed him...I said the numbers haven't looked good so far...if everybody wants to take that as both a condemnation and a prediction I guess they can but people are reading a hell of a lot more into a simple statement than was intended.

As I've said about six times now, fair or not, right or not, in society at large and especially in the business world the man at the top gets the blame or credit for what happens on his watch. Whether you personally want to blame Wagoner or appologize for him is up to you but that doesn't invalidate my statement.

Just for the record, Nissan's success wasn't a "few years back", it has been on a steady improvement over the past five-six years and it was just last fiscal year (2005) that their profitability exceeded all other car companies including Toyota (Nissan was at 10%, Toyota at 9%).

Nissan probably won't be that high this year since their biggest seller (Altima) has been in decline over the past 12-18 months with the major model redesign just now hitting the streets but there is another four months of sales before the end of the year so, as with Mr. Wagoner, time will tell.

 

Appropriate to what situation? AFAIK you're not the one responsible for setting GM's bond status, or for loaning them money, or anything else that would justtify such extreme caution.

Is it really that hard for you to recognize and acknowledge the signs of change? I readily admit that it's not complete and that there's no guarantee that things will continue on the current track, but any well-informed bystander can see that the captain has ordered full rudder and that the ship is halfway around. (Hmm, might be taking the ship metaphor too far. )

I didn't say it didn't apply. I said he doesn't deserve it. I don't care that the public at large blames him, nor do I care if the public at large gives him credit when all is said and done, assuming a positive outcome.

I could not care less about the opinion of the uninformed masses. I care about the truth. At this point, I think anyone who actually looks at more than the current stock price will see that Wagoner does not deserve the bad rap.

I understand that he will continue to get the bad rap from the public at large until the turnaround is complete (or at least mostly complete). However, I will call out any supposed uninformed news reporter when they make claims such as those made in the article we're discussing.

Apologies; I missed that particular post.

 

I don’t work for Moody or S&P so no; I don’t set GM’s bond rating.

As for the rest of it, financial data, financial data analysis and financial data reporting in the auto industry is precisely what I do for a living and I’ve been doing it for about 26 years now (albeit not all inside the auto industry) - I do have a basis for my “caution” and my caution is reasonable.

Are there good signs at GM? Yes.

Is there still a need for significant caution? Absolutely yes.

Will GM actually turn itself around to profitability in North America again? I’d like to think yes but assuming that is going to be the outcome would be the “extreme” position to take.

 

Aha! The truth comes out.

Now I understand why your point of view is appropriate for you.

I hope that you can also understand why not everyone is so cautious, and why automotive enthusiasts like myself have high hopes for GM and don't like it when you speak so negatively about them.

 

It isn't "new truth"...my profile is there for people to read should they care to do so.

I understand people’s enthusiasm…and as an enthusiast, which I am had have been since I was about 7 years old, I am as hopeful and optimistic as anyone can be.

However, that doesn’t mean than I can or should let my enthusiasm cloud my judgment about any company’s financial status and possible future.

 

Heh... I had never bothered to read your profile. I wonder how many others around here have...
Well, letting enthusiasm cloud your judgement is one thing, but shouldn't the recent successes of GM's latest redesigns bode well for them? Why do so many analysts and columnists ignore the obvious?

 

I wasn't trying to invalidate your statement just point out another way of looking at it. However though your statement is realy only valid to you.

Ok a few years back or last year I just know that Nissan wasn't profiting as much as they did. Correction noted, but point made.

We could have said this in 2002 or 2004 and no matter what happens I'm sure that would still be true in 2007 or 2009. Kidding aside I know GM doens't look good on the books there is no doubting that. Who's fault is it? Blame whomever you want there is no shortage of people to point your finger or calculator at. Our opinons on GM have one difference that I note. Your looking at them from the financial standpoint and thats black and white, or red in GM's case. I'm looking at them from a product standpoint and former employee. Its a constant battle becuase most "bean counters" don't care if GM builds a Camaro or a Cavalier as long as it makes good business sense. (I don't put yourself in that catagory but you know what I mean.) Car companies have to have the balance if not we'd still be driving Model A's, Henry Ford thought this way until the end. Cars are more than just the cost it takes to produce them. So when I look at GM and see the problems I understand that those have been there and will always be there. What I see is new products and GM getting closer in quality to the Asian rivals. I see some bolder moves in design and engineering that I "think" will lead to a better bottom line. I see some attempts to get back to the product led corp. that Alfred P. Sloan built and Harley Earl masterminded. Sure the competiton is more fierce today but I still beleive if you build it they will buy it!