GM selling at a loss should tell you something

GM selling at a loss should tell you something http://dailycaller.com/2010/11/18/gm-selling-at-a-loss-should-tell-you-something /
When a government sells stock in a company, it is usually trying to
maximize short-term revenue. Therefore, the share price is normally pegged at what the market will bear. If the valuation of the total stock offering is less than the value of the company (or a portion thereof) being sold, something is amiss. That is certainly the case with the initial public offering of GM stock sold to investors on November 17. The stock price is telling us something the federal government doesn’t want to admit, all the rhetoric about the supposed success of the GM bailout notwithstanding.
Take, for instance, the last IPO I was involved in, the flotation in 1996 on the London Stock Exchange of RailTrack, the company that owned the infrastructure of the formerly nationalized British Rail. The government of Prime Minister John Major wanted to raise around £2.5 billion in the privatization. However, the plan quickly unraveled.
Major’s government was on its last legs, as it seemed likely to lose the election of 1997. Moreover, spokesmen for the Labour Party — which did go on to win — started making noises about renationalizing the company and toughening regulations on the railroad industry. This scared investors and the government was forced to discount the offering, which sold at a measly 380p per share, ultimately raising less than £2 billion. However, the share price later rose quickly to reflect the market’s true valuation of the company, and investors reaped the benefits while the government reflected on what might have been.
If the federal government wanted to recoup its investment in GM, then the GM stock price should be much higher than the $33 initial price. In order to break even, as the Deal Journal reports, the stock price would have to rise to around $50 per share. So why is the Treasury Department selling off the company at a loss?
First, the government is what is known as a “motivated seller.” By offering such a low stock price, the administration is essentially admitting that it has no place in running an auto company. While GM’s financial position is much better than it was when it should have gone bankrupt, the company’s finances are not great. A quick crunch of any of the numbers in the GM prospectus shows the company is not the healthy organization the politicos would have you believe. They have done a poor job running the company, even if they did save it from going under by ignoring the law and throwing billions of dollars at it. The sale prospectus even admits “our (that is, the government’s) disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting are currently not effective.” Hardly a ringing endorsement!
Second, they’re not the only ones in the game. The unusual bankruptcy settlement for GM granted a significant portion of the company to the United Auto Workers. The union is in this game too, even though it has no investment to recoup. The UAW is selling around 18 million shares, so it stands to gain about $500 million for its pension fund — at taxpayers’ expense.
Finally, just as with RailTrack, there is considerable political risk involved. If the feds could nationalize GM once, they can do it again. The company admits in its prospectus that “The UST [U.S. Treasury] (or its designee) will continue to own a substantial interest in us following this offering, and its interests may differ from those of our other stockholders.” It suggests that government might interfere in “The selection, tenure and compensation of our management; our business strategy and product offerings; our relationship with our employees, unions and other constituencies; and our financing activities, including the issuance of debt and equity securities.” Furthermore, the government has asserted sovereign immunity, meaning that the IPO is not subject to anti-fraud laws.
This might sound familiar to RailTrack investors. The Labour government of Tony Blair eventually forcibly bought out RailTrack stockholders at a price of around 250p — a loss of about 35 percent from the heavily discounted price at which the stock initially traded. By selling GM stock at a loss, the federal government is giving us fair warning, and admitting the bailouts’ enormous cost to the taxpayer.
Iain Murray is Vice President for Strategy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. This column is not intended to offer investment advice on the GMO IPO being offered on the back of taxpayers, car dealership workers, and pension funds.
--
"I have tried to live my life so that my family would love me and my
friends respect me. The others can do whatever they please."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Unfortunately no rules govern the government. They start the presses and devalue the dollar. It was a mistake to take over GM and giving away the stocks is neither here nor there. GM is still a dead duck and it is only a matter of time before it either dies again or the government needs to print more dollars to save it again. The stocks are very risky investment. They may seem to be cheap but they may also just be worthless which in the long run is more likely.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I'm not sure "dead duck" or the "safety" of another government bailout is true.
I think GM's failure was the result of colossal poor management for the past 30 years. They were arrogant. They were oblivious to the competition. They used "quality" as a marketing phrase while they allowed dangerous POS to be sold to the public. They allowed the UAW to create a country club "job bank" for their members.
I was not a supporter of Obama's rescue of GM but I realize the scope of the then emerging recession could not allow a company that employed tens of thousands of (UAW) workers in an industry that employed many times that number in the supply chain to self implode. Also, I also realize the Democrats are beholding to the UAW labor.
GM may indeed fail again but let's hope the incompetent management has been routed and the corporate culture they fostered has been exorcized.
All this said, I for one will NEVER buy another GM product after my experience with an '84 Buick.
wrote:

somethinghttp://dailycaller.com/2010/11/18/gm-selling-at-a-loss-should-tell-yo ...
Unfortunately no rules govern the government. They start the presses and devalue the dollar. It was a mistake to take over GM and giving away the stocks is neither here nor there. GM is still a dead duck and it is only a matter of time before it either dies again or the government needs to print more dollars to save it again. The stocks are very risky investment. They may seem to be cheap but they may also just be worthless which in the long run is more likely.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The problem is that when people are allowed to make mistakes without consequences they repeat them.
If you park in the handicapped zone without a just cause and you do not get fined you may repeat it.
Mismanagement was indeed rampant at GM an it went bankrupt.
New GM is not new and will never learn from former mistakes if they are allowed to continue.
The FED prints more and more money and can buy anything but eventually it will reslt in hyperinflation your childern will pay for.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
JimG wrote:

Chevy Vega and Cavalier and a Buick with a suicidal transmission. Current car is a 2007 Honda Accord EX.

--
"I have tried to live my life so that my family would love me and my
friends respect me. The others can do whatever they please."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Government couldn't afford another round of GM/bank bailouts without shunting the economy.
On 20/11/2010 11:37 PM, JimG wrote:

--
Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when
no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Government knows the Volt is a lemon, and the market is turning down again. Both are bad for Government Motors. That is if you believe they really make money. With AmeriCredit loan quality going down, it is an unrealized bomb shell.
On 20/11/2010 7:57 AM, Jim_Higgins wrote:

http://dailycaller.com/2010/11/18/gm-selling-at-a-loss-should-tell-you-something /
--
Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when
no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.