Printable View
No, that's not true.Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUST...7?pageNumber=2
Quote:
The U.S. Treasury will remain GM's largest shareholder for now. U.S. officials have said unloading the entire stake is likely to take several years.
The stock price will need to rise by 47 percent to $48.58 -- about what it costs to fill the gasoline tank of a 2010 Chevy Malibu LS 4-door sedan -- for the U.S. government to break even on its follow-on stock sales.
No they didn't. They raised $20.1 Billion. Well short of the total bailout.Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
in case you don't believe me...http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AB43H20101117
Not very likely!Quote:
The stock price will need to rise by 47 percent to $48.58 -- about what it costs to fill the gasoline tank of a 2010 Chevy Malibu LS 4-door sedan -- for the U.S. government to break even on its follow-on stock sales.
Actually I have. But not here as this is a INDY CAR FORUM!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoop-98
EXACTLY!! So please take your misguided and uninformed philosophy of GM's "obligation" to you to a political forum. I don't think anybody here wants to hear your sob story.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
Obviously, you stopped reading at the first sentence in my post.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Gary
It would appear you also stopped reading at the first sentence of my post.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
In the second sentence, I said I had told the government to hold on to my share so anthony could get paid first and maybe he'd stop bitchin'.
Gary
"They raised $20.1 Billion"
The most GM will be investing in their IndyCar program is 0.2% of that amount. Could be closer to 0.1%.
Do you think GM spends more on U.S. marketing than Nissan? In the recession year of 2009, Nissan invested close to $700M on that expense. GM just elected to add a $20-$40M marketing expense on IndyCar. It will sell cars.
Gary gets his money back in six months, when the remaining GM shares are approved for public trade. If the economy and the sound guidance of GM continues to follow recent trends, the taxpayers will be refunded in full. I presume the Treasury keeps the excess if the share price commands it.
If there was a checkbox asking me to donate 0.1% of my taxes to fund some entertaining research project that created jobs and prevented a massive private sector collapse, I'd have enough reasons to sign up.
Correct, the Treasury does stand to make tons of money off this and the other bailouts. But the thing that gets me is that all the Feds did was print more money and increase the deficit. Not a single tax payer has paid a dollar more to fund the bailouts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Enjun Pullr
If it can be separated from one person's obsession, this really does put GM in a good position in terms of marketing awareness and correlation to their product. That is EXACTLY why Lotus is getting involved, to raise their brand awareness. Some (Someone actually) would have you believe that they must pay back their debt BEFORE they grow their company. Apparently oblivious to the fact a company must profit before it can repay debts. This person apparently believes that is possible without marketing and advertising.
Cheers, that's the way the picture looked to me. If I'm not mistaken, the auto manufacturer subsidies found consensus across the political and financial spectrums.
Diminished marketing investment and declining sales leaves us all to watch the money disappear. Then the jobs.
Geez Google is failing me, it can't seem to find all those posts, just keeps finding your Indycar complaints about GM :)Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Poor dude, next somebody is going to start a countdown.
Anthony, you get major props from me of you are in fact sponsoring Rally Car. That is a luminous display to watch. ;}
Naw no countdowns here, just my lil BS meter pegged. We have wandered far and wide, I think in my opinion, this news has been ok to good, but my socks stayed attached.Quote:
Originally Posted by Enjun Pullr
There is some contention here about people who love to pp in Indycar bowls of cereal, and some genuine concerned fans IMO.
Only Anthony would be on my list of people who are entirely disingenuous and slam every INDY car move. Others like to damn with faint praise or concern much as "Indycool" posted about CART/CC.
Of course, all we are saying here (and for certain all I am posting) are our opinions.
your mileage may vary (but I did get a few things right by picking the most obvious solutions right EP-JT :) )
BTW Split 15 years, reunion 4, when will we stop looking for the remedy to burning Atlanta or the South to rise again?. Could it be 2012, or how many years did the last Japanese soldier hold out. (If Drunkchickwithnopantson could post anywhere I would put him as that last soldier, but he suffered enough with MPH stock!).
Hoop
Yep, and you got props from me for advocating the solution. Obviously I shouldn't have listened to all the pining about how it could not be afforded.
Or aChevy'd, or aLotused.
Well I guess we just have accept the fact that I don't condone the use of OUR TAX DOLLARS to support a private enterprise and most of you have no problem with it.
Anthony, I don't think it's quite as simple as you make it. Primarily because, we are (at least most of us) IndyCar fans. So for the government to allocate some of its GM advertising money to IndyCar racing, while inherently a possible misuse of tax-dollars, I am an IndyCar fan, so I don't dislike this idea. If the Government said hey, AnthonyVOP we're going to take .001% of our taxes and give them to South Florida Motorsports report to possibly generate some awareness and income for our GM car dealerships in South Florida, I highly doubt you would be complaining or not accept a generous offer. As an IndyCar fan and also a libertarian, I am certainly against the wasteful use of government funds, but I do not find this usage wasteful (as it has marketing possibilities for the GM brand), and secondly I like IndyCar so I support a small chunk of my change going to it. I'm completely for the elimination of funds going to NPR, NEA, PBS, etc. So my bias is that I am ok with govt funds going to racing, and against it going to liberal news/arts organizations. Everyone has a bias and i don't think there's anything inherently wrong with that unless you claim to be a fair and balanced leader.
Is inaccurate as has been explained to you about 8 times. Why don't you get it?Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Anthony, with all due respect, GM dollars in ALMS have been going on for years since the bailout. Since google can't find where you have mounted the campaign against this as you have in the case of Indycar could you please point me to your ALMS Chevy outrage if it exists? I must say, I would be less than honest if I didn't say I do not believe you and in my opinion you are far from honest on this issue. However, I would welcome you pointing out the errors of my beliefs, until then I think you are being untruthful, prove me wrong please? Demonstrate how your protest against GM dollars in ALMS were equal or similar to your write your congressman requests for Indycar?Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Thanks
rh
All I know is racing is advertising and brand building. If Tony wants to see the government out of GM, the only way this happens if GM is healthy and making money. To do so, they must advertise, and that means racing.
Tony, really, if you understand business, you also understand the second GM acts like the government is in control, they are dead meat. If Obama had his way, they wouldn't be in racing either, and they would be drowning in red ink in 2012 when the GOP wins the election.
Be thankful they are continuing on as normal....it is working. GM is already starting to see black ink on the ledgers....
I wonder what he thinks about the RBS sponsorship of Williams F1? Don't recall seeing tirades against that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoop-98
With an improving economy and a brand portfolio which has been cleaned up (along with the balance sheet), GM as a $50 stock is not at all unlikely - depending on ones time horizon. Right now GM is making about $3000/car in profits, while Ford is making about $2700. At current profit levels, if the market assigned the same P/E ratio to GM as Ford, it would be about a $40 stock. At the same P/E ratio as Tata Motors, it would be a $79 stock! Joe Phillippi of AutoTrends has a 12 month price target of $45 on GM... assuming management continues to follow the plan and deliver desired products at competitive prices.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
I went heavy for Ford and Tata last year, so I have no appetite for GM - too many eggs in one basket seldom works out well... and those two have been homeruns thus far. But as automotive stocks go, I wouldn't be shocked to see GM at or around $50 in the next couple of years... depending on how Akerson and his team execute and where the economy is. Right now we're still building cars at a rate barely above the attrition rate, so there's certainly room for growth. But the FACT is, the government had nothing to do with GM's decision to enter Indy car racing, or remain in NASCAR, ALMS, Grand Am or any other series. I'm not aware of anyone in the government signing off on this decision, any more than they've signed off on which suppliers GM uses or which plants build which cars.
If people want to complain about taxpayer funds being (directly) used to fund racing endeavors, that's fine... but they need to start with the Army and National Guard programs that run in several different series. But like so many other issues and topics related to politics we see these days, people typically just piss & moan to piss & moan. :dozey: