Damaging the Brand

The Big 3 are back on Capitol Hill today, making their case again for access to taxpayer funding.  There are likely to be many ridiculous statements made, but even this crew will have trouble matching George Fisher, G.M.'s leading outside director.  Here's what I read in my local paper yesterday:

Fisher said that GM's 13 outside directors were in agreement with the automaker's chairman, Rick Wagoner, that bankruptcy would ruin the company's reputation.

"We are pretty convinced as to the serious damage to the brand from bankruptcy," he said. "We do not consider it to be a viable approach."

Fisher, the retired chairman of the Eastman Kodak Company, said the GM board would confront the possibility of a bankruptcy filing only if Congress turned down a loan package for GM, the Ford Motor Company and Chrysler.

"We're not going into this thinking we are going to lose," he said. "That would be a disaster. If you think you're going to lose, you will."

But he said that GM, which has lost more than $20 billion this year, could not keep operating without government help.

Let's ignore the obvious question of why a government would want to help keep a company that lost $20 billion this year operating.  Let's instead consider this phrase, "serious damage to the brand from bankruptcy."  I certainly agree that the brand is not helped by filing for bankruptcy.  (Though it is also worth pointing out that it is not helped by begging for money from the government, either.)  But these are side issues, and the damage done to the brand from this episode could be repaired.

I remember the cars that the extended Samwick family (parents plus grandparents) owned in my childhood.  At one point, there were five cars three from Ford, two from GM.  One of those GM cars was a Buick Riviera.  Mr. Fisher, that Buick Riviera, plus the local dealer's inability to service it and stand behind it, is what did serious damage to your brand.  After that, my parents bought a Datsun, and then another Nissan to replace the Ford, and then never another American-made car again.  And their son followed suit.  The damage done to the brand by years of substandard products is something that cannot be repaired so easily.

I suspect that the Samwick family story is not unique.  If it were, then Mr. Fisher's colleagues wouldn't be panhandling the Senate today.  The Senate should take Mr. Fisher at his word, deny the additional loan requests, and let the companies file for bankruptcy.

Too many Detroit dealers

State laws make it nearly impossible for Detroit to remove dealers, thus they have nearly five times as many as more recent entries in the market (such as the Japanese). This is on top of their UAW costs, and adds to the explanation of why Toyota is profitable in the US and Detroit is profitable outside the US.

What after bankruptcy?

I agree with you, but what do you think should happen to the car companies after bankruptcy? GM has no hope whatsoever of surviving Chapter 11. It’s not even clear to me that the private sector could come up with enough cash to keep GM alive until they returned to profitability. And if GM were to somehow find DIP financing, what do you think the interest rate will be? Talk about debt overhang.

Would you support a government bailout in the form of DIP financing (or another form of post-bankruptcy assistance)? I certainly trust a federal bankruptcy judge to do a better job overseeing a GM restructuring more than I trust Congress to do the same. As a bonus, a federal judge would likely adjust union contracts, and penalize GM’s existing debt holders.

Or do you think that GM should simply be liquidated?

GM in Bankruptcy

I was watching some of the hearings yesterday, and the thought that kept going through my mind was that there is some level of costs per vehicle that makes the company viable.  The stakeholders need to get themselves to that level.  If they are not willing to do so, then the alternatives are to use taxpayer funds to make up the difference or to enter liquidation. 

I don't see the justification for using taxpayer funds to prevent liquidation (as I would not in the case of most financial institutions).  The threat of liquidation while in bankruptcy should bring about the relevant concessions.  I don't see why the taxpayer should be more concerned about liquidation than the stakeholders.

new leadership

consider outsourcing CEO function

Senator Toyota and Senator Nissan

While there's plenty of blame to go around, the loudest voices against the loan come from two Senators that have hit the federal tax dollar lottery for years: Shelby (Alabama) and Corker (Tennessee). Their states received $166 and $96 Billion in federal welfare since 1981, while Michigan contributed nearly $200 billion in Federal Tax revenues during that time. The data is at the Tax Foundation web site.

Here's some detail: http://roblawrence.blogspot.com/2008/12/senator-toyota-and-senator-nissa...

What about AIG's brand?

What about AIG's brand? Greenberg vs. current management, why would anyone keep their policies with AIG?