GM. Chrysler need more money

Washington Times:

Congressional overseers and many analysts are skeptical about the post-bailout prospects of success for General Motors Corp. and Chrysler Group LLC, and some say they will need to raise more cash as early as next year.

Observers see little chance of another taxpayer bailout given the opposition to providing the automakers with $75 billion this spring and the administration's statements that it does not intend to commit more money to the sector.

But that doesn't mean they won't need greater funding — and the capital markets may be no more receptive than the government, especially given the risk of "political interference," as a congressional oversight panel put it.

Indicating its own concern for GM and Chrysler's sales, the administration said last week it is in talks to provide a third bailout to GMAC Financial Services, GM's former finance unit now 35 percent owned by the government. The lender is a huge source of auto loans, and its failure could decimate sales at the two automakers.

The company, scorched by subprime home loans and struggling with impaired loans to Chrysler dealers, has already received $12.5 billion in aid and might receive up to $5.8 billion more — possibly making the government the majority owner of another major corporation.

GMAC was unable to raise the necessary funds from the private markets. Taxpayers already own nearly 61 percent of GM, 35 percent of GMAC and 8 percent of Chrysler.

GM chief executive Fritz Henderson told reporters last week that the company has received sufficient funding and will not ask the government for more.

Although their costs have been reduced dramatically, the viability of GM and Chrysler depends on a rebound in sales and healthy market share.

The first is theoretical, and the last is questionable.

...

Ford Motor Co. and Asian automakers, especially South Korean companies, will gain significant market share at the expense of GM and Chrysler, Mr. Murphy projects.

...

After the way GM and Chrysler screwed their "most secured" creditors, I think they will be hard pressed to find lenders unless the unions want to pony up some funds. Besides their other problems, I think there is market resistance because of the bailouts. In other words the bailouts were not only a political problem, they are also a marketing problem. GM is still struggling even with a "money back" guarantee for the first 60 days. Of course any car that can't go 60 days without a screw up would be pretty bad, but then in the 70s they made some that failed that test.

With the continued viability problems investors are going to shun these companies and those investing in autos will too. Locally it looks like Ford is in the best shape, and Toyota is also doing OK. The GM and Chrysler dealers look like they are struggling.

Ford has announced profits of $997 million for the third quarter. It has substantial cash reserves and is in good position to post a profit for the year. Which company would you rather have a warranty with?