Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Honda Cars / December 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

S.& P. Cuts G.M. Rating to Lowest in 52 Years

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Sparky Spartacus - 17 Dec 2005 18:08 GMT
Just an FYI to the group.

  -----------------------------------------------------------

December 13, 2005

S.& P. Cuts G.M. Rating to Lowest in 52 Years

By MICHELINE MAYNARD

DETROIT, Dec. 12 - Standard & Poor's Ratings Services cut its rating on
General Motors' debt two more notches into junk status on Monday,
putting the automaker at the lowest level in the 52 years that S.& P.
has been assessing its creditworthiness.

And if G.M.'s financial position continues to deteriorate, Scott
Sprinzen, an automobile analyst for Standard & Poor's, said, it is "not
far-fetched" that G.M. may ultimately be forced to seek bankruptcy
protection to restructure its debt and its labor contracts.

G.M., the world's biggest auto company, reiterated Monday that it had no
intention of seeking Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. A G.M. spokesman,
Jerry Dubrowski, said G.M. has "an aggressive and well-thought-out
strategy to turn around our North American business," which has lost
more than $4 billion this year.

Nonetheless, the S.& P. ratings cut and bankruptcy warning threw fuel on
the smoldering speculation that G.M. would be forced to seek court
protection. Although other industry analysts have warned that the
possibility exists, the debt-rating agency is privy to confidential G.M.
information, which it uses to assess the company's risk of default.

The ratings agency, in a harshly worded report, cut its rating on G.M.'s
corporate debt to B, from BB-, with negative implications, and reduced
its rating on G.M.'s short-term debt to B3 from B2. It said its outlook
for G.M.'s debt was negative, meaning it could face another downgrade in
the next two years, but it removed both types of debt from CreditWatch,
meaning another cut was not imminent.

The B rating is the lowest since 1953, when S.& P. gave its first rating
of AAA to the company's debt. The downgrade marks the third ratings cut
in the last year for G.M., and its second descent into speculative
grade. The rating is below those G.M. held during its fiscal crisis in
the early 1990's.

By contrast, G.M. held an investment grade rating of A or higher from
1995 through 2001, when it basked in strong sales of profitable sport
utility vehicles and pickup trucks. And it held the AAA rating from the
1950's through the early 1980's.

This year, however, G.M. has been hit by a deep financial crisis. It
lost money in four of the last five quarters, and through November, its
market share in the United States was 26.2 percent, down 1.3 points from
27.5 percent a year ago.

Despite all that, its chief executive, Rick Wagoner, has steadfastly
rejected speculation that G.M. may have to join its biggest parts
supplier, the Delphi Corporation, in seeking bankruptcy protection.

Mr. Wagoner points to the $19 billion in cash that G.M. has on hand, and
its array of global assets that can be sold to raise cash.

Mr. Sprinzen said of a bankruptcy filing, "At this juncture, it's our
feeling that this isn't a far-fetched conclusion, if the deterioration
we've seen over the past few quarters is continuing."

Mr. Dubrowski at G.M. said the company was making some progress in its
turnaround efforts, noting that G.M. had reached agreement with the
United Automobile Workers union on historic, though modest, savings on
its annual health care costs. He added that G.M.'s plan was "not a
short-term strategy."

But Robert Schultz, an S.& P. credit analyst, said the agency was
pessimistic that the turnaround plan would work, adding that the agency
expected G.M. might lose $5 billion in North America this year and post
a $3 billion corporate net loss for 2005.

"This year has witnessed a stunning collapse of G.M.'s financial
performance," Mr. Schultz said in the report issued Monday. Although S.&
P. does not consider G.M. to be at any more danger of a Chapter 11
filing than any other company with a B rating, Mr. Schultz said, "We
felt we needed to spell it out."

S.& P. did not cut its ratings on General Motors Acceptance Corporation,
which also are in speculative grade, but it kept the financing company
on CreditWatch, meaning that a downgrade was likely.

On Monday, the S.& P. analysts said that they were keeping a close eye
on G.M.'s efforts to sell a controlling interest in the unit. Depending
on the buyer, and the amount of time that any deal could take to
conclude, they said another ratings cut could occur.

S.& P. first cut G.M.'s corporate rating into junk on May 9, reflecting
fears about the company's financial outlook, and the impact that the
bankruptcy filing at Delphi would have on G.M., which spun off the parts
supplier in 1999.

Delphi sought Chapter 11 protection in October, after failing to reach
an agreement with G.M. on an assistance package. G.M. estimated the
impact of a Delphi bankruptcy could be up to $12 billion, depending on
the costs it may incur for pension and health care coverage for Delphi
workers eligible to return to G.M. The companies recently accelerated
their negotiations on a bailout plan.

The Delphi bankruptcy is widely seen by analysts as the first move that
could set off a dominolike wave of auto industry restructurings. John
Casesa, an analyst with Merrill Lynch, said Monday that the cutbacks
were long overdue.

"Detroit has waited so long to address these deep-rooted fundamental
problems that a massive restructuring, unlike anything the industry has
seen before, is inevitable," Mr. Casesa said.

He added, "This is really about taking apart and reassembling the
domestic auto industry."

Jeremy W. Peters contributed reporting for this article.

    * Copyright 2005The New York Times Company

  ---------------------------------------------------------

IIRC GM, whose current market share is 26.2%, used to sell > half the
new cars & trucks in the US (maybe North America?).
Elle - 17 Dec 2005 19:03 GMT
Time Magazine in its Dec. 5th issue had a good overview of
GM's woes. It mentioned Honda and Toyota. Much of GM's
financial problems were said to be due to (1) health care
and (2) pensioned GM retirees, but it also emphasized its
design decisions, too. E.g. not enough emphasis on hybrids
and more fuel conservative vehicles earlier.

Honda and Toyota have much younger workers employed.

"At GM, each U.S. worker's production has to support 2.5
retirees, adding an average of $2,200 in legacy costs to the
price of a vehicle, a steep disadvantage vs. foreign
manufacturers."

http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,1134747,00.
html

The above link is not the full article. IIRC, the full
article mentioned that Honda paid something like $300 per
car per employee for health care. GM pays $1500, which I
think covers retirees and their current, older workforce.

The hard copy article had the market share of Honda, Toyota,
and GM in it. I think you're right, SS: The article quoted
around 50% as being the former market share of GM.

> Just an FYI to the group.
>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> half the
> new cars & trucks in the US (maybe North America?).
SoCalMike - 17 Dec 2005 21:59 GMT
> The above link is not the full article. IIRC, the full
> article mentioned that Honda paid something like $300 per
> car per employee for health care. GM pays $1500, which I
> think covers retirees and their current, older workforce.

not much to add, other than nationalized health care might help level
the playing field a bit. it wont stop crappy designs and badge
engineering, though.

side note- saw a lincoln somethingorother. badge-engineered ford 500.
they wanted $1500 "additional dealer markup" for that turd. c'mon!
Chuck - 18 Dec 2005 04:26 GMT
>> The above link is not the full article. IIRC, the full
>> article mentioned that Honda paid something like $300 per
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> side note- saw a lincoln somethingorother. badge-engineered ford 500.
> they wanted $1500 "additional dealer markup" for that turd. c'mon!

If you think their autos are bad, their football team is much worse and
stinks worse than a turd.
SoCalMike - 17 Dec 2005 20:22 GMT
> S.& P. Cuts G.M. Rating to Lowest in 52 Years

nothing new. ford isnt doing too hot either, but at least i can see ford
getting back out of the hole. doesnt hurt that their stock is only
$8/share, either. GM is $21.
High Tech Misfit - 17 Dec 2005 21:26 GMT
> nothing new. ford isnt doing too hot either, but at least i can see ford
> getting back out of the hole. doesnt hurt that their stock is only
> $8/share, either. GM is $21.

I heard recently that Ford is considering significant plant closures and
job cuts along the lines of what GM announced recently.

It's surprising to not see Crapsler in the same boat, especially
considering they were in deep sh.t a quarter-century ago.
SoCalMike - 18 Dec 2005 02:13 GMT
>> nothing new. ford isnt doing too hot either, but at least i can see ford
>> getting back out of the hole. doesnt hurt that their stock is only
>> $8/share, either. GM is $21.
>
> I heard recently that Ford is considering significant plant closures and
> job cuts along the lines of what GM announced recently.

yup. they still have a pretty decent worldwide presence, the F series
truck line, "world cars" like the focus, a decent relationship with
mazda, and ownership of volvo and jaguar- both of which have benefited
from having "entry level" models. they just need to work on the badge
engineering some more, and maybe drop mercury as a brand.

> It's surprising to not see Crapsler in the same boat, especially
> considering they were in deep sh.t a quarter-century ago.

i never coulda seen their cartoonish 300 series cars doing as well as
they are. but theyre using MB technology, replaced the ram van with the
high-roofed freightliner that gets excellent mileage. got rid of
plymouth, and concentrated their truck sales on the 4-door, with a 2
door base model.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.