We want the government out, period. We don’t want to be known as Government Motors.
GM Chairman and CEO Ed Whitacre channels his inner Rick “Bankruptcy is not an option” Wagoner in the New York Times, telling the taxpayers who put him in charge of a bailout-rinsed General Motors to get lost. Sure Ed, we’ll all go NSFW ourselves just as soon as we get our $49.5 billion back. Talk about putting the throat-clearing guttural in chutzpah…
Now that GM’s acquisition of the subprime lender AmeriCredit has had 24 hours to sink in, howls of protest are starting to surface. The charge is being led by Senator Chuck Grassley, who has requested a review of the deal from the SIGTARP, saying
If GM has $3.5 billion in cash to buy a financial institution, it seems like it should have paid back taxpayers first. After GM’s experience with GMAC, which left GM seeking a taxpayer bailout, you have to think the company and, in turn, the taxpayers would be better off if GM focused on making cars that people want to buy and stayed clear of repeating its effort to make high-risk car loans.
And though Grassley’s criticism could be read as mere partisan gamesmanship from a leader of “the party of no,” there are a number of very good reasons for opposing the deal.
Ford Motor Company has announced its second-quarter results for 2010, and the company says it earned $2.6b over the last three months on $2.9b in operating profit before special items. In a departure from the typical model for domestic automakers, Ford’s growth was largely driven by improvement in North American results: Ford earned $1.9b in pre-tax operating profits in North America after boosting its Ford brand to the top spot in the American market over the first six months of 2010. Ford earned $31.3b in Q2 revenue, a $4.5b improvement over Q2 2009 (a $7.4b improvement excluding Volvo). Ford’s operating cash flow improved by $2.6b despite ending the quarter with $21.9b in cash, a $3.4b drop since the end of Q1. However, that drop in cash-on-hand was the result of a $3.8b debt reduction, and Ford figures its total automotive liquidity (including all credit facilities) is $25.4b. Automotive debt was reduced by about $7b, to $27.3b, the result of both the UAW Retiree Medical Benefit trust buydown and a $3b repayment of a revolving credit line. The shutdown of Mercury has reportedly cost Ford about $229m so far, and Ford expects that amount to equal slightly under half of the total cost of eliminating the brand.
Ford’s results aren’t very surprising given the fact that it Ford brand outsold all other brands over the first half of 2010, but the healthy profit shows that a rumored dependence on fleet sales wasn’t enough of a factor to weaken Ford’s financial results. Though debt levels remain high and its overseas performance remains weak, Ford has proven once again that it’s the healthiest American automaker… if only in terms of its North American market performance.
Full financial release in PDF format here, Q2 results presentation slides in PDF format here, Ford Credit results in PDF format here
After months of speculation about GM’s re-entry into the subprime lending market, The General has announced a deal in which it will purchase the lender AmeriCredit for $3.5b. Founded in 1992, and managing assets worth $10b, AmeriCredit has been pursued by GM for the last month, according to GM CFO Chris Liddell in the WSJ [sub]. GM paid AmeriCredit stockholders $24.50 per share for a controlling interest in the firm, a 24 percent premium over its $19.70 closing price yesterday. Still, GM insists that acquiring AmeriCredit will have “a minimal impact” on its balance sheet, although no explanation is given as to how. $3.5b is at least ten percent of GM’s cash pile at this point, and it’s not clear if that qualifies it as a “minimal impact” or if GM is using some kind of financial instrument to purchase the firm. AmeriCredit says it will “expand its offerings” to support GM, likely in the area of lease deals, but it will also continue to offer loans to non-GM-brand car deals.
Bloomberg reports that GM has already pulled off one of the ballsiest IPO moves ever, by asking banks bidding to underwrite its IPO to use fees to subsidize the purchase of GM vehicles by its employees. According to the report, a GM document sent to bidding banks solicited
ideas as to how we can use the IPO to reposition GM and its vehicles within the investment community including your firm’s willingness to reinvest any portion of any underwriting fees into the purchase of GM vehicles for your employees and/or company use.
What a week it’s been! Tesla’s stock price is currently sitting just over $16, down from last week’s IPO price of $17. In the meantime, it’s been as high as $29.89 per share. Plenty of analysts figured Tesla’s IPO would be bubble-tastic, but did anyone think the fizz would go out of the EV maker’s stock so soon?
Will the North American market for cars go up 45 percent in the next four years? I’m not convinced. Certainly the momentum hasn’t shown up yet. But this slide is from GM’s “Global Business Conference” which the company is holding in Michigan this week to drum up support for its forthcoming IPO. So… a little over-optimism is hardly surprising. But we’re not the only ones skeptical of GM’s ability to take flight as a public company. Automotive News [sub] reports that
Mirko Mikelic, a fixed income portfolio manager at Fifth Third Bank in Grand Rapids, Michigan, said he expected GM to face grilling about the risks of a return to recession in the United States.
“There’s concern about a double dip out there. That’s probably the biggest thing that’s weighing over GM coming to the market because that’s going to keep (auto sales) down for another year or two,” he said.
Check out the complete presentation in PDF format here, and decide for yourself if The General is worth an investment. The slides after the jump are certainly more convincing…
Far be it from us to tell you to take Jim Cramer’s word as gospel… but he does seem to have Tesla’s IPO figured out. And now that the stock is public (NASDAQ: TSLA), he wants you to run away screaming. We find it difficult to disagree… but feel free to keep an eye on the stock yourself.
A source tells Reuters [UPDATE: Tesla confirms in press release] that Tesla has
sold 13.3 million shares for $17 each, raising about $226 million. It raised the number of shares it hoped to sell by 20 percent. It had planned to sell 11.1 million shares for $14 to $16 each.
That’s more than the “as much as $213m” number floated earlier, but with a recent Toyota deal and an EV-infrastructure bill in congress, Tesla has as much wind at its back as it can ask for. But if investors do get to start trading Tesla stock starting tomorrow, they’ll have a gut check before long. Tesla lost $30m last quarter, and it the second quarter ends on Wednesday. If those numbers show another healthy loss, investors will look away knowing that they’re in a risky, long-term investment. But can a $1.6b market-cap firm really compete in development, design and manufacturing with the giants of the automotive world simply by taking in two times its 2009 revenue in one IPO?
Throughout the debate on Wall Street reform, I have urged members of the Senate to fight the efforts of special interests and their lobbyists to weaken consumer protections. An amendment that the Senate will soon consider would do exactly that, undermining strong consumer protections with a special loophole for auto dealer-lenders. This amendment would carve out a special exemption for these lenders that would allow them to inflate rates, insert hidden fees into the fine print of paperwork, and include expensive add-ons that catch purchasers by surprise. This amendment guts provisions that empower consumers with clear information that allows them to make the financial decisions that work best for them and simply encourages misleading sales tactics that hurt American consumers. Unfortunately, countless families – particularly military families – have been the target of these deceptive practices.
This is what president Obama said just six weeks ago about efforts to exclude car dealership financing from consumer protection measures included in the forthcoming Financial Reform bill. With that bill moving towards Obama’s desk, all that stands in the way of its passage are angry dealers who don’t want to be subject to oversight. And despite the tough talk about standing up to financial interests to pass this reform, it seems Obama has caved to America’s auto dealers.
The WSJ [sub] reports that GM is officially looking outside of its former captive finance arm Ally Financial (formerly GMAC) as it seeks more subprime loan deals to drive sales volume ahead of its IPO. GM execs tell the WSJ that The General could do even better with an in-house finance arm, but that these deals will help. And, according to Experian Automotive’s Melinda Zabritski, GM needs the help because
By not financing [subprime] consumers, they are locking out about 40% of the U.S. population
GM’s restructuring consultants AlixPartners add that loyalty improves for customers who buy using a captive lender. The downsides? Higher default risks, the temptation to overload on incentives, and then there’s one more biggy…
(Read More…)
The Detroit News reports that GM will file paperwork to register its initial public offering as soon as next week, citing anonymous sources. This registration will be our first look at exactly what GM and its masters at the Treasury Department are trying to achieve with the offering. Analysts are predicting that the government will sell only one-third of its 61 percent stake in GM, which would rid it of an absolute majority stake but would preserve its status as the largest GM stakeholder. The Canadian and Ontario governments, the UAW’s VEBA fund and bondholders in Motors Liquidation may sell parts of their stakes as well, but there are still no estimates as to just how much of GM’s equity will be up for grabs in this offering. Or what the market response will be. And with the car market still shaky, Opel demanding more of GM’s cash, IPOs being canceled right and left, and only one profitable quarter under GM’s belt, voices are already starting to wonder if GM isn’t rushing this offering for political reasons.
Oh, one other thing, I think its maybe helpful to say what has been my track record in value creation – these are four of the companies Ive been associated with – its worth noting that every financing round in every company has been an up round, doesn’t matter if the market has gone up or the market has gone down, the squiggly line is the market, and the valuations are as you can see somewhat market independent, and I expect that to be the same for Tesla, or to continue to be the same with Tesla
Tesla CEO Elon Musk, in his IPO presentation [via Darryl Siry]. This, apparently, is the answer to the question how does a company that’s sold just over 1,000 cars think it’s going to become an industry player?
Good to know.
The AP [via Google] reports that Tesla has revised its IPO offering to $14 to $16 per share, for a total capital raising of up to $185m. The WSJ [sub] estimates the IPO’s take at $178m. Previously Tesla had valued its offering at $100m. This revision is not inconsequential: the offering is now valued higher than Tesla’s cumulative revenue since 2003, which now stands at $147.6m. The company has lost nearly $300m since 2003, and will continue to lose money until the Model S sedan starts selling. Especially with $100m-$125m in capital expenditures planned for this year. GM’ it seems, won’t be the only auto firm sweating an IPO this year.
Toll road giant Macquarie Bank this week announced its intention to acquire the leading operator of red light cameras and speed cameras in the US. Macquarie, known for its skill in harnessing government guarantees to make itself a “millionaire’s factory,” made an offer to purchase Redflex Traffic Systems of Australia at the bargain price of A$2.50 a share.
Recent Comments