Ontario premier Dalton McGuinty said Friday his government will wait to see how General Motors prices its public share offering before deciding whether to sell its stake in the company.
McGuinty said the government needs to be “patient” and sell at the most profitable time.
The Canadian and Ontario governments own about 12 percent of GM. The US Treasury, which owns about 60 percent of GM has said that it expects to sell “some” of its GM stake during the IPO, which is expected to occur by the end of this year. In short, as Ken Elias predicts, GM won’t stop being “Government Motors” after it goes public. No matter how emphatically Ed Whitacre declares victory.
Handling [GM’s] IPO assignment is something of a vanity project for the Wall Street banks, given the relatively small fees the banks will earn through the process. One person familiar with the offering said that the banks may earn less than 1% of the overall deal. At a valuation of $10 billion, that would equal a total fee pool of $100 million.
The Wall Street Journal [sub]’s take on the forthcoming GM IPO. Persons anonymous tell The Journal that Morgan Stanley and JPMorganChase are the frontrunners in the vanity project sweepstakes. But as charitable as the one-percent arrangement seems, the Wall Street mavens have their work cut out for them…
Somewhere under a “Mission Accomplished” banner on an aircraft carrier, former car czar Steve Rattner is starting to get a bit lonely. Reuters reports that the Securities and Exchange Commission is seeking a three year ban on Rattner that would prevent him from working in the securities field. The ban stems from a recently-settled investigation into kickback allegations at Rattner’s former investment firm Quadrangle Group (involving a distribution deal for his brother’s low-budget movie “Chooch,” no less).
The Detroit News reports that the Treasury Department has hired Lazard Frères & Co. as an advisor to GM’s forthcoming IPO sale. And with news of the hiring comes confirmation that GM’s IPO really is coming soon: the investment bank will receive half a million dollars, according to the DetN, but that amount will drop to $250,000 if the IPO isn’t completed within one year. If you’re one of the GM boosters who believes that an IPO will repay all or most of the government’s investment in GM, it’s time to start saving those pennies. You have less than a year now to put your money where your mouth has been.
On the strength of Coda Automotive’s plan to launch a $45,000 EV conversion of a Chinese Hafei sedan, our coverage of the EV startup (formed from the ashes of Miles Electric Vehicles) has pretty much been limited to the conclusion that it “make the Volt look good.” And as the competition has moved forward, the venture isn’t looking any better by comparison. With news that Nissan will be able to manufacture its Leaf batteries for the low, low price of under $400 per kWh (if all goes to plan, anyway) rocking the EV community, Coda’s proposition of asking $45,000 for a 33.8 kWh lithium-ion battery with a Chinese compact sedan attached to it has not aged well (conservatively assuming the Hafei costs $15k, that still breaks out to nearly $900 per battery kWh, as crude as the comparison may be). But don’t let a little common sense worry you about Coda’s future: according to a company press release [via PRNewswire] the firm just scored a cool $58m in an oversubscribed fundraising round that leaves it with over $125 in total investments.
As non-executive vice-chairman of the Swiss bank UBS, Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne has deep connections with the European banking community. Now, under threat of losing its primary lender Ally Financial to GM’s dreams of a return to in-house, subprime lending, Marchionne has leveraged that experience into a non-prime lending deal with a US division of Spain’s Banco Santander. Automotive News [sub] reports that Santander and Chrysler have reached a deal to provide loans to Chrysler customers with sub-650 credit scores that ChryCo reckons could result in an additional 2,000 sales each month. (Read More…)
What, you want more context from a headline? It’s not like we’ve lied to you or anything. Technically, every word of it is true. OK, OK, here’s the fine print: CGI Holding, owners of “Old Chrysler” and Chrysler Financial paid $1.9b of a $4b pre-bankruptcy TARP loan, according to Automotive News [sub]. Though far less than face value, that payback “is significantly more” than what Treasury was expecting in return. In other words, this is great news if you thought the bailout would be a complete loss. Otherwise, it means that the various remains of Chrysler have repaid $3.9b of the $14.3 invested by taxpayers into the company pre-bankruptcy… and unless Chrysler’s IPO brings in about $100b, Treasury will still take a bath on the rescue.
When we first heard that GM was eying a return to in-house financing, our first reaction was to worry that
the potential for falling back into old bad habits can’t be ignored.
Clearly our concern wasn’t wasted, as the AP [via Google] reports that The General’s major motivation for considering re-creating a captive lender is to chase subprime business its current major lender won’t touch. And considering that that lender is GM’s bailed-out former captive finance lender GMAC (now Ally Financial), which was badly burned by subprime mortgages, it’s not surprising that GM is frustrated by GMAC’s tentative approach. But should The General charge into the low-standard lending sectors where Ally fears to tread?
Well, the suspense is over. General Motors announced its Q1 earnings this morning, and for the first time since 2007 the quarterly numbers are positive. GM’s net revenue jumped to nearly $31.5b on strong performances from its North American and GM International Operations (GMIO), and across-the-board sales improvement for the Chevy brand. General Motors Europe was The General’s sole unprofitable division for the quarter, losing half a billion dollars while it waits for a deal on financial assistance to clear. Operating cash flow was $1.75b, with about $755m of that going towards capital expenditures. That left just under a billion dollars in free cash flow, as GM finished the quarter with $35.7b in cash on hand. Net income attributable to shareholders was $1.068b, less $203m for cumulative dividends, for a total net profit of $865m [Full financial highlights in .doc format available here].
One of the last vestiges of the Daimler-Chrysler union is being swept away, as Daimler has announced that it will delist from the NYSE. Daimler initially listed itself on Wall Street in 1993, as it began its “marriage made in heaven” with Chrysler. Since then, Daimler says advances in electronic trading make it easier for traders to buy and sell its Frankfurt listings, and that the low volume of NYSE trading isn’t worth all the financial regulation that comes with a Wall Street listing. According to the company, less than five percent of its trading volume comes through its US listing. This means no more SEC filings from the German firm, although it insists that the US market remains important to its business and that it wants to maintain open communication with American investors who own 17 percent of Daimler’s shares. And it definitely has nothing to do with the company’s recent settlement of a bribery investigation by the DOJ. Or the fact that Chrysler could find itself back on the exchange within another year.
After four straight profitable quarters, Alan Mulally’s forecast today of a “solidly profitable” 2010 shouldn’t come as a huge surprise. But, as Executive Chairman Bill Ford put it to Ford shareholders at the company’s annual meeting [via AP],
It is the very early days in our recovery. We still have a lot of debt
And he’s not kidding. As of the end of Q1 2010, Ford was carrying $34b in debt. And though Ford faces a higher cost of borrowing because of its staggering debts, Bill Ford was clear that he wouldn’t trade places with Ford’s Detroit competitors, which cleaned out their balance books, at the expense of government bailouts and accompanying PR problems. After all, while GM and Chrysler were rebuilding, Ford managed to outperform both of them last year by gaining sales and market share. And Ford’s leadership sees that momentum carrying forward into next year.
One of the things that we do not wish under any circumstance is to have an uncompetitive relationship vis-À-vis GM
That would certainly be the case if GM bought up its recently-bailed-out former captive finance arm, GMAC (now known as Ally Financial). Chrysler relies on GMAC for leasing and loans just as much as GM does at the moment, so an Ally buyout would create major long-term problems. But even if GM created a new finance arm, Chrysler doesn’t seem to think that it will be able to survive without forming its own in-house finance department. Which would then compete with GM and Ally, to say nothing of the industry’s other finance competitors. But is the rush to captive finance going to be good for anyone?
President Obama has weighed in on a crucial matter facing legislators attempting to overhaul America’s financial system: whether or not auto dealer finance should be subject to regulation by the new Consumer Protection Agency. Unsurprisingly, he has come down on the side of regulation, specifically echoing concerns voiced earlier by the Pentagon. The National Automobile Dealers Association has vowed to fight attempts to regulate dealer finance.
Statement by President Obama on Financial Reform
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.
Three years after spinning off GMAC, with which it pioneered captive auto financing, General Motors may be considering a return to in-house finance. Bloomberg BusinessWeek reports that:
GM may buy back the GMAC business, start a new finance unit or form a partnership with banks and other lenders, said the people, who asked not to be identified because details are private. Chief Executive Officer Ed Whitacre wants to form an in-house lender before selling shares in GM as soon as the fourth quarter, one person said.
GMAC has received $17.2b in TARP aid, but recently announced a$172m Q1 profit despite concern over its bailout in congress. GM’s previous experience with in-house lending has been decidedly mixed: though GMAC was long a cash-cow for the automaker, the easy financing cashflow is said to have enabled a culture of apathy towards product development. When the credit market collapsed, GMAC went down like a ton of bricks… and would have taken GM (even further) down with it, had Rick Wagoner not spun it off and sold it to keep the lights on a little longer. In the short term, a captive finance unit might help a GM IPO, but the potential for falling back into old bad habits can’t be ignored.
Chrysler crowed over its 9.1 percent market share in its Q1 results conference call yesterday, and though CEO Sergio Marchionne refused to be pinned down on an exact time frame, an IPO this year looks more likely than ever. Similarly, BusinessWeek reports that GM’s Ed Whitacre has hinted that a Q1 profit is likely, as is an IPO in Q4 of this year or early next year. This improvement in both bailed-out automakers was underlined by former Presidential Auto Task Force head Steve Rattner, who said the two firms were “meeting expectations,” at a Detroit-area conference. But Rattner also put his expectations into some context by saying
When we did this restructuring we never expected a full recovery of our investment. If it ends up costing us $10 billion we should consider it a success. For about $10 billion we avoided economic and human calamities… I would suggest that that’s a pretty effective cost of government stimulus
That assessment is down considerably from Rattner’s last prediction, which expected a taxpayer profit on the auto bailout.
Recent Comments