Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (45765)	11/25/2008 3:35:05 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 149317

Survey of Auto Suppliers BIRMINGHAM, Mich., Nov 25, 2008 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- In a spot survey last week of 270 supplier executives representing 185 companies, 76 percent said they support a federal government bailout of General Motors. Without it, they said they'd have to downsize or close, resulting in over 275,000 people losing jobs at their companies. While the survey focused on GM, 71 percent also favored government support for Ford Motor Company, but only 54 percent felt Chrysler deserved help. Overall, 41 percent of the suppliers indicated that GM troubles could be attributed to top management, 40 percent to the UAW, and 19 percent to the federal government itself. The Pulse Survey was undertaken by Planning Perspectives, a Birmingham Michigan consultancy that specializes in buyer-supplier relations in the automotive and other industries. It was conducted Nov 20-21 and included suppliers headquartered in 12 Midwestern and Southern states. The top three reasons why suppliers favored a GM bailout were the following: -- 34% felt that the potential negative economic impact of a GM failure on the country is too great to allow to happen -- 25% felt that the automotive industry deserves rescue just like the financial industry -- Nearly 20% indicated that bankruptcy is not a viable option for GM When the 24% of the suppliers who did not favor a GM federal government bailout were asked why they opposed the bailout, they gave the following responses: -- 35% said that bankruptcy is a better option than a Government bailout, principally because GM could renegotiate labor contracts and rid itself of unnecessary dealerships without concern for state franchise laws -- 35% felt that GM would get into financial trouble again and need more money -- 12% felt that the government bailout will have too many strings attached to it In response to what was most likely to happen to their company if GM declared bankruptcy: -- 68% indicated that their company would have to downsize -- 9% said they would more than likely go out of business -- 3% said they definitely would go out of business These 185 suppliers indicated that a GM bankruptcy would result in over 275,000 people losing their jobs at their companies. Typical supplier comments about the various issues: On the roles of the GM management, the UAW, and the federal government in creating the conditions that have lead to the current crisis: "GM was clearly on the path to restructuring until the double whammy of a rapid rise in the price of oil followed by the financial/credit market meltdown. None of the automakers would be in the mess they are in today had the government acted on the need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil that was identified in the seventies after the Arab oil embargoes, the need for a national energy policy highlighted at the same time, and the need for a US manufacturing strategy to preserve the leading edge competence we once enjoyed." "The real cause of the OEMs' current situation is the economy and the credit crisis. People can't get credit and therefore aren't buying vehicles. It's as simple as that and who is responsible for that?" On the difference in attitude regarding a bailout of GM and Ford vs Chrysler: "It is clear to me that the Big 3 have not done a good job to explain the concessions that they have achieved with the UAW for the future, the improvements in quality and their tireless effort to improve fuel economy for the future. This is clearly not a management issue as Toyota is facing the same production cuts and losses in North America. It is my belief that GM and Ford have done a great job to turnaround the measurable objectives, the culture and future structural costs. Unfortunately, I don't see the same results from Chrysler and their quality, technology and fuel economy are the worst in the industry. Based on these parameters and the structural issues of the industry I believe that Chrysler should be left to Chapter 11." In support of GM: "Did we forget GM was responsible for getting the economy back after 9/11 or its importance during WW II? The ramifications of GM going out of business would be so dynamic it would trigger a depression. Washington, wake up! You are selling our manufacturing base down the drain. You are partly responsible for this event. You have supported foreign investors and turned your back on the Domestics. Your CAFE standards and other government mandates have helped put the Domestic auto makers where they are today." About PPI Since 1990, PPI has specialized in developing and implementing in-depth surveys of suppliers for the automotive OEMs and Tier 1 suppliers, and companies in numerous other service and manufacturing industries worldwide, including, aircraft engine, computer, construction tools, electronics, energy, and food industries. In 2001, PPI initiated its syndicated Annual North American Automotive OEM -- Tier 1 Supplier Working Relations Study. This annual Study has been recognized as the benchmark of supplier working relations for the automotive industry in the Harvard Business Review and several books. The Studies provide critical sales and financial planning information for suppliers and their sales, marketing, and financial staffs, as well as a means by which OEMs and their purchasing staffs can get a reality check on their working relationships with suppliers. John W. Henke, Jr., Ph.D. is president of Planning Perspectives, Inc., and is a marketing professor at Oakland University in Rochester, MI. PPI is based on Birmingham, Michigan and can be reached at +1.248.644.7690. SOURCE Planning Perspectives, Inc.

To: RetiredNow who wrote (45765)	11/25/2008 7:03:04 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 149317

AIG CEO Liddy to get $1 salary through 2009 marketwatch.com SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- American International Group Inc. said Tuesday Chairman and Chief Executive Edward Liddy will receive a salary of $1 for 2008 and 2009. The insurance giant also said there will be no 2008 annual bonuses nor salary increases through 2009 for its top seven officers as a part of its voluntary restrictions on executive compensation. In addition, 50 of its next-highest executives will not be receiving salary increases or bonuses through 2009. The company is also developing a funding structure to ensure that no taxpayer funds are being used for bonuses or cash performance awards for AIG's senior partners. AIG has received billions in government funds as its capital position continued to deteriorate amid the financial market turbulence.

To: RetiredNow who wrote (45765)	11/25/2008 8:15:42 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 149317

Survey: GM bankruptcy would cost suppliers 275,000 jobs crainsdetroit.com 1:28 pm, November 25, 2008 By Ryan Beene A General Motors Corp. bankruptcy would force auto suppliers to downsize or close, costing 275,000 jobs, according to a survey last week conducted by Birmingham-based Planning Perspectives Inc. The survey encompassed 270 supplier executives from 185 companies across 12 states and found that 68 percent said a GM bankruptcy would force their company to downsize; 9 percent said they were likely to go out of business and 3 percent said they would definitely go out of business. Seventy-six percent said they supported a GM bailout for a variety of reasons, with 34 percent saying the economic consequences of a bankruptcy would be too damaging, while 25 percent said the auto industry deserves rescue like the financial industry. Some 20 percent said bankruptcy is not a viable option for GM. Among the executives who didn’t support a GM bailout, 35 percent said the ability to renegotiate labor contracts and shrink its dealer network in bankruptcy is a better option, 35 percent said GM would ask for more money and 12 percent said government aid would come with too many strings attached. The survey also found varying levels of support for government aid to other automakers among supplier execs, with 71 percent supporting aid to Ford Motor Co. but only 54 percent supporting aid for Chrysler L.L.C. Suppliers were split on where the blame falls for the problems facing GM, with 41 percent blaming top management, 40 percent blaming the United Auto Workers and 19 percent blaming the government. © 2007 Crain Communications Inc.