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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (594101)	11/23/2010 11:33:44 AM
From: Bill	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580276

Court restructuring of the union contracts would have saved most of the jobs. And restructuring the debt allows GM to thrive, as we have now seen. There was no need for a govt bailout.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (594101)	11/23/2010 11:48:55 AM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1580276

Other companies would have snapped up the manufacturing and the supply chain business. Ford, for instance. Complete bullshit. Only a portion of GM's demand would have been taken by Ford, much of it would go to foreigns whose hardware comes from Asia, and GM's suppliers would have gone through hell during the reassignment period, many of them would have perished...it's not just my opinion...it's been written about widely. Plus the brand names like Chevy, Buick, and Cadillac are just too valuable to just let die. (Even the name "Cadillac" is used to describe health care plans for the "rich.") What the hell does that mean? The brands would not survive spontaneously...in any case, GM's problem is primarily one of brand decline... Net loss would still have been significant, but nowhere close to a "couple of million claims." Ok...how big? Here's what the WSJ reported... blogs.wsj.com Al