GM Bankruptcy Fears Rising on Wall Street

NEW YORK - An increasing number of investors are betting that General Motors Corp., the world's largest automaker, may be forced to seek bankruptcy protection within the next six to 12 months as it struggles to overcome slumping sales and the high cost of health care benefits for workers and retirees.

Concerns about the automaker's future are showing up in the credit default swaps market, where investors effectively buy insurance protection against defaults. Holders of GM debt who want to arrange a hedge against the risk that they won't be repaid are finding that the cost of buying the protection has risen dramatically in recent days.

"The markets are telling you that more traders are starting to see a greater risk that a default scenario could happen sooner in time than later," said John Tierney, a credit strategist at Deutsche Bank Securities in New York. "You cannot deny there is a pattern here."

GM spokesman Jerry Dubrowski responded by saying the automaker has "no plans to declare bankruptcy," and he noted that GM has about $19 billion in cash on hand. Beyond that, he declined to discuss recent pricing trends for credit default swaps. "Typically we don't comment on stock prices or bond prices," he said. "We don't think it is appropriate to do that."

At issue is the nearly $31 billion in debt related to GM automaking operations that ratings agencies already have downgraded to junk status, or below investment grade. Dubrowski said GM's total debt, including debt sold by its General Motors Acceptance Corp. unit, now stands at $276 billion.

Credit default swaps for GM are now trading at what is known as an "upfront" basis, meaning a bondholder seeking protection against a default has to pay more money up front because the Wall Street firms arranging the hedges have to pay more to protect themselves.

Michiko Whetten, a quantitative credit analyst at Nomura Securities International Inc., said GM debt had previously never traded on an upfront basis. But now that it is, it puts GM in an unenviable category with Delphi Corp. and Delta Air Lines Inc. — other companies whose debt traded on an upfront basis ahead of their petitioning for bankruptcy.

Auto parts maker Delphi, once owned by GM declared bankruptcy in October, and Delta, the nation's third largest carrier, went bankrupt in September.

GM lost nearly $4 billion in the first nine months of this year. The Detroit-based company has been hammered by high labor costs and rising prices for raw materials like steel. And while it recently reached agreement with the United Auto Workers union to temper the rise in health costs, GM still has been losing U.S. market share due to competition from healthier foreign rivals and weakened demand for sport utility vehicles, its longtime cash cows.

Wall Street's credit default swaps traders now view GM as a company so risky that a holder now must pay as much as $12 per year for every $100 of the automaker's five-year corporate debt if they want to hedge against a default, up from $8 to $9 just several weeks ago. In addition, credit default swaps traders are now demanding more of that money up front from investors looking to protect their GM holdings.

These losses may not actually occur, but the pricing moves in the swaps market are a good indication of how Wall Street traders and investors are judging the risk of a GM default.

GM Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner said in an October interview with The Associated Press that unlike the airline industry, where some bankruptcy filings haven't had a big effect on business, even speculating about bankruptcy hurts the auto business.

"When you're buying a car it's a very different thing," Wagoner said. "It's a massive financial commitment. You expect to own it for a long time, and (bankruptcy) is something that's going to have an impact in the consumer's mind."

On Monday, GM, whose stock is trading at nearly half of its 52-week high, announced price cuts to shore up its sales. Its shares fell 40 cents, or 1.7 percent, to $23.34 in afternoon trading Tuesday on the New York Stock Exchange.

GM's outlook in the credit default swaps market took on a bleaker tone after last week's disclosure by GM that it plans to restate its earnings for recent years. GM said its 2001 earnings were overstated by approximately $300 million to $400 million, but the final amount hasn't been determined. GM plans to issue the restated earnings for 2001 and any subsequent years before it issues its 2005 annual report next year.

That triggered what is known as an inversion in the credit swaps curve — a measure of risk between short- and long-term GM debt — meaning that Wall Street traders are betting the risk of GM declaring bankruptcy is greater in the next six months to a year than over a longer period of time like five years.

In a November 10 report, Banc of America analysts reiterated a sell rating on the company's stock, saying they believe the odds GM management could be held accountable for the accounting woes has risen and this could accelerate a bankruptcy protection decision they judged to be "inevitable."

According to Deutsche Bank's Tierney, the accounting problems caught investors by surprise and "contributed to a sense that GM problems are very deep."

(("1.labor cares about one think...a fast vested check"))

And you don't as a salesman? Cmon now EVERY one that gets a paycheck considers that fact.

(("2.labor will eat her mother for that check"))

So will suits and so will stockholders.
Seems that your points reflect my position of them not working as a team...hardly aimless as you claimed.

(("3.19% interest ? oh please...that is easy to sell a buyer/sarcasm....a buyers pay history is his/her credit"))

Gmac did it alot in 90's take a good look back and you will see that. Maybe I missed all those interest free loaning campaigns then. Oh maybe I missed all those 'employee pricing" discounts then as well eh?
Show me those from the 90's. I bet ya cannot.

(("4.a 10 year truck w/150 k miles in NOT worth 10k
so says a bank,the NADA and Kelly's blue book "))

WANNA BET?

Go here : http://www.kbb.com/ and do a loaded suburban for 1996 in excellent condition with 150 thousand miles and jsut see that its retail value is over 11 thousand dollars.

Lower miles noted here but it is ten years old:

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?car_id=189420724&dealer_id=72593&car_year=1996&search_type=both&make=CHEV&model=&distance=0&address=62670&advanced=&certified=&bkms=1132158565835&max_price=15000&min_price=9000&first_record=26&end_year=1999&start_year=1996&isp=y&pager.offset=25&lang=&cardist=1689

Here is almost hundred thousand miles on a ten year old truck:http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?car_id=189953647&dealer_id=99488&car_year=1996&search_type=both&make=CHEV&distance=0&model=&address=62670&certified=&advanced=&max_price=15000&bkms=1132158565835&min_price=9000&end_year=1996&start_year=1995&isp=y&lang=&cardist=486

Here is another this one has 126 thousand miles:
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?car_id=191401104&dealer_id=568678&car_year=1996&search_type=both&make=CHEV&distance=0&model=&address=62670&certified=&advanced=&max_price=15000&bkms=1132158565835&min_price=9000&end_year=1996&start_year=1995&isp=y&lang=&cardist=762

Here is a 1995 tahoe with 164 thousand miles priced at $9895!
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?car_id=192161880&dealer_id=43306806&car_year=1995&search_type=both&make=CHEV&model=&distance=0&address=62670&advanced=&certified=&bkms=1132158565835&max_price=15000&min_price=9000&first_record=26&end_year=1996&start_year=1995&isp=y&pager.offset=25&lang=&cardist=1150

Ill stop now.

The point I was trying to make is this. Used vehicles with so many miles are NOT worth actually what they are stated to be worth. This , over the course of the last decade and a half has deterred people from buying them again. They are over priced when new and the latest round of 'discounts' offers shows that. GM has tried to keep hold of the status quo of raking in the cash and it has come back to bite them now.

Blaming it all on labor is hardly an objective position. Blaming it all on "suits" is hardly objective.
Blaming it all on stockholders is hardly objective.

A reasonable person would agree that all three contribute to the problems GM now faces. Problems that rest mostly in the laps of managment to lead thru. If they continue to take the position to just blame Labor GM will be no more.

This looks better in preview I hope it posts that way.

I am an "ass" becuase I backed up what I said using a source you said showed me wrong? So now I am an aimless ass HA HA. whatever.

Healthcare is A problem that is far from the only one. A feeble attempt to draw attention away from your obvious mistake in your attack on me that was shown to be unjustified. Guess what Remove entirely the issue of healthcare from GM and you know what, they are STILL on the verge of going under.

The way you treat people, as you have treated me in just a cuople posts, is one of the GM's problems too. Aloofness and a failure to see that people are not quite as stupid as you count on them to be.

Oh and healthcare as it relates to GM would lie in the lap of SUITS that get paid HUNDREDS of thousands of dollars to MANAGE. So indeed, it was mentioned in my (what you call attack stripe) post. In a more general way rather than a specific way.

How about admitting you was wrong about ten year old vehicles being 'worth' ten grand. BTW this issue applies to far more than just GM.

Maybe I should spout an attack on car salesman too. Like maybe how they LOVE to take a woman that is already upside down as to value on their vehicle relating to what they owe and take that upside down vehicle in trade for half what it will be sold on the used lot for. Adding that difference to the price of the new one, while piping about the discounts given, thus creating a larger margin of "upside down".
This tactic is coming home to roost.

Is that illegal, no. Is it honest? Nope. Is it for profit and eventually your paycheck and bonuses for sales? YUP.

Let me be a further intended ass.... I come to you and buy a new truck for 25 grand cash outright. I sign all the papers and I leave. Done deal. I get home and find that I just got an iheritance from a rich uncle that passed of 100 grand.

I decide I would rather have that loaded corvette so I run right back down to the dealership you work at and I want to trade that truck in on that vette. What are you going to offer me for that truck I just bought from you. Keep in mind it HAS BEEN titled. Be honest.

Sir it isn't me that is the ass, it is the truth about the auto industry, that hurts and precipitates your attacks on me.

"new is not used" Right the difference is "titled". The example a I gave you ( you know the one you refused to address as to how much you would offer me for that 25 thousand dollar truck) You seel MANY "new" vehicles with MORE miles on them (test drives) than the truck example I posed to you.

SO as the BUYER of the truck that you just sold me a few hours ago, how much will depreciation will there be?

How about just answering the question I asked in you?
How many dollars will you depreciate for the drive home? Keep in mind now,less miles than on that other new one that has had several test drives.

How about just admit that you would offer me 18 to 21 grand for that truck I just paid 25 grand for? You know that is how it works so just admit it.

Within GM you have labor managment and stockholders, Which one is it exactly you defend?

In post 79 you snap on labor, you say they will eat their mother or some such stuff.....you DO realize YOU are labor right? Now you say you are defending your career? Which is it?

I done told you that GM was not alone in what I said and now you tell me to name one that isn't? Sheesh.

You tell me the cost per unit. Then compare it to per stock dividend paid out, per pension check, per workmans comp policy, per 'suits' paycheck, per assembly line paycheck.....per windshield....per shock absorber, per gas cap.... that is all number rangling. Same thing you do everyday.

I asked you a legit question centering on the fact that you will sell a vehicle to someone that is already upside down and make them more so. This IS a fact and you KNOW it is which is why you are so pissed off. Hey, you have every right to do so and people are fools for allowing it to happen to them. The point I am making to you is that this has been done for a long time and people are tired of it....

I went on to ask what I did in my example to show you another area of problem. The hit people take when you "drive off the lot" ( actually when you sign the title) has people seeing that it just isn't worth it to buy a new vehicle, especially when financed.

Claiming healthcare is THE problem is silly. MANY problems exist and I was simply trying to show you a couple very real ones.

Too bad you went into defense mode and tried to avoid answering very simple and real questions that would have allowed the conversation to continue.

You are claiming that healthcare is eating up the profits....I am showing you that lossed sales is doing the same thing and a couple DIRECT reasons why they are falling....why they drew 'discounts'. I am showing you that ALOT of things eat up profits and suits paychecks that are FAR beyond labors is one example, Healthcare would be another. Healthcare however is not totally GM's ability to manage, suits crazy paychecks ARE. Customer treatment IS.

What you do here is attempt to defend GM from things they are responsible for. While it shows loyalty, it lack basic reality to the scope of the problems and thus the solutions.

In many ways, GM has made its own bed and now they do not want to lay down and take a nap in it.

aybe you should read your own posts and add that bit of context to your own. You sir cannot point to anything in any of my posts that isn't true.

You claimed I said something untrue when I talked about the over value of used vehicles. I showed you specific examples and even did so using what you claim said refuted me. What I did was back up what I said and showed you to be wrong in your post to me. Indeed what you said to me was untrue and I proved that to you. Accept that as the fact it is.

I never said to you that healthcare wasn't a problem, OBVIOUSLY it is and that spans the entire spectrum of our economy. Thus that one is a given. In addition that is NOT something GM can control within its own corperationm outside factors are at play there. I tried to offer to you things that are well within the control of GM itself when it comes to three main groups. Those being Labor, managment, and stockholders.

Choices that each of these groups make reflect and affect on the company as a whole. They themselves control the actions they take and thus the results of them.

You cannot point to anything I said that isn't true with anything more than namecalling and labeling in a negative fashion or basless claims that what I said is false.

You now claim that you rest your case, it would have been nice if you had actually made one to begin with.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.