Sector Outlooks
GM, Chrysler's New Ink Color: Black
The retooled General is cooking up a plan to finance a comeback -- and broaden its offerings.
By Jim Ostroff, Associate Editor, The Kiplinger Letter
January 12, 2010
- Comments
- Email This Article
- Print This Article
- Order a Reprint
Advertisement
The government takeovers of GM and Chrysler will bear fruit this year. Having shed billions of dollars’ worth of liabilities and shuttered outmoded manufacturing plants through bankruptcy proceedings, both companies are on their way to becoming much tougher global competitors.
They’re successfully transforming themselves into leaner, more efficient operations, with about a $2,000-per-vehicle cost advantage over Japanese and European car manufacturers -- at least on paper. That’ll let the two U.S. companies plow big bucks into new product development, spiffy interior designs and high-end technologies.
Despite a sluggish U.S. auto market -- likely under 12 million vehicles this year -- both GM and Chrysler should be in the black by the end of 2010 or so. After years of sustaining annual losses in the billions of dollars, Ford, which didn’t accept federal bailout money and skirted bankruptcy court, had a head start on new vehicle development and will likely post profits each quarter of 2010.
Giving GM’s new car development a lift: an initial public stock offering from the company, possibly this summer. The whole firm won’t be up for auction, though. Most companies prefer to dribble out stock sales, betting that share prices will rise, making subsequent offerings more lucrative. Moreover, the federal government, which holds 60% of GM, will likely hang onto its shares for a while, figuring taxpayers will get a better price for the stock later on. Still, even a limited public offering is expected to raise billions of dollars, making GM more competitive with other automakers, especially Ford.
GM’s stronger financial position will allow it to produce a wide array of niche vehicles, such as small sports cars, crossover SUVs and large cars, while simultaneously accelerating its development of big-production-volume passenger cars. The niche cars should prove to be profit centers for GM, says David Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research, an auto industry consultancy. That’s a big change from the old GM’s modus operandi -- churning out hundreds of thousands of the same model in order to wring out a profit despite sky-high operating costs. And it’ll give GM a considerable advantage over its smaller, crosstown rival, whose new car development is just gearing up under Fiat after a two-year hiatus imposed by Chrysler’s previous owner, Cerberus Capital Management.
For weekly updates on topics to improve your business decisionmaking, click here.
Topics:
- Comments
- RSS
Permission to post your comment is assumed when you submit it. The name you provide will be used to identify your post, and NOT your e-mail address. We reserve the right to excerpt or edit any posted comments for clarity, appropriateness, civility, and relevance to the topic.
View our full privacy policy


Reader Comments (9)
Posted by: Joe Honick at 01/12/2010 02:17:06 PM
That is great news. Does it mean we taxpayers can now recover some of our stimulus funds and that the companies will not provide jobs for the thousands laid off? Just asking.
Posted by: Matt Herbert at 01/13/2010 08:23:29 PM
The reason GM is bankrupt is because the make ugly and cheap vehicles. They lie in almost all of there commercials to make themselfs look and sound better. GM is sneaky and sly, I have no idea why people buy there vehicles they have people brainwashed thinking they make a decent vehicle. LOOK THE BOTTOM LINE IS "WHY WOULD YOU BUY A VEHICLE FROM A BANKRUPT COMPANY ???? America do your self a favor buy a FORD, you will be happy you did.
Posted by: JL McGee at 01/14/2010 06:01:31 AM
How many times have we heard THIS before? The "Big" Three are dinosaurs: cumbersome, dumb and fated for extinction. I think almost everyone has realized this except them and the U.S. government. The day I start to consider buying a GM or Chrysler product is the day that they can beat Japanese and German performance, reliability and safety. I'm not holding my breath, but I am holding a grudge for our unwitting bail-outs of their shoddy companies.
Posted by: Theodore F Kuchta at 01/14/2010 11:53:07 AM
I would love to buy a Camaro to go along with my Mustangs however I will not buy anything from GM or Chrysler as long as they are owned by the unions and the government.
Posted by: John S at 01/16/2010 06:57:29 AM
How many millions did they just spend on Super Bowl ads? I personally will not support a company who received US taxpayer bailout money that in the bankruptcy proceedings is stated that it will not be re payed. Oh and now it's owned by a foreign company Fiat. No thanks I will support a company with some good management that puts more Americans to work and not less.
Posted by: Bertlesmann Rustink at 01/16/2010 11:23:48 AM
While the US makers may (debatably) have a cost advantage, their vehicles are still absolutely abysmal, and any cost advantage will disappear when their product line quality is improved to European & Japanese standards. Most vehicles for the US market have dismal interior quality, pathetic chassis dynamics, and mediocre build quality. GM & Chrysler have a lot of catchup to do, and whole product lines to replace with modern technology. I am not optimistic that this is achievable, without a massive program of investment in product development, and serious manufacturing facility upgrades. Since there is no money for such a program. My personal view is that both of these companies can only achieve limited profitability in the short term through aggressive cost cutting, followed, ultimately by complete collapse, as they fail to deliver competitive product lines. I also don't see any supporting evidence of the 'cost advantage' for the bankrup US producers in this article. I'd debate that would actually positive anyway, since low cost vehicles command low margins compared to higher cost vehicles that may have less of a production cost advantage, but have overall higher margins.
Posted by: Brian Kurtz at 01/16/2010 02:59:02 PM
You have to wonder what could be the long-term viability of these two companies. The way they were running their companies violates some of the basic rules of the road that we talk about at BrianKurtz.com but if you look back in time, you see why it skewed that way. There is a big possibility that the Japanese companies will face a similar situation in the years to come...Toyota is already dealing with massive quality issues. I doubt the US Government will be so quick to bail them out though.
Posted by: Jacob at 01/16/2010 05:08:49 PM
Agreed! The unions and the government have really pulled one over on us.
Posted by: Ed at 01/20/2010 06:17:46 PM
Some day Detroit will wake up and understand what the american wants in a car. Until then they will remain behind the foreighn auto makers. I have owned anerican for the past 15 years, I have recently changed and now own Japanese, these cars are without a doubt head and shoulders above the amercian autos I have owend.