"Boater" wrote in message
...
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Sat, 6 Dec 2008 23:59:58 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:

The auto industry's contracts and historical ways of doing business need
a complete overhauling in order to be a viable, competitive entity in
today's global markets. Chapter 11 reorganization, prepackaged with a
government bridge loan to keep the beast breathing during the process,
makes sense to me.

While I understand the idea, I don't want money going to GM. Ford
doesn't want the money, just a backup which is one hell of a lot less
expensive.

Let GM sink. If they can't get through Chapter 11, tough. Let them
go Chapter 7 and disappear.

Ford, Toyota, Honda and others will take up the slack.

Survival of the fittest.


I think you are grossly minimizing the impact of a GM sinking. It's not
just GM that will sink.


Harry, the fallacy of simple bailout for GM is that it only serves to extend
the inevitable for GM and for those other businesses that rely on it without
major and immediate changes to GM's structure. Bankruptcy or no
bankruptcy, Chapter 11, or Chapter 7, the relationships are going to
change and jobs and benefits are going to be lost. Whatever market share GM
ends up with following a reorganization or the lost market share that will
be picked up by Ford, Toyota or Honda if GM goes belly-up will determine
what level business and therefore employment that the related companies
maintain.

The problem may be exasperated by the economic meltdown, but it existed well
before September 15th.
Collectively, GM, Ford and Chrysler have structures and capacities that are
too big to support their shrinking market share. Ford has recognized this
and has been streamlining their business and cutting back on the number of
different vechicles they produce. GM has not. Chrylser barely exists as it
is.

A bailout simply extends existing relationships and contracts until they run
out of money again.

Eisboch