"HK" wrote in message
m...

D.Duck wrote:

Now will see how the government can run a auto company. Guess it can't
be much worse, or can it?

Since the taxpayers basically own GM, the chief representative of the
taxpayers should be able to tell GM's CEO that it is over. That company,
and many other corporations, need fresh blood capable of leading their
companies in new directions.

I doubt the government will be "running" GM.


You missed the point of the announcement.
The government now is.

Eisboch

"HK" wrote in message
m...


Since the taxpayers basically own GM, the chief representative of the
taxpayers should be able to tell GM's CEO that it is over. That company,
and many other corporations, need fresh blood capable of leading their
companies in new directions.



This is going to be interesting in terms of how it is handled.
I am not questioning the request for Wagner to step down, but I am
interested in how his replacement is selected.

To my knowledge (I might be wrong) the bailout money received to date was
not given in exchange for stock in GM. Basically the government money is
subordinated debt, just like a bank loan.
There's no voting rights associated with it.

"Requesting" him to step down is probably a condition for additional bailout
money.
That's perfectly legal. But for the White House (Obama) to install a new
CEO without a vote from the GM Board of Directors (and possibly a
shareholder's meeting and vote, if he is also on the board) might present
some interesting legal issues.

We'll have to see what happens.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:


"HK" wrote in message
m...


Since the taxpayers basically own GM, the chief representative of the
taxpayers should be able to tell GM's CEO that it is over. That
company, and many other corporations, need fresh blood capable of
leading their companies in new directions.



This is going to be interesting in terms of how it is handled.
I am not questioning the request for Wagner to step down, but I am
interested in how his replacement is selected.

To my knowledge (I might be wrong) the bailout money received to date
was not given in exchange for stock in GM. Basically the government
money is subordinated debt, just like a bank loan.
There's no voting rights associated with it.

"Requesting" him to step down is probably a condition for additional
bailout money.
That's perfectly legal. But for the White House (Obama) to install a
new CEO without a vote from the GM Board of Directors (and possibly a
shareholder's meeting and vote, if he is also on the board) might
present some interesting legal issues.

We'll have to see what happens.

Eisboch

HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:


"HK" wrote in message
m...


Since the taxpayers basically own GM, the chief representative of
the taxpayers should be able to tell GM's CEO that it is over. That
company, and many other corporations, need fresh blood capable of
leading their companies in new directions.



This is going to be interesting in terms of how it is handled.
I am not questioning the request for Wagner to step down, but I am
interested in how his replacement is selected.

To my knowledge (I might be wrong) the bailout money received to date
was not given in exchange for stock in GM. Basically the government
money is subordinated debt, just like a bank loan.
There's no voting rights associated with it.

"Requesting" him to step down is probably a condition for additional
bailout money.
That's perfectly legal. But for the White House (Obama) to install a
new CEO without a vote from the GM Board of Directors (and possibly a
shareholder's meeting and vote, if he is also on the board) might
present some interesting legal issues.

We'll have to see what happens.

Eisboch


Whoops...hit enter too fast.

I think the GM board needs to be kicked out on its ass, too. The company
is run by incompetents.

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...


"HK" wrote in message
m...


Since the taxpayers basically own GM, the chief representative of the
taxpayers should be able to tell GM's CEO that it is over. That company,
and many other corporations, need fresh blood capable of leading their
companies in new directions.



This is going to be interesting in terms of how it is handled.
I am not questioning the request for Wagner to step down, but I am
interested in how his replacement is selected.

To my knowledge (I might be wrong) the bailout money received to date was
not given in exchange for stock in GM. Basically the government money is
subordinated debt, just like a bank loan.
There's no voting rights associated with it.

"Requesting" him to step down is probably a condition for additional
bailout money.
That's perfectly legal. But for the White House (Obama) to install a new
CEO without a vote from the GM Board of Directors (and possibly a
shareholder's meeting and vote, if he is also on the board) might present
some interesting legal issues.

We'll have to see what happens.

Eisboch

GM is for all intensive purposes bankrupt. It would not be hard for a
government type to point that out to the most inept of board members their
liability in continuing the fraud and BS. And bond holders could be moving
too next week as 30 cents on the dollar is an insult, which broke down last
week for some bond holders. This is really coming down to chapter 11. It
is the only sane avenue left.

Eisboch wrote:


"HK" wrote in message
m...


Since the taxpayers basically own GM, the chief representative of the
taxpayers should be able to tell GM's CEO that it is over. That
company, and many other corporations, need fresh blood capable of
leading their companies in new directions.



This is going to be interesting in terms of how it is handled.
I am not questioning the request for Wagner to step down, but I am
interested in how his replacement is selected.

To my knowledge (I might be wrong) the bailout money received to date
was not given in exchange for stock in GM. Basically the government
money is subordinated debt, just like a bank loan.
There's no voting rights associated with it.

"Requesting" him to step down is probably a condition for additional
bailout money.
That's perfectly legal. But for the White House (Obama) to install a
new CEO without a vote from the GM Board of Directors (and possibly a
shareholder's meeting and vote, if he is also on the board) might
present some interesting legal issues.

We'll have to see what happens.

Eisboch


I haven't seen anything on the government naming a replacement CEO. If
it were up to me, I'd want a new board, too, since the present one
obviously is not competent.

Eisboch wrote:


"HK" wrote in message
m...


Since the taxpayers basically own GM, the chief representative of the
taxpayers should be able to tell GM's CEO that it is over. That
company, and many other corporations, need fresh blood capable of
leading their companies in new directions.



This is going to be interesting in terms of how it is handled.
I am not questioning the request for Wagner to step down, but I am
interested in how his replacement is selected.

To my knowledge (I might be wrong) the bailout money received to date
was not given in exchange for stock in GM. Basically the government
money is subordinated debt, just like a bank loan.
There's no voting rights associated with it.

"Requesting" him to step down is probably a condition for additional
bailout money.
That's perfectly legal. But for the White House (Obama) to install a
new CEO without a vote from the GM Board of Directors (and possibly a
shareholder's meeting and vote, if he is also on the board) might
present some interesting legal issues.

We'll have to see what happens.

Eisboch


We have to get away from the idea that these damned boards of directors
are competent. Absent evidence, I think they are not. And we have to
chop up huge companies whose failures can kill our economy. Hugeness is
not serving the public's interest.

"HK" wrote in message
m...
Eisboch wrote:


"HK" wrote in message
m...


Since the taxpayers basically own GM, the chief representative of the
taxpayers should be able to tell GM's CEO that it is over. That
company, and many other corporations, need fresh blood capable of
leading their companies in new directions.



This is going to be interesting in terms of how it is handled.
I am not questioning the request for Wagner to step down, but I am
interested in how his replacement is selected.

To my knowledge (I might be wrong) the bailout money received to date
was not given in exchange for stock in GM. Basically the government
money is subordinated debt, just like a bank loan.
There's no voting rights associated with it.

"Requesting" him to step down is probably a condition for additional
bailout money.
That's perfectly legal. But for the White House (Obama) to install a
new CEO without a vote from the GM Board of Directors (and possibly a
shareholder's meeting and vote, if he is also on the board) might
present some interesting legal issues.

We'll have to see what happens.

Eisboch


We have to get away from the idea that these damned boards of directors
are competent. Absent evidence, I think they are not. And we have to chop
up huge companies whose failures can kill our economy. Hugeness is not
serving the public's interest.

Why? Even Buffett tried to control the idiots and could not. Shareholders
be dammed, they did what they wanted, porking.

The board too so needs to be fired it isn't funny. They should have put the
brakes on 8 years ago. Most are drunkards in someones pocket.

Hopefully Obama will send GM to chapter 11 where they too can get kicked
out. Maybe take some VPs too. GM needs a top down rapid management change.

"HK" wrote in message
m...
Eisboch wrote:


"HK" wrote in message
m...


Since the taxpayers basically own GM, the chief representative of the
taxpayers should be able to tell GM's CEO that it is over. That
company, and many other corporations, need fresh blood capable of
leading their companies in new directions.



This is going to be interesting in terms of how it is handled.
I am not questioning the request for Wagner to step down, but I am
interested in how his replacement is selected.

To my knowledge (I might be wrong) the bailout money received to date
was not given in exchange for stock in GM. Basically the government
money is subordinated debt, just like a bank loan.
There's no voting rights associated with it.

"Requesting" him to step down is probably a condition for additional
bailout money.
That's perfectly legal. But for the White House (Obama) to install a
new CEO without a vote from the GM Board of Directors (and possibly a
shareholder's meeting and vote, if he is also on the board) might
present some interesting legal issues.

We'll have to see what happens.

Eisboch


We have to get away from the idea that these damned boards of directors
are competent. Absent evidence, I think they are not. And we have to chop
up huge companies whose failures can kill our economy. Hugeness is not
serving the public's interest.

Incompetent Board or not, if this isn't handled correctly, the threatened
lawsuits against the government they were worried about with the AIG bonus
guys will pale in comparison to the lawsuits brought by GM stockholders.
*They* own the company, not the government or the taxpayers.

Chapter 11 is the vehicle (pun intended) to cleanly restructure the company.

Eisboch

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 21:34:34 -0400, Eisboch wrote:


Incompetent Board or not, if this isn't handled correctly, the
threatened lawsuits against the government they were worried about with
the AIG bonus guys will pale in comparison to the lawsuits brought by GM
stockholders. *They* own the company, not the government or the
taxpayers.

Chapter 11 is the vehicle (pun intended) to cleanly restructure the
company.

Wagoner should have been gone years ago, and bankruptcy is still on the
table. Obama is trying to light a fire under GM's management, and it's
about time. GM has been operating ten years behind the market. Now they
have 60 days to catch up, or it's bankruptcy.

Chrysler has even less time, 30 days. The Obama administration has
rightly figured they can not standalone. If they can't make a deal with
Fiat, they're gone.