Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

General Motors Chief Rick Wagoner Said to Step Down


88Comrade2000

Recommended Posts

Wagoner is one pompous ass** and needed to go but when are we going to allow GM and Chrysler to enter a structured BK? I knew three weeks back that was just a mirage when GM said they didn't need more money from us. At this point I wonder if I'll ever consider buying a car made by any of the "Big Three" (which btw, they should no longer be called going forward).

**about 5 years back the LA Times (which runs an Auto section, or did back then) published an unfavorable review on one of GM's many 4 wheel disasters. Wagoner threatened to pull all advertising away if they didn't publish a retraction on the story. They didn't. OK, hey Rick how about don't build junk? What a clown, surprised he lasted as long as he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AIG's CEO is around because he's working for 1$ and was brought in to fix this. :)

Taking bets on how big a "severance package" this guy gets? i'm going with 60million.

20.2 million "retirement package."

Government Motors will suck if they running the business from a political stance.

The Volt is DOA. Thank god

Twenty models made a profit for GM 11 of them are Trucks and SUVs but the current climate is set to discourage consumers from buying them, by manipulating oil prices and mandating car guzzler taxes to get people into subcompacts.

We aren't Europe.

We have wide open spaces and superhighways some of us have big families who are over 6ft tall with long legs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GM's board and share holders should have demanded his resignation long ago. GM attempted to call the Government's bluff about requiring a restructuring plan by ______ and hung himself. Good for Obama for not backing down and demanding a penalty for GM failing to live up to its agreements.

The Government effectively (even if not exactly) became the largest stockholder in GM and therefore had the rights that goes with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GM's board and share holders should have demanded his resignation long ago. GM attempted to call the Government's bluff about requiring a restructuring plan by ______ and hung himself. Good for Obama for not backing down and demanding a penalty for GM failing to live up to its agreements.

The Government effectively (even if not exactly) became the largest stockholder in GM and therefore had the rights that goes with it.

Those "rights" belong to the board of directors. Not the shareholders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those "rights" belong to the board of directors. Not the shareholders.

If you have enough shares of a company you have a lot of say.... just sayin' Heck, I've been begged, petitioned and on a occassionally personally solicited to vote a certain way with my paulty couple thousand shares of certain stocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, so our president is now firing private citizens from their jobs. One in which wasn't around when this particular automaker got into trouble.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123841609048669495.html

The remarks came a day after the administration ousted GM Chief Executive Rick Wagoner and rejected the restructuring plans that GM and Chrysler had hoped would lead to another infusion of government cash

If this isn't the govt running the auto industry based on what IT thinks should be produced. Which is part, not all, but part of the reason the auto makers are in the trouble their in. I might add that SUV's and trucks are GM's biggest sellers. With the gas being $2 a gallon now, people don't want smaller hybrid cars. They aren't selling. So now Obama wants them to sell cars that people don't want??? :doh:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123841609048669495.html

GM was also told in no uncertain terms that it must learn to make money on smaller cars–not just trucks and sport-utility vehicles, the dealer said.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have enough shares of a company you have a lot of say.... just sayin' Heck, I've been begged, petitioned and on a occassionally personally solicited to vote a certain way with my paulty couple thousand shares of certain stocks.

I'll plead ignorance on this one....how many shares did the gov't buy when they gave GM bailout $?

If that's what it was, a buying of stock, then GM is under no obligation to pay that money back right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:hysterical:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/29960093

New GM CEO: Bankruptcy May Be Best Option for Automaker

Dimwit:silly:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Beyond-AIG-A-Bill-to-let-Big-Government-Set-Your-Salary-42158597.html

But now, in a little-noticed move, the House Financial Services Committee, led by chairman Barney Frank, has approved a measure that would, in some key ways, go beyond the most draconian features of the original AIG bill. The new legislation, the "Pay for Performance Act of 2009," would impose government controls on the pay of all employees -- not just top executives -- of companies that have received a capital investment from the U.S. government. It would, like the tax measure, be retroactive, changing the terms of compensation agreements already in place. And it would give Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner extraordinary power to determine the pay of thousands of employees of American companies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...