You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views
GM News, New Models and Market Share

8270 messages, Last post on Nov 23, 2009 at 5:01 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Dec 26, 2008 6:22 am)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 26, 2008 6:40 am) http://www.gmacmortgage.com/index.html http://www.gmacbank.com/index.html And then they have a GMAC financial group that offers "Demand Notes" that when I call the above link they say they have nothing to do with the Demand notes, yet the logos look the same. http://www.gmacfs.com/us/en/business/investing/demandnotes/ Which of these 3 are getting the money and becoming a bank? Well I answered my own question. Per the media GMAC FINANCIAL will be getting the money. I believe that when Cerberus bought GMAC from GM they only purchased the Financial part and not the bank/Mortgage part? So now there will be two GMAC banks?? So confusing. But now I found a link to GMAC bank/Mortgage from the GMAC financial website and this: GMAC Financial Services is a global finance company operating in and servicing North America, South America, Europe and Asia-Pacific. GMAC specializes in automotive finance, real estate finance, insurance, commercial finance and online banking. As of Dec. 31, 2007, the organization had $249 billion in assets and serviced 15 million customers. Founded in 1919 as a wholly owned subsidiary of General Motors Corp., GMAC was established to provide GM dealers with the financing necessary to acquire and maintain vehicle inventories and to provide customers a means by which to finance vehicle purchases. The company's products and services have since been expanded and now include three primary lines of business: automotive financing, real estate financing and insurance. On Nov. 30, 2006, GM sold a 51 percent controlling interest in GMAC to a consortium of investors led by Cerberus Capital Management, L.P., a private investment firm, and included Citigroup Inc., Aozora Bank Ltd. and a subsidiary of The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. So it looks like all of the above is one company with 51% owned by Cerberus and 49% by GM. So the first link says they are a bank. What changed to make GMAC a bank that can get money? What is different that they can call themselves a bank holding bank?? FYI, GM got $13 billion for the 51% they sold to Cerberus in 2006.
|
|
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Dec 26, 2008 7:42 am) |
|
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Dec 26, 2008 6:22 am)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: jae5 (Dec 26, 2008 11:52 am) If GM held 51% I would say it would get out since it would help GM. At 10% with non voting shares I believe they will have little recourse? |
|
|
|
|
General Motors has spent millions of dollars developing and marketing its 2010 Chevrolet Camaro, which is scheduled to go into production in February. But the bankruptcy of an interior parts supplier is threatening to delay the pony car, which isn’t just bad news for GM, but could have a ripple effect on dealers and even other suppliers. In an effort to prevent a delay of the new Camaro, GM has filed a lawsuit against Cadence Innovation LLC, accusing the company of “holding hostage” the parts it needs to put the car into production. The suit demands Cadence immediately hand over the parts and equipment required for a new supplier to take over. GM says it needs to have a new supplier in place by January 12th, or it will not be able to begin production of the Camaro on schedule. “Even one day’s disruption in supply of certain component parts could cause a shutdown of GM assembly operations, disrupting not only GM’s business, but the operations of countless suppliers, dealers, customers and other stakeholders,” the lawsuit states.
|
|
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Dec 26, 2008 7:38 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Dec 26, 2008 7:38 pm) My company for example has our R&D people sourcing materials from a 2nd supplier even if we don't use them. We have them as a backup. On some of our parts we buy 50% from Supplier 1 and 50% from Supplier 2 to keep both in business, and to play one against the other if needed. GM then is really vulnerable to any strike. Or what if the plant making those parts has a fire and burns down tomorrow? Maybe GM ought to manage better, and stop suing others because of their stupidity. |
|
|
Replying to: kernick (Dec 27, 2008 7:55 am) And the truth to be told, there are more "foreign" plants operating on U.S. soil than ther are GM plants. Canada isn't the U.S. auto industry. Mexico isn't either. China is pretty much the anti-industry(think Anti-Christ for appropriate emphasis here). Tennessee and Georgia? Last I checked, those are inside the U.S. Yes, it's a "Japanese" make, but the reality is is that the U.S. auto industry has been taken over just like the TV and electronics industries were. And last I checked, people seem awfully happy to buy those iPods. And Hondas and Toyotas. Lastly - I bring this up again because the reality is that it doesn't matter where the car company's headquarters is. All that matters is where it's made. Those plants generate hundreds of millions of dollars a year in wages, upkeep, taxes, and other money just to keep running. And 99% of it is staying in the local economy. Honda is making a couple of thousand profit over cost on most cars that it sells. Most of that is eaten up by marketing and other costs, though. Their actual "profit" is very small. More than 50% of the entire cost of the car that you buy, though, is going into the pockets of the workers or someone who works or services or supplies the plant. The NUUMI plant in Fremont, CA. Generates a total of one billion dollars to the state economy. That's GM and Toyota working together, but it's not the norm. It's buying "Not made in the U.S." that's killing our industry. Not failing to support GM, Ford, and Chrysler.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views
GM News, New Models and Market Share
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle


Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats