Ford Motor Company Did or Didnt take bailout money???

[lilranch2001]

You know, thinking again about what you wrote.... please show me where I condoned GM's bankruptcy and their ditching their obligations to stockholders, dealers, creditors, etc...
Having shares in many mutual funds, some of which held GM stock, I got screwed by GM just like so many others.

On the subject of Ford, all I did was point out that Ford took government loans at a time when NO ONE ELSE WOULD LEND THEM MONEY. The American people lent them their money because NO ONE ELSE WOULD. If that's doesn't fit the definition of "bailout" its pretty darn close....

Bailout Definition | Investopedia

IF YOU READ MY POST AND THE POST I QUOTED FROM YOU.......
You will see you were making a stand that GM and Chrysler repaid their debt, and in my humble opinion they never have.
This was the first time in history investors never got any piece of the pie so to speak
So my point was no, those two companies have NOT repaid their debt.

Thus the reason I spoke with my purchasing power and purchased my first new ford since 1977 .
I have bought 4 new jeeps, and 5 GM pickup trucks (built in my back yard) since I bought that 1977 F-250, and now I have a shiny new Blue F-150 sitting out in the barn taking the spot of my late GMC

 

[fordmantpw]

You know, thinking again about what you wrote.... please show me where I condoned GM's bankruptcy and their ditching their obligations to stockholders, dealers, creditors, etc...
Having shares in many mutual funds, some of which held GM stock, I got screwed by GM just like so many others.

On the subject of Ford, all I did was point out that Ford took government loans at a time when NO ONE ELSE WOULD LEND THEM MONEY. The American people lent them their money because NO ONE ELSE WOULD. If that's doesn't fit the definition of "bailout" its pretty darn close....

Bailout Definition | Investopedia

Ford took out loans from plenty of places. They mortgaged everything, including the 'blue oval' as the saying goes. The saw the downturn coming (and knew they were in a big mess) and got the loans before the financial markets dried up.

They took the government loans because they were available and at a low interest. It wasn't "in order to prevent the consequences that arise from a business's downfall," it was in order to help Ford create more vehicles with higher fuel economy. That money was offered to all auto-makers, and Nissan (IIRC) took some of the loans as well others. It was not a bailout, it was an incentive to reduce fuel consumption. Ford did not go to the govt. asking for money, the govt. said, "Here is the money at a low interest rate. Come and get it if you want it, but you have to use it to decrease fuel use in your vehicles."

It's amazing how much mis-information is really out there on this subject...

 

[MossRoad]

IF YOU READ MY POST AND THE POST I QUOTED FROM YOU.......
You will see you were making a stand that GM and Chrysler repaid their debt, and in my humble opinion they never have.
This was the first time in history investors never got any piece of the pie so to speak
So my point was no, those two companies have NOT repaid their debt.

Thus the reason I spoke with my purchasing power and purchased my first new ford since 1977 .
I have bought 4 new jeeps, and 5 GM pickup trucks (built in my back yard) since I bought that 1977 F-250, and now I have a shiny new Blue F-150 sitting out in the barn taking the spot of my late GMC

I was not taking a stand on GM or Chrysler paying their debt. I was pointing out that Ford had a nearly $6,000,000,000 loan at the time, since for some reason, folks don't want to acknowledge that Ford took a huge government (you and me and Mr. and Mrs. taxpayer) loan. The only thing they didn't do was declare bankruptcy. Technically speaking, GM and Chrylser did pay back their legal debts on those loans. They screwed their creditors, but they paid back their loans. Their debt to morality, not so good.
:thumbdown:

As for vehicles, I've only purchased one new car in my life. An '89 Chevy Cavalier. All others have been used Chevy's and GMC, and a 71 Toyota Landcruiser, with the exception of a used 2004 Mercury Sable college car we just went halvsies on with our child. Only our current car, a 2013 Impala, is a post-bankruptcy GM product, and we bought that as an off-rental from a used car company, so no money to GM for that one.

 

[Monster5601]

It's amazing how much mis-information is really out there on this subject...

Amen!

If the bail-outs didn't happen like many of you wish, then millions of fellow Americans would have lost their job, communities would have closed up. Every auto brand on the globe would have been affected due to loss of automotive suppliers. Seems some of you are awfully quick to through your neighbor under the bus. Why always pick on GM? Why not Chrysler? How about the many banks that failed to pay-back, not a word about them. Seems like a lot of prejudice toward American workers.

 

[Diamondpilot]

Amen!

If the bail-outs didn't happen like many of you wish, then millions of fellow Americans would have lost their job, communities would have closed up. Every auto brand on the globe would have been affected due to loss of automotive suppliers. Seems some of you are awfully quick to through your neighbor under the bus. Why always pick on GM? Why not Chrysler? How about the many banks that failed to pay-back, not a word about them. Seems like a lot of prejudice toward American workers.

Boy, you really bought into the liberal media. I worked in the automotive industry at that time as did my father. We were both screwed as supplier's with our companies because of GM but are still open today and would have been.

It's business 101. Strong survive and weak falter. If they would have declared bankruptcy the normal way everything would have been fine. The strongest brands of GM would have survived and the weak would have faltered or been sold to the competition. The other manufacturers would have gained market share. The suppliers would have sold their goods to the new guy on the block. Pretty simple middle school stuff. Seems many missed that day.

As for GM vs Chrysler. GM stuck us with a bailout then when no one would buy the products or "NEW" stock the US Government had to step in once more and buy a then worthless product at an obscure rate of $35 a share to keep the lights on. All this while loosing market share.

Chrysler on the other hand became Fiat by selling off the company and repaying their debt asap with no further assistance. In doing so they became a much stronger and better company and as a bonus gained market share.

GM will be bankrupt once again. They are behind the eight ball because the funds were tight for so long. Engine development is where they really lack. To start from scratch your looking at about 7 years. They just keep doing the same old same old while the competition is screaming past them.

Chris

 

[wawajake]

Seems your displaying the height of hypocrisy Chris............so are you also saying all the 900 or so banks and other companies on the list of "bailouts" should of gone bankrupt too? ..........and are you dragging all their names thru the mud every chance you get with exaggerated claims of poor products and poor service or just a couple of them because they effected your large bank deposit?

Ps I have to smile about your comment re GM not having engine development, meanwhile their latest 5.3 V8 technology has no problem beating similar size ecoboost Ford in gas mileage and respectable power without needing to resort to a troublesome turbo...and considering Ford's histroy of problems with turbos continues(eg 6 litre D a few years ago) ......those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

 

[Monster5601]

Boy, you really bought into the liberal media.
Chris

Sorry Chris, I didn't buy in, I stated fact. I work for Lear, one of the largest Tier 1 automotive suppliers in the world. We make everything from seating to wiring harnesses, to body electronics. If GM went down, the loss of cash flow would have brought us down. There is not one auto manufacture in the world we do not make parts for, if we went down, every auto company would have had to stop building for lack of parts. Lear is not the only Tier 1 supplier, there are many more plus the Tier 2 and 3 suppliers that would have gone down with the Tier 1s.

I do not have a favorable view of GM or their management, current or past. I too believe they will once again go under. I didn't have a problem with the automotive bail-outs because I wanted to keep my job, keep the value of my home, e.t.c.. I had a problem with the way the bail-outs were managed by GM and our government.

Top GM execs paid $1 million in last year of bailout | Business - Home

How corporate executives that displayed such outrageous incompetency can be so well reward, on my dime, is what I can't deal with.

 

[ruffdog]

Sounds like someone positioned themselves in the wrong spot and got burned and now blames GM for everything bad in their life.

 

[wawajake]

Good point Ruffdog........

Quite frankly I think considering the "brand bashing" advice thread on "trailers and transportation forum" I suggest that this thread and any Avatar pictures that members like Chris have that denigrade other brands should be asked to be changed so that they do not inflame the brand bashing further. (that includes me)

 

[roadhunter]

I see the Ford folks are doing the SSDD act yet again. Funny thing was yesterday he was telling me I'm the problem. Now I see he is arguing the same point with others. At some point you would think he might realize he is the problem. Brand bashing sucks IMO.