GM Will Spend $109 Million To Preserve 96 Michigan Jobs

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

PapaG

Banned User
BANNED
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
32,870
Likes
291
Points
0
For Pete's sake, won't you liberals just buy the freaking Volt!!!

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/gm-investing-109-million-to-keep-or-add-96-michigan-jobs-2011-05-13

General Motors will invest $109 million in its operations in Flint and Bay City , Mich., to support engine production for current and future fuel-efficient small cars produced for the U.S. market. The investment will protect or add 96 jobs at the two sites.

"This investment marks the second major increase in engine and engine component output in less than six months - a sign that GM is moving quickly to meet growing demand for more fuel-efficient cars," said Terri Burden, Flint Engine Operations plant manager.

In November 2010, GM announced plans to invest $151 million and protect 143 jobs at the Flint and Bay City plants. The latest investment is part of a $2 billion investment to create or retain more than 4,000 hourly and salaried jobs at 17 facilities in eight states.

"This additional GM investment in the Ecotec engine is a testament to all the UAW Local 599 members who have worked so hard to make the 1.4-liter engine America's first choice," said Terry Everman, chairman of UAW Local 599 at Flint Engine Operations.

Of the $109 million, $84 million will be used at Flint to increase 1.4-liter engine capacity. Bay City's investment of $25 million is for connecting rods and camshafts used in the engine.
 
With the tsunami supposedly damaging Prius manufacturing and with gas prices near $4, it stands to reason electric car sales might increase. It's a gamble, but business is about risk. I also suspect Obama will win a second term and will assist GM/UAW if they get into dire straits. So maybe the gamble isn't so big after all. Still, if I were GM I'd probably do the same thing.
 
If it costs $1m per job over 10 years, it's a good deal. For 5 years or less, not so much.
 
I think the thread title is a bit misleading. They are making an investment in engine production, not jobs per se.

barfo
 
I think the thread title is a bit misleading. They are making an investment in engine production, not jobs per se.

barfo

Yet the press release mentioned jobs, didn't it?
 
Yet the press release mentioned jobs, didn't it?

Yes, but press releases are written by people in marketing.

barfo
 
Yes, but press releases are written by people in marketing.

barfo

The cost per job is bad PR, especially since we taxpayers bailed them out.
 
I think we as taxpayers "saved or created" their jobs as well. :sigh:
 
Didn't GM pay back the loan in full? And if they did, who really cares?
 
no, they're about 60% there (last I checked was 8.1B back of the 13.4B given).

But I agree...how they spend R&D while repaying the loan doesn't bother me much.
 
GM Will Spend $109 Million In Another Poor Business Decision Dumping Money Into Cars People Will Not Buy.

Seems more accurate.
 
Didn't GM pay back the loan in full? And if they did, who really cares?

No. Not even close, actually. The "loan" was semantics to fool idiots. Looks like they caught one!

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ceo-says-gm-has-repaid-government-loans-full/

With GM in deep trouble and hundreds of thousands of jobs in the balance, the Obama administration -- through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) -- stepped forward with tens of billions of dollars worth of assistance. As of March 31, 2010, the U.S. Treasury had committed approximately $52.4 billion to GM.

Only a fraction of that, $6.7 billion, was in the form of loans. Most of the government's GM investment was converted to an ownership stake in the New GM, the company that emerged from bankruptcy: $2.1 billion in preferred stock; and 60.8 percent of the company's common equity.

GM had already made several installments in paying back the $6.7 billion loan. But on April 21, 2010, GM announced that it had paid back the entirety of the remaining $4.7 billion in loans from the U.S. government (and another $1.1 million to the Canadian government). GM had until 2015 to pay back those loans.

So the loan portion of the GM bailout was, in fact, settled, with interest, five years ahead of schedule.

But the U.S. government is still on the hook for the bulk of its investment in GM. Again, the U.S. Treasury owns $2.1 billion in preferred stock and a 60.8 percent stake in the company. GM plans an initial public offering (IPO) as soon as this summer, and the government plans to sell off its interest in the company over time. The better the company does, the more the government looks to recoup. But the prospects for the government getting all its money back don't look promising.

On March 18, 2010, the government's nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected the government will end up losing $34 billion in TARP funds extended to the automotive industry. The CBO didn't break out how much of that is tied to GM, but it's fair to say most of it.
 

By last fall, however, the Treasury Department had revised its loss on the bailout downward, to $17 billion.

$17 billion is TARP's cost, not hundreds of billions, which was simply the amount paid out temporarily. The temporary outlay caused the 1-year deficit of what was it, a trillion or something. As this money is paid back (loans and selling back the stock, for example GM stock) each year, it will decrease that year's deficit to compensate for the giant upfront deficit caused by the temporary government outlay.

So two things are deceiving: cost of TARP and Obama's giant deficit. When reading about them, decrease both by paybacks.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top