Investor Reneges; GMAC Headed for C11. GM Next?

by Robert Farago

Published: December 18th, 2008

investor reneges gmac headed for c11 gm next

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reports that General Motor’s former captive finance unit and current chest-strapped TNT device looks set to miss its deadline for a debt-for-equity swap. GMAC needs to get the deal done to transform itself into a bank and score federal funding under the Troubled Asset Relief Plan (TARP). “GMAC needs to show $30 billion of capital in order to become a bank holding company regulated by the Federal Reserve… As of Wednesday, GMAC had received 58% of existing, eligible GMAC debt securities and 38% of outstanding debt securities of ResCap (as the mortgage unit is also known) — little changed from late Tuesday. Around 75% of the selected securities must be tendered for the proposed debt restructuring to succeed in raising capital that would go toward satisfying GMAC’s conditions to become a bank holding company.” Those plans took a major hit today…

“ Pacific Investment Management Co., a large bondholder of GMAC LLC debt, is unlikely to participate in the lender’s massive debt restructuring offer, said a person familiar with the matter.”

A WSJ source says if GMAC fails to reach its goals by close of play tomorrow, it might put its ailing mortgage unit, Residential Capital LLC, into bankruptcy. The move would be an attempt to cauterize the wound, so that GMAC could continue its auto financing and other operations. If that fails, and GMAC as a whole goes down, GM is through. Thousands of GM dealers would lose inventory financing and go belly-up, flooding the market with hundreds of thousands of unsellable vehicles.

This on the eve of the President’s decision on GM and Chrysler’s “managed bankruptcy” or similar. It’s going to be a busy not to say historic day…

Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 32 comments

PeteMoran on Dec 19, 2008

@ nonce Thanks for sharing. Back-door it through GMAC eh? The black hole maybe real. Hang on for a rough ride everybody.

Like Reply
Pch101 on Dec 19, 2008
If the car companies stay in business after this mess the dealerships should be run with one demonstrator model of each car, and then if the customer wants to purchase that model his car is “made to order” from the factory like a Subway sandwich. That model will not work in the US, for a lot of reasons. The current business model works well here, but the domestics have too many dealerships for the dealers themselves to be profitable. The best dealers would be better off if they had less competition from fewer dealers. On another note, we're now going to get to see how fragile the GM operation really is. They've been dumping inventory that can't be sold into the dealerships in order to claim the revenue on their books. With that gimmick under threat, their financial picture is going to get much uglier very quickly.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

ToolGuy First picture: I realize that opinions vary on the height of modern trucks, but that entry door on the building is 80 inches tall and hits just below the headlights. Does anyone really believe this is reasonable?Second picture: I do not believe that is a good parking spot to be able to access the bed storage. More specifically, how do you plan to unload topsoil with the truck parked like that? Maybe you kids are taller than me.
ToolGuy The other day I attempted to check the engine oil in one of my old embarrassing vehicles and I guess the red shop towel I used wasn't genuine Snap-on (lots of counterfeits floating around) plus my driveway isn't completely level and long story short, the engine seized 3 minutes later.No more used cars for me, and nothing but dealer service from here on in (the journalists were right).
Doughboy Wow, Merc knocks it out of the park with their naming convention… again. /s
Doughboy I’ve seen car bras before, but never car beards. ZZ Top would be proud.
Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.