General Motors Death Watch 122: Burn Baby Burn

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

GM’s Board of Bystanders just voted to allow its top execs to resume trading their company’s shares. GM’s big dogs have until May 21 to buy, sell, or buy and then sell their company-subsidized stock. According to Bloomberg News, it’s “another sign of confidence at GM.” Viewed another way, it’s a sign of impending doom. This fall, after GM fails to wrest any significant concessions from the United Auto Workers (UAW), after the full extent of GM’s cash conflagration becomes apparent to the Street, bankruptcy will once again loom large and GM stock will tank.

Looking at General Motors’ inflated stock price, I reckon Wallace Hartley’s band could have taken a few anti-anxiety tips from GM’s spinmeisters. GM’s PR machine has successfully focused the minds of both the press and the investment community on cost cutting, union buyouts, new products, theoretical new products, Chinese Buicks, carbon cap groups, anything and everything save the only thing that really matters: cash.

In its last quarterly statement, GM reported that it has $24.7b in the hopper. It’s generally accepted that the automaker needs $10b to keep the lights on (i.e. pay suppliers). So General Motors is $14.7b away from filing for Chapter 11 protection. Of course, that’s the best (worst?) case scenario; if General Motors has any sense, they’ll declare bankruptcy before hitting the wall and save some much-needed cash for restructuring. Anyway, they’re headed in that direction.

Last quarter, GM reported that it had immolated $1.7b of its cash hoard. All things being equal (i.e. no turnaround), the company’s coffers will be lightened by $6.8b this year. If GM’s cash burn continues at that rate, the company has a little over two years before bumping-up against the 10 bil barrier.

But all things are not equal– even without supposing GM’s turnaround turns into a nose dive. For one thing, the first quarter’s results are not the harbinger of things to come.

Last quarter, GM’s accounts payable rose by roughly a billion dollars. It’s entirely possible that the extra bil represents the current state of pay and belongs on the cash burn side of the ledger. If so, that would raise the [artist formerly known as the world’s largest] automaker’s quarterly cash burn to $2.7b per quarter. At that pace, General Motors could only evade bankruptcy for another year and four months.

At the same time, GM’s also declared that it will spend between $8b and $9.5b on capital expenditure (i.e. developing new products) this year. In the first financial quarter, GM spent just $1.2b of that total– some $800m to $1.17b less than one quarter of the total amount of their planned “cap ex.” If they spread the rest of the expense evenly over the last three quarters, that’s an additional $277m to $392m heaped onto GM's quarterly cash burn.

There’s one reason and one reason only why GM’s feeling the burn: the North American market. This quarter, GM North America (GMNA) posted an adjusted loss of $85m. This after selling the family jewels, cutting structural costs to the bone, trimming production and, most importantly, introducing a raft of new products. If GMNA’s not making a profit now with their new metal glittering in the marketplace, how will they do so in the short to long-term future?

There’s only one answer to that vexing conundrum: drastically cut the UAW’s wages, health care and pension costs. As we’ve said before, there’s not a hope in Hell that’s going to happen. For one thing, unions are in the business of increasing wages and benefits. For another, CEO Rick Wagoner’s $10.2m smash and grab compensation package has destroyed management’s bargaining position. But most critically, GM is profitable.

Although GM’s European operations are flat, GM Asia Pacific (GMAP) is on fire. Low-cost (non-union) labor and hot products have increased the unit’s sales by 20 percent, boosting revenue by 35 percent to $4.6b. GM Latin America, Africa and Middle East (GMLAAM) is also cranking. First quarter net income tripled to $201 million in the first quarter of 2007. Russia, India, China– the rest of the world is GM’s oyster.

This international dichotomy plays straight into the union’s hands. As long as GM’s foreign relations are banking bucks, their American and Canadian unions are happy to tough it out, take Johnny Foreigner’s money and keep on keeping on. If GM somehow turns its North America operations around, great! If not, so what? Let it limp.

Which brings us to the end game.

GM’s foreign operations can’t grow quickly enough to damp down the flames of GMNA’s cash burn. And even if they did, GM’s Board of Bystanders would eventually recognize that GMNA is a bottomless pit. GM’s foreign ops will need every dollar they make to compete against cash rich Toyota. One way or another, GMNA’s going down. GM execs are banking on it right now.

Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 39 comments
  • Gentle Ted Gentle Ted on May 17, 2007

    GM Canada is again asking Ontario Taxpayers to fund the expansion of the St. Catherines Ontario plant so that it can make transmissions for there new rear wheel drive vehicles, the first one being the new Sports model, I thought that GM decided not too build rear drive Cars?

  • GM Philosopher GM Philosopher on May 17, 2007

    JurisB: You'd probably be surprised at how much of your plan corresponds with GM's actual strategy to revive a strong NA market based on US products. But it's pernicious to think that GM can return to being only-US oriented. Toyota's ascendance has been built on globalism (and lots of Japanese government help), and GM's job is to compete in the current world, not 1967. As to GM executives, this is a tlatented group that "gets it," and is working hard to navigate out of nearly 30 years of mismanagement beginning in 1964, followed by ten years of desperate bumping around in the dark, and finally discovering a true path only since 2004. Even more than you, they wish it were easy and fast and could be resolved in an internet forum post.

  • Redapple2 Love the wheels
  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Off-road fluff on vehicles that should not be off road needs to die.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Saw this posted on social media; “Just bought a 2023 Tundra with the 14" screen. Let my son borrow it for the afternoon, he connected his phone to listen to his iTunes.The next day my insurance company raised my rates and added my son to my policy. The email said that a private company showed that my son drove the vehicle. He already had his own vehicle that he was insuring.My insurance company demanded he give all his insurance info and some private info for proof. He declined for privacy reasons and my insurance cancelled my policy.These new vehicles with their tech are on condition that we give up our privacy to enter their world. It's not worth it people.”
Next