You Have GOT to Be Kidding

you have got to be kidding

Financial advisers seem to agree that a panic-fueled stock market decline has opened a number of opportunities to snag solid investments on the cheap. Stock in solid, well-proven companies is being sold at huge discounts as panic grips the market. So why in the name of price-earnings ratios is the Detroit News shilling Ford and GM stock? Well, to be fair, the newspaper itself isn’t hyping stocks, because “Biz Insider can’t officially offer investment guidance into purchases of General Motors Corp. or Ford Motor Co. stock.” And why would they, when they have professional misleaders for that job? Former Chrysler spokesman and now Compuware Corp. veep Jason Vines “shared his own thoughts on the stock at the annual Automotive Hall of Fame dinner, telling the crowd of auto aficionados to buy, buy, buy Ford and GM paper.” No, seriously. And guess what else Vines would suggest you buy?

Chrysler stock. Too bad that the company is completely fucked privately held and doesn’t offer stock. Or, as Vines puts it, “they just have a three-headed Devil dog over there.” Seriously, wow. Though this blogger is certainly not qualified to offer investment advice, while there are surely some values out there in the automotive sector, you have to be dumber than shit on a stick to buy Ford or GM right now. These are not “solid firms selling at a discount based on irrational panic,” these are “dogs.” Plain and simple. Not convinced? DetN proves the point a short paragraph later. “Ford Executive Chairman Bill Ford Jr. has seen his nearly 5 million shares decline in value by about $16 million since Sept. 30, and that doesn’t include the stack of cash he and his family have lost from their preferred shares. Also watching a Ford fortune whittle away is billionaire investor Kirk Kerkorian, who has seen his $1 billion play in the company fall to just over $300 million. Across town at GM, Vice Chairman Bob Lutz is the biggest owner of company paper with 81,360 shares, meaning he’s lost nearly $400,000 this month. Don’t worry, though, they’ll all be fine.”

Join the conversation
2 of 20 comments
  • Bdplaid Bdplaid on Oct 14, 2008

    F-bomb still appears in the feed title. I'm a 51 year old rock musician and even I object to the use of that word in this context. Kids aside, there's a place for everything, and this ain't it. See, I respect the f***ing sensibilities of others, and it's just plain f***ing offensive. As for the f***ing objections to the objections on f***ing vulgarity: maybe you complaining f***ers no longer know the f***ing difference. F***ing American culture sure doesn't f***ing seem to. Have I made my point?

  • Jbstevens Jbstevens on Oct 14, 2008

    I think what bdplaid meant to say was "Have I made my f***ing point?". Seriously, I'm not offended by the use of the F word and find it effective as long as it's not overused. I've seen many items on the nightly news that offend me far more than the f bomb. However, I understand that some are offended and don't have any argument with them. TTAC can react as they please based on the feedback. I visit this site for auto news and reviews that don't read like infomercials. When that changes, I'll be offended.

  • Dennis Howerton Nice article, Cory. Makes me wish I had bought Festivas when they were being produced. Kia made them until the line was discontinued, but Kia evidently used some of the technology to make the Rio. Pictures of the interior look a lot like my Rio's interior, and the 1.5 liter engine is from Mazda while Ford made the automatic transmission in the used 2002 Rio I've been driving since 2006. I might add the Rio is also an excellent subcompact people mover.
  • Sgeffe Bronco looks with JLR “reliability!”What’s not to like?!
  • FreedMike Back in the '70s, the one thing keeping consumers from buying more Datsuns was styling - these guys were bringing over some of the ugliest product imaginable. Remember the F10? As hard as I try to blot that rolling aberration from my memory, it comes back. So the name change to Nissan made sense, and happened right as they started bringing over good-looking product (like the Maxima that will be featured in this series). They made a pretty clean break.
  • Flowerplough Liability - Autonomous vehicles must be programmed to make life-ending decisions, and who wants to risk that? Hit the moose or dive into the steep grassy ditch? Ram the sudden pile up that is occurring mere feet in front of the bumper or scan the oncoming lane and swing left? Ram the rogue machine that suddenly swung into my lane, head on, or hop up onto the sidewalk and maybe bump a pedestrian? With no driver involved, Ford/Volkswagen or GM or whomever will bear full responsibility and, in America, be ambulance-chaser sued into bankruptcy and extinction in well under a decade. Or maybe the yuge corporations will get special, good-faith, immunity laws, nation-wide? Yeah, that's the ticket.
  • FreedMike It's not that consumers wouldn't want this tech in theory - I think they would. Honestly, the idea of a car that can take over the truly tedious driving stuff that drives me bonkers - like sitting in traffic - appeals to me. But there's no way I'd put my property and my life in the hands of tech that's clearly not ready for prime time, and neither would the majority of other drivers. If they want this tech to sell, they need to get it right.