Will Visteon Drag Ford Down?

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

The Ford-as-Survivor meme has properly taken hold in the mainstream media. But how much of the cheerleading is wishful thinking? Matt Debord of thebigmoney.com figures there’s no reason to get to excited about Ford’s $300 million stock offering, and indeed Ford’s stock is down considerably today. But Ford’s troubled supplier Visteon turned a $2 million Q1 profit, insists the Freep. The first quarterly profit since 2006! What you have to read in the whole piece to find out is that the profit comes courtesy of Visteon’s spun-off and bankrupted UK facilities. Meanwhile, Automotive News [sub] reports that Visteon financial filings admit the firm’s “ability to continue operating as a going concern is, among other things, dependent on the success of discussions with the lenders.”

Visteon’s abandonment of its UK facilities is a story unto itself. The Belfast Telegraph reports that workers there received six minutes notice of their termination, setting off protests and sit-ins that The Guardian wistfully describes as part of a “global wave” of direct worker action. For the Freep the story is far more simple. “When Visteon put its operations in England and Northern Ireland into bankruptcy, Visteon shed that division’s assets and liabilities. Because the liabilities outweighed assets, Visteon was able to record a gain during the first quarter,” goes the Freep‘s only explanation of how Visteon actually made a profit. Incidentally, Delphi also turned a profit. By cutting salaried retiree health care and life insurance payments. Mamas don’t let your babies grow up to be suppliers.

Meanwhile, one of the lenders that Visteon admits being “dependent on” is Chrysler, who owes the supplier $26 million. Good luck getting that money. Meanwhile, other financial disclosure filings reveal that Visteon will be fine. As long as the entire economy fixes itself overnight. To wit:

The Company continues to develop and execute, as appropriate, additional actions designed to generate liquidity. The success of the Company’s liquidity plans depends on global economic conditions, levels of automotive sales and production, trade creditor business conduct and occurrence of no other material adverse developments. Additionally, various macro-level factors outside of the Company’s control may further negatively impact the Company’s ability to meet its obligations as they come due. Such factors include, but are not limited to, the following:

Sustained weakness and/or continued deterioration of global economic conditions.

Continued automotive sales and production at levels consistent with or lower than first quarter 2009.

Bankruptcy of any significant customer resulting in delayed payment and/or non-payment of receivables.

Bankruptcy of any significant supplier resulting in delayed shipments of materials necessary for production.

Meanwhile, Ford accounts for nearly a third of Visteon’s business. If its major supplier goes under (which seems likely—you can’t dump divisions and screw workers for a profit every quarter), Ford is facing a walk of shame to the government handout line in short order. Which would wipe out any imagined advantage it might have over its Detroit competitors.

Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 9 comments
  • Ihatetrees Ihatetrees on May 12, 2009
    SpeedRacerrrr: Exactly!!! I made a similar comment in another post and nobody even batted an eye! Yeah. The administration dropped the ball - especially in not liquidating Chrysler. Ford is still slower than the transplants. And least able to outrun the Chrysler and GM zombies. (No, having transplants is NOT the same thing!). Having lived in UAW areas, it'd say it's better.
  • SpeedRacerrrrr SpeedRacerrrrr on May 12, 2009
    (No, having transplants is NOT the same thing!). Having lived in UAW areas, it’d say it’s better. I wasn't thinking in terms of comparing transplant factories with factories of the domestic auto makers. I was thinking, rather, that it is better to have the creative, intellectual and financial base here, owned and managed by US citizens. This is true for a number of reasons. A major reason a company will locate a plant here is to reduce its costs. If all we as a nation want to offer or can offer the automotive world is cheaper labor and land, then I submit we are shorting our future. Not a good thing to do.
  • MaintenanceCosts Poorly packaged, oddly proportioned small CUV with an unrefined hybrid powertrain and a luxury-market price? Who wouldn't want it?
  • MaintenanceCosts Who knows whether it rides or handles acceptably or whether it chews up a set of tires in 5000 miles, but we definitely know it has a "mature stance."Sounds like JUST the kind of previous owner you'd want…
  • 28-Cars-Later Nissan will be very fortunate to not be in the Japanese equivalent of Chapter 11 reorganization over the next 36 months, "getting rolling" is a luxury (also, I see what you did there).
  • MaintenanceCosts RAM! RAM! RAM! ...... the child in the crosswalk that you can't see over the hood of this factory-lifted beast.
  • 3-On-The-Tree Yes all the Older Land Cruiser’s and samurai’s have gone up here as well. I’ve taken both vehicle ps on some pretty rough roads exploring old mine shafts etc. I bought mine right before I deployed back in 08 and got it for $4000 and also bought another that is non running for parts, got a complete engine, drive train. The mice love it unfortunately.
Next