Federal Bankruptcy Judge Clears New GM for Takeoff

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

Here’s the (warning) 87-page ruling that allows “Old GM” to sell its best assets to “New GM.” The bottom line: Judge Robert E. Gerber of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York brushed aside objections by dissident bondholders and product-liability claimants. Judge Gerber accepted the government/bankrupt automaker’s argument that there was no alternative to the Old-to-New-GM asset sale save liquidation, which would be “a disastrous result for GM’s creditors, its employees, the suppliers who depend on GM for their own existence, and the communities in which GM operates.” What’s more (or less), “In the event of a liquidation, creditors now trying to increase their incremental recoveries would get nothing.”

Before the ruling, TTAC contributor Steve Jakubowski told us the that judge was largely sympathetic to his argument that New GM should retain legal responsibility for the products created by Old GM. Fat lot of good that did, as The Wall Street Journal reports:

In his ruling, Judge Gerber said the question of whether the new GM should be subject to so-called “successor liability” represented “the only truly debatable issues in this case.” But the judge said he was bound by legal precedent – including Chrysler’s recent sale to Fiat SpA free of such liabilities – in not making GM go further than it already had on product-liability claims.

Jakubowski will appeal. “Injuries before New GM becomes official will not be covered by New GM,” the lawyer told us. “Injuries after closing are covered.” Meanwhile, The Detroit Free Press provides a profile of the man assigned to “lead” Old GM into oblivion: Al Koch.

Koch comes to praise ex-GM CEO Rick Wagoner (“You feel badly for a guy that you like. Rick’s a guy who worked his tail off for the company for a long time”) and to bury him (“Even as former Chief Executive Officer Rick Wagoner and others at GM kept warning that consumers would not buy vehicles from a bankrupt automaker, the company was quietly preparing for Chapter 11”). Note: told ya.

Strangely, The Freep doesn’t ask Koch how much he or his firm charged Old GM so far, or will charge New GM to “dispose of 50 surplus GM properties and wrangle with bondholders, product liability lawyers and others trying to grab a few crumbs from what’s being discarded by GM.” Brrrr.

Uncle Sam’s set aside $1.175 billion (up from $950 million) to euthanize Old GM. It’s not clear whether Alix’s crew will wet their beak from that billion, or get a separate pay-off. Lest we forget, a trustee for the feds called GM’s previous bankruptcy-related legal fees gross and unjustifiable. So much for that then. And according to a source speaking to TTAC about the cost of environmental clean-up, the money assigned in that regard is woefully inadequate. TTAC is investigating.

Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 20 comments
  • U mad scientist U mad scientist on Jul 06, 2009
    The fact remains that a number of respected law professors and financiers including financial supporters of Obama have said that the treatment of senior and secured creditors in the Chrysler bankruptcy were highly irregular and could jeopardize investments. You can pound on the table all you want but the fact remains that senior secured creditors were screwed in favor of the UAW because Obama was able to pressure enough of the creditors who were TARP recipients to cave. The actual facts of the case have been shown numerous times before. I've issued the challenge to product legal details, and I've received exactly one taker thus far: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/more-to-love-about-the-chrysler-asset-sale/ Suffice to say, the challenger did not fare well. Perhaps you can find someone who actually bothered to find out what kind of bankruptcy the d2 are going through. Personally, I only find it a bit curious that the conspiracy theorists can still find the gall to make accusations after the intellectual beatdowns they've been on the receiving end of.
  • U mad scientist U mad scientist on Jul 06, 2009
    buyers of “old GM” cars should not be warned they’ll have no legal protections, Their legal rights are exactly as they've always been. But now they going to have to fighting for cash against the owners of old GM (Saviors of Capitalism no doubt in the mind of the business-knowledge challenged). Perhaps those guys (Heros of the Right) are going to be more generous than the taxpayer, but I wouldn't count on it. It all makes statements like these super hilarious: Take care of the lawyers and the unions. "Take care of" must mean screw in their special vocabulary. People realize that the lawyers are pissed they're stuck with the old company, right?
  • Theflyersfan OK, I'm going to stretch the words "positive change" to the breaking point here, but there might be some positive change going on with the beaver grille here. This picture was at Car and Driver. You'll notice that the grille now dives into a larger lower air intake instead of really standing out in a sea of plastic. In darker colors like this blue, it somewhat conceals the absolute obscene amount of real estate this unneeded monstrosity of a failed styling attempt takes up. The Euro front plate might be hiding some sins as well. You be the judge.
  • Theflyersfan I know given the body style they'll sell dozens, but for those of us who grew up wanting a nice Prelude Si with 4WS but our student budgets said no way, it'd be interesting to see if Honda can persuade GenX-ers to open their wallets for one. Civic Type-R powertrain in a coupe body style? Mild hybrid if they have to? The holy grail will still be if Honda gives the ultimate middle finger towards all things EV and hybrid, hides a few engineers in the basement away from spy cameras and leaks, comes up with a limited run of 9,000 rpm engines and gives us the last gasp of the S2000 once again. A send off to remind us of when once they screamed before everything sounds like a whirring appliance.
  • Jeff Nice concept car. One can only dream.
  • Funky D The problem is not exclusively the cost of the vehicle. The problem is that there are too few use cases for BEVs that couldn't be done by a plug-in hybrid, with the latter having the ability to do long-range trips without requiring lengthy recharging and being better able to function in really cold climates.In our particular case, a plug-in hybrid would run in all electric mode for the vast majority of the miles we would drive on a regular basis. It would also charge faster and the battery replacement should be less expensive than its BEV counterpart.So the answer for me is a polite, but firm NO.
  • 3SpeedAutomatic 2012 Ford Escape V6 FWD at 147k miles:Just went thru a heavy maintenance cycle: full brake job with rotors and drums, replace top & bottom radiator hoses, radiator flush, transmission flush, replace valve cover gaskets (still leaks oil, but not as bad as before), & fan belt. Also, #4 fuel injector locked up. About $4.5k spread over 19 months. Sole means of transportation, so don't mind spending the money for reliability. Was going to replace prior to the above maintenance cycle, but COVID screwed up the market ( $4k markup over sticker including $400 for nitrogen in the tires), so bit the bullet. Now serious about replacing, but waiting for used and/or new car prices to fall a bit more. Have my eye on a particular SUV. Last I checked, had a $2.5k discount with great interest rate (better than my CU) for financing. Will keep on driving Escape as long as A/C works. 🚗🚗🚗
Next