October Surprise: GM's Q3 Numbers Better Than Expected
October 31st, 2012 10:36 AM Share
GM delivered its October surprise by posting what Reuters calls “a surprisingly strong profit.” In a bit of a hail Mary pass, GM said it is targeting a return to break-even levels in Europe by mid-decade.
GM’s third-quarter net income fell to $1.48 billion from $1.74 billion a year earlier. Excluding one-time items, GM earned 93 cents a share, surprising analysts who expected only 60 cents.
In Europe, GM expects a full-year operating loss of $1.5 billion to $1.8 billion, depending on what restructuring costs will be in the fourth quarter. GM hopes for slightly better European results in 2013, and to reach break-even there by mid-decade. Hope springs eternal, especially in the week before the elections.
Published October 31st, 2012 10:16 AM
Join the conversation
10 of 34 comments
I was looking for more of an average dollar amount the bailouts cost each taxpayer. I know people that had to sell their homes due to things like divorce and both were put into financial ruin because they couldn't sell them for anywhere near what they had payed when the economy was good. Even when they were prepared to take a 6 figure loss. Again the whole housing bubble and the auto bailouts are completely connected. For me that's the bigger picture, not that a few of my tax dollars that were spent on the bailouts. If that hadn't happened the government would have sent me check? Probably wouldn't have been enough to fill the gas tank in my lawnmower!.......LOL
"Most people who purchased a home and then were looking at a 6-figure loss way overpaid to begin with" No, they paid what the market would bare at that time. The more expensive the home the bigger the opportunity for loss. If they would have told the seller it's overpriced I'm not paying that much they would have been sent walking. And the house would have sold regardless to someone else. "Just because for a while people were able to sell their homes for significantly more than they paid for them does not mean that they were operating in “a good economy”. " So in my case the value of my first home more than doubling in 5 years when the square footage never changed was a "bad economy"? Or when builders are putting up homes on lots in new developemnts because they can sell that quicker(most/all sold before they were even done being built) than an empty lot that is not a "good economy"? If the economy wasn't good, where were all these people getting all this money to buy these homes?
GM is gonna need a channelectomy after this pre-election stuffing.
"They exactly overpaid. That’s what buying into an obvious bubble is." If you need a house, you need a house. You pay what the market dictates. It's that simple. People don't have the option of not buying a home, like you would with the newest and latest I-thing from Apple. Renting for most families would not have been a realistic option.