#HighFinance

With the Detroit Free Press reporting that combined Q2 profits for the Detroit automakers could hit $4b, the quadrennial negotiations with the UAW which opened today with a meeting between Chrysler and the union could be a tough slog. And because the profit outlook is mixed, with GM and Chrysler likely to improve profitability and Ford likely to see a drop in net takings, the long-standing tradition of “pattern bargaining” could come to an end. Ford currently pays about a dollar more per hour than GM and about $2 per hour more than Chrysler (which is partially owned by the UAW’s VEBA trust fund), and Ford also shoulders more of workers’ health care costs than its cross-town rivals. And UAW president Bob King admits

Being really blunt about it, when you don’t represent the overwhelming majority of an industry, which we don’t any more, then you can’t do pattern bargaining

Already unfairly disadvantaged by the UAW (Ford is the only Detroit-based automaker without a no-strike contract) and facing falling profitability, Ford is telling the union not to expect wage increases. But does that mean the union’s only choice is to bring GM and Chrysler up to Ford’s pay and benefit levels?

One of Saab’s suppliers, SwePart Verktyg AB, asked a Swedish court to declare a key Saab subsidiary, Saab Automobile Tools, bankrupt today reports Automotive News [sub]. Saab Tools owed about $935,000 to SwePart for tooling, and according to the supplier

More than one week has passed from the summons and payment has not yet been made. Saab Automobile should therefore be considered insolvent… We don’t want them to go into bankruptcy, I wish you understand that, that would be horrible, but we are a small company and for us that is a lot of money

Saab Tools was created to guarantee EIB loans for tooling, so had the “subsidiary” been declared insolvent, the whole ship would have gone down. But before a judge could act, Saab somehow managed to put out the fire, as a company press release proclaims

Swedish Automobile N.V. confirms that Saab Automobile Tools AB reached agreement on payment terms with the supplier that filed for bankruptcy, thereby resolving the issue.

Once again, Saab pulls the fat from the fire at the last minute… but the clouds are dark and rolling in fast. Many suppliers are still looking for money, Saab Automobile has 104 claims pending against it, and SwePart’s bankruptcy request won’t be formally withdrawn until Monday. And with the Swedish government and EIB seemingly unwilling to lift a finger to help, even the faithful are losing hope. This feels like the beginning of the end of the end…

After spending much of this year not producing vehicles, Saab is anxious to get to work on its 11,000 vehicle backlog of orders, and production was supposed to start on August 9 after workers return from Summer vacation. But a Saab press release reveals that the troubles aren’t over, with short term financing and supplier agreements still to hammer out, and that production won’t resume until August 29 at the earliest. Gunnar Brunius, Vice President of Production and Purchasing explains:

I am positive about the progress we made on the payment terms with our suppliers and it is good to see that we all want to make it work. What we need now is a full commitment on supply of parts into our factory to be able to restart production and secure a stable manufacturing operation. We are now working hard with our suppliers to nail down these plans, commit to a delivery schedule and start building the close to 11,000 cars that we currently have in our order books. The industry-wide summer break at our suppliers caused certain key suppliers not to be able to supply us in time. Saab Automobile hopes to restart production earliest in week 35 provided that it is able to commit to a delivery schedule with its suppliers.

But wait, there is some good news! Saab’s Communications Manager Eric Geers tells GP.se

I can promise one hundred percent to the salaries paid next week. Where the money comes from is not important, the main thing is that we pay [emphasis added]

That kind of sums up the whole Saab situation nicely, doesn’t it?

Almost two months ago, Saab was able to restart production after Gemini Investment Fund extended a €30m six-month convertible loan to the struggling Swedish automaker. Now, after another shutdown, it seems that Gemini has once again ridden to Saab’s rescue, as the company announces another six-month convertible loan from Gemini.

Swedish Automobile N.V. (SWAN) announces that it entered into a EUR 25 million convertible bridge loan agreement with Gemini Investment Fund Limited (Gemini), thereby securing additional short-term funding.

SWAN entered into a EUR 25 million convertible bridge loan agreement with Gemini with a 6 months maturity. The interest rate of the loan is 10% per annum and the conversion price is EUR 1.38 per share (the volume weighted average price over the past 10 trading days). SWAN may at any time during the loan’s term redeem it without penalty and it intends to do so once the funding from Pang Da and Youngman is received, in which case no dilution as a result of this bridge loan will occur.

Attention Chinese, Swedish and European Investment Bank regulators: you’d better cut through that red tape and approve the Pang Da and Youngman investments post-haste, or Saab will be back in the drink when these short-term loans mature. After all, hasn’t Valdimir Antonov been waiting for approval to buy into Saab since.. oh, 2009?

Strap on the man-pants, Saab fans, because there’s another heaping load of bad news for the Swedish brand this morning. First off, Saab’s mysterious Russian backer Vladimir Antonov has backed out of a deal in which he was to buy property at Saab’s Trollhättan plant and lease it back to the company, stabilizing its short-term cash position. Automotive News [sub] quotes an Antonov rep as saying

The property sale is now being discussed with external investors

Apparently the Swedish real estate investor Hemfosa has stepped into the breach and sources say a deal could happen quickly. Antonov’s man added that his boss was still interested in securing a shareholding in Saab, a move that has been awaiting approval by the European Investment Bank for some time now. But despite Antonov’s insistence that he’s not going anywhere, the real estate deal pullout is troubling. After all, if Antonov were really the Saab zealot he claims to be, willing to support and revamp the brand at any cost, wouldn’t he want to own the Trollhättan plant? Wouldn’t he want deed to the factory in case Saab, as it exists now, goes into bankruptcy? This is the first indication that Antonov is treating his Saab involvement as an investment rather than a crusade, which is frankly a bad sign for what’s left of the Swedish brand. On the other hand, with Chinese firms chopping up Saab, what’s a businessman to do?

Bloomberg reports that a “person familiar with the matter” says the US Treasury won’t sell its remaining stake in GM as long as the automaker trades below its $33/share IPO price. Previously the government’s auto team had said it would not try to “time the market” and our analysis showed that the Treasury was likely to sell sometime late this Summer. But it’s been months since GM spent more than a few days above its IPO price, indicating that Treasury may be waiting considerably longer if the IPO-price floor is set in stone. And with $36.5b in cash equivalents on hand and only $5b in debt, GM’s $45b market cap is hardly encouraging… especially with investors waiting for The General to match Ford’s profitability levels. Heavier discounts mean a lower operating profit for GM in the US market, and the first quarter shows a $1b swing in pricing between the two firms (with Ford improving $700m and GM dropping $300m) according to Bloomberg. Lower finance earnings are also holding The General back relative to Ford. So, what’s GM’s response?

Saab was supposed to reach 100% production speed sometime in the middle of last week after enduring a nearly two-month shutdown. But now it seems that more “material shortages” have brought the Trollhättan plant to its knees again, as Steve Wade of inside.saab.com reports

Yesterday, production at Saab Automobile stopped at lunchtime due to material shortages. We have now stopped again today for the same reasons…

The liquidity situation is still tense, and depends on several different financing solutions falling into place, long-term as well as short-term. Some milestones have been achieved, such as the letter of intent signed with Pang Da and the additional funding that their order of Saab cars means. An example of things that still await a solution is the sale and leaseback of Saab AB Property, which we have addressed in previous communications. Representatives from Spyker and Saab will continue to work with these solutions, while the dialogue between Saab and suppliers progresses.

According to the White House’s just-released report titled “The Resurgence of the American Automotive Business” [ PDF here]:

The U.S. Government provided a total of $80 billion to stabilize the U.S. automotive industry through investments in General Motors (GM), Chrysler, Chrysler Financial, Ally Financial, and programs to support automotive suppliers and guarantee warranties. As of today, $40 billion has been returned to taxpayers. While the government does not anticipate recovering all of the funds that it invested in the industry, the Treasury’s loss estimates have consistently improved – from more than 60 percent in 2009 to less than 20 percent today.

Independent analysts estimate that the Administration’s intervention saved the federal government tens of billions of dollars in direct and indirect costs, including transfer payments like unemployment insurance, foregone tax receipts, and costs to state and local governments.

This is as close as we’ve gotten to a thorough accounting of the full cost of the auto industry bailout, as both GM and Chrysler have erred on the side of counting as little of their own taxpayer support as possible (leaving out aid to their predecessor firms, finance companies and suppliers). On the other hand, it’s also two short paragraphs in a ten page report… and the rest of the document hews pretty closely to Democrat strategist Ron Klain’s advice to the White House, specifically

tell the story with fewer numbers and more emotion; less prose and more poetry

While the media debates whether this means the bailout bill will come to $14b or $16b, it’s becoming clear that the final number won’t make a big difference… at least politically.

When Chrysler celebrated its payback of “every penny that had been loaned less than two years ago” last week, I noted that CEO Sergio Marchionne’s triumphant line was technically correct, but hardly represented the whole truth of the story. I pointed to $1.5b in supplier aid that helped keep Chrysler afloat, as well $1.9b worth of the Bush Administration’s “bridge loan” to “Old Chrysler,” prior to its government-guided bankruptcy and sale to Fiat. Apparently my more-inclusive accounting of the price of Chrysler’s rescue (which was picked up elsewhere in the online media) caused Mr Gualberto Ranieri, Chrysler VP of Communication, to spend some part of his Memorial Day Weekend writing a response of sorts, outlining Chrysler Group LLC’s perspective on the situation. Hit the jump for Ranieri’s statement, and my brief answer to the headline’s question.

It took a bit of research to fully parse the California New Car Dealer Association’s complaint against Chrysler and its partially company-owned store in Los Angeles, and our finding is that the CNCDA is actually gunning for Chrysler with gusto. But, argued some of the B&B, surely Chrysler doesn’t want to be kicked out of California? Surely Chrysler’s California dealers don’t want to see their manufacturer banned from selling vehicles in the state? Well, it turns out we were missing a little context that seems to indicate why Chrysler’s California dealers are willing to go to war over a single dealership: Chrysler is overhauling its California retail presence with the help of Wall Street hedge funds. Having used the bailout to wipe out 789 dealerships across the country, Chrysler appears to be working around franchise law to exert more control over its retail network in the Golden State. No wonder then that California’s dealers are standing together to attack Motor Village, the most egregious example of Chrysler’s new retail model. And there’s no knowing where the conflict could end…

With €30m from PangDa and €30m from Gemini Investments, Saab restarted production today at its Trollhättan factory. According to SaabsUnited, the line will run at 80% speed today and Monday, before moving to 100% (over 200 cars per day) by the middle of next week. Speaking at a press conference, CEO Victor Muller reflected:

It’s been an interesting lesson. A company like Saab, that lives in a glass house, should never be caught in a situation where there is not enough cash to withstand the storm as the one we have seen now. What happened seemed like a very insignificant situation became a very significant situation, and next thing you know, you are losing six weeks of production… it was very, very tough and we’ve had some very adverse circumstances that we’ve had to live with, but we got out of it. I think that if you got through 2009-2010 as Saab has been, anything else is relatively easy. We will definitely ensure that this will not happen again. This means that we will be on a quest to ensure that we have sufficient funds at all times to overcome adveersities like this because we can’t afford to have another production stoppage with all the relating downsides, such as disappointed customers, upset suppliers and media attention… that is definitely not in our interests.

Chrysler’s bailout “thank you” event today was long on praise for the redemptive power of its government bailout and short on talk of remaining challenges, but at least one important fact was acknowledged: this highly-touted “payback” was only for 85% of the money loaned to Chrysler during the bailout period. Although, to be perfectly accurate, it wasn’t exactly Chrysler who acknowledged the outstanding obligation [the firm avoids any such nuance in its release], as CEO Sergio Marchionne simply stated that

We received confirmation this morning at 10.13 am from Citigroup that Chrysler Group repaid, with interest, by wire transfer to the United States Treasury and by bank transfer to the Canadian government, every penny that had been loaned less than two years ago. [Emphasis added]

That last bit was the important part… as in, the part that was most often repeated in Chrysler’s presentation and in subsequent media reports. But it’s not the whole story…

Does that headline seem ripped from the pages of TTAC’s 2008-2009 headlines, or what? But really, who’s shocked? Chrysler spent early 2009 trying to convince the government that it was worth a (second) taxpayer-funded second chance, and now that it’s looking for a private-sector bailout in order to escape the terms of its publicly-funded bailout, Chrysler’s still got some ‘splaining to do. The DetN reports:

Chrysler Group LLC does not intend to speed up plans for new cars despite media reports that investors see a high degree of risk in an automaker that has been so dependent on truck sales…

“Nothing has changed from the five-year plan,” [Chrysler Group VP of Design and Dodge boss Ralph Gilles] said.

New small and midsize cars for Chrysler, engineered by Fiat, “are coming strong and heavy,” Gilles told reporters following a speech. “There is no need to speed up.”

Now, nobody would suggest that Chrysler should mess with its product timing simply to please some bankers. If it’s even remotely possible to hurry new products to launch without cutting serious corners, Chrysler should/would be doing it anyway ( ask Sergio). Still, Gilles’ “nothing has changed” sound bite isn’t exactly true.