« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

At What Price A Domestic Auto Industry?

Stark Choices Ahead

This week, Congress returns to the question of what to do with the domestic auto industry, Detroit’s humbled Big Three. And the options range from awful to unthinkable.

Yesterday we got a reading of auto sales in November. The story was extremely bad. Continuing the trend from October, sales were down anywhere from a third to a half, across all the manufacturers who sell in North America.

Put simply, the US consumer, whose purchases comprise over 70% of GDP, has gone on strike. In the case of the automotive sector, opinion is split over the exact reason. It could be mostly because finance for new-car purchases has become far harder to get, as the credit crisis continues in full force.

Or, much more ominously, it could be because US consumers have simply decided to step down their purchasing levels, for whatever reason. Possibilities include: uncertainty about their jobs, desire to increase personal savings, concern about their ability to afford necessities, or a lack of confidence about the economy in general.


One of the possibilities is not dissatisfaction with the product offerings from the Detroit automakers. The two-month collapse in sales hit the Japanese automakers just as hard.

(It’s an untold story that companies like the vaunted Toyota Motor Company are in deep financial trouble too. In addition to falling sales, the Japanese are also impacted by the recent strength in the yen. Toyota’s debt securities were recently downgraded, which tremendously increases their cost of doing business.)

It’s been a general rule in US postwar recessions, that final demand continues even as industrial production falls and unemployment rises. The consumer has led us out of many a recession. But if the current one turns out to be characterized by weak consumer demand, there’s no clear blueprint for a recovery.

Now put this together with the self-made problems faced by the Big Three.

Led by General Motors, the Detroit automakers have cost structures that are unsuited to current times. They pay far too much for labor and benefits. They have the capacity to make far more vehicles than the market needs, especially considering the effective competition from non-domestic producers. They have far too many dealers that are carefully protected by a welter of confusing state laws.

And their cost of capital is essentially infinite, because neither they nor their financing units can sell stock, debt or commercial paper, and haven’t been able to for months.

But the position that General Motors, Ford Motor and Chrysler LLC find themselves in, is something many people have seen coming, for decades now. They didn’t make necessary and painful adjustments when they had the chance.

And now they’re stuck in a very tiny little box, with essentially no options.

That’s where you, the taxpayer, come in.

Let me make a very simple, bald statement: The domestic auto industry cannot survive without a huge amount of taxpayer money.

Let me make a few more bald statements. The taxpayer money that will go into the auto industry will NOT be used to make the industry healthy again. Instead, it will be used to wind the industry down, and pay off the people who will variously go out of business or become unemployed.

Are you feeling better about this yet?

Let’s see if I can help. As I’ve been explaining to you for nearly a month, GM faces a cash shortage. The continuing poor sales in November suggest that they are very likely to be all the way out of cash by anywhere from Christmastime to late January.

What does “out of cash” mean? It means they won’t be able to sign paychecks, or pay their dealers or their suppliers. Yes, it’s that bad.

Chrysler’s situation appears to be almost as bad. Ford Motor does not face an immediate cash squeeze.

So here’s what Congress is looking at. They have to answer to a public that’s still simmering angrily over the $700 billion TARP bailout. They have the spectacle of wealthy CEOs flying private jets to Washington to plead poverty. And they may need to do something immediately, in the current Congress.

Part of the dilemma for Congress is that they really don’t want to act twice on behalf of Detroit. It seemed quite likely two weeks ago that they would pass a near-term lifeline to the Big Three, with Republicans proposing to redirect $25 billion to working capital.

This money had already been allocated for the Big Three to spend on green-technology research. But House Democrats were dead-set against using it for such frivolities as mere survival. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wouldn’t even allow a vote on the idea.

So now, Congress faces a tougher set of choices, in a political atmosphere that has darkened considerably for Detroit.

They really don’t want to pass a small bridge loan with few strings attached now, and then come back in January for another big commitment. They’d rather just solve the problem now and get it over with.

To listen to House Speaker Pelosi, Congress would dearly love some kind of public contrition by the Big Three, with a solemn promise to be good little boys and girls in the future. Resignations of the current CEOs would be a big plus, and some happy talk about partnership and shared sacrifice from the UAW would be the icing on the cake.

In return for all of that PR-friendly nonsense, Congress would immediately give something upwards of $30 billion of taxpayer funds. Then they would all have a press conference, smile dazzlingly into the cameras, and announce that America’s domestic automakers are back to health.

The problem is that, instead of being back to health, they’ll be back to Capitol Hill next year for more taxpayer money. And Congress would rather not have to do this all over again.

The options for General Motors and Chrysler are very, very bad if they don’t get a lifeline this month. GM in particular simply can’t start a process of liquidation. There are far too many people, far too many companies, and far too many state and local governments that would face disaster if that happened.

Some kind of deus ex machina that I can’t predict will appear if there is no bridge loan from Congress. Possibly we’d see the emergency appointment of a Federal receiver or bankruptcy trustee with the power to dispense funds from the TARP program, to keep the upper Midwest from having a very unpleasant Christmas.

And in the end, the question we all need to answer is: at what price should we have a domestic auto industry?

In a simple, laissez-faire world, GM and Chrysler would go out of business. Ford Motor would pick up some of the pieces, possibly with some new private capital. There would be a lot of distress, and a big downward re-set of expectations by organized labor.

It would be like a hurricane passing through. Lots of damage, but a fairly quick recovery.

But in our world, the watchword is “too big to fail.” Are we prepared to spend $50 billion at the very least (more likely between $100 and $200 billion), to keep afloat a set of failed corporations, just because we like their logos?

Because make no mistake, the domestic auto industry will shrink, either now or later. It has far too much production capacity, it pays its workers far too much, and it has far too many dealers.

The temptation will be to put in a lot of money, so Detroit can slide along on their promises that everything will be back to full-normal by 2010. That’s what we shouldn’t do.

Instead, we need to force these companies, their dealers, and the UAW to restructure painfully, right now. The longer we draw the process out, the more it will cost.

-Francis Cianfrocca

COMMENTS

  • itdiehard

    I will not buy a new vehicle until something is done about energy cost. I can’t afford gas cost equal to a car payment. Energy cost will increase as the economy gets better. Democrats don’t have the right plan to fix the nations energy needs or Detroit.

  • JeffWoehrle

    Seems like Ford’s main concern is that if GM gets a bailout, it wants one as well.

    Likewise bankruptcy. Ford would need to level the playing field if GM went Chapter 11, lest Detroit be on better footing than Dearborn.

    Much of the same thinking went into creating this mess to begin with. Maybe it’s time for auto makers to have their own houses in order rather than worrying about what the other guy may get…

    • blackhedd

      They had the foresight to line up a serious amount of capital over the last two years. Many observers, including myself, saw those moves as something like desperation, given the high cost of the capital and the fact that they hypothecated nearly all their assets in the process.

      But they’re looking pretty good right now. And their ability to service their long-term debt from cash flow has never been seriously questioned.

      As far as GM is concerned, I’ve been looking at their long-term debt compared to cash flow for years now, and I’ve long been of the opinion that they’re insolvent.

      But did they do anything drastic to improve their situation? No, not really. It wasn’t entirely for lack of trying, though. The UAW and their dealer networks made serious cost-cutting all but impossible.

      • blackhedd

        Ford Motor took out some large bank and credit lines over the last two years. To say they added capital isn’t quite precise.

        It’s also worth pointing out that Ford has fresher top management than GM. Alan Mulally was brought in from Boeing Commercial Airplanes, and isn’t a long-tenured insider like Rick Wagoner.

        I don’t like Bob Nardelli so I won’t say anything about him.

  • jonathan_pujals

    that only last Friday, both Mulally (Ford) and Wagoner (GM) categorically stated that “…No, absolutely not” was a cut in salary even an option (22 million for Ford, 15.8 million for GM). Now, they are talking about accepting a token $1.00 salary. These guys haven’t a clue and prove it every time they open their mouths–oh, and just 2-weeks ago, the fleets of corporate jets were “non-negotiable”; now they’re promising to sell them off. The union will make some slight concessions in payment for the guarantee from Pelosi/Reid that the “Right to Work” bill will be passed speedily.

  • crankycon

    …China?

    You might as well have entitled this article, What Price National Defense?

  • rick554

    Those morons in Congress should just call these “bailouts” what they really are, the Great UAW Bailout Plan. Everyone knows exactly how much the UAW gave to Nancy Pelosi and her crew. Congressional Dems are going to do what the UAW wants , THATS a given.
    Frankly, if they keep the plants that make and repair the Abrahms tanks and the HUMVEE, I’ll be happy to see the rest of that dysfunctional crowd learning to live like 98% of the rest of us.
    Seeems like every recession, we are inundated by concerns about the “poor” auto companies and their even “poorer” workers. ENUFF already. You think Nancy and the crew cares about construction workers??? lol not hardly. Never have and never will.
    Good luck to the BIG 3 and the UAW. You’ll be getting my money , of course. BUT , not without a fight!

  • bk

    Part of the dilemma for Congress is that they really don?t want to act twice on behalf of Detroit. It seemed quite likely two weeks ago that they would pass a near-term lifeline to the Big Three, with Republicans proposing to redirect $25 billion to working capital.

    This money had already been allocated for the Big Three to spend on green-technology research. But House Democrats were dead-set against using it for such frivolities as mere survival. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wouldn?t even allow a vote on the idea.

    If they (2/3 anyway) don’t have the cash to pay their bills and are close to shutting down completely, WHO CARES what they are doing in terms of some sort of research and development for something that may become a product in 10 or 15 years?

    Ih fact, I hope they are NOT spending any money where the only choice is some pie in the sky project, because it sounds like that’s just pissing away good money after bad at this point.

    Are the Democrats so blindly wedded to political correctness that they would see these guys fail rather than to allow “green” bucks to be diverted out of a black hole?

    • izoneguy

      Most democrats have no idea how business works.
      They just keep raising and collecting taxes like the money
      is generated out of thin air. Look what they have done to the housing market. And you know the sad fact? Most of the American public thinks that George Bush & the Republicans caused the housing meltdown. The democrats play a great game of divert & blame. One day the Treasury will tell them the well is empty and I guess they will blame the Republicans.

  • bk

    If Ford is in pretty good shape compared to GM, wouldn’t they just as soon see GM fold? Can they engage in sort of a giant game of chicken where they get Congress to do nothing, or at least stretch it out long enough that GM folds and whatever business they would have had may go to Ford instead?

    It seems like kind of a catch-22. Knowing the way the Democrats in Congress think, Ford could demand FAIRNESS in getting the same bailout as GM, driving the price up to levels that Congress may balk at.

  • Shaggy_Dog

    In my limited understanding of the domestic auto industry problems, it seems to boil down to a couple of key points:

    1) The domestic auto companies are paying mega $$$ for retiree benefits – healthcare for 1 million, of which only 300,000 are active workers. From what I’ve seen, the hourly compensation for Domestic auto industry workers is around ~$40/hr, comparable with what Toyota/Honda US are paying. But when you bake in the retiree benefit costs, Detroit is spending ~$70/hr for labor cost. So it would seem that if this retiree benefit cost could be dealt with, Detroit would be on much more similar profitability footing to Toyota/Honda/etc.

    2) The CAFE standards require Detroit to make hundreds of thousands of small cars each year to balance out the fleet fuel efficiency with the SUVs and trucks it makes. My understanding is that SUV and truck production actually is profitable for the US firms, but because of the low sticker price associated with small cars and the high all-in labor cost as noted above, Detroit can not profitably make a small car.

    So it would seem that there are two solutions- either 1) flush the CAFE standards that require Detroit to build the small cars, which can not be done profitably with current labor costs (Not likely) or 2) Facilitate the Detroit Companies getting rid of the high retiree benefit costs.

    Now if I was Obama-Pelosi-Reid (and let’s face it, they’re going to be calling the shots) and I was already planning a Universal Healthcare Coverage bill, I’d simply tuck in a clause providing for the Unviersal Coverage to cover UAW retirees at whatever level would be necessary to keep that Democratic constituentcy happy. I wouldn’t like it, but in the grand scheme of what Universal Healthcare is going to cost, taking care of UAW retirees won’t move the needle that much.

    So unless I’m missing something big, this doesn’t seem like such an insurmountable problem, and at least from the Dem perspective it would be a win-win: take care of their UAW buddies in the Unversal Healthcare legislation and save Detroit by making their true labor cost apples-apples competitive with Toyota and Honda, and therefore forever have Detroit in their debt and under their thumb.

    • Incredible

      Chrysler sold off the military division long ago to a company that is doing well.

      I am against the bailout. And it’s not becuase I want the domestic auto industry, or even more Machiavellian, the UAW, to fail. It’s because a bailout is the wrong way to do it. They need C11 bankruptcy. That is the appropriate mechanism.

      • Incredible

        1) GM is a healthcare organization that is funded by selling some cars. They over-promised while times were good and it is killing them today.

        2) They already get to game the CAFE system with the ethanol loopholes. As a free-marketeer, I would favor shutting down CAFE. But if it hadn’t been there, the not-so-big 3 would already be dead. They simply put all of their eggs in an SUV shaped basket. When gas hit $4/gal. it would’ve killed them dead.

        You have correctly identified one of, if not the, biggest problems – retiree benefits. There is simply no clean fix to this. We can all propose solutions but I don’t think that they’d have any legs. I believe that the UAW will fight this tooth and nail until the bitter end and the end will be bitter. They, like parasites and not symbioses, will bring about the worst case scenario that has been warned about for years – the death of their host.

        Again, why not bankruptcy?

  • skey

    but I’d been planning on buying a new vehicle in September, and decided not to because of the economy. My current car is paid off, and I decided to have a few more months of savings before doing it. Now, assuming I’m still employed then (and that there’s still a US car industry) I’ll most likely buy something in March/April timeframe.

    Multiply my decision by millions of people, and there you have it.

    As for whether or not we should be propping them up? Well, we need a certain amount of manufacturing capacity domestically if we end up having to build thousands of planes, tanks, ships like we did in WW2, and I support keeping that around, because it should be a lot faster to retool a car plant to make tanks than it will be to build a line from scratch.

    But apart from that base capacity? Let them fold.

  • 10ksnooker

    Best for consumers, leave design studios in the developed world, move operations to the third world, ship cars. With automatic machinery, even third worlders can run it.

    Watch the video of Ford’s latest plant in rural Brazil
    http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/11/fords-most-advanced-assembly-plant-operates-in-rural-brazil/

    See how it’s supposed to be done.

  • MSU_Charles

    Since GM seems to be the most publicized of the 3, I will use them as my example. If GM is truly worth saving then why hasn’t a capital market player (individual or solid firm) already purchased them? Their market cap is only $2.95 Billion. They have not been purchased because capital markets know (as Francis points out above) that GM is at the end of its life cycle. During the recessions of the late 70s and 80s those companies that were being poorly managed and were viewed as restructurable, were taken over (friendly or hostile) and were restructured. Its time to let capital markets work.

    • blackhedd

      That’s because it would destabilize big parts of the supplier ecosystem that Ford also depends on.

      • JSobieski

        in 2006 (when credit was still available), Ford took out a mortgages on everything that they could—they leveraged the real estate that they owned (pre-real estate bust) to generate some cash for the bank.

        Smartest move by a domestic automaker in the past 5 years—and it had nothing to do with cars

        • JSobieski

          There is no indication that Ford is somehow not in favor of the bailout. I haven’t heard a single Ford employee or retiree who is opportunistic about a GM bankruptcy.

          I live in the Detroit area, and I haven’t seen any indication that Ford is somehow playing a two-faced game—Ford wants the bailout money too.

          • bk

            “We’ve exceeded our CAFE requirements because since no one is buying our cars, the total footprint from new cars sold is way down. Therefore we have OFFSET the reduction requirements.”

          • bk

            I didn’t know how cutthroat this was – sounds like the Big Three are working with each other much more than they are working against each other. I had to wonder about this and you’ve answered it.

          • leppard

            The liberal politician has the only job where they go to the office to work for everyone but those who pay their salary.

  • leppard

    I think the bailout is not about saving the american car industry; its about saving the UAW.

    If these ‘pro-bailout people’ were so concerned about keeping the american car industry, they would buy american cars.

    • JSobieski

      People in the auto industry relate more to each other than to the people outside the industry.

      Most suppliers support each of the Big Three, so there is particular at this point in time, more of a cooperative we are in the same boat perspective then a competitive perspective.

      Ford has publicly stated that it will NOT file for bankruptcy in 2009, but fears that a GM bankruptcy would destroy many Tier II/III Ford suppliers and that Ford is against a GM bankruptcy.

  • Scope

    I just heard a report that now Gettlefinger said they would be willing to renogotiate the union contracts. In addition, they would be willing to “hold off on funding their healthcare trusts.” Well, yes of course the healthcare trust can be put on the back burner for now, because he must be counting on Socialized medicine coming to your town very soon. He keeps changing his position as the auto bailout looks more and more doomed. Give it long enough and maybe he will be willing to disband the UAW, which will dissapear without the big 3 anyway. He should have thought about all those jobs long before they broke the auto industry bank.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    GM is already working out the terms with its major creditors on a Chapter 11 route. I realize in public they are saying no consumer will buy their product, but frankly that appears part of the meme. If they are put into a structured receivership or receive loan ?guarantees? exempli gratia Chrysler 1979 they will be just fine if combined with an agressive, achievable vision (where is the man from Allentown?).

    Anyway, the breathing room will help GM through the cash crunch but will need to be followed by serious restructuring. This includes either the UAW?s death or a substantial, eternal power reduction; no more $100K janitors, fully paid unemployment and gratuitous retiree benefits including killing the VEBA Trust. What they have currently offered as ?serious? concessions would be half measures in any other industry parlance. In total compensation and legacy costs they are the ball and chain of our entire industry. Any program that does not rid us of their overbearing expense is doomed and displays Detroit is not serious about paradigm changing long term visions. Conversely if they actually make these changes, when they are back to issuing stock- count me in. It’s day or night; they choose.

    Overall, I have no doubt they are in serious trouble as an industry and their failure would have serious economic consequences, especially in the Midwest. That said I look at Ford as a prime example of a company having the sagacious nature and foresight to understand what needs to be done for survival. Darwinism, survival of the fittest, free market capitalism and all that; call it what you want, I prefer their efforts. This otherwise reflexive and seemingly opportunistic feeding at the trough from others is not the way to build long term, economically feasible industry.

    This country has grown akin to pushing problems down the road with short term tactical fixes. It is time for someone to stand up, bite the bullet and pursue a strategy that is honestly painful in the short term, but strategically focuses on regrowing a financially sound and fundamentally strong industry. That will not be done if a Democrat Congress and their acolytes have any stake in this game.

    • zuiko

      People are used to seeing the airlines go through the Chapter 11 revolving door and how many of those airlines end up getting liquidated? Not many. You might have to give people some kind of a discount to get them to buy from you when you are in Chapter 11, but it won’t take much. People love to get a deal (or at least think they are getting a deal) on a car.

      The reason they are repeating that mantra is because they are looking for a ride on the free money train in DC rather than losing their jobs and wiping out most of their own assets, along with the rest of their common stockholders. Chapter 11 isn’t a great option from the point of view of an insider. But it is the best choice for the future of these companies.

      That all said, if we are going to take some of the money that has already been flushed down the toilet ($850 bln bailout, $25bln in “fuel efficiency” loans) and divert it to the automakers to keep them afloat, I have a hard time objecting too strenuously to that. That money is already gone. The question is how to waste it in a way that will do the least harm. Wasting it on loans to the automakers is probably less harmful than wasting it buying bad mortgages.

      • Chuck_Norris_Republican

        Cars are a long term investment, and not many people will purchase an auto from a company in bankruptcy. There would be too much uncertainty in term of parts, repairs, etc. This is different from the airline industry where you just take on flight. Bankruptcy will be the final nail in the coffin for the domestic auto industry.

        Bailing out the auto industry with conditions attached for downsizing, union pensions an wages, and energy efficient cars is the anwer. One to three more million Americans out of work will make the economy much worse. Also, the national security issues of not have a domestic auto industry manufacturing base, could have disasterous consequences in the future.

        • LJMiller96

          If it’s a preset C11 where the Car co’s agree to honor all customer warranties and not fold them into the bankruptcy protection, then I’d buy their cars. Union wages, the pensions, and health care are the big expense that will kill the car companies no matter what kind of loan they are given. The only thing that will save them is some form of bankruptcy that lets them junk their labor agreements.

          As for the UAW, it’s a government sponsored labor monopoly with a government granted license to intimidate and bully companies and workers in order to extort money from them. I have no sympathy for unions that run closed shops. That’s a government problem though and needs to be fixed by government. Even with C11 protection, if the car makers try to keep operating in Michigan they will still be under the thumb of the union monopoly. Hello Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi and Texas.

          • Achance

            who can afford to buy that Hecho en Brazil product. That’s kinda what we’re looking at these days.

  • VA_mom

    I thought Dems were supposed to be good at helping regular, middle class Americans. Yet they seem so fixated on “helping” taxpayers by giving money to greedy CEOs who don’t know what they are doing in an effort to help people keep their jobs (not guarantee their jobs mind you). Or maybe, they could get the money into the hands of the taxpayers to ensure that they can afford their food and temporary healthcare plans until they can get another job. Obama raised how much money during his campaign? NONE of his donors are rich enough to invest in an American industry?? If the Dems want more energy-efficient cars and fewer unemployed people, is there some reason they cannot persuade their rich donors to invest money into a new research company or into a new company that makes parts for all of the American-made cars that are currently out there until they come up with that awesome new car the Dems have promised? NONE of their campaign donors have the money or the guts to take over and properly run American businesses? Our government cannot be trusted with the responsibility of taking over businesses-it is run by elite, out-of-touch individuals trained to use unlimited amounts of money during campaigns who never quite realize that they DON’T have a blank check anymore when they get to DC!

  • tankertodd

    Rip off the band-aid and get it over with.

    We have a domestic auto industry. It’s in the Southeast. It’s BMW, Toyota, and Honda. If we need tanks, they can build them.

    And they won’t suck.

    • JustLeaveMeAlone

      and lotsa 55555555s

      Personally, I’m buying an American car this month — either a Nissan or a Toyota. They are made in America, well made too, and none of my money will be going to the corrupt UAW.