Back when the union was on strike they claimed to just want compensation for their contribution to the company’s success. Does compensation for contributing to a negative success mean they were asking for a pay cut?
Also, I love random one time events that change investors minds.
Shares of General Motors reversed course in pre-market trading Tuesday after enthusiasm about what looked like a surprise profit waned when the chief exeuctive said it was unlikely analysts knew about a one-time tax benefit
don’t let that mislead you. That loss is 99% attributable to the write off of impaired deferred tax assets, which is a one time charge that has exceedingly little to do with the profitability of operations. I think they had like a $23million loss, which means that $38.47billion was attributable to the write off of the deferred tax assets and other one time charges.
now, if that loss were attributable to operational factors, then i would say that GM is in trouble.
a $23million loss for GM is just barely material to analysts, investors, and readers of financial statements in terms of GM’s total annual sales and balance sheet. given the sudden downturn in the economy during the latter part of 2007, I am actually surprised that their losses from operations weren’t more substantial.
When are they going to realize they really need a good mid sized crossover SUV? Something to compete with the Ford Edge, which Ford is selling a ton of.
Like everyone else said, a one-time blow to ensure long-term financial viability. For those of you that don’t get it, this is the cut from surgery to repair a chronic problem.
And GMC, Buick, and Pontiac practially are one line. The vast majority of the dealers sell all 3 of them now, and between them they fill out one full product line. It’s not really costing them that much more to maintain them; it’s not like they have seperate, independent executive teams, manufacturing facilities, etc. for every branch.