GM Lies.

wrote in
:

> Didn't the Usurper in our White House promise a new free car for
> everybody?

Hardly. He said you could exchange your dying car for credit on a new
one. Something dealerships have always done since after the Model T, but
publicizing it as being funded by government money meant you *might* get
a better deal. I have my doubts without car salesman chained to their
desks.



--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )

jim > wrote:

>The old stock was liquidated.

The old GM stock was transferred to the Motors Liquidation Co and as
of today was still trading at $0.67 cents a share.

http://www.marke****ch.com/investing/stock/MTLQQ

On 2010-04-29, jim <"sjedgingN0Sp"@m> wrote:
> The old stock was liquidated. That stock would have been worthless whether or
> not there was bailout.

In other words the government stole the company out from under the existing
stockholders. Of course theft is a way of life for politicians.

In this case, like third-world dictators they simply nullified/ignored
the existing bankruptcy laws under which the shareholders might have at
least gotten a few cents on the dollar.

Even if I were inclined to purchase a new car it certainly would *not*
be from Government Motors.

--
Roger Blake
(Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled due to spam.)
"Obama dozed while people froze."

Roger Blake wrote:
>
> On 2010-04-29, jim <"sjedgingN0Sp"@m> wrote:
> > The old stock was liquidated. That stock would have been worthless whether or
> > not there was bailout.

The stockholders didn't have anything to steal. I think the politicians
were concerned about how the US was going to be able to wage war when
all the US automobile manufacturing plants become owned by the Japanese,
Germans and Italians. Some people in Washington still remember WW2.


>
> In other words the government stole the company out from under the existing
> stockholders. Of course theft is a way of life for politicians.
>
> In this case, like third-world dictators they simply nullified/ignored
> the existing bankruptcy laws under which the shareholders might have at
> least gotten a few cents on the dollar.

If all of GM's assets were to be liquidated the secured creditors would
get paid first. Remember that leading up to the Banking meltdown GMAC
was where most of GM earnings were coming from. The GM car making
business had been losing money for years. And then in 2008 GMAC
suddenly became mountain of debt.

>
> Even if I were inclined to purchase a new car it certainly would *not*
> be from Government Motors.

Do you think what you would hypothetically do if you were inclined to
purchase new car counts for much?



>
> --
> Roger Blake
> (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled due to spam.)
> "Obama dozed while people froze."

On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 10:02:22 -0500, jim >
wrote:


>> >
>> > Yeah, but that Studebaker stock is worthless just like the old GM
>> > stock
>> > is. Nobody can figure out why the old GM is still selling for as
>> > much as
>> > it is because they have announced that as soon as the bankruptcy
>> > liquidation is over the stock will be canceled and the owners will
>> > get
>> > nothing. My guess would be that people are expecting that someday
>> > they
>> > will be able to sell it on Ebay like this old Studebaker stock which
>> > has
>> > no value as a share in any existing company.
>>
>> Surely you jest. That would be insane.
>
>But it is true.
>

Irrational exuberance, or more likely, fandom.
All car brands gather up some fans.
Reality/rationality has no impact on them.
If they are stock market gamblers, there's hope and fear.
Again, reality has nothing to do with it.
You can always get somebody to take the bad end of a bet.

--Vic