Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One of my great-Aunts invested in GM long ago, hoping to have something to hand down to future generations. She sacrificed hard-earned cash at a time when money was scarce to invest in what she thought was a great American institution.
I'm glad my Dad had stopped keeping track of this stock long before he passed away. It would have been very sad for him think that this legacy to me was stolen by GM corporate mismanagement combined with political corruption by a President of the US, particularly since he lived his whole life with interest on the Labor side that were never once supported by our government.
Can someone explain to me why GM shareholders were not offered stock in the new company as compensation?
You mean the shares that were down to 75 cents a share just before the bankruptcy? Why anyone stayed in that long when the handwriting was on the wall for six months prier is beyond me. There wasn't much value there to compensate, was there.
You realize those Unions, are made up of a lot of American working people, right?
I'm really confused by this statement.. (as most from you)..
Are you saying that because the unions are made up of americans, that hell with the laws, the court systems, the creditor standards, and that we are now re-organizing priorities based upon ones citizen status over the laws put in place to protect everyone?
You mean the shares that were down to 75 cents a share just before the bankruptcy? Why anyone stayed in that long when the handwriting was on the wall for six months prier is beyond me. There wasn't much value there to compensate, was there.
As a guy who guaranteed tens of millions of shares of GM, I can tell you that they ONLY fell to $.75 because they were filing bankruptcy in order to screw the investors. Ford for example was in the EXACT same position but they managed to avoid bk...
Can someone explain to me why GM shareholders were not offered stock in the new company as compensation?
Shareholders are NEVER offered stock in the new company as compensation. You buy stock knowing darn well that if they file bk, you are lost on the list for reimbursement after all of the assets are divided up.. But.. stock holders are normally above unions on the chain of command so if the stock holders got squat, unions should have received even less..
Why is it any time someone says the word "union" the ignorant right wing fools start jumping around and yelling like apes at the zoo?
I'd rep you for that one if I could. To answer your question, I suspect it is lack of intelligence and a conditioned Pavlovian response caused by listening to partisan nonsense on on AM radio.
For me it's the word "General Motors", I don't care if it's the unions that killed them or the basic inability to make decent cars at competitive prices. Or the slimy sleezy execs that flew back and forth between Detroit and WashDC in their sleek jets. The bloodsucking company cheated death on my dime and added moral hazard to any enterprise to last a lifetime. I hope they go under eventually, the Darwin law demands it.
As long as the unions continue to hold sway in Detroit, GM is bound to flounder more and more, and DOA automobiles such as the Chevy Volt will essentially seal their doom in the marketplace, while Ford, Hyundai, Honda, Toyota, Nissan and the Germans continue to roll merrily along.....
The unions served a purpose 100 years ago, not since....
Really? So they've not done a damn thing good since 1910, huh?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.