Let's get the hard numbers out of the way. Today General Motors revealed that excluding special items, it posted a net loss of $23 million in 2007. Add in some funky deferred tax asset charge, and the automaker's net loss last year rises to $38.3 billion. Aside from that, we're interested in how GM fared in the business of selling cars and trucks around the world last year. In 2007, the automaker earned $553 million before taxes selling vehicles globally, compared to losing $339 million in 2006. Worldwide vehicles sales increased 3% to 9.4 million vehicles last year, but the North American market was no help, losing $1.5 billion before taxes. Numbers aside, GM also had some big news today in the form of new buyouts for its entire union workforce that's some 74,000 strong. Similar to the recent round of new buyouts offered by Ford and Chrysler to their union workers, the new arrangement is more generous to workers than what was offered back in 2006. GM hasn't said how many workers it will let go this time, but because of its new contract with the UAW, the automaker will be allowed to replace some of those workers with new hires at a reduced compensation rate of around $14/hour.
Follow the jump for nitty gritty details on both GM's posted loss for 2007 and the new UAW buyouts.
[Source: GM]
PRESS RELEASE:
General Motors and the UAW Reach Agreement on Comprehensive Special Attrition Program
DETROIT - General Motors Corp. (NYSE: GM) and the United Auto Workers (UAW) union have reached an agreement on a comprehensive special attrition program that will be offered to all of GM's 74,000 UAW-represented employees.
The special attrition program offers a choice of several pension and buyout incentives. GM is offering retirement pension incentives of $45,000 for production employees or $62,500 for skilled trades. Eligible employees can select from a variety of ways to receive their incentive:
- One time, lump-sum cash payment
- Direct rollover into their GM 401(k) or into an Individual Retirement Account (IRA)
- Monthly annuity
- Combination of partial lump-sum payment and direct rollover into their GM 401(k) or an IRA
- Mutually Satisfactory Retirement (MSR) for employees who are at least 50 years old with 10 or more years of service. This option provides a pension payment with full benefits.
- Pre-Retirement Program in which employees with 26, 27, 28 or 29 years of service can grow into a full "30 and out" retirement. Until they reach 30 years of credited service, participating employees would receive a fixed monthly payment with full benefits.
- Cash Buyout for employees who agree to voluntarily quit and sever all ties with GM.
– $70,000 buyout incentive to employees with less than 10 years of credited service or seniority
In December 2007, GM and the UAW reached an agreement on what the company was calling the first phase of a comprehensive special attrition program. Details of this program were rolled out to employees at select locations last month. Those employees are now eligible for the enhanced provisions of this new agreement.
"We've worked with our UAW partners to ensure our employees have a variety of attractive options to consider," said Rick Wagoner, GM Chairman and CEO. "The special attrition program is an important initiative that will help us transform the workforce."
PRESS RELEASE 2:
GM Reports Preliminary 2007 Financial Results
- 2007 adjusted automotive operating pre-tax income improved by almost $900 million
- Strong emerging market performance helps drive record automotive revenue of $178 billion
- Adjusted automotive operating cash flow improvement of $2 billion
- Continued improvement in automotive earnings expected for 2008
GM's core automotive business generated record revenue of $178 billion in 2007, a $7 billion improvement over 2006, aided by explosive growth in emerging markets and favorable foreign exchange against a weaker U.S. dollar. In total, GM generated $181 billion in revenue in 2007, compared with $206 billion in 2006. The decrease versus last year is due to the non-consolidation of GMAC revenue, following GM's sale of 51 percent of GMAC in November of 2006.
"2007 was another year of important progress for GM, as we implemented further significant structural cost reductions in North America, grew aggressively in emerging markets, negotiated an historic labor contract with our UAW partners in the U.S., advanced development of a broad range of advanced propulsion technologies and most importantly, introduced a series of breakthrough cars and trucks around the world," GM Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner said. "We're pleased with the positive improvement trend in our automotive results, especially given the challenging conditions in important markets like the U.S. and Germany, but we have more work to do to achieve acceptable profitability and positive cash flow," Wagoner added.
In the fourth quarter 2007, GM posted adjusted net income of $46 million or $.08 per diluted share, compared to adjusted net income of $180 million, or $.32 per diluted share in the year-ago period. Including special items, the company reported a net loss of $722 million, or $1.28 per diluted share in the fourth quarter 2007, compared to net income of $950 million, or $1.68 per diluted share in the year-ago period. The fourth quarter results reflect a $1.6 billion tax benefit in continuing operations related to SFAS No. 109 guidelines for intra-period tax allocations between continuing operations, other comprehensive income and discontinued operations.
Special charges recorded in the fourth quarter totaled $768 million, including an $805 million adjustment principally related to a favorable tax item related to the gain on the sale of Allison Transmission, which was offset by $622 million in charges associated with GM's support of Delphi's restructuring efforts, $552 million for pension benefits provided to Delphi employees and retirees and $290 million in other restructuring-related charges. De tails on special items are included in the "Highlights" section of the press release.
GM reported revenue of $47.1 billion in the fourth quarter versus $50.8 billion in the year ago period, with the decline more than accounted for by the exclusion of GMAC revenue starting December 1, 2006. Revenue from automotive operations totaled $46.7 billion in the quarter, a $3 billion increase over the prior year and a new quarterly revenue record, reflecting strong growth in Latin America, Asia Pacific and Eastern Europe.
Beginning in the fourth quarter of 2007 and reflected in the remainder of this release, GM will report its automotive operations and regional results on a pre-tax basis, with taxes reported on a total corporate basis.
GM Automotive Operations
GM's global automotive operations posted adjusted earnings before tax of $553 million in 2007 (reported loss of $1.9 billion), compared to an adjusted loss before tax of $339 million in 2006 (reported loss of $6.1 billion). In the fourth quarter 2007, GM's automotive operations had an adjusted loss before tax of $803 million (reported loss of $1.2 billion), compared to adjusted earnings before tax of $8 million in the year-ago quarter (reported loss of $111 million).
GM's worldwide vehicle sales increased 3 percent, or 277,000 units, to 9.4 million vehicles in 2007, marking the second best year in units sold in the company's 100-year history. For the third consecutive year, a majority of the company's sales – almost 60 percent – were outside of the U.S. Record sales performance was achieved in key growth markets throughout Eastern Europe, Latin America and the Asia Pacific.
GM North America (GMNA) posted an adjusted loss before tax of $1.5 billion for 2007 (reported loss of $3.3 billion), compared to a loss before tax of $1.6 billion in the year-ago period, excluding special items (reported loss of $7.5 billion). GMNA had an adjusted loss before tax of $1.1 billion in the fourth quarter (reported loss of $1.3 billion), compared to an adjusted loss before tax of $129 million in the fourth quarter 2006 (reported loss of $30 million).
Losses for the year in GMNA were largely attributable to a softer U.S. market, and the strategic actions to reduce dealer inventory by approximately 150,000 units and lower sales of daily rental vehicles by about 110,000 vehicles in the U.S. High commodity prices, unfavorable foreign exchange and lower unit sales exerted pressure on profitability, but were more than offset by better product mix, stronger pricing, and significantly reduced manufacturing and legacy costs. GMNA also incurred higher engineering costs to support continuing product and technology development activities.
"Our North America turnaround remains on track despite the weak U.S. economy and continued high commodity prices," Wagoner said. "The actions we've taken to further reduce structural costs and strengthen our product lineup with great new vehicles like the award-winning Chevrolet Malibu and Cadillac CTS are fundamentally improving our ability to compete in the U.S. and around the world. We're building a solid foundation for continued growth and improved operating results," Wagoner added.
GM reached its structural cost reduction target of $9 billion in North America in 2007 versus 2005, a key part of reducing global automotive structural cost as a percent of revenue from 34 percent in 2005 to 29.7 percent in 2007. GM expects to derive additional structural cost savings of $4 billion to $5 billion by 2010 in the U.S. as it fully implements the 2007 GM-UAW contract, including the independent healthcare trust. These savings will help GM reach its goal to reduce structural cost as a percent of revenue to 25 percent of revenue by 2010, and further to 23 percent of revenue by 2012.
GM Europe (GME) posted its second consecutive year of adjusted profitability in 2007 with earnings before tax of $55 million (reported loss of $524 million), down from earnings before tax of $357 million in 2006, excluding special items (reported loss of $297 million). For the fourth quarter GME posted an adjusted loss before tax of $215 million (reported loss of $445 million) versus an adjusted loss before tax of $12 million in the year ago period (reported loss of $154 million). The decline in calendar year and fourth quarter earnings were attributable primarily to a markedly softer German market as well as unfavorable foreign exchange rates. Other key areas of GME's business performed relatively well, including strong sales outside Germany, increases in net pricing, and improvements in structural and material cost performance.
GME sales were up 8.9 percent in 2007 to a record 2.2 million units, led by Chevrolet, up 34 percent, Opel/Vauxhall, up 4.3 percent and Cadillac up 31 percent. Strong demand for GM vehicles in the United Kingdom, Ukraine, Italy, Greece and Russia – where sales doubled to 260,000 units – made the company the fastest growing major automobile manufacturer in Europe in 2007. Financial results generated from the rapidly growing sales of GM Daewoo-built Chevrolet vehicles in Europe are consolidated in Korea and reflected in GM Asia Pacific (GMAP) results.
With a 19 percent increase in sales to a record 1.2 million units in 2007, GM Latin America, Africa, Middle East (GMLAAM) achieved a record $1.3 billion in adjusted earnings before tax for the year (reported income of $1.3 billion), up 140 percent over 2006 adjusted earnings of $561 million (reported income of $518 million). GMLAAM also set a sales record in the fourth quarter with 341,000 units, up 18 percent year over year, generating $424 million in adjusted earnings before tax (reported income of $424 million), up from $76 million in the fourth quarter of 2006 (reported income of $76 million). Robust sales in the GMLAAM region resulted in record revenue of $18.9 billion for the calendar year and $6 billion in the fourth quarter.
The year-over-year gain in GMLAAM pre-tax earnings was largely driven by strong volume growth, which outpaced industry growth, as well as favorable price and mix. Robust sales contributed to record GM sales in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Egypt and Venezuela in 2007. Continued strong sales of the Chevrolet Corsa, Aveo and Celta throughout the region were complemented by the successful launch of several new entries, including the Chevrolet Captiva in Latin America and Chevrolet Suburban and Cadillac Escalade in the Middle East. Chevrolet sales in the region were up 23 percent for the calendar year, and accounted for 90 percent of units sold in GMLAAM in 2007.
GMAP posted adjusted earnings before tax of $744 million in 2007 (reported income of $681 million) compared to $403 million (reported income of $1.2 billion) for 2006. GMAP adjusted earnings before tax for the fourth quarter were $72 million (reported income also $72 million), compared to $105 million in fourth quarter of 2006 (reported income of $29 million). The calendar year earnings gain was driven by favorable volume and mix, increased equity income from GM's China joint ventures and improved operating performance at Holden. The results were partially offset by increased structural cost increases associated with continued investment in high growth markets and lower Suzuki equity income resulting from the sale of a majority of GM's equity in 2006.
GMAP had continued strong performance in China, where domestic sales grew 18.5 percent in 2007 and GM, with its local partners, became the first global automotive manufacturer to sell more than 1 million vehicles. In addition, GM sales in India rose 74 percent, and export sales of the GM Daewoo products built in Korea increased by 30 percent to 870,000 vehicles.
GMAC
On a standalone basis, GMAC Financial Services reported a net loss of $2.3 billion in 2007, compared with net income of $2.1 billion in 2006. Profitable results in the global automotive and insurance businesses were more than offset by the significant loss at Residential Capital, LLC (ResCap). In the fourth quarter, GMAC reported a net loss of $724 million, compared to net income of $1.0 billion in the fourth quarter of 2006. The effect on ResCap of the continued disruption in the mortgage, housing and capital markets was the primary driver of adverse performance.
GM reported a $1.1 billion net loss attributable to GMAC, as a result of its 49 percent equity interest and preferred dividends received for the full year 2007, and a $394 million reported net loss for the fourth quarter.
While market conditions remain uncertain, GMAC has taken aggressive actions in 2007 across all its businesses in an effort to mitigate future risk, rationalize the cost structure and position the company for growth. As a result, GMAC currently expects to be profitable in 2008. GMAC's liquidity position is at relatively high historical levels and GM be lieves that GMAC remains adequately capitalized.
Cash and Liquidity
Cash, marketable securities and readily available assets of the Voluntary Employees Beneficiary Association (VEBA) trust totaled $27.3 billion as of December 31, 2007, up from $26.4 billion as of December 31, 2006. GM ended the 2007 calendar year with negative adjusted automotive operating cash flow of $2.4 billion, a significant $2 billion improvement compared to 2006. It marks the second consecutive year-over-year improvement in operating cash flow for all four of GM's operating regions.
Consistent with past years, GM withdrew $2.7 billion from the VEBA in December, leaving a balance of $16.3 billion at 2007 year-end, of which the UAW related portion is estimated at $14.5 billion. In negotiations with the UAW and UAW retiree class counsel on a Settlement Agreement involving the healthcare MOU that will shortly be filed with the court, the parties have agreed in principle that of the $18.5 billion that was agreed to be set aside upfront for future retiree healthcare claims, the difference of approximately $4 billion will be funded with a short term note maturing January 2010 with interest at 9 percent. This will enhance interim liquidity for GM and provide the UAW and plan participants a 9 percent return.
The parties have also agreed in principle, as part of the overall Settlement Agreement, to execute a series of derivatives that would effectively reduce the conversion price of the convertible note from $40 to $36, and would entitle GM to recover the additional economic value provided if the GM stock price appreciates to between $63.48 and $70.53 per share.
Future Outlook
Despite the uncertainty in the U.S. market, the company announced it expects improved pre-tax automotive earnings in 2008 versus 2007, largely driven by continued strong performance in emerging markets. GM expects improvements in automotive revenue, favorable pricing, favorable material cost performance and continued reductions in structural cost as a percentage of revenue in the 2008 calendar year. Operating cash flow is expected to be relatively flat in 2008 versus 2007, despite planned increases in capital spending to about $8 billion, up from $7.5 billion in 2007.
GM remains confident in the 2010-2011 opportunities to further improve earnings and cash flow. Most notable is the potential to realize the full impact of the GM-UAW labor agreement which is expected to provide significantly greater flexibility and yield additional savings of $4 billion to $5 billion. In addition, GM estimates that if the U.S. market volume returns to trend levels in 2009 and beyond, which would be an increase of 1 million units, the change would generate additional pre-tax income to GM in the range of approximately $1 billion to $1.5 billion annually. GM also expects to reduce a substantial portion of the cost premiums it has historically paid to Delphi for systems and components over the next three to five years. The savings will be offset by various labor and transitional subsidies of $300-400 million per year under Delphi's plan of reorganization, however GM expects to achieve annual net savings over the mid-term of approximately $500 million.
In addition, significant additional opportunities to further improve GM earnings and cash flow by 2010-2011 include improved pricing driven by a host of new products, continued strong growth in revenue and profitability in emerging markets, and improved performance at GMAC.











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
kris @ Feb 12th 2008 10:03AM
So just assuming they sweetened the deal enough for nearly ALL of its hourly work force to take the deal... GM wouldn't be under UAW's thumb anymore? Or, would UAW just force all of these new hires to become union?
Avinash machado @ Feb 12th 2008 10:04AM
Being number one is of no use if you do not make profits. Even if it beat Toyota by a whisker this year to remain numero uno profit is more important.
Mr. Oak @ Feb 12th 2008 11:23AM
It really irks me when people conveniently ignore the facts.
Dude(?) where have you been living? It has been known for some time (a matter of years) now, that GM is in the process of restructuring, rebuilding it's entire product line and consolidating it platforms, shedding it's legacy costs. Toyota is already there, GM is moving in that direction.
How much money did Toyota have to part with, to cover health care and retirement compensation for it workforce? How many new models did GM release in the second half of the year? This is going to be a very strong year for GM. expect to see a very different balance sheet this time next year.
Product-wise, I fully expect that GM throw Toyota a beating that will leave all astounded. Hang on, it is going to be a bumpy ride.
Rick Cavaretti @ Feb 12th 2008 10:07AM
So in with the low paid slaves..
No morale, dead end job and low pay. There goes the product, a big chunk of the middle class and the American dream. Ah corporate criminals, interested in only the bottom line, all other details be damned.
Of course the royalty at the top of the food chain is unaffected and can go on raping the company.
Mr. Oak @ Feb 12th 2008 11:40AM
Hey, what are you talking about? Unskilled labor does not deserve a STARTING wage of $27.00 per hour. The proposed GM starting wage is more than double the federal minimum wage. Retail businesses pay bare minimum wage ($5.15 ) and are admired. GM offers $14.00, more than double that. Now they are being viewed as plantation owners.
Retail business that pay on commission rather than salary, use voodoo math to get away with paying less than the minimum wage.
It goes something like this: If your commission for the week, does not meet the minimum federal requirement, they'll advance you the difference. Your next check that does exceed the minimum, the advanced money will be ducted.
sk @ Feb 12th 2008 10:08AM
$121 every second down the drain.
Nick @ Feb 12th 2008 10:20AM
If I was Rick, I would put a no Union clause in all "New Hire" contracts.
Rooster @ Feb 12th 2008 10:29AM
Quality is going to suffer as a result of this mess.
Scott @ Feb 12th 2008 10:30AM
I would agree with your argument if US automakers made quality products, but since they suck really bad, how do you justify $60/hr (thats $124K/yr) for crappy quality cars?
Just because people are getting paid that insane amount of money, doesn't mean that other workers can't be hired for less money to put the same crappy cars together. Hell you never know, it might actually be better quality in the long run and make people want to work their way up the ladder. Most jobs that don't require any kind of schooling usually has a salary cap, and for an assembly line worker $60/hr is recockulous and way above what the cap should be. This is what happens eventually when a union gets too greedy.
Mallory @ Feb 12th 2008 3:08PM
I wish I could figure out where this $60/hour union assembly worker fairy tale came from. Is that what the Detroit execs sold to an unwitting public to help kill the unions? "Oh, it's not our fault nobody buys Cavaliers and Azteks, that commie union worker making $120,000 a year is to blame!" What a load. And you bought it. They're laughing at you all the way to the bank.
Big Rocket @ Feb 12th 2008 4:14PM
Mallory, here are the FACTS, including an acknowledgement from the UAW president.
NY Times, 2006: "On average, U.A.W. members at G.M and Delphi cost the equivalent of $67 an hour, including pay of about $27 an hour plus pensions and health care expenses."
CNN Money, 2007: "...the gap between Japanese and American carmakers' profits average out to about $2900 per vehicle... A big reason is the cost of labor..."
Bloomberg, 2008: "Ford's... $60 expense for a current UAW member's wages and benefits."
Bloomberg, 2008: "UAW President Ron Gettelfinger... estimated that new contracts at [Big 3] will save the automakers 'somewhere in the neighborhood' of $1,000 per vehicle."
Links:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/23/business/23auto.html?ex=1300770000&en=57ea081b0a798618&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
http://money.cnn.com/2007/01/26/news/companies/pluggedin_taylor_ford.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2007012611
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601209&sid=aRxTHKjUeS7w&refer=transportation
Mallory @ Feb 12th 2008 5:15PM
You're confusing total theoretical cost with actual wages.
"...under its new contract with the UAW, (GM) will be able to replace up to 16,000 workers...who will be paid half the old wage of $28 per hour."
Link:
http://www.reportonbusiness.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080212.wgm0212/BNStory/robNews/?page=rss&id=RTGAM.20080212.wgm0212
Now if you want to make a valid comparison, how about comparing the $40,000 PER DAY Wagoner made in 2006 to the $112 a worker will make PER DAY under the new contract. That's $40,000 per day for the guy who green-lighted the Aztek compared to $112 per day for the guy making it. One of these is a good value while the other is not. Can you tell which one?
Big Rocket @ Feb 12th 2008 7:30PM
In response to Mallory:
In many posts by different Autoblog visitors, it has been made abundantly clear the difference between what the average UAW worker makes in take-home pay ($27/hr to $28/hr), and what he makes in total compensation including benefits ($60/hr to $67/hr). I don't think anyone, least of all you and I, are really confused by this difference. Now, as others have pointed out, even $27/hr is a lot to pay for unskilled labor, something that the Big 3 can ill afford when they are struggling to regain market share. And there is nothing "theoretical" about the $60/hr figure, because this is real money that the Big 3 has to pay in the real world, and this real money is passed on to the consumer in a very real $1,000-penalty to buy an American car, as the UAW president himself acknowledged.
Also, in 30 comments so far, not a single Autoblog visitor has expressed approval for the excessive compensation for CEOs. Let's not pretend the UAW is not a big financial drain on the Big 3 just because the CEOs are a big drain.
rar @ Feb 12th 2008 10:43AM
Scott, the quaility of US cars is now close to or at the same level of most Jap cars, and even above the quality of a lot of Euro cars. In the St. Louis area where I live we have a GM plant and Dodge truck and minivan plant. My wife has family in Flint, Mi. I know quite a few people and are related to several people that work for the auto industry. They make a fair living but not $60.00 per hour.
RRM @ Feb 12th 2008 10:47AM
It was my understanding that any new hires would be brought in to GM as union members but at a reduced hourly rate.
What would stop you from pocketing $100K and getting rehired at the reduced rate??
Scott @ Feb 12th 2008 10:53AM
Rar, I still find it hard to believe that american cars are up to par with japanese cars presently. I can't see someone getting 200-250k miles from an american car without lots of problems. Now this might not necessarily mean that it's the workers causing these reliability problems, but it might mean that the high labor costs cause the auto makers to buy lower quality parts which are causing the problems?
There are other japanese plants in the US that use non-unionized american labor. How do you explain their success for cars that last a long time?
Judy Zik @ Feb 12th 2008 2:10PM
Then there is a difference between what you are willing to believe and the facts. That is a clear sign of a closed mind. I can remember back in the 80's running into the same problem in reverse when I kept telling family and friends that Toyota and Honda were making better cars than the domestics they insisted on buying. The same problem when I worked at a Hyundai dealer at the end of the 90's and they were turning their quality around. Ford and GM have really turned the corner on quality on their new models. All you have to do is read JD Power, Consumer Reports or just about anything else. That and you need an open mind.
JUSBEEZ @ Feb 12th 2008 10:59AM
I would imagine GM would want this to happen? These people would already have the skills they need, why not rehire them at a reduced rate? Eventually that buyout money is worth the initial loss they are going to take or they wouldn't be doing it.
rar @ Feb 12th 2008 11:04AM
Scott, read this JD powers study, http://www.jdpower.com/autos/ratings/dependability-ratings-by-brand
some US cars are the same quaility as Jap cars, some are almost as good, but almost all are better than the Euro cars. I guess you did not read about all of the problems that Toyota has had with the new Tundra? That truck is made in Texas. I am sure they will get them worked out and is will be a quaility truck. Did you read about the Chevy truck on Autoblog that has one million miles on it? I am not knocking Toyota and Honda, they make good cars. Maybe you should take a second look at US cars. They have come a long way from the 70's and 80's.
Ted Kennedy Is My Chauffer @ Feb 12th 2008 11:09AM
From the 'Perception is Reality', ie; 'Domestics Suck' file:
JD Power's 2007 Long Term Durability Study (For 2004 Model Year Vehicles)
Problems Per 100 Vehicles
#1 Buick 145
Lexus 145
#2 Cadillac 162
#3 Mercury 168
#4 Honda 169
#5 Toyota 178
Yep, those domestics just can't compete with the imports. And to think that was at the start of GM and Ford's resurgence. Seeing as both have improved their qaulity dramatically in the last four model years, it will be interesting what excuses people make not to buy / bash domestics oe the long term studies of '05- '08 models become available.