The US Treasury's sale of General Motors stock continues, with the unloading of more than 110 million shares between May 9 and September 13 netting the government agency $3.82 billion and reducing its stake in GM to 7.3 percent, Reuters reports. The Treasury also confirmed that it now holds 101-million shares, which are on track to be sold by March 2014.

Those remaining shares are currently worth $3.7 billion, with GM stock closing at $36.71 per share as of yesterday. That means Treasury is on track to lose $10 billion from the bailout, which is far less than earlier estimates of more than $20 billion. But to recoup the full amount, it was reported in July that GM stock would need to be worth over $95 per share – it's presently trading around $37.50. Supporters of the bailout note that the bailout was meant to save jobs and stabilize the wider economy, a consequence of which is that Washington – and taxpayers – probably won't break even.

The US government originally took a 60.8 percent stake in GM valued at $49.5 billion as part of the 2009 bailout, and has since that time, it has been reducing its stake in the company with the goal of selling all of its GM stock and recouping as much of the bailout money as possible. The selloff started when the automaker went public in 2010.

In December, the Treasury announced it would sell its remaining GM stock over the next 12 to 15 months. At the time, it held roughly 500-million shares, 200m of which were bought back by General Motors before 2013 at a negotiated price of $27.50 per share. In February, it reduced its stake in GM to 19 percent with the sale of 17.2-million shares. In July, the Treasury announced that it had sold more shares, totaling $876.9 million, which reduced the government's stake in GM by 23-26-million shares to around 135-137-million shares. Between then and September 13, the Treasury sold another 34-36 million shares to land at the current number of 101 million, or a stake of 7.3 percent.

Treasury Assistant Secretary Timothy Massad said in a statement: "We remain on track to complete our exit from GM by early next year at a cost far less than originally projected," Reuters reports.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 83 Comments
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
        Daniel D
        • 1 Year Ago
        No it wont always be "Government Motors" its just you will keep using the term inappropriately and will be downvoted for it.
          mchica
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Daniel D
          Actually, it will never go away. You are looking at one of the biggest failures in history that was done to protect UAW socialist society. GM would be wise to pony up the 10 billion dollar loss one day.
        Renaurd
        • 1 Year Ago
        Do you realize how stupid you appear when you make that kind of comment. Go to FOX.
      reattadudes
      • 1 Year Ago
      oh my. what will the right wingers do when they can't call it "government motors" any longer?
        • 1 Year Ago
        @reattadudes
        [blocked]
        mchica
        • 1 Year Ago
        @reattadudes
        Garbage Motors Generic Motors Geriatric Motors (Cadillac, Buick) Generally Mediocre Plenty of Acronyms for the Haterz to use. It's up to the "team" to smack them down. Get on it boyz!
        riserburn99andre
        • 1 Year Ago
        @reattadudes
        So only people involved with politics call them that? So Toyota, Ford, Honda, etc. fanbois don't all scream it to the high heavens as well?
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
        • 1 Year Ago
        [blocked]
          • 1 Year Ago
          [blocked]
        • 1 Year Ago
        [blocked]
      libertedelacroix
      • 1 Year Ago
      "Ged dang gubmint motors! Aint nuffin butta bunch of NOBAMMA welfer soshalist marxist commies as employees!" ^See how stupid that sounds? Don't be that guy. I had my reservations about the government getting involved in a private industry, especially in a company that (by the theory of free market capitalism) should have gone out of business due to bad products. But my point is, if we are going to bailout the ******** who made a bunch of money by losing everyone else's money (wall street bankers), the LEAST we could do is bail out a company that employs middle class workers like you and me.
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
      mikeybyte1
      • 1 Year Ago
      So the good news is that the government will no longer own stock in GM after March of 2014. The bad news is the clueless trolls that love to call it Government Motors will continue to do so for the rest of their sad lives, no matter how profitable and successful GM becomes, or how little they bother to read up on bankruptcies, economics and, you know, basic math. Truth be told, I have never owned a GM product. But just like we had banks that were too big to fail, so too was our auto industry. Glad we saved it. Glad it is prospering.
        The Other Bob
        • 1 Year Ago
        @mikeybyte1
        I was at GM HQ yesterday. They are currently hiring thousands of IT professionals, insourcing much of the work to the U.S. from overseas contractors. They are building huge data centers, consolidating them in Michigan from all over the world. You won\'t get me to believe it wasn\'t worth every penny.
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
        Bubba Jones
        • 1 Year Ago
        You don't have a clue about GM. 2010 profit $4.7 Billion, 2011 profit 7.6 Billion, 2012 $5.5 Billions even though they were spending big bucks on several new cars being launched this year, Corvette, CTS, and full sized trucks. Not one dollar has gone to China, QUITE THE OPPOSITE. China is and has always been very profitable. GM sells TWICE as many Buicks there, as they do here. That's in a country where the cars are 30% more expensive and you have to pay cash, no financing. As for Opel, they cut their own deal with the German government. On top of that, many of GM's newest, and most highly praised vehicles are built on Opel platforms. These new cars are competing head to head with cars that were once considered far superior.
          mchica
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Bubba Jones
          Highly praised and glued to the lot. Example: Regal.
          Julius
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Bubba Jones
          @ mchica - "Highly praised and glued to the lot. Example: Regal." and... ? Same can be said about BMW's 1-series. Buick as a whole sold more vehicles than BMW (8/2013: 24,650 vs. 24,523) and is up almost 37% more than 8/2012.
        • 1 Year Ago
        [blocked]
        mchica
        • 1 Year Ago
        UAW 3 - Laser 0
      Eric M
      • 1 Year Ago
      Having the US Treasury sell off their shares to zero will be a good thing for everyone, regardless of your political leanings. GM wants it. The US wants it. Shareholders want it. And I'm sick of hearing clueless people talk about it.
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Eric M
        [blocked]
      Bubba Jones
      • 1 Year Ago
      Had GM gone out of business, it would have likely taken Ford with it. They share 70% of their suppliers. Ford was already on the ropes and had literally mortgaged their brand name to stay afloat. They simply would not have had the cash to survive having to replace several thousand suppliers. When you add up all the people that loosing all three of the car makers would have put out of work. Direct employees, supplier employees, dealership and transportation people. By some estimates, up to 2 million people. The income earned and taxes paid on that income has already repaid the entire cost of the bailout, before the government sold their shares. That the total loss will be roughly $10 Billion means, in terms of income taxes collected, the government has already made a huge profit on the deal and will continue to do so as long as these companies stay in business. Giving the unions a share was an utterly brilliant move. They can no longer afford to take an US against THEM, all or nothing, approach to their contract demands. They are now heavily dependent on the health and welfare of the company to to pay their membership's benefits. They will now have to weigh their wage, staffing and benefits demands against the companies profits and stock dividends.
        mchica
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Bubba Jones
        "Had GM gone out of business, it would have likely taken Ford with it." Bull Chit. GM wasn't going out of business. Fear mongering at it's finest.
      Luis A. Martinez
      • 1 Year Ago
      Type your comment heresies and for this,tomorow I'm going to run and buy a car design and engineering by Daewoo,S.A.I.C. Or Holden and forgot they used my tax money to spend it all overseas and also kill my favorite brand Saab,no lets see how Peugeot/Citroen is going to end (hope they don't sell Daewoos like Suzuki was force by GM on USA market with the Forenza)
      nocommie11
      • 1 Year Ago
      It left UAW in place and gave them a sweetheart stock deal, that was the worst deal ever. I'd fight 3 more Iraq wars before bailing out another union heavy industry.
        OptimusPrimeRib
        • 1 Year Ago
        @nocommie11
        130,000 plus people died and $3 trillion plus was wasted on that war and you would rather do that 3 times over? You sir are an idiot.
          Eric M
          • 1 Year Ago
          @OptimusPrimeRib
          Did nocommie11 really just say "only a couple thousand of ours died, the others don't count"? Really? Did he really just say that?
          nocommie11
          • 1 Year Ago
          @OptimusPrimeRib
          Firstly, only a couple of thousand of ours died, the other ones don't count. Secondly most of that money was spent on military salaries and military equipment made by American companies. It also gave us front lines on enemy soil not our own soil and gave us a foothold in the secpool that is middle east. UAW will continue strangling our economy for decades to come.
          • 1 Year Ago
          @OptimusPrimeRib
          [blocked]
          • 1 Year Ago
          @OptimusPrimeRib
          [blocked]
        riserburn99andre
        • 1 Year Ago
        @nocommie11
        How about we shouldn't have done either the way we did them?
        Renaurd
        • 1 Year Ago
        @nocommie11
        ....and you are without a doubt a dumbass.
        the.fog
        • 1 Year Ago
        @nocommie11
        I'm not a big UAW fan. But the UAW is the last bastion of worker rights in this country... It comes as absolutely NO surprise that the CONservatives would want to destroy it. After all, they view us common folk as simple servants anyway.
        • 1 Year Ago
        @nocommie11
        [blocked]
      manure
      • 1 Year Ago
      It was still badly done, screwed the shareholders and gave a giant hand-out to the UAW. It was illegal from top to bottom. But yes, I am glad that GM is still around. Firing Rick Wagoner was an important part of the turnaround.
        • 1 Year Ago
        @manure
        [blocked]
    • Load More Comments