If I got the concept, they would be all like: “Uh, are you having a mid-life crisis? An affair? Have you been diagnosed with something and you’re living it up your last six months?”

Here’s how to make everyone happy: Two-Mode Camaro. Git ‘er done, GM!

I am wondering how you know for a fact that:

“This is a lie, and one that most people perceive immediately. The styling of the concept car evoked strong, positive responses from a large part of the population. The styling of the production car does not.”

You may be right, but there’s nothing backing up your claims right now. Doesn’t seem like such a “simple truth” to me. As I said above, I like the production car better than the show car, at least going by the numerous pictures we have of both. How do you know that many others don’t feel the same? The population of gm-volt.com isn’t a random sample group.

They have jumped the shark on the whole economy, IMHO. Welcome to the brave new world.

#108 statik says “Wait, lets just give them another 5 billion out of the TARP, and presto, that makes up the shortfall…you qualify to be a bank holding company. That is completely the intention of why those laws are in place.”

Thanks for the update (and Dave G). I didn’t see this.

But exactly how is this different than pumping TARP money into Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley and then recognizing them as bank holding companies? Seems very similar. The only difference was that the Fed bought the toxic securities from Goldman and Morgan Stanley and then, after these sales allowed them to meet the criteria, granted them bank holding status. Here the liquidity was provided by TARP. Can’t see why this matters.

Actually the biggest difference, and one in GMAC’s favor, is that we know GMAC will take the money and lend it, which was the goal of TARP in the first place. We don’t know what’s happening with the TARP money given to the other “banks.”

===========================

How is this different?

GMAC = Car loan company owned by GM/Chrysler to finance their cars
Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley = Hands everywhere

Goldman/Morgan Stanley/AIG (et all) where bailout out under the flag of systemic risk/possible collapse of the credit/banking sector and plunging the US into a immediate depression. GMAC goes under, jack squat happens. The thing was already priced to nothing and discounted, and its two remaining customers (ResCap/other lending vehicles had been virually shuttered months ago) already have blank checks from the gov’t.

Yesterday you strongly agreed with me, today I strongly disagree with you here. (It is also exactly what I said was going to happen if they didn’t hit the swap). This sets a whole new precedent. It sets up the gov’t to be the main vehicle of funding to any troubled asset out there (regardless of its status/pull on the greater economy), everyone is going to come knocking now.

Tell me they are not going to just turn around and put that 17 billion+ in the hands of dealerships/customers with terrible balance sheets/credit ratings to buy cars from GM and Chrysler they have no business getting or can sell….and thus artificially giving GM and Chrsyler sales.

Side note: New tally of gov’t spending since bailout was ‘approved’ 11 days ago, Dec. 19th — 57 billion. 72 billion if you count the original 25 billion dollar ‘domestic development’ program earmarked back in October.

Let me ask you, do you have a limit on how much to give these guys? Or is it limitless?

How about Ford here…are they being punished by not being broke? How can they compete with the welfare brothers who don’t have to do pesky things like make money?

Does Ford automatically get 27 billion in cash and another 17 billion in fed guaranteed money to loan out, when they go broke? Because that is what you are saying about GMAC deserving money solely because Goldman/MS got some.

Why should Ford even try to make a profit ….their best play is to go broke as fast as they can. Heck why doesn’t every single financial institution that is close to being insolvent just take that last step off the cliff and into the big waiting pool of gov’t money.

Next up? Bailing out Delphi.

“When they saw the actual car, most people liked it better than the show car.”

This is a lie, and one that most people perceive immediately. The styling of the concept car evoked strong, positive responses from a large part of the population. The styling of the production car does not. This is the simple truth. Much better for Mr. Boniface and GM to simply acknowledge that practical considerations dictated changes in the form of the vehicle that, unfortunately, take away some of the “wow” factor, and leave it at that. Personally I suspect that “wow” factor COULD have been incorporated in the slippier, production design and the fact that it hasn’t been is a failure on Mr. Bonifaces part, but It’s not possible to know absolutely as we cannot be privy to all the manufacturing and technical strictures placed on the design team. So for GM to excuse the somewhat Vanilla end-result by crying technical necessity is perfectly reasonable.
Pretending that the production car is equally attractive, on the
other hand, is both offensive and pointless!