Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
O.K Prez Obama/Fritz Henderson:
there is your competitive advantage..Why dontcha jump all over -close the gap with the Japanese and begin an American Auto Renassiance. Gonna have to do something creative and proactive about the UAW Wage /Benefit disparity and of course ensure that TOVC shareholders are compensated to the tune of- I don't know..$25 or $30 for the IVT..?????
I'll wait to hear what's goin on with the FTV- someone else apparently wants that one....?? been sitting here with the waders on in case the watershed arrives....
Hey Zendo..
Jerry Garcia once said.."What a long strange trip it's been" !!
No in year 2000 I would not have expected to read this in anything related to Torvec:
"Our ability to continue is dependent on obtaining additional long-term financing and ultimately achieving profitable operating results. Please see Note A of our condensed consolidated financial statements for the three months ended March 31, 2010. Unless we are able to obtain financing and ultimately achieve profitability we will not be able to continue as a going concern."
I thought Torvec would have been happily assimilated into another dynamic growing automotive technology , OEM and First Tier supplier- further adding to the impressive Legacy of Vernon Gleasman. I can't help but think- despite the economic conditions- that we do not have agreement on value and valuation. If Keith and Jim say no sale then there's no sale.
That much is indisputable.Hope everyone has an enjoyable week.
Nissan....
maybe that ship has sailed as well...Yet maybe our focus on the Fed is the only tact left..Make these companies institute the new green tech....???? Still haven't witnessed that rush to Diesel and the clean diesel plant in Quatar and coal to diesel plants in US Rust Belt that management foretold..maybe ultimately gas is still too cheap for change..beats me I just know I'm more than ready to have something to get excited about with this investment...frustrated as a blind man trying to read the newspaper..
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Nissan-reports-1st-annual-apf-15212612.html?sec=topStories&pos=5&asset=&ccode=
Oh Yeh./..
sell holdings of course is another option....
Atleast the verbage is restrained
"negotiations" have been tempered to "discussions". I'll hope the D.C allies are sufficiently incentivized - what else can ya do...Sit wait hope pray and oh yeh occasionally whine...
Just interested in a return
on an investment. Again I maintain one can think critically without being unfair or unreasonable. As far as "grumbling/blaming management" much of my "criticism" if you'd like is strictly trying to follow the message and make correlations between what I've experienced as a Torvec Investor over a ten year period. That's all- no blood no venom.
For me there is a disconnect- for you not so much- As you have said we agree to disagree. Que Sera Sera. All I want and can expect is honest and accurate assessment of our progress- aware of the complications of non disclosures etc....EOM
Think some
of us are just trying to make connection between the rhetoric
-v- the Reality..granted it's not all black and white w/ the former ( the filings, CEO updates, the whispers and winks from the high rollers) but with the latter: the income statement, balence sheet and historical chart there is a disconnect. Dread did a fairly thorough job just laying it out there to look at....Yeh I don't exactly believe what the CEO says each and every time some of that is gut and some of that is historical experience...Ignore me..lots of folks do
<This is our year longs.>
Love the sunny outlook, I truly do- but If I had, I don't know maybe $10 for everytime I heard that forecast from both fellow longs and those involved in/and with the company, well I don't think I'd need to be invested here- I'd be on Jim's hypothetical beach by now- smiling at new girl friend, glancing back at the new Benz convertible in the lot- white or red depending on my mood..( It's my day dream get your own car..)
O.K..
Not gonna battle you on the tech specifics-but in general terms, I was thinking of a transmission that has 1/4 the parts of a conventional but increases fuel economy by 25% in most normal ranges or a vehicle that has tracks and can go 55 miles an hour and steers like a car..That kinda stuff..
Hey Fella- If ya don't think I share the frustration of no commercialization and the stock trading at less than a can of Mt Dew after ten years of stock ownership well you haven't been paying attention..Re-edit my post and put in "really valuable stuff" instead of paradigm shift technology- then we o.k. ???
Looking back..
It does seem plausible that "the Watershed" Language was meant more to have a "nice nice" Annual Meeting than the actual state of "discussions" with the Medium truck Manufacturer. Hope I am wrong, but I find myself hoping more and more things with respects to this Investment than trusting and believing. Why still Here one might ask?? I Was told and still believe that Vernon Gleasman was a paradigm shifting Inventor of Automotive technology- I'm hoping ( that word again) that despite possible missteps and certain economic factors beyond anyone's control that that fact may still prevail. Unlike some here I am also realistic and no longer feel there is an inevitability here. This opportunity can pass us buy- deals can be blown. Requires collaboration and a real partnership with a company that is open to creating new markets and revenue sources not just saving themselves from the brink of extinction.
It's CXO's fault...
Why ? I don't know- it seems to have been effective
rationale in the past.. Come to Next Year's Annual Meeting-
I hear big things will be disuccsed.
Man Tough crowd..
a guy can't even get a Happy Easter outta ya..??!!
Oh well- perhaps it's the seasonal malaise or the perpetual
stagnation with TOVC as an Investment..In any event- and at the risk of continuing to have a conversation with myself..Even in Chapter 11 GM will continue to develop new products- buy differentials will they not..?? Are they going to be buying any of ours ?? any time soon?? Artguy's gonna turn around from the front seat and slap my hand and tell me to sit down buckle my belt and stop with the incessant whining about "are we there yet?? are we there yet?" I know 'we'll get there when we get there'..Or will we..???
Report: GM must prepare for bankruptcy
The Obama administration has reportedly directed the automaker to complete preparations for a court filing by June 1. Buffett profits from the Wells Fargo advance. The price of oil drops on forecast of low demand.
By Andrew Rosenbaum Source MSN
President Barack Obama's automobile industry task force has told General Motors (GM, news, msgs) to complete preparations for a bankruptcy filing by June 1, The New York Times reported late Sunday.
While GM executives maintain that the company could still restructure without passing through bankruptcy court, the Obama administration reportedly prefers to put the company through a pre-arranged bankruptcy, one that could last as little as two weeks.
Shareholders, under normal conditions, would still be wiped out even in a pre-arranged bankruptcy. It is not clear whether the administration would make any provision for shareholders in the event of such proceedings for GM.
The news probably won't affect markets today as GM shares have dropped 90% in value in the past year to $2.04.
Happy Easter Weekend
to all posters regardless of one's religious or political affiliation. Here's to the "stone being rolled aside" in more ways than one this year..??!!It has to be this year doesn't it...??? Hey the definition of HOPE is really "hearing other people's encouragement"..That's all I can muster at this time....your turn...Leitrim
Yeh but who they gonna sell it to ?
GM in 'intense' preparations for bankruptcy
Posted Apr 07 2009, 11:48 MSN
General Motors (GM) is making "intense" and "earnest" preparations for bankruptcy, which is now seen as the best option, according to a source familiar with the company's plans. The company is operating under a June deadline from the U.S. Treasury to reduce debt and slash costs as part of its $13.4 billion loan and request for an additional $16.6 billion.
It appears the plan to split the company in two is gaining momentum. Known as a "363 sale" because of the relevant section of the Chapter 11 bankruptcy code, this would see GM divided into one company containing healthy brands like Chevrolet and Cadillac and another holding troubled units like Saturn.
Officially, GM continues to work toward an out-of-court restructuring, which is something Ford (F) has been making great progress on. The catalyst for the apparent change of heart is the ongoing difficultly new chief executive Fritz Henderson and his counterparts at Chrysler are having negotiating with bondholders and the labor union. Creditors are holding out for better terms, secure in the belief that a sympathetic Obama administration won't allow a bankruptcy judge to force unattractive terms on the United Auto Workers. Moreover, these secured debt holders have rights to factories and other assets should their stonewalling force a full liquidation.
It is likely that Tuesday's revelations are nothing more than theatrics designed to shake up bondholders -- many of which are recipients of the government's financial rescue money. Currently, GM maintains $62 billion in debt and is looking to cut this down to more manageable levels by slashing commitments to a health benefits fund for retirees ($20.4 billion) and by convincing bondholders to accept a debt-for-equity swap ($27.5 billion).
Discussions hinge on the size and terms of the debt swap and the depth of job cuts. Last month, GM offered bondholders 8 cents on the dollar in cash, 16 cents in new unsecured debt, and a 90% equity stake in the company, according to Reuters. This is a sweeter deal than the one Ford's senior convertible debt holders agreed to.
Previous concessions by the union, including the jobs bank program that paid for idled workers, will help save about $1.1 billion. But these reductions were made with an eye toward profitability at an industrywide annual production rate of 11.5 million cars and trucks. Things have slowed significantly since then: March deliveries clocked in at an annual rate of just 9.9 million vehicles. To survive in this environment, deeper cuts are needed. A recent proposal targeted 47,000 jobs this year, the closure of five U.S. assembly plants, and the elimination of thousands of dealerships.
If there is a silver lining to this story (although it doesn't seem like one to me), it is that the lawyers at Weil Gotshal & Manges are set to earn an estimated $230 million in legal fees should GM file for bankruptcy protection. This will set a new record, surpassing the $209 million the firm earned by guiding Lehman Bros. through the largest bankruptcy filing in U.S. history. Overall, it is estimated that a GM filing would generate $1.2 billion for all types of service professionals, including bankers and accountants
<What exactly do Torvec employees do
all day to keep busy as they are not selling or producing anything.....>
On occasion they read Ihub or so I'm told...for comic relief I guess...
Not sure if that's
meant to comfort or not !!!
Sure looks like if there is much light left here it is
it is going to be found in these ties to D.C and related agencies..( Air force, NASA etc.) I wish our latest consultant the best of luck- cause the US Govt -for all intents and purposes owns the largest Automaker, the largest banks and Investment banks, as well as the world's largest insurer. Communist China is more capitalistic than the USA- think we
still have Shanghai on Roledex ??? would welcome straight talk with substance.
Try some new Tech ??...
Obama says automakers need 'drastic changes'
Obama says 'drastic changes' needed before ailing automakers get more government assistance
Ken Thomas and Tom Krisher, Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama plans to announce a new aid package for General Motors and Chrysler in the coming days and says the carmakers must make "pretty drastic changes" to save their industry.
Obama gave a preview of his administration's approach to fixing the struggling U.S. auto industry during an online town hall meeting Thursday, promising additional aid only if the Detroit change its ways and receives concessions from stakeholders.
"We will provide them some help," Obama said. "I know that it is not popular to provide help to auto workers -- or to auto companies. But my job is to measure the costs of allowing these auto companies just to collapse versus us figuring out -- can they come up with a viable plan?"
He added: "If they're not willing to make the changes and the restructurings that are necessary, then I'm not willing to have taxpayer money chase after bad money."
General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC have received $17.4 billion in federal loans since December and are seeking billions more to stay afloat. A task force created by Obama has been meeting with industry officials and studying restructuring plans submitted by the companies, which employ thousands in Ohio, to put them on the path to long-term profitability through tough concessions.
"Everybody is going to have to give a little bit -- shareholders, workers, creditors, suppliers, dealers -- everybody is going to have to recognize that the current model, economic model, of the U.S. auto industry is unsustainable," Obama said.
The president said he agreed with a questioner at the town hall -- a Maryland woman with family members who work for GM and Ford Motor Co. -- that "there's been a lot of mismanagement of the auto industry over the last several years."
Obama stressed that the industry must be preserved, not only symbolically but because of the large number of jobs connected to the companies and suppliers. Obama said his job was to protect U.S. taxpayers and he wouldn't spend federal dollars on "a model that doesn't work."
< a deal of any size? >
on that point- suppose GM did in fact say Yep we're gonna make a switch and put the Iso Torque in every front wheel and Rear Wheel drive vehicle- across six model lines I think it was..
What is that worth- contract size ? annual # of Iso Torques..
Would they have to sell the company too meet it or could they do it with a joint venture....I hear ya though- If we get through this Stimulus Happy Phase with the Feds, and any kind of sustainable Recovery ( even if it is now a touch premature and artificial) and Torvec is sitting at .80 and has no orders-no joint ventures signed..particularly after that "called shot" prior to the Annual Meeting- then what the heck comes next??. ..whatever ya think about the change is administrations it's nice to hear O'Bama say "I'm responsible"
< Many Torvec investors,...
I suspect, are beginning to wonder if they should reallocate their money into other investments>...
Well on days that the market is up 6-7 % like today yeh I feel ya....as far as our little company goes..it is Economics 101
Supply and Demand -Risk and Reward..Seems to be though it is "never our time.." What's that they say though never say never...
Or Maybe he's just pleased
that "the world leader in the design, manufacture and sales of commercial-duty automatic transmissions, hybrid propulsion systems, and related parts and services for On-Highway Trucks and Buses, Off-Highway Equipment and Military Vehicles" paid to
license Technology that he invested in..It is a possibility ya know..??!!! His stock went up 63 % in a day too- that can put a bounce in a guy's stride ...Congrats to Lahasa too
Done that..
started in May of 2000- finished just before the "Watershed" Annual Meeting..Thing with Patience- sometimes it's rewarded, sometimes misplaced. Jury is still out
Mack Unveils Retrofit Diesel Particulate Filter To Meet New CARB Regulations
LEHIGH VALLEY, PA (February 9, 2009) – Mack Trucks, Inc. now offers retrofit diesel particulate filters (DPF) to allow operators of older-model Mack trucks to meet stringent new emissions requirements from California environmental regulators.
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) intends to improve air quality by reducing particulate matter (PM) emissions from older vehicles. The new requirements apply to all diesel-powered vehicles over 14,000 pounds GVWR; this includes out-of-state vehicles which operate in California, as well as vehicles based in the state. Mack’s retrofit DPFs are designed for non-EGR (exhaust gas recirculation) diesel engines sold from 1996 to 2002. CARB projects the use of retrofit DPFs will reduce PM emissions by 13 tons a day in 2014. CARB will offer financial assistance and incentives for the purchase and installation of the DPFs (preliminary details regarding the regulations and financial incentives can be found at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onrdiesel/documents.htm).
Mack’s retrofit DPFs come with a five year/150,000 mile warranty and can be ordered through any Mack dealer in the U.S. and Canada. Dealer installation is required. The product is integrated into existing exhaust systems and offered in several sizes based upon engine displacement and horsepower. Each retrofit DPF comes with an installation kit, complete with brackets, engineered for the customer’s specific Mack model.
The DPF uses active regeneration to clear accumulated PM from the unit’s filter element. This involves raising the heat of the DPF by injecting a small amount of diesel fuel, typically after 8 to 10 hours of truck operation. The DPF system includes an electronic control unit which constantly monitors the filter element to precisely control PM accumulation and regeneration. Retrofit DPFs using passive and passive/active regeneration technologies are under development for 2002-2006 EGR engines. The retrofit DPF system is manufactured by HUSS, LLC, Palm Springs, California, a specialist in exhaust aftertreatment for diesel engines.
Dedicated to quality, reliability, and total customer satisfaction, Mack Trucks, Inc. has provided its customers with innovative transportation solutions for more than a century. Today, Mack is one of North America’s largest producers of heavy-duty trucks, and MACK® vehicles are sold and serviced in more than 45 countries worldwide.
The Auto Industry's Other Crisis
by David Kiley and David Welch
Friday, March 13, 2009
Even if Washington bails out Detroit, many auto-parts companies could still fail — and drag GM, Ford, and Chrysler down with them.
When it comes to the auto industry's woes, most of the focus has been on the survival of General Motors and Chrysler. But many of the nation's auto-parts firms are on equally precarious ground.
A leading industry consultancy on Mar. 12 rang alarm bells when it said that unless the White House helps prop up auto supplier companies there will be a cascade of failures and bankruptcies in the next 90 days. A slew of failures like that could take down the automakers, including Ford, which has not borrowed government money yet.
Grant Thornton International warned that more than 500 auto suppliers across the U.S. are on the brink of failure. The liquidity crunch and the sharp downturn in auto sales have put them in a bind. "We have a crisis forming that is more immediate than a Chapter 11 filing of either GM or Chrysler," said Grant Thornton partner Laura Marcero.
The firm declined to name the most vulnerable parts firms.
Dozens of mostly small suppliers with revenues of less than $250 million a year have already shut their doors since the start of the year, Marcero said. Grant Thornton is one of the firms that had been tapped for advice by President Barack Obama's auto industry task force on the fragile state of the parts makers.
The firm is advocating that the automakers, supplier companies, and the White House start to hash out a managed consolidation of auto suppliers to prevent a "calamitous domino" effect of failures that could result in shutdowns of auto plants, worsening the already perilous state of the industry.
Parts Makers' Credit Lines Cut Back
Marcero says the nearest-term remedy is for the U.S. Treasury Dept. to provide $10 billion in near-term liquidity, and then to backstop banks that have cut back credit lines extended to the companies. In many cases banks are providing less than 50% of their receivables and inventory in short-term credit lines. Government guarantees could raise that to 90% and head off hundreds of failures.
"Right now the companies are headed into a brick wall at 90 mph," said Marcero, who made her remarks in Detroit at the Automotive Press Assn.
Grant Thornton has also advised the White House that it should do more to stimulate new car sales, including the tax deductibility of sales tax and auto loan interest. Auto industry sales are now tracking at around 9 million for 2009, which is below the rate at which old cars and trucks are scrapped. Marcero says that industry sales need to return to 11 million a year as soon as possible to avert too many corporate failures.
Suppliers have already been talking to the Treasury Dept. about some assistance programs. The Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Assn. on Feb. 2 submitted a request to Treasury for some help.
The suppliers group estimated that payments from Detroit's Big Three automakers to the parts firms fell to $2.4 billion this month, from a monthly average of $8.4 billion in the fourth quarter of 2008.
Either Way..
Usually only the lawyers win in this type of dispute and litigation.The comment was insider reference to earlier referenced depositions involving reported connections between one time posters here and the CXO organization but I think you knew that. I grow concerned that often they are not so much protecting shareholders interests but that any body involved/close ends up in court with our little company disputing whatever...pay, warrents,prototypes, who didn't put the FTV in the shed.. etc etc.. outta the kitchen and on the table we're hungry..plenty enough for everybody..
"You would have rather had Torvec pay out all those shares to CXO?
It was seemingly a bad partnership all the way around- "they never lived up to their contractual obligations.."I think was the knock from mgt.. Were they ever allowed to???!- bet there are divergent opinions on that point too. All I know is we don't have to worry about any of us being unjustly enriched with TOVC at .70 a share and zero revenue. CXO has been long gone- they're losing utility as the perennial scapegoat for the underperformance of this investment IMO. ( P.S. No I don't know Phil, Read et al so save the subpoena)
"The technology is ready; negotiations are in progress; while we can not predict when a deal will be made, we are
confident that we will win out. Our future is bright. "
10/25/05
No doubt about it....
We're great in court
"The technology is ready; negotiations are in progress; while we can not predict when a deal will be made, we are
confident that we will win out. Our future is bright. "
10/25/05
just put in the caveat- "Yeh but this could be 3-4 years from now..." that's all- I have noticed the word negotiations has been sanitized somewhat over the years to become "discussions". Big difference in my world as I think there is a huge distinction between Engineering -vs-Sales Marketing. The CEO update before the Annual Meeting was a big called shot. Time takes time I understand just keep talking and keep telling the truth- we can handle the consequences.
Check that
guess he doesn't have to.."discussions" have been going on for awhile..I'd think it would be great time for somebody to jump on the FTV-we need about 300 of them patrolling the Mexican border right now !
Well he has to follow up on:
"What matters now is that real companies are discussing real transactions involving real and significant dollars with us today."
in "real time" eventually does he not ?? when is anybody's guess..
Leitrim
Ford's direction on Fuel Economy
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090227/ap_on_bi_ge/ford_plant_ohio
< the years of effort and positioning are going to produce what we as investors want out of our Torvec positions>
Well here's to our collective good health then..that's rational ...Hope Moller MOLR.ob doesn't perfect that flying car
before we commercialize- that might make an IVT, FTV and World's hottest Diff kind of a yawn...:) yet money is tight for him too...
http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2009/02/23/daily13.html?ana=from_rss
<at some point there will be sizeable lift
from these levels >
or maybe not. Tor,Respect the optimism and the steadfast
belief in success- but they gotta show me know- outta the kitchen and on the table- Air Force contract could literally be years away and or sole source statement is great but maybe there is no budget for this prototype- that is a pretty fluid thing. I feel much more stuck than wise, fortunate or savvy - Hey I'm honest?? just cause it could or should happen doesn't mean it is going to..!! The big rock on the high hill has been perched there for 4 years- ears have been perked to hear Geronimo any day since then. And having some skin in this game and voicing this take doesn't mean I don't think the Tech is the bees knees or that I'm not impressed with what they have been able to do without traditional financing. I'm simply long time investor looking for a return and or some hope of an eventual exit point..Why is that irrational feeling to so many on this board- or management for that matter.?? Jim was supposed to be on that Beach somewhere 3-4 meetings ago..
He could use some sun and fresh sea air...
Ford article which addresses Diesel- the advantages and the challenges.
The 65-mpg car Ford won't sell in US
The Fiesta ECOnetic could compete with hybrids and help remake Ford's image. But big obstacles are keeping the vehicle out of the US market.
By BusinessWeek
If ever there was a car made for the times, this would seem to be it: a sporty subcompact that seats five, offers a navigation system and gets a whopping 65 miles to the gallon. Oh, yes, and the car is made by Ford Motor (F, news, msgs), known widely for lumbering gas hogs.
Ford's 2009 Fiesta ECOnetic goes on sale in November. But here's the catch: Despite the car's potential to transform Ford's image and help it compete with Toyota Motor (TM, news, msgs) and Honda Motor (HMC, news, msgs) in its home market, the company will sell the little fuel sipper only in Europe.
"We know it's an awesome vehicle," says Ford America President Mark Fields. "But there are business reasons why we can't sell it in the U.S." The main one: The Fiesta ECOnetic runs on diesel.
Talk back: Should we bail out the automakers next?
Automakers such as Volkswagen and Mercedes-Benz have predicted for years that a technology called "clean diesel" would overcome many Americans' antipathy toward a fuel still often thought of as the smelly stuff that powers tractor-trailers.
Diesel vehicles now hitting the market with pollution-fighting technology are as clean as, or even cleaner than, gasoline-powered cars, and they are at least 30% more fuel-efficient.
Yet while half of all cars sold in Europe last year ran on diesel, the U.S. market remains relatively unfriendly to the fuel.
Taxes aimed at commercial trucks mean diesel costs anywhere from 40 cents to $1 more per gallon than gasoline. Add to this the success of the Toyota Prius, and you can see why only 3% of cars in the U.S. use diesel.
"Americans see hybrids as the darling," says Global Insight auto analyst Philip Gott, "and diesel as old tech."
None of this is stopping European and Japanese automakers, which are betting they can jump-start the U.S. market with new diesel models. Mercedes-Benz by next year will have three cars it markets as BlueTec. Even Nissan Motor (NSANY, news, msgs) and Honda, which long opposed building diesel cars in Europe, plan to introduce them in the United States in 2010.
But Ford, whose Fiesta ECOnetic compares favorably with European diesels, can't make a business case for bringing the car to the United States.
First of all, the engines are built in Britain, so labor costs are high. Plus the pound remains stronger than the greenback. At prevailing exchange rates, the Fiesta ECOnetic would sell for about $25,700 in the United States.
By contrast, the Prius typically goes for about $24,000.
A $1,300 tax deduction available to buyers of new diesel cars could bring the price of the Fiesta to around $24,400. But Ford doesn't believe it could charge enough to make money on an imported ECOnetic.
Ford plans to make a gas-powered version of the Fiesta in Mexico for the United States. So why not manufacture diesel engines there, too?
Building a plant would cost at least $350 million at a time when Ford has been burning through more than $1 billion a month in cash reserves. Besides, the automaker would have to produce at least 350,000 engines a year to make such a venture profitable.
"We just don't think North and South America would buy that many diesel cars," Fields says.
The question, of course, is whether the U.S. will ever embrace diesel fuel and allow automakers to achieve sufficient scale to make money on such vehicles.
California certified VW and Mercedes diesel cars earlier this year, after a four-year ban. James N. Hall, of auto researcher 293 Analysts, says that bellwether state and the Northeast remain "hostile to diesel."
But the risk to Ford is that the fuel could take off, leaving the carmaker to play catch-up -- despite having a serious diesel contender in its arsenal.
This article was reported and written by David Kiley for BusinessWe
# 4
I don't have any idea- but I sure hope so.."at or before the meeting" language was strong- my expectations about something concrete being in place prior to being released were once again off the mark ( with others )- but sure was positioned as a deal
just not yet signed. And if the proposal is no good and dies on the vine I hope we learn why...Yeh I'm tired.. but please Don't tell me to sell It's my $$$ :) Just an owner interested in my investment
Been a long ride..
believe people took him at face value for the Watershed Meeting- It was informative, and they can always take pride in the Technology- It's theirs- they invented it- it's why I'm still parked here. I think the nagging doubt is are we really having "negotiation on valuation" as the technology is said to be proven and verifiable. Or are we still in open house mode saying "come to Mt read and look at out tech- see anything you like.???" The real puzzler for me has always been the IVT- the one CEO update wehre they posted the gains between conventional deisel- well I'm a simple man but I thought that tech would be long gone by now. Can they commercialize the tech..are they gonna? when? how?
I promise
I would not mock anything that rang the register.
Saw this on GM today- that may be their best bet: Chapter 11-
this coming back for more and more won;t change until they do- once and for all.
Bankruptcy may be good option for GM: analysts
Wednesday February 18, 2009, 12:18 pm EST
DETROIT (Reuters) - A government-backed bankruptcy reorganization may still be a viable option for saving General Motors Corp (NYSE:GM - News) and Chrysler LLC, analysts said on Wednesday, even though the automakers have said they would rather not go down that road.
GM and Chrysler asked for billions of dollars more in federal aid on Tuesday and announced sweeping changes including capacity reduction and job cuts.
Some Wall Street analysts were disappointed that the restructuring plans submitted to the U.S. Treasury did not include key concessions from the United Auto Workers union and the bondholders.
One analyst said that taking the bankruptcy option off the table would reduce the bargaining power of the companies.
Both GM and Chrysler analyzed a possible bankruptcy filing in their restructuring plans but stressed that it was not their preferred method for reorganizing and that they hoped to avoid this scenario.
GM, which has requested $16.4 billion in additional loans from the U.S. government for a total of up to $30 billion, has said it would run out of cash as soon as March without new federal funding.
The request came shortly after smaller rival Chrysler LLC asked for additional $5 billion in aid.
GM's request that a sizable chunk of total aid come in the form of preferred equity rather than debt is a "tacit acknowledgment of the fact that GM may emerge from an out-of-court process as a still highly levered firm," JP Morgan analyst Himanshu Patel said.
David Leiker, analyst with Robert W Baird, still sees bankruptcy as the best option for a reorganization.
"Though likely to be painful near-term, we continue to believe that the challenges to restructuring GM and Chrysler are too complicated to be met outside of a bankruptcy," Leiker said.
In its restructuring blueprint, GM estimated that if it was forced to reorganize in a traditional bankruptcy, the tab for the government could touch $100 billion in bankruptcy financing.
Chrysler estimated that the bill for such a scenario could hit $1,200 per taxpayer.
GM also outlined cost-reduction actions but still has to reach an agreement with its bondholders and the UAW on how to reduce the roughly $48 billion it owes to both groups.
But an equity-for-debt swap, which is being considered, could significantly hit stockholders.
"A substantial majority of the pro-forma equity in General Motors would be distributed to exchanging bondholders and the UAW VEBA," Credit Suisse analyst Chris Ceraso said. "The existing equity holders would largely be wiped out by the bond and VEBA exchanges."
GM shares were down 10 cents or 4.6 percent at $2.08 at midday on the New York Stock Exchange.
(Reporting by Poornima Gupta and David Bailey, editing by Matthew Lewis)
The private ones
are even funnier that the actual posts..remember getting one from a guy who used to post pretty regular then disappeared. Said they had buyers all sewn up for two of the technologies and felt the entire company would be sold prior to the end of the year..that was 2004 I believe. Open up a 6 pack, or pour yourelf a tall one- cause what you're likely to hear is about as reliable as the bar talk about the "one that got away..."(insert whatever applies: girl, fish, lucrative contract !!)
Enjoy the weekend
I try to
look for the positive, am fairly trusting soul, and I'm a slow learner. None of which is likely to change. If it helps for you to be RIGHT-then,& now great..I'm working on HAPPY..and TOVC under a buck doesn't make me happy.. I'd feel alot better if we were 4 years into our strategy of going direct to IVT end users of those medium to heavy trucks..who uses diesel-and will be for the foreseeable future..??..
If it was "Their Proposal"..
not ours..here is a novel idea.."sign the freakin thing"-create some tangible shareholder value- the patents are wonderful , the tech is paradigm shifting, we appreciate and respect the Legacy of the founder and the Family etc but at the end of the day we're shareholders/co-owners .
Guess you can tell I did not vote the slate of BOD for Re-election. Meaningless sure but my small vote on BOD's performance in building/creating shareholder appreciation.
If they were outside investors-they would get it.