.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
General Motors Corp., America’s largest automaker, reported an $891-million profit for the second quarter of the year, driven by strong sales in emerging global markets and reduced costs from its restructuring efforts (it’s companywide pension and healthcare buyouts).
GM’s quarterly profit of $891 million, or $1.56 per diluted share, is an improvement of $4.3 billion compared with a reported net loss of $3.4 billion, or $5.98 per diluted share, in the year-ago quarter. In a single year, GM went from a -$3.4 Billion LOSS to a +$4.3 Billion PROFIT, a $7.8 Billion turnaround!The positive results boosted GM’s stock 7% in pre-market trading this morning, with shares of the automaker trading up $2.29 a share to $34.90 on August 1st, 2007.Overall, Credit Suisse analyst Chris Cerasco said in a note Tuesday morning that GM’s earnings — at $2.48 per share — had “a big upside,” coming in significantly higher than the consensus analyst estimate of $1.13 per share. But, he said, North America again fell “short of expectations,” with 80 cents of its earnings improvement coming from tax-related gains.
GM’s quarterly profit of $891 million, or $1.56 per diluted share, is an improvement of $4.3 billion compared with a reported net loss of $3.4 billion, or $5.98 per diluted share, in the year-ago quarter. In a single year, GM went from a -$3.4 Billion LOSS to a +$4.3 Billion PROFIT, a $7.8 Billion turnaround!The positive results boosted GM’s stock 7% in pre-market trading this morning, with shares of the automaker trading up $2.29 a share to $34.90 on August 1st, 2007.Overall, Credit Suisse analyst Chris Cerasco said in a note Tuesday morning that GM’s earnings — at $2.48 per share — had “a big upside,” coming in significantly higher than the consensus analyst estimate of $1.13 per share. But, he said, North America again fell “short of expectations,” with 80 cents of its earnings improvement coming from tax-related gains.
.
To put this in the simplest terms, so that "progressives" can understand, "THIS is GOOD NEWS for America, because more profits for American-based corporations means more American jobs, more American tax revenues and more of that prosperity stuff we all pretty much take for granted.
.
Think about it, WITHOUT government there would still be commerce, but without commerce there'd be no need for government, not much ability to fund it, at all.
SEE: http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070731/BUSINESS01/70731014
It is indeed, JMK!
ReplyDeleteAdd to this the profit which Ford reported several weeks ago and one can only hope that Detroit has turned a corner.
You know what's amazing?
ReplyDeleteYou can spin almost ANY information to be negative or posiive.
When housing prices go up, that can either be reported as "an economic surge," or a "crisis for perspective home buyers." Likewise, when house prices fall it can either be "a great buying opportunity," or a "dangerous economic correction."
The truth is that for most home buyers, MOST have to sell one home to buy another, house prices mean very little.
When prices go up, they GET more for their houses, but PAY more for the one they buy and vice versa, when home prices drop, they GET less for their current house, but PAY less for the one they'll buy.
In general, higher house prices are better, much BETTER for home owners.
The same with GM's and Ford's profits, it can be reported as either a "boom for American industry," (it undoubtedly IS) or "profiting off the backs of American labor."
In short, those workers took those buyouts and these profits ARE good for America - more jobs, more taxes and a stronger economy for America.
Why do so many people fail to understand that?
I don't know, JMK.
ReplyDeleteAny more than I understand the collapse of the subprie lenders as being so bad.
The way I see it, the subprime gave mortgages to people who didn't qualify under the normal rules for same.
In my mind, it will eliminate the Dem sound byte about foreclosures being at record levels - a direct result of these bad loans which, as we both know, tended to be usurious.
In my simplistic mind, it seems that we got rid of two birds with one stone.
Whether Wall Street will reach that perception is open for debate.
Those subprime loans are a disaster.
ReplyDeleteThey should've been illegal - "no interest loans," with huge balloon payments at the backend, etc.
People who take out ARMs have to look at the credit market. They're a good tool when credit is tight and rates are high, as chances are, rates will eventually go down and ou're paying a lower rate up front. They're really bad in a good credit market with low interest rates, as rates will only go up.
Worse, or perhaps crazier still are all those bankers who thought these kinds of loans, made to poor credit risks were a "good idea."