Open Question
The proposal to give the UAW majority stakes in the automakers is very
wrongheaded (imo) and indicates that the company will be an underachiever from
an investment standpoint.
This is largely because of the (biblical) notion that you cannot serve two
masters. How can a company turn a profit if they are trying to satisfy labor?
I think a perfect example of this dynamic can be found in the airline industry,
in companies such as UAUA. The employee stockholders are not interested in
turning a profit, they are only interested in bleeding the company for every
dime that can be obtained for wages and benefits.
Page 1 of 1
The shares will be worth $5 but will cost you 10.
Rate Now:
Average Rating: 0.00 / 0
i agree with u ,look at gm and the shareholders owning 1% of the company
altogeather and the gov. owning half.the big 3 r doomed in the long run,thats
better for the forein auto companys i guuess. ford will be next its just a
matter of time,they have done great to stay out of the spot lingt,but their
problems will catch up too them eventuly.this is what happens when u get to damn
greedy and lazy and let idiot run a company.u destroy what was once a great
company
Rate Now:
Average Rating: 0.00 / 0
Ron Middlefinger ... LOL! DB
Rate Now:
Average Rating: 0.00 / 0
LOL. I think a company that is wholly owned by the UAW would be a great example
of the benefits of unions. I received a constant barrage of email (with
multiple typos and misspellings, of course) from UAW members when I contended
that labor expense (including legacy costs) made GM/F/Chrysler uncompetitive.
All I heard was how full of crap I was, and how unions actually boosted the
value of the automobiles.
Now, with Chrysler, Ron Middlefinger and the UAW will get the chance to prove
their real value to the manufacturing process.
Rate Now:
Average Rating: 0.00 / 0
No way fiat is going to buy into that structure.
Rate Now:
Average Rating: 0.00 / 0
Page 1 of 1
