Jump to content

GM Stock: Bargain or Bust?


Guest chevydeerhunter

Recommended Posts

Guest chevydeerhunter
Posted

FoxNews.com

 

BOSTON — Ray in Livonia, Mich., is torn between optimism and frustration. The long-time General Motors shareholder had just learned that his favorite company suffered a crushing fourth-quarter loss, it's fifth consecutive quarter in the red. Over the last five years, he's seen the stock lose about two-thirds of its value.

 

That's where the frustration comes in.

 

"But I look at GM and see a stock that's got a dividend of more than 8%, and which I still believe will be here in a decade or two," Ray wrote in an e-mail shortly after GM's earnings announcement. "So I'm wondering if maybe, after all of the bad news, it's a bargain again."

 

That's wishful thinking, because buying into GM right now would be a Stupid Investment of the Week.

 

Stupid Investment of the Week highlights the conditions and flaws that make a security less than ideal for the average consumer, in the hope that showcasing trouble in one situation will make it easier for readers to root out elsewhere. While obviously not a purchase recommendation, neither is this column meant to be an automatic sell signal, as there may be times when unloading a worrisome investment creates its own set of problems. In the case of long-time shareholders like Ray, for example, long-term capital gains may enter the picture.

 

The case for buying General Motors Corp. (GM) is not much more complicated than Ray laid out in his note. There's the big dividend yield, the chance to buy a big-name blue-chip stock for a lot less than he would have imagined possible in years past, and there is the presence of Kirk Kerkorian and his Tracinda Corp.

 

Kerkorian has been buying GM shares and working to get Tracinda representatives onto the company's board of directors, intent on working to improve future performance.

 

He's not the kind of guy who throws money away, which is why Ray takes solace in Kerkorian's involvement. A lot of analysts, however, are wondering what it is that Kerkorian is looking at.

 

That's because the case for avoiding GM is so strong. To borrow from the commercials of the company's bygone Oldsmobile unit, "This is not your father's General Motors."

 

Ray's thought process is, however, spawned from the way our fathers saw the stock, as a kind of widow-and-orphan issue, a perpetual powerhouse. GM hasn't been that company for years.

 

Start with the stock price; while GM has been beaten down in recent years, it's still trading above most fair-value estimates. It would need to lose about 25% just to get to its fair-market value; at that point, to be beaten down sufficiently that the stock truly is a buy-on-bad-news candidate, it would have to lose another 40% to 50%. Ray's buy-it-when-it's-down concept may work, but probably not until the stock price has moved down to single digits.

 

The dividend looks great right now, standing in the high 8% range; in fact, it would look pretty good to most income investors if it were at half of its current level. That's a good thing, too, because the bet here is that GM is going to have to reduce the dividend, probably cutting it in half in the next year.

 

While many long-time GM supporters still see the value of investing in the Big Three automakers, the truth is that they're not so big anymore. These days, it's the Global Six (the Big Three plus Toyota, Nissan and Honda), or maybe even the Global Seven (throw in Hyundai for good measure).

 

GM's products are improving and it has some exciting things in the pipeline, but the competition is not exactly moving forward in low gear. Competition is only getting more fierce (one new sign that the competition is aiming directly at GM's heart was Toyota's announcement this week that it will be racing Camry cars on the Nascar circuit in 2007).

 

Then there is the company's huge issues over health-care obligations for its workers; the shortfall in funding for those medical considerations swallows more than $90 per share of value.

 

There's no relief in the company's fundamentals. While it's not hard to find a balance sheet that is more homely, no one is going to look at the numbers and mistake the company for an immediate buy. Morningstar Inc. considers the stock to be "distressed," a label it pins on firms with serious operating problems.

 

And the economy isn't exactly making the ride any more comfortable. Increased gas prices are a problem, as some of GM's most innovative new products are trucks and large-scale sport-utility vehicles, which consumers might back away from if the numbers at the pump remain high. Sluggish consumer spending and the steady rise of interest rates have hurt the stock over its losing streak, and those trends won't turnaround overnight.

 

If those conditions can improve, that would help GM. So, too, would a new union contract -- likely to be negotiated late this year and put into effect a year later -- if it brings concessions that help ease the company's health-care and pension issues.

 

But none of those things is clear enough that it can be counted on right now, which means GM can't be considered a buy-on-the-dip candidate. And while Kerkorian is buying, he's definitely not the "average investor" and he is clearly looking at something the ordinary guy just can't see at this point.

 

"It's hard to imagine what the upside catalyst is, what specifically is going to change things and lead GM to a turnaround," says Morningstar analyst John Novak. "The list of negatives is so long, and you look at the positives and there's just not enough there to have any confidence at all. ... It probably will get worse before it gets better, so it's possible that GM will be a buy again someday, but that day's a long way off."

Posted

I bought GM stock a couple of weeks ago at mid $18 when all of the bad press came out, today it is trading at over $24. So in less than a month I have made around 30% on my investment. Will I hold the stock much longer? No, but it was fun while I had it....

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,947
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Sothpaw27
    Newest Member
    Sothpaw27
    Joined
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 548 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...