image description

The Independent Investor: Big Three Should Become the Big One

By Bill SchmickiBerkshires Columnist
Print Story | Email Story
Bill Schmick
Does anyone seriously believe that Congress is not going to bail out the auto industry? 

After all, a lot of labor money has been funneled into various political campaigns throughout the years. Detroit auto workers also vote and who wants 3 million unemployed voters casting their ballots against you in two years? Even the president-elect isn't going to buck that kind of voting power.

Yes, I know I'm cynical and, yes, I've heard all the arguments about why the auto industry is critical to our nation's manufacturing capacity. Other proponents of federal assistance argue that the last time the government bailed out one of the auto companies it turned out to be a profitable investment.

Back in 1979, Chrysler was the nation's 10th largest company and on the verge of bankruptcy. It had bet the farm on producing large gas-guzzlers only to hit a brick wall when OPEC jacked up oil prices. Americans shunned their products (does this sound familiar?) and both management and union leaders begged the government for $1.2 billion in subsidized loans. 

That was big money in those days. Under the charismatic leadership of Lee Iacocca, Chrysler used the money to re-create itself with the K-line of smaller vehicles like the Dodge Aries and the minivan as well as the forerunner to the popular SUV. By the mid-'80s, not only had the company repaid the loan but the government made a profit.


Time to squeeze the automakers
So here we are almost three decades later ready to "play it again Sam" with our favorite uncle, the government. Although they have already been promised $25 billion to make their cars more fuel-efficient, the three companies want another $25 billion. They claim without it they will burn through their existing cash within months. So Congress is scurrying to the rescue. Now our leaders are assuring us that there will be guidelines, and restrictions and demands so that we the tax payers will be protected. They said that about the $700 billion rescue plan, too, remember?

Yet riddle me this Detroit. Why are you, the auto industry, now exactly where you were almost 30 years ago? Why do we think that simply throwing money at the same old managements and business models will do any good at all?

If it were up to me, I would have a few of my own demands. How about for starters we fire top management of all three and then merge the companies into one. Let's call it GFC. Sure that would mean redundancies, painful job cuts especially in management, but it would also produce economies of scale, modernization and, hopefully, an industry that could not only survive but thrive in today's competitive marketplace. It might even improve our manufacturing capacity.

Did you know that there are a number of healthy auto manufactures in this country who are doing quite nicely in this environment? We could pick off some of their top managers to run the new GFC or get someone outside the industry that has experience re-organizing big companies.

"But what about our auto workers?" cry the outraged union bosses.

The evidence indicates that for the most part, workers employed by foreign car manufactures located in the South are making as much as those in Detroit and their benefits are similar. The largest difference, in my opinion, between foreign and domestic automakers is decision-making flexibility.

Today, every decision on the GM, Ford and Chrysler assembly lines requires union input. This is a result of hard-won labor negotiations over several decades. But times have changed as have manufacturing processes. Regardless of changing times and circumstances, this inch-thick book of rules, guidelines and regulations have literally stifled entrepreneurship, inventiveness and productivity in our factories. Those issues are missing from America's non-union competitors.

Now, I'm not bashing labor anymore than management here. Both bear the blame for the problems within our auto industry. These problems did not arrive overnight. General Motors management and union officials have been in place since 1995 watching gas prices increase and losing market share year after to year to more innovative and fuel-conscious competitors. Our U.S. companies look even worse when you consider that the dollar has declined continuously making our vehicles even cheaper for overseas buyers and their imports more expensive. And still we lost market share.

Union rules are stifling innovation
Bob Nardelli, after his spotted career at Home Depot and huge $210 million retirement payoff, is now in charge of Chrysler. I'm not sure why. So far his track record is less than stellar. Maybe his bank account is so fat that money no longer motivates him. Ford does seem to be on the right track, however, so maybe there is a little hope for Detroit after all.

Next week, I suspect that Detroit will get what it wants. Sure there will be some face-saving demands that the automakers improve the fuel efficiency of their products. By now even the densest managers realizes if they want to sell more cars, they better do that anyway. Outside of that it will be business as usual. 

The bosses will keep their jobs. Foreign companies will continue to take market share and the Little Three will be back in Washington next year for more money. They may even try to restrict imports since it worked in the '80s under the Reagan administration.

But I'll tell you what. I'm not buying another American-made car until they truly can offer a product comparable to their foreign competitors. And I think that will take a long, long time.

Bill Schmick is a licensed investment adviser representative and portfolio strategist as well as a registered financial planner with Berkshire-based Dion Money Management, which manages more than $500 million for middle-class Americans from coast to coast. Direct your inquires to Bill at 1-877-850-7942, Ext. 146, (toll-free) or e-mail him at wschmick@dionmm.com. You can also visit www.afewdollarsmore.com for more of Bill's insight.
If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Lanesborough Town Meeting to Vote Budget, Bylaws & Vehicle Purchases

By Breanna SteeleiBerkshires Staff

LANESBOROUGH, Mass. — Tuesday's annual town meeting includes a $14 million operating budget, new short-term rentals, accessory dwelling units and sign bylaws, and free cash article appropriations.

Voters will gather at Lanesborough Elementary School on June 9 at 6 p.m. to decide on 20 warrant articles.

The fiscal 2027 budget is up a little over 10 percent. Some of the main increases are the Mount Greylock Regional School District and McCann Technical School: the McCann assessment is up more than 30 percent based on factors including enrollment and the school renovation project, and Mount Greylock's is up 11 percent.

Article 11 is for the town to vote to approve from free cash the sum of $16,298.48 for the McCann Technical School roof and window replacement project so as not to impact the budget. Article 3 is  appropriate $7,586,284 for Mount Greylock Regional School assessment.

Another notable increase was in life and health insurance, showing an increase of about 26 percent.

Ambulance Director Jen Weber is planning 24-hour coverage, which means more staff and a hike in her budget. One of the articles asks the town to appropriate $234,100 to operate the Ambulance Enterprise Fund for salaries and expenses.

Many town departments are looking for new vehicles. The Fire Department is looking to replace its outdated 1996 fire engine. There are two articles related to the truck at a total of $813,366. Article 12 would transfer $225,000 from free cash into the Fire Truck Stabilization Fund; Article 13 would transfer $605,000 from the fund and authorize the borrowing of $208,366.08.

The total includes a $100,000 contingency cost to cover any additional costs if a 2026 model-year chassis cannot be secured before new emissions standards go into effect in 2027.

The board at its last meeting moved the $225,000 transfer to come before the borrowing article, changing the stabilization number. If the $225,000 is not voted on, then they will amend the next article's number on the floor, subtracting the $225,000. This shows the borrowing number significantly lower.

Article 17 asks for the transfer of $80,000 from free cash to replace a police cruiser.

Police Chief Rob Derksen's aim is to replace one vehicle every other year, meaning the oldest vehicle gets replaced about every 10 years. 

He stressed that if delayed this year, the town may have to double up in a future year to get back on schedule, and that paying later usually costs more. The article will ask for $80,000 from free cash, the vehicles used to be funded by the BHRD.

Lastly, the Highway Department is looking to replace a 2014 International dump truck that will be a total of $330,000 and will take two to three years to receive.

Money will be used from last year's approval of $250,000 from free cash for the replacement of a 2012 highway front-end loader that was underspent $49,261. Town meeting is being asked to approve  a transfer of $53,274.85 from free cash and the use of $227,464 from funds from the Sale of Town Real Estate to fund the balance.

Other free cash proposals include $1,200 to purchase software to support tracking and ongoing maintenance schedules of town-owned vehicles; $42,000 for the replacement of the Highway Department's storage shed roof, $200,000 to reduce the tax levy.

View Full Story

More Stories