Quote(s) Of The Day: The Coming IPO Edition

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

Editor’s Note: With GM’s S-1 IPO filing hitting the web today, every IPO and auto industry analyst is weighing in on the offering, and the state of GM. Here’s a collection of some of today’s more notable comments.

It looks to me that GM should be worth no more than Ford. If that’s the case, then the taxpayers will lose about 50% on their investment.

Francis Gaskins, president of IPOdesktop.com, commenting in the WSJ [sub] on GM’s IPO. More analyst commentary on GM’s just-released S-1 filing after the jump.

There seems to be a high demand for GM stock from hedge funds and large institutions, but retail investors don’t want to touch the stock… There is no doubt in my mind that we will see the administration patting itself on the back, congratulating itself, telling the public that the investment into the automakers was a good idea

David Silver, of WStreet.com, in MarketWatch. Silver reckons the IPO could bring in up to $18 billion with another $5 billion possible from the preferred shares, and up to $10 billion coming from the government’s holdings.

The fact that we are even talking about this is a milestone and was far from guaranteed…I think is an example not of an expanding government role, but the government and the private sector working together in an unprecedented way.

University of California at Berkley professor Harley Shaiken, in the Freep.

It sounds to me like a large part of it will go to repay the government and that only the proceeds of the preferred shares go to the company. But there’s still going to be an overhang of ownership, and that’s really looming over and will be looming over this company’s head for some time.

Depending on how the preferred shares are priced, there could be a good pricing opportunity depending on what the rating is. My sense is that the government will try to get their ownership down to as little as possible.

Jack Ablin, Chief Investment Officer, Harris Private Bank, in Reuters.

It was totally perplexing. I personally do not think the timing was right [for Whitacre to step down as CEO]. It put the filing of the IPO behind ….and we know that one of the main attributes that Wall Street looks for when the look at an IPO is stability in management. That just shows they didn’t have a succession plan.

Sheldon Stone of Amherst Partners, in the Freep.

I’m glad it’s out because the hype surrounding when it was coming out and the fact ‘Oh they didn’t file today, maybe it’s a problem’ really pressed too much on the anxiety button for investors.

Now comes the difficult part, assessing what the valuation of GM truly is…It’s a deal that seems to be very reasonable at this point based on what they’re showing for the fees that they paid.

I think this offering has a two-month shelf life on it

David Menlow, president of the IPOfinancial.com, in the Freep and Reuters.

Our position on the IPO is: Are the investors out there? Are they ready to invest as quickly as GM’s expectations are? I hope they are. We are not behind the closed doors but we are hearing good things.

Ken Lewenza, president of the Canadian Auto Workers union, in the Freep.

The surprise thing was the change in leadership — that was a wrench in the works there. I thought it may have behooved them to wait a little bit. A few more quarters of these solid results might have helped them out. The timing part is difficult. What if there is a double-dip recession? It is difficult to gauge the best time to come out.

I have to give them credit for restructuring, but it will come down in terms of economic headwinds — that will be the biggest issue.

Mirko Mikelic, Fixed Income Portfolio Manager, Fifth Third Bank, in Reuters.

They’re using the preferred shares…to pay some dividends and probably lock up some key shareholders. They will obviously try to get some key investors in now, like some wealth funds from the Middle East. That will be the first strategy, and then they will basically do more formal marketing for the offering to more institutions and retail (investors).

It’s all in now, so by November it’s going to happen.

Josef Schuster, IPOX Schuster LLC in Reuters.

People may have felt a little bit more comfortable if there was another quarter or two of profitability like we’ve seen in the last two quarters. You can really say somebody is fully reformed when they’ve been out of rehab for a longer period of time.

One thing overall investors aren’t recognizing fully is that these (U.S. auto) companies are making money in a variety of products now and that is not something that used to happen. That kind of diversity really needs to be recognized and rewarded.

Rebecca Lindland, IHS Global Insight, in Reuters.

If GM is valued in that $60 billion to $70 billion range, that gets the taxpayer paid back. But the question is, is that achievable for a company that is a year out of bankruptcy, that has just changed CEOs and that faces negotiations with the UAW? I just think that the risk of failure with the IPO is bigger than the risk of being known as Government Motors. Personally, I think they should wait and prove out their earnings.

I’m very positive about GM — they’ve got good products, they’re blowing up the bureaucracy and hopefully Akerson can keep that going. My only question is with the timing of the IPO.

Brad Coulter, O’Keefe And Associates in Reuters.

I can find other attractive names with lower risk for my portfolio

Ariel Hsiao, HSBC’s New Rich Equity Fund

Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 25 comments
  • Zackman Zackman on Aug 19, 2010

    Does this mean that GM can get back to reinventing the car again? You know, pillarless hardtops, vent windows, chrome and windows that roll down? Actual style? Nah...maybe? Hope? Pleasant thoughts, though!

    • BigOldChryslers BigOldChryslers on Aug 19, 2010

      Ha ha, you've hit most of my pet peeves about new cars. Don't forget cowl vents, so one can get fresh air in the cabin without having to turn on the blower fan or opening the windows, and little gutters over the door openings so you can open the door for a moment in the rain and the edge of the seat won't get soaked by the water running off the roof.

  • Nevets248 Nevets248 on Aug 23, 2010

    'Rebecca Lindland, IHS Global Insight, in Reuters. If GM is valued in that $60 billion to $70 billion range, that gets the taxpayer paid back. But the question is, is that achievable for a company that is a year out of bankruptcy, that has just changed CEOs and that faces negotiations with the UAW? I just think that the risk of failure with the IPO is bigger than the risk of being known as Government Motors. Personally, I think they should wait and prove out their earnings. I’m very positive about GM — they’ve got good products, they’re blowing up the bureaucracy and hopefully Akerson can keep that going. My only question is with the timing of the IPO." ANY time I read anything from her, I can't help but think of a line from Foghorn Leghorn..."..about as sharp as a bag full of wet mice".

  • Tassos Obsolete relic is NOT a used car.It might have attracted some buyers in ITS DAY, 1985, 40 years ago, but NOT today, unless you are a damned fool.
  • Stan Reither Jr. Part throttle efficiency was mentioned earlier in a postThis type of reciprocating engine opens the door to achieve(slightly) variable stroke which would provide variable mechanical compression ratio adjustments for high vacuum (light load) or boost(power) conditions IMO
  • Joe65688619 Keep in mind some of these suppliers are not just supplying parts, but assembled components (easy example is transmissions). But there are far more, and the more they are electronically connected and integrated with rest of the platform the more complex to design, engineer, and manufacture. Most contract manufacturers don't make a lot of money in the design and engineering space because their customers to that. Commodity components can be sourced anywhere, but there are only a handful of contract manufacturers (usually diversified companies that build all kinds of stuff for other brands) can engineer and build the more complex components, especially with electronics. Every single new car I've purchased in the last few years has had some sort of electronic component issue: Infinti (battery drain caused by software bug and poorly grounded wires), Acura (radio hiss, pops, burps, dash and infotainment screens occasionally throw errors and the ignition must be killed to reboot them, voice nav, whether using the car's system or CarPlay can't seem to make up its mind as to which speakers to use and how loud, even using the same app on the same trip - I almost jumped in my seat once), GMC drivetrain EMF causing a whine in the speakers that even when "off" that phased with engine RPM), Nissan (didn't have issues until 120K miles, but occassionally blew fuses for interior components - likely not a manufacturing defect other than a short developed somewhere, but on a high-mileage car that was mechanically sound was too expensive to fix (a lot of trial and error and tracing connections = labor costs). What I suspect will happen is that only the largest commodity suppliers that can really leverage their supply chain will remain, and for the more complex components (think bumper assemblies or the electronics for them supporting all kinds of sensors) will likley consolidate to a handful of manufacturers who may eventually specialize in what they produce. This is part of the reason why seemingly minor crashes cost so much - an auto brand does nst have the parts on hand to replace an integrated sensor , nor the expertice as they never built them, but bought them). And their suppliers, in attempt to cut costs, build them in way that is cheap to manufacture (not necessarily poorly bulit) but difficult to replace without swapping entire assemblies or units).I've love to see an article on repair costs and how those are impacting insurance rates. You almost need gap insurance now because of how quickly cars depreciate yet remain expensive to fix (orders more to originally build, in some cases). No way I would buy a CyberTruck - don't want one, but if I did, this would stop me. And it's not just EVs.
  • Joe65688619 I agree there should be more sedans, but recognize the trend. There's still a market for performance oriented-drivers. IMHO a low budget sedan will always be outsold by a low budget SUV. But a sports sedan, or a well executed mid-level sedan (the Accord and Camry) work. Smaller market for large sedans except I think for an older population. What I'm hoping to see is some consolidation across brands - the TLX for example is not selling well, but if it was offered only in the up-level configurations it would not be competing with it's Honda sibling. I know that makes the market smaller and niche, but that was the original purpose of the "luxury" brands - badge-engineering an existing platform at a relatively lower cost than a different car and sell it with a higher margin for buyers willing and able to pay for them. Also creates some "brand cachet." But smart buyers know that simple badging and slightly better interiors are usually not worth the cost. Put the innovative tech in the higher-end brands first, differentiate they drivetrain so it's "better" (the RDX sells well for Acura, same motor and tranmission, added turbo which makes a notable difference compared to the CRV). The sedan in many Western European countries is the "family car" as opposed to micro and compact crossovers (which still sell big, but can usually seat no more than a compact sedan).
  • Jonathan IMO the hatchback sedans like the Audi A5 Sportback, the Kia Stinger, and the already gone Buick Sportback are the answer to SUVs. The A5 and the AWD version of the Stinger being the better overall option IMO. I drive the A5, and love the depth and size of the trunk space as well as the low lift over. I've yet to find anything I need to carry that I can't, although I admit I don't carry things like drywall, building materials, etc. However, add in the fun to drive handling characteristics, there's almost no SUV that compares.
Next