So I read this article Sunday night, highlighting the GM bankruptcy, and showing who is in charge of reshaping things. (article) I have to say, I am very very glad Ford is still a viable company. The people taking over GM do not know the industry. What is their experience restructuring a broad, highly complex manufacturing base company?
The comparisons between F, GM and Chrysler are huge at the moment. Ford beautifully positioned themselves with the right people, and more importantly the right leader, to handle very complex issues. When I read about GM and Chrysler, and who will take over, I simply get more and more bullish on Ford.
Chrysler proved paper pushing, wanna-be know-it-all financiers, can not turn around this ailing company. So why does the government think their 'paper pushing, wanna-be know-it-alls' can turn around GM?
My personal experience is also leading to my skepticism here. I have experience with smart, but inexperienced management who think they can maximize productivity via a spread sheet analysis versus real world solutions. Real world solutions from experienced leaders with the know-how get muted as these 'wanna-bes' attempt to create a solution via trial and error.
I mean seriously... I'm almost 30, and can analyze a company/situations with best of them, and give (what I think) to be a very honest assessment. This ability has made me a very good investor/trader. Now, I do not fear new challenges, but I would not presume to know how to run (or completely understand) GM just because I analyzed it for a few months on a spread sheet. I would rather see more experienced people, with the back ground of turning manufacturing companies around, to be in charge of GM.
Since paper pushing, spread sheet loving, wanna-be know-it-alls types are in charge, Ford is in the position to really kick some ass.