Recently, my lecture-mates and I have been stalking GM in the TV and newspapers, just like some of you might read tabloids about celebrity gossips. The business section of the newspapers is "tabloid material" for me to analyze; it's all relevant to what I am studying. I have no life.
It's a real mess; Cerberus Capital (note: not an auto company) owns Chrysler and 51% of GMAC. GM and Chrysler were in talks of a merger; it all seemed very exciting since it might tell me what the answer to my assignment is. The assignment due date is November 17. Despite the events that are fast unveiling in the "real world", my time spent on reading the news now seems somewhat futile when Chrysler might turn to Nissan for merger talks -- my assignment is now a fictional "what-if" scenario; I am suppose to come up with a way to carve the deal if the merger were to happen, such that GM would have access to Chrysler's cash. (This takes account into setting my personal opinions aside, like many other doubters)
One of my frustrations with following the news is that a lot of the news articles are opinionated. Damn it, I don't care if you think GM's execs don't deserve to be on the board, bla, bla, bla... I just want facts! And FYI, it's not easy to just fire your top executives when there are severance packages, gold, silver and tin parachutes. Column writers ought to use their nogging before they voice their opinions, especially if it is a business news column.
Time is of the essence. $25 billion is supposed to go to the auto industry in the US, but there are going to be restrictions on how the car-makers can use it; they can't use it merely for survival purposes, but rather to help in the innovation process. It is rather tempting to write my paper as if I was a pseudo-journalist, but I will not. It is also tempting to add the cartoon as a part of my paper. So much for sardonic humour.
No comments:
Post a Comment