GM's woes

Yesterday, General Motors management took the time to explain how it intended to preserve the group's liquidity in 2008 and 2009. This latest set of restructuring measures comes just six weeks after the previous one (four truck plant closures and sale of the Hummer brand). It involves reducing office worker costs by 20% -- which would presumably mean making several thousand people redundant. This and other measures (including -- pensioners take note -- lower retiree healthcare) would help meet a new target of cutting costs by $10 billion. GM will also stop paying dividend on its common stock for now, reduce capital expenditure by $1.5 billion vs. plan, and sell up to $4 billion worth of assets (e.g. Hummer) to generate liquidity. GM holds some $24 billion in cash, but has an amazing cash-burning track-record. None of the new measures goes beyond the short-term: on the contrary, further cutbacks on white-collars and capital expenditure may well completely jeopardize GM's chances of coming up with a constructive longer-term vision.

Debt and equity analysts alike do not appear to be fooled by GM's latest announcement. Yesterday evening, after market hours, Moody's placed GM's ratings on review for a possible further downgrade (out of solidarity, Chrysler Automotive LLC's ratings are also on review, and those of Ford Motor Co remain on negative outlook). GM's senior unsecured debt is already rated Caa1, highlighting a very high likelihood of default. With sky-high oil prices and a GM portfolio full of fuel-guzzling models, who will want to take up the $2 to $3 billion of new financing that GM intends to issue? Surely not your conservative portfolio manager, but an aggressive breed that is probably betting on a debt-to-equity swap several years (or quarters?) down the road.

Continental's fight for independence

A few weeks ago, I would have said that the next big news about Continental AG would come on 31 July 2008, when the tyre and car component maker releases its results for the first half of 2008.

On 26 June, after Standard & Poor's changed the outlook to negative on its BBB credit rating, Continental's management insisted that they viewed their financing structure as "sound" and that this change would have "no effect on VDO financing – no additional costs". CFO Dr. Alan Hippe noted that this was equivalent to Moody's Baa2 with a negative outlook, and reflected the difficult market environment for issuing hybrid bonds. "Currently, we would only be able to place the hybrid bond planned as part of the VDO acquisition financing arrangements at extremely unfavorable conditions, which is why we have refrained from going ahead so far." The group continues to target annual sales of more than €26.4 billion in 2008.

But Continental is already back in the news. On Monday, it confirmed that "one brief conversation about a possible engagement by Schaeffler-Group in Continental AG took place at the end of last week." Yesterday, Schaeffler made a takeover offer for the group at €69.37 per share in cash. Unsurprisingly, this morning, Continental is announcing that "the Executive Board of Continental rejects the offer," adding that "the offer is highly opportunistic, does not come to the true value of Continental, does not create trust and lacks a convincing strategic rationale." The press release goes on to describe how Schaeffler took control 36% of Continental's capital "in an unlawful manner", or "using Porsche tactics" as the Financial Times says.

True, the Continental share price had under-performed the DAX index: since July 2007, it lost some 50% of its value before the recent surge, compared to only 25% in the case of the DAX. But the current share price reflects investors' belief that less than €70 per share (or the weighted average price over the last three months) is not sufficient.

But who is Schaeffler anyway? Well, it is a German-based industrial group that supplies the automotive, machinery and aviation/aerospace sectors with mechanical, mechatronic and precision components, including a whole variety of bearings. INA, FAG (since 2001) and LuK are household brands for its customers (and competitors like SKF). Synergies, if any, are with CAS (Continental Automotive Systems), rather than with the tyre activities of Continental. Schaeffler is "an independent family-owned company, which, as a major shareholder with a long-term outlook, offers Continental AG the stability and security it needs to continue on its course in a difficult market environment." Schaeffler says that it does not want to break up Continental and that it will not need to upstream cash flows from Continental to service the takeover financing package.


Continental is one of the healthiest groups in its sector, with an attractive combination of complementary segments that do not follow exactly the same demand or investment cycles, ensuring a reasonable cash flow stream even in "bad" years. Schaeffler's tactics may look mean, but maybe they will trigger a counter-offer from a deep-pocketed financial investor who has been wondering how to use its sponsors' cash. But as far as independence goes, it could well be time for Continental to waive it goodbye...

Valeo quo vadis?

Last Friday, car parts maker Valeo proudly affirmed that its operating profit margin would rise in 2008, from 3.3% last year and 3.6% in the first quarter of 2008, and would reach 6% by 2010. Management acknowledges that 2008 will be a "very difficult year for the car industry" and that raw material prices are a constant challenge. Valeo is betting on continued success of products like "stop and start" and "park4U", which I tended to view as nice-to-have gizmos, and on further geographical expansion, especially in Russia.

Pardus, which is also a Visteon Corp. shareholder, owns just under 20% of the capital of Valeo. In fact, in May 2008, Pardus has committed not to exercise voting rights beyond 20%, should its stake increase in the future. Patrick Faure, an ex-Renault executive, who was the representative of Pardus at Valeo's assembly general meeting, made diplomatic comments involving forgetting past disagreements and focusing on a win-win cooperation for the benefit of all shareholders. Another outspoken shareholder, Guy Wyser-Pratte, is growing impatient and complains that Valeo has not done enough lately to dispose of loss-making business units.

On 2 July 2007, when the discussions with an "investment fund" came to an end, Valeo had promised it would implement the value-creation strategy discussed at the May 2007 AGM: focus on three core activities thanks to targeted acquisitions and disposals. In October 2007, Valeo sold its cabling unit to Leoni, leading to a €200 million reduction in net debt. The group is working on selling its truck engine thermal unit to EQT. Anything else with respect to disposals of non-core activities? Valeo bought Connaught Electronics (which plans sales of about €80 million by 2010) a year ago. Any other acquisition of core activities? Unlike Mr. Wyser-Pratte, I do not have a penny invested in Valeo shares, but I certainly sympathize with him.

Pushing metal and buying metal

Pushing it... In the United States, GM, Ford and their fellow carmakers are increasingly creative in their efforts to "push metal" out of their factories. For instance, on Monday, GM announced, among other things, 6-year 0% car loans aimed at slowing the decline in some its previously most-successful models, which have now become unattractive due to their fuel requirements and consumer demand sluggishness. The GM share price recently hit a 26-year low: maybe the market does not really believe these measures will help much?

Buying it... Audi, part of the Volkswagen AG group, warned on Sunday that it may need to raise prices faster than inflation in 2009 due to higher raw material and other costs. This will depend on what competitors do. Nissan said that steel groups (e.g. ArcelorMittal, world #1) were bound to raise their prices significantly, perhaps in 2009: the carmaker is therefore planning to reflect this in its car prices, starting with markets where Nissan is strongest, such as +2% or +3% in Japan. The timing will depend on when its competitors start to announce similar intentions. Conversely, Fiat's spokesman said today that its Auto division did not plan an increase its prices, especially in the current market of sharply declining Italian car registration numbers. A Credit Suisse analyst estimates that raising prices by 5% to 10% would result in a 10% to 20% loss in volumes and therefore (additional) over-capacity. Are we going back full circle with carmakers desperately trying to "push metal" at any cost again?