For the only Detroit automaker that "didn't take the money" of the federal auto bailouts, Ford Motor Co. keeps paying a price for its comparative success and self-reliant turnaround...
As part of a campaign featuring "real people" explaining their decision to buy the Blue Oval, a guy named "Chris" says he "wasn't going to buy another car that was bailed out by our government," according the text of the ad, launched in early September.
"I was going to buy from a manufacturer that's standing on their own: win, lose, or draw. That's what America is about is taking the chance to succeed and understanding when you fail that you gotta' pick yourself up and go back to work."
That's what some of America is about, evidently. Because Ford pulled the ad after individuals inside the White House questioned whether the copy was publicly denigrating the controversial bailout policy CEO Alan Mulally repeatedly supported in the dark days of late 2008, in early '09 and again when the ad flap arose. And more.
With President Barack Obama tuning his re-election campaign amid dismal economic conditions and simmering antipathy toward his stimulus spending and associated bailouts, the Ford ad carried the makings of a political liability when Team Obama can least afford yet another one. Can't have that.
The ad, pulled in response to White House questions (and, presumably, carping from rival GM), threatened to rekindle the negative (if accurate) association just when the president wants credit for their positive results (GM and Chrysler are moving forward, making money and selling vehicles) and to distance himself from any public downside of his decision.
With President Barack Obama tuning his re-election campaign amid dismal economic conditions and simmering antipathy toward his stimulus spending and associated bailouts, the Ford ad carried the makings of a political liability when Team Obama can least afford yet another one. Can't have that.
Of course the WH doesn't want the truth to get out that alot of people will never ever buy another GM or Chrysler product again..... no real surprise here..
Rules for Leftards #14). We have to suppress/cover up the truth because it makes us look bad, really bad!!!!
A taxpayer that votes for Obama is like a chicken that votes for Col Sanders!!!!
For Wall Street analysts to claim “surprise” at GM's massive deferred tax asset writedown, during fiscal year 2007, and to finally discuss (in mid-2008) General Motors' financial condition in terms of a possible bankruptcy, indicate that low-level fluff is easily passed on to Main Street “investors” under the guise of serious analysis.
The point here is that GM is so unprofitable that its top-level management realized they had to come clean and write down the value of its deferred tax assets because it became completely unpredictable as to when the company would actually return to making a profit, and thus use that tax asset against any future tax liability it incurs."-mish
And just how did Ford manage to pay Mulally $100 million? And
Fact is, at Ford as with most companies, the back-slapping selection is a simply a big-money boys and girls club; where girls get paid a lot but still less than men; go figure.
In the minds of the board at Ford, though, the price tag for Mulally comes to about $58.3 million in stock, of which Ford held back a considerable amount just to cover taxes. Net to Mulally was still an arousing $34 million.
Was Mulally worth that much in compensation? Heck, it wasn’t that far back that Ford was on the brink of bankruptcy. Sure, they got the credit line before the bank spigot shut off after the mortgage market fell; and that’s the only reason the company wasn’t found begging like GM and Chrysler at the government table.
Fact is, at that time Ford was burning cash just like everyone else; and a bankrupt GM and Chrysler would have bankrupted the supplier base and thus the industry. So, in no way would Ford have survived.
Point is, Ford needed the bailout as much as GM and Chrysler; they just didn’t need it directly, but I digress. ...;}
Ford CEO Alan Mulally is $34.5 million richer after shares granted two years ago vested this week. The payout is sure to be a sore subject among some Ford factory workers, who have cited Mulally's pay when they have voted against contract changes.
Mulally coollected $26.5 million in 2010, making him the ninth highest-paid CEO in the U.S. last year, according to calculations by The Associated Press.
United Auto Workers President Bob King has called Mulally's pay “morally wrong.” Ford says Mulally's compensation is fair because it's tied to the shares' success.
And the share's success is tied to blatant stock manipulation by the FedRes.
