GM's Union Making Out Much Better than US Taxpayers on GM Stock Sale

No surprise here. It really pays to have their best friend at the White House.

From The Washington Times on November 25, 2010 [Emphasis is mine]:

General Motors Co.'s recent stock offering was staged to start paying back the government for its $50 billion bailout, but one group made out much better than the taxpayers or other investors: the company's union.

Thanks to a generous share of GM stock obtained in the company's 2009 bankruptcy settlement, the United Auto Workers is well on its way to recouping the billions of dollars GM owed it — putting it far ahead of taxpayers who have recouped only about 30 percent of their investment and further still ahead of investors in the old GM who have received nothing.

The boon for the union fits the pattern established when the White House pushed GM into bankruptcy and steered it through the courts in a way that consistently put the interests of the union ahead of many suppliers, dealers and investors — stakeholders that ordinarily would have fared as well or better under the bankruptcy laws.

"Priority one was serving the interests of the UAW" when the White House's auto task force engineered the bankruptcy, said Glenn Reynolds, an analyst at CreditSights. The stock offering served to show once again how the White House has handsomely rewarded its political allies, he said.

The union's health care and pension trust fund earned $3.4 billion through the sale of one-third of its shares in GM last week. Analysts estimate that it would break even if it sells the remaining two-thirds of its shares at an average price of $36 — close to where the stock traded shortly after the offering hit the market. GM shares closed at $33.45 on Wednesday.

For taxpayers to break even, by contrast, the stock would have to rise to at least $52 and by some estimates as high as $103 — levels that would take years to achieve.

In any event, after selling one-third of its shares last week, the U.S. Treasury has agreed not to sell any more of its GM stock for another six months, while the union fund is free to keep selling its shares.

For the full article, follow the link.

Tweet

House Committee Wants Auto Task Force Info

Maybe this is why Mr. Steve Rattner decided to quit the car czar post...

House committee wants GM, Chrysler documents
(7/17/09 AP via Yahoo Finance)

"A House committee asked the Obama administration Friday to release documents on the federal bailouts of General Motors Co. and Chrysler Group LLC, seeking more details on decisions that led to the auto industry bankruptcies.

""They negotiated, they reviewed and they approved every aspect of the Chrysler and General Motors reorganization," Rep. Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., said of the White House. "We don't know how the president's auto task force reached its conclusion."

"The resolution, proposed by House Republican Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, underscored lingering resentment in Congress over the government's work to push GM and Chrysler into bankruptcy. The House approved legislation Thursday pressing GM and Chrysler to restore closed dealerships. Auto task force head Ron Bloom was scheduled to testify before a House panel next week as part of a two-day hearing.

"Committee chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., said the resolution "does suffer from a certain selective memory approach," noting that the Bush administration provided the initial funding in late December to the companies. But he supported the request."

The House Committee the article mentions is the House Committee on Financial Services chaired by Barney Frank.

The lawmakers did nothing while Chrysler and GM were being dismantled and sold off, and now that's all done they want information. Better late than never, I suppose, although the resolution doesn't compel the White House to hand over the information. The White House could simply ignore, or tell the Congress it's none of their business just like the White House Press Secretary did a while ago:

"So, look, Congress certainly is involved in auto decisions obviously as it relates to setting fuel mileage standards that the President worked on last week, as well as proposals to create tax incentives to trade in older cars that aren’t doing as well on fuel mileage, to both increase auto sales and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. " (from the White House Press Briefings on 5/27/09)

So for the White House, the job for the Congress is to setting mileage standard that the President works over one weekend and approve cash for clunkers bill and climate bill. For more of Mr. Press Secretary's comment, see my post.

I'll keep an open mind to see if anything comes out of this, but I'm not holding my breath either.

Tweet

Rattner Leaves Auto Task Force

So, after bankrupting the two of the three U.S. auto makers, bankrupting part of their dealerships and subcontractors and suppliers, and selling off the best assets of the companies to foreign entities on the cheap, the investment banker leaves the post of the Car Czar. His boss, the President, now says "some" of the auto jobs will never return. (What was the point of using the taxpayers' money on these companies? The last I remember is the babble about "saving jobs". Ha!)

Rattner Departs as Head of U.S. Panel Overseeing GM, Chrysler (7/14/09 Bloomberg)

"Steven Rattner stepped down as head of the U.S. panel that forced General Motors Co. and Chrysler Group LLC into bankruptcy, signaling the government was easing into a new role as a passive investor in the automakers.

"His departure leaves Ron Bloom, a former union adviser and Lazard Ltd. vice president, to oversee remaining Obama administration carmaker decisions, including when to sell stakes in the two companies it bailed out with more than $75 billion in taxpayer money.

"“The administration definitely wants the perception to be out there that they’re not going to have their fingerprints in every decision,” said Clint Currie, an analyst with Concept Capital’s Washington Research Group."

Now, do you see the key word in this statement? It is "perception"; as long as the administration is "perceived" as not making every decision. It's more like some ad campaign for branded goods. Perception to make you feel good.

"“Job one for Ron Bloom is to get the government out of these equity positions in GM and Chrysler, preferably before the next election,” said auto analyst Michael Robinet of CSM Worldwide, a Northville, Michigan, consulting firm that did research for the task force. “The American public does not want to be long term owners of car companies.”"

I hope Mr. Robinet is talking about the mid-term election. The American public didn't want to be short-term owners of car companies either, but did they have a choice?

The article says Mr. Rattner has no plans to go back to his firm Quadrangle, which has been investigated by New York Attorney General for New York public pension bribery scandal.

One banker leaves (Rattner, Quadrangle), another banker steps in, albeit with a labor slant (Bloom, Lazard). Change we can believe in. (As if all we need to do is close our eyes and believe - oh look, I do see some green shoots...)

Tweet

GM Out Of Bankruptcy in 40 Days

It took only 40 days, 2 days less than it took for Chrysler. Now the government-owned (61%) General Motors can "compete" with the likes of Toyota and Honda on alternative energy cars - Toyota's Prius sells for just above $20,000, new GM's Volt will probably sell above $40,000. (Who in the rational mind would pick the latter, unless at a gun point - Oh I see, that's why the U.S. keeps military bases all around the world.)

GM Out Of Bankruptcy (7/10/09 Business Insider)

By the way, the rumor that GM will change the color of its logo from blue to green is probably false. For now at least. (Remember it was impossible for GM or Chrysler to go into bankruptcy, until they did. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were sound, until suddenly they weren't.)

I still want to know what happened to the GM's secured bond holders, and what happened to the holders of CDS on GM's debt (here's a notable one).

Now that both Chrysler and GM are "successfully" out of bankruptcy, will the Presidential Auto Task Force disband? Or will it transformed into a politburo-like governmental committee to manage the companies? Will Mr. Steve Rattner the Car Czar descend on GM as CEO, as the reward for his "hard" work?

Tweet

Obama Wants New Council On Auto Industry

His Auto Task Force is not enough?

Obama wants new council to help auto industry
(6/23/09 AP via Breitbart.com)

"A new government council will help workers tied to the auto industry transition to new manufacturing opportunities, including jobs in alternative energy, Vice President Joe Biden said Tuesday.

"President Barack Obama was expected to sign an executive order Tuesday that establishes the White House Council on Automotive Communities and Workers. The council will be chaired by the president's economic adviser, Larry Summers, and his labor secretary, Hilda Solis.

"The executive director will be Obama's director of recovery for auto communities and workers, Ed Montgomery."

Edward Montgomery is in Obama's Auto Task Force as "official designee".

Tweet

GM and Chrysler on Capitol Hill

GM's Chief Executive Fritz Henderson and Chrysler's President Jim Press were hauled in front of the Senate Commerce Committee today to defend the closure of their dealerships. GM now says it will close nearly 1,600 dealerships in the next 18 months, and by the end of 2010 wants to reduce the number of dealerships from the current 6,300 to 3,800 or less (40% or more reduction). Chrysler wants to shut down 789 dealerships by June 9 (25% of total Chrysler dealerships, in 5 days) and wants to end up with 2,392 dealerships.

The chairman of the committee, Democratic Senator John Rockefeller of New York, said in his opening statement:

"I don't believe that companies should be allowed to take taxpayer funds for a bailout and then leave it to local dealers and their customers to fend for themselves with no real plan, no real notice and no real help, that is just plain wrong, you don't do that."

The dealers slated to be eliminated as well as chairman of the National Automobile Dealers Association were also at the hearing.

So what would be the solution to right this wrong? More government help?

Curiously absent from today's hearing were the Presidential Auto Task Force - members, official designees, or the staff (one of whose influential voice is a 31-year old ex-campaign aide) - who crafted these two bankruptcies. At least they were not at the table with the automaker CEOs and dealers, being grilled by the Senators. Both GM's Henderson and Chrysler's Press seemed to be doing their best to present the case on behalf of the Auto Task Force. Mr. Henderson seemed to have rehearsed better than Mr. Press, who at times seemed lost for words.

You can watch the entire 3-hour hearing yourself, here.

Some Senators in the Committee were grumbling that there had been hardly any Congressional oversight. According to a largely ignored piece of news ("Lawmakers Blast GM Restructuring:
Obama's Auto Task Force Is Accused Of Treating Investors, Dealers Unfairly", 5/23/09 Washington Post), there was a last-ditch effort by some members of Congress (both Republican and Democrat) to take the role of restructuring back to Congress from the ad hoc Task Force set up by the President.

Belatedly, the Senate Banking Committee (chaired by Chris Dodd) said on Wednesday that it will hold a hearing on June 10 to examine the role of the Presidential Auto Task Force (see Reuters update). Better late than never. But will it be just a rubber-stamping and rolling-over exercise? Don't hold your breath, as the White House Press Secretary has already delineated the role of Congress (not much) in the matter of auto bailout (read it in my post here).

Tweet

Who Gave the Authority To Auto Task Force?

Judge Gonzalez approved the sale of Chrysler's assets to Fiat before Fiat could change its mind. GM is now in bankruptcy court. Many of their dealers will have to shut down, and no one has yet started counting the number of jobs that will be lost in the upstream, i.e. parts and material suppliers to the auto companies and subcontractors. All for 3-month work by the Auto Task Force, one of whose staff members was prominently featured in New York Times yesterday (31-year old ex-campaign aide).

I am still asking the same question to myself: Who authorized this Auto Task Force?

I searched for any Congressional bill authorizing the Task Force. I searched for an executive order authorizing the Task Force. A Congressional bill authorizing the President to form the Task Force. Any law, or binding instruction for the auto companies that they follow the direction given by the Auto Task Force. I haven't found any.

The Auto Industry Financing and Restructuring Act of 2008 (HR7321), which would have given the "car czar" extensive power, was killed in the Senate in December 2008.

So I have to conclude that the "authority" was assumed by the President and the Task Force by default, because no one else claimed it. They took it, and the Congress basically rolled over and became a bank to dispense money as requested.

And I found this from the White House Press Office web page (5/27/09 Press Briefings), so that you can judge it for yourself what the administration's thinking is: [emphasis is mine, and my musings in italic]

Q Robert, on autos -- not in the negotiating realm at all, but last week 36 members of the House wrote a letter to the President saying: We're a little concerned that the task force is making decisions that the legislative body also ought to have some role in. They talk about what happened to Chrysler -- this is members of a union who voted to make some sacrifices, yet they found out after the Chrysler deal that their jobs had been terminated. The implications for Chrysler dealerships they say are affecting their constituents.

Can you talk broadly about what it is about the task force that gives it so much legitimate power that members of Congress now wonder if the legislative branch also ought to have a more direct voice and legislative role in as the future of the auto industry is being debated and decided here at the White House.

[Valid question to me. Please read on to see if Mr. Gibbs answers the question. (Hint: He doesn't)]

MR. GIBBS: Well, let's first of all, just for some context, Major, understand that decisions on plant closings and decisions on dealerships are not made by the auto task force or by its members or people that work in the White House. These are decisions that are made by companies about what it is they believe is the best path toward renewed viability for their company. And understand that in the case of Chrysler I think 75 percent of the auto dealers remained open; that encompasses about 87 percent of annual auto sales.

I would say this to any member of Congress and to any member of the public: If it weren’t for the task force on autos, and if it weren’t for the President's intervention, a hundred percent of those dealerships would be gone, a hundred percent of those plants would be closed, and Roger would have just asked me about the liquidation assets of Chrysler, rather than whether or not we're making progress with General Motors.

[100%, Mr. Gibbs?]

So, look, Congress certainly is involved in auto decisions obviously as it relates to setting fuel mileage standards that the President worked on last week, as well as proposals to create tax incentives to trade in older cars that aren’t doing as well on fuel mileage, to both increase auto sales and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. But I think the vast majority of members I think are appreciative of the efforts of the task force each and every day in order to keep as much as we possibly can in a viable auto industry here in America.

[Now finally. Congress's role in anything auto is to set the mileage standards and tax incentive proposals, according to the White House.]

Q And those lawmakers who would agree with your initial point that the White House has not made decisions on dealerships or union contracts being terminated or kept, they would also point out that the viability standard is set by the task force and decisions flow from that viability standard set here at the White House. Therefore, the White House does have an enormous say, some might say an inordinate say, in things affecting their constituents. And your response to that would be?

MR. GIBBS: Well, I would say that we have a major role to play, and I think we are playing it in a way that is preserving and protecting as many jobs as possible, protecting as many communities as possible, and hopefully restructuring -- working to restructure an auto industry that has fallen on vastly hard times, and that we're doing all that we can to move that in a different direction.

[Yes, jobs in GM Europe have been certainly saved. And China's, too.]

Tweet

GM Bankruptcy and Plant Closures

General Motors is now Government Motors, as many say. GM filed for bankruptcy as expected, and as part of restructuring it plans to close 9 more plants and idle 3 plants in the US. The story is everywhere, and here's one of them. Here's the announcement from "New GM".

This is just as expected; all GM has done since the CEO was changed from Rick Wagoner to Fritz Henderson is to prepare for bankruptcy under the "guidance" from the Presidential Auto Task Force.

So how many plants does GM have in the US? As the number was not readily available in the news, I went to the GM website, found the information about GM's plants, and counted the number.

There are still 41 GM plants in the US. The one in Massena, New York was closed already on May 1. Here's the list of plants and number of employees (as GM lists them) affected:

• Wilmington, DE: 1875
• Indianapolis, IN: 819
• Flint North, MI: 1012
• Livonia, MI: 164
• Orion, MI: 3800 (idle)
• Pontiac, MI (stamping): 1481 (idle)
• Pontiac, MI (truck): 1362
• Ypsilanti Township (Willow Run), MI: 1285
• Parma, OH: 2120
• Mansfield, OH: 1754
• Spring Hill, TX: 3425 (idle)
• Fredericksburg, VA: 102
• (Grand Rapids, MI plant previously slated to close. About 800 employees)

12,931 jobs will be eliminated, 6,268 made idle. Total number of jobs affected: 19,199.

According to GM's 10-Q for the 1st quarter of 2009, GM employs 112,000 people in North America, and 235,000 worldwide. The total jobs affected amount to 17% of all GM North American employees.

I don't know whether the number is considered large or not enough. This could be simply a first wave of plant closures. Job losses at GM's dealers that are being forced to close will be definitely bigger.

The stock market is cheering the "less bad" news, as usual these days: ISM manufacturing number contracted less than feared, April consumer spending dropped less than expected. I think the market is also cheering GM's bankruptcy, that there will be no more uncertainty; thinking here must be "it cannot go any worse, can it?"

As of 9:38 am Pacific Standard Time, Dow is up 219 points (2.5%) to 8,719, S&P500 up 25 points (2.7%) to 944, and Nasdaq up 55 points (3.1%) to 1829. GM's stock is up 13 cents (18%) to 88 cents. (Common is going to be worthless. So what's the deal here?)

-----------------------------------
By the way, according to the above New GM's announcement, it is a DIP (Debtor In Possession) financing from the government. Why then didn't the Congress have extensive hearing over GM's restructuring? They did, before they gave the DIP financing to Chrysler back in 1979.

Tweet

GM Bankruptcy - Where Is Congress?

This article on Wall Street Journal questioning the authority of the Auto Task Force was written by a person whom I didn't imagine writing anything to question the wisdom of bankrupting GM: Ralph Nader, of Corvair fame. Mr. Nader wrote the article with Robert Weissman (editor of Multinational Monitor magazine).

Obama's GM Plan Looks Like a Raw Deal, Congress, not a secret task force, should decide the company's fate (Wall Street Journal, May 29, 2009)

Messrs. Nader and Weissman's contention is very well summarized in the article's subtitle.

[emphasis is mine]
"Millions of people in communities across the country depend on the government getting the GM rescue right. That's why it is startling -- and mistaken -- for the future of GM to rest with a small, largely unaccountable, ad hoc task force made up of a handful of Wall Street expats."

I'm not sure at all about why the government has to be in the so-called rescue to begin with, but I totally agree with the second sentence.

"A congressional abdication of authority of historic proportions has left the executive branch with nearly complete discretion over how to handle GM and Chrysler's restructuring. President Barack Obama has further delegated authority, giving effective control to this task force, which operates under the titular authority of a top-level interagency group headed by National Economic Council Director Larry Summers and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner."

Titular is such an appropriate word here. Please take a look at my previous post below ("Who Is In This Auto Task Force?"). This "titular" authority of interagency heads is further delegated to "official designees" of the "members", who in turn depend on "the staff" who do the real job. The leader of the staff is Mr. Steven Rattner, who reports to Messrs. Geithner and Summers (and who defaulted on the debt owed to Cerberus, soon-to-be-kicked-out owner of Chrysler). The staff include whiz kids on finance, economist, ex-Obama campain advisors.

"In the days before an avoidable June 1 bankruptcy filing, it is imperative that Congress honor its constitutional duties and demand that the GM restructuring deal be sent to it for deliberative review -- before any irreversible measures, such as a voluntary bankruptcy declaration, are taken. This means delaying any precipitous decisions until after Congress returns from its Memorial Day recess.

"The case for congressional involvement would be solid enough on constitutional and procedural grounds alone. But the secretive task force's plan raises red flags and requires Congressional examination in open hearings. With the government set to take a 70% ownership stake in GM, there are too many unanswered, troubling questions to proceed with a risky bankruptcy declaration."

Messrs. Nader and Weissman go on to list their 10 reasons for objection. But missing from these reason is the biggest one, I think.

Who gave the authority to the president of the United States to form this Task Force that's been dictating the two auto companies how they should go bankrupt and how they should reorganize?

The money that Chrysler and GM have received comes from the Treasury, not some spare change from the White House. Where is the Congress, indeed, as Mr. Nader asks? Why should Chrysler and GM even listen to the Task Force?

It's the authority by default.

It all seems too late now. Despite the righteous protests from some members of Congress (here's one from Alabama Senator Shelby), it's too late. Fait accompli. Chrysler is kaput, GM is dutifully preparing the bankruptcy statement. GM's European operation is already sold to a Canadian entity with Russian money (see my post). Dealerships will be forced to close, the American consumers can expect a flood of GM cars made in China. So much for saving American jobs.

In case you haven't noticed, it's been a "shock and awe" ever since September 2008, economic version. And it's been accelerating, in case you're shell-shocked.

Tweet

Who Is In This Auto Task Force?

The White House Auto Task Force (formally "The Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry") has already guided Chrysler into bankruptcy, and is about to do the same to General Motors. Who is in this Task Force? Curious minds want to know.

Most of the names below came from Wikipedia page (which in turn must have come from the White House announcement), though that page doesn't list Mr. Steven Rattner. Names of people who are not members but work closely (i.e. staff) were gleaned from various news sources available on the net.

Members:

• Tim Geithner
• Lawrence Summers
• (and 8 other cabinet members and official title holders)

Senior Advisor:

• Ron Bloom: 53-year-old working for United Steelworkers Union. Before that, he worked in Wall Street as an investment banker.

Official Designees (I take it to mean these are the people who do the work for the Members):

• Diana Farrell: Deputy Director of National Economic Council. She came from McKinsey (consulting firm), and before that, she worked for Goldman Sachs.
• Gene Sperling: economist. Currently a Counselor to Treasury Secretary.
• Jared Bernstein: economist, advising Vice President Joe Biden
• Edward Montgomery: economist. Currently Director of Recovery for Auto Communities and Workers
• Austan Dean Goolsbee: University of Chicago economist
• (and 5 other aides, advisors to various department)

Not a member but said to be working closely (I take it to mean "staff", who do the "real" work):

• Brian Deese: 31-year-old former Obama campaign aide
• Alan Krueger: economist at Princeton
• Matthew Feldman: partner at Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP (bankruptcy and restructuring)
• Harry J. Wilson: 37-year old former hedge fund star. Before that, he worked for Blackstone and Goldman Sachs.
• Clay Calhoon: recently completed a two-year internship as a Walt Disney Co. analyst

Where does Mr. Rattner fit? He is the so-called "car czar", isn't he?

• Steven Rattner: investment banker, reports to Geithner and Summers (more of his colorful background, see my post here)

Economists and bankers, mostly, and activists. Oh sorry these days it's "social entrepreneurs", according to my old b-school.

Speaking of b-school, reading this article published in March on Wall Street Journal, the whole thing looks just like a business school case study write-up exercise to me, albeit writ large, very large and real-time, affecting real people and real money.

Chrysler and GM should have decided on their own fate long, long time ago, rather than suffer this ignominy.

Tweet

How Would GM Bond Holders Fare in Bankruptcy?

This from AP: Experts say GM bankruptcy almost inevitable

"For General Motors Corp., the task at hand is so difficult that experts say a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing is all but inevitable.

"To remake itself outside of court, GM must persuade bondholders to swap $27 billion in debt for 10 percent of its risky stock. On top of that, the automaker must work out deals with its union, announce factory closures, cut or sell brands and force hundreds of dealers out of business -- all in three weeks." [emphasis mine]

So just like Chrysler, GM is basically being driven to bankruptcy. Yes yes, you could say for both auto makers that they have had all the time to do something but now they're out of money and option, it's their fault. GM's CEO Fritz Henderson, who replaced Rick Wagoner on March 29 (Mr. Wagoner resigned at the express request from the White House), pledged last week that:

""If we need to pursue bankruptcy, we will make sure that we do it in an expeditious fashion...""

However, the problem will be those "unpatriotic" bond holders again.

"The biggest obstacle to GM restructuring out of court appears to be its bondholders, who have been reluctant to sign on to the stock swap when the government and United Auto Workers union would get far more stock in exchange for debts owed by GM."

Sound familiar? Chrysler was just a prelude, a warm-up. The government successfully bullied the secure, 1st-lien senior bond holders into accepting less than 30 cents on a dollar (see my post here). And..

"GM has proposed issuing 62 billion new shares, 100 times more than the 611 million now offered publicly."

Under the restructuring plan being pushed by the government's Auto Task Force,

• 50% stake goes to the government, in exchange for writing off half the amount of loan ($27 billion total this year). Result: 50% stake for $13.5 billion.
• 39% stake goes to UAW, for swapping $20 billion GM's obligation for retiree health care payments and receiving $10 billion cash. Result: 39% stake for $10 billion.
• 10% state goes to bond holders, who hold $27 billion GM debt. Result: 10% stake for $27 billion.
• 1% stake goes to the current common share holders.

If Chrysler's case is any indication, GM's restructuring will be pushed through as the government wants. What will that portend, for the future relationship between the private investors and the government?

Here's the transcript of the interview of Thomas Lauria, who represented the Chrysler's "dissident" lenders. It aired on May 8 on PBS's Nightly Business Report.

" I think the bigger question though is will the auto industry or any other troubled industry that may have important political issues associated with it be able to attract private financing on a (INAUDIBLE) basis? Certainly a lender who looks at what is happening to the lenders in the Chrysler case might have second thoughts. And we know there are other industries that are going to need rescue financing, the airline industry, GM coming up. Will the government be the only source of that financing? Certainly the administration says that they're hopeful that the private sector will participate, but I'm not sure that this is much of an inducement for that. " [emphasis mine]

I am not sure either.

Tweet

Mr. Steve Rattner and Chrysler

Mr. Steve Rattner of Quadrangle Group, a private investment firm which is currently investigated by New York Attorney General for the public pension scandal, heads the government auto task force, advising Geithner and Summers. He recently made news when his forceful words to the hedge fund who refused to accept the government's offer on the Chrysler debt they owned was reported in the press.

What I find more amusing though, is that Mr. Rattner, whose investment firm defaulted on its debt to Cerberus, soon-to-be-wiped-out owner of Chrysler, is advising the top government officials on Chrysler restructuring. Not that Cerberus is an angel, but it must be raising blood pressure there, having to deal with Mr. Rattner.

Mr. Rattner was also the one who told GM's Wagoner to take a walk.

Tweet