Ford Still Financially Troubled Despite Q1 Earnings

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.


Debt ridden Ford Motor earned $2.1 billion in the first quarter or 50 cents a share. Mainstream media reported this as "another sign the economy is improving as people spend more on big-ticket items like cars". Unstated was which economy was improving or that those people were in China. Nor did any report mention that Ford stock has a negative book value of minus $2.32 per share.

What struck me immediately about Ford's 2010 Q1 earnings report was a major inconsistency with the Q1 earnings report for 2009. Ford lost $1.4 billion, or 60 cents per share in the same period last year. This implies that there were 2.3 billion shares outstanding twelve months ago. Based on today's earnings numbers there appear to be 4.2 billion shares outstanding. Ford did issue an additional 300 million plus shares of stock last May and exchanged $4.3 billion in convertible debt for 468 million shares of common stock in the first half of 2009. News reports in May 2009 indicated it had 2.9 billion shares outstanding before the new stock was sold. Today, Ford supposedly has 3.4 billion shares of stock. Off hand, I would say these numbers don't appear to match up.

It is quite amazing that Ford did not sink into bankruptcy, as did General Motors and Chrysler. From 2006 to the first quarter of 2009, the company lost $31.4 billion. Actions taken by Ford in 2009 though are helping the bottom line today. The new shares it issued at the time were used to fund VEBA, the UAW run health car trust, and this saved the company from using real money for this purpose. Ford also worked out an agreement with the UAW that allowed it to lower its labor costs by $500 million annually. At the same time, Ford managed to lower its interest payments on its substantial debt by $500 million a year with its debt to stock conversion. Fortunately for the company, Ford is making a good share of its profits from its credit unit (not from selling cars), which earned a net profit of $528 million in the first quarter of 2010. Ford has the Fed's zero interest rate policy to thank for that.

As for sales, there was a huge increase - in China. Ford reported an 84 percent improvement there. As for North America, U.S. sales did climb 37 percent over last years exceptionally low levels. Part of this is due to Ford's market share rising nearly three percentage points thanks to problems at Toyota. Total U.S. auto sales in 2009 came in at 10.4 million, down from over 16 million before the recession began. Ford still sees sales in the 11.5 to 12.5 million range for 2010. This is still substantially below pre-recession levels. Investors should also ask themselves how much of those extra sales are due to federal government policy. If this is a recovery, it's not much of one. 

Ford (F) stock was down more that 9% on its earnings announcement in morning trade. It fell as low as $13.15. That's still a pretty high stock price for a company with a negative book value.

Disclosure: None relevant.

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
 http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Bailout to Bailout: The Bear Stearns Bailout and Its Aftermath

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. In addition to the term helicopter economics, we have also coined the term, helicopternomics, to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government and to update the old-fashioned term wheelbarrow economics.

Our video for this posting can be found at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8Mn67rNCFQ

It was soon realized that the temporary loan given by the Federal Reserve to Bear Stearns would not be enough to keep the company afloat. Indeed this was probably already known before the loan's announcement was made on the afternoon of the 14th. The Fed, particularly the New York regional division, worked feverishly all weekend to find a definitive solution to Bear's insolvency. They decided to have JP Morgan take over Bear at a price of $2.52 a share, a rather sharp haircut to the Friday closing price of $30 a share ... and an even steeper discount to the official book value of $84 to $97 a share for Bear stock, which the CEO had announced was unimpaired only two days earlier.

Not only did JP Morgan get Bear Stearns essentially for free, but the Federal Reserve further guaranteed $30 billion (later reduced to $29 billion) of Bears troubled mortgage bonds. JP Morgan was by no means just a lucky bystander in this transaction. Its CEO sat on the board of governors of the New York Fed and got to influence the decision that proved highly favorable to them - in more ways than one it turned out. JP Morgan was a counter party to a large number of derivatives on Bear Stearns books and Bears failure would probably have sunk JP Morgan shortly thereafter. So the Fed's giveaway bailout of Bear Stearns was also an indirect bailout of JP Morgan. Membership (in the Fed) obviously has its privileges. Bear Stearns not being a Fed member wound up being thrown to the wolves.

While JP Morgan and the Bear Stearns bondholders were winners because of the Fed arranged bailout, stockholders and credit default swap (CDS) holders wound up being the big losers. If Bear Stearns had actually declared bankruptcy, the CDS holders would have had a big payday. However, once again the Fed's interference in the market turned winners who had made the correct investment decision into losers by changing the rules of the game at the last moment.It turned out that the stock holders had more clout and wound up successfully agitating for an increase in the takeover price to $10 a share. Even at that price some of the 'smart money' lost big, including British investor Joe Lewis, who lost over a billion dollars, and renowned mutual fund manager Bill Miller whose fund had large holding of Bear stock. The American taxpayer, as per usual, was put on the hook and would also wind up paying for Bear Stearns mismanagement and the Fed's gifting to JP Morgan.

As a result of being blindsided by Bear Stearns failure, the Fed set up the Primary Dealer Credit Facility (PDCF) in March of 2008. For the first time in its history, the Fed allowed broker-dealers to also borrow from them, not just commercial banks. Lehman Brothers was an immediate beneficiary of this new program, which probably kept it from failing shortly after Bear Stearns did. The legality of this new Fed operation was at best tenuous, but the Fed seemed to have little concern for following its mandate of controlling inflation or restricting its activities to those specifically granted to it by the U.S government. After all why should the Fed be concerned about such things since it knew the government was unlikely to try to keep it from doing whatever it wanted to do - legal or otherwise.

NEXT: Run on the Bank, 2008 - Indymac

Daryl Montgomery

Organizer, New York Investing meetup

http://investing.meetup.com/21