BNET Insight

10-Q Detective

Critical insights hidden in 10-Qs, 8-Ks, and other SEC docs

Will Taxpayers Bail Out Ford's Retiree Health Fund?

November 16th, 2008 @ 8:23 pm

Categories: Auto, Stocks

Tags: test, Ford Motor Co., Payment, Health Care, Vertical Industries, Benefits, Healthcare, Enterprise Software, Software, Human Resources

Model T - 1908 FordFord said it burned through $7.7 billion in its third-quarter ended September 30, reflecting operating losses and the carmaker’s purchase of Ford Credit debt securities. To conserve cash, Ford has undertaken several cost reduction initiatives, including salaried job cuts and reduced capital spending (up to $1 billion in both 2009 and 2010). Even if management is successful in meeting its objective of trimming $5 billion in cash ouflows from North American operations, the company is still obligated to fund $13.2 billion owed to retired workers (and spouses) covered under terms of a Health Care Settlement Trust Agreement reached with the United Auto Workers union.

In conjunction with a 2007 collective bargaining agreement between Ford and the UAW, obligation to provide post-retirement health care benefits, such as medical, dental, and vision, shifted from the auto maker to a union-administered trust, called a voluntary employees beneficiary association (VEBA), after December 2009. Approved by a federal judge on August 29, funding terms of the settlement are outlined in the third-quarter 2008 regulatory filing:

  • · cash of $2.73 billion; 
  • a $3 billion principal amount secured note, which bears interest from January 1, 2008 at 9.5% per annum, matures on January 1, 2018, and is secured on a second-lien basis with the collateral we have pledged as part of our secured Credit Agreement; 
  • a $3.3 billion principal amount convertible note, which bears interest from January 1, 2008 at 5.75% per annum, matures on January 1, 2013, and is convertible into Ford Common Stock at a conversion price of $9.20 per share; 
  • an obligation to continue to make payments for ongoing retiree health care costs through 2009, which we estimate to have a present value of $1.5 billion; and, 
  • an obligation to make 15 annual installment payments of $52.3 million beginning in April 2008.

In addition to the foregoing payments, Ford agreed to transfer plan assets, with a fair value of $3.5 billion to the trust. At August 29, the cash of $2.73 billion, together with the interest payments of $238 million due on the notes (issued in April), and the first installment of $52.3 million, had been transferred to the planned retiree health account. If Ford runs out of cash, who will foot the bill for the other monies owed to the VEBA, including the principal amounts of the convertible notes – American taxpayers?

Have an interesting tidbit of documentary gossip you'd like to share with your fellow BNET readers? Email David Phillips
 
Reply to Story

BNET TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

  •  
    1

    fgraham@...

    11/24/08 | Report as spam

    RE: Will Taxpayers Bail Out Ford's Retiree Health Fund?

    fwiw, it doesn't look to economically positive to see Detroit & BO push electric cars as a bail out. Moneylosers unless gas hits what $10+?

    Before we go to today's chart, let me speak out about GM and other electric car manufactures.

    They just don't get it!

    This is a recent GM news related release: "GM expects to build the Volt at its Detroit/Hamtramck plant, but it plans to use the Volt technology powertrain in a wide variety of vehicles around the world, possibly including midsize cars like the Chevrolet Malibu. Assuming current rates for electricity, a Volt owner could theoretically drive 15,000 miles a year for $180 to $300, chief engineer Frank Weber said Tuesday. Considering that the EPA estimates a compact car, like the Chevy Cobalt or Honda Civic, uses almost $2,000 a year in fuel, that savings would go a long way toward offsetting what's likely to be a $40,000-plus price."

    Are they out of their mind in terms of a break even and value expectations? Are they pricing these vehicles at a level that makes no sense on a "return of investment" basis?

    Let's look at the data (posted on today's website update) and compare a Chevy Volt to a 2005 Subaru Forester which sold for only $24,000 ... $18,000 cheaper than the Chevy Volt's projected price.

    Like many cars for under $25,000, the Subaru Forester has an estimated gas mileage rating of 24 Miles per Gallon. At 15,000 miles a year, it would consume 625 gallons. At $2 per gallon of gas that would cost $1,250 per year and $2,500 per year at $4 per gallon of gas.

    Question: How many years would it take to buy $18,000 of gas traveling 15,000 miles per year driving a vehicle that gets 24 miles per gallon? Depending on much you pay per gallon of gas, the answer is between 7.2 years and 14.4 years.

    Why on earth would GM expect someone to pay $18,000 more when you could buy all the gas you need for 7 to 14 years without paying $42,000 for an electric vehicle?

    Why would anyone prepay for 7 to 14 years of gas and think that was going to allow them to save money?

    When you consider that most vehicle owners finance their cars, the $18,000 extra becomes the worse business decision someone could make. A CFO of a corporation would be fired for making such a business decision. Maybe this kind of economic/financial thinking in their own internal decision making purchases is one reason why GM is in so much trouble.

    GM is not delivering a price/value solution that makes any sense at all for consumers who want to get out of debt or save money. So, why is it that GM feels it is worthy of getting a government bailout? ... So, consumers can buy their forthcoming electric vehicles at a price that makes no economic sense?

    Enough blabbering ... let's get back to the stock market ....

    This morning, we look at what the Institutional Investors are doing. You all know the significance of this group because they are responsible for over 50% of the trading volume each day. As a group, they have the controlling influence on the markets.

    So, let's see what has happened to the value of their core holdings since October. The answer is simple ... their core holdings broke below two important supports which resulted in a very bad week of selling. (See today's posted chart.)

    While it looks ugly, last Thursday took the S&P down to a level that was slightly below the hedge protection levels Institutions had previously initiated. Friday, the S&P 500 closed at 800.03 which was slightly above their hedge protection levels. At the same time, many Institutional investors where thinking of buying value priced stocks if the S&P went down to 765. It went below that on Thursday.

    So, do they become buyers now, or take out more hedge protection for a lower S&P in the days ahead?

    That is the decision they will be facing this week. If they decide for more hedging at a lower S&P value, then that will mean that they will not plan to buy any value/priced stocks until later and the market will fall further without their support.

    On the other hand, if they decide against initiating the buying of more hedge protection insurance at lower market values ... and start buying, then the market will start a bottoming process that could develop into a Bear market rally in the coming days or weeks.

    What happens this week on the Institutional index of core holdings will be the clue about what their decision was. This will be an important week for a directional decision by Institutions.


    Please click this link for today's update and chart(s):
    http://www.stocktiming.com/Monday-DailyMarketUpdate.htm
    (If you are having trouble with the link, copy and paste it in your browser.)

    Regards,
    Marty Chenard

    StockTiming.com
    80 Botany Drive
    Asheville, NC 28805
    Tel: 828-296-1200

Please add your comment:

  1. You are currently: a Guest |
  2.  

Basic HTML tags that work in comments are: bold (<b></b>), italic (<i></i>), underline (<u></u>), and hyperlink (<a href></a)

Top Rated
    advertisement
    • Click Here
    • Click Here
    • Click Here