Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:04am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:04am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:04am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:04am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:04pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:04am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:04am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:04pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:04pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
Non-Economic Questions of the Day
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
The Stress Test Blind Alley
Apr 24 20098:04am EDT -
Happy Hour
Apr 23 20099:04pm EDT -
Recovery Without Rebalancing
Apr 23 20096:04pm EDT -
The Shape of Your Recession
Apr 23 20095:04pm EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

How to Deal With GM's Bondholders?
If the comments on my GMAC bond entry earlier this morning are any indication, it's going to be harder than I think a lot of people anticipate to bail in GM's bondholders as part of any government bailout. Here's three:
fresnodan: I have a friend whose father-in-law owns GM bonds, and he simply can't see that it is possible for GM to go bankrupt. For him, any loss on the bonds seems ridiculous.
ken_g: Bankruptcy is the only way to deal with uncooperative bondholders.
anonymous: Why should GMAC and GM bondholders take a haircut but AIG counterparties and Bear Stearns, Citi, and Morgan Stanley bondholders not have to?
I am a GM bondholder, and I will certainly not agree to any haircut. If it were not for us having lent GM money, then GM would need even more federal money to avoid bankruptcy.
I suspect this is going to be a really big problem. Back in 1981, when Chrysler's creditors were bailed in as part of the last big auto-industry bailout, they were much fewer in number and were generally much more sophisticated investors than a large chunk of the people holding GM bonds today.
Now, there's a large contingent of GM bondholders who don't mark to market and therefore won't jump at any opportunity to get, say, 50 cents on the dollar for their paper. They want what they're owed, and the easiest legal way of preventing them from getting it is bankruptcy.
Yes, there can be a tender offer with things called "exit consents" which make it harder for holdouts to sue for the money they're owed. But the results of the GMAC tender offer would seem to imply that getting a critical mass of bondholders to agree to those exit consents would be tough. And in any case such an offer wouldn't extinguish the holdouts' debt, and those holdouts would certainly be a noisy thorn in GM's side for many years to come.
GM doesn't have a group of bank lenders it can get round a table and negotiate with: it has a bunch of very angry bondholders who do not, under any circumstances, want to take any haircut at all. And I fail to see how any car czar is going to be able to force them into taking one, short of putting together a pre-packaged bankruptcy.






