19 Votes

Boost it!

GM Returns 2 or 7 Corporate Jets After Whipping Shed Moment In Washington

Agent009 submitted on 11/21/2008 Official Bell & Ross Timestamp: 12:41:58 PM

17 user comments | Category: Misc News | Source: | SOURCE: www.reuters.com

General Motors Corp will return two of its leased corporate jets amid intense criticism in Washington this week on the luxury travel arrangements of its chief executive even as the company pleads for federal aid.

CEO Rick Wagoner was in the capital to testify on the company's dire financial situation but his testimony was overshadowed by irate lawmakers who blasted him for flying on a private jet to ask for public funds and failing to make personal sacrifices in exchange for federal assistance.

Chief executives from Ford Motor Co, and Chrysler LLC, who were also there to plead for $25 billion in federal aid, came under fire too for flying to Washington in private jets.

GM spokesman Tom Wilkinson said on Friday GM decided to return the aircraft because of a "really aggressive cutback in travel."


LA Auto Show Photo Gallery

This year's gallery is sponsored by Lexus

There is auto show coverage and then there is AutoSpies.com coverage!




Read Article

GM Returns 2 or 7 Corporate Jets After Whipping Shed Moment In Washington

About the Author

Agent009

"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough."

— Agent009 (View Profile)


User Comments

EL34

I keep hearing on the news if the Big 3 sell thier corporate jets it will get people back into the showrooms and buying the cars.

What a bunch of hog wash!

Does Toyota have to sell their jets?

The Big 3 need to tell the UAW to go to hell and that is how they will lower the price of cars and get people back into the showrooms.

Why do the Libs want to put the corportate jet buisiness in bankruptcy?

— EL34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/21/2008 12:53:12 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -3   

Bmw8ter

Toyota's not asking for taxpayer money.

The Big 3 are screwed even if they get rid of Unions. They'll be paying benefits until those overpaid sacs die. And it's not like they can tell the UAW, even though you don't like the new deal, that's all you're getting. Unions will burn their place of employment down just to make a point.

— Bmw8ter (View Profile)

Posted on 11/21/2008 1:07:25 PM | | Votes: 4   

_43LE

"Does Toyota have to sell their jets?"

No, they can afford them.



"Why do the Libs want to put the corportate jet buisiness in bankruptcy?"

It's the tight-assed republicans that caused the problem in the first place

— _43LE (View Profile)

Posted on 11/21/2008 2:55:12 PM | | Votes: 2   

cktoo

"It's the tight-assed republicans that caused the problem in the first place"

Wow, where the hell have you been. There's no politician that is a "tight-ass" with other people's money...save for maybe Ron Paul. They all spend like drunken sailors...my apologies to drunken sailors.

Furthermore, the Libs have been controlling the purse strings for 2 years (Congress) and things have gotten even worse.

— cktoo (View Profile)

Posted on 11/21/2008 7:30:44 PM | | Votes: 1   

_43LE

Tight assed as in anal-retentive and one dimensional, not with purse strings.

Bush allowed greedy corporate people to run amuck, threw the US into an endless money pit (the Iraq war), had no clear direction in Afghanistan while not supporting any initiatives that created value for the US. The two years of the democrats in congress could do little to reverse these bad decisions.

— _43LE (View Profile)

Posted on 11/22/2008 12:19:17 AM | | Votes: 3   

mmeecc

It has nothing to do with people going back to the showrooms after the jets are sold.
People are just fed up of having their hard earned money given to these morons so they can live it up on private jets and throw the money away....
Corporate jet business in bankruptcy? Are you kidding??? Yeah right!

— mmeecc (View Profile)

Posted on 11/21/2008 1:21:06 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 4   

njsidekick3

2 out of 7? how about 5 of 7...

— njsidekick3 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/21/2008 1:35:53 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 4   

PlanB

I say 7 out of 7, or is 1st class commercial "beneath them"?

— PlanB (View Profile)

Posted on 11/21/2008 3:49:19 PM | | Votes: 3   

g2ok

Keep the jets - fire the executives.

— g2ok (View Profile)

Posted on 11/21/2008 2:16:59 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

Hantra

What I find amazing is that people are whining b/c GM exec's took corporate jets to Washington to beg for money.

If they had taken commercial jets, they'd have to spend 5-6 extra hours negotiating security and waiting for a plane. If the company is about to go bankrupt, don't you think the shareholders are better served if the executives are working that extra 5-6 hours, versus pissing the time away in an airport?

— Hantra (View Profile)

Posted on 11/21/2008 2:17:37 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

neutral

You've got a good point. GM/Ford/All major companies already own the aircraft, they might as well use them. Obviously they should have seen the PR mess it caused... hell even I can see that.

Congress should make a deal that goes something like this:

$25-$50billion to automakers as a bridge LOAN with reasonable conditions (nothing stupid like a ban on truck sales, then the automakers would never make any money and would surely go under).

Big3 Execs: Make $1 a year until markets return and so do profits.

Wall St. Criminals (all the thousands of them): Loose the $10million condos, the luxury cars, jets and make no more than $60,000 a year until the financial mess is over.

Congess: $1 a year until these corrupt criminals bring back the oil speculation laws, regulate the finance industry, get our national defecit under control. Get back to propping up American industry, American technogy, American Engineering, and get rid of liberal Education.

Make education tough & mean, so we can turn out the engineers and leaders that the rest of the world has, not just lazy suburban kids who "like wanna do business stuff like my dad and make like tons of money... who cares what I buy, its my money and the world revolves around me"

— neutral (View Profile)

Posted on 11/21/2008 6:28:41 PM | | Votes: 3   

Whelan

If the commercial airlines are not safe enough for those people to travel, then how safe is it for me.

— Whelan (View Profile)

Posted on 11/21/2008 2:34:05 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

volnedan

Are any of the Wall Street folks going to sell their million dollar NYC apartments, turn in their Maybach limos and fly coach now that they got their $700 billion bailout? NO.

I agree they should have at least flown together in ONE corporate jet, but these hypocritical, corrupt politicians are driving nice cars from our tax money. They should all shut up and look in the mirror.

All car companies are hurting now due to poor credit and housing market which was NOT caused by the Big Three. Its the lenders who offered low interest rates coupled with 80-20 interest only loans, and people started to buy homes they couldn't afford. This all happened in the past few years, yet they deserve to be bailed out more than the Big Three? Come on now. $25 billion vs $700 billion? Blame the dumb American consumer who spends $5 for every dollar earned...

— volnedan (View Profile)

Posted on 11/21/2008 2:47:01 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

Schwitz916

Congress is trying to show their constituants that they care about "Main Street" to make a big deal about this whole private jet thing.
I think it was stupid PR move on Detroit's big 3. did they think nobody in the media would ever check? How they have handled this whole thing is just a reflection of how they run their companies...as poorly as the CEO's that were all fired for tying their entire company on a mortgage market for quick profits when the rates were fixed for 3 years.
And UAW head that keeps speaking is just making me even more mad. He says it will cost tax payers 3B to keep the healthcare going for retirees and says he won't accept any cuts on anything. last time i checked, and if I'm footing the bill, 3B is a lot less than 25B. Way for him to really make his point!!

and hantra--Not be a jerk, but ever hear of blackberry? these guys are probably making up those 5-6 hours getting $10K suits and $400 haircuts with John Edwards right before walking into testify...lol

— Schwitz916 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/21/2008 6:01:42 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

cktoo

Funny how the press picks and chooses stories. Don't remember them being too outraged when Al Gore was flying on a private jet to some Global Warming symposium, while the earth is supposedly evaporating.

Granted it was a stupid PR move for these guys to fly to Washington, separately, in private jets, but getting rid of the jets will do nothing. Ok, now they have an extra 2 minutes before they can file bankruptcy because they got rid of their jets.

Furthermore, these politicians are such hypocrits. Pelosi gets a private jet for her/her family/others to go back and forth to California. Almost all of them get shuttled around in gas guzzling SUV's. This is on top of working about 3 days a week, mulitple vacation sessions, and benefits out the ying yang. Last time I checked, we are pretty much in bankruptcy with our Federal finances.

Where's that damn "restart" button for the country...

— cktoo (View Profile)

Posted on 11/21/2008 7:43:14 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

neutral

Here's a point that has NEVER been brought up in the media, in congress, or on this website.

So it cost GM about $20,000 to fly its airplane down to washington DC. Aside from the fact that the politicians and media are wasting valuable time bickering about something this stupid, lets settle this once and for all.

Those planes were loaded to the max with advisors, lawyers, PR people, etc. If one of those planes carried 20 people, then the benefit WAY outweighs the costs. The PR is the problem, no one with a damn brain bothered to look this up.

What, do you all really thing rick wagoner just got in the plane all by his lonesome and wasted $20,000?

And as for the congessmen who asked if the Execs would be giving up their planes and taking a commercial flight home, do you really want them to say "yes" on a whim? Isn't the whole argument that congress is trying to make is that the big3 make rash decisions? Wouldn't offering to sell the plane on a whim like that be rash?

Once again, congress & the media make a mess.

— neutral (View Profile)

Posted on 11/22/2008 1:49:11 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

dodgedart

how are they going to build thoes Saabs without that jet DNA?

The jets are a good starting place. That gesture is still symbolic. There's a lot more fat to cut out.

— dodgedart (View Profile)

Posted on 11/24/2008 2:07:34 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Add your Comments

Images hosted in your AgentSpace can now be posted in the comments section using the following syntax (case matters): [img]IMAGE URL[/img]
Example: [img]http://agent001.myautospies.com/images/sample.jpg[/img]