April 18, 2024

Automakers and U.A.W. Are Still Talking

The U.A.W. and Chrysler also agreed to extend their contract, though the pace of talks with Chrysler has slowed while the focus shifts to G.M.

Chrysler’s chief executive, Sergio Marchionne, criticized the U.A.W.’s president, Bob King, for failing to show up at the bargaining table Wednesday as expected. Mr. Marchionne had left the Frankfurt auto show in Germany early, and said he arrived in Detroit expecting to finalize a deal.

With regard to G.M., top U.A.W. officials said in an update to workers posted online by several union locals that they were “hopeful that an agreement can be reached soon.”

“While we have made significant progress, we have not been able to secure a new agreement that we would recommend for ratification,” the message said.

A G.M. spokeswoman confirmed that officials were back in negotiations as of 10 a.m. Thursday.

Mr. Marchionne sent the letter to Mr. King after the union leader spent the day huddled in contract talks with General Motors rather than Chrysler. A copy of the letter was obtained from sources close to the negotiations.

“I flew back from the Frankfurt Motor Show late last night to be here today to finalize our dialogue that has been started by our teams but that required your presence and mine to conclude,” Mr. Marchionne wrote. “You unfortunately could not be here, I am told, due to competing engagements.”

Mr. Marchionne went on to say that he and Mr. King “failed” employees by not concluding the months-long negotiations before the current contract expired.

“I am willing to extend the contract by an additional week to allow closure on all outstanding matters,” Mr. Marchionne wrote.

Workers for both companies had been anxiously awaiting word of a settlement, and even U.A.W. officials at several plants said they were being kept in the dark about the pace and nature of the discussions.

“We are confident that we can reach an agreement that will meet many of the goals we set at the beginning of negotiations,” Joe Ashton, a U.A.W. vice president in charge of negotiations with G.M., wrote in a message to workers Wednesday.

Any agreements must be approved by the U.A.W.’s local leaders and then ratified by the rank-and-file membership.

Labor experts expect the companies to offer workers signing bonuses of at least $5,000 to improve the chances of ratification without permanently increasing labor costs.

Workers at all three companies received a $3,000 signing bonus in 2007. Their wages have not increased since 2003.

Talks with the Ford Motor Company are not as far along as the negotiations with G.M. and Chrysler.

On Tuesday, Ford and the union agreed to extend their contract indefinitely, at least temporarily putting off the possibility that a strike could be called. The union can end the extension with three days’ notice, and it might do so when a deal is close to pressure the company to settle.

Talks with all three companies lacked much of the acrimony that has defined past rounds of bargaining in the auto industry. Union leaders have vowed to help keep the carmakers competitive while also seeking ways for workers to be rewarded as the auto industry turns around.

Workers at G.M. and Chrysler are barred from striking over wage and benefit disputes through 2015, a provision they were required to approve when the companies received federal loans as they went through bankruptcy protection in 2009. Their only recourse in the case of an impasse is binding arbitration, a somewhat unpredictable process that both sides have said they want to avoid.

A major theme for the union during these talks has been regaining much of what workers gave up to keep their employers from collapsing under the weight of heavy debt and plummeting sales. But the union also wants to add jobs in the United States after suffering years of wrenching cutbacks at the three carmakers.

Mr. King, the U.A.W. president, has said U.A.W. members each ceded $7,000 to $30,000 worth of pay and benefits since 2005. In 2007, the union agreed to create a two-tier wage system that allowed the carmakers to cut costs by hiring new workers at about half the pay of other workers.

Many in the U.A.W. oppose the two-tier system, but Mr. King has said it is a way for the companies to become more competitive without cutting pay for existing workers and helps create jobs. Only about 4,000 of the 112,000 workers at G.M., Ford and Chrysler earn second-tier wages currently, but the companies hope to hire more people at the lower pay scale as older workers retire, further reducing their labor costs.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=02d123258db051cd5eeda29c13c155dc

G.M.’s Profit Jumps 89% as U.S. Sales Grow Quickly

DETROIT — General Motors built surprisingly strong second-quarter results on the most basic automotive arithmetic — higher prices plus lower incentives.

The nation’s largest automaker said Thursday that it earned $2.5 billion during the quarter, an 89 percent increase from the year earlier period, beating investors’ expectations.

The company was profitable in all its global regions, but the biggest contribution by far came from its rapidly improving North American division.

G.M. said it earned $2.2 billion in its home market before interest and taxes, primarily because it was able to charge higher base prices on its cars and trucks and rein in rebates. G.M. increased base prices twice this year, and it will do so a third time when 2012 models appear in showrooms this fall.

The combined increases resulted in about a 2 percent rise in sticker prices, or about $500 per vehicle.

“We were able to get prices up and incentives down and that really highlighted the value of the product,” Daniel Ammann, G.M.’s chief financial officer, said in a conference call with reporters. “It was another solid quarter.”

Analysts, however, said G.M. would be hard-pressed to maintain the higher margins in the second half of the year. Demand for new vehicles has been soft, and automakers in Japan are increasing production after disruptions that resulted from the March earthquake and tsunami there.

Mr. Ammann said G.M. expected income in the second half of the year to be “modestly lower” than in the first half because of uncertain market conditions.

The company sliced its incentive spending in the United States by about 20 percent a vehicle during the second quarter compared with the first three months of the year, Mr. Ammann said. The average rebate in the quarter was $2,800, about $800 less than in the first quarter.

“Pricing and mix should naturally be expected to fade in the second half from unsustainably strong second-quarter levels,” Adam Jonas, an analyst for Morgan Stanley, said in a research report.

This year, G.M. has proved that its product revival is gaining traction with consumers.

The company improved its American sales by about 16 percent in the first seven months of the year compared with 2010. The overall market, by comparison, has risen about 11 percent.

New products like the Chevrolet Cruze compact car and Buick Regal sedan have led to a 24 percent increase in sales of its passenger cars.

And there are more new cars on the way. G.M. said on Thursday that it would begin building two new Cadillacs — a large sedan and a rear-wheel-drive compact car — beginning next year.

Mark Reuss, G.M.’s head of North American operations, said the product offensive was critical to the company’s future as it continued to shift more resources into cars rather than the light trucks it had relied on for years.

Fresher models are allowing G.M. to charge higher prices, Mr. Reuss told reporters at an industry conference in northern Michigan. “You can’t do that if you don’t have highly desirable product,” he said.

Mr. Reuss also said that G.M.’s biggest brand, Chevrolet, was in the midst of renewing and expanding its car lineup with the introduction of the Sonic subcompact this fall and a new mini-car, the Spark, next year.

The company, which shed debt and downsized drastically in its 2009 bankruptcy, has also amassed an impressive cash hoard to keep the new models coming.

G.M. ended the second quarter with $39.7 billion in cash reserves and available credit, compared with $33.6 billion in the period a year earlier.

The company is committed to keeping a large cash reserve to preserve what Mr. Ammann called a “fortress balance sheet” that can finance new products and insulate G.M. from a downturn in the market.

“We want to be able to withstand any external shock that comes along,” he said. “Nothing is more important than getting the right vehicles on the road.”

G.M. had less impressive results outside of North America. In Asia, it reported pretax income of $600 million in the second quarter, while in South America and in Europe it earned about $100 million in each region.

Over all, the company produced 2.4 million vehicles in the quarter, compared with 2.25 million in the same period a year earlier. Its global market share was 12.2 percent, up from 11.6 percent in the second quarter of 2010.

Nick Bunkley contributed reporting.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=be7c665156b0aae2230bff5115a51c37

Ford Sued Over Patents for System That Allows Drivers to Connect Electronic Devices

High-tech amenities, like the popular Ford Sync system that lets drivers seamlessly connect their car and mobile phone, have helped bring more customers and huge profits to the automaker. But now a small company in Washington State says it actually developed the technology behind Sync and a handful of safety features that Ford is adding to much of its lineup. The company, Eagle Harbor Holdings, has filed a federal lawsuit against Ford, accusing the carmaker of infringing on seven patents.

Although the suit, filed last week, is unlikely to result in Ford being forced to stop putting the features in its vehicles, the carmaker could pay millions of dollars in licensing fees if it loses in court or agrees to settle. Analysts say such cases, commonplace in the high-tech world but not in the auto industry, will be seen more frequently as cars and trucks increasingly become roadworthy computers.

“When you start getting into more software in the vehicles you’re going to have this happen a lot more,” Kevin Hamlin, an analyst with the research firm IHS iSuppli, said. “Writing code in software leads to a lot of these suits. It just kind of goes along with the territory.”

Ford declined to comment on the suit, saying in an e-mailed statement that officials “have not yet had an opportunity to review the details.”

Eagle Harbor’s general counsel, Jeff Harmes, said the company had been in discussions with Ford for six years about licensing its technology to the automaker, but Ford cut off the talks in 2008.

The founders of Eagle Harbor, Dan Preston and his son Joseph, are inventors whose previous company, Airbiquity, developed technology licensed by General Motors for its OnStar communication service. Ford currently licenses technology from Airbiquity.

“This is a group of engineers with a long track record of developing commercially viable technology,” Mr. Harmes said.

In addition to Sync, which Ford developed in a partnership with Microsoft, the technology at issue in the suit includes MyKey, which gives parents the ability to monitor and limit actions by teenage drivers, and several safety features that use sensors. One of the features automatically steers the vehicle into a parallel parking space and another alerts drivers to vehicles in their blind spots and warns of potential collisions when backing out of a parking space.

Ford has been highlighting some of the innovations in recent commercials, and about 80 percent of Ford buyers get their vehicle with Sync, a $395 option that responds to voice commands and has been installed on nearly four million vehicles since its introduction in 2007. Sync has been a major contributor to Ford’s improved reputation and increased market share, though a newer offshoot known as MyFord Touch has been panned by Consumer Reports and criticized by buyers in a recent J. D. Power Associates quality survey.

Mr. Harmes said, before filing suit, Eagle Harbor repeatedly told Ford in 2009 and 2010 that it was infringing on the company’s patents.

“We would prefer to reach some business settlement with Ford as opposed to continuing the suit,” he said.

Eagle Harbor has been in discussions with other automakers and suppliers about its technology but none have agreed to license it yet, Mr. Harmes said. It also is working to commercialize environmental technology, including a method to strip metals from the waste created by coal-fired power plants

The company, with just 15 employees and a small office on an island in Puget Sound, would seem to have long odds in taking on Ford. But it is being backed by the Northwater Intellectual Property Fund, an investor in i4i, a Canadian company that was awarded $290 million in patent dispute against Microsoft that was upheld last month by the United States Supreme Court.

Katherine E. White, a law professor at Wayne State University in Detroit and an expert on intellectual property litigation, said infringement cases like the one against Ford hinged on whether the technology performed “the same function, in substantially the same way, to get the same result” as the patented concept. She said Ford was in little danger of having to stop offering Sync or the other disputed technology, so its risk was limited to paying royalties, not halting production and losing sales.

“Injunctions have become very difficult to get now for companies that don’t make anything,” Ms. White said. “Big companies can afford to pay the damages later. What they can’t afford is to stop producing.”

Ford agreed to pay $10.2 million to Robert Kearns, who invented intermittent windshield wipers, in a highly publicized 1990 case; it was the subject of the 2008 film “Flash of Genius.” Mr. Kearns later also received $30 million from Chrysler.

About a year ago, Ford settled a longstanding case brought by a Florida company, Paice, that accused Ford of infringing on a 1994 patent for hybrid technology. Ford agreed to license the Paice technology, but the terms were not released publicly. Paice also had sued Toyota, which agreed to license 23 patented technologies.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=82b9828ec2b41ae66b65a80afbd4651c

DealBook: Philanthropy Given Focus by Brain Cancer

Theodore Forstmann has been dating  Padma Lakshmi, the host of the reality television cooking show “Top Chef.”Hiroko Masuike for The New York TimesTheodore Forstmann has been dating Padma Lakshmi, the host of the reality television cooking show “Top Chef.”

Theodore J. Forstmann is tired.

Sitting on a couch last week in his office on the 45th floor of the General Motors building, he apologized for his lack of energy.

“Thinking and talking and responding is so tiring, I can’t tell you,” he said.

Mr. Forstmann — the billionaire financier who helped create the leveraged buyout industry in the 1970s and who coined the phrase “Barbarians at the Gate” — has brain cancer. After the removal of a tumor last month, he is now undergoing radiation therapy and taking a cocktail of steroids and other prescription drugs.

When I went to visit him, he was particularly drained, a function of the treatment as much as the cancer itself.

“You feel kind of a little bit like a guinea pig,” he said. “What you have to understand is that what they’re doing to you is ultimately the only thing they can do to save you, but the unintended bad consequences along the way are what you actually have to fight against. It’s very strange mentally.” He added: “The steroids kind of take over for your normal emotions so right now I could be crying, I could be laughing, I could be fighting.”

DealBook Column
View all posts


He doesn’t know how much time he has to live — the doctors “don’t really tell you the truth about anything,” he lamented. But he is in the office because he says he still has work to do.

“This is not how I want to end,” Mr. Forstmann said. “It’s a bend in the road for me. It’s kind of arrogant to put it that way, but that’s the way I want it to be.”

Leaning back as he tried to get comfortable, he said he did not want his obituary to read, “He did this, he did that, and he died of brain cancer. No way.”

Actually, between the words “no” and “way,” an expletive punctuated his point. But then he remembered this is a family newspaper.

At 71, Mr. Forstmann is on a mission. He wants to complete one last corporate turnaround as the grand finale of his storied career. It’s already an extensive list. There was Gulfstream Aerospace, Dr Pepper and General Instrument. He famously railed against his peers’ use of junk bonds, deriding them as “wampum.”

His other exploits are almost as legendary. Over the years, he has been linked in the gossip pages to Elizabeth Hurley, Diana, Princess of Wales, and he is now dating Padma Lakshmi, the host of the reality cooking show “Top Chef.”

Mr. Forstmann is now focused on the transformation of the talent agency IMG, which he bought in 2004 for $750 million and which represents the likes of Tiger Woods and Roger Federer. He considers it unfinished business.

“What I want to do is build IMG,” he said, “and I’d like to do it quicker than I was going to.”

He says he is in a rush for a reason: “I want to make a bunch of money now, stick it in a charitable trust and give it away.”

Mr. Forstmann, who has long eschewed the traditional Manhattan charity circuit, has for years been a quiet donor to children’s groups throughout Africa, and the world. He adopted two young boys from South Africa over a decade ago after being invited there to speak by Nelson Mandela. One of his adopted sons now works at his firm, Forstmann Little Company.

When I asked him why he took an interest in African children, he looked at me with a blank stare as if the question was ridiculous. “They’re helpless,” he said.

Last year, at the request of his friend Michael Bloomberg, the mayor of New York, Mr. Forstmann attended a dinner for billionaires hosted by Warren Buffett and Bill Gates. He agreed to sign “the Giving Pledge” — a vow to give away more than 50 percent of his wealth to philanthropy. But after the dinner, he said he told Mr. Bloomberg, “Mike, I already do this. I don’t need any formal pledge.” (He made the pledge anyway.)

Mr. Forstmann said he acquired IMG to “make a bunch of money, get it out of this thing and spend it on kids in the world. That was the reason.”

He says he is still haunted by articles that said he acquired IMG to simply fraternize “with the golfers or the models or whatever it is.” When he bought the company, he was also roundly criticized for overpaying for the trophy business, a point he now says was true.

“I hugely overpaid for it,” he said. “It was a piece of” — yes, he used an expletive there, too.

But over the last six years, he has transformed the company from a traditional talent agency to a global media entertainment and licensing business. IMG, which was barely break-even when he bought it, made $110 million last year, is expected to earn $140 million in 2011 and $200 million within the next two years.

After realizing that the talent business was “unscalable,” he decided to move the firm into other, more profitable businesses and into fast-growing countries.

IMG is now the dominant licensing company for colleges, propelled by a series of acquisitions — Host Communications and the Collegiate Licensing Company, both licensing companies; and, most recently, ISP Sports, a marketing firm. He formed an exclusive joint venture with CCTV, the national television network of China, to create sports programming.

In India, IMG helped develop the Indian Premier Cricket League through a joint venture with Mukesh Ambani, the chairman of Reliance Industries, and it owns rights to two soccer leagues and a basketball league. He has formed a joint venture in Brazil with Eike Batista, the chairman of the conglomerate EBX.

Although the partnerships are still in their infancies, Mr. Forstmann is hoping they prove valuable.

“My stake is probably worth a couple hundred million,” if sold today, he said, although he doesn’t seem ready to do that just yet.

As he reflected on his career and on modern Wall Street, he seemed befuddled.

“I don’t recognize it. They’re all a bunch of traders. Instead of trading thousands they’re trading trillions,” he said. “There are no more John Whiteheads or anything like that,” referring to the former co-chairman of Goldman Sachs.

Mr. Forstmann has always been outspoken about the financial industry, but this time he went a little further. “It is a pretty greed-driven business, the whole thing,” he said.

While he is proud of the life he has lived — and hopes to conquer the cancer and live many more years — he is not so enamored of the industry he pioneered, he says.

“I’m not very proud of how it’s turned out.”

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=95525ecafd532701522b0703f25ba519