AIG issues a fourth quarter loss of $61 billion dollars. That is in only one quarter. Let’s be realistic. How can a company have losses of $61 billion dollars? In the article listed below, it was indicated that the loss is due to rapid deterioration in certain markets. The explanation for the loss is very vague. The federal government has allotted another $30 billion to assist the troubled insurance giant. However, the monies are supposedly on a “standby” basis, whereby, AIG may not need to funds, yet they are there if necessary. The continued bailout of these companies seems to be rather derogatory. Government is willing to offer bailouts of billions of dollars to these giant corporations that do not seem to be able to achieve profitability. It is like throwing “good money after bad”. AIG continues to have the same board and the same CEO even though the organization has not been able to financially resolve its issues. When the automakers asked for monies from government, there was the requirement that the Big Three needed to provide strategic plans that would demonstrate how they could complete a “turnaround” strategy to make the companies solvent again. In reading the article, there was no indication that AIG needed to provide a strategic plan or that the same scrutiny that was imposed on the Big Three would be utilized with AIG. Why the double standards? Why should AIG get more monies when they are proving that they are not a sustainable organization?
The articles is available at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090302/ap_on_bi_ge/aig_rescue;_ylt=AnSOLF7vbGVl3TSRyN2KFjlv24cA;_ylu=X3oDMTE5a2oxbDI4BHBvcwMxBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDZ292dGV4dGVuZHNu
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment