Thread regarding General Electric Co. layoffs

GE Selling Off Family Furniture To Pay Bills - Future Break Up?

GE cash flow is so bad that they will have to sell off the last few businesses just to pay the bills.

They have sold off all the family furniture last ten years, and now are screwed because they do not have an empire generating cash flow. Like any investor portfolio, this diversity is what keeps the money rolling in when some are up and others are down through normal and predictable cycles.

Worse still, the decades of bad decisions made and departure from vertical integration especially since 1998 under Welch has stripped GE basic industries such as Power and Transportation to generate cash flow. Instead of turning raw materials into finished goods and capturing the value added, they are giving away much of the value added content of turbine generators sold to parts vendors with huge parasitic losses in shipping, handling, and middleman type activities. GE makes virtually no parts anymore, and thus has to ship heavy parts and major components hundreds and thousands of miles back and forth, pack and unpack instead of moving 50 or 100 yards during the manufacturing and assembly process. This, along with the many duplicate facilities with huge overhead they now support with little synergy instead of being in just several legacy Edison era plant buildings is bleeding their cash flow dry. They simply can't make money with all this bogus overhead that everyone knew was foolish to do under the guise of cost cutting by simply firing GE workers. Unfortunately, after you fire the workers, then you need to pay others with mark ups, poor quality, and inadequate technical capabilities to do you work for you, If you add the cost of quality to the equation, and customer impact in the power plant, you have a real mess.

We do have a real mess and now the management just wants to cut more across the board vs making GE great again. You can't replace people who know what they are doing, with those who don't which is what GE Power has done since 1998.

Now the parent company may no survive, just like Westinghouse.

by
| 2761 views | | 7 replies (last November 26, 2017) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+Qq4q0B8

7 replies (most recent on top)

What did GE management do besides nothing? This is becoming the mother of all f--- ups.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1jlt+Qq4q0B8

When you're a company that has your fingers in multiple pies (as GE did back when there were Capital, Plastics, NBC, etc etc), you have multiple revenue streams, some doing better than others. Get rid of all that, and you suddenly have nothing to fall back on if your narrower scope isn't a home run.

It'll be interesting to see how the so-called lean approach goes from here on out.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1yjh+Qq4q0B8

9 is a issue all investors should ask. What was the Board of Directors doing from 2000 to present. They presided over a host of bad decisions and seem to have acted as little more than a rubber stamp organiztion that meets to decide on the dividend and have the annual shareholders meeting.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1lle+Qq4q0B8
  1. Penetration of renewables

  2. Poor forecasting of how many new units and services orders it will get in a soft market.

6&7 are tied together. The GT product line leaders did not properly account for the impact of renewables. The idea was that a combination of GT's and WT's would displace coal. Not so. Instead WT's are displacing GT's. Coal is being left alone.

Not only are new unit sales suffering but services is being hit worse. If the existing GT's don't run then no new parts are needed.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1mco+Qq4q0B8

Qq4q0B8-1uea: Thanks and I fully agree with your in depth analysis. However, I do think power business is beyond repair and it will be the new normal going forward. Too bad for the folks working there.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1zdn+Qq4q0B8

I somewhat agree to what Qq4q0B8 has written above. Here is my summary of what went wrong:

  1. GE got an advise from some management gurus in late 90s to get out of Capital and concentrate on industrial businesses. The reason was GE Capital was contributing >50% of companies revenue and so industry had started treating GE as a financial institution. This is why it's share fell to $8 in 2008.

  2. I think the advise was good. GE capitals size should have been reduced but it should not have been completely sold. The reason is it was financing customers for other GE businesses and thus helping customers as well as other GE businesses. In recent years we have seen several potential customers cancelling orders as they could not manage the finance required.

  3. I agree that quality of hardware that's outsourced to vendors is not up to the mark and has resulted in cost of quality. However there is a bigger problem.

  4. GE started losing market to competition and there was a desperate attempt to become market leader in heavy duty GT market. This was done by (i) accelerating New products to market (ii) accepting too much customization (iii) accepting impossible timelines to execute projects. All this resulted in poor execution and margin erosion. GE won the battle of gaining market share but I am not sure if it it one the war of making customers happy to get repeat orders from them.

  5. Add to all this the Alstom acquisition. There was a time when GE wanted to do only high margin business like selling turbines. But customers were looking for complete plant solution. This was resulting in GE losing to competition. So one of the reason to acquire Alston was to help GE understand and deliver plant level solutions. But if GE went to customers all alone it would loose the partnership with several EPCs and that would impact it's turbine businesses. Hence it was confused for a while and Did not get too many orders for turnkey projects which could make Alstom acquisition fruitful. The Alstom team was warming the benches with very little to do.

  6. Penetration of renewables

  7. Poor forecasting of how many new units and services orders it will get in a soft market.

  8. Culture of not doing the real work of executing projects but doing cost outs ...which eventually increase project costs due to changes in the Project and also results in cost of quality. Most of these cost outs were done just to show exaggerated numbers to higher ups and there was very little real savings.

  9. Flannery is right when he says he needs to improve culture. What was the board doing when Jeff & Co. made all these decisions. Did anyone challenge him? Was there a debate?

  10. Anyone who opposes these pseudo cost outs is looked down upon and silenced through peer pressure and idiotic bosses who have no understanding of what they are supposed to do.

GE is a great company but GE Power really needs to change quite a few things if it wants to win.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1uea+Qq4q0B8

Nikola Tesla's revenge finally comes around for the General. That's the way I see it. Somewhere up there, the father of AC is looking down and laughing. Listen closely and you just might hear him...

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kqh+Qq4q0B8

Post a reply

: