GM
General Motors Company
stock NYSE

What you're missing is Elon Musk. It's his company, your essentially betting on him, not the actual business metrics or valuations. Tesla is worth > 1.5 trillion by market cap, thats roughly 5x Ford, GM and Toyota COMBINED. Tesla, the actual company is not worth what the market values it at based on a traditional definition of "worth".
SpaceX is going to be more of the same. Ridiculous market cap, a P/E multiple that's not in any way rooted in reality, and volatility based solely on Musk's tweets and not at all on the health of the business.
That's what you're investing in if you buy, it's Elon's ability to over inflate the "value" of the business based on his reputation alone.

Large companies and corporations can go bankrupt quickly like Enron, Blockbuster, Kodak, Blackberry, GM etc. The S&P500 cannot unless the world ends. Higher risk, higher reward

not sure why this was downvoted, it's an honest question.
> Is there any stock that just never recovered?
well, let's define 'never recovered'.
(1) there are companies that just go out of business and disappear. examples include:
- Sears, once the top American retailer and part of the Dow Jones Industrial Average. The entire company collapsed in slow motion and the stock became worthless.
- Lehman Brothers, an investment bank started in the 1800s that went bankrupt.
- Washington Mutual largest bank company bankruptcy in US history at at that point.
- General Motors, once the top stock in the S&P 500 but the company declared bankruptcy and original stockholders were wiped out. GM stock now is a different company legally.
(2) there are companies who stay in business but their stock deteriorates far below their peak and never recovers.
AIG, the insurance company and Cisco the IT company come to mind, they were both major players in their industries. Cisco is very dominant and well managed, but the stock still hasn't recovered from the dot com crash. look up a chart of AIG stock as it nosedived from over $1000 in 2008 and hasn't traded above $200 since then. https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/AIG/
There's a tiny company called NL Industries that used to be part of the Dow under the name National Lead before people understood how toxic lead could be.
Also Goodyear; Xerox and Kodak were once hot technology stocks of the day, in a sense, because 60 easy photocopies and instant cameras were revolutionary.

I’d mainly want to hear the AI part if it gets into actual operations, not just headline-level talking points. For a company like GM, the interesting questions are where it actually helps in manufacturing, supply chains, and vehicle software.

GM CEO Mary Barra talks economy, AI and more

Saying that "a fund which connects with 4100 companies as borrowers" is a diversified holding is the same as saying that putting all your money in GM is diversified because they have millions of customers. The Boglehead idea is to try and earn the average market return; putting 30% of your portfolio into an actively managed loan fund is speculation.

I did this once with stock in GM and Rollins an old company I worked for. Had to put xyz (I think it was like 3500) into the account to get $500 free $ or some shit. My return was no where near as nice but it sat for 6 years before I found it. My account just sat happily collecting dividends and growing while the emails went into the trash in my aol. Pretty fun stuff, personally I’d cash out and roll it into something more respectable like SPY or some other index. Congrats

Their biggest blunder was the small battery version. They should have just not released it. They have no problems stuffing lots full of $95k F150 Lariats, they should have made the lightning with a 400-450 mile range like GM did with the Silverado.

maybe Ford, GM and VW should make better cars. or maybe republicans and rurals should get on board with EVs

With 🥭 China glazing, we'll have BYD cars in the US for sure.
Puts on Ford and GM

US market is not being driven by consumers but by politics. To understand markets, you've to look beyond where consumers actually have choices they can make rather than what the government gives them (USA).
And after being a progressive company, always being eager to embark on newest developments in the 1990s thru mid 2000s, Honda has utterly failed and become extremely conservative. The outcomes also show in plenty of market where they had decent presence, to where they are now. Their own EV offerings have been abysmal, and they relied entirely on GM for North America.

The Prologue was neither rushed nor had GM batteries “tossed in”. It is literally the Chevy Blazer through and through with an altered appearance and some Honda-specific features/options. Not an accident or mistake by any means. Honda very correctly judged that it was risky to invest in their own entire EV platform that early, and the platform they were working on for later release has now been cancelled validating that decision further.

When GM made an electric pickup they couldn’t just use the same body they have on all their pickups, they had to make it a space ship.
That made it more expensive and less popular. Why?

I guess most people won't know it's a GM car though.

Their EV was a GM… they bet on a BAD ev platform. Honda buyers dont want GM “quality”

They rushed the prologue and tossed in GM batteries, software snd UI. If a Honda buyer wanted a GM they would not be buying Honda. They should have waited for their battery factories to be completed and rolled out a civic and accord EV at a the same price point as the higher end civic. That would have dominated the ev market and got a ton of new buyers to the brand.

I completely agree with other comments, he needs to immediately diversify the portfolio. My grandfather had accumulated a ton of stock working for GM upon his retirement. He never diversified the position and when they went bankrupt it was worth pennies on the dollar.