GM earned $1 billion in the first three months, down 69 percent from the $3.2 billion profit a year ago that benefited from one-time gains. Revenue climbed 4.3 percent to $37.76 billion, according to The Wall Street Journal.

The profitability was certainly an improvement from the losses that plagued GM before its 2009 bankruptcy. But in many ways, GM is still feeling the effects of the financial crisis. Amid that turmoil, GM halted development of its next generation of big trucks and SUVs and put off efforts to streamline its global manufacturing operations.

“We’re still addressing the consequences of decisions made in and around that time,” finance chief Dan Ammann said in an interview.

Shares in GM, which is still more than a quarter owned by the U.S. Treasury, fell 2.4 percent.

GM on average made $1,962 on every vehicle it produced in North America during the first quarter. Ford made $3,150 a vehicle, 60 percent more than GM in the quarter.

Meantime, Ford is far ahead of GM in its global effort to reduce auto “platforms” used across the globe. Major auto makers are moving to build vehicles from the same basic parts and assembled in plants that use the same tooling—wringing savings from engineering budgets.

Big global auto platforms, those used to build a million or more vehicles a year, comprise about 54 percent of GM’s current volume, according to IHS Global Insight. At Ford, global platforms account for close to 70 percent of the company’s volume.

Against that backdrop, each of GM’s international units posted weaker profit than a year ago, with its European operation suffering a $256 million loss, compared with a $5 million profit a year ago, on a 15 percent decline in vehicles sold. GM also took a $590 million charge to goodwill for Europe.

GM’s core North American unit, though solidly profitable and improved from a year ago, fell short of forecasts and trailed Ford, which is benefiting from its new line of high-margin pickup trucks and more efficient global manufacturing operations.

Mr. Ammann said GM’s North American results won’t likely improve in the second and third quarters this year as the company transitions to a new line of light trucks, thus building fewer of the high-margin vehicles throughout most of the year.

GM’s North American operating profit rose 31 percent to $1.7 billion, with margins improving to 7 percent, from 5.6 percent a year ago. That is better than the 5 percent figure that U.S. auto makers once considered acceptable, but far from GM’s goal of 10 percent globally.

Ford’s operating profit rose 16 percent to $2.1 billion, giving it a profit margin of 11.5 percent for the region. However, Ford said it is unlikely to maintain that margin level for the rest of 2012.

Ford’s new line of F-series pickup trucks are driving up profits for the auto maker. In comparison, GM’s Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra pickups are dated and redesigned models aren’t out until 2013.

GM aims to improve its margin this year with the launch of some important new vehicles, including luxury Cadillacs and its next-generation Chevrolet Malibu midsize sedan.

It has vowed to resist the urge to pile on discounts or unload vehicles into rental fleets to bolster volume at the expense of margins.

While U.S. sales rose 2.7 percent in the first quarter, its market share dropped nearly 2 percentage points to 17.2 percent as rivals notched bigger gains. Ford’s sales rose 8.5 percent in the quarter and Chrysler’s were up 35.9 percent.

Outside of North America, GM’s results fell from a year ago, hurt by economic turmoil in Europe and increasing competition in South America. Its unit including China reported operating profit of $529 million, down 9.7 percent.

Mr. Ammann said it was “too soon to tell” when losses in Europe will bottom out. The company is preparing a restructuring plan for the region and has its sights set on closing one or two factories amid overcapacity throughout the region, people familiar with the matter have said.

Investors, labor unions and regional governments are eagerly awaiting GM’s plan, which Mr. Ammann said could be rolled out gradually in the months ahead.

“Everybody is waiting for a big bang,” he said. “I am not sure there is going to be a big bang.”

Excluding charges of 33 cents a share for goodwill impairment on its international operations, GM’s earnings fell to 93 cents a share. Analysts had forecast earnings of 85 cents a share. A year ago, the company’s earnings were lifted by $1.5 billion in gains on sale of its holdings in former units Delphi Automotive LLP and Ally Financial. “We making solid progress, but it’s a long-term path that we are on to get to the [margin] levels we want to be at,” Mr. Ammann said.

Because the Treasury Department still owns a 26 percent stake in the company, G.M. remains saddled with pay restrictions that limit its ability to recruit new talent, a ban on corporate jets, and lingering image problems in the eyes of some consumers, reported The New York Times.

Company executives usually deflect questions about the effect of government ownership on their business, or their frustration with it. But in a rare interview on the topic, G.M.’s chief executive, Daniel F. Akerson, said he longs for the day that G.M. can finally say goodbye to its biggest shareholder.

“I try not to let it bother me,” Mr. Akerson said. “But the fact is it does bother me.”

The farewell celebration won’t be happening anytime soon. Based on G.M.’s current stock price of $22.37, taxpayers would lose an estimated $15 billion if the government’s shares were sold today. Unless the stock rose quite significantly, the chances are slim that the Obama administration would sell its 500 million shares before the November election and invite criticism from Republicans about the wisdom of the auto industry bailout.

Mr. Akerson said he has regular conversations with Treasury officials, but has never gotten guidance on when they intend to divest. “I don’t know what the government’s plan is,” he said. “I think it would be helpful if they would publicly state it.”

After pumping in nearly $50 billion to save G.M., American taxpayers owned about 60 percent of the company when it emerged from Chapter 11 in the summer of 2009. The government sold the bulk of its holdings at $33 a share in the company’s public stock offering a year later.

But the administration is not eager to sell the rest at a loss. “As with all of our investments, we try to balance the goals of maximizing taxpayer recoveries and exiting as soon as practicable,” said Timothy G. Massad, the assistant Treasury secretary overseeing the Troubled Asset Relief Program. “We don’t have a specific timetable, but we’ll continue to watch the market closely.”

Like partners in a three-legged foot race, both the company and the government are hobbled by their connection. Unless G.M. improves its performance and gets the stock price up, the government can’t sell without losing billions. At the same time, uncertainty about the government’s stake worries some investors and hurts consumer perceptions of G.M. cars.

In a survey last quarter of 30,000 Americans shopping for new vehicles, 32 percent of those who rejected a G.M. model said they would not consider buying from the carmaker because of the bailout.

While that is down from 59 percent in 2009, “G.M. still has quite a hangover,” said Art Spinella, president of the firm that conducted the survey, CNW Marketing Research of Bandon, Ore. “That’s a significant number of people who will buy something else because of the bailout.”

Chrysler, the other Detroit automaker to receive government aid, fared better in the most recent survey. The company paid off its federal loans last year, and just 22 percent of shoppers said they had avoided a Chrysler product because of the bailout.

Mr. Akerson said the negative feelings about G.M. were an unfortunate byproduct of the past struggles that led the company to seek government assistance.

“All we can do is put numbers on the board and hope people start to believe in our story,” he said.

Government ownership is also affecting G.M. internally. Mr. Akerson said the company has lost a half-dozen candidates for management jobs because of salary restrictions on companies getting TARP financing. G.M.’s search for a new head of human resources lasted months because several promising contenders balked at the uncertain time frame for the government’s exit.

The government’s ban on corporate aircraft is mostly a matter of inconvenience for Mr. Akerson and his senior staff members. He was stuck in a Paris airport for five hours last year after missing a connecting flight to China, and often spends an entire day traveling to remote factories for visits that last two or three hours.

“It is part of the deal,” Mr. Akerson said. “There’s no use complaining about it.”

He was more troubled by how G.M. had become, in his words, “a political football.” He still seethes about being called to testify before Congress in January about the safety of the Chevrolet Volt, which experienced battery fires after government crash tests. “I think the whole thing was politically driven,” he said.

Mr. Akerson also said he believed that politics were affecting the government’s decision to hang on to its G.M. stock. President Obama has been pointing to the turnaround at G.M. as a bright spot in the nation’s economy. But if Washington were to sell G.M. shares at a loss, the comeback story would be eclipsed by the cost to taxpayers for its rescue, he said.

“That’s why I don’t think they are going to sell in an election year,” Mr. Akerson said. “Right now, this is a positive for the current administration. If they sell it this year and don’t get all the money back, it’s not a positive.”

The presumed Republican presidential nominee, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, said in a Feb. 14 opinion article in The Detroit News that the Obama administration needed to “act now to divest itself of its ownership position in G.M.” But in the same article, he said the shares should be “sold in a responsible fashion,” without elaborating.

G.M. is not the only automaker with a lagging stock price. Shares in Ford, which weathered the recession without a bailout, have dropped almost as much as G.M.’s in the last year because of increased competition in the domestic auto market and economic troubles in Europe.

Still, if G.M. improved its sales and earnings, its share price might rise and hasten the government’s exit.

The company said Thursday that it earned $1 billion in the first quarter, a 69 percent decline from the year-ago period, when it benefited from one-time gains from asset sales.

Its earnings in North America improved 30 percent during the quarter, but continued struggles in Europe dragged down overall results. While the company is introducing 20 new models worldwide this year, industry analysts say G.M. has yet to match Ford’s pace in globalizing vehicle platforms to save money on product development, parts and manufacturing costs.

“It’s important for people to realize that they are not done transforming themselves,” said David Whiston, an analyst with the Morningstar investment firm. “It is going to take more time to right the ship.”

The skepticism is not lost on Mr. Akerson, a former executive with the Carlyle Group private equity firm who took over as G.M.’s chief in mid-2010.

“We have a good company,” he said. “It’s our job to make it great again. We know we have a lot of work to do.”

Losing the distinction of Government Motors could help it get there faster. “But we’re in a situation we can’t control,” Mr. Akerson said. “So we have to wait.”

The share sale includes an about €240 million investment by General Motors Co. for a 7 percent stake to cement their joint development and procurement alliance. Peugeot also said its financing arm, Banque PSA Finance, applied for €700 million in low-interest loans from the European Central Bank’s refinancing operation at the end of February, reported The Wall Street Journal.

“The capital increase is entirely designed to finance Peugeot’s strategic project with GM and will allow it to pursue its global expansion strategy and its plan to move its model range upmarket,” Chief Financial Officer Jean-Baptiste de Chatillon said on Tuesday.

Peugeot’s offer—giving shareholders the right to purchase 16 new shares for every 31 existing shares—will be open between March 8 and March 21, the company said. The family-controlled company said it won’t pay a 2011 dividend to bolster its finances.

Peugeot’s shares were down 3.5 percent at €13.71 in Paris on Tuesday, with some analysts warning of the significant dilution shareholders face from the capital increase and lack of a dividend. Peugeot and GM have also acknowledged slim initial financial benefits from the alliance even if annual cost savings could reach $2 billion a year in five years.

“Bottom line: such a dilution for the prospect of a long-dated payoff fuels our recommendation to sell the rights,” analysts at Barclays Capital said.

Mr. De Chatillon said the share price decline wasn’t surprising. “It’s true the share price has gone down a bit, but that’s normal in capital increases because of the dilution effect,” he said. “The news of the dividend [suspension] wasn’t expected by the market,” he added.

Peugeot and GM said they are seeking to address the problem of surplus capacity in Europe.

“We will deal with the overcapacity issue by 2014 notably in France and Spain where the overcapacity is most acute,” said Denis Martin, the head of Peugeot’s industrial operations. “We’ve already had a certain number of meetings with labor representatives in Europe and have put the overcapacity issue on the table,” Mr. Martin said.

GM Vice Chairman Stephen Girsky said on Tuesday that the U.S. auto maker also is in the middle of talks with unions about a fresh round of cost cuts.

“We’re trying to change the calculus here,” Mr. Girsky said. “This company has lost a lot of money [in Europe], and we know that running the same play the way we’ve been running it won’t work.”

The two auto makers expect each will generate significant cost savings at their struggling European car operations through their five-year alliance. The alliance will include sharing of vehicle architectures, components and the creation of a global procurement joint venture. Combined purchases will be about $125 billion a year, the companies said. They plan to build some vehicles together as soon as 2016.

Paris-based Peugeot is to become GM’s main partner in Europe and the two may consider broadening the partnership to other regions. They will continue to operate as separate companies and compete with each other in many markets. Longer term, the arrangement could lay the groundwork for a deeper partnership between the two.

But the deal isn’t an antidote to the companies’ financial troubles in Europe, which has GM undertaking a major restructuring in addition to Peugeot’s capital increase. Both companies have ruled out any deep changes to their operations in the short term while analysts have cautioned that the alliance doesn’t address the problem of chronic overcapacity, estimated at 20 percent or more, in Europe’s car industry.

Auto sales in Western Europe are down 14 percent since 2007. But in that time, among major auto makers, only GM and Fiat have closed a factory, one apiece. Matching production to sales would require eliminating 1.5 million vehicles worth of annual production capacity—the equivalent of five assembly plants, estimates Morgan Stanley.

The investment in Peugeot and cost-saving alliance is GM’s most significant manufacturing alliance since its 2009 bankruptcy. The auto maker has tried European partnerships in the past with mixed results. GM paid $2 billion to Fiat in 2005 to dissolve a failed alliance.

Following the rights issue, General Motors will hold 7 percent in Peugeot Citroën and the Peugeot family will remain the main shareholder, with 25.3 percent of capital and 37.9 percent of the voting rights.

Société Générale SA, BNP Paribas SA and Morgan Stanley are arranging the rights issue.

It earned $7.59 billion in 2011, a 62 percent increase from a year ago. The bulk of that profit came from GM’s large North American unit, where sales rose and customers are paying more for its cars and trucks, reported The Wall Street Journal.

Yet even as investors celebrated the gain by pushing GM’s stock up, company executives talked of the urgent need to slash expenses everywhere and to restructure its long-struggling business in Europe. GM shares gained 9 percent in 4 p.m. New York Stock Exchange trading on Thursday, adding $2.24, to $27.17, a six-month high.

The company, as it rolled out the news, disclosed a series of cost-cutting actions and offered a dire view of Europe’s economy this year. Among its moves, it will reduce 2011 bonuses for its 26,000 U.S. salaried workers and freeze their pay for 2012.

“We obviously have a long way to go to get to the objectives we want to get to,” Dan Ammann, GM’s finance chief, said at the company’s headquarters on Thursday.

GM has undergone a remarkable turnaround from 2009, when it needed a $50 billion lifeline from U.S. taxpayers to survive. Today, its car business is growing fast in China and North America, has little debt and $38.8 billion in liquidity. It also will pay scant U.S. taxes for years to come as a condition of the government rescue.

However, an 8 percent fourth quarter earnings drop underscored challenges it faces this year: Growing losses in Europe and thin profit margins in its overall business despite shedding debt and taxes in bankruptcy court.

On Thursday, Chief Executive Dan Akerson said the company expects sales volumes and revenue to grow in 2012. But when pressed, Mr. Akerson declined to predict whether that means GM will make more money this year.

“It’s tough to make predictions,” he said. “We know what our challenges are and we are addressing them.”

The auto maker lost $747 million in Europe last year. GM initially thought it would be profitable in the region last year, but rescinded its profit forecast last fall amid a regional sales slump triggered by the European debt crisis. Last year’s loss in Europe is narrower than in 2010, when GM lost nearly $2 billion in the region.

Mr. Akerson said the troubles in Europe are on the same scale of the 2008 meltdown in the U.S., which resulted in an $80 billion U.S. auto industry bailout and bankruptcies for GM and Chrysler Group LLC.

Executives are working with labor unions to hammer out a restructuring plan for Europe that will cut capacity and reduce costs in the region, officials said on Thursday. GM in recent months has sent several top executives to Europe and is overhauling the unit’s management.

The company is considering closing factories in Bochum, Germany, and Ellesmere Port, England, according to people familiar with the discussions. GM said on Thursday it would stick to labor agreements that prohibit further plant closings through 2014, signaling any closing won’t happen immediately.

Mr. Ammann, the finance chief, said GM has enough liquidity to manage further losses in its Opel/Vauxhall operations and doesn’t need to seek aid from European governments.

GM is moving to stop cracks from becoming fissures. This week, it disclosed plans to end this year payments to a traditional defined-benefit pension plan for 19,000 salaried workers who still receive them. The move is intended to help reduce its future pension risk. Workers will keep their existing pensions, but future retirement contributions will be made into a 401(k) plan.

Its pension shortfall rose to $24.5 billion at the end of 2011, from $21.4 billion a year earlier mostly because the company has reduced its projection of the future rate of return.

The company also failed to make significant progress on its goal of increasing profit margins. Fourth-quarter profit margin was 2.9 percent of sales, almost unchanged from the 2.8 percent of sales a year earlier. GM executives are working to get margins closer to 10 percent over the next few years. Its margin for the year was 5.5 percent, compared with 5.2 percent in 2010.

Analysts said the company’s lack of comment on its 2012 profit outlook wasn’t enough to change their opinion of its shares.

“A lack of guidance leaves GM shares shrouded in the thick fog of macro uncertainty,” Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas said in a research note. Still, he said, “We believe investors have little room to feel any different about their 2012 estimate in either direction.”

A strengthening stock price could get the U.S. closer to selling its 26.5 percent stake in the company. GM stock would need to exceed $50 a share for the U.S. government to break even on the rescue. But the U.S. Treasury would consider selling its stake once shares top $30, near to the $33 price in GM’s 2010 initial public offering, people familiar with the situation said.

The 103-year-old company, leaner and smarter under new management, cut costs by taking advantage of its size around the globe. And its new products boosted sales so much that it has reclaimed the title of world’s biggest automaker from Toyota, reported Yahoo Finance.

GM may have a hard time breaking this record in 2012 because it is losing money in Europe and South America, and U.S. sales growth slowed in the last three months of 2011.

But the company’s performance in North America and Asia still helped it earn $7.6 billion for the year, beating the record of $6.7 billion set during the truck boom in 1997.

The profit won’t stop the debate about spending $49.5 billion in taxpayer dollars to save GM. But it did drive up the company’s stock price, which could help the government get more of its money back.

The bailout of GM and Chrysler Group LLC, begun by George W. Bush and finished by Barack Obama, remains a major issue in this year’s presidential campaign. It’s so politically charged that even a Super Bowl ad celebrating Chrysler’s rebirth caused arguments.

GM, which released its earnings Thursday, performed best in its home territory, posting a $7.2 billion pretax profit in North America. The numbers were so good that 47,500 blue-collar workers will get $7,000 profit-sharing checks, the maximum allowable under their new union contract. International Operations, which includes Asia, made $1.9 billion before taxes, but that was down from 2010.

GM’s cost cuts, and its outlook for this year helped to push up the stock price by almost 9 percent to $27.08. The company said it trimmed costs by $500 million in the fourth quarter alone mainly by consolidating advertising agencies and engineering operations. A prediction that costs wouldn’t rise this year wowed investors, especially since other automakers have forecast rising costs, said Itay Michaeli, an analyst for Citi Investment Research.

“That was a very pleasant surprise,” he said.

GM also was optimistic about sales and revenue. It sees its global market share holding steady at 11.9 percent, and if global auto sales rise as expected this year, GM’s slice of that would also increase.

That’s especially promising, since GM managed to make money last year with industry-wide sales in the U.S. at a historically low 12.8 million. Sales this year could rise to 14 million.

The company expects to charge more for its cars and trucks this year, but warned that the prices could be pressured as the market shifts toward smaller, less-expensive vehicles.

CEO Dan Akerson hinted at a better year for GM in 2012, saying that the company will build on the 2011 results as it brings more new products into the market.

“The outlook here is quite favorable for earnings growth,” said Citi’s Michaeli. “They’re keeping their costs really under control.”

That’s good news for the U.S. government, which still owns 26.5 percent of the company and needs more strong earnings to push up the stock price.

The government owns 500 million shares of GM, which it got in exchange for the $49.5 billion bailout. Through earlier stock sales and loan repayments, the government has recouped about $22.3 billion of that money. The remaining shares would have to double in price and sell for around $53 for the government to get back the rest.

Despite the big annual profit and optimistic outlook, GM still lost $747 million before taxes in Europe last year, and its losses are expected to continue until a restructuring plan takes hold.

Akerson said GM will have to cut its European factory capacity to match lower sales. South America lost money, too: $122 million for the year. GM’s fourth-quarter profit fell 8 percent, and its U.S. sales growth slowed in the quarter even as more Americans bought cars and trucks.

Also, GM’s U.S. stockpile of cars and trucks is growing, and that could force it to offer discounts, especially in competitive market segments like pickup trucks and midsize cars. In January, GM’s inventory was about 620,000, enough to supply its dealers for 89 days. That’s up by more than 100,000 from a year earlier, when GM had a 68-day supply, according to Ward’s AutoInfoBank.

“Based on the available data, NHTSA does not believe that Chevy Volts or other electric vehicles pose a greater risk of fire than gasoline-powered vehicles,” the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said in an e-mailed statement.

The conclusion by NHTSA came two weeks after General Motors Co. told Volt owners to bring the vehicles to dealerships for repair.

The government started investigating the Volt after a side- impact crash test in May led to a fire three weeks later. During that test, the lithium-ion battery pack broke open and coolant leaked into the battery. When the car was physically rotated as part of the test, more coolant leaked into a circuit board, leading to a fire. NHTSA replicated the fire in November and started an official probe Nov. 25.

“GM is proud of the technological innovation the Volt represents,” Greg Martin, a GM spokesman, said yesterday in an e-mailed statement. “We appreciate the confidence our Volt customers continued to provide during the investigation.”

The June fire occurred following a May 12 crash test at a facility in Wisconsin run by contractor MGA Research Inc., which notified the regulator that the blaze burned a line of cars parked near the Volt, NHTSA said yesterday in its report.

The agency and its investigators concluded in July that the fire originated in the Volt battery and performed another side- impact test on a Volt in September. That crash, which didn’t penetrate the battery compartment, didn’t lead to a fire. NHTSA, which tested Volt batteries in November with the Energy and Defense departments, hadn’t previously disclosed the September crash test.

The June Volt fire was reported Nov. 11 by Bloomberg.

The Volt blaze had little effect on sales of the vehicles, so there may not be any significant improvement with the government completing its investigation, said Jeremy Anwyl, vice chairman of auto-researcher Edmunds.com, in an e-mail.

“Volt buyers tend to be passionate about their vehicle,” Anwyl said. “They really want an electrified vehicle. The small risk represented by the potential for fire wouldn’t have been an obstacle for this group of buyers.”

The attention focused on the Volt fire was, in part, a result of the vehicle’s new technology, Anwyl said.

“We see gasoline powered vehicles blow up in the movies all the time,” he said. “A vehicle with batteries catches fire and it is portrayed as a big deal.”
Representative Darrell Issa, the California Republican who is chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, plans to hold a hearing on Jan. 25 about the fires and the regulator’s handling of the incidents. GM Chief Executive Officer Dan Akerson and NHTSA Administrator David Strickland are scheduled to testify.

Issa has asked whether President Barack Obama’s administration kept silent about the fires because of its interest in the success of GM’s government-backed restructuring and a U.S. goal of having 1 million electric vehicles on the road by 2015.

U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood told reporters in December it was “absolutely not true” that his agency withheld information about the Volt’s safety.

GM, based in Detroit, said Jan. 5 it would provide a fix to the 8,000 plug-in hybrids it has sold, to reduce the risk of a post-crash fire. Strickland said in Detroit Jan. 8 that the agency was pleased with GM’s plan.

The Treasury Department owns 32 percent of GM’s stock, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

GM, which held the spot for almost eight decades before being dethroned by Toyota Motor Corp. in 2008, on Thursday disclosed it sold a bit more than nine million cars and trucks worldwide last year, a 7.6 percent rise over 2010. That would put it ahead of VW, which recently reported global sales totaled 8.16 million vehicles last year, reported The Wall Street Journal.

But shortly after GM’s disclosure, Volkswagen argued it, in fact, was the top-seller last year if sales of its affiliates are included. Volkswagen’s figures don’t include the contributions of majority-ownership stakes in truck makers MAN SE and Scania AB, which will be added in a few weeks, a Volkswagen spokesman said. The truck makers might add 200,000 vehicles to VW’s sales total.

GM’s rivals also point out that the big U.S. auto maker’s numbers are boosted by ownership stakes in China’s SAIC Motor Corp. and Liuzhou Wuling Motors Co. While SAIC builds GM cars in China, Wuling’s 1.2 million vehicles last year are mostly cheap commercial vehicles used only in China.

A GM spokesman said the company no longer focuses on being the world’s largest auto maker. “Our goal is to be the best, not necessarily the biggest,” said Jim Cain, a spokesman for GM. “If we had announced plans on world domination, we probably would have been quibbling with the sales of our competitors and that’s as far removed from focusing on the customers as you can get.”

Some analysts prefer not to count the Wuling vehicles in GM’s global total because GM doesn’t have a controlling stake in its partner. “We have to draw the line somewhere and this at least gives us some consistency around the globe,” said Jeff Schuster, an analyst with forecasting firm LMC Automotive.

The tiff over global sales has parallels to a similar one earlier this month when BMW AG and Daimler AG’s Mercedes-Benz delayed reporting their U.S. sales by a day, each hoping to beat out the other for the title of America’s top-selling luxury brand. BMW won by a nose.

Who is No. 1 and No. 2 globally isn’t the industry’s only unanswered question. Toyota appears to have dropped to fourth in the world behind the alliance of France’s Renault SA and Nissan Motor Co., as long as you accept the alliance’s counting methodology. Nissan-Renault, which essentially operate as a single company and are run by one chief executive, said they sold 8.03 million vehicles in 2011. That includes 638,000 vehicles sold by Russia’s AvtoVAZ OAO, in which Renault holds a 25 percent stake. The alliance has signaled its intention to increase its ownership to 50 percent, but hasn’t done it yet.

Toyota, meanwhile, said in December it expects 2011 sales to be around 7.91 million, down 6 percent, but it hasn’t released official figures yet. Japan’s largest auto maker was slowed because the March 11 earthquake and tsunami in Japan forced the company to cut global production and curtailed sales at home and abroad. In Japan, Toyota’s domestic sales dropped 26.8 percent in 2011, a big contributor to its fall in the global rankings.

The Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association recently forecast motor vehicle sales will rise 19 percent this year, to about five million cars, trucks and buses. That would be about the same as in 2008, before the global financial crisis hurt economies around the world but is still below the level of 5.7 million to 5.9 million reached in the early 2000s.

While the rankings are mostly about bragging rights, the accounting methods has become a near annual scuffle as the competition between the top several auto makers increases. Whether to count the sales from affiliate auto makers is a point of contention.

Volkswagen has stated an intention to sell 10 million vehicles a year by 2018.

Rebecca Lindland, a senior analyst at IHS Automotive Consulting, said there is no clear guideline for what to count and what not to count, creating a headache for firms like hers.

“It’s sort of like when you have a lot of step-brothers and sisters and someone asks you how many siblings you have,” she said. “It hasn’t worked out so great for the last couple who have been number one.”

Ms. Lindland said she was involved in an internal discussion lasting more than an hour about whether to combine Chrysler Group LLC’s figures with Fiat SpA. “It’s very annoying, and it’s also meaningless. The important thing is whether they are making money.” Eventually IHS did combine the two, she said.

Saab North America, which is based in Royal Oak and has about 50 employees, said it is halting warranty coverage on current vehicles and models for sale at dealerships in the wake of Monday’s bankruptcy filing by its parent Saab Automobile AB in Sweden, reported The Detroit News.

Saab spokeswoman Michele Tinson said the company has also stopped dealer incentive payments for vehicles at showrooms. Only a few thousand Saab vehicles are at its 188 U.S. dealer showrooms.

GM spokesman Jim Cain said GM is working to notify Saab customers that it will step in.

“In the event Saab cannot or will not fulfill its obligations to administer the warranty programs with its U.S. and Canadian dealers through Saab Cars North America or otherwise, GM will take necessary steps to ensure that remaining warranty obligations on Saab vehicles marketed by GM in the United States and Canada will be honored,” he said.

Saab has about 48,000 vehicles registered in the United States, GM said. Most of those would be covered by GM’s warranties.

GM sold Saab to Dutch luxury automaker Spyker in February 2010, one of four brands it off-loaded in bankruptcy.

Saab North America’s board of directors began meeting around noon Tuesday and was still meeting at 5 p.m, Tinson said.

The North American unit is still operating and hasn’t filed for bankruptcy.

It’s not clear what the company’s next step will be.

A deal to sell Saab to Chinese investors was blocked by GM, which provided key technology to Saab and still holds preferred shares in the automaker.

GM refused to go along with the move, citing intellectual property concerns.

Absent a last-minute investment deal, Saab is likely to be liquidated.

Saab has built few cars since March and struggled to pay its bills.

Mr. Wagoner picked his hometown of Richmond, Va., to make his first public appearance since 2009, when he was ousted from GM by the Obama administration as a condition of the government’s rescue of the company. He addressed 1,100 winter graduates at Virginia Commonwealth University, reported The Wall Street Journal.

His speech was short—roughly 12 minutes. Beforehand, he fended off several interview requests, including one from the local paper that has covered him since he was captain of the high-school basketball team. He barely mentioned GM, but talked to graduates about taking risks and accepting defeat gracefully.

It was a fitting speech for an executive who often was visibly uncomfortable in the spotlight, but popular among those who worked for him.

The 58-year-old former CEO’s only mention of GM came as he tried to convey to his audience the importance of accepting challenges. He said he never wanted to live in New York or overseas, though those were his first assignments from GM, and he benefited from them.

“I was willing to go just about anywhere in the U.S. for the best job—except New York City,” he said. “Of course, I received a job offer from GM—in New York City.”

“Don’t worry about planning every step of your life,” he added.

Mr. Wagoner rose to prominence at age 39 when he was named GM’s youngest-ever chief financial officer and heir apparent to then-CEO Jack Smith.

He succeeded his mentor in 2000, and became one of the highest-profile CEOs in the world and the face of Detroit. The way he ran GM played a major role in shaping the direction of the global auto industry.

He kept car sales going in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks with a “Keep America Rolling” campaign and heavy use of incentives.

Detroit’s smaller auto makers, Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler Group LLC, were forced to follow GM’s lead and, to some extent, Toyota Motor Corp. and other auto makers did as well.

When Mr. Wagoner entered GM into an alliance with Italian auto maker Fiat SpA, the move triggered a string of similar alliances around the world.

His focus on high-margin trucks and sport-utility vehicles, at the expense of passenger cars, in many ways defined Detroit’s strategy. After GM bought Hummer, the line of military-like SUVs, Ford followed with the purchase of Land Rover.

While Mr. Wagoner’s strategies helped propel GM to multibillion-dollar profits, particularly in the 1990s when he headed the company’s North American operations, they ultimately contributed to its downfall.

GM began racking up losses in the mid-2000s, amid sales declines and skyrocketing health-care costs. By 2008, truck sales were tanking and GM’s cars couldn’t compete with those built by Toyota and Honda Motor Co. of Japan.

Mr. Wagoner closed factories and reduced head count, but many of his steps to shore up GM came too late and fell short.

During his tenure, GM had losses of $85 billion. He struck a landmark deal with the union to offload retiree costs into a union trust in 2005, but three years later the company still owed the fund billions. He fought against a bankruptcy filing, fearing it would cause a customer exodus that would be fatal to GM. And he resisted cutting unprofitable brands and models, moves the Obama administration forced in bankruptcy, along with further job cuts, factory closures and steps to shed billions in debt through bankruptcy.

In early 2009, as GM pleaded for a government bailout, Mr. Wagoner told President Barack Obama’s automotive task force that he would step down if it meant saving GM. It did, and he resigned in March.

After leaving GM, Mr. Wagoner dug into work at his alma mater, Duke University, where he was named head of the board of directors earlier this year.

Two of his three sons are Duke graduates, and a third now is attending the school. Mr. Wagoner also sits on the boards of Washington Post Co. and Detroit Country Day High School.

Though he doesn’t talk about GM in public, Mr. Wagoner talks regularly to former co-workers at the company, inquiring often about how people are doing, according to several people who keep in touch with him.

Shortly after GM’s current CEO, Dan Akerson, took over last fall, Mr. Wagoner met with him to talk about the company.

“He’s still incredibly loyal to GM,” said one former executive who stays in contact with Mr. Wagoner.

Mr. Wagoner closed his address Saturday with a quote from Mother Teresa: ” ‘What you spend years building, someone could destroy overnight,’ ” he said. ” ‘Build anyway.’ “

“We have reviewed Saab’s proposed changes regarding the sale of the company. Nothing in the proposal changes GM’s position. We are unable to support the transaction,” GM spokesman Jim Cain said.

The latest announcement may mean the end of the struggling Swedish luxury automaker as early as this week, according to The Detroit News. Saab’s North American headquarters is in Royal Oak.

GM licenses the technology Saab uses to produce several key models. GM has raised concerns about the intellectual property it has licensed to the company.

In early November, GM said it would not support the sale of Saab Automobile AB to two Chinese automakers.

Saab said Monday it was in talks on a revised deal to sell itself to one of the automakers — Zhejiang Youngman Lotus Automobile Co. Ltd. — and an unnamed Chinese bank.

Saab, which is reorganizing in Sweden under court protection from creditors, has faced mounting financial problems this year as several funding sources fell through.

It has built few vehicles since late March, its employees have suffered through payless paydays, and it hasn’t been able to pay many of its bills.

Saab’s restructuring administrator, Guy Lofalk, may end efforts to try to revive Saab, the Swedish business daily Dagens Industri reported. “I immediately have to decide if it really is possible to continue this restructuring,” he told the paper.

Last week, GM attorneys met with Lofalk and the Swedish ambassador to the United States, Jonas Hafstrom. The two discussed efforts to save Saab, but the meeting didn’t result in any concrete proposals. Saab sent GM a new proposed ownership structure on Friday, which didn’t meet GM’s concerns.

GM is Saab’s former parent company. Saab was one of four brands GM opted to shed during 2009 bankruptcy restructuring.

In October, Pang Da Automobile Trade Co. and Zhejiang Youngman said they had agreed to buy Saab from its Dutch owner Swedish Automobile NV.

The sale price was $140 million in exchange for $600 million in funding to keep the company afloat.

Reuters reported Pang Da said in China on Monday it is still talking to Saab, though it wasn’t named by Saab on Monday as a possible buyer.