Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





GM News, New Models and Market Share

1155015511553155515561576

Comments

  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,641
    Pro GM and GM fanboy people should offer to subsidize GM on their own. Those against GM should be able to UNCHECK that tax box on their tax forms this Spring.

    Obviously there aren't enough of them, or GM wouldn't never have gone bankrupt.

    In all seriousness, while I am not happy about bailing out a business like GM that already had one foot in the grave long before the crisis, it probably was the right thing to do.

    The bonus is I get to continue criticizing GM.
  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,325
    And you're basing this on.....what? Oh, that's right, a '95 Neon.

    Yes, that's part of it, but I'm also basing it on the dealer interactions, reactions, and service after purchase.

    I went to 3 different Dodge dealers seeking refuge from continued breakdowns (fix it right and fix it once and for all dammit!).

    All of them pretty much performed the same with the same level of service and culture.

    So after warranty, that would have been years '98-'01 at 3 separate dealers. The reaction of "oh yeah, that's normal to go bad." The "parts just breakdown" routine, and so on and so on. It amazes me that more parts weren't broken while trying to repair other parts. At least, I was never told if they were.

    I'm basing it on the fact that Chrysler never sent a letter for extended warranties on the auto transmissions, the head gaskets, nor the air conditioners and compressors that routinely failed.

    Or how about a recall on the leaking gas tank? A recall would even be welcome, I can't recall a single recall on the Neon. :cry:
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,641
    But doesn't seeing obvious quality control gaps and shortcomings in a car lead you (logically I say) to thinking and at least perceiving that perhaps other shortcuts were taken under the hood, inside the wheels, and other unseen places?

    Logically yes, but I haven't seen that in reality. Most of the company cars my wife has received over the past 10 years have been shoddy to me, but they've mostly been very reliable. That doesn't change the fact I wouldn't buy any of those cars with my own money.

    I think she's got about 45k miles on her '11 Taurus. No problems yet except for a few rattles and lousy fit-n-finish. The Taurus is the first company car I've looked forward to her getting but it's not an impressive car.
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,354
    I believe the turbos increase rpm which may add wear on the internal combustion engine. I haven't driven a recent turbo, but from what I've read it sounds like spool time and turbo lag have been mostly resolved. However, I wonder whether they had to compromise efficiency to get there.

    I'd comment but I don't want to upset GM, which is way late to the 4T party. I'll note both points you made as follows:

    #1 - No lag or torque-steer in the Kia.
    #2 - Efficiency is way up there if you know how to use it, as bpizzuti noted. ;)

    Regards,
    OW
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,641
    edited February 2013
    The small car market can be won with good product. Since a small car is often one's first purchase, there are new customers to be won over.

    Ford and GM have already learned that IMO. The Cruze and Focus are nice small cars. They are selling well (not everyone can be #1 in sales) and from what I've seen on used listings, they seem to hold their value better than ever before. I'm surprised the Focus sells as well as it does with it's lumpy transmission.

    I don't think Uplander could buy a used Cruze for what he paid new for his Cobalt.
  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,325
    Obviously there aren't enough of them, or GM wouldn't never have gone bankrupt.

    Not sure about that. It is just that they want to continue to be able to buy bottom of the barrel vehicles for rock bottom prices. The only way to get rock bottom cheap prices is to make a cheap undesirable car, produce the heck out of it until inventories are ultra overstuffed, and then the massive discounts and rebates ensue.

    It's a vicious cycle.
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,641
    Not sure about that. It is just that they want to continue to be able to buy bottom of the barrel vehicles for rock bottom prices. The only way to get rock bottom cheap prices is to make a cheap undesirable car, produce the heck out of it until inventories are ultra overstuffed, and then the massive discounts and rebates ensue.

    Well you have a valid point, having a customer base that isn't willing to pay what the competitions customers will, can be a problem. At least GM, Chrysler, and Ford have trucks to extract some profits from customers;)
  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 4,737
    Too bad Lance Armstrong didn't have parents like you.

    It's the expectation that since everybody cheats, you can too that is sending the USA down the tubes.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,509
    I don't recall any clear profitability being shown when the old organization was intact - given the mediocre to horrible Hyundai product of the era, it's hard to believe real profit was being made. The government-coddled old chaebol might have broke up, but the connections remain - check who is the CEO.

    Korea's business, partially enabled by your tax dollars.
  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 4,737
    Guys like you give the other guys a free pass by saying things like, "Geez, look at GM's average owner age"--when it's the same or extremely close to all the other big manufacturers. Come on. Your high school debate teacher would shake his or her head at that one (I know that particular example wasn't you).

    Since I was the original poster, I'll respond. Even though you don't like people leaving things out, you left you the fact that I prefaced my message with "I believe I've read this but have not verified". Not quite as definitive as you are making it sound. Also, we did confirm that Buick and Caddy have quite old user populations - less so with Chevy, but still older than many others in the same market area.
  • andres3andres3 CAPosts: 5,325
    What has Chrysler done since 2000 or even 1994/5 to win my business as a customer, regain trust, or otherwise show they have changed and improved?

    What are the signs that say the odds have changed?

    What are the positive indicators that show they may have improved since 1995?

    They've successfully gone bankrupt, that's certainly not a positive indicator.

    They've successfully received a second bailout, I suppose a few CEO's and executives deserve huge bonuses and golden parachutes for finagling that arrangement, but how does that make a customer more confident?

    The bogus lifetime warranty on the power train was short lived, and riddled with exclusions and fine print anyway.

    FIAT's reputation is no better.

    What have they done to win back any trust?

    They still rank at the bottom of CR's rankings.

    I see no reason to predict otherwise yet.
  • tlongtlong CaliforniaPosts: 4,737
    But at the same time, if your kid falls behind in part due to the others cheating (and many of his own bad decisions, of course), and ends up the lowest ranked of his peers, then passed up for advancement or scholarship, how does that play out?

    That pans out that the companies that pass him up are not as sustainable in the long run. Do you really think GM is superior but is just doing badly because others are cheating? I don't think so.

    We can either assess equalizing and even punitive measures against those who cheat and wish to have access to our markets, or we can cheat to even things up a little. No other way about it.

    I'd go with number 1, not number 2. Unfortunately everybody seems to think #1 is the cats meow. How is that doing for our competitiveness?
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,354
    Please don't make me itemize the list of factually incorrect things I've seen on this board again.

    The posts that are "incorrect" have nothing to do with GM's reality.

    Start by itemizing everything GM did to go bankrupt. Then, itemize everything since bankruptcy they continue to do incorrectly. Feel free to add the things they learned to stop doing to prevent repeating bankruptcy.

    I'm waiting eagerly....

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Posts: 8,354
    Nice excuses. Kia/Hyundai are making GM look third-rate! I guess the Korean Government are all "Car Guys". :P

    Regards,
    OW
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,641
    I don't recall any clear profitability being shown when the old organization was intact

    Hyundai as a whole was loosing money, but that doesn't mean every division within Hyundai was unprofitable. I've read more than one article stating Hyundai Auto was relatively healthy at the time, same with Hyundai Heavy Industries.

    given the mediocre to horrible Hyundai product of the era,

    The D3 made money off lousy product for decades;)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Yep, some sort of carbon tax.

    US manufacturing plants are zero landfill and cleaner than ever.
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    edited February 2013
    I am positively stupefied at how much energy is exerted on a GM board by people who hate GM.

    How does one determine that a poster "hates" GM? Would simply posting parts of reviews by Edmunds, or CR, or Car and Driver, etc about their "findings" and when the findings are not complimentary after they have tested a GM vehicle constitute posting "hate"?
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,509
    They are more sustainable as long as they are coddled - which doesn't seem to be fading anytime soon. Even the leading makers receive gifts. Reminds me of college kids who are dependent on a parental allowance, if not a free ride, but pretend to be on their own.

    #1 helped the competition compete, we're supposed to blindly embrace theory as we have with trickle down and free trade garbage, why not here?
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,509
    I don't recall those articles. I suppose creative accounting could make it work - move the R&D under another umbrella, and reap pure profit from manufactured goods sales. Hard to believe H was truly that healthy given their 1990s product line.

    D3 didn't have real competition during most of their lousy days.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,509
    They know how to spoil their children, anyway. And when you received decades of developmental aid and still receive military protection, it comes that much easier.
Sign In or Register to comment.