Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Buying American Cars What Does It Mean?

1…366367369371372…382

Comments

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I just saw the new Corvette Stingray on the freeway. I am NOT impressed. The rear end looks Cheap with that after thought spoiler. I am sure it is fun to drive. BUT, I don't think I would trade in a last years model on one.

    http://www.chevrolet.com/corvette-stingray-convertible/exterior-pictures.html
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    What has the US done? More breaks for the top few, hugely bloated Praetorian class, withering middle class, en masse exportation of living wage jobs, et al. Trickle down.

    You are right about the corruption. If anything, the US adopting some of the worst traits of China - corruption, untouchable public sector, criminal "businessmen" who buy laws, substandard human development - devolution. Maybe proof of the race to the bottom that is unfair/free "trade"/"globalization".

    Good to see we agree on a number of those viewpoints regarding the US.

    And don't tell me to calm down, it won't end well

    I think you are correct; you wrote that post and then Edmund's forums wouldn't take postings for almost 24 hours!
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    That's a really interesting read, thanks for the link.

    However, one perspective of the story - that Wagoner was really brilliant all along in his leadership at GM...

    Excuse me for not buying it.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    If Wagoner had anything to do with tucking tail and letting the UAW run over GM in 1998, he is far from brilliant. Much closer to moron than genius.
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    Personally, I thought the gist of the article was how Wagoner was willing to go out of the box in trying to save GM and how GM was much more proactive than the gov made them out to be. In all fairness, I think you guys may be a little overly harsh on Wagoner. The problems there started long before he was in the executive suites and I'd bet that Mullaly would admit that Ford would have never been able to get the concessions necessary for their turnaround plan if GM and C hadn't gone BK first. It's easy to say go tough on the UAW, but the reality is that given the environment the UAW enjoyed where they could target one company while the industry couldn't band together, the UAW had a very strong armed advantage. Add to that the high fixed cost structure of that industry and a targeted company can see its finances go down the tube pretty quickly in those situations if it doesn't relent. It's the unbalanced nature of labor law that I've complained about before. Very similar in the airline business, lost vehicle sale vs. lost seat sale that really can't be recouped. Wagoner was actually respected by many for recognizing the mess he was brought into and trying to implement changes (and trying to do it without BK). But his mission was kind of like trying to do a U-turn in a B767 on a two lane highway. You have to recognize the many variables and constraints he was having to maneuver within. I'll criticize him for not being more aggressive and quicker on the trigger, but I really think calling him a moron or incompetent is not a fair assessment. When you're the commander and the mission screws up, you are generally relieved of command even if you performed admirably within the limits you faced in the situation that were not entirely under your control. Leadership has it's perks, and it's penalties, as well as usually many different interest groups that must be appeased to resolve matters. Just think about some of those conflicting interests he faced; UAW, white collar employees, stock and bond holders, creditors and vendors, dealerships, regulators, legal requirements and restrictions, appeasing politicians...and I'm sure there's more. Not sure any of us would have been able to do it any better really.
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    Gm was definitely was on a path to bankruptcy before Wagoner and likely would have needed a miracle to avoid bankruptcy.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    edited November 2013
    I wasn't keen to blame Wagoner for the BK mess, but the article was a bit much in the martyrdom department. I mean, this man did not suffer after he was ousted, or for being ousted. He came out gold.

    I also felt that the government should share the credit for the turn-around at GM, even if, as stated, they didn't engineer it. They sure as hell financed it.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Given the fact that there is at least 70 IQ points between Moron and Genius, I will be gracious and say Wagoner was in the 125 range with Obama and Dubya. Far from brilliant. Wagoner was COO over North American operations in 1998 when the UAW went on strike. He could have locked them out and been rid of them forever and ever. To me bending over for them was a very poor management decision, that kept the red ink flowing until the tax payers were forced to bail him out. If memory serves when Obama gave Wagoner the boot it was with a nice $25 million parting gift. Hardly put him on the street.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,150
    >It's easy to say go tough on the UAW, but the reality is that given the environment the UAW enjoyed where they could target one company while the industry couldn't band together, the UAW had a very strong armed advantage

    X2 all you said.

    Yes indeed. The UAW could use the strike reserve from all 3 auto company workers to support the strike at one. At the same time the company targeted was bleeding money rapidly per day. And the companies could not work together in any way to alleviate the advantage that the union had over them.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,150
    It's my suspicion that one of the top guys at GM was participating in Edmunds for a time.I believe that one of the posts said something to the effect that eventually we would know who had been the poster. The posts ended when the reorganization occurred.

    Does anyone have a sense that there was a such a person on the discussions.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 57,162
    I have my doubts that most of the insular old guard there would be able to go on the internet without guidance to begin with - not the most "with it" group I can imagine. Maybe a PR person.
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    Too funny! You're in a charitable mood today gagrice :-)

    I would have liked to have seen management at all of D3 take a harder line against some of the UAW crap, including pattern bargaining. Although I think the Detroit cartel actually liked pattern bargaining at the time since they were an oligopoly. Caterpillar often took a harder line. Of course their business model is a little different than D3 - low volume high margin and minimal competition. Ironically, Deere has generally kept more cordial relations with the UAW and I think is frequently more profitable. GM is in a high volume business with a lot of competition with the expansion of transplants. If they locked out the union I suspect they'd have a lot of political pressure and problems with the NLRB. They'd also have dealers on their [non-permissible content removed] in a hurry and sympathy actions such as teamsters not allowing trucks to enter the plant would further complicate trying to use replacement workers.

    Where I think GM leadership is most open for criticism to me is product, quality and reliability, and customer service. You can bring Lutz in for some hype, but if the product still has shiny plastic interiors and lots of black dots after warranty it all becomes whitewash to many consumers. Ackerson talks about changing GM and the new product definitely has nicer interior. However, I'm not sure they are really changing customer service or fixing older product issues. Reading different blogs on lambda's for example seems to show many of the same issues like steering racks and drivetrain on 2010 and 2011's developing as the car ages that were issues with the original 07 and 08's. Not good. And consumers are still posting dissatisfaction with dealers and GM reps when they encounter issues.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I'm usually charitable, when it comes to management. I am hard on Union people because I worked union jobs my whole career. I saw first hand how it destroys incentive to be the best in the shop. Why work any harder than the other guy? As shop steward you get hardened toward both management and the union members. Management for their ignorance in handling problems. Workers for their entitled mentality. Unions can be beneficial for both workers and management. It solves the problem of dealing individually over pay issues. I don't think the UAW/D3 was ever a good relationship. It was formed in violence and never really got any better.

    The relationship today is somewhat as it was during WW2. I can see the UAW is just waiting to strike against the automakers. I don't believe the bankruptcy agreements were good or fair to the workers. Having two people do the same job with one making twice as much is just stupid. So which moron appointed by Obama came up with that?
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Did you read that article I posted on the GM bankruptcy. Seems like the plan was devised in house and with GM consultants. It was not an administration concoction.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I did read it all the way through. It was more about the NewCo keeping GM alive and letting the old take it in the shorts. I think the Union contracts being redone were during the BK, which was under Administration oversight. I am not sure you would ever get such a contract past the NLRB in a regular negotiations. That is saying one worker is not worth as much as another doing the same job. I have seen longevity pay. Nothing to the extent of the UAW contract currently in place. Getting a buck an hour more after 20 years is not like getting $30 vs $15. It proves to me that Union workers are just as greedy as any CEO. It is the typical I got mine screw the rest of you.

    How Two-Tier Union Contracts Became Labor's Undoing

    Establishing lower pay for new hires, these agreements have undermined union solidarity by opening a gulf between generations.

    http://www.thenation.com/article/172684/how-two-tier-union-contracts-became-labo- rs-undoing#

    http://www.ueunion.org/stwd_twotier.html
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    Having two people do the same job with one making twice as much is just stupid. So which moron appointed by Obama came up with that?

    Actually, the UAW agreed to the two-tier wage system back in 2007. AFAIK, the Senate wasn't involved in negotiating that contract.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Looks like you are right.

    Detroit adopted two-tier wages because the United Auto Workers wanted it that way.

    In the long-term the U.A.W. cannot sustain two-tiered wages. The clout of second-tier workers in union elections will grow with their numbers. Eventually union leadership will have to insist on uniform wages. Until then, some United Auto Workers will remain more equal than others.

    http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/09/18/can-detroit-sustain-its-two-tier- -pay/two-tier-wages-blame-the-uaw-cartel
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited November 2013
    A friend of ours teaches up in Anchorage and she's "tier four".

    Marchionne is winning out over the UAW:

    Fiat seen gaining upper hand with Chrysler valued at $10 billion (autonews.com)
  • roadburnerroadburner Member Posts: 17,355
    Marchionne is winning out over the UAW

    Hmmm... Well, if Sergio DOES stick it to the UAW good and hard I definitely will buy an Abarth!!!

    Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport; 2020 C43; 2021 Sahara 4xe 1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica Wife's: 2015 X1 xDrive28i Son's: 2009 328i; 2018 330i xDrive

  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    Hmmm... Well, if Sergio DOES stick it to the UAW good and hard I definitely will buy an Abarth!!!

    Actually the $10 billion valuation the bankers are discussing are more in line with what the health care trust said it was worth. At that value, the trust will get $4.1 billion. Marchionne had offered $1.75 billion.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    The link suggests that the UAW trust is seeking $6 billion. So $4 billion would be close to splitting the difference.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    GM's BK has reasons which extend far beyond union/management relations. We must consider:

    1. product
    2. too many dealers
    3. in-bred dysfunctional corporate culture
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    All three reasons are good enough they should have let GM DIE. It will only be a big disappointment when China takes it over and all the diehards have to decide if they want to keep buying.
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    The link suggests that the UAW trust is seeking $6 billion. So $4 billion would be close to splitting the difference.

    But it's a heck of a lot more than the less than $2 billion he was trying to pay.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Fiat may not have $4 billion in cash to offer the UAW? What will it mean to the American car buyer if Chrysler is no longer an American company? Will they treat Jeep Chrysler Dodge Ram the same as Toyota, VW and Honda? As foreign invaders? I cannot believe Buy American advocates are all pro UAW.
  • scwmcanscwmcan Member Posts: 399
    Working within the company now ( though admittedly in Canada) I can say that it appears that the culture and mindset has changed for the better. They admit their mistakes and are doing everything they can to provide the best products to their customers, had it all happened yet, no, but they all say how much has changed in the last 10 years ( with a lot of it in the last five). For example apparently the plant ( in my case power train) never heard about warranty problems before, now they hear about them as they happen, and can figure out what they can change to make sure they don't happen again. I know that my line ( the 3.6 v6) was very upset that a customer had to have the engine replaced in their car for the first time in Two years ( from our plant). They were very proud of their record and were not happy to see it go away. So at least here there is pride in their work.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    As someone once said in comparing other automakers and GM during the economic meltdown---"all ships at sea contend with icebergs, but only a few hit them".
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I must say of the 5 GM trucks I owned at least 2 maybe 3 were built in Canada. The Suburban came from Mexico. The only one I did not like and had issues with came from a UAW factory in the USA. It was a 1/2 ton Hybrid. The first 3 PU trucks were 3/4 ton 4x4s. I loved all three. I know at least two came from Canada. Don't remember where the 1988 GMC was built.

    It is good to hear the GM mentality has changed for the better. I don't expect GM to offer anything I will want. I will only buy diesels going forward. And likely midsized SUVs.
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    I don't think GM's current product issues are from the line or the UAW. I lay it on mediocre engineering and low bidder purchasing these days. Also, reading consumer blogs, why does the company still seem to have steering rack and Stabilitrack problems on 2010/11 Lambda's. That should have been fixed within a year or two of the vehicles coming out. Makes me think that Ackerson is more talk than actual action? This is a real issue, because previously burned GM customers like me who rent and like vehicles like this are frightened away when reading things like that.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I really wanted to like the Acadia when it came out. After talking to two owners that were getting 16 MPG mostly freeway driving, I passed and bought the larger Sequoia which gets about the same. Looking at those that own them on Fuelly they seem to average in the 18 range. Still not that good.

    I rented a lot of Chevy Trailblazer size SUVs in Hawaii. I really liked them and the Ford Explorers. That was when gas was under 2 bucks even in Hawaii. Around 05-06 I got stuck with an Equinox. It only confirmed my belief that GM was in the toilet. I hated that little SUV. As soon as a Trailblazer came in I traded. Not as bad as the Geo Metro they stuck me with many years ago, but close.
  • uplanderguyuplanderguy Member Posts: 16,094
    berri, is it you with the Toureg? I can't remember. For it being so completely non-North American, CR says it is very unreliable....if you buy into that. ;)
    2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
  • andre1969andre1969 Member Posts: 25,684
    I'll confess that I actually liked the original Equinox when it first came out. Until I got the chance to drive one, that is. This was at a local GM test drive event. Initially I was impressed at how much legroom there was, both front and rear. I don't know what the actual specs are, but to me it felt like it had more legroom than a Suburban! But, upon driving it, I learned to hate it fast. On a closed circuit, I didn't get a chance to experience how bad the 3.4 V-6 was, but I did get to see how bad it handled, and how vague the steering was. I had a friend with me, and even he could tell how unruly it felt. He actually hollered out "don't tip us over!"

    I don't know how their latest offerings are, but for awhile, it seems like GM tended to make its smaller car handle, and in general, just feel like much bigger cars than they are. And that's how this particular Equinox felt. I swear, the big Suburban I also test drove felt more agile and light on its feet!

    To be fair though, I also drove a Saturn Vue, and it handled much better than the Equinox. I think it was some high-performance model, Redline or something like that?

    I wonder if part of the problem with that Equinox was the electric steering? I also remember driving a Malibu Maxx that had it, and it felt pretty bad, too.

    I've heard that the kinks got worked out of electric steering after a year or two, though, and they figured out how to give it better road feel and such, so perhaps the newer models are better?
  • berriberri Member Posts: 10,165
    edited November 2013
    No - gagrice bought a TDI diesel one. I'm looking and was leaning GM Lambda, but all of the blogs indicating some still unresolved issues like steering racks, drivetrain and water leaks has me backing off a bit. These aren't minor inconveniences. Now I'm going to look a bit closer at the Explorer. But I think I'm probably smart to hold off awhile because there is a new Toyota Highlander coming out in a few months and the new Honda Pilot is supposed to be out this summer. My cars are in good shape right now, so no real hurry, just want to move up to something a little bigger and more comfortable for long highway trips. My wife and I put a lot of emphasis on reliability because of all the grief and hassles we've had in the past with some vehicles. It's frustrating and time consuming while the dealers try to fix the matters, even if it is under warranty. Of course, my Camry has shown me that no brand is immune, just have to assess the probabilities I guess. Just noticed out the window that my neighbor apparently dumped his recently bought Jeep Grand Cherokee for a Ford. The JGC and Durango are nice vehicles, but I just don't trust Chrysler products any more.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    berri, is it you with the Toureg? I can't remember. For it being so completely non-North American, CR says it is very unreliable....if you buy into that.

    That would probably be me. It is totally EU made for sure. I am not really too worried about the reliability. Unless it leaves me stranded like my Toyota Land Cruiser did many, many years ago. I have 4 years and 48,000 miles bumper to bumper, with free service including brakes. It also has 10 years 100,000 mile drive train warranty. service intervals are also stretched out beyond any gas models to 10k miles. Unless I need a new set of tires like I did on the USA made Sequoia after only 25k miles, I don't expect any expenses with the Touareg.

    The previous model Touareg did get a poor choice for buying used from CR.
    It was on the same list as the Ford Explorer, Dodge Journey, BMW X5, MB GL, Nissan Armada, PT Cruiser, Dodge Caravan, Chrysler T&C and Ford Super Duty PU trucks.

    Unsurprising was the fact that most on the list were US made. Including the MB GL and BMW X5.

    You can be sure I will post if the Touareg gives me any problems.
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    It's my suspicion that one of the top guys at GM was participating in Edmunds for a time.I believe that one of the posts said something to the effect that eventually we would know who had been the poster. The posts ended when the reorganization occurred.

    Does anyone have a sense that there was a such a person on the discussions.

    Imid, I noticed exactly the same thing. One day (perhaps a year ago), I googled that same name and found it in another forum. I don't quite remember how, but I traced the identity to what seemed to be a product manager at a certain division for a certain car. Of course that might not be accurate. But I did think it was interesting that as soon as the BK hit the posts ceased from that person.
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    As someone once said in comparing other automakers and GM during the economic meltdown---"all ships at sea contend with icebergs, but only a few hit them".

    The ones that don't have good navigation. :)
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Best to just let sinking ships sink. You can always make a movie about them showing how stupidity is usually the cause.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    not possible. It would have been a national disgrace. And foreign governments would have scratched their heads in wonder.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    The bailout was a very bad precendent to set. It will only encourage other companies to waste. It has happened several times since. Fisker and Solyndra are good examples. If GM had a plan to get out of the mess they made they could have presented it like Chrysler in 1980. Instead it was chaos with laws broken and money thrown around like confetti.
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    not possible. It would have been a national disgrace. And foreign governments would have scratched their heads in wonder.

    Well lately we're up to enough other things that are a national disgrace, that are causing foreign governmens to scratch their heads in wonder....
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Well lately we're up to enough other things that are a national disgrace, that are causing foreign governmens to scratch their heads in wonder..

    Now ain't that the truth? They have been scratching their collective heads since before the GM/C bailouts. The scratching has gotten a lot more intense since the bailout. All the GM bailout did is prolong the inevitable. It slowed the transfer of GM/C jobs to Mexico and elsewhere. And they are being transferred since the bailout. GM's largest selling and most profitable vehicles have lost 50% of their US content. That does not say much for our $27 billion tax dollars GONE FOREVER in the UAW Pension fund. To keep it in perspective that money does not compare to the $100 billion a year we are flushing down the Afghan toilet.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,150
    edited November 2013
    > that are causing foreign governmens to scratch their heads in wonder..

    But how did those unnamed other countries handle their auto industries? We know about Britain. But, what about Japan, Korea? How did/do they subsidize their car companies to help with exports? Didn't Korea "assist" Hyundai or Kia through a really bad time a decade or more ago? And didn't Japan subsidize their companies?

    I recall long ago meeting a Japanese exchange student. I asked about Japan's dumping of products at below cost into the US and other markets. I asked about Japan's lower than par exchange rate favoring those Japanese exporters. His response was that it was all okay because Japan did not have natural resources like the US did, i.e., coal, iron ore, usw.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    But how did those unnamed other countries handle their auto industries? We know about Britain. But, what about Japan, Korea? How did/do they subsidize their car companies to help with exports? Didn't Korea "assist" Hyundai or Kia through a really bad time a decade or more ago? And didn't Japan subsidize their companies?

    I'd like to see the magnitude, too. Did any other countries put anywhere near the amount into their industries than the US did for just GM? I ask, because I honestly don't know. I suspect not.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,150
    >I ask, because I honestly don't know. I suspect not.

    I don't know quantities either. Exclusive of the unfair valuation of the Japanese currency through the decades, I have read comments leading me to believe that Japan gave breaks to their local industry to main the jobs over a long period of time. I even recall a mention of the push for the Prius into the US having been helped.

    Maybe someone knows facts on this. I sure don't. I only putting together pieces of the elephant. :grin

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Maybe someone knows facts on this. I sure don't. I only putting together pieces of the elephant.

    I don't think we will ever know the facts on all our bailouts banks included. So it is not likely a foreign government would say. Of course there is always the argument that countries like Canada, Germany, Japan provide adequate pensions and Healthcare which saves business a lot of money. They don't tell you that Joe citizen pays a lot more in taxes than we do. That most don't have the same standard of living as our middle class once had.

    I am not as unhappy about loaning viable companies money during hard times. It is picking one group over another to subsidize their pension plan. Did the Feds fill up the Steel Workers pension plan? Have they ponied up the $200 billion California public employees pensions are underfunded? Using public money to buy votes is my gripe.
  • tlongtlong Member Posts: 5,194
    Given that it's impossibly difficult to quantify our versus their subsidies, that's one reason why I think we should just quit fixating on "they-bail-theirs-out-too" and just figure a way to be competitive on a world stage. Every country has its own culture and rules, and to think the US rules are somehow the most "fair" or "best" is pretty arrogant. It is what it is. We're smart, we can still compete. Many US companies do. There's no reason our auto industry can't as well.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    edited November 2013
    I don't think you fully appreciate the role of world governments in assisting their new tech industries. Governments all over the world assist fledgling industries to go from product to global markets. Sometimes they bet right, sometimes they bet wrong. The worst thing to do is nothing. Then you lose your edge in global competition.

    Losing 1/3 or 2/3 of our auto industry would have been one of the worst blunders since the days when we gave away our camera, videorecorder and steel industries. And this is to say nothing about how important GM is to national defense.

    It is incomprehensible how any legislator would allow the repetition of the grievous errors of the UK, in allowing their own auto and motorcycle industry to be destroyed.

    I think losing GM and Chrysler might have thrown the USA into severe Depression.

    Any dislike of the bailout is based on a political stance. Some folks don't like it because it worked. Similar to ACA. Once it's up and going, it will be very popular. So the idea is to attempt to destroy success before it can become a success.

    Certainly a type of political warfare as old as the hills.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Losing 1/3 or 2/3 of our auto industry would have been one of the worst blunders since the days when we gave away our camera, videorecorder and steel industries. And this is to say nothing about how important GM is to national defense.

    That is overstating the market share of GM. They were at about 20% when they faced bankruptcty. Major reason they were in trouble was building crap less than 20% of the buyers wanted. We in fact did lose Chrysler, they are now owned by Fiat. GM also gave up Hummer which I believe supplied the military. So we spent billions on GM to save what 18% of the market now. I have no doubt Ford and the others would have picked up the slack and been happy to do it. Face it the bailout was a flop. Delphi just closed their last US factory. They were the largest supplier of auto parts in the WORLD. You can push your political agenda. It is a loser. We have further killed the most important aspect of business in this country. Incentive to be the best. Why bother when your competitors are part of the government?
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited November 2013
    I don't think you fully appreciate the role of world governments in assisting their new tech industries.

    Even goes beyond that imo - creating and incubating the tech is big too. The net is the current prominent example, having replaced Tang. ;)
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    edited November 2013
    Well, for a "flop" it seems to be doing fine, thank you very much. Marketwatch shows 14 analysts recommending "buy" and nobody recommending "sell". You are in a distinctly minority position on this.

    Analysts Recommendations
    current 1 Month Ago 3 Months Ago

    BUY: 14 15 15

    OVERWEIGHT: 1 1 1

    HOLD 2 3 3

    UNDERWEIGHT: 0 0 0

    SELL: 0 0 0

    MEAN: BUY BUY BUY
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles