But, Couldn't one say that the root cause of the mess we are in, both from a financial and jobs standpoint is that investors were TOO hung up on trying to make money from money, as opposed to making money from products and services?
Well that can certainly be debated, but speculative bubbles are nothing new, they go all the way back to the Dutch tulip bubble/bust in the 1600's.
I have just filed a Chapter 7 for a client in the construction business...revenues in 2008, $2.2 million, 2009, $100,000, 2010, under $50K...has surrendered his own home worth $400K...
A recent client usually made about $100K yearly, is currently on food stamps and is making about $1200 monthly...
Both were hit hard when construction hit the wall, but were riding high when construction could do no wrong...
But they were probably selling homes to folks who had no-doc loans and could not truly afford their homes...
So, which evil is worse???...selling homes and making a profit on people who have no chance of paying for the house, or the builders themselves who built on speculation and now no one is buying anything???
Both situations are part of the cycle...any opinions from you folks as to which bad situation is morally worse???
I have just filed a Chapter 7 for a client in the construction business...revenues in 2008, $2.2 million, 2009, $100,000, 2010, under $50K...has surrendered his own home worth $400K...
Well obviously, if everyone would have bought GM vehicles and nothing made from China, this poor fellow would have never lost his home and business.
Both situations are part of the cycle...any opinions from you folks as to which bad situation is morally worse???
It's just unfortunate fallout from a boom and bust. Same type of thing happened after the tech boom, only this is worse because housing is hitting everyone to a varying degree.
For the Japanese, to be captured and made a prisoner of war was a disgrace. You were beneath contempt. That is the reason the Japanese treated Allied POWs so harshly.
I was at a Battle of the Bulge reenactment a couple years ago in eastern PA and was in a barracks with survivors of the Battle of the Bulge. One I befriended as he was an old car guy, told me that as bad as the Germans were (and they were bad), they had nothing on the Japanese for torture of prisoners.
War is hell, and nobody's perfect, but at least the U.S. did not start WWII.
An interesting thing to listen to, IMO anyway, is Theodore Van Kirk who if you google his name, spoke recently at length about his experience on the Enola Gay. He is still extremely sharp and listening to him made me realize even more that we can't apply today's logic to rewrite the history of what was going on then.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
My Grandpop was at the Battle of the Bulge. He told me a story where they passed through a town and saw all these dead soldiers with a red keystone patch on their shoulders. They were the Pennsylvania National Guard who were sent over there and got wiped out. My own existence could've been precluded at the Battle of the Bulge. My Grandpop was driving a truck that went over a landmine. Fortunately, the mine exploded prematurely under the engine instead under the cab as it should have. That fluke saved my Grandpop's life.
That's one thing the US can say, generally the best treatment of POWs - although not without criminal instances, but far better than the British or especially the French or Soviets. Funny now that the UK is submissive to the EU, which is in many ways a newborn German pan-European scheme with some French influence...the latter having pissed away their own empire at the behest of the suicidal Brits in the war, and now cozy up to the Germans as much as possible. History is a funny thing sometimes.
Modern logic doesn't apply to the situation of 65 years ago. Second guessing what happened only does so much and sometimes can maginalize the sacrifice of the times - as it already happened and can't be changed. That war was started 20 years before Poland was invaded. It's done, and lessons can be learned by both sides, especially about who to choose as allies.
So, one can't touch a German or Japanese car...USA has its own issues...French or Russians no way, the British even worse, the Swedes aided the [non-permissible content removed] until the going got tough - so none of those cars...certainly nothing from China...maybe a car from India is the answer
An interesting thing to listen to, IMO anyway, is Theodore Van Kirk who if you google his name, spoke recently at length about his experience on the Enola Gay. He is still extremely sharp and listening to him made me realize even more that we can't apply today's logic to rewrite the history of what was going on then.
That's a really good point.
Far too often people attempt to view historical acts in todays environment, instead of the environment when the event actually happened.
And, the atomic bombs dropped on Japan are excellent examples of events that many attempt to analyze using today's viewpoints on nuclear weaponry, instead of 1945, when 1000's upon 1000's were expected to die in the invasion of the Japanese islands.
Personally, its difficult to see how, if one used today's viewpoints, we could fight WWII again. We had more men killed in a single battle than the entire Iraq "action".
What would the the public response today to something like that?
So, which evil is worse???...selling homes and making a profit on people who have no chance of paying for the house, or the builders themselves who built on speculation and now no one is buying anything???
Both situations are part of the cycle...any opinions from you folks as to which bad situation is morally worse???
Definitely a gray area. There's certainly a lot of blame to be passed around.
One thing both groups shared.... A lack of vision, viewing the future as 30 days from now instead of 30 years from now.
The point, imho, is that even the GM trucks have quality problems resulting from their third rate execution up to Failure 2009. Ford failed as well but hung on by their bare freakin' knuckles without a taxpayer-funded bailout. Their truck is the top selling at the moment so the consumers are telling us it's the best.
Can GM's downsized focus change that? Even if it does, one year does not a top rated company make.
>Far too often people attempt to view historical acts in todays environment, instead of the environment when the event actually happened.
>And, the atomic bombs dropped on Japan are excellent examples of events that many attempt to analyze using today's viewpoints on nuclear weaponry, instead of 1945, when 1000's upon 1000's were expected to die in the invasion of the Japanese islands.
Exactly right.
Too many are allowed to try to revise the history to distort the events to support their view, today, of what the revisionists think should be the value system for battles now.
Their truck is the top selling at the moment so the consumers are telling us it's the best.
Not to nit-pick, but all that really says is that consumers prefer it the most. It would definitely be the best seller, but may/maybe not the best in quality.
Ford trucks have a long history of really strong sales, so I would personally be a bit reluctant to say that its the best. Of course, a lot of that depends upon how one defines "best".
You don't have to do a lot of work to find examples of products that were top-sellers, yet nowhere near the top as it related to quality.
That's why we finally learned it's the leader at the end of the day that causes the masses to self-destruct based on the path they choose. Saddam Hussein is a case in point as power and greed corrupts and eventually flows beyond borders for the appetite to control more and more.
To base a contemporary car buying decision on past conflicts retains the negative effects those leaders lived by.
To each his own. I'm easier on the Germans because it's easier to get around the bend!
1937 Studebaker Dictator coupe in the collection of the Studebaker National Museum.The Studebaker Dictator was an automobile produced by the Studebaker Corporation of South Bend, Indiana (USA) from 1927-1937. Model year 1928 was the first full year of Dictator production.
In the mid-1920s, Studebaker began renaming its vehicles. The model previously known as the Studebaker Standard Six became the Dictator during the 1927 model year; internally these models were designated model GE. The name was chosen to imply that Studebaker's model "dictated the standard" that other automobile makes would follow.
Dictators were the low-end price leader of the Studebaker marque, followed (in ascending order) by the Studebaker Commander and Studebaker President series. In 1929, Studebaker began offering an 8-cylinder engine for the Dictator series. Dictators were available in a full range of body-styles.
At the end of the 1935 model year, Studebaker suspended production of the Commander, marketing only its Dictator and President series in 1936.
Consequences of the Dictator name
In retrospect, the choice of the model name might seem unfortunate. Benjamin L. Alpers begins his history of American perceptions of dictators, Dictators, Democracy, and American Public Culture: Envisioning the Totalitarian Enemy, 1920s-1950s, with the introduction of the Studebaker Dictator: "There were, of course, some political problems connected with the name 'Dictator'. A number of the European monarchies to which Studebaker exported the car were wary of the moniker. Diplomatically, Studebaker marketed its Standard Six as the 'Director' in these countries. In the United States, apparently, the name appears initially to have caused no problems."
Studebaker had chosen the Dictator name at a moment when the only dictator that would have immediately come to an American mind was Benito Mussolini, who was widely admired in the US for the image of audacious boldness and strength that successfully sold cars, in spite of well-publicized fascist violence (Alpers 2003). However the rise of Adolf Hitler in Germany tainted the word dictator, and Studebaker abruptly and without fanfare (or surviving internal correspondence) discontinued the Dictator at the end of the 1936 model year, and replaced it in the 1937 model year and beyond with the Studebaker Commander moniker.
Went to buy a 2010 Jeep Patriot today. Saw my first one 2 days ago, loved the look. Did the research on it, decided to buy if test drive went OK and trying to do my part to “buy American”. Liked everything about it, height, power, size etc, except rear headrests. About 3 blocks into the test drive, I told the salesman I need to pull over and remove the back seat headrests because when I look over my right shoulder to merge, all I see is the 12 inch tall headrest that blocks about 2 feet of the back window and 3 feet of the side window and that blocking of my view is dangerous, (I have them off in my current vehicle as well). He said they are fixed, part of the seat and they can't be removed. This is a change in the 2010 Patriot and it was done for "safety" reasons. What !?. This is definitely not a safety feature for me. Putting the back seats down, is not the solution, it defeats the purpose of having back seats and in essence creates a truck bed which I do not want. This is another example of things being built for men and not taking into account the size and proportions of women, and why we need women engineers as well. The specifics in this case are: Men are short in the leg and long in the trunk; women are long in the leg and short in the trunk. A 6'2" man and 5'8" woman will both wear a 32" pant leg. Likewise when a 5' 8" man and woman are seated, the man will have a head height 4" taller than the woman.(Men also have longer arms than women of the same height, hence his ability to lounge the car seat back and still reach the radio whereas she has to sit upright) This extra seated height gives him the ability to see over that head rest where my eyes hit just about center. You would think design engineers would be aware of these differences, after all any tailor or seamstress knows this. Anyhow, frustration and disappointment aside, the question is, can anything be done about the headrests, like would it be possible to switch out the seats and put a back seat from a 2009 Patriot that has removable headrests into the 2010 Patriot instead ? Any ideas, anyone ?
It used to be that Chevy and GMC combined outsold the F150. Not sure about now and too lazy to look up (I'm supposed to be working). Ford had bragging rights because they build all their trucks under one brand name.
CR picked the Avalanche best full-size truck in '09, prior to the Silverado for '10.
Ford is definitely benefitting image-wise from not taking TARP money, but look at Edwards' forums and their late-model stuff is not immune from problems. Not taking TARP money and the type of product built are not necessarily related. GM's warranty is better, I do know that.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
As a Studebaker buff (although generally not pre-war), I am aware that that name became a real albatross for Studebaker!
That article mentions the Studebaker National Museum, of which we are members. It's a beautiful, recent facility, and a great place to show off the history of my favorite marque.
It's funny...no one in my family would have been caught dead in a Studebaker, but I'm old enough to remember that they were neatly 'different'. I find I like the '60's models for a lot of the same reasons that I liked the downsized '77 Caprice Classic a lot...clean, simple styling, roomy interior, practical.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
GM also noted that its factory footprint is shifting to emerging nations. Today, 43 percent of GM's vehicles are built in low-cost countries, where GM pays workers less than $15 an hour for wages and benefits combined. Those countries include China and Mexico.
An additional 17 percent of GM vehicles are built in so-called medium-cost countries, such as South Korea and Brazil. Wages and benefits combined for those GM workers total between $15 and $30 an hour.
Well, GM is a worldwide company and was long before the bankruptcy. They build cars for world markets, even though they are an American corporation with the highest-level management people and major R&D done here. There are not any Brazilian cars sold in the U.S. that are GM models. The Aveo is built in Korea and is marketed as a captive import. The next Aveo is built in Michigan.
It's great to cheer for the home team. Ever hear of "Stockholm Syndrome"?
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
FWIW...I remember reading in the USA Today (I think it was last week) that many US companies were re-thinking their moves to 3rd world countries and bringing some operations back on-shore, with many finding that the low-cost manufacturing savings were being offset by longer delivery times and quality/fitment/translation issues.
Personally, I'd like to see that trend continue, especially for items that don't require a lot of environmental pollution to be manufactured. As for those items, if some country wants to poison its own land for a few bucks, well, that's their decision.
To be fair, I would add that it makes sense to build your product (when its the size & weight of an auto) primarily where you sell it. And, if the culture is significantly different, designing it there might also make sense.
After all, isn't that what many Japanese automakers figured out and now do? The Koreans?
Not to beat a dead horse, but I personally have been invited to the BMW plant near where I live (yes, I also own BMW's) to participate in product design changes/suggestions/evaluations. The most recent visit was in relation to vehicle A/C design, as the requirements in the southern US are far different than the ones in Bavaria.
Its always fun, because while you are there, you get to drive some really fast cars on BMW's closed test track, where you can "drive it like you stole it!".
This is another example of things being built for men and not taking into account the size and proportions of women, and why we need women engineers as well.
The new Z4 model interior was designed by women. I guess that's why the cup holders are inside the center console (no lie).
I'm just poking fun at you, but in all seriousness, you do have a valid point about some of the new "safer" design implementations.
My wife has a 2005 MINI convertible, and you practically need a periscope to see out the back when the top is up, due to the roll-bar being integral to the rear seats.They finally designed a way to have it safely retracted and improve the visibility around 2009, but in her car, I would not consider having it unless it had the backup sensor/alarm system option (hers does have it).
As for your particular case, I don't know the answer about seat swapping. Sorry, but good luck!
The point, imho, is that even the GM trucks have quality problems resulting from their third rate execution up to Failure 2009. Ford failed as well but hung on by their bare freakin' knuckles without a taxpayer-funded bailout. Their truck is the top selling at the moment so the consumers are telling us it's the best.
At least Ford Chevy and Dodge pickups don't have don't have their frames rust out from under them within 10 years like Toyotas
Don't you just love it when you try to place a call in the evening and you get, in broken English, "Good morning, Mr. Lemko, my name is...Billy. How may I help you?" Umm, it's not morning here, and I'm sure your name isn't Billy!
You hardly have to go out of the US for that. I once got a gal from Wisconsin or Minnesota or somewhere. I would have had better luck understanding Billy from Bangalore.
My solution is to ask the call center folk where they are located. That's usually followed by a long pause, then they will tell me. If they are really difficult to understand, I ask to speak to someone that's easier for me to understand their English. I tell them I have hearing trouble.
Often I wait 15 minutes and call back and hope to looped to a different call center.
Cincinnati Bell is really good. Their phone centers are all English that is easy to understand. Their internet centers about half the time end up in other countries. Other tiimes I've gotten someone in Florida and other areas including Cincinnati.
If you live in or near Las Vegas and recently bought, or considered buying, a used car and would be willing to speak to a reporter about your experience, please contact pr@edmunds.com by September 15, 2010.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
For what it's worth, CR recommends the Chevy Silverado among full-size trucks, replacing the Avalanche from the year before. Any good news about GM seems unpopular here though.
Well we need to admit that in the eyes of many (too many) consumers, GM is a highly damaged brand. IMHO they made a big mistake in not renaming the company after BK. They have not made enough of a break with the past. Hyundai is changing big time and so is Ford. I don't see as much from GM - more like incremental improvements. And their marketing is still overhyped while their products are still trying to catch up. They still have a lot of junkers in their lineup.
I'm not seeing it. 222 great reviews for the 2010 Equinox vs. 2 or 3 GM haters constantly espousing the same line on here. How come those 222 reviewers are not feeling the need to admit?
My neighbor has just had to do his first repair to his 2002 Sub. He failed to run in 3rd gear while towing for 1000s of miles and clogged his cat. conv. by bogging engine in high gear. I call it a user error, not any fault of GM's. The Sub does have the Mitsu coils though. Maybe not enough spark to sufficiently burn all the fuel?
GM sales of 4 core brands up 25% over same month last year.
My neighbor has just had to do his first repair to his 2002 Sub. He failed to run in 3rd gear while towing for 1000s of miles and clogged his cat. conv. by bogging engine in high gear.
I've never done any towing, so I don't know...but, shouldn't a transmission be "smart" enough that it would downshift on its own, if it was under enough load? Now a lot of those old 3-speed automatics won't kick down to second once you get over 65 mph or so, but every 4-speed I've driven would at least kick down to third pretty willingly, when needed in situations such as passing, or maintaining speed on a steep grade.
I can't believe towing in o/d would cause a cat to die on it's own. I towed thousands of miles with my Suburban and never had a cat go, trans yes. But, a Suburban just won't tow much in o/d, it will kick down to 3rd more than it will stay in o/d if towing anything more than a few thousand lbs and on any type of hill. Plus, no where in the manual did it state not to tow in o/d. It just said to use tow haul mode if towing or hauling heavy loads. With tow haul mode, IIRC, my Suburban wouldn't upshift to o/d unless going over 60mph. Towing my camper it had a hard enough time maintaining speed in 3rd, no way would it stay in o/d towing a 25' travel trailer. It could tow my boat in o/d on flat land and no head wind if I was going over 60mph. But it would never allow the engine to lug, it would downshift a lot, so 90% of the time, if I was towing, I used 3rd.
Ha Ha! Even the Hyundai Marketing Chief new to GM is turning tail on GM.
"General Motors is not a brand," said the 50-year-old Ewanick, on the job here now for three eventful months, in an interview with AutoObserver.
"Is (Procter & Gamble) a brand?" he asks and, without waiting for an answer that might be contrary, adds: "No, it's not a brand. I'm pushing this hard because I don't want to go back to the idea of selling GM
It sure ain't a brand...just a failed company that forgot to leave the failed name in the new organization!
GM market share down over 100% from the precipice....
AND WHERE DID THE PROFITS GO?????????????? Korea or Atlanta etc
Actually, the lion's share of the car's cost stays in the USA, much of it in the area whare the vehicle is manufactured, in the form of wages paid, parts purchased and taxes paid. In addition, it wouldn't be unusual for the "profits" to remain in $$$ and placed in American investments, as the dollar is weak against the Euro and some other currencies at this time.
Like almost every other country, the Koreans invest in the USA as well.
>the lion's share of the car's cost stays in the USA, much of it in the area whare the vehicle is manufactured, in the form of wages paid, parts purchased and taxes paid.
Do you have a data link for that percentage and information as to exactly how much goes for each of these costs?
Do you have a data link for that percentage and information as to exactly how much goes for each of these costs?
No, I'm just using common sense. I doubt exact data exist, simply because supplier information is constantly changing, and it would be different for each manufacturer.
I know of no vehicle with a 50% or greater profit margin. And, there's no question the wages paid and all benefits derived from those wages remain in the US (other than possible investments made by those wage earners).
Coupled with the local parts suppliers, and its pretty obvious the lion's share of the cost of a car remains in the country of manufacture, unless a concerted effort is made to truck parts in from outside the country of manufacture.
I'm not aware of any foreign manufacturer (auto) in the US that does that.
I agree, however, that it would be interesting to see the actual numbers.
I agree, however, that it would be interesting to see the actual numbers.
Same here, we all want the same thing, and that's to spend our hard earned dollars in a way that preserves the most jobs in the USA, not Mexico or Canada, but here in the good ole USofA.
... that's to spend our hard earned dollars in a way that preserves the most jobs in the USA, not Mexico or Canada, but here in the good ole USofA.
If we look at the US as one large community, well...who wouldn't want that?
What I often find ironic is that some posters claim the loss of US auto manufacturing jobs to locations overseas is significant and dramatic (I agree with that part, anyway), but then turn around and make the claim (or at a minimum, imply) that auto manufacturing jobs provided domestically (in the US) by foreign brands make an insignificant contribution to the local as well as US economy.
Sorry, but it can't be both...its either one or the other.
Of course, some will claim the US brands pay better, but I think most would agree that the Big-3 pretty much showed the flaws and failures in pursuing that particular business model.
No doubt, it can be a complex issue. However, I don't think I have ever read of a single community that has had a foreign auto brand locate an assembly plant in its vicinity make negative statements about the plant's economic impact on the local (and state) community.
Yes, some individuals complain about the less-than-UAW wages paid as well as possible incentives, but that's it.
Certainly, there isn't any shortage of localities that wouldn't kill to get such a facility.
"......Yes, some individuals complain about the less-than-UAW wages paid as well as possible incentives, but that's it.
Certainly, there isn't any shortage of localities that wouldn't kill to get such a facility."
See, my theory is if they paid UAW wages and had to deal with UAW contracts (thus putting all companies on a level playing field) then they wouldn't want to be here.
HOWEVER, I do believe that the buying public would have them over a barrel, as I believe that a major reason why these imported nameplates sell so well nowadays is that they build them HERE, thus alleviating any guilt that a prospective buyer would have about not "Buying American". Close up shop now, and you create a firestorm of controversy over shipping these jobs away.
Yes, the UAW would bear the brunt of the criticism for "forcing" these jobs back overseas, but the unasked question would be how much would they save shipping the jobs back home vs. the number of sales they would lose due to the "guilt factor" of unbiased shoppers wanting to buy "American"
Also, while it is understood that there are differences in the standard of living in this country, which would allow for lower wages in one state and require higher wages in another, the USA CAN'T be one large community if you have 50 states cutting one another's throats to steal jobs from one another. If state A offers incentives for a company to move 500 jobs there from state B, then all you have managed to do is take 500 people OFF unemployment in state A and put 500 people ON it in state B.
See, my theory is if they paid UAW wages and had to deal with UAW contracts (thus putting all companies on a level playing field) then they wouldn't want to be here.
It's my understanding that the transplants do pay UAW wages but don't submit to UAW work rules. That makes sense to me. After all, weren't UAW work rules a significant factor in the decline of the D3? Why should any company, foreign or domestic, hamstring itself with those rules? In almost any industry that you'd care to discuss, workforce flexibility is a key to success. And you can't have that if you're strangling yourself with archaic work rules.
If state A offers incentives for a company to move 500 jobs there from state B, then all you have managed to do is take 500 people OFF unemployment in state A and put 500 people ON it in state B.
You're right, but this was a fact of life long before the transplants came along. I know that at least some states were doing this as far back as the mid-1950s, & for all I know it was an old, established practice even then. I don't see any way to put an end to it.
Comments
Well that can certainly be debated, but speculative bubbles are nothing new, they go all the way back to the Dutch tulip bubble/bust in the 1600's.
A recent client usually made about $100K yearly, is currently on food stamps and is making about $1200 monthly...
Both were hit hard when construction hit the wall, but were riding high when construction could do no wrong...
But they were probably selling homes to folks who had no-doc loans and could not truly afford their homes...
So, which evil is worse???...selling homes and making a profit on people who have no chance of paying for the house, or the builders themselves who built on speculation and now no one is buying anything???
Both situations are part of the cycle...any opinions from you folks as to which bad situation is morally worse???
Well obviously, if everyone would have bought GM vehicles and nothing made from China, this poor fellow would have never lost his home and business.
Both situations are part of the cycle...any opinions from you folks as to which bad situation is morally worse???
It's just unfortunate fallout from a boom and bust. Same type of thing happened after the tech boom, only this is worse because housing is hitting everyone to a varying degree.
War is hell, and nobody's perfect, but at least the U.S. did not start WWII.
An interesting thing to listen to, IMO anyway, is Theodore Van Kirk who if you google his name, spoke recently at length about his experience on the Enola Gay. He is still extremely sharp and listening to him made me realize even more that we can't apply today's logic to rewrite the history of what was going on then.
Modern logic doesn't apply to the situation of 65 years ago. Second guessing what happened only does so much and sometimes can maginalize the sacrifice of the times - as it already happened and can't be changed. That war was started 20 years before Poland was invaded. It's done, and lessons can be learned by both sides, especially about who to choose as allies.
So, one can't touch a German or Japanese car...USA has its own issues...French or Russians no way, the British even worse, the Swedes aided the [non-permissible content removed] until the going got tough - so none of those cars...certainly nothing from China...maybe a car from India is the answer
I guess I should start raising horses;)
That's a really good point.
Far too often people attempt to view historical acts in todays environment, instead of the environment when the event actually happened.
And, the atomic bombs dropped on Japan are excellent examples of events that many attempt to analyze using today's viewpoints on nuclear weaponry, instead of 1945, when 1000's upon 1000's were expected to die in the invasion of the Japanese islands.
Personally, its difficult to see how, if one used today's viewpoints, we could fight WWII again. We had more men killed in a single battle than the entire Iraq "action".
What would the the public response today to something like that?
Both situations are part of the cycle...any opinions from you folks as to which bad situation is morally worse???
Definitely a gray area. There's certainly a lot of blame to be passed around.
One thing both groups shared.... A lack of vision, viewing the future as 30 days from now instead of 30 years from now.
Can GM's downsized focus change that? Even if it does, one year does not a top rated company make.
Like it or not.
Regards,
OW
>And, the atomic bombs dropped on Japan are excellent examples of events that many attempt to analyze using today's viewpoints on nuclear weaponry, instead of 1945, when 1000's upon 1000's were expected to die in the invasion of the Japanese islands.
Exactly right.
Too many are allowed to try to revise the history to distort the events to support their view, today, of what the revisionists think should be the value system for battles now.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Not to nit-pick, but all that really says is that consumers prefer it the most. It would definitely be the best seller, but may/maybe not the best in quality.
Ford trucks have a long history of really strong sales, so I would personally be a bit reluctant to say that its the best. Of course, a lot of that depends upon how one defines "best".
You don't have to do a lot of work to find examples of products that were top-sellers, yet nowhere near the top as it related to quality.
To base a contemporary car buying decision on past conflicts retains the negative effects those leaders lived by.
To each his own. I'm easier on the Germans because it's easier to get around the bend!
Regards,
OW
From...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studebaker_Dictator
Studebaker Dictator 4-Door Sedan 1937
1937 Studebaker Dictator coupe in the collection of the Studebaker National Museum.The Studebaker Dictator was an automobile produced by the Studebaker Corporation of South Bend, Indiana (USA) from 1927-1937. Model year 1928 was the first full year of Dictator production.
In the mid-1920s, Studebaker began renaming its vehicles. The model previously known as the Studebaker Standard Six became the Dictator during the 1927 model year; internally these models were designated model GE. The name was chosen to imply that Studebaker's model "dictated the standard" that other automobile makes would follow.
Dictators were the low-end price leader of the Studebaker marque, followed (in ascending order) by the Studebaker Commander and Studebaker President series. In 1929, Studebaker began offering an 8-cylinder engine for the Dictator series. Dictators were available in a full range of body-styles.
At the end of the 1935 model year, Studebaker suspended production of the Commander, marketing only its Dictator and President series in 1936.
Consequences of the Dictator name
In retrospect, the choice of the model name might seem unfortunate. Benjamin L. Alpers begins his history of American perceptions of dictators, Dictators, Democracy, and American Public Culture: Envisioning the Totalitarian Enemy, 1920s-1950s, with the introduction of the Studebaker Dictator: "There were, of course, some political problems connected with the name 'Dictator'. A number of the European monarchies to which Studebaker exported the car were wary of the moniker. Diplomatically, Studebaker marketed its Standard Six as the 'Director' in these countries. In the United States, apparently, the name appears initially to have caused no problems."
Studebaker had chosen the Dictator name at a moment when the only dictator that would have immediately come to an American mind was Benito Mussolini, who was widely admired in the US for the image of audacious boldness and strength that successfully sold cars, in spite of well-publicized fascist violence (Alpers 2003). However the rise of Adolf Hitler in Germany tainted the word dictator, and Studebaker abruptly and without fanfare (or surviving internal correspondence) discontinued the Dictator at the end of the 1936 model year, and replaced it in the 1937 model year and beyond with the Studebaker Commander moniker.
Timing is everything!
OK, The F-Series is the best seller on preference....45% more than Silverado at the moment.
Must be that C-11 thing or something else besides a quality decision in that preference.
Regards,
OW
CR picked the Avalanche best full-size truck in '09, prior to the Silverado for '10.
Ford is definitely benefitting image-wise from not taking TARP money, but look at Edwards' forums and their late-model stuff is not immune from problems. Not taking TARP money and the type of product built are not necessarily related. GM's warranty is better, I do know that.
As a Studebaker buff (although generally not pre-war), I am aware that that name became a real albatross for Studebaker!
That article mentions the Studebaker National Museum, of which we are members. It's a beautiful, recent facility, and a great place to show off the history of my favorite marque.
It's funny...no one in my family would have been caught dead in a Studebaker, but I'm old enough to remember that they were neatly 'different'. I find I like the '60's models for a lot of the same reasons that I liked the downsized '77 Caprice Classic a lot...clean, simple styling, roomy interior, practical.
GM also noted that its factory footprint is shifting to emerging nations. Today, 43 percent of GM's vehicles are built in low-cost countries, where GM pays workers less than $15 an hour for wages and benefits combined. Those countries include China and Mexico.
An additional 17 percent of GM vehicles are built in so-called medium-cost countries, such as South Korea and Brazil. Wages and benefits combined for those GM workers total between $15 and $30 an hour.
Go America... :sick:
It's great to cheer for the home team. Ever hear of "Stockholm Syndrome"?
Personally, I'd like to see that trend continue, especially for items that don't require a lot of environmental pollution to be manufactured. As for those items, if some country wants to poison its own land for a few bucks, well, that's their decision.
After all, isn't that what many Japanese automakers figured out and now do? The Koreans?
Not to beat a dead horse, but I personally have been invited to the BMW plant near where I live (yes, I also own BMW's) to participate in product design changes/suggestions/evaluations. The most recent visit was in relation to vehicle A/C design, as the requirements in the southern US are far different than the ones in Bavaria.
Its always fun, because while you are there, you get to drive some really fast cars on BMW's closed test track, where you can "drive it like you stole it!".
The new Z4 model interior was designed by women. I guess that's why the cup holders are inside the center console (no lie).
I'm just poking fun at you, but in all seriousness, you do have a valid point about some of the new "safer" design implementations.
My wife has a 2005 MINI convertible, and you practically need a periscope to see out the back when the top is up, due to the roll-bar being integral to the rear seats.They finally designed a way to have it safely retracted and improve the visibility around 2009, but in her car, I would not consider having it unless it had the backup sensor/alarm system option (hers does have it).
As for your particular case, I don't know the answer about seat swapping. Sorry, but good luck!
At least Ford Chevy and Dodge pickups don't have don't have their frames rust out from under them within 10 years like Toyotas
Often I wait 15 minutes and call back and hope to looped to a different call center.
Cincinnati Bell is really good. Their phone centers are all English that is easy to understand. Their internet centers about half the time end up in other countries. Other tiimes I've gotten someone in Florida and other areas including Cincinnati.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
As Unemployed Lose Benefits More Seek Welfare Benefits
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
Well we need to admit that in the eyes of many (too many) consumers, GM is a highly damaged brand. IMHO they made a big mistake in not renaming the company after BK. They have not made enough of a break with the past. Hyundai is changing big time and so is Ford. I don't see as much from GM - more like incremental improvements. And their marketing is still overhyped while their products are still trying to catch up. They still have a lot of junkers in their lineup.
I'm not seeing it. 222 great reviews for the 2010 Equinox vs. 2 or 3 GM haters constantly espousing the same line on here. How come those 222 reviewers are not feeling the need to admit?
My neighbor has just had to do his first repair to his 2002 Sub. He failed to run in 3rd gear while towing for 1000s of miles and clogged his cat. conv. by bogging engine in high gear. I call it a user error, not any fault of GM's. The Sub does have the Mitsu coils though. Maybe not enough spark to sufficiently burn all the fuel?
GM sales of 4 core brands up 25% over same month last year.
I've never done any towing, so I don't know...but, shouldn't a transmission be "smart" enough that it would downshift on its own, if it was under enough load? Now a lot of those old 3-speed automatics won't kick down to second once you get over 65 mph or so, but every 4-speed I've driven would at least kick down to third pretty willingly, when needed in situations such as passing, or maintaining speed on a steep grade.
"General Motors is not a brand," said the 50-year-old Ewanick, on the job here now for three eventful months, in an interview with AutoObserver.
"Is (Procter & Gamble) a brand?" he asks and, without waiting for an answer that might be contrary, adds: "No, it's not a brand. I'm pushing this hard because I don't want to go back to the idea of selling GM
It sure ain't a brand...just a failed company that forgot to leave the failed name in the new organization!
GM market share down over 100% from the precipice....
Regards,
OW
Actually, the lion's share of the car's cost stays in the USA, much of it in the area whare the vehicle is manufactured, in the form of wages paid, parts purchased and taxes paid. In addition, it wouldn't be unusual for the "profits" to remain in $$$ and placed in American investments, as the dollar is weak against the Euro and some other currencies at this time.
Like almost every other country, the Koreans invest in the USA as well.
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/08/31/report-nhtsa-investigating-steering-issues-on- -2011-hyundai-sona/
Do you have a data link for that percentage and information as to exactly how much goes for each of these costs?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
No, I'm just using common sense. I doubt exact data exist, simply because supplier information is constantly changing, and it would be different for each manufacturer.
I know of no vehicle with a 50% or greater profit margin. And, there's no question the wages paid and all benefits derived from those wages remain in the US (other than possible investments made by those wage earners).
Coupled with the local parts suppliers, and its pretty obvious the lion's share of the cost of a car remains in the country of manufacture, unless a concerted effort is made to truck parts in from outside the country of manufacture.
I'm not aware of any foreign manufacturer (auto) in the US that does that.
I agree, however, that it would be interesting to see the actual numbers.
Same here, we all want the same thing, and that's to spend our hard earned dollars in a way that preserves the most jobs in the USA, not Mexico or Canada, but here in the good ole USofA.
that's to spend our hard earned dollars in a way that preserves the most jobs in the USA, not Mexico or Canada, but here in the good ole USofA.
If we look at the US as one large community, well...who wouldn't want that?
What I often find ironic is that some posters claim the loss of US auto manufacturing jobs to locations overseas is significant and dramatic (I agree with that part, anyway), but then turn around and make the claim (or at a minimum, imply) that auto manufacturing jobs provided domestically (in the US) by foreign brands make an insignificant contribution to the local as well as US economy.
Sorry, but it can't be both...its either one or the other.
Of course, some will claim the US brands pay better, but I think most would agree that the Big-3 pretty much showed the flaws and failures in pursuing that particular business model.
No doubt, it can be a complex issue. However, I don't think I have ever read of a single community that has had a foreign auto brand locate an assembly plant in its vicinity make negative statements about the plant's economic impact on the local (and state) community.
Yes, some individuals complain about the less-than-UAW wages paid as well as possible incentives, but that's it.
Certainly, there isn't any shortage of localities that wouldn't kill to get such a facility.
Certainly, there isn't any shortage of localities that wouldn't kill to get such a facility."
See, my theory is if they paid UAW wages and had to deal with UAW contracts (thus putting all companies on a level playing field) then they wouldn't want to be here.
HOWEVER, I do believe that the buying public would have them over a barrel, as I believe that a major reason why these imported nameplates sell so well nowadays is that they build them HERE, thus alleviating any guilt that a prospective buyer would have about not "Buying American". Close up shop now, and you create a firestorm of controversy over shipping these jobs away.
Yes, the UAW would bear the brunt of the criticism for "forcing" these jobs back overseas, but the unasked question would be how much would they save shipping the jobs back home vs. the number of sales they would lose due to the "guilt factor" of unbiased shoppers wanting to buy "American"
Also, while it is understood that there are differences in the standard of living in this country, which would allow for lower wages in one state and require higher wages in another, the USA CAN'T be one large community if you have 50 states cutting one another's throats to steal jobs from one another. If state A offers incentives for a company to move 500 jobs there from state B, then all you have managed to do is take 500 people OFF unemployment in state A and put 500 people ON it in state B.
It's my understanding that the transplants do pay UAW wages but don't submit to UAW work rules. That makes sense to me. After all, weren't UAW work rules a significant factor in the decline of the D3? Why should any company, foreign or domestic, hamstring itself with those rules? In almost any industry that you'd care to discuss, workforce flexibility is a key to success. And you can't have that if you're strangling yourself with archaic work rules.
If state A offers incentives for a company to move 500 jobs there from state B, then all you have managed to do is take 500 people OFF unemployment in state A and put 500 people ON it in state B.
You're right, but this was a fact of life long before the transplants came along. I know that at least some states were doing this as far back as the mid-1950s, & for all I know it was an old, established practice even then. I don't see any way to put an end to it.