"The figures are based upon the average number of problems per one hundred vehicles for each brand. Market share does nothing to affect this statistic."
???
Say Brand 'X' sells 10,000 cars/year. They have an dependability of 50 problems /100 cars. Their rating is 50.
Brand 'Y' sells 10,000,000 cars/year. They have a dependability rating of 100 problems /100 cars. Their rating is 100.
The 'average' nationwide rating is NOT (50+100)/2 = 75.
Well, it appears that you're right. In reading the JD Power info, I figured that it wasn't a weighted average, but in crunching the numbers myself, I see that you are most likely correct -- the average must be weighted.
FYI, if you add the total PPH (9,396), and divide by the number of manufacturers on the list (37), you get a non-weighted industry average of 254. Since that doesn't match JD Power's industry average of 237, it's a fair guess that the figure should be weighted.
imidazol97: But Rockylee, didn't you read the earlier posts that currency manipulation by China and Japan doesn't really occur?
The rebuttal to the "currency manipulation" accusations has been effectively covered by other posters. Plus, as I mentioned in regard to the Cobalt, it costs no more to design a beautiful car than it does to design an ugly one. So even if the Japanese are manipulating their currency to gain an unfair advantage, that is still no excuse for the Cobalt looking like a warmed-over Cavalier.
imidazol97: Lou Dobbs must be wrong.
Just because someone is quoted regularly by the media doesn't necessarily mean that he is correct. Just look at Joan Claybrook's statements on the effects of raising speed limits on limited access highways as proof of that.
However it still doesn't off-set the catastrophic affects it's having on the Big 3
First of all its Big 2, not Big 3. Chrysler is not am American company. So I just don't see why you insist on counting Chrysler. The other thing is that Catastrophic effects its having on Big 2 is cause by UAW, not Japanesse. When you have people sitting on their [non-permissible content removed] in job banks and getting paid a full wage, you expect to have "Catastrophic" effects on the company. Where do you think the money to pay these people comes from? Don't you think that this money would not be better spent on development of better cars? I hope you do realize that money is a finite resource.
I dare you to show me any other industry in USA which continues to pay their laid off workers to sit on their [non-permissible content removed] and do nothing for years on end. Its the unions which caused the downfall of American steel industry and now its the same arrogant unions which are causing the fall of American auto industry.
If UAW members working for Ford and GM really care about survival of Ford and GM, then they should kick the union out of the plants. That would be a big first step towards recovery of the American auto industry.
Lets not blame the Germans and Japanies and Koreans for failures of the organized labor in the auto industry. Its the over the top contracts like retiring after 30 years and full medical insurance, and on and on and on. Its the kind of benefits that other hard working Americans do not have.
Why do you think that UAW members are entitled to better benefits then the customers who purchase your products. Or do you expect that American consumers are stupid enogth to support your job banks. Because its the American consumer who ultimately pays the price for your nice union perks.
There are 5 major minivan models being built in the US for the US market all by US workers.
Two are considered to be at the pinnacle as #1 and #2; One is very good and is in fact the industry leader; Two are so horrible that no one is buying them and the factories making them are going to be shut.
Very good point. Honda and Toyota make very good minivans. Even the new Kia Sedona is heads about the crap that Ford and GM make. Sometimes its just sad to see how bad and out of date the products from GM and Ford are. But what do you expect. Ford Freestar is only a little different from the Windstar that was introduced in 1995. It has the same OHV engine, the same 4-speed transmission and it is still based on the Taurus frame. The style of GM minivans was inspired by a Platypus (yes the strange Beaver with a Duck's head).
If the company does not want to invest the money in the product, it should not expect people to buy it. How many people here would buy an American made 133MHZ Pentium based computer now. That is what the domestic industry is trying to sell to us with their lack of investment in the products. And we, the American consumers, are just not that stupid. Name changes from Windstar to Freestar is not enogth. New grills for the Saturn minivan changes nothing.
"This segment that most wants reliability is generally better served with the "foreign" cars (including those "foreign" makes made in the US.)"
First: Highly speculative & opinionated.
Second: So in addition to Toyota and Honda this "segment" as you call it, is also better served by Mazda, Hyundia, Nissan, Kia and the like who all scored under indusrty average and would appear to be un-reliable,or at least not as reliable as Ford, Chevy, Dodge, etc. based on the JD Power results ?
All of these company's are also "foreign" as you describe above, and many of them are made right here in the U.S.
I know you'll clarify your PoV with logic based on facts ?
>Joan Claybrook's statements on the effects of raising speed limits on limited access highways
Hehehe. That topic got closed. We can't discuss it anymore.
>Cobalt looking like a warmed-over Cavalier.
I see what you mean because of size similarity between the two. I don't see the same shape. And the underpinnings are better from reviews. I haven't driven one. But I agree that it could have been more dramatic. GM needed a more dramatic car to make an impression. The Lucerne is a bigger change in its category than the Cobalt is.
I still think the problem is the high legacy costs of unions, total healthcare, retirement for Matilda and all her relatives being covered. GM just doesn't put in the emergency funds to make drastic change--and that's poor management and overpaid management. It's almost as bad as our government in DC.
>Lou Dobbs must be wrong.
That's a possibility. Even posters on Edmunds sometimes are wrong. I'm made more money doing the opposite of guru's suggestions on the markets than I've missed out on by not following certain people's advice. Sort of like the Motley Fools' advice.
How do you believe Buick and Cadillac rate much better than average. Especially consider that Buick's average includes Rendezvous which has probably average record on problems.
I guess I've bought the car that has a better rating than most on problems/reliability. The dealer factor in all those cars also affects the reliability the customer perceives in the car; a good dealer makes the difference.
I agree with your VW assessment. Friend has Jetta. Great to drive, but problems, problems, problems. When I drove their Jetta I thought I had my Mustang with supersticky tires and lots of fun in driving it back. I wished I had a 2nd car like it because of how it felt. But not after the problems started.
Of course, it gets better (or worse) than this. Because while the Cobalt, Focus and Impala all make it into the Top 10, this is largely due to sales to fleet buyers, such as rental car agencies, that buy a large proportion of Big 2.5 cars while buying few from the "imports."
According to Automotive News, 12% of total US car sales go to the rental agencies, which get the vast majority of their cars from the Big 2.5. (Anyone here who has spent much time behind the wheel of a lot of rental cars would not be surprised by this fact.) When you factor out fleet sales and look at what John Q. Public wants, he has a preference for Toyota:
___________________
January’s retail king: Toyota Automotive News / February 13, 2006 - 6:00 am
Chevrolet and Ford duke it out every year for the title of “America’s best-selling brand.” And in January the winner was . . . Toyota.
How does that figure? By looking at sales to individuals rather than total sales.
Total sales include low-profit sales to daily-rental and corporate fleets. A different — and perhaps more meaningful — way to measure popularity is to look at sales to real people laying out their own hard-earned dough.
In January, Chevy sold 172,428 vehicles. GM’s fleet average was 38 percent, and history shows Chevy typically in line with that. That means about 107,000 January retail sales for Chevy.
The Ford brand sold 168,227 units in January. Ford Motor Co. said overall fleet sales were about 39 percent, and Ford analyst George Pipas said the Ford brand was consistent with that figure. That means about 102,500 Ford retail sales.
Trailing in total sales was the Toyota brand, at 130,266. But fleet sales were only 8.5 percent. That means about 119,150 vehicles were sold to individuals.
And those are numbers that should have GM and Ford quaking in their boots. ___________________
Without fleet buyers such as rental car companies and government fleet purchasers (i.e. hidden subsidy from Uncle Sam), the Big 2.5 would be smaller than Toyota. Automotive News, the main magazine of the industry, knows that Joe Sixpack wants a Toyota. Learn more about the business, and you will, too.
You guessed it -- folks like Avis Rent A Car. From Automotive News ("Rental companies purchase 12% of new vehicles in U.S.", February 11, 2006):
Vehicles built by General Motors, Ford Motor Co. and the Chrysler group dominate rental car fleets. Those companies' cars and trucks made up 81 percent of rental fleet volume in 2005. That was down from 85 percent in 2004, the Manheim report says.
"Rental fleets account for a high percentage of sales for models such as the Ford Taurus and Chevrolet Impala," the report adds.
A few factoids from the same article:
-2.1 million new vehicles were sold to rental companies -81% of rental fleet volume came from GM, Ford, and Chrysler group -1,006,000 rental program vehicles were bought back by makers -Commercial and government fleets bought more than 959,000 new vehicles.
While companies such as Honda build vehicles demanded by regular folks who have to live with them year in and year out, the Big 2.5 depend on government handouts and corporate buyers who don't have to live with these cars day after day, and who don't tend to own them for very long.
This may explain one key reason why the Big 2.5 haven't stepped up to the plate in these important segments -- because they are more interested in serving corporate buyers than they are in pleasing individual customers. Thanks to their fleet businesses, they are able to sell a large proportion of whatever they build to these types of mass buyers, no matter how bad the cars may be.
Easy guaranteed sales breed laziness. Only competition improves the breed.
While companies such as Honda build vehicles demanded by regular folks who have to live with them year in and year out, the Big 2.5 depend on government handouts and corporate buyers who don't have to live with these cars day after day, and who don't tend to own them for very long.
This may explain one key reason why the Big 2.5 haven't stepped up to the plate in these important segments -- because they are more interested in serving corporate buyers than they are in pleasing individual customers. Thanks to their fleet businesses, they are able to sell a large proportion of whatever they build to these types of mass buyers, no matter how bad the cars may be.
Easy guaranteed sales breed laziness. Only competition improves the breed.
Great analysis on the relative disparity in the perception of quality in the 'mass market' vehicles. CamCord, Impala, Taurus. But it also may explain why the Buicks and Caddy's actually do rate higher than the mass market vehicles. GM for one realizes that these vehicles are going to real retail buyers who are going to keep them for 4-8 years. These have to be better.
Impalas, Malibus, Taurus' are all throwaways. Essentially they are built as used cars. In 9-12 months they will be mostly used cars.
Interesting cost cutting concept.. build mass fleets of used cars.
Once again, Automotive News provides a summary of how the Bush administration is bending to the needs of the Big 2.5 in an effort to give them preferential treatment ("Slipping Big 3 get traction in D.C.: Automakers make gains in legislation, fuel economy plan", Automotive News, September 12, 2005):
Among the decisions that benefit the Big 3:
A new energy law extends federal fuel economy credits for vehicles that can burn an ethanol-based fuel called E85 - even if those vehicles never use anything but gasoline. Only the Big 3 and Nissan make such vehicles.
The same law places a cap of 60,000 on the number of buyers who get tax credits for buying gasoline-electric hybrids from any one automaker. The provision will limit the tax breaks that go to customers of Toyota and Honda, the hybrid leaders.
The administration's new fuel economy proposal, if it is adopted, will require each automaker to meet its own light-truck fleet standard by 2011. Each standard is based on the company's product mix. The Big 3 would have lower standards than at least seven other automakers.
A new highway funding law sets national standards for single-occupant hybrid vehicles to use high-occupancy highway lanes during rush hours. The provision kept California, for example, from restricting such lanes to hybrids that got at least 45 mpg - which would have qualified the Toyota Prius and Honda Civic Hybrid but excluded the Ford Escape Hybrid.
I find it especially interesting that Detroit's answer to being competitive includes rewarding a technology almost exclusive to it (ethanol), while trying to both restrict the benefit to given to a technology of which it uses little and to lower the bar (hybrid motors.)
But perhaps the icing on the cake is that the Big 2.5 want to be given lower fuel economy standards for their truck fleets than would be given to their competitors. Isn't it ironic to see the likes of GM demanding to receive a form of affirmative action for itself?
First of all its Big 2, not Big 3. Chrysler is not am American company. So I just don't see why you insist on counting Chrysler. The other thing is that Catastrophic effects its having on Big 2 is cause by UAW, not Japanesse. When you have people sitting on their [non-permissible content removed] in job banks and getting paid a full wage, you expect to have "Catastrophic" effects on the company. Where do you think the money to pay these people comes from? Don't you think that this money would not be better spent on development of better cars? I hope you do realize that money is a finite resource.
First of all it was the Company that agreed to the Job Banks and they can write it off and retain trained workers for future use and expansion. Secondly like most large corporations you have white collar workers sitting on their [non-permissible content removed] playing cards, domino's, or sleeping, because their is a lack of work. This happens at my place of employment daily. So basically it works both ways, a paper pusher has dirt on his boss and does what he/she wants.
I dare you to show me any other industry in USA which continues to pay their laid off workers to sit on their [non-permissible content removed] and do nothing for years on end. Its the unions which caused the downfall of American steel industry and now its the same arrogant unions which are causing the fall of American auto industry.
Dude you need to go work for a few places and see that the Big 3 aren't the only company's that have "job banks" or a place for workers with no real classification. They get reassigned to jobs that have no meaning to retain employees that essentially work for a few hours and play card games on the computer for the rest of the day.
If UAW members working for Ford and GM really care about survival of Ford and GM, then they should kick the union out of the plants. That would be a big first step towards recovery of the American auto industry.
So were back to step 1 of blame the UAW, how original. I guess the overpaid failed management deserves the bonus cash for their decision making. Isn't that the role of Rick Wagoner to manage ???? Or should the UAW take that over since he's been proven incompetent :confuse:
Lets not blame the Germans and Japanies and Koreans for failures of the organized labor in the auto industry. Its the over the top contracts like retiring after 30 years and full medical insurance, and on and on and on. Its the kind of benefits that other hard working Americans do not have.
gtee,have a question ???? You don't agree that a company should be partially responsible to help it's employees that reach a certain age, or # of years to retire ????? The alternative is you and I picking up the bill for medicare and medicaid because the employees don't have company paid health insurance benefits. I thought that was the capatalist mentality of not having retirees on social programs ?????? I guess the alternative is to shoot them :surprise: and perhaps that's where your going with it ???? BTW- I never said directly blame the Germans, Japanese, Koreans, but rather blame the U.S. government to allow unfair currency manipulation buy BOTH the JAPANESE and CHINESE as Mr. Lou DOBBS explained yesterday in a report. The Russians also according to Mr. Dobbs are in the buiz of currency manipulation but has a lesser effect on the U.S. economy since we don't buy very many good produced in Russia.
Why do you think that UAW members are entitled to better benefits then the customers who purchase your products. Or do you expect that American consumers are stupid enogth to support your job banks. Because its the American consumer who ultimately pays the price for your nice union perks.
If the UAW is getting better benefits than you at your job, then perhaps you should contact a union about how to organize your place of employment instead of blaming the UAW for your poor contract between you and your employer. I do sense a degree of Jealousy in your statements. Hey pal I've worked for both union and non-union and every time I've worked union I always had better insurance, retirement, pay because I had a contract that my employer had to follow. A union contract is the only way to get out of being a "at will" employee who can be replaced anytime at his employers discretion. You have the choice to support an American company that pays it employees a fair wage now or you can support another company that doesn't pay it employees good and you can pick up the tab for both later in social programs in the form of your taxes.
You have the choice to support an American company that pays it employees a fair wage now or you can support another company that doesn't pay it employees good and you can pick up the tab for both later in social programs in the form of your taxes.
I guess you missed the posts that showed that the difference in average wages between the Big 2.5 and the transplants were just a couple of dollars per hours, and that Toyota was paying far larger bonuses to plant workers than the "American" automakers (including the German one).
You must have also missed the posts that showed that Chrysler stopped being a "domestic" some years ago, and that it was Honda and Toyota who seemed interested in adding Americans to the payroll, not GM or Ford.
Selective reading won't help if you really want to know what's going on. (And it should be clear from my posts that I largely blame management, not the UAW, for the Big 2.5's woes.)
This post wasn't directed to you Socala4. Your case that the Japanese- U.S. workforce have it as good as the UAW is completely false. They don't get company health benefits when they retire, have no define benefit, no time in a half over 8, and that $10,000 bonus is gobbled up quickly when you figure benefits and time and a half in over 8. Also you will be fired if your not kissing your bosses [non-permissible content removed] when your not working, and if you have a family issue like the kids being ill and can't find a baby sister, the company will give you a ultimatium of come to work or we will find someone else that wants this job more than you. That's what it's really like in a non-union american shop. I've worked in both pal, and when a company like Toyota does pay it's kind of salary it can play hard ball.
BTW- you also failed to mention how much "mud" and how long it's going to take that toyota employeee to reach the top still short of the UAW domestic auto worker.
CNN Money article Feb 6 quote Wagoner is exultant that he and the UAW gruelingly managed last year to make a deal that, if blessed by a federal judge, will cut GM's unfunded liability by around $15 billion and pare cash outlays as well. But that will still leave Wagoner facing a colossal competitive disadvantage. The cost is not his fault. Rather, it is a legacy dumped on him by CEOs of decades ago who gained a certain amount of wage restraint from the union--and labor peace for their own terms of office--by granting retiree health benefits that had neither large, immediate cash costs nor, under the accounting rules then applying, much effect on the bottom line. Today, with health-care costs exploding and the accounting rules stiffened, this mess has come home to roost. It is the problem, says Wagoner (almost certainly giving too little weight to his shortage of revenues), that more than anything else "affects the future viability of GM." Unquote
Now someone has to pay the bill for the Jobs Bank and free ticket on health/retirement. Everyone left it for Rick Wagoner.
In answer to rockylee.... no just working for a company does not entitle you or your anut or grandfather to anything except to be paid for what you do on the job. Everything else is a 'fringe benefit'. Extra.. bonus.. which can be taken away at any time. It's not an entitlement. It was only negotiated.. now it's being unnegotiated.. it happens all the time.
In working for 40 years I have never had any such program at any company. It was entirely up to me to take care of myself. Most companies are like this now. That's the fact of workers in the 21st century.
Also you will be fired if your not kissing your bosses [non-permissible content removed] when your not working, and if you have a family issue like the kids being ill and can't find a baby sister, the company will give you a ultimatium of come to work or we will find someone else that wants this job more than you. That's what it's really like in a non-union american shop. I've worked in both pal, and when a company like Toyota does pay it's kind of salary it can play hard ball.
News flash to rocky... this is how most companies are run. Here is a second newsflash. Companies are in the business of making money they are not a social agency to take care of their workers. Each of us takes care of ourselves.
Your case that the Japanese- U.S. workforce have it as good as the UAW is completely false.
I never made that claim, I have no doubt that the UAW has a better deal than the non-unionized workers with the transplants. But do you think that American workers benefit more when Toyota hires them in Kentucky, or when Ford shifts plant jobs to lower-wage facilities in Mexico?
Well you know understand why the United States and it's youth have went off the deep end. That mentality, along with greed has destroyed our country, family, future.
Newsflash: You made my point and is why I hate capatalism & globalization, and will support people like Lou Dobbs, and John Edwards, that actually give a rats [non-permissible content removed] other than making a extra buck in bonus money for a corrupt CEO and it's buisness.
That's obvious pal. However if we had more people with my way of thinking Ford wouldn't be shifting plants to Mexico, because that Mexican made car would be tariffed.
Let me take a moment to shoot down J.D. Powers. First of all there are several lists put out every year based on different lengths of time.
Second, these are based on customer surveys, not hard data.
Third, a single complaint could be a door seal that whistles, or a rod through the oil pan. In short, number of complaints does not consider how severe the issue is.
I personally have found that reliability is 10% product, 90% care. And older technology is more reliable technology.
Well you know understand why the United States and it's youth have went off the deep end. That mentality, along with greed has destroyed our country, family, future.
Newsflash: You made my point and is why I hate capatalism & globalization, and will support people like Lou Dobbs, and John Edwards, that actually give a rats [non-permissible content removed] other than making a extra buck in bonus money for a corrupt CEO and it's buisness.
The youth of America havent gone anywhere. The ones who've gone to college gotten advanced degrees planned their futures and implemented them are making more money than you and I together. Good for them. One word: 'plastics'.. errr 'computers'.
The ones who are drifting are the same ones who drifted 40 yrs ago when I was in HS.. they didnt pay attention, they didnt go to class, they hung out got into trouble and now 40 yrs later wonder 'wha happened'. Nothing has changed. Newsflash: the ones who apply themselves succeed and make tons of money!! without the benefit - or drag - of a union.
Newsflash: In case you missed it or ignored it the auto industry is far more successful and profitable now than it was 20 yrs ago... with a couple of exceptions.
From your highlighted statement above now we can safely place you in the socialist, patriotic, conservative, isolationist camp.
Newsflash: I make more money than 90% of those College Graduates and will continue to do so "god willing"
I'm not sure where you live, but in Texas, and Michigan, a college degree gets you a $29K avg. yr. job with crap benefits and retirement, and with good luck it might turn into $50-60K and I will still make more than them with my union job. :P I don't have a "college degree" but have company paid training at an acedemy where I recieved a certificate.
From your highlighted statement above now we can safely place you in the socialist, patriotic, conservative, isolationist camp.i>
The key to buying American is buying from a company that is American owned. This applies to all goods and services, not just automobiles.
Foreign owned companies do not pay taxes on profits and get many other breaks that domestic companies do not receive. What this means is that there is less money going to our government. We are losing billions of dollars a year that would go to government programs, schools, police, fire, Medicare, Medicaid, etc. Maybe even to restructure health care. So what happens when the government needs money: our personal tax burden increases? Domestic companies contribute more money to our government than foreign companies.
These foreign governments can then use this money for research and development, training and military growth. Foreign companies can use their American subsidiaries to influence our government. Why aren't things being done about the trade deficit and other injustices in trade? Did you ever think that this influence has been happening for years? Makes you think. Our government has given these foreign companies land to build plants and massive tax breaks on levels that our own companies have never see. Many of these plants were then built will imported materials.
By supporting companies like Ford and GM, who employee hundreds of thousands of American workers, you are supporting numerous businesses/industries that do business with these companies by requiring additional goods/services provided by other American companies and workers. American companies do more business with other American companies than foreign companies. We focus so much on the manufacturing. Most manufacturing is overseas but people don't realize that most American companies have their administrative jobs (accounting, IT, marketing, etc.) in this country so by buying from American owned companies you support these jobs.
People are going to debate which companies/countries make a better product and most is going to be subjective regardless of the numerous reports available. When most things are equal why would you not buy a product made by an American owned company?
What people need to realize is that these foreign companies are not selling themselves out. They are nationalistic and will do thing to support their country, companies and people. There is no nationalism here anymore. People need to evaluate how their purchasing affects their own government, companies and people. You often hear that when an industry in our country is in trouble people don't care because it doesn't affect them. In many cases they don't even really know how they are affected. It doesn't matter. The point is to support your country. Support your people. Our own country talks about the benefits of global competition and trading throughout the world when many of these foreign companies/countries practice protectionism and unfair trading practices which put us at a disadvantage.
We can debate forever about how corrupt our businesses might be but I would rather support this country than foreign countries. Let them worry about themselves for a change. Why do we owe everyone? Our forefathers fought hard to make this country what it is. These countries should do the same without expecting us to help out every country at the expense of our way of life. We have done more for other countries than any country would do for us. Everyone talks about how we are hated. Do you think other countries care about us? They are here to make money and if something would happen they would abandon their American workers. These countries have their own interest at heart (and so they should) and we should follow.
When there is a disaster in the world our country and companies are there with financial assistance, goods, services and manpower. Do you think that most foreign companies care about us? They are waiting for us to fall. What did GM and Ford do when after 9/11? They were there with millions of dollars and vehicles to help out. These are American companies. They have a stake in this country because them and their families live here and need our economy to be strong now and into the future. This is what you get when you support your own companies. Investment in your own country and people.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't trade with other companies. I'm saying we need to worry about our country and do what needs to be done to keep our way of life. We are not perfect but I couldn't choose any other place better. What would happen if we were not the world leader/police? Could you imaging what this world would be like if other countries took the helm? If the people are armed with all this information and still want to give this country away then what this country stands for and everything our forefathers fought for will cease to exist.
This is a well presented point of view, which is generally correct... with a few exceptions.
We/you dont know what taxes are actually paid by lets say Honda. I did work for a large international company for a long time and it is true that if it's structured correctly a corporation can avoid a lot of taxes. Honda, Ford, DCX do this all the time. Just to be clear, and you were, Honda and Hyundai and DCX and BMW are all in the same group. It's only Ford and GM that are truly 'domestic' if you look at the tax question. But in the absence of hard data we don't know what each company pays here, except GM/Ford which pay none due to losses from continuing operations.
What you omit though is that the NA auto industry has grown nearly 40% in the last 20 years because many 'foreign' companies have invested billions in plant and equipment here, employed workers here, invested in training and scholarships here, and made $10's of millions of charitable donations here - probably in lieu of taxes to be honest. At the same time Ford and GM are focusing their efforts overseas, in Europe ( Ford ) and in China ( GM ) where each seems to do very well.
The amount of taxes not paid here, if that's the case, is far less then the amount of the investments and purchases here. Those purchases generate profits on the part of the suppliers and those profits are taxed and stay in the community. In addition all the workers pay taxes thus in a newly developed area like Miss where there is a new Nissan plant life is bursting out, property values are going up, new small businesses are growing. It's just not in the traditional areas.. at the moment.
This is the radical type of vehicle which DCX ( unfortunately a foreign company ) grabs the initiative from GM/F in the important small car segment. From the look it is a Scion/Fit/Yaris fighter - with power - that might actually get young buyers into DCX showrooms.
GM/F have nothing to attract these buyers except their very capable trucks. But a 19 y.o. with no credit cannot afford a $22K truck nuch less a $35K 'dreamer'. Now this Hornet if priced right in the very low teens gets fanny's into Dodge seats at an early age.
GM/F caught napping?
Hmmmm GM/F?...GM/F? What if these two merged? Now there is an idea.
...been quite isolationist. Heck, we didn't enter WWI until much later. The war began in 1914 and we weren't involved until 1917, though the sinking of the Lusitania could've brought us in as early as 1915.
The average American wanted us to stay out of WWII until Pearl Harbor forced our hand. We may not have gone to war with Germany and Italy if Hitler hadn't first foolishly declared war on the United States.
We/you dont know what taxes are actually paid by lets say Honda.
Sorry, but that's not quite correct. Honda, Toyota, etc. all have US-based subsidiaries that will pay quite a few taxes. They will:
-Pay income taxes for US earnings -Pay property taxes on owned land -Collect sales taxes on retail inventory sold -Pay wages to American workers that are subject to income tax
And that doesn't include all of the ripple effects of building a factory and creating employment, namely all the suppliers, vendors and employees who generate earnings from the plant, pay taxes on their earnings, and put that money back in the community in the form of spending and investment.
The only thing is that if we focused on purchasing from our own companies these companies would also grow and do the same thing. New American companies could emerge which would be better than any kind of foreign presence. How much foreign presence do we want here influencing our government? They are friendly now but what happens if they control out lives through their influence in our government? They don't have the best interest of the American people in mind. Just money. I understand that most companies probably think this way but Americans would (or should) care more for themselves and their country than a foreign company.
On a side note, it seems that there are people who want our companies to fail. That is insane. Why would you wish this? We have many problems and should strive to make our companies and country better. If people who live here want our companies to fail then they are not Americans. People are missing the point. If you are an American you should want our companies to succeed and do your part to help this country. In general, companies are not better anywhere else. If people love these other countries so much they should move there and change their citizenship.
America has traditionally been quite isolationist.
The US stopped being isolationist when it decided to expand westward from the original colonies (declaring war on Mexico, destroying Indian tribes en masse, seizing Hawaii and buying Alaska) and with the Monroe Doctrine in 1823, which effectively stated that US foreign policy considered South America to be part of the US' sphere of influence. By the time that the US went to war with Spain in 1898, during which it turned Cuba into a puppet regime, colonized the Phillipines, etc., the only thing that was isolationist about the US was the rhetoric.
The isolationist talk has become an engrained myth of American philosophy since not long after the end of Washington's presidency. It allows us to believe that we are never the aggressor and are always the sleeping giant that is suddenly roused to anger before we enter a conflict. But it's just talk.
In any case, the world has globalized and the US and its allies are all highly dependent on an energy source that must largely be imported, so even if we had been isolationist (which we were for but a few years of our history), the world has changed enough so that it no longer works.
With that, the economy has globalized to the point that borders matter little to corporations. They will earn profits whereever they can and under any flag.
So wake up, folks -- the only companies that are "American" are those that hire Americans, invest in the US, and pay taxes to the US. Despite some of the comments on this thread, Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, Mazda, Mercedes, and BMW, among others, all do just that.
Meanwhile, the Big 2.5 have zero problem with building plants abroad and hiring foreign workers, so that they can avoid US wages, US industrial laws and reduce the power of the UAW. Some of you seem to be living in the 60's, and haven't figured out that it is no longer the same as it once was.
"New American companies could emerge which would be better than any kind of foreign presence."
With the production of 'import' branded cars here in the U.S., new American companies (with American workers) DO emerge. These would be the American suppliers for these American-built vehicles. Toyota uses more than 600 different AMERICAN suppliers to supply AMERICAN parts for their AMERICAN BUILT cars.
"They don't have the best interest of the American people in mind. Just money."
Paranoia.
First, in order to stay in business (ie. sell cars), their customers must be able to actually BUY their cars. What do you suppose this 'foreign presence' is going to do which would be detrimental to the American people? They're just in business to make money? HELL YES. And do you think that the 'domestics' aren't? You think that the 'domestics' care more about the American people and less about making money? MAYBE THAT'S WHY THEY'RE IN TROUBLE.
"On a side note, it seems that there are people who want our companies to fail."
No, I want our companies to improve. I have faith that American companies CAN compete (and BEAT) the 'imports'. But this will not happen as long as some folks insist that we overlook any shortcomings due to nationalistic pride.
"We have many problems and should strive to make our companies and country better."
YES. But you don't do this by IGNORING the problems these companies have. If I feel that the vehicles the domestics offer is inferior to the vehicles offered by their import competition, am I really doing the domestic company any favors by OVERLOOKING their flaws and purchasing what I feel to be the inferior vehicle anyway? Remember, these 'domestic' companies must compete with the 'imports' GLOBALLY. You may be willing to give them a free pass to produce whatever they think is 'good enough' but that won't cut it in other markets.
Wow! Then you should consider this scenario : US slaps tarriffs on Asian imports. Asian countries stop buying US treasuries. US needs to cover 800 Bn USD per year of extra money it needs to maintain its current lifestyle. Interest rates go up to 15%, housing market collapses, jobless rate hits 10% as consumption declines sharply (since incomes inflated by home equity go down sharply as Americans try to avoid bankruptcy). Of course, the Asian countries would suffer too, but will not have to experience the kind of wrenching lifestyle change that US would go through...
Seriously, if it was so easy, US Govt would have done it long time ago (apply tarrifs on imported Autos). But they know who would be the bigger loser in the Armageddon that might follow.
I was surprised to read how very uniformed some of the contributers of this discussion are. In no way can the amount of money that domestic car companies like GM & Ford put into this economy be compared with foreign companies. Longstanding companies like GM and Ford have very few tax breaks and use their own money to add on and upgrade their plants. However, foreign companies like Toyota do not. As an example, when Toyota build it's new facility in Tennessee/Kentucky, all of the land was DONATED to them. In addition, the state and local governments waived all taxes for several years to "encourage" them to build.
Someone mentioned that domestic car companies are building plants in other countries. While this is true, it is misleading. ALL foreign companies produce MOST of their vehicles outside of the United States. So, even if you don't care if a company is domestic or foreign, support the lesser of two evils, support the domestic companies that still produce MOST of their vehicles in the US.
One last point regarding foreign companies producing their cars in the US: Even if a car is produced in the US, does not mean that it is supporting the US economy in the same way that a US based company. EXAMPLE: Chevy Impala - Made in the US with 90% of its parts being US Made and assemble parts. Toyota Camry - Made in teh US with less than 20% of its parts being US Made.
Lastly, try comparing the amount of money that lets say, GM, pumps into individual communties, and social programs as compared to foreign companies. The numbers are stagering with GM contributing far more. Why you may ask....the answer has already been stated above. Domestic car companies have more than a financial stake in this country, but also a firm belief and support of the American people.
Well you know understand why the United States and it's youth have went off the deep end. That mentality, along with greed has destroyed our country, family, future.
I am not sure I understand you. I have spent years of my life earning advanced degrees and skills and work hard for my money. I expect others to do the same. On more than one occasion, my job went to India. I took it as "if someone can do the same job for $X less, then that is what it is worth". Therefore, instead of appealing to my employer's patriotism, I learned new skills,went back to school and made myself employable again. It is not easy but definitely nit impossible.
I am greedy because I do not subsidize the UAW worker (who earns above market wages by doing a job that requires little or no skill) by buying overpriced cars just because they are made by the UAW? The only way the domestic automakers will be competitive is by paying market rate for wages or by employing robots. That day is not far behind.
This post is so riddled with errors and out-of-context statements, it's hard to know where to start.
Longstanding companies like GM and Ford have very few tax breaks and use their own money to add on and upgrade their plants. However, foreign companies like Toyota do not.
Sorry, but all kinds of companies, whether automakers or not and whether "foreign" or not, get tax breaks to open new plants and facilities, particularly in depressed areas. Go to a casino strip along the Mississippi River, and you'll see numerous examples of US-based companies receiving handsome subsidies to build their facilities there.
Have you considered why they receive these benefits? Because these plants provide employment, a new base of taxpayers, and stimulate and support other business. If the deal is properly cut, then the cost is less than the benefit.
Perhaps GM and Ford would get more of these in the US if they were building plants in the US, instead of shutting them down and outsourcing the jobs.
ALL foreign companies produce MOST of their vehicles outside of the United States.
Not sure what this means. Do the math on GM and Ford's production outside the US (and don't forget to include subsidiaries such as Opel/Vauxhall, Holden, Volvo, Saab, etc., as well as the "Buicks" that are made in China sold in Asia), and you'll see that ALL of the major automakers have a significant global presence with a large amount of production outside of the US.
Toyota Camry - Made in teh US with less than 20% of its parts being US Made.
That's simply wrong. A Camry has 70% US/Canadian content, more than a PT Cruiser made by the German-owned Chrysler. Where you are getting your information, I don't know.
"On a side note, it seems that there are people who want our companies to fail. That is insane."
I disagree that it's insane.
First, we're very critical of our corporations for social reasons. We don't trust their motives, and we don't treat them like they're our compatriots. The tobacco industry was blamed for killing us. McDonalds and Coca Cola are blamed for making us fat. Walmart and Starbucks for stiffling competition and mom & pop shops. The Big 3 for a) focusing on polluters and gas guzzlers, b) focusing less on safety, and c) getting into more horsepower wars.
They've made themselves very easy target to a wide variety of social activists. And really, how many people would cry if Starbucks made 10 years of bad coffee and went bankrupt?
But more importantly, they gave a lot of people bad service during a long time. We grew up learning that the market is a meritocracy. Sucktitude is a crime, and the punishment is corporate death. We'll forgive one mistake, or a few years of mediocrity. But as they say, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me... After that second time (the 10 year of crappiness? The 20th?) who's going to feel sorry for them?
The only difference in the auto industry is that it's nearly impossible for a new local company to start up and replace GM or Ford. Is that really enough reason to love a bad company? They haven't even changed all that much.
Quote from that article: "BANGALORE (Reuters) - Software services provider Wipro Ltd. said on Thursday its share of the information technology outsourcing contract announced by General Motors Corp. was estimated at $300 million over 5 years. "
Just in case you thought that GM was an all-"American" uber-patriotic company:
-In 2005, 47% of GM's total vehicle production was outside of North America.
-If you deduct the production that occurred in Mexico (428,000 units during 2005, according to Automotive News), you find that 51% -- more than half of GM's production -- occurred outside the US and Canada.
-GM decreased its production of vehicles in North America by over 250,000 between 2001 and 2005. And let's keep in mind that it has been shifting some North American production to Mexico, so the number of vehicles assembled in the US has fallen more quickly than that.
-While it was slashing and burning production in the US, GM increased its production overseas by over 1.55 million vehicles between 2001 and 2005.
-Between 2001 and 2005, GM increased its production in its Asia Pacific region by 621%.
Meanwhile, we see that the "foreign" nameplates are adding jobs in the US, not decreasing them. Not sure why their money wouldn't be as green as is GM's.
Good post. I appreciate that data too, it's interesting that in addition to the top five, the top ten passenger cars sold in the U.S. for 2005 were rounded out by;
5. Impala 6. Malibu 7. Cobalt 8. Taurus 9. Focus
Source of course, is Ward's Automotive. I would agree that the Big 2.5 need to reduce percentage on fleet sales. I was in San Diego last month, and I think Toyota's entire rental fleet was there at Hertz !!
LOL..uhhh.. mention this to Dubya, Rumsfeld and Cheney.
But also consider Americans settling Texas and taking it away from Mexico; Teddy Roosevelt - he took Panama away from Colombia and set up a US protectorate; Cuba under Castro; Vietnam? Ah, try to put together a sentence with the words Iraq and isolationism in it.
Bad theory that Americans are isolationists. It has never been so.
They are friendly now but what happens if they control out lives through their influence in our government? They don't have the best interest of the American people in mind.
How is this any different than Ford in Europe and GM in China/Australia/Europe. It's simply one large market served/run by several large multinational companies. It's not a big deal really every major market is like this.
Oil, steel, autos, computers, pharmaceuticals, everything. It's just that this is an auto forum and here the 2 domestic automakers are struggling because of bad decisions 20 years ago. This too will pass.
Your last statement is getting childish. This is what it should be, 'Restructure GM/F making them smaller more vibrant and profitable.'
There is nothing evil going on here it's just that GM/F made bad business decisions 20 yrs ago and now they have to face the results.
Not a big deal until the rest of manufacturing leaves US and goes to China. Then, China will achieve their 50 year plan of world domination and rule with iron fist. How would you like to work for a communist party? Would you like to work 12 hrs /day for pennies and live in a 12’x12’ box – called an apartment? Keep supporting globalization and especially Chinese manufacturing and see where we’ll end up. If we don’t get manufacturing back to States, we are doomed. Copper, steel , aluminum ,cement and oil are all being consumed by China at record levels, they are driving the market prices way up – just look at the price of steel and copper that have doubled in 1 year. Same goes for oil and aluminum. Keep embracing the global economy and say goodbye to our way of life!
Comments
No, he didn't. Earlier posts specifically said that China DOES manipulate their currency, but that Japan doesn't.
Anybody want to bet that Dobbs was referring to China and NOT Japan?
Take it for what it's worth.
???
Say Brand 'X' sells 10,000 cars/year. They have an dependability of 50 problems /100 cars. Their rating is 50.
Brand 'Y' sells 10,000,000 cars/year. They have a dependability rating of 100 problems /100 cars. Their rating is 100.
The 'average' nationwide rating is NOT (50+100)/2 = 75.
Well, it appears that you're right. In reading the JD Power info, I figured that it wasn't a weighted average, but in crunching the numbers myself, I see that you are most likely correct -- the average must be weighted.
FYI, if you add the total PPH (9,396), and divide by the number of manufacturers on the list (37), you get a non-weighted industry average of 254. Since that doesn't match JD Power's industry average of 237, it's a fair guess that the figure should be weighted.
Thanks for the info, I learned something today!
The rebuttal to the "currency manipulation" accusations has been effectively covered by other posters. Plus, as I mentioned in regard to the Cobalt, it costs no more to design a beautiful car than it does to design an ugly one. So even if the Japanese are manipulating their currency to gain an unfair advantage, that is still no excuse for the Cobalt looking like a warmed-over Cavalier.
imidazol97: Lou Dobbs must be wrong.
Just because someone is quoted regularly by the media doesn't necessarily mean that he is correct. Just look at Joan Claybrook's statements on the effects of raising speed limits on limited access highways as proof of that.
First of all its Big 2, not Big 3. Chrysler is not am American company. So I just don't see why you insist on counting Chrysler. The other thing is that Catastrophic effects its having on Big 2 is cause by UAW, not Japanesse. When you have people sitting on their [non-permissible content removed] in job banks and getting paid a full wage, you expect to have "Catastrophic" effects on the company. Where do you think the money to pay these people comes from? Don't you think that this money would not be better spent on development of better cars? I hope you do realize that money is a finite resource.
I dare you to show me any other industry in USA which continues to pay their laid off workers to sit on their [non-permissible content removed] and do nothing for years on end. Its the unions which caused the downfall of American steel industry and now its the same arrogant unions which are causing the fall of American auto industry.
If UAW members working for Ford and GM really care about survival of Ford and GM, then they should kick the union out of the plants. That would be a big first step towards recovery of the American auto industry.
Lets not blame the Germans and Japanies and Koreans for failures of the organized labor in the auto industry. Its the over the top contracts like retiring after 30 years and full medical insurance, and on and on and on. Its the kind of benefits that other hard working Americans do not have.
Why do you think that UAW members are entitled to better benefits then the customers who purchase your products. Or do you expect that American consumers are stupid enogth to support your job banks. Because its the American consumer who ultimately pays the price for your nice union perks.
Two are considered to be at the pinnacle as #1 and #2;
One is very good and is in fact the industry leader;
Two are so horrible that no one is buying them and the factories making them are going to be shut.
Very good point. Honda and Toyota make very good minivans. Even the new Kia Sedona is heads about the crap that Ford and GM make. Sometimes its just sad to see how bad and out of date the products from GM and Ford are. But what do you expect. Ford Freestar is only a little different from the Windstar that was introduced in 1995. It has the same OHV engine, the same 4-speed transmission and it is still based on the Taurus frame. The style of GM minivans was inspired by a Platypus (yes the strange Beaver with a Duck's head).
If the company does not want to invest the money in the product, it should not expect people to buy it. How many people here would buy an American made 133MHZ Pentium based computer now. That is what the domestic industry is trying to sell to us with their lack of investment in the products. And we, the American consumers, are just not that stupid. Name changes from Windstar to Freestar is not enogth. New grills for the Saturn minivan changes nothing.
First: Highly speculative & opinionated.
Second: So in addition to Toyota and Honda this "segment" as you call it, is also better served by Mazda, Hyundia, Nissan, Kia and the like who all scored under indusrty average and would appear to be un-reliable,or at least not as reliable as Ford, Chevy, Dodge, etc. based on the JD Power results ?
All of these company's are also "foreign" as you describe above, and many of them are made right here in the U.S.
I know you'll clarify your PoV with logic based on facts ?
Hehehe. That topic got closed. We can't discuss it anymore.
>Cobalt looking like a warmed-over Cavalier.
I see what you mean because of size similarity between the two. I don't see the same shape. And the underpinnings are better from reviews. I haven't driven one. But I agree that it could have been more dramatic. GM needed a more dramatic car to make an impression. The Lucerne is a bigger change in its category than the Cobalt is.
I still think the problem is the high legacy costs of unions, total healthcare, retirement for Matilda and all her relatives being covered. GM just doesn't put in the emergency funds to make drastic change--and that's poor management and overpaid management. It's almost as bad as our government in DC.
>Lou Dobbs must be wrong.
That's a possibility. Even posters on Edmunds sometimes are wrong. I'm made more money doing the opposite of guru's suggestions on the markets than I've missed out on by not following certain people's advice. Sort of like the Motley Fools' advice.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I guess I've bought the car that has a better rating than most on problems/reliability. The dealer factor in all those cars also affects the reliability the customer perceives in the car; a good dealer makes the difference.
I agree with your VW assessment. Friend has Jetta. Great to drive, but problems, problems, problems. When I drove their Jetta I thought I had my Mustang with supersticky tires and lots of fun in driving it back. I wished I had a 2nd car like it because of how it felt. But not after the problems started.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
First: Highly speculative & opinionated.
No need to speculate. Top five new passenger cars sold in the US during 2005:
1. Camry
2. Corolla/ Matrix
3. Accord
4. Civic
5. Altima
Of course, it gets better (or worse) than this. Because while the Cobalt, Focus and Impala all make it into the Top 10, this is largely due to sales to fleet buyers, such as rental car agencies, that buy a large proportion of Big 2.5 cars while buying few from the "imports."
According to Automotive News, 12% of total US car sales go to the rental agencies, which get the vast majority of their cars from the Big 2.5. (Anyone here who has spent much time behind the wheel of a lot of rental cars would not be surprised by this fact.) When you factor out fleet sales and look at what John Q. Public wants, he has a preference for Toyota:
___________________
January’s retail king: Toyota
Automotive News / February 13, 2006 - 6:00 am
Chevrolet and Ford duke it out every year for the title of “America’s best-selling brand.” And in January the winner was . . . Toyota.
How does that figure? By looking at sales to individuals rather than total sales.
Total sales include low-profit sales to daily-rental and corporate fleets. A different — and perhaps more meaningful — way to measure popularity is to look at sales to real people laying out their own hard-earned dough.
In January, Chevy sold 172,428 vehicles. GM’s fleet average was 38 percent, and history shows Chevy typically in line with that. That means about 107,000 January retail sales for Chevy.
The Ford brand sold 168,227 units in January. Ford Motor Co. said overall fleet sales were about 39 percent, and Ford analyst George Pipas said the Ford brand was consistent with that figure. That means about 102,500 Ford retail sales.
Trailing in total sales was the Toyota brand, at 130,266. But fleet sales were only 8.5 percent. That means about 119,150 vehicles were sold to individuals.
And those are numbers that should have GM and Ford quaking in their boots.
___________________
Without fleet buyers such as rental car companies and government fleet purchasers (i.e. hidden subsidy from Uncle Sam), the Big 2.5 would be smaller than Toyota. Automotive News, the main magazine of the industry, knows that Joe Sixpack wants a Toyota. Learn more about the business, and you will, too.
Vehicles built by General Motors, Ford Motor Co. and the Chrysler group dominate rental car fleets. Those companies' cars and trucks made up 81 percent of rental fleet volume in 2005. That was down from 85 percent in 2004, the Manheim report says.
"Rental fleets account for a high percentage of sales for models such as the Ford Taurus and Chevrolet Impala," the report adds.
A few factoids from the same article:
-2.1 million new vehicles were sold to rental companies
-81% of rental fleet volume came from GM, Ford, and Chrysler group
-1,006,000 rental program vehicles were bought back by makers
-Commercial and government fleets bought more than 959,000 new vehicles.
While companies such as Honda build vehicles demanded by regular folks who have to live with them year in and year out, the Big 2.5 depend on government handouts and corporate buyers who don't have to live with these cars day after day, and who don't tend to own them for very long.
This may explain one key reason why the Big 2.5 haven't stepped up to the plate in these important segments -- because they are more interested in serving corporate buyers than they are in pleasing individual customers. Thanks to their fleet businesses, they are able to sell a large proportion of whatever they build to these types of mass buyers, no matter how bad the cars may be.
Easy guaranteed sales breed laziness. Only competition improves the breed.
This may explain one key reason why the Big 2.5 haven't stepped up to the plate in these important segments -- because they are more interested in serving corporate buyers than they are in pleasing individual customers. Thanks to their fleet businesses, they are able to sell a large proportion of whatever they build to these types of mass buyers, no matter how bad the cars may be.
Easy guaranteed sales breed laziness. Only competition improves the breed.
Great analysis on the relative disparity in the perception of quality in the 'mass market' vehicles. CamCord, Impala, Taurus. But it also may explain why the Buicks and Caddy's actually do rate higher than the mass market vehicles. GM for one realizes that these vehicles are going to real retail buyers who are going to keep them for 4-8 years. These have to be better.
Impalas, Malibus, Taurus' are all throwaways. Essentially they are built as used cars. In 9-12 months they will be mostly used cars.
Interesting cost cutting concept.. build mass fleets of used cars.
Among the decisions that benefit the Big 3:
A new energy law extends federal fuel economy credits for vehicles that can burn an ethanol-based fuel called E85 - even if those vehicles never use anything but gasoline. Only the Big 3 and Nissan make such vehicles.
The same law places a cap of 60,000 on the number of buyers who get tax credits for buying gasoline-electric hybrids from any one automaker. The provision will limit the tax breaks that go to customers of Toyota and Honda, the hybrid leaders.
The administration's new fuel economy proposal, if it is adopted, will require each automaker to meet its own light-truck fleet standard by 2011. Each standard is based on the company's product mix. The Big 3 would have lower standards than at least seven other automakers.
A new highway funding law sets national standards for single-occupant hybrid vehicles to use high-occupancy highway lanes during rush hours. The provision kept California, for example, from restricting such lanes to hybrids that got at least 45 mpg - which would have qualified the Toyota Prius and Honda Civic Hybrid but excluded the Ford Escape Hybrid.
I find it especially interesting that Detroit's answer to being competitive includes rewarding a technology almost exclusive to it (ethanol), while trying to both restrict the benefit to given to a technology of which it uses little and to lower the bar (hybrid motors.)
But perhaps the icing on the cake is that the Big 2.5 want to be given lower fuel economy standards for their truck fleets than would be given to their competitors. Isn't it ironic to see the likes of GM demanding to receive a form of affirmative action for itself?
First of all it was the Company that agreed to the Job Banks and they can write it off and retain trained workers for future use and expansion. Secondly like most large corporations you have white collar workers sitting on their [non-permissible content removed] playing cards, domino's, or sleeping, because their is a lack of work. This happens at my place of employment daily. So basically it works both ways, a paper pusher has dirt on his boss and does what he/she wants.
I dare you to show me any other industry in USA which continues to pay their laid off workers to sit on their [non-permissible content removed] and do nothing for years on end. Its the unions which caused the downfall of American steel industry and now its the same arrogant unions which are causing the fall of American auto industry.
Dude you need to go work for a few places and see that the Big 3 aren't the only company's that have "job banks" or a place for workers with no real classification. They get reassigned to jobs that have no meaning to retain employees that essentially work for a few hours and play card games on the computer for the rest of the day.
If UAW members working for Ford and GM really care about survival of Ford and GM, then they should kick the union out of the plants. That would be a big first step towards recovery of the American auto industry.
So were back to step 1 of blame the UAW, how original.
I guess the overpaid failed management deserves the bonus cash for their decision making. Isn't that the role of Rick Wagoner to manage ???? Or should the UAW take that over since he's been proven incompetent :confuse:
Lets not blame the Germans and Japanies and Koreans for failures of the organized labor in the auto industry. Its the over the top contracts like retiring after 30 years and full medical insurance, and on and on and on. Its the kind of benefits that other hard working Americans do not have.
gtee,have a question ???? You don't agree that a company should be partially responsible to help it's employees that reach a certain age, or # of years to retire ?????
The alternative is you and I picking up the bill for medicare and medicaid because the employees don't have company paid health insurance benefits. I thought that was the capatalist mentality of not having retirees on social programs ?????? I guess the alternative is to shoot them :surprise: and perhaps that's where your going with it ???? BTW- I never said directly blame the Germans, Japanese, Koreans, but rather blame the U.S. government to allow unfair currency manipulation buy BOTH the JAPANESE and CHINESE as Mr. Lou DOBBS explained yesterday in a report. The Russians also according to Mr. Dobbs are in the buiz of currency manipulation but has a lesser effect on the U.S. economy since we don't buy very many good produced in Russia.
Why do you think that UAW members are entitled to better benefits then the customers who purchase your products. Or do you expect that American consumers are stupid enogth to support your job banks. Because its the American consumer who ultimately pays the price for your nice union perks.
If the UAW is getting better benefits than you at your job, then perhaps you should contact a union about how to organize your place of employment instead of blaming the UAW for your poor contract between you and your employer. I do sense a degree of Jealousy in your statements. Hey pal I've worked for both union and non-union and every time I've worked union I always had better insurance, retirement, pay because I had a contract that my employer had to follow. A union contract is the only way to get out of being a "at will" employee who can be replaced anytime at his employers discretion. You have the choice to support an American company that pays it employees a fair wage now or you can support another company that doesn't pay it employees good and you can pick up the tab for both later in social programs in the form of your taxes.
Thanks,
Rocky
I guess you missed the posts that showed that the difference in average wages between the Big 2.5 and the transplants were just a couple of dollars per hours, and that Toyota was paying far larger bonuses to plant workers than the "American" automakers (including the German one).
You must have also missed the posts that showed that Chrysler stopped being a "domestic" some years ago, and that it was Honda and Toyota who seemed interested in adding Americans to the payroll, not GM or Ford.
Selective reading won't help if you really want to know what's going on. (And it should be clear from my posts that I largely blame management, not the UAW, for the Big 2.5's woes.)
I've worked in both pal, and when a company like Toyota does pay it's kind of salary it can play hard ball.
BTW- you also failed to mention how much "mud" and how long it's going to take that toyota employeee to reach the top still short of the UAW domestic auto worker.
Rocky
CNN Money article Feb 6
quote
Wagoner is exultant that he and the UAW gruelingly managed last year to make a deal that, if blessed by a federal judge, will cut GM's unfunded liability by around $15 billion and pare cash outlays as well. But that will still leave Wagoner facing a colossal competitive disadvantage. The cost is not his fault. Rather, it is a legacy dumped on him by CEOs of decades ago who gained a certain amount of wage restraint from the union--and labor peace for their own terms of office--by granting retiree health benefits that had neither large, immediate cash costs nor, under the accounting rules then applying, much effect on the bottom line. Today, with health-care costs exploding and the accounting rules stiffened, this mess has come home to roost. It is the problem, says Wagoner (almost certainly giving too little weight to his shortage of revenues), that more than anything else "affects the future viability of GM."
Unquote
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2006/02/20/8369111/index.- - htm
Now someone has to pay the bill for the Jobs Bank and free ticket on health/retirement. Everyone left it for Rick Wagoner.
In answer to rockylee.... no just working for a company does not entitle you or your anut or grandfather to anything except to be paid for what you do on the job. Everything else is a 'fringe benefit'. Extra.. bonus.. which can be taken away at any time. It's not an entitlement. It was only negotiated.. now it's being unnegotiated.. it happens all the time.
In working for 40 years I have never had any such program at any company. It was entirely up to me to take care of myself. Most companies are like this now. That's the fact of workers in the 21st century.
I've worked in both pal, and when a company like Toyota does pay it's kind of salary it can play hard ball.
News flash to rocky... this is how most companies are run. Here is a second newsflash. Companies are in the business of making money they are not a social agency to take care of their workers. Each of us takes care of ourselves.
I never made that claim, I have no doubt that the UAW has a better deal than the non-unionized workers with the transplants. But do you think that American workers benefit more when Toyota hires them in Kentucky, or when Ford shifts plant jobs to lower-wage facilities in Mexico?
Newsflash: You made my point and is why I hate capatalism & globalization, and will support people like Lou Dobbs, and John Edwards, that actually give a rats [non-permissible content removed] other than making a extra buck in bonus money for a corrupt CEO and it's buisness.
Rocky
Rocky
Second, these are based on customer surveys, not hard data.
Third, a single complaint could be a door seal that whistles, or a rod through the oil pan. In short, number of complaints does not consider how severe the issue is.
I personally have found that reliability is 10% product, 90% care. And older technology is more reliable technology.
Rocky
Newsflash: You made my point and is why I hate capatalism & globalization, and will support people like Lou Dobbs, and John Edwards, that actually give a rats [non-permissible content removed] other than making a extra buck in bonus money for a corrupt CEO and it's buisness.
The youth of America havent gone anywhere. The ones who've gone to college gotten advanced degrees planned their futures and implemented them are making more money than you and I together. Good for them. One word: 'plastics'.. errr 'computers'.
The ones who are drifting are the same ones who drifted 40 yrs ago when I was in HS.. they didnt pay attention, they didnt go to class, they hung out got into trouble and now 40 yrs later wonder 'wha happened'. Nothing has changed.
Newsflash: the ones who apply themselves succeed and make tons of money!! without the benefit - or drag - of a union.
Newsflash: In case you missed it or ignored it the auto industry is far more successful and profitable now than it was 20 yrs ago... with a couple of exceptions.
From your highlighted statement above now we can safely place you in the socialist, patriotic, conservative, isolationist camp.
I'm not sure where you live, but in Texas, and Michigan, a college degree gets you a $29K avg. yr. job with crap benefits and retirement, and with good luck it might turn into $50-60K and I will still make more than them with my union job. :P I don't have a "college degree" but have company paid training at an acedemy where I recieved a certificate.
From your highlighted statement above now we can safely place you in the socialist, patriotic, conservative, isolationist camp.i>
I will gladly go pal. :P
Rocky
Foreign owned companies do not pay taxes on profits and get many other breaks that domestic companies do not receive. What this means is that there is less money going to our government. We are losing billions of dollars a year that would go to government programs, schools, police, fire, Medicare, Medicaid, etc. Maybe even to restructure health care. So what happens when the government needs money: our personal tax burden increases? Domestic companies contribute more money to our government than foreign companies.
These foreign governments can then use this money for research and development, training and military growth. Foreign companies can use their American subsidiaries to influence our government. Why aren't things being done about the trade deficit and other injustices in trade? Did you ever think that this influence has been happening for years? Makes you think. Our government has given these foreign companies land to build plants and massive tax breaks on levels that our own companies have never see. Many of these plants were then built will imported materials.
By supporting companies like Ford and GM, who employee hundreds of thousands of American workers, you are supporting numerous businesses/industries that do business with these companies by requiring additional goods/services provided by other American companies and workers. American companies do more business with other American companies than foreign companies. We focus so much on the manufacturing. Most manufacturing is overseas but people don't realize that most American companies have their administrative jobs (accounting, IT, marketing, etc.) in this country so by buying from American owned companies you support these jobs.
People are going to debate which companies/countries make a better product and most is going to be subjective regardless of the numerous reports available. When most things are equal why would you not buy a product made by an American owned company?
What people need to realize is that these foreign companies are not selling themselves out. They are nationalistic and will do thing to support their country, companies and people. There is no nationalism here anymore. People need to evaluate how their purchasing affects their own government, companies and people. You often hear that when an industry in our country is in trouble people don't care because it doesn't affect them. In many cases they don't even really know how they are affected. It doesn't matter. The point is to support your country. Support your people. Our own country talks about the benefits of global competition and trading throughout the world when many of these foreign companies/countries practice protectionism and unfair trading practices which put us at a disadvantage.
We can debate forever about how corrupt our businesses might be but I would rather support this country than foreign countries. Let them worry about themselves for a change. Why do we owe everyone? Our forefathers fought hard to make this country what it is. These countries should do the same without expecting us to help out every country at the expense of our way of life. We have done more for other countries than any country would do for us. Everyone talks about how we are hated. Do you think other countries care about us? They are here to make money and if something would happen they would abandon their American workers. These countries have their own interest at heart (and so they should) and we should follow.
When there is a disaster in the world our country and companies are there with financial assistance, goods, services and manpower. Do you think that most foreign companies care about us? They are waiting for us to fall. What did GM and Ford do when after 9/11? They were there with millions of dollars and vehicles to help out. These are American companies. They have a stake in this country because them and their families live here and need our economy to be strong now and into the future. This is what you get when you support your own companies. Investment in your own country and people.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't trade with other companies. I'm saying we need to worry about our country and do what needs to be done to keep our way of life. We are not perfect but I couldn't choose any other place better. What would happen if we were not the world leader/police? Could you imaging what this world would be like if other countries took the helm? If the people are armed with all this information and still want to give this country away then what this country stands for and everything our forefathers fought for will cease to exist.
Where is better data published? The JD Powers reports are certainly better statistical information than an alternative source.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
We/you dont know what taxes are actually paid by lets say Honda. I did work for a large international company for a long time and it is true that if it's structured correctly a corporation can avoid a lot of taxes. Honda, Ford, DCX do this all the time. Just to be clear, and you were, Honda and Hyundai and DCX and BMW are all in the same group. It's only Ford and GM that are truly 'domestic' if you look at the tax question. But in the absence of hard data we don't know what each company pays here, except GM/Ford which pay none due to losses from continuing operations.
What you omit though is that the NA auto industry has grown nearly 40% in the last 20 years because many 'foreign' companies have invested billions in plant and equipment here, employed workers here, invested in training and scholarships here, and made $10's of millions of charitable donations here - probably in lieu of taxes to be honest. At the same time Ford and GM are focusing their efforts overseas, in Europe ( Ford ) and in China ( GM ) where each seems to do very well.
The amount of taxes not paid here, if that's the case, is far less then the amount of the investments and purchases here. Those purchases generate profits on the part of the suppliers and those profits are taxed and stay in the community. In addition all the workers pay taxes thus in a newly developed area like Miss where there is a new Nissan plant life is bursting out, property values are going up, new small businesses are growing. It's just not in the traditional areas.. at the moment.
All of this is beneficial to the US economy.
This is the radical type of vehicle which DCX ( unfortunately a foreign company ) grabs the initiative from GM/F in the important small car segment. From the look it is a Scion/Fit/Yaris fighter - with power - that might actually get young buyers into DCX showrooms.
GM/F have nothing to attract these buyers except their very capable trucks. But a 19 y.o. with no credit cannot afford a $22K truck nuch less a $35K 'dreamer'. Now this Hornet if priced right in the very low teens gets fanny's into Dodge seats at an early age.
GM/F caught napping?
Hmmmm GM/F?...GM/F? What if these two merged? Now there is an idea.
The average American wanted us to stay out of WWII until Pearl Harbor forced our hand. We may not have gone to war with Germany and Italy if Hitler hadn't first foolishly declared war on the United States.
Your Welcome!
Sorry, but that's not quite correct. Honda, Toyota, etc. all have US-based subsidiaries that will pay quite a few taxes. They will:
-Pay income taxes for US earnings
-Pay property taxes on owned land
-Collect sales taxes on retail inventory sold
-Pay wages to American workers that are subject to income tax
And that doesn't include all of the ripple effects of building a factory and creating employment, namely all the suppliers, vendors and employees who generate earnings from the plant, pay taxes on their earnings, and put that money back in the community in the form of spending and investment.
The only thing is that if we focused on purchasing from our own companies these companies would also grow and do the same thing. New American companies could emerge which would be better than any kind of foreign presence. How much foreign presence do we want here influencing our government? They are friendly now but what happens if they control out lives through their influence in our government? They don't have the best interest of the American people in mind. Just money. I understand that most companies probably think this way but Americans would (or should) care more for themselves and their country than a foreign company.
On a side note, it seems that there are people who want our companies to fail. That is insane. Why would you wish this? We have many problems and should strive to make our companies and country better. If people who live here want our companies to fail then they are not Americans. People are missing the point. If you are an American you should want our companies to succeed and do your part to help this country. In general, companies are not better anywhere else. If people love these other countries so much they should move there and change their citizenship.
The US stopped being isolationist when it decided to expand westward from the original colonies (declaring war on Mexico, destroying Indian tribes en masse, seizing Hawaii and buying Alaska) and with the Monroe Doctrine in 1823, which effectively stated that US foreign policy considered South America to be part of the US' sphere of influence. By the time that the US went to war with Spain in 1898, during which it turned Cuba into a puppet regime, colonized the Phillipines, etc., the only thing that was isolationist about the US was the rhetoric.
The isolationist talk has become an engrained myth of American philosophy since not long after the end of Washington's presidency. It allows us to believe that we are never the aggressor and are always the sleeping giant that is suddenly roused to anger before we enter a conflict. But it's just talk.
In any case, the world has globalized and the US and its allies are all highly dependent on an energy source that must largely be imported, so even if we had been isolationist (which we were for but a few years of our history), the world has changed enough so that it no longer works.
With that, the economy has globalized to the point that borders matter little to corporations. They will earn profits whereever they can and under any flag.
So wake up, folks -- the only companies that are "American" are those that hire Americans, invest in the US, and pay taxes to the US. Despite some of the comments on this thread, Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, Mazda, Mercedes, and BMW, among others, all do just that.
Meanwhile, the Big 2.5 have zero problem with building plants abroad and hiring foreign workers, so that they can avoid US wages, US industrial laws and reduce the power of the UAW. Some of you seem to be living in the 60's, and haven't figured out that it is no longer the same as it once was.
With the production of 'import' branded cars here in the U.S., new American companies (with American workers) DO emerge. These would be the American suppliers for these American-built vehicles. Toyota uses more than 600 different AMERICAN suppliers to supply AMERICAN parts for their AMERICAN BUILT cars.
"They don't have the best interest of the American people in mind. Just money."
Paranoia.
First, in order to stay in business (ie. sell cars), their customers must be able to actually BUY their cars. What do you suppose this 'foreign presence' is going to do which would be detrimental to the American people? They're just in business to make money? HELL YES. And do you think that the 'domestics' aren't? You think that the 'domestics' care more about the American people and less about making money? MAYBE THAT'S WHY THEY'RE IN TROUBLE.
"On a side note, it seems that there are people who want our companies to fail."
No, I want our companies to improve. I have faith that American companies CAN compete (and BEAT) the 'imports'. But this will not happen as long as some folks insist that we overlook any shortcomings due to nationalistic pride.
"We have many problems and should strive to make our companies and country better."
YES. But you don't do this by IGNORING the problems these companies have. If I feel that the vehicles the domestics offer is inferior to the vehicles offered by their import competition, am I really doing the domestic company any favors by OVERLOOKING their flaws and purchasing what I feel to be the inferior vehicle anyway? Remember, these 'domestic' companies must compete with the 'imports' GLOBALLY. You may be willing to give them a free pass to produce whatever they think is 'good enough' but that won't cut it in other markets.
Then you should consider this scenario :
US slaps tarriffs on Asian imports. Asian countries stop buying US treasuries. US needs to cover 800 Bn USD per year of extra money it needs to maintain its current lifestyle. Interest rates go up to 15%, housing market collapses, jobless rate hits 10% as consumption declines sharply (since incomes inflated by home equity go down sharply as Americans try to avoid bankruptcy). Of course, the Asian countries would suffer too, but will not have to experience the kind of wrenching lifestyle change that US would go through...
Seriously, if it was so easy, US Govt would have done it long time ago (apply tarrifs on imported Autos). But they know who would be the bigger loser in the Armageddon that might follow.
Someone mentioned that domestic car companies are building plants in other countries. While this is true, it is misleading. ALL foreign companies produce MOST of their vehicles outside of the United States. So, even if you don't care if a company is domestic or foreign, support the lesser of two evils, support the domestic companies that still produce MOST of their vehicles in the US.
One last point regarding foreign companies producing their cars in the US: Even if a car is produced in the US, does not mean that it is supporting the US economy in the same way that a US based company. EXAMPLE: Chevy Impala - Made in the US with 90% of its parts being US Made and assemble parts. Toyota Camry - Made in teh US with less than 20% of its parts being US Made.
Lastly, try comparing the amount of money that lets say, GM, pumps into individual communties, and social programs as compared to foreign companies. The numbers are stagering with GM contributing far more. Why you may ask....the answer has already been stated above. Domestic car companies have more than a financial stake in this country, but also a firm belief and support of the American people.
I am not sure I understand you. I have spent years of my life earning advanced degrees and skills and work hard for my money. I expect others to do the same. On more than one occasion, my job went to India. I took it as "if someone can do the same job for $X less, then that is what it is worth". Therefore, instead of appealing to my employer's patriotism, I learned new skills,went back to school and made myself employable again. It is not easy but definitely nit impossible.
I am greedy because I do not subsidize the UAW worker (who earns above market wages by doing a job that requires little or no skill) by buying overpriced cars just because they are made by the UAW? The only way the domestic automakers will be competitive is by paying market rate for wages or by employing robots. That day is not far behind.
Longstanding companies like GM and Ford have very few tax breaks and use their own money to add on and upgrade their plants. However, foreign companies like Toyota do not.
Sorry, but all kinds of companies, whether automakers or not and whether "foreign" or not, get tax breaks to open new plants and facilities, particularly in depressed areas. Go to a casino strip along the Mississippi River, and you'll see numerous examples of US-based companies receiving handsome subsidies to build their facilities there.
Have you considered why they receive these benefits? Because these plants provide employment, a new base of taxpayers, and stimulate and support other business. If the deal is properly cut, then the cost is less than the benefit.
Perhaps GM and Ford would get more of these in the US if they were building plants in the US, instead of shutting them down and outsourcing the jobs.
ALL foreign companies produce MOST of their vehicles outside of the United States.
Not sure what this means. Do the math on GM and Ford's production outside the US (and don't forget to include subsidiaries such as Opel/Vauxhall, Holden, Volvo, Saab, etc., as well as the "Buicks" that are made in China sold in Asia), and you'll see that ALL of the major automakers have a significant global presence with a large amount of production outside of the US.
Toyota Camry - Made in teh US with less than 20% of its parts being US Made.
That's simply wrong. A Camry has 70% US/Canadian content, more than a PT Cruiser made by the German-owned Chrysler. Where you are getting your information, I don't know.
I'll believe that propaganda when they stop building new plants in Mexico and stop closing US plants and firing US workers.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
I disagree that it's insane.
First, we're very critical of our corporations for social reasons. We don't trust their motives, and we don't treat them like they're our compatriots. The tobacco industry was blamed for killing us. McDonalds and Coca Cola are blamed for making us fat. Walmart and Starbucks for stiffling competition and mom & pop shops. The Big 3 for a) focusing on polluters and gas guzzlers, b) focusing less on safety, and c) getting into more horsepower wars.
They've made themselves very easy target to a wide variety of social activists. And really, how many people would cry if Starbucks made 10 years of bad coffee and went bankrupt?
But more importantly, they gave a lot of people bad service during a long time. We grew up learning that the market is a meritocracy. Sucktitude is a crime, and the punishment is corporate death.
We'll forgive one mistake, or a few years of mediocrity. But as they say, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me... After that second time (the 10 year of crappiness? The 20th?) who's going to feel sorry for them?
The only difference in the auto industry is that it's nearly impossible for a new local company to start up and replace GM or Ford. Is that really enough reason to love a bad company? They haven't even changed all that much.
http://in.news.yahoo.com/060202/137/62brw.html
Quote from that article:
"BANGALORE (Reuters) - Software services provider Wipro Ltd. said on Thursday its share of the information technology outsourcing contract announced by General Motors Corp. was estimated at $300 million over 5 years. "
Hint: Wipro is an Indian company.
-In 2005, 47% of GM's total vehicle production was outside of North America.
-If you deduct the production that occurred in Mexico (428,000 units during 2005, according to Automotive News), you find that 51% -- more than half of GM's production -- occurred outside the US and Canada.
-GM decreased its production of vehicles in North America by over 250,000 between 2001 and 2005. And let's keep in mind that it has been shifting some North American production to Mexico, so the number of vehicles assembled in the US has fallen more quickly than that.
-While it was slashing and burning production in the US, GM increased its production overseas by over 1.55 million vehicles between 2001 and 2005.
-Between 2001 and 2005, GM increased its production in its Asia Pacific region by 621%.
Meanwhile, we see that the "foreign" nameplates are adding jobs in the US, not decreasing them. Not sure why their money wouldn't be as green as is GM's.
Data per GM: http://www.gm.com/company/investor_information/docs/sales_prod/05_12/schedule_12- - 05.xls
Automotive News: http://www.autonews.com/assets/PDF/CA4327127.PDF
5. Impala
6. Malibu
7. Cobalt
8. Taurus
9. Focus
Source of course, is Ward's Automotive. I would agree that the Big 2.5 need to reduce percentage on fleet sales. I was in San Diego last month, and I think Toyota's entire rental fleet was there at Hertz !!
But also consider Americans settling Texas and taking it away from Mexico; Teddy Roosevelt - he took Panama away from Colombia and set up a US protectorate; Cuba under Castro; Vietnam? Ah, try to put together a sentence with the words Iraq and isolationism in it.
Bad theory that Americans are isolationists. It has never been so.
How is this any different than Ford in Europe and GM in China/Australia/Europe. It's simply one large market served/run by several large multinational companies. It's not a big deal really every major market is like this.
Oil, steel, autos, computers, pharmaceuticals, everything. It's just that this is an auto forum and here the 2 domestic automakers are struggling because of bad decisions 20 years ago. This too will pass.
Your last statement is getting childish. This is what it should be, 'Restructure GM/F making them smaller more vibrant and profitable.'
There is nothing evil going on here it's just that GM/F made bad business decisions 20 yrs ago and now they have to face the results.
Then, China will achieve their 50 year plan of world domination and rule with iron fist.
How would you like to work for a communist party? Would you like to work 12 hrs /day for pennies and live in a 12’x12’ box – called an apartment?
Keep supporting globalization and especially Chinese manufacturing and see where we’ll end up.
If we don’t get manufacturing back to States, we are doomed.
Copper, steel , aluminum ,cement and oil are all being consumed by China at record levels, they are driving the market prices way up – just look at the price of steel and copper that have doubled in 1 year. Same goes for oil and aluminum.
Keep embracing the global economy and say goodbye to our way of life!