By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
As I mentioned in an other post the difference between our 'foreign' investors and others like Iran, SA and Venezuela is that investors here cannot succeed if their customer's are impovershed. Building factories and creating jobs creates customers and the 'foreign' companies profit from it. Do you think GM/F want to see Europe wiped off the face of the earth. Certainly not.
Influential elements in Iran, SA and Venzuela however do want the US wiped off the face of the earth. And, what reinvestments have these three made back here in the US?
None. What jobs have these three created back here. None
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.
Ask Ford management if setting up the plant in Hermosillo was in the best interest of it's American citizens. They did it solely because it's in the best interest of Ford, which sometimes ( often ) is not the same as the best interest of the rest of us.
While we can definitely nuke Iran, Syria and any other ME country back to the stone age without any ramifications, we can’t do that to China. So the only way to deal with them is to oppose them economically.
How can we compete with China, if we completely outsourced all our manufacturing to China and India?
Do you really think that China is a benign country and is going to cooperate with US, when they run out of space/food and so on?
They are forming alliance with Russia , which is run by a vicious ex KGB agent, and a communist. By supporting their products we are playing into their hand. That is why wal-Mart is evil and BAD for US. Because it sells all the crap that is made in 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?"
Oh man, stop. You're KILLING me here.
That's got to be the funniest thing I've read all day.
But it might cheer you to know that GM is expanding its production in China. Why don't the great patriots of Detroit build it here and export it there?
1. I'm not talking about Casino's, I'm talking about The Automotive Industry. Is GM getting any tax breaks for teh $540 Million + dollars that they are putting into their Michigan plants in the next 2 years....I think not...get your facts straight.
2.If American cars are SO over priced, then how is it that every single Chevrolet vehicle is cheaper than any of its competitors. Don't believe me....go to Edmunds.com and compare them. In addition, if foreign car companies produce such a higher quanlity car, please explain to me why 210,000 Toyota Prius' were recalled last year (that is nearly 2 years worth of production). Doesn't seem like any sort of amazing quanlity to me.
3. I belive your information is out of date, the Camry (when it fist started being produced in the US) was made of 70% US parts. However, since then, that number has slowly declined to lower than the 20% number I stated earlier.
4. GM has begun producing more cars oversees ONLY because in the last few years, their market share is dropping in the US (Because more people are buying foreign cars) and the places they have expanded their building is in the areas they are building those cars. Don't blaim GM for building a factory in China to sell cars to the Chinese, when on the other hand you say it is ok for the foreign manufacturers to do this in the US. The KEY is that all of the profits still come back to the US.
planning to import their cars here in 2007, 08 and so on.
China estimates that by 2010 their car production will be around 20 million/year – that is more than double of that of the GM.
Will you buy a Pontiac, or a 10,000 Chinese knock-off ? I bet that most of the Greedy unconscious Americans will run to Wal-Mart to pick up that “super deal” car as soon as it hits the market. It’s coming my friend – MARK MY WORLDS
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.
This is all false so you are either guessing, and trying to believe it's true in order to justify your own viewpoint or you are making up/repeating figures and ideas from 'coffee-machine' discussions.
Both of these two ideas were discussed in detail in earlier thread in this forum and both were killed dead and put to rest. Even the staunchest GM/F proponent here knows what you said is hoohaa. It was true 20 yrs ago, admittedly.
BTW do I get a sense that the all the domestic proponents here are just waking up from a 20 yr sleep. All the car talk in previous threads and all the facts and ideas were relevent in the mid 80's. Life has moved on and many seem to be stuck in place not able to adjust quickly enough.
Life goes on and gets better move with it.
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.
Good statement, probably true given GM's pure size and longstanding position in certain communities. Now provide some facts and references proving your point.. otherewise your statemen is just an opinion trying to disquise itself as a fact. For comparison do the same for Nissan in Smyrna as well. I am certain that those in TN are very very happy about Nissan's presence there.
The Fed supports Chinese imports. If we buy cheaper things, we can buy more things, and by their calculations that helps the economy. I don't know how correct they are, but I know they've analyzed it more than I have.
Neither because both are crap. My next ride will be the 2008 Camry XLE V6.
I knew somebody on the domestic argument side would bring WalMart into this discussion.
You do realize of course it's a joke here that when you lose something specific to say about autos or run into a logic roadblock all of you come back to....
"Yeah but, WalMart ( fill in the blank rant )."
Newsflash: WalMart and China have nothing to do with this discussion. But it is funny.
Hmmmmmm.
"$7.5 billion worth of business from the $15 billion it expects to spend over the next 5 years on IT"
Let me see, 300,000,000 / 15,000,000,000 = 2%
"Some 40-60 percent of the work in the latest contract will be done from India"
Now we're down to 1%.
That certainly isn't much out of the total contract. Any other items to try to show someone was wrong?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Companies usually get incentives because they are building new facilities, not for updating current ones. Updating facilities is not generally going to lure governments into providing packages -- their goal is to expand the tax base and local employment, something that plant improvements won't generally provide.
Since you erroneously believe that the "domestics" never get such offers, consider what happened with GM before it opened the Spring Hill Saturn plant. From a 1985 article in Time Magazine:
More than 20 Governors made pilgrimages to Detroit to woo GM, offering all sorts of land deals, tax breaks and worker-training grants. Minnesota's Rudy Perpich said his package of inducements was worth $1.3 billion to the company. To remind GM's executives of its lures, Missouri erected a billboard in downtown Detroit that read GIVE US A RING. Another sign said CHICAGO WANTS YOU. Celebrities were enlisted as well. Boxer Ray ("Boom Boom") Mancini touted Youngstown, Ohio, and Golfing Great Arnold Palmer praised Westmoreland County, Penn...
...By last week, Spring Hill had emerged as GM's choice. Tennessee's pitch had been low-key but effective. Three months ago, when Smith was in Memphis to give a speech, Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander and former Senator Howard Baker cornered him. The three men met for an hour at the stately Peabody Hotel, once a favorite gathering place for Southern plantation owners. Alexander and Baker explained that Tennessee's constitution prohibits it from giving financial incentives to companies. They also emphasized that the state has a pro-business government, no income tax on wages and salaries, and a hardworking labor force. Another selling point was that Nissan and Bridgestone have achieved unusually high productivity and quality in Tennessee. One Nissan study showed that trucks built at Smyrna had 11% fewer defects after being on the road for three months than models assembled in Japan.
Read the subtext there: Nissan built a plant in Tennessee for largely the same reasons that GM did, and in fact provided GM with a roadmap for how to do it.
And of course GM will get to take depreciation deductions on any plant-and-equipment investment that it makes.
_____________
If American cars are SO over priced, then how is it that every single Chevrolet vehicle is cheaper than any of its competitors.
That actually proves my point -- even with lower prices, GM's cars still don't cut it. Contrary to what some people believe, the "imports" offer no price advantage. Many consumers would prefer to pay more to get a better car.
_____________
I belive your information is out of date, the Camry (when it fist started being produced in the US) was made of 70% US parts.
Sorry, I was wrong. US-Canadian content of a Camry is 80%, not 70%. From Associated Press in October 2005:
Go figure. Honda's first pickup truck, the 2006 Ridgeline, is more "American" than a Chevy pickup, the Avalanche. And the Toyota Camry is more "American" than the Chrysler 300.
The Ridgeline gets 75 percent of its parts from the United States and Canada, compared with 61 percent for Chevrolet's Avalanche. The Camry, built at an assembly plant in Georgetown, Ky., has 80 percent American content vs. the Canadian-built Chrysler 300's 72 percent.
'They're coming and I cant do anything about it. What am I going to do? Oh poor me.'
Ummm get better and invest over there. Start your own business and in the American way, Michael Dell, Bill Gates, Intel, GM, etc etc etc. Just do It.
Don't whine, adjust and move on.
If not, why not? Are you saying there is a grand conspiracy amoung the various states to only grant tax breaks to foreign companies? Interesting......
"If American cars are SO over priced, then how is it that every single Chevrolet vehicle is cheaper than any of its competitors."
Yes, they're cheaper than their competition. Chevy's problem is....it shows.
"In addition, if foreign car companies produce such a higher quanlity car, please explain to me why 210,000 Toyota Prius' were recalled last year (that is nearly 2 years worth of production)."
Wow. Do you REALLY want to play the recall game? Must I remind you that the Prius employs bleeding edge technology and that the recall you mention involves a software glitch? If you really want to go there, I could spend a few hours categorizing the recalls with GM/Ford products over the last few years......
"However, since then, that number has slowly declined to lower than the 20% number I stated earlier."
Bull. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't just pluck that number out of thin air. But honestly, ask yourself a question: why would Toyota INCREASE the numbers of U.S. (not Mexican and not Canadian) parts suppliers to over 600, invest BILLIONS in the U.S. in new and expanded plants, and then drastically lower the domestic parts content? For what possible reason would they do this? How does this even START to make sense to you?
"GM has begun producing more cars oversees ONLY because in the last few years, their market share is dropping in the US"
You really don't understand globalization, do you?
There are multiple markets. In addition to the North American Market, there are European markets and Asian markets (and others as well). GM (like Ford and Toyota and MB and Fiat and etc. etc. etc.) will attempt to make as much money, in as many different markets, as they can. To do that, they (like ALL THE REST) must identify what types of vehicles are most in demand, where their competition is the most vulnerable, and fill the local demand. If they do that well, they will start producing more cars.
GM would be absolutely MORONIC (not that that has stopped them in the past) to attempt to build cars in the U.S. for export to China when (as someone else pointed out) the average customer makes pennies a day and lives in a 12'x12' apartment. How many Tahoes do you think they'd sell that way? ZIP.
The idea for GM (like Ford and Toyota and etc. etc.) is to build LOCALLY the types of vehicles which the LOCALS want to buy. Whether or not Americans want to buy the vehicles which GM builds for Americans has NOTHING to do with whether or not GM should build vehicles for the Chinese.
"Don't blaim GM for building a factory in China to sell cars to the Chinese, when on the other hand you say it is ok for the foreign manufacturers to do this in the US."
I don't think anybody IS 'blaming' GM for building factories in China. If GM can sell cars profitably to the Chinese, TERRIFIC. We're trying to find out why you guys understand(?) why the 'Domestics' might want to open up factories overseas to sell to the locals but it is wrong to buy from imports who do the same thing here.
"The KEY is that all of the profits still come back to the US."
Really? What does GM use to build those plants, set up their supply chain, and do R&D for those Chinese vehicles? Pixie dust?
3. I belive your information is out of date, the Camry (when it fist started being produced in the US) was made of 70% US parts. However, since then, that number has slowly declined to lower than the 20% number I stated earlier.( False )
Two of these three statement are false. You need to do some research.
The 3rd about Chevy's being less expensive is a severe embarrassment to GM. Except for their trucks which are very good, what you correctly note is that the market is saying... 'It doesnt matter how low you prices this stuff, we are still not going to buy it. Get the hint.'
GM is building plants outside of the US and then importing those cars from those countries into the US and selling those cars to US citizens. That is completely different from building cars there and selling them there. My complaint (and the complaint of many others here) is regarding the first practice, not the 2nd. Don't confuse the two.
All the profits DO NOT come back to the US. Stop kidding yourself. If that were true, then where did the money come from to build those foreign plants in the first place? That's right! the profits!! And when GM gives its Mexico plant workers bonuses, raises, a free lunch, or whatever, they are doing that with the money that US citizens paid for their Mexican-made vehicle. Same goes for all the property taxes, electric bill, water bills, and any other money that goes to the Mexican government and other Mexican businesses that are making a living off the work generated by GM being there (and, consequently, NOT being here). Yay! Whoohoo! Let's wave that American flag for GM!!
'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
My education and experience puts me well ahead of any Chinese competition.
I am worried about MANUFACTURING in MY country!
Do you understand that once we stop producing anything meaningful here, we will become insignificant. Do you think that all the stock brokers and the savvy investors and their lawyers and accountants will have a future, when all we do is import?
Where is the working class going to go, back to school for their MBA’s ?
You are really a narrow minded person if you think that we can survive outsourcing, by adopting and becoming service provider. Where are all the engineers going to go, and the technicians and the laborers? Maybe they can get a job at Wal-Mart, I hear they are building 120 new super centers.
If someone thinks that everyone in this great country can become a stock broker, investor, CPA or a lawyer they are plain stupid.
Who is going to pay all the taxes, when the majority of the middle class have been outsourced to China?
You do know that this is going beyond hilarious. Is there any subject or discussion or even idea that doesnt end with the word 'WalMart'. Puleeese you're killing me.
My education and experience puts me well ahead of any Chinese competition.
I am worried about MANUFACTURING in MY country!
OK, I will ask you the question since you are educated and seem balanced ( escept the WalMart fixation - now you've got me doing it :P ). You are concerned with the manufacturing base here and what will happen to the middle class. The answer is easy to find...here it comes:
'What happened to Lt Truck and Auto production over the last 20 years here?'
You are right. That is the amount going directly . However, the point was that once the outsourcing is done, there is no control. I will be very surprised (I am in IT), if at least 60% of the whole contract is not done in India. Other contract winners (HP/IBM) etc. has captive companies in India just to do this type of work. And I applaud GM for doing this: it is certainly one way to remain competitive. Now, if they would do something about that overpriced UAW labor, they would have a shot at staying in business for a long time.
"Some 40-60 percent of the work in the latest contract will be done from India"
Now we're down to 1%.
I find that very ironic. If Toyota builds cars here, that is no good beacuse profits go to Toyota, but you are willing to give credit for IT work done here by a foreign company???
I agree that it is an insignificant amount but I find the attitude interesting.
Any other items to try to show someone was wrong?
No sarcasm, please.
My posts: #944 and #1052
and socala4's post #1080
Rick Wagoner is caught in a very difficult position because of the actions and agreements of his predecessors. He does have a valid contract which has to be honored under law. It can and has been renegotiated but it is still very burdensome. No matter how burdensome it is he cannot move the UAW and other unions out from his company. So what is he doing?
He's moving his company!!! :surprise:
At some time in the near future GM may produce/sell more vehicles in China than they do here. GM's main resources may move to Shanghai for example. From there they will build and perfect smaller vehicles for the world market including the US. Trucks are quintessentially American so those will stay here, big trucks anyway.
Don't doubt that this major shift is being done in a vacuum. It's not a surprise to anyone involved closely. It make come as a surprise to the public. GM knows what it has to do, I'm certain it has told Toyota, Hyundai, the UAW, the US Govt., the Canadian Govt it's banks, etc. 'This is the only way we can survive.'
I am nearly certain also that the pressure put on them by various Govt's goes something like.. 'Don't close up shop everywhere just yet, let us go and get other auto manufacturers to step in and build plants here, in new areas like TN, AL, MS, TX, ON etc. then you can move out.'
You seem to forget all of the overseas casualities (both killed and wounded) of the US Auto Wars:
- Peugeot -- Au revoir
- Citroen -- Adieu
- Renault -- US unit absorbed by Chrysler, nameplate dead
- Rover -- Dead and gone, even at home
- Daihatsu -- Sayonara
- Triumph -- Cheerio
- Hyundai -- Would have died after the Excel were it not a large multinational that could spend twenty years to win back its reputation
- Daewoo -- Rebadged by your friend, GM
- Audi -- Auf wiedersehen (almost) until it worked hard to win back customers with a long warranty, AWD, and class-leading interior
- Mazda -- Were it not for the success of the GLC (forebearer of the 3) and first RX-7, would have left the US market altogether
- Fiat -- Arrivederci
- MG -- Ta ta
- Yugo -- I think we all know what happened here.
Want to fail in the US? Then sell us a poor car, and unless you are GM, Chrysler or Ford, your days will surely be numbered.
If the Chinese try to sell a miserable car here, it will be rejected and will die a quick death, just as did the others on this list. The only foreign nameplates that have survived either earned their place here or else held on for dear life before changing their products to match customer needs. Can't see why GM, which builds more cars outside the US than it does within it, or Ford, which has half of its manufacturing plants outside the US, should be any different.
Ford will add third shift to meet Fusion demand
Amy Wilson/ Automotive News / November 14, 2005 - 6:00 am
Betting that its Ford Fusion sedan will be a hit, Ford Motor Co. plans to add a third shift at its Hermosillo, Mexico, plant next year.
The third shift will start during the first quarter, Brian Vought, chief engineer of Ford's new mid-sized sedans, told Automotive News. Hermosillo makes about 800 combined units of the Fusion and its two siblings, the Mercury Milan and Lincoln Zephyr, each day.
The goal is to ramp up to 1,050 cars a day early next year.
At that rate, Hermosillo would produce about 250,000 vehicles annually, the Automotive News Data Center estimates. Ford has said that Hermosillo would have a maximum annual capacity of 300,000...
...The Hermosillo plant will nearly double its work force when the third shift is added.
Ford employs about 1,600 hourly workers and 220 salaried workers at Hermosillo, a Ford official said. The automaker plans to add 1,500 hourly workers and 50 salaried workers when production is increased next year, with some of the new workers assigned to the existing shifts.
See, this is what happens when the Big 2.5 have a successful car on their hands -- they shift production to Mexico.
If you want a sedan and are concerned about American payrolls and the trade deficit, why would you buy a Ford Fusion with 30% US/Canadian content that is made in Mexico, when you could buy a Camry with 80% US/Canadian content or Accord with 70% US/Canadian content that is built in the US? Doesn't make much sense, does it?
The last time I looked (5 years or so ago) the Camery Monroeney label showed 55 % domestic content.
I've listed the top institutional shareholders of Honda and Toyota (both traded on the NYSE), and both are comprised exclusively of US investment banks.
Most of a company's revenues do NOT become profit, but are paid out in expenses. When a company makes a car that includes high US-Canadian content, built by US workers in US plants, most of the revenue is going to pay for wages, local parts and new investment, which then feeds back through the US economy in the form of taxes, savings and spending. Very little of the total revenue stream becomes profit, and the earnings made in the US are subject to US taxes.
U.S. companies are not easily welcomed when they want to do business in Japan and there is a lot of red tape in order to do business there.
Agreed that it is not entirely fair. But how does that prevent the Big 2.5 from making a decent car for Americans?
And why would the Japanese buy cars that are too big for their roads, are not reliable enough to meet their needs, require non-metric tools to repair, and have the steering wheel on the wrong side? I can't see many US SUV's filling Japanese highways when the price of fuel in Japan is over US$6 per gallon and when parking space is at a premium.
The last time I looked (5 years or so ago) the Camery Monroeney label showed 55 % domestic content.
The AP article from above as of four months ago shows it to be 80%, more than a German-owned Chrysler 300. As the import makers expand their presence in the US, they are generally increasing domestic content, not reducing it.
I've shown you that more than half of GM's production is outside the US and Canada, and it is increasing production in Asia as it reduces it in the US. Care to comment on that?
Good point.
I've heard that 'unfair because U.S. Companies can't sell their cars in Japan' argument so many times but (for some reason) it never occurred to me. Just which American cars do they think would be big sellers in Japan if given a chance? The Japanese would probably view the Chevy Cobalt a rung or two down from a comparable Hyundai.
Perhaps there are some European maket cars built by Ford/GM which would (perhaps) work in the Japanese market; Ford/GM typically produce these in both left hand and right hand drive.
Japan's tough though. It's saturated, for one thing. The Japanese big 3 have a LOT of offerings there, and in the small car market there are more companies that are good too. Usually it takes a significant and protracted quality screw-up by the domestics for someone new to get their foot in the door. That happened in the US and it happened in Europe, but it hasn't happened in Japan.
And what works in Europe doesn't really work there. Europe prefers manual transmissions, stiff suspensions, and good steering feel. Japan prefers cars that'll be ok in a traffic jam - miniature (very miniature) living rooms, soft and automatic, and cute. Lots of boxlike cars, and we're even starting to see wood floors!
I don't doubt there's a lot of red tape too.
2002 article on Ford in Japan
Interesting to note that a lot of Japanese manufacturers aren't making any money there. Another good reason not to dive in.
We bought a Honda Accord EX 4-cyl 5-sp for $20300 out-the-door in 1998. In 2005, we bought a new Accord with the same options for $20700.
That is a $400 increase over 7 years, and that comes to about .3% increase in price per year. Anyone who was alive in the high inflation 70's knows how wonderful things are these days.
You obviously haven't been reading some posts in this groups through the last days if you are looking for no sarcasm. Some folks seem to not have any Rules of the Road when it comes to ridiculing.
>but you are willing to give credit for IT work done here by a foreign company???
I'm not sure what that means. You may have misunderstood or I didn't make point clear. I just found that the amount of work going to India was smaller than it appeared at first compared to the total of the contracts to be awarded and also that part of the work by the group of companies to which it was awarded actually would be done in India.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Just to give you an example of the order of magnitude you're discussing.
Let's say an Camry sells for about $20000 ( It's a little high but it's a round figure )
$1350 goes to the dealer
$400 goes to advertising
$650 goes to freight
$17600 Balance
100% of the labor is paid to US workers
80% of the parts are from the US
100% of the plant overhead is paid to local utilities etc
100% of the Sales and Marketing is paid to US workers
Product development, design, testing are all done here ( CA & MI )
When all is said and done on a $2000 vehicle how much profit do you think there is $500, $1000, I'd guess $1500.
Thats $1500 'profit' as you say going back to Japan, part of which comes back to US financial institutions here.
So maybe 5% of the price of a Camry goes and stays out of the country while 95% stays here. This sale is much more beneficial to the US economy than to Japans.
Forgetting the IT for a moment, for which you had been hoping to have an I-gotcha moment with Black Tulip there, what do you think of GM building more than half of its cars outside the US, with that proportion likely to increase?
Do you prefer Toyota, that increases US payrolls, or GM, that works overtime to reduce them?
Funny thing -- Ford just recently announced its intent to avoid Euro styling in the US in favor of unique looks for the American market, claiming that the Five Hundred is proof that European doesn't work. (Does the 500 seem terribly European to you? It doesn't particularly seem so to me...)
Ford drops European styling for US models
Lindsay Chappell / Automotive News / January 23, 2006
Ford Motor Co. no longer wants its US models to have a European look.
After years of struggling with vehicle designs that communicated a fuzzy brand identity, Ford’s US division is quickly rolling out a new signature look.
The new style abandons Ford’s late-1990s desire to capture the European panache of Volkswagens and Audis. Instead, it embraces a simpler American look that borrows from the automaker’s iconic – and big-selling – Mustang.
The Edge crossover and the sporty Reflex concept car both bear Ford’s new brand markings.
The same design cues, referred to internally at Ford Motor Co. as Modern Styling, already exist on the Ford Fusion, which went on sale in the US last year.
Modern Styling includes a three-bar chrome grille, a slightly arched “power dome” hood, broad shoulders and an absence of side lines, such as creases and trim.
Together, the elements create what Peter Horbury, Ford Motor’s executive director of North American design, calls “the clean look of Ford cars” from the 1960s.
Horbury said Ford’s US-only Five Hundred sedan, which critics called uninspiring, was the brand’s turning point.
“No more European,” said Horbury, an Englishman who ran Volvo’s global studios for more than a decade. “The Five Hundred was not a success.”
Horbury was recruited to his current Ford post two years ago to help sharpen Ford’s North American identity. He says the new designs are intended to recapture what US consumers associated with Ford a generation ago.
“If there’s a change, it’s that we’ve stopped trying to be global in our design,” Horbury said during the show. “Bold American design is something that’s ours to use. It’s not European.
Please don't respond to my posts. Your manner of doing so is often discourteous and taunting. The tone does not follow the Rules of the Road. I suggest just skipping my posts as I often do yours.
I have a right to post on this forum and not be harassed by a particular person who always disagrees. If you wish to deride, please choose someone else.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
My personal surveyed complaint involved AC that would sweat on my right foot ('95 Nissan Hardbody), it turned out to be a kinked drain hose. Was this complaint the only one of its type, or did it happen enough to count? Even if it happened on 100% of the the trucks sold, how does this show anything about the cars reliability?
The Camry consistently has good numbers. If there are fewer complaints, customers are more satisfied (hence the name of the survey). But the numbers simply are not comparable without an indepth breakdown of the complaints.
The version of JD Power that we see does not include specifics, but the full study that automakers purchase includes far more details. Bear in mind that JD Power charges substantial sums for its data, and you're not going to see but a fraction of it for free on its website.
Really? What does GM use to build those plants, set up their supply chain, and do R&D for those Chinese vehicles? Pixie dust?
Exactly, GM's profits made in other countries stay in other countries where they are used to expand their factories. On top of this USA has a policy against double taxation. This means that GM's profits which are already taxed in other countries are not taxed again. Most countries have this law. So the profits GM makes in China does nothing for America. It only helps GM's share holders. Same as Toyota's share holders benefit from profits that Toyota makes in USA. I don't think that Japan's government makes too much money from Toyota's profits in USA.
I am sure that Toyota pays their fare share of USA taxes, Unless all of you think that IRS employees are stupid. I think that IRS keeps an eye out for the fact that Toyota made 6 billion dollars in USA. You know its like public information. I would say that Toyota and Honda contributed more to USA taxes then GM or Ford last year. GM and Ford probably managed to get a tax refund because of the losses that they made.
And I have a right to pose questions of you, to correct your misstatements and to point out that Japan and China are different countries. Rather than make it personal, you could address my question, which is specifically on point to comments you've made here.
A century ago I'm sure that buggy makers complained about these newfangled cars. Candle makers were upset about these light bulb thingys.
I know there were workers at Rambler who were upset to lose their jobs. I'm sure people were hurt by American Motors disappearing. Don't forget when Xerox had a monopoly on copiers.
We can spend the rest of our days as a country whining about globalization, or we can channel our intellect and energy into building world class products. Some people want changes to go away. They won't. Please deal with it.
Of course not. Who has time to read 100+ posts a day? Who do you think I am, a UAW worker?
On the other hand, US companies like Citibank, McDonalds, IBM, Coke etc dominate their markets, despite significant domestic competition.
Does that indicate something?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
$1350 goes to the dealer
$400 goes to advertising
$650 goes to freight
$17600 Balance
100% of the labor is paid to US workers
80% of the parts are from the US
100% of the plant overhead is paid to local utilities etc
100% of the Sales and Marketing is paid to US workers
Product development, design, testing are all done here ( CA & MI )
When all is said and done on a $2000 vehicle how much profit do you think there is $500, $1000, I'd guess $1500.
Good point. Based upon Toyota's 2005 annual report, here's a breakdown of where the money went. For every dollar earned by TMC from the business and interest income, here's where it went:
-77.8 cents went to "Cost of Product Sold" (this would include the assembly, parts, and other costs related to building the cars and other products)
-2.0 cents went to covering the costs of operating its financing arm (Toyota Motor Credit, etc.)
-10.8 cents went to overhead (this would include management, rental payment, property taxes, etc.)
Result: Profit before tax was about 9.4 cents for every dollar earned. Over 90 cents went to pay expenses, not including income taxes.
Toyota then paid 37.5% of its net income on income taxes (equivalent to 3.5 cents for every dollar of revenue received).
Net result: only 5.9 cents of every dollar taken in went to the bottom line, after tax.
This amount does not include investment in plant and equipment, because that is not booked as an "expense." (Depreciable items are classed as assets, not expenses -- you accountants and business people will understand this.)
The point remains: The vast majority of dollars taken in are put toward paying the cost of building cars, namely parts and labor. Obviously, the more of those costs that can be spent on American parts and American workers, the more benefit that goes to American business and employees.
Ask yourself where you'd prefer the 78 cents (or similar proportion) of an automaker's dollar to go. The more plants that are built in the US, the more that Americans will benefit, because that's where the lion share of the money taken in ends up being spent. Anyone believing that diverting the relatively small amount of profit to a few US institutional stockholders will somehow create more benefits to the American public is sorely misguided.