The key word here is finally What have been doing for the last 20 years? Picking their noses and wringing their hands. They obviously had no clue.
"The flaw in your argument is that Lutz has only been aboard less than 5 years - almost of which time he has spent making the various pieces more cohesive.
Wagoner has been aboard about 8 years.
The CFO only about one year."
Well, let's see how they hack it. I think Lutz is the best thing that has happened to GM. They need a car guy It will be interesting to see how the upcoming adaptable chassis works out. If they can't produce a world class reliable car this time, they may as well close up shop. No more excuses.
BTW, my neighbor stopped over last night. He has a Chev pickup that is only a few years old. He listed all the things that have gone wrong in 70k miles. Unreal. He says he will never buy another American vehicle, and I don't blame him. Way to go GM. Ya lost another one.
Just go to ford.com, search dealer inventory, type in 43215 (zip for Columbus, Ohio), and click on Ricart Ford to see pricing details on remaining '06 GTs. Ford's current rebate (good through 1/2/07) is $1500 plus $1000 bonus cash on automatics for a total rebate $2500. Actually, the ad gave the MSRP ($34,355) less rebate and discount for a offered purchase price of $28,355. Suggest that if you think you can make money on it, give 'em a call and buy it.
I just went to Ford's website and "built" an '06 Premium GT coupe with EVERY available option, including auto trans, side airbags, anti-theft, wheel locks, premium stereo, 18" wheels, etc. etc. etc. The total MSRP was $29,015...
As I said in my post #11021 yesterday, the vehicle in question was a convertible. They are about $5000 more than comparable coupes.
Actually, it is possible to arrive at a price in excess of $31,000 on an '06 coupe by adding the Shaker 1000 stereo (a $1295 option) and the red accent interior option. And don't forget freight charges.
Yep, it had just about every option. And I agree - it was too damned expensive. I would never have bought it without the zero financing - which is why, of course, Ford made such an offer.
And it's why GM (and Chrysler) have had all these tremendous "deals" for last 4 or 5 years now - their vehicles are simply overpriced.
And....to be honest, they could get that from another source. If I was GM, I'd want to merge or form an alliance with Honda, or Toyota. I'm really surprised Toyota, hasn't done this already with GM. Togeather, they could "STRONG-ARM" the competition
Do you? Do you really? Then why identify with Unions (which do everything in their power to quash 'independence'), Government healthcare, and protectionist policies? Each of these things (and I've but barely scratched the surface) scream 'DEPENDENT'......
I guess I lost you ? I was talking about independence as a nation. The domestic issues can't be resolved without some dependence. I even think you would prefer to have your voice count over some foreign national stuffing money into some of "our" politicians pockets. It's absolutely wrong rorr.
Rocky
P.S. Yeah, you are very very far away. It would be cool if you were only a hour away so I could "pick-on you" over a beer.
[regarding compact cars]...the lack of staying power of one long term nameplate hurt GM in the marketplace.
This is what is puzzling. Even if the first effort is poor, reuse the same name but improve the product. Each generation gets better. That's what didn't happen. If that had been the focus of say, the Vega, then today we might have a Vega that long ago shed its lousy image and was a really good car. The first Civics were nothing that great. Yet every generation got better. And the name stands for quality today.
As an aside, did everybody else know that the name "civic" was derived from the original CVCC initials used in the revolutionary stratified charge engines Honda pioneered? I just read that recently.
Trumpetting national independence while pursueing a policy of making individuals dependent on the state inevitably leads to a "protection racket" -- i.e. mafia thuggish state. The prime example of that on the planet today is North Korea, where "Jeju," literally meaning "self-sufficiency," is the mantra. Somehow, a "self-sufficient" North Korea is nowhere nearly as nice a place to live as a South Korea that is dependent on the outside word for both raw material and markets.
Foreign nationals have been stuffing money into some of "our" politicians for ages. That's how the US got into WWI, and that's how the US abandoned the constitutional dual-metallic monetary standards 40 years earlier than that (both thanks to British banking interest). That's precisely what we get for giving politicians too much power . . . real money does not respect national borders . . . national boundary is only one of the tools that a subset of human beings use to exploit others.
Yeah, OK, but Renault-Nissan was interested, while Toyota and Honda haven't shown any such inclination. And in fact, in the case of Honda at least, I doubt there would BE much interest.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
• NOT ENOUGH CASH: GM wanted more to offset uneven deal • GM STOCK PREMIUM: Renault-Nissan wouldn’t pay extra • TOUGH TERMS: GM feared plan would hinder future alliances
I think GM has a better plan with 2 great V-6 families. The DOHC and the "cam in block". The cheaper V6 allows an alternative to customers thaht want the power of a V-6 but do not want to pay the extra $1000. Proof of that is the huge number of cam in block V-6's they sell. Most customers have no idea what a DOHC even is. They just know V-6 and cheaper price.
In I4's they really only have 1 family with the Daewoo and Saab engines hanging on the side because they sort of came with the cars.
They also have four great V-8's. The small blocker for torque (trucks/Vette/Camaro/W cars), the big block for trucks with torque, the diesel for trucks and the DOHC for the others. GM needs both for the diverse customers they have.
So GM does not have a "zillion" different engines. In the future they will have maybe 2 fours, 2 sixes and 4 eights (and maybe an inline 6 which I think will die out in 3 years). Hey, I am forgetting the diesels that they have overseas. Guess I cannot say much about them.
How Nissan could help the above I have no idea. I guess Ghosn could come in and say "drop the XX". But anyone can do that. They just need to see the data and make a decision.
Which platform would you drop? I guess with such a huge linup of vehicles I cannot see one to drop that is not already being rationalized.
Brands is another story. GM is sorta stuck with what they have after seeing what happend with Olds. Dropping Buick would really costs a lot of money and they would lose a venerable brand. From what I have read the future is niche brands and with GM's plan they seem to be going after that. Now if they could sell Saab for a good price and not lose any benefits overseas I probably would IF I could get a good dollar ofr it.
I just do not see Nissan helping with any of the above. They do not need to enter an alliance with them to do any of the above.
GM is big enough. Other companies need to combine to get the purchasing bonus's of sharing parts. Nissan has one midsize car that sells in some quantities but not much else. Size would have helped them tremedously whild for GM it would have been a small blip.
No, it looks like Ghosn is seeing the writing on the wall that to compete with the big boys he needs the volume and to get that he will have to get an alliance with someone. maybe Honda? maybe Ford? maybe buy Chrysler?
GM, could use Ford, Honda, Toyota, and that's about it from my perspective. Ford would be the best fit because they have several platforms GM, could use IMHO.
Shaker 1000 stereo???? Just like GM's monsoon, when are they going to realize how cheesey that sounds. Even if it was fantasitc, it sounds like a $12.95 option, not a $1,295 option
GM, needs to upgrade the Monsoon. The Monsoon was awesome when it first came out but Delphi, never invested much R&D to get a 5.1-7.1 DVD-Audio unit on the market. It's ashame because back in the day Monsoon was a very desirable factory unit. :sick:
Rocky
P.S. The Shaker unit reminds of a "Ghetto Blaster" from the 1980's. It's loud but distorted. What a Pile of Dung !!! :surprise:
Which platform does Ford have that GM could use? Please do not say Mustang because GM just developed the Zeta.
Just because one company has a great car does not mean that the platform is that wonderful. It is the details that make a car great. The Camry has almost the same platform as the W cars as far as suspension yet the Camry is rated much higher than the W's in many ways.
You'll never hear Lexus offering a stereo with a name like Shaker 1000 or Monsoon. It just sounds like some POS you buy at a flea market. "Premium Audio System" doesn't convey what it is??
That is true and is why GM, stuck with Bose so much even though Bose isn't the best anymore. Right now Acura arguably has the best factory unit made. The 5.1 DVD-A ELS in the TL, and the 410 watt ELS in the RDX, has gotten some pretty darn good reviews. The 7.1 450 watt DVD-A Mark Levinson, in the Lexus LS 460 might be the best one on the market currently. I haven't heard the 500 Watt DVD-Audio unit in the Lincoln MKZ, or the soon to come "American Dream Luxury Sedan" the Lincoln MKS. :shades:
Reminds me of the religious sect from New England. The Shakers were known for a style of furniture, known as Shaker furniture. It was plain in style, durable, and functional. Maybe Shaker 1000 isn't such a bad name if you look at it that way.
Okay, I tracked down the latest 'tariff' quote....and it came from (surprise) rocky.
"I blame our governments incompetence for basically forcing the big 3 out of this country because they refuse to tariff foreign makes like they do the big 3 exports..."
So, I'll ask rocky - WHERE can a I find a list or site which says WHICH foreign governments have tariffs on the Big 3 produced vehicles?
Former Govoner of California, Jerry Brown was going to put tariffs on imports. Well that's what he said when he was running for President against Clinton in 92. So maybe it was during that time ?
lemme preface this by stating, again, this is something they don't necessarily need NISSAN for, but things they need to learn and do to improve their line.
1. I agree with Nippon. You may think what engines they have are great, but a great deal of comparison shoppers and 99% of the media disagree. Many of their smaller engines are unrefined, underpowered, and uneconomical when compared to the Japanese competition.
2. How about more decent transmissions? Good god, they are one of the last companies on the planet desperately trying to pass of a 4-speed automatic as competitive. The public ain't buying it. And you throw this tranny design in with an unrefined engine and you get a horribly unpleasant driving experience.
3. How about a decent compact car?? GM absolutely needs to learn a thing or three about building a compact car that feels like an expensive midsize car. Nissan, Toyota, and Honda have been doing it for years. When I get in a Civic or Corolla, it does not feel at all like an economy car. I'll admit the Cobalt was a HUGE improvement over the Cavalier, but its still not up to par with the market. Basically, the Cobalt feels like a Civic from 2 generations ago. GM can't keep playing catchup. At some point, they need to leap over the competition if they want to win back customers.
Overall, without a doubt, the competition is building better cars for less money. In my opinion, there is not much they COULDN'T learn from the japanese.
GM builds a heck of a car in the Corvette. But that's not where the money is. The money is in mass produced transportation devices, and they continue to fail to make money in that respect because they are constantly outshined.
'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 checked your link, but I must be dense (pick you jaw up off the floor and no jokes) but I don't see the specific tariffs listed for Big 3 automobiles.
"I know for a fact Japan has tariffs on Big 3 products because it was a big stink about it at the UAW."
I don't want to hear about scuttlebutt going around at the UAW. SHOW ME what tariffs Japan levies against Big 3 automobiles. Because I LOOKED at that link you sent; under "Japan" and "tariff", I see something called "APEC'S Japan Tariff Schedule". When I click on that link, I find that there are 96 Tariff Chapters with 1243 Tariff Headings on the Japanese tariff schedule. I believe that Chapter 87 (Vehicles other than railway or tramway rolling-stock) is the one with the info I want.
That Chapter has 16 seperate headings - under heading 8703 (Motor cars and other motor vehicles principally designed for the transport of persons), it lists the following tariffs:
Comments
"The flaw in your argument is that Lutz has only been aboard less than 5 years - almost of which time he has spent making the various pieces more cohesive.
Wagoner has been aboard about 8 years.
The CFO only about one year."
Well, let's see how they hack it. I think Lutz is the best thing that has happened to GM. They need a car guy It will be interesting to see how the upcoming adaptable chassis works out. If they can't produce a world class reliable car this time, they may as well close up shop. No more excuses.
BTW, my neighbor stopped over last night. He has a Chev pickup that is only a few years old. He listed all the things that have gone wrong in 70k miles. Unreal. He says he will never buy another American vehicle, and I don't blame him. Way to go GM. Ya lost another one.
I just went to Ford's website and "built" an '06 Premium GT coupe with EVERY available option, including auto trans, side airbags, anti-theft, wheel locks, premium stereo, 18" wheels, etc. etc. etc. The total MSRP was $29,015...
Actually, it is possible to arrive at a price in excess of $31,000 on an '06 coupe by adding the Shaker 1000 stereo (a $1295 option) and the red accent interior option. And don't forget freight charges.
And it's why GM (and Chrysler) have had all these tremendous "deals" for last 4 or 5 years now - their vehicles are simply overpriced.
"STRONG-ARM" the competition
Rocky
Do you? Do you really? Then why identify with Unions (which do everything in their power to quash 'independence'), Government healthcare, and protectionist policies? Each of these things (and I've but barely scratched the surface) scream 'DEPENDENT'......
I guess I lost you ? I was talking about independence as a nation. The domestic issues can't be resolved without some dependence. I even think you would prefer to have your voice count over some foreign national stuffing money into some of "our" politicians pockets. It's absolutely wrong rorr.
Rocky
P.S. Yeah, you are very very far away. It would be cool if you were only a hour away so I could "pick-on you" over a beer.
Rocky
Yep I agree with ya pal.
Rocky
This is what is puzzling. Even if the first effort is poor, reuse the same name but improve the product. Each generation gets better. That's what didn't happen. If that had been the focus of say, the Vega, then today we might have a Vega that long ago shed its lousy image and was a really good car. The first Civics were nothing that great. Yet every generation got better. And the name stands for quality today.
As an aside, did everybody else know that the name "civic" was derived from the original CVCC initials used in the revolutionary stratified charge engines Honda pioneered? I just read that recently.
Foreign nationals have been stuffing money into some of "our" politicians for ages. That's how the US got into WWI, and that's how the US abandoned the constitutional dual-metallic monetary standards 40 years earlier than that (both thanks to British banking interest). That's precisely what we get for giving politicians too much power . . . real money does not respect national borders . . . national boundary is only one of the tools that a subset of human beings use to exploit others.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Rocky
http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061005/AUTO01/610050394/- 1148
Oh, My the Crap hit the FAN !!!! I love it !!!! Rick, "strong-armed" Kerkorkian, I love it !!!!
Rocky
http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061005/AUTO01/610050397/- 1148
Rocky
http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061005/AUTO01/610050393/- 1148
Rocky
http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061005/AUTO02/610050395/- 1148
Rocky
Rocky
http://detnews.stockgroup.com/sn_overview.asp?lang=&uniqueid=&ticker=GM
Rocky
http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061005/AUTO01/610050382/- 1148
Rocky
• GM STOCK PREMIUM: Renault-Nissan wouldn’t pay extra
• TOUGH TERMS: GM feared plan would hinder future alliances
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061005/BUSINESS01/610050341/10- 14
Rocky
6,000 employees get American Axle offer
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061005/BUSINESS01/610050306/10- 14
Rocky
Rocky
In I4's they really only have 1 family with the Daewoo and Saab engines hanging on the side because they sort of came with the cars.
They also have four great V-8's. The small blocker for torque (trucks/Vette/Camaro/W cars), the big block for trucks with torque, the diesel for trucks and the DOHC for the others. GM needs both for the diverse customers they have.
So GM does not have a "zillion" different engines. In the future they will have maybe 2 fours, 2 sixes and 4 eights (and maybe an inline 6 which I think will die out in 3 years). Hey, I am forgetting the diesels that they have overseas. Guess I cannot say much about them.
http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/product_services/2007/07car.htm
How Nissan could help the above I have no idea. I guess Ghosn could come in and say "drop the XX". But anyone can do that. They just need to see the data and make a decision.
Which platform would you drop? I guess with such a huge linup of vehicles I cannot see one to drop that is not already being rationalized.
Brands is another story. GM is sorta stuck with what they have after seeing what happend with Olds. Dropping Buick would really costs a lot of money and they would lose a venerable brand. From what I have read the future is niche brands and with GM's plan they seem to be going after that. Now if they could sell Saab for a good price and not lose any benefits overseas I probably would IF I could get a good dollar ofr it.
I just do not see Nissan helping with any of the above. They do not need to enter an alliance with them to do any of the above.
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061005/BUSINESS01/610050338/10- 14
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061005/BUSINESS01/610050409/10- 14
Rocky
No, it looks like Ghosn is seeing the writing on the wall that to compete with the big boys he needs the volume and to get that he will have to get an alliance with someone. maybe Honda? maybe Ford? maybe buy Chrysler?
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061005/BUSINESS01/610050357/10- 14
ShoooooT, I was hoping he would quit !!!! :sick: :mad:
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
P.S. The Shaker unit reminds of a "Ghetto Blaster" from the 1980's. It's loud but distorted. What a Pile of Dung !!! :surprise:
Just because one company has a great car does not mean that the platform is that wonderful. It is the details that make a car great. The Camry has almost the same platform as the W cars as far as suspension yet the Camry is rated much higher than the W's in many ways.
That new S80 platform from Volvo would be nice on a Cadillac or Buick RWD/AWD
Aston Martin for the Vette and/or XLR. How bout the Ford GT platform ?
How bout the Land Rover Platform, and my god don't forget the European Ford Focus-Falcon platform.
See I only named a few off of the top of my head.
Rocky
P.S.
Oops how bout the Ford cars in Aussie ? :surprise:
Rocky
"Bite your Tongue" lemko, on the MKS comments :P
Rocky
"I blame our governments incompetence for basically forcing the big 3 out of this country because they refuse to tariff foreign makes like they do the big 3 exports..."
So, I'll ask rocky - WHERE can a I find a list or site which says WHICH foreign governments have tariffs on the Big 3 produced vehicles?
Rocky
http://www.ita.doc.gov/td/tic/tariff/country_tariff_info.htm#Germany
Rocky
When was this. I would like to see us at the very least tax them what they do us + add on 30-40% for currency manipulation tax
Rocky
Rocky
1. I agree with Nippon. You may think what engines they have are great, but a great deal of comparison shoppers and 99% of the media disagree. Many of their smaller engines are unrefined, underpowered, and uneconomical when compared to the Japanese competition.
2. How about more decent transmissions? Good god, they are one of the last companies on the planet desperately trying to pass of a 4-speed automatic as competitive. The public ain't buying it. And you throw this tranny design in with an unrefined engine and you get a horribly unpleasant driving experience.
3. How about a decent compact car?? GM absolutely needs to learn a thing or three about building a compact car that feels like an expensive midsize car. Nissan, Toyota, and Honda have been doing it for years. When I get in a Civic or Corolla, it does not feel at all like an economy car. I'll admit the Cobalt was a HUGE improvement over the Cavalier, but its still not up to par with the market. Basically, the Cobalt feels like a Civic from 2 generations ago. GM can't keep playing catchup. At some point, they need to leap over the competition if they want to win back customers.
Overall, without a doubt, the competition is building better cars for less money. In my opinion, there is not much they COULDN'T learn from the japanese.
GM builds a heck of a car in the Corvette. But that's not where the money is. The money is in mass produced transportation devices, and they continue to fail to make money in that respect because they are constantly outshined.
'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 know for a fact Japan has tariffs on Big 3 products because it was a big stink about it at the UAW."
I don't want to hear about scuttlebutt going around at the UAW. SHOW ME what tariffs Japan levies against Big 3 automobiles. Because I LOOKED at that link you sent; under "Japan" and "tariff", I see something called "APEC'S Japan Tariff Schedule". When I click on that link, I find that there are 96 Tariff Chapters with 1243 Tariff Headings on the Japanese tariff schedule. I believe that Chapter 87 (Vehicles other than railway or tramway rolling-stock) is the one with the info I want.
That Chapter has 16 seperate headings - under heading 8703 (Motor cars and other motor vehicles principally
designed for the transport of persons), it lists the following tariffs:
"FREE"
http://www.apectariff.org/tdb.cgi/ff3235/apecfind.cgi?JP+8703
http://www.apectariff.org/tdb.cgi/ff3235/apeccgi.cgi?JP
So, I'll ask you AGAIN: what countries HAVE TARIFFS on U.S. manufactured automobiles?