Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
General Motors discussions
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://www.carspace.com/pf_flyer
son a(Delphi employee) said Delphi and the UAW aren't close. They got letters from the Union that on Friday Febuary 17th their will be a strike at Delphi. Delphi said if the employees strike they will by the end of 2007 will close all North American Operations. Like Dennis said what do they have to lose ???? Delphi and the auto-industry will have the majority of their buisness over in China anyways. I told him the UAW has no choice but to strike, because what you are saying is absolutely true. I guess we will see how this plays out. I feel bad for autoworkers whom are forced to strike to fight a 63% wage reduction and paying $300-$650 a month for health benefits. GM is obligated by contract, but is resisting to accept their obligation. This could be the end of Delphi and GM.
I know many of you will blame the UAW like you've done so many times before. Delphi isn't being realistic with $9-12 an hour and those type of health insurance co-pays on that low salary. Hell they'd be virtually working for health insurance and would have to get a single wide trailer and a beater to make it. Would they make it if they had kids ????? I sure in the hell couldn't and my house is paid for. I would rather see Delphi and GM meet their doom than get away with gutting the workers like pigs. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
Rocky
"I feel bad for autoworkers whom are forced to strike to fight a 63% wage reduction and paying $300-$650 a month for health benefits." Yeah, so do I.
I have no idea what the answer is except to let nature take its course.
Gear are facing the same pay cuts when the contract comes
up in 2007.............
Magna Intl. now owns 80% and will get the remaining 20%
from DC as soon as the current contract expires........
Then its gonna be a NON-union shop !
$10 bucks a hour.......Take it or bye-bye.............. :sick:
There are some lacking items in your comeback strategy...
Sounds like you are trying to sell a Front loader to Bill gates...
GM offers nothing that anybody could want right now -- tainted brands, falling market share, excessively large fleet business, high costs, poor management. Chrysler offered Daimler an entirely new market demographic and product type that it could not have reached on its own, while a company such as Toyota is already competing head-to-head with GM, and beating it into the ground.
The only other compelling reason to buy it would be if its competitors feared that GM was more easily tamed by buying it than it would be by competing with it. If GM had a really competitive product line, this could be a possibility, but since GM is no match in the retail marketplace for the larger players such as Toyota, TMC's money is better spent on burying in through competition rather than paying an inflated price to buy it. And as a JV partner, Toyota has already done this where it served its interests (NUMMI, for example) and can do more of that on an as-needed basis going forward if it so chooses. (Automakers form alliances all of the time.
It also helps to know that Toyota has avoided the acquisition sprees indulged by Ford and GM, the company seems to prefer organic growth and creating its own brands in-house. Buying GM would be a radical cultural shift for the company -- if it had the urge the merge, I would think that it would have been buying up brands already.
I could see a slight possibility of Renault-Nissan (yes, Renault owns Nissan) wanting to buy it once the UAW and pension issues have been worked out. The French car makers have been wanting a way back into the US market (all have failed), and Renault might see GM as a gateway to building small cars with GM nameplates tweaked to American tastes on top of existing European market platforms, which would amortize their R&D costs across greater production. The Renault brand has negative cachet in the US, so this is one of those rare instances where GM may actually have a brand advantage, plus it would help Renault muscle into the growing markets in Asia, where GM is making positive strides.
On the other hand, the Alfred P. Sloan version of progressive marketing that at one time had GM selling nine auto divisions, became obsolete in the 1960's when divisions began multi-modelling.
But then on the other . . . Foot? Americans would have a hard time excepting a single division that covered the entire spectrum from Aveo to DTS. Thats why Honda created the Acura Division, a $30,000 Honda didn't fit perceptions.
Automobile in the lastest issue had a very good editorial by Lindamood that said that both GM and Ford will need good design to get out their current mess. Pricing schemes will not work.
That is actually a great idea. One of the things that has bothered me for years is that GM intentionally gimps the Chevies to make the Buick line look more "desirable". Well, of course this has nothing to do with real-world competition, and GM really didn't figure this out until their market share was halved over the course of the last couple decades.
I disagree with Pontiac not having a big car, though. Let Buick, or Chevy in your idea, have the Lucerne for the old guys who want a cruiser. Let the Pontiac G8 be the BMW 5 Series.
That said, the new Cadillac CTS is supposed to be a very, very nice ride. I'm most interested to see how it turns out.
Chevy and Cadillac amount to about 3 million sales (US) while the others add about half that. In terms of what happened here as a result of shutting down Oldsmobile is that my Olds/Caddy/GMC dealership is now gone, with the Buick/Pontiac dealership getting GMC and the Chevy dealership getting Caddy. So we have one less GM dealership which probably helps GM out in some in that they have one less dealer to deal with.
The only upside is that I'd have an '02 Altima with around 57,000 miles on it, instead of an '00 Intrepid with 114,000.
What kind of mileage restrictions would there be on an Impala for 27 months for $229? When you figure that I put $2000 down on my Intrepid, and its payment was $347.66 per month, that lease actually doesn't sound too bad.
However, the costs of 27 months plus the down is a bit over $8 grand. The car will depreciate to half the initial list price in 27 months, more than the 8 grand.
in Canada.............
It seems they hire all new folks at the base wage of
$15 hr (Canadian) on a 180 day CONTRACT with NO bennies
at all........After 180 days its BYE-BYE and they hire
a new sucker.............
Back then though, I lived further from work. Plus, there was that dark period of my life where I had a part time job delivering pizzas, which racked up the miles REAL fast!
Oh, BTW, I just went to Chevy's website, and for that $2,000 down, $229 per month 27 month lease, they limit you to 22,500 miles. Or about 833 miles per month. Anything over that and they hit you with 25 cents per mile.
Bill Haley
You may have heard of jalopies,
You heard the noise they make,
Let me introduce you to my Rocket '88.
Yes it's great, just won't wait,
Everybody likes my Rocket '88.
Gals will ride in style,
Movin' all along.
V-8 motor and this modern design,
My convertible top and the gals don't mind
Sportin' with me, ridin' all around town for joy.
-- Blow your horn, Rocket, blow your horn!
Step in my Rocket and-a don't be late,
We're pullin' out about a half-past-eight.
Goin' on the corner and-a havin' some fun,
Takin' my Rocket on a long, hot run.
Ooh, goin' out,
Oozin' and cruisin' along.
Now that you've ridden in my Rocket '88,
I'll be around every night about eight.
You know it's great, don't be late,
Everybody likes my Rocket '88.
Gals will ride in style,
Movin' all along.
I agree. Toyota is getting ready to reward Subaru with a contract to build 100k Camry's a year at Subaru of Indiana. That will give Toyota a production capacity of around 450k vehicles a year in Indiana. That gives Toyota more capacity than GM Fort Wayne.
I don't have any knowledge of Honda but both Toyota and Subaru in Indiana start at around $17 an hour with full medical benefits after a month. At the 2 year mark, both top their line worker pay at around $22 an hour with paid medical and generous 401k contributions. That pay scale is very good for our state without a college education.
Well, I've heard the $27 an hour for UAW members kicked around on various forums, so yes, they make more. How long will they make more? That's the big question. There are going to be 1000+ new jobs at Subaru of Indiana when they start building Camry's for Toyota in '07, so if I worked for Delphi in Kokomo, I would be filling out my application now. Toyota is also considering a new engine plant in Indiana so we have potential for growth there also.
Time will tell on how the Delphi situation plays out here.
Well, I don't think anybody said shut down all the divisions except one. If they close Buick, they will still have Chevy, Cadillac, Pontiac, GMC, and Saturn. That is five brands where in any given class there are only one or two distinct cars, with cloning accounting for the rest of the story. That is just way too much cloning for the public to be fooled for long. Ultimately, I would think that closing down Buick would get them through the latest downsizing forecast, say until around 2012, then they may have to close one more division before things finally settle down and they achieve market equilibrium. My vote then would be Saturn, unless it shows tremendous results between now and then, with the new line-up arriving this year and next.
lemko: that was great! A moving tribute.
perna: I dunno about the Escalade - my local dealer has only been moving them with huge discounts for the last year or so. We will see how the redesign does. But that piece I read that said GMC was the most profitable per unit sold may be obsolete by now, with the resurgence of Cadillac in the last couple of years.
Speaking of things that are dying, I was most saddened to notice recently that one of the next round of plant closures will be the original Saturn plant in Spring Hill, TN. Back when I bought my Saturn, that plant was a big rallying point for the brand (it produced Saturns exclusively at the time - no Saturns were built anywhere else, and it built nothing but Saturns), and in fact they would have annual Saturn owner gatherings there. It was touted as the most modern plant at GM, with a process that allowed the line workers to make suggestions for improvements, and gave them the ability to stop the line any time they caught a defect.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
What does "shutting down Olds" mean? I assume that it means eliminating the dealer network and some factories and employees tied to Olds production. But I'm sure that GM still holds any patents and trademarks of the nameplates belonging to it, which is about the only positive thing left to the name.
In other words, shedding Olds meant shedding itself of obligations and future expenses, which was probably a smart move, but the rights to most of the good aspects remain. If for some reason, GM wanted to revive the marque to sell a car or two, i.e. a new car branded as an Olds 88 that was sold through Buick or Cadillac, then I would guess it could do this so if it so chose. (Not claiming that it would do this, just giving a possible example of what it might do for a nameplate if GM thought it had value.)
Given Old's lack of a unique identity and its inability to profit before, I thought it was long overdue, and an example of the company's ongoing need to eliminate much of its largely failed badge engineering strategy. I'd be merging GM brands together and dumping more nameplates if I was them.
I have heard, strictly anecdotally, that many Escalade buyers way overextend themselves in buying such expensive vehicles, and not coincidentally repo men do a lot of business in Escalades.
Many union foreman continue to draw their pay from the manufacturer while they do nothing but union related work. Many of the low skill positions the the domestics have to pay union wages are outsourced at the Japanese transplants. Also, the transplants use a lot of temp labor.
Sure, the pay scale is fairly close if you make it to be a Honda/Toyota/etc. employee, but they are not paying UAW employees $25 a hour to cut the grass during the summer, or do the menial work in the plant.
The gravy train is ending, and it sucks. However, we as a country have decided we are willing to give that up for cheaper products made overseas. Look at the success of Walmart.
If GM wanted to bring Olds back at some point in the future I think they can. GM tried to re-do the Olds line up in the mid to late 90's, but the revised lineup did not seem to do particularly well. From my point of view, the Olds lineup was somewhere between Pontiac and Buick, and very similar to Buick, with perhaps a bit more flash. I am speaking of Oldsmobile from the 60's through the end in very general terms. During the 50's and 60's each GM division had their own line of engines, and, to some extent, differences in transmissions. By the late 70's the differences between divisions is mostly styling, with engines shared across most lineups, except Cadillac.
That's about right, which was a good reason to punt it. The old Sloan sales model -- start with Chevy, then aspire to climb the GM ladder up through Pontiac, Buick and Olds to eventually get to Cadillac, is long dead, and it was time to scrap the dead weight. The rebadging strategy was driven by accountants looking to cut costs, not to the car guys wanting to building market share.
Totally agree. When looking at GM's cost structure, the increased costs of production, marketing and channel management related to multiple, redundant nameplates simply bloats costs, while offering no improvement or appreciable difference to the consumer. It's a lot cheaper to build, promote and sell a few nameplates within a few marques than it is to do the same with multiple nameplates. Plus, differentiation among them becomes easier, as the message is less diluted.
In the 80's there were 5 divisions making small cars, and I think at this point the whole concept really came apart.
Good insight. And at to that that the car environment is far more competitive than it was once was, with far more large and medium-sized players making headway and offering a viable alternative to customers.
Once upon a time, buyers essentially had to choose among the Big 3, unless they wanted a quirky or odd car not offered by one of them such as a British roadster, Beetle or Mercedes sedan. Now, there is an abundance of choices in all styles and price categories coming from a wide range of makers, and it is much harder to stand out. It's much harder for GM to do battle with a half-dozen strong competitors than it was to fight off just two.
I think at this point in time, Chevy has become a smaller car division, with the Impala now a midsize. But it took Chevy until the mid-90's to dump the full size Chevy.
I think that GM needs to have a better designed line up of cars. They need a good mix of RWD as well as FWD cars. They need to make them all American cars (whatever that means). The Chrysler 300 is an American style RWD large sedan. It is a far better car than the big Ford RWD sedans, which are old American style sedans.
I must disagree. Cadillac did not become Americas leading luxury car maker until 1951 when it ended the 30+ year reign of Packard. There were numerous independent makes that were competetive through the 1950’s. In 1960 Rambler was 4th in sales behind Chevy, Ford and Plymouth, and remained a top 10 seller (as AMC) into the mid-1970’s. By this time many European and Japanese makes were well established in the US.
The Pinto was in direct response to small imports, and as bad as it was, it was a good buy compared to the B210, Corolla, 128, etc The Seville was introduced in response to Mercedes in 1975, and it road tests it was rated higher. Would there have been an in Omni/Horizon ’78 if there hadn’t been a Rabbit in ’75?
I dare say, lack of competition has never been an issue. In the late 70’s sales were hitting all time highs, but inflation was in double digits, and profit margins were hitting all time lows. The bean counters took over. Lower grade materials and shorter development times lead to America’s overall quality rating to start to decline for the first time ever.
Over the next few years, we got such garbage as Chryslers ODB1 (lean burn), the Cadillac 368 (early cylinder deactivation), the Ford short block (255 V-8) and the “K” car (Aries/Reliant). By 1983, Japans overall (including Mazda, Isuzu, etc ) quality rating was higher than Americas.
Unfortunately, when you dominate the global market, let alone the US market, “recovery” plans don’t exactly leap to the front of your priority list. The Americans are where they are today because saw no need to be competitive with cars they were outselling, and then were caught of guard when they quit outselling them.
The market is "atomizing," according to the analysts from AutoPacific, who keep tabs on future trends across the auto industry. The U.S. light vehicle market is splintering beyond niche markets as manufacturers push more and more new entries, each of which "require billions of dollars to develop, manufacture, and merchandize," according to the new report the firm published last week.
Not since the earliest days of the American auto industry a century ago has the growth nameplates been so rapid. For the ten years from 1999 through 2009, an average of eight new nameplates will hit the market each year, with the biggest jump coming between 2003 and 2007 with manufacturers adding as many as 50 new nameplates. By 2009, the nameplate count could reach 275 individual nameplates of cars and light trucks sold in the United States, the report added...
...The AutoPacific report also offered some historical perspective on the changes.
Immediately following World War II, there were 33 major nameplates, virtually all of them domestic, on sale in the United States. By 1954, the count had risen to 50 as the Big Three raced to expand their lineups to provide transportation for the booming post-war economy. By 1959, the number had grown to 72 nameplates and to 101 in 1968. "It was a time of exuberant growth when cars were distinctive and head-turning. Each new car had a place in the mind of the public. A Cadillac was the 'Standard of the World.' The Chevrolet was a car you were proud to own and Mustang launched a tidal wave towards personal sporty transportation that lasted for decades," the AutoPacific Report noted.
The number of vehicle nameplates grew to 129 by 1971 and to 150 in 1979 despite challenges presented by the new fuel-economy and safety regulation. The 175 mark passed by 1985 as more and more import nameplates went on sale in the U.S. The '90s were marked by a more stable count as some companies rationalized their lineups by eliminating less popular such as LTD, Cougar, Aerostar, Cutlass, 88, Ninety-Eight, Roadmaster, Caprice, LeBaron, Monaco, Dynasty, Supra, and many more. But as old nameplates disappeared, new ones, such as Explorer, Tiburon, and ML320, were quickly added. By 2000 there were 208 nameplates in the United States.
"Clearly the number of offerings is increasing dramatically more rapidly than the market itself. This dynamic product development and market growth situation have clear implications for the auto industry in the United States. In the years after World War II, sales per major nameplate approached 200,000 units per year. However, during the last peak in sales at the turn of the century, sales averaged 85,100 units per nameplate in 1999 and 83,300 in 2000.
"Number of Nameplates Exploding"
GM dealers have to recognize that the auto maker's collection of me-too nameplates has to be trimmed. GM has 89 car nameplates across eight brands in North America; Toyota Motor (TM ) Corp. has only 26 nameplates across three brands here. Triage is warranted on one or two GM brands so the remaining ones can get the distinctive vehicles and marketing support they'll need to beat back competition from the likes of Toyota and Honda -- and eventually new entrants from China.
"How To Keep GM Off The Disassembly Line"
So we have more time to gripe I guess. UAW workers in Delphi plants make $25 and change an hour for production. My father who is a Job Setter, makes $26 and change a hour at Delphi. A GM assembly plant worker makes $27 and change an hour. I have relatives doing all jobs above. The gravy train jobs with good pay and benefits indeed done. This next contract will end it all for the Big 3 and Delphi.
New workers like my Aunt make $14 an hour and she can top out at $18 and change. No more $25 or $26 an hour for new workers. The starting wage at Toyota for production is $16.33 an hour and your $22 top pay is actually what the Top pay for them. Some people are puting faux wages of $25 an hour but is for skilled trades workers, not production.
Here's a list of What a Delphi strike can do according to the UAW who've done sound research.
#1 shut down GM #2 Shutdown approx half of Toyota #3 Shut down All of Hyundai, Kia, who buy parts from Delphi (Injectors)
The workers have said they would take concessions, but 63% wage reduction and increased costs in health insurance is inmorale and will NOT happen period. This is the only power that the workers have and will only use it if they get forced too. The common man is standing up and saying NO your not going to destroy my family, make me sell my home and move to a trailer to pay yourself a huge million dollar bonus. :mad:
Rocky
Thanx
Rocky
I agree. I'm still mad at them for selling Hughes Electronics (Direc TV) it would of atleast provided some disposable income.
Rocky