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 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Does America Even Need Its Own Automakers?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Yes but cooter, 500,000 is a LONG way from 3 million. AND those jobs would go away in phases, as less than 25% of that number is direct job losses at GM (I'm not including Ford, as I think they will make it through). We have lost more than 3 times that number of jobs just in the last 10 months. If we lose that many more in the next 10, all it will do is extend the recession, not make things any worse than they are now.
Looks like it is a moot point anyway, as it seems the Repubs are dead set against giving the domestics any money at this point, and GM probably won't make it to the new year. I think it's weird that in the midst of the worst crisis GM has ever seen, they continue plugging away at the Volt. Shouldn't all spending on R&D cease when the company is looking at not being in business in 60 days' time? Even if they avoid the big 'B' this car is going to do little for the bottom line for at least a decade.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I think the Volt R&D will continue unless GM concentrates R&D on stuff like that new engine plant they have on the drawing board. The $25 billion loan guarantee already passed was intended "to spark a wave of automotive innovation." link.
So if they don't come up with something to fund that falls under that innovation umbrella, they may not get any of the guarantee money. And lots of that money could be designated for R&D but it also could tangentially help pay some of the existing salaries and overhead that is used for day-to-day operations.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Being your like for luxury, would think that an upgrade from a Cadillac to a Lexus ES or RX a more likely scenario.
For the record, I find it dubious at best to suggest that we need to sustain a war economy, or that we can't build a Humvee without GM, or that somehow GM and our "national security" are linked, but the man is entitled to his opinion and he's a smart guy. Sounds like more fear-mongering to me however, for the astronomical Pentagon budget. We already have a huge commercial/agricultural industrial arm in America to build whatever we want, unless we are going to be fighting the next war with Chevy Cobalts?
In a little more than a year, the Army has procured and fielded in Iraq more than a thousand so-called mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles. The lives of hundreds of soldiers and marines have been saved, and their tasks made more achievable, by the efforts of the American automotive industry. And unlike in World War II, America didn't have to divert much civilian capacity to meet these military needs. Without a vigorous automotive sector, those needs could not have been quickly met.
More challenges lie ahead for our military, and to meet them we need a strong industrial base. For years the military has sought better sources of electric power in its vehicles -- necessary to allow troops to monitor their radios with diesel engines off, to support increasingly high-powered communications technology, and eventually to support electric propulsion and innovative armaments like directed-energy weapons. In sum, this greater use of electricity will increase combat power while reducing our footprint. Much research and development spending has gone into these programs over the years, but nothing on the manufacturing scale we really need.
Now, though, as Detroit moves to plug-in hybrids and electric-drive technology, the scale problem can be remedied. Automakers are developing innovative electric motors, many with permanent magnet technology, that will have immediate military use. And only the auto industry, with its vast purchasing power, is able to establish a domestic advanced battery industry. Likewise, domestic fuel cell production -- which will undoubtedly have many critical military applications -- depends on a vibrant car industry.
[...]
This should be no giveaway. Instead, it is a historic opportunity to get it right in Detroit for the good of the country. But Americans must bear in mind that any federal assistance plan would not be just an economic measure. This is, fundamentally, about national security.
And only the auto industry, with its vast purchasing power, is able to establish a domestic advanced battery industry.
Sounds like Wes missed the news. GM has signed with Hitachi to build the batteries for the VOLT. Probably will be built in China. The only thing I see him saying is GM should keep HUMMER as it builds the vehicles for the military. I am sure if they have contracts some one will buy that company. It was not always part of GM. Seems like American Motors owned them for a while.
We built up from nothing to fight WW2. I just don't see much in his logic that makes sense. I believe in keeping a strong military. I don't see where GM in its current condition is a real asset to the military.
So, yesterday I researched this new little all-electric from Pininfarina-Bollore and had a ball doing it. I put the car on as my background picture on my Windows page with all the icons. She spotted it late last night and here we go..."Don't you go and buy another new car! :mad: "
The fact is though is that this all-EV appears to be just what I have been looking or...well-thought out by the manufacturer and a nice looking little rig, too. Lots of research must still be done, though(Warranty and Price, mainly)but if they don't price this thing over say $29,995 USD, the car will remain in contention for our next car.
However, only 10,000 become available in late 2010, so one can not sit on his hands waiting if he wants one, eh? It's going to be an absolute ball researching it. I have pre-set parameters that I look at while researching and this car has passed all tests(there's a lot of them, believe me)so far with flying colors. :shades:
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
An Acura RL would be OK if it had a V-8.
Infiniti? Too weird!
Genesis? A Hyundai? That's not just a step down from where I am, but falling down an elevator shaft. Maybe it would make a good beater car to replace my '88 Park Ave.
Audi? Nah. If I have to go with a Euro make, it will be Mercedes-Benz - most likely an S-Class.
I agree, the LS460 is the ONLY true luxury vehicle in the Lexus line-up. The rest are just fancy Toyota's or poor attempts to dethrone BMW.
That is an insult to many professional women who make their own car buying decisions. :P My wife, a professional, has not considered American brands in her car buying decisons over the last couple decades.
Seems to me modern wars are going to be small, dirty and right in with the civilian populations. They'll also be wars for hearts and minds, not territory.
If there's any massive industrial power that would be needed for national security in the future, it would be for aircraft, military robotics and law enforcement equipment. Not GMs strong points.
What's he saying? That Caterpillar can't make an armored personnel carrier?
I'm sure we'll need weapons and an army for the next XXX years but it won't look anything like it did in 2003 and I don't think the Big Three in anything like its current form will be building it.
So the arguments in favor of bail out so far seem to be:
1. If the Big Three goes bankrupt, the US economy will collapse
2. If the Big Three goes bankrupt, our enemies will overrun us
I'm not buying either myself. These claims strike me as alarmist and without solid evidence.
Congress: Vote Yes on Automaker Loans
(I'm not sure that all us hosts out here in the hinterlands got the memo, lol).
Disagree with this: This is a financial crisis, and not one of the auto industry's making
STRONGLY disagree with this: Further, the impact of the demise of the auto industry on the global economy would be devastating,
Who is writing this junk? As for U.S. taxpayers footing the bill - they will one way or another. They can ante up now for $25 billion or $50 billion loans whatever it turns out to be
...and then $25 billion more next year, and then $50 billion two years after that. And that's AFTER THIS LOAN, "whatever it turns out to be" - what, $100 billion? More? These greedy execs keep whining for more as soon as the last increase is accepted.
You can rest assured, if we pay now we will keep paying and paying and paying, and even THEN I am not real convinced GM will make it to 2020. I know Chrysler won't.
The part that might actually make me puke is the last part: So Congress, go ahead, point fingers. There's plenty of blame to go around, you included. Debate all you want; in fact, add the debate over a national energy policy and a national industrial policy to your future agenda. Chastise union workers and auto company execs. Attach strings to the loans. Do your political grandstanding.
Do what you have to do, Congress. But get the job done - now.
OMG! How trite can you get? I don't want grandstanding or chastisement, I want top-to-bottom total reform if we give these automakers one dime. I want the UAW contracts wiped out and new ones put in place at the average auto industry wage. I want every exec gone. I want NOT ONE SHRED of "business as usual" to remain at these dinosaur corporations.
And as so many have pointed out here already, I can't have any of that because the law prevents it. So no, NO BAILOUT (don't even call them a loan, what a joke).
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Well you can go to AutoObserver and not comment over there. :shades: No use stopping posting in here (you trying to banko GM and some of us hosts both? :P )
Do I want our tax dollars going to these companies? I don't know the answers, but help me understand why I should if this is where the dollars will go? Will it just prolong the inevitable?
Meanwhile, the giant bank bailout money is now lying unspent after we listened to all of that "we have to do it today" talk that led to its passage and now Paulson is saying he'll leave half of it for Obama to figure out.
Screaming "It's an emergency! It's an emergency!" isn't working for me.
Regards,
OW
I find it amazing that nobody call Toyota on the carpet for that fact.
Hmmmm. Maybe time for a new wife???? :surprise: :P
What I would take out of it is that a company like that or AM General may not have the capacity to build what is needed for "WW III". Therefore, we would need the manufacturing capacity that these companies offer. GM may not build aircraft engines, but have the space to convert a plant to build them under licence from a GE or Pratt & Whitney.
Big 3 go down = less advertising fee to Edmunds.
From my source Edmunds gets about something like 30 to 50 million dollars a year from GM so go figure...
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
If that concept annoys you consider this. They sell the same vehicle to $19000 buyers and to $45000 buyers. It just depends on which level of amenities the buyer wants. This is a problem? No, in fact it's ingenious, it's cost effective and it makes tons of money which BTW is the purpose of this whole exercise. It's a business.
Yup, from an extremely reliable source.
Agree 101%.
It's really funny how that the Big 3 invented badge engineering, Toyota then perfected it (Lexus ES/Toyota Camry and Lexus RX/Toyota Highlander) and now the Big 3 supporters are crying foul...
This is hypocrisy at its best. :sick:
Complaints about Edmunds' GM Ads -- at least you could FAKE gratitude :P
Because for years the Big 3 have been derided for doing this.
Whaddya think? The Big Three could end up having a great Spring resurgence!
I'd buy a car with some of that, sure thing.
$40K would sit real nice with me right now.
Hoovers has a tiny smattering of financial info about Edmunds.
Well, that's because they suck at it...
Take the 4 Lambdas, how is that "Platform sharing"? All 4 have identical seating, identical AWD systems, identical engines, nearly identical dimensions and similar features. I can load up a Chevy Traverse to be the same amount as a GMC Arcadia. I can also load down a Buick to be cheaper than a Saturn. Truth is they all serve the exact same mission.
Yay, so they have different sheetmetal, big whoop. They're clones.
GMT-900, GMT-360 - clones
The Aura, Malibu, G6 - clones
Future Saturn Vue, Chevy Cheapuinox, Pontiac Torent, 9-4x, SRX all based on "Theta". All identical sizes, same missions, same engine choices, transmission choices. The rebadging continues... :sick:
Platform sharing IMO is taking an Accord and basing the Odyssey off of it. Or the Dodge Avenger/Journey.
A '79 5th Ave would have probably stickered for around $12,000 in 1979. So heck, at $6K for a perfect one, I'd jump all over that!
But I imagine that, even with all the precautions taken to preserve it, it's still going to randomly refuse to start, the aluminum bumpers are probably peeling, most likely will leak around the opera windows if you get caught out in the rain, probably has interior parts falling off, and has a temperature warning light with a mind of its own, that seems to operate independently of the gauge.
Okay, remind me again why I like these things so much? :P
Yay, so they have different sheetmetal, big whoop. They're clones.
GMT-900, GMT-360 - clones
The Aura, Malibu, G6 - clones
Actually, I don't have too much of a problem with this, because at least it gives you some variety. For instance, I like the looks of the Saturn Aura better than that of the Malibu, and like them both better than the G6. Yet someone else might prefer the Malibu, while others may prefer the G6. So yeah, all the same basic car, just in different flavors to suit different tastes.
However, now that these vehicles can all be equipped pretty much the same way, it does dilute their status in the overall brand hierarchy. For instance, once upon a time, a Pontiac was considered a better car than a Chevy, with Olds being another step up, then Buick, and Cadillac at the top. Now there was always some overlap...in fact, even way back in the 1950's, you could get a Buick Special cheaper than the cheapest Olds 88. And if you optioned up a Chevy Bel Air to where it was comparable, it was priced about the same as a Special.
These days though, it's hard to really say a Saturn Aura is a nicer car than a Malibu. Yet I think the Malibu is nicer than the G6. But then the G6 has the convertible, sort of a premium body style that neither of the other two offer.
One thing I always hated was when they'd just badge-engineer a car, changing simple things like the taillights, grille inserts, etc. Not even bothering to change the sheetmetal. The one advantage there though, is that it does make it easier to find replacement parts in the junkyard. :P
We Are All Flint Michigan Now
Exactly.
It also makes the argument that GM has too many brands to support. When there is this much overlap, it just dilutes the mission that each brand once stood for. Again, why is there a Cobalt SS when your supposed "Sporty division" makes do with a base model G5? What the hell is the G3 doing in the Pontiac lineup?
What is Pontiac? A lineup of rebadged Chevies (minus the Holden G8)
What is GMC? An entire lineup of rebadged Chevies
What is Saturn? An entire lineup of rebadged Chevies (minus the Opel Astra)
What is Buick? A lineup of rebadged Chevies and a cheap Cadillac
The lines are too blurry here. And I think they are blurry to the GM execs as well.
For example, remember those commercials when the Lacrosse came out and the guy was playing on the racetrack with his kids while daydreaming of taking off ramps like it was a Ferrari? The Lacrosse is a dull, spongy, soft sprung pillow, yet you'd think the advertisments were making it out to be a 3-series or even an Acura TL. It sure was priced like one when they first came out... Now you can get them for less money than a Cobalt. Then you look across to GM's supposed "everyman car" and you find an Impala SS that looks much more racy and blows the Lacrosse away in exterior quality (interior is still as cheap as the Lax). Why "step up" to an inferior Buick?
Or the Aura. When the car made the rounds of the auto show curcuit, GM was touting the car as "Saturns interpretation of an Acura TL". I kid you not. The concept had sharp, racy lines, a center mounted dual exhaust with beefy chrome tips and a 6-speed manual plucked out of a Holden. I mean, the car looked the part for sure, and sure, the end product was a dull, watered-down shadow of its former self but still, why wasn't this car a Pontiac G6 in the first place? The G6 is laughable as a performance car and Chevies own Malibu is a major step up on the interior and exterior styling/quality. Why "step up" to an inferior Pontiac? Is Saturn supposed to be above Pontiac as well?
To GM, I have one recommendation.
K.I.S.S.
How the heck would you know? Do you own one? We do. Oh, and the Camry is a high performance exotic that would put a Ferrari to shame. I guess you conveniently forgot about the commercials that showed a Camry being aggressively driven on a deserted L.A. freeway. The only time you'd ever see a Camry being aggressively driven is when some wimpy whipped husband is two minutes late in coming home to his dominant, controlling wife so he can hand over his paycheck so she can go shopping and stick him with the bratty spoiled kids he never wanted in the first place.
Thing is, Camrys are really good cars otherwise with great resale and reliability. Buick has nothing else to offer other than a cushy ride.
We've done "foreign vs. domestic" a hundred times already :P
Shifty (just visiting)