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.
Options

GM News, New Models and Market Share

11213151718631

Comments

  • aspesisteveaspesisteve Member Posts: 833
    the 1980's Honda Civic CRX had a 1.3 litre engine that got over 50mpg (some said they got 60+mpg) - it was a great car - I have no clue as to why it can't be duplicated today.
  • nortsr1nortsr1 Member Posts: 1,060
    I would imagine a lot of it has to do with the added weight because of all the new safety requirements. Side impact bars in the doors, airbags, front impact safety, etc.
  • nwngnwng Member Posts: 663
    because we need to go 0-60 in 8 sec, otherwise, it would deem "unsafe". Do I really need a 140hp engine for a toyota corolla which I drive alone most of the time?
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    nwng has the right answer here. The added weight thing is a smoke screen the automakers put up. The CRX weighed only 10% less than a brand new 2005 Toyota Echo. Even the new Yaris weighs less than 2300 pounds and meets all applicable safety regulations. Automakers have been sacrificing fuel economy at the altar of speed for a very VERY long time. In econocars like these, that approach makes NO sense at all.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    General Motors will build Opel- and Vauxhall-branded versions of the Chevrolet Volt in the United States for export to Europe. GM will introduce the European versions of the plug-in electric car in 2012.

    The Opel electric vehicle essentially will be the Volt with different styling, says a source familiar with GM's plans. Opel, GM's German brand sold in most of Europe, and Vauxhall, its British brand, have wider dealer networks in Europe than Chevrolet does.

    The first of the vehicles sold in Europe will be built in the United States, Carl-Peter Forster, president of GM Europe, told Automobilwoche, a Crain Communications publication that covers the German auto industry.

    GM will build the Volt at its Detroit-Hamtramck assembly plant. It has a target date of late 2010 to launch the gasoline-electric vehicle in North America.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Looks like I can post this now.

    General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner plans to hold a press conference Tuesday morning to announce how GM plans weather the rapidly changing North American auto market.

    In a statement to the media, GM says Wagoner will announce “company actions to better align business to the current market conditions”, the statement says.

    The message is not likely to be any announcement of management changes or that GM is filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, a source familiar with GM told Automotive News on Monday. In fact, the news will be a “fairly upbeat” announcement, the source says.


    http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080714/FREE/527100178/1023/- LATESTNEWS
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Although General Motors’ U.S. sales are down through the first half of the year, the company is actually doing quite well in other regions of the world. While GM’s Chinese sales are up for the year, the auto giant is also experiencing record sales in Latin America, Africa and the Middle East.

    Through the first half of 2008, GM’s sales in Latin America, Africa and the Middle East are up 19 percent when compared to the same period the year before. However, those markets are relatively small and only combined for 670,000 sales, according to Automotive News.

    Overall, GM’s market share of those regions is up 0.7 percent to 17.5 percent.

    While these sales figures are positive for GM, they still aren’t strong enough to carry its sagging U.S. operations.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Last week, we reported on a Top Gear piece that indicated Cadillac would not be sending the CTS-V super-sedan to Europe. Cadillac contacted us with some corrections and clarifications, which we now deliver to you. First, the CTS-V is going to Europe. That fantasy matchup in the likes of Auto Motor und Sport that pits it against the likes of the M5, RS6 and the AMG E-Class is bound to happen after all.

    http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/14/lock-and-load-cts-v-to-go-hunting-in-europe-a- fter-all/
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Emma Ely bought her baby blue 1970 Chevy Camaro SS 350 38 years ago and has driven it daily ever since. As a result, she's racked up 1,104,000 miles on the odometer and counting — a number so high it caused the odo to rollover and start again at zero.

    The engine, transmission and rear end are all original and have never required major overhaul. The 72-year-old Ely chalks up the car's longevity to regular oil changes at 3,000 miles and careful attention to any maintenance issues. We chalk it up to a 1970 split bumper Camaro being driven by an old lady as being totally awesome. Check out the short interview at a CBS affiliate via the link below.

    Go to: http://jalopnik.com/398478/woman-drives-1970-camaro-over-one-million-miles-thumb- s-nose-at-volvo
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    I'm surprised a 1970 era car would have an odometer that would go over 99,999 miles.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    I think it may have "rolled over and started at zero" 11 times now...

    I wonder if GM's announcement tomorrow will be merely a rehash of some stuff that we have already heard, like pushing back/stopping the replacement program for the GMT900 trucks, cutting production of them, and pushing the Beat for North America, or if it will have brand new information.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    I wonder if GM's announcement tomorrow will be merely a rehash of some stuff that we have already heard, like pushing back/stopping the replacement program for the GMT900 trucks, cutting production of them, and pushing the Beat for North America, or if it will have brand new information.

    New info.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Cool! ;-)

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,415
    I doubt the competition is shaking, no matter how good the V may be...
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    now reporting the same as 62vette was: the impending news announcements tomorrow. Speculation is of the kind of sweeping layoffs rarely seen in GM history as well as major slashing of production on certain models.

    The layoffs are said to be mostly white collar types.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    now reporting the same as 62vette was: the impending news announcements tomorrow. Speculation is of the kind of sweeping layoffs rarely seen in GM history as well as major slashing of production on certain models.

    The layoffs are said to be mostly white collar types.


    Notice the word speculation. Nobody inside is talking. Everyone outside is guessing. So much bull out there.

    GM has been cutting salaried workforce for 6 years. Somewhere between 3 -6% each year. It is now running pretty lean. BUT I do not doubt there will be cuts. Just not "slashing" which to me would be something over 20%. Also look for no brands to be cut. Just too darn expensive to both market share and the bottom line. Truck production will continue to be cut.

    OK let the dissing begin. :sick:
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    No dissing from me...wait and see. This is not the defining moment.

    Regards,
    OW
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    I think whatever GM does, there will be a cascade downwards among the domestics in the next 12 months, and GM will end up on top of the heap. I would bet on GM's future today.

    But if there's one thing GM has to let go of, it's this obsession with market share. They should replace it with an obsession over per-unit profit. Some of the brands need to go. Why fight the inevitable.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Heck, not the first time I heard of a 1970 Chevrolet going that far. I remember a 1970 Chevrolet Impala that went 700K miles. I think what killed it was metal fatigue and not a mechnical failure.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    Well, if I were to kill a few brands:

    Hummer - suddenly rendered an anachronism by psychopathic pump prices. The market for this type of vehicle was already shrinking due to gradually escalating prices.

    Saab - Sorry, there aren't enough iconoclasts to support this brand.

    Saturn - Seems redundant with similar vehicle offered at Chevrolet

    GMC - I'd hate to cut it, but the same reason as above applies.

    To heck with worrying about market share. I think Toyota worries to much about capturing that #1 spot to the detriment of it's reputation. So, you have a smaller share, but it's a lot bigger pie.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    A year ago I would have said no way can GM cut GMC. It was the 2nd or 3rd most pofitable division. It is a huge part of the GMC/Pontiac/Buick dealership chain. Today with gas at $4 I would have thought perhaps they could cut GMC due to loss of sales but in looking at the June data GMC is still the 2nd highest brand for volume at GM. I do think they need more differentiation between Chevy and GMC with very different appearances.

    Saab could pretty easily go since most of the Saab dealers are also Cadillac or some other brand so the cost would be minimal.

    I have always wondered how Saturn fits in today.

    But bottom line is it is too expensive to kill a brand due to dealership franchise laws. However if they can sell it then they do not have the cost.
  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Well the speculation is over. The facts:

    Operating and related actions to generate approximately $10 billion in cash improvements
    More than 20 percent reduction in salaried employment cash costs
    Dividend on common stock suspended
    Asset sales and capital market activities to raise $4-7 billion of additional liquidity


    Big deal is the dividend. Been about 80 years since that happened last.

    Wish I could have bought GM stock last week :(

    http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet?target=http://image.emerald.gm.com/gm- news/viewpressreldetail.do?domain=2&docid=47123
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Yup, you picked the four I would have picked. Some can go sooner, with Saturn going last, maybe four or five years out. I believe Saturn franchise agreements were written so this could be done relatively easily compared to, say, GMC, which obvioously has to go as well.

    And honestly, I know you're fond of them lemko, but I think Buick will have to go as well. Pontiac could stay as part of a triumvirate: Pontiac - Chevy - Cadillac dealerships. Pontiac could be the entry-level/sport brand the way it looked like Scion would be before it fizzled out.

    62vette: They are also postponing $1.7 billion in payments to the healthcare fund until 2010. Who knows what will be going on in 2010, but I bet the UAW folks aren't too happy about that...they only just negotiated those payments as part of a major concession to GM last year.

    They expect to use up about 1/3 of their total liquid reserves just in 2008 alone, with this new plan, right? Started the year at $23 billion, expect to spend about $8 billion.

    And they are going to assess worldwide assets, in the hopes of selling approximately $2-4 billion worth to raise cash.

    The proposed white collar layoffs are what i would call sweeping, at 20% of salaried work force.

    I think their estimate of U.S. vehicle sales this year and next at 14 million is low, which is good. But I think their estimate that oil will remain at $130-150/barrel through 2009 is low, which is bad.

    After bouncing up a little first thing, GM stock had fallen lower than its opening price by 10 AM eastern time.

    http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080715/ANA02/413556798/1078- - /emailblast02&refsect=emailblast02

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    I would bet on GM's future today.

    I wouldn't. The management that got GM into this mess isn't going to get GM out of this mess. If it were, they would have done it already. :( If I had to bet on a domestic I'd bet on Ford, although that's kinda like betting on which gladiator will be the least mauled by the lions.

    What I'd watch for is to see when GM starts firewalling its overseas operations, since that will have to happen fairly soon to keep the GMNA arm from dragging everything else down with it into bankruptcy.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    There was no talk of bankruptcy today, and no talk of cutting brands, two items conspicuous by their absence from the discussion.

    On a brighter note, GM's new estimate that it will be able to hang onto 21% of the market in the U.S. is finally getting down near where everyone thought all along they would eventually be (my bet is and has been 20%). It injected a note of realism in today's press release.

    But my original remarks regarding betting on GM were spurred mostly by my thought that Ford is in a much worse position on multiple fronts and won't be able to hang on much longer. In this sense, I think GM benefits by being subject to so much public scrutiny, because it needs to keep aggressively taking measures to stay afloat, while Ford stays mum and continues to slide down the tubes.

    Plus, I know that Rick Wagoner has become the CEO that everyone loves to hate, but I think the team of Wagoner and Lutz is much more effective than anything Ford has.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    The proposed white collar layoffs are what i would call sweeping, at 20% of salaried work force.

    Where did you read that? Must have been a different announcement?

    GM plans further salaried headcount reductions in the U.S. and Canada in the 2008 calendar year, which will be achieved through normal attrition, early retirements, mutual separation programs and other separation tools. In addition, health care coverage for U.S. salaried retirees over 65 will be eliminated, effective January 1, 2009. Affected retirees and surviving spouses will receive a pension increase from GM's over funded U.S. salaried plan to help offset costs of Medicare and supplemental coverage. And there will be no new base compensation increases for U.S. and Canadian salaried employees for the remainder of 2008 and 2009.

    Beyond these moves, which also impact GM executives, additional actions are being taken. There will be no annual discretionary cash bonuses for the company's executive group in 2008. With the elimination of the annual cash bonus, combined with GM's long-term incentives which are driven by GM stock price performance to assure alignment with its stockholders, GM's executive group will have a significant reduction in their cash compensation opportunity for 2008. For the company's top executive officers, it represents a reduction in their cash compensation opportunity of 75 to 84 percent.

    These benefit changes, salaried headcount reductions and other related savings will result in an estimated reduction in cash costs of more than 20 percent, or $1.5 billion in 2009.


    I do not know the actual number but GM retired salary health care is a HUGE amount of that $1.5 billion.

    OK I found some old numbers:

    GM spent $3.3 billion for retiree health care in 2006, a tab it doesn't break down by salaried or hourly status. The company has 432,000 retirees, of which 100,000 are salaried.

    So ~1/4 of $3.3 is $.8 billion and that is 3 years ago so $1 billion in cuts there is possible.

    As I said earlier, GM has been cutting salaried headcount for 5-6 years. This time they are going to really put the pressure on retirements. There are a huge number of employees over 62 that would not leave and they will be "convinced" to leave. I know 3 execs that are already planning on leaving and they do not want to.

    They are also postponing $1.7 billion in payments to the healthcare fund until 2010. Who knows what will be going on in 2010, but I bet the UAW folks aren't too happy about that...they only just negotiated those payments as part of a major concession to GM last year.

    Uhh, they are probably very happy. Not sure but GM will most likely have to continue paying for the healthcare for the hourly until the money is there but I have no data on this.
  • trichardsontrichardson Member Posts: 28
    I can't believe GM makes their sweeping announcement and doesn't touch brand consolidation with a 10 foot pole. Outside of GM's board, does anyone think GM cannibalizing their own sales year after year with extraneous divisions is a good idea? Some of the Buick, Pontiacs and GMC vehicles are GREAT cars. But they get lost in the confusing shuffle of too many brands with no identity. Even if they only let loose a statement that are dropping Sabb in addition to Hummer it would be good to hear. But noooooooooo......
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    I wouldn't want to be on the short end of an "other separation tool" if I worked there! ;-)

    The $1.7 billion in payments to the healthcare fund that GM is postponing until 2010 were supposed to be made in 2008 and 2009. If GM DOES end up in bankruptcy, it is likely the workers will never see that money. If I were the UAW I would be displeased, to say the least.

    Meanwhile, GM is cutting all the salaried retirees' healthcare? I am surprised that contractual obligations give them that much wiggle room, but I am no expert on that score.

    Certainly the bottom line of all this is GM has been very good about finding numerous creative ways to raise cash so as to avert bankruptcy for at least 12-18 months. Obviously, they need new operating savings and a better product mix to have kicked in to produce healthy profits by the end of that period.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Outside of GM's board, does anyone think GM cannibalizing their own sales year after year with extraneous divisions is a good idea? Some of the Buick, Pontiacs and GMC vehicles are GREAT cars

    I cannot believe this still comes up! The only way GM can drop these 3 brands is if they go into bankruptcy and can skirt around state franchise rules. It cost GM $1 billion to close Olds. This was mostly due to the cost at the dealerships. At that time many of the Olds dealers were dualed with other GM brands and the losses were minimal. If GM closed BPG 1000's of dealers would be closed with each due millions of dollars. Figure it out.

    AND GM would lose about 15% of it's business. (BPG is ~30% of GM's US market share. When Olds died 1/2 of buyers went outside of GM). That is not chump change.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Maybe GM figured it was still too expensive to have to pay-off the dealers. I think every state has franchise laws with a lot of dealer protections built in. The Olds shutdown cost $1 to $2 billion from numbers I've seen tossed around.

    "General Motors took a $1 billion charge when it said it would phase out the Oldsmobile brand, which ceased production in 2004. Doing something similar now would strip out cash just as the company needs it most, he says, and its dealer consolidation strategy is a smarter move."

    Layoffs, Brand Sales Fail to Drive Up GM Stock (SmartMoney - beware the auto loading TV gizmo blaring).
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    I think GM probably has 15% to shrink in order to reach its natural size in this market.

    Maybe instead of paying off dealers, they just starve them of product....

    Fact is, GM also has way way WAY too many dealers for its market share. It's a problem that won't go away by itself.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • aspesisteveaspesisteve Member Posts: 833
    GMC may of been a profitable division withing GM when people were buying trucks, but since it's just a badge change from Chevy it was canabalizing another brand withing it's own company.

    Why spend the money to market the GMC image when you've got Chevy doing the same thing for the same product? Why have a VP of GMC when there is a VP of Chevy? Why have a GMC lot just down the road from a Chevy lot? I've even seen GMC and Chevy on the same lot?!

    Why someone chooses GMC over Chevy or Chevy over GMC is silly. Hmmm, do I want "professional grade" or "the heart beat of America"? hmmmmm
  • dieselonedieselone Member Posts: 5,729
    Why someone chooses GMC over Chevy or Chevy over GMC is silly. Hmmm, do I want "professional grade" or "the heart beat of America"? hmmmmm

    Actually their are some reasons to choose GMC. Can't get the 6.2/6speed combo in found in the Yukon Denali/Escalade in a Chevy. But that is easily fixable. So in today's market, I guess it would make since to consolidate the trucks/suvs. That would probably require some type of dealer consolidation. While I haven't seen many Denali trimmed GMC pickups, the Yukon Denali's are very common around here. They are much nicer than your run of the mill Suburban/Yukon. No doubt GM could add some type of Denali package to a Tahoe/Suburban.

    But like others have mentioned. Dealing with the dealers won't be cheap.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,675
    Can someone outline for me exactly how GM should lower their number of brands and how that will work with the contractual agreements with the dealerships?

    For years I've read people's post about how GM should have handled the UAW and other unions, in retrospect always. I'd like a little foresight and want to hear explanations of how to do the whittling. To me it looks like Steve is right about needing the cash to get cars that are marketable. Cutting dealerships by closing them as Ford is doing will cost money; the Oldsmobile example cited by Steve was expensive.

    I can see selling a GMC pickup and truck line rather than the Chev truck line in a combined store.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • 62vetteefp62vetteefp Member Posts: 6,043
    Dealing with the dealers won't be cheap.

    oh heck, what is a trillion dollars? ($1,000,000 per dealer at 1000 dealers minimum)
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Cutting dealerships by closing them as Ford is doing will cost money

    Well, Ford is forced to pay them off because the Ford brand will still exist, and they need to maintain the goodwill of the remaining dealers.

    In the case of GM, it can afford to close whole BRANDS, so it's a little different. Starve them of product, watch them die on the vine. GM needs to get the dealer count way down from what, about 3500 currently?, to more like 1/2 that number.

    Heck, several Buick-Pontiac-GMC dealers near me have gone out of business in the last few years, and that was with GM making the token effort to give them new product!

    If they starve Buick dealers, they could tweak the Enclave and Lucerne and make them a Chevy trim level and Cadillac entry model respectively, and Buick would be gone in a year or two, maybe even less. GMC wouldn't be much harder to kill - maybe offer a trim level or two among the Chevy trucks, call it a day. Give the GMC dealers nothing to sell, and watch them go away.

    Pontiac would be a longer-term fix - they need to stop the consolidation of Buick-Pontiac-GMC dealers right now, and work on consolidating Pontiac and Chevy dealers. And set a 3 year sales goal for Saturn. If it misses it, begin the works of shutting it down.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • michaellnomichaellno Member Posts: 4,120
    This is what I think GM could do in the US market:

    Chevrolet:
    Aveo - keep
    Cobalt (Cruze) - keep
    Malibu - keep
    Impala - rebadge Pontiac G8 to this
    HHR - keep
    Tahoe - keep
    Suburban - keep
    Traverse - keep
    Silverado - keep
    Colorado - keep
    Corvette - keep
    Avalanche - keep

    Pontiac:
    G5 - drop: see Cobalt / Cruze
    G6 - drop; see Malibu
    G8 - rebadge as Chevrolet Impala
    Vibe - rebadge as Chevrolet
    Solstice - rebadge as Chevrolet

    Cadillac:
    CTS - keep
    STS - keep
    DTS - keep; rebadge from G8
    Escalade (all models) - drop; see Chevrolet

    Buick
    LaCrosse - drop; see Malibu
    Lucerne - drop; see CTS
    Enclave - drop; see Traverse

    GMC:
    All models - drop; see Chevrolet

    Saturn:
    Astra - keep; rebadge as Chevrolet
    Aura - drop; see Malibu
    Sky - drop; see rebadged Solstice
    Outlook - drop; see Traverse

    Saab:
    All models - drop; hard to justify 100K cars a year for this brand

    International:
    Buick - keep alive in Asia Pacific
    Vauxhall and Opel - keep alive in Europe, Middle East, South America and Africa
    Cadillac - upscale brand in Europe, Middle East, South America and Africa
    Holden - keep alive in Australia
    Chevrolet - introduce as "mid level" brand in Middle East and South America
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    I think the only reason GMC even exists is so dealers of other GM products could have a truck to sell. The place from which my girlfriend bought her LaCrosse was a Buick-Pontiac-GMC dealer. At one time it seemed GMC trucks were a little more upscale from Chevrolet trucks.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    I suppose if worse comes to worse, GM could file Chapter 11 and shed brands and dealers under the bankruptcy court's oversight. Then you'd have a bunch of dealers filing their own Chapter 11's or 7's.

    GM says banko isn't an option because they have plenty of cash and they'd lose too many customers who would be afraid to buy a car from a company undergoing reorganization.

    Unlike the airlines, who go under regularly every few years and yet we keep flying on bankrupt carriers.
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    I think the only reason GMC even exists is so dealers of other GM products could have a truck to sell.

    Pontiac dealers, specifically, back in the day.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    I made a point of not flying United while it was undergoing "reorganization", and I would make a point of not buying a car from a bankrupt car company.

    As regards GM specifically, I like the way Dutch Mandel of Autoweek put it today:
    Most important, this announcement--which, based on its thoroughness and depth, was obviously a long, thought-out, involved process--sends a powerful cross-town memo. You can have your bankruptcy rumors, which circulated last week. You can have your takeover comments and speculation. But no matter how "transparent" Chrysler aims to make its message, no matter how far Ford's Alan Mulally carries the Blue Oval boys, the gauntlet has been thrown down by GM.

    Today's announcement says that they are here for a long, hard fight.


    I don't think Ford and Chrysler especially have what it takes to stand down GM in this fight. The General will emerge the victor, and that might happen sooner than anyone would think.

    Sidenote: GM has announced that next year's new Equinox will have a 2.3L direct-injected engine. Way to go GM! If that goes ahead as planned I think they will be the first ones to offer DI in a non-luxury automobile, although Toyota is close to pulling the trigger on DI for a couple of Toyota-branded models. This is a very good move for GM - DI improves fuel economy and low-speed power at the same time.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    I like Ford's prospects ok.

    The more I think on the branding talk, I think 62vetteefp nailed it with the customer base comments. I hadn't heard how many owners left GM before when Olds was put out to pasture.

    (btw, my sister retired from UAL before 9/11 and the Chap. 11, and even with the occasional free pass I got, I never much liked flying them either, except the one 1st Class 777 jaunt I got to do. :shades: )
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    But the customers are leaving anyway. Cancel those divisions, use the savings to promote future product development in much more profitable and vital sectors of your market. Have a vision for the future ten years from now, twenty.

    Ford? Ford is moving at 80s speed to turn the ship to avoid an 00s iceberg.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    this was kind of interesting: various analysts' reactions to today's GM announcements:

    "• Goldman Sachs analysts Patrick Archambault and Chris Hussey:

    "The operating savings outlined are a net positive, but in the current environment we think operating fundamentals are likely to continue to deteriorate, and with the current plan now announced we see few positive catalysts to support the shares."

    • Standard & Poor's credit analyst Robert Schulz:

    "We view these announcements as being absolutely necessary steps for maintaining liquidity. Given the magnitude of the company's expected cash use caused by currently dismal market conditions in the U.S. automotive market."

    • JPMorgan analyst Himanshu Patel:

    "The assumptions behind the measures (SAAR/oil prices) seem fair; the majority of the liquidity boost stems from non-capital markets actions, raising our confidence in achieving them, and implying far less-than-previously-expected risk to our EPS (earnings per share) estimates. We expect the stock reaction to be mildly positive and should partly allay near-term concerns about liquidity."

    Bush, when asked if GM was so important that it deserved government help, repeated his usual mantra:
    "In terms of private enterprises, no, I don't think the government ought to be involved with bailing out companies. I think the government ought to create the conditions so that companies can survive."

    http://www.autonews.com/article/20080715/ANA02/536714088/1128

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    funny in an ironic sense that is, if you can view it wholely with detachment:

    http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2008/07/15/fool-blog-this-company-is-an-ut- ter-disaster.aspx

    "Fool Blog: This Company Is an Utter Disaster"

    "The reality of the Volt still seems like it's four or five years off, but if the company can stay solvent long enough to get there, it might have a fighting chance.

    Of course, with GM's luck, either gas prices will drop, or Toyota (NYSE: TM) will secretly manage to scoop its technology. Stay far away from this stock
    ."

    "Look, I'm not Nostradamus. The problems that have hounded GM this year were scrawled on the wall when I first tarred the stock: high fixed costs in a decreasing sales environment, huge sensitivity to commodity prices, and inept management.

    And while management isn't likely to blame itself for the liquidity crunch it's facing, hey, I will"


    "You know, I sort of feel for GM. This is a once-great company undone by bad management, some bad products, and an unfortunate labor/benefits situation. Even worse, in an effort to get back to respectability, the company plowed a lot of time, effort, and resources into making and marketing its gas-guzzling Hummer brand a few years ago -- ignoring prediction after prediction that gas prices would start to skyrocket"

    Hummer is an odd story. I understand why the idea seemed really great in the mid-90s, but by the time they actually got it to fruition, it was fairly obvious that the tide of the SUV had crested. Too bad they couldn't change course at that point and use the money for something else. Then the reinvention of Saturn could have happened five crucial years earlier.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    And why would people feel safe now? Anyone?

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Just say the Genesis today. Can anyone at GM say "crush"? Look out below!

    Regards,
    OW
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Safe flying?

    Er, because it's still a regulated public carrier?

    Or did I miss a transition?
  • bumpybumpy Member Posts: 4,425
    GM has announced that next year's new Equinox will have a 2.3L direct-injected engine. Way to go GM! If that goes ahead as planned I think they will be the first ones to offer DI in a non-luxury automobile

    Isuzu, VW, Mazda, Pontiac, Saturn, etc.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Umm, oops, I should have been more specific: non-luxury, NORMALLY ASPIRATED gas-powered automobile. That's the realm that contains the vast majority of new cars and trucks sold today, and in which DI could provide such a benefit in driveability and fuel economy. Of course, it's also the most cost-sensitive realm in the car world, which is why no-one has done it yet.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

Sign In or Register to comment.