I think what Pletko was saying was that if you wait a year or two, you can get an almost-new GM car for 2/3 the MSRP. Sometimes even less.
2/3? More like 1/2 on or even less on many of GMs loser models like a 3.8 powered Lucerne, older body style Malibu, the Impala, and Grand Prix, Trailblazer etc. Lots of 07 and 08 Grand Prix's around here for $12k or so with low miles. That's pretty close to 1/2 of a new one, depending on options etc.
I bought a one year old Expedition last year for just over 1/2 what a new one would cost. $4.50/gal gas saved me thousands. Granted I had to kick and scream to get $4k out of my '00 Suburban with 105k miles on it.
Yet, all of those GM cars are better than a new $12K car.(what, a Hyundai Accent or a stripped down Corolla versus a Lucerne or Park Avenue?)
Let some other guy eat the initial depreciation. It'll depreciate in years 3-13 about $9K, which is pretty much what it did in the first three years. A Civic, by comparison, will also have lost about 9K in value in ten years. But I know which gives me more features and safety and a better ride.
Both of those cars are ferociously overpriced! I'm not paying 5 figures for any car that old. If that Park Ave was at least an '05 and an Ultra I'd be interested.
I was helping out the wife's family. I bought a 2005 Mercury Grand Marquis from her elderly aunt. Her husband passed away back in February and she can't drive because she's blind in one eye. Sold the P/A to some kids who really wanted it. Buicks are hot with the young 'uns around here.
OK, let me keep this straight. That's the Grand Marquis we knew you had, right? Testing by memory here that would make the Marquis, the Brougham, the DTS and the LaCrosse...
I'm good if that's right. For those of you keeping score at home.....
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Both of those cars are ferociously overpriced! I'm not paying 5 figures for any car that old. If that Park Ave was at least an '05 and an Ultra I'd be interested.
I'm with ya there. At first, '03 doesn't seem all that old, but now that the '10's are out, that's 7 years old! My first car,a 1980 Malibu, was 7 years old when my Mom gave it to me, and that was free! So I guess I have trouble wrapping my mind around the idea of paying 5 figures for a 7 year old car!
And back then, styling seemed to advance much more quickly, so that 7 year old Malibu just seemed old. The Taurus was out by then and made it look positively ancient, but even cars like the Celebrity, '83-86 small LTD, Dodge 600/Plymouth Caravelle, etc, seemed newer. But today, your typical '03 car doesn't look older than a '10...just different.
As for pricing, that 2003 Park Ave could have been pushing $40K MSRP, so it's down to about 25%. And I'm sure you could get them to go lower. It might actually be pretty nice, taking into account the low mileage.
As for pricing, that 2003 Park Ave could have been pushing $40K MSRP, so it's down to about 25%. And I'm sure you could get them to go lower. It might actually be pretty nice, taking into account the low mileage.
Who knows what you could have driven off the lot for, but MSRP easily could have been near $40k. Just for comparison, I found an 03 Lexus ES300 with 48k miles for $15,800. I'd guess the P/A and ES would have been close to the same price depending on options. I'd imagine at the time you could have received a large discount on the Buick, so out the door price probably still would be lower.
You can get a p/a with floor mats and not worry about speeding off into the unknown. That alone is worth the depreciation difference.
I've been around enough Park Ave's to know that I wouldn't take one for free, so I'd take my chances with the Lexus and the killer floor mats LOL.
BTW, my brother had that happen with a 04 or so Nissan Sentra Spec V. The floor mat somehow bunched up and held the throttle down. Nothing bad happened, he just pushed the clutch in, letting the engine bounce off the rev limiter until he could safely turn the car off.
I'd much rather have a floor mat on stuck on the throttle than have GM's infamous hydroboost failure in the trucks/SUVs that would cause loss of steering and braking boost at the same time. Or the ABS problems on the GM trucks. My Suburban had that problem. Hit a bump or turn while stopping and the ABS would activate, meaning you basically didn't have any braking ability for a second or two.
You need 3 things to refute my statements....$4 gas....13 mpg city....12000 miles a year driven in the city....
Who is this person? WHO... bought a 13 mpg SUV, drives only city mpg, and their local gas station will always be pegged at $4 for regular? Spends 250 miles a week driving around in the city???? And they care about whether they break even in yr 3 vs yr 4???
My '01 Silv 4X4 ext cab gets 16 mpg in a 40% city commute to work that totals under 7000 miles a year. It weighs over 5000 lbs with me and a half tank of gas. A 4 cyl Camry on same commute would get 26 or 27 mpg. Difference for 10,000 miles a year is $279 a year and that is using today's price of $2.76 a gallon, the highest price in the last year.
Take that $279 against the starting defecit of $2000 in taxes paid at time of new car purchase, and then consider that excise taxes in the next year will be about $200 more on the new camry. It ends up that the $79 left in yearly gas savings after excise taxes is enough to pay the interest on the $2000 I had to borrow to pay the sales tax when buying the Camry.
Hence no savings to ever materialize and the Camry will lose several thousand in value more than my used SUV, which is off the steep part of the depreciation curve at age 8, over the next 3 years.
I hope we will all be smarter the next time gas hits $4 and realize it is a short lived period where all goes to pot and America falls off a financial cliff. Not the time to run to the nearest Toy or Hon dlr to give away all your SUV equity.
that with GM's restructuring,, new models, and new leadership, they are going to be successful over the next 4 years give the likely directions of the economy?
I have my answer, but don't want to skew the results!
...that with GM's restructuring,, new models, and new leadership, they are going to be successful over the next 4 years give the likely directions of the economy?
It's my belief that without a miracle recovery in 2010, GM will be out of cash a year from now. With light vehicle sales likely around 11M units in 2010, they cannot turn it around and will continue to burn through $50 million/day in red ink financed by the U.S. Gov't.
That said, another multi-billion dollar bail-out at election time in 2010 seems iffy. I give GM a 30% chance of being around in 2012.
".....that with GM's restructuring,, new models, and new leadership, they are going to be successful over the next 4 years give the likely directions of the economy?"
Well, that depends on your definition of successful. If it means making money, I dunno. They have a long road ahead of them, and the economy does seem a little delicate right now, so it's probably unpredictable.
If we are talking about new model success, well it appears that the Lacrosse, Equinox, Terrain, and SRX are hits. The CTS is well received, and people seem to be looking forward to the CTS sprtwagon and coupe, even if they are a niche category. The Camaro is white hot, but time will tell if that keeps up, or was just a fad.
Looking ahead, we have the new Regal and Cruze for next year, and the Cruze seems to be getting good reviews where it is being sold now. So the product pipeline seems to be doing well.
As for leadership, Fritz seems to be holding no punches. For all the criticisims about the Bankruptcy, paring down the lineup, and government cash infusuions. He has steadied the ship. 9 months ago, the leadership seemed to be coming up with new ideas left and right, panicked, and just seeing what will stick, trying to convince the government that they could succeed, just give us money and time.
I have a friend who has a 2005 Silverado, 4.3 V-6, 5-speed stick. He thinks he gets about 20 mpg overall, although he has a long commute and it's mostly highway. Right now, with gas at say, $2.65 per gallon, he says he's paying about $50 per week. So, say, $217 per month.
If he managed to find a car that used half the gas, 40 mpg, he'd be down to about $109/month in fuel. Now that sounds like a nice savings. But, how many cars can you get for $109/month? Not to mention your up-front costs when you buy the car...down payment, taxes, etc.
Even if gas doubled over today's price, which would put it to about $5.30 per gallon, that would put the 40 mpg car at $217 per month, and the 20 mpg vehicle at around $434. Now that's a pretty big savings...however, you're still not going to get much of a car for $217 per month. Plus, again, down payment/taxes.
It almost never makes sense to ditch your current ride over fuel economy concerns. You're best off just waiting until you'd normally trade, and then go for something more economical then, if it suits you.
It almost never makes sense to ditch your current ride over fuel economy concerns. You're best off just waiting until you'd normally trade, and then go for something more economical then, if it suits you.
Yeah, I went through that last year. When gas was $4+/gal. I briefly tossed around the idea of buying a small car to drive around and letting my Suburban sit. Well most of the miles put on the Suburban were weekend miles heading to the lake, which I need something to haul a weekends worth of gear, wife, kids, dog, and tow the boat etc.
The math just didn't add up. Plus small cars at the time were going for a premium while SUVs were sitting on the lots with huge discounts. I decided to trade the Suburban in on a 1 year old SUV for nearly 1/2 the price of a new one.
Just shows how stupid some people were willing to take a $10-15k hit on their SUV just to save at best a $200/mo.
".....Just shows how stupid some people were willing to take a $10-15k hit on their SUV just to save at best a $200/mo. "
Touche....now, 15 months later, many have buyer's remorse. All told, you are still better off letting your needs dictate your purchase, and not your emotions.
All told, you are still better off letting your needs dictate your purchase, and not your emotions.
Exactly so.
You'll never make up in gas savings what you lose in car transactions.
One day people will figure out that gas goes up and down and you live with it.
As for GM survival I'm not optimistic. I don't think there will be enough quick enough to outlast the vast sums already "loaned" to them. I certainly don't have the stomach to lend them more.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
"..... I don't think there will be enough quick enough to outlast the vast sums already "loaned" to them. I certainly don't have the stomach to lend them more. "
That's a tough one. As a "private company", we haven't heard anything about cash burn since before the bankruptcy. I guess the answer lies in how well they have cut costs, how well and for how close to msrp the new cars are selling, and what happens when there is an IPO for the new company.
Congradulations to Chevy: There committee has won! Ah! Who will design the next award winning car with Opel sold to Russia. Yes! Russia. GM is the poster boy for bad management. It`s competition are corporate super stars, Toyota and Diamler Benz.
As far as GM making or not. I don't know. It probably really depends on the sales numbers of their recent and upcoming releases. No question GM has some good models for sale, but does the buying public care?
That's indeed the question. Key items are can teh Malibu actually get people out of Camrys and Accords? Can the Cruze when it shows get people out of Civics and Corollas?
It's a tall order but they have to get it right this time. Howie Long ain't gonna cut it.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
If we are talking about new model success, well it appears that the Lacrosse, Equinox, Terrain, and SRX are hits. The CTS is well received, and people seem to be looking forward to the CTS sprtwagon and coupe, even if they are a niche category. The Camaro is white hot, but time will tell if that keeps up, or was just a fad.
Seems that the ultimate measure of success would be increasing their market share, at least for those vehicles vs. the competition. If the vehicles would be critically acclaimed, but still not sell that well, then that doesn't really help GM even if their vehicles are quite good. The real question is what will be the GM perception by the public in the future - is it better due to better products, about the same, or worse due to the bailouts/Ch11/etc.? The "brand equity" of GM/Chevy/Buick/Caddy will be very important.
As for leadership, Fritz seems to be holding no punches. For all the criticisims about the Bankruptcy, paring down the lineup, and government cash infusuions. He has steadied the ship. 9 months ago, the leadership seemed to be coming up with new ideas left and right, panicked, and just seeing what will stick, trying to convince the government that they could succeed, just give us money and time.
Agree that Fritz looks like he's doing pretty well. But he was dealt a pretty crappy hand and it's a tough situation. Plus he still has the UAW ready to strangle the company if the show signs of life, like they have done with Ford in the last couple of days. And Ford is not even making money yet!
that with GM's restructuring,, new models, and new leadership, they are going to be successful over the next 4 years give the likely directions of the economy?
Uh, honestly I'm not convinced. New leadership is still a question mark as we've yet to see any real achievement. But looking at the new models they come up with, I'm getting mixed reactions. I still think Buick, despite it's costumers' loyalty, will still lose money. And since the product planners still can't refrain themselves from chruning out "twins", they're still not efficient enough in my book.
GM's plan to sell it's divisions went haywire. Hummer didn't sell for as much as expected (not even close). Saab's fate afaik is still in question (and the new 9-5 is way overpriced). Opel, GM's ultimate source for higher technology, is sold off. Pontiac is doomed and the company pulled the most ridiculous statement I've ever heard: that it will re-ship the leftover G8s to be sold in Australia. Hello???? Australian cars have right side steering, meaning the cars will have to be re-modified for Aussie market, just how much will that cost???
One more thing, we still need to wait and see what happens with the Volt project. Sure, production is already confirmed, but how about the buyers?
To make it worse, people still have doubts over GM and Chrysler. They keep losing sales to Ford. Inventories are piling up.That's a sign already. Alas, many of these people still don't forgive them for the bailout.
So the restructuring might work, but the rest is still all over the place IMO.
Plus he still has the UAW ready to strangle the company if the show signs of life, like they have done with Ford in the last couple of days. And Ford is not even making money yet
They made the move on Ford already?!?!? :surprise:
You wouln't know about inventory pileup at our local Chevy dealer. I don't think he has more than a dozen cars on his whole lot. Of course he's one slated to go away.
This is something I don't totally get. We would now have to travel a good 30 miles to so much look at a Chevy when this guy goes. We have half a million people in county! Meanwhile, right in town we have Ford, L-M, NIssan, Honda, Chrysler, Dodge, Buick-GMC and Hyundai. What are the odds of me looking at a Chevy next time?
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
The sad fact is it will affect their sales very quickly. If you ask me, the U.S. auto industry is still poised at the precipice and time is just about running out for a turnaround.
Now Ford is in the same boat as GM and forget about C which is really going to be a shell Italian auto company in the U.S.
Is the UAW not to blame? Need to look in the mirror and face it this time.
If Ford doesn't make the UAW incur consequences, 2011 will be even uglier. They have to move work, or starve some of the more militant UAW facilities. Otherwise the UAW members will be looking to screw them over harder in the next 2011 contract negotiations. The UAW put companies like Studebaker out of business in the past, Ford can't let them do it to them.
Is the UAW not to blame? Need to look in the mirror and face it this time.
Well at least those idiots "stuck it to the man!". Hopefully WalMart will do well so there will be more jobs for the unemployed UAW. There are a lot of floors that need sweeping, and don't forget the coveted greeter positions!
On another subject, anybody else finding the "Emotorcons" missing on these pages?
My biggest concern is that while Ford is the instant recipient of UAW member stupidity, if its not quickly put in check it will spread to GM at contract renewal time as well hindering the company's long term ability to compete. Its certainly more than a little ironic when the public seems to be more concerned about Ford and GM long term health than the union members. Its also a sad commentary on UAW selfishness.
Obama should have made everyone, including the senior UAW workers take salary and work rule hits instead of letting the oldtimers continue to line their pockets while they rape the company. Too much of the union givebacks focused on new employees. I guess putting it to management and white collar employees makes better political headlines and if the UAW succeeds in ruining Ford and GM that will eventually happen on someone elses watch. Money spent on UAW only reduces funds for product development, engineering and marketing, but who cares because those efforts aren't part of the union, right?
That's the one big advantage the Asian companies have over the domestics- no UAW issues. The latest news from Ford with the UAW contract talks has got to be making Honda and Toyota continue saying, "I told you so." At a time when the domestic % of the market share continues to decline, one has to wonder what the UAW is really thinking. I saw one study that said because of the huge differerence between GM and Asian auto company workers' salaries and benefits, GM cars cost $1,500.00 more right off the bat. My question is, once the UAW has run Ford, GM, and Chrysler out of business, then where do they go?
Where do they go? To the pits of hell where they belong.
I wonder if Ford and Chrysler will find a way to release themselves from UAW's paws. Maybe they can stop making contracts with UAW after 2011, that can work. GM, unfortunately, won't be able to do that so easily. With the government's share in it I bet they'd pressure the feds to keep hiring UAW members.
I see small chance of progress at F, much less at C and GM...
That's indeed the question. Key items are can teh Malibu actually get people out of Camrys and Accords? Can the Cruze when it shows get people out of Civics and Corollas?
Interesting point. From what I see, despite the products doing ok in terms of sales, none of them managed to dethrone the kings yet. Malibu, for instance, still can't beat Cam-Cord, yet at the same time Ford got the mighty fine new Fusion and Hyundai unweils a brand new Sonata. The same case applies to almost all other decent GM models. GM is getting pinned from every direction, not good.
"..... Plus he still has the UAW ready to strangle the company if the show signs of life, like they have done with Ford in the last couple of days. And Ford is not even making money yet! "
Well, don't forget, the UAW will have to show restraint w/ GM, as the VEBA "owns" 35% of GM. As for Ford, they have made money (as of today) $1 billion last quarter, and company liquidity is up over $2 bil for the year. Still, the UAW should offer concessions to Ford.
".....What are the odds of me looking at a Chevy next time? "
depends on what it is you are looking for. It is odd to see no Chevy dealer w/in 30 miles, especially w/ all those other makers in the area. At least GM IS still represented. If you are looking for a truck or suv/cuv, at least the GMC will still offer that. A small ecenomy car, well, I guess you'll be going elsewhere.
I think that GM hadn't counted on the Chevy dealer 20 miles up the road close up on their own (they were also the local Mada dealer - that's gone, too) and the one in town was already fading.
BTW - I'm down in Florida with the family in a rented Impala. There's nothing terribly wrong with it for the kids of driving I'm doing here. Sure it's a bit long in the tooth but it does what it's supposed to do - carry me, my wife and three of the kids (had the fourth come down I'd have had to go to a minivan) and all luggage quietly and smoothly. Fortunately there aren't any curves here. I hit one on an exit and it didn't like it at all...
People who think that the perceived difference between domestic and imports is greater than the actual difference may have a point but the perception counts for a great deal. In terms of handling I still prefer several imports - and Ford better than GM which I never thought I'd say - but that's me.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
It is odd to see no Chevy dealer w/in 30 miles, especially w/ all those other makers in the area. At least GM IS still represented. If you are looking for a truck or suv/cuv, at least the GMC will still offer that. A small ecenomy car, well, I guess you'll be going elsewhere.
Realistically, go elesewhere unless they're Rocky or UAW. GM has not had any competitive small economy cars anyway. If somebody goes out to buy one of the best 3 cars in this class, GM is not in consideration anyway, which is a bigger problem than the distance to a specific dealer.
Agree. GM got so many dealers (too many) it's odd not to see one within commuting distance.
As for the odds of looking at a Chevy, well, if you're looking for a truck based SUV nothing's better than a Tahoe. Other than that, well, you might look at Chevy as a, uh, 3rd, or maybe 4th option? :P
It is... in Europe, Australia, South Korea, etc. Supposedly we'll get it in another year or so, but last I heard GM hadn't even started on the engine plant for the 40+ mpg 1.4T yet, so I would have to assume we'll get the old 2.2 from the Cobalt (and Cavalier) instead. Other markets get the underwhelming 1.8 from the Astra.
Comments
2/3? More like 1/2 on or even less on many of GMs loser models like a 3.8 powered Lucerne, older body style Malibu, the Impala, and Grand Prix, Trailblazer etc. Lots of 07 and 08 Grand Prix's around here for $12k or so with low miles. That's pretty close to 1/2 of a new one, depending on options etc.
I bought a one year old Expedition last year for just over 1/2 what a new one would cost. $4.50/gal gas saved me thousands. Granted I had to kick and scream to get $4k out of my '00 Suburban with 105k miles on it.
Let some other guy eat the initial depreciation. It'll depreciate in years 3-13 about $9K, which is pretty much what it did in the first three years. A Civic, by comparison, will also have lost about 9K in value in ten years. But I know which gives me more features and safety and a better ride.
I can accept that you got married. I'm OK there. But YOU SOLD THE PARK AVENUE?
I'm worried about you...
I'm good if that's right. For those of you keeping score at home.....
I'm with ya there. At first, '03 doesn't seem all that old, but now that the '10's are out, that's 7 years old! My first car,a 1980 Malibu, was 7 years old when my Mom gave it to me, and that was free! So I guess I have trouble wrapping my mind around the idea of paying 5 figures for a 7 year old car!
And back then, styling seemed to advance much more quickly, so that 7 year old Malibu just seemed old. The Taurus was out by then and made it look positively ancient, but even cars like the Celebrity, '83-86 small LTD, Dodge 600/Plymouth Caravelle, etc, seemed newer. But today, your typical '03 car doesn't look older than a '10...just different.
As for pricing, that 2003 Park Ave could have been pushing $40K MSRP, so it's down to about 25%. And I'm sure you could get them to go lower. It might actually be pretty nice, taking into account the low mileage.
Who knows what you could have driven off the lot for, but MSRP easily could have been near $40k. Just for comparison, I found an 03 Lexus ES300 with 48k miles for $15,800. I'd guess the P/A and ES would have been close to the same price depending on options. I'd imagine at the time you could have received a large discount on the Buick, so out the door price probably still would be lower.
I've been around enough Park Ave's to know that I wouldn't take one for free, so I'd take my chances with the Lexus and the killer floor mats LOL.
BTW, my brother had that happen with a 04 or so Nissan Sentra Spec V. The floor mat somehow bunched up and held the throttle down. Nothing bad happened, he just pushed the clutch in, letting the engine bounce off the rev limiter until he could safely turn the car off.
I'd much rather have a floor mat on stuck on the throttle than have GM's infamous hydroboost failure in the trucks/SUVs that would cause loss of steering and braking boost at the same time. Or the ABS problems on the GM trucks. My Suburban had that problem. Hit a bump or turn while stopping and the ABS would activate, meaning you basically didn't have any braking ability for a second or two.
NICE CAR.
Who is this person? WHO...
bought a 13 mpg SUV, drives only city mpg, and their local gas station will always be pegged at $4 for regular? Spends 250 miles a week driving around in the city???? And they care about whether they break even in yr 3 vs yr 4???
My '01 Silv 4X4 ext cab gets 16 mpg in a 40% city commute to work that totals under 7000 miles a year. It weighs over 5000 lbs with me and a half tank of gas. A 4 cyl Camry on same commute would get 26 or 27 mpg. Difference for 10,000 miles a year is $279 a year and that is using today's price of $2.76 a gallon, the highest price in the last year.
Take that $279 against the starting defecit of $2000 in taxes paid at time of new car purchase, and then consider that excise taxes in the next year will be about $200 more on the new camry. It ends up that the $79 left in yearly gas savings after excise taxes is enough to pay the interest on the $2000 I had to borrow to pay the sales tax when buying the Camry.
Hence no savings to ever materialize and the Camry will lose several thousand in value more than my used SUV, which is off the steep part of the depreciation curve at age 8, over the next 3 years.
I hope we will all be smarter the next time gas hits $4 and realize it is a short lived period where all goes to pot and America falls off a financial cliff. Not the time to run to the nearest Toy or Hon dlr to give away all your SUV equity.
Oddly here we are on Halloween in NJ and it's a top down day!....
I have my answer, but don't want to skew the results!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's my belief that without a miracle recovery in 2010, GM will be out of cash a year from now. With light vehicle sales likely around 11M units in 2010, they cannot turn it around and will continue to burn through $50 million/day in red ink financed by the U.S. Gov't.
That said, another multi-billion dollar bail-out at election time in 2010 seems iffy. I give GM a 30% chance of being around in 2012.
Well, that depends on your definition of successful. If it means making money, I dunno. They have a long road ahead of them, and the economy does seem a little delicate right now, so it's probably unpredictable.
If we are talking about new model success, well it appears that the Lacrosse, Equinox, Terrain, and SRX are hits. The CTS is well received, and people seem to be looking forward to the CTS sprtwagon and coupe, even if they are a niche category. The Camaro is white hot, but time will tell if that keeps up, or was just a fad.
Looking ahead, we have the new Regal and Cruze for next year, and the Cruze seems to be getting good reviews where it is being sold now. So the product pipeline seems to be doing well.
As for leadership, Fritz seems to be holding no punches. For all the criticisims about the Bankruptcy, paring down the lineup, and government cash infusuions. He has steadied the ship. 9 months ago, the leadership seemed to be coming up with new ideas left and right, panicked, and just seeing what will stick, trying to convince the government that they could succeed, just give us money and time.
If he managed to find a car that used half the gas, 40 mpg, he'd be down to about $109/month in fuel. Now that sounds like a nice savings. But, how many cars can you get for $109/month? Not to mention your up-front costs when you buy the car...down payment, taxes, etc.
Even if gas doubled over today's price, which would put it to about $5.30 per gallon, that would put the 40 mpg car at $217 per month, and the 20 mpg vehicle at around $434. Now that's a pretty big savings...however, you're still not going to get much of a car for $217 per month. Plus, again, down payment/taxes.
It almost never makes sense to ditch your current ride over fuel economy concerns. You're best off just waiting until you'd normally trade, and then go for something more economical then, if it suits you.
Yeah, I went through that last year. When gas was $4+/gal. I briefly tossed around the idea of buying a small car to drive around and letting my Suburban sit. Well most of the miles put on the Suburban were weekend miles heading to the lake, which I need something to haul a weekends worth of gear, wife, kids, dog, and tow the boat etc.
The math just didn't add up. Plus small cars at the time were going for a premium while SUVs were sitting on the lots with huge discounts. I decided to trade the Suburban in on a 1 year old SUV for nearly 1/2 the price of a new one.
Just shows how stupid some people were willing to take a $10-15k hit on their SUV just to save at best a $200/mo.
Touche....now, 15 months later, many have buyer's remorse. All told, you are still better off letting your needs dictate your purchase, and not your emotions.
Exactly so.
You'll never make up in gas savings what you lose in car transactions.
One day people will figure out that gas goes up and down and you live with it.
As for GM survival I'm not optimistic. I don't think there will be enough quick enough to outlast the vast sums already "loaned" to them. I certainly don't have the stomach to lend them more.
That's a tough one. As a "private company", we haven't heard anything about cash burn since before the bankruptcy. I guess the answer lies in how well they have cut costs, how well and for how close to msrp the new cars are selling, and what happens when there is an IPO for the new company.
The best we can do now is stay tuned.
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/10/30/report-fritz-says-gm-doesnt-need-any-further-- aid-from-washingt/
We'll see....
It's a tall order but they have to get it right this time. Howie Long ain't gonna cut it.
Seems that the ultimate measure of success would be increasing their market share, at least for those vehicles vs. the competition. If the vehicles would be critically acclaimed, but still not sell that well, then that doesn't really help GM even if their vehicles are quite good. The real question is what will be the GM perception by the public in the future - is it better due to better products, about the same, or worse due to the bailouts/Ch11/etc.? The "brand equity" of GM/Chevy/Buick/Caddy will be very important.
As for leadership, Fritz seems to be holding no punches. For all the criticisims about the Bankruptcy, paring down the lineup, and government cash infusuions. He has steadied the ship. 9 months ago, the leadership seemed to be coming up with new ideas left and right, panicked, and just seeing what will stick, trying to convince the government that they could succeed, just give us money and time.
Agree that Fritz looks like he's doing pretty well. But he was dealt a pretty crappy hand and it's a tough situation. Plus he still has the UAW ready to strangle the company if the show signs of life, like they have done with Ford in the last couple of days. And Ford is not even making money yet!
Uh, honestly I'm not convinced. New leadership is still a question mark as we've yet to see any real achievement. But looking at the new models they come up with, I'm getting mixed reactions. I still think Buick, despite it's costumers' loyalty, will still lose money. And since the product planners still can't refrain themselves from chruning out "twins", they're still not efficient enough in my book.
GM's plan to sell it's divisions went haywire. Hummer didn't sell for as much as expected (not even close). Saab's fate afaik is still in question (and the new 9-5 is way overpriced). Opel, GM's ultimate source for higher technology, is sold off. Pontiac is doomed and the company pulled the most ridiculous statement I've ever heard: that it will re-ship the leftover G8s to be sold in Australia. Hello???? Australian cars have right side steering, meaning the cars will have to be re-modified for Aussie market, just how much will that cost???
One more thing, we still need to wait and see what happens with the Volt project. Sure, production is already confirmed, but how about the buyers?
To make it worse, people still have doubts over GM and Chrysler. They keep losing sales to Ford. Inventories are piling up.That's a sign already. Alas, many of these people still don't forgive them for the bailout.
So the restructuring might work, but the rest is still all over the place IMO.
They made the move on Ford already?!?!? :surprise:
This is something I don't totally get. We would now have to travel a good 30 miles to so much look at a Chevy when this guy goes. We have half a million people in county! Meanwhile, right in town we have Ford, L-M, NIssan, Honda, Chrysler, Dodge, Buick-GMC and Hyundai. What are the odds of me looking at a Chevy next time?
Yep, the UAW overwhelmingly voted down more concessions to Ford. It's going to be a fun 2011 at Ford when the current contract expires.
steve_, "United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)" #16502, 31 Oct 2009 5:46 pm
Now Ford is in the same boat as GM and forget about C which is really going to be a shell Italian auto company in the U.S.
Is the UAW not to blame? Need to look in the mirror and face it this time.
Regards,
OW
Well at least those idiots "stuck it to the man!". Hopefully WalMart will do well so there will be more jobs for the unemployed UAW. There are a lot of floors that need sweeping, and don't forget the coveted greeter positions!
On another subject, anybody else finding the "Emotorcons" missing on these pages?
Obama should have made everyone, including the senior UAW workers take salary and work rule hits instead of letting the oldtimers continue to line their pockets while they rape the company. Too much of the union givebacks focused on new employees. I guess putting it to management and white collar employees makes better political headlines and if the UAW succeeds in ruining Ford and GM that will eventually happen on someone elses watch. Money spent on UAW only reduces funds for product development, engineering and marketing, but who cares because those efforts aren't part of the union, right?
I wonder if Ford and Chrysler will find a way to release themselves from UAW's paws. Maybe they can stop making contracts with UAW after 2011, that can work. GM, unfortunately, won't be able to do that so easily. With the government's share in it I bet they'd pressure the feds to keep hiring UAW members.
I see small chance of progress at F, much less at C and GM...
Interesting point.
From what I see, despite the products doing ok in terms of sales, none of them managed to dethrone the kings yet. Malibu, for instance, still can't beat Cam-Cord, yet at the same time Ford got the mighty fine new Fusion and Hyundai unweils a brand new Sonata.
The same case applies to almost all other decent GM models. GM is getting pinned from every direction, not good.
Well, don't forget, the UAW will have to show restraint w/ GM, as the VEBA "owns" 35% of GM. As for Ford, they have made money (as of today) $1 billion last quarter, and company liquidity is up over $2 bil for the year. Still, the UAW should offer concessions to Ford.
depends on what it is you are looking for. It is odd to see no Chevy dealer w/in 30 miles, especially w/ all those other makers in the area. At least GM IS still represented. If you are looking for a truck or suv/cuv, at least the GMC will still offer that. A small ecenomy car, well, I guess you'll be going elsewhere.
BTW - I'm down in Florida with the family in a rented Impala. There's nothing terribly wrong with it for the kids of driving I'm doing here. Sure it's a bit long in the tooth but it does what it's supposed to do - carry me, my wife and three of the kids (had the fourth come down I'd have had to go to a minivan) and all luggage quietly and smoothly. Fortunately there aren't any curves here. I hit one on an exit and it didn't like it at all...
People who think that the perceived difference between domestic and imports is greater than the actual difference may have a point but the perception counts for a great deal. In terms of handling I still prefer several imports - and Ford better than GM which I never thought I'd say - but that's me.
Realistically, go elesewhere unless they're Rocky or UAW. GM has not had any competitive small economy cars anyway. If somebody goes out to buy one of the best 3 cars in this class, GM is not in consideration anyway, which is a bigger problem than the distance to a specific dealer.
As for the odds of looking at a Chevy, well, if you're looking for a truck based SUV nothing's better than a Tahoe. Other than that, well, you might look at Chevy as a, uh, 3rd, or maybe 4th option? :P
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
----------------------------------------------
We will be getting the 1.8 also. The 2.2 will not be available. The top engine, the 1.4T should be available by the U.S. launch date next summer.
link title