By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Find the book "Taken for a Ride", which details the DC merger. Fascinating reading.
But no dealer will stock them because they are manual-only, and the few people like me that might buy one will find that they can't have cruise control (or A/C, or dare I say it? A moonroof!) because Eco is really code for "stripped" even though GM vigorously denies that
Perhaps this is a smart(?) marketing move - make a very low volume variant that almost nobody will buy, but it gives GM the advertising angle of a "highest mileage small car". But it might get people into the showrooms.
Yep, happens every time! Oh well, less profit for GM.
Regards,
OW
Yep, happens every time! Oh well, less profit for GM.
Regards,
OW
That's when I'll buy my next full size truck or SUV, let the lemmings take the hit when they run for cover for a more fuel efficient vehicle. I'll buy my next Expedition or Suburban one year old and for less than 1/2 of MSRP. That's what happened when I bought my 07 Expedition in the summer of 08 when gas was $4+/gal. All that money saved will by a lot of gas.
I'm almost tempted to use the next fuel crisis as an excuse to replace my '85 Silverado with a newer truck. But, unless the '85 is about to fall apart, I guess it would still be an unneccessary expense.
Fortune says that because of last year's bailout and massive plant closings and layoffs, the carmaker now holds the 15th slot among the heavy-hitters of the business world. Meanwhile, rival Ford has managed to hold onto its place among the top 10 corporations.
A couple of weeks back I saw the rear end or something blow out on one of these things. Couple that with the recall for snapping driveshafts and maybe it's good that they offer a V6 model :P
Very responsible management in other auto manufacturers never needed a bailout. Why this simple truth is avoided is the reason that this failure continues to happen. You can't borrow and not pay back (the reason for the financial failure) and making horrible decisions in GM, C and F is not a free ride. The pendulum ALWAYS swings back.
When the company fails, it should cease to exist. The universe has been operating this way for eons. What one thinks as saving is another way of avoiding the inevitable and the underlying "good decision for the bailout" actually hurts the staff which clings on for dear life to "union jobs" that are changed forever.
The final wrong decision is keeping the "GM" badge. :lemon:
Regards,
OW
Misleading claims
Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley's charge was backed up by the inspector general for the bailout — also known as the Trouble Asset Relief Program, or TARP. Watchdog Neil Barofsky told Fox News, as well as the Senate Finance Committee, that General Motors used bailout money to pay back the federal government.
"It appears to be nothing more than an elaborate TARP money shuffle," Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said in a letter Thursday to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.
Well, meet the new GM. Same as the old GM. The company is still majority-owned by the federal government, which has a 60 percent stake in the Detroit titan; the Canadian government owns another 12 percent.
GM is not yet solvent, continues to be racked by debt and is still unable to turn a profit — something that has eluded the company since 2004. GM filed for bankruptcy in 2009 but was saved from collapse by a $52 billion infusion from the federal government.
:lemon:
We loan them money, and they do us over like this...! Surprising? No!
Never will I lease, purchase, own a GM product again. Because, this alone is reason enough not to. What they stand for and stabbing us all in the back. Acting like we're just dumb! We're not.
GM, you really blew it....yet again! I hope the face some major consequences for the lying.
But don't forget, they make the "best cars in the world".
Lemko, I know that if I ever wanted a GM I would beat a path to your door and beg to buy one of yours!
We are proud to announce we have repaid our government loan – in full, with interest, five years ahead of the original schedule. We realize we still have more to do. Our goal is to exceed every expectation you've set for us. We're designing, building and selling the best cars and trucks in the world. Like the award-winning Chevy Malibu, the all-new Buick LaCrosse, the versatile Cadillac CTS Sport Wagon and the innovative GMC Terrain, just to name a few. We invite you to learn more about the new GM and join our community, by visiting gm.com.
Susan E. Docherty
Vice President, U.S. Marketing
I wonder if it's really just a cut-and-paste, with appropriate names and models changed, of a press release that Lee Iaccocca sent out in 1983? :P
Sort of like the 5 years of Volt PR. Tons of advanced PR for things that have not happened yet is GM's pattern. I'm not denying that GM has improved their products and is on the right track, but it would be nice if they would quit their promising of vaporware and get with actually focusing on the future product introductions. They appear to be more about marketing than products, and that is what got them into this mess in the first place. Until GM quits this overhyping of everything, I'll not believe that they have really changed. Oh, and also show some positive cash flow and profits.
Saying they've repaid the loan is just blowing smoke around their still dire financial position.
I can't WAIT until they are discontinued as a U.S. company. :lemon:
Regards,
OW
What the US government should have done is push the GM approach on GM itself-- talk about the big loan for about 5 years before actually providing the money! And then GM would have been gone already. "What? You want it *at the time* it is being promised?"
I'll never say never, but I think that the government would be hard pressed by public opinion to not sell their "stock" in an IPO to a foreign entity, especially the Chinese. I think that the public would see this as giving them too much power in business stateside. Besides, there are far better companies for the CHinese to invest in in this country.
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
Well, for one thing the transplants are actually profitable, which means they pay income taxes in the states and to the Federal government. I wonder how many income taxes GM has been paying lately?
As for GM, many dealers are paying income tax, which wouldn't be the case now if it had folded. A lot of the vendors shared with Ford and the transplants would also be paying a lot less income tax had GM folded. And a lot of "former" employees of the defunct companies would be paying a lot less income tax and pulling unemployment compensation.
Bottom line, GM may or may not make it, but a slower failure will be less catastrophic in most areas than a sudden Chapter 7 would have been. Personally, I'm not writing them off yet.
I'm exponentially proud that GM is an American company! They have practically invented the modern corporation. They symbolize all that is great about America! To me, General Motors is something godly! Their cars are my religion!
MIght make that: Have invented a model of one of the most incompetently run American corporations in US history.
Am amazed by devotion to one consumer brand above all else when facts, data, results have shown over last 3+ decades a decline in market share of GM and also decline in quality/reliability as reported by magazines and others. Yes, GM products have been improving in last 5+ years, but so have Ford and the foreign brands.
They symbolize all that is great about America.
It was great that GM was bleeding billions in recent years, year after year? Needed taxpayer bailout to stay afloat, so far?
There are so many better examples of great American companies - Deere, Caterpillar, Baxter, 3M, P&G, General Mills, Boeing, Medtronic, Apple, Cisco, etc.
I agree, GM IMO has been a national embarrassment for several decades, they've made enough bad decisions over the past several decades to fill text books at B schools around the world..
I don't have blind loyalty to any company. Period. I certainly respect some more than others, but I'm not going to buy a companies product just because they were competitive 40 years ago.
I'll buy another GM product as soon as they have a product that I like more than any competing model from other makes. I don't see that happening for a while, but who knows. If I was in the market for a nice sedan, the Lacrosse would be on my shopping list for sure.
You are in the minority. Look at Fortune's most admired companies:
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/mostadmired/2010/full_list/
GM is not even on the list. Toyota is near the top.
GM retail customers are in the minority. I don't know to many people that have a positive view of GM right now. Most I talk to still plan to avoid their products. That's probably part of the reason Ford is riding high right now. Another good qtr. by our best auto manufacturer.
I have and it's not pleasant. Hell, is the best way I can explain my experience with the GM vehicles I've had to endure.
Lemko -- I just know there is an Audi or Lexus with your name on it!
Can't the Audis...the bigger expensive ones at least, be pretty hell-acious themselves, once they're a few years old?
That's why Caddy wants to distance themselves from GM. Let's make it easy for them....let Ford takeover Cadillac!
Regards,
OW
Well an Ecoboost MKS will smoke anything Cadillac has that doesn't have V on the end.
Look at the new SRX, talk about under powered with the lousy 3.0 v6. Outside the the CTS, the whole line up can be tossed out IMO.
But I do agree that Ford hasn't done much with Lincoln. The most important thing is Ford has turned a profit over the past 2 quarters.
That's not saying much. They are both pretty sad and unfortunately are not even in the ball park when it comes to vehicles people aspire to.
Right now, I would have to admit yes... however IMO from the late 70s until the mid/late 90s I personally think Lincoln had the advantage. What did Caddy have that could compete with the Mark VII when it first came out? How about the 90 Town Car (won car of the year IIRC).
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic / 2022 Icon I6L Golf Cart
Yeah, I remember the Town Car back then, it was impressive for the day, unfortunately it was basically left to die a disgraceful death. Those Mark VII LSCs were sweet. That was probably the last time I looked at a Lincoln with envy.
As for Cadillac, I've never liked anything really. I always found them to be "old man" cars, kind of like Buick, but for those old people with more money to waste. Now I find the CTS appealing, but that's about it.
Ford really screwed up back then. All that money they earned from the late 80's and 90's was thrown out the window essentially. Think of what they could have done with Lincoln if the money spent on Jag, Aston, and Rover was actually spent on developing a world class Lincoln and Mercury products? Not saying they wouldn't have wasted in on bad products anyway (as both GM and Ford seem to be good at), but the potential for greatness was there.
Nothing wrong with a LaCrosse CXS. The loaded CXS model look sharp, I don't care for the base models as much.
Well, they did have the Cadillac ETCetera, er, I mean, Eldorado Touring Coupe. It was actually a good looking car, with a firmer suspension, alloy wheels, and some blackout trim as I recall. But alas, it was stuck with that same sucky 4.1 aluminum V-8. Shame they didn't see fit to throw a Buick turbo under the hood, like what you could get with the Riviera T-type. But yeah, the Mark VII pretty much blew GM out of the water when it came out, and I don't think GM ever really caught back up. The final Eldorados and Rivieras were nice, though.
The '90 Town Car was a really nice car...sad thing is, I think those 90's models were nicer than the ones today! They went to sort of a funky style around '98 with a bolder grille and more sloping rear and more rounded roofline that seemed to cut down on interior space. But then as the years went by, it seemed like they were starting to cheapen the interiors. Even though you still had the leather and lots of nice features, the hard plastic was starting to rear its ugly head, as was faker looking plood, cheaper-looking switchgear, etc. It started getting to the point that it felt like a taxi with leather seats.
Personally, I think I'd take a '90-92 Caddy Brougham, especially if I could find one with a 350! The big whale-like '93-96 was cool too, if a bit overblown and disproportionate. But once they got the LT-1 engine, it was kinda like an Impala SS in drag. But, to the general public, it seemed like the Town Car was the way to go. I think part of Caddy's problem was that they divided their market by having the FWD DeVille and the RWD Fleetwood/Brougham, whereas Lincoln went with just one model.