Through 1970, you could still get those Chevy II's ("Chevy Nova" after '68) with a 4-cylinder engine. I remember seeing exactly one new one at our local Chevy dealer's--a light green 4-door '70 with the optional door/window frame moldings. The automatic was a semi-automatic called "Torque-Drive".
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
The 4-cyl was probably overmatched by the late 60's, but I can kinda see the appeal of an early/mid-60's Chevy II with a 4-cyl. Simple, cheap, and economical, yet still easy on the eye.
I imagine a 4-cyl in something like that was a bit of a dog, though, and might be a bit scary to drive in modern traffic, if you regularly encounter situations where you need to merge into high-speed traffic.
I did like the '68 redesign, but I think it was long-in-the-tooth by '73 (and we had a new '73). The '75 was a good redesign, as we've discussed, IMO.
Of the original design, I like the '65 best. There's something subtly different about the grille and the headlight surrounds, and I like the side-by-side taillight and backup light arrangement in back.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
My mom did buy a used 70 Nova when it was maybe two years old and in perfect shape. It was one of those color embarrassments that happened back then (bronze with a brown vinyl top) but it was a great car. Flat head 6 and an automatic and that was pretty much it. It survived years of my youngest brother driving it. It was nearly unkillable. I think what did it in was extreme old age.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
"But the $14 billion figure omits the cost of the previously accumulated tax losses GM can apply against future profits, thanks to a special post-bailout government gift. The ordinary rule is that these losses can only be preserved after bankruptcy if the company is restructured—not if it's sold. By waiving this rule, the government saved GM at least $12 billion to $13 billion in future taxes, a large chunk of which (not all, because taxpayers also own GM stock) came straight out of taxpayers' pockets.
Funny how some posters have talked about how much the government will get in taxes from GM due to the bailout and their "success". Apparently not so - for a long time.
70-80% of the cost of running the plants, though, goes into the local economy in the way of wages and money spent on transportation and materials expenses.
All of that does go into the local economy and is taxed.
We all know that GM won't pay a dime in corporate taxes. All the more reason to keep the plants in the U.S. operating.
I have posted that GM is improving but the question is how fast and how long will the "new life" effort meet or beat the competition?
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- All three domestic automakers are growing sales, adding jobs and, for the first time in years, they're profitable.
The question now is, can they keep it going? American carmakers have changed their ways before, only to return to their bad habits.
Here are three things experts think Detroit automakers need to do to keep their wheels on the road.
Don't take your eye off the product: No, General Motors, people don't care about catchy marketing. They're coming into your showrooms because you've got competitive products.
"The consumer now isn't Detroit-centric," said David Champion, head of auto testing for Consumer Reports magazine. "They'll buy the best cars they can from anywhere."
As one of the resident dimwits here, I'll always be first to blast GM on idiotic decisions (G8) and slow to applaud based on the past pain. But I'll always secretly hope GM can completely change which I still do not see signs that the past behaviors have been completely obliterated (marketing).
At least the current Cadillac commercial is bearable, however "We don't just make luxury cars, we make Cadillacs." I can at least not change the channel on that one.
I think our fellow poster is the master of hyperbole. I can't think of any auto manufacturer that is really taken so lightly as to be a "laughingstock." Heck, his cherished Hyundai-Kia could've been considered a "laughingstock" 20 years ago, but now they're a force to be reckoned with as is a resurgent GM. Fortunes in the auto industry change swiftly. Yesterday's champion could be today's goat. Look at Toyota. A couple years ago, they looked invincible and they had this aura of stellar reliability and enviable resale value. Now, look at them.
Hyundai-Kia's warranty is non-transferable and I don't know anybody who isn't a masochist who can endure a Hyundai-Kia for ten years or 100K miles. My brother just recently went through a divorce and let his ex-wife keep the Hyundai Sonata and kept his Jeep Cherokee Sport. He figures he got the better end of that deal.
Anybody who thinks losing the industrial base would create economic paradise needs to come to neighborhoods like Nicetown and Kensington in Philly to see the brutal reality.
You're too kind. I find Hyundai-Kia's styling as designs from emotionally disturbed space aliens who are smoking crack rocks the size of boulders and blunts and big as telephone poles.
Wow, in other words NO taxpayer noney is being spent on repairs. I never had a transmission, head gasket, steering column, or engine fail on ANY of the MANY GM cars I've owned. I have had both a transmission and engine failure on two Ford cars.
How much has the Korean government subsidized their auto industry? Both in bailouts recently and in subsidy to keep them operating and able to sell into the US market?
"Japan is Detroit's fiercest competitor. Here in Japan, a country of only 120 million people, there are nine domestic auto companies. Nine! They thrive while U.S. firms wither because the Japanese government helps them out. One of the main reasons the Japanese are farther ahead in the electric car category is that the Japanese government pays for a good deal of the research and development of superior batteries."
"Japan is Detroit's fiercest competitor. Here in Japan, a country of only 120 million people, there are nine domestic auto companies. Nine! They thrive while U.S. firms wither because the Japanese government helps them out. One of the main reasons the Japanese are farther ahead in the electric car category is that the Japanese government pays for a good deal of the research and development of superior batteries.
"Japan is Detroit's fiercest competitor. Here in Japan, a country of only 120 million people, there are nine domestic auto companies. Nine! They thrive while U.S. firms wither because the Japanese government helps them out. One of the main reasons the Japanese are farther ahead in the electric car category is that the Japanese government pays for a good deal of the research and development of superior batteries.
"Detroit's labor force healthcare coverage. Why? Because Japan offers socialized medicine that picks up the tab for the bulk of worker health coverage. Toyota (TM) doesn't pay for trips to the hospital. The Japanese government does."
"In Germany, government involvement is even more overt. Did you know, for instance, that Volkswagen (VLKAY.PK) is 20% government owned? It was created by the [non-permissible content removed] government in 1937, later became part of the German postwar state, and is now 20% owned by the government of Lower Saxony. That probably comes in handy when negotiating tax rates, labor compensation, and import/export regulations."
This post has the latest news on the billions in subsidies which off-shore transplant carmakers have received from state and local governments. Also, press releases from several unions supportive of the UAW and comments from Ralph Nader. We're running the first release, from Good Jobs First, in its entirety and have shortened those below it for space considerations. All quotes are verbatim.
(Working on an automotive assembly line is inherently dangerous and tiring, especially when sharing the work with powerful robots).
Responding to many queries, Good Jobs First today released its summary of state and local subsidies given to foreign-owned auto assembly plants, totaling $3.6 billion.
"As elected officials debate aid for the Big 3, taxpayers have the right to know the full extent of government involvement in America's auto industry," said Greg LeRoy, GJF's executive director.
"And while proposed federal aid to the Big 3 would take the form of a loan, the vast majority of subsidies to foreign auto plants were taxpayer gifts such as property and sales tax exemptions, income tax credits, infrastructure aid, land discounts, and training grants," he said.
Honda, Marysville OH, 1980, $27 million*
Nissan, Smyrna, TN, 1980, $233 million**
Toyota, Georgetown, KY, 1985, $147 million
Honda, Anna, OH, 1985, $27 million*
Subaru, Lafayette, IN, 1986, $94 million
Honda, East Liberty, OH, 1987, $27 million*
BMW, Spartanburg, SC, 1992, $150 million
Mercedes-Benz, Vance, AL, 1993, $258 million
Toyota, Princeton, IN, 1995, $30 million
Nissan, Decherd, TN, 1995, $200 million**
Toyota, Buffalo, WV, 1996, more than $15 million
Honda, Lincoln, AL, 1999, $248 million
Nissan, Canton, MS, 2000, $295 million
Toyota, Huntsville, AL, 2001, $30 million
Hyundai, Montgomery, AL, 2002, $252 million
Toyota, San Antonio, TX, 2003, $133 million
Kia, West Point, GA, 2006, $400 million
Honda, Greensburg, IN, 2006, $141 million
Toyota, Blue Springs, MS, 2007, $300 million
Volkswagen, Chattanooga, TN, 2008, $577 million
Total: more than $3.58 billion
* total of direct subsidies to all Honda facilities in Ohio
** includes about $200 million for expansions of Smyrna and Decherd plants
1/2 of the cars they produce will be done outside the USA in countries where the average cost will be less than $15.00/hr..
2/3 of the total cars produced will be sold outside of the USA..
Sounds like the United Nations is taking over..
Chrysler's new Italian owner may move the Headquarters from Michigan to Italy..
The "Bailout" really worked!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We bailed ourselves out of the manufacturing business..Our govt. took our tax $$$$$s and bailed out the UAW retirement plan which if the projected future manufacturing and sales projections pan out then the UAW will all be drawing retirement checks due to lack of a stateside job..
Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Nissan, Volkswagen, and Subaru will become the our manufacturing auto base..
How is the "Hope and Change" working for the USA?????
So we're effectively subsidizing foreign companies here in the U.S. such that they are strangling our own companies. We might as well just sell off the entire country at this point. That 0% import fee change that we gave to South Korea effectively undercuts our manufacturing base with cheap labor.
I don't mean to get overtly political here, but giving Big Business everything that they want (as both parties seem to be doing lately) is diametrically opposed to the ideals of capitalism and how it applies to small and more traditional businesses. They've both convinced the public over the last 20-30 years, though, that they are one and the same.(supply and demand doesn't work when the balancing mechanisms have been taken out of the equation)
So morons go to the polls and vote and support candidates and laws that give more and more power to the large corporations at the expense of the smaller ones. And you wonder why unemployment is so high and local tax bases are collapsing? Taxes, fees, and regulations on small businesses have hardly changed over the last few decades. If anything, they have gotten worse.
Big business and small business are directly opposed to each other at this point. Any time you hear a pundit on TV blathering about something being good for business, you immediately should ask "which "business" do you mean when you say that?"
Sorry - I'm a bit grumpy about us extending NAFTA type nonsense to countries that plainly don't need it. We might as well just become a giant version of the Cayman Islands. No taxes, no tariffs, free trade for everyone - come and use us, abuse us, and dump your trash here... It's a going out of business sale in the U.S., and we're giving it all away!
And in case you wonder, no, I didn't vote for either of the idiots in the last election. Neither party has the best interests of the nation at heart at this point. And I won't vote for either party as long as they keep doing idiocy like this.
Instead of our government doing the same exact things as these foreign governments, I'd suggest:
1) ending the unpaid protection of Japan and Korea. Remove our troops if they don't pay us $100B or so per year. 2) if Japan and Korea still have $$ to subsidize their auto manufacturing then we impose tariffs equal to those subsidies. If Japan and Korea retaliate, we up the tariffs or cut off their imports.
The U.S. had and still has most of the power needed to make our economy fair. I suggest we use it, rather than selectively bailing out industries here. Our government should not pick and choose who prospers here in the U.S. I hope the farm subsidies and ethanol-subsidies are eliminated when debt-reduction is done.
If our government exits this economic interference then some normality might return. The government should only "police" the economy making sure it is a Fair playing-field. The government should essentially be a neutral referee - NOT allowing those who cheat to continue to play, or helping the weak at the expense of those who are winning. Good companies with good policies thrive, those with bad policies fail and are replaced.
Yes, but even a bad year back then meant 15.5 million cars sold, not 12. The dip was below even worst-case scenarios.
price of fuel can change rapidly
Yes, but GM's mild hybrids didn't sell well, so they were reluctant to invest too much. They tried, though it was a half-hearted effort.
putting all eggs in the SUV/Truck basket might be a dangerous product strategy
Agreed, but that's where their only profits were. They did hybrid trucks and acquired Daewoo to build small cars, the catch is they got crappy ones. Compare the results from GM-DAT to Hyundai/Kia.
GM was so big they simply could not be nimble enough to respond to a 29% contraction in the overall market. I think they got hit hardest largely because of ... how large they were.
I'm not worrying too much, at this point it's just entertainment
If that was the case, Hyundai and Kia wouldn't exist today
That's a perfect example of why I'm pro-bailout. Today they are innovating like no one else, pushing competitors to improve their products so quick they have whiplash.
We're not going to become a larger version of the Caymans...we're going to become a larger version of Mexico. And before anyone whines, I don't mean that in a cultural or language sense, but rather in socio-economic terms.
I'm pro-bailout too. Admittedly, I have mild socialist leanings anyway, especially when matters such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure are on topic. But especially for this industry - if ALL of the competition are doing it, which they ARE and have done so for decades, we need to do it too - or we will simply lose the industry and replace it with mcjobs. Not a nice future.
That's a perfect example of why I'm pro-bailout. Today they are innovating like no one else, pushing competitors to improve their products so quick they have whiplash.
Be careful what you call "success". Contrary to the "pro-bailout crowd" there are fundamentals in our auto industry that preclude any"whiplash" that GM could even dream of.
So once one takes the $75 billion in total funds/tax breaks allocated to GM and then adds the $13 billion given to Chrysler (only valued currently at $5 billion), it’s clear the cost is much more than presented. But what about the benefit? It’s clear, as one would expect, that the injection of tens of billions of dollars has allowed these companies to keep many Americans employed. How long will these jobs last, though?
The underlying structural problems with the auto-industry remain. While labor costs were cut during the bankruptcy period, they are still higher than Asian competitors. Furthermore, UAW President Bob King has been clear that his union will utterly reject any later concessions. As the automobile market moves towards smaller and more gas-efficient cars, a market quickly being seized by Asian companies like Hyundai and Kia, American automakers will again find themselves too inflexible to compete. This is not a new revelation – rather, it is history repeating itself. From the 1979 bailout of Chrysler, to the trade quotas of the 1980s, to today, we have protected domestic automakers from the forces of competition and to their own detriment.
I find Hyundai-Kia's styling as designs from emotionally disturbed space aliens who are smoking crack rocks the size of boulders and blunts and big as telephone poles
Apparently the population of crack-smoking alien aficionados increased 53% last month here in the USA. :P
I find Hyundai-Kia's styling as designs from emotionally disturbed space aliens who are smoking crack rocks the size of boulders and blunts and big as telephone poles.
Yeah, those designers in California might as well be from outer space. Light 'em up, Dudes!! :P
Designed at Kia's studios in Frankfurt and Irvine, Calif., the third-generation Optima is longer, wider and lower than the vehicle it replaces and is based on a new midsize platform. With the 2011 model, Kia makes Optima the global name for its flagship sedan.
We live in a world of ever increasing speed of change. GM sells more cars off-shore and the Koreans will own 8% of the US market this year.
You innovate or die. GM is still a work in progress and Toyota and Honda just got bad religion. It will, indeed be a fierce market for cars and trucks going forward.
Korea needs us more than we need them, so why do we keep having to wet nurse them at American's expense (jobs and taxes)? I really don't see that a NAFTA type agreement with Korea will help us all that much, they'll find tricks like consumer tax policy to keep tripping US products up. It is much more to Korea's benefit. I agree with some of the other posts - its time to stop their shenanigans and start taking reprisals.
All of this talk of reducing spending and increasing tariffs and what we charge other countries for their defense is useless unless we reduce spending on those largest 6 items listed on that site (debtclock.org): Total U.S. budget 3.564 trillion 1:Medicare - $816 billion 2:Social Security - $712 billion 3:Defense/Wars - $699 billion 4:Income/Security - $426 billion 5:Net interest on debt - $209 Billion 6:Federal Pensions - $209 Billion 7: All other federal spending - $492 Billion.
We could kill Item #4 like the Republicans want, entirely, and still be roughly $940 billion in the red. In fact, if we cut #3 and #4 down to $0(in theory), we'd still be over $240 billion in the hole.
We collect $2.190 trillion in tax. Items 1, 2, 5, and 6 on that list equal almost 2 trillion alone. Those are set obligations that aren't going to change at this point. Just those 4 items. That leaves ~$240 billion for absolutely everything else. Literally tens of thousands of smaller items. And that includes cutting all government military programs (and NASA), all branches of the military, FBI, CIA, and so on to $0.
Numbers 1,2,5, and 6 are essentially sunk long-term costs. That doesn't even include the costs of the wars, either. Even the GM bailout is barely a blip compared to this.
We are simply broke at this point unless we collect more actual money in taxes. Or we get rid of social security and medicare. As in completely gone.
I have a disturbing feeling that it's going to be the former that our government chooses.
Anybody who thinks losing the industrial base would create economic paradise needs to come to neighborhoods like Nicetown and Kensington in Philly to see the brutal reality.
I agree that when you think of U.S. cities and "garden spots", Philly is not one of the cities that comes to mind.
So we're effectively subsidizing foreign companies here in the U.S. such that they are strangling our own companies. We might as well just sell off the entire country at this point. That 0% import fee change that we gave to South Korea effectively undercuts our manufacturing base with cheap labor.
Well that's one way to look at it. We are subsidizing SUCCESS. The ability to delivery STRONG PRODUCTS. Any company, of any type, that holds the promise of bringing lots of jobs to an area by building a big plant can usually get local subsidies. Haven't other posters commented on how saving GM meant lots of jobs and support for local economies, which pay taxes? Well isn't that exact same thing that all those foreign companies provide for an area? Which is why localities are willing to provide tax breaks - because the boost to the economy is likely to bring in more revenue than it costs in providing the tax break?
Why aren't GM and C getting those subsidies? Because until recently they and their products were LOSERS in the market. They weren't building any new plants.
So you can say we are subsidizing foreign firms. But we are actually encouraging SUCCESS and not encouraging ABJECT FAILURE. Until the bailouts of the failed US automakers. But is of course easier to blame it all on foreign companies. Just gloss over the failures of the US corporations in this instance. Which is why they were building no new plants which might get tax breaks. With the bailout we finally rewarded FAILURES. Isn't that just great?
GM's mild hybrids didn't sell well, so they were reluctant to invest too much. They tried, though it was a half-hearted effort.
GM was investing money it didn't have in THREE kinds of hybrids. The nearly useless "mild hybrids". The SUV "two mode hybrids" so you could pay $10K more to get 7 more mpg out of your Escalade. And then the Volt, which is an extremely poor value for what it delivers. So GM went into triple the number of approaches than Toyota or Honda did. Typical of GM, as with more than 10 divisions. Always do more, just don't do it very competently.
1: That's only IF Hyundai decides to build more plants here. The reason that they were building cars here instead of in Korea was because *of* the tariffs and fees. It was marginally cheaper to build vehicles here. Now with the fees at 0%, there' no incentive at all to invest another dime in the U.S. economy. It's now cheaper to just ship cars here.
After all, while they may promise the world to us, there's nothing that is actually forcing them to follow through and actually build the new plant(s).
We've been taken once again and the rest of the world is laughing at how easy we are to dupe. Our politicians see 2 yards in front of their face and are simpletons when it comes to international economics.
2: That also affects almost everything else made in Korea. 0% is a disaster as it means we're giving jobs away since they have a much lower wage and cost of living. 0% means "free trade" and $0 in money. It means a huge trade imbalance will happen and wages will be depressed. If you thought China was bad for the U.S. economy, you've seen nothing yet. Because Korea is already high-tech and able to compete in areas that China is still a decade from reaching.
You'll see cheap embedded computer parts, car parts, consumer electronics, engineering components, and on and on... things that were normally made in the U.S. because of quality issues with Chinese made goods. Basically the rest of the high-tech industry in the U.S. that was left. Lots of it is also in aerospace and complex machinery and the like, as well as instruments and higher quality items that require better tooling and craftsmanship. All now coming in for very very low prices. With the same quality, or close to it as U.S. made goods. And we're not actually getting "free trade", as they still impose a fee on us to import to them. What moron thought that was a fair deal?
Our politicians are as self-serving and corrupt as anything that was ever seen in ancient Rome. They consider 0% in import fees to us a 4% to them to be a good deal? I hope they can sleep well at night.
It's a disaster that dwarfs what NAFTA did with Mexico. We might as well have given Japan a 0% import fee as the resulting carnage will be the same. (though the quality of stuff at Wal Mart will likely go up as they shift to Korea - yay! )
edit - from Wikipedia about the Free Trade Agreement: The U.S. International Trade Commission, an independent federal agency, has projected that the Korea FTA will increase the U.S. trade deficit in goods and lead to no increase in U.S. employment.[30] The U.S. think-tank Economic Policy Institute predicts that it will lead the loss of 159,000 jobs.[31]
For reference, in 2009, 214K H1B visas were issued. 159,000 lost jobs is a real problem, as it's coming from places like musical instruments, bicycles, auto parts, engineering components, and so on for the most part. Higher technology industries that were still able to sell at home due to the fact that China hadn't caught up (yet) in overall quality. Oh, and auto manufacturers. Hyundai effectively can keep from having to raise its prices for the next 5 years, and permanently sell its cars for 1-2K less than any other manufacturer.
I wonder how long it will be before some of the other manufacturers *besides* GM and Ford decide that it's just not worth competing in our market since we've effectively given preferential treatment to Hyundai.
I find it odd that it is ok to bailout GM and then Korea is blamed for their success and now the USA needs to be protected against their success.
You make junk, you die. GM died.
They greatly improved their NEW products but their older designs remain sub-par (bof suv's). Unless they change dramatically to lead innovations in the market, history will repeat itself.
Another C-11 right around the corner that will be a mere blip in the budget deficit.
GM ALREADY decided to concentrate the majority of their products overseas.
Besides, SK is tiny, a mere blip on the trade front. If you look at their viewpoint, they are just as concerned as the Dems here at home.
The opinion of Koreans towards the FTA is divided, at least by sector. The Korea Institute for International Economic Policy estimates that exports to the United States will rise by 12% per year, or $5.4 billion, and grow by 15% in the longer run. However, the Korea Rural Economic Institute predicts that US agricultural exports to South Korea, currently $2.8 billion, could double after the FTA, causing the loss of up to 130,000 jobs[4]. Proponents of the FTA cite that it will create more jobs that the ones destroyed, and will be, on the long term, beneficial for the country[24]. Business groups welcomed the news that South Korea concluded the free trade agreement with the U.S. Business leaders stressed the importance of smoothly implementing the next steps, including ratifying the agreement in the National Assembly of South Korea.
I find it odd that it is ok to bailout GM and then Korea is blamed for their success and now the USA needs to be protected against their success.
The two issues go hand-in-hand, actually.
1: You must protect your manufacturing base and heavy industries at all costs if you want a viable middle class. Every other nation on the planet does this. Except for us.
2: The U.S. doesn't need to be "protected" against Korea. We just need to stop giving it away for free when we know that they already give preferential treatment and incentives to Hyundai and many other companies. The tariffs were originally there to enforce a bit of equality between the living standards and wages in Korea vs the U.S.
Exactly how bad does it have to get in the U.S before people care more about their own country and what's good for it rather than giving endless gifts to the rest of the world at our expense?
We bail out GM. That's a worthy thing to bail out (as opposed to, say, stomping around in Afghanistan for another month). But then we make it tougher on GM, Ford, and Chrysler by giving Hyundai gifts like this.
You know, if I didn't know better, I'd think that Obama changed parties. But I fear that the actual truth is that he simply sold out to the special interests.
Remember, if you go easy on GM, Ford and Chrysler, the results lead to FAILURE.
We should thank Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, Kia, BMW, Mercedes, Audi for forcing the Big 3 to follow correct business fundamentals. Protecting them from the market won't make them stronger.
Comments
1962 Chevy Nova
This one has an inline 6 194 c.i. engine. These had manual shifters on the column.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
I imagine a 4-cyl in something like that was a bit of a dog, though, and might be a bit scary to drive in modern traffic, if you regularly encounter situations where you need to merge into high-speed traffic.
Of the original design, I like the '65 best. There's something subtly different about the grille and the headlight surrounds, and I like the side-by-side taillight and backup light arrangement in back.
My mom did buy a used 70 Nova when it was maybe two years old and in perfect shape. It was one of those color embarrassments that happened back then (bronze with a brown vinyl top) but it was a great car. Flat head 6 and an automatic and that was pretty much it. It survived years of my youngest brother driving it. It was nearly unkillable. I think what did it in was extreme old age.
Funny how some posters have talked about how much the government will get in taxes from GM due to the bailout and their "success". Apparently not so - for a long time.
Read the entire article
All of that does go into the local economy and is taxed.
We all know that GM won't pay a dime in corporate taxes. All the more reason to keep the plants in the U.S. operating.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- All three domestic automakers are growing sales, adding jobs and, for the first time in years, they're profitable.
The question now is, can they keep it going? American carmakers have changed their ways before, only to return to their bad habits.
Here are three things experts think Detroit automakers need to do to keep their wheels on the road.
Don't take your eye off the product: No, General Motors, people don't care about catchy marketing. They're coming into your showrooms because you've got competitive products.
"The consumer now isn't Detroit-centric," said David Champion, head of auto testing for Consumer Reports magazine. "They'll buy the best cars they can from anywhere."
How to KEEP WINNING
As one of the resident dimwits here, I'll always be first to blast GM on idiotic decisions (G8) and slow to applaud based on the past pain. But I'll always secretly hope GM can completely change which I still do not see signs that the past behaviors have been completely obliterated (marketing).
At least the current Cadillac commercial is bearable, however "We don't just make luxury cars, we make Cadillacs." I can at least not change the channel on that one.
Regards,
OW
My brother just recently went through a divorce and let his ex-wife keep the Hyundai Sonata and kept his Jeep Cherokee Sport. He figures he got the better end of that deal.
"Japan is Detroit's fiercest competitor. Here in Japan, a country of only 120 million people, there are nine domestic auto companies. Nine! They thrive while U.S. firms wither because the Japanese government helps them out. One of the main reasons the Japanese are farther ahead in the electric car category is that the Japanese government pays for a good deal of the research and development of superior batteries."
"Japan is Detroit's fiercest competitor. Here in Japan, a country of only 120 million people, there are nine domestic auto companies. Nine! They thrive while U.S. firms wither because the Japanese government helps them out. One of the main reasons the Japanese are farther ahead in the electric car category is that the Japanese government pays for a good deal of the research and development of superior batteries.
"Japan is Detroit's fiercest competitor. Here in Japan, a country of only 120 million people, there are nine domestic auto companies. Nine! They thrive while U.S. firms wither because the Japanese government helps them out. One of the main reasons the Japanese are farther ahead in the electric car category is that the Japanese government pays for a good deal of the research and development of superior batteries.
"Detroit's labor force healthcare coverage. Why? Because Japan offers socialized medicine that picks up the tab for the bulk of worker health coverage. Toyota (TM) doesn't pay for trips to the hospital. The Japanese government does."
"In Germany, government involvement is even more overt. Did you know, for instance, that Volkswagen (VLKAY.PK) is 20% government owned? It was created by the [non-permissible content removed] government in 1937, later became part of the German postwar state, and is now 20% owned by the government of Lower Saxony. That probably comes in handy when negotiating tax rates, labor compensation, and import/export regulations."
link title
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-parker/transplant-automakers-get_b_150804.ht- - - ml
This post has the latest news on the billions in subsidies which off-shore transplant carmakers have received from state and local governments. Also, press releases from several unions supportive of the UAW and comments from Ralph Nader. We're running the first release, from Good Jobs First, in its entirety and have shortened those below it for space considerations. All quotes are verbatim.
(Working on an automotive assembly line is inherently dangerous and tiring, especially when sharing the work with powerful robots).
Responding to many queries, Good Jobs First today released its summary of state and local subsidies given to foreign-owned auto assembly plants, totaling $3.6 billion.
"As elected officials debate aid for the Big 3, taxpayers have the right to know the full extent of government involvement in America's auto industry," said Greg LeRoy, GJF's executive director.
"And while proposed federal aid to the Big 3 would take the form of a loan, the vast majority of subsidies to foreign auto plants were taxpayer gifts such as property and sales tax exemptions, income tax credits, infrastructure aid, land discounts, and training grants," he said.
Honda, Marysville OH, 1980, $27 million*
Nissan, Smyrna, TN, 1980, $233 million**
Toyota, Georgetown, KY, 1985, $147 million
Honda, Anna, OH, 1985, $27 million*
Subaru, Lafayette, IN, 1986, $94 million
Honda, East Liberty, OH, 1987, $27 million*
BMW, Spartanburg, SC, 1992, $150 million
Mercedes-Benz, Vance, AL, 1993, $258 million
Toyota, Princeton, IN, 1995, $30 million
Nissan, Decherd, TN, 1995, $200 million**
Toyota, Buffalo, WV, 1996, more than $15 million
Honda, Lincoln, AL, 1999, $248 million
Nissan, Canton, MS, 2000, $295 million
Toyota, Huntsville, AL, 2001, $30 million
Hyundai, Montgomery, AL, 2002, $252 million
Toyota, San Antonio, TX, 2003, $133 million
Kia, West Point, GA, 2006, $400 million
Honda, Greensburg, IN, 2006, $141 million
Toyota, Blue Springs, MS, 2007, $300 million
Volkswagen, Chattanooga, TN, 2008, $577 million
Total: more than $3.58 billion
* total of direct subsidies to all Honda facilities in Ohio
** includes about $200 million for expansions of Smyrna and Decherd plants
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2/3 of the total cars produced will be sold outside of the USA..
Sounds like the United Nations is taking over..
Chrysler's new Italian owner may move the Headquarters from Michigan to Italy..
The "Bailout" really worked!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We bailed ourselves out of the manufacturing business..Our govt. took our tax $$$$$s and bailed out the UAW retirement plan which if the projected future manufacturing and sales projections pan out then the UAW will all be drawing retirement checks due to lack of a stateside job..
Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Nissan, Volkswagen, and Subaru will become the our manufacturing auto base..
How is the "Hope and Change" working for the USA?????
I don't mean to get overtly political here, but giving Big Business everything that they want (as both parties seem to be doing lately) is diametrically opposed to the ideals of capitalism and how it applies to small and more traditional businesses. They've both convinced the public over the last 20-30 years, though, that they are one and the same.(supply and demand doesn't work when the balancing mechanisms have been taken out of the equation)
So morons go to the polls and vote and support candidates and laws that give more and more power to the large corporations at the expense of the smaller ones. And you wonder why unemployment is so high and local tax bases are collapsing? Taxes, fees, and regulations on small businesses have hardly changed over the last few decades. If anything, they have gotten worse.
Big business and small business are directly opposed to each other at this point. Any time you hear a pundit on TV blathering about something being good for business, you immediately should ask "which "business" do you mean when you say that?"
Sorry - I'm a bit grumpy about us extending NAFTA type nonsense to countries that plainly don't need it. We might as well just become a giant version of the Cayman Islands. No taxes, no tariffs, free trade for everyone - come and use us, abuse us, and dump your trash here... It's a going out of business sale in the U.S., and we're giving it all away!
And in case you wonder, no, I didn't vote for either of the idiots in the last election. Neither party has the best interests of the nation at heart at this point. And I won't vote for either party as long as they keep doing idiocy like this.
1) ending the unpaid protection of Japan and Korea. Remove our troops if they don't pay us $100B or so per year.
2) if Japan and Korea still have $$ to subsidize their auto manufacturing then we impose tariffs equal to those subsidies. If Japan and Korea retaliate, we up the tariffs or cut off their imports.
The U.S. had and still has most of the power needed to make our economy fair. I suggest we use it, rather than selectively bailing out industries here. Our government should not pick and choose who prospers here in the U.S. I hope the farm subsidies and ethanol-subsidies are eliminated when debt-reduction is done.
If our government exits this economic interference then some normality might return. The government should only "police" the economy making sure it is a Fair playing-field. The government should essentially be a neutral referee - NOT allowing those who cheat to continue to play, or helping the weak at the expense of those who are winning. Good companies with good policies thrive, those with bad policies fail and are replaced.
First, the economy was booming
Yes, but even a bad year back then meant 15.5 million cars sold, not 12. The dip was below even worst-case scenarios.
price of fuel can change rapidly
Yes, but GM's mild hybrids didn't sell well, so they were reluctant to invest too much. They tried, though it was a half-hearted effort.
putting all eggs in the SUV/Truck basket might be a dangerous product strategy
Agreed, but that's where their only profits were. They did hybrid trucks and acquired Daewoo to build small cars, the catch is they got crappy ones. Compare the results from GM-DAT to Hyundai/Kia.
GM was so big they simply could not be nimble enough to respond to a 29% contraction in the overall market. I think they got hit hardest largely because of ... how large they were.
I'm not worrying too much, at this point it's just entertainment
Yes, an entertaining response. Cheers. :shades:
Gotta send them a shout out...
Met one of their distributors when I was in college, after some nice conversation they basically offered to cater a small party we had for free.
Very cool group, and yes, a good domestic beer. Cheers.
That's a perfect example of why I'm pro-bailout. Today they are innovating like no one else, pushing competitors to improve their products so quick they have whiplash.
Source?
Boy that sounds like an old wives' tale.
I do like the idea of reciprocity - tax them back at the same rates.
Be careful what you call "success". Contrary to the "pro-bailout crowd" there are fundamentals in our auto industry that preclude any"whiplash" that GM could even dream of.
So once one takes the $75 billion in total funds/tax breaks allocated to GM and then adds the $13 billion given to Chrysler (only valued currently at $5 billion), it’s clear the cost is much more than presented. But what about the benefit? It’s clear, as one would expect, that the injection of tens of billions of dollars has allowed these companies to keep many Americans employed. How long will these jobs last, though?
The underlying structural problems with the auto-industry remain. While labor costs were cut during the bankruptcy period, they are still higher than Asian competitors. Furthermore, UAW President Bob King has been clear that his union will utterly reject any later concessions. As the automobile market moves towards smaller and more gas-efficient cars, a market quickly being seized by Asian companies like Hyundai and Kia, American automakers will again find themselves too inflexible to compete. This is not a new revelation – rather, it is history repeating itself. From the 1979 bailout of Chrysler, to the trade quotas of the 1980s, to today, we have protected domestic automakers from the forces of competition and to their own detriment.
I WILL be around for GM C-11 II! :P
Regards,
OW
Apparently the population of crack-smoking alien aficionados increased 53% last month here in the USA. :P
Edited for spelling.
The toyota/lexus folks have to go somewhere! :P
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Fiat 500 doesn't count. They're not even for sale at enough dealers.
Where's the Dodge Hornet? Could complete with the Sonic and Fiesta.
Yeah, those designers in California might as well be from outer space. Light 'em up, Dudes!! :P
Designed at Kia's studios in Frankfurt and Irvine, Calif., the third-generation Optima is longer, wider and lower than the vehicle it replaces and is based on a new midsize platform. With the 2011 model, Kia makes Optima the global name for its flagship sedan.
Regards,
OW
So is the Regal! :mad:
Regards,
OW
Being global is not a bad thing, we were just talking about hedging your bets, diversifying, etc.
Here your go:
link title
Considering the market share gains, the Koreans WILL make concessions.
Tarriffs will eventually be eliminated
We live in a world of ever increasing speed of change. GM sells more cars off-shore and the Koreans will own 8% of the US market this year.
You innovate or die. GM is still a work in progress and Toyota and Honda just got bad religion. It will, indeed be a fierce market for cars and trucks going forward.
Regards,
OW
protectionism rings through
Bumping up the Hope credit was good.
Can't think of anything else in 2.5 years that Obama has done right.
What a record to run on...I did 2 things right in 4 years
We have a place for the non-GM talk you might enjoy:
Forget Bushisms, Biden Gaffes, We have Obama blunders
Total U.S. budget 3.564 trillion
1:Medicare - $816 billion
2:Social Security - $712 billion
3:Defense/Wars - $699 billion
4:Income/Security - $426 billion
5:Net interest on debt - $209 Billion
6:Federal Pensions - $209 Billion
7: All other federal spending - $492 Billion.
We could kill Item #4 like the Republicans want, entirely, and still be roughly $940 billion in the red. In fact, if we cut #3 and #4 down to $0(in theory), we'd still be over $240 billion in the hole.
We collect $2.190 trillion in tax.
Items 1, 2, 5, and 6 on that list equal almost 2 trillion alone. Those are set obligations that aren't going to change at this point. Just those 4 items. That leaves ~$240 billion for absolutely everything else. Literally tens of thousands of smaller items. And that includes cutting all government military programs (and NASA), all branches of the military, FBI, CIA, and so on to $0.
Numbers 1,2,5, and 6 are essentially sunk long-term costs. That doesn't even include the costs of the wars, either. Even the GM bailout is barely a blip compared to this.
We are simply broke at this point unless we collect more actual money in taxes. Or we get rid of social security and medicare. As in completely gone.
I have a disturbing feeling that it's going to be the former that our government chooses.
I agree that when you think of U.S. cities and "garden spots", Philly is not one of the cities that comes to mind.
Well that's one way to look at it. We are subsidizing SUCCESS. The ability to delivery STRONG PRODUCTS. Any company, of any type, that holds the promise of bringing lots of jobs to an area by building a big plant can usually get local subsidies. Haven't other posters commented on how saving GM meant lots of jobs and support for local economies, which pay taxes? Well isn't that exact same thing that all those foreign companies provide for an area? Which is why localities are willing to provide tax breaks - because the boost to the economy is likely to bring in more revenue than it costs in providing the tax break?
Why aren't GM and C getting those subsidies? Because until recently they and their products were LOSERS in the market. They weren't building any new plants.
So you can say we are subsidizing foreign firms. But we are actually encouraging SUCCESS and not encouraging ABJECT FAILURE. Until the bailouts of the failed US automakers. But is of course easier to blame it all on foreign companies. Just gloss over the failures of the US corporations in this instance. Which is why they were building no new plants which might get tax breaks. With the bailout we finally rewarded FAILURES. Isn't that just great?
GM was investing money it didn't have in THREE kinds of hybrids. The nearly useless "mild hybrids". The SUV "two mode hybrids" so you could pay $10K more to get 7 more mpg out of your Escalade. And then the Volt, which is an extremely poor value for what it delivers. So GM went into triple the number of approaches than Toyota or Honda did. Typical of GM, as with more than 10 divisions. Always do more, just don't do it very competently.
I agree that Honda and especially Toyota have been slipping. That's good for Ford and GM.
After all, while they may promise the world to us, there's nothing that is actually forcing them to follow through and actually build the new plant(s).
We've been taken once again and the rest of the world is laughing at how easy we are to dupe. Our politicians see 2 yards in front of their face and are simpletons when it comes to international economics.
2: That also affects almost everything else made in Korea. 0% is a disaster as it means we're giving jobs away since they have a much lower wage and cost of living. 0% means "free trade" and $0 in money. It means a huge trade imbalance will happen and wages will be depressed. If you thought China was bad for the U.S. economy, you've seen nothing yet. Because Korea is already high-tech and able to compete in areas that China is still a decade from reaching.
You'll see cheap embedded computer parts, car parts, consumer electronics, engineering components, and on and on... things that were normally made in the U.S. because of quality issues with Chinese made goods. Basically the rest of the high-tech industry in the U.S. that was left. Lots of it is also in aerospace and complex machinery and the like, as well as instruments and higher quality items that require better tooling and craftsmanship. All now coming in for very very low prices. With the same quality, or close to it as U.S. made goods. And we're not actually getting "free trade", as they still impose a fee on us to import to them. What moron thought that was a fair deal?
Our politicians are as self-serving and corrupt as anything that was ever seen in ancient Rome. They consider 0% in import fees to us a 4% to them to be a good deal? I hope they can sleep well at night.
It's a disaster that dwarfs what NAFTA did with Mexico. We might as well have given Japan a 0% import fee as the resulting carnage will be the same. (though the quality of stuff at Wal Mart will likely go up as they shift to Korea - yay!
edit - from Wikipedia about the Free Trade Agreement:
The U.S. International Trade Commission, an independent federal agency, has projected that the Korea FTA will increase the U.S. trade deficit in goods and lead to no increase in U.S. employment.[30] The U.S. think-tank Economic Policy Institute predicts that it will lead the loss of 159,000 jobs.[31]
For reference, in 2009, 214K H1B visas were issued. 159,000 lost jobs is a real problem, as it's coming from places like musical instruments, bicycles, auto parts, engineering components, and so on for the most part. Higher technology industries that were still able to sell at home due to the fact that China hadn't caught up (yet) in overall quality. Oh, and auto manufacturers. Hyundai effectively can keep from having to raise its prices for the next 5 years, and permanently sell its cars for 1-2K less than any other manufacturer.
I wonder how long it will be before some of the other manufacturers *besides* GM and Ford decide that it's just not worth competing in our market since we've effectively given preferential treatment to Hyundai.
You make junk, you die. GM died.
They greatly improved their NEW products but their older designs remain sub-par (bof suv's). Unless they change dramatically to lead innovations in the market, history will repeat itself.
Another C-11 right around the corner that will be a mere blip in the budget deficit.
Regards,
OW
GM ALREADY decided to concentrate the majority of their products overseas.
Besides, SK is tiny, a mere blip on the trade front. If you look at their viewpoint, they are just as concerned as the Dems here at home.
The opinion of Koreans towards the FTA is divided, at least by sector. The Korea Institute for International Economic Policy estimates that exports to the United States will rise by 12% per year, or $5.4 billion, and grow by 15% in the longer run. However, the Korea Rural Economic Institute predicts that US agricultural exports to South Korea, currently $2.8 billion, could double after the FTA, causing the loss of up to 130,000 jobs[4]. Proponents of the FTA cite that it will create more jobs that the ones destroyed, and will be, on the long term, beneficial for the country[24]. Business groups welcomed the news that South Korea concluded the free trade agreement with the U.S. Business leaders stressed the importance of smoothly implementing the next steps, including ratifying the agreement in the National Assembly of South Korea.
Regards,
OW
The two issues go hand-in-hand, actually.
1: You must protect your manufacturing base and heavy industries at all costs if you want a viable middle class. Every other nation on the planet does this. Except for us.
2: The U.S. doesn't need to be "protected" against Korea. We just need to stop giving it away for free when we know that they already give preferential treatment and incentives to Hyundai and many other companies. The tariffs were originally there to enforce a bit of equality between the living standards and wages in Korea vs the U.S.
Exactly how bad does it have to get in the U.S before people care more about their own country and what's good for it rather than giving endless gifts to the rest of the world at our expense?
We bail out GM. That's a worthy thing to bail out (as opposed to, say, stomping around in Afghanistan for another month). But then we make it tougher on GM, Ford, and Chrysler by giving Hyundai gifts like this.
You know, if I didn't know better, I'd think that Obama changed parties. But I fear that the actual truth is that he simply sold out to the special interests.
We should thank Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, Kia, BMW, Mercedes, Audi for forcing the Big 3 to follow correct business fundamentals. Protecting them from the market won't make them stronger.
Go Kia! :shades:
Regards,
OW