Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
The pension is funded for those already retired and the health care is going to be self funded by the retirees. So yes I believe that cost is soon gone. And for those who still work for GM the pension promised is not as big anymore and GM has been supporting 401's for many years with dollar match. BUT that pension fund sure could be used to keep the company gong but I believe by law it cannot be touched. Then again if it is now overfunded (per the recently government revised requirements) perhaps some of it could be used or borrowed?
We may disagree on a lot of things but I try and use facts, and my opinion based on lots of years in the industry AND my contacts I still have (but NEVER giving out restricted information).
figure out how to become a car company instead of a health benefits company.
GM as of Jan 1 are no longer supplying health care to the salaried retirees, also the hourly retirees and workforce health care will be supplyed by the union, not GM.
How many Lumina's did Chevy try to market at once
2, the lumina sedan and the Lumina APV minivan.
I'd hate to see Buick go, but darned if I can tell any difference between the two remaining models they have
There are actually 3 and the Lucerne and LaCrosse are just about as different as any 2 sedans can be. They do now share grille styling but they are completely different. And the Enclave looks a bit different than both of them.
Easiest is Hummer. Pretty much standalone dealers so a buyer would have the franchise and GM would not have to buy them out. Hey, I have an idea. A 3 way deal. GM gets Chrysler from Cerebus. They give GMAC to GMAC. They sell jeep and Hummer to XXX china company for a lot of money. They gift all the Chrylser dealerships to this new company. That was easy. This would help GM today with liquidity.
I think Saturn is another that could go but will probalby go slowly with no refresh of models. That is not going to help GM now with liquidity. Perhaps they could sell the Saturn name and dealerships to the XXX company?
Saab is another possiblity but I am not really familiar with how much they would lose overseas. Not much cost to having them here.
Next would be Pontiac, even though they have lots of models but no overseas lifejacket to help them.
I think we are going to get a quick answer to the above from GM.
Darn close...and boring as Hades!
Regards,
OW
Jim Taylor has left his position at general manager of General Motors' Cadillac brand to become CEO of Hummer as GM considers selling the SUV line.
Mark McNabb, 47, remains GM North America vice president in charge of Cadillac and GM's premium sales channel. The three general manager positions reporting to him -- for the Cadillac, Hummer and Saab brands -- are being eliminated, spokeswoman Joanne Krell said in an interview today. In April, GM hired McNabb -- a former Nissan, Infiniti and Mercedes-Benz marketing executive -- as the channel's vice president, passing over Taylor.
Taylor, 52, became Cadillac general manager in August 2004. He previously had been vehicle line executive for Cadillac's Sigma platform vehicles -- the CTS and STS sedans, and the SRX crossover. ...
Tesla owner Elon Musk takes over as CEO; Announces layoffs, Model S delayRead More Discuss (10)E-Mail Millionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk, the largest investor and principal owner of Tesla Motors, today announce he will take over the role of CEO at the electric car startup. Musk, who co-founded PayPal and went to make a $328 million fortune, has ousted Tesla Motors CEO Ze’ev Drori, announced major layoffs, and confirmed delays in the Model S sedan project.
Our only Dayton area is Saab only.
Several near Cincinnati are called Just Saab so I assume they sell Just Saabs.
One Cincy is Cadillac and Saab.
One in Dublin (Columbus) is Saab, VW, Audi, and BMW. While trying to find their brands I came across a single comment on a site on google. Not good.
link title
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I will let others decide how different they look but the biggest reason for two models is one is a mid size vehicle and the other a full size vehicle on the same platform as the DTS.
The next LaCrosse is coming in the spring and I hope folks will be able to tell the difference between it and the Lucerne and the Enclave AND between it and the Malibu and Aura. It sure is different looking.
These 2 cars are not what the US should aspire to, IMHO. The new generations of consumers will make sure the "spark" gets back into the design.
We should be years ahead on electric propulsion as well as design let alone desirable cars people will wait on line to buy.
Heck, if the G8 was made here, it would more than triple the projected sales in the first year. No supply, no buy....and give me a break on dealer mark-up.
Again, past bad decisions. I am looking forward to the future.
I mean, ahhmm, Back to the Future!
Now, that's what I'm talkin' bout!
Regards,
OW
Actually I think that's the crux of the problem right there...one is supposed to be midsize and one's supposed to be full-size, but at a quick glance, it's hard to tell one's bigger than the other. The Lucerne really isn't much bigger or heavier than the LaCrosse, but it's a lot roomier inside...much better laid out. I'm sure the extra ~5" of wheelbase helps alot there.
Personally, I think the Lucerne is an attractive looking car. Does it wow me and make me lust over it? Hardly. But then again, nothing else out there really does, either. I think the Lucerne looks better proportioned than the LaCrosse. It's smoother and sleeker, seems to have a bit more glass area, and I like the longer wheelbase coupled with a bit less overhang.
I think that larger cars probably should be RWD, with much less front overhang. The Camaro is on a 112 inch wheel base, while the G8 is about 115. I think the RWD DTS should probably get about 118 inchs. This would give the zeta platform three distinct wheelbase sizes. With some different sizes in rear overhang and hood length differences, quite a sizable number of different models could be made on this platform. For example, a small sedan could be made on the 112 inch wheelbase, with a shorter hood, but longer rear overhang than the Camaro.
I am not quite sure where I first ran across the ammonia fuel idea, but ammonia allows for hydrogen storage at nominal pressures (about like propane which is used for gas fired outdoor grills). Even compared with liquid hydrogen (which is very cold, 20 degrees kelvin or so), there is more hydrogen in a liter of ammonia. What I am getting at here is that the future of the electric drive depends more on some sort of synthetic fuel that can supply a fuel cell to make electricity to power the vehicle. Ammonia is already made in quantity as a fertilizer, so this could become a fuel without great difficulty. With a fuel cell providing power, there is no need for an expensive rechargeable battery system. However, fuel cells are still expensive I think.
When the GM-10 sedans (Lumina, Grand Prix, Cutlass, Regal) came onto the scene for 1990, they were bigger than the Century, Ciera, etc, and almost indistinguishable in size from the C- and H-bodies. I think the Lumina sedan in 1990 was actually a touch longer than a LeSabre or Delta.
Back to the LaCrosse and the Lucerne. My Dad's '03 Regal is about the length of a LaCrosse (~198"), and my '00 Intrepid is about the length of a Lucerne (~203"). Parked back-to-back though, it's hard to tell that the Intrepid is a bigger car. When the sizes are that close together, it's easy to use styling to make one car look bigger and one look smaller, so that you can't always tell which one is larger until you whip out the tape measure.
However the Epsilons were to skinny for anywhere near enough width for making a comfortable rear seat for 3. The W did and that is why the Impala and LaCrosse remained for one more iteration. The new EPS II will be wider than EPS I and will have a decent width for the new LaCrosse.
That's another problem GM seems to have had for ages, starting with the 1997 Malibu. The Malibu seemed like a comfy car if you had four people with fairly long legs, but just wasn't wide enough for 3-across seating in the back. The Lumina, and Impala that followed, was wider inside, but actually seemed worse for legroom. The published measurements may not bear this out, but I swear that the all three iterations of Malibu ('97-03, '04-07, and current) have better legroom in back than any GM-10 or W-body ever did. And somehow, the Impala seemed to get more cramped in back with the '06 restyle. Maybe they did something with the seats?
So it seems like if you have 4 long-legged people, the Malibu is the better bet. But if you need space for 5 shorter people, the Impala's a better bet.
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=GM&read=3228
and after watching the financial station looks every ceo is having a hard time
Both medium sized cars with front wheel drive, V-6 normally aspirated power and automatic transmissions, about the same size and I have no idea why there are two. They aren't unattractive, but they're just kind of "there." Certainly better than the Camry. I figure the Enclave is no more a Buick than it is a Saturn.
Think back to the 60's, when they had the Skylark, Wildcat, and Electra. My dates may be off, but they were different, they looked different, but were still recognizable as Buicks.
The Lumina comment could as well have been about Oldsmobile and the Cutlass.
The comment about GM being a health car provider was a nod to a Jeremy Clarkson review (the Top Gear guy - he quite liked the new CTS V, picking it as preferable to an M5). The point being that they have a lot of inertia with their current labor agreements. Right or wrong, many of their competitors - at least those that are eating their market share - do not have that baggage. It may kill them.
Ford gets it. One good car in each market, sold around the world. BMW, Honda, Mercedes, Toyota, VW... they do this (with some regional adjustments like the trunk on the Golf). This is the case for keeping Saturn and Saab. Saturn becomes the Opel/Vauxhall/Holden in the US. Keep Saab for something to move up into. (Why they aren't marketing its history of turbocharged power, efficiency, and safety is beyond me). Chevy can be the no-frills version abroad, or the technology leader for extended range hybrid.
For the record, the 3 Saab dealers in Cincy/Dayton are related, and we bought a used 9-3 there last year. We wanted a 4 cyl, stick, 5* safety, room for four people my size.
(mini rant)The 9-3 was the ONLY thing GM had available at the time that met those criteria. Yeah, I know, they don't want to offer a stick in the Malibaura, because not that many people want them. Just give the sale away to Honda who does offer a stick. And why on earth Saab can figure out how to get a "Top Safety Pick" from IIHS with the Epsilon based 9-3 but NOBODY else in platform-land can... Don't they think people look at this sort of thing when they shop!?!? Arrgh! (end rant)
Spy shot of the next Lacrosse
General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC are accelerating merger discussions amid strong support from potential lenders that are eager to see a deal done.
GM, set to report dismal third-quarter earnings in coming weeks and scrambling to find new sources of funding, is aiming to get a deal done as early as the end of October, according to people familiar with the matter.
Heating Up
Very interesting...
Regards,
OW
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I think that if GM could swing it and it would get them 1 more year of liquidity it would be a great move.
Speaking on the CNBC cable channel, Nardelli said Thursday that Chrysler has been open about looking for partners and creating alliances, but he would not address the GM discussions.
However, he said the U.S. auto sales slump has set the stage for industry consolidation.
"It certainly creates an environment for consolidation where you can get synergies of productivity that will allow you to be more competitive, not only here in the U.S. market, but on a global basis," he said.
Industry Ripe for Mergers
Not a slam dunk yet but heating up is the word. This decision is about as complex as the "Troubled Asset Relief Program"...either that or put the tarp over both GM and Chrysler by mid 2009.
If it happens, where would that leave Ford?
Regards,
OW
With its cash evaporating and its share price sinking, General Motors clearly needs to do something fast, as the New York Times reported on Thursday.
Its chief executive Rick Wagoner "faces the prospect of cutting a deal for Chrysler or perhaps another automaker—or possibly going down in history as the executive who presided over G.M.'s demise," the Times said.
Driving a Merger
Like it's breaking news?..Time will tell...the cash burn is troubling.
Regards,
OW
Media reports say the merger deal is being pressed by Wall Street interests, largely Cerberus Capital Management LLC, which owns 81.1 percent of Chrysler, and J.P. Morgan Chase and Co., which, it seems, happens to be on the hook for reams of GM and Chrysler paper. No surprise, then, those interests are pushing any plan that might stave off something more drastic - and investment-bashing.
Given the performance of these entities in other big-picture financial maneuvers - i.e. the subprime mortgage adventure - their motivations and judgement in this matter should come under extreme suspicion.
Perhaps the GM board - reputedly still "cool" to the merger idea - will realize this and resist being talked into a bad play by bankers and hedge funds that haven't even begun counting their bailout money from the mortgage fiasco. These wizards did not understand their own business, so nobody should be enlisting their counsel about auto manufacturing.
OTOH, past decisions by GM have less than stellar results. Best of luck to all involved in whatever is decided.
$10B Pot??
Regards,
OW
Yikes, it would be terrible if GM ended up being responsible for bankrupting JP Morgan, one of the few banks left standing!
This seems like a darned-if-you-do, darned-if-you-don't scenario. I understand GM needs the pots of cash that Chrysler has, but Chrysler is literally an automaker with a million obligations and no future whatsoever. Merging it into GM seems like the poison pill that will certainly kill GM (well, force it into bankruptcy) in the long term.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
For everyone except Cerebus and the employees/dealers/suppliers/etc. And I doubt if Cerebus could just go bankrupt, at least not yet, but perhaps there is a bankruptcy where you just close your business and negate all the stuff you owe (supplier bills, pensions,etc.) or just pay out what you can? IN fact that does sound like something that could be done.
Why would Cerebus want to sell to GM? GMAC. And if GM goes under what happens to the value of GMAC? Probably worthless since it mostly finances GM vehicles.
GMAC does a lot more than auto loans. Auto loans are certainly a big portion of their business, but prior to the financial mess, most of GMACs net income was from Mortgage loans and Insurance. Net revenue in 2007, GMAC's insurance arm brought in nearly as much as auto finance. The mortgage loans which really helped GMAC in the past are really causing problems now to the tune of over $4 billion in loss in 07
I forgot Cerberus bought 51 percent of GMAC from GM, so I guess the deal makes a little more sense.
Not a good idea. Chrysler should sell to Nissan and Cerebus buys GMAC from GM. this way GM gets the cash they need without the burden of Chrysler.
Why not? Join the club! Come on in, the water's fine!
Seriously, that makes a merger so much more complex and risky. I assume there will be more rescue cash from Uncle Sam for a merged GM/Chrysler and raise the stakes for help under a new business. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, so to speak. That way, not everyone looses. Still very risky because the recession is just starting. This could be a 2 -3 year play easy. What to do, I don't know but either way, there is no great panacea just the lesser of two evils.
Regards,
OW
Cash, Chrylser finance, minivan, Jeep, new Ram PU truck and that is about it. Perhaps some of the electric/hybrid development team can be brought in. It will be a bloodbath in both people and plants. BUT the real big win will be plant capacity will be hugely cut here in the US. Those sales would help the entire industry. Someone has to kill Chrysler for the good of all.
Regards,
OW
One idea is that Cerebus, in looking for a partner to take Chrysler and finding nobody, is now trying to force Chrysler down GM's throat. They want GMAC, as that's the type of business they know, not automotive. Why make only people w/ credit scores of 700 elegible for loans? Why is GM offering incentives to dealers to take their financing business elsewhere. Is it possible that Cerebus, with their 51% stake in GMAC, is using that to leverage Chrysler onto GM??