But the bigger question that can't be answered is where thoses incentives actually are.
I agree. No question they're on trucks and the fullsize SUVs.
I'd guess all of the old out of date vehicles have high incentives too. Like the STS, DTS, Lucerne, and Impala etc. They'll be gone soon, so other than trucks, GM will be competitive at minimum (not that the trucks aren't competitive, just that they are out of date enough to need more incentives than Ford.)
Current 2012 Malibu incentives = $2,500 or low financing Current 2011Cruze incentives = $500 or low financing
Toyota and Honda - low financing only on Civic and Accord. $500 or low financing on Corolla, incentive on Camry Hybrid only ($2,000 or low financing).
It's not 50% more but GM was always leading in incentives despite the model compared with the Asians....it was addicting because the cars were lower grade and the inventory was always too high. Seems that is the target that management is working to improve. As the old models go away, incentives will fall relative to inventory. The poplar brands will always fetch low or no incentives. The overpriced, slower sellers will always have huge incentives. Incentives are like medication.....until it wears off and your ride is worth a lot less than a model that compares but no incentives were administered.
Take a look at the TCI file and you get a good idea of the brand and segment where the incentives compare. It's on Auto Observer.
GM will CONTINUE to lead incentives or loose market share if they do not. The mark of a true world-class brand is not through incentives....it's the car
Just got back from a highway trip stuck with a Chrysler T&C. Last month we had a GMC Acadia. I'll take most any GM over a current Mopar - I don't think they are even close. Chrysler didn't derserve to get bailed out and didn't have those many jobs here either, but you know about those high ranking former gov officials over at Cerebus, right? Had to just be a coincidence!
I would like to buy a new Lucerne to replace my Grand Marquis, except my local Buick dealer is fresh out of 'em! No new DTS's or STS's on my Cadillac lot either! Looks like "Black Beauty" is with me for life!
I don't think most dealers want a new DTS or STS on the lot unless they like dusting them.
Last time I drove by my local Buick dealer they had a few Lucernes on the lot among a sea of Regals. At least 3. Probably a years worth. Potential buyers are dying off by the day.
The last batch of Lucernes no doubt went to rental fleets, just like the final run of Crown Vic and Grand Marqs. Last batch of DTS has a similar fate no doubt. When I had my Regal rental, I could have picked a Lucerne, but as it was of course a base 3-holer with cloth, no thanks.
I would like to buy a new Lucerne to replace my Grand Marquis, except my local Buick dealer is fresh out of 'em!
The Caddy/Buick/GMC dealer I bought my 2000 Park Ave from had a 2008 Lucerne CXL for sale recently, but I just checked their website and it's not showing up. It just had the 3.8 V-6, but was still pretty nicely equipped, and had a sunroof. I think it had around 34,000 miles and they wanted around $19K for it.
They do currently have this, though...2011 Buick LaCrosse CXS. At first I thought that seemed like a decent price, but it doesn't look like this one is as fully loaded as I thought a CXS would be. Doesn't appear to have a sunroof or Nav, for instance.
That LaCrosse would make a nice car for my wife, but no more black cars. My DTS is enough of a PITA to clean, I don't need two. I think she wants one in White Diamond or Sapphire blue like her current ride.
So I'm seeing these EV charging stations pop up in DC area garages, and read they're necessary for buildings to maintain a LEED Platinum certification.
Just found out something neat - here at work, they're free!
So not only does an EV owner get a premium parking spot, near the elevator, but also the juice itself is totally free of charge, and they buy renewable energy to offset the amount used.
Not being somebody who needs the latest, I still think the Lucerne is a nice-looking car, available in some unique colors. I'd have to have whatever model gets you the chrome molding at the bottom of the decklid though...I do not like the rear end styling without them. I'd want a 'four holer' too.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I think it's a shame that GM didn't keep the Lucerne around a bit longer, perhaps just update the drivetrain to the 3.6/6-speed, like they did with the Impala. But, the Lucerne and DTS weren't selling that well anymore, so if one model went, they probably had to get rid of them both. Plus, I guess GM saved some money in eliminating the Northstar V-8.
Now that I think about it, aren't the 3.5/3.9 pushrod V-6 and the 4-speed automatic completely gone, as well?
They both seem like decent cars to me, although I gotta admit, I'm getting spoiled, and really want a car with a sunroof! I wonder if an aftermarket sunroof would be reliable/leak free, and look professional?
Oh, they also have this 2002 Park Ave for sale in Frederick, MD. 55,946 miles, for $7281. Almost looks like a dead ringer for my car, in that color. Although mine doesn't have a stand-up hood ornament, and has different rims.
The thing about the Lucerne, though, is that you really, no absolutely do want the CXS model as it has better suspension and the V8 engine. The others are simply too heavy and too slow for the V6 that GM puts in them. Also, not one CXS appears to have been sold to rental companies, so it's a good way to weed out the rental fodder. Note - it's the same with a Grand Marquis in that no fleet that I know of paid the extra money for the two-tone paint option.
The thing about the Lucerne, though, is that you really, no absolutely do want the CXS model as it has better suspension and the V8 engine. The others are simply too heavy and too slow for the V6 that GM puts in them
I've seen 0-60 times of around 9.5 seconds for the Lucerne with the 3.8 V-6. The 3.9 had more hp and torque, so I'd guess it would be slightly quicker.
FWIW, 9.5 seconds is about what it would take for my old Intrepid tp do 0-60. I could still tolerate that, I think. I just wouldnt' pay a whole lot of money for a car so equipped!
As for the Northstar V-8, are the newer models more reliable? I heard the older ones could be horribly expensive to maintain as they aged. Maybe they've improved in more recent years, though?
As for the Grand Marquis, I remember back in late 2001, going to a car dealer with a friend who wanted to look at them. He had a 1995, and was thinking about buying a new one. Every single base GS model on their lot had already been spoken for, by rental agencies. They only had a couple of the nicer LS models, and, as I recall, one LS Ultimate, or whatever they called the model that had bucket seats.
GM made two V8s for their cars at the time. One has higher compression and is designed to make more HP, while the one in the Lucerne is designed for torque and gets a little bit better gas mileage as well.
You do not want the L37, but rather, the LD8 engine. Some models/trims of the Cadillac DTS had the L37 instead of the LD8, so you have to actually check.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_Premium_V_engine#L37 Combined with a heavy-duty version of GM's traditional 4 speed automatic, it's a superb combination. Contrary to what most people would believe, you actually want less gears for a V8 as there's plenty of torque to deal with the mile-high gearing in those transmissions. With the V6, transitions are sluggish and it drives like a sofa on wheels.
The CXS has a great feel, exactly like a late 90s Mercedes S420. And the suspension is their Magnaride that is lifted from the Corvette. And also what GM sold to Ferrari, Mercedes, Audi, and others for their top-end cars. (all electromagnetic suspensions are based upon GM's designs - go figure)
The LD8 also is so under-stressed in the Lucerne and DTS by most drivers that it's about as bulletproof as the V8s in a Grand Marquis.
The other trims? Well, no fancy suspension, gearing is too tall for the engine, and the thing lacks low-end torque. The Lucerne Super uses the L37 as well, so you'd be looking at a narrow range of years for the DTS and Lucerne. But 5-6 years old is the sweet spot for used cars like this, as you can easily find examples with 30-50K on them for a mere fraction of their original price.
NOTE - the Lacrosse CXS is also an outlier as it has the same 3.6 VVT engine and suspension that they put into the first generation CTS. It's FWD versus RWD, but it's a superb deal used as it's perhaps the ultimate "sleeper".
EDIT - evidently GM fixed the problems with the headgasket in 2004 on both models. But since the LD8 runs 300-400 rpm slower in most gears, and is built to rev to about 4K rpm, while the L37 is closer to 6K to reach maximum HP, it should last a bit longer. Yes, a V8 is a bit more to fix, but all you really need to do is make absolutely sure that the car was filled with high-mileage/high zinc oil. The design of both engines is incompatible with synthetic oils (they didn't come from the factory with synthetic and mixing oil types is generally bad) and most modern oils since the EPA dropped the limits to 1200ppm. Some synthetics have 0ppm zinc additives, and a lot of oils are now closer to 700-800.
Castrol high mileage is a fairly safe bet in these engines, though.
So, if I wanted a Lucerne, it looks like that would narrow it down to the 2006-2007 models? I just did a search, and found five of them within 100 miles of me.
Federal safety regulators are investigating problems with the automatic shift levers on several General Motors cars, the Associated Press reports.
The probe began with the Saturn Aura midsize car from the 2007 and 2008 model years, affecting nearly 89,000 vehicles. But the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says on its website that it's looking into the same problem on other GM cars like the 2004-2008 Chevrolet Malibu and the 2005-2008 Pontiac G6. They have similar automatic transmission mechanisms.
The agency says that in some cases the floor shift lever may not match the car's gear. That means a driver could put the car in park but the transmission could be in drive or reverse.
Seven crashes and one injury have been reported to the agency and GM, which says the problem mainly affects models with four-speed transmissions. The Saturn division was closed by GM as part of its bankruptcy reorganization. It no longer exists.
Are the Saturn issues are unrecoverable for owners?? :confuse:
I'm still blown away by Hyundais improvements. They've slashed their incentives big time, their sales are up and with the smallest incentives in the biz.
Would anyone have expected that just 3 years ago? :surprise:
I'm still blown away by Hyundais improvements. They've slashed their incentives big time, their sales are up and with the smallest incentives in the biz.
Would anyone have expected that just 3 years ago? :surprise:
Um, no. Hyundai is certainly on a roll. Seems Sonatas and Elantras are everywhere.
Are the Saturn issues are unrecoverable for owners??
If there's a recall, Saturn owners will be directed to the nearest Chevrolet dealer.
Also known as "Your Authorized Saturn Service Center". I had to do this when I had the power steering recall work done earlier this year on my '06 ION. Used the Chevrolet dealer in Colorado Springs.
If you buy foreign stock, it goes up, then you sell, then not only do you profit, you brought money back to the USA.
If you plan on giving money away ... lemme know and I'll send you my snail mail address.
But seriously, wonder if GM is a good value now that the price is down? I don't see a quick recovery any time soon (NBA lockout sure won't help!) so I think it might still go down some more.
I don't think I'd buy any auto stock right now. Kia's stock is probably peaking right about now, not a time to buy.
Yep, surely it's better to spend your money on foreign companies that are subsidized by their governments.
First we complain about foreign companies, then we complain about foreign companies that might have increasing U.S. ownership through stock? :surprise: :confuse:
GM is getting ever more entrenched in foreign locations (China, etc.) while foreign companies build more assembly plants in the U.S.
It's kind of simplistic, this foreign vs. domestic thing.
Of course nothing is absolute (not all 'foreign' cars are built in the U.S. and not all 'Big Three' cars are made in Mexico), but it's widely reported how the 'domestics' employ so many more Americans, as well as utilize more American suppliers.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Well if you're following international business the last few years, you'll understand that if Europe or Southeast Asia, or China goes down economically we're all going down. We're all tied together in the water right now. And what is causing the peril of some going underwater is the philosophy that government can bailout everyone when they get in trouble thru their stupidity, laziness, greed, excessive spending, or all of the above.
GM has grown its business internationally so much, that I don't really consider it just a U.S. company. I bet over 50% of its parts, production, sales and profits are overseas. Or will be in a few years. GM is not the GM of decades ago, building parts, assembling vehicles and selling those vehicles in the U.S. to U.S. consumers. About the only legacy from those decades is their work force - the UAW, which has made concessions to the fact that they may be a high-cost albatross to their employer.
An auto-manufacturer can locate their plants anywhere in the world these days. The simple question comes down to where is the lowest cost, at an acceptable quality. I'm sure GM execs. (or most large corporate execs) find it rather amusing when they hear people cheer for giving them $$, because they are being patriotic protecting the great "U.S GM". The $$ given to GM and Chrysler went all over the world (the Chrysler case is pretty clear - Fiat of Italy was given the assets of a debt-free Chrysler!).
The bailout of GM and Chrysler stayed in the U.S. similarly to $$ we spend on Defense. It was spread out over the entire world, benefitting everyone else that the U.S subsidizes. At least in the auto industry, foreigners reciprocate and build auto plants in this country.
So, I really don't care if the GM plants in this country are owned by GM, or bought and run by Ford, Mercedes, Fiat, Toyota, or Hyundai. I just want the subsidies to stop. Oh you guys do remember that as part of the New GM, that the government would not ask the New GM for income tax on their first $45B in profit? When you pay your taxes, or look at your paychecks (if you still have one), remember the boys at GM "thank you" for providing them with T-Bone, while you eat the Spam.
Outstanding post. Imagine a Chinese or Indian customer of a GM product is berated for not supporting their home manufacturer....
Change hurts sometimes but it is continuous. Accept it or keep complaining but it doesn't change the fact that a multi-national company such as GM is as cold-hearted as the next.
For me, they do NOT receive even the least amount of loyalty considering my recent ownership experience. They blew it big time and still are at a loss for the taxpayers. That's good enough for me to go elsewhere. It's nice to blow past Malibus effortlessly! :shades:
GM remains in catch up mode for cars in the U.S. market...it's their legacy that will play out for a few more years as the competition gets even stronger.
"During her 31 years with General Motors, and later Delphi, Mary Miller received glossy personal benefit summaries about what her retirement would look like — her health benefits, stock savings, pension plans. “Year after year they sent it, and I believed them,” she said." Salaried workers at Delphi got taken by UAW and Obama administration
This may sound like whining at first from overpaid, over-benefitted white color workers. But the UAW and obama administration worked them over so the UAW and GM salary workers were well covered for their pensions and healthcare benefits. The Salary workers from Delphi (formerly GM) went to the Pension Guarantee Benefit Fund and get small fractions.
Of course nothing is absolute (not all 'foreign' cars are built in the U.S. and not all 'Big Three' cars are made in Mexico), but it's widely reported how the 'domestics' employ so many more Americans, as well as utilize more American suppliers.
One of the reasons domestics employ more people has been that they are horribly inefficient. Ford built its most automated assembly plant in Brazil because the UAW work rules wouldn't allow that here. That's great if you have more employed in the US, but is that sustainable? Not so sure it's good to cheer unsustainable, inefficient employment.
Regarding using more suppliers, that's just a function of domestic content, and all makes are all over the map, with GM's made in Canada and Mexico, Fords made in Mexico, and many foreign transplants with very high US content. The most US content in sedans are the Camry and Accord, followed by the Malibu. Yet the Fusion is only 20% US content.
Yeah, I made a point on my most recent purchase to go with American content if possible as long as the car suited my needs. It ended up as a Toyota - Solara convertible. If GM made a Malibu or Cruze convertible I might have waited.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Over and over again you see how government intervention, applying different sets of rules unfairly to different groups or businesses (depending on how powerful and connected you are), chooses winners and losers.
The government should not be involved with GM and Chrysler; it should not be involved with Solyndra, or helping or hindering any other entity, or person. When I watch a basketball game, I do not expect the Referee to doubleteam a player, or to make an assist at some point in the game. The government is supposed to be the Referee, and set and enforce the rules equally for all. It is not supposed to intervene in the game to help the player or team that takes him to dinner and clubbing.
On a purely auto note - I see Mazda is introducing the CX-5 crossover today. They will have high mpg Skyactiv engines, including a diesel in 2013. I believe that diesel will have over 300 ft-lb of torque and deliver 35+mpg. Is GM planning any diesels other than the Cruze? A diesel Colorado would be interesting if I can forgive the New GM for being a welfare-case.
I heard Bill Clinton say the other day that the Auto bailouts were not bailouts, just simple restructurings that saved 800,000 jobs directly and 2,000,000 jobs indirectly.
I think the democrats need to abandon the support of Obama's bailouts.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Certainly looks worlds better than what it replaces
That's up for debate. While the DTS might have been getting outdated, I always thought it had decent lines and proportions, at least. That XTS is just too big in the passenger cabin, and too stubby, almost minivan-like ahead of the cowl, and that C-pillar is so far back it might as well be a hatchback. It makes me think a bit of those clunky '78-79 Buick Century and Olds Cutlass Salon "aeroback" sedans...except they at least had longer hoods!
IMO, the XTS just doesn't have enough presence. It doesn't look like a big, prestigious car, somethng that the DTS, IMO at least, was able to accomplish. I think something like a BMW 7-series, Benz S-class, or Audi A8 all have better proportioning. Of course, they're also much more expensive cars, but there's no reason a less expensive car has to look awkward.
That XTS looks decent, but nothing groundbreaking. An evolution, but no revolution. I actually liked the DTS and STS myself, as at least the DTS was traditional, which is what a Caddy means to me. I've been looking at low mileage used ones, along with the last years of the Lincoln Continental.
NAV screens and such don't impress me; I would avoid them. I just see a large repair bill in someone's future, when the screen goes. I'd rather have separate knobs for the HVAC, radio, and put my $100 GPS in it.
Let's be honest Andres - we've got two loser political parties right now. I don't see a single presidential candidate (or incumbent) that inspires right now. I know this may sound a bit contradictory, but today Reagan and Clinton both look good in comparison, but one is dead and the other can't run again. None of today's crop of contenders has the leadership skills, intuition and savy to make anything constructive happen. They all remind me of the self serving, deceptive, special interest motivated Congress we have. I'll vote because after military service I truly feel its our duty as citizens, but I'll probably be holding my nose while I do it! Pretty pathetic for a great country like ours unfortunately.
Comments
I agree. No question they're on trucks and the fullsize SUVs.
I'd guess all of the old out of date vehicles have high incentives too. Like the STS, DTS, Lucerne, and Impala etc. They'll be gone soon, so other than trucks, GM will be competitive at minimum (not that the trucks aren't competitive, just that they are out of date enough to need more incentives than Ford.)
Current 2011Cruze incentives = $500 or low financing
Toyota and Honda - low financing only on Civic and Accord. $500 or low financing on Corolla, incentive on Camry Hybrid only ($2,000 or low financing).
It's not 50% more but GM was always leading in incentives despite the model compared with the Asians....it was addicting because the cars were lower grade and the inventory was always too high. Seems that is the target that management is working to improve. As the old models go away, incentives will fall relative to inventory. The poplar brands will always fetch low or no incentives. The overpriced, slower sellers will always have huge incentives. Incentives are like medication.....until it wears off and your ride is worth a lot less than a model that compares but no incentives were administered.
Take a look at the TCI file and you get a good idea of the brand and segment where the incentives compare. It's on Auto Observer.
Regards,
OW
Just got back from a highway trip stuck with a Chrysler T&C. Last month we had a GMC Acadia. I'll take most any GM over a current Mopar - I don't think they are even close. Chrysler didn't derserve to get bailed out and didn't have those many jobs here either, but you know about those high ranking former gov officials over at Cerebus, right? Had to just be a coincidence!
I don't think most dealers want a new DTS or STS on the lot unless they like dusting them.
Last time I drove by my local Buick dealer they had a few Lucernes on the lot among a sea of Regals. At least 3. Probably a years worth. Potential buyers are dying off by the day.
The Caddy/Buick/GMC dealer I bought my 2000 Park Ave from had a 2008 Lucerne CXL for sale recently, but I just checked their website and it's not showing up. It just had the 3.8 V-6, but was still pretty nicely equipped, and had a sunroof. I think it had around 34,000 miles and they wanted around $19K for it.
They do currently have this, though...2011 Buick LaCrosse CXS. At first I thought that seemed like a decent price, but it doesn't look like this one is as fully loaded as I thought a CXS would be. Doesn't appear to have a sunroof or Nav, for instance.
This chart tells you who has low inventories:
http://www.autoobserver.com/car-data-center/days-to-turn/by-manufacturer-days/
Hyundai, Subaru, Audi, Honda, and Toyota.
So tsunami affected supply, plus Audi is still hot.
Just found out something neat - here at work, they're free!
So not only does an EV owner get a premium parking spot, near the elevator, but also the juice itself is totally free of charge, and they buy renewable energy to offset the amount used.
That may help boost Volt and Leaf sales.
Regards,
OW
Haven't gone there for gas since, and I bought my own compressor, thanks very much!
Now that I think about it, aren't the 3.5/3.9 pushrod V-6 and the 4-speed automatic completely gone, as well?
Here's a base level 2007 CX model in Germantown, MD for $12.9K, with 53,000 miles.
here's a nicer 2011 CXL model with 27.7K miles for ~$23K, in Rockville, MD.
They both seem like decent cars to me, although I gotta admit, I'm getting spoiled, and really want a car with a sunroof! I wonder if an aftermarket sunroof would be reliable/leak free, and look professional?
Oh, they also have this 2002 Park Ave for sale in Frederick, MD. 55,946 miles, for $7281. Almost looks like a dead ringer for my car, in that color. Although mine doesn't have a stand-up hood ornament, and has different rims.
I've seen 0-60 times of around 9.5 seconds for the Lucerne with the 3.8 V-6. The 3.9 had more hp and torque, so I'd guess it would be slightly quicker.
FWIW, 9.5 seconds is about what it would take for my old Intrepid tp do 0-60. I could still tolerate that, I think. I just wouldnt' pay a whole lot of money for a car so equipped!
As for the Northstar V-8, are the newer models more reliable? I heard the older ones could be horribly expensive to maintain as they aged. Maybe they've improved in more recent years, though?
As for the Grand Marquis, I remember back in late 2001, going to a car dealer with a friend who wanted to look at them. He had a 1995, and was thinking about buying a new one. Every single base GS model on their lot had already been spoken for, by rental agencies. They only had a couple of the nicer LS models, and, as I recall, one LS Ultimate, or whatever they called the model that had bucket seats.
You do not want the L37, but rather, the LD8 engine. Some models/trims of the Cadillac DTS had the L37 instead of the LD8, so you have to actually check.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_Premium_V_engine#L37
Combined with a heavy-duty version of GM's traditional 4 speed automatic, it's a superb combination. Contrary to what most people would believe, you actually want less gears for a V8 as there's plenty of torque to deal with the mile-high gearing in those transmissions. With the V6, transitions are sluggish and it drives like a sofa on wheels.
The CXS has a great feel, exactly like a late 90s Mercedes S420. And the suspension is their Magnaride that is lifted from the Corvette. And also what GM sold to Ferrari, Mercedes, Audi, and others for their top-end cars. (all electromagnetic suspensions are based upon GM's designs - go figure)
The LD8 also is so under-stressed in the Lucerne and DTS by most drivers that it's about as bulletproof as the V8s in a Grand Marquis.
The other trims? Well, no fancy suspension, gearing is too tall for the engine, and the thing lacks low-end torque. The Lucerne Super uses the L37 as well, so you'd be looking at a narrow range of years for the DTS and Lucerne. But 5-6 years old is the sweet spot for used cars like this, as you can easily find examples with 30-50K on them for a mere fraction of their original price.
NOTE - the Lacrosse CXS is also an outlier as it has the same 3.6 VVT engine and suspension that they put into the first generation CTS. It's FWD versus RWD, but it's a superb deal used as it's perhaps the ultimate "sleeper".
EDIT - evidently GM fixed the problems with the headgasket in 2004 on both models. But since the LD8 runs 300-400 rpm slower in most gears, and is built to rev to about 4K rpm, while the L37 is closer to 6K to reach maximum HP, it should last a bit longer. Yes, a V8 is a bit more to fix, but all you really need to do is make absolutely sure that the car was filled with high-mileage/high zinc oil. The design of both engines is incompatible with synthetic oils (they didn't come from the factory with synthetic and mixing oil types is generally bad) and most modern oils since the EPA dropped the limits to 1200ppm. Some synthetics have 0ppm zinc additives, and a lot of oils are now closer to 700-800.
Castrol high mileage is a fairly safe bet in these engines, though.
The probe began with the Saturn Aura midsize car from the 2007 and 2008 model years, affecting nearly 89,000 vehicles. But the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says on its website that it's looking into the same problem on other GM cars like the 2004-2008 Chevrolet Malibu and the 2005-2008 Pontiac G6. They have similar automatic transmission mechanisms.
The agency says that in some cases the floor shift lever may not match the car's gear. That means a driver could put the car in park but the transmission could be in drive or reverse.
Seven crashes and one injury have been reported to the agency and GM, which says the problem mainly affects models with four-speed transmissions. The Saturn division was closed by GM as part of its bankruptcy reorganization. It no longer exists.
Are the Saturn issues are unrecoverable for owners?? :confuse:
Regards,
OW
Would anyone have expected that just 3 years ago? :surprise:
Would anyone have expected that just 3 years ago? :surprise:
Um, no. Hyundai is certainly on a roll. Seems Sonatas and Elantras are everywhere.
If there's a recall, Saturn owners will be directed to the nearest Chevrolet dealer.
If there's a recall, Saturn owners will be directed to the nearest Chevrolet dealer.
Also known as "Your Authorized Saturn Service Center". I had to do this when I had the power steering recall work done earlier this year on my '06 ION. Used the Chevrolet dealer in Colorado Springs.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2011/11/auto-bailout-losses- -expected-to-rise-by-9-billion/1
If you buy foreign stock, it goes up, then you sell, then not only do you profit, you brought money back to the USA.
If you plan on giving money away ... lemme know and I'll send you my snail mail address.
But seriously, wonder if GM is a good value now that the price is down? I don't see a quick recovery any time soon (NBA lockout sure won't help!) so I think it might still go down some more.
I don't think I'd buy any auto stock right now. Kia's stock is probably peaking right about now, not a time to buy.
http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/chart?symbol=000270.KS
Way too late to catch the rise in Kia's stock.
Index was at 6400 back in early 2009, now it's at 73500! Yikes, is that correct? A tenfold+ return on your money?
Too late, though. If you invest now, you missed the boat, and you're buying high.
First we complain about foreign companies, then we complain about foreign companies that might have increasing U.S. ownership through stock? :surprise: :confuse:
GM is getting ever more entrenched in foreign locations (China, etc.) while foreign companies build more assembly plants in the U.S.
It's kind of simplistic, this foreign vs. domestic thing.
GM has grown its business internationally so much, that I don't really consider it just a U.S. company. I bet over 50% of its parts, production, sales and profits are overseas. Or will be in a few years. GM is not the GM of decades ago, building parts, assembling vehicles and selling those vehicles in the U.S. to U.S. consumers. About the only legacy from those decades is their work force - the UAW, which has made concessions to the fact that they may be a high-cost albatross to their employer.
An auto-manufacturer can locate their plants anywhere in the world these days. The simple question comes down to where is the lowest cost, at an acceptable quality. I'm sure GM execs. (or most large corporate execs) find it rather amusing when they hear people cheer for giving them $$, because they are being patriotic protecting the great "U.S GM". The $$ given to GM and Chrysler went all over the world (the Chrysler case is pretty clear - Fiat of Italy was given the assets of a debt-free Chrysler!).
The bailout of GM and Chrysler stayed in the U.S. similarly to $$ we spend on Defense. It was spread out over the entire world, benefitting everyone else that the U.S subsidizes. At least in the auto industry, foreigners reciprocate and build auto plants in this country.
So, I really don't care if the GM plants in this country are owned by GM, or bought and run by Ford, Mercedes, Fiat, Toyota, or Hyundai. I just want the subsidies to stop. Oh you guys do remember that as part of the New GM, that the government would not ask the New GM for income tax on their first $45B in profit? When you pay your taxes, or look at your paychecks (if you still have one), remember the boys at GM "thank you" for providing them with T-Bone, while you eat the Spam.
Change hurts sometimes but it is continuous. Accept it or keep complaining but it doesn't change the fact that a multi-national company such as GM is as cold-hearted as the next.
For me, they do NOT receive even the least amount of loyalty considering my recent ownership experience. They blew it big time and still are at a loss for the taxpayers. That's good enough for me to go elsewhere. It's nice to blow past Malibus effortlessly! :shades:
GM remains in catch up mode for cars in the U.S. market...it's their legacy that will play out for a few more years as the competition gets even stronger.
Regards,
OW
"During her 31 years with General Motors, and later Delphi, Mary Miller received glossy personal benefit summaries about what her retirement would look like — her health benefits, stock savings, pension plans. “Year after year they sent it, and I believed them,” she said."
Salaried workers at Delphi got taken by UAW and Obama administration
This may sound like whining at first from overpaid, over-benefitted white color workers. But the UAW and obama administration worked them over so the UAW and GM salary workers were well covered for their pensions and healthcare benefits. The Salary workers from Delphi (formerly GM) went to the Pension Guarantee Benefit Fund and get small fractions.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
One of the reasons domestics employ more people has been that they are horribly inefficient. Ford built its most automated assembly plant in Brazil because the UAW work rules wouldn't allow that here. That's great if you have more employed in the US, but is that sustainable? Not so sure it's good to cheer unsustainable, inefficient employment.
Regarding using more suppliers, that's just a function of domestic content, and all makes are all over the map, with GM's made in Canada and Mexico, Fords made in Mexico, and many foreign transplants with very high US content. The most US content in sedans are the Camry and Accord, followed by the Malibu. Yet the Fusion is only 20% US content.
The government should not be involved with GM and Chrysler; it should not be involved with Solyndra, or helping or hindering any other entity, or person. When I watch a basketball game, I do not expect the Referee to doubleteam a player, or to make an assist at some point in the game. The government is supposed to be the Referee, and set and enforce the rules equally for all. It is not supposed to intervene in the game to help the player or team that takes him to dinner and clubbing.
On a purely auto note - I see Mazda is introducing the CX-5 crossover today. They will have high mpg Skyactiv engines, including a diesel in 2013. I believe that diesel will have over 300 ft-lb of torque and deliver 35+mpg. Is GM planning any diesels other than the Cruze? A diesel Colorado would be interesting if I can forgive the New GM for being a welfare-case.
I think the democrats need to abandon the support of Obama's bailouts.
Not quite free.
You either have to charge it, or plug it in, so it requires energy of some type and energy costs $$$.
http://www.autoblog.com/2011/11/16/2013-cadillac-xts-la-2011/
That's just awesome...
Any idea where the pricing will be? That is what will likely determine how well it sells.
Certainly looks worlds better than what it replaces.
That's up for debate. While the DTS might have been getting outdated, I always thought it had decent lines and proportions, at least. That XTS is just too big in the passenger cabin, and too stubby, almost minivan-like ahead of the cowl, and that C-pillar is so far back it might as well be a hatchback. It makes me think a bit of those clunky '78-79 Buick Century and Olds Cutlass Salon "aeroback" sedans...except they at least had longer hoods!
IMO, the XTS just doesn't have enough presence. It doesn't look like a big, prestigious car, somethng that the DTS, IMO at least, was able to accomplish. I think something like a BMW 7-series, Benz S-class, or Audi A8 all have better proportioning. Of course, they're also much more expensive cars, but there's no reason a less expensive car has to look awkward.
NAV screens and such don't impress me; I would avoid them. I just see a large repair bill in someone's future, when the screen goes. I'd rather have separate knobs for the HVAC, radio, and put my $100 GPS in it.