and an inept dealer can leave a bad taste in the mouth of the owner of the best built car on the planet.
That's a bit of an overstatement. The best Toyota's and Honda's in my families history didn't require a single visit to the dealer for any reason whatsoever (unless you count oil changes, which you don't need an original dealer for).
Flawless comes to mind.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
A trans failure doesn't automatically require a tow. When the trans went out in my suburban it slipped badly and shuddered, I was able to drive it the few miles to the trans shop. Painful miles they were.
I'm going to start a business selling Big 3 cars at 50% MSRP. I'll sign a contract to offer any car or truck you want at that price for any US citizen. I'll take away 99% of the Big 3's dealership distribution business.... and then of course... require a bailout or go bankrupt. I should get the bailout, right, since the Big 3 's life will depend on it since I have all these outstanding contracts to fulfill?
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Take your flawless vehicle to an inept dealer for scheduled maintenance and have him replace that specialty DSG transmission oil with standard ATF fluid because his service staff is inept, and then when you are stranded on the side of the road with the transmission lying in the middle of the road about 1/2 a mile back you will see the point I was making.
Even the best designed, best manufactured vehicle is going to need service at some point... And, some folks feel much better (safer) having their dealer do the service on their vehicle... Even though it may not be the smartest move on their part...
That was the point I was attempting to make... Nothing more.
We can let the "market" decide as soon as we either ban entities from other lands who have been bailed out, or we penalize them to level the playing field
In all seriousness, we know that GM was given a $60B plus loan, PLUS the government bought into the company, PLUS they're not having to pay income taxes for quite some time, PLUS other stuff I don't even know (but somebody here probably does)....
so what, exactly, did Toyota get from its government? How about Honda? Kia/Hyundai? Who has the links to the stories, or the actual numbers? The fact that others have been helped out, too, is such conventional wisdom - well let's see the data and know how similar (or not) reality actually is.
Are we talking $100B vs. $1M here, or are there similar levels of support on all sides?
Overall - if you were right, you're making the case that GM needs to be broken up into their smaller, separate divisions/brands. And then they can fail just like other companies and corporations.
IMHO, any company "too big to fail" is a company that is "too big to exist" as such. Be it GM, B of A, JP Morgan Chase, Citibank, or AIG - the biggest failure of the bailouts isn't that they happened (which I grudgingly see why they were done), but the fact that the government allowed these companies to remain intact, where they are getting primed to fail again in the next bubble burst. They should have ALL been broken into smaller pieces with independent, new management.
so what, exactly, did Toyota get from its government?
Don't know about from their government but Toyota got 363 million in tax breaks from Mississippi for their Tupelo plant. Nissan got about the same from Tennessee six years earlier. (Reuters). They've pumped car sales in Japan by giving tax breaks for fuel efficient vehicles. (Bloomberg)
Kia was foisted on Hyundai by the S. Korean government when they went broke what, a decade or so ago?
Hyunkia was gifted a massive bailout a little more than a decade ago - the company was in deep and had to be taken over. Look it up yourself, you're a skilled manager, right? Korea has been subsidized by the US for decades. The Japanese government helped fund Toyota developing hybrids, and that nation too has reaped the rewards of our policies for decades. Then we can get into the breaks given for opening facilities here. These are not entirely self-made companies, even if some of them do understand ideals such as engineering and quality control a little more strongly. Then we can touch on the various cost differences (places with socialized medicine vs US, etc). Not the most level playing field.
It's funny how those who blindly decry socialism have no problem with it competing here, or suddenly demand info with never giving it, themselves.
Hyunkia was gifted a massive bailout a little more than a decade ago - the company was in deep and had to be taken over.
So was Chrysler in 1980. Then, the diseased organization was allowed to operate largely unchanged. Pretty skilled management to actually run the auto industry into bankruptcy again, wouldn't you say? Could happen again easily as memories fade....
Regarding HyunKia, seems they are paying pack some subsidies back:
A total of 94,400 private sector jobs, and $5.9 billion in annual wages and salaries, are generated as a result of Hyundai’s total U.S. operations.
o Of the total jobs, 33,300 private sector jobs are created as a result of Hyundai’s direct employment in its manufacturer-related activities in the United States. Associated wages and salaries are estimated at $2.4 billion.
o The remaining 61,100 private sector jobs are generated by Hyundai’s dealerships in the United States. The associated wages and salaries are estimated at approximately $3.5 billion.
Hyundai manufacturing and Hyundai dealership operations contribute more than $7 billion to the U.S. economy (as defined by Gross Domestic Product or GDP).
Not perfect but it's a start.
Let's see if the New Small Three can be successful for more than 4 years without more bailouts. :confuse:
I'm sure that any D3 company building a plant in Miss. or elsewhere in the south would have gotten the same types of tax breaks. Those states and/or municipalities wanted new jobs and they don't really care whether the corporate HQ is within or outside US borders.
Also note that the $363 Million mentioned is much less than 1/165th the GM bailout and tax breaks amount.
Hyunkia was gifted a massive bailout a little more than a decade ago - the company was in deep and had to be taken over. Look it up yourself, you're a skilled manager, right?
Yes, but I'm not the one making claims about the similarity vs. GM, so I'd expect those making those claims to back them up with some real data. :P
I would say they had perfect reliability their first 100K miles. I would say Honda and Toyota performed perfectly during the quality control process for those vehicles (note my Ohio built '03 Accord doesn't get this honor). Do I believe 100% of '95 Camry's were flawless??? Of course not, but a good portion must of been, for a legendary reputation doesn't sprout from nothing.
Was the 4 cylinder Camry kind of slow and floaty with its suspension setup? I would say yes, so that's not perfect.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Yes, and we should also add that tax breaks like the $363 million mentioned were given voluntarily in fair negotations with these public policy makers.
The GM bailouts were only given by idiots in government with no spine who fell for the "world will end without GM!" story. :sick:
No one put a gun to their heads, but they might as well have, for if they had a spine, that might have been what it took to get the taxpayers to fund bailouts.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
To those who bow to CR: What say you about their reliability ratings of the Toyota Sienna and Honda Odyssey for 2011? Just wonderin'. If I wanted one (I don't), I wouldn't let that sway me, but just curious what you guys say.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I bought a car that I liked, was what I was looking for in a 'go to work' car, very reasonably priced, high domestic content, American corporation, and built 35-40 miles down the road from me...where people from where I live now, work, and people who live in the town I grew up in, work, and have for the 46 years that plant has been in continuous operation. That's pretty plain to me. And I had it serviced locally, until that dealership went away (sigh).
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
I bought a car that I liked, was what I was looking for in a 'go to work' car, very reasonably priced, high domestic content, American corporation, and built 35-40 miles down the road from me.
Fine. But as andres3 pointed out he could sell cars very reasonably priced - I believe he mentioned 50%, but then his business will fail and he'll need a bailout. Which leads us to - if GM charged enough for their vehicles during the years, they would not have been so reasonably priced. Maybe GM needed to charge another $3K per vehicle to keep their profits up? Instead they sold at a low average profit, or actually a loss, and then when that wasn't sustainable, they failed outright' and stuck the taxpayers with the bill for all those years of lower quality vehicles sold at a reasonable price.
1980 was about two decades before Hyundai was turning out cars that were absolutely, positively, the joke of the entire industry. Even J.D. Powers showed that 2009 Kias were bottom-of-the-barrel. Oh yeah...but 2009 was 'then', 'this is now'. Sheesh.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Instead they sold at a low average profit, or actually a loss, and then when that wasn't sustainable, they failed outright' and stuck the taxpayers with the bill for all those years of lower quality vehicles sold at a reasonable price.
Exactly! Their management (with the UAW a huge part of the "Team") refused to be competitive. I say it in that way to eliminate any emotion that comes along with change. Some do not do well with change. GM is the prime business example in the auto industry that refused to embrace change.
The fact that a bulk of their profit comes from trucks/SUVs will force them to meet the changes to remain viable but with a more difficult product portfolio.
Let's see if their profits outweigh their debt as they move to smaller vehicles.
So Chrysler had 29 years to become unprofitable and fail and Kia took 3 to become better than Chevrolet dependability. Not too bad for the Koreans', wouldn't you agree?
Stay tuned! That will only improve as sales skyrocket here in the USA.
Detroit is following GM's lead! Looks like UAW-like perks are part of the resistance to change.
It took General Motors a government-regulated bankruptcy to fix itself in 2009. And now Detroit, the city GM calls home, is so financially [non-permissible content removed]-backwards that the State of Michigan is expected to appoint an emergency financial manager to the city, and the Detroit City Council are kicking and screaming like the grey haired babies they are. Because they are about to lose a lot of power, while being completely in denial about how much they suck.
But hey, it might be politically messy, but Detroit’s still a cool city. Underrated, in fact. And GM CEO Dan Akerson isn’t scared of living in the city limits, but wishes more of his company’s recruits would feel the same. In an interview with The Detroit News, Akerson pointed out that just about everyone GM wants to bring in would rather live in the suburbs such as Birmingham, or Royal Oak — which offer plenty of things to do just like Downtown, but without the surrounding ghettos.
“That’s not the game we’re trying to play,” Akerson said, voicing that GM wants to be part of Detroit’s turnaround. It wants its employees to move back into the city.
“We are trying to be constructive, we’re trying to be helpful,” he said. It’s just too bad the city’s head-shaking-taxing methods make it expensive for professionals to live there another reason why a political takeover of Detroit seems so inviting.
Akerson recalled an account that city employees can “retire at 52 with 70 percent (of their income) and be guaranteed an increase every year for the rest of their lives. That is not a recipe for success and I think most people know that.”
“We all closed plants and, look at us, we’re healthier. But we had to come to the brink,” Akerson noted. That seems to be what’s happening to the old city.
Nice, circlew, but typical. This is not the same measure where the 2009 Kia did so poorly....that was for a 2009 car at three years of age. I am unable to tell what your latest chart is measuring.
And what's with Scion on this chart? Isn't that a darling of CR?
In all actuality, when one compares 1.67 problem per car to 1.76, there really is no difference. My entire point is that people complain about GM when other carmakers with similar or worse performance get a complete free pass. That is what is so stupefying to me.
It's like the 'pack mentality' kids in school that will line up and cheer a bully beating up a smaller kid.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Nice, UL but the chart is exactly what you referred to. The Dependability study reflects model year 2009. Kia is ahead of Chevy.
I complain about GM from experience. So far, nothing to complain about Kia. That is reality. I agree with you that Kia made pure junk but GM did as well after being the so-called greatest auto company on Earth. IOW, an exact contrast in the market: GM slid while Kia advances.
The GM bully in my case has been summarily dismissed from the 'pack'. Simply too many great choices to "cheer". :shades:
It's like the 'pack mentality' kids in school that will line up and cheer a bully beating up a smaller kid.
Except that GM isn't a smaller kid - they're huge. I think of it more like cheering on the kid who wins the spelling bee because he worked for it just that little bit more.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
Here is a good piece posted last August that eludes to the change-resistant culture:
FORTUNE -- The Obama administration's automotive task force did two favors for General Motors: It stripped away 100 years of accumulated obligations through bankruptcy, and it turned the company's management over to a team of Detroit outsiders who view the business with fresh eyes. Headed by chairman and CEO Dan Akerson, the new team has led GM to post solid financial results, gain market share, and strengthen its position in China. The company earned $5.4 billion in the first half of 2011, more than double 2010's $2.2 billion, and regained its title as the world's largest automaker. But to make the gains permanent, GM needs to stamp out a plodding, risk-averse, belt-and-suspenders culture and become opportunistic, flexible, and fast on its feet. That's not easy for this company. Following it for 34 years, I've watched many well-intended efforts to shake things up expire once they hit middle management. Like any bureaucracy, GM's vast army of white-collar workers (26,000 in 120 countries in 2010) stubbornly resists change. A former CEO referred to them as GM's "frozen middle."
This is constructive criticism I invite the GM-inclined to promote. Call it 'tough love' but I suggest laser-like focus on "Old GM-Style" indications that appear.
Bailouts are bailouts. Google it, you're a skilled high earner, right? :shades:
But seriously, I don't even know if the Koreans had to disclose the cost of that bailout. But I'd wager every penny I have and ever will have that it plus the coddling we give to Korea far exceeds this relatively small (compared to other waste) action.
FWIW, I have no problem with industry being aided no matter where it lives - it's just that if one receives the gift and others do not (or all others do but one), the playing field becomes broken. But a broken playing field seems to be the key hallmark of "free trade" "free market" "capitalism" in 2012.
Because most 2010 models were released in 2009. We're already seeing 2013 models available for some vehicles.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
Maybe the problem is DC doesn't get it - it can't help other countries and promote free-trade, while expecting competing U.S. industries to provide decent middle-class blue-collar wages and benefits. I'm not a Nobel winning economist, but it is pretty apparent that people making $30/hr or even $20/hr + U.S. health care and such, doing the same types of jobs as in Mexico, China, Korea, India, and such, are not going to survive without substantial subsidies. The TV and electronics manufacturing industries failed, and so have many others.
But we as a nation have chosen politicians who have given-away-the-store for many decades, and the result is that companies like GM need to be super-efficient, or will fail or need subsidies. I thought the BK was a great chance for GM to make substantial changes. Since they couldn't change their products overnight, I thought - ah you could improve 2 things
1) unburden yourself from the UAW. 2) unburden yourself from the archaic way you sell vehicles - thru dealers, and "pushing" vehicles to market- maintaining 2+ months of inventory of vehicles that may not be the models or colors and options that people really want.
Anyway, there are many people that contributed to GM failing.
If I were sitting in the White House right now, I'd do 4 things to fix the issue.
1) I'd get a report on wages and benefits, and government subsidies of the foreign countries. I'd give them 90 days to change, or else their ships turn around. 2) I'd dissolve all the unions here in the U.S. 3) I'd pass a minimum wage law for anyone 18 and over, who doesn't get tips of $20/hr. 4) Taxes on salary and bonuses over $2M would be 90%.
I have to believe that JDP operates on full model year, wouldn't they? The third year wouldn't be up for those who didn't buy a 2010 'right out of the gate'.
And even for 2010 models introduced in say, Sept. 2009, how would they have three years' of data? The cars would have been two years old in Sept. 2011, and I'm assuming it would take some time to tabulate data.
As I had to explain on the Toyota forum, I was born in June '58 but I don't turn 55 this year.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
Buying a car I wanted, and looking for American management, high N.A. parts content, low price, and built near me--there's no bad there. Maybe it wouldn't work for somebody else, but to make a generalization like "somebody's living in the past", when I discuss more-specific issues, is frustrating.
I tell my kids, "It's OK to admit stuff...doesn't mean you're weak", and also that it's OK to like or want to do something that's different from what the crowd is doing.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
worldwide VW is close to GM in sales. they are 4th from the bottom in reliability after 2 years. GM is tops in sales. So I guess all cars have good enough reliability to generate sales to be on top of the world. JD Powers might as well just send consolation prizes to the highest scorers because the winners are selling the most volume and creating the most jobs. GM, VW, Toyota
Of course, there is nothing wrong with the logic you use in purchasing cars, or any other products, for that matter... As far as you stated it.
What you omitted from your "equation" was the part about the product quality and reputation of the manufacturer.
That's where the "living in the past" and "resistance to change" comments begin to come into play.
I'm not going to buy a product of inferior quality or higher price just so I can have some sort of patriotic feeling I'm doing the "right" thing if it continues to prop up an outdated and inferior manufacturing system.
And, make no mistake about it.... That's an accurate description of how the big-3 operated. Was there unfair foreign competition? Yep, sure was.
Forget that for a second, though. How long do you think the Big-3 could survive without ANY foreign competition, yet paying wages and benefits far in excess of the value those workers add to the product?
It was already a train wreck waiting to happen long before the imports arrived. Their arrival, coupled with the shoddy quality of their products through the 1980-2000 time period only hastened the outcome.
Actually, that was a bailout of the best kind...paid in full and early.
A bailout of the best kind? Or was it?
I'm sure I'm not the only one who bought a Chrsyler vehicle after that 1980 bailout and has since punished GM, Ford, and Chrysler with no further consideration in this lifetime.
That first bailout for Chrysler has DIRECTLY led to my punishment of them, and taking it out on the other Big 2 as well.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Just wonderin'. If I wanted one (I don't), I wouldn't let that sway me, but just curious what you guys say.
I say what CR says goes! It's the bible after all. Actually, it's better than the bible. Blasphemy?
Circle's beloved Hyundai and Kia were semi-blasted in the reliability/durability department by CR. They had some of the "MOST IMPROVED" scores for design/engineering, but still lacking in the quality department for those that demand the best. They have come a long way though.
My '06 A3 is a car to avoid used according to CR; doesn't upset me too much. It wouldn't upset me at all if it didn't lower my resale value some; I think CR's power does affect resale value a bit. If you are looking for minimal costs, it is not the car for you. If you are looking for fun performance, it might very well be! CR doesn't factor in excitement enough, but people know that. They heavily favor FE, reliability, and comfort/ergonomics/fit and finish. I've been perhaps lucky with my A3, I got a good one. I actually think it's because I avoided the added options, and from my research, it's the options that are most unreliable (Xenon adaptive headlights, the opensky double moonroof, things like that; which my car doesnt' have).
They blasted the 2012 Civic interior as cheap and a BIG step in the wrong direction and awarded it "Most lost points." I have no problem with that either. I haven't looked at one up close yet, but I'm sure it is true. I trust CR wholeheartedly.
Honda even came out and apologized for the 2012 Civic's shortcomings and said a refresh was in store for 2013!
I don't see any Honda Execs claiming CR is biased towards GM now.... :sick:
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Comments
That's a bit of an overstatement. The best Toyota's and Honda's in my families history didn't require a single visit to the dealer for any reason whatsoever (unless you count oil changes, which you don't need an original dealer for).
Flawless comes to mind.
A trans failure doesn't automatically require a tow. When the trans went out in my suburban it slipped badly and shuddered, I was able to drive it the few miles to the trans shop. Painful miles they were.
Nah, the company would've been called Lem-Co. :P
Take your flawless vehicle to an inept dealer for scheduled maintenance and have him replace that specialty DSG transmission oil with standard ATF fluid because his service staff is inept, and then when you are stranded on the side of the road with the transmission lying in the middle of the road about 1/2 a mile back you will see the point I was making.
Even the best designed, best manufactured vehicle is going to need service at some point... And, some folks feel much better (safer) having their dealer do the service on their vehicle... Even though it may not be the smartest move on their part...
That was the point I was attempting to make... Nothing more.
In all seriousness, we know that GM was given a $60B plus loan, PLUS the government bought into the company, PLUS they're not having to pay income taxes for quite some time, PLUS other stuff I don't even know (but somebody here probably does)....
so what, exactly, did Toyota get from its government? How about Honda? Kia/Hyundai? Who has the links to the stories, or the actual numbers? The fact that others have been helped out, too, is such conventional wisdom - well let's see the data and know how similar (or not) reality actually is.
Are we talking $100B vs. $1M here, or are there similar levels of support on all sides?
IMHO, any company "too big to fail" is a company that is "too big to exist" as such. Be it GM, B of A, JP Morgan Chase, Citibank, or AIG - the biggest failure of the bailouts isn't that they happened (which I grudgingly see why they were done), but the fact that the government allowed these companies to remain intact, where they are getting primed to fail again in the next bubble burst. They should have ALL been broken into smaller pieces with independent, new management.
So would you say they were "perfect"?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Don't know about from their government but Toyota got 363 million in tax breaks from Mississippi for their Tupelo plant. Nissan got about the same from Tennessee six years earlier. (Reuters). They've pumped car sales in Japan by giving tax breaks for fuel efficient vehicles. (Bloomberg)
Kia was foisted on Hyundai by the S. Korean government when they went broke what, a decade or so ago?
It's funny how those who blindly decry socialism have no problem with it competing here, or suddenly demand info with never giving it, themselves.
So was Chrysler in 1980. Then, the diseased organization was allowed to operate largely unchanged. Pretty skilled management to actually run the auto industry into bankruptcy again, wouldn't you say? Could happen again easily as memories fade....
Regarding HyunKia, seems they are paying pack some subsidies back:
A total of 94,400 private sector jobs, and $5.9 billion in annual wages and salaries, are generated as a result of Hyundai’s total U.S. operations.
o Of the total jobs, 33,300 private sector jobs are created as a result of Hyundai’s direct employment in its manufacturer-related activities in the United States. Associated wages and salaries are estimated at $2.4 billion.
o The remaining 61,100 private sector jobs are generated by Hyundai’s dealerships in the United States. The associated wages and salaries are estimated at approximately $3.5 billion.
Hyundai manufacturing and Hyundai dealership operations contribute more than $7 billion to the U.S. economy (as defined by Gross Domestic Product or GDP).
Not perfect but it's a start.
Let's see if the New Small Three can be successful for more than 4 years without more bailouts. :confuse:
Regards,
OW
Also note that the $363 Million mentioned is much less than 1/165th the GM bailout and tax breaks amount.
Yes, but I'm not the one making claims about the similarity vs. GM, so I'd expect those making those claims to back them up with some real data.
Perfect is a strong word. Perfect in what sense?
I would say they had perfect reliability their first 100K miles. I would say Honda and Toyota performed perfectly during the quality control process for those vehicles (note my Ohio built '03 Accord doesn't get this honor). Do I believe 100% of '95 Camry's were flawless??? Of course not, but a good portion must of been, for a legendary reputation doesn't sprout from nothing.
Was the 4 cylinder Camry kind of slow and floaty with its suspension setup? I would say yes, so that's not perfect.
The GM bailouts were only given by idiots in government with no spine who fell for the "world will end without GM!" story.
No one put a gun to their heads, but they might as well have, for if they had a spine, that might have been what it took to get the taxpayers to fund bailouts.
Actually, that was a bailout of the best kind...paid in full and early.
Maybe I'm missing something, but were those tax breaks put to public vote or something?
They got plenty of war business only one generation before me.
But, they didn't. Coulda, woulda, shoulda.
Fine. But as andres3 pointed out he could sell cars very reasonably priced - I believe he mentioned 50%, but then his business will fail and he'll need a bailout. Which leads us to - if GM charged enough for their vehicles during the years, they would not have been so reasonably priced. Maybe GM needed to charge another $3K per vehicle to keep their profits up? Instead they sold at a low average profit, or actually a loss, and then when that wasn't sustainable, they failed outright' and stuck the taxpayers with the bill for all those years of lower quality vehicles sold at a reasonable price.
Actually, that was a bailout of the best kind...paid in full and early.
Now THAT'S comical! Thanks for that stress-relieving laugh!
Notice how Chrysler went bankrupt again and Hyunkia is growing the fastest in the industry.
Now that Chrysler is Italian, let's see if the disease brings them down again. The Germans left for good reason!
Regards,
OW
Yes...it took 29 years.
1980 was about two decades before Hyundai was turning out cars that were absolutely, positively, the joke of the entire industry. Even J.D. Powers showed that 2009 Kias were bottom-of-the-barrel. Oh yeah...but 2009 was 'then', 'this is now'. Sheesh.
Exactly! Their management (with the UAW a huge part of the "Team") refused to be competitive. I say it in that way to eliminate any emotion that comes along with change. Some do not do well with change. GM is the prime business example in the auto industry that refused to embrace change.
The fact that a bulk of their profit comes from trucks/SUVs will force them to meet the changes to remain viable but with a more difficult product portfolio.
Let's see if their profits outweigh their debt as they move to smaller vehicles.
Regards,
OW
Stay tuned! That will only improve as sales skyrocket here in the USA.
Regards,
OW
It took General Motors a government-regulated bankruptcy to fix itself in 2009. And now Detroit, the city GM calls home, is so financially [non-permissible content removed]-backwards that the State of Michigan is expected to appoint an emergency financial manager to the city, and the Detroit City Council are kicking and screaming like the grey haired babies they are. Because they are about to lose a lot of power, while being completely in denial about how much they suck.
But hey, it might be politically messy, but Detroit’s still a cool city. Underrated, in fact. And GM CEO Dan Akerson isn’t scared of living in the city limits, but wishes more of his company’s recruits would feel the same. In an interview with The Detroit News, Akerson pointed out that just about everyone GM wants to bring in would rather live in the suburbs such as Birmingham, or Royal Oak — which offer plenty of things to do just like Downtown, but without the surrounding ghettos.
“That’s not the game we’re trying to play,” Akerson said, voicing that GM wants to be part of Detroit’s turnaround. It wants its employees to move back into the city.
“We are trying to be constructive, we’re trying to be helpful,” he said. It’s just too bad the city’s head-shaking-taxing methods make it expensive for professionals to live there another reason why a political takeover of Detroit seems so inviting.
Akerson recalled an account that city employees can “retire at 52 with 70 percent (of their income) and be guaranteed an increase every year for the rest of their lives. That is not a recipe for success and I think most people know that.”
“We all closed plants and, look at us, we’re healthier. But we had to come to the brink,” Akerson noted. That seems to be what’s happening to the old city.
Regards,
OW
And what's with Scion on this chart? Isn't that a darling of CR?
In all actuality, when one compares 1.67 problem per car to 1.76, there really is no difference. My entire point is that people complain about GM when other carmakers with similar or worse performance get a complete free pass. That is what is so stupefying to me.
It's like the 'pack mentality' kids in school that will line up and cheer a bully beating up a smaller kid.
I complain about GM from experience. So far, nothing to complain about Kia. That is reality. I agree with you that Kia made pure junk but GM did as well after being the so-called greatest auto company on Earth. IOW, an exact contrast in the market: GM slid while Kia advances.
The GM bully in my case has been summarily dismissed from the 'pack'. Simply too many great choices to "cheer". :shades:
Regards,
OW
Except that GM isn't a smaller kid - they're huge. I think of it more like cheering on the kid who wins the spelling bee because he worked for it just that little bit more.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
Occasionally you would get a scratch, and the needle would constantly play the same track, over and over and over.... Until you bumped the needle...
It seems that some folks here also appear to have difficulty with change, at least in their postings...
Just my opinion...
FORTUNE -- The Obama administration's automotive task force did two favors for General Motors: It stripped away 100 years of accumulated obligations through bankruptcy, and it turned the company's management over to a team of Detroit outsiders who view the business with fresh eyes. Headed by chairman and CEO Dan Akerson, the new team has led GM to post solid financial results, gain market share, and strengthen its position in China. The company earned $5.4 billion in the first half of 2011, more than double 2010's $2.2 billion, and regained its title as the world's largest automaker. But to make the gains permanent, GM needs to stamp out a plodding, risk-averse, belt-and-suspenders culture and become opportunistic, flexible, and fast on its feet. That's not easy for this company. Following it for 34 years, I've watched many well-intended efforts to shake things up expire once they hit middle management. Like any bureaucracy, GM's vast army of white-collar workers (26,000 in 120 countries in 2010) stubbornly resists change. A former CEO referred to them as GM's "frozen middle."
This is constructive criticism I invite the GM-inclined to promote. Call it 'tough love' but I suggest laser-like focus on "Old GM-Style" indications that appear.
Regards,
OW
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
But seriously, I don't even know if the Koreans had to disclose the cost of that bailout. But I'd wager every penny I have and ever will have that it plus the coddling we give to Korea far exceeds this relatively small (compared to other waste) action.
FWIW, I have no problem with industry being aided no matter where it lives - it's just that if one receives the gift and others do not (or all others do but one), the playing field becomes broken. But a broken playing field seems to be the key hallmark of "free trade" "free market" "capitalism" in 2012.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
But we as a nation have chosen politicians who have given-away-the-store for many decades, and the result is that companies like GM need to be super-efficient, or will fail or need subsidies. I thought the BK was a great chance for GM to make substantial changes. Since they couldn't change their products overnight, I thought - ah you could improve 2 things
1) unburden yourself from the UAW.
2) unburden yourself from the archaic way you sell vehicles - thru dealers, and "pushing" vehicles to market- maintaining 2+ months of inventory of vehicles that may not be the models or colors and options that people really want.
Anyway, there are many people that contributed to GM failing.
If I were sitting in the White House right now, I'd do 4 things to fix the issue.
1) I'd get a report on wages and benefits, and government subsidies of the foreign countries. I'd give them 90 days to change, or else their ships turn around.
2) I'd dissolve all the unions here in the U.S.
3) I'd pass a minimum wage law for anyone 18 and over, who doesn't get tips of $20/hr.
4) Taxes on salary and bonuses over $2M would be 90%.
There are a few constitutional restraints on what the President can do.
Onlyl if someone can get them undone after president has already done them! :P
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I have to believe that JDP operates on full model year, wouldn't they? The third year wouldn't be up for those who didn't buy a 2010 'right out of the gate'.
And even for 2010 models introduced in say, Sept. 2009, how would they have three years' of data? The cars would have been two years old in Sept. 2011, and I'm assuming it would take some time to tabulate data.
As I had to explain on the Toyota forum, I was born in June '58 but I don't turn 55 this year.
I tell my kids, "It's OK to admit stuff...doesn't mean you're weak", and also that it's OK to like or want to do something that's different from what the crowd is doing.
GM is tops in sales. So I guess all cars have good enough reliability to generate sales to be on top of the world. JD Powers might as well just send consolation prizes to the highest scorers because the winners are selling the most volume and creating the most jobs. GM, VW, Toyota
What you omitted from your "equation" was the part about the product quality and reputation of the manufacturer.
That's where the "living in the past" and "resistance to change" comments begin to come into play.
I'm not going to buy a product of inferior quality or higher price just so I can have some sort of patriotic feeling I'm doing the "right" thing if it continues to prop up an outdated and inferior manufacturing system.
And, make no mistake about it.... That's an accurate description of how the big-3 operated. Was there unfair foreign competition? Yep, sure was.
Forget that for a second, though. How long do you think the Big-3 could survive without ANY foreign competition, yet paying wages and benefits far in excess of the value those workers add to the product?
It was already a train wreck waiting to happen long before the imports arrived. Their arrival, coupled with the shoddy quality of their products through the 1980-2000 time period only hastened the outcome.
The outcome was never in question.
A bailout of the best kind? Or was it?
I'm sure I'm not the only one who bought a Chrsyler vehicle after that 1980 bailout and has since punished GM, Ford, and Chrysler with no further consideration in this lifetime.
That first bailout for Chrysler has DIRECTLY led to my punishment of them, and taking it out on the other Big 2 as well.
I say what CR says goes! It's the bible after all. Actually, it's better than the bible.
Circle's beloved Hyundai and Kia were semi-blasted in the reliability/durability department by CR. They had some of the "MOST IMPROVED" scores for design/engineering, but still lacking in the quality department for those that demand the best. They have come a long way though.
My '06 A3 is a car to avoid used according to CR; doesn't upset me too much. It wouldn't upset me at all if it didn't lower my resale value some; I think CR's power does affect resale value a bit. If you are looking for minimal costs, it is not the car for you. If you are looking for fun performance, it might very well be! CR doesn't factor in excitement enough, but people know that. They heavily favor FE, reliability, and comfort/ergonomics/fit and finish. I've been perhaps lucky with my A3, I got a good one. I actually think it's because I avoided the added options, and from my research, it's the options that are most unreliable (Xenon adaptive headlights, the opensky double moonroof, things like that; which my car doesnt' have).
They blasted the 2012 Civic interior as cheap and a BIG step in the wrong direction and awarded it "Most lost points." I have no problem with that either. I haven't looked at one up close yet, but I'm sure it is true. I trust CR wholeheartedly.
Honda even came out and apologized for the 2012 Civic's shortcomings and said a refresh was in store for 2013!
I don't see any Honda Execs claiming CR is biased towards GM now.... :sick:
How about we draw the line in the sand at "if it didn't happen after you were born, then it isn't relevant to this lifetime?"
I won't complain about Big 3 lemons prior to 1978 for me. That's my line in the sand. Yours may go further back :P