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 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
Yeah, unfortunately. I'm only so grateful I'm not one of them :P
Another idea, we can do it this way, raise the import taxes to an almost ridiculous rate combined with lower costs. That'll do, I guess.
Let's see the combined numbers when the coupe comes out next year.
Regards,
OW
Must be a calculation of actual buyers in the 621 to 700 vs. the people who just have the credit rating.
However, seeing that out of those, the only one with a significant rise in sales IS the Genesis (some rose slightly, and some are holding steady, Saab sales are paultry anyways
In the NEW Economy, this car will no doubt sell. :surprise:
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
A Hyundai Genesis has even less cachet than a Chevrolet Caprice in my book. No Deal on the Genesis for me!
CTS is a competitor for the Genesis...and I can't say it's defeated by that competition.
If people are buying half as many 40K prestige brand cars, I can't see why they'd buy 40K econo brand cars.
What the??????? LMAO, nice joke, Dave... goodness, this is too hilarious...
As many as 900,000 US jobs depend on GM being open for business each day. With the $9B LOAN, these jobs can stay, temporarily. Lets look at the stimulus plans the OBAMA people have...For $900B, we can reverse the unemployment back from 7.5% to 5%. Lets see, that would be less than 3 million jobs created that we are powerless to do anything more that HOPE happens. No guarantees that they are permanent jobs. For instance, after the bridge is built, what does the worker then do? If you look at the return on the stimulus dollar spent, The bird in hand (GM Job) costs the same as 100 in the bush (OBAMA's plan). However, the GM workers have to manage a turnaround as does the country. If the LOANS to the D3 keep getting repeated, It could become comparable to the other gov't. stimulus plans, where the planned payback is a couple million jobs for a total stimulus package not to equal a Trillion Dollars.
Hence....If Obama's plan is as good as GM's at job creation...
are you one of the 'pissed'?
That'll just lead to two things:
1) I, along with everyone else out there with half a brain, will just simply buy a new foreign car a few days before the new higher "import" tax is implemented.
2) I, along with everyone else will vote against/vote out the Politicians who inact a ridiculous idea like taxing/tarrifing high quality vehicles (aka imports).
Many wealthy buyers don't need credit to buy. Many 750 and up people have savings and other financing paths that are better choices. I would put a new car on my HELOC at a tax deductible 5% interest rate and take the rebate. So you have to ignore maybe half the people from 750 to 850 FICO score. So, look at the bottom 80% as the credit buyer pool. The 20% gain is actually more like a 25% gain. But those gained are higher risk.
And while Hyundai is ready to release that barn burner that OW posted, Cadillac just cancelled it's CTS coupe. Oops :shades:
General Motors has confirmed that a number of its cars will be delayed, including the CTS Coupe and Chevrolet Cruze, which are being put on the backburner for around a year. The CTS Coupe wasn't expected to be a large-volume car anyway, so overall figures won't likely be hurt significantly by its delay. The Cruze, however, is much more central to the GM lineup.
On the other hand if they delay the CTS coupe they're not making a good decision because another company has a coupe coming that's in the same realm.
Have I got the drill down now?
Criticize no matter which they do...
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Delaying the coupe is one thing. I'm far more concerned with the delay of the Cruze. GM isn't going to rise or fall much on the CTS coupe but it they can't put out small competitive cars and make a profit on them that's a serious problem. The Cruze is a key to that.
Cadillac is not holding down GM as I see it. Making changes to your more successful brand to save the failing brands like Saturn, Saab and Pontiac does. It reaks of Oldsmobile all over again.
NEW YORK (Reuters) -- GMAC, the General Motors financing affiliate that received a $6 billion infusion from the government, completed a multibillion dollar debt swap today designed to bolster its capital.
The lender said holders of $21.2 billion of debt will swap their stakes for $15.7 billion of new securities plus cash.
Looks like GMAC is putting its' cash to work. Sales at GM looking better for December and that is only with a few days of easier/available lending.
"We thought the bottom was October. Then we thought it was November. It seemed like maybe it's December, but we're not so sure anymore," said Jesse Toprak, Edmunds.com's executive director of industry analysis.
Many analysts are not publishing forecasts until later this week. But Edmunds.com and J.D. Power forecast sales decreases of between 37 and 38.4 percent. The declines would be the industry's 18th in the past 19 months.
Edmunds.com predicts Chrysler will see the largest decline in December unit sales: 45.6 percent from December 2007. Nissan North America will follow with a 42.1 percent decline. General Motors will lose 39.3 percent, Toyota Motor 38.8 percent, American Honda Motor Co. 37.7 percent and Ford Motor Co. 33.8 percent.
All automakers will see adjusted sales increases from November, Edmunds.com said, with light trucks outselling cars for the first time in nine months.
GM is also forecasting a better December than November, said Mark LaNeve, GM's North American vice president of sales, service and marketing.
"Our share performance looks good," LaNeve said yesterday in a conference call with reporters. Edmunds.com has predicted a 22.8 percent market share for GM, up from 20.6 percent in November.
The auto market will not improve until the second half of 2009, Toprak said. Edmunds.com forecasts 2009 auto sales will decline at least 5 percent from 2008 and finish at less than 12.5 million units.
"There's a higher chance for an upside than a downside for the 12 million number," Toprak said. But "for any stabilization in the auto industry to be seen, we've got to see stability in the economy in general."
The annual selling rate must increase from its artificially low level, Toprak said, since the United States scraps 12.5 million cars annually after accidents and malfunctions.
Have I got the drill down now?
Criticize no matter which they do...
GM has earned it. Several of us think that they couldn't make the right turn on a road with no lefts.
As one can see, GM lost the most as a single entity and the D3 lost a lot of ground to the Asians...no surprise.
Here is a good graph that outlines the trend.
Best Regards and Happy New Year to All!
OW
Eventually, but there are about 40+ million lightly-used vehicles out there which need to be used up more before new vehicles become attractive again.
It also shows that there has been a steady decline in car sales in NA since 2000. We are becoming less of a market for anybody making cars. What explains this?
Are the quality of cars increasing so fast that new replacements are not needed as fast anymore?
Are we becoming a nation of people who can't afford new cars anymore?
Are the jobs that support new car buying dissappearing?
Is all our new car money funnelled into gas instead?
Will the price charged by Asia for new cars rise as they take all the volume and then there is no competition?
I do not think that $14.50 an hour for all US autoworkers is a good plan. Mitsubishi put a new plant in W.V. to take a huge chunk of parts business from the UAW. GM managers were promoted for coming up with the cost cuts associated with giving the business to the lower cost Asian supplier. I found the place in W.V. that got the new Mitsu plant. People there are loving the new factory. It's an hour from the nearest interstate in any direction. Only problem is that a rust belt town is dead as a result.
If Michigan and Ohio do not want to lose all their Auto industry they better become "Right to Work" states. No automaker in their right mind would build a factory in a state that the Unions control. Just as uncontrolled capitalism has negatives, so does uncontrolled Unionism. Michigan epitomizes Unions gone crazy. Unions never have and never will generate one penny of revenue for a community. Businesses create jobs, NOT Unions.
A little of what you said, but mostly the US market is simply saturated. Everyone who really wants a car has at least one (not necessarily new) and at this point any new car sales will be de facto replacements for worn-out or wrecked vehicles.
That really worked in the '80's. With the voluntary import quotas the J3 prices went way up and people STILL wanted those cars. People will pay for quality. So the D3 need to work on that, fast.
GM isn't making bad *cars*. It's making bad trucks. Too bad none of their plans seem to do a thing about fixing their truck lines.
On the other hand if they delay the CTS coupe they're not making a good decision because another company has a coupe coming that's in the same realm.
Why don't they get rid of some of the junk vehicles and design good new ones rather than delaying critical strategic vehicles?
There is something going on behind the scenes we do not know about. At least half the 1/2 ton full sized trucks could be replaced with S10/Ranger sized PU trucks if they got decent mileage and had any power. A 4 cylinder 2.5L diesel would be plenty of power, and yield over 30 MPG combined. My Ranger PU is a joke. No power from a V6 with 3.0L and an automatic. I never get over 16 MPG. And it does not have enough power to keep up with traffic on the Interstate when I go up the hill. It is FFV so gets special CAFE treatment. A midsized PU with half a Duramax diesel could put GM back in the running. Workmen in construction and maintenance just need a truck. They do not need a 1 ton crew cab with 600 HP diesel engine. You pull a 15k lb trailer then you need that. Most I see are pulling 3k lb utility trailers with lawnmowers and garden tools. My wife's stepson owns a contracting business. He has several F350 diesel trucks. He drives around in a 10 year old Tacoma 4 banger that he claims uses more fuel than his big one ton diesels. I know the 94 Toyota PU my son had was no mileage winner. If VW was able to offer a PU that got 50 MPG 30 years ago. Why can't GM or the other Domestics. Are they in bed with the oil companies?
I don't think the GM board or management have what it takes to gain back any of the market share they have thrown away.
I guess everybody knows it's STILL just a Hyundai, even though they hide the emblems real well
It's a Hyundai alright, comparing it with the Lucerne is somewhat adequate, but Enclave and CTS????? Come on, cooter. Be fair, it's positioned as a large car to compete in the near luxury class, CTS doesn't apply there. Much less Enclave, obviously. Lucerne indeed sold more, there's no denying that, helped by the fact that Buick customers are very loyal to the brand. Genesis is still new, wait another year or so to see what happens for a fair comparison.
IMO it's most appropriate to compare the Genesis with Buick (LaCrosse, Lucerne), Chrysler (300), Lincoln (MKZ), Nissan (Maxima) and Lexus ES by "class" and "market". Hyundai itself place the Genesis to fight off those competitors, not CTS and above.
"This is why they actually had to come up with "standards" to be met when using the terms "Made in America" and "Assembled in America" etc. etc. Which is a bit scary, a rule actually has to say "to qualify for "Made in America" product must be assembled in north america and contain at least 70% American sourced parts, all of which must qualify for at least "Assembled in America" status."
Now here's the key part IMO. We're looking at federal standardization, however no matter which status a car is qualified for the GM dealers will still sell those cars with the words "American Made", "Made in America", "Buy American", etc. etc stamped all over them. Simply because there's no law that can force companies to disclose the real status except by giving specific VIN codes. This way a GM car can have 50% foreign parts and still be sold on dealer's lot as "American" (notice the playing with words here).
Simple example, when a customer ask if the car's made in US, will GM officials and dealers' salespeople say something like
1) "Umm, 20% parts came from China, another 20% from Mexico, and about 5% from Canada, then they're all assembled in Fairfax, Kansas"? Or...
2) They'll simply say "This car is all American, it's an American brand, designed and surely assembled in America by American labors"
I bet 1,000% most, if not everytime the answer is (2).
1) I, along with everyone else out there with half a brain, will just simply buy a new foreign car a few days before the new higher "import" tax is implemented.
2) I, along with everyone else will vote against/vote out the Politicians who inact a ridiculous idea like taxing/tarrifing high quality vehicles (aka imports).
Same here, LOL.
Lets see,
1) I DO NOT beleve that 900k people will actually lose their jobs (read my post #2968). I've said this before with so many parts for GM cars produced overseas there's no way there are actually that many people related to GM in their jobs.
2) Some of those workers are already unemployed thanks to GM's poor business management. The economy ADDS the pain, but GM started the whole mess by itself. There's no guarantee that the bailout will be used wisely either.
3) Even assuming the 900k is accurate, not all will lose jobs, as I stated earlier (kernick also did so many times) some of those workers, parts supplier, dealer, etc, etc will switch to other brands for their living. Not all, but some will. Simply put: the projected unemployement numbers are well off and bloated.
4) You can't compare the cost of building bridges to the cost of building cars, the $9billion vs. 900billion doesn't apply. Construction, infrastructure building cost much more than operating a car company.
5) Please remember that GM will request more bailout by March 31st. Think, $9 billion to keep jobs open for 3 months???
"No guarantees that they are permanent jobs. For instance, after the bridge is built, what does the worker then do? If you look at the return on the stimulus dollar spent, The bird in hand (GM Job) costs the same as 100 in the bush (OBAMA's plan). "
1) The bridges, roads, and other infrastructures built will be OURS to use, not just for the wealth of certain companies. That's what taxpayers money is supposed to be used for, for our welfare not GM execs and UAW alone.
2) Infrastructure takes a whole lot of time to build. Meaning: jobs will be guaranteed for at least a few years, and by the time the projects are done the economy will recover and there will be new jobs for them, jobs that'll require more infrastructure for efficient distribution and transportation. Infrastructure means jobs, when they're done it means more jobs to come. It's among the basics of macroeconomics.
3) There are long term goals in Obama's plan, something totally missing in GM's and Wallstreet's.
"If the LOANS to the D3 keep getting repeated, It could become comparable to the other gov't. stimulus plans, where the planned payback is a couple million jobs for a total stimulus package not to equal a Trillion Dollars"
The planned payback still focus on the D3's benefit, and UAW's, NOT FOR US TAXPAYERS. The D3 loan isnt guaranteed to be used wisely. With even more outsourcing in their agenda GM will keep current jobs available at best. For how long???? There's no use in building cars nobody will buy. These years almost all carmakers are already overproducing by about 30%, GM among the worst. When the cars they make aren't selling, cash flow gets disturbed, or even worse, stuck. SImply put, big money goes out, but little or almost none goes in their account. At it's current position GM can't make enough profit per car sold, no need to ask why, it's so obvious. When that happens the jobs will go bye-bye unless the government gives even more loans. More loans = jobs stay = cash stuck again = loans, and around they go. If this keeps going just HOW will the D3 pay it back?
"Hence....If Obama's plan is as good as GM's at job creation... "
Obama's plan's a lot better and is focused on people's welfare not just a few groups
"are you one of the 'pissed'? "
Pissed of what? If you're talking about the bailout, yes, as I don't support bailout for anyone not even Wallstreet. I pay big taxes, and I dont want my tax money "donated" (read: wasted) on some trashes without anything in return just because they can't support their lifestyles anymore. Buy out those problematic companies if they must, I'll support, lending money with no guarantee of return, forget it. Public's money is for public welfare, period.
You're comparing GM's (microeconomics based) plan with Obama's (macro based). The thing is there's always a limit in which microeconomical plans such as GM's can't reach. We can debate as long as you want on economics, I'd gladly serve.
Additional note, thanks to the bailout, I've decided to not even consider D2 products (D3 if Ford gets one later) at least until they pay back the loans. And believe me I'm not alone, as far as I know a lot of people in the west coast and northeast are going the same route. Gee, I wonder what will happen to GM's future sales? So much for their "plans" :P :P :P
Of course, the gas mileage on them is so bad one may as well go to a full-size anyway, maybe that's the issue.
The window sticker should say USA content.
Canada, Mexico, Brazil etc are all American. When I lived in Mexico, they would get offended if you said you were from America. They consider themselves and rightly so as Americans also.
Have you seen the 2010 Fusion? Between that coming out and the goodwill towards Ford for not taking a bailout at all, they may get profitable quicker than they thought. I find it seriously doubtful that they'll need ANY sort of bailout with what they have in the pipe (remember, Fiesta is coming too). Any die-hard "buy American" type is going to favor Ford over the others.
That is the entire issue. I know for a fact that Ford builds and sells a lot of Ranger PU trucks all over the world. They are highly rated everywhere but the USA. My guess is the crappy engines they put in them for the US consumer has killed them here. I have met people here that have moved from overseas. They are baffled why they cannot get a Toyota or Ford PU like they had before. Two reasons EPA and the Chicken Tax. One established to protect domestic truck builders the other protects the oil companies.
I think Ford will be the recipient of much of GM and Chrysler's market share when they fold up. I like the Flex and would buy one if it was diesel powered. No more gas guzzlers for me.
Not the Edge the Flex is the vehicle I like.
From what I see people tend to choose Japanese models for smaller trucks (being more fuel friendly than domestics), American for full size trucks (having better utility than imports do).
Btw, happy new year guys.
Indeed, they're all American as well. That's why, do you notice them playing with the words "American made" here? Like you said, Canada, Mexico and Brazil are American too.
Have you seen the 2010 Fusion? Between that coming out and the goodwill towards Ford for not taking a bailout at all, they may get profitable quicker than they thought. I find it seriously doubtful that they'll need ANY sort of bailout with what they have in the pipe (remember, Fiesta is coming too). Any die-hard "buy American" type is going to favor Ford over the others.
True, bpizzuti. The Fusion is worth considering and I'd put it second only to it's "brother" Mazda6 in it's class. The F150 imo is still the best truck out there (alas, not the price). If only they'd put more into the Lincoln division...
Not at all, Ford has its priorities straight. Lincoln is a nice halo to have but Ford is the volume seller that pays the bills. That's part of the reason GM isn't in good shape...they've concentrated a lot of effort into Cady, the Vette, etc. Halos, none of which have trickled down to the mainstream volume sellers that pay the bills.
Now, they need to concentrate on making better products at less volumes. I will pay the price if the car lasts 200K miles. My recent results with GMC prove to me there is huge room for improvement.
As far as the salary goes, pay should match the level of expertise needed for the job. If your competition makes better product at less pay, your paying too much.
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW
Then I got a used V6 Sonoma with the extended cab weighing in at 3800 lbs. Turns 1300 rpms at 40 mph in town. I get 24 mpg combined all summer on regular. A diesel would have to get 34.6 mpg to just compare because reg is 1.59 and diesel is 2.29 a gallon. My brother has a 4 cyl '00 Tacoma 5M that he got new. He likes it but he is not impressed with its mileage.
*****
If you look at the sales figures, GM's cars are down less than the competition, percentage-wise. Their cars are just fine. Great, in fact, considering the economy. It's their truck lines that are imploding. And they put all of their eggs in that basket, as it were.
If you want to see a real truck that they CAN build, just look at the Ford. In the U.K., they offer a Ranger Supercab - about the size of a Tacoma, so no tiny little truck... And the reason it sells great is because they offer it like they do to the rest of the *world*...
With a diesel engine: A 143HP 2.5L Turbo Diesel engine(330 lb-ft torque!) Owners report a combined real-world average of 24-25mpg(converted to U.S. gallons). The one we get in the U.S.? About 23 combined, but it's a pathetic 4-banger that workers won't actually buy(can't haul, can't tow).
Payload: 1260 lbs.
Towing: 2600 lbs
The V6 is a gas glutton by comparison.
City (mpg) 14 - 15
Highway (mpg) 18 - 19
(automatic is the worse of the two figures) - Average reported is 16mpg!
I feel no pity. They *have* the engines. Just not in the U.S.