I like a certain type of vehicle. Smaller but higher quality. Refinement in the engine. Precision in steering (rather than necessarily a lot of power).
So for sedans, historically there have really been no US nameplate contenders that meet those critieria. I've owned an A4 and a Jetta and an Accord and an Acura. Looking at today's market for these types of vehicles, if I were buying cheap I would look at the Mazda 3 (if I could get over the smiley face). In the mid category I would look at TSX, possibly Fusion. I don't like the Accord anymore because it is too big and too soft. Camry too soft and cheap. I would consider the Fusion because it has had good reliability, has the handling like a Mazda 6, and is of pretty high quality. I think I'd be willing to buy this American make but it would give me a bit more pause. If I were going premium I'd look at A4, BMW 3, and perhaps Mercedes C series. GM has really nothing that interests me in this area, as they have no quality small sedans (and never have). And I'm not inclined to support bailed out companies, I even just dumped Chase for a local credit union for the same reason.
The other type of vehicle I might want is a smaller SUV. I would look at CRV. We have a Mazda 5 and it is great for a cheaper vehicle - it handles really well for a vehicle that is essentially a micro-minivan. Mazda has a heck of a chassis on the 3 and 5. I don't like Toyotas so the RAV4 is out. I'm too leery of GM to consider the Equinox. If I were going more premium I'd look at the Q5. The RDX is too firm and coarse for me, and the X3 (older one) was too firm and cheap looking inside for the high price.
I pretty much don't want to buy obscure brands, so that rules out Saab/Mitsu/Suzuki/etc. Mazda is about as obscure as I'm willing to go. Volvo feels overpriced and risky to me due to the Ford ownership. I like VW cars but had bad dealer service experiences so would rather not. For US makes, I'm willing to go with Ford as I admire a CEO who doesn't take bailouts and who actually works hard to improve the product and be innovative. GM has nothing that interests me except maybe the CTS, but for that price I'd probably buy a 3-series or A4. And Chrysler is not a consideration under any circumstances.
I'm sure if I wanted a large SUV or truck then I would be more inclined to buy a US nameplate, but I don't like large vehicles so I would either have a large family (too late for that) or a specific business need to get something that big. But for the reasons listed previously I would strongly favor Ford over GM or C. But I suppose it is possible that GM or C would be considered if their product was clearly more compelling.
Suppose the US auto manufacturers catered to customers and won them over year after year as their market share increased far past the off-shore mfg co's. Their products were so much better (dependable, long-lasting and the most aesthetically superior) than any other country, far exceeding the exact needs of the customer base and loyalty was easy to be gained, year after which ensured their sales continued to the upside.....zzzz...never....deceiving....their loyal................zzzz blind.....
OK, I'm awake now! Almost slipped into Lemko-Land!!
When you're shopping for a new car, do you use country of origin as a filter? In other words, do you look only at American cars when you're shopping? Or is it purely coincidental that all of the cars that you like happen to be American brands? For example, you really dig Buicks & you'd buy one even if it was made in, say, Sweden.
Suppose you fell in love with a non-American car. Would you refrain from buying it because its nationality was wrong? Or would you find a way to rationalize the purchase?
Well in my case I consider American branded cars a better value in addition to having a bias for domestic brands. My wife's previous car was Nissan Maxima which was a good car but I think overpriced. I bought a 2008 Saturn Aura for her which was $3000 less and is a better car in almost every way than the Maxima it replaced in terms of ride, gas mileage, acceleration (the Aura has the 3.6 V-6) quiteness and features. I realize all cars are better now than they were 5-10 years ago, and the new Maxima is a nice car and one I would consider buying but it is probably $10,000 more fully equipped than the Aura was.
I currently drive a 2006 Silverado which I paid $14,000 for new for my business. It is a 2wd V-6 work truck but my neighbor could,nt believe it cost $7000 less than his 2dr 4wd base Tacoma. Both the Aura and the Chevy truck have been bulletproof. I have not brought either one in for a warranty issue. Just normal maintenance.
In contrast my Cousin recently purchased a 2010 Acura RDX. When I went for a ride in it I was completley underwhelmed. I think he paid almost $40,000 for it and I found the 4 cyl. Turbo motor to be very buzzy and loud. The ride was harsh, and the interior looked cheaper than my wife's Aura IMO.
I think I made a couple of smart buying decisions and in contrast I think my cousin didn't. I'm not out to impress anyone by buying a car just for the name. I bought a Chrysler Crossfire SRTt-6, almost new about 3 years ago It is basically a previous generation Mercedes SLK-32 AMG with a hand built supercharged engine.Because of the Chrysler branding I paid about $15,000 less than the Mercedes model. The car is a lot of fun and it is truly unique. I have only seen 1 other Crossfire SRT on the road in the 3 years I've owned it. (only 3000 made in the world) I like the fact that it is a Chrylser product and would not like the car as much if it was branded a Mercedes.
My son bought a 2000 Chevy Cavalier new for $10,500. His girlfriend just traded it in on a new Nissan Versa. She got $1500 on the trade. It had 190,000 miles on it with no major repairs. I think that was a wise purchase ten years ago.
I am not "turned off" by the idea of owning a GM, Ford or Chrylser. If I like the car, and it is a good deal I will buy it regardless of the fact that there are a large percentage of the population that consider their Honda/Toyota/Hyundai/VW/Etc. superior. I just don't buy into that.
I've always liked mid 60's Studebakers. My favorite is the Hawk GT, but the tail end of Lark/Daytona era put out some interesting vehicles. Yours look very nice. I was in Milwaukee some years ago and got to see the Brooks Stevens museum somewhere in the northern suburbs. There is, or at least was, a prototype he worked on for the next gen Studebaker. It would have been a nice looking car for the times IMO. I thought it actually had a few styling cues from what the Virgil Exner 62's were supposed to look like before their rush downsizing by management, but was cleaner overall.
My favorite Studebakers are 1964 Gran Turismo Hawks. I like them best because of the denuded deck lid (metal overlay removed and deck retooled) and the availability of a front-half-only vinyl top. I'd love a Jet (dark) Green one with black top, full gauges inside, and Avanti Powershift automatic on the floor, as well as disc brakes!
Three of Brooks Stevens' prototypes are in the Studebaker Museum in South Bend, IN now. One is a hardtop coupe with a full-width Sylvania headlight system and a polarized panel in the "C" pillar. One is a four-door sedan with interchangeable doors, LF to RR and RF to LR. The last is an updated Wagonaire. They're all sharp.
No one in my family would have been caught dead in a Studebaker, but I always thought they were neat, nicely sized, and that Stude did a lot with what they had, styling and performance-wise. Our hometown had a Stude dealer owned by the same family for forty years so that's where I picked up my admiration of them...there were a good number in town.
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
...for why the UAW is a disaster for the US nameplates.
The following quote is from Colin Powell. Look at how it describes the essential situation of unions in general, and the UAW in particular:
Being responsible sometimes means pissing people off.
Good leadership involves responsibility to the welfare of the group, which means that some people will get angry at your actions and decisions. It’s inevitable, if you’re honorable. Trying to get everyone to like you is a sign of mediocrity: you’ll avoid the tough decisions, you’ll avoid confronting the people who need to be confronted, and you’ll avoid offering differential rewards based on differential performance because some people might get upset.
Ironically, by procrastinating on the difficult choices, by trying not to get anyone mad, and by treating everyone equally “nicely” regardless of their contributions, you’ll simply ensure that the only people you’ll wind up angering are the most creative and productive people in the organization.
Ironically, by procrastinating on the difficult choices, by trying not to get anyone mad, and by treating everyone equally “nicely” regardless of their contributions, you’ll simply ensure that the only people you’ll wind up angering are the most creative and productive people in the organization.
Can you do me a favor and pass that along to my supervisor? :P
I currently drive a 2006 Silverado which I paid $14,000 for new for my business. It is a 2wd V-6 work truck but my neighbor could,nt believe it cost $7000 less than his 2dr 4wd base Tacoma. Both the Aura and the Chevy truck have been bulletproof. I have not brought either one in for a warranty issue. Just normal maintenance.
How many miles do the Aura and Silverado have on them now? I always liked the Aura. Better than the Malibu, in fact...there's just something about styling that I think looks nicer, and more upscale.
Every once in awhile, I toy with the idea of buying a fairly basic Silverado or Sierra (or Ram, gotta admit I think the new one is pretty sexy), to replace my aging '85 Silverado. It only has around 133,000 miles on it, but old age is still taking its toll. It's rusting, has a big dent in the passenger door. A/C doesn't work, radio works when it wants to. Crappy fuel economy, leaking a bit of oil, and it has an exhaust leak or three. And the latest addition...power window switch stopped working, but it's because the wires in back pulled out! If you hold the wires to the back of the switch to make contact, you can get a window up or down, but it's not the most convenient thing.
The only thing that scares me about the Silverado and Sierra is that 4L60E transmission. I think Edmund's tested a newer model and had it fail. And the unit in my uncle's '97 Silverado has failed twice.
The only thing that scares me about the Silverado and Sierra is that 4L60E transmission. I think Edmund's tested a newer model and had it fail. And the unit in my uncle's '97 Silverado has failed twice.
Well you know my opinion of it. A buddy of mine has a 94 Silverado with 180k, he's going to have his 4l60e rebuilt for the 4th time.
Is net profit the same as gross profit? I wonder if they are really making money?
No. Gross profit is sales minus cost of goods sold. Net income is usually Gross Profit- Cost of goods sold - Operating Expenses - Non-cash Operating Expenses + Non-Operating Income - Non-Operating Expenses Net Income after Tax = Net Income before Tax.
But all of that can be manipulated by savvy accounting practices. If you really want to snoop a little more, look at the cash flow statement. By studying the trailing Free Cash Flow, you can see if the money reported is actually coming in.
GM's IPO will not pay us tax payers back any time soon. GM's highest market cap was in 2000 at $57 billion. I don't think they are worth anywhere near that amount currently.
I've read a couple of sources that state the initial stock price when the IPO is released will be over 100 dollars a share...
Hilarious. Roll on the floor laugh your butt off hilarious. Who is going to pay that?
Toyota stock at the moment is hovering around 70 - 75 dollars a share. At it's peak, before the Japan witch hunt came on full force it peaked about 90 dollars a share. Toyota currently has the most expensive (by far) stock prices of all the automakers. Honda I believe is second and they are at around 30 - 35 bucks per share right now?
One thing to keep in mind is that price per share has little to no bearing on determining the worth of a company.
Market cap is the total of share holder equity and is the stock price multiplied by the shares outstanding.
Which company is worth more? Berkshire Hathaway or Apple? Birkshire shares are trading at $120k per share. Apple is $250 per share. But Apple has a market cap of $237B and Berkshire's is $199B.
Shares outstanding is one way to manipulate the share price. A company can either buy back or issue new stock. Neither changes the value of the company (well it can if people decide to buy or sell the stock), but both can have a large effect on the share price.
As far as I'm concerned, NAFTA is one of the worst things that ever happened in that the main plant in town closed and moved to Mexico shortly after that.
NAFTA keeps getting a lot of blame, but one thing most people fail to look at is the Peso crash that took place in Dec of '94. Several economists believe the Peso crash may have had just as much an effect on our trade with Mexico as NAFTA. The Peso went from 3.50 to 1 to 10 per dollar by '99.
The devaluation of the Peso also hurt Mexico's buying power regarding our products. NAFTA or no NAFTA it was likely many plants were going there anyway. My '89 Mercury Tracer I had back in college was built in Mexico, so it wasn't like weren't building cars down there prior to NAFTA.
Well you know my opinion of it. A buddy of mine has a 94 Silverado with 180k, he's going to have his 4l60e rebuilt for the 4th time.
Maybe I could work a deal where I buy a new GM truck, and they transplant the THM350C out of my old '85 into it! It would hurt the fuel economy I'm sure, but I swear, that THM350 is probably the last thing that will die in that truck. I'm sure there are trucks with 4L60E transmissions that haven't even been born yet, that will succumb before that simple, durable old 3-speed finally pukes.
NAFTA or no NAFTA it was likely many plants were going there anyway. My '89 Mercury Tracer I had back in college was built in Mexico, so it wasn't like weren't building cars down there prior to NAFTA.
The Tracer was a 'world' car, being based on the Mazda 323. One bodystyle was built in Mexico and the other in Japan. It was a 'captive' import. After NAFTA, one started seeing vehicles that used to be built in the states, suddenly being built in Mexico. I prefer built in the 'States, but even so, I think being built in Mexico is a worse reflection of the manufacturer, than being built in Canada...and it has nothing to do with quality. It's about paying an absolute fraction of what the same workers would be paid in the 'States, or Canada for that matter. Besides liking the car better, that's another reason I'd choose a Malibu (Kansas City) over a Fusion (Mexico).
2024 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray 2LT; 2019 Chevrolet Equinox LT; 2015 Chevrolet Cruze LS
After NAFTA, one started seeing vehicles that used to be built in the states, suddenly being built in Mexico.
True, but my point I was bringing up is other factors other than NAFTA were in place. The Peso dropping in value by nearly 400% the same year NAFTA was put in place had more of a financial effect than NAFTA for companies importing from Mexico.
My point is that vehicles were being produced there prior to NAFTA. Ford's Cuautitlán Assembly Plant was built in 1964 and their Hermosillo Stamping and Assembly where the Fusion is manufactured was built in 1986.
NAFTA or no NAFTA, it's probable these cars would still be built in Mexico and shipped over the boarder. Now the Peso/dollar exchange rate is much closer, but still the wages are much less down there and they don't have to deal with.
I prefer built in the 'States, but even so, I think being built in Mexico is a worse reflection of the manufacturer, than being built in Canada...and it has nothing to do with quality. It's about paying an absolute fraction of what the same workers would be paid in the 'States, or Canada for that matter. Besides liking the car better, that's another reason I'd choose a Malibu (Kansas City) over a Fusion (Mexico).
No doubt it's about money. Ford and GM in the 90's were getting killed by legacy costs, labor rules, and health care etc. Going south of the border was one way to help alleviate (right or wrong) those issues.
But as far as being built in Mexico, Ford and GM are both guilty.
GM's Silao production plant was opened in 1994. No way could a plant be built and operational same year as NAFTA passed. It was going happen regardless.
My coworker has had a new Cadillac SRX for about 6 months and what a pile of junk that thing is. It has hed numerous, upon numerous issues with electrical, whining noises, grinding noises and transmission hiccups (no replacements yet, dealer keeps saying it's normal) and I swear it has spent more time at the dealer than she has had it at work...
Built in Mehico, what a gem :sick:
"Pass the tekillya man, we just built another car man!"
Wow, you said it way more eloquently than I can. I feel pretty much the same way. There is something "alien" and something just bit off about many of the foreign nameplates.
I avoid Citgo for its association with Hugo Chavez. I avoid Lukoil for its association with the Russian mafia. I avoid BP for its association with the Gulf oil spill. I still avoid Exxon for the Exxon Valdez Alaska oil spill. I prefer Sunoco as it is a Philadelphia-based company.
That increased volume might not sound like a bad thing until the numbers are compared to those at foreign automakers. Chrysler leads major industry players with 39 percent of its overall sales going to fleets. Ford has dropped its fleet dependency, but it’s still high at 35 percent. GM is a little lower at 31 percent.
By comparison, Hyundai leads foreign automakers at just 16 percent. Nissan (15 percent), Toyota (9 percent) and Honda (2 percent) have never been major fleet sellers.
Suppose you fell in love with a non-American car. Would you refrain from buying it because its nationality was wrong? Or would you find a way to rationalize the purchase?
I primarily buy what I like. If it's made in America by an American company, great. If not, I'll buy it anyway.
That said, I've only owned two non domestic nameplates, but 5 if you consider the '89 Mercury Tracer (Mazda 323), '94 Ford Probe (Mazda/Ford), and '96 Mercury Villager (Nissan engine/trans) as foreign. I've owned one '00 VW Jetta TDI and an '01 Nissan Pathfinder LE.
I do look domestic first, then if I don't like anything, I look elsewhere. A mexican sourced Fusion wouldn't bother me one bit. My brother just bought his first domestic car (Well sort of). A '10 Ford Fusion Sport. He'd primarily bought Nissan's over the past 15 years. And I gotta say, that Fusion is sweet. It's quick, quiet, solid, comfortable, and fun to drive.
Well, we were not at war with South Korea. We were fighting on their behalf against North Korea and China. I doubt their are any North Korean manufactured cars that aren't knock-offs of obsolete Chinese or Russian vehicles. Of course, Dear Leader probably has a Maybach 62 as his hooptie and a Rolls-Royce Phantom to haul garbage to the dump.
Unlike UAW-staffed plants, Toyota doesn’t lay off workers when a plant is idled. Instead of sending workers home without a paycheck, Toyota comes up with ways to keep employees busy, such as team-building exercise or efforts to improve the surrounding communities. “With the money spent not laying off people during the recession, I could have built a plant,” St. Angelo said.
Cool! My wife's father had a black 1950 Studebaker Champion sedan and my Aunt Marsha had a yellow 1953 Studebaker Starliner coupe when she was a lot younger.
I prefer built in the 'States, but even so, I think being built in Mexico is a worse reflection of the manufacturer, than being built in Canada...and it has nothing to do with quality. It's about paying an absolute fraction of what the same workers would be paid in the 'States, or Canada for that matter.
I've read this 3 times, & it still makes no sense. The distinction between Canadian workers & Mexican workers is what my late mother would call "a distinction without a difference". After all, the Canadian worker is just as foreign, relative to us, as the Mexican worker. Both are North Americans but neither is a U.S. citizen. Why should I prefer one over the other?
You could even argue, more convincingly, IMO, that a steady job with good pay & benefits means more to the Mexican, who, after all, lives in a much poorer country & has fewer choices. And you could go a step further & argue that I'm better off if that job goes to a Mexican. An unemployed Mexican is much more likely to sneak across the border & wind up standing in front of a 7-Eleven in my town, waiting for a local landscaper to hire him for the day, than an unemployed Canadian.
Oh, I love those Gran Turismo Hawks as well. It's funny what they could still do with a body shell that was over a decade old by that time. The 1961 Hawk was already looking really dated by that time, but the 1962 GT Hawk brought the car up to date.
I believe that Brooks Stevens prototype was called the Studebaker Sceptre.
> Toyota doesn’t lay off workers when a plant is idled. Instead of sending workers home without a paycheck, Toyota comes up with ways to keep employees busy, such as team-building exercise or efforts to improve the surrounding communities.
This PR was sent around several months ago too.
I suspect this refers only to the fulltime employees. The number for part-time employees I've seen is 40%. I guess they're not included in the 24-hour a day shifts that spend time doing exercises and kumbyah sessions for full pay?
It sounds good as propaganda, but I questions its validity.
So you are in the middle of nowhere and the only gas station is Citgo for quite a few miles and your car is almost empty.... So you are going to tow your car to a Sunoco??? Ya right!!! C`mon ,be practical !! :lemon:
Well, I follow lemko's guidelines but I'm not a nut about it. I'm not crazy about giving good money to any of those brands and won't if I can help it. Since generally I fill the tank when it hits about half I can usually help it.
My wife's grandfather worked at the Sunoco refinery in Philadelphia. I buy Sunoco more than anything.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Just out of curiosity, do you have any dirt on Shell?
I used to buy mainly at Shell because I had stock in them. It paid a pretty good dividend as far as oil company stocks go...usually around 6%, but the share price never really went anywhere. So, I sold it, bought some Apple when it dipped, and also bought some shares of a gold fund that, so far at least, has been paying a 10-11% dividend, depending on the share price.
Sunoco is pretty rare down in these parts. I think there's one in College Park, about 10 miles away.
Yeah, I don't see to many Sunoco stations around here. Locally, we have BP, Shell, and Mobile. I've had a BP card since the took over Amoco. 5% off a gallon of gas is hard to resist.
Watch this video and listen to the last couple of lines the speaker has to say about the UAW and figure how long there will be any of the big 3 in the USA. http://info.detnews.com/video/index.cfm?id=1189 :sick:
Very interesting video. Of course its a new, built from scratch facility. The Latin American markets are exploding, but don't get the coverage like China and India. It can probably eat up most of this production alone. I believe Ford is trying to do some of this flex line and supplier park stuff with their facility in Chicago, but you're right it has some limits due to unions and the age of the facility. Personally, I think the UAW is not likely to succeed in its latest campaign directed at Toyota and other transplant facilities in right to work states like the south. Their new leader is coming out swinging, but over time will either have to back down a bit or lose more membership. Any significant UAW growth potential probably lies outside of auto plants.
We've seen that video a time or two in here. It still amkes you stand up and pay attention.
The UAW has been averse to such things from the get go. I remember them slowing down any jobs moving to robots in the 80s. How much has that cost folks trying to buy American.
As far as the right to work plants by their very nature the UAW won't get them. A big reason is that even if they got in there is by definition no such thing as a closed shop in a right to work state so all an individual would have to do is not join. Unlike rust belt states they can opt not to be a part of teh bargaining unit and still have their jobs.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
BTW - diesel - couldn't you get the same deal on a Shell card? I don't know if Shell has any hideous crimes hiding. I don't buy it here because it's teh most expensive gas around but that seems to be a local thing.
The worst generally about them is that they aren't an American company but, of course, neither is BP. Do you prefer British weasels to Dutch ones?
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
BTW - diesel - couldn't you get the same deal on a Shell card? I don't know if Shell has any hideous crimes hiding. I don't buy it here because it's teh most expensive gas around but that seems to be a local thing.
The worst generally about them is that they aren't an American company but, of course, neither is BP. Do you prefer British weasels to Dutch ones?
I don't know if it matters, it's probably just jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire.
I think Shell has a 5% rebate too, not sure. Around here the stations are all close in price.
Comments
http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.com/showthread.php?16626-Bill-Pressler-s-63-a- nd-64-Daytonas&daysprune=-1
Thanks for the link.
So for sedans, historically there have really been no US nameplate contenders that meet those critieria. I've owned an A4 and a Jetta and an Accord and an Acura. Looking at today's market for these types of vehicles, if I were buying cheap I would look at the Mazda 3 (if I could get over the smiley face). In the mid category I would look at TSX, possibly Fusion. I don't like the Accord anymore because it is too big and too soft. Camry too soft and cheap. I would consider the Fusion because it has had good reliability, has the handling like a Mazda 6, and is of pretty high quality. I think I'd be willing to buy this American make but it would give me a bit more pause. If I were going premium I'd look at A4, BMW 3, and perhaps Mercedes C series. GM has really nothing that interests me in this area, as they have no quality small sedans (and never have). And I'm not inclined to support bailed out companies, I even just dumped Chase for a local credit union for the same reason.
The other type of vehicle I might want is a smaller SUV. I would look at CRV. We have a Mazda 5 and it is great for a cheaper vehicle - it handles really well for a vehicle that is essentially a micro-minivan. Mazda has a heck of a chassis on the 3 and 5. I don't like Toyotas so the RAV4 is out. I'm too leery of GM to consider the Equinox. If I were going more premium I'd look at the Q5. The RDX is too firm and coarse for me, and the X3 (older one) was too firm and cheap looking inside for the high price.
I pretty much don't want to buy obscure brands, so that rules out Saab/Mitsu/Suzuki/etc. Mazda is about as obscure as I'm willing to go. Volvo feels overpriced and risky to me due to the Ford ownership. I like VW cars but had bad dealer service experiences so would rather not. For US makes, I'm willing to go with Ford as I admire a CEO who doesn't take bailouts and who actually works hard to improve the product and be innovative. GM has nothing that interests me except maybe the CTS, but for that price I'd probably buy a 3-series or A4. And Chrysler is not a consideration under any circumstances.
I'm sure if I wanted a large SUV or truck then I would be more inclined to buy a US nameplate, but I don't like large vehicles so I would either have a large family (too late for that) or a specific business need to get something that big. But for the reasons listed previously I would strongly favor Ford over GM or C. But I suppose it is possible that GM or C would be considered if their product was clearly more compelling.
OK, I'm awake now! Almost slipped into Lemko-Land!!
Regards,
OW
Suppose you fell in love with a non-American car. Would you refrain from buying it because its nationality was wrong? Or would you find a way to rationalize the purchase?
Well in my case I consider American branded cars a better value in addition to having a bias for domestic brands. My wife's previous car was Nissan Maxima which was a good car but I think overpriced. I bought a 2008 Saturn Aura for her which was $3000 less and is a better car in almost every way than the Maxima it replaced in terms of ride, gas mileage, acceleration (the Aura has the 3.6 V-6) quiteness and features. I realize all cars are better now than they were 5-10 years ago, and the new Maxima is a nice car and one I would consider buying but it is probably $10,000 more fully equipped than the Aura was.
I currently drive a 2006 Silverado which I paid $14,000 for new for my business.
It is a 2wd V-6 work truck but my neighbor could,nt believe it cost $7000 less than
his 2dr 4wd base Tacoma. Both the Aura and the Chevy truck have been bulletproof. I have not brought either one in for a warranty issue. Just normal maintenance.
In contrast my Cousin recently purchased a 2010 Acura RDX. When I went for a ride in it I was completley underwhelmed. I think he paid almost $40,000 for it and I found the 4 cyl. Turbo motor to be very buzzy and loud. The ride was harsh, and the interior looked cheaper than my wife's Aura IMO.
I think I made a couple of smart buying decisions and in contrast I think my cousin
didn't. I'm not out to impress anyone by buying a car just for the name. I bought a Chrysler Crossfire SRTt-6, almost new about 3 years ago It is basically a previous generation Mercedes SLK-32 AMG with a hand built supercharged engine.Because of the Chrysler branding I paid about $15,000 less than the Mercedes model. The car is a lot of fun and it is truly unique. I have only seen 1 other Crossfire SRT on the road in the 3 years I've owned it. (only 3000 made in the world) I like the fact
that it is a Chrylser product and would not like the car as much if it was branded
a Mercedes.
My son bought a 2000 Chevy Cavalier new for $10,500. His girlfriend just traded it in on a new Nissan Versa. She got $1500 on the trade. It had 190,000 miles on it with no major repairs. I think that was a wise purchase ten years ago.
I am not "turned off" by the idea of owning a GM, Ford or Chrylser. If I like the car,
and it is a good deal I will buy it regardless of the fact that there are a large percentage of the population that consider their Honda/Toyota/Hyundai/VW/Etc.
superior. I just don't buy into that.
Three of Brooks Stevens' prototypes are in the Studebaker Museum in South Bend, IN now. One is a hardtop coupe with a full-width Sylvania headlight system and a polarized panel in the "C" pillar. One is a four-door sedan with interchangeable doors, LF to RR and RF to LR. The last is an updated Wagonaire. They're all sharp.
No one in my family would have been caught dead in a Studebaker, but I always thought they were neat, nicely sized, and that Stude did a lot with what they had, styling and performance-wise. Our hometown had a Stude dealer owned by the same family for forty years so that's where I picked up my admiration of them...there were a good number in town.
Regards,
OW
When I was 8 the next door neighbor bought a new 59 Lark. I loved the look of that. Wilbur Post drove one on Mr. Ed.
The following quote is from Colin Powell. Look at how it describes the essential situation of unions in general, and the UAW in particular:
Being responsible sometimes means pissing people off.
Good leadership involves responsibility to the welfare of the group, which means that some people will get angry at your actions and decisions. It’s inevitable, if you’re honorable. Trying to get everyone to like you is a sign of mediocrity: you’ll avoid the tough decisions, you’ll avoid confronting the people who need to be confronted, and you’ll avoid offering differential rewards based on differential performance because some people might get upset.
Ironically, by procrastinating on the difficult choices, by trying not to get anyone mad, and by treating everyone equally “nicely” regardless of their contributions, you’ll simply ensure that the only people you’ll wind up angering are the most creative and productive people in the organization.
Can you do me a favor and pass that along to my supervisor? :P
It is a 2wd V-6 work truck but my neighbor could,nt believe it cost $7000 less than
his 2dr 4wd base Tacoma. Both the Aura and the Chevy truck have been bulletproof. I have not brought either one in for a warranty issue. Just normal maintenance.
How many miles do the Aura and Silverado have on them now? I always liked the Aura. Better than the Malibu, in fact...there's just something about styling that I think looks nicer, and more upscale.
Every once in awhile, I toy with the idea of buying a fairly basic Silverado or Sierra (or Ram, gotta admit I think the new one is pretty sexy), to replace my aging '85 Silverado. It only has around 133,000 miles on it, but old age is still taking its toll. It's rusting, has a big dent in the passenger door. A/C doesn't work, radio works when it wants to. Crappy fuel economy, leaking a bit of oil, and it has an exhaust leak or three. And the latest addition...power window switch stopped working, but it's because the wires in back pulled out! If you hold the wires to the back of the switch to make contact, you can get a window up or down, but it's not the most convenient thing.
The only thing that scares me about the Silverado and Sierra is that 4L60E transmission. I think Edmund's tested a newer model and had it fail. And the unit in my uncle's '97 Silverado has failed twice.
Well you know my opinion of it. A buddy of mine has a 94 Silverado with 180k, he's going to have his 4l60e rebuilt for the 4th time.
No. Gross profit is sales minus cost of goods sold. Net income is usually Gross Profit- Cost of goods sold - Operating Expenses - Non-cash Operating Expenses + Non-Operating Income - Non-Operating Expenses
Net Income after Tax = Net Income before Tax.
But all of that can be manipulated by savvy accounting practices. If you really want to snoop a little more, look at the cash flow statement. By studying the trailing Free Cash Flow, you can see if the money reported is actually coming in.
GM's IPO will not pay us tax payers back any time soon. GM's highest market cap was in 2000 at $57 billion. I don't think they are worth anywhere near that amount currently.
Hilarious. Roll on the floor laugh your butt off hilarious. Who is going to pay that?
Toyota stock at the moment is hovering around 70 - 75 dollars a share. At it's peak, before the Japan witch hunt came on full force it peaked about 90 dollars a share. Toyota currently has the most expensive (by far) stock prices of all the automakers. Honda I believe is second and they are at around 30 - 35 bucks per share right now?
One thing to keep in mind is that price per share has little to no bearing on determining the worth of a company.
Market cap is the total of share holder equity and is the stock price multiplied by the shares outstanding.
Which company is worth more? Berkshire Hathaway or Apple? Birkshire shares are trading at $120k per share. Apple is $250 per share. But Apple has a market cap of $237B and Berkshire's is $199B.
Shares outstanding is one way to manipulate the share price. A company can either buy back or issue new stock. Neither changes the value of the company (well it can if people decide to buy or sell the stock), but both can have a large effect on the share price.
NAFTA keeps getting a lot of blame, but one thing most people fail to look at is the Peso crash that took place in Dec of '94. Several economists believe the Peso crash may have had just as much an effect on our trade with Mexico as NAFTA. The Peso went from 3.50 to 1 to 10 per dollar by '99.
The devaluation of the Peso also hurt Mexico's buying power regarding our products. NAFTA or no NAFTA it was likely many plants were going there anyway. My '89 Mercury Tracer I had back in college was built in Mexico, so it wasn't like weren't building cars down there prior to NAFTA.
Maybe I could work a deal where I buy a new GM truck, and they transplant the THM350C out of my old '85 into it! It would hurt the fuel economy I'm sure, but I swear, that THM350 is probably the last thing that will die in that truck. I'm sure there are trucks with 4L60E transmissions that haven't even been born yet, that will succumb before that simple, durable old 3-speed finally pukes.
The Tracer was a 'world' car, being based on the Mazda 323. One bodystyle was built in Mexico and the other in Japan. It was a 'captive' import. After NAFTA, one started seeing vehicles that used to be built in the states, suddenly being built in Mexico. I prefer built in the 'States, but even so, I think being built in Mexico is a worse reflection of the manufacturer, than being built in Canada...and it has nothing to do with quality. It's about paying an absolute fraction of what the same workers would be paid in the 'States, or Canada for that matter. Besides liking the car better, that's another reason I'd choose a Malibu (Kansas City) over a Fusion (Mexico).
True, but my point I was bringing up is other factors other than NAFTA were in place. The Peso dropping in value by nearly 400% the same year NAFTA was put in place had more of a financial effect than NAFTA for companies importing from Mexico.
My point is that vehicles were being produced there prior to NAFTA. Ford's Cuautitlán Assembly Plant was built in 1964 and their Hermosillo Stamping and Assembly where the Fusion is manufactured was built in 1986.
NAFTA or no NAFTA, it's probable these cars would still be built in Mexico and shipped over the boarder. Now the Peso/dollar exchange rate is much closer, but still the wages are much less down there and they don't have to deal with.
I prefer built in the 'States, but even so, I think being built in Mexico is a worse reflection of the manufacturer, than being built in Canada...and it has nothing to do with quality. It's about paying an absolute fraction of what the same workers would be paid in the 'States, or Canada for that matter. Besides liking the car better, that's another reason I'd choose a Malibu (Kansas City) over a Fusion (Mexico).
No doubt it's about money. Ford and GM in the 90's were getting killed by legacy costs, labor rules, and health care etc. Going south of the border was one way to help alleviate (right or wrong) those issues.
But as far as being built in Mexico, Ford and GM are both guilty.
GM's Silao production plant was opened in 1994. No way could a plant be built and operational same year as NAFTA passed. It was going happen regardless.
Built in Mehico, what a gem :sick:
"Pass the tekillya man, we just built another car man!"
I avoid Lukoil for its association with the Russian mafia.
I avoid BP for its association with the Gulf oil spill.
I still avoid Exxon for the Exxon Valdez Alaska oil spill.
I prefer Sunoco as it is a Philadelphia-based company.
That increased volume might not sound like a bad thing until the numbers are compared to those at foreign automakers. Chrysler leads major industry players with 39 percent of its overall sales going to fleets. Ford has dropped its fleet dependency, but it’s still high at 35 percent. GM is a little lower at 31 percent.
By comparison, Hyundai leads foreign automakers at just 16 percent. Nissan (15 percent), Toyota (9 percent) and Honda (2 percent) have never been major fleet sellers.
I primarily buy what I like. If it's made in America by an American company, great. If not, I'll buy it anyway.
That said, I've only owned two non domestic nameplates, but 5 if you consider the '89 Mercury Tracer (Mazda 323), '94 Ford Probe (Mazda/Ford), and '96 Mercury Villager (Nissan engine/trans) as foreign. I've owned one '00 VW Jetta TDI and an '01 Nissan Pathfinder LE.
I do look domestic first, then if I don't like anything, I look elsewhere. A mexican sourced Fusion wouldn't bother me one bit. My brother just bought his first domestic car (Well sort of). A '10 Ford Fusion Sport. He'd primarily bought Nissan's over the past 15 years. And I gotta say, that Fusion is sweet. It's quick, quiet, solid, comfortable, and fun to drive.
Unlike UAW-staffed plants, Toyota doesn’t lay off workers when a plant is idled. Instead of sending workers home without a paycheck, Toyota comes up with ways to keep employees busy, such as team-building exercise or efforts to improve the surrounding communities. “With the money spent not laying off people during the recession, I could have built a plant,” St. Angelo said.
I've read this 3 times, & it still makes no sense. The distinction between Canadian workers & Mexican workers is what my late mother would call "a distinction without a difference". After all, the Canadian worker is just as foreign, relative to us, as the Mexican worker. Both are North Americans but neither is a U.S. citizen. Why should I prefer one over the other?
You could even argue, more convincingly, IMO, that a steady job with good pay & benefits means more to the Mexican, who, after all, lives in a much poorer country & has fewer choices. And you could go a step further & argue that I'm better off if that job goes to a Mexican. An unemployed Mexican is much more likely to sneak across the border & wind up standing in front of a 7-Eleven in my town, waiting for a local landscaper to hire him for the day, than an unemployed Canadian.
I believe that Brooks Stevens prototype was called the Studebaker Sceptre.
This PR was sent around several months ago too.
I suspect this refers only to the fulltime employees. The number for part-time employees I've seen is 40%. I guess they're not included in the 24-hour a day shifts that spend time doing exercises and kumbyah sessions for full pay?
It sounds good as propaganda, but I questions its validity.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
1. Buying a Mazda 6 built in a Michigan Ford plant?
or
2. Buying a Buick assembled in Germany?
or
3. Buying a Pontiac assembled in Australia?
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
I'd lean to the Mazda but more because a) I like Mazdas and b) Pontiac doesn't exist anymore.
My wife's grandfather worked at the Sunoco refinery in Philadelphia. I buy Sunoco more than anything.
I used to buy mainly at Shell because I had stock in them. It paid a pretty good dividend as far as oil company stocks go...usually around 6%, but the share price never really went anywhere. So, I sold it, bought some Apple when it dipped, and also bought some shares of a gold fund that, so far at least, has been paying a 10-11% dividend, depending on the share price.
Sunoco is pretty rare down in these parts. I think there's one in College Park, about 10 miles away.
http://info.detnews.com/video/index.cfm?id=1189 :sick:
The UAW has been averse to such things from the get go. I remember them slowing down any jobs moving to robots in the 80s. How much has that cost folks trying to buy American.
As far as the right to work plants by their very nature the UAW won't get them. A big reason is that even if they got in there is by definition no such thing as a closed shop in a right to work state so all an individual would have to do is not join. Unlike rust belt states they can opt not to be a part of teh bargaining unit and still have their jobs.
The worst generally about them is that they aren't an American company but, of course, neither is BP. Do you prefer British weasels to Dutch ones?
Regards:
OldCEM
The worst generally about them is that they aren't an American company but, of course, neither is BP. Do you prefer British weasels to Dutch ones?
I don't know if it matters, it's probably just jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire.
I think Shell has a 5% rebate too, not sure. Around here the stations are all close in price.