Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
Again I ask you, do you think this $25B is the last they will ask for? GM alone has $66B in debt they can't repay. Chrysler is a "Dead Man Standing". Ford has the best chance.
But please do not think they will not need further financial support.
Regards,
OW
The General Motors of 2012 will have fewer brands and nameplates, thousands fewer dealers and employees, and much less debt on its balance sheet, under a restructuring plan GM gave Congress today.
GM will focus on its "core brands" of Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac, the plan says. GM will sell Saab, shrink Pontiac to a niche brand and consider selling or closing Saturn, GM President Fritz Henderson told reporters at a briefing today.
GM also plans to trim its U.S. dealerships from today's 6,450 to about 4,700, Henderson said. It will cut about one-third of the nameplates from its vehicle lineup.
GM's plan asks Congress for $12 billion in loans by the end of March. It seeks another $6 billion in revolving credit if market conditions don't turn around.
The total request is higher than the $10 billion to $12 billion that GM CEO Rick Wagoner requested of lawmakers during congressional hearings two weeks ago.
Henderson called the GM plan "a blueprint for creating a new General Motors -- one that is leaner, profitable, self-sustaining and fully competitive." Among its key features:
• Reducing the number of GM brands and nameplates, a step GM critics have demanded for years.
Henderson said GM will seek a buyer for Saab. Pontiac will be shrunk to a "specialty, niche" brand, Henderson said. GM already has put Hummer up for sale.
Under its franchise agreement with Saturn dealers, GM will seek a new course for that brand, Henderson said. Asked whether GM would sell or fold Saturn, he said he would not eliminate any options.
The brand "is just not successful," Henderson said.
The number of GM nameplates would drop from 63 today to about 40 by 2012, Henderson added.
• Trimming GM's 6,450 U.S. dealerships to about 4,700.
Most reductions would occur in metropolitan areas, Henderson said.
• Reopening talks with the UAW to cut manufacturing costs further.
Henderson declined to identify the additional concessions GM will seek. But he said GM expects to be fully competitive in labor costs with Toyota Motor Corp. by 2012.
Henderson estimated GM's total U.S. head count would drop from today's 96,000 employees to between 65,000 and 75,000.
• Negotiating with lenders and bondholders to remove about $35.6 billion in debt from GM's books. At the end of September, the company owed $66 billion. Henderson said that debt load is too heavy.
Sounds to me like it isn't enough. They will still have way too many dealers for one thing. And how are they going to get their labor costs down by 1/3 AND eliminate the Jobs Bank? Doesn't seem plausible. I also don't think they can continue to capture more than 20% of the U.S. market, so their projections based on a 24% market share are also apt to get them in further hot water.
http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081202/ANA02/812029978/1200- -
(registration link)
Edit...oh, and you just GOTTA love this: In the plan submitted to Congress today, GM said: "Absent such assistance, the company will default in the near term, very likely precipitating a total collapse of the domestic industry and its extensive supply chain, with a ripple effect that will have severe, long-term consequences to the U.S. economy."
That kind of talk leaves me half tempted to say BRING IT ON BABY! I mean, really, come ON........
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I don't think we have seen anywhere near the whole scope of financial mess we're in. I read CBS Marketwatch, and the people who were predicting this foreclosure mess a year or 2 ago, are saying that this slowdown is going to domino into a commercial property disaster next - malls, restaurants, businesses consolidating, and as people lose jobs you're going to have massive credit card defaults.
Watching ABC news tonight, they had an article on the cuts having to be made in 40 states to balance budgets including CA at -$28B. Ohio next year is looking at an $8B budget deficit. And given the bailouts this year the feds at $1,000+B deficit/year is not coming to the rescue! There will be many cuts in the nations largest employer - government.
So this is far from over. The economy isn't jumping back to healthy, anytime soon. Things probably are going to get worse for far longer than we've ever experienced.
Car sales will be lucky to hold where they are now.
The total request is higher than the $10 billion to $12 billion that GM CEO Rick Wagoner requested of lawmakers during congressional hearings two weeks ago.
They must have had an early look at the Nov. sales numbers! Frackin unbelievable!
That kind of talk leaves me half tempted to say BRING IT ON BABY! I mean, really, come ON........
In Fords report it says the same thing. If GM goes under Ford will follow suit because of suppliers.
If anything, you have it backwards. The Lambdas are comparable to the Tahoe in size, and the Sub. is far more stable as a towing vehicle, due to the longer wheelbase.
That's closer to the truth than anyone in Michigan will ever admit! As an former engineer at a major GM supplier I can tell you that GM has 12 months to live IF they get this money. 60 days without it!
Time to let nature take it's course.
I am proud of you!
The problem is this has become a sales pitch for cheap capital on the backs of taxpayers. They can not justify their existence as a profitable entity.
While it is partly due to the economic downturn, the decisions in the past 3 -5 years have been nothing short of laughable. Sure it's 20-20 hindsight but even I knew that D3 has been on life support long ago. Who am I?
"There isn't a Plan B," said GM Chief Operating Officer Fritz Henderson. "Absent support, frankly, the company just can't fund its operations."
It's not going to be the end of the world, just the sad epitaph of a once proud but then ultimately a bloated, mindless and blind industry that past the point of no return long ago. The moral is that although others have done far better as the D3 eroded, the Home Team could not or would not change to the beat the competition. Oh, part of the moral: Don't keep pissing off your customers. and these:
* Greed destroys the source of good. ($74/hr. compensation)
* Think before you act. (3 private jets to one meeting?? And you make CARS????)
* Those who want too much lose everything. (60 nameplates??)
Regards,
OW
What bank(s) do you suppose they'll take down with them if they default???
Regards,
OW
40? That's still way too many. 15 would cover the market.
*Chevy
Aveo (sedan and hatches)
Cruze (sedan and coupe), some CUV on this platform
Malibu, Equinox
Traverse (including Enclave)
Impala (aka Holden Commodore), Camaro
Corvette
*Cadillac
CTS (sedan, coupe, wagon- Holden Statesman reskins)
SRX- CUV on Statesman platform
DTS- long wheelbase CTS
*Chevy truck
Colorado, Silverado, Suburban, whatever the work van is called
Okay, that's sixteen.
Maybe another way to have the government handle this is to tell the banks we'll guarantee their debt, but seeing as how you guys have the trillion or so in cash, heres the rules:
1) Restructure their debt into 30 yr bonds at say, 8.5%
2) No payments or interest accrual for 24 months
3) We get 3%
Seeing as how the Big 3 are in Dire straits, here's YOUR rules:
1) Car Czar will be appointed to oversee compliance with agreements w/ gov't (see below)
2) Executive pay limited for life of this agreement (30 years???)
3) No Jobs bank
4) Czar will have final say on labor agreements
5) Preferred stock equvallent to 7.5% of company given to Government as collateral
This way, the Big 3 get relief, get the $25 billion for retooling that has already been passed, but no extra money changes hands.
GM also plans to trim its U.S. dealerships from today's 6,450 to about 4,700, Henderson said. It will cut about one-third of the nameplates from its vehicle lineup.
I'm happy to hear they finally came to their senses about cutting brands.... Not exactly what I would propose but it's a good start.
Agree that they still will have way too many dealers. Toyota gets it done with under 2000 dealers.
Also not sure why they think the UAW will come to the table and accept more concessions and job eliminations. Sure the writing is on the wall that GM needs to reduce labor costs to survive but I don't see the rank and file of the union caving in. I'm sure it has happened at some point in history but I have never seen anyone vote to give themselves less money and less job security.
And does anoyone really believe they can do this with only $12B from the government? The numbers don't work out. I still say Chapter 11 is the only way they can make this work.
BTW, the US sales numbers for November are horrible....across the board. I don't think we have hit bottom yet. More and more people will continue to go to the used car market. Lots of late model cars (lease, fleet and rental) available.
That was part of the GM plan to get rid of some of that debt through strong arming the lenders. They are not going to pay the $66billion back. We will get stuck with that no matter what else happens. GM is hoping for a marketing miracle where 5 million people decide all of a sudden they have to have a GM vehicle. The sales are not going back to 15 million vehicles for years. People have been buying on home equity and shoddy lending practices. Hopefully the bankers have put that behind them.
1 - It's not aggressive enough
2 - not enough specifics on phaseouts, timing, and union concessions. Looks like a carrot to get the money and then "we'll see..."
3 - GMC should also be folded into Buick/and/or Chevy
4 - Wagoner should be replaced
Clarify #2, do #3 and #4 and then we are starting to have a viable plan. Otherwise forget bailing GM.
Gettlefinger said on Sunday that the UAW costs were "now competitive". This quote says 2012. I smell a lot of propaganda. They're all piling the poop higher and deeper to sell the bailout to congress. See how one of GMs big claims is still holding the economy hostage: "We'll take a bunch of the economy down with us if we're allowed to fail". No accountability for Wagoner's screwups over 14 years. Pathetic. And now they pick our pockets.
Yes! Good god! It sounded good 3 years ago, but the closer to reality this gets the more of a turkey it becomes. I mean, really, what possible value could it have to GM? A halo effect? That's worth billions in development and marketing costs? It will never make money if it ever gets made in the first place.
They see this as an unfortunate problem and a temporary obstacle.
They fail to see that it's really a symptom of decay and ruinous policies that infests the entire management of the company. The proposal is a complete joke.
True. But is it good enough to pass congress?
There was an article in the L.A. times opinion section about this, where it was suggested that since the Government is basically taking control over much of the company, why not do the right thing and buy out the company entirely?
The Government will end up having to take over the pensions and health care of the workers anyways when GM goes under in a couple of years, so that part of the equation is pretty much a moot point. That leaves the value for the money. GM is only worth $10 billion or so right now, and that's less than they wold waste in the next year on frivolous garbage.
What would we gain? The article pointed out that it would fit well with Obama's desire to reshape our energy policy by making vehicles at cost and to fill a need rather than to pollute and make a profit. Losing a coupe of billion a year is far better than throwing 50 billion down a toilet and delaying the inevitable, after all.
Also consider the number of states that GM and Delphi are in. What have the STATES offered them? Or the CITIES - maybe in the form of tax breaks? If the people of MI and OH ... desperately need the Big3 - what are they doing? Maybe they can't provide all the support, but are they doing anything extra in the last 3 months? has anyone heard? Is MI issuing $5B in bonds or anything, and lending to GM? No? Why not?
That would work in normal times where the lobbyists and their cronies (congressfolk) hadn't messed up the financial system to the point where banks aren't lending the money that the FEDS just gave them to lend. Instead they're using it to bolster their highly over-leverages loan portfolios and are investing it in treasuries.
>vIf the people of MI and OH ... desperately need the Big3 - what are they doing?
I just saw a list of things that other states, three, had done to "win" (bribe) the foreign makers to build their plants in their nonunion states.
As for Ohio and Michigan, we have tried to "lure" (bribe) the companies to build here but are discriminated against because of a higher union reputation and having US manufacturers plants in the area. The article I just read pointed out a Mercedes plant in AL that cost their taxpayers $200,000 per job. In Ohio the painting/body plant that's closing in December was given taxfree status a few years ago so that GM would upgrade the plant and continue to build and assemble the vehicles here.
The jobs lost through the last years in those areas means the states' incomes are dropping. Granting loans and floating bonds to give more to the companies to make up for the damage caused by federal government laws and by buying of plant's locating in their states by other states isn't possible.
EDIT: Ohio needs 5 Billion
Ohio's Strickland helped campaign for BO after he campaigned for Hillary. He even had state employees doing campaign work on state time violating laws of privacy .
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
But new revenue numbers released Tuesday show the state tax haul is running about $70 million behind projections. State budget officials have instructed agencies to hold back 7 percent of their appropriated spending; a few building projects have been postponed and hiring is being closely scrutinized.
But it's the new biennial budget legislators have to craft starting in January that will be even harder as Indiana takes in less revenue than the year before, leaving no room for inflationary growth.
"We are going to have a very austere budget," Daniels said.
link title
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I don't believe that banks aren't lending ANY money to companies, or to consumers. Less is being loaned, as banks now are only willing to lend to good companies and consumers with a good probability of paying it back.
Granting loans and floating bonds to give more to the companies to make up for the damage caused by federal government laws and by buying of plant's locating in their states by other states isn't possible.
News alert - the federal government is over $10T in debt. They're more broke than the cities and states.
And I just posted links this morning that Detroit gave the Tigers and Lions $300M in the last few years to build stadiums. http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20070329144701-85817.pdf NY is currently giving the Yankees $833M to help with the Yankee Stadium project.
Honestly, vette, do you still believe that GM will ever get back to 15 mil annually? GM can still manage 10 million right now simply because they're practically giving away their cars for barely any profit, if not none. As more and more customers will become educated in the market, GM will lose sales even more. I have mentioned this many times, GM is relying too much on 1) very few competitive products, and 2) the tired old "buy American" cliche.
Whats with insisting on 15mil annual sales anyway? Forget getting back to 15 million, GM will have to figure out how to retain less but more profitable sales instead of just numbers. Simply thinking of the number of units sold is exactly what will make GM plummet even further.
"It just doesn't happen, as the world works on an equilibrium. If 12M vehicles are in demand here in the U.S. 12M will be bought and sold, no matter who's nameplate is on it. The market is very efficient in that respect. "
This is one thing I disagree with you, kernick.. I believe GM going under will affect sales and demand in 2 ways:
Demand changes due to the loss of GM cars
From the survey data I read in MT, the top reasons for choosing imports are higher reliability and resale value, whereas top reasons for choosing domestics are cheaper price (and better incentives) and the wish to buy American. Here's my prediction:
1) Should GM go under, most customers seeking price will look elsewhere, like to the Koreans and other Japanese. Others will stick to domestics.
2) Some fraction of the buy American customers will convert to something else, being non-loyalists and in need for a new car.
3) Some of the persistent domestic brand customers will be served by Ford (Chrysler is a goner imo).
4) The last group will be GM loyalists, which will probably choose to keep their current cars as there's no GM replacement.
So in the end the market will only lose demand from GM loyalists, and lets face it, there aren't enough of them to hurt demands significantly. Whats more, this drop in the market won't last long as GM assets will be purchased, plants re-opened, and in a few years there will be new GM cars for the loyalists.
Demand changes due to customers' financial condition
The fall of GM will cause approx. 1 million people to lose their jobs. This will at least affect our economy, meaning there will be less demand as some buyers can no longer afford a new car. And when/if someone or some company buys GM, they will most likely cut capacity in half, meaning not too many new jobs for Americans. Plus I doubt they'll make any new contracts with UAW (well they dont deserve it anyway). Doesnt matter, there are many more looking for jobs out there.
Either way there will be changes in demand, and both financial condition and the loss of GM lineup will put a negative number in the equation. As for how dramatic (or slight) the change will be is something I honestly can't predict, but I say YES there will be changes.
I believe they call that "reaping what you sow".
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
That is the industry number, not GM. GM was already cutting capacity by closing plants and getting rid of models for a lower, profitable percentage of the market. Unfortunately the overall market dropped faster than anyone predicted. Just in July Ray Young said that GM had enough cash on hand to get through a 14 million year. Now we are looking at 10 million.
Little info, Saturn had no new product in the pipeline. GM had already planned on phasing them out. Pontiac only had a few products in the pipeline and now we will see just a few performance products coming out. Most of the cuts announced in the plan were already in the pipeline, but many are just starting now or a year out. I think the UAW will be announcing some cuts today. Hopefully dropping the job banks start of 2009, paying for a much larger part of their medical care for both the retirees and workers and more buyouts of the higher paid workers making way for cheaper workers.
top reasons for choosing domestics are cheaper price (and better incentives) and the wish to buy American.
old data:
Exterior styling has bumped "the deal'' as the top reason consumers give for buying a General Motors product.
In 2003, 26.5 percent of those who bought a GM vehicle listed the deal as the top reason for their purchase, according to J.D. Power and Associates data. Performance followed, and exterior styling came in third.
But in 2007, that changed. Exterior styling led the rankings, with 12.6 percent of buyers listing it as the most influential reason to buy a GM car. Fuel economy and performance followed. The deal landed in fourth place
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb6674/is_/ai_n26640497
http://www.globalinsight.com/SDA/SDADetail15175.htm
Outlook and Implications
The automakers had an opportunity with the request to provide detail about their plans for federal funding to go in a new direction with their turnaround plans. What much of the country outside the "Rust Belt Midwest" does not understand (and
has not really had communicated to them) was that the domestic automakers began taking steps to put themselves on the way to recovery two years ago, before a confluence of events outside their control basically took away their revenue
streams. Plans were in place and being executed at GM and Ford to drastically revamp the way the automakers did business, the way they created vehicles, how they operated and interacted internationally, even what kinds of products were being scheduled for introduction in the United States. Those plans however were not effectively communicated outside the boundaries of the automotive press, it would seem, if the reactions of Congressional politicians and the American public at large are anything to judge by. Now that the bottom has fallen out of the conomy, taking new car sales to lows not seen in 26 years, the automakers' need to come to the only organisation in the land willing to lend money has
been perceived as the fault of the industry itself, despite the progress it had been making. So what the automakers have apparently done is finally taken those turnaround plans, tweaked them slightly to account for the fact that sales for the next several years are not going to be anywhere near what most people had thought they would be, and put them in a form to respond to Congress' request for business plans on viability. The double standard evident in the request itself is
staggering; for the comparably paltry sum of US$34 billion, the Detroit Three automakers have to jump through hoops not demanded of the financial industry, which has received hundreds of billions of dollars with no oversight, no testimony
before Congress on how it will be used, no request for reform or executive compensation cuts, and far from any guarantees that any of it will be seen again.
So the question then remains: has Congress' and the American public's question of "how will the money be spent" been answered? The answer is a resounding "maybe." There is little new information for an auto industry insider in any of the
business plans presented by the Detroit Three; but to an outsider, it may seem like a wealth of information, a treasure trove of data on which to measure the merits of the claims of continued viability of the Detroit Three. Of the plans, GM's is
probably the strongest in responding to the point-by-point requests that the original Pelosi/Reid letter outlined. GM's scenarios are conservative, but in line with IHS Global Insight's forecasts for potential market volumes going forward.
Ford's are a bit more aggressive, but like GM, it presents a variety of scenarios in terms of how the company would fare given varying levels of market health. But the one thing that the Chrysler plan does that neither the GM nor Ford plan do is
to say exactly how the federal loans would be spent.
Little info, Saturn had no new product in the pipeline. GM had already planned on phasing them out. Pontiac only had a few products in the pipeline and now we will see just a few performance products coming out.
Ah, I've seen this coming long ago.... although it's to my surprise GM hasnt planned on killing Pontiac yet. I can understand the cost of killing the whole GMC-Buick-Pontiac line, but at least Gm can keep GMC to take over Chevy's SUV and truck sales...
I've only heard 1 person EVER say they want GM or they'll walk, and that is Lemko.
The fall of GM will cause approx. 1 million people to lose their jobs. This will at least affect our economy,
I think that you miss the point that jobs are added too. Every other manufacturer is going to add workers or at least not lay them off. And suppliers that have tools to make parts for companies A, B, C, and GM, will simply make more of A, B, and C.
Also consider that if you took all the economic catastrophes from 1929 to today, and added the up how many millions and millions of jobs lost due to layoffs and industries closing what would you have? A total catastrophe right? But new jobs are created, at the same time.
If we protected industries and companies and never let them fail, like fertilizing weeds with the vegetables, then you'll end up with a weak economy. The economy and type of jobs in 1850 was not the same as in 1900, 1950, 1975, 2000, or today. The type of jobs and companies that exist must be allowed to die. All companies die. None of the Dow30 from 1900, are there today!
That's a huge stretch. :confuse:
Other than those in the midwest, it appears that on many sites the sentiment is running pretty against a bailout. I wonder how much consumer resentment might further deplete the sales of the (temporarily) bailed out D3? The general public is NOT happy about their tax dollars bailing all these companies at a time when they are suffering as well.
Does welfare, food stamps and college financial aid have to be repaid? No, and you don't need a plan to be a sucess either. Why not?
But Lets hold the providers of 2 million jobs to a much much higher standard. 25 billion in a 14 trillion dollar economy is one sixth of one percent of one year. That could never ever be overcome by our lousy country. Thats $100 out of $60,000. That would destroy me If I had to loan $100 and was making $60,000 a year.
Lets make a new law that any company less financially successful that Honda be dismantled, then maybe we could all be colonized.
Does welfare, food stamps and college financial aid have to be repaid? No, and you don't need a plan to be a sucess either. Why not?
Welfare families aren't trying to save their beleaguered manufacturing concern. They are trying to provide the three basics - food, clothing, and a roof over their heads - for themselves.
Let's not confuse family welfare with corporate welfare, OK? VERY different animals....
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Essentially, Ford provided further details on the direction it has been heading for years now. The path to profits will include ramping up electric car offerings, possibly selling off the Volvo brand, shedding dealerships, and closing more manufacturing plants.
But there's more to it than that, according to Wall Street Strategies analyst David Silver, who said Ford's approach is "arrogance, just plain and simple" and questioned the automaker's ability to pay down its debt load.
"The company mortgaged every asset it owned during 2006 and is selling off brands left and right," he said. "Ford has more cash on hand, but they have burnt through more cash than GM through the first three quarters of the year. It would be refreshing to see management take a worst case scenario approach instead of always being overly positive."
Actually some are trying to use the system so they can get extra money besides their incomes.
Some are trying to get money so they don't have to work to support the lifestyle they have chosen.
Some are in trouble and deserve help and work to help themselves.
Some are physically unable because of real health difficulties.
Some make bad decisions and then feel the consequences are not their fault so they deserve income others have earned just because, well, just because they feel they deserve other people's money.
In far too many cases around here the goal is to get extra money from someone else's work; income redistribution.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Link may be out of date but look for Dec 3, 2008. FYI Delorenzo is not exactly a GM supporter.
The point is that the powers that be in Washington, D.C., are just waking up to the fact that the U.S. automobile business is so ingrained and intertwined with the nation’s economy on the local and state levels that a collapse of the Detroit automakers would be a cataclysmic event that would send this nation - already teetering from a deep recession - into a full-on depression. And to pretend otherwise is just pure folly at this juncture.
This week, our lawmakers in Washington will be getting a double-shot of reality about the Detroit they were so quick to scoff at and criticize a couple of weeks ago. The fact that they spewed hoary stereotypes about the Detroit that existed more than a decade ago was painful to listen to and even more painful to watch.
But this time they will be introduced to the real American automobile companies.
American automobile companies that have been doing the heavy lifting and fundamental restructuring needed since 2000.
American automobile companies that are now on the cutting edge of advanced technological developments in fuel efficiency, safety and environmental responsibility.
American automobile companies that are building an impressive array of class-leading vehicles in all segments, with more on the way with each passing quarter.
“The Plan includes introducing this market’s smallest four-passenger vehicle, achieving higher fuel economy than the two-passenger Smart ForTwo, the most fuel-efficient non-hybrid vehicle in the U.S. market today.”
Say what? The Smart ForTwo gets 33/41 mpg and fits only two people. Could this be a production version of the Chevy Beat, which the company has been aloof about confirming?
The downside is that the blurb’s only time frame for producing this car was within a four-year plan to become more fuel-efficient. Would a 2013 Chevy Beat be a game-changer?
Um the government has been working hard to get people off the first 2 programs, to make people understand they need to support themselves. Since a person who may go to college but has never been an adult to earn $, maybe shouldn't be held back due to their parents lack of income, I can see aid to 18 year olds.
If your comparing GM and its employees to the needy, well the corporate jets, million $ salaries, and above average UAW wages, sure don't fit the description.
But Lets hold the providers of 2 million jobs to a much much higher standard.
No we are holding them to the same standard we face. The median income in this country is $40K - about $20/hr, we have no JobBank, about 25% of workers have no health insurance, the majority of us have no pension or retirement insurance to look forward to, and the self-employed have no paid vacation or sick days. WE are expected to do things right to be profitable or our companies lay us off or close.
The UAW and the GM execs expect the average U.S. worker who is poorer than they are, to feel sorry for them? The average poorer U.S. worker should subsidize the well to-do?
25 billion
You're too weeks behind. It's now about $37B they need for the next few months. Take a look at what GM, Ford and Chrysler are losing/month. How long does $25B last? Then what? Not 2 years until 2010 or 2011 when the savings kick-in.
a 14 trillion dollar economy is one sixth of one percent of one year.
So you're correcting prior statements that said GM is so large a part of the economy, that we'd be in trouble with its collapse? You're pointing out that the economy is so large we'll hardly miss their $60B in sales!
So the U.S. taxpayer just has to pay $3B/month to GM to cover their loses, until 2013? What a deal! :P
How about when GM goes bankrupt and must liquidate some successful car company buys the plans at auction for a few million $, and produces it? Maybe the buyer could buy a couple of the vacant GM plants for a bargain price, and build them there. That would cost the taxpayer $0, with the same result.
If you're looking for the short answer, here it is; the 2009 Cadillac CTS-V is undeniably faster, more nimble and between $27,000 and $32,000 less expensive than the BMW M5 it was designed to beat. The M5's price/performance ratio really penalizes it in this comparison.
Is the CTS-V really better than the C63 AMG? Well, once you look at the score cards, you'll find one 1st-place score in the M5's column (earned in our evaluation category), three 1sts for the CTS-V (features, performance and price), and two for the C63 (editors' personal and recommended picks). The winner would seem a forgone conclusion then. But have a look at the 2nd- and 3rd-place scores.
The C63 snatched four 2nd-place scores to the CTS-V's three 3rds. Because of the way we weight the final scores, the Cadillac ekes out a 1.6-point margin over the Mercedes-Benz. We've declared such close scores an effective tie in the past, but the Cadillac's dominance in measured performance tests plus its uncommon comfort, comprehensive list of features and even best observed fuel economy of this trio combine to earn it our fullest endorsement as the winner of this comparison.
"Sport Sedan Standard of the World" now wears a Cadillac wreath and crest