When you throw out these figures of $2 billion to close up 400 Saturn dealers, I never hear mention of how exactly GM's franchise agreements with the Saturn dealers differ from those with the other franchises. They have trumpeted the "differences" several times in press releases over the years, but have never spelled out what the "differences" were. However, they ALWAYS purport that these differences make it easier to close up the Saturn shop than to close up other brands.
I would very much like to know if it would REALLY take $2 billion to shutter Saturn.
The Tennessee misconception is that some here are not aware that Spring Hill is no longer the Saturn plant, it is now just another generic GM plant.
So who is with me to start a pot for lemko to visit Detroit and get a job as their new front man for advertising? I agree, this is just the sort of thing GM needs, a grassroots type of ad campaign showing people who genuinely like their GM cars, have had a trouble-free ownership experience, and would consider nothing else for their next car.
We need michaell too - he can give Saturn advertising a boost. 3 in one family! :-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Nor do you hear about blown head gaskets, bad intake manifolds, misaligned body panels, and electrical gremlins etc.
Funny, I never had any of those problems with my Park Ave. Geeze, why am I so lucky? I took my Park Ave from Philadelphia to Canada and back in '06 without any trouble. I drive it to and from the Harrisburg area during the Carlisle car show season without any worries. The winters are rough on a new car around here with the crazy drivers and ocean's worth of salt they use on the streets. I'll be bringing the DTS out when the weather improves.
Those experts will change their forecast of 13MM units very soon. Here's some further evidence that more buyers will be out of the market for a new car.
On Monday alone, companies across the employment spectrum announced about 62,000 job cuts in the United States and around the world, a stark sign that businesses are enduring a painful, protracted downturn.
Monday’s toll included 20,000 cuts at Caterpillar, the world’s largest maker of construction and mining machinery; 8,000 jobs at the wireless provider Sprint Nextel; 7,000 workers at Home Depot, and 8,000 from the expected merger of the pharmaceutical makers Pfizer and Wyeth. The beleaguered automaker General Motors announced that it would cut shifts at plants in Michigan and Ohio, where the downturn has hit hardest, eliminating some 2,000 jobs.
And in Europe, the banking and insurance group ING said it would cut 7,000 jobs; the electronics company Philips, 6,000; and the steel maker Corus, 3,500 worldwide.
“We’re now into the danger zone,” said Brian Bethune, chief United States financial economist at IHS Global Insight. “It really becomes pernicious because the uncertainty increases, corporate confidence is badly battered, and you get these severe measures being taken.”
Obama Directs Regulators to Tighten Auto Standards
Article Tools Sponsored By By JOHN M. BRODER Published: January 26, 2009
WASHINGTON — President Obama directed federal regulators on Monday to move swiftly on an application by California and 13 other states to set strict limits on greenhouse gases from cars and trucks. He also ordered the Transportation Department to begin drawing up rules imposing higher fuel-economy standards on cars and light trucks.
Looks like the Lamdas aren't moving so well. No surprise for the G5 but I thought the Cobalt might still sell.
General Motors News GM cuts 2,000 more jobs in Michigan, Ohio
General Motors says it is eliminating shifts at its Delta Township, Michigan, and Lordstown, Ohio, factories as a result of weak demand for new cars in North America. The eliminated shifts mean that about 2,000 workers will be affected. GM says it is also idling production at a further 10 plants across North America during the first or second quarter of 2009.
About 1,200 workers at the Delta Township plant will be laid off indefinitely. The plant produces the Lamdba-platfrom GM SUVs, including the Buick Enclave, GMC Acadia and Saturn Outlook. Workers will alternate shifts until April 6 when they will be laid off.
Another 800 workers at the Lordstown plant will lose their jobs, too. That plant, which builds the Chevrolet Cobalt and Pontiac G5, will be cut back to just one shift.
“We have hope things will turn and change,” UAW Local 1714 president Dave Green told the Detroit News. “This is no fault of our own. People are not purchasing cars right now.”
GM will temporarily idle production for additional weeks during the first and second quarters of this year at ten plants, including Spring Hill, Tennessee; Fairfax, Kansas; Arlington, Texas; Lansing/Grand River, Michigan; Orion Township, Michigan; Hamtramck, Michigan; Shreveport, Louisiana; Wilmington, Delware; Wentsville, Missouri; and Oshawa, Ontario.
As I said earlier about the relentless negatives...
As far as blown head gaskets, they are rare as hens' teeth on a 3800 so I don't believe that for a second other than someone's having driven a car with low coolant and overheating the motor to toast.
All the body panels on my 3 leSabres have been well aligned. They have the normal gap for cars in the 80s and 90s. IIRC it was Toyota having trouble with misalignment on product from Georgetown when they introduced the redesigned Camry and with the Avalon earlier.
>I'll be bringing the DTS out when the weather improves.
I'm ready for car cruise ins to start again. I have a few months to go here in Ohio. Maybe if we go to Nashville at spring break they'll have cruise in season there.
There are a lot of the Park Avenue cars such as you have running around here. They show the reliability and durability of GM products when given proper care.
What I don't understand about Saturn is that here is a brand that is quite attractive to the right foreign buyer, I am thinking either a Chinese company looking for a way into the U.S. market, or even better a European company looking for a way BACK into our market.
Perhaps the problem other than the lousy economy in general is the fact that few Saturns are unique. You'd be buying a brand that is a bunch of rebadges of other GM products. How do you disentangle yourself from THAT?
Someone needs to tell me how the '85 Merkur and the Contours got on the list. The Merkur was a great car, only the Mercury dealers didn't know how to sell a true European road car. I owned three Contours. It was a Porsche designed 6 cylinder motor and that thing would rev all day long. And a great handling car with great road dynamics. The problem was the American public didn't want to pay for performance with a car that had a bad back seat.
These cars had their marketing issues, but not embarrassing cars by any stretch.....
The scenario you bring up has more to do with having too many dealers as opposed to too many brands. You still have to factor in the fact that the buyer may not like the "Art and Science" look. If Caddy was all that GM had, then the customer is lost for good.
The biggest thing GM did to grab market share was to dump cars on the rental car fleets, something they have done a good job rectifying in the last 3 yrs.
I agree with you - the Contours and the Merkur were more marketing failures than product failures. Not at all in the same league with the Vega, Citation, Mustang II and Alliance....
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
I think the Merkur and Contour were on the list due to lack of sales and the Contour being to small. I had a 98 SVT Contour and while it was a great car, and yes that 2.5 Duratec loved to rev and handled great for a FWD car, but the backseat was tight and they weren't cheap.
the Mazda 3 competitor? - Astra - no laughing here actually, it's an adequate vehicle, just not well-thought-out for the American market, where it was never meant to be sold.
the Audi A4 or BMW-3 competitor? - Well, no laughing here either, the CTS, one of the General's best cars right now. It doesn't WIN, but it does make a serious effort to compete.
the Jetta competitor? - We're back to the Cobalt and massive laughter. the CRV competitor? - Equinox, which is even funnier.
There's the problem...the best GM seems to ever be able to do is adequacy. Adequacy isn't going to cut it, especially if they're looking for their dealers to get as many sales as their competitors.
The two items are related..having too many brands and too many dealers that is. Mostly you have the brands because the dealers want them...that's why Pontiac and Chevy compete now, because one dealer wanted a Chevy competitor, but didn't want to sell Chevy just like the GM dealer a mile down the road.
Reducing the number of dealers should help quite a bit with reducing the number of brands, and also reducing the NEED for so many. GM could get things done with Chevy, Caddy, and Saturn, and they could still do without Saturn. Pontiac, Buick, and GMC are entirely unnecessary. Chevy SS replaces Pontiac. High-end Chevys replace Buicks. Laredo trims replace GMC.
Everybody from Japan to Toyota to Chrysler have basically shut down their plants for all of January and announced further shutdown in Feb and March yet the large SUV's are selling?
General Motors plans to slightly boost production at its Arlington truck assembly plant beginning in March even as it cuts production and jobs at other plants.
The Arlington plant, which builds full-size sport utility vehicles, will boost production by about two dozen vehicles a day beginning March 9 while continuing to work two 8-hour shifts each day, GM spokeswoman Wendi Sabo said Monday.
The plant will also now be in operation the first week of March, a time when it had previously been scheduled to be shut down, and the second week of July, which is normally a scheduled vacation week. The plant will still be closed the week of June 29-July 3.
Dealership rationalization was something General Motors was looking at well before the economy went pear-shaped. GM still has more than 6,300 dealerships in the U.S., and it is even more important now to start shedding some of that financial burden. That is why The General told dealers at the NADA conference that it plans to get rid of 1,600 dealerships by 2012.
GM's initial viability plan to Congress proposed an eventual reduction to 4,000 dealerships. No one knows yet, though, how GM plans to do that. GM said it will explain the dealer elimination plan in the follow-up viability plan it submits to Congress on February 17. Said one GM dealer, "They basically said, 'We're looking for strong dealers, and if you're not a strong dealer, you better evaluate your options."
GM did say that 400 dealers per year being shut isn't a firm number, simply a target. Nevertheless, dealers are none too happy. Some dealers say GM is using GMAC to force dealers out by setting capital requirements beyond a dealer's reach. GM says it has no intention of using GMAC in such a way. When the time comes, dealership liquidation will be be judged market by market, and based on a number of factors including age, location, volume, capitalization and customer satisfaction. While the plan will obviously save GM money in the long term and make it more efficient, in the short term it is going to cost GM a fortune to close 1,600 locations. [Source: Automotive News, sub req'd, Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty]
One of Cadillac's most anticipated models is being delayed one year.
The 2010 CTS coupe had been scheduled to go into production this summer. Instead, the car will go into production during the summer of 2010.
"We made a few changes to the overall portfolio," said Joanne Krell, a GM spokeswoman. "Obviously we are in a challenging economic time, and one of the changes is to move the coupe back a year. Instead of coming out this summer, it will come out next summer."
The CTS coupe concept was one of the most talked-about models at the 2008 Detroit auto show. AutoWeek, a sibling publication of Automotive News, named it best concept at the show.
The CTS coupe had been part of a three-product blitz scheduled for Cadillac this year.
The 2010 CTS wagon remains on schedule for spring sales, as does the redesigned 2010 SRX crossover this summer.
Two automakers, Cadillac and Honda, announced today that production of their high-performance roadsters will come to a close during 2009. Cadillac says that production of the Chevrolet Corvette-based XLR will cease in March or April and Honda confirmed earlier reports that 2009 will be the last model year for the slow-selling S2000.
The Bowling Green, Kentucky-built XLR’s production cessation means that about 40 workers will lose their jobs. Cadillac sold just 1,250 XLRs last year, the model’s fifth year, even though it had been subject to a minor facelift.
Is this even possible? I guess the future is definitely electric powered then. The only vehicles that could be sold are electrics and plug in Hybrids on one side of the average and work trucks on the other. Unless work trucks die away? Perhaps the mule will be brought back.
California is driving the next phase of the national energy and climate-change debate. Although the state's proposal doesn't specifically address fuel efficiency, auto makers say it could force them to reach a mileage target of nearly 44 mpg. The top-selling U.S. car, the Toyota Camry, gets 25 mpg in combined city and highway driving, according to the EPA figures reported to consumers.
Hopefully Obama will sit down and listen and see exactly what this would entail. I just cannot imagine the citizens of California really wanting to pay the extra money to reach 44 mpg average. Yes a few would be happy with buying hybrid compacts but everyone in the state?
Put me down as one who kinda liked the Contour and the Mystique, too. I thought they were decent looking cars, and seemed pretty well-appointed. As for their size, I think they were about what a compact car should be...only problem is, that class of car was about to grow quickly.
When the car was introduced in 1995, it was about the same size as a Chevy Corsica, Plymouth Acclaim, Nissan Altima, or Honda Accord. The Camry was a little bigger though. But that same year, Chrysler introduced the Stratus/Cirrus sedans, and the Plymouth Breeze was on the horizon. Then in 1997 the Chevy Malibu came out, which was much roomier inside than the Corsica. Plus, the 1997 Camry and then the 1998 Accord and 1998 Altima, and suddenly the Contour/Mystique were getting dwarfed.
The Contour/Mystique essentially filled in for the Tempo/Topaz, which for the most part were low-end, bottom feeder cars bought by people who just wanted a cheap, no-frills car. People probably got used to the compact Ford coming in at that price point, and then balked when the Contour came out, and saw its higher price tag. Nevermind the fact that it was also a much nicer car!
I guess it's possible that they might use the raw EPA numbers rather than the numbers published on the window sticker? Still, 44 mpg combined, even with raw numbers, is awfully high. I have an excel spreadsheet that I downloaded a few years ago, that lists all the EPA stats from 2003. The only cars that were breaking 44 mpg combined were Diesel versions of the Beetle/Golf/Jetta, the stick shift version of the Toyota Echo, an economy version of the Civic that had a window sticker of 36/44 (raw #'s were 40.2/56.2), the Civic Hybrid, Prius, and Insight.
A fleet average is just like CAFE, means they need to sell a mix of vehicles so that the average FE of all of them is around that figure. Which means GM had really better get its act together regarding two-mode hybrids, dump the "mild" junk, and get moving on the Cruze and the TDI stuff.
Maybe that 40k Volt isn't such a bad idea after all. Selling some of those will bring the fleet average up significantly.
What I don't understand about Saturn is that here is a brand that is quite attractive to the right foreign buyer, I am thinking either a Chinese company looking for a way into the U.S. market, or even better a European company looking for a way BACK into our market.
Well the problem here: most of Saturn's cars are aleady sold in China as Opels, and a European company won't buy Saturn (a brand with no catchet) when they can wait a bit and purchase the more famous Opel (remember that almost all Saturns now are rebadged Opels).
Plus China can't sell any of it's local made products as none of them can pass US safety standard just yet.
OTOH california seem to be the sanctuary of "green" wannabes, where they always scream demanding fuel efficient, enviro friendly vehicles, at the same time insisting that demand is huuuuge, when in reality they're no more than a tiny cadre of fanatics.
Remember the EV1? California started it as far as I know. Then they insisted on Toyota EVs. Both failed, miserably at best. I really don;t understand their thinking.
What do you think might happen if the automakers decide not to sell new cars in California? Just decide, from an economic perspective, that it's not worth it to develop the technology to meet the standards.
New car dealers fail in record numbers. And, since many cities rely upon sales tax revenue generated by car dealers for a big portion of their budgets, they start cutting services.
The state is already facing a $42 billion budget shortfall ... has anyone in the state thought about the economic impact of this decision?
What do you think might happen if the automakers decide not to sell new cars in California? Just decide, from an economic perspective, that it's not worth it to develop the technology to meet the standards.
Funny that would get brought up. I actually made that suggestion about 6-7 years ago! My thinking was that the California gov't was just getting its nose too out-of-joint, and if the auto makers refused to buckle down to their demands, maybe CA would give in.
But now, it seems like CA is coming up with some much higher hurdles to jump. And you might be right, Michaell...it could get to the point that they force the auto makers to pull out of that market.
I guess CA is about 10% of the US market? If the technology is too expensive, it might just be cheaper to abandon that market. I wonder though, what kind of legal consequences might result?
I guess CA is about 10% of the US market? If the technology is too expensive, it might just be cheaper to abandon that market. I wonder though, what kind of legal consequences might result?
I think the CA dealer's left holding the bag would be screaming, but I wouldn't blame the manufactures wanting to tell states like CA where to go.
michael, were talking about californian green zealots. There's no use talking logic and sense with them. Remember that we're talking about the very same people who were furious with the constant pollution in their state, while at the same time keep adding more cars to their homes. Their Hollywood represenatives do no good as well. Their motto "save the environment while we buy more Escalades and Hummers" is widely accepted as enviro supportive in California. Enlish tanslation: hypocrites. :P :P
Doubt that any entity in any country in the world is interested in a "nothing" brand such as Saturn with no heritage, success. If, if, Saturn designers/engineers and management team had launched at least an equal to Civic/Corolla right out of the box and THEN had many years of parity, maybe beating Civic, THEN, Saturn might have some value.
Would imagine, hope(?), that GM planning experts (an oxymoron?) are looking at sale of Buick brand. Chinese have liked their Buick versions for many years. Maybe a Chinese big car company would pay well for exclusive ownership of the brand and rights to sell anywhere in the world. A win-win situation for both GM and the Chinese.
Remember that IBM sold their Think Pad to Chinese Lenovo. People in US can now buy the Lenovo laptop. Similarly, die-hard Buick fans in US could still buy Buicks made in China and imported to US. Some recent Chinese Buicks even have better styling than the US versions. Just as Japanese have shown for a number of decades that they can style cars better than US brands, so too will Chinese have better styling.
Having grown up in CA during the 70's and 80's, I remember the days where the smog was pretty bad, so I do understand the need to reduce emissions.
Sometimes, however, CARB can shoot itself in the foot. Remember the edict that 5% of all cars sold in the state by the year 2000 had to be zero emissions (ie, electric)? That didn't get too far - yeah, there were the odd EV1's and electric RAV4's sold, but certainly not in great numbers.
I read a piece on-line somewhere that talked about the impact of the new rules ... apparently, if you sell less than 60K new vehicles per year, you are exempt. And so are used cars (anything with over 7000 miles on it). There was a quote in the article from a big 3 rep stating that they might just drive the cars to CA instead of shipping them and selling them all as used.
I'm all for states' rights in some areas, but this isn't one of them. I think it makes sense to have one national set of regulations regarding emissions.
Right reason wrong methods. Alas, the greenies simply pushed too far with CARB. Imagine California becoming a carless state in the future. Well, at least that'll help fix the pollution problems. :P They need a set of strict rules, yes, but sensible one that is. Perhaps they can start by changing governor? I mean Arnie the terminator is a bad public face, talking about protecting environment while collecting Hummers at the same time. :P
Of course, what everyone is ignoring in this little discussion is that 13 states have already signed on to follow California's standards, representing 40-50% of all U.S. sales, IIRC. Do you suppose automakers will just want to give all 14 states a miss? My guess is ones like Honda are already not far off the target emissions - Honda already meets the CAFE2020 standards (remember, CAFE2020 is based on raw EPA numbers, which takes out its teeth and replaces them with raw gums).
All 3 domestic automakers combined sold less than 18% of all new vehicles sold in California last year, so if those 3 chose to withdraw I'm not sure it would be noticed that much....
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Maybe the next big quake will sever off the whole coast and they can start over in California (err, Nevada). I can't imagine enough green people in California to override the common needs of the masses for cheap transportation and pass this legislation. Perhaps they need outlaw cars and build a rail system? Even if they are willing to pay what requires the auto people to compete for that market.
Their motto "save the environment while we buy more Escalades and Hummers" is widely accepted as enviro supportive in California. Enlish tanslation: hypocrites.
Actually, it's a broad assumption to think that the eco-weenies and the gang-bangin rap stars that drive the Slades and HUMMER's are on the same wavelength when it comes to the environment. Sure, maybe there are a few in hollywood who get carted around in these blingbling-mobile/Schoolbusses, but I remember a majority of them hopped on the hybrid bandwagon and ate up the Priuses and Escape Hybrids like gangbusters
Recent issue of Autoweek has picture of dark red 2010 Buick LaCrosse. Of course styling is subjective, in eyes of beholder. Anyway, to this observer, it is dumpy, ungainly. Also, stylists/management made a mistake with a low-appearing roof line and small windows in terms of seniors target market for this car.
According to some seniors, they like big windows, lots of visibiliy. One senior couple I know were interested in a Chrysler 300 when it came out, then took a test drive, and did not buy the car strictly because of small windows.
A fleet average is just like CAFE, means they need to sell a mix of vehicles so that the average FE of all of them is around that figure. Which means GM had really better get its act together regarding two-mode hybrids, dump the "mild" junk, and get moving on the Cruze and the TDI stuff.
Not sure how the California mix works but the US is not corporate average anymore. It is US fleet average. The requirements are by footprint calculation. So each footprint is assigned a minimum MPG to meet. So if someone only wants to build small cars they will probably have to get 55 mpg or something like that (assuming 44 mpg average). If they only build large SUVS they probably have to get 35 mpg or something like that.
Do not worry about the rich and hollywood crowd. They will still be able to buy what they want.
The California rules through 2016 would apply only to automakers that averaged at least 60,000 vehicles sold in the state over three years. After 2016, the limit might drop to 4,000 vehicles a year.
Because California's limits would apply nationwide, Detroit's automakers and the three largest Japanese firms would have to meet the standards, but companies such as Volkswagen, Hyundai -- and perhaps BMW -- would not. The rules also would not apply to new competitors, such as automakers from China or India.
Only two of the eight worst gas guzzlers listed by the Environmental Protection Agency would fall under the rules in any state, because small luxury brands are excluded. "A patchwork regime -- with its exemptions, loopholes and unintended consequences -- would only exacerbate the economic turmoil in the auto sector, for little to no environmental or energy security benefit," the National Automobile Dealers Association said last week.
So if someone only wants to build small cars they will probably have to get 55 mpg or something like that (assuming 44 mpg average). If they only build large SUVS they probably have to get 35 mpg or something like that.
That's actually a lot more fair...GM could focus on their high-profit trucks and stop selling Cobalts and Aveos. Under the old CAFE standard they couldn't, which led to selling small cars at a loss just to bring the corporate fleet average down.
Perhaps Obama can throw some money to our domestic industry this way. Instead of GM paying for the job banks the government will?
Thousands of Japanese carworkers will soon draw part of their pay from the government under a scheme to prevent redundancies at companies hit by production cuts.
Mazda and Mitsubishi Motors, respectively Japan's fifth and sixth biggest carmakers, have applied for the employment adjustment grants, according to industry officials, and others may follow soon.
The grants are available to struggling manufacturers of all types but the particularly sharp downturn in the car sector, combined with a recent expansion of the programme, has made carmakers eligible for large levels of support.
Mitsubishi, for example, plans to build passenger cars at its main plant in Okayama prefecture on just seven days next month. On the other 14 weekdays, the plant's 3,000 full-time workers will stay at home but receive 85 per cent of their normal wages, half of which will be paid by the government.
Japan's carmakers have been hit hard by the global slump in demand. Toyota, the world's biggest carmaker, is eliminating at least 6,000 contract jobs in Japan and is understood to be looking at ways to reduce its full-time workforce overseas, including in the US and Britain. The company yesterday ruled out "involuntary" job cuts, suggesting any reductions would be accomplished through attrition and buy-outs.
My guess is ones like Honda are already not far off the target emissions - Honda already meets the CAFE2020 standards (remember, CAFE2020 is based on raw EPA numbers, which takes out its teeth and replaces them with raw gums).
Still, CAFE202 calls for a 35 mpg standard. That's a long way from 44 mpg. FWIW, I just pulled down the 2009 stats from the EPA's website. The following vehicles broke 44 mpg raw combined in the EPA tests: PRIUS: 65.8 CIVIC HYBRID: 58.4 ALTIMA HYBRID: 46.7 CAMRY HYBRID: 45.9 JETTA SPORTWAGEN (manual): 45.5 JETTA SPORTWAGEN (auto): 45.0 ESCAPE HYBRID FWD: 44.2 TRIBUTE HYBRID 2WD: 44.2 MARINER HYBRID FWD: 44.2
So at this point, the only way to break 44 mpg is with a hybrid or Diesel.
California might not miss it too much if the Detroit 3 pulled out of the market. But I think trying to get a fleet to average 44 mpg is going to put a hurting on a lot more than just Detroit!
Had the auto makers spent their money improving CAFE numbers instead of paying lawyers to fight them they'd be loads closer to the new targets. They did the same thing on safety features, fighting air bags and such until they realized they had a marketing tool. Suddenly they were finding all sorts of new places to put air bags.
Meanwhile what are they thinking? They aren't going to decide on Saturn for three years or more? It's this kind of thinking that has me leaning to believing that GM won't be around in three years.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Comments
I would very much like to know if it would REALLY take $2 billion to shutter Saturn.
The Tennessee misconception is that some here are not aware that Spring Hill is no longer the Saturn plant, it is now just another generic GM plant.
So who is with me to start a pot for lemko to visit Detroit and get a job as their new front man for advertising? I agree, this is just the sort of thing GM needs, a grassroots type of ad campaign showing people who genuinely like their GM cars, have had a trouble-free ownership experience, and would consider nothing else for their next car.
We need michaell too - he can give Saturn advertising a boost. 3 in one family! :-)
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Funny, I never had any of those problems with my Park Ave. Geeze, why am I so lucky? I took my Park Ave from Philadelphia to Canada and back in '06 without any trouble. I drive it to and from the Harrisburg area during the Carlisle car show season without any worries. The winters are rough on a new car around here with the crazy drivers and ocean's worth of salt they use on the streets. I'll be bringing the DTS out when the weather improves.
On Monday alone, companies across the employment spectrum announced about 62,000 job cuts in the United States and around the world, a stark sign that businesses are enduring a painful, protracted downturn.
Monday’s toll included 20,000 cuts at Caterpillar, the world’s largest maker of construction and mining machinery; 8,000 jobs at the wireless provider Sprint Nextel; 7,000 workers at Home Depot, and 8,000 from the expected merger of the pharmaceutical makers Pfizer and Wyeth. The beleaguered automaker General Motors announced that it would cut shifts at plants in Michigan and Ohio, where the downturn has hit hardest, eliminating some 2,000 jobs.
And in Europe, the banking and insurance group ING said it would cut 7,000 jobs; the electronics company Philips, 6,000; and the steel maker Corus, 3,500 worldwide.
“We’re now into the danger zone,” said Brian Bethune, chief United States financial economist at IHS Global Insight. “It really becomes pernicious because the uncertainty increases, corporate confidence is badly battered, and you get these severe measures being taken.”
Regards,
OW
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN M. BRODER
Published: January 26, 2009
WASHINGTON — President Obama directed federal regulators on Monday to move swiftly on an application by California and 13 other states to set strict limits on greenhouse gases from cars and trucks. He also ordered the Transportation Department to begin drawing up rules imposing higher fuel-economy standards on cars and light trucks.
40 percent improvement in gas mileage
Uh Oh! Gulp!
Regards,
OW
General Motors News
GM cuts 2,000 more jobs in Michigan, Ohio
General Motors says it is eliminating shifts at its Delta Township, Michigan, and Lordstown, Ohio, factories as a result of weak demand for new cars in North America. The eliminated shifts mean that about 2,000 workers will be affected. GM says it is also idling production at a further 10 plants across North America during the first or second quarter of 2009.
About 1,200 workers at the Delta Township plant will be laid off indefinitely. The plant produces the Lamdba-platfrom GM SUVs, including the Buick Enclave, GMC Acadia and Saturn Outlook. Workers will alternate shifts until April 6 when they will be laid off.
Another 800 workers at the Lordstown plant will lose their jobs, too. That plant, which builds the Chevrolet Cobalt and Pontiac G5, will be cut back to just one shift.
“We have hope things will turn and change,” UAW Local 1714 president Dave Green told the Detroit News. “This is no fault of our own. People are not purchasing cars right now.”
GM will temporarily idle production for additional weeks during the first and second quarters of this year at ten plants, including Spring Hill, Tennessee; Fairfax, Kansas; Arlington, Texas; Lansing/Grand River, Michigan; Orion Township, Michigan; Hamtramck, Michigan; Shreveport, Louisiana; Wilmington, Delware; Wentsville, Missouri; and Oshawa, Ontario.
Regards,
OW
As far as blown head gaskets, they are rare as hens' teeth on a 3800 so I don't believe that for a second other than someone's having driven a car with low coolant and overheating the motor to toast.
All the body panels on my 3 leSabres have been well aligned. They have the normal gap for cars in the 80s and 90s. IIRC it was Toyota having trouble with misalignment on product from Georgetown when they introduced the redesigned Camry and with the Avalon earlier.
>I'll be bringing the DTS out when the weather improves.
I'm ready for car cruise ins to start again. I have a few months to go here in Ohio. Maybe if we go to Nashville at spring break they'll have cruise in season there.
There are a lot of the Park Avenue cars such as you have running around here. They show the reliability and durability of GM products when given proper care.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
GM still needs its PRODUCT to advertise its products.
CTS - ok. Malibu - is all right. Where is:
the Fit competitor?
the Civic competitor?
the Mazda 3 competitor?
the Audi A4 or BMW-3 competitor?
the Jetta competitor?
the CRV competitor?
Perhaps the problem other than the lousy economy in general is the fact that few Saturns are unique. You'd be buying a brand that is a bunch of rebadges of other GM products. How do you disentangle yourself from THAT?
I think we are all paying for this, by loaning them money. Paying for GM to restructure itself. I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
These cars had their marketing issues, but not embarrassing cars by any stretch.....
The biggest thing GM did to grab market share was to dump cars on the rental car fleets, something they have done a good job rectifying in the last 3 yrs.
the Civic competitor? - Cobalt...LOLOL
the Mazda 3 competitor? - Astra - no laughing here actually, it's an adequate vehicle, just not well-thought-out for the American market, where it was never meant to be sold.
the Audi A4 or BMW-3 competitor? - Well, no laughing here either, the CTS, one of the General's best cars right now. It doesn't WIN, but it does make a serious effort to compete.
the Jetta competitor? - We're back to the Cobalt and massive laughter.
the CRV competitor? - Equinox, which is even funnier.
There's the problem...the best GM seems to ever be able to do is adequacy. Adequacy isn't going to cut it, especially if they're looking for their dealers to get as many sales as their competitors.
Reducing the number of dealers should help quite a bit with reducing the number of brands, and also reducing the NEED for so many. GM could get things done with Chevy, Caddy, and Saturn, and they could still do without Saturn. Pontiac, Buick, and GMC are entirely unnecessary. Chevy SS replaces Pontiac. High-end Chevys replace Buicks. Laredo trims replace GMC.
General Motors plans to slightly boost production at its Arlington truck
assembly plant beginning in March even as it cuts production and jobs at
other plants.
The Arlington plant, which builds full-size sport utility vehicles, will
boost production by about two dozen vehicles a day beginning March 9
while continuing to work two 8-hour shifts each day, GM spokeswoman
Wendi Sabo said Monday.
The plant will also now be in operation the first week of March, a time
when it had previously been scheduled to be shut down, and the second
week of July, which is normally a scheduled vacation week. The plant
will still be closed the week of June 29-July 3.
well before the economy went pear-shaped. GM still has more than 6,300
dealerships in the U.S., and it is even more important now to start
shedding some of that financial burden. That is why The General told
dealers at the NADA conference that it plans to get rid of 1,600
dealerships by 2012.
GM's initial viability plan to Congress proposed an eventual reduction
to 4,000 dealerships. No one knows yet, though, how GM plans to do that.
GM said it will explain the dealer elimination plan in the follow-up
viability plan it submits to Congress on February 17. Said one GM
dealer, "They basically said, 'We're looking for strong dealers, and if
you're not a strong dealer, you better evaluate your options."
GM did say that 400 dealers per year being shut isn't a firm number,
simply a target. Nevertheless, dealers are none too happy. Some dealers
say GM is using GMAC to force dealers out by setting capital
requirements beyond a dealer's reach. GM says it has no intention of
using GMAC in such a way. When the time comes, dealership liquidation
will be be judged market by market, and based on a number of factors
including age, location, volume, capitalization and customer
satisfaction. While the plan will obviously save GM money in the long
term and make it more efficient, in the short term it is going to cost
GM a fortune to close 1,600 locations. [Source: Automotive News, sub
req'd, Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty]
The 2010 CTS coupe had been scheduled to go into production this summer.
Instead, the car will go into production during the summer of 2010.
"We made a few changes to the overall portfolio," said Joanne Krell, a
GM spokeswoman. "Obviously we are in a challenging economic time, and
one of the changes is to move the coupe back a year. Instead of coming
out this summer, it will come out next summer."
The CTS coupe concept was one of the most talked-about models at the
2008 Detroit auto show. AutoWeek, a sibling publication of Automotive
News, named it best concept at the show.
The CTS coupe had been part of a three-product blitz scheduled for
Cadillac this year.
The 2010 CTS wagon remains on schedule for spring sales, as does the
redesigned 2010 SRX crossover this summer.
Two automakers, Cadillac and Honda, announced today that production of their high-performance roadsters will come to a close during 2009. Cadillac says that production of the Chevrolet Corvette-based XLR will cease in March or April and Honda confirmed earlier reports that 2009 will be the last model year for the slow-selling S2000.
The Bowling Green, Kentucky-built XLR’s production cessation means that about 40 workers will lose their jobs. Cadillac sold just 1,250 XLRs last year, the model’s fifth year, even though it had been subject to a minor facelift.
California is driving the next phase of the national energy and climate-change debate. Although the state's proposal doesn't specifically address fuel efficiency, auto makers say it could force them to reach a mileage target of nearly 44 mpg. The top-selling U.S. car, the Toyota Camry, gets 25 mpg in combined city and highway driving, according to the EPA figures reported to consumers.
Hopefully Obama will sit down and listen and see exactly what this would entail. I just cannot imagine the citizens of California really wanting to pay the extra money to reach 44 mpg average. Yes a few would be happy with buying hybrid compacts but everyone in the state?
When the car was introduced in 1995, it was about the same size as a Chevy Corsica, Plymouth Acclaim, Nissan Altima, or Honda Accord. The Camry was a little bigger though. But that same year, Chrysler introduced the Stratus/Cirrus sedans, and the Plymouth Breeze was on the horizon. Then in 1997 the Chevy Malibu came out, which was much roomier inside than the Corsica. Plus, the 1997 Camry and then the 1998 Accord and 1998 Altima, and suddenly the Contour/Mystique were getting dwarfed.
The Contour/Mystique essentially filled in for the Tempo/Topaz, which for the most part were low-end, bottom feeder cars bought by people who just wanted a cheap, no-frills car. People probably got used to the compact Ford coming in at that price point, and then balked when the Contour came out, and saw its higher price tag. Nevermind the fact that it was also a much nicer car!
Maybe that 40k Volt isn't such a bad idea after all. Selling some of those will bring the fleet average up significantly.
I've told them the Lambdas aren't gonna sell well for long and they won't listen. Well, the hard evidence is here now/ :P
Well the problem here: most of Saturn's cars are aleady sold in China as Opels, and a European company won't buy Saturn (a brand with no catchet) when they can wait a bit and purchase the more famous Opel (remember that almost all Saturns now are rebadged Opels).
Plus China can't sell any of it's local made products as none of them can pass US safety standard just yet.
OTOH california seem to be the sanctuary of "green" wannabes, where they always scream demanding fuel efficient, enviro friendly vehicles, at the same time insisting that demand is huuuuge, when in reality they're no more than a tiny cadre of fanatics.
Remember the EV1? California started it as far as I know. Then they insisted on Toyota EVs. Both failed, miserably at best. I really don;t understand their thinking.
New car dealers fail in record numbers. And, since many cities rely upon sales tax revenue generated by car dealers for a big portion of their budgets, they start cutting services.
The state is already facing a $42 billion budget shortfall ... has anyone in the state thought about the economic impact of this decision?
Funny that would get brought up. I actually made that suggestion about 6-7 years ago! My thinking was that the California gov't was just getting its nose too out-of-joint, and if the auto makers refused to buckle down to their demands, maybe CA would give in.
But now, it seems like CA is coming up with some much higher hurdles to jump. And you might be right, Michaell...it could get to the point that they force the auto makers to pull out of that market.
I guess CA is about 10% of the US market? If the technology is too expensive, it might just be cheaper to abandon that market. I wonder though, what kind of legal consequences might result?
I think the CA dealer's left holding the bag would be screaming, but I wouldn't blame the manufactures wanting to tell states like CA where to go.
Enlish tanslation: hypocrites. :P :P
Would imagine, hope(?), that GM planning experts (an oxymoron?) are looking at sale of Buick brand. Chinese have liked their Buick versions for many years. Maybe a Chinese big car company would pay well for exclusive ownership of the brand and rights to sell anywhere in the world. A win-win situation for both GM and the Chinese.
Remember that IBM sold their Think Pad to Chinese Lenovo. People in US can now buy the Lenovo laptop. Similarly, die-hard Buick fans in US could still buy Buicks made in China and imported to US. Some recent Chinese Buicks even have better styling than the US versions. Just as Japanese have shown for a number of decades that they can style cars better than US brands, so too will Chinese have better styling.
Sometimes, however, CARB can shoot itself in the foot. Remember the edict that 5% of all cars sold in the state by the year 2000 had to be zero emissions (ie, electric)? That didn't get too far - yeah, there were the odd EV1's and electric RAV4's sold, but certainly not in great numbers.
I read a piece on-line somewhere that talked about the impact of the new rules ... apparently, if you sell less than 60K new vehicles per year, you are exempt. And so are used cars (anything with over 7000 miles on it). There was a quote in the article from a big 3 rep stating that they might just drive the cars to CA instead of shipping them and selling them all as used.
I'm all for states' rights in some areas, but this isn't one of them. I think it makes sense to have one national set of regulations regarding emissions.
Imagine California becoming a carless state in the future. Well, at least that'll help fix the pollution problems. :P
They need a set of strict rules, yes, but sensible one that is.
Perhaps they can start by changing governor? I mean Arnie the terminator is a bad public face, talking about protecting environment while collecting Hummers at the same time. :P
All 3 domestic automakers combined sold less than 18% of all new vehicles sold in California last year, so if those 3 chose to withdraw I'm not sure it would be noticed that much....
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Enlish tanslation: hypocrites.
Actually, it's a broad assumption to think that the eco-weenies and the gang-bangin rap stars that drive the Slades and HUMMER's are on the same wavelength when it comes to the environment. Sure, maybe there are a few in hollywood who get carted around in these blingbling-mobile/Schoolbusses, but I remember a majority of them hopped on the hybrid bandwagon and ate up the Priuses and Escape Hybrids like gangbusters
According to some seniors, they like big windows, lots of visibiliy. One senior couple I know were interested in a Chrysler 300 when it came out, then took a test drive, and did not buy the car strictly because of small windows.
Not sure how the California mix works but the US is not corporate average anymore. It is US fleet average. The requirements are by footprint calculation. So each footprint is assigned a minimum MPG to meet. So if someone only wants to build small cars they will probably have to get 55 mpg or something like that (assuming 44 mpg average). If they only build large SUVS they probably have to get 35 mpg or something like that.
Actually Lamda sales are pretty even with the market. Down 20%. Just cought in the same non market like everyone else.
I do not know about what is happening elsewhere but the Lamdas are everywhere here. Seems like I have heard that here before.
The California rules through 2016 would apply only to automakers that averaged at least 60,000 vehicles sold in the state over three years. After 2016, the limit might drop to 4,000 vehicles a year.
Because California's limits would apply nationwide, Detroit's automakers and the three largest Japanese firms would have to meet the standards, but companies such as Volkswagen, Hyundai -- and perhaps BMW -- would not. The rules also would not apply to new competitors, such as automakers from China or India.
Only two of the eight worst gas guzzlers listed by the Environmental Protection Agency would fall under the rules in any state, because small luxury brands are excluded. "A patchwork regime -- with its exemptions, loopholes and unintended consequences -- would only exacerbate the economic turmoil in the auto sector, for little to no environmental or energy security benefit," the National Automobile Dealers Association said last week.
That's actually a lot more fair...GM could focus on their high-profit trucks and stop selling Cobalts and Aveos. Under the old CAFE standard they couldn't, which led to selling small cars at a loss just to bring the corporate fleet average down.
Thousands of Japanese carworkers will soon draw part of their pay from the government under a scheme to prevent redundancies at companies hit by production cuts.
Mazda and Mitsubishi Motors, respectively Japan's fifth and sixth biggest carmakers, have applied for the employment adjustment grants, according to industry officials, and others may follow soon.
The grants are available to struggling manufacturers of all types but the particularly sharp downturn in the car sector, combined with a recent expansion of the programme, has made carmakers eligible for large levels of support.
Mitsubishi, for example, plans to build passenger cars at its main plant in Okayama prefecture on just seven days next month. On the other 14 weekdays, the plant's 3,000 full-time workers will stay at home but receive 85 per cent of their normal wages, half of which will be paid by the government.
Japan's carmakers have been hit hard by the global slump in demand. Toyota, the world's biggest carmaker, is eliminating at least 6,000 contract jobs in Japan and is understood to be looking at ways to reduce its full-time workforce overseas, including in the US and Britain. The company yesterday ruled out "involuntary" job cuts, suggesting any reductions would be accomplished through attrition and buy-outs.
Still, CAFE202 calls for a 35 mpg standard. That's a long way from 44 mpg. FWIW, I just pulled down the 2009 stats from the EPA's website. The following vehicles broke 44 mpg raw combined in the EPA tests:
PRIUS: 65.8
CIVIC HYBRID: 58.4
ALTIMA HYBRID: 46.7
CAMRY HYBRID: 45.9
JETTA SPORTWAGEN (manual): 45.5
JETTA SPORTWAGEN (auto): 45.0
ESCAPE HYBRID FWD: 44.2
TRIBUTE HYBRID 2WD: 44.2
MARINER HYBRID FWD: 44.2
So at this point, the only way to break 44 mpg is with a hybrid or Diesel.
California might not miss it too much if the Detroit 3 pulled out of the market. But I think trying to get a fleet to average 44 mpg is going to put a hurting on a lot more than just Detroit!
Meanwhile what are they thinking? They aren't going to decide on Saturn for three years or more? It's this kind of thinking that has me leaning to believing that GM won't be around in three years.