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
'Scary' is being behind a pickup truck on the road or people painting the sales tax collected as a benefit of foreign car purchases.
There's 5 full size trucks to pick from for "truck of the year," only 3 of which are true contenders, no matter how hard Toyota tries It got it because it was new for that model year, and the F150 and RAM weren't. Either one beats the pants off of Silverado (and BTW, I hate Chrysler, so for me to say that is saying something).
Silverado is typical of GM these days...they aim for the top, hit "adequate" and figure they've hit a home run just by reaching "adequate."
I'm glad you posted that number. I've been wondering how many.
Another factor to consider is that those probably include many home mortgages bought as flips. I recall a guy at the local home depot telling me he had just started and that his main business was flipping houses. I hope he was better at flipping than he was at helping with parts and shopping the trimmers at home depot.
My point is I'm sure a lot of those mortgages are people who weren't struggling to get by with a solid job and deserving a bailout and just bought the houses to flip. I recall a person at our work location who flipped houses years back. The city offered reduced or zero percent mortgages to people buying the city homes to live in. He bought but didn't live in them. They never followed up to be sure the city was not spending money to help people who were already well off and speculating on the taxpayers' money.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I live in a fairly rural area with a lot of truck buyers, contractors, etc. Silverado/Sierra is usually third on their lists...most would choose F150 first, Ram second (some would switch that around, no accounting for taste I guess). Comparatively rare is the buyer who buys GM first unless they're buying in bulk (and that's fleet sales, which is a whole different animal to get into, and usually has nothing to do with the vehicle being bought, and everything to do with how low the price is for them).
Well as I see it that's already been tried, last year when most people got a $600 check. It delayed the economy's collapse a few months. If the check was $5,000 it would have delayed the collapse another year or so
Correct. What the government and mega-corps(which are the ones losing 90% of the jobs, you'll note) have to do is learn to live with less. A *LOT* less. They're big wallowing hogs who have bloated themselves on tax dollars for decades. And well, it's diet time.
thru Sept '08
GM 504313
Ford 392698
Dodge 196058
Toyota 115027
Imagine that, 4th best (aka Adequate), sells the most.
Smoke and mirrors please:
When was the last time you rented a car and it was a Camry or Accord? Right- it's usually a Kia or a GM or Ford because it's cheap for them to buy a lot of.
3rd best, the Tundra truly sucks. And we've already long established here that sales volume does NOT equal the best vehicle available. You can buy an Impala for less than a Malibu (or Accord, or anything else really) but does that make it a better vehicle? Nope. Nor does it mean GM is even making money on the Impala...or the Silverado. GM has long had a habit of discounting their vehicles so much that they lose money on them, just so that they'll sell, and then pointing to the raw sales numbers as a sign of how wonderful they are (and by implication, profitable).
And yes, probably a lot of them are fleet sales rather than retail. Fleet buyers care nothing about the vehicle, just that it costs less than the other options...and GM selling them at a loss will cost less than the (superior quality) F-series.
Car and driver named the Ram 1st, the F series second, and the Silverado last. http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison_test/pickups/dodge_ram_vs_ford_f_- 150_and_chevy_silverado_comparison_test
But I'm sure that's more smoke and mirrors, right? (Actually, with putting the Ram over the F series, it might be, heh).
mirrors
Ford 392698
smoke
Dodge 196058
as a sign
Toyota 115027
The last showdown, “Pay Dirt,” appeared in our April 2007 issue. The then-new Silverado emerged as the winner (C&D) "hide that"
I didn't see where you get the chevy totally embarrasses the dodge 0-60 when the dodge did win ever acceleration category. The 5.3 held up well. All I can say is that I've towed my camper and boat with a 5.3 powered Suburban and my current 5.4 powered Expedition. I don't care what a stop watch says, because the 5.4 is much better than the 5.3 in towing performance. When I'm towing 6000lbs+, the last thing I want is a torque peak at 4400rpm, the difference of having more torque at a much lower rpm is huge. I can pull my camper up grades comfortably at 3000rpm that the 5.3 needed 4000+. It gets really old listening to the engine scream all the time and having to downshift anytime you need pulling power. The 6.0 or 6.2 definitely have more power and torque but both engines still need to rev to 4k rpm plus for max power. No thanks, I'll take less peak torque at a more user friendly rpm. That's why diesels rule in the towing department.
The reasons the Chevy didn't win had nothing to do with the powertrain. 6.2 or not it still wouldn't have won when you look why it lost. The 5.3 won the mpg portion, with the 6.2 it probably would have been dead last.
So why the slide from first to third? In a word, details.
The most obvious shortcoming is rear-seat space. You can get three adult males buckled in back there, but it’s much more confining than in the Dodge or the Ford, particularly for the guy in the middle. There’s a shortage of rear cabin stowage, too—no door pockets, no under-floor bins—and the front door pockets were the smallest in this trio, as well as the flimsiest. Not good for guys who like to stash tools in the cab.
We were also underwhelmed with the Chevy’s interior materials. Although the instrument-panel design was clean and uncluttered, there were visible mold lines, and the quality of some of the plastics looked a little cheap for a truck in this price category.
The Chevy’s seats drew the lowest scores for comfort and support, and a venomous rattle manifested itself in the rear of the cabin during our dirt-road driving.
IMO, you really can't lose with any of these 3 trucks, only 8 points decided the winner from last place, so it really comes down to personal preference and how you use your truck and which one you like better. Each has their strong suit.
Plus, I don't know how serious I'd take a truck review from a car mag. C&D called the Ford underpowered, but I just read a boating magazine's test of the new f150 towing over 8k in their test and they raved about how great it towed. It wasn't about 0-60 times, but about how effortless the powertrain pulled from a dead stop and and pulling grades. Plus how the chassis and brakes handle the load. These are the areas Ford's generally excel.
Let's all agree to get this done ASAP.
Regards,
OW
how much is 56 weeks of unemployment for 200,000 ex GM cost? Only $5 Billion
but wouldn't the union even kick in more than that?
but wouldn't the union even kick in more than that?
The UAW does not have enough to last more than a few months. The state will have to pick that up. The Stimulus only offered the States something like $100 million to supplement unemployment. Does Michigan and Ohio have enough surplus to keep the unemployment checks coming. I know CA will be sending out IOUs before long as they have done with the tax payers. And that is the individuals personal money they are holding back. The out of work UAW people better snag those WalMart jobs while they last. The retirees should get their pension or a good share of it. That will be guaranteed by the Feds if they don't run out of ink to print more money... Hang onto your gold coins, they could go sky high.
I like small european cars; but I would be reluctant to buy a Fiat till I saw some real signs that their quality and service reputation has substantially improved
I'll go with May 17, 2009.
Being 4th in sales is what has kept Toyota #1. They don't build for the masses and then when there is a down turn or the public changes their mid they are not hurt as bad. They build for a consistant following that like their products and until recently did not go after the crowds by offering huge rebates (That's all off now_competition is tough). I won't get into an on going debate over who's truck is the toughest. Most people I see never load their truck to the limit or tow 10,000 pounds. That means for the 200,000 people that buy Toyota Trucks they are getting a good truck for their needs. Toughest truck? No. Good truck for a highway cowboy? Probably.
I've had a Silverado in the 80's and an F150 in 2004. I only towed jet ski's and a car can do that. I never wanted to scratch the bed so I used a trailer to haul. Laugh all you want, but probably 70% of the buyers treat their truck that way.
It should be the same plan they have for me. Savings, 401K, and medicare. That's what most people have.
how much is 56 weeks of unemployment for 200,000 ex GM cost?
If these people are skilled why can't they find a new job in a few months? You make it sound like every person laidoff can't switch industries, or start a business.
The worst thing you can do to people is to give them the myth that life is "you're 18 years old, you now a decent job for life and you never have to develop a plan of life for yourself. Someone is always responsible to take care of you." People ned to understand that they need to have backup plans in life, and to take care of themselves.
Supplier Diversity
This is similar to what we started doing years ago and it has paid off. I think this article shows the mindset of most auto suppliers, companies and employees and why many are in the shape they are in today.
It's a valid concern actually...in this economy it's going to be tough to switch industries, and with unemployment so high now there's a lot of competition. Retraining or starting a business usually takes loans, and the credit markets are still borked.
Courting customers outside the auto industry was foreign to many suppliers. When Moncrieff began working for her father in 1996, she pushed to find new business. When she took over a few years later, she learned that sales leads she'd brought in from other industries were often shredded or tossed out.
That's in part because, for a long time, making money in the auto sector was easy. Business came in through word of mouth or personal connections. Suppliers often had one or two big customers. That often was enough to keep their plants running full steam, and they didn't bother looking for new customers.
But it wasn't a smart way to do business, Moncrieff says. "The generation before us was greedy and short-sighted," she says. "We've got to think about the next generation. If it all goes, at least I can look at my kids in the eye and say, 'I did everything I could.' "
The key is GM needs to be smaller now not in 2012. This economy affects everyone and the rules that worked in the past are out the window. Everything is on the table.
The time has come....it is only a matter of days.
Their cars will be worthless and hard to get parts for.
We saw the writing on the wall a little over 10 years ago, when the demands for price cuts far outweighed the quality aspect of parts / services. We were even being "encouraged" I will say, to set up shop overseas, i.e. Brazil, China, India... or possibly lose future business. But some were still old-school in thinking that as long as OEMs order parts the wine would continue to flow. Diversifying can be hard but it's necessary to survive. Though admittedly our sales are currently down we are doing better than some.
There will still be a U.S. Auto Industry. It just won't include GM or Chrysler any more.
A big honking bankruptcy like GM's would be will get prepped for a weekend filing through special arrangements with the bankruptcy court. That gets it going before the US stock markets open Monday morning.
If they agree to another $16 billion, GM should be able to make it well into June, I would think. It's a travesty, all this money down that toilet.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
As we mentioned this morning, GM's total loss for the fourth quarter of 2008 was $9 billion. It's hard to imagine any number that large, so we decided to break it down by the day. It turns out that GM lost something like $85 million every day. That's still almost unimaginably huge. So let's break it down further.
General Motors losses.
Quarter: $9 billion.
Day: $85 million.
Hour: $3.5 million.
Minute: $58,333.
So that's a number we can understand. That's just a few thousand dollars more than the average household income in the US in 2007. In short, with every passing minute GM loses slightly more money than the average American household makes in a year.
http://www.businessinsider.com/general-motors-lost-85-million-every-day-2009-2
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
General Motors losses.
Quarter: $9 billion.
Day: $85 million.
Hour: $3.5 million.
Minute: $58,333.
Maybe we should just go ahead and nationalize GM. They resemble a government run entity more and more each day.
We lost 650,000 jobs last month. Where are they gonna go to work? Some will find work, but will they be "underemployed"? BTW, who will finance someone out of work to start a business??
Their cars (Domestic Big 3) were already worthless in my eyes for the last 15 years. I just didn't realize the truth 15 years ago and was tricked/defrauded/conspired against by the marketing might of Chrysler.
However, when the car didn't start the first morning after bringing it home the afternoon prior, I should have known better!
I saw on the news today that 720 people applied for one Janitorial position.
A local company offered 95 new jobs in December. Over 2800 Experienced Machinists applied. Soon after, they were told to be more productive and that their job was to fill a temporary need for a couple years. One guy said 'you mean we gave up our other jobs for this one and it is only temporary?'
Their medical plan in the union is worth about $14,000 a year per or more. That alone is worth more than minimum wage. It is a zero payroll deduction, zero out of pocket plan. A throwback from the early 80's from a salaried guy's perspective. I doubt anyone gave up a job with even half that benefit.
I saw a statistic today that Unions peaked in 1953 at 26.9% of all workers. Today it is at 7.8%. Pensions are now tremendously underfunded for all workers.
As far as VW coming in and taking a GM factory and converting it to make VW's and offering ex-UAW folks jobs? Will never happen. There would be a requirement that there be no union DNA be in their family history in order to get a job at VW, just like Honda actually stated in the newspaper article about their new factory.
The unions fought for a demand called 'middle class wages' back before the 50's.
Today that is a commonly hated concept, along with buy American.
You really think that there are jobs out there for skilled people? yes, 1 for every 30 looking, and that was before the s__ hit the fan. Back then we had 6.5% unemployment. Now it is 9.2% statewide, the RV belt has 18%.
LOL, like they say, "one man's trash is another man's treasure". If for some strange reason I ever end up with a Park Ave, I leave it out with my trash and you can come by pick it up;)
It WAS middle-class work back then. But things have changed. Manufacturing work has become lower wage , just above service-work; because of globalization. There wasn't globalization "before the 50's". Now your factory worker is competing against factory workers from around the world who are happy just to have a job - a job that pays less in a year, than what a UAW worker makes in a month.
This is the present, we're not living in the past.
http://www.autonews.com/article/20090309/ANA02/303099891/1200
The western world as we know it is at about the same point Rome was when Attila was hanging around.
Now look where GM is - staying afloat on government loans as it sets Saab lose and has Hummer on the auction block with a plan to eliminate it if no buyer is found."
Tracinda's Jerry York Says "I Told You So" In More Polite Terms
Do you have any idea of 1) what GM is asking for Hummer, and 2) what is the most GM was offered?
This kind of reminds of me of the guy who wants $10K for his used car, has some people look at it and make some lower offers, but in the end still has the car. What's the problem. The car owner has an artificailly high idea of what the car is worth either based on what they paid for the car new, have put into the car, and/or is ignoring the economic climate.
The monetary value of anything can change. Something is only worth the most you can get for it NOW.
As far as VW coming in and taking a GM factory and converting it to make VW's and offering ex-UAW folks jobs? Will never happen. There would be a requirement that there be no union DNA be in their family history in order to get a job at VW, just like Honda actually stated in the newspaper article about their new factory.
You missed the EX part. They'll hire you, but the UAW isn't allowed to even get within 5 miles of the plant any more. Expect $15 an hour and, well, it's better than starving.
But there still will physically be a U.S. auto industry. Just no longer operating out of Detroit.
That's why so many of the transplants move in down south where the UAW has no base and they screen for union types. This is why the UAW has yet to successfully organize a transplant factory.
I see no redeeming values in anything or anyone at GM or Chrysler.
I'll ONE UP Wagoner! Give me 5.5 million in salary for 2008 like you did to him, and I'll not only work for $1 in 2009, but also in 2010-2019 (for a decade!).
Also, I'll promise to buy a GM vehicle which will do more good for GM than Wagoner has done in 2008.
GM taps Opel designs for future Buicks in the U.S.
Even as General Motors explores the sale of Opel, it will tap its European unit as a source for future Buick sedans.
For the past two years, GM has shared Opel vehicles and design with Saturn. Sources familiar with GM's plans say those products now will go to Buick.
The Opel Insignia, due to go to Saturn as the redesigned 2010 Aura, will go to Buick as the 2010 Regal sedan in the United States, says a source familiar with GM's product plans
But what happens to Buick's product plans if GM sells Opel?
"I don't know the details of what GM is trying to get done with that restructuring," Docherty said. "But even so, we'd stay with the idea that GM will utilize all of its global architectural platforms."
Another source close to GM says it would be in any future partner's best interest to honor the global architecture-sharing programs in place.
http://www.autoweek.com/article/20090309/CARNEWS/903099995
This of course is because they have seen the writing on the wall that they will be forced to shut down Saturn, their current channel for importing Opels. Seems like we have gone from the just-plain-silly to the truly bizarre at GM HQ now. How can they plan on importing cars for Buick made by a company they were just forced to agree to give up the majority of as part of begging for money from the German government??
And I guess this answers the question "Should Buick introduce cheaper models" from the GM perspective.....tell me again how Buick will be distinguished from Chevy if this takes place? This company is beginning to do a real good imitation of a chicken with its head cut off.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)