Don't forget Oldsmobile started by Ransom Olds in 1897. When they killed that name it was the oldest longest running name in US automanufacturing. I think they would have been wiser to dump Buick and Pontiac and keep Oldsmobile. Just one of many screwups by Wagoner.
If he could not make GM profitable when the rest were making big profits he is not the man to head GM. If they cannot pull out of their mess on their own, throwing good money at them will not help.
It is not just about creating jobs. It is about building profitable companies that can make a go of it on their own. GM seems to have run out of time. Let them die and the others will pick up the pieces.
There is NO WAY a 1970 Dodge looked like that inside!
True, they hadn't discovered that hard plastic had so many uses yet, back in 1970! :P In those days, it was the good old fashioned exposed metal, where if you got in an accident, they'd just hose your remains off before selling the truck to the next buyer!
Yeah, right! The Tundra and Titan were serious efforts. The Tundra is an "almost full-size" truck with an interior straight out of a 1970 Dodge and the Titan is so flimsy I could tear its interior apart with my bare hands.
Your lack of knowledge is showing. Ya might try to move out of the 70s and 80s to this century.
In fact the Tundra is HUGE in comparison to the F150 and Silverado/Sierra. The Toyota and the Nissan engines are far more powerful than anything Ford has below a 3/4 ton diesel.
In the normal configurations that most buyers choose both Nissan and Toyota out pull and go faster than anything either Ford or GM can provide. Those are the little kids on the block now.
Don't forget Oldsmobile started by Ransom Olds in 1897. When they killed that name it was the oldest longest running name in US automanufacturing. I think they would have been wiser to dump Buick and Pontiac and keep Oldsmobile. Just one of many screwups by Wagoner.
Didn't GM/Olds ultimately get the Aurora right? Then, they killed it. But, didn't the Aurora not have the "Oldsmobile" name shown anywhere on the body?
But, Oldsmobile name sounds stodgy. Just like Buick. These names don't have the cachet of names such as Lexus, Infiniti, Acura. Toyota, Nissan and Honda were brilliant in creating these luxury brand names.
Congress should not give a loan unless Big 3, especially GM, present well detailed plans of cutting costs, getting rid of redundant vehicles, etc., that are ready to be implemented early next year. All salaried and hourly costs will have to be cut drastically for the near term. Union needs to cooperate and be willing to rewrite contract. But, still the problem with too many dealerships. Will GM ask Congress for some kind of relief to allow them to modify their agreements with dealers?
While not praising the domestic market, I can't find a restored '53 Toyota for $225,000 but I didn't look because I don't want one. And lets not forget that even the almighty H and T have problems when suppliers are squeezed to bring down the cost of product to be affordable to the down classing of Americans for some time now. Rich are richer and the middle class is struggling/borrowing for years to keep from being sucked down and called lower class (poor).
Do you remember the new 5 speed automatics. Did you read edmunds, Quotes like" I'll never buy another toyota again" (and lousy dearlers that I've been exposed to). Honda's extended transmission warranty. One year sold cars, chevies - great managers/owners so-so cars, then hondas - better cars but ruthless hateful greedy owner.
Don't forget that, if memory is not gone, it was non union Honda employees trying to prevent hand damage that pioneered all those plastic push pins in doors?-knock a plastic bumper off with your fist. Don't forget in addition to gm windows dropping down because of plastic?, civics did it too. Getting tint one day a woman drove in with a civic and the owner excused himself from our vehicle and started yelling at the lady, I told you not to roll down your window. She said her boyfriend rolled it down and would he please take off the door panel and reinsert the glass in the glide. five minute job to pop off door panel and set the glass.
Give me a break. All brands have problem, some more than others. Who just recently resumed control of Toyoda to save the family honor and the Toyota brand. Remember it is a disposable item these days and technology changes fast and so do the vehicles. We don't buy steel stamped hoods, carbs, and distributors anymore. And toyotas aren't "cheap to keep" anymore either.
GM has been doing the same thing for a couple of years now - consolidating vehicle design and planning for world cars. Both it and Ford were a solid 20 years late in starting this process, and in neither case is it anywhere close to coming to fruition. The Fiesta is the first model that will come from that effort at Ford, and it will be a decade or more before there is a diversity of models available that are a product of that process. I can't give Ford any more kudos than GM in that regard.
I give more kudos to Ford for one simple reason: GM is still planning. Ford is actually doing it.
Ford Motor Co. will tell Congress that it plans to return to a pretax profit or break even in 2011 when the Detroit Three automakers' CEOs appear before lawmakers this week to request $25 billion in government loans.
Ford CEO Alan Mulally said he'll work for $1 per year if the company has to take any government loan money.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
I'm supposed to believe a 4 cyl Mazda has 270 HP? Typo or BS?
Dave, you really need to get out more, or read more car reviews. Road&Track is my favorite. The turbo 4's in the Solstice and Cobalt are making 260hp from a 2.0L engine. My Mazda makes close to 300ft-lb of torque also.
I was thinking of an HHR SS before I bought the Mazda, but the lack of AWD was a killer for my 15-degree driveway. And the HHR was recalled because they needed to fit side-curtain airbags which weren't standard then to make the crash-test respectable.
Mr. Reid won't have to have his sensibilities offended by BO of the tourists (constituents?) who tour the capital building now that the visitor center is finished. It costs THREE times the original--government control anyone?
I don't picture Thomas Jefferson or George Washington being offended by BO from their constituents. These are the people complaining about flying to DC by automaker executives...
The Capitol Visitors Center, which opened this morning, may have tripled its original budget and fallen years behind schedule, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid found a silver lining for members of Congress: tourists won't offend them with their B.O. anymore.
"My staff tells me not to say this, but I'm going to say it anyway," said Reid in his remarks. "In the summer because of the heat and high humidity, you could literally smell the tourists coming into the Capitol. It may be descriptive but it's true."
But it's no longer going to be true, noted Reid, thanks to the air conditioned, indoor space.
And that's not all. "We have many bathrooms here, as you can see," Reid continued. "Souvenirs are available."
I don't really like the names Lexus, Infiniti, or Acura because they sound like cold, sterile mathematical terms. They've got all the personality of the room where they keep all the computer servers. Buick and Oldsmobile might seem quaint and old-fashioned, but they conjure up pleasant memories.
The Big Three's solution to downsizing and its never-ending job losses? For the past 24 years, all three U.S. automakers had tens of thousands of "workers" sitting in job banks, watching TV, playing cards and collecting 90 percent of their pay. Asks University of Maryland business professor Peter Morici, "Why should a waitress in Indiana have her tax money sent to Detroit to subsidize that?"
if closing Oldsmobile only cost $1 billion, then the bailout could go to closing five brands at GM (assuming Hummer is already sold as had been hinted at earlier this summer) and two at Ford. That's only $7 billion. Cerberus is private, NO taxpayer money to them, no way.
Spend another $1 billion closing down 2000 each of the excess Ford and Chevy dealers (both currently near a count of 4000, possibly higher for Chevy, if I am correctly informed).
Lay off all the corresponding Ford and GM hourly employees and 2/3 of the executive staff, pay them a year's severance (that's for hourly employees only, who would be barred from claiming unemployment, salaried executives get only 3 months), there's another $10 billion.
We've only spent $18 billion and we have right-sized GM and Ford! Trickle out the remaining $7 billion propping up suddenly beleaguered suppliers for 2 years.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The only problem with that is you've almost laid off all the employees, which is the argument for the loans, and left a small GM and Ford.
Now the problem with a small GM and Ford is that they still have the commitment to LARGE # of retirees. The reduction in size has not reduced the $'s going to the pension funds. So this gets passed on to the cost of each car, increasing the cost of each car, which increases prices and make them even LESS competitive, which decreases sales more ... no profits in sight, at least $25B spent, and they close it up in the spring or early summer '09.
I'm against any loan even as you describe though. Why spend $25B in taxpayer money to give it to well-paid people who screwed up for many years, to leave a company that otherwise would fold up? Why should Joe the Plumber who only gets his unemployment check if laid off, put up his tax-money to give all this money to someone else? Forced charity?!
I definitely agree even if a loan is approved somehow; that not 1 cent should go to privately held Chrysler. Cerberus and their family of companies can transfer the $ to Chrysler.
"As to your other point about the cost of labor, you simply have no idea of what you're talking about. With the current $ vs JY exchange rate the US labor costs are among the lowest among the developed countries. "
I'm not necessarily talking about them moving back to Japan, but what about India??? China??? South America???
With all the "billions" that Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, etc. make IN THIS COUNTRY, why aren't they made here??? BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO INCENTIVE TO DO SO.
Greed: When the Big 3 are gone, the only incentive others will have is to go with the lowest bidder, no matter where in the world that is.
Ford tells Congress profit may be restored in 2011
Amy Wilson
Automotive News | December 2, 2008 - 10:25 am EST
DETROIT -- Ford Motor Co., the first of the Detroit 3 to submit its plan to qualify for federal aid, says it doesn’t expect to make money until at least 2011.
That’s when Ford expects global and North American auto businesses to reach break-even or be profitable on a pretax basis, according to a news release summarizing its plan to Congress. In May, Ford abandoned a previous pledge to post a profit in 2009. The automaker has lost money every year since 2005.
Ford also said it is asking Congress for access to as much as $9 billion in federal loans. The company stressed that management hopes to complete its turnaround without accessing the loans.
“For Ford, government loans would serve as a critical backstop or safeguard against worsening conditions as we drive transformational change in our company,” Ford CEO Alan Mulally said in the release.
Selling the jets
Mulally said he would work for a salary of $1 a year if Ford draws money from a potential federal loan pool. Ford also said today that it would sell its five jets.
Those moves are responses to widespread criticism of the Detroit 3 after Congressional hearings in November on federal bailout money for the automakers.
The CEOs of Ford, General Motors and Chrysler LLC were lambasted for traveling to the hearings in separate corporate jets. Mulally plans to make the nine-hour drive to Washington in a Ford Escape Hybrid for another round of Congressional hearings this week.
The high pay packages of the Detroit 3 CEOs also came under scrutiny during the hearings. At that time, Mulally declined to work for less than his $2 million salary, saying “I think I’m OK where I am.” Mulally’s total compensation package was $21.7 million in 2007.
Ford reiterated that it would continue the turnaround plan Mulally implemented after arriving from Boeing in September 2006. A key tenet of that plan is to accelerate the development of new products that customers want. As part of that, Ford has said it will introduce several small European-developed cars in the United States beginning in early 2010.
Mulally's YouTube video
Technology spending
Today, Ford said it would spend $14 billion in the United States on advanced technologies and products to improve fuel efficiency during the next seven years. That includes a plan to make available for sale a family of new hybrids, plug-in hybrids and battery electric vehicles by 2012.
Ford said it will partner with suppliers to deliver a full battery electric van for commercial fleet use in 2010 and an electric sedan in 2011.
Ford also said it is discussing with the UAW ways to further reduce costs and eliminate the remaining labor cost gap existing between Ford and import-brand automakers.
Ford said it doesn’t anticipate a liquidity crisis in 2009 barring a bankruptcy by General Motors or Chrysler LLC -- or a more severe economic downturn that further hurts auto sales. It expects U.S. industry sales of 12.5 million vehicles in 2009, bouncing back to 14.5 million vehicles in 2010 and 15.5 vehicles in 2011.
Ford finished the third quarter of 2008 with $18.9 billion of cash and another $10.7 billion in available credit lines. The automaker burned through $7.7 billion in cash during the third quarter, a rate of $2.57 billion a month.
'Home improvement loan'
Ford wants to convince Congress and U.S. taxpayers that it should be seen as “different” from GM and Chrysler. To that effort, Ford today launched a new web site, www.thefordstory.com. It includes a youtube.com video of CEO Alan Mulally talking about Ford’s turnaround vision.
In the video, Mulally said Ford is asking for access to federal loans in part because the failure of GM or Chrysler could have a “domino effect” on Ford.
“I like our position today, as tough as it is,” Mulally says in the video. He talks about the $23 billion “home improvement” loan Ford took out two years ago to finance its turnaround and the development of new products.
“Now we have in the pipeline what arguably everybody believes is the best product lineup we’ve ever had at Ford,” he said. “I’m just so glad that we all pulled together early so that we are ready to take on the worst of times. And we’ll get through this and we’ll come out the other end as a turbo machine.”
WASHINGTON -- 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 executives say the plan will enable the company to be profitable even if the U.S. new-vehicle market makes only a modest recovery.
GM, like Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC, submitted its plan in an effort to persuade Congress and the Bush administration to approve $25 billion in emergency loans to the Detroit 3 this month.
In the starkest acknowledgment GM has made of its financial condition, the company says it needs $4 billion in federal aid by the end of the month.
Henderson, in a briefing with reporters today, refused to say what would happen if GM does not get the immediate aid it seeks. But without government support, he warned, "the company cannot fund its operations."
Request: $18 billion
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.
GM aims to achieve through negotiation the kind of debt reduction that otherwise might occur in bankruptcy, Henderson said. The plan probably will involve some exchange of debt for stock.
Breakeven: 13 million sales
Under its plan, GM would break even if U.S. light-vehicle sales recover to just 12.5 million to 13 million cars and trucks a year, Henderson said. Over the past few months, the annualized U.S. sales rate has been less than 11 million units. From 1999 to 2007, the industry sold more than 16 million new cars and trucks each year.
In its plan, GM also agreed to have a government oversight board monitor use of the federal money. Taxpayers would get a stake in the company in exchange for the loans.
After last month’s congressional hearings, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., chastised the Detroit 3 CEOs for failing to make an adequate case for federal aid.
The leaders demanded that the Detroit 3 tell Congress in detail how they would use federal loans and how they would make themselves viable for the long term.
Reacting to lawmakers’ complaints that the companies’ CEOs came to Washington last month in separate corporate jets, Wagoner is scheduled to return to the capital this week in a Chevrolet Malibu Hybrid.
Wagoner has agreed to accept a salary of $1 next year. The GM plan includes cuts in pay for other senior executives, and the company says it is ceasing use of its jets.
Committee hearings on the Detroit 3 loan requests are set for Thursday in the Senate and Friday in the House. As they did last month, the Detroit 3 CEOs and UAW President Ron Gettelfinger are expected to testify.
Reid and Pelosi have promised to call Congress back into session next week to consider the companies’ aid pleas if the viability plans are acceptable.
Your comment did not say it was turbocharged. I still can't find info on it. The pull down list under mazda on edmunds shows the speed3 but not the speed6.
I see the speed 3 weighs 3153 lbs and has a turbo 263 hp 2.3 liter. It can be had for $24,800 out the door at Edmunds TMV pricing and 7% sales tax. I can't find info on the 6 but $22,200 OTD seems like 15-20% off sticker.
I'm kind of disappointed in GM's plan as I see it. "Shrink Pontiac to a niche brand?" What the heck is it now? Of course they are saying that Buick, with three models, is a core brand. I am confused. Heck, there are more models of Saabs than that.
I don't know. Ford looks like they have a plan. GM's looks an awfully lot like the SNL skit.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Ford looks like they have a plan. GM's looks an awfully lot like the SNL skit
I read that plan also. Unless some serious concessions come from the executives and the UAW, it look like business as usual. What happens if they don't get $4 billion this month. I say no loans for GM. If Ford wants a credit line to fall back on that would be good. GM is toast. I just do not believe the doom scenario being shoved down our throats. How does less than 96,000 GM employees losing their jobs balloon to 3 million?
Let me get this straight. GM is going to cut 1/3rd of their nameplates and about 2000 of its dealers. Do they plan to sell as many vehicles as they did before? If not I was just reading an article from 2005 that says each GM vehicle has $1600 in legacy costs to retirees pension and health care. Each car less they sell makes that price higher per vehicle. How are they going to get out of those obligations with the plan they have laid out? Now they are losing twice as much with no chance of regaining any market share. That just will not happen. They will keep losing market share with nothing to stop the bleeding.
Why GM's Plan Won't Work ...and the ugly road ahead May 2005 And make no mistake, GM is in a horrible bind. That $1.1 billion loss in the first quarter doesn't begin to tell the whole story. The carmaker is saddled with a $1,600-per-vehicle handicap in so-called legacy costs, mostly retiree health and pension benefits. Any day now, GM is likely to get slapped with a junk-bond rating. GM has lost a breathtaking 74% of its market value -- some $43 billion -- since spring of 2000, giving it a valuation of $15 billion. What really scares investors is that GM keeps losing ground in its core business of selling cars. Underinvestment has left it struggling to catch up in technology and design. Sales fell 5.2% on GM's home turf last quarter as Toyota Motor Corp. (TM ), Nissan Motor Co. (NSANY ), and other more nimble competitors ate GM's lunch. Last month, CEO G. Richard "Rick" Wagoner Jr. and his team gave up even guessing where they'll stand financially at the end of this year.
Worst of all, GM reached a watershed in its four-decade decline in market share. After losing two percentage points of share over the past year to log in at 25.6%, GM has reached the point at which it actually consumes more cash than it brings in making cars, for the first time since the early '90s. GM, once the world's premier auto maker, is now cash-flow-negative. That's a game changer. Without growth, GM's strategy of simply trying to keep its factories humming and squeaking by until its legacy costs start to diminish is no longer tenable. If market share continues to slip, its losses will rapidly balloon.
If Congress looks at the whole it will get voted down at least till next session. If they look at each proposal I would say Ford has the best chance of getting the $9 billion loan guarantee. That is much easier to stomach than just an $18 billion handout to GM. Anyone that thinks that GM will ever pay back that money along with the $66 billion they owe now is just not realistic.
Well, the Fusion wasn't really a replacement for anything either. I mean I guess one could look at it as a replacement for the slow selling Taurus, but the release time for the current Taurus came right around the same time as the Fusion, if not before it.
The Taurus started out as a good car. It was actually the best selling midsize in the very early 90's. Then Ford sat on that car for the next 10 years, making only marginal improvements. Early Taurus buyers did't want to trade their 5 old Taurus in on a new Taurus, because it was basically the same car. Who wants to buy a brand new car, that looks almost exactly like the 5 year old car they already have. All the while Accords and Camrys were getting bigger and better every 4 or 5 years. Ford basically told midsize buyers they didn't care. Finally they use a Japanese brand chassis (Mazda6) and stretch it, to make the Fusion. The Taurus, by that time, was Rental Fleet only, and the current Taurus was still called the Ford Fivehundred. Now Ford decides to use the Taurus name on that full size car to make sure it has absolutely no resemblance to the previous Taurus. Basically all this name switching was done to cover their tracks after they ruined the Taurus name as a midsize. And they haven't learned anything, because they are doing the same thing to the Ranger as we type. Now Ford will have to kill the Ranger name.
You don't know there are many powerful 4cyl. turbos on the road? With $3K in aftermarket parts - like a larger turbo, these cars are making 450hp. Since you might need help, not promoting it, I suggest going to ATP Turbos.
Uh, Ford is currently selling a midsize sedan called the Taurus.
The current Taurus is the old Fivehundred, which is a "Full Size".
Yeah, right! The Tundra and Titan were serious efforts. The Tundra is an "almost full-size" truck with an interior straight out of a 1970 Dodge and the Titan is so flimsy I could tear its interior apart with my bare hands.
I bet you would have said the same thing about the Tacoma 5 years ago too. It now kicks the Ranger's but in every conceivable way. Just keep doubting Toyota. That's what GM and Ford did, and look what happened. The big 3 are now Toyota, Honda, and Nissan. One day you'll have to face those facts. First, they took the small car market, then the midsize car market, now the small truck market. Full size trucks are all Detroit has left. It too, will fall in time.
"GM vehicle has $1600 in legacy costs to retirees pension and health care."
That's where the new agreement comes in. It shifts the legacy costs onto the union's back with the VEBA, virtually eliminating this amount. Of course, this doesn't take effect until 1/1/10. Now, with the union willing to sit down, does this now take effect 1/1/09???
As far as Pontiac being a niche brand, I wonder if they mean just keeping the Solstice, G6 convertible, and a retro Firebird/ Trans-Am. Do stay tuned......
I think GM could go in with a "preapproved" bankruptcy and get it done in less than a year, but it would be difficult. Lots of Chapter 11's drag out for several years. It's been 3 years for Delphi.
Of course, if GM goes banko, Delphi will liquidate. Bloomberg
Humbled and fighting for survival, Detroit's once-mighty automakers appealed to Congress with a retooled case for a bailout as large as $34 billion Tuesday, pledging to slash workers, car lines and executive pay in return for a federal lifeline. GM and Chrysler said they needed an immediate cash infusion to last 'til New Year's, and warned they could drag the entire industry down if they fail.
Well, we can't let that happen. Bring it to and even $50B...that should do it until January 20th. I'll make a call now so consider it done! :P
It shifts the legacy costs onto the union's back with the VEBA,
Yes I remember that part of the UAW contract. Question is, where will GM get the $11 billion to give the UAW? I believe that was only for health care. Not sure if the retirement is fully funded and not available. Or is that part of the $66 billion that GM owes? I would think all these little billion dollar details would be in their proposal.
Why bother calling the G8 a Pontiac?? The Solstice and the G8 should be Buicks and cancel Pontiac for good. The Sky is going to go away anyway considering Saturn's divestment.
I was thinking about that. There's nothing that I see Pontiac doing that couldn't be consolidated into another division. I don't think they want to really close a division and are doing everything they can to avoid it. They can't really do that.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Pontiac was supposed to be the sport/performance brand...kind of like Mazda (except Mazda is a separate company from Ford, and is run by people who actually know how to build cars). Thing is Caddy has basically grabbed a lot of that...they're seen as more sport than luxury these days, not that they aren't luxury. But I could see making some of the more unique Pontiacs available as entry-level Caddys. And if they're not good enough to be Caddys then they're not really that sporty and they should be sold by Chevy like all the rest of the generic stuff (MAYBE as an SS if it rates).
I mean really, between "SS" Chevies and Sport/Lux Cadillacs, exactly where does Pontiac fit in anymore? It's competing with Chevy and Caddy....I think I read somewhere that GM's biggest competitor is itself sometimes. Why are you making a buyer decide between a G6 and a Malibu, hmmm?
that's the GM union headcount only. Then add salary and contract workers. Then add the 350,000 working at dealerships. then add the 100,000 working at Delphi Then add a million working at suppliers to GM and delphi. Then add the million that have jobs supporting the million that work supplying GM. I fully expect coastal people to be against the bailout. They don't have any direct benefit from GM surviving. They just created a lot of the mess that has hurt the auto industry, like Wall St collapse and subprime defaults.
I mean really, between "SS" Chevies and Sport/Lux Cadillacs, exactly where does Pontiac fit in anymore? It's competing with Chevy and Caddy....I think I read somewhere that GM's biggest competitor is itself sometimes. Why are you making a buyer decide between a G6 and a Malibu, hmmm?
This is a good point. GM has always had a flawed business model, in that they've always tried to have each division cater towards the 'mainstream' market (with the exceptions of Cadillac, Saab, and Hummer). A company as large as GM was (and still is, for now) should have one mainstream brand, with each of the others catering specifically to a certain niche.
It would make sense for Chevy to continue as the 'mainstream' line, and Cadillac as the luxury line. I'm not sure whether or not it is worth it to have a full brand for various niche markets, but if they intend to do so here's my suggestion: Saturn- return to the entry level market, concentrate on solid small and midsize cars that are cheaper than Chevy; GMC- commercial trucks; Pontiac- sports cars (would probably require the Corvette as a flagship). Buick- rental/fleet cars (based on older Chevy models so as not to dilute the mainstream brand, but keep development costs low).
The way things are going, I think GM is rather hopeless. A bailout loan will just allow them to circle the drain a bit longer. Will that soften the blow to the economy in general, or just delay it?
If anyone should bail out the big three companies, it should be big oil. Big oil has obscene amounts of capital, and they would be in deep trouble if the auto companies go under. They could use even a small portion of the record profits that they get every quarter, bail out the big three, and still have obscene profit margins.
a second volley of e-mails to my representatives in congress, asking them in no uncertain terms to turn down any proposal for an automotive bailout. I also e-mailed Nancy Pelosi's office. These folks in congress are so hot to burn taxpayer money giving it to everyone and their mother, I am sure the automaker bailout will go ahead despite my protests, but I just thought I would do my part for the democratic process. :sick:
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
What he did not mention is how many of those dealerships have already bit the bullet. I know many are laying off people here. The biggest Ford agency was off sales in October by nearly 80%. Of those 1000 dealerships closing in 2008, how many are Big 3? What is in the bailout for those people that have lost their jobs already. Giving the Big 3 a bailout will not increase sales by ONE VEHICLE. So it will be more losing their jobs and UAW workers sitting in a rubber room getting paid not to work.
Comments
If he could not make GM profitable when the rest were making big profits he is not the man to head GM. If they cannot pull out of their mess on their own, throwing good money at them will not help.
It is not just about creating jobs. It is about building profitable companies that can make a go of it on their own. GM seems to have run out of time. Let them die and the others will pick up the pieces.
You could also include GMC as it stands for Grabowski Motor Company - an early truck manufacturer. Daimler is for Gottlieb Daimler.
True, they hadn't discovered that hard plastic had so many uses yet, back in 1970! :P In those days, it was the good old fashioned exposed metal, where if you got in an accident, they'd just hose your remains off before selling the truck to the next buyer!
Here's an old ad for a 1971 Dodge pickup, in a guzzied up trim level. They were trying to make it more civilized and car-like...so even back then they were trying to push off trucks as alternatives to cars!
Your lack of knowledge is showing. Ya might try to move out of the 70s and 80s to this century.
In fact the Tundra is HUGE in comparison to the F150 and Silverado/Sierra. The Toyota and the Nissan engines are far more powerful than anything Ford has below a 3/4 ton diesel.
In the normal configurations that most buyers choose both Nissan and Toyota out pull and go faster than anything either Ford or GM can provide. Those are the little kids on the block now.
Hey come join us in the 21st century.
Didn't GM/Olds ultimately get the Aurora right? Then, they killed it. But, didn't the Aurora not have the "Oldsmobile" name shown anywhere on the body?
But, Oldsmobile name sounds stodgy. Just like Buick. These names don't have the cachet of names such as Lexus, Infiniti, Acura. Toyota, Nissan and Honda were brilliant in creating these luxury brand names.
Congress should not give a loan unless Big 3, especially GM, present well detailed plans of cutting costs, getting rid of redundant vehicles, etc., that are ready to be implemented early next year. All salaried and hourly costs will have to be cut drastically for the near term. Union needs to cooperate and be willing to rewrite contract. But, still the problem with too many dealerships. Will GM ask Congress for some kind of relief to allow them to modify their agreements with dealers?
Do you remember the new 5 speed automatics. Did you read edmunds, Quotes like" I'll never buy another toyota again" (and lousy dearlers that I've been exposed to). Honda's extended transmission warranty. One year sold cars, chevies - great managers/owners so-so cars, then hondas - better cars but ruthless hateful greedy owner.
Don't forget that, if memory is not gone, it was non union Honda employees trying to prevent hand damage that pioneered all those plastic push pins in doors?-knock a plastic bumper off with your fist. Don't forget in addition to gm windows dropping down because of plastic?, civics did it too. Getting tint one day a woman drove in with a civic and the owner excused himself from our vehicle and started yelling at the lady, I told you not to roll down your window. She said her boyfriend rolled it down and would he please take off the door panel and reinsert the glass in the glide. five minute job to pop off door panel and set the glass.
Give me a break. All brands have problem, some more than others. Who just recently resumed control of Toyoda to save the family honor and the Toyota brand. Remember it is a disposable item these days and technology changes fast and so do the vehicles. We don't buy steel stamped hoods, carbs, and distributors anymore. And toyotas aren't "cheap to keep" anymore either.
MazdaSpeed 6 - 273hp
MazdaSpeed 3 - 263hp
Other 4cylinder Pushing decent power...
Subaru STI - 305hp
Lancer Evolution - 291hp
Cobalt SS - 260hp
Caliber SRT4 - 285hp
I give more kudos to Ford for one simple reason: GM is still planning. Ford is actually doing it.
Ford CEO Alan Mulally said he'll work for $1 per year if the company has to take any government loan money.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081202/ap_on_go_co/meltdown_autos
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
Dave, you really need to get out more, or read more car reviews.
I was thinking of an HHR SS before I bought the Mazda, but the lack of AWD was a killer for my 15-degree driveway. And the HHR was recalled because they needed to fit side-curtain airbags which weren't standard then to make the crash-test respectable.
I don't picture Thomas Jefferson or George Washington being offended by BO from their constituents. These are the people complaining about flying to DC by automaker executives...
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/YeasandNays/Reid_We_wont_smell_the_touri- - sts_anymore_12_02_2008.html
Reid: We won't smell the tourists anymore
By Jeff Dufour and Patrick Gavin
POSTED December 2, 2008 | 11:00 AM
The Capitol Visitors Center, which opened this morning, may have tripled its original budget and fallen years behind schedule, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid found a silver lining for members of Congress: tourists won't offend them with their B.O. anymore.
"My staff tells me not to say this, but I'm going to say it anyway," said Reid in his remarks. "In the summer because of the heat and high humidity, you could literally smell the tourists coming into the Capitol. It may be descriptive but it's true."
But it's no longer going to be true, noted Reid, thanks to the air conditioned, indoor space.
And that's not all. "We have many bathrooms here, as you can see," Reid continued. "Souvenirs are available."
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Ford, Rivals Stress New Parsimony to Congress
GM's plan will surface later today.
Two words - Turbo Charged
Spend another $1 billion closing down 2000 each of the excess Ford and Chevy dealers (both currently near a count of 4000, possibly higher for Chevy, if I am correctly informed).
Lay off all the corresponding Ford and GM hourly employees and 2/3 of the executive staff, pay them a year's severance (that's for hourly employees only, who would be barred from claiming unemployment, salaried executives get only 3 months), there's another $10 billion.
We've only spent $18 billion and we have right-sized GM and Ford! Trickle out the remaining $7 billion propping up suddenly beleaguered suppliers for 2 years.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Now the problem with a small GM and Ford is that they still have the commitment to LARGE # of retirees. The reduction in size has not reduced the $'s going to the pension funds. So this gets passed on to the cost of each car, increasing the cost of each car, which increases prices and make them even LESS competitive, which decreases sales more ... no profits in sight, at least $25B spent, and they close it up in the spring or early summer '09.
I'm against any loan even as you describe though. Why spend $25B in taxpayer money to give it to well-paid people who screwed up for many years, to leave a company that otherwise would fold up? Why should Joe the Plumber who only gets his unemployment check if laid off, put up his tax-money to give all this money to someone else? Forced charity?!
I definitely agree even if a loan is approved somehow; that not 1 cent should go to privately held Chrysler. Cerberus and their family of companies can transfer the $ to Chrysler.
I'm not necessarily talking about them moving back to Japan, but what about India??? China??? South America???
With all the "billions" that Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, etc. make IN THIS COUNTRY, why aren't they made here??? BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO INCENTIVE TO DO SO.
Greed: When the Big 3 are gone, the only incentive others will have is to go with the lowest bidder, no matter where in the world that is.
Amy Wilson
Automotive News | December 2, 2008 - 10:25 am EST
DETROIT -- Ford Motor Co., the first of the Detroit 3 to submit its plan to qualify for federal aid, says it doesn’t expect to make money until at least 2011.
That’s when Ford expects global and North American auto businesses to reach break-even or be profitable on a pretax basis, according to a news release summarizing its plan to Congress. In May, Ford abandoned a previous pledge to post a profit in 2009. The automaker has lost money every year since 2005.
Ford also said it is asking Congress for access to as much as $9 billion in federal loans. The company stressed that management hopes to complete its turnaround without accessing the loans.
“For Ford, government loans would serve as a critical backstop or safeguard against worsening conditions as we drive transformational change in our company,” Ford CEO Alan Mulally said in the release.
Selling the jets
Mulally said he would work for a salary of $1 a year if Ford draws money from a potential federal loan pool. Ford also said today that it would sell its five jets.
Those moves are responses to widespread criticism of the Detroit 3 after Congressional hearings in November on federal bailout money for the automakers.
The CEOs of Ford, General Motors and Chrysler LLC were lambasted for traveling to the hearings in separate corporate jets. Mulally plans to make the nine-hour drive to Washington in a Ford Escape Hybrid for another round of Congressional hearings this week.
The high pay packages of the Detroit 3 CEOs also came under scrutiny during the hearings. At that time, Mulally declined to work for less than his $2 million salary, saying “I think I’m OK where I am.” Mulally’s total compensation package was $21.7 million in 2007.
Ford reiterated that it would continue the turnaround plan Mulally implemented after arriving from Boeing in September 2006. A key tenet of that plan is to accelerate the development of new products that customers want. As part of that, Ford has said it will introduce several small European-developed cars in the United States beginning in early 2010.
Mulally's YouTube video
Technology spending
Today, Ford said it would spend $14 billion in the United States on advanced technologies and products to improve fuel efficiency during the next seven years. That includes a plan to make available for sale a family of new hybrids, plug-in hybrids and battery electric vehicles by 2012.
Ford said it will partner with suppliers to deliver a full battery electric van for commercial fleet use in 2010 and an electric sedan in 2011.
Ford also said it is discussing with the UAW ways to further reduce costs and eliminate the remaining labor cost gap existing between Ford and import-brand automakers.
Ford said it doesn’t anticipate a liquidity crisis in 2009 barring a bankruptcy by General Motors or Chrysler LLC -- or a more severe economic downturn that further hurts auto sales. It expects U.S. industry sales of 12.5 million vehicles in 2009, bouncing back to 14.5 million vehicles in 2010 and 15.5 vehicles in 2011.
Ford finished the third quarter of 2008 with $18.9 billion of cash and another $10.7 billion in available credit lines. The automaker burned through $7.7 billion in cash during the third quarter, a rate of $2.57 billion a month.
'Home improvement loan'
Ford wants to convince Congress and U.S. taxpayers that it should be seen as “different” from GM and Chrysler. To that effort, Ford today launched a new web site, www.thefordstory.com. It includes a youtube.com video of CEO Alan Mulally talking about Ford’s turnaround vision.
In the video, Mulally said Ford is asking for access to federal loans in part because the failure of GM or Chrysler could have a “domino effect” on Ford.
“I like our position today, as tough as it is,” Mulally says in the video. He talks about the $23 billion “home improvement” loan Ford took out two years ago to finance its turnaround and the development of new products.
“Now we have in the pipeline what arguably everybody believes is the best product lineup we’ve ever had at Ford,” he said. “I’m just so glad that we all pulled together early so that we are ready to take on the worst of times. And we’ll get through this and we’ll come out the other end as a turbo machine.”
Harry Stoffer
Automotive News | December 2, 2008 - 3:17 pm EST
WASHINGTON -- 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 executives say the plan will enable the company to be profitable even if the U.S. new-vehicle market makes only a modest recovery.
GM, like Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC, submitted its plan in an effort to persuade Congress and the Bush administration to approve $25 billion in emergency loans to the Detroit 3 this month.
In the starkest acknowledgment GM has made of its financial condition, the company says it needs $4 billion in federal aid by the end of the month.
Henderson, in a briefing with reporters today, refused to say what would happen if GM does not get the immediate aid it seeks. But without government support, he warned, "the company cannot fund its operations."
Request: $18 billion
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.
GM aims to achieve through negotiation the kind of debt reduction that otherwise might occur in bankruptcy, Henderson said. The plan probably will involve some exchange of debt for stock.
Breakeven: 13 million sales
Under its plan, GM would break even if U.S. light-vehicle sales recover to just 12.5 million to 13 million cars and trucks a year, Henderson said. Over the past few months, the annualized U.S. sales rate has been less than 11 million units. From 1999 to 2007, the industry sold more than 16 million new cars and trucks each year.
In its plan, GM also agreed to have a government oversight board monitor use of the federal money. Taxpayers would get a stake in the company in exchange for the loans.
After last month’s congressional hearings, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., chastised the Detroit 3 CEOs for failing to make an adequate case for federal aid.
The leaders demanded that the Detroit 3 tell Congress in detail how they would use federal loans and how they would make themselves viable for the long term.
Reacting to lawmakers’ complaints that the companies’ CEOs came to Washington last month in separate corporate jets, Wagoner is scheduled to return to the capital this week in a Chevrolet Malibu Hybrid.
Wagoner has agreed to accept a salary of $1 next year. The GM plan includes cuts in pay for other senior executives, and the company says it is ceasing use of its jets.
Committee hearings on the Detroit 3 loan requests are set for Thursday in the Senate and Friday in the House. As they did last month, the Detroit 3 CEOs and UAW President Ron Gettelfinger are expected to testify.
Reid and Pelosi have promised to call Congress back into session next week to consider the companies’ aid pleas if the viability plans are acceptable.
No, YOUR lack of knowledge of lemko is showing. He's being faceitious
I don't know. Ford looks like they have a plan. GM's looks an awfully lot like the SNL skit.
I read that plan also. Unless some serious concessions come from the executives and the UAW, it look like business as usual. What happens if they don't get $4 billion this month. I say no loans for GM. If Ford wants a credit line to fall back on that would be good. GM is toast. I just do not believe the doom scenario being shoved down our throats. How does less than 96,000 GM employees losing their jobs balloon to 3 million?
Why GM's Plan Won't Work ...and the ugly road ahead May 2005
And make no mistake, GM is in a horrible bind. That $1.1 billion loss in the first quarter doesn't begin to tell the whole story. The carmaker is saddled with a $1,600-per-vehicle handicap in so-called legacy costs, mostly retiree health and pension benefits. Any day now, GM is likely to get slapped with a junk-bond rating. GM has lost a breathtaking 74% of its market value -- some $43 billion -- since spring of 2000, giving it a valuation of $15 billion. What really scares investors is that GM keeps losing ground in its core business of selling cars. Underinvestment has left it struggling to catch up in technology and design. Sales fell 5.2% on GM's home turf last quarter as Toyota Motor Corp. (TM ), Nissan Motor Co. (NSANY ), and other more nimble competitors ate GM's lunch. Last month, CEO G. Richard "Rick" Wagoner Jr. and his team gave up even guessing where they'll stand financially at the end of this year.
Worst of all, GM reached a watershed in its four-decade decline in market share. After losing two percentage points of share over the past year to log in at 25.6%, GM has reached the point at which it actually consumes more cash than it brings in making cars, for the first time since the early '90s. GM, once the world's premier auto maker, is now cash-flow-negative. That's a game changer. Without growth, GM's strategy of simply trying to keep its factories humming and squeaking by until its legacy costs start to diminish is no longer tenable. If market share continues to slip, its losses will rapidly balloon.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_19/b3932001_mz001.htm
It's a done deal as far as she's concerned. Trouble is, bailout or Bankruptcy, the $$$$ are only beginning to flow.
Regards,
OW
The Taurus started out as a good car. It was actually the best selling midsize in the very early 90's. Then Ford sat on that car for the next 10 years, making only marginal improvements. Early Taurus buyers did't want to trade their 5 old Taurus in on a new Taurus, because it was basically the same car. Who wants to buy a brand new car, that looks almost exactly like the 5 year old car they already have. All the while Accords and Camrys were getting bigger and better every 4 or 5 years. Ford basically told midsize buyers they didn't care. Finally they use a Japanese brand chassis (Mazda6) and stretch it, to make the Fusion. The Taurus, by that time, was Rental Fleet only, and the current Taurus was still called the Ford Fivehundred. Now Ford decides to use the Taurus name on that full size car to make sure it has absolutely no resemblance to the previous Taurus. Basically all this name switching was done to cover their tracks after they ruined the Taurus name as a midsize. And they haven't learned anything, because they are doing the same thing to the Ranger as we type. Now Ford will have to kill the Ranger name.
You don't know there are many powerful 4cyl. turbos on the road? With $3K in aftermarket parts - like a larger turbo, these cars are making 450hp. Since you might need help, not promoting it, I suggest going to ATP Turbos.
The current Taurus is the old Fivehundred, which is a "Full Size".
Yeah, right! The Tundra and Titan were serious efforts. The Tundra is an "almost full-size" truck with an interior straight out of a 1970 Dodge and the Titan is so flimsy I could tear its interior apart with my bare hands.
I bet you would have said the same thing about the Tacoma 5 years ago too. It now kicks the Ranger's but in every conceivable way. Just keep doubting Toyota. That's what GM and Ford did, and look what happened. The big 3 are now Toyota, Honda, and Nissan. One day you'll have to face those facts. First, they took the small car market, then the midsize car market, now the small truck market. Full size trucks are all Detroit has left. It too, will fall in time.
That's where the new agreement comes in. It shifts the legacy costs onto the union's back with the VEBA, virtually eliminating this amount. Of course, this doesn't take effect until 1/1/10. Now, with the union willing to sit down, does this now take effect 1/1/09???
As far as Pontiac being a niche brand, I wonder if they mean just keeping the Solstice, G6 convertible, and a retro Firebird/ Trans-Am. Do stay tuned......
I wonder if they'd put the G8 in another lineup of they are thinking of that in the niche?
I think GM could go in with a "preapproved" bankruptcy and get it done in less than a year, but it would be difficult. Lots of Chapter 11's drag out for several years. It's been 3 years for Delphi.
Of course, if GM goes banko, Delphi will liquidate. Bloomberg
Humbled and fighting for survival, Detroit's once-mighty automakers appealed to Congress with a retooled case for a bailout as large as $34 billion Tuesday, pledging to slash workers, car lines and executive pay in return for a federal lifeline. GM and Chrysler said they needed an immediate cash infusion to last 'til New Year's, and warned they could drag the entire industry down if they fail.
Well, we can't let that happen. Bring it to and even $50B...that should do it until January 20th. I'll make a call now so consider it done! :P
Regards,
OW
Yes I remember that part of the UAW contract. Question is, where will GM get the $11 billion to give the UAW? I believe that was only for health care. Not sure if the retirement is fully funded and not available. Or is that part of the $66 billion that GM owes? I would think all these little billion dollar details would be in their proposal.
Regards,
OW
I mean really, between "SS" Chevies and Sport/Lux Cadillacs, exactly where does Pontiac fit in anymore? It's competing with Chevy and Caddy....I think I read somewhere that GM's biggest competitor is itself sometimes. Why are you making a buyer decide between a G6 and a Malibu, hmmm?
Then add salary and contract workers.
Then add the 350,000 working at dealerships.
then add the 100,000 working at Delphi
Then add a million working at suppliers to GM and delphi.
Then add the million that have jobs supporting the million that work supplying GM.
I fully expect coastal people to be against the bailout. They don't have any direct benefit from GM surviving. They just created a lot of the mess that has hurt the auto industry, like Wall St collapse and subprime defaults.
The $11 billion for VEBA, not sure if thats included in cash on hand, debt, or already been paid.
This is a good point. GM has always had a flawed business model, in that they've always tried to have each division cater towards the 'mainstream' market (with the exceptions of Cadillac, Saab, and Hummer). A company as large as GM was (and still is, for now) should have one mainstream brand, with each of the others catering specifically to a certain niche.
It would make sense for Chevy to continue as the 'mainstream' line, and Cadillac as the luxury line. I'm not sure whether or not it is worth it to have a full brand for various niche markets, but if they intend to do so here's my suggestion: Saturn- return to the entry level market, concentrate on solid small and midsize cars that are cheaper than Chevy; GMC- commercial trucks; Pontiac- sports cars (would probably require the Corvette as a flagship). Buick- rental/fleet cars (based on older Chevy models so as not to dilute the mainstream brand, but keep development costs low).
The way things are going, I think GM is rather hopeless. A bailout loan will just allow them to circle the drain a bit longer. Will that soften the blow to the economy in general, or just delay it?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
About 7,000 GM dealerships, so 50 people per dealer on average? Yikes. :sick: