The domestics have gone from having a 70% share of the market to a 40% share in a relatively short period of time. Even if this financial crisis hadn't occurred, within a few years, the question of whether or not we should let the big 3 die would have been moot. So basically we've now got a terminal patient and people are arguing over whether to offer life support.
One thing that I find amusing about these Congressional hearings is the people holding them. I guess if you're coming, hat in hand, asking for money, you've got to hold your tongue. If I was one of these CEO's/CFO's being grilled about their business decisions I couldn't remain silent. I'd have to answer a question with a question. What's worse, running a corporation into bankruptcy or running a country into bankruptcy?
If the USA can simply turn over TRILLIONS to the Wall St. bankers, shysters and loan sharks who created this crisis, no questions asked, I’d have to say I’d support loaning the automakers $25 billion if they replaced their CEOs.
However when it comes to Wall Street I’d support not just replacing their incompetent corrupt CEOs, but putting them on trial and if guilty sending them to jail for high crimes against the nation.
It is outrageous that Congress is having this debate about US auto companies while European companies are already conniving to become American banks for the purpose of tapping into the TARP.
If Americans don’t demand a government for the USA, by those who put the USA first, we as a nation are headed into third world status. Our government has been infiltrated by those whose interests do not lie with the USA.
Frankly I’m one who is disgusted that elected officials have sold out our country and its manufacturing capability for other interests and other nations.
While they debate this $25 billion, $100 billion is being lost elsewhere because they are not watching out for their other responsibilities. they are trying to get a moment of fame out of this. The salaries and jets add less than a dollar to the cost of a new car, and I lost a dollar of taxes paid to the congress that spent an hour talking about the jets and ceo salaries. what's worse?
Blaming the current economy, and UAW doesn't fly with me. The Detroit 3 signed these contracts with the union, and they were loosing money way before the economy sped up the process. GM and Chrysler would have gone broke anyway, it just would have taken a little longer.
that is what congress works to oversee in the 100 days a year that they actually work. That comes out to $140 billion a day to oversee. How many weeks will they spend talking about $25 billion. I figure it is worth an hour or two total discussion time.
The question isn't the same as the bank bailouts. If it was, then Congress wouldn't have any difficulty giving away your money.
What makes this so difficult is that... if Congress gives them any money, will it make any difference? Or will they just come back, 3 months from now, and beg for another 30-40 billion of your dollars?
And it really doesn't look very good. Most likely, GM and Chrysler will come back in another quarter and beg for more.
GREED is the most basic principle of Capitalism. It's at the heart of Adam Smith's whole theory. Greed is good when everyone recognizes that it drives all of us in our economic system.
Greed makes you want to send me to the poor house and it makes me want to see your business collapse so that I get all your customers. As long as we both understand this all is good in the world of Capitalism. Greed makes Alabama wish for the demise of the D3 so that it's auto factories have to be expanded to meet the additional demand. Greed in the 50's and 60's made Michigan keep all of the wealth from auto production in state instead of sharing it with Alabama.
It's a vicious dog-eat-dog economic model but it's made us stronger and it's the basis of our entire way of life.
A lot of posts herein just above continue to excoriate the Congress for the mess in the banking and the ungodly sums being given to the banks.
Remember from whence this all came. The Executive Branch.
It was the Executive Branch that brought this to the nation's attention and threatened everyone of us and all our jobs if we didn't give them/him ( Paulsen ) the money needed ASAP no questions asked. Even more basic is the one person that has the most responsibility for all of this mess... Alan Greenspan... who at the time of making his horrific mistakes was part of the Executive Branch of Government.
The Executive Branch rammed the bailout down our throats, they took the money and have since changed directions at least twice on how it should be spent. They've been wrong on everything that they and their stupid boss have told us.
quote: After pouring vast amounts of money into financial institutions of almost every type, and having little to show for it, the Bush administration and the Federal Reserve are suddenly taking a new look at ordinary homeowners. unquote
I have no love or hate one way or the other for Congress I just don't like inaccuracies creating misconceptions. Lay the blame where it belongs.
have we forgotten that America is supposed to be "by the people, for THE PEOPLE"? All this huge bailout money is (to echo what others have said below) purely political, and quite outrageous. Our car companies are making tons of money, and they are giving it to their C-level execs, and to their politicians.
Haven't you heard the phrase "What's good for GM is good for the country?" I think someone taking it a bit too literally these days. But you are right...there should be no bailout..someone always steps up. The same would be true of the banks. Ford already came out and said they don't NEED a bailout, yet everyone keeps lumping them in...let GM and Chrysler go out of business, Ford will still make cars, Tesla might branch out, some entrepreneur might buy an engine plant and car factory cheap and we'll have a new domestic auto company. What's the big deal?
Not sure I will ever support GM or Chrysler. Not impressed. Only reason I would, keeping jobs available. I drive an 08 GM car now, I am impressed with its features, but never thought I would be driving one. Not by choice. I will be walking away from it the first chance I get. I am just sorry I have one now since the company is falling apart, which GM and Chrysler needs to own up to the fact that some of it is their fault. They knew this day would come. That alone is reason not to buy one for me. The depreciating values on their cars in a normal market is reason enough. I feel sorry for those who financed their GM car. Their stuck. Luckily I lease my GM car, if worse comes to worse, I can walk away in 2 years. Yes, all cars depreciate the minute you drive off the lot, but some sink faster than others.
My main impression that I get from GM, is that they are focusing on the "amount" of cars on the road, rather than focusing on fewer cars and having a higher quality rating. Its like, how many more cars can they make? make a box, put 4 wheels on it, and slap a name on it, you got a new car.
Anyway, it is just a car, and in the mean time, I am actually having fun in the GM car, but just know that soon I will have what I want.
BY MARK PHELAN • FREE PRESS COLUMNIST • December 5, 2008
"The debate over aid to the Detroit-based automakers is awash with half-truths and misrepresentations that are endlessly repeated by everyone from members of Congress to journalists. Here are seven myths about the companies and their vehicles, and the reality in each case.
Reality: General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC sold 8.5 million vehicles in the United States last year and millions more around the world. GM outsold Toyota by about 1.2 million vehicles in the United States last year and holds a U.S. lead over Toyota of nearly 700,000 so far this year. Globally, GM in 2007 remained the world's largest automaker, selling 9,369,524 vehicles worldwide -- about 3,000 more than Toyota.
Ford outsold Honda by about 850,000 and Nissan by more than 1.3 million vehicles in the United States last year.
Chrysler sold more vehicles here than Nissan and Hyundai combined in 2007 and so far this year.
Reality: The creaky, leaky vehicles of the 1980s and '90s are long gone. Consumer Reports recently found that 'Ford's reliability is now on par with good Japanese automakers.'
The independent J.D. Power Initial Quality Study scored Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, Ford, GMC, Mercury, Pontiac and Lincoln brands' overall quality as high as or higher than that of Acura, Audi, BMW, Honda, Nissan, Scion, Volkswagen and Volvo.
J.D. Power rated the Chevrolet Malibu the highest-quality midsize sedan. Both the Malibu and Ford Fusion scored better than the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry.
Reality: All of the Detroit Three build midsize sedans that the Environmental Protection Agency rates at 29-33 miles per gallon on the highway.
The most fuel-efficient Chevrolet Malibu gets 33 m.p.g. on the highway, 2 m.p.g. better than the best Honda Accord. The most fuel-efficient Ford Focus has the same highway fuel economy ratings as the most efficient Toyota Corolla. The most fuel-efficient Chevrolet Cobalt has the same city fuel economy and better highway fuel economy than the most efficient non-hybrid Honda Civic.
A recent study by Edmunds.com found that the Chevrolet Aveo subcompact is the least expensive car to buy and operate.
Reality: None of that money has been lent out and may not be for more than a year. In addition, it can, by law, be used only to invest in future vehicles and technology, so it has no effect on the shortage of operating cash the companies face because of the economic slowdown that's killing them now.
Reality: The domestics' lineup has been truck-heavy, but Toyota, Nissan, Mercedes-Benz and BMW have spent billions of dollars on pickups and SUVs because trucks are a large and historically profitable part of the auto industry.
The most fuel-efficient full-size pickups from GM, Ford and Chrysler all have higher EPA fuel-economy ratings than Toyota and Nissan's full-size pickups.
Reality: The Detroit Three got into the hybrid business late, but Ford and GM each now offers more hybrid models than Honda or Nissan, with several more due to hit the road in early 2009.
Reality: Chrysler tied Toyota as the most productive automaker in North America this year, according to the Harbour Report on manufacturing, which measures the amount of work done per employee. Eight of the 10 most productive vehicle assembly plants in North America belong to Chrysler, Ford or GM.
The oft-cited $70-an-hour wage and benefit figure for UAW workers inaccurately adds benefits that millions of retirees get to the pay of current workers, but divides the total only by current employees. That's like assuming you get your parents' retirement and Social Security benefits in addition to your own income.
Hourly pay for assembly line workers tops out around $28; benefits add about $14. New hires at the Detroit Three get $14 an hour. There's no pension or health care when they retire, but benefits raise their total hourly compensation to $29 while they're working. UAW wages are now comparable with Toyota workers, according to a Free Press analysis."
Check my profile, I drive a Mazda3, which is based on the European Ford Focus (pretty much is a Focus, just Mazda-tuned and skinned). before that I drove a Chevy, lasted me 6 years, and before that, a Mercury. before that another GM, and before that, a Ford. The Mazda is actually my FIRST "foreign" car, and it's still based on an American car design from an American car company, using primarily Ford parts with Mazda modifications. I've never once owned a Honda, Toyota, Subaru, Nissan...don't even LIKE Toyota, though I do like Honda and Nissan Nissan much more so than Honda).
You want to support the American brands, that's wonderful. That's your choice to buy their products if they appeal to you. That's everyone's choice to buy the products they prefer...the free market is the ultimate democracy. I personally do NOT like Chrysler's products, and don't buy them, because I don't want my money going to that company. I haven't bought a GM recently because I don't like their products and I don't want my money going to them. In both cases, neither makes a product I would choose, therefore they did not earn my dollars or my business. Ford did, but only through an intermediary, but that's OK. I also bought stock in Ford recently because I like the direction the company is going, and I think my next car purchase will be a Ford (that or Nissan anyway, have to see what happens).
The problem with the bailout money that GM and Chrysler want (remember, Ford just wants a really big credit card) is basically that they're saying the following: "We don't know how to run our companies or make products that people want to give us money for, so now we want the money anyway, or else." Remember, they get money from us buying their products. We generally chose not to (or they'd probably be in better shape and not need loans, right?), so now they're getting our (tax) money in the form of a loan. And guess what? If they have to liquidate anyway because they still don't know how to make money, those loans have to be paid back during the Ch7 liquidation sales. That means GM sells its assets...to whom, you ask? Us, the taxpayers. So we pay them our money for their assets so they have money to pay back the money that we gave them because they don't make products that enough of us want to give them money for.
Well, hey, I guess if you can't earn someone's money, it's OK to just take it, right? :shades:
It's a vicious dog-eat-dog economic model but it's made us stronger and it's the basis of our entire way of life.
Very good post I agree 100%. Any other system only weakens the people. Look at the EU and you can see just what happens when they think that greed can be removed from the equation. You end up with a nation of zombies that could not defend themselves. And a dictator has little trouble taking over. Think Putin.
I have no love or hate one way or the other for Congress
Congress did approve the $700b bailout adding 500 pages of earmarks. It could be argued that Congress over many years have done things that brought on the banking mess.
It is funny that with 500 pages of earmarks from Congress they did not include a bailout for the B3. They did throw in the $7500 tax credit for EV type vehicles aimed at the Volt.
After a car hits 100,000 miles, I wouldn't trade it, I'd just keep it and run it into the ground. After the 100K mark, it kind of becomes a contest to see how long you can keep it going.
There are other factors people trade before 100K - accidents for one. Another is somebody simply wants the features that are found on a new car that aren't on his old one. I thought my 2002 Seville STS was a loaded car. The DTS I bought last year makes it seem like a plain Jane. My 1988 Park Ave is downright spartan compared to it.
Mr. Mopar was a plump happy rich man strolling down the street in an upscale neighborhood wearing a tuxedo, shiny black shoes with spotless white spats, top hat, cape, and cane. He's wearing a big gold watch and a ring with a diamond as big as a walnut. His wallet is stuffed with crisp new bills in large denominations.
A big black S-Class pulls up to the curb. Two burly German thugs named Daimler and Benz grab Mr. Mopar and shove him in the back seat. Daimler sticks a Luger in Mr. Mopar's face as Benz shoves a Walther P-38 in his belly. Mr. Mopar cries, "What is this?" Daimler replies, "It's a 'merger of equals', (censored)!"
Mr. Mopar disappears for almost ten years.
It's late 2007. A big black S-Class is speeding through the ghetto and a skinny, sickly, barefoot emaciated man wearing nothing but stained "tighty whities" is pushed out of the car and rolls into the gutter. The S-Class disappears down the block. This cadaverous individual was once Mr. Mopar. Lying in the gutter among broken bottles of MD 20/20 and discarded crack vials he faces skyward with glazed eyes and wonders, "What happened?" Suddenly, a nasty pitbull named Cerberus latches his jaws on Mr. Mopar's ankle and starts dragging him into an alley next to a crack house...
That's good. Sadly pretty true. Just one case of a wealthy entity coming to the land of the free to practice capitalism. Something not allowed in places like Germany or Japan. Foreign ownership of America may be our ultimate downfall.
kdhspyder: Remember from whence this all came. The Executive Branch.
Sorry, but blaming this all on Bush won't fly...this entire mess has been brewing for well over a decade, and some of its roots reach back to the Clinton administration. Congress got into the act, too - and both Republicans and Democrats were very happy to support the laws and policies that got us into this mess.
The "blame everything on Bush" approach is far too simplistic...this mess has bipartisan roots.
Wasn't it Bush that lead us to the war in Iraq which costs way more per month than any loan or money that the D3 could burn through. Not to mention the waste of American lives.
Let's see the latest cost analysis put Iraq at $10B per month.
No that started in the Clinton era. But as it has been said, this is not the place for Political Banter.
Lets get it back on track and talk about how the Committee pointed out yesterday that they understood that Ford really did not need to be there but were there in support of the competitors. :P
Should we let Dick Shelby vote on the Loans to the big three? His smug appearance in the Senate chambers will be a definite no vote due to the fact he thinks he will gain the most. He has given away hundreds of millions of dollars in free land, tax abatements, and infrastructure to Honda, Hyundai, Mercedes, Toyota. Why would he want to support anything American? He has already "turned redcoat" on Detroit and sold out
This is entirely wrong and it shows a distinct lack of understanding on how this country was built from the very beginning. You actually are being un-American in suggesting that he should put the needs of the people of Michigan before his own constituents in AL. It's his sworn duty to protect and defend the Constitution of the US.
The basic premise of the Constitution and thus our whole way of government is that it's a confederation of independent states which has delegated limited powers to the Federals. All other rights remain in the hands of the states. His state takes preference over your state. He has to do what serves his state the best.
Now this is going to be hard to swallow. Most people in this country and thus most states don't care one whit about Detroit and/or Michigan and/or the D3. A goodly number of them want Detroit to die so that their own businesses get stronger. This is the basic tenet of our business model and it's why we fought the Cold War ... so that the rest of the world would accept they way we do things rather than the communistic way.
Let him do his job for his people. If it kills Michigan, well then they bought it on themselves. Where's the Michigan delegation?
No I don't live in Ala. I'm a NYer transplanted to NC. I don't have a side in this fight.
And NO I say to the hoary phrase that 'what's good for GM is good for the country'. That may have been true 60 yrs ago but we've moved beyond that today. The country is too large and too diverse. GM is a small part of the national economy.
Just one case of a wealthy entity coming to the land of the free to practice capitalism. Something not allowed in places like Germany or Japan.
Don't know about Japan, but I don't think that German law outlaws foreign ownership. Nothing would stop you from buying a German business if you wanted to. Chances are that you wouldn't want to because Germany is an extremely expensive place to do business. (Look at the German companies that build factories in Alabama to get away from the high cost of manufacturing at home.)
The only exception that comes to mind is Volkswagen, which enjoyed protected status under German law for many years & which is partly owned by the State of Lower Saxony.
Anyway, if you're a hard-core free market capitalist like I am, you should be against any laws against foreign ownership. Would you like it if the State of California decreed that you could sell your house only to a native Californian? You'd be spitting mad, & rightfully so, because that would mean a lower price for you. Similarly, I should be free to sell my Ford shares to the highest bidder, no matter what his nationality.
We Americans don't know the history of our own country, so we don't know that European money paid for the construction of our railroads in the middle & late 1800s, when the railroad industry was the biggest & most important part of the American economy. We also don't know that British & German investors owned big chunks of corporate America right up until WWI began in 1914. After that, they had to sell their shares to pay for the war.
The reason that I typed 'Executive Branch' was not to smear Bush alone, although he deserves a good smearing, but also to extend it to the prior 'Executive Branch' as well. Greenspan was the saint of deregulation and Clinton's best friend for 8 yrs. It was Greenspan and Rubin and Phil Gramm who really started us down this path( Glass-Steagall repeal ) at the behest of their constituents on Wall Street.
Congress is not the target here. The last two Executive Branches are.
obyone: Wasn't it Bush that lead us to the war in Iraq which costs way more per month than any loan or money that the D3 could burn through. Not to mention the waste of American lives.
Completely different subject...the Iraq War has little, if anything, to do with our present economic mess.
The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act did not cause the present situation...if anything, the Gramm-Leach-Blilely Act prevented it from becoming worse by allowing financial institutions to take over failing ones, something that Glass-Steagall would have prevented.
Again, the roots of this stretch back 15 or so years ago, or before Gramm-Leach-Bliley was signed into law...and a fair amount of it was caused by government MEDDLING in various markets, not deregulation.
AGREED! this does not all fall on Mr. Bush. it falls on all of us. most of Bush's "failed" policy was implemented because of, or carried over from the Clinton admin. don't misunderstand, i don't care for the policies of our current admin, but i do recognize that the role of our president is increasingly becoming that of a figure-head, rather than a policy maker.
this mess is the responsibility of everyone, Repub., Dem., Ind., EVERYONE! manage your assets properly, and you wont have to worry about it ever again!
Completely different subject...the Iraq War has little, if anything, to do with our present economic mess.
Totally agree! Whether to give a Loan to the Big3 comes down to 1 thing. Will the taxpayer be making a good investment such that they get their $ back with interest. It needs to stand on its own merits.
Ford and GM (Chrysler shouldn't even be included because they can get $ from their "parent" Cerberus), need to convince Congress 1) this $ is enough and 2) they can repay the loans.
Did anyone see the GM Plan, and any mention when they would start repaying the loan? Or the interest rate? If you or I get a mortgage loan or mortgage when do you have to start paying it back? When would GM start paying back the loan, what are the terms?
How about survival of the fittest? I thought the airline bailout was wrong. Stock market, wrong.
Can I go crying to congress to have them pay my house off?
Pay my credit card bill?
Gas?
Electric?
All I can say is this........the Corrupt Educated???????? Officers who FLEW to DC to beg for cash instead of driving there and showing what a good product they have.........if, and I really hope they DO NOT get one penny, if they do, a dollar a year salary is nice.....KICK EM ALL OUT.
Run your company into the ground..........heres a truckload of money, thanks.
That makes sense?
Oh, they went to college.........college of.......stupidity?
It is interesting to see how and how fast other manufacturers are cutting costs, evn BEFORE they start losing money. How many years did the Big3 lose money before this economic storm?
I'm sure Honda has many billions put away to ride out this storm. But Japanese industry is designed to be more flexible, to build only the numbers and types of products that are being sold.
Customers PULL product, instead of the manufacturers pushing product. organizations need to be able to change amounts and types of products quickly, and adjust costs quickly when revenues drop.
"Honda is looking to cut costs by $216 million. Honda also has eliminated workers and reduced production to cut costs.
The cost cuts come on the heels of Honda slashing its forecast for earnings by 13 percent to its lowest profit level in eight years. Its stock has dropped 56 percent this year, setting Honda up for its worst annual performance since at least 1975. Honda reported U.S. sales dropped 32 percent in November, the biggest decline since 1981."
What did the Big3 do for many years when losing money and market-share? Why they kept racing in NASCAR to promote the brand. Everyone ran out and bought a FWD 6-cyl Monte Carlo on Mon. when a RWD carbureated Monte Carlo would win. And if that didn't work they hired another advertising agency to come up with a "We are car" Pontiac advertising campaign, and such.
GM acted like a drunken sailor, spending every penny of their paycheck in the bar, and now realize they can't pay the rent or buy food for the next month. It seems like Honda with 33 years of profits, and cutting costs now, will survive w/o bailouts. And if GM folds, those factories and workers along with all the other manufacturers will makeup the slack.
Let no one doubt that the lobbiesest from foreign auto makers have not done a great job of getting their auto makers to have Congress refuse these loans! All of you foreign car owners THANKS A LOT FOR YOUR LOYALTY to the UNITED STATES. Enjoy your Chevy with that China made engine! Foreign auto buyers enjoy the coming DEPRESSION. Maybe if you like these foreign autos so much you might consider moving there!
can you tell I am really upset? Can you tell that I am LOYAL to the USA?
In my life, my wife and I had bought 2 new Ford Escorts, a '94 Chevy Corsica, a '96 Subaru Impreza, a '98 Camaro (V-6), traded that on an '01 Pontiac Firebird (V-8), have a '00 Silverado, and recently bought a Mazda (partial Ford ownership). I bought mostly USA, and I still would, but GM, Ford, and Chrysler must be replaced if they can't manage themselves. They are corporations; they are not the U.S.
Let GE, Walmart, McDonald's, or Berkshire Hathaway or someone else come in and make autos. If GM, Ford, or Chrysler liquidate certainly someone will buy the parts worth keeping.
In fact I'll make an offer right now to GM to get them some cash. $100,000 for the Bowling Green plant and the rights to the Corvette name. I'd hire back any of the workers who want to come to work, and I'll buy my parts from suppliers in the U.S.
No, but I can tell that you're confusing loyalty to America with loyalty to 3 corporations.
I'm not here to serve GM, Ford or Chrysler. Rather, they're here to serve me. If they offer me products that I like at prices that I'm willing to pay, I'll reward them with my dollars. If they can't do this, I'll take my business elsewhere.
This isn't a 2-way street. They must please me. I'm the customer, & as my late father, a businessman himself, taught me, the customer is always right. It's that simple.
If I don't want to buy what you're selling, it's your fault - not mine. Maybe there's something wrong with your product, or maybe you're asking too much money for it. Fix the problem. Don't whine about "loyalty". That's un-American.
Blind loyalty to corporations is the first step to socialism.
This isn't a 2-way street. They must please me. I'm the customer, & as my late father, a businessman himself, taught me, the customer is always right. It's that simple.
And one of the other benefits overlooked about trade between nations is it brings a better chance of peace, than war. Why? Well it's very few people that want to kill their customers! If I'm the head of China, I'm certainly not going to start a war with the U.S. for the simple fact that my economy would probably collapse and bring about social upheaval. On the other hand, what makes countries dangerous like N. Korea is that they are isolated, and don't have much to lose. The calculation of gain vs. loss, tips to war when there is not much at stake to lose.
You know another good idea the Big3 could do if they don't get those loans. Maybe they can ask any workers and pensioners to give back the profit-sharing, and bonuses they received during years when they lost money. Aren't there hundreds of thousnads of employees who received a minimum of $1,000/year for a number of years, while the company lost $. Someone have the numbers and want to do the math, as to how much this would be?
Why should we give to the Big3 when the employees helped themselves to the treasury for years when losing money? Why should we give to Chrysler when Cerberus could fund them?
Why should we give to Chrysler when Cerberus could fund them?
That's the biggest question I have. Chrysler is a privately held company, not a publicly traded one. If Cerberus thought Chrysler was worth funding, they'd do it themselves. We, and our Congress, should be asking why Cerberus ISN'T, and since they're not, why should we?
"Chrysler on Friday said it hired the prominent bankruptcy law firm of Jones Day to help study whether bankruptcy would be a better option than government loans.
"If we were denied the funds, it certainly would push us in that direction and possibly, even worse, to liquidation," Nardelli replied. "There's a million people, in our calculation, counting on Chrysler, point one, that certainly would be unemployed, and therefore run the risk of not being able to pay their mortgage."
"The Wall Street Journal speculates that Chrysler's move suggests the automaker is preparing for imminent financial failure should its efforts to persuade Congress to deliver federal rescue funds fall short."
"the afternoon session consisted of an impressive panel of experts -- three of them financial wizards. Their conclusion was the the fall of Detroit's automakers would have a disastrous effect on the already devastated U.S. economy."
Comments
Ha ha!!!
I remember those times when the only difference between a mark-II and a Mark-III was the mark-III had rubber lined bumpers.
The difference between the Mark-III and Mark-IV was the taillights.....
One thing that I find amusing about these Congressional hearings is the people holding them. I guess if you're coming, hat in hand, asking for money, you've got to hold your tongue. If I was one of these CEO's/CFO's being grilled about their business decisions I couldn't remain silent. I'd have to answer a question with a question. What's worse, running a corporation into bankruptcy or running a country into bankruptcy?
Regards,
OW
However when it comes to Wall Street I’d support not just replacing their incompetent corrupt CEOs, but putting them on trial and if guilty sending them to jail for high crimes against the nation.
It is outrageous that Congress is having this debate about US auto companies while European companies are already conniving to become American banks for the purpose of tapping into the TARP.
If Americans don’t demand a government for the USA, by those who put the USA first, we as a nation are headed into third world status. Our government has been infiltrated by those whose interests do not lie with the USA.
Frankly I’m one who is disgusted that elected officials have sold out our country and its manufacturing capability for other interests and other nations.
What makes this so difficult is that... if Congress gives them any money, will it make any difference? Or will they just come back, 3 months from now, and beg for another 30-40 billion of your dollars?
And it really doesn't look very good. Most likely, GM and Chrysler will come back in another quarter and beg for more.
Greed makes you want to send me to the poor house and it makes me want to see your business collapse so that I get all your customers. As long as we both understand this all is good in the world of Capitalism. Greed makes Alabama wish for the demise of the D3 so that it's auto factories have to be expanded to meet the additional demand. Greed in the 50's and 60's made Michigan keep all of the wealth from auto production in state instead of sharing it with Alabama.
It's a vicious dog-eat-dog economic model but it's made us stronger and it's the basis of our entire way of life.
Remember from whence this all came. The Executive Branch.
It was the Executive Branch that brought this to the nation's attention and threatened everyone of us and all our jobs if we didn't give them/him ( Paulsen ) the money needed ASAP no questions asked. Even more basic is the one person that has the most responsibility for all of this mess... Alan Greenspan... who at the time of making his horrific mistakes was part of the Executive Branch of Government.
The Executive Branch rammed the bailout down our throats, they took the money and have since changed directions at least twice on how it should be spent. They've been wrong on everything that they and their stupid boss have told us.
An article from the NYT today.
Bernanke/Paulsen changes his mind again!
quote:
After pouring vast amounts of money into financial institutions of almost every type, and having little to show for it, the Bush administration and the Federal Reserve are suddenly taking a new look at ordinary homeowners.
unquote
I have no love or hate one way or the other for Congress I just don't like inaccuracies creating misconceptions. Lay the blame where it belongs.
Haven't you heard the phrase "What's good for GM is good for the country?" I think someone taking it a bit too literally these days. But you are right...there should be no bailout..someone always steps up. The same would be true of the banks. Ford already came out and said they don't NEED a bailout, yet everyone keeps lumping them in...let GM and Chrysler go out of business, Ford will still make cars, Tesla might branch out, some entrepreneur might buy an engine plant and car factory cheap and we'll have a new domestic auto company. What's the big deal?
My main impression that I get from GM, is that they are focusing on the "amount" of cars on the road, rather than focusing on fewer cars and having a higher quality rating. Its like, how many more cars can they make? make a box, put 4 wheels on it, and slap a name on it, you got a new car.
Anyway, it is just a car, and in the mean time, I am actually having fun in the GM car, but just know that soon I will have what I want.
I am a Honda Fan, I also own an 08 VW Jetta.
link title
link title
You need to get a new act
BY MARK PHELAN • FREE PRESS COLUMNIST • December 5, 2008
"The debate over aid to the Detroit-based automakers is awash with half-truths and misrepresentations that are endlessly repeated by everyone from members of Congress to journalists. Here are seven myths about the companies and their vehicles, and the reality in each case.
Reality: General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC sold 8.5 million vehicles in the United States last year and millions more around the world. GM outsold Toyota by about 1.2 million vehicles in the United States last year and holds a U.S. lead over Toyota of nearly 700,000 so far this year. Globally, GM in 2007 remained the world's largest automaker, selling 9,369,524 vehicles worldwide -- about 3,000 more than Toyota.
Ford outsold Honda by about 850,000 and Nissan by more than 1.3 million vehicles in the United States last year.
Chrysler sold more vehicles here than Nissan and Hyundai combined in 2007 and so far this year.
Reality: The creaky, leaky vehicles of the 1980s and '90s are long gone. Consumer Reports recently found that 'Ford's reliability is now on par with good Japanese automakers.'
The independent J.D. Power Initial Quality Study scored Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, Ford, GMC, Mercury, Pontiac and Lincoln brands' overall quality as high as or higher than that of Acura, Audi, BMW, Honda, Nissan, Scion, Volkswagen and Volvo.
J.D. Power rated the Chevrolet Malibu the highest-quality midsize sedan. Both the Malibu and Ford Fusion scored better than the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry.
Reality: All of the Detroit Three build midsize sedans that the Environmental Protection Agency rates at 29-33 miles per gallon on the highway.
The most fuel-efficient Chevrolet Malibu gets 33 m.p.g. on the highway, 2 m.p.g. better than the best Honda Accord. The most fuel-efficient Ford Focus has the same highway fuel economy ratings as the most efficient Toyota Corolla. The most fuel-efficient Chevrolet Cobalt has the same city fuel economy and better highway fuel economy than the most efficient non-hybrid Honda Civic.
A recent study by Edmunds.com found that the Chevrolet Aveo subcompact is the least expensive car to buy and operate.
Reality: None of that money has been lent out and may not be for more than a year. In addition, it can, by law, be used only to invest in future vehicles and technology, so it has no effect on the shortage of operating cash the companies face because of the economic slowdown that's killing them now.
Reality: The domestics' lineup has been truck-heavy, but Toyota, Nissan, Mercedes-Benz and BMW have spent billions of dollars on pickups and SUVs because trucks are a large and historically profitable part of the auto industry.
The most fuel-efficient full-size pickups from GM, Ford and Chrysler all have higher EPA fuel-economy ratings than Toyota and Nissan's full-size pickups.
Reality: The Detroit Three got into the hybrid business late, but Ford and GM each now offers more hybrid models than Honda or Nissan, with several more due to hit the road in early 2009.
Reality: Chrysler tied Toyota as the most productive automaker in North America this year, according to the Harbour Report on manufacturing, which measures the amount of work done per employee. Eight of the 10 most productive vehicle assembly plants in North America belong to Chrysler, Ford or GM.
The oft-cited $70-an-hour wage and benefit figure for UAW workers inaccurately adds benefits that millions of retirees get to the pay of current workers, but divides the total only by current employees. That's like assuming you get your parents' retirement and Social Security benefits in addition to your own income.
Hourly pay for assembly line workers tops out around $28; benefits add about $14. New hires at the Detroit Three get $14 an hour. There's no pension or health care when they retire, but benefits raise their total hourly compensation to $29 while they're working. UAW wages are now comparable with Toyota workers, according to a Free Press analysis."
Buy whatever you want - that's your right - but don't ask American taxpayers for a bailout.
You want to support the American brands, that's wonderful. That's your choice to buy their products if they appeal to you. That's everyone's choice to buy the products they prefer...the free market is the ultimate democracy. I personally do NOT like Chrysler's products, and don't buy them, because I don't want my money going to that company. I haven't bought a GM recently because I don't like their products and I don't want my money going to them. In both cases, neither makes a product I would choose, therefore they did not earn my dollars or my business. Ford did, but only through an intermediary, but that's OK. I also bought stock in Ford recently because I like the direction the company is going, and I think my next car purchase will be a Ford (that or Nissan anyway, have to see what happens).
The problem with the bailout money that GM and Chrysler want (remember, Ford just wants a really big credit card) is basically that they're saying the following: "We don't know how to run our companies or make products that people want to give us money for, so now we want the money anyway, or else." Remember, they get money from us buying their products. We generally chose not to (or they'd probably be in better shape and not need loans, right?), so now they're getting our (tax) money in the form of a loan. And guess what? If they have to liquidate anyway because they still don't know how to make money, those loans have to be paid back during the Ch7 liquidation sales. That means GM sells its assets...to whom, you ask? Us, the taxpayers. So we pay them our money for their assets so they have money to pay back the money that we gave them because they don't make products that enough of us want to give them money for.
Well, hey, I guess if you can't earn someone's money, it's OK to just take it, right? :shades:
Very good post I agree 100%. Any other system only weakens the people. Look at the EU and you can see just what happens when they think that greed can be removed from the equation. You end up with a nation of zombies that could not defend themselves. And a dictator has little trouble taking over. Think Putin.
Congress did approve the $700b bailout adding 500 pages of earmarks. It could be argued that Congress over many years have done things that brought on the banking mess.
It is funny that with 500 pages of earmarks from Congress they did not include a bailout for the B3. They did throw in the $7500 tax credit for EV type vehicles aimed at the Volt.
There are other factors people trade before 100K - accidents for one. Another is somebody simply wants the features that are found on a new car that aren't on his old one. I thought my 2002 Seville STS was a loaded car. The DTS I bought last year makes it seem like a plain Jane. My 1988 Park Ave is downright spartan compared to it.
Mr. Mopar was a plump happy rich man strolling down the street in an upscale neighborhood wearing a tuxedo, shiny black shoes with spotless white spats, top hat, cape, and cane. He's wearing a big gold watch and a ring with a diamond as big as a walnut. His wallet is stuffed with crisp new bills in large denominations.
A big black S-Class pulls up to the curb. Two burly German thugs named Daimler and Benz grab Mr. Mopar and shove him in the back seat. Daimler sticks a Luger in Mr. Mopar's face as Benz shoves a Walther P-38 in his belly. Mr. Mopar cries, "What is this?" Daimler replies, "It's a 'merger of equals', (censored)!"
Mr. Mopar disappears for almost ten years.
It's late 2007. A big black S-Class is speeding through the ghetto and a skinny, sickly, barefoot emaciated man wearing nothing but stained "tighty whities" is pushed out of the car and rolls into the gutter. The S-Class disappears down the block. This cadaverous individual was once Mr. Mopar. Lying in the gutter among broken bottles of MD 20/20 and discarded crack vials he faces skyward with glazed eyes and wonders, "What happened?" Suddenly, a nasty pitbull named Cerberus latches his jaws on Mr. Mopar's ankle and starts dragging him into an alley next to a crack house...
Sorry, but blaming this all on Bush won't fly...this entire mess has been brewing for well over a decade, and some of its roots reach back to the Clinton administration. Congress got into the act, too - and both Republicans and Democrats were very happy to support the laws and policies that got us into this mess.
The "blame everything on Bush" approach is far too simplistic...this mess has bipartisan roots.
Let's see the latest cost analysis put Iraq at $10B per month.
Lets get it back on track and talk about how the Committee pointed out yesterday that they understood that Ford really did not need to be there but were there in support of the competitors.
This is entirely wrong and it shows a distinct lack of understanding on how this country was built from the very beginning. You actually are being un-American in suggesting that he should put the needs of the people of Michigan before his own constituents in AL. It's his sworn duty to protect and defend the Constitution of the US.
The basic premise of the Constitution and thus our whole way of government is that it's a confederation of independent states which has delegated limited powers to the Federals. All other rights remain in the hands of the states. His state takes preference over your state. He has to do what serves his state the best.
Now this is going to be hard to swallow. Most people in this country and thus most states don't care one whit about Detroit and/or Michigan and/or the D3. A goodly number of them want Detroit to die so that their own businesses get stronger. This is the basic tenet of our business model and it's why we fought the Cold War ... so that the rest of the world would accept they way we do things rather than the communistic way.
Let him do his job for his people. If it kills Michigan, well then they bought it on themselves. Where's the Michigan delegation?
No I don't live in Ala. I'm a NYer transplanted to NC. I don't have a side in this fight.
And NO I say to the hoary phrase that 'what's good for GM is good for the country'. That may have been true 60 yrs ago but we've moved beyond that today. The country is too large and too diverse. GM is a small part of the national economy.
Don't know about Japan, but I don't think that German law outlaws foreign ownership. Nothing would stop you from buying a German business if you wanted to. Chances are that you wouldn't want to because Germany is an extremely expensive place to do business. (Look at the German companies that build factories in Alabama to get away from the high cost of manufacturing at home.)
The only exception that comes to mind is Volkswagen, which enjoyed protected status under German law for many years & which is partly owned by the State of Lower Saxony.
Anyway, if you're a hard-core free market capitalist like I am, you should be against any laws against foreign ownership. Would you like it if the State of California decreed that you could sell your house only to a native Californian? You'd be spitting mad, & rightfully so, because that would mean a lower price for you. Similarly, I should be free to sell my Ford shares to the highest bidder, no matter what his nationality.
We Americans don't know the history of our own country, so we don't know that European money paid for the construction of our railroads in the middle & late 1800s, when the railroad industry was the biggest & most important part of the American economy. We also don't know that British & German investors owned big chunks of corporate America right up until WWI began in 1914. After that, they had to sell their shares to pay for the war.
The reason that I typed 'Executive Branch' was not to smear Bush alone, although he deserves a good smearing, but also to extend it to the prior 'Executive Branch' as well. Greenspan was the saint of deregulation and Clinton's best friend for 8 yrs. It was Greenspan and Rubin and Phil Gramm who really started us down this path( Glass-Steagall repeal ) at the behest of their constituents on Wall Street.
Congress is not the target here. The last two Executive Branches are.
Completely different subject...the Iraq War has little, if anything, to do with our present economic mess.
Again, the roots of this stretch back 15 or so years ago, or before Gramm-Leach-Bliley was signed into law...and a fair amount of it was caused by government MEDDLING in various markets, not deregulation.
this mess is the responsibility of everyone, Repub., Dem., Ind., EVERYONE! manage your assets properly, and you wont have to worry about it ever again!
One comment of note:
"GMAC is applying to be banking holding company and if successful will be eligible for money under the TARP."
Skepticism colors auto hearing (Detroit Free Press)
Totally agree! Whether to give a Loan to the Big3 comes down to 1 thing. Will the taxpayer be making a good investment such that they get their $ back with interest. It needs to stand on its own merits.
Ford and GM (Chrysler shouldn't even be included because they can get $ from their "parent" Cerberus), need to convince Congress 1) this $ is enough and 2) they can repay the loans.
Did anyone see the GM Plan, and any mention when they would start repaying the loan? Or the interest rate? If you or I get a mortgage loan or mortgage when do you have to start paying it back? When would GM start paying back the loan, what are the terms?
Can I go crying to congress to have them pay my house off?
Pay my credit card bill?
Gas?
Electric?
All I can say is this........the Corrupt Educated???????? Officers who FLEW to DC to beg for cash instead of driving there and showing what a good product they have.........if, and I really hope they DO NOT get one penny, if they do, a dollar a year salary is nice.....KICK EM ALL OUT.
Run your company into the ground..........heres a truckload of money, thanks.
That makes sense?
Oh, they went to college.........college of.......stupidity?
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2008-12-05-honda_N.htm
I'm sure Honda has many billions put away to ride out this storm. But Japanese industry is designed to be more flexible, to build only the numbers and types of products that are being sold.
Customers PULL product, instead of the manufacturers pushing product. organizations need to be able to change amounts and types of products quickly, and adjust costs quickly when revenues drop.
"Honda is looking to cut costs by $216 million. Honda also has eliminated workers and reduced production to cut costs.
The cost cuts come on the heels of Honda slashing its forecast for earnings by 13 percent to its lowest profit level in eight years. Its stock has dropped 56 percent this year, setting Honda up for its worst annual performance since at least 1975. Honda reported U.S. sales dropped 32 percent in November, the biggest decline since 1981."
GM acted like a drunken sailor, spending every penny of their paycheck in the bar, and now realize they can't pay the rent or buy food for the next month. It seems like Honda with 33 years of profits, and cutting costs now, will survive w/o bailouts. And if GM folds, those factories and workers along with all the other manufacturers will makeup the slack.
can you tell I am really upset? Can you tell that I am LOYAL to the USA?
farout
Oh, you mean the Equinox?
In my life, my wife and I had bought 2 new Ford Escorts, a '94 Chevy Corsica, a '96 Subaru Impreza, a '98 Camaro (V-6), traded that on an '01 Pontiac Firebird (V-8), have a '00 Silverado, and recently bought a Mazda (partial Ford ownership). I bought mostly USA, and I still would, but GM, Ford, and Chrysler must be replaced if they can't manage themselves. They are corporations; they are not the U.S.
Let GE, Walmart, McDonald's, or Berkshire Hathaway or someone else come in and make autos. If GM, Ford, or Chrysler liquidate certainly someone will buy the parts worth keeping.
In fact I'll make an offer right now to GM to get them some cash. $100,000 for the Bowling Green plant and the rights to the Corvette name.
No, but I can tell that you're confusing loyalty to America with loyalty to 3 corporations.
I'm not here to serve GM, Ford or Chrysler. Rather, they're here to serve me. If they offer me products that I like at prices that I'm willing to pay, I'll reward them with my dollars. If they can't do this, I'll take my business elsewhere.
This isn't a 2-way street. They must please me. I'm the customer, & as my late father, a businessman himself, taught me, the customer is always right. It's that simple.
If I don't want to buy what you're selling, it's your fault - not mine. Maybe there's something wrong with your product, or maybe you're asking too much money for it. Fix the problem. Don't whine about "loyalty". That's un-American.
Blind loyalty to corporations is the first step to socialism.
And one of the other benefits overlooked about trade between nations is it brings a better chance of peace, than war. Why? Well it's very few people that want to kill their customers! If I'm the head of China, I'm certainly not going to start a war with the U.S. for the simple fact that my economy would probably collapse and bring about social upheaval. On the other hand, what makes countries dangerous like N. Korea is that they are isolated, and don't have much to lose. The calculation of gain vs. loss, tips to war when there is not much at stake to lose.
You know another good idea the Big3 could do if they don't get those loans. Maybe they can ask any workers and pensioners to give back the profit-sharing, and bonuses they received during years when they lost money. Aren't there hundreds of thousnads of employees who received a minimum of $1,000/year for a number of years, while the company lost $. Someone have the numbers and want to do the math, as to how much this would be?
Why should we give to the Big3 when the employees helped themselves to the treasury for years when losing money? Why should we give to Chrysler when Cerberus could fund them?
You are absolutely right! I would never buy that Ford or GM made in Canada or Mexico, I'm driving an Acura made in the USA!
That's the biggest question I have. Chrysler is a privately held company, not a publicly traded one. If Cerberus thought Chrysler was worth funding, they'd do it themselves. We, and our Congress, should be asking why Cerberus ISN'T, and since they're not, why should we?
"If we were denied the funds, it certainly would push us in that direction and possibly, even worse, to liquidation," Nardelli replied. "There's a million people, in our calculation, counting on Chrysler, point one, that certainly would be unemployed, and therefore run the risk of not being able to pay their mortgage."
Yahoo
"The Wall Street Journal speculates that Chrysler's move suggests the automaker is preparing for imminent financial failure should its efforts to persuade Congress to deliver federal rescue funds fall short."
Chrysler Hires a Bankruptcy Firm, Report Says (AutoObserver)
"the afternoon session consisted of an impressive panel of experts -- three of them financial wizards. Their conclusion was the the fall of Detroit's automakers would have a disastrous effect on the already devastated U.S. economy."
Saving Detroit Three Is in the Country's National Interest, Experts Agree (AutoObserver)