Yeah, but andre3 owned one, it was a POS, and now every Chrysler product ever made is a POS, and they should go belly up for no other reason. The hatred is UNBELIEVEABLE!!!! I'm sure plenty of people have had good experiences w/ VW, but in general, they have a not so stellar reputation for reliability.
Oh, you don't want to be defending Chrysler's reputation based on the Neon. Maybe better with a PT Cruiser which, while basically a Neon, had bugs worked out.
I'd hate to get into a reliability fight between Chrysler and Volkswagen though I will say that based on personal experience (one of each) the Chrysler wins the reliability contest hands down.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Oh, I wouldn't defend Chrysler's rep either. And I can certainly understand never buying another car from a company after his experience. But the unadulterated VITRIOL he spews is unbelieveable.
Yeah, I know. I used to really get on Ford and certainly had my reasons but I think in all cases you have to allow that a company is different some years down the road. Some have shpwn that they have made progress (I give Ford credit for this and to a lesser extent GM) while some seem to have the same mindset for decades (think VW here).
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
See, this is what I'm seeing. The writing is on the wall now. I believe the D3 get it. It's just going to take time to flush "old school" products out of the system, and get new stuff in. Even the J3 are having problems. Toyota and Honda, having record setting productions, are probably going through growing pains producing that many cars. I'm sure it will pass.
Chrysler's biggest problem is that ever since the "merger of equals" (yeah right) they have been in a flux. They couldn't take advantage of the merger because they weren't "in charge". The Germans were. Now, the are controlled by hedge fund managers. So, I feel all judgement should be reserved until they are on their own again, if that ever happens.
The "if that ever happens" is my concern with Chrysler. I don't know that Daimler really left them viable after wringing all the cash out and now it's a matter of whether Cerberus will get enough cash in to create new product. Right now I don't see it.
I think GM is close enough to where they want to go that if they get serious on wringing out the junk they have to get rid of they'll make it. I think Ford will be fine.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Well, lets just hope, for our country's sake, that Fiat comes to the rescue. It sounds as if both companies could gain, with Fiat having instant access to our market, and Chrysler getting instant access to what seems are some credible small cars.
I don't know that Daimler really left them viable after wringing all the cash out and now it's a matter of whether Cerberus will get enough cash in to create new product.
Where do you get that from? First do you know that Daimler still owns 15% of Chrysler? Second Cerberus replaced Daimler investment in Chrysler $ for $. Chrysler was no worse off financially after the sale to Cerberus.
What has hurt Chrysler is losing $ each month. Cerberus does not wish to put $1B or so of their OWN $ into Chrysler with no end in sight. They had initially hoped to "flip" Chrysler to some other buyer, betting that the auto-industry would be healthy and they could put a "shine" on Chrysler. Well Cerberus lost that bet. Now they're trying to get the U.S. taxpayer to cover their losses from here, to get something back from Chrysler, before Cerberus losses more billions.
Too bad for Cerberus I say. They took the chance just like you or I, if we buy a stock at $30/share and it's now $2/share, and heading towards bankruptcy.
Either through C11 or continued Gov't restructured bailout, The price tag exceeds $100B. The parts suppliers are asking for $25B now. I was resigned to this in December...there seems to be no way around it.
He could also offer them an extension to work out the concessions by all parties. Though the fact that he has hired a Bankruptcy team looks like your second pick will be the one.
".....Too bad for Cerberus I say. They took the chance just like you or I, if we buy a stock at $30/share and it's now $2/share, and heading towards bankruptcy."
I give you that, too bad for Cerebus. But Daimler had the opportunity to turn this into a great relationship, with Dodge as the base Chrysler in the middle, and Mercedes at the top. They could've shared CURRENT platforms at least with the Chrysler name and Mercedes, much like Toyota does w/ Lexus, Honda and Acura, and GM and Ford do. But the German arrogance once again got in the way, and they punted their opportunity to do so.
As is the case so many times, they could've turned it around, but the stockholders said no more, and management capitulated.
The repubs got us to continue the overspending beyond our means in the last couple years to hold onto confidence due to the glimmer of hope that it caused. They didn't stand up to the BS at fannie mae.
The dems worked very very very hard to ruin our confidence to turn the last 8 years into a perception of failure. They were imensely successful. Brainwashing did happen on a massive scale. The market selloff hurt me the most. It was most highly confidence driven and suffered the fastest, deepest hit. In the '93 downturn, I lost my job which took 4 months to replace. In this downturn my mutual fund losses are over a year's salary. My real estate losses are twice my mutual fund losses.
It went beyond words though. News of eroded confidence caused behavioral changes. The dems now want us all to forget the last 2 years campaign rhetoric and regain our confidence in a whim, but after the loss of confidence has manifested itself into reality. They want you to go buy a new car when you are on the fence about your job security?
As we were spiraling downward, perceptively, over the last few years, costs of college, gas, food, utilities, and taxes were going up at some of the fastest rates ever. Effectively, half the economy was and still is booming. Exxon made 48 billion last year. now that private sector raises are a thing of the past and college is still going up in cost, there is $750 a year in the stimulus plan for college. The $1000 a year make work and the $750 a year college credit will in effect be my substitute raise. I will still find it difficult to trade savings for spending right after a few years of savings has recently eroded away. The savings is eroded because of two policies: real estate loans to those who should have never got them, and a market collapse caused by confidence destruction orchestrated to win an election.
I heard confidence mentioned many times on this morning's panel news as the only way out. Only problem is everyone who voted in the new administration were the ones making fun of those who still had confidence 4 months ago. Ironic.
We are headed into a new economy where private sector profits are hard to come by. Get a gov't job to survive best in it. If you can't beat em, join em. The best auto sector jobs will be as gov't hired C11 lawyers dealing with the D3.
Teachers in my area make 15% more per hour than UAW and get NO flak. Many news articles are aimed at making me feel sorry for them.
I say give them the money. I can't believe we are considering giving Nissan a handout for producing vehicles in this country, and at the same time are questioning if we are going to give the "Home team" a loan. Who is in charge in Washington? Are we answering to the paid off senetors from the south who are on Japan's payroll? Senetors Shelby, McConnel, and Corcker have to be pulling some strings to try and get the loans to fail. I say give GM & Chrysler the loan then put the "3 stooges " on trail for treason.
I don't think we should give anyone anymore money. If we give anymore money out we need to give it to people to buy the cars. The car companies keep building cars they aren't going to be able to sell they are just digging their hole deeper. Spending everything they can get to keep building cars they are not selling makes no sense.
Obama has an $800 billion stimulus plan creating 4 million jobs temporary jobs as a high end estimate (per David Axlerod today on Meet the Press). GM sells 260 billion a year worth of cars. At Obama's exchange rate, that would be equal to 1.3 million permanent jobs saved if GM could be saved. So by giving GM 50 billion over the long haul and saving 250,000 temporary jobs, it would have the same payback as the big Obama plan. If the jobs last over 2 years, it would beat the Obama plan.
You don't like the cars so don't save them (GM)? How many teachers, policemen, politicians, stock traders, or bankers do we not like? Looks like we don't get to pick and choose with the Trillions of bailout they get. remember: He with the gold makes the rules. So expect rules that grow votes for the next election for the rulemaker.
It isn't that I don't like GM cars. It don't make sense to borrow money to build cars if noone can buy them. If they build them and don't sell them, how will they repay the loans? I guess that is a dumb question because noone seems to mention the awful word repay especially the government unless someone owes them.
It looks like we'll have at least a troika of people watching over the D3:
"President Barack Obama plans to appoint senior administration officials - rather than a single "car czar," as had been discussed - to oversee a restructuring of the auto industry.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and National Economic Council Director Lawrence Summers will oversee the across-the-government panel, a senior administration official said Sunday on the condition of anonymity because no announcement had been made."
It don't make sense to borrow money to build cars if noone can buy them. If they build them and don't sell them, how will they repay the loans?
Excellent point. We (my wife & I) own our cars free & clear. It'll be years before we buy a new car. We'd rather use any extra dollars that come our way to pay off our mortgage ahead of schedule.
Wow, Your last two posts I totally agree with. I had to read them twice. I do feel for the teachers and the workers in schools here in CA. They will take the brunt of layoffs. They will keep a lot of useless administration and dump the guy that keeps the toilets unplugged. Makes little sense. But then, this is the land of fruits, flakes and NUTS.
I think those that will lose in the auto industry here on the West Coast, will be tied to dealerships. My mechanic friend went back to work in an independent shop. That tells me people are wising up and keeping their cars rather than trading them in on new.
1. Give GM more money 2. force them into structured C11
Not a surprise. On Dec 4 2008 I posted this in "2009 Predictions for the Auto Industry":
1. GM gets bailout and some concessions, but sales continue to tank. More money wanted from Congress by midyear and more tough cuts again. GM in bankruptcy by end of '09. Wagoner is not fired by useless board until after BK. 3. Volt is abandoned. 4. Ford doing better. 5. Chrysler broken up for parts. 6. Honda and Mazda doing better than most. 7. Toyota faltering some, but not nearly as bad as GM.
I'd have to say that my predictions are tracking nicely with reality up to this point. :shades: :shades:
You don't like the cars so don't save them (GM)? How many teachers, policemen, politicians, stock traders, or bankers do we not like?
The argument that we need to save GM so we can save all the other jobs that depend on GM is so lame. If I don't buy a GM, I'll go next door and buy a Ford, Toyota, or Honda. The market is what it is. The auto industry, and not just the D3, has to "right size". Building 13 million vehicles when the market is 10 or 11 million is idiotic.
Rather than having all automakers shrink and suffer, if 1 or 2 of them die, the others will become fairly healthy. The suppliers need to downsize though for the market.
The problem with union suppliers though is they are much slower and it is much more expensive for them to size themselves up or down. Non-union plants can hire or layoff faster and less expensively; thus non-union car companies are more efficient and effective at handling changes in the market.
Although I am with you guy and believe insolvent companies should go C11, it is not going to happen. This Admin. will spend over $100B to make sure the industry survives, bleeding and all!
circlew...I wholeheartedly agree. I see and extension on the present agreement and then more $$$ for them after that. I personally think chapter 11 is the answer but we won't see it.
I think Ford's analysts should rethink the numbers again. There are more cars (about 250M registered + how many unregistered?) than drivers in this country, therefore there is certainly room for the total number of cars to go down each year.
It would make sense for the major players to cut their production to meet the 9.6 million units Press has projected. It is better to work OT to catch up with demand than to have cars sitting collecting dust with associated flooring costs.
All I know is I've helped push more dead Jettas off the road than I have Neons.
Man, AMEN to that, cooter
Who cares. I've owned both and would rather push the Jetta on occasion then have to live with a Neon day to day. While I didn't have any reliability issues with my '00 Jetta or '95 Neon, the quality and refinement of the Jetta was superior to every domestic car I've owned, ever.
My '00 Suburban cost me enough in repairs between 45k -70k miles, I could have bought a nice used car to use as a spare.
My '00 Suburban cost me enough in repairs between 45k -70k miles
You mean I got rid of my 99 Suburban at just the right time with only 47k miles. I had a 7 year warranty and sold right after it expired. It was relatively trouble free to that point.
General Motors Corp, nearing a Tuesday deadline to present a viability plan to the U. S. government, is considering as one option a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing that would create a new company, the Wall Street Journal said in its Saturday edition.
"One plan includes a Chapter 11 filing that would assemble all of GM's viable assets, including some U.S. brands and international operations, into a new company," the newspaper said. "The undesirable assets would be liquidated or sold under protection of a bankruptcy court. Contracts with bondholders, unions, dealers and suppliers would also be reworked."
Go figure! We'll just have to wait for this weeks episode of " Desperate Automotive"
You mean I got rid of my 99 Suburban at just the right time with only 47k miles. I had a 7 year warranty and sold right after it expired. It was relatively trouble free to that point.
Seems those vintage GM trucks/SUVs were pretty good in terms of durability. My FIL still drives a '95 Tahoe that has provided 160k relatively trouble free miles. Granted it's horrid to drive, but he's happy with it.
I was hoping to keep my Suburban a lot longer than I did, but like the majority of GM vehicles I've owned, they've all sucked in one way or another. It really pisses me off that GM is getting my money whether I want their product or not.
I'm just waiting for the UAW to strike a GM plant after getting tax payer money and trying to hold all of us hostage.
I will say, that is a very nice looking car. I'm hoping to fit in the Chicago Autoshow next weekend. I'd like to check that out along with the new Taurus.
I'm losing my optimism that D3 can turn it around without bankruptcy. Little meaningful progress seems to be happening with everyone trying to blame it on the lack of a car czar. Now instead of a car czar there will be a group of people and all the bureaucracy that goes with commitee leadership. The UAW seems to be drawing a line in the sand, the debtholders don't appear to want equity, the dealers are trying to get even more stringent state level legislative protection, and the lawyers keep filing lawsuits against D3. Unlike the Chrysler loans in the 70's, there may be too many rings in this circus to get an out of court resolution. When you have these many players and special interests, everyone starts playing off each other as it heads down the hole. If they file for bankruptcy, the parties might get more serious and possibly resolve things before the judge has to. It's all just very sad.
Both cars look very promising. That's certainly the nicest looking Taurus - ever! Love the LaCrosse. Wouldn't mind getting one to replace my '88 Park Ave if it ever dies.
The Lincoln MKS has had some complaints about ride, braking and engine performance. Hopefully Taurus improved these areas. LaCrosse could be a sleeper if marketed right (and please no keeping the current model in the rental fleets at cross purposes like GM did with the Malibu).
The UAW seems to be drawing a line in the sand, the debtholders don't appear to want equity, the dealers are trying to get even more stringent state level legislative protection, and the lawyers keep filing lawsuits against D3.
You forget the part where GM and Chrysler are run by a bunch of cheap morons. I hate it when people try to make it out like it's everyone's fault but the company's when the company fails to make a profit.
Right now, if I were the dealers or the UAW, I'd see the writing on the wall and be looking out for Number One myself...I AM in fact a minor debtholder in GM and Chrysler, as well as a stakeholder (my company does a lot of business with them) and while I'd like to see them get out of it, it'll looking less and less likely, which means it's more and more likely that all parties involved are going to take all they can get and walk away from the rotting corpse.
Remember, all parties are looking to make a buck in this. If, for example, GM, is not looking like it's going to be a viable, profit making entity soon, why should any of the rest of these parties give up THEIR bucks to prop up something that's not going to make them any money down the road? No way, they want their money NOW, while there still is some.
Oh I think inept management has been understood going into this whole mess from the beginning and I expect more executive changes will be forthcoming. I'm not picking on the UAW, they are just one of the parties. However, they are going to have to decide just how much they will protect retirees and at what possible cost to themselves. Wherever the pay point is, that portion of the D3 problem is made of salary, employee benefits and retiree benefits, and unfortunately it is likely somewhat of a zero sum game.
After the new Car Team approves more money, the UAW and the bondholders will settle. It's a given in these negotiations that hey are waiting for the Government to add the extra funds they will ask for tomorrow. Not the amount already earmarked but EVEN MORE FUNDS they need so they can bleed their way through the restructuring.
Their original forecast of a "Worst Case Scenario" was a joke! The same forecasters thought home prices would continue to climb ad infinitum. And it took a year to tell we were in a recession. Where do we get these guys from?
BTW, no one on the car team could even change his own tires or fill his tank with gas! They are going to lead a restructuring plan for a manufacturing industry after killing the Banking Industry? And the leader can't use Turbo Tax correctly but is in charge of the U.S. Treasury??
The Lincoln MKS has had some complaints about ride, braking and engine performance.
I've read that too. But the Ford 3.7 in the MKS is also in the Mazda 6 which has received good reviews. I believe the Taurus will still use the 3.5, then the 3.5 Ecoboost twin turbo in SHO trim. Maybe at the price point the MKS plays in, a pounched out 3.5 Duratec isn't as refined as the powerplants in competing vehicles.
Ford may be okay for now, but they can't continue to lose $ like they are for long. And they are a relatively big ship to alter course.
If I was the executive of Ford or any other auto company I would be more worried about survival - what to do this year than anything else. My emphasis would be -how do I downsize to at least stop losing money.
Plans for 2011 and 12 are irrelevant, compared to the issues of surviving this economy.
Your post explains why i think Chap. 11 is the only way out for GM. too much debt, too many dealers, too many workers to re-structure the company. And no one wants to loan them money or take stake in the company.
Comments
I'd hate to get into a reliability fight between Chrysler and Volkswagen though I will say that based on personal experience (one of each) the Chrysler wins the reliability contest hands down.
Chrysler's biggest problem is that ever since the "merger of equals" (yeah right) they have been in a flux. They couldn't take advantage of the merger because they weren't "in charge". The Germans were. Now, the are controlled by hedge fund managers. So, I feel all judgement should be reserved until they are on their own again, if that ever happens.
I think GM is close enough to where they want to go that if they get serious on wringing out the junk they have to get rid of they'll make it. I think Ford will be fine.
Where do you get that from? First do you know that Daimler still owns 15% of Chrysler? Second Cerberus replaced Daimler investment in Chrysler $ for $. Chrysler was no worse off financially after the sale to Cerberus.
What has hurt Chrysler is losing $ each month. Cerberus does not wish to put $1B or so of their OWN $ into Chrysler with no end in sight. They had initially hoped to "flip" Chrysler to some other buyer, betting that the auto-industry would be healthy and they could put a "shine" on Chrysler. Well Cerberus lost that bet. Now they're trying to get the U.S. taxpayer to cover their losses from here, to get something back from Chrysler, before Cerberus losses more billions.
Too bad for Cerberus I say. They took the chance just like you or I, if we buy a stock at $30/share and it's now $2/share, and heading towards bankruptcy.
2. force them into structured C11
Can't Cut Costs Enough
Keep printing money...it's the sign of the times.
Regards,
OW
I give you that, too bad for Cerebus. But Daimler had the opportunity to turn this into a great relationship, with Dodge as the base Chrysler in the middle, and Mercedes at the top. They could've shared CURRENT platforms at least with the Chrysler name and Mercedes, much like Toyota does w/ Lexus, Honda and Acura, and GM and Ford do. But the German arrogance once again got in the way, and they punted their opportunity to do so.
As is the case so many times, they could've turned it around, but the stockholders said no more, and management capitulated.
The dems worked very very very hard to ruin our confidence to turn the last 8 years into a perception of failure. They were imensely successful. Brainwashing did happen on a massive scale. The market selloff hurt me the most. It was most highly confidence driven and suffered the fastest, deepest hit. In the '93 downturn, I lost my job which took 4 months to replace. In this downturn my mutual fund losses are over a year's salary. My real estate losses are twice my mutual fund losses.
It went beyond words though. News of eroded confidence caused behavioral changes. The dems now want us all to forget the last 2 years campaign rhetoric and regain our confidence in a whim, but after the loss of confidence has manifested itself into reality. They want you to go buy a new car when you are on the fence about your job security?
As we were spiraling downward, perceptively, over the last few years, costs of college, gas, food, utilities, and taxes were going up at some of the fastest rates ever. Effectively, half the economy was and still is booming. Exxon made 48 billion last year. now that private sector raises are a thing of the past and college is still going up in cost, there is $750 a year in the stimulus plan for college. The $1000 a year make work and the $750 a year college credit will in effect be my substitute raise. I will still find it difficult to trade savings for spending right after a few years of savings has recently eroded away. The savings is eroded because of two policies: real estate loans to those who should have never got them, and a market collapse caused by confidence destruction orchestrated to win an election.
I heard confidence mentioned many times on this morning's panel news as the only way out. Only problem is everyone who voted in the new administration were the ones making fun of those who still had confidence 4 months ago. Ironic.
We are headed into a new economy where private sector profits are hard to come by. Get a gov't job to survive best in it. If you can't beat em, join em. The best auto sector jobs will be as gov't hired C11 lawyers dealing with the D3.
Teachers in my area make 15% more per hour than UAW and get NO flak. Many news articles are aimed at making me feel sorry for them.
Sadly, the story is, either management capitulates - or management gets replaced. Been there..... It's the way of the world.
You don't like the cars so don't save them (GM)? How many teachers, policemen, politicians, stock traders, or bankers do we not like? Looks like we don't get to pick and choose with the Trillions of bailout they get. remember: He with the gold makes the rules. So expect rules that grow votes for the next election for the rulemaker.
I guess that is a dumb question because noone seems to mention the awful
word repay especially the government unless someone owes them.
"President Barack Obama plans to appoint senior administration officials - rather than a single "car czar," as had been discussed - to oversee a restructuring of the auto industry.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and National Economic Council Director Lawrence Summers will oversee the across-the-government panel, a senior administration official said Sunday on the condition of anonymity because no announcement had been made."
Obama to appoint panel for auto recovery (Idaho Statesman)
Excellent point. We (my wife & I) own our cars free & clear. It'll be years before we buy a new car. We'd rather use any extra dollars that come our way to pay off our mortgage ahead of schedule.
I think those that will lose in the auto industry here on the West Coast, will be tied to dealerships. My mechanic friend went back to work in an independent shop. That tells me people are wising up and keeping their cars rather than trading them in on new.
2. force them into structured C11
Not a surprise. On Dec 4 2008 I posted this in "2009 Predictions for the Auto Industry":
1. GM gets bailout and some concessions, but sales continue to tank. More money wanted from Congress by midyear and more tough cuts again. GM in bankruptcy by end of '09. Wagoner is not fired by useless board until after BK.
3. Volt is abandoned.
4. Ford doing better.
5. Chrysler broken up for parts.
6. Honda and Mazda doing better than most.
7. Toyota faltering some, but not nearly as bad as GM.
I'd have to say that my predictions are tracking nicely with reality up to this point. :shades: :shades:
The argument that we need to save GM so we can save all the other jobs that depend on GM is so lame. If I don't buy a GM, I'll go next door and buy a Ford, Toyota, or Honda. The market is what it is. The auto industry, and not just the D3, has to "right size". Building 13 million vehicles when the market is 10 or 11 million is idiotic.
Rather than having all automakers shrink and suffer, if 1 or 2 of them die, the others will become fairly healthy. The suppliers need to downsize though for the market.
The problem with union suppliers though is they are much slower and it is much more expensive for them to size themselves up or down. Non-union plants can hire or layoff faster and less expensively; thus non-union car companies are more efficient and effective at handling changes in the market.
Regards,
OW
I think Ford's analysts should rethink the numbers again. There are more cars (about 250M registered + how many unregistered?) than drivers in this country, therefore there is certainly room for the total number of cars to go down each year.
Man, AMEN to that, cooter
Who cares. I've owned both and would rather push the Jetta on occasion then have to live with a Neon day to day. While I didn't have any reliability issues with my '00 Jetta or '95 Neon, the quality and refinement of the Jetta was superior to every domestic car I've owned, ever.
My '00 Suburban cost me enough in repairs between 45k -70k miles, I could have bought a nice used car to use as a spare.
You mean I got rid of my 99 Suburban at just the right time with only 47k miles. I had a 7 year warranty and sold right after it expired. It was relatively trouble free to that point.
General Motors Corp, nearing a Tuesday deadline to present a viability plan to the U.
S. government, is considering as one option a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing that would create a new company, the Wall Street Journal said in its Saturday edition.
"One plan includes a Chapter 11 filing that would assemble all of GM's viable assets, including some U.S. brands and international operations, into a new company," the newspaper said. "The undesirable assets would be liquidated or sold under protection of a bankruptcy court. Contracts with bondholders, unions, dealers and suppliers would also be reworked."
Go figure! We'll just have to wait for this weeks episode of " Desperate Automotive"
Regards,
OW
Seems those vintage GM trucks/SUVs were pretty good in terms of durability. My FIL still drives a '95 Tahoe that has provided 160k relatively trouble free miles. Granted it's horrid to drive, but he's happy with it.
I was hoping to keep my Suburban a lot longer than I did, but like the majority of GM vehicles I've owned, they've all sucked in one way or another. It really pisses me off that GM is getting my money whether I want their product or not.
I'm just waiting for the UAW to strike a GM plant after getting tax payer money and trying to hold all of us hostage.
No matter what side of the coin you fall on, I would be surprised if THAT didn't get Congress to call in the loan.
Ron, don't be that foolish. Please. I want my 2010 LaCrosse!!!
I will say, that is a very nice looking car. I'm hoping to fit in the Chicago Autoshow next weekend. I'd like to check that out along with the new Taurus.
Yeah, if I go, I'll take some pics and post them next week.
Quick question. How do I insert Polaroid pics into my 8mhz XT PC and send them to you with my 2400 baud modem?! LOL
Just kidding of course;)
2010 SHO
Regards,
OW
You forget the part where GM and Chrysler are run by a bunch of cheap morons. I hate it when people try to make it out like it's everyone's fault but the company's when the company fails to make a profit.
Right now, if I were the dealers or the UAW, I'd see the writing on the wall and be looking out for Number One myself...I AM in fact a minor debtholder in GM and Chrysler, as well as a stakeholder (my company does a lot of business with them) and while I'd like to see them get out of it, it'll looking less and less likely, which means it's more and more likely that all parties involved are going to take all they can get and walk away from the rotting corpse.
Remember, all parties are looking to make a buck in this. If, for example, GM, is not looking like it's going to be a viable, profit making entity soon, why should any of the rest of these parties give up THEIR bucks to prop up something that's not going to make them any money down the road? No way, they want their money NOW, while there still is some.
Their original forecast of a "Worst Case Scenario" was a joke! The same forecasters thought home prices would continue to climb ad infinitum. And it took a year to tell we were in a recession. Where do we get these guys from?
BTW, no one on the car team could even change his own tires or fill his tank with gas! They are going to lead a restructuring plan for a manufacturing industry after killing the Banking Industry? And the leader can't use Turbo Tax correctly but is in charge of the U.S. Treasury??
Bwahahahahaha!
Regards,
OW
I've read that too. But the Ford 3.7 in the MKS is also in the Mazda 6 which has received good reviews. I believe the Taurus will still use the 3.5, then the 3.5 Ecoboost twin turbo in SHO trim. Maybe at the price point the MKS plays in, a pounched out 3.5 Duratec isn't as refined as the powerplants in competing vehicles.
If I was the executive of Ford or any other auto company I would be more worried about survival - what to do this year than anything else. My emphasis would be -how do I downsize to at least stop losing money.
Plans for 2011 and 12 are irrelevant, compared to the issues of surviving this economy.