"....I think bailing out GM is like rebuilding in a flood plain like NO. TOTAL WASTE OF MY TAX DOLLARS."
Well, that makes you consistent in your opinion. That was my point all along. If we are a benevolent enough society to help them rebuild then we should be benevolent enough to help our sagging auto industry to get them through a tough time. The only difference is that GM and the UAW can CHOOSE to be more competitive (which I believe they have begun to do with the 2007 contracts). New Orleans can't CHOOSE to be above sea level, and SF can't CHOOSE to be off a major fault line.
If we are a benevolent enough society to help them rebuild then we should be benevolent enough to help our sagging auto industry to get them through a tough time.
How would you propose we restructure the D3 so that they can not be a sagging industry? Do you think that just a bridge loan is going to be enough? Do you agree with Wagoner that the "restructuring has already been completed" and they just need to wait out the recession to be successful?
Absolutely right. It will also give Toyota, Honda and others the right to protest subsidizing the competition. I hear having a level playing field all the time in here. How much more level than two companies both building cars in the USA.
Maybe get a bigger kickback for buying a car from a US company with content made in the US.
I thought of that as a good stimulus. It would have to include all vehicles sold in the USA. Trying to figure out content is tough. Those charts treat Canada the same as USA made. I DON'T THINK SO. Mexico should be just as much American as Canada. Giving it directly to the tax payer as a credit seems a bit more fair.
"Do you agree with Wagoner that the "restructuring has already been completed" and they just need to wait out the recession to be successful?"
No. It's on it's way, but not complete. One of the things that seems to have worked against the Big 3 is how the NA market seemed to have turned into the European market so quickly. Even Toyota was caught off guard, as Tundra sales have TANKED. But the [non-permissible content removed] big 3 have vehicles like the Fit and Versa that they can just send here, where the NA big 3 don't.
It appears to me as though with the consolidation of platforms worldwide that GM and Ford are beginning to become more fluid, but this is still going to take time.
I do applaud them for taking their time and trying to get products such as the Aura and Malibu right, and right from the first one!!! I have 2 co-workers who own '08 Malibus and they absolutely LOVE them. Not one unscheduled trip to the dealer either. This is why I have faith that the Volt will be as good or better than advertised.
"....My son in law was moved from San Diego to Indiana. They gave him a small raise. His cost of living is about half of what it was here in San Diego. So he is starting to get ahead after 6 months."
One thing I don't understand. Is he making more or less in Indiana than he was in SD.
Volt, however, if GM is threatening to charge over $40,000 my interest will fade just like Bobby Engram in to the middle linebacker range of the opponent's defense.
But the [non-permissible content removed] big 3 have vehicles like the Fit and Versa that they can just send here, where the NA big 3 don't.
That's not the problem - GM has more models higher than 30 mpg than any other company (check their advertising). Their Cobalt XFE gets 37mpg; I believe that's higher than a Versa or a Civic. And the new Malibu and similar mid-size get the low-30's mpg.
The problem is that in matching the sales-price of the competition, while having higher costs, and having to give large incentives because of years-past quality issues that linger with the consumer, GM doesn't make any money on these. At least they are not selling them in high enough volume to make money on them.
So how would you propose we save as many of these D3 jobs as possible while making our auto industry truly competitive? What is the Chapter 11 alternative that preserves jobs?
GM has more models higher than 30 mpg than any other company
I'd say this is mostly advertising hype. Honda could have 8 divisions and sell the Civic under 5 names and it would have more models over 30mph, too.
The problem is that in matching the sales-price of the competition, while having higher costs, and having to give large incentives because of years-past quality issues that linger with the consumer, GM doesn't make any money on these.
A related problem and more important IMHO is that if GMs cars were more expensive, but CLEARLY BETTER, many people would pay the difference. But GMs cars are not as desirable, especially the small cars. People pay more for iPods because they are more desirable. GM should make their cars this way, too.
It will also give Toyota, Honda and others the right to protest subsidizing the competition. I hear having a level playing field all the time in here. How much more level than two companies both building cars in the USA
Toyota and Honda have no business protesting anything in NA they are lucky to even be allowed to do business here. If GM and Ford were allowed to do business in Japan do you think the [non-permissible content removed] would even think about giving them a handout.
Those charts treat Canada the same as USA made. I DON'T THINK SO
Well in all fairness Honda and Toyota benefit build plenty of cars in Canada too,Why arent you complaining about the way they calculate their American content?
If GM and Ford were allowed to do business in Japan do you think the [non-permissible content removed] would even think about giving them a handout.
Japan has fit products to our market by altering or replacing their right-drive, small vehicles offered in Japan to build even large, left-drive trucks in the US. Tell me about the small D3 cars that are built with high quality, small engines, left drive for the Japanese market.
It may be difficult for the D3, but the Japanese companies did it here. How much effort have the D3 put into making products that fit the Japanese market? Your argument is a smokescreen for no effort by the D3.
And of course now they have no money to even make the effort in Japan.
it's not Japan or Korea we should be worried about. The Chinese are poised to strike anytime.
You're right - We should have been afraid of the Japanese a long time ago (it's too late now), the Japanese should be very afraid of Korea, and Korea should be concerned about the Chinese.
We're done for here in the US for manufacturing......
Tell me about the small D3 cars that are built with high quality, small engines, left drive for the Japanese market.
Why dont you explain to me the purpose of designing a car for the [non-permissible content removed] market if you wont be allowed to sell it there in the first place?
Well, I harken back to an interview Bob Lutz did way back when he started at GM. He asked the beancounters this question. We're selling cars w/$4000 in incentives on the hood. If we were to invest another $500 in better quality parts and materials, and then the car became desirable enough to take $2000 off the hood, would we not increase revenues by $1500? The beancounters said yeah, we would, but we don't look at it that way.
Case in point today. New Malibu has a base MSRP of about $20,500. Base Impala, about $2500 more. Yet, look at ads for both cars. i see ads every day around here for the Malibu LS for about $19,000. The Impala is generally advertised for a few hundred to a thousand more. Seeing as how the Impala is "old school" GM and the Malibu is "new school", getting better materials and such, it's no wonder that the smaller, "cheaper" Malibu commands almost as much as the bigger "more expensive" Impala.
Remember, the Big 3 haven't begun to see the real savings from their 2007 contracts (VEBA). Now, that's not to say that more savings can't be negotiated right now, that would say loosen work restrictions, save healthcare monies, shrink the jobs bank, etc.
Why dont you explain to me the purpose of designing a car for the [non-permissible content removed] market if you wont be allowed to sell it there in the first place?
Quote from a March, 2008 article:
"Wander through Tokyo's upscale wards and you'll find no shortage of expensive German models".
What about the Holden Barina and Viva, or the Vauxhall Agila and Astra??? All GM owned, RHD (not left) and available now.
GM should bring some of those small models over here! I know Ford is working to rapidly bring some of their Euro cars to the US. Many of us don't like big cars and trucks. If I want a good-handling, quality smaller car there is nothing of interest for me from the D3. That's a real shame.
Remember, the Big 3 haven't begun to see the real savings from their 2007 contracts (VEBA). Now, that's not to say that more savings can't be negotiated right now, that would say loosen work restrictions, save healthcare monies, shrink the jobs bank, etc.
So while you don't say it explicitly, I'd gather from this statement that you mostly agree with Wagoner - the restructuring is complete, GM only needs a bridge loan until the economy improves and the previously negotiated changes take financial effect. There might be a few more incremental changes but nothing major. Is that correct?
Let's just say that I totally disagree that this will be enough.
One thing I don't understand. Is he making more or less in Indiana than he was in SD.
They gave him a raise over what he was making here in San Diego. Plus he only drives 4 miles to work and rent is half of what he paid here for a lot bigger apartment. Taxes are cheaper and so is gas and utilities. I think he was making $45k a year here as an IT person.
Nevertheless, the amount of cars imported to Japan is miniscule.
So you complain that the Japanese market is closed, but then you say why bother designing for it? That's no way to get into a market if there is really some interest. Which there isn't. It's just a smokescreen by the UAW to hide from all the mistakes made in this country.
What ever happened to accountability? Let the D3 fail if they cannot be competitive, or better yet, downsize to a competitive position and then they might get serious about making world-class products. That's why a loan to the D3 is a huge mistake. Dump the lousy vehicles (perhaps 50% of the total) that are just propping up all the underutilized facilities and perhaps they can focus on excellent products again.
I'd rather see a 15% market share of the D3 which is climbing, with a position of strength brought on by excellent vehicles, than a 30% market share where the patients are gasping for air and digging into our wallets for our money while they ride on corporate jets.
having to give large incentives because of years-past quality issues that linger with the consumer
I would say GM should do what Hyundai did to build confidence. Give 10 year 100k mile warranty on the cars they think will last that long. If GM does not have as much confidence in their cars longevity as Hyundai, why should the consumer?
Oh no. I do believe that there must be some philosophical changes in that they must be more willing and flexible with their rules and allow a car like the Chevy Beat to be brought here, bigger use of their diesels from other countries, etc. In other words engineer your cars so that they need little to no modifications to sell them worldwide. Maybe they should get the negotiated changes to take effect TODAY.
Wagoner may actually be more correct than we think. Remember, the [non-permissible content removed] big 3's profits are all way down, as they are selling less cars as well, and what they are selling are their smaller, less profitable cars. So aren't the Big 3. It's just that their losses go from being manageable to out of control.
Take this paragraph from Sebastian Mallaby of the Wash. Post as an example:
"The financial crisis has morphed into several simultaneous crises that feed upon each other. The real-estate bust crippled the banks. Crippled banks starved companies of credit. Starved companies laid off workers. Laid-off workers defaulted on mortgages, deepening the bust in real estate. By a similar process, crippled financial institutions stopped making auto loans, which caused people to stop buying cars, which pushed the carmakers to the brink. If the carmakers go down, a whole new round of job losses and mortgage defaults will slam into the financial system."
It may sound arrogant, and I STILL do believe that more needs to be done than just a "bridge loan", but Wagoner may be closer to the truth that we think.
"So you complain that the Japanese market is closed, but then you say why bother designing for it?"
I'm NOT saying why bother designing for it, as the models I mentioned beforehand that you (and I) would like to see here are ALREADY DESIGNED FOR IT!!!!!!! The UAW has NOTHING to do with that, as those cars are built OUTSIDE the US, and would be destined for JAPAN. My point is that 2 of the 3 companies DO have cars that could be sold there in significant quantities, but aren't, because the Japanese government doesn't want them there, and NOT because they arent good enough to be there.
I think it's great that his standard of living has gotten much better. But, based on the way the discussion has gone here about autoworkers salary, shouldn't he have gotten a pay cut living in and area that is alot cheaper than whrer he was???
If the carmakers go down, a whole new round of job losses and mortgage defaults will slam into the financial system."
Well they aren't going to fail as a Group, meaning at the same time. That then means that the first to go down, will benefit the other 2 left. If McDonald's closes, Burger King and Wendy's and Taco Bell gets their business.
So if GM closes, I see Ford and Chrysler will become profitable. The suppliers to GM will simply stop pouring plastic in their molds for GM, and use the molds for Chrysler and Ford more.
There is probably not any net-loss of business. The same number of cars will be made and sold if GM goes out of business tomorrow.
Remember that "the truth" you are hearing is biased. It is biased $25B worth. If someone is dangling $25B out there to me and my 2 friends, you're darn tooting I'm going to spin you a good tale that you can't do without me. If you believe you can trust these guys when they have $25B to gain, well there's little hope.
shouldn't he have gotten a pay cut living in and area that is alot cheaper
He had me to advise him. Some of the employees were told if they moved to Indiana they could have their jobs at a reduced rate. Tom was in a unique position and I advised him to get at least a years contract to move to Indiana. In this case you are asking some one to leave paradise and move to the Midwest. C'mon you know that should get a big raise. He only got 5% more but it was more than enough to give them a much higher standard of living in a small town with not so great weather. My daughter was an escrow officer and has switched to foreclosures. They were happy to keep her on and she works from home. I do miss having them around. With gas so cheap we may cruise back this winter for a visit.
So if GM closes, I see Ford and Chrysler will become profitable. The suppliers to GM will simply stop pouring plastic in their molds for GM, and use the molds for Chrysler and Ford more.
That is exactly how I see it. There will be no need for a bailout. Ford and Chrysler were not the ones instigating it. They just wanted a piece of the bailout pie.
GM will have to sell their assets to pay off the retirees. Ford can buy Corvette and let the rest turn to rust.
"...Well they aren't going to fail as a Group, meaning at the same time. That then means that the first to go down, will benefit the other 2 left. If McDonald's closes, Burger King and Wendy's and Taco Bell gets their business."
I doubt it will benefit them to the tune of 90,000 jobs, plus those at the dealers, if it were GM to go down. There would still be job losses, and that would be bad.
That's not the problem - GM has more models [ names ] higher than 30 mpg than any other company (check their advertising). Their Cobalt XFE gets 37mpg; I believe that's higher than a Versa or a Civic. And the new Malibu and similar mid-size get the low-30's mpg.
Correction inserted in your prior post. They may offer more names but in fact they sell far less units. The public isn't fooled by the wordplay.
Leave paradise ... not so great weather. Move further away from family. Lots of people would want a big raise do that.
Opinion from the Brookings Institution via the WSJ:
"In our judgment, based on experience elsewhere in American industry, the most constructive role the government can play at this point is to provide a short-term infusion of capital with strict repayment rules that will essentially require the auto makers to sell off their assets to other, successful companies.
By establishing firm mileposts for asset divestitures from which the companies could repay government funds, taxpayers could be reasonably assured that their money is well spent."
Selling less units doesn't mean the public has less choices. Just because the Cobalt and G5 are essentially the same car doen't mean that the buying public really has only one choice. Someone may prefer the looks of the G5 over the Cobalt, or if they aren't concerned about the looks all that much , the fact that the Chevy dealer is 5 miles closer may be what seals the deal.
If the buying public is just more comfortable with the Civic, that doesn't mean the G5 and Cobalt aren't 2 choices.
If the buying public is just more comfortable with the Civic, that doesn't mean the G5 and Cobalt aren't 2 choices.
Problem with this is, 9 out of 10 times the consumer will pick the Civic over the G5 or Cobalt, because it's just a better car. So GM has to pay for two different designs, built on two different assembly lines, and sold at two different dealerships. After all this extra cost, the Civic still out-sells both of them combined, by a large margin. To top it all off, the Civic probably cost Honda less to build, and will sell at a higher price. It's the same problem with the Malibu/G6/Aura deal. Three different designs to compete with one Accord design, one Accord assembly line, and one dealership. GM has to stop all this rebadging.
Some statistics on Japanese imported car market - It is worth around 9Bn USD / year (at 100 Yen = 1 USD). So not that big, but not that small either. Of this, around 80% are European cars, and around 7% are American. In other words, Europe outsells America 12 to 1 in Japan (in terms of amount). http://www.jaia-jp.org/e/stat/annual_data/quantity_and_value.html
"Profits of Japanese car sales, made in the USA, go to corporate HQ in JAPAN! So why did the UAW worker drive a Toyota or Volvo to work without any guilt?"
This is always the argument with the people who don't like the fact that so many Americans buy "Asian" cars. Do you really think their cars would be selling so much better if they were as awful as GM's? Puhleeez, give me a break. GM has the nerve to whine and complain when everyone but them can see that they build an inferior product. It's built into their business model. Hello? It's called planned obselescence. That's pretty sad when you consider their business strategy hasn't changed since the the booming 1950s
GM's problems reach far and wide beyond just the fact they build crappy cars and vehicles, many which have already been mentioned well here. I don't feel like repeating myself now...
"When the Big 3 goes under, it will not be the end of the world.
It'll be the end of my world! It doesn't matter how rich or successful I become if I can no longer purchase a new Cadillac or Buick! I'd sooner see the world burnt to cinders and the ashes flung into the void than live in a world without my beloved General Motors!"
First of all, you don't have to worry, because while GM might complain about their dismal sales in America, in other countries, namely China, their auto sales thrive. They just need some serious downsizing which they refuse to do, because they're stubborn and arrogant.
Frankly I don't care if they fail. My economy is fine. This is not an economy that is supposed to be financially rewarding business failure, and it never has been
The cars are built on the same assembly line. While I don't doubt that the Civic sells at a higher price, the Aura and Malibu sell at a comparable price to the Accord.
In spite of all this, the consumer still has 7 choices between the 2 companies in those 2 model sizes to choose from. I'm sure all those $99/mo leases that I see Herb Chambers Honda offering have a lot to do with the Civic's sales, as well as it's reputation.
Put another way. Is a 2 year old Cobalt worth $12,000. That is what is left owing after 20% down and $99 per month. I don't think an Impala is worth that much after 2 years. That has to be a huge dilemma for GM. That and GMAC is not lending to every Tom, Dick and Harry that wants to buy a new car.
Comments
Well, that makes you consistent in your opinion. That was my point all along. If we are a benevolent enough society to help them rebuild then we should be benevolent enough to help our sagging auto industry to get them through a tough time. The only difference is that GM and the UAW can CHOOSE to be more competitive (which I believe they have begun to do with the 2007 contracts). New Orleans can't CHOOSE to be above sea level, and SF can't CHOOSE to be off a major fault line.
Jumpin' mexican beans purchased at an Ocean Shores, WA gift shop!
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
How would you propose we restructure the D3 so that they can not be a sagging industry? Do you think that just a bridge loan is going to be enough? Do you agree with Wagoner that the "restructuring has already been completed" and they just need to wait out the recession to be successful?
Absolutely right. It will also give Toyota, Honda and others the right to protest subsidizing the competition. I hear having a level playing field all the time in here. How much more level than two companies both building cars in the USA.
Maybe get a bigger kickback for buying a car from a US company with content made in the US.
I thought of that as a good stimulus. It would have to include all vehicles sold in the USA. Trying to figure out content is tough. Those charts treat Canada the same as USA made. I DON'T THINK SO. Mexico should be just as much American as Canada. Giving it directly to the tax payer as a credit seems a bit more fair.
No. It's on it's way, but not complete. One of the things that seems to have worked against the Big 3 is how the NA market seemed to have turned into the European market so quickly. Even Toyota was caught off guard, as Tundra sales have TANKED. But the [non-permissible content removed] big 3 have vehicles like the Fit and Versa that they can just send here, where the NA big 3 don't.
It appears to me as though with the consolidation of platforms worldwide that GM and Ford are beginning to become more fluid, but this is still going to take time.
I do applaud them for taking their time and trying to get products such as the Aura and Malibu right, and right from the first one!!! I have 2 co-workers who own '08 Malibus and they absolutely LOVE them. Not one unscheduled trip to the dealer either. This is why I have faith that the Volt will be as good or better than advertised.
One thing I don't understand. Is he making more or less in Indiana than he was in SD.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Of course I do.
I made 100K in NJ where the house prices are $250K+ for 1200 sq. ft house. w/ 2 bedrooms.
I made a move to Dallas, TX where for the same Pay, I got a lot more house (4 bedrooms) for the same money.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/11/26/should-the-feds-buy-flocks-of-volts-for-- their-fleet/#comments
then the Gov't may be "giving" you more than $7,500 to buy one.
That's not the problem - GM has more models higher than 30 mpg than any other company (check their advertising). Their Cobalt XFE gets 37mpg; I believe that's higher than a Versa or a Civic. And the new Malibu and similar mid-size get the low-30's mpg.
The problem is that in matching the sales-price of the competition, while having higher costs, and having to give large incentives because of years-past quality issues that linger with the consumer, GM doesn't make any money on these. At least they are not selling them in high enough volume to make money on them.
So how would you propose we save as many of these D3 jobs as possible while making our auto industry truly competitive? What is the Chapter 11 alternative that preserves jobs?
I'd say this is mostly advertising hype. Honda could have 8 divisions and sell the Civic under 5 names and it would have more models over 30mph, too.
The problem is that in matching the sales-price of the competition, while having higher costs, and having to give large incentives because of years-past quality issues that linger with the consumer, GM doesn't make any money on these.
A related problem and more important IMHO is that if GMs cars were more expensive, but CLEARLY BETTER, many people would pay the difference. But GMs cars are not as desirable, especially the small cars. People pay more for iPods because they are more desirable. GM should make their cars this way, too.
Toyota and Honda have no business protesting anything in NA they are lucky to even be allowed to do business here. If GM and Ford were allowed to do business in Japan do you think the [non-permissible content removed] would even think about giving them a handout.
Those charts treat Canada the same as USA made. I DON'T THINK SO
Well in all fairness Honda and Toyota benefit build plenty of cars in Canada too,Why arent you complaining about the way they calculate their American content?
Japan has fit products to our market by altering or replacing their right-drive, small vehicles offered in Japan to build even large, left-drive trucks in the US. Tell me about the small D3 cars that are built with high quality, small engines, left drive for the Japanese market.
It may be difficult for the D3, but the Japanese companies did it here. How much effort have the D3 put into making products that fit the Japanese market? Your argument is a smokescreen for no effort by the D3.
And of course now they have no money to even make the effort in Japan.
You're right - We should have been afraid of the Japanese a long time ago (it's too late now), the Japanese should be very afraid of Korea, and Korea should be concerned about the Chinese.
We're done for here in the US for manufacturing......
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Why dont you explain to me the purpose of designing a car for the [non-permissible content removed] market if you wont be allowed to sell it there in the first place?
Case in point today. New Malibu has a base MSRP of about $20,500. Base Impala, about $2500 more. Yet, look at ads for both cars. i see ads every day around here for the Malibu LS for about $19,000. The Impala is generally advertised for a few hundred to a thousand more. Seeing as how the Impala is "old school" GM and the Malibu is "new school", getting better materials and such, it's no wonder that the smaller, "cheaper" Malibu commands almost as much as the bigger "more expensive" Impala.
Remember, the Big 3 haven't begun to see the real savings from their 2007 contracts (VEBA). Now, that's not to say that more savings can't be negotiated right now, that would say loosen work restrictions, save healthcare monies, shrink the jobs bank, etc.
What about the Holden Barina and Viva, or the Vauxhall Agila and Astra??? All GM owned, RHD (not left) and available now.
Quote from a March, 2008 article:
"Wander through Tokyo's upscale wards and you'll find no shortage of expensive German models".
BMW, Mercedes, and Audi manage to sell in Japan.
GM should bring some of those small models over here! I know Ford is working to rapidly bring some of their Euro cars to the US. Many of us don't like big cars and trucks. If I want a good-handling, quality smaller car there is nothing of interest for me from the D3. That's a real shame.
http://www.customs.go.jp/toukei/srch/indexe.htm?M=03&P=1,2,,,1,2008,0,10,0,0,1,7- 050101,,,,,,,,,,3,,,,,,20
Germany IS the leader, but since ther is no breakdown by mfr., I'll assume that VW has the lion's share of those.
So while you don't say it explicitly, I'd gather from this statement that you mostly agree with Wagoner - the restructuring is complete, GM only needs a bridge loan until the economy improves and the previously negotiated changes take financial effect. There might be a few more incremental changes but nothing major. Is that correct?
Let's just say that I totally disagree that this will be enough.
GM apparently doesn't want their plane trackable in the FAA public database!
They gave him a raise over what he was making here in San Diego. Plus he only drives 4 miles to work and rent is half of what he paid here for a lot bigger apartment. Taxes are cheaper and so is gas and utilities. I think he was making $45k a year here as an IT person.
So you complain that the Japanese market is closed, but then you say why bother designing for it? That's no way to get into a market if there is really some interest. Which there isn't. It's just a smokescreen by the UAW to hide from all the mistakes made in this country.
What ever happened to accountability? Let the D3 fail if they cannot be competitive, or better yet, downsize to a competitive position and then they might get serious about making world-class products. That's why a loan to the D3 is a huge mistake. Dump the lousy vehicles (perhaps 50% of the total) that are just propping up all the underutilized facilities and perhaps they can focus on excellent products again.
I'd rather see a 15% market share of the D3 which is climbing, with a position of strength brought on by excellent vehicles, than a 30% market share where the patients are gasping for air and digging into our wallets for our money while they ride on corporate jets.
I would say GM should do what Hyundai did to build confidence. Give 10 year 100k mile warranty on the cars they think will last that long. If GM does not have as much confidence in their cars longevity as Hyundai, why should the consumer?
Wagoner may actually be more correct than we think. Remember, the [non-permissible content removed] big 3's profits are all way down, as they are selling less cars as well, and what they are selling are their smaller, less profitable cars. So aren't the Big 3. It's just that their losses go from being manageable to out of control.
Take this paragraph from Sebastian Mallaby of the Wash. Post as an example:
"The financial crisis has morphed into several simultaneous crises that feed upon each other. The real-estate bust crippled the banks. Crippled banks starved companies of credit. Starved companies laid off workers. Laid-off workers defaulted on mortgages, deepening the bust in real estate. By a similar process, crippled financial institutions stopped making auto loans, which caused people to stop buying cars, which pushed the carmakers to the brink. If the carmakers go down, a whole new round of job losses and mortgage defaults will slam into the financial system."
It may sound arrogant, and I STILL do believe that more needs to be done than just a "bridge loan", but Wagoner may be closer to the truth that we think.
I'm NOT saying why bother designing for it, as the models I mentioned beforehand that you (and I) would like to see here are ALREADY DESIGNED FOR IT!!!!!!! The UAW has NOTHING to do with that, as those cars are built OUTSIDE the US, and would be destined for JAPAN. My point is that 2 of the 3 companies DO have cars that could be sold there in significant quantities, but aren't, because the Japanese government doesn't want them there, and NOT because they arent good enough to be there.
(BTW, as you know I wouldn't endorse that)
Well they aren't going to fail as a Group, meaning at the same time. That then means that the first to go down, will benefit the other 2 left. If McDonald's closes, Burger King and Wendy's and Taco Bell gets their business.
So if GM closes, I see Ford and Chrysler will become profitable. The suppliers to GM will simply stop pouring plastic in their molds for GM, and use the molds for Chrysler and Ford more.
There is probably not any net-loss of business. The same number of cars will be made and sold if GM goes out of business tomorrow.
Remember that "the truth" you are hearing is biased. It is biased $25B worth. If someone is dangling $25B out there to me and my 2 friends, you're darn tooting I'm going to spin you a good tale that you can't do without me. If you believe you can trust these guys when they have $25B to gain, well there's little hope.
He had me to advise him. Some of the employees were told if they moved to Indiana they could have their jobs at a reduced rate. Tom was in a unique position and I advised him to get at least a years contract to move to Indiana. In this case you are asking some one to leave paradise and move to the Midwest. C'mon you know that should get a big raise. He only got 5% more but it was more than enough to give them a much higher standard of living in a small town with not so great weather. My daughter was an escrow officer and has switched to foreclosures. They were happy to keep her on and she works from home. I do miss having them around. With gas so cheap we may cruise back this winter for a visit.
That is exactly how I see it. There will be no need for a bailout. Ford and Chrysler were not the ones instigating it. They just wanted a piece of the bailout pie.
GM will have to sell their assets to pay off the retirees. Ford can buy Corvette and let the rest turn to rust.
I doubt it will benefit them to the tune of 90,000 jobs, plus those at the dealers, if it were GM to go down. There would still be job losses, and that would be bad.
Show me where this guy in DC is biased???
Correction inserted in your prior post. They may offer more names but in fact they sell far less units. The public isn't fooled by the wordplay.
Opinion from the Brookings Institution via the WSJ:
"In our judgment, based on experience elsewhere in American industry, the most constructive role the government can play at this point is to provide a short-term infusion of capital with strict repayment rules that will essentially require the auto makers to sell off their assets to other, successful companies.
By establishing firm mileposts for asset divestitures from which the companies could repay government funds, taxpayers could be reasonably assured that their money is well spent."
link - may be registration only
If the buying public is just more comfortable with the Civic, that doesn't mean the G5 and Cobalt aren't 2 choices.
Problem with this is, 9 out of 10 times the consumer will pick the Civic over the G5 or Cobalt, because it's just a better car. So GM has to pay for two different designs, built on two different assembly lines, and sold at two different dealerships. After all this extra cost, the Civic still out-sells both of them combined, by a large margin. To top it all off, the Civic probably cost Honda less to build, and will sell at a higher price. It's the same problem with the Malibu/G6/Aura deal. Three different designs to compete with one Accord design, one Accord assembly line, and one dealership. GM has to stop all this rebadging.
http://www.jaia-jp.org/e/stat/annual_data/quantity_and_value.html
In terms of volume, yes, VW is the Number 1 company, followed by the other two Germans (Mercedes and BMW). GM probably comes at Number 11 (below - horrors - Peugeot)
http://www.jaia-jp.org/e/stat/quick_report/200810shamei_e.htm
So why did the UAW worker drive a Toyota or Volvo to work without any guilt?"
This is always the argument with the people who don't like the fact that so many Americans buy "Asian" cars. Do you really think their cars would be selling so much better if they were as awful as GM's? Puhleeez, give me a break. GM has the nerve to whine and complain when everyone but them can see that they build an inferior product. It's built into their business model. Hello? It's called planned obselescence. That's pretty sad when you consider their business strategy hasn't changed since the the booming 1950s
GM's problems reach far and wide beyond just the fact they build crappy cars and vehicles, many which have already been mentioned well here. I don't feel like repeating myself now...
It'll be the end of my world! It doesn't matter how rich or successful I become if I can no longer purchase a new Cadillac or Buick! I'd sooner see the world burnt to cinders and the ashes flung into the void than live in a world without my beloved General Motors!"
First of all, you don't have to worry, because while GM might complain about their dismal sales in America, in other countries, namely China, their auto sales thrive.
They just need some serious downsizing which they refuse to do, because they're stubborn and arrogant.
Frankly I don't care if they fail. My economy is fine. This is not an economy that is supposed to be financially rewarding business failure, and it never has been
In spite of all this, the consumer still has 7 choices between the 2 companies in those 2 model sizes to choose from. I'm sure all those $99/mo leases that I see Herb Chambers Honda offering have a lot to do with the Civic's sales, as well as it's reputation.
The question is? Can GM offer the same $99 lease on a Cobalt and not lose their shorts when the 3 year lease is up?
Nissan back in at Chicago Auto Show