Is GM finished?

drkitten said:
But I also don't think that my needs are particularly exceptional or unrepresentative (which is why the Civic sells so well), and for people who want a fuel-efficient midsize car, the Accord establishes quality standards. If you need a small SUV, check out the CR-V or the Toyota RAV4. Luxury sedan? The Lexus IS.
Click to expand...


The 2005 Buick Century scored higher that the Accord by a good margin. Again based on actual tracked data over a 3 year period it's a better car.

The Rav4 and the Honda Element are hard to beat. Coming close may be the Buick Rainier, but slightly larger and less fuel efficient I'm guessing.

Lexus IS? I don't think we have those here in NA? The ES?
 
Last edited:
Disbelief said:
You mean since the Malibu is the highest rated mid-sized, it should not be able to compete with the Accord? I believe it also gets better gas mileage. That's the Malibu that is built in Kansas (or Michigan) vs the Accord from Ohio (not Kenya).

ETA: As for the Vibe, you do know that it is a rebadged Toyota Matrix? The same cars that are built in California, running down the same lines and built by UAW workers.
Click to expand...

It's a joint venture and they're built in Canada.
 
3bodyproblem said:
It's a joint venture and they're built in Canada.
Click to expand...

I know it is a joint venture, but the Vibe is built in CA. I apologize, because the Corolla and the Prizm/Nova were the same cars built at Nummi. The Vibe/Matrix were designed together to continue the JV.
 
Disbelief said:
I know it is a joint venture, but the Vibe is built in CA. I apologize, because the Corolla and the Prizm/Nova were the same cars built at Nummi. The Vibe/Matrix were designed together to continue the JV.
Click to expand...

The Toyota is built in Cambridge, Ontario. As JV they aren't really one or the other. They are however a NA product :)
 
not_so_new said:
Really.... I need to take you for a drive in my BMW 330ci with 80,000 miles and still purring like a kitten on steroids.

Oh and for the record, I used to rebuild cars in my youth. Carburetors on the kitchen countertops, bare blocks on engine stands in the garage, frame off restorations of classic cars, I did a little bit of everything.

In my eyes the best cars I have bought in the last 20 years have been foreign designed.

The only American designed cars I had in that time was a GM (something or other) that ended up with a cracked head, a GM S10 that was starting to rust out from under me at 60,000 miles and a Jeep that was actually a pretty good car with very bad gas mileage. I had a Nissan with 110,000 miles on it that only died because of a run in with a deer, a Mazda that I only sold because I couldn't get my dogs in it (it was a convertible) and now the BMW that I LOVE LOVE LOVE.

Sorry, there isn't a domestic car that I am interested in or that I would seriously consider purchasing at this point.
Click to expand...

What year is the BMW? You know, your transmission could very well be one made by GM and shared with the CTS/SRX.
 
Well, well, we get down to the real issue as seen by Democrats as Bahney Fwank made it quite clear on NPR this morning that the main reason he prefers a bailout over Chapter 11 reorganization is that he wants to preserve the UAW contracts.

That's really all it comes down to for the idiots running Congress.
 
Disbelief said:
For those who say that it is the same old with the Big 3, here is some info on productivity:

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/car_shopping/latest_news_reviews/chrysler_ties_toyota_for_top_productivity_says_2008_harbour_report_car_news

Here is info on recalls for 2007. Ford had a rough year (as did Chrysler, Nissan and Volkswagen), but GM is not in the top ten vehicles:

http://www.usrecallnews.com/2008/05/top-ten-auto-recalls-of-2007.html
Click to expand...


The Big Bad Three have been churning and burning customers for the last 50 years.

Any attempt to just do more of the same is just downright stupid.

And any bailout preserving the current management, the byzantine design and engineering departments, and the UAW is only going to turn off more potential customers (and anyone who wants them to survive).

And especially so for GM; Chrysler already had a chance to reform under Daimler and blew it, so they may go under anyway since the current owners will abandon it if necessary; and Ford is just stuck with the same dated design game and UAW fist as GM.

So I suspect that their only chance at real survival is a massive reorganization (including everything I noted some posts above but especially kicking the UAW to the curb and being draconian with dealership arrangements).

That would also lend itself to one hell of an innovative new marketing campaign in and of itself.

.
 
balrog666 said:
The Big Bad Three have been churning and burning customers for the last 50 years.

Any attempt to just do more of the same is just downright stupid.

And any bailout preserving the current management, the byzantine design and engineering departments, and the UAW is only going to turn off more potential customers (and anyone who wants them to survive).

And especially so for GM; Chrysler already had a chance to reform under Daimler and blew it, so they may go under anyway since the current owners will abandon it if necessary; and Ford is just stuck with the same dated design game and UAW fist as GM.

So I suspect that their only chance at real survival is a massive reorganization (including everything I noted some posts above but especially kicking the UAW to the curb and being draconian with dealership arrangements).

That would also lend itself to one hell of an innovative new marketing campaign in and of itself.

.
Click to expand...

So, when has Toyota come out with some radical design? Have you looked at a CTS, the CTS coupe, the Malibu, the hybrid SUVs? How about the two mode hybrid that was developed for city busses and are superior to what is in the Prius? Do you have any clue about why they are trying to bridge to 2010? Think maybe it has to do with the cost savings that will be kicking in with the UAW contract?

Why not give credit to the vast improvements they have made in the past ten years, even with the UAW strapped to their back. Compare that to the free pass given to the Koreans (Hyundai and Kia) who foisted some of the worst vehicles ever on the American public. However, people were willing to give them another chance yet won't with the huge strides the domestics have made.

Does it concern you that Consumer Reports took away the free pass they gave Toyota because of quality issues? More food for thought for those who say that the Big 3 can't make quality vehicles:

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/04/2008-jd-power-rankings-released/?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
 
balrog666 said:
The Big Bad Three have been churning and burning customers for the last 50 years.

Any attempt to just do more of the same is just downright stupid.

And any bailout preserving the current management, the byzantine design and engineering departments, and the UAW is only going to turn off more potential customers (and anyone who wants them to survive).

And especially so for GM; Chrysler already had a chance to reform under Daimler and blew it, so they may go under anyway since the current owners will abandon it if necessary; and Ford is just stuck with the same dated design game and UAW fist as GM.

So I suspect that their only chance at real survival is a massive reorganization (including everything I noted some posts above but especially kicking the UAW to the curb and being draconian with dealership arrangements).

That would also lend itself to one hell of an innovative new marketing campaign in and of itself.

.
Click to expand...

Sorry, no direspect but, lol. Daimler is going to abandon Chrysler with 8 Billion sitting in the bank?
 
I would say no to the GM bailout unless a complete change in management and restructering takes place.
GM is in this mess because it is making cars few people have wanted to buy for some time.
 
As I sit here listening to reports coming out of Detroit I'm convinced their is no way they can allow GM, or the big 3 for that matter fail. 700 Billion for Wall street and nothing for Main street isn't going to happen. Numbers flying around here are saying 1 in 10 jobs in AMERICA is directly or indirectly related to the automotive industry. Massive. 25 Billion or there will be hell to pay.

I'm waiting for a press release on the Michigan Militia's official position in regards to the bailout :(
 
dudalb said:
I would say no to the GM bailout unless a complete change in management and restructering takes place.
Click to expand...

I think I agree with this. I mean I hope it's part of the package. But is it realistic to think that this will happen? My fingers are crossed...
 
Disbelief said:
For those who say that it is the same old with the Big 3, here is some info on productivity:

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/car_shopping/latest_news_reviews/chrysler_ties_toyota_for_top_productivity_says_2008_harbour_report_car_news
Click to expand...

But, but, but my friend has a Honda and the Japanese are masters of this domain. They're so efficient...

These are the numbers we discussed on a daily basis, during those boring meetings before start up (unpaid mind you). These are tracked very closely by all of the manufacturers (that, CSA and your RTR, Required to Run). Prior to the JV with Toyota and GM, GM held the reigns in this area if I'm not mistaken. I'm not saying this was a reason for them to do a JV, to get a glimpse of the goings on in a GM plant, but...
 
Roadtoad said:
Yeah. I've also seen the maintenance costs involved, too. The KW will cost less in the long run.
Click to expand...


Fair enough. I know a diesel mechanic and have a bay to do work if need be so I'm good. That being said I think I have a line on a cherry pre emissions C15 we pulled out of a 379 wreck... ;)
 
3bodyproblem said:
Sorry, no direspect but, lol. Daimler is going to abandon Chrysler with 8 Billion sitting in the bank?
Click to expand...


:boggled: Have you been asleep for the last 18 months?

Daimler no longer owns Chrysler and wouldn't touch it again even if it came with a $50 billion bailout.
 
balrog666 said:
:boggled: Have you been asleep for the last 18 months?

Daimler no longer owns Chrysler and wouldn't touch it again even if it came with a $50 billion bailout.
Click to expand...


No, I'm losing my mind. Cerberus deal. yes, Cerberus paid some 7.5 Billion for a majority stake (80%?) in Chrysler. But they still have some 8 Billion in the bank from the deal if I'm not mistaken. When I saw the Daimler I lost my noodle. I'll Google this and get back to you, but Chrysler isn't hemorrhaging money like GM, but worse than Ford if I remember.

Ouch, sorry, foot in mouth big time!

(Google reveals Chrysler has $11 Billion in the bank, not Daimler)

BTW, quit splitting hairs balrog666 you knew what I meant!
 
Last edited:
3bodyproblem said:
No, I'm losing my mind. Cerberus deal. yes, Cerberus paid some 7.5 Billion for a majority stake (80%?) in Chrysler. But they still have some 8 Billion in the bank from the deal if I'm not mistaken. When I saw the Daimler I lost my noodle. I'll Google this and get back to you, but Chrysler isn't hemorrhaging money like GM, but worse than Ford if I remember.

Ouch, sorry, foot in mouth big time!

(Google reveals Chrysler has $11 Billion in the bank, not Daimler)

BTW, quit splitting hairs balrog666 you knew what I meant!
Click to expand...


Oh, okay. I just wanted to make sure everyone knew that Daimler is NOT a player in this game and is completely off the hook for any liability or bailout.


But ... insolvency and bankruptcy aren't defined by how much money you have left before you call it quits but by the point when you have no expectation of ever being able to pay your creditors. And there is a point in the decline beyond which pretending to be running a business and paying your bills becomes fraud.

Also, $10 billion in the bank isn't enough for a company the size of GM, Ford, or Chrysler, especially with more-or-less exhausted lines of credit.

So, GM is technically insolvent and has been for some time, and still has 12-15 billion left in their coffers left right now. And yet yesterday they stopped paying the incentives to dealers on promotions and rebates (okay, maybe just delayed payments at this point). Other payments will soon be "delayed" just because they can't afford to pay them. The only reason they aren't in bankruptcy court yet is that none of their debtors is willing to take the blame for forcing them into bankruptcy and management is too linguine-spined to initiate it themselves.

.
 
3bodyproblem said:
As I sit here listening to reports coming out of Detroit I'm convinced their is no way they can allow GM, or the big 3 for that matter fail. 700 Billion for Wall street and nothing for Main street isn't going to happen. Numbers flying around here are saying 1 in 10 jobs in AMERICA is directly or indirectly related to the automotive industry. Massive. 25 Billion or there will be hell to pay.

I'm waiting for a press release on the Michigan Militia's official position in regards to the bailout :(
Click to expand...

I'm skeptical that the impact would be that much. It certainly would be terrible in Michigan, considering the direct jobs of course, but also all the service industries. But many of the other "indirect" businesses would seem to be able to either a) convert operations to foreign cars, or b) rely on warehouses of parts, and/or the retention of parts-manufacturers to survive long enough to transition. If there are 1/10 jobs, or 15 million related to the auto industry, it doesn't mean 1/10 are related to just the big 3.

The hardest hit direct business would be dealerships. They couldn't convert to foreign as other dealers already have that market. They'd have to find new jobs. The other largest direct is rental agencies, but they could presumably convert entirely to foreign cars; labor/parts on existing cars would be the problem. Small businesses using big 3 trucks and equipment would face the labor/parts problems too, along with truckers, public works autos, etc.

But, the parts/labor thing could be solved (I guess) by relaxing or excepting patent laws so that die shops able to convert some equipment to make GM/Ford/Chrysler but not currently under contract could be able to start doing this, or new shops spring up to cover the demand. That solution, or for existing parts facilities being given "mini-bailouts" if they need them until a buyer is found. Let the production of cars fail, but retain production of parts for existing/past cars until either reliant businesses transition to foreign cars, or to any new domestic automakers that might rise.

btw, I've learned quite a lot from this thread, thanks to you and other knowledgeable posters.
 
Dragoonster said:
I'm skeptical that the impact would be that much. It certainly would be terrible in Michigan, considering the direct jobs of course, but also all the service industries. But many of the other "indirect" businesses would seem to be able to either a) convert operations to foreign cars, or b) rely on warehouses of parts, and/or the retention of parts-manufacturers to survive long enough to transition. If there are 1/10 jobs, or 15 million related to the auto industry, it doesn't mean 1/10 are related to just the big 3.

The hardest hit direct business would be dealerships. They couldn't convert to foreign as other dealers already have that market. They'd have to find new jobs. The other largest direct is rental agencies, but they could presumably convert entirely to foreign cars; labor/parts on existing cars would be the problem. Small businesses using big 3 trucks and equipment would face the labor/parts problems too, along with truckers, public works autos, etc.

But, the parts/labor thing could be solved (I guess) by relaxing or excepting patent laws so that die shops able to convert some equipment to make GM/Ford/Chrysler but not currently under contract could be able to start doing this, or new shops spring up to cover the demand. That solution, or for existing parts facilities being given "mini-bailouts" if they need them until a buyer is found. Let the production of cars fail, but retain production of parts for existing/past cars until either reliant businesses transition to foreign cars, or to any new domestic automakers that might rise.

btw, I've learned quite a lot from this thread, thanks to you and other knowledgeable posters.
Click to expand...



I think it really will be very bad in Michigan and Ohio and surrounding areas.

It was damn bad after the steel workers got burned and the auto workers were laid off in the 70's. This will be worse. But there is no better alternative.

Chrysler will almost certainly go with GM or go under; there is no third alternative for them.

Ford may hang on longer but if GM goes through bankruptcy, they will almost certainly have to follow suit just to stay competitive!

.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom