Is GM finished?

drkitten said:
And who was buying them, then?



I dunno. I think that's more or less exactly what Toyota and Honda did, don't you?

Why was it a good idea for Toyota and Honda to predict long-term market trends and to prepare for them, but a bad idea for GM?

How did Toyota and Honda manage to avoid "[cutting] themselves out of the game"?
Click to expand...


Because their primary market isn't NA. Their primary markets have a more centralized populous that demands smaller=more fuel efficient cars. Let's be honest, Toyota and Honda just brought to the US market what they were already making. Had they designed cars specifically for the NA market (please see "Tundra") they would have failed. And don't forget these Japanese manufacturers benefited from years of development in Detroit. Had they started with the Model T and moved forward from there I think they would be in as bad a shape as the Big 3. Speculation on my part, but I think its sound. A few years ago Toyota projected a loss in NA beginning in 2013 due to an aging workforce (pensions,benefits etc.). To me that says they knew they could only be competitive in NA for a total of 45 years, that puts the Big three out of business in what the 60's? NA made the automotive market what it is for the rest or the World by its own blood, sweat and tears.
 
Prometheus said:
Before blaming "the American people" and insisting that "we" must share the cost of bailing out the Big 3, please keep in mind that "we" includes millions of Americans like me, who stopped purchasing Detroit's over-priced, under-performing crap decades ago. "We" includes quite a lot of people who have voted with our dollars for a change in the cars they built, and often voted on election day for any politician who even talked about bringing about such change, but it "we" were ignored.

I'm sorry, but I don't feel the slightest bit responsible for this problem, and I vehemently disagree with anyone who suggests that so much as a dime of my taxes be used to bail them out. Let them die; I'm quite happy to continue driving my American-made Honda.
Click to expand...

You fail to see he impact of moving your hard earned dollars out of the country by buying forgeign. But I understand where you're coming from, I was there until I realized fully how dependant the economy is on the automotive market. It's huge. People buy a house and keep it. What besides a car do they spend, and continue to spend their money on? Cars. It's a massive industry. But before buying forgeign, consider putting in a little research. Consult customer satisfaction audits, JD powers, blogs etc. before just buying forgeign to buy forgeign. It's my personal experience that people who buy forgeign are less likely to tell you the problems they have with their cars and have little or no experience with fixing or repairing cars. In the early 80's yes, the Japanese built a superior 4 cylinder +30 mpg car. After about 95' the playing field was evened and for the most part you could buy a comparable domestic for the same price with the same reliability.
 
Prometheus said:
I wasn't making a claim. I was questioning the idea that GM might be, "the corner stone holding back the avalanche of another Great Depression."

I'm not saying they aren't. I'd just like to see something in the way of evidence. I don't see that it's any more prudent to give them billions on the chance that maybe they're some sort of economic lynchpin, than to gamble that maybe they're not as important as all that and save the money instead.
Click to expand...

Could it be that by the time the evidence shows up it would already be too late?

Engineer - "I say the Titanic is unsinkable."
Iceberg - "I beg to differ"

:D

Like you, I am not saying GM IS the cornerstone to a much worse problem.

All I am saying is that I think everyone should just take a minute to examine the issue rationally. It's REALLY easy to say "screw'm, they got themselves into this on their own." That is not clear headed thinking and I think clear-headedness is in order right now.

In the end maybe a GM bailout is a bad idea, heck if I know, but I would like to wait for some arguments from both sides to come in before I make that judgment and I think that is prudent advice for everyone. Let's just see what arguments are presented before we weigh in on the situation.
 
The problem isn't with the automobiles GM made, the idiotic CAFE standards, the UAW clowns, management bonuses, or the American people's buying preferences.

The problem always has been that GM couldn't make a profit manufacturing the cars they designed (and manufactured with UAW labor) at the prices the market was willing to pay for them [GMAC made most of their profits for the last few decades and it's already spun off].

A loan or bailout isn't going to fix a management team that won't make hard choices in the first place.

A loan or bailout isn't going to fix the design and engineering departments that have no idea what consumers want to drive or what can be economically manufactured.

A loan or bailout isn't going to fix poor manufacturing processes that are a world-wide joke.

A loan or bailout isn't going to fix the UAW, reduce their membership pay or benefits, or instill any pride in their so-called jobs.

A loan or bailout isn't going to change consumer preferences for quality engineering, reliability and/or superior economic efficiency.

But it will keep the UAW donating millions of dollars to politicians.

:pigsfly:pigsfly:pigsfly:pigsfly
 
Prometheus said:
As yet, I've not seen anything that looks like evidence that that might be the case. If GM fails, it will certainly hurt a lot in the short term, but a bail-out won't solve anything; it'll just postpone the inevitable. It would be better if the government took any proposed bail-out money and offered it as loans to companies like Honda, on condition that they use it to build new factories in the U.S. and hire some of the workers who were formerly with GM.
Click to expand...

I'm not big on a bail out either. But that includes the banks as well as the Automotive market. So if you give to one, you have to give to the other. IMHO. Where I live, if you ask the question "How many bankers do you know out of work, and how many automotive workers do you know out of work?" You get a resounding "None" and "Lots". I live in a blue collar town and come from blue collar blood. From where I sit, the bankers sat on their asses and pimped the populous, feeding them money they couldn't pay back, while hard working people ruined their bodies, made share holders rich, and now sit on the brink of losing everything.
 
3bodyproblem said:
You fail to see he impact of moving your hard earned dollars out of the country by buying forgeign. But I understand where you're coming from, I was there until I realized fully how dependant the economy is on the automotive market. It's huge. People buy a house and keep it. What besides a car do they spend, and continue to spend their money on? Cars. It's a massive industry. But before buying forgeign, consider putting in a little research. Consult customer satisfaction audits, JD powers, blogs etc. before just buying forgeign to buy forgeign. It's my personal experience that people who buy forgeign are less likely to tell you the problems they have with their cars and have little or no experience with fixing or repairing cars. In the early 80's yes, the Japanese built a superior 4 cylinder +30 mpg car. After about 95' the playing field was evened and for the most part you could buy a comparable domestic for the same price with the same reliability.
Click to expand...

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.
 
not_so_new said:
3bodyproblem I DO think the American people are partly to blame, but maybe in part for only being gullible. There is a good bit of circular thinking going on right? The car makers were "only making the cars the public wanted" but they also were pushing the cars they were making to the public and building enthusiasm in product lines that we not sustainable.

That is the POINT of marketing right, create excitement about your companies products? And the marketing arms of the auto makers are some of the best in the business.

How is it that Honda, Toyota, Subaru, BMW etc. are down in sales but not down and out like the Big 3? Because their business model didn't rely as heavily on a market segment that was doomed for failure.

YES the American people take some of the blame but good marketing by the American car companies fed part of that "need" for larger automobiles as well.

So that leads to the fact that GM's top management are a bunch of idiots at best or shortsighted greedy criminals at worst. As I said in a post above, one of the terms for any bailout in my eyes must be the complete suspension of any and all golden parachutes as well as a massive reduction in executive salaries. They should not be rewarded for the extremely poor management of the companies they ran. In fact it was suggested by some that the whole management structure of these companies should be canned, that might not be a bad place to start.

The gullible American consumer should take the heat, the government is part of the problem and the Big 3 lead them both around by the nose until we reached a small windowless cinderblock room with only one exit. Shame on all of us.

AGAIN. ALL of the above is talking about how we got here and what we need to do to not go down this road again. I am trying to point out that we need to deal with the situation as it is now because we are in crisis mode here.
Click to expand...

You make a very good point with this marketing angle NSN. I'd like to think we're smarter than that, but I know deep down we aren't. I'm not, I buy what I need and as cheap as I can as long as it's functional. But even if it was marketing, that's still a sign of the weakness in the buyer not so much the supplier. I'm still saying we need to own up for what has happened and take action. Thoughtful, directed logical action.
 
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...

Touche. My first car, 1982 Honda Accord Hatch Back with 350 000 Km. Automatic I changed to stick, purchase price $50 ;)

I still think JD powers does a good job auditing customer satisfaction. That being said, there are many NA cars that rate high, even higher than your BMW (for less $$) Trade your 330 for an XJ6? I mean their both forgeign right? :)
 
balrog666 said:
The problem isn't with the automobiles GM made, the idiotic CAFE standards, the UAW clowns, management bonuses, or the American people's buying preferences.

The problem always has been that GM couldn't make a profit manufacturing the cars they designed (and manufactured with UAW labor) at the prices the market was willing to pay for them [GMAC made most of their profits for the last few decades and it's already spun off].

A loan or bailout isn't going to fix a management team that won't make hard choices in the first place.

A loan or bailout isn't going to fix the design and engineering departments that have no idea what consumers want to drive or what can be economically manufactured.

A loan or bailout isn't going to fix poor manufacturing processes that are a world-wide joke.

A loan or bailout isn't going to fix the UAW, reduce their membership pay or benefits, or instill any pride in their so-called jobs.

A loan or bailout isn't going to change consumer preferences for quality engineering, reliability and/or superior economic efficiency.

But it will keep the UAW donating millions of dollars to politicians.

:pigsfly:pigsfly:pigsfly:pigsfly
Click to expand...


K. So, yur solution then please? Quick, this boat is sinking...
 
balrog666 said:
A loan or bailout isn't going to fix poor manufacturing processes that are a world-wide joke.

:pigsfly:pigsfly:pigsfly:pigsfly
Click to expand...

WAIT! As I posted my last response I read this. This is patently false. Please support it with something, anything. I can quote cycle times and QSA audit concerns that totally blow this out of the water. This is simply not the truth.

ps- Henry Ford called and said he's taking back the assembly line process for manufacturing, you guys figure out how to do it another way if you're going to laugh. His words, not mine.

Yours sincerely,

Pete from Detroit (Windsor, close enough)
 
Last edited:
not_so_new said:
snip..., a GM S10 that was starting to rust out from under me at 60,000 miles snip...
Click to expand...


Pre 92' the phosphate bath, a NA idea, was not common place. The deposition layer on cars dipped in phosphate resulted in a rust resistant layer. My Honda rusted out from under me, literally. In the North West to this day you can almost date cars based on the amount of rust in the quarter panels and sill plates.
 
Last edited:
What about taking the bail out money and giving it to American consumers as an incentive to buy (big 3) American? Say $5000 off the price of any GM, Ford or Chrysler car you buy.

I hate the idea of a bailout but if you have to do it... why not do it in a way that benefits the people your taking the money from?

.02
Russell
 
3bodyproblem said:
Because their primary market isn't NA. Their primary markets have a more centralized populous that demands smaller=more fuel efficient cars. Let's be honest, Toyota and Honda just brought to the US market what they were already making. Had they designed cars specifically for the NA market (please see "Tundra") they would have failed.
Click to expand...

The 1997 Toyota Camry was designed and built in the US for the the US market. Shortly thereafter, the Camry became the No. 1 selling car in America, and remained so for so for quite a few years.
 
rhtufts said:
What about taking the bail out money and giving it to American consumers as an incentive to buy (big 3) American? Say $5000 off the price of any GM, Ford or Chrysler car you buy.

I hate the idea of a bailout but if you have to do it... why not do it in a way that benefits the people your taking the money from?

.02
Russell
Click to expand...

k. As a Canadian how much do i get?
 
ZirconBlue said:
The 1997 Toyota Camry was designed and built in the US for the the US market. Shortly thereafter, the Camry became the No. 1 selling car in America, and remained so for so for quite a few years.
Click to expand...

Based on what platform? With what engine?
 
ZirconBlue said:
The 1997 Toyota Camry was designed and built in the US for the the US market. Shortly thereafter, the Camry became the No. 1 selling car in America, and remained so for so for quite a few years.
Click to expand...

Just because you re-vamp to accomodate a market with a current platform? I wish it were that simple. That sewing machine has been running for a while...
 
3bodyproblem said:
Based on what platform? With what engine?
Click to expand...


I'm not sure what you're asking. There was a Lexus sharing the platform of the Camry, but my recollection is that the '97 Camry design was created first, then extended to the Lexus model. The engines were a mix of 4- and 6-cylinder engines made in Kentucky.

My point is that Toyota didn't just luck out and have their Japanese models become successes in NA. They built Camrys, Carollas, Avalons, etc. in Kentucky, Ontario, California, etc, and, starting with the '97 Camry, actually started doing design work in the US, as well. And when fuel efficiency became more of an issue, they proved that a hybrid could be profitiable in the US. Ford saw the writing on the wall and licensed the "Hybrid Synergy Drive" technology from Toyota, but GM had to be dragged along kicking and screaming.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom