Is GM finished?

[MIKILLINI]

You know, I haven't seen a Mr. Goodwrench commercial in over a year. The only thing I've allowed "Mr. Goodwrench" to perform on my '98 Skylark was a recall repair on the ignition switch wiring within the steering column.

Other repairs I did myself, such as replacing the water pump, serpentine belt (twice) and alternator. Would have cost Me twice as much if GM performed the replacement of those parts.
After 145,000 miles these are the only repairs the car has needed, so this has been one of the better GM cars I've owned (along with all those 60's and 70's Chevelle's I owned previously)...The wife had a '81 Chevy Citation, which had to be one of the worst cars GM has ever conceived in that decade.
Their best cars were the muscle cars of the mid to later 60's and some early 70's models.

 

[drkitten]

Sure India and China may represent huge markets that could save the Big 3, but will they remain open to NA manufacturers? My guess is they will retain their own "oligopoly" and keep the NA manufacturers out. No use making the same mistakes we already made in this industry...

What's this idiotic idee fixe you have about protectionism?

Protectionism -- or more accurately, a lack of protectionism -- is the only thing that has kept GM and the American auto industry going as long as it has, because the Big 3 have been forced to develop cost-cutting measures in order to compete in the world market. Putting a tariff on US imports would simply have meant that GM couldn't compete at all in non-tariff economies, the very ones that are keeping GM afloat at the moment.

 

[Dragoonster]

In order to remain competitive in the global economy it's something we need to consider. The fact of the matter is most older employees cannot continue to operate at the cycle times required to keep the NA market competitive. The Union is fighting to keep high seniority jobs for older employees, which I understand, but at what cost? If we have to compete against a Chinese or Taiwanese work force that is willing to forgo not only wages, but safety, to produce a product, in the Free Market, what can be done? I'm not willing to forgo safety, so my only recourse is to ensure faster cycles times at all of my work stations. This allows me to reduce the number of workers in any given plant and keep productions times competitive. I'm not saying that age would be the determining factor, I'm saying ability would be a determining factor. The next generation of autoworkers needs to be athletes. They need to be in constant training to keep competitive and keep their position. If they fail to do so, they should be eliminated. The Union has fought tooth and nail for too long to keep these high seniority jobs for older lazy workers. The problem is two fold, not only does it hinder production, it creates resentment in productive workers as they realize they are responsible for picking up the slack. Line workers have an uncanny ability to remain constantly aware of exactly how much work any other employees is doing.

This was sort of brought up at today's Senate Banking Committee hearing (still on CSPAN for anyone who wants to watch). The hearing features all big 3 CEOs, UAW president, and token business professor who's against the bailouts. The professor has repeated the point that the margins are too thin in the industry compared to others. And on the retirement point asked whether retirees would still be paid or paid to retire, which the CEOs dodged.

That seems one of the biggest problems--thin margins coupled with grossly inordinate pay and benefits. A congressman also questioned the policy of idle plants still paying their workers 95% salary for literally being at home doing nothing, and whether this would change. Neither the UAW guy or CEOs was much responsive to this. If they aren't aware enough to realize that serious changes need to be made, why bail them out?

The professor also brought up the durability of cars that could/will lead to consumers owning them longer, reducing the units sold per year. And that the CEOs hadn't factored this in with their estimates of return to production.

As far as product goes, the Ford CEO seems to be the most responsive. He's outlining particular moves and strategy, specific products and cost, etc. The other CEOs are being more vague, basically asking us to trust them.

Anyway it's an interesting hearing, may have an hour or so left if anyone wants to watch.

 

[DanishDynamite]

The Big 3 deserve to fail, as any other non-compettive company does. If the US goverment bails out the Big 3, there should at least be very sound strings attached and they should be called on this by the WHO.

 

[Damien Evans]

Similarly, Consumer Reports has published reliability studies for every major car manufacturer on a yearly basis for something like forty years. I don't have one to hand, but it would be relatively easy for anyone to pick one up and look at the average rating for Honda, for Toyota, and for GM.

No GM car made Consumer Reports' 2008 most reliable list. Lots of Hondas, Toyotas, and Scions, though.

Warranty Direct publishes the following:



If 3bodyproblem can show that GM averages as reliable as Toyota, I'll cheerfully admit that I'm wrong. I didn't see any GM cars in that list above, though. What did I miss?

Daewoo has a few there. GM own them.

 

[Prometheus]

The Big 3 deserve to fail, as any other non-compettive company does. If the US goverment bails out the Big 3, there should at least be very sound strings attached and they should be called on this by the WHO.

i

"We won't be fooled again!"

 

[Damien Evans]

my Holden :

[qimg]http://www.automedia.com/NewCarBuyersGuide/photos/2005/Pontiac/GTO/Coupe/2005_Pontiac_GTO_ext_1.jpg[/qimg]

Yea, its a Pontiac GTO, but it is really a Holden

Yeah, the Holden Monaro.

Do they still sell them over there? They went out of production here 2 or 3 years ago.

 

[DanishDynamite]

i

"We won't be fooled again!"

Sorry, WTO.

 

[Just thinking]

Yeah, the Holden Monaro.

Do they still sell them over there? They went out of production here 2 or 3 years ago.

That practice is not unique to GM or the US auto industry. Nissan kept making the 300ZX several years after they stopped exporting them to the US. I believe the same was true for the RX-7 by Mazda.

Plus ... a rose by any other name ...

 

[Damien Evans]

BTW, just so you know it's not just anecdotal evidence that GM had a severe problem with peeling paint from that time period: http://www.autosafety.org/gm-paint-release

and: http://www.autosafety.org/chevrolet-beretta

Took them 6 years to admit there was a problem! By that time my mother, and I'm sure many other GM customers, had had enough of GM and weren't going back no matter what. And notice how they tried to place blame on the owners for the problem with their cute little "owner care and maintenance also are factors in the appearance and durability of exterior finishes".

Screw 'em.

They did the same thing with the Gen III V8. It took GM/Holden years to admit it chewed far more oil than it should have, particularly the LS1 variant.

http://www.c5registry.com/2k2z06/page5.htm

 

[WildCat]

That practice is not unique to GM or the US auto industry. Nissan kept making the 300ZX several years after they stopped exporting them to the US. I believe the same was true for the RX-7 by Mazda.

Plus ... a rose by any other name ...

And look how long the original Volkswagon Beetle was made in Mexico. They might still be making the damned thing there for all I know.

 

[Furcifer]

What's this idiotic idee fixe you have about protectionism?

Protectionism -- or more accurately, a lack of protectionism -- is the only thing that has kept GM and the American auto industry going as long as it has, because the Big 3 have been forced to develop cost-cutting measures in order to compete in the world market. Putting a tariff on US imports would simply have meant that GM couldn't compete at all in non-tariff economies, the very ones that are keeping GM afloat at the moment.

It wasn't my idea, I can assure you this practice has been around for a while.

I think it's a quaint notion that people believe this is what forced the Big 3 to introduce cost saving measures.

There's enough competition between themselves without the addition of Forgeign competitors to accomplish this. If you think Toyota invented the production line, or bettered it without studying and learning from the NA's you're wrong. Most of the advancements in production line technology have come from NA. I will admit however, in my experience Honda has led the way in ergonomics and introducing them to the production line.

They (the Japanese) could have kept their 5 S's to themselves.

 

[balrog666]

If the UAW gets its money, their sales figures will plunge as consumers show them the meaning of the word, "backlash". I'd seriously doubt they'd last another year, even with a full bailout and even if they miraculously "retool" in that time. Why would so many people who perceive themselves as being robbed do business with the robbers?

 

[Furcifer]

Similarly, Consumer Reports has published reliability studies for every major car manufacturer on a yearly basis for something like forty years. I don't have one to hand, but it would be relatively easy for anyone to pick one up and look at the average rating for Honda, for Toyota, and for GM.

No GM car made Consumer Reports' 2008 most reliable list. Lots of Hondas, Toyotas, and Scions, though.

Warranty Direct publishes the following:



If 3bodyproblem can show that GM averages as reliable as Toyota, I'll cheerfully admit that I'm wrong. I didn't see any GM cars in that list above, though. What did I miss?

Sorry drK I didn't see this post earlier. My internet is very slow and I'm having trouble loading pages. My only response to this list is that I have no idea who Warranty Direct is, or how they compiled this list.

My question would be why all these excellent cars were dumped off and sold as used? The title suggests they were bought "Used" meaning (to me) the original owners were unsatisfied with them. Why?

I noticed the Accord tops the list. My mother drives a 1992 Honda Accord Exr. She loves the car and thinks it is the best most reliable car ever. She loves the car so much it actually runs on love. The love for two mechanics (one professional and one self proclaimed backyard) who have practically replaced and repaired everything on that car

 

[Toke]

Ok, so no GM car is sold used as they are so great no one would want to part with one.
Therefore they never appear on a list of most reliable used cars.

 

[Furcifer]

Um, because, as a rule, American companies make bigger cars?

Having trunk space isn't a requirement for a cab. If you're making airport runs, then it's an important consideration. The biggest consideration is downtime. When you're down you're losing money. Reliability is key.

 

[Furcifer]

Ok, so no GM car is sold used as they are so great no one would want to part with one.
Therefore they never appear on a list of most reliable used cars.

Not exactly.

I'm talking about new cars anyways, not used ones. Used car salesmen aren't looking for a bailout

 

[Furcifer]

This was sort of brought up at today's Senate Banking Committee hearing (still on CSPAN for anyone who wants to watch). The hearing features all big 3 CEOs, UAW president, and token business professor who's against the bailouts. The professor has repeated the point that the margins are too thin in the industry compared to others. And on the retirement point asked whether retirees would still be paid or paid to retire, which the CEOs dodged.

That seems one of the biggest problems--thin margins coupled with grossly inordinate pay and benefits. A congressman also questioned the policy of idle plants still paying their workers 95% salary for literally being at home doing nothing, and whether this would change. Neither the UAW guy or CEOs was much responsive to this. If they aren't aware enough to realize that serious changes need to be made, why bail them out?

The professor also brought up the durability of cars that could/will lead to consumers owning them longer, reducing the units sold per year. And that the CEOs hadn't factored this in with their estimates of return to production.

As far as product goes, the Ford CEO seems to be the most responsive. He's outlining particular moves and strategy, specific products and cost, etc. The other CEOs are being more vague, basically asking us to trust them.

Anyway it's an interesting hearing, may have an hour or so left if anyone wants to watch.

I missed hearing today We got a blip on the bottom of the screen on a Detroit local station saying it could be viewed online at Fox.com but I can't do streaming video. I'm waiting for the 11 o'clock news for snipets.

 

[Roadtoad]

What's this idiotic idee fixe you have about protectionism?

Protectionism -- or more accurately, a lack of protectionism -- is the only thing that has kept GM and the American auto industry going as long as it has, because the Big 3 have been forced to develop cost-cutting measures in order to compete in the world market. Putting a tariff on US imports would simply have meant that GM couldn't compete at all in non-tariff economies, the very ones that are keeping GM afloat at the moment.

Latest word is that GM is unveiling new models in China from Chevy, Buick, and Cadillac. Still looking for images and the like, but it seems to me they can't be doing THAT bad, if they can come up with new models.

The reason GM is failing is not only Unions, but corporate greed. Considering what George Will noted in the column that Balrog cited, it seems to me bankruptcy may be the only option that will force GM's management to either change or leave. This kind of incompetence, in light of a marketplace that had not merely changed, but evolved, borders on the criminal, particularly in light of executive bonuses which depleted the cash reserves that GM now says it needs.

In talking with one of my sons, I found myself agreeing with my very liberal offspring that what Rick Waggoner pulled this afternoon before Congress bordered on economic terrorism. Had his words been physical elements of any sort, he'd have been wrestled to the ground and hauled off to Gitmo.

Sorry, I have a hard time feeling sorry for GM, its shareholders (who tolerated this barbarity), and the UAW who refused to see what their mule-headedness has brought about. They want people like me to bail their sorry asses out? Too frigging bad: I need what little money I earn to hang on to the little bit I have.

 

[Furcifer]

Sorry, I have a hard time feeling sorry for GM, its shareholders (who tolerated this barbarity), and the UAW who refused to see what their mule-headedness has brought about. They want people like me to bail their sorry asses out? Too frigging bad: I need what little money I earn to hang on to the little bit I have.

You seem to echo WC's "screw em'" stance on the matter. While I respect this, for the reasons many have stated here, I also see a bigger picture. I've heard a lot fo numbers over the years, but the auto motive industry creates some 10 indirectly related jobs, and 3-4 directly related jobs for every 1 in the company. What about the feeder plants, whose employees saw half of the earnings their counterparts saw over the years, but continued to do their jobs to feed their families? "Screw em'"?

You can't feel sorry for GM, the UAW or the CEO's? Fine, their just an assortment of capital letters.

But can you really say the same when you put faces to those letters?