What Will It Take to Save GM? - READ ONLY

11674 messages, Last post on Oct 12, 2006 at 10:06 AM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Chevrolet, GMC, Cadillac, Pontiac, Oldsmobile

Discuss all topics related to General Motors.

Outline

Messages Page 356 of 1169: 1; ...; 353; 354; 355; 356; 357; 358; 359; ...; 1169; Prev; Next; Last

#3543 of 11674 Mich. future now more tied to autos by rockylee Apr 19, 2006 (2:08 am)
Plant closures outside the region concentrate production in the state, for better or worse. Now that Detroit's largest automakers are retrenching their U.S. manufacturing operations to the Midwest, Michigan will bear an even greater share of the hardship if General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. keep losing sales. By the same token, the state will reap the benefits if the U.S. automakers succeed in their turnaround efforts, a Federal Reserve Bank economist said. "Since their restructurings, their production is more concentrated in this region than it has been in a long, long time," said Thomas Klier, senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. "So the fortunes of this region are more than ever tied to the market success of these three companies," he said, referring to GM, Ford and DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler Group. Michigan's government is struggling to diversify the economy and reduce its reliance on the domestic auto industry. Between 2002 and 2005, Michigan lost nearly 50,000 auto jobs, or 18 percent, even though the U.S. economy was expanding. "One could argue these are structural job losses -- this isn't a cyclical issue," Klier said. The reduction in jobs partly reflects productivity increases that enable fewer people to produce the same amount. But the fall is due primarily to the steady decline in U.S. market share of the Big Three -- to 56.5 percent from 62 percent five years ago. Many Wall Street analysts expect the slide will continue, but Klier was reluctant to make a prediction. "Three years from now, we'll see whether the downward trends we're seeing are reversible or not," he said. GM and Ford are now downsizing their North American operations to reflect their reduced share of the U.S. vehicle market. After abandoning its goal to recover a 29 percent market share, GM is hoping to stabilize in the low- to mid-20s. Ford is trying to slow the rate at which its U.S. market share -- now 19 percent -- is contracting. Last week, it announced plans to close truck plants in St. Paul, Minn., and in Norfolk, Va. It is expected to ramp up pickup truck output in Michigan to make up some of the shortfall. GM also has targeted more outlying factories than Midwestern plants in its restructuring plans. Chrysler, the only U.S. automaker to have gained market share in recent years, did not close U.S. assembly plants during its recent restructuring. Its manufacturing network was less far-flung than those of its larger rivals. If the U.S. automakers cannot halt the decline in their market share, the Midwestern operations will be more exposed to future cutbacks. On the other hand, "if it turns around, the upside development will be concentrated in this region, as well," Klier said at a conference organized by the Chicago Fed's Detroit branch. The number of auto assembly plants in the United States has declined to 50 from 55 since 1979. But it has tripled in the South to 15. Japan's Toyota Motor Corp. has just built a truck plant in San Antonio, and expects to be producing 2 million vehicles annually in North America by 2008. Dennis Cuneo, senior vice president of Toyota Motor Manufacturing North America, said 65 percent of those vehicles would be assembled at plants in the range of its supplier base in the Great Lakes area. Toyota is considering Michigan as a site for an engine plant.
#3544 of 11674 heh by gljvd Apr 19, 2006 (2:42 am)
this is all a bit of nonsense . GM and Ford just need to produce solid cars with quality parts . Doing this for a few years will turn around sales , if they can get the quality in line with the japanese makers and get the mpg close to them alos they will be fine . The problem is they aren't doing this and they need to start doing this .
#3545 of 11674 Saturn Aura by lweiss Apr 19, 2006 (3:09 am)
Please tell me why the Saturn Aura is just not a derivative of the Pontiac G6. Looks the same to me at least on the outside. And remember that Saturn has always been positioned as the Asian car alternative, and the last 10 years they have failed miserably in that effort. The people that have Saturns do love them (my daughter included) and their dealers are stellar. But is that enough to dislodge the love affair with the Asian makes? Replies to this message: dieselone (Apr 19, 2006 4:48 am)
#3546 of 11674 Re: Saturn Aura [lweiss] by dieselone Apr 19, 2006 (4:48 am)
Replying to: lweiss (Apr 19, 2006 3:09 am) Well, I think the Aura looks good in on paper, I like the looks inside and out. But the competition is tough as well. I'm also interested in the redesigned 2007 Altima which is riding on a new platform along with an 80% new 3.5v6. I like the fact the Altima offers a CVT and a 6speed manual along with 265HP with a much improved interior. Granted, all I've seen of the '07 Altima and Aura are photos, wait and see them when they are out. Unfortunately, neither will be here soon enough. I'll probably have to by the wife a car within the next two months. Right now, a Mustang GT Conv is her choice, but a sedan is still not out of the question. But we'll see once we really get serious.
#3547 of 11674 Aura v Altima by gsemike Apr 19, 2006 (5:08 am)
I'm a pleased owner of a 2003 Altima and was very impressed by the 2007 Alt at the show. The Aura is very nice as well. I would consider both, but the preliminary prices on the Aura seem a little high. You have to remember that Saturn still has there no haggle policy so there is no possibility of negotiating a great deal. I looked at the L300 before buying the Alt but thought it was pricey as well and didn't get anywhere talking price. Rocky, I am a patriot as well and wish that I could support GM. They used to have me as a loyal customer and lost me. My Nissan was built in TN. They pay American workers and taxes to the Fed and the State. These a fair wage jobs with fair benefits. What's the problem? What will the snake oil salesman John Edwards do about the ridiculous pension and health obligations that GM signed on for years ago? What has he ever done? Nobody benefits from protectionism. Will protectionism make GM a leaner more effective company or just buy them some more time to remain inert? Just Monday at the show, I had a GM rep tell me about the Impala, "customers don't expect a telescoping steeting wheel at this price point"... REALLY???????????
#3548 of 11674 Re: GM woes [carlisimo] by logic1 Apr 19, 2006 (5:11 am)
Replying to: carlisimo (Apr 19, 2006 12:26 am) Yeah, GM Europe is a very capable outfit. They have reason to be proud, especially with rumors picking up that the Astra will replace the Ion. Oh and the Sky was modeled after the Opel Speedster. Opel's designers and engineers have proven themselves better than Saturn's, for better or worse. Here they come to the rescue! While I fully support the Opel/Saturn move (less redundancy means less overhead) I must point out you are wrong about the Sky being an Opel design. The Sky design is by the US Saturn designers. The engineering is by GM's folks in Detroit. I cannot wait for the Astra either. Appears it will be here sooner than originally thought as well, if reports on some of the other boards pans out. Replies to this message: carlisimo (Apr 19, 2006 6:05 am) logic1 (Apr 19, 2006 6:10 am) carlisimo (Apr 19, 2006 7:55 am)
#3549 of 11674 Re: GM woes [logic1] by carlisimo Apr 19, 2006 (6:05 am)
Replying to: logic1 (Apr 19, 2006 5:11 am) 2001 Opel Speedster (aka Vauxhall VX220): The Sky is designed here, but the styling is basically an evolution of the Speedster. I'm not trying take away credit from the Sky's designers, but point out that the design theme came from Europe. Replies to this message: logic1 (Apr 19, 2006 6:10 am) carlisimo (Apr 19, 2006 7:55 am)
#3550 of 11674 Re: GM woes [carlisimo] by logic1 Apr 19, 2006 (6:10 am)
Replying to: carlisimo (Apr 19, 2006 6:05 am) The Sky is designed here, but the styling is basically an evolution of the Speedster. I'm not trying take away credit from the Sky's designers, but point out that the design theme came from Europe. Ok. I got you. You can definitely see hints of the Sky in the Speedster. Wasn't that Speedster based on a Lotus platform? Nice to see the new car coming from in house. The Saab engineered 2.0 litre ecotec in the redline really promises to be something. Replies to this message: carlisimo (Apr 19, 2006 7:55 am)
#3551 of 11674 Re: GM woes [rockylee] by w9cw Apr 19, 2006 (7:43 am)
Replying to: rockylee (Apr 18, 2006 11:11 pm) I driven SAABs for a long time. My first was in the late '60s and still have two mid-80s Classic 900 models in the family. SAABs are problematic, if and only if, you don't follow the maintenance schedule. Both SAABs and Volvos can be very problematic if they're not maintained properly, and many aren't. Both of our Classic 900s are still going strong with only routine maintenace, and both have over 150K without any engine or transmission problems. I no nothing of the newer generation SAABs built on the Global Platforms, but the older "real SAABs" were reliable brutes when maintained properly. Let's face it, the 9-2X and the 9-7X aren't real SAABs and they never will be.
#3552 of 11674 Re: GM woes [logic1] by carlisimo Apr 19, 2006 (7:55 am)
Replying to: logic1 (Apr 19, 2006 6:10 am) Yeah I think it's on the Lotus platform, but it never got the Celica GT-S engine. Once Lotus upgraded from the old 110hp engine to the Celica's, Opel/Vauxhall released a turbo version. The Sky's a porker in comparison, but it's taken the styling pretty darn close to perfection.