Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Smart Shopper Stories from the Sales Frontlines
47862 messages, Last post on Nov 23, 2009 at 7:49 PM
You are in the Smart Shopper Forum. Your Hosts are kirstie_h & tidester
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: driver100 (Dec 02, 2008 7:02 pm) Didn't think I would here 23 and (Buick) Regal in the same sentence I can remember a supercharged Regal GS around that vintage that wasn't a bad looking ride. (search buick regal gs on ebay, look at the red one) For the money, nephew could have ended up with a lot of blander things. Still not what you'd expect a 23 year old to drive at first guess, but I'd rather have this than some generic Fujisaki Scootabout. I think the key for a lot of cars is to check off all the option boxes. The generic low end rental versions that flood the used car market sour me on many models. When you see one with optional rims, sunroof, spoiler, leather, etc. they don't seem so dowdy. Big 3 sedans and Toyotas immediately come to mind as things that really benefit from a little window dressing.
|
|
|
Replying to: richard64 (Dec 02, 2008 7:19 pm) Now let's look at those other bozos: Wagoner has been there for 15 years now and still can't figure out how to make cars that people want at price higher than his cost  . Time's out. Nardelli is a joke: damaged Home Depot, collected 200 milion bucks and as a punishment they put him in charge of another damaged company, likely with another juicy contract . And his bosses are total morons: what did they actually see that was worth buying not so long ago is beyond me. My not so smart little sister would know not to touch Chrysler. Were was the value? 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: joel0622 (Dec 02, 2008 12:48 pm) Proof positive that Buick ownership causes irreversible brain damage...
|
|
|
Replying to: explorerx4 (Dec 02, 2008 3:51 pm) He qualified that statement by saying only "if" Ford had to use the bailout money. He anticipates that "most likely" Ford won't need the money. He also expects Ford to go under if GM does. So what does that say?
|
|
|
Replying to: roadburner (Dec 02, 2008 8:56 pm) Tiger has a kid and a gorgeous wife. What could he possible need a two seater for? Now the caddy just got married a year or two ago. Additionally by giving it away he is no longer responsible for the full tax liability caused by winning it.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: obyone (Dec 03, 2008 12:04 am) Sorry wrong answer, if he won it and accepted it he is taxed on its value. If he gives it away not only is he taxed on the value of the car he might incur a gift tax (unless its donated to a bonified charity).
|
|
|
Replying to: traindriver (Dec 02, 2008 7:42 pm) Couldn't find one on EBay but this should be close; Buick Regal GS Looks like a nice car but I thought you had to prove you were 80 or over before they would give you a Buick. I heard they have a new option, it automatically turns off your signal light if you don't actually make a turn in 2 miles 
|
|
|
Replying to: snakeweasel (Dec 03, 2008 4:52 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: obyone (Dec 03, 2008 12:02 am) Ford and GM share same parts suppliers. If GM goes under, suppliers will go under and pull Ford down with them. I still don’t think that GM and Ford will survive unless UAW is disbanded. No company can survive if they have to pay an army of retirees and their spouses a pension and health benefits for the rest of their lives? Is there any other company that still offers these benefits to their current blue color employees? |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: driver100 (Dec 03, 2008 5:25 am) isell....I would also ask that you extend my kind wishes to Mack when you get in touch with him again. Glad to hear he's doing better. Chrysler? Nardelli? I agree. Cerebus/Chrysler is a private company. They deserve public money, why exactly? Daimler/Cerebus did everything within their power to screw Chrysler. We're supposed to clean up their mess? I'm thinking....NO! FIrst, Daimler still has a vested interest in Chrysler. They're a foreign entity. If Nardelli can't put forth a better plan than what he's laid out, I can't see any reason for us to agree to their bailout. Wagoner and GM....I don't know any of the specifics of what models he's axing, plants he's going to shutter, or how he's planning to sustain GM past the next few months (let alone the next few years). Still, gotta do better than what I'm hearing. Ford and Mullaly? Seems to have a better handle on what Ford needs to do. Still, I have yet to hear any concrete details on how he intends to stay out of putting his hand in the public till.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Smart Shopper Stories from the Sales Frontlines
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
