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
Automotive News & Views Does America Even Need Its Own Automakers?
1788 messages, Last post on Mar 03, 2009 at 2:18 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: wvgasguy (Nov 12, 2008 6:28 am) No, they had to be taught (marketed to) the benefits of the new stuff. Toyota invented "feel good marketing" (well Volvo really invented it I guess), not GM. GM invented "built tough" and "like a rock" which is okay but what does that mean exactly? Personally I think if you only *listen* to the public, you are going to get a lot of screwy, conflicting messages. I think politics rather proves that. But if you are the *framer* of the debate, you gain power. Same with marketing I think, cars, fashion, video games, whatever. |
|
|
|
|
My understanding is that we will never see any of the BANK BAILOUT money, ever again. I am pretty sure that your understanding is mistaken. To date the only "bail out" money that has been spent has been used to buy preferred stock in several banks. I would assume the government will collect dividends and then some day can sell the shares back to the bank or whoever wants to buy them. The government could very well make a profit, if share prices increase by the time they sell.
|
|
|
I think the Government should give low interest loans to the Big Three. If my memory serves me right, loans get repaid. Bailouts are free money. This is ridiculous and I completely disagree. First off, why should I pay additional taxes to fund ultra low rate loans for the Big 3? Why should I subsidize loans to the Big 3? I'd rather have the gov't give me an ultra low rate loan on my mortagage. Or better yet, how about you lower my taxes and let me keep this "loan" money going to the Big 3 at 2% loan rates when I could make a better profit and put it to better use in an online savings or money market account earning twice that at 4%. The other option to make the loans profitable would be to only loan it to the Big 3 if they are willing to pay 10 to 20% in interest so that at least my tax money becomes profitable. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: jeffyscott (Nov 12, 2008 9:20 am) "As you know, we have taken the tough, necessary actions over the last few years to strengthen our competitive position. With our UAW partners we have reshaped our business and will have reduced our structural costs by more than $13 billion by 2010 and have closed the quality and efficiency gaps with our competitors. We also are building products that have received great customer acceptance and acclaim..." "....And, there's more to come with the Chevy Volt which will position GM as a global technology leader..." "Today, I want you to take the time to contact your members of Congress to ask them to support America's domestic auto industry. Please call the following number to be connected with your legislators 1-866-927-2233. Directions and key messages are in the attached document to assist you with the calls. Also attached is a fact sheet that includes the economic figures cited above. Additionally, you can visit www.gmfactsandfiction.com to obtain further information on the auto industry and GM." Troy Clarke President GM North America --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - ---------------- I haven't seen the original letter/mass mailing/ so I can't verify all of this but it is a very sobering thing to read---it's kind of sad, really. I'm glad that some "facts" might be illuminated but I'm not so sure I agree whole heartedly with everything that is said here. The letter goes on to state how many jobs will be lost, etc. and that they need $25 billion bucks |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Nov 12, 2008 3:33 am) But when he characterizes "everyone's" view of GM, he certainly doesn't characterize my view of it. And the rest of his blue-collar-poser-taking-a-stab-at-white-collar-exploiters routine is worthless drivel. I do NOT agree that autoworkers are just a bunch of lazy jackasses, to paraphrase his comments early on in the piece. I think this company does build something of worth but it has been driven to the end of its rope by management that could never take a long-term view longer than a single product cycle (if that) and has no idea of how to diversify its product portfolio as insulation against the bad times. So they have taken the easy way out time and time again and the company has become more and more ragged. Companies like this ARE THE VERY REASON BANKRUPTCY LAWS EXIST. This report being bandied about this week quotes American job losses at 2.5 million if all 3 automakers fail entirely. Obviously, nothing close to that scenario is envisioned here, why would it be? Micheline Maynard was a guest on the local morning news here this morning, and she quoted the figure of 100,000 job losses both directly and indirectly if GM were to declare bankruptcy. We lost more jobs nationally than that just in the last two weeks. Very manageable, and a first step to rebuilding this company into something with some lasting power through economic upturns and downturns. Take it to the court, GM! Ford, it seems, will be able to weather the storm. And Chrysler? Now there's a domestic automaker we genuinely don't need in its current form. Sell the parts, Cerberus, and lick your wounds. Someone (or several someones) with some common sense will buy up the parts and operate them much better than you ever would have been able to . |
|
|
There has been no one I have ever come across that has been as big a supporter of the American car industry or GM than me I have ever come across. That being said, I am completely against any money going to the big 3 under any circumstances. Chrysler is not worthy of getting money because they have become a bit player on the global scene. Their models generally speaking are of marhinal quality versus that of GM and Ford. If you don't believe me look at JD Powers and Associates quality surveys over the last 20 years. Although Chrysler has made marked improvement in their quality ovet this period, they are still generally speaking behind Ford and GM. I realize part of Chryslers present problems are brought about by the wicked step child perception Mercedes viewed Chrysler. Mercedes looked at Chrysler as a cash cow in the early days of their relationship, than saddled Chrysler with big inefficient engines, and ugly car bodies without upgrading their manufacturing processes to compete effectively with the other Detroit offerings and the offerings in markets around the world. Also Chrysler was and is presently hampered by being tied at the hip to Mercedes as a major supplier. This will hurt Chryslers potential for survival to a great extent because of Mercedes over priced parts and other components for the next number of years of this exclusive arrangement Mercedes put together in spinning off Chrysler. Ford and GM are different from Chrysler in the following ways. Both of these companies actually have a much better potential for survival. I would not bail these companies out. Why? Well, it comes down to the fact that the big 3's legacy costs are so ridiculously expensive that GM and Ford can't sell a car on the same even playing field as Toyota or Honda can. If GM and Ford were to file for bankruptcy than all the legacy costs and unions are busted. If you bust the unions, than they are on the same footing as Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Hyundai, Mercedes, and BMW here in the US. GM and Ford will be able to save the roughly $2,000 per car wasted on these legacy costs and put some of that money back into the research and development of their products. It will be only a matter of time before they would be making even better quality cars than they are at present (which by the way very very good overall.) I fully understand that the Big 3 brought this on themselves. I will admit this point to an extent but you the reader of this have to realize that the unions were in their own way greedy of taking the opportunity put at their feet to an extreme extent. If the unions were smart and looked at the long term viability of their demands they would have (and probably did) realize that the extremely generous benefits couldn't be sustained with the ever increasing world competition within the car market. This motivation to be as much of a parasite on the backs of the Big 3 was especially true after the Arab Oil Embargo of the early 1970's and the price shock of oil prices in the late 70's. Even if the Big 3 automotive boards were incompetent and in their own right willing accomplises the UAW should have realized that things were not sustainable over the decades ahead and the Big 3 would be in peril to the point of killing the UAW itself. I give Walter Reuther and Doug Frasier a whole lot of credit for instituting programs and benefit packages that were great for the unions at first, but now that UAW membership is about 10% of the US workforce, it hasn't been the utopian world both these leaders worked so hard to implement. If the Big 3 were to get money from Congress they would have to establish policies and provisions politicians in Washington (primarily Democrat) politicians want. One of the biggest parts of a potential bailout that Washington wants to be a part of, is for Washington to control the Big 3's making of small fuel efficent cars. Washington screws everything up. Social security, Fannie and Freddie you name it. Government on all levels tries to legislate everything including the use of oils that contain trans fats. Freedom of choice is being assulted on a daily basis. If I want to buy a Hummer, I can at present but who knows whether I'll be able to 10-20 years from now, and even if I can they will tax that vehicle like crazy thereby legislating behavior. This applies to many different things. A toilet that was the standard 20+ years ago that could flush 3 gallons of water everytime its flushed now can't be purchased as brand new anymore. Now you have to buy a a smaller capacity flushing unit that flushes less water thereby saving water. Why not sell a lower capacity toilet along side the normal capacity unit and let the market decide. It might sound trivial folks, but it demonstrates my point exactly. Let industry come up with solutions to market problems, and changing conditions. That is much better than forcing businesses through government intervention fix the problem(s). If gas goes to $10 a gallon auto companies will build the right cars for the market if they don't they will be out of business. Government shouldn't legislate peoples behavior, government should work on making markets available to businesses and establishing rules and regulations that promote business growth. By taxing a type of car because "its considered a gas guzzler in the eyes of some people" doesn't promote the sale of that vehicle. The people are smarter than the government is aware. |
|
|
I think the main problem with the Big 3 is that they have burned too many customers that just "won't go back." So they've earned a reputation for cheating customers, which means they have lost those customers. The simple fact is no matter what the Big 3 do, they have lost too many customers, and there are not enough customers in the world to replace all the ones they have burned. Extinction is inevitable. |
|
|
|
|
The head of Audi, the high-end line made by the Volkswagen group, said he favoured a "junkyard bonus" to encourage households to get rid of older cars The German automobile importers federation VDIK also called for a bonus for households that junked old vehicles, saying it would be an "incitement to trade in old clunkers for new cars that respect the environment." http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081112/ts_alt_afp/financeeconomygermanyautoaidcomp- anyford_081112153824/print;_ylt=AnfoLVMbsVtFwwCR.PeZ9PfZa7gF How you would arrange this in the US so that it would encourage purchase cars from Ford or GM, I don't know. In any case, something like this could act as a general economic stimulus and, in the US, could maybe help get rid of some of our fleet of gas guzzling SUVs and trucks (a legacy from the era of cheap gas...oh wait, maybe that's back?)
|
|
|
Replying to: jeffyscott (Nov 12, 2008 11:41 am)  Turn in a car for a Big 3 one, get a nice tax credit. Works for me - I'd go buy a Pontiac Vibe based on a Toyota Matrix.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Does America Even Need Its Own Automakers?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
