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 GM News, New Models and Market Share
8060 messages, Last post on Nov 09, 2009 at 5:54 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Jan 12, 2009 8:54 am) Don't hold your breath on batteries being built here. I think that LG had the inside track for months. The A123 was to get Congressional support. Those batteries will come out of China or Korea, would be my bet. A123 will soon fold as they will not get any of that money without a contract for the Volt battery. And the research center if built here will just be a scam to get some of that $25 billion in alternative money. GM and Chrysler have already requested $22 billion. Not much left in that kitty, if they hand it out as requested.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 12, 2009 9:04 am) And LG will be building the batteries in Michigan for GM. In a major economic development for Michigan, General Motors Corp. will build a lithium-ion battery pack manufacturing plant in the state, GM Chairman Rick Wagoner said today. Wagoner said the batteries GM manufactures will be used in the Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid, expected to go on sale late next year. Location of the plant has not been determined. "Yes, GM is getting back in the battery business," Wagoner told journalists. GM used to make automotive batteries under the Delco brand. Wagoner said GM has selected Korean battery maker LG Chem to make the individual battery cells used in the packs GM will manufacture. LG Chem has a partnership with Compact Power in Troy to make battery cells.
|
|
|
DETROIT – General Motors Corp.'s chief operating officer wouldn't say Monday whether GM will need all $18 billion in government loans it sought from Congress, but he said GM's worst-case scenario would require more than the $13.4 billion already allocated by the Treasury Department. I thought just a couple of days ago GM was saying that they would not need more money even in their worst-case scenarios? Funny how that story is changing, but not surprising.
|
|
|
|
|
General Motors, seeking buyers for Saab and Hummer, will be able to follow through with plans to shrink to four core brands, North American President Troy Clarke says. As part of the survival strategy submitted to Congress last month, GM said it intends to focus U.S. product and marketing resources on Buick, Chevrolet, Cadillac and GMC. Today at the auto show, Clarke said the company will be able to execute the plan, even as the global credit crisis chills merger and acquisition activity. "We have to re-engineer the way we're doing business in many regards," Clarke said. "We're going to be a smaller company." Meanwhile, Pontiac will dwindle to a five-vehicle line, Vice Chairman Bob Lutz said here in a separate interview today. The cars: the G8, G5, Vibe, Solstice and Solstice hardtop coupe. In the viability plan -- submitted as part of GM's effort to win $13.4 billion in federal bailout loans -- GM also said it would consider options for Saturn, without saying whether the line would be sold or shuttered. "We've entered into a very, very open and candid dialogue with our Saturn retailers,'' Clarke said. Saturn, launched 19 years ago, has been successful in terms of brand attributes, he said. But "it just hasn't been a good business for us." Saturn's only annual profit came in 1993. GM will be able to work within state franchise laws as it whittles its dealer count, Clarke said. GM has calculated the estimated costs, he said, without elaborating. In the viability plan it submitted to Congress, GM said it planned to go from 6,600 dealers to 4,700 by 2012. Well it looks like the G6 is gone so look for the Insignia to become a Malibu next year?
|
|
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Jan 12, 2009 7:48 am) I supplied the data? When was this? Can you show me where this was? Uh, it was about 200 posts back, post #3100 something I believe. You said Chevy and Toyota are virtually tied, well I agree and not in a bad way. GM is going up, Toyota's going down, it's that simple. As for top class Honda, I only read and hear reviews from customers or potential customers (fairly, only from WA, CA, FL, OR, or MA where I can get infos from) who mostly rate Honda as much superior to Toyota in service quality. Also from my own experience as a customer. Toyota's falling service quality can be found all over the newspapers since 2001, you can easily find them on reader's letters section. |
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Jan 12, 2009 7:42 am) Mercedes-Benz is a rolemodel that suffers the disease called "ARROGANCE", along with, sadly, D3 and Toyota. And I fear BMW may become the next. |
|
|
They got no support from the unions in improving assembly quality either. That, imidazol, is so right on spot. UAW is one of the groups I consider as lazy incompetent bums. Like I said, they can drop dead for all I care. Not all GMs were junk; furthermore some problems are the result of poor maintenance by owners. But GM could have should have done better business management through those decades. Yes, I agree. CTS, Corvette = world level. Malibu, Tahoe, Silverado, Traverse, G8 = decent. Vue and LaCrosse = so-so. Astra = potential but become a trash thanks to overpricing. 2010 Camaro and Equinox = potential goodies. Homework #1: do something about the rest of the lineup. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Jan 12, 2009 9:32 am) Meanwhile, Pontiac will dwindle to a five-vehicle line, GM also said it would consider options for Saturn, without saying whether the line would be sold or shuttered. So Hummer is for sale with no takers, Saab is quietly for sale (again with no takers), now Pontiac is supposedly going away, but will still be around as five models, and Saturn is undecided? It has been obvious from the get-go that GM had too many brands and too many models and needed to downsize in order to be viable. This just sounds like smoke and mirrors. So what is it?
|
|
|
Replying to: anythngbutgm (Jan 12, 2009 10:06 am) Saab makes 1 decent vehicle, the 9-3. The 9-5 is archaic, while the 9-2x and the 9-7x are sad clones that ironically are dressed in very fine clothes. I admit I think the 9-7 is the best looking among the Trailblazer brothers. Saab has potential imo (though not as much as Hummer), but it deserves better owner. This just sounds like smoke and mirrors. So what is it? IMO this simply proves that reality is undeniable, once again. |
|
|
is that it is priced at or above an Audi A3 and it should be priced in-line with a Mazda 3. About 10K overpriced! 
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views GM News, New Models and Market Share
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
