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
8638 messages, Last post on Dec 07, 2009 at 10:07 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: dieselone (Apr 25, 2009 4:52 am) All non warranty work in up to 50,000 miles in my 6 new GMs: an alternator belt on one, $14 a battery on another in 5th year nothing nothing a battery in another, but in 6th year nothing. My used Ford has been near flawless. It has the terrible 3.8 with factory headers and a bad O2 sensor and only gets 28 mpg hwy. I ran a used Buick from 88k up to 171k miles for less than just your a/c repair and that includes maintenance and wear items like tires and oil changes. Your luck has been about 20 times worse than mine with GM. With Ford we are even. Neither one of us is typical. Maybe the average luck with GM's is better than mine so far. |
|
|
Replying to: pafromfl (Apr 24, 2009 8:46 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Apr 25, 2009 8:36 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: PMO (Apr 25, 2009 10:23 am) It would be the same as someone in Alabama claiming they control Daimler-Benz or someone in Ohio claiming they control Honda...insane....branch plants do not allow anyone to "give" permission to a foreign company. |
|
|
General Motors (GM) disclosed in an SEC filing Friday afternoon that the GM Common Stock Fund, an option in the automaker’s employee savings plans that allowed workers to choose to invest some of their retirement money in the company’s stock, has sold all of its GM shares, and now holds only short-term fixed income investments and money market instruments. GM explained in the filing that the manger of the fund, State Street Bank and Trust, under certain circumstances is specifically authorized to do exactly what it did: : * If “there is a serious question concerning General Motors…short-term viability as a going concern without resorting to bankruptcy proceedings.” * Or if “there is no possibility in the short-term of recouping any substantial proceeds from the sale of stock in bankruptcy proceedings.” In the filing, GM said that “State Street made the determination that this standard had been met due to the economic climate and the circumstances surrounding GM’s business.” GM said the fund began selling the stock on March 31, and completed the sales today. The fund is going to be liquidated, and will no longer be offered as an option on GM retirement plans. Draw your own conclusions. Regards, OW
|
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Apr 25, 2009 8:36 am) Nah. Stealing had nothing to do with it. One of the largest problems was that folks that could both afford and appreciate the Phaeton's virtues would not be caught dead in a VW dealership. Much the same as if Toyota were to have made a mistake (not too likely) and develop and market a car equivalent in price and atttributes to top Lexus sedan and name it a Toyota something that would be bought and serviced at Toyota dealers. Who in their right mind would spend $60-70K on it and then have to sit in ordinary waiting room next to Corolla owners while getting brief service. This would be beneath them.
|
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Apr 25, 2009 8:12 am) "Meant to compete with..." They did not even come close. These cars were failures in every regard. Nobody high up got fired for these bombs. The only acclaim for Allante that I recall is when Kelly Bundy was competing with other models to do an ad/promo for the car. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: xrunner2 (Apr 25, 2009 12:22 pm) I think you make a lot of assumptions about other people - "them" and what they would do and not do. I can't think of a stand alone Audi dealer in Michigan that isn't paired with VW and or Porsche, sharing the same service facility and waiting room. Hyundai too seems to be having a pretty good go at a "premium" vehicle from a pedestrian brand. Instead Toyota introduced the Lexus ES250, which didn't even differ in body components from the Camry of the time. Even the ES300 had very little real difference. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: steevo (Apr 25, 2009 10:29 am) Yup, both ugly trucks the market didn't want and no one bought. At least you can get a piece of plywood in the Aztec.
|
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Apr 25, 2009 1:00 pm) Yup, both ugly trucks the market didn't want and no one bought. At least you can get a piece of plywood in the Aztec. The only thing they have in common is that they're ugly. The Aztek was a crossover, the FJ an offroader truck. The Aztek was a midsize vehicle, the FJ a compact. Aztek - AWD. FJ - 4WD. To even think that they might be similar is truly a sense of desperation as far as justifying GM's screwups.
|
|
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
