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 Do You Favor A Government Loan To The Detroit 3?
3958 messages, Last post on Oct 02, 2009 at 4:52 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: chikoo (Dec 02, 2008 2:08 pm) I don't know. Ford looks like they have a plan. GM's looks an awfully lot like the SNL skit.
|
|
|
Replying to: fezo (Dec 02, 2008 2:28 pm) I read that plan also. Unless some serious concessions come from the executives and the UAW, it look like business as usual. What happens if they don't get $4 billion this month. I say no loans for GM. If Ford wants a credit line to fall back on that would be good. GM is toast. I just do not believe the doom scenario being shoved down our throats. How does less than 96,000 GM employees losing their jobs balloon to 3 million?
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 02, 2008 4:04 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: joel0622 (Dec 02, 2008 1:41 pm) Why GM's Plan Won't Work ...and the ugly road ahead May 2005 And make no mistake, GM is in a horrible bind. That $1.1 billion loss in the first quarter doesn't begin to tell the whole story. The carmaker is saddled with a $1,600-per-vehicle handicap in so-called legacy costs, mostly retiree health and pension benefits. Any day now, GM is likely to get slapped with a junk-bond rating. GM has lost a breathtaking 74% of its market value -- some $43 billion -- since spring of 2000, giving it a valuation of $15 billion. What really scares investors is that GM keeps losing ground in its core business of selling cars. Underinvestment has left it struggling to catch up in technology and design. Sales fell 5.2% on GM's home turf last quarter as Toyota Motor Corp. (TM ), Nissan Motor Co. (NSANY ), and other more nimble competitors ate GM's lunch. Last month, CEO G. Richard "Rick" Wagoner Jr. and his team gave up even guessing where they'll stand financially at the end of this year. Worst of all, GM reached a watershed in its four-decade decline in market share. After losing two percentage points of share over the past year to log in at 25.6%, GM has reached the point at which it actually consumes more cash than it brings in making cars, for the first time since the early '90s. GM, once the world's premier auto maker, is now cash-flow-negative. That's a game changer. Without growth, GM's strategy of simply trying to keep its factories humming and squeaking by until its legacy costs start to diminish is no longer tenable. If market share continues to slip, its losses will rapidly balloon. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_19/b3932001_mz001.htm
|
|
|
Replying to: joel0622 (Dec 02, 2008 4:07 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 02, 2008 4:25 pm) It's a done deal as far as she's concerned. Trouble is, bailout or Bankruptcy, the $$$$ are only beginning to flow. Regards, OW
|
|
|
Replying to: anythngbutgm (Dec 02, 2008 4:57 am) The Taurus started out as a good car. It was actually the best selling midsize in the very early 90's. Then Ford sat on that car for the next 10 years, making only marginal improvements. Early Taurus buyers did't want to trade their 5 old Taurus in on a new Taurus, because it was basically the same car. Who wants to buy a brand new car, that looks almost exactly like the 5 year old car they already have. All the while Accords and Camrys were getting bigger and better every 4 or 5 years. Ford basically told midsize buyers they didn't care. Finally they use a Japanese brand chassis (Mazda6) and stretch it, to make the Fusion. The Taurus, by that time, was Rental Fleet only, and the current Taurus was still called the Ford Fivehundred. Now Ford decides to use the Taurus name on that full size car to make sure it has absolutely no resemblance to the previous Taurus. Basically all this name switching was done to cover their tracks after they ruined the Taurus name as a midsize. And they haven't learned anything, because they are doing the same thing to the Ranger as we type. Now Ford will have to kill the Ranger name. |
|
|
Replying to: dave8697 (Dec 02, 2008 1:46 pm) You don't know there are many powerful 4cyl. turbos on the road? With $3K in aftermarket parts - like a larger turbo, these cars are making 450hp. Since you might need help, not promoting it, I suggest going to ATP Turbos. |
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Dec 02, 2008 6:07 am) The current Taurus is the old Fivehundred, which is a "Full Size". Yeah, right! The Tundra and Titan were serious efforts. The Tundra is an "almost full-size" truck with an interior straight out of a 1970 Dodge and the Titan is so flimsy I could tear its interior apart with my bare hands. I bet you would have said the same thing about the Tacoma 5 years ago too. It now kicks the Ranger's but in every conceivable way. Just keep doubting Toyota. That's what GM and Ford did, and look what happened. The big 3 are now Toyota, Honda, and Nissan. One day you'll have to face those facts. First, they took the small car market, then the midsize car market, now the small truck market. Full size trucks are all Detroit has left. It too, will fall in time.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 02, 2008 4:20 pm) That's where the new agreement comes in. It shifts the legacy costs onto the union's back with the VEBA, virtually eliminating this amount. Of course, this doesn't take effect until 1/1/10. Now, with the union willing to sit down, does this now take effect 1/1/09??? As far as Pontiac being a niche brand, I wonder if they mean just keeping the Solstice, G6 convertible, and a retro Firebird/ Trans-Am. Do stay tuned......
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Do You Favor A Government Loan To The Detroit 3?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
