GM & Ford downgraded to junk

[oddlycalm]

Unions, engineering, products, all those are just smaller problems within the larger problem for the U.S. auto industry (and U.S. industry in general). U.S. companies are too driven by Wall Street to pursue short term profits. The Japanese take a longer view and look to gain market share. This is true in a broad sense in that their focus is on quarterly results, not 10yr results, and it's also true when it comes to macro decisions. Here's an example.

A lot of people don't know (although some here do) that GM (Delco Remy Anderson) developed a super efficient electric car powertrain back in the early - mid 90's. GM also started Delco Magnequench which developed into the largest world producer of Neodymium/iron/boron. This material has the highest flux density of any of the rare earth magnetic material, even more that samarium cobalt. To put it into perspective, if you fully charged a 10lb. block of neodymium and tossed it into an intersection you would have cars stuck together. :thumbup: :D I provided instruments used on the jet casters that sprayed the molten metal onto rotating refrigerated wheels, but that's another story.

So, GM has this really great electric powertrain and the capability to make the magnetic material required to produce electric powertrains in large quantity. Smart! So what do they do? They spin off their manufacturing divisions, including Delco Remy, and spin off Magnequench separately. Wall Street loved it, but GM no longer owned that electric powertrain or the magnetic material production to build it. :gomer:

Fast foward 10yrs. Toyota and Honda hybrid models are back-ordered up to a year and selling at thousands over MSRP while GM is discounting SUV's and and trucks up to 25% and having trouble moving them at that price. Every single Japanese hybrid has motor/generators made with Magnequench neodymium that GM paid to develop, because Magnequench has 90% of the world market share.

It's not the engineering that is bad, it's that the engineers are not listened to, tasked to use 20yr old platforms and 30yr old engines, or their work is tossed over the side by management team after management team that doesn't have any business running a major company that actually makes things. :shakehead

oc

[FCYTravis]

oc, thanks for a very intriguing post.

Guess who owns Magnequench now?

Uh huh. The Chinese.

1995
Beijing San Huan New Material High-tech, Inc., China National Non-Ferrous Metals Import & Export Corporation, and an investment group led by Sextant Group, Inc. acquire Magnequench and establish Magnequench International, Inc.

:shakehead

They closed all their US facilities and now make magnets and do research in Singapore, Mexico and China.

[oddlycalm]

Guess who owns Magnequench now?

Uh huh. The Chinese.

1995
Beijing San Huan New Material High-tech, Inc., China National Non-Ferrous Metals Import & Export Corporation, and an investment group led by Sextant Group, Inc. acquire Magnequench and establish Magnequench International, Inc.

They closed all their US facilities and now make magnets and do research in Singapore, Mexico and China. Exactly right Travis, very good. :thumbup: The icing on the cake in this little fiasco is that rare earth boron is also a strategic material, and the US government had no business allowing that sale to occur. Lets just say that rare earth boron is indespensible in any high power density motor, power supply or generation device and leave it at that. GM had the world by the tail but sold out as part of a cockyeyed divestiture plan that was the financial equivalent of tossing the engines out of an airplane to save weight. :gomer:

This is just one screwup picked at random. After working with GM, Ford, as well as all their competitors for all these years I could write a book on the bad decisions and missed opportunities.

The only effective way to deal with pension and health care costs is to outgrow them and you don't do that by cutting the same old pie into different sized pieces, you have to bake new pies. Unfortunately, the dopes on the 14th floor would discard the new pies as quick as the engineers could bake them because they didn't understand them. Then they divested the manufacturing divisions and got rid of the organizations that did most of the innovation in the company. Certainly some divisions were dogs, but they threw the baby out with the bathwater and are now painted into a corner of their own making.

The irony is that because they were myopically focused on quarterly results to keep the stock price up, they now find themselves in a situation where their junk bond rating prevents many institutionals from buying their bonds and in some cases their stock, which realistically puts an effective ceiling on future results. :shakehead :thumdown:

oc

[JLMannin]

This is true in a broad sense in that their focus is on quarterly results, not 10yr results, and it's also true when it comes to macro decisions. Here's an example.

A lot of people don't know (although some here do) that GM (Delco Remy Anderson) developed a super efficient electric car powertrain back in the early - mid 90's. GM also started Delco Magnequench which developed into the largest world producer of Neodymium/iron/boron. This material has the highest flux density of any of the rare earth magnetic material, even more that samarium cobalt. To put it into perspective, if you fully charged a 10lb. block of neodymium and tossed it into an intersection you would have cars stuck together. :thumbup: :D I provided instruments used on the jet casters that sprayed the molten metal onto rotating refrigerated wheels, but that's another story.

So, GM has this really great electric powertrain and the capability to make the magnetic material required to produce electric powertrains in large quantity. Smart! So what do they do? They spin off their manufacturing divisions, including Delco Remy, and spin off Magnequench separately. Wall Street loved it, but GM no longer owned that electric powertrain or the magnetic material production to build it. :gomer:

Fast foward 10yrs. Toyota and Honda hybrid models are back-ordered up to a year and selling at thousands over MSRP while GM is discounting SUV's and and trucks up to 25% and having trouble moving them at that price. Every single Japanese hybrid has motor/generators made with Magnequench neodymium that GM paid to develop, because Magnequench has 90% of the world market share.

It's not the engineering that is bad, it's that the engineers are not listened to, tasked to use 20yr old platforms and 30yr old engines, or their work is tossed over the side by management team after management team that doesn't have any business running a major company that actually makes things. :shakehead

oc

Coolhand - explain to a dolt like me how the above sequence of events is the unions fault and not the executives.

[Winston Wolfe]

I dont think you can really focus the blame on Union or Mgmt, although Mgmt has been making the decisions which got them there in the first place.

Union LEGACY costs are what is really hurting GM from a financial drain standpoint, or at least that is what I read in various auto industry related publications. GMs lack of foresight, anticipating customer needs, following trends instead of blazing new trails, and warming over old product and technology have taken them out of the highly competitive auto industry, not only in the US, but globally as well.

The automotive new vehicle pie is equal to about 16.5 - 17.0 million units annually. GM used to account for 50% of a pie that was equal to approx 12 million units approx 25 years ago. Toyota has set record sales years virtually every year for the last 20, with new product, new segments, new technology. Honda has done the same. Nissan had its troubles in the late 90's \ early '00s, but is clearly back on track with some great product and new segments, but still have quality issues.

THE BAD NEWS is that GM will not be turning this ship around any time soon. Nissan is a much smaller company, and their stock rating was down to $2.00 \ share back in 2002-03. Nissan is 1\7 the company that GM is. Having a HUGE company like GM go into a spin will be wide reaching and potentially devastating to the US economy. Suppliers, Unions, and every one in the chain of concept, manufacturing, delivery, and sales will be affected in some way, shape or form.

GM and to a lesser extent, FoMoCo, need to take a look at what they have been doing (selling TRUCKS to make a profit), and should take a look at what the other guys are doing (like Hyundai is vs. Hon\Toy\Nissan) and get some fresh product that people want.

Bottom line:
Is there a vehicle made by GM that you "aspire" to own \ drive ????
If so, what are the long term affects of ownership of one of those vehicles ?
What's it worth in 3 years ?

The rebate \ cash back game that GM has been playing since their "genius" 0% interest, post 9-11-01 so called "marketing" campaign showed some nice short term games, but has proven that their cars \ trucks \ SUVs are over the "market price" and they cant turn off the incentive juice spigot.

I hope they think of something, and they think of something SOON !!!!

[Sean O'Gorman]

Is there a vehicle made by GM that you "aspire" to own \ drive ????
If so, what are the long term affects of ownership of one of those vehicles ?
What's it worth in 3 years ?

1. Yes, but I'm not a typical buyer. If I had the money, I'd look at a Solstice/Sky Roadster, GTO, Corvette, CTS-V, etc., but those are all niche vehicles. The Cobalt, Impala, G6, Lacrosse, Ion, etc etc etc aren't appealing to anyone but midwest xenophobes.
2. High likelihood of recalls
3. Jacksh_t

[Spicoli]

1. Yes, but I'm not a typical buyer. If I had the money, I'd look at a Solstice/Sky Roadster, GTO, Corvette, CTS-V, etc., but those are all niche vehicles. The Cobalt, Impala, G6, Lacrosse, Ion, etc etc etc aren't appealing to anyone but midwest xenophobes.
2. High likelihood of recalls
3. Jacksh_t



But you would look FAB in a Cobalt.

:gomer:

[Sean O'Gorman]

Yeah maybe I'll get it in yellow

[nrc]

Yeah maybe I'll get it in yellow

You got a problem with yellow cars? :cool:

[Sean O'Gorman]

You got a problem with yellow cars? :cool:

Not at all.

From my ricer days:

http://members.cox.net/sogorman35/civic.jpg

I still have it, but don't know what to do with it, aside from get rid of the corny wheels and the stupid muffler. It still gets 50 mpg.

[FCYTravis]

Wow, is that a Honda Civic CVCC? I think my mom used to drive one of those...

In 1979 :rofl:

[Spicoli]

Not at all.

From my ricer days:

http://members.cox.net/sogorman35/civic.jpg

I still have it, but don't know what to do with it, aside from get rid of the corny wheels and the stupid muffler. It still gets 50 mpg.

:thumbup:

good luck with that.

[ferrarigod]

The Japanese take a longer view and look to gain market share.

So is that why they are in the EARL? Do the Japanese really believe the 497.5 is going to get better in a few years.


Well maybe when the ChampCars go back ;)

[Jag_Warrior]

I dont think you can really focus the blame on Union or Mgmt, although Mgmt has been making the decisions which got them there in the first place.

I hope they think of something, and they think of something SOON !!!!

With all due respect, every root cause in your post has management written all over it.

The UAW is what it is. Yeah, they ask for the moon. But hell, so do I. :) Who doesn't? The health care burden and unfunded pension costs have been building for over a decade. Quality, design and production concerns have been plaguing them for 20 years+. A gas price spike caught them by the nads once before, yet their strategy in this one is pretty much unchanged from the 70's: build more big crap, cause the big crap is what makes money. Problem is, people will be buying less big crap, cause the big crap costs so much more to own and maintain with higher fuel prices. It wasn't a big secret to anyone that GM had an aging workforce. No big secret that healthcare costs were getting out of control. There's no crime in resourcing assets to right-to-work states either.

Management is in place to do just that: manage. If there is risk, management must mitigate or manage it - not ignore it, or put their focus on less pressing problems. One of their latest ideas is to put the GM badge on every GM vehicle made. The whole point of Saturn was to distance it from the old ways - now each one will have a proud GM badge/L (for Loser) plastered somewhere near the door.

For what is, performance vs. price, it would be hard to shoot down a Corvette - but I can't see myself ever owning one... certainly wouldn't buy one new off the floor. But they're fine performance cars. To rebuild the image and take it away from the goldchain wearin'/40 year old pickin' up h.s. cheerleaders/CB radio in the console/the 70's weren't so bad crowd, they developed it and raced it and made it a worldclass sports car. And in many ways, they've done the same thing with Cadillac - not just for pimps anymore. But on their non-niche, bread & butter cars, they've failed miserably. I'd rather hire an illegal alien before dealing with the UAW. But if Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Hyundai or any of the transplants were managed like GM, they wouldn't be a threat to anyone but themselves.


GM and to a lesser extent, FoMoCo, need to take a look at what they have been doing (selling TRUCKS to make a profit), and should take a look at what the other guys are doing (like Hyundai is vs. Hon\Toy\Nissan) and get some fresh product that people want. :thumbup:

As one of the guys in the southern plants said... you ain't neva lied!

[Sean O'Gorman]

I remember reading once, someone's opinion was that the American manufacturers sell cars based on emotion, whereas the Japanese manufacturers sell on logic. I guess this would be why GM, Ford, and the Chrysler arm of DCX bring back old names, retro styling, and use popular music, and Toyota, Honda, etc. focus on fuel mileage, reliability, and value.

When it comes down to it, yes it can be cool to drool at a new Mustang or the Chevy SSR (I think its lame but someone, somewhere must like it), the majority of new car buyers simply want something that runs, doesn't cost an arm and a leg to fill up, and is still worth something when they go to sell it.

[Jag_Warrior]

Emotion that some call logic is more like it. Even if GM cars were at six sigma levels of quality, many would still buy the Honda, Nissan or Toyota.

You'd think my dad would have forgotten what sex appeal was. But at 91, he still likes shiney wheels and stuff. I just know he bought his Pathfinder because of its shape and how the tires filled up the wheel wells... AND it had a good reputation. Kinda like the situation with Indy (just so I can take a dig at the Prince of Dufus, Little Lord Snort), it will take years of getting it 100% right before GM can live down getting it wrong for so long.

BTW, how's the auto-X thing going?

[Ankf00]

they dont sell on emotion, they sell on a ridiculously misguided sense of taste, combine s***** taste with abhorable design and build quality and you've got a failing product line.

who cares if toyota makes tupperware, the tupperware doesnt melt, it's microwave safe, and it keeps all your food fresh. s'quality, yo.

european makes are anything but the vanguard of build quality, but they're laid out well enough to convince ppl to keep dropping 30+K on their goods... GM and FMC can't hit that level even with 12K cars...

[oddlycalm]

Union LEGACY costs are what is really hurting GM from a financial drain standpoint, or at least that is what I read in various auto industry related publications. GMs lack of foresight, anticipating customer needs, following trends instead of blazing new trails, and warming over old product and technology have taken them out of the highly competitive auto industry, not only in the US, but globally as well. Good post. The only way to get to the point where the legacy costs can be dealt with is to produce products people want and will pay full price for. This is what they have been doing with the SUV and truck products, and it's been working just fine, but that ship has now sailed, probably forever.

The product mistakes on cars have a cultural basis. In the past, GM and Ford have primarily had people from the Great Lakes area making their final product decisions, so they tend to end up with products that work well on arrow straight, frost heaved, concrete slab freeways, i.e. long wheelbase, high weight and the infamous "flying livingroom" suspensions. However, they didn't work well anywhere else, so as soon as there were viable alternatives to this product model people on both coasts began deserting the domestic products in droves. The Detroit metro areas has a tradition of being long on insular thinking and short on tolerance for the tastes of other regions. Unfortunately for these companies, the population shifts of the last 30yrs have meant that most people now live someplace other than the Great Lakes area and have tastes that are not consistant with what people in Detroit like. Their German and Japanese competitors have made serious use of their design studios in California that keep them in the forefront of automotive trends, however GM and Ford have made only token gestures at looking outside their insulated little box.

I find it interesting that the new Ford Mustang project was managed by an engineer that spent his childhood in Vietnam, not Dearborn. As far as I'm concerned it's the best Mustang product since 1967. GM's best ideas are coming from Holden in Australia. Fresh blood is the key to their design future, and fresh thinking is the key to their only hope in the management suite as well. Lutz was the right pick, but they were at least a decade too late. Much as I dislike what he has done as Chief Stylist at BMW, I think Wisconsin native Chris Bangle would be a great fit at GM and he would bring exactly what is needed.

One thing is certain; the US government can't allow failure of one, let alone both, of these companies. It would quite simply destroy the US economy. Regardless of what some might think, this is everyone's problem, which is why I started the thread.

oc

[Ankf00]

One thing is certain; the US government can't allow failure of one, let alone both, of these companies. It would quite simply destroy the US economy. Regardless of what some might think, this is everyone's problem, which is why I started the thread.

oc

which is funny, it's so true, yet we're supposed to be the foremost example of economic Drawinism... anything said past this point brings up politics so i won't go there, but it's just funny that these two stalwarts of our economy can be so misguided and ignorant when it comes to the business they helped found

as for the GTO OGorman mentioned: ugly, land yacht, old design, but since it has high HP and has "GM" somewhere on it ppl are licking it up from the saucer for some reason :rolleyes:

I bet both their corporate boards drink Berringer or Pabst or something else equally s*****...

[Sean O'Gorman]

BTW, how's the auto-X thing going?

http://www.axtime.com/8/120/pax

's going good. :cool:

I guess though since you brought the subject of auto-x into the GM thread, I'd mention that if the Solstice/Sky was 500 lbs lighter, I'd have a hard time convincing myself why not to consider buying one. Cars today are too fat, but like I said earlier in the thread, people like me who buy cars with some sort of second intention for them are pretty rare, so I can see why they are so fat. :thumdown:


as for the GTO OGorman mentioned: ugly, land yacht, old design, but since it has high HP and has "GM" somewhere on it ppl are licking it up from the saucer for some reason :rolleyes:

As a sports car it falls short, but compared to a comparably priced FWD V-6 sports coupe like the Accord, I'd rather have the GTO.

[Methanolandbrats]

PAX is for math geeks and *****s..........raw time should be used for determining FTD.

[Sean O'Gorman]

PAX is for math geeks and *****s..........raw time should be used for determining FTD.

http://www.axtime.com/i_topnum.php?EventID=120&Flavor=FTD&num=10

Is that better for you? ;)

[Ankf00]

As a sports car it falls short, but compared to a comparably priced FWD V-6 sports coupe like the Accord, I'd rather have the GTO.

and this is why GM still sells a positive number of cars every year :shakehead

you realize a modicum of "class" is a desirable quality, right?

[Sean O'Gorman]

Please inform me, Mr, 30k millionaire, what is so classless about a GTO?

I think this one will look cool:

http://www.speedtv.com/_assets/library/img/large/64204_1024_gto_pr_300.jpg

:gomer: :gomer:

[Ankf00]

yes, because you're definitely going to drive that tacky race car on a public road :gomer:

and when I buy a shiny shirt or lease a 3 series, you can call me a $30K millionaire, but just cuz they're all my neighbors doesn't mean I'm one too :gomer:

[FCYTravis]

Ank, WTF is wrong with the 3-series? Best ****ing sports sedans in the world. Just because a lot of buyers choose the slushbox 16-inch all-season tire yellow-turn-signal models doesn't make the 5-speed, 17-inch ZR Sport package clear-lens coupes "classless." :shakehead

(You know who's really classless? The twerp I saw in driving around a 16-inch-wheeled four-door 3-series TO WHICH HE HAD ATTACHED M3 front quarterpanels. Yeah, the poser wanted everyone to think he was driving around in a four-door E46 M3. Too bad his expensively unpainted tacked-on white fiberglass aftermarket M3 rear fascia only had one set of exhaust tips sticking out the left side, leaving a gaping hole on the right :shakehead :rolleyes: )

Poser.

[Ankf00]

theres nothing wrong with it, only if you're making 30K and leasing one and wearing shiny shirts and calling people "chief" :gomer:


eat me. :p

although, with modern inflation levels, I do propose we up that to $35K millionaires, it's only appropriate I think to reflect their new position of power with the more powerful more responsive more expensive Bangle 3 series :gomer:

[Methanolandbrats]

http://www.axtime.com/i_topnum.php?EventID=120&Flavor=FTD&num=10

Is that better for you? ;) Yes, way to go, you can really pedal that Mr. Two :thumbup:

[racer2c]

Ank, WTF is wrong with the 3-series? Best ****ing sports sedans in the world. Just because a lot of buyers choose the slushbox 16-inch all-season tire yellow-turn-signal models doesn't make the 5-speed, 17-inch ZR Sport package clear-lens coupes "classless." :shakehead

(You know who's really classless? The twerp I saw in driving around a 16-inch-wheeled four-door 3-series TO WHICH HE HAD ATTACHED M3 front quarterpanels. Yeah, the poser wanted everyone to think he was driving around in a four-door E46 M3. Too bad his expensively unpainted tacked-on white fiberglass aftermarket M3 rear fascia only had one set of exhaust tips sticking out the left side, leaving a gaping hole on the right :shakehead :rolleyes: )

Poser.

Do you carry a tape measure to gauge the difference of an inch? :gomer:

[eiregosod]

Interesting article on the shift in world manufacturing. The article has been written for an irish newspaper, any place names that arent American nor dont sound Chinese are Irish :p FYI it was published in the main Business newspaper here.

http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/Articles/view.asp?CategoryID=-1&CategoryName=&ArticleID=281

[coolhand]

A dedicated Teamsters union worker was attending a
convention in Las Vegas and decided to check out the
local brothels. When he got to the first one, he asked
the Madam, "Is this a union house?"

No," she replied, "I'm sorry it isn't."

"Well, if I pay you $100, what cut do the girls get?"

"The house gets $80 and the girls get $20," she
answered.

Mightily offended at such unfair dealings, the union man
stomped off down the street in search of a more equitable,
hopefully unionized shop.

His search continued until finally he reached a brothel
where the Madam responded, "Why yes sir, this is a
union house. We observe all union rules."

The man asked, "And if I pay you $100, what cut do the
girls get?"

"The girls get $80 and the house gets $20."

That's more like it!" the union man said He handed the
Madam $100, looked around the room and pointed to a
stunningly attractive blonde.

I'd like her," he said.

I'm sure you would, sir," said the Madam.

Then she gestured to a 92-year old woman in the corner,
"but Ethel here has 67 years seniority and she's next."

[Spicoli]

funny. :D

[oddlycalm]

Interesting article on the shift in world manufacturing. The article has been written for an irish newspaper, any place names that arent American nor dont sound Chinese are Irish The article gets right where we are have been, the shift of cheap manufacturing, but it's missing the point of where it's all rapidly going.

A detailed look at the next step can be found here.
The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0374292884/qid=1115680247/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/104-6135558-6300715)

Friedman gets it and he's fun to read as well. The Chinese and Indians are racing us to the top, not the bottom. They may have been taking the manufacturing and IT labor jobs up until now, but what they are really after the high end engineering and research. They are graduating armies of graduate level engineers and scientists at a time when US immigration policy has slammed the door shut on the best and brightest. That's fine with them, as with modern telecommunications people won't be compelled to physically move to the US any longer. What we are going to lose in the future isn't the $22/hr assembly line jobs at GM and Ford, it's the six figure jobs at Microsoft, Intel and the biotechs.

Today it's possible to run a business that spans multiple continents and rarely/never leave your home. I've been doing exactly that for 17yrs, so it's not a big surprise that much brighter people than I have figured out how to do it as well. As Friedman says, the world has gone flat. Nothing is vertical, it's all lateral.

To further illustrate the point, as I type this workers are drilling in an fiber optic pipe through our neighborhood. Within a few weeks we will be able to get 15Mbps fiber optic connections for $49/month with 30Mbps connections available. Most of the developed areas in Asia are already there and have been for some time. High def teleconferencing to Singapore? No problem, and you can use Citrix to work off the same server as your counterparts in realtime. The only thing you miss is the interesting food. ;) This kind of thing was the sole domain of the large multi-national companies until recently, but no more.

oc

[Ankf00]

citrix rocks :cool:

[eiregosod]

The article gets right where we are have been, the shift of cheap manufacturing, but it's missing the point of where it's all rapidly going.

A detailed look at the next step can be found here.
The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0374292884/qid=1115680247/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/104-6135558-6300715)



I read the quotes there, damn looks like China will be the place to get a job ;)

The decline of Math & science concerns Bill gates. If more graduates emerge with degress in science/applied science/engineering would that be a way to stop the rot? At the university where I'm at, there are as many undergrads in tall 4 years of electronic eng as there were in one single year when I was an undergrad (1999) . Mind you mechanical/civil engineering remains strong.

is the western world going to end up with an economy solely based upon lawyers & junk bond traders? :p

[racer2c]

I read the quotes there, damn looks like China will be the place to get a job ;)



is the western world going to end up with an economy solely based upon lawyers & junk bond traders? :p

I thought it was. :confused:

[Ankf00]

GM has hope to run out of excuses for sucking after all.

Federal judge has cleared the way for the biggest corporate pension default ever.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7804770/

[oddlycalm]

Federal judge has cleared the way for the biggest corporate pension default ever.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7804770/

Yep, and the employees that put in their 30yrs will get 30 percent of their expected pension check every month, which has a ripple effect, and the taxpayers (us) end up footing the ultimate bill. Can't comment too much on the UA pension default without crossing the politcal line and examining the history of the airlines since deregulation.

This is exactly where GM is headed as well unless something changes fast, and it's already beginning to effect the financial markets.

oc

[KLang]

This has been a great thread. :thumbup:

Not in ANY way trying to go political here....

I've never worked anywhere that offered a traditional pension plan so I've never paid much attention to the subject in general so I'm surprised to see that we have a government agency that assumes these obligations. :saywhat: When did that come about?

I would certainly be pissed if it was my pension being cut. I suppose the airline spent the money elsewhere?

[Ankf00]

I would certainly be pissed if it was my pension being cut. I suppose the airline spent the money elsewhere?

yes, like the executives' bonuses, bonuses they never earned according to the airlines' balance sheets...

[Gnam]

Good news/Bad news:

Everyone can now get GM Employee Pricing on a Humvee. link (http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB111782138515750511-XJaCWH0kTmaAaJxdIlow4hp2C2U_20060605,00.html?mod=t ff_main_tff_top)

There are now 25,000 fewer GM employees. link (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050607/D8AISFPG0.html)

[Methanolandbrats]

At this moment, a swarm of GM designers and engineers are downsizing the Aztec and trying to figure out how to hang an electric motor on the end of a Quad 4 block. Should be a winner! :laugh:

[Michaelhatesfans]

At this moment, a swarm of GM designers and engineers are downsizing the Aztec and trying to figure out how to hang an electric motor on the end of a Quad 4 block. Should be a winner! :laugh:
Then they'll put some goofy plastic body panels on it, badge it a Eurosport, and jack the price up six grand. Classic GM wisdom.

[Sean O'Gorman]

Good news/Bad news:

Everyone can now get GM Employee Pricing on a Humvee. link (http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB111782138515750511-XJaCWH0kTmaAaJxdIlow4hp2C2U_20060605,00.html?mod=t ff_main_tff_top)

There are now 25,000 fewer GM employees. link (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050607/D8AISFPG0.html)

Wow, great move. Now they can make even less money on cars that the buyers they need weren't even considering anyway.

They can reduce the cost of the cars until they are all under $10,000, but if it isn't what the consumer wants, using price as a buying factor isn't going to work. :shakehead

[Jag_Warrior]

Wow, great move. Now they can make even less money on cars that the buyers they need weren't even considering anyway.

They can reduce the cost of the cars until they are all under $10,000, but if it isn't what the consumer wants, using price as a buying factor isn't going to work. :shakehead

Price is always a buying factor. It's getting the price (already below the cost in some cases) and value lines to meet that GM has such a hard time with.

Ford is in pretty bad shape too. But I think Ford will get it turned around well before GM does. The latest supplier survey has GM as the worst auto maker to deal with (Toyota and Honda the best). To slash costs, they'll start muscling companies that are hanging on by a thread already... and wonder why no one wants to bend over backwards for them.

Detroit Free Press:

Eighty-five percent of the suppliers questioned who work with GM reported a poor working relationship, and just 3% said they have a good or very good relationship. Fifty-three percent of suppliers said they prefer not to work with GM, saying the automaker has little regard for suppliers' financial stability.

Toyota Motor Corp. and Honda Motor Co. fared best in the survey. Sixty-three percent of suppliers have a good or very good relationship with Toyota; 53% said the same about Honda.

[Sean O'Gorman]

Price is always a buying factor. It's getting the price (already below the cost in some cases) and value lines to meet that GM has such a hard time with.

That is what I was implying. If a typical buyer looks at a G6 and thinks "unreliable", "poor resale value", "cheap interior", "bad gas mileage", a further discount isn't going to increase that value.

[Ankf00]

That is what I was implying. If a typical buyer looks at a G6 and thinks "unreliable", "poor resale value", "cheap interior", "bad gas mileage", a further discount isn't going to increase that value.

$ changes everything. Idiots are still idiots and greed is still greed.

[Jag_Warrior]

That is what I was implying. If a typical buyer looks at a G6 and thinks "unreliable", "poor resale value", "cheap interior", "bad gas mileage", a further discount isn't going to increase that value.

I agree, they probably can't increase the value (though their quality is getting much better), but they can lower the price (including the costs) to intersect the value point. Even dried manure is worth something. Fair market value is simply what a ready, willing and able buyer is prepared to pay for a product.

You probably wouldn't buy one. I know I wouldn't buy one. Ank, you up for a Cobalt? Nah? I didn't think so. Most of the people on this board are "car people"... and GM stopped making cars for "car people" years ago (except for the Vette and a couple of others). GM can cut costs and produce a few more, better looking, higher quality sheepmobiles and they may yet pull out of this.

All I know is they're pure bastiges to deal with and I look forward to buying some GM bonds at $.45 on the $1.00. :cool:

[Sean O'Gorman]

You probably wouldn't buy one. I know I wouldn't buy one. Ank, you up for a Cobalt? Nah? I didn't think so. Most of the people on this board are "car people"... and GM stopped making cars for "car people" years ago (except for the Vette and a couple of others). GM can cut costs and produce a few more, better looking, higher quality sheepmobiles and they may yet pull out of this.


Actually, I disagree. I think GM makes too many cars for "car people" and not enough for the rest of the world, which is what they should be doing. I'd buy a Cobalt if I thought it would be a competitively class autocross car and I could muster up the confidence to think I could beat it up on course for 5 years without it falling apart. If the Solstice/Sky was 300 lbs lighter, I'd have one tomorrow. But right now no new cars short of the Elise are appealing to me.

GM has the following performance oriented cars:

Corvette
GTO
Solstice/Sky
CTS-V
Cobalt SS
Ion Red Line

Some of them (like the Cobalt) probably aren't even worth the plastic they're made of, while others such as a Z06 are almost unbeatable performance wise before you factor in the price. But then you look at their sedans and compact cars, and there is nothing there of value. The G6 is one of the cheapest feeling cars I've ever driven, I've been in ten year old Camrys that feel better. :eek:

Now look at Toyota's performance line:

IS300

Nothing much to look at from a driving standpoint, but they have lots of cars that work.

The Americans sell cars based on emotions. Retro styling, old nameplates, popular rock songs. The Japanese sell on logic, with technology and a conservative image being the name of the game. Unfortunately for the big three, the average American isn't as emotional about his or her car as they should be.

At least that is how I see it. :)

[Ankf00]

the CTS and GTO are for douches, not "car people"

hell, they can't even do their "car people" cars correctly

anywho, you listed 6 models, you think those 6 models are amount to the majority of their staff's focus? when they do most of their "car people" cars they're an afterthough, such as the cobalt SS and the GTO, Holden already made the GTO... just stick on the pontiac badge and market it and *boom* new product for NA market

[Sean O'Gorman]

the CTS and GTO are for douches, not "car people"

hell, they can't even do their "car people" cars correctly

The CTS-V that "some douche" drove at the Runoffs last fall seemed to do a pretty good job beating M3s, Boxsters, heavily boosted SRT-4s, S2000s, 350Zs, and RX-8s...

[Ankf00]

wow, it won at the track, huzzah, again, do you really think GM's staff spends the majority of their time mulling over the Z06 and the CTS?

they axed olds, they want to axe buick, pontiac has nothing except this new car you seem to like alot and that GTO behemoth. they have gmc name-tag on top of chevy trucks. monte carlo, lumina, cavalier, cobalt... ya, who are we kidding, they're a "car people" company :gomer:

[Sean O'Gorman]

wow, it won at the track, huzzah, again, do you really think GM's staff spends the majority of their time mulling over the Z06 and the CTS?


I don't know, why don't you ask this guy:

http://www.scca.com/_FileLibrary/News/379/04-run-t1-35heinrocket.jpg


they axed olds, they want to axe buick, pontiac has nothing except this new car you seem to like alot and that GTO behemoth. they have gmc name-tag on top of chevy trucks. monte carlo, lumina, cavalier, cobalt... ya, who are we kidding, they're a "car people" company

You are missing my point, as usual. I'm saying that for a stand automaker, being a "car guy company" means nothing if your "normal" cars (such as the Monte Carlo, Cobalt, etc. that you mention) aren't worth buying. :gomer:

[Ankf00]

ooooor, I could just talk to GM engineers themselves :gomer:



Actually, I disagree. I think GM makes too many cars for "car people" and not enough for the rest of the world, which is what they should be doing.

you're pulling revisionism on your point, as usual
they make more than enough vehicles for the normal world, no one wants them at their undercut prices, thus they hedge that with marked up SUV sales and financing, and now their f***ed business model is crashing down.

[Sean O'Gorman]

you're pulling revisionism on your point, as usual
they make more than enough vehicles for the normal world, no one wants them at their undercut prices, thus they hedge that with marked up SUV sales and financing, and now their f***ed business model is crashing down.

Isn't that what I said like a page ago?

[Ankf00]

I think GM makes too many cars for "car people" and not enough for the rest of the world, which is what they should be doing. guess my english is rusty :gomer:

[Gnam]

The reason why GM is cutting the price of Suburbans by nearly $10,000 under the guise of its "Employee Discounts for Everyone" offer is mainly because Chevy dealers have more than three months' supply of Suburbans sitting on their lots. A redesigned model is coming in about six months, along with other new GM large SUVs, and GM executives predict it will help to reinvigorate slumping large SUV sales.

But if the old models don't start moving soon, dealers won't order enough of the new ones. That's bad because GM has three factories devoted to making large SUVs, and workers at those plants get health care and a portion of their salary whether they work or not.

Similar logic applies to Cadillac.

Cool. GM should put a "motorcade" package together. Three or four Black Suburbans, two Cadillac STS limo's, and a couple of tiny flags all for $150,000. Should be a huge hit with the bling bling community. :p

[oddlycalm]

It's all about product planning now. If they can get enough models right in under 5yrs they survive and if they don't they are gone eventually. GM's quality rating came out 2nd behind Toyota this year, so there's really nowhere to go there. Unfortunetly, while word will get around that the quality is back I don't see buyers that got burned by the crap they were building for the last 20yrs come flocking back anytime soon.

There are waiting lists for hybrids, which are selling for over MSRP, yet GM is worried about a facelift for their large SUV's... :shakehead GM has had since 1974 when the first oil embargo happened to get their house in order and perfect smaller and more efficient vehicles, yet they spent that time finding ways around the CAFE standards.

They are paying the price for 30yrs of terrible management choices. Companies may survive 10yrs under guys like Roger Smith, but they seldom recover. Taking a surly tone with both their customers and their suppliers has come home to roost as well. If you show no loyalty to your employees, customers or suppliers what do you suppose is going to happen?

oc

[Sean O'Gorman]

It's all about product planning now. If they can get enough models right in under 5yrs they survive and if they don't they are gone eventually. GM's quality rating came out 2nd behind Toyota this year, so there's really nowhere to go there. Unfortunetly, while word will get around that the quality is back I don't see buyers that got burned by the crap they were building for the last 20yrs come flocking back anytime soon.

If you ask me, the biggest problem with the reliability stigma is the high number of recalls. It seems like every year when the local paper publishes the ten largest recalls of the year, 9 of them are from Detroit.

[mapguy]

It seems like every year when the local paper publishes the ten largest recalls of the year, 9 of them are from Detroit.

Are you from Detroit? HAHAHAHA! I'm friggin hilarious....
:gomer:

Thank you, thank you. No, really.. thanks...

[Ankf00]

sauced at 5:42, impressive :) :thumbup:

"CAFE" has driven everything to this moment, hope HQ njoys the sodomy they're about to receive...

[mapguy]

GM and Ford may be putting out duds but at least Chrysler is putting out some hot ones.

http://alw7sh.net/gded/dodge-charger-srt8-2.jpg

I want one. Bad.

[Sean O'Gorman]

Wow, a car that is too much a hulking sedan to compete on performance (like the average sedan owner cares anyway), and too too fuel inefficient to compete on practicality, and it'll probably suck in the snow for the average driver. But they threw some retro names on it and attached a 70s rock song to the ad campaign so its considered cool. :gomer:

That car should be the poster child for why Detroit doesn't "get it."

[mapguy]

Wow, a car that is too much a hulking sedan to compete on performance (like the average sedan owner cares anyway), and too too fuel inefficient to compete on practicality, and it'll probably suck in the snow for the average driver. But they threw some retro names on it and attached a 70s rock song to the ad campaign so its considered cool. :gomer:

That car should be the poster child for why Detroit doesn't "get it."

Dan Wheldon? Is that you? :D

[oddlycalm]

GM and Ford may be putting out duds but at least Chrysler is putting out some hot ones.

I want one. Bad. Chrysler realized the shortening the design-build cycle was going to be the key to future success and they bit the bullet and invested hundreds of millions in the Auburn Hills facility. It worked and they have the shortest product cycles in the industry along with some of the best product planning. It's allowed them to go after niche markets very effectively as well as allowing them to keep their product lineup looking fresh. It's the asset Benz was really interested in.

oc

[Ankf00]

Chrysler realized the shortening the design-build cycle was going to be the key to future success and they bit the bullet and invested hundreds of millions in the Auburn Hills facility. It worked and they have the shortest product cycles in the industry along with some of the best product planning. It's allowed them to go after niche markets very effectively as well as allowing them to keep their product lineup looking fresh. It's the asset Benz was really interested in.

oc

you're going to have to put that in parking-lot racer terms for SOG. ;)

[Cam]

Wow, a car that is too much a hulking sedan to compete on performance (like the average sedan owner cares anyway), and too too fuel inefficient to compete on practicality, and it'll probably suck in the snow for the average driver. But they threw some retro names on it and attached a 70s rock song to the ad campaign so its considered cool. :gomer:

That car should be the poster child for why Detroit doesn't "get it."

Too slow to be a Pace/Safety Car? :D

http://www.pccruisers.com/dodge-pacecar.jpg

[Sean O'Gorman]

Hey I thought you were ignoring me? ;)

I've driven the 300C with a Hemi and its nice to hear the roar of the V-8 with the stock exhaust and I'm sure it'd be fun to leave big black marks all over the place with, I just question how practical of a car it would be to own.

[racer2c]

Wow, a car that is too much a hulking sedan to compete on performance (like the average sedan owner cares anyway), and too too fuel inefficient to compete on practicality, and it'll probably suck in the snow for the average driver. But they threw some retro names on it and attached a 70s rock song to the ad campaign so its considered cool. :gomer:

That car should be the poster child for why Detroit doesn't "get it."

The Hemi's uses MDS (multiple displacment system) which switches from 8 to 4 cylinders depending on your foot. 17city/25highway. Not too bad for a 350 hp engine. Although, heck, the 6.1 liter 425 hp engine gets the same fuel mileage as my V8 pickup with half the horsepower.

It's always been my belief that pickups are the number 1 selling vehicles, not just becuase of their utilty, but because they are the last V8, rear wheel drive vehicles around besides Mustangs (and look how many of those there are). I love my V8 pickup and often wish I had a V8 rear wheel drive passenger car. Plus it has all whell traction control and electronic stability.

No, the Charger or 300C shouldn't be made an example of, it should be appuaded. It's a car for adults who for one, can afford it, and two, can afford the gas. Toyota and Honda make cars for the kiddies.

Who wouln't want 425 horses under your foot, hell, that's Grand Am level! :gomer:

[Sean O'Gorman]

Toyota and Honda make cars for the kiddies.

Well if people would learn to wrap it they wouldn't need to compromise performance by buying a family sedan in the first place. ;)

[racer2c]

Well if people would learn to wrap it they wouldn't need to compromise performance by buying a family sedan in the first place. ;)

I agree with you there. I've always hated four door sports cars.

[Cam]

Hey I thought you were ignoring me? ;)

I am, but when everyone keeps quoting your lame *** comments it makes things difficult! :gomer:

[Ankf00]

No, the Charger or 300C shouldn't be made an example of, it should be appuaded. It's a car for adults who for one, can afford it, and two, can afford the gas. Toyota and Honda make cars for the kiddies.

Who wouln't want 425 horses under your foot, hell, that's Grand Am level! :gomer:

:rofl:

300c was created by those with ADHD who lacked any and all creativity.

[racer2c]

:rofl:

300c was created by those with ADHD who lacked any and all creativity.


I take it you're a BMW design fan?

For the past decade Chrysler has been heralded by the automotive press as the top creative company. I love the look of the new 300. Bold. Retro. It turns heads. I know many 20 somethings that never would have thought of 1, a Chrysler and 2, a full size foor door sedan. The 300 now has them drooling for one.

Only Chrysler has the gumption to bring their prototype vehicles to production on such a large scale.

Lacked any and all creativity? :shakehead Hardly. Stick to aeroplanes son.

[oddlycalm]

No, the Charger or 300C shouldn't be made an example of, it should be appuaded. Agreed, although I'm not sure that having the Charger, 300C and Magnum isn't a bit of overkill. Time will tell, and at least all are interesting designs (like them or hate them) and fun cars to drive, something GM only addresses with the Corvette and one might stretch to include the GTO.

I spent a day with an all wheel drive Magnum on a trip up to Mt. Hood and back last winter and found it difficult to keep my foot out of the fun pedal. While the car is no efficiency champion the mileage is not much different than an Audi A6 wagon, which is remarkable IMO. Fun car and it can keep up with any SUV on snow and ice. The stability control will keep the amateurs out of the ditch. It might be the best ski trip car out there, or you can toss full size step ladder and a load of tools or paint in the back. Unless one really does offroad, the Magnum smokes any SUV on the road.

The thing about DCX is that they have also been successful with smaller more efficient vehicles as well. The Neon and the PT Cruiser have both sold in respectable numbers and are not regarded with the same disdain as GM's small car efforts. Ford's Focus has also been a success, yet GM can't seem to find buyers for it's designed-by-commitee buzz bombs that feel even cheaper than they look.

oc

[TKGAngel]

The thing about DCX is that they have also been successful with smaller more efficient vehicles as well. The Neon and the PT Cruiser have both sold in respectable numbers and are not regarded with the same disdain as GM's small car efforts. Ford's Focus has also been a success, yet GM can't seem to find buyers for it's designed-by-commitee buzz bombs that feel even cheaper than they look.

I love my Neon. Gets great (at least I think so) gas mileage - 28ish miles to the gallon for a mix of city/highway driving, and its an affordable car. However, I am sad that Dodge is going to be redesigning the car, and from what I've seen it looks nothing like my little Neon.

I saw a Chevy Aveo the other day and it looked like VW bug crossed with a minivan. Its just not an attractive looking car. Looking out my parking lot here at work, the only GM cars that are popular are Saturns.

[chop456]

The only people in their 20's "drooling" for a 300 are the ones wearing their baseball caps sideways and hubcaps around their necks. "It's like a Bentley, Yo! Propa!" :gomer:

:uberlame:

[Ankf00]

The only people in their 20's "drooling" for a 300 are the ones wearing their baseball caps sideways and hubcaps around their necks. "It's like a Bentley, Yo! Propa!" :gomer:

:uberlame:

chop speaketh truth. not only is it a lack of creativity, it's riding the coattails of something else, oh yes, such foresight involved... again, how many of these retro cars do they keep releasing? exactly. no ideas. SSR, thunderbird, magnum, blah blah blah, and Wisconsin can keep their native son Chris Bangle :p


Lacked any and all creativity? Hardly. Stick to aeroplanes son.
SAE does both autos and aero :gomer:

regardless, chrysler is selling, shortening their product cycle, doing manuf the right way, and delivering an appropriate level of quality, something FMC and GM are oblivious to, GM faaaar more than FMC, FMC has hope...

[racer2c]

The only people in their 20's "drooling" for a 300 are the ones wearing their baseball caps sideways and hubcaps around their necks. "It's like a Bentley, Yo! Propa!" :gomer:

:uberlame:

Stop watching MTV and get out outside.

:uberdork:

[racer2c]

chop speaketh truth. not only is it a lack of creativity, it's riding the coattails of something else, oh yes, such foresight involved... again, how many of these retro cars do they keep releasing? exactly. no ideas. SSR, thunderbird, magnum, blah blah blah, and Wisconsin can keep their native son Chris Bangle :p


SAE does both autos and aero :gomer:

regardless, chrysler is selling, shortening their product cycle, doing manuf the right way, and delivering an appropriate level of quality, something FMC and GM are oblivious to, GM faaaar more than FMC, FMC has hope...

Comparing the lame SST, which only came about because GM persuaded Bob Lutz to come to work for them to teach the GM toothpaste and laundry detergent management how to bring a prototype to production, with the 'new' Thunderbird (which isn't even made anymore because ironically it befell the same demise as it's original in that there was no market for it, not even a niche (people who want a two seater, want a sports car, not half a Town Car), with the Magnum is like comparing Ru Paul with Paula Zahn.

I'll never argue design opinions with folks because beauty truly is in the eye of the beholder but when looked at from an indusrty eye, in other words a collective automotive journalism opinion, the DCX folks make great looking cars. To disagree is to stand in the minority, not that there's anything wrong with that.

[Ankf00]

whatever, the same theme, the same lack of vision and guidance

[oddlycalm]

I love my Neon. Gets great (at least I think so) gas mileage - 28ish miles to the gallon for a mix of city/highway driving, and its an affordable car. Yep, I've heard the same thing from everyone I've talked to that owns one. Considering how tough the competition is in that segment that's saying quite a lot. Same thing happens when you talk to people about their PT Cruisers, Jeeps, trucks and minivans. Provide enough favorable ownership experiences and you are well on your way.


The only people in their 20's "drooling" for a 300 are the ones wearing their baseball caps sideways and hubcaps around their necks. Since the 300C, Charger and Magnum aren't targeted at 20 somethings, what's your point? Since most people in their 20's can't afford an expensive car, many companies don't target cars in that price range at younger buyers. There is a niche market for affluent 20 somethings performance buyers, but it's really tiny and already being addressed by the M3, G35, AMG versions of the CLK & SLK, etc. Personally, I prefer smaller more agile cars, but to pretend that the market isn't there for large muscle cars flies in the face of the sales numbers.

Today it's a fragmented market, as opposed to the one-size-fits-all market of the past, and the companies that successfully address the broadest range of customers wins.

oc

[Ankf00]

G35, seriously, don't know any early 20's with m3's, but too many of my bud's have g35's, they wet themselves over who has the better option packages...