Comments on: Who is to Blame?

By: s2k_redhead

s2k_redhead — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 20:06:07 +0000

Good article, Erik. I think that in addition to the acknowledged management issues, one of the reasons the American automakers have failed to remain competitive against the Japanese and even European makers is that they have too many brands and products. Why do we need the “twin” cars like Ford/Mercury, Chevy/GMC, etc.? Although Honda has started adding more and more SKUs to their lineup, for decades their business thrived on the basic offering of Civic and Accord (small and medium cars with 3 very simple option levels). The introduction of the luxury lines Lexus and Acura seem to contradict this idea, but I think they did a much better job of differentiating those brands. The American brands are too much alike, creating enormous waste supporting so many different models.

I think the idea of a “managed bankruptcy,” or even straight bankruptcy, might help them understand that they need to get leaner and more simple. Just like the defense industry had to learn that their jobs were not guaranteed, nor were those pensions they felt entitled to … or those of us in high-tech who suffered the tech bust and many had to relocate all over the country in order to stay working. Not to mention that we NEVER had the luxury of pensions – we were expected to bank our own earnings into 401(k)s with minimal matching contributions from our employers. And guess what – tech has survived and gotten more innovative. The unions are not doing anyone a favor now. Management needs to wake up and make smarter product decisions and workers need to start accepting less in exchange for having jobs.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 14:08:52 +0000

Heres my $.02, give us another stimulous package that consists of the $15 billion these three are asking for. Make the money only good towards a product these companies produce. That should stimulate more than enough revenue for them to bounce back. Even if they do recieve this bail out I can’t afford a new vehicle anyways, and sure won’t be buying one anytime soon either. It doesn’t matter which companies are in this situation (there are what seems like hundreds of companies filing chapter 11 each month now), if consumers don’t have money to buy the product why give the company money to stay afloat.

consumers with money = non failing economy

By: ShocK

ShocK — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 06:16:25 +0000

^^ Because two years ago Ford’s truck line up sold twice as much as Toyota sold in camry’s and made a marginal less profit, billions less. Ford and Chevy have admitted there is more money in building cars than trucks. But I havent seen hard data from them, I have seen the hard data from Toyota. But who you can believe is the hardest part of that whole argument.

By: Rednine

Rednine — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:19:04 +0000

^^^How can you make a statement like that! “The least profitable vehicle any auto manufacturer makes are trucks.” lol

Bill, I agree with you 100%.

What many people here are not paying attention to is the fact that all manufacturers sales are down right now. Not just the Big 3. This isn’t so much about not having the right vehicles right now as the cash flow to make it through the current financial downturn.

And many people are conveniently forgetting that they are making the vehicles consumers want. SUV’s were a hot ticket right up until $4.00/gallon fuel…the sales figures support this. And unfortunately, with lower gas prices we are starting to see a return in this market segment! Unbelievable but American’s like their big vehicles.

Also with regards to the original article (above ) we are all responding to:
GM developed the airbag system. An American car company was the first to use anti-lock brakes in a car…Get your facts straight. Yes they fought against many of the collision requirements but go weigh your car and before you cry about it’s fuel economy, compare it’s weight to a similar sized car in the early 70′s.

I remember back in the 70′s when the Japanese first began importing cars here and everyone thought they were too small so they didn’t sell well. Remember the CVCC hatchback? An average size American could hardly fit in the front seats let alone the back. Compare the size of that car to todays Corolla and Civic. Now go look at a Cobalt or Focus.

I think one of the biggest problems facing the American car companies today is perception. They could build (and do) some of the best small cars, with the best in class mileage and still some people would not consider them.

By: ShocK

ShocK — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 17:42:58 +0000

^^ $2000 per unit makes sense, but consider that we have to ship in a large percentage of our goods because we can either not afford to make it for ourselves or places like China have most of the worlds steel.

GM and Ford relied too much on their truck market, the least profitable vehicle any auto manufacturer makes are trucks.