G8 won't become Caprice after all
07-17-2009, 11:16 AM
#1
Moderator
Thread Starter
G8 won't become Caprice after all
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/07/16/from-th...-spawn-chevrol/
GM has decided not to rename the G8 as Caprice - no word on what it will do though...
GM has decided not to rename the G8 as Caprice - no word on what it will do though...
07-17-2009, 12:01 PM
#2
Bah. Lutz says in that article that they can't make a business case for it. Sounds like it's dead. 
G8 is such a great car for the segment. Shame they're canning it...
G8 is such a great car for the segment. Shame they're canning it...
07-17-2009, 07:57 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Granted they aren't the best company
I don't think they would can their best seller lol
just cause you like it, doesn't mean it's their cash cow
**edit- just looked up number
seems these cars sold more than the g8 recently
Camaro
Cobalt
Impala
Malibu
G6
Vibe
but the source was less than reliable so I really don't know
I don't think they would can their best seller lol
just cause you like it, doesn't mean it's their cash cow
**edit- just looked up number
seems these cars sold more than the g8 recently
Camaro
Cobalt
Impala
Malibu
G6
Vibe
but the source was less than reliable so I really don't know
07-17-2009, 08:41 PM
#6
Registered User
-> Shame for New GM to can their best mainstream sedan. Oh well, Holden will lose USD$ 1 billion/year. 
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/04/27/report-...hutters-pontia/
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/04/27/report-...hutters-pontia/
07-17-2009, 08:50 PM
#7
Registered User
Originally Posted by Malloric,Jul 17 2009, 07:53 PM
I'm loathe to support Government Motors.
Trending Topics
07-17-2009, 11:49 PM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=PedalFaster,Jul 17 2009, 08:50 PM] Normally when you invest in something (and we all invested in GM via our tax dollars), you want that business to do well afterwards so you see a return on your investment.
07-18-2009, 01:41 AM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: panhandle state
Posts: 11,644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=Malloric,Jul 17 2009, 11:49 PM] What investment?
Investment requires thorough analysis. Merely throwing money around blindly with substantial risk of loss of principal is speculation, not investment.
Was there thorough analysis? I'd say no. A thirty two page business model on how GM would return to profitability was submitted to Congress and 17 days later the tax payer "invested". In March, after failing to demonstrate any means of returning to profitability (No one saw that coming) Wagoner ousted, per terms of the bail out the balance of the loan due in 30 days. If there was thorough analysis it definitely wasn't good analysis.
So, what should have happened six months ago finally happens and GM declares Chapter 11. And gets rushed through bankruptcy court in an unprecedentedly short amount of time. Just one problem. No one actually wants to own GM. The secured debt holders bought secured debt, not equity, and just want their money back. As does the UAW so it can fund the depleted pension fund of all those unemployed workers. And the tax payer isn't any happier owning them either.
So, you have a failed company which has failed to show any ability to return to profitability owned entirely by the unwilling saps who can't wait to unload it asap. Which won't be any time soon. GM has proven it can make a competitive product... unfortunately, it has also proven it can't do so profitably. At least not today.
So, will it get better? With Congress calling the shots? I doubt it. Congress will undoubtedly push the Volt and similar projects, which even GM (which thought everything was hunky-dory in Dec 2008, as long as it got a few billion in bailout loans) says will never be profitable.
Investment requires thorough analysis. Merely throwing money around blindly with substantial risk of loss of principal is speculation, not investment.
Was there thorough analysis? I'd say no. A thirty two page business model on how GM would return to profitability was submitted to Congress and 17 days later the tax payer "invested". In March, after failing to demonstrate any means of returning to profitability (No one saw that coming) Wagoner ousted, per terms of the bail out the balance of the loan due in 30 days. If there was thorough analysis it definitely wasn't good analysis.
So, what should have happened six months ago finally happens and GM declares Chapter 11. And gets rushed through bankruptcy court in an unprecedentedly short amount of time. Just one problem. No one actually wants to own GM. The secured debt holders bought secured debt, not equity, and just want their money back. As does the UAW so it can fund the depleted pension fund of all those unemployed workers. And the tax payer isn't any happier owning them either.
So, you have a failed company which has failed to show any ability to return to profitability owned entirely by the unwilling saps who can't wait to unload it asap. Which won't be any time soon. GM has proven it can make a competitive product... unfortunately, it has also proven it can't do so profitably. At least not today.
So, will it get better? With Congress calling the shots? I doubt it. Congress will undoubtedly push the Volt and similar projects, which even GM (which thought everything was hunky-dory in Dec 2008, as long as it got a few billion in bailout loans) says will never be profitable.
07-18-2009, 02:18 AM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's the Graham-Dodd definition of investing. Originally published in 1931, Security Analysis is STILL required reading at some of the top MBA programs. It's THE foundation of modern investing, although the field has definitely moved on since. Not necessarily for the best given the speculation that contributed to the current economic crises.
Anyway, going way off topic. I'm split. Ideologically I strongly oppose new GM. I fear the 50 billion we spent buying it would have been better spent if we'd just given it to the employees the Obama administration expects to be maintained and told them to go find new jobs. At ~$700,000 per employee there's plenty to go around to cover suppliers and dealerships. Sometimes it's cheaper to pay the farmer not to farm than to subsidize the crop.
On the other hand, GM is an integral part of our countries history and identiy. And they CAN make good cars (Malibu, G8, CTS, Corvette, the trucks, etc). If costs can be controlled without returning to the things that came out of the '80s they could become profitable again.
Anyway, bailout is done. Water under the bridge and a sunk cost. Hopefully GM can turn things around, but I'm still skeptical.
Anyway, going way off topic. I'm split. Ideologically I strongly oppose new GM. I fear the 50 billion we spent buying it would have been better spent if we'd just given it to the employees the Obama administration expects to be maintained and told them to go find new jobs. At ~$700,000 per employee there's plenty to go around to cover suppliers and dealerships. Sometimes it's cheaper to pay the farmer not to farm than to subsidize the crop.
On the other hand, GM is an integral part of our countries history and identiy. And they CAN make good cars (Malibu, G8, CTS, Corvette, the trucks, etc). If costs can be controlled without returning to the things that came out of the '80s they could become profitable again.
Anyway, bailout is done. Water under the bridge and a sunk cost. Hopefully GM can turn things around, but I'm still skeptical.