Car and Bike Talk Discussions and comparisons of cars and motorcycles of all makes and models.

GM Comments...

Thread Tools
 
Old Nov 6, 2008 | 08:53 AM
  #11  
TommyDeVito's Avatar
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,357
Likes: 490
Default

They got themselves into this mess. The first step towards our country's future is to quit spending money we don't have. Don't look to the government to bail you out because they don't have the money either! At this rate the Chinese will own everything in this country. Sorry GM, you messed up, you gotta pay the price. Reflect on the decision making you did in years past, especially concerning the continuing development of fuel sucking vehicles when you should have been focused on efficiency.
Reply
Old Nov 6, 2008 | 09:07 AM
  #12  
2007 Zx-10's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,149
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte, NC
Default

GM is the elephant in the room that is likely destined to become extinct...so much dead weight (including a long list of cars no one will buy)
Reply
Old Nov 6, 2008 | 09:16 AM
  #13  
Wildncrazy's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,771
Likes: 2
Default

After having to rent for almost a month and driving several of GM's cars I totally understand why they are in the position they are in.
Reply
Old Nov 6, 2008 | 09:46 AM
  #14  
vader1's Avatar
Member (Premium)
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 11,949
Likes: 474
From: MAHT-O-MEDI
Default

Originally Posted by cdelena,Nov 6 2008, 10:51 AM

As much as they would like to declare bankruptcy and restructure their way out of some long term contracts the fact is few would buy a new car from a company with an unknown future. Sales would go to near zero.
I suppose one can say that would change and customers would have faith in them after govt backing, but I would say what you are suggesting is happening now. There sales are near zero and people are afraid to buy from them. I certainly would not go buy a car from GM or CHrysler right now because their future is very uncertain.

But in my case, if they were entering a bankruptcy proceding that would shield them from creditors and emerge after getting rid of some serious liabilities (bad UAW contracts) then my faith about their prospects would be much better in them than if we just pour cash into a company with an unreal UAW burden.

I guess the short version of what I am trying to say is that the bankrutcy option would give me more faith in them than giving them cash, (unless it is obscene amounts of free cash) but who knows, I am probably the exception to the rule.

The feds will never let gm go under simply because they employ over 200,000 people. By I make them exhaust ALL options on the table first.
Reply
Old Nov 6, 2008 | 09:49 AM
  #15  
The Hoth's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,550
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by 2007 Zx-10,Nov 6 2008, 10:46 AM
+1

who's next in line if they get a hand out?
The wooden arrow industry......
Reply
Old Nov 6, 2008 | 12:06 PM
  #16  
cdelena's Avatar
Thread Starter
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 9,210
Likes: 7
From: WA
Default

I expect something will come out of the government since we are talking about impacting 3 to 5 million jobs.

While the big three have done a miserable job in some respects, the government has hurt them more than the importers... some say Washington could help greatly...

"It would simply have to allow auto makers to meet the fuel economy standards with any mix of autos made in domestic or overseas factories."

'How dumb is the two-fleet rule? Nissan, in a petition for its removal, points out foreign brands may actually minimize the domestic content in their U.S. cars so they can continue to count as "nondomestic."'

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122584326266699163.html
Reply
Old Nov 6, 2008 | 05:18 PM
  #17  
Yellow_S's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Default

[QUOTE=vtec9,Nov 6 2008, 07:21 AM] Obama can't give them shit.
Reply
Old Nov 6, 2008 | 07:44 PM
  #18  
LostMotion's Avatar
15 Year Member
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,217
Likes: 4
Default

Originally Posted by cdelena,Nov 6 2008, 09:51 AM
The loans approved by Congress in September are tied up in the bureaucracy with projections that money might not reach to companies for 18 months... too late in today's environment.

As much as they would like to declare bankruptcy and restructure their way out of some long term contracts the fact is few would buy a new car from a company with an unknown future. Sales would go to near zero.

On top of that there is a fear that any substantial interruption in payments to suppliers would start a chain of bankruptcies that would effectively end major US auto production.

The 100 day comment was made by Troy Clarke, president of GM North America, who has a reputation as a straight shooter. It is not believed to be a bluff in any way.
This is such scare-mongering.

Building cars isn't that complicated. The hard assets will continue to exist and they fall into the hands of people that will use them. The collective knowledge of the employees will reorganize under different banners with better business models.

A bankruptcy of the entire U.S. auto industry would lead to more innovation and better cars 10 years down the line. Or we can continue to muddle through for 10 years.

Accept a couple years of pain for long-term gain. Give Americans the chance to start new car companies that tackle today's transportation problems in new ways.

Why continue to support failed institutions?

EDIT: you know what? I'm wrong, forget all this mumbo jumbo.
Reply
Old Nov 7, 2008 | 05:52 AM
  #19  
Wildncrazy's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,771
Likes: 2
Default

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/11/05/gm-perf...inricy-retires/

John Heinricy, the GM performance guru, is retiring.

One more coffin nail
Reply
Old Nov 7, 2008 | 06:22 AM
  #20  
vader1's Avatar
Member (Premium)
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 11,949
Likes: 474
From: MAHT-O-MEDI
Default

Originally Posted by cdelena,Nov 6 2008, 03:06 PM

While the big three have done a miserable job in some respects, the government has hurt them more than the importers... some say Washington could help greatly...

I don't buy this line of thinking because the American government has done the same thing to the importers that it does to the domestics. They all have the same legal regulations to follow. The big three chose to put all their eggs in one basket, chasing big profit in big autoumobiles. The perfect illustration would be the comparative health of Chrysler versus Honda and the stark difference between the kinds of cars that they build and the perception of quality. Neither have anything to do with the goverment.

Thats thing got a Hemi? And while there are stations in my area selling gas now for sub $2, there are a bunch of people out there who owned or still own guzzlers and have adopted the montra of "fool me once".
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:14 PM.