LeftLaneNews

[I]

 

you don't agree

people forget very quickly

 

^ with Bass on this one. People do not proact they react. As long as prices are low for fuel they wont make much of an effort to conserve any.

 

ok so I was just on golf.com watching a video with david duval then i read your post.
WTF??








oh GOVERNER Duval

I need to get out more.

 

Nope. I saw the gas crunch coming 2 years before it even happened. Right after Katrina. Wagoner thinks it was a fluke that prices broke the 4 dollar barrier in 2008. It was inevitable. In fact, I'm surprised it stopped there!

Meanwhile, GM back in 2007, made the decision to concentrate on the "then-new" SUV program called GMT-900 (Suburban, Tahoe, Yukon, Sierra, Silverado, etc). Those trucks weren't due out until 2008 as 2009 models, but GM (and their short-term thinking) was seeing dollar signs and sped up the program, thus starving the car end of things. Hence, a HUGE reason they are on the brink of bankruptcy.

Now, this clueless idiot is backing the same consequences that stung them so that he can sell a few 45 thousand dollar Chevy Volts (which nobody is going to buy in the first place, when there are better alternatives). What he doesn't get is that raising the gas prices also affects alot more than car sales, it brings the entire system down from food costs, to infrastructure, to our own personal budgets.

THis arrogant prick thinks the economy revolves around GM and that his failing company is the center of the universe, when in actuality it's not.

[I]In fact, Wagoner says a tax to keep fuel prices above $4 a gallon is

 

Nope i wouldn't want to see a tax

but they build cars / SUVs people will buy

if no one wanted the Suburban, Tahoe, Yukon, Sierra, Silverado, etc there would not be a market for them- not many saw the $4.00 a gallon price coming and then everyone was yelling we need green cars (heck remember the Geo that sold for 6k)

GM should have had something in the line up like a toyota prius / ev1 but they focused on what people wanted

 

[QUOTE=Bass,Mar 19 2009, 11:02 AM] Nope i wouldn't want to see a tax

but they build cars / SUVs people will buy

if no one wanted the Suburban, Tahoe, Yukon, Sierra, Silverado, etc there would not be a market for them- not many saw the $4.00 a gallon price coming and then everyone was yelling we need green cars (heck remember the Geo that sold for 6k)

GM should have had something in the line up like a toyota prius

 

Wagoner seems to have that innate talent to zig when he's supposed to zag.

 

Steve, one more thing. Let's go back to 2006.

When Toyota decided to expand their hybrid selections with the Camry hybrid, the Lexus RX hybrid, the Highlander hybrid, the Lexus hybrids and they were leaking information on the future Prius, Bob Lutz (GM VP for those who are not familiar) came out and specifically called hybrids a "fad". he called them "A marketing tool" and "not Economically sensible"

Here is an example (One of many, but the first one I came across):

Bob Lutz Interview

What happened? Toyota sold 250 thousand hybrids Annually! for the following years. 180k of them were Prius models. This year, Honda released the new Insight hybrid which is already on sale in Japan and is already selling like crazy. The Prius is predicted to rise to 250k units annually when it goes on sale this year as well. Now, tell me buyers aren't concerned about fuel economy?

Meanwhile, this so-called "miracle car" from GM is not expected to be shown until November of 2010. For around 40k bucks. I'd be willing to bet if they had shifted their budgets AWAY from the "short term success stories" Trucks and SUV's, GM would probably have the Volt on the floor now. It probably wouldn't cost nearly as much either because, well, if GM were smart, they would have spread the development costs out through a range of electric vehicles (Just like they did with the 10 identical truck and SUV models). And best of all, they'd get a jump on these new hybrids which are going to swoop in and steal many potential customers away due to cost and availability alone which is not what GM needs right now. Remember, the VOLT is going to be sold at a "loss" until the supply meets up with demand and the costs get more spread out.

But they got 10 good months out of those trucks!

 

while not disagreeing with you, you have to separate tech talk from talking to the stockholders and working on the share price.

of course that orwellian doublespeak may be why they are where they are now.