  Gravitymachine Member Username: Gravitymachine Post Number: 2410 Registered: 05-2005 |
some good reading www.autoextremist.com | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 5594 Registered: 06-2004 |
I like the rant but the ad at the bottom for his book detracts from the message. I think linking to that column as long as that ad is there will make the anti-Detroit activists feel justified. | ||
Folk313 Member Username: Folk313 Post Number: 18 Registered: 01-2008 |
Lilpup, chill out man! friedman's got a lot of important things to say, and he makes an argument that a lot of folks in detroit do also--that detroit can create an economy of innovation, just as it created an economy of the car a hundred years ago. why do you say that he's an ass and then say that you like the column? | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 2775 Registered: 12-2003 |
quote: Add 0% with thousands in employee discounts and you can see where their profits are going. On some cars that is $6k in discounts and 8% over the term of the agreement. You don't turn profits giving the cars away. Think about it, if the employees and suppliers gave up their subsidies how much more money would be through the company. | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 5595 Registered: 06-2004 |
I didn't say I liked Friedman's column. Friedman's an ignorant ass who merely goes along with the fad thinking of the day. The column I like is De Lorenzo's (at the link Gravity posted). | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 5203 Registered: 10-2003 |
^^^Unfortunately, it doesn't matter whose column anyone likes, but what is truth. DeLorenzo injected too much unverified commentary (Does a single person honestly think it's a good idea for the Big Three to fail?). Just when you think he's about to make a point, he switches arguments entirely. What the fuck does secondary education have to do with complacent management that sits with their thumbs up their asses, dreaming nostalgic of the rocket-fin era? The long and the short of it is, the management at the Big Three banked on SUVs, and now they can't get out of the mindset. It doesn't take a genius to realize that they simply aren't making vehicles that people want to buy. Instead of lobbying Congress for lax CAFE standards, maybe they should have been investing that money into engineering, research and development. Have any of you driven a Chrysler product in the last ten years? The transmissions are absolute shit. Why spend money on a car that will die before 100,000 miles when you can spend a few thousand more on a car that will last twice as long? To absolve management of any responsibility directly contradicts the entire corporate structure. It is the JOB of management to take responsibility--they certainly accepted huge bonuses in 1998 when they were profitable! Why is it not their fault now? (Message edited by DaninDC on November 12, 2008) | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 7913 Registered: 02-2004 |
The Big Three MUST COMPETE or DIE! Create some fuel efficient cars. In which they made hybrids, but too late. Come up with more cars that would run on alternative fuels. Forget about Bio fuels like Ethanol are its not going to work in our North American enviroment and it could rise up food prices. Hydrogen powered cars will be the next solution. So far Toyota will be releasing its first Hydrogen powered car to the U.S. market by 2010; the Big Three must answer this automobile development or stay broke, declare bankruptcy cut over 2.5 Million jobs by 2009. When the holidays coming up those Big Three folks and their children will not be looking for an abundance of food for Thanksgiving or presents under the tree this Christmas. | ||
Pffft Member Username: Pffft Post Number: 1800 Registered: 12-2003 |
People WANTED SUVs. That's what sold. Isn't that what companies are in business to do, give people what they want to buy? How popular have econoboxes been to the American public? Until gas prices really skyrocketed this past year, you couldn't give them away. So GM, Ford and Chrysler were supposed to say "Hey, you may want SUVs, but these compact cars are what you SHOULD be buying, you naughty Americans." ?? | ||
Sirrealone Member Username: Sirrealone Post Number: 267 Registered: 01-2007 |
I disagree about people wanting only SUVs. There were, believe it or not, plenty of people that never bought an SUV during the last 10 years. I am one of them and there are millions of people who similiarly never ran out and bought SUVs. A lot of those people ended up going to other automakers. I stuck with GM and have been happy with my cars never having had any major defects (knock on wood). GM is General Motors. There' not SUVM (SUV Motors) or CM (Car Motors). There was room for both. I personally think that GM should have focused on both SUVs as well as cars. If they had done that, they could have retained a lot of the market share that they lost even when they were selling SUVs. Think about if they had sold all the SUVs that they had plus kept their share of the car market. Then, when the market shifted, they would have been in a position to easily make that transition instead of having to re-focus. There's no excuse for a company that size with the resources it has to have lost focus of the entire car market, which, though shrinking, has always been significant. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 5204 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Past tense. The Big Three (and Ford in particular) never really imagined a world where the heyday of SUVs would ever end. Their fault. You'll note that the Japanese and Korean makers of "econoboxes" are doing much better than the Big Three these days. Read Friedman's op-ed. Instead of paying lobbyists, they should have been paying engineers. | ||
Folk313 Member Username: Folk313 Post Number: 19 Registered: 01-2008 |
Sorry Lilpup, I was confused which article you were referring to. Calling Friedman ignorant and an ass is complete hyperbole. I cannot see how you've decided that he's just a follower of fads. | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 5596 Registered: 06-2004 |
"You'll note that the Japanese and Korean makers of "econoboxes" are doing much better than the Big Three these days." No, they aren't. They are getting as hammered in this downturn as the Big 3 are. The primary difference is they have more cash on hand because they have substantial advantages by not having an American legacy. Toyota is not profitable in North America until you add in the foreign builds the sell here. Toyota, Honda, and Nissan have all had layoffs at their North American facilities. The Big 3 have been thinking beyond oil and other non-renewables. They have rolled out millions of cars that are flex fuel. They have poured billions into R&D. Yet all we hear are ignorant assholes saying Detroit hasn't done anything. How about somebody help Detroit take on the oil lobby, huh? How about all the west coast greenies and east coast elitists get their collective heads out of their asses and join Detroit in thinking BEYOND OIL, because hybrids and higher CAFE standards are just the same old shit that cater to the oil lobby! | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 5207 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: All of the automakers are getting hammered because of the tight credit markets. The Big Three have been tanking ever since the price of oil started to skyrocket. quote: The West Coast Greenies and East Coast Elitists have been investing money in public transportation and passenger rail. Let's stop pretending like the Big Three are taking the lead on anything resembling fuel conservation. The Japanese have been kicking their ass for years in that regard. | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 2776 Registered: 12-2003 |
Those west coast greenies would say the Big Three are helping big oil not stopping it. quote: Marketing campaigns are wonderful. Wonder what would have happened had they spent all that time and money on making you believe you needed a SUV and shifting resources around to make them cheap into other important tasks. quote: Are they on the cusp of bankruptcy. They also have less cash than GM after 2007 with 40 billion more in assets and 30 billion more liabilities. GM just like all other industries and governments that were servants to the unions are all in the same mess, their expenses are too much. | ||
Sstashmoo Member Username: Sstashmoo Post Number: 2872 Registered: 02-2007 |
Quote: "Yet all we hear are ignorant assholes saying Detroit hasn't done anything." Amen. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200 81112/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/auto_b ailout ""Paulson called autos a "critical industry in this country" on Wednesday but said the government's $700 billion financial rescue program wasn't designed to help automakers."" And let's hear it for Granholm, from the same article: ""Granholm said Wednesday on CBS' "Early Show." "If this industry is allowed to fail, there would be a ripple effect throughout the nation." She added: "This government decided that it was going to step in and throw $700 billion at the financial sector. We're just asking for a fraction of that."" | ||
Pffft Member Username: Pffft Post Number: 1801 Registered: 12-2003 |
Big 3's Woes Affect Japanese Automakers The ripple effect continues. Who still thinks they're immune to this? http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20081112/A UTO01/811120396/&imw=Y | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 2777 Registered: 12-2003 |
quote: The same people who still believe they are immune from the banking crisis. | ||
Detroit313 Member Username: Detroit313 Post Number: 757 Registered: 02-2006 |
Just read the 700 billion is NOT for the automakers. Henry Merritt "Hank" Paulson Jr. (born March 28, 1946) is the United States Treasury Secretary and member of the International Monetary Fund Board of Governors. He previously served as the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Goldman Sachs. duh! Henry M. Paulson is obviously out for his friends on Wall Street! I bet if Bill Ford was Treasury Sec, The 700B would include the Automakers. Jan 20, 2009. Please hurry. <313> | ||
Atl_runner Member Username: Atl_runner Post Number: 1998 Registered: 10-2003 |
Lilpup.. your post 5 above this one is one of the best posts i've seen regarding this crisis. Your last two paragraphs nailed it. | ||
Higgs1634 Member Username: Higgs1634 Post Number: 753 Registered: 10-2005 |
Honestly, fucking let 'em fail. Let's just get it over with. Bring it on. What will 75billion in loans really do anyway? There will still be a jobs bank. There will still be 8 different nameplates at GM all cannibalizing sales from each other. There will still be the same morons running these companies and the same idiots will still strike over any attempt to right size the workforce and/or compensation. Fuck it. we're doomed. we've been doomed. It's only now people are starting to notice and it's about 30 years to late to do anything about it. Enjoy the ride. It should be interesting. | ||
Sstashmoo Member Username: Sstashmoo Post Number: 2876 Registered: 02-2007 |
Higgs, your post definitely has some meat to it. | ||
Ggores Member Username: Ggores Post Number: 479 Registered: 10-2007 |
Yeah, Higgs brings a sobering dose of reality-speak, ala Doctor Smith from Lost In Space. Turns out that the Robinson family, in fact, WAS doomed. Wow, just think of the analogy's! Reading through the recent posts, I notice lots of references to "bought", "buying", "selling", and "sold". But wait a second - wasn't the over-valuing of leasing vehicles a significant contributing factor to the debacle? Leasing never made much sense to me, but it certainly did move product off the showroom floor, and dealerships could jack their sales figures, and the public was all into it, and so the manufacturer's responded to the - burp - HIGH DEMAND. Here we must blame the consumer, because leasing was touted incessantly, not only by advertisements, but by so-called financial advisors. I bet Murray Feldman has twenty episodes of Money Works, espousing the money-smartness of leasing a vehicle. Millions upon millions vehicles - not SOLD - but temporarily leased. "Easy financing. Good, bad, or no credit, come on down to Jacobson Ford and see the money man". Apologies to Jacobson Ford, by the way. So. You lease millions upon million of vehicles, which, after four years, are put back into the car lots. You do this for about ten years. Not saying this is a certain cause, but certainly a significant contributing factor to the whole mess. Used to be, if you were well enough off financially, and was steady working, you'd trade in the vehicle you bought four years ago (with it nearly, if not completely, paid-off), for a new model. ONLY THOSE WHO COULD... WOULD. But thru the miracle of leasing... it was a foregone conclusion that, no matter WHAT, you had to "trade in" that vehicle that you "bought" four years ago. Same principle applies to the housing market. Man, I really enjoy the free education in Economics 101. And as Higgs stated, yeah, might be very ugly, but also quite, ummmmmm, intersting. And by the way. Just checked my wallet. I gots a buck and guess what? I'm in luck! | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 5597 Registered: 06-2004 |
I know Ford has written down about $2 billion in leases - don't know what GM's or Chrysler's vehicle lease loss numbers are, but GM and Cerberus really got walloped via GMAC in the mortgage meltdown. The mortgage damage had to have been substantially worse than the vehicle lease damage. | ||
Fmstack Member Username: Fmstack Post Number: 83 Registered: 06-2007 |
(throwing a stinkbomb here, but I think it's a stinkbomb that I actually mean) The federal government should not just give billions of dollars to the Big Three (or Medium Two...) automakers. The federal government should nationalize the damn things. If it's vital to American interests that there be major automakers in Detroit, and if the management of those automakers insist on continuing to be so overwhelmingly stupid, it is therefore in America's interest to take over the companies. | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 5598 Registered: 06-2004 |
The Feds aren't *giving* money to them. | ||
Erikd Member Username: Erikd Post Number: 1077 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: The reality of the US auto market contradicts this whole argument. After record high gas prices in August and September, US sales of small economy cars hit their highest sales levels ever, and light truck sales plummeted. However, the October 2008 sales figures show that American still buy FAR more light trucks than economy cars, even with $4.50 gas prices. In October 2008, the Honda Fit sold 6478 units, the Nissan Versa sold 6889, the Toyota Yaris sold 4871, and Mini Cooper sold 5272. The total US October sales of these 4 models was 23,510. Compare that with the best-selling vehicle in the US: 43,324 F-series pickups sold by Ford in October. Or the second-best selling vehicle in the US: 31,689 Chevy Silverado pickups sold in October. With gas prices plummeting in recent weeks, it is certain that sales of light trucks in the US will rise over the next few months, while sales of these economy cars will level off, or decline. I am not saying that the American car companies should not build more fuel efficient vehicles, but the realities of the US auto market should be considered before we start bashing the Big 3 for building trucks and SUVs. | ||
Ray Member Username: Ray Post Number: 1162 Registered: 06-2004 |
It will be a castrophe for Michigan if we lose the big three. that's why I drive a ford, which incidently has been a much better car than the VW we brought 2 years earlier. DaninDc, your posts make me hope for a limited first strike by the Russians against DC and perhaps NY and SF. | ||
Lefty2 Member Username: Lefty2 Post Number: 2863 Registered: 07-2007 |
gm going bankrupt would be a good option as it eliminates the union contracts. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 5210 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Would you like to discuss salient points, or do you simply prefer to wish death upon bastions of liberalism? | ||
Haikoont Member Username: Haikoont Post Number: 33 Registered: 09-2008 |
quote: Bankrupty would be the death knell for a car company. quote: I thought Dan had informed the unwashed masses that he'd relocated from the most awesome place on earth to the new most awesome place on earth -- "the South." Why would a person who lives in such fulfilling environs bother posting on a site dedicated to a city he never lived in? Hmm ... |
