Discuss Detroit Archives - Beginning January 2007 Chrysler Cuts Previous Next
Top of pageBottom of page

Pam
Member
Username: Pam

Post Number: 1049
Registered: 11-2005
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 11:44 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200 70214/ap_on_bi_ge/chrysler_res tructuring
Top of pageBottom of page

Tetsua
Member
Username: Tetsua

Post Number: 1107
Registered: 01-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 11:56 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Yeah, a buddy of mine says they're having a meeting today at the Jefferson Assem Plant. We all know what that means.
Top of pageBottom of page

Iheartthed
Member
Username: Iheartthed

Post Number: 390
Registered: 04-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 11:59 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"I'll take a transfer," the 33-year-old said as he walked into the local United Auto Workers hall. Almuwalld said he has relatives in Detroit. "I've got family there, so I'm ready to go."

I guess that's one way to get people moving to Detroit. Here's another:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200 70214/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq_r efugees
Top of pageBottom of page

Supersport
Member
Username: Supersport

Post Number: 11259
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 12:13 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

NEVER FEAR, GRANHOLM IS HERE! I'm sure she will simply bump up our taxes just a touch more than her plan was yesterday. Perhaps offer some big tax breaks to build a few more manufacturing plants while she's at it. Sure, Chrysler is laying off 13,000, but didn't you hear the good news? Granholm created 353 jobs with Visteon building in Highland Park. Yay Granholm!
Top of pageBottom of page

E_hemingway
Member
Username: E_hemingway

Post Number: 1057
Registered: 11-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 12:17 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

SS, your Granholm rants are starting to sound as stale as CL's Detroit rants.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2517
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 12:18 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Some 2000 of Chrysler's job cuts are in Canada.
Top of pageBottom of page

Scottr
Member
Username: Scottr

Post Number: 249
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 12:19 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Great. The plant i was recently laid off from supplied Warren truck. the last thing we needed was more of us losing our jobs. Between losing our work with one automaker, and a production cut at another, and now this, it's not looking promising for that plant, or any chance of being called back.
Top of pageBottom of page

Bob
Member
Username: Bob

Post Number: 1368
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 12:29 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Never fear, we can all go sell Amway!!!! It's the American Way!
Top of pageBottom of page

Tetsua
Member
Username: Tetsua

Post Number: 1108
Registered: 01-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 12:40 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Never fear, we can all go sell Amway!!!! It's the American Way!



On that note, is anyone else getting harrassed about that damn prepaid legal thing that's going around now?
Top of pageBottom of page

Jerome81
Member
Username: Jerome81

Post Number: 1297
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 1:43 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Unfortunate.

I'm just glad to hear the possibility of a Chrysler spin-off is alive and kickin. That was a match made in hell from day one. Never should have happened.

Notice too, they didn't announce the expected platform sharing between MBZ and Chrysler. I thought that was to be a staple of the announcement? What does that tell me? That DCX is gonna go out actively shopping a buyer for Chrysler before they start work on joint platforms.

Only thing worse? That the Chinese may be interested. Watch them rush into the US before being prepared for it and suddenly that spun-off Chrysler goes completely down the drain. The Chinese are itchin to get into the US, but the products I see so far, and the lack of US knowledge seem to spell distaster at this point. The Japanese and Koreans started small and worked up. The couple Chinese companies that seem to really want to get in here want to do it with a bang. Bang a bunch of crummy, low quality cars on the market, and they'll be outta here in a very short time.

Not saying they can't do it. But they gotta start small, and the product better be value oriented. A dirt cheap car won't go over well if its a hunk of junk.
Top of pageBottom of page

Aiw
Member
Username: Aiw

Post Number: 6162
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 2:03 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

If it's cheap enough it will.

It's hard to pay $40K for an SUV when you don't have a job that pays you more than $8.00 an hour.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2519
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 2:16 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Great. The plant i was recently laid off from supplied Warren truck.


Understandable. Considering the current jobs (multiplier = 8) ratio of seven Tier jobs per every UAW/CAW assembly job, that means some 84,000 Tier jobs should suffer (12,000 * 7) in the US and Canada.
Top of pageBottom of page

Douglasm
Member
Username: Douglasm

Post Number: 773
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 2:20 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Chrysler seems to have a worse history when it comes to boom/bust cycles than Ford or GM. I remember one from the mid '50's, '61 or '62, then again in the late '60's when my Dad, who was an engineer at Highland Park, was "required" to take vacation time. His job ended up being eliminated through "early retirement" sometime in the mid '70's due to another bust. He ended up at DIT until it went poof.
Top of pageBottom of page

Gannon
Member
Username: Gannon

Post Number: 8385
Registered: 12-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 3:30 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

LY,

Thank you for that multiplier revelation...I've never heard that before.

Have they done the same for the effects on the community at large?! I seem to remember some metrics in that direction years ago.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2522
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 4:00 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The multiplier is a basic concept taught in any economics survey course. But it usually refers to "imported" capital coming into a "local" economy and circulating until it's totally consumed. A common value for that type of multiplier is around five or so.

Security analysts have been using their own jobs multiplier for the auto industry or other industries that they follow. The jobs multiplier was previously put at ten--nine Tier jobs per assembly-line worker at body or engine/tranny plants. With all the bankruptcies in the Tiers, about 15 firms (not just plants) will/have, on average, disappear weekly from 2004 to 2010 nationally (a drop from 8000 Tiers then to about 4000 firms and then drop some more until, say, 2012 or so. How low can they go?
Top of pageBottom of page

Scottr
Member
Username: Scottr

Post Number: 250
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 4:27 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Wow, that's flat out scary, LY. I didn't know how many tier jobs there were, but that certainly makes it much clearer just how bad it is.

Now figure it for the industry as a whole:
132,000 big 3 job cuts since May 2005
*7 = 924000 supplier cuts


fwiw, my plant was a tier 1 supplier. I don't cry so much for the $8 an hour plastics molding jobs, but the component assembly jobs like mine are (were) pretty decent paying.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2524
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 4:32 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Heat-treating or magna-fluxing plants do other than just auto-related stuff. But, in Michigan, Indiana, Ohio (especially), and Pennsylvania, among others, cars and truck parts is what they mostly do.

One probable reason for the multiplier to drop the past few years is a result of the jobs bank where nonproductive UAW members sat out their existence at "work," doing little other than playing cards or read. The jobs multiplier today probably more reflects reality better than before.

Remember, companies like Lear (Southfield) or Johnson Controls (headquartered in Milwaukee) make assemblies, such as instrument panels and seats, at their own plants, and the UAW line workers just bolt, screw, or snap them into place.

(Message edited by LivernoisYard on February 14, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Jerome81
Member
Username: Jerome81

Post Number: 1299
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 4:54 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

LY,
I was under the impression that the multiplier was 8-12 NATIONALLY. Is that correct? If you look at just Metro Detroit, it has gotta be way more than that. Nearly everyone in the area has a job that stems from some sort of involvement with the Big 3. You either work for them, you supply them, or you work for the people who work for them or you work for the people who work for the people who work for them (say dry cleaners, lawn services, etc). Unfortunately Detroit has such a one-sided economy that if the Big3 all disappeared, I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be much need for most other people to stick around either.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2525
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 5:03 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The figure used is the national figure and is used primarily to determine the number of MANUFACTURING-related jobs affected in the Tiers--not those among the general communities who derive income from totality of auto-related employment.

Besides, it would be extremely difficult to assess that metric locally due to the lack of detailed information available for the analysts to do that. Besides, they're not that concerned about that level of micromanaging details. That's not in their job description.
Top of pageBottom of page

Scottr
Member
Username: Scottr

Post Number: 251
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 5:11 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Remember, companies like Lear... make assemblies, such as instrument panels... at their own plants, and the UAW line workers just bolt, screw, or snap them into place.


exactly. (portions removed to be more specific as to what i did. i was avoiding being too specific, but you hit it right on the head.)

also keep in mind, the components (radios, instrument clusters, hvacs, etc) are handled much the same way by the suppliers - assembled in another plant and just bolted, screwed, or snapped into place at the suppliers plant. that keeps going down the line the same way until you get to a guy working on (for example) a plastics molding machine, and even then, someone worked at the plant that produced the virgin plastic material. I can't even imagine how many people are involved in the production of a single car.

Even worse is when you consider the secondary 'casualties' of this - anything from the gas station on the corner by a plant to the catering truck. Or people going out to eat less often causes a restaurant to close or cut back on staff. and it keeps cascading on...
Top of pageBottom of page

Angry_dad
Member
Username: Angry_dad

Post Number: 131
Registered: 02-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 6:54 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Free trade really works?

Doesn't anybody see what has happened?

Bob Eaton sold the keys to Chrysler and split, Jurgen Schremp looted the bank accounts and put the cash into Benz who were and still build and sell lousy cars. Too bad the public is so willing to follow rather than think and see what is really happening.

And in the meantime, southern politicians are getting greased by the crooks from Japan and Korea into dishing out billions in tax breaks to the criminals to build assembly plants in their states. And yet the "trendy" want a hideous Camry that tends to turn it's motor oil into tar. We must be the biggest collection of idiots in the world, this nation is being looted and then fools that buy these crappy Toyotas talk about quality while their neighbor is broke and at the same time those "quality" savvy home owners are watching thier homes go down in value.

Let's see how great these Japanese car companies really are, end any and all tax subsidies they get, they never paid any in to begin with. And any state that gives them their extortion payment should lose the same amount in federal revenue sharing.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2527
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 7:49 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Good news for a Tier plant (in Mississippi) that has Nissan as its primary customer. It announced today that it's adding a quarter billion dollar expansion and hiring new workers...

(Message edited by LivernoisYard on February 14, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Lt_tom
Member
Username: Lt_tom

Post Number: 135
Registered: 06-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 8:18 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Think old Kirk Kerkorian will try to take another crack at buying Chrysler?
Top of pageBottom of page

Angry_dad
Member
Username: Angry_dad

Post Number: 132
Registered: 02-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 8:20 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Nice link to that Nissan plant. Guess who paid for it? Not Nissan. The rest of the taxpayers paid for over half. And now that Nissan can't sell the trucks they build there, they are in the process of moving production elsewhere.

http://www.autoblog.com/2006/10/03/nissan-moving-production-of-quest-and-qx56-back-to-japan/

Real good news.

(Message edited by angry dad on February 14, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2528
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 8:24 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

A buyout offer from insiders is a likelier possibility. That's what happened at Harley-Davidson where a core group of its engineering managers bought the HD subsidiary from AMF some time ago.

(Message edited by LivernoisYard on February 14, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Scottr
Member
Username: Scottr

Post Number: 252
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 8:27 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I just read a rumor that GM is in talks to buy Chrysler. I put about as much stock in it as I would if there was a rumor that the sun would be purple when it rose tomorrow, and i think it would be probably the Worst Merger Ever. But it's an interesting thought nonetheless.

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/0 2/14/rumor-of-the-day-gm-may-b uy-chrysler-group/2#comments
Top of pageBottom of page

Jerome81
Member
Username: Jerome81

Post Number: 1301
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 8:31 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

GM will NEVER buy Chrysler.
Top of pageBottom of page

East_detroit
Member
Username: East_detroit

Post Number: 960
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 8:36 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ford might.

And with their global stance and the Fusion beating Camry and Accord in the latest Consumer Reports (sorry SJ, its true).... I think it would be a good move.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2529
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 8:45 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Chrysler, like Ford, was mainly a truck company. GM realized that it too was too heavily into SUVs and cut back and returned to sedans, although sedan's profit margins were once smaller. But that was back before the Japanese started making SUVs and larger trucks.

This crisis at Chrysler will probably destroy any serious attempts by the UAW to play hardball with Chrysler--as was rumored last year--before the 4-year UAW contracts end this fall.

My guess, Mercedes will keep Chrysler because it too has money problems but DCX might not get much for selling and their CEO wants to keep Chrysler. Its board of directors would probably have to fire him over this issue. Mr. Z will play along and solicit offers for selling, slim down its excess capacity, and, thus, keep the UAW at bay before contract negotiations.
Top of pageBottom of page

Scottr
Member
Username: Scottr

Post Number: 253
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 8:45 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ford's even less likely - do you really think a company that just used all their NA assets as collateral on loans would be able to buy yet another struggling automaker? Even if they could pull off some sort of stock trade to avoid actual cash expenditures, wall street would be calling for mullaly's head after overwhelmingly voting against it.

I would say a Chinese company would be much more likely than any American or even Japanese companies. It makes sense just to get a foothold in the market.

Not that i EVER want to see that.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jiminnm
Member
Username: Jiminnm

Post Number: 1183
Registered: 02-2005
Posted on Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - 9:08 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

"And in the meantime, southern politicians are getting greased by the crooks from Japan and Korea ..."

Sorry to burst your bubble angry_dad, but this far from the case. There was a serious proposal to put a Korean facility here in NM (don't recall if it was Hyundai or Kia). The company backed out as they neared final agreement. It didn't take long for word to get around that officials from the smaller town wanted some concessions for themselves (not an uncommon expectation here in NM) but the Koreans said that's not the way we do business and they went elsewhere.

You seem to have some serious problem with cars not made here in the USA by manufacturers considered traditionally American. It's a big world, except for Ford and GM, who just can't seem to get it right. You better get over it, as their numbers are going to continue to shrink.
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 155
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 12:30 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I have to agree the US automakers will continue to shrink. As a lifelong resident of the area, I have always purchased American cars and always will.

I will NOT however, ever buy a NEW car ever again. I purchased my first Chrysler in 2004 after being a GM guy all of my life. I know some of you don't consider Chrysler American anymore, but my car was made in Toledo with 85% US content.

I switched because of the problems I was having with GM and their unwillingness to stand behind their cars. Unfortunately, the experience I am having with my Jeep is much the same. The engine is shot due to an oil sludge issue that is well known by Chrysler and within the industry yet the dealer chooses to blame me and not stand behind their product.

So now I am facing paying over 10 grand in payments over the next 2 years for a car that I cannot drive or sell. NEVER AGAIN!
Top of pageBottom of page

Scottr
Member
Username: Scottr

Post Number: 254
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 1:26 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Both GM and Chrysler are saying 'no comment' to the acquistion rumors.

You can, of course, spin that any way you want. But it seems to me, usually such rumors are outright denied.

I'm not saying it makes any sense, but it could make for a very interesting year for the auto industry.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2535
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 1:44 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Chrysler was the number 2 of the Big Three in size until some time around WWII, when Ford beat out Chrysler. Mercedes paid $37 billion for Chrysler nine years ago. Today, the market capitalization of both GM and Ford combined is only a little higher than $30 billion.

The difference between what Mercedes paid for Chrysler and what Ford and GM are now worth together would be even greater if the time-value of $37 billion after nine years is taken into consideration. The former Big Three of the 1990s have all come down to relative worthlessness in a global economy where the major element of Toyota alone has a market capitalization over $230 billion.
Top of pageBottom of page

Warrenite84
Member
Username: Warrenite84

Post Number: 32
Registered: 01-2007
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 2:32 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I would be surprised if Daimlerchrysler doesn't use this loss as their "broken-wing" tactic going into this summer's contract talks.

(They ALWAYS come off like the workers are bleeding them bone dry.)

Many of us at my plant as early as August 2006, were waiting for DC to match GM and Ford's truck incentives. It didn't come.
They had us working some 12's, Sat. and Sun. if we wanted it.

All the while we were thinking,"We've got trucks stashed everywhere, why aren't we unloading our inventory and running at a reasonable level?"
What people don't know is that management gets a bonus when they hit their production targets. For a plant manager, it can be up to 100% of their pay.

When we don't submit enough improvement suggestions, we are told we have poor morale.
When we did suggest something, it rarely was implemented.

Don't get me wrong, 99.99% of production and maintainance depts. bust their ass to make sure the parts are correct and defect free.

But when the company buys cheap foreign or outsourced dies and tooling that could be made in-house, you get what you pay for.

Dies that are hard to maintain and tooling that has to be fixed or re-worked increases the chance of mistakes and more scrap.

Poor production planning and maintainance are what kills us.

So here we are, the hourly workers taking one for the team, again.

Sorry for the venting. It's been building for some time.
Top of pageBottom of page

_sj_
Member
Username: _sj_

Post Number: 1722
Registered: 12-2003
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 1:15 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

And with their global stance and the Fusion beating Camry and Accord in the latest Consumer Reports (sorry SJ, its true).... I think it would be a good move.



Still reading the wrong review, The Fusion scores higher in user poll and initial product review, however the Consumer Report Score shows the Fusion as 77 and the Camry as a 87.

quote:

Chrysler seems to have a worse history when it comes to boom/bust cycles than Ford or GM.



That is because they were not on the scale of Ford or GM, they are meant to be a lean company that sold cars high in style for a lower price than their competitors. That is why are more boom/bust than the other two who had more capital to wait those cycles out.

quote:

greased by the crooks from Japan and Korea



Who are the crooks, might want to double check the US record when it comes to open trade and international court rulings, I think you might be surprised.
Top of pageBottom of page

Goat
Member
Username: Goat

Post Number: 9218
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 6:05 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I think Consumer Reports is bought off by the Japanese companies. I know enough people who have bought Japanese cars and didn't like them (reliability issues, expensive to repair, crappy ergonomics etc). So why it the big 3 always get shafted in those reports? I don't buy that all the cars are lousy.

Impressions are a bitch and the media and those at consumer reports love to say how wonderful the Japanese are while kicking the big 3 every chance they get.

If Daimler where to sell Chrysler, I don't think anyone would buy. Who has the cash flow?
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2543
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 6:44 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Jeep is worth buying. Just as Chrysler bought the Jeff brand from American Motors.
Top of pageBottom of page

Ltdave
Member
Username: Ltdave

Post Number: 34
Registered: 09-2006
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 7:20 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

word on the street is that J.P. Morgan is actively seeking buyers...

if DCX is bought by an investment group, you can say good by to it...

1st hand info here is that if it is not a Core Plant, (assy? component?) then it is as good as sold or closed...

david
Top of pageBottom of page

Burnsie
Member
Username: Burnsie

Post Number: 851
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 8:13 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Livernoisyard wrote, "Chrysler was the number 2 of the Big Three in size until some time around WWII"

Do you have a source for that? I thought it was never higher than number 3.
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 156
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 8:31 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I agree that the automotive press and the mainstream media have not been kind to American automakers. I too have heard about many problems with Japanese cars. I do hear also however, that the dealership experience is somewhat better. I believe Toyota recalled over 2 million vehicles last year???
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2546
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 9:08 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Livernoisyard wrote, "Chrysler was the number 2 of the Big Three in size until some time around WWII."

Do you have a source for that? I thought it was never higher than number 3.


I encountered this factoid previously on occasion and accepted it as fact. If I have more time while taking breaks from working, I might do a search. Perhaps, somebody might bet me to it and fill in the blanks.

I believed the flip occurred sometime during the 1930s. The Dodge and Plymouth plants were fairly huge when they were at their peaks in Hamtramck, I thought, but that's before my Michigan time.

Ford didn't make vehicles at the Rouge until the 1928 model year. Previously, Ford built farm tractors there and then made them in HP until 1947--the year that Ford died. Might there have been a connection?

(Message edited by LivernoisYard on February 15, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Scottr
Member
Username: Scottr

Post Number: 255
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Thursday, February 15, 2007 - 9:34 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Perfectgentleman - that was 2005.
2006 recall numbers, United States (source)

GM 1.4 million
Ford 1.7 million
Chrysler Group 2.3 million
Toyota 814,507
Honda 1,397, excluding a 1.2 million vehicle recall for an incorrect phone number in the owners manual. (it was for a phone sex line. ha!)

keep in mind, GM still sells a lot more cars than anyone else in the US, so looking at the raw numbers is a poor comparision. However, that also makes Chrysler appear even worse.
Top of pageBottom of page

Sstashmoo
Member
Username: Sstashmoo

Post Number: 8
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Friday, February 16, 2007 - 12:24 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

LY wrote
""Today, the market capitalization of both GM and Ford combined is only a little higher than $30 billion.

The difference between what Mercedes paid for Chrysler and what Ford and GM are now worth together would be even greater if the time-value of $37 billion after nine years is taken into consideration. The former Big Three of the 1990s have all come down to relative worthlessness in a global economy where the major element of Toyota alone has a market capitalization over $230 billion.""

Not trying to argue, do you have a source to back up these figures?
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2552
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Friday, February 16, 2007 - 12:46 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

It was reported on the radio (WJR or WWJ) back in early 2006 that its market capitalization passed the $200 billion mark for its first time. Forbes generally lists the market capitalization of the top 500 international companies (or is it the top 300?) at the end of every year. So checking its web site should provide that metric.

I heard it was over $230 (233?) billion just recently, but I didn't check. But it made sense because Toyota had issued generous bonus checks to their rank-and-file autoworkers.
Top of pageBottom of page

Track75
Member
Username: Track75

Post Number: 2488
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Friday, February 16, 2007 - 1:00 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Just type the stock ticker symbol into Google. The first "result" will be financial info including market cap.

In billions of US$:

TM = $220
GM = $20
F = $16
DCX = $71
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2553
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Friday, February 16, 2007 - 1:06 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Is that GM figure including GMAC that it recently sold a majority of? Two years ago, GMAC was worth about 80% of GM according to security analysts. However, GM picked up quite a bit after it dumped their UAW people via the buyouts. What is the effective date of the GMAC selloff?
Top of pageBottom of page

Scottr
Member
Username: Scottr

Post Number: 257
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Friday, February 16, 2007 - 1:13 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

LY, that wouldn't matter. market cap is just the stock price x the number of shares out. the stock price would be how that is worked into the market cap.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2554
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Friday, February 16, 2007 - 1:16 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

My point is whether the market cap figures were current or at some recent past date.
Top of pageBottom of page

Scottr
Member
Username: Scottr

Post Number: 259
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Friday, February 16, 2007 - 1:24 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

yeah, they are current. market cap changes with the stock price, and is updated the same.

marketwatch.com includes the number of shares out, if you wish to check their figuring.

it still comes out to less than the dcx merger, either way.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2556
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Friday, February 16, 2007 - 1:30 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

BTW, there is another component of Toyota in addition to its auto component. Still, that small part is higher than GM or Ford. Even Harley-Davidson's market cap beats GM at times.

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.