America's Best Car Company

[Rustican]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

Originally posted by: Rustican

Originally posted by: piasabird
I would like to say one thing. Unions do not run companies. Companies are mismanaged by management. That is how companies fail or succeed.

I'd like to say that when companies realize there is a problem and the business has to be restructured to remain alive/competitive, negotiating with unions to accept new changes slows down if not stops the reorganization process entirely.

Management: We've horribly misjudged the market. Our products are not innovative enough to sell at a premium nor competitive enough to sell without huge discounts. Our focus on short-term gains (for shareholders) at the expense of competent long-term strategic planning and execution has left us with few options:

1) layoff much of the workforce
2) significant salary cuts
3) reduction in benefits
4) salary cuts, revoking shares, and firing of management responsible for the problems in the first place

Ignore that last one . . . some kind of weird typo.

Ford and GM have been steaming towards an iceberg for MANY years. You avoid the iceberg by turning EARLY not by throwing people overboards and hoping that you only hit the tip.

I agree with you that management steering the company into in iceberg is entirely their fault. But once the problem has become blatantly apparent making changes to fix the problems are slowed down by unions who stubbornly refuse to give up concessions to better the health of the company and help save it.

Ship Captain: OMG we hit an iceberg!

Union: You noob! This is your fault!

Ship Captain: Sorry guys my bad. But now we need to save the passengers. Man the pumps to slow the rising water and lower the life boats! And I?ll see if I can get us out of this mess.

Union: We?re not contractually obligated to do that. We demand a pay increase for the new responsibilities involved.

Ship Captain: But the ship is sinking!

Union: We also want better health benefits to protect us against the increased risk of drowning and hypothermia.

Ship Captain: You can?t be serious!?!

Union: We also demand a job?s bank so that when the ship does sink and you have no work for us to do we still get paied.

Ship Captain: ?

 

[Ktulu]

Originally posted by: Rustican

Ship Captain: OMG we hit an iceberg!

Union: You noob! This is your fault!

Ship Captain: Sorry guys my bad. But now we need to save the passengers. Man the pumps to slow the rising water and lower the life boats! And I?ll see if I can get us out of this mess.

Union: Not my Job.

Ship Captain: But the ship is sinking!

Union: Not My Job!

Ship Captain: You can?t be serious!?!

Union: Talk to my shop stewart.

Ship Captain: ?

Fixed.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

^^Fair enough

 

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: Rustican

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

Originally posted by: Rustican

Originally posted by: piasabird
I would like to say one thing. Unions do not run companies. Companies are mismanaged by management. That is how companies fail or succeed.

I'd like to say that when companies realize there is a problem and the business has to be restructured to remain alive/competitive, negotiating with unions to accept new changes slows down if not stops the reorganization process entirely.

Management: We've horribly misjudged the market. Our products are not innovative enough to sell at a premium nor competitive enough to sell without huge discounts. Our focus on short-term gains (for shareholders) at the expense of competent long-term strategic planning and execution has left us with few options:

1) layoff much of the workforce
2) significant salary cuts
3) reduction in benefits
4) salary cuts, revoking shares, and firing of management responsible for the problems in the first place

Ignore that last one . . . some kind of weird typo.

Ford and GM have been steaming towards an iceberg for MANY years. You avoid the iceberg by turning EARLY not by throwing people overboards and hoping that you only hit the tip.

I agree with you that management steering the company into in iceberg is entirely their fault. But once the problem has become blatantly apparent making changes to fix the problems are slowed down by unions who stubbornly refuse to give up concessions to better the health of the company and help save it.

Ship Captain: OMG we hit an iceberg!

Union: You noob! This is your fault!

Ship Captain: Sorry guys my bad. But now we need to save the passengers. Man the pumps to slow the rising water and lower the life boats! And I?ll see if I can get us out of this mess.

Union: We?re not contractually obligated to do that. We demand a pay increase for the new responsibilities involved.

Ship Captain: But the ship is sinking!

Union: We also want better health benefits to protect us against the increased risk of drowning and hypothermia.

Ship Captain: You can?t be serious!?!

Union: We also demand a job?s bank so that when the ship does sink and you have no work for us to do we still get paied.

Ship Captain: ?

Bad analogy. When a ship is in any emergency all rules are overridden. No questions asked. Also no compensation / overtime / union rules etc during emergencies.
😀

 

[theeedude]

Toyota is going to be the media darling, until they aren't. I find GM's recent lineup much more impressive, but all you'll hear is doom and gloom from the media.
Toyota will go the way of Sony. One day on top, the next day, yesterday's news.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: ntdz
I fail to see how a company that's not even number one in it's industry conquered it's industry.

In the same way that Apple gets all the buzz in the computer world, even though Microsoft is still much larger and in far more places.

Microsoft, like GM, is old and boring.
While Apple, and Toyota, are the new exciting people on the block.

BTW I'll take a Honda over a Toyota, better cars 🙂

Toyota will overtake GM either this year or next year...That is pretty much a fact.
When will Apple overtake Microsoft? Never.

I don't see a correlation.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: senseamp
Toyota is going to be the media darling, until they aren't. I find GM's recent lineup much more impressive, but all you'll hear is doom and gloom from the media.
Toyota will go the way of Sony. One day on top, the next day, yesterday's news.

Toyota isn't a media darling. It's a well-run company.

GM is making better vehicles in part b/c they finally realized there is no future in having to give people 6-grand to buy their vehicles. The doom and gloom continues b/c even if GM starts making autos like the Camry, RAV4, Avalon, LS, or Prius . . . they will still have:

1) too many makes
2) too many dealers
3) retirees
4) huge healthcare bill
5) legacy infrastructure designed for making mostly body on frame vehicles
6) comparatively weak technology in small displacement (under 3L) engines and overall efficiency

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: ntdz
I fail to see how a company that's not even number one in it's industry conquered it's industry.

In the same way that Apple gets all the buzz in the computer world, even though Microsoft is still much larger and in far more places.

Microsoft, like GM, is old and boring.
While Apple, and Toyota, are the new exciting people on the block.

BTW I'll take a Honda over a Toyota, better cars 🙂

Toyota will overtake GM either this year or next year...That is pretty much a fact.
When will Apple overtake Microsoft? Never.

I don't see a correlation.

While it's not likely Apple will overtake MS, it's still possible. What's even more possible is Apple passing Microsoft in size...Apple already makes over $1 billion each quarter. Their hardware sales are increasing, they own the mp3 player market, and they're putting out a new phone that should sell very well.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

What's up with all the bad analogies?

GM makes cars and trucks and sells them globally. 9.09 million (2006) and falling.
Toyota makes cars and trucks and sells them globally. 8.8 million (2006) and rising.

GM loses a lot of money and had to sell a huge stake in its finance arm (GMAC) to keep the lights on. By the end of 2008, GM will have dropped over 34,000 employees.
Toyota makes a lot of money and has the enviable problem of not being able to make enough cars and trucks to satisfy demand. If I had to guess, I would say they are hiring.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
What's up with all the bad analogies?

GM makes cars and trucks and sells them globally. 9.09 million (2006) and falling.
Toyota makes cars and trucks and sells them globally. 8.8 million (2006) and rising.

GM loses a lot of money and had to sell a huge stake in its finance arm (GMAC) to keep the lights on. By the end of 2008, GM will have dropped over 34,000 employees.
Toyota makes a lot of money and has the enviable problem of not being able to make enough cars and trucks to satisfy demand. If I had to guess, I would say they are hiring.

Honda has 132,000 employees and Toyota has 264,000 employees.

The japanese have forced the US makers to create a better quality , more fuel efficient and less expensive product. For every 'big 3' plant closure, I am seeing a Japanese plant open with more high tech equipment (more demand for skilled workers, more efficient use of materials and energy). I think the competition from these car manufacturers is nothing but good for the average North American. Good work Toyota, it's much deserved. :thumbsup:

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
What's up with all the bad analogies?

GM makes cars and trucks and sells them globally. 9.09 million (2006) and falling.
Toyota makes cars and trucks and sells them globally. 8.8 million (2006) and rising.

GM loses a lot of money and had to sell a huge stake in its finance arm (GMAC) to keep the lights on. By the end of 2008, GM will have dropped over 34,000 employees.
Toyota makes a lot of money and has the enviable problem of not being able to make enough cars and trucks to satisfy demand. If I had to guess, I would say they are hiring.

Yes big 3 are shedding workers, however their production volume is not going down based on the number of workers lost. They have too much production capacity to meet demand, but they have even more excess workers.

But yes, toyota is at least partially displacing jobs losses that are occurring at the big3.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
What's up with all the bad analogies?

GM makes cars and trucks and sells them globally. 9.09 million (2006) and falling.
Toyota makes cars and trucks and sells them globally. 8.8 million (2006) and rising.

GM loses a lot of money and had to sell a huge stake in its finance arm (GMAC) to keep the lights on. By the end of 2008, GM will have dropped over 34,000 employees.
Toyota makes a lot of money and has the enviable problem of not being able to make enough cars and trucks to satisfy demand. If I had to guess, I would say they are hiring.

Yes big 3 are shedding workers, however their production volume is not going down based on the number of workers lost. They have too much production capacity to meet demand, but they have even more excess workers.

But yes, toyota is at least partially displacing jobs losses that are occurring at the big3.

The difference is that HoMoCo and Toyota have production that closely matches sales. The Detroit 3 have excess capacity. GM and Ford are in the process of wringing out much of their excess and DC (Chrysler/Dodge) is sure to follow. The only reason production volume at GM may keep pace is b/c GM is actually expanding in emerging markets. But my guess is that sales (and production) will continue to fall. I agree that it will not fall as quickly as UAW jobs, though.

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: ntdz
I fail to see how a company that's not even number one in it's industry conquered it's industry.

In the same way that Apple gets all the buzz in the computer world, even though Microsoft is still much larger and in far more places.

Microsoft, like GM, is old and boring.
While Apple, and Toyota, are the new exciting people on the block.

BTW I'll take a Honda over a Toyota, better cars 🙂

Toyota is exciting? Oooook?

By the way, the reason Toyota is doing better than American car companies? GM, Ford and Chrysler have been building garbage for years. They killed the only decent car they ever designed, GM's electric car. They build ******. That's why Toyota is doing well.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: ntdz
I fail to see how a company that's not even number one in it's industry conquered it's industry.

In the same way that Apple gets all the buzz in the computer world, even though Microsoft is still much larger and in far more places.

Microsoft, like GM, is old and boring.
While Apple, and Toyota, are the new exciting people on the block.

BTW I'll take a Honda over a Toyota, better cars 🙂

Toyota is exciting? Oooook?

By the way, the reason Toyota is doing better than American car companies? GM, Ford and Chrysler have been building garbage for years. They killed the only decent car they ever designed, GM's electric car. They build ******. That's why Toyota is doing well.

That's why I objected to many of the analogies. You use an analogy to relate something novel to something that is well known to foster a better understanding of that which is novel. Unfortunately, most people don't do it very well. Instead, they take two things that have the most tenuous of correlation and then insist they are almost one in the same. For instance, comparing the Bush War in Iraq to the US Revolutionary War or WWII or even Vietnam.

Toyota (just like HoMoCo) have some of the most (aesthetically) uninspiring vehicles on the market. But when it comes to getting from point A to point B, for a reasonable price, with good gas mileage, safety, and reliability . . . they are hard to beat. The difference is now that Toyota has established such dominance in the bland (insert any Toyota car HERE) they have moved on luxury (LS), trucks (Tundra), and SUVs (RX, LX).

The Detroit 3 are FINALLY producing competitive products but arguably they are truly competitive with what Toyota and Honda were making a couple of years ago.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: ntdz
I fail to see how a company that's not even number one in it's industry conquered it's industry.

In the same way that Apple gets all the buzz in the computer world, even though Microsoft is still much larger and in far more places.

Microsoft, like GM, is old and boring.
While Apple, and Toyota, are the new exciting people on the block.

BTW I'll take a Honda over a Toyota, better cars 🙂

Toyota will overtake GM either this year or next year...That is pretty much a fact.
When will Apple overtake Microsoft? Never.

I don't see a correlation.

While it's not likely Apple will overtake MS, it's still possible. What's even more possible is Apple passing Microsoft in size...Apple already makes over $1 billion each quarter. Their hardware sales are increasing, they own the mp3 player market, and they're putting out a new phone that should sell very well.

Do you know how much Microsoft makes each quarter?
Keep in mind the fact that last reported quarter earnings doesn't include Vista/Office 2007 sales.

Veering a little off topic here, but my point was...You're pretty much using semantics.
Toyota has conquered the Auto industry(yes, it's safe to say so)...They will overtake GM in a year or less. I know it (and I'm sure you do as well).

My second point was ProfJohn using the Apple/Microsoft analogy with Toyota/GM didn't make much sense and is incomparable.
Apple is an ant compared to Microsoft.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

The primary problems with the Detroit Three were not unionized labor or government regulations. The problem was always at the top . . . poor management. For decades, if you needed a good work truck, the Detroit 3 could deliver . . . exclusively. Despite their claims to the contrary, it looks like Toyota wants to take the last pot that the Detroit 3 had to micturate in.

You forgot to factor in that quality is a significant component of the Toyota Production System, one that blurs the line between management and hourly wage employees on the production line.

Any employee on the assembly line can stop it for quality issues, resulting in a rapid response from management and engineering to resolve the problem. Empowering employees to control quality has consistently allowed Toyota to avoid the embarrassing recalls and rework operating costs that continue to plague American car companies. Toyota also cross trains its employees to serve multiple functions, thereby increasing job satisfaction and productivity.

American companies have been unable to mirror this process because of the barrier that exists between union and management...unions don't want cross training, because it eliminates job security through exclusive job codes and seniority...similarly, both unions and management are to blame for not breaking down the barriers between them to create a true quality driven organization.

Unions are not to blame for the woes of American car companies, but they are part of the equation.

This is a management issue too.

 

[BarneyFife]

Nobody seems to bring up how management at Ford went trigger happy and bought Aston Martin, Jaguar, Volvo, Land Rover, and Mazda.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I wonder why Honda hasn't received this sort of publicity lately? Is Honda chopped liver all of the sudden? I've always regarded Honda as Toyota's peer in terms of product quality.

What do people think about Mazda, which seems to get overlooked? I'm concerned that Ford owns a good chunk (1/3?) of it.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Nobody seems to bring up how management at Ford went trigger happy and bought Aston Martin, Jaguar, Volvo, Land Rover, and Mazda.

Buying Mazda and Volvo was a good move for Ford...the vast majority of their models were derived from those platforms. Without those aquisitions; Ford would already be dead.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

I wonder why Honda hasn't received this sort of publicity lately? Is Honda chopped liver all of the sudden? I've always regarded Honda as Toyota's peer in terms of product quality.

What do people think about Mazda, which seems to get overlooked? I'm concerned that Ford owns a good chunk (1/3?) of it.

Honda is still growing; it's nowhere near the size of Toyota though and with Toyota overtaking Ford and Chrysler, it's bound to get far more press.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

I wonder why Honda hasn't received this sort of publicity lately? Is Honda chopped liver all of the sudden? I've always regarded Honda as Toyota's peer in terms of product quality.

What do people think about Mazda, which seems to get overlooked? I'm concerned that Ford owns a good chunk (1/3?) of it.

Honda the Stealth Bomber . . . built by Japan

Honda's emphasis on technology positions it to become an even stronger rival in the future. "In many areas, we take Honda more seriously than Toyota, especially when it comes to engine technology," said Bob Lutz, vice chairman of General Motors Corp. "Honda doesn't have the scale of Toyota, but they're also on a very fast track."

But with its image as an environmentally friendly company specializing in small cars, Honda arouses less fear and antagonism than Toyota, which has set out to become the biggest automaker in the world.

"They love to let Toyota take the blows, whereas Honda has done practically as much damage," saidJames Womack, chairman of the Lean Enterprise Institute in Cambridge, Mass., and a manufacturing specialist.

Mazda is one of the few bright spots at Ford. The 3 and 6 FWD platforms shared with Volvo and Ford are among the best products in the FoMoCo (crumbling) Empire. But the whole PAG thing is indicative of the difference in management between Japan Inc companies and their American competitors. Ford paid a premium for a Euro luxo make with crappy quality (Jag). Unsatisfied . . . they bought another (Aston Martin). For good measure they went after the ultimate image SUV (Land Rover) with even worse quality issues than Jag. The purchase of Volvo might still prove worthwhile.

The problem is Ford spent billions in acquisitions and many billions more in operations. Yet, poor management led to the worst possible outcomes. Putting a Jag engine into a Lincoln makes sense . . . unless of course the volume on both is so low that neither makes money. Putting Ford parts in a Jag, Aston Martin, or Land Rover is just plain stupid. Rebadging requires A LOT of skill (and marketing) to pull off. Only a moron would think people would pay a premium for a Ford Escape by calling it a Land Rover Freelander or a Ford Contour called a Jaguar X-type.

The sad part is that FoMoCo is NOW doing a much better job with PAG but Ford and Lincoln are in terrible condition. Arguably, every member of PAG is better today than any time in the recent past but FoMoCo cannot afford to keep them (even the one's making money like Aston Martin) b/c they need the cash to keep the rest of FoMoCo afloat. It is truly a sign of dire straits given Aston Martin is not only profitable but the value of AM is likely to increase over the next few years. To the contrary, Ford may have to do a BOGO to get rid of Jaguar and Land Rover.

 

[Strk]

That was a pretty good article, BaliBabyDoc. I like how it points out how Toyota's environmental image is actually kind of iffy.

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: ntdz
I fail to see how a company that's not even number one in it's industry conquered it's industry.

In the same way that Apple gets all the buzz in the computer world, even though Microsoft is still much larger and in far more places.

Microsoft, like GM, is old and boring.
While Apple, and Toyota, are the new exciting people on the block.

BTW I'll take a Honda over a Toyota, better cars 🙂

Toyota is exciting? Oooook?

By the way, the reason Toyota is doing better than American car companies? GM, Ford and Chrysler have been building garbage for years. They killed the only decent car they ever designed, GM's electric car. They build ******. That's why Toyota is doing well.

That's why I objected to many of the analogies. You use an analogy to relate something novel to something that is well known to foster a better understanding of that which is novel. Unfortunately, most people don't do it very well. Instead, they take two things that have the most tenuous of correlation and then insist they are almost one in the same. For instance, comparing the Bush War in Iraq to the US Revolutionary War or WWII or even Vietnam.

Toyota (just like HoMoCo) have some of the most (aesthetically) uninspiring vehicles on the market. But when it comes to getting from point A to point B, for a reasonable price, with good gas mileage, safety, and reliability . . . they are hard to beat. The difference is now that Toyota has established such dominance in the bland (insert any Toyota car HERE) they have moved on luxury (LS), trucks (Tundra), and SUVs (RX, LX).

The Detroit 3 are FINALLY producing competitive products but arguably they are truly competitive with what Toyota and Honda were making a couple of years ago.

I agree with you on the Toyota points.
The problem is, the Americans aren't truly quality competitive even now, IMO. Rent an American fleet car your next trip, you'll see what I mean. They're crap at any level. Then rent a Toyota, at any level. No comparison. They're still crap, but at least they don't feel like a rickety- ass bucket of bolts bumbling down the road.
I've said it before (and been as often ignored 😉) but Volkswagen is the best car for my money. The ride/handling quality blows away anything American in a like price range. They don't compete well price wise in the super economy area, but I'd rather eat a sword than drive an Aveo, Cobalt, Fucus or Neon. They're all crap. Hence my original point: GM, Ford and Chrysler were not murdered, they committed suicide.