• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

CNNMoney.com: GM to pull the plug on Pontiac

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

MikeMike

Lifer
Feb 6, 2000
45,885
66
91
Originally posted by: makken
Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
Originally posted by: Elfear
Originally posted by: Triumph
The G8 is an important car in GM's lineup. It'd be very bad if they did not rebadge it as a Chevrolet. The thing that sets GM apart from Chrysler is that while GM still has a bunch of badge engineered vehicles and a few bad ones, their are balanced by a number of very good vehicles, such as the G8, the CTS, the Silverado, Equinox, Suburban, etc., the Corvette, V6 Camaro (great fuel economy, actually), the Volt, Cobalt SS, a bunch of others. Meanwhile Chrysler has...the Viper? Maybe the new Ram, but that's about it. The rest of their lineup is junk. I hate to see Pontiac go, but if it means keeping GM alive, then I'm all for it.
Come on now. The Challenger is one sexy automobile, the 300s are nice cars, Charger, great mini-vans, etc. They have some dumpy products but they have some good ones as well.


Originally posted by: herm0016
i hope they keep the G8 also. its an awesome car. I thought Saturn would go first.
+1

There are way too many boring cars on the road to terminate the G8. Hopefuly they'll rebadge as a Chevy.
The Challenger is sexy, yes... the interior is cheap, it is slow, underpowered, overweight, sloppy handling... it is outclassed by the Camaro, Mustang, 370Z, Genesis Coupe...
The T&C is meh... it is outclassed by every single minivan available today.
The 300 has run its course... the engines are old and outdated... the interior is nice, but the G8 spanks it every where...
The new Ram is their one innovative product available today... the only truck without leaf springs in the rear.
Don't forget Jeep
Jeep is a solid brand with a core following unlike almost any other brand currently around today.
 

Triumph

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,031
13
81
Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
Originally posted by: makken
Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
Originally posted by: Elfear
Originally posted by: Triumph
The G8 is an important car in GM's lineup. It'd be very bad if they did not rebadge it as a Chevrolet. The thing that sets GM apart from Chrysler is that while GM still has a bunch of badge engineered vehicles and a few bad ones, their are balanced by a number of very good vehicles, such as the G8, the CTS, the Silverado, Equinox, Suburban, etc., the Corvette, V6 Camaro (great fuel economy, actually), the Volt, Cobalt SS, a bunch of others. Meanwhile Chrysler has...the Viper? Maybe the new Ram, but that's about it. The rest of their lineup is junk. I hate to see Pontiac go, but if it means keeping GM alive, then I'm all for it.
Come on now. The Challenger is one sexy automobile, the 300s are nice cars, Charger, great mini-vans, etc. They have some dumpy products but they have some good ones as well.


Originally posted by: herm0016
i hope they keep the G8 also. its an awesome car. I thought Saturn would go first.
+1

There are way too many boring cars on the road to terminate the G8. Hopefuly they'll rebadge as a Chevy.
The Challenger is sexy, yes... the interior is cheap, it is slow, underpowered, overweight, sloppy handling... it is outclassed by the Camaro, Mustang, 370Z, Genesis Coupe...
The T&C is meh... it is outclassed by every single minivan available today.
The 300 has run its course... the engines are old and outdated... the interior is nice, but the G8 spanks it every where...
The new Ram is their one innovative product available today... the only truck without leaf springs in the rear.
Don't forget Jeep
Jeep is a solid brand with a core following unlike almost any other brand currently around today.
That has been watered down by Chrysler management with such abominations as the Compass and the Patriot. I agree with everything you said about the rest of Chrysler, they focused their entire strategy on the 300 platform, which was an outdated platform even when it came out, so at that time it was just "good enough." How about the craptastic Sebring? They actually expect that steaming pile of manure to compete with such high volume/high quality offerings like the Altima, Camry, Accord, Malibu, Sonata, etc? The mid size sedan market is where the bread and butter is, and while you could make a case for purchasing any of those cars I just mentioned, all of them completely outclass the Sebring. This is why I hope that GM continues past bankruptcy. They have genuinely competitive models but they are hampered by the economic situation and timing. Chrysler, they just don't even try.
 

Drakkon

Diamond Member
Aug 14, 2001
8,401
1
0
Why get rid of the Pontiac line and keep around the GMC line? I don't get why they keep around those gas guzzling trucks/SUVs that are consistently ranked as mediocre. They barely compete with their Chevrolet counterparts. The only reason for them is their van line but i would think they could roll that into Chevy.
 

Triumph

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,031
13
81
Originally posted by: Drakkon
Why get rid of the Pontiac line and keep around the GMC line? I don't get why they keep around those gas guzzling trucks/SUVs that are consistently ranked as mediocre. They barely compete with their Chevrolet counterparts. The only reason for them is their van line but i would think they could roll that into Chevy.
Well, they're not mediocre and are not "competing" with their Chevy counterparts, because they are basically the same thing. And if someone buys a GMC Canyon over a Chevy Colorado, GM corporate still sells a truck rather than losing to Toyota. But I agree that GMC should be axed. The nearest I can figure for their continued existence, is because you had Chevy dealerships, and you had Pontiac dealerships. Chevy dealerships had Chevy trucks to sell, but Pontiac dealers didn't want to sell Chevy trucks, so they "made" GMC. Made isn't the right word, because GMC was an independent company bought by GM a long time ago, like 1905 or something.
 

MikeMike

Lifer
Feb 6, 2000
45,885
66
91
GMC is an ingenious brand right now...

Take an already made platform, make $50M in changes to produce it... sell it for $1000 more per truck... PROFIT... GMC is one of their largest profit makers.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,890
639
126
IMO, this is why GMC is being kept. I've expressed this view several times before.

http://www.gmc.com/commercialBridge.jsp

I would imagine the commercial vehicle market is lucrative. Typically a utility company will order many thousands of vehicles to replace an aging fleet. There is a company near me that does conversions on these. Their enormous parking lot can be filled to near overflowing at times with vehicles waiting to be done.

If they drop GMC, they are totally excluding themselves from that market. I think the assumption that GMC is being kept to produce essentially carbon copies of Chevy trucks in competition with them is incorrect.

I may be wrong though.
 

MikeMike

Lifer
Feb 6, 2000
45,885
66
91
Guys, i hope you realize how drastic what they announced was... They arent just slowly tapering off the lines, they are gone, Pontiac will cease production in 2010. Saturn will as well unless other investors are found.

"If both are successful, the government and UAW health care trust would own 89 percent of GM stock, with the government holding more than a 50 percent stake, CEO Fritz Henderson said in a news conference at GM's Detroit headquarters."

"The company also said it plans to reduce its dealership ranks by 42 percent from 2008 to 2010, cutting them from 6,246 to 3,605. When asked how GM would accomplish that, Henderson would say only that the company would be making offers to the dealers in the coming weeks."

"The company said it would phase out its storied Pontiac brand no later than next year, and the futures of Hummer, Saturn and Saab will be resolved by the end of this year by either selling them or phasing them out."

"The struggling automaker said it will offer 225 shares of common stock for every $1,000 in notes held by bondholders as part of a debt-for-equity swap. Henderson said the objective is to reduce GM's $27 billion of outstanding public debt by about $24 billion. The company estimates that after the exchange, bondholders would own 10 percent of the company.

That would leave current common stockholders with only 1 percent, GM said. Still, GM shares rose 47 cents, or 27.8 percent, to $2.16 in midday trading.

The plans, if successful, would reduce GM's debt by $44 billion from the present figure of about $62.4 billion."

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...es&pos=1&asset=&ccode=

well atleast those who park a G8 GXP in a garage and keep it maintained, next to a Saturn Astra, will have a nice retirement fund in 40 years, if you can get a 3 car garage, you can throw a solstice coupe in there :D
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
101,581
5,837
126
Originally posted by: Triumph
Chrysler, they just don't even try.
well, ze germans didn't, at least.

every product that chrysler currently sells was done under the old german management that decided to run it into the ground and not bother competing in the midsize sedan market (probably because they don't get the midsize sedan market).

chrysler's new management may not know much about the car industry, but if chrysler's latest concept cars are any indication, the management certainly knows to let the engineers and designers do their jobs.
 

evident

Lifer
Apr 5, 2005
11,625
182
106
Originally posted by: Kadarin
Originally posted by: Atreus21
The G8 wasn't bad looking. Naturally they discontinued it.
I have to agree. It was a pretty decent car.
its something they can easily bring to chevy. there was no reason why pontiac should have existed this long except to satisfy middle aged men's wet dreams of reliving the 67' GTO days and having that same badge :roll: this is the sort of mentality that's spreading gm thin and wearing it dry
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,890
639
126
Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
Guys, i hope you realize how drastic what they announced was... They arent just slowly tapering off the lines, they are gone, Pontiac will cease production in 2010. Saturn will as well unless other investors are found.

well atleast those who park a G8 GXP in a garage and keep it maintained, next to a Saturn Astra, will have a nice retirement fund in 40 years, if you can get a 3 car garage, you can throw a solstice coupe in there :D
I'm thinking that 2010 refers to 2010 model year, so essentially there are only going to be approximately 2 more months of production at whatever level they feel they can sell at. Which may essentially be zero.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
0
Originally posted by: herm0016
i hope they keep the G8 also. its an awesome car. I thought Saturn would go first.
Until today Saturn had until some time in 2012 to find a buyer. That got moved up to the end of this year. :(


<=== Saturn owner
 

miketheidiot

Lifer
Sep 3, 2004
11,062
1
0
Originally posted by: boomerang
IMO, this is why GMC is being kept. I've expressed this view several times before.

http://www.gmc.com/commercialBridge.jsp

I would imagine the commercial vehicle market is lucrative. Typically a utility company will order many thousands of vehicles to replace an aging fleet. There is a company near me that does conversions on these. Their enormous parking lot can be filled to near overflowing at times with vehicles waiting to be done.

If they drop GMC, they are totally excluding themselves from that market. I think the assumption that GMC is being kept to produce essentially carbon copies of Chevy trucks in competition with them is incorrect.

I may be wrong though.
the general idea since the beginning was that

gmc would be the commercial/industrial company

chevy would be you standard mass consumption company

cadilac/buick would be luxury brands and eventually worked into one, mainly because Buick is popular in some important emerging foreign markets (brazil and china iirc) eventually buick would be phased out
 

GroundedSailor

Platinum Member
Feb 18, 2001
2,502
0
76
Originally posted by: Triumph
Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
Originally posted by: makken

Don't forget Jeep
Jeep is a solid brand with a core following unlike almost any other brand currently around today.
That has been watered down by Chrysler management with such abominations as the Compass and the Patriot. I agree with everything you said about the rest of Chrysler, they focused their entire strategy on the 300 platform, which was an outdated platform even when it came out, so at that time it was just "good enough." How about the craptastic Sebring? They actually expect that steaming pile of manure to compete with such high volume/high quality offerings like the Altima, Camry, Accord, Malibu, Sonata, etc? The mid size sedan market is where the bread and butter is, and while you could make a case for purchasing any of those cars I just mentioned, all of them completely outclass the Sebring. This is why I hope that GM continues past bankruptcy. They have genuinely competitive models but they are hampered by the economic situation and timing. Chrysler, they just don't even try.
Even watered down by the compass & patriot, Jeep is the prize name in the Chrysler stable. That is their most valuable brand. Even though they came out with Compass/Patriot to have a line up in the smaller cute-ute market, Jeep still has their Wrangler and Grand Cherokee which are not dumbed down. I just bought a new Grand Cherokee and it is streets ahead of the previous model (thats what I had).

As MIKEMIKE said, Jeep has a die hard core following unlike any other brand. They (should I use We!!) will bitch and moan but will still buy Jeeps. The only other brand I can think of that comes close to such loyalty is Subaru.


 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126


GM lays out post-bankruptcy plans

This is complete crap. Why would the creditors (75% of the debt is owned by 5 big banks, who are also being bailed out by Uncle Sam) take a 90% haircut when they'll get back close to 100% in bankruptcy due to their long positions in Credit Default Swaps? GM is literally worth more dead than alive.

Also, WTF to 40% of the equity owned by the UAW, and half by the U.S. Government? I can't even imagine what kind of craptacular cars that would get built by that company, and who would be crazy/stupid enough to buy a car from them anyway?

Please, let GM die - it's truly a mercy killing at this point.

 

Ronstang

Lifer
Jul 8, 2000
12,427
10
81
Originally posted by: boomerang
Originally posted by: wwswimming
wasn't the Oldsmobile 442 a Pontiac ?

that was a classic gas-guzzler.
Is this a serious question?
I'm assuming there are many young people around here that don't remember, or simply don't know, that all the different divisions, even at Ford, used to be almost independent. Back then Pontiac, Olds, Buick, and Chevy all had DIFFERENT engines. They might have been of the same displacement at times but they were all completely different engines with no interchangeability which just further added to the confusion. Even up until the early 60's Ford and Mercury had completely different engines (Mercury sharing engines with Lincoln and Edsel hence the MEL notation) but they standardized on drive train platforms to span across divisions much earlier than GM did. It did not happen at GM until the early 80s. Another reason GM is in the pickle it is in today.
 

rchiu

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2002
3,846
0
0
Originally posted by: glenn1


GM lays out post-bankruptcy plans

This is complete crap. Why would the creditors (75% of the debt is owned by 5 big banks, who are also being bailed out by Uncle Sam) take a 90% haircut when they'll get back close to 100% in bankruptcy due to their long positions in Credit Default Swaps? GM is literally worth more dead than alive.

Also, WTF to 40% of the equity owned by the UAW, and half by the U.S. Government? I can't even imagine what kind of craptacular cars that would get built by that company, and who would be crazy/stupid enough to buy a car from them anyway?

Please, let GM die - it's truly a mercy killing at this point.
Anyone saying UAW has no effect on Big 3 and their problems should get a wake up call. Just look at this plan and you should see UAW's one track mind to preserve their own interests and their ability to bargain and get what they want. 40% of the company when all creditors get 10%....yeah that sounds about right.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,890
639
126
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: glenn1


GM lays out post-bankruptcy plans

This is complete crap. Why would the creditors (75% of the debt is owned by 5 big banks, who are also being bailed out by Uncle Sam) take a 90% haircut when they'll get back close to 100% in bankruptcy due to their long positions in Credit Default Swaps? GM is literally worth more dead than alive.

Also, WTF to 40% of the equity owned by the UAW, and half by the U.S. Government? I can't even imagine what kind of craptacular cars that would get built by that company, and who would be crazy/stupid enough to buy a car from them anyway?

Please, let GM die - it's truly a mercy killing at this point.
Anyone saying UAW has no effect on Big 3 and their problems should get a wake up call. Just look at this plan and you should see UAW's one track mind to preserve their own interests and their ability to bargain and get what they want. 40% of the company when all creditors get 10%....yeah that sounds about right.
Instead of spewing out this garbage based on an article that is nothing more than a blog, try reading facts. http://www.businessweek.com/li...0427_188693_page_2.htm

LOL at you guys thinking this is a UAW plan. This is the plan put forth by GM today. You don't even understand the point behind the proposal of stock. This wouldn't represent the stake of the UAW in GM, it would represent the stake that the VEBA would hold.

You let your hatred for all that is union blind you and then you start running your mouths based on shit. You're nothing more than shit salesmen with mouthful's of samples.

My guess is the truth doesn't suit your agenda.

 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Originally posted by: boomerang
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: glenn1


GM lays out post-bankruptcy plans

This is complete crap. Why would the creditors (75% of the debt is owned by 5 big banks, who are also being bailed out by Uncle Sam) take a 90% haircut when they'll get back close to 100% in bankruptcy due to their long positions in Credit Default Swaps? GM is literally worth more dead than alive.

Also, WTF to 40% of the equity owned by the UAW, and half by the U.S. Government? I can't even imagine what kind of craptacular cars that would get built by that company, and who would be crazy/stupid enough to buy a car from them anyway?

Please, let GM die - it's truly a mercy killing at this point.
Anyone saying UAW has no effect on Big 3 and their problems should get a wake up call. Just look at this plan and you should see UAW's one track mind to preserve their own interests and their ability to bargain and get what they want. 40% of the company when all creditors get 10%....yeah that sounds about right.
Instead of spewing out this garbage based on an article that is nothing more than a blog, try reading facts. http://www.businessweek.com/li...0427_188693_page_2.htm
Your reading skills must suck, because the link you posted completely validates every statement of fact from the article I linked, and my commentary on it.

As far as hating the unions, I don't care about them. In fact, if the UAW gets a substantial ownership stake, they'll probably be more likely to support wage cuts, since they'll quickly realize that high wages will cannibalize the value of their equity stake.
 

rchiu

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2002
3,846
0
0
Originally posted by: boomerang
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: glenn1


GM lays out post-bankruptcy plans

This is complete crap. Why would the creditors (75% of the debt is owned by 5 big banks, who are also being bailed out by Uncle Sam) take a 90% haircut when they'll get back close to 100% in bankruptcy due to their long positions in Credit Default Swaps? GM is literally worth more dead than alive.

Also, WTF to 40% of the equity owned by the UAW, and half by the U.S. Government? I can't even imagine what kind of craptacular cars that would get built by that company, and who would be crazy/stupid enough to buy a car from them anyway?

Please, let GM die - it's truly a mercy killing at this point.
Anyone saying UAW has no effect on Big 3 and their problems should get a wake up call. Just look at this plan and you should see UAW's one track mind to preserve their own interests and their ability to bargain and get what they want. 40% of the company when all creditors get 10%....yeah that sounds about right.
Instead of spewing out this garbage based on an article that is nothing more than a blog, try reading facts. http://www.businessweek.com/li...0427_188693_page_2.htm

LOL at you guys thinking this is a UAW plan. This is the plan put forth by GM today. You don't even understand the point behind the proposal of stock. This wouldn't represent the stake of the UAW in GM, it would represent the stake that the VEBA would hold.

You let your hatred for all that is union blind you and then you start running your mouths based on shit. You're nothing more than shit salesmen with mouthful's of samples.

My guess is the truth doesn't suit your agenda.
Let's be honest here, are you trying to say VEBA has no relationship with UAW and UAW do not negotiate on behalf of VEBA?

And who the heck said the plan is a UAW plan, we all know it is a GM plan. A GM plan that was put forward to appease UAW because they have strong presence in the democratic party without regard of the true owner/debt holder of the company.

quote:

For $20bn in obligations that GM has to a union-managed healthcare fund, unions would receive a 50 per cent recovery in cash and a 39 per cent stake in a new GM.

Bondholders, with $27bn in GM debt and the same legal rights as the unions, would receive 10 per cent of the restructured company and essentially no cash, the committee?s advisers said.

Source
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
37,330
11,797
136
Originally posted by: glenn1


GM lays out post-bankruptcy plans

This is complete crap. Why would the creditors (75% of the debt is owned by 5 big banks, who are also being bailed out by Uncle Sam) take a 90% haircut when they'll get back close to 100% in bankruptcy due to their long positions in Credit Default Swaps? GM is literally worth more dead than alive.

Also, WTF to 40% of the equity owned by the UAW, and half by the U.S. Government? I can't even imagine what kind of craptacular cars that would get built by that company, and who would be crazy/stupid enough to buy a car from them anyway?

Please, let GM die - it's truly a mercy killing at this point.
Even if they recovered 100% in court the press/public is going to figure out that the government provided the money which the banks are getting to kill off the company and send hundreds of thousands out of work during the worst downturn since the Great Depression.

Our goddamn bankers would be hiding out at my house for fear of their lives.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: glenn1


GM lays out post-bankruptcy plans

This is complete crap. Why would the creditors (75% of the debt is owned by 5 big banks, who are also being bailed out by Uncle Sam) take a 90% haircut when they'll get back close to 100% in bankruptcy due to their long positions in Credit Default Swaps? GM is literally worth more dead than alive.

Also, WTF to 40% of the equity owned by the UAW, and half by the U.S. Government? I can't even imagine what kind of craptacular cars that would get built by that company, and who would be crazy/stupid enough to buy a car from them anyway?

Please, let GM die - it's truly a mercy killing at this point.
Even if they recovered 100% in court the press/public is going to figure out that the government provided the money which the banks are getting to kill off the company and send hundreds of thousands out of work during the worst downturn since the Great Depression.

Our goddamn bankers would be hiding out at my house for fear of their lives.
Perhaps the government should have thought of that beforehand. The workers are hosed either way.
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
37,330
11,797
136
Originally posted by: glenn1
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: glenn1


GM lays out post-bankruptcy plans

This is complete crap. Why would the creditors (75% of the debt is owned by 5 big banks, who are also being bailed out by Uncle Sam) take a 90% haircut when they'll get back close to 100% in bankruptcy due to their long positions in Credit Default Swaps? GM is literally worth more dead than alive.

Also, WTF to 40% of the equity owned by the UAW, and half by the U.S. Government? I can't even imagine what kind of craptacular cars that would get built by that company, and who would be crazy/stupid enough to buy a car from them anyway?

Please, let GM die - it's truly a mercy killing at this point.
Even if they recovered 100% in court the press/public is going to figure out that the government provided the money which the banks are getting to kill off the company and send hundreds of thousands out of work during the worst downturn since the Great Depression.

Our goddamn bankers would be hiding out at my house for fear of their lives.
Perhaps the government should have thought of that beforehand. The workers are hosed either way.
The admin is probably leaning on the banks as we speak. I can see the government helping the bondholders out to some degree but if GM (and by extension the suppliers) up and dies on the table because the banks wouldn't play ball Congess will set land speed records for assembling a lynch mob in a desperate bid to placate millions of very pissed off voters. The financial sector as we know it would not survive that kind of wrath given the public's already dim view of it as a whole.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: glenn1
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: glenn1


GM lays out post-bankruptcy plans

This is complete crap. Why would the creditors (75% of the debt is owned by 5 big banks, who are also being bailed out by Uncle Sam) take a 90% haircut when they'll get back close to 100% in bankruptcy due to their long positions in Credit Default Swaps? GM is literally worth more dead than alive.

Also, WTF to 40% of the equity owned by the UAW, and half by the U.S. Government? I can't even imagine what kind of craptacular cars that would get built by that company, and who would be crazy/stupid enough to buy a car from them anyway?

Please, let GM die - it's truly a mercy killing at this point.
Even if they recovered 100% in court the press/public is going to figure out that the government provided the money which the banks are getting to kill off the company and send hundreds of thousands out of work during the worst downturn since the Great Depression.

Our goddamn bankers would be hiding out at my house for fear of their lives.
Perhaps the government should have thought of that beforehand. The workers are hosed either way.
The admin is probably leaning on the banks as we speak. I can see the government helping the bondholders out to some degree but if GM (and by extension the suppliers) up and dies on the table because the banks wouldn't play ball Congess will set land speed records for assembling a lynch mob in a desperate bid to placate millions of very pissed off voters. The financial sector as we know it would not survive that kind of wrath given the public's already dim view of it as a whole.
So to save a few thousand UAW jobs, the government would torpedo the financial sector, which they're already bailed out to the tune of trillions of dollars and which represents about a sixth of the entire economy? And for what? A company which will likely fail anyway, regardless of whether or how it reorganizes?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY