GM = Bankrupt

[TheEarthWillShake]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Perknose
Nobody but the brain dead would choose a Chevy Cobalt over an equivalent Toyo Corolla or Honda Civic.

That's not true at all. With some of the discounts given to suppliers (like myself), getting a MSRP $17,500 Cobalt for $12,500 + ttl (with no dickering involved) = no brainer and the car included remote start, cruise, XM radio, automatic, power windows and quite a few other features. Find me a Civic or Corolla anywhere near that price with those features....and also being NEW.

The savings alone on the car price more than make up for the few extra miles per gallon that the Toyota or Honda get over the Cobalt (which is averaging 31.5 mpg in a combo of 40% city / 60% highway driving so far for me).

Take into account that Cobalt will probably break more then the Civic and Corolla combined.

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: TheEarthWillShake

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Perknose
Nobody but the brain dead would choose a Chevy Cobalt over an equivalent Toyo Corolla or Honda Civic.

That's not true at all. With some of the discounts given to suppliers (like myself), getting a MSRP $17,500 Cobalt for $12,500 + ttl (with no dickering involved) = no brainer and the car included remote start, cruise, XM radio, automatic, power windows and quite a few other features. Find me a Civic or Corolla anywhere near that price with those features....and also being NEW.

The savings alone on the car price more than make up for the few extra miles per gallon that the Toyota or Honda get over the Cobalt (which is averaging 31.5 mpg in a combo of 40% city / 60% highway driving so far for me).

Take into account that Cobalt will probably break more then the Civic and Corolla combined.

Got proof?

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: TheEarthWillShake

Take into account that Cobalt will probably break more then the Civic and Corolla combined.

Unless you have some proof of that, it's all your opinion. I'll admit that I've had bad luck with GM cars in the past and have good luck with Fords, and especially good luck with Dodge. I took a chance on GM this time as it was heavily discounted and it fit the bill. If it turns out to be a lemon (or close), I'll use my dollars to buy something different (brand) next time.

Do you have links and statistics on the Cobalt and it's reliability?

 

[Pliablemoose]

I suspect GM & Ford will survive, Chrysler on the other hand is destined for the chopping block.

When Chrysler offered the lifetime warranty I looked extensively at their line up, and there wasn't a single vehicle I could stand.

There are Fords & GM vehicles I could live with. I'm considering a Solstice at the moment, but will likely just shoot a coat of paint on my 12 year old Miata instead.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
I suspect GM & Ford will survive, Chrysler on the other hand is destined for the chopping block.

When Chrysler offered the lifetime warranty I looked extensively at their line up, and there wasn't a single vehicle I could stand.

There are Fords & GM vehicles I could live with. I'm considering a Solstice at the moment, but will likely just shoot a coat of paint on my 12 year old Miata instead.

I might agree with you on Chrysler. Their product lineup is far from what it used to be (i.e. See Siebring hood if you need proof). It was estimated that Chrysler will take a major hit next year. Ford and GM are taking steps....although I'm not sure if they have made time in time....to increase their likelihood of survival (even if it means Ford is moving mainly to Mexico which, IMO, sucks and I won't buy one from there ...period).

 

[OokiiNeko]

Ford and GM are taking steps....although I'm not sure if they have made time in time....to increase their likelihood of survival (even if it means Ford is moving mainly to Mexico which, IMO, sucks and I won't buy one from there ...period).

Ford and GM are taking steps alright, to eliminate as much American labor from the equation as possible.

Not so New GM Mexican plant.

New Ford plant to build the Fiesta.

The plan has become clear. Big Three continue to produce a mostly gas-guzzling product line in the US, then when gas prices reach unprecedented levels via "speculation", Big Three wring their hands, and have a tear in their eye when they announce that they are "forced to" shut down the plants in the US which produce the gas guzzlers.
AT THE SAME TIME THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING, they have negotiated for, purchased and built up brand new plants in Mexico, where the labor is not only cheaper, but labor laws much less restrictive. All the fuel efficient small cars will come from the new Mexican plants. GO USA! The true face of NAFTA finally starting to show.

Should pull up some old NAFTA threads. You know, where some people predicted this would happen and got the same kind of reponses McOwen got in his $5 gas thread.



Edit to add the Ford plant.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: OokiiNeko

Ford and GM are taking steps....although I'm not sure if they have made time in time....to increase their likelihood of survival (even if it means Ford is moving mainly to Mexico which, IMO, sucks and I won't buy one from there ...period).

Ford and GM are taking steps alright, to eliminate as much American labor from the equation as possible.

New Mexican plant.

The plan has become clear. Big Three continue to produce a mostly gas-guzzling product line in the US, then when gas prices reach unprecedented levels via "speculation", Big Three wring their hands, and have a tear in their eye when they announce that they are "forced to" shut down the plants in the US which produce the gas guzzlers.
AT THE SAME TIME THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING, they have negotiated for, purchased and built up brand new plants in Mexico, where the labor is not only cheaper, but labor laws much less restrictive. All the fuel efficient small cars will come from the new Mexican plants. GO USA! The true face of NAFTA finally starting to show.

Should pull up some old NAFTA threads. You know, where some people predicted this would happen and got the same kind of reponses McOwen got in his $5 gas thread.

I know they are moving to Mexico and that's the reason I'm not buying one of their cars. If any car is made in Mexico, I refuse to look at it. My own company, an automotive supplier, is moving to Mexico as fast as possible. The Mexican operations are generating scrap at an unpresidented rate and the parts per million defects, which was in steady decline for a decade down to a low of 17 parts per million last year, have skyrocketed to 132 parts per million this year from Mexican operations. The Mexican plants have now lost $3,000,000 this year and that's considerable when you look at the size of a company like the one I work for. Pretty damn sad that those in charge think they are saving money...when in reality, some are fucking themselves (and thousands of others) out of a job and long term future that is good for the US.

 

[OokiiNeko]

If any car is made in Mexico, I refuse to look at it.

It is sad, isn`t it? One of the things I liked about my old Saturn was that, at the time, it was the highest US content car available (radio and one other item made in Canada).
Reliable, good on gas (crossed the US for less than $100), and the plastic body panels resulted in no dings after 8 years! Truly the best car I have ever owned.

I saw a black Chrysler (SRT?) the other day, and all I could think was SUX 2000.
What the hell is going on?

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: ericlp
Dunno if they will go bankrupt but it serves them right for building gas guzzlers and I believe they a division of the hummer ...

I just kinda hope that Ford and Chevy follow them as they had a lot of time to build a smart car that can get 40+ MPG's. Any company that couldn't see what was going to happen in the past few years deserves what they get.

It has nothing to do with gas guzzlers and everything to do with a union that is bleeding them dry.
I believe that for every car they build they spend a lot on healthcare costs. (amount is questionable, perhaps $750 or $1500 not 100% sure)

We have had LONG threads about how the people who sweep the floors in their factories make $20 an hour thanks to the union etc.

How can it have nothing to do with it?
They make gas guzzlers..People are not buying gas guzzlers because gas is 4.25 a gal with no end in sight. On the other hand fuel efficient vehicles are selling like pancakes..just ask Toyota , they almost passed GM in sales in the U.S. for the first time ever.
If They don't sell cars or mostly trucks and SUV's in there case, you can't pay the bills.
Supply and demand.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Perknose
Nobody but the brain dead would choose a Chevy Cobalt over an equivalent Toyo Corolla or Honda Civic.

The cobalt still sold 20,000(20% increase in sales) units last month, putting it right behind corolla and civic. If is not a bad car.l

That's not true at all. With some of the discounts given to suppliers (like myself), getting a MSRP $17,500 Cobalt for $12,500 + ttl . . .

I like and know automobiles. The Cobalt is nowhere near as good a car as the Corolla or the Civic.

Charrison, Cobalt sales, like the sales of ALL small cars these days, are benefitting from our current gas prices. This does not make the Cobalt a good car.

Engineer, the price you got is due to special privelege. Personally, I STILL wouldn't have bought a Cobalt, but I understand why you did.

I believe you would respect the opinion of Consumer Reports, a dedicated bunch of, well, engineers who have never accepted advertising of any kind in their publication.

CR Model Summary

The Cobalt falls short of the best small cars. Its 2.2-liter engine is spirited but noisy and relatively thirsty. Drivers can expect just 24 mpg overall. The ride is relatively comfortable, but handling isn't agile. The steering is too light at low speeds. The rear seat is not roomy, even by small-car standards. Interior fit and finish is unimpressive. The Cobalt sedan received a score of acceptable in the IIHS side-crash test with the now-standard head-curtain air bags. Electronic stability control is optional for 2008, but only in the sport version that is priced close to the larger Malibu. The sporty SS model returns with a turbocharged engine.

Highs Turning circle.

Lows Engine noise, fuel economy, driving position, seating comfort, fit and finish.

I don't currently have a CR sub, so I can't prove it to either of you here, but I know cars in some depth. Trust me, both the Civic and the Corolla are a clear cut above -- way above, actually -- the Cobalt in just about every area: refinement, reliability, quality, engineering, performance, resale value, you name it!

Also, the Ford Focus is a better vehilce, imho, as a self-professed car lover, than the Chevy Cobalt.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

If you were restructuring GM, how would you merge the divisions?

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Perknose
Nobody but the brain dead would choose a Chevy Cobalt over an equivalent Toyo Corolla or Honda Civic.

The cobalt still sold 20,000(20% increase in sales) units last month, putting it right behind corolla and civic. If is not a bad car.l

That's not true at all. With some of the discounts given to suppliers (like myself), getting a MSRP $17,500 Cobalt for $12,500 + ttl . . .

I like and know automobiles. The Cobalt is nowhere near as good a car as the Corolla or the Civic.

Charrison, Cobalt sales, like the sales of ALL small cars these days, are benefitting from our current gas prices. This does not make the Cobalt a good car.

Engineer, the price you got is due to special privelege. Personally, I STILL wouldn't have bought a Cobalt, but I understand why you did.

I believe you would respect the opinion of Consumer Reports, a dedicated bunch of, well, engineers who have never accepted advertising of any kind in their publication.

CR Model Summary

The Cobalt falls short of the best small cars. Its 2.2-liter engine is spirited but noisy and relatively thirsty. Drivers can expect just 24 mpg overall. The ride is relatively comfortable, but handling isn't agile. The steering is too light at low speeds. The rear seat is not roomy, even by small-car standards. Interior fit and finish is unimpressive. The Cobalt sedan received a score of acceptable in the IIHS side-crash test with the now-standard head-curtain air bags. Electronic stability control is optional for 2008, but only in the sport version that is priced close to the larger Malibu. The sporty SS model returns with a turbocharged engine.

Highs Turning circle.

Lows Engine noise, fuel economy, driving position, seating comfort, fit and finish.

I don't currently have a CR sub, so I can't prove it to either of you here, but I know cars in some depth. Trust me, both the Civic and the Corolla are a clear cut above -- way above, actually -- the Cobalt in just about every area: refinement, reliability, quality, engineering, performance, resale value, you name it!

Also, the Ford Focus is a better vehilce, imho, as a self-professed car lover, than the Chevy Cobalt.

I'm not doubting that the Civic or Corolla are better vehicles....but are they "WORTH" the extra money (which would be 50% above the cost of the Cobalt in my case for the same set of featurees)?

As for the general public with no special pricing, sure, it might be better to get a Corolla or Civic (I love the Civic and think about replacing my Dodge Intrepid with one but my Intrepid runs fine and gets a decent 25mpg average city/highway combo driving and it's paid for). There are just certain cases in which the Cobalt made more sense...and in this case it made more "CENTS" to buy it "this time". Maybe next time, it won't...


Oh, and we bought the Cobalt Coupe, which is an entirely different car than the sedan. As for the mileage, I disagree with the above numbers but I guess it's the way you drive them. When I drive it, it averages 31.5 mpg with combo driving. When the wife drives it (city only), she averages 27.5 mpg which still isn't bad.

I agree that fit and finish could be better, especially with all of the plastic involved. I really dislike GM's use of plastic, especially the hard dash stuff.

Seats are OK, and the rear seat room for the Coupe was more than several cars that we had looked at including the Mitsubishi Eclipse and Hyundai Tiberon.

Finally, this car will be for my daughter in a few years. We figured since we could get a great price deal now, we would pick it up and my wife and I could drive it saving gas over driving the Durango while making sure the car was going to be reliable at the same time. If it proves otherwise over the next 1.5 years, we'll can it and refuse GM ownership again.

 

[Pliablemoose]

All of the Japanese based companies fell prey to consumer demand too, Honda has the Ridgeline, Toyota has the Tundra/Sequoia and Nissan has the Titan/Armada, all great vehicles, but have insanely poor MPG for today's gas prices, unless you need a big vehicle.

The Cobalt is a decent car, particularly the coupe, if it had been on the market a bit longer I would have found a used one for my daughter.

What kills me is that I'd pay $1K extra to purchase a Big 3 vehicle over an import (yes, I know world car/part content issues aside), but the cars are substandard compared with the competition.

Consumer Reports on the Solstice:

This stylish, two-seat roadster is powered by a standard 2.4-liter, four-cylinder engine that sounds and feels harsh. A revised gearbox with a lower third gear rectified some of our complaints. Handling is fairly nimble, and the ride is tolerable. Wind noise is apparent even at modest speeds. Interior fit and finish is unimpressive. Lowering the manual top is a multi-step process that requires getting out of the car. Trunk space and interior storage are virtually nonexistent. The GXP comes with a 260-hp, turbocharged engine and standard stability control. Reliability has been well below average.

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

If you were restructuring GM, how would you merge the divisions?

I'd start with putting Hummer and GMC on the chopping block.

 

[1prophet]

The real reason US automakers promoted the SUV/Truck market for years in lieu of cars and pushed marketing and financing to the max to get us to buy them.


Text

?Car sales might be up, but the average profit margin difference for trucks and cars is massive, so people are concerned about GM?s health,? Bragman said.

?If you have a Chevy Silverado Heavy Duty it?s not uncommon to make a $10,000 profit on each vehicle, but there?s a much smaller profit margin for the average Chevy Cobalt, which is the sort of fuel-efficient car people are looking for right now,? he said. A small car like that might yield only a $100 profit for the manufacturer, he said.[/b]

Ask yourselves this question, you are the CEO of a company, what would you do and propose to the shareholders who only care about short term profits after the accountants run the numbers for you between cars and SUVS/Trucks?

 

[sammyunltd]

Basically, Ford and GM will have their plans sorted out by 2010 (Ford's European models, GM have to bring back the Metro, introduce better cars to replace the Aveo (Metro, anyone?), Astra, G5, Cobalt, etc., the Volt, and if the Volt is successful, they can use its technology to promote their hybrid models or launch all-Electric models with the Volt's technology).

Ford and GM also need to have worthy opponents against the Accord and Camry. The Malibu's fine, but Ford really need to bring the new and sexy European Mondeo over herre and GM needs to replace the Impala with something better or reposition it so that it competes against the Maxima and G35.

Basically, both companies need to overhaul their lineup badly, except the Malibu (although they need better fuel efficiency out of it). They need big plans and big R&D...

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: sammyunltd
Basically, Ford and GM will have their plans sorted out by 2010 (Ford's European models, GM have to bring back the Metro, introduce better cars to replace the Aveo (Metro, anyone?), Astra, G5, Cobalt, etc., the Volt, and if the Volt is successful, they can use its technology to promote their hybrid models or launch all-Electric models with the Volt's technology).

Ford and GM also need to have worthy opponents against the Accord and Camry. The Malibu's fine, but Ford really need to bring the new and sexy European Mondeo over herre and GM needs to replace the Impala with something better or reposition it so that it competes against the Maxima and G35.

Basically, both companies need to overhaul their lineup badly, except the Malibu (although they need better fuel efficiency out of it). They need big plans and big R&D...

Ford is actually doing quite well in looks and ratings with the Fusion. Too bad it's made in Mexico though.

As for the Volt and the likes, if GM isn't careful, Toyota will beat them to the punch and with the brand perception, win that battle too. Hell, Honda is going to introduce cheaper hybrids (next year IIRC) that are supposed to be only $1,000 more than the traditional non hybrid model. GM and Ford had better get moving on the fuel economy stuff or they will be left with nothing.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Skoorb
I don't believe that Toyota/Honda, et al. IN THE US pay factory-line workers the same amount (including benefits) as the Big3 for similar duties. Onus is on somebody to prove me wrong, I just don't buy it. The unions hardly seem to have worked if it's the case.

Text

What about benefits, pensions and job banks?

I'm interested in hearing Vic's response to this question.

I'm not sure what response is expected of me here. Skoorb asked for evidence, so I provided the first google hit.

I'm neither pro- nor anti-unionist, and I've already said that IMO the unions have nothing to do with the automakers' current woes.

I wanted benefits, too, but that is still a meaningful link.

[regarding jaguar reliability] or 50 years. An uncle had xke's in the 60s and early 70s - definitely fix or repair daily long before ford ever bought them. I've heard that the reliability has increased somewhat since ford bought them. A boss had one in the 90s - I was always dropping him off or picking him up at the repair shop.

It is better now. My dad has had two of the X-Types and they've not caused any problems at all in the 50k or so he put on them. That is new for a car these days, though. I don't think they are even jaguars except by the badge. Some of these foreign companies are so diluted. like for example I see somebody driving a saab and I wonder if they realize it's the same damn car as a subaru imprezza plus a few niceties and thousands of dollars to say you drive a "Born by jets". Yeah, whatever!

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: Engineer


As for the Volt and the likes, if GM isn't careful, Toyota will beat them to the punch and with the brand perception, win that battle too. Hell, Honda is going to introduce cheaper hybrids (next year IIRC) that are supposed to be only $1,000 more than the traditional non hybrid model. GM and Ford had better get moving on the fuel economy stuff or they will be left with nothing.

I'm getting the sinking feeling the Volt will retail for around $50K

A company bought the tooling for the Corbin Sparrow & is ramping up production & with the lithium batteries, they're asking $30K for it.

 

[Ktulu]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080707/bs_nm/gm_jobs_dc

Looks like they finally might sell off some of it's redundant brands. About freakin' time if you asked me. Rebadging is almost like a disease that they've never been able to get rid of. If they limited themselves to only Chevy and Cadillac I can't see their cars wouldn't be every bit as reliable and well designed any Toyota or Honda. Here's to a leaner, meaner and greener GM.

The board may also hear management's latest thoughts on whether GM should trim the number of brands it offers in the United States, the people told the paper.

All but the Cadillac and Chevrolet brands, which GM considers core to its business, are undergoing close scrutiny, some other people told the paper.

 

[OutHouse]

did you guys know that last year 2007 GM spent 30 BILLION bucks on retirement benefits?

thats right 30 BILLION on benefits for people who no longer work at GM...

 

[Ktulu]

Originally posted by: Citrix
did you guys know that last year 2007 GM spent 30 BILLION bucks on retirement benefits?

thats right 30 BILLION on benefits for people who no longer work at GM...

Back the bus up. How much?! Sure that doesn't include all the buyouts they've been doing lately?

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: Citrix
did you guys know that last year 2007 GM spent 30 BILLION bucks on retirement benefits?

thats right 30 BILLION on benefits for people who no longer work at GM...

Back the bus up. How much?! Sure that doesn't include all the buyouts they've been doing lately?

Most of that was a ONE TIME lump sum payment to the UNION so that they could ditch retiree health care costs. The Union now handles that. Don' t know what kind of inflation GM built into that figure, but one would hope that they had enough sense to project it as a win for them in long term expenses.....(but somehow, I think they'll screw it up).

 

[Pliablemoose]

second-quarter loss of $15.5 billion

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
second-quarter loss of $15.5 billion

I know I shouldn't be, but I'm absolutely laughing my ass off right now. That's such an absurd amount of money to lose in a single quarter that I can't really mentally grasp it. Their operating losses (the money they lost just to run the company, compared to their income) was more than their entire market capitalization, never mind the further 9bil or so in writeoffs.