GM lost $1,227 per vehicle through June, Harbour says

[flashbacck]

Random union question:

Are companies ever required by law to use union labor?

 

[MisterCornell]

Originally posted by: chowderhead
People are blaming the unions and retired folks for the problems that GM has. Well, yes, of course the cost of pensions, work rules and such is causing GM to be not as competitive. But GM has to be at fault as well for not fully funding the pension funds when times were good and instead returning all those years of profits to shareholders.
They say What?s good for the country is good for General Motors, and vice versa. Well, I see GM's problems mirroring what we have currently with the federal government and SS and Medicare. We need reforms there or the federal gov't will be in a similar situation GM is facing.

However, my main thing with GM, Ford and Chysler is quality and durability. I won't buy any more domestic cars until they show they can last. They, especially GM, build so many of the same models across their brands which are crappy cars with bad durability and low resale value. The Japanese cars can sell at a preminum because they are reliable and hold their resale value. American car companies need to get their act together and start making better cars.

You're talking nonsense. GM's pension fund is fully funded. There are laws that mandate that.

The problem is with the health costs, which are more nebulous to define into the future. Nobody knew that healthcare costs would explode at 10-15% a year like they are now, and that adversely affects a company that has lots of retirees like GM.

Also another problem is that in the negotiations with the UAW, there is almost never any give and take. The union just takes, takes, takes, and GM has to give what they want otherwise they will strike and cause the company to collapse. A short strike in 1996 caused GM to lose $2 billion, and since then they they know that they are at the mercy of the union.

 

[desy]

They made crappy cars in the 80's, avg cars in the 90's, and pretty good cars in the 00's
I have no problem buying domestic cause I run the wheels off cars I don't give a damn what the resale is.
Every article I've read said they have closed the gap significantly but I notice down in the states foreign are often as cheap if not cheaper than domestics , not so here in Canada.
Jap cars $$$ over domestics. Kias and Hyundais are cheap tho.
Still can't psycholgically buy one yet😱

I read health costs run about 1/3 of a companies operating costs down in the states.
I assumed currently emplyees but I guesss you keep paying benefits after they left the company? Ouch!

 

[suse920]

Originally posted by: dartworth

Originally posted by: Nik


I would much rather not work for a union and put those "dues" into my own savings account where I'll earn more in interest than what they pay back after retirement. Unions suck.

Again, you do not know what you are talking about.

Trust me Nik. You wouldn't last very long in a union anyways...

People like you are exactly why unions exist...

Watch out nik, dartworth has legions of free webhosted warriors who will sacrifice anything for him.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: flashbacck
Random union question:

Are companies ever required by law to use union labor?

if a majority of the plant votes for a union and you're in a closed-shop state, then yes.

 

[chowderhead]

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: chowderhead
People are blaming the unions and retired folks for the problems that GM has. Well, yes, of course the cost of pensions, work rules and such is causing GM to be not as competitive. But GM has to be at fault as well for not fully funding the pension funds when times were good and instead returning all those years of profits to shareholders.
They say What?s good for the country is good for General Motors, and vice versa. Well, I see GM's problems mirroring what we have currently with the federal government and SS and Medicare. We need reforms there or the federal gov't will be in a similar situation GM is facing.

However, my main thing with GM, Ford and Chysler is quality and durability. I won't buy any more domestic cars until they show they can last. They, especially GM, build so many of the same models across their brands which are crappy cars with bad durability and low resale value. The Japanese cars can sell at a preminum because they are reliable and hold their resale value. American car companies need to get their act together and start making better cars.

American auto makers have gotten their act together, just take a look at recent quality and reliability reports. Their main problem is changing the publics perception. Perception is the key.

not for me. Until I see 10 year old Dodge neons or Buick LaCrosses on the road, I ain't buying. :laugh: The cars don't last and they have horrible resell value especially with all these employee discounting pricing on new cars tanking the used car business. I don't trust the JD powers rating since they switch from 5 years to 3 years for long term reliability and are in bed with the car companies. Perception is based on experiences and the experiences of what others have gone through to help form your reality. My reality is that domestic cars have a long ways to go.

 

[0roo0roo]

blame the union? the only time american car makers didn't suck was when they had no real competition😛 look at german car makers..their unions are even more powerful

 

[MikeMike]

Originally posted by: chowderhead

Originally posted by: Ktulu

Originally posted by: chowderhead
People are blaming the unions and retired folks for the problems that GM has. Well, yes, of course the cost of pensions, work rules and such is causing GM to be not as competitive. But GM has to be at fault as well for not fully funding the pension funds when times were good and instead returning all those years of profits to shareholders.
They say What?s good for the country is good for General Motors, and vice versa. Well, I see GM's problems mirroring what we have currently with the federal government and SS and Medicare. We need reforms there or the federal gov't will be in a similar situation GM is facing.

However, my main thing with GM, Ford and Chysler is quality and durability. I won't buy any more domestic cars until they show they can last. They, especially GM, build so many of the same models across their brands which are crappy cars with bad durability and low resale value. The Japanese cars can sell at a preminum because they are reliable and hold their resale value. American car companies need to get their act together and start making better cars.

American auto makers have gotten their act together, just take a look at recent quality and reliability reports. Their main problem is changing the publics perception. Perception is the key.

not for me. Until I see 10 year old Dodge neons or Buick LaCrosses on the road, I ain't buying. :laugh: The cars don't last and they have horrible resell value especially with all these employee discounting pricing on new cars tanking the used car business. I don't trust the JD powers rating since they switch from 5 years to 3 years for long term reliability and are in bed with the car companies. Perception is based on experiences and the experiences of what others have gone through to help form your reality. My reality is that domestic cars have a long ways to go.

friend drove a 93 S-10. until the Parking cable broke on it, 150k miles or so iirc.
i drove a 98 GMC Jimmy. still runs well
99 Tahoe, with 100k miles on it, cousin now drives it no repairs on it. prolly has 130k on it atleast now

they are out there, and not that rare.

0ooroo0 and look where MB quality is headed 😀 o wait, that might be because they bought out Chrysler.

 

[dirtboy]

Originally posted by: Viper GTS
To all Detroit autoworkers:

What good is your union going to do you when your employer doesn't exist?

Viper GTS

A loss of one or more domestic automakers will have a tremendous impact on our economy. I hope there is some way they can recover from this.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: NFS4
PWNED

Topic Title: GM lost $1,227 per vehicle through June

Good. That's what they get for still producing 8 mpg vehicles.

The H3 isn't much better at 16mpg.

:thumbsdown: GM

 

[dds14u]

I prefer foriegn.

 

[iamwiz82]

This is going to kill Michigan.

Sadly, the average joe on the line at GM only knows that he's getting $25/hr to put a light bulb in. He's not gonna give that up.

 

[RbSX]

Originally posted by: NFS4
PWNED

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArtic...-Aug-2005+RTRS&srch=GM+lost+%241%2c227

GM lost $1,227 per vehicle through June, Harbour says

Reuters / August 29, 2005

DETROIT General Motors lost an average of $1,227 per vehicle in the first half of this year in North America, while cross-town rival Ford Motor Co. lost $139, according to new research from Harbour Consulting.

"GM has two to three people sitting at home for every single person working today, and that has a huge legacy cost impact on them," Laurie Felax, vice president of Harbour Consulting, told an automotive conference on Monday. "It wipes away any profit that they have."

Both GM and Ford are struggling with multibillion-dollar "legacy costs," including generous retiree health care and pension benefits awarded under their restrictive contracts with the United Auto Workers union.

In June, GM also launched its big employee pricing discount program in which any consumer pays the same lower price a GM employee would pay for new cars and trucks. The discounts resulted in blockbuster sales for GM, but some Wall Street analysts said the incentives, which continue through September, are squeezing already low or nonexistent profit margins.

The employee pricing program was matched by Ford and DaimlerChrysler's Chrysler arm in July.

Through the first six months of this year, Chrysler was the only Detroit automaker to make a profit per vehicle, Felax said. It averaged a meager $186 per vehicle, she said.

In sharp contrast, the big three Japanese automakers -- Toyota Motor Corp., Honda Motor Co. Ltd. and Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. -- all earned well over $1,000 per vehicle in North America.

Nissan earned an average of $1,826, Toyota $1,488 and Honda $1,203 per vehicle in the first half of their fiscal 2005, Felax said.

Japanese automakers, relentlessly gaining U.S. market share, have very high profits per vehicle because they have more efficient manufacturing operations and lower legacy costs, Felax said.

The relatively new plants of Japanese automakers in North America have younger workers and a mostly non-unionized work force.

Toyota, Nissan and Honda are also stepping up production capacity in North America, particularly for high-margin pickups, Felax said.

"The (profit numbers) are going to continue to grow as that mix of trucks grow for the Big Three Japanese companies," Felax said.

Whatever, their stock prices are way up, and their sales are WAY up.

I don't think the last year was about returning to profit, it was about garnering consumer confidence.

 

[TuffGuy]

Originally posted by: RyanSengara
Whatever, their stock prices are way up, and their sales are WAY up.

I don't think the last year was about returning to profit, it was about garnering consumer confidence.

But at what cost?

$1,227 per vehicle translates to $1,227,000 for every thousand vehicles sold.

Can they afford to sacrifice a million dollars to sell a thousand cars?

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: RyanSengara

Originally posted by: NFS4
PWNED

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArtic...-Aug-2005+RTRS&srch=GM+lost+%241%2c227

GM lost $1,227 per vehicle through June, Harbour says

Reuters / August 29, 2005

DETROIT General Motors lost an average of $1,227 per vehicle in the first half of this year in North America, while cross-town rival Ford Motor Co. lost $139, according to new research from Harbour Consulting.

"GM has two to three people sitting at home for every single person working today, and that has a huge legacy cost impact on them," Laurie Felax, vice president of Harbour Consulting, told an automotive conference on Monday. "It wipes away any profit that they have."

Both GM and Ford are struggling with multibillion-dollar "legacy costs," including generous retiree health care and pension benefits awarded under their restrictive contracts with the United Auto Workers union.

In June, GM also launched its big employee pricing discount program in which any consumer pays the same lower price a GM employee would pay for new cars and trucks. The discounts resulted in blockbuster sales for GM, but some Wall Street analysts said the incentives, which continue through September, are squeezing already low or nonexistent profit margins.

The employee pricing program was matched by Ford and DaimlerChrysler's Chrysler arm in July.

Through the first six months of this year, Chrysler was the only Detroit automaker to make a profit per vehicle, Felax said. It averaged a meager $186 per vehicle, she said.

In sharp contrast, the big three Japanese automakers -- Toyota Motor Corp., Honda Motor Co. Ltd. and Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. -- all earned well over $1,000 per vehicle in North America.

Nissan earned an average of $1,826, Toyota $1,488 and Honda $1,203 per vehicle in the first half of their fiscal 2005, Felax said.

Japanese automakers, relentlessly gaining U.S. market share, have very high profits per vehicle because they have more efficient manufacturing operations and lower legacy costs, Felax said.

The relatively new plants of Japanese automakers in North America have younger workers and a mostly non-unionized work force.

Toyota, Nissan and Honda are also stepping up production capacity in North America, particularly for high-margin pickups, Felax said.

"The (profit numbers) are going to continue to grow as that mix of trucks grow for the Big Three Japanese companies," Felax said.

Whatever, their stock prices are way up, and their sales are WAY up.

I don't think the last year was about returning to profit, it was about garnering consumer confidence.

Huh huh what? What good are boosted sales if you are losing $1227 per vehicle. You sell more vehicle and you LOSE MORE MONEY!!!!! My dog could understand that.

If I sell 100 hot dogs at a profit of $2.00 a piece in 2004, should I be happy that I sell 300 hot dogs in 2005 at a loss of $1.00 a piece when I'm already strapped for cash?

And selling your cars with thousands of dollars of discounts doesn't boost customer confidence. It just strokes their ego into thinking that they are getting a good deal.

 

[FeuerFrei]

If GMs losing $$ on a sale, I wonder if the dealers are breaking even or profiting? Maybe GM's sucking it up to make their dealers happy.

 

[MikeMike]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: RyanSengara

Originally posted by: NFS4
PWNED

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArtic...-Aug-2005+RTRS&srch=GM+lost+%241%2c227

GM lost $1,227 per vehicle through June, Harbour says

Reuters / August 29, 2005

DETROIT General Motors lost an average of $1,227 per vehicle in the first half of this year in North America, while cross-town rival Ford Motor Co. lost $139, according to new research from Harbour Consulting.

"GM has two to three people sitting at home for every single person working today, and that has a huge legacy cost impact on them," Laurie Felax, vice president of Harbour Consulting, told an automotive conference on Monday. "It wipes away any profit that they have."

Both GM and Ford are struggling with multibillion-dollar "legacy costs," including generous retiree health care and pension benefits awarded under their restrictive contracts with the United Auto Workers union.

In June, GM also launched its big employee pricing discount program in which any consumer pays the same lower price a GM employee would pay for new cars and trucks. The discounts resulted in blockbuster sales for GM, but some Wall Street analysts said the incentives, which continue through September, are squeezing already low or nonexistent profit margins.

The employee pricing program was matched by Ford and DaimlerChrysler's Chrysler arm in July.

Through the first six months of this year, Chrysler was the only Detroit automaker to make a profit per vehicle, Felax said. It averaged a meager $186 per vehicle, she said.

In sharp contrast, the big three Japanese automakers -- Toyota Motor Corp., Honda Motor Co. Ltd. and Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. -- all earned well over $1,000 per vehicle in North America.

Nissan earned an average of $1,826, Toyota $1,488 and Honda $1,203 per vehicle in the first half of their fiscal 2005, Felax said.

Japanese automakers, relentlessly gaining U.S. market share, have very high profits per vehicle because they have more efficient manufacturing operations and lower legacy costs, Felax said.

The relatively new plants of Japanese automakers in North America have younger workers and a mostly non-unionized work force.

Toyota, Nissan and Honda are also stepping up production capacity in North America, particularly for high-margin pickups, Felax said.

"The (profit numbers) are going to continue to grow as that mix of trucks grow for the Big Three Japanese companies," Felax said.

Whatever, their stock prices are way up, and their sales are WAY up.

I don't think the last year was about returning to profit, it was about garnering consumer confidence.

Huh huh what? What good are boosted sales if you are losing $1227 per vehicle. You sell more vehicle and you LOSE MORE MONEY!!!!! My dog could understand that.

If I sell 100 hot dogs at a profit of $2.00 a piece in 2004, should I be happy that I sell 300 hot dogs in 2005 at a loss of $1.00 a piece when I'm already strapped for cash?

And selling your cars with thousands of dollars of discounts doesn't boost customer confidence. It just strokes their ego into thinking that they are getting a good deal.

however it lowered inventory, taken into that Loss has to be inventory tax, and with less vehicles on their hands, that means less tax to be charged to them, all vehicles sitting do is cost the manuf, and dealership money by being taxed.

 

[RbSX]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: RyanSengara

Originally posted by: NFS4
PWNED

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArtic...-Aug-2005+RTRS&srch=GM+lost+%241%2c227

GM lost $1,227 per vehicle through June, Harbour says

Reuters / August 29, 2005

DETROIT General Motors lost an average of $1,227 per vehicle in the first half of this year in North America, while cross-town rival Ford Motor Co. lost $139, according to new research from Harbour Consulting.

"GM has two to three people sitting at home for every single person working today, and that has a huge legacy cost impact on them," Laurie Felax, vice president of Harbour Consulting, told an automotive conference on Monday. "It wipes away any profit that they have."

Both GM and Ford are struggling with multibillion-dollar "legacy costs," including generous retiree health care and pension benefits awarded under their restrictive contracts with the United Auto Workers union.

In June, GM also launched its big employee pricing discount program in which any consumer pays the same lower price a GM employee would pay for new cars and trucks. The discounts resulted in blockbuster sales for GM, but some Wall Street analysts said the incentives, which continue through September, are squeezing already low or nonexistent profit margins.

The employee pricing program was matched by Ford and DaimlerChrysler's Chrysler arm in July.

Through the first six months of this year, Chrysler was the only Detroit automaker to make a profit per vehicle, Felax said. It averaged a meager $186 per vehicle, she said.

In sharp contrast, the big three Japanese automakers -- Toyota Motor Corp., Honda Motor Co. Ltd. and Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. -- all earned well over $1,000 per vehicle in North America.

Nissan earned an average of $1,826, Toyota $1,488 and Honda $1,203 per vehicle in the first half of their fiscal 2005, Felax said.

Japanese automakers, relentlessly gaining U.S. market share, have very high profits per vehicle because they have more efficient manufacturing operations and lower legacy costs, Felax said.

The relatively new plants of Japanese automakers in North America have younger workers and a mostly non-unionized work force.

Toyota, Nissan and Honda are also stepping up production capacity in North America, particularly for high-margin pickups, Felax said.

"The (profit numbers) are going to continue to grow as that mix of trucks grow for the Big Three Japanese companies," Felax said.

Whatever, their stock prices are way up, and their sales are WAY up.

I don't think the last year was about returning to profit, it was about garnering consumer confidence.

Huh huh what? What good are boosted sales if you are losing $1227 per vehicle. You sell more vehicle and you LOSE MORE MONEY!!!!! My dog could understand that.

If I sell 100 hot dogs at a profit of $2.00 a piece in 2004, should I be happy that I sell 300 hot dogs in 2005 at a loss of $1.00 a piece when I'm already strapped for cash?

And selling your cars with thousands of dollars of discounts doesn't boost customer confidence. It just strokes their ego into thinking that they are getting a good deal.

Again, when all of these people realize that the cars they are driving aren't TOTAL shat.. they'll start considering buying another one, or one for their wife, or their son, or their daughter.

Right now no one considers domestic cars. So this is exactly what they needed, it's not an immediate solution, but it will help in the long term.

 

[ajf3]

Originally posted by: desy
They made crappy cars in the 80's, avg cars in the 90's, and pretty good cars in the 00's

Bull... I swore off domestics after my 2000 Ply Voyagers tranny blew after 4 years at around 110k...

The people at the dealership and corp both had the same attitude - like I was crazy to expect to get more than 100k out of a tranny - one actually said yeah - that's about how long they're good for! At the time, my second car was a Camry with 230k. ORIGINAL tranny. ORIGINAL CLUTCH, etc.

Detroit is FAT. They build crap cars that don't last because they know there are significant hordes of sheeple who will go right back out and buy another Ford or Chevy cause that what their pops did.

 

[shilala]

Originally posted by: Deeko
Fvcking unions.

Yeah, you're right, it's the unions. Folks shouldn't be paid a fair wage or have a pension.
CEO's should definately be paid 5 million a year and retire with multimillion dollar severances.
Check the numbers before shooting off your mouth, fvckstick.
Ignorance can be cured, but stupidity is forever.

 

[Ktulu]

Originally posted by: ajf3

Originally posted by: desy
They made crappy cars in the 80's, avg cars in the 90's, and pretty good cars in the 00's

Bull... I swore off domestics after my 2000 Ply Voyagers tranny blew after 4 years at around 110k...

The people at the dealership and corp both had the same attitude - like I was crazy to expect to get more than 100k out of a tranny - one actually said yeah - that's about how long they're good for! At the time, my second car was a Camry with 230k. ORIGINAL tranny. ORIGINAL CLUTCH, etc.

Detroit is FAT. They build crap cars that don't last because they know there are significant hordes of sheeple who will go right back out and buy another Ford or Chevy cause that what their pops did.

What did you expect from them to do at 100k, you were obviously out of your warranty. Any other manufacturer would have treated you the same way

 

[FeuerFrei]

Originally posted by: shilala

Originally posted by: Deeko
Fvcking unions.

Yeah, you're right, it's the unions. Folks shouldn't be paid a fair wage or have a pension.
CEO's should definately be paid 5 million a year and retire with multimillion dollar severances.
Check the numbers before shooting off your mouth, fvckstick.
Ignorance can be cured, but stupidity is forever.

Market decides a fair wage. Not a stupid union. CEOs are more valuable so they get big bucks.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: chowderhead
they have horrible resell value especially with all these employee discounting pricing on new cars tanking the used car business

i'm sorry, but you're an idiot if your concern is that resale value will be $2000 less when you just saved $5000 up front. anyone who uses MSRP on a car that isn't and never has sold at MSRP to calculate % resale value is truly a moron.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Huh huh what? What good are boosted sales if you are losing $1227 per vehicle. You sell more vehicle and you LOSE MORE MONEY!!!!! My dog could understand that.

If I sell 100 hot dogs at a profit of $2.00 a piece in 2004, should I be happy that I sell 300 hot dogs in 2005 at a loss of $1.00 a piece when I'm already strapped for cash?

And selling your cars with thousands of dollars of discounts doesn't boost customer confidence. It just strokes their ego into thinking that they are getting a good deal.

please take an introductory economics course and understand that what they are doing might be their most profitable strategy given the fixed costs they face, and that if they can cover all of their variable costs and some of their fixed costs they are better off than merely going out of business.

to put it in simple language: lets say you've got rent on a hot dog cart, of $100. and you can buy hot dogs at $0.95. you'd have to sell 2000 hot dogs to break even. but the market will only bear 1000 hot dogs. do you sell all 1000 hot dogs and cover $50 of your fixed costs, or do you sell nothing and pay up the $100 for fixed costs?

 

[MikeMike]

Originally posted by: ajf3

Originally posted by: desy
They made crappy cars in the 80's, avg cars in the 90's, and pretty good cars in the 00's

Bull... I swore off domestics after my 2000 Ply Voyagers tranny blew after 4 years at around 110k...

The people at the dealership and corp both had the same attitude - like I was crazy to expect to get more than 100k out of a tranny - one actually said yeah - that's about how long they're good for! At the time, my second car was a Camry with 230k. ORIGINAL tranny. ORIGINAL CLUTCH, etc.

Detroit is FAT. They build crap cars that don't last because they know there are significant hordes of sheeple who will go right back out and buy another Ford or Chevy cause that what their pops did.

so hmm since you had a bad experience on a transmission of a company that had been known for bad trannies, you swore off GM and Ford. and now DC is no longer considered fully domestic, so you swore of foreign vehicles too. your screwed dude.