You wont be able to kill the dealship problem, jobs bank, work rules without bankruptcy. GM wasted billions getting rid of its last brand.
And UAW would rather have 100% of nothing, than to give back more.
You wont be able to kill the dealship problem, jobs bank, work rules without bankruptcy. GM wasted billions getting rid of its last brand.
And UAW would rather have 100% of nothing, than to give back more.
Yes and no. The new tundra plant in San Antonio got idled for several months due to excess inventory. These people were not laid off. They went to training classes, looks for process improvement, did facility maintenance. Flexible work rules allowed them to be productive and not get laid off.
For temporary layoffs, you need to keep paying the workforce as you dont want to have to retrain new hires.
Jobs bank is still there...
This is the noose the UAW has been hanging itself with for the past 2 decades.
Only good for fleet sales short term as there is not a refueling infrastructure for mass market.
Better off going with downsized turbocharged direct injected engines.
Variable displacement for 8 and 6 cylinders.
6 speed transmission
Start stop engine, with a big enough batter to run the AC at a 2 minute stop light.
In 1957 the VW revealed where the car companies had to go. 55 years ago the end of oil was propounded as a looming disaster. All those years have been wasted by criminal corporations who care more for money and nothing about the future of the earth. Fuck them, let their world die. I don't care if they take me with them.
Stunt
Diamond Member
- Jul 17, 2002
- 9,717
- 2
- 0
GMC is exclusively rebadges; there's not one GMC product not offered through Chev, Pontiac. Pontiac is a sporty brand and commands a younger customer than Chev and should be pushed more towards higher performance brakes, higher horsepower engines and firmer suspension. Pontiac should be competing against Mazda, Subaru, and Nissan. Chevrolet should be more conservative but practical and cost effective competing more with Ford, Toyota, Honda.
I've always liked some of the Saturn products and I like the concept behind the company but they again turned it into a rebadge. I'd like it to be their high tech wing where they compete against Smart, Prius with hybrids, CNG, Propane, Electric, etc. Their manufacturing processes at this company lend itself towards this sort of a shift. Saturn sounds more futuristic, doesn't have the legacy brand/reputation issues like Chevrolet. It should be a brand developed to push to the future with environmentally friendly, low consumption, new ideas. They've always had a bit of this reputation.
So...
Chev - Mainstream product
Pontiac - Sport/Performance line
Saturn - High tech, futuristic products
Caddy - High end, Luxury
No model should be the similar with Chev offering maybe 3 cars(small, mid, large), 1 van, 1 small suv or crossover, one large suv. Pontiac offering 2 cars (mid, large) with one crossover. Saturn offering 3 cars (CNG, decent hybrid, deisel). Caddy offering 2 cars (mid/large), 1 suv.
KB
Diamond Member
- Nov 8, 1999
- 5,406
- 389
- 126
Non-union employees have lower salaries and have a 401k instead of a pension. The pension obligations of GM are 85 billion dollars. This is a big reason they are getting screwed. The bailout is likely to go solely to executive pay and pension before GM folds.
http://www.3news.co.nz/News/Bu...31/cat/52/Default.aspx
http://www.cfo.com/article.cfm/7269298/c_7146188
SP33Demon
Lifer
- Jun 22, 2001
- 27,928
- 143
- 106
1) Convert to full electric and hybrid SUV's by 2011. Their cars are competitive so give them until 2014.
2) Eliminate redundant branding.
3) Get rid of pensions and excessive benefits. If this means cutting ties with UAW through Chapter 7/11, then do it.
4) Replace most upper level management who make monetary decisions.
5) Allow the government to tightly audit this process.
2) Eliminate redundant branding.
3) Get rid of pensions and excessive benefits. If this means cutting ties with UAW through Chapter 7/11, then do it.
4) Replace most upper level management who make monetary decisions.
5) Allow the government to tightly audit this process.
Puffnstuff
Lifer
- Mar 9, 2005
- 16,200
- 4,883
- 136
None of the needed changes to their structure can take place outside of chap 11. I believe that gm doesn't want to go that route because they know that the government can force changes upon them that they won't make on their own. It will force them to give up lots of the perks they consider themselves entitled to even though their own house is burning down around them.
The big 3 lost me as a customer after my last 3 new cars and trucks bearing their name plates. I decided, sitting in the chevy dealers customer waiting area with a room full of other owners waiting for warranty repairs to be completed on their vehicles that I'd had enough of this. During my last phone call to chevy customer service I told the nice lady to tell her boss that I'd be buying japanese from now on.
Right now a toyota tundra and a honda civic grace my driveway. Neither of them has caused me to drive a rental car like my domestics did. I was on a first name basis at enterprise rental car while I owned my ram and silverado. The big 3 have no one to blame but themselves for the situation they're in.
I'm totally opposed to giving them money to continue the status quo especially since I won't even buy one of their cars for myself. Why should my tax dollars go to incompetent companies? Force them into bankruptcy and dictate to them what they will and will not do before doling them any money from the public coffers.
The big 3 lost me as a customer after my last 3 new cars and trucks bearing their name plates. I decided, sitting in the chevy dealers customer waiting area with a room full of other owners waiting for warranty repairs to be completed on their vehicles that I'd had enough of this. During my last phone call to chevy customer service I told the nice lady to tell her boss that I'd be buying japanese from now on.
Right now a toyota tundra and a honda civic grace my driveway. Neither of them has caused me to drive a rental car like my domestics did. I was on a first name basis at enterprise rental car while I owned my ram and silverado. The big 3 have no one to blame but themselves for the situation they're in.
I'm totally opposed to giving them money to continue the status quo especially since I won't even buy one of their cars for myself. Why should my tax dollars go to incompetent companies? Force them into bankruptcy and dictate to them what they will and will not do before doling them any money from the public coffers.
Congress has asked the Big Three to give them a plan. They are in the best position, one would think (I'm re-thinking this notion), to come up with FIXES.
But, will the Big Three do the things necessary to meet falling demand for their products, rising health care costs, rising retirement costs, and overpaid management? What will they do about the excess capacity for auto making world wide? With the Chinese onboard the auto making 'train', won't this demand problem simply get worse?
I'm afraid some of the solutions will have to be IMPOSED by the markets and/or Congress. If Congress intervenes, market forces will not clean out the dead wood.
-Robert
But, will the Big Three do the things necessary to meet falling demand for their products, rising health care costs, rising retirement costs, and overpaid management? What will they do about the excess capacity for auto making world wide? With the Chinese onboard the auto making 'train', won't this demand problem simply get worse?
I'm afraid some of the solutions will have to be IMPOSED by the markets and/or Congress. If Congress intervenes, market forces will not clean out the dead wood.
-Robert
K1052
Elite Member
- Aug 21, 2003
- 52,635
- 46,324
- 136
That would be like ranting at a corpse during the funeral about the chores you want it to do when you get home. In a word: insane.
Problems with the bankruptcy route to restructure for the Big 3:
1) Cost effective Chapter 11 financing not available to them on the open market (or probably not available on any terms whatsoever).
2) A terminal loss of consumer confidence leading even further drastic reductions in sales and therefor revenue making it impossible to sustain even the restructured company. Who among the average buyers are going to take a $30K gamble on if these companies are going to be around to honor their warranties?
I shit you not that the Big 3 will file Chapter 7 and put millions of people out of work during one of the biggest economic downswings in living memory without the government loans. Anyone doing the math on the money lost out of the economy and taxes will find it pretty clear that $25B isn't anything compared to the losses that will be incurred should they fail. Chrysler is however a dead company, it's profitable lines should be folded into GM or Ford.
That's not to say that signifigant reforms from both the management and the unions shouldn't be required for the bridge loans but we need to shelve the righteous indignation for a while before it fucks us all.
- Oct 28, 1999
- 62,484
- 8,345
- 126
Honda, Nissan, and Toyota (until they created Scion) existed on two name plates and it seems to work well for them. You have your "normal" cars, and then a high end division that milks the best tech and luxury and uses it for an upscale product.
There should be Chevy and Caddilac. That's it. Normal stuff and then luxury. No brand dilution, no repeats of the same freaking vehicle four times over. No internal competition or model schism killing sales totals. You have a workforce that only has to be trained on two different brands and parts being engineer for two different brands. You also don't have some spiderweb hierarchy of muddled middle management for each division.
Once that's done, you up your warranty to match that of Hyundai. They have it for powertrain but not for bumper to bumper stuff. That helps build more buyer confidence.
I got no clue what to do about labor or what they are even legally allowed to short of declaring bankrupcy for restructuring. It's obvious they have some glaring money pits of labor costs and their legacy healthcare and retirement benefits are suffocating. Maybe they can take a one time bailout, and turn around give all their legacy costs a lump sum buyout and cut the strings and wipe that liability from the balance sheet.
There should be Chevy and Caddilac. That's it. Normal stuff and then luxury. No brand dilution, no repeats of the same freaking vehicle four times over. No internal competition or model schism killing sales totals. You have a workforce that only has to be trained on two different brands and parts being engineer for two different brands. You also don't have some spiderweb hierarchy of muddled middle management for each division.
Once that's done, you up your warranty to match that of Hyundai. They have it for powertrain but not for bumper to bumper stuff. That helps build more buyer confidence.
I got no clue what to do about labor or what they are even legally allowed to short of declaring bankrupcy for restructuring. It's obvious they have some glaring money pits of labor costs and their legacy healthcare and retirement benefits are suffocating. Maybe they can take a one time bailout, and turn around give all their legacy costs a lump sum buyout and cut the strings and wipe that liability from the balance sheet.
KB
Diamond Member
- Nov 8, 1999
- 5,406
- 389
- 126
I am not saying its a good thing, more that this is a terrible inevitability as GM can't compete with that load kind of load on it. Each vehicle costs $2000 more to make because of the workers salaries and pensions.
The good news for pensioners as I understand it, is that if GM fails a government sponsored pension insurance plan takes over the pensions. So instead the tax payer who props up this money losing entity will be "boned hard and dry in the ass with a 60-grit sandpaper condom".
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/f...F937A25750C0A960958260
MikeyLSU
Platinum Member
- Dec 21, 2005
- 2,747
- 0
- 71
or you can think of it this way. We can bail them out for $25-$50b and they will just as likely fail again in another couple of years unless you really believe they can just "turn it around" while still having the UAW or let them go Ch 11 and bail out that part and let the union go away forever.
The problem is this: WHICH POLITICAL PROPERTY WILL TAKE OWNERSHIP OF THE CONSEQUENCES IF AT LEAST ONE BAILOUT IS NOT TRIED?
Obviously, the Dems don't want to take 'title' to the coming deep recession or any of its constituent parts. A bailout must be tried (it will probably FAIL), and then the Dems can say they gave it a shot.
The Republicans are taking a huge political risk opposing the bailout, and they know it, but they are still standing behind Bush for the most part and their ideology.
The best political move for the Dems is to have a vote in the House and Senate on a proposed bailout bill. If it fails for lack of Republican support, then the Republicans will own the subsequent failure of the Big Three in the eyes of most Americans, IMHO.
BTW, notice that Mitt Romney, favored son of Michigan
OPPOSES the bailout! Imagine if he'd been elected President. The people of Michigan would have wanted to string him up.-Robert
MikeyLSU
Platinum Member
- Dec 21, 2005
- 2,747
- 0
- 71
Originally posted by: chess9
The problem is this: WHICH POLITICAL PROPERTY WILL TAKE OWNERSHIP OF THE CONSEQUENCES IF AT LEAST ONE BAILOUT IS NOT TRIED?
Obviously, the Dems don't want to take 'title' to the coming deep recession or any of its constituent parts. A bailout must be tried (it will probably FAIL), and then the Dems can say they gave it a shot.
The Republicans are taking a huge political risk opposing the bailout, and they know it, but they are still standing behind Bush for the most part and their ideology.
The best political move for the Dems is to have a vote in the House and Senate on a proposed bailout bill. If it fails for lack of Republican support, then the Republicans will own the subsequent failure of the Big Three in the eyes of most Americans, IMHO.
BTW, notice that Mitt Romney, favored son of Michigan
-Robert
To me the republicans should vote how they feel, which is nearly all against the bailout. Let the vote happen, don't filibuster. If the Dems want the bailout, let them pass it and it is on them. Right now the Dems are afraid to pass the bailout without Rep support because it puts them on the line. They don't want to do this without full Senate support.
I'm a Rep, and obviously very against this bailout. I am 100% for a bailout after chapter 11 once the UAW is gone.
But we are a democrocy, let the vote happen and see where we stand.
1. Declare their internal combustion engines a failure and stop producing them.
2. Release the Volt and mass produce it.
3. Come up with other electric vehicles.
4. Hire talented designers who won't make ugly cars and trucks.
2. Release the Volt and mass produce it.
3. Come up with other electric vehicles.
4. Hire talented designers who won't make ugly cars and trucks.
I would fire the upper management and smack the union down. Then file for bankruptcy protection and reorganize.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 386
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter