U.S. Expected to Own 70% of Restructured G.M.

[Paddington]

Originally posted by: Nitemare
Has every board member and decision maker for these auto makers been fired yet?

To what end? Why wipe out people with decades of knowledge and hands on experience. It's not that easy to run an American car company.

Consider the Wall St. geniuses at Cerberus. They thought, "Shit, we have all these billions of dollars, making money hand over fist. We must be the smartest people in the world. We can takeover one of these Detroit auto majors, run by what must be absolute retards, and make a killing with our superior business skills!"

We all know how that turned out.

What they found out is that it's about 10x harder to run a car company, than it is to shuffle spreadsheets to make your billions on Wall Street. You need to know the nuts and bolts technology. You've got fierce overseas competition to deal with. You have unions, which can pretty much ruin the company with a prolonged strike unless you give in to their demands. It's extremely tricky.

Maybe Rick Wagoner at GM did deserve to go, though a lot of the auto industry analysts look back on him now and say that he did a good job steering GM through pretty dire straights since 2005, while preserving many people's jobs, instead of just tanking a blunt knife and making huge cuts all over the place with no guarantee of success. But to wipe out the rest of the management would be pure idiocy.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Paddington

Originally posted by: Nitemare
Has every board member and decision maker for these auto makers been fired yet?

To what end? Why wipe out people with decades of knowledge and hands on experience. It's not that easy to run an American car company.

Consider the Wall St. geniuses at Cerberus. They thought, "Shit, we have all these billions of dollars, making money hand over fist. We must be the smartest people in the world. We can takeover one of these Detroit auto majors, run by what must be absolute retards, and make a killing with our superior business skills!"

We all know how that turned out.

What they found out is that it's about 10x harder to run a car company, than it is to shuffle spreadsheets to make your billions on Wall Street. You need to know the nuts and bolts technology. You've got fierce overseas competition to deal with. You have unions, which can pretty much ruin the company with a prolonged strike unless you give in to their demands. It's extremely tricky.

Maybe Rick Wagoner at GM did deserve to go, though a lot of the auto industry analysts look back on him now and say that he did a good job steering GM through pretty dire straights since 2005, while preserving many people's jobs, instead of just tanking a blunt knife and making huge cuts all over the place with no guarantee of success. But to wipe out the rest of the management would be pure idiocy.

Maybe you are right, but you still have to hold those people that made retarded decisions responsible. Same thing for the banking industry bailout.

Most of the fierce overseas competition that you speak of are ran by overseas people but their production is mostly Made in the USA. The decades of knowledge and hands on experience has done what? They have had 80-90 years to increase the mpg of cars yet have not/ nor will not until the government makes them.

People started buying foreign cars because they did not need a new transmission every 100k miles like their domestic counterparts. The total cost of ownership was way lower because they did not have to in fact Fix Or Repair Daily. The government needs to get rid of the unions while they can.

Rick put a bandaid on a gaping wound that has went untreated for 20+ years.

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: woodie1

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
America..f-ya!!! Well America has been on a steady decline anyway so this was all but inevitable. Once other nations like China achieve military parity with the US, the glory days of waving the US flag around and bullying smaller nations will come to an end. A cool sight I saw today was someone with a big US flag waving from their Toyota Camry..simply beautiful. I'm sure the Japanese must be laughing their asses off.

Isn't Kentucky still one of the 50 States? Did Toyota close their Georgetown, KY, plant?

So what if they assemble cars in the US? Samsung asembles most of it's North American televisions in Mexico, does that make it a Mexican company? The money Toyota, Honda etc make all goes back to their shareholders and Japanese employees back home. But more to the point: Waving an American flag from an automobile designed by JAPANESE is hilarious! What are they so proud of? That a bunch of American grunts can assemble something? A monkey can do that. The brains behind the Toyota Camry (from which he so proudly waved his American flag) are located in Japan. Americans should be ashamed - a superpower that can't even compete against S. Korean cars anymore let alone Japanese and German (which are on an entirely different level).

Toyota stock is sold on the NYSE. Not all shareholder are Japanese.

Not all Toyota employees are in Japan, they have a number of plants located around the USA.

The days when big internationals were 'American" or "Japanese" etc are long gone. Nobody knows who, from what country, owns these things etc. Back in the 80's it was often said by various finance scholars that almost all companies were ultimately owned by the Royal Dutch Petroleum Company (IIRC, now called Shell). For all we know, it or Ford, could be majority owned by Saudi money funneled through various funds and/or other holdings.

IDK how you can be so sure who works on the design teams and how they are all Japanese/non-Americans either.

Fern

Doesn't matter if they are international corporations, where they are headquartered and founded is what counts. Not only that, if the top executives are all or mainly composed of one ethnic group as well as the shareholders, it becomes that much more evident:

Type Public (TYO: 7203) & (NYSE: TM)
Founded 1937
Founder(s) Kiichiro Toyoda
Headquarters Flag of Japan Toyota City, Japan;
Tokyo, Japan
Key people Kiichiro Toyoda (Founder),
Fujio Cho (Chairman and Representative Director),
Katsuhiro Nakagawa (Vice chairman and Representative Director),
Katsuaki Watanabe (President and Representative Director),
Shoichiro Toyoda (Honorary Chairman)[1]


Oh and the top shareholders:

[ Major Shareholders ] (Top 10 Largest Shareholders)
(As of March 31, 2008)
Names Number of shares held
(thousands of shares)
The Master Trust Bank of Japan, Ltd. 217,049
Japan Trustee Services Bank, Ltd. 216,780
Toyota Industries Corporation 200,195
Nippon Life Insurance Company 131,653
Hero and Company 121,480
Trust & Custody Services Bank, Ltd. 105,072
State Street Bank and Trust Company 97,459
Tokio Marine & Nichido Fire Insurance Co., Ltd. 83,821
Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co, Ltd. 65,166
DENSO CORPORATION 58,678


Looks majority Japanese to me on that list. No matter how many R&D centers or assembly plants the company puts outside of Japan, it will always be a Japanese company. Just like GM/Ford/Chrysler will always be failed American companies.

 

[woodie1]

Doesn't matter if they are international corporations, where they are headquartered and founded is what counts. Not only that, if the top executives are all or mainly composed of one ethnic group as well as the shareholders, it becomes that much more evident:

Type Public (TYO: 7203) & (NYSE: TM)
Founded 1937
Founder(s) Kiichiro Toyoda
Headquarters Flag of Japan Toyota City, Japan;
Tokyo, Japan
Key people Kiichiro Toyoda (Founder),
Fujio Cho (Chairman and Representative Director),
Katsuhiro Nakagawa (Vice chairman and Representative Director),
Katsuaki Watanabe (President and Representative Director),
Shoichiro Toyoda (Honorary Chairman)[1]


Oh and the top shareholders:

[ Major Shareholders ] (Top 10 Largest Shareholders)
(As of March 31, 2008)
Names Number of shares held
(thousands of shares)
The Master Trust Bank of Japan, Ltd. 217,049
Japan Trustee Services Bank, Ltd. 216,780
Toyota Industries Corporation 200,195
Nippon Life Insurance Company 131,653
Hero and Company 121,480
Trust & Custody Services Bank, Ltd. 105,072
State Street Bank and Trust Company 97,459
Tokio Marine & Nichido Fire Insurance Co., Ltd. 83,821
Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co, Ltd. 65,166
DENSO CORPORATION 58,678


Looks majority Japanese to me on that list. No matter how many R&D centers or assembly plants the company puts outside of Japan, it will always be a Japanese company. Just like GM/Ford/Chrysler will always be failed American companies.

lol ... You are a real tool of the UAW. I hope you are properly compensated by them.

 

[Cattlegod]

they just reached a deal with the bondholders, all trading halted for GM www.cnbc.com

 

[Cattlegod]

Anyone know what the 363 sale means for common shareholders? Trading started back up btw.


http://www.streetinsider.com/P...+Proposal/4688556.html

Here is the SEC filing if anyone cares:

http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/...19312509119940/d8k.htm

 

[trooper11]

After all of this, it just goes to show just how well off Ford is.


Think about it, GM and Chrysler both were in dire straits, the government swoops in with loans that are meant to keep these companies out of bankruptcy and return them to health. At the same time, the government gets a large amount of power over these companies under the same guise of keeping them alive and brining them back from the brink.

Fast forward to today and both companies went into bankruptcy anyway and are now at the mercy of the government going forward for the forseeable future. Ford, on the other hand, sticks it out, works within the market for a solution instead of asking for our money (the tax payers), and is coming out ahead. sure, times are still tough, but they have made great strides to weather the storm and come out much better once it passes. I hope Ford sees continued success as an example of how the market can fix these issues when neccesary.


Im not quite sure how giving GM and Chrysler the loans/bailouts we have up to this point really did anything positive. To me, if they were both looking at bankruptcy anyway, then I say let them move to that as quickly as possible so that the restructuring could have begun much sooner then it has. Maybe the government could have waited to step in until that point, instead of trying to avoid the unavoidable.

 

[Ktulu]

Originally posted by: trooper11
After all of this, it just goes to show just how well off Ford is.


Think about it, GM and Chrysler both were in dire straits, the government swoops in with loans that are meant to keep these companies out of bankruptcy and return them to health. At the same time, the government gets a large amount of power over these companies under the same guise of keeping them alive and brining them back from the brink.

Fast forward to today and both companies went into bankruptcy anyway and are now at the mercy of the government going forward for the forseeable future. Ford, on the other hand, sticks it out, works within the market for a solution instead of asking for our money (the tax payers), and is coming out ahead. sure, times are still tough, but they have made great strides to weather the storm and come out much better once it passes. I hope Ford sees continued success as an example of how the market can fix these issues when neccesary.


Im not quite sure how giving GM and Chrysler the loans/bailouts we have up to this point really did anything positive. To me, if they were both looking at bankruptcy anyway, then I say let them move to that as quickly as possible so that the restructuring could have begun much sooner then it has. Maybe the government could have waited to step in until that point, instead of trying to avoid the unavoidable.

IIRC Ford mortgaged alot of their assets just before the economy took a shit on the auto industry. Perfect timing if you ask me. Had they not they would have been in the same position GM and Chrysler are in now.

 

[trooper11]

Originally posted by: Ktulu

IIRC Ford mortgaged alot of their assets just before the economy took a shit on the auto industry. Perfect timing if you ask me. Had they not they would have been in the same position GM and Chrysler are in now.

Exactly, they made the right moves and it paid off. If this was simply a matter of choice, they we would want all the companies to do well for the sake of competition, but it just seems like throwing all the money we have at the problems of GM and Chrysler were wasteful, knee-jerk responses during a time of fear about the economy as a whole.

Instead, they both ended up where they thought they would be months ago, despite the government's efforts. Going the bailout route just seems to have been one of those risks that didnt need to taken. Its good to see one American company that can be an example of making the market work properly.

 

[Aikouka]

Originally posted by: techs
Yes, because having a US owned auto industry would be bad. I guess when we need to replace the HUMVEE we can just ask China to develop and build it.

Psst, we're already replacing the HUMVEE .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JLTV

 

[Xellos2099]

Originally posted by: trooper11

Originally posted by: Ktulu

IIRC Ford mortgaged alot of their assets just before the economy took a shit on the auto industry. Perfect timing if you ask me. Had they not they would have been in the same position GM and Chrysler are in now.

Exactly, they made the right moves and it paid off. If this was simply a matter of choice, they we would want all the companies to do well for the sake of competition, but it just seems like throwing all the money we have at the problems of GM and Chrysler were wasteful, knee-jerk responses during a time of fear about the economy as a whole.

Instead, they both ended up where they thought they would be months ago, despite the government's efforts. Going the bailout route just seems to have been one of those risks that didnt need to taken. Its good to see one American company that can be an example of making the market work properly.

I think it has more to do with lower their legacy cost of the worker union that saved them.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Ktulu
I am absolutely confident that no matter what car you drive you are the type of person that carries a heavy bias against anything domestic. So what you say does not surprise me one bit.

http://www.edmunds.com/insidel...paros/articleId=124091
http://www.motortrend.com/road...nd_road_test_data.html
http://money.cnn.com/galleries...ibu_review//index.html

The Malibu might not win every comparo or have everything everyone wants but it's a damn good car and I'll take the word over pros in the industry over some biased individual online. The same goes for many other GM's and Fords.

So I take it you've not driven one? Or are you one of those people that doesn't notice blind spots the size of a semi because you don't bother to check them before changing lanes? I'm 6'4" and I couldn't even see over the trunk while trying to back up. The function of things like power windows and temperature control (which it didn't have... WTF?) were inferior to my 1990 Acura Integra. It didn't even have any cupholders. All of these were things I tried to use in my four-day stint with the car. So yes, based on my experience, I am biased against the Malibu.

My rental experiences always seem to be with American cars, so perhaps that's building an overall bias against them. But that would be because they are very poorly engineered. I have to ask myself if anyone tried to drive it before they built it. Or, if they had, if they had driven a comparable Toyota or Honda to see if their car passed muster. My 2008 Prius was the same price as the 2008 Malibu. I have a hard time believing anyone who was capable of making an objective choice between the two would ever choose the Malibu.

Now that I acknowledge your fallacious appeal to authority and click on your junk links, I see the following:

1ST PLACE: TOYOTA CAMRY SE V-6
Finest all-around mix of power, handling, room, and bells and whistles-no wonder it was our 2007 Car of the Year.

2ND PLACE: CHEVROLET MALIBU LTZ
Great combination of sport and luxury bettered only by Camry. America's best and segment's best-looking.

Hmm, imagine that - exactly what I said. Have YOU driven both of them? It sounds like you're one of those people who are biased against foreign cars.

The idiocy of your comparison between a Prius and a Malibu is astounding. I own a Toyota made subcompact (specifically a Lexus IS350) and I would choose a Malibu over a Prius without a 2nd thought. I'm not too keen on driving an "appliance", at least the Malibu is interesting to drive, unlike the Prius. But hey, if a skinny tires, joystick steering, and 100 horsepower floats your boat, the Prius is the car for you.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
So I take it you've not driven one? Or are you one of those people that doesn't notice blind spots the size of a semi because you don't bother to check them before changing lanes? I'm 6'4" and I couldn't even see over the trunk while trying to back up. The function of things like power windows and temperature control (which it didn't have... WTF?) were inferior to my 1990 Acura Integra. It didn't even have any cupholders. All of these were things I tried to use in my four-day stint with the car. So yes, based on my experience, I am biased against the Malibu.

Looks like it's got cup holders to me........

 

[nullzero]

So its official government motors, I wonder what is next.... Sounds like communist Russia as the days go by.

 

[boomerang]

Originally posted by: Corn

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
So I take it you've not driven one? Or are you one of those people that doesn't notice blind spots the size of a semi because you don't bother to check them before changing lanes? I'm 6'4" and I couldn't even see over the trunk while trying to back up. The function of things like power windows and temperature control (which it didn't have... WTF?) were inferior to my 1990 Acura Integra. It didn't even have any cupholders. All of these were things I tried to use in my four-day stint with the car. So yes, based on my experience, I am biased against the Malibu.

Looks like it's got cup holders to me........

Well, you see there's a sliding door that may have been closed so he didn't see them. They try to make cars simple and easy to figure out, but there's a certain percentage of the population for whom they're still going to be too complex. As a manufacturer, what are you going to do?

 

[Paratus]

Originally posted by: Corn

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
So I take it you've not driven one? Or are you one of those people that doesn't notice blind spots the size of a semi because you don't bother to check them before changing lanes? I'm 6'4" and I couldn't even see over the trunk while trying to back up. The function of things like power windows and temperature control (which it didn't have... WTF?) were inferior to my 1990 Acura Integra. It didn't even have any cupholders. All of these were things I tried to use in my four-day stint with the car. So yes, based on my experience, I am biased against the Malibu.

Looks like it's got cup holders to me........

Yup it's got 6. 2 in the center console, 1 in each front door and 2 in a flip out in the rear.

The temeperature controls are low on the center stack. A knob for the lower models, or buttons for the climate control on my 09LTZ model.

I chose it over the Camry, Accord, Civic, Mazda 3, Acura TSX, and IS250. The interior is nicer than any of those cars, excluding the IS and about equal to the TSX.

It also gets better mileage (22/33), as quite frankly the Japanese mid size gas powered sedans are falling behind thier American competition (Malibu and Ford Fusion), in MPG.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Paddington
At the end of the day, the biggest problem at GM remains their labor costs. The product is improved, and there's several I would consider. But in the auto industry, profit margins are fairly slim. GM's wage + benefit deficit means that they make no money on cars sold essentially. I mean no GM worker has been laid off in decades, despite several plants shuttered. Those people all went to the jobs bank where they collected 95% of their pay for several years, before eventually being bought out of their contracts - voluntarily - to the tune of $50,000 - $400,000 packages. People bitch and whine about CEO golden parachutes, but this was much worse because it was on such a huge scale.

Obama's plan does nothing to challenge the root cause of GM's problems, which is the ridiculous wage and benefit package of the employees. They still haven't taken as much of a "haircut" as they would have in a real bankruptcy court, or a real pre-bankruptcy settlement. They know Obama will take care of them, which he has. GM's biggest problem going into the future will still remain: overpaid grunts on the assembly line. In what kind of world can a monkey who cranks a wrench make $80,000+ in wages and benefits? Not the prosperous one of 5 years ago, and probably not the much tighter one we're heading into.

You kids need to stop debating about Japanese cars and American cars and which is better, and listen to this man.

Big 3's problem is not the car, it's they are handicapped by UAW. And it's not just the salary cost, it is the time/money wasted negotiating with UAW, and the inflexibility UAW introduced that made Big 3 not nimble enough to adjust to the changing market place and the economy.

Normally when company start to lose market share, you layoff people, close office/plants, focus on areas/products you are profitable in. And for big 3, all that involves UAW. Yeah UAW makes concession, only after months and years of negotiation, when it is way too late and bankruptcy, for GM/Chrysler is unavoidable. Big 3 should have made adjustments years ago to be competitive.

And yes, UAW is still going to be powerful after the bankruptcy reorg. When all these media frenzy dies down, they will have a board seat, they still have the most control outside of government. How the hell GM is gonna be a for profit company when employee and political benefit comes first?

At this rate, US will never be competitve in making and selling cars. This industry (unless Ford survive and does well), will be there to serve the workers and not there to make the best car or to be profitable.

 

[boomerang]

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: Paddington
At the end of the day, the biggest problem at GM remains their labor costs. The product is improved, and there's several I would consider. But in the auto industry, profit margins are fairly slim. GM's wage + benefit deficit means that they make no money on cars sold essentially. I mean no GM worker has been laid off in decades, despite several plants shuttered. Those people all went to the jobs bank where they collected 95% of their pay for several years, before eventually being bought out of their contracts - voluntarily - to the tune of $50,000 - $400,000 packages. People bitch and whine about CEO golden parachutes, but this was much worse because it was on such a huge scale.

Obama's plan does nothing to challenge the root cause of GM's problems, which is the ridiculous wage and benefit package of the employees. They still haven't taken as much of a "haircut" as they would have in a real bankruptcy court, or a real pre-bankruptcy settlement. They know Obama will take care of them, which he has. GM's biggest problem going into the future will still remain: overpaid grunts on the assembly line. In what kind of world can a monkey who cranks a wrench make $80,000+ in wages and benefits? Not the prosperous one of 5 years ago, and probably not the much tighter one we're heading into.

You kids need to stop debating about Japanese cars and American cars and which is better, and listen to this man.

Big 3's problem is not the car, it's they are handicapped by UAW. And it's not just the salary cost, it is the time/money wasted negotiating with UAW, and the inflexibility UAW introduced that made Big 3 not nimble enough to adjust to the changing market place and the economy.

Normally when company start to lose market share, you layoff people, close office/plants, focus on areas/products you are profitable in. And for big 3, all that involves UAW. Yeah UAW makes concession, only after months and years of negotiation, when it is way too late and bankruptcy, for GM/Chrysler is unavoidable. Big 3 should have made adjustments years ago to be competitive.

And yes, UAW is still going to be powerful after the bankruptcy reorg. When all these media frenzy dies down, they will have a board seat, they still have the most control outside of government. How the hell GM is gonna be a for profit company when employee and political benefit comes first?

At this rate, US will never be competitve in making and selling cars. This industry (unless Ford survive and does well), will be there to serve the workers and not there to make the best car or to be profitable.

Well, we could listen except he's wrong. You then tell us that if Ford does well they will not be serving the workers. Workers represented by the same union.

The fail is great in this one. I don't know how you guys can spout off all this personal opinion and purport it to be gospel.

$400,000 packages! Hell, might as well exaggerate it up to $6 million. LOL!

If you want to bash them, bash them with facts. Not biased bullshit your daddy told you when you were growing up. Or worse, high and mighty bullshit your tenured Professor spouted out while he scratched his nuts in class.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Corn
The idiocy of your comparison between a Prius and a Malibu is astounding. I own a Toyota made subcompact (specifically a Lexus IS350) and I would choose a Malibu over a Prius without a 2nd thought. I'm not too keen on driving an "appliance", at least the Malibu is interesting to drive, unlike the Prius. But hey, if a skinny tires, joystick steering, and 100 horsepower floats your boat, the Prius is the car for you.

Ah, another genius who thinks anyone who disagrees with his opinions is an idiot. for you. Obviously you've never driven a Prius or a Malibu and are just so important that you feel the need to trumpet your ignorance as fact. Thanks for sharing.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Corn
Looks like it's got cup holders to me........

Must have been a stripped down fleet car because none of the trim packages looks like what I was driving. *shrug*

 

[Xellos2099]

Ford bought out a lot of the contract and that is why Ford is still standing.

 

[StageLeft]

Finally the clowns who were still buying stock got the memo. Today GM's stock down 21% so far, below $1 for first time in 76 years. Nevermind the company has been warning for many many weeks it would file for BK.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Corn
The idiocy of your comparison between a Prius and a Malibu is astounding. I own a Toyota made subcompact (specifically a Lexus IS350) and I would choose a Malibu over a Prius without a 2nd thought. I'm not too keen on driving an "appliance", at least the Malibu is interesting to drive, unlike the Prius. But hey, if a skinny tires, joystick steering, and 100 horsepower floats your boat, the Prius is the car for you.

Ah, another genius who thinks anyone who disagrees with his opinions is an idiot. for you. Obviously you've never driven a Prius or a Malibu and are just so important that you feel the need to trumpet your ignorance as fact. Thanks for sharing.

Firstly I didn't call you an idiot, I stated your comparison of the Prius and Malibu was idiotic. They are both different cars aimed at different targets. The Malibu is a full size family sedan, the Prius is a gas saving appliance with a hatchback. If you'd like to argue that your Prius doesn't have skinny tires, numb electronic steering, and 110 horsepower, I encourge you to do so. I've driven both cars as rentals for extended periods of time. I found cup holders and climate controls in both vehicles and didn't notice any glaring blind spots in either as well.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Corn
Firstly I didn't call you an idiot, I stated your comparison of the Prius and Malibu was idiotic. They are both different cars aimed at different targets. The Malibu is a full size family sedan, the Prius is a gas saving appliance with a hatchback. If you'd like to argue that your Prius doesn't have skinny tires, numb electronic steering, and 110 horsepower, I encourge you to do so. I've driven both cars as rentals for extended periods of time. I found cup holders and climate controls in both vehicles and didn't notice any glaring blind spots in either as well.

Firstly, I compared the Malibu to a Camry. A quick googling indicates I'm not the only one who noticed problems with blind spots in the Malibu. I'd recommend looking before backing up or changing lanes in the future.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Firstly, I compared the Malibu to a Camry. A quick googling indicates I'm not the only one who noticed problems with blind spots in the Malibu. I'd recommend looking before backing up or changing lanes in the future.

Ahem:

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
My 2008 Prius was the same price as the 2008 Malibu. I have a hard time believing anyone who was capable of making an objective choice between the two would ever choose the Malibu.

A quick googling also indicates some people notice problems with blind spots in a Prius as well. Huh. But hey, if you say the Malibu's blind spots are so terrible it must be true.......kinda like how the Malibu doesn't have cup holders or temperature control...........