**Updated 4/20** GM reports $1.1 billion loss as sales sink, costs rise

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

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
61,248
16,731
136
Originally posted by: PingSpike
Originally posted by: psteng19
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
How about a true successor to the Beetle? Cheap, easy to maintain, utilitarian, but with a hint of charm.

The Beetle is VW :confused:

That doesn't mean they couldn't put out a product that was similar in nature. They just couldn't call it the beetle.

Yeah, exactly. But I suppose they'd have to launch yet another brand because they wouldn't want to sully the names of any of their current properties with a "cheap" car. Make something like that new Smart ForTwo, but cut overhead and such and price it at 50% less. I'm thinking that in today's market, a small 2 seater that costs 5-7k brand new and gets 40+ mpg would do alright.
How much cheaper is it to manufacture an air cooled engine these days? Without the need for the radiator, water pump, etc...
 

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
62,484
8,344
126
Can GM just up and say "F You" to their health care burdens and pensions owed to retirees? I know that some of the airline companies (United in particular) just flat out said "Sorry, we're dropping your benefits, deal with it". If they continued to pay out they would have been dead as a company.

Can GM do that, or are there some legally binding contracts saying they are required to pay those costs?

Obviously the unions will be out with pitchforks and shovels and they'll riot...err I mean picket to protest.
 

Leper Messiah

Banned
Dec 13, 2004
7,973
8
0
Considering I live in Flint, MI, which is basically car city, I kinda have an inside view of this.

GM sucks. Pure and simple. they know that the unions are dragging them down, because they're being paid $25 an hour+ benefits to do a job that should get them $10 an hour, max. So instead of not hiring union employees, they move overseas, and F*ck towns like the one I live in over. Michigan has the second highest un-employment rate in the nation, and Genesee County (where Flint is) has one of the highest in the state. This town is slowly dying, and ultimately, its the union's fault.

As for the design crap, well, all GM's cars look the same. They need like three brands, consoldate the bueracracy, and they'll start making money again.
 

iamwiz82

Lifer
Jan 10, 2001
30,772
13
81
Originally posted by: L3p3rM355i4h
Considering I live in Flint, MI, which is basically car city, I kinda have an inside view of this.

GM sucks. Pure and simple. they know that the unions are dragging them down, because they're being paid $25 an hour+ benefits to do a job that should get them $10 an hour, max. So instead of not hiring union employees, they move overseas, and F*ck towns like the one I live in over. Michigan has the second highest un-employment rate in the nation, and Genesee County (where Flint is) has one of the highest in the state. This town is slowly dying, and ultimately, its the union's fault.

As for the design crap, well, all GM's cars look the same. They need like three brands, consoldate the bueracracy, and they'll start making money again.

Flint died 25 years ago, it never came back.

<---Went to college in Flint

Back to the subject. There is no chance that Ford and GM can continue to compete with their Japanese couterparts on a 1:1 basis because Toyota, Honda, etc, have all kept their overhead so low. For 40 years getting a job on the line at one of the big three was akin to hitting the lotto. You got paid big bucks to do very menial things and you were taken care of for life, no matter what.

My uncle worked for Ford and retired after climbing the ladder. He makes VERY close to 6 figures a year from him pension alone, not including his 401k and savings. Now imagine paying 1/6 of that, on average, to every living employee or their spouse who has ever retired from the company.


 

MasterAndCommander

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2004
3,656
0
71
At least the new 'stang is selling well :D
It's the only Ford product, besides the GT, and upcoming Shelby GT500 that I care about.
If I wanted a sedan, truck, SUV or something else, I'd look elsewhere like Toyota/Nissan....well maybe I'd consider an F-150 for a full size. I'm loyal to no brand...whatever gives me the most bang for the buck :thumbsup:
Source: Automotive News
--------------------------------------------------------------
By Amy Wilson
Automotive News / April 04, 2005 / By Amy Wilson

Orders for a Mustang GT might not be filled before the model year ends.

DETROIT -- As problems go, this is a pretty good one to have. Still, Ford Motor Co. sales executives are having a devil of a time figuring out how to feed America's raging Mustang fever.

From affluent teenagers to nostalgic baby boomers, buyers are clamoring for the retro-styled 2005 Mustang. Incentives are nonexistent, dealers are turning pony cars from their lots in three weeks, and Ford is raking in profits.

So what's the problem? Ford vastly underestimated the appetite for snazzy interior upgrades and the GT model's 300-hp V-8 engine. And Ford's ability to crank up production of those options is limited.

That creates other challenges. For instance, how does Ford equitably allocate cars to dealerships? And how do dealerships retain eager, cash-in-hand customers when they might not be able to fill an order for the rest of model year?

Although the GT is the hottest Mustang, the V-6 is selling briskly as well. It takes a dealer an average of only 11 days to turn a GT - but the turn time for a V-6 is a still-quick 22 days, Ford says.

Some dealers are turning to extreme measures to get Mustangs.

Bill Summers Ford in North Platte, Neb., bid more than sticker price for two used Mustang GTs in one week. And the dealership, which has taken delivery of only one 2005 Mustang so far, still didn't win the auctions.

"I got so angry I walked away," said used-car manager Matt Smith after bidding on a red GT with 5,307 miles at a March 24 Manheim auction in Denver. The car, which had an original sticker price of around $27,000, according to dealers, ended up selling wholesale for $29,900.

Paying over sticker for a used car sounds crazy. But Smith said customers are so eager for Mustangs that dealers can recoup their money. "On a daily basis, we have someone calling and looking for a GT," he said.

Martin Gubbels of Big Sky Ford-Lincoln-Mercury in Torrington, Wyo., was prepared to sacrifice his only 2005 Mustang convertible allocation to satisfy a long-standing retail order on a GT coupe. In the end, he didn't have to. Facing a long wait for the car, the coupe customer backed out.

Gubbels sold the convertible at full sticker price to a customer who qualifies for Ford's X-plan discount price but didn't want to wait for an X-plan order to be scheduled.

John Nielsen of Nielsen Ford-Mercury in Bloomer, Wis., recently bought a GT from another dealer for $100 less than the sticker price. He sold the car at sticker, making no money in the deal but showing Ford that he can move Mustangs.

"We were trying to earn allocation so we could get these retail orders in the order bank," Nielsen said.

But Nielsen is among hundreds of dealers who probably won't get all their GT orders filled during the waning months of the model year. The sales mix is already 38 percent GT, compared with around 33 percent GT in past years. But the unscheduled order bank contains almost 61 percent GTs, Ford says.

"It's safe to say demand is well above our ability to supply it at this point," said George Pipas, Ford's sales analysis and reporting manager.

There is a positive side to all this, Ford executives say. Pent-up demand should keep the redesigned Mustang strong well beyond its launch year

"While some customers are going to have to wait," Pipas said, "it smoothes out the period of strong sales for the product, which means you can avoid putting on higher incentives for a longer period of time."

Dealers are delighted to have the redesigned Mustang, especially since Ford's car stable has been so weak in recent years. But some are grumbling about allocation. Ford's smallest dealers may only get a few Mustangs for the entire model year. Some have been told not to expect any more GTs.

Ford guaranteed at least one 2005 Mustang to each of its 3,500 U.S. dealers. The automaker's "turn and earn" philosophy means the bulk of allocation has gone to metropolitan stores and dealers in the Sunbelt states, where a rear-drive sports car sells even in the winter.

"I would like to see more of them come to rural dealers because the Mustang is a hot product on every street corner in America, not just metropolitan areas," Gubbels said.

With the start of spring, Ford is shifting more deliveries to the northern states.

Ford is "allocating Mustang based on previous dealer sales," said Ben Poore, Ford Division car marketing manager. "We've got to allocate in the fairest way possible."

Ford already has pumped up capacity for the Mustang's interior upgrade package, which features an aluminum-covered dash and customized instrument panel lighting. Demand is nearly 50 percent, compared with a take rate originally forecast to be in the teens. The aluminum dash supplier added robots in February, and Ford says it now is closer to meeting demand.

Poore also says Ford is working on turning up GT production any way it can. He wouldn't give specifics on how much output could rise.

"We'll get up as high as we can within the boundaries of our engine capacity and axle capacity," he said.

Ford says it will build at least 192,000 Mustangs this year in part by scheduling overtime at its Mazda joint venture plant in Flat Rock, Mich. Ford expects to sell up to 165,000 Mustangs in the United States and 10,000 or more in Canada in 2005.

But dealers and customers shouldn't expect the mix to swing wildly to the GT, which shares its 4.6-liter engine with other Ford vehicles - notably the F-150 pickup. The automaker isn't likely to sacrifice higher-margin F-150 sales for more Mustang GTs.

The Romeo, Mich., engine plant, which makes the V-8, is not currently on overtime.

Ford already increased prices in January, something the company says was planned before the car went on sale in October. The base GT jumped from $24,995, including destination charges, to $25,570. The base V-6 went from $19,410 to $19,770.

The average selling price on a 2005 Mustang in February was $23,480, according to industry researcher Edmunds.com. For the 2005 model year, the average Mustang is selling for $27 below the sticker price, Ford says. Dealers can make more on eBay, where some GTs are selling for more than sticker price.

The shortage of GTs mean lost income for Ford dealers, who already saw profits slide in 2004 and early this year. "If we could get the right number of GTs, it would mean increased profits for Ford Motor Co., and some of the dealer profit problems will be worked out," Gubbels said. "But you can only sell what they can build."
 

NFS4

No Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
72,636
47
91
Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Originally posted by: L3p3rM355i4h
Considering I live in Flint, MI, which is basically car city, I kinda have an inside view of this.

GM sucks. Pure and simple. they know that the unions are dragging them down, because they're being paid $25 an hour+ benefits to do a job that should get them $10 an hour, max. So instead of not hiring union employees, they move overseas, and F*ck towns like the one I live in over. Michigan has the second highest un-employment rate in the nation, and Genesee County (where Flint is) has one of the highest in the state. This town is slowly dying, and ultimately, its the union's fault.

As for the design crap, well, all GM's cars look the same. They need like three brands, consoldate the bueracracy, and they'll start making money again.

Flint died 25 years ago, it never came back.

<---Went to college in Flint

Back to the subject. There is no chance that Ford and GM can continue to compete with their Japanese couterparts on a 1:1 basis because Toyota, Honda, etc, have all kept their overhead so low. For 40 years getting a job on the line at one of the big three was akin to hitting the lotto. You got paid big bucks to do very menial things and you were taken care of for life, no matter what.

My uncle worked for Ford and retired after climbing the ladder. He makes VERY close to 6 figures a year from him pension alone, not including his 401k and savings. Now imagine paying 1/6 of that, on average, to every living employee or their spouse who has ever retired from the company.

Didn't Michael Moore do a documentary on that?? Roger and Me or something like that.
 

alent1234

Diamond Member
Dec 15, 2002
3,915
0
0
Originally posted by: NFS4
GM stock hits 12-year low

General Motors Corp. stock fell to a 12-year low Thursday after a meeting with the United Auto Workers union failed to produce any strong indications that significant health care cost relief is on the way.

The automaker's stock closed at $26.66, down six percent from Wednesday's closing price. A year ago, GM was trading near $50, its 52-week high.

The soaring cost of providing health care for GM's 307,000 hourly employees was the focus of Thursday's discussion between top company executives and senior UAW officials.

UAW President Ron Gettelfinger said the meeting he has no plans to reopen the labor agreement that sets out employee benefits.

The contract doesn't expire until 2007, but analysts have warned GM must restructure soon in the face of an anticipated $850 million first-quarter loss and a health care tab expected to increase by $300 million this year to $5.6 billion.

Thursday's uneventful meeting left investors unsettled, said David Healy of Burnham Securities.

"Wall Street has been pinning its expectations or at least its hopes on getting some serious concessions from the union on health care," said Healy, who doesn't own auto stocks.

Burnham Securities has no banking relationship with GM, but it does own GMAC notes, Healy added.

Steve Girsky of Morgan Stanley was not surprised by the decline.

"It's not like the stock was going up," Girsky said. "The economy may be weakening and GM is very exposed to a potentially weakening economy."

Last month, GM Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner spent $1.5 million on GM stock when it was trading at about $29.65.

When trading ended Thursday, Wagoner stood to lose $145,000 on this transaction.

Wagoner "obviously has a vested interest in painting a bleak financial picture to the UAW," said J.P. Morgan analyst Himanshu Patel.
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0504/15/B01-151349.htm

If GM declared BK it would solve this problem of unions not wanting to negotiate

 

iamwiz82

Lifer
Jan 10, 2001
30,772
13
81
Originally posted by: NFS4
Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Originally posted by: L3p3rM355i4h
Considering I live in Flint, MI, which is basically car city, I kinda have an inside view of this.

GM sucks. Pure and simple. they know that the unions are dragging them down, because they're being paid $25 an hour+ benefits to do a job that should get them $10 an hour, max. So instead of not hiring union employees, they move overseas, and F*ck towns like the one I live in over. Michigan has the second highest un-employment rate in the nation, and Genesee County (where Flint is) has one of the highest in the state. This town is slowly dying, and ultimately, its the union's fault.

As for the design crap, well, all GM's cars look the same. They need like three brands, consoldate the bueracracy, and they'll start making money again.

Flint died 25 years ago, it never came back.

<---Went to college in Flint

Back to the subject. There is no chance that Ford and GM can continue to compete with their Japanese couterparts on a 1:1 basis because Toyota, Honda, etc, have all kept their overhead so low. For 40 years getting a job on the line at one of the big three was akin to hitting the lotto. You got paid big bucks to do very menial things and you were taken care of for life, no matter what.

My uncle worked for Ford and retired after climbing the ladder. He makes VERY close to 6 figures a year from him pension alone, not including his 401k and savings. Now imagine paying 1/6 of that, on average, to every living employee or their spouse who has ever retired from the company.

Didn't Michael Moore do a documentary on that?? Roger and Me or something like that.

Yep, Roger and Me. It's a good film. Unfortunately, Flint never really recovered.
 

Leper Messiah

Banned
Dec 13, 2004
7,973
8
0
you're damn right it didn't. This place is the ghetto. I met Micheal Moore in our local borders over the summer. No one recongized him. Yes, he's fat and ugly in person too. He visted my school a few years back, also (I think when bowling for columbine came out).
 

spacelord

Platinum Member
Oct 11, 2002
2,127
0
76
Besides the fact that GM needs to come up with some sexier cars.. the UAW is going to bring the whole thing down. They argue about benefits which are currently WAY better than 99% of the rest of the American population. Most of us pay decent monthy amounts and co-pays.
Although it will be sad, nothing personal, but only because its the UAW I'm gonna laugh my ass off when tons of UAW workers are completely without jobs.
 

acemcmac

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
13,712
1
0
Roger and me is a great movie. MM makes it clear that the town is dead dead dead dead and chronicles several government programs designed to turn it around that all fell on their faces.
 

Calin

Diamond Member
Apr 9, 2001
3,112
0
0
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: PingSpike
Originally posted by: psteng19
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
How about a true successor to the Beetle? Cheap, easy to maintain, utilitarian, but with a hint of charm.

The Beetle is VW :confused:

That doesn't mean they couldn't put out a product that was similar in nature. They just couldn't call it the beetle.

Yeah, exactly. But I suppose they'd have to launch yet another brand because they wouldn't want to sully the names of any of their current properties with a "cheap" car. Make something like that new Smart ForTwo, but cut overhead and such and price it at 50% less. I'm thinking that in today's market, a small 2 seater that costs 5-7k brand new and gets 40+ mpg would do alright.
How much cheaper is it to manufacture an air cooled engine these days? Without the need for the radiator, water pump, etc...

I don't think an air cooled engine will do well in today's America roads (hot air, very slow moving, air conditioning on). But it is just my $.02
 

Slaimus

Senior member
Sep 24, 2000
985
0
76
GM is failing because of the POS acquisitions they have made. Saab probably loses them $250mil a year alone. Ford looks like a genious now after they picked up Volvo and Land Rover.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
64
91
Originally posted by: nourdmrolNMT1
Soaring health care costs are a crushing burden because G.M. and Ford cover 1.7 million Americans, or more than half a percent of the total population.

OUCH!

MIKE

Maybe they should start lobying for socialized medical care :D