[quote]dhickey wrote:
Growing_Boy wrote:
The Chinese will take over Hummer. LMAO!
I thought that was a bit strange as well. Are there certain plants that only make Hummers? Are they just after the plants? I can’t imagine wanting that piece of shit. I apologize to any Hummer owners but they never seemed very functional to me.[/quote]
If you own a Hummer and purposely went out and bought one you are stuck on stupid along with all the aging hippy liberals driving around in a Prius. They are a piece of shit box with wheels and an underpowered powerplant. From what I’m reading they will take over the brand and contract with GM to use their plants to continue manufacturing the vehicle. Made in US of Chinese materials. Would touch that sum bitch with a 40 foot pole
Truck sales in 2008 - Does not include SUVs!!!
GM - 740k
Ford - 590k
Dodge - 270k
Toyota - 280k
Nissan - 79k
Honda - 34k
Nobody has sold more Hybrids than trucks. Again, I didn’t even have the numbers for SUVs.
GM and Chrysler 2011 production
hybrids - 500k
Trucks - 500k
GM and Chrysler 2011 sales
Hybrids - 200k
Trucks - 500k
[/quote]
Just to add to this – and I really hesitate to do this without citing sources, but I just can’t find them right now --a few years back, I checked into these stats, hybrid vs. trucks. I found that even if you subtract company/work trucks, they still significantly outsell hybrids. (Although I think the stats I looked at included SUVs.)
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
GM is breaking contracts with thousands of dealers. Yet we should trust a GM warranty?
GM will be owned by the Feds and the UAW. Should we trust the quality of the product?
The Feds broke solemn contractual bond agreements because there are more UAW voters, and they tend to vote the ‘right’ way.
“I will stop the motor of the world.” — John Galt[/quote]
GM isn’t breaking a damn thing. They are not renewing contracts that are expiring next year.
If you want to point a finger, then point it at Chrysler, they are the ones breaking contracts.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
GM hasn’t made anything good in a long time, not anything that compare with anything from Japan or Germany. People aren’t stupid, they aren’t going to buy piece of shit cars anymore. You cannot kill a car from Japan or Germany. Believe me I have tried, and after 245,000 miles that sucker keeps on trucking with the original engine.[/quote]
So I guess Cadillac, Buick, GM trucks, and the Corvette don’t exist.
Their quality is a long way from anything good, and has been for a long time. The only thing they did well over the past few years was trucks, and I have no need for one. In addition I don’t like the political situation and I refuse to support it.[/quote]
So, I guess Buick must be buying the top spot for the past few years in J.D. Power and Associates Vehicle Dependability Study. Why else would they be there? Oh, right. They might be building quality vehicles and GM might be putting this info to work in it’s other brands.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
There is a reason why Toyota is #1, they are indestructible. You can’t kill them if you try in most cases. The last thing anyone wants to deal with is car trouble, because it’s so inconvenient. I have seen so many Escalades that leak oil after 10k miles. Pathetic. [/quote]
Yeah, right. The indestructibility of any vehicle relates to how it is maintained. Put a dumb ass behind the wheel and leave them to maintain their vehicle and it is fucked.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
I think the most disturbing part is that the UAW will own a chunk of GM while controlling the labor force of Ford.
I’m currently in the marked for a knew car, and I can tell you it won’t be from any bailout company.
They are going to own a lot more of chrysler. Not to mention gov’t board seats.[/quote]
They will have a seat on GM’s board but will have to vote how the rest of the board votes.
It died because unions and management had to confront each other, instead of pulling together for all their own good. The company was destroyed because the workers and management no longer deserved to have this magnificent company.
[/quote]
I will partially agree with you here. I believe it has more to do with greedy union scum bleeding the big three dry and management not having big enough balls to tell them to go fuck themselves.
Obama had nothing to do with inflated pay rates for union workers, shit sucking under performing brands, and generally shit sucking vehicles except the Corvette. We should have let that fucker die, put it in a history book, and mourned its death for about 5 minutes and move on. [/quote]
Will you feel the same way, when Ford finally hemorrhages through it’s cash reserves, it acquired through mortgaging everything it possibly could a few years ago?
The quality of American cars and their ergonomics were put on the back burner to maximize profits and pay UAW wages and benes. This was a stupid strategy, very short-term oriented. And that goes a long way toward explaining why America is in trouble – Obama and Congress can spend untold trillions with no reckoning of tomorrow. The same mindset that destroyed GM created Obama and the libs.
We unthinking idiots get exactly what we deserve — collapsing economies and BHO.
[/quote]
See my post on Buick. You think this was an actual managerial strategy? More like they were forced to focus on getting a decent but not great vehicle out to sale, so they could afford the $1,500 per vehicle they have to pay in health benefits, amongst other costs.
[quote]DB297 wrote:
I want to see what happens now that the UAW is an owner of the company. Are they still going to try to get over-inflated pay packages that drive the company to fail again or will they realize they are one of the largest reasons the auto companies failed and act more responsible now that their pension and healthcare plans own a big percentage of GM.
I forget where i read it recently but there was an interview with Jack Welch where he asked someone to name one industry that is heavily unionized and successful…[/quote]
The UAW labor force can petition all they want but the ONE seat they have on the board can’t vote on it’s own whim.
Like I mentioned earlier, the scary part is that they control a competitorâ??s labor (Ford). The UAW can now institute slow downs/walk outs/poor quality at Ford plants and monetarily benefit from their stake in GM/Chrysler.
Itâ??s like having a part owner of the Yankees in charge of all trades for the red socks.
[/quote]
Do you really believe the work force of Ford would be that stupid? The relatively small amount of money they gain through stocks would more than likely be offset through lost wages during a strike.
yep. as I said, ford is fucked. If I were them I would be laying plans to open plants down south.
This is one of the most disgusting things our gov’t has done in my lifetime. It is an absolute assault on the free market and capitalism. The fact that our gov’t can be bought for whatever the UAW has been paying, is absolutly absurd. Don’t like the CEO of a private company, fire him and put in your guy. Legal backruptcy procedures, out the window. Approval from the legislative branch or anyone else to take over private companies, out the window. Fuck share holders and bond holders to give payola to the UAW, no problem. I honestly cannot believe what I am seeing.
Say what you will about GWB. This guys is taking it to a whole new level. You think we are done bailing out GM and Chrysler? think again. They are going to build the little shit boxes Obama wants them to build, not what people actually want to buy. The tax payer is going to end up subsidizing everyone of them that moves off the lot.
The next move to watch is card check and unionization of southern plants. Anyone want to guess how long that takes? [/quote]
Sadly, the big three probably would still be hamstrung by the UAW in the Southern states.
Example from article: “But he said the UAW is concerned that giving too much on these fronts will just allow the companies to speed up production and transfer more and more work to lower-paid supplier employees.”
Damn, the last thing we would want to do is make the company competitive and profitable!
Oh by the way, Saturn started out roughly the same as the plant in the article I posted a link to. Alas, the UAW balked about the contract it was in regarding their Saturn employees and got their way, which in turn sent Saturn to the dumps.
[quote]tme wrote:
All you “American cars suck” assholes can blow me. Quality is absolutely comparible, it’s just become “cool” to badmouth American made as trash.
My 2001 Dodge Grand Caravan has 120k and is still just as strong and solid as when it was new. I was pulling 75 mph up a 6% grade at 9000 ft yesterday, passing Hondas and VWs all the way up.
My 1998 Dodge 1500 4x4 will still get me anywhere I need to go, and I guarantee you’ll have to chain up your Toyota long before I have to.
My 2004 Pontiac Vibe is basically a Toyota Matrix, but it’s still Made in America at the NUMMI plant in CA. Great little car that gets 32mpg average, I bought it used with 38k on it and have put over 50k on in three years. Love the low maint and an reliability, but it really isn’t any better or worse than my Dodge.
[/quote]
you realize that toyota has a plant in Texas and Kentucky and I think alabama right?
then theres west virgina and mexico and indiana
a few in canada and one in mississippi
face it, toyota is a japanese company but they make just as many cars in north america employing americans as the “big 3” does
fact of the mater is they put out a better product so people buy it
[quote]Mhatch wrote:
DB297 wrote:
I want to see what happens now that the UAW is an owner of the company. Are they still going to try to get over-inflated pay packages that drive the company to fail again or will they realize they are one of the largest reasons the auto companies failed and act more responsible now that their pension and healthcare plans own a big percentage of GM.
I forget where i read it recently but there was an interview with Jack Welch where he asked someone to name one industry that is heavily unionized and successful…
The UAW labor force can petition all they want but the ONE seat they have on the board can’t vote on it’s own whim.[/quote]
In the case of chrysler, how do you think the board seats owned by the us and canadian gov’t will vote? I am sure all that campaign money the UAW throws around will be forgotten.
Anyone know if the gov’t is taking any board seats from GM?
[quote]dhickey wrote:
Mhatch wrote:
DB297 wrote:
I want to see what happens now that the UAW is an owner of the company. Are they still going to try to get over-inflated pay packages that drive the company to fail again or will they realize they are one of the largest reasons the auto companies failed and act more responsible now that their pension and healthcare plans own a big percentage of GM.
I forget where i read it recently but there was an interview with Jack Welch where he asked someone to name one industry that is heavily unionized and successful…
The UAW labor force can petition all they want but the ONE seat they have on the board can’t vote on it’s own whim.
In the case of chrysler, how do you think the board seats owned by the us and canadian gov’t will vote? I am sure all that campaign money the UAW throws around will be forgotten.
Anyone know if the gov’t is taking any board seats from GM?
[/quote]
"While the reborn Chrysler will be run by the Italian automaker Fiat SpA, it is a lot less certain who will manage the “newco” assuming General Motors’ assets. Will Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner call the shots on key financial decisions? Will Energy Secretary Steven Chu banish the big Chevrolet Silverado pickup in favor of a 50 mpg minicar? Perhaps President Barack Obama himself will weigh in on the design of the next Cadillac crossover design. Obama quickly tried to tamp down any such speculation, declaring: “What we are not doing, what I have no interest in doing, is running GM.”
“GM will be run by a private board of directors with a track record in American manufacturing,” Obama said Monday. “The federal government will refrain from exercising its rights as a shareholder in all but the most fundamental corporate decisions.”
Now whether they hold to this or not, we will see.
[quote]Mhatch wrote:
“The federal government will refrain from exercising its rights as a shareholder in all but the most fundamental corporate decisions.”
Now whether they hold to this or not, we will see.
[/quote]
this is not very reassuring to me. what is a fundemental corporate decision? we have already seen he has no problem making personnel decisions unilateraly.