 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / GMC Cars / January 2006GM MFIC speaks from auto show
This mornings news had a GM mucketymuck broadcasting from the auto show, and his tone was to reassure all us that GM has no plans to go bankrupt. He admits they have serious problems, but - honestly or not - says that bankruptcy is not an option. They plan to introduce new lines, creative engineering, blah blah. They would do well to listen to their customers and find out what we like and what we dont, why we are backing off the various models, etc. I doubt GM will ever go bankrupt, it just CAN'T happen....I'm sure someone would find a way to bail them out. I for one an being supportive, only GM vehicles for me from here on out when I buy something new. ------------------------------------ http://www.carforums.net Auto Forums They are decreasing their operations in USA and moving to other countries That is the only chance they have to stay away from bankrupcy It may be too late The unions as we know them will be humiliated If the unions play with GM it could be possible to salvage bits of GM USA It is hardly likely I hate to seem like a complete idiot (ok, I know, too late) but what is the core reason for GM's flirting with bankruptcy? I mean if you had to pick just one reason as the biggest, what would that be? I've read the threads here and have come to the conclusion that it has never really told me what the hell's going on. And now the bigwigs are saying that there's no way they're doing it anyway. > I hate to seem like a complete idiot (ok, I know, too late) but what > is the core reason for GM's flirting with bankruptcy? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > never really told me what the hell's going on. And now the bigwigs are > saying that there's no way they're doing it anyway. GM is caught with (1) excessive expenses, due to union contracts, (2) a profitable product mix which is dependent upon gashog pickups and SUVs and (3) a growing rebellion of GM stalwarts who now see that quality and client orientation are below world class levels. GM is overburdened with dipshit middle and upper management, who don't seem to have a clue. That is the problem, in a nutshell. GM does not PAY members union dues, the member pays his own dues.. The dues is deducted from the employees pay, once he has worked 50 hours in any one month. mike hunt >> I hate to seem like a complete idiot (ok, I know, too late) but what >> is the core reason for GM's flirting with bankruptcy? [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > That is the problem, in a nutshell. Actually, quality is quite good as seen in: http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0505/18/0auto-186012.htm Buick and Cadillac in the top 5. "G.M. is expected to be in a neck-and-neck race with Toyota Motor Corporation this year for the title as the world's biggest auto company because of Toyota's aggressive growth plans in the United States, Europe and parts of Asia. Toyota's sales in the United States rose more than 10 percent last year. Mr. Wagoner noted that G.M.'s expenses for health care and pensions put it at a $5 billion disadvantage to Toyota, providing one reason why it had to focus on reducing its costs. " I wondered how much of a factor the health care expense played in it. Socialized medicine versus private. Do U.S.-built Toyotas afford workers health care benefits while Japan-built Toyota workers recieve socialized health care? Japanese workers are definitely covered by the Japanese national health insurance plan. US workers are covered by Toyota, but since they are relatively young and few in number (in comparison to GM, Ford, and DCX), Toyota isn't seeing the huge health care costs that GM is. Nor is the healthcare coverage, offered by non union plant, nearly as comprehensive. Foreign assemblers in the US offer lower wages, fewer benefits and much less desirable pension plans the do domestic manufactures. mike hunt > Japanese workers are definitely covered by the Japanese national health > insurance plan. US workers are covered by Toyota, but since they are > relatively young and few in number (in comparison to GM, Ford, and > DCX), Toyota isn't seeing the huge health care costs that GM is. I can't speak to the salary level at transplant plants in the US. I think the wages are competitive (so as to forestall any effort by the UAW to organize). The pensions are most likely of the 401K variety (i.e., defined contributions) as opposed to the older school defined benefits plan that most/all GM UAW workers get (and white collar employees hired before about 2000). Pensions are going the way of the dinasaur, I believe. > Nor is the healthcare coverage, offered by non union plant, nearly as > comprehensive. Foreign assemblers in the US offer lower wages, fewer > benefits and much less desirable pension plans the do domestic manufactures. In Canada all workers get the same Canadian universal health care, but GM is struggling just as much here. > I wondered how much of a factor the health care expense played in it. > Socialized medicine versus private. > Do U.S.-built Toyotas afford workers health care benefits while > Japan-built Toyota workers recieve socialized health care? I can tell you that in Canada all workers benefit from our universal health care. There are many cars built in Canada by Toyota and Honda, etc. then shipped to the USA. The USA stands out as a rich country not interested in reasonable health care for their citizens. > "G.M. is expected to be in a neck-and-neck race with Toyota Motor > Corporation this year for the title as the world's biggest auto company [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > it at a $5 billion disadvantage to Toyota, providing one reason why it > had to focus on reducing its costs. " True story- Last year a Toyota exec said they could impact GM more by lowering prices, but they don't need to and want to be kind to poor struggling GM. > True story- > Last year a Toyota exec said they could impact GM more by lowering > prices, but they don't need to and want to be kind to poor struggling GM. It is like seing a matador letting the bull run around before the kill > I hate to seem like a complete idiot (ok, I know, too late) but what > is the core reason for GM's flirting with bankruptcy? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > never really told me what the hell's going on. And now the bigwigs are > saying that there's no way they're doing it anyway. Well from me as a one time GM customer, pre 1979, I've found GM's designs not to my liking. My most recent experience was a 2005 Impalla rental which was painful to drive compared to my 1995 Concord. I moved to Chrysler in 1979 for a more modern designs with crisp handling (not the poor handling K car), but now even though they produce excellent quality vehicles find nothing there I want. > This mornings news had a GM mucketymuck broadcasting from the auto show, > and his tone was to reassure all us that GM has no plans to go bankrupt. > > He admits they have serious problems, but - honestly or not - says that > bankruptcy is not an option. Baaaaaaaa Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's rich. > They plan to introduce new lines, creative engineering, blah blah. > > They would do well to listen to their customers and find out what we > like and what we dont, why we are backing off the various models, etc. Good! Tell em to build a car that has the fuel economy and long term reliability of the Honda Civic. My daughter is driving a pre-owned 89 Civic with over 270K on the clock. She bought it in 98 when it had 110K on the meter. It's been in the shop twice in EIGHT YEARS for just a brake job and a timing belt repklacement. IF THE JAPS CAN BUILD A HONDA CIVIV THAT RUNS FOR 17 YEARS WITH MINIMAL BREAKDOWNS, THEN WHY THE FRIG CAN'T GM DO THE SAME THING WITH A SATURN OR A CHEVY ????? It seems all GM wants to do is have the customer buy a new car every 5 years either by the damm thing falling apart or getting tired of it. What make you say that? I'm sure there are quite a few Chevys over 17 years old that are still running fine and trouble free. How about 35 years or more with no major problems? I own a 1971 Pinto with nearly 300K on the clock that has the original drive train that looks and runs great. I also own a 1941 Continental, 1964 Mustang, 1972 LTD Brougham, and a 1983 Continental Mark VI. They all have lots of miles on the clock and even win awards at car shows. All one needs to do is the proper preventive maintenance and any car you buy today will easily run up over 200K. Of course when one buys only used vehicles the problems, or lack there of, are more likely the result of poor maintenance by the previous owners(s) than the manufacture ;) mike hunt > IF THE JAPS CAN BUILD A HONDA CIVIV THAT RUNS > FOR 17 YEARS WITH MINIMAL BREAKDOWNS, THEN > WHY THE FRIG CAN'T GM DO THE SAME THING WITH > A SATURN OR A CHEVY ????? >What make you say that? I'm sure there are quite a few Chevys over 17 years >old that are still running fine and trouble free. How about 35 years or more [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >mike hunt And I have a 2002 Monte Carlo 3400 bought straight from the dealer with 3500 mile oil changes and dealer service. At 38000, I have had the lower manifold Intake leak, and the front rotors warped...the paint surface is chipping big time. And about my 1990 Silhouette with 111, 000 miles.... I've fixed the alternator, battery, waterpump.... it has a leaky heater core back rear panel latch cylinder is broken...passenger side door latch is inoperative, and the TCC solenoid is defective..... this is on a car with "proper maintenance". My friend has a 1994 Buick Regal 3800 engine.... ONLY 26,000 miles, kept garaged and well maintained (like a baby)...... replaced alternator at 24,000 miles AND uppper intake manifold plenum at 26,000. I've got a lot more examples of GM (and Ford) product failing.... otoh most of my Honda and Toyota friends are very happy with their cars...... Personally, I don't think you know what you're talking about....you must have some agenda...do you work for GM??? Or get paid for shrilling for them ??? My c.nt is getting paid for writing lies to the NG Unfortunately for him his outrages are so great that they serve the opposite purpose The way to solve problems is not to ignore them That is exactly what My c.nt and his pals in management are doing It would be possible to take sides with GM and help them face their problems if they would admit them and try solving them They are like Alchoholics shying avay admitting their situation Recovering Alcoholics you can admire and assist >My c.nt is getting paid for writing lies to the NG >Unfortunately for him his outrages are so great that they serve the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >They are like Alchoholics shying avay admitting their situation >Recovering Alcoholics you can admire and assist It is indeed very obvious that he has a personal agenda, or is being paid as a shrill for GM. Guess his main purpose is to attempt to deceive and mislead others, through the use of psuedo-intellectual comments and references to statistics which are taken out of context of the whole. When the banks say GM is in deep dodo, it doesn't matter what the managers say... management always has a tendency to ignore reality. It's easier to see the boat sinking, when you're on firm ground. And...goddamit...when I buy a $22,000.00 car, I don't expect to have to pay for an engine repair at 38,000 miles....just 3 years after the car was purchased. When a friend buys a 1994 and treats it like a baby for 10 years, she shouldn't have to replace an alternator and plenum with less than 28,000 miles on the car. I won't even rant and rave about the 3.1L intake manifold's that I've had done, at 80,000 and 110,000 miles on the two "tupperware" vans that I've owned. Nice cars, nice styling, good capacity, but very high maintenance costs due to "substandard" engineering. And he will continue to deny reality and say this is "normal", I don't think so !!! But he'll argue just for the sake of it... I believe the correct word is "shill", but who would be paying him as a shill for GM, and to what end? This is a discussion room where there are endless postings describing problems with GM cars, as well as solutions to said problems, i.e. suggestions, repair procedures, sites, etc. Paying someone to post bullshit statistics and etc wouldn't be productive--there are too many in this room to rebut them if they're not true. They wouldn't stand. > My c.nt is getting paid for writing lies to the NG And is "Your a.s" getting paid to troll the GM news group? Explain to us why you are even here. Does GM sell cars in your native Iceland? > Unfortunately for him his outrages are so great that they serve the > opposite purpose And your anti-GM rants are so great that you must be labelled as a troll! Does GM sell cars in your native Iceland? Check www.benni.is and www.ih.is >SNIPPED out of mercy< Hey, stool wet, when your relatives describe you to the police, do they use 3 or 4 o's in stupid? Later, Andy C.(never #) Do you work for Toyota or get paid to bash GM? Just curious. I don't work for anybody, I'm almost 80 years old. Although I own two vehicles, a 2005 and 2006, they are not GM products. The point is every manufacture makes some that are not up to snuff, including import brands. To imply in a NG that every vehicle made by particular manufacture domestic or foreign is good or bad based on the ONE you or your friends own is ridicules mike hunt >>What make you say that? I'm sure there are quite a few Chevys over 17 >>years [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > some agenda...do you work for GM??? Or get paid for shrilling for them > ??? >I don't work for anybody, I'm almost 80 years old. Although I own two >vehicles, a 2005 and 2006, they are not GM products. The point is every [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >mike hunt Well, now I understand where part of it comes from as to the other part... Not one car, not two cars, not three cars , but 4 cars AND all the failures are very predictable, as others have been discussing these vunerabiliities . Coupled with all the online reports about the 3.1, 3.4, 3.8 engine problems AND the reports of the alternators cooking.... How YOU get ONE car out of all of this is beyond my comprehension of how a rational mind works. Which is why I think you have a personal agenda...( ie trying to piss everyone off with unrealistic comments) or you are just a shill for GM, sprouting information that flies in the face of all reality. Here are some interesting numbers....... Next time on the big board checkout the current and historical numbers for GM (GM) and Toyota Motor Co. (TM)..... Someone is doing something right and it ain't GM. Now Theoretically , if you want to get a turn around expert in at GM...they are going to remove the operation from union-control, and lower production costs by moving operations to lower cost production countries. (which they have started doing). And once the union has been busted, GM will reduce debt and liabilities by declaring a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy.(reorganization and renegotiation of debt instruments with creditors). And when they finally come out of Chapter 11.... if they have been unsuccessful in unloading pension obligations under Chapter 11.... they will decrease their pension obligation by turning to cash value pensions as other companies such as IBM and HP have done. At which time GM now becomes an attractive candidate for takeover and as I understand it, the Chinese are looking for a foothold into the american car market. However the GMAC group will continue to do just fine !!! > >I don't work for anybody, I'm almost 80 years old. Although I own two > >vehicles, a 2005 and 2006, they are not GM products. The point is every [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > GM, sprouting information that flies in the face of all reality. I believe the word is "spouting"......... > I don't work for anybody, I'm almost 80 years old. Although I own two > vehicles, a 2005 and 2006, they are not GM products. The point is every > manufacture makes some that are not up to snuff, including import brands. > To imply in a NG that every vehicle made by particular manufacture domestic > or foreign is good or bad based on the ONE you or your friends own is > ridicules Plus you have no real experience owning an "import" vehicle and you like driving poor handling gas eating boats of cars. Rest assure I have owned more import cars than you have owned cars, several brands as well. ;) mike hunt >> I don't work for anybody, I'm almost 80 years old. Although I own two >> vehicles, a 2005 and 2006, they are not GM products. The point is every [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> or foreign is good or bad based on the ONE you or your friends own is >> ridicules > Plus you have no real experience owning an "import" vehicle and you like > driving poor handling gas eating boats of cars. > What make you say that? I'm sure there are quite a few Chevys over 17 years > old that are still running fine and trouble free. How about 35 years or more [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > more likely the result of poor maintenance by the previous owners(s) than > the manufacture ;) Your cars are obviously collector cars. "Michael 544" was talking about a daily use car. Do you think they came from the factory with all those miles? LOL mike hunt >> What make you say that? I'm sure there are quite a few Chevys over 17 >> years [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >> more likely the result of poor maintenance by the previous owners(s) than >> the manufacture ;) > Your cars are obviously collector cars. > > "Michael 544" was talking about a daily use car. I owned a 1990 Honda Civic. I liked it, but it certainly wasn't problem free, and I got rid of it after about 100K (and 10 years of ownership). I had some serious throttle rust problems. Also, I had to replace the entire exhaust system. A circuit board that controlled ignition cracked and had to be replaced. Also, had to change the timing belt (but that was part of the regular maintenance routine). All in all, not a bad car, but not a miracle car either. The 2000 Honda Odyssey I owned had brake problems from the start. My understanding is that this vehicle has had transmission troubles as well (though I didn't experience this in the two years I owned the vehicle). Exactly my point as well. Harping in a NG that brand 'X' is better than brand 'Y' is stupid. They all make some that are problematic no matter whose name is on the hood. Anybody who thinks otherwise is not really thinking. ;) mike hunt >I owned a 1990 Honda Civic. I liked it, but it certainly wasn't > problem free, and I got rid of it after about 100K (and 10 years of [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > well (though I didn't experience this in the two years I owned the > vehicle). > This mornings news had a GM mucketymuck broadcasting from the auto show, > and his tone was to reassure all us that GM has no plans to go bankrupt. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > They would do well to listen to their customers and find out what we > like and what we dont, why we are backing off the various models, etc. Unfortunately most auto companies don't listen to their customers. One of the worse cases of this recently was Chryslers very significant design change with the new 300 line, which left existing mid sized Chrysler buyers standing in the cold. Yes Chrysler has done very well selling these cars, but I know they aren't selling them to their previous mid sized buyers. I my area of the North West the 300 isn't selling very well because the market is for more reasonable sized and fuel efficient vehicles. They have a very changed customer base for the 300 and I'm sure they don't car as long as they make money. My own Chrysler dealer put lots of pressure on me to buy the 300 and once they accepted that I wasn't going to buy what didn't meet my needs, even suggested I look at what they sell at the Toyota dealership they own. So they are covering their bases both ways, certainly adverse to selling the "enemies" car. > > This mornings news had a GM mucketymuck broadcasting from the auto show, > > and his tone was to reassure all us that GM has no plans to go bankrupt. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > So they are covering their bases both ways, certainly adverse to > selling the "enemies" car. That would be "enemy's" car. Illiterate oaf...... |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.