IMO a bailout should void all current union contracts. They share the blame.
Is GM completely hosed?
Do unions have any say in company policy and marketing strategy? Really if the company can't rake in enough money to pay its employees a fair reflection of their labor then it shouldn't exist.
Don't have much experience with the fabulousnous that is the UAW, do you?
FWIW.
Good listen on Chryslers 1979 bailout....
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=96922222
Good listen on Chryslers 1979 bailout....
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=96922222
There's a LOT of collusion between automakers sharing platforms even if they're not connected.
Pontiac Vibe / Toyota Matrix
Upcoming Toyota / Subaru coupe (although there is some financial tie-in)
VW / Chrysler (minivan)
MINIs using Peugeot engines
Mitsubishi / Hyundai ("World Engine" development)
Nissan / Chrysler (Pickup & small car swap)
I'm sure that there are tons more that I don't know about, or just can't remember, but even if the company was split up it doesn't mean they would have to stop sharing.
the new scion TC will be the Subaru collaboration RWD platform out by 2010.
and i think this was Chrysler's downfall:
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/chrysler_halts_production_of
Yup. As a current owner of a tC, I'm definitely looking forward to what it finally is. Lightweight 2+2 RWD coupe, 200hp out of the 2.0 boxer engine, coming in (hopefully?) around 2700lbs and I'll be all over it.
In context of the thread, it's a perfect example of how to do platform sharing. Toyota and Subaru needed a new RWD (possibly AWD for Subie internationally?) coupe, and split the design and startup costs. Granted, Toyota owns shares in Fuji industries, the parent of Subaru, so there is a little financial tie in as well, but it's not the type of rebadging that GM does. If Toyota were like GM, they'd take their Corolla, rebadge it into two "new" models the Scion xE and the Lexus IS 150 and try to sell all three side by side on the same lot...
(As a followup to the new tC, supposedly Nissan is coming out with a small, lightweight, RWD coupe as well... can't wait!!)
Last edited:
That's exactly my point. We can split them up and each will still be a viable company. GM is convinced they ave these huge economies of scale by keeping everything under one design/R&D roof, and I'm saying they don't and can maintain most of there economies of scale even if split up into separate entities.
But what about the synergies?? THINK OF THE SYNERGIES!!!!
The problem is there's still too much overlap... even if they're separate companies, do you really need a Caddy and a Buick? A Chevy Cobalt and a Pontiac G5? GM needs to kill half its brands and at least half it's models and get back to a streamlined, profitable company. They spent HUGE amounts of money when they killed Oldsmobile, and right now they can't afford to do that to get rid of Hummer, Pontiac, Buick, GMC, etc. Possibly under a Chapter 11 they might be able to reorganize, dump unprofitable brands, maybe get some concessions from the UAW, and be a healthy company in 3-5 years... Maybe.
this summer, i rented a mercury, a hyundai, and 13 different '08 gm models. i did not exhaust the available gm stable at avis in just the mid-sized class.
ridiculous
Holy ****ing ****. Will someone actually read my posts before responding to them? I don't know if I can credibly write "that's exactly my point" one more time before I start to question my own writing skills.
1) Kill off worthless brands
2) Break up remaining brands
1) Kill off worthless brands
2) Break up remaining brands
ok, ok, i'm still looking up that turtle jerky recipe you said you wanted somewhere upthread
who tagged uni "healthcare wtf"?
i'm sure it was inspired by this post: http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3099027&postcount=33 , which fails to mentions unfunded mandates of gov't imposed industry standards
GM is now selling Suzuki off.....for $230mil....thats enough to keep them going for 2 days or so, judging by the $13bil+ they spend every month to operate
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/11/17/gm-selling-remaining-suzuki-stake-for-230m/
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/11/17/gm-selling-remaining-suzuki-stake-for-230m/
The worst part is Suzuki is the only line of cars that have any form or reliability. They get a bad rap because of the GM brand.
that 3% share that they owned, hurt the other 97% of Japanese engineering.The worst part is Suzuki is the only line of cars that have any form or reliability. They get a bad rap because of the GM brand.
Ford and GM has invested 465 billion dollars since 1998. At the same time their market value has gone from 120 billion to 6.5 billion.
Stange thing is the in Europe Ford and GM's Opel make some really nice cars. I just drove an Opel the last two weeks and it was much nicer than the A3 I rented the last time. I wouldn't own any US or their US offerings.
Stange thing is the in Europe Ford and GM's Opel make some really nice cars. I just drove an Opel the last two weeks and it was much nicer than the A3 I rented the last time. I wouldn't own any US or their US offerings.
Let them file bankruptcy protection and have to answer to their investors and make some drastic changes.
The world needs more japanese kei cars and less suburbans, hummers, explorers and denalis. You fail to adapt, you go bankrupt. It's disgusting that they use taxpayers to foot their bad decision making bills, and hold current employees as hostages. meanwhile they are paying huge bonuses and severance packages to CEOs and the like.
The best part is many of the same idiots who support this actually call Obama Socialist..when controlling the means of production and distribution is the very meaning of socialism. Ironic, isn't it?
The world needs more japanese kei cars and less suburbans, hummers, explorers and denalis. You fail to adapt, you go bankrupt. It's disgusting that they use taxpayers to foot their bad decision making bills, and hold current employees as hostages. meanwhile they are paying huge bonuses and severance packages to CEOs and the like.
The best part is many of the same idiots who support this actually call Obama Socialist..when controlling the means of production and distribution is the very meaning of socialism. Ironic, isn't it?
Microsoft is doing well largely due to a captive audience and anti-trust practices. Exxon is doing well due to collusion, price fixing and lobbyists buying government officials and forcing legislation down many businesses throats.
Walmart just got it right.
It is when the proletariat controls the means of production, and since there isn't really a proletariat in the U.S, then it isn't socialist. The people don't control government that much anyway.
Union busting?
lthumbsdown:
Yes. Unions should be busted. This is not the Industrial revolution. The vast majority of unions now do nothing but allow lazy, unmotivated employees sit on their asses and earn more than they should. See the Auto Workers Union as well as many teachers unions.Union busting?
A large part of why these automobile dealers have high expenses if because of the insane pay/benefits their mostly un-skilled labour receive.
Last edited:
If you ban Unions and leave the system unchanged you are welcoming regression.
In a perfect society unions would be obsolete because the people would own the industries, however until then unions are a necessary check for corporate greed.
In a perfect society unions would be obsolete because the people would own the industries, however until then unions are a necessary check for corporate greed.
The major cost is healthcare, which the U.S doesn't provide. They are merely demanding what should be provided to every American man, woman, and child
How many places have you worked with powerful unions? I have family members who work in education, for example, which is heavily unionized in many areas. All the unions do is allow the unmotivated, slacker employees to stay employed. The best teachers see no gains, nor do they see any major benefits.
In the auto trade it is even worse. Button pushers and unskilled labourers making $40+ an hour. I know highly educated, necessary members of society making much less than this (see nurses for example).
Unions almost always favour and enable the lazy and self-entitled, and very rarely provide benefits to those who actually deserve them.
That and the $40 an hour + they pay unskilled labour simply because they have no choice. The unions would strike, and the auto manufacturers lose millions and hour.
I don't think many here would debate that the US Gov't should be providing some level of healthcare to it's citizens.
Yup. If you cannot run your business and be profitable, close the doors. If I can't run my business profitably for 3 years, I lose my tax status as a business and the perks (claiming expenses etc) that go along with it. Why do these idiots get an exception? Businesses that are run poorly, fail. Deal with it.IAWTP.
It holds for GM, Ford, IAG, Bear Stearns, and all the rest of the lot.
If your company fails, you don't risk millions of jobs.
We currently have about 20 million unemployed people, if the big car companies fail, that is another 13 million people who will be affected. They are too big to fail.
Let those fvckers fail.
It's not like there aren't successful car companies waiting to sell consumers vehicles.
Last edited:
The problem isn't a lack of cars, it will be the job fallout that results from them failing.Let those fvckers fail.
It's not like there aren't successful car companies waiting to sell consumers vehicles.
Bailing them out simply enables them. Businesses fail when run poorly, it is not the government's fault. In this case, unions are a large part of the problem. Bad business choices are another.
The Auto Workers union had reps on a few networks today discussing it. Not a single one of them said they would agree to accept ANY compromises in benefits or salaries in order to help their member's employers succeed. I have no pity for them when they are not willing to help keep their employers afloat under these circumstances.
If that is the case, you lose your job. It isn't tax payers responsibility to pay your salary when you aren't willing to make any sort of compromise.
Slash the unskilled labour's pay to 50% (apx $20/hr), give them only base benefits. Knock off the ridiculously expensive ad campaigns. Get rid of multiple high level executives. Stop paying exhorbinant severance packages and bonuses to said executives. This would go a long way to "bailing out" these companies.
Last edited:
So when are we going to kick all of the big 3 and big oil lobbyist out? Or are we going to have to resort to sniper teams?