Date: 15/08/25 - 13:57 PM   48060 Topics and 694399 Posts

Author Topic: OMG GM  (Read 5566 times)

March 09, 2009, 12:39:13 AM
Reply #60

sys

  • Second String Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 10936
  • Personal Text
    gmafb
The factory won't stay empty.

the world is filled with empty factories.
"these are no longer “games” in the commonly accepted sense of the term. these are free throw shooting contests leavened by the occasional sprint to the other end of the floor."

March 09, 2009, 01:03:29 AM
Reply #61

AzCat

  • Classless Cat
  • Scout Team Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 7320
They got stuck into a model that focused on trucks/suvs ....

They were forced into it by CAFE standards which pushed the cars American wanted out of the lineups of American car makers while exempting light trucks (pickups) & models based on light trucks (SUVs).  Thus to get the larger vehicles they wanted Americans began to buy SUVs since the car companies were required not to produce the cars Americans wanted in the quantities in which Americans wanted them.

The second deadly prong of CAFE was that it forced American car makers to cut every corner imagineable on small cheap cars and to sell them at near zero profit in an attempt to bring their fleet economy up to the legal mandate.  Americans didn't want all of those little pieces of crap but to avoid massive legal sanction the car builders had to build them and sell them. 

Did GM get "stuck into a model that focused on trucks/SUVs"?  Sure, but it was the federal government and its CAFE regulation that did it. 
« Last Edit: March 09, 2009, 01:10:05 AM by AzCat »
Ladies & gentlemen, I present: The Problem

March 09, 2009, 01:07:35 AM
Reply #62

AzCat

  • Classless Cat
  • Scout Team Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 7320
Oh and don't forget that the Wagner Act is largely responsible for the excessive labor costs experienced by American car builders so we can chalk that particular problem up to government intervention in the marketplace as well.
Ladies & gentlemen, I present: The Problem

March 09, 2009, 01:08:52 AM
Reply #63

FBWillie

  • Classless Cat
  • Senior Cub

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 3541
Yeah, that's pretty much the opposite of what every economist is saying.

As for your other two points 1. you're right the workers were getting paid too much, you know what else? the cars got a terrible reputation and the innovation lagged behind foreign auto.  They got stuck into a model that focused on trucks/suvs, GM made terrible redundant lines that cost them $$ and they are NEVER going to be able to compete with the labor markets of Mexico or India or China.  Those auto plants are going some place cheaper with cheaper talent.  People in the auto industry have skills.  Not just the people on the assembly line moron, but all of the engineers, draftsmen, fabrication guys, skilled welders that are largely based on the Detroit/automaker industry.  True, theoretically they could adapt and get other jobs.  BUT THERE AREN'T ANY FREAKING JOBS.  Nobodies taking on a project that hasn't worked in their industry and may or may not need to re-tool before they become a valued member of their team.

You can get your rocks off on trying to snort at the sit and pretend like nothing is wrong, but when GM fails it will be bad and no one is stepping in to clean them up except the govt.  No one has the power of the genie from Aladdin to pick up GM and put it in a different country with a more friendly business/labor environment where it belongs.

But carry on with your car salesman gig, sounds like you're doing great.

Are these the same dipcrap economist that saw this crap coming in 2001?

I'm not a &@#%ing car salesman.  I worked at a dealership for 2 years as a Customer service manager.  Do you honestly think I would want GM to fail if I worked in that industry any more?  That part of my life is over and I learned more about people there than any place I've ever been, included 4 years at KSU.  The honest truth is, Car salesman are no worse than you.  The difference is, their ability to pay the bills depends on being a slimy piece of crap.  Most people do it for no reason at all.

As for "Skilled workers" I'm not talking about getting new jobs now, I'm talking about the last time contract negotiations came around.   FTR, I'm bagging on the unions more than the employee's.  A company should be able to fire anyone that has the mindset of: "That's not in my job description, Now give me a raise and a pension that doesn't exist in any other industry"  I'm talking about the people that are sitting in their hummers screaming at a channel 3 news camera saying: "Have you read this contract?  It's wrong what their doing to us."  It's a &@#%ing joke.   We're in this mess because of all the entitlement people feel.   No one owes anyone a &@#%ing thing unless you work for it.   That's what’s wrong with everything.  Pick a sector that's failing right now and I guarantee you it failed because people felt entitled to more than their "fair share"

Which brings me to my next point.  GM got stuck on the suburban & truck line because that's what people want.  The same stupid &@#%s that are complaining about gas mileage go into a dealership and drive a four cyl that gets 35 MPG against a V8 that gets 15 and will buy the car with more power every &@#%ing day.   That's what GM owners want.  Power and space they don't &@#%ing need.  Hippies in california are the only ones that want anything different.

People that are smart and realize they don't need an 8 passenger vehicle to drive around their 3 kids go buy a &@#%ing used honda because they realize that's all they need.   But those people rarely exist.   Try experiencing real life before you go off and believe every &@#%ing thing the media shoves down your throat.   The only thing that sucks about GM's business model is where the cash flow goes.   The cars they make are entirely a result of what stupid craps buy.  People don't want a &@#%ing "green" car.  They want a big piece of crap that will pull their boat and shut their kids up with 3 DVD players in the back so each of their spoiled brat kids can tune out to sponge bob without their elbows touching. Liberal media is pointing the blame at auto industries for not venturing towards a more economical vehicle, but it's not their &@#%ing market.  Honda & toyota sells cars to people that want to be responsible.  And GM & Ford sells cars to dipcraps that want more than they need.   That's how this crap works.  GM will die unless they start building what their old customer base can afford.  An $8,000 piece of crap with crank windows & a tape deck.

American's provided every inch of rope that is hanging us right now.   Secure the noose, and kick the chair because our ass is done.  And no amount of $$ from the government is going to stop this hangman.
The comments posted above do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of FBWillie

March 09, 2009, 01:08:53 AM
Reply #64

AzCat

  • Classless Cat
  • Scout Team Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 7320
The factory won't stay empty.

the world is filled with empty factories.

70,000 newly emptied ones in China alone according to something I ran across the other day. 
Ladies & gentlemen, I present: The Problem

March 09, 2009, 01:09:51 AM
Reply #65

FBWillie

  • Classless Cat
  • Senior Cub

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 3541
The factory won't stay empty.

the world is filled with empty factories.

How many of them are car factories with multimillion dollar equipment?
The comments posted above do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of FBWillie

March 09, 2009, 01:11:40 AM
Reply #66

FBWillie

  • Classless Cat
  • Senior Cub

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 3541
regardless, they won't stay empty.
The comments posted above do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of FBWillie

March 09, 2009, 01:16:43 AM
Reply #67

AzCat

  • Classless Cat
  • Scout Team Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 7320
regardless, they won't stay empty.

In China that's probably true for the most part, in the US I'm not so certain.  The economy here can only drag so many governmental anchors along behind it before it stalls more or less permanently.
Ladies & gentlemen, I present: The Problem

March 09, 2009, 01:24:46 AM
Reply #68

Kat Kid

  • Administrator
  • Junior Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ********

  • 8821
  • Personal Text
    warm up the EMAW
They got stuck into a model that focused on trucks/suvs ....

They were forced into it by CAFE standards which pushed the cars American wanted out of the lineups of American car makers while exempting light trucks (pickups) & models based on light trucks (SUVs).  Thus to get the larger vehicles they wanted Americans began to buy SUVs since the car companies were required not to produce the cars Americans wanted in the quantities in which Americans wanted them.

The second deadly prong of CAFE was that it forced American car makers to cut every corner imagineable on small cheap cars and to sell them at near zero profit in an attempt to bring their fleet economy up to the legal mandate.  Americans didn't want all of those little pieces of crap but to avoid massive legal sanction the car builders had to build them and sell them. 

Did GM get "stuck into a model that focused on trucks/SUVs"?  Sure, but it was the federal government and its CAFE regulation that did it. 

Partially, but partially because the only money they made significant profit on were luxury cars, trucks and SUV's.  They couldn't compete in the cars that most americans drive (4-door sedans).
ksufanscopycat my friends.

March 09, 2009, 01:28:31 AM
Reply #69

FBWillie

  • Classless Cat
  • Senior Cub

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 3541
They got stuck into a model that focused on trucks/suvs ....

They were forced into it by CAFE standards which pushed the cars American wanted out of the lineups of American car makers while exempting light trucks (pickups) & models based on light trucks (SUVs).  Thus to get the larger vehicles they wanted Americans began to buy SUVs since the car companies were required not to produce the cars Americans wanted in the quantities in which Americans wanted them.

The second deadly prong of CAFE was that it forced American car makers to cut every corner imagineable on small cheap cars and to sell them at near zero profit in an attempt to bring their fleet economy up to the legal mandate.  Americans didn't want all of those little pieces of crap but to avoid massive legal sanction the car builders had to build them and sell them. 

Did GM get "stuck into a model that focused on trucks/SUVs"?  Sure, but it was the federal government and its CAFE regulation that did it. 

Partially, but partially because the only money they made significant profit on were luxury cars, trucks and SUV's.  They couldn't compete in the cars that most americans drive (4-door sedans).
The people that buy/lease cars every 3 years buy trucks & SUV's.

Sedan drivers don't buy cars but every 8 years. Not worth going after when foreign car companies own that market.  Saturn was created to try to steal that market away.  When it wasn't successful Saturn began making SUV's.

   
The comments posted above do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of FBWillie

March 09, 2009, 01:48:59 AM
Reply #70

AzCat

  • Classless Cat
  • Scout Team Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 7320
They got stuck into a model that focused on trucks/suvs ....

They were forced into it by CAFE standards which pushed the cars American wanted out of the lineups of American car makers while exempting light trucks (pickups) & models based on light trucks (SUVs).  Thus to get the larger vehicles they wanted Americans began to buy SUVs since the car companies were required not to produce the cars Americans wanted in the quantities in which Americans wanted them.

The second deadly prong of CAFE was that it forced American car makers to cut every corner imagineable on small cheap cars and to sell them at near zero profit in an attempt to bring their fleet economy up to the legal mandate.  Americans didn't want all of those little pieces of crap but to avoid massive legal sanction the car builders had to build them and sell them. 

Did GM get "stuck into a model that focused on trucks/SUVs"?  Sure, but it was the federal government and its CAFE regulation that did it. 

Partially, but partially because the only money they made significant profit on were luxury cars, trucks and SUV's.  They couldn't compete in the cars that most americans drive (4-door sedans).

That statement is demonstrably false as GM, Ford & Chrysler have historically had in excess of a 50% market share in the US.  Thus since "most Americans" are driving products built by GM, Ford or Chrysler they, by definition, are competing just fine in the market segments that include the vehicles that "most Americans" drive.

And you know good and well that the reason they only made money on the higher-end market segments is because they were forced to sell a ton of crapty little cars to make their CAFE requirements and the only way for them to do that was to slash prices until they found buyers.  Hence it's the government that is responsible for their higher-end products being the only ones turning a profit.  Allow car makers to make cars of the types and in the amounts demanded by the market and you'll be on the road to a recovery.   Force them to build cars better built by cheaper foreign competitors and/or cars the market doesn't want in the amounts required by government and of course they'll fail.  Duh. 



« Last Edit: March 09, 2009, 01:50:48 AM by AzCat »
Ladies & gentlemen, I present: The Problem

March 09, 2009, 06:55:37 AM
Reply #71

michigancat

  • All American

  • Offline
  • ******

  • 23713
  • Personal Text
    You can't be racist and like basketball.
They got stuck into a model that focused on trucks/suvs ....

They were forced into it by CAFE standards which pushed the cars American wanted out of the lineups of American car makers while exempting light trucks (pickups) & models based on light trucks (SUVs).  Thus to get the larger vehicles they wanted Americans began to buy SUVs since the car companies were required not to produce the cars Americans wanted in the quantities in which Americans wanted them.

The second deadly prong of CAFE was that it forced American car makers to cut every corner imagineable on small cheap cars and to sell them at near zero profit in an attempt to bring their fleet economy up to the legal mandate.  Americans didn't want all of those little pieces of crap but to avoid massive legal sanction the car builders had to build them and sell them. 

Did GM get "stuck into a model that focused on trucks/SUVs"?  Sure, but it was the federal government and its CAFE regulation that did it. 

Partially, but partially because the only money they made significant profit on were luxury cars, trucks and SUV's.  They couldn't compete in the cars that most americans drive (4-door sedans).

That statement is demonstrably false as GM, Ford & Chrysler have historically had in excess of a 50% market share in the US.  Thus since "most Americans" are driving products built by GM, Ford or Chrysler they, by definition, are competing just fine in the market segments that include the vehicles that "most Americans" drive.

And you know good and well that the reason they only made money on the higher-end market segments is because they were forced to sell a ton of crapty little cars to make their CAFE requirements and the only way for them to do that was to slash prices until they found buyers.  Hence it's the government that is responsible for their higher-end products being the only ones turning a profit.  Allow car makers to make cars of the types and in the amounts demanded by the market and you'll be on the road to a recovery.   Force them to build cars better built by cheaper foreign competitors and/or cars the market doesn't want in the amounts required by government and of course they'll fail.  Duh. 





Agreed - GM's failure has nothing to do with a business model built around trucks and SUV's, gas prices skyrocketing, the sales of trucks/SUV's plummeting.  It's all because poor lil ol' GM was forced to make compact cars since CAFE was passed 35 years ago.

And Americans hate small, fuel efficient cars.  Just look @ the Prius.  LOL @ Toyota for thinking a dorky looking 55MPG hybrid could sell in the US.  :lol:

March 09, 2009, 12:25:50 PM
Reply #72

FBWillie

  • Classless Cat
  • Senior Cub

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 3541

Agreed - GM's failure has nothing to do with a business model built around trucks and SUV's, gas prices skyrocketing, the sales of trucks/SUV's plummeting.  It's all because poor lil ol' GM was forced to make compact cars since CAFE was passed 35 years ago.

And Americans hate small, fuel efficient cars.  Just look @ the Prius.  LOL @ Toyota for thinking a dorky looking 55MPG hybrid could sell in the US.  :lol:

And GM or Ford aren't making Hybrid cars at all right now.  An american made hybrid doesn't exist... and that's the real reason the Prius is doing so well.... there just aren't any other options.  Tree hugg'n hippies would rather buy american; but instead are forced to appear elite and better than everyone else because they can afford to drop 30K on a car that will take 6 years to make up the difference in fuel they've saved.
The comments posted above do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of FBWillie

March 09, 2009, 12:39:12 PM
Reply #73

Thin Blue Line

  • Classless Cat
  • Senior Cub

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 4166
Not an entirely change of subject, but....
A local parts dealer said that he can't get Ford truck parts anymore due to that portion of Ford Motor Parts being bought out by Peterbilt, with Peterbilt discontinuing the production. Uh-oh.

March 09, 2009, 12:45:31 PM
Reply #74

Rick Daris

  • Administrator
  • Scout Team Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ********

  • 5014
Not an entirely change of subject, but....
A local parts dealer said that he can't get Ford truck parts anymore due to that portion of Ford Motor Parts being bought out by Peterbilt, with Peterbilt discontinuing the production. Uh-oh.

Guys!-

remember that parts in Cars where lightning mcqueen gets separated from mac on the interstate and then chases down a different truck on accident and the other truck is like "Mac? I'm not a Mac...I'm a Peterbilt!" LMAO because they made the front of the Peterbilts grill look like facial hair.  :lol:
« Last Edit: March 09, 2009, 12:48:27 PM by Rick Daris »

March 09, 2009, 12:48:56 PM
Reply #75

Thin Blue Line

  • Classless Cat
  • Senior Cub

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 4166
Not an entirely change of subject, but....
A local parts dealer said that he can't get Ford truck parts anymore due to that portion of Ford Motor Parts being bought out by Peterbilt, with Peterbilt discontinuing the production. Uh-oh.

Guys!-

remember that parts in Cars where lightning mcqueen gets separated from mac on the interstate and then chases down a different truck on accident and the other truck is like "Mac? I'm not a Mac...I'm a Peterbilt!" LMAO because they made the front of the Peterbilts grill look like facial hair.  :lol:


 :lol: :lol:

March 09, 2009, 12:54:00 PM
Reply #76

michigancat

  • All American

  • Offline
  • ******

  • 23713
  • Personal Text
    You can't be racist and like basketball.

Agreed - GM's failure has nothing to do with a business model built around trucks and SUV's, gas prices skyrocketing, the sales of trucks/SUV's plummeting.  It's all because poor lil ol' GM was forced to make compact cars since CAFE was passed 35 years ago.

And Americans hate small, fuel efficient cars.  Just look @ the Prius.  LOL @ Toyota for thinking a dorky looking 55MPG hybrid could sell in the US.  :lol:

And GM or Ford aren't making Hybrid cars at all right now.  An american made hybrid doesn't exist... and that's the real reason the Prius is doing so well.... there just aren't any other options.  Tree hugg'n hippies would rather buy american; but instead are forced to appear elite and better than everyone else because they can afford to drop 30K on a car that will take 6 years to make up the difference in fuel they've saved.

LOL...you're completely missing my point.  Props for somehow making a horrible argument against a non-existent point, though.

March 09, 2009, 01:05:08 PM
Reply #77

Pete

  • Administrator
  • Scout Team Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ********

  • 6413
  • Personal Text
    Hicks
You two do realize that whether or not federal bailouts happen is almost entirely a moot point don't you?  The sheer volume of derivatives contracts outstanding coupled with the fact that parties to same stand ahead of all other creditors in US bankruptcy courts is going to crush the economy if things don't turn around pronto.  If that cascade starts, and judging by AIG's results it might well already be underway, the collapse will be far worse than anything the world has ever seen.  No amount of hot-off-the-presses Monopoly money will stop it. 

Most of the time I think your are a fascist frack, but I completely agree with you on this point.

Bad stuff is just beginning. 

I honestly half expect to be moving the old lady and I into the folks basement by this time next year.  I am going to go drink smoke hash now.

Better.  Good fix.

March 09, 2009, 01:26:50 PM
Reply #78

Thin Blue Line

  • Classless Cat
  • Senior Cub

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 4166
You two do realize that whether or not federal bailouts happen is almost entirely a moot point don't you?  The sheer volume of derivatives contracts outstanding coupled with the fact that parties to same stand ahead of all other creditors in US bankruptcy courts is going to crush the economy if things don't turn around pronto.  If that cascade starts, and judging by AIG's results it might well already be underway, the collapse will be far worse than anything the world has ever seen.  No amount of hot-off-the-presses Monopoly money will stop it. 

Most of the time I think your are a fascist frack, but I completely agree with you on this point.

Bad stuff is just beginning. 

I honestly half expect to be moving the old lady and I into the folks basement by this time next year.  I am going to go drink smoke hash now.

Better.  Good fix.

 :scared:

March 09, 2009, 02:02:09 PM
Reply #79

AzCat

  • Classless Cat
  • Scout Team Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 7320
Agreed - GM's failure has nothing to do with a business model built around trucks and SUV's, gas prices skyrocketing, the sales of trucks/SUV's plummeting.  It's all because poor lil ol' GM was forced to make compact cars since CAFE was passed 35 years ago.

I understand that you're just ignoring the facts but again: that business model developed because it was the only way they could meet the CAFE mandate while staying in business.  American buyers didn't (and largely still don't) want the tiny tinny little crapboxes that our politicians want us to drive, thus the only way to sell enough to meet the CAFE mandates was to lower the price until those buyers on the very bottom of the economic food chain bit.  By the time they reached that price they were turning no profit on the little crapboxes so they did what any sane rational business would do in a similar circumstance: they oriented their business towards those product lines where they could turn a profit but they were, unfortunately, forced to continue subsidizing the crapbox market as well in order to meet their CAFE mandates.  Really, this isn't all that hard.

And Americans hate small, fuel efficient cars.  Just look @ the Prius.  LOL @ Toyota for thinking a dorky looking 55MPG hybrid could sell in the US.  :lol:

LOL @ you adding 10 MPG to Honda's own over-inflated estimate of the Prius' efficiency.  And LOL @ anyone who believes they'll actually get 45 MPG routinely in one.  Unlike most of the greenies here I actually spent a couple of weeks driving one and can say with some certainty that if you baby it along and try to never allow the gas engine to engage you'll be in the high 30s.  Not bad but well short of what many pure gasoline / diesel vehicles are capable of in real life.  There are some very efficient small cars, much more so than the Prius, and some built by American car companies that simply aren't brought to the US because: 1) there's little demand; 2) they don't comply with our Clean Air Act (though oddly they're good enough for Europe), and 3) they don't meet our safety regulations (again oddly they're good enough for Europe) and/or lawyers would destroy manufacturers putting them on the road here. 

And a big LOL @ the idea that Americans are clamoring for small cars.  Sales were improving relative to other options during that month but recall that we were just seeing the end of $4/gal gasoline, at sub-$2/gal that statistic will rebound in the other direction. 
« Last Edit: March 09, 2009, 02:04:41 PM by AzCat »
Ladies & gentlemen, I present: The Problem

March 09, 2009, 02:23:19 PM
Reply #80

michigancat

  • All American

  • Offline
  • ******

  • 23713
  • Personal Text
    You can't be racist and like basketball.
Agreed - GM's failure has nothing to do with a business model built around trucks and SUV's, gas prices skyrocketing, the sales of trucks/SUV's plummeting.  It's all because poor lil ol' GM was forced to make compact cars since CAFE was passed 35 years ago.

I understand that you're just ignoring the facts but again: that business model developed because it was the only way they could meet the CAFE mandate while staying in business.  American buyers didn't (and largely still don't) want the tiny tinny little crapboxes that our politicians want us to drive, thus the only way to sell enough to meet the CAFE mandates was to lower the price until those buyers on the very bottom of the economic food chain bit.  By the time they reached that price they were turning no profit on the little crapboxes so they did what any sane rational business would do in a similar circumstance: they oriented their business towards those product lines where they could turn a profit but they were, unfortunately, forced to continue subsidizing the crapbox market as well in order to meet their CAFE mandates.  Really, this isn't all that hard.

They had 35 years to make "crapboxes" profitable, and learned absolutely nothing from the energy crisis or the 70's.  They were stupid to build a business model around $1 gasoline.  Toyota was smarter than the Americans and figured out a great way to make a small car profitable (and wildly popular).

LOL @ you adding 10 MPG to Honda's own over-inflated estimate of the Prius' efficiency.  And LOL @ anyone who believes they'll actually get 45 MPG routinely in one.  Unlike most of the greenies here I actually spent a couple of weeks driving one and can say with some certainty that if you baby it along and try to never allow the gas engine to engage you'll be in the high 30s.  Not bad but well short of what many pure gasoline / diesel vehicles are capable of in real life.  There are some very efficient small cars, much more so than the Prius, and some built by American car companies that simply aren't brought to the US because: 1) there's little demand; 2) they don't comply with our Clean Air Act (though oddly they're good enough for Europe), and 3) they don't meet our safety regulations (again oddly they're good enough for Europe) and/or lawyers would destroy manufacturers putting them on the road here. 

Jesus, when you're backed into a corner, you sure do use a lot of words to say absolutely nothing.  The actual MPG of the Prius is irrelevant.  The point is that Toyota showed that Americans want fuel efficient vehicles that they think are good for the environment.  GM, meanwhile, viewed small, fuel efficient cars as "unprofitable crapboxes" and put all their eggs in the Escalade basket.

And a big LOL @ the idea that Americans are clamoring for small cars.  Sales were improving relative to other options during that month but recall that we were just seeing the end of $4/gal gasoline, at sub-$2/gal that statistic will rebound in the other direction. 

LMAO!  This is your argument that people don't want small cars?!?!?



 :lol: :lol: :lol:

March 09, 2009, 02:33:06 PM
Reply #81

AzCat

  • Classless Cat
  • Scout Team Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 7320
Small cars are around 15% of the monthly market, even with gas @ $4/gal (check the date).  That's not overwhelming demand in anyone's book. :lol:
Ladies & gentlemen, I present: The Problem

March 09, 2009, 02:35:47 PM
Reply #82

AzCat

  • Classless Cat
  • Scout Team Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 7320
Jesus, when you're backed into a corner, you sure do use a lot of words to say absolutely nothing.  The actual MPG of the Prius is irrelevant.  The point is that Toyota showed that Americans want fuel efficient vehicles that they think are good for the environment.  GM, meanwhile, viewed small, fuel efficient cars as "unprofitable crapboxes" and put all their eggs in the Escalade basket.

The fact that you lied about it is quite relevant, even more relevant is the fact that you're now defending the lie. 

And again you're ignoring the point: there are far more efficient vehicles on the road than the Prius but it's your precious lefty big government regulatory state that's prohibiting their import (even the ones made by US auto makers overseas).  Those vehicles, by the way, are far better for the environment that the Prius because: 1) they use less fuel; and 2) they don't contain hundreds of pounds of highly toxic batteries. 

Try again.
Ladies & gentlemen, I present: The Problem

March 09, 2009, 02:39:11 PM
Reply #83

AzCat

  • Classless Cat
  • Scout Team Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 7320
They had 35 years to make "crapboxes" profitable, and learned absolutely nothing from the energy crisis or the 70's.  They were stupid to build a business model around $1 gasoline.  Toyota was smarter than the Americans and figured out a great way to make a small car profitable (and wildly popular).

Again: no one would buy them here, even now they're but a small fraction of the market.  No rational business would spend "35 years" dumping money into a product lines on the far ass-end of sales.  Gasoline was far more expensive in markets overseas thus overseas car builders had very strong incentives to build smaller more efficient cars much sooner than did domestic auto makers.  Again, understanding the history here really isn't all that difficult.
Ladies & gentlemen, I present: The Problem

March 09, 2009, 02:52:18 PM
Reply #84

michigancat

  • All American

  • Offline
  • ******

  • 23713
  • Personal Text
    You can't be racist and like basketball.
Small cars are around 15% of the monthly market, even with gas @ $4/gal (check the date).  That's not overwhelming demand in anyone's book. :lol:

LOL.  OK, dude.  GM obviously made the right decision when they decided to write off 15% of the market as little "crapboxes".  It's especially obvious when you look at all the success they've been having since gas prices have fallen.  People are back to buying Escalades!  

Jesus, when you're backed into a corner, you sure do use a lot of words to say absolutely nothing.  The actual MPG of the Prius is irrelevant.  The point is that Toyota showed that Americans want fuel efficient vehicles that they think are good for the environment.  GM, meanwhile, viewed small, fuel efficient cars as "unprofitable crapboxes" and put all their eggs in the Escalade basket.

The fact that you lied about it is quite relevant, even more relevant is the fact that you're now defending the lie. 

And again you're ignoring the point: there are far more efficient vehicles on the road than the Prius but it's your precious lefty big government regulatory state that's prohibiting their import (even the ones made by US auto makers overseas).  Those vehicles, by the way, are far better for the environment that the Prius because: 1) they use less fuel; and 2) they don't contain hundreds of pounds of highly toxic batteries. 

Try again.

Again, not the point.  I'm all in favor of more fuel efficient options coming to the market, especially diesels like you seem to be alluding to.  My point is Toyota proved you can successfuly sell a fuel efficient crapbox to the American market, despite being under the exact same restrictions the Big 3 were under.  GM could have done something similar - they chose not to.

Again: no one would buy them here, even now they're but a small fraction of the market.  No rational business would spend "35 years" dumping money into a product lines on the far ass-end of sales.  Gasoline was far more expensive in markets overseas thus overseas car builders had very strong incentives to build smaller more efficient cars much sooner than did domestic auto makers.  Again, understanding the history here really isn't all that difficult.

Does GM not sell vehicles overseas?  :dunno:

March 09, 2009, 04:06:45 PM
Reply #85

Ben Ji 2.0

  • Cub

  • Offline

  • 387
So guess who's doing a group industry analysis on the transportation industry in their business strategy class?

ME

Guess what company I'm researching?

GM



I wonder if I can reference people from message boards... Might look something like this

According to AZCat from ksufans.com  :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah:

Michigancat counters with  :blahblah: :blahblah: :blahblah:

jbleinweber points out  :lol: :lol: :lol:

In summary GM is F'ed in the A and will likely go bankrupt due to poor strategic planning and a $1,600 legacy cost for every vehicle produced.



On a side note I found an interesting statistic, In 2006 GM was the largest healthcare provider in the world.


I think my grandpa killed somebody once, but he never liked to talk about Kent State.

March 09, 2009, 04:34:19 PM
Reply #86

CatsNChiefs

  • Cub

  • Offline

  • 2302
And GM or Ford aren't making Hybrid cars at all right now.

 :confused:

http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/escapehybrid/

http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/fusion/models/

Think you might be a little confused lil' guy.  Best to just leave Ford out of this, much better off.

March 09, 2009, 06:27:45 PM
Reply #87

sys

  • Second String Wildcat

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 10936
  • Personal Text
    gmafb
1) there's little demand; 2) they don't comply with our Clean Air Act (though oddly they're good enough for Europe), and 3) they don't meet our safety regulations (again oddly they're good enough for Europe) and/or lawyers would destroy manufacturers putting them on the road here. 

there is demand in the us (and canada and mexico).  i don't know what the market would be, but it would certainly be large enough to be worth selling to.

agree that it is ridiculous that ford can't sell some of the best vehicles they make in the us.
"these are no longer “games” in the commonly accepted sense of the term. these are free throw shooting contests leavened by the occasional sprint to the other end of the floor."

March 09, 2009, 07:14:31 PM
Reply #88

FBWillie

  • Classless Cat
  • Senior Cub

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 3541
And GM or Ford aren't making Hybrid cars at all right now.

 :confused:

http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/escapehybrid/

http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/fusion/models/

Think you might be a little confused lil' guy.  Best to just leave Ford out of this, much better off.

Was sarcasm; read rusty's post that I was replying to;  He tried to make the point that GM isn't taking advantage of the market that prius owns... he wrote it off as, "i wasn't even trying to make a point... blah blah blah... I'm not going to dispute anything you say because you're stupid... blah blah blah. 


Nevermind that I pointed out several post ago GM tried the take the small cheap sedan market with Saturn in the 90's but realized GM buyers only want gas hogging sh1t boxes that can pull 10,000 lbs.

I guess my attempt at sarcasm was trying to dumb down my post so that dipcraps like rusty can keep up with the argument; but I can't get a rebuttal that way either.

The comments posted above do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of FBWillie

March 09, 2009, 07:18:48 PM
Reply #89

FBWillie

  • Classless Cat
  • Senior Cub

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 3541
1) there's little demand; 2) they don't comply with our Clean Air Act (though oddly they're good enough for Europe), and 3) they don't meet our safety regulations (again oddly they're good enough for Europe) and/or lawyers would destroy manufacturers putting them on the road here. 

there is demand in the us (and canada and mexico).  i don't know what the market would be, but it would certainly be large enough to be worth selling to.

agree that it is ridiculous that ford can't sell some of the best vehicles they make in the us.

Is this why Honda discontinued the Accord Hybrid in 2007?   You guys don't know a &@#%ing thing about the car industry.
The comments posted above do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of FBWillie