magnamx-5

iTrader: (7)

You didnt watch the press conference where obama garunteed All GM and Chrysler warantys?

cueball1

iTrader: (13)

Buick is still huge with the 50+ middle class crowd and rightly so. They know what those customers want and they give it to them. Quiet and comfortable cars. The newer Buicks are at the top of US cars for reliability too.

Buick also has a history of unexpected performance models. Remember the Grand National? Quicker than the corvette of the same year to 60mph. Turbo, so it was easy to make faster still. In the Muscle car era the GS455 was the king of the 1/4 mile but only Buick fans remember that. Look it up. The 1970 GS455 stage 1 was the fastest muscle car ever produced in stock factory form. There were faster, but that was done with dealership ad ons, not out of the factory. I would guess that the G6 and/or G8 might show up in the Buick line and without the ugly Pontiac grill.

jbresee

I wonder if they'll just re-badge the strong cars in the buick line.

y8s, with the number of dealers they have to drop (something like 65% of all GM dealers must go), you'll see small town and large corporate dealerships getting hosed.

I feel bad for people who bought a dealership. GM is going to use the bankruptcy laws to screw them hard.

elesjuan

iTrader: (11)

Don't forget that ratty, shitty, terrible sounding "BLAT BLAT BLAT BLAT BLAT BLAT BLAT BLAT" noise that comes from the motor after the exhaust falls off... GM's V6 motors sound ******* HORRID. Have ever since the 2800 60 degree.

hustler

iTrader: (6)

how many are left to go?


Probably not enough. Phale away, renew the economy, stop bankrolling idiots who make more in a year than I make in my life. Rape my wallet, I don't give a ****.

I loved the G8. So much for ever owning a G8 wagon.

kotomile

iTrader: (24)

I don't think Buick is going anywhere (purely speculation).

I remember reading that GM wanted to make Buick a Lexus competitor. Something about the GM CEO being taken around in a Buick SUV that had been dynamatted to death and liking it.

johndoe

iTrader: (5)

The important thing to think of is those emerging foreign markets like China, and not the shrinking market of the US. I'm sure that will dictate which brands stay more than anything that makes sense to an American.

jbresee

Great point johndoe!

The new market is India and China. Tata has just produced a $2k car for that market... that is the real competition.

Can any car be manufactured in the USA for that market?

the_man

Yes and no. While that's somewhat of a new market segment to compete in/for, it's not THE competition. Saying it's THE competition is like asking why Mercedes thinks it can sell $100,000 luxury cars when a Hyundai gets you to the same places for under $10,000. I wouldn't be surprised to see GM market some ultra low-cost, made (and sold) overseas car for the el chapo market, but there's plenty of room upmarket, too.

Project84

iTrader: (2)

First it was the gas price hike, now its the failing economy... GM should've abandoned high end niche market cars LONG ago, like 4 to 5 years ago, and focused more on mid level cars that brought buyers back.

I feel strongly that the V-Series Cadillacs are a HUGE set back for GM as they cost a ton to build and don't sell well enough to validate the effort in producing them. I feel that the Camaro was out of the market long enough to now have such a tiny demand, it was senseless of them to wait so long and now to release the V6 model at such a high price, they'll get no buyers (not many). Think of all the developement money invested which is now nearly all wasted (sales figures will tell the truth here).

Saturn should've remained Saturn. I'm a proud Saturn owner of a '96 SL2. Yes, it's no frills, but it's a great car. Much better than a Cavalier or Sunfire, I shouldn't even mention Neon, but, it destroys all those models in reliability. 148k on my original engine/trans/wheel bearings/struts and still getting in the 30's for MPG.

jbresee

the_man,
Your point is valid. I should have said that the growth market is Inida/China. Much of the rest of the world is a replacement market with limited growth potential.

In the existing markets, what would make GM strong again?

I see a company that is so arrogant and flawed in its management that I cannot justify dumping a penny into them.

Do you know that even today they have an executive dining room with white linens and waiters for them to eat breakfast lunch and dinner for free? I know it's chump change, but it exemplifies the arrogance that is pervasive in that company.

They are not operating like the house is on fire.

They have a fleet of private jets and their own private terminal. When the noise about the fleet of jets became too loud, they sold the jets to a private company, and now lease them all back (at a higher cost!).

I could go on, but until the management acknowledges that they are in a death spiral, I am reluctant for my taxes to fund their jets. What would happen if we gave the 25 billion they've sucked up so far to the affected employees? At least they would waste the money efficiently!

gompers

iTrader: (4)

Survival of the fittest baby.


Lets remove those that make shitty investment decisions while holding millions of American jobs. **** bailouts

the_man

Yes and no. There's always growth potential, at least until you have 100% market share. Toyota, Honda et al have been taking market share from GM all along in the US market, there's no reason that GM couldn't build cars that get them that market share back.

Building cars that people want more than competitors and/or selling them at lower costs than competitors. Not a simple task. People will pay more for something they see as being more valuable, the problem is figuring out WHAT, exactly, the next fad will be.

Doesn't really bother me any. If that's how the company owners/shareholders/management want to operate, it's their right and privilege.

I don't know enough about the inner workings of GM to say HOW they're operating. I don't know what the back room discussions are like. I know that they are downplaying the negativity of their situation in the press/to the public- but EVERY company does that. Nobody wants to come out screaming about how they're going to go out of business, as that's the surest way to make it a reality.

I would expect a global company to have the jets. I think it sucks that they have to lease them back at a higher cost. As much as we like to think that it's a new world and we can do everything via email and whatnot, at some point there's no substitute for a face to face meeting. Executives of global companies might need to be in NYC in the morning, LA in the afternoon, and London or Beijing the next day. Having private jets and a private terminal ensures that you're flexible with when you can depart and return, rather than having to find an open commercial seat and change planes six times. More expensive? Likely, although I don't know if anybody has added up the costs of all the commercial tickets that'd be required to replace the private fleet, the cost of having a couple more secretaries to book all the flights and whatnot, and the costs of downtime for company executives as they're standing in security lines for two hours at the airport.



Regarding the bailout/tax dollars issue: It's tough. Way tougher than I'd like to admit. I'm nearly as much of a rabid free marketer as JasonC. The problem is global competitiveness. If Japan is going to subsidize Toyota/Honda, or whatever country/company combination one should choose, to the point that GM/Ford can't compete, where are we left? Do we do the "morally correct" thing and let GM burn, in keeping with our free market principles? Or do we say "hey, we don't have much choice..." and subsidize them*?

Along the same lines, do we allow such a large company to go belly up? Forget the typical sob stories about laid off employees and whatnot- that's just the normal course of business- what about all the creditors? What about the ultimate impact on the economy on a (significantly) larger scale? One could make an argument that all of those impacts are just business as well, but if it has a cascading domino effect, the ultimate impact (to the economy as a whole and to your wallet as a taxpayer) could be way, way bigger than subsidies for the time being.

Does GM need to change? Yeah. Lots of companies need to change. The problem is that a lot of the real issues get cluttered with media sensationalism and stereotypes to the point that it's hard to see the forest through the trees.


*I'm not only talking about direct subsidies/bailouts, but all sorts of corporatism that subsidizes these companies, whether it's favorable taxes, tariffs, loans, legal protection, whatever.

mrtonyg

iTrader: (1)

Well, it's official now...no more Pontiac.



Here is a screen shot of the current (as of today) Pontiac website:

"Total Confidence"...WOW...the irony, or is it the deceit?

the_man

Meh, no biggie. The components are standard GM stuff, GM dealerships will still honor warranties, etc., so yeah, one should have as much confidence in Pontiac as Chevy or anything else. I mean, you can still get parts for an old AMC or Austin-Healey, I see no reason it'd be a problem to get parts/service for a Pontiac, especially in the 3-5 year window that people actually keep new cars. Even 30 years out, I don't see it being a problem.

mrtonyg

iTrader: (1)

I agree with you regarding future part availability and servicing.

My point was the wording they chose to use on their home page!

elesjuan

iTrader: (11)

Have you ever bought a brand new car? American or Foreign?

Reason I ask this is, its a general rule of thumb NOT To buy the first production year of any "New" vehicle on the market. Reason for this is typically they need a bit of time to work the bugs out. Buying that first year Isn't necessarily a bad idea, you'll just have more recalls and warranty issues.

You realize that $2000.00 chinachong car will not have a warranty of any kind, right? Thats the final step to our Ultimate disposable society, next to disposable housing.

jayc72

iTrader: (14)

I've owned 3 new Mazda's in the last 6-7 years. '02 Protege5, '05 Tribute and an '08 Mazda3. Aside from a couple of minor repairs I haven't had to use the warranty expect for the Tribute (that's telling, guess where it is made?). New cat and rear shocks.

Warranty is so over rated, and mostly marketing anyway. If I could have saved $3K on each car and opted out of the warranty I would be probably $10K richer.

You come to market with a $2000 dollar car, who gives a **** if it has a warranty? By 4 of them, there's your warranty.

Saml01

iTrader: (9)

So tempting to pick up a G8. V8, 4 Doors, 6 speed. 0% APR is awesome as well.

the_man

A $2000 car will never, ever, ever happen in America. Safety and emissions crap preclude it, moreso each year as you have to put on TPMS, traction control, etc. Remember that in India, China, etc, you can still buy a NEW Tracker/Sidekick. Not the latest models, though, the early-80s models. Still produced. Cheap, reliable, capable. No safety or emissions stuff, no frills, no creature comforts.

That's how they do a $2000 car. Obsolete, cheap, off the shelf components that require no testing, no new factories, no real design. Minimal R&D.