Not with those exact figures, but there are many out there.
This is the first good idea youve had in forever. 
[QUOTE=casstommy;367757]The Energy Department has warned of the volatility of oil prices/supplies since the damn 70ās. Peak Oil has been a debate for decades. Oil prices rose at a steady rate since late 2002. Youād have to be living in a hole to not know that gas prices could at any point in time be a significant issue.[/QUOTE]
partially agree.
price volatility has definately been a concernā¦for a long time.
Oil prices have steadily risenā¦I agree.
However, a steady rise hid many of the consequencesā¦which we have seen in pricing since Katrina.
[QUOTE=metro;367762]
hell I got an ideaā¦let Exxon bail out GM:lmao:[/QUOTE]
I think I will send this idea to President-Elect Obama.
Exxon bails out GM
Shell bails out Ford
BP bails out Chrysler.
the avg Toyota costs $35 of employee benefits to construct, GM is $75, so the UAW essentially makes GM cars twice the cost.
THIS is the bottom line for the problem with American manufacturers. The union required pay and benefits have handcuffed the American manufacturers and made them play at a disadvantage.
They should only bail them out if they also allow the rules of the unions to change. Allow them to get out of Michigan and build plants where ever they want. If they moved a lot of the manufacturing to the deep south, Miss and Louisiana areas, and allowed them to pay what they think they need to pay to make a profit, there will be employees lining up. The existing in Detroit mindset is going to be impossible to change.
As much as I hate to say it, I canāt support the bailout if nothing else changes. I donāt want to see them fail by any means. But a bailout without any other changes will only be a temporary fix and shouldnāt be expected for the American public to have to do this every couple of years.
There is plenty of blame to go around. UAW shares a big piece, but the big 3 management has sucked ass. Their market share continues to be eroded, and they all turned their nose up in the air to vehicles with increased fuel effeciency and its biting them in the ass.
If Iām not mistaken, the head guy at Chrysler is a former Toyota guy. The companies management donāt really think that differently.
I have a '07 Charger and while the interior of that car was more impressive than the Chevyās or Fordās I looked at, it was honestly on par with the '07 Accord. Donāt fool yourself on too much plastic, itās almost all plastic on every car until you hit $35k+, the difference is how ****ty it looks. My Charger lacks a bunch of features that a higher model would, but still is pretty sleek and decent. Of course it didnāt hurt that it was Daimler Chrysler at the time I bought my car and Iāve read many stories saying those cars received some better parts due to that merger.
On the other hand, we got my wife an '05 Matrix from her Aunt with just 50k miles on it, and Iāve honestly never been more impressed with a vehicle. Sure, it has a hatch and isnāt the manliest thing, but it sits you up right (not too low), and the interior is really well designed. It gets about 35 to the mile on the highway, too. Itās made me really reconsider buying American made vehicles in the future if they donāt shape up.
Toyota, Honda execs and CEO's apparently only make a small fraction of what the big three make. I've read this alot, but havent found any evidence, although it isnt hard to believe.
I believe this is common in all of Japanese business and not just the automotive. Their pay scales are reasonable among the different levels, like only 5 to 10% differences between levels. Where itās not uncommon to see 400% differences in American companies. Iāve thought American businesses have been behind the ball on this for a while. The interesting thing about this though is that the Japanese economy(all businesses, not just automotive) has struggled more than the American until recent years.
I have a '07 Charger and while the interior of that car was more impressive than the Chevy's or Ford's I looked at, it was honestly on par with the '07 Accord. Don't fool yourself on too much plastic, it's almost all plastic on every car until you hit $35k+, the difference is how ****ty it looks.
I was thinking the same thing. If theyāre not using plastic, what are they using? They all use plastic.
Ultimately, the reason is the SUV craze. The Big 3 completely stopped caring about small to midsize cars when the American public demanded large gas guzzlers. International companies added SUV lines, but kept their sedans at the highest quality. When the gas crisis hit and people realized gas can't be cheap forever, they started to trade in their SUVs, but the Big 3 didn't have much to meet that demand.
I just donāt think thatās true. Did the American manufacturers continue to build SUVs and trucks? Yes. But at the same time the international companies were building up their fleet with the same types of vehicles. Pretty much every manufacturer offers a SUV, Porsche included. There was no difference in the mindsets. If anything, the Japanese companies were trying to mimic the American manufacturers, and were playing catch up. I have no doubt that Toyota was trying to be GM or Ford.
At the time the American manufacturers ramped up in SUVs, SUVs were the best sellers. Thatās a basic business principal, supply and demand. But like Metro mentioned, then the oil prices skyrockted. Honda was affected by this too with the Ridgeline.
And don't get me started on GM considering dropping the Saturn brand while keeping Buick and Pontiac.
I honestly donāt get this either. This is one thing Iāve disagreed with the US manufacturers on for awhile. In this economy, thereās need to build the same vehicle under different platforms. And Saturnās reputation is probably the best among the US companies.
The Odyssey still sells well, and I've ridden in a Previa (sp?) - its a nice vehicle... for a minivan.
I know everybody has examples like this, and could just make up examples, but my sister and brother-in-law bought a new Odyssey a few years ago. They had to take it back for something to repair every couple of months for the first year. Nothing that made the vehicle actually breakdown. But enough to be a huge nuisance for a brand new vehicle. They got rid of it after 2 years and got a Suburban. Yes, it is the biggest of the big. But for a family of 5 it is very practical and safe.
I also had a buddy who bought a new Accord that had to have the whole transmission replaced after only 6 months. He was really pissed because that was the main reason he bought the Accord because of the reliability claims. To be fair, they obviously replaced it for nothing under warranty, and he hasnāt had any problems the past couple of years. But he says because it did happen once, he feels like itās going to happen again.
I have a 93 pathfinder and it works fine still to this day.
My car before that was a 91 honda accord. It never had a problem until the transmission went bad around 200k miles.
As you can see, I donāt invest a lot of money into my cars, but they were both japanese and neither gave me a problem.
they were both japanese and neither gave me a problem.
errr, the holding company is in Japan
honda, toy, bmw, hydaui, nissan are largely built in the US
did yall know Volkswagon is building a BILLION dollar plant in Chattanooga as we speak?? And get thisā¦its on a WWII ammo dumpā¦kind of ironic ehh??
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20081205/NEWS02/812050395/1001/RSS6001
[QUOTE=metro;367798]errr, the holding company is in Japan
honda, toy, bmw, hydaui, nissan are largely built in the US[/QUOTE]
Not arguing that, but it is a japanese manufacturer.
some rather interesting comments from a Detroit area columnistā¦donāt totally agree with everything he says.
http://www.freep.com/article/20081123/COL01/811230371
[QUOTE]Why werenāt you equally vocal when your state handed out hundreds of millions in tax breaks to Mercedes-Benz, Hyundai, Honda and others to open plants there? Why not ālet the market workā? Or is it better for Alabama if the Detroit Three fold so that the foreign companies ā in your state ā can produce more?
Way to think of the nation first, senator.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]AIG lost hundred of billions in credit default swaps ā which no one can explain and which make nothing, produce nothing, employ no one and are essentially bets on failure.
And you donāt demand a paragraph from it?
Look. Nobody is saying the auto business is healthy. Its unions need to adjust more. Its models and dealerships need to shrink. Its top executives have to downsize their own importance.[/QUOTE]
Before we throw the UAW completely to the wolves, the Big Three and UAW had an existing arrangement that would make the labor costs of the Big Three on par with foreign manufacturers. It largely has to do with transferring the pension plans to the UAW I think either in 2009 or 2010. Had this housing collapse not happened (worse than peak oil) I think the Big Three would have made it. I have a lot of ill-will towards both the Big Three execs and the UAW but itās not entirely on the UAW.
[QUOTE=Gill2003;367689]I say let em declare chapter 11 and reorganize their debts[/QUOTE]
GM would more likely file Chapter 7 and liquidate its assets. There is no way that they can secure a loan for the guarantee of its obligations (necessary for Chapter 11), so their only option is to spend taxpayer money on an investment that is so risky the private industry will not touch.
Itās either Chapter 7 and goodbye, or Chapter 11 ā wait 20 years ā and goodbye. They need to completely start from scratch, and without a leader who can sell off divisions and decentralize the company they are finished.
The bailout money will come through in January, although it should not. When it comes through, the stock will spike, and crash 2 weeks later when the market realizes that nothing will change.
[QUOTE=Gill2003;367724]I think that the bailout is only going to delay in inevitable. Pay the vendors with the bailout money, let the corporation restructure.[/QUOTE]i like this idea.
[QUOTE=darrenmoorehead;367825]The bailout money will come through in January, although it should not. When it comes through, the stock will spike, and crash 2 weeks later when the market realizes that nothing will change.[/QUOTE]itās sad but thatās probably true.
I was thinking the same thing. If they're not using plastic, what are they using? They all use plastic.
Itās just ****tier plastic. You tap on it and itās a shell, itāll crack like crazy where better plastic can handle the beating thatās all.
I have a 93 pathfinder and it works fine still to this day.My car before that was a 91 honda accord. It never had a problem until the transmission went bad around 200k miles.
As you can see, I donāt invest a lot of money into my cars, but they were both japanese and neither gave me a problem.
I donāt doubt theyāre not reliable. Just saying is hard to quantify reliable. Thereās examples both ways, good and bad, American manufacturer and foreign. My last vehicle was a 99 Blazer. Had it 7 years and put 140K on it before I sold it. Had to replace a radiator hose and battery, and thatās it. My uncle had a mid-1980s Silverado work truck, with around 240K miles on it. My girlfriend bought a Mercedes C class new. Had to take it back to the dealership at least 3 times because of the brakes before just giving up and living with it.
I think a large part of the American manufacturers problem is image. Their vehicles saturated the market for a long time, then people enjoyed starting to get something different. Also, most of their customers are perceived as blue collar, middle America. And its mostly marketed that way. So a lot of white collar America didnāt relate to that, and I can understand that. Not only do they have to restructure, I think they have to work to change their image too.