|
U.S. auto bailout talks collapse (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| pmoisse |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
canada should seize the opportunity and get their deal in now. Basically the canadian government can look like the good guy and in the process, guarantee jobs stay in canada before the US turns around with the next deal and demands the same thereby screwing us. But we will probably be canadian and wait to see what our big brother does.
Stupid move |
That would be quite the gamble on the off-chance that the US doesn't throw these guys a lifeline. Our domestic production can't use all the parts that are made here since a good chunk of them go south of the border.
It's also a gamble throwing money down the hole in the likelihood that these companies can't get their together and solve their union / systemic / cost / over production issues. They will continue to bleed money like it's going out of style without major changes. Would you bet on them making those changes? They've had what, the last 5 years or so to make those changes where the common perception was that the big trucks and SUV's wouldn't last and remain profitable?
The chose to grab the profits while they could at the expense of developing a quality, marketable, and affordable product that people would want. In addition to that, the fac that they the bed in the 80's with garbage cars did nothing to earn them any enduring brand loyalty into the 90's and 2000's when their whole business model was built on the concept of brand loyalty (multiple GM brands making essentially the same cars under different badges, same with Ford / Mercury and Chrysler / Dodge)
This government buyout plan would make more sense to Sweden to buy Saab from GM and Volvo from Ford - both are only made in Sweden and pretty unique brads even if there is some compnent sharing. Germany could buy Opel from GM and do much the same.
Ford already has Mazda and Volvo up for sale. |
|
|
| zoogla |
| wheres the market right now? |
|
|
| The Ear |
 |
|
|
| Jem_hadar |
| quote: | Originally posted by NuERA
I guess this is what happens when you keep making cars that nobody wants. Now where are the keys to my dodge ram? :rolleyes: |
lol!
(so glad i drive a yaris!)
| quote: | Originally posted by exstasie
You also have to look at profit margins.
Sure, you could sell 10000% more cars then you're competition, but if you're selling all of your cars at a loss, then it isn't to smart is it. |
This historically (up to new realities they're facing now) has been what they've been facing.
All NA car companies have NEEDED to have their small (and usually ty) compact cars, bc all the companies are held to minimum regulations on such things as fuel economy for example. The box Aveo helps compensate for the Silverado (for example). too often w/ the Big Three, they never treated the compact/subcompact market seriously in their business plans... they were used for meeting certain requirements re: their overall fleet (such as the aforementioned minimum avg fuel economy their fleet had to maintain in america)
thus, yes, they sold their compacts at a loss essentially, bc they MORE than made up for it w/ their massive SUVS, trucks and full-sized sedans. that's where the money was so thats what they built (w/o trying to find ways to make the cheaper, more fuel efficient and practical cars cost-efficient to produce and sell in the north american market)
hahah, now, years later, its the reason for their downfall. how ironic. |
|
|
| rulzz |
| bailout would be passed long time ago but they need to crush union first as soon as union gives up bailout will be there in nano second |
|
|
| Skipper |
| Bush granting 17B in LOANS with steep debt covenants, to be paid out of the bailout money and repaid in 3 months. Big 3 must prove they are financially viable at that time. |
|
|
| MarkT |
Ford isn't asking or getting anything...GM is getting the bulk of it.
I may have misheard...but they don't have to be repaid in three months, do they? I thought they just had to have a viable proposal/plan in place by March 2009...?
I'm soooooo pleased to see that this isn't a handout and comes with MAJOR conditions (including the companies and unions addressing the wages and putting them on par with foreign car makers). |
|
|
| She_Fitz |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
I may have misheard...but they don't have to be repaid in three months, do they? I thought they just had to have a viable proposal/plan in place by March 2009...?
|
They have to prove that they have resturctured and can be viable companies... or repay the loans by the end of March. |
|
|
| VERTiG0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by miljan
unions protect lazy people. |
Yes.
Unions were a good thing to have 60-70+ years ago, but these days with labour laws as they are and all the protection that your average worker has, unions are completely redundant.
Crush them all. As far as I'm concerned, "unionized" is synonymous with "inefficient." |
|
|
| zoogla |
| i have a major GM dealership network as a client. spoke to them this morning and they were relieved at this morning's news, but you can expect at least 10 GM dealerships will go under in the next 12 months. feel sorry for them :( |
|
|
| patpicos |
| quote: | Originally posted by Skipper
Bush granting 17B in LOANS with steep debt covenants, to be paid out of the bailout money and repaid in 3 months. Big 3 must prove they are financially viable at that time. |
the plan that failed at the senate was better then what they just passed :( less restrictions, no overseer "car czar", no forced restrictions on bondholders and union....pff weak! |
|
|
| Skipper |
| quote: | Originally posted by devnull
the plan that failed at the senate was better then what they just passed :( less restrictions, no overseer "car czar", no forced restrictions on bondholders and union....pff weak! |
Those are all things that are absolutely necessary to prevent this from being another handout. |
|
|
|
|
