gm and nissan

Just wondering what you all thought of the possible alliance between GM and nissan. what if any affect it might have on the camaro ?

Well I have no idea, it would be cool to have the same specs for the Camaro z28 as the new GT-R. And all wheel drive would be nice.

This is making me sick to my stomach! :( I can't take it. I would rather see GM and Ford, and that would be bad enough. I pray this does not happen. I hope kerkorian burns in hell for this ****! :death: What a jackass. :mad:

Well I have no idea, it would be cool to have the same specs for the Camaro z28 as the new GT-R. And all wheel drive would be nice.



Go jump off a cliff

People I urge you to boycott all tracinda products immediately! Anyone planning to stay at a mirage hotel & casino go somewhere else.

Go jump off a cliff
My thoughts exactly. :D

How many freaking Renault-Nissan love GM threads to we need?!? There's at least five of them in the appropriate forum for it.

NO! that's it PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!! If this happen's GM is ruined. Never will I look at any gm vehicle in the same respect I once did. AWD=CAMARO= NO GOOD!
GM has built so many awesome cars and trucks from the day it started. GM the company trying to buy into you is NISSAN is GM turning japanese on us? Don't let Nissan ruin your HERITAGE... which would be American pleaseee! FORD will have a continued sales from me with a new 2009 Mustang GT, if Nissan's influences flow into GM's new sport coupe design's.

It's bad enough buicks are being made in China.
It's bad enough the GTO and Camaro will and are being made in Australia (no offense to Holden, but they're AMERICAN muscle cars)
It's bad enough I drive a custom import (Canadian muscle baby)
We don't need a Nissan GM alliance.

If Honda and Toyota can make Camry's, Accords and such in frickin' Ohio and wherever then GM can stay an American company.

I'm against the whole idea, but it would not be the end of the world for me. The article was kinda confusing but from what i gather, GM is trying to actually acquire Nissan? Anyway, I'm gonna play devils advocate and list why it would not be a bad idea.

Okay, first off, Nissan has an image among young car buyers/tuners that rivals even honda and mitsubishi. Just saying the name "skyline" puts goosebumps on tuners kinda like "cobra" or "427" does for muscle car guys.

Second of all, Nissan may be imports, but they have some beautiful vehicles. The 350Z and its cousin infiniti's look GOOD. Also, there titans are pretty sharp looking and are some of the cheapest V8's you can get.

Third, Nissan's V6 technology is also a world leader. Not many company's can advertise about V6's putting out around 300hp, especially from sub 30K prices. This would be great technology to adapt to the camaro. Imagine how much R&D money would be saved.

Okay, my final point is one of a business case. Since the debut of the Cobalt, solstice, sky, aveo, g6, ions replacement, Pursuit,etc GM has been trying to get a part of the "sport compact" market away from the japanese. This would not only eliminate a major competitor for that market share, but also grab some nissan loyals and convert them.

From any point of view, I find it hard to beleive that GM would not make profit from an acquisition.

My world is shattered. I would NEVER buy a Japanese car. I only drive GM. So now what the hell am I supposed to do? This SUCKS.

I would NEVER buy a Japanese car.

You bought a Japanese bike. :shrug: :)

It's bad enough the GTO and Camaro will and are being made in Australia

Huh? Camaro isn't going to be built in Australia. Stop reading Automobile Magazine and pay attention! :p

The article was kinda confusing but from what i gather, GM is trying to actually acquire Nissan?

No, it's the other way around. Nissan/Renault is interested in gaining a significant minority stake in GM, after the suggestion was made by Kerkorian's Tracendia group, which controls roughly 10% of GM's stock (I think it's 10). Think Daimler-Benz - Chrysler merger on a smaller scale. :mad:

I cant see how you guys look at Nissan in the same light as Honda or mitsu?
It looks like you guys only look at "American Muscle" well look at the history of the 240Z i mean i dont think you guys know this but piror to 1970 the Corvette held the #1 selling 2 seater sport car in America than Datsun came out with the 240Z in 1970 and changed the sport car world! now fast foward to 1996 where they stoped making the 300ZX, and at that time in 1997 Cheve introduced the C5, the Corvette held the #1 selling 2 seater sport car till the yeay of 2003 Nissan came back out with the 350Z and took the tittle back, now being the #1 Selling 2 seater sport car in America!

First thing Z's get a ton of respect
Second Nissan can make a hell of a car.
(and yes my stock LS1 will smoke any stock Z) But i do love Z's

No, it's the other way around. Nissan/Renault is interested in gaining a significant minority stake in GM, after the suggestion was made by Kerkorian's Tracendia group, which controls roughly 10% of GM's stock (I think it's 10). Think Daimler-Benz - Chrysler merger on a smaller scale. :mad:

Thanks for the clarification. So if this happens, will nissan be another name under the GM title such as hummer, cadillac, and saab?

And i still stand by my statement that nissan is stereotyped with mitsubishi and honda as one of the best examples of import tuner. Nissan and mitsubishi have been in all three fast and the furious movies. And as all of you are aware of, the fast and the furious is the epitome of japanese car worship. (ie the skyline driven by vin diesels henchmen in the first movie, paul walkers blue skyline in the second one, and the bad guys 350z in the third one)

Also, the need for speed underground video games contribute greatly to nissan reputation. In the original game, the fastest car you could get was the skyline, and you unlocked it last after defeating one of the main bosses.

Trust me on this, nissan has some iconic cars for todays youth and todays youth will be tomorrows buyers.

I cant see how you guys look at Nissan in the same light as Honda or mitsu?
It looks like you guys only look at "American Muscle" well look at the history of the 240Z i mean i dont think you guys know this but piror to 1970 the Corvette held the #1 selling 2 seater sport car in America than Datsun came out with the 240Z in 1970 and changed the sport car world! now fast foward to 1996 where they stoped making the 300ZX, and at that time in 1997 Cheve introduced the C5, the Corvette held the #1 selling 2 seater sport car till the yeay of 2003 Nissan came back out with the 350Z and took the tittle back, now being the #1 Selling 2 seater sport car in America!


Please, don't get PacerX started! :lol:

....Trust me on this, nissan has some iconic cars for todays youth and todays youth will be tomorrows buyers.

All that Gen-Y pop-culture stuff you mentioned is all well and good, but Skylines aren't the kinds of cars a 20-something walks into a dealership and buys brand new. And I'd still take my chances with a nice new RWD Impala or FWD Malibu over the Altima/Maxima for mass public-consumption, for the simple fact that Chevrolet has the dealership numbers that Nissan could only dream about.

In all honestly, I think GM has MORE to offer Nissan/Renault than the other way around....heck, Renault has never been able to build cars to suit American tastes, that's why they ain't playing here....and the comparatively paltry sum of a $3 billion payment to GM seems pretty flimsy.

All that Gen-Y pop-culture stuff you mentioned is all well and good, but Skylines aren't the kinds of cars a 20-something walks into a dealership and buys brand new. And I'd still take my chances with a nice new RWD Impala or FWD Malibu over the Altima/Maxima for mass public-consumption, for the simple fact that Chevrolet has the dealership numbers that Nissan could only dream about.

I absolutely agree. I am just trying to be optimistic here. More cars made by GM equals more profit, more profit means less financial trouble, less financial trouble equals less corner cutting and job layoffs. Everybody wins;).

In all honestly, I think GM has MORE to offer Nissan/Renault than the other way around....heck, Renault has never been able to build cars to suit American tastes, that's why they ain't playing here....and the comparatively paltry sum of a $3 billion payment to GM seems pretty flimsy.
You guys crack me up.

You think GM builds cars that suit American's taste so well??? Bull****, Americans are buying twice as many imports as domestics these days.

Do you guys not realize that the Camry, Accord, Civic, Corolla, 350Z, and all of those sell so much better than American cars...??? WHY? Because people want those brands. Mainly for reliability. Whether you want to believe it or not.

Why do you think that Toyota is fastly becoming the worlds largest Auto Manufactuer.

And why is GM on the verge of going bankrupt.

Dont look at this like Nissan is going to take over, they arent going to start building chevrolet 350'Z's or Nissan Camaro's. They just want shareholding in the company. I think its actually good, because when you think about it, they have enough faith in GM to buy that much stock...

Just wondering what you all thought of the possible alliance between GM and nissan. what if any affect it might have on the camaro ?

None

I absolutely agree. I am just trying to be optimistic here. More cars made by GM equals more profit, more profit means less financial trouble, less financial trouble equals less corner cutting and job layoffs. Everybody wins;).

I think this would be more true if GM were accuiring shares in Nissan. If this were like SAAB where GM was the buyer, GM would be profiting from Nissan sales as well as their own. Instead Nissan would have a piece of GM. I dont think Nissan would let themselves fall under GM like the other brands when they are the ones buying.

I could see some platform/drivetrain sharing with reskinned Nissans as GM and vice versa and the companies working on projects together though.

Re-skinning cars isn't really useful unless the looks suck. What we need is different things with different looks, instead of the same things with different looks.

Please, don't get PacerX started! :lol:
Please do he has been awefully quiet recently.

I guess he is stuck in some forsaken hotel without internet while he upgrades some crap hole factory .;)


Just playin' Pacer put down the napalm:p

In all honestly, I think GM has MORE to offer Nissan/Renault than the other way around....heck, Renault has never been able to build cars to suit American tastes, that's why they ain't playing here....and the comparatively paltry sum of a $3 billion payment to GM seems pretty flimsy.
Amen to that. This is a sneaky back-door attempt by R-N to get in on GM's success in fullsize SUV's, trucks and good old American Muscle. Wagoner... pls politely show them the door.

Everybody needs to keep in mind survival in the global marketplace SHOULD be the top priority.

Its no accident Nissan's alliance with Renault probably saved both companies. Its no secret GM is in serious trouble. Its also very ovbious that an ALLIANCE (note nobody is talking merger...just a partnernship) could yield great gains in possibly some shared platforms but more than likely shared technologies, shared powerplants, combined R&D on hybrids and fuel cell cars and other future tech.

I think everyone is overreacting w/o understanding what they are actually talking about doing. Kerkorian's tracinda holds 10% of GM's stock. If Nissan and Renault each bought 10% then the group as a whole would control about a third of GM stock. There's no other groups that could really challenge that on the board of directors level. So this new group would more or less be able to direct GM. I think Kerkorian would also want to fire Waggoner and replace him with Nissan's Ghosn, who also happens to be Renault's CEO. Can one guy run all three effectively?

[quote=Z28Wilson]You bought a Japanese bike. :shrug: :)

Let me explain that. First of all, I didn't buy it new. My reason here, is A Japanese held company didn't get my money, an individual did. Second, when I comes to motorcycles, if you want all out performance and balls to the walls speed, what ELSE are you going to buy? I'm very happy for Harley's success, but I'm not exactly their demo. I love muscle. I love performance. But most of all I love America. Too bad America doesn't make anything in the same league as a Busa. Now when it comes to cars, we have a totally different ball game. The Japanese don't have anything in the league with a Camaro or Firebird. (And if they did, I'd still buy American). Some may see me as a hypocrite, but I don't. :usa:

The Japanese don't have anything in the league with a Camaro or Firebird. (And if they did, I'd still buy American). Some may see me as a hypocrite, but I don't. :usa:[/QUOTE]

What do you mean "in the same league" because its kind of the other way around, i mean my LS1 is a fast American car for being stock but Supra turbo's and Nizmo turbo Z's will spank me all day, in pretty much every aspect acceleration, breaking, handling, fit and finish etc, etc.

I mean Camaro is a bad ass car but I think with the ***'s quality aspect
And technology it will help GM to make a better car.

They're different animals. Are you saying that a Supra is a "musclecar"? I never said the *** cars weren't as fast, they are just different. And dollar for dollar, take a Camaro LS1 and with the change you have left over for NOT buying the Supra, you could put that money in the Camaro and spank pretty much ANY Supra. If I'm not mistaken, the Supra was at least 8 grand more than a LS1 was.

I mean Camaro is a bad ass car but I think with the ***'s quality aspect
And technology it will help GM to make a better car.


How much more did they pay than you? I thought Supras died because of the price tag. it was killin the 300Z too till they managed to make a faster cheaper 350Z right? the neatest 280z's had 350 sb in them.

Anyway I kinda always wished GM would buy into Honda. I always thought Hondas reliability and engineering amoung Japaneese cars was unmatched. With GM's bringing SUV/Truck Muscle car Sports car to the table and Hondas small car reliability and engineering pushed through Chevrolet Dealerships nothing would even come close.

Go ahead flame me :D

What do you mean "in the same league" because its kind of the other way around, i mean my LS1 is a fast American car for being stock but Supra turbo's and Nizmo turbo Z's will spank me all day, in pretty much every aspect acceleration, breaking, handling, fit and finish etc, etc.

I mean Camaro is a bad ass car but I think with the ***'s quality aspect
And technology it will help GM to make a better car.

Nissan is below GM in quality. Just because a brand is from the same country as another doesn't mean they are the same.

I'd take a C5 over those *** 90's sports cars. The Nissan and Toyota Turbo 6's are good engines, but the rest of the car are no better than LS1 cars

I think some ppl just stero type "rice rockets" witch are mainly dominated by Honda and Acura with real ***. preformance cars, I feel that Nissan has a big Preformance history and still is in to prefomance cars i mean look at sedans even, ill take an SE-R Altima over a Impalla SS any day.

I just dont see a problem with Nissan teaming up with GM.
Think it will make a good match!

:barf: My gizzards feel worse every day. I wonder if this has anything to do with my sudden loss of appetite?

ill take an SE-R Altima over a Impalla SS any day.
Those cars are in 2 totally different classes. Impala is a fullsize car, closer to Maxima by far than Altima. The Altima competes with Malibu sedan in size and performance. Put it against the Malibu SS sedan and you would likely have pretty competitive cars but the 303 hp V8 Impala SS is completely different than an Altima.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1152265927210&call_pageid=968350072197&col=969048863851

Source: AP/Toronto Star

DETROIT — General Motors Corp.'s board of directors has voted to start exploratory discussions with Renault SA and Nissan Motor Co. on a potential alliance between the three companies.

In a teleconference meeting held Friday, the board authorized the company's management to consider the proposal and "weigh the potential benefits of such an alliance in order to assist the Board in its decision making," George Fisher, a member of the board, said in a statement.

Chairman and Chief Executive Rick Wagoner will lead the talks, which stem from a proposal by billionaire shareholder Kirk Kerkorian.

"General Motors has a lot of experience with different types of alliances and some have provided significant benefits to GM's competitive position and financial strength," Wagoner said in a statement. "We will enter into discussions with the managements of Renault and Nissan with an open mind — eager to hear their ideas of how an alliance between our companies might work to our mutual benefit. Given the complexity of any potential relationship, it has to be carefully considered on its merits before coming to any conclusion.''

A spokeswoman for Renault had no immediate comment on the GM board decision, and no one was available at Nissan for comment late Friday in Japan.

Kerkorian is pushing for GM to consider an alliance with Renault and Nissan in an effort to help the world's biggest automaker stage a turnaround and reverse its declining market share.

GM shares rose 65 cents, or 2.2 percent, to $29.85 in midday trading after the announcement. They have been trading in a 52-week range of $18.33 to $37.70.

Fisher, retired chairman and CEO of Eastman Kodak Co., said the board will monitor the talks and make sure they serve the best interest of all GM stockholders.

The Nissan and Renault boards each endorsed the discussions after Kerkorian's Tracinda Corp. disclosed the potential alliance in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission June 30.

Wagoner said that when the idea of joining with Renault and Nissan was first suggested, he contacted Carlos Ghosn, chief executive of both Renault and Nissan, and the two agreed to meet.

"We periodically receive interesting proposals, and we owe it to the company and its shareholders to explore how they might work, and to objectively weigh the potential benefits and issues that each might present," Wagoner said.

Anyone read the article in the business section of the NYTimes today?

They made it sound like Nissan was brilliant for turning around the 350Z in 20 months and that GM is fumbling because they still have not said they would build the Camaro after it had rave reviews at the Autoshow.

What I found interesting was they said that "If the Board of Directors voted to build the Camaro at the Meeting held Friday (Today)" that it would still take 3 years to have a car in production.

Thats a very interesting statement....

What I found interesting was they said that "If the Board of Directors voted to build the Camaro at the Meeting held Friday (Today)" that it would still take 3 years to have a car in production.

The New York Times is assuming that no work has been done on Camaro to this point, even though there is evidence flying around all over the place that work has been done, and is ongoing, as though Camaro has been approved. Bob Lutz came right out and told the press that Camaro is moving along, full speed ahead, despite the lack of an official announcement. You'd think the clowns over at the NYT would've taken note. :rolleyes:

The New York Times is a rag that could only serve as one purpose -- litter box lining for my cat.....

My world is shattered. I would NEVER buy a Japanese car. I only drive GM. So now what the hell am I supposed to do? This SUCKS.
Well, sorry chum. Don't you know this world has globalised? And that several of the parts of your very car could be designed or made in japan? And that the Japanese have some of the best technology second to none (such as Nissan's)??

The Slimes are about as useless an organization as the un! Those are the type of comments, I've been bitchin' about for years. I hope they fold up and go bankrupt, along with tracinda, nison, renalt, etc. I am just sick over this whole load of ****! :barf: How in the hell can I continue to push a company, I have believed in for all my life, once they get in bed with the french? I don't think I can. And I haven't spoken of the general since hearing this disgusting news. Sick I tell ya! I should have known. Things were getting too good to be true, I should have just realized that, as usual my parade would be **** on! This has been the story of my life. :mad: Can't we make some kind of a hookup between kerkorian & kevorkian? :death: Wishful thinking I guess. I knew every time I heard mention of this POS, buying gm stock, one day he was going to **** things up, but this......this is just too much. :confused:

GM plus Nissan/Renault is bad news. Sure both companies will prob. profit from sharing chassis, interiors etc...BUT GM BETTER NOT SHARE THEIR TECHNOLOGY. Once GM gives Nissan a look at what GM has as far as HD truck/ full size suv technology, Nissan will be buddy buddy for a few years than turn around and kick gm's you know what with the same technology secret's discovered from the General itself. I can't believe GM would even consider a deal with Nissan. Nissan has alot of history, but nowhere near GM's. The Z is a great car for 30-35K, but that's it. GM don't be a trader.
Hope the new Camaro isn't based on the next gen. Z chassis...

All I have to say is if GM and Nissan/Renault do partner up. I'll be buying a Challenger next year. I refuse to buy from a company that betrayed it's stockholders, and loyalists by selling GM's soul to France/Japan. It's bad enough they killed the Camaro 4 years ago but this bull**** I can't stomach. All i've got to say is the GM Board of Directors had better pull their heads out of their a**es. And go tell Kerkorian and Nissan/Renault where to stick it. Or this consumer will take his money and go get a Hemi.

Rant Off

As opposed to chrysler who sold out to the germans years ago?

As told to me by a professor who directly works with carlos ghosn (i had the priviledge of meeting him face to face) that renault paid billions of $ to buy Nissan because of their technology that is 2nd to none. Nissan was poorly managed before the takeover and that is the plain truth. Nissan is benefitting from Renaults management and in turn Renault is benefiting from their technology. I love GM, thats why both our cars are chevys, and I realise that you guys are passionate about GM as a company. Hence GM's brands definitely have more soul than any Japanese brand. I believe that too as I am proudly passionate about my Camaro. Back in the 1970'sGM's top management were told by the best market analysts that in the next 25 years there is going to come a shift in the centre of gravity of the automobile industry from Detroit to Japan. But the then top management failed to do anything about it and they actually let it happen, as correctly predicted. Interestingly enough they now have to come to grips with it with outside help. Let's for a minute shed the emotional attachement of "the let's buy American & be American" thing--> I'm not sure if GM has made wrong decisions with regard to technology and market needs, but if this deal goes ahead GM can benefit from what Nissan and Renault can offer as long as GM keeps it's American identity. GM is the worlds #1 carmaker, yet it is valued less than Toyota. It all boils down to management and subsequently profitability. There is no such thing as "100% Japanese" or "100% American" in this globalised world. Metanational is the buzzword today. My wife's chevy is assembled in Korea. It's parts are made in China and Japan. Yet it carries the badge of an American icon. Brands too soon will be metanational just like companies that own them. Yes I believe it's possible to retain the soul of the brand and that will be important for GM.

As opposed to chrysler who sold out to the germans years ago?


Well it's either that or Ford, and it'll be a cold day in Hell before I own a Mustang or an F150. Although I may change from a Challenger to a Ram. My daughter is learning how to ride horses, and we plan on getting her a Horse of her own. She's interested in Rodeo's so I'll need something to pull a Horse Trailer. I'm sure that 6.1L Hemi could do it but I don't think a trailer hitch would look good on the back of that car lol.

As told to me by a professor who directly works with carlos ghosn (i had the priviledge of meeting him face to face) that renault paid billions of $ to buy Nissan because of their technology that is 2nd to none. Nissan was poorly managed before the takeover and that is the plain truth. Nissan is benefitting from Renaults management and in turn Renault is benefiting from their technology. I love GM, thats why both our cars are chevys, and I realise that you guys are passionate about GM as a company. Hence GM's brands definitely have more soul than any Japanese brand. I believe that too as I am proudly passionate about my Camaro. Back in the 1970'sGM's top management were told by the best market analysts that in the next 25 years there is going to come a shift in the centre of gravity of the automobile industry from Detroit to Japan. But the then top management failed to do anything about it and they actually let it happen, as correctly predicted. Interestingly enough they now have to come to grips with it with outside help. Let's for a minute shed the emotional attachement of "the let's buy American & be American" thing--> I'm not sure if GM has made wrong decisions with regard to technology and market needs, but if this deal goes ahead GM can benefit from what Nissan and Renault can offer as long as GM keeps it's American identity. GM is the worlds #1 carmaker, yet it is valued less than Toyota. It all boils down to management and subsequently profitability. There is no such thing as "100% Japanese" or "100% American" in this globalised world. Metanational is the buzzword today. My wife's chevy is assembled in Korea. It's parts are made in China and Japan. Yet it carries the badge of an American icon. Brands too soon will be metanational just like companies that own them. Yes I believe it's possible to retain the soul of the brand and that will be important for GM.

My brother makes the same global economy argument you are. So its cheaper to manufacture in China then would it be ok to have all GM manufacturing there? What if China goes to war with the US? With their backing of North Korea its entirely possible. That would theoretically halt GM production. If GMs owners were outside the US wouldnt that mean that GM didnt pay US taxes for US schools and roads. Also that American workers werent working? Im not thrilled with the unions but Im more than just a little concerned.

We can stop this immediately. All we need to do is, first everone having purchased outside of the GM brands, realize you were lied to about GM products for years by the french. All the while mocking US for any BS they can come up with, like "Americans are so lazy they can't even drive cars with manual trans". Now if we suck so bad why in hell do they want to buy into the company who pioneered automatic transmissions? Why? Because they wanted that company all along! So, ok you made a mistake. Go down first thing monday morning to any one of the GM brand dealers, and trade in that POS you were sold on a real car or truck. GM will have a flood of $$$ and they will be able to sent kerk & the french packing. Don't pull your head from the sand, and mark my words this country & the free world are doomed.......DOOMED I Tell YA! This is all about mining GM for what they can get from them nothing more. And once their through **** GM, you'll see. I assure you, no good can come from this, at least not for GM. This will be the begining of the end for GM.

Nissan can't be any worse for GM than GM already is for themselves.

Well, sorry chum. Don't you know this world has globalised? And that several of the parts of your very car could be designed or made in japan? And that the Japanese have some of the best technology second to none (such as Nissan's)??

I never questioned the Japanese technology. (hell, we GAVE it to them.) I wouldn't care if they made a flying car. I'm American, and I'll buy a car whose main profits go to an American company. Period. My Trans Am was built in Canada. But It's a Pontiac. The bulk of the profits go to Americans. I'm very aware of globalization. Just not happy with it. I can have my feelings of patriotism if I want. Frankly I still haven't fogiven Japan for Pearl Harbor and all the atrocities of the Japanese soldiers. (but that's another forum). In a nut shell, if I can support my country with my purchases I will. Although that is becoming increasingly harder due to globalization.:usa:

I never questioned the Japanese technology. (hell, we GAVE it to them.)
That is the dumbest thing i have ever heard.

What great technological breakthrough's did we feed the Japanese.

And why is it that we give them all this stuff and yet, they still make better more dependable cars than GM.

Im all for the new Camaro and i love GM, but dont say something stupid like that.

It works both ways, to the benefit of and detriment to a country. It's time also for America to enjoy the fruits of globalization with reciprocative trade by exporting what America is good at. American processor technology could be an example. So a Japanese guy might buy a PC to the benefit of the US economy. :shrug:

...and your sig says that you've owned a heck load of cars :)

I will probably be barbecued for this, but this thread consists mostly of the some of the most whiny posts I have ever seen on the Internet.

GM already has 1000's of "foreign" owners -- both individuals and companies as well as global non-profit organizations. It is a public company and anyone with cash can buy into GM.

Many of the shares are owned by mutual funds which are in turn owned by people all over the world. Some of them are probably grandmothers from Iowa and there is a very good chance that some of them are declared enemies of the U.S. -- those want to murder all U.S. citizens. GM is publicly owned and is global -- it been that way since before anyone here was even born.

That being said, a 20% stake is a large stake in a large public company. Will that get them a seat on the board? -- probably not. Will it give them the power to force things down GM's throat? No way. If the stake being purchased was 51% or if the stake being purchased combined with holdings of friendly institutional holders was more than 51%, then the management of GM would be worried.

In macro economic terms, globalization of the economy is good -- as long as all involved look to their "natural advantage" and do not cling to areas where there is no advantage. What is happening today was predicted by almost every single economist during the 60's. Even President Eisenhower warned the country about relying on the military/industrial complex too much -- that came in the late 50's.

As for the claims that we "gave" technology to the Japanese, we did no such thing. We helped Japan finance the rebuilding of their country after the war. We did so because it was in our best interest. The communists had just taken over China and at the time, Japan was our only potential ally in the Pacific rim. Also, keep in mind that Japan was the first country to implement "just in time" manufacturing. We "imported" those concepts in the U.S. without compensating the Japanese.

As for the concept of a domestic company versus a foreign company, with the exception of Uncle Joe's corner grocery store, there is no such thing as there was in the past. Many foreign companies have owners who live in the U.S. and are U.S. citizens. Many U.S. companies have foreign owners. Moreover, many foreign companies have domestic production facilities. My wife's Honda was built in Ohio. My Chevrolet was built in Canada. Honda pays taxes to the State of Ohio and to our Federal government. GM paid taxes to Canada Quebec and to Canada.

But, most everyone else is probably right. It is better for GM to go the way of the Penn Central Railroad and U.S. Steel rather than accept investment from someone whose home office just happens to be outside of U.S. borders.

I will probably be barbecued for this, but this thread consists mostly of the some of the most whiny posts I have ever seen on the Internet.

GM already has 1000's of "foreign" owners -- both individuals and companies as well as global non-profit organizations. It is a public company and anyone with cash can buy into GM.

Many of the shares are owned by mutual funds which are in turn owned by people all over the world. Some of them are probably grandmothers from Iowa and there is a very good chance that some of them are declared enemies of the U.S. -- those want to murder all U.S. citizens. GM is publicly owned and is global -- it been that way since before anyone here was even born.

That being said, a 20% stake is a large stake in a large public company. Will that get them a seat on the board? -- probably not. Will it give them the power to force things down GM's throat? No way. If the stake being purchased was 51% or if the stake being purchased combined with holdings of friendly institutional holders was more than 51%, then the management of GM would be worried.

In macro economic terms, globalization of the economy is good -- as long as all involved look to their "natural advantage" and do not cling to areas where there is no advantage. What is happening today was predicted by almost every single economist during the 60's. Even President Eisenhower warned the country about relying on the military/industrial complex too much -- that came in the late 50's.

As for the claims that we "gave" technology to the Japanese, we did no such thing. We helped Japan finance the rebuilding of their country after the war. We did so because it was in our best interest. The communists had just taken over China and at the time, Japan was our only potential ally in the Pacific rim. Also, keep in mind that Japan was the first country to implement "just in time" manufacturing. We "imported" those concepts in the U.S. without compensating the Japanese.

As for the concept of a domestic company versus a foreign company, with the exception of Uncle Joe's corner grocery store, there is no such thing as there was in the past. Many foreign companies have owners who live in the U.S. and are U.S. citizens. Many U.S. companies have foreign owners. Moreover, many foreign companies have domestic production facilities. My wife's Honda was built in Ohio. My Chevrolet was built in Canada. Honda pays taxes to the State of Ohio and to our Federal government. GM paid taxes to Canada Quebec and to Canada.

But, most everyone else is probably right. It is better for GM to go the way of the Penn Central Railroad and U.S. Steel rather than accept investment from someone whose home office just happens to be outside of U.S. borders.

Excellent post. Finally somebody who understands economics and history. I find it ironic people will call you a traitor for buying a Nissan built in Tennessee but then they'll go out and buy a Camaro made in Canada or a GTO built down under. I'm GM loyal as long as they are building cars I want. I'll always root for them to succeed but the terms "domestic" and "import" are totally screwed up when a GTO is considered domestic and a Camry built in Georgetown KY is an import.

Correct. And I like to also add that my previous 2 cars were a Honda Coupe (Made by Honda of the USA), and Nissan Altima also assembled in the US. So what if I and a thousand other potential car buyers said no to Japanese cars? Who would lose out? America. Nissan Altima is a phenominal success here in Dubai. And who is gaining? America.

Overpatriotism hasn't helped any nation in the past, and nor will it ever. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. That's why it's good to take a balanced view/approach to situations.

Excellent post. Finally somebody who understands economics and history. I find it ironic people will call you a traitor for buying a Nissan built in Tennessee but then they'll go out and buy a Camaro made in Canada or a GTO built down under. I'm GM loyal as long as they are building cars I want. I'll always root for them to succeed but the terms "domestic" and "import" are totally screwed up when a GTO is considered domestic and a Camry built in Georgetown KY is an import.

I agree, excellend post. As stated, if there was a chance Nissan/Renault would become a majority shareholder, I would be concerned...otherwise, we may see some influence from Nissan in GM cars, but that's it. We won't see Nissan Titans rebadged as Silverados, we won't see 350Zs rebadged as "insert name here", etc. Might we see a Nissan V6 in a GM car? Possibly.

For the record Chris 96, a lot of GTO owners consider their cars imports. Just look at the VIN numbers. ;)

I was under the impression that the proposed merger involved Renault buying 10% of outstanding shares and Nissan buying 20%, along with Kerkorians 10%giving them 50 % of outstanding shares, resulting in Kerkorian basically having his way with the board. While of course not yet aprooved, I thought this was his original proposition.

...and your sig says that you've owned a heck load of cars :)[/quote]

That's not even all of them.

And to all you "American Honda" ect. owners. Answer me this. If you are throwing the idea that your car is a Japanese car "made by Americans", then WHY NOT BUY AN AMERICAN CAR? If it's American know how and labor building the cars, why send the profits over seas to Japan? I find the argument empty. I have a friend that defends his love of Japanese cars and how well they are made, but his car was made HERE. So if it was actually Americans building his *** car, why not trust Americans to build an American Car? Does this make any sense to anyone else? I've owned a LOT of cars. All GM. And NOT ONE of them has been a bad car. I'm batting 1000. And most were built here in the USA. By American unions (shudders). Perception is your own reality. If you love Japanese cars (regarless of where they are built) then fine. But I will not support a country that buys OUR land, owns companies in OUR country. Can any American buy land in Japan? NO. Can any American own a company in Japan? I don't think so, but I could be wrong about that. I'm tired of other countries getting rich off of us and us exporting jobs to other countries because labor unions have shafted this country up the a$$ for so long. But I digress. Long an short of it, I don't like the idea of GM going to bed with Nissan. And nothing I've read here is making me feel any better about it.

Tracinda currently owns about 10% of GM. Their proposal would allow the combined Nissan/Renault company to buy up to an additional 20%. That would give them about 30% -- enough for a seat on the board good chance of yes.

The key is that the additional 20% would be calculated on outstanding shares -- not authorized shares. GM's board could always choose to dilute by selling authorized, non-outstanding shares. They would probably get about 10% less per share than the then current price, but that acton would be dilutive to Tracinda's holdings -- as well as those owned by company officers.

BTW, look at the current major holders of GM stock. Britain and West Germany both hold very major positions. Is GM an American company, a British company, a German company..............

Overall, it could very well be that Tracinda's offer is meant more to initiate action at GM than it is to actually buy something. On the news that Tracinda made an offer to GM, their share price jumped substancially thus making Kirk Kerkorian's shares worth much more than they were. Something to think about................

...and your sig says that you've owned a heck load of cars :)

That's not even all of them.

And to all you "American Honda" ect. owners. Answer me this. If you are throwing the idea that your car is a Japanese car "made by Americans", then WHY NOT BUY AN AMERICAN CAR? If it's American know how and labor building the cars, why send the profits over seas to Japan? I find the argument empty. I have a friend that defends his love of Japanese cars and how well they are made, but his car was made HERE. So if it was actually Americans building his *** car, why not trust Americans to build an American Car? Does this make any sense to anyone else? I've owned a LOT of cars. All GM. And NOT ONE of them has been a bad car. I'm batting 1000. And most were built here in the USA. By American unions (shudders). Perception is your own reality. If you love Japanese cars (regarless of where they are built) then fine. But I will not support a country that buys OUR land, owns companies in OUR country. Can any American buy land in Japan? NO. Can any American own a company in Japan? I don't think so, but I could be wrong about that. I'm tired of other countries getting rich off of us and us exporting jobs to other countries because labor unions have shafted this country up the a$$ for so long. But I digress. Long an short of it, I don't like the idea of GM going to bed with Nissan. And nothing I've read here is making me feel any better about it.[/QUOTE]

Hate to burst your bubble, but the profits do NOT go over seas. The profits accrue to the share holders. Honda has MANY red-blooded American share holders.

Moreover, American own MANY companies in Japan. One merely has a "local" be a part owner in a Japanese based firm with the majority of shares held under trusteeship by us good 'ole Americans. It happens every single day.

...and your sig says that you've owned a heck load of cars :)

That's not even all of them.

And to all you "American Honda" ect. owners. Answer me this. If you are throwing the idea that your car is a Japanese car "made by Americans", then WHY NOT BUY AN AMERICAN CAR? If it's American know how and labor building the cars, why send the profits over seas to Japan? I find the argument empty. I have a friend that defends his love of Japanese cars and how well they are made, but his car was made HERE. So if it was actually Americans building his *** car, why not trust Americans to build an American Car? Does this make any sense to anyone else? I've owned a LOT of cars. All GM. And NOT ONE of them has been a bad car. I'm batting 1000. And most were built here in the USA. By American unions (shudders). Perception is your own reality. If you love Japanese cars (regarless of where they are built) then fine. But I will not support a country that buys OUR land, owns companies in OUR country. Can any American buy land in Japan? NO. Can any American own a company in Japan? I don't think so, but I could be wrong about that. I'm tired of other countries getting rich off of us and us exporting jobs to other countries because labor unions have shafted this country up the a$$ for so long. But I digress. Long an short of it, I don't like the idea of GM going to bed with Nissan. And nothing I've read here is making me feel any better about it.


yeeeeehawwww! :rolleyes:

I agree, excellend post. As stated, if there was a chance Nissan/Renault would become a majority shareholder, I would be concerned...otherwise, we may see some influence from Nissan in GM cars, but that's it. We won't see Nissan Titans rebadged as Silverados, we won't see 350Zs rebadged as "insert name here", etc. Might we see a Nissan V6 in a GM car? Possibly.

For the record Chris 96, a lot of GTO owners consider their cars imports. Just look at the VIN numbers. ;)

Not that you implied, but for the record I'm not knocking GTO owners. Obviously I own a Canadian built F-body, though I didn't buy it new. I'm just making a larger point about the dumbing down of the idea of a "domestic" automobile.

You are of course 100% correct about the alliance, not merger, they're talking about. This is about 80% overreaction and 20% legit concern.

I love it when somebody brings up the argument "but where do the profits go?"

Yes, some of the money may ultimately go back to Japan or Germany, whereever, but out of a $20,000 car, $18,000 of it is spent HERE in the US on the plant, the labor, the raw goods, etc. There are thousands of suppliers who make money as well as corner diners serving lunch to Nissan people on lunch breaks. Every Nissan USA employee buys stuff and pays taxes, all that is going back into the US economy, and then Nissan starts a new plant or new model and reinvests billions in the US for that.

And as was mentioned ultimately "profits" are returned the the shareholders after X amount is held out for whatever growth is budgeted for the next fiscal year.

Particularly at a time when GM is not making a profit at all, I see the "profits" argument as a really irrelevant point.

Nissan sells more cars here than they do in Japan. Almost all the cars they sell here are made here. Their US Headquarters is in Nashville Tennessee which is about as American as you can get IMO.

The irony is if you buy a GTO, most of the money in that sales price goes back into Australian paychecks, suppliers, taxes, etc. etc. What's the greater benefit to America? $2000 in profit on a GTO to GM that is paid out to shareholders, or $18,000 in cost of production spread out across the US on the sale of an Altima?

I'm not knocking GM here, given a choice I will always choose their product over any other brand if it fits my needs, price, etc. But I'm just sick of people hiding behind the flag and questioning the patriotism of anybody that buys an American made car that happens to say Nissan or Toyota on the trunk.

I love it when somebody brings up the argument "but where do the profits go?"

Yes, some of the money may ultimately go back to Japan or Germany, whereever, but out of a $20,000 car, $18,000 of it is spent HERE in the US on the plant, the labor, the raw goods, etc. There are thousands of suppliers who make money as well as corner diners serving lunch to Nissan people on lunch breaks. Every Nissan USA employee buys stuff and pays taxes, all that is going back into the US economy, and then Nissan starts a new plant or new model and reinvests billions in the US for that.

And as was mentioned ultimately "profits" are returned the the shareholders after X amount is held out for whatever growth is budgeted for the next fiscal year.

Particularly at a time when GM is not making a profit at all, I see the "profits" argument as a really irrelevant point.

Nissan sells more cars here than they do in Japan. Almost all the cars they sell here are made here. Their US Headquarters is in Nashville Tennessee which is about as American as you can get IMO.

The irony is if you buy a GTO, most of the money in that sales price goes back into Australian paychecks, suppliers, taxes, etc. etc. What's the greater benefit to America? $2000 in profit on a GTO to GM that is paid out to shareholders, or $18,000 in cost of production spread out across the US on the sale of an Altima?

I'm not knocking GM here, given a choice I will always choose their product over any other brand if it fits my needs, price, etc. But I'm just sick of people hiding behind the flag and questioning the patriotism of anybody that buys an American made car that happens to say Nissan or Toyota on the trunk.

And I'm tired of "patriotic Americans" putting an American flag sticker on thier Toyota or Nissan. My question still hasn't been answered. If Americans are building your *** car, then why not buy American? (if in name only)

The reason I bought my 04 Nissan Titan over a Chevy Silverado was at that time my Titan was $2000 cheaper, in my opinion looked better and had a much better performing engine.

The term built in the USA is being used in a very general sense. There should be clarity brought to where the parts, components and subsystems are sourced (domestic content) as well. While final assembly done in the US is good, all of the parts and components sourced from the US would be exponentially better to the country.

There are some statistics that have been posted here in the recent past that identify the amount of total investment each of the car companies have put into the country over the past twenty years. By this alone you can see how much of this money stays here to benefit us here in the USA. The stats show that that import brands simply don’t invest in our country as the domestics. Somehow in someway we all benefit from the domestic auto industry being strong and secure.

not to mention, the fact that *** car companies can afford to build cars here is because of years of profits going over seas to Japanese buisness men. About 30 years of car sales that did NOT benifit this country for the most part funded these factories that are building *** cars here. Now what if all that money had stayed in this country to begin with? What if all the billions of dollars spent on *** cars over the last 30 years was spent on American cars? Like I've said, I've been owning American cars for almost 30 years. And all of them have been GM. And I haven't had a bad car in the bunch. My wife owned a Ford once when we were dating, and THAT car was a total piece of crap. (but there ya go, Ford.:D )

not to mention, the fact that *** car companies can afford to build cars here is because of years of profits going over seas to Japanese buisness men. About 30 years of car sales that did NOT benifit this country for the most part funded these factories that are building *** cars here. Now what if all that money had stayed in this country to begin with? What if all the billions of dollars spent on *** cars over the last 30 years was spent on American cars? Like I've said, I've been owning American cars for almost 30 years. And all of them have been GM. And I haven't had a bad car in the bunch. My wife owned a Ford once when we were dating, and THAT car was a total piece of crap. (but there ya go, Ford.:D )

Do you go to the movies? Sony....
Do you own a TV -- almost all Japanese -- not ***
Ever added memory to your PC? Malaysian
Ever buy glasses? Almost all German owned in the U.S.
Buy gasoline? Most of it is not U.S.
Shell Gasoline? BP? Not American
Enjoy champagne? French
Enjoy the T56 in your f-body? Mexican
Have any Nike wear? oops -- mostly overseas
The wife like Tanzanites or diamonds? Sorry - African
Have any gold jewelry? 75% comes from outside the U.S.
Enjoy that aluminum based LS1 in your ride? Sorry, most bauxite comes from outside the U.S.
Like the CPU in your Windows or Mac machine? Sorry, the substrate used in semi-conductors just ain't American.

Everyone wants everyone else to buy American right up to the point where it effects THEIR life. Then there are a multitude of reasons why there was simply no choice. Funny how that works.

Some interesting and some scary points here:


(Fortune Magazine) -- Carlos Ghosn circumnavigates the planet in his Gulfstream 550 once a month. He typically spends two weeks in Paris, ten days in Tokyo, and what's left of his time in the U.S. and the rest of the world.

At the invitation of financier Kirk Kerkorian, Ghosn has proposed an alliance between his two auto companies and General Motors (Charts) that could put him at the helm of the troubled industry giant.

Add Detroit to the flight plan! Putting one man in charge of three companies separated by thousands of miles in an industry as complex and competitive as automobiles is a bizarre prospect and at the moment still an uncertain one.

The boards of Renault and Nissan backed Ghosn and have expressed wary interest in the proposal, under which each would buy 10% of GM's shares.

But their support is conditional on GM's management and board endorsing the plan. The current forecast is for a lengthy GM study of the arrangement, with no guarantee of a favorable conclusion.

Still, Kerkorian, who owns 9.9% of GM's stock, wants action. He is known to be unhappy with the pace of change under current CEO Rick Wagoner and has been prodding him to do more.

Ghosn is equally impatient. He performed a historic turnaround of Japan's Nissan after taking charge in 1999, embarked on a similar effort with France's Renault a year ago, and has reportedly been considering new strategic options for both companies.

Despite GM's gargantuan problems - it lost $10.6 billion last year - Ghosn would find the challenge of fixing it appealing, particularly if he could benefit Renault and Nissan by doing so.

Even if Ghosn doesn't end up in charge at GM, it's useful to contemplate just what the world's most celebrated auto executive might change at the world's largest auto company.

Some of GM's problems, such as its huge health-care and retiree obligations, seem relatively intractable.

For the others, a playbook already exists - the history of the Nissan turnaround that Ghosn has taken pains to document. Here's the path he might take.

Kill a few brands.

Critics love to point out that GM divides its 24% U.S. market share among eight brands, while Toyota, two-thirds GM's size and growing, makes do with three.

Kerkorian advisor and GM board member Jerry York has publicly recommended getting rid of Saab and Hummer; others have advocated dumping Pontiac and Buick.

But GM was pummeled for giving up on Oldsmobile a few years ago and could face billions of dollars in claims from dealers for effectively putting them out of business.

Besides, engineering among the brands is so intertwined - Cadillac and Saab share a platform, as do Chevy and Hummer - that getting rid of one or more of them wouldn't necessarily save tons of money.


Super Carlos, as he is sometimes known, might have no qualms about killing all four brands, and perhaps Saturn and GMC too, as part of a big initial write-off.

In return, he could offer dealers Renault franchises so that they could introduce U.S. buyers with Francophile tastes to such exotic models as Kangoo and Clio.

Invest in small cars.

GM has suffered no end of embarrassment this year after launching gas-hungry SUVs and pickup trucks when a barrel of oil costs $75.

The company's managers aren't quite as boneheaded as that makes them look - product decisions about this year's models were made three or four years ago, before fuel prices skyrocketed.

Nonetheless, Ghosn's Nissan was significantly more prescient. The company is coming out this fall with a new version of its Sentra small car and a new, even tinier car called the Versa.

Ghosn, since he works in Tokyo and Paris, knows the value of small cars - he sees them parked on city sidewalks every day. Attractive new ones would go far in creating a more favorable image for General Motors.

Step back from alternative fuels.

Small cars would do for Ghosn what technology won't - boost fuel economy without costing a bundle.

Being a numbers guy at heart, Ghosn is deeply suspicious of hybrid and alternative-fuel engines - expensive new technologies for which customers have so far displayed limited willingness to pay.

He has invested only reluctantly in hybrid power trains at Nissan. So he would probably scale down GM's investment in hybrid trucks and eliminate entirely its space-shot effort to put a fuel-cell car on the road by 2010.

Find the elusive synergies.

At Nissan, Ghosn used cross-functional teams to burrow into the company's innards, uncover waste and duplication, and improve productivity.

He's told Kerkorian he can do the same at GM, locating billions of dollars in savings from synergies among the three companies.

But he's going to have to look hard. GM has already made substantial progress in bulk buying and parts sharing by clustering its products worldwide around a few platforms.

Lehman Brothers analyst Darren Kimball believes that savings from shared purchasing and engineering would be more than offset by organizational complexity and the stifling of creativity in a combined GM-Nissan-Renault.

He thinks Kerkorian's plans have less to do with synergy than with "his desire to bring in someone he perceives is a more effective manager."

Keep score.

Public targets are anathema to Wagoner. Risk-averse at heart, he prefers to keep his cards close to his chest and reveals information only grudgingly.

As a lifetime GMer, he has been embarrassed too often by having to explain why GM missed a profit or market-share target.

Ghosn brags about his ability to set financial and performance targets three years out - and meet or exceed them.

At Nissan he even offered to resign if he missed. How many other CEOs have done that?

Magnify the myth of Carlos.

Although still shiny, Ghosn's star has lost some sparkle this year as Nissan sales in Japan and the U.S. have slipped and Renault has issued profit warnings.

"Ghosn is not a miracle maker," says one longtime industry observer. "He was merely a gaijin who did the unpalatable things [at Nissan] that a Japanese couldn't do."

Some analysts view him as a turnaround specialist who is less effective at actually running a business. But rescuing the ultimate basket case would make Ghosn nearly immortal.

"It is very tempting for Ghosn to try to prove he can fix GM - what some may define as the ultimate auto-industry challenge," writes Goldman Sachs analyst Robert Barry.

"Ego often trumps logic." Then again, ego could also prompt Ghosn to take the sort of shockingly bold steps probably needed to get GM back on track.

With his multi-continental monthly commute already beginning to wear, Ghosn, 52, may have his eye fixed on his legacy.

What could be better than being remembered as the man who saved General Motors?

Do you go to the movies? Sony....
Do you own a TV -- almost all Japanese -- not ***
Ever added memory to your PC? Malaysian
Ever buy glasses? Almost all German owned in the U.S.
Buy gasoline? Most of it is not U.S.
Shell Gasoline? BP? Not American
Enjoy champagne? French
Enjoy the T56 in your f-body? Mexican
Have any Nike wear? oops -- mostly overseas
The wife like Tanzanites or diamonds? Sorry - African
Have any gold jewelry? 75% comes from outside the U.S.
Enjoy that aluminum based LS1 in your ride? Sorry, most bauxite comes from outside the U.S.
Like the CPU in your Windows or Mac machine? Sorry, the substrate used in semi-conductors just ain't American.

Everyone wants everyone else to buy American right up to the point where it effects THEIR life. Then there are a multitude of reasons why there was simply no choice. Funny how that works.

I buy American when it is possible. Doesn't it bother you that we can't even make a damn hammer in this country anymore? (guess we lost the recipe to China) I never said I ONLY buy American products. I know there is no such thing (hardly) anymore. But to call a Toyota made in America an American car is just plain false. Let's just agree to disagree. I'll continue to buy my Chevys and Pontiacs as long as there is a model that fits my requirements. V8, rear wheel drive. Sporty, fast. And I don't care if there is a *** version out there with the same specs. I feel better about myself for doing it if you guys like it or not. You want to know what would really say the American auto industry? Dismantle the parasitic Unions. They have long out lived their usefulness. Now they only drive up the price and make it hard for thier employer to put out a competitive product.

Doesn't it bother you that we can't even make a damn hammer in this country anymore?

No. Of all things I can think to outsource or not outsource I'm happy to let hangar production go.

We don't have to make EVERYTHING. We don't have enough labor to make EVERYTHING. The natural tendency is to outsource the lower wage, lower skill stuff overseas to developing economies, which simultaneously 1. frees up our labor force for high wage high skill work and 2. brings us better prices on the cheap crap we buy a lot of.

Besides, this is WAYYY off topic because we're not talking about outsourcing jobs, the whole debate is about cars THAT ARE AMERICAN MADE by foreign owned companies.

Its a screwed up world when "buy American" means its OK to buy a GM built in the south Pacific (Aveo) but its unamerican to buy a Camry built in Kentucky.

On unions you will get no argument from me. IMO they are responsible for 80% of the trouble the domestics are in, and any other industry where their collective bargaining and threats of work stoppage inflate wages beyond market sustainable levels. Want to know who's driving US jobs to other countries? Unions. But, that's another issue for another thread and I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell of UAW going away anytime soon.

No. Of all things I can think to outsource or not outsource I'm happy to let hangar production go.

We don't have to make EVERYTHING. We don't have enough labor to make EVERYTHING. The natural tendency is to outsource the lower wage, lower skill stuff overseas to developing economies, which simultaneously 1. frees up our labor force for high wage high skill work and 2. brings us better prices on the cheap crap we buy a lot of.

Besides, this is WAYYY off topic because we're not talking about outsourcing jobs, the whole debate is about cars THAT ARE AMERICAN MADE by foreign owned companies.

Its a screwed up world when "buy American" means its OK to buy a GM built in the south Pacific (Aveo) but its unamerican to buy a Camry built in Kentucky.

yeah, so what's your point? ;) First of all, anyone why would buy an Aveo should be deported anyway. :D

My question still hasn't been answered. If Americans are building your *** car, then why not buy American? (if in name only)

The fact that Americans assemble Nissans in Nashville is not what determines the quality of Nissans that come out of the production facility in Nashiville. The difference in quality between Hondas, Toyotas, etc. and American manufacturers such as Chevy, Ford, Chrysler is not a function of the nationality of the person on the assembly line, as the production facilities are highly automated. The quality of an automobile starts much higher up on the ladder. The engineering, supply chain, quality control and quality standards of the foreign auto makers is simply higher than those of the big three. This appears to be changing (looking at the build/interior quality of the GTO, '07 Tahoe/Yukon, etc.), as the big three have no choice but to up their standards as consumers up their standards and are presented with many more, high quality options (Honda, Toyota, etc.).

The main reason I left GM was because of customer service. I still have two camaros and can't wait to buy a new one but that would be it. I had a 2001 Pontiac Grand Am and had lots of problems with it. After five pontiac dealerships later, call after call and email after email with no help I traded into a Nissan. I had a problem with my nissan also but the difference was first my loaner car was a Nissan that was new and not a ford focus like gm gave me, second when I got my truck back Nissan contacted me on the phone a made 1 month of my truck payment for the inconvience. Now GM has never done anything close to that for me. I think gm could learn a little from them on customer service.

It's bad enough buicks are being made in China.
It's bad enough the GTO and Camaro will and are being made in Australia (no offense to Holden, but they're AMERICAN muscle cars)
It's bad enough I drive a custom import (Canadian muscle baby)
We don't need a Nissan GM alliance.

If Honda and Toyota can make Camry's, Accords and such in frickin' Ohio and wherever then GM can stay an American company.

I agree that Nissan/GM is a bad thing. If it happens, I suspect it will be forced on GM.

Who said we're gonna build a Camaro in Australia???? (go stand in the corner until I tell you to come out, young man!)

(It will NOT be built in Australia.......write it in the family bible....)

The Slimes are about as useless an organization as the un! Those are the type of comments, I've been bitchin' about for years. I hope they fold up and go bankrupt, along with tracinda, nison, renalt, etc. I am just sick over this whole load of ****! :barf: How in the hell can I continue to push a company, I have believed in for all my life, once they get in bed with the french? I don't think I can. And I haven't spoken of the general since hearing this disgusting news. Sick I tell ya! I should have known. Things were getting too good to be true, I should have just realized that, as usual my parade would be **** on! This has been the story of my life. :mad: Can't we make some kind of a hookup between kerkorian & kevorkian? :death: Wishful thinking I guess. I knew every time I heard mention of this POS, buying gm stock, one day he was going to **** things up, but this......this is just too much. :confused:

Calm down, buddy.

I'm pleased you feel so passionate about GM (as do I)

It's important to understand that this was not something GM planned.....rather, I believe it can be traced to Mr. Kerkorian having dinner with Mr. Ghosn -- and the rest, as they say is history.

I believe the Board of Directors MUST do 'due diligence' in looking at the proposal. I, for one, hope they turn it down.......on the other hand, it MAY be forced on GM.

Things could get very interesting. (and that's NOT a good thing....)

Guys like Kerkorian make me sick. It's ALLLLL about the bucks. Unencumbered by emotions about the entities they're dealing with, or the traditions and history thereof, if there's a buck to be made, you can count on these )$)*%&$ to find it. This is the same quack that worked out the Chrysler merger w/ Daimler. Now we get German engineers driving Chryslers around vaunting them for their German engineering. IT"S A FRIGGIN AMERICAN CAR! The thought of a French national, who is already the CEO of Renault and Nissan, running GM......uggh. And frankly, Ghosn has a less than stellar reputaion of actually running a company sucessfully after slashing and burning it.....it just makes me sick.

Rant off

The main reason I left GM was because of customer service. I still have two camaros and can't wait to buy a new one but that would be it. I had a 2001 Pontiac Grand Am and had lots of problems with it. After five pontiac dealerships later, call after call and email after email with no help I traded into a Nissan. I had a problem with my nissan also but the difference was first my loaner car was a Nissan that was new and not a ford focus like gm gave me, second when I got my truck back Nissan contacted me on the phone a made 1 month of my truck payment for the inconvience. Now GM has never done anything close to that for me. I think gm could learn a little from them on customer service.

First of all, your problem is with poor customer service at individually owned dealerships, not with GM. (except they built you a lemon aparently). Dealerships are franchised. They are not GM owned. (part of the problem I feel, perhaps GM should own some dealerships). It is unfortunate that you recieved better service from a Nissan dealer. But that is what wins customer loyalty as much as a good car. The service after the sale. I worked in the field for a couple of years back in the 80's. With the proper customer service, you can make a happy customer out of the owner of a piece of crap car.
2nd. Nissan dealerships have busy service departments too. What does THAT say? I'm not knocking japanese cars, I'm just not saying they are superior. See, I don't believe everything I read in Motortrend.
3rd. A Frenchman running GM? I'd bet he'd surrender it to the Germans in the first week.:D

(It will NOT be built in Australia.......write it in the family bible....)

Glad to hear that from a reliable source!

Not that I have anything against Aussies, but the Camaro should be American in every sense of the word!

FWIW the more I think about the Nissan deal the more I see its pitfalls and not its opportunities. Guy's analysis in the Auto News forum seems right on, it is just a play by Kerkorian to increase his share value. It would be foolish for GM not to look at it even if they fully intend to turn it down. But the only way they can stop it is to put more shares into other hands so that Kerkorian-Nissan-Renault won't be able to buy enough to get a board seat.

Right now the big three are not doing good. After Nissan-Renault got hooked up it seemed to improve those two companys. Maybe some fresh eyes could help gm get back on the right track. GM already works with Nissan-Renault overseas so maybe it could help GM get some new projects off the ground faster.

Calm down, buddy.

I'm pleased you feel so passionate about GM (as do I)

It's important to understand that this was not something GM planned.....rather, I believe it can be traced to Mr. Kerkorian having dinner with Mr. Ghosn -- and the rest, as they say is history.

I believe the Board of Directors MUST do 'due diligence' in looking at the proposal. I, for one, hope they turn it down.......on the other hand, it MAY be forced on GM.

Things could get very interesting. (and that's NOT a good thing....)
I have calmed quite a bit since my ranting posts. However just the thought of jerk cheroc being handed the keys to the General, makes me want to vomit. I pray this does not happen! I still feel the same, and still haven't been eating regular. I respect your opinion a great deal, and you guys did a tremendous job on the Camaro. I cannot say enough about the car. I've seen it up close and personal at the E-Town Power Tour stop, and it does not dissappoint one bit. :bow: I Love It! I just don't know if I can bring myself to give the french my $$$ to get one! You must know how this is tearing me up inside, I have been one of a very few supporting you guys when many others were trashing GM, saying the Camaro would never be back. I knew different. I guess I was in denial about the kerk thing, but deep down I knew. Every time they mentioned his name, and his purchasing of GM stock, I would get a sick feeling about it, knowing that his intentions were not going to be good for the company!

the way i figure it, there's no sense worrying, or bitching, or complaining or anything like that.. it's out of our hands, what happens happens..

I agree there is nothing I can do about this "partnership" but I can choose to spend my dollars on another truck. Which i'm sure alot of other people would choose to do as well. For some people GM isn't just a car company it's their entire life. Some people have owned just GM, my wife and her dad are two examples. Ironically she isn't even bothered by this, then again she has her eyes on a Charger. For Camaro guys this is the second act of betrayal by GM, the first one was in 2002. All I can do right now is sit, watch and wait, and hope this doesn't happen. As i've said before if it does happen, hello Daimler Chrysler. My dad had two Dodge Dakota's and I loved both of his trucks. And my Step-Dad has been pro Mopar all of my life, so really I have no problem walking away from GM. I guess I could look at it like a few rocky relationships in my past. It may have hurt at first and I may have been angry, but in the end it was the best thing that could ever happened to me. Lets just hope as a consumer I don't have to have that attitude with GM.

i wonder, did mopar fans get this pissy when Daimler-Benz merged with Chrysler?

i wonder, did mopar fans get this pissy when Daimler-Benz merged with Chrysler?
Yep.

Yep.

if you ask me, that particular merger was for the better.. Chrysler has some pretty nice cars out right now

i'm not saying i want this Nissan-Renault "alliance" to happen... i'd rather it not

if you ask me, that particular merger was for the better.. Chrysler has some pretty nice cars out right now

i'm not saying i want this Nissan-Renault "alliance" to happen... i'd rather it not
The LX cars could have come out a year sooner without Mercedes. Same with the new Hemi engine.

The LX cars could have come out a year sooner without Mercedes. Same with the new Hemi engine.

LX arent modified Mercedes platforms? I thought Mercedes gave them the platform and let them modify it.

LX arent modified Mercedes platforms? I thought Mercedes gave them the platform and let them modify it.

thought the same too, the platform being the superceeded E-class. so what gives???

i wonder, did mopar fans get this pissy when Daimler-Benz merged with Chrysler?

"Pissy" doesn't even begin to describe it. :rolleyes:

As far as LX cars being out earlier had Chrysler not merged with Dr. Z and the gang, yes, that is true. guionM can provide specifics, but Chrysler had pretty concrete plans to bring at least 1 all-new RWD sedan to the market in the late 90's. In the DCX merger, Mercedes basically raided Chrysler's substantial cash reserves for their own benefit and then, to add insult to injury, put most new programs at Chrysler on hold...including the RWD program.

thought the same too, the platform being the superceeded E-class. so what gives???
The only things on the LXs that are even Mercedes based are the 5 speed auto and the rear 5 link suspension. Neither of those are directly from Mercedes. The rear suspension is based on the old Mercedes E(orS)-class suspension, it is not the same. The 5 speed auto is the Merc 6 speed minus a cog and with different programming. The Torque capacity is also lessened because of the parts specs.