I agree. I knew all along that merger with mercedes and Chrysler wouldn't be worth a dam for anybody but mercedes. The same would hold true IMO for any other foreign brands buying into Chrysler as others have mentioned. Not gonna be good for the brand. The American brands NEED to stay American the way I see it. I don't care for a GM Chrysler merger, but IF that has to happen. So be it. It's a shame people buy so many foreign vehicles in this country. We should have a huge tax on import car purchases in this country. Maybe even a tax incentive for buying American!

 

I agree, but like I said before, "American brands" haven't really been "American" for a LONG time.

If the automakers themselves had provided that "incentive", then they wouldn't be in this predicament. How can you blame a customer for buying what they buy? Haven't you ever heard the saying "The customer is ALWAYS right."?
What I do believe is that automakers worldwide should be able to compete equally in the worldwide market. That might be a pipe dream, but that's what I believe. I don't want to live in a place where the government determines what I buy.

 

I've never looked at a new car at a dealer, but when they have the car show out here in KC, if its a production car, all US/Japan automakers always show what percentage of the parts came from US/Canada. I can't remember if the Europeans do or not.

 

How short a memory we have here SCNGENNFTHGEN. It was import cars that finally made American cars better.

I have never owned an import, but I can say that I don't buy into protectionist schemes or any policy that keeps imported cars out of the country. I'm old enough to remember the pieces of s*it that US automakers sent out of the factory in the late 70s, 80s, and 90s. As those sales bled away to Honda, Toyota, and once upon a time, Mitsubishi, each manufacturer at their own time and own pace realized that they actually have to put effort into making vehicles oinstead of peddling the pieces of crap that they did.

Ford was one of the 1st to get their act together. In the 80's they adopted a "continuous improvement" philosophy that resulted in some of the industry's best quality cars. My 1981 mustang was a pile, yet my '85 and later Mustangs held up extremely well.

US automakers also simply are not able to sustain good quality vehicles without competition.

No one with 2 syncronized brain cells will call GM's quality in the 80s as industry leading. GM recovered nicely in the early 90s. Then sank again as the economy got better. Playskool interior materials, power window motors that barely could lift the window (I have replaced the motors in all 3 4th gens I've owned, and even the 2002 needed replacemet 3 times on 2 windows). and generally not giving a f*ck about cars sent GM to the bottom again. Ford ranked near the top of quality in the late 80s early 90s, then plunged late in the decade with penny pinching that toasted cooling fans, blew head gaskets, and botched new vehicle introductions. Chrysler, never stellar quality, at least created "WOW" Gotta have it designs.

However, having spent alot of time overseas, I [color=red]DO[color] feel strongly about fair trade. I feel that we should match any barriers other countries have against us and our products.

I know (and this is ironic) that my attitude helped accelerate the Great Depression. The crash was exasperated when Hoover signed a bill that raised tarriffs on imports which prompted other countries to raise tarriffs on us, which sent already tumbling demand for US products here in the US into the dumpster because we lost alot of our ability to at least keep production going with exports.


Lets not loose focus of the fact that the US auto industry ended up in the crapper because they put all their eggs in the Truck & SUV basket when even a D- student of business would recognize as a losing proposition if fuel prices suddenly went up (which has often happened over the years), and their decision (GM most openly) decided that there was no need to continue to heavily invest in cars.... which Toyota, Honda, and Nissan continued to with a vengence.

If someone else from another school wins a race at your school, does it make you a better athlete if you ban him from running at your school, or does it lower your standards against all the other schools.

We aren't going to have the best cars if we don't have imports from other contries to compete against. It's up to our industry to step in, and rise to the challenge.......... or I may start eventially having to by imports.

 

Yes, we primarily have the Japanese to thank for the vast quality improvement to current domestic vehicles. I agree with everything you say, until we get to the "dumb old Detroit automakers building gas-guzzling SUV" line. They built and sold what people wanted (notice I said wanted, not needed). The Asian automakers continued to focus on car design because that's what their home-markets demanded. When the market changed, they already had home-market designs to shift over to. Everyone screams about how "forward-thinking" and "smart" Toyota is. But who just spent a fortune entering the full-size truck segment in the U.S. right before oil prices skyrocketed?

 

Toyota felt that they couldn't ignore the huge full size US truck market any longer. And when you are worth $132 billion, whats $3 or $4 billion to risk to get more of the US market.

 

GM declaring would shrink their market segment an amount they would probably never recover. Car dealers wouldn't be able to sell cars and would go out of business, which would save GM some headaches of closing them the hard way. After 90 or 120 days, consolidating brands and dealers would become much easier. Downside to the economy is the number of jobs lost from local dealers.

I agree on leaving Chevy and Caddy and leaning staff like crazy. A regular brand and a luxury brand seems to work for a lot of the competition - and most other cars have a Chevy version as well (or could quite easily). Perhaps leave GMC for commercial sales, but thats still assuming they keep the class 5, 6, and 7 medium duty trucks.

If you kept any brands between Buick, Pontiac, or Saturn - keep Saturn.

 

Here's an interesting excerpt from today's Automotive News:

"GMAC has cited tough credit markets as a reason for the tighter standards. But many dealers see it as a tactic by Cerberus to exert pressure on GM at the bargaining table."

 

In light of today's news that automaker's finance arms qualify for TARP, does anyone see the merger going through?

http://www.reuters.com/article/bonds...33011720081027

It sounds like GM needs GMAC to qualify, or am I reading this wrong?

 

Good point. I didn't really mean not keeping some of the same employees, though. I was meaning more them saying "we are no longer a UAW operation."

We don't all live in California. I'd guess there are a lot of Wal Mart workers in Missouri who would be THRILLED if you're offering them a raise to $12 per hour. I know they're not going that low literally, I was more saying that it will see a significant reduction.

Nonetheless, whatever the guys at the non-union import plants are making I'd guess that's the max you'd be looking at.

And if GM goes non-UAW, will the import plants have an incentive to keep wages as high?

After seeing what happened to the Buick dealership my dad worked at for over 30 years, I know for a fact that while GM can't just say "you're closed," if they want you closed, they can get you there. You know that. It costs "something" but that something's not always much.

 

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com...the-brink.aspx

 

Looks like you beat me to the punch.

This is a good article and explains a lot.

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122488710556068177.html

This one is even better.

 

Here's something interesting: How quickly we forget cheaper gas higher pickup and suv sales/

They link to a Automotive news article, but I don't have a subscription to view it.

 

At least one expert thinks the merger is the best alternative...

"Grant Thornton Says a GM and Chrysler Transaction is the Best Alternative to Preserve Jobs and Cash"

http://sev.prnewswire.com/banking-fi...0102008-1.html