If GM does this, I lose all respect for GM....
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,502
In all honesty, he did have some very good points about after-sales service, and how GM could do better by implementing some of his strategies in the interests of winning over some customers instead of scamming money from them.
But his tirade against the GM board was tiring and non-constructive. Sure he might not like the current board but there are ways to challenge for their positions... and it's not on the internet.
But his tirade against the GM board was tiring and non-constructive. Sure he might not like the current board but there are ways to challenge for their positions... and it's not on the internet.
While the guy is a bit crazy and his "Return To Greatness" plan is vastly overblown, his basic assessment that GM management is not doing the job and needs to be removed has been proven correct, IMO.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 1998
Posts: 615
From: Pekin, IL, United States
Doommaster Lame
You are very out of touch.
Here you are saying the you want your Camaro and you are also saying
that GM will not have enough cash for the end of 2009 to be in business.
They make street signs after people like you ONE WAY
To me March is so far away and I don't think GM will be around in March,,,well
thats 5 months from now smuck.
To me there will be no camaro if GM is going out of business anytime soon..
No Camaro for 2009 and I will be stuck in getting a 2010 Challenger RT then.
I am glad Ford don't want any part of GM
Ford will be around way after GM goes out of business
You are very out of touch.
Here you are saying the you want your Camaro and you are also saying
that GM will not have enough cash for the end of 2009 to be in business.
They make street signs after people like you ONE WAY
To me March is so far away and I don't think GM will be around in March,,,well
thats 5 months from now smuck.
To me there will be no camaro if GM is going out of business anytime soon..
No Camaro for 2009 and I will be stuck in getting a 2010 Challenger RT then.
I am glad Ford don't want any part of GM
Ford will be around way after GM goes out of business
I was giving a worst case scenario, but obviously that went WAY over your ability to comprehend. GM has options for staying around, which is something you don't seem to understand. The Camaro is coming, regardless of what your (very wrongly, I might add) ignorant ideas might be. And yes, I know March is 5 months from now. But unlike you, I also know that GM has enough money stored away to last them at least another 11 months at the current cash burn rate before running into their minimum cash on hand amount. I'm just curious, but wouldn't the smuck be the guy that can't do simple mathmatics (again, looking at you here). If to you there will be no Camaro, you are going to have one hell of a surprise come Feb 2009.
Anyways, enough of poking holes in JohnnyTuinals ridiculous fantasy world.
Does anyone have any further info on why GM might be pursuing this merger aside from acquiring Chrysler, keeping the few parts they want (Jeep and minivans have been mentioned) and getting the extra government loans that the combined company would be able to obtain? I mentioned the idea of selling off the Dodge truck line to a company like Nissan, but no one has said anything further in regard to that.
I don't know too much about whether that would even be practical or feasible, but if GM could sell the entire line as well as all the manufacturing equipment/sites to someone such as Nissan, wouldn't they also be able to transfer all the workers with it? Not only would these people not lose their jobs, they wouldn't have to be bought out by GM. Seems to me that Nissan is already in an agreement with Chrysler to rebadge trucks, would they be at all interested in buying the entire line from GM if the GM-Chrysler deal goes through? And what about the rest of the Chrysler lines? Would any other manufacturer have an interest in them?
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Wow, you have to be one of the most IGNORANT posters I've EVER seen on here. Have you considered mental help? Out of touch is EXACTLY what you are, especially with reality. Before having read some of your posts, I didn't think a person could operate without a functioning brain. Apparently, I was mistaken.
I was giving a worst case scenario, but obviously that went WAY over your ability to comprehend. GM has options for staying around, which is something you don't seem to understand. The Camaro is coming, regardless of what your (very wrongly, I might add) ignorant ideas might be. And yes, I know March is 5 months from now. But unlike you, I also know that GM has enough money stored away to last them at least another 11 months at the current cash burn rate before running into their minimum cash on hand amount. I'm just curious, but wouldn't the smuck be the guy that can't do simple mathmatics (again, looking at you here). If to you there will be no Camaro, you are going to have one hell of a surprise come Feb 2009.
Anyways, enough of poking holes in JohnnyTuinals ridiculous fantasy world.
Does anyone have any further info on why GM might be pursuing this merger aside from acquiring Chrysler, keeping the few parts they want (Jeep and minivans have been mentioned) and getting the extra government loans that the combined company would be able to obtain? I mentioned the idea of selling off the Dodge truck line to a company like Nissan, but no one has said anything further in regard to that.
I don't know too much about whether that would even be practical or feasible, but if GM could sell the entire line as well as all the manufacturing equipment/sites to someone such as Nissan, wouldn't they also be able to transfer all the workers with it? Not only would these people not lose their jobs, they wouldn't have to be bought out by GM. Seems to me that Nissan is already in an agreement with Chrysler to rebadge trucks, would they be at all interested in buying the entire line from GM if the GM-Chrysler deal goes through? And what about the rest of the Chrysler lines? Would any other manufacturer have an interest in them?
I was giving a worst case scenario, but obviously that went WAY over your ability to comprehend. GM has options for staying around, which is something you don't seem to understand. The Camaro is coming, regardless of what your (very wrongly, I might add) ignorant ideas might be. And yes, I know March is 5 months from now. But unlike you, I also know that GM has enough money stored away to last them at least another 11 months at the current cash burn rate before running into their minimum cash on hand amount. I'm just curious, but wouldn't the smuck be the guy that can't do simple mathmatics (again, looking at you here). If to you there will be no Camaro, you are going to have one hell of a surprise come Feb 2009.
Anyways, enough of poking holes in JohnnyTuinals ridiculous fantasy world.
Does anyone have any further info on why GM might be pursuing this merger aside from acquiring Chrysler, keeping the few parts they want (Jeep and minivans have been mentioned) and getting the extra government loans that the combined company would be able to obtain? I mentioned the idea of selling off the Dodge truck line to a company like Nissan, but no one has said anything further in regard to that.
I don't know too much about whether that would even be practical or feasible, but if GM could sell the entire line as well as all the manufacturing equipment/sites to someone such as Nissan, wouldn't they also be able to transfer all the workers with it? Not only would these people not lose their jobs, they wouldn't have to be bought out by GM. Seems to me that Nissan is already in an agreement with Chrysler to rebadge trucks, would they be at all interested in buying the entire line from GM if the GM-Chrysler deal goes through? And what about the rest of the Chrysler lines? Would any other manufacturer have an interest in them?
Too funny!On the subject of the Dodge trucks being sold to R-N... good idea as it's a win-win scenario for each entity: http://car-reviews.automobile.com/ne...t-nissan/5981/
Registered User
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 1,547
From: Panhandle of West Virginia
Very interesting article:
DETROIT, Oct 21 (Reuters) - Finance company GMAC has told some General Motors Corp (GM.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) dealers they will have to begin paying off older inventory, a step a major dealer group is protesting as an unfair tightening of credit that could prompt dealer bankruptcies.
"Unless immediately stopped, GMAC's actions will directly lead to the insolvency of a number of our dealer members," California New Car Dealers Association President Peter Welch said in a letter of protest to GMAC released on Tuesday.
"At a time of their greatest need, our GM dealer members feel completely abandoned by GMAC's rogue actions," he said.
GMAC, which is 51-percent owned by Cerberus Capital Management [CBS.UL], has limited financing for dealerships and for consumer purchases of new GM cars and trucks in recent weeks because of its own difficulty securing credit.
Last week, GMAC moved to limit auto loans to borrowers with credit scores above 700, hiked the fee it charges for new loans and demanded higher down-payments from buyers.
Welch told Reuters other auto finance companies, including those owned by Ford Motor Co (F.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) and Toyota Motor Corp <7203.T had not tightened like GMAC under Cerberus.
GM dealers have found alternatives to consumer financing, through GMAC, Welch said, but the decision to curtail inventory financing has hit dealerships hard.
Many GM dealers in California had been told that they would have to begin paying down the principal they owe on GM vehicles over 180 days old. Those new payments will require principal payments of 5 percent to 10 percent per month, Welch said.
"At the time where dealers can least afford to have their working capital depleted, they're just sucking it out," Welch said of GMAC.
In response, GMAC said it had been forced to cut back on consumer loans because of the credit "market disruption" of recent weeks while changes to inventory financing were being made on a case-by-case basis to reduce risk. Those changes are not limited to California, GMAC said.
"We continue to implement prudent risk management that includes working with dealers, regularly assessing credit-worthiness and appropriately taking actions to reduce risk," GMAC spokeswoman Gina Proia said in a statement.
Analysts have said the steps by GMAC threaten to compound sales difficulties for GM, which has seen its U.S. sales fall by 18 percent through September.
GM sold a controlling stake in GMAC to Cerberus in 2006 for $7.4 billion. It retains the remaining 49 percent. GMAC financed over 40 percent of GM's sales in the past quarter.
The tightening by GMAC comes as GM and Cerberus remain in talks about a potential deal for GM to acquire Chrysler LLC, which is also owned by Cerberus.
Some GM dealers believe that the crackdown by Cerberus is partly aimed at forcing GM to the table to negotiate a merger with Chrysler.
Welch declined to comment on that view, although he acknowledged it was widespread among GM dealers. "I don't think if General Motors was in control of the levers here they would be doing this to their dealer body," he said.
A Cerberus spokesman was not immediately available.
California, which has seen its economy slow with a slump in the housing market, represents about 12 percent of the new car market so far this year.
The California dealer group, which represents about 1,500 dealers and over 400 GM dealers, said it has confirmed 82 dealer closures in the state so this year, up from 20 in 2007.
DETROIT, Oct 21 (Reuters) - Finance company GMAC has told some General Motors Corp (GM.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) dealers they will have to begin paying off older inventory, a step a major dealer group is protesting as an unfair tightening of credit that could prompt dealer bankruptcies.
"Unless immediately stopped, GMAC's actions will directly lead to the insolvency of a number of our dealer members," California New Car Dealers Association President Peter Welch said in a letter of protest to GMAC released on Tuesday.
"At a time of their greatest need, our GM dealer members feel completely abandoned by GMAC's rogue actions," he said.
GMAC, which is 51-percent owned by Cerberus Capital Management [CBS.UL], has limited financing for dealerships and for consumer purchases of new GM cars and trucks in recent weeks because of its own difficulty securing credit.
Last week, GMAC moved to limit auto loans to borrowers with credit scores above 700, hiked the fee it charges for new loans and demanded higher down-payments from buyers.
Welch told Reuters other auto finance companies, including those owned by Ford Motor Co (F.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) and Toyota Motor Corp <7203.T had not tightened like GMAC under Cerberus.
GM dealers have found alternatives to consumer financing, through GMAC, Welch said, but the decision to curtail inventory financing has hit dealerships hard.
Many GM dealers in California had been told that they would have to begin paying down the principal they owe on GM vehicles over 180 days old. Those new payments will require principal payments of 5 percent to 10 percent per month, Welch said.
"At the time where dealers can least afford to have their working capital depleted, they're just sucking it out," Welch said of GMAC.
In response, GMAC said it had been forced to cut back on consumer loans because of the credit "market disruption" of recent weeks while changes to inventory financing were being made on a case-by-case basis to reduce risk. Those changes are not limited to California, GMAC said.
"We continue to implement prudent risk management that includes working with dealers, regularly assessing credit-worthiness and appropriately taking actions to reduce risk," GMAC spokeswoman Gina Proia said in a statement.
Analysts have said the steps by GMAC threaten to compound sales difficulties for GM, which has seen its U.S. sales fall by 18 percent through September.
GM sold a controlling stake in GMAC to Cerberus in 2006 for $7.4 billion. It retains the remaining 49 percent. GMAC financed over 40 percent of GM's sales in the past quarter.
The tightening by GMAC comes as GM and Cerberus remain in talks about a potential deal for GM to acquire Chrysler LLC, which is also owned by Cerberus.
Some GM dealers believe that the crackdown by Cerberus is partly aimed at forcing GM to the table to negotiate a merger with Chrysler.
Welch declined to comment on that view, although he acknowledged it was widespread among GM dealers. "I don't think if General Motors was in control of the levers here they would be doing this to their dealer body," he said.
A Cerberus spokesman was not immediately available.
California, which has seen its economy slow with a slump in the housing market, represents about 12 percent of the new car market so far this year.
The California dealer group, which represents about 1,500 dealers and over 400 GM dealers, said it has confirmed 82 dealer closures in the state so this year, up from 20 in 2007.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Man, there are so many dynamics swirling around.
There is Cerberus wanting to dump Chrysler, and it's ability to influence - yes, even muscle - GM through GMAC.
There is GM, which may look at Chrysler as a way to get a larger percentage of the $25B in Federal loans. But how do you close down an American institution and fire 60,000 people and then pass your hat for more fed loans?
There is Nissan/Renault. Nissan could benefit from the Dodge Ram brand and Renault could use some Chrysler remnant, in part or whole, as a North American sales channel.
And any number of potential Russians, Indians and Chinese are eyeing the tooling and design for some of Chrysler's FWD programs for possible purchase.
Anyway you look at it, American brands will die. GM can't even manage the brands it has, does anyone think that ADDING another three will help them? If GM merges with Chrysler, I think it's safe to say that Dodge, Pontiac, GMC, Hummer and Chrysler are not long for this world.
If you're a Chrysler fan, a Renault/Nissan deal is the best chance for life. Ghosn has reportedly recently made an offer to Cerberus for a percentage of Chrysler - AND HE WANTS TO RETAIN CHRYSLER'S BRANDS, since he sees no overlap with Nissan/Renault's other brands.
There is Cerberus wanting to dump Chrysler, and it's ability to influence - yes, even muscle - GM through GMAC.
There is GM, which may look at Chrysler as a way to get a larger percentage of the $25B in Federal loans. But how do you close down an American institution and fire 60,000 people and then pass your hat for more fed loans?
There is Nissan/Renault. Nissan could benefit from the Dodge Ram brand and Renault could use some Chrysler remnant, in part or whole, as a North American sales channel.
And any number of potential Russians, Indians and Chinese are eyeing the tooling and design for some of Chrysler's FWD programs for possible purchase.
Anyway you look at it, American brands will die. GM can't even manage the brands it has, does anyone think that ADDING another three will help them? If GM merges with Chrysler, I think it's safe to say that Dodge, Pontiac, GMC, Hummer and Chrysler are not long for this world.
If you're a Chrysler fan, a Renault/Nissan deal is the best chance for life. Ghosn has reportedly recently made an offer to Cerberus for a percentage of Chrysler - AND HE WANTS TO RETAIN CHRYSLER'S BRANDS, since he sees no overlap with Nissan/Renault's other brands.
Last edited by Z284ever; Oct 22, 2008 at 11:01 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,705
From: Oakland, California
It looks like GM is now trying to sell ACDelco to raise cash to make the Chrysler deal work...
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssC...36880420081022
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssC...36880420081022
Last edited by jg95z28; Oct 22, 2008 at 01:53 PM. Reason: duh :p
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 658
From: Madisonville, Louisiana
In all honesty, he did have some very good points about after-sales service, and how GM could do better by implementing some of his strategies in the interests of winning over some customers instead of scamming money from them.
But his tirade against the GM board was tiring and non-constructive. Sure he might not like the current board but there are ways to challenge for their positions... and it's not on the internet.
But his tirade against the GM board was tiring and non-constructive. Sure he might not like the current board but there are ways to challenge for their positions... and it's not on the internet.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 1,547
From: Panhandle of West Virginia
Not many people, me included, are paying much attention to anything you are saying. The article was just in the Washington Post today.
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 107
Yep and if you read when the bill was passed you would have known
that the auto companys will never see the money............
Gezzzzzz why don't you read something other then Camaros and maybe you will get ahead in life......Or maybe you enjoy watching the price is right on tv,,,,gezzzzz many of you have nothing better in life to do.
that the auto companys will never see the money............
Gezzzzzz why don't you read something other then Camaros and maybe you will get ahead in life......Or maybe you enjoy watching the price is right on tv,,,,gezzzzz many of you have nothing better in life to do.
Banned
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,604
From: Milton, FL
Yep and if you read when the bill was passed you would have known
that the auto companys will never see the money............
Gezzzzzz why don't you read something other then Camaros and maybe you will get ahead in life......Or maybe you enjoy watching the price is right on tv,,,,gezzzzz many of you have nothing better in life to do.
that the auto companys will never see the money............
Gezzzzzz why don't you read something other then Camaros and maybe you will get ahead in life......Or maybe you enjoy watching the price is right on tv,,,,gezzzzz many of you have nothing better in life to do.
edit:
ohh i get it. he's from the mustang boards trolling. funny. he's on the dodge challenger forums too.
edit2:
he's 45
Last edited by anasazi; Oct 22, 2008 at 09:52 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Some GM dealers believe that the crackdown by Cerberus is partly aimed at forcing GM to the table to negotiate a merger with Chrysler.
Welch declined to comment on that view, although he acknowledged it was widespread among GM dealers. "I don't think if General Motors was in control of the levers here they would be doing this to their dealer body," he said.
A Cerberus spokesman was not immediately available.
Welch declined to comment on that view, although he acknowledged it was widespread among GM dealers. "I don't think if General Motors was in control of the levers here they would be doing this to their dealer body," he said.
A Cerberus spokesman was not immediately available.
