QFT.

This right here is nail on head. People are realizing this, and instead of buying the more expensive cars they want, they're buying the less expensive ones they need that get better fuel economy. This is one of the many things kicking the American automakers straight in the nuts. They don't have the small economic cars to compete with foreign automakers - in fact they NEVER have. Even if they do now, only the most astute buyers can keep up with what the d@mn things are called this year. For example: GM (Chevette-Cavalier-Cobalt-Cruze). What the hell? Why the name changes? Is it because of the attempted departure from the previous models, which SUCKED? Even more ironic is the Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla nameplates have been around for 30+ years. People KNOW what they're getting when they buy those - a reliable, affordable, practical car that gets excellent fuel economy. I wonder why sales are up on those models even during these tough times? If GM is worth it's salt, they better get the Cruze (or whatever it's called today) to market like right now.
Oh yeah, I don't know what I'm talking about; I'm just a consumer. I'm also one of the many people who the American automakers are asking to loan them money. I may not know a lot of things, but even I know that it's bad tact to tell us, the consumer/taxpayer, that we "don't know what we're talking about", and blame us for the automaker's business management problems, only to turn around and ask us for a loan.

 

This statement isn't worth the bandwidth it's occupying.



Ahhh, the internet. Empty statements and bull crap.

 

I have done so in the past and I don't figure I'm any different or special by being willing to do so. Neither does where I ply my talents disqualify me from having a wise decision making process.

This is ostensibly a Chevy/GM fan site. I would think that coming here otherwise would fall under some level of being a troll and being a troll usually denotes someone with too much time on their hands and a proclivity to find entertainment in mean spiritedness.

I have been taken on different careers in my lifetime. I was a professional musician from my early teens. In the process I played tiny venues amd up to 67,000 seat stadiums. I certainly didn't achieve superstar status, but I did did recordings for major labels, know what it's like to hear yourself on the radio, and learned what's involved in running your own business.

On and off during my musician career I was fortunate enough to be able to find good work as a audio engineer, primarily at the earliest ground floor part of the business which began in the 1970's. Fortunately I have a talent for making acts sound good in live situations. I was a lucky guy in that respect and learned a great deal about dealing with princes, wackos, and prima donnas in the process of presenting lucrative performances.

I moved back to performing and songwriting in the mid '70s. Did well with that.
Returned to the live audio and concert production business when I received an offer that was hard to refuse and I ran a stage, lighting, and live sound company. Most of what I did involved me not sitting at a desk but rather in the field making it all work. I moved to England convinced I would find a place there... Luckily I was correct and became involved with one of the largest live audio companies in Europe. The last thing I did in England was as part of the design team for the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the end of WWII in London. I'm gratified that my ideas eliminated many expensive obstacles and resulted in a great success. I didn't manager, however. to convince the British ownership that I could secure them a mutually lucrative deal here in the USA.

I returned to the USA and started writing and playing again strictly to record an album project. As can happen with bands, the wheels started falling off in the middle of the project and I determined enough is enough with that.

I helped co write some songs that brought some money in and decided I was in the mood to be involved in a solitary sort of business. Of all things, I became a trainer of racing greyhounds, and thus was given my nickname that I use as my internet handle.

All during these times I was very much a automobile fanatic. Had money to buy new cars and gained a larger and larger appreciation for General Motors and, in particular, Chevrolet. I did some road racing, had friends that were engine builders for different racing disciplines. I did a whole lot of questioning and self-educated myself on how vehicles can be made to handle, and what's involved in a winning combination.

I got the notion to pursue the automobile business. I figured the best way to understand something is to be willing to jump into the ground level. I took a large pay cut to work at a Chevy dealership as a sales person. Did that for a year and a half and came away with a pretty good understanding of how that part of the business actually works. The dealership was one of the longest running in the country and learning the old school think and new school think was available.

An opportunity arose to get with General Motors in the area of customer and relationship services. It's a bit more than customer assistance, but customer assistance is a good basic description. In a very short amount of time I was picked to be a part of customer relations that dealt strictly with escalations to the CEO and presidents and VP's of GM. All manner of situations from Congressional constituency issues, etc., etc. About a year into that I was made one of the leaders of that enterprise. In the process I made lots of friends in different brand teams and engineering groups. I was called on to attend and assist many enthusiast events, the vast majority being Corvette related. Among the folks I became good friends with was Scott Settlemire. We had numerous opportunities to talk about our mutual love of cars, car enthusiasts, and what we thought we could do to make GM as great a company as we believed it was and could be.

In a cost controlling move which was among many, I was offered to be sent outside the USA. It was not something I was interested in doing. I was disappointed that realities dictated the situation, but I wasn't bitter about it. My love for Chevy and GM preceded my working for them and it wasn't dimmed by my not staying. I figured I was looking for a career when I came to GM and that I'd be looking for a career if I left.

When Scott got wind that I was going he made it possible for me to continue to serve Chevy and GM. I accepted. I have always pursued making a living by doing and associating with things I believe in.

When it comes to politics? Very conservative. I have read the Constitution, studied the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers. Studied the political swing that US history has had and continues to have.

I don't like government intervention in business. However, when government works against business, and does much to hurt an industry, I believe thay should think hard about helping to correct some of the situations government has forced on an industry.

The edict in the Constitution calls for the government to provide for the common defense. Elevating the third world to second or first world status while allowing your own country to sink to second or third world status is not, IMHO, providing for the common defense. We won't be able to promote our laudable ideals if we are content to be little other than the customer and investment house of the world. It's a fool's paradise with cheap "big screen" TV's as unworthy compensation.

I apologize for the length of the post. I have tried to edit it down but keep the forthcoming parts intact.

Suffice it to say there are political realities which have prevented GM and other domestics from having the freedom to go toe to toe in the ruthless fashion that can go with that path. America has put some of those political realities in place. I only offer that if politics hampers capitalism it has some responsibility to help rectify some of the collateral damage they have built in to the process.

Certainly you can at least entertain the notion that some political realities exist that prevent the ad hoc dismantling of organized labor. Whether organized has slipped into going to far, or has ignored some, organized labor was a key to expanding the middle class. The politics of reality will not stand by in silence were such drastic measures be attempted. Not while votes are involved.

Perhaps you can agree that open capitalism is thwarted in no small way when social engineering legislation is put forth which directs consumers to buy what they SHOULD want rather than what they DO want. It is of no small bafflement to me that the balance of trade in oil is a major crisis to be legislated to prevent, but other balances of trade must be considered the natural forces of trade and must welcomed and thus tolerated. Any casualties along the way should thus be welcomed or tolerated. It is no small puzzlement to me that one large sum going out is different than another.

Anyway Robert. That's my history and I am forthcoming in trying to state my motivations.

Hopefully you know I consider your thoughts to be welcomed. Hopefully you can understand my motivations are more about the good of us all than keeping me in a career.

 

I appreciate your post; truly.

I have an almost equally long history with GM as you although I've never worked for them in any capacity...beyond that, my "history" has been pretty much laid bare in 1,600+ posts over some 7+ years...if people want to know "me" they can find me there (not that I expect them to).

If people want to think me a "troll" then let them think that...there is just some levels of ignorance I refuse to deal with.

 

This site's administration takes the exact same stance, which includes people selectively forgetting that this site is PRO-GM.

 

So if you aren't PRO GM you can't belong? I don't remember reading that in the TOS.

Does that mean all opinions are welcome so long as they agree with whatever everyone else thinks?

Does "PRO GM" mean you can't disagree with what GM does or says or wants...are we all supposed to just march in lockstep with whatever GM says is best?

 

I wouldn't suggest you are a troll Robert. If that was suggested in my post I assure you it was not intended. I wouldn't respond to a troll. You asked a question, I answered as best I could.

I figure we disagree about a loan. I wouldn't presume to attempt to delegitimize your opinion. Gentlemen of goodwill and idealogy can disagree.

We likely have more we agree upon than not.

 

I really wasn't suggesting that you were calling me a troll...but the charge has been made many times.

Yes...I suspect we do agree on a lot more than we disagree; at the very least I I suspect we agree on a love of the automobile in all it's various shapes, sizes, mode of propulsion and yes, even nameplates.

 

I almost always get assumption of an exaggerated accusation coupled with a challenge of terms when I make that reminder.

TOS or otherwise, common sense and mutual respect should be in place so everyone knows what is allowed and what is not allowed here, and they need to govern themselves accordingly as adults who have respect for the community here and what it stands for.

You will note that people respectfully disagree frequently on this site, even in this thread.

People can claim they are here for all the right reasons, but when their intent shows otherwise in the content they provide and the results their content generates, that dictates where the real separation lies.

 

Fascinating insight, thanks for posting. I agree with the logic and perspective.

One facet of American society that's a deeply ingrained part of our culture - is basic fairness. Our government has laid on all manner of heavy-handed rules and regulations for carmakers over the years... many/most with the best of intentions, but with little regard for the financial impacts. Our government (and the folks who voted them in) should today have an inkling that they are partly the cause of MoTown's current troubles... and should step up to help.

 

Voicing the extreme is often useful in determining exactly where the real boundaries are.

I don't believe my disagreements have been any less "respectful" than the majority of others here and on the whole, where I've disagreed, I tend to be as or more respectful than the opposing poster has been to me. In those cases where I've not been so "respectful", a bit of reading will usually reveal that such was in response to equally disrespectful treatment of me. I don't say that so as to make my part in it "right"...it's just the way it is.

With some notable exceptions, the majority of those who disagree with my opinions have not been based not on fact or on thoughtful positions of their own but on pure emotion. Many here seem to have blinders on when it comes to GM...while that may be understandable, that doesn't make their position right (or even more "PRO GM") than my own.

In any case, there is really nothing more to be said on the subject of the bailout anyway...it's all been said and no one is going to change their minds. And even if some individuals here did change their mind, those in power are going to do what they want with respect to Detroit regardless of what anywhere here thinks (as they've already proven).

 

C'mon Robert. If the shoe doesn't fit, you need not wear it. All that needs be said may or may not have been said. That really doesn't have any true bearing on the nature of a community. This is a community. It doesn't spring or exist as a PR device for a corporation.

Guarding against cannibalism is the realm of the administrators of a site such as this.

Any correspondence through this site which is mindful of the importnce of the community at large is and has been fair game. I have never seen that heavy hand excercised here. If anything is true, posters here are allowed to dispense the appropriate amount of rope to hang themselves with.

If such were not the case, this place would not be worthy of existance. Thing is, it is worthy. I have met the owners and they were not drinking any form of kool-ade.

By the same token. I fully fronted up at your behest. Not because I need to, but because you are due that consideration. Not because you ask, but because I think there is room for gentlemanly discourse.

There actually has been no demand for silence that I can see.

You will note that I have not called for you to advance by recoil. I am being straight forward and trying to converse with a fellow fan.

 

I don't think it is your flat out opinion per se, but your vigorous defense of a position that could cost the jobs of those you are arguing against and destroy a segment that many on here have given a large part of their lives for whether it be in work or hobby. G.M. is to many an ideal of what America once was and what it could possibly be again. The same can be said for Ford and Chrysler. Once you take that away a part of this country dies and it can never be regained again. The fact that so many are apparently willing to throw them under the bus and punish millions for the stupidity of a few is unsettling and part of the reason that you are getting the reaction that you are. I understand your position and feelings, but sometimes throwing gasoline on your neighbor's house when it is already on fire is not the right thing to do.

 

Yes, and Toyota isn't laying off people from the new Tundra plants they just built. They aren't changing there plants over to build smaller cars because the larger ones they sell stopped selling. They had plenty of capacity for the amount of small fuel efficient cars that people wanted. There were no waits to buy a prius or honda civic hybrid.

Every manufacture is taking a hit from this. Honda and Toyota just have more money right now to help.


So, the argument is they never have... but even if they do now??? GM changing names of models can be debated. There were times which GM didn't build the greatest cars. No one will deny that. And it was probably the right move to do. Other car companies have done the same thing. Where did that Toyota T100 go? Before the Tacoma, Toyota's truck name was... Truck. Toyota had a minivan not named Sienna. But oh so blessed are the Civic and the Corolla that never break down and have wonderful fuel economy. Although the both models have had problems. Also, didn't Toyota delay there latest Corolla? I am pretty sure they did. Obviously, Toyota was thinking we must get it out on the market.


Oh, and the civic and corolla sales are down now. Nothing is selling. Look at October, the civic was down 22%. Corolla was actually up 6%, and for some odd reason, so was the Sequoia. For September, the Corolla was down 25%. You are incorrect, no cars are selling right now. People are waiting or can't get loans. People who are buying right now, are getting some good deals.

Oh, and I am sure GM is just waiting on the Cruze. They don't want to have a nice small economical car in the mix. Nope, they just want to keep there Cobalt here. It doesn't have anything to do with the car being on a global architecture and GM can't spend millions of dollars to get the tooling every right now. Nope, nothing to do with any of that.

I am sorry, who blamed you for their management problems? Who blamed you for any of the big 3's problems? And yes, the are asking you for a loan. But, I guess you will be ok with giving, not loaning, all of their employees unemployment benefits and their insurance benefits. I guess that would be a better use of much more money than the 25 billion that GM is asking for in a loan.

 

It would be great and wonderful if that $25/50/100 billion would actually fix the problem. Something tells me if (when) this "loan" gets approved, it will buy American automakers about a year before we're paying all the costs in bold anyway, plus the $25/50/100 billion on top of that. It's risky loans like this that got us into this whole mess in the first place.

The definition of insanity is doing the same things the same way and expecting different results.