HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2006, 5:02 AM
bmorescottamanda's Avatar
bmorescottamanda bmorescottamanda is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: baltimore
Posts: 329
Ford and GM will stay the biggest car companys in the world.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2006, 9:11 AM
edluva edluva is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond Agent 007
I said no such thing - I said that "refinement" is such an ambiguous, immeasurable and ill-defined term it is practically worthless as a measure to determine whether a certain car is "high quality" or not. Nor does it have anything to do with whether a car is "reliable" or not (which was the original point of discussion anyway).
If refinement is worthless as a measure, I guess you're suggesting that it means refinement doesn't exist. Because consumers can only percieve what can be measured, right? Are you suggesting nothing in this universe exists that can't be reliably measured?

So by your defintion, a "dish" from McDonalds is equivalent in quality to one from Patina Bistro because even though 97% of us opted for the latter, as long as we can't quantify the value judgement behind our decision, the existence of that value judgement has been negated.

and regarding a car's origin, just because a car is built by mexicans, it doesn't follow that it was conceived, funded, engineered, and designed by a mexican firm. the problem with american cars lie in their conception - everything before the actual assembly.

Last edited by edluva; Apr 18, 2006 at 9:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2006, 9:22 AM
Evan's Avatar
Evan Evan is offline
I have lurking issues
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 453
I still say that what is killing American autos isn't their mechanical quality, it's the fact that most of them look like generic econo-blobs that have virtually no character or personality whatsoever. Not all of them of course, but the largest percentage of them. GM puts out some models that are so boring and plain jane you won't even notice them going down the street.

Mechanically though, I have had good luck with American cars built from the 90's on. *knock on wood* The lack of style, and the antiquated ways American automakers do business is killing them. GM and Ford still act like they think it's the 1950's. They haven't kept up very well with modern assembly processes, they are hemmoraging money because they have outdated factories and old equipment. There are some factories that use robotics, but overall, the assembly process is in most of their North American plants are old.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2006, 9:42 AM
edluva edluva is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,134
^and again, mechanical quality goes skin deep with what ails our industry. management also has to ensure marketing, refinement, technology, styling, engineering/performace all hit their targets - the consumer. the big 3 simply aren't doing that.

If they were street-legal, I can try to sell a tank, but even a superior mechanical quality won't find many buyers if the numerous other dimensions of true "quality" aren't met. It'd be myopic to assume consumers only want a car that doesn't shed it's rear bumper at 65k, or that cloth and leather are perfect substitutes so long as both materials have identical reliability according to JD power. And that's where 007 oversimplifies things.

Last edited by edluva; Apr 18, 2006 at 9:47 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2006, 10:38 AM
bmorescottamanda's Avatar
bmorescottamanda bmorescottamanda is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: baltimore
Posts: 329
When people say american cars dont last that is so funny to me. I have a mustang with 285,000 miles on it, with the same engine. other people I know has GMs with over 200,000. And people that buys american cars dont pay a arm and a leg for them. Its find with me if there are a few more things wrong with them over the life of the car than an import because you still save money after you pay more at frist for the same kind of car in an import.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2006, 11:26 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
^Quality Japanese and German cars cost more up front--but you recoup much of that with their strong resale values.
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2006, 4:22 PM
James Bond Agent 007's Avatar
James Bond Agent 007 James Bond Agent 007 is offline
Posh
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
Posts: 21,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva
If refinement is worthless as a measure, I guess you're suggesting that it means refinement doesn't exist. Because consumers can only percieve what can be measured, right? Are you suggesting nothing in this universe exists that can't be reliably measured?
Let me put it this way: Beauty exists, just as "refinement" does. That does not mean either beauty or refinement can be measured, because they can't. Both are entirely subjective.

You are claiming that Japanese cars are "better" because they are more "refined." That is the equlivalent of saying that Japanese cars are "better" because they are more "beautiful." These are not objective measures of "better" but are, rather, subjective measures.

I have driven both Japanese and American cars. I don't find Japanese cars to be any more "refined" than American ones. So, as I said, your perception about the "refinement" of Japanese cars is 100% subjective, and not everyone will agree with you. You are trying to state something as if it were a fact ("Japanese cars are more refined") when it is impossible for it to be a fact.

Quote:
and regarding a car's origin, just because a car is built by mexicans, it doesn't follow that it was conceived, funded, engineered, and designed by a mexican firm. the problem with american cars lie in their conception - everything before the actual assembly.
Where the hell did I say anything about who built or designed what????

And once again, why the hell did you resurrect a topic which I said absolutely nothing new about since November?
__________________
"There's two kinds of men in the world. Those who have a crush on Linda Ronstadt, and those who never heard of her." - Willie Nelson
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Apr 18, 2006, 9:01 PM
SSLL's Avatar
SSLL SSLL is offline
samsonyuen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canary Wharf->CityPlace
Posts: 4,241
From: http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ema...257154000A0C95
____________________________
Quote:
Toyota says it's good for America
By Dan Sewell
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Monday, Apr. 17 2006

CINCINNATI — In the 1950s, the saying went, what was good for the country was
good for General Motors -- and what was good for GM was good for the country.

Now, Japanese automaker Toyota Motor Corp. has a new promotional campaign that
says it's good for America, too.
Billboards along highways in areas of the country such as the
Cincinnati-northern Kentucky region, where Toyota employs about 8,800 people,
tout the company's economic impact in the United States.

The messages highlight numbers, such as 13 -- "Donuts in a baker's dozen;
Toyota's U.S. investment, in billions," and 386,000 -- "Kilometers to the moon;
U.S. jobs created by Toyota."

The billboards are in 24 U.S. markets where Toyota has factories or supplier
operations, from Fremont, Calif., where Toyota partners with GM at an
automaking plant, to Huntsville, Ala., where Toyota makes engines.

"Our intent is to raise awareness of our growing U.S. presence," said Patricia
Pineda of Toyota Motor North America. "Our research tells us that consumers
want to learn more about Toyota's U.S. presence."

She said Toyota highlights its U.S. investments and "level of commitment" to
the country in a campaign that began last month and also includes local radio
spots and airport advertising.

Toyota, on its way to passing GM as the world's largest automaker now has about
13 percent of U.S. vehicle sales. While GM and Ford Motor Co. are facing major
restructuring with plant closings and job cuts, Toyota says it wants to expand
car output in the United States, such as recently announced plans to make up to
100,000 Camrys a year in Lafayette, Ind.

Toyota's message is generally warmly received in Kentucky, where it has
provided a major economic boost to the state and employs 7,000 workers at its
plant in Georgetown.

"I think most people, particularly in this area, like Toyota a lot," said
Kenneth Troske, who heads the University of Kentucky's Center for Business and
Economic Research. "They bring a lot of things to the community."

However, the billboards can be irritating to U.S. workers with an uncertain
future.

"We're not real happy about it," said Tony Currington, vice president of United
Auto Workers Local 696, with members facing possible closure of a Dayton brake
plant by Delphi Corp., the largest auto parts supplier for GM, its former
parent.

"As a result of us losing market share to the foreign imports, we're losing
American jobs. It just hurts our economy here," Currington said, adding that
the UAW has been weakened by Toyota's mostly nonunion operations.

"It's not the Japanese who are causing the market share decline," said Bruce
Belzowski, an auto analyst at the University of Michigan's Transportation
Research Institute. "It's Americans buying the Japanese vehicles."

GM was the U.S. market share leader in March sales with about 24 percent,
according to Ward's AutoInfoBank. Ford was second at about 19 percent, but
Toyota and Chrysler each had about 14 percent. For all of 2005, GM lost 1.3
percent and Ford lost 1.1 percent of market share, compared with the previous
year, while Chrysler gained one-half percent and Toyota jumped to 13.3 percent
from 12.2 percent in 2004.

Belzowski said Toyota's latest campaign underlines that "they build where they
sell."

General Motors Corp. spokeswoman Ryndee Carney said the company usually doesn't
comment on competitors' advertising. But she noted that GM has launched its own
new advertising this month, with print ads describing GM's restructuring, price
cuts and new products.

The ads' tag line: "At the global car company that's proud to be American."

In a speech last week to the Swiss American Chamber of Commerce in New York,
Robert Lutz, GM's vice chairman, cited statistics about GM, Ford and
DaimlerChrysler AG's importance to the U.S. auto industry and economy, saying
they account for 4 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product and 11 percent of
manufacturing shipments.

"People who think it doesn't matter who owns our auto industry are flat wrong,"
Lutz said.

But the days of Japan-bashing and "Buy American" appeals have mostly faded,
said Gordon Wangers, head of Los Angeles-based Automotive Marketing Consultants
Inc., which has done work for Toyota, GM and other companies.

"I think today's consumers, especially in our global economy, are not
particularly moved by it the way they once were," he said. "I think they're
moved by a good product at a good price," he said.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2006, 3:34 AM
bmorescottamanda's Avatar
bmorescottamanda bmorescottamanda is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: baltimore
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by fflint
^Quality Japanese and German cars cost more up front--but you recoup much of that with their strong resale values.
yea if you are the kind of person that sales there car every couple of years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2006, 9:33 AM
edluva edluva is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond Agent 007
So, as I said, your perception about the "refinement" of Japanese cars is 100% subjective, and not everyone will agree with you. You are trying to state something as if it were a fact ("Japanese cars are more refined") when it is impossible for it to be a fact.
that's where your strict reliance on one small aspect of a broad concept falls short. I can choose to approach this from an economic perspective - preferences. And from an economic perspective, demand is all I need to tell you about what value refinement poses to measures of "superiority". From this standpoint, you're wrong in saying that a directly immeasurable quality such as refinement is 100% subjective - it's not. There is a discrete, measurable consequence to an economic good, even if that economic good itself can't be put in quantifiable terms - it's comes in the form of money, surveys, consumer behavior, election outcomes. To deny this is to deny the *real* quantifiable effects that subjective efforts like campaign, marketing, and managerial decisions have on intended, primarily quantifiable outcomes.

So following this idea, any given administrative or strategic policy can have measureable economic consequences. The ability of japanese auto to, as you would probably put it, "trick the consumer" into thinking their cars are more refined, is a measureable economic good produced by japanese auto. I really believe you understand this, and see your attempt to discount the value of anything outside of JD Power as a conscious effort to deny it

Last edited by edluva; Apr 22, 2006 at 9:46 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2006, 9:39 AM
edluva edluva is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,134
PS - Sorry but we didn't get a chance to beat this horse dead. Reason for the hiatus is I forgot this thread awhile back, but the debate continues...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2006, 10:51 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmorescottamanda
yea if you are the kind of person that sales there car every couple of years.
Value of a top of the line 2005 Honda Accord family sedan (non-hybrid)--$29,300
Value of a top of the line 2005 Toyota Camry family sedan--$25,805
Value of a top of the line 2005 Ford Taurus family sedan--$22,980

How about after five years?

Value of a top of the line 2001 Honda Accord family sedan in good condition--$13,394
Value of a top of the line 2001 Toyota Camry family sedan in good condition--$12,209
Value of a top of the line 2001 Ford Taurus family sedan in good condition--$6,983

How about after ten years?

Value of a top of the line 1996 Honda Accord family sedan in good condition--$6,367
Value of a top of the line 1996 Toyota Camry family sedan in good condition--$6,454
Value of a top of the line 1996 Ford Taurus family sedan in good condition--$2,630

Source: http://www.edmunds.com
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2006, 12:04 PM
SSLL's Avatar
SSLL SSLL is offline
samsonyuen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canary Wharf->CityPlace
Posts: 4,241
^That sure says a lot about the reliability of Japanese brands. But a lot of those Japanese cars are now built in Canada and the US.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2006, 8:09 PM
James Bond Agent 007's Avatar
James Bond Agent 007 James Bond Agent 007 is offline
Posh
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
Posts: 21,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva
that's where your strict reliance on one small aspect of a broad concept falls short. I can choose to approach this from an economic perspective - preferences. And from an economic perspective, demand is all I need to tell you about what value refinement poses to measures of "superiority". From this standpoint, you're wrong in saying that a directly immeasurable quality such as refinement is 100% subjective - it's not. There is a discrete, measurable consequence to an economic good, even if that economic good itself can't be put in quantifiable terms - it's comes in the form of money, surveys, consumer behavior, election outcomes. To deny this is to deny the *real* quantifiable effects that subjective efforts like campaign, marketing, and managerial decisions have on intended, primarily quantifiable outcomes.
If "refinement" is not 100% subjective, then prove to me that Japanese cars are more "refined" than American cars.

Citing sales figures won't prove this, because that's like saying that Japanese cars are objectively more aesthetically pleasing simply because their sales are growing while American car sales are stagnant.

That said, American cars still out-sell Japanese ones (in America). So, if I were to use your own economic criteria, I could say that Americans still think American cars are more "refined" than Japanese ones (or are more attractive, or whatever other subjective criteria we want to try to objectify).

Quote:
So following this idea, any given administrative or strategic policy can have measureable economic consequences. The ability of japanese auto to, as you would probably put it, "trick the consumer" into thinking their cars are more refined, is a measureable economic good produced by japanese auto. I really believe you understand this, and see your attempt to discount the value of anything outside of JD Power as a conscious effort to deny it
I have no doubt that a lot of Americans, for some reason, get some warm and fuzzy feeling from Japanese cars, which they don't get from American ones. I'm merely trying to say that that warm and fuzzy feeling is an emotion, subjective one. On a more objective level, the differences between Japanese and American cars aren't that great anymore.
__________________
"There's two kinds of men in the world. Those who have a crush on Linda Ronstadt, and those who never heard of her." - Willie Nelson
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2006, 6:12 AM
bmorescottamanda's Avatar
bmorescottamanda bmorescottamanda is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: baltimore
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by fflint
Value of a top of the line 2005 Honda Accord family sedan (non-hybrid)--$29,300
Value of a top of the line 2005 Toyota Camry family sedan--$25,805
Value of a top of the line 2005 Ford Taurus family sedan--$22,980

How about after five years?

Value of a top of the line 2001 Honda Accord family sedan in good condition--$13,394
Value of a top of the line 2001 Toyota Camry family sedan in good condition--$12,209
Value of a top of the line 2001 Ford Taurus family sedan in good condition--$6,983

How about after ten years?

Value of a top of the line 1996 Honda Accord family sedan in good condition--$6,367
Value of a top of the line 1996 Toyota Camry family sedan in good condition--$6,454
Value of a top of the line 1996 Ford Taurus family sedan in good condition--$2,630

Source: http://www.edmunds.com
That’s not true a Honda cost like a 1,000 bucks after 10 years. And if anyone paid that much for a 10-year-old car they need help. And a Toyota Camay might cost that much after 10 years but how much did you spend in those over price parts.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2006, 5:06 PM
SSLL's Avatar
SSLL SSLL is offline
samsonyuen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canary Wharf->CityPlace
Posts: 4,241
From: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...lines-business
________________________
Quote:
If GM Fails, Then What?
The carmaker says it has no intention of entering Chapter 11, but some analysts say a bankruptcy filing in the next few years is a definite possibility. The ripple effects on the economy would be huge
By Tom Petruno and John O'Dell, Times Staff Writers
April 23, 2006

Ponying up more than $100,000 of their own money, three dozen General Motors Corp. dealers nationwide this month bought full-page newspaper ads imploring the public to give GM a chance.

"For the good of everyone, they must succeed and they need our help," the ad read. "We pledge ours. We hope you will do the same."

For most of GM's 98-year history, that kind of plea would have been unimaginable. But now, the company long synonymous with U.S. industrial might is scrambling to avoid something else once unimaginable: bankruptcy.

GM executives, including Chief Executive Rick Wagoner, say they have no intention of filing for bankruptcy protection, and no need to do so.

On Thursday, the company reported a $323 million first quarter loss, a sharp improvement from recent quarters and an "important milestone" in the automaker's turnaround plan, Wagoner said.

But some veteran industry analysts say GM's fundamental problems of high labor costs and falling market share are so severe that there is a serious risk that the auto giant will enter Bankruptcy Court in the next few years. Any number of events could be the tipping point — another surge in oil and gasoline prices, a recession brought on by rising interest rates or a strike by GM's main parts supplier, which already is operating under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.

For the world's largest automaker and its vast constituencies, the prospect of a bankruptcy filing is so daunting that even many of Wagoner's critics hope his revival program works.

A GM bankruptcy filing would be the largest in history, challenging Wall Street, organized labor, politicians and the legal system to deal with the fallout.

GM's 147,000 workers in the U.S. and 460,000 retirees would face the prospect of their pension plans' being dumped on the federal government and of seeing their future benefits reduced.

Stock and bond markets could be upended, at least temporarily. GM shareholders, including billionaire Kirk Kerkorian, who owns 9.9% of GM, could lose every penny of their investments in the carmaker. Meanwhile, the company's bondholders, banks and other creditors would face unknown losses on $33 billion of debt.

Almost certainly, a GM bankruptcy filing would have enormous repercussions for the entire U.S. auto industry, which still directly employs about 1 million Americans, many of them in the Midwest.

Several big auto parts suppliers already are in financial reorganization. If GM joined them, it would raise the possibility of a domino effect of additional failures throughout the industry — including Ford Motor Co., some analysts say.

Although the public has witnessed some colossal corporate busts in recent years, "I would not underestimate the effect on the American psyche" of GM in Chapter 11, said Steven Roach, an economist at brokerage Morgan Stanley in New York.

The shock effects would ripple through the economy, from assembly lines to auto insurance offices, from Midwest shopping malls to global financial capitals.

For GM's 7,300 U.S. dealers, an immediate worry would be that sales might halt.

GM in bankruptcy would be "really uncharted territory," said Leonard Renick, owner of Renick Cadillac in Fullerton.

In terms of his ability to keep customers coming through the door, "It couldn't be good," Renick said. "I think it would be pretty devastating."

For all of its problems, GM still accounts for about 1 of every 4 passenger vehicles sold in the U.S. Its worldwide sales were $193 billion in 2005, ranking third on the Fortune 500 list.

But GM lost $10.6 billion last year, and Asian rivals have been taking market share from the company for decades.

Since last fall, GM has been trying to shrink its way back to health by closing a dozen plants and offering cash buyouts and retirement incentives to all 113,000 of its U.S. hourly workers, hoping to get a large number of them off the payroll. The company also has struck a deal with the United Auto Workers to trim retiree healthcare costs. Even so, by some estimates GM is draining $13 million a day.

"The current path is simply unsustainable," said Sean Egan, managing director of credit-rating firm Egan-Jones Ratings Co. in Haverford, Pa. He predicts GM will be in Bankruptcy Court within two years.

Chapter 11 is designed to give a troubled company breathing room while it restructures. Debts are instantly suspended, and the company operates under court oversight and protection while it tries to work out its problems.

In that sense, a filing by GM might seem a logical step for a business that is battling to reinvent itself. Major airlines and telecommunication firms have sought bankruptcy protection in recent years, and their customers have stuck with them.

But apart from a home, a car is the most expensive item most consumers buy. They expect big-ticket goods to last for years and for the manufacturer to be around to service them. In bankruptcy protection, GM would have to convince consumers that it wasn't going away.

Renick, the Fullerton dealer, said he would expect to tough it out if sales withered initially because of a GM Chapter 11 filing. His dealership, which his father founded as a Packard franchise in 1952, employs about 80 people.

But he wasn't sure what GM's strategy would be to lure people back into the showrooms. "Would GM be willing to slash prices? I doubt it. They've already done it across the board," Renick said.

Roy Adler, a marketing professor and consumer-attitude specialist at Pepperdine University, said it would be hard to overcome peoples' fears.

"The quality of most cars is really close now, so if I've got $25,000 and there are four or five other carmakers with competing products and they aren't in bankruptcy, then I've got a lot less risk going to one of them" instead of a company in Chapter 11, he said.

The stigma of bankruptcy would affect used GM cars too, said Maryann Keller, an independent auto industry analyst in Greenwich, Conn. "Every owner of a GM car would suffer an immediate loss of value," she said.

GM would be forced to drop sticker prices to draw customers, Keller said.

"There's only one way to compensate consumers for the risk, and that's by cutting the price," she said.

GM also would need to project a hopeful message in its post-bankruptcy advertising, Adler said.

"They would have to avoid the B-word," he said, "and craft a pretty dramatic message that said they were going to be stronger than ever with the streamlining they were doing."

Adler suggested that GM might take a page from South Korea's Hyundai Motor Co. and provide a 10-year service warranty on cars and trucks, with the funding to back up those warranties held in a trust by a large financial institution.

In addition, Adler said, the company "would have to promise exciting new cars were coming soon, and show some examples, and they'd have to promise an expanded commitment to serving GM owners."

Lee Iacocca did that for Chrysler Corp. in the late-1970s and early-1980s, after it avoided bankruptcy with a $1.5-billion federal loan guarantee. "He was able to keep sales from faltering by wrapping himself in the flag, going on TV and pitching those cars," Keller said.

But that was a different era, she said, when manufacturing was a larger part of the U.S. economy and Chrysler's woes struck a patriotic nerve. Today, Japanese cars outsell GM's models in the U.S.

"Rick Wagoner couldn't do what Iacocca did," Keller said.

Much of what might happen to GM in bankruptcy will happen in any case, many analysts say. One way or another, "The old GM is going away. It will be a totally different company," said Sean McAlinden, an economist at the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Mich.

But for GM workers and their families, bankruptcy could instantly intensify uncertainty about their future. No job would be safe, because the shape of a new GM wouldn't be management's decision alone. Creditors would have to agree to the company's reorganization plan, and a Bankruptcy Court judge would have final say-so.

Wagoner, who has been GM's CEO for six years and has been widely criticized for not dealing with the company's problems sooner, says the game plan to stay solvent is to continue hacking expenses. The company says it is on track to reduce North American structural costs — including union labor expenses — by $7 billion a year.

GM also is raising capital by selling long-held stakes in foreign auto makers such as Fiat and 51% of its profitable financing subsidiary, General Motors Acceptance Corp.

But cost cutting alone won't save GM, many analysts say. In recent months, sales have continued to decline despite the company's restructuring moves.

In or out of bankruptcy, Wagoner must decide which GM car and truck brands to keep, which plants to close and how much the company can profitably afford in wages and benefits.

Last year, GM Vice Chairman Robert Lutz called Pontiac and Buick "damaged brands." Since then, they frequently have been mentioned as divisions that GM might shed. A bankruptcy filing could speed up the process.

GM now has eight brands, and "that's just too many mouths to feed," said Eric Noble, president of CarLab market research in Orange.

That analogy also applies to GM's workforce.

As so-called legacy costs for retirees' pensions and healthcare expenses have mounted over the last 20 years, GM's competitive disadvantage compared with foreign rivals has ballooned.

Its U.S. labor costs averaged $74 an hour in wages and benefits last year, compared with $48 for Toyota's U.S. labor force. GM said it spent $5.4 billion last year on healthcare alone.

If GM and the auto workers union can't agree on how to cut labor costs so that GM can be consistently profitable, and bankruptcy follows, a federal judge ultimately will make the decision.

On that issue, Delphi Corp. may be a prelude to how a GM bankruptcy would unfold.

Delphi, an auto parts supplier spun off by GM in 1999, filed for Chapter 11 protection last October. Delphi wants to slash hourly union wages by 40%. The auto workers union has balked. Two weeks ago, Delphi took the radical step of asking the Bankruptcy Court's permission to void its labor contracts and modify retiree benefits.

The union warned that if the court agreed to Delphi's request, it would sanction a strike. A judge is expected to rule by June.

So what would happen if GM sought to cut its pension benefits by, say, 20% to 40%?

"I might as well shoot myself," said 65-year-old Linda Ruth Jones, who retired in 1996 after 34 years as a GM assembly worker and inspector at plants in Flint and Pontiac, Mich.

Jones retired to the rural community of Harrison, Mich., about 300 miles north of Detroit. If her GM pension was cut by even 20%, Jones said, she couldn't continue making her $350 monthly mortgage payment.

Recently, Jones protested a GM-union agreement made last fall to begin imposing extra costs on retirees for health insurance. She says that the automaker is breaking a promise that kept her working hard for more than three decades.

"I didn't go to work at GM for the wages," she said. "I went for benefits for my two children, whose father wouldn't support them, and for myself when I retired. I paid a baby-sitter every day so I could work for GM."

In return, she said, the company promised a certain level of benefits "and now they are forcing things on us that we shouldn't have to face at this time of our life. They signed a contract with us at retirement, and they should be made to stand by that contract."

For the auto workers union, GM's financial woes are forcing bitter choices: how to apportion financial pain among former workers who draw healthcare and pension benefits and the workers currently on the shop floor.

Paul Krell, a spokesman for the union in Detroit, said its goal in reducing pay and benefits "is to spread the sacrifices as broadly but as thinly as possible."

The issue of legacy costs "creates a real conflict between existing workers and retired workers," said Jeff Werbalowsky, a reorganization specialist and co-chief executive of financial advisory firm Houlihan Lokey Howard & Zukin in Los Angeles.

That conflict could deepen in bankruptcy, because under Chapter 11 the automaker could try to dump its $95-billion pension plans onto the federal Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. If the Bankruptcy Court agreed, many GM workers could face sharply reduced benefits, because the federal agency is limited in what it can pay.

Even if GM didn't seek to hand its pension funds to the agency, many analysts say the company undoubtedly would use that threat as a key bargaining chip to wring other cost savings from the union.

Moreover, the auto workers union faces the likelihood that whatever deals it strikes with GM, they would be models for the rest of the auto industry.

"We expect that any concessions that GM got out of the UAW, Ford and Chrysler would expect to get as well," said Mark Oline, head of corporate debt at credit-rating firm Fitch Ratings in Chicago.

The implications of a new round of labor cost cutting in the auto industry, however, could go far beyond that business.

What is happening at GM, many analysts say, is a microcosm of the rest of the country. The question it poses: In the age of globalization, can U.S. companies, state and local governments and the Social Security system really afford the healthcare and retirement benefits they have promised their workers?

Politically, that issue has been too hot to touch.

In bankruptcy, however, some obligations ultimately go unpaid.

"The one thing that a bankruptcy makes clear is that, this is the size of the pie, and that's all there is," Werbalowsky said.

*

(INFOBOX BELOW)

Largest U.S. bankruptcies

With $160 billion in assets in its automotive operations, General

Motors would rank as the largest U.S. bankruptcy in history if the company filed for reorganization — a move that GM says it is not contemplating.

Largest U.S. bankruptcies, ranked by pre-bankruptcy assets (in billions)

Company Year filed Assets
1. WorldCom 2002 $103.9
2. Enron 2001 $63.4
3. Conseco 2002 $61.4
4. Texaco 1987 $35.9
5. Financial Corp. of America 1988 $33.9
6. Global Crossing 2002 $30.2
7. Pacific Gas & Electric 2001 $29.8
8. Calpine 2005 $26.6
9. UAL (United Air Lines) 2002 $25.2
10. Delta Air Lines 2005 $21.8
11. Adelphia Communications 2002 $21.5
12. MCorp (Texas bank) 1989 $20.2
13. Mirant 2003 $19.4
14. Delphi 2005 $17.1
15. First Executive 1991 $15.2


*

Source: New Generation Research

-

Skidding marks

For decades GM has lost sales to Asian and European automakers. Here's a look at the company's shrinking slice of the U.S. market over the past four decades.

Share of U.S. auto sales

1965

General Motors: 50%

Ford: 26%

Chrysler: 14%

Total imports: 5%

Other American: 4%

*

1985

General Motors: 41%

Total imports: 24%

Ford: 21%

Chrysler: 12%

Other American: 2%

*

2005

Total imports: 43%

General Motors: 26%

Ford: 17%

Chrysler: 14%
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2006, 5:21 PM
austin356 austin356 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tuscaloosa
Posts: 2,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmorescottamanda
That’s not true a Honda cost like a 1,000 bucks after 10 years. And if anyone paid that much for a 10-year-old car they need help. And a Toyota Camay might cost that much after 10 years but how much did you spend in those over price parts.

fflint's stats are correct, so you are calling the American consumer stupid.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2006, 3:36 AM
bmorescottamanda's Avatar
bmorescottamanda bmorescottamanda is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: baltimore
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by austin356
fflint's stats are correct, so you are calling the American consumer stupid.
If they paid that much for a old ass car when they can get a american car for so much cheaper.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2006, 6:43 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
^Really, do you have anything to contribute to this thread other than ill-formed opinion and a denial of the truth?
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2006, 7:31 AM
bmorescottamanda's Avatar
bmorescottamanda bmorescottamanda is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: baltimore
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by fflint
^Really, do you have anything to contribute to this thread other than ill-formed opinion and a denial of the truth?
No I don't have anything else to say other than Ford and GM will stay the top car companies in the world. You all will see they will win back the america people that are now buying imports, with affordable good price cars and parts.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:51 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.