Smoke Screen: The New General Motors

[fmorris]

General Motors slithers out of Chapter 11 and dumps billions in debt for tax payers to pick up. With big-G running the show via 60% controlling interest, the new and so-called improved GM will be focusing in on a vehicle line that includes: Cadillac, Chevrolet, Buick, and GMC. Gone by way of the scrap heap are: Saturn, Saab, Hummer, and Pontiac.

In an interview with PBS.org, CEO Fritz Henderson states that new efforts will be dedicated to customers, cars, and paying back tax-payers. Simply put, GM plans on making a profit by making a better vehicle. Now there’s a business concept!

However, according to General Motor’s Vice Chairman, Bob Lutz, in an interview with “Take Away,”, “Our problem was financial and market collapse, it wasn’t that we were building bad vehicles that the public wasn’t buying.” Right off the bat we see contradictions in the new management, but we’ll get to Lutz momentarily.

Not that Fritz is necessarily an expert in such matters, with a prolonged background in finance and a Harvard education; he’s not spent a lot of time under the hood bending wrenches. This not withstanding, if GM has just now determined that a business model built around quality is appropriate, just what in the hell was the GM brain trust doing in the past? Is this what 50 billion dollars of taxpayer’s money buys—not to mention Henderson’s 1,719,667.00 yearly compensation?

For starters, the new & improved streamlined GM will oversee a loss of nearly 30,000 American jobs. The focus according to Henderson is on “…delivering great cars; focus on the consumer; and getting our culture right.” Just how the “culture” plays a part is anyone’s guess. He further outlines three operating indicators (tied into cost structure) that “suggest” profitability:

*Fully competitive (One would speculate that this is a must?)

*Reduced fixed costs.

*Level of indebtedness eliminated (you’re welcome).

Click here for the rest of article http://www.mediadismemberment.com/2009/07/smoke-screen-new-gm.html

[Toe Jam]

Convenient how they don't have to pay back any of the bailout money.

[fmorris]

Convenient how they don't have to pay back any of the bailout money.

Actually what I've been reading is that they're responsible for 9bil of the 50. Still.

[Toe Jam]

Actually what I've been reading is that they're responsible for 9bil of the 50. Still.

Oh wonderful.

Next time I go out to dinner I'm going to ask if I can pay only a fraction of my bill since GM is allowed to do it.:silly:

[RedlightG20]

I think you're being a bit overly critical of the words and phrases management uses to try to smooth things over with taxpayers and other potential investors.

That being said, these guys opening their mouths, trying to soothe the resentment towards them is much like talking to football announcers when they do their "keys to the game" segment:


What are the keys to today's game, Johnny?
-Well for starters, Team A needs to play tough defense and control the clock. And for Team B, they need to score points and get strong play strong play from special teams.

Genius. You basically described the basics of the entire sport. Can't wait to hear next week's.

Likewise, the management of GM are pointing out the basics of running a successful business, for which they haven't been able to do in years. In fact, they've been more successful at running it into the ground.

Life has a term for people like these: failures. And the fact that we've been giving them money to continue to fail is killing the driving force behind the whole free market ideal.

Should have let GM die. A better and more efficient company would have risen up in it's place.

[IbleedBnG83]

Well I certainly hope they can turn things around.

Aside from quality cars, design needs to be a focal point. Man, MANY, people buy cars on looks. If they can produce some good looking cars and in the process make them reliable, they can really start to rebuild their reputation. But it will take some time.

The stimulus for buying a new American car will certainly help this.

[twa]

The stimulus for buying a new American car will certainly help this.

Yet more giveaways to prop up failure



And they won't even let me get the full stimulus for a Camaro...*******s:mad:

They can rot

[Kosher Ham]

Why even keep the Buick division ? Focus on fixing everything else under one name and then worry about keeping other brands alive.

[skinsfan44]

Does GM still have to deal with the UAW union?

If so GM is doomed to fail again.

I blame much of what happened to GM on the union.

I have been buying pickup trucks and SUV's from Chevy for many years and they have been very reliable and rugged vehicles, but now that the US Gov is 60% owners, I won't be buying GM ever again.

I guess my next pickup truck will be either a Ford or a Toyota. :(

[fmorris]

Yet more giveaways to prop up failure



And they won't even let me get the full stimulus for a Camaro...*******s:mad:

They can rot

This is an industry that excels in the manipulation of government assisted programs. When a corporation's business plan includes exploitation/implementation of government _______(fill in the blank), then we're moving further & further away from a pure capitalism--not that there has ever been one. To expect the quality of output to go up is delusional at best.

Failure has been rewarded...which then makes it NOT a failure in real terms. It's a failure for the 30,000 plus workers, but not for Lutz & his cronies. GM earned the right to die a deserved death--and a message of change (how ironic) would have descended. Instead we get generic explanations of basic business principles.

Can anyone here find a legit quote from any quarter of the GM circle that shows remorse and/or takes responsibility for its incompetence?

[fmorris]

Does GM still have to deal with the UAW union?

If so GM is doomed to fail again.

I blame much of what happened to GM on the union.

I have been buying pickup trucks and SUV's from Chevy for many years and they have been very reliable and rugged vehicles, but now that the US Gov is 60% owners, I won't be buying GM ever again.

I guess my next pickup truck will be either a Ford or a Toyota. :(


I've been standing on the fence on this. Likely because I don't know enough of the UAW and its operating relationship with GM. Here's two opposing view points on the matter, note that the pro-union perspective is from a professed libertarian who looks for a balance:

http://walkersunknownthoughts.blogspot.com/2009/07/of-union-and-libertarians.html

http://mises.org/story/2124

[zoony]

However, according to General Motor’s Vice Chairman, Bob Lutz, in an interview with “Take Away,”, “Our problem was financial and market collapse, it wasn’t that we were building bad vehicles that the public wasn’t buying.” Right off the bat we see contradictions in the new management, but we’ll get to Lutz momentarily.




Lutz is exactly correct on this. GM's product line over the last 5 years has developed quietly into one of the strongest in the industry.

This strikes me as dishonest and biased journalism for a number of reasons. Nothing more than fodder for all the masses pissed off about GM taking federal money.

....

[RedlightG20]

Why even keep the Buick division ? Focus on fixing everything else under one name and then worry about keeping other brands alive.

Buick is their most profitable brand. It would be foolish for them to get rid of it now. It's the help of these other brands that are keeping them around.

Then again, practically all the cars are the same, just rebranded. Buicks are generally nicer (or more refined) vehicles, though.

[fmorris]

Lutz is exactly correct on this. GM's product line over the last 5 years has developed quietly into one of the strongest in the industry.

This strikes me as dishonest and biased journalism for a number of reasons. Nothing more than fodder for all the masses pissed off about GM taking federal money.

....

GM's market share has been in decline since the early 80's--this according to CNNmoney. To blame this solely on the current market decline would be stretching it. Although past failure certainly made them vulnerable. See link:

http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/10/news/companies/new_gm_outlook/index.htm?section=money_lates

I will lay claim to any bias represented in the article--this happens, but dishonest, I am not.

[zoony]

GM's market share has been in decline since the early 80's--this according to CNNmoney.

Well, yah. Not sure what that has to do with what Bob Lutz is saying. He's actually been one of the most vocal critics of GM over the past 30 years. :whoknows:

What Lutz is talking about is the product lineup as it exists currently. The author of the article used it to try to set up a strawman to paint GM as incompetent and bumbling and ignorant (executives who don't communicate)- just what so many pissed off taxpayers want to hear.

So yah, this piece is a steaming pile of pooh, imo.


To blame this solely on the current market decline would be stretching it.

"this" = what, exactly? You seem to be talking about a few different things. GM's declining marketshare over the past 30 years and the company's recent bankruptcy and/or reception of federal money.

The bankruptcy would not have happened without the economic collapse. So that's not a stretch at all. However, GM's declining marketshare over the past 30 years was a result of poor management and a poor product lineup.

Which is why they did the right thing and brought in Lutz a few years back. Research him a bit, you might be surprised what you find out.




Although past failure certainly made them vulnerable. See link:

http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/10/news/companies/new_gm_outlook/index.htm?section=money_lates


I don't need to see a link to know that GM has made plenty of mistakes over the last 30 years. Lutz wasn't referring to that. Lutz was talking about the product lineup decisions GM has made over the past 5 years.

And right now, GM's product lineup is one of the strongest in the industry. Lutz is exactly right about that. Of course, the article tries to take Lutz's quote and lump it in with the past 30 years of decision making. Where Lutz himself has said 1000 x's... "GM DID build crap for a long time. I acknowledge that. We acknowledge it. However, we aren't anymore."



I will lay claim to any bias represented in the article--this happens, but dishonest, I am not.

It's a dishonest article, which is all I said. And I stand by it. I wasn't trying to paint you as a dishonest person.

[Mad Mike]

Lutz is exactly correct on this. GM's product line over the last 5 years has developed quietly into one of the strongest in the industry.

This strikes me as dishonest and biased journalism for a number of reasons. Nothing more than fodder for all the masses pissed off about GM taking federal money.

....

What's more, the new CEO's comments were standard marketing talk. He's saying what he needs to say to sell cars and promote confidence in the brand. To take it for anything more than that is just stupid.

I'm telling you. Real journalism is dead. The last vestige of it died with Walter Cronkite. It's been replaced with a bunch of whiny little morons with agendas and news companies who's major interest is profit generated by controversy - real or imagined... Oh, and celebrity scandals and death. :doh:

(But I have to say GMs quality has been crap for years unless you buy top of the line. Even then they aren't great. just good.)

[fmorris]

What Lutz is talking about is the product lineup as it exists currently. The author of the article used it to try to set up a strawman to paint GM as incompetent and bumbling and ignorant (executives who don't communicate)- just what so many pissed off taxpayers want to hear.

**The author was going for a more diabolical/archaic Lutz to put before the pissed off tax payers. Honestly, the money isn't what interests/concerns me in the end, rather the question of capitalistic integrity, or the natural order of the thing, if you follow.




"this" = what, exactly? You seem to be talking about a few different things. GM's declining marketshare over the past 30 years and the company's recent bankruptcy and/or reception of federal money.

**The "this" pronoun in question was in reference to the collapse/bankruptcy.


The bankruptcy would not have happened without the economic collapse. So that's not a stretch at all. However, GM's declining marketshare over the past 30 years was a result of poor management and a poor product lineup.

**So poor management & poor product line over the past 30 years is whose fault? To me that's like saying, "I screwed up for a really, really, long time, but i got it now. Save me." Perhaps they do "got it" now, but does that make it right for the bail out? Why?


Which is why they did the right thing and brought in Lutz a few years back. Research him a bit, you might be surprised what you find out.

I do admit my lack of knowledge on Lutz, outside of the general resume information one finds on the net, as well as his critical comments on global warming, hybrid vehicles, etc.



I don't need to see a link to know that GM has made plenty of mistakes over the last 30 years. Lutz wasn't referring to that. Lutz was talking about the product lineup decisions GM has made over the past 5 years.

And right now, GM's product lineup is one of the strongest in the industry. Lutz is exactly right about that. Of course, the article tries to take Lutz's quote and lump it in with the past 30 years of decision making. Where Lutz himself has said 1000 x's... "GM DID build crap for a long time. I acknowledge that. We acknowledge it. However, we aren't anymore."

**Yes, I was looking at the big view and did not acknowledge the past 5 years, and in doing so perhaps demonized him unfairly. I stand by what I write, and when I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I'll further research Lutz in the revision.


It's a dishonest article, which is all I said. And I stand by it. I wasn't trying to paint you as a dishonest person.

**Fair enough, and I appreciate the honest critique/feedback. It's easy to get side tracked on this issue, but my main intent is to question government interventions into corporate affairs. Mediadismembent is my personal blog. I'm not a member of the press, just a dude. I posted here because I knew there would be strong agreement as well as disagreement and I'd be able to help isolate the weaknesses of the article, as well as further educate myself on the situation.

[Enzo]

Does GM still have to deal with the UAW union?

If so GM is doomed to fail again.

I blame much of what happened to GM on the union.

I have been buying pickup trucks and SUV's from Chevy for many years and they have been very reliable and rugged vehicles, but now that the US Gov is 60% owners, I won't be buying GM ever again.

I guess my next pickup truck will be either a Ford or a Toyota. :(

But I bet you're willing to buy things that are "Made in China". Even though everything over there is owned by the government & a communist government at that. If you don't want to purchase a GM car or truck just because it is owned by the government then that is your right. But, if you are anyone else says or does this & willing buys stuff "Made in China" then you are all hypocrites.

[zoony]

**Fair enough, and I appreciate the honest critique/feedback. It's easy to get side tracked on this issue, but my main intent is to question government interventions into corporate affairs. Mediadismembent is my personal blog. I'm not a member of the press, just a dude. I posted here because I knew there would be strong agreement as well as disagreement and I'd be able to help isolate the weaknesses of the article, as well as further educate myself on the situation.



Hey, that's whats cool about ES, you'll always get an honest opinion :silly:

I felt like in reading the article that the author had reached his conclusion before doing the research.

Don't get discouraged though, keep after it, it's clear you have great writing skills. And after all, I'm not necesarily right, just opinionated

[Mad Mike]

**Fair enough, and I appreciate the honest critique/feedback. It's easy to get side tracked on this issue, but my main intent is to question government interventions into corporate affairs. Mediadismembent is my personal blog. I'm not a member of the press, just a dude. I posted here because I knew there would be strong agreement as well as disagreement and I'd be able to help isolate the weaknesses of the article, as well as further educate myself on the situation.

Hi. My name is Mad Mike and I only open my mouth to change feet. :D

Seriously, my comments were not directed at bloggers but at professional journalists who do not live up to professional standards. You fooled me with the quality of your writing. ;) Judging from your libertarian leanings and some of your reading material, we don't agree on politics but you are entitled to your opinion without my smarmy comments. I apologize.

For the record. I'm an independent who believes that the republicans and dems are full of crap and libertarians are too ridged in their ideology. :silly:

[zoony]

Hi. My name is Mad Mike and I only open my mouth to change feet. :D

:rotflmao:



For the record. I'm an independent who believes that the republicans and dems are full of crap and libertarians are too ridged in their ideology. :silly:


I'm pretty close on this one... though I think there are some very good politicians out there from both parties

[Mad Mike]

I'm pretty close on this one... though I think there are some very good politicians out there from both parties

I agree, the tough thing is that the party system keeps them beholden to their parties benefactors. There is only so much the good ones can do.

[Chachie]

I cannot claim to be very educated about the GM situation but I can give my :2cents: from a dumb american:

GM's product was inferior for years. They basically sold americans bad cars because they knew many americans would only buy american cars due to their loyalty.

Then people got wise and stopped buying, so eventually GM asked americans for billions of dollars to keep them in the business of making inferior products. They got away with it because the govt didn't give americans a choice in the matter. Why should the govt do that when they can just own GM?

Goodbye, GM. I hope the american public stays smart and leaves you to rot. You had at least 25 years to get it right and you didn't bother. Billions of dollars out of our pockets to save your butts isn't making me show up in your dealer lots ever again.

[zoony]

Chachie, I think that's a popular view held by many Americans. And I think it's grounded in truth, but not necessarily true.

GM DID suck for years. GM DID rest on its laurels. GM DID make a bunch of mistakes.

However, I think GM should get a lot of credit for their turnaround over the past 3-5 years. When Nissan pulled a huge turnaround earlier this decade, they were applauded for it by industry experts and consumers alike. When GM does it, they're hit with the biggest global economic meltdown since the Great Depression. I don't think it is fair to criticize the current path they're on... because its a good one.

If anything, GM has gone about their transformation too quietly. This is probably one of the best lineups in the automotive industry

http://flagchev.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/2009_chevrolet_traverse1.jpg

http://bharrison.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/chevy-volt-a01.jpg

http://bigpicture.typepad.com/writing/images/0602_naias_z2009_chevrolet_camaro_concep_1.jpg

http://img.motorpasion.com/2007/03/cadillac_cts-v_predator-00.jpg

[Midnight Judges]

Agree with Zoony. GM has been building better cars as of late IMO. Cadillac has been showing up on the JD powers list the last few years and the other brands have been climbing. I just read an article about how the Cadillac CTS-V beats the BMW M5 and M3 around the track at Nurburging.

[Mad Mike]

Agree with Zoony. GM has been building better cars as of late IMO. Cadillac has been showing up on the JD powers list the last few years and the other brands have been climbing. I just read an article about how the Cadillac CTS-V beats the BMW M5 and M3 around the track at Nurburging.

That's amazing. I don't put too much into a few seconds when it comes to who is fastest though. Driver skill, and track conditions vary the results. I still give credit where it is due. At that level, a few seconds one way or another is more than any of us would ever notice on the street.

I still like the BMWs because I think they look much better. But I have to share a story about my buddy's new M3. I hadn't seen him in about two months and he told me he had to have his engine replaced because it was flooded. "huh? I thought... weeeell.... see those little intakes on the hood?

http://media.nextautos.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/2008-bmw-m3-hood-med.jpg

They are real and are designed to let rain water drain away while gulping air. Unfortunately they were not designed to handle giant wave of water from a passing truck on flooded streets. :silly: $37,000 later... (insurance is a good thing) they shipped him a new crate motor and installed it. Poor guy has to keep his lead foot in check again while he breaks the new motor in.

[zoony]

I think the CTS-V is proof that when actual car guys in Detroit (not the lawyers, accountants, and segment nazis) build a car, it's the best in the world.

And how could I forget the New Corvette ZR-1? Probably the best sports car in the world right now, period. Much less for around $100k. Porsche **** their pants when it bested their $500k supercar on their own track.

http://www.dieselstation.com/up_pics/2009-corvette-zr1-pictures.jpg

......

[Seabee1973]

. Poor guy has to keep his lead foot in check again while he breaks the new motor in.

That was good idea back in the day but nowadays you can drive it exactly liek you would at 30,000 miles. If you baby it at the beginning you should baby it when it hits 40,000 miles and such

[Mad Mike]

That was good idea back in the day but nowadays you can drive it exactly liek you would at 30,000 miles. If you baby it at the beginning you should baby it when it hits 40,000 miles and such

Depends on the engine. This one does.

The M3 motor is a 420 HP, 8300 RPM, aluminum block beast, who's tolerances are so tight that a break-in is needed. In fact they are so tight, that RPMs are computer limited until the motor warms up. One of the cool things is that it is also one of the lightest V8s in the world. Lighter in fact than my 2.5 BMW straight 6.

http://www.roadfly.com/bmws-new-m3-v8-engine-official-m-v8-engine-specs.html

[Mad Mike]

I think the CTS-V is proof that when actual car guys in Detroit (not the lawyers, accountants, and segment nazis) build a car, it's the best in the world.

And how could I forget the New Corvette ZR-1? Probably the best sports car in the world right now, period. Much less for around $100k. Porsche **** their pants when it bested their $500k supercar on their own track.

http://www.dieselstation.com/up_pics/2009-corvette-zr1-pictures.jpg

......

Sorry bro but I have to disagree.

The ZR1 is an awesome performer and dollar for dollar the best value for it's performance level, but the build quality is crap compared to a Porsche. The interior quality is no comparison. And that stupid hood... Note to Chevy: Ferrari uses a clear engine cover to show off their beautiful engine like a gem in a setting. Using clear plastic on the hood to show a plastic engine cover is not the same thing. Doing it on a car like the ZR1 is stupid. It just cheapens the look of the car. :doh:

the ZR1 is $115,000 car. For that price I would MUCH rather have an Audi R8.

http://www.audiusa.com/us/brand/en/models/r8.html

Top Gear :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaENG1vt6-Y

[fmorris]

Hi. My name is Mad Mike and I only open my mouth to change feet. :D

Seriously, my comments were not directed at bloggers but at professional journalists who do not live up to professional standards. You fooled me with the quality of your writing. ;) Judging from your libertarian leanings and some of your reading material, we don't agree on politics but you are entitled to your opinion without my smarmy comments. I apologize.

For the record. I'm an independent who believes that the republicans and dems are full of crap and libertarians are too ridged in their ideology. :silly:

It's all good Mike. Like most people, I'm guilty of what the psych cats call, confirmation bias--where we bend our ideology to fit every situation and vehemently discard everything that conflicts or contradicts said ideology. I'd imagine that a good journalist would need to utilize checks & balances to keep this from manifesting in their work, but my guess is that this is not the norm. I did not see your comments as smarmy, but rather an honest assessment from your perspective. Any writer worth their salt would thank you for doing so.

[AAARedskin]

Currently GM is building OUTSTANDING cars, trucks, cross-overs, and SUVs. Period. Oh, and so is Ford.

[HighOnHendrix]

Buick is their most profitable brand.

No, that would be Chevrolet, followed by GMC.

http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2009/07/gm-set-to-leave-bankruptcy-where-do-the-brands-stand.html


Buick: Despite being only the sixth-best-selling brand in GM’s old lineup, Buick survived the cut thanks to a focus on affordable luxury vehicles. Models like the Enclave have proved popular, while Buick maintains a large following in the expanding market of China. Thanks to these factors, the brand is seen as having been resurrected. The new, eagerly awaited Buick LaCrosse goes on sale this summer.


I just read an article about how the Cadillac CTS-V beats the BMW M5 and M3 around the track at Nurburging.


That's amazing. I don't put too much into a few seconds when it comes to who is fastest though. Driver skill, and track conditions vary the results. I still give credit where it is due. At that level, a few seconds one way or another is more than any of us would ever notice on the street.



When the manufacturers test at the 'Ring, they take several of their best test drivers and have hundreds of laps to produce the definitive time. There's not as much wiggle room left to variables as you think; which is the one of the reasons they test there. It is over 12 miles in length, has around 75 turns, changes elevation and camber constantly, and is widely regarded as the most demanding race course in the world. Any deficiencies a car has in its performance or handling will be exposed; you can't hide anything at the Nordschleife. Noticing it on the street depends on how many seconds we're talking about, of course.

[skinsfan44]

But I bet you willing to buy things that are "Made in China". Even though everything over there is owned by the government & a communist government at that. If you don't want to purchase a GM car or truck just because it is owned by the government then that is your right. But, if you are anyone else says or does this & willing buys stuff "Made in China" the you are all hypocrites.

I don't buy Chinese products.

Haven't for a few years now.

I just don't want to buy a truck/SUV that the US Gov has ownership in.

I am a big Chevy guy. Have been for many years. I own a Chevy 4x4 pickup and Tahoe. I have also owned many Chevy cars and trucks in the past (1963 Nova, 1970 Chevelle, 1987 4x4 pickup for example). Not once have I thought of buying anything else, until now.

That is my right.

[zoony]

but the build quality is crap compared to a Porsche.



This isn't true

But the Audi is a nice car. However, the ZR1 would eat its lunch. And it's not even close

[Mad Mike]

This isn't true

But the Audi is a nice car. However, the ZR1 would eat its lunch. And it's not even close

That's your opinion but I've been in a ZO6 and a comparably priced Porsche Cayman and in my opinion, for fit and finish, craftsmanship, and sheer beauty, the Porsche wins hands down. :D

I love Corvettes. And the ZR1 is an amazing car. But given the choice of a faster Corvette and a a slower R8 or Porsche. I'd rather go for the luxury. I mean lets face it. They are all fast as hell. Unless you are going to the track, you will never see the difference in speed between them.

In the end though there is no wrong choice for a car guy. Pick the one you like most and go for a ride. :cheers:

[Blackest Eyes]

I would consider buying a Chevrolet if I was buying a new car. My biggest beef with them is that they all look boring for the most part. I guess am more partial to the styling of European cars. I absolutely love the new Camaro though. Maybe Chevrolet will go in that direction with the rest of its line...or at least something similar.

[Enzo]

I don't buy Chinese products.

Haven't for a few years now.

I just don't want to buy a truck/SUV that the US Gov has ownership in.

I am a big Chevy guy. Have been for many years. I own a Chevy 4x4 pickup and Tahoe. I have also owned many Chevy cars and trucks in the past (1963 Nova, 1970 Chevelle, 1987 4x4 pickup for example). Not once have I thought of buying anything else, until now.

That is my right.

Good! I guess I should have said if you buy "Made in China". So many people willingly do it that it's hard to find someone that doesn't. But my statement still applies to people that say "I'm not going to buy a GM car because they are owned by the government" & then buy products made in China, they are hypocrites. I for one am still willing to buy GM cars. Remember this saving GM was much more important than saving AIG. The experts say that on average every job lost at GM is about 10 jobs lost else where, I want everybody to remember that when they wish for GM to disappear. Also don't fall for the false hype of Toyota's, they are no better & from personal experience don't last as many miles as American made cars. Before I go I hope you are trying to convince as many people as possible to stop buying "Made in China". One good tactic I use is I tell them to go on the internet & put in the search term "China stealing U.S. Military Technology". If they keep buying "Made in China" after that then do this :chair: to them.

[twa]

Bump for bitching....we bailed them out for this kinda horse****?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/19/gm-impala-lawsuit-idUSN1E77I0Z820110819

GM says bankruptcy excuses it from Impala repairs

General Motors Co (GM.N) is seeking to dismiss a lawsuit over a suspension problem on more than 400,000 Chevrolet Impalas from the 2007 and 2008 model years, saying it should not be responsible for repairs because the flaw predated its bankruptcy.

The lawsuit, filed on June 29 by Donna Trusky of Blakely, Pennsylvania, contended that her Impala suffered from faulty rear spindle rods, causing her rear tires to wear out after just 6,000 miles. [ID:nN1E7650CT]

Seeking class-action status and alleging breach of warranty, the lawsuit demands that GM fix the rods, saying that it had done so on Impala police vehicles.

But in a recent filing with the U.S. District Court in Detroit, GM noted that the cars were made by its predecessor General Motors Corp, now called Motors Liquidation Co or "Old GM," before its 2009 bankruptcy and federal bailout.

The current company, called "New GM," said it did not assume responsibility under the reorganization to fix the Impala problem, but only to make repairs "subject to conditions and limitations" in express written warranties. In essence, the automaker said, Trusky sued the wrong entity.

"New GM's warranty obligations for vehicles sold by Old GM are limited to the express terms and conditions in the Old GM written warranties on a going-forward basis," wrote Benjamin Jeffers, a lawyer for GM. "New GM did not assume responsibility for Old GM's design choices, conduct, or alleged breaches of liability under the warranty."

[SC_RedskinsFan]

It amazes me that people would even buy a GM vehicle anymore....

[Larry]

If anything, GM has gone about their transformation too quietly. This is probably one of the best lineups in the automotive industry

Sorry. Don't like the Camaro (or the Charger, for that matter). Or the other, similar, cars.

Too much door, not enough window. Every time I see them, I think they're gang banger cars.

[SpringfieldSkins]

From my end, GM's quality is falling off... hard.

[twa]

From my end, GM's quality is falling off... hard.

No complaints on mine...yet(crossing fingers)

[SpringfieldSkins]

No complaints on mine...yet(crossing fingers)

You ended up getting a Camaro right?

I haven't heard anything bad about them and they haven't been on the market long enough for repair shops like mine to see a large enough sample size yet. The engines that they put in those things (both the V8 and V6) don't really have the track record of being lemons... however I think that the V6 in the Camaro is new to that model.

My boss got a first run SS V8. One of the first defects on the Camaro was the fact that GM had Brembo build them brake calipers that chattered. His Camaro's front brake calipers have weights on both of them, kinda look like stick on wheel weights. I hope that doesn't speak to the quality to the rest of the car.

[mjah]

Bump for bitching....we bailed them out for this kinda horse****?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/19/gm-impala-lawsuit-idUSN1E77I0Z820110819
If the never-ending shenanigans of auto company lawyers bother you, then don't buy an American car ever again, from any American brand.

American automakers are absolute experts at dodging the effects of their design or engineering failures, be it through something like this or via decades-long political fights against hopelessly outmatched and outgunned NHTSA regulators down in DC.

The Japanese, Koreans, and Europeans are very far from perfect in the backroom and courtroom, but they're leagues better about manipulating American law to duck their responsibilities, for two reasons. One, they're foreign companies even if many of them do build many products in America, so they simply don't have the same access or power. And two, their cultures are typically different from ours when it comes to taking responsibility for their failures. Particularly the Japanese.

Oh, and I'll add a third reason: Foreign automakers don't have to engage in endless wars with American government safety regulators, lobby Capitol Hill in an attempt to water down automotive standards, and spend endless millions in court to establish lax American legal baselines and precedents for prosecuting their screw-ups... because the American companies do such a thorough job of that already.

I really like a lot of what Ford is making these days -- so much so that I bought one. And GM seems to have some good stuff too. But I've gotta tell you: If you're anti-legal-horse**** then don't ever buy American again.

[twa]

You ended up getting a Camaro right?



yeah, the old lady wanted to look like a gang banger:ols:

my RS has the Brembo brakes,no issues so far,never cared for first run models....but I got impatient:silly:

[Madison Redskin]

Bankruptcy discharges all of the debtors' debts and obligations arising on or before the date which the debtor filed for bankruptcy. I believe the discharge applies to pre-petition warranty claims. So, I believe GM is simply doing what most debtors do, i.e., exercising its rights under the bankruptcy code. It might suck for the consumers, but it's not like GM is exploiting a loophole in the bankruptcy code.

[twa]

Bankruptcy discharges all of the debtors' debts and obligations arising on or before the date which the debtor filed for bankruptcy. I believe the discharge applies to pre-petition warranty claims. So, I believe GM is simply doing what most debtors do, i.e., exercising its rights under the bankruptcy code. It might suck for the consumers, but it's not like GM is exploiting a loophole in the bankruptcy code.

The bailouts were sold as protecting consumers....it was no ordinary bankruptcy as the bondholders/creditors can attest

[SWFLSkins]

Actually what I've been reading is that they're responsible for 9bil of the 50. Still.

Saturn start up cost was 4 billiion, including what was the worlds greenest factory and transferring cost for non working UAW members to SpringHill Tn.

[Thiebear]

Bankruptcy discharges all of the debtors' debts and obligations arising on or before the date which the debtor filed for bankruptcy. I believe the discharge applies to pre-petition warranty claims. So, I believe GM is simply doing what most debtors do, i.e., exercising its rights under the bankruptcy code. It might suck for the consumers, but it's not like GM is exploiting a loophole in the bankruptcy code.

Wow, they were given gobs of money in the alledged bankruptsy so the company wouldn't buckle and jobs lost.
So to come back pretending they actually 'suffered' anything and thus no longer responsible for anything is laughable at best.

Let me guess, Pensions and raises and everything else was written into protection, just not the loaners/buyers normal protection.

[Madison Redskin]

Wow, they were given gobs of money in the alledged bankruptsy so the company wouldn't buckle and jobs lost.
So to come back pretending they actually 'suffered' anything and thus no longer responsible for anything is laughable at best.

Let me guess, Pensions and raises and everything else was written into protection, just not the loaners/buyers normal protection.

The debtor gets to "start fresh" (well, almost) by being released of all pre-petition debts and obligations. I understand why people think that's BS, but that's how Chapter 11 proceedings work.

[twa]

bump for more good news

http://www.detnews.com/article/20111114/AUTO01/111140434/1361/U.S.-boosts-estimate-of-auto-bailout-losses-to-$23.6B

U.S. boosts estimate of auto bailout losses to $23.6B
David Shepardson/ Detroit News Washington Bureau

The Treasury Department dramatically boosted its estimate of losses from its $85 billion auto industry bailout by more than $9 billion in the face of General Motors Co.'s steep stock decline.

In its monthly report to Congress, the Treasury Department now says it expects to lose $23.6 billion, up from its previous estimate of $14.33 billion.

The Treasury now pegs the cost of the bailout of GM, Chrysler Group LLC and the auto finance companies at $79.6 billion. It no longer includes $5 billion it set aside to guarantee payments to auto suppliers in 2009.

The big increase is a reflection of the sharp decline in the value of GM's share price.

The current estimate of losses is based on GM's Sept. 30 closing price of $20.18, down one-third over the previous quarterly price.

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20111114/AUTO01/111140434/U.S.-boosts-estimate-of-auto-bailout-losses-to-$23.6B#ixzz1dtWBrIel

[twa]

An American Auto Bailout – For France?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/an-american-auto-bailout-for-france/

Attention U.S. taxpayers: You now own a piece of a French car company that is drowning in red ink.

That’s right. In a move little noticed outside of the business pages, General Motors last week bought more than $400 million in shares of PSA Peugeot Citroen – a 7 percent stake in the company.

Because U.S. taxpayers still own roughly one-quarter of GM, they now own a piece of Peugeot.

Peugeot can undoubtedly use the cash. Last year, Peugeot’s auto making division lost $123 million. And on March 1 – just a day after the deal with GM was announced – Moody’s downgraded Peugeot’s credit rating to junk status with a negative outlook, citing “severe deterioration” of its finances.

In other words, General Motors essentially just dumped more than $400 million of taxpayer assets on junk bonds.

GM has said the deal is designed to give GM access to Peugeot’s expertise in small car and hybrid vehicle technology and ultimately allow both GM and Peugeot to save money by pooling their resources. But auto industry analysts find the deal mystifying.

An analysis by auto industry consultants IHS said it is “somewhat baffling that GM is willing to get involved in an alliance that it frankly does not need for size or complexity, while still avoiding any public plan to rationalise its European production, cut costs, or deal with labour rates.”

[SWFLSkins]

Saturn cost GM 4 billion to start up from the ground up, including a very impressive, modern and green plant in Spring Hill Tn. - Another words the American consumer could have built 5 new car lines with factories that were state of the art and not taken on any other related debt.