1
2
3
Since we all know more than the powers in any of the automobile manufacturers do, here is your chance to put down in words what YOU would do if YOU were a manufacturer.
Tell me what where and how YOU would get the job done from top to bottom.
Me? i'd leave it to the professionals, I only ask that they make a product you can afford to buy while making and average low-middle class wage.
carguy123 wrote:speedblind wrote:70% gov't owned
20% UAW
10% Shareholders
Where'd you get your ownership numbers? The last one I saw showed 55% UAW
Got that from Automotive News yesterday. Latest I've heard is (quoted from AN Alert):
DETROIT (Reuters) -- General Motors and the U.S. Treasury today made an improved equity exchange offer to bondholders with $27 billion in debt intended to pave the way for a quick bankruptcy process for the automaker. Under the proposed deal, which GM said was supported by creditors representing about 20 percent of its debt, bondholders would be offered 10 percent of a reorganized company and given warrants to purchase another 15 percent.
In exchange for the improved payout, creditors would agree not to oppose a move to sell GM's profitable assets to a new company funded by the U.S. government in a fast-track bankruptcy process.
The exchange offer will be open to bondholders until 5 p.m ET on Saturday
The U.S. Treasury would own 72.5 percent of the new GM coming out of a bankruptcy sale process, while a trust affiliated with the United Auto Workers union would own 17.5 percent, GM said in a filing with securities regulators. "The U.S. Treasury proposal announced today provides incentives for GM's unsecured bondholders to support GM's restructuring efforts in the event GM decides to pursue a 363 sale as part of a bankruptcy proceeding," a GM statement said today.
So, that puts it at:
Stockholders - 10%
UAW - 17.5%
Gubmit - 72.5%
Adrian_Thompson wrote:speedblind wrote: I'm more interested in what Ford's going to do. All their worst case scenarios are built around 10 million cars and the industry is tracking below 9 right now. They're in a temporarily better position, but it won't last. Bad times indeed.We may be at below 9 million right now. But most people still see the economy picking up in the 4th Q. and early next year. We (Ford) can easily survive that, we're already mostly out of the low profit fleet market and have been offer less rebates than the competition (inc Foreign).
Supposedly the base demand of the market is 14 million units just to replace existing vehicles going off to the scrappy every year. Once credit opens up the latent demand will come back and vehicle sales WILL increase. You do the math, 10mil units for profitability and a 'market' of 14 mil units.
Note. I'm making no comments on the accuracy of the 10 mil units and I'm not making reference to anything that isn't in the public domain.
Good to know - I didn't have that info before. Of course, there's a much higher opportunity for market share when/if things get to 14million units. With Chrysler and GM weak, Ford has a great opportunity to pick up some of the die hard domestic business...but again it has to survive until we reach that projected 14mm. And I think that's a long ways off.
I'm expecting Hyundai to increase its market share dramatically over the next few years. They're poised perfectly to do it. VW too.
If it was up to me to decide what kind of car to produce it would be this:
A platform that can be adjusted to accept fwd, awd, and rwd. Each version might not have the appropriate equipment to just swap a different drivetrain in but the the platform would be to. Multiple door arrangements (2, 4, hatchback, wagon,...whatever). 4 clyinder only but options for econo/diesel/turbo. Car about the size of a Focus or Original 3 series BMW. Mostly manual transmissions. Pricing: (FWD) $16k, (RWD) $17k, (AWD) $18k and a turbo or diesel engine would add $500. Top of the Line would have no leather seats, no GPS and would max out at $20k.
Its a tall order but it's mostly been done before. Look at the 5th Gen Corolla. There has been more corollas produced than any other car.
ddavidv wrote:How's all that Hope and Change working out for everyone?
Well the hope part was giving them all that loot in hope that they'd save themselves. The change part is what's going to happen to GM soon.
ignorant wrote:so I asked
"will GM make it to the magic 8 ball?" and I got this..
someone else try
I got this:
Wow that's a huge jump in Govt. ownership from all the numbers that were being bandied about earlier. I thought the Govt. said they didnt' want to be in the car business and wouldn't have a big ownership interest.
This could go both ways. The govt ownership in some of the foreign car companies is what got them going well, but then again can you see our govt being efficient? This'd be like having 2 unions involved.
I agree. When you have a company that, all told, is 90% owned by the government and the UAW, I think it's doomed to fail. That, or some seriously scary things will happen. I'm fairly uneasy about the thought of a governing body producing a product - seems like a conflict of interest at a very basic level.
You guys just aren't "hopeing for change." You better start hopeing for change or the Change Police (CP) are going to come get you.
I'm fully confident that Nuevo GM will produce The Homer. You will like The Homer. If you don't like The Homer, the CP will make you like The Homer.
Will my taxes have to pay to keep GM profitable no matter what with Big O's share in the biz? If so there's no reason to even attempt to be profitable, just pay the Unions whatever they ask and keep building the Homer or whatever they want.
Why does all this make me think of the Communist cars of a decade ago?
OOOooooo....
Government Motors! If this means i can buy a brand new mail truck, then i'm in.
"What’s good for the country is good for General Motors, and vice versa." -- Charles E. Wilson, president of the General Motors Corporation (1941-1953), Secretary of Defense (1953-1957)
Tim Baxter wrote:"What’s good for the country is good for General Motors, and vice versa." -- Charles E. Wilson, president of the General Motors Corporation (1941-1953), Secretary of Defense (1953-1957)
Communism is good for the country, by way of basic logic!
RossD wrote:If it was up to me to decide what kind of car to produce it would be this:
A platform that can be adjusted to accept fwd, awd, and rwd. Each version might not have the appropriate equipment to just swap a different drivetrain in but the the platform would be to. Multiple door arrangements (2, 4, hatchback, wagon,...whatever). 4 clyinder only but options for econo/diesel/turbo. Car about the size of a Focus or Original 3 series BMW. Mostly manual transmissions. Pricing: (FWD) $16k, (RWD) $17k, (AWD) $18k and a turbo or diesel engine would add $500. Top of the Line would have no leather seats, no GPS and would max out at $20k.
Its a tall order but it's mostly been done before. Look at the 5th Gen Corolla. There has been more corollas produced than any other car.
To a certain extent that's the way things are going, all manufacturers are doing that. It's called platform sharing, one platform has multiple top hats for different body styles, engine and drive arrangements. But a couple of points
Manual transmission. 95% of vehicles sold in the US are automatics. It's what people want and most modern 6 speed auto's are very very good. Everything in the 4 cyl Focus sized segment already has an manual option, going exclusively that way just lost you 95% of potential customers.
FWD, RWD and AWD on one platform doesn’t make sense. FWD/AWD sure, most do that. RWD or RWD/AWD makes less sense in vehicle size segment your proposing, but all three makes no sense and would lead to a very inefficient package.
Don't forget that the GRM population is probably 0.001% of the buying public. Right now the goal is to sell cars at a profit to lot's and lot's of people.
Double post, cleaned up to save electrons.
Not to hijack the thread, but I see someone else is having trouble posting. (double post above)
I keep getting the hit it with a hammer page plus just about every other time I access the page the type switches from pretty dang large to a little smaller than normal.
Daddy is that your not so subtle way to tell me to get back to work and quit wasting time on the forum?
carguy123 wrote:Not to hijack the thread, but I see someone else is having trouble posting. (double post above)
I keep getting the hit it with a hammer
Yup some weird stuff going on. I couldn't see the forum at all for a while. I love the hammer page though, it's funny
I just want a cheap rwd small car that has the potential to be sporty. Why does sporty and luxurious always seem to go together? Thats why I proposed a multi-drive platform. The other stuff is to make the rest of the platform more marketable.
average public has such a short memory, the USA would not have won the WW2, without General Motors Corp. and built one of the worlds greatst powers. some people should read the Book,HIROSHIMA, was mandatory reading in most US high schools. not anymore tho! I know,, im from a different time zone.
IF YOU DO NOT LEARN FROM HISTORY, YOU MAY HAVE TO REPEAT IT!!
hey! im double posting on some other sites also,, what the hell gives,
is some of this computor stuff comin UNDONE?
Gearhead_42 wrote:Nope.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=av6aV2soJRn8&refer=home
Chapter 11 doesn't mean they go out of buisness. See Delta, Kmart, etc.
They will survive.
RossD wrote:Me too! What's wrong with the AE86 concept? Small econobox that just happens to have a rev-happy engine, awesome weight balance, and power going to the rear tires.I just want a cheap rwd small car that has the potential to be sporty.
RossD wrote: Why does sporty and luxurious always seem to go together?Because people show up knowing nothing about cars, and they want "the best". They don't know what "the best" means, and they don't care, that's just what they want because it's more impressive.
pete240z wrote: It seems that GM is on its last legs. Who would have thought?
I would have delivered that line in l33tspeak...nothing else can convey enough sarcasm.
honestly, with the platforms they have now, they should be able to survive.. they just need to differentiate them enough so they are not competing with themselves
Keep the lower end cars with Chevy, Trucks and vans with GMC, Middle end cars with Buick, and the high end with Caddy.
you can sprinkle the sporty cars in there as needed.
As much as I hate the idea of saab going away.. it needs to for now. I would keep saturn though, as a way to bring over the euro contigent
