Give taxpayers a 50% credit on any new Ford, GM or Chrysler purchased. Force the bailed out banks to take the loans. That way we get to vote on which companies and models survive. I haven't bought a new car since '87 but with a deal like this I would consider it.
As I had said earlier....
I think it's funny how Ford gets thrown in with the other two for this bail out. They should really call it the "Save the Other Two Guys, Bail-out." Because Ford is the only one not soaked in debt, and nobody seems to realize this. Of all 3 American companies only one of them was smart enough to SAVE money. So even after all the spending they have been doing for the past couple years, FoMoCo still has over $15 billion in liquid cash assets, and $30 billion if you include their emergency line of credit they secured if the economy stays like this for a really long time.
I say let them die, if you can't operate your company to be financially stable, then giving them a pay out to stay alive is like giving a crack addict money to get a job, he's just going to buy crack again. Our government is now run by a bunch of soccer mom's too blind to see their children for what they really are.
I'm sorry, wasn't Ford in Washington also alsking for money?
Ford is not soaked in debt because Ford was smart enough to not think it could start a mortgage company, Chrysler is owned by a three headed dog from hell... do the math there.
porschenut wrote: I'm sorry, wasn't Ford in Washington also alsking for money?
Yes,because according to the few good policies of our government they can not offer a bail out to it's competitors and not give the same bail out to them.
I have been listening to a lot of coverage of the auto bail out news on npr over the past weeks, and one thing that I keep hearing from so called experts, and even members of congress bothers me. I keep hearing a blanket statment about how american cars are built so poorly and cost more than japanese imports.
Don't most american cars cost less than the comparable imports these days? And, although I wouldn't say that american cars are built better than imports (with some exceptions) isin,t the quality gap narrower than ever before?
Some times I feel like these people are comparing early 80's cars, not current ones.
I do however think that there are deep problems in the managment and labor of the domestics that need to be fixed.
I am not in the luxury car buying demegraghic but I would take a new Caddy over any M-B or Lexus. I am in the people mover car demographic and I would definitly consider cars like the Ford Focus & Fuzion, and I also like the Chrysler 300 and charger (V6). Even the chevy Cobalt and HHR seem competitive to me. (and I have seen a ton of HHR pannel/deliver body style in my area recently).
I'm sorry, but having looked at the price of a new car what with employee pricing, red tags, AND rebates...the Big 2.5 are close to giving away cars and trucks as it is (well, most models anyway).
So what am I waiting for? I'm like alot of folks...I think, in that I wonder if I buy a new car today...will I have a job tomorrow to pay for it?
It's sucks that I can afford a Mustang AND gas for it is cheap but I'm not sure I'll still be employed by the time the 1st payment is due....or the last. Tho I suppose I should do as many folks here suggest "...use saviings to pay for that depreciating asset".
If GM and Chrysler go down, Ford is in a huge spot of bother. There are two main reasons that I gathered when I read Ford's submission to Congress.
1.) Nearly 80% of Ford's supplier base overlaps into GM and Chrylser production. That said, these suppliers will be hurting and possibly be forced to close if GM and Chrysler go down the tubes or into bankrupcy. If Ford loses 80% of its suppliers (or even a portion of that 80%) the effect on their own production will be substantial.
2.) More than half of Ford's dealers also sell GM and Chrysler products. If these dealers are forced to close or lose business because of GM or Chrysler's closures, it will also damage Ford.
While GM and Chrysler appear to have squandered their money away, I just don't think it's the case. Look at any one of the Big Three's product lineup and you'll see that since 2000, their products have changed pretty radically. The Chrysler 300 was Car and Driver's Car of the Year in 2005 and the Mustang took Car of the Year for a magazine in Canada. It wasn't the Camry for once!
Ford has been working with their labor unions to cut back on labor costs. I'm sure the other two did the same thing as well. But they didn't reduce pay of existing employees, so they have to wait to bring in the new waves of employees for the lower entry-level wages to take effect. So, contrary to popular belief, the UAW is actually playing ball with everyone.
Remember: the credit markets did not just freeze for you and me. Businesses cannot get credit either - even huge ones. Donald Trump was "on the wire" with Gretta Van Sustren a couple days ago and he was talking about what all the banks are doing with their bailout money --- they're buying banks in China! They're not lending money. So when Ford, GM, or Chrysler need a loan to make ends meet in hard times, there's only one institution who has the money to do it. Yep - it's the US government.
I don't buy the supplier base argument. Will it hurt the suppliers if one or two of the 2.5 die? Yes. Will it kill them? Not most of them. They will adjust, right-size the company, and proceed with who is left. For those that do die, there are competitors waiting in the wings to fill the need. If Spring Supplier A dies because they were too leveraged, too heavily invested in a single customer, etc, then Spring Supplier B will be rewarded for their financial discipline with new business.
Capitalism works if you let it.
As much as it may suck to loose jobs, it makes even less sense to keep a dieing mule around simply because you don't want to have to hook the plow up to a different one.
These companies have been going down hill for decades. How long and how much money are you willing to keep putting out so that these companies can pretend to be providing jobs for the future. Why don't we just skip the BS and divide the 15 billion bail out directly to the employees and quit spending money making things nobody wants to buy.
The big 3 have been battling for dominance for over 70 years, it's an absolutely preposterous thought that a champion will never rise to the top. Eventually one company will survive and the others will fade, that is the nature of a free market economy. It sucks but it's time for new companies to arise, and it's time to get a new job.
DILYSI Dave wrote: Capitalism works if you let it.
Washington Politics will not let it work, it is not politically correct.
DILYSI Dave wrote: I don't buy the supplier base argument. Will it hurt the suppliers if one or two of the 2.5 die? Yes. Will it kill them? Not most of them. They will adjust, right-size the company, and proceed with who is left. For those that do die, there are competitors waiting in the wings to fill the need. If Spring Supplier A dies because they were too leveraged, too heavily invested in a single customer, etc, then Spring Supplier B will be rewarded for their financial discipline with new business. Capitalism works if you let it.
Are you in the auto industry?
It's an unbelievable hassle and financial burden to have a supplier go out of business and have to transfer their parts to another supplier.
jwdmotorsports wrote:DILYSI Dave wrote: I don't buy the supplier base argument. Will it hurt the suppliers if one or two of the 2.5 die? Yes. Will it kill them? Not most of them. They will adjust, right-size the company, and proceed with who is left. For those that do die, there are competitors waiting in the wings to fill the need. If Spring Supplier A dies because they were too leveraged, too heavily invested in a single customer, etc, then Spring Supplier B will be rewarded for their financial discipline with new business. Capitalism works if you let it.Are you in the auto industry? It's an unbelievable hassle and financial burden to have a supplier go out of business and have to transfer their parts to another supplier.
Yes I am. And yes it is. OTOH, I'm in a viable company that has the potential to fill the shoes of some of those poorly run companies, so I really just wish Washington would get out of the way so that we can continue to kick ass.
So the companies close, thousands of people out of work. Then the gov't will have to pay unemployment and wellfare plus medicaid. Then the banks will have all those mortgages to recall. Ford is in Washington to support the industry as a whole. It's also interesting that Ford had the least fall off of sales of all companies, imports included. People are afraid to spend their money in fear that their bank might fail.
HappyAndy wrote: I have been listening to a lot of coverage of the auto bail out news on npr over the past weeks, and one thing that I keep hearing from so called experts, and even members of congress bothers me. I keep hearing a blanket statment about how american cars are built so poorly and cost more than japanese imports.
The problem isn't their current quality. It's usually just as good or better than the competition now. The problem is the two decades they spent convincing everyone that american cars were junk. GM worked especially hard at it with the cavalier.
Imagine if you had traded your lumina in for a camry in 95. You'd have probably stayed with toyota due to the shockingly better quality at the time and never looked back. Some of the most terrible american cars came out at a time when the japanese were really getting how to make good cars. Almost everyone I know has a horror story about buying some terrible lemon from the big 3 and then getting seriously burnt by the dealer. They all switched to toyota or honda and never looked at an american product again. My inlaws had a blazer and Grand Prix in the mid 90s. Multiple transmissions and stupid electrical problems later they got traded in for hondas. Now they'll never even consider looking at an american car, much less actually test driving or buying one.
I can tell similar stories for my parents, grandparents, and multiple co-workers. And myself, now that I think about it.
blaze86vic wrote: I think it's funny how Ford gets thrown in with the other two for this bail out. They should really call it the "Save the Other Two Guys, Bail-out." Because Ford is the only one not soaked in debt, and nobody seems to realize this. Of all 3 American companies only one of them was smart enough to SAVE money. So even after all the spending they have been doing for the past couple years, FoMoCo still has over $15 billion in liquid cash assets, and $30 billion if you include their emergency line of credit they secured if the economy stays like this for a really long time.
Not exactly the case. Ford was on the brink of dying in 2006 when Alan Mullally was hired as CEO from Boeing. Within the first 4 months, he executed what he refers to as the "largest home equity loan" in history by mortgaging everything Ford has. That included real estate, patents, and "even the blue oval". As a result of that and aggressive cost cutting, Ford was able to right their ship in advance of this crisis. Doing so was fortuitous timing, as you pointed out, because they are now sitting on a cash stockpile compared to the others.
So maybe it would take a lease program with all repairs covered to turn some people. Given the right incentive I would rather buy a new american car than see bailout money given out to them. Does anyone else out there feel the same way?
In reply to DILYSI Dave:
no, Dave, there aren't competitors waiting in the wings to fill the need. 25% of my job for the last two years has been scrounging around trying to get approval for moving business from dying suppliers to living ones, and I'm not even in supply chain management. Sometimes the living suppliers don't want the increased volume because they've already "right-sized" for their current volume. It's more grim at the OE level than you aftermarket fags will ever know.
Maybe it's just me, but name calling wasn't really called for in that post.
It's bad on both the OE and Aftermarket side. But either way throwing money at the problem won't fix anything. Though this kind of solution is becoming ever more typical of American society these days. Something needs to change in this country, and honestly I don't think it's the government. Because as bad as it looks I'm sad to say I think it actually is an accurate representation of what the majority of the US citizens want. Corruption, greed, and the "I got mine" mentality are the norm.
blaze, do have ANY idea what's actually going on? Did you complain this loud when we gave almost a TRILLION to banks? This a freaking LOAN man! It has to be paid back with interest! Come on man, you can be right when you want to (the Ford stuff) so stop pulling the salesman line on us.
skruffy, ironically I can say the same thing about family members MUCH more recently (last 2-3 years) only backwards. I'm talking about people buying Toyotas (and getting RIPPED by the scum dealers) and having catastrophic problems, only to switch back into US cars and be hugely impressed with the quality and value. The tables have turned and people will prove to have short memories sooner or later...
I know I'm being ridiculously simplistic but if a living creature can't survive it dies, its called the circle of life, I firmly believe that if a business can't survive it should die.
I also believe that one of the 3 may need to die and once the economy settles down again, the other two will start making more cars, fill the factories of the third and business will continue as it should.
I own a small business, who would bail me out if I paid myself stupid amounts and flew 1st class everyday, I know that's not a major financial part of it, but really, how does it look to those of us struggling to make a mortgage payment. These actions of the management are so ignorant they deserve to be fired on the spot.
Oh and bonuses....aren't bonuses paid for a job well done.
porschenut wrote: So maybe it would take a lease program with all repairs covered to turn some people. Given the right incentive I would rather buy a new american car than see bailout money given out to them. Does anyone else out there feel the same way?
I could be convinced IF the dealers honored their warranty. I bought a convertible from a domestic years ago and got reamed by a dealer who wouldn't cover a top that self-destructed in 20k miles. After that I assumed all warranties were worth the toilet paper they were printed on. I bought a car that wouldn't need to visit a dealer again to avoid the same problem. Unfortunately after being strictly domestic for years that stand changed that very day.
Also, when the domestic denied my repair claim on the top they agreed to fix the radio that was also broken. I then had to fight tooth and nail to get a rental while the car was in the shop. I also had to listen to the service manager complain endlessly about having to give me a rental while filling out the paperwork. When my Mazda had a loose swaybar bolt they offered me a rental without having to ask. That domestic experience was close to 10 yrs ago but I still carry that with me. It might be irrational but my feelings are along the lines of "fool me once..."
I'd like to say things are different because I want domestic manufacturers here. I'm just not willing to risk it with my dime.
P71 wrote: skruffy, ironically I can say the same thing about family members MUCH more recently (last 2-3 years) only backwards. I'm talking about people buying Toyotas (and getting RIPPED by the scum dealers) and having catastrophic problems, only to switch back into US cars and be hugely impressed with the quality and value. The tables have turned and people will prove to have short memories sooner or later...
Man..I hope you're right. I just related my story above.
I do like the Mustang and would consider buying one if the price was right and it fit what I wanted/needed at the time. I don't know that I'd ever buy a GM product again. I most certainly wouldn't buy new.
blaze86vic wrote: Maybe it's just me, but name calling wasn't really called for in that post.
but his name is Dave. 
aussiesmg wrote: I know I'm being ridiculously simplistic but if a living creature can't survive it dies, its called the circle of life, I firmly believe that if a business can't survive it should die.
If the sales lost by GM or Chrysler going away were picked up by an American company, then I'd agree. Unfortunately for USA, these sales would go foreign really quickly, with no chance of going to a domestic competitor. At least now, the D3 have a good share of the truck market (which itself is a huge market).
AngryCorvair wrote: In reply to DILYSI Dave: no, Dave, there aren't competitors waiting in the wings to fill the need. 25% of my job for the last two years has been scrounging around trying to get approval for moving business from dying suppliers to living ones, and I'm not even in supply chain management. Sometimes the living suppliers don't want the increased volume because they've already "right-sized" for their current volume.
I'm right there with you. Even if you have a good supplier that you would like to give business to doesn't mean they have the floor space currently or have the money to add floor space.
You'll need to log in to post.
