http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/05/01/gm-still-taking-taxpayers-for-a-ride.aspx
It's kind of strange that they are chastising GM for both loosing money on each Volt AND not selling enough of them (they would prefer they sell more and loose more?). They also don't mention how much Nissan or Tesla makes on each of their cars.
GM does have the potential advantage of having different technology then the other cars. That might be useful in the future.
I don't know if the Volt will be successful or in the future it will be considered a great investment / risk, but I does seem like some people almost want it to be a failure.
ugh - I hate news like that. Losing $x on each widget can be calculated hundreds of ways. Plus, the Volt was well into the product line by the time GM was bailed out. Even though I disagree with the bailout, GM knew what it was doing with the Volt, and it being a big profit loss isn't a surprise to them, I'm sure. They were risking their own money at that point.
Sounds more like editorial than news to me.
What can we make of the fact that fool.com still recommends GM stock, per the footer on that article?
[EDIT: When I say "what can we make of...", I'm not hoping for mountains from molehills, I'm just observing that their overall assessment of the stock appears to be positive, even if they do have an editor who doesn't like the way the Volt is being handled]
One thing to consider is that the whole electric car industry is a money pit for the government. They're doing their best to push it out the door, and it isn't flying with the American public. GM is claiming the next Volt will be cheaper and sell better, so I'd bet a lot of the costs for that version are being paid for now by tax dollars.
Out before the first "in before the lock" posts 
Constitution!
In reply to Swank Force One:
Frequency and volume!
Swank Force One wrote: Constitution!
General welfare clause!
Free Market!
Volt is a poor concept as are most "hybrids" eagle ithrust is the key! All electric with a diesel generator to recharge if needed. Besies, who wants to sped 40k to save 3k a year if your lucky?
General Tsao's Motors?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324482504578451410328454302.html?mod=hp_opinion
It's amazing...GM plans to build cars in China...to sell to America. Japan, Germany, and Korea build cars in the U.S...to sell around the world. About the only people who seem to be positioned to make out are shipping companies.
Canadia!
Jaxmadine wrote: Volt is a poor concept as are most "hybrids" eagle ithrust is the key! All electric with a diesel generator to recharge if needed.
That's what the Volt is, except it uses an engine that has decent emissions.
Jaxmadine wrote: Volt is a poor concept as are most "hybrids" eagle ithrust is the key! All electric with a diesel generator to recharge if needed. Besies, who wants to sped 40k to save 3k a year if your lucky?
Math has no place in an economic debate. Particularly an environmental/economic debate .
DoctorBlade wrote: They're doing their best to push it out the door, and it isn't flying with the American public.
I wouldn't be opposed to an electric car. Except it isn't useable outside driving to work and running in-town errands.
It's a dual-edged sword, people won't buy them because there is no national infrastructure (if I could get in my electric car and drive from Tulsa to Montana we'd be on our way), but there will be no infrastructure until people buy them.
Jaxmadine wrote: Volt is a poor concept as are most "hybrids" eagle ithrust is the key! All electric with a diesel generator to recharge if needed. Besies, who wants to sped 40k to save 3k a year if your lucky?
Most people buying new cars don't get them for free. Net a Volt costs $32500 (there's the $7500 tax credit that hopefully anyone making the poor financial decision of buying an over-$30k car would qualify for) so the question isn't whether spending $40k is worth it but whether spending the difference between $32500 and the cost of the other new car you're looking at.
Let's pick a random competing car and compare it to a base model Honda Accord. $23,000 MSRP, so the difference is $9,500. Saving $3k/year means you'd break even buying the Volt versus the Accord at 3 years, 2 months.
Assuming you drive the national average of 12,000 miles/year though, you're unlikely to save $3000/year since you don't even spend that on gas.
Look at it this way, you can buy a car that costs, what, $65,000 to build? For only $32,000! That is a real bargain when you think about it. You usually buy cars for way more than they cost to build. I mean, based on worldwide demand, volume, and automation, the VW Golf costs VW $6,123.15 to build, and you buy it for $25,000!
Yes, I made that figure up. 
gay slur
Putting the politics aside, no one that I know whos driven a Volt has said that it sucked, and a few have said its a decent car. I haven't driven one personally, but if I get a chance I will. I also have a pretty good understanding of how the drivetrain works, and I think its brilliant.
If Japan inc. built the Volt I bet they wouldn't be able to build them fast enough.
Furthermore, I hope GM learns everything that then can from the 1st generation Volt (pun intended) and refines it further and spreads it to other market segments. Wouldn't it be great to have an American company being a true innovator again. Hopefully they don't ruin it by deciding to build them in China.
.
You'll need to log in to post.
