Auto Execs Fly Corporate Jets to D.C., Tin Cups in Hand

[PeppyGPhiB]

Originally Posted by AGDee

I love the Volt and would drive one in a heartbeat. If I never had to buy gas again, I'd be willing to pay in the mid 30's (the anticipated cost that I've read for it) to never buy gas again.

Well, different strokes for different folks I guess. But the battery is only supposed to last for 40 miles on a charge, so you would have to buy gas...that is, if you ever drive more than 40 miles when you're out and about, which I do practically daily. Right now it wouldn't work for me because I live in an apartment with no power outlet nearby to charge it. And it is supposed to retail for 40k, but they're trying to get it elligible for a tax credit that would bring it down to around 35k. But still, people could buy a cheaper BMW for that.

My point was that the Chevy Volt is ONE car - that won't be out for another 2-3 years - that GM is hanging its hat on. Why is it the only one, and why didn't they have the vision to come up with it years ago? Toyota and Honda have been working on their hybrids for about 15-20 years.

[AGDee]

GM has numerous hybrids on the market already and has for several years. It's not as though GM is hanging it's hat on the Volt. The Chevy Malibu hybrid was selling so fast they couldn't keep up with demand until the credit freeze hit. The Saturn Vue Hybrid is a hot seller also. They are hard to get. GM is also testing hydrogen fuel cell cars but there is nowhere for people to get the hydrogen fuel cells recharged, so that's an issue.

My commute to work is 44 miles so I'd have to use gas for maybe 10 miles a day with errands if I planned them right. That sure beats using gas for 54 miles a day. You'd be talking like a gallon or two a week! That would be so cool. The Honda electric car can currently only go 10 miles without a charge so the 40 miles is a big improvement.

[Kevlar281]

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

This is a perfect illustration of why GM is going under. The Chevy Volt, which I think is ugly and bulky and looks like a car only a man would drive, is scheduled to come out in 2011 and sell for more than $40,000.

I'm sure certain aesthetics had to be sacrificed to make the Volt as energy efficient as possible. Yes $40,000 is a lot of money and for the record in will be out in 2010.

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

Meanwhile, Honda is gradually moving to an all-hybrid fleet, with its second generation of the Insight coming out in 2009 and retailing for LESS than the Civic Hybrid...in other words, it'll be one of Honda's cheapest cars (less than $20,000), and if it's like the previous Insight, it'll get more than 60 mpg. And it looks awesome!

I'd take a GM over a Honda any day of the week and twice on Sunday. You do realize there are still parts of this country where buying American or at least buying something that is perceived as American means something right?

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

GM lacks vision and is out of touch with what Americans want to buy. That is their problem, not the unions. The cheapest workers in the world won't help them if no one wants to buy their cars. And they just don't get it! They need a complete redesign of their line.

I'd say out of the big three GM is the only one who "gets it" and their foresight to produce an electric car shows that.

[Tinia2]

Originally Posted by Kevlar281

I'm sure certain aesthetics had to be sacrificed to make the Volt as energy efficient as possible. Yes $40,000 is a lot of money and for the record in will be out in 2010.



I'd take a GM over a Honda any day of the week and twice on Sunday. You do realize there are still parts of this country where buying American or at least buying something that is perceived as American means something right?


I'd say out of the big three GM is the only one who "gets it" and their foresight to produce an electric car shows that.

I agree with most of what you have posted. However, perhaps it is Ford that "got it" the most:
Ford Scion Looks Beyond Bailout to Green Agenda
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/24/bu...l?ref=business
http://www.ajc.com/biz/content/share...f9b4a189e.html
"“One of the things that I feel very encouraged about is the president-elect and where he’d like to take this country in terms of energy, and I completely buy into his vision,” Mr. Ford said in an interview, his first since the Big Three approached Washington lawmakers about a rescue plan.
He can afford to take a longer view because Ford, unlike G.M. and Chrysler, does not need an immediate infusion of government aid to stay in business."
"The company has enough cash on hand — $18.9 billion, as well as a $10.7 billion line of credit with private lenders — that will keep it running through 2009 without cutting development of its next generation of more fuel-efficient cars.
While Ford cannot continue to burn cash indefinitely, it is also not on the verge of bankruptcy like G.M. and Chrysler. And the health of the company presents a unique opportunity for Mr. Ford, 51, who has been chairman of the company since 1999 and served five years as its chief executive."
“One of the things we need to sort out as a country is batteries,” Mr. Ford said. “We really don’t want to trade one foreign dependency, oil, for another foreign dependency, batteries.” The main producers of batteries are Asian manufacturers."
"Mr. Ford has been Detroit’s most vocal environmentalist since becoming the first family member to run Ford since his uncle, Henry Ford II.
"Even when Ford was living off profits from its big sport utility vehicles, he was pushing to take the company in a greener direction. Ford was the first automaker to bring to market a hybrid version of an S.U.V., the Ford Escape, and it is introducing a new line of Ecoboost engines next year that will cut fuel consumption by up to 20 percent."...............

As for hybrids, there is a thread somewhere in GC about them.
If you were to compare the costs (fuel, operation, maintenance) of the same vehicle, gas vs hybrid, you would find out:
That the gas model cost less up front.
And the amount of gas savings with a hybrid would break even after (well) over 80,000 miles. And that was calculated when gas was over $3.50/gal.

[PM_Mama00]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

I should have said "how much the union workers cost" which is the issue I'm getting at. However, they do make an incredible salary for their skill level.

Originally Posted by PM_Mama00

I take it you've never met a Union line worker. You've never seen the blood sweat and tears they put into their job. The hours they spend away from their family to put food on the table, going to bed before their own children go to bed because they have to be up at 2 or 3am to make it in for the early shift. They deserve that money. Auto workers are the hardest workers I know. And most aren't even Union. Most are temps who are trying to get into the Union so that they don't lose their job and can get benefits that are hard to come by these days.

x

[agzg]

Dee you're not alone in your fear. My worry is a little different from yours, however. I know there's a lake between us, but what goes on in my head is:

"Auto industry fails ----> layoffs ----> saturated job market ----> if I can't get lucky and find a job in my field, what are the chances of finding a job in a semi-skilled market to hold me over?"

Because this is how I think employers will be thinking:

"This girl is overqualified, and while we still could hire her, there's this guy over here and he got laid off from GM, he's driving four hours a day to get here, and he's got a family to feed. We're gonna hire the guy."

Not to mention all the other scary things about a possible bankruptcy that you mentioned.

Believe me, even people in Chicago are shaking in their boots about this, and we haven't even begun to feel the effects like you guys have.

[RU OX Alum]

How is keeping both Buick and Cadilac going to help? Didn't they have to get rid of Oldsmobile because it was too much like Buick and Cadillac? They should keep pontiac but in a scaled back plant. Like, maybe only have the plant in Pontiac, MI make them, and then that brand is the sport car/muscle car brand, Chevrolet is Chevrolet cars and the top selling trucks (no new ones and no suvs) GMC would be for the other trucks and suvs (one name plate per plant. If demand for a bowtie on the thing is that great then fine, but don't make a seperate chevy and gmc suv plant.) Cadillac is luxury cars. That's it. Didn't they used to have like around 8 or 9 lines at one point? I really don't want the US auto industry to tank.

[agzg]

Aren't Saturns (on the whole) more fuel efficient than the other GM brands? Why would they ditch the more eco-friendly brands?

I totally could be making that up - it was just my assumption. And yes, I know what happens when one assumes.

[AGDee]

When Saturn was started, they were touted as the highest quality, practically hand made cars. Their dealerships are known for their excellent service. It was the "quality/service" division, basically. When you buy a Saturn, they treat you like a king/queen, give you roses, etc. While there are two hybrid Saturns, there are hybrids in their other divisions too.

Pontiac and Saturn are the two divisions that have repeatedly attracted me. This may end up being my last GM car and that bums me out, but if they're going to get rid of the ones I like, then I'm not going to be buying from them. (Besides, once my dad is gone, my big discount is gone too). I've been flip flopping here between the Saturn Vue and the Pontiac Vibe for months and I think the Vue is going to win. I first wanted a Vibe in 2003 and it's been so long now that it has lost it's appeal!

If I got to pick which GM brands to keep around, I'd say get rid of GMC because Chevy makes everything that GMC does (pick ups, SUVs) and Buick (because those are old people cars and they would buy a Cadillac too). Then you have Chevy's for your low end, entry level cars. Downsize Cadillac by a lot (do you ever see them on the road?? I sure don't!). Yeah, I'd keep Chevy, Saturn, Pontiac and Cadillac. They didn't ask me though.

[nittanyalum]

My husband and I watched the full replay of the Senate hearings last night and then the full replay of the House hearings tonight. Really, really interesting stuff.

[PM_Mama00]

On the radio this morning they mentioned a bunch of states and how many jobs would be lost if the companies went bankrupt. And that one guy, governor or senator of a southern state (Alabama? the one that is so very against a bailout), that state would lose a couple hundred thousand jobs.

[Zephyrus]

Question. If they go bankrupt, that doesn't mean the big three would be no more does it? Huge corporations file bankruptcy all the time and still survive.

[AGDee]

Chrysler says it will not be able to come out of a bankruptcy. Their suppliers would also end up closing their doors, many of whom also supply some things to Ford and GM (like steel, glass, polymers, paints, etc.

Delphi, is a GM parts supplier that GM spun it off on it's own in 1999. They filed for bankruptcy in 2005 and have said that if GM files for bankruptcy they will not survive.

There is a chance it would whittle down to the Big 2 if Chrysler goes under, but from all the analysis, the parts suppliers going under will be the end of the American Auto Industry altogether.

This blog talks about the major differences in spending between Toyota/Nissan/Honda and GM and why the burden of health care is one of the big issues for GM.
http://chinamatters.blogspot.com/200...al-health.html


In the United States, GM paid $4.6 billion in 2006 in health care costs for 350,000 retirees. A lot of those retirees were employees who were downsized in a series of restructurings.

In an effort to whittle away at this number, GM changed its policies so white collar retirees have lost their lifetime GM health insurance and will be pushed into Medicare upon reaching 65, saving GM $1.5 billion. Health care for union retirees will be pushed into a UAW-administered trust—a Voluntary Employee Benefits Association or VEBA—into which GM will pour $33 billion.

Even with these changes, GM has a hefty, multi-billion dollar yearly bill in retiree health care costs it has to work through.

If GM doesn’t go bankrupt first.

The story’s different for Toyota in its home base in Japan.

In Japan, Toyota pays health care for its retirees for two years after they leave the company. That’s less than 3,000 workers per year. The health care costs are so small they don’t show up on Toyota’s balance sheet.

Then the Japanese National Health Insurance—the government-operated facility that covers the retiree and non-worker end of Japan’s universal insurance system--picks up the tab.
Japan is an expensive place to have a factory. When bonuses are factored in, Toyota and GM workers both make yearly incomes in the $60,000 range.

Even with massive exports of Japan-built cars, the Japanese operations account for about 1/3 of global profits while posting 50% of worldwide sales.

In the first quarter of FY 2006, Toyota’s home operations brought in about US$1 billion of its total profits of $3.23 billion.

That’s roughly what GM was paying per quarter on retirees’ health care.

ETA: I spent my morning at a Saturn dealership and on Wednesday or Thursday, I will be the proud owner of a ruby red 1009 Saturn Vue! I have done all that I can to help

[b_estes19]

what is sad is that the auto companys did it to themselves with a lot of help from the unions. they ignored the fact that people wanted to have more efficient vehicles and continued to make the gas guzzelers inspite of ourselves. the unions fought for higher wages and benefits and people not working getting paid. the saturn was a great idea and started as a basic no frills car made with a lot of plastic. now they are making them of metal and basing them on the same frame base as other cars of the same size.
corporate jets and huge executive salarys were one of the dumbest things i have seen but seems to be the norm for many in the business world.
all that i know who have a saturn are very happy with them and the designs are as good as any made, plus they are cheaper to purchase.
there has to be a bail out as much as i hate to say it to keep people working and putting money into the economy. if we the tax payer are going to foot the bill for this, there had better be some restraints and oversites on these companys stating with the banking system that is not using the money (ours) for what it was ment to be.

[awkward1]

The shame of this all is that the American auto companies were starting to shed their reputation for building unreliable vehicles. About 8 years ago we purchased a Chrysler and the transmission went out at 30,000 miles, 42,0000 miles, then again at about 58,000. We looked at other vehicles both foreign and domestic and in our minds the American vehicles were superior in comfort and despite what had happened with the Chrysler we went American again with a Chevy. This Chevy has 120,000 miles on it and it has run beautifully with the exception of the transmission. Go figure. We have had to replace the transmission twice but I wouldn't trade this vehicle for another vehicle and I have no regrets for purchasing it. With the exception of the transmission the fit and finish on this vehicle is still solid. No squeeks and no rattles. I would buy a Chevy again when we have run this vehicle into the ground, but I have a feeling that will be years from now.

On another note....can Toyota and Honda not build comfortable seats? When we were shopping for vehicles 6 years ago it seemed like the models we tested from those companies had seats that felt like sitting on a rock. Maybe this has changed as of late...