GM = bankrupt
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 01:30:21 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Economics (Moderator: Torie)
  GM = bankrupt
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: GM = bankrupt  (Read 10060 times)
Vepres
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,032
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: June 01, 2009, 12:40:43 PM »

I agree that I've been looking at investing in Ford, but I heard an interesting perspective that GM's bankruptcy may also trigger Ford to eventually go under as well in the distant future due to having to compete with a now debt free GM, as well as the potential fallout from suppliers.

I invested in Ford when they were very low, late February, and I have made a 200% gain thus far! Too bad I'm young and don't have much to invest, but still. I think the fact they didn't refuse the bailout is evidence that they are a competent and efficient company. The new Ford Fusion hybrid is an American answer to the Prius. I suspect they will surpass GM in market share, possibly Volkswagen as well, globally.

I don't think GM will knock Ford out simply because Ford has far superior products. Of the big three US automakers, Ford is the only one that can compete with Japanese automakers in terms of longevity and quality (not in the past, but they've really pulled themselves together these past few years). I would wager that GM will improve, but that the government influence could also hurt. Politicians may force them to do things for political reasons such as build a plant in the US, even though the cars built in that plant will be sold in China, South America, or Europe. They may not, but government influence is rarely a good thing.

One final point. The fact that Ford didn't go into bankruptcy nor took bailout funds has a psychological effect on consumers. They will have more trust in Ford than in GM or Chrysler, and for good reason. If I were to assess the situation, I would say that Ford and GM will effectively switch places in terms of market share in the coming years.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,080
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: June 01, 2009, 11:05:41 PM »

There's not much worth salvaging in the GM lineup. The only car that immediately comes to mind is the iconic Corvette, though the only good ones are the classic ones.
The last few generations of Corvettes are very good cars, but you can't keep a giant company alive because of one very good niche market car.  They need, and have needed for 30 years, a Camry/Accord beater.  Or at least a Civic/Corrola beater.

I disagree about the most recent Corvettes.  My mother has a 1999, and there's a lot on the interior that looks just too "standard GM." For a $60,000 car, Corvettes need some higher-end finishes.

They look nice from the outside, though.
When you make as car as fast as a Ferrari for a quarter the price you have to cut corners somewhere.  I'd much rather they do it with the AC nobs instead of the suspension engineering.  You may have different concerns in your sports car/gran touring car.
Logged
Queen Mum Inks.LWC
Inks.LWC
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,028
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.65, S: -2.78

P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: June 02, 2009, 01:07:43 AM »

GM = bankrupt ... this is news?

Glad that they're finally ending the cycle of government bailout and money (well, at least after the last 30 billion or so + the 2 billion from the Canada).
Logged
Jacobtm
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,216


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: June 02, 2009, 02:02:35 AM »

GM = bankrupt ... this is news?

Glad that they're finally ending the cycle of government bailout and money (well, at least after the last 30 billion or so + the 2 billion from the Canada).

Ha, yea, ending it was a $30 billion bailout. Nothing like one last rager before going cold turkey; always works out.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: June 02, 2009, 03:01:44 AM »

This thread is hilarious and repulsive for the usual reasons - idiotic devotion to the fiction of the 'free market', and complete ignorance about automobilies.

Sam Spade wants to spit on GM cars because the company is 'government owned' at the moment.  Sam Spade doesn't understand economics and engages in simple-minded Archie-Bunkeresque knee-jerk reactions.

As for those who love to jump on the bandwagon to say that GM cars are 'crappy products', like States, well, you're simply wrong.  For the last 25 years or so, my family have mostly purchased cheap second hand GM products, and have essentially motored for free relative to income.  These products have always been largely reliable, and even if they have been very slightly less reliable than an equivalent Toyota, they're much cheaper to fix and buy than said Japanese products.  And of course GMs are overall much more reliable than Fords (check out the Taurus).  And Chrysler, forget about it - the last decent Chryslers were the K-cars and K-car spinoffs.

There are a few exceptions - we've owned quite a few Grand Marquis and Town Cars - full sized Fords are roughly as good as or nearly as good as full sized GMs.  Obviously certain vehicles are to be purchased regardless of reliability - we always bought lots of Jeep Grand Wagoneers simpy because they were so damned nice, even though they were certainly less reliable than an equivalent GM.

It is true that GM products have been in decline since around 1996 or 1998, but many are still reasonable values and they're certainly better than the equivalent Fords.  Bankruptcy really tells us nothing about product quality - there are many other factors at work.  Anyway it is ridiculous to contemplate shuttering such a large and historic company because of a mere ten bad years.  Keep in mind that most of what is wrong with 'american industry' is caused by poor government policy, not any error on the part of management.

Thus we come to the root of the problem with the childish reactions posted in this thread - few here seem to understand that the 'public'/'private' dichotomy is a false one, and that economic disasters such as the destruction Michigan, GM, and the well being of the american working cass don't 'just happen', they are utterly and completely political imposed by a ruling class.  And quite intentionally and with malice aforethought I might add.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: June 02, 2009, 04:09:55 AM »

lol
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,080
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: June 02, 2009, 09:12:39 AM »

New Fords are among the most reliable vehicles on the road.  In comparison after comparison with Japanese rivals, Fords consistently come out equal to or above the competition. 
cite?


The Ford Fusion Hybrid looks to be a kickass vehicle at the perfect time.  Remember what the K-Car and the minivan sort of did for Chyrsler in the early 80s....this may turn out more impressive.....mainly because the Fusion isn't a piece of poo like the K-Car and Chyrsler minivans were.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,080
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: June 02, 2009, 09:30:57 AM »

Ok, the "equal to" part is true (except for the trucks), but I'm still not seeing "above the competition". 

(and the Detroit News article was just a heavy spinning of the Consumer Reports conclusion)

(and I'm not being an ass just to be an ass.  I don't want people to think that Ford now makes more reliable vehicles than Toyota or Honda, equal to in a lot of cases sure, but not better...and if they really are better, I want to know.  I'm actually rooting hard for Ford here.  They own a good chunk of Mazda ya see.)

(and the best Fords are often redesigned cars from other makers...the Fusion rides on a Mazda6 chassis for example)
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,080
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: June 02, 2009, 09:49:46 AM »

Totally agree.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: June 02, 2009, 10:40:23 AM »

How on earth can a new car 'be reliable'?  Or another way to put it - how can one know whether a car has proven to be reliable when it is new?

You have to look at the history of cars at least 10 years old or so to determine much about reliability and certainly to know anything at all about durability. 

For example, a new Ford (like the Taurus of the past decade or two), may have much 'better' 'fit and finish' than, say an equivalent GM.  But as the history of the twenty years have shown, Tauruses (along with most other Ford products) are enormously more troublesome than the GM.  The particular massive and costly failing tends to be the transmissions - which are the weak point on any car.

To go back to the point that 'success' in the 'marketplace' has nothing to do with the quality of products - just take a look at Walmart, or Fast Food.  If anything we can say that 'success' over time equals a dimunition of quality and service.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,080
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: June 02, 2009, 10:41:39 AM »

Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: June 02, 2009, 11:03:40 AM »


You're so brainwashed your unwilling to even go out and observe your own community, deadman.

Of course in fairness 'the marketplace' which is giving us worse and worse products and services is responding to a rapidly declining standard of living.  The specialty producers for the elite are still producing quality, its just beyond the means of the 99%.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,080
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: June 02, 2009, 11:51:07 AM »

You're so brainwashed your unwilling to even go out and observe your own community, deadman.
I'm brainwashed and unwilling to observe my own community?  Praise from Caesar!?
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: June 02, 2009, 03:49:43 PM »

Not really.  The best way to know how vehicles that have actually been tested - have been on the road for a decade or two - is to check out www.carsurvey.org or www.epinions.com.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: June 02, 2009, 03:56:02 PM »

Right...and we're talking about quality now, not in the '80s.

Right, and I'm making the point that we will have no idea what the quality was until the product is tested on the road for at least a few years.

That said, I think it is a given that the newer cars will be more troublesome due to excessive and growing complexity.
Logged
MK
Mike Keller
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,432
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: June 02, 2009, 10:17:46 PM »

Hate to see this happen because of all the people who will lose pentions/benefits and the current ones who will lose jobs.  Not a good thing for our economy right now.   But on the other hand GM has dug their own graves with sh**tty products and bad decisions in the last 30 years.  Case in point... I remember when Ford was bashed by consumers/ media for allowing Chevy to out shine them in the early - mid 90's in the performance department Mustang vs Camaro. While ford decided to downgrade ( from the 5.0L) and introduce the smaller 4.6 sohc " mod" motors, GM wanted to stay with the all popular, faster 5.7. Ford of course more interested in selling cars then going for the quick buck/ gimmick.  A lot of it from fords end had to due with emissions/ fuel economy and wanting to keep the mustang profitable , being able to sell to all types of buyers.  Well the end result for GM http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4182/is_20010926/ai_n10148436/

Not to mention those suckers were a bitch to work on and have warranty work done.

This is not of course all of the reason GM is screwed , but it shows a contrast in the decision making of both companies.   The SUV boom is another one.

In the mean time the ford mustang remained one of the top selling cars from ford while the faster camaro folded.

If GM wants to come back they need to think more like Ford motor company.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: June 03, 2009, 03:53:30 AM »

The Ford 4.6, while better than most modern engines, is still absolute crap compared to the Chevrolet '5.7' (350).
Logged
MK
Mike Keller
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,432
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: June 03, 2009, 02:41:01 PM »

The Ford 4.6, while better than most modern engines, is still absolute crap compared to the Chevrolet '5.7' (350).

Not really considering the 4.6 is used in everything from police crown vics to the  Land Rover ( or was). I've personally never been a fan of the 4.6 due to its performance and cost to modify, but that's a hot rod guy talking.  Far as reliability and practicality goes, its doing pretty well.    The old 5.7 Chevy 350 ( not the LS1-LS6 etc) are the most overrated motors of all time.  Give me the 5.0 HO anytime. Better engineering and reliability.


Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: June 03, 2009, 04:29:39 PM »

The Ford 4.6, while better than most modern engines, is still absolute crap compared to the Chevrolet '5.7' (350).

Not really considering the 4.6 is used in everything from police crown vics to the  Land Rover ( or was). I've personally never been a fan of the 4.6 due to its performance and cost to modify, but that's a hot rod guy talking.  Far as reliability and practicality goes, its doing pretty well.    The old 5.7 Chevy 350 ( not the LS1-LS6 etc) are the most overrated motors of all time.  Give me the 5.0 HO anytime. Better engineering and reliability.

Interesting.  I'm no huge fan of the 350, I just don't like the unneccessary complexity of the overhead-cam style engine, like the 4.6.  My personal favorite over the years has been the Oldsmobile 307, which I had in various Olds, Buicks, and Cadillacs.  Nice and smooth, and a 300,000 miler easily.   Other engines that really impressed me way back when were the Cadillac 472/500 - what a wonderfully huge powerplant!  My '73 deville was a joy to drive, and handled great.  And the Pontiac 400 - I had a 70s grand prix once that I didn't really like (I prefer four doors), but it just would not die no matter what.  I had the 302 you mention in several Grand Marquis and Town Cars, but it was really noticably less powerful than the GM V8s..
Logged
MK
Mike Keller
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,432
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: June 03, 2009, 04:53:38 PM »

The Ford 4.6, while better than most modern engines, is still absolute crap compared to the Chevrolet '5.7' (350).

Not really considering the 4.6 is used in everything from police crown vics to the  Land Rover ( or was). I've personally never been a fan of the 4.6 due to its performance and cost to modify, but that's a hot rod guy talking.  Far as reliability and practicality goes, its doing pretty well.    The old 5.7 Chevy 350 ( not the LS1-LS6 etc) are the most overrated motors of all time.  Give me the 5.0 HO anytime. Better engineering and reliability.

Interesting.  I'm no huge fan of the 350, I just don't like the unneccessary complexity of the overhead-cam style engine, like the 4.6.  My personal favorite over the years has been the Oldsmobile 307, which I had in various Olds, Buicks, and Cadillacs.  Nice and smooth, and a 300,000 miler easily.   Other engines that really impressed me way back when were the Cadillac 472/500 - what a wonderfully huge powerplant!  My '73 deville was a joy to drive, and handled great.  And the Pontiac 400 - I had a 70s grand prix once that I didn't really like (I prefer four doors), but it just would not die no matter what.  I had the 302 you mention in several Grand Marquis and Town Cars, but it was really noticably less powerful than the GM V8s..

Because they were not the HO in town cars etc..    The forged piston, roller camed "HO" was actually faster then the 350 in that time.  In fact Chevy stole fords roller ( started in 85) cam ideal and adopted it themselves after 92 I believe.    I've always liked fords engineering over GM.    Your towncars 302 compression ratio is something like 8.4, while the HO was 9.1 - 9.2 - that's a big difference in power.

The Pontiac 400 or 455 is the only engine Ive known to wear out a camshaft.  They can be made into powerhouses, but in stock form are slugs.

The ford 5.8 Windsor is underrated aswell.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,080
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: June 03, 2009, 05:31:38 PM »

Best engine, ever:

Beautiful.  3 moving parts.  THREE.  Smooth.  Sure it's weak at low RPM and it drinks gas like frat boy drinks beer, but get it above 5 grand and she'll sing.  They don't weigh anything compared to how much power they put out.  But they aint for everybody.


Logged
MK
Mike Keller
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,432
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: June 03, 2009, 05:45:45 PM »

Best engine, ever:

Beautiful.  3 moving parts.  THREE.  Smooth.  Sure it's weak at low RPM and it drinks gas like frat boy drinks beer, but get it above 5 grand and she'll sing.  They don't weigh anything compared to how much power they put out.  But they aint for everybody.




Rotary yuck

Yeah their fine if you like NO torque.

Ive had a few RX7s beat my old 93 cobra setup with just HCI. I would jump out 2 cars and by 1/8 of the track they would just nose me out.    The RX8 has been somewhat of a disappointment.... hey i forgot ford owns Mazda LOL.

Todays cars IMO need torque because they aren't making them any lighter these days.



Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: June 03, 2009, 06:23:02 PM »

Opebo, your ignorance is showing. The Ford Taurus was the most popular and well made cars Ford ever put out.
Logged
MK
Mike Keller
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,432
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: June 03, 2009, 06:46:41 PM »

Opebo, your ignorance is showing. The Ford Taurus was the most popular and well made cars Ford ever put out.

Some people hate them or have bad luck.   The ford 3.8 was always a probelm child, but the taurus was a decent car for its time.   

Didn't they just rename the 500 to Taurus here recently?
Logged
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: June 05, 2009, 09:27:08 PM »
« Edited: June 05, 2009, 09:32:00 PM by memphis »

Opebo, your ignorance is showing. The Ford Taurus was the most popular and well made cars Ford ever put out.

I know anecdotal evidence isn't always the most useful but my parents had an '87 and an '88 Taurus when I was a kid and they were both pieces of crap. Several years later, my parents next got '93 and '94 Corollas (my dad had this envy thing where he had to go get whatever my mom had) and they were great cars. I was driving the '93 until a few years ago. I suppose it's possible that the quality of American cars has improved since then, but I really don't want to gamble five figures that they have when Japanese models have consistently proven themselves. My family is now very loyal to Toyotas and Hondas, and I feel like we're pretty typical of American consumers.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.057 seconds with 12 queries.