Doa

[flash gordon]

That would be FIRST-ON RACE-DAY....DUDE

I must be on ignore list.

[black bart]

If GM makes better than Ford why are they going into bankruptcy

[Bunky]

I hope you have a spare..someone left the parking lights on.

[southerndetail]

If GM makes better than Ford why are they going into bankruptcy

Give it time

[black bart]

Give it time

Ford will survive unless GM dumps cars at big discounts.

Today Obama gave GM another 50 billion of tax payers money as long as the government continues to prop them up they can sell at prices that will wind up hurting Ford.

Ford can compete with General Motors but not with what we have today which is Government Motors.

[GearHead_1]

It`s kind of interesting. About 4 years ago Ford dropped the Lightning, stopped production of the GT early and axed the Special Vehicle Team (SVT). There stock was valued far below both GM and Chrysler and they were talking bankruptcy. Not really sure how things got so 180 but it sure seems to have happened. Ford had some really cool vehicles slated for release while the SVT was in place. They had a 10 cylinder (427 C.I.D.) Shelby Cobra (AC style, not Mustang) and a modern version of the Daytona Coupe based on the same Cobra Platform that was hitting shows. They pulled the plug on the SVT division and it all evaporated. They were apparently wise enough to know where the bread and butter was and were willing to drop the fantasy cars to help the company turn it around. I have to admit I would have liked to see these two cars come to fruition and I really hated to see the Lightning go away.

[Ronkh]

If GM makes better than Ford why are they going into bankruptcy

Cuz they were stupid enough to trust the government. Ford was smart enough not to.

[Ronkh]

The quality of both manufacturers are very good. It`s not quality that drove them down. It`s legacy costs, unions (opening a can of worms) and government intervention, and mandates.

The US auto industry has just gone in the same direction as the steel industry. Forced out by high costs and forgien competition without the overhead and taxation. As well as some bad decisions.

IMHO Obama forcing out the ceo of GM a few months ago was the biggest case of industrial sabotage ever perpetrated.

[black bart]

Ford is making a big turnaround they are ready to bring to market some good fuel efficient cars.


European Ford Focus coming to US in 2010! Third shift added now

[tmacsad]

Ford is making a big turnaround they are ready to bring to market some good fuel efficient cars.

Have you driven a FORD lately

[Bunky]

The quality of both manufacturers are very good. It`s not quality that drove them down. It`s legacy costs, unions (opening a can of worms) and government intervention, and mandates.

The US auto industry has just gone in the same direction as the steel industry. Forced out by high costs and forgien competition without the overhead and taxation. As well as some bad decisions.

IMHO Obama forcing out the ceo of GM a few months ago was the biggest case of industrial sabotage ever perpetrated.

The primary reasons are the antagonist relationship between management and labor and the associated higher labor costs coupled with many bad decisions. The government is not the root cause.

[Ronkh]

The primary reasons are the antagonist relationship between management and labor and the associated higher labor costs coupled with many bad decisions. The government is not the root cause.

Not the root cause - agreed. But I see amazing culpability in the chapter 11 filing. I`m sure that management thought that the govenrment would help out in their troubles, only to get screwed in the end.

Ford took another tack. They chose to leverage their assets and go it alone. I`m sure that if they had asked for govt help, it would have ended the same way.

I still see the government forcing Ford down the tubes. The last enviornmental move on the governments side in the past would have had the manufactureres up in arms. Instead, they had the ceo`s there smiling and applauding. So all it really takes is a few more mandates from the fed and Ford too will be sitting there with their hand open.

Chrysler will go down in a few short years, GM will probably follow.

What this really did was weaken our stance both economically and defense wise.

[Mr. Clean]

... I have to admit I would have liked to see these two cars come to fruition and I really hated to see the Lightning go away.
...

Yeah, the Lightning and the SVT division will be missed, but I haven`t given up on the hopes of their revival. My hope is it is just another cycle.

Cuz they were stupid enough to trust the government. Ford was smart enough not to.

It wasn`t that Ford trusted or distrusted the government. From all that I have read, itt was just a simple case of timing. Ford managed to secure their financing before the credit crunch prevented GM/Chrysler from taking similar action. I don`t know that it was necessarily foresight on Ford`s part.

The quality of both manufacturers are very good. It`s not quality that drove them down. It`s legacy costs, unions (opening a can of worms) and government intervention, and mandates.

The US auto industry has just gone in the same direction as the steel industry. Forced out by high costs and forgien competition without the overhead and taxation. As well as some bad decisions.

IMHO Obama forcing out the ceo of GM a few months ago was the biggest case of industrial sabotage ever perpetrated.

I agree that (again based on what I`ve read), Ford and GM have improved significantly their levels of quaility. And that legacy costs vs. payroll costs are an albatross around the neck of U.S. auto manufacturers.

The U.S. steel industry provided their own undoing. Greed by management and stock holders kept the industry from reinvestment of profits, improving their infrastructure. In the end you could purchase a better quality product for less money (Belgium steel not cheap Chinese cr@p), including the transportation costs was what cost us (America). ***That opinion is based on second hand/third hand knowledge. ***

The GM ceo thing is not exactly cut and dried for me. On the one hand it is an unusual step in our culture. We, as taxpayers, are now "shareholders" in GM and Chrysler based on our considerable investment. Shareholders can exercise their right to call company leadership to account. And, will GM be better off with new leadership?

The primary reasons are the antagonist relationship between management and labor and the associated higher labor costs coupled with many bad decisions. The government is not the root cause.

That is an ageless battle.

Not the root cause - agreed. But I see amazing culpability in the chapter 11 filing. I`m sure that management thought that the govenrment would help out in their troubles, only to get screwed in the end.

Ford took another tack. They chose to leverage their assets and go it alone. I`m sure that if they had asked for govt help, it would have ended the same way.

I still see the government forcing Ford down the tubes. The last enviornmental move on the governments side in the past would have had the manufactureres up in arms. Instead, they had the ceo`s there smiling and applauding. So all it really takes is a few more mandates from the fed and Ford too will be sitting there with their hand open.

Chrysler will go down in a few short years, GM will probably follow.

What this really did was weaken our stance both economically and defense wise.

I don`t know that it is the "government`s" intention to "force anyone down the tubes". In the case of the auto manufacturing industry, it would not appear to be in our best interests. As far as the EPA`s gas mileage/emmission mandates, those would seem to benefit the country. If the goals are unreasonable then the engineers would surely come forward to explain why they are unattainable.

My hope is that the industry emerges as leaner entities shed of the unnecessary duplication of models across different "badges". Spending their resources building their best quality, best selling vehicles.

[Ronkh]

The U.S. steel industry provided their own undoing. Greed by management and stock holders kept the industry from reinvestment of profits, improving their infrastructure. In the end you could purchase a better quality product for less money (Belgium steel not cheap Chinese cr@p), including the transportation costs was what cost us (America). ***That opinion is based on second hand/third hand knowledge. ***

The GM ceo thing is not exactly cut and dried for me. On the one hand it is an unusual step in our culture. We, as taxpayers, are now "shareholders" in GM and Chrysler based on our considerable investment. Shareholders can exercise their right to call company leadership to account. And, will GM be better off with new leadership?


That is an ageless battle.


I don`t know that it is the "government`s" intention to "force anyone down the tubes". In the case of the auto manufacturing industry, it would not appear to be in our best interests. As far as the EPA`s gas mileage/emmission mandates, those would seem to benefit the country. If the goals are unreasonable then the engineers would surely come forward to explain why they are unattainable.

My hope is that the industry emerges as leaner entities shed of the unnecessary duplication of models across different "badges". Spending their resources building their best quality, best selling vehicles.

Somewhat scattered thoughts on what you said:

First, the steel industry was not just greed on the companies side.

My biggest thought/fear is that the government is dictating to the manufactureres what/how to build. The surest way to increase costs and lower production and standards is allow the government to handle things. Letting the government manage anything is a perfect way of letting things go to H. This will be as successfull as the UN is at nation building.

The day that will go down in infamy is the day that GM got to use "engines and other parts manufactured in other GM plants". Each brand had it`s wow factor.

I dunno about you, but I am not looking forward to the Pelosi, Murtha, or Obama model cars.

[Mr. Clean]

...First, the steel industry was not just greed on the companies side.
Of course not, and I included the stock holders who had an equal share in the blame.
My biggest thought/fear is that the government is dictating to the manufactureres what/how to build. The surest way to increase costs and lower production and standards is allow the government to handle things. Letting the government manage anything is a perfect way of letting things go to H. This will be as successfull as the UN is at nation building.
Where have you seen that the government has a hand in the design or build of any automobile? I agree that our government has it`s own inefficiencies to deal with. UN nation building? I miss the correlation???

The day that will go down in infamy is the day that GM got to use "engines and other parts manufactured in other GM plants". Each brand had it`s wow factor.
That was then. This is now. Duplication across multiple "badges" is inefficient and IMO poor business in today`s climate.

I dunno about you, but I am not looking forward to the Pelosi, Murtha, or Obama model cars.
I don`t think there is even the remotest of possibilities. Maybe a Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld model would be more to your liking?

At this point this and the "Russian" posts reads like a lot of hand wringing to me.