No, you're not missing one at all. That one bothers me as well. I never trusted Cerberus. Now that Chrysler's problems has cost my wife her paralegal job, only reason I would still, with some reluctance, support Chrysler getting any money is to keep from screwing up any of the suppliers GM & Ford are relying on. And I say that with several members of my extended family (uncles) and neighbors drawing a Chrysler pension.Mr. Clean said:
Should the government bail-out include domestic automakers?
- Thread starter tibbsonaphone
- Start date
Len_A, again I "get" your personal involvement with the Chrysler situation. Still my concern, as I have expressed here before, is that 1) they are a privately held entity and 2) they have been here before. What makes me, an investor (read taxpayer) believe that they won't be here again. After all I (we) want a return on my (our) investment. They obviously learned nothing in the ensuing decades.
Who can say that these loans will be sufficient to buy enough time to get these companies to turn themselves around? I hear a lot of noise about "credit crunch" being the reason that people aren't buying new vehicles. I don't buy that. People I know personally have had no problem getting auto loans/home mortgages etc. Of course, these people have good credit. Perhaps the lending institutions are looking a bit harder on those with less than good credit. Rightfully so. I believe a lot of people are not buying new vehicles because they are worried about the economy in general and their own personal finances in particular. How is the industry going to benefit by putting people to work (and/or keeping people working) building new vehicles when they can't sell the units already produced?
I don't see how these companies are going to be able to continue to support the employees (direct/indirect) and still return to financial viability. IMO there will be a significant number of people associated with the industry displaced.
Who can say that these loans will be sufficient to buy enough time to get these companies to turn themselves around? I hear a lot of noise about "credit crunch" being the reason that people aren't buying new vehicles. I don't buy that. People I know personally have had no problem getting auto loans/home mortgages etc. Of course, these people have good credit. Perhaps the lending institutions are looking a bit harder on those with less than good credit. Rightfully so. I believe a lot of people are not buying new vehicles because they are worried about the economy in general and their own personal finances in particular. How is the industry going to benefit by putting people to work (and/or keeping people working) building new vehicles when they can't sell the units already produced?
I don't see how these companies are going to be able to continue to support the employees (direct/indirect) and still return to financial viability. IMO there will be a significant number of people associated with the industry displaced.
I think you're right - there's no doubt that a significant portion of the people directly within the industry and in the support/supplier community will get downsized out of a job. We agree on that.Mr. Clean said:
We also agree, in part, on the credit. It looks like only the best credit scores are getting loans, and I don't think that applies only to the Big Three dealerships. From what I'm reading in Automotive News, it's the same thing happening to the import brand sales decline. It looks, and I have no absolute numbers here, but it looks like the people with just under the best credit scores are being locked out of the market. And let's face it, with eh economic news that we've been seeing, a portion of the market will take a wait-and-see attitude on that big a purchase.
Whether these loans will be enough is a damn good question. It depends on vehicle sales. Ford isn't asking for a loan, and last month, best selling vehicle in the United States was the F-150. Ford makes a lot of profit on the F-150 and that has to have a positive effect on cash flow. In Ford's case, the Lincoln MKS was selling real well at it's introduction, then the gas prices spike above $4 a gallon, credit Flex as well, polarizing as it's design is, was just starting to gain some traction and then gas went even higher than the $3 a gallon at it's intro. Those are two vehicles that don't have to sell in huge numbers to have a positive effect on cash flow.
I'm going to go out a bit on a limb here, and say that if the loans for GM & Chrysler come through, and gas prices don't spike above $2 a gallon, you may see the same thing happen at those two companies. Enough profitable light truck sales, Cadillac CTS & STS Sales, and maybe Chevy Traverse to make into 2010, when they labor costs kick down to close to , if not on par, with the transplants.
Big problem is, and this lends a lot of creditability to your concern about viability, is that no one is going to do well financially at a 13 million vehicle sales a year level. Damn, Toyota lost $336 million last quarter in the USA and is trimming their support of NASCAR, Nissan scrapped coming to the Detroit Auto Show (and it's still the premier event in auto shows), and Honda bailed out of Formula 1 to conserve cash. And now we have foreign governments helping their industries.
Speaking of foreign governments, let's not forget that all three Detroit automakers, and Toyota and Honda have big Canadian operations. Looks like Canada might also step up and help:
Federal government, Ontario appoint adviser on auto industry
reportonbusiness.com: globeinvestor.com - Detroit 3 seeking $6-billion from Canada
If Canada steps up as well, they may just pull this turnaround off.
Mr. Clean said:
I know we've been here before with Chrysler, but let's not forget that Daimler owned Chrysler for about eight years (correct me if I'm wrong on that), and prior to the so-called merger of equals that turned out to be a Daimler takeover, Chrysler had a decent product development department. The LH cars were good sellers (and gave GM & Ford a run for their money in the large sedan segment) and Neon was a good seller. Jeep and the minivans were handled pretty well by the product development folks at Chrysler. Under Bob Lutz (who was at Chrysler before he moved to GM) they turned the Dodge Ram pickup from an also-ran to a contender in the light truck market.
What did Daimler do for Chrysler? The Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger, and...
That's it. The rest of the product development decision making (not the engineering) was shifted to Stuttgart, where all they did was second guess everyone here in Detroit. Right after the acquisition of Chrysler, the Mercedes side of Daimler's business ran into quality problems that the German shareholders started blaming on Chrysler. Never mind that the first three years of the "merger" Mercedes profits tanked, and it was the growing Chrysler profits that kept the company afloat. Never mind that Chrysler had nothing to do worth the Mercedes Alabama plant, or that's plants continuing quality problems. The German shareholders ousted CEO Jurgen Schremp (who was nicknamed Neutron Jurgen, for his cost cutting at Mercedes), Dieter Zeche was moved from Chrysler back to Germany to take over as Daimler CEO, and the shareholders hammered Daimler management to dump Chrysler. The Dodge Caliber and the two front-wheel drive based Jeep counterparts, the Patriot and the Compass - those have Daimler's fingerprints all over the product planning process. Great selling replacements for the Neon, they aren't.
They sold 80.1% of Chrysler to Cerberus at a loss, and now there is lawsuit by Cerberus against Daimler alleging some kind kind of cover up while Cerberus was performing their due diligence (something I have a hard time believing). Still, Bob Nardeli made a comment during his Congressional testimony that Daimler "hollowed out" Chrysler's product development department.
I hate to see Chrysler disappear because the German shareholders forced Daimler to bail on them, and they left the company in far worse shape than when they bought it. And considering how profitable Chrysler was initially to Daimler, it has the appearance now that Daimler ran Chrysler into the ground.
And now I hear from family of mine in Europe that the same German shareholder groups are crabbing about the Alabama plant's quality problems, and there have been some snide comments to German media that it isn't the unions in the USA that can't make things right, it's just Americans in general.
Len_A said:
I don't know about "the best", and I didn't inquire about what the credit scores were (I assumed in the 700 range). I still see quite a number of brand new vehicles driving around, so a lot of somebodies feel confident enough to purchase and are obviously getting financing. Personally, I am waiting until after the new year to decide what we are going to do about replacing one of ours. I don't think I'm in the minority as every automaker foreign and domestic are seeing a significant slump in sales.
Len_A said:
From a taxpayer (investor) standpoint that is a major concern. I don't want to throw good money after bad if all we are going to do is to delay the ineviteable. I don't believe that either Ford or GM will simply go away. They have products that (at least some) Americans want. I still believe that we are mostly a country of "Can Do" people. There must be good leaders, and I don't know if those leaders are in place in these organizations.
From what I've read, Ford did do some good things financially to put them in a better cash position. And again from what I've read, GM could have (should have?) exercised some of the same strategy and might not be where they are today.
And good for the F-150! IMO, one of the best vehicles around. The Flex...I'll pass. I fear that when the economy begins to ramp up again (and I believe it will, but not as soon as I would hope), the gas prices will rise accordingly. So we will have people willing and able to purchase new trucks, but may not feel like buying one because of operating costs.
MSOsr
New member
The new CTS-V is a BEAST! I have a 2005, but the new one has the best of everything starting under $60K. 556 HP and 551 lb.ft. of torque.
Some of the car magazines say it has replaced the M5 and MB as the top sedan in the world.
Mike
Some of the car magazines say it has replaced the M5 and MB as the top sedan in the world.
Mike
Len_A, I am admittedly not a Chrysler product fan. Their new Dodge Rams may be alright, but have lingering doubts about their reliability (appearance/mechanical) long term (I normally keep my vehicles for a minimum of 7 years and >100k miles). I like the Dodge Charger, but it does not fit my needs for transportation. Other than that I don't see that Chrysler has anything to offer that can't be found in a GM or Ford product line.
Just let the good folks at Cerberus put the required monies in, I feel certain that they have the ability. They will be the ones to ultimately reap the financial rewards. Risk/Reward. I know that is how my investments seem to go.
Just let the good folks at Cerberus put the required monies in, I feel certain that they have the ability. They will be the ones to ultimately reap the financial rewards. Risk/Reward. I know that is how my investments seem to go.
The 2009 F-150 is even better than the previous generation. Here's a link to Dan Neil's review (LA Times)Mr. Clean said:
Ford F-150 pickup is king of the mountain - Los Angeles Times
Laser welded roof seams and body panels?!?!? I was just in the metal fabrication - that is not a cheap way to build. One huge advantage, in addition to what Dan Neil wrote about, is that you can take pieces of different grades of steel, with different metallurgy, and laser weld them into one solid piece of metal with different metallurgy in different zones. Wild.
The Flex, and the GM three-row crossover counterparts, Enclave and Traverse, fill a gap for people tired of the minivan look and not wanting the gas consumption of the big SUV's. But I'm thinking the same thing - economy improves and gas prices go up again. I hope we're both wrong.
I have family who works for Chrysler, and GM, and my dad retired from Ford. I could have bought a 300. The Ford Five Hundred and Mercury Montego may have been plain by comparison, but I'll take the higher seating position, and the trunk space any day over what passes for a trunk on a lot of cars these days, 300 and big GM sedans included. So far, the all wheel drive and all speed traction control hasn't let me down, and get this - same 3.0 liter 24 valve, aluminum block V-6 as the 1996 Taurus I replaced (I'm like you - 7+ years, 100+K miles), and with all wheel drive - I get real world gas mileage that's at least two MPG and most of the time three MPG than the lighter 1996 Taurus I had. Not bad for a car that parks in the same space as my old Taurus, but has as much room as a Crown Vic.Mr. Clean said:
We'll see what the Senate hammers out. Hopefully something useful.
With all of my past customers in the Detroit area being either the Detroit auto companies or their suppliers, driving a Japanese or European car wouldn't be a good idea for me as a supplier sales rep. Plus with those jobs that provide company cars, Toyota and Hinda won't sell to the fleet companies like Mike Albert Leasing or GE Capital, so there's no chance of getting one as a company car.Inzane said:
That said, at one time, my sister had an Accord, an Acura Legend, and a Subaru Outback. The Accord and the Legend were fairly reliable vehicles, the Subaru Outback was a POS. I detailed all of them repeatedly, and the Subaru she had sucked. That said, they were also some of the most boring cars I've ever driven or rode in. The two Honda's were solid as hell, but boring. For most of my family, immediate and extended, all cars are is an appliance that you drive. Serves a purpose. My wife and I are a bit above that, but never to the point where the whole "car as status symbol" ever influenced us.
My brother-in-law is a GM engineer, at a high enough level that there are vehicle ownership requirements for employee and spouse (believe it or not - my brother was a zone manager with Ford, down in Mr. Clean's neck of the woods - Ford has no such requirements), and now she has a Chevrolet Equinox. I'll take my wife's six year old Escape any day.
Like I said in a previous post, I've test driven a lot of cars. The newer Accords and the newer Acura's, especially the TL and the RL, are sweet. The Toyota Camry and the Lexus ES, I don't like either. The Avalon? Yuck. It's like Toyota tried to copy the ride from an eight year old Buick.
Len_A said:
I share your dislike for Toyota products. The last few years at the annual auto shows I haven't even bothered to cross through the Toyota booth. Now THAT is a boring product line-up.
I am mildly more interested in Lexus, but not much. It's highly unlikely I'd choose an IS over a BMW 3 or an Infiniti G. There's just so little sporty DNA in Toyota products these days, across the board.
Inzane said:
Toyota, Honda, and Nissan didn't give me any reason to buy or lease anything they make, either, Toyota's has an engineering office in Ann Arbor they just expanded, and Nissan has an engineering center in Farmington, MI. Both are less than thirty minutes from my home.
I called on Toyota once a month for over four-and-a-half years. Spoke to an engineer maybe twice in 2005, because I called. Not one returned phone call in fifty-four months. Not one chance to quote any prototype work, for what prototyping they do in North America, not one fixture, in over four-and-a-half years.
Nissan, my former employer did some prototype work for the original Quest (and it's twin, the Mercury Villager) minivan, that was built in Ford's Avon Lake Assembly Plant, back in 1991, 13 years before I was hired. I even went there to meet with purchasing and the prototype engineers, complete with prints that had Nissan's name all over them & letters of commendation from Nissan, to prove that we were a supplier at one time. In over four-and-a-half years, not one inquiry.
Honda? Those guys are located down in Marysville, OH, out in the cornfields. Unless you're going to spend a lot of money on gas, making repeated 157 mile drives down there to make repeated cold calls, they won't give you the time of day either.
No way I'm inclined to patronize someone who wouldn't give me the time of day.
Inzane said:
I spent a half a day in an Avalon, and that afternoon, spent three hours driving a Ford Flex Limited with AWD. Had I been in the market for a new car, I'd have taken the Flex in heart beat. Ride and handling were better than most big, main stream sedans (and Flex is a big crossover), the fuel economy was comparable to my Mercury Montego and better than the Avalon I drove in the morning, and it felt solid, as good as any Honda or Toyota I've ever test driven. SYNC took me all of one minute to master. Paired my Bluetooth phone and copied my call history and phone book in a minute (I was just pulling out of the dealership, when I remembered to go back, ask for the keys, and delete them from the Flex's SYNC memory). I took a USB flash drive with about twenty songs - SYNC worked as advertised, so does the Sirius Travel Link. Nav system, with and without the voice controls, was also flawless.
The Avalon's nav system was just as good as the Ford Flex, and the Bluetooth worked fine, but there was there was nothing special about it.
As reliable as Consumer Reports has been rating Ford, and my own experience, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend Ford.
Len_A said:
Yes. the gouverment here is starting a company to develope better engines .
so far that ive seen the FORD & GM brands has only been bad for our swedish brands (Volvo & Saab) Saab has had their XWD ready for 10 years and GM told them NO all the time and Ethanol engines is their strong side specially with turbos .
volvo has been going with profit until now. and ford has taken all the money and not helpt volvo at all . its more like volvo helpt ford. (the worst thing we could done was sell those brands to the american companies..
sweden is a country thats stands for Green energy and Friendly to the enviorment. like the never engine that GM put in Saab 9-5 griffin around 99-03 what a crap . how do you really think that kind of **** is going to work in a land that thinking about Enviorment and good quality ?
i hope the swedish automakers get a new swedish owner and get rid of GM and Ford.
and i can only quote our Minister of Economic Affairs said on the news today . the american owners of saab and volvo is not getting a cent of this money. they had their fingers in the jam-jar too long now.
but i do hope the US industry will make it. i hope we all will . Economical problems like this is not fun for anyone
Mortil, I understand your frustration. I own a pre-Ford Volvo, '96 850 GLT, 180K+ miles. My first Volvo, and purchased new. One of the best paint jobs of any vehicle I've owned since a '65 Ford Galaxie. The Volvo seats are the most comfortable, supportive, rugged seating ever. Since Ford took up Volvo I hadn't seen 1 vehicle I would trade my 850 for until the C30 arrived on the scene.
Maintaining these vehicles to spec is not exactly cheap, but I must say that after almost 13 years my dealership experience has been mostly outstanding. With the exception of <12 month period I have had the same service writer for my entire ownership period.
I don't know the specifics of the transaction, but I got the feeling that Volvo was the one who went courting, not content with their small market share. If that is accurate, then it proves the axiom "Be careful what you ask for. You might just get it."
From people that I know who owned pre and post GM Saabs they feel the earlier Saabs were the better, more reliable vehicles.
Maintaining these vehicles to spec is not exactly cheap, but I must say that after almost 13 years my dealership experience has been mostly outstanding. With the exception of <12 month period I have had the same service writer for my entire ownership period.
I don't know the specifics of the transaction, but I got the feeling that Volvo was the one who went courting, not content with their small market share. If that is accurate, then it proves the axiom "Be careful what you ask for. You might just get it."
From people that I know who owned pre and post GM Saabs they feel the earlier Saabs were the better, more reliable vehicles.
Mr. Clean said:
nice . the 850 is a nice mashine . i was thinking about buying one but it went on a Saab 9000Aero instead. (mutch cheaper insurance) my choise was between an Volvo 855 T-yellow 250 bhp it was the modell that kicked the *** of volvo 850R
my english is a bit bad but. volvo has relly really good engineers that can make things go out to production because volvo went with profit every year.
but saab the other way has extremely good engineers but the has no money.
ive seen stuff that nog came out "on the floor" thats amazing. like engines so efficient and powerfull but still low consumption that one GM stopped before it came out of the engineering lab. to bad to bad. for my self i dont mind the economical crisis . BUT! i really really didnt like to see grown people running out from offices crying @ volvo becaus they where fired this week (4000 of them)
i hope the whole Autoindustry will make it and thats fast. if the large companies in US for example goes bye bye . then where screwed .
i dont like that .and hey . if you intend to keep the 850 and do regular services . i guarantee it will run 180k miles more
i know people done 500 000 miles with theirs 
I agree that the economy globally is looking somewhat dismal. Layoffs and cutbacks everywhere you turn. No hope for a bailout for most of those workers. The unemployed gets the headlines, but there are many more under-employed people and they rarely get even a mention.
I'm struggling with that thought now. Even more than I, the Wife l-o-v-e-s that car.
BTW, you English looks pretty darned good to me. :xyxthumbs I've read (or tried to) posts from people who claim English as their primary language who don't do that well.
Mortil said:...and hey . if you intend to keep the 850 and do regular services . i guarantee it will run 180k miles more
I'm struggling with that thought now. Even more than I, the Wife l-o-v-e-s that car.
BTW, you English looks pretty darned good to me. :xyxthumbs I've read (or tried to) posts from people who claim English as their primary language who don't do that well.
I get a kick out of the way Car & Driver tend to phrase things.
10 Lies Pinhead Legislators Believe About the Auto Industry - Car News/Latest News
10 Lies Pinhead Legislators Believe About the Auto Industry - Car News/Latest News