wildcat

"GM takes flack..."

87 posts in this topic

New York Times columnist Tom Friedman is criticizing GM for offering to "cap" gas prices at $1.99 for certain GM vehicles sold in Florida and California. "Is there a company more dangerous to America's future than General Motors? Surely, the sooner this company gets taken over by Toyota, the better this country will be," Friedman wrote, comparing GM to "a crack dealer looking to keep his addicts on a tight leash" by making the offer. Bob Lutz has shot back that Friedman "is so 'over the top' that it borders on psychosis." (:lol: Go get 'em, Bob!) To view the article, which appeared in the 6/1 Detroit News, click here. Edited by wildcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go get 'em, Bob!

Although I do agree to a point that America has to ween itself off this addiction to pointless, excessive SUVs, as usual Toyota is getting a free ride when they, just like GM, are doing everything they can to sell more and more big, gas swilling trucks.

No mention of GM's efforts with hybrid buses, which is saving Americans more fuel than all of Toyota's Priuses combined!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. Now it's getting bad. Some people in the media will do anything to see GM fail just because they don't agree with what they sell. In doing so, they believe that the people who read their crap articles are dumb enough to actually believe what they are reading. Hey, some are but others see that Hybrid cars are a gimmick and not SUVs. People know that when they buy a Tahoe or an Expedition that the fuel mileage will be poor. Yet, with cars like the Prius and the Honda Civic Hybrid, they believe that they will be getting well over 60 mpg and save the environment. WRONG! If they want to save the environment, they'd buy an E85 vehicle, drive an electric car, or wait for Hydrogen fuel cells.

Speaking of which, has anyone noticed that ever since GM started promoting E85 and its investment in Hydrogen fuel cells, journalists in the media are now "questioning" whether or not they are practical options? I have in recent months.

Also, has anyone else seen the trailers for the new movie "who killed the electric car?" It's mostly about GM's EV1 project that was ended due to lack of popularity.

From the trailer, it appears that GM ended it because they wanted to build gas guzzling SUVs and that they were in cahoots with big oil. It also completely ignores the fact that GM was one of the first companies that even attempted a mass-market electric vehicle.

Interesting.

Edited by Cadillacfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Three words: New York Times. It is all you need to know.

CARBIZ, as it has been pointed out many a time, please count how many SUVs and trucks GM has versus Toyota or any other car manufacturer. You have to admit, GM sucked that cow dry during the 1990's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know I hate to say it but Thomas Friedman is Jewish, and like many Jewish Americans he sees foreign relations (including trade) through the prism of Israel.

Money going to Middle Eastern oil producers creates tax revenues in those countries, which can be used to improve their armies. And the Arab armies have threatened Israel with annihilation before.

But we need to seperate that with the notion that this money necessarily goes to terrorists, which I don't think is the case. You think the insurgency in Iraq and Afghanistan is being fueled by oil money? The oil industry in Iraq is run by Americans now and Afghanistan has no oil.

Thomas Friedman probably cares more about Israel than he does about America. He just doesn't want any money going to Arabs, and he's willing to sacrifice GM - in the misguided belief that they are driving the demand for "gas guzzlers".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest YellowJacket894

That article is disgusting. I haven't read anything that horrible in months.

One environmentalist says GM's latest marketing effort shows it made too large a bet on SUVs, rather than hybrids or more fuel-efficient vehicles.

I smell bull$h!. How does "Live Green, Go Yellow" back up this statement? How does the fact GM just intro'd a V-6 with DOD back this up? It doesn't. It shows that GM is trying to be just as fuel efficient as the other guys out there.

David Cole, head of the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, said GM has to offer incentives to be competitive.

I don't think GM is discounting the GMT-900s, are they...? :scratchchin:

"The liberal philosophy is we ought to not be buying GM SUVs and instead buying Toyota Priuses. That's their perfect world but it's not the world in which we live."

And a fantasy it shall remain. Some Americans aren't blind and stupid enough as to follow that dumbass smoke and mirror act.

(And can I say that this is proof this article is poorly written? Who in the hell said this? I found no name credited with the quote.)

"Let's be honest, a $1,000 gas card is not going to convince someone who was going to buy a $15,000 small car to buy a $35,000 Chevy Tahoe," Akre said.

Exactly. But the media chooses to ignore this. A person who wants a Cobalt will not go for a Tahoe, assuming that the customer is not fickle and cannot be easily pursuaded to buy something else on the lot.

The program, which runs through July 5, includes gas-thirsty SUVs such as the Chevy Tahoe and Suburban, GMC Yukon, Hummer H2 and H3, and Cadillac SRX.

Yes, but it also includes vehicles like the Chevy Malibu/Maxx, which is by no means a gas guzzler. This is more proof that the media chooses to cut away a part of what makes the truth the truth.

Edited by YellowJacket894

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know I hate to say it but Thomas Friedman is Jewish, and like many Jewish Americans he sees foreign relations (including trade) through the prism of Israel.

Money going to Middle Eastern oil producers creates tax revenues in those countries, which can be used to improve their armies.  And the Arab armies have threatened Israel with annihilation before.

But we need to seperate that with the notion that this money necessarily goes to terrorists, which I don't think is the case.  You think the insurgency in Iraq and Afghanistan is being fueled by oil money?  The oil industry in Iraq is run by Americans now and Afghanistan has no oil.

Thomas Friedman probably cares more about Israel than he does about America.  He just doesn't want any money going to Arabs, and he's willing to sacrifice GM - in the misguided belief that they are driving the demand for "gas guzzlers".

I know exactly what you're getting at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thomas Friedman probably cares more about Israel than he does about America.  He just doesn't want any money going to Arabs, and he's willing to sacrifice GM - in the misguided belief that they are driving the demand for "gas guzzlers".

Melvin Udall:" Where do they teach you to talk like this? In some Panama City "Sailor wanna hump-hump" bar, or is it getaway day and your last shot at his whiskey? Sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here" from "as good as it gets"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole premise of the article is pure garbage. GM is simply doing what they think they have to in order to sell their vehicles. Period. If Mr. "dumbass" Friedman wants the US to cut down on their consumption of foreign oil, let him pay his lobbyists like every one else. Have them convince congress to increase the gas tax so the price per gallon is 5 or 10 dollars a gallon. Then people will cut back on the gas guzzlers.

Until then he should stop whining. Nobody cares about his opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The basic fact is that at $3 a gallon, gasoline is not a high enough cost to deter that many Americans from buying the SUVs that they want. This has been a huge dissapointment for many in the media who have been enthusiastically predicting the death of the SUV when the next gasoline shock comes. So these frustrated journalists are ripping on GM instead for making these vehicles. And every villain story needs a hero, so they prop up Toyota whose Prius counts for an almost insignificant share of the company's overall sales. :nono:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole premise of the article is pure garbage. GM is simply doing what they think they have to in order to sell their vehicles. Period. If Mr. "dumbass" Friedman wants the US to cut down on their consumption of foreign oil, let him pay his lobbyists like every one else. Have them convince congress to increase the gas tax so the price per gallon is 5 or 10 dollars a gallon. Then people will cut back on the gas guzzlers.

Until then he should stop whining. Nobody cares about his opinion.

Exactly, change demand, and the manufacturers will change supply. It doesn't work the other way around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The basic fact is that at $3 a gallon, gasoline is not a high enough cost to deter that many Americans from buying the SUVs that they want.  This has been a huge dissapointment for many in the media who have been enthusiastically predicting the death of the SUV when the next gasoline shock comes.  So these frustrated journalists are ripping on GM instead for making these vehicles.  And every villain story needs a hero, so they prop up Toyota whose Prius counts for an almost insignificant share of the company's overall sales. :nono:

GM should be the hero, then, and offer compelling reasons (products) for buyers to switch out of Tahoes and into small cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, change demand, and the manufacturers will change supply. It doesn't work the other way around.

Isn't there a demand for fuel-efficient cars now? What does GM have for the concerned motorist... a 26 MPG city Aveo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't there a demand for fuel-efficient cars now? What does GM have for the concerned motorist... a 26 MPG city Aveo?

If the demand was as huge as the media makes it out to be, Toyota would be shipping millions of Prius cars.

There's no doubt there's been a slight shift in consumer preferences. Some of the really huge SUVs aren't selling that well. But the switch hasn't been to sub-compact cars, not by any means. Some of the more moderate sized and cross over SUVs are selling better now. That's all.

Basically these jackasses like Tom Friedman are frustrated that the average American is not buying little sub-compact cars. But they can't rip the consumer for his preferences because that will piss off readers. So they attack GM for "forcing huge SUVs on the consumer", as if all GM makes is the Hummer H2 and there are no other automakers out there. :nono:

Edited by Shantanu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Melvin Udall:" Where do they teach you to talk like this? In some Panama City "Sailor wanna hump-hump" bar, or is it getaway day and your last shot at his whiskey? Sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here" from "as good as it gets"

I see someone else was watching "As Good as It Gets" this weekend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't there a demand for fuel-efficient cars now? What does GM have for the concerned motorist... a 26 MPG city Aveo?

Sell SUVs with an average price over $40,000, or a subcompact for $15,000? If it were your business, what would you rather sell? Nobody can seem to get past the fact that buyers out there with money are still spending $40,000+ on huge Suvs. As long as those buyers are there, GM will keep building vehicles to their tastes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ridiculous comment. You move a notch down on the credibility scale. Aveo's actually get quite a bit better than 26 mpg and if people ONLY wanted econoboxes, Toyota would have been the only car company left long ago.

Isn't there a demand for fuel-efficient cars now? What does GM have for the concerned motorist... a 26 MPG city Aveo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way companies become heroes is by making profits. A hero in your mind by what definition? They should build what people want to buy. Otherwise, they're out of business.

GM should be the hero, then, and offer compelling reasons (products) for buyers to switch out of Tahoes and into small cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The basic fact is that at $3 a gallon, gasoline is not a high enough cost to deter that many Americans from buying the SUVs that they want.  This has been a huge dissapointment for many in the media who have been enthusiastically predicting the death of the SUV when the next gasoline shock comes.  So these frustrated journalists are ripping on GM instead for making these vehicles.  And every villain story needs a hero, so they prop up Toyota whose Prius counts for an almost insignificant share of the company's overall sales. :nono:

sure it is, hence the 1.99 gas cap. Really outside of the GMT-900's all other full-size trucks and SUV's are seeing a sales decline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ridiculous comment. You move a notch down on the credibility scale. Aveo's actually get quite a bit better than 26 mpg and if people ONLY wanted econoboxes, Toyota would have been the only car company left long ago.

How is that a rediculous comment? The number of people who want a fuel efficient car has gone up tenfold since the 1990's, that's common sense. People purchased SUVs just to say they had one...the biggest one, the one with the most horsepower, most cupholders, etc. They did not have a real reason (boat, trailer, moving company, etc.) to buy it. With gas prices at $3.00 a gallon and rising and falling by the week, most see how stupid they were and realize they are fine buying a midsize I4 and using the rental Home Depot trucks once a year.

Toyota only has, what, 5 econoboxes? Out of how many cars? Talk about a rediculous comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go with this tired old thread: big, bad GM for building huge trucks. Well, the fact is that GM and Ford made a lot of money off those big, bad trucks while Japan Inc. totally missed the boat. Now that Nissan and Toyota are ramping up production on new, bigger than the Titanic trucks they are the ones who may have egg on their faces when gasoline hits $5 a gallon.

GM has a new Aveo coming, the Cobalt is a great car for touring around the city and its gas mileage is quite good. The 4 cylinder Malibu is absolutely stellar on gas efficiency - I've driven many of them. Canada is big on minivans and the Venture was the best fuel mileage winner for years.

GM has had no choice but to re-do the Tahoes, etc. in record time - they have a lot better competition than the past. Japan INc. has finally waken up and actually has a couple trucks that are worth looking at for the first time. But the press seems totally oblivious to the new Toyota Texas plant coming online just as gas prices hit the roof. Or that they have been floundering in the truck market for 11 years.

No, let's just bitch about GM's lack of hybrids.

And Toyoguy, of course GM's pick ups are going to level off - people know there is a new one coming out soon, so they are holding off buying one.

Geesh, the body isn't even cold yet and the vultures are picking over the corpse!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think some people are forgetting that when you raise the gas tax and charge people $5 or more, it's going to hurt a lot of small businesses that rely on large trucks/SUVs. Thus, the economy will take a nosedive while small businesses scramble to find alternatives for transportation. The reason why small businesses in Europe haven't suffered with higher fuel costs is because gasolene and other fuels have been taxed for decades and busses, light/industrial rail are the dominant sources of transport.

The U.S. and Canada built up public roads and highways and focused less on city and national railroads. It will take years for the governments to build up the public transportation system to meet the needs of their citizens and environmentalist groups & congress should allow them enough time before demanding higher fuel prices to keep the economy from tanking.

What do you want? The air to be cleaner or a recession?

Edited by Cadillacfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is that a rediculous comment?  The number of people who want a fuel efficient car has gone up tenfold since the 1990's, that's common sense.  People purchased SUVs just to say they had one...the biggest one, the one with the most horsepower, most cupholders, etc.  They did not have a real reason (boat, trailer, moving company, etc.) to buy it.  With gas prices at $3.00 a gallon and rising and falling by the week, most see how stupid they were and realize they are fine buying a midsize I4 and using the rental Home Depot trucks once a year.

Toyota only has, what, 5 econoboxes?  Out of how many cars?  Talk about a rediculous comment.

The original comment was "Isn't there a demand for fuel-efficient cars now? What does GM have for the concerned motorist... a 26 MPG city Aveo? "

This is typical media BS. It slants facts on the side convenient to the argument. The published MPG of the Aveo is higher. There *is* demand for efficient cars now but it's not the ONLY demand. There is ALSO significant demand for large vehicles and GM has chosen to pursue that market... at their own peril. It's a recipe that has worked in the past so why not? Like I said, when customers stop buying large SUV's, GM will build something else. Why blame them for building what people want? Sheesh.

Edited by ellives

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.