evok

There is one problem that you ignore in GM's decision to axe Oldsmobile. Unlike Saturn, Oldsmobile's image still sucked in the market after $2 billion of investment over 10 years. Saturn does not have to overcome being "Your father's OLDsmobile". The brand became irrelevant just like Buick and Pontiac are becoming today.

Re-read my post in the order it was written. Well I have the 05,06 and certain 07 numbers. Things are a changing and my numbers are still correct.

I just find this interesting. http://www.jdpa.com/pdf/2005268.pdf http://www.jdpa.com/news/releases/pressrel....asp?ID=2005036 http://www.jdpa.com/news/releases/pressrel....asp?ID=2005236

There is no best answer about the union's impact today on % US/Canada content at the transplants. The problem is the undustry has become so global and cost driven, that even if the transplans were to unionize, that will have a limited impact on where the transplants purchase their components that the union workers would assemble into the final product. When the UAW formed, the US auto manufacturers were fully integrated manufacturers. That was for the most part true until, Dephi and Visteon were split off and modular manufacturing became the norm. Today GM, F and C manufacturer only powertrains and final vehicles. As a result everything else that goes into a car can be purchased from anywhere and anywho. As the transplants build more powertrain plants in the US, their content will go up. And GM, F and C will go down. ie In the past a GM truck plant would build up a complete instrument panel off line at a GA plant. Today they purchase a complete module from a supplier that takes 10 seconds to install. With or without a union I do not see the transplants or the US companies change philosophy unless there is another cost structure shift. Over time all will equalize as far as content is concerned.

Husdon: My post was just a cut and paste repost and the link was provided. Meaning this is an old discussion as recently as just about a month ago. My data refutes again, what the same poster brought up once before. The term ""lose merit" was used in that earlier post refuting old data from that earlier discussion. I got lazy and tired of repeating myself around here.

Well the trend show from the data that US/Canada content is dropping and the transplants are increasing on average.

Hudson: Here is the most recent data from a previous post of mine. http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...topic=7460&st=0 For the year end results for the 2005 MY Ford (traditional US) and Toyotas corporate (all brands) sales weighted average are as follow: 2005CY sales including 2006 MY vehicles. Ford drops to 82% (Ford's number is your post conveniently leave out PAG) Toyota Rises to 50% GM is about 80% for reference. Fords number will drop further (below 80) as the sales for the Fusion and the cousin increase and the Taurus is phase out. That number also excludes Ford's foreign brands (Volvo, Land Rover, Jaguar) which would drop Fords number for the 2005 CY close to 73%. You argument looses its merit because this discussion is about transplants and those vehicle produced by transplants in the US have a higher US/Canada content. Toyota's corporate number will increase with their new US operations. So your argument is again pointless because the traditional US brands are reducing their US content while the Asia's are increasing theirs as their operation shift to NA production. Toyota's transplant operation uses app. 70% NA sourced content as a sale weighted average.

sad

fraud

NG STS and SRX are not due until late in the decade. Let us see if GM can be consistent and take the 08 CTS design philosophy (inside and out) and evolve them forward with the NG STS and SRX. As opposed to watering down the theme or going with a completely different them. i.e Does the current STS interior have anything in common "stylistically" with the other vehicles in the brand's portfolio? The XLR was a great attempt at building upon the CTS theme. The DTS well that is another story.

The original GMX-265 (SRX) was smaller and shorter than what came to market. There was a last minute dynamite and rebuild on the program to stretch the vehicle for the 3rd row option, styling was dumbed down,... The program was a disaster during development. Cost over runs, delays etc. The original volume projections for the vehicle was 50k-60k per year. The SRX barely touches half that volume. For Cadillac and GM, the vehicle has been a sales disaster. Particulary when compared to the competition and size of the market. BTW - Do not expect much with the 07 MCE interior update.

Really are you that f'in illiterate that you cannot read what I wrote?

Just delete this thread and repost Tama's article with only appropriate posts.

I would not get your hopes up. As I have said earlier - this is way out there. Hint: Other RWD choices from GM are planned to be out before.

Cadillac is not out of the woods yet and is not even close. There is no question that sigma is a world class architecture and will continue to form the basis for phase 2. Cadillac's mission with phase 2 needs to correct all that is wrong with phase 1 and it is glairing. Phase 1 has not been a complete success as it could have been. Not by a long shot. The only 2 real success stories in the market have been the CTS and the Escalade. The SRX and STS show all that was and may still be wrong with GM. GM lost sight of their vision for Cadillac and hedged there bets on Art and Science. It shows in the sales and lack of consistency with the rest of the line up from the aesthetics point of view. The Cadillac brand team forgot what the original John Smith A&S focus for Cadillac was all about. Even though the current Escalade is leaps and bounds better than the previous generation, the vehicle is still a schizophrenic blending of old school Cadillac and a watered down A&S. I do not advocate a stagnation or lack of evolution in A&S, but GM needs to maintain the philosophy of A&S because that is the definition of Cadillac. That is what separates Cadillac from the rest of the luxury market. That lack of focus doomed the first generation SRX and STS when compared to the CTS. And the public was not fooled by Cadillac's lost vision or hedge. Phase 2 is critical and Lutz/Taylor need to keep Cadillac, with the follow-up to the second generation CTS on focus. I am less concerned with the NG CTS than with the follow up to the SRX and STS. Phase 2 begins in July 2007. We shall see if history will repeat itself.

Show me data and not anecdotal stories. Do not waste my time otherwise as you have been at your attempts to dispute my posts. You obviously are either very young or not very bright. I can go either way.

When Toyota ignores the customer than they will fail like GM. The issues you just mentioned as reported by the press is not relevant. If they start falling JD Power, CR etc, and the issues are not properly rectified in short order Toyota will fail. But at this point all signs indicate that they are the best managed auto company on the globe. The difference between GM and Toyota arrogance is that Toyota is not letting the customer down. At this time there management has not lost sight that their customers come first.

Satty: FYI That is a dead link!

http://amway.com/

If it were signed: General Motors A retired automobile manufacturer I would have LMAO

Years away! All things being equal!

GM Europe seeks nearly 1,000 British job cuts Reuters / May 10, 2006 - 1:00 pm / UPDATED: 5/10/2006 2:48 P.M. RUESSELSHEIM, Germany -- General Motors Europe has proposed cutting nearly 1,000 jobs this year at its Ellesmere Port plant in Britain to improve productivity for the Opel/Vauxhall Astra model, GME President Carl-Peter Forster said on Wednesday. He said the carmaker was negotiating with labor representatives who wanted to spread production cuts over other GM plants in Europe that make the Astra compact, but that the idea was "not super-attractive." "This just delays a real solution," he said on the sidelines of a ceremony opening GM Europe's design center. He declined to give an exact timetable for making a decision, saying only, "We won't debate this for weeks." Plants at Antwerp, Belgium, and Bochum, Germany, also build the Astra, which was GM's best-selling vehicle in Europe last year but typically sees sales decline as the model ages. Forster said GM Europe was intent on boosting productivity at the current Astra plants, which he said had improved but was not at benchmark levels. "We want to take the opportunity now to part with workers whom we will not need in future," he said, noting Britain's more flexible labor market argued for making job cuts there. Klaus Franz, who heads GM Europe's employee council, told reporters that workers at the other plants were prepared to work more flexible hours or make other concessions to help absorb reduced Astra production. "There is no way to get around adjusting volumes but how to do it is a different matter," Franz said. He suggested linking the issue to a package of measures governing manufacture of the next generation of Astra, which is due for launch in 2010. GM Europe is supposed to decide early next year which plants will build the next-generation model, and workers are keen to ensure it does not close any plants or adopt forced layoffs. The three current plants plus Trollhattan, Sweden, and Gliwice, Poland, are in the running. Any British job losses would follow last month's decision by French carmaker PSA/Peugeot-Citroen to close its central England plant next year, eliminating 2,300 jobs, and the collapse of British carmaker MG Rover last year. On other subjects, Forster said GM had not yet decided whether to export Astras from Europe to North America to be marketed under its sister brand Saturn. "What is important is to create the conditions to be able to do this," he said, then judge whether market conditions were ripe to proceed with the idea.

It ain't over yet! GM says Delphi deal could mean more costs Reuters / May 10, 2006 - 11:00 am DETROIT -- General Motors on Wednesday said a deal with former subsidiary Delphi Corp. could lead to additional costs for the automaker. The world's largest automaker is liable for former employees who now work for bankrupt Delphi Corp. GM expects it could be on the hook for $5.5 billion and $12 billion for those liabilities. But in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, GM said there could be more costs as the automaker makes progress in three-way talks with Delphi and the United Auto Workers union. "A consensual agreement to resolve the Delphi matter may cause GM to incur additional costs in exchange for benefits that would accrue to GM over time," GM said in the filing. The automaker also said it will remeasure its U.S. salaried pension plans, adding that the effect of this remeasurement will be reflected in the second quarter of 2006 and subsequent periods.

Since this is a giant do loop, here it is in a nut shell. http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...20entry136992 True retail market share.

"It is crucially important that they see this through," said Michael J. Jackson, chief executive of AutoNation Inc., the U.S.'s largest auto-dealer chain and a major retailer of GM, Ford and Chrysler cars. He added, "If you're producing products nobody wants and you dump them at discounts on rental fleets, you're undermining your chances of success." That sums it up. Also that means GM was under 17% retail market share for 2005 and Toyota was at just under 13% with Ford being just under 15%. And Toyota is ahead of DCX (MB + Chrysler group). That goes to illustrate the true picture of the Big 3.