balthazar

NA miata sales have plummeted 85% from their peak in 1990, declining every year since '90 except for '99.

The farther back in time you go model year-wise, the rarer you can get. There were only approximately 55K of my '40 Ford COE built in the 7 model years of it's generation ('38-42, '46-47). That's only 7K per year, but there has to be less than 1% left. I've only seen 1 other in person in the 10 years or so I've been a fan.

Not exactly the same from what I've seen, but if that one isn't called 'neon', it must be an obvious reference to it. 'honda' is pretty straightforward- you could get away with something close... or 'spell' it out using other letters there.

OK; you didn't mention selling the Camaro up top, so I counted the 4 you listed. Still sounds crazy to me, even if you could buy it for cash. I've bought numerous cars and at one time owned 9 at once, but none of the 3rd, 4th, etc were ever even $4-digit cars- so I never carried payments on them. And I had my house at that point. Use your head and don't get in over it!!! Debt is a real killer...

Respective profit margins are immaterial in this instance.

>>"My only question is this. If we were to buy this second Q45 would my eventual 1959 Buick ownership still balance out three Japanese cars."<< As powerful and iconic as a B-59 is; No. BTW, I am both upset AND disappointed with you for buying a THIRD japanese car. Seriously, Buying a 4th car for a 2-driver household seems totally nuts financially. It's no investment, that's for sure. $15K (don't forget the interest) will pick you up a real solid B-59 hardtop; you are wasting your money with a 3rd nissan. Unless you came into disposable income and didn't tell us. Halloween is only 7 months away, and weren't you saving up for a house?

There were 2 of those delsols for sale in my neighborhood for almost a year; don't seem to be very popular- I never see them on the road. Then again- I doubt I would notice one.

Oh, this could be a Godsend... BV- see Variance's definition of 'troll' vs 'annoying member' for clarification before you start waving your big foam "BAN!" finger.

IMO- that letter's author has grossly distorted the 'facts' in an attempt to support his emotions. I could take them point by point but they should be obvious to all.

The problem with this sort of report is that it tends to implant 'tested OK' in the mind's of disinterested consumers, who continue to use the product irrespective of it's many other side effects.

>>"Do not condescend to me again. Is that clear?"<< After you. >>"Please identify your top 3."<< I thought this topic was moot....

An owner reporting that their honda burned to the ground is certainly not "hearsay". Even a handful of fires is more than enough for consumers to shop elsewhere- it's not like honda builds any unique trucks/SUVs unavailable anywhere else; lots of competition with no repeated, running vehicular fire problems.

croc: >>"Is delayering "doing nothing" in your book? So far the GMT900s are exceeding expectations. Is that not proof that something is different?..."<< You are misdirecting again. I did not address product and neither does Buickman's plan. Product is not the issue being addressed. Focus. The O.C.: >>"Balthazar, In the past, I've presented on here (numerous times) a COMPREHENSIVE review of Buickman's "20 Points for a Return to Greatness" and would be more than willing to share those comments of mine again, should you wish to see them."<< I'VE.......... SEEN........ YOUR........ REVIEW....., thanks. Read thru each & every counterpoint. And there were very good counterpoints but there were also some shaky, unfounded ones. The aim seemed to be 'devalue each & every step' at little cost (just my interpretation). However, there were a number of steps that had great merit. THEY NEED TO BE IMPLEMENTED, not brushed aside. >>"I have no problem with someone that has ideas, however, Dollinger presents his 20 Points as a way to "save GM." In THAT context, it appears as a child's-like view on the overall General Motors struggle for survival."<< 'Context'?? that's exactly the "huckster spin" I was talking about! Who gives a rat's ass; this is once again personal politics getting in the way of specific ideas. "Save GM" is a baseball cap, not a recovery plan. I wish things were better and we (GM fans) had the luxury of picking & choosing & waiting for image to change. We don't. Bring on the improved image, the improved product, the improved everything. No one is advocating NOT to. But IN THE MEANTIME let GM also address minor practices at the dealership level, esp if the net result is positive. So modify some of the points, toss out a few, but goddamnit; put what works TO WORK NOW. Thanks, O.C., for the civil tone; sorry if mine comes off as less so. I've said my peace for now, esp since the majority here is convinced there's not a shread of value in the Plan. balthazar out.

I'd love to join in on the congratulations, but I think you are misreading the pic: no 17.8-sec car is going to lift a front wheel. If it was 600-HP and it coasted from the 100-foot mark or some sort of radically imbalanced car (Lil' Red Wagon).... maybe. When you jack up the front of the car (it's a nissan; undoubtedly that's not uncommon ) until the wheels are hanging, compare where the wheel center is in relation to the rocker panel. Your car would have unusually short suspension travel if that pic had the wheel hanging on the bump stops....

I have read them and they are no more supportable than the points they oppose, no matter the degree of conviction. Far too often the discussion deteriorates into personal-based subjectives. 'that's not going to work in CA' and the like is, again, obtuse and misdirective, not objective & factual. Would you rather do nothing? Is not now prime time to try anything that has even half a chance at making at least SOME positive difference? Or is selling off half of GMAC 'doing something'? There are no 'mute point' discussions; it's the 11th hour.

turbo200: >>"I have read the Plan and it does not address the core issues of what faces GM."<< Umm- it did not target 'core issues'. Focus on what it DID target and tell me why dealer-level issues should NOT be addressed (see your earlier post regarding 'shudder-inducing' dealers). To refuse to address dealer-level practices is to proclaim they are already running at optimum methodology. You already stated emphatically you don't agree with this. >>"I don't see anywhere in the Plan where Buickman addresses sales in the coasts, where GM's share is piddling and really reflective of the public's opinion."<< Interesting- people's opinions somehow carry more relevence merely based on where they live? I would love to see the study results that document this. >>"I don't see anywhere in the Plan where Buickman addresses out of date product, overcapacity issues, incredible medical and overhead costs, union dealings, quality quality quality, investment, or even his forte, sales environments..."<< The Plan addresses sales practices. Why would you think those proposals would affect legacy costs or investment or anything other than sales practices? You seem to think GM can be poured into a teacup, requiring only a teaspoon of sugar to make it sweet. You should know it's not that simple of an issue. This addresses ONE FRONT, not ONE HUNDRED. To fault it for NOT doing what it is NOT doing is incredibly, unfathomably obtuse. I have no problem cutting thru the huckster spin sometimes accompanying the Plan, but I don't get completely wrapped up in a perceived personality of the author, the immediate result being a whitewashing of real, specific ideas. The day we ban individuals with ideas is the day we begin chiseling a tombstone for GM. Get over your hangups and put on your thinking cap.

"...as well"? Did you miss that I was hardly bowled over and that I found it far from magnificent? No LR3: it was the range rover; he paid $90K. This guy knows little self control- also reportedly via the brother; he has 'gone thru' a million dollars in automobiles in the last 12 years.

Well, this is certainly going to f**k up some people's hardline opinions....

The millionaire's brother's rover is brand new. I don't know the guy and he hardly comes around, but like I said, I gave it a good slow walk-around the one day and sitting parked: the vehicle is nothing special whatsoever. It's nice, esp if it was $45K (what is it; double that?), but it's far from 'magnificent' and 'sophisticated'. Unless you guys are referring to in-motion aspects, you are really splitting atoms on this one. It's ironic- this thing is supposed to be some sort of big deal offroad, but the brother won't even drive it up the paved driveway- he's afraid of the dust or maybe getting a stone chip.

No one has yet answered: if a Plan could provide tangible, NET positive results, why would anyone refuse it???? An endorsement of an IDEA is not an endorsement of a PERSON. If the idea can provide results, F*** what you think of the individual that created it; take your personal beefs to the flagpole at 3PM; those of us that care want real results ASAP. All I read in counter-point is 'It's not going to save General Motors' like ANYONE --bar none- has a single plan to save an entire corporation. The idea is to IMPROVE the State of the Union, not return the Union to 58% marketshare. IMPROVE BUSINESS. Here, the overwhelming response is 'we don't want that'. Where is the alternate plan?? Not breezy generalities, but tested, executable specifics that can be implemented immediately? Thorough business analysis (not knee-jerk emotional opinion) should clearly show the likelyhood of success of BM's steps. There's always endless hand-wringing and teeth-knashing to fall back on as Plan B if Plan A doesn't work. "You're bleeding. Here is some medicine that has worked well for me before." "No; I don't like you or a person you dealt with before. I refuse the medicine and prefer to bleed to death."

Even my pre-teen boys know from experience: anything labeled 'Made in China' will break inside of a week.

>>"i hate fake boobs "<< Unless there's duct tape or pop rivets involved, bring on the implants!

GM is not the corner Mom-n-Pop hardware store where one of 3 people always answers the phone and they always know the other 2 person's business. Undoubtedly, getting the 'proper' response depends of contacting the responsible party. How the F do these stories get picked up???

In all likelyhood, based on long-running reports, your garage will have an H1 but the Rover service department garage will have your RR. I fail to see how bottom of the barrel quality could ever be termed either sophisticated or magnificent. Guy I work for sometimes is a multi-millionaire. Buys a brand new Silverado 2500HD Duramax every year- loaded. You should see how he sneers at his brothers RR- not an ounce of envy there. I've walked around the RR- can't say I disagree -esp considering the price tag. Completely overhyped (at the curb, anyway). I would never waste my money on it.