Z-06

While I will not go to an extent of calling it being doomed, the traffic has definitely slowed down. The level of intensity and information has gone down. Less posts are seen as time goes by. There used to be time when I was gone for 24 hours the "View New Post" used to have 6-7 pages to see and read. Many a times now it is hardly a page long. The political discussion went a little bit overboard, but hey it was one of the most important election and I am glad that sanctity is now prevailing. I want best of and like my conversations with Fly, I would like to reiterate that I am ready to help in anyways (except for being a moderator - I do not have time for that).

Beats me why others think it is hell. May be some Opel bias many have. I personally do not like busy interiors. But to me compared to the Accord interior this one is better. Like I said there is nothing wrong with it, that does not mean it is giving me joygasm. As for the level of reaction, people have certainly reduced the criticism for the beige colored one, so certainly it does not look like hell. As for the TSX, it was better than all of the GM or Ford cars (in 2005) in terms of practicality, ammenities, driving and fuel economy (often gives 35 mpg on highway) at an affordable price and at 90% of BMW RWD experience. And oh yes it has a gem of a 6-speed south of Porsche which can putter around at 20 mph in city in 6th gear to give hybridesque fuel efficiency. I may be mocked, but that car can dance and I agree why Car and Driver felt it that way too. Would I get it now? no because there are other cars which have surpassed it and the new hideousness turns me off (that is why the GF drives) and most importantly I am more of a GM fan that I used to be. But at that time no car beat the value of the TSX in my books. As for enhancing my life I would not reveal my personal details.

Totally agree on that point. Despite being more of a looker than the Solstice, Sky never top its Poncho sibling in sales. Olds could have propelled the premium alternative, which I think Buick can do without Saturn easily.

I agree. I can see SAAB as a alternative fuel niche brand. I like their ideas of bio fuel, and other concepts they introduce. Saturn and Hummer on the other hand bring nothing to the table. Dealership sucks bad for them. One in Orlando is near boon dogs, and one in Tampa is near a landfill. Talk about the BS saturn people call about their retention being high because of their "dealership experience". The brand got hammered in the retention survey that was released yesterday.

What is an important tit bit is that GMNA had actually made profit in second quarter of 2007 after heavy restructuring. It is the third quarter when they adjusted their 38 billion in deffered tax (around same time when negotiations with UAW went through) and after that the weak economy started hurting the operations. Before the first quarter of 2007 (Net income of 78 million), the GMNA had losses in 100 millions if not more. The point is that people who think GM needs more restructuring is not whole heartedly correct. If 40% of your sales tank of course your bottom line will take a tremendous hit and given the cut throat competition, you will see staggering losses. Not one high volume manufacturer expected this around the globe, and GM is not an exception. Call it chess, call it destiny, it seems like both congress and the automakers want to end the autoworker legacy. A desperate time is the best time to do so. As has been the case with the administration, they have not been entirely honest with what they want to accomplish (read Iraq), same applies to this current bailout scenario.

WSJ - Saving Volvo and Saab One in every five cars sold in Sweden last year was a Volvo and Saab is the exclusive supplier to King Carl XVI Gustaf. So Sweden was never likely to abandon its two famous marques entirely to the mercies of parent companies Ford and General Motors. But while Thursday's promise of a 28 billion Swedish kronor ($3.44 billion) aid package offers Sweden's car-makers a lifeline, it may not be enough to ensure their long term survival. The Swedish car industry needs all the help it can get as the parent companies of Volvo and Saab look for a bailout. One in every five cars sold in Sweden last year was a Volvo. With the U.S. rescue plan for GM and Ford stalling in the Senate and more than 150,000 Swedish car industry jobs on the line amid falling sales and mounting losses, the Swedish car industry needs all the help it can get. Of the total package, SEK20 billion is in credit guarantees for loans to help fund environmentally-friendly research. And SEK3 billion is for a government-run company to conduct research and strengthen competitiveness.That's good for the long-term viability of the companies, especially when added to the billions already spent by Ford and GM on new models and green technologies, such as biofuel. At the same time, the government has provided a further SEK5 billion in rescue loans to help the companies stay afloat long enough to restructure or liquidate. But if Ford and General Motors are forced to sell, this aid package will not be enough to allow Saab and Volvo to survive as standalone businesses and may not be enough to attract bidders. All the European manufacturers have more or less ruled themselves out. The best hope is an Asian buyer, most likely an Indian or Chinese car-maker, although this too looks like a long shot. Volvo's unique selling point used to be its safety, but as standards have risen across the industry, this advantage has eroded. The brand now falls between stools: its record 458,323 cars sold worldwide in 2007 was well below that of a true volume producer such as Volkswagen which sold 3.66 million cars in the same period, but too few to be considered a specialist player. Saab, which sold just 125,000 cars in 2007, could just about qualify as a niche player but lacks Volvo's attractive large US dealer network. Volvo and Saab's best chance may lie in a GM and Ford firesale. As every car dealer knows, the best way to shift stock is to knock a few zeroes off the price.

Carpet munchers.

Someone should ask Dickie Moe, which of the cars churning out of Mercedes's Tuscaloosa plant are fuel efficient? Is it ML, GL, or RL because I surely cannot find one.

I do not think anything is wrong with the Buick interior. TSeX's new interior is nothing to write about. As a previous gen TSX owner I cringe when I look at the new interior. It looks even ho-hum in person and definitely a touch lower quality plastic. The dealer almost put my girlfriend in a new one, till she said it is too messy and she prefers the older one. S40 feels cheap. It is simplistic, but nothing exciting. Audi feels and looks the best, but like olds said by the time you get the real good interior you are looking at $40k. These cars attract people (read mostly single folks) who want sedan do not want main stream and do not care for power too much. That is the reason why previous TSX did so well. The Regal with ubiquitous LNF turbo 4 (one with lower output and one with higher output) along with goodies will do fine here.

Sarah Brightman

Harrelson

That is terrible. I am glad you and your GF are fine. Are you mourning over the Cavi?

Even a special education student will write that piece. What special does it bring to the table?

Dutch oven

Is the port making money from this stock-piling or has it been asked by Senator Shelby to offer incentives for providing the space?

Triumph GT6 MKI in British Green. Dodge Challenger RT in white. Pontiac Catalina in that "Blue" which Balthy described in other thread, cannot make anything of the model year.

More than anyone it is the GM's lawyers who should be fired. From holding out performance models, to finding anything which can be legacy issue to this brilliant idea things just get better from GM. What were these guys thinking? I never asked this to you ZL-1, but what do you think of this entire bailout fiasco? If you feel you would like to not to display your viewpoint PM me. I am curious to hear POV of a non American consultant.

That is certainly a possibility, but the ambivalence of GM on saying Beat (which I think is on Gamma) will not be designed for US, my thought that this Aveo may be on current Gamma. I would love to see the new Aveo on GammaII. Let griffon clear the clouds on this aspect.

I think the way GM is working, all the FWD platforms are coming to Opel, Buick first before Chevy gets one (Epsilon II for example). I have heard from a guy that NG Aveo is due for replacement in South Asia in middle of next year or early 2010. Griffon kinda confirmed that timeline in another topic. Considering those two premises, this Aveo may on be the current Gamma on which the latest Corsa is based on.

+1 on both counts. And make those God Darn oval tracks into curvaceous racetracks with real curves.

Linkity Auto Dealers, Late to the Game, Rally for Big Three Rescue Some Reticence Lingers, as Federal Help Could Speed the Closure of Sales Networks -- but a 'Way of Life' Is Threatened NEW CARROLLTON, Md. -- At a Chrysler dealership here Wednesday, dealers rallying in support of a government bailout for Detroit's Big Three grew emotional over the threat to "our way of life," as one put it. But even as they backed Detroit's plea, they acknowledged being late to the lobbying effort. "We probably should have done this across the country," Tammy Darvish, who owns the DarCars dealership that hosted the gathering, told a crowd that included a local seafood business, charity representatives and public officials. The National Automobile Dealers Association says the nation's 20,000 auto dealers directly employ 1.1 million people, more than the three domestic auto makers combined, and as the nation's largest retail businesses, generated $693 billion in revenues last year. The public face of the auto industry, dealers have a business presence in every congressional district. Only in the past two weeks have dealers put their full heft into a lobbying effort that has faltered, one reason why support for Detroit in Congress has been so tepid -- and remained so during Thursday's hearings. One factor behind their reticence, some dealers say: Federal help could speed their demise. Analysts and the domestic auto makers themselves say their sprawling dealer networks need streamlining. Plans to cut dealerships were spelled out in restructuring plans that all three companies presented to Congress. That puts dealers in an awkward spot. On the other hand, a bankruptcy of one of the Big Three would cause enormous disruption. "I think dealers have been lost in this equation some," said Michael Martin, dealer and owner of Dudley Martin Chevrolet and Saturn of Manassas, Va. "The tremendous effect we have on Main Street is something we need to bring to bear." The Big Three's dealership structure is one reason they've been harder hit by the recession than foreign manufacturers, whose smaller networks have helped their bottom lines as auto sales have fallen. State franchise laws protect dealerships, making it expensive for auto makers to close them. In an interview Wednesday, Ford Motor Co. Chief Executive Alan Mulally said that the number of Big Three dealers was still too high, but "There isn't enough money in the world to buy everybody out." Ford expects to have cut its dealership base by 14% from 2005 to the end of this year, to 3,790 outlets. General Motors Corp. hopes to reduce its dealerships by up to 1,800 -- to 4,000 outlets by 2012. Chief executive Rick Wagoner has pointed out that would leave GM with four times more outlets than Toyota Motor Corp. Regardless of what happens in Congress, said Paul Melville, a principal at restructuring advisers Grant Thornton LLP who specialize in the auto industry, dealers have "to realize that they are part of the solution and they can't stand on the side." When the auto makers first appeared in Washington to press for federal help, some dealers hung back, even as other sector players such as parts suppliers lobbied hard. Some say they wrongly assumed the auto makers would secure the funding with little problem. "I think they probably should have made their case a little more clearly," said Mike Catron, a manager at DarCars in Rockville, Md. Until the auto makers were rejected, "we didn't realize the urgency." Other dealers oppose a rescue. Some have questioned why the auto makers need a bailout. "I'm somewhat conflicted supporting any requests for government assistance. ...If those companies were making a lot of money they wouldn't offer to pay more taxes or reduce the national debt," said Greg Kelly, president of the Kelly Automotive Group, which operates seven dealerships in Pennsylvania's Lehigh Valley, speaking before the auto makers' first appearance before Congress. Mr. Kelly and others say the threat of bankruptcy at GM, Chrysler LLC or both has drawn dealers off the fence. Bolstered by recent industry research, they say Americans won't buy a car from a bankrupt company. Next week, 150 dealers will fly to Washington to visit congressional offices, whether or not Congress decides to vote next week on the loans. "We're not having to persuade dealers" to lobby, said Annette Sykora, a Texas car dealer who heads NADA. "This is our livelihood."

Orifice

No NASCAR for you Bitches! Oops forgot Toyota will continue to supply their engines and camries.

The only reason why Saturn existed after 2004-5 was because of its executive's strong push from keeping the brand from being euthanized. The idea of Saturn at the time of conceptualization was brilliant but had turd products, then they "revitalized" the products but lost the idea in translation. Had GM gotten both right if not at the first time but somewhere in middle from then and 2005, Saturn would have made business sense today. The Sky should have gone to Chevy where it would have made decent dent. Many people still do not know what that vehicle is despite being a better looking vehicle than the solstice.

Force the banks.