smk4565

Because they run forever and they get late 1980s and 1990s Benzes. Especially diesel S-classes, those are good for 300,000+ miles easily.

Wagoner should go, he has overseen the demise of the company or 8 years. He, the board, and other officers got them into this mess, I doubt they know how to get out of it. The current group if they get a $25 billion loan will just use the same failed strategy they have used the past 4 years and use the money to fund the cash burn, while they close some factories and lay some people off and have red tag sales on cars with platforms from 1990. Problem is, Wagoner wants the $25 billion loan, but never said how they will pay it back. They couldn't make money in a good economy with 17 million volume, they may never make profit again. The product lineup overall isn't good enough, there are a few good products, but many more outdated ones. Ford is the only one of the Detroit 3 doing the right thing, they are accelerating new products, while GM and Chrysler delay them.

I like this idea, Rick has to go.

I am only stating the obvious, that if there is no bailout until February or later, GM will be out of money by then. Businesses without money can't stay open, they won't be making payroll and the employees won't show. Chapter 11 is their best route because at least they can stay open, if they don't do that, and have to go to chapter 7 it's over forever.

Looks like with no bailout they'll have to file chapter 11. They are going to run out of cash before they get help, 10 years of short term thinking has killed them. Too late to sell off Hummer or Saab now and get the money in time, although they should still do it since they'll need the money anyway.

Only 166k units retail worldwide huh? Since they sold over 120,000 in the US alone, and 0% of that is fleet, they only sold 46,000 3-series at retail worldwide? BMW is quite profitable, no one can criticize their business because they make money. GM does not make money, they burn it, and they lose all the money that investors put into the company. Now they are a drag that needs taxpayer money to stay in business. BMW isn't the company that needs government money to stay in business.

GM base wage is $28, with OT and other extras it is $39. PLUS healthcare costs at $33 per employee, that puts them at $72 and hour, which was their 2007 average. I would never buy a Toyota, I see them as appliances. The money is going into making a car that can park itself, a 6-speed on their pickup rather than a 4, hybrid technology, and a lot goes into 5-6 year product life cycles. I'd actually be interested to see how they break down their R&D spending, and how much goes to each brand.

Toyota has a 6-speed too, Lexus has 8. Toyota is going to have a plug-in hybrid like the Volt, plus a smart For2 competitor, plus a new 60+ mpg Prius, a Lexus version, etc. The stuff GM is coming out with now isn't anything everyone else isn't doing as well. IF GM has to pay $2500 more in labor per car, then they better be able to charge $2500 more for a Malibu compared to a CamCord, and they aren't able to do that. I don't think they can be profitable with the UAW, it is a failed business model. I want to see GM back on top again, but I think they are at the point where they need to go into chapter 11, blow it up and start over.

Well the alpha doesn't exist, perhaps GM should have developed that instead of making another Hummer or dumping money on Saab. Poor product planning aside, BMW's $45,000 compact outsold the $15,000 Cobalt last month, 9,000 to 6,700. I'd rather sell 9,000 3-series cars and make $405 million than sell 6700 Cobalts and make $100 million. Since the CTS is sized like a 5-series, why don't they make the base $49,000, $60,000 for a well equipped model and $90,000 for the V-series and make some money off it? I brought up the 335d in the first place, because if GM had a CTS that got Cobalt XFE mileage, then they'd have a class leading product that could bring in new buyers. Most of GM's products are not all that innovative, they just follow what others have done. The fact that the 3-series ousells the entire Saturn brand is a signal that GM as too many mediocre models and not enough stars. They need to trim anything that isn't an all-star, and focus on class leaders that they can sell a ton of. The Malibu's sales target should be 450,000 a year with 5% fleet, CTS should be 125,000 a year, 0% fleet, Cruze, 400,000 a year, 5% fleet. That is how to make profit, not by making 4 or 5 rebadges of an average car.

I know Toyota has some built in advantages thanks to the Japanese government, but the Detroit 3 just have to compete with that. If the Detroit 3 weren't paying $75 an hour to employees, maybe they could. What product will GM kick ass with in 3 years? They cut annual R&D spending to about $5 billion or perhaps less. Toyota spends $8 billion a year, over 3 years that is a $9 billion dollar gap. GM has to get ahead of the curve for a change, and unless they spend about $10 billion a year, they won't.

Toyota has a very long term point of view, as do many Japanese companies. Many Japanese will work for one company their entire life, where as in the U.S. we tend to have 5-7 career changes, and we are more short term focused than they are. Toyota wouldn't mind 3-5 bad years after a Detroit collapse, if they know that in 2020 or 2030 they will be strong. Toyota has kept quiet, if they thought they were in trouble long term, they would have said something by now. I also wonder what GM's plan to pay back this $25 billion loan will be?

335d averages 30 mpg, 10 more than a CTS or 335i, it more than makes up for the higher cost of diesel. That is Cobalt mileage on a car faster than a CTS DI. They'll bring in some new buyers, GM fans are just jealous that there isn't a 30 mpg CTS on sale right now. The 3-series outsold the following last month: Cobalt G6 entire Buick brand entire Saturn brand CTS, DTS, STS, XLR combined If BMW can make one car charge $45k for it, and outsell 5 combined Saturns that sell for half as much, who has the better business plan?

Even with $25 billion to GM, by December 2009 they will be bankrupt again. All it does is delay bankruptcy until a time the economy is hopefully doing better and the impact of them going under won't be as bad. The problem is not whether or not they get a bailout (I am sure they will) but what they actually do with it. Wagoner and clan will screw it up. If they don't change their business model, come 2010-2011 perhaps Toyota will buy them and change it for them.

Canadian? $50-64,000 in US dollars, which I think is a good deal, incredible interior.

Toyota will gain the most, they'll by far be the #1 automaker, and they can source parts from around the world, and drive down supplier costs like Wal-Mart does. Toyota could rise to 35% market share if GM and Ford collapse, and they have the cash to buy any factories or assets of other companies.

The engine has 425 lb-ft of torque, and their manual can't handle that, unless they use the SMG 7-speed, which is an option few people would buy since manuals aren't that popular here. The 335d is supposed to save $700 a year compared to the 335i, plus it gives off far less CO2 emissions. I'd rather have a Jaguar XF over any car on the market right now. I am looking forward to the XF based coupe and convertible and new XJ that are coming also. Moltar is right, that GM bet the farm on SUVs, they stopped work on Zeta and some car projects to rush the Silverado and Tahoe to market. One reason why the Camaro still isn't for sale. Toyota and Honda made profit on every small car they sold, plus profit on their trucks, regardless of which way the market went they were diversified. Putting your money in 30 stocks and mutual funds makes more sense than putting it all in 2 or 3.

Apparently, a lot of people can afford it, the 3-series easily outsold the Cobalt or G6 last month. The 335d costs the same as a CTS, do only rich jerks buy the CTS? Will Cadillac's whole customer base lose everything? Plus the 335d will have a tax credit of $1200-1800 (hasn't been decided yet) and it costs about $700 less per year to fuel than a CTS. I would agree that many people can't afford luxury cars, but then why did GM bank on GMT900 and Lambda full size SUVs that are $30-50,000, or Hummers and Escalades, while ignoring cars. They never made real threats to the Civic, Corolla, Jetta, Mini, Prius, etc. The Malibu is as close as they have come to the Camry/Accord, but it is only selling half the volume, and they really lagged in that segment in 2002-2006. GM management made bad decisions. The UAW refused to make concessions for years, thinking that $73 an hour (including benefits) was a reasonable wage for an auto worker, while Toyota and other manufacturers pay half that. Detroit News once interviewed a Delphi forklift operator that makes $103,000 a year, when the national average for that job is $26,000. Why should my tax dollars go to paying a forklift operator $100k a year. The UAW and GM brought this upon themselves, it is no one else's fault but their own. That being said, I believe they need and will get bailout money, and I am fine with that because the loss of 1-2 million jobs would damage the economy even more. But if they don't change their business model, GM will require government aid EVERY YEAR.

It's a Cadillac, it is supposed to be expensive. Charge $120,000 for it, Lexus gets that for their dumb 20 mpg hybrid. I agree on people not planning ahead. People wanted big SUVs and houses they couldn't afford and now they are paying for it, I don't feel sorry for people that were irresponsible and are paying for it now. Although I wish people were more responsible and didn't rack up credit card debt or default on home loans to weaken the economy.

335d on sale soon for $44,900 (and tax credit eligible). Faster than a DI CTS, costs the same, 10 mpg better.

Agree with all. The Cobalt was thought to be the savior in 2004. I know GM needs a bailout, and I believe that they will get one, and the original $25 billion for the Detroit 3 will be increased to $50 billion. (I wonder the Gov't has to borrow that from China?) My question is, what will GM do with the bailout money to fix their problems, and will they be successful. I have little faith in Rick, Lutz, and Co. to actually pull this off.

Hyundai developing an 8-speed is an example of them trying to innovate, when they offer a 400 hp V8 and 8-speed tranny for CTS or MKS money, Hyundai is going to win over buyers they used to not get. GM needs to constantly innovate so they don't fall behind, and attract new customers. I am not being silly, integrated computer would be easy, the 7-series has in car internet and Chrysler is doing that also. They could incorporate on-board diagnostics with that so you don't need to go to a dealer to pull a check engine code. BMW has a car that gets 36 mpg highway and does 0-60 in 5.7 seconds. If Cadillac had some innovation and entrepreneurial spirit, they could easily do something faster and more powerful than a CTS that got well over 30 mpg. Make an aluminum and carbon fiber car with hybrid and diesel or HCCI engine tech, turbos and 8 gears. It is possible to engineer a 30+ mpg, sub 5-second 0-60 car. Just like 300 miles on a single battery charge is possible, Tesla already has 200 mile range, GM can't beat a little start-up in California?

Sales are down 45% this year compared to 2007, I didn't make that up, it was on CNBC today. CTS coupe was delayed 1 year to a 2011 model, as were the 9-4x and 9-5. Buick LaCrosse was delayed to mid-late 2009. The GLK and Q5 will beat the SRX to market, and that segment is already over crowded. Epsilon II Malibu was delayed also, and they don't have replacements in line for the Impala, STS, DTS, Lucerne. GM always says "the new product is coming" "just wait til next year." Problem is, everyone else has new products coming also, the competition doesn't stand still. The Genesis is getting an 8-speed transmission in 2010 or 2011, is the CTS? GM said the Sky, Aura, Astra would turn around Saturn, they didn't. They said the CTS, G8, Malibu and Lambda trio were going to be class leading and turn things around, and they didn't. Those products are better than what they replaced, but not revolutionary. GM needs revolutionary products to turn it around, and that takes big time R&D dollars which unfortunately they don't have. I want to see GM on top again, I want to see a 400 hp Cadillac that gets over 30 mpg, a Malibu so good they sell 500,000 a year, and an electric car as fast as a CTS that goes 300 miles on a single charge. A car with an integrated computer and glove box keyboard so traveling business people can surf the internet, type reports or compose email from the passenger seat. The iPhone can do it, why can't a car. How about an e-flex SUV with a solar roof that charges itself in the parking lot, or can power the house when parked in the driveway in the summer.

A challenge all American industries face is creating jobs you can't outsource. If a person in China can assemble a car just as well as a person in Detroit and does it for 1/4th the pay, companies will build the car in China. Detroit has to find a way to out innovate Japan and China, build something they can't build and make it better than they can. Make a Volt that goes 300 miles instead of 40, or the same body gap tolerances of a CTS into a Cobalt, or a two-mode hybrid Cruze that gets 70 mpg, or a CTS with an 8-speed transmission and bio-diesel engine. Detroit and any other American person or business has to compete with the whole world, and there is a lot of talent and competition emerging from all over right now.

That could all be gone, under chapter 11, they can tear up every contract they had for labor and suppliers. You say GM is turning it around, but they have lost $73 billion over the past 4 years and this is the worst year, they haven't hit the bottom yet. How are they turning it around, sales are down 45% this year, and they are burning nearly $2 billion a month in cash. Furthermore, they had to cut R&D spending and delay new models, so if the economy does rebound, come 2010/2011 they'll have dated products while other automakers have new ones. They are in crisis mode, not turnaround mode. Can't only blame the economy either, because VW, Toyota, Honda aren't facing bankruptcy. Blame it on the business model that only is adequate under flourishing economic conditions.

Chapter 11 is their way out of the UAW deal that costs them $2000 more per car. To me this is their best path, combined with government aid. If they just take the bailout money, but continue to burn $2 billion a month, in December 2009 they will be out of money again.