CARBIZ

Those of us who have to work in the trenches and deal with reality every day are only too well aware of GM's failings/challenges. We face them every day. We deal with the smug Japanese Apologist whose only reason for stepping on the dealer lot is to unearth more reasons NOT to buy an America product. We deal with the constant stream of negative press that puts GM's failings on the front page and buries Toyota's (and NIssan, Honda, Mazda, etc.) on the back page or business section. Average, every day customers don't give a damn about whether the Impala is a Rental Queen, unless the media tells them to be concerned. Recalls DO matter to the average consumer, but again when Toyota has wheels falling off the Avalon and CR spinning it for them - well, you get the picture when those of us who believe in General Motors get fed up with the crap coming from the media.

Isn't it interesting how Japan Inc. operates? They are all modest and humble in the beginning so that nobody perceives them as a threat, then when they are the juggernaut, the mask comes off and - POW!!!! Well, at least Japan has to admit one thing: TOYOTA COULD NEVER HAVE REACHED #1 WITHOUT AMERICANS. They have to give America some credit. They can't deny that, at least. Without the 2 million or so CULTURAL SUICIDES that occur every year in America, Toyota would just be another also-ran.

My father made Archie Bunker look like a liberal. He made cruel Jewish jokes and his then girlfriend was Jewish! He was also a notorious alcholic, which eventually destroyed him. Being gay separated me from both my parents, although after I turned 18 my mother slowly came around (they had been divorced for years). My father never did. He died 21 years ago and we never really saw eye to eye. In some ways I am like him. I inherited his temper. My parents split up when I was 6, so I can't really say he influenced my life much. I idolized him for the 4 years that I couldn't see him, but then when we moved back to Ontario and cold reality hit (and I grew older) I realized that he was a troubled, troubled man. My mother wondered aloud one day that perhaps he was closeted in some way. She said he had always had a strange attitude toward women (quite misogynist, really). I don't know, he definitely was haunted.

Guys, guys, the world has not come to an end! Drop by Mexico City or Sao Paulo if you want to visit the future! Pennsylvania may not SEEM to have a problem with air pollution, but that is only masked by the fact that the prevailing winds blow it away into EVERYBODY ELSE'S BACK YARD! Standing by a street corner on relatively windless days in Sao Paulo and it would make you gag! Yet more than half the people in that city use transit and they still have a huge problem. Travel to any Latin American country where they have absolutely NO laws about safety, emissions or the condition of the vehicle and you will see what total freedom from government regulation will bring you. Or have you never taken a taxi in a small town anywhere south of the Mexican border? Having mandatory emission tests is the lesser of two evils, trust me. Would you rather air pollution get so bad that there is a general public outrcry to ban vehicular traffic down town, as has happened in some European cities?

At heart, I basically (still) believe (faith?) that technology can and will save the day. I do not for one moment believe we all have to be shoved into tiny tin cans and hurtled through tunnels, clinging to a metal pole with someone's armpits in our faces. How is what most ecofreaks today propose any different than what London, England would have been like 125 years ago? It saddens and depressed me to think that personal transport is somehow (jealously?) seen as evil and wrong. Why should we North Americans be made to feel bad for having invented and nurtured the technology of Freedom of Space? How many of you have actually ridden in a crowded, noisy subway in a major world city recently? If that is the future, I would rather go back to tents and donkeys. Is there a need to use less fuel to motivate these contraptions? Yes. Should they emit less toxins? Certainly. Should we be looking at alternate forms of power? Definitely. Until teleportation becomes the norm, let's look at improving on these personal modes of transport, rather than forcing people into "public transport" just because some eco-groups are ashamed that we are consuming resources that we found anyway.

Dodgefan, I hate to burst your bubble, but I had a '82 Dodge Rampage with the 2.2 and then a '87 Shadow ES with the turbo - both vehicles were total crap. I bought them both new. Both had two head gaskets go: one under warranty and one that I had to pay for. I leased the Shadow and I was damn glad. Let's see what I remember: First head gasket in three months. Engine boiling over in parking lot. Rack and pinion steering in year 2. Two water pumps in 4 years. The entire ignition linkage went inside the steering column - it would take me 20 or 30 cranks of the key to start the car some times. The engine would mysteriously conk out on the highway, yet the lights, radio, etc. still worked, then it would start itself as I was desperately signalling to get off the highway. The last 6 months I had the car were the worst six months of my life. The engine would start rough, even if left sitting for only a few minutes, and would NOT move - the gas pedal would not rev the engine. It ran like it was on 2 cylinders and then, suddenly, it would rev a little on its own and run smooth as silk. I took it to 3 garages - they replaced everything. Finally, the guy at Goodyear service suggested a new computer. F@@k you, I said - the car is leased and I am not spending that kind of money on a car that is going back! So I put up with it for another few months. I swore off Chrysler after that, but I realize that I am guilty of what a lot of current import owners do - they blame Detroit for the '80s. EVERYBODY built crap in the '80s, including Toyota and Honda. (Just try and find any '80s Tercels on the road around here, yet you can find K-cars and 2nd generation Cavaliers still on the road!) The difference is that GM had the potential to piss off 5 million customers a year, Ford 3.5 million and Chrysler 2 million, while Toyota could only piss off 900k people a year! Customers have long memories and will still bitch about their '87 Pontiac 6000 while spending $140 on a service trip on their new Honda.

Hmmmmmm......$15,000 car/$1,500 legacy/healthcare costs $30,000 car/$1,500 legacy/healhcare costs Which one will turn a profit? So, build the $15,000 car in Korea, where they make a lot less than their UAW counterparts (if for no other reason than the American $$ is stronger than Korean currency) OR build in Canada where the healthcare costs (to GM anyway) are a lot lower. The mathematics are pretty clear. Just ask Toyota.

There are two inherent problems with nuclear: horrific start up costs (ironically, a lot of those costs go to appeasing the enviro-freaks) and long term disposal of the spent fuel cores. Other than that, frankly, the power is clean, safe and reliable as hell. The Candu reactors actually automatically cool down in the event of an internal power loss or pump failure, which is the exact opposite of how most other systems are designed. Newer designs are proving to be very safe. One argument stopper I use when people argue against nuclear power is the fact that most of the guys/gals that work at the Pickering nuclear plant (just east of Toronto) LIVE in Pickering! My sister and her kids live 2 miles from the plant. Her (ex)husband works inside the reactor area. Ontario gets nearly half its electricity from nuclear, more than any other jurisdiction in the world. For better or for worse.

Unlike Ford and GM, Chrysler's North American market share has been pretty stable for the past 45 years - steady around 12-14%. They are always experiencing wild inventory surpluses, it seems. Sounds more like an internal problem. After all, GM and Ford are grappling with a sudden drop in market share, Chrysler isn't. Well, not yet anyway!

I am glad that I am not the only one concerned about the greater national security issue. The "arsenal of democracy" can only be an arsenal if the manufacturing base is domestically controlled. Otherwise, the next President may have to go to the Japanese Prime Minister to beg permission to commandeer Japanese-owned factories in North America to build tanks and weapons. Won't that be sobering? As to the merger rumours, I don't see it yet. The Japanese companies have been cooperating with each other for decades. Long ago they decided the real battle zone wasn't with their domestic market (puny) but, rather, was in North America where the real money was to be made. Anti-Trust is a non-starter. If GM/Ford don't reverse their current free-fall market share drop, then a merger may look promising, but as I said, I don't see it - YET.

For the record, if you want a taste of where America COULD be with $3+ a gallon of gas, you need to look no farther than your cousins to the north. After Katrina, we were paying $1.30 a litre; now, it is down to $.84, even .79 on a good day - a drop of about 35%. That translates into about $3.05 a U.S. gallon, currently. Our dealership has never relied on trucks for sales. We sell a lot of Malibus, Impalas, Aveos and Cobalts. Our biggest selling truck (hold the laughter, please) is the Uplander, followed by the Equinox. We cannot GIVE away the Tahoe. It is very challenging for GM to guess which way gas prices are going. In the meantime, trying to straddle the entire breadth of the market is a nightmare! With the Aveo at one end and the Suburban at the other, what a juggling act. At least Wagoner and the gang had the fortitude to buy into Daewood and position itself with a fleet of small, fuel efficient vehicles. Will we have $4 a gallon gas a year from now? Or will it stay where it is? The Flint's of the world almost sound like the WANT GM and Ford to go down. Makes you wonder how much Toyota stock they own.

...In other news, Ford lays of 75,000 workers, considers another 35,000 job cuts.

Not a bad write up, really. I can't say I disagree with any of the points. The SS interior is quite an improvement over the base car. Looks quite sharp in the two tone black/dark grey. Naturally, purists will dismiss the FWD, but I think this article does justice to the realities of the 21st century and $3 a gallon gas. As I've said many times before, the price difference shouldn't be made light of. When financing advantages are added to the mix, the Malibu in any dress, is 3-5 thousand less than a comparably equipped Accord or Camry.

Coal plants are not evil. There are a few new coal plants that have opened in Europe - and nobody is more eco-freaky than they. So-called "clean coal" emits far less pollutants than it once did. Very soon, the choices are going to be nuclear or clean coal, because natural gas is becoming prohibitively expensive (and that is a joke, after everyone was told to use natural gas heating because it was cheap and efficient!). There is enough coal in Pennsylvania and the Virginias, etc. to keep North America heated and lit for a very, very long time. The technology is there, we just have to use it. The so-caled renewables are unreliable and still relatively expensive, although getting better. Unfortunately for us, the hottest days in summer tend to be windless, thus knocking out wind power. Sun power may work in Arizona, but not efficiently any where else - not yet, anyway. As to China and India - well, if they rose to even 50% of the per capita consumption that we NOrth Americans use, we would be facing the worst shortages of raw materials EVER, and probably WW IV. Long before that happens, we'd either better find 3 more Saudi Arabias, or find the miracle energy source, like cold fusion. When I think about the energy challenges facing us, I am glad I don't (and won't) have kids.

Look, we can debate about brand confusion in North America all day long, but I am convinced one of the reasons Toyota is so successful is that they don't have brand confusion. A Corolla is a Toyota around the world. Period. GM needs to become the same around the world, if it is to succeed. In South America, GM is Chevrolet. In China, it is Chevrolet and Buick. In Europe and the rest of Asia, it is a hodgepodge. I had a customer from New Zealand last week and he was only dimly aware that Holden is GM. We have a lot of "new Canadians" in this area, and it certainly would be a benefit to have someone from Asia buy a Chevrolet because they recognize it from home. Instead, they buy a Hyundai because they recognize THAT from home.

You know, I can't agree about the manufacturers staying out of the retail business. Due to the nature of anti-competition laws, this whole issue about "dealer may sell for less" pits dealer against dealer, pisses off the consumer and generally erodes consumer confidence in the car purchase process. There is enough competition in this business between the major players, without adding the additional layer of dealers within brands slitting each other's throats. Unfortunately, from my meager understanding of the law, the only way the manufacturer can dictate prices is by owning the retail end of things. It serves no purpose to have commissioned sales people stabbing each other in the back, playing BS games like "destroy the price," etc. just to satisfy archaic retail sales laws. Toyota already tried to set a fixed price on the internet a couple years back (here in Canada) and were sued by a consumer group, who complained they couldn't get a better deal from any of the dealers on the west coast because the dealers wouldn't sell directly to them. 90% of the consumers HATE the negotiating practice, plain and simple. It would be FAR better to have sales consultants actually be real CONSULTANTS and to have the prices set by the manufacturer, who has already researched the market and can better guess what the market price of the vehicle should be anyway I understand the argument that the manufacturer shouldn't be diverting attention from manufacturing vehicles, but how does that automatically disqualify them from being ABLE to direct how they are sold? Hell, they could hire you, right Buickman?

If I sell two cars this year and 4 next, then my sales just went up 100%, no? If GM is up 3% and Toyota up 10%, in absolute numbers, GM is still ahead. Of course, over time the compounding of Toyota's larger percentage gains will catch up, but the blemishes appearing on Toyota's reputation can't be ignored by their legions of supporters in the media much longer. Those of us who SELL both brands can see there is no clear superiority of the Japanese product, other than they have succeeded in convincing influential media types that they are. Now that the blisters are starting to fester, well, eventually even CR will have to admit something is up. With GM's new warranty, it gives us a "money where your mouth is" bragging rights which should further dent Toyota's armour. It is certainly POSSIBLE that Toyota could over take GM in the next two or three years, but is it PROBABLE? I don't believe so, but I guess in two years we can have this conversation again, eh?

Tough call! Guess millions of people make this decision every year when they buy their Hondas/Toyotas. Our sister store (Toyota) offered me a position there a couple years back. I wouldn't take it. Maybe I would make more money over there (although they are far more cut throat than we are here at Chevy), but I just couldn't do it. Maybe I have the luxury and stability of solid career experience that lets me be choosy, I don't know. I do know, however, that there is too much about Japanese trade practices that I don't like and deeply resent. If GM went belly up (not likely) or shut down in Canada (read: Texaco after restructuring), I would probably get out of the business. We are sewing the seeds of our own destruction every day. I wish you luck in whatever you decide.

I took my partner out on Sunday (he is 36 years old) to let him practice driving. He's Brazilian and has a G2 (can only drive with a licensed driver with him) Ontario license which expires in 9 months so he has to get his G license soon. Anyway, first he goes looking for the clutch in my Malibu (he only drove sticks in Sao Paulo), then he tries to brake with his left foot. When I challenged him on that, he protested that that IS how they drive in Brazil. How can it be, I retorted, when THAT is the foot you use for the clutch! No answer to that one. Then he runs right through a stop sign! Oh, do we have to stop for that one? Look, I said, I know STOP is PARE in Portuguese, but the bloody red octagon is pretty much UNIVERSAL. Russia, China, England - it doesn't matter. Red octagon is STOP. Did I mention he is 36? I could only laugh. I know he hasn't driven in about 6 months, but I woulda thought the rules would be second nature after driving for, like 12 years in the 3rd largest city in the world! He wants to buy an Aveo. I think he should drive a Tahoe so at least HE will survive the inevitable wreck.

Well, considering GM used to have 50% market share, and very recently had 35%, it wouldn't be hard to find a current Toyota owner who USED to drive a GM! And until the last generation Rams came out in 1994, Dodge was a historic also-ran in the pick up market. Ford and GM didn't even consider Dodge competition until the '94 model year. Relying solely on looks and a slick marketing campaign (anyone in the RenCen listening?), Dodge ratcheted up their sales and market share in the truck market, just as that market was starting to explode.

It isn't GM's global numbers that are the problem - it is GMNA where Toyota is growing like a weed. GM is #1 in Brazil ( a growing market) and China (a fast growing market). It is holding its own in Europe. Toyota does not do well in any of those markets. And how is shoring up the 900k+ units of pick ups that GM sells not going to help her global numbers? Wouldn't a 300k unit hit with the '08 Malibu help things? What if the Aura did sell 100k + next year? I know it is just a hiccup now, but Toyota has hit a couple speed bumps, just when the General seems to be (finally) getting its act together. I see light in the tunnel. (And, no, it isn't the oncoming train!)

If we ran out of oil tomorrow, it would be an unparalleled disaster. If we slowly run out of oil over the next 40 years, ever increasing prices and necessity will fill the void with some new technology. Remember, coal was once the main source of fuel and it was said that that would one day run out, then oil replaced it. Having said that, it wouldn't kill us to explore alternatives, if only to stop financing the terrorists who use our money against us.

I gotta hand it to the Chrysler marketing boys. The GM guys should hire them! Most people today won't remember why the hemi went away in the first place: expensive to build, horrible on gas and not all that reliable. However, Chrysler has marketing magic here - they've made gas guzzling fashionable. While GM touts the fuel efficiency of their in-line engines (Trailblazer/Colorado) and displacement on demand, Chrysler builds a mini truck (Liberty) that gets the same mileages as an Envoy. That's what I call progress.

I don't think you'd have a problem with a 3 or 4 year old vehicle. With a new vehicle, yes, you would have a problem. I know Chrysler cracked down on this, too. The problem is with "market pricing." Right now, the MSRP of a lot of vehicles are higher in Canada, even when adjused for our lower dollar, than buying the equivalent vehicle in the U.S. On a Malibu or Impala, the difference may not be worth it, but on a $66,000 Tahoe that can be had for $45,000 U.S., it would be worth it to import the vehicle. To stop this "illegal" border hopping, the manufactuters combat that with disallowing the warranty. Of course, if you had a California license and address, the dealer would probably go ahead, but these rules are the manufacturer's, not the dealer. Remember: most often we are on YOUR side. I don't know why GM and others do this. At one time, dealers would get in serious trouble for knowingly selling a vehicle to somone who was going to export it. I personally had $7,000 charged back against a Suburban deal that I did about 6 years ago because we hadn't done "due dilligence" in ensuring this guy wasn't going to turn around and flip it in the U.S. Now, the situation is reversed. Frankly, right now Canadians are getting gouged. It hurts when the vehicles are built here (in Oshawa) and can be had across the border in Buffalo for cheaper.

Nice little dig at the end that Toyota is expected to surpass GM next year in sales volume. Didn't they predict last year that it would be this year? With GM's sales in South America, China and Europe doing okay, I don't think over all sales numbers are dropping that much. I don't necessarily think that Toyota being #1 in the world is a forgone conclusion - not just yet. The Aura, '08 Malibu and the new Silverado/Sierra may help win the war yet.