CARBIZ

Hey, where'd you get my baby pic from??? I'm reporting you to my agent! I still charge for that.

:rotflmao: Park benches!!! I love it. I've wondered to myself for years what to call those hideous, glued on, Mr. Potato Head bumpers on that AWFUL era of cars (could the '73/'74 Ford LTD look any worse with those unfortunate bumpers?) I was a ripe old 14 when my friends' parents bought a '74 LTD and I thought to myself then EWWWW! I wish I was born 10 years earlier (well, no, not really) or 10 years later because I haunted the dealers in those days, and the only cars of that era that stick out (no pun intended) were the Eldorados, and the odd Chrysler. Mopar did a better job tha most with their bumpers. More so on the New Yorkers/Imperials, or whatever the hell they called them as the names seem to be interchangeable from those years. Ford really seemed to have the most unfortunate solutions with their bumpers.

You know, I wouldn't be so anti-union if it was just simply about the wages. Everyone wants better wages - who wouldn't? Back when trade unions (and I am talking hundreds of years ago) first formed, they were all about pride in their work and passing their arts down, often to their own sons. When did that all stop? Where did "I won't do that because it is unsafe" give way to "I won't do that because it isn't in my contract?" Personally, I hate the idea of trying to pigeon-hole people. Labor is, after all, about people. In this globalized economy, however, labor is being treated as just another commodity. I don't like it and I don't agree with it, but as long as Free Trade and world trade are the mantra of the moment, we all have to abide by that reality. The UAW has to accept this reality. If they were offering something like better productivity, more efficiency, better skills - anything, I would say they were worth it. They do not. It is all about me, me, me. Entitlement. Squeezing more in compensation from their employers, while all the while offering less in return. Let's face it: it is human nature. There isn't one of us who wouldn't try to get away with coming in late, leaving early, taking more vacations, doing less at work while getting away with exorbitant pay hikes. The UAW (and unions in general) got away with that in the '70s and '80s. Has anyone told the UAW that their employers now have half the market share and 1/4 of the market capitalization that they once did? It is times like this when I wonder why anyone would want to try and run any of the Big 2.5. Seriously. The tale wagged the dog for so many years can it ever change? How many jobs do GM and Ford have to send to Mexico, India, Korea or whever, until the UAW gets it. I feel for them, I really do. However, I don't know anyone (including me!) who is making what they were 5 years ago. None of us like it, but suck it up! Let's work together to get our employers (our countries?) healthy again, then demand our due.

But where was the Euro 5 years ago? The Astra is only looking attractive now because of the recent decline in the $US. I doubt Wallstreet forsaw the rapid depreciation of the dollar, although they should have, so one cannot blame Detroit for not being ready for it. GM-DAT was an example of an opportunity that GM saw and pounced on. The Aveo is not 'class leading,' but neither is it embarassing (unlike the Uplander). Considering what the Metro was and considering how little respect small cars got 5 years ago (Cavalier, anyone?), the Aveo is a marvel. Is it enough? No. But I am happy to have it and we can't keep them in stock, BTW. I'll tell you what: (Enzl, are you listening?) if the Aveo replacement (which we are hearing is in the works for '10) is not 'class leading,' then you will have been proven right. In the meantime, since we all know where the market was 5 years ago (Tahoe, Trailblazer), I am prepared to give Lutz & Co. the next generation to cover the lost ground. If they do what they did to the Tracker, which was class leading in '99 but was allowed to rot on the vine, then I may have to put my purse down and get ugly. I will be man enough to admit I am wrong but woman enough to argue about it.

Hmmph, never saw that one in my travels. Well, I have another $40 made in China POS. Let's see how long this one lasts.

I'm glad I can just sit this one out and watch the fireworks.

I considered that, but the Kitchenaide food processors sold around here are $250 and do everything but the dishes. I only wanted a lowly blender, not a kitchen robot!

Partly because we are selfish; partly because we are convinced by 'experts' that offshoring our jobs, decimating our manufacturing base and selling out our technology is good for us. The chickens will come home to roost. We are being played like a harp. None of the companies setting up over there are allowed to be completely autonomous. Amost all of them involve some form of exchange of technologies. It is a pretty good gig: we teach them how to build things, then they export them back to us at half price. The Japanese already did it. What's the saying: fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me? I understand the theory: world trade is supposed to bring benefits to all and raise them to our standard of living which will in turn raise their labor costs and we will all live in peace and harmony. Except that I don't see that happening. Has it worked for Mexico? Our companies set up there 15, 20 years ago, yet they are still pouring across your borders because their labor pool is growing faster than the economy can absorb them. Now magnify that on a scale about 10 times larger and that is the challenge that is China. Perhaps the Communists will have better luck with more 'central' planning but I doubt it. Mexico is a mess. We think we can acheive better in China? I'm not saying we had any other choices. One of the bad things about free enterprise is that someone, the Germans, the Dutch, the British, would have jumped on the bandwagon, so we all can go down together. One of the things that has changed in the world over the past 50 years is that our adversaries have learned to play our own individual nationalisms against each other. Look at the mess that is the U.N. It has almost worked for Japan. Their economy became so successful that they are drowning in their own seniors, but China is so much more fantastically large than Japan. Just wait until they decide there is more room across the border into Siberia!

Interesting read. 1973 was the first year I started paying attention to cars. I remember GM put a 5 or 6 page, full color supplement in the Toyota Star (actually, back then it was the Toronto Star) in, I'd guess, September '72, introducing the entire '73 GM car line up. (I stillh have the supplement, I might add - a real walk down memory lane!) For some reason, I spent a lot of time pouring over the pictures and decided to keep it. That began my career as Scourge of the Auto Dealers and I used to write to GM, Ford and Chrysler every year, asking for brochures. Ford and Chrysler were very generous. GM was stingey. I even wrote to Citroen when they were still in Montreal, and they sent me a full glossy spread on the SM which I also still have. Funny that Toyota and Honda never made it to my mailing list. Imagine that. Even at 12 I had taste.

One word: cost. Now that the U.S. dollar is in free-fall, the economics have changed, but I doubt the Corsa could have been sold here as a $10k entry level vehicle. Bringing the Corsa over as a 'premium' compact is a clever idea whose time has come. Five or six years ago (when GM-DAT came into being), all that was being thought of was future cheap. I've driven the Corsa in Brazil, and unless the European version is tons better, it is no better than the Aveo. As I have said all along, the weakest point of the Aveo is the crappy (non GM) transmission. I've driven many Aveos over the past few years. The crash ratings and dynamics of the vehicle are fine. Is it a Mini? No, but then it is less than half the price of a Mini. I can't wait to try the upgraded 1.6 that we should be getting in a couple months - that will help to address the other weakness: lackluster fuel mileage. Let's see what GM does with the next round of Aveos. Now that you guys are paying $4 a gallon, everyone is taking this market more seriously. Five years ago, that was not the case. By moving truck production to Brazil and capitalizing on Korean, GM is going to be in a good position once gas hits $5 and $6 here.

I believe we are starting to see Big Business (and Big Government?) hit the proverbial Law of Diminishing Returns. As more and more MBAs try to justify their jobs (and cover their asses) by impressing everyone around them with pie charts and graphs, less and less work is actually getting done. There was a time (when America was successful, BTW) that engineers, entrepreneurs and other mavericks ran the country. Now, we are being strangled by red tape, BS and pie charts. Why make a decision when you can send it off to a committee? How about we have a meeting tomorrow to discuss our next meeting? Let's text each other because I'd rather not have to deal with you face to face. You're getting two types of executives: 1) the type who tries to control everyone by having them file endless reports about every second of the day they breathe or 2) the type who wants to sit on the end of their dock at the cottage and run their company by remote. Neither type of executive is very productive. Another mistake big business makes is consulting other management. Every time I see any big shots from Oshawa, they are always consulting with the dealer pricipal, General Manager, etc. Who says these guys have a clue what is going on? When was the last time they talked to a customer, other than maybe one who was threatening to sue? When I was managing stores for Rogers, I declared to my Zone Manager that if he wanted to really know what was going on at the store level, he needed to take the assisant managers out for lunch - they did all the actual work, and since they didn't get moved from post to post, they knew what actually worked and didn't work. No Big Business prefers to surround itself with its own kind. I guess that is a natural human tendency. You are never going to learn about reality by mingling only with your own kind.

You know the old punchline: what's the difference between the Cavalier and the Cimarron? $5,000.

Chinese made products I have replaced in the past couple years: Blender my mother gave to me in 1979 original purchase date unknown died in 2002 when idiot roommate put blade assembly in dishwasher 'Betty Crocker' model purchased in 2003, made in China died 2 years later when 'safety' switch fouled up. Untimely demise down 26 floors. Cassette clock radio bought in 1990 on illicit trip to Buffalo still working, I threw it out in 2005 replaced with RCA Cd/clock radio' made in China Xmas '05 died about 6 months ago when Cd would not switch off. Untimely demise down 11 floors. Eureka vacuum parents got as wedding present in 1960 died in 1991 (it made a great push toy when I was a kid) replaced with Kenmore canister vacuum 1991 died in 2002 replaced with Kenmore canister vacuum 2002 died in 2004 replaced with Kenmore canister vacuum 2004 (no I am not a glutton for punishment, Sears gave me a new one for 1/2 price) machine is already eating its own power cord and I've snapped the release handle on one a wand So, I can save $50 on a blender I have no choice but to buy Chinese because they are all made in China. All of them. Believe me, I looked. I may pay cash, but it would seem my fellow Canadians do not. Our trade deficit with China has soared from $3.9b in 1997 to $27b in 2006. Put that in persective, my fellow North Americans: Canada's economy is 1/10 the size of the Excited States! Not a bad deal, eh? We export our jobs and they mortgage our homes.

Hey, they missed the Cimarron in that commerical!

Other than the orange backlit guages, the dash is the same as the Cobalt. Only the center cloth insert is different. The electric steering gets no respect, but I miss it, frankly. Let me know if they do knock $1,500 off the $10,500 - that would be a steal, unless it was in an accident. You'd be lucky to get a base Cobalt/G5 for $10k around here, let alone an LT. Make sure you do the CarFax, etc. Sounds too good to be true. I always managed 30 mpg (Can. gal) on the Cobalts when I drove them, combined city/highway. If you are used to a 6 cylinder, the 2.2 is probably the best engine for delivering acceptable power and decent mileage. You'll be happy with the car and the price certainly sounds right.

Pray, do continue. I was going to rent a movie for the BF and I tonight, but this is more entertaining.

TWENTY YEARS OLD? I have shoes older than that! Congrats, Mustang. I, myself, just passed 3 years about 3 weeks ago. Still addicted, I'm afraid.

Interesting though that it is OUR money that these new Chinese masters are using.

So is that the result of what Japan Inc has brought to the auto world: customers and brands reduced to sales charts and binary codes? Yet perhaps more than any other purchase, an automobile purchase is emotional. If there is one thing that Detroit (particularly GM) forgot in the '90s, it is that. There has to be an emotional connection between the buyer and the product. If one is merely buying a toaster, then who cares what color it is, whether it is attractive or not, or even if it lasts a long time (since it is about $35)? Perhaps it is because GM tried to run the company buy committee that it failed. When times were good, Wallstreet ignored Detroit. Now that times are bad, the tail is wagging the dog. I'm not disagreeing with the author, I'm only pointing out that as companies grow too big and try to pigeon-hole the customer (as well as employees), they do so at their own peril. There is a certain amount of magic to the car business as there is science. The Henry Fords and Walter Chryslers understood that.

Since we are talking about the North American market, I will stand by my remarks. By the time GM invested in Daewoo, the current version of the Aveo was already well under way. GM had some influence, but not an awful lot. For example, OnStar wasn't able to be retrofited, although I am told the software and hardware are ready to go for '09. Honda, Toyota and the others had more lead time to decide what to do with the North American market. For whatever reasons, the Echo was not well-received, although I don't see how the Yaris is all that much better. It strikes me as odd that Toyota would abandon a name - that isn't like them to do so, unlike GM and Ford who like to throw names around like confetti. Toyota and Honda have more experience with the small cars, so I would have been stunned if the Fit and Yaris weren't formidable when they entered this market. It is to GM's detriment that they have taken so long to engage their world-wide experience. I think Detroit is finally getting it that the North American market need not be so far removed from the Rest of the World. Unlike a lot of people, I am not in panic mode over GM's loss of market share here. I view it as inevitable. It is quite remarkable that Ford and GM enjoyed the 40 year reign that they did. As I have said before, there is no shame in a 20% share of the world's largest market. In fact, if NAFTA continues to bind us together, the North American market will continue to be the largest for quite some time. Detroit just has to learn to capitalize on the expertise they already have, and not think so much that it is the center of the universe. But that doesn't negate the fact that 2008 is going to be ugly, or even exclude the possibility that one or more of the Big 2.5 will eventually implode. As they say, we are living in interesting times. Suddenly, it is 1954 all over again.

Of course it is as 'good' as the competition. Is it class leading (whatever that means!)? No it is not. However, considering the Yaris, Fit and Versa all came out AFTER the Aveo, then I should hope those vehicles were at least as good as the Aveo, if not superior. The '09 changes should help to address my pet peeve about the Aveo, and that is the disappointing fuel mileage. I wouldn't expect the Aveo to live up to your expectations, Enzl - that's the trouble. Car critics get out of their BMW and drive an Aveo for a day, then think they are experts. The last 3 months I was at my old job, I had a lot of fun driving all the vehicles they were dumping on us, from Minis to Lexus, and I have to say that my impressions of the imports neither got better or worse. I wouldn't drive an Aveo or a Fit, but they are both pretty decent for what they are. I do know, however, that if I had to drive one of them, I would rather drive the Aveo because it is 'cheaper.' If I wanted to throw money away, it would be on something nicer than either of them. As we know, the goalposts keep moving. GM is fighting for market share on 80 different fronts, which is another issue to be sure. I give credit to Wagoner & Co. for investing in Daewoo and at least getting their feet wet in this small car market. With some of the shake up in the GM over in Asia, I would expect big things for the replacement small cars, but then I would expect Honda and Toyota to come out with something even better after that. How could we expect otherwise? Not sure whether to agree or disagree with the idea of customer's being 'bamboozled.' Very few people 'lay down' any more. Almost all of them are a challenge to be separated from their wallets. As I said earlier, I know salespeople who have gone over to the imports, thinking it will be the Promised Land and road to riches, only to discover that in many ways those customers are even more demanding.

You seem to be insinuating that it is the dealers that are playing the games. It is not. With a margin of 5-9%, how much would you expect a dealer to discount an Aveo or CTS? It is the manufacturers that are holding all the marbles and it is THEY who have to maneuver the subtleties of franchise laws, international laws, trade agreements - and deal with the consequences if they guess wrong. I've seen first hand the blood bath that is happening with 3rd party leasing companies right now. It's a great time to buy a used BMW or Acura, let me tell you. Tons of 4 year old ones flooding the market with buy backs $15-$20k less than what the deals were written up at 4 years ago. If you think the imports don't play games with the prices, then you are sadly mistaken, too. Ever see what they want to put a used Camry on the lot for, after trade in? It's very easy for armchair critics to say multinationals should do this or they should not do that. One thing that is very difficult for us Canadians to accept is that we are viewed, at best, as a branch office to American subsidiaries. If we didn't share the same language and culture as the U.S., I doubt many of them would bother with our tiny market (see: Mexico). It certainly pisses me off, as someone who has to wave the Chevrolet flag every day, to also have to battle misconceptions and misinformation about the $C on top of everything else, but the fact that NONE of the auto manufacturers have a firm grasp on this issue yet is proof that there is no simple solution. There are so many products and services that we Canadians must do without, or have to wait for. That's just the simple fact of living in a very big country with a very small population. How long did we have to wait for the iPhone to arrive here? Should we sue Apple? Look at all the blocks to American television programming, to preserve Canadian 'culture'. As a nation, if we are going to ask companies to do business here, in a climate that is more expensive for them to do business in, then they must be afforded some level of protection for their investments. That is what trade and treaty laws are all about. This is why the U.S. and Canada are each other's largest trading partners (although China is about to usurp us) and have been for centuries. However, we are still a sovereign country with our own laws, taxes and regulations. But, as I said earlier, if you feel entitled to buying your import across the border and 'save' $$$, that is your perogative. But think about that, too, when your wife goes to emergency at 2 in the morning and you have to wait 4 hours for a doctor. The ripple effects of the couple grand you MAY save are pretty profound.

From where I sit, it is the strike and the over abundance of dealerships that are GM's biggest problems. What has happened to the truck market was both inevitable and predictable. GM had absolutely no choice but to defend its market share in the truck arena. Can you imagine the screaming for Wagoner's head if the 900s weren't rushed to market at the expense of RWD cars? If gas prices had stayed at $2.50 a gallon for you guys and pick ups sales at a million, they would have looked like heroes. Toyota made no secrets of its new Texas plant: GM could not afford to let that go unchallenged. GM-DAT is rushing new product to market, I am told. The '09 Aveo is going to fill a gap. Not sure where the Daewoo jokes are coming from. I drive one. Love it. I've had a lot of repeat business on the Aveo. The Epica was a mistake, which GM quickly yanked from the market here. Customers I have talked to love their Aveos. Several have leased second ones. I am currently involved in a gentleman who bought a base 4 door in September who wants to trade it in for a loaded 4 door now. The mess at Saturn also could be predicted. Legally, I am not sure what choices GM has, but from a business model point of view, Saturn has to go. The sales of the Outlook and Aura prove that. '08 is going to be an ugly year. No questions there.

I had a chat with a broker yesterday when he dropped by. This gentleman moves about 35 vehicles a month. He figures about 75% of his sales are Honda and Toyota. His comments, however, were quite illuminating: "I don't make any money selling the imports." A direct quote. He could offer no explanation, other than to say he is 'forced' to move Toyotas (and Hondas in particular) for $400-$450 'gross.' He said he prefers selling GM because at least he can make some money. I've heard these comments before. A 3 year salesguy at a dealer I used to work at went to sell Honda. He hated it. Firstly, he thought the product would sell itself, but he quickly found that the people drawn to those products quibbled over everything. Secondly, as a result, there were no 'grosses' in the product. Thirdly, the amount of bashing of the domestics at that dealer made him sick, so he quit and went back to another GM store. So, Honda's sales are up 30% YTD over 2007 in Canada. It makes me wonder how they are acheiving those sales. The strike is certainly hurting us. There are no Silverados around, but more significantly, because there are no Silverados around, GM is not pushing them. Right now, a Ford or Dodge pickup is about $9k cheaper than a comparable Silverado. It is easy to say the Silverado is a better truck (which it is), but even as a die-hard GM guy, I am finding it hard to justify $9k. I am lamely quoting a customer today on a Silvy. I doubt I will get the deal. The customer has already declared Ford dropped $9k off the price without hesitation. I can't even come close. The Cobalt/G5 are now outselling the Mazda 3 in Canada. Great. Too bad there aren't any around. I suspect this is more the dealers fault around here, but it is great to have a hotselling product (like the Cobalt and Malibu), but not so great if we can't get them. The declining market share of trucks is going to hurt GM, to be sure. Ford, too. Personally, it won't affect the market I sell in. Trailblazers, Tahoes, Silverados don't sell in Toronto. It's the small cars. I am more excited about the revamped Aveo than I am by the Traverse.

When I was 14, my buddy and I 'borrowed' my father's '69 Chrysler 300 and took it for a spin on a freeway just north of Toronto at about 2 in the morning. I buried the needle at 120 mph, so I really have no idea how fast we were going. I nearly $h! myself thinking about that now: no seatbelts, no air bags. At least the beasty had front discs, Michelin radials (my dad was a big tire nut) and a 15' hood to fly over if we had hit anything.