IfICouldWouldYou?

Whether we wish to admit it or not, some balance between 'socialism' and pure capitalism are necessary. For example, auto insurance is a form of 'socialism.' Would anyone here argue that we should not pool our resources in the event of an accident or hurricane? I thought not. $h! happens, and that is why healthcare and insurance are necessary. I agree that it is easy to get ugly because your neighbor smokes, is overweight, is promiscuous (don't we wish?) or has 'unhealthy' lifestyles, but unless we want to unleash the Thought Police, there has to be some give and take on this issue. The problem with unions, like Big Government, is that they seem to have become a power unto themselves. Perhaps union members should sit on the Board - and I am not talking about some Fat Cat union boss, either. What about having a couple 10+ year unionized workers sitting on the Board, picked at random? Let them see first hand the difficult choices made and the challenges in today's globalized markets. Too often, the people at the top, whether it is government, business, or union leadership, become too insulated from the realities around them.

What concerns me is that the apparent increasing militancy of the UAW could spell trouble for quality control. What if this marks the ugly return to the labor unrest of the '70s and the infamous plant sabotage the unions pulled? Both sides in this need to understand that an increase in tensions is detrimental to both their mutual well-being!

What happens if you die and go to Hell but actually like Michael Bolton music?

It'll take more than the $4 a gallon to change Americans' opinions. It took WWII to change Europe's. Before WWII, American cars and European cars were quite similar. After the war, they were completely different. Maybe that's what it'll take here to get us out of our Impalas, F-150s and Tahoes. Re-launch the Astra with the 2.0 Ecotec turbo - then watch sales fly.

I'm blown away. I want to believe you are yanking our chains, but I suspect you are not. If yours is any indication of the emotions on the factory floor, I almost (almost!) hope that GM and Ford go bankrupt so it can all be swept away and started anew. On the other hand, I wonder how many of us would feel if we had the opportunity to retire at 50 with full pension and benefits? I have a friend that works security at one of the plants and he started out of highschool and will be in a position to retire by 52 or so and get paid $4,200 a month for the rest of his life to do nothing. I can't disagree that it sounds like a great plan, but with the billions that GM has had to pump into the fund, it annoys the sh%t out of me that GM has to pay this while the real competition (Toyota & Honda) don't. It sounds to me like any actuarial analyst in Japan could have looked at these numbers 30 years ago and yelled BINGO! How could they have lost?

No, but some of us are genuinely concerned about the future of our country, and the auto industry has long been the backbone of industry in this country. Thirty years ago when the Big 3 controlled 85% of the market, the UAW's power at least was evenly distributed and probably did not hurt any one company more than the other, since all 3 were tied to the same rules. As Iaccoca said in his first book, the only time he ever met anyone from GM or Chrysler (when he was at Ford) was during union negotiations. What the UAW does not understand (or at least the common folk don't seem to) is that now the Big 2.5 only have 50% of the market - and that number is still dropping. So now when the UAW extorts its unreasonable 'compensations' from their employers, it is hurting their employers because now HALF the vehicles sold in this country are sourced from non- union shops who do not abide by the same union contracts. But this isn't just limited to the UAW. Anyone who has worked at one company for 30 years, in one place, let alone in a union shop, has no idea what the real world is like. In reality, that is the challenge: these people feel they are 'entitled,' regardless of how it hurts their employer. In fact, I venture to say that in many cases, it is BECAUSE it hurts their employer that these workers are so intransigent. Revenge for some past perceived insults? I am not speaking about any one particular person, just unionized employees in general that I have met over the years. Darwin must be rolling in his grave. If evolution was subject to union rules, we would probably be tadpoles somewhere in a swamp, arguing over which tadpole gets to grow appendages first.

However, will they manage.............? The horror of it all. Now they only make as much money as most South American countries.

A car is a car is a car, period. Whether it is FWD, RWD, AWD, 4 doors, 2 doors - these are all details. The real differences between the Malibu, Camry, Accord, Mazda 6 are all in the subtleties. None of these are bad cars. That is my point. Choosing which one is better for you, the consumer, that is the challenge. That is where marketing comes into play. We can argue that homogenization is a bad thing, but I suspect too much choice is overwhelming the consumer. They are starting to tune the facts out and going with what they believe (need?) to be true. GM has the product. Where they are suffering is in the details of how to get the message out. With all the makes and models that everyone is advertising, it is getting harder to be heard in the cacophony. This could be the real problem. Does GM need 80+ models to target 24% market share? That is the question. How to target an ever diminishing pool of funds into a market that is, if anything, fragmenting more every year.

In retrospect, GM should have spent the money on Oldsmobile and turned it into the import fighting division in the late '80s. You can only imagine the damage that could have been done if the Intrigue and Alero had come out 2 or 3 years earlier. I guess once the money was committed on Saturn, how could they not follow through?

But here's the thing: each new iteration looks like something was held back. Look at the '04 Malibu versus the G6. The Malibu is what the G6 should have been. Then the Aura, which was immediately superseded by the new Malibu. Wanna bet the next G6 is better than the existing Malibu? This only pits Pontiac dealers against Chev dealers, etc. O.C. has hit the nail on the head. The Japanese had the benefits of building their business slowly, over decades with modern business plans, modern factories and a modern labor force. Factor in a steadily growing business cycle and how could they not succeed? The Japanese government laid out the groundwork for them with the electronics business. Now look at GM and Ford. They have had to deal with older factories, an intransigent work force, a splintering market (which clearly they did not understand at first, thanks to their growth years in the '50s and '60s), all the while trying to downsize. No doubt the myopia in Detroit has worsened matters, but the blame cannot be entirely laid at their feet. There is plenty of blame to go around, I am sure. Clearly, it isn't like a CEO wakes up one morning and declares: "OMIGOD, where did all my customers go?" They left by degrees. IBM has gotten out of manufacturing entirely. They've decided there is more money to be made in IT services. Consumer perceptions are all about optics. One example that jumps out at me (being the old fart that I am) is that even with the mags like Road & Track, Motor Trend and others, the 'imports' in fact dominate both the print ads and the articles. Since those vehicles don't interest me, I stopped buying the magazines years ago, but that only played into the imports hands. I remember a time when Motor Trend actually separated their Car of the Year offerings. I remember when there might be one Mazda or one Datsun in an entire issue of Motor Trend, while the rest of the articles were devoted to the latest Detroit iron. Snowball rolling down hill, I am afraid. Is all of that a bad thing? No, in a mature market, I suppose not. But when GM and Ford used to unveil a dozen models each year and occupied the majority of the press, it would have been upstarts like VW, AMC and others that would have fought for respect. Now, with the majority of the 'excitement' coming from the imports, it is Detroit that is fighting for recognition. The point of the book I cited earlier is that with products becoming more alike, marketing becomes more imperative. GM and Ford have clearly lost sight of this. Whether Mullaly's fresher eyes can turn things around for Ford remain to be seen, but perhaps that is a major reason why the Japanese bested Detroit: they could see America from the outside.

Enzl - pick up a copy of "Predictabably Irrational: The Hidden Forces that Shape our Decisions." Fascinating read. Dan Ariely is a behavioral economist at MIT. This is his new book. He has spent years studying the behavior of consumers. In a nutshell: if people believe something, then they will not accept new data to the contrary. An odd twist on the "if the facts do not conform to the theory, then the facts must be altered" axiom. One of the examples he cites is the recent New York Times expose on a Vancouver-based company, Lululemon's assertions that its seaweed fiber clothing had all kinds of therapeutic properties, which turned out to be bogus. After a short WallStreet panic, Lululemon's stock went up 30% over where it was before the expose. Ariely talks about energy drinks, and his study shows that the more expensive they are, the more people expressed increased awareness, energy, etc., even though the products themselves were not better. This is how Toyota has managed to get away with selling a Camry for $9,000 more in a Lexus - people are convinced it is better, even though it is essentially the same car. In an age where the differences, real differences between brands is negligible or non-existant, it is only the marketing and hype that can destinguish them. This is a fact that Toyota has been relentless since the beginning: sing one song and stick to it.

..that car would look great on N. Halstead, or Castro, or Chelsea or Church St., or P-town, or................

I don't think $4-4.25 a gallon is quite enough yet. I'll bet that at $5 a gallon, the micro cars will start heating up here. Think about it - that's double where it was only a couple years ago. How many people can afford to see their fuel bills double? In the life cycle of a vehicle purchase, it will take a 2 or 3 year spread for the momentum to build. By 2010 (Volt anyone?), the trickle should be an avalanche. GM may be very well positioned with a replacement Aveo, Cobalt and first true hybrids coming online by then. .........or oil could drop to $80 a barrel and the GMT-900s and Lambdas will look good again. It's anyone's game at this point.

I think we may be heading for a summer of discontent all across America. With many unions there is a growing disconnect between the lifers who have a ton of seniority and feel they are untouchables, versus the newer recruits who realize how scary the real world is. The unions are getting desperate, but rather than being part of the solution, they are becoming, more than ever, part of the problem. Sort of like a cancer patient defiantly smoking MORE because they don't believe cancer is caused by cigarette smoking.

There, I feel better now.

No, instead GM is giving us a V8 in the Colorado/Canyon because that is what the 'enthusiasts' have been pining for. Not very good timing, IMO.

We in the West enjoy eating our young. Let's root for the underdog and pull #1 down. Once Toyota is #1, they will probably turn on Toyota like a pack of jackals.

Interesting. I can't decide which side of the fence he is on. At first, I thought he was merely slamming General Motors, but then he allows a full frontal slam against Toyota to go unchallenged. Sounds to me like the author himself isn't convinced about all the hype around CAFE and hybrids.

Or could this be simply a matter of customers trying to beat down the price of the import to match the domestics? If I am convinced the Civic or Corolla are better drives but I really can only afford a Cobalt, perhaps I can just beat the dealer into giving me a price I can afford? Could that be the perception out there?

Please hush up! You know nothing about the way corporations are structured and you are a pimply-faced kid! [sarcasm intended.]

OH MY GOD! Are you still here? Every time I log on to Cheers and Gears, I see the same people making personal attacks. Why, oh why would people want to bother posting on a GM fan site if they only live to provoke people? Every time someone makes a personal observation, certain people go on the defensive. Even 'kids and teenagers' are entitled to their opinons. Constantly making personal attacks on people is not going to win any arguments. I also don't have a lot of respect for analysts. On a slow news day, they will dig up whatever stale news that they can to fill their broadsheets. 'Oh, look. Toyota has beat General Motors again!' I am tired of this Chicken Little Syndrome. Too many people put too much trust in what lawyers and accountants say, but we are beginning to discover that a large minority of them are crooks, or at least have their own agendas at heart. We can have a civil discourse without attacking members. Especially when you (and I) are new on this site.

However, you do realize this means that Toyota is actually coralling their hapless suckers, er I mean owners, into buying another Toyota. GM should take out full page ads, offering the same deal to Tacoma owners to buy a real truck.

Ouch, I need a tetanus shot!

Does it have an 8-track?

I see what is happening in China and Europe (with respect to the auto markets at least) as examples of healthy competition, as opposed to what is happening here.