Would you buy GM products going forward?
06-02-2009, 09:28 AM
#1
Would you buy GM products going forward?
We are on the hook on this one for a while. Honestly I don't think the government can get out of this situation anytime soon. Think Amtrak.
With that said, if we stop buying GM's products, I bet our Government will keep pouring our tax dollars into this failing company to keep UAW happy.
I think I saw a quote from someone in the UAW, saying "Buy a GM product and you will like it".
As if we have a choice.
I just puchased a GM car or a portion of a GM car. I won't be driving it and I don't even own it, if you know what I mean.
With that said, if we stop buying GM's products, I bet our Government will keep pouring our tax dollars into this failing company to keep UAW happy.
I think I saw a quote from someone in the UAW, saying "Buy a GM product and you will like it".
As if we have a choice.
I just puchased a GM car or a portion of a GM car. I won't be driving it and I don't even own it, if you know what I mean.
06-02-2009, 09:36 AM
#2
Moderator
It doesn't matter who owns GM as long as it makes a decent product - the problem is the product isn't that good, and I don't see people being patriotic all the sudden and buying GM/Chrysler product.
One the dust settles, we'll see what GM is selling. Bankruptcy is a golden opportunity to shed the dead weight, restructure the product line, and focus on the good products (Cadillacs, G8s, Malibus, etc). Unfortunately, the government is already mucking up the works. Cars have to be built in the US, the can't have more than 30% outsourced products, there is pressure to make lighter, fuel efficient cars. Basically a bunch of government hopes and dreams that are at odds with the free market, and if GM is stifled in its ability to rebuild properly, we'll end up with a bunch of crap product no one wants, subsidized by the taxpayers..
Chrysler products suck, the reliability is terrible, and Fiat isn't known for reliability either. At least Chrysler will get the small cars it desperately needs, but that won't be enough to get people to buy when there are better cars for the money.
The problem with Amtak is the gov't took it over but never funded it properly so it could become independent again. With a proper investment, there's be an effective high-speed rail system to get up/down the coasts and across the country that would work, instead the gov't is fine to keep it underfunded and bleeding cash. People would love to take a high speed train from Miami to New York if it actually got you there faster than by bus.
One the dust settles, we'll see what GM is selling. Bankruptcy is a golden opportunity to shed the dead weight, restructure the product line, and focus on the good products (Cadillacs, G8s, Malibus, etc). Unfortunately, the government is already mucking up the works. Cars have to be built in the US, the can't have more than 30% outsourced products, there is pressure to make lighter, fuel efficient cars. Basically a bunch of government hopes and dreams that are at odds with the free market, and if GM is stifled in its ability to rebuild properly, we'll end up with a bunch of crap product no one wants, subsidized by the taxpayers..
Chrysler products suck, the reliability is terrible, and Fiat isn't known for reliability either. At least Chrysler will get the small cars it desperately needs, but that won't be enough to get people to buy when there are better cars for the money.
The problem with Amtak is the gov't took it over but never funded it properly so it could become independent again. With a proper investment, there's be an effective high-speed rail system to get up/down the coasts and across the country that would work, instead the gov't is fine to keep it underfunded and bleeding cash. People would love to take a high speed train from Miami to New York if it actually got you there faster than by bus.
06-02-2009, 09:37 AM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 3,434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Saki GT,Jun 2 2009, 12:36 PM
It doesn't matter who owns GM as long as it makes a decent product - the problem is the product isn't that good, and I don't see people being patriotic all the sudden and buying GM/Chrysler product.
One the dust settles, we'll see what GM is selling. Bankruptcy is a golden opportunity to shed the dead weight, restructure the product line, and focus on the good products (Cadillacs, G8s, Malibus, etc). Unfortunately, the government is already mucking up the works. Cars have to be built in the US, the can't have more than 30% outsourced products, there is pressure to make lighter, fuel efficient cars. Basically a bunch of government hopes and dreams that are at odds with the free market, and if GM is stifled in its ability to rebuild properly, we'll end up with a bunch of crap product no one wants, subsidized by the taxpayers..
Chrysler products suck, the reliability is terrible, and Fiat isn't known for reliability either. At least Chrysler will get the small cars it desperately needs, but that won't be enough to get people to buy when there are better cars for the money.
One the dust settles, we'll see what GM is selling. Bankruptcy is a golden opportunity to shed the dead weight, restructure the product line, and focus on the good products (Cadillacs, G8s, Malibus, etc). Unfortunately, the government is already mucking up the works. Cars have to be built in the US, the can't have more than 30% outsourced products, there is pressure to make lighter, fuel efficient cars. Basically a bunch of government hopes and dreams that are at odds with the free market, and if GM is stifled in its ability to rebuild properly, we'll end up with a bunch of crap product no one wants, subsidized by the taxpayers..
Chrysler products suck, the reliability is terrible, and Fiat isn't known for reliability either. At least Chrysler will get the small cars it desperately needs, but that won't be enough to get people to buy when there are better cars for the money.
06-02-2009, 09:41 AM
#5
Originally Posted by Anrosphynx,Jun 2 2009, 12:36 PM
I have been purchasing Social Security for years and will never collect.. whats your point?
06-02-2009, 09:43 AM
#6
Moderator
Originally Posted by The Hoth,Jun 2 2009, 01:28 PM
With that said, if we stop buying GM's products, I bet our Government will keep pouring our tax dollars into this failing company to keep UAW happy.
Trending Topics
06-02-2009, 10:23 AM
#8
Moderator
Originally Posted by The Hoth,Jun 2 2009, 01:54 PM
I hope the auto team Obama put together at least has some experience in manufacturing.
http://www.detnews.com/article/20090321/AU...0357/1022/rss10
You know, like the accountants that so successfully managed GM before but building cars to cost points rather than design merits.
The Obama Auto task forc has no one with auto experience on it. The path seems to go down the route to cutting costs versus restructuring and building GM for the future. Its incredibly shortsighted imo and spells disaster in the coming years unless the auto team changes course.
06-02-2009, 10:28 AM
#9
I would consider a Vette for example but I am not in the market for a car right now. Just bought and SC kit, that should be fine for a while.
But for the most part I GM would make what I like, sure. For the most part they haven't. I am not a truck guy, not a muscle car guy. I think the Malibu is a nice product and if I were looking for a family car I'd give it a look.
Problem for me is I might not buy a car for 10 years. I used to buy new every three, searching for something that was just right. I have a turbo outback wagon thats kind of fun grocery getter and decent milage for pulling my ski boat and it has 18,000 miles on it. My S2000 is old, but will soon be SC and it has only 28,000. If something is going to make me buy another car anytime soon its going to have to WOW me significantly and thats probably going to be done by a Porsche. I am more than happy to put car payment money into fun, travel and retirement.
But for the most part I GM would make what I like, sure. For the most part they haven't. I am not a truck guy, not a muscle car guy. I think the Malibu is a nice product and if I were looking for a family car I'd give it a look.
Problem for me is I might not buy a car for 10 years. I used to buy new every three, searching for something that was just right. I have a turbo outback wagon thats kind of fun grocery getter and decent milage for pulling my ski boat and it has 18,000 miles on it. My S2000 is old, but will soon be SC and it has only 28,000. If something is going to make me buy another car anytime soon its going to have to WOW me significantly and thats probably going to be done by a Porsche. I am more than happy to put car payment money into fun, travel and retirement.
06-02-2009, 10:36 AM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Palo Alto
Posts: 5,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm with Saki GT as well. I haven't heard about any of the production rules that Saki mentioned but none of it would surprise me. It would also be exactly the sort of thing I would be afraid of. Perhaps GM didn't want to sell Opel but Washington "suggested" it.
When Chrysler was in dire straights years back the feds stepped in and helped. One of the results of that help was Chrysler was forced to sell their overseas assets. That hurt Chrysler years later when they weren't able to draw on an over seas small car group when gas prices went up. It was politically better to force Chrysler to be a US only company even though in the end that was one of the reasons why they felt the need to join with Mercedes years later.
Those sort of work rules are going to hurt GM in the end. What will end up happening is the next round of honestly smart people running GM (and I don't place any sarcasm in that statement) will be unable to compete. The politicians and public will blame GM for their incompetence. No one will place any blame on the rules which were set external to GM and which caused the problems.
When Chrysler was in dire straights years back the feds stepped in and helped. One of the results of that help was Chrysler was forced to sell their overseas assets. That hurt Chrysler years later when they weren't able to draw on an over seas small car group when gas prices went up. It was politically better to force Chrysler to be a US only company even though in the end that was one of the reasons why they felt the need to join with Mercedes years later.
Those sort of work rules are going to hurt GM in the end. What will end up happening is the next round of honestly smart people running GM (and I don't place any sarcasm in that statement) will be unable to compete. The politicians and public will blame GM for their incompetence. No one will place any blame on the rules which were set external to GM and which caused the problems.