First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
Bailing out the Big-3 Automakers: Your opinion?
21 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Toronto, Canada
Offline
Posted 11/22/08
I have read interesting articles about Honda and Toyota being worried about the Big 3 affecting their suppliers. I guess the logic was if the big 3 died off or changed in such a way that they would demand less from their suppliers through a reorganization, the suppliers would still lose a lot of business and go into a panic frenzy thus impacting even Honda and Toyota.

I originally was not in favour of a bailout, but after reading articles like that, I just wasn't sure anymore...
683 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34
Offline
Posted 11/22/08

Xzyrus wrote:

I have read interesting articles about Honda and Toyota being worried about the Big 3 affecting their suppliers. I guess the logic was if the big 3 died off or changed in such a way that they would demand less from their suppliers through a reorganization, the suppliers would still lose a lot of business and go into a panic frenzy thus impacting even Honda and Toyota.

I originally was not in favour of a bailout, but after reading articles like that, I just wasn't sure anymore...


How about give the suppliers the bailout money and have the failing 3 go bankrupt. For all the people that lose the jobs, send all the illegal aliens across the border and look more jobs open.
Posted 11/22/08

RossoCorsa wrote:

We've known for years that the big-3 automakers (GM, Chrysler, and Ford) have been in trouble due to diminishing sales and their inability to adapt to changing market trends.

However, the Big-3, after seeing how easily the government gave a bailout to banks with loopholes in abundance, they suddenly say that they need 25 billion dollars in emergency aide loans or else they'll be out of money by the end of the year.

Thankfully, our state senators are not a bunch of cocky dumbasses, so they've been scolding and ripping apart the big 3 top brass since day one of the plea meeting.

Supporters of this bailout have been throwing around a statistic that the auto industry supports one in ten jobs in the US, and that if we don't help these guys out, the whole industry will collapse.

Realistically, the statistic is a 2003 study by the "Center for Auto Research" on the 'economic contributions of motor vehicles to the US economy'. The study concludes that "new vehicle production sales, and other jobs relat3ed to the use of automobiles, are responsible for one out of every 10 jobs in the US economy". the term 'responsible for' is actually insanely broad and includes jobs in steelwork, glass and electronics, as well as company expenses. *cough-privatejets-cough*

Also, the study on auto-related jobs accounts for ALL automakers, from Audi and Ferrari to Toyota and Volvo.

It in no way states that this statistic is ONLY for the big three.

Now with that aside, I'm strongly against the bailout as a lot of people are.

What was it that caused this failure? The big 3's decisions themselves.

First of all, they had the opportunity to invest in hybrid and alternative-energy-consuming vehicles. They laughed at the idea while continuing to build and release newer SUV's and trucks... interestingly enough, even with this huge economic crisis to date, they are still releasing a new Hummer truck as well as a newer fleet of SUV's.

Remember the firestone tire failures? That practically destroyed them for good. Firestone is only partially to blame. The big one was Ford, because they demanded that Firestone build a tire setup to their designers' specifications and not to that of what Firestone deemed both safe and acceptable.

I've also heard people argue that the American public wants cars that have good horsepower and that such a thing is something japanese and euro automakers can't provide.

C'mon, we ALL know that isn't true. You can buy a used Japanese car for a couple grand, invest a couple grand into a turbo or supercharger or hell even a few minor internals kits, and you've got yourself a car that's fast and yet is still cheaper than buying anything the big 3 can put out.

Even when they went up to the senators with their pleas, the big 3 didn't even have a plan or even a spreadsheet of exactly how much they need and for what reasons. That proves they don't NEED the money, but are merely looking for a new freebie.

So once again, my opinion is that they shouldn't get the money and if the big 3 will end up closing down for good, then let them. It's survival of the fittest and they are now reaping what they sowed.

What's your guys' opinion on all this?


My opinion is: YOU ARE RIGHT!!!
The big 3 executives could afford their pleasures for their self but why can't support their company...thats pretty stupid now they need the help of the government?? Is that a joke??? They are just a bunch of craps and thats it!
94748 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
88 / M / In my "Secret Lai...
Offline
Posted 11/23/08 , edited 11/23/08

Xzyrus wrote:

I have read interesting articles about Honda and Toyota being worried about the Big 3 affecting their suppliers. I guess the logic was if the big 3 died off or changed in such a way that they would demand less from their suppliers through a reorganization, the suppliers would still lose a lot of business and go into a panic frenzy thus impacting even Honda and Toyota.

Read something similar too...

Suppliers in the past tended to focus on one customer, but now almost all have overlapping customer bases. That's why Toyota is worried about the Big Three. About 75 percent of Toyota's suppliers here are North American companies who also make parts for the Detroit companies.

"We are concerned with the industry in general, but we're mostly concerned about our suppliers," Toyota spokesman Mike Goss said. "If the worst happens in Detroit and these companies suffer, we're worried about their longevity as well."

http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20081123/BUSINESS/811230323/1003


Ford's CEO, Alan Mulally said a similar thing about the parts suppliers...


Chief Executive Officer Alan Mulally told Senate and House committees he wasn't even sure that Ford, which had $19 billion in cash at the end of September, would need federal assistance.

"I think we can make it through this recession, if it doesn't get worse," Mulally said. "We believe we have sufficient liquidity to make it through this slowdown."

Mulally, who left Boeing Co. to become Ford's CEO in September 2006, said the automaker joined in the request for aid only because it might need the money if the economy worsens and because a collapse of GM or Chrysler could take down parts suppliers, which would ultimately seize up operations for Ford, too

http://www.freep.com/article/20081123/BUSINESS01/811230406


Xzyrus, I too wasn't originally in favor of the Bailout when I first heard about it, but after you look at how many people will get affected in the US and outside the US even if only one or two of the Big three fail... it really makes you think, thats why I'm for the bailout.

I wish they work something out soon.

331 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / colorado
Offline
Posted 11/23/08
As RossoCorsa said, its their own fault.
the only answer they had to the demand for more power was super heavy cars that cost way too much for average people.
where as japanese companies make affordable perfomance cars that usually don't end up weighing as much as a whale.
not to mention that american cars are not exactly well built.
especially the wiring.
i've heard too many stories of american cars catching on fire because of wiring problems.
overall, you build good cars and people will buy them.
you build half-assed cars and generally people won't buy them.
838 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32
Offline
Posted 11/25/08
I am for a bailout but there needs to be a person or system that allows the government to oversee how the money is spent. Even then the government providing funds for operation costs does not gaurantee the big manufacturers will get out of the situation, which people will need to buy the cars in the first place. Sure, surging petroleum prices influenced a decline sales figures but the situation is larger than that; the global economic crisis.

Suppliers is one key component to why I am for the bailout. It is naive to think that allowing these companies to go under because there are some implications if it were to happen. Prices for parts Toyota uses will increase thus inflating the overall price of their automobiles. What was seemingly cheap will become a bit out of range for certain customer groups. The Japanese manufacturers are not immune to this and are not prepared if North America's automotive landscape collapses, which is the reason for the likes of Honda and Toyota are worried and if not anxious.

I am an empathetic towards the workers whether they are engineers to plant workers. They are not responsible for the situation they are in and are at the mercy of how things develop in short and long term solutions whether be it good or bad. The higher-ups who make the decisions should be responsible for their firms' inability to adapt. The people who come to work everyday to build these machines are people like you and I. Some of these plants are in remote locations, in which are the main employer of any given town or county. To want the Big 3 to close off more factories that later affects the people to live in an area that provides little opportunity is bit cold and inhuman. Most of these people cannot just pack up and move in search for another job. How are they going to live? If a bailout is conducted, the higher positions need to take responsibility (losing their jobs) and giving the hard workers at the factories and plants a chance to get back to work.

Although North America is hit hard (understatement) by the economic situation, it is not the only one. Europe has been feeling the heat for some time and Japan announced it is in a recession on November 17th. Corporate powerhouses like Toyota, Honda and Sony have seen profits dive. Motorsports is one of my biggest passions. Such a global situation will have an impact on these sports as they are expensive and might hold little importance in such times. There is speculation a lot of manufacturers might pull out or provide less support. Such is the case with Suzuki racing in America as well as Corvette Racing (GM needs to allocate funds elsewhere to survive). Aare we going to see the NASCAR Nextel Cup go under next year? Will the Grand Am series falter too? F1 can slide under since most of the constructers use sponsorship money to function (with the exception of Toyota and possibly Honda) and with little trust to lending money makes it more plausible.

These are some hard times for automotive enthusiasts.
683 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34
Offline
Posted 11/25/08
Read a recent report that the only way GM can survive is if the govt takes control the the peoples money doing what they want with the company or they are bought out by China.
4154 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 11/28/08

RossoCorsa wrote:

We've known for years that the big-3 automakers (GM, Chrysler, and Ford) have been in trouble due to diminishing sales and their inability to adapt to changing market trends.

However, the Big-3, after seeing how easily the government gave a bailout to banks with loopholes in abundance, they suddenly say that they need 25 billion dollars in emergency aide loans or else they'll be out of money by the end of the year.

Thankfully, our state senators are not a bunch of cocky dumbasses, so they've been scolding and ripping apart the big 3 top brass since day one of the plea meeting.

Supporters of this bailout have been throwing around a statistic that the auto industry supports one in ten jobs in the US, and that if we don't help these guys out, the whole industry will collapse.

Realistically, the statistic is a 2003 study by the "Center for Auto Research" on the 'economic contributions of motor vehicles to the US economy'. The study concludes that "new vehicle production sales, and other jobs relat3ed to the use of automobiles, are responsible for one out of every 10 jobs in the US economy". the term 'responsible for' is actually insanely broad and includes jobs in steelwork, glass and electronics, as well as company expenses. *cough-privatejets-cough*

Also, the study on auto-related jobs accounts for ALL automakers, from Audi and Ferrari to Toyota and Volvo.

It in no way states that this statistic is ONLY for the big three.

Now with that aside, I'm strongly against the bailout as a lot of people are.

What was it that caused this failure? The big 3's decisions themselves.

First of all, they had the opportunity to invest in hybrid and alternative-energy-consuming vehicles. They laughed at the idea while continuing to build and release newer SUV's and trucks... interestingly enough, even with this huge economic crisis to date, they are still releasing a new Hummer truck as well as a newer fleet of SUV's.

Remember the firestone tire failures? That practically destroyed them for good. Firestone is only partially to blame. The big one was Ford, because they demanded that Firestone build a tire setup to their designers' specifications and not to that of what Firestone deemed both safe and acceptable.

I've also heard people argue that the American public wants cars that have good horsepower and that such a thing is something japanese and euro automakers can't provide.

C'mon, we ALL know that isn't true. You can buy a used Japanese car for a couple grand, invest a couple grand into a turbo or supercharger or hell even a few minor internals kits, and you've got yourself a car that's fast and yet is still cheaper than buying anything the big 3 can put out.

Even when they went up to the senators with their pleas, the big 3 didn't even have a plan or even a spreadsheet of exactly how much they need and for what reasons. That proves they don't NEED the money, but are merely looking for a new freebie.

So once again, my opinion is that they shouldn't get the money and if the big 3 will end up closing down for good, then let them. It's survival of the fittest and they are now reaping what they sowed.

What's your guys' opinion on all this?


I love my chevy and my ford, but you're right.I just hope the don't go down like that.If they are in that bad of shape they'll need to come up with something fast because the way the economy is looking these days they aren't gonna get any help.I know they've gotta have some type of reserve incase of something like this.

Posted 11/28/08
this is why fuck and rape any v8's , for exp. why spend 60-80 on the new zo6's RT's that make 400+ of the line, when u can get a 4 banger and invest in it and make as much or even more, but if they had wise ideas they should of gone with small blocks and only inline 6's .. look at nissan, honda toyota or any import company... there making money out of us cause they have good shit, and its nice and reliable. but all in all fuck them i wound not give them any more money fuck them
178 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Washington... Not...
Offline
Posted 11/29/08
Let the big 3 learn their lesson, and let the workers migrate to Toyota, Nissan and Wal-Mart.
The only the thing I'm worried about is, if Ford bites the dust, what'll happen to Mazda?
5357 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
74 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 12/18/08
I hate american cars! i hope they disappear forever! mwhahaha!
388 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / a
Offline
Posted 12/22/08
I would have agreed on the bailout but when i heard the CEO is willing to have a $ 1.00 salary if they get the bailout..

That makes me wonder WTF are the CEO's are doing? If they have the guts to say that in public to have a salary of $ 1.00 a month or year.. That means they had already taken a lot from the fund and profits the company makes.. I think they corrupted the funds for Research and Development for improving their cars..

That's why american cars are so less innovative compared to a japanese or european car.

So i really disagree on the bailout.. they should know better. they've been around longer enough than japanese car makers..
20924 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Singapore
Offline
Posted 12/23/08
Let them collapse......
412 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M
Offline
Posted 12/23/08
i say nay sir! let them fix their own shiz. and why would they ask for a bailout that costs more than what their company is worth lol
94748 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
88 / M / In my "Secret Lai...
Offline
Posted 12/23/08 , edited 12/23/08

Mr_Nissan wrote:

Let the big 3 learn their lesson, and let the workers migrate to Toyota, Nissan and Wal-Mart.
The only the thing I'm worried about is, if Ford bites the dust, what'll happen to Mazda?


Ford now only owns 13.4% of Mazda.

I think Ford's CEO, Alan Mulally is doing a good job considering that he has only been with Ford for 2 years and just inherited the problems from the previous management (non-global models developed before his arrival using redundant platforms etc).
The new Fusion Hybrid, eliminating redundant platforms, pushing for global Ford models, and concentrating on the core brands by selling unprofitable luxury brands like Jaguar and Land Rover were all part of the original plan to turn the company around.

Its good to see that at least one of the not so big 3 is heading towards the right direction without using any bailout money.

Ford's December sales in the US showed some since of improvement over last month's sales, at least based on the first 2 weeks.
Ford's European division which develops most of the global models is doing quite well.
The updated Euro Focus is the best selling car in Europe, the all-new Fiesta is the 2nd best selling car in Europe and the Mondeo is the 4th best selling car in Europe.

The US spec Fiesta will be available in early 2010.

The new international 2009 Ford Fiesta...


I bet you if Alan Mulally arrived at Ford some 2 or 3 years earlier, their US division would have been miles ahead of GM and Chrysler.


UPDATE:
Officially, the 2010 Fusion Hybrid will be the most fuel efficient mid-size car in the US.


Ford Fusion Hybrid to get 41 mpg city, says EPA

DETROIT (AP) — Ford Motor Co.'s much ballyhooed 2010 Fusion Hybrid will get 41 city miles per gallon and 36 mpg on highways, based on final certification figures from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the company said Monday.

The move is one of the final steps in getting the vehicle to dealerships next spring. Certification of the vehicle was recently completed at the company's testing laboratories in Allen Park, Mich.

Ford said that the Fusion Hybrid tops Toyota's Camry hybrid — its main competitor_ mileage by 8 mpg in the city and 2 mpg on the highway.

The Fusion can travel up to 47 miles per hour using only battery power. After 47 miles, the car's four-cylinder engine turns on to power the car and recharge the battery.

The Fusion's nickel-metal hydride battery is lighter and produces 20 percent more power than the Ford Escape hybrid. It also devised a way to get 28 percent more power out of the battery cells, said Praveen Cherian, program leader for the Fusion Hybrid.

"It's not just one thing, but thousands," he said of the improved mileage numbers. "We've optimized the heck out of that vehicle, it's individual components."

The battery can also tolerate higher temperatures, and Ford has eliminated its battery cooling system in the Fusion, allowing the battery to cool using regular cabin air.

The company has also improved its regenerative braking system, which captures energy lost through brake friction and stores it for battery usage. Ford said 94 percent of brake friction energy is recovered in the new model.

The Fusion also includes SmartGauge technology, which helps drivers adjust their driving to get more mileage out of the car.

Ford unveiled the Fusion Hybrid at the Los Angeles Auto Show last month, along with the Mercury Milan hybrid.

Associated Press http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ibR4EW6CAzVFKEMw17aTrlmp6UowD95874GG0
First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.