AND 
GM Submits Long-Term Viability Plan to Congress: $18 Billion Needed
Today GM submitted its plan to congress outlining how it plans to remain viable in exchange for loans.
Highlighting the severity of the situation they are requesting an immediate $4 billion in the month of December or else they will no longer be able to operate. They will need an additional $8 billion to operate through the end of 2009, with the option of an additional $6 billion should economic conditions be on the downside. The total amount requested will be $18 billion. These funds will allow GM to stay at minimum operating cash levels considering a market of 10.5 to 12.0 million sales in 2009.
These are some other highlights of the plan:
Fuel Efficient Vehicles – The Volt was mentioned and it was indicated that other vehicles using the E-Flex platform are planned. 15 hybrids will be available by 2012. They say they plan to continue to develop hydrogen vehicles. $768 million will be spent on E-REV R&D from 2009-2012. It was mentioned that strong hybrid cars are planned.
Market and Retail Operations - Pontiac will be reduced to a niche brand, they will continue to try to sell Hummer, and “review” Saturn and Saab for sale or even termination. Total number of ‘nameplates” will be reduced from 48 to 40 by 2012. Dealerships will be reduced from 6450 to 4700.
Manufacturing and Structural Cost reductions - includes workforce reduction from 96,000 to 65,000,
Reduction of Debt – they will begin negotiations with stakeholders to whom they owe a debt of $60 billion dollars to reduce those obligations in exchange for equity down to $30 billion. They acknowledge the government may need to help broker that. This includes the retiree healthcare obligations.
Executive Compensation – CEO will get $1 for 2009, and other top 4 executives will have a 50% reduction in total cash compensation in 2009.
Corporate Aircraft- all corporate aircraft operations will cease.
GMAC- GM owns 49%, it will be transformed into a bank holding company and will allow access to federal funds and be able to improve leasing and selling options for consumers.
It was agreed that there will be a federal oversight board ensuring taxpayer protection for the loans.
CFO Fritz Henderson has described the plan as essentially achieving the same goal as bankruptcy reorganization.
You can download the plan here.
On a related note, Ford has requested $9 billion and Chrysler $7 billion. Thus the total for the three is $34 billion, despite the fact that only $25 billion has been allocated so far in retooling loans.
109 Responses to “GM Submits Long-Term Viability Plan to Congress: $18 Billion Needed”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- GM Will Not Create a Line of Volt-Branded Vehicles
- Video: GM’s Rough Road Chevy Volt Testing
- Chevy Volt is the Centerpiece for Many Rapidly Emerging Industries
- GM Wins* October Sales Race; Decides to Keep Opel Citing Improved Financial Health
- One-Year Left to Volt Launch: Has the Date Slipped?
- GM’s Expectations for the Chevy Volt
- 7 Questions for Site Founder/Neurologist/NYC Marathon Runner Lyle Dennis
- Volt Chief Frank Weber Going to Opel
- GM Delays Launch of Volt’s ‘Sister’ Car, the Chevrolet Cruze
- GM CEO Says Help Needed to Achieve Mass Adoption of Electric Cars
Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts
- Embrace technology to turn nuclear energy into environmental solution November 6, 2009From the Seattle Times: "STEWART Brand, author of "The Whole Earth Catalog," visited Seattle last week, promoting his latest environmental manifesto... […]misslexi
- Lutz to Head Opel November 6, 2009Der Spiegel reports that Lutz is going to head up Opel: Spiegel Online(link)... […]dagwood55
- Do home chargers include meters? November 6, 2009I conduct a real-world fuel economy survey (http://www.truedelta.com/fuel_economy.php), and will want to adapt it for electric and range-extended... […]mkaresh
- HHSE (Hybrid-Hybrid-Serial-Electric) vehicle invented November 5, 2009A HHSE is a cross between using a lower efficiency but more functional serial hybrid drivetrain for city driving and using a mechanical drivetrain to... […]Texas
- Renault, Nissan to build $892 million battery factory outside Paris November 5, 2009“This will be the center of our lithium battery production for all of our assembly plants and for other carmakers,” Ghosn said. “It’s a major... […]Texas
- GM to cut 10,000 Jobs Across Europe After Sudden U-Turn on Opel Deal November 5, 2009Max Keiser on Russia Today. " ... General Motors cut ten thousand jobs across Europe at its Opel unit in favor of Christmas bonuses." -Max... […]Guy Incognito
- Nissan Releases Concept Sketch Of Light Commercial Electric Vehicle November 5, 2009NISSAN RELEASES CONCEPT SKETCH OF LIGHT COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC VEHICLE _Link_... […]Jason M. Hendler
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Company
All contents copyright 2007-2009 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Privacy Policy | About | Back to Top
December 2nd, 2008 at 5:26 pm
NO GO BACK, (3rd time to be first)
NO PLUG NO SALE, NO GAS, LJGTVWOTR, (my house)=D~~~~~~(my volt)
don’t buy new gas cars, make em make EVs
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 5:28 pm
I just want a bunch on EREVs on the road very soon. This whole GM thing is starting to get depressing.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 5:31 pm
“General Motors will also continue to invest in hydrogen fuel cell technology.”
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 5:34 pm
GM should trim down to just Chevy,Cadillac and GMC. Pick the best vehicles from Pontiac,Saturn,Saab and than selloff/trash the rest. Chevy sells compact, mid size cars and trucks(&Corvette).Cadillac sells full size and luxury. GMC sells comercial trucks and vans. Currently GM has way to many Brands and vehicles. Their resources are spread thin over everything.
Specializing in only a few cars will allow GM to invest and make those few vehicles better and very reliable over time.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 5:39 pm
That’s pretty pathetic that they’re going to continue the Hummer brand. Any smart company would have axed that the moment gas went to $4 a gallon and sales went belly up.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 5:41 pm
This is the jump direct to GM’s media release:
http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet?target=http://image.emerald.gm.com/gmnews/viewpressreldetail.do?domain=827&docid=50755
————————-
Bullet points:
“Pontiac will be a specialty brand with reduced product offerings within the Buick-Pontiac-GMC channel”
–translation, Pontiac is done–we ain’t making anything new for it and it is going to be grandfathered, but not so much that we are legally liable for anything, we can’t afford another ‘Oldsmobile fiasco’ (ironically one of Wagoner’s first moves at GM, “900 million dollar charge should do it”–oops, 2.5 billion I mean)
“GM will immediately undertake a global strategic review of the Saab brand”
–translation: we already tried to sell in quietly so we are going to put it in the ‘HUMMER’ allocation box now
“As part of the plan, the company also will accelerate discussions with the Saturn retailers, consistent with their unique relationship, to explore alternatives for the Saturn brand”
–Forget selling it…too darn hard and no one wants it. Lets hope the dealers are dumb enough to let us talk them out of their contracts. Maybe they can sell whatever the dealership right next door isn’t selling, lol.
“Balance Sheet Restructuring – Under the plan, GM would significantly reduce the debt currently carried on its balance sheet. GM plans to engage current lenders, bond holders and its unions to negotiate the needed changes”
–this is the part where we have a fancy daydream
“The plan calls for shared sacrifice, including further reduction in the number of executives and total compensation paid to senior leadership. For example, the chairman and CEO will reduce his salary to $1 per year. The plan also requires further changes in existing labor agreements, including job security provisions, paid time-off, and post-retirement health-care obligations. The common stock dividend will remain suspended during the life of the loans.”
-–Wags makes a buck, but watch out pensioners and line workers we are coming for you…big time
BIG FINISH!!!
–at the very end of ‘the plan’ they say that after they do ALL those things, they need the industry to be at a annualized level of 12.5 to 13 million vehicles sold…or they are not solvent.
ie) They are not solvent regardless of what they do…now give us our money
(The extra 6 billion dollar loan is just silly. They can’t pass that now, they only have 25 billion in the kitty total…thats a ‘Obama’ issue in February).
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 5:44 pm
GM will survive!
We’ll all have a Volt
No plug, no sale
We are the EV cult!
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 5:44 pm
From everything I’ve seen until major breakthroughs happen a pure quick charge ev is more probable than making hydrogen economical. Fuel cells have a long way to go from both a cost and reliability standpoint. Not to mention you still have to use another power source to produce Hydrogen inefficiently. Be it nuclear, coal,natural gas, or something renewable (wave,solar,wind,etc). Directed at #3
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 5:44 pm
Does GM have any plans at all? This is sad. I think GM should go bankrupt. This is best for the economy and tax payers’ money.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 5:46 pm
@5
That’s pretty pathetic that they’re going to continue the Hummer brand. Any smart company would have axed that the moment gas went to $4 a gallon and sales went belly up.
________________________________________
They tried selling Hummer to an overseas auto company but than the company dropped out of the deal at the last moment.
I believe it was stated that it cost a Billion dollars for GM to cut a Auto Brand. Money they do not have.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Jeezus… why can’t they combine the names for certain Niche’s?
Chevrolet-Pontiac – Sporty, little luxurious and fairly economic cars.
GMC-Hummer – Trucks, Trucks and more Trucks.
Buick-Cadillac – High-end luxury cars that doesn’t necessarily have lots of power.
Saturn-Daewoo – Fun, small economic cars.
But whatever. I don’t really like the plan. Still too much emphasis on gas drinkers.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:01 pm
#2 Rashiid Amul:
“This whole GM thing is starting to get depressing.” must be the understatement of the year. Alas, that it should come to this.
I can only agree with Casey at #1, “don’t buy new gas cars, make ‘em make EVs.” That’s the message from our house as well. If GM can’t do it, God send that it will be Ford, Chrysler, Tesla, Aptera, or some other domestically based company. If not, ???????
DBNGCMEMEVS anyone?
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Too bad Buick isn’t getting the axe. Sure Buick may not be losing as much $$$ as some other brands but that’s only because the senior citizens that buy them are extremely brand loyal. It’s not like they’re good cars. To me, Buick’s cars are a perfect example of all that’s wrong with GM. They’re ugly, boring and poorly made.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:13 pm
GM probably needs $50B to truly restructure. It also needs the UAW to step up or for Congress to step in. And it needs help from Congress with state dealership laws.
#6 Statik – “they need the industry to be at a annualized level of 12.5 to 13 million vehicles sold…or they are not solvent.”
This is a very interesting question. One point some writer made about a Prius, and I think it’s right, is that as you electrify the car you start making it more like an consumer electronics product, meaning the new model become a reason to upgrade. This was perceived as a negative because the trend depressed resale prices, but from a manufacturer standpoint it’s positive.
The Volt won’t get here in numbers in the time frame we’re talking about, but I think that if we go EV or E-REV we’ll see people getting new cars more rather than less often. Right now people are holding on to the cars longer because the cars are more reliable and longer-lasting, but once you get into tech people want the new model for the new features.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:13 pm
#5 Ignatius Says: “That’s pretty pathetic that they’re going to continue the Hummer brand. Any smart company would have axed that the moment gas went to $4 a gallon and sales went belly up.”
————————————————————————————–
GM tried to sell Hummer last summer. No buyers. GM can’t just destroy Hummer because of all the military vehicles they make. Needles to say, Hummer will be scaled back.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:23 pm
#9 John Says: “I think GM should go bankrupt. This is best for the economy and tax payers’ money.”
————————————————————————————–
If GM goes belly-up, it will start a domino effect that will kill many other companies as well. By the time it’s all done, up to 3 million more people will be unemployed. This would cost U.S. taxpayers $100B in lost income tax revenue and unemployment benefits.
So it’s quite possible that letting GM go bankrupt would cost taxpayers more than a bailout.
Also, the bailout is loans – not a giveaway. So if GM survives, tax payers get the money back with interest.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:24 pm
I read all the Big 3′ s plan to suceed .
GM’s plan is based on 12 million market while Ford is based on 14 million market .What about Chrsyler ? Nardelli said Chrysler is still hoping to partner with another carmaker. …..WTF . Chrysler does’nt need a loan . It needs a sugar daddy |!
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:24 pm
It takes time to study the plan, but well worth it, especially when reading:
“…Chevrolet Volt, Chevrolet Cruze and Saturn Two-Mode Hybrid, which launch in the next 24 months.”
Thank you GM for your commitment to return to profitability.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Casey #1
“don’t buy new gas cars, make em make EVs”
You’re not the only one with that line of thought.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaMeCT_GoO0
NPNS!
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:30 pm
Yikes!!!!
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:33 pm
#15 & #16 Dave G:
I’m sure that someone will correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think GM makes the military Hummers. I believe that AM General still makes them. They sold the rights to use the name to GM to use on their civilian versions, which are quite different. Also, the DOD is in the process of taking bids from the usual “defense contractors” for a follow on/replacement version of the Hummer anyway, so even AM General may be out of the game soon. Anybody care to guess what that will cost? Probably more than the $25 bil, LOL.
Did you see the SNL send up of the last hearings? One of the “auto execs” pointed out that the $25 bil was not a “bailout”, but a loan. One of the committee members responded, “You mean a loan which will never be paid back?” The three “execs” covered their mikes with their hands, put their heads together, and whispered for a few seconds. Then they straightened up and one of them answered, “Yes”. End of skit.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:42 pm
#12 Noel Park says.
DBNGCMEMEVS anyone?
———-
Agreed for as long as it is possible.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:42 pm
I don’t understand the desire to get rid of brands. A brand is just a name that people know, and it costs a lot of time and money to invent a brand. All of GM’s brands are worth a lot of money, except maybe Hummer which now might have negative value.
However, I definitely think it’s stupid to make four versions (one under each brand) of the same car, each with unique parts. Example: Traverse, Outlook, Enclave, and Acadia. Making four versions of everything costs real money. If they want the same car under four brands, they should be identical except for the friggin brand badging.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:45 pm
I wish they hadn’t mentioned hydrogen. At this point, flushing more money down the hydrogen toilet just seems foolish. IMHO, they would have been better off committing to vehicles that run on CNG and propane.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:48 pm
From the article:
They say they plan to continue to develop hydrogen vehicles.
———–
You got to be freaking kidding me, right!
What the hell for?
And what a freaking waste.
Put the money into battery research. They don’t need to spend money researching Hydrogen because then more money will have to be spent building an infrastructure. Just research batteries. The infrastructure is already there! Batteries! Don’t they get it?!
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:49 pm
#13 Dan says about Buick and its sales:
“that’s only because the senior citizens that buy them are extremely brand loyal. It’s not like they’re good cars. To me, Buick’s cars are a perfect example of all that’s wrong with GM. They’re ugly, boring and poorly made.”
=====================================
So you are hurting my feelings, as I am a senior citizen and I have a Buick, among other cars. Buicks may be boring to you, but not to me. They go fast, very smoothly, and very quietly. Regarding poorly made, usually they are ranked the best in the quality survey, often 3rd or 4th against all brands, including Lexus and those similar. And regarding senior citizens, you are right that GM has to have other offerings that appeal to younger buyers. In the meantime, we senior citizens have more money and are willing to spend chunks on cars, which also is useful.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:51 pm
#24 Paul-R
I will agree with your hydrogen comment, but CNG and Propane aren’t much better off from an infrastructure point of view. This could be different where you live, but I can’t think of single place where I can fill up with CNG where I live.
However, I do have a plug in my garage.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:53 pm
RB #26,
You forgot to mention that there are a boat load of baby boomers coming and Buick might be appealing to them.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 7:10 pm
Rashiid stated…\
“I will agree with your hydrogen comment, but CNG and Propane aren’t much better off from an infrastructure point of view. … However, I do have a plug in my garage.”
I respectfully disagree. Most buildings in the US are heated with CNG or propane, including existing gas stations. Not so with hydrogen. The existing CNG/propane supply points could be easily tapped to create fueling stations. And I consider this to be an alternative only to gasoline/alcohol, not batteries. Clearly E-Flex is still the way to go.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 7:15 pm
DaveG
Have you heard what the Big 3 are putting up for loan collateral?
Just curious.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 7:16 pm
About the hydrogen thing. The government gives funding for that. If they stopped that it would cut into their electrification of the automobile R&D budget. It’s my contention that most of the money goes into components that will be useful for EVs and Plug-in hybrids. Less money is used for hydrogen fuel cells and hydrogen storage (most engineers know the problems with the hydrogen economy). Thus, This funding, that is provided by the government, helps GM develop cars like the Volt.
Let’s keep hydrogen research going! It might pay off in a decade or two. The government is smart to sponsor this long-term effort. Again, any money we can get into petroleum alternatives for transportation the better. I’m hoping this will be a big part of Obama’s plan. Let’s work hard to get the successful research pushed though to large scale pilot production. That’s where all the costs can be analyzed and where many of the technical [devil in the] details are learned. This is very worthwhile funding that applies directly to our country’s number one problem – petroleum. Much better than funding the military or NASA where only a small percentage of research is applicable. It also creates jobs. Jobs in the new green industry that America must (should) lead.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 7:19 pm
@Rashiid Amul 25
Totally agree with you there.
Their Hydrogen “Skateboard” basically just creates ELECTRICITY to run the motors. Wouldn’t it be more prudent to just have batteries and room for batteries than to have an entire rolling hydrogen conversion laboratory to give you the same end product of ELECTRICITY?
I want my Volt!
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 7:24 pm
@Paul-R 29
“Most buildings in the US are heated with CNG or propane…”
I haven’t been to most houses in the US but I have never ever seen a house with CNG. I have seen manhouses with uncompressed natural gass lines. I have also seen rural homes with propane tanks.
But then again, I haven’t seen most of the houses in the US.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 7:31 pm
Hydrogen, smallest molecule, impossible to store – these folks just don’t get it.
I am not against spending money. I just want it spent with a chance of acomplishing something positive. I think the states need an infusion of cash to make up their budget shortfalls and that will keep people employed and keep our cities infrastructure operational. Education, roads, sewage – I even think “loaning” Tesla some money to get them through this liquidy crunch would be a positive move. IMO Loaning GM money for hydrogen research is money down the rabbit hole.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 7:40 pm
Rashiid, but if nobody buys the thirty million cars the 2.8 need to sell to make the ‘loan’ work next year, there will not be any EV’s.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 7:40 pm
33 CaptJackSparrow,
I hear you.
I live in New England, and as I understand it, most houses are heated by oil here. We don’t have gas lines where I live either. I could put in a storage tank I suppose, but plugging the car into a socket is just soooo easy and takes what, 10 seconds at most?
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 7:42 pm
#35 NZDavid,
I’m missing your point, my friend. Is it sarcasm by chance?
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 7:43 pm
As long as they bang the HYBRID/ELECTRIC/FUEL CELL drum, Congress will give them the money because that is what they believe will save the U.S. auto industry.
______________________________
#11
You are right on the money. Brands should be combined and the number of models decreased.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 7:45 pm
#16.
If GM goes belly-up, it will start a domino effect that will kill many other companies as well. By the time it’s all done, up to 3 million more people will be unemployed. This would cost U.S. taxpayers $100B in lost income tax revenue and unemployment benefits.
==
Are you suggesting that we should support all these uncompetitive companies with our hard-earned money? The unemployment benefits is a short-term problem while supporting these companies is a long term problem. $25B is just a start. GM isn’t competitive for years and give them money doesn’t change their fate. We are just delaying it. The best GM can do is file bankruptcy and let the economy/competition to correct itself. And no, GM will not pay back. See #21
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 7:49 pm
My take on the whole thing is that GM is going for as much as it thinks it can get (and then some…ask for 18billion, hopefully get the 12), Chrysler is lying in the weeds and Ford has jackassed them both.
I know I mentioned this about a dozen times over the last month or two, but if GM gets the money I think it instantly ‘merges’ with Chrysler and it puts both ‘bailout bucks’ along with the Cerberus bribe money (to take it off their hands) all in one big pile, tries to go as long as possible burning that off…and then hopes the gov’t sees it as ‘too big to fail’
I see Ford as just being along for the ride in all this…now when their day to submit a plan has come they are knifing GM and Chrysler in the back, telling the government “Nah, we are ok…we don’t really need your money, we got lots of cash here. But if you do vote to give us the cash, we will take it…but only if it you give it do us at the cheap rate and as a line of credit we can draw on…with no oversight”
Lawmakers might look at the ‘plans for productivity’ and think, heck we can let GM go…they have zero plans, Ford maybe alright without our help…they could suck up GM’s good pieces and create a viable North American automaker without us spending 100s of billions of dollars.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 7:52 pm
CaptJackSparrow #33
Aren’t the residential gas lines at higher than atmospheric pressures? Not that they are anywhere near the pressure needed for cars but the point isn’t the pressure in the line, it’s the infrastructure to supply the gas. It can be easily compressed at the point of sale (so to speak). But…I think that is a bit of waste anyway. The practical amount of combustible energy needed for an EREV is a non-issue. Getting EV’s & EREV’s on the road is really where the focus needs to be to cut our passenger vehicle oil use most expediantly.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 7:53 pm
Rashiid, yep you’re right it’s sarcasm. Either that or extreme frustration.
I think Lyle just put the H2 comment in to upset me.
Wish Tagamet would get back to work, I need one of those couches!
/sigh
LJGTVWOTR
NO plug, NO sale.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 7:57 pm
NZDavid.
Too funny, my friend. And I feel your frustration.
I miss seeing Tag regularly as well. Grizzly too for that matter.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:11 pm
As I recall Natural Gas was only available by pipeline until the last few years. I live in a rural area where it wasn’t available except by gas line but now you can get it delivered just like LP. I had to go with LP which I now have. Also Oil heat is popular in Western North Carolina where I live.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:11 pm
Wow, I guess we really do have representative government. Congress and the Bush administration can give billions with no strings attached to their buddies on wall street and finance but just give a kick to the n_ts to the biggest blue collar industry in the country. And what do the bloggers on this website say about GM cars? “Ugly, boring, poorly made.” Hey, blogger #13, go to a Buick dealership and drive a Buick. I think they are beautiful, polished and very well made. Go to an Acura dealer or a Lexus dealer and drive their cars. Now look at the price. If you have any sense you’ll buy the Buick and you’ll find after years of ownership it is reliable, economical, quiet, with a great ride and excellent performance AND you’ll have paid thousands less for a car with features that add real value to the car. If you pay for OnStar the car might even save your life one day.
Quit bashing GM. They NOW make excellent cars. Sure, 10 or even 5 years ago SOME of the criticism may have been true but I’ve owned a GM vehicle of one brand or another (Chevy, GMC, Pontiac) as well as Honda and Acura and quite frankly my next car will be a Volt. GM makes great cars. Drive a new one (NOT a 1994 Buick Century….) and you’ll find GM is a company that has EARNED not a “bailout” but an INVESTMENT by the American people that will result in a return of not just the money invested but in technology that no one else has the foresight, fortitude or resources to BRING TO MARKET. GM is a national treasure. Did Toyota come out with a plug in hybrid? No, they came out with the Prius; an electric car that pollutes! Did Mercedes come out with a 100mpg car? No, they bought Chrysler then dumped it to a bunch of suits that are trying to break it into pieces and make a ton of money. (And you thought corporate raiders had gone out of style? Too bad they got caught in this recession…)
Come on people, get off your anti-American high horse. (Where are all you flag waving Republicans? Could use a little help here against all these tree-hugging, anti-business liberals!)
Hey, Len #34, Tesla has already been assured of government money, both local (for a new auto plant in California) and federal (Congress has to release it. It’s part of the $25B we keep hearing about) as well as MORE venture capital money. Check it out at their website.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:12 pm
I truly believe that GM has put forth a reasonable plan, worthy of government assistance. I wish there would be some strings attached to any monies given to GM that would ensure they build the Volt, and other EV’s, PHEV’s, EREV’s or whatever you choose to call them!
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Natural gas in US homes is normally less than 3psi so tapping into it would take extra compressing equipment to fill a car’s CNG tank. Pain in the … Plus it will one day run out like gasoline so we’ll be back in the same boat.
Let’s just plug it in.
As for hydrogen, that’ll come but right now GM doesn’t need to be spending money on its development.
Also, very stupid for GM to ask for more money than RW said at the last meeing. Get real, if you ask me for $10.00 and I tell you to tell me why; So you go away and come back an hour later with the reason why, but now you’re asking me for $17.00 – go file BK GM. I hate saying that because I want my Volt. I think GM has a lot to offer the public in the future but get a clue RW! Cut your freaking costs and rework your present debt, but NEVER ask for money the way you did today!
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:29 pm
So much ignorance from what appear to be trolls around here:
13 Dan: “To me, Buick’s cars are a perfect example of all that’s wrong with GM. They’re ugly, boring and poorly made.”
Uh, no. They are highly ranked in many reliability surveys.
5 Ignatius: “That’s pretty pathetic that they’re going to continue the Hummer brand.”
Uhh… can’t you read? The story above says: “they [GM] will continue to try to sell Hummer”
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:31 pm
Statik #40
You, probably better than anyboby here, knows Ford is in no position to pick up any GM pieces in this market. They are would be bought by out of country companies in all likelihood (best guesses would be Japanese, Korean, and Chinese). The drop in industry production would be a boon though. They probably could make it in the near term, even with the realistic projected sales figures (not there BS numbers).
NPNS LTGTVWOTR
Start your own recovery plan, BUY (NORTH)AMERICAN!
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:32 pm
#17 Coach Says: “What about Chrsyler ? Nardelli said Chrysler is still hoping to partner with another carmaker. …..WTF . Chrysler does’nt need a loan . It needs a sugar daddy |!”
————————————————————————————–
No surprise here. Chrysler wants to merge with GM. More info here:
http://gm-volt.com/2008/10/11/gm-and-chrysler-in-merger-talks/
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:40 pm
Hey we don’t need CNG, rechargeable PHEV stations are here ready to go.
Coulomb Technologies is showcasing prototypes of Level 2 high power networked charging stations that will comply with the new SAE J1772 Electric Vehicle Conductive Charge Coupler Specification at the EDTA conference 2-4 December in Washington, DC.
SAE has been making modifications to the older J1772 REV NOV 2001 standard, moving toward a smaller (and less expensive) coupler made by Yazaki to replace the former Avcon connector. The new SAE J1772 standard is being finalized now, and may be balloted by the first quarter of 2009.
The J1772 standard specifies a specific 5-pin plug (two power, two signal, one ground) for single-phase supply up to 80A.
Source: greencarcongress.com/2008/12/coulomb-techn-1.html#more
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:42 pm
@ KentT#45
I have always bought a Detroit car for myself BUT now I always buy an Asian car for my wife(family). I love my detroit cars BUT my wife’s car usually has about 1/10 the Problems that I experience with my Detriot cars. I watch people all the time get frustrated by the flow of TSB’s,recalls bad dealer service etc from the Detroit 3 and than finally buy an Asian car and never look back.
I joke to people that my passion is for American muscle/sports car and my hobby is keeping them running.
I hope The Volt doesn’t become another great detroit car with great potential but gets overrrun by TSB’s, recalls, bad dealer service etc…
I don’t think it’s UNAMERICAN to go buy the best product one thinks is best.
I bet you don’t go to Walmart/Target and Only buy American product.(If you can find any).
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:43 pm
#24 Paul-R Says: “I wish they hadn’t mentioned hydrogen. At this point, flushing more money down the hydrogen toilet just seems foolish. IMHO, they would have been better off committing to vehicles that run on CNG and propane.”
————————————————————————————–
Yes, hydrogen is a dead end. See here for details:
http://www.physorg.com/news85074285.html
But CNG isn’t any better. The carbon emissions for CNG is worse than a Prius. Worse than fool sells. Details here:
http://www.stanford.edu/group/greendorm/participate/cee124/TeslaReading.pdf
(page 4)
Like fool sells, CNG also requires a whole new infrastructure of filling stations.
EREVs and E85 are the way to go. Check out coskata.com. Their gasification process can replace 35% of our current gasoline usage from renewable non-food sources for as little as $1/gallon.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:48 pm
—-
Total number of ‘nameplates” will be reduced from 48 to 49 by 2012.
—-
Reduced from 48 to 49 ? Reminds me of the SNL skit about the Big 3 CEOs.
While 31,000 lose their jobs, all execs will keep their bonuses earned while driving GM to the ground. Well Done.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:49 pm
I want to touch on this part of the ‘plan for turnaround’ again (straight out of their press release)
—-
“Once GM has completed the restructuring actions laid out in the plan, the company will be able to operate profitably at industry volumes between 12.5 and 13 million vehicles. This is substantially below the 17 million industry levels averaged over the last nine years, so it is considered to be a reasonably conservative assumption for gauging liquidity needs.”
http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet?target=http://image.emerald.gm.com/gmnews/viewpressreldetail.do?domain=827&docid=50755
———
Reasonably conservative? The SAAR (seasonal adjusted annual rate) is tracking at 10.2 million units.
Their 12.5 to 13 billion estimate is reasonably conservative because the industry has averaged 17 billion the last 9 years? Huh? Novembers auto sales numbers were the LOWEST in 26 years…I think that trumps their ‘the industry average’ numbers.
The industry is in total freefall here, here is the 3-month trend:
Novemeber -36.7%, SAAR 10.2 million units
October -31.7%, SAAR 10.6 million units
September -26.6%, SAAR 12.5 million units
Besides the fact they are already about 3 billion light in sales going into 2009 on their ‘conservative’ projection. Just how exactly do they see that not falling another couple billion?
The ‘big 2.8′ currently have 48.1% domestic nameplate of that 10.2 million annualized sales estimate. GM 20.7%, F 15.9%, Chrysler 11.5%.
How in the name of Zeus are the ‘big 2.8′ not totally going to ‘pooch’ that number? GM just about said today they are going to shut down a third of everything on top of current cutbacks…Ford announced Q1 production was to drop 38%, and Chrysler is drastically cutting back as well.
Are they predicting that Toyota and Honda’s business is going to double to pick up that slack…so therefore they will be ok?
It is over. GM said it right there in black and white. 12.5 to 13 million sales needed to be viable AFTER all these cuts. No way that happens…there is no scenario where that is a reality.
I’ve said all along GM needs to go C11, and if that doesn’t work out, the get chopped up and sold off. There is no ‘bailout’ option…if the government really wants a healthy Detroit 2.8, they need to pony up about 400-500 billion and expect nothing back…forget this 25 billion loan stuff.
The market demands attrition here of one, maybe two of the big 2.8. Much like the rest of the economic downturn, this automaker crisis will not stop until the gov’t gets out of the way and just lets the weak fail…take the hit, and rebuild from the bottom. Again, no scenario for success here…only delaying the inevitable.
This is the perfect opportunity for the gov’t to draw the line in the sand on the whole economic recession. Let the auto business crater, put real fear in the rest of the market–bottom this thing out and start to rebuild.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:56 pm
#34 Len wrote:
“Hydrogen, smallest molecule, impossible to store – these folks just don’t get it. ”
1) It’s not impossible to store. Only very difficult.
That’s why more research is needed. There are many promising new ideas for storage out there.
2) GM engineers most likely get it. However the government does not (they have no idea about technology) and things take so long to change that you might was well use the funding they provide. Again, most of the funding is probably spend on the electrification components (Skate board concept, high efficiency accessories, electric powertrains, charging systems, control systems, software development, testing of electric drivetrains and data collection, etc). Unless you want the government to just cut all of that funding and not replace it (or have it take a couple of years to replace). Your choice.
3) Maybe hydrogen will never be viable for cars. However, it might be great for planes, large trucks, and what I feel may be it’s biggest and greatest application – the storage of renewable energy. If Dr. Nocera is right and can deliver that very efficient electrolyzer technology then we would have that beautiful silver bullet we are all waiting for – unlimited solar energy stored in hydrogen. Completely environmentally friendly, sustainable and virtually unlimited. Maybe it’s worth looking into? Maybe just a little? Yeah, I would say so.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:56 pm
#49 Koz said,
Statik, you, probably better than anyboby here, knows Ford is in no position to pick up any GM pieces in this market. They are would be bought by out of country companies in all likelihood (best guesses would be Japanese, Korean, and Chinese).
——————–
If GM goes C7, Ford gets those pieces almost for free,…thanks to gov’t protectionism keeping foreign automakers at bay (if they would even want to attempt to try and pick GM’s bones in this climate). As soon as one goes under, the gov’t has a lot more pressure to stabilize/protect the other two.
Just my opinion on one train of thought, there is a lot of scenarios that could unfold here. We should have a lot more focus on monday, lol.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:56 pm
Re: #13 above:
Have you ever bothered to go LOOK at the new Buicks? I just saw a new dark ruby red Lucerne and it is a GORGEOUS automobile.
And the Buick Enclave is one of the best looking crossovers out there.
Buicks are consistently rated in the top 5 in initial quality. Right up there with Lexus. And the Chinese seem to be buying them by the trainload. It is highly respected over there.
My advice to all you American car bashers out there is to stop living in the 1980’s – when GM made some very bad cars. American brands, particularly GM and Ford, are now equal to or better than anything made on the planet. And I think they look better.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 8:57 pm
#39 John Says: “And no, GM will not pay back. See #21″
————————————————————————————–
The U.S. government bailed out Chrysler in the 80s. Did Chrysler repay that loan? Of course. The loan had restrictions. There were no dividends, no executive bonuses, etc., until the loan was repaid.
This deal is no different. The only way the loan won’t be re-paid is if GM goes belly-up.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Statik.
Not to worry GM delivered a total of 1,335 hybrid vehicles in the month. Hybrid sales included: 404 hybrid Chevrolet Tahoe, 190 GMC Yukon and 173 Cadillac Escalade 2-mode SUVs delivered. There were 195 Chevrolet Malibu, 45 Saturn Aura and 328 Vue hybrids sold in November. Hybrids represented 10% of combined Yukon/Tahoe retail sales and 12% of Escalade retail sales in the month. So far in 2008, GM has sold a total of 11,884 hybrids.
They are all but saved!
/Nissan looks to be in a world of hurt as well.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/12/us-light-duty-v.html#more
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 9:18 pm
Well I am back. There is something interesting going on out in the land where our LI batteries came from. The one I like best is the methanol fuel cell. Go back and study WWII. The Germans ran their aircraft on the stuff. They made it from garbage. Not a bad idea. They hybrid that I designed ran on Methanol.
http://tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20081130/ap_on_hi_te/portable_fuel_cells
Look at how much hydrogen is in Methanol. Its clean.
Take Care
Arch
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 9:18 pm
@PJ#58
My advice to all you American car bashers out there is to stop living in the 1980’s – when GM made some very bad cars. American brands, particularly GM and Ford, are now equal to or better than anything made on the planet. And I think they look better.
______________________________________________
I own both Detroit (made in Canada/Mexico) and Asian(made in Kentury/Texas) cars/trucks. Yes American cars have gotten better BUT I still have more problems with my Detroit built auto than my wife asian autos.
My wife bought a 2004 toyota while three of my coworkers bought 2003-2005 Tahoes/suburbans. MY wifes car no problems over the last 4-5 years. My co workers have had several problems(1entertainment system failure,1 transmission problem, all three had fuel/speedameter gauge problems, 2 ignition problems). When I went online their are many many other owners who are upset with their GM truck.
Yes Buick does make the Quality list(out of 10 cars only 2 american cars usually make the list) every year but many many Detroit cars are still lemons.
This from a Car Guy who loves American cars but I aknowlege that american cars have come a long way but still need be improved across the brands not just the Buicks/Malibu.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 9:26 pm
I read the full GM plan (public report anyhow–35 pages) and holy crap was that a let down. What an opportunity to show that they have learned from their past mistakes of crushing their strong programs and supporting weak. As a shareholder, I’m screwed…
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 9:39 pm
hi blkstne # 62,
Yes, ladies seem to have a Japanese car fetish. Several I know will ONLY buy Japanese. It’s not even an argument, it’s a done deal. My wife’s last three cars have been Mazda, Honda, and Honda. As you might expect, she’s riding me on liking the Volt.
With today’s activity it looks like the world will be getting an American E-REV. And it’s very good news to hear that GM has dropped the attitude and has realized that tough measures need to be taken to move forward. Good for them.
=D~
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Statik #57
I can’t see the Gov being able to protect domestic production under Ch7. It seems too disjointed and creditor issues would be overwhelming. Plus, car production isn’t like a hose valve. Ch7 is more like derailing a humongous train. It will take a lot of time and $ to get production back on track after Ch7 shutout, bankruptcy court, and asset sale. Just my opion too but I don’t think we’ll ever know since the Gov already showed their hand and will do the loans.
By the way, were near term hybrid production increases along with (more importantly) remarketing hybrids in base model configurations included in their plan?
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:11 pm
This is kind of sad in a way. It’s necessary though. GM is a bit like the old Roman Empire. It just got TOO big to manage it all efficiently. GM needs to retrench and get FOCUSED. Focused on the most popular, best selling segments of the auto industry.
Design cars from the ground up to be the prize winning, highly rated models that all the auto magazines are talking about. If a new model does NOT look destined to be a highly rated, prize winning, best selling car that will get lots of good press and word of mouth … don’t built it at all! GM needs to continue to take some risks, but they need to be well thought out, prudent ones. One well thought out vehicle at a time.
GM needs to get a rock solid reputation for quality, cool exterior/interior styles, reliability and all that. They gotta match up and exceed Toyota and everyone else in all the categories like you’d see in Consumer Reports or other car magazines.
GM needs to stay up to date on the process that most people go through when they decide to shop for a car. The latest market research, buyer behavior, etc. All the research car buyers go through, who and what influences them, etc. Then … DELIVER THE GOODS. Really nice looking, rock solid, high quality vehicles.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:39 pm
#54 nataraj
…Total nameplates being reduced to 49 from 48.
—-
I presume that was Lyle’s error in quoting the original source. The document, which was linked, indicates that GM is reducing the number to 40.
I am a complete fool when it comes to this stuff, but what is a nameplate? GM boasts 17 models over 30 mpg, but most of them are absolutely ridiculous repetitions like the Cobalt Coupe, Cobalt Sedan, cobalt XFE, HHR and HHR panel. Maybe they can reduce it to one nameplate, and use these confusing gimmicks. Volt IBU, Volt Panel, Volt Sedan, Volt X, Voltette, Volt CTX, Volt SE, Volt SSR, Volt VUE. Nameplates are meaningless unless they truly introduce economies of scale. If GM were to make it possible to interchange one of five transmissions, engines, and propulsion systems that would be a way to save costs (and dramatically increase the flexibility / agility of the automaker).
My 1988 buick had an amazing motor. I still see them on the road. Why would GM or anyone else for that matter need to change it? It gets as good of fuel economy as many new cars. Keep pumping that thing out over 30 years and you will have an extremely cheap car. Oh yeah, that is what VW did.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:39 pm
#62 blkstne Says: “My wife bought a 2004 toyota while three of my coworkers bought 2003-2005 Tahoes/suburbans. MY wifes car no problems over the last 4-5 years. My co workers have had several problems(1entertainment system failure,1 transmission problem, all three had fuel/speedameter gauge problems, 2 ignition problems). When I went online their are many many other owners who are upset with their GM truck.”
————————————————————————————–
Yes.
For the last 25 years, American car companies have been saying that their reliability is now competitive with Japanese cars, but it just hasn’t happened. See here for details:
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzenu6hr/ebay_pictures/tt.jpg
GM needs to fix that…
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:39 pm
$18 Billion. Nope.
My crystal ball shows Ford smiling as they watch the competition fall to its knees.
Have you driven a Ford, lately?
NBA!
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:40 pm
#65 koz
Statik #57
I can’t see the Gov being able to protect domestic production under Ch7. It seems too disjointed and creditor issues would be overwhelming. Plus, car production isn’t like a hose valve. Ch7 is more like derailing a humongous train. It will take a lot of time and $ to get production back on track after Ch7 shutout, bankruptcy court, and asset sale. Just my opion too but I don’t think we’ll ever know since the Gov already showed their hand and will do the loans.
By the way, were near term hybrid production increases along with (more importantly) remarketing hybrids in base model configurations included in their plan?
——————————
You may be right…in that case, just shutter them down. I don’t think the gov’t has shown all their hand yet, I don’t even think they know what their hand is. Never underestimate the red tape of bureaucracy…it could make a decision in the absence of a decision, lol.
The ‘plan’ is all over the place…I’m still digesting it now. As well as going over Ford’s and Chrysler’s.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Here are some handy links to all of the big 2.8’s plans as submitted
Pdf link to GM’s plan in full (as Lyle as also linked to in topic thread):
http://www.freep.com/assets/PDF/1202gmplan.pdf
Link to the Ford plan in full:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/8598852/Ford-Restructing-Plan-as-submitted-to-Congress
PDF to the Chrysler plan in full:
http://www.wxyz.com/media/news/1/3/d/13d0680a-d1e6-4cf9-9a22-dcfc4547d31f/ChryslerPlantoCongress.pdf
/knock yourselves out
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:51 pm
Now I’m getting pi$%^$d, I just watched GM VP Larry Burns on Greta (fox) state the UAW has made concessions that they (GM) will be competitive by 2012, 2012? this is concessions? the union is going to make GM competitive by 2012, that’s three years from now, whats wrong with tomorrow morning? GM wants our tax money right now, but the unions wont give up anything for three years.
I IMHO don’t want the bailout anymore, I want to see GM use whatever it needs to downsize, if its chapter 11, so be it.
NO PLUG NO SALE, —NO UAW–(not right now anyway)
I was 20 years TWU and 10 years Teamsters, but times are different now.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:54 pm
Apologies to Statik if he already covered this, but there was one number that was pretty significant to our discussions here in the November sales reports. While all Toyota sales were off 33.9% for November, PRIUS sales were off by 48%. The speculation is that falling gas prices resulted in a huge drop-off in sales. This is a point worth noting for all of us Volt fanatics.
Left to it’s own devices, the market may not reward GM/Big 3 for going to more hybrids. The plan is a farce, because GM may not believe in it anyway. We may need the government to step in, take an ownership stake in GM, and subsidize a transition away from oil in order to make it happen at all.
Again, I feel like, as an economy, we can afford to import our Wal-Mart crud, or we can afford to import our energy, but not both. So to me, this is a no-brainer: we get off oil. Otherwise, we’ll be vulnerable to a repeat of this summer at any time, and any economic recovery will always be vulnerable to a set-back.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:56 pm
I hope the Volt would help to GM survive to this difficult downturn time and to be only the beginning of new era.
The big 3 have serious challenge ahead only to survive and maybe, re-bounce stronger later but at this point, I do not understand the above GM’s commitment to continue burning money in R&D for “hydrogen vehicle” … Think hard, long and twice!!
I know the Volt to be a Chevy but ironically (I’m still a Saturn SW1 owner) have a few past Saturn slogan in my minds: “A Different Kind of Company, A Different Kind of Car”, ”Like Always. Like Never Before” and “Rethink American” …. no offense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_Corporation
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:56 pm
#62 blkstne
Yes, foreign cars are immune to failure due to the reliance on rare metals Admantium and of course the surplus Chinese lead. Interesting that you state you have both a domestic and foreign car but go on to reference “co-workers” when talking about how the Detroit cars were ‘lemons’.
Your “Asian” car (I think it would be correct to call it Oriental?), by the way, is not made in America. Its assembled here. Where is the Toyota headquarters that towers over detroit, the Nissan Museum, or the Honda campus that spralls an entire US city? The big three do more than assemble cars in the United States. The Research, development, testing, HR, legal, finance, facilities, executive leadership all is based here.
Do you think Wagoner’s salary is outrageous? How much does the CEO of Honda make, or Toyota? How about Subaru? You are going to have to do a conversion, because it is in Yen. Do you know there names? Do they buy coffee in your neighborhood? Do your kids play soccer with theirs?
I’m not say buy a car because it is American, but don’t rule it out based on that alone. A bias AGAINST American made is simply anti-American.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:44 pm
I made it to posts in the mid 20’s, and got thinking…
Where in the hell is all this money coming from? Seriously, $600billion+ to the banks, the Big 3 loans of $25+ billion, the war, $100’s of billions…….. Damn, this country is falling apart, QUICK!!
No wonder the Chinese want to buy out GM and Chrysler! They could get it for pennies on the dollar! Oh, and the Chinese would probably loan the government the money to bail them out, the perfect way to collect multiple streams of intrest!
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:44 pm
#71 statik : Thanks , Now i can write an application for a loan. Now i got why ford pays for its CEO that big. Looked impressive
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:48 pm
In response to CaptainJackSparrow…
“I haven’t been to most houses in the US but I have never ever seen a house with CNG.”
Sorry, I misspoke. I meant to say that houses heated with utility NG (like mine) could have that same fuel compressed for use in a car with a CNG fuel tank.
(Quote)
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:49 pm
Rather than trying to sell Hummer for next to nothing, why not transform it’s image to a luscious green using EREV technology applied to slightly modified existing models? There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the brand once you get rid of it’s gas guzzling, tribute to the age of fossil fuels, reputation. In fact I would argue, if it survives this crunch, Hummer may develop into an enduring brand icon like Jeep.
And by the way, I’m sure jeep is going to go production with that EREV Wrangler Unlimited they’ve been strutting around in.
What think you to this, sage Statik?
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 12:01 am
I find these arguments that question the reliability of car brand X versus brand Y rather questionable.
Consider the following:
When Windows Vista first came out, it had some compatibility problems. Hey, so did the changeover to Windows 95, Windows XP, etc. Nobody bitched and moaned about it much. It was part of any upgrade process for ANY piece of computer software.
In the meantime, Apple’s marketing wizards came up with their clever “I’m and Mac, and I’m a PC” commercials which poked fun at Vista’s shortcomings. We saw these commercials over and over again. More and more varations. Before you know it, millions have been convinced that Vista sucks. It goes to say: “The bigger the lie, the easier it is to believe”. People should make their own decisions, rather than relying on someone else’s swayed opinions. I was talking to someone today who bought a laptop with Vista, and he said that he was hesitant to buy it simply because it came with Vista. Once he learned its differences like any other Windows upgrade, he didn’t find it as bad as he was led to believe.
A co-worker of mine has a Mac. It isn’t problem free. He has an automatic shutdown set for every night and when he comes in to work the next morning, the computer is typically hung. And You know that cute commercial that pokes fun at the Vista “Cancel or Allow” security feature? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyGUrPxG1iM Well, according to my co-worker, there are certain functions that require you to type your password to continue. Is that much better? There are many other shortcomings that the general public doesn’t know about, either.
Where are all the Vista commercials rebutting Apple’s ads?
We have been inundated with messages about how often a domestic-branded car breaks down for years and years. And how they have poor handling. When a supervisor saw some pictures of the new Challenger, upcoming Mustang, and upcoming Camaro, he said that they were all junk that are only worth their performance in a straight line. Maybe in the 60s. Maybe if he drove a new one, he wouldn’t think that. Well, since you can’t drive the new Camaro at this point, I guess I’ll have to be a hypocrite and tell you to read someone else’s opinion:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/112_0811_2010_chevrolet_camaro_v6_first_drive/index.html
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 12:05 am
Dave G, regarding your graph:
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzenu6hr/ebay_pictures/tt.jpg
It would be interesting to know the source of that data and how it was collected, and what constitutes a “problem”. Different manufacturers have different service requirements, so one car’s problem (eg, replace part-A because it failed) can be another car’s service (eg, replace part-A whether it needs it or not). Also, I noticed the Nissan curve has a negative slope between 3 and 4 years … that seems to imply that 3-4 year old Nissans can self-heal. Ever see the movie “Christine”?
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 12:15 am
13. Dan
Too bad Buick isn’t getting the axe. Sure Buick may not be losing as much $$$ as some other brands but that’s only because the senior citizens that buy them are extremely brand loyal. It’s not like they’re good cars. To me, Buick’s cars are a perfect example of all that’s wrong with GM. They’re ugly, boring and poorly made.
———————————————————————
First car I had was a Buick. alternator, starter after 150k. Senior Citizens probably buy them because they never break. I knew someone that had 190k on his. What more do you want from a car
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 12:28 am
#13 Dan says about Buick and its sales:
“that’s only because the senior citizens that buy them are extremely brand loyal. It’s not like they’re good cars. To me, Buick’s cars are a perfect example of all that’s wrong with GM. They’re ugly, boring and poorly made.”
=====================================
So you are hurting my feelings, as I am a senior citizen and I have a Buick, among other cars. Buicks may be boring to you, but not to me. They go fast, very smoothly, and very quietly. Regarding poorly made, usually they are ranked the best in the quality survey, often 3rd or 4th against all brands, including Lexus and those similar. And regarding senior citizens, you are right that GM has to have other offerings that appeal to younger buyers. In the meantime, we senior citizens have more money and are willing to spend chunks on cars, which also is useful.
A sidenote to this is that the lowly Buick Century BEAT Toyotas Flagship Lexus brand in a long term durability survey a while back too, ha….ps I am not a senior citizen, but I am an INFORMED American citizen. Take care all
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 12:35 am
At least they have a plan better than none . But what we see can be less than what is in the offing and I want to see if congress ( most time the opiset of progress ) will do .
Happy perhaps . or Not .
God Bless all and have a Very Good Christmass
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 12:49 am
Statik,
From 1 of your earlier post, i don’t see how letting the Auto industry go CH11 or 7 helps this freefall bottom out. If either GM or Ford goes you can expect to see Unemployment jump at least 1% in the first 3 months. How does letting one of our largest employers in the country go out of buisness speed up the bottom of the recession, if anything i think it lengthens it.
I agree with your annual volume levels for the short term, but i think we’ll start to get back up mid/late 09 into 2010. Not to mention if GMAC gets in on the TARP money which it looks like they will we could see increased numbers from that alone. GM says “downside equals” 10.5M units in 09 & 11.5M in 2010. That seems reasonable to me. I’d say probably safer to say 10M units in 09, but an increase in 2010 to 11M or 11.5M units seems reasonable based on projections for this recession. People aren’t broke, their just scared and holding the purse tight because all we get from washington is “the sky is falling” bailout talk, and little leadership. Personally i see the market stabilizing as soon as Obama becomes president just because he will bring a sense of calm & control, and hopefully a steady rebound from there.
The 12 to 13 million units for profitability they mentioned was in 2012. Which even if this thing goes real bad most people see the upside in late 11′ into 2012. Plus at that point alot of people who were due for a new car in 09-11 will be buying, like a huge market correction.
If you were wondering what i did with the stock we talked about, i caught the drop to $1.72 last week. I didn’t get in till $2.17 though, it happened so fast. I doubled down on my shares, and i’m a little above break even. I’ll be watching the wire like a hawk on thur & fri ready to jump ship if i have to. ( i know what your thinking get out why your ahead)
THE ONE BRIGHT SPOT OF THE PLAN FOR ME WAS:
“GM will launch the ground-breaking Chevrolet Volt in 2010. As indicated in Table 8, GM is investing over $750 million in the Volt and its propulsion system, prototypes of which are currently on test at GM’s Milford Proving Grounds. An extended-range electric vehicle, the Volt will deliver up to 40 miles on a single electric charge, well within the daily commute of approximately 80% of Americans. Volt represents a fundamental reinvention of the American automobile industry, creating new growth and environmentally-friendly/sustainable industries, and represents a giant step toward energy independence. No other car company has made such a commitment to the American people. It involves the development of advanced batteries, power electronics, systems integration and manufacturing methods. The company’s product plan includes additional vehicles utilizing Volt’s extended-range electric vehicle system and potentially, the assembly of battery packs in the United States.”
————————————————————-
Now to me, saying something at a press conference is one thing. Putting something on paper to the congress while asking for assistance and saying this is what we will do with it is another. Notice the hard numbers. (2010, 40 miles AER) I would expect if they get the loan we will hear about the battery contract before the end of DEC. What a great Christmas present!
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 12:52 am
Let em rot. All 3.
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 12:55 am
Hey Lyle,
How about putting on a camp out this spring?
some where in Oklahoma would be a central place, someplace we could bring our EVs and compare stories and meet all the bloggers on the Volt waiting list, wouldn’t that be fun? give us something to do for the next few years while were waiting for all of this to blow over and the Volt finally gets here
NPNS, LJGTVWOTR, DBAMGCMEMEVS, (mh)=D~~~~~~(mv)
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 1:08 am
Lets let some of the local Goverment’s get some Help getting some of the older vehicles retired and see some of that bail out here .
Besides I like seeing the new cars on the road . Some around here are made in the 1970’s . Lets give grants to them and get some visual sign that things are better .
God Bless
Tiger
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 1:54 am
I saw Pelosi’s news conference. A few points stood out:
1. She expects an auto industry assistance bill to pass
2. Neither the Hill nor the White House want to see a bankruptcy
3. Treasury Secretary Paulson could use TARP money for bridge loans
I read the GM plan. I don’t think the estimated number of units is that off (sorry Statik). This year and likely 2009 will be depressed, but household formation is very strong, and at the end of the day this is what drives car sales. (That and cheap financing).
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:36 am
#11
Saturn-Daewoo – Fun, small economic cars.
__________________________________________________
Isn’t Daewoo Korean? Or is it like Opel in Europe?
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:15 am
It will be an interesting week!
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:13 am
Hey, did you all notice nasaman’s influence on the plan.
When talking about E-REV etc.
The U.S. Government could also play a key role in providing the needed “venture capital” and become a major customer for these early generation vehicles, paving the way for the commercially high sales volumes necessary for new technology to deliver cost-effective, societal benefits.
If they go for the 3 plans, hope you emailers write your congressman, pointing out the need to toughen up sales standards to get off gas. Thought the bit about tax credits to get junkers off the roads was good. Helps lower pollution as well. Make CARB mandatory would help things along.
I agree Jay, it sure will!
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:14 am
Adam #76, all that money is from printing bonds and selling them overseas with interest attached. Yes, this equates to just printing more money, which causes inflation lessening the value of everything you own. The US is so in debt it is ridiculous. The last time debt to GDP was remotely as high as it is now was back during the great depression. The US economy is in a huge mess, both measuring GDP and the current inflation rate is completely wrong!
I suggest every American actually look at the way debt is accumulated in your own country, especially how your GDP is currently calculated. There was a point were there was no US debt, then it used to accumulate in millions, then billion’s, but now? now it’s growing by more than a trillion per year; with this latest amount just iceing on the cake. At the end of the day, its part your debt as federal debt is accumulated with you as the ultimate borrower.
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:19 am
Ned @ 34 & DavidG @ 53
PBS-Scientific American Frontier-Hydrogen-Ovionics packs.
Wikipedia.com-Palladium at room temp. absorbes 900x its weight in hydrogen.
Instead of spending all OUR MONEY on bailouts, why not our cash goes to implanting the appropriate eguipment at ALL gas stations to begin providing hydrogen fuel. Ford admitted 2-3 years ago to knowing how to convert I.C.E. to run on hydrogen with minimal conversion.
Oh, just for fun; Mr. UFO Bob Lazar has his own business selling science stuff to promote the study of physics. What to make your own thermal battery?. He also is converting a vehicle to run of hydrogen and speaks of how much safer it is. METAL HYDRIDES ABSORBES THE FUEL AND USES HEAT TO RELEASE IT FOR FUEL. You break it in two and set fire to it, know what you’d get? Do you smoke? When the tank catches it’ll look like a burning ciggarette! Cool huh?
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:44 am
When will GM release a Wagoner Edition Camaro? 600Hp, complete with gold “W” badges near both side mirrors. Available in black only.
It worked for DeLorean.
=D~
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 8:30 am
#85 JonP
Everyone has a opinion on this one. I’m not going to disagree with anything with you on anything you said (although I don’t agree with it all either), but I thought I should acknowledge your post.
I’m sure there will be a lot more posts we can debate this issue, hehe.
/have a good one
Side note: Glad you see you are at break even on the shares. I don’t want anyone to get hurt on this stock unnecessarily.
This is a very strange, and unprecedented situation, so I don’t pretend to know how the stock is going to react in the next 4-5 trading days. My motto has always been, ‘if I don’t understand it…I don’t trade it’.
I think your taking a gamble holding it. If the market gets a whiff of this thing not going through, GM falls to a $1–instantly, if it actually doesn’t pass or it gets caught up in red tape, it goes to a nickel–instantly, and GM is filing for protection the next day. There are already a string of sell orders just wanting to execute here.
However, if they get the money easily (coupled with market strengthening) you might see a pop of a few bucks. I don’t know the risk is worth it.
(I still think if your going to report on your GM stock activities you should be stating what you are doing, when you do it. You would get all the credit in the world here if you called a buy at $2.17 here and then it went up, rather than revisiting history after the fact…just my 2p)
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 9:42 am
They’d save a lot of money if their average workers weren’t getting paid two to three times as much as the average worker in the US. I heard the average worker at GM gets about $75 an hour? Any truth there?
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 12:23 pm
WORK FORCE REDUCTION: 96,000 TO 65,000 = 31,000 IN THE “JOBS BANK”. 31,000X ($150,000 X .85) $127,500 = $3,952,500,000 X 2 YEARS = $7,905,000,000. It’ s quite a coincidence that this is what they say that they need immediately! Is this supposed to be part of the aggregate $18,000,000,000 that GM is begging for? In the “highlights” above I failed to see anything in the way of UAW concessions. In it’s present state this organization appears to be incapable of managing it’s way out of the proverbial “wet paper bag” and should file Chapter 11 forthwith.
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 12:41 pm
I like the $1 salary and the 50% cut in other salaries. But not just for 2009. They should keep the CEO at $1 through at least through 2012 or maybe until GM becomes profitable and the loan is repaid.
Trim the number of vehicles and number of brands – Yes. GMC offers nothing that Chevrolet does not now offer also. Eliminate GMC and stop the duplication. I don’t see keeping Buick as a full brand. Either just keep Buick as a specialty brand like Pontiac or eliminate both.
Saturn could stay or go. If they would cut Buick and Pontiac completely, I would say keep Saturn. Else maybe sell it if you are going to spend money keeping Buick and Pontiac brands.
I don’t see congress giving the three over the 25 billion already allocated. Either GM will only get 9 billion total or the other two will not get what they asked for. Maybe Ford won’t get anything but a promise to be considered later if the need arises and then the 25 billion could be split up between GM (18 billion) and Chrysler (7 billion). That comes out very neatly to 25 billion.
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Look, GM stop wasting money on hydrogen. No one wants you to waste money on a potential power source that is another 25 years away. Plus not infrastructure to support it anyway. Just say NO, GM. Stop wasting OUR money. It’s ours if you get a taxpayer subsidized loan. So, just stop it, GM.
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Questions about the “VOLT”: How do apartment dwellers and others, who park under overhangs or on the street, recharge the battery and how does the heater or AC work under the electric mode? This sounds more like a novelty and less like a practical solution to GM’s problems.
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:42 pm
#51 When I read this crap I realize that American industry is doomed. Millions of nice standard 120V outlets available. Hundreds of thousands of available 240V outlets set up for campers and motor homes and yachts. % or 6 other standards for stoves and dryers. So now these morons need to come up with yet another standard for autos? The big advantage that battery powered vehicles have over other alternatives is the infrastructure already exists. Let’s go guys and remove that advantage.
Just how stupid can these folks get?
Here’s the quote:
Coulomb Technologies is showcasing prototypes of Level 2 high power networked charging stations that will comply with the new SAE J1772 Electric Vehicle Conductive Charge Coupler Specification at the EDTA conference 2-4 December in Washington, DC.
SAE has been making modifications to the older J1772 REV NOV 2001 standard, moving toward a smaller (and less expensive) coupler made by Yazaki to replace the former Avcon connector. The new SAE J1772 standard is being finalized now, and may be balloted by the first quarter of 2009.
The J1772 standard specifies a specific 5-pin plug (two power, two signal, one ground) for single-phase supply up to 80A.
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:47 pm
And here’s the link:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/12/coulomb-techn-1.html#more
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:48 pm
“f GM goes belly-up, it will start a domino effect that will kill many other companies as well. By the time it’s all done, up to 3 million more people will be unemployed”
Put those 3 million to work building wind turbines and solar panels.
“How do apartment dwellers and others, who park under overhangs or on the street, recharge the battery and how does the heater or AC work under the electric mode? This sounds more like a novelty and less like a practical solution to GM’s problems.”
If you are so anti plugin, why the hell are you reading this blog?
(Quote)
December 3rd, 2008 at 4:22 pm
To ug:
I didn’t say that I’m anti plugin, per se, but I think practicality is an important consideration for a possible $40,000 investment. I only posed a couple of questions. I guess that you can’t answer them and thus your surly remark. What other blog(s) should such questions be directed to? If you have a civil, cogent response I would appreciate hearing it.
(Quote)
December 4th, 2008 at 2:38 am
I’m the guy who made the initial ‘axe buick’ post (#13). I gotta respond to those people who are defending Buick.
Buick currently sells 3 vehicles: The Lucerne, LaCross and Enclave.
Which of these is so great? The Enclave is the same vehicle as GMC’s Acadia, Chevy’s Traverse and Saturn’s Outlook. Since GMC and Chevy are certainly sticking around, we’re not losing anything if the Enclave goes. I don’t see how you can argue that the Enclave is anything special since 3 other brands sell the same thing. FWIW, the Enclave has a ‘below average’ durability rated from consumer reports.
Then there’s the Lucerne. The Lucerne is based on the G-body platform which initially appeared in the Pontiac Bonneville in 2000. It’s not a bad car (style-wise and engineering) but it’s nothing special either. I wouldn’t keep Buick around because they have a car based on nearly a decade old technology.
Lastly, we have the LaCross….and it’s a nice looking car. Too bad it’s not nearly as nice as the concept thought. Besides the styling, it’s still nothing special. It’s got the same Series III 3800 series engine you can find is loads of GM vehicles. I don’t have anything against this car but I would keep Buick because they have one nice car. All of GM’s brands have atleast one nice vehicle.
Honestly, the styling of Buick’s has come a long way since the 90’s. The new Invicta concept car is pretty sexy. By the time this makes it to the market it’s going to be watered way down like the LaCrosse though.
The problem is that the 90’s Buick’s did so much damage to the brands image, that it’s hardly worth pouring all the money into fixing their image. The quality of Buicks have been improving as well, but only because GM is improving their overall quality. It’s not like Buick is getting their own platforms or engines that are above average in quality.
(Quote)
December 5th, 2008 at 12:09 am
Well, I saw the Big Three (B.T.) beggers, otherwise known as the Detroit Three, this morning. Why are they so afraid of Chapter 11? Do you really think that people would be reluctant to buy the cars under Chapter 11 any more, or less, than in some free fall plan with contiuning government funding as proposed by the B.T. and the UAW puppet who has no clue about anything ? The argument about parts suppliers is bogus because they supply” transplants”, as well, who will take up the slack in the demand for vehicles should the B.T. go. They the B.T. and the UAW have had 30 or more years to get their act together but were too arrogant in thinking that because of blind patriotism people would continue to buy anything that they produced. The companies capitulated to all sorts of unrealistic union demands instead of saying we will hire new folks who wish to work, if you don’t, and not have allowed the absurd “Jobs Bank” thing to ever have taken root! File a cogent Chapter 11 plan or die. I prefer the former!
(Quote)
February 19th, 2009 at 1:00 am
Have any of you seen the new Pontiac G-8
Where has been all the promotions of this
smart good-looking buggy?
Buy the way….only 7% made in US/Canada
(Quote)
February 23rd, 2009 at 1:31 pm
I am NOT part of a so called “EV” cult! I am part of a “FREE AMERICA” cult. I wanted GM and the VOLT to succeed in the worst way. But not at the cost of losing our Repuiblic to a Socialist State. I am on the “BUY” list for the VOLT, but I no longer have reserves large enough to purchase anything. I will not purchase to sustain a company run by unions and crippled by them regardless of the creativity that comes out of GM engineering. I will not indulge in furthering the Communist agenda of some and Socialist agenda of many in Washington. I have lost confidence in our Congress – they are presiding over the demise of a once great nation. You can tear down the edifices in Washington, the symbols of our history, of commitment to nation, of commitment to faith. Our faith will survive, our nation will not, it’s symbols will come to mean little as our nation embraces the ideals of Socialists and Communists. It may be goodbye America, but before that it is goodbye UAW and goodbye Volt! Where our resources have been destroyed by usurpation, there can and will be no voice to purchase or support “Volt”.
(Quote)