This is just one person's opinion of course...from today's Wall Street Journal. Maybe bankruptcy would be a viable option, heck if customers fly on bankrupt airlines why wouldn't they buy a car from a manufacturer running under Chapter 11? I'm starting to lean that way, versus taking a "loan" from the government.

-----------
Dow and S&P component General Motors slid 21.6%, or 97 cents, to $3.52 a share after Credit Suisse's auto analyst Chris Ceraso downgraded the company to an "underperform" rating from "neutral." Mr. Ceraso said that GM could yet wind up in bankruptcy and that shareholder value is likely to be eliminated no matter how the government's recent efforts to prop up the auto industry pan out.

"Over the next two months, as bondholders, union representatives, and company management meet to hammer out concessions, we think it will become increasingly clear that the enormous sacrifice of value … will require the complete or near-complete elimination of the existing GM equity," he wrote.

I don't care if GM is in chapter 11 or not, I'd still buy a car from them if they had one that I wanted at a price I wanted to pay.

I have flown bankrupt airlines. I've purchased products from Circuit City and they are in Chapter 11. I think if I look further I'd find that I do business and purchase products and services from any number of corporations in chapter-11. Why would GM be any different?

I don't care if GM is in chapter 11 or not, I'd still buy a car from them if they had one that I wanted at a price I wanted to pay.

I have flown bankrupt airlines. I've purchased products from Circuit City and they are in Chapter 11. I think if I look further I'd find that I do business and purchase products and services from any number of corporations in chapter-11. Why would GM be any different?

When you fly on an airline, you make your trip and you are done. They provide a service, with no tangible products remaining in your possession (unless you keep the little bag of snacks.)

When you buy something from Circuit City, you are buying products manufactured by large companies like Panasonic, Sony, etc.; CC is not a manufacturer. If CC goes bust, you can still get factory warranty and service on your products. However, if you pay for CC-supported extended warranties, you could be out.

When you buy a GM product, you are buying from the manufacturer (through a dealer network). Without GM standing behind the product, you will have little or no recourse in case of warranty problems. Even though you could get some minor servicing done at local shops, ultimately the supply of required repair parts would dry up.

Also, an expensive flatscreen TV at CC costs ~$3k. Losing $3k wouldn't generally destroy anyone's budget. A reasonably inexpensive car costs around $20k - losing that would sting most anyone I know.

There IS a difference.

A reasonably inexpensive car costs around $20k - losing that would sting most anyone I know.

There IS a difference.

I think you and I have a very different point of view about what we would call a reasonably inexpensive car.

-------------

While I agree there is a a difference ... I don't think it is as significant as many people including the Big 3's CEO's say it is.

Allot of people buy stuff from off brands at stores because it is cheaper... if people only bought it when the likes of Sony and such were backing it... Walmart , the Grocery store , among others would have to change their entire business model.

Also a House is a much larger investment than just about any car is... and yet there is no such thing as a brand name house... I'd bet 90+% of people never know who built the house they live in... and they don't care... you get qualified people to check out the condition of the investment... a Mechanic for a Car or similar for a house... you deal with malfunction to either when the situation comes up either with a warranty or insurance or out of your own pocket.

I think you and I have a very different point of view about what we would call a reasonably inexpensive car.

-------------

While I agree there is a a difference ... I don't think it is as significant as many people including the Big 3's CEO's say it is.

Allot of people buy stuff from off brands at stores because it is cheaper... if people only bought it when the likes of Sony and such were backing it... Walmart , the Grocery store , among others would have to change their entire business model.

Also a House is a much larger investment than just about any car is... and yet there is no such thing as a brand name house... I'd bet 90+% of people never know who built the house they live in... and they don't care... you get qualified people to check out the condition of the investment... a Mechanic for a Car or similar for a house... you deal with malfunction to either when the situation comes up either with a warranty or insurance or out of your own pocket.

Houses aren't complex machines that are dependent on hundreds of complex moving parts in order to serve their purpose. They don't "break down" and render your entire investment useless when a part fails. And yes, most new houses do come with warranties. Also, if your builder goes under and your roof springs a leak, you aren't screwed because you can't find "replacement shingles" from your builder. Houses are made up entirely of generic parts that are available anywhere.

When you purchase a car, part of your investment is going into that manufacturers warranty and the knowledge that you will have a lifetime of parts available for your car. When a car company goes under, you lost a huge part of your investment, and a huge guarantee of reliability. Also, when a car company goes under, the auto maker may decide to cease producing spare parts for vehicles made before the restructuring. Unlike a house, you can't always find generic parts to use when something fails.

I have bought from Circuit City exclusively since I banned Fry's and their garbage. Single exception the IMac. I never knew they were in Chapter 11. I don't think it matters. Manufacturer's warranties, in electrical, aren't worth the paper they are printed on, IMO. I will buy a VOLT if I can afford it, regardless if GM is in Chapter 11 or not. I am of the belief they would be better off filing Chp 11 and getting it over with. They cannot compete under their current mode without major restructuring. And the best way to do that is CHP 11. The CEOs and UAW are vehemently anti CHP 11 because it will send them packing. I say get the painfull part behind us before and Steal some Honda engineers.........

This isn't a perfect analogy but I was working for a group of dealerships years ago when one of them, a GMC-Buick dealer, decided to take on the then-new Kia line. I remember looking over those generation one Kias, comparing them to the relatively flawless by comparison Buicks and thinking who in their right mind would come in here and choose one of these? The rest is history, Kia persevered, improved their product and became a successful car company.

Maybe if GM could wipe the slate clean and deliver a fresh, good value proposition, which I'm confident they could, they too could once again thrive.

It crossed my mind that if they continue with the same baggage they now sport, "Bailout" the movie will have a few sequels.