[ambush]

Has anyone heard the news?

Lots of job losses to come, methinks!

[TETENAL]

As long as no Opel jobs are lost I'm fine with that.

[ManOfSteal]

Yes, the GM is being downloaded.

Oh wait...

[Kilbey]

Possibly. Lotsa layoffs at my plant, but none permanent yet. All high seniority inverse temporary layoffs. Meaning they ask from the top of the seniority list on down to see if the want to be temporarily laid off. A free vacation basically. They get about 80% of their pay while laid off.

Salary workers are quite scared. They have no protection.

Contractually, I have a guaranteed paycheck until Sept 14th, 2007. I am not worried.

Actually, it looks like I might be made to work forced overtime on some Saturdays in the Summer. I am NOT happy about that.

On a side note, a couple of school districts have contacted me recently to recruit me for teaching positions. Very tempting, but the pay is only about 75% of what I currently make. The benefits packages are better though. If I get laid off I will be fine. But there are a lot of people who won't be.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally Posted by ManOfSteal

Yes, the GM is being downloaded.

Oh wait...

Ha that was funny.

Anywho, GM should go down after that horrid Aztec.

[Kilbey]

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

Ha that was funny.

Anywho, GM should go down after that horrid Aztec.

The Aztek was a great concept car when it was initially revealed. Unfortunately, GM removed everything that made it unique and cool and put out what we have today. The worst thing is that it rides good and has great quality. But not many people can look past it's appearance. I certainly can't.

[ambush]

GM will have to accept its new position in the market, it seems. And yes, that means laying off people to keep the profits high.

You see, the shareholders DO NOT give a damn if you get laid off. All they want is profit, profit, and profit.

[Goldfinger]

Originally Posted by ambush

GM will have to accept its new position in the market, it seems. And yes, that means laying off people to keep the profits high.

You see, the shareholders DO NOT give a damn if you get laid off. All they want is profit, profit, and profit.

So you want the company go bust and lay off everybody. Please wake up from your idealistic dream.

[ambush]

No I want capitalism to be more human. And yes, that means LESS profits.

Wake up from your evil domination dream. Oh wait it's not a dream!

[Goldfinger]

GM is at a $1.1 billion LOSS Ambush.

[blackstar]

laying of people to raise the profit for the shareholders is actually not a fantasy

[Goldfinger]

Originally Posted by blackstar

laying of people to raise the profit for the shareholders is actually not a fantasy

Nobody said that it's a fantasy.

[analogika]

In fact, the hard reality of shareholder value over real-world value was, I believe, the point of ambush's post.

[ambush]

Finally, someone got me right.

Thanks.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by ambush

No I want capitalism to be more human. And yes, that means LESS profits.

Wake up from your evil domination dream. Oh wait it's not a dream!

Humanistic capitalism is a bit of an anachronism, isn't it? The profit motive IS what drives these companies and maximizing profits IS the only concern. That is never going to change, certainly not on a large scale. I think you need to wake up from your dream.

Everything a company does is to maximize profits. The only time humanistic concerns might come into play is in addressing employee or environmental concerns ONLY IF it effects the bottom line. So, if treating your employees better helps productivity--which means more sales--then a company will do it. If being "green" helps the companies perception in the marketplace then they will do so, or at least make overt attempts to appear green.

Hell, all the businesses in Socialist Europe are concerned about maximizing profit. Greed is greed all over the world. Get used to it.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by analogika

In fact, the hard reality of shareholder value over real-world value was, I believe, the point of ambush's post.

Originally Posted by ambush

Finally, someone got me right.

Thanks.

And again I say, when has this ever been different? Large multi-national corporations serve only one constituent, their shareholders. If GM can't make a profit selling cars then they need to make a profit cutting costs. Cost == labor. So to cut costs, they cut labor. I am not saying this is comendable but why is this suddenly a surprise to anyone?

[Cody Dawg]

I heard today that Ford was also WAY down in sales.

Finally GW is going to get the message that the price of gasoline in this country is too high.

I call a lame duck president or a president lame duck.

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by blackstar

laying of people to raise the profit for the shareholders is actually not a fantasy

Hmm... "Laying of people"

So, they're going to be getting laid to raise shareholder profit, huh?

Sorry, that was too good to pass up.

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

I heard today that Ford was also WAY down in sales.

Finally GW is going to get the message that the price of gasoline in this country is too high.

I call a lame duck president or a president lame duck.

Well, technically, "lame duck" is applied to the president after a new one has been elected, and before the new one takes office. Meaning that there isn't too much he can do in that short period of time to influence the government.

It's still a long way off until 2008, and Bush can make plenty of changes in that time period. I'd still like to see Congress be a bit more Democrat oriented in 2006, though, so that Bush's policies have better checks and balances, if you will... But I also prefer a Republican Congress when there's a Democrat president for the same reasons.

[xi_hyperon]

Originally Posted by Kilbey

The Aztek was a great concept car when it was initially revealed. Unfortunately, GM removed everything that made it unique and cool and put out what we have today. The worst thing is that it rides good and has great quality. But not many people can look past it's appearance. I certainly can't.

Kilbey, not to get too far off topic, but I was curious if you have any insight to what Pontiac was thinking when they released the Aztec as is. I can't help but wonder about that every time I see one. It is such a strange design - did they make it different aestheticallly just for the sake of being different?

[pman68]

The new PONTIAC SOLSTICE looks really nice.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

I heard today that Ford was also WAY down in sales.

Finally GW is going to get the message that the price of gasoline in this country is too high.

I call a lame duck president or a president lame duck.

But you can't do much about the gas prices. Gas is much more expensive elsewhere (aka Europe and Japan), so exports are down, too. So you have to build cars which consume less.

[Cody Dawg]

Yeah, you're right.

About the Aztec? That car gets my "THE MOST UGLY CAR EVER MANUFACTURED" award.

That thing is SO ugly. I honestly don't know what they were thinking when they developed that car other than, "Hey, why don't we design the ugliest car ever and see if people buy it?"

It's a joke on the public. Sort of like being Punk'd.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

But you can't do much about the gas prices. Gas is much more expensive elsewhere (aka Europe and Japan), so exports are down, too. So you have to build cars which consume less.

Yes, but the current rise in gas prices can be traced back to US actions

[Cody Dawg]

That's true too.

1600 lives ago and a promise "to be out within 2 years."

[OldManMac]

Gm is just doing what GM has done for decades; continuing its' slow, but sure, decline from world automotive dominance to a second-tier producer of bland vehicles.

[xi_hyperon]

Originally Posted by pman68

The new PONTIAC SOLSTICE looks really nice.

The G6 is a bit of a departure for Pontiac. Other than the telltale split grille and inverted star trek badge, it is very Japanese-luxury in its styling.

[OldManMac]

And the G6 is getting mixed reviews, at best, and is not selling in anywhere near the volume that the car it replaces, the Grand AM, was. Looks like Oprah didn't help this one. The Cobalt is also off to a slow start, replacing the hot selling Cavalier.

These were two of GM's best selling cars; GM is in trouble.

[Cody Dawg]

I don't know as much as everyone else except that I love my Suburban. I know it's big and a gas hog but I love it.

I also need the space that it has - and the ruggedness. A minivan would never take the beatings that the Suburban gets.

[xi_hyperon]

Originally Posted by KarlG

And the G6 is getting mixed reviews, at best, and is not selling in anywhere near the volume that the car it replaces, the Grand AM, was. Looks like Oprah didn't help this one. The Cobalt is also off to a slow start, replacing the hot selling Cavalier.

These were two of GM's best selling cars; GM is in trouble.

I actually meant to question that in my previous post. I was wondering if the G6 was selling or not. I have not seen many on the road in my area so far.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

That's true too.

1600 lives ago and a promise "to be out within 2 years."

Well, I guess that's another topic …*

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

I don't know as much as everyone else except that I love my Suburban. I know it's big and a gas hog but I love it.

I also need the space that it has - and the ruggedness. A minivan would never take the beatings that the Suburban gets.

I don't know about the latter part, but as long as you're willing to pay the premium in terms of gas-mileage, continue to drive the Suburban (although I always felt, the name never quite suited that automobile)

What exactly do you do with your car that makes an offroader a necessity?

My hostmom gave up on SUVs three years ago or so (she drove a Chevy for a couple of years, then an Explorer), because the car was eating up her salary.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

That's true too.

1600 lives ago and a promise "to be out within 2 years."

I know this is OT, but was that criticism of the current US administration?

[SVass]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

And again I say, when has this ever been different? Large multi-national corporations serve only one constituent, their shareholders. If GM can't make a profit selling cars then they need to make a profit cutting costs. Cost == labor. So to cut costs, they cut labor. I am not saying this is comendable but why is this suddenly a surprise to anyone?

I must disagree! Large companies primarily serve their management. Their goal is short-term profit to generate bonuses for top managers. GM provided life time health care benefits to their employees that incurred future costs to the company, thus allowing short term bonuses, higher salaries, and public adulation for their top management. Now the future has come and the current management has very little room to maneuver. Large shareholders are now retirement funds of sister corporations and mutual funds who do not exercise control. Note that Arnold wants his state's retirement fund to make nice to its owned corporations. Pataki has accused Spitzer of hurting retirees by over aggressively enforcing criminal law. sam

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by ambush

GM going down?

I think they are already doing business in Australia, thank you very much

-t

[ambush]

Originally Posted by KarlG

Gm is just doing what GM has done for decades; continuing its' slow, but sure, decline from world automotive dominance to a second-tier producer of bland vehicles.

^ What he said

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

I heard today that Ford was also WAY down in sales.

Finally GW is going to get the message that the price of gasoline in this country is too high.

I call a lame duck president or a president lame duck.

Yes, but correct me if I'm wrong, but Ford already has a share in the Euro market. Two markets are better than one. And for the rest, well, I'd choose a Focus over a Cavalier anytime.

Anyone remember the Aztek Official Hotline Server?????? This thing was such a joke... it was like a Hotline server hosted by Pontiac or whatever and like it had a chat were people flamebaited eachother and like photos of the pontiac aztek..

it was so lame.

GM is not making any cool cars I could think of. That's too bad. And no, the Aveo does NOT count as "cool".

"When The Donald calls aspiring apprentices into the boardroom to determine which one to fire, I'm always hoping for a miracle. I want him to can ALL of them. My feelings about GM are identical. When GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz hinted that he’d axe Buick or Pontiac if the divisions didn’t "gain traction", he ignited a debate over which of the General's lackluster brands deserved death. The answer is, of course, all of them."

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/con...0219/index.php

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

But you can't do much about the gas prices. Gas is much more expensive elsewhere (aka Europe and Japan), so exports are down, too. So you have to build cars which consume less.

A couple other key differences between the US and Europe/Japan.

The main reasons that gasoline is so much more expensive in Europe are the high taxes per liter (per gallon) of gasoline. It's not uncommon that around 50-70% or so of the price is taxes alone. I don't know if the situation is similar in Japan.

The other thing is that Europe/Japan have a much better public transportation infrastructure than the United States, so people are not as reliant on personal transportation as we are. I'm talking about smaller towns, not places like New York, etc. Think of New York level public transportation (buses, trains, subways) taken to smaller towns like Akron, Ohio, for example.

[waxcrash]

Originally Posted by ambush

GM is not making any cool cars I could think of. That's too bad.

Cough…cough.

[BoomStick]

Three words why they are failing

GTO

nuff said.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Person Man

A couple other key differences between the US and Europe/Japan.

The main reasons that gasoline is so much more expensive in Europe are the high taxes per liter (per gallon) of gasoline. It's not uncommon that around 50-70% or so of the price is taxes alone. I don't know if the situation is similar in Japan.

The other thing is that Europe/Japan have a much better public transportation infrastructure than the United States, so people are not as reliant on personal transportation as we are. I'm talking about smaller towns, not places like New York, etc. Think of New York level public transportation (buses, trains, subways) taken to smaller towns like Akron, Ohio, for example.

I'm aware of that. I couldn't do anything while I lived in the states, I always had to ask people with a car.

However, crude oil prices (hence gas prices) are on the rise and so costs for gas-guzzlers skyrocket. It's a fact and in a way, Americans feel it stronger than Europeans, because we don't have that car culture like the US.

Also, German car makers have made a quick buck for the last couple of years building huge engines in cars, whereas the Japanese have put a lot of effort into making cars more efficient. Now Toyota is 1.5-2 generations ahead of big German names when it comes to hybrid engines. The cars need to become smaller. I'm still amazed with the obsession of huge engines in the states when you can't drive fast. Why do you need 300 hp doing 65-70 on a highway?

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by waxcrash

Cough…cough.

Boring. Looks like Face's Corvette from the 80s.

I prefer the GTO, now that's a cool car. Although I would hardly suspect, it's GM's cash cow

[BoomStick]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

I'm still amazed with the obsession of huge engines in the states when you can't drive fast. Why do you need 300 hp doing 65-70 on a highway?

Try pulling a boat or camper with a 25hp hybrid.

The new GTO doesn't have the soul of the muscle car of yesteryear. It's name only.

The Charger and Mustang have the soul captured.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by BoomStick

Try pulling a boat or camper with a 25hp hybrid.

The new GTO doesn't have the soul of the muscle car of yesteryear. It's name only.

The Charger and Mustang have the soul captured.

So you have a boat on your hanger when you go to work every morning? Hybrids have more like 100-120 hp engines. If you want pull a boat, my neighbors had a 150 hp diesel doing that with no problem whatsoever.

I could never figure out the obsession with the (newer) Mustangs. The 1997 model looked like a Golf with a longer hood to me

[BoomStick]

A 2000lb boat will destroy the transmission of a meager 150hp diesel quickly.

I don't have access to your neighbor's vehicle anyways.

I'll stick with me truck that has been engineered to tow heavy loads.

A diesel engined truck gets worse mileage than a gasoline of the same HP because of the gearing.

Now you get me an electric that has 250hp and will go 300 miles on a single charge and it's mine tomorrow!

[waxcrash]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

So you have a boat on your hanger when you go to work every morning? Hybrids have more like 100-120 hp engines. If you want pull a boat, my neighbors had a 150 hp diesel doing that with no problem whatsoever.

Comparing a diesel vs. hybrid or even gas isn't fair. A diesel engine at the same horsepower as a gas or hybrid is going to have more torque. Torque = pulling power.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by waxcrash

Comparing a diesel vs. hybrid or even gas isn't fair. A diesel engine at the same horsepower as a gas or hybrid is going to have more torque. Torque = pulling power.

Quite interestingly, even small electric engines can create quite a bit of torque. And they don't need to run at high rpms to reach optimum efficiency. Hence, a hybrid would compare even better than a regular gas engine by itself.

The mention of diesel just shows that there are alternatives out there, and quite capable ones, too. Even smaller diesel engines can easily produces around 200 Nm at lower rpms than their brothers. BTW, that's why US engines usually have `very little' horsepower if you take the size into consideration. For instance, the 5.7 l engine in the new Grand Cherokee is only rated at 326 hp. The engine in an S350/E350 (3.5 l) has 272 hp. Why is that? AFAIK the difference is torque. But I'm no expert on this.

Anyway, there are more efficient alternatives for 90-95 % of the usage scenarios. Especially when you aren't supposed to do more than 65 mph

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by BoomStick

A 2000lb boat will destroy the transmission of a meager 150hp diesel quickly.

I don't have access to your neighbor's vehicle anyways.

I'll stick with me truck that has been engineered to tow heavy loads.

A diesel engined truck gets worse mileage than a gasoline of the same HP because of the gearing.

Now you get me an electric that has 250hp and will go 300 miles on a single charge and it's mine tomorrow!

Actually cars with 130-150 hp diesel engines can do 500+ miles on a single tank. And apparently the transmission of my neighbors survived at least five years. Unfortunately, the car was totaled, because the neighbor's brother was too fast in a curve (with boat).

Edit: I checked how much you can tow with a VW Passat (a regular family car here in Germany) with the smallest diesel engine, a measely 100 hp diesel, and it's 650 kg (no brakes in your trailer) or 1400 kg (trailer with brakes) which is 1433 and 3086 lbs. With the stronger 2.5 l engine, you can tow up to 2 (metric) tons.

[BoomStick]

A 2500lb diesel car towing a 2000lb boat?

My hitch on my truck is only rated at 2500lbs.

My brother in law's boat weighs in at a whopping 3500lbs and his dualie axled 400hp truck barely pulls it.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by BoomStick

A 2500lb diesel car towing a 2000lb boat?

My hitch on my truck is only rated at 2500lbs.

My brother in law's boat weighs in at a whopping 3500lbs and his dualie axled 400hp truck barely pulls it.

Yes. If the official rating is to be believed.

Edit: A quick google turned up a post concerning this topic in a German boat forum. A Passat 2.5 TDI is supposed to be able to tow a 2 ton boat (roughly 4400 pounds) with no problems whatsoever.

[BoomStick]

Holy He||!!!

It's $85,000!!!!

I read a post where it wouldn't go up a hill towing a 3000lb trailer.