[Cody Dawg]

I thought this was an interesting article:

GM is $291 BILLION dollars in debt and in danger of becoming junk bond rated.

Last week, GM said its 2004 fourth-quarter profits declined 37 percent to $630 million from $1 billion during the October-December period a year ago and that full year profits slipped to $3.7 billion from $3.8 billion in 2004, including special items.

Earlier, the company warned its 2005 profits would be significantly lower in large part because of increasing health care costs and continued losses at its European unit, which has been in the red for five straight years.

The company is offering deep discounts on vehicles but has not been able to hold on to U.S. market share, which slipped to 27.3 percent in 2004 from 28 percent in 2003.

GM is one of the largest borrowers in the world with $291 billion in outstanding debt, and even the possibility of a downgrade has shaken up the bond market in recent days.

$291 BILLION dollars in debt.



My Suburban is a GM. Everyone has a Suburban here where I live. I'm surprised by this news.

I hope GM can hold on. I don't see how they can crawl out of this amount of debt. It is staggering.

[Millennium]

They stand a chance, at the absolute least. Apple's managed to crawl out of worse.

[bubblewrap]

Aren't most GM products assembled in Canada now?
I know we have one GM assembly plant left in Norcross GA.

[The Oracle]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I'm surprised by this news.

I'm not really surprised. Toyota has been gaining marketshare and in vehicles sold; they just make a better product. Maybe the union wages and benefits are dragging GM down just like the airlines. The Japanese companies open up a lot of factories in the South where wages are lower and unions are choking everything like kudzu.

[G4ME]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
Everyone has a Suburban here where I live

wheres kilbey?

[OldManMac]

They won't go broke and simply disappear, but they will lose their number one spot as the world's largest automaker to Toyota, by the end of this decade. It's amazing to think that, 4 decades ago, they had 60% of the automotive market in the U. S. It's just another sign of America's decline in importance on the world stage.

[Cody Dawg]

That's probably true about automaking.

But at least we have Microsoft...for a while.

Until Mr. Gates follows Dell's lead, HP's lead, and countless others and outsources everything to India.

[wdlove]

GM is such a large company that they will pull through. Being so large is what's causing problems, they haven't reacted to market changes. Microsoft could have the same problems.

[BoomStick]

With the garbage they are producing, it's no wonder.

The new GTO? I've never laughed so hard. It doesn't even look like a GTO. It looks like a clone of the other identiccal body styles in GM's lineup.

At least there some of the soul of the old Mustang in the new one along with Chrysler's Charger.


Our Blazer has been a complete piece of garbage from day one.

[Kilbey]

Originally posted by G4ME:


wheres kilbey?

Here I am.

Cody doggie just doesn't understand simple US economics or US business practices. But I'll bite her flame bait.

GM actually earned US$570 million dollars in the last fourth quarter. The previous fourth quarter GM earned US$1 billion.

So their profits were down. GM is still not going broke.

I am still getting a profit sharing check this year. It's not huge, but it's better than a few years ago when I got nothing.

When they stop begging me to work 12 hours days 7 days a week then I will start worrying.

Originally posted by flamer dawg:
I hope GM can hold on. I don't see how they can crawl out of this amount of debt. It is staggering.

Ummm... a majority of GM's debt is to itself. GM borrows from it's own financial holdings. To a company GM's size this debt is not as it appears.

You really should leave the discussion of economics to those that understand such things dog. Are you still bitter about the way you were proven wrong when you tried to sell your propaganda about oil changes?

That article is from the Detroit News. A very vocal anti-GM paper that has a severe history of actions against unions. This should have been your clue : "at least according to the notoriously hard-nosed bond rating agencies."

Originally posted by bubblewrap:
IAren't most GM products assembled in Canada now?
I know we have one GM assembly plant left in Norcross GA.

HUH?!?! Are you serious? I'm sorry, but this is simply not true.

If GM goes towards more Canadian automotive assembly then I will truly be worried. The quality of GM cars made in Canada is horrendous! I don't know why, but I assume it's the work ethic in Canada. They just don't seem to have an eye for quality.

[Kilbey]

Originally posted by BoomStick:
With the garbage they are producing, it's no wonder.

The new GTO? I've never laughed so hard. It doesn't even look like a GTO. It looks like a clone of the other identiccal body styles in GM's lineup.

At least there some of the soul of the old Mustang in the new one along with Chrysler's Charger.

Our Blazer has been a complete piece of garbage from day one.

I agree, GM made a mistake with calling it a GTO. They should have named it something else.

I put 80K miles on my GMC Jimmy (exactly the same as car the Blazer). Not a single problem. I even had the same tires, brakes, and even wiper blades on it when I sold it. I only got rid of it to buy a Cavalier for better gas mileage as I have such a long commute. I don't know why you had so many problems as most people I know who have owned one loved it and had better luck than you.

[Cody Dawg]

You're just snotty no matter where you post, aren't you, Kilbey?



The article isn't about whether or not I like or dislike or am correct or incorrect about GM.

Apparently you don't read much do you? It's not just myself that is wondering about GM's financial status.

Standard & Poor's is rating them barely above junk bond status.

THAT is the point of the thread, not what I know or do not know. And, no, I'm not an economics professor. Where did you get that idea?

[Cody Dawg]

Kilbey, are you secretly Michael Moore? You are from Michigan, same as the bloviator.

[OldManMac]

I wonder what Kilbey's coworkers think of him, coming to work daily in a cheerleader's outfit?

The facts are, GM is not making much of its money from the car manufacturing side of operations. The profits come primarily from their financing arm, GMAC.

I would tend to believe that the experts on Wall Street know a tad bit more about financing and and economics than GM's cheerleader.

As to the Jimmy anecdote; you were indeed unusually fortunate. My son-in-laws parents bought a Jimmy new in 1999, and they've had nothing but trouble with it, especially with front end and drive train components. It's gone through four sets of ball joints, and it's never even been off road, in 120,000 miles. My son-in-law has a 1999 Chevy pickup that is getting ready for it's third set, in 71,000 miles. He just replaced the fuel pump, he's replaced the brakes twice, and now he is having problems with the brakes again; just before the truck comes to a complete stop, it shudders so violently that one would think the drive train is going to fall off.

My daughter has a three-year old GrandAM, which went into the dealer's nine times for a horrible clunking sound in the front end, usually while turning. They claimed to have replaced everything on the front end, and it didn't stop, so they contacted an attorney, for the possibility of suing under the lemon laws. All of a sudden, they get a check from GM, for $3500, for their rental expenses, attorney fees, and inconvenience, but the noise persists. So my son-in-law takes it back to the dealer one more time, and demands that they replace the control arms, which they do. Bingo; the noise is gone, after he tells them what's wrong, and after they claim they had already replaced them, and after two plus years of literally driving a clunker!

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

They make some of the ugliest, clunkiest cars in the world so I am not surprised.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Has anyone even read the article? It said the problem is primarily related to losses in GM's subsidiaries in Europe.

Presumably, they mean that lossmaking Opel plant in Germany that we discussed before. Perhaps also its SAAB or Vauxhall divisions. The article also discussed a put involving GM's ownership interest in Fiat.

GM is a huge multinational corporation. It's not just in Detroit.

[Cody Dawg]

I have a Suburban and it IS huge and clunky and big.

That's why I have it.

So, if someone smashes into me while driving like an idiot I have more protection than I would in a car, especially a flimsy small car.

Now about the article, I did read that they are having problems with the European division, yes. Fiat in particular is a problem.

Why did they even buy Fiat? What was the point?

[brapper]

Originally posted by Kilbey:
I don't know why, but I assume it's the work ethic in Canada. They just don't seem to have an eye for quality.

Stop "flaming" and stop being a dick.

[TheBadgerHunter]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I have a Suburban and it IS huge and clunky and big.

That's why I have it.

So, if someone smashes into me while driving like an idiot I have more protection than I would in a car, especially a flimsy small car.

Now about the article, I did read that they are having problems with the European division, yes. Fiat in particular is a problem.

Why did they even buy Fiat? What was the point?

So the other person has a greater chance of dying. How noble of you.

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

Originally posted by brapper:
Stop "flaming" and stop being a dick.

He doesn't know how. His US insecurity makes him say stupid things like that.

[TheBadgerHunter]

Originally posted by Kilbey:
If GM goes towards more Canadian automotive assembly then I will truly be worried. The quality of GM cars made in Canada is horrendous! I don't know why, but I assume it's the work ethic in Canada. They just don't seem to have an eye for quality.

Actually just browsing around everyone else is saying Canada holds the top two north american GM plants based on quality and efficiency. Of course it may be as you say that canadians are inherently lazy and stupid. Being one I wouldn't really know.

[Thorin]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
Now about the article, I did read that they are having problems with the European division, yes. Fiat in particular is a problem.

Why did they even buy Fiat? What was the point?

More to the point.... when did they buy Fiat? So far as I'm aware GM don't own Fiat. Fiat are a seperate company, who have had some dealings with GM, and there were rumours that GM had negotiated a deal where they had first refusal, on a buy out of Fiat, but I'm pretty sure they haven't done that yet.

It doesn't surprise me that Opel (or Vauxhall as they're branded in the UK) are in trouble, as the cars they produce are absolutely abysmal, and have a reputation for being so.

Ford are in dire straights as well I believe.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Thorin:
More to the point.... when did they buy Fiat? So far as I'm aware GM don't own Fiat. Fiat are a seperate company, who have had some dealings with GM, and there were rumours that GM had negotiated a deal where they had first refusal, on a buy out of Fiat, but I'm pretty sure they haven't done that yet.

Reading the article would have answered your question:

Five years ago, with merger mania gripping the auto industry, the GM-Fiat deal was praised as a savvy move by both companies. GM paid $2.4 billion for a 20 percent stake in Fiat Auto, a subsidiary of Fiat SpA.

As part of the deal, GM agreed to the "put" option that would allow Fiat to force the automaker to buy the remaining 80 percent of the company it didn't already own. GM's interest in Fiat was reduced to 10 percent in 2003 when it refused to take part in the company's recapitalization and last year, GM wrote-off its entire investment in Fiat, signaling the investment is worthless.

GM has argued the put is no longer valid since Fiat's recapitalization and sale of certain assets are in violation of the original agreement, but Fiat said in a statement Monday the put option is "valid and enforceable."

On Monday, the two companies said that a mediation period that began Dec. 16 would end Feb. 1. After that date, Fiat will have until July 24, 2010, to force GM to buy the remaining 10 percent of the company.

If GM is compelled to buy Fiat it would also be stuck with the Italian automaker's $10 billion in debt.

[Thorin]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Reading the article would have answered your question:

Fair play - I should have read the article

I was sort of right though, they haven't actually bought them yet .

At least if they did buy Fiat they'd get Ferrari, Maserati and Alfa Romeo. The main problem with Fiat is the cars they make branded as Fiat's. Their other brands are pretty good.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Thorin:
Fair play - I should have read the article

I was sort of right though, they haven't actually bought them yet .

Sort of wrong too. They own 10% with a disputed potential obligation to buy the rest.

[Thorin]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Sort of wrong too. They own 10% with a disputed potential obligation to buy the rest.

Sort of right is obviously sort of wrong as well

But yes - I was wrong, I admit it

[Cody Dawg]

I think Canadians have a good work ethic, to be honest.

Seriously.

We have Canadians in the family and I cannot, even remotely, remember a single Canadian's home or friend's home that was not spotless and clean. You'd have to pick on another country other than Canada to say that they don't work hard or well.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Thorin:
Sort of right is obviously sort of wrong as well

But yes - I was wrong, I admit it

No biggie. These days it is getting to be very hard to put a country to any car brand. They are all multinationals.

It reminds me of one of the funnier things I saw in the UK when I lived there. About 20 years ago, the British government was looking to sell off Land Rover. GM wanted to buy it.

Being such a national icon, there was a huge outcry and a big rally in London. One protester when asked what should happen said Land Rover shouldn't be sold to an American company like General Motors, it should be sold to a British company like Ford.

[angelmb]

The main problem with Fiat is the cars they make branded as Fiat's. Their other brands are pretty good. [/B]

Italian cars? arg, no thanks.

[Thorin]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
It reminds me of one of the funnier things I saw in the UK when I lived there. About 20 years ago, the British government was looking to sell off Land Rover. GM wanted to buy it.

Being such a national icon, there was a huge outcry and a big rally in London. One protester when asked what should happen said Land Rover shouldn't be sold to an American company like General Motors, it should be sold to a British company like Ford.

D'oh - poor misguided fool

Ford own Land Rover, Jaguar and Aston Martin. They're about to stop making Jaguar cars in the last Jaguar factory in Coventry, which is where I live, and where the company was founded. Kind of sad.

The only British car company left now is Rover, and they make shockingly awful cars. It's a bit sad really. Whenever I see cars on French plates they're either Citroen's, Peugeot's or Renault's. Coventry has a lot of Peogeot's on British plates because they're made here. I wouldn't be surprised if the most popular car in the UK is the Ford Focus or something similar at the moment.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Thorin:
in Coventry, which is where I live,

OT: You poor bastard. My brother lives in Wyken, so I know Cov fairly well.

[Thorin]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
OT: You poor bastard. My brother lives in Wyken, so I know Cov fairly well.

I came here to go to Uni. I got stuck - I can't get out - it's the ring road, it's just too confusing!

I wasn't born here and I'll be here for about another year max. Then you won't see me for dust

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I think Canadians have a good work ethic, to be honest.

Seriously.

Probably one of the reasons US companies are out-sourcing to Canada as much as they do now.

[rozwado1]

Kilbey's book of the month:


Kilbey: Enjoy your profit sharing while you can and start learning Japanese.

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

Originally posted by rozwado1:
Kilbey: Enjoy your profit sharing while you can and start learning Japanese.

Ha ha. When he is laid off I am sure nobody is going to feel sorry for him as he is so arrogant. Well wdlove might.

[Cody Dawg]

[Mastrap]

Originally posted by Cody Dawg:
I have a Suburban and it IS huge and clunky and big.

That's why I have it.

So, if someone smashes into me while driving like an idiot I have more protection than I would in a car, especially a flimsy small car.

And here we are at the root of the issue why we have so many gas guzzling, resource eating, planet destroying monster cars on our roads. Perceived safety.

Unfortunately you could not be further from the truth. Driving an SUV, or similar car, might give you a feeling of safety. The truth is that many smaller cars are give you a far higher chance of surviving a serious accident than an SUV ever will.



From Car Accessories Magazine:
"The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety in USA takes an approach called the offset-frontal test. In the IIHS tests, only 40 percent of the vehicle's driver's side front hits the barrier, which is deformable, rather than rigid, so that it crumples as another car might. Tests are conducted at 40 mph, rather than 35 mph, because IIHS researchers determined that the higher speed allows the offset crash to cover real-world crashes, including those where a collapsing vehicle structure contributes to injury.

The following are some of the 2002 vehicles with a good car safety rating based on the IIHS offset-frontal tests :

2002 BMW 5 SERIES
2002 LINCOLN LS
2002 BUICK PARK AVENUE
2002 CADILLAC SEVILLE
2002 VOLVO S80
2002 LEXUS ES 300
2002 AUDI A4
2002 TOYOTA AVALON
2002 SUZUKI AERIO
2002 HONDA CIVIC
2002 SUBARU IMPREZA
2002 ACURA MDX
2002 HONDA CR-V
2002 TOYOTA SIENNA


In Europe, the Euro NCAP also supports the offset-crash testing for the same reasons. Of all the 2002 makes and models tested the following came on top of the car safety rating charts provided by the NCAP experts :

2002 Audi A2
BMW Mini
Vauxhall/Opel Corsa
Volkswagen Polo
Ford Mondeo
Jaguar X-Type
Vauxhall/Opel Vectra
Peugeot 607
Honda S2000
Mazda MX-5
Mercedes-Benz SLK
Range Rover
Mercedes-Benz M-Class
Honda CR-V
"

[Kilbey]

Originally posted by TheBadgerHunter:
Actually just browsing around everyone else is saying Canada holds the top two north american GM plants based on quality and efficiency. Of course it may be as you say that canadians are inherently lazy and stupid. Being one I wouldn't really know.

My plant has recently been rewarded some work from a couple Canadian plants. Why, due to their inability to keep up quality. They were the worst in the North American operation and showed no motivation to improve. The guy who awarded the work to our plant? A Canadian.

[Kilbey]

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
Ha ha. When he is laid off I am sure nobody is going to feel sorry for him as he is so arrogant. Well wdlove might.

I have not been laid off by GM for the 10 years I have been working for them.

They just asked me to work 16 hours today if I wanted to. 12 hours, 7 days a week overtime is available. They just said they might have to force workers to work overtime because so many are getting worn out working so much. Now when they start forcing me to work overtime you will hear me talk bad about GM.

wdlove is a great person. I respect him more than any member on here. I seriously wish I could be more like him in regards to his attitude to people and life in general.

[effgee]

Originally posted by Kilbey:
... But I'll bite her flame bait. ..., but I assume it's the work ethic in Canada. They just don't seem to have an eye for quality.

Talk about flame bait ... btw, that is pretty much the impression large parts of the rest of the world have of cars made in the US. Cheaply made, shitty materials, crappy quality ... but as long as you get 300hp,an 8 cyl. big block along with 7 seats and more interior room than your average school bus for under 30K ("Now with -13% financing and no payments for an entire decade*" * - Qualified buyers only. Certain terms and conditions apply. See your local dealer for details.) all is well.

Prejudices. Tsk, tsk, tsk.

[rozwado1]

Originally posted by Kilbey:
The guy who awarded the work to our plant? A Canadian.

[Kilbey]

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
Probably one of the reasons US companies are out-sourcing to Canada as much as they do now.

Huh? Back that up SWF.

The reason if there is any increased outsourcing to Canada is simply NAFTA. Blame Bill Clinton for lowering your countries possible future wage increases. American companies might outsource to Canada because it's cheaper, but it's certainly not for the quality.

[effgee]

Originally posted by Kilbey:
... American companies might outsource to Canada because it's cheaper, but it's certainly not for the quality.

True - Asian countries, India etc., are resoponsible for that.

Right?

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

Originally posted by Kilbey:
Huh? Back that up SWF.

The reason if there is any increased outsourcing to Canada is simply NAFTA. Blame Bill Clinton for lowering your countries possible future wage increases. American companies might outsource to Canada because it's cheaper, but it's certainly not for the quality.

Pfff, ya you just know it all don't you.

Isn't anything with "made is the USA" stamp on it avoided by even most Americans?

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

Canadian outsourcing vendors tend to attract sophisticated work and projects closely tied to American culture and the English language. As such, despite the stronger numbers of outsourcing firms and employees in offshore locations such as India and the Far East, Canada is holding its own against overseas competitors, especially in high-end project areas.

http://www.technewsworld.com/story/39293.html

Can you back up your story with something?

[Sherwin]

Originally posted by Thorin:
I wouldn't be surprised if the most popular car in the UK is the Ford Focus or something similar at the moment.

No need for something similar - the Focus is the best selling car - has been since about a year after its introduction.

[Sherwin]

Originally posted by TheBadgerHunter:
So the other person has a greater chance of dying. How noble of you.

Cody clearly stated "if someone smashes into me while driving like an idiot", so why should she care that the other person dies while she doesn't?

Originally posted by Mastrap:
Unfortunately you could not be further from the truth. Driving an SUV, or similar car, might give you a feeling of safety. The truth is that many smaller cars are give you a far higher chance of surviving a serious accident than an SUV ever will.

I'm starting to not believe these tests. I don't think their findings really hold up in real real world. For example, a head on between a Jeep and an MX-5, I know which would come out best - and it's not the Mazda.

[angelmb]

Originally posted by Mastrap:
In Europe, the Euro NCAP also supports the offset-crash testing for the same reasons. Of all the 2002 makes and models tested the following came on top of the car safety rating charts provided by the NCAP experts :

2002 Audi A2
BMW Mini
Vauxhall/Opel Corsa
Volkswagen Polo
Ford Mondeo
Jaguar X-Type
Vauxhall/Opel Vectra
Peugeot 607
Honda S2000
Mazda MX-5
Mercedes-Benz SLK
Range Rover
Mercedes-Benz M-Class
Honda CR-V
"

The french automaker Renault has seven cars that got 5 euroncap stars, maximum security level ate every segment of the market, from superminis to big saloons and mono spaces. Huge achievement.

[thesearcher]

Originally posted by Kilbey:
They just said they might have to force workers to work overtime because so many are getting worn out working so much.

Allrighty then...

[rozwado1]

Since when is Cody Dawg a female?