BAILOUT or BANKRUPTCY

[regfootball]

you know, if GM goes bankrupt, or is using it as a threat to leverage cash from the US Govt.....

could you make a case to say

the CANADIAN GOVERNMENT should chip in also?

or can you use bankruptcy in the US as a threat to coerce some cash out of Canada too?

of if the ship sinks, does that mean all of the Canadian operations goes down too?

I am curious to hear how this affects the folks north of Pembina.

[black02]

you know, if GM goes bankrupt, or is using it as a threat to leverage cash from the US Govt.....

could you make a case to say

the CANADIAN GOVERNMENT should chip in also?

or can you use bankruptcy in the US as a threat to coerce some cash out of Canada too?

of if the ship sinks, does that mean all of the Canadian operations goes down too?

I am curious to hear how this affects the folks north of Pembina.

Pembina? All of the Canadian auto industry is south of Pembina, as is Ottawa. There are a couple of bus manufacturers in Winnipeg....

[regfootball]

Pembina? All of the Canadian auto industry is south of Pembina, as is Ottawa. There are a couple of bus manufacturers in Winnipeg....

ok, how bout north of ohio?

[the_yellow_dart]

Here's a little background for you Reg...

Because Canada is a collection of some very different provinces which are in different financial situations, there is a transfer program in place in which the 'have' provinces transfer some money to the 'have not' provinces. This has helped the maritime provinces to survive problems with the fishing industry.

Ontario has 38.8% of Canada's population and is therefore obviously a very important province. California by contrast has only 11.95% of the US population.

Ontario has long been a 'have' province, doling money out to others. Now that massive amounts of oil are flowing out of Alberta and the auto industry in Ontario has already taken a massive hit, Ontario has become a 'have not' province and will soon receive equalization payments.

This is not a question of when it will affect Canada. It already has. Oshawa in particular is having a bit of a real estate crash right now due to GM.

[CARBIZ]

The auto sector is more important to the Ontario economy than probably any state in the Union. The last figures I saw (2007?) Ontario 'built' more vehicles than Michigan did. Magna is one of the largest auto parts suppliers and one of the biggest Canadian companies - built on the success of the Big 3. Our proximity to Michigan and the 'rust belt' also means that our manufacturing base is very important. Unfortunately, so much of that has depended on our lower dollar (which was at par with the $US for the past year or so, until very recently) and on our 'free' health care.

The one issue often overlooked by Americans is that ALL auto manufacturers are foreign to us. Although a strong argument can be made for the historical/investment ties that the Big 3 have made in Canada over the past 100 years, there are legions of liberal economists who would argue that Toyota and Honda's recent expansion into Ontario should be encouraged over any 'pandering' to the Big 3. There was yet another diatribe in the Toronto Sun yesterday that basically called GM a 'dinsosaur' and said let it die. I file that under one of the new, more self-centered categories of "What Have You Done For Me Lately?" They cited the upcoming Camaro as yet another example that Detroit 'doesn't get it.' Whatever. Nobody in Queen's Park (Ontario's capital buildings) complained when the Silverado crewcabs and Impalas were flying out the door with tons of overtime being paid to CAW workers in Oshawa, only 2 years ago.

When I think of GM and bankruptcy, I think of what happened with Texaco. When Texaco filed for bankruptcy, they were forced to 'sell off' their Canadian holdings to appease stakeholders. Since Canada represents a puny portion (although still profitable) of GM's holdings (China is now GM's #2 market), I would think that would be a real possibility. Although we are told that GM is doing very well outside of the greater Toronto area, in this city it is a bloodbath. No less than about 9 dealers have closed in and around this city in the past few years. K-Mart also did the same thing. We no longer have K-Mart

Due to our higher gas prices, what happens in Canada, generally happens south of the border in a few years. For example, the Civic has been the #1 selling vehicle here for a while; whereas, the F-150 stole the limelight south of the border. Hell, the Silverardo is the #4 selling pickup in this country! I think GM often treats us like the poor cousin (even though a Canadian-born is running GM's finances south of the border!), but Detroit should have paid more heed to what was or wasn't selling here 5 or 10 years ago as to a clue what might have happened in the Excited States.

Opel product brought over and sold here 5 years ago would have postioned Detroit to be ready for any turn of the marketplace, rather than being caught flat-footed without competitive small cars just as the market for those turned up.

[Cremazie]

^ Even though all auto manufacturers are foreign to us GM, Ford and Chrysler offer much more to Canada than Honda.

Edited November 6, 2008 by Cremazie

[Cremazie]

you know, if GM goes bankrupt, or is using it as a threat to leverage cash from the US Govt.....

could you make a case to say

the CANADIAN GOVERNMENT should chip in also?

or can you use bankruptcy in the US as a threat to coerce some cash out of Canada too?

of if the ship sinks, does that mean all of the Canadian operations goes down too?

I am curious to hear how this affects the folks north of Pembina.

With the Canadian Government in Surplus territory and the relatively low debt I would love to see a large scale Canadian Bailout with an Equity share in GM with a guarantee that there would be no Canadian job losses.

[daves87rs]

It could go either way...

[regfootball]

The auto sector is more important to the Ontario economy than probably any state in the Union. The last figures I saw (2007?) Ontario 'built' more vehicles than Michigan did. Magna is one of the largest auto parts suppliers and one of the biggest Canadian companies - built on the success of the Big 3. Our proximity to Michigan and the 'rust belt' also means that our manufacturing base is very important. Unfortunately, so much of that has depended on our lower dollar (which was at par with the $US for the past year or so, until very recently) and on our 'free' health care.

The one issue often overlooked by Americans is that ALL auto manufacturers are foreign to us. Although a strong argument can be made for the historical/investment ties that the Big 3 have made in Canada over the past 100 years, there are legions of liberal economists who would argue that Toyota and Honda's recent expansion into Ontario should be encouraged over any 'pandering' to the Big 3. There was yet another diatribe in the Toronto Sun yesterday that basically called GM a 'dinsosaur' and said let it die. I file that under one of the new, more self-centered categories of "What Have You Done For Me Lately?" They cited the upcoming Camaro as yet another example that Detroit 'doesn't get it.' Whatever. Nobody in Queen's Park (Ontario's capital buildings) complained when the Silverado crewcabs and Impalas were flying out the door with tons of overtime being paid to CAW workers in Oshawa, only 2 years ago.

When I think of GM and bankruptcy, I think of what happened with Texaco. When Texaco filed for bankruptcy, they were forced to 'sell off' their Canadian holdings to appease stakeholders. Since Canada represents a puny portion (although still profitable) of GM's holdings (China is now GM's #2 market), I would think that would be a real possibility. Although we are told that GM is doing very well outside of the greater Toronto area, in this city it is a bloodbath. No less than about 9 dealers have closed in and around this city in the past few years. K-Mart also did the same thing. We no longer have K-Mart

Due to our higher gas prices, what happens in Canada, generally happens south of the border in a few years. For example, the Civic has been the #1 selling vehicle here for a while; whereas, the F-150 stole the limelight south of the border. Hell, the Silverardo is the #4 selling pickup in this country! I think GM often treats us like the poor cousin (even though a Canadian-born is running GM's finances south of the border!), but Detroit should have paid more heed to what was or wasn't selling here 5 or 10 years ago as to a clue what might have happened in the Excited States.

Opel product brought over and sold here 5 years ago would have postioned Detroit to be ready for any turn of the marketplace, rather than being caught flat-footed without competitive small cars just as the market for those turned up.

bingo. that was why i asked the question and started the thread, actually.

[regfootball]

Here's a little background for you Reg...

Because Canada is a collection of some very different provinces which are in different financial situations, there is a transfer program in place in which the 'have' provinces transfer some money to the 'have not' provinces. This has helped the maritime provinces to survive problems with the fishing industry.

Ontario has 38.8% of Canada's population and is therefore obviously a very important province. California by contrast has only 11.95% of the US population.

Ontario has long been a 'have' province, doling money out to others. Now that massive amounts of oil are flowing out of Alberta and the auto industry in Ontario has already taken a massive hit, Ontario has become a 'have not' province and will soon receive equalization payments.

This is not a question of when it will affect Canada. It already has. Oshawa in particular is having a bit of a real estate crash right now due to GM.

like revenue sharing in major league baseball......

[GXT]

With the Canadian Government in Surplus territory and the relatively low debt I would love to see a large scale Canadian Bailout with an Equity share in GM with a guarantee that there would be no Canadian job losses.

GM is sinking under the weight of their debt and shrinking market share. Giving ANY money to GM is a COMPLETE waste of money at this time because it will go straight to any number of non-Canadian debtors and there is pretty much no chance of getting paid back.

We may as well just give the money directly to the ex-GM employees for retraining. Alternatively, we could use it to bring auto-makers that have a chance of surviving.

I'm already annoyed that we didn't take the recent opportunity to get our $300 Million back from GM due to breaking their word.

[CARBIZ]

GM is sinking under the weight of their debt and shrinking market share. Giving ANY money to GM is a COMPLETE waste of money at this time because it will go straight to any number of non-Canadian debtors and there is pretty much no chance of getting paid back.

We may as well just give the money directly to the ex-GM employees for retraining. Alternatively, we could use it to bring auto-makers that have a chance of surviving.

I'm already annoyed that we didn't take the recent opportunity to get our $300 Million back from GM due to breaking their word.

... and how much money did Toyota get to open in Woodstock; a plant that is barely running with one shift these days? That's the trouble with big players playing States/Provinces against each other: the taxpayer is always the loser in the end. As long as Ontario whored itself out to Japan Inc. to get those precious jobs in Alliston and Cambridge, they were merely adding more nails in the coffins to jobs in Windsor, Oshawa and Oakville.

Or what about the Korean transplants - which don't employ a single f'ing job in a factory in this country? Ditto for VW, BMW and the rest. GM and Ford have literally paid out BILLIONS in taxes over the past 90+ years. So what if they are going through tough times and need a hand.

Besides, there is a big difference between 'loan guarantees' and subsidies. A loan guarantee merely allows free market cash to come to the rescue. Half the trouble with GM and Chrysler right now is that the banks aren't loaning money to anybody right now, let alone those who are in trouble.

Edited November 6, 2008 by CARBIZ

[GXT]

Or what about the Korean transplants - which don't employ a single f'ing job in a factory in this country? Ditto for VW, BMW and the rest. GM and Ford have literally paid out BILLIONS in taxes over the past 90+ years. So what if they are going through tough times and need a hand.

GM is a business, not a charity case. It might be different if they had a reasonable chance of coming through this. But they don't. There is NO reason that Canadian tax payer money should be given to GM to pay off Chinese debtors.

Besides, there is a big difference between 'loan guarantees' and subsidies. A loan guarantee merely allows free market cash to come to the rescue.

Really? What happens to the loan guarantee when GM is bankrupt or in restructuring? Perhaps I don't understand the concept, but I believe the "guarantee" part means that Canada is out the money. So in this case there is no difference.

Half the trouble with GM and Chrysler right now is that the banks aren't loaning money to anybody right now, let alone those who are in trouble.

Actually, the real problem is shrinking market share, shrinking profits and rising debt. We'll see the real effects tomorrow, but even in the relatively health Q2 GM's sales were off some 20% YOY. In Q2 2007 GM's equity was NEGATIVE $3.7Billion. Q2 2008 it was NEGATIVE $57 Billion.

They will almost certainly never recover from this. Assisting them now would leave us less able to clean up the mess when they are gone.

No thanks.

Edited November 7, 2008 by GXT

[CARBIZ]

The banks created this mess and it's okay to bail them out?

If GM can no longer finance its customers because it cannot borrow money, is that necessarily GM (or GMAC's) fault? The money markets have dried up, my friend. If they don't free up soon, it won't be just Detroit that is going down.

Right now, Warren Buffet probably wouldn't get approved for a loan.

[FAPTurbo]

With the Canadian Government in Surplus territory and the relatively low debt I would love to see a large scale Canadian Bailout with an Equity share in GM with a guarantee that there would be no Canadian job losses.

Policy-wise, I doubt the Conservative government would be receptive to such an action. It'd surely compromise support from the West.

[GXT]

The banks created this mess and it's okay to bail them out?

If GM can no longer finance its customers because it cannot borrow money, is that necessarily GM (or GMAC's) fault? The money markets have dried up, my friend. If they don't free up soon, it won't be just Detroit that is going down.

That isn't the issue. GM is a zombie. Just because there is a heart for transplant doens't mean that GM should get it. They'd still be dead and the heart will be wasted.

Right now, Warren Buffet probably wouldn't get approved for a loan.

I don't think you are being realistic about GM's situation. I am sure that Toyota, Honda, Nissan, etc. are still getting financing.

GM lost $54 billion in equity in one year. I can only imagine how much worse it will be tomorrow. At the same time their revenue is shrinking rapidly. It is a horrible investment. The banks know it, and I suspect you probably know it as well. I'd appreciate if you would stop suggesting that the government waste my money.

[GXT]

Policy-wise, I doubt the Conservative government would be receptive to such an action. It'd surely compromise support from the West.

NEP

[FAPTurbo]

NEP

Well yeah, and a major chunk of the current Conservative government are people that were part of the Reform Party which opposed the NEP.

I'd see a similar argument being made if GM were to be bailed out heavily by the government; many westerners viewed the NEP as a crutch to prop up inefficient manufacturers in the East.

[CARBIZ]

That isn't the issue. GM is a zombie. Just because there is a heart for transplant doens't mean that GM should get it. They'd still be dead and the heart will be wasted.

I don't think you are being realistic about GM's situation. I am sure that Toyota, Honda, Nissan, etc. are still getting financing.

GM lost $54 billion in equity in one year. I can only imagine how much worse it will be tomorrow. At the same time their revenue is shrinking rapidly. It is a horrible investment. The banks know it, and I suspect you probably know it as well. I'd appreciate if you would stop suggesting that the government waste my money.

I'd appreciate it if you would stop trolling here as well. I re-read some of your posts last night and ever since you've joined C&G, all you have done is harp on GM. It's clear to me that you must work for a Honda or Toyota dealer. In all your posts, there has not been a single positive thing said about GM. Not one. In fact, the Volt terrifies you. You've been trashing the Volt more than Toyota has in Washington.

If you can read, read yesterday's Post. If Ford or GM went down, the job losses (both direct and indirect) would be on the order of 3 million. Those are American figures, of course, but Canada's would probably be proportionately the same. Magna is a Canadian Company and it is also in trouble, having lost huge backing by a Russian investor. If Chrysler goes, there is a real possibility Magna would, too. The study cited suggests as much as 130 BILLION in tax revenue would be lost to the U.S. side of things within 3 years (the time period the study looked at.)

We have to decide whether or not as a nation(s) we want to be in the auto business. The jobs Toyota and Honda create in Canada are strictly for window dressing. Any pretence at building vehicles here would be out the window with no direct competition from Detroit. GM has been retrenching since 2001, but it isn't easy untangling 100 years of job contracts and other legal entanglements. Vehicles like the Traverse, Malibu and CTS prove that GM is worth saving, even if that hurts your sensibilities, GXT.

I say, bring back the Auto Pact.

[gm4life]

Take the money. I believe we need to level the playing field and practice protectionism in the American Auto industry. The reason is because Japan has given Toyota so much help it just should be fair. This is the one area I agree with protectionism and giving a bail-out, this industry is too important not to save.

[smk4565]

Bankruptcy time. They just burned another $6.9 billion in the 3rd quarter. The cash burn is no longer $1 billion a month, it is now $2.3. By early-middle of next year they will be out of money, if they declare bankruptcy, and can get rid of the union, and can get government help, they could come back as Chevy-Buick-Cadillac and hold 15% market share probably and at least make a profit. Not the ideal situation and a lot of jobs will be lost, but they didn't take measures years ago to prevent this, this is their best option now.

Edited November 7, 2008 by smk4565

[GXT]

I'd appreciate it if you would stop trolling here as well. I re-read some of your posts last night and ever since you've joined C&G, all you have done is harp on GM. It's clear to me that you must work for a Honda or Toyota dealer. In all your posts, there has not been a single positive thing said about GM. Not one. In fact, the Volt terrifies you. You've been trashing the Volt more than Toyota has in Washington.

I don't work for any automaker. I'm just a consumer with a grudge. My wife that bought a new GM product and we suffered horribly with the reliability and finally the depreciation of it. Perhaps I should let it go, but rest assured my anger at GM is because of their own crappy product.

As for nothing positive... I'll give credit when it is due. I've made some positive posts on the CTS and the Lucerne.

I "trash" the Volt because when GM first displayed the concept... which we now know had a detergent box and two standard automotive batteries under the hood... so many on this board claimed that GM had just jumped ahead of Toyota. Reality was plain... the Volt was nothing but flash and Toyota et al recognized the problems with the Volt and had left it quietly in the lab where it belonged. GM had nothing on anyone except for commercials and desperation based on incompetent product and decisions in the hybrid market.

What do you think should terrify me about it? The high cost? The loss per vehicle? The watered-down design? The flawed concept? The way GM is rushing it to market without the usual checks? The potential for disaster? GM's complete lack of knowledge of the longevity of the battery? The shrinking of the range? The lowering of the ICE fuel economy? The trivial and nonchalant way in which Toyota (and apparently Chrysler and Ford) could match it at will? The only thing terrifying about the Volt is how the faithful are blind to the reality of it. GM never would have done it if they didn't have a giant case of Prius-envy.

Vehicles like the Traverse, Malibu and CTS prove that GM is worth saving, even if that hurts your sensibilities, GXT.

The Malibu is a great step forward. My criticism regarding it has been limited to GM's misleading comparisons with the Accord.

But they don't "prove that GM is worth saving". There is lots of product just as good or better backed by financially capable automakers.

Edited November 7, 2008 by GXT

[GXT]

Bankruptcy time. They just burned another $6.9 billion in the 3rd quarter. The cash burn is no longer $1 billion a month, it is now $2.3. By early-middle of next year they will be out of money, if they declare bankruptcy, and can get rid of the union, and can get government help, they could come back as Chevy-Buick-Cadillac and hold 15% market share probably and at least make a profit. Not the ideal situation and a lot of jobs will be lost, but they didn't take measures years ago to prevent this, this is their best option now.

It is worse than that. Apparently they need ~12Billion to operate. It sounds like they only have a couple of months left unless they can get someone to give them some money.

[smk4565]

They have $16.2 billion in cash right now, and need 11-14 to operate, so about $4 billion left. Wagoner said the cash burn will slow down, but even if it does, come February 1, 2009 they are probably bankrupt. Maybe Toyota can buy them, and spare Chevy, Cadillac, and a few jobs.

[regfootball]

I don't work for any automaker. I'm just a consumer with a grudge. My wife that bought a new GM product and we suffered horribly with the reliability and finally the depreciation of it. Perhaps I should let it go, but rest assured my anger at GM is because of their own crappy product.

As for nothing positive... I'll give credit when it is due. I've made some positive posts on the CTS and the Lucerne.

I "trash" the Volt because when GM first displayed the concept... which we now know had a detergent box and two standard automotive batteries under the hood... so many on this board claimed that GM had just jumped ahead of Toyota. Reality was plain... the Volt was nothing but flash and Toyota et al recognized the problems with the Volt and had left it quietly in the lab where it belonged. GM had nothing on anyone except for commercials and desperation based on incompetent product and decisions in the hybrid market.

What do you think should terrify me about it? The high cost? The loss per vehicle? The watered-down design? The flawed concept? The way GM is rushing it to market without the usual checks? The potential for disaster? GM's complete lack of knowledge of the longevity of the battery? The shrinking of the range? The lowering of the ICE fuel economy? The trivial and nonchalant way in which Toyota (and apparently Chrysler and Ford) could match it at will? The only thing terrifying about the Volt is how the faithful are blind to the reality of it. GM never would have done it if they didn't have a giant case of Prius-envy.

The Malibu is a great step forward. My criticism regarding it has been limited to GM's misleading comparisons with the Accord.

But they don't "prove that GM is worth saving". There is lots of product just as good or better backed by financially capable automakers.

people need to get over their mancrush for the accord. i don't get it. my 08 accord test drove showed me that the accord was an average driving experience. slightly insubstantial feel to it. creepy dash. having driven the g6, aura, and newest malibu, i can say that there is not any real substantive difference in these cars to 95% of the drivers out there (save the G6's cheap interior).

if you hang your hat on 'depreciation' you're a fool. you paid more for that rice burner to begin with, or its residual was artificially high on a subsidized lease.

rest assured, with the market crash, any used car is worth nothing when you trade it in now, espcially a car like the accord or camry which are now commodity cars flooding the used market like everything else. the days of the golden resale of import makes is fast ending as they become as common as white bread and flood the market.

[CARBIZ]

people need to get over their mancrush for the accord. i don't get it. my 08 accord test drove showed me that the accord was an average driving experience. slightly insubstantial feel to it. creepy dash. having driven the g6, aura, and newest malibu, i can say that there is not any real substantive difference in these cars to 95% of the drivers out there (save the G6's cheap interior).

if you hang your hat on 'depreciation' you're a fool. you paid more for that rice burner to begin with, or its residual was artificially high on a subsidized lease.

rest assured, with the market crash, any used car is worth nothing when you trade it in now, espcially a car like the accord or camry which are now commodity cars flooding the used market like everything else. the days of the golden resale of import makes is fast ending as they become as common as white bread and flood the market.

The Accord is an engine with a Hyundai wrapped around it. GM made us spend the entire day with the Malibu and the Accord. No contest. I could fill an entire page with how Honda is cutting corners, but none of that will matter now that Detroit is on the run.

And if this generation of Accord is crap, just wait and see what lackluster products Japan Inc bothers to bring out if Detroit is gone.

As long as people who know nothing about cars keep perpetuating the myth that Detroit builds crap, we are doomed to be a nation of Wal-Mart greeters. Every week I get people trading in Cavaliers and Malibus with 300k km on them - and that is harsh, Ontario winter kilometers, not vacation in Arizona mileage.

As I've said before, if some clown will deliberately spend $5k more for an Accord than a Malibu, do you think he/she is going to admit they f$3ked up? No. Instead, we get whiners who had a 15 year old Lumina that had a light clip break and they kneel at the altar every night, hoping and praying that Detroit goes down.

There are times when I wish a meteor the size of Texas would land right in the middle of North America so Earth can start over again. Maybe this time a more worthy species will rise to ascension.

[GXT]

rest assured, with the market crash, any used car is worth nothing when you trade it in now, espcially a car like the accord or camry which are now commodity cars flooding the used market like everything else. the days of the golden resale of import makes is fast ending as they become as common as white bread and flood the market.

Of course that is not true. The civic has been the number one selling in car for I don't know how many years (near a decade?) in Canada and resale is still very high.

[GXT]

The Accord is an engine with a Hyundai wrapped around it. GM made us spend the entire day with the Malibu and the Accord. No contest. I could fill an entire page with how Honda is cutting corners, but none of that will matter now that Detroit is on the run.

And if this generation of Accord is crap, just wait and see what lackluster products Japan Inc bothers to bring out if Detroit is gone.

As long as people who know nothing about cars keep perpetuating the myth that Detroit builds crap, we are doomed to be a nation of Wal-Mart greeters. Every week I get people trading in Cavaliers and Malibus with 300k km on them - and that is harsh, Ontario winter kilometers, not vacation in Arizona mileage.

As I've said before, if some clown will deliberately spend $5k more for an Accord than a Malibu, do you think he/she is going to admit they f$3ked up? No. Instead, we get whiners who had a 15 year old Lumina that had a light clip break and they kneel at the altar every night, hoping and praying that Detroit goes down.

There are times when I wish a meteor the size of Texas would land right in the middle of North America so Earth can start over again. Maybe this time a more worthy species will rise to ascension.

I grew up on Chrysler products. My wife on GM. We don't drive Honda products now because of CR. I had never heard of CR when I bought my first Honda. No, we drive them because we drove Chrysler and GM products.

I can't express to you how many times I took that peice of crap Alero in to get fixed. It was made worse by the incompetent dealer (or were they on the take?) that took three visits to solve almost every problem. We must have had it in three dozen times in 4 years. It was in so often I don't think we ever had to take it it just for regular maintenance. Ironically, we only bought it in the first place because her other not-too-old GM was already starting to cost a fair amount of money and she wanted something more reliable.

I remember when her grandpa (long time domestic buyer) heard that she was using her e-brake (it was an MT) and he warned her not to because it would break. I just laughed. Sure domestics break easy, but don't use the e-brake? That's silly! Would you believe that both the older GM and the Alero had their e-brake handles break? Twice on the Alero! They were complete garbage.

Her accord is just about as old as her Alero was when we managed to rid ourselves of it. She has had NO problems with the Accord. And I mean NO problems. Even I didn't expect that.

As for resale, she paid about as much for her accord as her alero. The black book on a 4 year old version of her accord (even in these "challenging times") is $13,150 so we could probably get $14,000-15,000 on a trade and perhaps a bit more on a private sale. Dealers in my area are selling them with twice as many KM for $15,500-$18,000 I believe we ended up getting rid of her Alero for ~$9,500 on a PRIVATE SALE after months with no interest. I think only two people even test drove it.

Perhaps we got lucky with our Honda's and unlucky with our GM's. Perhaps CR is wrong. Perhaps conumers are ignorant. Perhaps you actually believe the incorrect pricing information you usually give. Perhaps. Or perhaps GM has tended to make crap product with high depreciation and you can only fool consumers so many times before they move on and that is why GM is going bankrupt and can't survive without welfare.

Just leave my tax dollars out of it.

[CARBIZ]

Of course that is not true. The civic has been the number one selling in car for I don't know how many years (near a decade?) in Canada and resale is still very high.

Again, misinformed: even in it's last year, the J-cars outsold the Civic, but naturally the Sunfire/Cavalier sales were reported separately. Either they're bad rebadges or not. Depends on which side of the argument you're on.

As a separate nameplate, yes, the Civic overtook the Cavalier in '99, but as I said, GM has more than one car on the same platform at the same price.

In fact, the last sales stats I saw (about 2 months ago), the Cobalt/G5 weren't that far behind the Civic and were ahead of the Mazda 3.

[longtooth]

Again, misinformed: even in it's last year, the J-cars outsold the Civic, but naturally the Sunfire/Cavalier sales were reported separately. Either they're bad rebadges or not. Depends on which side of the argument you're on.

As a separate nameplate, yes, the Civic overtook the Cavalier in '99, but as I said, GM has more than one car on the same platform at the same price.

In fact, the last sales stats I saw (about 2 months ago), the Cobalt/G5 weren't that far behind the Civic and were ahead of the Mazda 3.

'BIZ, in all seriousness, do you think Canada would pony-up the loan, save the whole deal and shame us at the same time?

[CARBIZ]

I grew up on Chrysler products. My wife on GM. We don't drive Honda products now because of CR. I had never heard of CR when I bought my first Honda. No, we drive them because we drove Chrysler and GM products.

I can't express to you how many times I took that peice of crap Alero in to get fixed. It was made worse by the incompetent dealer (or were they on the take?) that took three visits to solve almost every problem. We must have had it in three dozen times in 4 years. It was in so often I don't think we ever had to take it it just for regular maintenance. Ironically, we only bought it in the first place because her other not-too-old GM was already starting to cost a fair amount of money and she wanted something more reliable.

I remember when her grandpa (long time domestic buyer) heard that she was using her e-brake (it was an MT) and he warned her not to because it would break. I just laughed. Sure domestics break easy, but don't use the e-brake? That's silly! Would you believe that both the older GM and the Alero had their e-brake handles break? Twice on the Alero! They were complete garbage.

Her accord is just about as old as her Alero was when we managed to rid ourselves of it. She has had NO problems with the Accord. And I mean NO problems. Even I didn't expect that.

As for resale, she paid about as much for her accord as her alero. The black book on a 4 year old version of her accord (even in these "challenging times") is $13,150 so we could probably get $14,000-15,000 on a trade and perhaps a bit more on a private sale. Dealers in my area are selling them with twice as many KM for $15,500-$18,000 I believe we ended up getting rid of her Alero for ~$9,500 on a PRIVATE SALE after months with no interest. I think only two people even test drove it.

Perhaps we got lucky with our Honda's and unlucky with our GM's. Perhaps CR is wrong. Perhaps conumers are ignorant. Perhaps you actually believe the incorrect pricing information you usually give. Perhaps. Or perhaps GM has tended to make crap product with high depreciation and you can only fool consumers so many times before they move on and that is why GM is going bankrupt and can't survive without welfare.

Just leave my tax dollars out of it.

Or perhaps I know what I am talking about. :AH-HA_wink:

I can't deny whether or not you had problems with the Alero. I probably sold more than 100 of them and I had a few customers bitch about the brakes (rotors). The fit and finish was shoddy, I will concede. BTW, nobody uses the handbrake in Ontario. It will seize, thanks to our salt. I've also had customers put 200k km on their Alero and buy out their leases because they loved the car. The Aleros were sold cheap as dirt. $400 a month leases for a loaded GLS back in '01/'02. That alone hits resale. A $400 lease on an Accord would've been plus tax and with money down; no leather, no roof, no 6 cylinder. I know, I leased Camries back then through our sister store.

BTW, nobody uses the black book. What Honda shows you for your trade and what it is worth are 2 entirely different things. Or why else would Honda/Toyota salesmen clamor to get into used cars so they can 'make some money?'

Yes, I took in a '97 Civic with 120 k km for $2,500 last week. Black book doesn't go back that far, BTW. Customer was PO'd because AutoTrader shows the same vehicle 'going' for $5k. Well, people can ask for any number they want, can't they? Doesn't mean they'll get it. Of course, a '97 Cavalier with the same mileage would be worth, maybe $500, but then it was $3,500 or so less to buy and has no timing belt that has been replaced. CR considers a $600 timing belt on a Civic to be 'maintenance.' Our customers freak at a $600 bill for anything in service.

But all this pleasantry aside, if you hate GM so much (and it is clear that you do) why do you spread vitrol and anger on a GM fansite? I haunted ToyotaNation for about a month, two or three years ago, but realized I had nothing in common with those people and it was like a bad episode of the Twilight Zone.

I hated my '87 Shadow, but have no desire to haunt MoPar sites, nor do I judge Chrysler today for the troubles my Shadow gave me (largely dealer related) 20 years ago.

Just something for you to ponder, is all..............

[regfootball]

what i find hilarious. the company i work for builds some housing. even some 2 mill plus condos. and i get to see all sorts of places where costs are cut to still milk huge profits out of some of them. These are people that are somewhat discerning about the quality of their units.....at 2 million bucks you kind of think they have the right nitpick if their cabinets have poor fit and finish on them.

People are pickier about the inside of a 20k bread and butter sedan as far as finish and all of that than people who buy those 2 million dollar homes.

Its borderline ludicrous these days the extent to which people bitch about some commodity cars.

I caught up with an old buddy last weekend and he had a rental avenger. I have actually driven the sebring and at that time was not impressed.

But i had to admit, aside from the hardness and grain of the cheap plastic and the dull gray monotone color schemes, everything felt pretty solid in there and it was well assembled, it even had some nice chromey highlights here and there and all the gauges and swtichgear and radio stuff was nice to look at and operate. now, they need to fix the cheap plastic, but what really impressed me was the tightness of fit of some of the interior stuff......all really nice. Precise I would even say. A level of precision that cannot be achieved in a 2 million dollar condo. Yet the car is a 17 thou rental and people will bitch incessantly about the differences of panel gaps between a slew of 20-25k cars......which is fine....but those differences do not MEAN THAT ONE CAR IS WORTH NOTHING THE OTHER TWICE ITS STICKER! Has anyone seen how awful the new Accord's interior is?

The sensationalization of all that kind of stuff makes it seem like one car is $h! and the other is baby Jesus. Its this hyperbole that has gone out of control and is repsonsible for this overblown sense of the domestics being poor. THEY ARE NOT. Good God, people, wake the f-ck up!

A lot of this auto ripping is even done by people on sites like this who either don't own cars, or maybe have only been driving 3-4 years and maybe have never even made their own house or rent payment to gain a proper perspective on anything. To these idiots, its a matter of regurgitating what 'temple of vtec' said about Hondas, or what COnsumer Reports said about the Hyundais.

Go to the f-cking grocery store and go shop for canned vegetables. Tomatoes even. There are 10 brands and 60-100 different packages to buy tomatoes in a can. crushed, whole peeled, puree, etc. What's the effing difference? NOT A LOT. So would i let Del Monte and Hunts and Contadina and Red Gold and stuff go out of business and let them sell tomatoes from Japan and send that money back overseas?

Where there are differences these days, its often misstated. For example, having driven the Vue and Forester, the Vue is a way better machine. Yes, your results will vary. But now MT calls the forester SUV of the year.....and it in no way of any kind deserves this award. Yet now i am sure we will see all sorts of hyperbole about how great it is and how crappy the Vue is. And its not true.

Bottom line, do you think its important for the US to be global big shots in the auto industry, remember, we invented autos, and we are the world's biggest market. The world car market is one of the largest global product markets in the world. You decide......it is simply this. If you feel it is important for the USA to be the top global companies in the global automobile market, and if you feel it is important to have American companies provide products in its own backyard in one of the largest industries in our country, then the best recipe to keep the status of these companies solid for the long haul is to consider helping them out now.

Normally i say let a failed business die, but here's why you don't here.

competitive global disadvantage. GM was the corporate citizen for decades......paying generous wages and benefits and taxes. Union contracts. Health care. That was how business was done here, and GM was not empowered to break all those issues themselves. THEY HAD TO WORK AROUND THESE THINGS. What was GM's flexibility to adapt when its competition was able to flex their currency or give no interest loans to its companies or pick up its workers health care? Did GM have nearly as many tax breaks for new plants etc that Hyundai and Toyota etc had?

it will majorly disrupt the economy and could turn a severely bad downturn into a pandemic failure. A lot more than letting a bunch of wall street crooks go without a bailout. The big 3 going down mean instant job losses of terrible proportions in many states, towns.....and these are working folks who pay taxes and feed their local economies.

allow our companies to fail in the global arena in this product shows that we will throw in the towel and give away our economy in every other product and service and is an admission we are simply open season on every other country to take us over and drain us dry. It also shows we are not willing be leaders in the global arena in manufacturing (or anything else), and this weakens our national security. It is throwing in the towel and saying, we no longer wish to participate in manufacturing, and we have no capacity to make our own stuff and provide for ourselves if the sht comes down and we are in war bunker mode.

So, what's next then.....food and agriculture? Computers and tech? Medical technology and health care? MILITARY?

This all reminds of me of cities that let their sports teams leave because they say its too costly to build a new stadium. Well, they lose the team, and then they ultimately end up spending 10x the amount a few years later to get something back because they all of a sudden decide they need it back. CLEVELAND BROWNS HELLOOOOOOOO...LA/NFL. Minnesota North Stars....HELLOOOOOOO. Seattle, your Sonics are gonna happen some day. Bend over, it won't be cheap. Its more expensive to let it fail. You're giving up that business to the outsider.

The government can spend the money on MASSIVE UNEMPLOYMENT, ASSUMING HEALTHCARE BURDENS, AND LOST TAX REVENUE or they can try to prop it up one more time before it fails. WHICH ONE WILL ULTIMATELY COST MORE? AND FOR HOW LONG? Who pays the price in the meantime? Thousands of families in average town USA? Ex-GM employees or the EX-TOYOTA employees that lose their jobs when ultimately someday toyota decides they no longer need to keep assembly lines here in America for PR purposes.

GM sells 60% of its stuff in other countries and you want the US company to throw that all back and give it to someone else and weaken your position in the global trade arena?

It would not be unreasonable to demand management changes though for GM or chrysler or whoever, i feel. Uncompensated. Nardelli, go put on the apron on sell plywood, you ass.

Edited November 9, 2008 by regfootball

[regfootball]

Of course that is not true. The civic has been the number one selling in car for I don't know how many years (near a decade?) in Canada and resale is still very high.

oh BS. the civic costs more to start and the difference at trade in time is about the same. net ownership cost for the non honda is still about the same. another myth to debunk. you simply don't make up for the extra you paid to start. those camry owners in about 2-3 years will all be finding that out.

the person buying that civic used is the dumbass. not only are they overpaying for a USED car....they now own it for the the period of time its gonna take its MAJOR dive in resale, plus some repairs.

How often do you need to spell this out to people. A CAR IS NOT AN INVESTMENT. it is an expense. anyone who expects to have anything of value left after owning a car is a darned fool.

Edited November 9, 2008 by regfootball