evok

It is not opinion but a stated fact for the most part when it comes to business and investing. If you own a mutual fund that is focused on international markets there is a good chance there is a Japanese or European auto company or supllier. There was talk years ago about Honda moving their HQ to the US and when DCX merged talk of putting the HQ in the Netherlands I believe. News Corp was an OZ company and now it is a US. In practice the HQ of the company in question is just a location. Companies are investing resources where business dictates be that the US or China or anywhere else in the world. Investors be that individual or institutional can easily take capitalize of the more successful global companies because there is greater transparency and trust in governmental oversight. I do not remember the last time Toyota or Nissan built a plant in Japan but they sure have build plenty in the US and NA over the past decade. But, I do see a lot of GM investment flowing to places like China, Korea, India and Eastern Europe.

****The question people posed is what will happen to GM when Lutz goes? The answer is as I stated above. Lutz for the most part - good or bad is a spokesman and his contribution is spotty and overblown. Therefore when Lutz goes nothing substative should change and if anything should get better because there will not be one individual to override Ed Welburn and John Smith. As far as the product "renaissance" you speak of, that is still open for debate and much of the product coming out today was well timed prior to Lutz's arrival.

Lutz's contribution to GM has been greatly exagerated in the press. If anything, he may have stiffled creativity because of his own overblown design opinion.

Nationality for the most part is irrelevant. - Has the world changed where I can take advantage and participate financially in a well run foreign company. As far as your China example - I would not compare a Chinese company at the moment to a traditional "western" company. At this time. China is like the movie "Gangs of NY". But in time... I agree. The press needs to wake up to the realities of a global auto industry. The press is incompetent in this respect.

On another note - what exactly make a US, German, Japanes, British company today? I can, you can, a Mutual Fund can purchas shares, an ADR into almost any public company in the world. If I wanted to I can purchase shares in Toyota so I am seeing less and less the relevance of where a company is HQed. http://quotes.nasdaq.com/quote.dll?mode=st...amp;selected=tm

Point 1: I am unsure of what you are trying to say with this but I believe you are citing those convuluted stats from from one of those buy American anti foreign lobby groups. The facts are the big Asian companies are designing vehicles in the US today and for US production are suing suppliers with operations in the US. That may include Japanes transplant suppliers or US suppliers. That can also include parts designed locally designed in the US and manufactured overseas or locally. For the most part that is the same supplier relationship the domestics use. i.e. Airbags might be designed right off I75 in MI and manufactured in Mexico or Utah. The whole automobile if Japanes or Domestic is so global at the moment it is impossible to pin point what the US contribution is to the vehicle or what % is designed in the US or overseas. As a result of global cost pressures - the automobile business is becoming effecient and labor sourced where it makes sense. i.e The NG Saturn Vue. US designed platform, program designed in Korea, manufactured in Korea and Mexico. Point 2: I defer to ehaase's most recent post.

There is a 2010 vehicle to replace the PT in the lineup. It is unknown to me if it will be the NG PT or something else.

The facts are Toyota, Honda, Nissan, BMW, MB, Hyundai, etc., are creating jobs in the US - The Big 2.5 are not and have not in 25+ years. And let us not forget - the transplant operations are legally US corporations.

And least we forget: Dr. Z and Wolfgang were the people in charge of operations and product at the time.

I do not care what the quantity of the sales at Chrysler Group are - the quality of the sales are dismal. Their day of reckoning may yet be upon them. I hear things are not pretty on the operations side beyond what is reported in the press. I would not be surprised to see a repeat of the Dr. Z era in 2000 with another mass round of layoffs and corporate restructuring. It appears Chrysler is still the same old Chrysler we knew independent of their current owners.

He is the Ms. Cleo of CG.

I think many of you nay sayers, have to wait and see the vehicle in person especially if you were a fan of the first. This vehicle is just as dramatic as the first generation but 5 years after the launch of the first vehicle, the impact will be less because of what the first generation did for the brand. As a once proud owner of an early CTS, I thought at the time, that vehicle was the first in a long time that Cadillac got right. The vehicle was such a dramatic departure for GM and Cadillac that I had to have one. And as a long time fan of Cadillac, this vehicle to me made Cadillac cool again. I never thought the vehicle was pretty, the interior well executed or the driving dynamics of the early model year up to the best on the market. But the styling was so novel for the time; it was fun to be back at Cadillac and be seen in one. It was exciting to have that vehicle when it came out. No matter where I went, people would ask what it was? Or call over to me when I was stopped at a light to ask about the car. Well almost 5 years have passed and I have not been excited about much that Cadillac had done since the arrival of the original CTS. That includes the STS, SRX, V-Series, XLR, etc. That is until now with the 2008 CTS. To me, this again is the best Cadillac since the launch of the original and it not only picks up where the original left off, but shows Cadillac finally figured out the Art and Science DNA for the brand and made it work with the same drama as the original and this time with a touch of elegance that Cadillac needed. Least we forget, the original CTS was the vehicle to relaunch the division. It did just that and Cadillac has sold about 300k vehicles in that time. The original effect the CTS had on public perception is all but impossible to duplicate because the original was such a dramatic departure from people perceptions of what a Cadillac was. This new vehicle comes as close as possible to the original CTS without having to relaunch Cadillac with a completely new look. This vehicle to me is as revolutionary as the first but maintains and evolves the Cadillac styling cues. Cadillac matured with this vehicle and the CTS grew up to be a first rate luxury vehicle with substance. As a first generation owner, this vehicle exceeds my expectation and proves to me Cadillac and GM are on the right track. I just wish I was in the market for a new vehicle because it again would be fun to be seen in a new Cadillac CTS again.

When it comes to quality - Honda and Toyota are still the best companies out there by any metric, contived metric or not. Toyota - has a lot of good will as a company and can overcome these recent "un-Toyota" like gliches because the corporate culture is that good and focused. After reading many many many Toyota articles in the press about the number of recalls etc, I found the year end vehicle count to be surprisingly low. Especially given the amount of press coverage. And BTW - go check the 2006 end of year totals - You will be surprised to see that I am right for the sales totals.

perhaps? Actually not true - but what does Canada and Mexico have to deal with US recalls? Since it is the US government that requires the safety action by the OEM when appropriate. Yes you should - the actual vehicle count or total recall count is meaningless since there is no severity associated with it. But the most important insight from the article is that Toyotas safety recalls in the press has been over hyped in 2006. But if you want to play games with the numbers, GM recalled 15 million vehicles in 2004 and 2004. That is almost 2 years worth of global production for them. And that is a lot less than what Toyota recalled in the US during that period. Probably true but what does that have to do with the reason why I posted the article in the first place. Toyotas recall gliches in the US received way more press than needed. Still less than the US OEMS.

http://detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic.../701060374/1148That is not what the data shows. Might I suggest you check out NHTSA.DOT.GOV.

Yes - I know just trying to dispel a myth. But if you look at the product they have introduced in NA since 2000, most of the product has been global product and not necessarily unique to the US or if so introduced later elsewhere like the Camry and OZ Auron. Plus products like the first generation Scions were release years prior in Asia before their US Scion debut. Also - their product cycles are about 5 years which is about par for industry at this point.

I am sure you can google it?

I have been called worse but in either case I used to like reading his posts. Now he just bitches.

You have no idea what you are talking about. You sound like Turbo200. More opinion than fact at this point.

And, how does the current BLS compare to the original Lexus ES250 or Infiniti M30 and J30? How does the BLS compare to some of the entry level Audis? Given that Cadillac expects to sell hundreds of BLS in Europe and developed a business case accordingly to keep the price down and keep their retailer happy, how else do you expect to do things? Is it the ideal model no, but it is not half bad and wished it was offered in the US. I think you need to get your head out of fantasy land. For some reason I have read too many of your posts today and must close the day with this.

I would not put to much faith in those 12, 18, 24 month development programs. The question no one asks is when do they start the clock? The OEMs fail to mention the 3 years of lead time prior to the claims. A good example is why did it take GM 3+ years to get the kappa cars out from concept or now the Camaro? Hell if Toyota can do it in 12 I would have contracted the Camaro development to Toyota. But they can't.

Revenue alone could be up by 25% on the Escalade alone. And that does not factor reduced incentives and the higher MSRP compared to the 800.

Again - you cannot have an intelligent opinion on something you do not know about. As I have said above, I will expand upon for clarification, the GMT-166, could be called anything at this point. It could be called BRX or SRX. You do not remember him saying anything because as far as I am aware, I am the only one on the boards who has seen the vehicle or what at the time was the direction for the GMT-166. Really you just like to argue and keep moving the discussion around in circles. Here are my final thoughts unless someone brings up actual holes in my story that I need to address: I have already outlined in the CTS wagon thread that the SRX appears to be making money on product mix instead of the original volume targets for the vehicle at launch. But you continue to fail to realize the significance of that. Especially in light of the fact the CTS did better than expected in volume and LGR is running efficiently. And you continue to fail to accept the significane of the Escalade to the Cadillac showroom. So in summary, volume is great but profitability is that much greater. Jim Taylor recently said, though volumes are down for Cadillac in 2006, cash flow is significantly up.

And you have seen the vehicle assumed to be called the BRX and know how it will be sized, optioned and priced? Your statements are baseless. I know what I said about the rebuild of the SRX - I was there. But again the Escalade sold 8000 copies last month and the SRX did not do to bad compared to the R and FX.

http://anunreasonableman.com/synopsis.cfm http://video.msn.com/v/us/v.htm?g=4305fa25...64&fg=email