smk4565

Or for a little less (or same depending on equipment) get a Honda Fit, the hands down best car under $15k.

I don't want a BMW, I just recognize them as being the performance standard that everyone else is chasing. If a software issue was the only problem that isn't that bad, it will be years (if ever) before Cadillac or Lexus get a double clutch transmission.

He didn't play it well at all, he should have said we need X amount of money and we will do A, B, and C to make sure that we pay it back. GM is going to have to file for bankruptcy in January, they have zero time to negotiate or play games with Congress.

Wanting a plan is reasonable, I knew they would want one. I don't know why Red Ink Rick thought he didn't need a plan and they would just fork over the money. What the 3 CEOs failed to do is explain how they will pay the money back. All they did was try to scare Congress and say jobs would be lost if we don't get money. They need to present a real recovery plan, unfortunately, I don't think they have one. Northstar is right about needed to get down to 3-4 brands and 25 solid models. I said that years ago, but everyone argued that Pontiac and Buick have such great history and we can't get rid of them. They need class leaders, not 20 front drive generics and 20 mid-size SUVs.

Wagoner looked weak in front of the House committee and the Senate committee. Nardelli looked at least like he was willing to work for $1 or do whatever it takes. Ford isn't in as bad a shape, so Mullally seemed not as desperate and like he had a plan, but none of them were convincing. Wagoner was especially bad, not being able to answer when they would run out of money or how big of a loan they need. They aren't going to get a loan if they look incompetent and that is how they looked.

When you let market cap fall to $1.7 billion you run the risk of being bought. I am surprised Kirk Kerkorian hasn't come back.

Looks much better than before, the MKS front end helps. Too much black plastic in the interior, although I like the layout and aluminum and wood. Looks better in and out than a TL or ES350, way better than any Buick product, but not going to threaten the CTS or the Germans. But it is cheaper than a CTS, it offers a lot of technology and features for the money, it should meet sales goals. Stereo must be good since it is 14 speakers and 600 watts. The CTS's optional system is 10 speakers and 300 watts.

The G3 is overpriced by $14,994.

I don't like CAFE regs because they'd have to build only econo-boxes to get 50 mpg, and that limits consumer choice. If they want to deter purchases of gas guzzlers, put a $2000-$3000 tax on cars getting under 25-30 mpg, and give a tax credit on cars getting over 40 mpg. Then consumers have incentive to buy a fuel efficient car, but still have a choice.

Chapter 11 or lack of a bailout will kill off the UAW. When a UAW worker makes $34 more an hour than a Toyota worker to make a car with lower quality, it can't last long before going bust.

$230 million should buy them 4 more days.

The convention center sells tickets and food to visitors, so they'd lose a ton of money. Detroit would also take a hit from restaurant and hotel revenue. The city would lose too much money if the show didn't go on, and the import manufacturers will want to be there. If GM-Ford-Chrysler want to skip it they could, but then they are losing out on free press coverage while Toyota sucks it up with the new Prius.

I wish bailout would go to new product development at Cadillac and Chevy, and closing/selling Hummer and Saab (possibly Saturn as well) and focusing on making the core brands competitive. But, I believe the money will just go to funding the cash burn, and have no impact on product or innovation.

Toyota will have a plug-in hybrid as well, plus the 3rd generation Prius. The Volt has to be first to market and excellent, because Toyota can attract the "green" crowd as well. Problem is GM R&D is not funded properly, and lags $2-3 billion a year behind Toyota. GM has more models, they should be spending $2 billion more than Toyota, not less. In 2007, GM's hourly wage with benefits was $71, Toyota's was $47. The 2010 deal won't be enough to make up for that.

I wouldn't buy a Toyota or Lexus product, but I wouldn't discredit them so quickly or call Toyota a one trick pony. If their products is so weak and what they do is so easy, how come GM or Ford aren't doing it, and being as successful as they are? The primary thing they have is the Toyota Production System, which goes beyond just-in-time inventory, waste reduction and efficiency and actually recognizes defects and problems which are then eliminated. No one can match their efficiency. Others may be able to copy product attributes, but they can't duplicate the production system. Secondly, they have some strong product attributes. They have a car that gets 48 mpg in the city, no body else does. They were first with an 8-speed automatic, they have the only car that parks itself, and the LS can recognize a crash before it happens and adjust the power headrest to prevent whiplash (S-class has that I think, but Ford and GM don't). I don't like Toyota products, but I recognize how well they run their business and how strong of a competitor they are. Underestimating Toyota is a huge mistake. GM for years didn't see them as a threat, just like many here think they are a joke. Toyota is more profitable than all other automakers combined. They are a tough competitor, and I don't think GM knows how good they have to become to compete with them.

Prius outsold the Malibu 11,800 to 10,000. The Malibu was supposed to be the savior, and it can't outsell an ugly econo-box that is getting replaced in 4 months. If the Malibu was the best GM could do, they are in trouble.

But GM uses a 4-speed in a $46,000 2009 DTS. Not light years, but the Camry is 5 years ahead of the DTS. Corolla has an optional 5-speed auto, Cobalt doesn't. I'm glad GM is getting more 6-speeds out there, but transmissions aren't giving GM a competitive advantage, more so just keeping them par for the course. Toyota sells cars on reputation anyway. It may take GM 10-20 years to build a reputation like that, and they don't have that kind of time.

Camry, Venza, Avalon, Tundra, Sequoia have them also. Everything else but the Yaris has a 5-speed auto standard or optional. It is good that GM and Ford are putting 6-speeds in many vehicles, it is definitely needed, but the competition has them too.

Toyota's product is overrated but their management team and business model absolutely kills Detroit. Toyota could buy Chrysler, GM, Ford combined for 6 months profit. That is the difference between good management, and 40+ years of poor management by the Detroit 3.

Chapter 11, and bye-bye UAW. Tear up the contract, let them strike if they want. Everyone whines about how these jobs are so important, if that is the case, the workers would be foolish to strike. Even if every UAW member sticks wit the union, there are 10 million unemployed in this country, GM could replace everyone of them within a year. I have a 4T80 tranny, and even if it is the best 4-speed in the world, my car would be significantly better with 5 or 6 gears.

I agree with ellives that the UAW must go. Toyota found a business case for hybrids, and not only 6-speeds, but 8-speeds. They started development on that long before oil went up, so they were ready when it did. GM has almost no ability to see the future, they only react to current market, then start their 4 year development process, so the car often comes too late (Camaro, Cruze). Even back to the 1990s, The Ford Explorer and Jeep Grand Cherokee started the SUV craze, GM followed on that. GM can't AFFORD to innovate because of too many brands and too high of a labor cost. I have said for years they need to dump the UAW and a few brands. GM should be rolling out 4 products per year like the Malibu and CTS, on 6 year cycles (plus mid cycle refresh) that is 24 good products at a time. Problem is they roll out 2 models like that per year and have over 40 models.

Friedman is right about the industry not changing and Jobs would do a good job. GM doesn't innovate, look at how long the 3800-4-speed combo survived because they were too cheap to engineer something better. They will blow through the money like a kid in the candy store and do little to restructure their business.

Because they run forever and they get late 1980s and 1990s Benzes. Especially diesel S-classes, those are good for 300,000+ miles easily.

Wagoner should go, he has overseen the demise of the company or 8 years. He, the board, and other officers got them into this mess, I doubt they know how to get out of it. The current group if they get a $25 billion loan will just use the same failed strategy they have used the past 4 years and use the money to fund the cash burn, while they close some factories and lay some people off and have red tag sales on cars with platforms from 1990. Problem is, Wagoner wants the $25 billion loan, but never said how they will pay it back. They couldn't make money in a good economy with 17 million volume, they may never make profit again. The product lineup overall isn't good enough, there are a few good products, but many more outdated ones. Ford is the only one of the Detroit 3 doing the right thing, they are accelerating new products, while GM and Chrysler delay them.

I like this idea, Rick has to go.