ellives

No facts - just passing commentary.

I hope it's true and they put the hurt on Toyota eventually.

It doesn't matter how many units they sell if they aren't making money. They need to build products people want to buy... are excited about buying... and making more money per unit than Toyota. The alternative is to continue slowly sliding into the abyss.

We have always been able to buy ownership in foreign companies where they are headquartered and operated in stable countries. Don't for a second believe that "nationality is irrelevent." It is and always will be relevent. It may not mean the same thing it always did. To me it means it is managed (headquartered) out of the US. Because of the globalization phenomina every US manufacturer has been forced to move to other countries for labor because the cost of labor here is so high. I personally would not feel the same about GM if they moved their headquarters to a foreign country. It's also a matter of national pride. The US should maintain an automobile industry as part of it's national identity. If we can't build anything we can't effectively defend ourselves. As it is, we're borrowing the money it takes to build weapons. Eventually we'll be borrowing money to buy our weapons and defense systems from foreign companies because we can't build anything ourselves. What kind of situation would this be?

I believe the SRX has the power tilt/scoping wheel.

Shoulda, Coulda, Woulda. They just need to fix it before it's over. September is the deadline.

I didn't care for the comment either. It was just flame bait in my book and chose to ignore it. It's just crude and unsophisticated.

This fact alone, above all else, is why the UAW must die.

I don't care what other WTO countries do. Your comment is either oversimplification of the issue or it's ignorance. Neither is a good thing. The fact is Japan and Honda are able to operate quite effectively against GM and Ford because they have a huge cost advantage being non-union. Before they came to the US, they built their vehicles offshore for a fraction of Union labor costs (which is what got them enough profits to build plants here.) I "suggest" the UAW be tossed out on their collective asses in September if they aren't well along with unionizing Toyota and Honda plants in the US.

Nevermind - it's on the link in the first post in the thread - it was a bit choppy for me for some reason but great content.

Is this on cadillac.com?

It does really raise the question of the future of the STS. I heard there was talk about the future of STS and DTS being mutually exclusive here on C&G but I haven't found it. I really hate the thought of abandoning the STS model as it is "younger crowd" market recognition developed over a long period of time whereas the DTS is meaningless even to those who actually buy them (who know they're buying a DeVille.) Isn't the BLS FWD? I have no interest in adding a FWD product in the US Cadillac lineup. Those days are over.

I read this thread tonight and it amazes me how much re-writing of history there is, particularly with regard to what has become known as the "bustle back" Seville. While the critics can deride the exterior design, I was at the Boston IAS in 1979 when this car was unveiled and there was an audible amazement of the car when it was unveiled back then. I remember it was displayed on a round, rotating platform with the model spokesperson up there describing the features of the car. To me the car took it's style cues from one of the Rolls or Bentley models. They sold a ton of them. Apparently they weren't as bad as the revisionists would imply. I find it humorous people bitch about the fact GM doesn't take design risks but criticize them for building this car which was obviously a risk since it is visual departure from everything else built at the time. What was at the time a trend setting design has become universally seen as poor taste. Personally I don't think the design was what ruined this car as much as it was the quality of the 4100 which even today brings fear and loathing in the minds of mechanics. Unfortunately what followed this design was a true embarrassment in a little box of a car (in both the Seville and Eldorado versions) that effectively killed the sales of the line until the 92 redesign was released. The challenge for luxury car builders is to gradually change and improve the exterior design as the model evolves. Cadillac broke this when they moved from the bustleback to the next design. (Part of the problem with the then new design is buyers felt they were getting into a toy car it was so small relative to the prior model.) I think they've done a good job of this gradual change particularly with the current vs. prior Escalade and apparently with the '08 CTS. I *do* wonder about the fate of the STS vs. DTS with the introduction of the '08 CTS. It's becoming what the STS was originally born for.

I love the sunroof. Who needs a droptop?

More Toyota lies....

Give this guy credit for having the balls on own up to a change in opinion. Hello Mr. Obvious 40 percent is admirable but probably unattainable. They can't get a break. If you'll notice, companies are punished on the stock market when they don't do what they forecast they'll do. GM gets dinged when they DO what they said they'll do. Typical media bull$h!. They make a comment like this but don't explain the basis for the rating. If this is true, it's disappointing. The UAW must move into the import plants or die and they have until September to do it. Tick tock.

Whatever Lutz has to do to get GM mindshare if fine with me. In real life you do what you have to do get the business. GM employees need to understand this too some day. Those same "lots of Americans" are the ones that buy anything anywhere without understanding the long term ramifications of their decisions. Of course the other side of it is when they just don't care at all as long as it doesn't impact them immediately or directly or betters them personally at the detriment of the rest of the country? How else do you explain a guy like Robert Bird getting elected over and over when he is clearly another Washington crook? The problem with US politics is it has gone from the "vote" controlling the politicians to "money" controlling them, which means we've lost the democracy. Personally I think we should completely disallow political ads on television. The "right-to-free-speechers" can be damned. These ads have far too much influence on who uninformed people vote for and relatedly put too much value on fundraising. I'm sure the big fundraisers get behind the "free-speechers" and support them when it's convenient to do so. We should make people work at studying the candidates themselves or just don't vote. It's ludicrous that people vote for candidates based on what bull$h! they see on TV.

The only problem I see with this guy in Ct is the fact he's chasing the little guys jacking up their local price at the pump. No one appears to be going after ExxonMobil who is the real culprit. In a way you could say they've hastened the situation at Ford and GM by artificially and illegally pushing up the price of gas at the pump and singlehandedly destroying the market for SUV's and trucks.

I agree. The key is quality. There is still a gap here and GM needs to close it. In the mean time (concurrently) there is some momentum in the product area at the moment and they should take advantage of this to get public mindshare and start turning the tide of public opinion.

That would be a liberal perspective. Anybody making big profits in their eyes is gouging. I'm not so sure I'd call it gouging. Whenever I see these kinds of profits I can always point to an opportunity the company is taking advantage of, right or wrong. In Toyota's case they're taking advantage of the Detroit big 3's saddling with union legacies and concurrent public apathy. If we're going to bitch about profits we should be pointing our congressmen at ExxonMobil which has taken every opportunity available to screw the US consumer with gas prices. They complain they have no control over gas prices but yet they have been raking in billions in profits. They are criminals to my mind because we as consumers have no other choice - we have to buy gas from somebody and the oil companies have obviously colluded to set pricing for high profits. Toyota on the other hand has plenty of competitors. They are simply taking advantage of a temporary situation in their favor. I say temporary because the current situation in the car business is tenuous and can not be sustained.

Implying GM, Ford and Chrysler "aren't smart enough" is naive. Unions operate successfully when they have numbers. If they were able to get enough numbers to unionize Toyota and Honda, I am quite doubtful intelligence would have anything to do with making concessions under strike conditions. When you aren't shipping vehicles, the bills don't get paid and the business eventually goes down the tubes. Management will do amazing things under those circumstances. Congress *could* help with national health care but there are plenty of other ways they could help. For instance they could decide to slap tarriffs on imported vehicles to compensate for the fact environmental and labor laws are not comparable within importing countries (thereby putting US manufacturers at a disadvantage.) Our "trade policies" within the US are far to one sided in favor of importers at the moment and they're eating our lunch. Maybe the Dems will help.

I completely agree with everything above. The sense of the entitlement is amazing. It's a shame it may take the demise of GM before they get their comeuppance. The municipal unions are the ones who scare me (teachers, police, state workers, etc.) There is no limit to what (in theory) taxpayers can be made to pay so their demands seem to be unendless. It's going to be interesting to see what will happen with underfunded pensions over the next 10 years. I hope they are eventually all killed. I'm personally tired of paying for underperforming, uninterested teachers who are only in it for a pension and not for the kids.

If they have, the Company should publicize it more and make this discussion go away. The union will use it to argue their case for more compensation if the cuts others have made aren't well known. From my perspective it's no business of the union what the Company does in other areas.

Having the CEO cut his pay is a "feel good" move. Most of them make their real money on their bonuses anyway so fine have the CEO do it. The problem with having the whole employee base take a pay cut is "why should they?" If you cut their pay and they can get more money elsewhere they will. The best way to manage the cost of non-union employees is by establishing a bonus target and if they don't meet their goals / company goals, their bonus is reduced or eliminated. As I said in my prior post, the problem with the UAW employees GM has is they are being grossly overcompensated vs. what the rest of the market is so GM can't be competitive. This situation simply can't continue. Toyota doesn't have a pension plan for their labor. GM needs to dump theirs if they want to be competitive. Talking about "fairness" is counterproductive. Life isn't fair. We're talking about reality here and the reality is GM can't afford the current labor arrangement and should actually shoot for a better cost structure than Toyota has. It doesn't feel good but it's what is required to survive, return to profitability and kill Toyota.

Irv Miller is a dirtbag as far as I'm concerned. I have no time for US citizens helping Toyota in any way.