cmattson

How concise - and on the money. You can't get any better than that.

I'll let her know when I'm done, k? Thank God my wife doesn't check out the browser history -- I'd be out buying flowers this afternoon.

Sorry to hear about your loss. I wish you good health. If it does turn out to be your gual bladder & if it's any consolation; my wife had her gaul bladder removed a couple of years back & my co-worker had it done about 10 days ago. It's basically outpatient surgery. According to both, the gas they use to blow up your stomach causes you more discomfort a couple of days later then the surgery does.

IT'S OFFICIAL: Apologies to everyone, esp. Evok (who gave me the crappy idea)

I look at this as a necessary setback. Like Giff stated, GM didn't need to have an Astra and a Delta-based small car platform. If GM needs to take a step back, bunker down and make the necessary needed changes to be profitable, then so be it. We've had far, far, far too many years of incremental, half-assed changes that result in mediocrity. Take the drastic measures, make the necessary changes -- and if that means new GM models are delayed - then so be it. I'd rather have the next Malibu be late, have strong sales AND strong profit than another having an on-time piece of mediocrity.

Having the '08 Ion pushed back a year isn't the end of the world. Take a look at how Ford leveraged the hot Mazda6 platform for teir Ford/Mercury/Lincoln triplets. That's how you make use of a platform. If GM needs to push back on a model to make sure it gets it right, then that is more important for the long-term success of the company

A couple of quotes and comments: I started laughing at this point. I almost sprayed pop on my keyboard. It was hard to concentrate after this sentence. I thought Toyota was a flag-waving American company with built-in-the-USA pickups (right from San Antonio!)? If you believe the import-loving-rube logic, then a Toyota assembled in the US is every bit as American as your Chevrolet.. But you can't compare yourself to an American vehicle if you are already American! Wait.. I get it. When bashing, then it's okay to be not be American, and when advertising yourself, then it's ok to be American. Everybody got that? One might note that Toyota's existing high-tech 4.7l truck engine is already "purely American" in it's gas-guzzling nature -- all the while being lackluster in hp and torque in comparison to GM's engine choices) No please -- take it -- somebody -- anybody?! Lord knows they can't actually sell the overpriced, miserable thing. This is complete BS. GM's hybrid efforts were directed towards busses -- where large fuel savings can be made .. instead of an econobox. Kudo's to GM on this one. By rolling out the device on busses, GM was able to develop a heavy-duty hybrid device, under severe service. It was able road-test them and NOT have the general public experience issues on a new technology. Take a look at any of the Prius forums to see the multitudes of issues with the new technology. This isn't a knock on Toyota at all: it's just that a new technology is going to experience more than it's fair share of issues. GM was able to protect it's consumer-base from having to deal with them -- all while road-testing it's technology on a vehicle that: - will weigh far-more than any consumer-vehicle would, - will start-stop more times in a day than a consumer vehicle normally would, - will be on the road more hours in a day than a consumer-vehicle would The one "problem" with GM's approach is the lack-of-press.

My point of the post was to illustrate how GM can get crushed on certain issues while others get a pass. GM can lead with technology and safety items - and not receive the good press they deserve (ABS). GM is held to a different standard than just about any other manufacturer.

Ok, hear me out, but.. Didn't GM have digital dashes back in the mid-to-late eighties? It was panned as being too gimmicky. Didn't Chevrolet used to have ABS as standard equipment? It has knocked as an added option (and extra expense) that was forced upon consumers. Consumers should have the ability to choose. Today? You're criticized if you don't have ABS as std equipment. Didn't GM get crucified for the heavy use of unpainted gray plastic molding/panels on their Aztec and Avalanche? Seems ok for use on the Element Didn't the dustbuster vans get critized for their design-pushing tall tail-lamps (that extended along the rear glass up towards the roof)? The CR-V does just fine by this design Didn't GM have an all electric-car? Where was Toyota? Honda? Ford? Anybody else? Either you have hybrid or you aren't green enough nowadays Remember when Pontiac was bashed for their heavy use of plastic molding that gave their car curves and character? Pontiac, as well as Chevrolet are currently critized as having cars whose exterior designs are too bland & vanilla Remember when the domestic were knocked for having cars that were 1-2 mpg behind the segment leaders? What happened when the Malibu 4cyl and 6cyl models were matching and beating the imports 4 cyl's? We started hearing about the number of gears in the transmission. Hey, I'm not saying that GM's always been out front on things -- far cry from it. But they've been industry leading when the auto-press chose to use different benchmarks. How sad.

Unfortunately - yes.

GM's got a lot of new product invested into Saturn (finally!) - so I doubt they are leaving (a la Oldsmobile). You can doubt that they'd move downscale - that would put in competition with Chevrolet and/or parts of Pontiac (well at least as Pontiac's current portfoilio sits). You read rumors on the Aura - and they mention 6 speed transmissions and the 3.6l engine. Assuming that's true, then by cost-of-content alone, I'd expect Saturn to move up the ladder from it's current position of primarly selling economy cars & sedans.

I'm wondering if it's not better to compare the "Malibu vs the Impala" when trying to decipher Griff's latest. By re-examing price and market pos, that tells me that GM is trying to slot the car in a different area than they originally had targeted. Compare the Malibu and the Impala: both are sedans, but the Malibu is clearly the smaller, more fuel efficient and less powerful of the two. It's price/value also reflects the differences between the two. The Malibu and Impala, while both sedans, are clearly targeted towards different consumers. Perhaps Chevrolet was trying to determine where the Camaro should fit on the scale of things. Perhaps two RWD vehicles? If that's the case, could Chevrolet have a smaller, sporty RWD coupe (Camaro) and later have a larger, touring RWD coupe (Chevelle)? Damn I'm curious!

I applaud any business that value's production of a quality product. Kudos to Toyota's statement - I guess I'd jaded from all of GM's lip-service when I say that I hope that their actions backup their words.

Perhaps I should have made myself clearer. I was implying that Honda was last-to-the-party to realize the potential of the Chinese market - not that Honda was absent from the market. Lets here it for politeness :CG_all:

Medicare's administration & overhead costs are unbelievably better than private healthcare. Just because our gov't administers something doesn't mean it's bloated beyond belief. While Medicare does have it's issues -- overhead isn't one of them.

A companies board of directors are usually made up of executives from other companies (of whom Wagoneer and other GM brass probably sit as board members). As a result you have a bit of the 'fox guarding the hen-house' type of situation. A board usually will turn their head when it comes to executive compensation packages -- and they expect (and usually get) the same in return.

I wonder what measurement Toyota is using for the billboard: EPA figures or real-life? Toyota doesn't hesitate to advertise and use the EPA figures when it can gain by them, but will acknowledge that a consumer probably won't regularly see the figures the EPA obtains.

I don't think gov't-run healthcare is the answer. I think a couple of things could help: 1. Discouple healthcare from businesses. As much as *I HATE* the thought of businesses shifting the burden from themselves to individuals (a la pensions -> 401k), you'd have to admit that if people had to shop-themselves around they'd take a little bit better care of themselves and they'd pay closer attention to the cost; forcing ins. companies to be a bit more competitive. This means I won't get to open the financial page of the Mpls. Star & Tribune business section and find that 5 of the United Healthcare executives made the Minnesota's top-10 for executive compensation. That's absurd. 2. Curb profits at the drug companies and at healthcare companies. This is no different than what the government does with utilities companies. When a utility company needs to raise rates, it must make a business case to do so. It opens it's books and has to petition the gov't to raise it's rates. If drug companies and healthcare companies did the same, perhaps we wouldn't have the runaway profiteering we do now. Quick factiod. Q: Since the great depression, what business sector has enjoyed gains each and every year. This business sector has outperformed every other business sector in the economy each and every year for the past 35 years. A: Pharmaceuticals. Now you know where to put your money boys and girls. If you really wanted to look at growing the economy, I think you could probably extend thought #2 to include oil/energy companies as well. What good isn't transported into and around this country? Our basic cost of living is soo tied to energy costs, it isn't even funny. If energy profits were curbed (meaning oil/energy were even cheaper) the consumers spending ability would rise. And if you really wanted to bring up people's spending power, you'd index a companies average pay to their executive pay -> meaning the executive's pay couldn't exceed the average pay in the company by some sort of ratio. I don't think that would limit an executive's pay so much that it would rise pay levels, limit company profit/share-holder return. Shareholders would have to get used to the idea that businesses cannot sustain their "this-quarter is only 5% better than last quarter and we need to see never ending double-digit gains mentality". Personally, I think that one's a bit over-the-top, but I'd be curious to see where things would be if we had that in place for a while..

Hmm.. imagine that. Toyota's already jumped into the Chinese market. GM's made even better inroads there. VW's been there for eternity. Honda last to the party? Who'd have thought? It's not like they were last to make a V6 sedan or a minivan or a suv or a pickup or a V8. What? Oh, yeah->they were. My bad. Nevermind. Let's here it for Honda's consistency!

I'm with Empowah on this one. I'm not a fan of the exterior, but it does use and extend Toyota's existing exterior designs. The interior is just funky. Perhaps it's a design that pushes the boundaries a bit past comfortableness, but will grow on me with time. Perhaps I should shove a fork in my eye as well. Ahh, life's many mysteries.. 269hp in the vehicle should make it scoot. I think the Equinox and especially the Torrent (Pontiac=Excitement?) are left out of the sport-compact SUV market. They both need an upgraded powertrain. The "SS" models can't get here fast enough. Aren't they rumored to get the 3.9l? In current form, that's 240hp -- which helps, but IMO, the automotive press will find that 29hp gap too hard to not criticize (especially since the Malibu's 200hp 3.5l got ripped in comparison to Toyota's 210hp (oops, I meant 190hp) 3.0l.

Not to get too political; but Newsmax has a political bend to it. It mixes fact and fiction at will. I'd hardly consider it a credible source. However, I'm not debunking the story -- I'm just saying that Newmax shouldn't be your most trusted news source. Now, if we specualte that Wagoneer is getting in on a $4.6m/year pension, all the while GM is in well-speculated struggles, could one look into such an event that Wagonner is only interested in his pension because he could soon be using it?

Thought I'd tag into this existing thread to mention that Toyota has reached an agreement to supply Subaru with it's synergy hybrid system: http://www.nni.nikkei.co.jp/AC/TNKS...125D25JFA14.htm One might wonder how Toyota can be both: (1) limited in meeting Prius demand because hybrid components are so scarce and (2) sell/supply hybrid componentry to a limited (<10% stake) partner. I'll stand behind the idea that Toyota is still losing money on each hybrid they sell & they intentionally limit demand to curb their losses and keep hybrid demand high.

How about: a power sunroof, a class 4 hitch, a transmission cooler and the trailer wiring? (all on my '03 Suburban). Don't forget classics such as "I sure am thirsty" (if they have a pop machine nearby) or "I sure am hungry" (while rubbing your stomach). After being serious about purchasing said vehicle and consuming a great deal of the salesperson's time, you should try suggesting to the salesperson that perhaps you and your wife should leave, have dinner, and talk things over. They really don't want you to leave... I guess I'm one of the rare individuals that enjoy car shopping. Don't be afraid to suggest unusual items such as a candy-bar from a nearby machine or car wash coupons from the car wash across the street. hehe.

Hmm.. imagine that. Gas prices receed and the sales slump goes away for a performance-bent car company. Who'd have guessed?

That's great speculation. It softens the blow (those affected see it comming). A leak like this can also be a trial-baloon of sorts. Let the idea out and see what sort of response it gets. Either way, it's very encouraging to see that the UAW is willing to make concessions to this level.