GM

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Seems like the greenies and the government have demanded, no caused, a lot of the styling in our automobiles, because of safety and weight savings. </div></div>

Did you mean during the last 19 years, when safety and fuel economy standards were totally unchanged (for cars, not trucks)? Or did you just mean during the years 1995 to 2004 when emissions standards as well were unchanged?

Car companies build what they can sell, even the ones who are failing. That today a bunch of people who like 1958 DeSotos are out of step with that is not surprising. What is surprising is the <span style="text-decoration: underline">constant</span> refrain of blaming the government for <span style="text-decoration: underline">everything</span>. Slightly less so is the concomittant idea that something like our government (which is so heavily influenced by elements of commerce) is somehow in bed with "the greenies" (whatever that obviously evil group must be) and "the unions" (who seem to be the new communists). It's offensive.

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rawja</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Speaking of Prius, that style hasn't changed since they were introduced, but I guess because it's Japanese, that's OK!</div></div>

More sound and fury...

1st gen 2001-2003

2nd gen 2004-2009

3rd gen 2010- </div></div>

Actually Roger there have been <span style="font-weight: bold">four</span> generations of Prius. The true first generation (1997-2000) was never imported to the U.S., but was sold to the public (mainly in Japan). The facelift between the first and second generation cars (2001-2003) was very mild (<span style="font-style: italic">I think the sheetmetal may even have been unchanged.</span>), but there were extensive engineering/mechanical tweeks. They share very little under the skin.

I think during the same period of time (1997-2010) they might have changed the number of squares in the PT Cruiser's grille once. I think.

As for the "sound and fury", expecting different reactions would be like trying to get Red Sox fans to admit that Alex Rodriguez is handsome. It's about as meaningful as it would be likely to expect a different outcome.

[LINC400]

I think the government is responsible for the current problems in the auto industry. The buyer of a 1975 Buick LeSabre would never look at a Toyota or Honda unless they wanted something completely unlike what they normally bought. However, with CAFE, everything shrunk until there was no difference between the size, price, and look of a late 1980's to present Buick and Toyota. People that bought those 1975 Buicks had to drastically reduce the size, passenger room, cargo space, and power of their cars as time went by, or switch to an SUV. If there was no demand for those vehicles, they would not sell.

Also, Dave@Moon, you repeatedly state that the foreign companies regularly update their cars, but then say that the buyer of a 2004 Chrysler would not be looking for another car in 2007 because new cars are kept an average of 17 years. So then what is your point about the foreign cars constantly updating? Personally I think that American cars not updating often enough is a problem, however, GM has a lot more models to get around to updating than Toyota does.

Also, I can afford to buy a new car. But I am not going to pay a huge amount of money for a car that is simply unexciting. Gas would have to be $20 a gallon before I bought a Prius. The only cars of interest that I have seen in the last 10 years are the Camaro and Challenger. But I think I'd still be better off using that money towards paying off my mortgage early. While the 2 cars are the best I have seen in years, they are still not exciting enough to get me to buy them.

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">However, with CAFE, everything shrunk until there was no difference between the size, price, and look of a late 1980's to present Buick and Toyota.</div></div>

And size is the only measure of difference? (In price and "look" Toyota is much more of a Chevy competitor than a Buick.) <span style="font-weight: bold">I seriously doubt that 10 mpg land yachts are the future of any car company.</span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">People that bought those 1975 Buicks had to drastically reduce the size, passenger room, cargo space, and power of their cars as time went by, or switch to an SUV. If there was no demand for those vehicles, they would not sell.</div></div>

They're not. It isn't 2004 any more.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So then what is your point about the foreign cars constantly updating?</div></div>

Making a new grille every few years and making a better/more efficient drivetrain whenever possible are different things. Which happened to the Cavalier? Which happened to the Corolla? Which one is providing the incentive to buyers?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Personally I think that American cars not updating often enough is a problem, however, GM has a lot more models to get around to updating than Toyota does.</div></div>

Which had a MUCH larger development and engineering staff than Toyota during the intervening period. GM is still the bigger company, BTW.

In the 2009 <span style="font-style: italic">Consumer Reports</span> Auto issue Toyota Motors has 27 models listed (cars & trucks), with 3 Lexus models being uprated clones of Toyota models. All of GM has 37 models listed, virtually every one of which is a clone in several "brands" (counted individually regardless in the total of 37). So which one do you think was really trying during the past few decades?

=======================

The proof is in the pudding. Some companies were poorly managed, and are paying for it now.

[Guest Dean_H.]

GM has two problems - government regulations and the union. Now with tax dollars bailing them out, I certainly won't be patronizing them.

[Reatta Man]

Dave@moon,

Once again, this is a string of messages about GM cars, not Toyotas.

You have done this many, many times before, trying to steer a GM (Buick) discussion to the merits and superiority of Toyotas.

That is not what we are here for. Please go to a Toyota board to discuss the virtues of Toyotas. Your absolute devotion to them being the best thing ever put on 4 wheels is easily matched here by those that are devoted to GM and their outstanding products.

Like those of us who grew up in the 60's and 70's who had fun debating the merits of Ford vs. Chevy (or F-150 vs Silverado or Mustang vs Camaro) we can have a very spirited discussion, but no one expects to win over a Mustang or F-150 owner to a GM product. It should be fun, not resemble a fire fight in downtown Baghdad.

Where it gets tempestuous is when you seem to want to insist on steering it off-subject or making the discussion personal.

Please stop it. If you want to discuss the good or bad things about GM, fine. But if you want to get a job selling Toyotas, please go see if your local Toyota dealer is hiring.

[Guest palosfv3]

The decline of the American auto manufacturing and our economy over the last several decades will go down in our great grandchildrens history books as the " Great Technology Depression ". Stop and think a minute about what has occurred over the years. It happened slowly. Kinda like gray hair and a few extra pounds. So slow that most dont even realized it has happened and is still continueing.

The Japanese and Europeans would not have had access to the American auto market in the late 60's and early 70's if they could not get their product to our shores. Technology allowed them to build boats capable to bring ten to twenty thousand cars over at one time and get a foot hold with the American public.

Technology allows the rest of todays world to compete with us for the rewards of life. We are not used to that challenge.

Change is an inevitable part of life both personal and in business. If we along with our leaders dont get a better handle on what the future holds we will only be in for more of the same.

Wagner really blew the best opportunity he ever had to get a shot at the competition and to get the media on their side for once . When he was being grilled in Congress over the GM bailout request, they asked what were some of the problems that are contributing to the ills of the company. I wish he would have said " We are building our cars too good ."

[Restorer32]

Say what you will about WalMart, they employ my mentally challenged niece and pay her far more than her productivity merits.

[R W Burgess]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">.....goes to Wal-Mart, a non union company that employs thousands of part time associates that get <span style="font-style: italic"><span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="text-decoration: underline">no benefits</span></span></span> and no retirement.... </div></div>

Say what you will about WalMart, but my wife says they have the best medical coverage anywhere, including the coverage that we pay over a $1000.00 a month for . She just had a friend/WalMart employee receive a lung transplant with full payments and a job waiting for them when they recover.

Wayne

[sfair]

Brand Loyalty... Fought the good fight, but is sinking fast and is doomed to be written about in history books. Blame? The education of the consumer.

GM's 2 worst enemies? 1. Themselves and 2. Themselves. Blame? Themselves.

The outsourcing of America? Blame? Us!!!

[R W Burgess]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">....The education of the consumer..... </div></div>

....or the lack of education of our children, or maybe as my oldest son says, the over-education of some.

Now, my youngest son still thinks his foreign made Ford is American. My middle daughter? She still thinks that the new tires she got last year came with "Blue Walled" tires.........then wondered why they turned white after the first rain storm.

Wait, maybe Mom and Dad's the problem here!????

After questioning Mom about the blue, Mom said, "I didn't think you wanted purple ones??"

Wayne

*

*

*

[sfair]

Information... used to be passed from parent to child; from teacher to student; from newspaper to reader; from pier to pier. All routes filtered and with some bias. NOW, all the information you could ever use is at your finger tips - biased, unbiased; truths, lies; good and bad... all for you to analyze, sort and digest for your use to utilize as you see fit, including making a vehicle buying decision. As a corporation, you had better be on top of the new age or I can see a coal fired forge in your future! "I will buy brand X because it's what my father drove" or "They were the father of the muscle car" just don't cut it anymore. Who cares?? Its "What can you do for me today" that counts.

[Reatta Man]

Wayne,

Keep in mind that most young people get their news from a COMEDY channel, not a NEWS channel, NEWSpaper or evening NEWS program.

23% of 18 to 29 y.o. in 2004....

http://www.seattlepi.com/tv/157538_tv22.html

From a Pew Research study...

Pew Research

Other Key Findings:

...the proportion of young people getting <span style="font-weight: bold">no news </span>on a typical day has increased substantially over the past decade. About a third of those younger than 25 (34%) say they get no news on a typical day, up from 25% in 1998.

A slim majority of Americans (51%) now say they check in on the news from time to time during the day, rather than get the news at regular times. This marks the first time since the question was first asked in 2002 that most Americans consider themselves "news grazers."

So, if Chrysler, GM and Ford having financial problems isn't 'funny', it isn't news to most young people.

[jscheib]

Wayne,

Another lapse. I assume she had the tires mounted by a dealer. Should he not have taking the pride of workmanship to clean of the protective blue?

John

[Guest windjamer]

Wow. Lots of good points here,but the bottom line on our trouble, not just GMs Ford or Chrysler,Hoovers or May-tags is greed,plane and simple.Little guy wants a fair and decent wage,you think the big guy is going to give up anything?? Think again. I pushed a beer truck and delivered on average 250-300 cases a day. I was a member of teamsters but earned almost $3. per.hr. less than the drivers that hauled whisky and they where members of the same union. After we voted to strike we got a 35 cent an hr. rase over a three year contract. The first load I took out of the plant had a notice to every customer I delivered to that the price of beer was increased 35 cents PER CASE due to the damands of the union drivers. Now you tell me who got the rase? Cant rase the price of the product any more?? no problem. Have it made overseas by child or slave labor for pennys on the doller compaired to what you pay Americans.

Who cares if a few more thousand American workers lose there jobs. Do NOT expect that million doller a year ceo to cut back or give up anything he has WORKED?? so hard for.

God bless Henry Ford. BTW Dave eat your Toyota, Buy made in the USA. The job you save may be mine.

[sfair]

"Dave, eat your Toyota"...that statement has no relevance in this world anymore. "The Global economy" ( I know, choke choke, cough!) no longer supports it. You cannot tell Dave what to buy, it's up to GM to build what he wants, and if they cannot, it will be bye-bye to them. Simple as that!!

[Guest Skyking]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Reatta Man</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Like those of us who grew up in the 60's and 70's who had fun debating the merits of Ford vs. Chevy (or F-150 vs Silverado or Mustang vs Camaro) we can have a very spirited discussion, but no one expects to win over a Mustang or F-150 owner to a GM product. It should be fun, not resemble a fire fight in downtown Baghdad.

</div></div>

That's the problem with Mr. Moon..........He didn't grow up in the 60's, if he did, he probably had a diaper on. He doesn't have a clue to how good things were, only what he reads.

[Dave@Moon]

I'm 51, and a past Buick Club of America Chapter President. You can do the math on both counts yourself.

If either one doesn't add up, don't blame me. (Like Joe does. He generally has no other choice but to resort to pretending this is personal.)

The proof is still in the pudding. It always will be.

[Dave@Moon]

Oh yeah, I forgot.

Toyota.

There, now some may continue in their delusions of what my statements are, and where or if this thread ever was steered in a different direction.

[Steve_Mack_CT]

This is an interesting thread and Dave Fields makes a great point along with others but I think there is another reason US automakers are faltering. It is not just about uneven trade or even profits or organizational issues – I believe all corporations in the car business are for profit, and the bigger you get the more organizational mass you have. The issue is really that the perception of the quality gap persists and basically it continues to be chic for many who are not necessarily car people to go foreign “because they must be better”. I have not seen a lot of effort by US manufacturers to kill this perception despite the fact that for the most part, US quality meets the foreign competition. I have heard plenty of horror stories about lemons from all makers – including (gasp) Hondas and Toyotas where the mfg. and dealer have been as difficult to deal with as any other brand. Again, the notion that they are not looking to maximize profit is just silly, and just one way to do that is minimize warranty work – they all do it. While greatly improved in the last 25 years, the perfect car has yet to be made, or there would be no repair people working on any cars including foreign cars.

The domestic models that do well tend to be those that make no excuses for what they are rather than try to emulate foreign brands. I chose a Cadillac CTS when I decided it was time for a bit of an upscale everyday car largely because of it’s “American-ness”. Cadillac has developed its own updated look throughout the line that appeals to enough buyers to make it a pretty successful division. The line up is exciting, fresh and on par with any foreign competition in the classes its models sell in. Even the somewhat biased automotive journalists (another problem, but hard to ignore the world's fastest production sedan - '09 CTS-V) admit that. I have been pleased with the overall quality and have had no mechanical concerns so far. But the best thing is, it looks like a Cadillac, not another brand X trying to look like a BMW. The styling queues emulate the bigger Cadillac models, not Europe or Japan. You know what it is and for that reason I love this car. But, in my area, when I look around any given parking lot, I see a sea of foreign cars. Eggs driven by younger people who aspire to move up to the German sedan knock offs the Japanese seem to do so well and fill the rest of the lot. Drive what you want, but I think the issue is that most car buyers today are enthralled with anything foreign. The domestics need to overcome this and expand excitement beyond just the low volume image cars (Corvette, Mustang, whatever) to their entire lines.

Competition is a good thing. The domestics deserved the beating they got in the 80s, and to their credit, they made huge improvements. But unfortunately the effects have been long term. Perceptions are hard to change, people still equate foreign with “better quality” or “better taste” – I have owned some Japanese cars and agree they are very well built, but decided a while ago to buy American only, my own personal decision. I have not been at all disappointed with the quality on either my new or near new domestic car purchases in the last 15 years. I would argue that the domestics are as capable as the others to build world class cars, and probably better equipped to fill the needs of all classes - there are still plenty of SUV buyers and people who want or need bigger cars out there. This has been proven by the increasing vehicle size and line ups of the foreign companies.

Regarding GM, since that is what the thread is based on, I grew up on great GM cars, all we ever had ‘till the mid 80s. I would say I had a higher comfort level with Ford for years, but tried GM again with the CTS. I would buy another late model GM car in total confidence, but again, just my own experience with the brand.

Maybe I am in the minority, but I will continue to drive American based vehicles as long as I have that option.

[Guest Skyking]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dave@Moon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm 51, and a past Buick Club of America Chapter President. You can do the math on both counts yourself.

</div></div>

My math tells me you were 4 in 1962, the last of the good years in America. 1963 was the beginning of the downfall, with the assasination of our president and the invasion of the British music. The world now knew we were vulnerable in every way.

As for the car makers, I'm a true believer that Congress did the most damage.

[1937hd45]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Skyking</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dave@Moon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm 51, and a past Buick Club of America Chapter President. You can do the math on both counts yourself.

</div></div>

My math tells me you were 4 in 1962, the last of the good years in America. 1963 was the beginning of the downfall, with the assasination of our president and the invasion of the British music. The world now knew we were vulnerable in every way.

As for the car makers, I'm a true believer that Congress did the most damage. </div></div>

Skyking, Glad we have something in common, I've used 1965 as a cutoff date for years, life was just fine for me up until 1964. In 1965 the toilet got flushed and we've been swirling around ever since.

[2doorcoupeman]

Some clarification on my comment about"being 1965".I was thinking about when the mustang first came out(it was probably in 1964)I was just 1 then hehe.I did see the videos and hear the stories of how the public showed up at the new car lots so as to catch a peek of the new models.

[Guest THEHKP7M13]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dave@Moon</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> All this is assuming the following about the above mentioned people:

1.) All their curreent cars are paid off

2.) They aren't underwater on their houses

3.) They aren't swimming in credit card debt.

4.) They aren't funding a childs college education or still paying off their own

</div></div>

No, "all this" is just assuming similar "average" expenses in all other categories, including these. </div></div>

OK.

But you cannot assume that ALL those people don't have any of the above mentioned items.

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">OK.

But you cannot assume that ALL those people don't have any of the above mentioned items.

</div></div>

Of course not, just as you can't assume "ALL those people" aren't eccentric wealthy heirs of large fortunes who maintain a normal job/income to keep themselves grounded.

The point is that new cars are hardly beyond the means of many Americans, if not a small majority of them. They <span style="text-decoration: underline">could</span> be buying Chevys and Dodges, they're just not.

[Guest Skyking]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1937hd45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Skyking, Glad we have something in common, I've used 1965 as a cutoff date for years, life was just fine for me up until 1964. In 1965 the toilet got flushed and we've been swirling around ever since. </div></div>

1937, we're both pretty close, if you didn't live it at least in your teens, you'd never know. Some people can only read it in books...

too bad for them..........

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> My math tells me you were 4 in 1962, the last of the good years in America. 1963 was the beginning of the downfall, with the assasination of our president and the invasion of the British music. The world now knew we were vulnerable in every way.

</div></div>

Lets see if this one doesn't get pulled...

1962, when median annual household income in the U.S. was over $15,000 less than it is now (adjusted for inflation).

This is a downfall?

[Reatta Man]

The issue now is NOT affordability; it is about perceptions built by myths perpetuated by the news media, with a small grain of truth mixed in.

The fact is, Hyundai, whether they stumbled into it or really planned it, really hit on something with their Hyundai Assurance plan. People are scared or just uncomfortable over loosing their job, or going into further debt, and what it could do to their long-term financial security. Now, more and more companies are copying them to stay competitive.

Add to that the teachings of Dave Ramsey, Suzy Ormon and even Donald Trump to build up your cash reserves, dump debt and only buy what you can afford (including good 1-3 year old cars instead of new) and an industry built upon monthly payments is really hurting. Remember, just a few years ago, GM (through GMAC) made more profit on financing new cars than on building and selling the cars themselves. Of course, they then dumped GMAC, but that is another story.

So, anyone can come in here and spout adjusted family income, the superiority of their favorite foreign car, but the fact is, the car sales numbers are part of a much more complex, multi-layered problem.

And, more and more people every day are becoming convinced that giving hundreds of billions to banks while ALL car companies, foreign and domestic, are watching their sales go into and stay in the tank is NOT the solution. Add to that the fact that most people know these trillion-dollar deficits spent on 'free' government programs and bailouts are going to come due SOON, and consumer confidence is way down.

And, as I tell people almost every day, people vote with their feet and their wallet, including right now.

So, run all the numbers you wish to try to convince everyone they can afford a Prius, the fact is, most people don't want the debt, are afraid of being upside down in their car loan, and don't want a Prius (most dealers are now discounting them, including the 2009 models).

Bottom line: the cars of the 1980s that had quality issues are all in a junkyard or recycled into a new washing machine or toaster, so they are ancient history. GM quality is at or above all foreign brands, including virtually all Euro brands. And when you consider what a GM car costs compared to the foreign cars in the J.D. Power ratings (Buick vs. Lexus) they are a good value. Their gas mileage is up, their model lineup is fair, even though most of us wish they had some more sizzle to their cars, and yes, even though some elitists love to hate trucks and SUVs, they are still in demand also. (Trucks and SUVs, that is, NOT elitists, )

So, give me a good medium to large 2-5 year old GM, Ford or Chrysler any day over a Toyota Yaris or other small car any day. Why? Because I know I can turn that 2-5 year old car into a reliable 9-11 year old car with proper maintenance, and I can do it for far less money than any new small (especially foreign) car AND the doors won't fly off in an accident!

Meanwhile Washington will continue to take over the car companies, nationalize the banks, socialize medicine, bow down to or coddle up to dictators and terrorists and raise my taxes to pay for their socialist utopia. I will just keep working for a living and driving a paid-for American car.

To all the GM and Chrysler people who are worried because their factories are or soon will close, my heart and prayers are with you and your families.

[Guest THEHKP7M13]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Reatta Man</div><div class="ubbcode-body">To all the GM and Chrysler people who are worried because their factories are or soon will close, my heart and prayers are with you and your families. </div></div>

+1

[Guest Skyking]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dave@Moon</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> My math tells me you were 4 in 1962, the last of the good years in America. 1963 was the beginning of the downfall, with the assasination of our president and the invasion of the British music. The world now knew we were vulnerable in every way.

</div></div>

Lets see if this one doesn't get pulled...

1962, when median annual household income in the U.S. was over $15,000 less than it is now (adjusted for inflation).

This is a downfall? </div></div>

Dave, this is one arguement you can't win, no matter how hard you try, at 4 years old, you'll never know.

[Guest Skyking]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Skyking</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

As for the car makers, I'm a true believer that Congress did the most damage. </div></div>

This article is in this mornings paper. The first & second paragraphs confirm what I said last night. What else are they doing <span style="font-style: italic">wrong........ </span> ?

[ex98thdrill]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Dave@moon,

Once again, this is a string of messages about GM cars, not Toyotas.

You have done this many, many times before, trying to steer a GM (Buick) discussion to the merits and superiority of Toyotas.

</div></div>AMEN!!!

As the previous posts have stated, the mismangement lies with the executives, and not the common worker. To fault someone for what they make, is not right without understanding what the actual job is.

The one thing that I will remind everyone is that Steve Moskowitz and Joe Vicini both came from GM and they have both made significant contributions to both AACA and the automotive hobby. I'm sure there are others, but these two fine gentlemen have been very good for this club. Trying to put myself in their shoes, I feel sorry for these two. I will also remind everyone that we got Steve after GM closed the doors on Oldsmobile. This issue with GM has got to hit very close to home for both of them, and out of respect for those two, they don't need to hear us bash the company that put the food on their tables for a long time. It is what it is, and it'll be what it's going to be.

Chrysler was in trouble 30 years ago, they got a government bail out, and they survived. I'm sure if Chrysler did it once before, they and GM can do it again.

[Guest Hinckley]

As a whole this discussion can be summed up in one word - leadership. On a corporate or even national level there is a huge void in the realm of leadership.

Take a look at the story of Charles Nash (the subject of an Independent Thinker column in Cars & Parts in about two months)and his company during the first 15 years. Here is a company where the employee was seen as having more value than the machinery, the automobiles were engineered and designed, and the owner fully understood the concept of fiscal responsibility. This is a company that turned a profit during the first years of the Great Depression while others were running aground.

In compiling a list of character studies to gain a deeper understanding of what is missing in the American auto industry and how to fix it I would add Henry Ford in regards to his challenge of the Selden patent, Walter Chrysler, and Albert Erskine before 1927.

[Larry Schramm]

The real decline in the American auto industry started with the elevation of Roger Smith to the head of GM in 1980. He started the binge of selling parts of the company and spending the money just like many homeowners did in the last decade. Every time the value of the house went up, they remortgaged the house and spend the money. Now that the housing prices have gone down( like auto sales down from 17.5 million annual sales a year ago to probably less than 10 million this year) the house is going to be lost. Prior to Roger, the guys that ran the car companies knew that you needed to keep 20-30 billion in the bank to last the down turns that happen. You saw that when Daimler took over Chrysler and sucked $26 Billion right out of their rainy day fund back to Stutgart almost over night. Sad time.

[Guest Skyking]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ex98thdrill</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

The one thing that I will remind everyone is that Steve Moskowitz and Joe Vicini both came from GM and they have both made significant contributions to both AACA and the automotive hobby. I'm sure there are others, but these two fine gentlemen have been very good for this club. Trying to put myself in their shoes, I feel sorry for these two. I will also remind everyone that we got Steve after GM closed the doors on Oldsmobile. This issue with GM has got to hit very close to home for both of them, and out of respect for those two, they don't need to hear us bash the company that put the food on their tables for a long time. It is what it is, and it'll be what it's going to be.

</div></div>

Ex, I agree........this is a big blow to all of us that have been loyal American car owners.

[Steve Moskowitz]

Pat, kind of you but Joe and I are nothing more than a pebble of sand in this whole thing. We are both very loyal to GM despite everything that has swirled around us over the years. However, others are right smack in the middle of it now.

I could write chapter after chapter of everything I have seen from an Olds employee until now. I have had a very unique perspective of things as few (there were a couple of others) people have worked for the factory, become a dealer and served on GM's national boards. I did all those things and had many years of frustration and some times of being proud as well.

I have tried to state that there is a terrible toll on average hard working people in the domestic industry right now. Loss of jobs, income, houses, divorce and worse. It is extremely stressful. There is also a trickle down effect on other businesses and of course a monumental impact on the dealers and thusly their employees, vendors, etc.

It does bug me when people are completely thoughtless about the humanity in this situation but I guess that is just natural with some. I fear for what we are leaving the next generation and do not see our government stepping up to protect our future the way they should. Just my view.

Blame, wow there is so much to throw around and so many people that can take "credit" for it! People would never believe some of the inside stories on how decisions were made, etc. In fact, no one would believe it except those that were around at the time. As much as I fault Roger Smith, he did make some good decisions that could have worked for GM if they were executed right, I blame others even more. Smale, Zarella and Rick Wagoner (especially the front two) literally destroyed the company with their mismanagement. Do some digging on these guys and their brand management! Oh and the falsified resume!

I could go on but won't. In the end what is really important is saving some type of manufacturing base in this country. The way it is going down now all we are doing is giving up every possible opportunity to allow our future generations to make a honest living and support their families.

Hard for me to believe this is all real and not a nightmare.

[Guest BJM]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hinckley</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As a whole this discussion can be summed up in one word - leadership. On a corporate or even national level there is a huge void in the realm of leadership.

Take a look at the story of Charles Nash (the subject of an Independent Thinker column in Cars & Parts in about two months)and his company during the first 15 years. Here is a company where the employee was seen as having more value than the machinery, the automobiles were engineered and designed, and the owner fully understood the concept of fiscal responsibility. This is a company that turned a profit during the first years of the Great Depression while others were running aground.

In compiling a list of character studies to gain a deeper understanding of what is missing in the American auto industry and how to fix it I would add Henry Ford in regards to his challenge of the Selden patent, Walter Chrysler, and Albert Erskine before 1927.

</div></div>

Hinckley, I like your quote. I don't care that this post went all over the map but as stated, it was meant to be a historical rose colred glasses lament that the once proud and mighty automotive brands in America have been laid this bare, begging a Socialist President for money.

It's about leadership. America has had recessions before but the big 3 and many of the Independents had strong leadership. Harlow Curtice in the 50's at GM when they had a recession. Henry the Duece (say what you want about him personally but he saved Ford, along with the whiz kids) KT Keller.

Charles Nash and Walter P Chrysler started companies that quickly grew because of their leadership. Only Lee Iacocca stands out as a leader in the last30 years and he was old school.

Waggoner, Smith (yawn) Billy Ford et al

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Skyking</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Dave, this is one argument you can't win, no matter how hard you try, at 4 years old, you'll never know. </div></div>

You're wrong. It's the same argument every generation I've seen in life has used,... at the end. Your grandfathers probably all said the same thing, too. <span style="font-style: italic">"The good ol' days were sooo much better than today."</span>

More time wins the argument every time, at least for the people making it. I hope when it's my turn I'm wiser than that.

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Skyking</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Skyking</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

As for the car makers, I'm a true believer that Congress did the most damage. </div></div>

This article is in this mornings paper. The first & second paragraphs confirm what I said last night. What else are they doing <span style="font-style: italic">wrong........ </span> ? </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">WASHINGTON — Troll the garages and parking lots of Capitol Hill. Lots of Acura, Audi, BMW, Honda, Mercedes-Benz and Toyota cars are in those places. After a while, it becomes clear that it’s not so much that Detroit does not make cars Americans want to buy. It’s that many of the people who were sent to Washington to represent America are no longer interested in taking what America is making.

<span style="color: #3333FF">Their rejection of homemade goods has more to do with <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="text-decoration: underline">their</span></span> illusion of status and sophistication than it does with any inherent inferiority in American cars and trucks.</span> What they need is a motorized attitude changer. I can suggest many with GM, Ford and, on the truck side, Chrysler badges. But in this space, at this time, I offer one — the 2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid family sedan.</div></div>

Does the word "their" I underlined refer to the <span style="font-style: italic">they</span> of "Their rejection" or the <span style="font-style: italic">they</span> of "homemade goods"? It can be interpreted either way.

If it's the first, the statement confirms nothing but that we have a bunch of people running this country who don't know what they're doing and don't believe what they say. If it's the second, I don't know anyone knowledgeable about cars who'd disagree with the statement and it confirms something the author actually has expertise in. If one interpretation conforms with political opinion, and the other with technical expertise, I'd tend to favor the latter myself.

BTW, the car in question is an unassailable example of what we all are saying (but some like to believe I'm not for reasons known only to them), that this is a preception problem and no longer a quality issue. However it's not a GM car, so please stop trying to hyjack the thread!

[Guest Skyking]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dave@Moon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

You're wrong. </div></div>

I doubt it, buy why argue with you, I made my point long ago......nuff said!