Sad and disgusting GM Cartoons

[Bill Stoneberg]

More can be found at GM Cartoons.

[Guest greg72monte]

It's amazing how much the media can help to make or break a business. They have drilled into the customer that USA cars are garbage, and japanese cars are better than sex. To those foreign cars drivers, I hope the next job lost is yours. Definition of hypocrite: "driving a toyota with an "I love USA" sticker"

Sad, isn't it........

(By the way, I am not now, nor have I ever been employed by, or directly associated with the automotive industry)

[Aaron65]

I know! I HATE foreign cars flying the flag!

[Charles2]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They have drilled into the customer that USA cars are garbage, and Jap cars are better than sex. To those foreign cars drivers, I hope the next job lost is yours. Definition of hypocrite: "driving a toyota with an "I love USA" sticker"

Sad, isn't it........

</div></div>

If you care to notice, while "American" auto manufacturers are busy moving their operations to places like Mexico, companies such as Toyota, Nissan, Honda and Hyundai are building plants in the U.S. I live near a railroad line that connects Hermosillo, Mexico to the Southern Pacific division yard in Tucson. I see train after train of new Ford vehicles headed North to American markets from Mexico. The same sort of thing can be seen at other border crossings as well. For example, the Chrysler PT Cruiser is made in Mexico along with other Daimler-Chrysler products. Arguably, the only thing "American" about some of these companies is the nationality of the executives in charge of out-sourcing their auto assembly. With the current President so high on "free trade", NAFTA and its offspring, don't expect to see any changes in the situation in the next three years either.

So, who is the "better" American: someone who buys a Toyota built in the U.S.? or someone who buys a Ford (or Chrysler) built in Mexico?

One other thing, the term "Jap" is derogatory and rude at the very least, it is clearly racist and should not be used in polite (or impolite) company.

[Guest greg72monte]

I apologize, it was not meant as derogatory. That being said, if the car is not built in the USA, by American workers, by an American company (sorry Chrysler doesn't qualify anymore) I will not buy it. I know this limits my choices, but so be it.

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> One other thing, the term "Jap" is derogatory and rude at the very least, it is clearly racist and should not be used in polite (or impolite) company. </div></div>

greg72monte responds:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I will remember that when I think about my family that was lost at Pearl Harbor </div></div>

Nobody, and I mean <span style="font-weight: bold">nobody</span>, said these things about Volkswagens when they were a major player here (nobody knows anyone killed at Normandy or Dachau? ). You will <span style="font-weight: bold">never, [color:\\"red\\"]ever</span> hear vitriol like this said about Jaguar, BMW, Mercede, Volvo, Audi, Porsche, Ferrari, or Dodge (which, yes, are totally "foreign" owned and largely "foreign" built) buyers.

Every year I'm more convinced it's because white people run those companies and (largely) work in their factories.

<span style="font-weight: bold">[color:\\"blue\\"]As for the CARTOONS:</span>

I originally posted this link in the "Misc. Chat" forum here (WHAT'S UP WITH GM?, towards the end of that thread). The <span style="font-style: italic">vast</span> majority of them say the same things we have regarding G.M's mess.

Blaming the customer for G.M.'s troubles is like blaming the ball for losing the game. Blaming the "media" is like blaming the play-by-play guy. The game isn't over for G.M. yet, but I hope their players are smarter than some of the comments here.

[Guest Skyking]

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

If you care to notice, while "American" auto manufacturers are busy moving their operations to places like Mexico, companies such as Toyota, Nissan, Honda and Hyundai are building plants in the U.S. I live near a railroad line that connects Hermosillo, Mexico to the Southern Pacific division yard in Tucson. I see train after train of new Ford vehicles headed North to American markets from Mexico. The same sort of thing can be seen at other border crossings as well. For example, the Chrysler PT Cruiser is made in Mexico along with other Daimler-Chrysler products. </div></div>

When the Japanese build cars here the profit goes to Japan. When the American cars are built in Mexico the profits come here. This is the BIG difference!!! You will never see our cars built in Japan and the profits come back....Their Government won't allow it. It's a one sided deal!

[Charles2]

I'm sorry for your loss of family and apologize if I offended you. I too lost family during the Second World War. I had one uncle killed on Guadalcanal, another in Burma. I lost one cousin in Italy and another on Omaha Beach. I was old enough at the time to feel the loss although too young to really understand what it meant. Still, the war has been over for 50 years and personally, I think it is well past time to put the anger behind us. I'm not saying we should forget but that we should let go of the animosity. A number of my male ancestors were killed by the British, either at the Battle of Culloden (1746) or in the aftermath of the battle along with their families. There are Scots and their American offspring that still hate the British for this just as there are still southerners who hate Yankees for the Civil War and blame them for problems in the South. Wouldn't it be great if these folks could just drop it after all this time and start messing around with old cars instead.

At any rate, my point in my original post was that Toyota, Nissan, Hyundai, Volkswagen etc. are making cars in the U.S. and employing American workers to do so. At the same time, Ford, D-C and to a lesser extent, GM are making cars in other countries, employing foreign workers to do so and expanding their offshore facilities while closing American plants and laying-off American workers. Sure, profit goes to the "home" country but profit is typically a small proportion of an auto makers cash flow; payroll (jobs) is a much larger part of the budget than profits. And, the multiplier effect of a companies payroll is far greater than the payroll itself. So, again, who benefits the American worker more, the person who buys a Toyota made in the U.S. or a person who buys a Ford made in Mexico? Sorry, but I vote for the Toyota.

[Guest BJM]

It is better that the Japanese companies build cars here and take profits back to Japan. I think that every foreign manaufacturer has a 'privilege' to build and sell here. I think it is sad that GM / Ford / Chrysler did not model new plants and worker arrangements after the Japanese and Germans. It's called BEST PRACTICES and it's common in industry and service organizations to know when a better method is being used.

Saturn was supposed to be a Japanese modeled plant and I think it has worked out. The problem is that the auto manufacturers didn't have the kahunas to open new plants using non union employees. That would have prevented or greatly reduced building plants in Mexico.

I was listening to Bob Brinker's money talk program this weekend and they had a guest that said the dollars that go to China have to come back. he had a long explanation that made sense but I couldn't regurgitate it on this forum.

I think it'll all work out. We collect Buicks as a common thread. We want to see a solvent and prosperous GM but in some ways they did this to themselves and they need to get themselves out of the mess or go the way of the dinosaur. They have enough cash reserves and equity to get out OK. It'll just be a different GM.

[ranchero]

Dave at Moon says "I'm more convinced it's because white people run those companies".

Isn't that comment as racist the use of "Jap"?

White people run Microsoft, E-Bay, Pepsico and Johnson & Johnson. Any problem with the white folks' management of those companies? Or do you just dislike white people?

Sky King: No, maybe American companies can not take money back here from sales of cars in Japan however GM is doing so from Buicks made in Shanghai and sold in China. That is a little good news to go with the fleets of Boeings that are being sold to China.

Clearly the problem with production of automobiles in America is not the American worker but rather it is the UAW. The non-union plants in the south ( making Japanese, Korean or German vehicles) are doing quite well and pay hourly rates very close to what the union factories in the more expensive north pay for UAW labor. However the southern plants do not have the burden of defined benefit retirement programs nor of retiree & retiree family health care benefits - generous giveaways cemented into the financial plan back in the times of Bel Airs, Galaxies and Star Chiefs

The UAW/big three partnership was sealed decades ago. It was an experiment in European type social benefits (socialism, if you will) for America's then largest and most important industry. At that time, any weakness of GM and the American auto industry was not conceivable; a Volkswagen beetle was an insignificant bump on Harlow Curtice's rear. The concept (and the partners) have failed because of competition from nimbler, more efficient car makers - first foreign producers who nibbled away and now from Americans making cars for foreign owned companies. It is creative destruction. Consumers are well served; we now have better, safer, more durable, more reliable and more competitive cars. Non-union workers in the south have great new jobs that did not exist there for their parents. And investors in Toyota and Nissan thrive. Who loses are the union workers and the investors in GM and Ford. This is change and is to be expected with competition. Note also that there are no longer workers at nor companies with the names like "New York Central", "Eastern Air Lines", "Admiral" or "Bethlehem Steel".

- Ranchero -

[Smartin]

GM should've been steering away from the big SUV thing for 10 years. Sure, keep it up until the interest dies out, but have a backup plan!

I do tend to notice, though, that most people around town don't give a rat's @$$ what gas prices are. They'll keep driving the Excursion to matter if it costs them $50 or $150 to fill the gas tank! Very interesting..

This thread may get as good as my "SUV's and Terrorism" thread a couple years ago

[Guest]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I apologize, it was not meant as derogatory. That being said, if the car is not built in the USA, by American workers, by an American company (sorry Chrysler doesn't qualify anymore) I will not buy it. I know this limits my choices, but so be it. </div></div>

What about Canadian made cars? Ontario makes more cars than Michigan now thanks to the old Auto Pact and now NAFTA. Several models such as the Ford Crown Victoria and Mercury Grand Marquis are only made in Canada. The Camaro/ Firebirds before their demise were all built in Quebec for the past several years as well. Of course the Canada car industry has been tied to the US makers since the early 1900's so it is an natural evolution. The Big Three like Canadian workers because the Canadian dollar is lower and the workers get medical coverage through a government plan so union demands are lower cost. The Japanese and Korean makers and the big parts makers like Magna which makes everything from seat to chassis have plants here as well.

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> When the Japanese build cars here the profit goes to Japan. When the American cars are built in Mexico the profits come here. </div></div>

Bull.

You're free to buy and sell stocks in companies in the Nikkei Index just as much as any Japanese person is free to buy and sell their S&P 500 stocks. Who owns what is a very complicated issue these days. If you have enough money to own an antique car, I guarantee that you know at least one Toyota stockholder, probably many. You might even have some yourself in a mutual fund that you're not aware of, or your bank is paying dividends based in part on investments in Hyundai.

"Foreign" can only really refer to what banks are used to hold a corporation's major accounts now, if that. Even at that you have Nissan held in France, Land Rover/Mini/Chrysler/Rolls Royce/Bentley held in Germany, Mazda/Isuzu/Volvo/Saab/Jaguar/Aston Martin/etc. held here, not to mention Subaru going from 100% Japanese to 1/4 French to 1/4 American and back to 100% Japanese again inside of 15 years, and every other manner of complication. Money doesn't really know any boundaries.

Now if you <span style="font-style: italic">really</span> want to look at where the money goes, it's silly to look at corporate profit in the first place. At best you're talking 10% of the purchase price, usually more like 2%. It's the suppliers and overhead that really count, and then you're talking factory locations and not corporate host countries.

But more important than any of that is that we're talking about a major commodity purchase here, <span style="font-style: italic">not</span> charity. And making purchases based on who gets the money instead of what is purchased <span style="font-style: italic">is</span> charity.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Do <span style="font-style: italic">you</span> want G.M. to be <span style="font-style: italic">dependent</span> on charity?</span>

[Bill Stoneberg]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As for the CARTOONS:

I originally posted this link in the "Misc. Chat" forum here (WHAT'S UP WITH GM?, towards the end of that thread). The vast majority of them say the same things we have regarding G.M's mess. </div></div>

Sorry Dave, didn't mean to steal your thunder... I got the link and cartoon from a friend, thought it was good enough to post. Dont read the Whine and Bi**CH Political forum much anymore... It has gone downhill.

As far as GM goes, its a sad state of affairs when they are doing away with their 3800 engine and still building 1 SUV every 63 seconds at their Arlington plant. This is not one of the plants that are going to be shut down.

As much as any of us hate to see it, Toyota will be the number 1 car manufacturer in the world soon. Good quality product that people want at a good price point. They are doing something right thats for sure. Yes GM has had the title for many moons, but unless they get a car that people want and are willing to pay for WITHOUT DISCOUNTS, they will be number 2.

I wonder how long Buick will stay around then ?

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Yes GM has had the title for many moons, but unless they get a car that people want and are willing to pay for WITHOUT DISCOUNTS, they will be number 2. </div></div>

Most of GM's products today are downright excellent. Most encouraging is they have finally appeared to have lost their bias towards the high-end product. You can buy a (relatively) cheap GM car today <span style="font-style: italic">and</span> get a good one (Korean "captive imports" not withstanding"). Ten years ago there wasn't a GM car below full-size I'd even consider.

What GM needs is <span style="font-weight: bold">time</span> to let new approaches make their impression. It will take 20-30 years to wipe away the stench of their previous product.

There are going to be some ugly changes in the mean time. I hope against hope that the remaining brands survive, but they will certainly do so in truncated form if at all. Buying a Buick must be very different than buying a Saturn, or neither will survive. Maybe they can be paired the way Chrysler was successfully paired with Plymouth for decades. Without mutual brand exclusivity they're all just going to be seen as the same old GM.

At least we've seen the last of products like the Terraza.

[Guest BJM]

Ranchero says -

Clearly the problem with production of automobiles in America is not the American worker but rather it is the UAW. The non-union plants in the south ( making Japanese, Korean or German vehicles) are doing quite well and pay hourly rates very close to what the union factories in the more expensive north pay for UAW labor. However the southern plants do not have the burden of defined benefit retirement programs nor of retiree & retiree family health care benefits - generous giveaways cemented into the financial plan back in the times of Bel Airs, Galaxies and Star Chiefs

Absolutely correct.

Time for the UAW to realize that the 401k has largely replaced the guaranteed retirement program. If GM went seriously bankrupt, which it still could without UAW contract reform, then those workers wiould be right there behind the United Pilots and stewardesses, etc looking for a pennies on the dollar handout from the Pension Guarantee Fund, which is ultimately tax dollars and other companies putting money in.

[old-tank]

These are all GM cartoons....are there any union cartoons? If so I could not find them.

The following is from a UAW union web site:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Union workers earn more

Wages and benefits for the average union worker in the private sector totaled $31.94 per hour in 2004, compared to $22.28 an hour for the typical non-union worker. The advantage to the union worker is $9.66 per hour or $20,092 per year for a full-time, full-year worker.

Wages and salaries

In March 2004, the average union worker in the private sector earned $20.32 per hour while the average non-union worker earned $16.21 per hour. Therefore, the typical union worker enjoys $4.11 per hour more than their non-union counterpart does, which is $8,548 per year for a full-time, full-year worker.

... But benefits are the biggest union advantage

Benefits though are where the biggest union advantage lies. The average union worker in the private sector receives $11.61 per hour toward their benefits package while their non-union counterpart receives only $6.06 per hour.

Retirement benefits

After years of service, workers deserve a secure retirement. Unfortunately, only 45 percent of non-union workers receive retirement benefits; either defined benefit, defined contribution or both. Just 15 percent have a defined benefit plan that pays out a set amount every month, regardless of fluctuations in the stock market. Forty percent have riskier defined contribution plans like 401(k)s whose payouts rise and fall with the investments that make up the plan. As employees at Enron and WorldCom have discovered, defined contribution retirement funds may not be there when it's time to retire. In stark contrast, 83 percent of union workers have retirement benefits and nearly 72 percent have the safer, defined benefit plans.

Nearly 50 percent of all workers have no medical care through their employer, and far fewer have dental and vision coverage. For union workers that is not the case. Seventy-five percent of all private sector union workers have medical benefits, 53 percent have dental care and 41 percent have vision care.

More vacation, holidays and sick leave

Union workers are more likely to receive vacation, holiday and sick leave than non-union workers do. Ninety percent of union workers receive paid vacations, versus 78 percent of non-union workers. Similarly, union workers are more likely to receive paid holidays ? 91 percent compared to 78 percent.

Union advantage holds across occupations and industries

Blue-collar workers in manufacturing enjoy a substantial advantage from union representation ? but so do workers in non-manufacturing settings. In fact, the Bureau of Labor Statistics? report, ?Union Members in 2003,? shows that the union advantage holds across occupations and industries.

For example, union workers in protective service jobs (such as security guards and corrections officers) earn $857 per week, compared with $510 for non-union workers. The union premium also exists in office and administrative support occupations where union workers earn $632 per week compared to $510 per week for non-union workers. Unionized production workers earned $665 per week, compared with $495 for non-union workers.

Unions also help close the gender gap in earnings. In 2003, non-union women earned 65 percent as union men and 78 percent as much as non-union men. In contrast, union women earned 86 percent as much as union men and 4 percent more than non-union men.

</div></div>

This is all great for the union worker, but who pays for all this? The company?....not really, it is you and me.

This all balances if you are a union worker buying union made products.

I avoid higher priced union made products if I have a choice.

Willie

[Guest Straight eight]

The story behind the headlines, at both General Motors

> and Delphi:

>

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>

> General Motors Winning Ways

>

> General Motors and an Australian company decided to

> have a canoe race on the Detroit river. Both teams

> practiced hard and long to reach their peak performance

> before the race. On the big day the Australian's won by

> a mile.

>

> Afterwards, the GM team became very discouraged and

> morally depressed. The GM management decided that the

> reason for the crushing defeat had to be found. A

> "Measurement Team", made up of senior management was

> formed. They would investigate and recommend

> appropriate action.

>

> Their conclusion was that the Australian's had 8 people

> rowing and 1 person steering, while GM had 1 person

> rowing and 8 people steering. So GM management hired a

> consulting company and paid them incredible amounts of

> money. They advised that too many people were steering

> the boat and not enough people were rowing.

>

> To prevent losing to the Australian's again next year,

> the rowing team's management structure was totally

> reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering

> superintendents and 1 assistant superintendents

> steering manager. They also implemented a new

> performance system that would give the 1 person rowing

> the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was

> called the "Rowing Team Quality First Program", with

> meetings, dinners and free pens for the rower. "We must

> give the rower empowerment and enrichments through this

> quality program".

>

> The next year the Australian's won by 2 miles.

>

> Humiliated, the GM management laid off the rower for

> poor performance, halted development of a new canoe,

> sold the paddles, and canceled all capital investments

> for new equipment. Then they gave a High Performance

> Award to the steering managers and distributed the

> money saved as bonuses to the senior executives.

>

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>

> NOT A JOKE

>

> Now you understand why the people who build the cars at

> GM and their suppliers are being held up (robbed might

> say it better) while the executives "at the top" still

> get total paid benefits and even bonuses even though

> they've totally blown developing and selling good

> products made in the United States by your neighbors in

> America.

>

> NOW -- You have a choice......

> Delete this or if you're truly a Patriotic

> American......

> Send it to all your friends and email buddies so we can

> get this stupid train of events back on the track.

> Make America Strong and forward this, or.....

> watch your neighbor lose his/her house and ... guess

> what.....???

> You'll be next.

> Believe it.

[West Peterson]

Are you implying that there are 8 executives at GM for every line man?

[Charles2]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Are you implying that there are 8 executives at GM for every line man?

</div></div>

Not yet! But, after the layoffs, who knows?

[manikmekanik]

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That being said, if the car is not built in the USA, by American workers, by an American company (sorry Chrysler doesn't qualify anymore) I will not buy it. I know this limits my choices, but so be it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then we ALL should only buy USED cars from Americans in America, and repair them with parts made in America. There are enough used american cars to keep everyone on the road. Americans will stay employed performing repairs, selling cars, parts and services. Members here have an old American car for show, or nostalgia, and drive something else daily, to preserve the old one. Buy a used car to support our economy, and our countrymen. Automakers can get by on their sales to the masses (sheep) without our help. The $25k spent on a used car, and refurbishing, or restoring it for daily use, stays here in the USA-100%, and pays more to our citizens than to taxes, with 0% going to corporate bonuses.

As for the GM/SUV issue, I feel GM made a large mistake by killing the Reatta line for further entrenchment into the SUV market. Now, 15+ years later, they see a little of thier errors, but only release one 2-seater, Solstice, while killing the Velite for Buick, in order to keep up with the never-ending demand for SUVs. They've even closed the Craft Centre which made all these special cars. The US market is leaning toward UNIQUE or personalized cars, and if GM does'nt grab those reins, it will never become #1 again. Diversity keeps auto manufacturers on top, not focusing on one facet of the overall market(SUVs).

So, I'll keep on buyin' used cars 'till I see the US carmakers come out with something BETTER than the cars already out there. I'm up to 10 Reattae now, with 12 other used cars and trucks, we'll be on the road longer than GM can stay afloat, at their current pace.

Anyone interested in fine used American cars should check out my post on the AACA/BCA/Reatta discussion forum at this site. I promise NONE of the proceeds from selling any of my cars will go outside the USA. Rather, I'll buy another used American car (Reatta), and invest in (Reatta)restoration/custom jobs I've lined up here at the farm. The post is titled "FS 88-91 Reatta coupes, convertibles- show winning cars!" I've attached a photo of the "big one" for your viewing pleasure. GM scored big with these cars, yet just ahead of thier time in the marketplace. These cars are now among the most desired "new collectibles", and for good reason. Well equipped and appointed, the Reatta line is the best GM has offered in the last 20 years. Out-styling the competition, 25-30MPG, and high reliability. One of my Reattae has 281,000 miles and still runs strong, my wife's favorite has 181,000, and her commuter-Reatta has 102,000-it still drives and looks like a newer car, winning a silver award at the BCA Midwest show this summer. Why drive an SUV or a six-seater to work, when one rarely has any passengers? Seems like a waste to drive anything with more than 2 seats to work, hauling all that extra, un-needed capacity around with gas prices as high as they are.

In a nutshell, buy a car from when they actually made great cars, rather than choosing the lesser of 2 evils on the new car lot. One can save big bucks, based on new car prices, one could buy between 2 and 10 cars.

[Guest sintid58]

All I have ever heard or read about GM talks about the top heavy corporate structure that keeps anything new or really productive from happening. Huge corporate management is almost impossible to kill, who in their right mind that is making millions in the old structure would possibly want to start to change the organization that put him in his job. After all when the tower falls yours may be one of the many jobs that has gone. What GM needs is a corporate raider from the outside to take control and steamline the management to what it needs to be, not what it is. Sometime this can be disasterous for a large company if the raider sells off everything but other times it can be very beneficial in getting rid of the dead wood that stops anything from really changing. GM is at the point where they can not see the forest for the trees in front of them and the people who need most to work for change will not for fear they will not have a job at the end. Yes they have a huge union contract they have to take care of but I would make bets that if you saw what they paid their non union corporate management people and the benefits paid to those people it would be as much if not more than all of that. We never hear about any upper management packages in big corporations other that the top one or two (who are paid ridiculous amounts of money) but those same people at GM can sure make it known how the union workers are killing the company. I have never worked one minute under a union contract in my life but this country is going away from the unions and without unions there would be no true middle class.

[Guest Skyking]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Huge corporate management is almost impossible to kill, who in their right mind that is making millions in the old structure would possibly want to start to change the organization that put him in his job. After all when the tower falls yours may be one of the many jobs that has gone. What GM needs is a corporate raider from the outside to take control and steamline the management to what it needs to be, not what it is. Sometime this can be disasterous for a large company if the raider sells off everything but other times it can be very beneficial in getting rid of the dead wood that stops anything from really changing. </div></div>

This could also work for our government!

[Guest John Chapman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What GM needs is a corporate raider from the outside to take control and steamline the management to what it needs to be...</div></div>

His name is Kirk Kerkorian. He owns most of Nevada and almost 10% of GM common stock.

There will be no prisoners.

JMC

[Dr Morbius]

Yea , but the guy is 89 years old !

[Dr Morbius]

Sorry , actually 88 not 89 !