GM - Bankruptcy?

[Nicks67GTO]

Well that is an interesting point. I think a lot of people yearn for the days when they could order a car or truck with exactly the list of options they wanted. Mini does this right now, though you can buy off the lot as well. People didn't seem to mind the wait back then and Mini sure isn't having trouble with the model.

It would be great and I would be willing to wait. If this was the case i would order a V-8 4wd F-150 crew cab with ac, ps, pb and carpet. Thats it. I dont think I can do this anymore and I think its BS. As soon as you order one thing you have to order the entire package that jacks the price up big time....I want a cheap truck that is going to take an absolute beating and get me around. I do not want a "luxary truck" wich is almost a requirement for a crew cab truck....i think this may fall under the category of people not wanting what Detroit is selling

[Damn True]

Well for the record you can't get that from the import brands either.

[D_Presley916]

I just gotta put in my .02. I work for the railroad as a Union freight car mechanic, so I am biased towards Unions, so I will start by discussing two non-union companies. Wal-Mart more specifically Sams Club vs. Costco, both sell very similar items at very similar prices, Sams starting wage is minimum wage guaranteed, Costcos starting wage $13.00 an hour, yet both companies are profiting and doing very well. How is it that Costco can pay more to employees and stay competitive, simple they are not overly greedy and they believe in making a fair profit. Just a little side note, Wal-Mart bought two Wal-Mart style companies in Germany, they were both Union, they are still Union, proof that Wal-Mart can sustain higher wages and still make a profit.

Now back to G.M. some of you have an issue with the fact that employees who are laid off, will continue to be paid. Can that not be compared to a severance package given to most upper management. Remember the guy from Wamu that only worked there for about a week or a day, I dont remember exactly how long it was but he was given an enormous severance package because it was in his contract, did he deserve it just because he went to college? Absolutely not. I dont think that was smart business or fair, but I'm sure the CEO didnt go up to him and say gee whiz I know we have a contractual agreement but we did not forsee this happening, would you consider taking $500 and a handshake instead. A Union agreement is the same thing, but all the sudden things get rough and they expect the Union to bow down and give back everything they fought for, what should happen is they should start from the top and start making pay cuts, maybe sell a few jets, before the Union even considers giving anything back.

My last point (only because I keep losing my train of thought) is on seniority, I used to be a Union Tinner, so that will be my example. lets start with the non union journeyman, lets say he has been with the company 10 years and has earned the company several millions of dollars, now lets say a young kid right out of High School gets hired on as an apprentice, the 10 year journeyman is tasked with training him, the Journeyman really loves what he does and the kid really seems interested in the work so the Journeyman takes his time with the kid and really does a great job training him. Now in 1 year the kid knows enough to run jobs on his own and makes 1/3 of what the journeyman makes, the company decides to cut back a little and lay a guy off, the journeyman makes a lot more than the apprentice but he is now more than capable of handling the work, so the journeyman gets laid off to save a few more dollars. The Journeyman receives nothing more than a thank you if hes lucky.
So what actually ends up happening is the Journeyman holds back a ton of information and training just in case times get tough and someone gets laid off, so he can keep his job, everyone suffers
On the Union side of things, the Journeyman is not scared of losing his job to apprentices because the companies were not aloud to hire more than 3 apprentices to every 1 Journeyman, which meant if you had 3 journeyman and 9 apprentices you had to lay off 3 apprentices before any journeyman could go. Now a little side note on how to become a journeyman, first you get hired as a pre apprentice and if the company likes you they sponsor you and you can go to the Union apprenticeship school which is a 5 year program accredited by American River College, so once you graduate from the program you are a college graduate and a Union member, so is that skilled or non skilled labor?

Sorry if I rambled my thoughts were all over the place.

[ProTouring442]

Neighbors Bonny? Junk. He's on his 3rd motor in 150k miles.

3rd motor? maybe he needs to stop buying junkyard engines. If all 3 have been new, he needs to learn how to spell o-i-l c-h-a-n-g-e

Also just replaced (again) all tranny lines - they rusted out.

And since GM doesn't sell replacement cooler lines (they are considered "standard parts") what exactly does this prove, other than the fact that you live in an area that heavily salts its roads?

He hates that car. See how individual experiences are? Meaningless. It's in the aggragate that you see trends.

Ok, we can go back to 1965...

My parents and other family members have owned, and had little trouble with:

1965 Oldsmobile Cutlass(parent's car): traveled over 100K-no problems

1972 Oldsmobile Custom Cruizer Wagon(parent's car): 250K-no major problems

1976 Oldsmobile Cultass(Grand parent's):180K, then Gramps hit a curb HARD

1969 Cutlass 4-door(Oldest uncle's): over 300K. Needed a trany rebuild early one. Other than that, only normal maintenance. I got the front disc brakes off of it for my '66 Chevelle after it was totaled by a drunk.

1986 Pontiac 6000STE(Grand Parent's): 200K-Normal Maintenance

1983 Pontiac Trans Am(Youngest uncle's): At first this one did have a few electronic difficulties, until we convinced my uncle to stop washing the engine every time he washed the car. 200K

1980 Oldsmobile Toronado(Mom's): 150K. In that time it did need 3 intake manifold gaskets. Modern gasket technology would have solved this.

1986 Pontiac Grand Prix(Mine): 200K-no problems

1987 Monte Carlo(Ex GF's): 150K-died when it hit a tree

1979 Oldsmobile Cutlass(Dad's): 200K-no major problems, sold at a profit (purchased at 100K)

1981 Oldsmobile Custom Cruizer(Dad's): 200K

1979 Oldsmobile Custom Cruizer(Dad's): Still made 150K, even after I damned near killed it hitting a tree around the 125K mark

1985 Buick Wagon: 250K

199? (can't rmemeber) Chevrolet Caprice Wagon: Currently over 150K: No Problems

Oh, and there was a '71 or '72 Olds Cutlass 4-door in there somewhere... I know it went to at least 100K as my dad purchased it wholesale to use as a commuter somewhere near the 100K mark... I'll have to call dad back...

Maybe GM only sells junk in Pennsylvania?

Shiny Side Up!
Bill

[wmhjr]

Going to go out on a limb here,and take a position no one else seems to get.

In the first and second quarter 2008, everything was fine. The wages weren't too high, the imports weren't smarter- the UAW had agreed with the Detroit automakers to start the VEBA program (reducing legacy costs)- all was on course to get at least GM and Ford profitable by 2011 or so.

Then, the implosion in the credit market occured in parallel w/ the evaporation in housing values. GM's problems were't it was paying it's hourlys too much, it's that they we building cars to stock and not selling anything.

IF this was a wage issue, WHY are Toyota, Nissan, and Honda bleeding red ink?

This is, IMO, strictly a sales issue. The banks screwed w/high risk securities, got themselves insolvent, stopped loaning money, so nobody can buy cars.

Meanwhile, the Detroit boys have huge payrolls and capital costs that need tobe met.

And that is why GM and Chrysler, and toa lesser extent Ford, are needed to kowtow to the Feds, who screwed up by not regulating the damn banking industry.

And why I'm sitting on my can looking for work now.



Probably off topic, and probably going toget myself talked to by the mods

So let's clear up a couple things right now. I'm tired of hearing people claim that the reason Detroit is in trouble is because "the Feds screwed up the banking..."

NOT TRUE - PERIOD!

Take a look at Chrysler for example. Do you know the main reason why Mercedes took a quality beating between 2003-2005? Because of the Daimler Chrysler fiasco. The actual financial situation of Chrysler BEFORE 2003 was SO bad that they were bleeding like crazy. Mercedes (Daimler Chrysler) had to siphon SO much money away from their core product that it cased massive quality issues on the MB side. Don't believe me? Believe the WSJ. The NYT. The Washington Post. Business Week. Take your pick. The business week quote in 2005 was "Far from being the perfect hedge, Chrysler proved to be a massive rescue job that sucked up billions and absorbed German management for years.".

Come ON people! Wake UP! PLEASE don't make stuff up about how the federal government failing to regulate the banking industry is responsible for this. IT IS NOT. And frankly, the federal government that got us into this mess to begin with. To be very honest, it was trying to use our economy as a social experiment without regard for credit risk that sent us down this path. It was trying to push how every man, woman and child in this country has a "right" to home ownership.

There are a number of vehicles that GM makes that it lost money on every unit sold. Frankly, this is nothing new for GM. A senior management representative back in the late 70s made the comment "for every Chevette we sell, we're putting $600 in every trunk. That's how much we lose on every one we sell".

[wmhjr]

3rd motor? maybe he needs to stop buying junkyard engines. If all 3 have been new, he needs to learn how to spell o-i-l c-h-a-n-g-e



And since GM doesn't sell replacement cooler lines (they are considered "standard parts") what exactly does this prove, other than the fact that you live in an area that heavily salts its roads?

Maybe GM only sells junk in Pennsylvania?

Shiny Side Up!
Bill

Maybe you missed the first part of my comment, where I said individual experiences really don't mean anything, but it's the aggragate that counts? I was simply proving my point - but you missed it. The point is that on "average" the imports are frankly of superior quality according to service records, longevity, and resale value.

But, to respond to your other comments....

You also apparently missed the entire part about how the Silverado for example is maintained and used EXACTLY LIKE ALL MY OTHER VEHICLES. That it is the ONLY ONE with any rust issues whatsoever. So, unless there is some magic pixie dust that Honda, Mazda, BMW and Mercedes use to prevent such rust, the only other explanation is that the GM product uses substandard materials. Like on those minor components called frames.

If you really think that somebody with a 18 year old Bonny should buy a new engine, while it's rusting out......

For every person who has a bad story, there is somebody who has a contradictory comment about it. That's fine.

But here is one thing that cannot be overlooked. GM does not stand behind their product. When Toyota had a truck frame rust issue, what did they do? They offered to buy back every single one of them at a premium. Now, what did GM do?

Nothing. Pics are available. GM got them. They just said "sorry".

[andrewb70]

.....

There are a number of vehicles that GM makes that it lost money on every unit sold......

It's OK. They make it up in volume...

Andrew

[parsonsj]

But here is one thing that cannot be overlooked. GM does not stand behind their product. When Toyota had a truck frame rust issue, what did they do? They offered to buy back every single one of them at a premium. Now, what did GM do?

If the the two problems were of the same magnitude, I would expect that the solutions offered by the two companies to be similar, and if they weren't, one could make a judgement.

But the Tacoma frame rust problem is a clear manufacturing defect, and Toyota got lit up all over the country. They screwed up big time, and they have no choice but to admit it and make it right. Toyota is buying the trucks back at current value retail pricing. It's not enough to go buy another new one. The funny thing is that it probably isn't enough to buy a used Chevy or GMC, or Ford... since they hold their value so much better. And anybody who bought a Tacoma with the intention of keeping it for 10 years or more is out of luck. They'll be better off buying a domestic truck if they want something with a track record of value over time.

When one goes looking for a similar GM story with their Chevy trucks and frame rust, you find very little. There is no systemic rust problem, and there is no clear manufacturing defect. One would assume the company response would be different. I'm sorry that your truck seems to have had its share of problems with rust, but at least GM didn't screw up the drain holes on it.

If you want some alternative data (that doesn't support your basic argument...), do some googling on Rav4 rust issues. You'll find that Toyota is not doing the same thing there.

As a matter of fact, your argument seems a little turned around to me: you are giving kudos to the company that messed up big time, and taking credit away from the company with a good track record of making quality trucks at good value.

jp

[wmhjr]

If the the two problems were of the same magnitude, I would expect that the solutions offered by the two companies to be similar, and if they weren't, one could make a judgement.

But the Tacoma frame rust problem is a clear manufacturing defect, and Toyota got lit up all over the country. They screwed up big time, and they have no choice but to admit it and make it right. Toyota is buying the trucks back at current value retail pricing. It's not enough to go buy another new one. The funny thing is that it probably isn't enough to buy a used Chevy or GMC, or Ford... since they hold their value so much better. And anybody who bought a Tacoma with the intention of keeping it for 10 years or more is out of luck. They'll be better off buying a domestic truck if they want something with a track record of value over time.

When one goes looking for a similar GM story with their Chevy trucks and frame rust, you find very little. There is no systemic rust problem, and there is no clear manufacturing defect. One would assume the company response would be different. I'm sorry that your truck seems to have had its share of problems with rust, but at least GM didn't screw up the drain holes on it.

If you want some alternative data (that doesn't support your basic argument...), do some googling on Rav4 rust issues. You'll find that Toyota is not doing the same thing there.

As a matter of fact, your argument seems a little turned around to me: you are giving kudos to the company that messed up big time, and taking credit away from the company with a good track record of making quality trucks at good value.

jp

Actually not true whatsoever. I can provide you with the names at the GM Executive office that fully admitted the rust issues associated with the '00 and '01 Silverado line. They freely admitted that there was a significant quality issue.

This would be somewhat similar to the horrendous rear disc brake issues with the early 90's Luminas. They were defective on the showroom floor, and were never truly fixed nor supported. Actually, the GM solution was to put rear drums back on the car in the mid 90's - but customers who purchased the previous vehicles were out of luck.

The measure of a company is not simply in how good a quality product they produce, but also how they honestly and openly deal with issues. Again, I've stated that every experience may be different, but in the aggragate the story is told. And in those averages, GM unfortunately is extremely poor.

My father is a retired UAW employee. I was raised on GM products. However, at this point my father will not purchase a new GM product, and strongly recommended buying a Honda minivan for my wife. That's a strong statement.

[parsonsj]

Actually not true whatsoever. I can provide you with the names at the GM Executive office that fully admitted the rust issues associated with the '00 and '01 Silverado line. They freely admitted that there was a significant quality issue.

Very intriguing. Did that admission make the news? Got a link?

jp

[wmhjr]

Very intriguing. Did that admission make the news? Got a link?

jp

Nope. No link. And no it hasn't made the news - at least to my knowledge. Did the 90's lumina rear brake issue make the news? No. Was it real? Any mechanic on this planet who ever touched a '90-'93 Lumina, Regal, etc can vouch for the poor rear brake caliper design that resulted in virtually every single car having non-functioning rear brakes the majority of the time.

I am not making this up. As I said, I have direct evidence, and written correspondence - as well as a junk truck sitting (so far) for about a year that I'm having to rebuild as a result of GM poor quality and non-existant support. If you're truly interested let me know. We can talk. It's very real. I was an ardent supporter of GM for many many years. I bought nothing BUT GM. I will never again buy one - except for a classic or older muscle car. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice (or 3, 4, or 5 times) - shame on me.

[Damn True]

Virtually every car had a rear brake failure and there wasn't a recall?

Where do we keep the BS flag?

[surlyjoe]

The rear brake problem was real. The caliper would seize up on the pins. It was more a matter of maintenance. Every rear disk vehicle that is driven in extremes like salty winter will have this issue from time to time. Those cars may have been worse than most. As far as your vehicles and rust I think your environment isn't helping. Also do you ever wash the salt off during the winter?

[parsonsj]

I am not making this up. As I said, I have direct evidence, and written correspondence.

I believe you believe this. But I'm skeptical that a "significant quality issue" that spanned two model years on one of the highest selling vehicles on the road did not make the news. If you have written evidence, let's see it.

If you have direct written evidence, why haven't you made it public before now?

I gotta say that I'm starting to think your location has a lot to do with both of these situations. I know how much salt Pennsylvania road crews put on the road.

jp

[wmhjr]

Virtually every car had a rear brake failure and there wasn't a recall?

Where do we keep the BS flag?

Are you familiar with it? Didn't think so. Just do a quick search why don't you...

http://www.autosafety.org/chevrolet-lumina

Or maybe just ask yourself why the Lumina went back to rear drum brakes in '95?

The sliders on the rear brake calipers consistently corroded. The only way you knew was that when you had the vehicle inspected you would see that the pads had no wear - because they were not working. The only repair was a "repair kit" from GM that essentially included a couple seals and some lube. It generally worked for less than a year. Then you did it again. And again. And again.

Put the BS flag away. Not necessary.

[wmhjr]

The rear brake problem was real. The caliper would seize up on the pins. It was more a matter of maintenance. Every rear disk vehicle that is driven in extremes like salty winter will have this issue from time to time. Those cars may have been worse than most. As far as your vehicles and rust I think your environment isn't helping. Also do you ever wash the salt off during the winter?

First of all, remember that the rear discs on this model were eliminated in '95. They went back to drum brakes. On this car. Because of the issue.

Maybe you missed the part where I stated that the vehicles are well maintained. That all vehicles I own are maintained well - and identically. They are washed. None of my other vehicles exhibit this. Frankly, the '66 Pontiac frame that was essentially sitting out in the field for the last umpteen years had a frame that was in far superior condition than the '00 Silverado w/50K miles.

[wmhjr]

I believe you believe this. But I'm skeptical that a "significant quality issue" that spanned two model years on one of the highest selling vehicles on the road did not make the news. If you have written evidence, let's see it.

If you have direct written evidence, why haven't you made it public before now?

I gotta say that I'm starting to think your location has a lot to do with both of these situations. I know how much salt Pennsylvania road crews put on the road.

jp

OK, you're right. I'm imagining everything. The discussions I had with the GM Executive office at (313) 667-7153 were just my imagination. The discussions I had with Lee Mundy, VP of Engineering, never took place. The '00 Silverado truck sitting in my garage that I removed state registration and insurance on, that has 50k miles, that I bought brand new, is a figment of my imagination. The fact that none of my other vehicles have this issue, including my daily driver car which is driven in every single snowstorm, ice, salt, etc, have any rust is due to the magic pixie dust. All vehicles in Pennsylvania have rusted out frames.

OK, yeah.

I guess today I'll pretend that I've driven that truck sometime in the past year. I'll pretend that I never got those letters from GM. BTW, I HAVE made some of that documentation public, and frankly I pushed GM pretty hard. I don't need to publish every document or conversation I have to justify my position that GM frankly failed. I honestly don't feel the need. If people want to give them more money, fine. But not me, and I've got VERY good reason.

You know, if we were talking about a machine job that screwed up boring a block and failed to make it right, people here would be fine with taking them to task. But the problem here is that people have blind loyalty in some cases and can't see when things don't go their way. I was like that. Maybe that's why I'm adamant that I'll never give GM another dime. I supported them - pretty much without question - and paid the price. No more.

[wmhjr]

Since there are so many non-believers..... Here's a pic. This was taken last year after I removed the bed in order to start getting at things. The vehicle was only moved to where it is in this picture in order to have room to lift the bed and put it somewhere else. Prior to this - and since - it has been garaged.

The frame is rusty. The interesting thing is that it rusted from the inside out. In other words, there is a rubbery coating from the factory on the frame, and the metal rusted through finally breaking the coating. The crossmembers have pinholes all the way around them near the joints to the frame rails. The body is rusty all along the rockers from the back of the cab to the front. In particular on the frame, you can see where the rust exists UNDER the coating. Unlike what you normally see for rust, where exposed metal starts to rust and then flakes off, in this case it really seems as though whatever coating GM put on (from the factory) trapped some sort of moisture or corrosive, causing the underlying metal to begin rusting. I have never seen anything like this before. The guy doing the interior on my '66 has a son who owns an '01 Silverado. His is exactly the same. The GM Executive office and a Senior VP of Engineering admitted to abnormal rust issues specific to the first 2.5 yrs of this model run.

The truck was well maintained, and lightly used. Honestly, it rarely saw action in the winter but was kept clean. My car is AWD. In 8 (going on 9) years it (the truck) barely has 50k miles on it. All of my vehicles are VERY well maintained. They generally look - and run - like new when I sell them used (with a couple exceptions, including the '90 Lumina).

[parsonsj]

But the problem here is that people have blind loyalty in some cases and can't see when things don't go their way. I was like that. Maybe that's why I'm adamant that I'll never give GM another dime. I supported them - pretty much without question - and paid the price. No more.

Don't include me in this description. I am no apologist for GM. They are like a hundred other large American corporations, soulless, and without any real ethical values other than that which is driven by profit and fear of lawsuit.

I'm just questioning your equating the Tacoma truck deal with your own Chevy truck. I don't see the equality, and you've provided no evidence other than your own truck. I remain unconvinced. That's not a personal judgement about you, so don't take it personally.

jp

[wmhjr]

Don't include me in this description I hope. I am no apologist for GM. They are like a hundred other large American corporations, soulless, and without any real ethical values other than that which is driven by profit and fear of lawsuit.

I'm just questioning your equating the Tacoma truck deal with your own Chevy truck. I don't see the equality, and you've provided no evidence other than your own truck. I remain unconvinced. That's not a personal judgement about you, so don't take it personally.

jp

And the fact that you question whether GM actually admitted to quality issues when I posted it IS a personal judgement. I've told you which office, and now even a name. I've now shown a picture which graphically shows clearly unacceptable results. I fail to understand exactly what more I need to "prove". There's a truck with a rusted frame - that has holes in it. GM's efforts were half hearted at best. I STILL have a voicemail saved on my cell phone from GM's Executive office that once every month or so I have to listen to (it prompts me that it's going to delete it if I don't save it) reminds me of their poor customer service.

I take heavy issue with people who point to Toyota and say, "well, they have RECALLS! That's TERRIBLE!". No, it isn't. I have no problem with a company issuing a recall and taking care of their customer. Owning up to a problem is FAR better than ignoring it. Take a look at the URL for the Lumina rear brakes. THOUSANDS of reported claims. GM refused a recall. They abandoned their customers - then eliminated the very design that was poor to begin with. There are degrees of failure, and GM has reached my tolerance.