Will they end up in bankruptcy? The PBGC is already strapped from the airline industry. I'm sure they are hoping GM does pile theirs on too. Apparently the Employee Discount promotion that latest for months over the summer didn't work.

They were making a lot of money on the huge SUVs for a long time. Gas prices shot up and it killed them. It sounds like a replay of the 70's if you replace SUVs with large cars.

They have also had a number of models that didn't sell well at all like the Chevy SSR two seater truck. The Saturn ION production line will be shut down in 2006.

The towns these plants are in will also suffer from the loss of jobs.

They may have to reinvent themselves. What other car lines will follow Oldsmobile into obsolescence?

Why can't they learn from other successful car companies?

They're about to roll out whole bunch of new fuel guzzling models that not many people are going to want either. They're in deep dark doo doo.

They're about to roll out whole bunch of new fuel guzzling models that not many people are going to want either. They're in deep dark doo doo.I don't have much sympathy for a company that makes stupid choices like that but I will miss the Saturn line if they kill it off.

It's a lot of jobs lost. Not good no matter how you skin it.

I don't have much sympathy for a company that makes stupid choices like that but I will miss the Saturn line if they kill it off.

It's a lot of jobs lost. Not good no matter how you skin it.


I have sympathy for the rank and file workers but the top brass who on average probably get 25+x what the rank file workers earn while making truely head in the sand choices should have their faces printed on front pages and headlines. I have no doubt others will think otherwise. Like you said, not good no matter how you skin it.

What's good for America is good for GM.

They're operating out of a hole that ironically they dug for themselves back in the days when they were the king of the marketplace.

Back around 1980 they had about 45% of the auto market - today they're down to around 26%. Yet, GM is still paying benefits to those workers that retired or were laid off as the company shrunk. The unions are now in a pickle - they're going to have to give up something serious in order to keep their jobs. And Joe Sixpack should think twice before buying that Toyota or Nissan and give the GM offerings a serious shot.

This is one of those times when I have a little trouble embracing capitalism. The union's "demands" are getting a lot of publicity, and health cost really is a huge issue for GM, but the root of this problem is bad management decisions going back 20 years or more.
I tested cars for magazines for several years, and the quality control of things like the Camaro and Corvette, cars people liked and were prepared to support, was just horrible--a Z-28 Camaro singlehandedly converted me from Chevy man to Ford man (then an SVO Mustang made me a Honda man...). Letting the minivans get old and creaky was probably GM's most obvious mistake, because now they have nothing to sell in a growing category, but this goes back way before that, and much deeper. I thought Bob Lutz might get them aimed straight, but it doesn't seem to have happened.

No. 1: GM made bad choices when it came to their lines of cars.

No. 2: American businesses have to compete in the global marketplace with companies that operate in countries that provide healthcare to all their citizens. Which is one of the main reasons a national healthcare plan is awfully important.

They're operating out of a hole that ironically they dug for themselves back in the days when they were the king of the marketplace.

Back around 1980 they had about 45% of the auto market - today they're down to around 26%. Yet, GM is still paying benefits to those workers that retired or were laid off as the company shrunk. The unions are now in a pickle - they're going to have to give up something serious in order to keep their jobs. And Joe Sixpack should think twice before buying that Toyota or Nissan and give the GM offerings a serious shot.

I'm a little surprised by your reply on this. Could this be sarcasm?

How did GM get to the point where they are down to 26% market share and falling? That certainly doesn't help them honor their legacy costs. Why did they sign agreements and contracts that they couldn't honor in the first place? Their are plenty of Toyotas and Nissans made by all American Joe Sixpacks. Why should anyone buy any old crap that GM is offering to save GM? GM brass has future challenged for nearly 40 years now. They're luck they made it this long. People in the know have watching for their demise for more than 15 years.

This is one of those times when I have a little trouble embracing capitalism. The union's "demands" are getting a lot of publicity, and health cost really is a huge issue for GM, but the root of this problem is bad management decisions going back 20 years or more.
I tested cars for magazines for several years, and the quality control of things like the Camaro and Corvette, cars people liked and were prepared to support, was just horrible--a Z-28 Camaro singlehandedly converted me from Chevy man to Ford man (then an SVO Mustang made me a Honda man...). Letting the minivans get old and creaky was probably GM's most obvious mistake, because now they have nothing to sell in a growing category, but this goes back way before that, and much deeper. I thought Bob Lutz might get them aimed straight, but it doesn't seem to have happened.


I've listened to what some industrial designers who work in GM's design department had to say about the company, the products and Lutz so I'm not at all surprised. GM's fate is the product of it's myopic culture.

I can't think of a single American car, in any category, that would enter the discussion if I were in the market. Truck, maybe.

It's doubly obvious how short-sighted and stupid American car execs have been when you look at Hyundai. This is a new (to us) car company, from a country we are not accustomed buying cars from, surpassing all American car companies in perceived quality in less than 5 years.

What are American car companies doing? Putting Hemi's in station wagons, and shoring up that gas-guzzling, muscle car market that has such a bright future. What a joke.

BTW - 4bkyn, the Eclipse is gorgeous. Love that burnt orange.

I can't think of a single American car, in any category, that would enter the discussion if I were in the market. Truck, maybe.

It's doubly obvious how short-sighted and stupid American car execs have been when you look at Hyundai. This is a new (to us) car company, from a country we are not accustomed buying cars from, surpassing all American car companies in perceived quality in less than 5 years.

What are American car companies doing? Putting Hemi's in station wagons, and shoring up that gas-guzzling, muscle car market that has such a bright future. What a joke.

BTW - 4bkyn, the Eclipse is gorgeous. Love that burnt orange.

It's deja vu all over again and it goes way beyond the American auto industry. We're living in retro times and I don't mean in a good way. Perhaps the Rolling Stones will put a CD out called Sucking In The Aughties.

What are American car companies doing? Putting Hemi's in station wagons, and shoring up that gas-guzzling, muscle car market that has such a bright future. What a joke. That's because it's our God Given Right to own and drive a 500HP wagon and we'll go to war to defend it!

Those hemi commercials are pretty telling.

That's because it's our God Given Right to own and drive a 500HP wagon and we'll go to war to defend it!

Those hemi commercials are pretty telling.

As if you never hear about performance in a commercial from Lexus, Infiniti, BMW, Nissan.... those hemi commercials sell Chrysler products - which are the one USA company (owned by M-B) holding steady and even gaining market share. So what's your point -

As if you never hear about performance in a commercial from Lexus, Infiniti, BMW, Nissan.... those hemi commercials sell Chrysler products - which are the one USA company (owned by M-B) holding steady and even gaining market share. So what's your point -My point is concerning the audience and mindset they cater to. That they're gaining market share is also telling.

That's because it's our God Given Right to own and drive a 500HP wagon and we'll go to war to defend it!

Those hemi commercials are pretty telling.

"Can you say Hemi"?

They certainly made eyes roll in this household.

As if you never hear about performance in a commercial from Lexus, Infiniti, BMW, Nissan.... those hemi commercials sell Chrysler products - which are the one USA company (owned by M-B) holding steady and even gaining market share. So what's your point -

...for now. Is it just because of the engine performance or it also related to the design of the vehicle also?

Who wants to make a bet that Hemi goes the way of the Bay City Rollers by 2008? Deja vu all over again?

I'm a little surprised by your reply on this. Could this be sarcasm?

How did GM get to the point where they are down to 26% market share and falling? That certainly doesn't help them honor their legacy costs. Why did they sign agreements and contracts that they couldn't honor in the first place? Their are plenty of Toyotas and Nissans made by all American Joe Sixpacks. Why should anyone buy any old crap that GM is offering to save GM? GM brass has future challenged for nearly 40 years now. They're luck they made it this long. People in the know have watching for their demise for more than 15 years.

Well I'm surprised by your cavalier attitude toward GM. There's a hell of a lot more at stake than just GM workers - multiply that by five or ten in order to account for all the suppliers and local services and tax bases and such that'll go down with the ship.

I'm not making excuses for them - there were many bad product decisions made that hurt them over the years and gave them their relatively lousy product image. But a bad image doesn't mean that the current products are bad. GM's products today are a closer match to the competition than they were five years ago, and they'll continue to get better. What I'm saying is, don't cross them off your list.

Well I'm surprised by your cavalier attitude toward GM. There's a hell of a lot more at stake than just GM workers - multiply that by five or ten in order to account for all the suppliers and local services and tax bases and such that'll go down with the ship.

You no idea how ironic this statement is and you should read all my comments on this from the top.


I'm not making excuses for them - there were many bad product decisions made that hurt them over the years and gave them their relatively lousy product image. But a bad image doesn't mean that the current products are bad. GM's products today are a closer match to the competition than they were five years ago, and they'll continue to get better. What I'm saying is, don't cross them off your list.


That's a contradiction and it's not just about image. I'm one of the last people to choose a car based on image.

Are you saying the market is to blame? You're blaming the market? They've been off my list and an ever increasing percentage of the market's list for quite a while now. If they can earn a spot back on that list then more power to them. Seeing as their poor decisions continue to date I seriously doubt that's going to happen.

I'm one of the last people to choose a car based on image.

Are you saying the market is to blame? You're blaming the market? They've been off my list and an ever increasing percentage of the market's list for quite a while now. If they can earn a spot back on that list then more power to them. Seeing as their poor decisions continue to date I seriously doubt that's going to happen.

But you do choose a car based upon image - your image of GM is so bad you admit that 'they've been off (your) list .... for quite a while now.' Your mind is closed, but that's your business.

But you do choose a car based upon image - your image of GM is so bad you admit that 'they've been off (your) list .... for quite a while now.' Your mind is closed, but that's your business.

Just because you say it doesn't necessarily make it so. What you claim is laughably ironic because you have no clue who you're saying this to or what I know.

...and by the way, I drive an ugly Toyota Camry because I'm an informed consumer on a budget. My choice has zero to do with image when it comes to automotive vehicles. An automotive vehicle is purely an appliance to me at this point in my life. I save my $$$$ for great bikes. Furthermore, speaking as a designer of luxury goods if and when I do come to the point where vehicles are in part about image I guarantee you I won't be buying GM product unless they make an unprecedented sea change.

But you do choose a car based upon image - your image of GM is so bad you admit that 'they've been off (your) list .... for quite a while now.' Your mind is closed, but that's your business.

Then again... You probably wouldn't ever see me driving an Aztec.;)

Then again... You probably wouldn't ever see me driving an Aztec.;)

No, but I could see you driving this....

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d150/psychic22/GMDreamBus.jpg

No, but I could see you driving this....

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d150/psychic22/GMDreamBus.jpg

From the days of Raymond Loewy and Harley Earl.