http://money.cnn.com/2005/10/26/news...n=money_latest

Visit my newly-acquired website, Volconvo Debate Forums!

This does not surprise me. Toyota also makes a lot of reliable economy cars too. GM hasn't innovated in 30 years and mostly makes hulks that are shot by 70k mile.

Sad news!

Back in the 50s, a GM executive said something to the tone of: "Whatever is good for GM, is also good for America". Not the exact quote, but similar meaning.

Unfortunately, the reverse is also true. GM relinquishing the title of the world's largest manufacturer, is part of a larger picture where the US is rapidly being overtaken in the manufacturing and technology sector.

As much as I dislike GM, these are sad news. Sad news indeed.

So whatever's good for Exxon/Mobil and Texaco is good for America, right? As long as the big oil companies are making a ton of money, that's good for America? Same thing. GM is a giant multinational that (tries to) make as much profit off selling overpriced goods. Don't even try to pretend they're any different either. People try to say oil should be zero profit because you NEED it for your car. Well if you NEED oil so much, then you must need your car even more because the car is the item that needs the oil in the first place! Anyone calling for oil companies to make zero profit should be happy that GM has zero profit too. Car companies and oil companies are in the exact same business - selling a product you're addicted to at whatever price they want to charge.

GM needs to figure out their problems or they will cease to exist.

Part of their problem is not making innovative, "quality is Job One" vehicles. I mean look at the ridiculous new HHR vehicle - what, did someone look at the PT Cruiser and say, "Man, we gotta get us one of THOSE in our line !!" That vehicle is idiotic, and the sales of the PT Cruiser should have indicated to them that the HHR will be a joke.

Part two of their problem is offering such generous and ridiculous benefit packages that they are almost committing business suicide.

Part three of their problem is the "old school mentality" of running the company and the accompanied failure in modernizing their entire operation, from HR to Bolts.

I feel for their employees who might suffer layoffs or early retirement or reduced benefits, but a lot of their problem is of their own doing.

GM in the past, Walmart today: Huge companies that were/are barometers of the nations' economy. When GM goes bankrupt, the repercussions are going to be felt all across the country.

GM (and most recently Walmart) complain that the workforce is obese and sickly ..
Guess what ? They are microcosms of the nation. I personally think GM and Walmart stink and do not shop at either one, but it is imprudent to ignore them. Their realities are your realities.

R2-E2, 2G Prius.
Highway/City/Husband/Wife MPG: 56.5, as of 12/2005, 26K miles

Jac Nasser, Ford President: "We are planning to launch a hybrid version of
this car [P2000] within this year [1998]. We will also make FCEV available in
2004."

Good! My point EXACTLY!
Since automaking is primarily a high-tech design and manufacturing endeavor, the failing of GM, Ford and their autoparts suppliers (Delphi, Visteon, etc) will impact the standard of living one way or another.

Quote: "Helped by a reputation for building reliable and fuel-efficient vehicles, Toyota is picking up market share from loss-riddled GM in the U.S. company's home market."

To put this into perspective;
My very first vehicle I owned was a well-worn and battered 1962 Toyota Land Cruiser. It had 11 well travelled years on it and the 5 digit odometer had reset to zero a couple of times.

Since the body and frame were so sturdy and good shape, I decided to overhaul the engine.

This is the kicker: Toyota back then had licenced the engine design from General Motors, the rugged and dependable 230 CID six-inline light truck engine.

I know, because during the overhaul, I used stock Chevrolet pistons, rings, valves, etc, and they just fit right in.

Back then Toyota did not have the technology to design dependable engines. Who would have thought back then, that a few decades later, the reverse would be true.

GM owns a chunk of Toyota, so what's good for Toyota is good for GM. Toyota also has quite a few manufacturing plants in North America, and is building more, so if Toyota is taking over sales and employment, is it not better to have a fiscally responsible and quality oriented corporation employing people?

On the other hand, this is pushing GM to shake things up and re-think their plans that had included years of big vehicles, competition in the "free" market is supposed to move us along, and those that can't keep up are just left behind. If GM really want to stick around they will adapt and evolve.

2001 Prius Photos       2005 Prius Photos
'97 Prius Simulation Prius inner workings

The good news: The stock you own in that other company has appreciated
The bad news: Your company is heading towards bankruptcy.

All in all, just another day at GM, and nothing to worry about. Right ?

R2-E2, 2G Prius.
Highway/City/Husband/Wife MPG: 56.5, as of 12/2005, 26K miles

Jac Nasser, Ford President: "We are planning to launch a hybrid version of
this car [P2000] within this year [1998]. We will also make FCEV available in
2004."