Here's an article in the Detroit News that paints a similar picture to what I and others on this newsgroup have been saying.....

• Toyota's primary advantage over GM is in labor costs and legacy costs relative to health care and pensions.
• If GM didn't supply 1.7 million large trucks and SUVs / year, Toyota would.
• Toyota's product mix has been shifting from small and mid-sized cars to large trucks and SUVs, because they are more profitable.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...73251638935397

Peace,

Martin

I am NOT the official voice of GM with respect to Hybrid issues

I am NOT the official voice of GM with respect to Hybrid issues

I am NOT the official voice of GM with respect to Hybrid issues

Hmmm, I agree. I have always said I didn't-and don't -think Toyota makes a nickel on the Prius. All the BS about "efficient Japanese management and production techniques" has been pure BS for the last 15 years. All the car companies "read the same books" and adopt the most efficient production methods.
GM has a core of customers that are deeply loyal to GM;Toyota has loyal customers, but they aren't deeply loyal-there isn't the emotional connection.Still, it is impossible to make up $1500 more in labor costs per vehicle.Is GM hoping to pare their labor/pension/healthcare costs to near Texas/Toyota levels?The new wage earners in that plant will probably start out at $12/hr+ benefits-under $20/hr. How does GM approach that? It looks impossible, if the UAW won't allow non union plants to be built here-USA. GM also needs to push for national health care-that would save them billions/yr!
Good luck.Charlie

AMEN! It would save us all a lot although there would be bump up in the unemployment ranks. All of those insurance form clerks in medical offices and facilities would have to look for a useful job . . . along with army of insurance company claims processors.

Heck, I'd be happy if just the paper work were standardized.

Bob Wilson

Operation Iraqi Oil Freedom:

Automatic, stock, project car.

My other 1500 cc car:

Automatic, stock, backup car.
Free speech, dialog and knowledge thrives without the poison of SPAM.

Bob, Honda claims that it built or is building its latest plants in Canada to dodge the healthcare costs it has to pay in the USA.
Charlie

What I never quite understood was the concept of funding pensions and health care out of future earnings. GM is paying NOW for all those liabilities they agreed to years ago. For my own personal pension plan my workplace contributes into that yearly. No matter what happens in the future, that part of my pension is already paid for. For all those GM employees out their working for their pension, The 2007 Chev you're building is paying for good old retired Bob to fill his Viagra prescription after back from his fishing trip. Better hope the 2021 model year Chevy HyperNova sells well so you can go fishing too...

Two climate control systems, one inside and the other at the tailpipe.

Distance: 29169km (75% city - 20 min trips)
FE: 6.77L/100km or 34.7 mpg
Operating Cost: $0.066/km / $0.107/mile

There's another thread where I went through exhaustive detail to point out that GM is currently funding pension requirements for all retired AND CURRENT employees, based on current financial standards for actuarial estimates. I'd prefer not to go through that again, so if anybody remembers the thread, please post a link to it.

Peace,

Martin

I am NOT the official voice of GM with respect to Hybrid issues

I am NOT the official voice of GM with respect to Hybrid issues

I am NOT the official voice of GM with respect to Hybrid issues

I'm pretty sure that GM could afford the pensions just fine if they didn't also have to pay a handful of executives at the top several billion dollars per year. That's one of the biggest differences between GM and Toyota: with asian companies, you don't have 2-3 people whose salary is equal to the rest of the work force combined.

Droid, maybe your pension is secure,but maybe not.Who actually owns the $$ in the pension plan?If the company goes under, are the $$ in the pension fund guarded from other creditors?Many aren't. Retirees are just another group of creditors.
I think the pension fund is actually "owned" by the company.It agrees to pay retirees, but if it goes out of business, they wait in line like everyone else.
There is usually a very good reason to not "overfund" pensions.If you overfund it, then you become a takeover target.The takeover guys then take the excess pension $$ and give it to-THEMSELVES!
There is usually some complicated accounting/guessing/magic involved in predicting future healthcare costs.Unfortunately these highly paid "guessers" have been WRONG! GM and most other big Corps fully fund their pensions according to these guesses.
If we-USA- suddenly got a national healthcare system/single payer-not partially employer based like the REPS. want, that just makes it more complicated/expensive-GM and many other USA Big Corps would suddenly be able to use "some" of the pension fund to fund new products.Toyota/Honda/Nissan's labor cost advantage would drop quite a bit.It wouldn't evaporate- non union workers in TX/MISS. would still be making a heck of a lot less than UAW workers, but the margin would be narrowed. If I was GM, I would sure as heck back the Dems in the next elections.
National Healthcare/single payer would be the one change that could really make a huge dent in Toyota's labor cost advantage.Luck,Charlie

Please substantiate. Officers' compensation is a matter of public record. Prove that GM exec salaries are out of line with Toyota's or any other car company.

Peace,

Martin

I am NOT the official voice of GM with respect to Hybrid issues

I am NOT the official voice of GM with respect to Hybrid issues

I am NOT the official voice of GM with respect to Hybrid issues

GM and Toyota definitely have a different way of spinning hybrid technology.

GM
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2...20/015349.html

Toyota
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...n_x.htm?csp=34