[VIPER_SRT]

I dont get this, why are people favoring bail out! if GM and Chrysler file for bankruptcy they will still be there. There will be more advantages to this decision. UAW wont be able to touch them anymore and they can shut down those extra factories and make the whole process more efficient. 14 Billion which they requested is just enough to cover the salaries/benefits for 2 quarters. The running cost of GM is close to 5 Billion/month. Now imagine how many months will they survive with the bail out package especially when the economy is down and people are not buying new cars, they are just sitting in lots. They will be back for 2nd bail out package after 3 months asking for more cash and the Govt. will be obligated to give it, having fear of loosing the 1st package. The congressmen and the senators are not supporting it, if it were a good decision this thing would have passed and we wouldnt be having this discussion.

One great example: Circuitcity, one of the biggest electronics retail store filed for bankruptcy recently and closed more than 100 retail stores nationwide in US and they are still in business trying to cut down their costs of operation and making their whole business model more efficient. They didnt disappear though.

Ford will not file for chapter 11. They have enough cash to survive till 2011-12. Bail out money is US tax payer's money and myself being a tax payer, will not support it. 700 Billion is still not spent but if big 3's are given this bail out money then other industries like insurance, retail, manufacturing are all lined up to get help from the feds, which is not a good sign.

[hrag]

I thought the "boyracer" was a Mitsubishi fan. When did this change?

VIPER_SRT you sound like someone who reads thetruthaboutcars too.
Unfortunately this bailout has now become a political issue so rational discussion is no longer welcome. People profit by painting scary pictures, although we know that even with a bankruptcy *someone* will have to make the vehicles that Small 2.8 are presently making.

It is simply too big a vaccum, too big a sales gap.

These companies do not deserve a bailout because that will prevent them from addressing the problems. Bankruptcy is good. Ch. 11 is what they need.

[VIPER_SRT]

Originally Posted by SuperSyn

VIPER_SRT you sound like someone who reads thetruthaboutcars too.
Unfortunately this bailout has now become a political issue so rational discussion is no longer welcome. People profit by painting scary pictures, although we know that even with a bankruptcy *someone* will have to make the vehicles that Small 2.8 are presently making.

It is simply too big a vaccum, too big a sales gap.

These companies do not deserve a bailout because that will prevent them from addressing the problems. Bankruptcy is good. Ch. 11 is what they need.

SuperSyn, I agree with you that this has become a political issue and the reason this drama is still going on in Washington. The Michigan Congressmen and senators are favoring this big time because they dont want to loose the next elections by showing that they gave their best fight.

[aaggoswami]

Originally Posted by VIPER_SRT

1) I dont get this, why are people favoring bail out! if GM and Chrysler file for bankruptcy they will still be there. There will be more advantages to this decision. UAW wont be able to touch them anymore and they can shut down those extra factories and make the whole process more efficient. 14 Billion which they requested is just enough to cover the salaries/benefits for 2 quarters. The running cost of GM is close to 5 Billion/month.

2) Ford will not file for chapter 11. They have enough cash to survive till 2011-12. Bail out money is US tax payer's money and myself being a tax payer, will not support it. 700 Billion is still not spent but if big 3's are given this bail out money then other industries like insurance, retail, manufacturing are all lined up to get help from the feds, which is not a good sign.

1) GM needs $7 Billion in December and the same amount in Jan 2009 to just stay away from Bankruptcy. I think that UAW is creating more trouble for them.

2) If GM and Chrysler fail and shut down, Ford will follow due to supplier overlap. This is true for all those who are manufacturing cars in US including Hyundai.

Originally Posted by SuperSyn

Unfortunately this bailout has now become a political issue so rational discussion is no longer welcome. People profit by painting scary pictures, although we know that even with a bankruptcy *someone* will have to make the vehicles that Small 2.8 are presently making.

It is simply too big a vaccum, too big a sales gap.

These companies do not deserve a bailout because that will prevent them from addressing the problems. Bankruptcy is good. Ch. 11 is what they need.

The Bailout is made more media frenzy by GM. And Americ's media is not highly rated. Also Americans are known not for stuff, but they way they manage to present stuff. I agree with you, no bail out is required. They have to learn a lesson. They just cant carry on with old appreciation words " GM = US ", etc.

If the supplier chain is not massively disturbed, then Ford will emerge as a hero out of this.

[sujaylahiri]

I think the Big 3 deserve another chance. If you look at their current line-up, okay GM's and Ford's line-up, I don't see anything there which won't match up to the imports.

The Malibu is already a class leader, the Cobalt is an amazing car to drive, so is the Fusion. The new F-150 is probably the best truck ever made in America, and throw in a couple of Mustangs, Challengers, Corvettes etc. and you've got a winner.

[vasudeva]

Regardless of who has got them into their mess (largely self-inflicted), for consumers, more competition is better anyday. As it is, Toyota and Honda charge higher prices for supposedly better value. If the Detroit 2.5 are not there or become pygmies, expect less competition to cause even higher prices.

[sridhga]

Agree with Devarshi84. There is a huge propaganda machine behind Japanese auto makers. When I bought a Toyota car, I was promised that it would give 41 mpg. I never got anything beyond 28mpg. People buy Toyota because it is economical and runs for several years without breakdown. People do not buy Toyota because its fun to drive or luxurious etc. But I felt my purchase was based on false economics and a false promise. There are many successful cars made by Ford, GM, Chrysler. Ford Escape was an absolutely fantastic car to drive and I enjoyed driving it. Jeep Liberty is an equally good car and fun to drive. Also Lincoln cars have been reliable taxis. The longest driven car record in the world goes to a Ford truck which has done approx 16,00,000 kms+ so far. Also remember current economic down turn is as well reponsible for squeezing credit to customers and pushing US auto industry into the brink. This credit crunch was caused by crooks on Wall Street who get bailed out. But US Auto industry does not get bailed out because they really produce and sell 'things' that you can see and touch. They are begging for 35Billion USD. Media calls all sorts of things that they flew in planes etc. which is sheer nonsense. I also work for a corporate and I do not expect my CEO to drive interstate and waste time. I own shares in several companies and their executives fly corporate jets and I think thats okay. One single idiot Bernie Madoff can wipe out 50 Billion USD from the system and he is a Wall Street product. We still think its fair to give 700 Billion USD to scoundrels than to give 35 Billion USD to an industry that hires people in large numbers and pays above market wages and provides life time employment to workers and makes things that Americans love.

[phamilyman]

here's a perspective: Robbers on the Loot at Financial Wisdom - By Kalidas

[bhp1]

GM, Chrysler get 13.4 Billion $ support.

[devarshi84]

Originally Posted by sridhga

Agree with Devarshi84. There is a huge propaganda machine behind Japanese auto makers. When I bought a Toyota car, I was promised that it would give 41 mpg. I never got anything beyond 28mpg. People buy Toyota because it is economical and runs for several years without breakdown. People do not buy Toyota because its fun to drive or luxurious etc. But I felt my purchase was based on false economics and a false promise. There are many successful cars made by Ford, GM, Chrysler. Ford Escape was an absolutely fantastic car to drive and I enjoyed driving it. Jeep Liberty is an equally good car and fun to drive. Also Lincoln cars have been reliable taxis. The longest driven car record in the world goes to a Ford truck which has done approx 16,00,000 kms+ so far. .

Thank you, for the facts mentioned. A friend of mine owns a fiesta 1.6 Exi and another owns a Honda City Gxi or something. I am yet to see a difference in Fuel efficiency quoted by them (11-12 in the city). And another friend's Honda civic which I have personally driven a lot rarely gives more than 8. And I am yet to see in what way do Ford parts costs more than Honda before we subtract the huge purchase price difference.

The American consumer has been a victim to a huge marketing gimmick by the Japanese makers (not illegal but surely unethical). I still remember them announcing a new plant the same day GM announced closure of one in Canada. The plant never came up. Toyota was also warned for not declaring the recall publicly in the papers once.

The Big three too are to blame. As I mentioned in one of my previous posts, they dont have a PR and Marketing department in place or it's a joke.

We need to remember that the same can happen in India if we keep on buying Honda and Toyota's. I am not against the brands but against the huge premium they charge unnecessarily and killing the fair competition.

At the end of the day, we the customer always want the best product for the best price. Atleast I for one do not care for the brand. (three of our vehicles are Japanese and not American)

[tadukuttan]

Originally Posted by devarshi84

At the end of the day, we the customer always want the best product for the best price. Atleast I for one do not care for the brand. (three of our vehicles are Japanese and not American)

Hm, you saying that you believe that the Jap cars are better, or not?

[jat]

The economical factor play more important role than the quality of cars (you can look at our own TATAs, MAHINDRAse etc). The people at top work on only money and rest are done at the people below them. This economical problem is not only faced by these big threes but by entire USA due to certain economical policies - which have beein basically based on securities provided to the people themselves without savings or recovery system in place (if you look at our own govt. pension policy and subsidies policies, we are going to face the same problem in future - "only when" is difficult to predict)

So, the big three do deserve a bail out. However they should have a complete plan about how they are going to achieve their targets and what are the results if there is going to be failure. So that public should be aware of the risks involved.

[Astleviz]

Originally Posted by jat

The economical factor play more important role than the quality of cars (you can look at our own TATAs, MAHINDRAse etc).

Huh? Are you trying to compare bad management practices of ford and GM with the VFM offerings of Tata and Mahindra? GM and Ford are in a soup because they have ignored the car buyers for too long while tata and mahindra have been doing good because they have been offering VFM products at a price that most people are comfortable with. Tata can also equip an indica/indigo with 6 airbags, a state of art 150 bhp crdi engine, air suspension and the works but would you buy an indica if it were priced at 8 lacs or more?

The people at top work on only money and rest are done at the people below them.

Can't make head or tails out of that statement.

This economical problem is not only faced by these big threes but by entire USA due to certain economical policies - which have beein basically based on securities provided to the people themselves without savings or recovery system in place (if you look at our own govt. pension policy and subsidies policies, we are going to face the same problem in future - "only when" is difficult to predict)

By that logic, every US company that is not doing good deserves a bailout package because the same economic policies apply to them as well. And so do those hundreds of thousand of americans who have huge credit card debts. What about their bailout package?

So, the big three do deserve a bail out. However they should have a complete plan about how they are going to achieve their targets and what are the results if there is going to be failure. So that public should be aware of the risks involved.

Ah! So the government should take the tax payers money and give it to these companies just because they have a plan? AIG also had a plan and they got several billion dollars. And what did they do with that money? They gave $500 million to their top executives as deferred payments to retain their top employees (who were actually responsible for the financial mess in the first place). Then the CEO and some other executives went on a company sponsored vacation to an exotic resort to unwind. The bill for their exotic vacation- $500,000. And then they fired thousand of employees in the name of efficiency and restructuring.

[jat]

Originally Posted by Astleviz

Huh? Are you trying to compare bad management practices of ford and GM with the VFM offerings of Tata and Mahindra?

. I am talking about good managment practices of TATA and MAHINDRA vs bad management practices of big 3 (not only car makers but the other industries and to some extent govt agencies in USA also). The management at the top were unable to take the feedback from the people. Public requirement may be different than what they think. (For example, in India, automatics are still quite far behind the needs of general public and is economical may not be viable for most of the cars, especially smaller ones. Another one, see the new Ford Ikon Diesel)

people on top work on money

. For them quality, inventory, R&D, etc all are seen on the balance sheet. I have seen it myself. It becomes hard to explain to the top sometimes about returns. Small technical flaws can drain lot of money but you can't put it on paper because there is no hard data available till you research on it. So it doesn't go on balance sheet and then top management is not interested to allocated the resources to sort it out. (In fact this is one of the biggest problem faced by big companies, bigger you grow, more problems like this as communication system starts failing)

By that logic, every US company that is not doing good deserves a bailout package because the same economic policies apply to them as well. And so do those hundreds of thousand of americans who have huge credit card debts. What about their bailout package?

. Well what i get to understand is that if somebody has been seriously injured due to rash driving and there is a hope of survival, the doctors should reject the idea of providing medical relief because he or she is at fault due to rash driving.
. What I meant was that there should be policy where these companies can show that the money which they will get will come back to public. The economical policies will be too complex and too big to put it here in few lines. But that may include, cutting down on huge pay packets and security benefits to people, working on improving sales, working on reducing manufactering costs etc etc.
. If those big 3 are unable to come out with a good plan, then they should not get bailout package. However, if they have an excellent plan, then why not give them the bail out.
American credit card debts is one of the main problems in American crisis. hehehe.

Then the CEO and some other executives went on a company sponsored vacation to an exotic resort to unwind.

. Well, it should be in their plan that this kind of wastage won't be there. Don't you think so that when you have to submit a plan for bail out, you should describe the expenditure of finances provided to you in detail - what goes where? And if you put that most of the money is going to top executives for their vacation, do you think the public or the govt (given the repercussion at such stage) will agree?

PS: Please don't use the bold letters as it is reserved for important announcements etc by moderators.