So opens a guest commentary by Ira Lacher in today’s Des Moines Register. And if you believe the Detroit line, you might assume this voice from the middle American heartland would answer in the affirmative. You’d be wrong. Lacher describes his impression of American cars as being “designed and put together by committee – a bunch of parts cobbled together. The steering wheel felt as if it were just sticking out of the dashboard. The gas and brake pedals seemed mere appendages to the floor. The seats were uncomfortable frames covered with cheap cloth. This wasn’t a car; it was a homemade personal computer! By contrast, every rented Honda, Toyota, Mazda and Nissan seemed like a machine that functioned like one machine.” But when he recently purchased a Hyundai, Lacher clearly felt at least a few pangs of guilt.
“If the Big Three were in this much trouble a year and a half ago as I was car shopping, would it have mattered?” wonders Lacher. “Maybe. I might have taken Hyundai’s best offer to my fast-talking, quintessentially arrogant American-brand dealership and said, “Match this and you’ve got a sale. But based on my shopping experiences with them, I think I know what they would have said. I think they still felt that American consumers owed them something because after all, they were the American auto industry, the folks who remade the country, who beat the Nazis. They would have said, ‘No.’ And maybe that’s why even though the Big Three’s fall into Chapter 11 – and perhaps their demise – would psychologically and empirically hammer America, I wouldn’t feel responsible. It is not unpatriotic to want the greatest return for the money you work so hard to earn.”
It is not unpatriotic to want the greatest return for the money you work so hard to earn
Exactly.
A consumer’s loyalty should be to his wallet. Besides, some “foreign” cars have more domestic content in them than some “American” cars.
Buy what’s best for you and forget about it.
John
The most American of American cars is the Grand Marquis – which is built in Mexico.
After many years of driving so called foreign brands (because of disappointment in the Big 3), I went back to Pontiac and bought a top of the line brand new 2003 Montana. It was…ok, I guess. Needed a fuel pump in the first year, the manifold gasket replaced, and a litany of little things here and there. Drove me nuts. When I sold it in 2007, it was nearly worthless. I tried, I really did.
I have four cars in the driveway, non of which are the big 3. I have a 3 year old Hyundai that has NEVER needed a single repair – only oil changes – for the past 3 years. I don’t only not feel guilty for not driving a Big 3, I feel sorry for my neighbors who do (not many of them though.)
[Nevermind.]
It is not unpatriotic to want the greatest return for the money you work so hard to earn.
A bunch of people striving to get the greatest return on their money is one of the fundamental principles of the United States. That’s why America, despite it’s faults, has produced and continues to produce many innovations and discoveries. Which is why the bailout makes me want to punch someone.
There are a lot of companies with American stockholders, developing, engineering and building cars in the United States, so I will say this.
It is unpatriotic to buy a car from a Detroit automaker. The Detroit automakers have been using disreputable dealers to sell Americans poorly built, unsafe cars for years. They now produce some cars that are almost as good as the competition and whine that they don’t get any credit for that.
Now that they are bankrupt the Detroit automakers are perverting the American financial system with a corrupt bailout with no transparency, indebting your children and their children.
All while the Detroit automakers rush to move their research and development to India and South Korea, and give away their intellectual property to China in exchange for the empty promise that they are establishing a presence there.
GM is the only company selling cars in the US with Chinese made engines, and GM’s supposedly amazing new compact, the Chevy Cruze, was developed in Europe and Korea.
If you want to be patriotic buy some Honda or Toyota stock to increase the American ownership stake in those companies. Also, buying Honda or Toyota stock will not put you at any risk of being shaken down by bankrupt GMAC’s debt collectors.
Buying a new car from a company that has harmed the US, and destroyed as much US capital, as much as the Detroit automakers is treason.
Not in the least. I think the average new car sells above $30K. That is a good deal of money to the vast majority of Americans. You should buy whatever you determine best meets your needs.
That much cash is not something that should be parted with lightly and I dont think you can blame anybody for attempting to get the most out of their money and doing the best they can for themselves and their family, sometimes that means buying foreign and sometimes that may even mean…gasp, buying a domestic.
“If the Big Three were in this much trouble a year and a half ago…”
Actually they were. The Big Three have been “in this much trouble” for my entire adult life. The only thing that changed is Mr. Lacher, along with the rest of the world, had their eyes opened to that fact recently.
The only reason Detroit has survived as long as it has is the fact that the domestic market is just so damn huge. Had GM been producing the crap they have since the 70s in any other market they would have died 20 years ago.
–chuck
Your choices are:
1. Spend another $1500 or so to make up for the higher cost structure the Big 2.8 have versus the foreign automakers for a comparable product…
2. Buy a Big 2.8-car that sells for about the same price as its foreign couterpart, and suffer from the lack of content, development, or refinement (maybe all three) that resulted from the US automaker cutting that $1500 from their product so they could sell it at a comparable price…
3. Buy a foreign-named car (maybe even BUILT in the US), save YOURSELF that $1500 or else get a better product for the same price.
If I were you, the only real choice would be #3. Buying an inferior product just to protect Union workers jobs doesn’t make you patriotic; it just makes you a chump.
In the old days when American auto manufacturers built their own parts and assembled their own cars, I felt it was important to buy Amercian. It was good for our economy. The money and the jobs stayed here in the states. But now that the American auto manufacturers no longer build their own parts but farm it out to other countries, there is no such thing as an American car (only the name says domestic). I bought my first “import” this year and do not feel in the least bit guilty. It has no more, or less, foreign parts in it than any car built by the big three.
So if you take this into consideration, what is the difference between a domestic and an import vehicle? I will tell you. Poor design and management of a business here in the states. Quality here in the states has been a roller coaster ride and never really reaching the performance levels of their competitors.
I do not hold the big three completely to blame. Our government has turned a blind eye to the dispicable working conditions of manufacturers overseas and have continued to allow unfair working practices to continue without protection for workers here in the states. Health care, workers comp, fair wages, pensions, insurance, and safe work environments in general cost a LOT of money. Then you wonder why the big three have a hard time competing and have resorted to acquiring parts overseas.
Everyone needs to accept responsibility and the US government must level the playing field like other countries do and throw this “international” economic business plan out the window. We need protection if we are to continue to be a force in the global market. We have tried this open market policy and the current economic setting is proof that it does not work.
Yeah, the big three have made some bad decisions-products but they are not the only ones accountable for the failure of the auto industry.
philbailey: Isn’t the Grand Marquis built in Canada?
I drive an American branded car made in Mexico- should I care?
If your so called American Brand car which has a VIN starting with anything other than a 1 then it is assembled in a different country than the USA.
And how about that Pontiac GTO (Holden), or GM Daewoo etc…
My car is a 1995 Dodge 4dr/4cyl/5sp sohc Neon w/ 246,000 miles, dead a/c, but still gets about 30mpg/89oct with a missing motor (probably a broken ring) and used to get 37-39mpg before missing. This was a handme down car from my now exwife who bought it new.
My new spouse wife has an ’01Hyundai Elantra and for the 5 years newer it beats the Neon on design and content. Then to find out that the majority of Chinese taxi’s are 01-07 Elantras showes how tough they are. Even the prior version Elantras are rare to show up in junk yards.
One of the reasons I bought the car I bought this year is because it was made in the United States.
It is made in a state that is considered hippie, liberal, high cost and has some of the strictest environmental laws in the world. (California)
It is made in an old GM plant, alongside Pontiacs.
My Car: Toyota Corolla.
I was not interested in a Chevrolet Aveo, because it was made in South Korea. Didn’t want a Mexican Ford Focus.
I have a soft spot for Lincoln Town Cars, but I don’t want a foreign car.
It makes me happy that I have a car that was made by Americans in America. They spend their pay in America, on their American rent or American Mortgage. Should I go on…?
I currently own a 2008 Mercury Mariner, bought new about 7 months ago and built in KCMO. Prior to that, I had a 2004 F-150 – also purchased new and built in Norfolk, VA. Both vehicles have served me well with no problems and good fit and finish. I have also owned in the past 10 years two BMWs (a 3 and 5 series both built in the Fatherland) and one Acura-RL (new style SHAWD and built in Japan). I had several quality/mechanical/electronic (take your pick) issues with all 3 of these foreign brands. And in particular, I received unacceptably sloppy repairs (on more than one occasion) from the local BMW dealership and a completely arrogant and worthless response when I escalated my complaints to BMW of NA. Enough foreign metal for me – thanks very much. It seems a bit short sighted (and cliché) to paint an entire segment of American manufacturing with one brush. But isn’t that in vogue these days?
I fault (in particular) GM management and its board of bystanders (thanks for the term RF) for the sad state of that organization. Any company which has been consistently losing market share for the past twenty-odd years should have its board (s) and senior management team (s) behind bars, and every dime they have stolen during their incompetent “tenure” should be confiscated
I was surprised to see a Kia Rondo in my neighbor’s driveway today. In 15 years he’s only owned Chevrolets. I wonder how much brand loyality is changing in the current car market?
Ed,
Was there any reason why you left this part out of Mr. Lacher’s commentary?
But as the years went by, U.S. brands, punch-drunk by Asian competition, got off the mat and began earning praise from well-regarded consumer magazines. And an astonishing thing happened more frequently: I started to become impressed by the American cars I rented. I even toyed with the idea of actually owning a Pontiac G6, Ford Fusion, Saturn Aura or even, heaven help me, a Chevy Malibu or Impala.
Ultimately Lacher bought a Hyundai not because of quality or value, but because of their long warranty and the fact that he didn’t have to buy options he didn’t want.
His column is less critical of the domestic manufacturers than you made it out to be.
Also, while he may be representative of consumers, Mr. Lacher could be better informed.
I have been driving foreign brands since 1982, when I bought my first Honda Accord. (At that time it was made in Japan; since then, the company has opened plants in Ohio and Michigan.)
No Honda plants in Michigan.
I will never forget driving from Des Moines to St. Louis in a rented Ford Probe, flooring the gas all the way and never exceeding 65.
The Probe is mechanically identical to the Mazda MX-6, based on a Mazda platform and was built alongside the MX-6 and Mazda 626 at a joint venture plant operated by Mazda and Ford.
Walmart buys and sells clothes that are made in China, Indonesia, India,….everywhere but the USA….and yet, I don’t here Sam kids questioned about their patriotism.
Why is this conversation just limited to the Auto industry? If buying on the global market is OK for Sam and the kids to make a few (billion) bucks on, then I guess for me to buy a used Audi and a used Mitsubishi, because they were affordable and reliable, is OK too. Ditto for electronics, tools, almost everything. Why is the question only being asked now that the auto industry is about to collapse? No one said a damned thing when the last American TV manufacturer closed up its doors.
No, what is un-American and un-patriotic is for our government to give billions with no accountability to people who are billionaires who should have known better….
westcott,
I completely agree with your comment:
“Our government has turned a blind eye to the dispicable working conditions of manufacturers overseas and have continued to allow unfair working practices to continue without protection for workers here in the states. Health care, workers comp, fair wages, pensions, insurance, and safe work environments in general cost a LOT of money. Then you wonder why the big three have a hard time competing and have resorted to acquiring parts overseas.”
This is one industry in which NAFTA / open trading borders completely killed us. I figure we should have had a social/environmental tariff on goods from overseas. The Walmart-ization of industry (lower cost of product every year) is killing traditional manufacturing in the USA.
The Panther platform cars are built in Ontario at the Talbotville/St. Thomas plant. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Thomas_Assembly
The Detroit automakers have been using disreputable dealers
Foreign dealers, for the most part, are operated by the same companies who own domestic brand shops. Roger Penske and Rick Hendricks don’t send all their good employees to the their Toyota and Honda stores and save all the incompetent and greedy ones for Chevy dealerships. The Suburban Group in the Detroit area sells both foreign and domestic brands, as do the dealers owned by the Glassman family.
All while the Detroit automakers rush to move their research and development to India and South Korea
Another canard. While GM has design and r&d facilities in those countries, one of the more successful things GM has done has been to leverage its world wide design and r&d resources as one coherent unit led by the Tech Center in Warren.
So, as far as you’re concerned, because Toyota (which spends most of its R&D dollars in Japan) has a large tech center in Ann Arbor we should buy Toyotas but because GM has satellite r&d facilities around the globe we shouldn’t buy GM products even though the lion’s share of their R&D dollars are spent in Michigan.
Even the prior version Elantras are rare to show up in junk yards.
Yeah, they were so reliable and long lasting that Hyundai had to buy back customers with their 10/100 warranty.
Ronnie: it’s a blog post, I can’t get everything in. As you say, even as someone who has had negative experiences with domestic brands, Lacher was willing to at least consider the new generation of domestic products. This shows how far GM has come in terms of product, but the fact that he went with Hyundai proves that improving product alone isn’t enough.
Question – does anyone think it possible for Detroit to build cars that are significantly better than the competition at the same price point? Significantly better NVH, handeling, initial quality, safety, long term durability, material quality, and interior and exterior styleing?
That’s what they need to be able to compete and win back customers and build marketshare – does anyone think that’s possible?
And no, I don’t mean build a car just as good as a Toyota/Honda/Mercedes/BMW, but a car that is in all measures significantly better.
This site is, to me, like my wasted summer of cocaine. The fun outweighs the destruction-at least for the first few months, then the repetition of message begins to drone, and the inherent bias begins to echo through the limbic system. I guess the whole sad tale comes down to one issue- do we try to export our living standard to the rest of the world, or import theirs to our shores? As one commenter said- labor laws, environmental standards, etc. etc. are not cheap. I have never been a protectionist, BUT, in this case, tariffs are in order. Toyota, Nissan, et al, managed to establish their truck market with a 25% tariff in place, and it looks to me that they have thrived. Also, try to remember the gigantic hit the taxpayers will take when the pensions and medical costs get shifted to the Feds in a bankruptcy. If the UAW were to work for free, it would only cut the costs per unit by $800-1000. This minor cost, when addressed alongside the fact that all competing countries have public single-payer healthcare funded by taxpayers makes the dynamics much harder to calculate. Well, my rambling is over, at least for the next six months, so return to your normal programming.
Olddavid: High praise indeed. Seriously, if we can offer even half the fun of a summer-long coke binge, we’ve done our job.
Anyway, I happen to agree that the government could do more to help the auto market. Eliminating CAFE in favor of a carbon tax, aligning crash test standards with the rest of the world, and yes, some form of government-provided health care safety net are all in order as far as I’m concerned. Bailouts and protective tariffs, however, are abusive and ineffective.
Thanks Ronnie Schreiber, I didn’t have time to look this article up, but I knew something wasn’t right. ‘Lacher describes his impression of American cars as being “designed and put together by committee – a bunch of parts cobbled together. The steering wheel felt as if it were just sticking out of the dashboard. The gas and brake pedals seemed mere appendages to the floor. The seats were uncomfortable frames covered with cheap cloth. This wasn’t a car; it was a homemade personal computer!’ I’m thinking, WTF American car is he writing about, something made in 1974? Looks like I was right.
Google “Smoot-Hawley” and note the date and the economic climate of the time. Now, think about enacting tariffs and the law of unintended consequences.
–chuck
I’m a Canadian, so perhaps it might be unfair for me to be critical of the US car industry, but economics are economics, so what the heck.
Imagine what would have happened if either a) consumers bought American products blindly because they were American and not foreign, or b) governments levied high tariffs and duties to protect American products (or any combination of the two you like).
What would happen?
American producers would have an economic incentive to sell products at higher prices or with lower quality and features (or both) than the foreign competition.
Why is that good?
The only way that foreign competition helps to make domestic competition better is if it is a serious option for people. It doesn’t mean people have to buy a foreign car or good, but it means they have to be willing to seriously consider it. If they won’t consider it, the domestic producers have an artificially constrained market in which to function and few economic incentives to compete.
I think that, in an ideal market, people don’t prefer domestic goods unless all things are equal, or the domestic goods are better. That is (to my mind) how it should be. If you were completely ambivalent in all regards between a Honda Accord and a Chevrolet Malibu, and you live in the US, by all means buy the Malibu. Of course, if you prefer either, buy that one. (I speak in the economic sense of preference, where cost is one of the factors. I prefer a steak to a banana, but if the steak is $59 at a New York restaurant and the banana is 29 cents at a market stall, right beside me…)
The issue of where a car is from is also an interesting one. Is a Chevrolet Aveo (built in South Korea) more of an American car than a Honda Accord (built in Ohio)? Here in Canada, there are Canadians who would prefer the Aveo to a Honda Fit, but is an American car made in South Korea more Canadian than a Japanese car made in Japan?
The increasing tendency of the US to make it more difficult to enter the country (understandable given the 2001 attacks) does make me feel less like a close neighbour of the US and more like a distant relative that is welcome to come, but not really, really welcome. I wouldn’t be surprised if this apparently increasing inwardness of the US has a cost in its ability to export products. If it’s good for Americans to look inwardly and support their own country, isn’t it good for everyone else, too?
I try not to think too much about these things. I’m a Canadian. I like supporting my country. My country does not have any domestic automakers. It has plants for foreign automakers. Still, when I’m going to spend $20,000 or $30,000 on a car, and keep it for the better part of a decade (as is my tendency), I want to like the car enough at the end of my time with it that I would make the same decision again if I could go back. The first time I had that happen, my car was made in Japan (by Mazda). An accident took the car away from me. While I replaced it with a Honda, I’m not terribly surprised it’s Japanese. When we sold our hand-me-down ’92 Corolla this fall (made in Canada and still super reliable, but boring), it was replaced by yet another Honda. I have little doubt that in seven or eight years we’ll still be enjoying both cars (or wishing the accident that took them away hadn’t happened :) ).
olddavid:
In a certain way I would like tariffs, at least instead of billions in bailouts.
But tariffs will not help the Detroit automakers. Tariffs against countries without labor standards (i.e. Mexico) and countries with single payer health care (i.e. Canada) would hurt the Detroit automakers more than the Japanese automakers. Most models of mainstream Japanese cars are made in the US. The Japanese thrive in the face of the 25% pickup tariff by not paying it, they build their pickups in the US.
Tariffs would hurt the Germans and Koreans, but most likely those customers would either pay the tariffs or go to Japanese transplant products. And the Germans and Koreans already have plants here.
The bailout argument is that the Detroit automakers are predominantly US owned (although none of them are 100% US owned, and Chrysler is still 20% owned by German Daimler) and that the Detroit automakers do development in the US (although they are offshoring that as fast as possible, GM to Daewoo, Opel and India, and Ford to Ford of Europe).
Tariffs will do nothing to ensure ownership or development occurs in the US, they will simply encourage assembly to be moved to the US, something that most automakers are already doing.
Also, it is pretty unanimously accepted that tariffs caused the Great Depression.
What may work is “fair trade”, where the US takes down tariffs in exchange for the other country adopting near US levels of environmental and labor standards, but back to the point:
Most of the people on this site would probably agree that Ford and GM cannot be allowed to liquidate. But those people do realize that Ford and GM have no future unless they go through real Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganizations. The alternative is British Leyland.
This site’s readers are disgusted that some people think that the Detroit automakers deserve something better than government assistance through bankruptcy when the Detroit automakers have abused their customers, lost money during economic booms, and destroyed hundreds of billions of dollars of US investors’ capital.
The entitlement mentality of chronically mismanaged, horribly structured Detroit automakers unnerves people.
At least someone with a coke habit has a choice about burning through all their money and ending up with nothing, the Detroit automakers are forcing that on the American taxpayers.
On a personal level the best thing an individual concerned about the US can do is buy Toyota, Honda or other successful automaker stock. It increases the US ownership of those companies, and, as a side benefit, annoys the Japanese.
Stubbornly buying Detroit automaker stock is a mistake, whether the Detroit automakers are kept on life support or actually forced through bankruptcy their shareholders will be wiped out (bonds are a different story).
Lets not overlook the actual economic foolishness of buying domestic to “help” the USA. If you really wanted to help GM/Ford/Chrysler, the best thing to do is to buy the car you want. If it happens to be foreign made, take the money you “saved” versus what you would have paid for the comparable american car you would have wanted instead, and send a check to the GM treasurer. This avoids the additional price distortions and utility bleed created by you “taxing” yourself to make a distributional transfer. Or take one for the team—keep it, and enrich one American.
And I can’t bear to hear the nonesense about how “Toyota’s profits go back to Japan while GM’s stay here.” Corporate profits go to their shareholders, by definition. And these companies are public corporations. If you are really concerned about foreigners earning more capital gains than some americans, you should be buying that Toyota stock the day you get your car.
You might be making a “Statement.” But buying american specifically to support U.S. industry is irrational and ineffective.
Edward Niedermeyer:
While I generally agree with the policies you mention; they would not help the Detroit automakers.
For all the big-3 complaints about regulation, the unique US emissions and safety standards are incredibly good barriers to entry, protecting the big-3 from foreign competition.
The buying shifts that occurred during the summer, as gas went above $4, also show that a gas/carbon tax would be bad for the Detroit automakers compared to CAFE.
Question – does anyone think it possible for Detroit to build cars that are significantly better than the competition at the same price point? Significantly better NVH, handeling, initial quality, safety, long term durability, material quality, and interior and exterior styling?
I think its possible, and you see it now on higher-priced, higher-margin machines like Corvettes, some Caddies, and trucks.
When you get into ~$30,000 rides and down though, it gets harder and harder for the D3 to compete. The difference in labor-hours – if not the materials – to build a GMT-900 vs. a Cobalt vs. a CTS is not the same difference as the retail price between the three. As a result, that relatively fixed “legacy cost” of all those UAW retirees becomes a more and more acute drag on total costs at the cheap end of the car world. Even with a dream duo of Warren Buffet handling finance and Roger Penske running product at GM in lieu of current Special Needs Kids management, those costs and that sliding scale of relative impact on the product mix are there.
Its one of the reasons the D3 like SUV’s and trucks soooo much, and probably a background instigator of the ~$40k MSRP estimate on the Volt, which I imagine is going to be more labor intensive to build than any other GM compact by some margin.
I Drive a GM/Chrysler. This supports a Soviet-style industry. They are the antithesis of American capitalism. They get free money from taxpayers even though taxpayers are against it. They exist only as welfare queens.
Should I feel guilty?
Guilt? That’s up to the individual. But if you drive an imported car, or a car assembled in the US by a foreign-owned and headquartered company, you do share responsibility — which is different from “guilt.” Whether you see responsibility as guilt depends on your worldview, politics and sense of social integration.
Some people are gleeful about accepting their share of responsibility, viewing purchase of an American car “treason.” They fully intend to undermine the D3 producers because they believe these companies deserve to die and the sooner the better, for the good of all of us. For this person, guilt is displaced by pride. Some people take responsibility for their community and go out of their way to buy good cars produced by the D3, doing their best to buy from among the competitive product offerings, and are willing to pay that $1500. $1800, $2000 producer cost gap to keep more manufacturing and financial strength at home. This person does not want to be part of the problem imploding the D3. And then there is the majority that just isn’t thinking about the larger picture, instead focused on their immediate sphere, their wallet, and operating with a combination of unawareness of the extended consequences of their decisions along with apathy about consciously using their purchasing power to shape their world.
If you bought a new mainstream imported or transplant vehicle for which competitive D3 products exist, you are among those responsible for the existential threat to the D3 and the millions of people dependent on them, whatever your motives. Whether responsibility translates to feeling of guilt is a personal matter only known to the individual, but responsibility is fixed.
Now this isn’t to say that the import buyer is wholly responsible for the current state of affairs in the macro-economy of American-owned automotive manufacturing, just that he or she is *among* those responsible.
Someone above pointed out that we essentially have a choice of whether to export our living standards or import someone else’s. Correct. American policy since the end of WWII has been to use the power of our markets, among other things, to lift the world into prosperity as a way of avoiding a repeat of Nazi Germany, improve prospects for an extended peace, and to combat Communism. We have the world we worked hard to get, which is in many respects a tremendous success at significant cost. But as a society, we haven’t collectively assimilated the consequences, nor managed the grand endeavor for pace and balance. Government can’t do that alone; individuals have to participate. People bought into the plan, but they for the most part did not anticipate what would be required of them beyond paying their taxes. It takes lifting your gaze a bit to see the value of paying a little more for everything from environmental responsibility to health-covered labor to plant safety to local procurement when buying a car. While the D3 egregiously undermined consumer trust for many years, the attachment of personal responsibility to purchasing decisions is no different than to the person who laments Wal-Mart’s arrival in their town, decries the destruction of their local retail economy, and then shops at the new behemoth store anyway.
Guilt on this matter is your decision. Responsibility can’t be evaded.
Phil
Ronin: you got them pre bailout so you’re off the hook.
For me, after never owning anything but domestic, now that I am involuntarily being robbed to support these fools, I won’t pay twice. My “patriotic duty” has already been co-opted by my own government. I gave at the office. Any “guilt” I might have had in buying a foreign car, absolved. Thank you Massa Sam.
When the time comes to buy a new car the only domestic brand I would now even consider would be Ford. More satisfying would be to side step the whole foolish exercise and never buy a new car again. At least from a domestic manufacturer. Sorry. It’s one thing to buy something others find of questionable appeal [from a Caliber to an Impala to a whatever Big 3 branded product] , it’s quite another to force everyone else to help subsidize it’s availability.
This shows how far GM has come in terms of product, but the fact that he went with Hyundai proves that improving product alone isn’t enough.
Yes, the domestics need some kind of game changing marketing idea. I think better warranties are to much samo samo to make much of a difference (remember, Hyundai pissed off a lot fewer customers when they were selling crap). What I think might help is what Harley-Davidson is trying on Sportsters, a guaranteed resale value. One way the domestics alienated customers was by dumping cars into the rental fleets, depressing resale value for their retail customers. Guarantying a certain percentage of MSRP if they trade in on another car from the same manufacturer would automatically raise the resale value. With that as an option, buyers would hold out for more cash or a better trade in deal if selling to used market or if trading in on a different brand.
And then there is the majority that just isn’t thinking about the larger picture, instead focused on their immediate sphere, their wallet, and operating with a combination of unawareness of the extended consequences of their decisions along with apathy about consciously using their purchasing power to shape their world.
The management of the D3, and the UAW are in this mess for “thinking of their immediate sphere, their wallet, and operating with a combination of unawareness of the extended consequences of their decisions along with apathy about consciously using their purchasing power to shape their world” for the past few decades.
Like most other Americans, I am sure UAW personnel and management enjoy foreign clothes and electronics, housewares, furniture, you name it. I don’t understand why they feel shocked and surprised it seems that other Americans share their sentiments.
“If your so called American Brand car which has a VIN starting with anything other than a 1 then it is assembled in a different country than the USA.”
1, 4, and 5. 2 is Canada, 3 is Mexico. 6-9 are South America, and the Old World gets letters. For future reference, China is ‘L’.
I find it confusing that some of the Big 2.8 have managed to make such remarkable strides in quality ratings over the last couple of years carrying the ‘burden’ of union representation!
How can it be that some of the U.S. Brand cars stand up to the ALMIGHTY Imports given thier $2-3K
labor cost differential?
SOMEONE PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS TO ME!!!!!
Because If I could manufacture a product with similar quality with more overhead…I would be on the cover of ‘Forbes’
My point is that if..and I mean if U.S Auto companies can come even close to the percieved quality of imports…
Who is really the most innovative car company?
Just think about it
o.k.?
(although they are offshoring that as fast as possible, GM to Daewoo, Opel and India, and Ford to Ford of Europe).
no_slushbox,
You keep repeating this even though people who work in design and R&D for GM and Ford have said that it isn’t true. Both companies have rationalized their design/r&d to leverage their global resources. In both cases the global teams are driven by the HQs in the Detroit area.
You don’t have a problem w/ Toyota having tech centers outside of their home company – in fact you admire it, pointing out that they have a large facility in Michigan. Why should you object to GM doing likewise?
I understand that in the no_slushbox universe Detroit can do no right, but in the real world, GM’s Tech Center is still driving GM R&D and design.
I’m the first to criticize American fit and finish, but Lacher’s little diatribe (pedals as appendages, stuck on steering wheel, etc) erases any trace of credibility. What the hell is he talking about? Not even my old ’89 Buick Century coupe, the unholiest of shitboxes, was that poorly put together.
As an aside, what do all the following have in common: Unionization, equal pay, forced salaries regardless of market demands, and state intervention to support a car company on behalf of the populace. Answer: They are all communist principles. So buying an American car sounds as unpatriotic as pissing on the flag.
CarnotCycle: I think its possible, and you see it now on higher-priced, higher-margin machines like Corvettes, some Caddies, and trucks.
Funny, I was going to say (almost) the opposite, trucks aside. The Corvette, the CTS, full-size luxury SUV’s and a handful of special editions are all Detroit can offer to compete in the higher-end market. That’s pretty weak. What exactly can they offer to the 3-series/A4/C-class buyer?
I spent some time this weekend thinking about what American car I could buy to replace my S4 wagon, should I ever want to do such a crazy thing. The closest thing to an “American” competitor I could come up with was a Volvo. Though if I ever decided I could live with an oversized look-at-me bling-mobile and live without a hatch in the back, you might talk me into a CTS.
It is not unpatriotic to want the greatest return for the money you work so hard to earn.
That’s the heart of it. For new cars, I’ll stick with the ‘imports’.
However, if you have time, I would recommend used Detroit iron at an appropriately brutal (~3 years old, 33% MSRP) discount and a good mechanic’s inspection. Their warranties are worthless and should be reflected in the price.
DweezilSFV
“For me, after never owning anything but domestic, now that I am involuntarily being robbed to support these fools, I won’t pay twice. My “patriotic duty” has already been co-opted by my own government. I gave at the office. Any “guilt” I might have had in buying a foreign car, absolved. Thank you Massa Sam.”
Everyone wants cheaper products but no one wants to face the facts and the consequences of getting cheaper products. So we rob Peter to pay Paul. Yeah, you get a good deal on foreign products but at the cost of good paying jobs and a strong US economy. Who cares how cheap a products is in you do not have a job (directly or indirectly). The loss of good paying manufacturing jobs here in the states because we want cheaper products comes with a price. And we are ALL paying it now. So the money you saved all these years buying foreign products is now going to cost you and you had no say in the decision. Your government made it for you. And, it did not create jobs or a stronger economy. It is all short sighted and a detriment to the US. Provide a level playing field, protect American jobs, and pay a fair price for a good product, and this nation will prosper once more.
[
[
[
[
Phil Ressler
Although I somewhat agree with your statements, in todays market, there is no difference between an “import” or “domestic”. It is too late to support your domestic auto makers because they no longer manufacture here in the US. The money is still bleeding from the US into other countries. Does this buy world peace? Maybe, but it sure is a long way around to go about it and the results are very subjective. There are still a lot of third world countries that do not produce goods or benefit from this type of trickle down economics. And, the middle class is footing the bill while the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, here in the states and abroad. Corruption is rampant and trickle down economics has been a huge failure here in the states. We still bilk billions from hard working Americans on defense with tax payer dollars trickling down to fewer and fewer wealthy business and tax payers.
Your arguements would have been spot on 20 years ago but buying foreign goods today is unavoidable. Just about everything is made elsewhere, no matter who’s name is double side taped to the back end of it.
“Guilt on this matter is your decision. Responsibility can’t be evaded.”
Thanks “Phil” – I laughed so hard I cried my contacts out.
westcott: this nation will prosper once more
Sorry, was I supposed to revert to subsistence farming last week? I didn’t get that memo.
We have it pretty damn good in this country, recession and all – count your blessings.
westcott said:
Everyone wants cheaper products but no one wants to face the facts and the consequences of getting cheaper products. So we rob Peter to pay Paul. Yeah, you get a good deal on foreign products but at the cost of good paying jobs and a strong US economy.
Well, why preserve good-paying jobs of undeserving workers? Do you tip your waiter $10000 for every dinner so that he can have a good-paying job?
I mean, if a UAW worker or a waiter wants a good-paying job, he better earn it. A good-paying job is not a birthright. Communism has been proven wrong in Soviet and China already.
I don’t see how the economy could be strong if you pay a $30/hr laborer $75/hr. In a functional and sustainable economy, everyone is paid at their market worth.
If all good-paying jobs have been preserved, all of us would be doing farming and hunting now.
brownie :
December 30th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
westcott: this nation will prosper once more
“We have it pretty damn good in this country, recession and all – count your blessings.”
Tell that to all the people who don’t have jobs now or in the coming year(s). Our country has lost more manufacting jobs to other countries because our government has allowed it to. All in the name of cheaper products.
Yeah, we have it better than just about everyone else in the world but our standard of living has still dropped in relation to what it once was in the 50′ and 60’s. For some, that is acceptable but for many, it means working at Burger King or selling appliances for a fraction of what they could be making if we were the manufacting giant we once were.
wsn :
December 30th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
westcott said:
Everyone wants cheaper products but no one wants to face the facts and the consequences of getting cheaper products. So we rob Peter to pay Paul. Yeah, you get a good deal on foreign products but at the cost of good paying jobs and a strong US economy.
“Well, why preserve good-paying jobs of undeserving workers? Do you tip your waiter $10000 for every dinner so that he can have a good-paying job?
I mean, if a UAW worker or a waiter wants a good-paying job, he better earn it. A good-paying job is not a birthright. Communism has been proven wrong in Soviet and China already.
I don’t see how the economy could be strong if you pay a $30/hr laborer $75/hr. In a functional and sustainable economy, everyone is paid at their market worth.
If all good-paying jobs have been preserved, all of us would be doing farming and hunting now.”
[
[
[
First of all, you are incorrect. Auto workers do not make $75 dollars an hour.
Second, this is not a functional and sustainable economy. If it were, the big three would not have their part built in foreign countries. It is not salaries that are the largest expense, it is the cost of complying with government standards for labor and environmental protection. These standards to not apply in third world countries. They do not have workmans comp., health insurance, pensions, safe work environments, or any of the other hundred or so requirments here in the states. Before automation, skilled labor was at a premium. The UAW could demand high salaries because it did take skill to manufacture goods. It was a simple matter of supply and demand. A shortage of skilled workers meant the car companies has to pay. Is this true today? No, but they do not make the same kind of money in todays dollars as they did then either.
Your analogy of a waiter is ludicrous.
The point of this discussion is that American jobs must be protected just like they are abroad. That is why they are prospering while still in the same industy. And since they are not held to the same standards, can manufacture goods for far less than we can here in the states. Make them provide the same level of benefits and protection and see what you will pay for that foreign made product.
…there is no difference between an “import” or “domestic”. It is too late to support your domestic auto makers because they no longer manufacture here in the US….
There certainly is a difference between an import and domestic car. The notion that there isn’t, in terms of domestic economic leverage is just plain wrong.
First there are many models that are in fact designed and built within US borders. There are others that are designed in the US with assistance from distributed offices and built in NAFTA countries. And there are others that are built outside NAFTA by US-owned factories and which have economic value that supports US headquarters jobs of high average value.
A Malibu, or F150 or Cadillac CTS or Silverado or Dodge RAM or Ford Focus or Chevy HHR, just for example, all carry very high domestic economic leverage. A Ford Fusion carries only a little less which still outranks the leverage of a transplant. My garage has two true US sourced cars and there are many altenatives for contributing the same domestic leverage via your purchasing power. The D3 operate more manufacturing plants than any transplant producer.
Your arguements would have been spot on 20 years ago but buying foreign goods today is unavoidable. Just about everything is made elsewhere, no matter who’s name is double side taped to the back end of it.
For some product sectors, US production is not an option for consumers. But cars are not among those sectors. You might be surprised how much you can buy from US owned factories if you make the effort. My own home is a global procurement zone, but some of my clothes are American made. Some of my electronics are American made. All of my guitars are American. My furniture is all made in the US, by choice. My cars are American. Most of my entertainment and information media consumption is American. My cell phone was designed in the US along with its control software, but the phone itself — the lowest value component — was built in Asia. My appliances are American as are most of my tools.
Americans can choose to support American-owned manufacturing in broad areas of their consuming life.
Phil
They will never get my money. Ever. They invented SUVs, convinced average family that SUV is “must have”, made this country sucking gas like there no tomorrow, destroyed Volvo and Saab. I am not giving Detroit my money for even Volt.
It’s sometimes just fascinating to see what people believe:
They will never get my money. Ever. They invented SUVs…
Connection? So the original Suburban, the Grand Wagoneer, the original Bronco and the original Blazer — just to name a few — and the many import imitators from around the globe as the genre proliferated were somehow original sins? The Jeep Cherokee introduced when Renault owned AMC? All of these vehicles were introduced to meet market needs and wants.
…convinced average family that SUV is “must have”…
As if average families had no choice in the matter.
…made this country sucking gas like there no tomorrow…
While cheap fuel, the peculiarities of the US continental market and Americans’ love of big vehicles degraded the mix of our national fleet from a strict fuel efficiency standpoint, *every* vehicle category primarily driven by the D3 became steadily, incrementally more efficient and cleaner, both relative to large 1960s vehicles and year-by-year over the recent 15 years truck boom. Further, much of what prompted the US to “suck gas” was adding 100 million people since the early 1970s.
…destroyed Volvo and Saab…
Volvo and Saab were doing a pretty good job of self-destruction all by themselves as independent companies, which is why they were available to be bought by American companies. Arguably Ford and GM respectively extended the life of both brands.
Phil
Unionization, equal pay, forced salaries regardless of market demands, and state intervention to support a car company on behalf of the populace. Answer: They are all communist principles.
Actually, unionization was hated by the communists. It was the Solidarity trade union in Poland under Lech Walesa that helped bring down the Iron Curtain. There were no free unions in the USSR and as far as I know (perhaps Bertel can verify) none in China now.
As for state intervention to support a car company, in a communist state the businesses are already nationalized so there aren’t any real car “companies” per se, just a different government appendage.
The UAW, particularly under Walter Reuther was fiercely anti-communist. While there are exceptions like the mine workers, the American labor movement is pretty much a capitalist labor movement. Samuel Gompers, the founder of the AFL said that the worst sin a company can commit against its employees is to not be profitable. Compare the UAW with their Canadian counterparts. The CAW has been much more militant and more likely to strike because it’s a more socialist organization than the UAW.
So Phil, you expect American’s who purchased import cars to realize their culpability in the D3’s downfall when the D3’s own management won’t even recognize that they are primarily responsible for their predicament? Give me a freaking break. You make some very intelligent arguments, but you forget who is ultimately responsible.
Was it the American consumers fault the D3 burdened the country with sub-standard vehicles in the 1970s, 1980’s and 1990’s?
Was it the American consumers fault that the D3 chose to focus their product line-up on high-margin trucks and SUVs and forgo investments in smaller vehicles?
Was it the American consumers fault that the D3 all but gave the imports the economy car market in the 1970’s and 1980’s?
Was it the American consumers fault that GM when on an acquisition spending spree instead of internalizing their profits on the product?
Was it the American consumers fault that the D3 always focused on the next big “hit” instead of continuously improving an existing product?
FYI, the Chinese do not buy electronic products made by Chinese companies when they can afford not to. The same goes for cars. Why? Even they know that a Chinese company has a tendency to make a substandard product.
So, wise Phil, if I buy a Toyota Venza….
Which is designed in the US. (Ann Arbor, MI)
And assembled by Americans in the US. (Georgetown, KY)
Am I helping America?
They will never get my money. Ever. They invented SUVs, convinced average family that SUV is “must have”,
What, did the Big 3 have some big guy swinging a pocket watch back and forth going “you are getting very sleepy, now go out and buy a SUV”?
The Detroit companies have been building “SUVs” for decades, long before they were embraced by soccermoms who didn’t want the image of driving a mommobile minivan. There were Suburbans and Jeeps and Broncos I & II. The first Explorers were little more than closed in Ranger pickups. Detroit just took advantage of the shift in consumer demand. The fact that with highly amortized components shared with their body on frame trucks the SUVs were very profitable was just gravy.
If the Detroit companies were so good at convincing people to buy SUVs they didn’t need, how come they’re having so much trouble now?
Phil,
I am not talking about where a vehicle is assembled. That is totally different from manufacturing. The engine block is probably from Mexico, the heads, from Canada, the seats from Taiwan, the upholstery from China, and on an on. That is what I mean by there is no difference. Toyota and others assemble here for shipping cost and tarriff reasons. Not out of the generosity of their hearts.
Assembly is such a small part of the process.
And the auto industry is not the only industry affected by exporting manufacturing jobs. It crosses all lines of goods, as you mentioned.
What makes it worse for the auto industry is tooling times and R&D in response to the flux in oilenergy prices and raw materials. How do you plan for the future when the target keeps moving? You can’t just decide your going to make a prius instead of SUV’s overnight. These areas of the business are tightly linked to demand and oil. Fluctuation and uncertainty make it impossible to predict market demand.
I do agree and do buy American when I can (my Klipsch Reference Audio System is an example) but even those goods you think are American made (like your appliances) are probably American assembled but use import parts, just like the auto industry. So are they really American any more? Not really.
P.S. This is the list of my cars I have owned over the years
1969 Oldsmobile 442
1981 Chevrolet Silverado
1990 Chrysler Eclipse
1991 Dodge Stealth ES
1995 GMC Yukon SLT
1998 Lincoln Continental
2008 Mercedes Benz E550
As you can see, I have given the American auto industry every benefit of the doubt. But, in this day and age, the lines have blurred and all cars should just be called “imports” if you look at where the parts come from. And, to give credit, where credit is due, all these cars were good or great cars except the 1981 Silverado. It was nothing but trouble and in hindsight, reflects the worst decade for the American auto industry when it comes to quality.
I spent some time this weekend thinking about what American car I could buy to replace my S4 wagon, should I ever want to do such a crazy thing. The closest thing to an “American” competitor I could come up with was a Volvo. Though if I ever decided I could live with an oversized look-at-me bling-mobile and live without a hatch in the back, you might talk me into a CTS.
You might want to wait for the CTS wagon, announced last year at the Paris show and to be on display at Detroit in a couple of weeks.
If you bought a new mainstream imported or transplant vehicle for which competitive D3 products exist, you are among those responsible for the existential threat to the D3 and the millions of people dependent on them, whatever your motives. Whether responsibility translates to feeling of guilt is a personal matter only known to the individual, but responsibility is fixed.
That sort of thinking doesn’t connect with reality. Many people have been previously burned by the D3 and will never go back. It doesn’t matter if there is a competitive car made by a domestic automaker out there or not, they had a horrible experience and they aren’t going to fooled again. Are you saying it is their responsibility to try the D3 again because they’ve won some award from a magazine they don’t read? No, it is the D3’s fault for losing that customer with crappy product in days gone by.
A car is generally the second most expensive purchase that someone will make. If they get burned once by a carmaker, they aren’t going to go back and I don’t see how someone could hold them responsible for not going back.
…but even those goods you think are American made (like your appliances) are probably American assembled but use import parts, just like the auto industry. So are they really American any more? Not really.
It’s pretty easy to do the research. Few complex items are devoid of globally-sourced components. That’s OK. Where do the highest value components come from, and where are the highest-value jobs and intellectual capital supported? On as much as possible that I buy, here.
Phil
Was it the American consumers fault that the D3 chose to focus their product line-up on high-margin trucks and SUVs and forgo investments in smaller vehicles?
Well, since the D3 were responding to market demand for those trucks and SUVs, yes consumers played a role. You blame the D3 for having made the vehicles people wanted and now blame them for not making the vehicles people want now.
So, wise Phil, if I buy a Toyota Venza….
Which is designed in the US. (Ann Arbor, MI)
And assembled by Americans in the US. (Georgetown, KY)
Am I helping America?
Not so much, and less than you hope. The design draws on a Japanese asset portfolio. The profits feed cash reserves that are controlled by a Japanese entity. The entire endeavor supports a thick cadre of high value corporate jobs at HQ in Japan. You’d be helping so much more if you bought a similar vehicle from an American firm with all these layers of economic activity supporting the domestic entity.
Phil
“You’d be helping so much more if you bought a similar vehicle from an American firm with all these layers of economic activity supporting the domestic entity.”
So I buy a “GM” product that’s designed in Korea, assembled in Korea (with Korean parts) and shipped over in a Korean cargo ship I should be happier because the CEO is American?
Hmm. Yea, don’t buy that logic.
I do buy Faygo pop though. And Better Made Potato Chips. Go Detroit!
I used to drive a first generation Mazda RX-7. When people asked me why I bought a foreign car, I replied that I would have been happy to buy a Pontiac RX-7. Unfortunately, Pontiac decided instead to build a miserable POS called the Fiero.
The situation hasn’t changed. Ten years ago, I wanted a medium size, all wheel drive wagon. (No vans, pickups or SUVs.) The only choices were Audi and Subaru and I bought one of the latter because it was the better bargain. Last year, I wanted a quiet, comfortable, high performance coupe. Manual transmission required. No front wheel drive or turbo engines. Ford’s only candidate was the Mustang. Chrysler had nothing at all. GM’s only candidate would have been a left over Pontiac GTO. I ended up with an Infiniti G37 6MT. In three years, I may be in the market for a pickup or SUV big enough and powerful enough to pull a horse trailer. Detroit builds these better than anyone else. I just hope they don’t quit before I’m ready to buy.
I would never even look at Japanese brand cars, then I spent 4 years working in Detroit and they sold me on buying a Honda.
So I buy a “GM” product that’s designed in Korea, assembled in Korea (with Korean parts) and shipped over in a Korean cargo ship I should be happier because the CEO is American?
Hmm. Yea, don’t buy that logic.
No, I’m not advocating sales of Aveo. Stretch for a Focus. This Aveo matter is one car, that sells in low volume. That this little aberration is used to justify anti-D3 buying behavior defies logic, or it exposes the emotion behind detractors’ thinking, reaching for anything to justify a specific prevailing behavior that arguably works against their own self-interest.
Phil
Not so much, and less than you hope. The design draws on a Japanese asset portfolio.
No, I’m not advocating sales of Aveo. Stretch for a Focus.
LOL. So, you don’t mind if it’s for the europeans?
.
The entire endeavor supports a thick cadre of high value corporate jobs at HQ in Japan.
The other hilarious bit is that you’re advocating for paying some american exec >$10mil compensation vs ~$1mil for the japanese one as if he’ll reciprocate (did he pay you off?). I know which one represents better value.
The Detroit 2.5 are the ones who should feel guilty for driving their customers away.
Beats me. I used to have a GTi, Hecho en Mexico. I now have an Acura, Hecho en Canada. My buddy drives a BMW, Hecho en South Carolina, and my wife’s friend has a Mercedes, Hecho en South Carolina.
My BMW was made in Germany, so I guess that’s a foreign car. Still, my Mom and Brother have Acuras made in Ohio, so does that make up for it ?
Short answer…the people in charge of WHAT cars are made eff-ed up. Not the laborers. Not the suppliers. The execs who decided. They messed up.
I have 3 cars that I drive frequently, 2 are of German manufacture,
one is purely American. All three were sold in the US by an American
manufacturer, the two Germans as captive imports, and the other was
manufactured completely here in the US…
Did I mention the newest one is 21 years old??
SteveL
never mind…
If you bought a new mainstream imported or transplant vehicle for which competitive D3 products exist, you are among those responsible for the existential threat to the D3 and the millions of people dependent on them, whatever your motives.
Ah jeeeze…. I feel like I just got the car equivalent of a PETA flyer…
Phil – GM has played Lucy-with-the-football with American consumers since 1970. Every new car they bring out is the one that has the quality (this time) and is as good or better than the Japanese. And for about 24 to 36 months, it is as good. And then the Consumer Reports et al start trickling in.
All that bad stuff is just in the past, you say?
Well, how about famous plastic intake manifolds?
Too old? How about the dex-cool coolant class action suit that GM recently settled (28 Oct 2008)? Still pending is the piston slap class action suit.
But trust Lucy GM this time. THIS time the quality is really going to be world class, and the employee discount pricing on the 2010 models won’t affect your resale values on the 2008 you bought..
“So I buy a “GM” product that’s designed in Korea, assembled in Korea (with Korean parts) and shipped over in a Korean cargo ship I should be happier because the CEO is American?”
You mean the CTS, the Corvette, the Lambda quadruplets, the Silverado, the Malibu, even the upcoming Camaro are all made in Korea? Damn, I’m never gonna buy another GM product.
“Buy Local” campaigns have been spectacular failures almost everywhere worldwide, except perhaps for food.
Setting aside the content question, if money leaves the USA, you have to find ways for those countries receiving that money to be your customers again. Loosing money locally won’t help because your own scarce capital is incorrectly allocated.
Spending taxpayer money on a dysfunctional Bigish3 in a market already well serviced by more capable companies might mean you don’t invest in the next global opportunity.
The “bailout” is a soft landing for those companies, but the structural adjustment opportunity will be missed with billions down the toilet.
I would feel embarrased to drive an import-especially these days. All the nonsense that the domestics aren’t as good is pure unadulterated BS. And all the other justification phrases like “Aveo from Korea” is a smokescreen to the obvious guilt felt by many here.
Phil Ressler: No, I’m not advocating sales of Aveo. Stretch for a Focus. This Aveo matter is one car, that sells in low volume. That this little aberration is used to justify anti-D3 buying behavior defies logic, or it exposes the emotion behind detractors’ thinking, reaching for anything to justify a specific prevailing behavior that arguably works against their own self-interest.
I’m afraid your argument doesn’t hold water in today’s ultra-globalized car market. What if I buy an “import” like a Saab 9-3? It’s on a Malibu platform and has GM engines, but it’s built in Sweden. Or is it somehow better to buy a Saab 9-7X, on a GM SUV platform with a Corvette engine?
Same goes for Volvo on Ford’s side. Their cars share plenty of components with both their parent company and Mazda.
To say that you should only buy a purely American car built only in America is to really limit yourself.
Payment and debt of gratitude is not the same as loyalty. We do not have to or need to be loyal to GM.
@ Bridge2far
I would feel embarrased to drive an import-especially these days.
Why? You’d already be in the majority if GM/Chrysler’s market share is anything to go by.
Customers have (are?) already voting and they don’t appear to want to buy from the Detroit excuse makers.
“Why? You’d already be in the majority…”
Well, I’m really not worried about “being in the majority”. And for the record, the foreign driver is still in the minority. Customers buy more GM vehicles Toyotas. But why let facts get in the way of a good rant?
And as I said earlier, many here are coming up with ridiculous statements to help them rationalize their mistakes. It’s OK. Next time, man up and buy American! Don’t be ashamed of your country. Be proud.
@Phil Ressler :
Not so much, and less than you hope. The design draws on a Japanese asset portfolio. The profits feed cash reserves that are controlled by a Japanese entity. The entire endeavor supports a thick cadre of high value corporate jobs at HQ in Japan. You’d be helping so much more if you bought a similar vehicle from an American firm with all these layers of economic activity supporting the domestic entity.
This is old mid 20th century thinking. The reality is that we have a global economy. What that means is if the Asians trash our economy and send us back to the stone age, then we can’t buy their products and they join us in Flintstoneland. It’s that simple. All you have to do is look at what happened when we had our little sub-prime problem. It’s one single global wide economy.
If you’re concerned about your neighbor, then buy from that neighbor’s employer regardless of where the neighbor’s employer’s headquarters is located. If money goes to Japan – so what! Your neighbor is still getting paid out of the transaction. Maybe the executive in Japan will take his money and invest in your other neighbors start-up company.
Why does everyone seem to forget that most oil is imported. Some individuals get their panties in a twist if someone dares to buy a Prius, but if they buy an F-150 and send all kinds of cash to all of our happy fans in the Middle East, there’s no problem. They seem to think it’s better to help Iran finance new centrifuges rather than allow a Japanese executive a little extra karaoke money.
Another thing to remember is that all of these wonderful manufacturing jobs every wants to save are going start disappearing without even being shipped to Asia. Even Asia will lose manufacturing jobs. Automation advances that will happen over the next decade will consume far more manufacturing jobs than any third world country could dream of taking away.
Ronnie Schreiber:
“‘(although they are offshoring that as fast as possible, GM to Daewoo, Opel and India, and Ford to Ford of Europe).’
You keep repeating this even though people who work in design and R&D for GM and Ford have said that it isn’t true. Both companies have rationalized their design/r&d to leverage their global resources. In both cases the global teams are driven by the HQs in the Detroit area.”
That’s the point, Ford, GM and Chrysler will continue to rationalize their design/r&d to leverage their global resources. They have no loyalty the United States, and will engineer and design their cars wherever it is cheapest to do so. That will be the US less and less often.
Mulally has said that the future of Ford is building cars designed and engineered by Ford of Europe in the US, and one of most important future GM products is the heavily Korean designed Daewoo Lacetti Chevrolet Cruze. Another is the Australian designed and engineered Camaro, which I believe will be built in Canada.
Offshoring design and R&D makes business sense, but does nothing to help the US, which is why the US government should not be in the business of bailing out companies that will design and build cars in whatever country it is cheapest to do so.
Also, the Detroit automakers have already tried your idea of guaranteeing resale value. It’s nothing new, it’s called leasing, and it helped to bankrupt GMAC.
Phil Ressler:
You make a big deal about the Detroit automakers being US owned, but we should wish they were not. The horrible mismanagement of the Detroit automakers has destroyed at least 100 billion dollars of American shareholders’ money in the last 10 to 20 years, and additional billions of American bondholders’ money. I really wish those losses were incurred by foreigners instead.
Henry Ford’s company is worth around $5 billion, with the industry bailed out. His friend Thomas Edison’s company, General Electric, is worth $157 Billion. GM is worth around what it was in 1950, in absolute terms, not adjusted for the massive inflation that has occured since then. GM is worth 1/13 of what it was worth in 1965, also in absolute terms. And that is with a bailout. The stock chart is shocking. This destruction of American wealth is just a joke to the Detroit automakers; sorry, we goofed, well actually it wasn’t our fault anyway. Where’s our money?
The Detroit automakers are multinational corporations that don’t give a damn about the US except when asking for what will be never ending bailouts.
The transplants design and engineer local market cars like the Ridgline and Venza in the US, they build most of their major product lines in the US, and they rely heavily on US suppliers, which is one of the reasons that a disorganized bankruptcy of the big-3 was so scary for the Japanese. Suppliers are responsible for much more value added and R&D than they used to be, so the use of local suppliers creates a lot of local value. Between suppliers, factory construction, electrical and other energy use and employee wages I would guess that most transplants’ cars leave much more than half their value in the US. And that is for the transplants’ cars do not have any of their development and engineering done in the US.
As I have said over before. Anyone that is upset about the foreign ownership of the successful automakers can buy them. Investing money, especially in taking over the stock of successful foreign companies, is much more patriotic than buying a depreciating asset. Especially since that depreciating asset comes from a multinational corporation, with no national loyalties, that simply happens to be, to the misfortune of US investors and taxpayers, headquartered in Detroit.
@ Bridge2far
And for the record, the foreign driver is still in the minority.
On the road right now maybe, but GM/Chrysler/Ford are somewhat significantly less than 50% of the new car buying market, so buying a non-domestic means you’re in the majority.
Still, don’t let the facts get in the way of a Detroit excuse. If you’re the Bigish3 it’s OK not to understand sliding market share and low repeat buyer rates because it’s someone elses’ problem.
…many here are coming up with ridiculous statements to help them rationalize their mistakes.
Surely, you’re talking about Rick, Bob or Ron aren’t you????
“Surely, you’re talking about Rick, Bob or Ron aren’t you????
Ah, the best and brightest…
The other hilarious bit is that you’re advocating for paying some american exec >$10mil compensation
Rick Wagoner took home $3.5 million in ’07. Mulally made a lot more at Ford but then he’s done a great job there.
Why does everyone seem to forget that most oil is imported. Some individuals get their panties in a twist if someone dares to buy a Prius, but if they buy an F-150 and send all kinds of cash to all of our happy fans in the Middle East, there’s no problem. They seem to think it’s better to help Iran finance new centrifuges rather than allow a Japanese executive a little extra karaoke money.
Most of our imported oil comes from Canada, Mexico and that little shit Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. I think about 12% comes from the Middle East, none from Iran.
On the road right now maybe, but GM/Chrysler/Ford are somewhat significantly less than 50% of the new car buying market, so buying a non-domestic means you’re in the majority.
The domestics’ market share in October was 55%. In November it was 57%. I’d say that 5-7% is significantly more than 50%. GM continues to sell about 24,000 vehicles a month more than Toyota, and Ford and Chrysler each continue to outsell Honda and Nissan.
@Ronnie Schreiber :
Most of our imported oil comes from Canada, Mexico and that little shit Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. I think about 12% comes from the Middle East, none from Iran.
According to the DOE/EIA, Saudi Arabia is number 2 behind Canada. While we don’t directly import oil from Iran, increased consumption drives up the price and increases the amount of money flowing into their coffers.
Rick Wagoner took home $3.5 million in ‘07. Mulally made a lot more at Ford but then he’s done a great job there.
So I guess even you’re admitting all the stock is worthless?
And I assume by “great job” you mean not a total failure.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-autopay3-2008dec03,0,5863676.story
@ Ronnie
57%??? WTF? Where are you getting your numbers from?
U.S. total vehicle sales by make, Nov. & YTD
Maybe I can’t read, but the best I can get to is 36% YTD, and 34% for Nov. Only Ford have shown some improvement at the expense of GM/Chrysler.
I felt SO patriotic today, and I should have, because it was devoted to my D3 machines. I picked up a new a/c compressor for my Lincoln. I picked up parts for the GM engines in my boat. I picked up parts for my Chevy Silverado. My Cadillac needed nothing because the Northstar is shot and I keep it around solely because I don’t have the heart to junk it yet. And I did all I this running around in my Toyota.
windswords :
December 30th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Thanks Ronnie Schreiber, I didn’t have time to look this article up, but I knew something wasn’t right. ‘Lacher describes his impression of American cars as being “designed and put together by committee – a bunch of parts cobbled together. The steering wheel felt as if it were just sticking out of the dashboard. The gas and brake pedals seemed mere appendages to the floor. The seats were uncomfortable frames covered with cheap cloth. This wasn’t a car; it was a homemade personal computer!’ I’m thinking, WTF American car is he writing about, something made in 1974? Looks like I was right.
Take a look at a calendar.
Now, note what year it is. See? Not quite 2009.
Despite this, his description sounds identical to the 2009 Pontiac G6 I drove home this evening. Yes, a 2009. Barely even available on dealer lots yet.
The engine, transmission, interior, exterior, and features all are subpar compared to its competition (Accord, Camry… Well, actually, that’s what Pontiac claimed when the G6 was launched a few years ago. Now, it seems they’re fishing for Civic/Corolla buyers with a space-per-dollar hook). The only – and I mean only – thing that I found positive about the car was the suspension tuning, which despite this being an $18 grand four-cylinder, made it feel more substantial (heavier and better damped) on the highway than most four-cylinder sedans. It hadn’t an ounce of driving character, just felt substantial moving in a straight line at 65 mph on a smooth, dry road.
Some car. Must be swaying buyers by the tens.
Yes, it was an example of the 76% of G6s sold to fleets – a Hertz rental. The old “it’s an abused rental car” excuse doesn’t apply, though. It had 968 miles on it at the end of my journey.
So I guess even you’re admitting all the stock is worthless?
It doesn’t have to be worth zero for Wagoner’s options to have no value to him, it just has to be trading below his option price.
I’m not trying to defend GM. I just have a low tolerance for BS. The Detroit-can-do-no-right crowd can say things that have no basis in reality.
You will note that with or without the word option, the point remains unchanged.
Bridge2far :
I would feel embarrased to drive an import-especially these days. All the nonsense that the domestics aren’t as good is pure unadulterated BS. And all the other justification phrases like “Aveo from Korea” is a smokescreen to the obvious guilt felt by many here.
I absolutely LOVE statements like this. They remind me of Still Technically President Bush, and his adorable assertions that We Are Not In A Recession, Dammit. Obvious guilt! Ha! I could just eat you up. <3
It’s one thing for someone to get sufficiently deep in denial and make the claim that, say, Chevy and Toyota are neck-and-neck in quality…but to expect we (the reader) to do the same is along the lines of insisting to grown adults that Santa Claus really is real after all. (I apologize to any 5-year-olds who are reading this topic – he’s not. Don’t worry, you’ll still get presents.)
No amount of smarmy tone is going to change the fact that your fellow Americans’ brains do work. No amount of “Initial Quality” surveys is going to stop us from thinking “Gee, my dear old mother’s Freestar vomited out its fuel pump at 37,000 miles, while my xB has rolled along for fifty thousand, trouble-free! And the xB was ten grand cheaper! Golly, that says something!”
In a question of who to believe – my own experience, or the condescending guy on the Internet – it’s a pretty easy decision. And I imagine my experience isn’t just a fluke.
True story on the Freestar, btw. I also have a friend who’s rebuilding his Impala’s “heavy duty” transmission after 57K, if you’d prefer a GM flavor to your rebuttal.
Lastly: the Aveo IS from Korea (and it is a giant pile of crap). How is that smokescreen?
57%??? WTF? Where are you getting your numbers from?
http://www.autoblog.com/category/by-the-numbers/
However, I realize now that I left off some of the smaller manufacturers, so my numbers are skewed high. GM outsold Toyota in November and Ford & Chrysler each sold more cars than Honda or Nissan.
Looking at the link you provided, though, I don’t know how you came up with 34%, since for Nov. that chart has the domestics with a 48.3% market share, and YTD 48.2%.
YTD:
GM 22.1%
Ford 15.1%
Chrysler 11.0%
It’s possible he only counted cars not trucks.
And if you look at the lower bottom corner, it’s clear in 2007 detroit had 51.1 overall vs 47.4 in 2008. Quite a drop.
Despite this, his description sounds identical to the 2009 Pontiac G6 I drove home this evening. Yes, a 2009. Barely even available on dealer lots yet.
The engine, transmission, interior, exterior, and features all are subpar compared to its competition
So you believe that “subpar” is “identical” to “The steering wheel felt as if it were just sticking out of the dashboard. The gas and brake pedals seemed mere appendages to the floor. The seats were uncomfortable frames covered with cheap cloth.”?
If that’s the case, then even Mr. Larcher disagrees with you about the G6:
And an astonishing thing happened more frequently: I started to become impressed by the American cars I rented. I even toyed with the idea of actually owning a Pontiac G6
The lesson for tonight, students, is to look up the words “sub par”, “identical” and “hyperbole”.
@ Ronnie
Sorry, my mistake. I did know the numbers were under 50%, but then proceeded to total only the car column.
@ Agenthex
Thanks.
LOL. So, you don’t mind if it’s for the europeans?
The other hilarious bit is that you’re advocating for paying some american exec >$10mil compensation vs ~$1mil for the japanese one as if he’ll reciprocate (did he pay you off?). I know which one represents better value.
I used a Japanese example in response to a Toyota-related question. There’s nothing Euro-centric about my answer. Stretch for a Cobalt — hell, you can get a good deal on a Dodge now — over an Aveo.
If American’s get distracted by the compensation practices of American corporations compared to those in Japan, they will miss the much bigger picture. Rick Wagoner’s multi-million dollar compensation is a symbolic target but it is materially inconsequential to the domestic social value of buying a competitive domestic car.
That sort of thinking doesn’t connect with reality. Many people have been previously burned by the D3 and will never go back. It doesn’t matter if there is a competitive car made by a domestic automaker out there or not, they had a horrible experience and they aren’t going to fooled again. Are you saying it is their responsibility to try the D3 again because they’ve won some award from a magazine they don’t read? No, it is the D3’s fault for losing that customer with crappy product in days gone by.
Yup, life’s a risk. There has to be a statute of limitations on how long a prior bad experience drives one’s behavior when there are larger questions of greater good involved.
Phil
I’m afraid your argument doesn’t hold water in today’s ultra-globalized car market. What if I buy an “import” like a Saab 9-3? It’s on a Malibu platform and has GM engines, but it’s built in Sweden. Or is it somehow better to buy a Saab 9-7X, on a GM SUV platform with a Corvette engine?
Same goes for Volvo on Ford’s side. Their cars share plenty of components with both their parent company and Mazda.
To say that you should only buy a purely American car built only in America is to really limit yourself.
Exactly. Americans should consider limiting themselves while a sustainable balance is found. There would be no bailout needed if buyers of imported products having no advantage over competitive domestic alternatives simply bought from the D3. If you’re interested in not having to pay huge unemployment benefits, large bailout funds, etc., what possible reason is there for an American to buy a Camry or Accord over a Malibu, Fusion or Taurus, for example; or a Tundra over a Silverado, F150 or RAM? Or a wide range of luxury cars over a Cadillac? Now, clearly lots of people will claim personal reasons, or some prior hurt, vehicle preference, driving feel, or whatever. But there’s no denying that this problem can be largely solved even at this late date by an objectively-driven shift in market share toward the competitive products by the D3, even in a constrained market.
We don’t want our government trying to solve a business problem if possible. That we are in this mess is shared by consumer intransigence along with boneheaded management and business practices by the companies involved. Like it or not, that’s the reality. This gulf between producers and consumers is much wider than warranted by the facts, but lack of vision on both sides threatens to hang everyone.
This is old mid 20th century thinking. The reality is that we have a global economy. What that means is if the Asians trash our economy and send us back to the stone age, then we can’t buy their products and they join us in Flintstoneland. It’s that simple. All you have to do is look at what happened when we had our little sub-prime problem. It’s one single global wide economy.
The intelligentsia always believes things have changed more thoroughly than they have. No kidding, we have a global economy. That’s not a rebuttal to the reality that we have nations, national economies, national currencies, local production, local dependencies and accounts to be settled between national economies. And nations that are operating as independent polities. The globalists and free market purists damn near always miss the politics in the equation.
The sub-prime problem showed the *linkage* between national economies, not that global economy trumps national stakes. In fact, if you believed the “21st Century” faddists 9 months ago, the smug view of globalists was that China, India, the BRICs and the EU had finally become unlinked from the prior dependency on the US economic engine. Well, so much for that. We have an economy of many national units lubricated to behave globally with progressively greater frequency and efficacy, but that’s not the same an economy that’s truly global.
Why does everyone seem to forget that most oil is imported. Some individuals get their panties in a twist if someone dares to buy a Prius, but if they buy an F-150 and send all kinds of cash to all of our happy fans in the Middle East, there’s no problem. They seem to think it’s better to help Iran finance new centrifuges rather than allow a Japanese executive a little extra karaoke money.
I have no issue with the Japanese, or executive. The issue is not to deny him or his efforts to sell here, but to direct purchasing power to shape your world to your objectives, including a holistic view of your interests.
Another thing to remember is that all of these wonderful manufacturing jobs everyone wants to save are going start disappearing without even being shipped to Asia. Even Asia will lose manufacturing jobs. Automation advances that will happen over the next decade will consume far more manufacturing jobs than any third world country could dream of taking away.
Automation has been supplanting human labor for more than 200 years. We can assimilate that kind of change, yet production tends to persist in other ways. Manufacturing underpins a broad middle class even today, and it is still a strong mobility engine for a country that will continue to grow.
As I have said over before. Anyone that is upset about the foreign ownership of the successful automakers can buy them. Investing money, especially in taking over the stock of successful foreign companies, is much more patriotic than buying a depreciating asset. Especially since that depreciating asset comes from a multinational corporation, with no national loyalties, that simply happens to be, to the misfortune of US investors and taxpayers, headquartered in Detroit.
Patriotism is not part of my argument. I do not advocate buying a car or anything else on patriotic appeal. My reasons are social & economic self-interest expanded by communitarian concerns. The destruction of stock value by the D3, while heinous, is socially and politically absorbable. Every investor assumes that risk anyway. Massive, precipitous, middle-class manufacturing unemployment is not sustainable with anywhere near the same equanimity as market capital valuation losses.
Phil
Yup, life’s a risk. There has to be a statute of limitations on how long a prior bad experience drives one’s behavior when there are larger questions of greater good involved.
There is no statute of limitations. If you get screwed out of thousands of dollars, you can’t expect someone to come back just for “greater good”. The D3 burned their bridges to too many customers. It’s their responsibility, not the customers.
Ressler: “There would be no bailout needed if buyers of imported products having no advantage over competitive domestic alternatives simply bought from the D3.”
There would be no bailout needed if Detroit hadn’t built crap for 20 years while Toyota and Honda busted their butts to build good cars.
If Detroit hadn’t driven their customers away, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
The responsibility is ENTIRELY Detroit’s.
Ressler: “Stretch for a Cobalt.”
Somehow, that’s really funny.
But it’s also probably a symptom of a more fundamental problem… Can Detroit build a small car profitably? The conventional wisdom is “no,” they seem to need many sales with large margins on large vehicles to sustain an unsupportable small-car business practice. But we can suspect that Toyota and Honda can build small cars profitably because that’s mostly what they sell and they make money.
And this difference is Detroit’s own fault, too. Toyota and Honda are not staffed by magicians… anything they can do, Detroit could do. If they put the time and energy into it.
So, if Detroit can’t build small cars profitably, it probably helps them more to buy your small cars elsewhere.
Which is what I plan to do.
By the way, Ressler, must we revisit “competitive” again and again and again? Detroit may have vehicles with similar curb appeal to the Camry and Accord but without a long record for reliability or a killer warranty to compensate for that lack, Detroit’s cars are not competitive.
Ronnie Schreiber :
December 31st, 2008 at 2:28 am
Despite this, his description sounds identical to the 2009 Pontiac G6 I drove home this evening. Yes, a 2009. Barely even available on dealer lots yet.
The engine, transmission, interior, exterior, and features all are subpar compared to its competition
So you believe that “subpar” is “identical” to “The steering wheel felt as if it were just sticking out of the dashboard. The gas and brake pedals seemed mere appendages to the floor. The seats were uncomfortable frames covered with cheap cloth.”?
If that’s the case, then even Mr. Larcher disagrees with you about the G6:
And an astonishing thing happened more frequently: I started to become impressed by the American cars I rented. I even toyed with the idea of actually owning a Pontiac G6
The lesson for tonight, students, is to look up the words “sub par”, “identical” and “hyperbole”.
It seems you’ve attacked the words I used instead of the idea I floated.
Simple question: if the G6 is so competitive, why isn’t it selling in volumes even close to the Accord and Camry? Hell, even the Impala and Cobalt?
Why are Avis and Hertz its biggest customers?
I subscribe to a noted auto rental industry trade magazine. The G6 was number four in the top five most-registered nameplates by car rental companies in 2008, despite not being anywhere near the top five selling cars of 2008. Something like 30,000 of them were registered.
If they were as hot as you say, why weren’t they selling through dealer lots? Don’t give me the old “no advertising” excuse, either. I see at least one G6 commercial per day despite only watching TV for perhaps an hour per day.
For the record, four of the five top rental car registrations were not only domestics, but GMs (Cobalt, Impala, G6, Malibu). The lone non-domestic is the drastically over-produced Hyundai Sonata.
All five of the top rental truck regstrations were domestic (F-150, Silverado, Ram, Sierra, Colorado).
All five of the top rental SUV registrations were domestic (Torrent, Equinox, Edge, Escape, Explorer).
I don’t remember vans, but I know that the Dodge Caravan, Chrysler Town and Country, and Ford Econoline (duh) took three of the five spots. Considering GM doesn’t make vans anymore and Ford doesn’t make minivans, that’s saying quite a bit.
Notice that, excepting the Cobalt and Impala, which thanks to massive fleet sales (over 35,000 last year for each) are in the top ten best-selling cars list for the industry overall, none of the others is the best-selling even in its own category. Why is the Honda CR-V the best-selling SUV without being in the top five SUV rental car registrations? Same for Camry and Accord in the car sector. And Odyssey in the minivan sector.
@ KalapanaBlack
It’s been a few years, but I believe Toyota will not sell direct to rental companies, but perhaps GM do? It’s certainly the case in Australia where you really only see majority GM/Holden, Hyundai and Ford. Same for the taxi companies.
BTW, Happy New Year everyone! Let’s hope it’s a better one. Australia is ahead of the rest of the world of course, but just behind New Zealand our mortal enemies (joking).
PeteMoran :
December 31st, 2008 at 10:11 am
@ KalapanaBlack
It’s been a few years, but I believe Toyota will not sell direct to rental companies, but perhaps GM do? It’s certainly the case in Australia where you really only see majority GM/Holden, Hyundai and Ford. Same for the taxi companies.
BTW, Happy New Year everyone! Let’s hope it’s a better one. Australia is ahead of the rest of the world of course, but just behind New Zealand our mortal enemies (joking).
Lots of people bring up the fact that numbers reported by the manufacturers are skewed, as most (GM and Ford included) sell directly to fleets while a few keep their reported fleet numbers down (notoriously, Honda and Toyota) by selling to dealers first then to fleets through the dealers.
These numbers are based on rental company registrations, not sales numbers from companies or dealers, so they include the cars that are actually in service, regardless of where they were bought.
Toyota does sell directly to fleets, as well. I believe something like 35,000 vehicles in MY 2008. I don’t have the numbers right in front of me.
Ford has really reduced, below 45,000 sales last year.
The top three brands (don’t recall the corporate breakdowns) were Chevrolet (>90,000 rentals), Dodge (>80,000 rentals), and Chrysler (>60,000 rentals).
The lowest, in order, were Acura (with two registrations), Smart (four registrations), and a tie between Mini and Scion, with five each.
The discussion here only reinforces why GM is doomed.
For the sake of argument, let’s pretend for just a moment that the Detroit Defenders are right on all counts. Detroit quality is just perfect, consumers are stupid, buying cars from people with black hair and accented English is anti-American, yadda, yadda, yadda.
Now that we’ve granted you all of your points about the 2.8’s alleged superiority, guess what? It isn’t working for you. You’ve tried this shtick for thirty years, in an increasingly shrill pitch, and it’s working less well by the day.
Recycling the same ineffective tactics over and over again doesn’t make much sense, even if you do hold the moral high ground.
If Detroit’s products are perfect but consumers are stupid, then here’s a wacky idea — make a perfect product that all of these stupid people like enough to buy. Since everyone who isn’t a Detroit Defender is an idiot, it should be easy to fool the idiots and sell them products that idiots like.
The fact that Detroit hasn’t figured out how to fool alleged morons since Nixon was president speaks poorly of Detroit, not the alleged morons. It’s supposed to be easy to dupe morons, remember? After all, they are morons. So go fool the morons.
Your mission, Detroit Defenders, should you choose to accept it, is to craft a plan to fool the millions of unpatriotic JD Power-crazed morons who have been fooled by the furriners. Since they’re fools, fooling them oughta be easy, especially when you have the Wagoner brain trust to lead the charge. Go concoct a plan for that, because this holistic/ patriotism/ Consumer Reports is evil routine obviously hasn’t done you a hell of a lot of good.
Kalapanablack,
If you’re unsure who’s dumping into fleets and who isn’t, look at the back end of fleet purchases.. fleet sales.
In MY 2008, the Camry easily outsold the Impala (by 15K units/month or so). When I look up used 2008 vehicles for sale in my area, I find 40 Camrys available and 425 Impalas available. That’s quite a difference and it’s caused by Impalas coming off short-term fleet leases.
Many of GM’s monthly press releases over the past few years have pointed to significant reductions in fleet sales. That was mostly obfuscation and this is the result of GM’s real fleet sales policies… after a year on the road, ten times as many Impalas for sale as Camrys… and at a $5K lower asking price.
I am astonished how what type of vehicle someone drives is somehow patriotic, but all other aspects of consumerism aren’t. Perfect example, a family member remodeled his kitchen and decided on quartz countertops. One manufacturer is located in rural Minnesota, the other in Brazil. He went with the foreign one because “it was cheaper.” Meanwhile this same person lectures me about driving a Honda (Built in Ohio). Excuse me?
If the American consumer gave a damn about buying “American” Wal-Mart would not be the largest retailer in the world. But I’m willing to bet you that your average Wal-Mart parking lot has more “American” made cars than foreign ones.
More American manufacturing and American jobs would be saved by boycotting the thousands of imported goods on the retail shelves across this country than by buying so-called American cars.
But the truth is Americans care about getting things cheap, which in turn means they can have more stuff. This is not inheriantly bad. It has much to do with our high standard of living, even if much of the retail products from Asia are sometimes of questionable quality. Today I can have 3 televisions instead of 1, etc. etc.
Same goes for vehicles. Only difference is since these are “durable” goods the consumer isn’t only looking at the original purchase price, but the total cost of ownership, right down to resale. The consumer is flocking to the lowest cost, and why I drive a Honda over the several “American” cars I’ve owned in the past. It’s cheaper to own, bar none.
Americans will buy American if it is the car they want and feel they can trust the company it is made by. It is as simple as that. Think of how many people were screwed with all the discount mania, new models being dropped after one product cycle, names being changed after one year, etc. I don’t think it is as much a reliability issue as it is now a trust issue.
Mulally basically acknowledged this when he said “We used to build it and expect people to come.” He went on to say that Ford is now focusing just on Ford and designing what people want. On the surface, it looks like the Fiesta and new Focus will be nice cars. I think if people have confidence in Ford, they will give these cars a look.
But to expect me to spend $30k for a car that is designed poorly and then pay for management’s poor decisions in terms of resale is ridicules.
KixStart :
December 31st, 2008 at 11:04 am
Kalapanablack,
If you’re unsure who’s dumping into fleets and who isn’t, look at the back end of fleet purchases.. fleet sales.
In MY 2008, the Camry easily outsold the Impala (by 15K units/month or so). When I look up used 2008 vehicles for sale in my area, I find 40 Camrys available and 425 Impalas available. That’s quite a difference and it’s caused by Impalas coming off short-term fleet leases.
Many of GM’s monthly press releases over the past few years have pointed to significant reductions in fleet sales. That was mostly obfuscation and this is the result of GM’s real fleet sales policies… after a year on the road, ten times as many Impalas for sale as Camrys… and at a $5K lower asking price.
Precisely. If anyone is interested, I have the magazine at home (I’m at work now, in fact). It has model breakdowns, manufacturer breakdowns, etc. It’s really got a wealth of information, though most of it (as it should) relates to the rental companies themselves. But it’s got actual, real numbers from the rental companies’ operations, not from GM’s “gloss-over” press releases.
I don’t have past issues, but 90,000 rental sales from Chevrolet alone is quite a bit. Probably up near ten percent of total production for the brand.
It’s higher at other brands, such as Dodge’s 80,000 rental sales, Chryslers 60,000 rental sales, and Saturns 25,000 rental sales.
I got worn down and tired from reading all of the same comments over and over; so, I skipped to the end to add my same old, same old comment. My wife and I own an ’04 Mazda6s, a 95 Cobra Mustang, a 68 Mustang, and a 58 Chevy Apache. I have owned a Dodge Aries K, a Nissan Sentra Wagon, a Mazda RX7, a Nissan 240SX, and a Saturn Vue. The worst of those cars, the one that cost me the most money was the Saturn Vue, and it would take a lot to get me to buy a new GM vehicle. I’m supposed to feel sorry for the GM employees losing their jobs (including my brother-in-law)? How bad did they feel for me when I took a $7,000 bath on that POS Saturn (well designed, very poorly executed)? I do not owe any responsibility to keep any one employed. The responsibility rests in the offices of the decision makers at these companies. They owe their employees (and share holders). It is their responsibility to keep the company healthy and productive. NOT MINE!
Bridge2far:
“And as I said earlier, many here are coming up with ridiculous statements to help them rationalize their mistakes. It’s OK. Next time, man up and buy American! Don’t be ashamed of your country. Be proud.”
You’re kidding me right? Who is ‘rationalizing their mistakes’? So you mean that buying a ‘foreign’ car is a mistake? Give me a break!
This has nothing to do with being ashamed of my country OR “manning up”. This has everything to do with buying the product that best meets my needs AND wants AND does so at the lowest overall cost of ownership.
The stunning ignorance of Detroit apologists never ceases to amaze! It’s the management of these companies that has run them into the ground! How can you not see that? Like I’ve said before, I watched my dad “man up” for two decades and he paid dearly for it! I still have nightmares about Ford headgaskets and transmissions – there is no statute of limitations to this effect. That’s just a convenient way to ignore the quality issues of the past. And as many have pointed out, many of these experiences, although not my family’s, have been within the last few years.
In my recent purchases, I tried to research every car company known to man, both foreign and domestic, but time and time again it has been a foreign car that checks all the right boxes.
My wife wanted a small, economical hatchback to replace her aging Camry in early 2007. So I researched everything under the sun. What American offerings were even worth a second glance? I tried, but the product just wasn’t there. I’m such an awful American, though, I bought Japanese. I should be so ashamed of myself. It’s my fault the D2.8 didn’t offer a vehicle that met my needs.
I should be so ashamed of myself. It’s my fault the D2.8 didn’t offer a vehicle that met my needs.
You obviously have unreasonable needs and need to be re-educated.
I used a Japanese example in response to a Toyota-related question. There’s nothing Euro-centric about my answer.
So the focus is not mostly a euro design.
.
If American’s get distracted by the compensation practices of American corporations compared to those in Japan, they will miss the much bigger picture. Rick Wagoner’s multi-million dollar compensation is a symbolic target but it is materially inconsequential to the domestic social value of buying a competitive domestic car.
Sure, the absolute figure is inconsequential, but it’s indicative of the relative value you get.
“I’m such an awful American, though, I bought Japanese. I should be so ashamed of myself.”
No. You are not an awful American. Just not a very loyal one. You need to get over the image thing in my opinion. It’s OK to drive a Chevrolet. Or a Ford. No matter what your circle of influence thinks. Support your country’s manufacturers for goodness sake.
Detroit quality is just perfect, consumers are stupid, buying cars from people with black hair and accented English is anti-American, yadda, yadda, yadda.
Pch101, that’s a strawman argument with the added frisson of an accusation of racism.
…convinced average family that SUV is “must have”…
As if average families had no choice in the matter.
Same argument as with tobacco companies. Clever commercials about safety of “truck with leather” = cleaver commercials about tobacco products 40 years ago. Sure, sure, people always have a choice…
And lobbying government so SUVs would not be classified as passenger cars and would remain beyond CAFE and gas guzzler tax. Just bringing HUMMER to life is enough for me.
Yes, Toyota/Lexus has SUVs. But they also worked on hybrids. As did Honda. Meanwhile, GM was working hard “inventing” HUMMER. Awesome, just awesome.
Before Ford Volvo had much more interesting cars with much better mileage. 15/24 in a Volvo wagon? I consider Ford cramming large 6 cyl into Volvos intentionally – so people would buy Explorers instead “oh, same mileage, but so much bigger and can tow…”
Driver 23-
Are you saying the big 3 put a hypnotic trance on the public to induce them to buy suv’s? Amazing. Your astute observation is appreciated. Especially how Volvo made interesting cars…
that’s a strawman argument with the added frisson of an accusation of racism.
Right. We all know that there’s no racism in the Detroit Defender community: https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/ford-dealer-japanese-cars-rice-ready-not-road-ready/
In any case, you sidestepped my point, so let me restate it. To date, here’s the Detroit Defenders score card:
-The patriotism guilt-trip thing hasn’t worked
-The don’t-believe-Consumer-Reports routine has flopped miserably
-The consumers-are-bigots-and-idiots shtick has fallen flat
So what your next move? Maybe y’all ought to have a different plan, because from here, it’s pretty obvious that the current plan isn’t working.
If you want to win the hearts and minds of the American car buyer, some new tactics are in order, don’t ya think?
Bridge2far:
“No. You are not an awful American. Just not a very loyal one. You need to get over the image thing in my opinion. It’s OK to drive a Chevrolet. Or a Ford. No matter what your circle of influence thinks. Support your country’s manufacturers for goodness sake.”
You and Phil crack me up. I’m glad you guys can decide, based on automobile purchases, who is and isn’t a “loyal American”.
You really don’t get it, do you? Would I be a ‘loyal American’ if I bought an ‘American’ car assembled in Mexico or Canada? And how exactly did you surmise that it’s an ‘image thing’? Oh, that’s right, because that’s the last line of defense for the Detroit apologist.
I’ll restate all this plainly so you can try to comprehend this time, since it’s clear you didn’t read my first post. In 2007, my wife wanted a small, economical hatch without sacrificing a) interior space, b) safety, or c) amenities. The first-gen Focus was at the end of a 7 year run and had well-known quality and reliability issues. The Aveo is a complete piece of crap. And it’s not even American. The Caliber just looks horrendous, inside and out, and my ‘Loyal American’ brother’s ’06 Pacifica and ’08 Sebring have been in the shop more than his garage.
About the only “American” car worth consideration at the time was the Pontiac Vibe – which is little more than a rebadged Toyota Matrix. And its fuel economy just wasn’t where I wanted it to be in comparison to the Fit and Versa, nor were the options. The Fit was heavily marked up at the time, so we bought a Versa that has voice-activated Bluetooth, intelligent keyless ignition, side curtain airbags, and returns 30 MPG in town, all with 50 cubic feet of interior space with the rear seats folded.
Remind me again, how is this an ‘image thing’? What ‘American’ car should I have bought that could have met all our needs?
And why is this ‘Loyal American’ crap only dependent on car purchases? Why not computers? TVs? Stereos? Appliances?
Are you saying the big 3 put a hypnotic trance on the public to induce them to buy suv’s? Amazing.
Indeed. That trance is called advertisement. In case you are not aware, purpose of advertisement is to induce desire to buy stuff – doesn’t matter if you really need it or not. That’s why advertisement of alcohol and tobacco products is heavily regulated. Have a look here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advertisement
It is pretty easy to feed on someone sense of insecurity – there are a lot of products that specifically target this audience. Some companies at least have a bit or moral values not to go there. I am sure Google could make a lot of money on searching free p**n efficiently. But they don’t – they have ‘do no evil’ stance. Detroit wanted every dollar they could make – no matter how. Who do you think lobbied to classify SUVs as trucks so they would not be taxed appropriately to their actual use – as passenger cars?
Your astute observation is appreciated. Especially how Volvo made interesting cars…
Yes, because I owned a few. Not anymore. They used to be frugal and had R models and came with a stick. Check it out: ’97 850R is was 19/26 mpg. That was 10 years ago. Go compare specs on MSN Autos – they keep specs of old cars. ’97 850 wagon has MORE leg room in the rear seat, same shoulder space and has better fuel economy. They were also very reliable.
Detroit quality is just perfect, consumers are stupid, buying cars from people with black hair and accented English is anti-American, yadda, yadda, yadda.
Pch101, that’s a strawman argument with the added frisson of an accusation of racism.
Hey, as long as we’re on the subject, what about nationalism (you know, national socialism? lol) and xenophobia?
—
This whole farce is so transparent:
1. Some large multinations runs factories in the midwest, and builds cars that lose money.
2. Some other large multinations run factories in the south, and builds cars that make money.
But we have to support (1), because they’re our large faceless corps, and they care about us, or something. Really?
I will also note that pretty much none of the vitriol is directed at european manufacturers. Racism much?