After our post on the “1000-DAY BIG THREE PLAN” to save the domestic automakers, TTAC commentators have been wondering about the man behind the website supportthebigthree.com. I’ve just got off the blower with site founder Sid Taylor who, it turns out, is the CEO of an automotive supplier named Set Enterprises. Scanning the site, it turns out the campaigner who would have Americans buy only Chrysler, Ford and GM products has a contract with Toyota. When asked about the apparent contradiction, Mr. Turner said the money involved is so small as to render the contract meaningless. “If I didn’t have Toyota it wouldn’t have any impact on my business.” Besides . . .
“Minority owned suppliers have trouble getting business from Toyota,” the former president of the National Association of Black Automotive Suppliers (NABAS) insists. Not to go too far off-topic, but is Mr. Taylor suggesting that Toyota is racist? “The numbers speak for themselves,” Taylor says. “You can draw your own conclusions.” Not to mention the fact that when it comes to supporting inner city causes, Taylor says “Toyota’s non-existent.”
OK, well, that’s that then. Back to the America first deal . . .
I asked Taylor about another contradiction: supporting American automakers who build cars abroad using foreign workers while eschewing cars built by foreign automakers in America using American workers. “You’ve got to ask yourself a simple question: where do the profits go?”
When I pointed out that the domestics haven’t made any profits for quite some time, Taylor blamed the American consumers, southern tax subsidies, foreign automotive import quotas and government fuel economy regulations for creating an “unfair playing field” that allowed foreign automakers to “build-up an excess war chest.”
So, nothing new there, then.
Taylor also answered the question that’s been vexing me since gamper sent me the link to his site. “When exactly did the thousand days start?” I asked. “January first,” Taylor revealed. Which means we only have 788 days to go before we learn whether Taylor’s campaign can save Chrysler, Ford and GM. Needless to say, we’ll keep you posted.
Only a very small fraction of the cost of the car goes to “profit.” The principal economic impact of selling the car is mostly in the expenses of building it, not in the profit.
Further, as another TTAC regular once pointed out, the transplants are investing in development here, which is tremendous gobs of money. At this point, the cross-border cash flow summary for, say, Hyundai may well be “incoming.”
GM is further internationalizing its operations, so more and more of your “domestic” dollar is spent elsewhere to make other people happy.
And, of course, Chrysler… isn’t it Italian, now?
RF, did Taylor tell you where he got his figures for Toyota’s non support of NABAS suppliers, etc? Where we can go to check this out?
Can’t blame the man for trying.
KixStart
You’re kidding, right?
Robert,
You have a real talent for exposing the nutjobs and fleecers surrounding the car industry. Perhaps we should AskPatty what she thinks of Mr. Taylor’s con game.
She’d probably remind us that 154% of automobiles are purchased by African-American women.
So is the site going to make it a mission to ruin this guy’s business because he holds an opinion that’s unpopular here? I’m sure you could blow his comments out of proportion and see if his point on losing Toyota business is sincere.
Facts can be spun many ways, we all know that. The arguments I constantly see about ‘domestic’ versus ‘foreign’ are great examples. Built here? Profits here? Headquarters here? Which do you choose?
I come down on the side of the home-grown industry being more important to the economy, and here is one reason why . . . commitment to diversity in suppliers. There are many others.
I agree with dkulmacz. There’s no need to make this such a big deal and try to make him seem like a bad guy just because his opinion is unpopular on this site. Everyone has the right to their own opinion.
He may not have given you sources for his facts, but it certainly seems like he has them. He gave many good reasons for his non-support of toyota and I would be very unlikely to doubt him because of his involvement in the business.
I’m sure Toyota is very low on the list of giving support to inner city causes or any American causes for that matter.
In no way am I flaming TTAC, I am just saying that just because he has an opinion that is unpopular on this site does not make him a bad person or a person making up facts.
“August 12th, 2009 at 11:55 am
So is the site going to make it a mission to ruin this guy’s business…”
Well, I think the Big Three have done a pretty good job of destroying this man’s business as it is. No one is protesting his right to try to save his business and to promote his self-interest. It’s just that’s what consumers are doing too, and that hurts the Big Three pretty consisently.
I’m sure Toyota is very low on the list of giving support to inner city causes or any American causes for that matter.
What has the big 3 done for the inner cities? The big 3 are the very reason there’s a need for support in the inner cities of Detroit, Flint, Lansing and Saginaw. They’re the ones who pulled the rug out from under them and moved their factories to other states and countries. Would a big 3 renaissance mean anything to those inner cities? They were all struggling before GM and Chrysler’s demise.
Mr. Taylor sounds more like a “community organizer” than a corporate CEO. His complaint about Toyota not “supporting inner city causes” is a red herring — it’s not the job of a company to support people in the inner city; that’s the job of the people in the inner city with assistance from their local mayor. The job of a car company is to build cars and make a profit for its workers and shareholders, period.
The comment about the domestics not making any profits in response to Mr. Taylor’s complaint that transplant automakers’ profits go overseas and thus don’t help Americans is spot-on! Let’s also not forget the fact that the domestic automakers are not only not sending profits home to Americans, they are bleeding Americans dry via taxpayer-funded bailouts. Which helps Americans more: transplants that send profits overseas or domestics that take money out of the pockets of Americans?
Regarding “commitment to diversity of suppliers”: Sorry, but that’s a racially discriminatory policy. Suppliers who produce better parts or equivalent parts for less money should get the business, not those that are owned by someone with PC pigmentation in his skin.
Mr. Taylor’s incendiary comment about his contract with Toyota being insignificantly small and implying that’s because Toyota’s management is racist is outrageous. These race bullies must not go unchallenged when claiming racism/discrimination is assuredly the cause of things they don’t like in life. Also, considering Mr. Taylor’s lack of business acumen evidenced by his publicly trashing one of his customers, it is not surprising he is not getting more business from Toyota. It’s actually surprising he has any customers at all.
craigefa : What has the big 3 done for the inner cities? The big 3 are the very reason there’s a need for support in the inner cities of Detroit, Flint, Lansing and Saginaw. They’re the ones who pulled the rug out from under them and moved their factories to other states and countries. Would a big 3 renaissance mean anything to those inner cities? They were all struggling before GM and Chrysler’s demise.
I remember, circa 1994, Chrysler built an R&D facility in an urban area near Detroit. Other than that, I’d have to agree with you. After hearing that Metro Detroit schools require kids to bring a host of items normally provided by the school district (IIRC, toilet paper was on the list), I really wonder what the Motown heros do with their money.
Picking up where I left off in the original thread…
I have no problem with the guy wanting to support the American auotmakers; it’s a free country. He can even spew allusions to racist behavior all he wants.
But man up, dude. Don’t hide your “Big 3” push behind a wall, saying “We are an independent organization and are not in anyway affiliated or endorsed by General Motors, Ford Motor Company, or Chrysler, LLC“. Don’t feed me a line – the dealers already do that enough.
If you can’t be honest and up front about the self-interests you have at stake, why the hell should I give a damn about them either?
Minority owned suppliers have trouble getting business from Toyota
That may be true, but the question that needs to be answered is “Why?”.
Toyota will not squeeze suppliers to the same degree. Could it be that non-minority suppliers aren’t willing to stoop as low to get business? If so, why? Could it also be that Toyota doesn’t switch suppliers very often, and keeps relationship with established suppliers, who are more likely to be larger entities owned by old white guys?
Dropping a loaded comment like that without any kind of analysis is a low form of debate.
Not to mention the fact that when it comes to supporting inner city causes, Taylor says “Toyota’s non-existent.”
This might be true, but getting into a “who-pays-off-whom” pissing match can get very ugly, and is often filled with a lot of innuendo, hearsay and outright falsifications. The “Only the Big Three did anything for Katrina victims” meme is the prime example of this.
craigefa….to look at just the auto industry as the ruining factor in inner city life i think is seriously underestimating all that has taken place not only in the manufacturing sector of this country, but in the attitudes of the people that live here. In today’s world, specifically inner city life, people don’t care for anyone or anything but themselves, they don’t want to do the right thing when it is the harder choice, no one wants to put an honests days worth of work in, and most are lazy. A cultural change, not only a lack of jobs, created the inner city problems and i know, because I live in the inner city of Dayton, Ohio, so i have first hand experience with not only GM and factory jobs leaving, but the attitudes of the people living in the inner city.
Also i would blame the reason for the decline in the big three partly on the consumer. I personally have never been burned by any of the American products I have owned, and have never seen interest in the exteriors or interiors of the foreign makes. And for all of the nice touch interiors and quality cars the magazines say the foreign makes produce, I have never been able to find that in my real life experiences. Maybe equal, but certainly not better, not even in a $80,000.00 Lexus LS did i see nice looking, soft touch plastics. I’m not saying the detroit 3 havent made product mistakes and poor products, but i think the media has blown the issue way out of proportion.
And to say the big three has done nothing for inner cities is ignorant. The big three have been around for 100 years or so, and in all that time have done many a great thing to help this country. I dont have facts from an source right now to back that up, but it wouldnt be hard to find it, and ive seen and read it about it myself.
…when it comes to supporting inner city causes, Taylor says “Toyota’s non-existent.”
As it should be.
Toyota business is about buying cars people want to buy, and obtaining a profit. Period.
Let inner city inhabitants support “inner city causes”, if they want to do so.
“Minority owned suppliers have trouble getting business from Toyota…You can draw your own conclusions.”
I draw my own conclussions: If that is true, “Minority owned suppliers” (whatever that means) are inefficient.
BTW, Toyota is a “minority owned” manufacturer.
I’m not a Toyota employee, and they’re smart enough to defend themselves, but for the record….
http://www.bdrusa.org/members.php
Toyota in one of only about 15 companies in the country that spend more than a billion dollars a year with certified minority companies.
Mr. Taylor can also speak for himself, but while his contracts with Toyota may be insignificant, obviously for a lot of other minority owned companies they’re not. If I’m legal counsel to Mr. Taylor, I’d recommend he retract his statement and not do any other interviews.
Again, for the record, the legal certification body for minority owned companies is the National Minority Supplier Development Council (www.NMSDC.org). Sorry, never heard of Mr. Taylor’s NABAS.
“You’ve got to ask yourself a simple question: where do the profits go?”
They are taxed by the government of origin, true, but beside that go to shareholders who can really hail from any country, and to executives, who are grossly overpaid in the US compared to most other countries, and in particular Japan.
When I pointed out that the domestics haven’t made any profits for quite some time, Taylor blamed the American consumers, southern tax subsidies, foreign automotive import quotas and government fuel economy regulations for creating an “unfair playing field” that allowed foreign automakers to “build-up an excess war chest.”
Government fuel economy regulations exist in all developed countries, and they’re actually tougher in China than in the U.S. And GM is doing well in China.
American consumers exercise their freedom of choice. Do I personally agree with those choices? Considering the amount of SUV and cars with needlessly large engines purchased, no. But since all manufacturers offer them in the U.S., the Big 3 are not at a disadvantage.
Don’t really know about the southern states tax subsidies, so I won’t comment on that.
He may not have given you sources for his facts, but it certainly seems like he has them. He gave many good reasons for his non-support of toyota and I would be very unlikely to doubt him because of his involvement in the business.
I’m sure Toyota is very low on the list of giving support to inner city causes or any American causes for that matter.
Sigh – you believe that Global Warming is man-made too, don’t you?
New York, NY–(HISPANIC PR WIRE)–June 14, 2006–Today, Toyota was named among the Best Companies for Diversity by Black Enterprise, to be included in the July 2006 issue of the magazine. With 40 companies included this year, the list recognizes companies that have demonstrated significant representation of African Americans and other ethnic minorities in areas including procurement, corporate boards, senior management, and the total workforce. This was the first time that Toyota has participated in the Black Enterprise survey, which looks at over 1,000 of America’s largest publicly traded companies, as well as global companies with significant U.S. operations.
http://www.hispanicprwire.com/news.php?=in&id=6424
Your turn to find one for GM, or Chrysler.
Until you do, I get to speculate about why I think this guy doesn’t like Toyota….
Here’s a link that’s interesting reading….
(NB: Toyota doesn’t appear until paragraph #12,but you’ll find the reference relevant to this discussion. You can skip straight there if you want)
http://www.judicialwatch.org/cases/82/complaint.htm
KixStart:
“And, of course, Chrysler… isn’t it Italian, now?”
No.
Unless you subscribe to the new math and 20% is the same as 100%.
In no particular order:
Toyota
Honda
Ford
General Motors
Chrysler
Johnson Controls
These are the automotive companies that have been named to the Billion Dollar Round Table – $1B USD spent with minority owned companies annually.
This man seems to be upset that HIS company does not get much in Toyota contracts, and in turn is slandering the company.
RF was right to post his comments as they are factually un-true and imply racism where none exists.
I could care less about his website, motivations, or intentions…facts are facts.
See for yourselves:
http://www.bdrusa.org/members.php
YotaCarFan said: Regarding “commitment to diversity of suppliers”: Sorry, but that’s a racially discriminatory policy. Suppliers who produce better parts or equivalent parts for less money should get the business, not those that are owned by someone with PC pigmentation in his skin.
Dead on. If “minorities” really wanted equality, they’d quit bitching about discrimination and would strive to be the best at whatever they do.
I’ve never heard Morgan Freeman, Will Smith, or Bill Cosby complain about being discriminated against.
This concept that a company HAS to have a certain percentage (any percentage) of minority subcontractors (and employees) is just bullshit RACISM at work. As YotaCarFan said, whichever business provides the best overall serviceproducts should get the contract… period.
Lokkii I actually do not think global warming is man made and that you even brought that up based on things is rude.
I am glad you found sources though and i retract some of my statements.
Off topic:
I still do not and never will like any of the transplant companies from Japan simply because I do not like their products and do not find them as “amazing” as the media portrays them to be.
I am college educated and support American products. Even though the imports do build vehicles here and employ Americans, I still realize the unfair practices they have. We aren’t allowed to build and sell nearly the volume of vehicles and products they build here in Japan, so why should we let them? I guess i am just sick of all of the negativity towards America these days and the negativity towards American products when i have never had an issue with the american vehicles i have owned.
OK, I’ll walk right into this, at my own risk, I suppose.
I think I understand the point of Taylor’s site. I could provide a rebuttal for every one of you that have posted a negative comment. For goodness sake, stop drinking the Kool-Aid and check your facts. Psarhjinian & KixStart, you are simply factually incorrect. I am in this industry, Taylor’s comments are right on. Case in point, look-up the following website http://www.millenniumsteelservice.com. One of the largest minority owned suppliers to Toyota. Sounds great, right… Now delve into the ownership, low & behold, it’s owned by… TOYOTA! It’s a front. Welcome to the world of Japanese sourcing that for some unknown reason, nobody wants to tell us.
At what point do we simply choose to become serfs to the rest of the world. The fact is there are two types of people in the world, those who create wealth, and those who support the people that create wealth. And the only way to create wealth is to take something of lesser value, add something to that item and make it something more valuable. The rest of us (and I fully acknowledge being one of them) are paper pushers that simply move around the shells. Our country cannot survive if we do not create value. We give a $700 billion blank check to Wall Street paper pushers who move around the shells and create NO wealth, and then gripe about giving a fraction of that to those who create wealth. The Chinese and Indians have know this, when the heck are we going to figure it out.
Do the US automakers always do the right thing, hey I’m not drinking the kool-aid either, absolutely not. In the 70’s they built junk. They allowed the unions to get out of hand to where the only vehicles they could make a profit on were the pickups & SUVs. Both stupid & irresponsible, but level the playing field. How many $$$ were given by the Japanese gov’t to their manufacturers, how many tax breaks were given by the States of Alabama & Tennessee? How many vehicles are we allowed to export to Japan? I know it’s a trite argument, but get your heads out of the sand & at least recognize both sides of the equation.
And don’t me started on the argument that US Automakers don’t build what Americans. That’s CNN headline blather and pure BS. When gas hit $4.00 per gallon, did we want SUV’s, no, but before that & since, the best selling vehicles… US built pickups & SUVs. Best selling vehicle under Cash for Clunkers — Ford Escape (screw you DOT and your agenda, add up the Escape FWD + Escape AWD + Escape Hybrid). Stop listening to what people tell you that you prefer to buy.
Dump the kool-aid, get the facts and level the playing field. Taylor’s right, wake the heck up!
First point that should be made is that Farago mentioned race not Sid Taylor. It is quite possible that some minority owned businesses lack the capital and manufacturing capabilities Toyota requires. I dont like race baiting and I think Farago could have CHOSEN a better more educated conclusion.
paperpusher
Your assertion about http://www.millenniumsteelservice.com is incorrect. Toyota may be a partial owner, but in order to be a certified MBE by the NMSDC, the company must be 51% minority owned. Many automakers have partnered with small MBE who had the capability, but not the funding. That’s a good thing and produces a win-win for the OEM & the supplier. While some may try to bend the rules with holding companies and fronts, it’s the NMSDC’s job to investigate and certify if a business meets the ownership requirements.
YotaCarFan said “Regarding “commitment to diversity of suppliers”: Sorry, but that’s a racially discriminatory policy. Suppliers who produce better parts or equivalent parts for less money should get the business, not those that are owned by someone with PC pigmentation in his skin.
Mr. Taylor’s incendiary comment about his contract with Toyota being insignificantly small and implying that’s because Toyota’s management is racist is outrageous. These race bullies must not go unchallenged when claiming racism/discrimination is assuredly the cause of things they don’t like in life. Also, considering Mr. Taylor’s lack of business acumen evidenced by his publicly trashing one of his customers, it is not surprising he is not getting more business from Toyota. It’s actually surprising he has any customers at all.”
+1 on both counts.
Apparently, when you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail. When you’re black living in America, everything looks like discrimination.
I for one, am sick of hearing about it.
As for Toyota, GM and Chrysler; guess what?
I’d rather support a company which actually puts jobs INTO my country and returns a profit for shareholders whether they are in my country or not – as opposed to support a Fascist state owned entity such as GM or Chrysler, any day of the week.
Fascism = the unification of business/banks and government.
What did “W” and “BO” both do recently, but that?
Two sides of the same coin. And so, you thought this coin was two different coins? I’ve been saying it is one coin for 3 decades.
People are finally starting to wise up. At least, some of them.
Dead on. If “minorities” really wanted equality, they’d quit bitching about discrimination and would strive to be the best at whatever they do.
They have a point about discrimination, but they misclassified an economic problem as a social one. Forced equality by race is a really nice way to avoid discussing the real problem, which is not that black people are black, but that they’re poor and suffer poor-people problems.
Affirmative action and policy-based racial equality are awful programs, but not because they’re unfair. It’s because they further the culture of victimization on one hand, and on the other allow the wealthy to escape from having to address the income disparity.
I’ve never heard Morgan Freeman, Will Smith, or Bill Cosby complain about being discriminated against.
To be fair, Cosby did make some hay about this in his career as a stand-up. I think Smith has, too. Discrimination does exist and none of those you mention would deny it.
There’s difference, though, in bringing the problems of discimination to light (as, say, Martin Luther King did) and stressing the importance of making it go away, versus using discrimination as a crutch, or worse, as a kind of ethnic get-out-of-jail-free card for what you have suffered, or how you might make others suffer.
There’s a lot of virtue in a culture, but there’s no real virtue to being, and remaining, an angry victim.
Re: paperpusher
As long as we *subsidize* a sub-par product and/or business model, we are doing a dis-service to the American economy as a value added proposition.
Either American companies can be competitive designing and building cars in America or they can’t. Let the sales numbers decide.
Whether it’s using tax dollars, clunker programs, or patriotic purchasing rules we are prolonging the status quo rather than having one strong domestic (looks like Ford) and developing other value-added industries where we actually have an advantage. If Caterpillar hadn’t woken up and fought tooth-and-nail against foreign competition I have no doubt you would be advocating ‘buy american’ for heavy equipment also. But they are the model of a domestic manufacturer who figured out how to compete and THOSE are the types of companies that make our economy stronger…not GM and Chrysler.
Re: loverofcars1969
““Minority owned suppliers have trouble getting business from Toyota,” the former president of the National Association of Black Automotive Suppliers (NABAS) insists.“
Exactly what other conclusion is supposed to be made by this statement? Especially since Toyota meets the standard by which these types of interactions are measured on a macro level…
greenb1ood :
August 12th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Minority does not automatically mean black as Farago should be aware. That combined with the picture of the guy leads the great unwashed to ASSume a racial slant that may or may not be valid. People (whites) tend to ASSume when they see affirmative action that whites are getting the shaft. Where is the proof? We are all in this together folks and the sooner you realize the better. Personally I am proud the guy has a business and kudos to him for it. Wonder if he has any whites on the payroll?
Eastaboga, sorry, 51% is no longer a requirement, rules allow minority % to be as low as 35% now. Having said that, admittedly, my example, Millenium is above the 51% threshold. BUT, what happens when its the 49% interest that provides the capital (directly or indirectly) for the 51% to aquire his interest? Your win-win point works in theory, that is the intent of the rules, but the kiritzu (sorry on the spelling) world, is a closed loop and every supplier knows it. The point of the ownership is NOT to provide a Win-Win for the community & minority suppliers. It’s to make Greenb1ood’s Billion $ roundtable. Gerrnb1ood, look at the suppliers that make up the minority sourcing by Toyota. The % of minority $$$ sourced by Toyota that end up BACK to Toyota would shock you. Don’t fool yourself.
And Greenb1ood, I have no disagreements with the Darwinian approach to capitalism you offer. Lets end ALL the subsidies, tarrifs and import quotas throughout the world and in the State of Alabama and let the chips fall where they may. Let’s face it, prior to the Ch. 11’s of GM & Chrysler, Toyota had a $2,500 per vehicle labor & legacy cost advantage. That allowed Toyota to plow those $$$ back into their R&D, etc. If we rewrite history and argue the GMs & Chryslers made their own bed, OK, but it was those $$$ that built the middle class here, because its the GMs and Chryslers that create wealth. Admittedly, that’s more opinion than fact because there’s no way to prove or disprove that, but regardless, Chapter 11 leveled the playing field, at least in this Country. Let’s see what happens now.
@unseensightz – Also i would blame the reason for the decline in the big three partly on the consumer.
I am not directing this at you personally, you aren’t the first one to make this argument. However I have such a hard time understanding the logic of this one. If all of your American cars have been great, and you have never seen the value in any foreign car that is fine. But could you please explain to me how you take your own opinion and extrapolate that out to indict the American Consumer?
I guess I just look at the world a different way. I may have no interest in a Toyota but the hard facts are obvious: In general Toyota is increasing market share and making money selling cars in America, and the Domestics have been able to do neither for years. I guess I could conclude “everyone is crazy” and turn my attention back to the TV, as you seem to be doing when you “have never seen interest in the exteriors or interiors of the foreign makes.” I am a troubleshooter by nature and profession, so I look at the facts at hand and attempt to understand the “why”. I don’t have to like a Toyota in order to understand why consumers prefer them over a Chevy. And I certainly don’t have to agree with them.
I can’t ask this without sounding all high and mighty(I’m a college drop-out if that makes it better): Is it worth going through life rejecting that which you do not understand? Or aren’t you better served to try to understand why things are the way they are? If GM as a company had tried to do the latter rather than the former, they would have been able to break the code and build cars that people would buy at a high enough price to turn a profit. Conversely if I tell a customer “it shouldn’t work that way” and hang up the phone when they are having a problem it doesn’t serve me or my company very well.
What has the big 3 done for the inner cities? The big 3 are the very reason there’s a need for support in the inner cities of Detroit, Flint, Lansing and Saginaw. They’re the ones who pulled the rug out from under them and moved their factories to other states and countries. Would a big 3 renaissance mean anything to those inner cities? They were all struggling before GM and Chrysler’s demise.
Fail. It is a HELL of a lot more complicated than that. Racism, segregation and more. It can be said that the black community used the Big 3 as a crutch in Detroit…so did the Italians, Poles, Irish, and so on.
paperpusher
I do see that they’ve tweaked the rules as to the 51% to:
“Certification II — Minority Controlled Firm (NMSDC Growth Initiative)
The NMSDC Growth Initiative affects only NMSDC-certified firms that have an opportunity to grow their businesses.
The business must be certified through an NMSDC affiliate (see above) first before it can apply for the Growth Initiative.
A minority business may be certified as a minority “controlled” enterprise if the minority owners own at least 30% of the economic equity* of the firm. This occurs when non-minority institutional investors contribute a majority of the firm’s risk capital (equity). Under this special circumstance, a business may be certified as a minority “controlled” firm if the following criteria are met:
A. Minority management/owners control the day-to-day operations of the firm.
B. Minority management/owners retain a majority (no less than 51%) of the firm’s “voting equity”.
C. Minority owner/s operationally control the board of directors (i.e., must appoint a majority of the board of directors).” (source: http://msdc.adaptone.com/nmsdc/app/template/contentMgmt%2CContentPage.vm/contentid/1959)
I understand your point about Toyota ownership in MBE suppliers, but if it meets the certification rules then you can’t blame them. The win-win I was speaking of wasn’t really about the “community”. I firmly believe that to be sourced by any OEM an MBE should be an outstanding supplier first and foremost. The point is to get outstanding suppliers an opportunity they have earned, but have not been afforded. An OEM benefits by helping out a small company that is focused on providing the best service or product possible to that specific OEM requirements. That’s the theory, doesn’t work perfectly every time, like anything else in this world, but there are many, many success stories.
Also, to be clear, the NMSDC and MBE’s are not using any tax dollars, unlike the OEM’s.
I remember, circa 1994, Chrysler built an R&D facility in an urban area near Detroit. Other than that, I’d have to agree with you. After hearing that Metro Detroit schools require kids to bring a host of items normally provided by the school district (IIRC, toilet paper was on the list)
What is Metro Detroit schools? There are a few dozen school districts in SE Michigan. I can see Pontiac and Detroit Public…but there is no such thing as Metro Detroit schools. Gotta be more accurate than that.
I really wonder what the Motown heros do with their money
Supporting and helped build world-class museums and also to support the arts, support countless educational initiatives, support local college engineering programs, support large non-profits and food banks. The Big 3 have been some of the most charitable companies over the years. Wonder why Dayton, OH is pissed that NCR got up and left? Take that and multiply it times 20 for Detroit. With the Big 3.
Ok, let me give a perspective from the front lines…The Big 3 have jumped through HOOPS for the black community. Not just the Big 3…any company with a presence in Detroit will be going through all sorts of minority bullshiat initiatives. If they don’t, they are afraid of lawsuits and Al Sharpton. The CITY of Detroit is really Chocolate City….more that ATL and more than New Orleans.
I think Mr. Taylor is trying to go Jesse Jackson here: <a href=”http://articles.latimes.com/2001/jun/22/business/fi-13336″ Threatened Toyota Boycott Is Put on Hold
This guy’s company makes stamping blanks and slits coils. He basically makes rectangular pieces of metal. Toyota makes their own blanks and buys their coils at the size they need. He doesn’t get any Toyota business because he doesn’t provide anything Toyota needs. But I guess Toyota should buy his overpriced product because he is an African-American? Yeah, that’ll work.
Is Mr. Taylor inferring that the only community charities for blacks are in the inner city? Interesting. What about rural blacks … don’t they exist?
And while we’re on the topic of who is in a minority, the last time I checked, there were still more black people in the U.S. than Japanese people. Or Asian people. And isn’t Toyota a Japanese company? Or Asian company?
So if Toyota is run by Asians, and there are fewer Asians than blacks, then who really is the minority?
And aren’t we supposed to look beyond a person’s color and see the real person anyway?
These discussions on race confuse me.
I understand your point about Toyota ownership in MBE suppliers, but if it meets the certification rules then you can’t blame them. The win-win I was speaking of wasn’t really about the “community”. I firmly believe that to be sourced by any OEM an MBE should be an outstanding supplier first and foremost. The point is to get outstanding suppliers an opportunity they have earned, but have not been afforded. An OEM benefits by helping out a small company that is focused on providing the best service or product possible to that specific OEM requirements. That’s the theory, doesn’t work perfectly every time, like anything else in this world, but there are many, many success stories.
Also, to be clear, the NMSDC and MBE’s are not using any tax dollars, unlike the OEM’s.
Eastaboga, I respect your perspectives and the points you have made above are correct, but I think Taylor’s point is that while the Toyota’s of the world attempt to “appear” to be committed to the MBE community, and to the “American worker” in general, their support is superficial. Is what they do within the rules, absolutely. Can we blame them for doing what is within the rules, nope. But, I can assure you that Ford, Chrysler & GM do not take an equity position in their MBE suppliers (except maybe in a distressed situation and they feel that must)because as you point out, the idea is give them an opportunity to become a successful supplier. And I think, whether or not you agree with Taylor’s point of view, its his perogative to complain when he can’t get sourced business because he’s not willing to sell an equity position to them. I hope you agree, while fully within the rules, that’s not the spirit of the MBE programs. If Toyota made an initial investment to incubate the business then divest once the business can stand on its own, that would be pretty cool, but that’s not what they do.
And Angainor, you are exactly the reason it’s impossible to have a fact based discussion on a blog site, because anybody can spew garbage as fact. I purposely picked Millenium as my MBE example, because I knew what business they were in, supplying blanks & slit coils to Toyota. You are wrong, Toyota does buy blanks & slit coil, because Millenium sells to them. Again, look at the website. It’s no coincidence they are located in Princeton, IN and San Antonio, TX.
Sweet ‘stache, though. I think we can all agree on that.
Pretty simple, IMO.
Toyota contract = volume doesn’t make much money
Big 3 contracts = volume makes him lots of money
Import sales = up
Domestic sales = down (sans Ford)
Solution = play the bleeding heart for the domestics to increase Big 3 volume.
Result = his profit goes up.
Always follow the money.
Toyota raciest? I thought only white males can be racist?!
Really, Toyota if anything doesn’t like playing games, as I bet in their eyes the best in business should win without skin color being figured into it.
@ Quentin
Always follow the money.
Quentin’s Razor I think we should call it.
@ Pete: Sounds good to me.
Paperpusher
Eastaboga, I respect your perspectives and the points you have made above are correct, but I think Taylor’s point is that while the Toyota’s of the world attempt to “appear” to be committed to the MBE community, and to the “American worker” in general, their support is superficial. Is what they do within the rules, absolutely. Can we blame them for doing what is within the rules, nope. But, I can assure you that Ford, Chrysler & GM do not take an equity position in their MBE suppliers (except maybe in a distressed situation and they feel that must)because as you point out, the idea is give them an opportunity to become a successful supplier. And I think, whether or not you agree with Taylor’s point of view, its his perogative to complain when he can’t get sourced business because he’s not willing to sell an equity position to them. I hope you agree, while fully within the rules, that’s not the spirit of the MBE programs. If Toyota made an initial investment to incubate the business then divest once the business can stand on its own, that would be pretty cool, but that’s not what they do.
I can agree with that, the rules should probably be tweaked to require that equity position to be bought out by outside investors over time. I also appreciate the constructive dialogue. I encourage everyone who’s spent the time to comment on this to actually do a little research on it. It’s a fascinating auto supplier industry sector and an example of private industry engaged in social policy.
I would say, only to those speaking in soundbites, that an MBE must be a great supplier first and foremost, if not then they should not be awarded business by any OEM. For any such program to work, the results have to be mutually beneficial. OEM’s actually do a fair amount of charity work, but this is not charity.
Cole Trickle :
August 12th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
Sweet ’stache, though. I think we can all agree on that.
LOL I was thinking the same thing but didnt wanna be first to say it. Nice suit as well.