Seems to me the only solution is to close down the company and maybe build >>a new one from scratch. Maybe.>

Can't speak for Ford, but I've never seen a more over-managed, top

concerning vehicle production, from design to delivery is ticked

So Waggoner, Lutz et al - why not let the divisions build the cars,

those that don't can fall by the wayside.>

Can't speak for Ford, but I've never seen a more over-managed, top heavy > > structure than the current GM one. Instead of corporate GM being there as a > > service industry for the various divisions, it seems every decision > > concerning vehicle production, from design to delivery is ticked off by GM > > Corporate. Stupid.> >

So Waggoner, Lutz et al - why not let the divisions build the cars, and > > those that don't can fall by the wayside.>

Finally, have they ever driven a BMW? The cars have 'soul', they're> > tight, stick to the road, and can stop on a dime. GM and Ford S..t> Boxes> > can't. Take a Ford Taurus up to 80 or so and slam on the brakes and> see> > what happens. You'll notice the font suspension will tuck one wheel> or> > other under and you'll loose steering. Not so with a BMW. The only> > problem you have stopping is that someone will slam into you from

back if you're not careful.> >

80 mph? And where is that legal?.

AFAIK, there aren't any more "divisions" at GM anymore. This all>>changed in the late 1990s. Pontiac, GMC, Chevy, Cadillac, Buick, etc.>>are just "brands" now, all managed out of GM HQ at the Ren Cen. The>>old divisions hadn't made their own cars for years...>

Finally, have they ever driven a BMW? >

They went from 50% market share to 25% in 10 years!>>

Egads!>

80 mph? And where is that legal?. How many people have you killed and>> maimed with your criminal driving, you psychopath?>>

GM has not had a 50% market share in the last 50 years, > > and maybe never!> >

Have you priced a BMW lately?>

Have you priced a BMW lately?>>

And, I had a guy behind me yesterday with road rage - I was in his lane >> or something. He takes his hand and makes it into a gun and points it at >> me.>>

You should not cruise in the left lane. Of course people are enraged>>by cretinous slowpokes blocking the road.>>

It's very simple: Keep Right Except to Pass and you'll stop having problems.>

Have you priced a BMW lately?> >

John Harlow wrote:> >> Seems to me the only solution is to close down the company and maybe> > build a> >> new one from scratch. Maybe.> >

We should do that for the United States as a whole.> >

Americans make crap cars.....People outside the US prefer Japanese and>> German and Swedish cars because they are better engineered and better >> made.>

Doing 80 in a BMW isn't so bad; at least you can steer or brake out of >> the way of anything ahead and you aren't out-driving the car.>>

It's the idiots in the pickup trucks that pull up behind me and flash >> their lights for me to get out of the way that scare me. I pull over >> and they blow by at 90 or 95. These folks are driving way past the >> capabilities of their autos.>>

And, I had a guy behind me yesterday with road rage - I was in his >> lane or something. He takes his hand and makes it into a gun and >> points it at me.>>

DTJ wrote:>>

In the past, they enjoyed 50% of the American car market.>>

They used to boast that 'What's good for GM is good for the US'. They>>can't make that claim any more.>

In article <427c8c3f@news.orco­n.net.nz>, steve wrote:>>

How can they prefer them, the NA offerings, the US built cars generally>> aren't sold anywhere outside north america. Maybe some south american>> countries, the occasional clone, etc, but generally speaking the crap is>> left here at home.>

Bert Hyman wrote:>>

They are expensive to purchase but cheeper to operate.>>

I've rarely gotten over 120k miles out of an American car and they fall>>apart, whereas the European cars are good to between 150 and 200k.>>

Further, gas is cheeper for the BMW 300 series, that do about 25 mpg>>highway, whereas the typical American SUV gets around 14.>>

Lastly, both BMW and Audi now offer ALL service free for the first 4>>years or 50k miles. The only thing you pay for is the tires.>>

Compare that with a GM truck I had whose ABS braking system failed at>>36001 miles, and I had to spring for $800 in repairs.>

80 mph? And where is that legal?. How many people have you killed> and> > maimed with your criminal driving, you psychopath?

This isn't as true now as it once was. GM has learned a lot from its >> partnerships with Toyota, Suzuki, etc. Quality is up (generally); but so is >> engine size, and gross vehicle weight. Fuel economy is down. What's >> killing car sales is the Bush economy, which of course includes record-high >> gasoline prices, slumping wages and reduced social protections for working >> people. In such a harsh economic climate, the target audience for most >> domestic auto sales - working-class Americans - are "making do" with their >> 4-year-old minivan, which they bought with a zero-interest loan. SUV's >> sounded like a great idea, until gas started heading for $3/gal in many >> cities. Guess what? SUV sales are in the toilet. GM bet that the SUV trend >> was up. They lost. I wish they had called me first. I could have saved >> them a whole bunch of money ­>

It always was stupid to have 5 versions of the same thing. I've read> > the pontiac and buick names are due to be phased out shortly.>

You should not cruise in the left lane. Of course people are enraged>> by cretinous slowpokes blocking the road.>>

It's very simple: Keep Right Except to Pass and you'll stop having >> problems.>

I have to laugh at this one. The "cheap" American car I am driving> > now is 8,000 miles short of 200,000 miles. The only thing I have> > done is put fuel in, changed the oil, filters and timing belt> > regularly, replaced the worn out tires and have a the front break> > replaced at 80,000 miles. Oh did i mention it gets 35 plus miles> > per gallon?> >

If I hadn't totaled my last "cheap" American made car it would> > have been close to having 500,000 miles on it by now.>

GM and Ford for the most part fail to build vehicles for the US / north>>american market that are as good as they build overseas. And when they>>bring the same car in, they usually manage to screw it up.>

I was in the extreme right lane of a three lane highway at the time.>

John R Cambron wrote:> >

We had a 1990 Chevy Silverado. In just a YEAR, the paint on the cab> > started to peel and flake off. Rust started showing almost instantly.> > GM offered extended warranty on the paint and offered to paint it for> > nothing -- but the catch was, that it had to be reported within 3> > MONTHS of purchase. Of course, noone could claim that, as it didn't> > start until a year typically after manufacture.>

I hope that most of the American car companies die a slow and painful> > death. Chrysler can stay on my list; they have innovated their line and> > produce some wonderful vehicles that are classy and are safe all the> > while. Do you see that with GM? Hell no.>

laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:>>> I believe this was also done to Ford.>>

Free market, baybee! What does that have to do with GWB? Unless you>> think Dubya is in bed with Toyota (Damned Trilateralists...)>­>

You want another Iacocca/Chrysler bailout?>>

Toyota oughta buy GM for the price of the outstanding pension>> obligations, then shutter the plants. And Honda should do the same for>> Ford.>

Well, like Arif says, you must have done SOMETHING to provoke this>> guy. Stuff like this doesn't just happen for no reason...>

Yeah, but it doesn't have to be a reasonable reason.>

Once a guy went apeshit> >on me when I didn't move one lane over so he could merge into the spot I was> >currently occupying. Not a sloth merger, a MFFY merger. I could see his> >girlfriend chewing him out as he disappeared into the distance. If she was> >smart, she dumped him.>

How do you know he was going apeshit on YOU? Maybe he and his lady>> friend were having a fight...>

The GM cars that I have bought since 1989 never had any body rust> > whatsoever, and no paint deterioration, and the current car has 54K> > miles, and the previous three had 150K, 155K and 142K, respectively,> > when I sold them.>

GM and Ford for the most part fail to build vehicles for the US / north american >>market that are as good as they build overseas. And when they bring the same car >>in, they usually manage to screw it up.

On Sun, 08 May 2005 01:01:16 -0500, tetraethylleadREMOV­ETHIS@yahoo.com>> (Brent P) wrote:>>

Maybe GM needs to bring some of those European and Australian managers>> over here to run things for a while?>>

OK, OK, I should stop picking on them and help them out a bit.>>

Here's some things they could do today.>>

1. Become #1 in occupant safety. How? Come on! They know how. But, you >>want the list? Here's a partial one; occupant should survive on 30 mph >>side impact, or rollover, or partial front or rear collision. Have your >>engineers do it, then market the heck out of it. Start releasing crash >>tests of your cars verses the competition. Start advertizing each safety >>feature.>>

2. Become #1 in a line of super fuel efficient cars. How? Again, come >>on!>

GM shouldn't try to blame higher gas prices and therefore lower SUV >>sales for their woes.>

Couldn't they see higher gas prices coming? And they can't say it didn't >>happen before in the US. The oil shocks of the 70's caught them as well.>

So, twice, they've been fooled?>

Well, ok, you can't see into the future, but still, that should not have >>given them an excuse.>>

For a company their size, they should have not had only one strategy for >>success - that is, the SUV - putting all your eggs into one basket as it >>were. They should have had a lineup that can survive at 5$ a gallon, as >>well as some cars that would do well at 1.50$ a gal.>

OK, OK, I should stop picking on them and help them out a bit.>>

Here's some things they could do today.>>

1. Become #1 in occupant safety. How? Come on! They know how. But, you >>want the list? Here's a partial one; occupant should survive on 30 mph >>side impact, or rollover, or partial front or rear collision. Have your >>engineers do it, then market the heck out of it. Start releasing crash >>tests of your cars verses the competition. Start advertizing each safety >>feature.>

2. Become #1 in a line of super fuel efficient cars. How? Again, come >>on! Fully embrace hybrid technology, as well incorporate simple >>engineering changes into older lines by such things as an extra gear in >>the automatic tranny, or alternative firing of cylinders if the driver >>doesn't need the power, or add hybrid technology to older lines.>

3. Become #1 in understanding your competition. What makes a BMW so much >>fun to drive, for example, and can some of their ideas be incorporated >>into your car lines. To help out, allow your employees to purchase other >>manufacturers cars instead of just your own. It'll start them thinking.>

"Damon Scott Hynes" <damonhynes@hotmail­.com> wrote in message >>news:1115499430.9­42254.310170@z14g200­0cwz.googlegroups.co­m...>>

If this happened, the Great Bush Depression would start early. It's just >>a matter of time before GM and Ford close their doors.>>

I believe this was also done to Ford.>>

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Standard & Poor's cut General Motors Corp.'s>>(GM.N: Quote, Profile, Research) debt ratings to junk status on>>Thursday in a move that will reduce the automaker's avenues for>>raising funds as it struggles with global competition and rising>>healthcare costs.>>

Sounds like a fun car to drive.>

"Scott M. Kozel" wrote:> >

Drive through your average K-Mart parking lot and observe the late 1970s/1980s> > (and probably 1990s) GM cars with peeling paint. Pay special attention to> > what's happening to the protective "clear coat" on top of the paint. Can cars> > get leprosy?> >

When my mom gave me her 1978 Caddy when she bought her 1988 Caddy (I couldn't> > stop her) the paint had been peeling for years. A body shop told me that the> > auto companies had been experimenting with water-based lacquer. I finally> > wrote some letters back and forth to GM, the ultimate result being that if I'd> > written before the car was 5 years old they might have been able to do> > something.>

1. GM already has a $2000 obligation per car they are paying to>retirees.>

2. Such a move would increase gross margins, but that won't help if>> people aren't buying your cars to begin with.>

3. GM has lost market share due to poor quality, poor design, poor>> safety features, poor customer relations, and poor gas milage - but>> their cars are priced about where the Japaneese cars are. Further, GM>

doesn't have to contend with the declining dollar - something that>has>> hurt the Japaneese bottom line.>

TV's PagCal wrote:>>>> 500 HP Vet?>>>

I want a ZO6 engine (LS7) to put in my 55 Bel Air.>

PagCal wrote:> >> It won't help, for a number of reasons.> >>

Hmm; union negotiated pension, per chance?>

Again, the laziness and incometence of the average American auto

Perhaps poor design had something to do with this, but as an

high as I have seen on that factory floor.>

My 1975 Chevrolet Nova developed a significant amount of rust and paint> > deterioration, and in 1981 I got a recondition job where the body was> > stripped to bare metal, rust areas repaired, and new paint layers> > placed. That cost $540 back then, and I drove the car until 1989 with> > 305K miles before I traded it, and the body stayed good until the last> > couple years. Overall I was pretty satisfied with that car.> >

My first car in the above group was a 1988 Chevrolet Celebrity, and they> > must have licked the body problems by then.>

Uhh! Clinton signed the free trade agreement, not Bush.>