GM wants more money????

[afterhours]

the system is broken....and it cannot be fixed by shoveling more money into it....

GM, sells a crap load of cars every year...it has some severe handicaps.

management that is incompetant
Union LAbor that is over priced

until that is fixed, nothing will change.

i do not think that anything is "too big to fail". GM, and everybody should have been allowed to file BK..

the economy can survive, recover and evolve....as long as we stop letting the politicians manipulate it with thier special programs and bailout money....

 

[tdrcomm]

F=MA:

Outstanding write-up.
I get where you're coming from but a couple issues make me question the whole bailout scenario:

For this bailout to work GM has to totally change their way of thinking AND doing business. From what I've seen, that hasn't been demonstrated nor have they proven they know how. (The leak of the outrageous mileage claims of the Chevy Volt is a perfect example. I'm sure the marketing guys were scratching their heads over that one. The last thing the public wants to see or hear is "pie-in-the-sky" promises that will be hard to deliver on. 230 mpg?? Another PR nightmare if it doesn't come though.)

The hard cuts that should have been made BEFORE coming to Washington with their hands out never materialized until Washington forced them back to the boardrooms. They still didn't understand that they had to change their business model and radically stem the losses in a tangible way before asking for help.

If a person came to me and asked for a loan to bail them out of financial catastrophe the first question I'd ask is not how they got in this position but what are you going to do to not let this happen again. The second question is what are you doing NOW to solve the problem.

GM and Chrysler had to COME BACK LATER with the answer??!!

That tell me that it would have been business as usual. If the money was given just out of pure sympathy for the displaced workers of these companies nothing would have changed. That's not how business should be helped or rewarded. What was leadership thinking?

They knew this day was coming for over 10 years and they chose to ignore it by focusing on short-term gains instead of the overall health of the company.

I've worked on marketing projects for Honda/Acura corporate and from as early as '98 Honda has NEVER viewed GM as a direct competitor. The reason from behind closed doors: They knew they were going to implode. Focus the efforts against companies that will be around.

I worry about the subcontractors and suppliers, too, but I would rather the bailout money have gone to THEM directly to provide a cushion until GM came out of bankruptcy reorganization leaner and stronger. I would have like to seen that money gone to retraining and reeducation displaced workers or seed funding for new business ventures for skilled people that were going to lose their jobs at the restructured GM.

I also fault the union leadership for some of this mess. A great and talented workforce led by leadership just as short-sighted as management. It would have been refreshing (And gotten EVERYBODY'S attention) if for once, they threatened to go on strike complaining about the lack of a quality product to build. Because no matter what gains they get in the pay envelope every two weeks, it all means nothing if no one buys the flippin' product.

 

[F=MA]

Thanks tdrcomm, and others who had kind words for my post whether they agreed with it or not.

I don't disagree with you tdrcomm, though in December 2008 the opportunity to travel back in time to fire GM management wasn't available to us. That leaves us with the same options I wrote of.

I think we've pretty much hashed this one to death for now. Thanks all for a spirited and mostly respectful discourse...not an easy accomplishment on an internet message board.

 

[Zoinks!]

F=MA:
From what I've seen, that hasn't been demonstrated nor have they proven they know how. (The leak of the outrageous mileage claims of the Chevy Volt is a perfect example. I'm sure the marketing guys were scratching their heads over that one. The last thing the public wants to see or hear is "pie-in-the-sky" promises that will be hard to deliver on. 230 mpg?? Another PR nightmare if it doesn't come though.)

There was a lot that I agreed with in your post, but the only thing I wanted to point out is that with the Volt, there really is no MPG rating that can be accurate. GM and the EPA have been trying to figure out what to put on the sticker for quite some time. The problem is that if you commute less than 40 miles a day then you won't ever use any fuel. But if you go farther than that, then the fuel mileage will depend on how far you go. The Volt can run for 40 miles on electricity alone, then it uses fuel to power a small generator which charges the batteries (it doesn't use fuel in a standard "engine to drive the vehicle" configuration). So the 230 mpg you mentioned (not sure where that number came from) would be very very possible. It all depends on the distance driven. And if you were to have an outlet you could park close to, then you could have an 80 mile round trip commute and never use any fuel.

 

[tdrcomm]

Thanks tdrcomm, and others who had kind words for my post whether they agreed with it or not.

I don't disagree with you tdrcomm, though in December 2008 the opportunity to travel back in time to fire GM management wasn't available to us. That leaves us with the same options I wrote of.

I think we've pretty much hashed this one to death for now. Thanks all for a spirited and mostly respectful discourse...not an easy accomplishment on an internet message board.

Agreed! Unfortunate situation all around. Either solution (if they can be called that) is neither painless or victimless. Everyone gets the shaft.

If the arguments are respectful and intelligent I LOVE A GOOD DEBATE!
If we never share our opinions nothing will ever be said... or worst, learned.

 

[Zoinks!]

Agreed! Unfortunate situation all around. Either solution (if they can be called that) is neither painless or victimless. Everyone gets the shaft.

If the arguments are respectful and intelligent I LOVE A GOOD DEBATE!
If we never share our opinions nothing will ever be said... or worst, learned.

That's for sure.

 

[tdrcomm]

There was a lot that I agreed with in your post, but the only thing I wanted to point out is that with the Volt, there really is no MPG rating that can be accurate. GM and the EPA have been trying to figure out what to put on the sticker for quite some time. The problem is that if you commute less than 40 miles a day then you won't ever use any fuel. But if you go farther than that, then the fuel mileage will depend on how far you go. The Volt can run for 40 miles on electricity alone, then it uses fuel to power a small generator which charges the batteries (it doesn't use fuel in a standard "engine to drive the vehicle" configuration). So the 230 mpg you mentioned (not sure where that number came from) would be very very possible. It all depends on the distance driven. And if you were to have an outlet you could park close to, then you could have an 80 mile round trip commute and never use any fuel.

True.

My problem with that pronouncement is that it comes across as deceptive and marketing hype, not fact. And I think the public is tired of unsubstantiated hype especially when the economy is in the crapper.

It's true, the 230 mpg (sic) can be had for commutes of 40 miles or less. That is fantastic for those drivers that either: live close to work or don't have ancillary driving to do (kids, shopping, errands, etc.). It would be a godsend for urban areas like NYC, Chicago, Miami - Dade County, etc. But in regions where the weather is rough half of the year the mileage would be considerably less (heat or AC would surely put a huge drain on battery life. And commuter states like Cali, a 40 mile commute in traffic turns into a 30 mile actual drain. We have nearly a million SoCal residents that call a 40+ commute "normal".

Yes, the mileage will be better. Hopefully the combined mileage of gas/electric would put it in the 60 mph range. But why wet the public's appetite for gas pump relief with an outrageous claim that they would surely have to back track on in real world application (In fact, GM started the damage control a couple days after the announcement).

All they need is for a few new owners to start saying "I'm not getting any freakin' 230 mpg" to tank this car faster than an Aztek. Jeez... Marketing 101: If you can't promise high and deliver high, it's better to promise low and deliver high. 60 mpg sounds fantastic, but not when you call a press conference to trumpet 230 mpg.

Chevy Volt to pull 230 mpg in city | Green Tech - CNET News

GM Claims Chevy Volt Will Get 230 MPG--But How? | Popular Science

The Truth Behind the 230 MPG Claim From the Chevy Volt: Analysis - Popular Mechanics

 

[Zoinks!]

Ahhh. Interesting articles. Thanks for posting them! Sounds like the EPA needs to come up with a new testing strategy for these types of cars. I used to work for GM and about a year ago I personally talked to one of the guys responsible for the Volt (at which time they were still stumped on how to come up with a window sticker fuel mileage figure). It appears that they still haven't come up with a very good solution. I do agree with you that they probably should have come out with a number more like 65-85 which would have been much easier to attain from the majority of commuters than 230. However, it does appear that they came up with that using the same testing the EPA is currently planning to use for such vehicles. . . I'm interested to see what the final numbers are. Thanks again for the articles; they were good reads. I've been interested in the Volt ever since I first heard about it, so this info is good to have.

 

[Casperle]

There was a lot that I agreed with in your post, but the only thing I wanted to point out is that with the Volt, there really is no MPG rating that can be accurate. GM and the EPA have been trying to figure out what to put on the sticker for quite some time. The problem is that if you commute less than 40 miles a day then you won't ever use any fuel. But if you go farther than that, then the fuel mileage will depend on how far you go. The Volt can run for 40 miles on electricity alone, then it uses fuel to power a small generator which charges the batteries (it doesn't use fuel in a standard "engine to drive the vehicle" configuration). So the 230 mpg you mentioned (not sure where that number came from) would be very very possible. It all depends on the distance driven. And if you were to have an outlet you could park close to, then you could have an 80 mile round trip commute and never use any fuel.

What about the coal burned to make the electicity to recharge the battery at said workplace. Coworkers saying hey to the company give me some gas money for my trip to work he's using you electic not fair! Just sayin.........

 

[Zoinks!]

What about the coal burned to make the electicity to recharge the battery at said workplace. Coworkers saying hey to the company give me some gas money for my trip to work he's using you electic not fair! Just sayin.........

Ok, well I wasn't really trying to get into that debate. I was simply giving some facts about the car's capability that may or may not have been known prior to my post. But if you want to make that argument, there are 2 solutions. . .

#1, boss man says "If you have a problem with it, then go buy a car that you can plug in."

#2, boss man says to guy with Volt, "I'm sorry, but I can't allow you to use company k/w to charge your personal vehicle."

It's really not that hard to realize the simple solutions to that issue. . . Just sayin.

 

[Casperle]

OK. My bad.

 

[BlueHaya]

GM plans 10,000 job cuts at Opel - Yahoo! News

Come on GM...whats the plan?

 

[afterhours]

GM management and the UAW have the same plan.....Collect a paycheck.

why fix it, if you have the Gov. bailing you out?