“stave of” should be “stave off.”

johnnycanuck: “That would be ‘b’ as in ‘belly up?’” Funny stuff!

howsmydriving: marketing is selling more Toyotas and Hondas than is product quality. GM is wasting money on cute marketing campaigns, when it should just go with a simple approach: “buy our cars because they’re better.”

400horseSS: “How about asking the Gov for retiree pension and healthcare help?” Good question. PBGC, your phone is ringing.

bcjohnso99: “The gov needs to make unions illegal.” That’s an incredibly dumb comment. Maybe you want the minimum wage gone, too? The government needs to make universal default and the BCS illegal.

“Anyone not capable of finding themselves decent employment does not deserve it.” Even dumber.

americancarssuck: “Hard plastic is not luxury.” neither is a rebadged CamCord.

But you do have a point on there being too many Lambdas.

“A new factory there (Chine) but no new jobs in MI? BS.” It’d be prohibitively expensive to build cars in Michigan for the Chinese market, then ship them over.

complinitor: toyota probably could buy the Big three outright.

beemerdude: “When the economy was rolling, THEY WERE SIMPLY GIVING AMERICAN CONSUMERS WHAT THEY WANTED… huge, gas slurping SUVs and trucks.” Yep.

TomF: “American consumers in the main want reliability, build quality … The Big Three have gotten progressively worse at providing any of the above.” You done lost yo’ damn mind!

“You hear the same lameness from bad parents who give their kids Oreos and Mountain Dew for dinner, ‘because that’s what they wanted.’” Not the same thing; parents have a monopoly.

What I was referring to in my comments was the PERCEPTION that Americans have always had that domestic vehicles should be big, strong and powerful. And that Asians manufactured small and inexpensive cars. For sure, some of this thinking has been altered in recent years. Lexus comes to mind. And of course, Toyota/Honda/Nissan SUVs (which in many cases, are built in the U.S.). But the original perception still holds true for many.

I agree that U.S. manufacturers have really never been serious about building and selling small cars. The quality and designs of American small cars was never on par with the imports. U.S. companies sold small cars grudgingly and never realized that entry level small vehicles were how Asian makes grabbed young customers.

And then moved them up the ladder by graduating them into larger, more profitable models.

In one brush stroke, you completely ignore the fact that MANAGEMENT failed to direct the companies to produce the kind of products customers want. Ford has since learned a lot from Mazda and Volvo (good handling and safety standard). GM on the other lets Saab, Subaru and Suzuki sit to collect dust while continuing its own stubborn way. Chrysler, well, there is a lot more wrong with Chrysler than simply product development.

I hear your complain about union, and while there is some merits to that argument, it is not the whole argument. Union or not, the Big Three would have been in the same position. Why? They are sold that American won’t buy import; that they should focus on gas guzzler; that American are stuck on the 3 box design and would never consider the more versatile hatchback and wagon and to ditch those SUVs.

Well, they were wrong not once, twice but many more times and don’t blame the Union solely on these bad decisions and missed chances. Labor component is only one element.

In fact, since 1970 a very large, perhaps fatally large, percentage of American carbuyers decided that Big Three products were NOT “what they wanted.” It’s more than the gas-guzzler stereotype. The Big Three have consistent misread public option, fought innovation and efficiency, and dismissed the consumers who walked away from them as eccentrics or idiots. It wasn’t THAT long ago that Detroit execs did not think inexpensive cars should even exsit. “The consumer already has cheap cars to choose from!” roared one GM exec, infamously, in the late 1960s. “They’re called USED CARS!” Hopefully that visionary is dead by now, and not watching his company heel over like a dying brontosaurus.

American consumers in the main want reliability, build quality, innovation, safety, efficiency and style — in about that order. The Big Three have gotten progressively worse at providing any of the above. But mainly they have failed to provide market leadership. This “we were only giving consumers what they wanted” stuff is an excuse for lack of leadership. You hear the same lameness from bad parents who give their kids Oreos and Mountain Dew for dinner, “because that’s what they wanted.” Do kids grow up to respect such parents? No. Did today’s Gen Xers grow up respecting GM and Chrsyler? No. They have disdain for them.

But now, everyone is rushing to hang the U.S. companies. It wasn’t THAT long ago that you were lining up to buy their products. But now that the large, fuel hungry vehicle has fallen out of favor you are really quick to throw darts at the American auto industry.

WHO’S REALLY TO BLAME HERE? It’s time America shouldered some responsibility for this. It wasn’t that long ago that the nation couldn’t get enough of the SUV/truck craze. But boy, we sure as hell like pointing fingers now that the economy has tanked and fuel efficiency is more of a concern.

Insanity is defined as repeating the same behavior and expecting different results. Producing one or two good products in limited quantities and a bunch of useless crap in mass quantities, is hardly a recipe for success or profits.

I want to see them get past this but, they have to show that they want to get past this and PROVE it.

TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION PURCHASES CHEVROLET, CADILLAC AND HOLDEN.

Thats why Toyota spent 9 figures advertising the Tundra in 2007? give me a break. Every company advertises.

It’s not that anyone wants GM to go down. It’s that GM as built today is definitely going to go down, and nobody on the inside is willing to make the hard call — and decide to save half.

Education and training are ubiquitous. Anyone not capable of finding themselves decent employment does not deserve it. Is this not the core of capitalism?

If the big 3 cannot survive on equal terms, then they should fail (capitalism at its best) but until then, the gov owes them support for making laws that allowed the unions to get too strong.

If GM, Ford and Chrysler survive, they will be a shell of themselves. They need to get the old management out if they do survive. It’s what has gotten them in this mess in the first place. If it’s broken, you fix it.

Their shell of a company has been over inflated for too long. It’s time to bring them down to realistic operations. The other Autos will pick up the pieces but GM will be half of what it once was. Maybe from there they can get back to making cars that change the rules and sell themselves.

B for belly up indeed.

EVERYONE WILL SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES.
Don’t be in such a rush to see GM fold. You will not like the results.