Take a look at this item in the NY Times financial section: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/30/business...8Dc4BTbbJyMXmBw I've started to feel strongly that GM would be assembling the lion's share of its vehicles Off-shore in 10 years. It may come sooner now.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(syclone @ Jun 30 2006, 01:05 PM) [snapback]279125[/snapback]</div> I have had a theory that both ford, and GM are intentionaly destroying the american part of there business. Why would they do this, to be able to shut down there US auto manufacturing, without taking the heat for doing so. They can say we tried, but the economics made us move offshore, and declare bankruptcy, avoiding their huge pension obligations to retired workers. Both companies manufacture cars all over the world, and participate in the global economy right now. They know the future sales of cars will be in emerging markets, not the united states. The americans will still have to buy cars, regardless of where they are made. Here in texas I see lots of funny looking little economy cars with chevrolet bagdes, from mexico. These little cars are'nt sold or offered in the states.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(prion @ Jun 30 2006, 12:14 PM) [snapback]279136[/snapback]</div> I don't think that they're destroying the American part of their business, just downsizing it. I'd do the same if I was in their position. Why build your cars in the U.S. where you have less than half the market of a population of 300 million where your workers cost you $85 per hour? It's more effective to build the cars in the markets where you can sell more and where the workers cost far less than $85 per hour. Of course, the downside, and nonauto companies are already finding this out in India, is that the workers in emerging markets will become steadily more expensive to employ but that's down the road a good ways. I'm glad that I still have GM shares because they're going to be worth more in the coming years. I still rather wish that I'd sold them when they were trading at $47 though <sigh>
Jack, you're funny. You make me laugh sometimes. The way you've projected long-term thinking and ramifications in a thread about GM just floors me. Thanks for that chuckle. Now I can go into the weekend smilling.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TonyPSchaefer @ Jun 30 2006, 02:10 PM) [snapback]279219[/snapback]</div> People keep telling me that I should be a comedian but I don't like the hours By the way, your avatar is becoming increasingly disturbing. :lol:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(JackDodge @ Jun 30 2006, 09:35 AM) [snapback]279157[/snapback]</div> What rock did you just crawl out from under? Companies started getting out of India years ago because of rising labor costs and started moving to even cheaper labor markets, such as Romania and China. Sure, companies are still making investments in India, but the rising costs and move to cheaper labor markets - that already happened, it's not "down the road a good ways" as you claim.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusenvy @ Jun 30 2006, 04:07 PM) [snapback]279283[/snapback]</div> Don't be obtuse. I'm referring to a recent article in BusinessWeek so if you're worried about rocks, worry about your own. You and Tony don't read enough current events in the business world. Or perhaps you're more of the experts than BusinessWeek is.
The "Headline" of this thread is misleading; Nissan/Renault are floating an offer to buy 20% share, not takeover... And Kerkorian is the guy who offloaded a bunch of D-C stock last year
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(wstander @ Jul 2 2006, 08:29 PM) [snapback]280305[/snapback]</div> Notice that Bought out is in quotes. And, by the way, someone with 20% of the stock can pretty much control a company.
If Nissan/Reunalt does take a stake and Ghosn is able to call the shots, it's possible that GM's situation could improve A LOT from where it is now. The articles below are pretty good if you're unaware of the turnaround that Ghosn executed. http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic...402/1148/AUTO01 http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic.../607010371/1148 http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic.../606020346/1148 Nissan is slipping somewhat this year, which isn't terribly surprising given their huge sales increases in prior years. See http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2005/01/05/314644.html and http://asia.news.yahoo.com/060105/ap/d8eu65l00.html to get an overall picture for the 04 and 05 years.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(JackDodge @ Jul 2 2006, 05:11 PM) [snapback]280301[/snapback]</div> In this case, perhaps. We built out our two campuses in India years ago, and have been looking in Eastern Europe and China for some time now (already opened offices in some locations). If the extent of your knowledge is limited to what's printed in Businessweek, well, that's pretty weak. What you're saying is you just read about news - you never actually participate in making any of it.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ghostofjk @ Jul 3 2006, 03:21 AM) [snapback]280433[/snapback]</div> Just my opinion here -- I think this is more about kerk forcing changes in management that anything else. I think he would love to have ghosn run GM. BTW, if GM joins nissan/renault similar to how that alliance was set up, GM does not get cash. They became minority partners in each other's company -- essentially an equity swap. The alliance worked for those two companies by improving their economies of scale. I doubt it would have similar benefit to GM which has already choked it's suppliers to BK.
I hear the repeated question that I just shrug my shoulders anytime Im asked "Why doesn't Nissan make a hybrid"? GM already quit making the Oldsmobile, they should follow up by closing Buick & Cadillac too.. and just sell chevorlet....
Kerkorian is a Vulture and Ghosn is a Cost Slasher. Kerkorian wants to jack the price of his shares and the Ghosn 'medicine' is one easy way to do it. However, it says nothing about the long term viability of GM. It just allows Kerkorian to take the money and run, which is what he lives for. The jury is still out on whether Ghosn can actually run a Car Company long term after his initial slash and burn. The products that bumped up Nissan were designed and planned before Ghosn. We'll see where they go from here, and if they still have the resources to keep rolling out desirable new products, or if Ghosn has left them to wither on the vine. If you want a real no-holds barred discussion of GM problems, go read the GM Death Watch series on The Truth About Cars website. Very interesting.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tempus @ Jul 3 2006, 12:29 PM) [snapback]280526[/snapback]</div> NICE website ! Thanks
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Jul 3 2006, 09:03 AM) [snapback]280521[/snapback]</div> See http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12285537/. They will have a hybrid Altima soon. Hmm, Pontiac doesn't make cars I'd want either. I think GM should close up Buick. It's hard to say about their other brands, esp. since Chevy makes the VAST majority of their sales (http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2006/06/01/009393.html).
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(cwerdna @ Jul 3 2006, 01:50 PM) [snapback]280564[/snapback]</div> The hybrid Altima is licensed Toyota tech, and is going to be a *very* limited production only marketed in CA. I don't know why they bother. A side comment about Ghosn and Nissan -- Huge cost improvements of around 20% are attributed to Ghosn at Nissan, which no doubt was central to their financial turnaround. Less discussed is the huge drop in reliability in their vehicles. So to my mind, Ghosn simply spent goodwill that Nissan had spent decades accumulating. Some may call that leadership; I call it stupidity. This kind of short range profit taking at the expense of long term viabililty is practiced at our favorite US car company, too.
