Stalins Organ Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Wait - I thought health and pensions funded by employers was way better than having it sorted by the govt? Only right up until the bit where the Govt needs to buy it all to stop it collapsing in a screaming heap as proper capitalist system would have happen. after that point Govt funding is fine. You can't have it both ways - have the companies 'pay' for it 'cos you don't wanna pay the taxes, then let the coys renege whenever it becomes inconvienient - surely? why not?:cool: Yes it's all a bit of black irony. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 The market for the Big3 has been the US domestic market - no need to export when the profit can be made at home. With this market going belly-up, the US manufacturer has to, all of a sudden, compete globally. Some, like Caterpillar, have always competed there and should do ok if the US dollar falls. The Big3 can't and won't. Let the companies fail. Get rid of the top two or three levels of management (kick 'em out - no way they can be about to starve unless they're outright oxygen thieves) and have the units of the companies re-formed into govt. funded startups - i.e. the state owns the issued shares and provides start-up capital for retooling. This way the original shareholders, who could not be ****ed doing the work and taking the decisions required to protect their capital (retooling, R&D, proactively competing, medium to long term decisions based on developed strategies) - they lose the lot. Sobs to them. The management that presided over the fall should do the decent thing and fall on their swords. In a more just society the bastards would be doing it for real. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Mulally in for Ford is the only one who seems to hae some savvy - but given Ford has mortgaged itself to the hilt it was going to be tough. The reason for this is that he only joined Ford this year. He was at Boeing before, and passed over for the top job on the civil aircraft side, I think. All the best Andreas 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Wait - I thought health and pensions funded by employers was way better than having it sorted by the govt? You can't have it both ways - have the companies 'pay' for it 'cos you don't wanna pay the taxes, then let the coys renege whenever it becomes inconvienient - surely? When I read a post like Runyan's, I can't help but wonder if what they are really pining for isn't a return to slave labor. With themselves as part of the wealthy and privileged elite of course. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 When I read a post like Runyan's, I can't help but wonder if what they are really pining for isn't a return to slave labor. With themselves as part of the wealthy and privileged elite of course. Michael It's what your Founding Fathers believed in, so it must be good. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 On the one hand, the labor unions are being demonized as the "cause" of the Big 3's plight, yet we hear NO discussion of the zillions the Big 3've spent on executive compensation, both direct and indirect, their all but utter refusal to learn from the last big gas crunch in the 1970s, their diehard fight against CAFE, when the technology has long existed to meet it, etc. Oh, and the handout seeking execs blew it big time by showing up for the hearing in their company jets! Classical capitalist theory holds that if they can't hack it in the marketplace, the Big 3 will be allowed to collapse and their assets, to include trained personnel, will be better applied by those who will. Business pundits seem to expect that the Big 3 will use Chapter 11 to shatter those hard won union contracts and will restructure, but isn't it interesting that management is prepared to demand labor live on less while seldom, if ever, taking any kind of hit itself? If ever there was a place in need of drastic pruning, it's the overgrown cash sink called GM HQ. Ford went through a massive overhaul under Iacocca, and Chrysler, I think, went through something similar under Daimler. Meanwhile, GM grew so top heavy, it's a wonder the HQ buildings didn't simply tip over. There's an old military adage which says "Never reinforce failure." The execs seeking bailouts not only want us to reinforce it, but to reward their gross incompetence. Nyet! Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/11/20/ap5722359.html Yep rewarding failure seems to be it. Strangely when you consider that Ford and GM have large European operations, and for that matter interests in Far East companies, the decision to use the existing fuel efficient designs has only occurred in the last year. The normal line from the D3 is that the US consumer would not buy anything other than big gas guzzlers etc. I think it was really an exercise in keeping the status quo at HQ. It was Mulally arriving at Ford who looked at the Ford portfolio of cars and got on the case of using Fords world resources/designs rather than believing that only US designs would work. GM belatedly turned to Opel/Vauxhall to see what they had in the armoury. In GM's case 61% of its sales are overseas derived. However in both cases the decline of the dollar and the European costings made it a tricky situation. The thing that amazes me is that with peak oil perhaps a decade away the D3 had not already thought through the option to have factories able to buld in the US fuel economic cars. The current flurry of activity on hybrids etc sounds great but the lead time to economically affordable technologies is normally a decade when dealing with autos. The major blessing is I suppose that the electronics industry is involved an they work somewhat faster. Honestly none of this is important compared to the D3's ability to make meagre profits other than in boom times. I think this is because of the hammering the share price by Wall St. every quarter if the company failed to pay sufficient dividend. Another words US "group think" fails to pay sufficient attention to funding the business for the future and more to current image on Wall St. Bonuses anyone? The culture where bonuses come due in a year is a major problem as short-termism is rewarded heavily and anyone taking a long view is a maverick, or more dangerously, a threat to your current bonus and should be got rid of or sidelined. And just to show what pisses potential US car buyers off and raises doubts as to business values. Inc. Chairman and CEO Richard Dauch has been awarded an $8.5 million bonus in part for leading the auto parts supplier through a bitter strike. Revealed in a filing with the , the bonus is in addition to his earlier reported 2007 compensation valued at $5.55 million. About 3,650 union members at American Axle's five original facilities in New York and Michigan went on strike Feb. 26 for nearly three months, but later ratified a contract with deep concessions. Most of Dauch's previously reported pay was stock and options worth roughly $3.99 million on the day they were granted. He also earned $1.47 million in salary and $94,684 in other compensation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 All of which were agreed to by the corporation and tolerated by general US society for decades' date=' along with the products the whole system supported - to blame the unions alone is bollocks.[/quote'] Well, not quite. Seems a lot of people bought foreign cars instead. But yeah, the problem is bigger than just the unions, but they still deserve a share of the blame. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 But yeah, the problem is bigger than just the unions, but they still deserve a share of the blame. It's just that it seems like those like yourself are all too quick to lay the blame exactly there and overlook most everything else, especially executive compensation and perks. Those you seem very happy with. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 It's just that it seems like those like yourself are all too quick to lay the blame exactly there and overlook most everything else, especially executive compensation and perks. Those you seem very happy with. Michael Wouldn't say happy. Would say more "Don't Care". You don't like executive pay, buy a bunch of stock and vote it down. In fact, this is probably what the unions should have done with their gains. Me, I don't own any stock. Don't have a dog in the fight. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSgt Viljuri Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Wouldn't say happy. Would say more "Don't Care". You don't like executive pay, buy a bunch of stock and vote it down. In fact, this is probably what the unions should have done with their gains. Me, I don't own any stock. Don't have a dog in the fight. Does it matter? Isn't it like so that the target price for these shares (GM's) is at 0.00 $. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Should make it very easy for Emrys to buy it all up and vote them out then, eh? Sure, the execs get their share of the blame too. They gave in to the union contracts, dealer contracts, pension plans, private jets, etc. And it does look like soon they'll be out on the street. But before going off on exec pay, a good question to ask is, if you find a guy who can fix GM, what would you be willing to pay him? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Ah, how nice. A WSJ editorial on the very subject today. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122722835387246299.html Doesn't look like they're in the tank for management to me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Nice article. I agree. : ) I am available for GM BTW. The myth that there are only so many good CEO's is cack. The problem is that people tend to only look at a small pool of talent for CEO's and that pool is made up of CEO's in other companies who have not dropped a clanger. It is interesting when looking for CEO's for even small listed companies as what the "City" thinks of him is a consideration. Whether he has the right credibility to impress the shareholders AND the "City". And finally does he know the industry , does he have the right contacts if we need to carry the company forward. So the pool is reduced not so much as by availabilty but trying to please external people that they have the right guy. Ford got my approval for bringing in Mulally - a bold move and a successful one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer_M 2.0 Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Preston Tucker will have finally gotten his revenge. yep. FIAT, VW_AG and Toyaduh will become the next 3. and a better one IMO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 One option would be to start exporting to Cuba. I hear they have a taste for US cars, and their current fleet is getting long in the tooth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 They don't drive those because they like them, they drive them because they ain't got any money. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Should make it very easy for Emrys to buy it all up and vote them out then, eh? Sure, the execs get their share of the blame too. They gave in to the union contracts, dealer contracts, pension plans, private jets, etc. And it does look like soon they'll be out on the street. But before going off on exec pay, a good question to ask is, if you find a guy who can fix GM, what would you be willing to pay him? Problem here is that the "fix" is the same no matter who takes the reins. It is a series of decisions and actions taken, unpopular, unsympathetic and unlikely to benefit anyone who's pay packet has skyrocketed in the past two decades - and that includes all the professional staff and middle-management. All those uni grads with monster debts, the children of the stock owners and management (we're talking middle class here, right?). Someone able to perform miracles? - well, first you have to believe, than he has to deliver. It's a gamble, and you don't have a lot left to gamble with. He'll quite happily take it all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 One option would be to start exporting to Cuba. I hear they have a taste for US cars, and their current fleet is getting long in the tooth. Sergei, this is far too good an idea for it to be adopted. How old is the photo? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogface Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 The photo was taken between Dec 21, 2003 to Jan 04, 2004 . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 The photo was taken between Dec 21, 2003 to Jan 04, 2004 . Interesting. How did you arrive at that range of dates? Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicky Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 http://www.travelpod.com/travel-blog/andrea/cuba2003/tpod.html Photo journal of a Christmas time backpacking adventure in Cuba Written by andrea We're off to Cuba to celebrate Christmas 2003. Having decided to forgo the resort idea, we are backpacking to experience as much of this beautiful country as possible Start of travels: Dec 21, 2003 End of travels: Jan 04, 2004 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Hmmm. I went there looking for that but couldn't fine it. Nice catch, Wicky. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Interesting. How did you arrive at that range of dates? Michael Geese entrails. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 Hang on, so Dogface and Wicky are cooking the same goose? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.