How Bankruptcy Would Wreck GM and Chrysler

A hard head makes for a soft behind

I said it 3 years ago and I'll say it again. japan was putting cassette w/AM-FM stereos in cars while the big-3 american were still using am radios. This is the mindset of the big-3. Even now they could and should be equipping car with feature we like as a user i.e., remote start, mp3 players, rear cameras,etc.

This would be a start. Then the finish would be a vehicle that gets about 40-80 mpg. If we can go to Mars then damn-it this too can be done. They have dug their own graves by not giving the public what it wants proactively. Now Hyundai will be the next major player because like japan, korea too, has learned to appease americans better than the swollen headed big-3

Phillip Sebree of IN @ Aug 23, 2008 23:45:46 PM

Chrysler is having "cash flow problems?" News to me -- and them.

Chrysler already opened up its books and showed that its operations generated $1.1 billion in free cash through June. That's far from a cash flow crisis, last time I checked.

But here I come in with pesky facts again, and ruining a good old fashioned "Detroit sucks" rant. Shame on me.

Tired of BS of PA @ Aug 23, 2008 21:41:56 PM

Toyota never again

Louis, maybe you can tell me why my Toyota Avalon has been in the shop 9 times...yes, NINE times in the past 2 years.

Patrick of CA @ Aug 23, 2008 16:25:31 PM

It's the quality, stupid!

Everyone misses the point. If the public were buying cars from the Detroit 3, it wouldn't matter if their production lines weren't as efficient as Toyota's. It wouldn't matter if their pension and health care costs were not quite as efficient.

The bottome line? The public doesn't want their cars?

Why? It's the quality. People are sick and tired of buying over priced junk that costs a bundle to service or in making trip after trip back to the dealership to fix problems that even though they are coverd under warranty, the issues should have been fixed during the quality control process.

I bought a 2005 Toyota Camry 4-cylinder made in Lexington Kentucky. It has almost 40,000 miles on it.

I had one warranty repair at 32,500 miles. Know what was wrong with it?

The left rear tailight burned out!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Toyota tech wiggled the bulb, it still light, but he replaced it anyway.

Now, you show me a Detroit car that can do that and I will drive it.

I have put a set of tires on this car, front brakes, engine air filter, cabin air filter and oil changes.

And, yes, I did have to buy a set of wiper blade inserts. That set me back $11!

So, there you have it.

There is only one drawback to the car. It is so much fun that I drive it all over.

Detroit builds over priced junk. They don't care about their customers and never have.

I rented a 2005 Trailblazer while I was looking for a new car before I bought the Toyota.

The Trailblaer cost me $50 a week in gas before gas went up.

When I called the factory and asked them why they didn't make the Trailblazer lighter, like the Toyota Highlander, and why they didn't offer a higher rear axle ratio for better fuel economy, you should have heard the rep.

All GM had to do is lighted up the Trailblzer, offer a higher rear axel ratio so I could get a respectable 20 MPG in town and I would have bought the vehicle.

But, the nagging doubt always lingered about their reliability.

With a Toyota, you don't need a warranty.

I get 34 MPG on the highway and the car is great!

Detroit doesn't get it. They never have and they never will.

I drove 35 cars before I bought the Toyota.

The Detroit cars were good in the old days before people had the Japanese cars to compare them to and knew any better.

Now, of course, all bets are off.

The Detroit cars ride poorly, are made poorly, cheaply and shoddy and are unreliable.

Even with their new quality programs, I still won't trust a Detroit 3 car.

Louis of NY @ Aug 23, 2008 13:49:42 PM

I hear U.S.news is close to bankruptcy

of @ Aug 23, 2008 13:09:44 PM

Bankruptcy would help

Interesting article, but seems misguided on several points.

Most of the article is basically proved wrong by the early 80's Chrysler. Unless the author forgot that Chrysler declared bankruptcy, renegotiated UAW contracts, and cleared off debt. The extra cash allowed them to fund new product, including the Dodge Omni small car and a new vehicle called the minivan.

Regarding the too big to fail sentiment... It's not just the 80-100k company workers that would lose their jobs. Don't forget that almost every town in America has a GM dealership. If GM goes under, those people are out of work. Even the mighty Toyota can increase their capacity by 2 million units in one year. After dealerships, you also need to consider the suppliers, the finance companies, rental car companies, on and on. If GM is allowed to completely fail, the US economy would be devasted for several YEARS.

Chad of IL @ Aug 22, 2008 22:17:16 PM

Rust in Piece

Good riddance to these 3 crap car makers. Get the ugly pickups, minivans, and boxlike SUVs off the street. They reap what they sewed, and that's what they get for designing cars covered completely in right or nearly right angles.

Keep those eyesores off the road, kthxbye!

LOL of CA @ Aug 22, 2008 16:57:15 PM

17MM VS 14MM AND GOING LOWER

A rebound in U.S. sales seems very unlikey given how leasing has become more expensive even for the import brands. Ultimately, buying cycles will lenghten, reducing annualized sales. Waiting for a turn around is not an option. In my opinion, there needs to be a consolodation in both manufacturing and retail outlets

dave dargenio of NJ @ Aug 22, 2008 16:18:13 PM