Re: "Big Three" bailout ....
 

I'm sure it was a unique and novel concept for them; I bet they've never really sat in their own cars (certainly the smaller, fuel-efficient ones anyway) for any length of time so this was probably something of an eye-opener to them. I'm sure it was a worthwhile experience overall. It's not like they are going to have to do it every day!

You are missing the point. We have Costco, providing much the same type of service, but doing it better, AND paying their staff much more than Wallmart and giving better benefits. For your analogy to work, not only would the 'big three' have to be paying higher wages/benefits, but they'd also have to be selling better quality cars than Honda/Toyota for less money.

Re: "Big Three" bailout ....
 

I've had a fair number of American made cars, paid a lot less money than I would for Honda etc. (and I know, because I compared).

My last one was still running well at 12 years old, and 165,000 miles. With little maintenance. They aren't all that good, but that car was terrific. My current one is quite fine too.

My last japanese made car died (engine) at 100,000. I was told that model of car was known for doing that.

So I am not remotely convinced that all the foreign cars are better than all the American ones. Some models, some ways - sure. But not all.

Sams Club, imo, does at least a good a job as Costco re. merchandise. I do know some people switching over, so I'm not the only one. Costco certainly does not sell better things for less money, as you said the big 3 would have to do.

So... to fit your 'criteria' - the big three are WAY better than the foreign car employers as far as wages, benefits, and especially the health care for the retirees. Their products generally cost less. So your only issue is quality - to hear people rant about Walmart, you ought to sacrifice a little quality (if it is) to get the price, and most importantly the great treatment of the workers.

Re: "Big Three" bailout ....
 

Tracy, have you ever worked in one of those 'evil foreign car plants'? I have. When I worked for one in the late 90's, the workers were treated very well, and made damn good money too. So I don't know what you're going on about.

I have never bought American, but I have bought 'foreign designed, built in America' cars. My parents bought several American cars in the 80s and early 90s. I remember them having nothing but trouble out of them, and they spend a considerable amount of money on repairs. When they bought 'evil foreign cars', they had no trouble, and very little repair bills. That taught me a lesson right there. When I was old enough to buy a car, I bought foreign. I've never had one prob with them breaking down, and they hold their value amazingly well, unlike the Big 3 - which depreciate considerably once driven off the lot. Not to mention the huge diff in mpg. Have you looked at a typical American car to see just how many parts are actually made outside the USA? I'd almost be willing to bet that the 'evil foreign cars' built here in America actually have more American parts than the Big 3.

If you're so worried about quality, why don't you do some of your own research on Consumer Reports.

Re: "Big Three" bailout ....
 

I did not say they were evil. But you can find plenty of articles about how the UAW workers get far more benefits. UAW is having to make concessions now, as the big three try to stay in business.

Personally, I'm all for the competition. Quality. Price. And not a huge fan of unions generally.

My comments were for those who are so against Walmart/Sams Club and for Costco, because the workers are supposedly treated so much better. I've known and talked to various employees of Sams Club, who have said they are treated just fine - but many don't believe that.

I'm sure many parts of cars are manufactured elsewhere - just like many things.

I'd personally buy and American car or a foreign car - whichever suited my needs and budget best.

Re: "Big Three" bailout ....
 

Buy GM stock, there's money to be made when they agree a bailout package. At least on the short term investment

Re: "Big Three" bailout ....
 

True... that could be...

Takes a bit of bravery though - do you feel lucky...?

Re: "Big Three" bailout ....
 

:sneaky: :sneaky: 20% return in a week getting in and out

There's some bargains out there with US blue chip stocks that pay dividends too

Re: "Big Three" bailout ....
 

I would think Ford would be a bit safer. At least they appear to be more financially stable than the other 2.

Re: "Big Three" bailout ....
 

Probably not discounted quite as much then.

Re: "Big Three" bailout ....
 

As long as nothing goes wrong with the bailout.. or the 'good news' isn't already in the price (the old "buy the rumour, sell the fact") ...

What blue chips do you think are bargains?

Re: "Big Three" bailout ....
 

GM will receive money before Ford. Ford will go it alone and will have to sell off divisions.
Metal markets are also a gamble as there's less demand for copper and aluminum. AA has been good, get in around $7.50
There's some other long term stocks that are at low prices, it's a gamble of course

Re: "Big Three" bailout ....
 

Ironic indeed. What was even more ironic was that the big trucks remained in full production with ford and GM for so long, even when there was an obvious slow down going on and their sales figures were slipping on those particular vehicles each week. Producing cars at full speed ahead that nobody wants is no way to move the company forward, or to make money.

Yeah, funny how the 21 MPG is always "hwy" in smaller letters. So for 21 highway, assume 17 or less in the city... as you say, little wonder they're losing money. IMHO, anyone that's starting production of a new truck in the turbulant times of the oil prices right now, rather than stepping up production of the more fuel efficient vehicles that america (and the planet) needs, does not deserve a bailout.

Re: "Big Three" bailout ....
 

GE Pfizer Merck and Archer Daniels Midland. It's a few weeks too late on some of them. Watch them, chart them......................... and then come back and tell me I was full of shit :lol:

Re: "Big Three" bailout ....
 

They need to build what will sell - regardless of what the MPG is.

There will always be a market for some trucks - if you're trying to haul a load of hay, you are not going to buy a yugo.

If you have a five kids, you're going to want a minivan.

For myself personally, MPG is not a huge consideration. More is better of course, but other things are a much higher priority. I need the space, seating, flexibility to haul things. And I don't drive a ton of miles. I'd sacrifice a little in MPG, if necessary, for more power - getting on an expressway etc., I want sufficient acceleration, or I feel unsafe (not a race car, but I want it to move if I need it to). There will always be some like me.

That said - they need to figure out how many like me, how many want a truck, how many have enough people to need a van - and produce cars accordingly. They don't seem to have done a very good job in predicting demand.

Re: "Big Three" bailout ....
 

Why I'd never say anything so unkind to you :p

I will take a look.