General Motors CEO - Rick Wagoner Resigns.. - Page 3

zed · 03-31-2009, 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smittie61984

Plus the money was already given to them. Maybe there was a clause in whatever paperwork that said "If you recieve this money we can make decisions for you". But for the government to give them the money and then after they recieve the money put new terms on them. That's not good.

they have done this already, why not again?

101lifts2 · 03-31-2009, 01:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smittie61984

....GM is dying because of the UAW and that no one wants to buy a fucking peice of shit.

GM is dying because of all the retirement and healthcare (for retirees) that they are shelling out. The UAW cost per person isn't all that much compared to Toyota and Honda in the U.S.

And for the record GM continues to outsell every other make in the United States.

Wagoner has done wonders for GM and was probably the single most CEO to change the structure of General Motors. Unfortunately, GM is so huge that making changes were too slow. I would say Wagoner was the best CEO GM has ever had. Most of the others have driven GM into the ground over the last 100 years.

zed · 03-31-2009, 01:30 AM

I heard something that the Gov was going to try to make them take stock to fund those programs. I think that would be good, that way they would also have a vested interest to make the company do good so their stocks would go up.

goof2 · 03-31-2009, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zed

I heard something that the Gov was going to try to make them take stock to fund those programs. I think that would be good, that way they would also have a vested interest to make the company do good so their stocks would go up.

I see a big problem with this. The direction in which the government wants to force the auto industry will not be profitable in the next ten years, if ever. The government seems focused on forcing the American auto industry to build hybrids, plug in hybrids, and electric only vehicles. I could be mistaken but I don't believe anyone has built any of these and made any kind of profit. Toyota and Honda, the pinnacle of making profitable vehicles, both loose money on each hybrid they build. I suspect the domestics are not doing any better.

The question is, who would want to be an executive in the auto industry where your compensation is directly tied to profits, but you are either discouraged or ordered to build unprofitable vehicles. Is it a good idea to work for stock in a company where the government is essentially guaranteeing the demise of the company?

zed · 03-31-2009, 05:00 PM

I have been told that every Honda RC51 that was sold, lost Honda money. don't know for sure thats the truth either but the guy has been in the business for a long time.

Homeslice · 03-31-2009, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zed

I have been told that every Honda RC51 that was sold, lost Honda money. don't know for sure thats the truth either but the guy has been in the business for a long time.

Wouldn't doubt it.

Believe it or not there was a time when Ford lost money on every Escort, simply because they couldn't sell them for what they wanted to sell them for.

goof2 · 03-31-2009, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zed

I have been told that every Honda RC51 that was sold, lost Honda money. don't know for sure thats the truth either but the guy has been in the business for a long time.

Honda can afford to do that on some motorcycles and cars because they make money on a large majority of their vehicles. GM and Chrysler do not have that luxury since they loose money on the majority of their vehicles.

goof2 · 03-31-2009, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Homeslice

Wouldn't doubt it.

Believe it or not there was a time when Ford lost money on every Escort, simply because they couldn't sell them for what they wanted to sell them for.

That seems to be the case with about every GM and Chrysler full size truck and SUV right now.

Rsv1000R · 03-31-2009, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goof2

The question is, who would want to be an executive in the auto industry where your compensation is directly tied to profits, but you are either discouraged or ordered to build unprofitable vehicles. Is it a good idea to work for stock in a company where the government is essentially guaranteeing the demise of the company?

Welcome to a US Auto Industry run by the Car Czar......

Homeslice · 03-31-2009, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goof2

That seems to be the case with about every GM and Chrysler full size truck and SUV right now.

Maybe, but 2 years ago those same models were making bank. I know Ford used to make $18K after manufacturing costs on every Navigator.

03-31-2009, 01:30 AM	#23
zed yellow don't corner well Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Kansas City, KS Moto: 06 ZX10R Posts: 1,243	I heard something that the Gov was going to try to make them take stock to fund those programs. I think that would be good, that way they would also have a vested interest to make the company do good so their stocks would go up.

03-31-2009, 05:00 PM	#25
zed yellow don't corner well Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Kansas City, KS Moto: 06 ZX10R Posts: 1,243	I have been told that every Honda RC51 that was sold, lost Honda money. don't know for sure thats the truth either but the guy has been in the business for a long time.