Printable View
thanks for that mate, I have not ever sent a letter to the paper and I doubt it would very much make a difference. An old saying from the netherlands comes to mind when thinking about all this mess.Quote:
Originally Posted by PAT303
If you have a bucket of muddy water and add to it a bucket of clean water, you get a bigger bucket of muddy water.
Fact is hybrids did/do make a bad business case, they cost too much to produce and can't be sold for enough. Take honda for example, that's why they stopped making the "insight", it was costing them $100,000 each to make and they weren't selling even at $50,000.Quote:
Originally Posted by F4Phantom
Times have changed, technology has advanced, people are more willing to spend the extra cash to get the warm fuzzy feeling pretending they are saving the environment, so honda has announced it will start making them again. Same goes for the rest of them, it is getting easier and more marketable to produce hybrids and the like.
As for taking the jet to Washington, can you see the lost time in driving? At the salary they are on (probably too much!) it just doesn't make sense to drive. Granted, they probably should have taken a commercial flight, but if your company has access to a fleet of jets (which are rented, so costing $$$ to sit), why leave them sitting there idle? They can't win either way.
There seems to be a lot of 20/20 hindsight flying around these days, particularly concerning these 3 companies. Fact is they are in completely uncharted waters, and trying to predict what to do with the company at the moment is probably earning them at least part of those huge paychecks.
I do not think that the problem is inefficient or poorly managed companies. The problem is globalization. Just pay the workers in GM and Ford factories in USA and Australia the same wages that the workers get in China or Brazil and the companies will run in a big profit.Quote:
Originally Posted by QLDMIKE
For that reason the German manufacturers are moving to China and in Germany now is unemployment on the car industry.
John Howard when he was under Malcom Fraser said one day that the solution for Australia is integrate with Asia and pay asian wages :mad: I remember that very well
And you reckon paying car company workers Asian wages will stop this happening in the future NO it wont !Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucaro
Once all the lower paid countrys all gear up for mass production and higher employment rates their workers will all demand higher wages as we have done !
I would be disadvantaged if your plan would come in to effect as i work for GMH , Also every other company in oz and the usa would all want to pay their workers Asian wages ,which will affect more than myself ,
How would we all pay our enormous morgages then or pay for food fuel to run them 4x4,s:cool:
Mate it is not my plan and I do not like it either, wes Johny Howard idea. Coming fron South America I can telling you that the big capital do not care less about the conditions of the workers of if they have to clese down a factory. They only care for the big share holders and keep their position in management.Quote:
Originally Posted by rangieman
I believe that was the big capital that pushed for globalization and now we are starting to pay for that. Here in Oz we finished without industry and the trend continues. :(
Detroit 3 seeking $6.8 billion from Canadian government
by Frank Filipponio on Dec 8th 2008 at 12:59PM
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...08/12/1090.jpg
What to do when you wanted $34 billion and Congress only gave you $15 billion? Try again, but this time go North young man. The Detroit 3 are now making a pitch to the Canadian legislature seeking an additional $6.8 billion from Canada where nearly 100,000 workers are employed in factories and dealerships bearing the Chrysler, General Motors or Ford name.
General Motors of Canada has asked for $2.4 billion in loans, Chrysler Canada Inc. is looking for $1.6 billion and Ford wants a $2 billion line of credit on "stand-by" to be used "only if the current economic crisis worsens." GM is also seeking an immediate $800 million to make it through the end of the year. The Detroit automakers are quick to point out that these amounts are proportional to the U.S. bailout requests and that they are asking for loans, not handouts.
Federal Industry Minister Tony Clement was in Washington during the recent hearings and says the Canadian government will have to review the requests before pledging any funds. He had previously confirmed that funds were set aside to help automakers in the most recent budget. Premier Dalton McGuinty also pointed out the need to balance the public's needs with the carmakers' requests: "We want to move as quickly as we can, but we don't want to move so quickly that we end up with a response that is irresponsible given the legitimate demands of taxpayers." Thanks for the tip, Xeyad!
[Source: The Hamilton Spectator via MotorGears.com}
Actually the problem is only partly what the workers are paid. A large part of the US manufacturer's problem (and Australia) is simply that there are too many car manufacturers with too much capacity, making too many cars. In a large part because of governments everywhere either explicitly or implicitly subsidising them.
The result is that for years they have survived for years (rather precariously) on the basis of convincing customers to buy cars they do not really need. Give these customers a scare, as has happened, and they can (mostly) just put off buying that new car, in most cases for years.
The result is the only car manufacturers with a secure future are the ones with the most reliable government support. The ones that need the least support are the ones with new factories that are more fully automated than the old ones in Detroit (e.g. China, Korea, possibly India), and the ones already tooled up for the designs that people will buy in a severe economic climate. The further problem that Detroit has, is a huge unfunded superannuation debt that they agreed to when business was booming.
John
Filed under: Government/Legal, Earnings/Financials
Paulson: Automaker aid won't come from financial bailout money
by Jeremy Korzeniewski on Nov 12th 2008 at 5:58PM
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...008/12/855.jpg
Some U.S. policymakers believe that the domestic auto industry needs a multi-billion $hot in the arm, but the sticking point seems to be where to find the funds. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) is calling for a portion of the financial sector's $700 billion TARP buyout to be apportioned to Detroit, but Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson doesn't like the sound of that at all. Instead, Paulson would like to see the automakers get the $25 billion they've already been promised, and suggests that it be made available as soon as possible. Of course, that money was supposed to go towards retooling the industry to make more fuel efficient cars, not necessarily as a cash-infusion to keep the Detroit 2.8 running. In any case, Frank has called for a meeting with the heads of each automaker in Washington next Wednesday to discuss whether a new loan for Detroit should be sectioned off from the TARP fund. This could get interesting.
Filed under: Government/Legal
Canada to the rescue! (after U.S.)
by Alex Nunez on Dec 14th 2008 at 5:31PM
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...008/12/854.jpgWith all signs pointing to White House action on an automaker bailout despite the the bill not making it out of the Senate last Thursday, Canada has its taxpayers' wallets on standby as well. Our neighbors to the north account for a 20% share of the auto industry, and both the federal and Ontario governments are ready to add a commensurate amount of money to the bailout pot if U.S. government action does take place. So, assuming President Bush instructs Henry Paulson, the recently-crowned King of All Our Money, to give Detroit $14B out of TARP to tide them over and keep the RenCen escalators running until this all officially becomes Obama's problem next month, look for an additional $2.8B or so to float across the Detroit River. Thanks for the tip, BrandleSmith!
[Source: Reuters]
BREAKING: Bush greenlights $17.4 billion Auto Rescue/Bailout package
by Chris Paukert on Dec 19th 2008 at 9:32AM
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...008/12/649.jpg
President George W. Bush will doubtlessly be remembered for many things things, but his parting legacy may yet be his eleventh-hour pledge of $17.4 billion in low-interest loans to General Motors and Chrysler (Ford Motor Company has said it does not require relief at this time).
The funding will reportedly come from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), the financial industry bailout package signed off on this fall. Up front, the White House will earmark $17.4 billion in short-term financing for December and January, and in February, another $4 billion will be disbursed, provided it can draw the funds from the second half of TARP's $700 billion.
More details are doubtlessly coming, but the bridge loans appear to hinge largely on whether General Motors and Chrysler are deemed "viable" enterprises by the government. In the terms of the agreement, that means that the automakers must prove whether they have a "positive net present value, taking into account all current and future costs, and can fully repay the government loan." There's no word yet on how they will prove said viability, but we expect to learn more soon. In the meantime, expect for both General Motors and Chrysler to stick to their previous production suspension announcements.