Orzel

iTrader: (1)

And pray tell, who appointed all the task masters to run GM after the violations of the laws? The management team was all of the governments choosing, without approval of the board. And to a greater or lessor degree, they still jump though the hoops as dictated by both union and government.

84Cressida

Let's see that Sierra 3500 not go through intermediate steering shafts every 20,000 miles. Not a fair comparison? GM's fault for building garbage.

84Cressida

Yeah, it's not GM's fault they went out of business. Clearly it was those stupid Americans for not knowing a good car when they see one. Love them Cobalts and Blazers.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

you're changing the subject from them going bankrupt, which they largely deserved, to how the bailout was put together by the govt working in cahoots with the UAW and screwing the bond holders and taxpayers.

gm certainly made a lot of foul cars in its past (and some great ones) but was actually turning it around when the economy collapsed (not gm's fault) causing them to fail. ford's good timing of refinancing some big loans right before the economic collapse allowed them to avoid bankruptcy and the bailout mess. unfortunately they then had to compete with no help against a bailed out gm, which was grotesquely unfair.

anyway, i doubt you're interested in what i'm writing, as your seething hatred of anything 'merican made is pretty obvious.

84Cressida

GM was losing money hand over fist as far back as 2001. So was Chrysler. The only thing the market collapse of 2008 did was quicken their demise.

You're right, Ford went broke sooner than GM did and they lucked out. GM was offered the same loans that Ford was in 2006, but they did not take it, which was yet another management failure.

Joey-E

iTrader: (1)

Only the Vette

mmarshall

The last-generation Chevy Malibu and Saturn Aura were good examples of that. Too bad the Aura was lost with Saturn's demise....but the Malibu lived on.

Ford, however, by dumping Land Rover, Volvo, Jaguar, Mercury, and (part of) Mazda, got rid of a lot of money-draining divisions that, financially, had more or less the same positive effect as a government bailout would have been.


I have to agree with you....some people simply have their head in the sand. Detroit still does some poorly-done vehicles (witness the Cadillac XLS and Lincoln MKS), but they also are doing some EXCELLENT products as well...admittedly, at least partly with the help of European and Asian platforms. And, each year, more and more of the junk that Detroit still does produce is steadily being redone and redesigned.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

don't care about chrysler, and can't find data as far back as '01, but this chart below shows gm lost money from '05-'08 but made money in '04.

not sure how you can say they went broke, they didn't go bankrupt. did they borrow money? sure, but all car companies do that.

hey i'm not defending gm's management here... their problems though did get created over a LONG time and have a lot to do with caving in to unions time and time again which eventually, combined with economic calamity (which began long before '08) was a ball and chain so huge it sank the company.

on this chart, gotta love the 'other income' in 09 of 127 BILLION

tex2670

If this is an updated look for the Impala, I retract what I said:

GS3Tek

iTrader: (8)

Why buy an accord wannabe when you can get a real accord

baddis es

iTrader: (3)

dunno if it's been said but the 2014 Buick Regal GS is one nice sedan!

mmarshall

Have you DRIVEN a new Impala? As good a car as the Accord is, chassis-wise, it can't hold a candle to the Impala. Nor, for that matter can last year's Impala. GM clearly hit a home run out of the park with the 2014 Impala. Its driving dynamics and ride-handling balance is as different from past Impalas as steak is to hamburger.