Car Chat General discussion about Lexus, other auto manufacturers and automotive news.

UAW blasts GM for possible China-to-U.S. export (Buick)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-19-15, 09:50 AM
  #16  
S2000toIS350
Pole Position
 
S2000toIS350's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: IL
Posts: 2,372
Likes: 0
Received 121 Likes on 94 Posts
Default

Can we count Volvo as a major?

If so the union bahstids are incorrect, as we should have Chinese made Volvos on the ground here by now
S2000toIS350 is offline  
Old 08-19-15, 02:23 PM
  #17  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,202
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by gengar
But what is the cause and what is the effect?

The problem is that union workers (especially past union workers, including retirees) were receiving total compensation far in excess of what the middle class receives. So it's no surprise that GM was unable to remain profitable or maintain market share.
If you look back at GM's history, though, they made their greatest profits, and controlled more of the U.S. market-share (at one point over 50%) exactly at a time when the auto workers were making some of their highest wages and benefits relative to what they get today. I don't buy the often-used excuse that it was the UAW that drove the Big Three to actual bankruptcy or, in Ford's case, to the brink of it. Not only that, but assembly-line work can be very difficult, leading to repetitive-motion injuries of bone, muscle, and nerve tissue, although that has been lessened to some extent with robots. But, in general, those workers earned what they got. And, unless the rules have been changed since the 2008-2009 buyout, the UAW now actually has a seat on GM's Board, a condition for putting up union money to help save the corporation. That, of course, was unheard of at one time.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 08-19-15, 04:09 PM
  #18  
bagwell
Lexus Champion
Thread Starter
 
bagwell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Woodlands, TX
Posts: 11,205
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by gengar
The problem is that union workers (especially past union workers, including retirees) were receiving total compensation far in excess of what the middle class receives. So it's no surprise that GM was unable to remain profitable or maintain market share.
not only the UAW wages but the contract terms were just a joke.... I remember reading something like if your job was eliminated, you could come to the plant and sit in a break room just in case they needed you for 100% pay....or sit at home and do nothing for 75% pay.
bagwell is offline  
Old 08-19-15, 05:14 PM
  #19  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,202
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bagwell
not only the UAW wages but the contract terms were just a joke.... I remember reading something like if your job was eliminated, you could come to the plant and sit in a break room just in case they needed you for 100% pay....or sit at home and do nothing for 75% pay.
Well, even aside from that, it's not always to the company's advantage to eliminate jobs. Sure, the payroll may be temporarily trimmed somewhat, but unemployed auto workers usually can't buy new cars....and companies have to sell vehicles to survive.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 08-19-15, 05:44 PM
  #20  
Sulu
Lexus Champion
 
Sulu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,309
Likes: 0
Received 31 Likes on 24 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mmarshall
Well, even aside from that, it's not always to the company's advantage to eliminate jobs. Sure, the payroll may be temporarily trimmed somewhat, but unemployed auto workers usually can't buy new cars....and companies have to sell vehicles to survive.
That is the reason behind Henry Ford's decision to pay his workers higher wages -- so they could afford to buy the Ford cars they were building.
Sulu is offline  
Old 08-19-15, 06:19 PM
  #21  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,202
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sulu
That is the reason behind Henry Ford's decision to pay his workers higher wages -- so they could afford to buy the Ford cars they were building.
Exactly. When he announced that, Henry's competitors laughed at him and said he would go out of business......but he ended up completely transforming America's auto industry and making the car affordable to the masses.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 08-19-15, 06:57 PM
  #22  
bitkahuna
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
 
bitkahuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Present
Posts: 74,790
Received 2,419 Likes on 1,584 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by gengar
The problem is that union workers (especially past union workers, including retirees) were receiving total compensation far in excess of what the middle class receives. So it's no surprise that GM was unable to remain profitable or maintain market share.
ding ding ding.

Originally Posted by Sulu
That is the reason behind Henry Ford's decision to pay his workers higher wages -- so they could afford to buy the Ford cars they were building.
that worked since cars were VERY profitable back then (almost no competition). now, not so much, they're a commodity.
bitkahuna is offline  
Old 08-19-15, 07:16 PM
  #23  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,202
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bitkahuna
that worked since cars were VERY profitable back then (almost no competition). now, not so much, they're a commodity.
By 1914, the year that Ford doubled wages to $5 a day, Chevrolet was already a strong competitor ready to merge with GM, and the Dodge Brothers (Horace and John) were just getting started on their firm, which would become another strong competitor allied with Walter Chrysler.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 08-19-15, 07:38 PM
  #24  
S2000toIS350
Pole Position
 
S2000toIS350's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: IL
Posts: 2,372
Likes: 0
Received 121 Likes on 94 Posts
Default

A: Dodge/Chrysler was never a strong competitor (broken record that I am)

B: Modern business is about taking costs out to compete (ex. robots cost a lot to get in the plant and then do not draw a salary and benefits and when used well can increase quality, except when used by FCA)

C:The UAW can be seen as a tax, failing to bring a tangible benefit to the consumer, inherently wasteful and should be eliminated where possible
S2000toIS350 is offline  
Old 08-19-15, 07:49 PM
  #25  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,202
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by S2000toIS350
A: Dodge/Chrysler was never a strong competitor (broken record that I am)
I have to disagree. They went on to become the third of the Big Three.



C:The UAW can be seen as a tax, failing to bring a tangible benefit to the consumer, inherently wasteful and should be eliminated where possible
Remember, though, that UAW members ARE consumers. And they also buy their company's products if they can afford them.


Anyhow, we all got somewhat off-topic........Mid-size Buick SUVs built in China. if I get a chance to review or test-drive a Chinese-built Buick, I'm going to check it over, inside and out, VERY carefully. Chinese plants have a reputation for sloppiness by American standards, though they seem to be satisfying millions of Chinese, as Buick is a universally-well-liked brand in that country.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 08-20-15, 09:19 AM
  #26  
1QWKGS4
Pole Position
iTrader: (3)
 
1QWKGS4's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: AL/FL
Posts: 2,386
Received 37 Likes on 22 Posts
Default Chinese-made Buicks are about to flood the US

http://www.businessinsider.com/chine...-the-us-2015-8

“We do not comment on future product speculation,” a Buick spokesman said, refusing to confirm the leaks, but didn’t deny them either.

GM sold 919,582 Buicks in China in 2014, four times as many as it sold in the US! GM manufactures in China nearly all vehicles it sells there. About half of GM’s earnings are generated in China. After having been bailed out of bankruptcy by US taxpayers to keep the manufacturing base in the US, GM bet big on China.

In July, GM announced that it would invest an additional $5 billion in China to develop a new family of Chevrolet vehicles with its Chinese partner SAIC. All global automakers have invested billions in China, year after year, to build new plants, add capacity, and increase production. More new plants are coming. More capacity is being added. It all worked out because automakers sold these vehicles in China as fast as they could make them.

Until this year. But now supply and capacity are still rising. Demand has started to fall. Inventories are piling up. A vicious price war has broken out. And the bane of the auto industry, overcapacity, is suddenly looming ominously above them all.

Overcapacity tore up the industry in the US. It tore up the industry in the EU. It’s a deadly disease for automakers. It led to bankruptcies and bailouts. And now it’s spreading in China.

But there is a solution, apparently: exporting China-made vehicles to the US.

A few small-scale efforts have gone nowhere. America is a tough market. The best companies fight it out on a daily basis and are being taught lessons the hard way by finicky consumers.

Volvo, owned by Zhejiang Geely Holding, is starting to export its China-made S60 Inscription to the US this summer. It’s the long-wheelbase version of the Swedish-made S60 sedan. This will be the first mass-produced car from China on US streets. Not exactly a tsunami.

But now GM is reportedly jumping into the game in a big way.

On Monday, the first leak appeared, and at a very inconvenient time for GM, currently in contract negotiations with the UAW. Automotive News reported that GM is planning to sell its Chinese-built compact crossover, the Buick Envision, in the US.

“It would fit perfectly in the Buick lineup at a time when crossover sales are growing fast,” Jack Nerad, executive market analyst at Kelley Blue Book, told Automotive News. “I’m sure a lot of Buick dealers wish they had it today.”

Crossovers are hot in China, unlike cars, whose sales volumes are plunging. The Envision, built by GM’s joint venture Shanghai GM, arrived in Chinese showrooms last fall. And already, over 57,000 were sold during the first half this year. According to Buick spokesman Nick Richards, it has been “extremely well-received.”

But China would remain by far the largest market for it. Automotive News:

Both IHS and LMC Automotive forecast a U.S. launch of the Envision sometime in the second half of 2016, with annual volume forecasts from the mid-20,000s to the high 30,000s. Their forecasts for annual Envision sales in China range from 140,000 to 170,000 through 2018.

And US consumers would presumably flock to buy them:

A decade ago, the idea of China-made vehicles in U.S. showrooms might have turned off American buyers. But that’s far less likely today, IHS analyst Stephanie Brinley says. In recent years, GM and other global automakers have built modern assembly plants in China. And Americans are accustomed to their iPhones and other high-end consumer goods being made there.

“For the U.S. consumer experience, there is likely to be little difference between a Buick built at GM’s Orion Assembly plant [near Detroit] or in Shanghai,” Brinley says.

That was on Monday. On Tuesday, Reuters added fuel to the fire when it reported, based on two “sources familiar” with GM’s plans, that “most Buick vehicles sold in the United States after 2016 could be imported from China and Europe….”

According to the sources, “who did not want to be identified because their companies work with GM”:

Production of the compact Verano sedan will likely be shifted from Michigan to China in late 2016.
Production of the mid-size Regal sedan will likely be shifted from Canada to either China or Europe in 2017.
Buick will import the compact Cascada convertible from Europe early next year.
And production of the subcompact Encore crossover will be shifted from Korea to China.
Buick LacrosseStradablog via flickr
Buick Lacrosse

In the future Buick lineup, only two models would be made in North America: the replacements for the mid-size LaCrosse sedan and the large Enclave crossover.

The automotive component industry has already centered itself in China after the Financial Crisis in a whirlwind of bankruptcies and reorganizations that led to hundreds of thousands of job losses in the US. Today, Chinese-made components are used by all automakers that sell vehicles in the US.

And Chinese-made Buicks, Chevrolets, Fords, Toyotas, and BMWs are simply the next step. With the rosy prospects of overcapacity tearing up the industry in China, exports to the US are a natural solution.

When GM jumps into it in a big way, other automakers will follow. This would be the beginning of the long-awaited and much rumored tsunami of Chinese-made cars on US streets. American consumers will get used to them. At first, they were leery of Mexican-made cars; today, they aren’t even asking anymore.

But hope for the vaunted “Manufacturing Renaissance” in the US takes another hit, this time from China’s blossoming overcapacity fiasco.

China’s auto market had been the single most important element in the convoluted recovery of GM and other global automakers. But the market has been getting battered this year. And since the yuan devaluation, the elements are coagulating into a toxic mix for GM. Read… China Mess, Yuan Devaluation Spread to the US
1QWKGS4 is offline  
Old 08-20-15, 09:33 AM
  #27  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,202
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Moderators: I think these two threads can be combined:

https://www.clublexus.com/forums/car...ort-buick.html
mmarshall is offline  
Old 08-20-15, 10:27 AM
  #28  
Sulu
Lexus Champion
 
Sulu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,309
Likes: 0
Received 31 Likes on 24 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mmarshall
Anyhow, we all got somewhat off-topic........Mid-size Buick SUVs built in China. if I get a chance to review or test-drive a Chinese-built Buick, I'm going to check it over, inside and out, VERY carefully. Chinese plants have a reputation for sloppiness by American standards, though they seem to be satisfying millions of Chinese, as Buick is a universally-well-liked brand in that country.
I can understand the worry about Chinese products but history tells us this is inevitable. We have already seen products flood North America (USA and Canada) from offshore (and nearshore) locations with questionable quality for many years now. The first products to come had questionable quality but those problems were soon resolved.

Thirty and forty years ago (not that long ago to you and me, Mike), we were worried by the bad Japanese products. Toyotas and Datsuns (Nissans) of that time were terrible but quality had improved quite a bit by the time the first Honda Civics and Accords became popular.

Ten to fifteen years after those first horrible Datsuns, the Koreans came with the Hyundai Pony. And five years after that came Acura and Lexus. It took one generation (20 ~ 25 years) to go from tin-can cars to world-beating luxury cars.

Ten or so years ago, we were worried about the poor quality of cars imported from Mexico. Now, they are producing cars with quality comparable to the average American domestic car.

We may now be worried about cars made in China but we already have so many, many items we buy everyday that comes from China. Could Walmart survive without China as its supplier? Most of our smartphones are made in China, yet they don't fall apart in our hands. Our luggage is made in China and we have no problem with it. The first Chinese-made cars may be like those first Toyota Corollas or Honda Civics -- inexpensive and seemingly rather flimsy -- but they got the job done.

In fact, we should probably be satisfied that the first Chinese-made cars to be sold here will be sold as Volvos or Buicks. I remember being told a few years back that our Samsonite luggage is made in Chinese factories. Luggage is sold on the streets in China from the same factory that Samsonite uses (without the Samsonite badge), but those were rejected by Samsonite quality control. The difference between "Chinese quality" and "acceptable (for North America) quality" may be that internationally-recognized badge and brand name; that international brand provides the management and quality control oversight that allows us to use Chinese-made products without worry.
Sulu is offline  
Old 08-20-15, 10:53 AM
  #29  
My0gr81
Lexus Test Driver
 
My0gr81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,363
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sulu
...
In fact, we should probably be satisfied that the first Chinese-made cars to be sold here will be sold as Volvos or Buicks. I remember being told a few years back that our Samsonite luggage is made in Chinese factories. Luggage is sold on the streets in China from the same factory that Samsonite uses (without the Samsonite badge), but those were rejected by Samsonite quality control. The difference between "Chinese quality" and "acceptable (for North America) quality" may be that internationally-recognized badge and brand name; that international brand provides the management and quality control oversight that allows us to use Chinese-made products without worry.
All good points, most of the Chinese suppliers are happy to meet the minimum quality of material and workmanship set the by their 'customers" given that customer to pay the price for it. In 2007, Mattel had to recall a large number of toys because of paint containing lead. Originally, Mattel didn't deny the story lines blaming "Chinese factories" and "Chinese quality standards". The Chinese manufacturer pushed back, and eventually the Chinese government got involved to point out that the majority of the recalls were due to toys that were manufactured to Mattel's design standards and only a small portion were actually due to the paint.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/...10394020070921

Look at Apple, while they get much better pricing from factories in China, they still maintain their material, quality and workmanship standards high, pay for it, and then charge for their products accordingly in the marketplace.

Last edited by My0gr81; 08-20-15 at 11:06 AM. Reason: added clarity to the Mattel recall and new link that speak more clearly to the clarity
My0gr81 is offline  
Old 08-20-15, 11:17 AM
  #30  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,202
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Sulu
Thirty and forty years ago (not that long ago to you and me, Mike), we were worried by the bad Japanese products. Toyotas and Datsuns (Nissans) of that time were terrible but quality had improved quite a bit by the time the first Honda Civics and Accords became popular.
Actually, 40 years ago was the mid-1970s, and, by then, Japanese-designed vehicles, though uncomfortable and underpowered, had become quite reliable except for rust problems in the American climate....and were starting to eat into the domestic Big Three.

Ten to fifteen years after those first horrible Datsuns, the Koreans came with the Hyundai Pony. And five years after that came Acura and Lexus. It took one generation (20 ~ 25 years) to go from tin-can cars to world-beating luxury cars.
The first Hyundai sold in the U.S., the Excel, was actually shared with Mitsubishi as the Precis. Both, IMO, were a POS.

Acura and Lexus, though, avoided the Korean mistake, and sold reliable cars here from the start.
mmarshall is offline  


Quick Reply: UAW blasts GM for possible China-to-U.S. export (Buick)



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:14 PM.