Why Not Let Honda Et Al. Take Over GM?

Elle wrote:
> Is any other Honda enthusiast struck by the U.S. Congress's
> and President's effort to shore up and nationalize companies
> that make terrible automobiles and have long promoted
> gluttony by consumers? Why not instead compel, one way or
> another, mergers with Honda, Toyota, and Subaru or Nissan
> such that they would agree to start new plants, employ many
> of Detroit's former workers, and fill the gap that the
> demise of Detroit's auto companies would unquestionably
> cause?
>
>
Hi,
Big 3 can make cars superior to Honda and others. If top game caller is
engineering backgroundtype. Book keeper type has had top jobs who
created wrong market/product strategy. Management style has to change
to produce cars people want to buy. They've been producing cars they
want to sell(same old technology with new skins), not the cars people want.

Elle wrote:
> "News" > wrote
>
>>Elle wrote:
>>
>>>"News" > wrote
>>>
>>>
>>>>Elle wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"News" > wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>And why would this interest Honda and the others?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>The government would pay Honda Et Al. for their interest
>>>>>as opposed to paying money to the Big 3.
>>>>
>>>>I repeat, why would keeping competitors alive interest
>>>>Honda et al?
>>>
>>>
>>>No no; I am saying let the competitors die. Just move
>>>their workers to Honda et al. and continue making Hondas,
>>>Toyotas etc. but not the crappy Fords, GMs, and
>>>Chryslers.
>>>
>>>If you have not been reading about the proposed Big 3
>>>bailout, you are not going to understand this thread.
>>
>>Ha ha. If you don't understand international competitive
>>dynamics and game theory, you are over your head.
>
>
> So you are unaware of the bailout. Wrong thread for you.
>
>

And you don't know what you don't know. Good luck to you.

"Tony Hwang" > wrote
> Elle wrote:
>> Is any other Honda enthusiast struck by the U.S.
>> Congress's and President's effort to shore up and
>> nationalize companies that make terrible automobiles and
>> have long promoted gluttony by consumers? Why not instead
>> compel, one way or another, mergers with Honda, Toyota,
>> and Subaru or Nissan such that they would agree to start
>> new plants, employ many of Detroit's former workers, and
>> fill the gap that the demise of Detroit's auto companies
>> would unquestionably cause?
>>
>>
> Hi,
> Big 3 can make cars superior to Honda and others. If top
> game caller is engineering backgroundtype. Book keeper
> type has had top jobs who created wrong market/product
> strategy.

Why would an engineer have a better grasp of market and
product strategy compared to a business person? Especially
American engineers who are as interested in muscle cars as
any teenage boy.

> Management style has to change
> to produce cars people want to buy.

Do you really doubt that people's desires did not drive the
demand for SUVs?

> They've been producing cars they want to sell(same old
> technology with new skins), not the cars people want.

Lastly, consider (1) how many years it would take to put out
yet another Big 3 model and that (2) the new model may or
may not be successful to keep the company afloat. (As Rick
suggested, part of the problem is the Big 3 make too many
different models.) Why take our tax dollars and gamble? Is
this as good a decision as compelling Honda, Toyota, etc. to
simply absorb the Big 3's labor force and continue to put
out cars we know are reliable? Friggin' government is not
even talking to Honda or Toyota.

"News" > wrote
Elle wrote
>> So you are unaware of the bailout. Wrong thread for you.
>
> And you don't know what you don't know.

Likewise chief.

Elle wrote:
> "News" > wrote
> Elle wrote
>
>>>So you are unaware of the bailout. Wrong thread for you.
>>
>>And you don't know what you don't know.
>
>
> Likewise chief.
>
>

You got the last part right.

"News" > wrote in message
t...
>
>
> Elle wrote:
>> "News" > wrote
>> Elle wrote
>>
>>>>So you are unaware of the bailout. Wrong thread for you.
>>>
>>>And you don't know what you don't know.
>>
>>
>> Likewise chief.
>
> You got the last part right.

It's all correct, troll.

Elle wrote:
> "News" > wrote in message
> t...
>
>>
>>Elle wrote:
>>
>>>"News" > wrote
>>>Elle wrote
>>>
>>>
>>>>>So you are unaware of the bailout. Wrong thread for you.
>>>>
>>>>And you don't know what you don't know.
>>>
>>>
>>>Likewise chief.
>>
>>You got the last part right.
>
>
> It's all correct, troll.
>


Be sure to let us know when yout deal closes.

Better not hold your breath, you ignorant snot.

"Elle" > wrote in news:Bks%k.4528$uS1.594
@newsfe19.iad:

> Is any other Honda enthusiast struck by the U.S. Congress's
> and President's effort to shore up and nationalize companies
> that make terrible automobiles and have long promoted
> gluttony by consumers? Why not instead compel, one way or
> another, mergers with Honda, Toyota, and Subaru or Nissan
> such that they would agree to start new plants, employ many
> of Detroit's former workers, and fill the gap that the
> demise of Detroit's auto companies would unquestionably
> cause?
>
>
>



That's essentially what the British government did with BMH (priorly BMC)
and Leyland in the late '60s. The marriage was fatal then, and it would be
fatal if attempted again.

Individuals operating within a governmental structure make stupidly bad
decisions. Period. Full stop.

There is a /real/ solution, but it's one that is politically impossible,
given how democratic politicians value their necks.


--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Elle wrote:
> Is any other Honda enthusiast struck by the U.S. Congress's
> and President's effort to shore up and nationalize companies
> that make terrible automobiles and have long promoted
> gluttony by consumers? Why not instead compel, one way or
> another, mergers with Honda, Toyota, and Subaru or Nissan
> such that they would agree to start new plants, employ many
> of Detroit's former workers, and fill the gap that the
> demise of Detroit's auto companies would unquestionably
> cause?
>
>


I dunno, but I think that Import car companies that assemble product in
the US would steer far and wide to avoid hiring former overpaid Detroit
style assemblers.

Personally, I think that GM needs to downsize its domestic operation by
at least 50% and concentrate on already profitable overseas activities.

JT

rick++ wrote:

> I read an interesting tongue-in-check proposal to
> have Steve Jobs take over GM. When Steve left
> Apple for eight years to run NeXT and Pixar,
> Apple pretty much became the GM of computers-
> almost bankrupt, stoogy old product lines,
> excessive model types, etc.
> When Steve returned he dumped non-core functions
> such as manufacturing, cut product lines by 2/3rds,
> and returned style to the lineup.
>
> http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2...07_005508.html


Not really a fair comparison. Apple was never in debt and in fact
during its darkest days still had over a billion $$$ in cash. Also, the
company was already turning around under Gil (the Italian guy).

Yeah, Jobs does have a certain talent for pizzaze that takes advantage
of the mooing masses.

He's also responsible for some bombs... The Cube comes to mind first.

Oh, and the transfer of manufacturing to China has hurt in the
dependability area.

OTOH, having been a long time Mac user, the company certainly is
innovative...

JT

G4 desktop
G4 Powerbook


(Who remembers Michael Dell stating about ten years ago that Apple would
not be part of the computer story in ten years. Ironically, one only
has to look at Apple vs. Dell stock performance over the past ten years.
How I'd like to be a fly on the wall in the Dell boardroom these days..)