Detroit's Biggest Failure: Losing the Youth Market

We have all been listening to the debates about the possible future competitiveness of the Big 3. Talk has centered on dollars and cents. Talk has centered on engineering and science. Talk has not addressed lineage. The Big 3 have not really talked about customer emotions or customer commitment to a brand. Perhaps they have not talked about this because it is an embarrassment. The Big 3 have consistently been losing customers over the years. Why is this?

The most glaring explanation is not dollars and cents. It is lineage. When I was a kid, people bought a good old faithful Ford (F) or Chevy (GM) (or Chrysler) because their parents had owned a Ford or Chevy. A Ford or Chevy was usually the first car they ever drove. A Ford or Chevy was usually the first car they ever owned. The European cars were a little chic, but there was nothing like a dependable Ford or Chevy. The Japanese cars were considered cheap junk. What changed all this?

One could say it was the gas crisis of the early 1970s. However, that would not be true. Instead I propose that it was the total lack of commitment by the Big 3 to the youth of America. Even prior to the gas crisis Volkswagen (VLKAY.PK) had developed a following. It was dependable, and it got good gas mileage. The air cooled engine was a little bit of a gimmick too. Some people liked the fact that you didn't have to worry about the radiator anymore.

When youths bought these cars, the Big 3 ignored them. Apparently in their self conceit they thought that these brash young men and women would eventually settle down to a more conservative, staid car like a Ford or a Chevy. What they didn't count on was lineage. Many of these young men and women kept buying Volkswagens throughout their lives. Then their children drove Volkswagens as their first car. Their children owned Volkswagens as their first car. The gas crisis of the early 1970s may have spurred people to buy Japanese cars for the first time. But lineage has made them stick with the brand.

The Big 3 have to address this as their primary objective. This is the only way they will ever win market share back. They have to appeal to the youth. The youth want "green". The youth want fuel efficiency. The youth want chic. They want this all in the lowest price car they can get. The idea that the Big 3 can afford to be at a $2000+ competitive disadvantage to other car makers is especially telling in the "economy" car arena. While $2000+ is just a small part of the cost in a $50,000+ vehicle, it is a huge percentage of the cost in a $10,000 to $20,000 vehicle. If the youth buy a foreign car as their first vehicle because it is $2000+ cheaper (and gets a little bit better gas mileage, etc.), it is more likely they will buy their second vehicle from the same (or a similar) manufacturer. Even if they become wealthier as they age, they will likely continue to buy the same type of vehicles which they relied on to get them to that state.

When the UAW tries to argue that this $2000+ is not important, that is a fool's argument. It is time the Big 3 woke up. They need to concentrate on serving the youth of America. They need to concentrate on serving the struggling worker. That is how they will return to profitability. That is real answer to Detroit's problem. So when the UAW tries to tell people that that $2000+ that they add to the price of an economy vehicle is unimportant, they are not only trying to fool the Big 3. They are trying to fool the public. They are trying to fool themselves. Their numbers have been dwindling as the Big 3 have shrunk.

The UAW has dictated the Big 3's car strategy for some time now. They have known they could not be competitive in the "economy" car market due to this extra cost. They have therefore concentrated on other markets. This has led to a huge loss of lineage customers. It has led to their downfall. It is time they corrected their thinking. The government has the chance to make sure that the Big 3 adjusts their thinking on this. It has the chance to make sure that the Big 3 takes the right path toward long term profitability.

The government should make sure they take advantage of this opportunity. A strong US automaker industry is essential to long term US economic health. It is essential to US strategic readiness for war. The government needs to envision the day when the US not only imports fewer cars, but we actually export a lot more. Serving the youth of America will serve the youth of other countries. Lineage will work in those countries too.

Disclosure: None

Comments

[car_guy:]

The author is correct that if the US 3 don't start making in roads with the 'echo boomers' then they will miss their best chance at long-term success, beyond simply staying alive. The baby boomers moved to foreign, primarily Asian, cars because of fuel economy but also because it was something to truly separate themselves from their WWII generation parents (it is very rare to find a WWII vet driving a Japanese or German car for obvious reasons).

Nobody likes to drive/have/do what their parents drive/have/do. The best way to show independence is to drive/have/do something completely different than your parents.

With boomers, especially those on the coasts, driving Asian and European vehicles it is a once in a lifetime opportunity for the US 3 to provide vehicles to be 'different than your parents'. You can already see this in the tuner market where 1980's vintage GM 'G' body vehicles (Olds Cutlass, Buick Regal, Pontiac Grand Prix, Chevy Monte Carlo) are in high demand to pimp & modify.

But as the author states, these vehicles also has to be 'green' & fun. The US 3 has taken a few shots at this in the past w/specific models but they need to focus a full vehicle line, or preferably a brand like Lexus has w/Scion, and make this a priority.

The $2K/vehicle penalty is primarily for legacy costs & was addressed w/the 2007 contract & will be addressed further with the restructuring in the coming months. It is NOT a reason to wait to target this market. If you are going to lose $ w/small cars anyway you might as well be building a long term market for your profitable vehicles.

2008 Dec 22 11:00 AM

[GMShareholder:]

It does not take a rocket scientist to see that the Three companies that lost the most market share in the last 30 years and that have had historical financial issues have been UAW companies. Management may have made some bad decisions on products but these decisions were made based on high cost structures .
No business stays in business investing in something that does not return a sufficient profit!!!!!!!!!!
GM,Ford and Chrysler would not be in the position they are in today if they did not have these higher costs to deal with. In addition the FEDERAL goverment , by not keeping gasoline prices higher encourages , through low gasoline prices, the sale of larger less fuel efficient vehicles.
Encouraging the Big Three to make smaller fuel efficient vehicles without raising fuel taxes encourages the sale of larger more fuel efficient vehicles. The government must begin raising fuel taxes, over a period of years, to encourage conservation and to encourage the sale of more fuel efficient vehicles.
The US uses 4 x the per capita consumption of oil than our European and world counterparts.

2008 Dec 22 11:14 AM

[car_guy:]

There are a variety of decisions that have had very good results. A few off the top of my head...
-Ford 'created' the large SUV market in 1996 by replacing the 10+ year old Ford Bronco w/the Expedition. This segment of the market doubled in sales (from 250K to 500K per year) and eventually grew to 1M vehicles per year. Ford made billions in profits in late '90s on this decision and the Japanese, especially Toyota, spent billions trying to catch up and finally 'arrived' in 04/05/06 when the market had died due to high gas prices.
-GM decided in the late '90s to push very hard into China when it was very unclear how the market would develop & if any money could be made. This was a key Wagoner decision. Moving early & reviving the Buick brand, which the emperor drove before he was removed, helped GM catch up & challenge VW for market leadership in the largest growing auto market in the world.
-GM & Ford pushed early into Eastern Europe in the 90s and established low cost manufacturing sites & established a solid market in a growing region.
-GM's global strategy has enabled them to produce over 9MM vehicles per year in 05/06/07 and grow share in the key Chinese, Russian, & Brazilian markets. The only other year GM has sold 9MM vehicles was 1978. Wagoner & company saw this downsizing coming a long time ago & understood the only way for the company to survive was to be successful in growing markets & manage the costs in the US.
-Ford's new Fiesta, which debuted in Europe this year, is a true globally designed vehicle & is touted by the Auto press as one of the best, if not the best, small car on the market.
-GM bought bankrupt Daewoo Motors in Korea & transformed it into GM's global small car design center. This gave GM entry into the closed Korean market & also provided them with a design center that was very experienced in producing good, low cost, small cars. This is paying off w/the Chevy Cruize which is getting good reviews.

There are various bad decisions, see my previous post, but to say everyone is an idiot and there are no good decisions is simply ignorant. It is no different than saying that everyone on Wall Street is stupid because they did not think that using default statistics for past prime loans as a baseline for current sub-prime liar loans would result in a global financial collapse.


On Dec 22 09:51 AM eddie64 wrote:

> We all have read all the things the Big 3 did wrong over the years.
> I'd like to challenge the readers, or even the companies themselves,
> to submit specific decisions that either GM, C or F made over the
> past 10 years that were correct and generated positive results. Discuss
> engineering, design, quality, reliability, proactive marketing, pricing,
>
> M& A, international growth, etc.
>
> I'm guessing the list won't be very long. Or it may not even be a
> list. And therein lies the reality of making the Big 3 viable, as
> their foreign competitors aren't standing still...........
>
> IMHO

2008 Dec 22 11:32 AM

[EC48:]

I think moc1166 is living in fairyland. The UAW may not be responsible for all the Detroit 3's woes but they are certainly a huge contributor. If you multiply $2,000 by multi millions of cars that Detroit has sold it adds up to billions of $'s, many more billions than the amount they are asking for in loans from Washington, I would guess in the range of 100 billion+ over the last ten years. That additional 100 billion might have put theem in an entirely different position than they are today.
As for building cars no one wanted, seems to me an awful lot of people bought them, they also built vehicles that would keep them viable due to the additional burdened costs caused by the UAW comittments.
The author of the article is correct though that they need to appeal to the youth market, they also lost many customers due to their arrogance in the past, me being one of them. Much more difficult to win customers back than to retain them.

2008 Dec 22 11:37 AM

[elcopone:]

I think youth is a poor point considering that Toyota has the highest average age of any manufacturer. So when you say it's all about the youth, I must disagree. Lineage maybe, but lineage is not a youth problem. Toyota, to it's credit, came up with Scion to address the age issue.

Additionally, I must disagree on the +2000 analysis. American cars already sell at 2000 DISCOUNT to comparable Japanese cars! Blaming price is more of the same arrogance that got the Big 3 into the position they are in. Why is it that CAT can be the best manufacturer in the world of their products depsite being American? I'll tell you why, it's all about the product!

Your "strategic readiness for war" is a laughable argument at best. When was the last time an american AUTO company made an F-18??? Last I checked, wars were fought in the air. Additionally, the used auto market alone would enable America in wartime. Also, Isn't GM producing more and more in Canada, Mexico, and China anyway? How does that help "strategic readiness"???

Bottom line (which you missed), as always, it's all about the product. When you have a great product, all other problems fix themselves. Design (interior and exterier), long-term quality, fuel effficency, everything has lagged behind the Japanese and Europeans for 20 years now. While GM still hasn't figured out how to make a stylish car people want (have you seen ANY Pontiac recently???)

Customers are won and lossed on product and product alone, not lineage.

2008 Dec 22 12:37 PM

[Jack B.:]

Scion,Scion and Scion. Look at Scion's website and you will see how it appeals to youngsters. Even has a great "First Time buyer" program. When has anyone heard of that with GMAC????? Gmac is useless and has caused GM alot of Woe....With no leaseing (how stupid) Gm is losing all of its cadillac customers to the highline imports and Ford.

Remember this, if you are not selling or leasing any cars, you will go out of business.......

When is the last time you saw GM make something that appeals to the young people??? GM has lost 3 generations while still worrying about the 80 year old people with Buick????

2008 Dec 22 12:48 PM

[Stedfast:]

Whats wrong with the big three U.S. Automakers.It's very simple,If You produce a good dependable,long lasting vehicle at a reasonable price,people will buy.Throw in a little style and good looks instead of making all the vehicles to look like they came from the same Co.People want a vehicle that will last longer than the monthly payments.U.S. auto companies have more recalls than any other co's on Earth.The Quality of U.S. vehicles has went to hell in a handbag period!!!!!I know because I have always bought U.S.made.The Cars of the 60's,such as Chevrolets Impalas,Chevelles etc.The Buyer wants a ring and pinion gear rear axle instead of front wheel drive CV joint systems.Thats why Pickups,full size SUV's,Crown Vics,ImpalaSS cars are what people want to buy.as for Gas mileage,these vehicles with the right Injection systems,would get excellent mileage.Big Three,Wake Up,take a Lesson from Harley Earl,Mr Duntov.They knew Style as well as Quality.You have screwed the consumer long enough.The Public wants thier Moneys worth,when buying Your Vehicles.I would buy a new vehicle today if it would last several years without recalls and problems everytime I turn around.

2008 Dec 22 02:28 PM

[exec1107:]

Unions are dinosaurs that have outlived their usefulness. The big issues that the unions once campaigned for (e.g., basic health benefits, length of the work week, etc.) are now largely a part of US Labor Law. Now, the UAW is just a giant leech. All of the imports made in the USA come from non-union plants, and Toyota, Honda, and BMW make cars that sell and return a profit. The UAW belongs in a museum with the Model "T". Clearly, some of the blame rest with the (mis-) management of GM. CEO Stemple thought it was a good idea to pay a UAW worker 95% of his/her wage when laid off. Rather that risk a strike that might have lasted several weeks, he caved in to outrageous demands. Stupidity and gutlessness like that helped ruin GM. Also, too many irrelevant brands that were essentially the same car with different grills and bumpers. Every consumer product company with long-term growth opportunities in the US succeeds by building brand loyalty with young consumers and then creating products that evolve with the needs and desires of that demographic group. This is Economics 101. Ditch the UAW, and install management with some balls and business sense, and GM can be saved.

2008 Dec 22 03:14 PM

[Mike InMich:]

This is the first article I've seen that realizes that the UAW costs can't be carried as we go forward with small cars...mandated by the feds and to a lesser extent by the public.

Regading the VW bug, I once rode with a guy in Winter who was telling me what a great car it was as he was reaching out the side window with a scraper to clear the front window while driving.

It is true that the biggest problem faced by the big 3 is that they are just plain out of style. People feel a need to justify purchasing foreign cars by complaining about the American cars they owned 20 years ago, and give the Jap cars a pass on their numerous problems at every opportunity. Witness the whole damn fleet of Toyota Tundra trucks recalled because the engines were not properly ventilated and the oil sludged. Toyota tried to blame the owners for poor service habits, but the big 3 know Americans abuse their trucks and licked this problem years ago.

The reason people keep going after the UAW is it is their costs that are out of line. The management and salary engineers get paid what they would in any major US city at a major US company. The UAW is way out of line in wages, and especially benefits for their education, skill level and work ethic. Waaaaay out of line.

Note also that the remaining US car buyers are mostly middle and lower class, who are not amused that your wages and benefits far exceed theirs. The UAW thinks they are the leaders of these people, but no one else is buying that now.

So in order to convince Americans to buy your cars you must cut you wages and benefits to transplant level (at least 20%), thank America for a second chance, and plead with working class Americans to buy your cars. BTW cutting the wage and beenfits of people not hired yet doesn't count as a cut in my world. Nice try.

Otherwise the big 3 will die and you will take down the Midwest with you. Hope you will be happy with yourselves.

So far Gettlefinger's response was to cry about being picked on and said he'll go to his ?lapdog? Obama for a redo. Nice way to show gratitude Ron!

2008 Dec 22 08:10 PM

[Mike InMich:]

elcapone: You were talking about the sucess of CAT. CAT broke the UAW in a protracted strike. Here is a little cut from the below weblink:
fleetowner.com/news/08.../

"The last strike UAW called against Caterpillar resulted in a defeat that left the union in a weakened state, Devinatz noted. “In 1994, UAW held a strike that lasted 18 months. During that time 13,000 workers struck— 4,000 crossed the picket line— that’s 30% of the work force,” he said.

UAW’s failure to hold the picket line during the last strike may have emboldened Caterpillar’s management this time around, Devinatz said. “They were able to maintain high productivity levels based on the workers that crossed the picket line. Certainly it was a defeat for the union. The union ended the strike because they felt it wasn’t having an effect— the plant was still able to operate.” "

I don't think the big 3 would ever be able to break the union like this due to the density of union people in big 3 neighborhoods.

Someone else above blamed GM for granting 95% pay to laid off workers. Look up the word "extortion" in the dictionary and tell me how it differs from a strike?

2008 Dec 22 08:19 PM

[rm32644:]

Did anyone notice, Ford did not take the money? I hope you guys are all going to buy Fords, in support of their non-bailout approach, and quit saying bailout of the big 3, it was just the big 2.

Only in America can a union shut down an auto plant for 5 weeks. It wouldn't happen in Japan. Unions don't have the actual legal authority to do this, but half of our culture supports their right to do it, so the auto companies can't tick off half of their potential customers by hiring replacement workers. Do you think the auto execs can't do the math on the cost of a 5 week shut down versus the cost of giving the union what they want?

We need to heal our culture and get off this class warfare thing, and let the auto companies do what they have to do to break the union. They will if they see support. With Obama and crew coming in, it doesn't look likely in the next 4 years.

2008 Dec 22 08:27 PM

[Mike InMich:]

Yes, support Ford. Buy American while we still can. You others, where do you work where you think that American made does not make a difference?

It is an illusion if you think we can all work in finance, for the government, sue each other, and otherwise support ourselves by "consumption". Making things is essential to the economy, and in case you haven't noticed we don't make much anymore. Cars, in fact, are just about the last thing left, and then we are down to less than 50% designed and built in the US. There are figures out there saying 3 million jobs are tied to the US big 3; I think it is 10 times that when you look at the multiplier effect.

We may find out too late to bring this back. Already I saw a story where a textile compnay wanted to bring back some production to the US. but they failed because all the tooling and supplier infrastructure was gone.

So thanks for the bailout, whether you agreed or not. Now with the UAW facing up to reality we can rebuild the US auto industry. Then the sons and daughters of the current UAW can have above average wages and benefits, and job security as well.

2008 Dec 22 10:36 PM

[working at ...:]

Mike I can understand the way you feel is based on the information you are getting from the media. The real truth is the transplants are paying about the same base wage as the detriot based companies. the exagerated numbers that are reported by the press are based on outdated data and figure in cost the are covered in other counties by there governments such as heathcare and retirement. but the us operation of toyo and the like are paying for the same level of health insurance that I have at ford.Toyo has tried very hard to stay below the media radar but had to admit thing are not what the seem and are also losing money in this economy. They have also avoided the negative attention by keeping there workforce busy painting floors and training instead of laying them off. I hope you do give FORD another look we have been building world class cars and trucks for over a century and will keep doing so for another 100 years

Remember when your friends loses their job it a recession but when you lose your job it is a depression


On Dec 22 08:10 PM Mike Inmich wrote:

> This is the first article I've seen that realizes that the UAW costs
> can't be carried as we go forward with small cars...mandated by the
> feds and to a lesser extent by the public.
>
> Regading the VW bug, I once rode with a guy in Winter who was telling
> me what a great car it was as he was reaching out the side window
> with a scraper to clear the front window while driving.
>
> It is true that the biggest problem faced by the big 3 is that they
> are just plain out of style. People feel a need to justify purchasing
> foreign cars by complaining about the American cars they owned 20
> years ago, and give the Jap cars a pass on their numerous problems
> at every opportunity. Witness the whole damn fleet of Toyota Tundra
> trucks recalled because the engines were not properly ventilated
> and the oil sludged. Toyota tried to blame the owners for poor service
> habits, but the big 3 know Americans abuse their trucks and licked
> this problem years ago.
>
> The reason people keep going after the UAW is it is their costs that
> are out of line. The management and salary engineers get paid what
> they would in any major US city at a major US company. The UAW is
> way out of line in wages, and especially benefits for their education,
> skill level and work ethic. Waaaaay out of line.
>
> Note also that the remaining US car buyers are mostly middle and
> lower class, who are not amused that your wages and benefits far
> exceed theirs. The UAW thinks they are the leaders of these people,
> but no one else is buying that now.
>
> So in order to convince Americans to buy your cars you must cut you
> wages and benefits to transplant level (at least 20%), thank America
> for a second chance, and plead with working class Americans to buy
> your cars. BTW cutting the wage and beenfits of people not hired
> yet doesn't count as a cut in my world. Nice try.
>
> Otherwise the big 3 will die and you will take down the Midwest with
> you. Hope you will be happy with yourselves.
>
> So far Gettlefinger's response was to cry about being picked on and
> said he'll go to his ?lapdog? Obama for a redo. Nice way to show
> gratitude Ron!

2008 Dec 22 11:09 PM

[ajstar:]

toyoda pays there workers 100% when there laid off there paying 4,500 in texas only


On Dec 22 03:14 PM exec1107 wrote:

> Unions are dinosaurs that have outlived their usefulness. The big
> issues that the unions once campaigned for (e.g., basic health benefits,
> length of the work week, etc.) are now largely a part of US Labor
> Law. Now, the UAW is just a giant leech. All of the imports made
> in the USA come from non-union plants, and Toyota, Honda, and BMW
> make cars that sell and return a profit. The UAW belongs in a museum
> with the Model "T". Clearly, some of the blame rest with the (mis-)
> management of GM. CEO Stemple thought it was a good idea to pay a
> UAW worker 95% of his/her wage when laid off. Rather that risk a
> strike that might have lasted several weeks, he caved in to outrageous
> demands. Stupidity and gutlessness like that helped ruin GM. Also,
> too many irrelevant brands that were essentially the same car with
> different grills and bumpers. Every consumer product company with
> long-term growth opportunities in the US succeeds by building brand
> loyalty with young consumers and then creating products that evolve
> with the needs and desires of that demographic group. This is Economics
> 101. Ditch the UAW, and install management with some balls and business
> sense, and GM can be saved.

2008 Dec 23 01:09 AM

[ajstar:]

every worker in the north make more than the people in the south not just auto works should dr,s and teachers in the north make the same as dr,s and teachers in the south


On Dec 22 11:09 PM working at ford wrote:

> Mike I can understand the way you feel is based on the information
> you are getting from the media. The real truth is the transplants
> are paying about the same base wage as the detriot based companies.
> the exagerated numbers that are reported by the press are based on
> outdated data and figure in cost the are covered in other counties
> by there governments such as heathcare and retirement. but the us
> operation of toyo and the like are paying for the same level of health
> insurance that I have at ford.Toyo has tried very hard to stay below
> the media radar but had to admit thing are not what the seem and
> are also losing money in this economy. They have also avoided the
> negative attention by keeping there workforce busy painting floors
> and training instead of laying them off. I hope you do give FORD
> another look we have been building world class cars and trucks for
> over a century and will keep doing so for another 100 years
>
> Remember when your friends loses their job it a recession but when
> you lose your job it is a depression

2008 Dec 23 01:17 AM

[ajstar:]

by the way the toyoda plant tenn.signed 70% to join the uaw.


On Dec 22 11:09 PM working at ford wrote:

> Mike I can understand the way you feel is based on the information
> you are getting from the media. The real truth is the transplants
> are paying about the same base wage as the detriot based companies.
> the exagerated numbers that are reported by the press are based on
> outdated data and figure in cost the are covered in other counties
> by there governments such as heathcare and retirement. but the us
> operation of toyo and the like are paying for the same level of health
> insurance that I have at ford.Toyo has tried very hard to stay below
> the media radar but had to admit thing are not what the seem and
> are also losing money in this economy. They have also avoided the
> negative attention by keeping there workforce busy painting floors
> and training instead of laying them off. I hope you do give FORD
> another look we have been building world class cars and trucks for
> over a century and will keep doing so for another 100 years
>
> Remember when your friends loses their job it a recession but when
> you lose your job it is a depression

2008 Dec 23 01:20 AM

[old big 3 r...:]

20 years ago I was working on a car line ,when a uaw contract was up. I\we were receiving more money and benifits than most 4 year college grads could expect. I told those around me then we were too gready and had to make sure that the goose (gm) had to remain fat and happy or we would suffer . I was threatend ,cursed, screamed at , I was fearfull for my wellbeing.

2008 Dec 23 11:21 AM

[wchope:]

The youth market? The majority of people purchasing new vehicles are over 35. You have to be established in your job to afford one, unless your parents are still covering for you. So if by 35, you mean "young people" than the most consistent seller with the largest market is the Ford F150 pickup. Next would be the Ford Explorer than the Chyrsler mini vans. If your talking sedans then Toyota Camry and Honda Accord are leaders except for the fact the Ford Taurus and Mercury Sable combined sold just as many sedans. Youth vehicles like Scion, Honda Fit (sp?) Ford Mustang don't sell enough to keep any car company in the world profitable. Ford Focus is selling well and soon the Ford Feista will have a real shot at beiing the largest volume sedan in the world. Ford Feista diesels get 65MPG. Ask why "Green" Europe thinks their emissions are OK but our government doesn't? As far as the UAW goes we should all be thankful for the benefits workers everywhere enjoy were fought for by the UAW. Yes, they have failed to change ther "Brand" over the last 20 years, and have paid the price with more than 60% of the auto workers opting to be non union. The UAW members should have insisted their elected management change their message, sadly now the UAW has become irrelevant.

2008 Dec 24 01:54 PM

[Kunst:]

The number one reason the US car companies have declined is because they were complacent and did not make improving their products a priority. Detroit used to believe that everyone should buy a new car every three years, so why make them last long? 100,000 miles was an event to celebrate; 200,000 was unheard of.

The Germans and Japanese took advantage of this stupidity by producing cheaper, more reliable, and more economical vehicles. Detroit could have done the same, but they deluded themselves into ignoring the threat from the foreign upstarts.

All of this is management stupidity. Whatever UAW greed and inefficiency has added to the problem comes on top of fundamental management failure.

2008 Dec 25 01:20 AM

[Philip Obal:]

When will the Ford Feista arrive for sale in the good old USA? Seems that Ford is a bit slow on delivering - we could have used it during the high gas prices in 2007 and 2008.

After reading everyones opinions on the UAW, it is obvious that the "per hour" cost of building cars is higher for GM/Chrysler/Ford - so why blame the UAW for protecting it's members (just doing it's job). The real problem is GM/Chrysler/Ford management for permitting the UAW to obtain the stranglehold tha it has. Unfortunately, the bull dog UAW does NOT want to release it's very tight grip. Stalemate = high costs to build a US car continues.

Quality? Look at Consumers Reports for the last 12 years in the April car issue - the Japanese car manufacturers have consistently manufactured higher car quality that we have. Did Ford/GM/Chrysler managment and executives sleep and fail to analyze these April issues? Maybe, they were sleeping in their private jets on the way to DC, or just planned another car sale (same strategy = sell more at discounted prices).

Problems will continue at all three, until they address (1) fuel efficient cars to meet/beat the Jap cars, (2) higher quality = lower $$$ spent on maintenance by owners, and (3) UAW costs. Multiple problems have to be addressed by these executives or b-u-s-t (chapter 11).

Jan 08 11:54 AM