The Betsy's Comments

Chrysler Models Already on the Chopping Block

Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:44:23 -0400

So how is this global marketing supposed to work? One size fits all? "When in Rome, do as the Romans do," but when in the U.S., fuggetaboutit? Every Dodge Caliber owner I've met loves their car -- the size, roominess, versatility, the great mpg (28+city/32-36hwy), safety rating, the affordability. I've talked to approximately 20 owners face-to-face, and have read dozens of blogs. Why put a winner on the chopping block?

Same story on the bioidentical Jeep Patriot. But my new Jeep Patriot is even roomier than the Caliber and is supposed to get 23 city/28-32 hwy. It's getting better than that -- 28 city/34 hwy (so far). I hear it will improve after I drive it longer. How is this considered "underperforming?" That would be a marketing issue, not engineering.

So, how is this global marketing supposed to work?

Good Auto News: Chrysler Restarts Production, Ford Confirms Profit Plans

Fri, 19 Jun 2009 17:43:03 -0400

It's hard to imagine any of the lower and middle class affording or buying ANY cars without financial aid / incentives in today's torched economy. Still recovering from third-degree burns of the last eight years, I'm glad the incentives were there for me. If you haven't test-driven a Chrysler or GM product lately, do so. I will never trust Consumer Reports again without test-driving and thoroughly investigating on my own. Do your own research whenever you can. Honest journalism is almost all gone.

On Jun 18 03:49 PM cynnatalie2000 wrote:

> FIAT has stood for "Fix It Again Tony" for so many years. Chrysler
> now has a Detroit stigma, a UAW stigma, a bankruptcy stigma, the
> stigma of hundreds of closed dealers, and a FIAT stigma.
>
> It is hard to imagine anyone buying a Chrysler without a giant rebate
> and free financing. That giant rebate will have to grow much bigger
> for anyone to touch a Chrysler prodct.

Good Auto News: Chrysler Restarts Production, Ford Confirms Profit Plans

Fri, 19 Jun 2009 16:46:56 -0400

Already did! So did many other motorists around here. We are everywhere!!!! Keep it up!!

On Jun 18 10:24 AM 303820 wrote:

> The good news will be short lived ...unless Americans start to buy
> american!!!!!!!!

Supporting the U.S. Auto Portfolio: Cash for Clunkers

Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:03:39 -0400

Good question.
Also, clunker must be owned for a minimum of one year by trading party. This means I can't sell you my 1985 Mazda for you to trade in to the dealer for you to get the voucher and new car. She's still getting 33 mpg but without a working odometer, only her mother knows for sure. I'm not sure why this old body can't pass the clunker criteria.

On Jun 10 12:44 PM berated wrote:

> How will they calculate the mpg of the trade-in vehicle?

Are Chrysler and GM Counting on Consumer Ignorance to Sell Their Products?

Tue, 26 May 2009 19:39:37 -0400

You sound like you're baiting us for a response -- doing your own survey on consumer confidence, or doing more of Consumer Reports bidding for them.

I decided to do my own research too -- independent of Consumer Reports. I was curious to know why CR surveys were so consistently against American automobiles and if CR was truly being honest, fair and balanced. It seemed like an important journalistic question.

Starting eight months ago, I decided to use myself as the guinea pig. I test-drove countless vehicles from various auto makers. I also committed to the old-school gumshoe way of reporting. I went out of my way to interview owners of these products -- in parking lots, at gas stations, etc. I told people the truth. I was shopping for a car.

In my personal research I found that owners of GM and Chrysler vehicles LOVED their cars. Then, I questioned them referring only to CR description on a vehicle -- never mentioning Consumer Reports. I never told them I was also curious about CR's preferences. Across the board -- for eight months -- owners said they LOVED their cars and most would buy them again.

I would not want to falsely accuse, so I will just have to say that I cannot understand why CR's extreme American vehicle dissatisfaction does not represent my findings. I did not do these interviews to find fault with CR. I was personally looking for a reliable source and the truth of the matter -- ME.

I have eight months of witnesses to attest to everything I have written here. Want to interview me??

And then I put my money where my mouth is and bought a Chrysler product . . . that I LOVE!!!!

Sincerely,
The Betsy

General Motors, Chrysler: Cutting Their Way to Greatness

Mon, 18 May 2009 18:25:49 -0400

Before the dust settles, the New [World Order] Dealership warranty and general repair plan should include all Big 3 brands repaired under one roof. Even if your Chrysler or GM dealership disappeared, you could still get your vehicle repaired by state-of-the-art, trained Chrysler, GM, Ford, or what-not mechanics at the [Ford] dealer or [Walmart] all-in-one Super Gargage.

Well, next thing you know, we'll all be driving identical, small, "gas-efficient," white-roof civilians cars which will only seat 2.5 children anyway. The white roof will make the vehicle's eventual ID numbers or barcodes scannable from above. . . . Sorry for the negativity. Hope these thoughts were at least entertaining.

General Motors, Chrysler: Cutting Their Way to Greatness

Mon, 18 May 2009 17:44:18 -0400

Mr. Ed, jr., . . . .not saved or closed because of political favoritism -- saved or closed because of financial stability and long-term healthy economic growth using zip code and demographic studies -- the same way businesses carefully scout new locations to build new stores.

On May 18 01:41 AM Mr. Ed, Jr. wrote:

> How long before the stories start to surface about how certain dealerships
> were saved and others closed because of political favoritism ?

>
> This country is in the process of being corrupted beyond all recognition.

Chrysler: Reshuffle the Corporate Capital Structure?

Mon, 04 May 2009 19:29:16 -0400

"Correction is appreciated."???? You just did the blogger/reporter's homework for him. Did he bait you?

On May 03 02:07 PM car_guy wrote:

> You have a number of items incorrect, but you do make some interesting
> points.
>
> First, Fiat is not "paying" $2B for 20% of Chrysler. Fiat is receiving
> their equity stake for specific commitments to share technology,
> distribution network, and to make specific investments to build product
> in the US. Fiat estimates it will spend $2-3B, however, Chrysler
> estimates that it will save $8-10B it would have to spend to develop
> the same technology. This is one of the many things the Cerberus
> bankers learned about the Auto industry AFTER they bought the company
> from Daimler. Chrysler will replace all of their mid-size & small
> cars & trucks (B, C, D platforms) with models based on Fiat designs
> and produce new very small cars (A platform) from Fiat designs &
> engines. Chrysler must have these platforms & engines to meet
> new US CAFE standards, even if gas stays cheap for the long term.
> Daimler would have provided this technology with the DCX model. With
> Cerberus Chrysler tried to farm it out to partners (Chery, Nissan,
> etc) and was unsuccessful (only Nissan came to fruition and the strong
> Yen broke that model). Chrysler's only options were outright aquisition,
> which the credit crisis made impossible, or a Renault/Nissan style
> alliance which is what they accomplish w/Fiat.
> The terms for Fiat earning the additional 15% are defined in the
> press release and are the result of specific milestone achievement
> (build 40mpg car in US, build new small engine for Chrysler in US,
> sell Chrysler vehicles w/global network). Tooling plants to produce
> the car & engine will require cash from Fiat, at least $1-2B.
> What Fiat gets from Chrysler is hardly mutual. Aside from the US
> sales distribution network, which is really cost avoidance on their
> part, they get access to Chrysler's new V6 engine and SUV platforms
> which are helpful, but not mission critical. Chrysler can't survive
> w/o Fiat because they can't meet the 2020 CAFE standards without
> the $8-10B investment even if gas stays cheap in the long run. Fiat
> wants the Chrysler alliance because Marchione believes that a global
> Auto OEM will need to produce over 5 million vehicles/year to survive
> in the future. While this is logical, only Toyota, GM, VW, Ford,
> and Renault/Nissan achieved this goal in 2007 which would provide
> Fiat with plenty of partners if this theory becomes more real.
Cerberus
> gets to keep Chrysler Financial (which they admit they ran into the
> ground in WSJ) and Chrysler Real Estate which has value, but how
> much is not clear. Cerberus is also using Chrysler to be GMAC's (not
> GMCC) captive Auto OEM since, due to more brilliance on their part,
> GMAC is no longer tied to GM and suddenly needs to compete for business.
> They don't walk away empty handed, but this obviously was not the
> ending they intended. I agree, no tears for them.
> The US taxpayer gets 8% (Canadian get 2%) for their initial $4.5B
> loan ($1B from Canada). The return is more like 20%. The DIP funding
> and approx $11B to get out of C11 will be loans that will have to
> be repaid.
> The UAW is not really getting 55%. Classifying them as an unsecured
> debtor may be legally accurate, but is not an accurate description
> of the liability they hold for Chrysler. When Cerberus bought their
> 80.1% of Chrysler from Daimler, they took on $18B of health care
> liability. The UAW took over this liability for approx 0.70/$1 when
> the VEBA was created in 2007. The $10B was the remaining cash owed
> to the VEBA to fund the $18B liability. Counting the approx $2.5B
> in cash already deposited into the VEBA, the UAW's liability is around
> $15.5B so using your numbers they recover approx 30%. Same as the
> bond holders, but they can't simply write off their losses. The UAW
> is still on the hook for the health care costs and is going to be
> struggling with this for years to come.
> You are right on the money with your assessment of how this situation
> was impacted by CDS. Based on their actions, it is reasonable to
> assume the hold outs were fully hedged and drove the C11 to cash
> out their positions. This is no different than buying a building
> and burning it down for the insurance money. You would think that
> the companies issuing the CDS would be smart enough to protect against
> this behavior or at least void the claim. You propose that the hedged
> owner transfers their voting rights to the insurer, which makes sense.
> I propose that a simpler solution is to simply call this what it
> is, insurance fraud, and prosecute accordingly.

Chrysler Bankruptcy: Why Car Buyers Might Not Notice

Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:03:26 -0400

Rick Newman said:
"Chrysler’s vehicles are the wrong kind. When gas hit $4 per gallon last year and Americans downsized their taste in cars, Chrysler suffered more than any other automaker. That’s because it’s far more reliant on big trucks and SUVs than anybody else, even GM."

1. Chrysler's vehicles are not the wrong kind in a free society. We are not yet a People's Republic forced to drive "The People's Car." But this might be the intended direction of global governments. Why are the federal and local governments are buying up these hemi-powered "gas guzzlers" for themselves.

2. Despite gas prices, I know I never downsized my "taste" in cars. I have never liked the minimalist Japanese styling or sizing. Nothing against Asia -- just not my personal style or taste. Many of us have gotten used to buying used economical cars over the years, not by choice of style or size, but for sheer economy and longevity sake. We have had to settle for what we can afford to buy and repair. Through this Big 3 re-org, it is finally a pleasure to afford an American car after owning 2.5 driven-into the-ground Japanese cars in the past 30 years. (The Chinese will probably tell you the same thing.) This was purely out of financial necessity, not by "taste."

3. Chrysler suffered the most because financially they are the smallest company in comprison. Compare Krogers to Joe's Grocery Store. Chrysler is also targeting a market that likes big powerful engines -- now the government.

Chrysler: Looking for a Miracle to Survive

Thu, 16 Apr 2009 19:34:29 -0400

All of this is true.

On Apr 16 12:26 PM twilsondodge wrote:

> For those of you that blame Chrysler you need to learn a little about
> history. Chrysler was a very profitable company when they were purchased
> by Daimler and Daimler sucked them dry and tried to run them like
> they did Mercedes and they destroyed them. The purchase by Daimler
> was the worste thing that ever happened to Chrysler. Well maybe not
> the worste The Dog's that guard the gates of Hell have'nt done much
> better. The perfect storm that has consumed the American auto manufacturer
> is also taking a toll on Toyota and Honda as well so those of you
> that are downing the big three open your eyes Toyota and Honda are
> just as in just as bad of shape as the big three. Fortunately for
> them they are in a better position to weather this storm. If the
> government forces the big three to build smaller fuel efficient hybrids
> that 1 in 10000 people will buy it will do nothing to improve there
> positions. If fuel efficient Hybrids were the answer then Honda and
> Toyota would be up instead of thier business being down 40 % just
> like Chryslers was last month

GM and Chrysler: What's Next

Thu, 02 Apr 2009 19:34:28 -0400

Chrysler "won’t be able to meet new fuel-economy standards?" In other words, 28 -32 mpg for a Jeep is not good enough at this point in technology? What are you talking about? 41-45 mpg in a Honda pea pod with six air bags that inflate on the first hit, and deflate a split-second after first impact is worth your money and your life? Hope you don't spin out into oncoming traffic of a Jeep or Dodge truck. Your airbags are already used up.

This is all about the dis-empowerment and devaluation of the middle class, Phase III. Why are the police departments and government buying all of these gas guzzlers?

GM Gets Some Good News, Chrysler - Not So Much

Mon, 23 Mar 2009 18:01:56 -0400

Like father like son. You already told us this story. That's OK. I like hearing it. However it will come about, we will become our parents' "greatest generation" again. We will do whatever it takes. "No pain, no gain." -- Is this really true? I just sure hope it doesn't hurt too much. We've all gotten so soft, fat and comfortable. There's still time to give up foreign goods for Lent.

On Mar 22 10:11 AM The Mad Hedge Fund Trader wrote:

> Too bad they are 30 years too late. I’ll tell you what GM’s problem
> is. My dad was a religious lifetime GM customer, buying a new Oldsmobile
> every five years. Once he even flew to Detroit for a factory tour
> and drove his new prize home. Thirty years ago I told him he was
> doing GM no favors by buying their cars, and the only way to force
> them to improve a deteriorating product was to buy better made German
> and Japanese vehicles. This was right after the State of California
> had forced auto makers to install seatbelts on new cars. Airbags
> and ABS brake systems were still years away. His response, “I didn’t
> fight the Japs for four years so I could buy their cars.” (He was
> a Marine). GM’s problem is that my Dad passed away seven years ago.
> Of the original 17 million WWII veterans, 1,500 a day are dying,
> and there are only 1.5 million left. All of them loved Detroit because
> it built great Jeeps, Sherman tanks, and half tracks. Their kids
> prefer German, Japanese, Italian, Korean, and soon, Chinese, and
> Indian vehicles. It is no coincidence that GM’s problems really accelerated
> with the passing of the “greatest generation.”
>

How to Deal with the Automakers' Crisis in Confidence

Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:05:28 -0500

Since you are one of the lucky ones to be employed in the communication business, you have a direct opportunity to influence confidence. Confidence, like criticism, is contagious. Instead, pundits have contributed to this analysis paralysis, lulling the workforce into a deep hypnotic sleep state or state of fear.

Turn off the news and think outside of the televised/Internet box. Stop following and start leading. There is a light at the end of this dark tunnel, but it's truly not coming from the glow of the television or the computer monitor.

Auto Manufacturing: What Does 'Buy American' Even Mean?

Fri, 27 Feb 2009 18:52:16 -0500

Just thoughts.
1. Do any of these problems have to do with "global warming?" I'd love to know if while we go into a global depression, our environmental pollution improves. If not, there is something important to learn about emissions and politics.

2. Oil men shut down Detroit.

3. Is all of this just a dramatic money-making segue to the next technologies? Do they already exist? Just unloading the old obsolete stuff to make money on it? There are enough cars on this planet to last us til the next new and improved. Just make them affordable for all of the future economically impoverished. Or will the lower class be riding the bus?

The Cap Case for Letting GM Fail

Fri, 27 Feb 2009 18:18:06 -0500

More damage has been done, quicker, by electronic media than any paper news product could ever do.

Auto Advertising: Big Three Need an Attitude Adjustment

Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:21:44 -0500

I was just thinking about auto commercials this morning while drinking my carrot juice. I would love to come up with some stunning, never-thought-a-that-b... phenomenal ideas for commercials, made on a shoe string budget, for the American auto industry. I think they could be fun and challenging to write -- hopefully not too sappy or machismo. The U.S. auto industry is a very worthwhile investment. Is there really still such a thing as "American" ideas and innovative? Maybe innovation stopped with the our parents' generation. Got any ideas in the here and now? Send them to the companies. Drink your carrot juice.

Why AIG Gets Billions While GM Gets Scorn

Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:59:16 -0500

Don't shoot the messenger. ONE of the differences between the smile on the AIG bailout and the scorn on the Big 3 also has to do with race.

Detroit is one of many underdeveloped places in the US where it is still not popular, profitable or self-advancing for politicians to to help blue-collar, middle-class peoples -- and many of these people are Black (think Bush vs. New Orleans).

Politicians and financiers have gotten used to getting kick-backs for doing the -- now proverbial -- middle-class' "honest day's work." If the rust belt has nothing to offer them and their expensive tastes, they're not interested.

This is still about America needing to grow up sociologically. Someone's got to think of a way to make fair play a valued asset in America.

Who Might Benefit From Detroit's Failings

Fri, 05 Dec 2008 18:16:46 -0500

Are people so hard headed and myopic that they would rather be "right" and punish the US automakers -- now -- for their errors? Would they really rather see the economic implosion that will follow the collapse of the American auto companies? Think you're standing on high enough ground that it won't effect you??

It is ironic and sickening that our corrupt Washington politicians get to stand in judgement of the Big Three. How quickly they transform themselves into this charade of choirboys, correcting and scolding Detroit's CEOs from behind their slimey political pulpit. It was never financially profitable, prestigious, in vogue or self-advancing for politicians to pay attention to American automotive engineering -- especially when it is housed in old, Black blue-collar towns. Is Washington hoping we have forgotten their own lavish overspending as well as their moral and ethical crimes? What's that ironic twist about the US auto factories building tanks for the Germans during WWII? I would think the Bush family would be greatful . . . .

I'd love to hear a Dennis Kozlowski (Tyco grand larceny) recession reaction interview now. It might throw some light on this hypocracy.

Give the US auto makers financial aid NOW. It will buy the world's stock markets some time to try to escape the same collapse. We are all sitting on the same time bomb.

GM's Letter to Car Owners Reeks of Desperation

Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:24:22 -0500

Sorry. My gut feeling has always been that GM and American-made autos are good for the American economy. I back them 100 percent on this loan. If Congress won't lend them the money, maybe the alcohol, firearms and tobacco industries can.