Should the American automakers...

[ilw]

An interesting sidenote occurred at the LA Car Show this week...the Volkswagon Jetta TDI was named the "Green Car of the Year". Without using any exotic technology, the Jetta is 50 state legal and gets 41mpg (highway).
One of my brothers just bought one and says it's a blast to drive.
Without prior notice, he says you'd never know it was a diesel...it's quiet, fast and handles great in the snow. He has been averaging close to 40mpg in combined city/highway driving so far.
Both Ford and GM make diesels in Europe but haven't brought any to the States. GM is considering doing it sometime in 2010 but only in V-8 form for trucks.
This shows more starkly than anything why the BIG Three deserve the big nut-kicking they are currently getting.
Volksawagon can't keep the TDI in stock and GM is considering bringing the same same technology to our market...in two years and in truck form.
Now, tell me again why these dunces deserve a bailout?

but surely this says more about the american car buyer than the american car makers. They were just supplying what the market wanted, which was pointlessly large and inefficient SUVs. Now that you're suddenly willing to consider smaller cars, or smaller engines, or diesel technology which has been around for the best part of a decade, you can't just blame them for taking a couple of years to retool their factories, as you've just completely changed what you're asking for.

Bottom line is that the American car market has suddenly shifted from having a unique set of requirements (fulfilled, and admittedly nurtured, by the big 3), to a generic set of requirements which match what every other car maker on the planet produces and doesn't match what your own industry produces.

[clocker]

but surely this says more about the american car buyer than the american car makers. They were just supplying what the market wanted...

A "market" they created.
Sure, the American public ( and a witless government) were complicit, but it was the manufacturers who created the SUV and then sold the concept to the public.
But that's a "chicken/egg" debate that we could both argue endlessly.

Instead, let's consider another angle.
Starting in the mid-sixties (long before the first OPEC embargo of 1973) there were industry analysts predicting the end of cheap, easily obtained gasoline and also pointing out the growing reduction in quality that had begun to manifest in American manufacturing.
Did you know that by 1950- only five years after WWII- the Japanese had already overtaken the US as the #1 steelmaker in the world?
A country in ruins, with no natural resources to speak of, outperformed the US and killed one of the largest heavy manufacturing industries we had.

These two points are not unrelated.
The men who predicted the fuel crisis and the men who foretold the death of the steel industry were completely ignored in the US and so they turned to Japan where people in charge were eager to listen to them.
This leads to today's highly ironic situation where US automakers want to emulate the Japanese business model- a model in large part developed by Americans who went unheeded here in the first place.

Finally, to tie all this up (yeah, I could go on forever), let's talk about CEOs a bit.
These guys make the big bucks not because they are exceptionally skilled at designing or assembling the product they sell- in fact, traditionally they don't even know much about the product they sell- rather, they are supposed to be skilled at guiding their companies into a murky future- interpreting trends and events to ensure their corporation is well placed to exploit markets that don't even exist yet.
Yet, for the past thirty odd years, the CEOs of Detroit have willfully ignored current events and guided their companies based on what they wanted to happen rather than what was actually going on.
They were no more prescient or astute than the assembly line workers they employed.
Today's current situation is apparently as big a surprise to them as the guys who sweep the factory floor.
Today's CEOs are creatures of very same mindset that lead to this problem...have we seen any evidence whatsoever that they have changed and are suddenly capable of the leadership necessary to guide their companies through these troubles?

ilw, when you say the American car makers must now match "set of requirements which match what every other car maker on the planet produces and doesn't match what your own industry produces", you imply that there is a difference between US and foreign car makers. This is for the most part, not true.
Both Ford and GM have had a significant presence in Europe for decades.
All of the technology that is available in Europe and Japan has been there for the taking...the US arms of these multinational corporations simply refused to avail themselves of it. It was easier and cheaper to exploit holes in US law (think CAFE here) and build/market inefficient trucks (SUVs) than to build interesting and desirable small cars.
Look at US car magazines for the last 15 years and you'll see a steady stream of complaints about why Ford/GM products that are available worldwide are not brought into the States.

For years now the US auto industry has lobbied to keep US safety regulations separate/different from those of Europe and Japan.
Even areas as seemingly minor as lighting were battleground issues. Halogen headlights- available for years in Europe- were illegal in the US till Sylvania had the time to catch up and produce their version.
This meant that a European car had to undergo major revisions and significant change to be allowed in the US market. And that was fine by the Big Three...they effectively sandboxed their foreign product from the US market.
Now of course, they are clamoring to change the very rules they created and exploited for so long.
They can't just import the cars they make in Europe because they don't pass our safety standards and would be prohibitively expensive to retool.

The US auto makers are slowly (well, not so slowly anymore) being strangled by the very same "catch-22" laws they themselves engineered.
Talk about being hoisted on one's own petard.

[j2k4]

but surely this says more about the american car buyer than the american car makers. They were just supplying what the market wanted...

A "market" they created.
Sure, the American public ( and a witless government) were complicit, but it was the manufacturers who created the SUV and then sold the concept to the public.
But that's a "chicken/egg" debate that we could both argue endlessly.

Instead, let's consider another angle.
Starting in the mid-sixties (long before the first OPEC embargo of 1973) there were industry analysts predicting the end of cheap, easily obtained gasoline and also pointing out the growing reduction in quality that had begun to manifest in American manufacturing.
Did you know that by 1950- only five years after WWII- the Japanese had already overtaken the US as the #1 steelmaker in the world?
A country in ruins, with no natural resources to speak of, outperformed the US and killed one of the largest heavy manufacturing industries we had.

These two points are not unrelated.
The men who predicted the fuel crisis and the men who foretold the death of the steel industry were completely ignored in the US and so they turned to Japan where people in charge were eager to listen to them.
This leads to today's highly ironic situation where US automakers want to emulate the Japanese business model- a model in large part developed by Americans who went unheeded here in the first place.

Finally, to tie all this up (yeah, I could go on forever), let's talk about CEOs a bit.
These guys make the big bucks not because they are exceptionally skilled at designing or assembling the product they sell- in fact, traditionally they don't even know much about the product they sell- rather, they are supposed to be skilled at guiding their companies into a murky future- interpreting trends and events to ensure their corporation is well placed to exploit markets that don't even exist yet.
Yet, for the past thirty odd years, the CEOs of Detroit have willfully ignored current events and guided their companies based on what they wanted to happen rather than what was actually going on.
They were no more prescient or astute than the assembly line workers they employed.
Today's current situation is apparently as big a surprise to them as the guys who sweep the factory floor.
Today's CEOs are creatures of very same mindset that lead to this problem...have we seen any evidence whatsoever that they have changed and are suddenly capable of the leadership necessary to guide their companies through these troubles?

ilw, when you say the American car makers must now match "set of requirements which match what every other car maker on the planet produces and doesn't match what your own industry produces", you imply that there is a difference between US and foreign car makers. This is for the most part, not true.
Both Ford and GM have had a significant presence in Europe for decades.
All of the technology that is available in Europe and Japan has been there for the taking...the US arms of these multinational corporations simply refused to avail themselves of it. It was easier and cheaper to exploit holes in US law (think CAFE here) and build/market inefficient trucks (SUVs) than to build interesting and desirable small cars.
Look at US car magazines for the last 15 years and you'll see a steady stream of complaints about why Ford/GM products that are available worldwide are not brought into the States.

For years now the US auto industry has lobbied to keep US safety regulations separate/different from those of Europe and Japan.
Even areas as seemingly minor as lighting were battleground issues. Halogen headlights- available for years in Europe- were illegal in the US till Sylvania had the time to catch up and produce their version.
This meant that a European car had to undergo major revisions and significant change to be allowed in the US market. And that was fine by the Big Three...they effectively sandboxed their foreign product from the US market.
Now of course, they are clamoring to change the very rules they created and exploited for so long.
They can't just import the cars they make in Europe because they don't pass our safety standards and would be prohibitively expensive to retool.

The US auto makers are slowly (well, not so slowly anymore) being strangled by the very same "catch-22" laws they themselves engineered.
Talk about being hoisted on one's own petard.

And that pretty much fills the nutshell, you see.

In typically American fashion, even our fuck-ups inspire "Shock and Awe".

[clocker]

One might say that only our mistakes inspire shock and awe.

[DannyGnXz]

Oh, I forgot to mention-

The average employee at GM Ford and Chrysler makes $73.50 an hour, which translates to about $150,000 per year, assuming no overtime.

The auto workers do not actually make $73.50 per hour for the most part.... this number incorporates health benefits and pension contributions into that number. ie they may actually make $51 / hour which goes towards their check and then you add $14 which goes to their pension & $8.50 which goes towards their health benefits. My Numbers are just an example. But the $73.50 is what it cost the company to employ that person.

There check would be $51 x 40 hours = $2040 - taxes = take home pay.

My opinion is for NO BAILOUT. Bankruptcy - Its the only way for this failing industry to re-organize themselves and try to get the ship righted again.

[j2k4]

Oh, I forgot to mention-

The average employee at GM Ford and Chrysler makes $73.50 an hour, which translates to about $150,000 per year, assuming no overtime.

The auto workers do not actually make $73.50 per hour for the most part.... this number incorporates health benefits and pension contributions into that number. ie they may actually make $51 / hour which goes towards their check and then you add $14 which goes to their pension & $8.50 which goes towards their health benefits. My Numbers are just an example. But the $73.50 is what it cost the company to employ that person.

There check would be $51 x 40 hours = $2040 - taxes = take home pay.

Yes, yes, well-

I tend to make a case for management, thinking in terms of cost.

My opinion is for NO BAILOUT. Bankruptcy - Its the only way for this failing industry to re-organize themselves and try to get the ship righted again.

True enough.

There will surely be some suffering, but bankruptcy doesn't mean the big three (and all associated industry likewise) go wanting, job-wise.

This hasn't been adequately pointed up.

[Detale]

One might say that only our mistakes inspire shock and awe.

And others might say that NOT only our mistakes inspire shock and awe.

[callas]

Each CEO went to capital by the private airplane.

[j2k4]

Here's something to consider when weighing the health of the Big Three on the domestic front:

http://info.detnews.com/video/index.cfm?id=1189

[devilsadvocate]

The harsh reality of technological advances is that machines replace humans and companies that use said technology have a cost advantage over their competitors.

I wonder at what point humans will become unable to support the robots existence. When will enough humans be displaced to be unable to financially sustain industrial output (buy the products).

The plant in question created jobs because of it's location. Build one here and it would remove jobs.

Also the product would need to change to make it work. A product that could be exported to those product efficiency demanding foreign markets