Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Seems like Mr. Wang's old customers haven't even sampled his food in 10 years.
Absolutely right!!
These old customers make a judgment based on their past experiences and will stick to the other restaurant no matter how tasteless or expensive it gets.
The analogy points toward the ideal solution. If Wang's goes out of business no one will notice. The problem with this as it relates to GM is that we need to be more pragmatic, given the sheer size of impact. And I like the statement that the customers haven't been around for 10 years. Trust of the brands has been lost and this takes a lot to regain, no matter how good your product has become. However it should still be mentioned that the Big 3 still have a 45% marketplace share; the rest is split by 15 or so other automakers. So it isn't like nobody is buying; its a lot deeper than that.
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,512,979 times
Reputation: 12187
If the Big Leeches would build another plant in the US they would get the same tax breaks that Toyota, Honda, and Hyundai do. You can't give incentives for them to build a plant in Kentucky when their only new plants are in Mexico and China
I could agree with even consideration for a big three bailout until or unless the top exectives agree to reduce their salaries to say $500,000, sell their corporate jets, agree to no parachute agreements, give up their chauffures (sp), stock options etc, etc, etc. then CONSIDERATION and only consideration may be in order. They are paid way too much considering they did not operate their corporations in a manner to keep them from a financial situation putting their corps in need of a bail out. Greedy corp execs rub me the wrong way.
I could agree with even consideration for a big three bailout until or unless the top exectives agree to reduce their salaries to say $500,000, sell their corporate jets, agree to no parachute agreements, give up their chauffures (sp), stock options etc, etc, etc. then CONSIDERATION and only consideration may be in order. They are paid way too much considering they did not operate their corporations in a manner to keep them from a financial situation putting their corps in need of a bail out. Greedy corp execs rub me the wrong way.
You forgot the UAW leaches
Anyway, regardless of what the concessions are, the loans are wrong.
In America, the Government is not supposed to build cars, widgets, bail out banks, etc.
Great analogy and it does happen in the fast food biz a lot. No one has to lose their job just restructure how much they are being compensated. If the only meals they produce that are worth eating there are expensive and their fast, cheap items give you gas then a lot more people are going to switch roach coaches.
No one started eating there because they were that great, they ate there because that's the only place that had the big large meals needed by people working so hard on farms and construction. If the other places do that better now too. Well, now there's trouble.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
