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.
i don't think that americans are objecting to the union workers but to the union itself. The workers have been pawns played by both the uaw and the government, and a lot of them will still lose their jobs over this. You need to look no further than the car czar that mr. Obama has appointed.
I completely understand your point of view and can't say I blame you. On the other hand, not buying a GM would be like starting a business and then only buying from your competitors, intentionally forcing yourself out of business and into bankruptcy.
IMO, the bad behavior has already been rewarded: GM gets to stay in business. What sucks is now if they fail you, me and every other taxpayer gets screwed.
We've already been screwed you just don't know how bad yet but that'll be more clear as the BK progresses.
We've already been screwed you just don't know how bad yet but that'll be more clear as the BK progresses.
Right on ! The last shoe has yet to drop , or thrown as it may be reported.
GM will die a slow death , most people just don't realize it. Whats going on is a "works" project for all those soon to be unemployed...... There is no real future for a company that has outlived is usefulness.
GMC may live on , but it will be much different , mostly selling P/U trucks, and medium duty commercial vehicles. The sub compact car thats being made in China , and will be " assembled" in the US , is just an appeasement to the Unions. It too will go away..... look for Cadillac to be sold to MB. Buick to China , and Chev cars to a separate consortium of Government backed investors.
Not many new car companies have been successful. I see the same for whats left of the " new GM ".... If you want a US made car , buy a Ford , they will be all thats left , and , most of the parts will be made overseas also. However , the name , FORD , will live on.
As far as Chrysler , that too is almost history. warranty will be a nightmare , used values will be depressed , even more than now. ........ The new Chrysler will have a badge that says Chrysler/ Fiat , for now . That too will go away , when one day the badge will just say Fiat. Dodge will become part of Freightliner ( Owned by MB ) , and , will only make trucks big and small. The Dodge car is history , toast. However , if you want a real deal on one on a closed dealers lot , talk to the bank , who now will own the cars , starting tomorrow. make a low ball offer , you may own it quicker than you think ! More Chrysler dealerships will close than has been reported. Most taking Bankruptcy due to the huge inventory still on the lot. Again , look to the bank for the best deal , as there will be no company financing , service , or trade in value. Sell your junker on Ebay , and have cash in hand when dealing with the banker.......... Wait a week , then start looking for the deal of a lifetime.
The value of all the other cars out there will also be hurt by this GM /Chrysler fire sale. Used cars will be hurt the most however. Forget a trade in of a GM / Chrysler, you won't get much........
as far as chrysler goes, justice ginsburg has (at least temporarily) blocked the sale of chrysler.
And quite right too. The administration, aided and abetted by a compliant judge, were over-riding established bankruptcy law and the legal rights of secured creditors in the name of economic expediency. While we don't know which way the Supreme Court will go, it is absolutely right for them to examine the issues involved.
i guess there are 2 issues to be considered. the 1st issue is the legal rights of the secured creditors and the 2nd issue is the legality of using TARP money to bail out automakers. it will be interesting to see whether she makes her ruling alone or with the entire supreme court.
The pension funds must take the hit , just like all the others. Second guessing lower court rulings is not what the Supreme Court likes to do. My guess is , they as a body , they will not weigh in on this issue.
If the matter gets held up by the Court past the dead line , Fiat my back out.......Good by Chrysler, Dodge , your warranty , and any repair or service facilities.
We have been notified locally , as of tomorrow Our Dodge P/U will not be welcome at the dealership.( under warranty ). They have 3 trucks left on the lot to sell.......tonight !
Our closest dealer will now be over 100 miles away in Iron Mountain , and , that may close if sales do not increase. Maybe Cummins will honor my engine warranty ?
The pension funds must take the hit , just like all the others. Second guessing lower court rulings is not what the Supreme Court likes to do. My guess is , they as a body , they will not weigh in on this issue.
This isn't really the issue. The issue is whether the Administration can change the law "on the fly" to suit their national economic interest and set aside the legal rights of secured creditors. If the Supreme Court chooses not to act then that will have implications for the amount of risk lenders are willing to take on.
This isn't really the issue. The issue is whether the Administration can change the law "on the fly" to suit their national economic interest and set aside the legal rights of secured creditors. If the Supreme Court chooses not to act then that will have implications for the amount of risk lenders are willing to take on.
In any Bankruptcy there is always creditors who feel they got less of the left over pie than deserved. One of the reasons for bankruptcy is to introduce a neutral party with the end result of a fair and impartial settlement. I know this does not always happen, even in the simplest cases. What we have here is anything far from simple.
The Supreme Court could change the whole face of the bailout plans , now in the works. The president will effect the GM deal as well. Thats why I think the Court will be reluctant to get involved. Yes , its about politics , always boils down to that. If there are Constitutional issues , then by all means weight in....just like the torture debate. Where is the Court on that ?
This isn't really the issue. The issue is whether the Administration can change the law "on the fly" to suit their national economic interest and set aside the legal rights of secured creditors. If the Supreme Court chooses not to act then that will have implications for the amount of risk lenders are willing to take on.
Not to mention the impact it'll have on any future bond sales for any company and I would guess the govt. as well.
Who the heck would put money into bonds when you know the real possibility exists that you'd be shafted out of repayment at the whim of the government?
Once burned twice learned!
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.
