In order to even things out, I thought I'd post an anti-bailout opinion to counter the pro-bailout story I previously posted. I chose one that was referenced in the previous article - Mitt Romney's New York Times Op-Ed piece titled, "Let Detriot Go Bankrupt" (catchy, eh?) It is interesting to note that Mr. Romney's father, George Romney, once ran American Motors Corporation. From the piece:
First, their huge disadvantage in costs relative to foreign brands must be eliminated. That means new labor agreements to align pay and benefits to match those of workers at competitors like BMW, Honda, Nissan and Toyota. Furthermore, retiree benefits must be reduced so that the total burden per auto for domestic makers is not higher than that of foreign producers.
That extra burden is estimated to be more than $2,000 per car. Think what that means: Ford, for example, needs to cut $2,000 worth of features and quality out of its Taurus to compete with Toyota’s Avalon. Of course the Avalon feels like a better product — it has $2,000 more put into it. Considering this disadvantage, Detroit has done a remarkable job of designing and engineering its cars. But if this cost penalty persists, any bailout will only delay the inevitable.
Second, management as is must go. New faces should be recruited from unrelated industries — from companies widely respected for excellence in marketing, innovation, creativity and labor relations.
Well, what do you think? Let us know in the comments section.
Reader Reactions
The comments are owned by the poster.
We aren't responsible for their content.
You must login or register to post a comment.
Poster | Thread |
---|---|
bkcurtis | Posted: 2008/12/8 17:27 Updated: 2008/12/8 19:06 |
Just can't stay away ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/10/8 From: NW Indiana, USA Posts: 130 |
![]() What this article doesn't mention is the governments role in the automakers financial woes.
Think about it. What are the government regulations on safety, CAFE standards, and a host of other factors costing the car manufactures? While I think the car manufactures need short term help for a short term problem, I don't think we need a car czar--appointed by the federal government--to oversee another private business. If one studies the Great Depression, one will see how the federal government's interventions actually prolonged the event. Obviously, our politicians haven't studied history since we are about to repeat it when the new administration takes office next month. |
|
Poster | Thread |
---|---|
bear7 | Posted: 2008/12/8 12:42 Updated: 2008/12/8 12:42 |
Just popping in ![]() ![]() Joined: 2008/1/8 From: Henderson KY Posts: 1 |
![]() Instead of asking for a govenerment bail out, why doesn't Chrysler go to the UAW and say we need a 20% across board pay cuts or we'll have to close the doors. I'd be more infavor of financial aid if they were willing to make the tough decisions to stay afloat. Yes, large pay cuts and limited down sizing would be painful but I'd rather have 20% less pay than lose everything plus retirement. As long as there is hope for a bail they can put off the really tough decisions that need to be made for long term viability.
|
Poster | Thread |
---|---|
my97tj | Posted: 2008/12/8 11:01 Updated: 2008/12/8 11:01 |
Not too shy to talk ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/9/18 From: North Central Mass Posts: 22 |
![]() i totally agree! too bad he isn't still our governor or, even better, our president elect!
|
Poster | Thread |
---|---|
chuknchez | Posted: 2008/12/8 10:28 Updated: 2008/12/8 10:28 |
Just popping in ![]() ![]() Joined: 2008/4/22 From: Posts: 9 |
![]() The apple doesn't fall from the tree. Romney's father was a business visionary, but not a political visionary. Mitt's dad saw the post World War II fallout on the auto industry years before anyone else did. He tried to consolidate Packard, Nash, Hudson, and Studebaker into one giant company. Hudson-Nash became American Motors, and Packard and Studebaker became history. Too bad he left AMC to run for president, otherwise AMC would still be around today. Mitt should stay with business and stay out of politics.
|
Poster | Thread |
---|---|
JoeJeep | Posted: 2008/12/8 9:30 Updated: 2008/12/8 9:30 |
Just popping in ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/8/2 From: Posts: 15 |
![]() I agree 100%!!! I'm aginst the bailouts.
|
Poster | Thread |
---|---|
loner | Posted: 2008/12/8 9:28 Updated: 2008/12/8 9:29 |
Just can't stay away ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/2/23 From: Posts: 71 |
![]() Well at least I won't have to ever worry about Mitt Romney stepping foot in Michigan ever again. LOL!
I am so torn on the whole thing. They clearly do not deserve a bailout but what they did was merely incompetent not verging on willfully criminal as in the finance industry. In the end even if they all fail in 5 years it's worth postponing it so it doesn't send the economy into complete chaos now. The cost is a drop in the bucket compared to all the money they are spending elsewhere and would give some time for prospective buyers of salvageable parts of the big three to putn together a plan. There are MANY worse things to spend money on than that. |
Poster | Thread |
---|---|
Weave | Posted: 2008/12/8 8:54 Updated: 2008/12/8 9:01 |
Just popping in ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/2/1 From: Posts: 5 |
![]() Sounds pretty good. It all makes sense except for the risk of poor customer perception associated with bankruptcy that isn't addressed above. Would I buy a Big 3 product if they were in chapter 11? Yes, because I know what is going on and what will become of it. However, all that Joe Public hears from the media is the word bankrupt and it's off to the import/transplant dealer because he thinks the Big 3 are going out of business. Then the Big 3 is on its way to chapter 7 bankruptcy and really going out of business.
|
Poster | Thread |
---|---|
wjsiii | Posted: 2008/12/7 20:51 Updated: 2008/12/7 20:51 |
Quite a regular ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/7/16 From: Posts: 61 |
![]() I agree.
|
|
|