GM Gives You Your Money Back

No, I did not support the bailout. However I think if GM and Chrysler had went REALLY bankrupt the auto producing states wide have augured straight into bankruptcy. Can you imagine how much worse the economy would have been? Can you imagine 4 or 5 states turning into economic deserts? Try putting the bailout in a total costs and common good perspective. It was an ugly decision and only time will tell if we were right. Yes, I own and wear a Reagan t-shirt. Are you insinuating that UAW employees are dishonest? I fail to see the logic between the bailout and the rank and file UAW members being dishonest. How about saying the UAW board in this case? GM's quality has improved; it had to. I think GM's quality has improved enough that it can compete in the mid size sedan market. IMHO the mid size sedan market is the toughest market. Personally, I think GM needs to run a nation wide ad stating: We were arrogant and we made mistakes; we listened, we learned, and we changed, come see the new GM. They have to run an ad like that to convince people who had a POS GM product to come back. Or at least go to a dealer and look. What kinda of nation wide ad should GM run would make a great TTAC blog. My Grandparents own a Buick (don't be shocked) and the seat bottoms are too long for my stubby legs. I'd like to find the GM VP for seat design and kick him the gonads and tell bigger car=bigger seats does not work for everyone.

A consumer who is willing to condemn a manufacturer for mis-steps made 30 years ago is just as bad a judge as someone who is willing to forgive another manufacturer almost any error, screw up or mis-step. The trouble with complex, manufactured goods is that just because a company has a bad year (JVC, 1989) does not make the entire company suspect. Even within a model line, there could be a bad batch. Forensic accounting has worked miracles in catching bad batches of parts before they actually break in a vehicle. As the auto industry went through 2 decades of turmoil, beginning in about the mid-70s, it was the industry leaders (Ford, GM) that had the volume sales and deep pockets to be exposed to new technologies that were being tried to meet CAFE ratings, bumper crash ratings and new pollution controls. The perfect storm. Perfect timing for the motorized skateboards made by Datsun, Honda and Toyota to swoop in and grab up 20% of the market in no time. But this is a dead issue. One should be focusing on the present, and it was sheer bad timing that the banks nearly went under, taking the auto loan business with it and vaporizing 50% of the American auto market over night. Make no mistake: many American banks were insolvent in late 2008. Nobody like government intervention, but given the information at the time, Bush and then incoming Obama really didn't have much of a choice. With no viable auto industry, the United States would be finished as a world power. I cannot believe that the (for the most part) educated readers on TTAC don't get that: the tool and die industry, plastics, rubber, glass, electronics - the list is endless, all depend on auto manufacturing. If Detroit had collapsed, who could have stepped in and scooped up GM and Ford's patents? (Do not laugh: GM still has more patents that Toyota or Honda.) Why else was the Opel deal scuttled when Magna wanted to team up with a Russian backer? Isn't it bad enough the Russians have to give American astronauts a ride to the Space Station? Will they have to fly them to Russia, too? Airbus is eating Boeing's lunch,but it took all of Europe to gang up on it. Take away the Pentagon's money, and Boeing likely would be gone, too. Japan Inc wrote the book, Korea wrote the jacket copy and China is going to write the epilogue on invasion without firing a shot. Well, perhaps invasion is too strong a word: after all, as the prime mortgagor, I suppose they indirectly own everything anyway. With the current state of the U.S. trade deficit, its foreign debt and manufacturing job losses, it is only a matter of time that China and the U.S. will meet in some frozen wasteland and trade pot shots over an oil or gas deposit. The question is: where will the troop carriers, tanks and trucks be built if Detroit is a dustbowl? I know: Detroit deserves to die and it is our entitled right to have access to 130 models of imported vehicles. Pass the popcorn: this Canadian is enjoying the show.

@carbiz Let me know if GM's ex-bondholders every see their money or if we taxpayers ever see ours. This is a nice soliloquy to a dishonest company that still has yet to transform itself the way it would have had it actually gone through a real bk. But let's not get caught up in details, right? As usual, the deep pockets and those connected got bailed out, but small businesses and taxpayers will always take it on the chin. It's sad you're enjoying the show. Enjoyable isn't what I would call this, but hey, different strokes, right?

@el scotto >>Are you insinuating that UAW employees are dishonest? I fail to see the logic between the bailout and the rank and file UAW members being dishonest. For legal purposes the rank and file employees have selected a representative, the UAW. The UAW is the rank and file employees. The problem is that this was a politicized bailout to insulate and reward the UAW, not pursue "the common good." If this had been a genuine Chapter 11 reorganization the unsecured creditor UAW wouldn't have walked away with big ownership / equity interests in the "new" GM and Chrysler, nor would those "new" entities still be burdened with the legacy costs of UAW pensions. >>GM’s quality has improved; it had to I'm sure that the new stuff isn't as bad as a Vega or X-car. But one look at Consumer Reports tells one that on a relative basis GM vehicles are still bottom-feeders. Think about it. GM / Ford / Chrysler are still saddled with the UAW: the union-slacker attitudes it fosters among the workers; the work rules and featherbedding in the contracts; the legacy costs of pensions. To try to offset the resultant higher fixed costs, those manufacturers have to cut corners elsewhere -- component quality, lowest bidder for inferior quality supplier procurement, decontenting. Since lower quality is structurally inherent in their products, don't you think that they'll continue to lose market share over time and be back at the taxpayer trough?