Though I am not a fan of Toyotas (I’ve had problems with them too), it’s good to see a company know where their problems are and work to resolve them regardless of the bottom line. A company that doesn’t build product just to be competitive but to be the best at what they do, deserves to be in business and at the number one position too.

Since you are so obsessed with recall numbers, let’s talk about them. Even though I don’t think that’s a good metric of quality—Honda recalled 1 million user mannuals last year.

2004: GM 10.8M Ford __5M, DCX 5.8M, Toyota 1.1M
2005: GM ___5M Ford __6M, DCX __1M, Toyota 2.2M
2006: GM _1.6M Ford 1.7M, DCX 2.4M, Toyota 0.8M

In any given year, Toyota’s recalls are less than half of the GM or Ford recalls.

Given the one-shot nature of the recalls, it makes more sense to compare a moving average line of one model cycle (i.e. 4 or 8 years) and then read the results.

The quality superiority of Toyota cars over GM cars is as true as the handling superiority of BMW cars over Toyota or Lexus. Most believe so; others thinks it’s just hype.

Reached Wednesday, GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz offered a curt response to Toyota’s outpacing GM in the first three months of the year: “My reaction is ‘So what?’ “

I happen to know someone who’s a fairly successful professional comedian (relatively speaking)…he’d kill for material like this.

Thank you, sir….best laugh I’ve had all day.

If a large number of GM workers and those affiliated with GM were so focused on this idea, keeping in mind the mountain of problems that GM has on it’s hands, then it’s easy to see how the end is near for GM.

While GM is so focused on sales numbers, and makes a committed effort to show the media that it’s not concerned in the first place, Toyota keeps it’s head down. In fact, now that Toyota has the #1 spot, they are even more worried about their quality than before.

There is the old saying that many GM loyals are clinging to … “when you’re at the top, you can only go down”. While that may be true, there is another perspective. When you’re at the top, it’s possible to stay there.

Apart from continuing to compete with other automakers, including up and coming automakers from China and India, Toyota also is competing with itself in a way. Toyota is always picking apart and critiquing it’s own cars, and looking at how they can make them better.

Reached Wednesday, GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz offered a curt response to Toyota’s outpacing GM in the first three months of the year: “My reaction is ‘So what?’ “

So if ain’t broke why fix it?

I think I recognize “mikey” from previous usenet postings :). The idea that as long as the current product is selling ok one need not be developing the next generation is so foolish that it can be left as an excercise for the student to figure out why in a competitive market that is the wrong answer.

Hint: Camry had a complete redesign last year and was the #1 selling car in the US before the redesign and after the redesign. Accord is #2 and gets it’s all new design next year.

Neither the Impala nor the Cobalt have been #1 or #2 retail sellers in their segments anytime in the past decade.

LOL…My computer becomes a food/drink-free zone when visiting TTAC…The people at ThinkPad are thinking.

Engineering is about selecting the best materials/methods that Scientists create and figuring out how to reduce costs and commercialize. This is counter to bean counter mentality of if it aint broke, dont fix it…Or it is good enough…Or cant you use a less expensive (obsolete?) material/method. With Sabanes-Oxley law and other SEC crap, the bean counters are/will be secure at the helm of public-owned/traded corporate America. Yep…Government to the rescue.

I like that Windswords: “No taxpayer was harmed….”. Cant say that about Ethanol.

Thanks for the Ranger Rick quotes. Good stuff. I’m familiar with them, but like a lot of good humor, it’s aging very well.

As to this exchange:
mikey:
April 24th, 2007 at 10:41 pm
Yes indeed jt horner Cobalt and Impala sales are rolling along quite well.

Next?

That was definitely responsible for water on my keyboard – fortunately, ThinkPads actually have drain holes for such incidents. I think there’s an ad in that idea “ThinkPads – Certified For TTAC Use”.

My sincere thanks to all parties involved in those posts.

I wasn’t making a case for a bailout. Actually I ended up (unintentionally) of making a case for not having a bailout. You make a good historical point about multinationals in a time of war. I didn’t know about what happened to the nationals of each country who were in the other when war started. I assumed that the Nazis just took over the Opel factories for their war production either by nationalising them or declaring Opel no longer a part of GM.

We made an interesting discovery regarding the philosophy by which the two groups of engineers were taught to approach their work:

The American engineers were taught to look at an existing part and think: “ How can I make this part the same quality and reduce costs”

The Japanese engineers were taught to look at an existing part and think: “ How can I make this part BETTER quality and not increase costs”

Of course neither engineer ever completely succedes. Over time American quality is going to fall. Over time Japanese costs are going to increase. In the end though, the Japanese part is increasing in quality or utility while the American part is declining in quality.

After this revelation, I knew that GM was ultimately doomed; it is just a matter of time.

It would take a complete rethink of their engineering training to save them.

But there is one advantage that never seems to get mentioned. In the future when Toyota sells 1 million Camry’s and a million Corolla’s a year, people will want alternatives (after all not everyone wants to drive an appliance). So if GM sells 1 million mid-size cars, they will be spread out over 5 brands with 5 different designs.

People will learn to hate Shopping mall parking lots when they can’t find their car in a sea of silver and gold.

Contrary to the many protests of those in Detroit, GM, Ford or Chrysler’s demise are not national defense related.

In case anyone is wondering what happens to defense needs in times of war one only has to look at history. GM and Ford were multnational companies in the 1920’s each established overseas manufacturing plants to support their forien sales. GM purchased Opel in the 1920’s as an example. When war came the location of the factory not the location of the parent company determined whose defense needs were met. GM and Ford were not only a part of the arsenal of democracy but also of the axis as well. When the German army moved they did so on the Opel Blitz (and horses). When war was declared between Germany and the US, all american civillians nationals were exchanged with German nationals in America. Germans ran GM and Fords european operations and the profits (yes GM and Ford made money selling to Nazi Germany) were held in trust for GM and Ford until the war ended. I believe although I might be mistaken that GM and Ford even filed claims against the US for damages from airforce bombings of their european operations.

You are correct they were government gaurantees on loans by private banks (think student loans). No taxpayer was harmed in the saving of this company. While this may be a model for a future a guarantee program there are some differences:

1.) None of the domestics to my knowledge makes any defense related products.
2.) Chrylser had a very specific and understood recovery plan that Lee was able to sell to Congress. And it had the right car at the right time to lead the recovery (K-car). You can’t say that about any of domestics now. I don’t see a force of personality like Lido, and I don’t see a plan based on some new revolutionary product.
3.) It’s one thing to guarantee loans to one major industrial corp, but three? At the same time, or near the same time? Even a Democrat Congress might balk at that as they considering the prospect of a default.

Another thing to consider is that Congress will not be able to help itself and will impose all kinds of restrictions and qualifications on the domestics in return for guaranteeing loans. Some, like a limit on CEO pay, will be welcomed by the public at large. But others, like a demand to produce 45 mpg, super low emmisions, 6 passenger auto, designed and engineered by disabled, transgendered, economically disadvantaged, minority engineers might not be technically feasible. The point is they think they are experts at things just because they got elected, and if they start dictating how the domestics should run their business they might make worse decisions than the sorry mgt that is running these companies now. How would you like GM to look like Amtrack?

That sounds about right. In short, you might say it’s a contrast between the systematic development of the next generation and desperate, stopgap measures. I don’t think I need to say who is who.

GM’s sales number includes lots of vehicles produced by GM Daewoo and GM’s Chinese joint ventures.
Those are not wholly-owned subsidiaries. GM owns only 30% of Wuling, so why are they counting Wuling’s 500K sales as GM sales?

By the way, those Wulings and Daewoos are incredibly cheap and therefore bring in little revenue and profit. GM may be selling more vehicles in China than Toyota, but if GM is selling Wulings for $5K each and Toyota is selling Camrys for $25K each, I know which of the two I would prefer to be.

What really counts is total global automotive revenue and operating profit. But those numbers are only published for consolidated subsidiaries in which GM or Toyota have more than 50% ownership. Chinese subsidiaries are excluded from consolidated numbers. Likewise, Toyota’s important NUMMI factory in California that produces 400K vehicles is not consolidated (because both GM and Toyota own 50% each, so neither consolidates it). It’s not published how the profits of NUMMI are allocated between GM and Toyota, but I bet most go to Toyota.
Toyota has a similar factory in Europe with Peugeot/Citroen that is not consolidated and produces 300K vehicles.

Anyway, despite the distortion of consolidation, we can look at consolidated automotive revenue as a benchmark (which, again, excludes China and some other important ventures). In the Q4 2006 quarterly report, Toyota was already about 15% ahead of GM in that respect.

Why is it important who is the biggest? Despite GM’s sudden pooh-poohing, being the biggest is incredibly important to achieve the best economy of scale, that’s why.

The bottomline truth: Toyota was already ahead of GM, and their pole position will allow them to break away from the rest even faster.

I was on a cross-country flight on an L1011, and when we landed, I’ve never experienced again what I experienced then:

The landing was SO SMOOTH, the entire flight burst out into applause. No lie…it was the coolest thing I’ve experienced on a flight. You could not even tell we hit the earth..and 200+ people simply burst out in applause :)

Too cool!!! You see..when things are done RIGHT, people instinctively know what’s good…and it comes from the heart.

When you buy a GM, you make excuses for your “sorry purchase”.

Interesting how that works, huh?