Noah Harbinger Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Hey, did you know your state produces more than 50% of the fruits, nuts and vegetables in this country? So which one of those three are you? Ouch, I'm SO hurt by your demonstration of objectivity and truthiness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Reynolds Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Because Flint, Detroit, Gary and Fort Wayne are great places to live? Wow took that one personal didn't ya. Detroit isn't so bad, at least there is a healthy amount of culture, nightlife and other things to do in the area. Those other cities I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthewq4b Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Wow, look at Chrysler go. Big incentives and all, it`s good to see them at the top in Canada. One thing Chrysler is missing is a compact 4 door sedan. How stupid of them not to offer direct competition to the Focus, Civic, Corolla......How do they not offer a 4 door compact sedan, when there is clearly a huge market for them. Overall, look who is making huge gains: `Hyundai - February 2009 sales of 6,912 up 29.8% from February 2008` This company has been impressive lately. Product after product...they just keep on getting better and better. I think even Honda and Toyota are getting nervous.. The only reason Chrysler is doing as well as they are is because they are fire selling every thing they can. They are under cutting every body price wise by thousands and thousands of dollars. You can walk in to a dealer and get $20k off MSRP on a new Ram with out even trying. Haggle a bit and you can kick that up to $25K They can not keep it up for long, this the last big hurrah before the ship sinks. Chrysler is basically selling everything at a loss. Chrysler's quarterly is going to be damn ugly and it may be the last nail in the coffin. I know more than a few of the Chrysler dealers here are looking at selling off the land they sit on to developers and going to month to month rental on the sites. Crosstown here had started a brand new building in a new location and it has sat half finished for nearly 5 months now with no plans to ever complete it. Matthew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKII Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 I know the F-Series is sold elsewhere mainly Canada, where did l say it was sold in the US only? Fiesta should outsell F-Series this month worldwide. So far, customers have purchased more than 110,000 new Fiestas on the three continents where the car is on sale, including preliminary estimates from February results since the global debut last autumn China market debuts this month. http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=29983 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSFan00 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 There you go assailing that straw man again. I have clearly and repeatedly said that NOTHING will work for GM as long as present management remains in charge. "Nothing" encompasses everything from private financing to chapter 11 restructuring. As long as GM's management remains what it was at the beginning of this crisis (and this crisis began in 2002), GM will find no way out of it. "That" straw man? If I can recall correctly, you trumpeted the expenditure of many billions in loan handouts (guarantees) as necessary. Necessary for what? Now there are more funds being requested. You advocated that the subsidy, and avoidance of bankruptcy was essential, and now you admit that "...management remains...GM will find no way out of it." I do not concede to you that I am the one who has changed tunes. You advocated that the bailout (version 1, anyway), and federal oversight (coming from Congress of all places) was more likely to help than bankruptcy, and now you believe that "well, they didn't force the right changes." Guess what, CONGRESS WILL NEVER FORCE THE RIGHT CHANGES! That was my whole point! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 "That" straw man? If I can recall correctly, you trumpeted the expenditure of many billions in loan handouts (guarantees) as necessary. Necessary for what? Now there are more funds being requested. Huh? Everyone knew the first payout was a down-payment to keep the companies afloat long enough to come up with a long term plan.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSFan00 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Huh? Everyone knew the first payout was a down-payment to keep the companies afloat long enough to come up with a long term plan.... Long term plan? I thought they had already done that, in order to get the first guarantees? Is the long term plan to take cash quarterly from the fed's in exchange for not going bankrupt? W shouldn't have caved...that was not the promise at the time. Why are GM/Chrysler only now coming up with a long term plan? Hell, Chrysler won't even be around this summer...the restructuring plans were to have been developed in 3 months, not the next round of begging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 now you admit that "...management remains...GM will find no way out of it." http://blueovalblogs.com/blogs/?p=95 Similarly, any bailout of GM must include wholesale replacement of management in order to be effective. Why? Moral hazard. People that make decisions that are wrong for the company should not be retained by the company. There should be a price to pay for a succession of poor decisions. Learn to read, moron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Wow took that one personal didn't ya. Detroit isn't so bad, at least there is a healthy amount of culture, nightlife and other things to do in the area. Those other cities I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole. Just making a point about the relative merits of Fargo, Omaha, Sioux Falls, etc.... And while Detroit has good things well, having seen the Kilpatrick saga from afar, it's also had more than its fair share of bad things as well..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 BTW: Watch LSFan00 disappear for a while on this subject. Then in a couple weeks, he'll come back with his strawmen, all ready to have another go at them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplesituations Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 BTW: Watch LSFan00 disappear for a while on this subject. Then in a couple weeks, he'll come back with his strawmen, all ready to have another go at them. this is gettin good Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSFan00 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 I don't read Richard's blog and I don't give a damn what he posted there. I assume he takes his most profound thoughts on Ford/the auto industry and puts them on a separate page for posterity, so he can re-read them down the road with a deep sense of pride. Whatever, his ego is not my problem. He DEFINITELY came on his forum and posted that of course the bailout money should be given in late Dec-Jan when it was known that Congress, while ticked at the use of corporate jets, would not demand replacement of the management at the companies. Trite name calling may make you feel better about quoting your equivocal positions, but nothing in the federal intervention then, or now, indicates that Congress, or the Executive branch will be demanding replacement of the management, but you support the continued bailouts, which should rightfully simply be called taxpayer-funded bankruptcy postponements. Have a nice day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 I don't read Richard's blog and I don't give a damn what he posted there. Then how can you argue if you don't know what he said there. Richard set up his blog because he was tired of explaining simple facts over and over to people like you that turn up every couple of months and expound their propaganda on threads like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 quoting your equivocal positions http://www.blueovalforums.com/forums/index...st&p=425925 http://www.blueovalforums.com/forums/index...st&p=427505 From the VERY BEGINNING, I have said that NO BAILOUT will work with CURRENT MANAGEMENT. Your admitted lack of interest in reading what I write is curiously at odds with your claims that I have 'changed' my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 you support the continued bailouts, which should rightfully simply be called taxpayer-funded bankruptcy postponements. Have a nice day. Any bailout at GM must address the fundamental issues with GM’s structure, with its decision making processes, with its absolute failure, over the past 30 years, to adequately respond to a changing marketplace. GM in its present state cannot be salvaged, and any bailout must acknowledge that in order to be successful. Otherwise, all a bailout does is assure a more orderly demise for the General. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSFan00 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Then how can you argue if you don't know what he said there. Richard set up his blog because he was tired of explaining simple facts over and over to people like you that turn up every couple of months and expound their propaganda on threads like this. Well he shouldn't come on the threads then and re-explain it differently, and I'll be happy to just remain ignorant of his little theses. Furthermore, as the moderator/owner, he can at his leisure just kick me off the site rather than resorting to name calling. I didn't realize my occasional absence was noted/missed, or otherwise caused such a disruption in the sophisticated dialog on the board, and duly apologize for not meeting the board standards for conduct, intelligence or fealty toward the great Ford/GM/Auto thought leader. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 (edited) Well he shouldn't come on the threads then and re-explain it differently, and I'll be happy to just remain ignorant of his little theses. Furthermore, as the moderator/owner, he can at his leisure just kick me off the site rather than resorting to name calling. I didn't realize my occasional absence was noted/missed, or otherwise caused such a disruption in the sophisticated dialog on the board, and duly apologize for not meeting the board standards for conduct, intelligence or fealty toward the great Ford/GM/Auto thought leader. 1) 2) what 're-explain differently' are you talking about? I said 'no bailouts = disaster' and 'bailouts w/o management change = orderly demise'. What part of those statements can be taken exception with? I said it then, I have said it periodically since, and I'm still saying it today. 3) I don't own the board 4) please explain to me why you deserve to be complimented for refusing to read what I write while claiming to know what I think. Please tell me how that merits you any favorable sobriquet. Please tell me how this entitles you to anything other than derision. 5) again, Edited March 6, 2009 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSFan00 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Jeeze, RJ, work with me; what you said initially (and on your blog, as I now note) doesn't matter. Your advocacy of an idealistic solution was impractical, that's all there is to it. Congress/President Bush (even when considering not giving away the money to hand the problem over to Obama), never considered demanding replacement of the management. You did however call me some other name at the time for questioning whether the handout should be made (the hand out, AGAIN, never required/considered management change). It accomplished nothing. You agreed it needed to happen. So where are you now? Do you think Congress/BO will now demand management change @ GM? OF COURSE NOT! It's about as likely as Barney Frank/Nancy Pelosi's dream enviro-mobile catching on next year with the public. Saying "well, that's what I think is necessary, but I do support the bailout anyway" doesn't change your childishly duplicitous/equivocal position. Bailout 1: RJ supported: Failed. Bailout 2: RJ supports: will Fail. GM/Chrysler: Still need to go bankrupt. LSfan00 remains right throughout dialog. Original blog post/threads demanding leadership change: irrelevent vs. Dec. support of bailout as is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 (edited) Jeeze, RJ, work with me; what you said initially (and on your blog, as I now note) doesn't matter. Yes. You certainly DON'T deserve to be called a moron. Your insistence that I work with you while asserting that the fundamental position outlined in the blog entry is irrelevant definitely earns you any of a variety of insults that I frankly am not going to bother with at this point. The fundamental position, summarized in the very last paragraphs of the second blog entry remains as true now as it was then: A bailout with no management change does no more than ensure an orderly bankruptcy. But, according to YOU, that statement doesn't matter. I repeat: Edited March 6, 2009 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 (edited) What you objected to, then, was the assertion that a Ch. 11 filing would create chaos. It's something that I believed true at the time, and something that I still believe true. The rapid dissolution of GM, which would be precipitated by a bankruptcy filing with NO financial assistance from the government, would wreak havoc on the Great Lakes region. Of course, the subject then turned to a varied debate on what can be done in bankruptcy as opposed to outside of it. I would note that Ford's negotiations to terminate the jobs bank, to alter the VEBA funding requirements, and to retire debt have all been done outside of bankruptcy and that certainly puts lie to the assertion that such negotiations can only be carried out when supervised by government employees. Edited March 6, 2009 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 People think that all GM has to do is enter their submission by March 31 and all is done/finished. That is only the beginning of negotiations and I can see further conditions applying to lending once the full layout of GM's restructuring plans are dissected. If the team has been too optimistic with recovery SAAR numbers, the whole plan is back out the window. If the government feels it's public money is in peril, they are compelled to take measures to ensure that is not the case, either by modifying the agreement (a new team at GM?) or by withdrawing the loan offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 GM's management has to go. It has been too long at GM, too long at the top of GM, and too long responsible for bad decisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 LSFan00 is apparently not capable of grasping as nuanced an argument as: No bailout = mess bailout/no management change = delay the inevitable bailout/management change = best shot at fixing things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 The problem with GM's plan is the guys running GM. In the past they have been inept at reading the market and making changes quickly and effectively. Those same people now present a plan full of blue sky and expect treasury to roll over and say yes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Bill Ford done good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.