Fox New Just Reported, GM Board of Directors Gone Also.

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by DeathChill

EDIT: Also, for the love of God working for $1 means nothing. You don't think he was given millions of dollars in bonuses and stock options instead? Of course he was.

You don't know anything about the government loan deal then. he could not take any bonuses or stock options until the loan was paid back.. also he cannot take any severance pay for leaving now, he can just draw his nomal retiment.

[Hylton]

Originally Posted by Skyman 08

Rick Wagner WAS almost doing that, he was working for 1$
Give me your address and I will send you a dollar so you can give GM your bright Marketing scheme...

Both of your points are indeed hilarious! Keep on blaming the public for GM's troubles.

[DeathChill]

Originally Posted by Skyman 08

You don't know anything about the government loan deal then. he could not take any bonuses or stock options until the loan was paid back.. also he cannot take any severance pay for leaving now, he can just draw his nomal retiment.

Oh no, he can't continue getting bonuses for running a failing company. He already has received millions of dollars in bonuses and stock options and they only received the bailout money at the end of 2008. He sure as hell was getting bonuses and stock options all of the way until then:
"CEO Rick Wagoner received a pay package worth $14.9 million in 2008."

MANY CEO's take a $1 salary but it's for tax purposes really.

EDIT: \/\/\/This post is right about political discussion. The reason the President/government has a say at this point is because the auto companies took money from them under certain conditions and to meet these conditions the guys that were running the company had to go.

[rmyers]

So I have read all the posts and concerns me is I don't see any outrage or even simple questions as to where in Article 2 of the Constitution does it say that the President can do what he has done? Since when can the President come on TV and say "starting today the US Government will back warranties of GM and Chrysler cars". Since when can a President force a CEO out of his position. Regardless of whether or not he should be fired. Its not the President's or governments job. I would say that regardless of the political party that is involved.

Regarding political discussion on this forum, it is clear to me that the moderators have been fair about allowing some political discussions to take place. And I agree we should just all be adults about it. I just disagree with the policy of no politcal discussions officially. If a member is being disrepectful, a moderator could simply warn that person to tone it down rather than asking us all to review a list of rules that appear more like a middle-school code of conduct.

The bottom line is it is all about personal responsibilty, and the responsible ones should not be required to limit our speech based on the childish behavior of others.

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by DeathChill

Oh no, he can't continue getting bonuses for running a failing company. He already has received millions of dollars in bonuses and stock options and they only received the bailout money at the end of 2008. He sure as hell was getting bonuses and stock options all of the way until then:
"CEO Rick Wagoner received a pay package worth $14.9 million in 2008."

MANY CEO's take a $1 salary but it's for tax purposes really.

Ok you win, GM is a terrible company, and Wagoner was such a terrible CEO that he did nothing to help the company, all he wanted to do was make his millions run the company down the tubes and get out... There was no outside influences to the business, no economic downturn, no oil price spike, nobody bought foreign cars just because they had a bad perception of GM cars.. it is all junk and they should shut down and lay everyone off and put another million people out of work...
Not to mention crush every 2010 camaro already built so nobody will ever get to drive one..

[DeathChill]

Originally Posted by Skyman 08

Ok you win, GM is a terrible company, and Wagoner was such a terrible CEO that he did nothing to help the company, all he wanted to do was make his millions run the company down the tubes and get out... There was no outside influences to the business, no economic downturn, no oil price spike, nobody bought foreign cars just because they had a bad perception of GM cars.. it is all junk and they should shut down and lay everyone off and put another million people out of work...
Not to mention crush every 2010 camaro already built so nobody will ever get to drive one..

This is not what I was saying at all. I'm saying that there were poor decisions made (not focusing on advancing other fuel technologies, not focusing on mileage) and someone has to be accountable for this stuff.

There was outside factors that caused problems, but look at other car companies: they're surviving. No one is conspiring against GM and they have no one to blame but themselves for the situation they're in.

Is it anyone's fault that GM's quality slipped for quite some time? Why should I have to buy a car from a company that has a bad track record in regards to quality? I'm not saying they still do but any bad perception of them from the public is probably from when there was a reason for that.

[Angrybird 12]

Originally Posted by DeathChill

This is not what I was saying at all. I'm saying that there were poor decisions made (not focusing on advancing other fuel technologies, not focusing on mileage) and someone has to be accountable for this stuff.

There was outside factors that caused problems, but look at other car companies: they're surviving. No one is conspiring against GM and they have no one to blame but themselves for the situation they're in.

Is it anyone's fault that GM's quality slipped for quite some time? Why should I have to buy a car from a company that has a bad track record in regards to quality?

But you fail to note that those things occured BEFORE Wagoner was CEO. Since he took over Quality has vastly improved, But it takes time for the word to get around.. Other companies were in a better position to "Weather the storm"
That is a Storm that nobody predictied would occur so quickly, and hit so hard. Look how many companies have gone bellyup since this all started. Most of them are AMERICAN companies.. Yet this recession is world wide. not just a U.S. thing. Lots of things influenced this problem, GM was on the way to recovery when the S__t hit the fan..The bleeding of money had slowed BUT they were still far from out of trouble. A large corporation like GM cannot stop and turn around overnight or even in a few years. The company I work for had problems back several years ago, and in 98 for the first time in it's 80 year history they had a layoff... it took 5 years for us to recover from that layoff (and we employed 14,000 people at that time)and now we are facing another layoff... Is it the CEO's fault? No, He was here during the first recovery and is here now, it was the world wide economic slowdown that caused this problem...

I would bet my last dollar that if the oil prices which triggered this along with the Banking crisis had never occured nobody would be saying this about Rick Wagoner...

[Hylton]

Originally Posted by Skyman 08

I would bet my last dollar that if the oil prices which triggered this along with the Banking crisis had never occured nobody would be saying this about Rick Wagoner...

I would bet my last dollar that if there had been no banking crisis or rise in the price of oil, GM would still be losing money!

[Silver Streak]

Originally Posted by Hylton

I would bet my last dollar that if there had been no banking crisis or rise in the price of oil, GM would still be losing money!

If there was no crisis though, GM would not be asking the gov for money, they could get private lending to restructure.

[Hylton]

Originally Posted by Silver Streak

If there was no crisis though, GM would not be asking the gov for money, they could get private lending to restructure.

No disagreement there. They've been borrowing money year after year - it doesn't mean they will make money though.

[Hylton]

Originally Posted by Skyman 08

You don't know anything about the government loan deal then. he could not take any bonuses or stock options until the loan was paid back.. also he cannot take any severance pay for leaving now, he can just draw his nomal retiment.

Not exactly chump change....

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/03/30/gm....ion/index.html

[TStko]

Are we worried that CHANGE is gonna shut down the performance vehicles like in the 70s for vehicles that are still around or BACK today? (corvette, camaro, mustang, challenger) Oh my goodness somebody help me!! I don't want a Camaro that's fuel efficient!! I refuse to drive a car that's gorgeous AND gives good mileage it's supposed to cost me a lot of money for gas that only last 2 days!!! It's the end of the world!!! LO LO LLO LOL

I loved this site up until yesterday. No one is looking looking at both sides of the story. You know like, The Challenger & Mustang are wonderful cars too, though not better than a Camaro...or how NON GM people don't want the same people running the company. Sorry people there's more of them than us. Who cares if the board of directors got let go, they have been letting average people like you and myself go for the last few years, and most of them are wealthy anyway. They'll be just fine.

Too many whiners. Give me my car so i can stop coming here for updates. Newbies have ruined the desire to look through posts to learn something new about the car i've been waiting on for 3 years.

[Moose]

Originally Posted by TStko

I loved this site up until yesterday. No one is looking looking at both sides of the story. You know like, The Challenger & Mustang are wonderful cars too, though not better than a Camaro...or how NON GM people don't want the same people running the company. Sorry people there's more of them than us. Who cares if the board of directors got let go, they have been letting average people like you and myself go for the last few years, and most of them are wealthy anyway. They'll be just fine.

Too many whiners. Give me my car so i can stop coming here for updates. Newbies have ruined the desire to look through posts to learn something new about the car i've been waiting on for 3 years.

You have to expect people who consider themselves fans of a particular brand to have some feelings when the company they've supported is facing drastic changes.

As for this site; I hope you'll still "love" it and enjoy it. Stick around. Even though you'll soon have your 5th Gen., this site will continue to have good information, and be a great place for the enthusiast, regardless of their loyalty, to hang out.

Stick around.

[Zhawk]

Originally Posted by TStko

Are we worried that CHANGE is gonna shut down the performance vehicles like in the 70s for vehicles that are still around or BACK today? (corvette, camaro, mustang, challenger) Oh my goodness somebody help me!! I don't want a Camaro that's fuel efficient!! I refuse to drive a car that's gorgeous AND gives good mileage it's supposed to cost me a lot of money for gas that only last 2 days!!! It's the end of the world!!! LO LO LLO LOL

Yeah, I'm concerned. I remember the power dropping off in the 70s, the introduction of the 305. Hey, don't we all just LOVE the iron duke in a Camaro, maybe that will be great again.
Yes, I would be very happy with a fuel efficient Camaro, I would even consider an all electric one. (Think about the torque at launch). BUT, I also want a Camaro that is true to the heritage. The 5th gen is. Can it stay that way with the gov't interferring with GM? I am not so sure. Its not the end of the world. It wasn't in 2002 when the Camaro went on hiatus. Read again that list; Corvette, Camaro, Mustang, Challenger. Think. The Mustang went through the horrid Mustang II years, in 74 the Cobra II had an anemic V6. The Challenger went away and has been considered on the chopping block by parties with Chrysler already. The Camaro went through the Iron Duke, 305s, 2.8s and then was cut altogether. The Vette alone has stood true to its heritage since 1953. And it has been saddled with some very weak engines in its one turn. In the 80s a V6 Vette was considered.
I started calling the a pontential second golden age of muscle cars. Ages do end though. It may not be the end of the world, but it could well be the end of affordable performance.

I loved this site up until yesterday. No one is looking looking at both sides of the story. You know like, The Challenger & Mustang are wonderful cars too, though not better than a Camaro...or how NON GM people don't want the same people running the company. Sorry people there's more of them than us. Who cares if the board of directors got let go, they have been letting average people like you and myself go for the last few years, and most of them are wealthy anyway. They'll be just fine.

Too many whiners. Give me my car so i can stop coming here for updates. Newbies have ruined the desire to look through posts to learn something new about the car i've been waiting on for 3 years.

You say that no one has looked at both sides of the story. They people here have been doing that for years. These are the ones that have 'kept the faith'. That board of directors you so easily dismiss are the ones who approved the case for the Solstice, Sky, C6 Vette, new Camaro, turbo Cobalt, Cruse, Malibu, etc. They are the people who have been trying to turn around a massive company. That is tough and takes time, ask any captain of an aircraft carrier and he'll let you know it has to be done with thought and doesn't happen in as short a space as a canoe.
I am not jumping your case. I just want you to do what you accuse others of, look at the other side.

One last thing, it is sad you don't have patience with new people here. I am more than glad to see new people. They bring new energy. How would it be at my job, where I train aircraft mechanics, if I never wanted new trainees, who would I train? Think about it. And to all of you people who are just joining in on the Camaro and GM conversation, welcome!