Don't know if I can buy a government car?

[OUR72GTO]

The current Challenger and there fore CAMARO exist today because the USA bailed out Chrysler Corp. Lee was a better salesman than Wagner. They paid the money back early.

[radz28]

Originally Posted by Isshinryu

I don't plan on buying any government vehicle. I'm gonna buy a Chevy Camaro!

That's what I'm screamin'!

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by Morepwr

I saw a news report on this last night and it actually bothered me quite a bit. If they have majority interest then they can decide what cars to build and with all the "green" stuff being the fad, I can see GM just building econo cars and stop building anything sporty. Especially with the new mandates on minimum fuel mileage requirements.

I am still hoping for the best, but it just looks sad to me right now.

This would be hugely incorrect. If the government has a majority stake, then it has to get its money back out of the company as an objective. The goal isn't to socialize autos. The goal is to get paid.

When the government starts making GM's decisions, the objective is to make it money. Green cars are great, but the government will have to invest even more to make all of GM's cars electric or green in other ways, even though GM has more hybrids and green cars than any other manufacturer. The fact is that the government actually has less incentive to force green cars on the market because the government will be responsible for making GM more successful. In other words, the US government will have to let the business professionals at GM continue making decisions while all they do is veto the bad ideas.

Who gets to decide what is a bad idea? That's where it gets tricky. The US government is very number-oriented right now. They need a success story to look good. They need GM to survive and beat the import market to restore faith and investment in the US economy. In order for that to happen, GM must be focused on the market. The good news is that the hard decisions GM has already made will allow it to be more profitable. The bad news is that, if I'm wrong about the government being numbers-oriented, GM will go into bankruptcy and have to shed core brands. I have a lot of faith that the US government is focussing on the numbers right now, and that will save GM.

I'll provide an example. Did anyone notice that GMC is still around? I would love to see GMC trucks replace Chevy trucks as far as the options go, but GM has pointed out that GMC can't be killed. It's simply too profitable, whereas Pontiac has not had the same backing. It's sad to see Pontiac go, but this may be one of the sacrifices necessary for GM's survival. The numbers killed Pontiac, but they saved GMC, a truck company that produces a few hybrids and a whole lot of gas-guzzlers. In the end, this will be the way GM is handled. Where can we cut costs and still turn a profit? Expect more hard decisions in the future, but you can certainly expect GM to be making cars for another hundred years.

[Camaro_Corvette]

Well said Blur

[radz28]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

This would be hugely incorrect. If the government has a majority stake, then it has to get its money back out of the company as an objective. The goal isn't to socialize autos. The goal is to get paid.

When the government starts making GM's decisions, the objective is to make it money. Green cars are great, but the government will have to invest even more to make all of GM's cars electric or green in other ways, even though GM has more hybrids and green cars than any other manufacturer. The fact is that the government actually has less incentive to force green cars on the market because the government will be responsible for making GM more successful. In other words, the US government will have to let the business professionals at GM continue making decisions while all they do is veto the bad ideas.

Who gets to decide what is a bad idea? That's where it gets tricky. The US government is very number-oriented right now. They need a success story to look good. They need GM to survive and beat the import market to restore faith and investment in the US economy. In order for that to happen, GM must be focused on the market. The good news is that the hard decisions GM has already made will allow it to be more profitable. The bad news is that, if I'm wrong about the government being numbers-oriented, GM will go into bankruptcy and have to shed core brands. I have a lot of faith that the US government is focussing on the numbers right now, and that will save GM.

I'll provide an example. Did anyone notice that GMC is still around? I would love to see GMC trucks replace Chevy trucks as far as the options go, but GM has pointed out that GMC can't be killed. It's simply too profitable, whereas Pontiac has not had the same backing. It's sad to see Pontiac go, but this may be one of the sacrifices necessary for GM's survival. The numbers killed Pontiac, but they saved GMC, a truck company that produces a few hybrids and a whole lot of gas-guzzlers. In the end, this will be the way GM is handled. Where can we cut costs and still turn a profit? Expect more hard decisions in the future, but you can certainly expect GM to be making cars for another hundred years.

I think I understand what you've said here, but maybe what's got many people worried (well, me at least) is a general thought that with the "Green" push that's out there, on the whole, that more and more cars are going to bo hybrid or electric, and cars like Camaro, Corvette, Challenger, Mustang, etc., are just going to be pushed out. Again, I'm pretty stupid when it comes to how this works. I just have reservations. I do hope that whatever happens will allow GM to heal and to continue to provide us enthusiasts the cars we want to buy.

[DGthe3]

first off ... link to said report?

secondly, what does it matter if its the government owns GM or not? GM's current shareholders have little influence on the cars that get built and the same would be true for any future shareholders. They would impact the corporate structure and such, but the fact of the matter is, small eco cars are not profitable for GM and big powerful ones are. So forcing them to build only eco cars is one of the stupidest possible moves that could be made.

And once again, all this "my tax money" this and that, any clue as to how much money GM has generated in tax revenue over the last year? From sales taxes, gas guzzler taxes, corportate taxes, and income taxes from employees? I'm going to go out on a limb and say that its a couple bucks more than what the members of this forum collectively contribute. In effect, they have a greater claim to ownership of the company that any of us ever would, even if it was 100% owned by the government.

[UCF w00t]

This is where it all gets interesting. The government can regulate, yes, but the government is not permitted to compete with private enterprise EXCEPT in cases where that enterprise is necessary for the safety and core functions of the country. This is how the postal service is allowed to exist and compete with FedEx and UPS.

If the US federal government took over a controlling stake of GM (50% + 1 share), they would in effect be competing with Ford, Chrysler (assuming they aren't in the same situation), Toyota, etc. This would almost certainly be deemed illegal. So, I have a feeling that they will actually NOT have a controlling stake in GM. I know the reports were that the fed would get 50% of the common stock but it probably would be more like 49.9%.

Let's just say the fed does take a controlling stake in GM, what does that mean to the day-to-day operations? Well really not as much as you probably think. Most decisions are not voted on by the shareholders. The shareholders vote for the board of directors (which would probably become mostly government appointees, basically the "Auto Task Force" would be directly on the board). The board gets to hire/fire senior executives as well as make other massive decisions. The board does not vote on individual vehicles. They could, however, set the vision of greener vehicles. Things like brand closures would get a vote as well.

And as The Blur said, it's all about $. Yea they will probably attempt to use their position to influence greener vehicles but in the end, the government can't remain in the car business. We've already seen their ability to use regulation to drive greener vehicles so I don't think they need to have a controlling stake in the company.

In the end, not much will change. The fed will sell their stake as soon as they can. Remember, Obama doesn't really control these things. It's his financial people (one of whom was a Bush holdover) that do.

[The_Blur]

Originally Posted by radz282003

I think I understand what you've said here, but maybe what's got many people worried (well, me at least) is a general thought that with the "Green" push that's out there, on the whole, that more and more cars are going to bo hybrid or electric, and cars like Camaro, Corvette, Challenger, Mustang, etc., are just going to be pushed out. Again, I'm pretty stupid when it comes to how this works. I just have reservations. I do hope that whatever happens will allow GM to heal and to continue to provide us enthusiasts the cars we want to buy.

Here's the big thing that worries me: killing our own cars. If we hesitate to buy from a company majority owned by the government, they will have no incentive to cater to us. They will stop making our cars because they aren't selling rather than because they have no place in the market. If we buy, then we are keeping them alive. If we don't buy, then our favorite cars go away because we didn't invest in what we liked. This is how capitalism works, and I'm fairly certain that the current administration will enforce it. We represent the market, so we need to buy what we want. That alone should keep our favorite products alive.

[radz28]

I can see that I think I can stand to learn a lot of perspective in this thread if posts keep coming like the last three, to name a few. Thanks guys, and keep 'em coming. My bottom line is I hope that I don't have to go to Ford or Chrysler in order to buy the kind of car I want because things between GM and the Government don't work out for us car guys...

[dkb]

by definition ... a government owned car company could care less what the customer wants. It's like saying the Post Office or BMV is concerned about customer service as they take their mandated 15 breaks a day while the lines stream out the door. A big, gas guzzling, 425 HP muscle car is NOT what Washington WANTS us to be driving. So say goodbye to the Camaro if this happens.

I'm not going to screw myself over I guess and not get my car because of this but I'm pretty sure it's the last time I'll buy a GM car ... more than likely because the government won't build a car I want ...

I read that the government told GM they wanted them to stop building pickups? Hello Ford ... buy stock now. I've got news for the government ... people kind of like their pickups. They haul STUFF in them ....

I'm ranting ...

Please just finish up my awesome car before the washington bureaucrats take over and finish off the destruction of a once great company ...

[BigRigMike]

Originally Posted by dkb

I read that the government told GM they wanted them to stop building pickups?

Do you have a link for this or was it in a regular paper?

[Captain Awesome]

Thank you mods for NOT killing this thread.

I am learning a great deal from this discussion and it has even changed my opinion which I made when I was not as well informed on the subject. I hope we can continue to have civil discussions on these sensitive issues that affect us all and not have knee-jerk locking of any political topic. If anything we could perhaps just keep these types of topics alive or move them to a politics area and let them continue so people like me can see all sides of the issues!

Thanks again!

[radz28]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

Thank you mods for NOT killing this thread.

I am learning a great deal from this discussion and it has even changed my opinion which I made when I was not as well informed on the subject. I hope we can continue to have civil discussions on these sensitive issues that affect us all and not have knee-jerk locking of any political topic. If anything we could perhaps just keep these types of topics alive or move them to a politics area and let them continue so people like me can see all sides of the issues!

Thanks again!

I'm hoping there's something we all can learn in this thread. Hopefully things can remain civil and constructive

[dkb]

i realize there are a lot of younger guys on here but the idea that the government will run GM like a smart business because they're interested in making money boggles me. The gov loses money with everything it touches. It gave us amtrak which has lost money year in and year out for decades. And it just took on enough debt to put us all in the hole for generations to come.

The government will make decisions based on what is politically expedient ... not based on rational/logical thinking. And certainly not based on what consumers want. Otherwise we'd all be trying to get our hands on the Soviet era LADAs or whatever that car was they produced over there.

I just think by buying my Camaro and paying GM over the next 3 years I'll be supporting what I think is an incredibly bad precedent and I hate to do that ..


... But I like the car too much ....