goblue1999

Finally, some posts with factual data AND a sense of humor!!thanks for making my surfing night.

That is quite easily true, dump Slaab.

That volume number seems way off, I find it hard to believe that nearly an entire assembly plant's production would be needed to make it viable. Are you sure on those numbers??

Actually, if you don't understand the statement, YOU are out of touch. Gas is cheap!! Even at $3/gallon, it is historically cheap. There is no justifiable reason to spend hundreds of millions, or billions to save such a plentiful fuel. If you think it makes sense to spend $5000 for a hybrid (your cost, no mention of the hundreds of millions to develop it) to save a couple of hundred bucks of gas a year, you should go into business for yourself....see how long you last.

I thought that I was the only one that thought GM's response to 9/11 was heroic and patriotic. I am justifiably proud of GM's reaction, a risky move to help keep the country moving at a very difficult time.

when my daughters are old enough to drive, their cars WILL have OnStar, and I will have exactly what they advertise, a small piece of mind.

At least that explains the current, sub $20, weakness. Let's hope he's not giving up, just booking some losses for the tax year. If he gives up, GM is sunk.

True, it is not...but a 600+ HP GM Powertrain motor will (if history holds) beat 700HP from any one of the fudgers.

True, but it WOULD make you a dolt!

yeah, like scion ugly....Gen DUH'ers will buy it.

You are the worst kind of poster, the one that shoots down someone else, without offering a rebuttal or an idea of your own. A web posting board is for ideas to be shared, similar to brainstorming, except that you ARE allowed to shoot down ideas that you don't agree with. It is the most childish of all drivel to simply categorize someone else's work as "tiring" without offering a rebuttal. YOU are the one that should grow up.

You are so painfully right!

saturn and Hummer both have futures in GM, the only new brands in 100 years. Pontiac, GMC and Buick are the ones to jettison.

Mis-informed apologies will not restore the reputation of Devine. He is the CFO, that is chief financial officer, he had nothing to do with GMAC, except for being the idiot that wants to sell it off.

Good bye, and good riddance!! Mr. Devine was to GM's financial credibility what Ron Zarella was to sales/marketing. (Is it a coincidence, or do they look almost the same.....hmmm) Thank you Mr. Devine for helping out with Fiat, Subaru, DirecTV, and the rest. I imagine you had a hand in Isuzu too, although it was before your time. Thank you for the promise to earn $10/share by mid decade (that would be NOW, by the way), and thank you for the brilliant plan to sell off the company jewel, GMAC. Take your lucrative retirement, and go help Ford.

Much easier to make the business case for the midsize BOF with ONE assembly plant, flexible from 2-3 shifts.

That plant is too old, she is done. Any new equipment, like the new paint shop, will be relocated to a flexible facility, nearer the supply base.

I believe the plan, whether "retarded" or not, is to push the EXT buyers to the new Tahoe. The new tahoe is a much nicer vehicle, better power, fuel economy and refinement. It actually seems very un-retarded to me.

good point. GM should forgo fleet sales except for the vehicles that are stellar, since rental customers are usually conquest targets. Shouldn't have them driving anything but the best GM has to offer.

If you really want GM to be around, to employ you or make your next car, you would stop worrying about market share and focus on profitability.

Unless of course, Ron Zarella cooks the numbers, in which case you certainly can't trust what you read.....

were you born yesterday? GM wasn't "doing everything right" from the 20s to the 70s. The company rode the demographic bubble, making reasonable versions of transportation and expression that the growing American public needed, and wanted......all with no foreign competition. don't get my statement wrong, I am not saying that foreign competition, by itself, is shrinking GM, they have significant help from their own governments in the form of subsidies, bigoted protectionist policies at home, and rampant currency manipulation. Today's buying public is so fickle, dominant brands cannot hold onto their positions for long. If for no other reason than "I don't want a (car, tv, boat, mp3 player, blue jeans, etc.) that everyone else has, the market naturally fragments. It is now up to GM to find a way to succeed in this new paradigm, one that has been under way for at least a decade, superimposed on the increased pressures from abroad, mentioned above. GM has the talent within to rise again, will the leaders begin focusing on developing the "must have" products that they so often mention??

Good point. If the Delphi Union "workers" want to have any future, they will have to keep supplying their customers with quality product while they negotiate their future with their benevolent employer. Non-GM customers will drop Delphi so fast, their bobble heads will spin.

While Steve Miller's style is not fully appreciated by the UAW, to the investment community and to others with a stake in the success of the American Automotive industry, he is a breath of fresh air. Steve tells it like it is, and makes it clear that market forces should dictate wages and benefits, not group coersion, as engendered by the UAW.