  Pam Member Username: Pam Post Number: 1049 Registered: 11-2005 |
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200 70214/ap_on_bi_ge/chrysler_res tructuring | ||
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua Post Number: 1107 Registered: 01-2004 |
Yeah, a buddy of mine says they're having a meeting today at the Jefferson Assem Plant. We all know what that means. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 390 Registered: 04-2006 |
"I'll take a transfer," the 33-year-old said as he walked into the local United Auto Workers hall. Almuwalld said he has relatives in Detroit. "I've got family there, so I'm ready to go." I guess that's one way to get people moving to Detroit. Here's another: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200 70214/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq_r efugees | ||
Supersport Member Username: Supersport Post Number: 11259 Registered: 10-2003 |
NEVER FEAR, GRANHOLM IS HERE! I'm sure she will simply bump up our taxes just a touch more than her plan was yesterday. Perhaps offer some big tax breaks to build a few more manufacturing plants while she's at it. Sure, Chrysler is laying off 13,000, but didn't you hear the good news? Granholm created 353 jobs with Visteon building in Highland Park. Yay Granholm! | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 1057 Registered: 11-2004 |
SS, your Granholm rants are starting to sound as stale as CL's Detroit rants. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2517 Registered: 10-2004 |
Some 2000 of Chrysler's job cuts are in Canada. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 249 Registered: 07-2006 |
Great. The plant i was recently laid off from supplied Warren truck. the last thing we needed was more of us losing our jobs. Between losing our work with one automaker, and a production cut at another, and now this, it's not looking promising for that plant, or any chance of being called back. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1368 Registered: 11-2003 |
Never fear, we can all go sell Amway!!!! It's the American Way! | ||
Tetsua Member Username: Tetsua Post Number: 1108 Registered: 01-2004 |
quote: On that note, is anyone else getting harrassed about that damn prepaid legal thing that's going around now? | ||
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81 Post Number: 1297 Registered: 11-2003 |
Unfortunate. I'm just glad to hear the possibility of a Chrysler spin-off is alive and kickin. That was a match made in hell from day one. Never should have happened. Notice too, they didn't announce the expected platform sharing between MBZ and Chrysler. I thought that was to be a staple of the announcement? What does that tell me? That DCX is gonna go out actively shopping a buyer for Chrysler before they start work on joint platforms. Only thing worse? That the Chinese may be interested. Watch them rush into the US before being prepared for it and suddenly that spun-off Chrysler goes completely down the drain. The Chinese are itchin to get into the US, but the products I see so far, and the lack of US knowledge seem to spell distaster at this point. The Japanese and Koreans started small and worked up. The couple Chinese companies that seem to really want to get in here want to do it with a bang. Bang a bunch of crummy, low quality cars on the market, and they'll be outta here in a very short time. Not saying they can't do it. But they gotta start small, and the product better be value oriented. A dirt cheap car won't go over well if its a hunk of junk. | ||
Aiw Member Username: Aiw Post Number: 6162 Registered: 10-2003 |
If it's cheap enough it will. It's hard to pay $40K for an SUV when you don't have a job that pays you more than $8.00 an hour. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2519 Registered: 10-2004 |
quote: Understandable. Considering the current jobs (multiplier = 8) ratio of seven Tier jobs per every UAW/CAW assembly job, that means some 84,000 Tier jobs should suffer (12,000 * 7) in the US and Canada. | ||
Douglasm Member Username: Douglasm Post Number: 773 Registered: 10-2003 |
Chrysler seems to have a worse history when it comes to boom/bust cycles than Ford or GM. I remember one from the mid '50's, '61 or '62, then again in the late '60's when my Dad, who was an engineer at Highland Park, was "required" to take vacation time. His job ended up being eliminated through "early retirement" sometime in the mid '70's due to another bust. He ended up at DIT until it went poof. | ||
Gannon Member Username: Gannon Post Number: 8385 Registered: 12-2003 |
LY, Thank you for that multiplier revelation...I've never heard that before. Have they done the same for the effects on the community at large?! I seem to remember some metrics in that direction years ago. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2522 Registered: 10-2004 |
The multiplier is a basic concept taught in any economics survey course. But it usually refers to "imported" capital coming into a "local" economy and circulating until it's totally consumed. A common value for that type of multiplier is around five or so. Security analysts have been using their own jobs multiplier for the auto industry or other industries that they follow. The jobs multiplier was previously put at ten--nine Tier jobs per assembly-line worker at body or engine/tranny plants. With all the bankruptcies in the Tiers, about 15 firms (not just plants) will/have, on average, disappear weekly from 2004 to 2010 nationally (a drop from 8000 Tiers then to about 4000 firms and then drop some more until, say, 2012 or so. How low can they go? | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 250 Registered: 07-2006 |
Wow, that's flat out scary, LY. I didn't know how many tier jobs there were, but that certainly makes it much clearer just how bad it is. Now figure it for the industry as a whole: 132,000 big 3 job cuts since May 2005 *7 = 924000 supplier cuts fwiw, my plant was a tier 1 supplier. I don't cry so much for the $8 an hour plastics molding jobs, but the component assembly jobs like mine are (were) pretty decent paying. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2524 Registered: 10-2004 |
Heat-treating or magna-fluxing plants do other than just auto-related stuff. But, in Michigan, Indiana, Ohio (especially), and Pennsylvania, among others, cars and truck parts is what they mostly do. One probable reason for the multiplier to drop the past few years is a result of the jobs bank where nonproductive UAW members sat out their existence at "work," doing little other than playing cards or read. The jobs multiplier today probably more reflects reality better than before. Remember, companies like Lear (Southfield) or Johnson Controls (headquartered in Milwaukee) make assemblies, such as instrument panels and seats, at their own plants, and the UAW line workers just bolt, screw, or snap them into place. (Message edited by LivernoisYard on February 14, 2007) | ||
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81 Post Number: 1299 Registered: 11-2003 |
LY, I was under the impression that the multiplier was 8-12 NATIONALLY. Is that correct? If you look at just Metro Detroit, it has gotta be way more than that. Nearly everyone in the area has a job that stems from some sort of involvement with the Big 3. You either work for them, you supply them, or you work for the people who work for them or you work for the people who work for the people who work for them (say dry cleaners, lawn services, etc). Unfortunately Detroit has such a one-sided economy that if the Big3 all disappeared, I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be much need for most other people to stick around either. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2525 Registered: 10-2004 |
The figure used is the national figure and is used primarily to determine the number of MANUFACTURING-related jobs affected in the Tiers--not those among the general communities who derive income from totality of auto-related employment. Besides, it would be extremely difficult to assess that metric locally due to the lack of detailed information available for the analysts to do that. Besides, they're not that concerned about that level of micromanaging details. That's not in their job description. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 251 Registered: 07-2006 |
quote: exactly. (portions removed to be more specific as to what i did. i was avoiding being too specific, but you hit it right on the head.) also keep in mind, the components (radios, instrument clusters, hvacs, etc) are handled much the same way by the suppliers - assembled in another plant and just bolted, screwed, or snapped into place at the suppliers plant. that keeps going down the line the same way until you get to a guy working on (for example) a plastics molding machine, and even then, someone worked at the plant that produced the virgin plastic material. I can't even imagine how many people are involved in the production of a single car. Even worse is when you consider the secondary 'casualties' of this - anything from the gas station on the corner by a plant to the catering truck. Or people going out to eat less often causes a restaurant to close or cut back on staff. and it keeps cascading on... | ||
Angry_dad Member Username: Angry_dad Post Number: 131 Registered: 02-2006 |
Free trade really works? Doesn't anybody see what has happened? Bob Eaton sold the keys to Chrysler and split, Jurgen Schremp looted the bank accounts and put the cash into Benz who were and still build and sell lousy cars. Too bad the public is so willing to follow rather than think and see what is really happening. And in the meantime, southern politicians are getting greased by the crooks from Japan and Korea into dishing out billions in tax breaks to the criminals to build assembly plants in their states. And yet the "trendy" want a hideous Camry that tends to turn it's motor oil into tar. We must be the biggest collection of idiots in the world, this nation is being looted and then fools that buy these crappy Toyotas talk about quality while their neighbor is broke and at the same time those "quality" savvy home owners are watching thier homes go down in value. Let's see how great these Japanese car companies really are, end any and all tax subsidies they get, they never paid any in to begin with. And any state that gives them their extortion payment should lose the same amount in federal revenue sharing. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2527 Registered: 10-2004 |
Good news for a Tier plant (in Mississippi) that has Nissan as its primary customer. It announced today that it's adding a quarter billion dollar expansion and hiring new workers... (Message edited by LivernoisYard on February 14, 2007) | ||
Lt_tom Member Username: Lt_tom Post Number: 135 Registered: 06-2004 |
Think old Kirk Kerkorian will try to take another crack at buying Chrysler? | ||
Angry_dad Member Username: Angry_dad Post Number: 132 Registered: 02-2006 |
Nice link to that Nissan plant. Guess who paid for it? Not Nissan. The rest of the taxpayers paid for over half. And now that Nissan can't sell the trucks they build there, they are in the process of moving production elsewhere. http://www.autoblog.com/2006/10/03/nissan-moving-production-of-quest-and-qx56-back-to-japan/ Real good news. (Message edited by angry dad on February 14, 2007) | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2528 Registered: 10-2004 |
A buyout offer from insiders is a likelier possibility. That's what happened at Harley-Davidson where a core group of its engineering managers bought the HD subsidiary from AMF some time ago. (Message edited by LivernoisYard on February 14, 2007) | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 252 Registered: 07-2006 |
I just read a rumor that GM is in talks to buy Chrysler. I put about as much stock in it as I would if there was a rumor that the sun would be purple when it rose tomorrow, and i think it would be probably the Worst Merger Ever. But it's an interesting thought nonetheless. http://www.autoblog.com/2007/0 2/14/rumor-of-the-day-gm-may-b uy-chrysler-group/2#comments | ||
Jerome81 Member Username: Jerome81 Post Number: 1301 Registered: 11-2003 |
GM will NEVER buy Chrysler. | ||
East_detroit Member Username: East_detroit Post Number: 960 Registered: 11-2003 |
Ford might. And with their global stance and the Fusion beating Camry and Accord in the latest Consumer Reports (sorry SJ, its true).... I think it would be a good move. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2529 Registered: 10-2004 |
Chrysler, like Ford, was mainly a truck company. GM realized that it too was too heavily into SUVs and cut back and returned to sedans, although sedan's profit margins were once smaller. But that was back before the Japanese started making SUVs and larger trucks. This crisis at Chrysler will probably destroy any serious attempts by the UAW to play hardball with Chrysler--as was rumored last year--before the 4-year UAW contracts end this fall. My guess, Mercedes will keep Chrysler because it too has money problems but DCX might not get much for selling and their CEO wants to keep Chrysler. Its board of directors would probably have to fire him over this issue. Mr. Z will play along and solicit offers for selling, slim down its excess capacity, and, thus, keep the UAW at bay before contract negotiations. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 253 Registered: 07-2006 |
Ford's even less likely - do you really think a company that just used all their NA assets as collateral on loans would be able to buy yet another struggling automaker? Even if they could pull off some sort of stock trade to avoid actual cash expenditures, wall street would be calling for mullaly's head after overwhelmingly voting against it. I would say a Chinese company would be much more likely than any American or even Japanese companies. It makes sense just to get a foothold in the market. Not that i EVER want to see that. | ||
Jiminnm Member Username: Jiminnm Post Number: 1183 Registered: 02-2005 |
"And in the meantime, southern politicians are getting greased by the crooks from Japan and Korea ..." Sorry to burst your bubble angry_dad, but this far from the case. There was a serious proposal to put a Korean facility here in NM (don't recall if it was Hyundai or Kia). The company backed out as they neared final agreement. It didn't take long for word to get around that officials from the smaller town wanted some concessions for themselves (not an uncommon expectation here in NM) but the Koreans said that's not the way we do business and they went elsewhere. You seem to have some serious problem with cars not made here in the USA by manufacturers considered traditionally American. It's a big world, except for Ford and GM, who just can't seem to get it right. You better get over it, as their numbers are going to continue to shrink. | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 155 Registered: 03-2006 |
I have to agree the US automakers will continue to shrink. As a lifelong resident of the area, I have always purchased American cars and always will. I will NOT however, ever buy a NEW car ever again. I purchased my first Chrysler in 2004 after being a GM guy all of my life. I know some of you don't consider Chrysler American anymore, but my car was made in Toledo with 85% US content. I switched because of the problems I was having with GM and their unwillingness to stand behind their cars. Unfortunately, the experience I am having with my Jeep is much the same. The engine is shot due to an oil sludge issue that is well known by Chrysler and within the industry yet the dealer chooses to blame me and not stand behind their product. So now I am facing paying over 10 grand in payments over the next 2 years for a car that I cannot drive or sell. NEVER AGAIN! | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 254 Registered: 07-2006 |
Both GM and Chrysler are saying 'no comment' to the acquistion rumors. You can, of course, spin that any way you want. But it seems to me, usually such rumors are outright denied. I'm not saying it makes any sense, but it could make for a very interesting year for the auto industry. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2535 Registered: 10-2004 |
Chrysler was the number 2 of the Big Three in size until some time around WWII, when Ford beat out Chrysler. Mercedes paid $37 billion for Chrysler nine years ago. Today, the market capitalization of both GM and Ford combined is only a little higher than $30 billion. The difference between what Mercedes paid for Chrysler and what Ford and GM are now worth together would be even greater if the time-value of $37 billion after nine years is taken into consideration. The former Big Three of the 1990s have all come down to relative worthlessness in a global economy where the major element of Toyota alone has a market capitalization over $230 billion. | ||
Warrenite84 Member Username: Warrenite84 Post Number: 32 Registered: 01-2007 |
I would be surprised if Daimlerchrysler doesn't use this loss as their "broken-wing" tactic going into this summer's contract talks. (They ALWAYS come off like the workers are bleeding them bone dry.) Many of us at my plant as early as August 2006, were waiting for DC to match GM and Ford's truck incentives. It didn't come. They had us working some 12's, Sat. and Sun. if we wanted it. All the while we were thinking,"We've got trucks stashed everywhere, why aren't we unloading our inventory and running at a reasonable level?" What people don't know is that management gets a bonus when they hit their production targets. For a plant manager, it can be up to 100% of their pay. When we don't submit enough improvement suggestions, we are told we have poor morale. When we did suggest something, it rarely was implemented. Don't get me wrong, 99.99% of production and maintainance depts. bust their ass to make sure the parts are correct and defect free. But when the company buys cheap foreign or outsourced dies and tooling that could be made in-house, you get what you pay for. Dies that are hard to maintain and tooling that has to be fixed or re-worked increases the chance of mistakes and more scrap. Poor production planning and maintainance are what kills us. So here we are, the hourly workers taking one for the team, again. Sorry for the venting. It's been building for some time. | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1722 Registered: 12-2003 |
quote: Still reading the wrong review, The Fusion scores higher in user poll and initial product review, however the Consumer Report Score shows the Fusion as 77 and the Camry as a 87. quote: That is because they were not on the scale of Ford or GM, they are meant to be a lean company that sold cars high in style for a lower price than their competitors. That is why are more boom/bust than the other two who had more capital to wait those cycles out. quote: Who are the crooks, might want to double check the US record when it comes to open trade and international court rulings, I think you might be surprised. | ||
Goat Member Username: Goat Post Number: 9218 Registered: 10-2003 |
I think Consumer Reports is bought off by the Japanese companies. I know enough people who have bought Japanese cars and didn't like them (reliability issues, expensive to repair, crappy ergonomics etc). So why it the big 3 always get shafted in those reports? I don't buy that all the cars are lousy. Impressions are a bitch and the media and those at consumer reports love to say how wonderful the Japanese are while kicking the big 3 every chance they get. If Daimler where to sell Chrysler, I don't think anyone would buy. Who has the cash flow? | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2543 Registered: 10-2004 |
Jeep is worth buying. Just as Chrysler bought the Jeff brand from American Motors. | ||
Ltdave Member Username: Ltdave Post Number: 34 Registered: 09-2006 |
word on the street is that J.P. Morgan is actively seeking buyers... if DCX is bought by an investment group, you can say good by to it... 1st hand info here is that if it is not a Core Plant, (assy? component?) then it is as good as sold or closed... david | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 851 Registered: 11-2003 |
Livernoisyard wrote, "Chrysler was the number 2 of the Big Three in size until some time around WWII" Do you have a source for that? I thought it was never higher than number 3. | ||
Perfectgentleman Member Username: Perfectgentleman Post Number: 156 Registered: 03-2006 |
I agree that the automotive press and the mainstream media have not been kind to American automakers. I too have heard about many problems with Japanese cars. I do hear also however, that the dealership experience is somewhat better. I believe Toyota recalled over 2 million vehicles last year??? | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2546 Registered: 10-2004 |
quote: I encountered this factoid previously on occasion and accepted it as fact. If I have more time while taking breaks from working, I might do a search. Perhaps, somebody might bet me to it and fill in the blanks. I believed the flip occurred sometime during the 1930s. The Dodge and Plymouth plants were fairly huge when they were at their peaks in Hamtramck, I thought, but that's before my Michigan time. Ford didn't make vehicles at the Rouge until the 1928 model year. Previously, Ford built farm tractors there and then made them in HP until 1947--the year that Ford died. Might there have been a connection? (Message edited by LivernoisYard on February 15, 2007) | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 255 Registered: 07-2006 |
Perfectgentleman - that was 2005. 2006 recall numbers, United States (source) GM 1.4 million Ford 1.7 million Chrysler Group 2.3 million Toyota 814,507 Honda 1,397, excluding a 1.2 million vehicle recall for an incorrect phone number in the owners manual. (it was for a phone sex line. ha!) keep in mind, GM still sells a lot more cars than anyone else in the US, so looking at the raw numbers is a poor comparision. However, that also makes Chrysler appear even worse. | ||
Sstashmoo Member Username: Sstashmoo Post Number: 8 Registered: 02-2007 |
LY wrote ""Today, the market capitalization of both GM and Ford combined is only a little higher than $30 billion. The difference between what Mercedes paid for Chrysler and what Ford and GM are now worth together would be even greater if the time-value of $37 billion after nine years is taken into consideration. The former Big Three of the 1990s have all come down to relative worthlessness in a global economy where the major element of Toyota alone has a market capitalization over $230 billion."" Not trying to argue, do you have a source to back up these figures? | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2552 Registered: 10-2004 |
It was reported on the radio (WJR or WWJ) back in early 2006 that its market capitalization passed the $200 billion mark for its first time. Forbes generally lists the market capitalization of the top 500 international companies (or is it the top 300?) at the end of every year. So checking its web site should provide that metric. I heard it was over $230 (233?) billion just recently, but I didn't check. But it made sense because Toyota had issued generous bonus checks to their rank-and-file autoworkers. | ||
Track75 Member Username: Track75 Post Number: 2488 Registered: 10-2003 |
Just type the stock ticker symbol into Google. The first "result" will be financial info including market cap. In billions of US$: TM = $220 GM = $20 F = $16 DCX = $71 | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2553 Registered: 10-2004 |
Is that GM figure including GMAC that it recently sold a majority of? Two years ago, GMAC was worth about 80% of GM according to security analysts. However, GM picked up quite a bit after it dumped their UAW people via the buyouts. What is the effective date of the GMAC selloff? | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 257 Registered: 07-2006 |
LY, that wouldn't matter. market cap is just the stock price x the number of shares out. the stock price would be how that is worked into the market cap. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2554 Registered: 10-2004 |
My point is whether the market cap figures were current or at some recent past date. | ||
Scottr Member Username: Scottr Post Number: 259 Registered: 07-2006 |
yeah, they are current. market cap changes with the stock price, and is updated the same. marketwatch.com includes the number of shares out, if you wish to check their figuring. it still comes out to less than the dcx merger, either way. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 2556 Registered: 10-2004 |
BTW, there is another component of Toyota in addition to its auto component. Still, that small part is higher than GM or Ford. Even Harley-Davidson's market cap beats GM at times. |
