What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
220 Comments
- inactive, on 11/12/2008, -9/+66Toyota isn't really in trouble. Toyota's profit was ONLY $6.9 billion - yes, that's billion with a B.
Let the Big three go under and maybe we can get the small seven car makers some actual national distribution and sales. - jboitnott, on 11/12/2008, -1/+56The underlying problems with our economy are so large that they go beyond just American automakers. People aren't buying cars in general.
- phreak79, on 11/12/2008, -2/+49I'd bank on Toyota to get out of this though. Their lean manufacturing system is incredible at cutting waste out of the production process, which is exactly what's required to weather a recession. GM on the other hand...
- therealrico, on 11/12/2008, -2/+48Dumb misleading title
"Toyota won't go the way of Bear Stearns. It has a fat $18.5 billion cash cushion, almost no debt and a big lead in clean technology led by the Prius."
Why not just rename the title, "Toyota struggles like everyone else because of a recession, but was smart enough in the past to have prepared themselves with no debt, and 18.5 billion in cash!" - taiwanniggadu, on 11/12/2008, -4/+40stop building those damn suvs
- kanabiis, on 11/12/2008, -3/+36Wait a minute, Toyota is in trouble because they posted profits lower then expected? Isn't that the case with EVERY company right now?
6.9 Billion dollars profit is in trouble?? Lets compare that with GM's 3rd quarter earnings, or shall I say losses, 2.5 Billion dollars LOST. While I agree sometimes with Wired blogs, lets call a spade a spade here, the author is smoking crack. Yes, Toyota did not make as much as expected, but they are in no way shape or form anywhere near comparison to GM. GM is having trouble paying the bills, Toyota paid all of their bills, employees etc. AND STILL posted 6.9 billion in PROFIT. GM is bleeding money out the ass... to suggest that Toyota is in comparable trouble to GM is dishonest, and truthfully an outright lie.
It amazes me that the same people that claim to support capitalist theory all of a sudden scream for socialist bailouts when capitalism effects their favorite company. Look, GM is failing because of their own mistakes, mismanagement and failure to innovate, capitalism 101. You fail to compete with your competitors, you go out of business, period. Thats capitalism folks. - Dumbledorito, on 11/12/2008, -3/+35I was listening to a commentator on NPR's "Marketplace" this morning, and he had an idea that had appeal: The ordering of cars in a similar way we order computers. You pick features, colors, etc., and its assembled for you and delivered at a later date. naturally, the showrooms would still have cars you could test drive and so on, but the PC-building model would be coupled with the elimination of "model years" which creates a ***** of excess and "wasted" production; improvements to cars would come in the same way they do with computers (engine upgrades, new gizmos for the chassis, etc.).
- OstrakonX, on 11/12/2008, -3/+30I heard somewhere that buying American doesn't always support Americans, since a lot of Fords and Chevys are made in Mexico and brought over. However, a lot of foreign-owned companies make their cars here to save shipping costs (Honda, for example), and therefore I end up supporting American workers more by buying a Civic than buying a Focus.
I'd rather support an American workforce and a foreign CEO than a foreign workforce and an American CEO. Please digg me down if I heard wrong. - inactive, on 11/12/2008, -7/+22That isn't true. There are businesses and people with money to invest that will buy those factories and put those workers to work. Granted they won't be paid the kingly union wages, but they can make a decent living and produce a good product.
- inactive, on 11/12/2008, -3/+18If a business model fails, let it fail.
Im not sinking money into something that is failing. - inboxnews, on 11/12/2008, -3/+17It costs GM $3,000 more in labor to build each car than Toyota or Honda. That's the problem--Labor Unions who forced GM to sign those contracts meant the eventual end of GM. I say, let GM die. Better sooner than later.
- perfectsilence, on 11/12/2008, -3/+14why stop at the auto industry? let's bail out the airlines, Circuit City, Mervyn's, or any company that's in trouble.
- vertigo32, on 11/12/2008, -0/+11If you take out the health care and pension costs, the US is actually ahead though - the average American worker is more productive then the average Japanese worker.
The difference is that the Japanese government subsidizes Toyota and Honda through socialized health care and pensions. Ironically, one of the biggest reasons that the Japanese auto makers have come to the US (other then marketing, transport isn't really that expensive) is that by employing American non-union employees for $10-14 / hour, they avoid having to pay even those significantly reduced health care and pension costs. - 3Den, on 11/12/2008, -2/+13I would like to request a bailout as well - I think everyone should get one.
I've got good savings, no debts, and I made a healthy profit last year - but it could have been higher if it were not for the US rececession - its' only fair that I am compensated for this so I can continue my current lifestly. - MadOgre, on 11/12/2008, -5/+16No Bailouts.
- SniperGX1, on 11/12/2008, -0/+11A sample size of one on each side is hardly enough information to make any conclusions.
- Brian48216, on 11/12/2008, -0/+10Mini already does this. They have a few cars in the show room and a few that people have ordered but decided not to follow through with, but the vast majority of minis on the road are custom ordered on an as needed basis. You put your order in, two months later, the car shows up.
- 4thcage, on 11/12/2008, -0/+10let your gf drive your honda for a while, then we will know if toyota quality is ***** or ur gf is *****.
- inactive, on 11/12/2008, -10/+20"I want a good green tech car- not too expensive-
not the old dull smoking garbage wagons they dress
up then push on us- had too many years of
seeing that crap and I'm sick of it. I want
something that looks interesting to build, fun to
drive- smart. I want the company that makes it to
be smart so I don't feel like an idiot supporting
their moron manufacturing culture. If these
companies can't get the message and scrape their
talents and assets together then let them find
another business and let those with real enthusiasm
do the job. These old jerks are the same kind of
guys who reclaimed the EV1 from happy owners and
put them through concrete shredders in Nevada- real
nit wits. Just how dumb do you have to be to do
something like that? They apologized later but I
think it was only because they got caught in the act.
I don't necessarily want them to sink but if they are
inclined to be hostile to intelligent and earnest
consumers then why should I hold their hand while
their dumping their garbage on myself, my family and
my friends? Should I pretend I'm an idiot and I don't
see what's going on? What would I get out of it? What
do any of us get out of it? It's the biggest turd joke
I have ever heard in my life. Too bad it isn't funny."
This from a 14 year old in a History class. - zigardne, on 11/12/2008, -0/+9if GM didn't have to provide pension or health insurance they'd be on equal footing for labor and overhead, and despite perceptions, the quality gap has disappeared over the last 7 years.
- inactive, on 11/12/2008, -1/+10Wow , thats great.
It would require the creation of standard parts / connection mechanisms but still its a great idea. - inboxnews, on 11/12/2008, -1/+10Negative, GM is failing because it cost's them an additional $3,000 in labor to build each car. They cannot compete with Japan's labor costs.
- Smogtdi, on 11/12/2008, -1/+9then why do GM is closing manufacturing in Canada ?
we also have pensions and health care socialized...
GM need to listen to market but also offer models that sells in troubled times
when car manufacturers are considering a 8L/100km small car "eco efficient" (hint dodge caliber), you know there's a lot of work to do. (hey, even the gmc canyon/colorado pick up are rated at 7L/100km)
I think they should match the security and emmisions laws to what they have in Europe so we can get the same cars without expensive modification from manufacturers. - Pwelborn1, on 11/12/2008, -0/+8Bring back the TUCKER!
- arkaycee, on 11/12/2008, -0/+8A buddy of mine retired from Chrysler fairly recently, and told me he watched a lot of projects just keep going and going and going because of pride, or at least the inability to admit to a problem that might be traced to poor decision-making on the part of that manager or his/her fellow managers. He told me about an engine that was to be a high-performance engine that, fairly early in the game, everyone knew pretty much would be so heavy and inefficient that it would be a dog... but they kept right on with it because, you know, they had already sunk so much $$ into it, and well, no one directly connected to managing its design and inception wanted to admit that they or their fellow managers had messed up ... so it went to market and was panned in all the vehicles it was used in.
- rumorsofdemise, on 11/12/2008, -5/+12it's not a quality gap, it's a perception gap.
- inactive, on 11/12/2008, -10/+17Detroit isn't tanking because Japan makes better cars, it's because Detroit makes ***** cars.
- Aleman360, on 11/12/2008, -0/+7The computer industry is somewhat moving away from that though. Dell and Gateway, both of which used to be exclusively build-to-order, now seem to be shifting to selling pre-configured computers at retail. Very interesting idea though.
- JeffH, on 11/12/2008, -0/+7We're likely to see an automotive bailout sometime in 2009, or at least that's what I predict.
It sucks, but honestly the auto industry already has pretty solid plans for a comeback with stuff like the Chevy Volt.
The government won't let Detroit crumble, just like they didn't let the banks crumble, but at the very least they're not spending millions on exec retreats and some actually have solid plans for the future. - faithforever, on 11/12/2008, -1/+8The problem isn't that the big 3 make "*****" cars. The problem is the perception that they make "*****" cars. And that's what Detroit failed to change. There are plenty of good cars coming out of Detroit with high safety ratings. Even fuel efficient cars. Overall, the quality has improved. The problem is, the majority of people don't know that.
The Big 3 have made more small fuel efficient cars, but they didn't sell because those who purchase those type of cars already are against US manufacturers. They wouldn't buy a Ford or Chevy to save their lives, and believe purchasing a more expensive Honda or Toyota is better because it will have higher resale value and less repair costs. So, Detroit goes back to building SUVs for the people who still buy their vehicles.
I'm not saying the Big Three have been perfect. The stigma that they make "*****" cars was caused by their stupidity of not fixing problems fast enough. For example, the 90s/early 2000s Jeep Cherokee had so many mechanical problems because it was built in 3 floor plant that hadn't changed since the 1940s. The plant was completely outdated and producing a flawed product. But did the plant close? No, the city of Toledo gave Jeep tax breaks to keep the plant running to avoid losing jobs and unions went crazy about moving the plant to Oklahoma. A new plant was built eventually, but all those folks that bought Jeeps that were lemons won't touch another Jeep. It's already tainted their perception that all American cars are garbage. (Geesh, why didn't anyone in Detroit see that coming???)
The UAW and Unions is also to blame for the collapse of Detroit. The contracts are extremely bloated and keeps the prices of the Big Three's cars incredibly high, and also keeps in business suppliers who constantly building parts that are inferior. The unions have kept the Big Three from changing. Alternative fuels and engines have been nixed by the Big Three if they couldn't be produced by existing suppliers.
But the biggest thing going against the Big Three is a general negativity from the public that their cars suck. And they all don't. People are shocked when I tell them that my old Ford Taurus had 300,000+ miles on it when I traded it in on a new Ford. The Big Three have failed to create any sort of effective marketing against that public perception.
Although, that points to another problem the Big Three have - Midwesterns who love the Big Three keep a car for 10 years. Honda, and Toyota have been very successful at getting consumers to lease cars and buy a new one every 2 years.
I really hope that there isn't a bail out so that the Big Three and the UAW make the changes they need. There are huge fundamental flaws.
But I would also like to ask everyone on here saying the Big Three make "*****" cars to please re-examine what they're saying. A friend of mine bought a Toyota Rav4 last year that was a piece of crap that Toyota had to buy back and refund his money. All manufacturers can make "*****" cars. - vertigo32, on 11/12/2008, -4/+11Detroit is tanking because it's cool to trash American cars.
There are exceptions (Chrysler...) but quality is about the same across the board. The problem is that on a scale of 1-10, a GM or Ford nameplate automatically costs a vehicle 2 points simply on perception. Something is wrong when the Toyota Matrix scores significantly higher in reviews than a Pontiac Vibe when they are the exact same car.
But hey, for all these people who say "Let the Big 3 fail, I'll keep buying Honda / Toyota" - when they fail, this country's back is going to be broken. We might recover, but those UAW jobs, white collar jobs, service jobs, tier 1, 2, and 3 supplier jobs, shipping / logistics jobs, engineering jobs, etc that depend on the Big 3 aren't going to be the only ones being lost. All of the service industries will find that there isn't anyone left to service. - ifruit, on 11/12/2008, -17/+23Detroit is tanking because of labor unions. (The same reason public education sucks)
- inactive, on 11/12/2008, -1/+7a simple check of their stock price compared to ford and gm, shows they are not going under anytime soon...
The junior college stop teaching economics these days? - acknotSW, on 11/12/2008, -0/+6There is a problem with unions. They provide safety and security for many employees who do not deserve it.
True story: I worked for a company that supplied some oil and chemical cleaners to one of the big 3 for their parts cleaners. In the break room, they had a big plastic jug of fruit punch. The top of this thing had chains and locks on it and it was strapped to a steel bench. I asked one of the guys what the deal was the chains and stuff, mainly wondering if someone had been pouring alcohol in it or something. The answer was so much worse. It turns out about 3 months before they caught a union guy taking a piss in it. I said something like "I assume he got canned for that". Nope, they got his named changed and placed him in a plant down in Ohio. They even paid his moving expenses. Now that's a pretty extreme case, but if you walk around at any of the big 3 lines, you can find LOTS of people just sleeping. I can't even begin to tell you how many liquor bottles I used to find while doing my rounds. - vision777, on 11/12/2008, -1/+7Without the unions the people working at these companies will only make 9-10 dollars an hour. How are you going to support a family for that amount of money. We need our citizens working and making a decent wage, there are not enough high tech jobs to support the entire country. Also not everyone is equipped to make it through college. The problem is we have outsourced many of our better paying jobs outside the country and now there are less people to buy the high ticket items. Also not as many people who can afford to buy houses hence our mortgage crisis.
If everyone wants zero say in how much companies pay you then I guess a union is not for you. In most cases though companies are going to pay you as little as possible. The people at the top tend to feel their job is worth many times more than the people at the bottom and unions allow people to organize so they can ban together and get treated fairly. Yes in some cases in the auto industry the unions may have gotten too much but I have seen in some cases they have been willing to take pay cuts and at the same time you see the executives still giving themselves raises. - inactive, on 11/12/2008, -0/+6Well, from the news on CNBC and elsewhere, GM and Ford aren't likely to survive to 2009 if they don't get help ASAP. Once they have a cash flow problem, that's it. Chapter 11. Not many come back from that stage.
- Netizentalk, on 11/12/2008, -1/+7"EU cars are dirty and not very safe compared to US/Canada standards."
WHAT??? You should inform yourself... Most US cars cannot be sold in the EU because they are to dirty and unsafe... - inactive, on 11/12/2008, -1/+7OMG! What happens if we start using the cotton gin?
OMG! What happens if we allow the dot.com bubble to burst?
Here's what happens. Non-profitable companies slow/stop production and go out of business or innovate. While the profitable companies grow and increase production. Some employees move to the profitable companies and some employees make career changes. Some communities will be negatively impacted while others will not.
Here's what a bail-out will do -- In the short term, some GM executives and union bosses will get to go on more retreats and pad their golden parachutes. They've had almost 40 years to change since the last auto industry crisis and haven't done it yet. Do you expect them to do it now? Not likely. In the long term, nothing will change and they'll be back asking for more handouts. - kingmanic, on 11/12/2008, -0/+6Japan vs US leadership:
I think a big part of this is management style. Quality wise US cars have greatly closed the gap in regards to Japanese cars. While there is still an objective gap it's much smaller then it's perceived to be. But Japans management style is much different.
In this recession Japanese manufacturers will try as hard as they can to keep the staff they have while US management will slash jobs to appease short term stock holders.
A Japanese CEO/Exec makes a comparably lower salary then a US exec and feels this is better for the company.
It seems Japanese companies are less combative with it's work force. It's not US vs Them like the US. It's US as in the whole company and they try to foster this through more then speeches and empty corporate slogans. They legitimately want to keep their workforce and feel more loyalty to their own. This translate into more co-operative unions, better ability to spring back when the economy picks up and much less back biting between workers and executives. - dshPls, on 11/12/2008, -4/+9My GF drives a Toyota corrolla and it's been to the shop multiple times, she got it new too... my Honda on the other hand is in perfect mechanical shape, I've not had a single problem yet. I'm starting to think that Toyota's quality is going in the *****. At the same time my girlfriend is a bad driver and has probably damaged the car way more than the average driver.
- aletoledo, on 11/12/2008, -1/+6Solid plans for the future? Where were these plans ten years ago? Bad management is simply bad management. These execs probably sold great plans for building fleets of SUVs ten years ago, playing them as a solid plan. Their previous plan failed miserably and there is nothing to suggest that their new plans will work.
If a bailout is passed, then at the very least everyone in middle management and above should be fired and replaced. Promoting bad leadership for the next 10 years isn't going to solve anything. If the cronyism of this bailout won't allow for executives to be fired, then we as citizens should gain control of the future plans of these companies. If they're working on my dime, then I don't want them making more SUVs. - darkciti2, on 11/12/2008, -0/+5I think you just hit the nail on the head with the European car market statement.
If Ford and GM brought some fresh / more efficient cars in to the US people would buy them.
Clear demand exists for efficient cars and they already have them. They just need to bring them to the US market. - 80hd, on 11/12/2008, -1/+6dwindling faster than a keg at a frat party
Is that all they think we relate to? - absentmindedjwc, on 11/12/2008, -1/+6but in this case (toyota), it is not necessarily the business model that is failing, it is the market that is failing.
If Bob sells widgets and nobody can afford them because money is tight, Bob will stop making money and may eventually close. This is in no way a bad business model, this is just a risk of doing business, there are times when the economy is doing poorly and it is hard for business to survive.
Failed business models are what you are seeing from Detroit. You are seeing companies that are not changing to try and better themselves. How many Ford cars get over 30 MPG? How long did it take for them to get those?
I do, however, agree that companies should not get bailed out, that is capitalism at work. - pak314, on 11/12/2008, -0/+5get two girlfriends then.
- noblepaladin, on 11/13/2008, -0/+5This is the nature of the auto market. During good times, people may replace their cars every 6-8 years. However, when times are bad, they will tell themselves, maybe I'll wait one more year. The auto market can be very brutal because once the economy is bad, everybody says "I'll wait one more year before I get a new car", and sales go way down. Many other consumables like food or gas, people have to buy regardless. The car (or other appliances like a new TV when the old one still works, etc) is usually one item that people can delay for one, two, or even more years.
- secrity, on 11/12/2008, -0/+4That used to be how cars were sold.
The difference between custom ordered computers and custom ordered cars is that custom configured computers are delivered just a few days after they are ordered.
Unless it is a new, not yet released car model, people won't wait two months for their car to be delivered. - shaftbond, on 11/12/2008, -0/+4dwindling faster than GB's on your porn hard drive?
- inactive, on 11/12/2008, -0/+4They build them because people buy them. The problem is that they aren't smart enough to recognize changes in the market and disciplined, quick, or nimble enough to respond to them.
- DukeRevo, on 11/12/2008, -0/+4German automakers have to deal with unions too, and they're not going anyplace.
UAW did hurt the Big 3, but so did the golden parachutes of executives and the quality gap (or perception of such). It's difficult to place blame on any one factor - it's likely a combination of all three and then some. -
Show 51 - 100 of 226 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is