What is Digg?53 Comments
- brad3378, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16I never thought I'd see the day this was discussed. Has hell frozen over?
Among other implications, this could be the end of the epic Ford Vs. Chevy rivalry.
Which brand(s) would remain in NASCAR, and other forms of racing?
Would dealerships consolidate rather than compete?
Would consumers benefit?
Would the government allow a merger or alliance?
Regardless of the final outcome, this should prove to be interesting. - trunkster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14And they have already decided not too. Digg is a little slow sometimes.
- dantidote, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Yeah, hell has reached absolute zero.
Lots of questions to be answered. - Chompy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"Would consumers benefit?"
When the number of competitors decrease, consumers never benefit. - mtwolf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4not really, the auto industry is not what it used to be. No longer dominated by Chevy, ford, and Chrysler.
- Brian48216, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Hummer + Explorer = Soccer Mom's APC?
- masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Wow. I expected this about as much as I expect a Honda and Toyota merger anytime in the next 500 years.
- 0siris, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6http://digg.com/business_finance/GM_Ford_Merger_Won_t_Drive
*(My first article) - alf86, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@spyyder
Actually most Ford and GM vehicles sold in the US are built in the US, excluding their European brands and only some Mazda vehicles. Most of the Canadian and Mexico plants make components or engines for commercial vehicles. Only a hand full of passenger models sold in the US are made outside of the US. Even still, non-American plants make up a very small percentage of the plants that serve the US.
As for the number of brands, its really just about identifying the types of vehicles. A brand for luxury, one for trucks, one for average and flagship vehicles, etc. Its not that big of a deal when you provide so many more options than Honda and Toyota do. - UrlorJkron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Practically every manufactuor has shop manuals availible for every vehicle. There is usually instruction in the owners manuel on how to order one. They generally cost $70-$80.
Cars are getting harder and harder to work on. I think that VWs and Hondas were for awhile easier to work on than others makes that I have worked on, but lately even they have made things difficult. - dh8r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Misery loves company
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Right, Its more dominated by Honda and Toyota
- puzzlesource, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6they can merge all they want but as long as they continue to focus on big heavy cars that eat gas, nothing will change. Sure they have "hybrids" but both companies have acknowledged it's just trying to fulfill the trend rather than looking for ways to cut gas consumption in their vehicles. The asians have a good handle on fuel economy and the europeans have the performance and finness thing down, so really unless the companies radically retool, it's just going to continue selling to the "enthusiasts"
- dengar69, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4You mean trying to get the head exec's to say "Ford Corvette?"
- Petrarch1603, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3this won't be a monopoly. there are a plethora of other car makers out there
- Threephaserebel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Hey look, your ignorance is showing! Here's some of my favorites:
"1. Making vehicles that can't be serviced by the owner. (even at a black box level)"
As others have said before, every car is now like this. They have become so complicated (to try and give customers the best experience) that the average person would more likely break something than help it. If you want to work on a car, go buy an old one without ABS, traction control, AC and all the other additions that have been made to cars over the years.
"3. Moving production & jobs 1st to Mexico, then to Thailand & Mainland China."
It's sad but true. Production costs too much here (especially because of the workforce) so to remain competitive companies have to ship jobs and factories to countries where labor is cheaper (you'd be hard pressed to name a company that hasn't done this).
"8. Failure to adopt modular on-board electronics/computing. (MP3, audio in jacks)"
I don't know about Ford but nearly all new GM vehicles have a audio in jack now. I haven't seen many companies that have those anyway (minus a couple iPod plugs here and there).
"10. CEO & management salaries not tied to user satisfaction."
What company in the USA has this policy? Name it, I'd like to work there.
There's so much ignorance in this topic it's no surprise to me that things are the way they are in the US. People still remember the old car companies that behaved like people are describing them. A lot of that has changed, GM now offers a 5 year, 100,000 mile warranty, the second best in the business (the only ones better are Hyundai and Kia with their 10 year, 100,000 mile warranty). I've seen others that complain about a lack of innovation. What's Toyota done? Created an expensive hybrid that is extremely hard to ever benefit from (minus lower emissions). GM has just shown off the first hydrogen car that feels like a normal combustion engine car (a great feat). They're behind on hybrids because hybrids don't make sense. They're expensive to make and maintain, complicated and will only return the extra cost of getting one many years down the road. Hydrogen makes more sense and that's why GM was going that route first. Hybrids are only created because the population thinks they're a benefit (which they do have some on a short scale).
That's my rant, enjoy and maybe one day be freed from your ignorance. - Sithlrd, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!
THIS wont be popular, but I gotta say it. As a geek/gearhead, I'd rather see Microsoft buy Apple. - kevinmoore, on 06/13/2009, -0/+2hiscity, are you even old enough to drive? Why am I asking you that? Because almost all car companies suffer from most of your points.
1. Making vehicles that can't be serviced by the owner. (even at a black box level)
What car brand makes a car that owners can service?
5. Sticker shock repair charges.
What brand of cars are inexpensive to repair?
6. Not providing detailed service & parts manual information to owners. (on-line, etc.)
Name one company that makes this information available. Provide links.
7. Construction requiring special tools or skills to tear down or rebuild.
Yes, working on cars, like everything else, requires skills. Name one brand that doesn't require special tools or skills.
11. Making things too complicated, such as dashboards that can't be removed.
Who makes a dashboard that can't be removed? I've never seen one.
12. Making things too cheap, such as windshielsd that crack from rocks & road debris.
Rocks can chip any windshield. - lukas88, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3WHO WILL CALVIN PEE ON THEN?
Toyota I guess, but what is the point? - SPLASTiK, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wow. I knew they've been having troubles but didn't know they were doing THAT poorly.
GM/Ford vs Dodge? Hmmmm. - mtwolf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1no, like getting billy bob to buy a chevy knowing that his paw would be rollin' in his grave
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I like this game
Chevy Mustang
Saturn Focus(GM owns Saturn... so why not)
GM GT
Ford Camaro
all I could think of, Ford Corvette had been said already - sparkrainfir, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5ford + GM = worst car ever.
i can't wait until the new silverado f790 powerstroke ram charger hemi comes out. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2don't you mean Apple... somehow... buy...
never mind... - Veretax, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Big Heavy cars... bah you sound like a European, no offense. People buy bigger cars because they believe bigger cars are safer. That and in some parts of the US you need an engine bigger than 4 Cylinders to get around. However, this is just a blog so i wouldn't take any stock in this rumor.
- absurdist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Anyone here remember British Leyland? And how many British car companies merged to form that industrial titan? Which was, at one time, the third largest automaker in the world?
Bold, dynamic management leadership, inspired automotive design, and a motivated workforce (all three similar to what exists at both Ford and GM today) combined to make BL the dynamic automotive titan it is today.
I love old British iron, don't get me wrong. But it doesn't matter how many crap companies with crap products you combine, all you end up with is a much larger (at first), then rapidly shrinking pile of crap. - Legondaree, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1what I don't understand about ford and gm. and I may be wrong but it seems like just about every factory, state and government facility, and most of the other places of employment in the us (maybe its just where I live I dunno) uses either a ford, or a gm vehicle as the company ride. If they have pickups used to move stuff around the facility its always a ford or Chevy, if they have cars for workers to get around with, its always a ford or Chevy, every police vehicle is a ford or Chevy. it seems like that alone would be enough to keep both companies in the good as far as profits
- MysticSavage, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think Calvin would piss himself if this happened.
- UrlorJkron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"2. Changing models every year, instead of modular systems improvements."
You're beeing to optomistic. I work on cars and Ford manages to change something practically every month. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3I'm insulted by that remark, Capitalism is Dumb, Socialism ftw... I pity your brainwashed little mind
- zoombusa, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6I say they both close up shop. If they merge it will mean more problems. I am all for buy american but when they screw their customers over and over again what do you expect us consumers to do?
Crap + Crap = *****! - simoncoul, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4Maybe will we finally get an innovative car made in north america, and they will stop producing new gas chugging trucks every couple of months.
- mateo60, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Not gonna happen.
- mingistech, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I work at Ford WHQ in dearborn and have heard nothing about this.
I hope it's not true... I could see even more layoffs is this came about. - signal15, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Everyone here is digging down comments that rip on Ford and GM. You know what, they suck, and here's why:
Most other car companies have only one or two brands, a regular brand and a luxury brand. GM and Ford both have numerous brands, and many of their models are the same car with different labels on them. This is ridiculous.
GM and Ford are very happy using old technology, there is NO innovation in their vehicles. When they buy foreign auto manufacturers, they implement their inferior tech into the foreign product, making it suck. Case in point, the new Volve SUV which is just an Explorer with the Volve frontend. Don't forget the ***** jags that are just lincolns now also.
Additionally, my uncle worked for GM as an engineer at one time, and he was told to design an engine for the Chevette that wouldn't last more than 50k miles, so it would force people to buy a new car. Chevrolet, Buick, Pontiac, and some of the "lower" brands purposely have crappy parts in them to bring in revenue from the dealership service departments. You can buy the exact same parts from a cadillac dealer for double the price, and it will last forever. The problem with this is the manufacturing costs were nearly identicle. He told me all sorts of evil things american auto companies did to increase profits.
When Chrysler purchased Benz, they put German tech in a bunch of their american models. I don't know if you've been in a Chrysler lately, but they are actually pretty decent for the most part. This is in direct contrast to the other two american auto manufacturers.
I'm on my 16th car now. The only cars I have had that were decent from a reliability standpoint is japanese and german cars. All american cars I've had have been total junk. - wibblewibble, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1There is only really 2 motor companies in the world ( the rest are owned by them :) and thats ford and gm. This won't happen because they become a major MONOPOLY.
Then again the current format of "personal" transport is dying anyway and needs a major rethink in the entire network and concept. - MemoryDump, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1If this happens I won't be buying GM vehicles anymore as I can't stand Ford rust buckets. When they(ford) bought/merged with Mazda that was the end of my interest for Mazda vehicles.
This will be a very bad move for GM if this is true. Most people like 1 or the other.
The imports will be taking over the market and will end up swallowing both these companies. - UrlorJkron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Saturns are pretty nice but aside from them I don't see anything desirable.
- wibblewibble, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The West lost the automotive market to the East along time ago and it wont get it back anytime soon.
- hiscity, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@freakygeeky
Several of your questions were addressed by others.
Your main point was that every company is pretty much the same as regards what I listed. You'd likely agree then that if Ford or GM would make changes in any of those areas that they would have an advantage over the competition.
I'm old enough to remember when vehicles were user serviceable -- with standard tools that a homeowner would keep in their garage. A torque wrench is not unreasonable. Special jigs are another matter.
To the extent that Honda and Toyota travel the same failed strategy as Ford and GM they will reap the same results. They're certainly headed that way. So no, I'm not picking only on GM and Ford.
ps. I'm very familiar with both Visteon and Delphi manufacturing on the border. And have dealt with Detroit and Japan. I worked several years tracking field repairs for both. Got any hole cards?
pps. As for rock breaks, it amazes me how much better replacement glass is than OEM. The more important point is that windshield glass shouldn't break from rock chips. From bullets -- yes. Rocks kicked up from driving speeds -- no. Now that we've discussed it you'll likely start noticing which makes have cracked windshields and which don't. - nwshc, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Talk about a monopoly...
I don't see anything good coming from this. Aside from GM's research into hydrogen vehicles, there is no real inovating coming from both camps. Rather than combining to survive, why don't they each try to compete against the forgein auto makers (Honda, Toyota, etc.) and come up with some new tech, and at the same time compete with eachother to give the American people a choice. - MrViklund, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Merger is not s solution at all here, not at all. That was the most stupid thing I ever heard. GM and Ford are already too big. They should instead start to make better cars and cars people want. The Japanese companies makes the best and most popular cars in the US. That's fact.
- reed311, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2The Justice Department will rubber stamp this, just as they do every merger. This is the equivalent of Microsoft and Apple or Coke and Pepsi.
- agarc, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Even if this merger did exist, it would be hilarious. Being fairly close to the Detroit area, there are lots of GM and Ford models everywhere. But so many GM and Ford drivers have them because they (or somebody in their family) work for GM/Ford and get huge incentives for not buying anything else.
With the exception of a few models, does anybody actually desire owning a GM or Ford make? - thart, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Typical. Instead of getting their head out of their ass, they are just merging. One non innovative company + one non innovation company = 1 Huge non innovative company. I agree with nwshc, they should try this thing called competition instead of trying to become a monopoly. Socialism is dumb. Yeah capitalism.
- mtwolf, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I am sure this would go through if agreed to, but getting them to agree on this would be like getting a chevy die hard to buy a ford and vice-versa.
- hiscity, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3You reap what you sow -- with increase. Their big mistakes.
1. Making vehicles that can't be serviced by the owner. (even at a black box level)
2. Changing models every year, instead of modular systems improvements.
3. Moving production & jobs 1st to Mexico, then to Thailand & Mainland China.
4. Planned obsolescence. (Honda kicked their asses with 400,000 mile vehicles)
5. Sticker shock repair charges.
6. Not providing detailed service & parts manual information to owners. (on-line, etc.)
7. Construction requiring special tools or skills to tear down or rebuild.
8. Failure to adopt modular on-board electronics/computing. (MP3, audio in jacks)
9. Chintzy warranties, such as not covering rain leakage, etc.
10. CEO & management salaries not tied to user satisfaction.
11. Making things too complicated, such as dashboards that can't be removed.
12. Making things too cheap, such as windshielsd that crack from rocks & road debris.
Basically, if you try to screw-over or ignore your customer -- you get ditched -- forever.
It's like Walmart NOT maintaining their shopping carts so that it's a pleasant experience to use them rather than an annoyance or a pain. That's gonna catch up to them. Just like has happened with US automakers. If their management & directors had to own and drive their high volume sales vehicles (instead of BMWs, Lexus, or other luxury cars) then they would have known what a pain it is to deal with a US vehicle. Good riddance.
Can merger save them? No, not hardly. How will that change their reputations? - mancat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Dodge?
- Punisher2K, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1The only thing worse then a pissed off muslim is a pissed of redneck. You're talking about dismantling the churches of Ford vs Chevy. Think of all the Calvin pissing on stickers that will be rendered invalid!
- Wingnut233, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3The main question here is that when you combine two otherwise bland and boring domestic car companies, what could the outcome possibly be? More mediocre products, or something that can compete with the import models like Honda and Toyota?
-
Show 51 - 53 of 53 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is