|
A selection of letters concerning Mark's post "What's so wrong with Obama motors?".
AUTO AIRHEADS
C'mon on Steyn. This time it is different. Obama is different than any human has ever walked the earth. Surely he has spent time studying the failure of the Postal Service and Amtrak. He is, after all, a constitutional scholar and author of two best sellers! The car czar putting these deals together is a former NYTimes writer! Talk about a brain trust!
Seriously. A bunch of guys who cannot change a tire are now running two huge carmakers. How long before we find our Diogenes who spends his days going through Washington looking for a man who has ever had an honest job?
The Zman
CHEVY OBAMA ANYONE?
I drive a Chevy Suburban, but even before I got to this last paragraph of your post I was telling myself the same thing.
Unless we are especially unique in our thinking (and I doubt it), it will be a fact that a government owned car company will drive away potential buyers and further exasperate the ability of GM or Chrysler to recover.
Has anyone in Barack's circle considered that?
Glenn
Jefferson, Georgia
TIME FOR A BOYCOTT
Mark, this is exactly the argument I have been making:
“I love American cars. I have a Chevy truck, Chevy SUV, the whole Steyn fleet. But I will never buy another Chevy until it is restored to private ownership.”
I really don't understand why there isn't more discussion about this. This is one case in which a boycot is warranted and could really have teeth.
Steve
A VICTIM-THUG RELATIONSHIP
For me, there's another, simpler reason not to buy from GM and Chrysler: enough has already been taken from me on their behalf. When a crook burgles my house, I don't turn around and buy goods from that burglar. We have a victim/thug relationship, not a business relationship. As far as I'm concerned, that's enough to part ways permanently.
V. White
Destin, Florida
I’LL NEVER BUY A CAR FROM THE GOVERNMENT
I couldn't agree more. My Dad sold Chevrolet's, for the last 45 years I have only purchased GM products. I will never buy a car from a government owned car company. I suspect enough people feel like we do that this will be a very steep hill to climb.
David Kilbourn
Fairbanks, AK
PRODUCTS NEED ADVERTISING
I'm sure this point has been made, but I haven't seen it myself.
So Obama cuts the advertising budget of Chrysler in half and that's supposed to help the company? Obama spent some $1,000,000,000 getting elected, correct? How much of that was advertising budget? And who would be President today if Obama had only spent half of that?
Chris Zmuda
Coon Rapids, Minnesota
DO THEY DESERVE TO SURVIVE?
You hit on something in passing that the guys at our "man-law" (the fire pit outside Joel's house) already mentioned, namely, that they are not even considering American cars anymore--too risky, too uncertain, too much government and not enough free market accountability. More's the pity, too, since the quality is in fact increasing and we would like to do our part to help out an American company that deserves to survive. But, at this point, I really wonder whether they do deserve to survive because they could have rejected Obama's offer, but did not.
Unfortunately, Ford, who has not taken the cash, falls in the same category. We just won't even consider it because it could happen at any moment that Ford becomes another government-run enterprise churning out pc bureaucrautos.
Nope. If I need a new truck, it will be a Toyota or Nissan for me.
Don Meyer
Chandler, Arizona
FORD IT IS
I particularly loved your response to this idiot especially this line of ours..
My wife and I are in the Market for two vehicles, one for the family, one for the business, we were dealing on a Brand New Chevy SUV and Brand New 2500 series truck. Then Obama announced the government/union owner ship. We bought a Ford Expedition and an F250. My prediction is that barring any government intervention / mandates to Ford, or Ford being stupid enough to take gov. cash, Ford Motor Company's recovery will be MUCH faster then either GM or Chrysler. I am now a solid FORD man.
Dave
BUY A PRE-1970 CLASSIC
I with you on never buying another GM or Chrysler until the companies are no longer union/government owned, and this is coming from a guy that has only ever owned GM cars (previous cars included Grand Am, Jeep Cherokee, Cadillac Deville Concours, and Cadillac DTS). Having worked for years on U.S./Japan trade issues, I have no illusions that Japan is an open market.
But what are guys like us to do? I just sold my last Cadillac and my sole means of transportation is a 1966 BMW R69S motorcycle. I suggest that if you can't buy a foreign car and you can't buy Obamamotors, then consider the purchase of a pre-1970 American classic. Easy to work on, sturdy as a tank, offensive to the left, and it would beautify our towns and cities to see them littered with GTO's, old Mustangs, and Continentals with suicide doors.
Doug
YOU ARE A RETARD (AND A MORON)
"When GM sneezes, America catches a cold..."
What are you, seven? 1956 called and they want their talking points back. Where the hell have you been this last 30 years while the US auto companies were building cheap, high profit SUVs as opposed to ENGINEERING some really decent cars for the "future"?
And your statement that "the unions" got the poor auto companies in this mess proves one thing - even retards can write bestsellers. And I use the word "retard" because there has to be something fundamentally wrong with your brain to blame collective bargining for this mess rather than blame the auto companies for not INVESTING THEIR RECORD PROFITS they were making a decade ago into something other than their own bank accounts. GM MADE RECORD profits in the late 90s early 00s - I know you have an internet-machine because I read the dreck you post on NRO so you can look it up yourself.
You sir, are a moron.
Michael Garrity
GOOSED
For years, conservatives and other patriotic Americans have bought American cars even though they knew or at least suspected they could get a better car by buying from a foreign automaker. I am one of those Americans. I currently own a GMC Yukon XL and a Ford F-150 Supercrew. (We need big vehicles to haul our five kids and often others.) I wonder to what degree such Americans have propped up what were clearly ailing and inferior car companies. Ironically, wealthy, educated liberals abandoned Detroit years ago.
Like you, I have been outraged by the government's intervention and the union power grab. I am familiar enough with United Airlines to know that union control was a principal reason for United's bankruptcy. Remember the famous quote attributed to Rick Dubinsky (a United union official): "We don't want to kill the golden goose, but we do want to squeeze every last egg out of it." Unions do not know how to run companies and can't help themselves when it comes to increasing the pay and benefits of their members to unjustified levels.
For the past few months, my feelings about GM and Chrysler have changed dramatically for the worse. Like you, I don't think I will ever buy a car from a union or government dominated automaker. I wonder how many other conservative and patriotic Americans are thinking the same thing. Does Obama realize that he may have ruined one of the only things these companies had going for them: a loyal and dependable and wealthy group of key customers. If not, he soon will. I predict this will be a campaign issue in 2012.
Adam Merrill
Wilmette, Illinois
BANKRUPTCY AIN’T A GOOD OPTION
What evidence do you have for this statement?
"Under traditional bankruptcy restructuring, the various GM/Chrysler brands - Chevy,Dodge, etc - would have wound up in the hands of new owners, domestic and foreign, willing to make a go of them."
1. Chrysler's been on the block for months now with no takers, despite attractive terms offered to Fiat.
2. One of the main opponents of the Chrysler/Fiat deal has, in fact, been the Chrysler dealers!
The most likely result would have been a quick trip to oblivion for Chrysler and, at a minimum, the dismantling of GM and the destruction of many more dealerships than we're seeing presently. Not a better result -- and nothing like your prediction!
Andy Schriever
Batavia, Illinois
BETTER OFF BALONEY
So under the alternative scenario, who would have been better off? You sort of implied that folks would be better off under traditional bankruptcy proceedings, but gave us none of the actual mechanics. Who would have bought the GM brands? Domestic and Foreign, or just foreign, as seems likely to me? I suspect the various brands would have been bought for chump change, broken up and sold for parts, with most of the remaining jobs going overseas. The shareholders would have benefited slightly, and nearly no one else. While it's possible that things could get 'even worse' under Obama's plan, it's worth bearing in mind that it would be hard for them to be too much worse. I suspect Obama sees this as a long shot that - if it pays off - could keep GM a going American concern. This would never have been my first choice, but I'm pretty sure it was never Obama's first choice either.
Also - at this point, decisions for the "workforce" and decisions for the "market" are precisely the same thing. If the union is too stupid to act in its own self-interest, then so be it, but if they're smart they'll put some smart 'car guys' in place and stay out of the way. If not, then they go into their destitute retirements with mostly themselves to blame.
Marc Schriftman
DISGUSTING
I see your point, although it bears repeating that prior to the "bailouts" participated in by Chrysler it was (and technically still is) a private business. Chrysler was not a publicly traded company, but rather was held by a bunch of funds and their managers, which makes this bankruptcy-at-the-point-of-a-knife- deal with the Feds so thoroughly disgusting.
Full disclosure - I have a client that is a Chrysler supplier whose business is heavily impacted by this mess.
Keep up the great work. I'm now a self-confessed demography bore as well after reading American Alone.
Alexander P. Brackett
Louisville, Kentucky
ACORN MOTORS
Sounds like a good name for the next Dodge -- "The New Dodge Acorn".
Rod Lowe
OBAMAMOBILES
So you and all the other conservative optimists think GM and Chrysler will die because consumers won't buy the new Pelosi Model XL500 cars. Do you think Obama and the UAW will let the free market work?
Don't underestimate our Mechanic-in-Chief. Next will come tariffs, taxes, and ham-handed regulations that will smother the competition, so we'll be HAPPY to buy the latest Obamobile. And it will all be justified by "fairness," environmentalism, and return on the taxpayers' "investments" in GM and Chrysler.
Hope & change!
Paul Simpson
Houston, Texas
INSTINCTIVE AVOIDANCE
I remember when the Liberals formed Petro-Canada. I drove by those stations for years, never stopping because I refused to subsidize the socialists who were ruining my country. Even now that PetroCanada is privatized, I instinctively avoid it where possible.
I have never purchased a vehicle other than from GM, and currently own a 1955 Chev and a 2000 Chev. I am one of the loyal buyers that they need to survive. I won't be buying from GM and must now consider buying a Ford. Everyone over a certain age who was loyal to a particular brand will understand how difficult that is!
David G Roberts
THE CHEVY HALIBURTON
Can you imagine if Bush had done what Obama has and instead of Unions, he let Haliburton run the autos?
Gary Alexander
Carmel, Indiana
JUST REPUBLICANS?
I admit to being blissfully unaware of the mechanics of car dealerships, but it would seem to me that if I were a company selling certain products it would be in my best interest to have MORE outlets for those products rather than less. I'm not sure of the purpose to closing dealerships. There is a Chrysler dealership in N. Ky (Cincy area) that has been running in the black that was cut off despite their decades long history with Chrysler.
One question: It has been posited on another blog that the dealers being shut down were ones where the owners were on record as donating to Republican nominees/causes. That sounds a bit "Truther-ish" to me, but I'd be curious if there were any patterns.
JohnO
IT’S NO YOKE
I love your work and wit. Tell Rush you should be the heir apparent. However, I don't think Obama is to blame for the dealerships. Their problem is the structure of their relationship with the car manufacturers. How foolish is it to be yoked to one manufacturer so much that transfer of ownership of said manufacturer can strip you of said dealership?!? What should exist are contracts between dealers and manufacturers that become null in these cases. Unless these exist and Obama is corrupting such contracts, I think the dealer's plight is his own fault.
That being said, Obama sucks and will hopefully suffer great shame one day.
Tim Johnson
THE FRANCHISEES FRANCHED
I have no doubt you are correct about your general statement of the "deals" Obama is brokering for Chrysler and GM. However, that doesn't necessarily translate to what has happened to the franchisees who have lost their franchises. Even in a normal bankruptcy, GM and Chrysler would have shed most of these (the underperforming) franchises. These underperformers are detrimental to GM and Chrysler because they are ineffective sellers with exclusive rights to specific geographical locations. GM and Chrysler want to shut them down so that they have replace them with better dealers who will sell more cars. Mitt Romney wrote an NY Times op-ed back in November titled "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt" where he recognized that many franchisees would lose their franchises.
Chris Brower
Layton, Utah
EVERYTHING MUST GO
I have been told that soon-to-be-ex-Chrysler dealers have been informed that the company will not buy back any unsold cars. Which means the dealers have to clear the cars off the lot fast. Which means that they have to give super discounts. Which means the remaining Chrysler dealers will either have to give super discounts as well or not sell their cars. Which means Chrysler will make less money. Which means . .
.
Maybe we should just house Gitmo prisoners in the unsold cars.
Jim Rudolph
Meridian, Idaho
HAVE A HEART
I usually love your work on NRO, but I think you were a bit too cavalier and harsh on the FL Dodge owner. He is in a real pickle that he has no role in and can do nothing about. While I agree with the points you were making, a little compassion for him would certainly not be out of place.
Mark Dennett
Lutz, Florida
A SURFEIT OF DEALERS
I believe that the question asked about dealer franchises is different than the question you answered. One of the identified structural challenges with the US car companies is that they just have too many dealers that compete with each other. If I remember the numbers correctly for a similar number of cars sold there is something like three times as many Domestic dealers as foreign dealers. Any bankruptcy proceedings would have to address the issue of numbers of dealerships. I don't know enough about bankruptcy law and how the court would deal with that but I do believe that it would be more equitable than just telling dealers that their franchise will expire in 30 days and they can't return any cars.
Chris Kennedy
UNFAIR TO FORD
I just heard an awesome radio ad today from Jones Dodge, a dealer in Wickenberg (city north of Phoenix on the route to Las Vegas). The owner did the spot. He announced that he was forced to liquidate by Chrysler, offered firesale prices and ripped on the incompetent idiots at Chrysler. He then said, he'd be happy to sell you a Ford at his other franchise since “they still know what they're doing” or something to that effect.
Unfortunately Ford now has to negotiate its labor contracts with the owners (UAW) of GM and Chrysler. Insane. If I was Ford, I'd explore converting its employees to a different union with an independent incentive structure (or better yet, dissolve or decertify it). It is grossly unfair.
BTW, a real bankruptcy would also have created relief from franchise laws (and closed dealers) as well as relief from union contracts terms. But, as you note, it would have been market driven. I harbor hope that bondholder lawsuits can stop this mess.
Also, you might be happy to know that I was at a DoD Summit meeting for Biometrics and Forensics (basically the technology we need to fight an enemy that lacks name, rank, serial number and a modicum of civilized behavior). I was just sitting in as part of the vendor community. General Custer (who runs a big chunk of our military intel function -- yes, he's related to the Gen Custer of Little Bighorn) plugged your book America Alone and gave it to a couple of the guest speakers. It was my first exposure to this community of people. Nice to see a bastion of competence and can-do spirit in an otherwise depressing government.|
John A. Beckwith
Phoenix, Arizona
THE FUTURE OF MOTORING
Have you seen this, Mark?
Earl Aagaard
|
