| Jump to bottom |
Demand For Immediate Immigration Reductions
""Why does Congress continue to order up 75,000 new permanent foreign workers each month at a time of so much suffering by unemployed Americans and the families that often depend on them?"" - comment by Aron, MI There are a number of reasons, besides the humanitarian ones, for maintaining immigration; a few are: 1. the skill sets of the immigrant may be in short supply; I don't believe that most of the unemployed are doctors, engineers, or other highly trained individuals 2. the 'umemployed' are unwilling to relocate to the areas where their skill sets are needed 3. the 'unemployed' have negotiated a significant benefit as part of their contract negotiations, and could actually take a wage, and definiely a benefit cut if they changed jobs 4. the 'unemployed' may lose 'recall rights' if they took another job or relocated don't know if it's the same in the US, but here in Canada, it seems that a majority of people want to maintain their staus quo - work for the same money & benefits, work in the same town/city, work using the same skill sets, either that or take unemployment benefits and keep dreaming that their job will come back; unfortunately for many, the jobs are gone forever; to maintain their lifetyles, many will need to upgrade/broaden their skill sets, improve their work ethic, and generally may themselves more employable and a better employee; tough love, but it is a way out
GM's $1.15B loss 3Qtr 2009
and even the pundits are buying the sales pitch; let's compare some numbers income 3qtr 2008 2.5B loss, sales $37B, units 977804 income 3qtr 2009 1.2B loss, sales $27B, units 569448 'structural costs' per qtr 2008 $12.6B 'structural costs' per qtr 2009 $9.86B sales - costs = profit/loss costs = structural costs + 'non'structural costs using these formulae, structural costs are down 22%, but up 34.3% on a per vehicle basis; let's assume they are relatively fixed, and independent of sales volume also, using the same formula, the 'non' structrual costs are up by 25.3% in 2009 on a per vehicle basis; some of these costs are fixed, but most will 'flex' with sales volume so now we can see why GM is so bent on pushing production up by 1MM vehicles in 2010; without that increase in sales, both the structural and 'non'-structural costs will be unfavourable on a per vehicle basis, and GM will run at a loss; only this time, the accounting wizards won't have a convenient place to dump extra costs nor an excuse to explain their poor performance; but just how likely is the scenario that GM will sell those extra 1MM vehicles, or 50% more in 2010, when most industry experts are forecasting a modest 10.4 - 10.8MM market, about 6% higher than 2009???; discount city here we come, to the detriment of all NA vehicle manufacturers and parts suppliers; GM is going to need their reserve of cash to support their operations in NA, not to be buying assets or restructuring companies in other parts of the world, as has been their most recent intentions
GM to shrink Opel 25%
now some details of GM's plans are coming to the surface; in its heyday, Opel was producing 2.5MM vehicles per year, with a capacity of just under 3MM; 25% of 3MM = 750,000; if the plants are setup the same as in NA, each shift represents ~ 100,000 vehicles per assembly line, so this reduction would equate to 7 - 8 shifts of production, or 20% of the assembly work force; with production spread among several European countries, and with model-specific plants, and with profitability requiring plant utilizations > 70%, wonder which Opel models are on the chopping block??; the regional production, and vehicle preferences will make this decision complicated as nationalistic fervor runs much higher in Europe; kill Vauxhall and lose sales in Great Britain, for example; GM may be forced, as was Magna, to compromise and maintain production in plants well below their level of profitability, and hope that sales will increase enough, fast enough to reduce the drain on GM's coffers, I mean the NA taxpayers' money; where have I heard that story before??? - oh, yeah, sounds a lot like GM's plans to increase production of vehicles in NA in 2010 by 1MM vehicles over 2009, so they can meet their target of profitablilty as sold to the US Treasury; sounds like the same 'old GM' as before - "if we build it, they will buy it"
GM to shrink Opel 25%
now some details of GM's plans are coming to the surface; in its heyday, Opel was producing 2.5MM vehicles per year, with a capacity of just under 3MM; 25% of 3MM = 750,000; if the plants are setup the same as in NA, each shift represents ~ 100,000 vehicles per assembly line, so this reduction would equate to 7 - 8 shifts of production, or 20% of the assembly work force; with production spread among several European countries, and with model-specific plants, and with profitability requiring plant utilizations > 70%, wonder which Opel models are on the chopping block??; the regional production, and vehicle preferences will make this decision complicated as nationalistic fervor runs much higher in Europe; kill Vauxhall and lose sales in Great Britain, for example; GM may be forced, as was Magna, to compromise and maintain production in plants well below their level of profitability, and hope that sales will increase enough, fast enough to reduce the drain on GM's coffers, I mean the NA taxpayers' money; where have I heard that story before??? - oh, yeah, sounds a lot like GM's plans to increase production of vehicles in NA in 2010 by 1MM vehicles over 2009, so they can meet their target of profitablilty as sold to the US Treasury; sounds like the same 'old GM' as before - "if we build it, they will buy it"
Chrysler Quality
and we're proud of 4%; most Japanese companies are measuring the defect rate in parts per million ( PPM ), which is a 10,000 times improvement over parts per hundred ( Per Cent ); when I ran a company supplying parts into Toyota, out target PPM for the 1st month was 100, 2nd month it was 50, and by the end of the 1st year 10; that's 0.001%; not sure where Chryler was before the union with Fiat, but if they want to compete with Toyota, Honda, Nissan, & Mazda
they need to do a lot better than 4%
That should be
hinsight2020 - the only reason GM has outsold Toyota this year is GM offers many more brands/models; take the top 20 sellers only, and Toyota sold 83,320 vehicles, GM sold 65,228 vehicles in Oct; both with 4 models in the top 20; if an asembly plant must run above a certain production volume to be profitable, this tells me that the top 4 GM vehicles in sales are helping pay for the losses of all the other brands; same for Toyota, except they have just a couple of other brands; which company is in a better profit position??
GM Retains Opel
DOA - where have you been lately; the German government has stated publicly that GM can take a hike, unlikely to go back on their word now after the Magna fiasco; the German workers have rescinded all concessions; the most recent estimate of restructuring Opel and financing their losses in the short term in $8.5B ( estimates from one European company, one American company ); most European newspapers/ auto industry analysts are reporting the money is coming from NA; whomever is your source should go back to their source and/or reconfirm from a second source; seems like the UAW members are getting a different story from most of us around the world
I dont get it
where is all this money coming from????; from you and me, the NA taxpayer!!!!; and the estimate to restructure and finance Opel going forward has reached $8.5B; where will that money come from???; GM is already in a legal quagmire with the Opel Trust, so ownership of GM Europe is in question; to protect GM Europe from creditors, the assets were placed in trust, commonly called the Opel Trust, with GM retaining 35% ownership; now they unilaterally decide, nope, we're not doing that, we'll keep Opel for ourselves??; the Sberbank is mounting a legal challenge, so the ownership position may not be decided for some time; and GM wants to put $8.5B more of our taxpayer money into a company that GM has questionable ownership position in; do they think money grows on trees???; we need to demand some repayment NOW, and a very detailed repayment plan with significant penalties for the balance; we, the rescuers of GM ( GM would not be here today without our generosity ) are being treated worse than the bondholders were during the bankruptcy - at least they had some legal recourse and got pennies on the dollar for their headaches; what we have are a bunch of free-spending idiots that apparently don't know the minimal basics of operating a company, nor the impact of public perception on the viability of their company; such arrogance
GM expanding production at Canadian plant
I give up....boy, did they butcher the last post....in the Toronto Globe&Mail, the stated production at CAMI was < 55,000 vehicles so far this year, so different that in this article; even with the planned 40,000 increase in vehicle production, CAMI will be < 42% of capacity; can it be profitable with that volume?; even GM's plan to the US Treasury states, and as reflected by GM's plan to increase NA production by > 1MM vehicles in 2010, an assembly plant needs to be >80% of capacity to be profitable; add in the labour cost disadvantage, and the rising Cdn $, and either the price for the Equinox/Terrain is going up or GM's profit is going down?????
GM expanding production at Canadian plant
boy, did they butcher the last post....in the Toronto Globe&Mail, the stated production at CAMI was < 55,000 vehicles so far this year, so different that in this article; even with the planned 40,000 increase in vehicle production, CAMI will be 1MM vehicles in 2010, an assembly plant needs to be >80% of capacity to be profitable; add in the labour cost disadvantage, and the rising Cdn $, and either the price for the Equinox/Terrain is going up or GM's profit is going down?????
GM expanding production at Canadian plant
in the Toronto Globe&Mail, the stated production at CAMI was < 55,000 vehicles so far this year, so different that in this article; even with the planned 40,000 increase in vehicle production, CAMI will be 1MM vehicles in 2010, an assembly plant needs to be >80% of capacity to be profitable; add in the labour cost disadvantage, and the rising Cdn $, and either the price for the Equinox/Terrain is going up or GM's profit is going down?????
GM CEO Henderson in Germany discussing Opel future
Mr Henderson etal have a steep hill to climb to regain credibility in Europe; not only have they created strong dislike and mistrust among the Germans and east, but they will do the same in any other country where they shut down manufacturing operations; Russia still has considerable influence over a good part of Eastern Europe ( source of energy, raw materials, transportation portal to SE Asia ), and nationalistic tendencies are much stronger in Europe than NA; if GM's actions were to compound the drop in market share that Opel has already experienced in 2009 ( dn > 20% ), where would they sell; not in NA, as the agreement with the UAW, and the ownership position of the UAW will make any significant import numbers almost an impossibility; perhaps, the Opel workers saw the writing on the wall and reacted accordingly???
H.Arnold
and GM agreed to place all GM-Europe assets in a German trust to protect from claims by creditors, and GM, once out of bankruptcy, did?????; if GM follows their past practice of only following 'agreements' when it is to their advantage, how long before any agreement with the UAW is somehow skirted/circumvented/ignored???; still, Saturn, which was/is based on the Opel technology is about to be shut down, and money from the American taxpayer is about to be used to restructure Opel, and 6000 - 7000 Americans formerly employed by GM are about to receive their walking papers; what's wrong with this picture?????
H.Arnold
and GM agreed to place all GM-Europe assets in a German trust to protect from claims by creditors, and GM, once out of bankruptcy, did?????; if GM follows their past practice of only following 'agreements' when it is to their advantage, how long before any agreement with the UAW is somehow skirted/circumvented/ignored???; still, Saturn, which was/is based on the Opel technology is about to be shut down, and money from the American taxpayer is about to be used to restructure Opel, and 6000 - 7000 Americans formerly employed by GM are about to receive their walking papers; what's wrong with this picture?????
H.Arnold
Mike Winslow - haven't had any answer to my question regarding the UAW's postion on using American taxpayer money to restructure/bailout Opel; from your posts, I gather you have some UAW connections, so I put the question directly to you - what is the UAW position on using American taxpayers' money to maintain jobs in Europe while GM continues to 'permanently' reduce the workforce in the US???; also, add in GM's plans to import Opels etal to the US to meet mileage targets; couldn't a revitalized Saturn do the same????
| Jump to top |
