BrianCunningham

In case you missed the thread in OT
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show....php?t=1624554

http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto...omotive/35373/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17186900/

CHJ In Virginia

Just what Chrysler needs - A large SUV when the market for that type of vehicle is dying. A GM Chrysler marriage would be a sure disaster for both, leading to a quicker death. New passenger cars that are stylish, innovative and well built are the thing that both companies need NOW.

Race Prepared

The all new 2008 Corvette Viper!

The Spark

We are heading to one world order.

First the UN will take over control and then GM will control the auto market

01C5fan

GM is interested in this deal only because their long term strategy includes a Chapter 11 reorganization. They can acquire Chrysler's assets at a deep discount because no other auto manufacturer, including Daimler, can afford to assume the long term liabilities associated with health care and to a lesser extent pensions for Chrysler's retired workers. Since GM is headed for reorganization anyway, they can effectively unload Chrysler's liabilities along with their own. Given this scenerio, it's a match made in heaven.

vms4evr

More like Toyota will control the auto market. They're the top dog at the moment and show no signs of letting up.

The last thing GM needs is help from Chrysler. Chrysler is looking for another bail out. First the Feds tried then Daimler. So much for Mercedes being their saving grace. I never bought that solution.

I hope Chrysler goes through with the new Challenger. I thought they did pretty good revamping their lineup with these Magnum vehicles. It's not like they have no ingenuity. They kicked butt with the minivan. Their PT Cruiser (which I find ugly) sold really well. They should skip the idea of making yet another big-a$$ SUV.

I agree with CHJ. They need something innovative, and they need it now.

John Shiels

Chrysler has 13 new models for next year.

John Shiels

MB lost 666 million when Chrysler made 1.5 billion they are not the great saviour. GM is off to a flying start in China miles ahead of Toyota.
Size wise GM is at 180 billion vs 141 for Toyota. They would have turn a profit recently if not for the one time charges associated with the buyouts and other one time charges.

Gary2KC5

I heard Toyota was buying GM.

US car makers are in a world of hurt. they have let their labor force get totally out of hand. My son works at 1 of the 2 GM plants that are not losing $$. It's unbelievable how unproductive and lazy UAW workers are at this plant. How can you make over $50/hour for sleeping?

The only other GM plant I've visited is BG and I did not see anything like that there.

AMERICANMUSL

HUh! I heard it was to offset a Chinese takeover of Chrysler...

outnumbered

Don't you think you should explain the $50 per hour? In real money as far as pay check it is more like the mid to upper 20's. Then you add their sick days, vacation days, health and Etc. We all make more per hour when you add the package as hourly cash.

The problem is The Union won't allow Gm to grandfather the older employees to their commitments and make a new deal competitive with foreign autos setting up shop in the US for the new employees.

parkerracing

Maybe they'll bring back the Prowler with the SBC it should have had to begin with . /:\

John Shiels

funny the latest study has GM plants within one percent of the Toyota plants productivity and Chrysler and Ford another point or two behind.

John Shiels

that's why companies are buying out the older employees and replacing them with new cheaper ones like Delphi

John Shiels

GM's Oshawa #1 is Most Productive Assembly Plant in North America
GM Leads seven of 13 segments; three out of top five assembly plants overall


Most improved manufacturer for last five years; improves 22 percent
DETROIT (June 3, 2005) – The General Motors Corp. Oshawa #1 plant in Ontario, Canada is the most productive vehicle assembly plant in North America, according to “The Harbour Report North America 2005.” Oshawa #1 took the No. 1 spot with 15.85 hours per vehicle. In total, GM has three of the top five assembly plants.

GM also leads in seven of the study’s 13 vehicle segments, three of them in cars and four in trucks. GM is the most improved manufacturer for the last five years at a total rate of 22 percent.

In addition, GM’s stamping operations improved productivity by 2.7 percent. The company’s Marion, Indiana plant led in major progressive pieces per hour (PPH) equipment productivity and the Lansing, Mich. plant led in transfer press PPH equipment productivity. In powertrains, Flint Engine North was the most productive 6-cylinder OHV engine plant in the industry at 3.52 hours per unit.

“Our manufacturing productivity is a critical piece of our ability to compete in today’s fierce market place,” said Guy Briggs, GM group vice president for Manufacturing and Labor Relations. “We are pleased with the results of our Oshawa #1 assembly plant and continue to implement strategies that will improve manufacturing productivity in all our facilities.”

“Everyone at GM, including our Union partners, management and employees, are focused on working hard together to make GM a more successful company. We will continue to improve our productivity and efficiency in order to further improve our competitive position in the market,” Briggs added

"The fact that overall productivity at GM has improved 22 percent over the past five years affirms that our joint approach significantly enhances GM's manufacturing productivity," said UAW Vice President Richard Shoemaker. "Yet, even with GM's notable improvements in 2004 as seen in the Harbour report," Shoemaker added, "additional progress is definitely possible and necessary."

The world’s largest automaker’s efficiency gains have also been fueled by the company’s continued improvements in product quality.

“GM’s productivity improvements are closely tied to our quality commitment,” said Briggs. Two weeks ago, GM received the Gold, Silver and Bronze plant quality awards in North / South America in the J.D. Power and Associates 2005 Initial Quality Study (IQS) and also received numerous vehicle segment quality awards in both J. D. Power IQS and Strategic Vision’s 2005 Total Quality Index TM. “ Oshawa #1 is a prime example in that it is not only the most productive plant in North America, but also number two in initial quality, right behind Oshawa #2.”

“Despite recent challenges, it is obvious that GM’s manufacturing organization has maintained its focus,” said Ron Harbour, president of Harbour Consulting. “More than two-thirds of GM’s assembly plants show year-over-year improvements, and that is very impressive, particularly given the environment the company is operating in.”

Some of GM’s productivity highlights according to Harbour include:

At 34.33 total labor hours per vehicle (including assembly, stamping, engine and transmission manufacturing), GM improved its overall manufacturing productivity by 2.5 percent.
GM has three of the top five most productive vehicle assembly plants in North America.
Oshawa #1, Ontario, was ranked #1 at 15.85 hours per vehicle.
Oshawa #2, Ontario, was ranked #4 at 17.47 hours per vehicle.
Lansing M, Mich., was ranked #5 at 17.53 hours per vehicle.


GM vehicle assembly plants led in seven of 13 North American assembly plant segments:
Lansing M, Mich., was the industry’s most productive compact car plant at 17.53 hours per vehicle.
Oshawa #1, Ontario, was the most productive midsize car plant at 15.85 hours per vehicle.
Lansing Grand River, Mich., was the most productive luxury car plant at 24.11 hours per vehicle.
Moraine, Ohio, was the most productive midsize SUV plant at 20.73 hours per vehicle.
Arlington, Texas, was the most productive fullsize SUV plant at 22.39 hours per vehicle.
Fort Wayne, Ind., was the most productive fullsize pickup plant at 19.86 hours per vehicle.
Wentzville, Mo., was the most productive large van plant at 24.41 hours per vehicle.

John Shiels

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Monday, February 19, 2007
Print this Comment on this E-mail this

GM, DCX talks serious

Nation's top automaker could absorb Chrysler

Bill Vlasic and Christine Tierney / The Detroit News



General Motors Corp. has been in talks for two months with DaimlerChrysler AG about acquiring all of the troubled Chrysler Group and folding its operations into GM, according to people familiar with the discussions.

The first contact occurred in December, when GM Chairman Rick Wagoner and DaimlerChrysler Chief Executive Dieter Zetsche met in Detroit to discuss the blockbuster idea of GM buying Chrysler from its German parent company.

While a deal is far from certain, at least four meetings have taken place involving Wagoner and GM's chief financial officer, Fritz Henderson, and Zetsche and DaimlerChrysler's CFO Bodo Uebber. Talks are said to be ongoing, primarily between Henderson and Uebber.

Both companies declined comment Sunday.

The underlying rationale for the deal is the need for major consolidation in the intensely competitive American auto industry, said people with knowledge of the talks.

GM, the No. 1 U.S. automaker, is said to be interested in absorbing Chrysler's revenue, production volume and brands, while cutting duplicative labor costs, management and overhead.

DaimlerChrysler, for its part, is intent on dissolving the 1998 merger that brought together the former Daimler-Benz AG and Chrysler Corp.

A GM acquisition of Chrysler would essentially reduce the Big Three to a Big Two, with only GM and Ford Motor Co. surviving from the dozens of American automakers that once existed in the 20th century.

As the deal has so far been discussed, Chrysler would cease to exist as a company or a corporate subsidiary. Instead its factories, brands and products would become part of GM's organizational structure.

But industry experts say such a deal would be fraught with risk for GM, which is in the midst of its own turnaround.

"They're not far along enough, in my assessment, to take on something as gigantic as absorbing Chrysler," said Gerald Meyers, a business professor at the University of Michigan and former chairman of the AMC automaker acquired in 1987 by Chrysler.

Wall Street analysts also have been skeptical about whether this would be a good deal for GM, ever since last Wednesday when the talks were first reported in Germany's Manager magazine.

"GM already has too many brands that cannibalize each other," said analyst Brad Rubin at investment firm BNP-Paribas. "If you add three more, there's going to be more cannibalization."

The talks, according to one source, could take months to complete. Also, other bidders are likely to emerge for Chrysler, which lost $1.5 billion in 2006 on revenues of $62 billion.

But there is growing momentum in the discussions between GM and DaimlerChrysler.

At DaimlerChrysler, the negotiations are being handled in great secrecy, at the highest levels. Company insiders say the management concluded that it needed to sell Chrysler during the annual 10-year strategic review of its operations, which took place in the fall.

DaimlerChrysler sources said it would be beneficial to sell the Auburn Hills unit as a whole rather than in parts because of the health care liabilities, which are estimated at $18 billion. Without liabilities, Banc of America Securities puts Chrysler's value at $5 billion.

There are two crucial issues that could prevent a GM purchase from happening: what price GM would pay for Chrysler and how the United Auto Workers union will react to two of the Big Three automakers joining together.

After losing $10.6 billion in 2005, GM is in the midst of a historic turnaround that includes slashing more than 30,000 jobs and closing several U.S. plants.

Chrysler last week announced its own broad restructuring that will eliminate 13,000 jobs and downsize vehicle production to match its shrinking market share.

A combination of the two would lead to deeper cuts, according to Meyers. "If you think the layoffs you've seen today are large, well, it's going to be a bloodbath in Detroit and in the Midwest."

He said the Chrysler assets that would be most valuable to GM were the Jeep brand, which could be paired with the Hummer nameplate, and its minivans.

"You could make the case that it's a good defensive move (for GM)," Meyers said. "But it's a huge risk. There's a lot more to be lost than to be gained."

On Wednesday, Zetsche stunned the automotive world when he said that "all options are on the table" regarding Chrysler, including alliances with other automakers or a possible sale.

In fact, Zetsche had begun discussing the plan of selling off Chrysler with Wagoner in December, according to people with knowledge of the meeting.

The talks were said to be of a serious nature from the start.

Zetsche was coming under heavy pressure from German shareholders to dump Chrysler, which has ridden a roller-coaster cycle of profits and losses since it was acquired nine years ago.

The initial meeting with Wagoner established that GM was interested in a Chrysler deal.

While GM had hit bottom with its own losses and painful restructuring, Wagoner and his management team had growing confidence that its turnaround plans were on track.

Buying Chrysler would boost its volumes and revenues significantly, and ensure that GM remained ahead of Toyota Motor Corp. as the world's biggest automaker. In the process, Chrysler's management structure would be eliminated and much of its staff functions taken over by GM.

GM would add the Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep brands to its corporate lineup, and save money by spreading engineering and vehicle development costs over a larger and broader range of products.

Together, GM and Chrysler accounted for 11.8 million vehicles sold in 2006. Their combined U.S. market share would exceed 35 percent. And their status as American icons would make a combination of the two a historic event in the history of the U.S. auto industry.

GM's board of directors was said to be supportive of the discussions continuing. DaimlerChrysler's supervisory board has already publicly endorsed exploring "far-reaching strategic options" for Chrysler.

The wild card in any deal, however, will be the UAW. Bringing Chrysler into GM's organizational structure would likely require union cooperation on health care costs and staffing levels.

You can reach Bill Vlasic at (313) 222-2152 or bvlasic@detnews.com.

More Autos-Insider Headlines

Oyishdog

whatever happens, I just hope they cut down on the brands...it's stupid to be able to buy the same platform 5 different ways just because one says dodge, jeep, chevy, saturn, etc etc. They just need to pick one for SUV's, one for small fuel efficient cars, one for trucks, etc etc....Toyota has what? scion, toyota and lexus?

I will be curious to see what happens between viper v. corvette

John Shiels

Unfortunately I think Viper will die with only 1,000 + - units per year. If it truly makes a profit it may live.

AUTO_X_AL

It's nice to see fact and not these inflated $50/hour proclamations. Thank you for the FACTUAL information John.

Al

AU N EGL

BG produced averages 15 vettes per hour with the capabilty of 18 vettes per hour.

On the 2 seater caddie line it is 6 caddies per day. NO demand.