March 19, 200916 yr Incidentally I just got a call to work up in Detroit this weekend at the Cobo Center (or whatever it's called). I've got a conflict so I can't do it, but anyway this guy I work for sometimes had to pay the union to set up his gear at the convention center. By gear I mean a few folding tables, extension chords, a backdrop and some computers. Actually they just basically watched him set up and walked off with a few hundred bucks.
March 20, 200916 yr ^ That's how the convention and trade show biz works in union cities. A lot of times exhibitors are not supposed to handle certain items once they leave their car, the semi trailer or the freight desk.
March 20, 200916 yr Pile in! Station wagons are making a comeback [excerpt] By Hannah Elliott updated 6:26 p.m. ET, Thurs., March. 19, 2009 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29516880/ Recent announcements from General Motors and Chrysler about their plans to drop several models and brands didn't seem to hinder Cadillac's resolution to press forward with the launch of its first-ever station wagon. The Cadillac CTS Sport Wagon, due out in May, is essentially the brand's successful CTS sedan, but with additional cargo space. Cadillac reps say they're catering to luxury-minded buyers who want to downsize while maintaining practicality. There are 17 new 2009 models on the market that are true wagons, ranging on the high end from the $88,500 Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG to the $55,800 BMW 535i xDrive Sports Wagon. And there are several lifestyle-oriented brands with new wagons at the lower end of the price spectrum as well, such as the $22,295 Subaru Outback and the $29,800 Volvo V50. The wagon's heyday was the late 1950s, when American-made models like the AMC Rambler, Ford Country Squire and Oldsmobile Vista Cruiser ruled the market. In the span of a decade, sales rose from about 3 percent in 1950 to almost 17 percent of the U.S. auto market, before they fell in the 1970s and '80s, largely due to the minivan and rising gas prices. Wagons now command about 1 percent of the national market.
March 21, 200916 yr MTS prefers something lower to the ground!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kz8RxcTgE_Q
March 21, 200916 yr MTS prefers something lower to the ground!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kz8RxcTgE_Q Na..this is my ride
March 21, 200916 yr Maybe, but you'd really rather have: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1ZWCNk6GIw OK..Thats more like it!
March 21, 200916 yr Ruined my evening all by myself with that video! What a shame about Freddie Prinze Sr.
March 26, 200916 yr Source: 12% Of GM Workers Accept Buyout $20,000 Offer, Plus $25,000 Toward A New Car, Taken By 7,500 (AP) About 7,500 General Motors Corp. workers have signed up to take buyout and early retirement incentives to leave the company, the automaker said Thursday. Also, Chrysler LLC said Thursday it would extend its offers to entice blue-collar workers to leave the company. The old deadline was Friday. At GM, about 12 percent of the company's U.S. hourly work force of 62,400 decided to leave, most through early retirement offers. GM offered $20,000 cash and a $25,000 voucher to buy a car to all of its hourly U.S. employees in an effort to further trim its blue-collar work force to match reduced sales. The deadline to decide was Tuesday, and many of the workers waited until the last minute to turn in their paperwork. The workers have seven days from the date they turn in the paperwork to rescind their decision, so many will have to decide by March 31. Full article at http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/26/business/main4894466.shtml?tag=topHome;topStories
March 26, 200916 yr Now are the using tax payers money to fund the buy out??? The buyout is an insult though. I know my friend that worked for Ford was offered 100k+
March 31, 200916 yr So... GM gets split into good and bad halves, maybe. Wagoner fired at Obama's behest. Chrysler goes to Fiat, by fiat. Warranties will be honored by the feds. Auto industry as a whole still getting treatment several orders lower than financials got... no guarantees, no reassuring announcement to the world, no limitless money pipeline, and a slew of arbitrary deadlines. Is any of this wise? Is any of this fair?
March 31, 200916 yr Is any of this wise? Is any of this fair? I think the retail industry probably supports a lot more jobs than the auto industry. shouldn't it get bailed out? Let's see... Defense industry - gov't funded Health care industry - gov't funded education industry - gov't funded construction industry - gov't funded thru stimulous pkg banking industry - now gov't funded Auto industry - now funded thru bailouts What about the chemical industry? What about the music industry? What about the insurance industry (oops- don't look at AIG)? what about....... Is any of it fair? what are the new rules to society these days?
March 31, 200916 yr ^ That's what I'm getting at. Where does it end? I'm still troubled by the fact that NYC-heavy industries get bailed out to no end, with questions reserved for later, while the midwest gets treated very differently. There is no question an auto industry collapse disproportionately hurts the midwest. I feel like we're being written off, like our states are considered expendable in a way NYC isn't.
March 31, 200916 yr ^ I think you make a valid point. Nobody outside the Midwest cares about the autoworkers or the impact it will have on the Midwest. I think "written off" is an excellent term. Over the last several months, many articles have downplayed the significance of the collapse of the auto market on the Midwest. I guess since manufacturing isn't a sexy "coast-industry" it's not that important. It's like ESPN's obsession with the Red Sox, Yankees, Lakers and Celtics.
March 31, 200916 yr It's like ESPN's obsession with the Red Sox, Yankees, Lakers and Celtics. Yeah, except this is much more serious. Are we part of this country or not?
March 31, 200916 yr ^^maybe Canada would like us, eh? We DO have a lot more in common with southern Onatrio than Georgia, Bos-Wash, Texas, Portland/Seattle, or California, along with other major population regions such as southern Florida or Phoenix. If we were lucky, we could even be speaking French right now :wink: :yap:
March 31, 200916 yr That's a good question. We're just "flyover" states to the East and West Coast. Seriously, this is something that needs to be discussed. Yes, the auto industry has not helped itself over the last thirty years, but this is a key industry. It does feel like the Midwest is expendable.
March 31, 200916 yr ^^maybe Canada would like us, eh? We DO have a lot more in common with southern Onatrio than Georgia, Bos-Wash, Texas, Portland/Seattle, or California, along with other major population regions such as southern Florida or Phoenix. If we were lucky, we could even be speaking French right now :wink: :yap: This is what that Russian professor predicted as America's fate... the midwest joins Canada, while other regions go their own ways. I hope it doesn't come to that. I saw one article yesterday on Politico about this issue, which is the first mention I've seen anywhere. What troubles me most is that people from this area can't even agree on saving our one cash cow.
April 1, 200916 yr ^^maybe Canada would like us, eh? We DO have a lot more in common with southern Onatrio than Georgia, Bos-Wash, Texas, Portland/Seattle, or California, along with other major population regions such as southern Florida or Phoenix. If we were lucky, we could even be speaking French right now :wink: :yap: This is what that Russian professor predicted as America's fate... the midwest joins Canada, while other regions go their own ways. I hope it doesn't come to that. I saw one article yesterday on Politico about this issue, which is the first mention I've seen anywhere. What troubles me most is that people from this area can't even agree on saving our one cash cow. ???
April 1, 200916 yr One of the big mistakes that Detroit made was as they shrank they mostly retained factories in the core states - MI, OH, IN, IL, KY, MO and the like. They all used to have factories throughout the country - west coast and east coast, but those were closed a while ago. If they had increased the pain earlier on in the Midwest maybe they would have more national support for a bail out today than they do.
April 1, 200916 yr Heavy industry works well here because of the lakes, existing infrastructure, and a populace skilled in metalwork. Of course it can be and has been done elsewhere, but while we're on the subject, I think NY/LA/DC all have some sharing to do as well. We can do finance, marketing, soundstage production, and certainly federal paper pushing. But they dare not spread those opportunities around... only ours.
April 1, 200916 yr What troubles me most is that people from this area can't even agree on saving our one cash cow. Well, it is only a cash cow if it is generating cash. I understand your point, but if there is no cash, there is no cow.
April 1, 200916 yr What troubles me most is that people from this area can't even agree on saving our one cash cow. Well, it is only a cash cow if it is generating cash. I understand your point, but if there is no cash, there is no cow. The same could be said for finance in New York, but we're seeing a fierce determination to make sure New York continues to recieve everyone's cash.
April 1, 200916 yr In my opinion, we're forgetting something... that Obama is FROM Chicago, the capital of the midwest. He, of all people, should know what effect the collapse of the auto industry would have on this region of the country, regardless if our region is sexy or not (lol). There definitely is a double standard though... <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHGU5vOfOrs&hl=en&fs=1">
April 1, 200916 yr In my opinion, we're forgetting something... that Obama is FROM Chicago, the capital of the midwest. If anyone's forgetting, it's him. I was really excited about having a president from this region, but if he doesn't play hardball when other regions are trying to leave us behind, what good is it?
April 1, 200916 yr Chicago isn't exactly rooted in the auto industry, either. Hopefully he has spent some time in Detroit or Gary, because it will truly show you what kinds of problems we face. However, I think he will make smart, rational(sp?) decisions. We might be hurting for the next decade or so, but I do have full faith that he will give us a path to a new industry.
April 1, 200916 yr The fact is, this industry has been in the crapper for decades. If this region hasn't figured out that we shouldn't be depending on the auto industry by now, I hate to say it, but it's really our own fault.
April 1, 200916 yr The fact is, this industry has been in the crapper for decades. If this region hasn't figured out that we shouldn't be depending on the auto industry by now, I hate to say it, but it's really our own fault. That's a good point, and I don't have a good answer for it. I will offer this: another NYC comparison. At what point do they need to give up on their financial sector? It's practically destroyed commerce as we know it. How's that for failure. And in hindsight, it's been failing for a long time too. Gramm Leach Bliley was passed to ensure that NYC's financial sector couldn't be destroyed by foreign competition. How much of a failure would Detroit be if similarly protected? Will we get to find out? And is the south also expected to give up its auto plants? What about California? Chicago does (or at least did) produce all the Tauruses, so is that something Obama would feel good about losing? Plenty of opportunity for community activism on the south side after that happens...
April 1, 200916 yr The fact is, this industry has been in the crapper for decades. If this region hasn't figured out that we shouldn't be depending on the auto industry by now, I hate to say it, but it's really our own fault. In fairness, I think everyone understands that an over-reliance on manufacturing leaves the region vulnerable. But you can't just snap your fingers and create tens of thousands of recession-proof non-manufacturing jobs to replace the remaining blue color jobs. And I don't see any reason why propping up industry to prevent sudden shocks would stifle the creation of new non-manufacturing jobs that would further diversify the local economy (though I don't pretend to be a labor or development economist).
April 1, 200916 yr I'm trying to figure out how all these unemployed factory workers are going to pay the rent and their utility bills when unemployment runs out.
April 2, 200916 yr The problem with saying that we should stop relying on cars or steel or biotech or whatever is that it is the economic engine until it stops being so. Very few places have ever managed to transition from one dominant industry to another. The other option is avoid having any kind of dominant industry, but you risk having an economy like Cincinnati's, which tends to focus on stability and trends toward stagnancy. Big dominant industries tend to create a lot of wealth on the way up, but don't allow much space for sustainable decline. You have to be willing to say no to some growth if you want to prevent monocultures from developing.
April 2, 200916 yr ^ yea, what Dmerkow said. There seems to be 2 models of local economics: Boom-bust vs staid. There probably are a few cities that might be large enough and diversified enough to get some positive effects from the booms, while well buffered on the down-size, but not many. Maybe Chicago, Atlanta, and DC. Those cities are regional/national capitals, though, so they tend to have a strong political/economic safety net when the downside comes.
April 2, 200916 yr ^ yea, what Dmerkow said. There seems to be 2 models of local economics: Boom-bust vs staid. There probably are a few cities that might be large enough and diversified enough to get some positive effects from the booms, while well buffered on the down-size, but not many. Maybe Chicago, Atlanta, and DC. Those cities are regional/national capitals, though, so they tend to have a strong political/economic safety net when the downside comes. I would never say Atlanta. San Fran, Chicago & Houston, yes. DC, somewhat. ATL, San Diego, MIA, charlotte NO!
April 2, 200916 yr ^Also would argue against Houston being stable. An extremely large portion of their industry is oil-related. If alternative fuels ever happen.... Then Houston will be hurting (Imagine Detroit with a strong latino influence)
April 2, 200916 yr ^Also would argue against Houston being stable. An extremely large portion of their industry is oil-related. If alternative fuels ever happen.... Then Houston will be hurting (Imagine Detroit with a strong latino influence) I would. Houston, has the 2nd largest number or HQ in the states. They have worked hard at diversifying.
April 2, 200916 yr I'll be honest, I'm not sure what diversified means in the current environment. Traditionally as a city with a more service based economy was seen as more stable, but I'm not sure a lot of that service wasn't being done on debt and we know how that ended. D.C. should be the most stable economy of the country because of the fed gov't is probably the most boom-bust town of the major metros on the East Coast.
April 3, 200916 yr ^ Only 23% of DC's economy is based on government these days. Including lobbyists and contractors and thinktanks?
April 3, 200916 yr ^ Only 23% of DC's economy is based on government these days. What stats are you using?
April 3, 200916 yr Ok, then I'll add SanFran and Dallas to my list of large, diversified cities that attract growth but buffer on the downside. But again, these are regional capitals. They attract the young, vibrant from the region, and therefore tend to have more of a creative business class ready to rise. We can argue the city list, but basically, the US economy is constantly cannabalizing itself to grow. Growth comes from the dealth of other economic sectors. Yes, the overall size of the economy is also growing, but that may be due more to overall population growth. Now, for industries to rise from the ashes of others, you need a creative (business) class ready to launch new products. And you need a creative financial sector ready to embrace new ideas and fund them. And you need a creative political class that is not going to put up roadblocks to protect the economically entrenched class. The socio-economic-political leaders of mid-sized cities tend to be quite protectionists when it comes to their bread-and-butter industries. They claim they want new, high-paying industries but the unspoken part of their claim is all to often "as long as the current local leaders get to bring it in". I've seen this thinking all to often. Cities build around a handfull of major industries or companies are going to put all their energies into protecting those industries, and give very little to nuturing new industries. I think we've talked about this on other threads, when I used Syracuse, NY as a good example. But it seems to me that the large, regional capitals are diversified enough that there is no one industry strong enough to command all the energy of leaders, that no one industry large enough to protect at all cost, enough creative people in the various industries to accept new ideas, enough young, diversified, and renewable people to come up with the new ideas, etc, etc. In other words, the protectionism isn't that strong.
April 24, 200916 yr Batavia Twp. eyes options for Ford plant By Barrett J. Brunsman, Cincinnati Enquirer, April 21, 2009 BATAVIA TWP. – The prospect of finding a buyer for the Ford Motor Co. plant that was once the largest employer in Clermont County will be discussed Wednesday during a tour of the closed facility by county officials, township trustees and members of the local school board. It’s “basically to take a look at opportunities to maybe redevelop and reoccupy that facility,” said Steve Wharton, executive director of the Economic Development Corp. of Clermont County. “This is information sharing and partnership building so we can all be on the same page to try to attract some jobs.” The plant, which encompasses 1.8 million square feet, once employed about 1,700 people to manufacture transmissions. It opened in 1980 and closed last June... http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage
April 24, 200916 yr They should make an offer to Tata and try and get the first American Assembly Plant for the new Nanos.
May 7, 200916 yr GM loses another $6 billion Troubled automaker burns through $10.2 billion in the first quarter, leaving it with barely enough cash to operate. By Chris Isidore, CNNMoney, May 7, 2009 NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- General Motors' financial woes continue as the automaker teetering on the edge of bankruptcy reported a $6 billion loss during the first three months of the year Thursday. GM (GM, Fortune 500) burned through $10.2 billion in cash in the quarter, leaving it with only $11.6 billion in cash on hand at the end of the period. The company says it needs between $11 billion and $14 billion on hand to continue normal operations. As recently as a Feb. 17 filing to the government, GM was projecting that it would burn through only $4.1 billion in cash in the period. Excluding special items, GM reported a loss of $5.9 billion, or $9.66 a share in the first quarter, compared to a 62 cents per share loss a year ago. The company has now lost $88 billion since 2005.
May 7, 200916 yr 88 billion since 2005??? Do you know what we could do with 88 Billion? We could look to correcting so many problems. We could look at the source of the problem(s) and putting procedures in place to make sure things work right going forward.
Create an account or sign in to comment