GM Exects a bunch of schmucks

They have sold all their stocks and bailed out on their company.

http://www.marke****ch.com/story/lut...es-sell-shares

I only own a 64 Vette. I wouldn't own a newer GM car if they gave one to
me.

Vito

On May 12, 6:08*am, "Uncle_vito" > wrote:
> They have sold all their stocks and bailed out on their company.
>
> http://www.marke****ch.com/story/lut...executives-sel...
>
> I only own a 64 Vette. *I wouldn't own a newer GM car if they gave one to
> me.
>
> Vito

Maybe the new General will be a heck of alot better than the old
General .

That article left out that these were restricted shares and they only
had between Friday and Tuesday to sell them before they become part of
the new company that will be 90% owned by the government and the UAW.
Looks like they got out when they had a chance.

On Tue, 12 May 2009 04:08:15 -0700, "Uncle_vito"
> wrote:

>They have sold all their stocks and bailed out on their company.
>
>http://www.marke****ch.com/story/lut...es-sell-shares
>
>I only own a 64 Vette. I wouldn't own a newer GM car if they gave one to
>me.
>
>Vito
>

On May 12, 7:08*am, "Uncle_vito" > wrote:
> They have sold all their stocks and bailed out on their company.
>
> http://www.marke****ch.com/story/lut...executives-sel...
>
> I only own a 64 Vette. *I wouldn't own a newer GM car if they gave one to
> me.
>
> Vito

So you got the "bailed out on their company" wrong as GM is gonna
become part of the Govt.
And you got it wrong about GM products, especially new Corvettes that
put yours to shame from a performance standpoint. You know, the new
Corvette can actually go around corners, unlike yours. C6Rs get around
race tracks MUCH faster than NASCAR cup cars.

But don't get me wrong. GM deserves to go tits up. As much as people
like to say he was a "car guy" Lutz was a marketing idiot. He had GM
build cars for non-existent buyers. The entire GM board seems to be in
a sort of distorted universe where they think buyers have forgotten
the last 30 years of GM crap. What GM needs to do is focus on building
extremely good cars and trucks that cost less than $25K - because
that's where young buyers are who'll give GM a chance. Older buyers
have moved on and aren't coming back.

"ACAR" > wrote in message
...
On May 12, 7:08 am, "Uncle_vito" > wrote:
> They have sold all their stocks and bailed out on their company.
>
> http://www.marke****ch.com/story/lut...executives-sel...
>
> I only own a 64 Vette. I wouldn't own a newer GM car if they gave one to
> me.
>
> Vito

So you got the "bailed out on their company" wrong as GM is gonna
become part of the Govt.
And you got it wrong about GM products, especially new Corvettes that
put yours to shame from a performance standpoint. You know, the new
Corvette can actually go around corners, unlike yours. C6Rs get around
race tracks MUCH faster than NASCAR cup cars.

But don't get me wrong. GM deserves to go tits up. As much as people
like to say he was a "car guy" Lutz was a marketing idiot. He had GM
build cars for non-existent buyers. The entire GM board seems to be in
a sort of distorted universe where they think buyers have forgotten
the last 30 years of GM crap. What GM needs to do is focus on building
extremely good cars and trucks that cost less than $25K - because
that's where young buyers are who'll give GM a chance. Older buyers
have moved on and aren't coming back.
______________

I couldn't agree more. I love the 'Vette I have and will own it until I
die. It will never be an NCRS car. Maybe someday I'll buy another
Corvette. I hope so. But GM passenger cars? Nope.

AJM
'93 40th Anniversary coupe, 6 sp (both tops)

P.S. Uncle Vito earned a spot in my ig list long ago. Like some people are
coffee snobs, he's a technology snob. He doesn't understand that
performance for lots of people means bang for the buck.

P.P.S. Ric Seyler - you still with us?

TOO MUCH, TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE
(Nat Kipler / John McIntyre Vallins)
Johnny Mathis & Deniece Williams - 1978


Guess it's over, call it a day
Sorry that it had to end this way
No reason to pretend
We knew it had to end someday
This way

Guess it's over, the cars are gone
What's the use of trying to hang on
Somewhere we lost the key
So little left for you and me
And it's clear to see

Too much, too little, too late to lie again with you
Too much, too little, too late to try again with you
We're in the middle of ending something that we knew
Was over {Oh, it was over}

Too much, too little, too late to ever try again
Too much, too little, too late, let's end at being friends
Too much, too little, too late, we knew it had to end
And it's over (It's over)

Guess it's over, the chips are down (Whoa, babe)
Pity all our bridges tumbled down
Whatever chance we try, let's face it widened eye
It's over {It's over}, it's over {Oh...ho...}

Too much, too little, too late to ever try again
Too much, too little, too late, let's end at being friends
Too much, too little, too late, we knew it had to end
And it's over {And it's over}, it's over {And it's over}

Too much, too little, too late to ever try again
Too much, too little, too late, let's end at being friends
Too much, too little, too late, we knew it had to end




But don't get me wrong. GM deserves to go tits up. As much as people
like to say he was a "car guy" Lutz was a marketing idiot. He had GM
build cars for non-existent buyers. The entire GM board seems to be in
a sort of distorted universe where they think buyers have forgotten
the last 30 years of GM crap. What GM needs to do is focus on building
extremely good cars and trucks that cost less than $25K - because
that's where young buyers are who'll give GM a chance. Older buyers
have moved on and aren't coming back.

I know I've been bad rappin GM here for the better part of last year. So in
response to "what is it you think is wrong with GM ?" I'll answer that for
starters:


1) They don't make a good 4 cyl. engine.
2) They make a second class 6 Cyl. engine.
3) They don't make a CAR that has a low operating cost/low maintenance for
the 1st 100,000 miles.
4) They make almost no 4 valve per cyl. engines.
5) They're engines still use pushrods !!!!


ANSWERS:


1) Honda AND Toyota do:
2) Honda AND Toyota do Let us not forget the 3800 intake disaster a few
years ago. And the 80's 3400 pour the oil in and out simultaneously engine
..
3) Honda and Toyota do and it's cost is lower that any American maker
4) 20 + years ago H Ross Perot wanted to know why the Japanese can make a
4 valve per cyl. engine in 2 years or less and GM couldn't convene the first
committees to talk about it in 2 years.
5) They had overhead cam engines and 4 valve per cyl IE from Lotus when
they picked Lotus's brain when they owned Lotus. ..........How about
Northstar and Aurora? Where are you now? When GM had 4 cyl good engine but
had somebody's name tag on them.Geo and Izuzu and Toyota (nova).

Notice any similarities with TV's? Zenith, RCA and Magnetbox are good
products and will always be in business. As they said in the 1970's

"Speaker of the Truth" > wrote in message
...
>I know I've been bad rappin GM here for the better part of last year. So in
> response to "what is it you think is wrong with GM ?" I'll answer that
> for
> starters:
>
>
> 1) They don't make a good 4 cyl. engine.
> 2) They make a second class 6 Cyl. engine.
> 3) They don't make a CAR that has a low operating cost/low maintenance for
> the 1st 100,000 miles.
> 4) They make almost no 4 valve per cyl. engines.
> 5) They're engines still use pushrods !!!!
>
>
> ANSWERS:

I spent two years in Japan 67-69, and it was obvious then where they going.
When I saw the Honda 750 four cylinder motorcycle at the Tokyo auto show in
late 1968, I was overwhelmed -- it was a real breakthough. A SOHC mc with a
"disc brake." And it was in production the next year at around $1200.00.
Then, there was the Civic and Accord in the mid 70s. GM never took Honda
and Toyota seriously.

>
>
> 1) Honda AND Toyota do:
> 2) Honda AND Toyota do Let us not forget the 3800 intake disaster a few
> years ago. And the 80's 3400 pour the oil in and out simultaneously
> engine
> .
> 3) Honda and Toyota do and it's cost is lower that any American maker
> 4) 20 + years ago H Ross Perot wanted to know why the Japanese can make
> a
> 4 valve per cyl. engine in 2 years or less and GM couldn't convene the
> first
> committees to talk about it in 2 years.
> 5) They had overhead cam engines and 4 valve per cyl IE from Lotus when
> they picked Lotus's brain when they owned Lotus. ..........How about
> Northstar and Aurora? Where are you now? When GM had 4 cyl good engine but
> had somebody's name tag on them.Geo and Izuzu and Toyota (nova).
>
> Notice any similarities with TV's? Zenith, RCA and Magnetbox are good
> products and will always be in business. As they said in the 1970's
>
>

Speaker of the Truth wrote:
> I know I've been bad rappin GM here for the better part of last year. So in
> response to "what is it you think is wrong with GM ?" I'll answer that for
> starters:
>
>
> 1) They don't make a good 4 cyl. engine.

Only your opinion

http://www.pickuptrucks.com/html/news/I4I5.html

> 2) They make a second class 6 Cyl. engine.

Again your opinion
http://www.pickuptrucks.com/html/news/I4I5.html

> 3) They don't make a CAR that has a low operating cost/low maintenance for
> the 1st 100,000 miles.

Humm, how is change the oil and check the air filter is High cost.

> 4) They make almost no 4 valve per cyl. engines.

So, it is better engineering if you don't need as many parts to
accomplish the objective.

> 5) They're engines still use pushrods !!!!
>

And they soundly beat the engines that don't use them!!!!

Sounds like you favor complexity for the sheer reason it is more complex!

I'm refering to cars. They make great big pick me up trucks and SUV's but
when gas goes to $4.50 nobody wants their trucks and SUV's and even more so
don't want their cars because:

1) They don't make a good 4 cyl. engine.
> 2) They make a second class 6 Cyl. engine.
> 3) They don't make a CAR that has a low operating cost/low maintenance for
> the 1st 100,000 miles.
> 4) They make almost no 4 valve per cyl. engines.
> 5) They're engines still use pushrods !!!!
>


"Humm, how is change the oil and check the air filter is high cost."

take survey of 200 Grand Prix owners with over 100,000 miles and take a
survey of 200 Camry or Accord owners with over 100,000 miles. Subtract or
disregard gas, oil and tires and tell me who spends less on the maintence
over 100,000 miles.

As much as I am not a fan of Michael Moore his flick Roger and Me was great.
One of the main ideas you get from it and I'm not sure if Moore indended it
that way is the central arogant message of Detroit. "we invented the car
don't tell us what to do".

A friend of mine retired from Ford 2 years ago after 30 years. He is very
bearish on the automobile industry in America. He said it best. " the
problem with Detroit is that they still give the American public what they
think it needs and Japan gives the general public what they want".