Autoblog http://www.autoblog.com Autoblog http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog.com/media/feedlogo.gif Autoblog http://www.autoblog.com en-us Copyright 2009 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/<![CDATA[Lutz: One of Big 3 will die, but not us]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2007/03/08/lutz-one-of-big-3-will-die-but-not-us/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/03/08/lutz-one-of-big-3-will-die-but-not-us/http://www.autoblog.com/2007/03/08/lutz-one-of-big-3-will-die-but-not-us/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

While deftly avoiding the General Motors buyout of Chrysler issue, GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz did say that he can see one of Detroit's Big 3 dying off in the not-too-distant future. Citing increased market pressures and too much capacity, he said in Geneva that present trends lead to only one conclusion, that one of the domestic automakers will be squeezed out. It won't be GM, however. "Right now, we're in the best position," he said. "We're approaching the end of the beginning of the transformation of GM."

We agree that GM is closest to being on the right track, so it remains to be seen whether Ford can survive its own turnaround, or if Chrysler will weather the current storms and right the ship before somebody comes in and dismantles it.

Lutz went on to detail the legacy costs that are behind most of the pessimism about the domestic industry. It's stuff we've heard before like pensions and health care for employees (and retirees) that are a $2,000-per-vehicle "burden" on the manufacturers. The biggest question on everybody's mind, however, wasn't directly addressed. Rather than talking about a GM/Chrysler deal, Lutz discussed the breakdown in the Renault-Nissan talks. "Generically, synergies are easier to get in the same geography than across geographies," he said. "That was the problem with Renault-Nissan. What sane auto company would sign up for that?" What company indeed?

[Source: Detroit News]

Lutz: One of Big 3 will die, but not us originally appeared on Autoblog on Thu, 08 Mar 2007 13:56:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>Bob LutzBobLutzbuyoutGM ChryslerGmChryslerlegacy costsLegacyCostsThu, 08 Mar 2007 13:56:00 EST<![CDATA[Should the Big Two become the Big One?]]>http://www.autoblog.com/2006/07/18/should-the-big-two-become-the-big-one/http://www.autoblog.com/2006/07/18/should-the-big-two-become-the-big-one/http://www.autoblog.com/2006/07/18/should-the-big-two-become-the-big-one/#commentsFiled under: , ,


The Big One -- that's an interesting thought. The Wall Street Journal has subscribed to the idea that two wrongs make a right, urging General Motors and Ford Motor Company to go in on it together to hopefully come out stronger in the end. The two would enjoy a 40 percent market share in North America and be able to better attack legacy costs (no doubt due to a much more powerful position in relation to the United Auto Workers), but the problems may outweigh the benefits -- dealerships will close, union members will strike, F-150-owning Silverado-bashers will suffer from irreconcilable identity crises, hell will freeze over and pigs will fly.

So, what do you all think? Is it time to roll out the Big One, or are the folks at The Wall Street Journal on crack?

[Source: The Wall Street Journal, via WDIV-TV]

Should the Big Two become the Big One? originally appeared on Autoblog on Tue, 18 Jul 2006 09:55:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>fordGmlegacy costsLegacyCostsmergersUAWUnited Auto WorkersUnitedAutoWorkersTue, 18 Jul 2006 09:55:00 EST