GM has been in a downward spiral for a long time, it's just accelerating now.
Exactly! GM in NO WAY could possibly keep 50% market share in this highly populated market. Sure, they did make junk in the 80's but they would of still lost market share if they didn't make shady products in the 80's. At that time, America was becoming an import hungry nation for electronics, vehicles, clothing, etc. With companies like Coke for example, making New Coke in the 80's SHOULD of destroyed Coke's market share, but what choice did people have besides Coke & Pepsi. With GM, the people had many choices.I'm missing something...who are Microsoft's 30 competitors ? I'm seeing Apple and maybe Red Hat. Who are Intel's competitors ? AMD ? Coke - Pepsi ?
I'm not seeing that any of the above companies have had to compete with well funded competition from foreign companies that are supported behind the scenes by their governments.
He’s b****ing as always, I didn’t even have to read what he said to know that!I'm not sure I follow what you're getting at above. But, all things being equal, I would have expected GM market share to decline over the last 20 years - numerous new players have entered the US auto market in the last two decades. The pie is only so big. I think it would be unreasonable to expect GM to hold on to 50% of the market now that we've gone from three players (GM, Ford and Chrysler) to like 30.
As far as the rest of your statement, I'm not sure I'm following you...
While GM's managment are by no means exempt from responsiblity you might want to mention Toyota enjoys the advantage of using non-union labor, still builds products in Japan where the government subsidies them and manipulates the yen to make them more profitable. Our government does nothing to protect our industries. It has hardly been an even playing field.Psst, windvale, don't tell that to Microsoft, Intel, Coca-Cola, and Wal-Mart. Despite new competitors, they seem to do well holding onto their market share... and even growing in some cases. To be clear, GM did not lose market share because it was building strong product and newer companies came in and magically took share. They lost share because they were building garbage. If they were pleasing their consumers, consumers would not have had a reason to flee the company. Saying that GM share fell because the market was getting crowded is a cop-out; they built crap, and their share fell. They're building better product now, and their retail share is holding. See how that works?
Toyota is actually one of the older competitors in the US market now; it's been around for 50 years in the US. Despite new entries like Hyundai and Kia (and GM's own Saturn!) coming in after Toyota did and offering products in the same exact market as Toyota fields its products, Toyota really hasn't retreated. It may have had a few bad months recently, but if you follow the growth curve for Toyota over the past several decades, both before and after Hyundai's and Kia's entries into the US market, you will nicely see that these two companies had very little effect on Toyota sales. Funny, Saturn hasn't really grown over the past decade or so, either.
i completely agree with that however what has been hurting gm the most is the union, and the amount of pension that is given to the retired employees, gm has been lossing alot of money because of that actually.Come on. If people are not buying pick-up trucks, GM is not going to build them. If GM is not building them, it is going to lay off employees. Period. There is nothing workers, union leadership or management can do about it.
If gasoline cost $2.00 a gallon, there would be demand for trucks, and GM would be hiring people, and we all would be waxing about how the UAW and GM leadership were the greatest.
Funny... the unions were not hurting GM in the 1950s. Then again, GM was not competing against Japanese cars made from Chinese steel, and the unions were not competing against Mexican labor. But I am sure that is all a coincidence. Just cut the wages of American workers, and everything will be fine.i completely agree with that however what has been hurting gm the most is the union, and the amount of pension that is given to the retired employees, gm has been lossing alot of money because of that actually.
and the band plays on...I think the surprise stems from the fact that GM accepted $500 million from the governments of Ontario and Canada three years ago, and in the last 4 months GM has announced more than 2000 layoffs in the province.$500 million pays about 1800 workers for three years, coincidence? The government money runs out, and so do the jobs.
What that really means is "....was not successful in finding another job that paid $31/hr CAD with top-line benefits for doing unskilled labor with no education..."He was laid off for two years beginning in 2000 and has participated in retraining but was not successful finding another job outside of GM.
Speaking of them, 25 years ago the Accord owned its market segment... so the Accord must suck because now it doesn't.You want to talk about a good Japanese company at least talk about Honda.
I always find it strange, too, when people assume that once they've had a good paying job, that there's an invisible floor that follows them up to that pay grade.What that really means is "....was not successful in finding another job that paid $31/hr CAD with top-line benefits for doing unskilled labor with no education..."