Toyota vs. GM
So, I drive a Toyota Prius. I am extremely happy with it as a car, but it was not the car that I truly wanted. I wanted a Chevy Prius. No such car existed. Not even stretching my imagination as far as it could go. I just could not get an American car that even remotely fit the bill. So I settled and ended up with perhaps the highest quality vehicle I've ever owned.
I really want the US-owned auto manufacturing industry to be the best in the world, but for a couple of decades it just seems that their management does not want that. It's complicated, but it really appears that all parties involved that could take the big steps towards improvements are very content to continue with business as usual. Rome is burning and Nero is fiddling.
What Toyota knows that GM doesn't
At American auto companies, finance guys and marketers rise to the top - not at Honda
Added 11/19: What is an American Car
Added 11/19: Interesting blog post on reducing GM brands
I really want the US-owned auto manufacturing industry to be the best in the world, but for a couple of decades it just seems that their management does not want that. It's complicated, but it really appears that all parties involved that could take the big steps towards improvements are very content to continue with business as usual. Rome is burning and Nero is fiddling.
What Toyota knows that GM doesn't
At American auto companies, finance guys and marketers rise to the top - not at Honda
Added 11/19: What is an American Car
Added 11/19: Interesting blog post on reducing GM brands
posted by zblog at
9:44 PM
4 Comments:
I really have a hard time understanding you guys at times... Is the market free or not?
First: why is a Toyota NOT an american car?
OK, the Prius is currently NOT manufactured in the USA... It will be in 2010. But most of the "american" cars are actually manufactured in Mexico and South America and barely assembled here... Same with Volkswagen (supposedly German engineering; mostly manufactured in Brazil).
It is not as if Toyota, Honda, Volks, etc are not generating jobs here by selling more and more - and the more they sell the more jobs - like any other "american" company.
I understand that this is not your point. That you wanted to discuss the fact that the US Auto Manufacturers don't get what the consumers want and expect. That is true. There is a lack of vision.
But this idea that an "american car" is better for the US than a "foreign car" is ludicrous! As a consumer it shouldn't matter where the goods you purchase are produced - more, if you keep buying toyotas, the demand will force Toyota to manufacture locally (like is happening with the prius), hire more service technicians, sales people, etc.
Things are just going to get more and more globalized. It is silly to keep trying to paint flags in every product and claim "it is american made!" as if that was doing anything for consumers or employees...
What would you say if the other countries decided that they should only buy "local" cars? Renault and Citroën are big in France (and pretty much only there... hehehe), yes, but I think the american manufacturer and the german manufacturers do quite well there too. Would you call the country protectionist? I would.
By
C.E. Lopes, at 10:31 AM
CE,
I know where you're coming from, and I partially agree. What I really want to see on any products, where practical, is a percentage of where profit from that product is going. True, my Prius can legitimately say "made in Japan", and there are many an "American" car that is predominately made in Mexico, Canada or Korea.
As a consumer, I want the information about where the money of my purchase is going. I buy free trade coffee because I want to, and I would like to know what countries' labor is benefiting from my car purchase, and where the corporate profit is going.
With that information, I would slant towards more American products, because I want my neighbors employed. My Prius facilitates sales and maintenance folk domestically, but all things being equal, I'd rather have supported American manufacturing too. For that matter, I always look for Wisconsin potatoes and apples, instead of Idaho and Washington. Just my choice, and I want the information to make that choice.
As far as the US auto manufacturers lacking vision - well, yes. That's the biggest frustration. I want GM's products to be flat-out superior to Honda's and Toyota's, but they're not, and neither is their long-term planning.
That said, I would also much rather buy a Toyota manufactured in the US rather than a Chevy manufactured in Mexico. This is not being anti-Mexico, it's being anti free trade. I'm in favor of fair trade - if labor is treated fairly, no tariffs, otherwise be protectionist. Free trade seeks a race to the bottom, where all countries have equally crappy working conditions and piss-poor wages. Fair trade seeks the rising tide that will lift all boats. If all laborers on the planet could comfortably raise a family on their 40 (or so) hour work week with benefits, then I thing the world would be a better place.
Yet another reason I'm a progressive politically and can't stand what now passes for conservative values.
By
zblog, at 9:32 PM
Interesting blog post on reducing GM brands
http://www.occamshaircut.com/2008/11/post.html
Now let's do the math
GM shares outstanding: 610.5M
GM price on 11/19/08: $2.63
Value of GM: $1.6B
Ford shares outstanding: 2.39B
Ford price on 11/19/08: $1.30
Value of Ford: $3.1B
Total value of GM and Ford: $4.7 billion
How on God's green earth could it possibly make sense to give these two companies $25 billion, over 5 times their total value? If the government wants to bail them out, buy them for $4.7B, then invest money and management to turn them around.
That way, when (if) they return to profitability, the US taxpayers can MAKE money on saving the US auto industry. With the proposed bailout, the US taxpayers are guaranteed to lose their money with the hopes that the same old failed plan can now work.
By
zblog, at 4:38 PM
"This is not being anti-Mexico, it's being anti free trade. I'm in favor of fair trade - if labor is treated fairly, no tariffs, otherwise be protectionist."
I think you show a severe misunderstanding of what free trade is supposed to be, and an expectation that the values you assume - as an american - should be observed forcefully by other nations doing business with the US.
The idea that just because a commercial partner holds different values in regards to what is acceptable in terms of wages and benefits - given the state of their development, their cost of living, etc - they are being unfair is... well... unfair and a little naive. Labor is cheaper in these countries, yes, but, eventually, through free trade (real free trade) their standards will rise and approach yours. But not by imposing sanctions - that will condemn them to be where they are for a long time.
Protectionism is never a good tool. It doesn't work for you - because goods will be more expensive and you are cutting competition that could actually IMPROVE the products; and it doesn't work for the partner on the other side, because they don't progress as independent entities.
Free trade, real free trade, is about choices on both sides. Yes, there should be rules, but not impositions. It is - or it should be - a partnership.
And I agree with you that we (I pay taxes too) should not be giving money to auto-makers that consistently show no vision and are unrepentant.
By
C.E. Lopes, at 7:49 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home