Bridge loan to nowhere..
 

JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 08:43:59 -0500, Boater wrote:

D.Duck wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 07:14:20 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1228...28184421.html?
mod=rss_opinion_main
Bankrupt them, downsize them, get rid of the onerous contracts and
merge
Chrysler with Ford.

No bail out.
Personally, I can't see Chrysler surviving. Ford, yes, and a much
smaller and different GM.
Exactly. Chrysler hired an outside bankruptcy law firm yesterday. They
are preparing for the inevitable.

GM needs to replace Wagoner. He is so out of touch with reality that he
can't be in charge of
reorganizing.

The Ford guy (ex-Boeing) seems to be a little more pro-active and may
be ok. He's only been there for two years
and has already made some serious changes to Ford's overall business
structure.

Eisboch
Sorry, but if we can bail out the useless pushers of paper on wall street
and get absolutely nothing in return, we can help the millions of real
working Americans whose jobs depend on the domestic auto industry. I don't
buy into the concept that bankruptcy reorganization will work for
Chrysler, Ford or GM.

You just want to see what some bankruptcy judge would do to union contracts.



We're in dire straits in this country. Everyone has to sacrifice, and if
that means nulling and voiding contracts, let's also cut the pension and
healthcare benefits of civilian and military retirees. Right?

You thinking Obama's going to run the government out of business?

Arnold's done it to California.

Bridge loan to nowhere..
 

On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 10:16:06 -0500, JohnH
wrote:



jobs bank,,, http://tinyurl.com/cbksn

When I was UAW the layoffs were few and far between.
And didn't last long either.
The crossword puzzle bit reminded me of being in that position.
I was hired to the bench by CGA as a computer analyst - in '88.
Spent at least two months doing crossword puzzles on the bench before
they got me on a contract. They wanted me, and they got their money
back easy.
But those were good times in the business.
When times got bad there was no bench. You were out.

--Vic

Bridge loan to nowhere..
 

BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 07:22:04 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1228...s_opinion_main


Bankrupt them, downsize them, get rid of the onerous contracts and
merge Chrysler with Ford.

No bail out.
Wall street brokerage house and bankers...

Bankrupt them, downsize them, get rid of all management, and then
blow up their buildings.

No golden parachutes.

Oh...and in all publicly traded corporations, no executive earnings
to exceed 10 times the earnings of the average employee.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, blah, blah, blah...

By the way, when is the UAW going to fire it's Executives for getting
them in this mess to begin with?


UAW members elect their leadership.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Maybe they should have hired professional managers.

You mean, like the guys who ruin, er, run, corporate america's banks and
brokerage houses?

Bridge loan to nowhere..
 

Don White wrote:
wrote in message
t...
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 08:38:52 -0500, D.Duck wrote:


You just want to see what some bankruptcy judge would do to union
contracts.
Direct labor costs are only @10% of the cost of building a car. If you
want to cut costs, labor isn't the place to start.


............... and assuming that the assembly line workers are being paid
twice what they are worth (according to some here), that means only 5% of
the overall costs could be saved by attacking union workers and cutting
their renumeration by half.
I wonder what advertising cost the Big Three? It must be expensive hiring
agencys to make up new bull**** every year.

It doesn't matter how many you make or how much it costs you to make
them if nobody knows you have them.

My company is over paying for a lease on a building that faces a major
interstate highway, our name is on top of the building. 250 thousand
people in government, government contracting and private industry see
our building and our sign everyday on their way to work and on their way
home from work. It is great advertising. Besides the people we have
working in the build have to work somewhere.

Bridge loan to nowhere..
 

Eisboch wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message
...
On Dec 6, 7:17 am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
messagenews:s3ukj4dksrfj18mrb6l047d3a90lniqpk0@4ax .com...



On Sat, 6 Dec 2008 07:25:24 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:
"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
messagenews:b2rkj4hrnvj4m6p6prft2vp4s3bv7jvpms@4ax .com...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1228...?mod=rss_opini...
Bankrupt them, downsize them, get rid of the onerous contracts and
merge Chrysler with Ford.
No bail out.
Ford doesn't want them. They are trying to downsize themselves. They've
sold their stakes in Saab, Jaguar, most of Mazda and are thinking of
dumping
Volvo.
That's probably true, but Chrysler does have a few products lines that
would merge very nicely with the overall Ford product line - I'm
thinking Jeep in particular if there was only one. And their design
team could do a lot for upgrading Ford's design group which has been
stuck in neutral for a long time. When was the last time they
upgraded the Crown Vic for example - that design has been around since
1999/2000 I think.
The Crown Vic is no longer available to the public. (as of 2008) Ford
still
makes them for fleet sales only ... police and taxie cabs. The Mercury
version is still available to the public, but not for long.

Ford will end up with about three global car platforms and trucks.

Eisboch

All this started when they quit the Taurus.

Actually, the Taurus is back. I believe it's a replacement for the Ford
"Five Hundred" which never caught on. The new Taurus is based largely on a
colaborative effort by Ford and Volvo and incorporates many Volvo designs.

The marketing idiots at Ford decided that all cars in the Ford line
needed to have their names start with "F" and all SUV's needed to start
with "E". So when they redesigned the Taurus the named it Five-Hundred
when nobody bought it the renamed it back to Taurus. The
Five-Hundred/Taurus could be based on a Volvo platform.

Bridge loan to nowhere..
 

On Dec 6, 10:35*am, Boater wrote:
JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 10:04:57 -0500, Boater wrote:

Vic Smith wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 09:39:04 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
wrote in message
news:2NydnaVa9s9PG6fUnZ2dnUVZ_o7inZ2d@posted. gtinet...
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 08:38:52 -0500, D.Duck wrote:

You just want to see what some bankruptcy judge would do to union
contracts.
Direct labor costs are only @10% of the cost of building a car. *If you
want to cut costs, labor isn't the place to start.
Someone outside and disconnected from management and the labor unions needs
to review and determine that.

What if your fixed labor costs are based on selling 18 million cars a year
but you only sold 10 million last year?

Eisboch

Then you have massive layoffs, of course.,
UAW has sub-pay, or whatever they're calling it now.
When I was UAW at IH the senior guys went first on a layoff.
95% pay for fishing. *I think they got unemployment comp then
the company made up the rest.
Never saw a layoff, but heard what happens when we got close once.
That's one of the things Corker was hammering the union guy about.
I don't think I ever heard a straight answer.
But that's one of the contract provisions that should have to go as a
condition of a taxpayer loan.
The only way to make it work is the UAW gives up a lot.

--Vic

The UAW already has proposed massive givebacks. Congress acknowledged that.

Some liberal folks in Congress acknowledged the UAW's attempts to help?

Hee, hee!!

You're coming up with some good stuff today.

Actually, it was a couple of Republicans.

You're really back to your old style of being a horse's ass, Herring.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yeah, Republicans... which ones? Could they be as republican as
Lieberman or Miller are Democrats? You seem to cherry pick, but of
course intellectual honesty is not really your strong suit...

Bridge loan to nowhere..
 

Boater wrote:
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 07:22:04 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1228...s_opinion_main


Bankrupt them, downsize them, get rid of the onerous contracts and
merge Chrysler with Ford.

No bail out.
Wall street brokerage house and bankers...

Bankrupt them, downsize them, get rid of all management, and then
blow up their buildings.

No golden parachutes.

Oh...and in all publicly traded corporations, no executive earnings
to exceed 10 times the earnings of the average employee.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, blah, blah, blah...

By the way, when is the UAW going to fire it's Executives for getting
them in this mess to begin with?


UAW members elect their leadership.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Maybe they should have hired professional managers.

You mean, like the guys who ruin, er, run, corporate america's banks and
brokerage houses?

No, like the guys who run IBM, Lockheed Martin, ....

Bridge loan to nowhere..
 

On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 10:35:14 -0500, Boater wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 10:04:57 -0500, Boater wrote:

Vic Smith wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 09:39:04 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
wrote in message
t...
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 08:38:52 -0500, D.Duck wrote:


You just want to see what some bankruptcy judge would do to union
contracts.
Direct labor costs are only @10% of the cost of building a car. If you
want to cut costs, labor isn't the place to start.
Someone outside and disconnected from management and the labor unions needs
to review and determine that.

What if your fixed labor costs are based on selling 18 million cars a year
but you only sold 10 million last year?

Eisboch


Then you have massive layoffs, of course.,
UAW has sub-pay, or whatever they're calling it now.
When I was UAW at IH the senior guys went first on a layoff.
95% pay for fishing. I think they got unemployment comp then
the company made up the rest.
Never saw a layoff, but heard what happens when we got close once.
That's one of the things Corker was hammering the union guy about.
I don't think I ever heard a straight answer.
But that's one of the contract provisions that should have to go as a
condition of a taxpayer loan.
The only way to make it work is the UAW gives up a lot.

--Vic



The UAW already has proposed massive givebacks. Congress acknowledged that.

Some liberal folks in Congress acknowledged the UAW's attempts to help?

Hee, hee!!

You're coming up with some good stuff today.


Actually, it was a couple of Republicans.

You're really back to your old style of being a horse's ass, Herring.

More personal insults, Harry?
--
John H.

Bridge loan to nowhere..
 

"Boater" wrote in message
...
Vic Smith wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 09:39:04 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
wrote in message
t...
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 08:38:52 -0500, D.Duck wrote:


You just want to see what some bankruptcy judge would do to union
contracts.
Direct labor costs are only @10% of the cost of building a car. If
you
want to cut costs, labor isn't the place to start.

Someone outside and disconnected from management and the labor unions
needs to review and determine that.

What if your fixed labor costs are based on selling 18 million cars a
year but you only sold 10 million last year?

Eisboch

Then you have massive layoffs, of course.,

UAW has sub-pay, or whatever they're calling it now.
When I was UAW at IH the senior guys went first on a layoff.
95% pay for fishing. I think they got unemployment comp then
the company made up the rest. Never saw a layoff, but heard what happens
when we got close once.
That's one of the things Corker was hammering the union guy about.
I don't think I ever heard a straight answer.
But that's one of the contract provisions that should have to go as a
condition of a taxpayer loan.
The only way to make it work is the UAW gives up a lot.

--Vic




The UAW already has proposed massive givebacks. Congress acknowledged
that.

If you notice, every House or Senate member goes out of their way to
acknowledge and commend the UAW president for the concessions they have
made. And they have. But, the *major* concession was the recent
willingness to eliminate the 95% pay for staying home because there's no
work deal. At first it was to be temporary, then, sensing the wind, it was
changed to "will consider making it permanent". For non-union workers,
that isn't really a concession, it's reality.

Both sides, management and the UAW president are being very careful about
what they say and what they are willing to do to get some money. In the
case of Chrysler, I think he sees the handwriting on the wall. I suspect we
are witnessing the last gasps of breath for that company.


Eisboch

Bridge loan to nowhere..
 

On Sat, 6 Dec 2008 11:42:48 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Boater" wrote in message
...
Vic Smith wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 09:39:04 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
wrote in message

If you notice, every House or Senate member goes out of their way to
acknowledge and commend the UAW president for the concessions they have
made. And they have. But, the *major* concession was the recent
willingness to eliminate the 95% pay for staying home because there's no
work deal. At first it was to be temporary, then, sensing the wind, it was
changed to "will consider making it permanent".

"will consider making it permanent" won't work.
Those opposed to the loan can rightly say that taxpayers are paying
autoworkers to do crossword puzzles at 95% of their wages.
Of course just because I say that's unacceptable doesn't mean
that Nancy and Barney will agree with me.

--Vic