wrote:
On Aug 1, 12:16 pm, hk wrote:
wrote:
On Aug 1, 9:20 am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote
in messagenews:SdCdnTQC6JDYkw7VnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@comca st.com...
I am trying to figure out why Harry is relishing the fact that any company
is having a downturn.
It has a negative impact on individuals who have stock in the company,
retirees who depend on dividends for part of their income,
it has a negative impact on the employees and the local and/or national
economy.
I guess Harry just enjoys seeing others hurt.
I sincerely don't think Harry wants anybody hurt.
He's in warm-up mode for November. Happens every four years.
Eisboch
That's why I try to squash it, but it seems with 22 followup posts,
you all want to talk about it here.. Seems you have forgotten what
wafa can do to a group in an election year... geeze..
What, stimulate discussion? What's wrong with that? I'm bored with your
guitars and kiddie motorcycle racing.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Then leave.

You know he *can't*.

Richard Casady wrote:
On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 19:17:45 -0400, hk wrote:

In later years, the Johnson and Evinrude
brand names had some products identical under the cover and some
different. I recall a 5-1/2 hp Johnson, a 7-1/2 hp Evinrude, a 10 hp
Johnson, a 15 and 18 hp Evinrude. I believe both lines had 25 hp
engines. I think from that point on, both lines had the same engines
under different hoods and in different colors.

We had a 51/2 Evinrude. It was a fiftieth anniversary model, whatever
year that was. There were no sizes unique to either brand. The only
discernable difference on any of them was the outer cover. I was there
and went to the boat stores and everything.

Did you get WAFA's "my father" story, too? It's legendary.

"Canuck57" wrote in message
news:RROkk.50596$nD.3370@pd7urf1no...

"Eisboch" wrote in message


Although dismal financial results, the bulk of the "losses" are write
offs and charges to re-tool for the manufacture of more smaller, fuel
efficient cars for the US market.



They have been retooling for 4 decades.

WTF.



Sounds horrible, and I am not making light of the problems, but it's not
as bad as the media (and you) are making it out to be.

Worse, bankrupt GM.

GM is toast.


I'll try again.

Automakers build what the consumer buys.

Eisboch

"Canuck57" wrote in news:IQOkk.50593$nD.27486
@pd7urf1no:

At least if I buy a Tata Nano for $4000 I know I am getting a cheap car.



Dave, do they have Nanos in Canada, yet?

I'm seriously considering flying to Canada to buy a Smart ForTwo DIESEL
they won't sell me in South Carolina. I found out I can import it as it is
on the EPA list of excluded cars way back to 2004 Smart Cars so bringing it
home isn't a problem.

They sure don't lose their value very much. Used 2005 Smart Diesels are
$CN12000 in Toronto.

"Eisboch" wrote in news:
:

Automakers build what the consumer buys.

Eisboch



This consumer is trying to by a DIESEL Smart ForTwo but Smart USA doesn't
want to sell me one....dammit.

I may toss caution to the wind and fly to Canada and buy one, even used.
They're plastic so the salt doesn't eat them up there. The diesel is
important to me as I want one to burn on Vegetable oil like my other
diesels do.

On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 21:57:26 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

I'll try again.

Automakers build what the consumer buys.

Eisboch

That's true up to a point but GM and Ford pigged out at the party.
They knew very well they were making much higher margins on their big
vehicles, and as a result, put way too little funding into R & D for
fuel efficiency. The handwriting has been on the wall for quite
awhile for anyone who cared to look, but GM and Ford had their head in
the sand. Is there any doubt that they could have produced high
quality efficient vehicles, similar to Toyota and Honda, if they had
put an effort into it?

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 21:57:26 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

I'll try again.

Automakers build what the consumer buys.

Eisboch

That's true up to a point but GM and Ford pigged out at the party.
They knew very well they were making much higher margins on their big
vehicles, and as a result, put way too little funding into R & D for
fuel efficiency. The handwriting has been on the wall for quite
awhile for anyone who cared to look, but GM and Ford had their head in
the sand. Is there any doubt that they could have produced high
quality efficient vehicles, similar to Toyota and Honda, if they had
put an effort into it?


And Toyota and Honda have also taken a bad road. Looking at new vehicle for
SWMBO. Liked the Acura MDX. People complaining about mileage. 12-18 mpg.
Look at the new Tundra. Same size as an F150. 14 mpg highway. Toyota
Highlander Hybrid. $49k. Like the look and feel of the Saturn GreenVue.
32 mpg highway, 20+ around town. $25k. My daughter bought a new Sequoia
last year. $48k, and probably gets the same crappy mileage as the same size
Ford Expedition. About 14 around town, and 16 highway. Look at all the ads
for the Japanese cars. Touting the performance.

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

Although dismal financial results, the bulk of the "losses" are write offs
and charges to re-tool for the manufacture of more smaller, fuel efficient
cars for the US market.

Sounds horrible, and I am not making light of the problems, but it's not
as bad as the media (and you) are making it out to be.

Sounds worse actually. Posting a quarterly loss that is more than twice as
much as your market cap well, in my books is serious bankruptcy coming on.
GM's troubles are understated, and in fact it is probably too late for GM as
we know it to come back from this.

My guess is GM will be broken apart. The US side will just go bankrupt
while if GM has any profitable divisions off shore they will be bought
piecemeal by others.

Target price, $0.20 as a speculation buy.

"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote
in message ...
hk wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..

I *love* it. It tells me Wal-Mart is scared.



Wal-Mart is among the most exploitative major employers in the United
States. The so-called "health insurance" it "offers" its employees is a
fraud. It is a major violator of wage-hour laws. It is the major seller
of crap ChiComm products in the USA.




It seems to me that Wal-Mart has a specific goal to remain a low-cost
outlet for limited income families and/or those that like to pinch
pennys when buying basic necessities. In your quote you left out the
part whereby by unionizing, Wal-Mart would need to raise prices and lay
off employees.

Why not let the public chose where they want to shop and work?

Eisboch




Shop wherever the hell you want. Free choice in shopping is fine if the
"public" has the ability to have influence on how its area is developed.
In our part of our rural, conservative county, we have an older Wal-Mart
store (that I've never been in), but we stopped Wal-Mart dead in its
tracks with its plans to built a "super Wal-Mart" in our area. Wal-Mart
spent a ton of money on PR and political bribes to force it way. All it
took to defeat Wal-Mart was a number of petitions signed by enough voters
to let the county pols know they'd be out on their asses if they approved
building the new store.


What Harry is really saying:

Free choice in shopping is fine as long as I can tell people what their
choices are.

The same way unions work.

"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote
in message . ..

I am trying to figure out why Harry is relishing the fact that any company
is having a downturn.

Harry might be like me, a former stock holder of GM. Fortunately I got out
without too much of a loss.

GM is the kind of company you want to see smashed, bankrupt and broken
appart. Between incopentant lethargic managment and dumb union rant the GM
company has been run into the ground ripping off shareholders for too many
years.

No one believes the same promises made by management and unions 20-30 years
ago today do they?

It has a negative impact on individuals who have stock in the company,
retirees who depend on dividends for part of their income,
it has a negative impact on the employees and the local and/or national
economy.

I guess Harry just enjoys seeing others hurt.

I was lucky enough to get out at $30. I feel for those who buy an hold. GM
is a stellar let down and a prime example of what is wrong with corporate
management in North America.