Replies

The author of this article has an antiquated perspective of the global automotive cartel.
GM, Ford, Daimler-Chrysler, Toyota and Volkswagen are the transnational giants of this cartel.
Most other automotive companies are merely puppets with incestuously entangled financial ties back to one of these Big Five.
The annual revenues of these transnational corporations exceeds the GDP of many developed nations. As such, their financial influence corruptly distorts and dictates national policies to the detriment of citizens those governments supposedly represent.

The annual revenues of these transnational corporations exceeds the GDP of many developed nations. As such, their financial influence corruptly distorts and dictates national policies to the detriment of citizens those governments supposedly represent.

Willie, this is called serious trouble.

Most frightening are Ford's financial statements, in particular its balance sheet. At December 31, 2002, the company had only $5.6 billion of stockholders' equity, compared with $162 billion of debt. Of course, this includes the financing activities of Ford Credit, so the balance sheet is partly that of a bank. Even so, a decline in stockholders equity from $18.6 billion in 2000 to $5.6 billion in 2002 suggests that all is far from well, and that the company's financial flexibility is extremely limited.

Ford is on the ropes and it looks like in the not too distant future, you will be able to post the Mother of all Layoff threads.

"GM, Ford, Daimler-Chrysler, Toyota and Volkswagen are the transnational giants of this cartel.
Most other automotive companies are merely puppets with incestuously entangled financial ties back to one of these Big Five."

I backed up to this post, after seeing the loooong list. I had hoped to find some summary, which would give proof to the Big Five notion.

In such a tabulation, the remainder "all other" category is typically small.

In this case, beyond the Big Five (as you call them) are some very noteworthy vehicle companies.

I cite Honda and BMW. Both build excellent, well designed, high quality products. Both have seen rising market share.

BMW has been reported to be the most profitable auto company.

The demise of the American auto companies would be attributable to the inferiority of car products. Thus far, trucks have propped up GM and Ford.

GM is such a smart company that it announced cancellation of Camero/Firebird WITHOUT a replacement.

GM cannot design/build the GTO domestically. It goes to Australian Holden sub to find a suitable product.

GM puts forth Design vehicles, one after the other. And doesn't build any.

I give Chrysler credit. They are bringing our a string of new vehicles. I believe Mercedes management will breath a lot of creativity into them.

GM creativity can be best viewed with the Aztek crossover beauty.

Now Ford. So far there is little evidence of sharing designs between Europe/world cars and US Ford cars. In other words, there isn't a combined design effort, since the Lincoln LS/Jaguar S series.

Likewise Volvo. Volvo just released just about the best overall SUV/Crossover vehicle XC 90. If they followed the Honda model, there would be a less costly version, with a Ford brand.

I am pretty impressed with the new line of products, from Nissan. The new 350Z car is a beauty, as are the Infinity GS35 (sedan and coupe).

Americans have shown a preference for European/Japanese automobiles in terms of design features, and a preference for American trucks in terms of design features.

SUVs fall between these categories. Hence the flurry of new crossover design combinations. And the resurgence of the "station wagon" segment (completely being missed by GM, Ford).

In the Crossover/wagon segment GM and Ford are sleeping at the wheel, thus far trying to compete simply with small SUVs.