Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (270175)	1/27/2006 4:17:21 AM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1577893

GM missed the boat. I'd say their management is plain old stupid. End of story. They need to get a Six Sigma Black Belt in there to teach them how to do things like Voice of the Customer to figure out what consumers really want. It should be fairly obvious by now, but GM executives appear to be particularly dense. If Bush or any other President every decides to bail out an American car company for due to the stupidity of those companies' executives, then I will automatically vote against that President in the very next election. American car makers should be reaching out to Toyota to be figuring out how we can emulate their success. Maybe license some of their patents or something.

To: tejek who wrote (270175)	1/27/2006 5:52:55 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1577893

RE: "GM's health liabilities may well be worse than Toyota's" May be worse? [ Cough ] Okay, this means you're uninformed about Toyota. Your post also implies you believe Ford has a $98B liability in benefits. You really can't ignore $98B benefit liability issues when you discuss a business. To do so, would be to ignore the business you are attempting to discuss. RE: "And its not just me that feels this way" Reread my post - did you miss the "Yes, I concur with you" on many points? Don't confuse your inability to factually include $98B benefit liability, an extremely huge issue that you continuously ignore. By ignoring the $98B you essentially void your entire post because it financially is illogical to neglect $98B benefit liability when making an analysis on a business. How many research projects would $98B fund? Ted, money does't grow on trees, but when you ignore $98B, you imply money grows on tree. Again, what is Toyota's health care liabilities? If you become informed on this, and state it in your post along with mentionign the $98B liability and state the total RND funds both firms spend, this would provide a factually complete post. Without that information, your post is opinion without facts, thus, I keep harping on you for that one small (yet large) detail, so you can make your point in a factual way. By repeatedly asking you for this important information, it is not a challenge on your opinion (for some reason you think it is), but definitely a challenge in how you present your opinion. I don't think you can hold properly an opinion without the facts. What if you find out that Japan govt is subsidizing all of Toyota's health care and has a socialist retirement structure, that puts GM $98B behind in the hole, while one company spends $5B in RND and the other gets to spend $10B in RND. Just making this up, but I'd be more interested in your opinion if you present all the facts. By repeatedly asking you for this important information, it is not a challenge on your opinion, but definitely a challenge in how you present your opinion. If you pull out how much Toyota spends in health care (or doesn't) and if you compare this to GM's $98B liability and if you also bring forward how much both companies spend on RND, that would be an interesting discussion. Regards, Amy J