"Brian Nystrom" <brian.nystrom@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:dKZgf.12914$8o6.12682@trndny03...
> Paradox wrote:
> > "Brian Nystrom" <brian.nystrom@verizon.net> wrote in message
> > news:lyMgf.4653$8o6.1608@trndny03...
> >
> >>Paradox wrote:
> >>
> >>>you know hyundai just buries the cost into the price of the car
> >>
> >>Yet they still manage to offer lower prices and higher value than the
> >>Chevys you allude to. No wonder GM is laying off 30,000 workers and
> >>bankruptcy is not out of the question. If I was forced to own GM junk,
> >>I'd buy an extended warranty, since it's a good bet that I'd need it.
> >
> >
> > Apples and oranges, I doubt Hyundai employee's have as good benefits,
>
> I guess "benefits" is a relative term. With the UAW, it seems to mean
> "whatever we can force the company to give us TODAY, regardless of the
> what will happen tomorrow."

Exactly, Unions asked for too much to benefit themselves without looking at
the future to see how sustainable it would be, they looked at the company as
an enemy instead of a partner in keeping the workers happy and keeping the
company profitable.

> As for Hyundai workers, it's not like they're working in sweatshops for
> slave wages.

I'm sure they arn't, building cars requires some degree of skill.

> > alot
> > easier to sell cars cheaper if you don't have alot of overhead. Unions
are
> > what have done GM in, forcing more and more benefits without looking at
> > whats happening to the company that is supporting them. There is a rule
> > about biting the hand that feeds you.
>
> Absolutely. Unions like the UAW exist more for their own sake than for
> the workers or the companies. It's about power, not workers or product
> quality and it comes back to bite them in the *** periodically. BTW, I
> don't think you can let GM management off the hook, either. The workers
> didn't make the decisons to continually build crappy products and bet
> the farm on gas guzzling trucks and SUVs. The shortsightedness and
> environment irresponsibility of GM is amazing.

Yeah management has blown it the last 30 years or so, they should have seen
this coming in the 80's when the Japaneses started rolling out good cars.

> >
> > As for quality issues, you get what you pay for.
>
> Hmmm. Hyundai quality ranks right up there with Honda and Toyota, the
> two best, but their prices are substantially lower. The reasons are
> obvious; their costs are lower and they actually care about quality.
>

Yeah Hyundai has definately changed alot from 1995 to present, much like how
honda went from the 70's to the mid 90's to today, BIG change, its a change
that the big 3 in detroit will have to make if they expect to last to the
end of the decade.

> There's a big difference between the general asian attitude of "How can
> we make it better for the price?" and the GM attitude of "How little do
> we have to do to fool people into paying too much for it?" It seems that
> asian companies are geared toward the thinking buyer, whereas GM has
> always bet there will be enough of a "herd mentality" in the marketplace
> to maintain their momentum. They were wrong.
>
> There's a quote from Alfred P. Sloan, Jr., former President of GM that
> really sums it up well. He state emphatically: "General Motors is not in
> the business of making cars. General Motors is in the business of making
> money!" GM has never learned that if you concentrate on the product, the
> profits will naturally follow.
>

Every company is in the business to make money, GM just didn't look to the
long term "how can we make money today and tommorow and into the forseable
future? not counting service work on the old cars that were sold, hmm wait
thats why things break..