General Motors Viability Report: US Government

[Adam]

Interesting news on the GM loan and company viability:

 

EMBARGOED UNTIL MIDNIGHT ET

Determination of Viability Summary March 30, 2009

General Motors Corporation

1

GM February 17 Plan

Viability Determination

Summary

 

The Loan and Security Agreement of December 31, 2008 between the General Motors Corporation and the United States Department of the Treasury (“LSA”) laid out conditions that needed to be met by March 31, including the approval of Labor Modifications, VEBA Modifications, and the commencement of a Bond Exchange (all as defined in the LSA). As of the date of this memo, the above steps have not been completed, nor are they expected to be completed by March 31.

 

As a result, General Motors has not satisfied the terms of its loan agreement. Additionally, after substantial effort and review, the President’s Designee¹ has concluded that the GM plan, in its current form, is not viable and will need to be restructured substantially while GM operates under an amendment to the existing LSA. It is strongly believed, however, that such a substantial restructuring will lead to a viable GM.

 

This determination of viability was based on a thorough review, as conducted by the Task Force and its outside

advisors and as summarized below, of the Company’s submitted plan and prospects. While there were many

individual considerations, no single factor was critical to the assessment. Rather, the ultimate determination of

viability was based upon a total consideration of all relevant factors, taken as a whole.

 

General Motors is in the early stages of an operational turnaround in which the Company has made material progress in a number of areas, including purchasing, product design, manufacturing, brand rationalization and its dealer network.

 

Despite these steps, a great deal more progress needs to be made, and GM’s plan contemplates initiatives that will take

many years to complete. In the end, GM’s plan is based on a number of assumptions that will be very challenging to meet without a more dramatic restructuring in which many of its planned changes are accelerated. A few highlights:

 

• Market Share: GM has been losing market share to its competitors for decades, yet its plan assumes only a very

moderate decline, despite reducing fleet sales and shuttering brands that represent 1.8% of its current market share.

 

• Price: The plan assumes improvement in net price realization despite a severely distressed market, lingering consumer quality perceptions, and an increase in smaller vehicles (where the Company has previously struggled to maintain pricing power).

 

• Brands/Dealers: The Company is currently burdened with underperforming brands, nameplates and an excess of dealers. The plan does not act aggressively enough to curb these problems.

 

• Product mix: GM earns a large share of its profits from high-margin trucks and SUVs, which are vulnerable to a

continuing shift in consumer preference to smaller vehicles. Additionally, while the Chevy Volt holds promise, it will likely be too expensive to be commercially successful in the short-term.

 

• Legacy liabilities: In GM’s plan, its cash needs associated with legacy liabilities grow to unsustainable levels, reaching approximately $6 billion per year in 2013 and 2014. Moreover, even under the Company’s optimistic assumptions, the Company continues to experience negative free cash flow (before financing but after legacy obligations) through the projection period, failing a fundamental test of viability. In short, while the Company has made meaningful progress in its turnaround plan over the last few years, the progress has

been far too slow, allowing the Company to continue to lag the best-in-class competitors. As a result, the President’s Designee has found that General Motors’ plan is not viable as it is currently structured. However, because of GM's scale, franchise and progress to date, we believe that there could be a viable business within GM if the Company and its stakeholders engage in a substantially more aggressive restructuring plan.

 

EMBARGOED UNTIL MIDNIGHT ET

Determination of Viability Summary March 30, 2009

General Motors Corporation

2

Detailed Determination

The Loan and Security Agreement of December 31, 2008 between the General Motors Corporation and the United States Department of the Treasury (“LSA”) laid out various conditions that needed to be met by March 31, including:

(a) Approval of the Labor Modifications (Compensation Reductions, the Severance Rationalization and the Work Rule

Modifications) by the members of the Unions;

( Receipt of all necessary approvals of the VEBA Modifications other than regulatory and judicial approvals; provided, that the Borrower must have filed and be diligently prosecuting applications for any necessary regulatory and judicial

approvals; and

 

© The commencement of an exchange offer to implement a Bond Exchange.

As of the date of this memo, none of the above steps has been completed. As a result, General Motors has not satisfied the terms of its loan agreement.

The LSA also requires that the President’s Designee review the Restructuring Plan Report in order to determine whether General Motors has taken all necessary steps to achieve and sustain the long-term viability, international competitiveness and energy efficiency of the Company and its subsidiaries Since receiving the Company’s plan on February 17th, the Government has engaged in substantial efforts to assess its viability. This work has involved staff from the Department of the Treasury, National Economic Council, Council of Economic Advisors as well as the numerous other Cabinet agencies involved in the President’s Task Force on the Auto Industry. The working group has also worked extensively with several dozen individuals at industry-leading consulting, financial advisory and law firms. Numerous outside experts and affected stakeholders have been consulted. As a result of

this work, the President’s Designee has concluded that the General Motors plan, in its current form, is not viable and will need to be restructured substantially in order to lead to a viable General Motors. It is strongly believed, however, that such a substantial restructuring will lead to a viable General Motors.

 

While the President’s Designee considered many factors when assessing viability, the most fundamental benchmark was the following: for a business to be viable, it must be able – after accounting for spending on research and development and capital expenditures necessary to maintain and enhance the company’s competitive position -- to generate positive

cashflow and earn an adequate return on capital over the course of a normal business cycle.

 

Progress to date:

General Motors is in the early stages of an operational turnaround in which GM has made material progress in a number of areas: Purchasing: GM has organized its purchasing globally, with its purchasing organization taking advantage of GM’s global scale, and has put into place a rigorous, metric-oriented approach to drive supplier quality and cost improvements.

 

o Product design: GM has refined its product design process to create global vehicle platforms, thus

allowing GM to reduce engineering costs and improve the content of its cars. These global platforms leverage the scale of the business and allow GM to amortize product development costs over a large range

 

EMBARGOED UNTIL MIDNIGHT ET

Determination of Viability Summary March 30, 2009

General Motors Corporation 3 of models. GM has also, since 2005, focused on customer needs, interior designs, styling and quality to provide more attractive products. Examples of successes of this initiative include the 2008 North American Car of the Year Chevy Malibu and the 2008 Motor Trend Car of the Year Cadillac CTS

(though they constitute a modest share of GM’s portfolio today).

 

Manufacturing: GM has worked to create greater flexibility within its facilities, allowing for increased

capacity utilization and an enhanced ability to spread its significant fixed costs across a broader car base.

o Brand rationalization: The recently announced decisions to divest or shut down Saab, Saturn and Hummer, while late, were important steps in reducing the Company’s brand portfolio and allowing it to focus its

financial and human resources on a smaller number of higher quality brands.

 

o Dealer network: GM has been eliminating dealers from markets where it is oversaturated, as well as eliminating dealers who are either unprofitable or create a poor customer experience. However, it is important to recognize that a great deal more progress needs to be made, and that GM’s plan is based on fairly optimistic assumptions that will be challenging in the absence of a more aggressive restructuring.

 

• The plan contemplates that each of its restructuring initiatives will continue well into the future, in some cases

until 2014, before they are complete.

o The slow pace at which this turnaround is progressing undermines the Company’s ability to compete

against large, highly capable and well-funded competitors. GM’s plan forecasts it to catch up to (and, in

some cases, surpass) its competitors’ current performance metrics; however, its key competitors are

constantly working to improve as well, potentially leaving GM further behind over time. • Given the slow pace of the turnaround, the assumptions in GM’s business plan are too optimistic.

 

o Market Share

? GM has been losing market share slowly to its competitors for decades. In 1980, GM’s US

market share was 45%; in 1990, GM’s US share was 36%, in 2000, its share was 29%. In 2008,

its share was 22%. In short, GM has been losing 0.7% per year for the last 30 years.

 

• Yet, in its forecast, GM assumes a much slower rate of decline, 0.3% per year until 2014, even though it is reducing fleet sales and shuttering brands which represent a loss of 1.8% market share, of which only a fraction will be retained. Management’s plan to achieve

this is driven by a reduction in nameplates and an ensuing increase in marketing spend per nameplate.

 

• Furthermore, in the current plan, GM has retained too many unprofitable nameplates that tarnish its brands, distract the focus of its management team, demand increasingly scarce marketing dollars and are a lingering drag on consumer perception, market share and margin.

 

o Price

? In 2006 and 2007, GM North America achieved a 30.4% contribution margin. Then, the plan

assumes, despite a severely distressed market, that margins increase to 30.8% in 2009 and 30.7%

in 2010. These figures remain at 30.9% in 2013 and 30.3% in 2014, despite GM’s plan to increase its focus on passenger cars and crossovers, which have traditionally earned lower margins.

 

? Fundamentally, the lingering consumer perception is that GM makes lower-quality cars (despite meaningful improvements in the last few years), which in turn leads to greater discounting, which harms GM’s price realizations and depresses profitability. These lower price points are an important impediment to enhanced GM profitability and need to be reversed over time in order

for GM to bring its margins into line with its best-in-class peers.

 

EMBARGOED UNTIL MIDNIGHT ET

Determination of Viability Summary March 30, 2009

General Motors Corporation

4

o Brands/dealers

? GM has been successfully pruning unprofitable or underperforming dealers for several years.

However, its current pace will leave it with too many such dealers for a long period of time while requiring significant closure costs that its competitors will not incur. These underperforming dealers create a drag on the overall brand equity of GM and hurt the prospects of the many stronger dealers who could help GM drive incremental sales.

 

o Europe

? GM’s European operations have experienced negative results for at least the last decade with a

sharp decline in market share from 12.9% to 9.3% between 1995 and 2008, leaving the Company

with high fixed costs and low capacity utilization.

? The European business is seeking additional capital beyond the funds requested from the Treasury. These funds have not been allocated and thus represent a risk to the viability of GM’s current plan.

 

o Product mix and CAFE compliance

? GM earns a disproportionate share of its profits from high-margin trucks and SUVs and is thus vulnerable to energy cost-driven shifts in consumer demand. For example, of its top 20 profit contributors in 2008, only nine were cars.

 

? GM is at least one generation behind Toyota on advanced, “green” powertrain development. In an

attempt to leapfrog Toyota, GM has devoted significant resources to the Chevy Volt. While the

Volt holds promise, it is currently projected to be much more expensive than its gasoline-fueled

peers and will likely need substantial reductions in manufacturing cost in order to become

commercially viable

? Absent the successful introduction of a number of new-generation nameplates, as described in the

Company’s plan, GM’s product portfolio is more vulnerable to CAFE standard increases than the

portfolios of many of its competitors (although GM is in compliance today with current standards). Many of its products fail to meet the minimum threshold on fuel economy and rank in the bottom quartile of fuel economy achievement.

 

o Legacy liabilities – cash costs

? As GM moves through its forecast period, its cash needs associated with legacy liabilities grow,

reaching approximately $6 billion per year in 2013 and 2014. To meet this cash outflow, GM needs to sell 900,000 additional cars per year, creating a difficult burden that leaves it fighting to maximize volume rather than return on investment.

• Even under the Company’s optimistic assumptions, the Company remains breakeven, at best, on a free cash flow

basis throughout the projection period, thus failing the fundamental test of viability.

 

o Under its own plan, GM generates $14.5bn of negative free cash flow over its 6 year forecast period.

Even in 2014, on its own assumptions, GM generates negative free cash flow after servicing legacy

obligations.

 

o Given the highly challenging current market, the Company is already behind plan in its overall volume

expectations and market share for calendar year 2009.

o Since the Company has built a plan with little margin for error, even slight swings in its assumptions

produce significant and ongoing negative cash flows. For example, a 1% share miss in overall global sales,

all else being equal, in 2014 would lead to a $2 billion cash flow reduction in that year.

 

In short, while the Company has made meaningful progress in its turnaround plan over the last few years, the progress has been far too slow, allowing the Company to continue to lag the best-in-class competitors. Furthermore, even if the projected plan is achieved, the cash flow forecast is quite modest, leaving the Company little margin for error in what will

EMBARGOED UNTIL MIDNIGHT ET

 

Determination of Viability Summary March 30, 2009

General Motors Corporation

5

be a very difficult turnaround. As a result, the President’s Designee has found that General Motors’ plan is not viable as it

is currently structured. However, given the improvements that have been made to date, and the path on which these improvements place GM, we believe that there could be a viable business within GM if the Company and its stakeholders engage in a substantially more aggressive restructuring plan.

Edited April 3, 2009 by Adam

[Marylander]

Chisel it down to Chevy/Buick/Cadillac, break the legacy costs (as painful as that will be to the unions) and ditch the LOUSY dealers (there are plenty of good ones that try to take care of the customer) and GM could be a whole new lean company that makes a great range of cars:

 

From bottom to top:

 

Chevy Cruze (upcoming)

Malibu

Camaro

Impala

Orlando/Traverse

Silverado/Suburban/Avalanche

Corvette

 

Buick LaCrosse

Lucerne

Enclave

 

Cadillac CTS

STS

Escalade

and a premium, world-class uber-sedan like the Cadillac 16 concept from a few years back. The standard of the world.

 

Then maybe -- if viable -- revive the Pontiac brand as a boutique line with the Solstice, G8 and maybe a smaller Audi A4/ BMW 3-series competitive sedan.

 

Do all those cars and trucks right and you could happily be a GM customer at every stage of your life.

 

Rich

Edited April 4, 2009 by MarylandTDI

[6spdg37s]

i cant even discuss this anymore its the main topic in all of my business classes. there was an interesting article on bloomberg though about how the govt doesnt want to pay the convertable bonds which need to be paid out as of june 1st..ill see if i can find the article and edit the link in

 

edit: okay theres tons of articles on it i only skimmed thru it but im pretty sure this was the one i was reading talking about the convt bonds...if its not i apoligize but im busy at work and theres like 8k things goin on at once

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aM1kmqWO5nck

Edited April 3, 2009 by 6spdg37s

[livingwater]

I'm concerned about the warrenty on my 2009 vette

[11chevz71]

Chisel it down to Chevy/Buick/Cadillac, break the legacy costs (as painful as that will be to the unions) and ditch the LOUSY dealers (there are plenty of good ones that try to take care of the customer) and GM could be a whole new lean company that makes a great range of cars:

 

From bottom to top:

 

Chevy Cruze (upcoming)

Malibu

Camaro

Orlando/Traverse

Silverado/Suburban/Avalanche

Corvette

 

Buick LaCrosse

Lucerne

Enclave

 

Cadillac CTS

STS

Escalade

and a premium, world-class uber-sedan like the Cadillac 16 concept from a few years back. The standard of the world.

 

Then maybe -- if viable -- revive the Pontiac brand as a boutique line with the Solstice, G8 and maybe a smaller Audi A4/ BMW 3-series competitive sedan.

 

Do all those cars and trucks right and you could happily be a GM customer at every stage of your life.

 

Rich

 

 

Add i Impala under chevy too

[Rich]

Add i Impala under chevy too

 

I agreee. They need to have a family sedan in there.

[Marylander]

Add i Impala under chevy too

 

Oh yea -- def. a needed vehicle. And a good one -- I rented one about two years ago and drove it from Seattle to Glacier National Park in Montana. Even though it was a base rental model, I was really impressed with the comfort and ride. A very solid car and well-executed. I imagine the uplevel trim lines and the SS models are even that much better.

 

Rich

[jjwvette]

GM will never be the same...they raped us with the truck prices and now small cars prices...:willy:to try and make up there loss,:mad:it's no wonder people buy Kia's and the other garbage out there

[6spdg37s]

70k for an escalade..but now they discounted them deeply as well as 0% financing...they kept inflating them because people kept buying them. But im a car guy so while it might have been overpriced if i had the money in hand i might have bought one.

[IMADreamer]

I think the proposed car line up here in this thread is interesting, but what do they have to keep the young, single, adults like me loyal to their brand? It sure isn't their customer service which is total garbage. Getting warranty work is like pulling teeth and even getting TSBs fixed has been a problem. Then there is trying to get parts. Don't even get me started there.

 

As for cars, am I suppose to buy a new Camaro? I like my cars small and light so that's out. How about a solstice? While they are nice at the end of the day it's a turbo 4 banger with a very blah interior. I think I'm forced to go elsewhere really with my next car purchase.

 

I realize buyers like me are a very small group and GM isn't going to worry about us too much. However I think GM has worked hard on turning away people like me who would be loyal customers and I see no evidence that GM is really changing.

 

I hate to see them go over purely from the standpoint of I hate to see good people lose jobs but as far as GM itself possibly going under, good riddens.

[11chevz71]

I think the proposed car line up here in this thread is interesting, but what do they have to keep the young, single, adults like me loyal to their brand? It sure isn't their customer service which is total garbage. Getting warranty work is like pulling teeth and even getting TSBs fixed has been a problem. Then there is trying to get parts. Don't even get me started there.

 

As for cars, am I suppose to buy a new Camaro? I like my cars small and light so that's out. How about a solstice? While they are nice at the end of the day it's a turbo 4 banger with a very blah interior. I think I'm forced to go elsewhere really with my next car purchase.

 

I realize buyers like me are a very small group and GM isn't going to worry about us too much. However I think GM has worked hard on turning away people like me who would be loyal customers and I see no evidence that GM is really changing.

 

I hate to see them go over purely from the standpoint of I hate to see good people lose jobs but as far as GM itself possibly going under, good riddens.

 

 

First of all you are probably 3% of the population. you want a car that is not practicul. and did you think of a colbalt that they smallest by far. and would mathch up to others lines of being the small to. alot of people want a car to be practucul they want room and haf descent gas milage. one thing i can say is i dislike cars but that is just my opion. i know one thing i can fit into to many i am 6' 4" 288 pounds. and for warrenties i have seen horer stories from kia and there warrenty. at least with gm you have a fighting chance. and which company warrenties are not hard to get when you need warrenty work.

[Loud Pedal]

I think the proposed car line up here in this thread is interesting, but what do they have to keep the young, single, adults like me loyal to their brand? It sure isn't their customer service which is total garbage. Getting warranty work is like pulling teeth and even getting TSBs fixed has been a problem. Then there is trying to get parts. Don't even get me started there.

 

As for cars, am I suppose to buy a new Camaro? I like my cars small and light so that's out. How about a solstice? While they are nice at the end of the day it's a turbo 4 banger with a very blah interior. I think I'm forced to go elsewhere really with my next car purchase.

 

I realize buyers like me are a very small group and GM isn't going to worry about us too much. However I think GM has worked hard on turning away people like me who would be loyal customers and I see no evidence that GM is really changing.

 

I hate to see them go over purely from the standpoint of I hate to see good people lose jobs but as far as GM itself possibly going under, good riddens.

 

Have you thought about a Smart Car?

 

That turbo 4 banger you talk about destroys everything in it's class.

 

As far as warranty work, I don't know where you take your cars but with my many past GM vehicles I never had a problem as long as it was covered under warrant.

 

Not to sound bad but your comment about not caring about GM going under is what is wrong with this country IMO. Nothing personal.

 

GM has also won numerous awards in the last few years that noboby likes to mention.

[IMADreamer]

First of all you are probably 3% of the population. you want a car that is not practicul. and did you think of a colbalt that they smallest by far. and would mathch up to others lines of being the small to. alot of people want a car to be practucul they want room and haf descent gas milage. one thing i can say is i dislike cars but that is just my opion. i know one thing i can fit into to many i am 6' 4" 288 pounds. and for warrenties i have seen horer stories from kia and there warrenty. at least with gm you have a fighting chance. and which company warrenties are not hard to get when you need warrenty work.

 

I know I'm a small percent and I get that. I don't expect them to make a vehicle just for me I'm just pointing out they don't. If I were looking for a family car I'd be in heaven with the G8, new Malibu, etc. They got that market down.

 

Honestly I don't feel like I have a fighting chance with GM and my warranty. There was a TSB on my warped rotars that happened after 500 miles and I fought them for a month to get it fixed. Another problem with a leaky trunk that I had to talk to the corporate office to get fixed under warranty. If these were things I've done myself I wouldn't cry about them being screwed up but they weren't.

 

BTW I drive a Cobalt and love it. It's my favorite car I've ever owned and before it I had a Camaro SS. I'm not exactly a GM hater here I have a history with them.

 

Have you thought about a Smart Car?

 

That turbo 4 banger you talk about destroys everything in it's class.

 

As far as warranty work, I don't know where you take your cars but with my many past GM vehicles I never had a problem as long as it was covered under warrant.

 

Not to sound bad but your comment about not caring about GM going under is what is wrong with this country IMO. Nothing personal.

 

GM has also won numerous awards in the last few years that noboby likes to mention.

 

 

The solstice is a solid car, but it's just not what I want. I'm sorry but I've driven it and the sky both and it had a lot of punch and torque everywhere but it just doesn't do it for me.

 

How is what I said what is wrong with this country?

 

We coddle everything too much in this country.

 

If a kid acts out in school we say he has ADD and don't punish him because has a disease.

 

If a guy gets drunk and hits someone and kills them he's out of jail a year later and we send him to conseling and blame it on his troubled past.

 

If a huge multinational corperation makes three decades worth of bad choices we send them billions and beg them not to go under.

 

 

THAT is what is wrong with this country. We need to learn from generations past and say to the kid acting out in school, the drunk driver, and the huge corperation "well you screwed up, and you have to live with the consequences."

[Loud Pedal]

I know I'm a small percent and I get that. I don't expect them to make a vehicle just for me I'm just pointing out they don't. If I were looking for a family car I'd be in heaven with the G8, new Malibu, etc. They got that market down.

 

Honestly I don't feel like I have a fighting chance with GM and my warranty. There was a TSB on my warped rotars that happened after 500 miles and I fought them for a month to get it fixed. Another problem with a leaky trunk that I had to talk to the corporate office to get fixed under warranty. If these were things I've done myself I wouldn't cry about them being screwed up but they weren't.

 

BTW I drive a Cobalt and love it. It's my favorite car I've ever owned and before it I had a Camaro SS. I'm not exactly a GM hater here I have a history with them.

 

 

 

 

The solstice is a solid car, but it's just not what I want. I'm sorry but I've driven it and the sky both and it had a lot of punch and torque everywhere but it just doesn't do it for me.

 

How is what I said what is wrong with this country?

 

We coddle everything too much in this country.

 

If a kid acts out in school we say he has ADD and don't punish him because has a disease.

 

If a guy gets drunk and hits someone and kills them he's out of jail a year later and we send him to conseling and blame it on his troubled past.

 

If a huge multinational corperation makes three decades worth of bad choices we send them billions and beg them not to go under.

 

 

THAT is what is wrong with this country. We need to learn from generations past and say to the kid acting out in school, the drunk driver, and the huge corperation "well you screwed up, and you have to live with the consequences."

 

 

I agree with most of what you said, GM certainly didn't run it's business the best but they were the biggest auto manufacturer in the world until recently which means they must have been doing something right. I agree, I don't approve of any of this giving businesses money to stay afloat. I wanted GM to file bankruptcy before they took one cent and get the friggin' union crap straightened out and come back lean and mean. And to just let you know this is a legit conversation, not hating on you at all. But your comment about good riddens to GM didn't sound very good to a loyal GM fan!

[Rich]

No matter what the reasons, the problem exists, and if this country....or any country.....fails to support a middle class of people, then Socialism ensues. We've lost the steel industry, the mining industry, and now perhaps the auto industry. Three of the main support structures of the middle class. A lot of people fail to see just how many people are affected when a huge support system disappears. It won't just be the auto workers. It's the thousands of people who work at jobs to support auto manufacturing. Nobody cared when big steel left. Nobody cared when the mines shut down. But now we are realizing what a mistake that was. We are in big trouble in this country. We need to fix it..........NOW! Because we may not get another chance!

[IMADreamer]

I think what we have to do is create new industry and not prop up the old though. I was extremely disappointed in the stimulus bill. I was hoping it would be something like 95% new energy development. Put a windmill on ever block, solar panels on ever house etc. ok I'm exaggerating a little bit, but the point is we have to create the next big industry or we will die as a country. We can't look to the past at what made this country great we have to look to the future to see how we can keep this country great.

[Marylander]

I think the proposed car line up here in this thread is interesting, but what do they have to keep the young, single, adults like me loyal to their brand? It sure isn't their customer service which is total garbage. Getting warranty work is like pulling teeth and even getting TSBs fixed has been a problem. Then there is trying to get parts. Don't even get me started there.

 

As for cars, am I suppose to buy a new Camaro? I like my cars small and light so that's out. How about a solstice? While they are nice at the end of the day it's a turbo 4 banger with a very blah interior. I think I'm forced to go elsewhere really with my next car purchase.

 

I realize buyers like me are a very small group and GM isn't going to worry about us too much. However I think GM has worked hard on turning away people like me who would be loyal customers and I see no evidence that GM is really changing.

 

I hate to see them go over purely from the standpoint of I hate to see good people lose jobs but as far as GM itself possibly going under, good riddens.

 

Warranty issues and customer service are things that need to improve in the new/leaner/profitable GM -- no question.

 

As for that small, light car you're looking for, it's largely gone from the market -- at least at a reasonable price. The govt. has certain safety requirements that the cars need to meet, and the mass market demands stuff like power windows, stereos with lots of speakers and amps, noise insulation, etc., so even small cars start to pack on the pounds. So gone are the days of the original CRX, for example.

[IMADreamer]

Warranty issues and customer service are things that need to improve in the new/leaner/profitable GM -- no question.

 

As for that small, light car you're looking for, it's largely gone from the market -- at least at a reasonable price. The govt. has certain safety requirements that the cars need to meet, and the mass market demands stuff like power windows, stereos with lots of speakers and amps, noise insulation, etc., so even small cars start to pack on the pounds. So gone are the days of the original CRX, for example.

 

Yeah you are right, but at this point I would settle for something around 3k lbs, RWD, gobs of power. I don't think I'm asking for too much.

 

I'm just very disappointed in the new Camaro which is a pig, the new Challenger which is a pig, and heck even that new Hyundai coupe is a total pig.

 

Weight is fine if you give me loads of luxury. Say like an SL Benz. It's a pig. Those cars are way out of my price range though and I don't think I'd buy one anyway.

 

I do think if a company could make a nice RWD, relatively light (3k lbs or less) give it some go and a reasonable price tab they would sell the crap out of them. I mean back in the day of the original mustang, and corvette wasn't that kind of the appeal of them? Before they got all carried away with 440ci engines? It seems like we've lost our way a bit in that regaurd.

Edited April 7, 2009 by Rich

[Baron_Von_Awesome]

I do think if a company could make a nice RWD, relatively light (3k lbs or less) give it some go and a reasonable price tab they would sell the crap out of them.

 

[11chevz71]

 

 

No it is not pratical

[Baron_Von_Awesome]

No it is not pratical

 

Why not? You can load it in the back of your pickup and take it for a ride

[IMADreamer]

No it is not pratical

 

Who said anything about practical?

 

 

I like Miatas alot, but my knee hits the steering wheel when I clutch. lol Well it did on the old ones, not sure about the new style.

[Baron_Von_Awesome]

Who said anything about practical?

 

 

I like Miatas alot, but my knee hits the steering wheel when I clutch. lol Well it did on the old ones, not sure about the new style.

 

They're gotten a bit better with leg/head room in the last couple of years. One hell of a better ride than the previous generation, too!

[IMADreamer]

They're gotten a bit better with leg/head room in the last couple of years. One hell of a better ride than the previous generation, too!

 

That's good to know. I'll have to get a drive in one of those sometime.