Toyota, GM, and Ford differences

Page 5 of 12  


Uhh, Hey Mikey, there are actually only 2 domestic automobile manufactures left in the US, Daimler Chrysler is a German company... Doh!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mike Hunter wrote:

Thank is true but their share is shrinking every year.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Doesn't make a damn what they sell, Mike. They are approaching bankruptcy. If they lose money on every car, it is hard to make up the difference on volume.
Financial gurus, banks, etc all predict that bankruptcy is the most likely outcome for GM and Ford, and perhaps is their salvation.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lots of 'ifs' your post. The naysayers had Chrysler going out of business in the seventies and Ford in the eighties but they are both still here. LOL
mike hunt

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mike Hunter wrote:

The only reason Chrysler is still around is because the Germans bought them. If Hyundai buys out GM sometime in the next 10 years (not that I expect it to happen, but simply as a thought experiment) will you consider that to mean that GM is "still here"?
As businesses GM and Ford are both in trouble right now.
Do you remember when Sears was the 800 lb. Gorilla of US retailing? It was not very long ago, and today Sears continues to wander in the wilderness of great businesses. Sears long time nemesis Montgomery Ward is completely gone ... even oil company money couldn't save 'em.
John
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You do realize Kmart bought Sears, right?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Or did Sears buy K-Mart? Or did a 3rd party buy both?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
SgtSilicon wrote:

Nope, K-Mart bought Sears. Sort of surreal isn't it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
SgtSilicon wrote:

Well, a third party bought K-Mart out of bankrupcy and then bought Sears. Then he renamed the whole thing Sears, just to keep it confusing.
John
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
If you cant be happy where you are, its a cinch you wont be happy where you aint.
| > Mike Hunter wrote: | >> Lots of 'ifs' your post. The naysayers had Chrysler going out of business | >> in the seventies and Ford in the eighties but they are both still here. | >> LOL | >> | > | > The only reason Chrysler is still around is because the Germans bought | > them. If Hyundai buys out GM sometime in the next 10 years (not that I | > expect it to happen, but simply as a thought experiment) will you consider | > that to mean that GM is "still here"? | > | > As businesses GM and Ford are both in trouble right now. | > | > Do you remember when Sears was the 800 lb. Gorilla of US retailing? It | > was not very long ago, and today Sears continues to wander in the | > wilderness of great businesses. Sears long time nemesis Montgomery Ward | > is completely gone ... even oil company money couldn't save 'em. | > | > | > John | | You do realize Kmart bought Sears, right? | | Actually, I believe that it was classified as *a merger* with KMart pulling Sears out of the doldrums. Whatever, they are a couple now...And, I thought that Chrysler went into the DC merger in great cash flow shape, and the Germans drained the $$$ in a hurry.
--



PcolaPhil


To <Reply> Remove -SPAMNOT-
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
351CJ wrote:

Yes I do, and both combined continue to wander in the business wilderness. What really happened is that a real estate speculator bought K-mart out of bankrupcy and then bought Sears. Then he renamed the combined company Sears.
20 years ago Sears was #1 and K-mart was #2, much like GM and Ford. Now Sears-Kmart is one company and together is still a basket case.
John
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mike Hunter wrote:

Chrysler was saved by a federal loan guarantee and the minivan. Iacocca wanted to build the FWD minivan while at Ford, but the board refused to fund a FWD chassis, something Chrysler already had in development (K-car) by the time Iacocca joined the company. Minivans gave Chrysler a profit of $1500 per vehicle from the beginning, and currently each one nets $5000-7000.
Ford greatly improved in the 1980s mostly because of a very good chairman, Donald Petersen, the decision to copy the Audio 5000 FWD sedan, and by not overly increasing production capacity. Ford was also helped by GM's stumbles.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I spent over thirty years of my life as a automotive design engineer, retiring in 1986 at age 60. Your recollection is a bit foggy. FWD cars cost more for manufactures to build than the larger RWD vehicles they replaced. Chrysler had to sell their new smaller 4 cy FWD cars for at least 20% more than the larger V8 and 6 cy RWD cars they replaced, to earn a profit. The economies of scale of using one chassis to make ten variation of the same basic vehicle chassis was what enabled Chrysler to afford the billons to convert their assembly plants to FWD.
mike hunt

5
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
[top-posting deleted, unread]
Mike, why do you top-post? Top-posting violates usenet netiquette policy, makes it hard to understand your who or what post your post is referring to. And several people have told you that it is very annoying.
Why would you continue to do it? Do you want to annoy people or are you a newbie who doesn't know any better? If you are the latter, you should lurk for awhile, to see how the rest of the posters do it.
cordially, as always,
rm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
When one post at the bottom it requires everyone to scroll all the way to the bottom to read the latest of a zillion posts, at times. By posting at the top one can quickly read the latest post. If not familiar with the thread, can then scroll to the bottom is they choose. I don't stay in a NG long enough to do all that. I read the post that interest me and reply to those where I have something to add to the discussion. Most post that have long lost the intent of the original poster to which I have replied and they are no longer are of interest to me. If you find my method of replying a problem, just skip my posts WBMA. ;)
mike hunt
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sort your postings by date, not by thread.

If you sort your postings by date, there is no "top one." All the postings are the top posting. That's how most of us sort the postings after we have been around awhile.

You should cut away that part of the post that you are not interested in replying to. (it only takes a half a second) Then you just enter your prose underneath the text that you are referring to. This is especially important in larger postings.
Again, I point out to you, that you are either a newbie or you are trying to annoy the long time posters on usenet. It was long ago determined that bottom posting is the policy. You should really adopt it yourself and you will see how much better it is if you give it a chance.
cordially, as always,
rm
cordially, as always,
rm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I'll try
mike hunt
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Realto Margarino wrote:

The troll won't listen. Like most all top posters, he's a lazy, selfish, idiot, and if top posting makes his life easier, he's going to do it, even if it makes it worse for everyone who reads his top-posted idiocy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I top post. I'm not lazy. It is more efficient to the readers. I can easily configure my news reader to start my replies at the top or the bottom so it's no less or more effort in my posting process. The lazy ones are those who keep requiting everything without culling out the uneeded parts. Think what you want.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Do you also drive on what ever side of the road you feel like regardless of normal convention?
Top-posting makes your message incomprehensible to many of your readers. In normal conversation, after all, you don't answer to something that has not yet been said. For your edification, widely observed Usenet etiquette dictates that top posting is absolutely INAPPROPRIATE!
When you quote, you're doing it to provide context. Requiring your readers to scroll down and then back, repeatedly (as they attempt to figure out what the heck you're talking about), is a rather difficult way for you to make the context available. Providing the context up-front will get you better results. There's no way to build a threaded discussion with top-posting. Top-posting severely inhibits others from understanding the conversation, because the context of the conversation is out of order, as in broken. Replying at the top confuses your readers, making any point you're trying to get across very unclear without them scrolling down and back repeatedly, searching to re-integrate context. That extra, wholly unnecessary work leads to reader irritation, or worse, to readers just not bothering with your words at all. Since your object is to get your message across, help your readers follow by placing your words in context, not prior to the context. Doing otherwise, forcing your readers to go to extra work unnecessarily, is often irritating, sometimes interpreted as insulting, or in severe cases taken as attempt by you to show your "power". Any way you cut that, delivering your words in an hard to read manner doesn't help your case. Instead, post in-line to preserve context and respect your readers. http://www.river.com/users/share/etiquette /
Top-posting means replying to a message above the original message. This may be a message in an Internet forum, an e-mail message or a Usenet post. Top-posting is considered improper by many definitions of Internet etiquette since it breaks down the flow of the thread: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_posting
Top-posting vs bottom-posting Some people like to put reply after the quoted text, some like it the other way around, and still some prefer interspersed style. Debates about which posting style is better have lead to many flame wars in the forums. To keep forum discussion friendly, please follow the general preference, which is bottom-posting http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html
Why is Bottom-posting better than Top-posting By A. Smit and H.W. de Haan Below you can find our arguments why bottom-posting is better than top-posting. http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.