Delphi

Looks like one of the big things these days is for the big guys to bail out on the pension plans they promised and contracted to provide over the years. They haven't bothered to fund the programs adequately over the years. Now, they are trying to shift the pension cost to the taxpayers while screwing the workers with both lower wages and reduced retirement if any at all. The pensions are an area where I think both the unions and the government have failed the workers by not making damn sure the pensions are secure or give the money to the workers with an investment requirement that they control. Maybe it's time to eliminate pensions that are entirely dependant upon the viability and existance of the company.

My $.02 Lugnut

I'm sure they wanted to break up legacy contracts, among other things.

I heard that Delphi was not strapped for cash, but that this was a good point in time for it to go bankrupt. (I'll have to research that a bit and see if I heard, and understood, correctly.)

It is a serious commentary on business in America.

Companies who are not strapped for cash do not go bankrupt or ask for protection from bankruptcy. Delphi are major manufacturers and OEM suppliers in Europe as well as the USA. This is a major problem for most major vehicle and plant manufacturers who rely on Delphi products. I suspect that there is no way that the important parts of Delphi will be allowed to cease production.

Huw

I know what you are saying, but it is quite funny to see "rely" and "Delphi" in the same sentence.

Toyota MDT in MO

manufacturers

'Not strapped for cash' was the comment. Have no idea what it portends. Maybe they have immediate operating capital, but are insolvent for the longer haul. Hope we can get to the bottom of it.

The stocks are in the dumper.

manufacturers

Found this on the net, Huw

"The auto parts maker is not cash-strapped but is filing to take advantage of current, more lenient, bankruptcy rules, which are set to change on October 17, making reorganizations more challenging. It is also filing to pressure its unions to come up with wage concessions."

You can search that text string,if it is of interest to you.

************************************* From Delphi bankruptcy would be among the 15 largest since 1980, according to the BankruptcyData.com Web site, based on total assets of about $16.6 billion at the end of 2004. Delphi had revenue of $28.6 billion in 2004, including $12.7 billion from GM in North America.

Delphi posted net losses of $741 million in the first half of 2005, weighed down by high wage and benefit costs inherited from GM and the automaker's production cuts in sport utility vehicles and other slow-moving models.

Delphi's stock, which has traded above $9 during the last 12 months, fell $1.08 to close at $1.12 on the New York Stock Exchange on Friday amid concerns the company may be unable to reach a deal with GM and its unions to avert a bankruptcy filing.

***********************

It sounds to me that they are very cash strapped , going from their losses and the value of their 'junk status' stock, even prior to Friday. Of course it is the job of the executives of the Company to talk the business up as much as they can but the fact remains that they would run out of cash in a few short months if nothing was done. 'While their cheques are not bouncing yet, they would be very soon', is how I read it.

Huw

Perhaps not 'would be' but certainly could be bouncing. Airlines have lost amounts like that for years in certain periods without always having to file for bankruptcy. You have to make some real money sometime or another. Accountants can prepare books to make the business look either overly optimistic or overly pessimistic and if they are careful, they can stay within the law.

Delphi wants to fire a bunch of people, cancel benefits and lower wages to the ones who stay, it seems to me. And they want to do this before the bankruptcy laws get more stringent. But of course they want to go home at the end of the day with their pockets full of money, having done a wonderful job of streamlining the operation. Those who are retained will do fine, and those who leave will be sopped up by other companies who want fine decisive management types like this.

Even Toyota is using Delphi parts. Are you saying we shouldn't rely on Toyota now becasue they are using Delphi parts?

Ed

So why is it that Visteon (the Ford equivalent of Delphi), instead of declaring bankruptcy, was able to force (coerce, persuade) Ford to take back

17 money losing plants and their UAW workers, and Delphi wasn't able to do the same to GM? Seems to me that GM is getting the better deal. Delphi can go bankrupt, cancel pensions, layoff union workers, and pay the executives big bucks, without saddling GM with the UAW workers. Ford gets stuck holding the bag. Did the UAW get a better deal when Ford spun off Visteon?

Ed

I'm well aware of the Delco (mostly at time of manufacture) parts used by Toyota. They are the parts that by and large have horrific failure rates. Make of that what you will.

Many chose not to believe that Delco(phi) products generally suck. Are you one of them?

Toyota MDT in MO

I don't rely on them because they still use a few Toyota parts :-p

GM spun off Delphi some time back, according to what I read. GM would have no accountability or responsibility whatever, unless agreed to at the time of the spinoff.

And since GM is in deep doo itself, it might conceivably follow Delphi's suit and wipe the slate clean.

I don't know what would happen to the stockholders in such a case. In the worst case, the stocks would become valueless and a new company would be incorporated, I guess. As a better case, the stockholders would take a value hit, but might hope to come out on top as the company restructures.

Ford is in as bad shape as, or more likely worse than, GM. And the problems are more or less the same...unlivable contracts, high costs, and a run of really serious recalls.

Management (or Miss Management, as the case may be) protects itself, is my point. Had Miss Management been better, perhaps the issues that lead to this failure might have been minimized or eliminated early on.

I do not in any way defend unionized labor to the point that it destroys the industry it services. If it sounded that way, I am sorry for the misunderstanding.

"Comboverfish" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

I don't know my experience with Delco products has been limited. I had a Jensen-Healey that came with a European Delco alternator. It failed and parts were impossible to find. I replaced it with a Lucas alternator from a wrecked car (same mounts and pulley sizes). We converted an old farm tractor to 12V using a Delco alternator and it never gave us any problems. We had another farm tractor with a Delco generator (and I mean the old style with a commutator) - again trouble free for 30 years. I currently own a Saturn and haven't had any problems at all for the first 2 years and 38,000 miles. On the other hand I have heard horror stories about certain GM air conditioning compressors (R4?), and in general it seems that older GM alternators have a higher failure rate that others. But then the worst alternators I owned were on Japanese cars. The Toyota I owned ate alternators. You could pretty much guarantee that it would fail in August. My ex would usually have it fail while putting around town on a hundred degree day. Likewise, my SO had her Toyota eat an alternator. All things considered, based solely on personal experience and the experience of those close to me, I'd say most Delco stuff is about average as far as reliability goes. They have good parts and bad parts, just like most other part suppliers. I would hope that the vehicle manufacturer would require testing and quality control procedures sufficient to insure that the parts were of the required quality.

Do you think Toyota allows Delphi to ship them lower quality parts than those they get from other suppliers? If so why? Politics, price, bad decision, delivery date, availability? I know both Visteon and Delphi have been trying hard to sell to the import brands with some success.

Ed

C. E. White wrote: But then the worst alternators I owned were

If these Toyotas were 90's era Corollas, they (mostly) used the small Delco CS alternator. They would fail in ~ 30k miles pretty regularly and would RARELY exceed 100k.

If you were refering to Nippon Denso alternators (every model except Corolla), I can't see why you have experienced so much trouble with them. They are extremely hearty; a unit with 150k+ miles may come in occasionally in need of brushes but you will rarely see a regulator, rectifier set, or rotor/stator/bearing failure. This said, some of the newer ones circa 2000-up I *have* seen generate either a faint bearing noise or some sort of magnetic resonance induced whine on several fully loaded models. Replacement units under warranty fixed this complaint. I think they may be slightly underdesigned for the task these days.

I think it is possible you are were experiencing repeat failure due to poor reman units. Yes, the aftermarket is full of junk remans, filled with crap regulator and rectifier parts. This is no knock on original ND alternators. ND alternators can use a set of brushes every 150k and ND starters can use a set of solenoid contacts every 100k. That's pretty reliable in my book.

I think the Toyota procured Delco(phi) parts quality is the same as the Delco(phi) stuff used by everyone else. Delco(phi) has, however, proved inferior to the standard brands of comparable items that Toyota uses. In one unique case, Toyota bought the existing Delphi power sliding door system for their new 98 Sienna body. This is an feature that Toyota never had before and therefore was no "Toyota benchmark" for comparison. It turned out to be a POS system with failures of every mode and variety. It can't be proven that another manufacturer would have done better, but do you really think anyone could have done worse?

In the case of the 84-87 Nova/Corolla, 88-92 Geo Prizm/Corolla, 93-97 Geo Prizm/Corolla, and 98-02 Chevy Prizm/Corolla, Toyota made the vehicles. GM only changed the name plates and various minor items such as trim, HVAC setup, and radios. I assume that, out of this long period of business transactions, the use of Delco alternators and Harrison radiators (both junk parts) on Corollas began. I also assume it was to save money. The Corolla has seemed like an overpriced economy car since the 1988 bodystyle IMO, and I think they wanted to reduce cost where possible to keep it competitive.

Toyota MDT in MO

Yep, R4s in particular -- you can't keep shaft seals in them.

Naw, the *newer* GM alternators are the short-lived ones.

My problem alternator was on an '80's era Cressida. As long as my ex was working, we had no problems with the alternator. After she became a stay at home, she cooked it every summer. It was the internal regulator that failed. I never bought a remanufactured unit because no one stocked them. Only source was the local Toyota dealer. How maybe they were selling me crap, but I'd hope not (especially considering how much they cost). I blamed the failure on a combination of factors - 1) the alternator was in a horrible location - next to the exhaust manifold with very restricted air flow, 2) high electrical demands in the summer (A/C, lights, radio), 3) the alternator was undersized for electrical load, 4)after my ex quit work, she never drove the car on the highway. She was always putting around in stop and go traffic. The failures were always during the middle of a very hot day. After the third failure I took the alternator to a local rebuilder. He sold me the regulator and some thermal grease (much cheaper than buying a Toyota alternator). He indicated it was a common problem.

Ed

I'm not going to take sides, but the voltage regulator built into the alternator in my '71 Grand Prix failed every week for nine weeks before they got me a decent one. There was nothing else wrong with my car; the parts dealers admitted GM was having a bad time with them.

Probably because it knew it didn't actually exist. The first year for internal regulators in GM Delco alternators was *1972*.

Who's "they"?