If one of the Big 3 Automakers had to fail, who would you pick?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ford is doing away with most of their cars and banking on the higher margin trucks. They are selling strong now and a good product but if gas goes up then cars are a necessary mix. Some trucks are getting 25+ mpg now though.


Chrysler makes the only decent minivan of the 3. Honda and Toyota are good as well. Really no other minivan worth looking at.


Jeeps are pretty iconic but novelty. Fun for off road but really suck on road. They don't ride well, noisy, reliability issues and hard on fuel.


If one goes under there and many suppliers linked to each of them. Will cause huge job losses.
 
There is no big 3. Chrysler already got sold to FIAT for pennies on the dollar after all of the bond holder got rooked. It is a foreign company.
 
Ford would be my pick. Everytime I see a new 2019 $35,000 F-150 on the road with halogen headlights and a full incandescent bulb complement, I shake my head and say WHY??!?!? It's 2019!!

Even base model U-haul rental GMC/Chevy trucks have LED headlights and halo. New Dodge 2019 trucks, it's standard equipment.

Drive a halogen headlight-equipped car versus HID (LED or Xenon) and you can't tell me there's not a safety improvement.

It's clear to me that Ford is going for profit margin above all else. They want you to step into the Lariat or purchase additional options to get what IMO should be a standard feature.
 
If you're asking which of these companies is most likely to fail in the near term, I'd say Ford.
FCA at least has a deep back bench of Euro models that it can easily bring here should the need for smaller, cheaper and more fuel efficient vehicles arise.
GM has about nothing in Europe these days but does have a deep back bench of models in Asia, especially China.
Ford is a minor player in Europe these days and a non player in Asia.
Ford avoided a cleansing bath in a reorganization under the federal bankruptcy code for one reason only, and that had nothing to do with either virtue or astute management.
None of these three seem as well managed as VAG, DB, BMW, Honda, Toyota, Hyundai, Nissan or even Subaru, but all three do offer some very good products.
The question is how relevant the three will remain as they focus on trucks and CUVs and eschew the passenger car market.
This strategy may well bring the end of all three firms in the next deep recession, but that may be quite a ways off, by which time everything in the auto market will have changed.
We'll see a recession in the next year or two, but I think it'll be a minor one.
More of a cold than a case of influenza and Ford, GM and FCA can easily survive a cold.
 
Ford is soon quitting the car business except for the Mustang and just selling trucks from now on. They are paying a 6-1/2% dividend on their stock now. At current $9.25 a share the stock has been beaten down enough to be attractive. I like their stock a lot more than I like their vehicles.
 
If any one of the big three is going to last forever,it will be Ford. Just take a look around,F-150's and Mustangs are everywhere. I bet they're the world's most popular vehicles.
 
First, to set the record straight, there hasn't been "the big 3" since Mercedes bought up Chrysler in 1998. As pointed out by others above, it's been a very long time since even Ford or even GM have been the big dogs in the auto business.

Second, I don't want to see anyone loose their jobs because of the failures of a bunch of overpaid men that will never feel the pain.

That said, many car companies have failed, and the world has marched right on. Many more brand names have disappeared when plants have continued to make cars only because their brand was bought by someone else.

My vindictive side says that GM should have been allowed to fail rather than bailing them out in 2008. The Federal government (you and me, and all of us) ended up writing off $11.2 billion of the GM bailout. Meanwhile, GM continues to roll in profit. And to set the record straight, that was the second time we taxpayers bailed out GM. At least they paid us back in full the first time.

However, I'll admit that Mary Barra seems to care about GM being the sort of company that it should be. More than anyone else that was at the helm in the last 30 years. Either she cares more, or she works harder, or she's just smarter. Not sure. But she's making a difference. I know a lot of our fellow men don't like to hear that. I suppose they think it makes their balls smaller, or something like that, to think that a woman is turning around a car company. At least GM is working hard to be competitive the the electric and hybrid business. That's something that Ford and Chrysler seem to be totally clueless about.

As far as contributing to cars that make a difference, Chrysler could go out of business tomorrow, and the only part that anyone would care about putting on life support would be Jeep and Ram. Maybe Dodge to try to save the Challenger and Charger. But I doubt it.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by aquariuscsm
If any one of the big three is going to last forever,it will be Ford. Just take a look around,F-150's and Mustangs are everywhere. I bet they're the world's most popular vehicles.



You are partly right. The F-150 is the best selling car in the world. But the Mustang doesn't even make the top 50. Sorry, but it's just a North American thing. Fortunately for Ford, they do have a few other good selling world cars, like the Escape and the Focus, but Ford's only entry into the global top 10 is the F-150. But of course that's a big one.
 
Originally Posted by 02SE
Originally Posted by Convert
GM Again. No bail out

TOMB


All of them have taken taxpayer money. Ford was for the TARP bailout before they were against it, and they still took 5.9 billion in taxpayer dollars. Call it a bailout or not, the taxpayers ponied up just the same.

All of them have good vehicles and problematic ones.

Saying that one of the "big three' has an entire lineup of bad vehicles, means that person has limited experience, or simply doesn't know what they are talking about.



Once again you have a very selective memory. Ford took a government backed loan. Ford paid it in full and early. Once again you have displayed the inability to understand the most basic of concepts.
 
Originally Posted by dave1251
Originally Posted by 02SE
Originally Posted by Convert
GM Again. No bail out

TOMB


All of them have taken taxpayer money. Ford was for the TARP bailout before they were against it, and they still took 5.9 billion in taxpayer dollars. Call it a bailout or not, the taxpayers ponied up just the same.

All of them have good vehicles and problematic ones.

Saying that one of the "big three' has an entire lineup of bad vehicles, means that person has limited experience, or simply doesn't know what they are talking about.



Once again you have a very selective memory. Ford took a government backed loan. Ford paid it in full and early. Once again you have displayed the inability to understand the most basic of concepts.



Dave, I don't understand how you think 02SE was in err. You both said Ford took money from the government. You added that it was technically a loan, and that Ford repaid in full. Nothing 02SE said contradicts that.

What is your point?
 
Originally Posted by BHopkins
Originally Posted by dave1251
Originally Posted by 02SE
Originally Posted by Convert
GM Again. No bail out

TOMB


All of them have taken taxpayer money. Ford was for the TARP bailout before they were against it, and they still took 5.9 billion in taxpayer dollars. Call it a bailout or not, the taxpayers ponied up just the same.

All of them have good vehicles and problematic ones.

Saying that one of the "big three' has an entire lineup of bad vehicles, means that person has limited experience, or simply doesn't know what they are talking about.



Once again you have a very selective memory. Ford took a government backed loan. Ford paid it in full and early. Once again you have displayed the inability to understand the most basic of concepts.



Dave, I don't understand how you think 02SE was in err. You both said Ford took money from the government. You added that it was technically a loan, and that Ford repaid in full. Nothing 02SE said contradicts that.

What is your point?



Wow. You don't understand the difference between a bailout and a loan? A loan is when a person, business, ect borrows money and repays. Like Ford did. The government bought GM out and lost 9 billion dollars when it sold its ownership in the company.

What is your point? You needed a history lesson?
 
Originally Posted by dave1251



Wow. You don't understand the difference between a bailout and a loan? A loan is when a person, business, ect borrows money and repays. Like Ford did. The government bought GM out and lost 9 billion dollars when it sold its ownership in the company.

What is your point? You needed a history lesson?


Do YOU need a history lesson?

They were ALL considered loans...

Auto Industry Bailout
 
In short, Chrysler (FCA).
I do not agree 100% with the government bailouts either. I see the perspective of job loss and American industry loosing grip. However, from a free market perspective a business will fail when it is not capable of maintaining itself appropriately. The big 3 failed at that. Tesla also receives money from the government currently despite being a growing successful company. Just remember that more automotive companies have failed and closed than remained successful and strong. On a side note, my grandparents will not buy any GM or FCA products because they accepted the bailouts. However, they only will drive sedans. They have accepted that their next vehicle will be a Toyota. (I didn't influence that either).
 
Originally Posted by 02SE
Originally Posted by dave1251



Wow. You don't understand the difference between a bailout and a loan? A loan is when a person, business, ect borrows money and repays. Like Ford did. The government bought GM out and lost 9 billion dollars when it sold its ownership in the company.

What is your point? You needed a history lesson?


Do YOU need a history lesson?

They were ALL considered loans...

Auto Industry Bailout




The other two went bankrupt, Ford didn't and Ford managed to secure its money outside the bailout. Ergo, the government lost 11.3 billion on GM as per your source there and 1.3 billion on Chrysler and of course the table doesn't show Ford, because it wasn't part of the program.
 
Originally Posted by OVERKILL
Originally Posted by 02SE
Originally Posted by dave1251



Wow. You don't understand the difference between a bailout and a loan? A loan is when a person, business, ect borrows money and repays. Like Ford did. The government bought GM out and lost 9 billion dollars when it sold its ownership in the company.

What is your point? You needed a history lesson?


Do YOU need a history lesson?

They were ALL considered loans...

Auto Industry Bailout




The other two went bankrupt, Ford didn't and Ford managed to secure its money outside the bailout. Ergo, the government lost 11.3 billion on GM as per your source there and 1.3 billion on Chrysler and of course the table doesn't show Ford, because it wasn't part of the program.


Do you not understand that they all took taxpayer money, and were considered loans, regardless of which program they did it under? The Obama administration forgave and the taxpayers lost 10+ billion on GM's debt, Ford hasn't paid all of their loan back yet, it remains to be seen whether they will, and the taxpayers did lose 1.3 billion on the loan to FCA.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Boomer
Toyota Credit Gets a Black Eye
Replies
11
Views
903
Rand
JTK
Interesting failed 2018 Nissan 5.6L video
2 3
Replies
40
Views
2K
Elkins45
wemay
VW to integrate ChatGpt into vehicles by mid year.
3 4 5
Replies
83
Views
2K
JohnnyG
R
Pick one car if you had to made it last the rest of your life.
6 7 8
Replies
146
Views
5K
350Rocket
A
Long drive to pick up parts as cheap as possible.
Replies
15
Views
870
atikovi
Back
Top