Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Discussions27,039
- Orphaned Marques
- ↳ Hudson21,110
- ↳ Street Rods807
- ↳ Off Topic573
- ↳ American Motors148
- ↳ Kaiser - Frazer70
- ↳ Nash70
- ↳ Packard163
- ↳ Studebaker122
- Classic American Cars
- ↳ Ford Motor Company956
- ↳ Chrysler Corporation477
- ↳ GM Corporation1,396
- ↳ Post War Chevrolets75
- ↳ Pontiac Forum119
- General
- ↳ All makes1,959
- ↳ Poll Discussions24
- Swapmeets & Events
- ↳ Events130
- ↳ Swapmeets108
- Hot Rod Corner
- ↳ Ford Rods90
- ↳ Lead Sleds67
- Special Interest Groups
- ↳ The Flathead Forum139
- European marques
- ↳ MG Car Company2
- ↳ Mercedes-Benz2
In this Discussion
- 51hornetA December 2008
- Aaron D. IL December 2008
- bobdriveshudson December 2008
- Dave53-7C December 2008
- half baked December 2008
- Heart Of Texas December 2008
- MikeWA December 2008
- Nevada Hudson December 2008
- Oldcar_Mechanic December 2008
- SamJ December 2008
- SuperDave December 2008
Would Hudson still be here with a Bailout?
-
Food for thought....
Given the current political climate of never-ending taxpayer bailouts or "loans" if you will...
Q If Hudson were in a position to ask for money back then and given the direction the company was going in with the Jet etc ~ does anyone think Hudson might still be around today or were they too far off from what consumers wanted back then?
BTW - when is our Government going to give US taxpayers a business plan for how they plan to continue spending our money? -
Personally I think it was more than one factor that lead Hudson into the hands of a merger. How much political clout the Big 3 had at that point to leverage against independants is a matter of historical debate. There was also a Ford/GM price war in the early '50's. But I've heard then President of Hudson (McAneeny?? or was it Baits ?) Was 'ready for retirement'. And was of the mind that if the independants and Hudson were to survive George Mason's merger was the answer. We know what happened after that.
Also for historical debate was given the public mood at that time would this country or its' congress EVER have tolerated taxpayer money for a bailout? And this was back when the US dolllar was still on a gold standard. They may have not been so easily able to print more money to bail people out with.
Definately you could say Hudson didn't give the public what they wanted in the Jet and spent a lot to tool up to make it. IF they could've been kept afloat through a bailout for a few more years when compact cars did get some demand maybe they could've redesigned the Jet, and got a v8 for their larger lines and made it to .....oh....about 1965ish like Studebaker I'm guessing. AMC would've been a lot stronger if big egos at the head of S&P didn't prevail and George mason's merger happened. As we know AMC made it to the '80's..... they might've become the 3rd "Big 3" and edged out Chrysler if George Mason 's plan hadn't collapsed.
As far as bailouts for the rest of us.... absolutely we should all write our congressmen with our housing bills enclosed and ask to be bailed out too. LOL
To echo their own mantra "LET THE MARKET TAKE CARE OF IT" We haven't seen them do that yet though. If you can't make money making cars or flying planes or anything else and do it profitably.... you don't get to. End of story. Why don't they take the bailout money and instead of giving it to the Big 3 give it to startups like Tesla Motors and Detroit Electric???? -
Short and sweet, Hudson as well as all of the major auto industry members was given post war taxpayer monies to restart auto production. The cost to reestablish auto manufacturing lines was essentially the same for all makes. The distinguishing difference was the sales base from which each brand could predict sales. Hudson's and all other independent makes customer base were much smaller than those of the Big Three. Couple this with the fact Hudson automobiles price point was near that of the mid to High price models of the non independents, the market share was pretty narrow.
Many who are now Hudson owners will have no personal or education memory of the recession’s of 1949-50 or 1953-54. The current economic problems facing the auto industry mirror the condition of the auto industry then. Production of each automobile brand exceeded the market needs. Hudson was just as guilty as the Big Three. Hudson just made fewer cars. The economic press of those years leaves no doubt the manufacturing of automobiles in excess of demand was a large contributor to the economic uncertainty of the country at large. Look thought the literature and you will find many auto workers were furloughed from good paying jobs and were forced to find other avocations.
Yesterday when asked what was the core problem for GM... The CEO answered... we have built excessive numbers of cars the public did not want, and then to get rid of the excess we slashed the price in year end sales. The loss was borne by our shareholders and the American Banking industry.
So, is there a difference? NO, the lunacy of trying to muddle through continues. My guess is Hudson had no chance what so ever, even if the managers were the most fiscally sound in the industry. In 1949-50 or 1953-54, most folks were trying to get more miles out of the ole Betsy they were driving and not too interested in a new car of any brand. Kinda like today! -
I know one thing Ken last figure I heard (2007) I think, there was 205 million cars on the road in America. The industry that year produced 17 milllion more cars. Hudson over it's whole existance only produced just under 4 million cars. Even accounting for attrition through scrapping and accidents. I think they're over-producing themselves out of a job. There's always more cars for sale out there than there are buyers. .......and I'd rather keep fixing the Hudson
-
The biggest problem the carmakers have is that a new car purchase is a luxury, not a necessity. When I am in the market to buy milk, its because I'm outta milk; but when I'm in the market for a new car, its not because I'm outta car- the car I have is almost certainly less than 10 years old, more probably less than 5, and its generally perfectly serviceable- I just want a new car, for whatever reason. Maybe the present car's got an issue or two, but that's usually just a justification to get a new one. When's the last time you ever heard of someone who literally junks the current car, then goes and buys a new one? By the time most cars are junked, they have gone through 3 or 4 owners. When the economic meltdown occurred, and people watched their 401K turn into a 201k overnight, the first thing most did was "hunker down", and decided to keep the old Buick going until better times.
Saw something "telling" while watching the congressional grilling of the Big 3 kahunas- As each congressman was given the floor, he started by linking his district to the auto industry- some guy from Indianna, I think, mentioned the Chrysler plant in his district that made the x, the y and the z models. I thought it was interesting that I HAD NEVER HEARD OF ANY OF THEM! And I'm at least kind of a car guy! These guys have got problems that no bail out is going to solve. -
Mike
U got it... the Big Three is like a Rubik’s cube. Your comment gets you to move 6 places on the way to solving what is a solvable problem. We all know what the problem is and if every industry was run as if it had to make money at all levels... the size of the problem being tackled would be significantly smaller and more than likely would never have happened.
Integrity, Honesty and Accountability are characteristics which MUST be the core of solutions and the future of the US auto industry.
Good comments all... hope some of the younger readers of this forum are thinking about how to be part of the solution. As for me... I am going back to being a one man business, consulting for those who are frozen by indecision... pays well and the answers I give are actionable or ignored.... I still get paid.
Keep the comments coming' -
For those watching the CEO's of the Big Three appearances before Congress, has anyone though about questions they'd ask of Congress?* I for one would like to ask the legislators how they go to and from Washington and who foots the bill.* I'd also ask for a show of hands for those who own a vehicle made by one of the Big Three.* I'd also like to ask who is responsible for mismanaging the finaces of our state's, some of whom are now billions of dollars in the hole.* I'd also like to know why no questions were asked or stipulations made as part of the bail-out of wall street, AIG, Citi, etc.** As I see it, the legislators wagging tounges and fingers at the CEO's of Ford, GM and Chrysler are a clear cut case of the pots calling the kettles black.Like it or not, the taxpayers are going to pay whether the bail-outs occur or our car industry collapses and millions of former employees flood the welfare rolls.*
I say the government should allocate a million dollars to each citizen over the age of 21 with the stipulation that monies can only be drawn upon to fund one-time major purchases (a home, business, or automobile) as well as ongoing tuition or medical expenses.* The remainder would stay in a government trust fund for the individual's future welfare and retirement.* Am I being naive to think this would benefit the economy by spending a few hundred millions to do this as opposed to giving away billions of dollars to businesss to squander.* Come on, who of you wouldn't like to have a million dollar cushion?
-
I like the question asked this week. If we give you money we don't want to see you expanding your plant in Mexico. I found that funny. As most of these big businesses offshore what they can to pad the financial bottom line. Its all done under the heading of free market economy. Meanwhile more people are moving from middle class to poor than middle class to rich. Should be some plan in place that if you have a big business here you invest here.
Consequently its up to us to buy cars made here. I am from Ireland when we got to Canada my Dad would only buy North American cars. He was a mechanic and ran a engine shop. He told me you support the cars where you are. I have only bought big three cars. Never had an import. Never even looked. Its give and take I travel around the world a lot and I drive GM and Ford cars in Europe and South America that are brilliant. Small well designed and gas efficient. I always shake my head and say they should sell this at home we would buy them. When the big three produce good cars we should buy them. End of story. Support your own businesses. And I know the foreign car companies have factories here but at the end of the day the money leaves the country.
And I do agree seems hypocritical to lambast the auto industry and let the banks and insurance companies that mismanaged everything for years get a bailout without submitting detailed plans for what they are going to do with it. And those AIG execs who went to spa's they should have jailed those bastards to smarten them up a bit.www.hudsonmotorcar.org -
Hudson could have survived by claiming chapter 11, and asking for a government loan. The government would have insisted that Barit leave ! One Billion then would go a long way. Enjoy your 2008 Hudson Hornet!
Also look at car complaints.com
Our 2003 Ford Explorer fell apart at 75,000 miles ! We posted on there what problems we had with our exploder ! You can't keep customers by producing crap ! We just bought a Toyota Camry. Ford lost a customer! -
Nevada Hudson wrote:Hudson could have survived by claiming chapter 11, and asking for a government loan. The government would have insisted that Barit leave ! One Billion then would go a long way. Enjoy your 2008 Hudson Hornet!
Also look at car complaints.com
Our 2003 Ford Explorer fell apart at 75,000 miles ! We just bought a Toyota Camry. Ford lost a customer!
I had a top of the line Toyota that had a knocking problem with the electronic front struts from day one. Although the factory VP who was handling my case acknowledged the problem, he stated that their engineering dept. didn't know how to fix it. After three failed attempts at repair, Toyota lost a customer and I've since bought Lincolns and Fords. Of all the vehicles I've own, I've racked up 150k miles on several Ford products and have had them be the most trouble free vehicles I've ever owned. Although I swore I'd never buy foreign again, I bought an Infiniti FX45. Without rambling on about it, let's just say that I'm sticking with American iron from now on. Since every manufacturer has problems, the arguement that one brand is better than another is moot. -
51hornetA wrote:I like the question asked this week. If we give you money we don't want to see you expanding your plant in Mexico. I found that funny. As most of these big businesses offshore what they can to pad the financial bottom line. Its all done under the heading of free market economy. Meanwhile more people are moving from middle class to poor than middle class to rich. Should be some plan in place that if you have a big business here you invest here.
Consequently its up to us to buy cars made here. I am from Ireland when we got to Canada my Dad would only buy North American cars. He was a mechanic and ran a engine shop. He told me you support the cars where you are. I have only bought big three cars. Never had an import. Never even looked. Its give and take I travel around the world a lot and I drive GM and Ford cars in Europe and South America that are brilliant. Small well designed and gas efficient. I always shake my head and say they should sell this at home we would buy them. When the big three produce good cars we should buy them. End of story. Support your own businesses. And I know the foreign car companies have factories here but at the end of the day the money leaves the country.
And I do agree seems hypocritical to lambast the auto industry and let the banks and insurance companies that mismanaged everything for years get a bailout without submitting detailed plans for what they are going to do with it. And those AIG execs who went to spa's they should have jailed those bastards to smarten them up a bit.
While they were asking about foreign investments, they should have asked Chrysler's Robert Nardelli why a company with 19% foreign ownership (Daimler) deserves a USA bail-out. Maybe Nardelli should hop on a company jet and have the pilot aim it at Stuttgart.
Good for you Sean. At least you realize that if we want American/Canadian made and to keep jobs here, we need to support our manufacturers. I can only shake my head when I see people in stores complaining about wasting time to return defective foreign made junk. Then again, there are many lazy shoppers who cannot be bothered to invest the time/money to resource/purchase quality domestic made goods.
It looks like Ford will follow through with plans to bring their European cars to North America and will begin modeling some of their American models after them. Although most large companies are multi-national, the lion's share of profit on foreign cars goes back to the parent company. I wouldn't have a problem with that as long as the playing field was leveled. We either need to place whopping tarifs on foreign car brands or strike a trade agreement which requires a vehicle for vehicle balance. -
My son-in-law's first new car was a Toyota 4-wheel drive truck. After he had it for a couple of years, he attempted to start it in the garage one morning. It wouldnt even grunt, no electrical connections. Had it towed in. Apartrently a mouse ate the wiring up. I told him maybe some Toyota workers ate fried chicken without washing their hands the day they wired his truck. I have heard of mice eating up home wiriing when houses were wired by electricians that had KY chicken for lunch. Anyway, just another story. Bob
-
Growing up in the 50's and 60's, my dad was a Chevy guy and brand loyalty was something that most people I knew had. Someplace in the later years all the manufacturers lost that when they built garbage and thought that they could rest on their reputation. The imports took over because they had the quality.
I will not buy imports, no matter what. If I have to I will buy an older American vehicle and fix it.
Good questions Dave53-7C. The same things I would like to ask.
WHen the CEO's told congress that they were going to take a salary of $1.00 for the year, I thought that was cool, but if I were them I would also have asked if the congressmen would do the same to help the bailout process.
Many interesting comments here but it's a shame that even with all of our knowledge and the rational thinking, our government will still do what's best for politicians.
Ron -
Hmm a dollar a year.. Sounds like about what they were worth..
-
As Oldcar mechanic says,* people have given up on brand loyalty.* At one time, people could count on constants, things ranging from the familiarity of a car brand to the promise that one's job would always be there.* As time passed, loyalty has gone away on both sides and it's become a world of everyone for themselves.
I don't understand the double standard of Congress expecting accountability from the automakers but not from their own ranks or the the already bankrupt banking sector.* If Congress is so dead set against loaning bail-out money directly to the big three, they should order the banks that sucked up bail-out money to lend out the 25-34 billion requested.
To date, the bail-out has been such a flop, one of my Brother-in-Laws was quoted 7.9% for a loan on a new car yesterday that required a 25% downpayment. Just two years ago, anyone with similarly sterling credit could walk into any car dealer, sign their name and drive off with a low rate and no money down. Oh, yeah, the bail-out is really helping out the little guys...NOT!
The economy will continue to spiral downward until jobs and money get back into the hands of those who move the economy and create the county's prosperity, Mr. & Mrs. middle class Amerian. -
Why be loyal to an inferior product? I'm not going to support a company simply because they are local, they have to provide me with a product I can benefit from the most. I especially object to being loyal to a company that outsources to other countries and then overpays their top execs. I rent cars frequently for business and have found the imports to drive nicer, are more fuel efficient and have better interiors. My favorite car thus far is the Hyundai Sonata from all of the cars I've driven this past year and that includes models from the big 3. The big 3 need to produce a car worthy of my money, period!
-
Dave53-7C wrote:I had a top of the line Toyota that had a knocking problem with the electronic front struts from day one. Although the factory VP who was handling my case acknowledged the problem, he stated that their engineering dept. didn't know how to fix it. After three failed attempts at repair, Toyota lost a customer and I've since bought Lincolns and Fords. Of all the vehicles I've own, I've racked up 150k miles on several Ford products and have had them be the most trouble free vehicles I've ever owned. Although I swore I'd never buy foreign again, I bought an Infiniti FX45. Without rambling on about it, let's just say that I'm sticking with American iron from now on. Since every manufacturer has problems, the arguement that one brand is better than another is moot.
We still own two Fords and like the models that we own. Not every model is bad, but a few are horrible. We Had a 1996 Ford Explorer and it was a great vehicle. But the 2002-2004 Ford Explorer is one of the worst vehicles ever built. The body panels start craking, the transmission is a "sealed "unit, and only the dealer can check the fluid. Look on carcomplaints.com and you will see what I mean. -
ford DOES make good cars, it just seems not in the usa. gm does too, but again, not seeming to in the usa. the falcon just won car of the year in australia against some stiff competiton from around the world. yes, we still get them here and they are a very good car. too bad quality slipped and faith was lost, my 71 falcon was an excellent car, hard to kill!if only they still built them that well. i will point the bone at GM execs though, the former head of holden came from opel in the 70s as an engineer, spent 30 odd years in australia, turned it from holden second to way out on top and went home to germany a celebrated leader of the industry. GM replaces him with a yank who sources all the models below astra with junk made in thailand and korea (small gm cars we got in
aus came from opel or vauxhall and were very good), cuts shifts and models at the commodore plant in australia and sources most components from thailand or china, crippling many local suppliers. sure the bottom line looks good in the short term but i think that they are finally getting their wake up calls now. oh and cars sold in america are priced WAY too low. we pay on average an extra 30% for equivalent models in aus.
back to the topic of this thread, i was born 28 years after hudson merged, but from the history ive read id say hudson would of had a chance had Barit left running the show to someone with some fresher thinking. surely someone in detroit had to be a realist and twig to the fact that post war demand had to plateau at some point. -
Jimalberta wrote:Why be loyal to an inferior product? I'm not going to support a company simply because they are local, they have to provide me with a product I can benefit from the most. I especially object to being loyal to a company that outsources to other countries and then overpays their top execs. I rent cars frequently for business and have found the imports to drive nicer, are more fuel efficient and have better interiors. My favorite car thus far is the Hyundai Sonata from all of the cars I've driven this past year and that includes models from the big 3. The big 3 need to produce a car worthy of my money, period!
I know for a fact that Fords have a high content of Canadian made parts. All manufacturers outsource parts. Draw your own conclusions. -
As far as I am concerned you have to look at the bigger picture about how you want your local business to survive. if you don't like the cars phone up your big three and give em heck. They are in business to please you. I have bought Chrysler for years and when they send surveys I blast them. I have had managers of Chrysler Canada phone me to ask me what I dislike so they do follow up.
Now you can say stuff like it does not affect me they should build better cars and I am not loyal. Then they go under and you don't have that sector of your economy anymore. Then you ask yourself which local manufacturer is next? and guess what it may be you.
These are things you cannot take back when British Leyland went under England lost its car manufacturing and a little of their pride. I for one prefer to buy local and really kick their asses to do a better job and I like complaining.....its just me.....www.hudsonmotorcar.org -
The MSRP on the cheapest Chevrolet Tahoe hybrid is $53,000. I'm surprised they can make enough to keep up with the demand. Give me a bucking frake...:mad:HETfortyqtpi@earthlink.net (drop the HET)
-
Unless you prefer something made in Asia, here you go, Sam.
http://www.zenncars.com/
How about something made in the USA?
http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/escapehybrid/index.asp
Looks like someone isn't supporting their own manufacturers.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/10/28/canada-is-killing-the-electric-car/ -
51hornetA wrote:As far as I am concerned you have to look at the bigger picture about how you want your local business to survive. if you don't like the cars phone up your big three and give em heck. They are in business to please you. I have bought Chrysler for years and when they send surveys I blast them. I have had managers of Chrysler Canada phone me to ask me what I dislike so they do follow up.
Now you can say stuff like it does not affect me they should build better cars and I am not loyal. Then they go under and you don't have that sector of your economy anymore. Then you ask yourself which local manufacturer is next? and guess what it may be you.
These are things you cannot take back when British Leyland went under England lost its car manufacturing and a little of their pride. I for one prefer to buy local and really kick their asses to do a better job and I like complaining.....its just me.....
Sean I certainly can appreciate that sentiment and good for you. However the reality is that most people want the biggest bang for their buck and if the North American Manufacturers can't provide it, that buck will go overseas.
I work for Carrier Air Cond. Corp. and you better believe in our sector if Carrier were to have financial problems or produce an inferior product there would be no bailouts or customer loyalty. So its up to us, the employees, to make it work. We have to provide a superior product and make a profit or there will be no jobs. Same thing for the Automotive industry in my humble opinion.
