GM on their last legs

[Morfin]

Yeah, these fuckers deserve the bail-out money soooo much more than the auto industry. Anyone in Congress ask them about their private jets?

Citigroup Saw No Red Flags Even as It Made Bolder Bets

In September 2007, with Wall Street confronting a crisis caused by too many souring mortgages, Citigroup executives gathered in a wood-paneled library to assess their own well-being.

There, Citigroup’s chief executive, Charles O. Prince III, learned for the first time that the bank owned about $43 billion in mortgage-related assets. He asked Thomas G. Maheras, who oversaw trading at the bank, whether everything was O.K.

Mr. Maheras told his boss that no big losses were looming, according to people briefed on the meeting who would speak only on the condition that they not be named.

For months, Mr. Maheras’s reassurances to others at Citigroup had quieted internal concerns about the bank’s vulnerabilities. But this time, a risk-management team was dispatched to more rigorously examine Citigroup’s huge mortgage-related holdings. They were too late, however: within several weeks, Citigroup would announce billions of dollars in losses.

Normally, a big bank would never allow the word of just one executive to carry so much weight. Instead, it would have its risk managers aggressively look over any shoulder and guard against trading or lending excesses.

But many Citigroup insiders say the bank’s risk managers never investigated deeply enough. Because of longstanding ties that clouded their judgment, the very people charged with overseeing deal makers eager to increase short-term earnings — and executives’ multimillion-dollar bonuses — failed to rein them in, these insiders say.

Today, Citigroup, once the nation’s largest and mightiest financial institution, has been brought to its knees by more than $65 billion in losses, write-downs for troubled assets and charges to account for future losses. More than half of that amount stems from mortgage-related securities created by Mr. Maheras’s team — the same products Mr. Prince was briefed on during that 2007 meeting.

Citigroup’s stock has plummeted to its lowest price in more than a decade, closing Friday at $3.77. At that price the company is worth just $20.5 billion, down from $244 billion two years ago. Waves of layoffs have accompanied that slide, with about 75,000 jobs already gone or set to disappear from a work force that numbered about 375,000 a year ago.

Burdened by the losses and a crisis of confidence, Citigroup’s future is so uncertain that regulators in New York and Washington held a series of emergency meetings late last week to discuss ways to help the bank right itself.

And as the credit crisis appears to be entering another treacherous phase despite a $700 billion federal bailout, Citigroup’s woes are emblematic of the haphazard management and rush to riches that enveloped all of Wall Street. All across the banking business, easy profits and a booming housing market led many prominent financiers to overlook the dangers they courted.Link (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/23/business/23citi.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin)

Right. This is sooo much different than the short-sighted auto industry who failed to produce more fuel-efficient cars. Fucking Congress.

[Archangel]

If the banks go, everything goes. I am disgusted at the fact that those greedy fucking parasites have made themselves indispensable to the world to the point of indemnity, but that's how it is.

[Don Scrappy]

banks allow an economy to operate, we can't lose them. We can however do without horrible vehicle producers.

[Archangel]

That's what I said...

[Morfin]

I agree with Scrappy about the shitty car companies and I am anti-bailout. I just am so galled by Congress' efforts to make the auto industry the scapegoat for the country's problems while giving a pass -- a $700 billion pass -- to the banks.

I am just venting here. I agree with what you are all saying, but it just sucks. So I'm venting. Maybe I have need something stronger to pull me through, more than my usual Diet Coke. I may have to... have a regular Coke!!!! See what you've done, Congress? See what you've done to me?

[Claydon]

So basically we can boil this whole thread down to the following statements.....


1. The UAW can go fuck themselves.
2. The business model for the US car makers has been shit for two decades.
3. Buy a Honda/Toyota/Nissan/BMW if you want to support American workers.

[TylerDurden]

So basically we can boil this whole thread down to the following statements.....


1. The UAW can go fuck themselves.
2. The business model for the US car makers has been shit for two decades.
3. Buy a Honda/Toyota/Nissan/BMW if you want to support American workers.

there it is. perfectly summed up. goodbye, gm. so long as two of the big three stand, i'm okay with gm taking a huge dick up the ass.

[Claydon]

Believe it or not I would love for these companies to go on. They created the automobile industry more or less (yes euro car makers did a lot for the world as well so untwist your panties arch). But these companies are the very icons of auto manufactering and US industrial might. I would love for these guys to stay in business, keeping hundreds of thousands if not millions of people employed across this country. However, if they are going to keep sucking the UAW's peen, and they want to continue to just make 'cars' off of their light truck lines then they can fuck themselves.

[TylerDurden]

Believe it or not I would love for these companies to go on. They created the automobile industry more or less (yes euro car makers did a lot for the world as well so untwist your panties arch). But these companies are the very icons of auto manufactering and US industrial might. I would love for these guys to stay in business, keeping hundreds of thousands if not millions of people employed across this country. However, if they are going to keep sucking the UAW's peen, and they want to continue to just make 'cars' off of their light truck lines then they can fuck themselves.

i'm actually going to have to disagree on this one. keeping something going because it's tradition or history is the worst argument to keep something going at all. these companies were the very icons of u.s. industrial might, but they haven't been that, or relevant, for a couple of decades.

the rest of the world is moving towards a global economy. the u.s. is struggling. this situation is the proof. ford and chrysler should take note: continue making shitboxes that no one on the planet wants to buy and find yourself completely irrelevant anywhere.

remove the hundreds of thousands of workers who will be ousted from their cush jobs from the equation. does anyone really care whether gm goes under? they've been faced with this issue so many times in the past it's become the boy that cries wolf. they say it's different this time, but it's not. and it won't be next time, or the time after that, or the time after that.

if gm gets a bailout it's setting a dangerous precedent: if you fuck up your company in this country we'll give you money to fuck it up again, and again, and again.

[Don Scrappy]

maybe these companies will fail and future American automakers will realize that building good cars helps business.

[Claydon]

Believe it or not I would love for these companies to go on. They created the automobile industry more or less (yes euro car makers did a lot for the world as well so untwist your panties arch). But these companies are the very icons of auto manufactering and US industrial might. I would love for these guys to stay in business, keeping hundreds of thousands if not millions of people employed across this country. However, if they are going to keep sucking the UAW's peen, and they want to continue to just make 'cars' off of their light truck lines then they can fuck themselves.

i'm actually going to have to disagree on this one. keeping something going because it's tradition or history is the worst argument to keep something going at all. these companies were the very icons of u.s. industrial might, but they haven't been that, or relevant, for a couple of decades.

the rest of the world is moving towards a global economy. the u.s. is struggling. this situation is the proof. ford and chrysler should take note: continue making shitboxes that no one on the planet wants to buy and find yourself completely irrelevant anywhere.

remove the hundreds of thousands of workers who will be ousted from their cush jobs from the equation. does anyone really care whether gm goes under? they've been faced with this issue so many times in the past it's become the boy that cries wolf. they say it's different this time, but it's not. and it won't be next time, or the time after that, or the time after that.

if gm gets a bailout it's setting a dangerous precedent: if you fuck up your company in this country we'll give you money to fuck it up again, and again, and again.


You are 100% correct, however, I would like these companies to survive but not in their current form. I want them away from the UAW and I want their management fucking purged. I want them to survive if and only if they can create products and services that people actually want. I don't want them to survive just because of history (although I tend to be nostalgic).

[Archangel]

What's the profit margin on a sports saloon these days? $5000? If your labour costs are gonna be $2000 higher than your competition's, you'll have to start saving somewhere...

And for some reason, the Big 3 always picked build quality.

Why not, say, engines? Seriously: America, with its frankly ridiculous speed limits, is the last country in which a car (not some pick up that needs to pull outhouses up the Alleghenies) needs a 300-hp "small block" V8. Hell, you don't even need acceleration since your roads are straight. You people invented cruise control, for fuck's sake. Hell, Mercedes won't even sell a car under 3 litres in the US, even though a 230 Kompressor has sufficient power for 95% of people.

But no, you needed bigger engines. As big as humanly possible. I look at the American "equivalents" of the 3-series, and I see nothing smaller than a 2.7-litre V6. For no visible fucking reason other than ostentation. So the powertrain was untouchable, so suspensions and brakes were never improved, and build quality and materials went to shit. At which point the cars got a bad rep. Oh yeah, and those big engines aren't exactly great in the mileage department, are they?

One can rightfully point the finger at the UAW's insatiability, or the myopy of management, or the marketing departments that pushed shit down people's throats, but part of the blame has to go to the American consumers for not realising that the last time you actually needed a V8 was 1974.

[Claydon]

A v8 is very necessary for hauling 3 tons of shit for a construction site.

as it has been pointed out in other posts, US made trucks are second to no one.

[TylerDurden]

What's the profit margin on a sports saloon these days? $5000? If your labour costs are gonna be $2000 higher than your competition's, you'll have to start saving somewhere...

And for some reason, the Big 3 always picked build quality.

Why not, say, engines? Seriously: America, with its frankly ridiculous speed limits, is the last country in which a car (not some pick up that needs to pull outhouses up the Alleghenies) needs a 300-hp "small block" V8. Hell, you don't even need acceleration since your roads are straight. You people invented cruise control, for fuck's sake. Hell, Mercedes won't even sell a car under 3 litres in the US, even though a 230 Kompressor has sufficient power for 95% of people.

But no, you needed bigger engines. As big as humanly possible. I look at the American "equivalents" of the 3-series, and I see nothing smaller than a 2.7-litre V6. For no visible fucking reason other than ostentation. So the powertrain was untouchable, so suspensions and brakes were never improved, and build quality and materials went to shit. At which point the cars got a bad rep. Oh yeah, and those big engines aren't exactly great in the mileage department, are they?

One can rightfully point the finger at the UAW's insatiability, or the myopy of management, or the marketing departments that pushed shit down people's throats, but part of the blame has to go to the American consumers for not realising that the last time you actually needed a V8 was 1974.

it has to do with penis-size and comparisons.

[Archangel]

A v8 is very necessary for hauling 3 tons of shit for a construction site.

as it has been pointed out in other posts, US made trucks are second to no one.

Reading comprehension is a beautiful thing.

Why not, say, engines? Seriously: America, with its frankly ridiculous speed limits, is the last country in which a car (not some pick up that needs to pull outhouses up the Alleghenies) needs a 300-hp "small block" V8.

And I'll take a Mercedes or Steyr truck over any other every day.

[Archangel]

it has to do with penis-size and comparisons.
Which would explain those 22ft monsters.

[TylerDurden]

A v8 is very necessary for hauling 3 tons of shit for a construction site.

but Mrs. Soccer Mom and her five brats does not a construction site make (okay, maybe in the metaphorical sense). not everyone needs a fucking duallie to haul their goods. it doesn't take a 3/4-ton to go to the grocery store, and it's particularly disturbing to see these vehicles modded, lowered, pimped-out, etc... because surely the ability for this vehicle to haul myriad "shit" improves when you've destroyed its suspension and covered its cargo area with a color-matched lid sporting a five-foot-tall wing. </sarcasm>

as it has been pointed out in other posts, US made trucks are second to no one.

if by u.s. you mean toyota. i would consider toyota's trucks to be on the level of amazing.

as for ford/chevy/dodge: i'm not sure about anyone else but just because my truck still moves and hauls groceries after the radio has crapped out, the glovebox has rattled open (permanently), the undercarriage decays at an accelerated rate after a single winter, and the headlights long ago flooded with rain water and melted snow doesn't mean it's second-to-none. it means the boxed-frame, solid-mounted powertrain, and the rod connecting the steering wheel to the rack is damn near impossible to fuck up for any truck company. you think the uaw hits a switch and goes into "quality mode" when they're rocking the assembly of a silverado versus a malibu?

[Claydon]

Ford 150/250/350 are bullet proof.

of course toyota makes a solid truck.

[Archangel]

You could take a Kübelwagen (Wehrmacht cousin to the Beetle) out of the Sahara sands after 40 years, and it still would run after being filled up, for the same reason that hammers don't break when you bang them against the wall. They're the simplest fucking things in the universe after hydrogen and Turkish brains.

A ladder frame, a 40-year-old powertrain, live rear axle, and leaf springs. The reason those things don't break isn't because of some Audi-esque build quality; the reason they don't break is because an inert piece of steel is a rather tough thing. Anvils are harder to break than laptop computers - it's as simple as that.

Oh, and I'm pretty sure that in the durability stakes, the Toyota Hilux eats anything in the world for breakfast.

[Trident]

I agree...

Lrk6vsb77xk
0Uc4Ksz3nHM
YfZDtC9kjVk

[Claydon]

You could take a Kübelwagen (Wehrmacht cousin to the Beetle) out of the Sahara sands after 40 years, and it still would run after being filled up, for the same reason that hammers don't break when you bang them against the wall. They're the simplest fucking things in the universe after hydrogen and Turkish brains.

A ladder frame, a 40-year-old powertrain, live rear axle, and leaf springs. The reason those things don't break isn't because of some Audi-esque build quality; the reason they don't break is because an inert piece of steel is a rather tough thing. Anvils are harder to break than laptop computers - it's as simple as that.

Oh, and I'm pretty sure that in the durability stakes, the Toyota Hilux eats anything in the world for breakfast.


That is not a work vehicle, durable YES, it can take on the desert with ease and Im sure you could pour sand into the cylinders and the fucking thing would still run. Now, hook a trailer on it with 3 tons of tools, supplies and other shit and send it out into the midwest winters with salted roads....not so much.


You need that trucoat yah!

[Morfin]

I want to echo something Arch menitoned: blaming the American consumer.

Just like someone who helps an alcoholic is an enabler, the U.S. has to be considered the Big 3's enabler as well. Americans have continued to buy Big 3 cars, by and large, even though there are better-made and higher-mileage American-built cars (albeit owned by foreign companies). If the U.S. had demanded (and by this I mean not contune to buy shitty cars with 6 or 8 cynlinders) higher-mileage cars, then the Big 3 would have been forced to change with the market.

The argument that the Big 3 forced these crappy cars on the U.S. market has not been valid since the American market opened up in the 70's to foreign cars. Yes, the Big 3 marketed to us to buy bigger, more powerful cars, but if Americans were sheep-like and bought into this marketing, they have no one to blame but themselves for being stupid sheep.

My point is that Americans kept buying this crap, so the Big 3 figured the market would always be there. In other words, Americans have been enablers to the Big 3. GM cannot totally be blamed for producing what the market has been asking for and continuing to buy. It can, of course, be blamed for not pushing its own development and producing other cars, rather than sitting back relying on a base it thought had been solid.

I also agree with the point about the over-powered engines. We Americans primarily drive on streets or freeways/Interstates. 6- and 8-cylinder engines can be important where pick-up and good acceleration is required. But, in America, that is when on a freeway entrance ramp or when passing on a two-lane highway. Those times are few and far between in my mind. I drive a 4-cylinder Ford Fusion. This was not easy to find and had to be special-ordered because almost all are 6-cylinders. The pick-up is sufficient -- it's not like, when I put the accelerator down, that I just chug-chug along -- I get going fast enough. Short of ego, there is no need for the power that Americans seem to desire, or are willing to pay for.

[Ghostrider]

maybe these companies will fail and future American automakers will realize that building good cars helps business.

The problem is they do make good cars, but the 70's and early eighties gave them such a bad name they have not recovered. add to that high payrates to upper management and Union Douches and they can't compete as well from a profit standpoint. and poor customer service when there are problems and you get what we have here.

GM should probably sell Saab, and any other non core GM stakes it has, and focus on Pontiac, Cadillac, and Chevrolet for passenger vehicles. Make Buick a China only product and get back to basics.

[Swurgen]

You can't blame the American consumer because the problem with the big 3 is not limited to fuel economy. Price (union wages) and fuel economy (silly consumers) are not the only problems they have to deal with and the problems didn't start when gas broke the $4/gal mark. Their are plenty of non-SUV's on the road. It's not the consumers fault that the big 3 came to rely on SUV's and pickup trucks because they couldn't seem to do anything else right. Complacency is their problem. If not for the 'buy American' mentality that many people have or at least had at some point (that for some reason only extends to the automobile industry), this would have happened years ago.

[freegood]

Yeah, these fuckers deserve the bail-out money soooo much more than the auto industry. Anyone in Congress ask them about their private jets?


Right. This is sooo much different than the short-sighted auto industry who failed to produce more fuel-efficient cars. Fucking Congress.

No Income No Job Apps, liars loans, 0 money down...yeah greedy fucks like CitiFinancial didn't know that perpetuating fraud would bring down the system.

I'm wondering how much howling would be done if Glass Steagall is brought back. After all it was Citigroup who broke the damn thing.

[TylerDurden]

The problem is they do make good cars, but the 70's and early eighties gave them such a bad name they have not recovered. add to that high payrates to upper management and Union Douches and they can't compete as well from a profit standpoint. and poor customer service when there are problems and you get what we have here.

ford was actually the company screwed by the 70s and early-80s. there's a reason that people are instantly pointing at the cars and the sliding sales performance of gm, and it's because that's the (not the only, but a primary) problem. their cars suck, their labor sucks, their management sucks. this is still pretty accurate for gm:

maybe future American automakers will realize that building good cars helps business.

GM should probably sell Saab, and any other non core GM stakes it has, and focus on Pontiac, Cadillac, and Chevrolet for passenger vehicles. Make Buick a China only product and get back to basics.

gm should sell the quality car companies in their arsenal, and anything else that makes it money and validates its existence outside of the u.s. what? pontiac, cadillac, and chevy are the problem children and are at the root of the problem.

as for china... don't worry: if the gov't doesn't give the big three any money china will be there to snap all them shits up for a small price to gain access to the global market. buying the entirety of the big three is chump change for china, and who's going to stop them? not the gov't. china owns a huge portion of our debt; not the people we want to deny something as piddly as a company that's worth less than adobe.

[Archangel]

Oh, and by the way, for all those Americans joking about how our fuel efficient cars are just little shoe boxes (which inside are usually more spacious than your dreadnoughts, but still), Clarkson drove the new Jag XJ twin-turbo V6 diesel at 49 mpg.

[TylerDurden]

Oh, and by the way, for all those Americans joking about how our fuel efficient cars are just little shoe boxes (which inside are usually more spacious than your dreadnoughts, but still), Clarkson drove the new Jag XJ twin-turbo V6 diesel at 49 mpg.

interesting that after ford dumps the majority of its jag ownership that all the sudden they start making decent cars that people want again. odd, isn't it?

[Archangel]

Well, they built some decent cars when Reitzle headed PAG.

[TylerDurden]

Well, they built some decent cars when Reitzle headed PAG.

that's because reitzle comes from good stock. the man comes from bmw for shit's sake. it'd be kinda hard to make a shit car when you're coming from the company that sets the standards for quality.

[Archangel]

I wasn't aware that Mr Reitzle had worked for Audi.

[Le Goat]

I wasn't aware that Mr Reitzle had worked for Audi.

http://jj.am/gallery/d/50251-2/Josef_Fritzl_Hansen.jpg ???

[Le Goat]

oh, Reitzle. not Fritz

[Archangel]

That's Fritzl, actually.

No, Mr Reitzle is very much a distinguished scholar and gentleman, not to mention a fine engineer.

http://pix.sueddeutsche.de/bayern/bildstrecke/85/136812/image_fmbg_0_28-1191873592.jpg

[TylerDurden]

http://pix.sueddeutsche.de/bayern/bildstrecke/85/136812/image_fmbg_0_28-1191873592.jpg

i would do some strange shit to his wife, no question about it.

[Archangel]

Nina Ruge? Biggest cunt on German television...

[TylerDurden]

Nina Ruge? Biggest cunt on German television...

i don't care. look at her mouth. and by biggest cunt do you mean she is a huge cunt or she has a huge cunt? either way i can still fuck her mouth.

[Pax Britannia]

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii85/Raptor08_2008/koterba20081118.jpg

[Grieves]

The American automotive industry died with DMC's demise. The pinnacle of American automotive machismo.
http://www.somewhereontheinternet.com/delorean/gallery/images/dmc_grill.jpg

[Morfin]

I have used this thread to express my disgust regarding Congress and the bail-out, in the context of why the auto industries are getting such a hard going-over and yet the banking industry is getting a free pass. Here is another piece.

Citigroup bailout another subsidy for the Mets?


Mets fans can rest easy. Citigroup and the New York Mets have confirmed that their record 20-year, $400 million naming rights deal for the team’s new ball park, set to open for the 2009 baseball season, is still on. Not that Citi could wiggle out of the deal anyway.

On Sunday, the struggling bank won a $326 billion bailout from the federal government. But the Mets deal was signed in 2006, when times were flush for Citi, or at least when the extent of its troubles was harder to see.

To be sure, handing over $20 million a year to the National League baseball team is a drop in the bucket compared to the magnitude of the bailout, but even the bank seems to be having second thoughts about the deal’s value.

Millions of fans and television spectators will be regularly reminded of how much Citi spent to name the baseball field, before ultimately turning to the government to be rescued. Probably not be the branding Citi intended for when it signed the deal.

Here is what CFO Gary Crittendon had to say about it Monday on CNBC:

“That was a decision made in a different time. We have binding legal agreements… I don’t think it’s an issue.”Link (http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-dealzone/2008/11/24/citigroup-bailout-another-subsidy-for-the-mets/)

That crap about a "binding legal agreement" is ridiculous. Yes, there is a binding contract, and contract law requires compensation to the amount the non-breaching party lost. But, and this is the important part, the non-breaching party must make an effort to mitigate -- lessen -- its losses. That is, assume Citigroup breaches, the Mets can't just sit back and say, "Oh, well. Citi pay us our $400 million." They have to make a reasonable effort to find another company willing to pay for naming rights.

Let's assume they get JPMorganChase to agree to pay $19 million per year for 20 years, that totals $380 million, therefore, the Citi breach cost the Mets $20 million, and that is what Citi has to pay the Mets.

Therefore, yes, there is a binding $400 million contract, but it can be broken and they would lose some portion -- let's assume 10%, $40 million -- but they would ultimately save $360 million.

Given the guff Congress gave the Big 3 CEOs about giving up their private jets, why is there no such outcry about this large vanity expenditure. Especially given that Citi did not get a $25 Billion bail-out like the Big 3 requested, THEY GOT $326 FUCKING BILLION!

[Archangel]

Dude.


Diet Coke.

[Gary_Busey]

The Ford place down the street completely cleared out it's lot. I don't know if this is related to the Ford's financial problems or not. Happened quick though.

http://i33.tinypic.com/v434ie.jpg

[redsox39]

How long did the Union figure they could get people $50 an hour to screw screws without getting screwed?

[moe_blunts]

bailing out Chrysler when it is own by Mercedes, a German company? Shouldn't Archie and his fellow citizens be doing it? (This point was brought up by my Business teacher. I thought it was a gud-un.)

[Yelram]

bailing out Chrysler when it is own by Mercedes, a German company? Shouldn't Archie and his fellow citizens be doing it? (This point was brought up by my Business teacher. I thought it was a gud-un.)

It has nothing to do with saving an "American" business, and everything to do with preserving the unions that destroyed it to begin with.

[TylerDurden]

bailing out Chrysler when it is own by Mercedes, a German company? Shouldn't Archie and his fellow citizens be doing it? (This point was brought up by my Business teacher. I thought it was a gud-un.)

it wasn't mercedes it was daimler, which has somehow become ubiquitous of being one and the same. it's not. daimler ag is the parent company that owns mercedes-benz. that's like fucking saying that ferrari owns maserati simply because fiat owns them both. it's grossly fucking inaccurate. furthermore daimler ag doesn't even own chrysler and hasn't since early 2007.

your business teacher is a fucking homo.

[TylerDurden]

just found this over at cnn money (http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2008/fortune/0807/gallery.gm.fortune/7.html) in a feature on gm's greatest hits fuck-ups...

In early 2006, billionaire investor Kirk Kerkorian buys almost 10% of GM's stock, becoming the company's largest individual shareholder. Kerkorian, although claiming to be a "passive investor," pressures chief executive officer Richard Wagoner to sell a 20% stake of the company to rivals Nissan and Renault, reduce the number of brands, cut costs, and improve product designs. Once alliance talks fail, Kerkorian sells his 56 million shares for little to no profit.

i know that hindsight is crystal clear, but this is akin to yahoo telling microsoft to fuck off. i recall hearing about this when it happened and thinking that wagoner was a fucking tool, but seeing it now puts things into much sharper perspective.

[Claydon]

wagoner is a fucking tool and seeing his stupid fucking face wimpering to congress makes me want to unzip and piss all over his face...........WAIT!?

[Archangel]

bailing out Chrysler when it is own by Mercedes, a German company? Shouldn't Archie and his fellow citizens be doing it? (This point was brought up by my Business teacher. I thought it was a gud-un.)

it wasn't mercedes it was daimler, which has somehow become ubiquitous of being one and the same. it's not. daimler ag is the parent company that owns mercedes-benz. that's like fucking saying that ferrari owns maserati simply because fiat owns them both. it's grossly fucking inaccurate. furthermore daimler ag doesn't even own chrysler and hasn't since early 2007.

your business teacher is a fucking homo.

QFmotherfuckingT. What kind of podunk school do you go to? Does your law teacher also tell you that Rehnquist should get off the Supreme Court?

Furthermore, the only reason Chrysler even sell cars these days is due to what synergistic effects there were: The fact is that without the Mercedes undercarriages, frames, engines etc, Chrysler would have failed years ago.

[Morfin]

Does your law teacher also tell you that Rehnquist should get off the Supreme Court?

He's right: that fricking corpse is really beginning to stink.

[Archangel]

Also, Henry Ford should really stop cosying up to the nazis.

[Gary_Busey]

I hope Chevy stays around in some form or another, well, their trucks at least. If I ever get some land, I want a Chevy truck.

[tockit]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/chinese-want-to-buy-the-b_b_144920.html

They would gain instant access to the world's markets with accepted brands, and proven technology.


Say what? American brands are "accepted" nowhere except North America and developing countries (where driving any POS is a status symbol in itself); and "proven technology"? As in, "stuck in the 1940s"?

Dude, do you have a life?

I check this site out about once a week, and you are on about every other post???


As far as American cars go, yeah, they have their problems, but European cars aren't all that!

I can't speak with experience on automobiles, but I work on Aircraft for a living, and the European aircraft sucks!

Piaggio, for example, is one of the biggest pieces of shit in the sky! Made in Italy, co-founded by Ferarri.

What a flying abortion!

Airbus is another example! Engineering is shitty, and parts are outrageous!

American aircraft are light years ahead of the Europeans hands down!!!

[TylerDurden]

hush your fucking mouth, cunt. big people are talking.

[Archangel]

We have a live on here, folks.


I'll say this much: With geniuses like him working in the US aerospace industry, their supremacy ain't gonna last long...

[TylerDurden]

Dude, do you have a life?

I check this site out about once a week, and you are on about every other post???

curiously enough this is a fucking place of "conversation". in order to have a "conversation" it normally takes multiple people varied responses for it to be a successful one.

As far as American cars go, yeah, they have their problems, but European cars aren't all that!

a response positively fucking exuding wit and intelligence. jesus fucking christ, please tell us more...

I can't speak with experience on automobiles...

woah, woah... wait. you mean to say you have no fucking experience in the subject you're speaking on but you're going to open that big fucking cock-holster and speak from it anyways?

...but I work on Aircraft for a living, and the European aircraft sucks!

as i suspected: i've seen better attempts at giving a properly formed opinion from a pack of fucking jerry's kids. you're absolutely fucking right... building a quality car is fucking identical to building a quality aircraft.

Blah, blah blah, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah! Blah blah Blah, co-founded by Ferrari.

Blah blah blah blah!

after interpreting this last bit i see you're under the mistaken and sad fucking impression that a) what you said was relevant, or b) someone gives a shit. by the way, you misspelled ferrari, faggot.

Blah blah blah blah! Blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah!

American blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Europeans blah blah!!!

you're a pathetic failure at life and as a man. i'd tell you to go kill yourself, but you'd certainly fuck that up, too. you're the perfect fucking proof that we don't allow natural selection to intervene enough in this country.

[Archangel]

If he does any more than mop the floors at Piper, the American aerospace sector is fucked.

[Mustard]

Hey, the world needs janitors too...

[CarsyCarsten]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/chinese-want-to-buy-the-b_b_144920.html

They would gain instant access to the world's markets with accepted brands, and proven technology.


Say what? American brands are "accepted" nowhere except North America and developing countries (where driving any POS is a status symbol in itself); and "proven technology"? As in, "stuck in the 1940s"?

Dude, do you have a life?

I check this site out about once a week, and you are on about every other post???

Yes, he has one.



As far as American cars go, yeah, they have their problems, but European cars aren't all that!

I can't speak with experience on automobiles, but I work on

an

Aircraft for a living, and the European aircraft sucks!

You guys got it all wrong! He did not claim to be an engineer or such, he is a steward! So don't fuck with him when it comes to pushing and pulling big things through tight holes!

http://corporate.airfrance.com/uploads/pics/service_boissons_par_steward_a_bord_A320.jpg

[Claydon]

although tockit's post is not exactly on topic, he is correct, US aerospace is lightyears ahead of Europe's. But that is for another thread....