Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Well, if tax payers are to bail out the auto industry in the U.S., there should be caveats.
UAW should be required to dismantle themselves and allow free market priced salaries.
If tax payers are bailing all these folks out, maybe we the tax payers should also have the ability to vote on salaries of CEO's the same way boards of directors do. LOL!
With Democrats having the majority, the thought of disbanning the UAW won't even cross their minds unfortunately.
Another reason why Detroit auto makers need to go away. They allowed this to happen:
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0510/17/A01-351179.htm
Jobs bank programs -- 12,000 paid not to work
Big 3 and suppliers pay billions to keep downsized UAW members on payroll in decades-long deal.
This says it best:
http://biz.yahoo.com/usnews/081114/14_10_cars_that_sank_detroit.html?.v=1
U.S.News & World Report
10 Cars That Sank Detroit
Friday November 14, 5:34 pm ET
By Rick Newman
The global financial crisis is suffocating the Detroit automakers, but the problems at General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler have been festering for years--even when the mighty "Big Three" were earning billions. Aging factories, inflexible unions, arrogant executives and shoddy quality have all damaged Detroit. Now, with panicky consumers fleeing showrooms, catastrophe looms: Without a dubious federal bailout, all three automakers face the prospect of bankruptcy.
There will be plenty of business-school case studies analyzing all the automakers' wrong turns. But, as they say in the industry, it all comes down to product. So here are 10 cars that help explain the demise of Detroit:
Ford Pinto. This ill-fated subcompact came to epitomize the arrogance of Big Auto. Ford hurried the Pinto to market in the early 1970s to battle cheap imports like the Volkswagen Beetle that were selling for less than $2,000. Initial sales were strong, but quality problems emerged. Then came the infamous safety problems with exploding fuel tanks, which Ford refused to acknowledge. Message: The customer comes last. "The problems for the domestics really started in the '70s when they were offering cars like the Pinto up against higher-tech, better-built Toyota Corollas and Honda Civics," says Jack Nerad of Kelley Blue Book.
Chevrolet Cavalier. GM sold millions of Cavaliers in the 1980s--and decided the thrifty car was so successful the company didn't need to update it for more than a decade. To milk the model, GM even added some lipstick and high heels and tried to peddle the upgrade as the Cadillac Cimarron--a legendary flop. Honda and Toyota, meanwhile, were updating their competing models every four or five years, and grabbing market share with each quality improvement. A new Cavalier came out in the mid 1990s--then languished for another decade, while GM put most of its money into big trucks and SUVs. GM has since improved its small cars. "But they have to be miles better than the imports for Americans to forget how bad their small cars used to be," says Jamie Page Deaton of U.S.News's Rankings and Reviews car-ranking site. Even if they are better, many Americans wonder why they should give Detroit a second--or third--chance.
Chevrolet Astro. While Chrysler, Toyota, and Honda were refining their minivans in the 1990s and coming up with innovations like hideaway seats and electric sliding doors, GM was offering an old, truck-based van gussied up with carpeting and cupholders. "It showed GM's repeated failure to market competitive products based on styling and packaging," says Tom Libby of J.D. Power & Associates. The Astro drove like a bread truck, and consumers noticed. It also earned the worst safety ratings in its class. Before long, GM was effectively out of the minivan segment. No biggie--those were just mainstream American families the automaker decided to ignore.
[Check out 10 cars that can help salvage Detroit.]
Ford Taurus. Try to explain this logic: After its 1986 debut, the Taurus became a perennial bestseller. So for the next 20 years, Ford let quality decline and neglected the family sedan, while pouring love and money into trucks and SUVs. By early this decade, the Taurus had become a dowdy, rental-lot staple. So Ford simply retired the Taurus in 2006 and replaced it with the 500 sedan--which went on to set records as one of the most short-lived models ever. A year later, Ford revived the Taurus name and applied it to a bastardized 500. But by then, the damage was done.
Ford Explorer. This breakout vehicle helped launch SUVs and drove record profits at Ford in the 1990s, as Americans flocked to big utilities that could take them off-road if they ever got adventurous. It also blinded Ford to the future. "Executives could not see beyond the green piling up at their feet," says David Magee, author of How Toyota Became No. 1. "The Explorer helped create an addiction that lasted 15 years." GM and Chrysler followed right behind, with SUVs like the Chevy Trailblazer and the Dodge Durango--lockstep moves that reveal how the Detroit automakers focused on each other rather than the broader marketplace.
Jaguar X-Type. Ford bought the British luxury brand Jaguar in 1990, when all three Detroit automakers were seeking ways to expand their global reach. Eventually, Ford decided to build an entry-level Jaguar starting at around $30,000 for people looking to move up from, say, a Mercury Marquis. The down-market move "represented everything that Jaguar is not," says Libby of J.D. Power. The X-Type was built on an ordinary sedan platform from elsewhere in Ford's lineup, and the front-wheel-drive system underwhelmed enthusiasts used to rear-drive European makes. Jag purists were horrified, and aspiring luxury buyers shunned the X-Type in favor of BMWs, Lexuses, and Acuras. After fumbling the luxury brand for nearly two decades, Ford sold Jaguar to an Indian conglomerate in 2008.
[Tell us what cars would you add to this list, and why: flowchart@usnews.com]
Hummer H2. It sure seemed cool back in 2003, when gas was less than $2 per gallon. And it sure seems gaudy now. This supersized SUV clearly had a heyday, but it also helped paint parent company GM as an enviro-hostile corporation that sold only gas guzzlers. Sales collapsed as gas prices rose toward $4 a gallon in mid-2008, and GM has been trying to sell the division for six months--with no takers, so far. "GM wanted to make Hummer a signature company brand," says Magee. "Instead, it showed the company was out of touch with the needs of the 21st century."
Toyota Prius. While GM was spending $1 billion to build up the Hummer franchise, Toyota was spending $1 billion to develop a high-mileage hybrid--even though gas prices were still low. After the Prius debuted in the United States in 2000, GM execs seized yet another opportunity to display their intimate knowledge of American consumers, arguing that hybrids didn't make economic sense and that only environmentalists would buy them. Today, Toyota can barely keep up with demand for the Prius, and it has plans to start building them in the United States. GM, meanwhile, is scrambling to rush hybrids and other high-mileage cars into dealerships--far too late.
Chrysler Sebring. Did Chrysler engineers set out to build the world's most boring car? Of course not. Yet Chrysler still produces this blandmobile to keep assembly lines running and maintain a presence, however weak, in the sedan market. In the new Darwinian auto industry, this model seems destined for extinction, since the only way to sell marginal cars is with steep discounts, which money-losing automakers can no longer afford. In fact, if Chrysler ends up being carved into pieces and sold to competitors, as many analysts expect, most of its passenger-car lineup could get the axe, since there's little to distinguish it. Besides--what's a sebring, anyway?
Jeep Compass. Quick, what's the difference between the Jeep Compass, the Jeep Liberty, and the Jeep Patriot? The bosses at Chrysler, which owns Jeep, could explain, but the real answer is that Chrysler has oversaturated its strongest brand lineup in a desperate attempt to boost sales. "The Compass is not needed," says James Bell of Intellichoice.com. "Just the Liberty, please." The Compass has the same mechanical underpinnings as the Dodge Caliber, which helps illustrate one of Detroit's favorite tricks: Create multiple versions of every product under a bunch of different brand names, hoping that if buyers shun one, they'll take a more favorable view of another. Message to Detroit: Consumers aren't that stupid. Give them a bit more credit, and you might have a future.
After trading with Optionsxpress for about a month, I chatted with their support online asking for lower commissions and they gave it to me on the spot.
Now, that was for trading stock, not options. Since I was trading penny stocks, my commission would be up to 40 bucks +. They gave me unlimited amount of shares per trade at 9.95.
I thought that was fair.
Thinking I'll sell into Monday's run up. Hehehe. We should be good for one more day of green since all the negative is baked in.
IMO, of course.
Ummm, did I say 2:30? LOL!
Almost 2:30! Speculation on my part that the market moves up at the same time it did yesterday.
Well, it didn't really bounce yesterday until around 2:30.
I'm ready for it at any time. LOL!
I'm just curious if the rally goes into Monday or not. I'm thinking that getting to cash today would be smart. LOL!
I think the DOW closes green today so DIA call's would be in order, IMO.
Republicans would also if it were limited to Financial sector CEO's. LOL! Make it retro for the last 2 years and let this year be the final year. Also, the Treasury should make sure they are relieved of their duty before bailing their companies out. Their retirement parachutes should be made of lead instead of gold.
That should do it.
I use optionsxpress.com.
LOL! Good point. Many times when I have a long position on a stock option, it's the equivalent of me holding it down by stepping on it's neck. Once I sell, the stock option is relieved and free to run up. The longer I hold it down by owning a long position, the faster it goes up after I sell. It's also a direct correlation to how much of a loss I sell for.
I see $80's in BUD's future. Since I only held a few days, it may take it a month to get there. Unlike when I held IPI until I was down 80% over 2 weeks, once I sold, it surpassed my strike price by around 10 bucks within 1.5 weeks.
Nice!
One thing I thought about the other day is the possibility that there is heavy short positions on BUD since it's at it's 52week high. A nice squeeze could get it over $70 by a couple of bucks.
Interesting play to say the least.
Me too. My bet is that the DOW closes above 9k tomorrow. We go back red on Monday, IMO. Probably after a brief gap up.
A lot of speculation, eh? Hehehe
I have a couple DIA call contracts that would love to see 6 green days in a row!
I learned something new that's worth posting here regarding BUD and a buyout, IMO.
I bought $70 calls for January @ .15. The $65 calls were around $4! BUD kept creeping up but the $70 calls lost value. BUD closed up another $1.60 and the $70 Jan calls are down.
I'm guessing it's because of the $70 buyout. So folks already know that $70 calls will expire worthless. Therefore, the contracts in that price will do nothing. I ended up selling those calls @ .10 for a loss. Still watching to see if I made a big mistake or not. LOL! This one has me intrigued.
Anyone disagree?
My bet is that the DOW closes above 9k tomorrow. We go back red on Monday, IMO. Probably after a brief gap up.
A lot of speculation, eh? Hehehe
Yesterday, it wasn't really worth posting that I got a whopping 2 contracts filled at .31. LOL!
But they are up 100% now. All I need is another 200% and I'll sell them to buy my kid a new computer for xmas. Hehehe
Ooops. Left out the actual trade info:
.BQDLZ DIA DEC Q4 104 Calls
Doubt I'll buy any more. The I'll be looking at DIA puts... probably on Monday.
Yeah, I wonder how those "analysts" like that? LOL! That will teach them to bash Boeing and others. Hehehe. The pot was calling the kettles black.
I don't know why the banks want these homes back so bad since values are declining. LOL! They might as well go buy some rocks.
If they wanted to mitigate foreclosures, help the banking industry, and provide a simulus package, they could have directed that 700 billion to get all loans current with the caveat of making the banks rewrite loans to conventional terms first. Include making conventional loans current as well to help those who may have lost jobs, etc. (I know this will help deadbeats that will go into foreclosure anyway but they spend money too!).
Voila! Banks get infused with cash, foreclosures are mitigated for at least 90 days and most likely saved because of new conventional loans, and wiping out a huge burden on borrows which will help increase retail spending.
Done deal. Not necessarily fair to responsible home lenders/borrowers. But good for the economy.
Now, if only Washington thought of their electorate as their buddies rather than incompetent bankers just hoping they get to save their multimillion dollar early retirements. Wouldn't that be nice?
He's hoping this thread disappears so he can run another scam. He's so tainted, I doubt the proverbial devil would use him for anything at this point. Hehehe
What's your target on these? You could get some really cheap DEC $3 puts on this today.
DRYS $8.90
Wow!
I'm thinking any $70 calls are going to remain worthless due to the speculative fact that the deal will be closed before end of the year. Meaning, the calls will be worthless if it is known that the stock price will never exceed $70 by expiration (Jan + Calls).
Is that accurate?
DOW components are so low now, just a matter of time before heavy bargain buying. Should be good for a nice pop. I'm going for some of these:
.BQDLZ DIA DEC Q4 104 Calls
Is it time to start loading some DIA calls yet? Maybe another 150 DJI point drop first?
Dividends promte people to hold the stock for the long haul, whereas, buying back creates a pop and promotes day traders. They want folks to hold for the long haul. Paying dividends also says that the company is liquid.
BUT, buying back shares helps as well by giving the company "assets" they get to put on the positive side of the balance sheet and the obvious increase in PPS.
They'll probably do that also down the road. IBM has dedicated around 30 billion to buy back shares the last couple of years and offer a .50 dividend! Can't beat that in today's market!
Yeah, and Jan Puts are pretty expensive right now. Hmmmm.
Gas is under $2 in my area. Whoo hoo!
Yeah, I'm thinking my Jan $70 calls will be around 1.00 if it beats $68. That's my target anyway. Since I posted this, Belgium will become a target for a Russian nuclear attack and the deal will be off with BUD. Price will go right back to the low $40's before the open so that my contracts will be worth zero.
I quit on earnings plays. Yahoo is my holy water! Will not touch that one with a 10 foot poll. Earnings killed me on it earlier this year. Then I threw $150 at it the other day pending a potential MSFT buy out offer. All I can say, I'm glad I only through $150 at it. LOL!
IBM seems to hold value in options better than most of them, IMO. That's the only one I'd play earnings on.
Certainly had a strong close. Checking out the prices of options, and this will sound elementary, but look at the difference between the Jan $65 and $70 calls:
65.00 BUDAM.X Last 4.20 Bid 3.90 Ask 4.20
70.00 BUDAN.X Last 0.10 Bid 0.10 Ask 0.15
I understand that the $65 calls are ITM. But such a huge difference with $70 not far off? I guess you have to consider that $70 is higher than the 52 week high.
I bought some Jan $70 calls for .15. The risk/reward was a no-brainer.
Like I said earlier. No one's going to change their mind here. However, I'll put a single check on the Republican side to represent Gramm's part.
LOL!
Make no mistake where the economic crisis started and why.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=6201900&page=1
Emanuel Was Director Of Freddie Mac During Scandal
New Obama Chief of Staff, Others on Board, Missed "Red Flags" of Alleged Fraud Scheme
By BRIAN ROSS and RHONDA SCHWARTZ
November 7, 2008
I don't know of any Republicans that were responsible for making it easy for individuals that couldn't afford them to buy houses. I do know of a couple Republicans that sounded the alarm starting in early 2004. One's in office now and the other one lost the 2008 election.
I wonder how much the lobbyist representing AIG earned over the last few months.
AIG bailout = Sick
You have to know there will be a big pop when the government comes in to bail them out. IMO, of course.
Gearing up to buy some DIA puts if the DOW gains too much. Maybe wait until Tuesday to pick them up.
FWIW, no one's going to change their minds here. I believe that Obama will make great strides internationally by sympathizing more with UN members. He'll do really well with that.
It's his domestic policies I don't like. However, considering military spending will decrease HUGE after about 2 years as we leave Iraq, Obama will get to boast about reducing deficit spending even though social spending will increase.
Just getting out of Iraq is going to help this country tremendously regardless of who were taking power.
I still wonder who that woman in that video thinks is going to start paying her mortgage and filling her gas tank!
And those Harlem voters that Howard Stern's guy interviewed are going to be sorely disappointed when they find out that Obama is pro-choice, interested in getting out of Iraq, and that Sarah Palin is NOT the VP elect. LOL!
We will see. He's taking on some big challenges. Of course, regardless of what he does, the media will smooth over anything unbecoming. Hehehe.
I'll wager many left wingers will give him a bye in keeping our troops in Iraq another 2 years contrary to the campaign mantra. IMO, Obama got a dose of reality from his most recent briefings.