PDA

View Full Version : Full list of GM Dealerships Closing.



Apocalypse
05-15-2009, 04:45 PM
http://www.scribd.com/doc/15450140/Chrysler-Dealerships-Closing


Its 40 pages long. Sad list.

expat-pattaya
05-15-2009, 09:37 PM
Yup. Lot of people out of work.

I sure hope the .gov doesn't so screw the pooch we can't climb out of this. :(

BadCat
05-15-2009, 09:39 PM
http://www.scribd.com/doc/15450140/Chrysler-Dealerships-Closing


Its 40 pages long. Sad list.

Man, that is a lot of jobs gone.

But hey, it's OK, they're not Union.

Gingersnap
05-15-2009, 09:49 PM
Two dealerships took a hit here and both were profitable businesses. That's over a hundred out of work plus the nearby stores taking a loss on what the employees spent on lunches and dry cleaning.

Good job! :rolleyes:

patriot45
05-15-2009, 09:55 PM
It is sad, over 150,000 jobs lost, add that to the jobs saved or gained that the 0 is touting.

wilbur
05-15-2009, 11:55 PM
Good thing we bailed them out....

Japandroid
05-16-2009, 02:29 AM
GM should've been doing this a long time ago.

Constitutionally Speaking
05-16-2009, 08:08 AM
This list was for Chrysler dealerships.


GM's is MUCH longer.



:(

Space Gravy
05-16-2009, 08:12 AM
The Chrysler dealer in my town lost his dealership.

On the news he said he was still going to stay open as an independent dealer and didn't anticipate any layoffs.

SaintLouieWoman
05-16-2009, 09:19 AM
The Chrysler dealer in my town lost his dealership.

On the news he said he was still going to stay open as an independent dealer and didn't anticipate any layoffs.

One of the dealers in a small town outside STL is staying open as a used car dealership. It's very sad.

This has been badly mishandled, but not sure anyone has the right solution.

blueyonder
05-16-2009, 12:09 PM
:confused: My one concern (well I have more..) is are these people even aloud to collect unemployment as most are on commission?

Japandroid
05-16-2009, 12:11 PM
The wrong solution was back in 1979 when one of the American auto-industry execs said in the midest of the oil embargo that "Americans will not buy small cars." That's where they screwed up.

Rockntractor
05-16-2009, 12:20 PM
The wrong solution was back in 1979 when one of the American auto-industry execs said in the midest of the oil embargo that "Americans will not buy small cars." That's where they screwed up.
The wrong solution was when congress buried them iunder so much regulation they could no longer be profitable.

Japandroid
05-16-2009, 12:32 PM
The wrong solution was when congress buried them iunder so much regulation they could no longer be profitable.

US auto regulations apply to foreign manufacturers too. And they aren't having to make these kind of drastic decisions despite largely diminished sales.

Lager
05-16-2009, 12:36 PM
I don't believe the foreign companies that manufacture in the U.S. have to deal with the UAW. That might be just a little part of their problem.

lacarnut
05-16-2009, 12:37 PM
The wrong solution was back in 1979 when one of the American auto-industry execs said in the midest of the oil embargo that "Americans will not buy small cars." That's where they screwed up.

They screwed up when they started making shitty cars and gave the unions workers extravagant benefits. The Windfall Profits Tax was just another dumb ass idea by Carter.

Apocalypse
05-16-2009, 02:26 PM
GM should've been doing this a long time ago.
Why/how do you figure?

These dealerships cost GM nothing to stay open. They buy the cars upfront then sell them to their customers. All GM is doing is telling thousands of dealers they don't want to sell their products to them any longer for no good reason.

Constitutionally Speaking
05-17-2009, 08:47 AM
The wrong solution was back in 1979 when one of the American auto-industry execs said in the midest of the oil embargo that "Americans will not buy small cars." That's where they screwed up.


This just shows how friggin ignorant you are.

The U.S. Automakers CANNOT make the smaller cars in a profitable manner. There is NOT enough margin to make up for the increased cost of the UAW contracts.


You can hide the extra $2,500 per car if the car is expensive enough. The profit the Japanese make on a small car is less than the extra cost the American automakers need to add because of their increased costs.

Selling big SUV's was and is the ONLY way the US automakers CAN be profitable UNLESS they can shed the legacy costs they are forced into by the Union contracts.

If the U.S. Automakers had switched to making small cars years ago they would have gone bankrupt sooner.

YES, they may have sold more vehicles, but they lose money on every single small car they sell, and instead going bankrupt now they would have gone bankrupt years ago.

AlmostThere
05-17-2009, 08:39 PM
If the U.S. Automakers had switched to making small cars years ago they would have gone bankrupt sooner.

YES, they may have sold more vehicles, but they lose money on every single small car they sell, and instead going bankrupt now they would have gone bankrupt years ago.

Fine, natural selection at its best. When the automakers burdened under UAW contracts failed, automakers who were not so burdened could have come in to fill the void. The automakers who would have been laid off 20-30 years ago could have been assimilated into what was left of our manufacturing sector. Now, with hardly any manufacturing jobs to speak of, where are these thousands of displaced workers going to go? Don't get me wrong, I think this is necessary. But it would have been more humane if it had been done at an earlier time.

Who knows, maybe people would have jobs today building those small affordable cars?

RobJohnson
05-18-2009, 04:13 AM
Why/how do you figure?

These dealerships cost GM nothing to stay open. They buy the cars upfront then sell them to their customers. All GM is doing is telling thousands of dealers they don't want to sell their products to them any longer for no good reason.

Dealerships do not own the cars on the lot.