http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/05/letter_from_a_dodge_dealer.html

[Gilding the Lily]

Huh? :huh:

Your a bit disillusioned that I was for the bailout to begin with...I was not.

I never said you were. I just thought it was funny that you were calling me a socialist when it was you who wanted Chrysler to use tax payer money to fund failing businesses. And now you are complaining that private funds are being used to purchase failing businesses. It seems to me that you are fine with socialist agenda when it benefits someone that you want it to, and anti-capitalist when it favors a democrat.

 

[777 fixer]

Shock! Big Dem Donor Group Allowed to Keep Their 6 Chrysler Dealerships Open ...Update: Their Local Competitors Eliminated!!

Now there's this...
RLJ-McLarty-Landers is owned by three men.
One was the former Chief of Staff for President Clinton.
One is the founder of Black Entertainment Television and a huge Obama supporter.
All 6 of their Chrysler dealerships will remain open.

Here's who Steve Landers contributes money to.

http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.p...ge=&page=13

Oh yea, he's a "big" democratic contributor.

 

[Freedom4all]

I never said you were. I just thought it was funny that you were calling me a socialist when it was you who wanted Chrysler to use tax payer money to fund failing businesses. And now you are complaining that private funds are being used to purchase failing businesses. It seems to me that you are fine with socialist agenda when it benefits someone that you want it to, and anti-capitalist when it favors a democrat.

Wrong again comrade! I never was for the government sticking their fat nose in business and decidedly picking the winners and losers.

 

[Gilding the Lily]

Wrong again comrade! I never was for the government sticking their fat nose in business and decidedly picking the winners and losers.

I will repeat it again. You called me the "socialist" for wanting Chrysler to be able to rightfully cancel its contracts with unprofitable dealerships. Yet, if you take the opposite approach and allow Chrysler to compensate those dealerships, then you are using taxpayer money to do so. Since you are currently paying for Chrysler's financing, and Chrysler would be paying for this so-called taking, then ipso facto, you and every other taxpayer would be paying that dealership. And if they keep funding unprofitable enterprises with government money, then how is that furthering capitalism? Then you complain about another dealership using private funds to purchase an otherwise failing dealership. But go ahead and keep calling ME the "comrade".

 

[Gilding the Lily]

"Chrysler’s ploy is a shell game to make the American public think they have done something constructive through their bankruptcy filing in order to validate receiving bailout money. It wouldn’t be the first time that some administration thought a policy was good and it later backfired."



Balance of Article Here

That argument may be belied by the fact that since 2006, hundreds -- if not thousands -- of Ford dealerships have closed. And I need not say which one of the 3 american OEMs thankfully has not taken bailout money. Ford did its restructuring earlier than GM and Chrysler, and it closed numerous plants to make its restructuring effective (even if it may be shortlived?)

 

[777 fixer]

Let's assume that the above might be correct for a second.


Obama has a gun to their head and their assets are on the line. So to me it is not only possible but plausable that Chrysler would seek to punish large Republican donors at the suggestion or not of the Obama Administration in order to improve their financial position.

Well if someone is going after "big" Republican donors they are not doing a very good job. As an industry auto dealers are not even in the top twenty in contributions to congressional and presidential elections.

When you look at the top twenty contributors from the auto dealership ranks from the 2008 election here's what you will find.

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/cont...&cycle=2008

Almost all of them have one thing in common. They all are part of a large dealership group with multiple numbers of dealerships. If they are one of the companies with a dealership on the list they still have other dealerships still in operation. Some are losing dealerships because the manufacturer is ending production, i.e. Pontiac and Saturn. Hard to make the case for a sinister conspiracy in that situation. Then there are some that are no losing any.

The ones that are truly being hurt, the small ma and pop outfits are not even a blip on the radar when it comes to political contributions. I would imagine this is due to the fact they did not have that much spare cash to being with.

 

[777 fixer]

That argument may be belied by the fact that since 2006, hundreds -- if not thousands -- of Ford dealerships have closed. And I need not say which one of the 3 american OEMs thankfully has not taken bailout money. Ford did its restructuring earlier than GM and Chrysler, and it closed numerous plants to make its restructuring effective (even if it may be shortlived?)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122969965719421799.html

According to the graph in the article between 2002-2008 925 domestic brand dealerships have closed. Two hundred and thirty two of them Ford dealerships. The argument that Chysler will lose marketshare to Ford by closing dealerships is a bit flawed. Toyota has half the number of dealers than Chysler yet they sell a lot more cars.

Interesting article from 2007.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2007-1...r-dealers_N.htm

 

[dapoes]

Its coming to a boil:

Texas Rep. Accuses Dems of Closing GOP-Donating Chrysler Dealerships (Video)

 

[Garfield1966]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122969965719421799.html

According to the graph in the article between 2002-2008 925 domestic brand dealerships have closed. Two hundred and thirty two of them Ford dealerships. The argument that Chysler will lose marketshare to Ford by closing dealerships is a bit flawed. Toyota has half the number of dealers than Chysler yet they sell a lot more cars.

Interesting article from 2007.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2007-1...r-dealers_N.htm

Strikes me as being similar to the airline market. Too many dealerships chasing too few purchasers. I have not done an actual count but my perception is that there are far more domestic dealers than foreign dealers. I do not know many people who decide they want a car and look in the phone book for the closet dealer to determine their choice. Build a product the people want and they will come to your door to buy it.

 

[tech2101]

Its coming to a boil:

Texas Rep. Accuses Dems of Closing GOP-Donating Chrysler Dealerships (Video)

Hmmm...

But the flourishing of the transplants didn’t come without significant taxpayer help. Shelby’s Alabama, for example, secured construction of a Mercedes-Benz plant in 1993 by offering $253 million in state and local tax breaks, worker training and land improvement. For Honda, the state’s sweetener surrounding a 1999 deal to build a mini-van plant was $158 million in similar perks, adding $90 million in enticements when the company expanded the plant three years later. A 2001 deal with Toyota left the company with $29 million in taxpayer gifts.

Alabama is hardly alone. Corker’s Tennessee recently lured Volkswagen to build a manufacturing plant in Chattanooga, offering the German automaker tax breaks, training and land preparation that could total $577 million. In 2005, the state inspired Nissan to relocate its headquarters from southern California by offering $197 million in incentives, including $20 million in utility savings.

In 1992, South Carolina snagged a BMW plant for $150 million in giveaways. In Mississippi in 2003, Nissan was lured with $363 million. In Georgia, a still-under-construction Kia plant received breaks estimated to be $415 million. The list goes on.

 

[777 fixer]

Shut your mouth tech! Were not supposed to talk about things like that. Only dealerships being closed in tough economic times that supposedly gave money to Republicans. Ignoring of course that most auto dealers give money to Republicans and that the truly big donors among them will still be around.

 

[777 fixer]

Saturn sold to Penske.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...av=rss_business

 

[Garfield1966]

Saturn sold to Penske.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...av=rss_business

I wonder how this will work with cars like the Opel Astra that was brought over as a Saturn. I hope GM survives and can come out of this. US car makers need to reinvent them selves. Can't keep going around pretending like it's 1960 where Japan, Korea and Europe were not producing cars that America wants. May be they can hook up with VW and turn the Sky into something like the VW Blue Sport. That's a Saturn I would buy.

 

[777 fixer]

I wonder how this will work with cars like the Opel Astra that was brought over as a Saturn. I hope GM survives and can come out of this. US car makers need to reinvent them selves. Can't keep going around pretending like it's 1960 where Japan, Korea and Europe were not producing cars that America wants. May be they can hook up with VW and turn the Sky into something like the VW Blue Sport. That's a Saturn I would buy.

From what I have read the Astra is going away. It's been a poor seller since it was introduced. I suspect part of the problem is that it was more expensive than the car it was supposed to replace, the Saturn ION.

US automakers can put out a good product when they put their mind to it. However I suspect they are still paying the price for the junk they put out in the 1970's and 80's. Plus, IMHO, the American car buyer tends to be a bit schizophrenic. They say they want reliability and that's why they don't buy American. Yet they will turn around and buy Volkswagens which usually rank low in dependability. Great looking cars just make sure it’s under warranty and you have spare time to drop it off at the shop.