Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Truth About Cars - Studebaker Content

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • GTtim
    replied
    The report I heard on the radio the other day said that Ford's healtcare bill was over 3 billion annually, with 2/3 of this being for the retired pensioners. It seems very clear to me that until we decide we can no longer afford to be the only developed country in the world that doesn't have government paid health care we can look forward to seeing more jobs shipped out of the country by companies that would rather avoid this kind of expense.

    Tim K.
    '64 R2 GT Hawk

    Leave a comment:


  • GTtim
    replied
    The report I heard on the radio the other day said that Ford's healtcare bill was over 3 billion annually, with 2/3 of this being for the retired pensioners. It seems very clear to me that until we decide we can no longer afford to be the only developed country in the world that doesn't have government paid health care we can look forward to seeing more jobs shipped out of the country by companies that would rather avoid this kind of expense.

    Tim K.
    '64 R2 GT Hawk

    Leave a comment:


  • JBOYLE
    replied
    At the risk of getting slightly off topic and earning a rebuke from the mods...

    When it comes to offshore jobs it's the same thing in the airline industry. Airbus has huge indirect national subsidies...like they don't have to pay off R&D loans until AFTER the program has made a profit.
    The result:
    McDonnell-Douglas and Lockheed are out of the airliner business, with thousands of high paying jobs lost.

    Airbus then sells the planes with rock bottom financing through European national banks. Aviation Week reported American West was getting a $1 million rebate for every A320 they bought. (Then the airline wanted the city of Phoenix and its taxpayers to fund a new maintenace base. If they didn't, they threatened to pull out of the city.)

    So next time you fly on an Airbus belonging to Northwest, United, or someone else, thank them for losing American Jobs.

    63 Avanti R1 2788
    1914 Stutz Bearcat
    (George Barris replica)

    Washington State

    Leave a comment:


  • JBOYLE
    replied
    At the risk of getting slightly off topic and earning a rebuke from the mods...

    When it comes to offshore jobs it's the same thing in the airline industry. Airbus has huge indirect national subsidies...like they don't have to pay off R&D loans until AFTER the program has made a profit.
    The result:
    McDonnell-Douglas and Lockheed are out of the airliner business, with thousands of high paying jobs lost.

    Airbus then sells the planes with rock bottom financing through European national banks. Aviation Week reported American West was getting a $1 million rebate for every A320 they bought. (Then the airline wanted the city of Phoenix and its taxpayers to fund a new maintenace base. If they didn't, they threatened to pull out of the city.)

    So next time you fly on an Airbus belonging to Northwest, United, or someone else, thank them for losing American Jobs.

    63 Avanti R1 2788
    1914 Stutz Bearcat
    (George Barris replica)

    Washington State

    Leave a comment:


  • 8E45E
    replied
    [quote]Originally posted by Studedude1961

    A billion here and a billion there and pretty soon you're talking real money!

    Even allowing for inflation and using the political spin of today, Studebaker was much more successful..ahem...than Ford.

    Immediately after WW-II, that was correct. Old man Henry had driven that company into the ground so bad that HF-II was allowed to come home from the service a few months early to turn Ford around. In late 1946, Ford was losing something like $3 million a month (a fantastic sum in 1946/7), and the 1949 Ford was their 'do or die' product. Of course history showed HF-II was successful in turning Ford around, but apparently during Ford's 'dark days' in 1947, Harold Vance was approached for a merger or a purchase of Ford by Studebaker, but he was not interested. Studebaker was on a roll with its new '47's and making good money. Last thing Studebaker needed was a liability with assets ten times as large as what they had at the time.

    Craig

    Leave a comment:


  • 8E45E
    replied
    [quote]Originally posted by Studedude1961

    A billion here and a billion there and pretty soon you're talking real money!

    Even allowing for inflation and using the political spin of today, Studebaker was much more successful..ahem...than Ford.

    Immediately after WW-II, that was correct. Old man Henry had driven that company into the ground so bad that HF-II was allowed to come home from the service a few months early to turn Ford around. In late 1946, Ford was losing something like $3 million a month (a fantastic sum in 1946/7), and the 1949 Ford was their 'do or die' product. Of course history showed HF-II was successful in turning Ford around, but apparently during Ford's 'dark days' in 1947, Harold Vance was approached for a merger or a purchase of Ford by Studebaker, but he was not interested. Studebaker was on a roll with its new '47's and making good money. Last thing Studebaker needed was a liability with assets ten times as large as what they had at the time.

    Craig

    Leave a comment:


  • BeeJay
    replied
    Ford's problems, along with the rest of the auto companies, are basically the same as Stude. Poor management.

    When NAFTA passed, thanks to our far seeing government, the auto jumped on the chance to move jobs to the low paying countries. This of course, eliminated the high paying jobs in the states. Now no one can understand why they can,t sell there high priced cars. A good portion of the autos made in the states were sold to the same people who built them. Now those people can't buy them because they don't have jobs, and the people who now build them can't buy them because they don't make enough money.

    TV showed a picture of the parking lot at the Mich State Fair Grounds full of Chrysler vehicles that they can't even deliver to the dealers because the dealers lots are also full.

    I recently purchased a new Silverado pickup. Guess how pleased I was to find that it was assembled in Mexico. Open the hood and look at all the parts mared "Made in Brazil", or Wherever and think of the American jobs lost.

    Just My Favorite Rant

    Bob

    Own '53 Commander Starliner. Red w/beige top. 350 Chev/700R4. Tilt,cruise,A/C.

    Leave a comment:


  • BeeJay
    replied
    Ford's problems, along with the rest of the auto companies, are basically the same as Stude. Poor management.

    When NAFTA passed, thanks to our far seeing government, the auto jumped on the chance to move jobs to the low paying countries. This of course, eliminated the high paying jobs in the states. Now no one can understand why they can,t sell there high priced cars. A good portion of the autos made in the states were sold to the same people who built them. Now those people can't buy them because they don't have jobs, and the people who now build them can't buy them because they don't make enough money.

    TV showed a picture of the parking lot at the Mich State Fair Grounds full of Chrysler vehicles that they can't even deliver to the dealers because the dealers lots are also full.

    I recently purchased a new Silverado pickup. Guess how pleased I was to find that it was assembled in Mexico. Open the hood and look at all the parts mared "Made in Brazil", or Wherever and think of the American jobs lost.

    Just My Favorite Rant

    Bob

    Own '53 Commander Starliner. Red w/beige top. 350 Chev/700R4. Tilt,cruise,A/C.

    Leave a comment:


  • Blue 15G
    replied
    The Chrysler deal wasn't a "bailout", as it is often called. It was a loan. Which Chrysler paid back, ahead of schedule.

    Leave a comment:


  • Blue 15G
    replied
    The Chrysler deal wasn't a "bailout", as it is often called. It was a loan. Which Chrysler paid back, ahead of schedule.

    Leave a comment:


  • studeclunker
    replied
    I think that everyone knows how much I'm in love with Ford.

    All that positive and lovely encouragement to the management of Ford aside, the company is likely to pull off an eleventh hour recovery. Things do look dire for Henry's company. Hell, things look dire for this entire country, if one can look further.

    Let me explain. Ford is in Dire straights, so is GM. Chrysler isn't even an American company anymore. You want proof? Look at their vans. Mentioned in the above article is the fact that the American parts suppliers are all in bad shape as well. Folks, Ford is only the tip of the iceberg. We're all in trouble. Sounds like 1928 all over again...

    Still, I don't think that congress is blind to the situation. What they will do or not is yet to be seen. After all, they bailed out Chrysler, did'nt they?



    Lotsa Larks!
    K.I.S.S. Keep It Simple Studebaker!
    Ron Smith

    Leave a comment:


  • studeclunker
    replied
    I think that everyone knows how much I'm in love with Ford.

    All that positive and lovely encouragement to the management of Ford aside, the company is likely to pull off an eleventh hour recovery. Things do look dire for Henry's company. Hell, things look dire for this entire country, if one can look further.

    Let me explain. Ford is in Dire straights, so is GM. Chrysler isn't even an American company anymore. You want proof? Look at their vans. Mentioned in the above article is the fact that the American parts suppliers are all in bad shape as well. Folks, Ford is only the tip of the iceberg. We're all in trouble. Sounds like 1928 all over again...

    Still, I don't think that congress is blind to the situation. What they will do or not is yet to be seen. After all, they bailed out Chrysler, did'nt they?



    Lotsa Larks!
    K.I.S.S. Keep It Simple Studebaker!
    Ron Smith

    Leave a comment:


  • Studedude1961
    replied
    A billion here and a billion there and pretty soon you're talking real money!

    Even allowing for inflation and using the political spin of today, Studebaker was much more successful..ahem...than Ford.


    Studedude1961
    --1963 Cruiser

    Leave a comment:


  • Studedude1961
    replied
    A billion here and a billion there and pretty soon you're talking real money!

    Even allowing for inflation and using the political spin of today, Studebaker was much more successful..ahem...than Ford.


    Studedude1961
    --1963 Cruiser

    Leave a comment:


  • lstude
    replied
    I read that Ford just lost 5.8 billion. If Studebaker made 28 million every year (which they didn't) for their 114 years in the vehicle business that would only equal 3.2 billion

    Leonard Shepherd, editor, The Commanding Leader, Central Virginia Chapter, http://centralvirginiachapter.org/

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X