Fewer dealers selling it, fewer servicing it do not sound like a formula to increase sales. Now if you have one not every Chevy dealer will be able to service it.
Good thing the government was buying them or they wouln't have sold many at all.
Fewer dealers selling it, fewer servicing it do not sound like a formula to increase sales. Now if you have one not every Chevy dealer will be able to service it.
Good thing the government was buying them or they wouldn't have sold many at all.
Still rooting against the country huh, Robert? Don't 'cha just love it, and doesn't it send you into fits of joy, when an American product does not do well?
The Volt is, for now, one of the few electric/gas cars on the road. It will have its ups and downs. Likely GM will learn lessons from the car's successes and failures and try to make a better product the next time around.
Nonetheless, you will continue your tirades against the Volt because the president supported supplying GM with the money it needed to survive.
Actually I think GM, as a whole, is doing pretty well. Just think, if things go bad for GM you can get to writing more awful threads...
Well hopefully this helps:
"John Holt, owner of John Holt Chevrolet-Cadillac in Chickasha, Okla., near Oklahoma City, says he also has sold five Volts since he began carrying the car, in 2011. But he decided to buy the tools and remain a certified dealer, partly because he wants to sell the Cadillac ELR plug-in hybrid, due out by summer. The ELR's powertrain will be based on that of the Volt.
"I've heard that a lot of the nonmetro dealers have opted out" of the certified Volt program, Holt says. "But with the new Cadillac coming, I figured I'd be foolish not to buy the damn $5,100 tool."
These need to get going. Can't just have the Prius being super successful.
Still rooting against the country huh, Robert? Don't 'cha just love it, and doesn't it send you into fits of joy, when an American product does not do well?
The Volt is, for now, one of the few electric/gas cars on the road. It will have its ups and downs. Likely GM will learn lessons from the car's successes and failures and try to make a better product the next time around.
Nonetheless, you will continue your tirades against the Volt because the president supported supplying GM with the money it needed to survive.
Actually I think GM, as a whole, is doing pretty well. Just think, if things go bad for GM you can get to writing more awful threads...
The Volt is a failure. But there you go rooting for a turd circling the bowl again.
Try the New Ford Fusion plug-in hybrid....a far better vehicle in performance and looks.
Still rooting against the country huh, Robert? Don't 'cha just love it, and doesn't it send you into fits of joy, when an American product does not do well?
The Volt is, for now, one of the few electric/gas cars on the road. It will have its ups and downs. Likely GM will learn lessons from the car's successes and failures and try to make a better product the next time around.
Nonetheless, you will continue your tirades against the Volt because the president supported supplying GM with the money it needed to survive.
Actually I think GM, as a whole, is doing pretty well. Just think, if things go bad for GM you can get to writing more awful threads...
Last I checked Chevy is not America.
The car was/is a good idea that is overpriced and poorly marketed and since GM is still the cornerstone of ObamaMotors it another great example of how government cannot pick market winners only losers. It should have been marketed as a Caddy in the first place with the Chevy version coming later when it could have been sold at a Chevy price.
There is a place for electric and hybrid cars but can you think of any new technology in the automotive industry that first appeard in an economy marque. I cannot it is usually MB, BMW, Ferrari, Porsche,Honda and Toyota on their highest priced cars so that they can absorb the R&D hit until it gets economy of mass and affordable.
Pointing out bad management is not Anti American, HC says it is the highest form of patriotism...right up there with paying high taxes.
Pointing out a shrinking dealer base do to higher cost is simple business analysis of the likelyhood of future success or failure. GM has a long list of good ideas that were marketplace failures (Caddy XLR, great car 15,460 sold in 9 years , less than 1000 in the last three years combined , in comparison Ferrari sell 1500+ cars per year in the US)
Fewer dealers selling it, fewer servicing it do not sound like a formula to increase sales. Now if you have one not every Chevy dealer will be able to service it.
Good thing the government was buying them or they wouln't have sold many at all.
And how many tax dollars are the rebates for each car sold?
The car was/is a good idea that is overpriced and poorly marketed and since GM is still the cornerstone of ObamaMotors it another great example of how government cannot pick market winners only losers. It should have been marketed as a Caddy in the first place with the Chevy version coming later when it could have been sold at a Chevy price.
There is a place for electric and hybrid cars but can you think of any new technology in the automotive industry that first appeard in an economy marque. I cannot it is usually MB, BMW, Ferrari, Porsche,Honda and Toyota on their highest priced cars so that they can absorb the R&D hit until it gets economy of mass and affordable.
Pointing out bad management is not Anti American, HC says it is the highest form of patriotism...right up there with paying high taxes.
Pointing out a shrinking dealer base do to higher cost is simple business analysis of the likelyhood of future success or failure. GM has a long list of good ideas that were marketplace failures (Caddy XLR, great car 15,460 sold in 9 years , less than 1000 in the last three years combined , in comparison Ferrari sell 1500+ cars per year in the US)
The Chevy brand is as American as apple pie, Bobbie.
My bottom line is that you are cheering because you want to celebrate at the Volt's funeral. Why? As I said before you celebrate the "failure" of anything associated with the president. I.e., the president successfully pushed to lend money to GM in hopes the American icon would survive.
GM, and the Volt, are still in business and you just can't stand it.
The Chevy brand is as American as apple pie, Bobbie.
My bottom line is that you are cheering because you want to celebrate at the Volt's funeral. Why? As I said before you celebrate the "failure" of anything associated with the president. I.e., the president successfully pushed to lend money to GM in hopes the American icon would survive.
GM, and the Volt, are still in business and you just can't stand it.
Yes I can see you watch the commercials, it is American but not America. I like GM, have owned a few of their products and I celebrate success, loath failure and wish GM to be profitable so it can repay the taxpayer.
With or without Obama GM would be alive, maybe doing better. The Volt would not. Good products,well priced and marketed that fill a need are what drives success. The Volt has at best 2 of those.
Now rather than attacking me make an argument of how the car can be a success. I did. Ford, Toyota and Honda seem to be doing rather well with their comparable cars. Why can't GM with PBO's and the taxpayers help?
Yes I can see you watch the commercials, it is American but not America. I like GM, have owned a few of their products and I celebrate success, loath failure and wish GM to be profitable so it can repay the taxpayer.
With or without Obama GM would be alive, maybe doing better. The Volt would not. Good products,well priced and marketed that fill a need are what drives success. The Volt has at best 2 of those.
Now rather than attacking me make an argument of how the car can be a success. I did. Ford, Toyota and Honda seem to be doing rather well with their comparable cars. Why can't GM with PBO's and the taxpayers help?
No, Bobbie, if America had a Republican president GM would not have been saved. Please remember that Republicans attacked Obama for wanting to "bail out" GM. "Government Motors" sound familiar?
GM had no money and there was no private funding available -- even from Bain.
I have not "attacked" you. You are dancing with glee at the possibility that the Volt will fail and I responded in kind.
The Signature Image wrote: No, Bobbie, if America had a Republican president GM would not have been saved. Please remember that Republicans attacked Obama for wanting to "bail out" GM. "Government Motors" sound familiar?
GM had no money and there was no private funding available -- even from Bain.
I have not "attacked" you. You are dancing with glee at the possibility that the Volt will fail and I responded in kind.
I root for the country.
No matter who was President, GM would not have been allowed to go under. Too many people (and thus the economy in general) depend on GM, it's suppliers and dealers.
The Democrats and Republicans played their opposite sides game with GM, as they do with most all other issues. If the sides have been flipped, they would have each played their respective role, coming up with some BS as to why they are correct and the other side is not.
Robert Helm wrote: With or without Obama GM would be alive, maybe doing better.
Well, under the bailout, GM regained its top spot, however temporarily, for world's leader in production. Meanwhile, Romney was saying, "Let Detroit go bankrupt."
Better without Obama? Theoretically unlikely at best, astoundingly wrong at worst.
ernst tischler wrote: I wonder what the difference is between what GM spends on Advertising vs Research/Development as compared to what Ford/Toyota/Honda spend.
I thought Ford got their hybrid technology from Toyota?
The Volt sold 2,633 units in the month of December 2012. This beat out other cars in the EV segment including the Nissan Leaf, Smart EV, Honda Fit EV (granted this one has limited availability), etc. etc.
The company I work for has 2 Volts on hand for fleet usage. They are excellent cars. Smooth as all hell when running on pure electric and very comfortable behind the wheel. To me, this is the car that represents a jump in individual auto technology which we haven't seen in a very long time.
An argument can certainly be made that government should not be providing tax breaks for these cars. Fine. But to argue that the Volt is some how a bad car in and of itself is petty at best. It's a nice car. The fact that people want to make political hay out of it reeks of desperation and is just plain silly.
Andrew Kaiser wrote: An argument can certainly be made that government should not be providing tax breaks for these cars. Fine. But to argue that the Volt is some how a bad car in and of itself is petty at best. It's a nice car. The fact that people want to make political hay out of it reeks of desperation and is just plain silly.
The marketplace has made that decision, even with tax credits at time of purchase.
This is interesting:
GM offers big discounts to boost Volt sales
Now the losses could be even higher. It costs $60,000 to $75,000 to build a Volt, including development, manufacturing and raw materials, estimates Sandy Munro, president of Munro & Associates, a Troy, Mich., a company that analyzes vehicle production expenses for automakers. Much of the cost comes from an expensive combination of two power systems — electric and gasoline. With a sticker price of $40,000, minus the $10,000 the company pays in incentives, GM gets roughly $30,000 for every Volt. So it could be losing at least $30,000 per car.
OMarkcompa wrote: The Volt is a nice looking vehicle with at tag of around 40K but for 60K I can get a pretty good sports car so the average person won't be sold IMO.
The Volt doesn't do it for me, either.
But I'm a little befuddled by the people who are rooting for it to fail, or joy-wallowing in the news of potential failure.
OMarkcompa wrote: The Volt is a nice looking vehicle with at tag of around 40K but for 60K I can get a pretty good sports car so the average person won't be sold IMO.
Justin wrote: The Volt doesn't do it for me, either.
But I'm a little befuddled by the people who are rooting for it to fail, or joy-wallowing in the news of potential failure.
I too want it to fail if it cannot exist outside of entitlements. Otherwise, I wish it well.
Mike Kelcher
Posts: 11,625
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US
Justin wrote:
Well, under the bailout, GM regained its top spot, however temporarily, for world's leader in production. Meanwhile, Romney was saying, "Let Detroit go bankrupt."
Better without Obama? Theoretically unlikely at best, astoundingly wrong at worst.
Romney did sat "Let Detroit (automakers) go bankrupt." It wasn't that he didn't care, it's that he knew that following a bankruptcy, things often change for the better. In fact, Detroit (automakers) did go bankrupt, under Obama.
GM and the feds need to give up on the Volt. The Ford Edsel is considered the biggest automotive flops in history, yet Ford managed to sell over 84,000 Edsels between late 1957 and 1960. Ford only earned half of what it considered the break even point (R&D and production costs) on the Edsel line and lost over two billion in today's dollars.
Mike Kelcher wrote: Romney did sat "Let Detroit (automakers) go bankrupt." It wasn't that he didn't care, it's that he knew that following a bankruptcy, things often change for the better. In fact, Detroit (automakers) did go bankrupt, under Obama.
Op-Ed Contributor
Let Detroit Go Bankrupt By MITT ROMNEY
Published: November 18, 2008
If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye.
----------------
They got the bailout, came out performing well, and thousands of workers who would have been dropped from productivity and filed for unemployment stayed employed.
I think what Mr. Romney meant to say was, "If I publish this op-ed piece, I'm writing off Ohio and my home state of Michigan in any upcoming election."
1. The Volt is a superb example of something that needs government intervention. Free markets are great....when something is already popular and there's a big demand for. The problem is that we can't wait for demand for alternatives to fossil fuels. Government did exactly the same with air bags (buying 100,000 GM cars with air bags in them when they first came out and there was debate about whether or not to leave air bags out completely b/c the auto companies were convinced that air bags would depress sales and discourage people from buying cars).
2. It's a mistake to argue that the USG is picking winners and losers in this case. The USG does pick winners and losers...but mostly with defense technology and aerospace (where getting the big contract DoD often decides if you stay in business or not).
3. What people don't get about the Volt is that this isn't about Chrysler or about the Volt. It's about hundreds of small independent manufacturers. And it's about battery technology. Anything we do that advances battery technology is a good thing--a damn good thing. It makes solar more viable. It makes electric cars more viable. It extends the range of fossil fuels (effectively increasing mpg or cost per gallon of fuel oil). People talk about R&D on this list: it doesn't exist anymore. There is no business or market acceptance for R&D. Just check on at what even big companies like GE or Boeing or Microsoft assign to R&D today vs. 20-30 years ago...it's trivial. Today, here is how R&D is done:
--you buy up smaller competitors who have a promising product.
--you bring something to market that is an evolutionary improvement and continue to improve it. And that's what the Volt is.
4. FWIW, I know someone at BP who drives a Volt. He loves the car. B/c there aren't charging stations everywhere, he can only use it to commute. He swears it's the best car he's ever owned. I asked him about his mpg...he doesn't know, he hasn't filled the gas tank yet (and he's owned it 7 months).
"Nearly two years after the introduction of the path-breaking plug-in hybrid, GM is still losing as much as $49,000 on each Volt it builds, according to estimates provided to Reuters by industry analysts and manufacturing experts."
Michael Bots
Posts: 4,098
Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Justin wrote: Op-Ed Contributor
Let Detroit Go Bankrupt By MITT ROMNEY
Published: November 18, 2008
If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye.
----------------
They got the bailout, came out performing well, and thousands of workers who would have been dropped from productivity and filed for unemployment stayed employed.
I think what Mr. Romney meant to say was, "If I publish this op-ed piece, I'm writing off Ohio and my home state of Michigan in any upcoming election."
Chrysler was all but given to Fiat.
GM was taken from shareholders with no compensation (essentially bankrupted) and new stock in a new entity sold.
"Sales there jumped thanks to a few engineering tweaks that made the Volt eligible for California's highly desirable carpool lane stickers for the first time.
"More than half of all Volt sales are in California,
Besides the carpool lane stickers, the Volt has also been helped by aggressive leasing incentives offered in 2012. Last year, GM was offering the car for $289 a month with a $2,800 down payment. That was far less than a car with the Volt's nearly $40,000 purchase price would ordinarily lease for, even factoring in a $7,500 plug-in car tax credit."
GM loses money on each Volt they sell. So do the taxpayers.
Justin wrote: Op-Ed Contributor
Let Detroit Go Bankrupt By MITT ROMNEY
Published: November 18, 2008
If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye.
----------------
They got the bailout, came out performing well, and thousands of workers who would have been dropped from productivity and filed for unemployment stayed employed.
I think what Mr. Romney meant to say was, "If I publish this op-ed piece, I'm writing off Ohio and my home state of Michigan in any upcoming election."
Michael Bots wrote: Chrysler was all but given to Fiat.
GM was taken from shareholders with no compensation (essentially bankrupted) and new stock in a new entity sold.
Chrysler stayed in business. Its sales had gone down four years straight, finishing up down 30+% in both 2008 and 2009. 2010, 2011, and 2012 showed a strong rebound with sales climbing. American car workers and auto vendors stayed employed.
I don't think that would've happened under Romney, which was the point I was making.
Op-Ed Contributor
Let Detroit Go Bankrupt By MITT ROMNEY
Published: November 18, 2008
If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye.
----------------
They got the bailout, came out performing well, and thousands of workers who would have been dropped from productivity and filed for unemployment stayed employed.
I think what Mr. Romney meant to say was, "If I publish this op-ed piece, I'm writing off Ohio and my home state of Michigan in any upcoming election."
You need to read the article you are quoting. The newspaper picked the headline. If you read the actual article, it does not say what the headline implies.
This was thoroughly discussed during the campaign. The Dems used that headline to beat Romney over the head. The article is much different.
afplcc wrote: 3. What people don't get about the Volt is that this isn't about Chrysler or about the Volt. It's about hundreds of small independent manufacturers. And it's about battery technology. Anything we do that advances battery technology is a good thing--a damn good thing. It makes solar more viable. It makes electric cars more viable. It extends the range of fossil fuels (effectively increasing mpg or cost per gallon of fuel oil). People talk about R&D on this list: it doesn't exist anymore. There is no business or market acceptance for R&D. Just check on at what even big companies like GE or Boeing or Microsoft assign to R&D today vs. 20-30 years ago...it's trivial. Today, here is how R&D is done:
--you buy up smaller competitors who have a promising product.
--you bring something to market that is an evolutionary improvement and continue to improve it. And that's what the Volt is.
Ed
Exactly. It's the same sort of reason we went to the moon. Same agenda, different mission.
In context, if they're selling 2600 units a month, it's probably more reliable then the space program.
| 
| 
| edu