F. George McDuffee wrote:

One of the posters in another GM thread indicated that it was
commony GM practice to *NOT* pay for tooling until production
started. ==Does anyone know if GM ever paid for this tooling as
it is for a 2009 model?== If they did not, it may be a major
reason that Cadence went b/k.


George,

As you read the responses you have gleaned, maybe you and Ed can understand my hatred for
GM and why such a bully should not be bailed out. This has been going on for at least a
decade.

Having said that you are learning the magnitude of the problem. Where was government when
vendors needed protection? Seriously, I think organized crime has better ethics than GM.

Any bailout better address the vendors. If G/F/C ride this out by gutting the supply base,
you will see the bigest abuse of power in your lifetime.


Wes

"Wes" wrote in message
...
F. George McDuffee wrote:

One of the posters in another GM thread indicated that it was
commony GM practice to *NOT* pay for tooling until production
started. ==Does anyone know if GM ever paid for this tooling as
it is for a 2009 model?== If they did not, it may be a major
reason that Cadence went b/k.


George,

As you read the responses you have gleaned, maybe you and Ed can
understand my hatred for
GM and why such a bully should not be bailed out. This has been going on
for at least a
decade.

I hope you don't have the idea that I would defend the way GM manages -- or
Ford or Chrysler, for that matter. I reported on the industry for over 25
years and I saw how they bled their supply chain dry. They couldn't run the
parts-making on their own, so they shoved all their troubles onto outside
suppliers.


Having said that you are learning the magnitude of the problem. Where was
government when
vendors needed protection? Seriously, I think organized crime has better
ethics than GM.

The vendors didn't need protection -- how would you protect them, anyway?
What they needed was to get into another line of business. Those who have
generally have done better. Savvy tier-two and -three vendors have made an
extreme effort to diversify. But, with cheap imports to battle for consumer
goods, that's been an uphill battle.

Making parts for cars has been one of the few high-volume metalworking
segments available, in good times, at least, for a couple of decades.
Medical-device manufacturing has been good but the industry is too small.
Making parts for off-road equipment, home-and-garden, and so on has also
been better than automotive but, again, it wouldn't begin to take up the
slack.


Any bailout better address the vendors. If G/F/C ride this out by gutting
the supply base,
you will see the bigest abuse of power in your lifetime.

I think they'll gut their supply chains and offshore as much parts-making as
they can. Now what?

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote:


"Wes" wrote in message
...
F. George McDuffee wrote:

One of the posters in another GM thread indicated that it was
commony GM practice to *NOT* pay for tooling until production
started. ==Does anyone know if GM ever paid for this tooling as
it is for a 2009 model?== If they did not, it may be a major
reason that Cadence went b/k.


George,

As you read the responses you have gleaned, maybe you and Ed can
understand my hatred for
GM and why such a bully should not be bailed out. This has been going on
for at least a
decade.

I hope you don't have the idea that I would defend the way GM manages -- or
Ford or Chrysler, for that matter. I reported on the industry for over 25
years and I saw how they bled their supply chain dry. They couldn't run the
parts-making on their own, so they shoved all their troubles onto outside
suppliers.

No Ed, I do not believe you would defend their practices. I know you are a much better
man than that. This is more a response to earlier threads where I take the position that
the bail out is wrong. FGM's post just have me a canvas to paint a picture of my
perspective.



Having said that you are learning the magnitude of the problem. Where was
government when
vendors needed protection? Seriously, I think organized crime has better
ethics than GM.

The vendors didn't need protection -- how would you protect them, anyway?
What they needed was to get into another line of business. Those who have
generally have done better. Savvy tier-two and -three vendors have made an
extreme effort to diversify. But, with cheap imports to battle for consumer
goods, that's been an uphill battle.

Actually legislation on monopolies should have been brought to bear. Normally we think of
monopolies as corporate vs private citizen. It also exists in the world of
GM/Ford/Chrysler. Ford or Chrysler may have better ethics, we dealt 55% with GM. Btw,
Mazda, a company we ran a couple jobs for was very honorable. They kept asking when they
would need to move the tools and let us run them up to the end.


Making parts for cars has been one of the few high-volume metalworking
segments available, in good times, at least, for a couple of decades.
Medical-device manufacturing has been good but the industry is too small.
Making parts for off-road equipment, home-and-garden, and so on has also
been better than automotive but, again, it wouldn't begin to take up the
slack.

Automotive is a major industry. WWII showed just how important it was to our national
defense. I do not want it to die. I would like to see abusive practices curtailed
though. Too late for me, but it would help others.


Any bailout better address the vendors. If G/F/C ride this out by gutting
the supply base,
you will see the bigest abuse of power in your lifetime.

I think they'll gut their supply chains and offshore as much parts-making as
they can. Now what?

If they gut them, there isn't anyone left to supply. The supplier base as you know has
been reduced by GM considerably. Others can pipe up on Ford and Chrysler. We lost our
Ford and Chrysler business when we would not cross a line we thought unprofitable.

This is a company that extended credit to Chrysler during their bad timed. What have you
done for me lately comes to mind.

There are a lot of hard feelings out there. I'd rather see GM go over the side and see
the vendors live to supply the transplants and whatever emerges out of Chapter 7. The
former Big 3 earned this fate.

Wes

"Wes" wrote in message
...
F. George McDuffee wrote:

One of the posters in another GM thread indicated that it was
commony GM practice to *NOT* pay for tooling until production
started. ==Does anyone know if GM ever paid for this tooling as
it is for a 2009 model?== If they did not, it may be a major
reason that Cadence went b/k.


George,

As you read the responses you have gleaned, maybe you and Ed can
understand my hatred for
GM and why such a bully should not be bailed out. This has been going on
for at least a
decade.

It's been going on in as a matter of corporate policy for thirty years Wes.


Having said that you are learning the magnitude of the problem. Where was
government when
vendors needed protection? Seriously, I think organized crime has better
ethics than GM.

This isn't really an ethics issue. It's a stupidity issue.
GM acts on their belief that they ought to wring every bit of advantage they
can, and then a little bit more, out of their vendor base and their vendors
are convinced that they can't walk away or find other fields to enter.

Niether is accurate and both are completely stupid.


Any bailout better address the vendors. If G/F/C ride this out by gutting
the supply base,
you will see the bigest abuse of power in your lifetime.

We've already seen the biggest abuse of power in government in our lifetime
Wes.
GM and Chrysler won't exist as you and I now know them in six months or
less.
What will remain is the part that really matters, the work force and vendor
base.

Shareholders are very unlikely to be forgiving in light of the haircut they
have taken and the one they are about to get.
You must know that when a corporation files for bankruptcy protection their
stock ceases to have any value.
Literally.
Debt is what you want to have if there is a choice and it's the reason GM
couldn't get GMAC bond holders to convert their bonds into shares of stock.
They were presented wth a choice between almost nothing and actually nothing
as far as they were concerned.

JC

On Tue, 30 Dec 2008 19:19:06 -0500, Wes wrote:


George,

As you read the responses you have gleaned, maybe you and Ed can understand my hatred for
GM and why such a bully should not be bailed out. This has been going on for at least a
decade.

Having said that you are learning the magnitude of the problem. Where was government when
vendors needed protection? Seriously, I think organized crime has better ethics than GM.
Wes

Jose Ignacio Lopez de Arriortua

Former GM purchasing manager. Basically crushed the OEM/supplier trust
factor to nada. Wonder boy of manufacturing.
Dave

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 30 Dec 2008 19:19:06 -0500, Wes wrote:


George,

As you read the responses you have gleaned, maybe you and Ed can
understand my hatred for
GM and why such a bully should not be bailed out. This has been going on
for at least a
decade.

Having said that you are learning the magnitude of the problem. Where was
government when
vendors needed protection? Seriously, I think organized crime has better
ethics than GM.
Wes

Jose Ignacio Lopez de Arriortua

Former GM purchasing manager. Basically crushed the OEM/supplier trust
factor to nada. Wonder boy of manufacturing.

He was just the "best" at it.


JC

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 30 Dec 2008 19:19:06 -0500, Wes wrote:


George,

As you read the responses you have gleaned, maybe you and Ed can
understand my hatred for
GM and why such a bully should not be bailed out. This has been going on
for at least a
decade.

Having said that you are learning the magnitude of the problem. Where
was government when
vendors needed protection? Seriously, I think organized crime has better
ethics than GM.
Wes

Jose Ignacio Lopez de Arriortua

Former GM purchasing manager. Basically crushed the OEM/supplier trust
factor to nada. Wonder boy of manufacturing.

He was just the "best" at it.

But he marked a definite demarcation point. He single-handedly revised the
cultural relationship.

--
Ed Huntress

"John R. Carroll" wrote:

Jose Ignacio Lopez de Arriortua

Former GM purchasing manager. Basically crushed the OEM/supplier trust
factor to nada. Wonder boy of manufacturing.

He was just the "best" at it.


Señor Smoke was the nickname he was known by. Appropriate.

Wes