Bookmarks

Yahoo Gmail Google Facebook Delicious Twitter Reddit Stumpleupon Myspace Digg

Search queries

sprocket xt 600, how to bypass crank position sensor honda, dr 350 cdi, 1992 dodge spirit fuel system, how long will 4mm brake pads last, temporary fix for crankshaft position sensor, vg30e fuel pressure regulator, 99 suburban running rich, ga16 valve clearance, galsawya.com

Links

XODOX
Impressum

#1: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-14 14:24:49 by Bret Ludwig

Wouldn't be that hard.

The State of California could concoct some law whose real effect would
be to punish GM for its perceived perfidy. When the Governator goes, it
will become politically feasible.

Report this message

#2: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-14 17:55:15 by KILLFILTERED.TROLLS

In article &lt;<a href="mailto:1152879889.331251.294180&#64;35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com" target="_blank">1152879889.331251.294180&#64;35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com</a>&gt;,
<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a> pounded on his/her keyboard and came up with...

[drivel snipped]

Begone troll.

Report this message

#3: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-15 02:03:01 by Bert Hyman

In news:<a href="mailto:1152879889.331251.294180&#64;35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com" target="_blank">1152879889.331251.294180&#64;35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com</a> &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot;
&lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt; wrote:

&gt; Wouldn't be that hard.

But would be really stupid.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN <a href="mailto:bert&#64;iphouse.com" target="_blank">bert&#64;iphouse.com</a>

Report this message

#4: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-15 03:48:12 by TheSnoMan

On 15 Jul 2006 00:03:01 GMT, Bert Hyman &lt;<a href="mailto:bert&#64;iphouse.com" target="_blank">bert&#64;iphouse.com</a>&gt; wrote:

&gt;In news:<a href="mailto:1152879889.331251.294180&#64;35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com" target="_blank">1152879889.331251.294180&#64;35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com</a> &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot;
&gt;&lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt; wrote:
&gt;
&gt;&gt; Wouldn't be that hard.
&gt;
&gt;But would be really stupid.


I do not blame GM because they were responding to &quot;political&quot; pressure
when they did it. The oil companies still do not want to see this
happen and they run the government more or less. This is why they (Big
Oil) see hydrogen cars because they can make, transport and sell that
too. (today most hydrogen fuel comes from oil processing because there
is not other easy way to do it.
-----------------
The SnoMan
www.thesnoman.com

Report this message

#5: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-15 06:54:59 by Bret Ludwig

Bert Hyman wrote:
&gt; In news:<a href="mailto:1152879889.331251.294180&#64;35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com" target="_blank">1152879889.331251.294180&#64;35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com</a> &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot;
&gt; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt; wrote:
&gt;
&gt; &gt; Wouldn't be that hard.
&gt;
&gt; But would be really stupid.
&gt;

No, it would be smart.

Report this message

#6: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-15 12:46:24 by Bret Ludwig

SnoMan wrote:
&gt; On 15 Jul 2006 00:03:01 GMT, Bert Hyman &lt;<a href="mailto:bert&#64;iphouse.com" target="_blank">bert&#64;iphouse.com</a>&gt; wrote:
&gt;
&gt; &gt;In news:<a href="mailto:1152879889.331251.294180&#64;35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com" target="_blank">1152879889.331251.294180&#64;35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com</a> &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot;
&gt; &gt;&lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt; wrote:
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt;&gt; Wouldn't be that hard.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt;But would be really stupid.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; I do not blame GM because they were responding to &quot;political&quot; pressure
&gt; when they did it. The oil companies still do not want to see this
&gt; happen and they run the government more or less. This is why they (Big
&gt; Oil) see hydrogen cars because they can make, transport and sell that
&gt; too. (today most hydrogen fuel comes from oil processing because there
&gt; is not other easy way to do it.

How are the oil companies going to punish GM? They should fear the
government, even the state government, a lot more than Big Oil.
California could easily figure out some way to fuck with GM's profits
or marketing in California.

Report this message

#7: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-15 16:20:13 by TheSnoMan

On 15 Jul 2006 03:46:24 -0700, &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt;
wrote:

&gt; How are the oil companies going to punish GM? They should fear the
&gt;government, even the state government, a lot more than Big Oil.
&gt;California could easily figure out some way to fuck with GM's profits


It is not about them (Big Oil) punishing GM. It is about trying to
punish GM for something that was being influanced on them so it is not
really their fault.
-----------------
The SnoMan
www.thesnoman.com

Report this message

#8: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-15 21:56:49 by Bret Ludwig

SnoMan wrote:
&gt; On 15 Jul 2006 03:46:24 -0700, &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt;
&gt; wrote:
&gt;
&gt; &gt; How are the oil companies going to punish GM? They should fear the
&gt; &gt;government, even the state government, a lot more than Big Oil.
&gt; &gt;California could easily figure out some way to fuck with GM's profits
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; It is not about them (Big Oil) punishing GM. It is about trying to
&gt; punish GM for something that was being influanced on them so it is not
&gt; really their fault.


Nuremberg said differently.

Report this message

#9: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-16 00:10:08 by TheSnoMan

On 15 Jul 2006 12:56:49 -0700, &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt;
wrote:

&gt; Nuremberg said differently.


Not a valid comparision and a poor answer. GM is no saint but they too
are subject to someone pulling their strings too. GM was the messanger
here not the real cause behind its death. John Q. Public and techology
in general was not ready for a electric car then and not really now
either because of its current limitations. They have some more way to
go before they are seriously viable. BTW, GM was playing with electric
S10 in the 90's. I know because I saw a few on them and did some
contract work on the machine the tested the motors for them. Same
problem though, limited range and cost/weight of batteries.
-----------------
The SnoMan
www.thesnoman.com

Report this message

#10: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-16 00:36:55 by Bret Ludwig

SnoMan wrote:
&gt; On 15 Jul 2006 12:56:49 -0700, &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt;
&gt; wrote:
&gt;
&gt; &gt; Nuremberg said differently.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; Not a valid comparision and a poor answer. GM is no saint but they too
&gt; are subject to someone pulling their strings too. GM was the messanger
&gt; here not the real cause behind its death. John Q. Public and techology
&gt; in general was not ready for a electric car then and not really now
&gt; either because of its current limitations. They have some more way to
&gt; go before they are seriously viable. BTW, GM was playing with electric
&gt; S10 in the 90's. I know because I saw a few on them and did some
&gt; contract work on the machine the tested the motors for them. Same
&gt; problem though, limited range and cost/weight of batteries.


In this case you had a product that already existed and a number of
people (like 500) that were offering cash for them.

Electric cars are not for everyone but there is no question some
people want and can benefit from them.

Report this message

#11: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-16 02:17:38 by TheSnoMan

On 15 Jul 2006 15:36:55 -0700, &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt;
wrote:

&gt; In this case you had a product that already existed and a number of
&gt;people (like 500) that were offering cash for them.


500 is not worth the trouble in the scheme of things for GM, it needs
to be in the tens of thousands and then some to even begin about being
profitable one day.
-----------------
The SnoMan
www.thesnoman.com

Report this message

#12: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-16 17:02:43 by RsEaMtOyVrE

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 00:17:38 GMT, SnoMan &lt;<a href="mailto:admin&#64;snoman.com" target="_blank">admin&#64;snoman.com</a>&gt; wrote:

&gt;On 15 Jul 2006 15:36:55 -0700, &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt;
&gt;wrote:
&gt;
&gt;&gt; In this case you had a product that already existed and a number of
&gt;&gt;people (like 500) that were offering cash for them.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt;500 is not worth the trouble in the scheme of things for GM, it needs
&gt;to be in the tens of thousands and then some to even begin about being
&gt;profitable one day.

I think that GM had some nifty technology but it was too expensive.
They saw that they would be forced to keep building these cars and
selling (leasing) them at a loss while they drew sales away form
profitable car lines and cast the rest of their business in a bad
light.

Ironically, GM is being punished for their short term mentality.
Punished not by the government or consumer activists but by the
market. Huge, fuel-guzzling vehicles have a large profit margin,
until the day comes when they start sucking the wells dry. GM walked
away from electric technology which could have formed the basis for
successful, cost effective hybrid vehicles. Instead, GM spent money
redesigning their huge, truck-frame SUVs which rolled out just in time
for $78 oil.

For the record, I don't think pure battery powered road cars are
economically viable with any foreseeable technology. The high price
and operational limitations can not be overcome in the near future.
Hybrids OTOH, are economically viable now (barely) and give up little
in utility.

Report this message

#13: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-16 23:57:30 by Bret Ludwig

satyr wrote:

&gt;
&gt; I think that GM had some nifty technology but it was too expensive.
&gt; They saw that they would be forced to keep building these cars and
&gt; selling (leasing) them at a loss while they drew sales away form
&gt; profitable car lines and cast the rest of their business in a bad
&gt; light.
&gt;
&gt; Ironically, GM is being punished for their short term mentality.
&gt; Punished not by the government or consumer activists but by the
&gt; market. Huge, fuel-guzzling vehicles have a large profit margin,
&gt; until the day comes when they start sucking the wells dry. GM walked
&gt; away from electric technology which could have formed the basis for
&gt; successful, cost effective hybrid vehicles. Instead, GM spent money
&gt; redesigning their huge, truck-frame SUVs which rolled out just in time
&gt; for $78 oil.

Bullshit.

Electric cars do not have to be truly cost-effective for a modest but
definite market to exist. Is a Ferrari cost-effective? My guess is
there is a market for a $100,000 electric car in Hollywood and the
Hamptons. Especially if there were a hybrid gen set module that could
be swapped out for some battery storage.

GM was being jerky and they should fear the legislature.
&gt;
&gt; For the record, I don't think pure battery powered road cars are
&gt; economically viable with any foreseeable technology. The high price
&gt; and operational limitations can not be overcome in the near future.
&gt; Hybrids OTOH, are economically viable now (barely) and give up little
&gt; in utility.

Report this message

#14: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-17 02:49:07 by TheSnoMan

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 15:02:43 GMT, <a href="mailto:RsEaMtOyVrE&#64;infidels.org" target="_blank">RsEaMtOyVrE&#64;infidels.org</a> (satyr)
wrote:

&gt;I think that GM had some nifty technology but it was too expensive.
&gt;They saw that they would be forced to keep building these cars and
&gt;selling (leasing) them at a loss while they drew sales away form
&gt;profitable car lines and cast the rest of their business in a bad
&gt;light.
&gt;
&gt;Ironically, GM is being punished for their short term mentality.
&gt;Punished not by the government or consumer activists but by the
&gt;market. Huge, fuel-guzzling vehicles have a large profit margin,
&gt;until the day comes when they start sucking the wells dry. GM walked
&gt;away from electric technology which could have formed the basis for
&gt;successful, cost effective hybrid vehicles. Instead, GM spent money
&gt;redesigning their huge, truck-frame SUVs which rolled out just in time
&gt;for $78 oil.
&gt;
&gt;For the record, I don't think pure battery powered road cars are
&gt;economically viable with any foreseeable technology. The high price
&gt;and operational limitations can not be overcome in the near future.
&gt;Hybrids OTOH, are economically viable now (barely) and give up little
&gt;in utility.


Nice thoughful comment :)
-----------------
The SnoMan
www.thesnoman.com

Report this message

#15: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-17 02:51:49 by TheSnoMan

On 16 Jul 2006 15:14:32 -0700, &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt;
wrote:

&gt; Electric cars do not have to be truly cost-effective for a modest but
&gt;definite market to exist.


This is where you are dead wrong because they have to be profitable to
produce as GM is a mass producer and it is not profitable to make a
small quanity of them. Do not compare them to a hand built car market
manufacture because this is like trying to compare apple and oranges.
-----------------
The SnoMan
www.thesnoman.com

Report this message

#16: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-17 05:16:21 by none

On 16 Jul 2006 15:14:32 -0700, &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt;
wrote:

&gt;
&gt; Electric cars do not have to be truly cost-effective for a modest but
&gt;definite market to exist. Is a Ferrari cost-effective? My guess is
&gt;there is a market for a $100,000 electric car in Hollywood and the
&gt;Hamptons. Especially if there were a hybrid gen set module that could
&gt;be swapped out for some battery storage.
&gt;
&gt; GM was being jerky and they should fear the legislature.


Big difference. A 100lk Ferrari doesn't cost the manufacturer
anywhere near 100k to produce and their whole company premise is to
sell very few and very expensive cars. The electrics cost GM 100k to
produce so they had no profit and GM is set up to sell a bunch of
moderately priced cars. If you think this market exist why aren't you
out raising capital and building it yourself?

Steve B.

Report this message

#17: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-17 20:57:56 by NapalmHeart

&quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt; wrote in message
news:<a href="mailto:1152939298.960860.301750&#64;s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com..." target="_blank">1152939298.960860.301750&#64;s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...</a>
&gt;
&gt; Bert Hyman wrote:
&gt;&gt; In news:<a href="mailto:1152879889.331251.294180&#64;35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com" target="_blank">1152879889.331251.294180&#64;35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com</a> &quot;Bret
&gt;&gt; Ludwig&quot;
&gt;&gt; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt; wrote:
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; &gt; Wouldn't be that hard.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; But would be really stupid.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;
&gt; No, it would be smart.
&gt;

Smart to those with a collectivist orientation.

Report this message

#18: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-17 21:43:03 by RKHenry

GM can't &quot;kill&quot; the electric car. Any fool who wants to attempt that
business is free to try. There are already several vendors, though
most are little more than garage customizations or fancy golf carts..

Remember back to the early 1970s when the U.S. Department of Justice
was proposing to break up GM into its constituent parts because it was
&quot;Monopolizing the auto industry.&quot; So if GM is a monopoly, then if GM
had continued to sell its electric car at a loss, it might have been
construed as a violation of antitrust legislation, selling at a loss
to force out smaller electric car companies. GM would be tarred as
abusing its &quot;monopoly&quot; power, selling at a loss to run other electric
car companies out of business.

GM can't win. They're condemned when they screw up, and they're
condemned when they succeed.

RK Henry

Report this message

#19: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-18 02:28:46 by Bret Ludwig

Steve B. wrote:
&gt; On 16 Jul 2006 15:14:32 -0700, &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt;
&gt; wrote:
&gt;
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Electric cars do not have to be truly cost-effective for a modest but
&gt; &gt;definite market to exist. Is a Ferrari cost-effective? My guess is
&gt; &gt;there is a market for a $100,000 electric car in Hollywood and the
&gt; &gt;Hamptons. Especially if there were a hybrid gen set module that could
&gt; &gt;be swapped out for some battery storage.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; GM was being jerky and they should fear the legislature.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; Big difference. A 100lk Ferrari doesn't cost the manufacturer
&gt; anywhere near 100k to produce and their whole company premise is to
&gt; sell very few and very expensive cars. The electrics cost GM 100k to
&gt; produce so they had no profit and GM is set up to sell a bunch of
&gt; moderately priced cars. If you think this market exist why aren't you
&gt; out raising capital and building it yourself?

You are very very very naive. Each car cost much less than 100k to
produce. The total R&amp;D amortized out per vehicle may have been that,
but since over 1000 vehicles were produced, that would put the program
cost at $100,000,000. I seriously doubt GM spent that much.

The fact is that GM was offered a huge sum for all of the
already-produced cars at the end and showed their ass to this offer.

Ferrari is owned by Fiat and in fact is subsidized as far as their car
production goes. Where Ferrari makes a profit is their extremely high
tech light nonferrous foundry program, but the cars lose money. My
guess is Corvette is a net-net loser too. But they make it up on the
logo program.

Report this message

#20: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-18 04:46:00 by TheSnoMan

On 17 Jul 2006 17:28:46 -0700, &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt;
wrote:

&gt;You are very very very naive. Each car cost much less than 100k to
&gt;produce. The total R&amp;D amortized out per vehicle may have been that,
&gt;but since over 1000 vehicles were produced, that would put the program
&gt;cost at $100,000,000. I seriously doubt GM spent that much.


Your are the one nieve. It cost atleast 100K a car to make them back
them and likley more as that stuff was pricey then to build with. If
it had been possible to make a profit, GM would have built them but
the timing and costs were all wrong. Today, 70% of the cost of
building of a new vehicle is labor costs with health insurance along
adding about 1500 a car and climbing. No way you could build a cheap
all electric one today either. (not at GM's labor costs)
-----------------
The SnoMan
www.thesnoman.com

Report this message

#21: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-18 15:22:32 by Bret Ludwig

SnoMan wrote:
&gt; On 17 Jul 2006 17:28:46 -0700, &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt;
&gt; wrote:
&gt;
&gt; &gt;You are very very very naive. Each car cost much less than 100k to
&gt; &gt;produce. The total R&amp;D amortized out per vehicle may have been that,
&gt; &gt;but since over 1000 vehicles were produced, that would put the program
&gt; &gt;cost at $100,000,000. I seriously doubt GM spent that much.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; Your are the one nieve. It cost atleast 100K a car to make them back
&gt; them and likley more as that stuff was pricey then to build with. If
&gt; it had been possible to make a profit, GM would have built them but
&gt; the timing and costs were all wrong. Today, 70% of the cost of
&gt; building of a new vehicle is labor costs with health insurance along
&gt; adding about 1500 a car and climbing. No way you could build a cheap
&gt; all electric one today either. (not at GM's labor costs)

$1500 a car for health insurance? I would like to see them prove that.
I think it's hooey.
But, the expensive parts of the electric car are the batteries, and GM
would buy, not build these, from overseas probably. High labor is an
argument FOR building high build cost low volume high margin producr,
and let's face it, if a sleb will pay $100K for a electric car they
will probably pay $125K.

GM's luxury and sports cars are underpriced anyway. The top Corvette
should be in Ferrari territory pricewise or Corvette isn't to be taken
seriously (which it isn't).

Report this message

#22: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-18 22:48:56 by Box134

It sounds like you've been watching the PBS program Now. They had multiple
conspiracy theories, all based on junk science, or more like no science.
Right now it's technically infeasible to store enough energy in batteries to
make an electric car useful for the majority of people, so they won't buy
them. Maybe some day, but I doubt it. They've tried multiple chemistries for
batteries and there are only so many possibilities. Nothing beats liquid
fuels for energy density.

I'd love an electric car, but I want transportation, not a hobby.

&quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt; wrote in message
news:<a href="mailto:1152879889.331251.294180&#64;35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com..." target="_blank">1152879889.331251.294180&#64;35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...</a>
&gt; Wouldn't be that hard.
&gt;
&gt; The State of California could concoct some law whose real effect would
&gt; be to punish GM for its perceived perfidy. When the Governator goes, it
&gt; will become politically feasible.
&gt;

Report this message

#23: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-23 00:15:12 by Gary

Really when you think about it, if GM abandoned the car, who would service
it? How many techs do they train, and where do they station them? How many
parts do they stock for repairs? Even if GM sold them at the end of the
trial, the buyers would be left with an electric Yugo.

&quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt; wrote in message
news:<a href="mailto:1153182526.044818.178180&#64;75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com..." target="_blank">1153182526.044818.178180&#64;75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...</a>
&gt;
&gt; Steve B. wrote:
&gt;&gt; On 16 Jul 2006 15:14:32 -0700, &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt;
&gt;&gt; wrote:
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; &gt;
&gt;&gt; &gt; Electric cars do not have to be truly cost-effective for a modest but
&gt;&gt; &gt;definite market to exist. Is a Ferrari cost-effective? My guess is
&gt;&gt; &gt;there is a market for a $100,000 electric car in Hollywood and the
&gt;&gt; &gt;Hamptons. Especially if there were a hybrid gen set module that could
&gt;&gt; &gt;be swapped out for some battery storage.
&gt;&gt; &gt;
&gt;&gt; &gt; GM was being jerky and they should fear the legislature.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; Big difference. A 100lk Ferrari doesn't cost the manufacturer
&gt;&gt; anywhere near 100k to produce and their whole company premise is to
&gt;&gt; sell very few and very expensive cars. The electrics cost GM 100k to
&gt;&gt; produce so they had no profit and GM is set up to sell a bunch of
&gt;&gt; moderately priced cars. If you think this market exist why aren't you
&gt;&gt; out raising capital and building it yourself?
&gt;
&gt; You are very very very naive. Each car cost much less than 100k to
&gt; produce. The total R&amp;D amortized out per vehicle may have been that,
&gt; but since over 1000 vehicles were produced, that would put the program
&gt; cost at $100,000,000. I seriously doubt GM spent that much.
&gt;
&gt; The fact is that GM was offered a huge sum for all of the
&gt; already-produced cars at the end and showed their ass to this offer.
&gt;
&gt; Ferrari is owned by Fiat and in fact is subsidized as far as their car
&gt; production goes. Where Ferrari makes a profit is their extremely high
&gt; tech light nonferrous foundry program, but the cars lose money. My
&gt; guess is Corvette is a net-net loser too. But they make it up on the
&gt; logo program.
&gt;

Report this message

#24: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-23 03:12:00 by Bret Ludwig

Gary wrote:
&gt; Really when you think about it, if GM abandoned the car, who would service
&gt; it? How many techs do they train, and where do they station them? How many
&gt; parts do they stock for repairs? Even if GM sold them at the end of the
&gt; trial, the buyers would be left with an electric Yugo.


The same people who service the converted electric cars and DIY
conversions available now. The buyers know these are a esoteric thing.
They wanted them anyway.

Quit sticking up for GM. They are a bully needing an asskicking.

Report this message

#25: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-23 06:06:48 by Orval Fairbairn

In article &lt;<a href="mailto:1153617120.125854.279490&#64;p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com" target="_blank">1153617120.125854.279490&#64;p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com</a>&gt;,
&quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt; wrote:

&gt; Gary wrote:
&gt; &gt; Really when you think about it, if GM abandoned the car, who would service
&gt; &gt; it? How many techs do they train, and where do they station them? How many
&gt; &gt; parts do they stock for repairs? Even if GM sold them at the end of the
&gt; &gt; trial, the buyers would be left with an electric Yugo.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; The same people who service the converted electric cars and DIY
&gt; conversions available now. The buyers know these are a esoteric thing.
&gt; They wanted them anyway.
&gt;
&gt; Quit sticking up for GM. They are a bully needing an asskicking.

And ... the eco-Nazis are even bigger bullies, who have cost the
American public untold billions of $$ with their incessant wild goose
chases and unwarranted requirements, such as:

oxygenates in the fuel
electric cars
mass transit
destruction of the American nuclear power industry
super-restrictive smog inspections, even on cars that were manufactured
pre-emission control
blocking of freeway improvements

Report this message

#26: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-23 15:56:42 by TheSnoMan

On 18 Jul 2006 06:22:32 -0700, &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt;
wrote:

&gt; $1500 a car for health insurance? I would like to see them prove that.
&gt;I think it's hooey.


That was well know and that was for 2005, I am not making this up. GM
has very liberale insurance benifits at basically no cost to employees
and it is starting to bleed them a lot. Below is a old link that took
10 seconds to find with a search engine (there are a a lot more) that
state GM's insurance costs in 2005. It will be higher in 2006. You
should read more before making some claims.


<a href="http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=NC&amp;pubid=1113" target="_blank">http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=NC&amp;pubid=1113</a>
-----------------
The SnoMan
www.thesnoman.com

Report this message

#27: Re: Punishing GM for killing electric car

Posted on 2006-07-23 16:38:10 by mmo

SnoMan wrote:
&gt; On 18 Jul 2006 06:22:32 -0700, &quot;Bret Ludwig&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">bretldwig&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt;
&gt; wrote:
&gt;
&gt;&gt; $1500 a car for health insurance? I would like to see them prove that.
&gt;&gt; I think it's hooey.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; That was well know and that was for 2005, I am not making this up. GM
&gt; has very liberale insurance benifits at basically no cost to employees
&gt; and it is starting to bleed them a lot. Below is a old link that took
&gt; 10 seconds to find with a search engine (there are a a lot more) that
&gt; state GM's insurance costs in 2005. It will be higher in 2006. You
&gt; should read more before making some claims.
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; <a href="http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=NC&amp;pubid=1113" target="_blank">http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=NC&amp;pubid=1113</a>
&gt; -----------------
&gt; The SnoMan
&gt; www.thesnoman.com
Well if all you People that there company's don't pay there health
insurance would pay there own insurance in stead of going to the
hospital and getting there health care for free. Then the hospitals
wouldn't have to charge inflated rates to the people that have company
sponsored insurance to cover you slackers.
Hay I'm a UAW member and I do have to pay into my health insurance plan!!
Maybe the mass out there might want to start organizing and take back
some of the company's profits and CEO wages. No that not right I really
want to pay for my own insurance and while were at it just take me out
of the middle class and beat me with a stick..

Report this message