Gas Prices making a dent ... finally!

GM, Ford sales tumble in September; Asian brands see smaller drop
October 03, 2005 11:25 PM EDT
DETROIT - High gas prices and a summer of heavy discounting sent sales of
sport utility vehicles plummeting last month for U.S. automakers. Asian
manufacturers, who had avoided the employee-pricing lures Detroit offered,
saw their results less affected.

Several automakers reported strong car sales in their monthly reports
released Monday, but SUVs took a hit industrywide in the U.S. market as gas
prices skyrocketed following Hurricane Katrina. Sales of the GMC Envoy and
Chevrolet Tahoe fell more than 50 percent compared to last September. The
Cadillac Escalade, Mazda Tribute, Ford Explorer, Ford Expedition, Toyota
Sequoia and Nissan Armada all saw their sales fall by 18 percent or more.
Dodge Durango sales were down 11 percent.

General Motors Corp. sales were down 24 percent overall. Its SUV and truck
sales fell 30 percent while its car sales dropped 14 percent. GM's overall
sales were flat for the first nine months of the year.

GM said it knew September would be a challenge after a summer of heavily
promoted discounting. GM began letting consumers pay the employee price in
June and ended the promotion Friday.

"We're coming off the three strongest months in the history of the
industry," said Paul Ballew, GM's executive director of market and industry
analysis.

Ford Motor Co. also took a hit, with sales down nearly 20 percent in
September. Ford, Lincoln and Mercury car sales rose 6 percent, but sales of
trucks and SUVs fell nearly 28 percent. The company's overall sales were
also flat for the first nine months of the year.

Ford attributed the declines to the strong summer. Ford began allowing
customers to pay the employee price in July, and the incentive helped
deplete the automaker's 2005 inventory. George Pipas, Ford's U.S. sales
analysis manager, said the company expects SUV sales will stay soft in the
near term.

Ballew cautioned that gas prices aren't the only reason for falling SUV
sales. He said an aging lineup of SUVs and more options in car-based
crossovers also are affecting the segment.

Strong pickup sales were further proof that gas prices aren't the only
factor in the SUV's decline. The Dodge Ram pickup had its best month ever
and its sales were up 5 percent, DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler Group said.
Toyota said sales of its Tacoma pickup rose more than 21 percent.

Chrysler bucked the trend among U.S. automakers, reporting a 4 percent
increase in September sales, led by a 26 percent jump in car sales. The
Dodge Neon, which Chrysler stopped making two weeks ago, saw a 69 percent
increase. Chrysler's truck and SUV sales were down 1.8 percent, but its
overall sales were up 7.5 percent for the year.

Asian automakers also saw weak SUV sales, but none of the payback that U.S.
automakers had to contend with. Toyota Motor Corp.'s sales were up 10
percent in September, thanks to a 22 percent increase in car sales. Toyota's
truck sales fell 4 percent. The Japanese automaker's sales were up 11
percent in the first nine months of the year, and the company said it set a
third-quarter U.S. sales record.

Sales of the hybrid Toyota Prius surged 90 percent.

Nissan Motor Co. said its sales were up 16.4 percent in September, led by a
26.5 percent increase in car sales. While sales of the Armada, its largest
SUV, were down, sales of the midsize Pathfinder SUV more than doubled, which
helped lift Nissan's truck sales by 3 percent.

Honda Motor Co.'s sales rose 11.7 percent thanks to positive response to the
redesigned 2006 Civic, which helped boost car sales by 20 percent. Honda's
truck sales were flat for the month and its overall sales were up 6.3
percent for the January-September period.

Hyundai Motor Co.'s sales were up 9 percent in September. The South Korean
automaker's overall sales were up 10 percent for the year.

Volkswagen AG was the only automaker that didn't report U.S. sales on
Monday. Spokesman Tony Fouladpour said the results would be delayed until
Tuesday because Monday was a German holiday.

There were 25 selling days in September 2005, the same number as September
2004.

In article <P2o0f.9274$q1.8752@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.ne t>,
Philip <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:

> GM, Ford sales tumble in September; Asian brands see smaller drop
> October 03, 2005 11:25 PM EDT

What was the source of the article?

Thanks.

Brent

Brent Secombe, 10/4/2005, 7:30:37 AM,
<041020050730375965%bsecombover@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> In article <P2o0f.9274$q1.8752@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.ne t>,
> Philip <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > GM, Ford sales tumble in September; Asian brands see smaller drop
> > October 03, 2005 11:25 PM EDT
>
> What was the source of the article?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Brent

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20051003/bs_nm/autos_sales_d
c_4

--
"Golf balls are attracted to water as unerringly as the eye of a
middle-aged man to a female bosom." -- Michael Green

"Brent Secombe" <bsecombover@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:041020050730375965%bsecombover@yahoo.co.uk...
> In article <P2o0f.9274$q1.8752@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.ne t>,
> Philip <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> GM, Ford sales tumble in September; Asian brands see smaller drop
>> October 03, 2005 11:25 PM EDT
>
> What was the source of the article?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Brent

Associated Press, yesterday.

On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 07:30:37 -0400, Brent Secombe wrote:

> In article <P2o0f.9274$q1.8752@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.ne t>,
> Philip <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> GM, Ford sales tumble in September; Asian brands see smaller drop
>> October 03, 2005 11:25 PM EDT
>
> What was the source of the article?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Brent


With Honda and Nissan leading the way!

With all that domestics still sold more vehicles than all of the various
import brands combined. I addition Chevrolet earned the number one car
brand spot over Toyota. GM still is number manufacture as well as first in
total car sales and total truck sales. Ford in still the number two
manufacture, as well as the number one in individual vehicle sales with the
F150. The number one mid size and small SUV with the Explorer and the
Escape. ;)

mike hunt



mike hunt


"Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:P2o0f.9274$q1.8752@newsread3.news.atl.earthli nk.net...
> GM, Ford sales tumble in September; Asian brands see smaller drop
> October 03, 2005 11:25 PM EDT
> DETROIT - High gas prices and a summer of heavy discounting sent sales of
> sport utility vehicles plummeting last month for U.S. automakers. Asian
> manufacturers, who had avoided the employee-pricing lures Detroit offered,
> saw their results less affected.
>
> Several automakers reported strong car sales in their monthly reports
> released Monday, but SUVs took a hit industrywide in the U.S. market as
> gas prices skyrocketed following Hurricane Katrina. Sales of the GMC Envoy
> and Chevrolet Tahoe fell more than 50 percent compared to last September.
> The Cadillac Escalade, Mazda Tribute, Ford Explorer, Ford Expedition,
> Toyota Sequoia and Nissan Armada all saw their sales fall by 18 percent or
> more. Dodge Durango sales were down 11 percent.
>
> General Motors Corp. sales were down 24 percent overall. Its SUV and truck
> sales fell 30 percent while its car sales dropped 14 percent. GM's overall
> sales were flat for the first nine months of the year.
>
> GM said it knew September would be a challenge after a summer of heavily
> promoted discounting. GM began letting consumers pay the employee price in
> June and ended the promotion Friday.
>
> "We're coming off the three strongest months in the history of the
> industry," said Paul Ballew, GM's executive director of market and
> industry analysis.
>
> Ford Motor Co. also took a hit, with sales down nearly 20 percent in
> September. Ford, Lincoln and Mercury car sales rose 6 percent, but sales
> of trucks and SUVs fell nearly 28 percent. The company's overall sales
> were also flat for the first nine months of the year.
>
> Ford attributed the declines to the strong summer. Ford began allowing
> customers to pay the employee price in July, and the incentive helped
> deplete the automaker's 2005 inventory. George Pipas, Ford's U.S. sales
> analysis manager, said the company expects SUV sales will stay soft in the
> near term.
>
> Ballew cautioned that gas prices aren't the only reason for falling SUV
> sales. He said an aging lineup of SUVs and more options in car-based
> crossovers also are affecting the segment.
>
> Strong pickup sales were further proof that gas prices aren't the only
> factor in the SUV's decline. The Dodge Ram pickup had its best month ever
> and its sales were up 5 percent, DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler Group said.
> Toyota said sales of its Tacoma pickup rose more than 21 percent.
>
> Chrysler bucked the trend among U.S. automakers, reporting a 4 percent
> increase in September sales, led by a 26 percent jump in car sales. The
> Dodge Neon, which Chrysler stopped making two weeks ago, saw a 69 percent
> increase. Chrysler's truck and SUV sales were down 1.8 percent, but its
> overall sales were up 7.5 percent for the year.
>
> Asian automakers also saw weak SUV sales, but none of the payback that
> U.S. automakers had to contend with. Toyota Motor Corp.'s sales were up 10
> percent in September, thanks to a 22 percent increase in car sales.
> Toyota's truck sales fell 4 percent. The Japanese automaker's sales were
> up 11 percent in the first nine months of the year, and the company said
> it set a third-quarter U.S. sales record.
>
> Sales of the hybrid Toyota Prius surged 90 percent.
>
> Nissan Motor Co. said its sales were up 16.4 percent in September, led by
> a 26.5 percent increase in car sales. While sales of the Armada, its
> largest SUV, were down, sales of the midsize Pathfinder SUV more than
> doubled, which helped lift Nissan's truck sales by 3 percent.
>
> Honda Motor Co.'s sales rose 11.7 percent thanks to positive response to
> the redesigned 2006 Civic, which helped boost car sales by 20 percent.
> Honda's truck sales were flat for the month and its overall sales were up
> 6.3 percent for the January-September period.
>
> Hyundai Motor Co.'s sales were up 9 percent in September. The South Korean
> automaker's overall sales were up 10 percent for the year.
>
> Volkswagen AG was the only automaker that didn't report U.S. sales on
> Monday. Spokesman Tony Fouladpour said the results would be delayed until
> Tuesday because Monday was a German holiday.
>
> There were 25 selling days in September 2005, the same number as September
> 2004.
>
>

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:_YCcndlfbbJvOd_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> With all that domestics still sold more vehicles than all of the various
> import brands combined. I addition Chevrolet earned the number one car
> brand spot over Toyota. GM still is number manufacture as well as first
> in total car sales and total truck sales. Ford in still the number two
> manufacture, as well as the number one in individual vehicle sales with
> the F150. The number one mid size and small SUV with the Explorer and the
> Escape. ;)
Only in this country. Anywhere else they don't stack up. The only thing that
drives the big three's sales is huge, powerful, gas guzzling engines and
sales to people who "just have to buy American." If you took those things
away, why would you ever look past Toyota and Honda for a new vehicle?

> Only in this country. Anywhere else they don't stack up. The only thing that
> drives the big three's sales is huge, powerful, gas guzzling engines and
> sales to people who "just have to buy American." If you took those things
> away, why would you ever look past Toyota and Honda for a new vehicle?

I don't think you'll be able to take that "good feeling" of buying
American away from people, especially the ignorant. But, over the long
run, The Economist predicts that either GM or Ford will fold within the
decade. Given the overhead that the big 3 run at, I wouldn't be
surprised. These organizations are too ingrained into the gas guzzlers
to adapt to change. Ford may learn to adapt with their earlier embrace
of hybrid technology, but GM will almost certainly die a painful death
before they even dent the fuel cell arena.

Apparently most buyers do not agree with you opinion, since GM is number
one in the world as well

mike hunt


"Bob Palmer" <jenbobkatelyn@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:frSdnTn1n-PZNt_eRVn-hQ@adelphia.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:_YCcndlfbbJvOd_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> With all that domestics still sold more vehicles than all of the various
>> import brands combined. I addition Chevrolet earned the number one car
>> brand spot over Toyota. GM still is number manufacture as well as first
>> in total car sales and total truck sales. Ford in still the number two
>> manufacture, as well as the number one in individual vehicle sales with
>> the F150. The number one mid size and small SUV with the Explorer and the
>> Escape. ;)
> Only in this country. Anywhere else they don't stack up. The only thing
> that drives the big three's sales is huge, powerful, gas guzzling engines
> and sales to people who "just have to buy American." If you took those
> things away, why would you ever look past Toyota and Honda for a new
> vehicle?
>

Too bad their bonds are too junky to be called junk bonds according to
analysists.


"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:_YCcndlfbbJvOd_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> With all that domestics still sold more vehicles than all of the various
> import brands combined. I addition Chevrolet earned the number one car
> brand spot over Toyota. GM still is number manufacture as well as first
> in total car sales and total truck sales. Ford in still the number two
> manufacture, as well as the number one in individual vehicle sales with
> the F150. The number one mid size and small SUV with the Explorer and the
> Escape. ;)
>
> mike hunt
>
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:P2o0f.9274$q1.8752@newsread3.news.atl.earthli nk.net...
>> GM, Ford sales tumble in September; Asian brands see smaller drop
>> October 03, 2005 11:25 PM EDT
>> DETROIT - High gas prices and a summer of heavy discounting sent sales of
>> sport utility vehicles plummeting last month for U.S. automakers. Asian
>> manufacturers, who had avoided the employee-pricing lures Detroit
>> offered, saw their results less affected.
>>
>> Several automakers reported strong car sales in their monthly reports
>> released Monday, but SUVs took a hit industrywide in the U.S. market as
>> gas prices skyrocketed following Hurricane Katrina. Sales of the GMC
>> Envoy and Chevrolet Tahoe fell more than 50 percent compared to last
>> September. The Cadillac Escalade, Mazda Tribute, Ford Explorer, Ford
>> Expedition, Toyota Sequoia and Nissan Armada all saw their sales fall by
>> 18 percent or more. Dodge Durango sales were down 11 percent.
>>
>> General Motors Corp. sales were down 24 percent overall. Its SUV and
>> truck sales fell 30 percent while its car sales dropped 14 percent. GM's
>> overall sales were flat for the first nine months of the year.
>>
>> GM said it knew September would be a challenge after a summer of heavily
>> promoted discounting. GM began letting consumers pay the employee price
>> in June and ended the promotion Friday.
>>
>> "We're coming off the three strongest months in the history of the
>> industry," said Paul Ballew, GM's executive director of market and
>> industry analysis.
>>
>> Ford Motor Co. also took a hit, with sales down nearly 20 percent in
>> September. Ford, Lincoln and Mercury car sales rose 6 percent, but sales
>> of trucks and SUVs fell nearly 28 percent. The company's overall sales
>> were also flat for the first nine months of the year.
>>
>> Ford attributed the declines to the strong summer. Ford began allowing
>> customers to pay the employee price in July, and the incentive helped
>> deplete the automaker's 2005 inventory. George Pipas, Ford's U.S. sales
>> analysis manager, said the company expects SUV sales will stay soft in
>> the near term.
>>
>> Ballew cautioned that gas prices aren't the only reason for falling SUV
>> sales. He said an aging lineup of SUVs and more options in car-based
>> crossovers also are affecting the segment.
>>
>> Strong pickup sales were further proof that gas prices aren't the only
>> factor in the SUV's decline. The Dodge Ram pickup had its best month ever
>> and its sales were up 5 percent, DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler Group
>> said. Toyota said sales of its Tacoma pickup rose more than 21 percent.
>>
>> Chrysler bucked the trend among U.S. automakers, reporting a 4 percent
>> increase in September sales, led by a 26 percent jump in car sales. The
>> Dodge Neon, which Chrysler stopped making two weeks ago, saw a 69 percent
>> increase. Chrysler's truck and SUV sales were down 1.8 percent, but its
>> overall sales were up 7.5 percent for the year.
>>
>> Asian automakers also saw weak SUV sales, but none of the payback that
>> U.S. automakers had to contend with. Toyota Motor Corp.'s sales were up
>> 10 percent in September, thanks to a 22 percent increase in car sales.
>> Toyota's truck sales fell 4 percent. The Japanese automaker's sales were
>> up 11 percent in the first nine months of the year, and the company said
>> it set a third-quarter U.S. sales record.
>>
>> Sales of the hybrid Toyota Prius surged 90 percent.
>>
>> Nissan Motor Co. said its sales were up 16.4 percent in September, led by
>> a 26.5 percent increase in car sales. While sales of the Armada, its
>> largest SUV, were down, sales of the midsize Pathfinder SUV more than
>> doubled, which helped lift Nissan's truck sales by 3 percent.
>>
>> Honda Motor Co.'s sales rose 11.7 percent thanks to positive response to
>> the redesigned 2006 Civic, which helped boost car sales by 20 percent.
>> Honda's truck sales were flat for the month and its overall sales were up
>> 6.3 percent for the January-September period.
>>
>> Hyundai Motor Co.'s sales were up 9 percent in September. The South
>> Korean automaker's overall sales were up 10 percent for the year.
>>
>> Volkswagen AG was the only automaker that didn't report U.S. sales on
>> Monday. Spokesman Tony Fouladpour said the results would be delayed until
>> Tuesday because Monday was a German holiday.
>>
>> There were 25 selling days in September 2005, the same number as
>> September 2004.
>>
>>
>
>

Mike -

I think it is very telling that GM stock has done not appreciated in
value at all over the last 42 years, and in fact has fallen very
dramatically when inflation is considered. The entire company has a
market value of $17 billion dollars, a mere pittance considering its
size and employment. Ford stock has WAY outperformed GM stock since
the early 80s.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=my&s=GM&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=f

Good guess but trucks still outsell cars in the US. Manufactures know what
their customers want to buy and that is what they offer. GM and Ford offer
small cars for those that want them but more buyers want the larger safer
vehicles. Ford does offer a hybrid SUV but Ford buyer apparently are smart
enough to know it is not worth $3,000 more than buying the same vehicle with
a V6 and ALL of it fuel for three years for the same amount or less. With
the V6 they not need to worry about replacing a battery pack some where down
the road, for $4,000, in the hybrid.

Why do you think Toyota offers so many trucks and car based trucks? Buyers
want trucks, Honda is even offering their Accord based van as a truck called
the Ridgerunner. GM offers more high mileage vehicles than does Toyota and
Ford offers many fuel efficient cars with decent performance, as well. That
is why both GM and Ford far outsell Toyota in cars and trucks. Many buyers
do not want to settle for an under powered truck or car with a 4 cy engine
to get reasonable fuel mileage as do the 8 out of 10 buyers of the Camry.

mike hunt


<jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
news:1128443210.669768.293850@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
>
>> Only in this country. Anywhere else they don't stack up. The only thing
>> that
>> drives the big three's sales is huge, powerful, gas guzzling engines and
>> sales to people who "just have to buy American." If you took those things
>> away, why would you ever look past Toyota and Honda for a new vehicle?
>
> I don't think you'll be able to take that "good feeling" of buying
> American away from people, especially the ignorant. But, over the long
> run, The Economist predicts that either GM or Ford will fold within the
> decade. Given the overhead that the big 3 run at, I wouldn't be
> surprised. These organizations are too ingrained into the gas guzzlers
> to adapt to change. Ford may learn to adapt with their earlier embrace
> of hybrid technology, but GM will almost certainly die a painful death
> before they even dent the fuel cell arena.
>

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> sez:

> Apparently most buyers do not agree with you opinion, since GM is number
> one in the world as well

I'm well aware of your love fest going on with GM but the fact still remains
that the biggest POS (Piece Of Shit) I've ever owned was a '97 Chevy
Suburban made in Mexico import. Engine problems, transmission problems,
brake problems, exhaust problems, suspension problems, air-conditioning
problems, etc. I nick-named it the AEV for Accelerated Entropy Vehicle.

That's why we now have a Tundra and a Sequoia (both made in the USA) and are
interested in the soon to come Yaris for the kids. I'll never own another
GM product as long as I live.

You on the other hand get to buy whatever you want so knock yourself out
with the "Professional Grade" stuff.

Good reliability and value to ya,
VLJ
--

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:_YCcndlfbbJvOd_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> With all that domestics still sold more vehicles than all of the various
> import brands combined. I addition Chevrolet earned the number one car
> brand spot over Toyota. GM still is number manufacture as well as first
> in total car sales and total truck sales. Ford in still the number two
> manufacture, as well as the number one in individual vehicle sales with
> the F150. The number one mid size and small SUV with the Explorer and the
> Escape. ;)
>
> mike hunt

Well....OK. An entire paragraph of statements which can only be considered
meaningless without further information.

> With all that domestics still sold more vehicles than all of the various
> import brands combined.

Of course. The big 3 have been tripping all over each other since spring,
offering one ridiculous discount after another. It's the only way they can
generate healthy sales numbers. Furthermore, the vehicles they sell *have*
to be replaced more often than Toyotas because they're garbage. Since they
tend to sell to repeat customers who like being boned in the ass by shoddy
manufacturers, they have a locked up market.

> I addition Chevrolet earned the number one car brand spot over Toyota.

Number one in what? Sales numbers?

> GM still is number manufacture as well as first in total car sales and
> total truck sales. Ford in still the number two manufacture, as well as
> the number one in individual vehicle sales with the F150. The number one
> mid size and small SUV with the Explorer and the Escape. ;)

Correct. And, on any given day in American grocery stores, far more people
buy chicken than lobster. Why? Because it's cheaper. American cars will
always be sold in higher numbers. They're cheaper, and they're throwaways,
like disposable plastic plates.

Apparently you know little of how bond investors get rich on the higher
interest rates paid on unrated bonds LOL

mike hunt


"Art" <begunaNOSPAMPLEASE@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:Uwy0f.9468$q1.5826@newsread3.news.atl.earthli nk.net...
> Too bad their bonds are too junky to be called junk bonds according to
> analysists.
>
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:_YCcndlfbbJvOd_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> With all that domestics still sold more vehicles than all of the various
>> import brands combined. I addition Chevrolet earned the number one car
>> brand spot over Toyota. GM still is number manufacture as well as first
>> in total car sales and total truck sales. Ford in still the number two
>> manufacture, as well as the number one in individual vehicle sales with
>> the F150. The number one mid size and small SUV with the Explorer and the
>> Escape. ;)
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>> "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:P2o0f.9274$q1.8752@newsread3.news.atl.earthli nk.net...
>>> GM, Ford sales tumble in September; Asian brands see smaller drop
>>> October 03, 2005 11:25 PM EDT
>>> DETROIT - High gas prices and a summer of heavy discounting sent sales
>>> of sport utility vehicles plummeting last month for U.S. automakers.
>>> Asian manufacturers, who had avoided the employee-pricing lures Detroit
>>> offered, saw their results less affected.
>>>
>>> Several automakers reported strong car sales in their monthly reports
>>> released Monday, but SUVs took a hit industrywide in the U.S. market as
>>> gas prices skyrocketed following Hurricane Katrina. Sales of the GMC
>>> Envoy and Chevrolet Tahoe fell more than 50 percent compared to last
>>> September. The Cadillac Escalade, Mazda Tribute, Ford Explorer, Ford
>>> Expedition, Toyota Sequoia and Nissan Armada all saw their sales fall by
>>> 18 percent or more. Dodge Durango sales were down 11 percent.
>>>
>>> General Motors Corp. sales were down 24 percent overall. Its SUV and
>>> truck sales fell 30 percent while its car sales dropped 14 percent. GM's
>>> overall sales were flat for the first nine months of the year.
>>>
>>> GM said it knew September would be a challenge after a summer of heavily
>>> promoted discounting. GM began letting consumers pay the employee price
>>> in June and ended the promotion Friday.
>>>
>>> "We're coming off the three strongest months in the history of the
>>> industry," said Paul Ballew, GM's executive director of market and
>>> industry analysis.
>>>
>>> Ford Motor Co. also took a hit, with sales down nearly 20 percent in
>>> September. Ford, Lincoln and Mercury car sales rose 6 percent, but sales
>>> of trucks and SUVs fell nearly 28 percent. The company's overall sales
>>> were also flat for the first nine months of the year.
>>>
>>> Ford attributed the declines to the strong summer. Ford began allowing
>>> customers to pay the employee price in July, and the incentive helped
>>> deplete the automaker's 2005 inventory. George Pipas, Ford's U.S. sales
>>> analysis manager, said the company expects SUV sales will stay soft in
>>> the near term.
>>>
>>> Ballew cautioned that gas prices aren't the only reason for falling SUV
>>> sales. He said an aging lineup of SUVs and more options in car-based
>>> crossovers also are affecting the segment.
>>>
>>> Strong pickup sales were further proof that gas prices aren't the only
>>> factor in the SUV's decline. The Dodge Ram pickup had its best month
>>> ever and its sales were up 5 percent, DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler
>>> Group said. Toyota said sales of its Tacoma pickup rose more than 21
>>> percent.
>>>
>>> Chrysler bucked the trend among U.S. automakers, reporting a 4 percent
>>> increase in September sales, led by a 26 percent jump in car sales. The
>>> Dodge Neon, which Chrysler stopped making two weeks ago, saw a 69
>>> percent increase. Chrysler's truck and SUV sales were down 1.8 percent,
>>> but its overall sales were up 7.5 percent for the year.
>>>
>>> Asian automakers also saw weak SUV sales, but none of the payback that
>>> U.S. automakers had to contend with. Toyota Motor Corp.'s sales were up
>>> 10 percent in September, thanks to a 22 percent increase in car sales.
>>> Toyota's truck sales fell 4 percent. The Japanese automaker's sales were
>>> up 11 percent in the first nine months of the year, and the company said
>>> it set a third-quarter U.S. sales record.
>>>
>>> Sales of the hybrid Toyota Prius surged 90 percent.
>>>
>>> Nissan Motor Co. said its sales were up 16.4 percent in September, led
>>> by a 26.5 percent increase in car sales. While sales of the Armada, its
>>> largest SUV, were down, sales of the midsize Pathfinder SUV more than
>>> doubled, which helped lift Nissan's truck sales by 3 percent.
>>>
>>> Honda Motor Co.'s sales rose 11.7 percent thanks to positive response to
>>> the redesigned 2006 Civic, which helped boost car sales by 20 percent.
>>> Honda's truck sales were flat for the month and its overall sales were
>>> up 6.3 percent for the January-September period.
>>>
>>> Hyundai Motor Co.'s sales were up 9 percent in September. The South
>>> Korean automaker's overall sales were up 10 percent for the year.
>>>
>>> Volkswagen AG was the only automaker that didn't report U.S. sales on
>>> Monday. Spokesman Tony Fouladpour said the results would be delayed
>>> until Tuesday because Monday was a German holiday.
>>>
>>> There were 25 selling days in September 2005, the same number as
>>> September 2004.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

In article <EZOdna4ej-ltJN_eRVn-uA@comcast.com>, "vlj" <v@l.j> wrote:

> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> sez:
>
> > Apparently most buyers do not agree with you opinion, since GM is number
> > one in the world as well

I just rented a 2005 Impalla for 10 days.
MO vety spacious, good ride, very good seats, very good visibility
(chrysler 300 is terrible here) very good highway fuel mileage, but:
-Slightly sloppy handling.
-Outdated transmission. This car is geared very high to achieve high
highway fuel mileage and is very reluctant to downshift on hills, making
it painful to drive in hilly areas, unless on cruise. Surprisingly it
also doesn't downshift itself when in cruise control and over speeding
down hill.
This transmission would have bee good in the 80s.

My current car is a '95 Chrysler Concord which I wouldn't trade straight
for this older tech Impalla.
Sorry GM, you really are selling out of date car technology.

You can't prove it by me. I don't own Ford stock but I know it is down
today. I bought GM at 40.8 in 1960. GM has always paid good dividends, and
still does today. GM has split twice in the interim, more than returning my
original investment many times over.

My shares today are worth far more than the amount invested. I sold shares
for more than my total original investment and the balance are still worth
far more and still paying me thousands in dividends

mike hunt


Mark" <bogusmailmark@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1128445418.513482.215940@g44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> Mike -
>
> I think it is very telling that GM stock has done not appreciated in
> value at all over the last 42 years, and in fact has fallen very
> dramatically when inflation is considered. The entire company has a
> market value of $17 billion dollars, a mere pittance considering its
> size and employment. Ford stock has WAY outperformed GM stock since
> the early 80s.
>
> http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=my&s=GM&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=f
>

Mike Hunter wrote:
> Apparently you know little of how bond investors get rich on the higher
> interest rates paid on unrated bonds LOL
>
> mike hunt
>

Apparently you're unaware that GM has to take the burden of the higher
interest rates associated with their "good for toilet paper" bonds.
Apparently you're also unaware that GM, although generating sales that
are still good, is losing profitability on a consistent basis. I think
their earnings/share is negative, as Cheney would say, big time!

If I were any type of investor, Toyota would be the only game in town.
Even Honda will not match their growth potential in the long run. I
would short GM, again, BIG TIME! :)

Later

Naturally one is free to buy whatever they wish and based on sales, in a
free market, they prefer GM to ALL others. However I agree ALL manufacture
build some that are not up to snuff on occasion that is why they all offer a
warranty, even RR. With around 17,000,000 new vehicles sold annually in the
US, I Personally would never judge everything a manufacture builds, to be
good or bad, based on the ONE with which I did or did not have problems.
That would be foolish. The fact is the vehicles available from all
manufacture today are great vehicles. Look at all of the available
statistics, ALL manufactures have a failure rate between 2% and 2 1/2% over
time. Given the proper prevetive maintenance, the chance of getting a good
one from any manufacture are the same, between 97 1/2% and 98% no mater
whose brand is on the hood.


mike hunt


"vlj" <v@l.j> wrote in message news:EZOdna4ej-ltJN_eRVn-uA@comcast.com...
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> sez:
>
>> Apparently most buyers do not agree with you opinion, since GM is number
>> one in the world as well
>
> I'm well aware of your love fest going on with GM but the fact still
> remains
> that the biggest POS (Piece Of Shit) I've ever owned was a '97 Chevy
> Suburban made in Mexico import. Engine problems, transmission problems,
> brake problems, exhaust problems, suspension problems, air-conditioning
> problems, etc. I nick-named it the AEV for Accelerated Entropy Vehicle.
>
> That's why we now have a Tundra and a Sequoia (both made in the USA) and
> are
> interested in the soon to come Yaris for the kids. I'll never own another
> GM product as long as I live.
>
> You on the other hand get to buy whatever you want so knock yourself out
> with the "Professional Grade" stuff.
>
> Good reliability and value to ya,
> VLJ
> --
>
>

Mike, that graph I published is adjusted for splits. I am aware of the
dividend, but I would be willing to bet that the return net of
inflation has been very low.

What is your point? Every manufacture offers rebates. The average new
vehicle buyer in the US, and that is what we are referring to new vehicle
sales, buy another new vehicle in three to four years with 45K to 60K on the
clock. ANY vehicle sold today will easily last to 200K, given the proper
maintenance. But whatever you wish, that is what buyers do after all and
they buy more GM models than Toyota models, period. Price is ALWAYS the
determining factor, that is why Toyota sells more than Lexus. The Lexus
must meet any imagined quality and longevity standard better than a Toyota
yet more buyers buy a Toyota because it's less expensive than the Lexus

mike hunt


"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ZVy0f.688$647.46@news01.roc.ny...
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:_YCcndlfbbJvOd_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> With all that domestics still sold more vehicles than all of the various
>> import brands combined. I addition Chevrolet earned the number one car
>> brand spot over Toyota. GM still is number manufacture as well as first
>> in total car sales and total truck sales. Ford in still the number two
>> manufacture, as well as the number one in individual vehicle sales with
>> the F150. The number one mid size and small SUV with the Explorer and the
>> Escape. ;)
>>
>> mike hunt
>
> Well....OK. An entire paragraph of statements which can only be considered
> meaningless without further information.
>
>> With all that domestics still sold more vehicles than all of the various
>> import brands combined.
>
> Of course. The big 3 have been tripping all over each other since spring,
> offering one ridiculous discount after another. It's the only way they can
> generate healthy sales numbers. Furthermore, the vehicles they sell *have*
> to be replaced more often than Toyotas because they're garbage. Since they
> tend to sell to repeat customers who like being boned in the ass by shoddy
> manufacturers, they have a locked up market.
>
>> I addition Chevrolet earned the number one car brand spot over Toyota.
>
> Number one in what? Sales numbers?
>
>> GM still is number manufacture as well as first in total car sales and
>> total truck sales. Ford in still the number two manufacture, as well as
>> the number one in individual vehicle sales with the F150. The number one
>> mid size and small SUV with the Explorer and the Escape. ;)
>
> Correct. And, on any given day in American grocery stores, far more people
> buy chicken than lobster. Why? Because it's cheaper. American cars will
> always be sold in higher numbers. They're cheaper, and they're throwaways,
> like disposable plastic plates.
>

I guess you never had a 4cy Camry rental if you thought the Buick was a slug
on the hills? I have news for you all 95s are outdated today. The cars
today are technologically far better than those sold ten years ago or even
five years ago.


mike hunt


"Spam Hater" <iHate@spam.net> wrote in message
news:iHate-3BBCFA.10355704102005@news.telus.net...
> In article <EZOdna4ej-ltJN_eRVn-uA@comcast.com>, "vlj" <v@l.j> wrote:
>
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> sez:
>>
>> > Apparently most buyers do not agree with you opinion, since GM is
>> > number
>> > one in the world as well
>
> I just rented a 2005 Impalla for 10 days.
> MO vety spacious, good ride, very good seats, very good visibility
> (chrysler 300 is terrible here) very good highway fuel mileage, but:
> -Slightly sloppy handling.
> -Outdated transmission. This car is geared very high to achieve high
> highway fuel mileage and is very reluctant to downshift on hills, making
> it painful to drive in hilly areas, unless on cruise. Surprisingly it
> also doesn't downshift itself when in cruise control and over speeding
> down hill.
> This transmission would have bee good in the 80s.
>
> My current car is a '95 Chrysler Concord which I wouldn't trade straight
> for this older tech Impalla.
> Sorry GM, you really are selling out of date car technology.

Price isn't the only factor. Some of us have had MULTIPLE experiences where
a car dies at the worst possible time. All cars eventually need batteries,
starter motors, power steering pumps, etc. But, when a Buick (to use one
example) requires a new transmission at 60k miles, that's pure bullshit.
And, warranty doesn't matter. You're still stuck on some road, probably in
pouring rain, trying to go on vacation. No amount of warranty coverage
compensates for that.

People who buy American cars accept mickey mouse problems as being normal.
How sad.



"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:orOcnegxO_ZiWN_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> What is your point? Every manufacture offers rebates. The average new
> vehicle buyer in the US, and that is what we are referring to new vehicle
> sales, buy another new vehicle in three to four years with 45K to 60K on
> the clock. ANY vehicle sold today will easily last to 200K, given the
> proper maintenance. But whatever you wish, that is what buyers do after
> all and they buy more GM models than Toyota models, period. Price is
> ALWAYS the determining factor, that is why Toyota sells more than Lexus.
> The Lexus must meet any imagined quality and longevity standard better
> than a Toyota yet more buyers buy a Toyota because it's less expensive
> than the Lexus
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ZVy0f.688$647.46@news01.roc.ny...
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> news:_YCcndlfbbJvOd_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>> With all that domestics still sold more vehicles than all of the various
>>> import brands combined. I addition Chevrolet earned the number one car
>>> brand spot over Toyota. GM still is number manufacture as well as first
>>> in total car sales and total truck sales. Ford in still the number two
>>> manufacture, as well as the number one in individual vehicle sales with
>>> the F150. The number one mid size and small SUV with the Explorer and
>>> the Escape. ;)
>>>
>>> mike hunt
>>
>> Well....OK. An entire paragraph of statements which can only be
>> considered meaningless without further information.
>>
>>> With all that domestics still sold more vehicles than all of the various
>>> import brands combined.
>>
>> Of course. The big 3 have been tripping all over each other since spring,
>> offering one ridiculous discount after another. It's the only way they
>> can generate healthy sales numbers. Furthermore, the vehicles they sell
>> *have* to be replaced more often than Toyotas because they're garbage.
>> Since they tend to sell to repeat customers who like being boned in the
>> ass by shoddy manufacturers, they have a locked up market.
>>
>>> I addition Chevrolet earned the number one car brand spot over Toyota.
>>
>> Number one in what? Sales numbers?
>>
>>> GM still is number manufacture as well as first in total car sales and
>>> total truck sales. Ford in still the number two manufacture, as well as
>>> the number one in individual vehicle sales with the F150. The number one
>>> mid size and small SUV with the Explorer and the Escape. ;)
>>
>> Correct. And, on any given day in American grocery stores, far more
>> people buy chicken than lobster. Why? Because it's cheaper. American cars
>> will always be sold in higher numbers. They're cheaper, and they're
>> throwaways, like disposable plastic plates.
>>
>
>

Mike Hunter wrote:
> Naturally one is free to buy whatever they wish and based on sales, in a
> free market, they prefer GM to ALL others. However I agree ALL manufacture
> build some that are not up to snuff on occasion that is why they all offer a
> warranty, even RR. With around 17,000,000 new vehicles sold annually in the
> US, I Personally would never judge everything a manufacture builds, to be
> good or bad, based on the ONE with which I did or did not have problems.
> That would be foolish. The fact is the vehicles available from all
> manufacture today are great vehicles. Look at all of the available
> statistics, ALL manufactures have a failure rate between 2% and 2 1/2% over
> time. Given the proper prevetive maintenance, the chance of getting a good
> one from any manufacture are the same, between 97 1/2% and 98% no mater
> whose brand is on the hood.
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>

Is this why Toyota recently voluntareed raised prices to prevent
political retribution in the form of tariffs?

This discussion began by someone posting to suggest that GM was in trouble
because their sales were off and it would be a good thing for them to go
our of business. My purpose in replying was to point out how wrong it was
to assume that. The fact is the market is expanding every year and GM even
with a smaller piece of the growing pie is selling more vehicle that it did
years ago when the market was only 8,000,000 rather than 17,00,000. Why go
off to another field, we were taking about GM and its ability to out sell
all other manufactures?

Someone suggest so called junk bonds being a bad thing, again to make it
look like GM was going down the tubes which is far from the truth. I earn a
lot of money on junk bonds, because they pay a guaranteed higher interest
with little or no expectation of losing money.

I wonder what Sigmund would think? One does not read negative posts about
other brands all the time in other NGs, like we read in this NG.. It is
almost like Toyota owners are trying hard to reinforce there buying decision
by pointing out that they think all the models of all the other brands are
no good and that simply defies logic.

mike hunt


<jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
news:1128447841.772219.258610@g14g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> Apparently you know little of how bond investors get rich on the higher
>> interest rates paid on unrated bonds LOL
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>
> Apparently you're unaware that GM has to take the burden of the higher
> interest rates associated with their "good for toilet paper" bonds.
> Apparently you're also unaware that GM, although generating sales that
> are still good, is losing profitability on a consistent basis. I think
> their earnings/share is negative, as Cheney would say, big time!
>
> If I were any type of investor, Toyota would be the only game in town.
> Even Honda will not match their growth potential in the long run. I
> would short GM, again, BIG TIME! :)
>
> Later
>

You are referring to share price alone apparently . How does one adjust for
inflation without looking at the dividends over 40 years? I relayed to you
my personal experience with GM over 40 years of ownership. GM has done so
well that it is the ONLY stock that I did not buy and sell over time as I
have with all others

mike hunt


"Mark" <bogusmailmark@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1128448572.749693.104580@g47g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> Mike, that graph I published is adjusted for splits. I am aware of the
> dividend, but I would be willing to bet that the return net of
> inflation has been very low.
>

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> sez:

<snip> I Personally would never judge everything a manufacture builds, to be
> good or bad, based on the ONE with which I did or did not have problems.
> That would be foolish. <snip>

Indeed, however the infamous 4L60E transmission valve-body torque converter
solenoid defect and the notorious leaking intake manifold gaskets on the 5.7
Vortec engines are NOT a single vehicle issues ... they are systemic in GM's
designs. As a degreed Mechanical Engineer and lifelong mechanic who does
all of the vehicle maintenance and repair on our fleet of cars &
motorcycles, I can appreciate good design and disdain poor design. My sole
GM ownership experience was the quintessential experience in the latter ...
even the factory shop manuals suck compared to the ones put out by Toyota,
Honda and Mitsubishi.

Good wrenchin' to ya,
VLJ
--

Again what is you point and you forgot to say in my opinion. I've been on
all sides of the business in my time and one vehicle good or bad does not
mean they are all good or bad. I've seen Toyotas tyranny's go at as low as
30K. That certainly does not indicate that all Toyotas tyranny's are bad.
If you think Toyotas do not breakdown as often you are in for a rude
awaking, especially when you get a bill far greater then the cost to do the
same repair to a domestic brand.

mike hunt


"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:qUz0f.8799$cg.8315@news02.roc.ny...
> Price isn't the only factor. Some of us have had MULTIPLE experiences
> where a car dies at the worst possible time. All cars eventually need
> batteries, starter motors, power steering pumps, etc. But, when a Buick
> (to use one example) requires a new transmission at 60k miles, that's pure
> bullshit. And, warranty doesn't matter. You're still stuck on some road,
> probably in pouring rain, trying to go on vacation. No amount of warranty
> coverage compensates for that.
>
> People who buy American cars accept mickey mouse problems as being normal.
> How sad.
>
>
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:orOcnegxO_ZiWN_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> What is your point? Every manufacture offers rebates. The average new
>> vehicle buyer in the US, and that is what we are referring to new vehicle
>> sales, buy another new vehicle in three to four years with 45K to 60K on
>> the clock. ANY vehicle sold today will easily last to 200K, given the
>> proper maintenance. But whatever you wish, that is what buyers do after
>> all and they buy more GM models than Toyota models, period. Price is
>> ALWAYS the determining factor, that is why Toyota sells more than Lexus.
>> The Lexus must meet any imagined quality and longevity standard better
>> than a Toyota yet more buyers buy a Toyota because it's less expensive
>> than the Lexus
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:ZVy0f.688$647.46@news01.roc.ny...
>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>> news:_YCcndlfbbJvOd_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>>> With all that domestics still sold more vehicles than all of the
>>>> various import brands combined. I addition Chevrolet earned the number
>>>> one car brand spot over Toyota. GM still is number manufacture as well
>>>> as first in total car sales and total truck sales. Ford in still the
>>>> number two manufacture, as well as the number one in individual vehicle
>>>> sales with the F150. The number one mid size and small SUV with the
>>>> Explorer and the Escape. ;)
>>>>
>>>> mike hunt
>>>
>>> Well....OK. An entire paragraph of statements which can only be
>>> considered meaningless without further information.
>>>
>>>> With all that domestics still sold more vehicles than all of the
>>>> various import brands combined.
>>>
>>> Of course. The big 3 have been tripping all over each other since
>>> spring, offering one ridiculous discount after another. It's the only
>>> way they can generate healthy sales numbers. Furthermore, the vehicles
>>> they sell *have* to be replaced more often than Toyotas because they're
>>> garbage. Since they tend to sell to repeat customers who like being
>>> boned in the ass by shoddy manufacturers, they have a locked up market.
>>>
>>>> I addition Chevrolet earned the number one car brand spot over Toyota.
>>>
>>> Number one in what? Sales numbers?
>>>
>>>> GM still is number manufacture as well as first in total car sales and
>>>> total truck sales. Ford in still the number two manufacture, as well
>>>> as the number one in individual vehicle sales with the F150. The number
>>>> one mid size and small SUV with the Explorer and the Escape. ;)
>>>
>>> Correct. And, on any given day in American grocery stores, far more
>>> people buy chicken than lobster. Why? Because it's cheaper. American
>>> cars will always be sold in higher numbers. They're cheaper, and they're
>>> throwaways, like disposable plastic plates.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

You would have to ask that question of someone at Toyota. Personally I
don't care what Toyota does with their pricing. I discovered a long time
ago, after owning several Lexus V8s, that they were overpriced and no longer
buy their vehicles . I would be happy if they would just offer to pay
federal corporate income taxes on the millions they take out of this county
every year.

mike hunt


<jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
news:1128451449.569647.91450@o13g2000cwo.googlegro ups.com...
>
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> Naturally one is free to buy whatever they wish and based on sales, in a
>> free market, they prefer GM to ALL others. However I agree ALL
>> manufacture
>> build some that are not up to snuff on occasion that is why they all
>> offer a
>> warranty, even RR. With around 17,000,000 new vehicles sold annually in
>> the
>> US, I Personally would never judge everything a manufacture builds, to
>> be
>> good or bad, based on the ONE with which I did or did not have problems.
>> That would be foolish. The fact is the vehicles available from all
>> manufacture today are great vehicles. Look at all of the available
>> statistics, ALL manufactures have a failure rate between 2% and 2 1/2%
>> over
>> time. Given the proper prevetive maintenance, the chance of getting a
>> good
>> one from any manufacture are the same, between 97 1/2% and 98% no mater
>> whose brand is on the hood.
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>
> Is this why Toyota recently voluntareed raised prices to prevent
> political retribution in the form of tariffs?
>

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:Va6cnVlwZ5XvT9_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...

> If you think Toyotas do not breakdown as often you are in for a rude
> awaking, especially when you get a bill far greater then the cost to do
> the same repair to a domestic brand.

Toyota #1: 1982 Tercel, their cheapest model. Made it to 240,000 miles,
would've gone another 240k if someone hadn't driven into it at 75mph. No
body rust, even though it spent its life in Rochester NY where road salt is
used heavily. Still hadn't finished the quart of oil I bought when I first
got the car. It used pretty much none.

Toyota #2: 1987 Corolla wagon, bought used in 1989. Reached 185,000 miles
before we sold it because we needed something to tow a small boat. No odd
problems whatsoever. Same "quart of oil" situation as car #1.

Toyota #3: Current vehicle. 2002 Tacoma. No nonsense whatsoever.

Previous to owning the Toyotas, and intermingled with them (company cars), I
drove 2 Fords and a Chevy. All 3 had ridiculous problems based on poor
initial quality control and/or design mistakes.

Now that Toyota is selling car by the millions, rather than the hundreds of
thousands, more of their bad one are showing up as well. Get real how about
all of the V6 engines with the 'gelling;' problem or the blown head gaskets
on Toyotas? Does that mean all Toyotas are junk, I don't think so.. Every
manufacture makes good vehicles today and yes some are not up to par even
Toyotas


mike hunt


"vlj" <v@l.j> wrote in message
news:UJ6dnc0Hb5W-T9_enZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> sez:
>
> <snip> I Personally would never judge everything a manufacture builds, to
> be
>> good or bad, based on the ONE with which I did or did not have problems.
>> That would be foolish. <snip>
>
> Indeed, however the infamous 4L60E transmission valve-body torque
> converter
> solenoid defect and the notorious leaking intake manifold gaskets on the
> 5.7
> Vortec engines are NOT a single vehicle issues ... they are systemic in
> GM's
> designs. As a degreed Mechanical Engineer and lifelong mechanic who does
> all of the vehicle maintenance and repair on our fleet of cars &
> motorcycles, I can appreciate good design and disdain poor design. My
> sole
> GM ownership experience was the quintessential experience in the latter
> ...
> even the factory shop manuals suck compared to the ones put out by Toyota,
> Honda and Mitsubishi.
>
> Good wrenchin' to ya,
> VLJ
> --
>
>

Among others I have a 1941 Continental, a 1974 Mustang and 1971 Pinto that
cost $1,985 when new with nearly 300K on the clock that all look and run
like new, what's your point. Any vehicle given the proper maintenance will
last a long time. What is available on the market toddy is far superior to
anything build back when we bought those cars.

mike hunt


"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:LyA0f.704$647.202@news01.roc.ny...
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:Va6cnVlwZ5XvT9_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>
>> If you think Toyotas do not breakdown as often you are in for a rude
>> awaking, especially when you get a bill far greater then the cost to do
>> the same repair to a domestic brand.
>
> Toyota #1: 1982 Tercel, their cheapest model. Made it to 240,000 miles,
> would've gone another 240k if someone hadn't driven into it at 75mph. No
> body rust, even though it spent its life in Rochester NY where road salt
> is used heavily. Still hadn't finished the quart of oil I bought when I
> first got the car. It used pretty much none.
>
> Toyota #2: 1987 Corolla wagon, bought used in 1989. Reached 185,000 miles
> before we sold it because we needed something to tow a small boat. No odd
> problems whatsoever. Same "quart of oil" situation as car #1.
>
> Toyota #3: Current vehicle. 2002 Tacoma. No nonsense whatsoever.
>
> Previous to owning the Toyotas, and intermingled with them (company cars),
> I drove 2 Fords and a Chevy. All 3 had ridiculous problems based on poor
> initial quality control and/or design mistakes.
>
>
>

Here's an idea: When the big 3 reimburse millions of customers for the total
pieces of crap they bought in the mid to late 1970s, then Toyota can be
appropriately "punished" for behaving like any other overseas conglomerate.

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:NKmcnegPZdZiTt_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> You would have to ask that question of someone at Toyota. Personally I
> don't care what Toyota does with their pricing. I discovered a long time
> ago, after owning several Lexus V8s, that they were overpriced and no
> longer buy their vehicles . I would be happy if they would just offer to
> pay federal corporate income taxes on the millions they take out of this
> county every year.
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> <jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
> news:1128451449.569647.91450@o13g2000cwo.googlegro ups.com...
>>
>> Mike Hunter wrote:
>>> Naturally one is free to buy whatever they wish and based on sales, in a
>>> free market, they prefer GM to ALL others. However I agree ALL
>>> manufacture
>>> build some that are not up to snuff on occasion that is why they all
>>> offer a
>>> warranty, even RR. With around 17,000,000 new vehicles sold annually in
>>> the
>>> US, I Personally would never judge everything a manufacture builds, to
>>> be
>>> good or bad, based on the ONE with which I did or did not have problems.
>>> That would be foolish. The fact is the vehicles available from all
>>> manufacture today are great vehicles. Look at all of the available
>>> statistics, ALL manufactures have a failure rate between 2% and 2 1/2%
>>> over
>>> time. Given the proper prevetive maintenance, the chance of getting a
>>> good
>>> one from any manufacture are the same, between 97 1/2% and 98% no mater
>>> whose brand is on the hood.
>>>
>>>
>>> mike hunt
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Is this why Toyota recently voluntareed raised prices to prevent
>> political retribution in the form of tariffs?
>>
>
>

On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:40:00 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
<mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:

>GM has always paid good dividends,

I'd investigate where GM is getting the money for your dividends...

....and then sell all you have...

Don't say I didn't warn ya
--

Scott in Florida

Did you ever hear of the word profit? ;)

mike hunt


"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
news:5js5k1hkt534njjhej27pk95mfkhmqg0ia@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:40:00 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
>>GM has always paid good dividends,
>
> I'd investigate where GM is getting the money for your dividends...
>
> ...and then sell all you have...
>
> Don't say I didn't warn ya
> --
>
> Scott in Florida

Just for giggles....
http://www.buyandhold.com/bh/en/education/oak/qa/2004/qa179.html

Unrated Bonds

You may run across bonds that are not rated. An unrated bond is not
necessarily high in risk. It may be unrated because the municipality is so
small or has such modest debt that its bonds have never been rated.

If you personally know the community and if it is well run, you should
consider adding its municipals to your portfolio. But plan to hold them to
maturity as there probably is very little demand for them and therefore a
very small secondary market.

If you know nothing about the issuer of an unrated bond, move on.





"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:vbScnVx-tMwHJt_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> Apparently you know little of how bond investors get rich on the higher
> interest rates paid on unrated bonds LOL
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Art" <begunaNOSPAMPLEASE@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:Uwy0f.9468$q1.5826@newsread3.news.atl.earthli nk.net...
>> Too bad their bonds are too junky to be called junk bonds according to
>> analysists.
>>
>>
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> news:_YCcndlfbbJvOd_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>> With all that domestics still sold more vehicles than all of the various
>>> import brands combined. I addition Chevrolet earned the number one car
>>> brand spot over Toyota. GM still is number manufacture as well as first
>>> in total car sales and total truck sales. Ford in still the number two
>>> manufacture, as well as the number one in individual vehicle sales with
>>> the F150. The number one mid size and small SUV with the Explorer and
>>> the Escape. ;)
>>>
>>> mike hunt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> mike hunt
>>>
>>>
>>> "Philip" <1chip-state1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> news:P2o0f.9274$q1.8752@newsread3.news.atl.earthli nk.net...
>>>> GM, Ford sales tumble in September; Asian brands see smaller drop
>>>> October 03, 2005 11:25 PM EDT
>>>> DETROIT - High gas prices and a summer of heavy discounting sent sales
>>>> of sport utility vehicles plummeting last month for U.S. automakers.
>>>> Asian manufacturers, who had avoided the employee-pricing lures Detroit
>>>> offered, saw their results less affected.
>>>>
>>>> Several automakers reported strong car sales in their monthly reports
>>>> released Monday, but SUVs took a hit industrywide in the U.S. market as
>>>> gas prices skyrocketed following Hurricane Katrina. Sales of the GMC
>>>> Envoy and Chevrolet Tahoe fell more than 50 percent compared to last
>>>> September. The Cadillac Escalade, Mazda Tribute, Ford Explorer, Ford
>>>> Expedition, Toyota Sequoia and Nissan Armada all saw their sales fall
>>>> by 18 percent or more. Dodge Durango sales were down 11 percent.
>>>>
>>>> General Motors Corp. sales were down 24 percent overall. Its SUV and
>>>> truck sales fell 30 percent while its car sales dropped 14 percent.
>>>> GM's overall sales were flat for the first nine months of the year.
>>>>
>>>> GM said it knew September would be a challenge after a summer of
>>>> heavily promoted discounting. GM began letting consumers pay the
>>>> employee price in June and ended the promotion Friday.
>>>>
>>>> "We're coming off the three strongest months in the history of the
>>>> industry," said Paul Ballew, GM's executive director of market and
>>>> industry analysis.
>>>>
>>>> Ford Motor Co. also took a hit, with sales down nearly 20 percent in
>>>> September. Ford, Lincoln and Mercury car sales rose 6 percent, but
>>>> sales of trucks and SUVs fell nearly 28 percent. The company's overall
>>>> sales were also flat for the first nine months of the year.
>>>>
>>>> Ford attributed the declines to the strong summer. Ford began allowing
>>>> customers to pay the employee price in July, and the incentive helped
>>>> deplete the automaker's 2005 inventory. George Pipas, Ford's U.S. sales
>>>> analysis manager, said the company expects SUV sales will stay soft in
>>>> the near term.
>>>>
>>>> Ballew cautioned that gas prices aren't the only reason for falling SUV
>>>> sales. He said an aging lineup of SUVs and more options in car-based
>>>> crossovers also are affecting the segment.
>>>>
>>>> Strong pickup sales were further proof that gas prices aren't the only
>>>> factor in the SUV's decline. The Dodge Ram pickup had its best month
>>>> ever and its sales were up 5 percent, DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler
>>>> Group said. Toyota said sales of its Tacoma pickup rose more than 21
>>>> percent.
>>>>
>>>> Chrysler bucked the trend among U.S. automakers, reporting a 4 percent
>>>> increase in September sales, led by a 26 percent jump in car sales. The
>>>> Dodge Neon, which Chrysler stopped making two weeks ago, saw a 69
>>>> percent increase. Chrysler's truck and SUV sales were down 1.8 percent,
>>>> but its overall sales were up 7.5 percent for the year.
>>>>
>>>> Asian automakers also saw weak SUV sales, but none of the payback that
>>>> U.S. automakers had to contend with. Toyota Motor Corp.'s sales were up
>>>> 10 percent in September, thanks to a 22 percent increase in car sales.
>>>> Toyota's truck sales fell 4 percent. The Japanese automaker's sales
>>>> were up 11 percent in the first nine months of the year, and the
>>>> company said it set a third-quarter U.S. sales record.
>>>>
>>>> Sales of the hybrid Toyota Prius surged 90 percent.
>>>>
>>>> Nissan Motor Co. said its sales were up 16.4 percent in September, led
>>>> by a 26.5 percent increase in car sales. While sales of the Armada, its
>>>> largest SUV, were down, sales of the midsize Pathfinder SUV more than
>>>> doubled, which helped lift Nissan's truck sales by 3 percent.
>>>>
>>>> Honda Motor Co.'s sales rose 11.7 percent thanks to positive response
>>>> to the redesigned 2006 Civic, which helped boost car sales by 20
>>>> percent. Honda's truck sales were flat for the month and its overall
>>>> sales were up 6.3 percent for the January-September period.
>>>>
>>>> Hyundai Motor Co.'s sales were up 9 percent in September. The South
>>>> Korean automaker's overall sales were up 10 percent for the year.
>>>>
>>>> Volkswagen AG was the only automaker that didn't report U.S. sales on
>>>> Monday. Spokesman Tony Fouladpour said the results would be delayed
>>>> until Tuesday because Monday was a German holiday.
>>>>
>>>> There were 25 selling days in September 2005, the same number as
>>>> September 2004.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

The return on bonds isn't "guaranteed" unless you mean by the company.
That's why they're rated by bond rating companies.

GM's rating are "junk" meaning "non-investment grade". Meaning pension
and banks shouldn't own them. They are high risk. High risk of you
not getting back your principal when/if the company goes bankrupt.

You can collect all the coupons you want. If you get back 50 cents on
the dollar in principal it won't be worth it. Moreover, if GM wants to
borrow new money, it has to pay high rates, because it is such a crappy
profitless company. It's a catch 22. Higher interest rates will help
push it into bankruptcy.

On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 18:34:41 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
<mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:

>Did you ever hear of the word profit? ;)
>
>mike hunt

GM is only making money on their financing operation and issuing bonds
for the money to pay dividends. Very bad idea.

Like I said....sell

You can buy my a drink with your profits...

>
>
>"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
>news:5js5k1hkt534njjhej27pk95mfkhmqg0ia@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:40:00 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>
>>>GM has always paid good dividends,
>>
>> I'd investigate where GM is getting the money for your dividends...
>>
>> ...and then sell all you have...
>>
>> Don't say I didn't warn ya
>> --
>>
>> Scott in Florida
>
--

Scott in Florida

Re: Gas Prices making a dent ... finally!

Group: alt.autos.toyota Date: Tue, Oct 4, 2005, 3:24pm From:
mikehunt2@mailcity.com (Mike*Hunter)
Now that Toyota is selling car by the millions, rather than the hundreds
of thousands, more of their bad one are showing up as well. Get real how
about all of the V6 engines with the 'gelling;' problem........

-------------------

Actually I think gelling was more prevalent in the 4 cyls.


-----------------------------------------------
...... or the blown head gaskets on Toyotas? Does that mean all Toyotas
are junk, I don't think so.. Every manufacture makes good vehicles today
and yes some are not up to par even Toyotas
mike hunt
------------------

I'd have better luck trying to convince a discussion group full of GM
owners that Toyota is superior to GM than you do trying to convince this
DB that GM is on 'par' with Toyo...

My 95 Chev. Blazer was not unlike the above posters suburban (one
problem after another). My pontiac GP was the same way.

I (also) would never, never , ever buy another GM. That is the only way
I can ever get justice from a company that ripped me off and could care
less of my opinion 'after' they cashed my check..

I hope they go out of business sooner than later.

CP

In article <1128443210.669768.293850@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups. com>,
jcd1234@kattare.com wrote:

> > Only in this country. Anywhere else they don't stack up. The only thing that
> > drives the big three's sales is huge, powerful, gas guzzling engines and
> > sales to people who "just have to buy American." If you took those things
> > away, why would you ever look past Toyota and Honda for a new vehicle?
>
> I don't think you'll be able to take that "good feeling" of buying
> American away from people, especially the ignorant. But, over the long
> run, The Economist predicts that either GM or Ford will fold within the
> decade. Given the overhead that the big 3 run at, I wouldn't be
> surprised. These organizations are too ingrained into the gas guzzlers
> to adapt to change. Ford may learn to adapt with their earlier embrace
> of hybrid technology, but GM will almost certainly die a painful death
> before they even dent the fuel cell arena.

Death would be the best thing for GM.

I heard on the radio recently that GM starts every vehicle with a $1500
disadvantage compared to the Japanese manufacturers because of medical
obligations to retirees. If GM goes truly belly up, someone can buy the
wreckage or reorganize them without their crushing obligations. Too bad
for the retirees, but that's what you get when you squeeze the company for
mega benefits for years even in the face of increasing competition.

My health insurance sucks. I can only dream of the kind of benefits that
the UAW gets from the Big Three. Soon, I fear, they will only dream of
them as well.

Doug Kanter wrote:
> Here's an idea: When the big 3 reimburse millions of customers for the total
> pieces of crap they bought in the mid to late 1970s, then Toyota can be
> appropriately "punished" for behaving like any other overseas conglomerate.
>

It certainly gives the freedom-hating people of this country enough
reason to raise tariffs.

st-bum wrote:
> The return on bonds isn't "guaranteed" unless you mean by the company.
> That's why they're rated by bond rating companies.
>
> GM's rating are "junk" meaning "non-investment grade". Meaning pension
> and banks shouldn't own them. They are high risk. High risk of you
> not getting back your principal when/if the company goes bankrupt.
>
> You can collect all the coupons you want. If you get back 50 cents on
> the dollar in principal it won't be worth it. Moreover, if GM wants to
> borrow new money, it has to pay high rates, because it is such a crappy
> profitless company. It's a catch 22. Higher interest rates will help
> push it into bankruptcy.

You also have to consider the fact that the government will not have
money to bail GM or Ford out, as it's tapped out from Katrina, the
bridge to nowhere, and Iraq. GM will have to die a miserable death on
its very own. Investors can hope all they want for government
intervention...it ain't gonna happen. It will go the way of Enron,
Worldcom, Eastern Airline, Arthur Anderson, etc.

On 5 Oct 2005 04:51:40 -0700, jcd1234@kattare.com wrote:

>
>st-bum wrote:
>> The return on bonds isn't "guaranteed" unless you mean by the company.
>> That's why they're rated by bond rating companies.
>>
>> GM's rating are "junk" meaning "non-investment grade". Meaning pension
>> and banks shouldn't own them. They are high risk. High risk of you
>> not getting back your principal when/if the company goes bankrupt.
>>
>> You can collect all the coupons you want. If you get back 50 cents on
>> the dollar in principal it won't be worth it. Moreover, if GM wants to
>> borrow new money, it has to pay high rates, because it is such a crappy
>> profitless company. It's a catch 22. Higher interest rates will help
>> push it into bankruptcy.
>
>You also have to consider the fact that the government will not have
>money to bail GM or Ford out, as it's tapped out from Katrina, the
>bridge to nowhere, and Iraq.

No, pretty much just Iraq.
--
gburnore at DataBasix dot Com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³
Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase
================================================== =========================

<jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
news:1128512878.424186.319130@g49g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>
> Doug Kanter wrote:
>> Here's an idea: When the big 3 reimburse millions of customers for the
>> total
>> pieces of crap they bought in the mid to late 1970s, then Toyota can be
>> appropriately "punished" for behaving like any other overseas
>> conglomerate.
>>
>
> It certainly gives the freedom-hating people of this country enough
> reason to raise tariffs.
>

Aren't those the same people who get bent out of shape when other countries
raise tarriffs on our exports?

Doug Kanter wrote:
> <jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
> news:1128512878.424186.319130@g49g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> >
> > Doug Kanter wrote:
> >> Here's an idea: When the big 3 reimburse millions of customers for the
> >> total
> >> pieces of crap they bought in the mid to late 1970s, then Toyota can be
> >> appropriately "punished" for behaving like any other overseas
> >> conglomerate.
> >>
> >
> > It certainly gives the freedom-hating people of this country enough
> > reason to raise tariffs.
> >
>
> Aren't those the same people who get bent out of shape when other countries
> raise tarriffs on our exports?

Name a country that tariffs our steel exports.

>
> No, pretty much just Iraq.
> --

Considering that Katrina's rebuilding effort could pay for 3 months of
additional war mongering, I'd say that it's substantial. The bridge to
nowhere couldn't pay for 1 day, however. That's more icing on our
country's bankruptcy cake.

<jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
news:1128515508.778800.267320@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>
> Doug Kanter wrote:
>> <jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
>> news:1128512878.424186.319130@g49g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>> >
>> > Doug Kanter wrote:
>> >> Here's an idea: When the big 3 reimburse millions of customers for the
>> >> total
>> >> pieces of crap they bought in the mid to late 1970s, then Toyota can
>> >> be
>> >> appropriately "punished" for behaving like any other overseas
>> >> conglomerate.
>> >>
>> >
>> > It certainly gives the freedom-hating people of this country enough
>> > reason to raise tariffs.
>> >
>>
>> Aren't those the same people who get bent out of shape when other
>> countries
>> raise tarriffs on our exports?
>
> Name a country that tariffs our steel exports.
>

I can't, but that's not the point. Any time another country suggests
tarriffs on our products, it's all over the news and politicians & the
affected manufacturers begin foaming at the mouth. You've seen this.

>
> I can't, but that's not the point. Any time another country suggests
> tarriffs on our products, it's all over the news and politicians & the
> affected manufacturers begin foaming at the mouth. You've seen this.

Sure, it sucks, but in the set of all possible trading partners, of
course you will see some countries employ "protectionist" measures. If
GM is losing money because Toyota had the vision to see that gas
guzzlers would go the way of the dinosaur, why should the government
aid GM in recovering? The company needs restructuring badly, and
keeping it afloat rather than letting an Iacocca take it over and turn
it around is bad for business, and bad for America. Therefore, those
who favor tariffs as corporate welfare are freedom-hating people.

<jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
news:1128518220.996482.237340@g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>
>>
>> I can't, but that's not the point. Any time another country suggests
>> tarriffs on our products, it's all over the news and politicians & the
>> affected manufacturers begin foaming at the mouth. You've seen this.
>
> Sure, it sucks, but in the set of all possible trading partners, of
> course you will see some countries employ "protectionist" measures. If
> GM is losing money because Toyota had the vision to see that gas
> guzzlers would go the way of the dinosaur, why should the government
> aid GM in recovering? The company needs restructuring badly, and
> keeping it afloat rather than letting an Iacocca take it over and turn
> it around is bad for business, and bad for America. Therefore, those
> who favor tariffs as corporate welfare are freedom-hating people.
>

That last sentence is true, but for strange reasons. I'll state it another
way: All businesses are subject to competition, and deserve to float or sink
based on whether they do the right things or not. If a lawn chair
manufacturer built garbage and finally went out of business, nobody would
raise an eyebrow. It's the normal course of events.

But, automobiles occupy a special place in the American psyche, for reasons
I'll never understand. So, for quite a few years, the big 3 built vehicles
of hideous quality. Some have now reached levels between "better" and
"decent". But, between (roughly) 1970 and 1990, millions of people continued
to buy garbage from the big 3. Why? Can you think of any other product
people would continue buying, knowing it was trash and that the
manufacturers were laughing all the way to the bank?

There were the obvious reasons, like my fathers: "The Japs tried multiple
times to shoot my plane out of the sky over the Pacific in WWII. I'd never
buy a Jap car". (He was OK with buying me Japanese cameras and electronics
when I was a kid, though). This doesn't completely explain the brand
loyalty, though. I'm too busy to speculate further, but it's very weird.

There was a point when Van Heusen began making really gnarly dress shirts,
so I switched to Lands' End. I did the same with cars. Other people don't.

>
> That last sentence is true, but for strange reasons. I'll state it another
> way: All businesses are subject to competition, and deserve to float or sink
> based on whether they do the right things or not. If a lawn chair
> manufacturer built garbage and finally went out of business, nobody would
> raise an eyebrow. It's the normal course of events.
>
> But, automobiles occupy a special place in the American psyche, for reasons
> I'll never understand. So, for quite a few years, the big 3 built vehicles
> of hideous quality. Some have now reached levels between "better" and
> "decent". But, between (roughly) 1970 and 1990, millions of people continued
> to buy garbage from the big 3. Why? Can you think of any other product
> people would continue buying, knowing it was trash and that the
> manufacturers were laughing all the way to the bank?
>
> There were the obvious reasons, like my fathers: "The Japs tried multiple
> times to shoot my plane out of the sky over the Pacific in WWII. I'd never
> buy a Jap car". (He was OK with buying me Japanese cameras and electronics
> when I was a kid, though). This doesn't completely explain the brand
> loyalty, though. I'm too busy to speculate further, but it's very weird.
>
> There was a point when Van Heusen began making really gnarly dress shirts,
> so I switched to Lands' End. I did the same with cars. Other people don't.

I see your point about blind patriotism and consumer purchasing, but
WWII veterans are dying at an astonishing rate every day. The hatred
of Japanese cars is dying with it. The 80s was riddled with hatred for
all things Japanese, as their quality symbolized a demise in the U.S.
automobile industry. Quality increased somewhat at that time, so
people bought American again. Now, the quality factor, not to mention
the MPG factor, is displacing that "patriotism" of consumer purchasing.
People already forget the 80s and the Jap threat that materialized.
Also, Jap companies employ U.S. workers and help boost the U.S. economy
anyway. So, there's little reason for most educated (and even
non-educated) people to avoid purchasing them anymore. This blind
patriotism is a dying breed. In a way, it's a good thing, because the
free market works best when gov't isn't involved in bailing out
organizations and consumers choose based on value (not to mention
meddling in our personal affairs). It helps promote the concept that
vehicles will continue to improve in their longevity and endurance.

If that is what you believe then you have not read GMs latest stockholders
report LOL


mike hunt




"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
news:3466k1d7i14o8ppdm887tu62vh5qfd791m@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 18:34:41 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
>>Did you ever hear of the word profit? ;)
>>
>>mike hunt
>
> GM is only making money on their financing operation and issuing bonds
> for the money to pay dividends. Very bad idea.
>
> Like I said....sell
>
> You can buy my a drink with your profits...
>
>>
>>
>>"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
>>news:5js5k1hkt534njjhej27pk95mfkhmqg0ia@4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:40:00 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>GM has always paid good dividends,
>>>
>>> I'd investigate where GM is getting the money for your dividends...
>>>
>>> ...and then sell all you have...
>>>
>>> Don't say I didn't warn ya
>>> --
>>>
>>> Scott in Florida
>>
> --
>
> Scott in Florida

One is entitled to their own opinion and to spend their money wherever they
wish. ;)

mike hunt


"Charles Pisano" <pisanochas@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:29455-434329AD-58@storefull-3271.bay.webtv.net...

Re: Gas Prices making a dent ... finally!

Group: alt.autos.toyota Date: Tue, Oct 4, 2005, 3:24pm From:
mikehunt2@mailcity.com (Mike Hunter)
Now that Toyota is selling car by the millions, rather than the hundreds
of thousands, more of their bad one are showing up as well. Get real how
about all of the V6 engines with the 'gelling;' problem........

-------------------

Actually I think gelling was more prevalent in the 4 cyls.


-----------------------------------------------
...... or the blown head gaskets on Toyotas? Does that mean all Toyotas
are junk, I don't think so.. Every manufacture makes good vehicles today
and yes some are not up to par even Toyotas
mike hunt
------------------

I'd have better luck trying to convince a discussion group full of GM
owners that Toyota is superior to GM than you do trying to convince this
DB that GM is on 'par' with Toyo...

My 95 Chev. Blazer was not unlike the above posters suburban (one
problem after another). My pontiac GP was the same way.

I (also) would never, never , ever buy another GM. That is the only way
I can ever get justice from a company that ripped me off and could care
less of my opinion 'after' they cashed my check..

I hope they go out of business sooner than later.

CP

Isn't envy one of the deadly sins?


mike hunt


"Sean Elkins" <sean_elkins@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:sean_elkins-0410052301550001@lou-er-ts1-40.iglou.com...
> In article <1128443210.669768.293850@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups. com>,
> jcd1234@kattare.com wrote:
>
>> > Only in this country. Anywhere else they don't stack up. The only thing
>> > that
>> > drives the big three's sales is huge, powerful, gas guzzling engines
>> > and
>> > sales to people who "just have to buy American." If you took those
>> > things
>> > away, why would you ever look past Toyota and Honda for a new vehicle?
>>
>> I don't think you'll be able to take that "good feeling" of buying
>> American away from people, especially the ignorant. But, over the long
>> run, The Economist predicts that either GM or Ford will fold within the
>> decade. Given the overhead that the big 3 run at, I wouldn't be
>> surprised. These organizations are too ingrained into the gas guzzlers
>> to adapt to change. Ford may learn to adapt with their earlier embrace
>> of hybrid technology, but GM will almost certainly die a painful death
>> before they even dent the fuel cell arena.
>
> Death would be the best thing for GM.
>
> I heard on the radio recently that GM starts every vehicle with a $1500
> disadvantage compared to the Japanese manufacturers because of medical
> obligations to retirees. If GM goes truly belly up, someone can buy the
> wreckage or reorganize them without their crushing obligations. Too bad
> for the retirees, but that's what you get when you squeeze the company for
> mega benefits for years even in the face of increasing competition.
>
> My health insurance sucks. I can only dream of the kind of benefits that
> the UAW gets from the Big Three. Soon, I fear, they will only dream of
> them as well.

Not if the government intervenes like they have lately and force people
not to fill up their gas guzzlers due to war rationing. :) There may
also be random mobs to beat people up filling up more than say 10
gallons at a time, and the government may conveniently look the other
way (like it does with immigration)



Mike Hunter wrote:
> One is entitled to their own opinion and to spend their money wherever they
> wish. ;)
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Charles Pisano" <pisanochas@webtv.net> wrote in message
> news:29455-434329AD-58@storefull-3271.bay.webtv.net...
>
> Re: Gas Prices making a dent ... finally!
>
> Group: alt.autos.toyota Date: Tue, Oct 4, 2005, 3:24pm From:
> mikehunt2@mailcity.com (Mike Hunter)
> Now that Toyota is selling car by the millions, rather than the hundreds
> of thousands, more of their bad one are showing up as well. Get real how
> about all of the V6 engines with the 'gelling;' problem........
>
> -------------------
>
> Actually I think gelling was more prevalent in the 4 cyls.
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> ..... or the blown head gaskets on Toyotas? Does that mean all Toyotas
> are junk, I don't think so.. Every manufacture makes good vehicles today
> and yes some are not up to par even Toyotas
> mike hunt
> ------------------
>
> I'd have better luck trying to convince a discussion group full of GM
> owners that Toyota is superior to GM than you do trying to convince this
> DB that GM is on 'par' with Toyo...
>
> My 95 Chev. Blazer was not unlike the above posters suburban (one
> problem after another). My pontiac GP was the same way.
>
> I (also) would never, never , ever buy another GM. That is the only way
> I can ever get justice from a company that ripped me off and could care
> less of my opinion 'after' they cashed my check..
>
> I hope they go out of business sooner than later.
>
> CP

Do you actually believe Toyota or any of the other import brands will still
assemble there vehicles in the US if there were no domestic cooperators?
LOL


mike hunt


<jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
news:1128513100.137809.289970@o13g2000cwo.googlegr oups.com...
>
> st-bum wrote:
>> The return on bonds isn't "guaranteed" unless you mean by the company.
>> That's why they're rated by bond rating companies.
>>
>> GM's rating are "junk" meaning "non-investment grade". Meaning pension
>> and banks shouldn't own them. They are high risk. High risk of you
>> not getting back your principal when/if the company goes bankrupt.
>>
>> You can collect all the coupons you want. If you get back 50 cents on
>> the dollar in principal it won't be worth it. Moreover, if GM wants to
>> borrow new money, it has to pay high rates, because it is such a crappy
>> profitless company. It's a catch 22. Higher interest rates will help
>> push it into bankruptcy.
>
> You also have to consider the fact that the government will not have
> money to bail GM or Ford out, as it's tapped out from Katrina, the
> bridge to nowhere, and Iraq. GM will have to die a miserable death on
> its very own. Investors can hope all they want for government
> intervention...it ain't gonna happen. It will go the way of Enron,
> Worldcom, Eastern Airline, Arthur Anderson, etc.
>

You forgot to say in my opinion, since more Americans believe domestics are
as good or better than anything Toyota has to offer. On can not argue with
the sales figures. Buy what ever you choose, but the fact remains GM sells
three times as many vehicles in the US as does Toyota and Ford sells more
than twice as many as Toyota. Contrary what many in the NG want to believe
GM is not loosing money even though they did in one quarter.


mike hunt



>
> That last sentence is true, but for strange reasons. I'll state it another
> way: All businesses are subject to competition, and deserve to float or
> sink based on whether they do the right things or not. If a lawn chair
> manufacturer built garbage and finally went out of business, nobody would
> raise an eyebrow. It's the normal course of events.
>
> But, automobiles occupy a special place in the American psyche, for
> reasons I'll never understand. So, for quite a few years, the big 3 built
> vehicles of hideous quality. Some have now reached levels between "better"
> and "decent". But, between (roughly) 1970 and 1990, millions of people
> continued to buy garbage from the big 3. Why? Can you think of any other
> product people would continue buying, knowing it was trash and that the
> manufacturers were laughing all the way to the bank?
>
> There were the obvious reasons, like my fathers: "The Japs tried multiple
> times to shoot my plane out of the sky over the Pacific in WWII. I'd never
> buy a Jap car". (He was OK with buying me Japanese cameras and electronics
> when I was a kid, though). This doesn't completely explain the brand
> loyalty, though. I'm too busy to speculate further, but it's very weird.
>
> There was a point when Van Heusen began making really gnarly dress shirts,
> so I switched to Lands' End. I did the same with cars. Other people don't.
>

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:GaCdnd0xe7bjfd7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...

> the fact remains GM sells three times as many vehicles in the US as does
> Toyota and Ford sells more than twice as many as Toyota.

Do you need an explanation of why sheer sales numbers are meaningless
without further information?

And, do you know what it means to "audit a college course"? You might want
to consider auditing a statistics course at a nearby college. It'll probably
cost you nothing to do so.

What is a "domestic cooperator"?

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:yaGdndtNu5WxQ97eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> Do you actually believe Toyota or any of the other import brands will
> still assemble there vehicles in the US if there were no domestic
> cooperators? LOL
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> <jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
> news:1128513100.137809.289970@o13g2000cwo.googlegr oups.com...
>>
>> st-bum wrote:
>>> The return on bonds isn't "guaranteed" unless you mean by the company.
>>> That's why they're rated by bond rating companies.
>>>
>>> GM's rating are "junk" meaning "non-investment grade". Meaning pension
>>> and banks shouldn't own them. They are high risk. High risk of you
>>> not getting back your principal when/if the company goes bankrupt.
>>>
>>> You can collect all the coupons you want. If you get back 50 cents on
>>> the dollar in principal it won't be worth it. Moreover, if GM wants to
>>> borrow new money, it has to pay high rates, because it is such a crappy
>>> profitless company. It's a catch 22. Higher interest rates will help
>>> push it into bankruptcy.
>>
>> You also have to consider the fact that the government will not have
>> money to bail GM or Ford out, as it's tapped out from Katrina, the
>> bridge to nowhere, and Iraq. GM will have to die a miserable death on
>> its very own. Investors can hope all they want for government
>> intervention...it ain't gonna happen. It will go the way of Enron,
>> Worldcom, Eastern Airline, Arthur Anderson, etc.
>>
>
>

Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable difference
in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles offer for sale by all
of the manufactures today. As to fuel economy GM offers more vehicles that
get MPG figures equal or better than to anything sold by Toyota and they are
doing it with engines that are not underpowered. Do a little research
rather than expressing an uninformed opinion, WBMA


mike hunt


<jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
news:1128520615.935380.134680@g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>
>> I see your point about blind patriotism and consumer purchasing, but
> WWII veterans are dying at an astonishing rate every day. The hatred
> of Japanese cars is dying with it. The 80s was riddled with hatred for
> all things Japanese, as their quality symbolized a demise in the U.S.
> automobile industry. Quality increased somewhat at that time, so
> people bought American again. Now, the quality factor, not to mention
> the MPG factor, is displacing that "patriotism" of consumer purchasing.
> People already forget the 80s and the Jap threat that materialized.
> Also, Jap companies employ U.S. workers and help boost the U.S. economy
> anyway. So, there's little reason for most educated (and even
> non-educated) people to avoid purchasing them anymore. This blind
> patriotism is a dying breed. In a way, it's a good thing, because the
> free market works best when gov't isn't involved in bailing out
> organizations and consumers choose based on value (not to mention
> meddling in our personal affairs). It helps promote the concept that
> vehicles will continue to improve in their longevity and endurance.
>

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:a92dna_FO8l1eN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable
> difference in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles offer for
> sale by all of the manufactures today.

Consumer Reports continues to find more defects in the American cars they
test. It's improved over the past 15 years, but there's still a wide margin.
It's significant because most of what they find involves fit and finish.
They can't see the hidden things that pop up 2-3 years later.

Fat chance that there will be rationing with the Republicans in power. The
commodities buyers, in a free market, determine the price of crude. If
demand exceeds the supply the higher price will discourage unnecessary
consumption. Those that can not afford the fuel will drive less. Those
that can afford to buy the fuel they need will buy what they need.


mike hunt

<jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
news:1128521217.899881.316530@g49g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> Not if the government intervenes like they have lately and force people
> not to fill up their gas guzzlers due to war rationing. :) There may
> also be random mobs to beat people up filling up more than say 10
> gallons at a time, and the government may conveniently look the other
> way (like it does with immigration)
>
>
>
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> One is entitled to their own opinion and to spend their money wherever
>> they
>> wish. ;)
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>> "Charles Pisano" <pisanochas@webtv.net> wrote in message
>> news:29455-434329AD-58@storefull-3271.bay.webtv.net...
>>
>> Re: Gas Prices making a dent ... finally!
>>
>> Group: alt.autos.toyota Date: Tue, Oct 4, 2005, 3:24pm From:
>> mikehunt2@mailcity.com (Mike Hunter)
>> Now that Toyota is selling car by the millions, rather than the hundreds
>> of thousands, more of their bad one are showing up as well. Get real how
>> about all of the V6 engines with the 'gelling;' problem........
>>
>> -------------------
>>
>> Actually I think gelling was more prevalent in the 4 cyls.
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------
>> ..... or the blown head gaskets on Toyotas? Does that mean all Toyotas
>> are junk, I don't think so.. Every manufacture makes good vehicles today
>> and yes some are not up to par even Toyotas
>> mike hunt
>> ------------------
>>
>> I'd have better luck trying to convince a discussion group full of GM
>> owners that Toyota is superior to GM than you do trying to convince this
>> DB that GM is on 'par' with Toyo...
>>
>> My 95 Chev. Blazer was not unlike the above posters suburban (one
>> problem after another). My pontiac GP was the same way.
>>
>> I (also) would never, never , ever buy another GM. That is the only way
>> I can ever get justice from a company that ripped me off and could care
>> less of my opinion 'after' they cashed my check..
>>
>> I hope they go out of business sooner than later.
>>
>> CP
>

No further information is needed when one is comparing similar sized and
equipped vehicles that are available to buyers and brand A and B sell more
than C and D. The conclusion as to why is obvious ;)

mike hunt


"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:qsR0f.8913$cg.8512@news02.roc.ny...
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:GaCdnd0xe7bjfd7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>
>> the fact remains GM sells three times as many vehicles in the US as does
>> Toyota and Ford sells more than twice as many as Toyota.
>
> Do you need an explanation of why sheer sales numbers are meaningless
> without further information?

I not going to argue your opinion, you can believe what you wish, but I
suggest you ask for more detail and expand your search criteria LOL

mike hunt


"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6GR0f.8915$cg.4209@news02.roc.ny...
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:a92dna_FO8l1eN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable
>> difference in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles offer
>> for sale by all of the manufactures today.
>
> Consumer Reports continues to find more defects in the American cars they
> test. It's improved over the past 15 years, but there's still a wide
> margin. It's significant because most of what they find involves fit and
> finish. They can't see the hidden things that pop up 2-3 years later.
>

Well....it's on the printed page right in front of me when I read the
magazine, and I'm pretty sure I'm not hallucinating. In addition, they
conduct owner surveys which reveal how people feel about their cars a few
years later.

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:nt6dnemHGJr4d97eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>I not going to argue your opinion, you can believe what you wish, but I
>suggest you ask for more detail and expand your search criteria LOL
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:6GR0f.8915$cg.4209@news02.roc.ny...
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> news:a92dna_FO8l1eN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>> Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable
>>> difference in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles offer
>>> for sale by all of the manufactures today.
>>
>> Consumer Reports continues to find more defects in the American cars they
>> test. It's improved over the past 15 years, but there's still a wide
>> margin. It's significant because most of what they find involves fit and
>> finish. They can't see the hidden things that pop up 2-3 years later.
>>
>
>

Mike Hunter wrote:
> Fat chance that there will be rationing with the Republicans in power. The
> commodities buyers, in a free market, determine the price of crude. If
> demand exceeds the supply the higher price will discourage unnecessary
> consumption. Those that can not afford the fuel will drive less. Those
> that can afford to buy the fuel they need will buy what they need.
>
>

Can you say the same thing if vigilante groups go around beating people
up for filling up their tanks? Enforcing these people will prove a
fruitless venture. Whenever a communal asset is overused by a few,
people take it amongst themselves to do something about it, regardless
of the potential criminal outcome.

Umm....no. Wasn't it you who, in another message, said that the number of
potential buyers had increased over the years, and that even though GM's
percentage share was smaller than in the past, they were selling more cars
than Toyota?

Do you see how meaningless that is? Yes, or no?

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:HN-dnXw4PeundN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> No further information is needed when one is comparing similar sized and
> equipped vehicles that are available to buyers and brand A and B sell more
> than C and D. The conclusion as to why is obvious ;)
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:qsR0f.8913$cg.8512@news02.roc.ny...
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> news:GaCdnd0xe7bjfd7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>
>>> the fact remains GM sells three times as many vehicles in the US as does
>>> Toyota and Ford sells more than twice as many as Toyota.
>>
>> Do you need an explanation of why sheer sales numbers are meaningless
>> without further information?
>
>

Incidentally, the government is already asking for voluntary
conservation. Considering that the Republican party has abandoned its
constituents (and the Democratic party longer ago) concerning the free
market and not having the gov't intervene for just about anything, do
you really think Republicans will let the free market dictate the
buying and selling of an asset as essential as this? Fat chance. Many
of Reps supporters will not be able to afford $5-7/gal gas and they are
a strong voter base. Controls will be put into place to save those
votes. These white collar folks and soccer moms have to get to work,
and the Republicans will not let a little rationing get in the way of
maintaining their voter base. I would do the same. It's just good
business to keep your customers happy.

Mike Hunter wrote:
> Fat chance that there will be rationing with the Republicans in power. The
> commodities buyers, in a free market, determine the price of crude. If
> demand exceeds the supply the higher price will discourage unnecessary
> consumption. Those that can not afford the fuel will drive less. Those
> that can afford to buy the fuel they need will buy what they need.
>
>
> mike hunt

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:a92dna_FO8l1eN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable
difference
> in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles offer for sale by
all
> of the manufactures today.

You've made this claim before and never offered a reference to back it. Do
so.

> As to fuel economy GM offers more vehicles that
> get MPG figures equal or better than to anything sold by Toyota and they
are
> doing it with engines that are not underpowered. Do a little research
> rather than expressing an uninformed opinion, WBMA
>

You've made this claim before. Do a bumper-to-bumber comparison for us.
What GM or Ford vehicle do you think is equivalent to or better than a 154hp
Camry LE and still gets equal or better gas mileage?

Here, I'll do one for you... In spite of the price difference (the 154hp
Camry LE is considerably cheaper, at least before the givebacks GM finds
necessary to move Buicks), you could compare the Buick LaCrosse (one of GM's
most recent introductions, so we'd expect it to be technologically
sophisticated) and the Camry LE. The Camry's 9 in or so shorter and a
little narrower (i.e., fits into my garage more readily) but has more
luggage room and most interior dimensions are very, very close. The
features list is similar, too, but the edge goes to the Buick for having
"wood trim" in several places (yippee). The Camry is rated at 24/34 for
mileage and the LaCrosse is rated at 20/29 mpg.

You've also disparaged the performance of 4-cylinder Camrys before. The
good people at www.web-cars.com project that, yes, the V6 LaCrosse will beat
the I4 Camry in the quarter mile by 16.80 to 17.75 seconds (I added 150 lbs
for the drivers). Not a terribly impressive victory (I'll take the gas
savings, thank you). I'd bet you'd find that the LaCrosse doesn't actually
have a one-second lead over the Camry, either, since the Toyota uses a DOHC
VVTi motor (in my experience, VVTi engines give much better low-end torque)
while the Buick has an 3.8L OHV engine without any tricks.

By the way, good luck parking that Buick. GM thoughtfully engineered a
turning in a turning circle of 40.4 feet vs 34.8 for the Camry.

Of course, if you do value performance over fuel mileage, the 3.3L V6 Camry
SE is still list-priced less than the LaCrosse and has 210HP on tap in a
3450 lb package, getting 21/29mpg (slightly better than the LaCrosse). It is
projected to quarter mile .35 sec faster than the Buick but I'd be very
suprised the margin if wasn't actually larger (the Toyota 3.3L V6 is also a
VVTi/DOHC engine).

Got a trailer? Consider buying a Camry, which tows 2000 lbs, as opposed to
the Buick's 1000 lbs.

Sources: www.edmunds.com

> mike hunt
>
>
> <jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
> news:1128520615.935380.134680@g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> >
> >> I see your point about blind patriotism and consumer purchasing, but
> > WWII veterans are dying at an astonishing rate every day. The hatred
> > of Japanese cars is dying with it. The 80s was riddled with hatred for
> > all things Japanese, as their quality symbolized a demise in the U.S.
> > automobile industry. Quality increased somewhat at that time, so
> > people bought American again. Now, the quality factor, not to mention
> > the MPG factor, is displacing that "patriotism" of consumer purchasing.
> > People already forget the 80s and the Jap threat that materialized.
> > Also, Jap companies employ U.S. workers and help boost the U.S. economy
> > anyway. So, there's little reason for most educated (and even
> > non-educated) people to avoid purchasing them anymore. This blind
> > patriotism is a dying breed. In a way, it's a good thing, because the
> > free market works best when gov't isn't involved in bailing out
> > organizations and consumers choose based on value (not to mention
> > meddling in our personal affairs). It helps promote the concept that
> > vehicles will continue to improve in their longevity and endurance.
> >
>
>

On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 09:59:51 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
<mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:

>If that is what you believe then you have not read GMs latest stockholders
>report LOL
>
>
>mike hunt

The latest Annual Report on GM

Look at page 46 of 108 Results of Operations

Net Income 2,894

Then look a bit deeper and find out where that came from.....

GMAC

2,913

GM is losing its ass in the automotive end.

Like I said....sell all you have while it is worth anything WBMA

http://www.gm.com/company/investor_information/docs/fin_data/gm04ar/download/gm04ar.pdf

>
>
>
>
>"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
>news:3466k1d7i14o8ppdm887tu62vh5qfd791m@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 18:34:41 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Did you ever hear of the word profit? ;)
>>>
>>>mike hunt
>>
>> GM is only making money on their financing operation and issuing bonds
>> for the money to pay dividends. Very bad idea.
>>
>> Like I said....sell
>>
>> You can buy my a drink with your profits...
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
>>>news:5js5k1hkt534njjhej27pk95mfkhmqg0ia@4ax.com...
>>>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:40:00 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>>>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>GM has always paid good dividends,
>>>>
>>>> I'd investigate where GM is getting the money for your dividends...
>>>>
>>>> ...and then sell all you have...
>>>>
>>>> Don't say I didn't warn ya
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Scott in Florida
>>>
>> --
>>
>> Scott in Florida
>
--

Scott in Florida

Doug Kanter wrote:

> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:a92dna_FO8l1eN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable
>> difference in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles offer for
>> sale by all of the manufactures today.
>
> Consumer Reports continues to find more defects in the American cars they
> test. It's improved over the past 15 years, but there's still a wide margin.
> It's significant because most of what they find involves fit and finish.
> They can't see the hidden things that pop up 2-3 years later.

Don't listen to "Mike Hunt(er)". He has thrown around this claim and other
pro-domestic claims time and time again, and yet has offered no solid
evidence to back them up. He's just a troll, and an illiterate one at that.
"Manufactures"... LOFL!!!

"High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:17fvvwbkl074b$.dlg@hightech.misfit...
> Doug Kanter wrote:
>
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> news:a92dna_FO8l1eN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>> Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable
>>> difference in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles offer
>>> for
>>> sale by all of the manufactures today.
>>
>> Consumer Reports continues to find more defects in the American cars they
>> test. It's improved over the past 15 years, but there's still a wide
>> margin.
>> It's significant because most of what they find involves fit and finish.
>> They can't see the hidden things that pop up 2-3 years later.
>
> Don't listen to "Mike Hunt(er)". He has thrown around this claim and
> other
> pro-domestic claims time and time again, and yet has offered no solid
> evidence to back them up. He's just a troll, and an illiterate one at
> that.
> "Manufactures"... LOFL!!!

I love the bit about how a smaller percentage of a higher number is evidence
of something (?), even if the actual number of cars ends up being larger.

You mesn the peopl that subscribe to their magazine,
"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:HeS0f.802$647.379@news01.roc.ny...
> Well....it's on the printed page right in front of me when I read the
> magazine, and I'm pretty sure I'm not hallucinating. In addition, they
> conduct owner surveys which reveal how people feel about their cars a few
> years later.
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:nt6dnemHGJr4d97eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>I not going to argue your opinion, you can believe what you wish, but I
>>suggest you ask for more detail and expand your search criteria LOL
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:6GR0f.8915$cg.4209@news02.roc.ny...
>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>> news:a92dna_FO8l1eN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>>> Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable
>>>> difference in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles offer
>>>> for sale by all of the manufactures today.
>>>
>>> Consumer Reports continues to find more defects in the American cars
>>> they test. It's improved over the past 15 years, but there's still a
>>> wide margin. It's significant because most of what they find involves
>>> fit and finish. They can't see the hidden things that pop up 2-3 years
>>> later.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Yes. People who subscribe. You're an expert statistician. Explain the effect
of this fact on the survey results.

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:tPmdnamTkMO8utneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> You mesn the peopl that subscribe to their magazine,
> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:HeS0f.802$647.379@news01.roc.ny...
>> Well....it's on the printed page right in front of me when I read the
>> magazine, and I'm pretty sure I'm not hallucinating. In addition, they
>> conduct owner surveys which reveal how people feel about their cars a few
>> years later.

You mean they survey the FEW thousand people who happen to subscribe to
their magazine, you need to expand your search criteria to get the true
picture. An average of nearly 17,000,000 new vehicles have been sold
annually in the US over the past ten years. I for one buy a lot of new cars
and I have not had ONE that was problematic in years, foreign or domestic
In my former business we serviced thousands of vehicles from all brands
monthly in our shops and we saw little difference in the failure rate among
brands. In my opinion the average new car buyer would do better to look at
the cost of repairs among brands rather than any perceived frequency
difference in the need for repairs


mike hunt


"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:HeS0f.802$647.379@news01.roc.ny...
> Well....it's on the printed page right in front of me when I read the
> magazine, and I'm pretty sure I'm not hallucinating. In addition, they
> conduct owner surveys which reveal how people feel about their cars a few
> years later.
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:nt6dnemHGJr4d97eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>I not going to argue your opinion, you can believe what you wish, but I
>>suggest you ask for more detail and expand your search criteria LOL
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:6GR0f.8915$cg.4209@news02.roc.ny...
>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>> news:a92dna_FO8l1eN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>>> Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable
>>>> difference in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles offer
>>>> for sale by all of the manufactures today.
>>>
>>> Consumer Reports continues to find more defects in the American cars
>>> they test. It's improved over the past 15 years, but there's still a
>>> wide margin. It's significant because most of what they find involves
>>> fit and finish. They can't see the hidden things that pop up 2-3 years
>>> later.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

GM has ALWAYS sold more vehicles than Toyota. GM today sells more trucks
alone in the US than Toyota sells cars and trucks combined. At one point
GM sold nearly 50% of all the vehicles sold in the US. They now sell around
32% but that is a greater number in a 17,000,000 market than 50% was in a
9,000,000 market. Toyota sells a bit over 10% of the market


mike hunt


"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%fS0f.8916$cg.5207@news02.roc.ny...
> Umm....no. Wasn't it you who, in another message, said that the number of
> potential buyers had increased over the years, and that even though GM's
> percentage share was smaller than in the past, they were selling more cars
> than Toyota?
>
> Do you see how meaningless that is? Yes, or no?
>

Why do you buy a lot of new cars? How often? What kind?


"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:9_idnZMzbq1OtNneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> You mean they survey the FEW thousand people who happen to subscribe to
> their magazine, you need to expand your search criteria to get the true
> picture. An average of nearly 17,000,000 new vehicles have been sold
> annually in the US over the past ten years. I for one buy a lot of new
> cars and I have not had ONE that was problematic in years, foreign or
> domestic
> In my former business we serviced thousands of vehicles from all brands
> monthly in our shops and we saw little difference in the failure rate
> among brands. In my opinion the average new car buyer would do better to
> look at the cost of repairs among brands rather than any perceived
> frequency difference in the need for repairs
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:HeS0f.802$647.379@news01.roc.ny...
>> Well....it's on the printed page right in front of me when I read the
>> magazine, and I'm pretty sure I'm not hallucinating. In addition, they
>> conduct owner surveys which reveal how people feel about their cars a few
>> years later.
>>
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> news:nt6dnemHGJr4d97eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>>I not going to argue your opinion, you can believe what you wish, but I
>>>suggest you ask for more detail and expand your search criteria LOL
>>>
>>> mike hunt
>>>
>>>
>>> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:6GR0f.8915$cg.4209@news02.roc.ny...
>>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:a92dna_FO8l1eN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>>>> Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable
>>>>> difference in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles offer
>>>>> for sale by all of the manufactures today.
>>>>
>>>> Consumer Reports continues to find more defects in the American cars
>>>> they test. It's improved over the past 15 years, but there's still a
>>>> wide margin. It's significant because most of what they find involves
>>>> fit and finish. They can't see the hidden things that pop up 2-3 years
>>>> later.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

These figures are in no way indicative of quality. You know that.


"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:pvudnTW99vnbsdneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> GM has ALWAYS sold more vehicles than Toyota. GM today sells more trucks
> alone in the US than Toyota sells cars and trucks combined. At one point
> GM sold nearly 50% of all the vehicles sold in the US. They now sell
> around 32% but that is a greater number in a 17,000,000 market than 50%
> was in a 9,000,000 market. Toyota sells a bit over 10% of the market
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%fS0f.8916$cg.5207@news02.roc.ny...
>> Umm....no. Wasn't it you who, in another message, said that the number of
>> potential buyers had increased over the years, and that even though GM's
>> percentage share was smaller than in the past, they were selling more
>> cars than Toyota?
>>
>> Do you see how meaningless that is? Yes, or no?
>>
>
>

Better do a bit more research. Government can not control the market,
period. Carter tried that by controlling the distribution of gasoline and
stations ran out of gasoline. It was not until Reagan let market forces
decided did the supply return, albeit at higher price. Rationing will only
result in even higher prices, or worse, it will lower the amount of
available gasoline. If gasoline can not be sold at a profit it will just be
burned off at the refinery so that the profitable distillates can be refined
and sold. After all gasoline is a byproduct of the refining process.
Economics 101



mike hunt


<jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
news:1128526195.006637.263290@g44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> Incidentally, the government is already asking for voluntary
> conservation. Considering that the Republican party has abandoned its
> constituents (and the Democratic party longer ago) concerning the free
> market and not having the gov't intervene for just about anything, do
> you really think Republicans will let the free market dictate the
> buying and selling of an asset as essential as this? Fat chance. Many
> of Reps supporters will not be able to afford $5-7/gal gas and they are
> a strong voter base. Controls will be put into place to save those
> votes. These white collar folks and soccer moms have to get to work,
> and the Republicans will not let a little rationing get in the way of
> maintaining their voter base. I would do the same. It's just good
> business to keep your customers happy.
>
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> Fat chance that there will be rationing with the Republicans in power.
>> The
>> commodities buyers, in a free market, determine the price of crude. If
>> demand exceeds the supply the higher price will discourage unnecessary
>> consumption. Those that can not afford the fuel will drive less. Those
>> that can afford to buy the fuel they need will buy what they need.
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>

"DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
news:1128530479.15e733417a16395881b36cb37add5ad0@t eranews...
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:a92dna_FO8l1eN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable
> difference
>> in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles offer for sale by
> all
>> of the manufactures today.
>
> You've made this claim before and never offered a reference to back it.
> Do
> so.
>
>> As to fuel economy GM offers more vehicles that
>> get MPG figures equal or better than to anything sold by Toyota and they
> are
>> doing it with engines that are not underpowered. Do a little research
>> rather than expressing an uninformed opinion, WBMA
>>
>
> You've made this claim before. Do a bumper-to-bumber comparison for us.
> What GM or Ford vehicle do you think is equivalent to or better than a
> 154hp
> Camry LE and still gets equal or better gas mileage?
>
> Here, I'll do one for you... In spite of the price difference (the 154hp
> Camry LE is considerably cheaper, at least before the givebacks GM finds
> necessary to move Buicks), you could compare the Buick LaCrosse (one of
> GM's
> most recent introductions, so we'd expect it to be technologically
> sophisticated) and the Camry LE. The Camry's 9 in or so shorter and a
> little narrower (i.e., fits into my garage more readily) but has more
> luggage room and most interior dimensions are very, very close. The
> features list is similar, too, but the edge goes to the Buick for having
> "wood trim" in several places (yippee). The Camry is rated at 24/34 for
> mileage and the LaCrosse is rated at 20/29 mpg.
>
> You've also disparaged the performance of 4-cylinder Camrys before. The
> good people at www.web-cars.com project that, yes, the V6 LaCrosse will
> beat
> the I4 Camry in the quarter mile by 16.80 to 17.75 seconds (I added 150
> lbs
> for the drivers). Not a terribly impressive victory (I'll take the gas
> savings, thank you). I'd bet you'd find that the LaCrosse doesn't
> actually
> have a one-second lead over the Camry, either, since the Toyota uses a
> DOHC
> VVTi motor (in my experience, VVTi engines give much better low-end
> torque)
> while the Buick has an 3.8L OHV engine without any tricks.
>
> By the way, good luck parking that Buick. GM thoughtfully engineered a
> turning in a turning circle of 40.4 feet vs 34.8 for the Camry.
>
> Of course, if you do value performance over fuel mileage, the 3.3L V6
> Camry
> SE is still list-priced less than the LaCrosse and has 210HP on tap in a
> 3450 lb package, getting 21/29mpg (slightly better than the LaCrosse). It
> is
> projected to quarter mile .35 sec faster than the Buick but I'd be very
> suprised the margin if wasn't actually larger (the Toyota 3.3L V6 is also
> a
> VVTi/DOHC engine).
>
> Got a trailer? Consider buying a Camry, which tows 2000 lbs, as opposed
> to
> the Buick's 1000 lbs.
>
> Sources: www.edmunds.com
>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>> <jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
>> news:1128520615.935380.134680@g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>> >
>> >> I see your point about blind patriotism and consumer purchasing, but
>> > WWII veterans are dying at an astonishing rate every day. The hatred
>> > of Japanese cars is dying with it. The 80s was riddled with hatred for
>> > all things Japanese, as their quality symbolized a demise in the U.S.
>> > automobile industry. Quality increased somewhat at that time, so
>> > people bought American again. Now, the quality factor, not to mention
>> > the MPG factor, is displacing that "patriotism" of consumer purchasing.
>> > People already forget the 80s and the Jap threat that materialized.
>> > Also, Jap companies employ U.S. workers and help boost the U.S. economy
>> > anyway. So, there's little reason for most educated (and even
>> > non-educated) people to avoid purchasing them anymore. This blind
>> > patriotism is a dying breed. In a way, it's a good thing, because the
>> > free market works best when gov't isn't involved in bailing out
>> > organizations and consumers choose based on value (not to mention
>> > meddling in our personal affairs). It helps promote the concept that
>> > vehicles will continue to improve in their longevity and endurance.
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

I could not care less where one chooses to spend their money. My point is,
buying a particular brand any brand, at a premium price thinking it will not
break down is foolish. They ALL break down at some point. In our business
we serviced thousands of vehicles and kept meticulous records over the
years. No matter how one feels about the brand they prefer, the fact is
there is little difference in the failure rate among brands and we had the
records to prove that fact. What should be more important to the owner is
the cost of maintenance and repairs over time, if they are not the average
new vehicle buyer who replaces his vehicle with another new vehicle in three
to four years with 30K to 45K on the clock. Would you rather spend $500
to replace a power steering pump on a Caddy or one on a Lexus for $1,500?
Better yet price an engine or tranny for both. A four cylinder Honda engine
cost nearly as much as a Detroit V8. One reason one sees plenty of old
domestics sedans at car shows and few if any Japanese cars is the cost and
availability of parts to keep them on the road over time.

mike hunt


"High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:17fvvwbkl074b$.dlg@hightech.misfit...
> Doug Kanter wrote:
>
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> news:a92dna_FO8l1eN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>> Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable
>>> difference in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles offer
>>> for
>>> sale by all of the manufactures today.
>>
>> Consumer Reports continues to find more defects in the American cars they
>> test. It's improved over the past 15 years, but there's still a wide
>> margin.
>> It's significant because most of what they find involves fit and finish.
>> They can't see the hidden things that pop up 2-3 years later.
>
> Don't listen to "Mike Hunt(er)". He has thrown around this claim and
> other
> pro-domestic claims time and time again, and yet has offered no solid
> evidence to back them up. He's just a troll, and an illiterate one at
> that.
> "Manufactures"... LOFL!!!

If I said I was going to shoot at you with 50% of the bullets in a six shot
38 revolver or 30% of the 20 shot clip in a Klock would it mean something to
you? LOL


mike hunt


"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:sAT0f.8936$cg.4928@news02.roc.ny...
>
>>
> I love the bit about how a smaller percentage of a higher number is
> evidence of something (?), even if the actual number of cars ends up being
> larger.
>

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:4PedndxWc6eGqNneUSdV9g@ptd.net...

> Would you rather spend $500 to replace a power steering pump on a Caddy
> or one on a Lexus for $1,500?

Are you referring to the cost of only the pump itself, or is labor included
in those numbers?

And what generated those profit for GMAC? ;)

mike hunt


"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
news:mk08k1975nuoj876u9jfv1d7uhcq3n4ve5@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 09:59:51 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
>>If that is what you believe then you have not read GMs latest stockholders
>>report LOL
>>
>>
>>mike hunt
>
> The latest Annual Report on GM
>
> Look at page 46 of 108 Results of Operations
>
> Net Income 2,894
>
> Then look a bit deeper and find out where that came from.....
>
> GMAC
>
> 2,913
>
> GM is losing its ass in the automotive end.
>
> Like I said....sell all you have while it is worth anything WBMA
>
> http://www.gm.com/company/investor_information/docs/fin_data/gm04ar/download/gm04ar.pdf
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
>>news:3466k1d7i14o8ppdm887tu62vh5qfd791m@4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 18:34:41 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Did you ever hear of the word profit? ;)
>>>>
>>>>mike hunt
>>>
>>> GM is only making money on their financing operation and issuing bonds
>>> for the money to pay dividends. Very bad idea.
>>>
>>> Like I said....sell
>>>
>>> You can buy my a drink with your profits...
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:5js5k1hkt534njjhej27pk95mfkhmqg0ia@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:40:00 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>>>>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>GM has always paid good dividends,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd investigate where GM is getting the money for your dividends...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...and then sell all you have...
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't say I didn't warn ya
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Scott in Florida
>>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Scott in Florida
>>
> --
>
> Scott in Florida

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:XPqdnXewEIQistneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>
> "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
> news:1128530479.15e733417a16395881b36cb37add5ad0@t eranews...
> > "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> > news:a92dna_FO8l1eN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> >> Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable
> > difference
> >> in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles offer for sale by
> > all
> >> of the manufactures today.
> >
> > You've made this claim before and never offered a reference to back it.
> > Do
> > so.
> >
> >> As to fuel economy GM offers more vehicles that
> >> get MPG figures equal or better than to anything sold by Toyota and
they
> > are
> >> doing it with engines that are not underpowered. Do a little research
> >> rather than expressing an uninformed opinion, WBMA
> >>
> >
> > You've made this claim before. Do a bumper-to-bumber comparison for us.
> > What GM or Ford vehicle do you think is equivalent to or better than a
> > 154hp
> > Camry LE and still gets equal or better gas mileage?
> >
> > Here, I'll do one for you... In spite of the price difference (the
154hp
> > Camry LE is considerably cheaper, at least before the givebacks GM finds
> > necessary to move Buicks), you could compare the Buick LaCrosse (one of
> > GM's
> > most recent introductions, so we'd expect it to be technologically
> > sophisticated) and the Camry LE. The Camry's 9 in or so shorter and a
> > little narrower (i.e., fits into my garage more readily) but has more
> > luggage room and most interior dimensions are very, very close. The
> > features list is similar, too, but the edge goes to the Buick for having
> > "wood trim" in several places (yippee). The Camry is rated at 24/34 for
> > mileage and the LaCrosse is rated at 20/29 mpg.
> >
> > You've also disparaged the performance of 4-cylinder Camrys before. The
> > good people at www.web-cars.com project that, yes, the V6 LaCrosse will
> > beat
> > the I4 Camry in the quarter mile by 16.80 to 17.75 seconds (I added 150
> > lbs
> > for the drivers). Not a terribly impressive victory (I'll take the gas
> > savings, thank you). I'd bet you'd find that the LaCrosse doesn't
> > actually
> > have a one-second lead over the Camry, either, since the Toyota uses a
> > DOHC
> > VVTi motor (in my experience, VVTi engines give much better low-end
> > torque)
> > while the Buick has an 3.8L OHV engine without any tricks.
> >
> > By the way, good luck parking that Buick. GM thoughtfully engineered a
> > turning in a turning circle of 40.4 feet vs 34.8 for the Camry.
> >
> > Of course, if you do value performance over fuel mileage, the 3.3L V6
> > Camry
> > SE is still list-priced less than the LaCrosse and has 210HP on tap in a
> > 3450 lb package, getting 21/29mpg (slightly better than the LaCrosse).
It
> > is
> > projected to quarter mile .35 sec faster than the Buick but I'd be very
> > suprised the margin if wasn't actually larger (the Toyota 3.3L V6 is
also
> > a
> > VVTi/DOHC engine).
> >
> > Got a trailer? Consider buying a Camry, which tows 2000 lbs, as opposed
> > to
> > the Buick's 1000 lbs.
> >
> > Sources: www.edmunds.com
> >
> >> mike hunt
> >>
> >>

Maybe you'd better sign up for lessons on how to use your newsreader.

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:4PedndxWc6eGqNneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> I could not care less where one chooses to spend their money. My point
is,
> buying a particular brand any brand, at a premium price thinking it will
not
> break down is foolish. They ALL break down at some point. In our
business
> we serviced thousands of vehicles and kept meticulous records over the
> years. No matter how one feels about the brand they prefer, the fact is
> there is little difference in the failure rate among brands and we had the
> records to prove that fact. What should be more important to the owner is
> the cost of maintenance and repairs over time, if they are not the average
> new vehicle buyer who replaces his vehicle with another new vehicle in
three
> to four years with 30K to 45K on the clock. Would you rather spend $500
> to replace a power steering pump on a Caddy or one on a Lexus for $1,500?
> Better yet price an engine or tranny for both. A four cylinder Honda
engine
> cost nearly as much as a Detroit V8. One reason one sees plenty of old
> domestics sedans at car shows and few if any Japanese cars is the cost and
> availability of parts to keep them on the road over time.
>
> mike hunt
>
>

If your business was the service business, then you're in a poor situation
to judge. From your perspective, the failure rate is going to be 100%;
everything that comes in is broken.

I haven't had to get any Toyota repairs, yet (approaching 6 Toyota-years,
now), but I was favorably impressed with the price of Volvo parts and
service; it was less per hour than the Chevy or Ford dealer and the parts
were comparable (recollection from the 1990s, I stopped owning Fords and
Chevys before 2000).

> "High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:17fvvwbkl074b$.dlg@hightech.misfit...
> > Doug Kanter wrote:
> >
> >> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> >> news:a92dna_FO8l1eN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> >>> Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable
> >>> difference in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles offer
> >>> for
> >>> sale by all of the manufactures today.
> >>
> >> Consumer Reports continues to find more defects in the American cars
they
> >> test. It's improved over the past 15 years, but there's still a wide
> >> margin.
> >> It's significant because most of what they find involves fit and
finish.
> >> They can't see the hidden things that pop up 2-3 years later.
> >
> > Don't listen to "Mike Hunt(er)". He has thrown around this claim and
> > other
> > pro-domestic claims time and time again, and yet has offered no solid
> > evidence to back them up. He's just a troll, and an illiterate one at
> > that.
> > "Manufactures"... LOFL!!!
>
>

Mike Hunter wrote:
> Better do a bit more research. Government can not control the market,
> period. Carter tried that by controlling the distribution of gasoline and
> stations ran out of gasoline. It was not until Reagan let market forces
> decided did the supply return, albeit at higher price. Rationing will only
> result in even higher prices, or worse, it will lower the amount of
> available gasoline. If gasoline can not be sold at a profit it will just be
> burned off at the refinery so that the profitable distillates can be refined
> and sold. After all gasoline is a byproduct of the refining process.
> Economics 101
>

Gas coupons become a viable alternative to make sure that everyone only
gets X gallons of gas/week. Gasoline will still be sold at a profit,
but the distribution will be even and no one, even gas guzzlers will
get over their allotment. Those owners will just have to take shorter
trips.

Yes, I do envy the purchasers of vehicles that had the side-saddle gas tank,
the guillotine windshield, the undersized tires for a smooth ride, the
tuck-under rear wheels, the rear-license plate gas filler, the hood-latch
failures, the poor reliability, the roll-overs from bad design, the numerous
lawsuits, the fires, the breakdowns.... I'm sorry, I am a little biased
since I've bought Hondas and Toyotas, I've had NO problems.
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:Y6adnf8Xm73KQN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> Isn't envy one of the deadly sins?
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Sean Elkins" <sean_elkins@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:sean_elkins-0410052301550001@lou-er-ts1-40.iglou.com...
>> In article <1128443210.669768.293850@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups. com>,
>> jcd1234@kattare.com wrote:
>>
>>> > Only in this country. Anywhere else they don't stack up. The only
>>> > thing that
>>> > drives the big three's sales is huge, powerful, gas guzzling engines
>>> > and
>>> > sales to people who "just have to buy American." If you took those
>>> > things
>>> > away, why would you ever look past Toyota and Honda for a new vehicle?
>>>
>>> I don't think you'll be able to take that "good feeling" of buying
>>> American away from people, especially the ignorant. But, over the long
>>> run, The Economist predicts that either GM or Ford will fold within the
>>> decade. Given the overhead that the big 3 run at, I wouldn't be
>>> surprised. These organizations are too ingrained into the gas guzzlers
>>> to adapt to change. Ford may learn to adapt with their earlier embrace
>>> of hybrid technology, but GM will almost certainly die a painful death
>>> before they even dent the fuel cell arena.
>>
>> Death would be the best thing for GM.
>>
>> I heard on the radio recently that GM starts every vehicle with a $1500
>> disadvantage compared to the Japanese manufacturers because of medical
>> obligations to retirees. If GM goes truly belly up, someone can buy the
>> wreckage or reorganize them without their crushing obligations. Too bad
>> for the retirees, but that's what you get when you squeeze the company
>> for
>> mega benefits for years even in the face of increasing competition.
>>
>> My health insurance sucks. I can only dream of the kind of benefits that
>> the UAW gets from the Big Three. Soon, I fear, they will only dream of
>> them as well.
>
>

"Mike Hunter"

Mike, you need to get out of this Toyota group here and go to the GMC
newsgroup so you can be pacified. I'm sorry, but your arguments do not stack
up. It is ok if you are one of the patriotics that have to buy American. We
here in this newsgroup would like to talk about our Toyotas, and how long we
must go before the next oil change. Good luck promoting the GM way of life.

"Bob Palmer" <jenbobkatelyn@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:uPCdnf0nq_aR2NneRVn-iQ@adelphia.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter"
>
> Mike, you need to get out of this Toyota group here and go to the GMC
> newsgroup so you can be pacified. I'm sorry, but your arguments do not
> stack up. It is ok if you are one of the patriotics that have to buy
> American. We here in this newsgroup would like to talk about our Toyotas,
> and how long we must go before the next oil change. Good luck promoting
> the GM way of life.
>
But then he wouldn't be able to start flame threads.

Natalie

Mike Hunter wrote:
<snip>
> If you think Toyotas do not breakdown as often you are in for a rude
> awaking, especially when you get a bill far greater then the cost to do the
> same repair to a domestic brand.

That has not been my experience! My Ford F250 was much more expensive to
repair and maintain than my Tundra. Plus it was not as well engineered
at all. It seems that the American big 3 do the bare minimum to get
their vehicles to the end of the warranty period. As soon as my Fords
hit 100000 Km they were starting to cost big $$$. I had many Ford trucks
before coming back to Toyota. They all had the same rough best before
date (100000km)

Bob Palmer, 10/5/2005,5:26:46 PM, wrote:

>
> "Mike Hunter"
>
> Mike, you need to get out of this Toyota group here and go to the GMC
> newsgroup so you can be pacified. I'm sorry, but your arguments do
> not stack up. It is ok if you are one of the patriotics that have to
> buy American. We here in this newsgroup would like to talk about our
> Toyotas, and how long we must go before the next oil change. Good
> luck promoting the GM way of life.

Nah, there should always be someone with an alternate point of view.
Whether it's right or wrong doesn't matter. We can't have everyone
thinking within the same "box", can we? Besides, how much Toyota talk
is there going on in this group anyway?

--
"The least thing upset him on the links. He missed short putts because
of the uproar of butterflies in the adjoining meadows." -- P.G.
Wodehouse

A Klock?

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:yPadnWcjv-8Nq9neUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> If I said I was going to shoot at you with 50% of the bullets in a six
> shot 38 revolver or 30% of the 20 shot clip in a Klock would it mean
> something to you? LOL
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:sAT0f.8936$cg.4928@news02.roc.ny...
>>
>>>
>> I love the bit about how a smaller percentage of a higher number is
>> evidence of something (?), even if the actual number of cars ends up
>> being larger.
>>
>
>

"Bob Palmer" <jenbobkatelyn@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:aZSdnRKzUsEi3NneRVn-hQ@adelphia.com...
> Yes, I do envy the purchasers of vehicles that had the side-saddle gas
> tank, the guillotine windshield, the undersized tires for a smooth ride,
> the tuck-under rear wheels, the rear-license plate gas filler, the
> hood-latch failures, the poor reliability, the roll-overs from bad design,
> the numerous lawsuits, the fires, the breakdowns.... I'm sorry, I am a
> little biased since I've bought Hondas and Toyotas, I've had NO problems.
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:Y6adnf8Xm73KQN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> Isn't envy one of the deadly sins?
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>> "Sean Elkins" <sean_elkins@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:sean_elkins-0410052301550001@lou-er-ts1-40.iglou.com...
>>> In article <1128443210.669768.293850@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups. com>,
>>> jcd1234@kattare.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> > Only in this country. Anywhere else they don't stack up. The only
>>>> > thing that
>>>> > drives the big three's sales is huge, powerful, gas guzzling engines
>>>> > and
>>>> > sales to people who "just have to buy American." If you took those
>>>> > things
>>>> > away, why would you ever look past Toyota and Honda for a new
>>>> > vehicle?
>>>>
>>>> I don't think you'll be able to take that "good feeling" of buying
>>>> American away from people, especially the ignorant. But, over the long
>>>> run, The Economist predicts that either GM or Ford will fold within the
>>>> decade. Given the overhead that the big 3 run at, I wouldn't be
>>>> surprised. These organizations are too ingrained into the gas guzzlers
>>>> to adapt to change. Ford may learn to adapt with their earlier embrace
>>>> of hybrid technology, but GM will almost certainly die a painful death
>>>> before they even dent the fuel cell arena.
>>>
>>> Death would be the best thing for GM.
>>>
>>> I heard on the radio recently that GM starts every vehicle with a $1500
>>> disadvantage compared to the Japanese manufacturers because of medical
>>> obligations to retirees. If GM goes truly belly up, someone can buy the
>>> wreckage or reorganize them without their crushing obligations. Too bad
>>> for the retirees, but that's what you get when you squeeze the company
>>> for
>>> mega benefits for years even in the face of increasing competition.
>>>
>>> My health insurance sucks. I can only dream of the kind of benefits that
>>> the UAW gets from the Big Three. Soon, I fear, they will only dream of
>>> them as well.
>>
>>
>
>

I envy the purchasers of vehicles that last 200,000 miles and more without
major problems. Wait. I am one! I don't have to envy myself anymore. . .
..

Charles of Kankakee
93 Corolla 205,500 miles

"Gary L. Burnore" <gburnore@databasix.com> wrote in message
news:di0f07$636$1@blackhelicopter.databasix.com...
> On 5 Oct 2005 04:51:40 -0700, jcd1234@kattare.com wrote:
>
>>
>>st-bum wrote:
>>> The return on bonds isn't "guaranteed" unless you mean by the company.
>>> That's why they're rated by bond rating companies.
>>>
>>> GM's rating are "junk" meaning "non-investment grade". Meaning pension
>>> and banks shouldn't own them. They are high risk. High risk of you
>>> not getting back your principal when/if the company goes bankrupt.
>>>
>>> You can collect all the coupons you want. If you get back 50 cents on
>>> the dollar in principal it won't be worth it. Moreover, if GM wants to
>>> borrow new money, it has to pay high rates, because it is such a crappy
>>> profitless company. It's a catch 22. Higher interest rates will help
>>> push it into bankruptcy.
>>
>>You also have to consider the fact that the government will not have
>>money to bail GM or Ford out, as it's tapped out from Katrina, the
>>bridge to nowhere, and Iraq.
>
> No, pretty much just Iraq.
> --
> gburnore at DataBasix dot Com

OK. Just how do you stand working in IT and being such a liberal at the
same time?

I'd figure your head would explode from the contradiction.

Charles of Kankakee

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:1vqdnbV4X4NYs9neUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> Better do a bit more research. Government can not control the market,
> period. Carter tried that by controlling the distribution of gasoline and
> stations ran out of gasoline. It was not until Reagan let market forces
> decided did the supply return, albeit at higher price. Rationing will
> only result in even higher prices, or worse, it will lower the amount of
> available gasoline. If gasoline can not be sold at a profit it will just
> be burned off at the refinery so that the profitable distillates can be
> refined and sold. After all gasoline is a byproduct of the refining
> process. Economics 101
>
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> <jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
> news:1128526195.006637.263290@g44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>> Incidentally, the government is already asking for voluntary
>> conservation. Considering that the Republican party has abandoned its
>> constituents (and the Democratic party longer ago) concerning the free
>> market and not having the gov't intervene for just about anything, do
>> you really think Republicans will let the free market dictate the
>> buying and selling of an asset as essential as this? Fat chance. Many
>> of Reps supporters will not be able to afford $5-7/gal gas and they are
>> a strong voter base. Controls will be put into place to save those
>> votes. These white collar folks and soccer moms have to get to work,
>> and the Republicans will not let a little rationing get in the way of
>> maintaining their voter base. I would do the same. It's just good
>> business to keep your customers happy.
>>
>> Mike Hunter wrote:
>>> Fat chance that there will be rationing with the Republicans in power.
>>> The
>>> commodities buyers, in a free market, determine the price of crude. If
>>> demand exceeds the supply the higher price will discourage unnecessary
>>> consumption. Those that can not afford the fuel will drive less. Those
>>> that can afford to buy the fuel they need will buy what they need.
>>>
>>>
>>> mike hunt
>>
>
>

Mike,

How soon you forget. Regean releasing the supply actually caused a net
drop in price before very long. In 1990 I was paying 86 cents a gallon and
had been paying about that for a couple years. Down from 1.25 in 1980 when
Carter was still president.

We have had some wierdness here. Kankakee has been 2.96 to 2.99 for several
weeks, up from 2.80. The Hinsdale Oasis on the I-294, never known for
cheap gas, has been 2.72 to 2.82 during that period. Today, for the first
time, the Oasis was 2.93. Oh, no, there's no price fixing in Kankakee.
None whatsoever. Never was.

If you believe that last statement, I have some ocean front property you
might be interested in. In Aridzona.

Charles of Kankakee

"Charles @ Kankakee" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:VrCdnW65h_5809neRVn-pg@comcast.com...
>
> "Bob Palmer" <jenbobkatelyn@adelphia.net> wrote in message
> news:aZSdnRKzUsEi3NneRVn-hQ@adelphia.com...
>> Yes, I do envy the purchasers of vehicles that had the side-saddle gas
>> tank, the guillotine windshield, the undersized tires for a smooth ride,
>> the tuck-under rear wheels, the rear-license plate gas filler, the
>> hood-latch failures, the poor reliability, the roll-overs from bad
>> design, the numerous lawsuits, the fires, the breakdowns.... I'm sorry, I
>> am a little biased since I've bought Hondas and Toyotas, I've had NO
>> problems.
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> news:Y6adnf8Xm73KQN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>> Isn't envy one of the deadly sins?
>>>
>>>
>>> mike hunt
>>>
>>>
>>> "Sean Elkins" <sean_elkins@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:sean_elkins-0410052301550001@lou-er-ts1-40.iglou.com...
>>>> In article <1128443210.669768.293850@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups. com>,
>>>> jcd1234@kattare.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> > Only in this country. Anywhere else they don't stack up. The only
>>>>> > thing that
>>>>> > drives the big three's sales is huge, powerful, gas guzzling engines
>>>>> > and
>>>>> > sales to people who "just have to buy American." If you took those
>>>>> > things
>>>>> > away, why would you ever look past Toyota and Honda for a new
>>>>> > vehicle?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think you'll be able to take that "good feeling" of buying
>>>>> American away from people, especially the ignorant. But, over the
>>>>> long
>>>>> run, The Economist predicts that either GM or Ford will fold within
>>>>> the
>>>>> decade. Given the overhead that the big 3 run at, I wouldn't be
>>>>> surprised. These organizations are too ingrained into the gas
>>>>> guzzlers
>>>>> to adapt to change. Ford may learn to adapt with their earlier
>>>>> embrace
>>>>> of hybrid technology, but GM will almost certainly die a painful death
>>>>> before they even dent the fuel cell arena.
>>>>
>>>> Death would be the best thing for GM.
>>>>
>>>> I heard on the radio recently that GM starts every vehicle with a $1500
>>>> disadvantage compared to the Japanese manufacturers because of medical
>>>> obligations to retirees. If GM goes truly belly up, someone can buy the
>>>> wreckage or reorganize them without their crushing obligations. Too bad
>>>> for the retirees, but that's what you get when you squeeze the company
>>>> for
>>>> mega benefits for years even in the face of increasing competition.
>>>>
>>>> My health insurance sucks. I can only dream of the kind of benefits
>>>> that
>>>> the UAW gets from the Big Three. Soon, I fear, they will only dream of
>>>> them as well.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> I envy the purchasers of vehicles that last 200,000 miles and more without
> major problems. Wait. I am one! I don't have to envy myself anymore. .
> . .
>
> Charles of Kankakee
> 93 Corolla 205,500 miles

LOL My five-year-old Echo just went over 60,000, so it's still a cream puff.
The '87 Corolla we sold my mom still hasn't cracked 150,000 yet.

Cars don't work hard for us

:-)

Natalie

"notmyrealname" <"NoSpam"@all.org> wrote in message
news:bSX0f.1859$yS6.531@clgrps12...
> Mike Hunter wrote:
> <snip>
>> If you think Toyotas do not breakdown as often you are in for a rude
>> awaking, especially when you get a bill far greater then the cost to do
>> the
>> same repair to a domestic brand.
>
> That has not been my experience! My Ford F250 was much more expensive to
> repair and maintain than my Tundra. Plus it was not as well engineered at
> all. It seems that the American big 3 do the bare minimum to get their
> vehicles to the end of the warranty period. As soon as my Fords hit 100000
> Km they were starting to cost big $$$. I had many Ford trucks before
> coming back to Toyota. They all had the same rough best before date
> (100000km)

Have they started putting a "Best Before End" on Canadian Fords yet?

Charles of Kankakee

Charles @ Kankakee wrote:

> I envy the purchasers of vehicles that last 200,000 miles and more without
> major problems. Wait. I am one! I don't have to envy myself anymore. . .
> .
>
> Charles of Kankakee
> 93 Corolla 205,500 miles

I have rarely seen a North American brand car (other than a handful of old
GM V8's) make it to 200,000 miles with few non-routine problems, even with
regular maintenance. On the other hand, I have seen lots of Toyotas and
Hondas that have done so, including one friend of mine who put close to
300,000 miles on a late 80s Accord with very few problems. Another friend
put 200,000 miles on a '90 Corolla GT-S, and the only major problem was the
alternator (it must have been a crappy Delco!).

I buy about one new vehicle a year then pass them or sell them after two or
three years, generally. Personally I prefer to drive sporty and luxury RWD
V8s or AWD. I have five children, twelve grandchildren that drive whatever
I pass on or buy for them, generally. I also have a half dozen cars that I
bought new, over the years, that I held on to rather than passed on. As to
brands, you name it I probably owned at least one of them. Currently I'm
driving two 2005 V8s and a 2006 V6 AWD that I just bought a few days ago.

mike hunt

"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:66W0f.828$647.405@news01.roc.ny...
> Why do you buy a lot of new cars? How often? What kind?
>
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:9_idnZMzbq1OtNneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> You mean they survey the FEW thousand people who happen to subscribe to
>> their magazine, you need to expand your search criteria to get the true
>> picture. An average of nearly 17,000,000 new vehicles have been sold
>> annually in the US over the past ten years. I for one buy a lot of new
>> cars and I have not had ONE that was problematic in years, foreign or
>> domestic
>> In my former business we serviced thousands of vehicles from all brands
>> monthly in our shops and we saw little difference in the failure rate
>> among brands. In my opinion the average new car buyer would do better
>> to look at the cost of repairs among brands rather than any perceived
>> frequency difference in the need for repairs
>>
>>
>> mike hunt

That may be your opinion but obviously the people buying all those GM
vehicles do not agree with your personal opinion.

mike hunt


"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c7W0f.829$647.609@news01.roc.ny...
> These figures are in no way indicative of quality. You know that.
>
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:pvudnTW99vnbsdneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> GM has ALWAYS sold more vehicles than Toyota. GM today sells more trucks
>> alone in the US than Toyota sells cars and trucks combined. At one
>> point GM sold nearly 50% of all the vehicles sold in the US. They now
>> sell around 32% but that is a greater number in a 17,000,000 market than
>> 50% was in a 9,000,000 market. Toyota sells a bit over 10% of the market
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%fS0f.8916$cg.5207@news02.roc.ny...
>>> Umm....no. Wasn't it you who, in another message, said that the number
>>> of potential buyers had increased over the years, and that even though
>>> GM's percentage share was smaller than in the past, they were selling
>>> more cars than Toyota?
>>>
>>> Do you see how meaningless that is? Yes, or no?
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

I don't mind helping you out but I'm not going to teach a class in a NG. Do
your own homework, that's what I tell MY grandchildren ;)


mike hunt


"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bFW0f.832$647.103@news01.roc.ny...
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:4PedndxWc6eGqNneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>
>> Would you rather spend $500 to replace a power steering pump on a Caddy
>> or one on a Lexus for $1,500?
>
> Are you referring to the cost of only the pump itself, or is labor
> included in those numbers?
>

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, buy what you wish, I do.

mike hunt


"DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
news:1128546171.a8414dc82df62cb17487ce6c9b322591@t eranews...
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:4PedndxWc6eGqNneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> I could not care less where one chooses to spend their money. My point
> is,
>> buying a particular brand any brand, at a premium price thinking it will
> not
>> break down is foolish. They ALL break down at some point. In our
> business
>> we serviced thousands of vehicles and kept meticulous records over the
>> years. No matter how one feels about the brand they prefer, the fact is
>> there is little difference in the failure rate among brands and we had
>> the
>> records to prove that fact. What should be more important to the owner
>> is
>> the cost of maintenance and repairs over time, if they are not the
>> average
>> new vehicle buyer who replaces his vehicle with another new vehicle in
> three
>> to four years with 30K to 45K on the clock. Would you rather spend
>> $500
>> to replace a power steering pump on a Caddy or one on a Lexus for $1,500?
>> Better yet price an engine or tranny for both. A four cylinder Honda
> engine
>> cost nearly as much as a Detroit V8. One reason one sees plenty of old
>> domestics sedans at car shows and few if any Japanese cars is the cost
>> and
>> availability of parts to keep them on the road over time.
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>
> If your business was the service business, then you're in a poor situation
> to judge. From your perspective, the failure rate is going to be 100%;
> everything that comes in is broken.
>
> I haven't had to get any Toyota repairs, yet (approaching 6 Toyota-years,
> now), but I was favorably impressed with the price of Volvo parts and
> service; it was less per hour than the Chevy or Ford dealer and the parts
> were comparable (recollection from the 1990s, I stopped owning Fords and
> Chevys before 2000).
>
>> "High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>> news:17fvvwbkl074b$.dlg@hightech.misfit...
>> > Doug Kanter wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:a92dna_FO8l1eN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> >>> Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable
>> >>> difference in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles
>> >>> offer
>> >>> for
>> >>> sale by all of the manufactures today.
>> >>
>> >> Consumer Reports continues to find more defects in the American cars
> they
>> >> test. It's improved over the past 15 years, but there's still a wide
>> >> margin.
>> >> It's significant because most of what they find involves fit and
> finish.
>> >> They can't see the hidden things that pop up 2-3 years later.
>> >
>> > Don't listen to "Mike Hunt(er)". He has thrown around this claim and
>> > other
>> > pro-domestic claims time and time again, and yet has offered no solid
>> > evidence to back them up. He's just a troll, and an illiterate one at
>> > that.
>> > "Manufactures"... LOFL!!!
>>
>>
>
>

You obviously were not around during WWII if you believe that ;)


mike hunt


<jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
news:1128546361.668726.134880@g47g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> Better do a bit more research. Government can not control the market,
>> period. Carter tried that by controlling the distribution of gasoline
>> and
>> stations ran out of gasoline. It was not until Reagan let market forces
>> decided did the supply return, albeit at higher price. Rationing will
>> only
>> result in even higher prices, or worse, it will lower the amount of
>> available gasoline. If gasoline can not be sold at a profit it will just
>> be
>> burned off at the refinery so that the profitable distillates can be
>> refined
>> and sold. After all gasoline is a byproduct of the refining process.
>> Economics 101
>>
>
> Gas coupons become a viable alternative to make sure that everyone only
> gets X gallons of gas/week. Gasoline will still be sold at a profit,
> but the distribution will be even and no one, even gas guzzlers will
> get over their allotment. Those owners will just have to take shorter
> trips.
>

Done already. I found a wide assortment of power steering pumps for Lexus,
all under $500.00. Thanks for the laugh, though.

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:EBydnVCdkMdqytneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>I don't mind helping you out but I'm not going to teach a class in a NG.
>Do your own homework, that's what I tell MY grandchildren ;)
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:bFW0f.832$647.103@news01.roc.ny...
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> news:4PedndxWc6eGqNneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>
>>> Would you rather spend $500 to replace a power steering pump on a
>>> Caddy or one on a Lexus for $1,500?
>>
>> Are you referring to the cost of only the pump itself, or is labor
>> included in those numbers?
>>
>
>

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:xxydnWBHz476ytneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> That may be your opinion but obviously the people buying all those GM
> vehicles do not agree with your personal opinion.

They don't know any better.

Doug Kanter wrote:

> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:xxydnWBHz476ytneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> That may be your opinion but obviously the people buying all those GM
>> vehicles do not agree with your personal opinion.
>
> They don't know any better.

Bingo! Too many people are easily swayed by promotions and
(false/misleading) advertising.

Why would one ever think to compare the vehicles that any manufutactures
built twenty years ago to the vehicles another manufactures builds today?
All manufactures vehicles today are far superior in all respects to those
built then, or even those built ten years ago. I sure your new Honda is a
much better car than my 59 Toyapet or my first Civic. LOL


mike hunt


Palmer" <jenbobkatelyn@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:aZSdnRKzUsEi3NneRVn-hQ@adelphia.com...
> Yes, I do envy the purchasers of vehicles that had the side-saddle gas
> tank, the guillotine windshield, the undersized tires for a smooth ride,
> the tuck-under rear wheels, the rear-license plate gas filler, the
> hood-latch failures, the poor reliability, the roll-overs from bad design,
> the numerous lawsuits, the fires, the breakdowns.... I'm sorry, I am a
> little biased since I've bought Hondas and Toyotas, I've had NO problems.
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:Y6adnf8Xm73KQN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> Isn't envy one of the deadly sins?
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>

"High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:bl3axbt93905.dlg@hightech.misfit...
> Doug Kanter wrote:
>
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> news:xxydnWBHz476ytneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>> That may be your opinion but obviously the people buying all those GM
>>> vehicles do not agree with your personal opinion.
>>
>> They don't know any better.
>
> Bingo! Too many people are easily swayed by promotions and
> (false/misleading) advertising.

....not to mention the fact that the big 3 sell trucks by appealing to the
pants, not the brain. IT'S GOT A HEMI! It's a Titan! blah blah blah....

I thought Viagra was supposed to take care of these things.

My friend although I have at times owned GM and Toyota vehicles I currently
do not. I'm as simply pointing out that the glee with which some of you are
forecasting the demise of GM, and the domestic manufactures, is a bit
juvenile and asinine at best. GM is still number one, no matter how you
might like that or not. The facts are more buyers prefer their vehicles to
all others including the other domestic and ALL of the imports. GM will be
here for a long time to come, as will Ford.

mike hunt


"Bob Palmer" <jenbobkatelyn@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:uPCdnf0nq_aR2NneRVn-iQ@adelphia.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter"
>
> Mike, you need to get out of this Toyota group here and go to the GMC
> newsgroup so you can be pacified. I'm sorry, but your arguments do not
> stack up. It is ok if you are one of the patriotics that have to buy
> American. We here in this newsgroup would like to talk about our Toyotas,
> and how long we must go before the next oil change. Good luck promoting
> the GM way of life.
>

Nattie have I ever started a thread? ;)

mike hunt


"Wickeddoll®" <wickeddoll1958DIEspammersDIE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:di13fu.1qg.1@news.evilcabal.org...
>
> "Bob Palmer" <jenbobkatelyn@adelphia.net> wrote in message
> news:uPCdnf0nq_aR2NneRVn-iQ@adelphia.com...
>>
>> "Mike Hunter"
>>
>> Mike, you need to get out of this Toyota group here and go to the GMC
>> newsgroup so you can be pacified. I'm sorry, but your arguments do not
>> stack up. It is ok if you are one of the patriotics that have to buy
>> American. We here in this newsgroup would like to talk about our Toyotas,
>> and how long we must go before the next oil change. Good luck promoting
>> the GM way of life.
>>
> But then he wouldn't be able to start flame threads.
>
> Natalie
>
>
>

Gee I'm sorry you had problems with your Ford trucks but I see a lot of
Toyota trucks on Ford dealers use car lots. Others must have problems with
Toyota trucks as well. Especially when you consider the Ford F Series is
still the number one selling truck line and the F150 is still the number one
selling vehicle in the world, car or truck, and has been for twenty eight
years. The F150 is such a good truck that Ford sells more of them alone, in
one month, then Toyota sell trucks in a whole year. Apparently, unlike your
personal experience, more buyers like the buff mags think Fords trucks are
better, more dependable, longer lasting trucks, than any other and keep
buying more of them every year. ;)


mike hunt



"notmyrealname" <"NoSpam"@all.org> wrote in message
news:bSX0f.1859$yS6.531@clgrps12...
> Mike Hunter wrote:
> <snip>
>> If you think Toyotas do not breakdown as often you are in for a rude
>> awaking, especially when you get a bill far greater then the cost to do
>> the same repair to a domestic brand.
>
> That has not been my experience! My Ford F250 was much more expensive to
> repair and maintain than my Tundra. Plus it was not as well engineered at
> all. It seems that the American big 3 do the bare minimum to get their
> vehicles to the end of the warranty period. As soon as my Fords hit 100000
> Km they were starting to cost big $$$. I had many Ford trucks before
> coming back to Toyota. They all had the same rough best before date
> (100000km)

Domestic cooperators? What is that?

If GM went bust? Toyota wouldn't miss a beat. It would help them.

GM is junk. Don't they still use push rod engines or something? My
Toyota is 10 years and 155K miles on it. Runs like new. GM cars at
half that are wheezing and coughing. Sound like a bucket of bolts.
Spewing oil smoke all over the place. They are a joke.

"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:G_Y0f.8967$cg.4567@news02.roc.ny...
>
> "High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:bl3axbt93905.dlg@hightech.misfit...
>> Doug Kanter wrote:
>>
>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>> news:xxydnWBHz476ytneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>>> That may be your opinion but obviously the people buying all those GM
>>>> vehicles do not agree with your personal opinion.
>>>
>>> They don't know any better.
>>
>> Bingo! Too many people are easily swayed by promotions and
>> (false/misleading) advertising.
>
> ...not to mention the fact that the big 3 sell trucks by appealing to the
> pants, not the brain. IT'S GOT A HEMI! It's a Titan! blah blah blah....
>
> I thought Viagra was supposed to take care of these things.
>
LOL - it gets better - the bubbas around here hang 'nut sacks' from their
trucks. It's quite sad

Natalie

GM's bonds aren't unrated. They're rated below BB or whatever the
cutoff is. They're rating is known informally as "junk", or "below
investment grade". As in "not for widows and orphans" as you may not
get your money back.

200K is that all? I saw thousands of vehicles over many years in fleet
service with twice that and still going strong, I have a 71 vehicle with
nearly 300K on the clock that looks and runs like new ;)

mike hunt


"Charles @ Kankakee" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:VrCdnW65h_5809neRVn-pg@comcast.com...
>
>>
>
> I envy the purchasers of vehicles that last 200,000 miles and more without
> major problems. Wait. I am one! I don't have to envy myself anymore. .
> . .
>
> Charles of Kankakee
> 93 Corolla 205,500 miles
>

Toyota actually has healthy profits right now, while GM is treading
water to save its life. Toyota stock market cap is 150 billion, GM's
is what 20 billion?

GM revenues 190B vs. Toyota's 165B.

Toyota actually MADE 10B in profit last year. They made 1/2 of GM's
market cap.

You said you bought GM in 1964 and it has "quadrupled"? Maybe it has,
but it has gone down 50% since 1990. The stock market since 1964 has
gone up about 12-15 fold.

Think about what you are implying. If the oil companies really could
control the price of crude they must buy, why does it continue to go up?
If the oil companies could really control the retail price of gasoline, why
does it ever go down?

mike hunt


"Charles @ Kankakee" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:g-ednXxC0M50zNneRVn-jw@comcast.com...
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:1vqdnbV4X4NYs9neUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> Better do a bit more research. Government can not control the market,
>> period. Carter tried that by controlling the distribution of gasoline
>> and stations ran out of gasoline. It was not until Reagan let market
>> forces decided did the supply return, albeit at higher price. Rationing
>> will only result in even higher prices, or worse, it will lower the
>> amount of available gasoline. If gasoline can not be sold at a profit it
>> will just be burned off at the refinery so that the profitable
>> distillates can be refined and sold. After all gasoline is a byproduct
>> of the refining process. Economics 101
>>
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>> <jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
>> news:1128526195.006637.263290@g44g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>>> Incidentally, the government is already asking for voluntary
>>> conservation. Considering that the Republican party has abandoned its
>>> constituents (and the Democratic party longer ago) concerning the free
>>> market and not having the gov't intervene for just about anything, do
>>> you really think Republicans will let the free market dictate the
>>> buying and selling of an asset as essential as this? Fat chance. Many
>>> of Reps supporters will not be able to afford $5-7/gal gas and they are
>>> a strong voter base. Controls will be put into place to save those
>>> votes. These white collar folks and soccer moms have to get to work,
>>> and the Republicans will not let a little rationing get in the way of
>>> maintaining their voter base. I would do the same. It's just good
>>> business to keep your customers happy.
>>>
>>> Mike Hunter wrote:
>>>> Fat chance that there will be rationing with the Republicans in power.
>>>> The
>>>> commodities buyers, in a free market, determine the price of crude. If
>>>> demand exceeds the supply the higher price will discourage unnecessary
>>>> consumption. Those that can not afford the fuel will drive less.
>>>> Those
>>>> that can afford to buy the fuel they need will buy what they need.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> mike hunt
>>>
>>
>>
>
> Mike,
>
> How soon you forget. Regean releasing the supply actually caused a net
> drop in price before very long. In 1990 I was paying 86 cents a gallon
> and had been paying about that for a couple years. Down from 1.25 in 1980
> when Carter was still president.
>
> We have had some wierdness here. Kankakee has been 2.96 to 2.99 for
> several weeks, up from 2.80. The Hinsdale Oasis on the I-294, never
> known for cheap gas, has been 2.72 to 2.82 during that period. Today, for
> the first time, the Oasis was 2.93. Oh, no, there's no price fixing in
> Kankakee. None whatsoever. Never was.
>
> If you believe that last statement, I have some ocean front property you
> might be interested in. In Aridzona.
>
> Charles of Kankakee
>

Junk or rebuilt or for a V6? LOL

mike hunt
"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nPY0f.859$647.302@news01.roc.ny...
> Done already. I found a wide assortment of power steering pumps for Lexus,
> all under $500.00. Thanks for the laugh, though.
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:EBydnVCdkMdqytneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>I don't mind helping you out but I'm not going to teach a class in a NG.
>>Do your own homework, that's what I tell MY grandchildren ;)
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:bFW0f.832$647.103@news01.roc.ny...
>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4PedndxWc6eGqNneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>>
>>>> Would you rather spend $500 to replace a power steering pump on a
>>>> Caddy or one on a Lexus for $1,500?
>>>
>>> Are you referring to the cost of only the pump itself, or is labor
>>> included in those numbers?
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Yes but that hemi will blow the doors of a Tundra, while hauling a bigger
load LOL


mike hunt


"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:G_Y0f.8967$cg.4567@news02.roc.ny...
>
> "High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:bl3axbt93905.dlg@hightech.misfit...
>> Doug Kanter wrote:
>>
>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>> news:xxydnWBHz476ytneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>>> That may be your opinion but obviously the people buying all those GM
>>>> vehicles do not agree with your personal opinion.
>>>
>>> They don't know any better.
>>
>> Bingo! Too many people are easily swayed by promotions and
>> (false/misleading) advertising.
>
> ...not to mention the fact that the big 3 sell trucks by appealing to the
> pants, not the brain. IT'S GOT A HEMI! It's a Titan! blah blah blah....
>
> I thought Viagra was supposed to take care of these things.
>

On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 14:17:45 -0400, some stupid top-posting,
nym-shifting troll, currently calling himself Mike Hunter wrote:

>I guess you never had a 4cy Camry rental if you thought the Buick was a slug
>on the hills? I have news for you all 95s are outdated today. The cars
>today are technologically far better than those sold ten years ago or even
>five years ago.

I wouldn't go that far... The changes in the last ten years heave
been pretty subtle, really... Can you give a specific example of the
improvements? What I mostly see is increased features of varying
desirability (think multi-airbags, nav systems), along with more
weight and bigger engines to propel them.

On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:44:52 -0400, some stupid top-posting,
nym-shifting troll, currently calling himself Mike Hunter wrote:

>>> GM has ALWAYS sold more vehicles than Toyota. GM today sells more trucks
>>> alone in the US than Toyota sells cars and trucks combined.
>>
>> These figures are in no way indicative of quality. You know that.
>
>That may be your opinion but obviously the people buying all those GM
>vehicles do not agree with your personal opinion.

Idiot. This is not true, as has previously been explained to you.
Price, prejudice, style, ignorance and other factors lead people to
buy the "home team's brand". Any knowledgeable person knows that GM
lags in quality.

On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:50:43 -0400, some stupid top-posting,
nym-shifting troll, currently calling himself Mike Hunter wrote:

>You obviously were not around during WWII if you believe that ;)

Believe what, top poster?

On 5 Oct 2005 14:06:01 -0700, jcd1234@kattare.com wrote:

>
>Mike Hunter wrote:
>> Better do a bit more research. Government can not control the market,
>> period. Carter tried that by controlling the distribution of gasoline and
>> stations ran out of gasoline. It was not until Reagan let market forces
>> decided did the supply return, albeit at higher price. Rationing will only
>> result in even higher prices, or worse, it will lower the amount of
>> available gasoline. If gasoline can not be sold at a profit it will just be
>> burned off at the refinery so that the profitable distillates can be refined
>> and sold. After all gasoline is a byproduct of the refining process.
>> Economics 101
>>
>
>Gas coupons become a viable alternative to make sure that everyone only
>gets X gallons of gas/week. Gasoline will still be sold at a profit,
>but the distribution will be even and no one, even gas guzzlers will
>get over their allotment. Those owners will just have to take shorter
>trips.

Move to Cuba....

--

Scott in Florida

On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 22:08:23 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
<ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote:

>A Klock?


That is a Glock with a lisp...


>
>"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>news:yPadnWcjv-8Nq9neUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> If I said I was going to shoot at you with 50% of the bullets in a six
>> shot 38 revolver or 30% of the 20 shot clip in a Klock would it mean
>> something to you? LOL
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:sAT0f.8936$cg.4928@news02.roc.ny...
>>>
>>>>
>>> I love the bit about how a smaller percentage of a higher number is
>>> evidence of something (?), even if the actual number of cars ends up
>>> being larger.
>>>
>>
>>
>
--

Scott in Florida

On 5 Oct 2005 16:40:17 -0700, "st-bum" <kennykabuki@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Toyota actually has healthy profits right now, while GM is treading
>water to save its life. Toyota stock market cap is 150 billion, GM's
>is what 20 billion?
>
>GM revenues 190B vs. Toyota's 165B.

all those GM revenues are from GMAC...their financing arm.

They are losing money on every vehicle they sell...


>
>Toyota actually MADE 10B in profit last year. They made 1/2 of GM's
>market cap.
>
>You said you bought GM in 1964 and it has "quadrupled"? Maybe it has,
>but it has gone down 50% since 1990. The stock market since 1964 has
>gone up about 12-15 fold.
--

Scott in Florida

On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:26:47 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
<mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:

>And what generated those profit for GMAC? ;)

The fact that they have to sell a new car/truck on time every year
cause they are junk after that time?

lol

>
>mike hunt
>
>
>"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
>news:mk08k1975nuoj876u9jfv1d7uhcq3n4ve5@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 09:59:51 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>
>>>If that is what you believe then you have not read GMs latest stockholders
>>>report LOL
>>>
>>>
>>>mike hunt
>>
>> The latest Annual Report on GM
>>
>> Look at page 46 of 108 Results of Operations
>>
>> Net Income 2,894
>>
>> Then look a bit deeper and find out where that came from.....
>>
>> GMAC
>>
>> 2,913
>>
>> GM is losing its ass in the automotive end.
>>
>> Like I said....sell all you have while it is worth anything WBMA
>>
>> http://www.gm.com/company/investor_information/docs/fin_data/gm04ar/download/gm04ar.pdf
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
>>>news:3466k1d7i14o8ppdm887tu62vh5qfd791m@4ax.com...
>>>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 18:34:41 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>>>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Did you ever hear of the word profit? ;)
>>>>>
>>>>>mike hunt
>>>>
>>>> GM is only making money on their financing operation and issuing bonds
>>>> for the money to pay dividends. Very bad idea.
>>>>
>>>> Like I said....sell
>>>>
>>>> You can buy my a drink with your profits...
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:5js5k1hkt534njjhej27pk95mfkhmqg0ia@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:40:00 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>>>>>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>GM has always paid good dividends,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd investigate where GM is getting the money for your dividends...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...and then sell all you have...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Don't say I didn't warn ya
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Scott in Florida
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Scott in Florida
>>>
>> --
>>
>> Scott in Florida
>
--

Scott in Florida

On Wednesday October 5 at 08:22pm
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:

> Yes but that hemi will blow the doors of a Tundra, while hauling a
> bigger load LOL

Yeah but the Cummins turbo diesel is a real engine, and will walk
circles around that HEMI.
--
-Johann Koenig

"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
news:n619k15280vugdut54a34i09mlh5i8mol5@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 22:08:23 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
> <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>A Klock?
>
>
> That is a Glock with a lisp...
>
>
LOL

Natalie
>>
>>"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>news:yPadnWcjv-8Nq9neUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>> If I said I was going to shoot at you with 50% of the bullets in a six
>>> shot 38 revolver or 30% of the 20 shot clip in a Klock would it mean
>>> something to you? LOL
>>>
>>>
>>> mike hunt
>>>
>>>
>>> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:sAT0f.8936$cg.4928@news02.roc.ny...
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I love the bit about how a smaller percentage of a higher number is
>>>> evidence of something (?), even if the actual number of cars ends up
>>>> being larger.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> --
>
> Scott in Florida

"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
news:tg19k1hcjlr9t11mr0jia409q56ht76vrr@4ax.com...
> On 5 Oct 2005 16:40:17 -0700, "st-bum" <kennykabuki@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Toyota actually has healthy profits right now, while GM is treading
>>water to save its life. Toyota stock market cap is 150 billion, GM's
>>is what 20 billion?
>>
>>GM revenues 190B vs. Toyota's 165B.
>
> all those GM revenues are from GMAC...their financing arm.
>
> They are losing money on every vehicle they sell...
>
So they over-finance you for your POS car. Lovely

Natalie
>
>>
>>Toyota actually MADE 10B in profit last year. They made 1/2 of GM's
>>market cap.
>>
>>You said you bought GM in 1964 and it has "quadrupled"? Maybe it has,
>>but it has gone down 50% since 1990. The stock market since 1964 has
>>gone up about 12-15 fold.
> --
>
> Scott in Florida

"Wickeddoll®" <wickeddoll1958DIEspammersDIE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:di15u5.2g0.1@news.evilcabal.org...
>
> "Charles @ Kankakee" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:VrCdnW65h_5809neRVn-pg@comcast.com...
>
>> I envy the purchasers of vehicles that last 200,000 miles and more
>> without major problems. Wait. I am one! I don't have to envy myself
>> anymore. . . .
>>
>> Charles of Kankakee
>> 93 Corolla 205,500 miles
>
> LOL My five-year-old Echo just went over 60,000, so it's still a cream
> puff. The '87 Corolla we sold my mom still hasn't cracked 150,000 yet.
>
> Cars don't work hard for us
>
> :-)
>
> Natalie

Well, you have to admit 90 miles a day adds up fast.

Charles of Kankakee

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:

>
>"DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
>news:1128530479.15e733417a16395881b36cb37add5ad0@t eranews...
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> news:a92dna_FO8l1eN7eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>> Where do you get those assumptions? There is little discernable
>> difference
>>> in the build quality and longevity among the vehicles offer for sale by
>> all
>>> of the manufactures today.
>>
>> You've made this claim before and never offered a reference to back it.
>> Do
>> so.
>>
>>> As to fuel economy GM offers more vehicles that
>>> get MPG figures equal or better than to anything sold by Toyota and they
>> are
>>> doing it with engines that are not underpowered. Do a little research
>>> rather than expressing an uninformed opinion, WBMA
>>>
>>
>> You've made this claim before. Do a bumper-to-bumber comparison for us.
>> What GM or Ford vehicle do you think is equivalent to or better than a
>> 154hp
>> Camry LE and still gets equal or better gas mileage?
>>
>> Here, I'll do one for you... In spite of the price difference (the 154hp
>> Camry LE is considerably cheaper, at least before the givebacks GM finds
>> necessary to move Buicks), you could compare the Buick LaCrosse (one of
>> GM's
>> most recent introductions, so we'd expect it to be technologically
>> sophisticated) and the Camry LE. The Camry's 9 in or so shorter and a
>> little narrower (i.e., fits into my garage more readily) but has more
>> luggage room and most interior dimensions are very, very close. The
>> features list is similar, too, but the edge goes to the Buick for having
>> "wood trim" in several places (yippee). The Camry is rated at 24/34 for
>> mileage and the LaCrosse is rated at 20/29 mpg.
>>
>> You've also disparaged the performance of 4-cylinder Camrys before. The
>> good people at www.web-cars.com project that, yes, the V6 LaCrosse will
>> beat
>> the I4 Camry in the quarter mile by 16.80 to 17.75 seconds (I added 150
>> lbs
>> for the drivers). Not a terribly impressive victory (I'll take the gas
>> savings, thank you). I'd bet you'd find that the LaCrosse doesn't
>> actually
>> have a one-second lead over the Camry, either, since the Toyota uses a
>> DOHC
>> VVTi motor (in my experience, VVTi engines give much better low-end
>> torque)
>> while the Buick has an 3.8L OHV engine without any tricks.
>>
>> By the way, good luck parking that Buick. GM thoughtfully engineered a
>> turning in a turning circle of 40.4 feet vs 34.8 for the Camry.
>>
>> Of course, if you do value performance over fuel mileage, the 3.3L V6
>> Camry
>> SE is still list-priced less than the LaCrosse and has 210HP on tap in a
>> 3450 lb package, getting 21/29mpg (slightly better than the LaCrosse). It
>> is
>> projected to quarter mile .35 sec faster than the Buick but I'd be very
>> suprised the margin if wasn't actually larger (the Toyota 3.3L V6 is also
>> a
>> VVTi/DOHC engine).
>>
>> Got a trailer? Consider buying a Camry, which tows 2000 lbs, as opposed
>> to
>> the Buick's 1000 lbs.
>>
>> Sources: www.edmunds.com
>>
>>> mike hunt
>>>
>>>
>>> <jcd1234@kattare.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1128520615.935380.134680@g43g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>>> >
>>> >> I see your point about blind patriotism and consumer purchasing, but
>>> > WWII veterans are dying at an astonishing rate every day. The hatred
>>> > of Japanese cars is dying with it. The 80s was riddled with hatred for
>>> > all things Japanese, as their quality symbolized a demise in the U.S.
>>> > automobile industry. Quality increased somewhat at that time, so
>>> > people bought American again. Now, the quality factor, not to mention
>>> > the MPG factor, is displacing that "patriotism" of consumer purchasing.
>>> > People already forget the 80s and the Jap threat that materialized.
>>> > Also, Jap companies employ U.S. workers and help boost the U.S. economy
>>> > anyway. So, there's little reason for most educated (and even
>>> > non-educated) people to avoid purchasing them anymore. This blind
>>> > patriotism is a dying breed. In a way, it's a good thing, because the
>>> > free market works best when gov't isn't involved in bailing out
>>> > organizations and consumers choose based on value (not to mention
>>> > meddling in our personal affairs). It helps promote the concept that
>>> > vehicles will continue to improve in their longevity and endurance.
>>> >
Wots a klock...?
--

-Gord.
(use gordon in email)

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:aRSdnfTb_Y4--dneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> Think about what you are implying. If the oil companies really could
> control the price of crude they must buy, why does it continue to go up?
> If the oil companies could really control the retail price of gasoline,
why
> does it ever go down?
>
> mike hunt
>

I thought you were merely a blowhard but it turns out you're also
breathtakingly stupid.

Hey, stupid, any oil company that produces any oil at all is cheering on the
price of crude. The $50+ per barrel price applies to domestically produced
oil as well as foreign. It's all gravy to the producers.

Hey, blowhard, I'm still waiting to see your bumper-to-bumper comparison of
a GM vehicle that you think whips a Camry. You made the claim. Prove it.

Hey, blowhard, I'm still waiting to see your credible evidence of equal US
manufacturer and Toyota quality. You made the claim. Prove it.

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:orOcnegxO_ZiWN_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> What is your point? Every manufacture offers rebates. The average new
> vehicle buyer in the US, and that is what we are referring to new vehicle
> sales, buy another new vehicle in three to four years with 45K to 60K on
the
> clock. ANY vehicle sold today will easily last to 200K, given the proper
> maintenance. But whatever you wish, that is what buyers do after all and
> they buy more GM models than Toyota models, period. Price is ALWAYS the
> determining factor,

For many people, this is true. However, these people are, let me try and
put this delicately, stupid.

Minimum lifecycle cost should be the determining factor. The purchase price
is just one component:

Purchase Price
Depreciation
Maintenance Expense
Repair expense (incidence rate times cost of repair)
Insurance
Fuel Mileage

We bought a minivan in 2001. We looked at the mid-range models of the Dodge
Caravan, the Chevy Venture and the Toyota Sienna. They were very comparable
in purchase price (the Toyota was actually least expensive and the most
expensive was the Venture, with the Caravan next most expensive). Edmunds
now puts the private party resale prices at:

Venture: $7249
Caravan: $8858
Sienna: $13034

Which one turns out to be least expensive if you keep it for 5 years and
sell or trade it to buy something newer? We bought a Sienna. I'm probably
$5,000 ahead at this point over where I'd be if I'd bought the Caravan.

Of those things that make up the lifecyle cost, the depreciation and the
repair cost are not known and have to be projected. This is partly
subjective and partly regression. If Toyota has a good track record for
repair cost, consistently, for the last 10 years (something you can get from
Consumer Reports or other sources) and Toyotas consistently have higher
resale values (Edmunds.com or KBB.com can help you there), which otherwise
equivalent $25,000 minivan do you buy?

> that is why Toyota sells more than Lexus. The Lexus
> must meet any imagined quality and longevity standard better than a
Toyota
> yet more buyers buy a Toyota because it's less expensive than the Lexus
>
> mike hunt
>
>

Lexus may well have measurably better quality and/or lower projected repair
expense than a Toyota but not enough so to justify the extra $5,000 or so it
costs to buy one. However, not everyone does attempt to minimuze life cycle
cost but some prefer to spend a little more for intangibles (prestige,
style) or extras of arguable value (a better zero-to-sixty time or genuine
wood trim). Well, these differences do make life more interesting.

"Wickeddoll®" <wickeddoll1958DIEspammersDIE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:di19qt.3p4.1@news.evilcabal.org...

>>> Bingo! Too many people are easily swayed by promotions and
>>> (false/misleading) advertising.
>>
>> ...not to mention the fact that the big 3 sell trucks by appealing to the
>> pants, not the brain. IT'S GOT A HEMI! It's a Titan! blah blah blah....
>>
>> I thought Viagra was supposed to take care of these things.
>>
> LOL - it gets better - the bubbas around here hang 'nut sacks' from their
> trucks. It's quite sad

Are you kidding??? :-)

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:6g-dnWbBV9-w89neUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> Yes but that hemi will blow the doors of a Tundra, while hauling a bigger
> load LOL

"blow the doors off" - You mean....like in a race?

"dizzy" <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:m7u8k11f2equ82sd7lrnd5d95rhcn1kluv@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:44:52 -0400, some stupid top-posting,
> nym-shifting troll, currently calling himself Mike Hunter wrote:
>
>>>> GM has ALWAYS sold more vehicles than Toyota. GM today sells more
>>>> trucks
>>>> alone in the US than Toyota sells cars and trucks combined.
>>>
>>> These figures are in no way indicative of quality. You know that.
>>
>>That may be your opinion but obviously the people buying all those GM
>>vehicles do not agree with your personal opinion.
>
> Idiot. This is not true, as has previously been explained to you.
> Price, prejudice, style, ignorance and other factors lead people to
> buy the "home team's brand". Any knowledgeable person knows that GM
> lags in quality.
>

Actually, he may be right about some GM/Ford/Dodge truck buyers, but he has
no idea why he's right. Some people require cargo accessories that may not
exist yet for the Tundra, for carrying stuff like ladders, etc. And, what's
the arrangement with 4 wheels in the back called? Not available on Tundra.

But, these people are not the majority.

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:PhqdnZPbpq9J_NneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> Gee I'm sorry you had problems with your Ford trucks but I see a lot of
> Toyota trucks on Ford dealers use car lots.

You draw some rather bizarre conclusions from your observations. If a single
guy gets married and has a kid, and then trades in his Toyota pickup, do you
suppose it's because he didn't like the truck? Or, could there be another
reason? Read sentence #2 several times if the answer eludes you.

If it still eludes you, then you are a living example of why the No Child
Left Behind idea is a good one.

"Yes but that hemi will blow the doors of a Tundra, while hauling a
bigger load * LOL"

Mike Hunt
----------------
Mike H. I always take your reasoning with a grain of salt. After all you
are the same guy who said he drives big RWD vehicles because they are
safer compared to FWD cars. And in the next breath, said you rode
motorcycles up until you were in your 70's ???

It costs DC the $AME to make the hemi as it does the regular engine they
put in their vehicles. So basically they're selling suckers (not unlike
yourself) a ($10,000) set of those rubber testicles Natalie was
talking about.

The Hemi (pure profit) is the ONLY reason DC is not in the same crying
game as Ford and GM right now. But given time, people will figure
out they've been had (hemi-ed). And DC will be right back with the
other 2 'mericans. Sweeet..!

CP

Thank you for supporting what I have been saying all along. Toyota makes
good dependable vehicles but so do most other manufactures today. Your last
paragraph says it all. The premium that one must pay to buy ANY of Toyota
products, compared to what is available on the market, does not justify any
perceived advantage they may offer the average new car buyer. One of the
buff mags came to the same conclusion when they did head to head tests of a
V6 Camry and five other comparable midsized vehicles. They rated the Camry
SIXTH because of the $7,000 premium it cost was not worth any advantage it
may have had over the others. Four of the others outperformed the Camry in
their test. That is the reason I personally no longer buy Lexus V8s. I
have bought other luxury cars that have proven to me to be just as
dependable, for thousands of dollars less to own annually, than when I was
buying Toyota products. In fact when I first switch from Lexus to a
domestic I saved enough money to cover nearly the total cost of a second
vehicle that I bought from the dealership. To me the total costs of
ownership are only the acquisition cost, insurance, scheduled maintenance,
fuel and replacement vehicle cost, I haven't needed to repaired any car
domestic or foreign for many years

You can believe whatever you wish but in all my years in retail I can affirm
that the last question a customer will ask before signing on the bottom line
is 'How much is my monthly payment?' ;).

mike hunt


"dh" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
news:1128574967.c01a6f598ab8095605b8755b9afe29ad@t eranews...
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:orOcnegxO_ZiWN_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> What is your point? Every manufacture offers rebates. The average new
>> vehicle buyer in the US, and that is what we are referring to new vehicle
>> sales, buy another new vehicle in three to four years with 45K to 60K on
> the
>> clock. ANY vehicle sold today will easily last to 200K, given the
>> proper
>> maintenance. But whatever you wish, that is what buyers do after all and
>> they buy more GM models than Toyota models, period. Price is ALWAYS the
>> determining factor,
>
> For many people, this is true. However, these people are, let me try and
> put this delicately, stupid.
>
> Minimum lifecycle cost should be the determining factor. The purchase
> price
> is just one component:
>
> Purchase Price
> Depreciation
> Maintenance Expense
> Repair expense (incidence rate times cost of repair)
> Insurance
> Fuel Mileage
>
> Of those things that make up the lifecyle cost, the depreciation and the
> repair cost are not known and have to be projected. This is partly
> subjective and partly regression. If Toyota has a good track record for
> repair cost, consistently, for the last 10 years (something you can get
> from
> Consumer Reports or other sources) and Toyotas consistently have higher
> resale values (Edmunds.com or KBB.com can help you there), which otherwise
> equivalent $25,000 minivan do you buy?
>
>> that is why Toyota sells more than Lexus. The Lexus
>> must meet any imagined quality and longevity standard better than a
> Toyota
>> yet more buyers buy a Toyota because it's less expensive than the Lexus
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>
> Lexus may well have measurably better quality and/or lower projected
> repair
> expense than a Toyota but not enough so to justify the extra $5,000 or so
> it
> costs to buy one. However, not everyone does attempt to minimuze life
> cycle
> cost but some prefer to spend a little more for intangibles (prestige,
> style) or extras of arguable value (a better zero-to-sixty time or genuine
> wood trim). Well, these differences do make life more interesting.
>
>

I have never seen a Toyota truck on a Ford lot. I very rarely see a Toyota
truck on any used lot.
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:PhqdnZPbpq9J_NneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> Gee I'm sorry you had problems with your Ford trucks but I see a lot of
> Toyota trucks on Ford dealers use car lots. Others must have problems
> with Toyota trucks as well. Especially when you consider the Ford F
> Series is still the number one selling truck line and the F150 is still
> the number one selling vehicle in the world, car or truck, and has been
> for twenty eight years. The F150 is such a good truck that Ford sells
> more of them alone, in one month, then Toyota sell trucks in a whole year.
> Apparently, unlike your personal experience, more buyers like the buff
> mags think Fords trucks are better, more dependable, longer lasting
> trucks, than any other and keep buying more of them every year. ;)
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
>
> "notmyrealname" <"NoSpam"@all.org> wrote in message
> news:bSX0f.1859$yS6.531@clgrps12...
>> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> <snip>
>>> If you think Toyotas do not breakdown as often you are in for a rude
>>> awaking, especially when you get a bill far greater then the cost to do
>>> the same repair to a domestic brand.
>>
>> That has not been my experience! My Ford F250 was much more expensive to
>> repair and maintain than my Tundra. Plus it was not as well engineered at
>> all. It seems that the American big 3 do the bare minimum to get their
>> vehicles to the end of the warranty period. As soon as my Fords hit
>> 100000 Km they were starting to cost big $$$. I had many Ford trucks
>> before coming back to Toyota. They all had the same rough best before
>> date (100000km)
>
>

Until the transmission blows at 50,000 miles and while getting 5 MPG.
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:6g-dnWbBV9-w89neUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> Yes but that hemi will blow the doors of a Tundra, while hauling a bigger
> load LOL
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:G_Y0f.8967$cg.4567@news02.roc.ny...
>>
>> "High Tech Misfit" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>> news:bl3axbt93905.dlg@hightech.misfit...
>>> Doug Kanter wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:xxydnWBHz476ytneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>>>> That may be your opinion but obviously the people buying all those GM
>>>>> vehicles do not agree with your personal opinion.
>>>>
>>>> They don't know any better.
>>>
>>> Bingo! Too many people are easily swayed by promotions and
>>> (false/misleading) advertising.
>>
>> ...not to mention the fact that the big 3 sell trucks by appealing to the
>> pants, not the brain. IT'S GOT A HEMI! It's a Titan! blah blah blah....
>>
>> I thought Viagra was supposed to take care of these things.
>>
>
>

I see you sniped the bulk of my post when your replied, did the facts get in
the way? As to your suggestion the guy may have needed a larger truck, one
can only wonder why did he not buy a larger Toyota truck? ;)


mike hunt


"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:My81f.8997$cg.4562@news02.roc.ny...
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:PhqdnZPbpq9J_NneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> Gee I'm sorry you had problems with your Ford trucks but I see a lot of
>> Toyota trucks on Ford dealers use car lots.
>
> You draw some rather bizarre conclusions from your observations. If a
> single guy gets married and has a kid, and then trades in his Toyota
> pickup, do you suppose it's because he didn't like the truck? Or, could
> there be another reason? Read sentence #2 several times if the answer
> eludes you.
>
> If it still eludes you, then you are a living example of why the No Child
> Left Behind idea is a good one.
>

I don't own a truck and the Hemi' is not really a hemi head engine. But it
does have bigger balls than a Tundra and for less money. ;)


mike hunt


"Charles Pisano" <pisanochas@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:24343-434517F1-44@storefull-3277.bay.webtv.net...
"Yes but that hemi will blow the doors of a Tundra, while hauling a
bigger load LOL"

Mike Hunt
----------------
Mike H. I always take your reasoning with a grain of salt. After all you
are the same guy who said he drives big RWD vehicles because they are
safer compared to FWD cars. And in the next breath, said you rode
motorcycles up until you were in your 70's ???

It costs DC the $AME to make the hemi as it does the regular engine they
put in their vehicles. So basically they're selling suckers (not unlike
yourself) a ($10,000) set of those rubber testicles Natalie was
talking about.

The Hemi (pure profit) is the ONLY reason DC is not in the same crying
game as Ford and GM right now. But given time, people will figure
out they've been had (hemi-ed). And DC will be right back with the
other 2 'mericans. Sweeet..!

CP

You are assuming he wanted a truck as his next car. You can assume
absolutely NOTHING about a car you see in a used car lot.

And, it's "snipped", not "sniped".

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:5L6cnS7HbM6V3djeUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>I see you sniped the bulk of my post when your replied, did the facts get
>in the way? As to your suggestion the guy may have needed a larger truck,
>one can only wonder why did he not buy a larger Toyota truck? ;)
>
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:My81f.8997$cg.4562@news02.roc.ny...
>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>> news:PhqdnZPbpq9J_NneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>> Gee I'm sorry you had problems with your Ford trucks but I see a lot of
>>> Toyota trucks on Ford dealers use car lots.
>>
>> You draw some rather bizarre conclusions from your observations. If a
>> single guy gets married and has a kid, and then trades in his Toyota
>> pickup, do you suppose it's because he didn't like the truck? Or, could
>> there be another reason? Read sentence #2 several times if the answer
>> eludes you.
>>
>> If it still eludes you, then you are a living example of why the No Child
>> Left Behind idea is a good one.
>>
>
>

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:4L-cne5elaRYoNjeUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> Thank you for supporting what I have been saying all along. Toyota makes
> good dependable vehicles but so do most other manufactures today. Your
last
> paragraph says it all.

You have poor reading comprehension. My last paragraph points out that the
Lexus offers only marginal/diminishing returns in terms of reliability over
the Toyota, not autos in general.

> The premium that one must pay to buy ANY of Toyota
> products, compared to what is available on the market, does not justify
any
> perceived advantage they may offer the average new car buyer.

What premium? Comparing MSRP to MSRP, Toyotas are similar in price
(sometimes less) than cars I consider "comparable." Is this alleged
"premium" going to be larger or smaller than the "premium" I can recover if
I sell the car in 5 years?

What do you consider "comparable?" Be specific. What GM/Ford givebacks are
required to put a "premium" on Toyota pricing?

> One of the
> buff mags came to the same conclusion when they did head to head tests of
a
> V6 Camry and five other comparable midsized vehicles. They rated the
Camry
> SIXTH because of the $7,000 premium it cost was not worth any advantage it
> may have had over the others.

Which magazine? What year? What month? What were the other six cars?
Where did they get the idea a Camry was $7,000 more than some other,
comparable car? A Camry SE DOHC VVTi 3.3L V6 is $24,025, MSRP.
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/toyota/camry/100566045/prices.html?action=1

A Buick LaCrosse CXL OHV 3.8L V6 is $25,435 MSRP
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/buick/lacrosse/100569953/prices.html?action=1

To be $7,000 less than the Camry, the Buick would have come equipped with
$8,000 in cash in the glove box.

Chevy Impalas MSRP for 22,000 to 25,000 (unless you want the V8, which is
$27,000). What are the givebacks on those? $5,000 cash in the glove box?

Are you going to answer the questions or are you just bullshitting?


> Four of the others outperformed the Camry in
> their test. That is the reason I personally no longer buy Lexus V8s. I
> have bought other luxury cars that have proven to me to be just as
> dependable, for thousands of dollars less to own annually, than when I was
> buying Toyota products. In fact when I first switch from Lexus to a
> domestic I saved enough money to cover nearly the total cost of a second
> vehicle that I bought from the dealership. To me the total costs of
> ownership are only the acquisition cost, insurance, scheduled maintenance,
> fuel and replacement vehicle cost,

You're overlooking the potential of thousands less in depreciation.

> I haven't needed to repaired any car
> domestic or foreign for many years
>

Since you say you only keep cars for a very few years, this observation
carries little weight. If GM and Ford couldn't count on most of their cars
lasting the warranty period, they'd go out of business very promptly. The
interesting repairs kick in after the warranty expires. One of my friends,
a former Buick loyalist, now says he tries to unload them by 80,000 miles,
which is when he thinks they start to fall apart.

> You can believe whatever you wish but in all my years in retail I can
affirm
> that the last question a customer will ask before signing on the bottom
line
> is 'How much is my monthly payment?' ;).
>
> mike hunt
>
>
> "dh" <dh@stargate.com> wrote in message
> news:1128574967.c01a6f598ab8095605b8755b9afe29ad@t eranews...
> > "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> > news:orOcnegxO_ZiWN_eUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> >> What is your point? Every manufacture offers rebates. The average new
> >> vehicle buyer in the US, and that is what we are referring to new
vehicle
> >> sales, buy another new vehicle in three to four years with 45K to 60K
on
> > the
> >> clock. ANY vehicle sold today will easily last to 200K, given the
> >> proper
> >> maintenance. But whatever you wish, that is what buyers do after all
and
> >> they buy more GM models than Toyota models, period. Price is ALWAYS
the
> >> determining factor,
> >
> > For many people, this is true. However, these people are, let me try
and
> > put this delicately, stupid.
> >
> > Minimum lifecycle cost should be the determining factor. The purchase
> > price
> > is just one component:
> >
> > Purchase Price
> > Depreciation
> > Maintenance Expense
> > Repair expense (incidence rate times cost of repair)
> > Insurance
> > Fuel Mileage
> >
> > Of those things that make up the lifecyle cost, the depreciation and the
> > repair cost are not known and have to be projected. This is partly
> > subjective and partly regression. If Toyota has a good track record for
> > repair cost, consistently, for the last 10 years (something you can get
> > from
> > Consumer Reports or other sources) and Toyotas consistently have higher
> > resale values (Edmunds.com or KBB.com can help you there), which
otherwise
> > equivalent $25,000 minivan do you buy?
> >
> >> that is why Toyota sells more than Lexus. The Lexus
> >> must meet any imagined quality and longevity standard better than a
> > Toyota
> >> yet more buyers buy a Toyota because it's less expensive than the Lexus
> >>
> >> mike hunt
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Lexus may well have measurably better quality and/or lower projected
> > repair
> > expense than a Toyota but not enough so to justify the extra $5,000 or
so
> > it
> > costs to buy one. However, not everyone does attempt to minimuze life
> > cycle
> > cost but some prefer to spend a little more for intangibles (prestige,
> > style) or extras of arguable value (a better zero-to-sixty time or
genuine
> > wood trim). Well, these differences do make life more interesting.
> >
> >
>
>

Seems like you may be spending too much time on the net LOL


mike hunt

"Bob Palmer" <jenbobkatelyn@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:ddydnXJf67I_o9jenZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@adelphia.com ...
>I have never seen a Toyota truck on a Ford lot. I very rarely see a Toyota
>truck on any used lot.
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:PhqdnZPbpq9J_NneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>> Gee I'm sorry you had problems with your Ford trucks but I see a lot of
>> Toyota trucks on Ford dealers use car lots. Others must have problems
>> with Toyota trucks as well. Especially when you consider the Ford F
>> Series is still the number one selling truck line and the F150 is still
>> the number one selling vehicle in the world, car or truck, and has been
>> for twenty eight years. The F150 is such a good truck that Ford sells
>> more of them alone, in one month, then Toyota sell trucks in a whole
>> year. Apparently, unlike your personal experience, more buyers like the
>> buff mags think Fords trucks are better, more dependable, longer lasting
>> trucks, than any other and keep buying more of them every year. ;)
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>>
>> "notmyrealname" <"NoSpam"@all.org> wrote in message
>> news:bSX0f.1859$yS6.531@clgrps12...
>>> Mike Hunter wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>> If you think Toyotas do not breakdown as often you are in for a rude
>>>> awaking, especially when you get a bill far greater then the cost to do
>>>> the same repair to a domestic brand.
>>>
>>> That has not been my experience! My Ford F250 was much more expensive to
>>> repair and maintain than my Tundra. Plus it was not as well engineered
>>> at all. It seems that the American big 3 do the bare minimum to get
>>> their vehicles to the end of the warranty period. As soon as my Fords
>>> hit 100000 Km they were starting to cost big $$$. I had many Ford trucks
>>> before coming back to Toyota. They all had the same rough best before
>>> date (100000km)
>>
>>
>
>

Beats me I always buy new. Why would anyone want to buy anything that
someone else did not want? ;)

mike hunt


"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:WEb1f.932$647.526@news01.roc.ny...
> You are assuming he wanted a truck as his next car. You can assume
> absolutely NOTHING about a car you see in a used car lot.
>
> And, it's "snipped", not "sniped".
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:5L6cnS7HbM6V3djeUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>I see you sniped the bulk of my post when your replied, did the facts get
>>in the way? As to your suggestion the guy may have needed a larger
>>truck, one can only wonder why did he not buy a larger Toyota truck? ;)
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:My81f.8997$cg.4562@news02.roc.ny...
>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>> news:PhqdnZPbpq9J_NneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>>> Gee I'm sorry you had problems with your Ford trucks but I see a lot of
>>>> Toyota trucks on Ford dealers use car lots.
>>>
>>> You draw some rather bizarre conclusions from your observations. If a
>>> single guy gets married and has a kid, and then trades in his Toyota
>>> pickup, do you suppose it's because he didn't like the truck? Or, could
>>> there be another reason? Read sentence #2 several times if the answer
>>> eludes you.
>>>
>>> If it still eludes you, then you are a living example of why the No
>>> Child Left Behind idea is a good one.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Are you saying the Toyotas people by 'on time' are junk? I don't think
Toyotas are great cars, merely overpriced and underpowered. ;)


"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
news:2k19k114hmee4o8vshhf1s2od8e5rkuaef@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:26:47 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
>>And what generated those profit for GMAC? ;)
>
> The fact that they have to sell a new car/truck on time every year
> cause they are junk after that time?
>
> lol
>
>>
>>mike hunt
>>
>>
>>"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
>>news:mk08k1975nuoj876u9jfv1d7uhcq3n4ve5@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 09:59:51 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>If that is what you believe then you have not read GMs latest
>>>>stockholders
>>>>report LOL
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>mike hunt
>>>
>>> The latest Annual Report on GM
>>>
>>> Look at page 46 of 108 Results of Operations
>>>
>>> Net Income 2,894
>>>
>>> Then look a bit deeper and find out where that came from.....
>>>
>>> GMAC
>>>
>>> 2,913
>>>
>>> GM is losing its ass in the automotive end.
>>>
>>> Like I said....sell all you have while it is worth anything WBMA
>>>
>>> http://www.gm.com/company/investor_information/docs/fin_data/gm04ar/download/gm04ar.pdf
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:3466k1d7i14o8ppdm887tu62vh5qfd791m@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 18:34:41 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>>>>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Did you ever hear of the word profit? ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>mike hunt
>>>>>
>>>>> GM is only making money on their financing operation and issuing bonds
>>>>> for the money to pay dividends. Very bad idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> Like I said....sell
>>>>>
>>>>> You can buy my a drink with your profits...
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Scott in Florida" <JustAsk@Florida.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:5js5k1hkt534njjhej27pk95mfkhmqg0ia@4ax.com...
>>>>>>> On Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:40:00 -0400, "Mike Hunter"
>>>>>>> <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>GM has always paid good dividends,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd investigate where GM is getting the money for your dividends...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...and then sell all you have...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Don't say I didn't warn ya
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Scott in Florida
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Scott in Florida
>>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Scott in Florida
>>
> --
>
> Scott in Florida

As others have suggested, I think it's time for you to start backing up your
wild claims with facts from organizations whose job it is to provide useful
data. Powers & Associates would be one. Magazines are useless unless they
get their data from a source that's skilled at collecting it. And, what
you've said about your service business - pointless, too. You only saw the
broken cars, so you have no data on the ones you did NOT see.

"Charles @ Kankakee" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:s5-dneKk0MjfCdneRVn-pA@comcast.com...
>
> "Wickeddoll®" <wickeddoll1958DIEspammersDIE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:di15u5.2g0.1@news.evilcabal.org...
>>
>> "Charles @ Kankakee" <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:VrCdnW65h_5809neRVn-pg@comcast.com...
>>
>>> I envy the purchasers of vehicles that last 200,000 miles and more
>>> without major problems. Wait. I am one! I don't have to envy myself
>>> anymore. . . .
>>>
>>> Charles of Kankakee
>>> 93 Corolla 205,500 miles
>>
>> LOL My five-year-old Echo just went over 60,000, so it's still a cream
>> puff. The '87 Corolla we sold my mom still hasn't cracked 150,000 yet.
>>
>> Cars don't work hard for us
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> Natalie
>
> Well, you have to admit 90 miles a day adds up fast.
>
> Charles of Kankakee
>
Ya think?

Natalie

"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Cp81f.918$647.542@news01.roc.ny...
> "Wickeddoll®" <wickeddoll1958DIEspammersDIE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:di19qt.3p4.1@news.evilcabal.org...
>
>>>> Bingo! Too many people are easily swayed by promotions and
>>>> (false/misleading) advertising.
>>>
>>> ...not to mention the fact that the big 3 sell trucks by appealing to
>>> the pants, not the brain. IT'S GOT A HEMI! It's a Titan! blah blah
>>> blah....
>>>
>>> I thought Viagra was supposed to take care of these things.
>>>
>> LOL - it gets better - the bubbas around here hang 'nut sacks' from their
>> trucks. It's quite sad
>
> Are you kidding??? :-)
>
I'm NOT - they're little black sacks shaped like testicles

Like I said - sad

Natalie

"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:WEb1f.932$647.526@news01.roc.ny...
> You are assuming he wanted a truck as his next car. You can assume
> absolutely NOTHING about a car you see in a used car lot.

Actually, if I were shopping for a big, wasteful vehicle, I'd go domestic -
nobody does that better - not even the Japanese

Natalie
>
> And, it's "snipped", not "sniped".
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:5L6cnS7HbM6V3djeUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>I see you sniped the bulk of my post when your replied, did the facts get
>>in the way? As to your suggestion the guy may have needed a larger
>>truck, one can only wonder why did he not buy a larger Toyota truck? ;)
>>
>>
>> mike hunt
>>
>>
>> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:My81f.8997$cg.4562@news02.roc.ny...
>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>> news:PhqdnZPbpq9J_NneUSdV9g@ptd.net...
>>>> Gee I'm sorry you had problems with your Ford trucks but I see a lot of
>>>> Toyota trucks on Ford dealers use car lots.
>>>
>>> You draw some rather bizarre conclusions from your observations. If a
>>> single guy gets married and has a kid, and then trades in his Toyota
>>> pickup, do you suppose it's because he didn't like the truck? Or, could
>>> there be another reason? Read sentence #2 several times if the answer
>>> eludes you.
>>>
>>> If it still eludes you, then you are a living example of why the No
>>> Child Left Behind idea is a good one.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

"Wickeddoll®" <wickeddoll1958DIEspammersDIE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:di45n3.34k.1@news.evilcabal.org...
>
> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Cp81f.918$647.542@news01.roc.ny...
>> "Wickeddoll®" <wickeddoll1958DIEspammersDIE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:di19qt.3p4.1@news.evilcabal.org...
>>
>>>>> Bingo! Too many people are easily swayed by promotions and
>>>>> (false/misleading) advertising.
>>>>
>>>> ...not to mention the fact that the big 3 sell trucks by appealing to
>>>> the pants, not the brain. IT'S GOT A HEMI! It's a Titan! blah blah
>>>> blah....
>>>>
>>>> I thought Viagra was supposed to take care of these things.
>>>>
>>> LOL - it gets better - the bubbas around here hang 'nut sacks' from
>>> their trucks. It's quite sad
>>
>> Are you kidding??? :-)
>>
> I'm NOT - they're little black sacks shaped like testicles
>
> Like I said - sad
>
> Natalie

Where's "around here"?

"Wickeddoll®" <wickeddoll1958DIEspammersDIE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:di45pp.2p4.1@news.evilcabal.org...
>
> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:WEb1f.932$647.526@news01.roc.ny...
>> You are assuming he wanted a truck as his next car. You can assume
>> absolutely NOTHING about a car you see in a used car lot.
>
> Actually, if I were shopping for a big, wasteful vehicle, I'd go
> domestic - nobody does that better - not even the Japanese
>
> Natalie

They're lined up like fat soldiers at all the dealerships around here - the
morons have finally noticed that their Escalades and Navigators really,
honestly do NOT get 25 mpg as they hoped they would, and that the 12 mpg
figures on the window stickers were not invented by tree hugging vegetarian
East Coast commie elitist scientists. :-)

"Doug Kanter" >
> "Wickeddoll®" >>
>> "Doug Kanter"
>>> "Wickeddoll®" >>>
>>>>>> Bingo! Too many people are easily swayed by promotions and
>>>>>> (false/misleading) advertising.
>>>>>
>>>>> ...not to mention the fact that the big 3 sell trucks by appealing to
>>>>> the pants, not the brain. IT'S GOT A HEMI! It's a Titan! blah blah
>>>>> blah....
>>>>>
>>>>> I thought Viagra was supposed to take care of these things.
>>>>>
>>>> LOL - it gets better - the bubbas around here hang 'nut sacks' from
>>>> their trucks. It's quite sad
>>>
>>> Are you kidding??? :-)
>>>
>> I'm NOT - they're little black sacks shaped like testicles
>>
>> Like I said - sad
>>
>> Natalie
>
> Where's "around here"?
>
North Carolina...need I say more?

Natalie

"Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ILl1f.9049$cg.3996@news02.roc.ny...
> "Wickeddoll®" <wickeddoll1958DIEspammersDIE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:di45pp.2p4.1@news.evilcabal.org...
>>
>> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:WEb1f.932$647.526@news01.roc.ny...
>>> You are assuming he wanted a truck as his next car. You can assume
>>> absolutely NOTHING about a car you see in a used car lot.
>>
>> Actually, if I were shopping for a big, wasteful vehicle, I'd go
>> domestic - nobody does that better - not even the Japanese
>>
>> Natalie
>
> They're lined up like fat soldiers at all the dealerships around here -
> the morons have finally noticed that their Escalades and Navigators
> really, honestly do NOT get 25 mpg as they hoped they would, and that the
> 12 mpg figures on the window stickers were not invented by tree hugging
> vegetarian East Coast commie elitist scientists. :-)
>
LOL - some don't mind paying a fortune for gas, when they can strut their
genital inadequacies around for all to see. My hubby drives a sub-compact;
no issues there ;-)

In Phoenix, I saw one of those 6-tire monstrosities, with the vanity plate
"NTBGENF" No kidding, micro-man

Natalie

Wickeddoll®, 10/6/2005,9:41:45 PM, wrote:

>
> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Cp81f.918$647.542@news01.roc.ny... >"Wickeddoll®"
> <wickeddoll1958DIEspammersDIE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:di19qt.3p4.1@news.evilcabal.org...
> >
> > > > > Bingo! Too many people are easily swayed by promotions and
> > > > > (false/misleading) advertising.
> > > >
> > > > ...not to mention the fact that the big 3 sell trucks by
> > > > appealing to the pants, not the brain. IT'S GOT A HEMI! It's a
> > > > Titan! blah blah blah....
> > > >
> > > > I thought Viagra was supposed to take care of these things.
> > > >
> > > LOL - it gets better - the bubbas around here hang 'nut sacks'
> > > from their trucks. It's quite sad
> >
> > Are you kidding??? :-)
> >
> I'm NOT - they're little black sacks shaped like testicles
>
> Like I said - sad
>
> Natalie

Would you rather see a Rebel flag and gun rack in the truck? Those NC
boys are proud of their heritage and manhood. They had to choose
something to display...

--
"I miss. I miss. I miss. I make." -- Seve Ballesteros describing his
four-putt at Augusta's No. 16 in 1988.

"Wickeddoll®" <wickeddoll1958DIEspammersDIE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:di4ge9.3pk.1@news.evilcabal.org...
>
> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:ILl1f.9049$cg.3996@news02.roc.ny...
>> "Wickeddoll®" <wickeddoll1958DIEspammersDIE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:di45pp.2p4.1@news.evilcabal.org...
>>>
>>> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:WEb1f.932$647.526@news01.roc.ny...
>>>> You are assuming he wanted a truck as his next car. You can assume
>>>> absolutely NOTHING about a car you see in a used car lot.
>>>
>>> Actually, if I were shopping for a big, wasteful vehicle, I'd go
>>> domestic - nobody does that better - not even the Japanese
>>>
>>> Natalie
>>
>> They're lined up like fat soldiers at all the dealerships around here -
>> the morons have finally noticed that their Escalades and Navigators
>> really, honestly do NOT get 25 mpg as they hoped they would, and that the
>> 12 mpg figures on the window stickers were not invented by tree hugging
>> vegetarian East Coast commie elitist scientists. :-)
>>
> LOL - some don't mind paying a fortune for gas, when they can strut their
> genital inadequacies around for all to see. My hubby drives a
> sub-compact; no issues there ;-)
>
> In Phoenix, I saw one of those 6-tire monstrosities, with the vanity plate
> "NTBGENF" No kidding, micro-man
>
> Natalie

Seriously, my father actually believes that his Navigator gets over 30mpg,
and that the window sticker is "just an approximation". Jeez.....

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0e87bjvrprwh001@news.readfreenews.net...
> Wickeddoll®, 10/6/2005,9:41:45 PM, wrote:
>
>>
>> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Cp81f.918$647.542@news01.roc.ny... >"Wickeddoll®"
>> <wickeddoll1958DIEspammersDIE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:di19qt.3p4.1@news.evilcabal.org...
>> >
>> > > > > Bingo! Too many people are easily swayed by promotions and
>> > > > > (false/misleading) advertising.
>> > > >
>> > > > ...not to mention the fact that the big 3 sell trucks by
>> > > > appealing to the pants, not the brain. IT'S GOT A HEMI! It's a
>> > > > Titan! blah blah blah....
>> > > >
>> > > > I thought Viagra was supposed to take care of these things.
>> > > >
>> > > LOL - it gets better - the bubbas around here hang 'nut sacks'
>> > > from their trucks. It's quite sad
>> >
>> > Are you kidding??? :-)
>> >
>> I'm NOT - they're little black sacks shaped like testicles
>>
>> Like I said - sad
>>
>> Natalie
>
> Would you rather see a Rebel flag and gun rack in the truck? Those NC
> boys are proud of their heritage and manhood. They had to choose
> something to display...
>
> --

"Show us your RACK!!!"

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0e87bjvrprwh001@news.readfreenews.net...
> Wickeddoll®, 10/6/2005,9:41:45 PM, wrote:
>
>>
>> "Doug Kanter" <ancientangler@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Cp81f.918$647.542@news01.roc.ny... >"Wickeddoll®"
>> <wickeddoll1958DIEspammersDIE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:di19qt.3p4.1@news.evilcabal.org...
>> >
>> > > > > Bingo! Too many people are easily swayed by promotions and
>> > > > > (false/misleading) advertising.
>> > > >
>> > > > ...not to mention the fact that the big 3 sell trucks by
>> > > > appealing to the pants, not the brain. IT'S GOT A HEMI! It's a
>> > > > Titan! blah blah blah....
>> > > >
>> > > > I thought Viagra was supposed to take care of these things.
>> > > >
>> > > LOL - it gets better - the bubbas around here hang 'nut sacks'
>> > > from their trucks. It's quite sad
>> >
>> > Are you kidding??? :-)
>> >
>> I'm NOT - they're little black sacks shaped like testicles
>>
>> Like I said - sad
>>
>> Natalie
>
> Would you rather see a Rebel flag and gun rack in the truck? Those NC
> boys are proud of their heritage and manhood. They had to choose
> something to display...
>

What makes you think those flags and guns aren't there?

Natalie

"Doug Kanter" >
> "Wickeddoll®" >>
>>>>> You are assuming he wanted a truck as his next car. You can assume
>>>>> absolutely NOTHING about a car you see in a used car lot.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, if I were shopping for a big, wasteful vehicle, I'd go
>>>> domestic - nobody does that better - not even the Japanese
>>>>
>>>> Natalie
>>>
>>> They're lined up like fat soldiers at all the dealerships around here -
>>> the morons have finally noticed that their Escalades and Navigators
>>> really, honestly do NOT get 25 mpg as they hoped they would, and that
>>> the 12 mpg figures on the window stickers were not invented by tree
>>> hugging vegetarian East Coast commie elitist scientists. :-)
>>>
>> LOL - some don't mind paying a fortune for gas, when they can strut their
>> genital inadequacies around for all to see. My hubby drives a
>> sub-compact; no issues there ;-)
>>
>> In Phoenix, I saw one of those 6-tire monstrosities, with the vanity
>> plate "NTBGENF" No kidding, micro-man
>>
>> Natalie
>
> Seriously, my father actually believes that his Navigator gets over 30mpg,
> and that the window sticker is "just an approximation". Jeez.....
>
Now, don't be so harsh on your dad. He sounds like a perfectly logical,
reasonable man (Tell him I said so). And please, also let him know that if
he should ever want to move to my native Florida, I have just the spot for
him at a very good price - near a sinkhole....um LAKE!

Yeah, that's it.

Natalie, whistling innocently