When I was growing up, my next door neighbor worked for GM and nobody had to tell him to buy GM vehicles. He made the product, was proud of the prouduct and was incented (discount) to buy the product. There was never a non-GM vehicle in his driveway since I have been alive.

The Big 3 are my customers and that spirit is quickly dying in Detroit and around the US. I owned a Volvo (Ford) and went to the stealer for service. They had no more loaners on the lot and arranged a rental... from Enterprise. I asked the manager why would you put me in a Saab from Enterprise instead of using Hertz which exclusively rents Ford vehicles (Volvos included)... he said Enterprise is cheaper. Another example is Chrysler management, before the merger with Daimler all execs drove the biggest Chrylser they made. Yet I was told that 1 month after the merger the employee purchase plan was temporarily suspended due to the overwhelming number of execs requesting Mercedes - who couldn't wait to get out of their Imperials and Concordes.

My gut tells me that the decision had liitle to do with pride and more to do with money. Like the "K-Street Project" Ford realizes this move will sell more cars... that's sad. What Ford needs to deal with is the tougher question: Why would a 15+ year Ford employee, who believes that they are making a superior product, getting 0% financing and a paying almost cost - rather drive a Toyota or Honda at full retail??? If Ford and the UAW leadership honestly sought that answer and then set a plan in place to achieve it, they would not have to strong arm vendors and employees.

__________________
----------------------
the REAL Shaka Zulu
My X5 Page: http://www.xoutpost.com/userpage/RealShakaZulu.html

Silver w/ Black Interior
'03 4.4i w/ Sport & Winter Pkg
ClearBra, BimmerSpinners, XM Radio, Pirelli Scorpions, Thule Rack (Snowboard), ADS Amp, MB Quart (front), Focal (rear), JL Subwoofer, GG Bailey Custom Mats, Dension Ice>Link, ACS Pedals

I agree with goal of implementing such a policy - to show that employees back the products they make. But this type of policy achieves the opposite. It only makes the public question why such a policy has to be there in the first place. How good can a product be if the employees must be forced into buying them?

For most employees a vehicle is a big purchase. You cannot compare it to clothing and cell phones where having more than you need likely isn't going to hurt you financially.

Anyone know if Toyota has such a policy? I would guess not. I would also guess that the Toyota employee parking lot looks much like the Toyota dealer lot.

__________________
Wake up every day that would be a start.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...ord-usat_x.htm

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/...ford_1-11.html

http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/08/news...t_taylor_ford/

Even if every single employee buys a new car every year, they still won't reclaim market share. They lost 1% in 2005, which is more than the number of employees they have.

"As recently as 2002, Ford Motor Co. accounted for 20.2 percent of the U.S. market. Its market share has slipped about one percentage point a year in the face of aggressive foreign competition since then, reaching 17.4 percent in 2005."

Thats all fine and dandy if you are gonna give everyone a nice new ford to drive back and forth to work.

If I was a Ford employee, I'd be doing whatever it took to keep my job right now. I'm sure they can get excellent discounts on the products.

It's not a new policy. The following news article dated May 2005 states that Chrysler had implemented the same policy:
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosins...A02-175379.htm

No Fords or GM vehicles in their parking lots.

My guess is GM or Ford is going down within the next 10-15 years. Neither seem capable of reinventing themselves as Nissan and Chrysler have done.

I'll refrain from commenting on unions. Having dealt with them for 25 years, I have nothing nice to say.

Regards, Mike

If Ford paid their employees to drive to work, then they could state what you drive as well. Since the workers are clock punchers and they are not on the clock until they walk in a clock in, Ford has very little to say about what their employees drive.

See my post above. Even if every active Ford employee buys a new car every year, Ford will still lose market share year over year. I know people that work at the Wixom plant, guess what, they will most likely be out of a job. If they wanted to keep their jobs, they would truly have to buy what they make; Lincolns. Buying something that is made at a different factory does little to protect your own job.

It won’t take that long for GM. They will run out of money in the bank first. For 2005, GM lost over 2 million dollars every single day. Why they still pay a dividend, I don’t know. The premise behind a dividend is a share of the profits.

GMAC, Mortgage division, Insurance, Asia and the Latin America/Africa/Middle East divisions were the only ones that posted a profit for 2005. Asia posted lower earnings compared to 2004, as did GMAC. The Latin America/Africa/Middle East, insurance and the mortgage divisions were the only one that posted higher earnings, but the Latin America/Africa/Middle East division were hit in the 4th quarter by unfavorable exchange rates, especially in Brail, so their 4th quarter was down compared to 2004.

GM has 20 billion in the bank plus another 20 billion that GMAC can tap. If GM has two more years like 2005, that first 20 billion will be gone. If GM and the unions cannot agree on something for Delphi, GM may have to throw some cash into that as well, possibly between 3.6 and 12 billion for benefit guarantees. That is up from zero to 12 billion they estimated earlier.

The future is pretty bleak for GM. GM was too busy selling cars instead of taking care of loyal customers. Those customers have left and will most likely never be back, and for that, GM now suffers.