It's The End of An Era As GM Files For Bankruptcy
I just wonder why Obama's approach is so very different with the automakers than it is with the banking industry:
General Motors filed for bankruptcy on Monday morning, submitting its reorganization papers to a federal clerk in Lower Manhattan.
G.M. said it had $82.3 billion in assets and $172.8 billion in debts. Its largest creditors were the Wilmington Trust Company, representing a group of bondholders holding $22.8 billion in debts, and affiliates of the United Auto Workers union, representing nearly $20.6 billion in employee obligations.
The filing itself seemed anticlimactic. It was a simple procedure done thousands of times each day across the country, by individuals and business alike. But not usually, as in this case, by companies like G.M. that have woven themselves into the fabric of America culture.
The company was forced into the filing by President Obama, who is betting that by temporarily nationalizing the onetime icon of American capitalism, he can save at least a diminished automaker that is competitive.
[...] The bankruptcy of General Motors culminates a remarkable four months of confrontation between Washington and Detroit that is expected to result in a drastic downsizing of the company. It also places the government in uncharted territory as a business owner, as it takes a majority ownership stake in the company during its restructuring.
Why aren't we forcing the "too big to fail" banks to downsize?
Applause
How about too fat to survive?
Small, regional companies. Start with banks and insurance companies. Limit how big they can be and it will improve society.
Get RID of corporate personhood. It allows companies to become too big and divorces the owners from the true risk they are taking.
There are no lessons being learned by the govt in this financial crisis, except just how gullible the people really are.
Simple question. Simple answer.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
I said start with ricky. Start with.
There are actually a lot of start up companies that are making cars, no its not so far fetched an idea.
So I apologize.
My comment was in reponse to this question in the post:
"I just wonder why Obama's approach is so very different with the automakers than it is with the banking industry:"
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
Unto you I bequeath forgiveness my child.
it's OK to take my corporate personhood as long as you leave the hood ornament.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
in reference to GM and Chrysler makes plenty of sense, since they clearly could not be left in charge of their own recovery (which is perhaps the saddest part of the whole episode).
When General Motors was flush with money, what did they do? They purchased Hummer (right when fuel prices were about to go through the roof), Saab, and created a new brand, Saturn, which was a bizarre thing to do considering they just got rid of the Oldsmobile division.
And Chrysler has been flirting with bankruptcy so often (the last time in 1979) that it's almost a rite of passage for them.
I think what Obama has done will (in the long run) do much to bring the auto industry back to robust health and only wish that he had did the same thing with the banks and financial houses.
Actually, Saturn was established in the early 90s. It was a hugely popular idea because of several features the car would boast: relatively fuel-efficient (which, I realize, isn't saying much, but still...); built only in the U.S.; dent-resistent doors and bumpers (at very low speeds); cheap; and an unusual "bottom-up" relationship between auto workers and management (which didn't sit well with the UAW or management in other GM divisions).
Saturn customers, early on, were very loyal to the brand--those little cars were actually quite good. But, typical of both GM and U.S. corporations, GM had no idea what they had captured. They began tinkering with the brand, moving manufacturing to Mexico, trying to promote Saturn as the maker of SUVs, of all things (as Saturn had been the "anti-SUV" GM model).
Basically, Saturn was the kernel of a good idea that the corporation fckued up. Now it will likely be purchased by some holding company, stripped of its value, and digested for what profit it can supply a 29-year-old pin-striper in some NY skyscraper.
So why couldn't GM have applied the lessons that went into Saturn into other already existing divisions (Chevy, being the 'entry-level' division, would have been ideal).
While there were indeed some innovations (for GM) brought about by Saturn, there was no reason they could not have been applied elsewhere.
I have never claimed that Saturn wasn't a good idea, but when your fundamentals aren't too strong, creating another division isn't the answer.
Btw, General Motors makes small cars all over the world, competitively. I have always wondered why they could not do that here.
And in the name of preemption, I suspect that labor costs have less to do with it than most think (especially since they always manage to pay the CEO's millions while complaining about how much line workers make).
So why couldn't GM have applied the lessons that went into Saturn into other already existing divisions (Chevy, being the 'entry-level' division, would have been ideal).
I think that's what most wonder. GM took something that worked and destroyed it--either deliberately or simply because they didn't understand what they had. As I've heard it described by an auto engineer: "They captured lightning in a bottle at just the right time. They just didn't know what to do with it when they caught it."
I bought a Saturn in October, 2001 (a 2002 model). I had never bought a new car in my life. I got 0.9% interest for 4 years.
I thought I was being a good Americn, helping out the economy and American automakers after the September 11 attacks. Bush said "go shopping" didn't he? HA,HA!
My car now has 56,000 miles on it and it has been a good car. It gets decent mileage, around 24 in town, and about 33 on the highway.
Last month, the Saturn dealership here closed overnight, and the nearest dealer is 100 miles away. I can take it to another mechanic to get serviced, but what a shame that the last Saturn will be 2010 I think, then no more.
Thanks a lot, GM.
are taking us to a strange place.
1. Just as President Roosevelt did after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the President must tell the nation that we are at war and we must immediately convert our auto factories to factories that build mass transit vehicles and alternative energy devices. Within months in Flint in 1942, GM halted all car production and immediately used the assembly lines to build planes, tanks and machine guns. The conversion took no time at all. Everyone pitched in. The fascists were defeated.
2. Don't put another $30 billion into the coffers of GM to build cars. Instead, use that money to keep the current workforce -- and most of those who have been laid off -- employed so that they can build the new modes of 21st century transportation. Let them start the conversion work now.
3. Announce that we will have bullet trains criss-crossing this country in the next five years. Japan is celebrating the 45th anniversary of its first bullet train this year. Now they have dozens of them. Average speed: 165 mph. Average time a train is late: under 30 seconds. They have had these high speed trains for nearly five decades -- and we don't even have one! The fact that the technology already exists for us to go from New York to L.A. in 17 hours by train, and that we haven't used it, is criminal. Let's hire the unemployed to build the new high speed lines all over the country. Chicago to Detroit in less than two hours. Miami to DC in under 7 hours. Denver to Dallas in five and a half. This can be done and done now.
4. Initiate a program to put light rail mass transit lines in all our large and medium-sized cities. Build those trains in the GM factories. And hire local people everywhere to install and run this system.
5. For people in rural areas not served by the train lines, have the GM plants produce energy efficient clean buses.
6. For the time being, have some factories build hybrid or all-electric cars (and batteries). It will take a few years for people to get used to the new ways to transport ourselves, so if we're going to have automobiles, let's have kinder, gentler ones. We can be building these next month (do not believe anyone who tells you it will take years to retool the factories -- that simply isn't true).
7. Transform some of the empty GM factories to facilities that build windmills, solar panels and other means of alternate forms of energy. We need tens of millions of solar panels right now. And there is an eager and skilled workforce who can build them.
8. Provide tax incentives for those who travel by hybrid car or bus or train. Also, credits for those who convert their home to alternative energy.
9. To help pay for this, impose a two-dollar tax on every gallon of gasoline. This will get people to switch to more energy saving cars or to use the new rail lines and rail cars the former autoworkers have built for them.
...today is yet another missed opportunity.
Because, as every good corporatist (and mouth-breather) knows, high-speed trains "is nuthin' but socializm."
I agree very much with the train idea. I lived in Europe for 4 years and have been there 16 other times for vacation. During that entire time, I only drove a car once, and that was not during the 4 years I worked there.....I walked to work, and I took an awful lot of public transportation which really was not that expensive, and which was usually on time and very efficient.
Now I also lived in the City of Chicago for 5 years....I rarely drove a car; I also walked and took the train often to get around.
Now, that might be difficult for a country the size of the U.S., but it's got to work in places.
I live in St. Louis, I am going back to school this fall and I will
be able to bus and light rail the whole way, BUT Minneapolis is
decades ahead of St. Louis. Minneapolis has HYBRID buses. The
rail is about the same. But you can bus just about anywhere, St.
Louis is more limited. I would like to see smaller buses, like
they use for the elderly that you could subscribe to similar to
the "Call a Ride" Program.
In Korea you can use public transportation to go anywhere, city and country. Buses leave to all other main cities every 15 minutes, and smaller cities every 30 minutes. They have a high speed train down the main corridor, the length of the country. It's also very affordable. 7 milliom ride the subway in Seoul each day-- cost $1. The city also has 50,000 taxis which are affordable. No need for a car, ever.
In Japan, the train system is mind-boggling and excellent. You can go anywhere by train.
Public transportation: If you build it, and it's good, people will use it.
Sure, Korea is small, but this can be done around major cities and populated corridors, especially along the East coast.
far left loon >.<
The gist of this post should be sent to the White House--by the hundreds of thousands.
Obama's people should be made very much aware how disappointed his "base" is with the direction he's taking here. I understand wanting to keep GM alive--and I'm sympathetic toward the unions, being a union employee, myself--but there is a better way.
As this post points out, all these union employees could be put to work if the leadership in this country truly had a "new direction" in its sights.
Another YES to all of those!
I’ll not only say goodbye to the end of GM’s era, I’ll look forward to the time we can say goodbye to the use of gasoline as a monopoly auto-fuel.
Like the incandescent light-bulb, the combustion-engine seems so 20th century.
The few times I have taken a train (Amtrak), I liked the experience. Sure, I was not happy that the train was NEVER on time, but I liked that I was able to accomplish some reading/ work and see the countryside instead of driving for seven hours and essentially wasting my time. If we actually got high speed rail that was on time and had internet access, I think many people would prefer traveling that way as opposed to either taking a car or plane.
I've heard people say that implementing a cross country high speed rail system would be impossible in our nation, but didn't people say the exact same thing about the early railroads? Furthermore, if Europe, an area that is a little larger than ours, can do high speed rail, then why can't the US? Whatever happened to the US "can do" attitude? The only thing that is preventing the majority of Americans to rally behind high speed rail and light rail mass transit is this odd mentality that a car somehow gives a person more independence or freedom which is actually contrary to what reality states --cars tie you to gasoline, car insurance, and maintenance for a lifetime.
How about the independence of not having to park you car or worry about traffic. Just get off the bus/train and you're done; no car to worry about. While on the bus, read, sleep, listen to music, chat-- freedom!!
far left loon >.<
I've taken the Amtrak from Baltimore to D.C. with my sister for her commute to work (then getting on the Metro there) and could not have appreciated it more (especially with all that god awful interstate traffic)
YES to high speed rail, yes to alternative energy sources, yes to restructuring General Motors to help in these endeavors.
Radix Omnium Malorum Avaritia
As one era ends, so begins a new one.
It's both a crisis and and an opportunity, what we know as a crisitunity.
GM shows off it's latest 'vettes...in all their souped up, gas guzzling and impractical glory. Unbelievable.
If they can't adapt, then I say to hell with 'em.
had their "parts" downsized already. There will always be a market for vehicles made just for them.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
... so you'd rather trample on the dreams of people who want a Corvette?
Um, you also do know that Corvettes get good mileage, right?
Leave the sports cars alone.
My Xbox Live gamertag/PSN ID is tifosiotaku. Shoot me a PM if you add me to your friends list, thanks!
Reaganomics was the beginning of the decline of wages, benefits and pensions of the working class.
decided to raise profits by capping wages.
But, because we are a 'consumer economy,' they needed to have money in workers' hands.
So they loosened credit.
Spending, without accompanying, troublesome prosperity for the workers.
Worked fine for a while...
Til last year, in fact.
Now, not so much...
(and I can relate to that), in fact the USA had started to lose its manufacturing base in the 1970s.
5...4....3.....2...
the New Dark Age
...the banks do.
Yes, the banks with the help of the last 2 admins have a gun to the US tax payers heads.
Let them pull the trigger. So the banks ALL go under, all of the debt holders in the world get screwed. And this would affect the average person how? We average folks are loosing our jobs, health benefits, homes, retirements, 401k's, our ability to simply live. What else can they do? Ship us to China to work as slaves? Buy a gun and LOTS of ammo, then welcome them into your home for a cup of coffee and a doughnut, POW....
If the wealthy all fear it, you can be the pols will all fear it and act accordingly. Personally, I think it's past time for a fresh start but it ain't gonna happen.
It seems more and more like that reset button's going to happen.
We in the U.S. (and more likely, globally) will be on the losing end of it. We can't keep living this unsustainably.
unions....
they want to bust up the power of organized labour...
n/t
They will rebuild and retool in China. This country is finished. Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Raygun, they are all the same. If you are not one of the 'haves or have mores' you are nobody.
Call me Cassandra.
The only reality is peak oil.
Links here.
And - Chomsky - Class war - see links here.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Couldn't help but think this as I read Kunstler's "The Long Emergency."
I really hoped this country was ready to change. We've certainly had enough reasons to embrace a new direction over the last 8-10 years. But the measure of "success" in the U.S. still seems to be individual gain at the expense of others around us. I guess we're not ready yet.
What an incredible opportunity squandered. And yet, why do I feel change is going to come, whether we're ready or not?
The Long Emergency: Surviving the Converging Catastrophes of the 21st Century - James Howard Kunstler
Google videos - 1:00:15 - Oct 29, 2005 here
The interviewer is really annoying as he is clueless, but he is not alone and the video is a bandwidth hog but it is still very worthwhile.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Just a note…
The reality of the peak-oil prediction is not that we will run out of usable oil. That won’t happen for centuries, and this is a common misconception. The reality is that from now on, we will never be able to keep up with demand. No matter how much we pump out of the ground, no matter how many more wells we drill and offshore platforms we put into place, peak-oil predicts that our demand will always exceed our ability to produce. We are past peak.
That is, unless our demand is dramatically reduced.
Increasing the MPG of autos, trucks, and diesels is not enough. Our currency is soon to be devalued and our refineries won’t keep up. I predict that $7 per gallon of gas will be the tipping point for alternative fuels, and we’re not far off. At that price the energy equivalences of gas will be on par with the electrical grid in this country. When that happens hybrids and electric will over take combustion. (Yes, I realize the energy still has to be produced at the grid, but electric is more efficient and production easier to deal with from a central location). Efficiency is the key.
;-)
It has taken us 150 years to use half of the oil in the ground. That was the easy oil.
The second half will be chaos.
Our infrastructure is completely oil centric and we are completely unprepared for the change.
Think of what havoc $4 a gallon produced on our economy last summer and then make it $7.
On top of our other economic problems.
China's oil consumption increased by 25% last year.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
...the misconception that natural gas is "cheap and plentiful," when it's neither. And liquified natural gas is no solution.
That book was an eye-opener. And a page-turner.
Supposedly.
But theres massive amounts of trapped methane in the frozen tundras.
no doubt. at times it seems to point to nuclear energy to power the grid.
As is pointed out in the documentary, links above, we would need ten thousand nuclear plants to offset the oil powered plants.
In the last thirty years we have built exactly ZERO nuclear plants and they take years to build.
Even if we had them, all of the uranium 235 in the world would then be exhausted in ten to twenty years.
Plus we would then have that wonderful side product of all the nuclear waste which we still do not know what to do with.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
you know i watched that peak oil series. i'm just saying i believe right or wrong nuclear will be PART of the strategic solution. do i believe that's the solution? personally, i'm NOT sure. i believe there's a pent up desire to have regional mass transit. i also believe we will have NO choice eventually. this may be the transition time and/OR the calm before the storm. CHINA as you well know is going to change everything. many chinese consumers are coming onboard in the next 5-10 yrs. the resource WAR has been heightened.many resources will be sought/fought for BUT the two major resources will be the two that don't mix OIL and water. i don't know what the solution is BUT i believe nuclear for now will become part of the solution right or wrong if you will. how people live is going to change.
They turn waste into energy.
So much could have been done to increase the efficiency of cars over the last 50 years. But gas was less than a dollar a gallon and nobody cared.
For the next 20 years, the best research will be into energy storage and drive-drain efficiency of cars (like regenerative breaking which has been around since the 70’s). I certainly hope this coincides with more efficient mass-transit, but I’m not certain this will happen.
Unlike many, I’m not so concerned about the safety of nuclear power plants, but the cost IS prohibitive because of those safety concerns. They are not currently economical.
Another prediction: if hybrids and DC-battery based personal transportation takes off, electricity will become more in demand, and cost will increase. That should be the tipping point for home solar power. I’m nearly 80% off-grid right now, and solar panels have a great ROI. There’s just not enough incentive for most people to install them right now.
When Gore talked about a green energy based economy, it was these things that he was referring to. An energy efficient economy is not just for collecting green-house certificates.
the government. That's why.
and 11/22?
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
... the automakers than it is with the banking industry:
Money.
Barack Obama: Change we can only imagine
GM pension fund to be exchanged for GM stock !!!!
This is outright piracy, the same illegal shite that Maxwell did in the 80s in the UK.
There will be riots if this happens.
This should of happened before we gave these lazy idiots 50 billion dollars..
I think we have enough vehicles in this country that we could have a system where these manufacturers only produced a new vehicle every 5 years.
We need a new paradigm.... Well we do if we want to survive as a species for another 1000 years.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/05/31/after-...
many try to blame the unions. there's much more to it than that talking point. GM focused on profit from financing NOT quality products/ownership loyality.
a voice of reason comes along and brings us back to reality.
Perhaps it is because the government does not possess any expertise in the auto industry, whereas, members of the FED and FDIC possess knowledge in the area of banking and finance.
I'm not stating this as the ultimate reason, just something to ponder.
GM's failure after 101 years is an indictment of American management in general. It highlights the damage to our economy that results when finance becomes the tail that wags the economic dog. And it shows what happens to any company that rests on its laurels and fails to adapt to change.
His approach is different because they gave him the most money.
Where is the story on Obama siding with the Saudis against his own citizens with regards to 9/11 lawsuit?
no kidding, next he will be seen kissing the saudi king and holding his hand.
hey can you provide a link? thanks
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/05/31/obama-...
Thanks for the link gary, good article.
thanks. now i need to cross reference with some other articles on this topic.
but never mind....you want to hate him, so hate him
You should read the article uncle joe.
The Jersey girls brought up the lawsuit in the first place against Bush.
Do they hate Obama just because they want to hate him too?
we were decrying the Bush admin for committing, suddenly become perfectly excusable when they become the responsibility of the Obama admin.
The airport design class I took at PSU
back in 1985 taught us that our transportation
system was broken because of our ignoring
light and fast trains. Flying is inefficient
for distances under 300 miles and is too dependent
on the weather. We know that GM and Firestone conspired
back in the 50's and 60's to destroy mass transit.
Can we now intelligently redirect our resources to build
the transport systems this country needs???? I like the
idea of using GM's factories to do just that.
I was just thinking that as well; how ironic it would be to use GM's facilities to replace the excellent transportation system it helped destroy.
It would be justice indeed. The about to be laid off workers could be put to work, the country would be improved for all, the wealthy could get their piece of it...Ben Franklin would approve.
Personally I was against the bailout of the banks but was willing to put up with it because it didn't feel right to doom the hundreds of millions who would have been devastated by their failure.
However I say any company too big to fail is by definition 'too big'. Break em up so they can safely be left to fail if they warrant it in the future.
40 years of fighting every innovation and safety measure
killing the electric car
working with the bush crime family to get tax breaks for gas guzzlers
and still, the gov is giving them an infusion of cash
im broke...my biz is down 80 percent...the only job offered to me is part time
where is my bailout?
I think looking at GM's bankruptcy as a complete disaster is incorrect. As previous posters have stated, this can lead to good things if the government acts accordingly and rectifies its mistake of giving the transportation monopoly to cars and airplanes.
The government now holds 60% of GM. They should restructure the company as a producer of green renewable transportation and energy options that can range from solar panels to high speed rail. Rename the company as General Manufacturing. Unionize the entire company and hire workers to start making our cross-country high speed rail system. If workers in the 1800s could create the trans-continental railroad with the limited technology that they had, then there is no reason why we cannot create a high speed rail system today. As the cliche goes, there is no time like the present.
Reaganomics was the beginning of the decline of wages, benefits and pensions of the working class.
-----------------
Reaganomics was the beginning of the decline in inflation, leading to deflation, to complete the inflation / deflation cycle.
Every inflation ends in a deflation. There are no exceptions.
Kondratieff Spring- the era of inflation begins.
Kondratiedff summer- inflation peaks, as in the 1970's.
Kondratieff Fall- inflation declines, culminating a low interest rate, debt fuled boom.
Kondratieff Winter- Boom turns to bust and a depression era.
If Reagan was never President, Reaganomics would have occurred under another President's name. Cycles always complete themselves.
but if there weren't the corporatists facist nazi rightwing neocons always trying to screw the working class, the cycles wouldn't be so extreme.
but if there weren't the corporatists facist nazi rightwing neocons always trying to screw the working class, the cycles wouldn't be so extreme.
-------------------
World War 2 was huge. Much of global industrial capacity was destroyed. It made the U.S. producer to the world, thus creating the great post war middleclass boom. Concurrent with that, a billion Chinese went into the industrial dark ages.
A billion Chinese, in their industrial renaiasance, is very deflationary. The extremity of the cycle has nothing to do with neocons trying to screw over the working class. It has to do with global events over a long arc of time, which is what a cycle is. You cannot keep the Chinese from industrializing and sucking in industrial production from other parts of the world, to fill a vacuum.
http://www.safehaven.com/showarticle.cfm?id=1...
Take a look at the first chart. With extrapolation back to the pre-DOW days of the mayflower, it is a multi-century chart of the DOW index. The first thing i note is that it is a parabolic arc.
The parabolic arc was building long before Reagan ever became President. A parabolic rises at a faster and faster pace, then collapses.
A Great inflation cannot be prevented from becoming a great deflation.
and 11/22?
------------------
11/22 was Lee Harvey Oswald.
Oswald's brother visited his brother in jail. As Robert looked into Lee's eyes, Lee remarked, don't bother looking in there, you won't find anything. In that comment, Lee acknowleged his guilt, to his brother. An innocent man would not have said that.
What a joke. My daughter was enquiring at our local GM dealership about trading her mint 2003 Chrysler (loaded) on a Chevy Impala. The Chev was 3 years newer and was not loaded like her Chrysler. The dealer offered her $2000 trade in! The salesman's reasoning was that nobody wanted Chryslers. Um. Hello? How many GM's you selling right now buddy? Zilch. D'oh. Here's hoping GM really does a massive cleaning out of their dealerships. They've become nothing more than greedy, corrupt *ssholes that would screw their own parents out of their money.
Hey GM asses and liars. General Motors Deliberately Destroyed Public Transit in Los Angeles.
General Motors Deliberately Destroyed the Electric Car, the EV1 which would have been hugely popular today as it was in the 90's.
And now you have some green wet behind the ears punk rehabilitating the company?
You disgust me. Roger Moore was right about you, greedy archaic monster of a company. You've proven you don't care about America, so why did America buy you?
GM Go away. You betrayed us too many times already. Just go away.
How much has GM been "given" in government assistance since December? Assets of 82 billion and debts double that. OK. Now Obama says he is giving them 30 billion, and Ontario and Ottawa are giving them almost 11 billion, on top of the money already given which was how much? Doesn't sound like they are financially bankrupt, but ideally bankrupt. The assets and debts WITH TAXdollar investments balance out. What the hell is really going on here? Can you say union busting? Yes you can!!
Howz about this for a bankrupt company?
Well, I guess we borrowed the 30 Billion that we gave to Chrysler from China, so now China gets the jobs and the factories since GM is bankrupt.
?
That Shanghai has been the nucleus of the Chinese electric vehicle revolution since 1995 or so. Other countries have small efficient cars, some gas, some electric priced at sub $5K, we have a $30K plus miracle car coming out soon (but too late), plus the $50K and $100K ones that are around now.
Bought one new in 1999 for less than 15000...way less...now they changed the name to Cobalt, and guess what the price tag is at my local GeeM dealers? Almost 30 grand. It's a piece of sh*t car...a piece of sh*t car......sorry...Adam Sandler's tune came to mind there.
"I just wonder why Obama's approach is so very different with the automakers than it is with the banking industry:..."
Because the finance industry, especially GoldmanSachs, was Obama's largest contributor. If you want something from Obama, you must buy it.
Why are the car companies treated differently than the financial industry? Because the workers are unionized. There's still a little more that the ruling elite can steal from the lower classes. The only group left is unionized labor. What they giving to the financial sector is obscene and we're paying for it. But the world will come crashing down if we pay people a living wage.
eat the rich
Branding expert John Tantillo called the GM reinvention commercial a "love fest" and insists that corporate advertising never works--but is still optimistic about the company's future, saying that GM is the company, but that people don't buy a company--they buy a brand (Chevy, Cadillac, etc.).
I wish we wouldn't pour money into companies that have proven to be failures.
Comments are closed on this entry