Honda "Drive by Wire" question... what if the power goes out?

snip


I suspect that the "savings" of $1,300 would quickly be distributed as
bonuses and other executive perks etc. with little going to reduce
prices or instituting efficiencies...

JT

(Who really like to call "trickle down" something else...)

 

This all sounds right at face value, until you look at that new Nissan, or
Honda, or Toyota and note that they are all built in US plants using > 90%
US content by US workers. I don't think healthcare is the real issue.

 

This all sounds right at face value, until you look at that new Nissan, or
Honda, or Toyota and note that they are all built in US plants using > 90%
US content by US workers. I don't think healthcare is the real issue.

 

real issue.

That's a good point, but as I think I pointed out earlier in
the thread, Time magazine in its Dec. 5th issue had an
article on GM and pointed out that Honda or Toyota's (can't
remember which) health care cost per car for its much
younger work force was only about $300. Compare this to the
IIRC roughly $1500 per car that goes for health care for
GM's workforce (including retirees).

 

real issue.

That's a good point, but as I think I pointed out earlier in
the thread, Time magazine in its Dec. 5th issue had an
article on GM and pointed out that Honda or Toyota's (can't
remember which) health care cost per car for its much
younger work force was only about $300. Compare this to the
IIRC roughly $1500 per car that goes for health care for
GM's workforce (including retirees).

 

they dont have all the retirees... yet. and the workers make sub-UAW
wages, which isnt necessarily a bad thing.

if GM hadnt kept giving outrageous executive pay and bonuses, the UAW
wouldnt have asked for (and gotten) all those wage increases. someone
had to draw the line somewhere, and it might take bankruptcy court to
settle the whole thing.

 

they dont have all the retirees... yet. and the workers make sub-UAW
wages, which isnt necessarily a bad thing.

if GM hadnt kept giving outrageous executive pay and bonuses, the UAW
wouldnt have asked for (and gotten) all those wage increases. someone
had to draw the line somewhere, and it might take bankruptcy court to
settle the whole thing.

 

All good points about which I had been wondering as well.

The Time magazine article also pointed out that GM (and I
think Ford) too were selling their cars at relatively huge
discounts the last few years. Whereas Honda and Toyota cars
have been in such demand that they go for a premium. (Which
I guess means consistently higher than invoice or far more
over invoice than GM and Ford cars.) So the GM and Ford
profit for each car sold tends to be lower.

Sorta blows away my theory that Americans are jerks about
buying small, fuel efficient cars, though. They do buy them.

Elle
Hoping to buy some Honda stock in the next year or so.
Doggone Toyota stock has just about gone through the roof
but still may be a good investment, if GM goes under.

 

All good points about which I had been wondering as well.

The Time magazine article also pointed out that GM (and I
think Ford) too were selling their cars at relatively huge
discounts the last few years. Whereas Honda and Toyota cars
have been in such demand that they go for a premium. (Which
I guess means consistently higher than invoice or far more
over invoice than GM and Ford cars.) So the GM and Ford
profit for each car sold tends to be lower.

Sorta blows away my theory that Americans are jerks about
buying small, fuel efficient cars, though. They do buy them.

Elle
Hoping to buy some Honda stock in the next year or so.
Doggone Toyota stock has just about gone through the roof
but still may be a good investment, if GM goes under.

 

if youre looking to invest to actually MAKE some money, i think ford is
undervalued.

yes- theyre in the same boat as GM, but theyre smaller and easier to
turn around.

 

if youre looking to invest to actually MAKE some money, i think ford is
undervalued.

yes- theyre in the same boat as GM, but theyre smaller and easier to
turn around.

 

If you mean check it's P/E (particularly the expected, next
year's P/E) and make sure it's low, sure, that's one
so-called stock fundamental to check. Ford's P/E is low at
the moment. But, as you may be aware, this is one of dozens
of company fundamentals that an astute investor should
check. I often go next to the earnings history. In fact,
Ford's annual earnings were in negative territory in the
last five years, and are otherwise erratic. If you're
interested, see the chart in the lower right of
http://quicktake.morningstar.com/Stock/Snapshot.asp?Country=
USA&Symbol=F&stocktab=snapshot&pgid=qtqnnavsnapshot for the
earnings trend in the last five years. Type in HMC for Honda
or TM for Toyota, and compare their earnings trends. Also,
compare to a huge conglomerate like GE or the soda pop
company Coca-cola KO.

Then too simple realities like Ford bonds are now rated at
the junk level make its stock an easy rejection. Not to be
obnoxiously pedantic, but for the interested student, this
means professional business analysts have gone over a
company's fundamentals (prospects for making profit!) with a
fine tooth comb and ruled the company in deep doo-doo, at
significantly greater risk of going bankrupt compared to,
say, a company like Honda these days.

Both are too risky for my blood at this time. That took some
hard experience in investing to realize--I did own some Ford
stock a few years ago! Coulda timed it and come out ahead,
but you know how that goes. Likewise, one could buy some
Ford stock today, like you suggest, and try to time it. But
it really could go under. It's even more likely today than a
few years ago. It's for gamblers, or people that want to put
a very small portion of their portfolio in risky stocks, in
the hope it will go up and provide a little gain. But they
can also sustain the loss of the company going under, and
the stock becoming worthless.

I also had some GMAC bonds (a subsidiary of GM) a few years
ago. Pre-junk rating. They paid a nice interest rate,
matured and all was swell. But today any GMAC bond available
is rated junk. The yield is great, but they're high risk.

Of course, I know reputable people who say there is a fair
chance the government would bail out either GM or Ford and
not let them go under. Point being to spare the drag on the
economy all these folks out of work etc. would be, I
suppose. But then that may be seen to unfairly stifle
companies producing a good product, like Honda and Toyota.

So we'll see. For me, I want stock in products I know people
like and that are quality. Ford and GM once were. No more.
Onto Honda and Toyota.

Back to the fun, substantive stuff that makes us all go
"Whish, vroom, putt-putt-putt-putt... "

Elle
(Gonna lay off poor Elliott, too.)

 

If you mean check it's P/E (particularly the expected, next
year's P/E) and make sure it's low, sure, that's one
so-called stock fundamental to check. Ford's P/E is low at
the moment. But, as you may be aware, this is one of dozens
of company fundamentals that an astute investor should
check. I often go next to the earnings history. In fact,
Ford's annual earnings were in negative territory in the
last five years, and are otherwise erratic. If you're
interested, see the chart in the lower right of
http://quicktake.morningstar.com/Stock/Snapshot.asp?Country=
USA&Symbol=F&stocktab=snapshot&pgid=qtqnnavsnapshot for the
earnings trend in the last five years. Type in HMC for Honda
or TM for Toyota, and compare their earnings trends. Also,
compare to a huge conglomerate like GE or the soda pop
company Coca-cola KO.

Then too simple realities like Ford bonds are now rated at
the junk level make its stock an easy rejection. Not to be
obnoxiously pedantic, but for the interested student, this
means professional business analysts have gone over a
company's fundamentals (prospects for making profit!) with a
fine tooth comb and ruled the company in deep doo-doo, at
significantly greater risk of going bankrupt compared to,
say, a company like Honda these days.

Both are too risky for my blood at this time. That took some
hard experience in investing to realize--I did own some Ford
stock a few years ago! Coulda timed it and come out ahead,
but you know how that goes. Likewise, one could buy some
Ford stock today, like you suggest, and try to time it. But
it really could go under. It's even more likely today than a
few years ago. It's for gamblers, or people that want to put
a very small portion of their portfolio in risky stocks, in
the hope it will go up and provide a little gain. But they
can also sustain the loss of the company going under, and
the stock becoming worthless.

I also had some GMAC bonds (a subsidiary of GM) a few years
ago. Pre-junk rating. They paid a nice interest rate,
matured and all was swell. But today any GMAC bond available
is rated junk. The yield is great, but they're high risk.

Of course, I know reputable people who say there is a fair
chance the government would bail out either GM or Ford and
not let them go under. Point being to spare the drag on the
economy all these folks out of work etc. would be, I
suppose. But then that may be seen to unfairly stifle
companies producing a good product, like Honda and Toyota.

So we'll see. For me, I want stock in products I know people
like and that are quality. Ford and GM once were. No more.
Onto Honda and Toyota.

Back to the fun, substantive stuff that makes us all go
"Whish, vroom, putt-putt-putt-putt... "

Elle
(Gonna lay off poor Elliott, too.)

 

The transplant factories employee mostly younger workers and have almost
no retirees on the books. Healthcare expenses, and healthcare insurance
costs, go up exponentially as a person ages.

John

 

The transplant factories employee mostly younger workers and have almost
no retirees on the books. Healthcare expenses, and healthcare insurance
costs, go up exponentially as a person ages.

John

 

Smaller is a highly relative term here. Ford is a massive company both
in North America and globally. The first obvious action Ford needs to
take is to stop putting money down the Jaguar sink-hole, but instead
Ford just put another $2.1 billion into Jaguar.

http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=marketsNews&storyID=2005-12-23T110104Z_01_L23231860_RTRIDST_0_AUTOS-FORD-JAGUAR-UPDATE-2.XML


John

 

Smaller is a highly relative term here. Ford is a massive company both
in North America and globally. The first obvious action Ford needs to
take is to stop putting money down the Jaguar sink-hole, but instead
Ford just put another $2.1 billion into Jaguar.

http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=marketsNews&storyID=2005-12-23T110104Z_01_L23231860_RTRIDST_0_AUTOS-FORD-JAGUAR-UPDATE-2.XML


John

 

dunno if jaguar is that much of a sinkhole. mebbe i should read the
link, huh?

before the ford buyout, jags were extremely pricey and had a completely
lousy reputation. now, hell- anyone could afford one! taurus guts
underneath, FWIW. i see a lot more of em on the road than i used to,
also. and they also managed to keep jags looking like jags.

and then theres GM/saab. ugh. rebadged crap from a once quirky company.
even a rebadged subie, fer chrissakes.

i still say ford can turn it all around way before GM. yes, therye
massive, but not as huge as GM and with a bit less baggage and a bit
better reputation.

GM needs a LOT of help and should get rid of at *least* one US division
entirely. id suggest losing the chevy truck line, badge em all GMC, and
get rid of buick.

 

dunno if jaguar is that much of a sinkhole. mebbe i should read the
link, huh?

before the ford buyout, jags were extremely pricey and had a completely
lousy reputation. now, hell- anyone could afford one! taurus guts
underneath, FWIW. i see a lot more of em on the road than i used to,
also. and they also managed to keep jags looking like jags.

and then theres GM/saab. ugh. rebadged crap from a once quirky company.
even a rebadged subie, fer chrissakes.

i still say ford can turn it all around way before GM. yes, therye
massive, but not as huge as GM and with a bit less baggage and a bit
better reputation.

GM needs a LOT of help and should get rid of at *least* one US division
entirely. id suggest losing the chevy truck line, badge em all GMC, and
get rid of buick.