http://www.statenews.com Start your engines, Detroit, but don’t forget to plug in your car overnight. The Big Three auto companies unveiled several electric concept cars at the 2009 North American International Auto Show as the car manufacturers attempt to keep their collective heads above water. en-us Gryphon 2.2.3b-tsn (woodward)/Foundry5 Tue, 13 Jan 2009 12:28:41 -0500 webmaster@statenews.com http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30101 It’s not the Big 3 that believe electric cars are their salvation. It’s their new masters in Washington DC who head the National Bank of Taxpayers that demand GM and Chrysler bow at the Green Altar. This bailout is not about making the Big 3 profitable. It’s about keeping union (i.e. campaign contributors) jobs and appeasing the environmentalists. GM and Chrysler know their only hope for survival is to keep the politicians (who control the purse strings) happy. Mon, 12 Jan 2009 09:02:44 -0500 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30101 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30102 Steve, who do you think contributes more to political campaigns? The UAW or Exxon Mobile? Mon, 12 Jan 2009 09:09:01 -0500 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30102 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30106 In the 2008 presidential campaign… Oil and gas industry donated $5 million. 25% to Dems / 75% to GOP Labor donated $1 million. 96% to Dems / 4% to GOP What’s your point? Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:23:46 -0500 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30106 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30117 So the oil and gas industry donated 5x the amount of money than that of the labor unions, Steve S. What’s YOUR point? Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:24:12 -0500 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30117 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30120 Joe believes Exxon’s contributions are an issue. Not sure why he (or you) believes that’s an issue. The market doesn’t believe electric cars are the answer – at least not in a time frame that will matter for the short term viability of GM and Chrysler. If either company was responding to market conditions, they wouldn’t be promoting these concept vehicles. They are catering to politicians, not the market. And the politicians have an agenda that has nothing to do with profitability. Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:45:27 -0500 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30120 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30121 “there isn’t a market for electric cars”… Technically, I guess this is correct. Since electric cars are not yet available there cannot be a market for them (yet). Not at all the same thing as saying that there wouldn’t be one, is it? They wouldn’t ‘undoubtedly’ be more expensive than internal-combustion cars. Although the initial price would certainly be higher, this could very well be offset by actual ownership costs (not paying for gas, but more importantly, not having mechanical parts to replace). Finally “in these tough economic times” seems to refer to the here-and-now, but the article acknowledges that the cars won’t be available for several years. While it’s completely possible that the economy won’t recover by then, it just might. All-in-all, this editorial pretty much lives up to State News expectations. Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:03:14 -0500 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30121 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30130 For the Big Three it’s probably not going to be about the future, it is going to be about the past and missed opportunitities. As for the debate over big oil and the unions, you need to throw management into that mix as well. I think that CEO’s need to be fairly comensated, but I find it hard to believe that any CEO is worth compensation packages worth tens of millions a year (just as I think some union workers are over compensated for the work they perform).Greedy is good as long as the cash flow is there and there is little competition. For decades the Big Three ruled – they had no foreign competition and a huge country addicted to their cars (there is a political reason for this car addiction, but I won’t bore you with that). The Big Three have had their chance to get it right – they lived through oil embargos, the introduction of foreign imports, recessions, etc. BUT what they did not learn was that their is a difference between merely surviving – and have a plan to prosper in a changing world market. They chose to survive, but not plan. I find it hard to believe that not one single person in these organizations rose a red flag long ago. Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:01:34 -0500 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30130 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30135 My point is that the oil companies have far more influence over either party than the UAW. The development of the Chevy Volt started years ago. This is not a way to get them to “bow at the green altar.” This is merely so GM can say, “See, we don’t just make giant SUVs that use lots of gas.” Kind of like Chevron and Exxon’s “we’re researching alternative energies” commercials. And the electric car was already created and destroyed by GM, partly due to the influence of the oil companies. There were several other factors, but an absence of demand was not one of them. I recommend everyone on this thread watch the documentary “Who Killed the Electric Car?” You don’t even have to watch it, just Google it and read up. Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:43:23 -0500 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30135 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30136 I whole-heartedly disagree with this editorial. They are way off-base. The American car companies have the same, if not better, quality as any foreign vehicle. Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:58:20 -0500 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30136 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30147 Joe – if you believe “who killed the electric car” we all got more problems. Rememeber at the end when they are trying to lay blame (I still couldn’t figure out why they didn’t make a car instead of the movie). They talk about the consumer for 3 seconds. Where is Toyota’s electric car. Same time, same thing. I bet a bunch of bullies from GM went to Toyota to steal their only prototype and kill it too. GM WANTS TO MAKE MONEY. IF THEY COULD DO IT WITH AN ELECTRIC CAR THEY WOULD. Please learn all about our government and rules and regulations required by automakers if they are going to have serviceable vehicles on the road. It ain’t cheap. Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:57:17 -0500 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30147 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30211 Who ever said that the Big 3 are relying on electric cars for a turnaround? This editorial equates to saying, “Grass is green”, but an editorial board published it and it spans several paragraphs. Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:37:31 -0500 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30211 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30220 “There isn’t a market for electric cars” —The State News, January 13, 2009 • “There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.” — Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977. • “This ‘telephone’ has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.” — Western Union internal memo, 1876. • “The Americans have need of the telephone, but we do not. We have plenty of messenger boys.” — Sir William Preece, chief engineer of the British Post Office, 1876. • “The bomb will never go off. I speak as an expert in explosives.” — Admiral William Leahy, U.S. Atomic Bomb Project. • “Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value.” — Marechal Ferdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre. •“With over 50 foreign cars already on sale here, the Japanese auto industry isn’t likely to carve out a big slice of the U.S. market.” — Business Week, August 2, 1968. Tue, 13 Jan 2009 12:28:41 -0500 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/30220