The New GM
 

Probably not the best way to inspire consumer confidence, but their stocks are off 33% from the IPO in 11/10, and someone has to take it in the shorts.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...77I0Z820110819

I know, she should have sued Motors Liquidation Co.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=mtlqq.pk&ql=1

Chas

Pretty lame IMHO. I wonder what this means for any future NHTSA recalls?

Charlie the Tuna, move over???

Chas

The "New" GM also once tried to claim that all of it's labor agreements were made by the "Old" GM, and were therefore null and void. It didn't wash and neither should this.

If you don't want to get sued, don't leave yourself open to it with half-assed practices.

Dave

Hey, win new customers, screw your existing ones. What could go wrong?

Pete

Sounds like the Obama 2012 election strategy :D.

ROTFLMAO!!!!

Pete

It seems that the actual issue is that they're not going to sit still for a class action suit over whatever the issue is with the rear end. My understanding is that if your Impala is within the original warranty parameters under the old GM, they'll fix it if you take it in.

Murray

Rob has a couple Impalas I think, maybe he knows something.

I've been a loyal GM customer all my life, but my next vehicles will be Fords.

Being I ain't real smart, I still go back and fix things free gratis for people I've worked for 10 or 15 yrs after the fact, even though I specify that I only guarantee labor and materials for a period of one year, which is written on the contract I give them.

And there is no place to sign my contract, as their word, as well as mine is all that matters. Basically it's no more than a hard bid, type written, which specifies what I'm going to do and how much they're going to pay.

And I like it like that, because I generate so many of them, I can't remember what I've told them in the first place. That way we both know.

While it costs me some money, I have repeat customers that go back to every since I've been in business.

It's what you call Karma, get it???

Chas

I understand that completely and at my office, we do pretty much the same thing.

Repairing cars as customers bring them in is one thing. Being forced to recall a few hundred thousand because some lawyer thinks you should is a different matter.

Murray

Right, reminds me of a recall on our Impalals where we were warned not to park the cars in our garage because of the danger of fire. The recall replaced a plastic part that held spark plug cables. The fire danger was in some idiots mind. Meanwhile they want airbags to protect a 150 pound male who is not wearing a seatbelt, but that same airbag will seriously injure a small female sitting closer to the wheel.:rolleyes:

Twodogs, welcome to the dark side. I've got a nice 85 Town Car I'll sell you, 'cheap' :D Seriously look at the last of the full size, crown vics and grand marquis. The '03 I own is not my parents (or my old ones for that matter) Oldsmobile. It's awesome.

Chas, any chance you'll take jobs in Cleveland?

Rob, when they first came out IIRC it was a 200# male! There's very little common sense left I fear.

Pete

The way I look at it is if a 200# or 150# male does not wear a seatbelt, that's Darwin in action.

I don't have much use for class action lawsuits, as a rule.

Chas