Been reading a lot about the moves by Delphi and GM and how it could bankrupt GM...

If GM was to one day soon go bankrupt...how would that affect part availability and prices for our cars? I mean SOMEONE would continue making parts, right?

Yes parts will still be made for some time. The type of bankruptcy GM would file is not the go out of business kind but a reorganization type. GM will be around for some time just not worth what it use to be. Keep in mind Chrysler and Ford are both having the same problems it's just not being reported as heavily. Currently GM is trying to sell off GMAC to get some cash back into the coffers so they can pull themselves up off the floor.

Agreed. Bankruptcy is different that out of business. Even then, there will be New Old Stock (NOS) parts that will be available.

The Delphi move was to help it not move into bankruptcy. If that doesn't work in a certain amount of time, then they will examine GMAC.

If GM hadn't invested all that money into the redesign of their SUVs recently when gas prices are soaring (duh) they could have invested it in nicer car platforms. At least their cars are starting to look better, they just need to quit focusing so much on the V8 gas hogs at the moment and more on reliable economy cars. This is what happens when you don't listen to consumer demand.

Consumer demand?

I'm sorry but up until the last year or so the trend has been people wanted trucks and SUVs. So GM focused on what people were wanting at the time. Yes now people on whole want something with better mileage but...

Also remember that most of the V8s offered by GM now are DOD.

The general american public wants big motor'd big cars. If you want some one to blame then blame the EPA for giving trucks the easy way out. While car emission standards got tougher the cars got smaller, lighter and smaller engined and the trucks stayed the same and got more comfortable. So the automakers could still sell there Big vehicles to the people who wanted them without having to worry about their CAFE standards.

So if you had a product and one is your bread and butter which product would you put your stake in? The proven product or the lower selling one? Either way it's a gamble. GM gambled the fuel situation would stay the same and well the bottom fell out.

But fuel economy isn't what's killing them. It's greed in general. From the CEO to the person sweeping the floors. Cut costs here, cut there so I can enjoy my lofty paycheck and let quality suffer and sales with it.

Well that, and the unions and pensions also screwed over GM (and all American manufacturers)

If GM went out, they'd end up spinning off a bunch of their divisions. AC Delco, OnStar, etc....

Let's not throw too much blame at the unions, the largest blame needs to be directed at those high priced officials at the top of the food chain that pull in astronomical salaries and bonuses that are even more astronomical. Pensions/retirement programs, health and other benefits have hurt automakers pretty bad also. Bottom line, those at the top of the food chain agreed to everything the unions got for the worker in the end.

Right you are Herc. The only difference in the greed is the amount that the person gets. The higher they are in the food chain, the higher the greed cost is. GM, and all US automakers for that part, kept flooding the market with the gas guzzling SUV's and trucks for two reasons: 1.The consumer wanted them. 2. More importantly, the profit margins on SUV's and trucks is much higher than the average car. Only two things can change what the US automakers bring to market, the Federal government and the consumer. I prefer letting the consumer control this, since anytime the Fed gets involved it ends up costing us tax payers much more.

I guess I disagree because execs and CEOs get paid huge sums of money in every industry. It's not specific to US automakers. And most of these other businesses do just fine. What seperates the US automakers from the other companies is the unions and the pensions (which were union negotiated).

I come from a family of UAW line workers, but I just believe the unions started with good intentions years ago, but wound up biting the workers in the butt. I'm just not a big union guy.

You're correct UMfan, that pension, benefits and hourly worker salaries were negotiated by the union. Directly on the other side of that negotiating table were the folks that run the company. They ended up agreeing to a contract, whatever the stipulations were, knowing full well that any and all cost of those agreed upon negotiations would be passed on in the cost of a vehicle. A lot of companies with "union shops" are doing fine, but a lot of concessions have been made in other industries. My biggest problem with unions is that it is often too hard to fire someone that really needs to be fired. It's even harde to get rid of inept corporate types that have much more control than your average union worker. People can complain that corrupt unions cost this country millions or more, but corrupt, and even uncorrupt corporate folks have cost many times more than that. My Dad was in the Teamsters in California back in the late 50's for a few years, I did 22 years in the Navy and haven't ever been in a union. Florida isn't a big union state.

everybody is right, from the greed, to the unions. everything is having problems. Iwill side with herc by stating that GM has tried to keep up with consumer wants. I went in to ask about GM putting the Duramax into the Suburbans yet, and I was told no, won't happen, but GM is putting a new 6 speed tranny in them that is supposed to (teamed with the DOD engines)be able to get as high as 30 MPG in certain applications. Might be 08 before we see that though. not saying that's what is happening, just what I was told by a dealer rep