I seem to remember all the big car companies had hugh Pension Liability issues. Seems that was directly union related.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Former GM CEO on Apple Car: 'They Have No Idea What They're Getting Into'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I seem to remember all the big car companies had hugh Pension Liability issues. Seems that was directly union related.
And on pension liability show me they had been funding it correctly for 30 years. Give you a hint they were not. They been short changing it for years and now that it is coming time to pay up they have issues.
That is what happens when you do not save for retirement. If they had funded it correctly the money would be there.
But hey let's blame the unions not the fact that management choose short term profit year after year instead of saving for their retirement of their employees for the 20-30 years.
Its my own "what if", so what if I changed it. Did you actually read the argument; does it change the actual conclusion of it. No, not alt all.
BTW, sanctimonious nitpicking is a trait shared by 100% on my ignore list (I welcome being ignored the like of you, please do it)).
You have a large ignore list! How petty. Well they say If you run into a jerk in the morning you're probably just unlucky. If you run into them all day long, you might be the jerk.
It isn't about the funding. Yes, they were underfunded. But it was the size of the benefit in comparison to non-union workers that is the issue. That was a burden on GM that other companies didn't have.
And again blaming the unions is still wrong. This was/is a 100% management fault years in the making.
Blaming the unions us wrong. Go blame the upper management that choose to underfunded it for short term boost in profits. It is time to pay up. Blame the ones at fault. Do not blame the union and keep spreading the same lie.
Even putting in those burden still not big change to car price. It still works out to be around 10%.
Except, people were buying $500 phones back then all the time. It's just that $300-400 were hidden in the form of a subsidy.
Sure, the original iPhone still carried a service contract, but I think that had more to do with securing unlimited data for $20/mo. for iPhone users. Apple didn't have the leverage with the iPhone to demand that AT&T provide a $450 subsidy, while also offering $20/unlimited data.
Fast forward to the present. Apple just sold 70 million iPhones at an average price of $670 last quarter. I think this proves that Ballmer was proven wrong, even when he may have been thechnically right at the time.
Management was at fault for negotiating these sweetheart deals in the first place. The unions aren't really at fault except for asking for something that wasn't realistic in the marketplace.
Either way, there was no way these benefits were sustainable in the long term. That's the issue.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/05/20/what-explains-gms-problems-with-the-uaw/
He doesn't even work for GM anymore so really he has no dog in this fight. And he's absolutely right. Having been a mechanical engineer in the industry, I can tell you that anything that's going to be on the road requires years of research and safety code obedience.
Yet, you have not proven how is the recall relevant about Dan making a comment about Apple attempting to make cars...
----------
And you would be feeding those of us around here for the past 5 years?
Thanks!
I'm attacking their credibility as a car maker (they suck); and his credibility to actually make such a declaration (by his own admission, and background, he didn't know what the hell he was doing when he got there in 2010). That's how its linked.
So, did he just admit his own incompetence in 2010... How else can I take judge his statements.
Well hello Keira,
See you've decided to bring your antics into yet another discussion.
Seems you think you know all the answers. That's great. I'm glad you know how to do everything better and know where everyone made their mistakes. That'll give you some advantage as you launch your new car business.
Come back and let us know how things are going after you've sold several hundred million cars and been in business for over 100 years.
Obviously I'm being very optimistic. Odds are you'll fail within your first week. But, since you've shown you know everything, I'll be very optimistic and look forward to your return with good news. Looking forward to reading about the spectacular success of the soon to be released Keira supercar.
Get going. We're rooting for you. Don't let us down.
So, yes he failed in 2010 and hey we all fail... "great answer". Good thing I don't take my job as lightly as that, even if I haven't done it for 100 years.
As for the rest "papa"... (sic) Your paternalistic and condescending tone is something, being born mid 1960s and being around tech since the mid 1980s, I can disregard completely. Thanks for the heads up. Now I know not to read your posts.
all the time? since you like play back to future here what was the average price of a phone back then? what was the most popular back then?
the reasons for apples setup with att is irrelevant. the price was nonsense, the 4 gig was nonsense and apple rectified both within weeks.
ballmer was talking about the product just announced, its specs and its price in 2007. the price of the computer the average person needs has come down while the price of their phone has gone up. phones have taken on duties from multiple other devices. to hold that huge change against ballmer is asinine.
the iphone wouldnt be where it is today without the price reduction.
Actually, they did get both $20 data (understandable since it was only EDGE) and a subsidy, only the customer did not get to see the latter.
Instead, AT&T gave Apple the monthly subsidy amount that normally would've gone to help the customer pay less upfront for the phone. Since this arrangement didn't cost AT&T anything extra, they didn't care.
In other words, Apple got BOTH their retail price... AND the monthly portion of revenues normally set aside for a subsidy. To disguise this subsidy shift, they called it "revenue sharing".
This arrangement was doomed to failure, and changed a year later:
Part of the reason of course was to get more Americans to buy the iPhone. As Balmer knew, most people were not willing to pay over $200 upfront.
Another big reason the "sharing" got dropped, was because more and more people were unlocking iPhones and using them elsewhere. Apple never got to see an AT&T monthly payment from all those units, and this drop in revenue became a concern to Apple and its investors.
In fact, you could watch Jobs' view about jailbreakers and unlockers change because of it. At first he seemed proud of all the attention his new device was getting. Then Apple realized how much they were losing in revenue, and suddenly jailbreaking became evil, and Apple has since spent their time trying to convince the US government to ban it.
The average selling price is not what everyone is paying upfront.
It's what Apple gets per unit, helped in many cases because of a carrier subsidy.
We're paying $375 up front in Canada for 6+ and Iphone's are even more popular here than in the US.
There is no such thing as a subsidy. Its a loan rolled into your service charges of their 2 year contract. Most people are not idiots ;-); they know this.
That being said, even if they do know this... people like to buy on credit. So, some most of your point still stands. Buying on credit encourages spending and Apple was the beneficiary of that.
I would like to see Apple enter into this area, and destroy the hassle and haggling method of how we purchase cars!
They don't call it stealership for nothing!
GM wants to lecture Apple on manufacturing processes because they know how to make cars out of steel? (Wait, does anyone still make cars out of steel?)
Apple would probably be doing crazy innovations like carving a car frame out of a solid block of aluminum, with nary a weld in site. Because it's Apple.
Oh, and curved glass. Apple's car would have curved glass everywhere.
Apple would probably be doing crazy innovations like carving a car frame out of a solid block of aluminum, with nary a weld in site. Because it's Apple.
Oh, and curved glass. Apple's car would have curved glass everywhere.
GM also is willing to help Apple with making cars that murder people, that are slapped together like a toy, and that are generally some of the least reliable. And, for no extra charge, GM will help Apple suck the taxpayer for free money when Apple figures out how to go bankrupt like GM did.
Excellent.
And not when it comes to iPhones. Oh, wait.....
And not when it comes to Macs. Oh, wait.....
They're only saying that because Apple will once again disrupt the industry and the car companies don't want that.
It's funny how much everyone wants to turn this into a conspiracy to squash Apple. The reality is that someone asked a guy what his thoughts were on the subject. And he answered. And he doesn't represent GM.
If some guy had asked a kid on the corner selling ice cream, you'd all be frantically claiming the ice cream industry was out to squash Apple.
You guys will build a conspiracy out of nothing.
Because it's happened before. People were calling the iPhone a flop before it even released. People are calling the iWatch a flop, again before it even releases. Now they're doing basically the same thing with the Apple car.
Put money on it then, but as Michael Goff said, it doesn't matter how well Apple did with iPhones and Macs.
And yet we've heard nothing from the automotive industry. No auto company has said a word.
Reality is that Apple will likely never produce a complete car. It's a bunch of assumptions based on speculation of what Apple might be planning.
A smart company could quietly create the impression that they're working on a car, and let everyone focus on speculation about a car, and then catch everyone off guard when they release an amazing new computerized refrigerator that acts as the central hub for your house and provides you with amazing interactive content.
An old business strategy is to get your competitors all thinking about something else, and then shock them when you go a totally different direction.
It could be very possible that Apple is working on an airplane or a space craft. Who knows. So they've hired people with battery tech and transportation and mechanical backgrounds. A guy who designs drivetrains could be useful in a number of mechanical engineering applications.
Everybody's speculating on circumstantial observations and rumors with no facts. And the mac fans are getting excited over a bunch of things that could mean nothing.
Maybe Apple's going to introduce addons for cars. Maybe they're going to integrate a Garmin type navigation system. Who knows.
Let the competitors make wrong assumptions, prepare to compete in the wrong areas, and then blow them out of the water when you release what you actually intended to release.
Perhaps more simply put... Slight of hand.
At this point, it could be anything. And it could come to nothing.
And, there's no conspiracy going on except in the wild imagination of a bunch of uninformed apple loyalists who thrive on believing everyone else is out to get them.