GM likely to retake No. 1 sales spot from Toyota

US auto import regulators had their hands pockets in pockets of Japanese automakers. Now its back to bread line now that their suger daddy went belly up....

hey just give it a few decades the govenrment will have the monopoly on the auto industry.

already have it in other areas....why not add the auto industry?

First off, Toyotas decline has been gong on well before the Tsunami;
Last year, Toyota sold 8.42 million cars and trucks, barely ahead of a resurgent GM, which sold 8.39 million. GM held the No. 1 spot from 1932 until 2008.

See that? They were at the precipice of retaking the market anyway.

Second There is no country that gives aid to its companies more than Japan , particularly with the heavily subsidized Prius developent and battery cells for them, but they of course have been doing it for decades

The year was 1958 and the country was, in fact, Japan. The company was Toyota, and the car was called the Toyopet. Toyota started out as a manufacturer of textile machinery (Toyoda Automatic Loom) and moved into car production in 1933. The Japanese government kicked out General Motors and Ford in 1939 and bailed out Toyota with money from the central bank (Bank of Japan) in 1949. Today, Japanese cars are considered as 'natural' as Scottish salmon or French wine, but fewer than 50 years ago, most people, including many Japanese, thought the Japanese car industry simply should not exist.

You know, you really should read Alexander Hamilton's Report on manufacturers, the very documents that guided our country to Demand side prosperity, which explicitly lays out subsidizing industries and protection of our companies and labor, before the supply side sham infected our country and we are in the situation we are in today specifically because of that trickledown pipe dream

Whether your opponent has a stroke is not the point. A win is a win. You got to be at your best to stay on top. Yeah!

Randy McMurphy--

The Toyopet Tiara was a nice car.

I think it still sucks. The only reason they are beating Toyota is because Toyota has suffered from multiple major catastrophes. That's like winning a boxing match because your opponent has a stroke.

That may be true, but had GM been allowed to collapse it wouldn't be around to pick up the slack. Sometimes being in the right place at the right time is just as important as all the skill in the world.

First off, Toyotas decline has been gong on well before the Tsunami; Last year, Toyota sold 8.42 million cars and trucks, barely ahead of a resurgent GM, which sold 8.39 million. GM held the No. 1 spot from 1932 until 2008.

That didn't happen to involve 'Toyota-gate' and the sticky pedal incident did it?,...

Sticky pedal, and a string of other recalls and bad press. I noticed in my friends car , though looked good had been made on a lower standard I had seen.

I see in Toyota the same I had seen in American cars when they declined, Produce solid reliable cars, then the cost and corner cutting to maximize profit for reduced quality. I remeber looking a ford tempo in the 1990's..God what a piece of crap! Ergonomic horror and all the vigor of a yugo.

Now I see the Quality of american cars coming back, more so since their bridge loans. I would have never have thought I'd say I would want a Buick, but the lacrosse is impressive .

Krasna, I checked out the Tiara , Love that lil boxy look. I have a 1993 Toyota camry myself I bartered for services...its a trooper, stick, I could get from Los Angleles to Sacremento on one tank of Gas

Toyota makes excellent products and have for decades .

Until 'Toyota-Gate' happened.

Gotta love those Tempos, big sellers; now relagated to the dust-bin of automotive history.

Taxpayers bailed out General Motors, so now how about having General Motors bail out taxpayers? Tax outsourcing!!!

Toyota is the victim of their own success, just as GM's complacency led to their loss in market share, Toyota's managers belief they were infallible led to the recall mess. I won't be surprised if GM's victory is short lived, since they have a history of bad moves, including some of these peaches : shuttering Pontiac but keeping Buick in the States, despite the fact Pontiac far outsold them, keeping GMC, which are merely rebadged Chevrolet trucks, selling a $120,000 638 horsepower super car with a Chevrolet badge (Chevrolet base prices should end at $50,000, $60,000 tops), in fact it would take a novel length post to document all of the GM management foul ups, including the "brand management" garbage that ruined Oldsmobile and Pontiac (whose demise also had to have some bailout politics involved, since it didn't make economic sense, but then again neither did Oldsmobile's phase out) and nearly destroyed Buick.

Many real Americans are employed by Toyota. LOL!

At least Toyota built factories in the US. Many other companies fled the US for their company's production. Shame on them for leaving the US.

"Real Americans buy American"

Please, tell me where I can buy something 100% American made-other than the Colt .45 I just bought.

Smart buy Bdodd .

Want to buy something 100% American, try Jack Daniels whiskey. And you may need it as you try to find something else 100% US made,..

Thanks, gotme. You'd probably also enjoy my Coonan .357 automag-another one 100% made in the USA.

Bloowhatshisname- What kind of gun? A buck-an? Oragn-an?Ka-Nikker-an? Ooo-Ooo-OO-an?

Is there a special shell?

Never seen one Bdodd , but I've always enjoyed guns .

Real Americans are smart with their money.

Real Americans buy what ever is at the best price/quality point be that foreign or domestic.

The whole "made in America" thing is just false propaganda for the stupid in many cases. Most of the stuff with that label can have a large amount of foreign sub-products in it.

Yeah, you should buy Made In China...That always helps our economy.

There are zero factories in Japan building American cars because the Japanese government will not allow them.

It is actually the mindset of the consumer, as Japan has no restrictions on cars sold in their country that are not applied to Japanese manufacturers as well. However, the U.S. does have tariffs on vehicles coming from Japan and depending on vehicle type can range from $250 to $2,500.

Actually, GM doesn't owe the taxpayers any money. They borrowed about $8.0 billion and have paid all of that back. The rest of the taxpayer investment was in the form of equity. The taxpayers own about 33% of GM right now.

The taxpayers own about 33% of GM right now.

And the stock stands a good chance to be sold for a loss to the taxpayer.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/19/us-gm-followon-idUSTRE73I0IE20110419

http://1click.indiatimes.com/article/0cPZ20Ba8ubK2

And the stock stands a good chance to be sold for a loss to the taxpayer.

Possibly, if your view is limited specifically to the transaction itself. The stock has to get to almost $53.00 per share before taxpayers get all of their money back on the bailout which of course is a long trek from the current price of $31.00. But I think that is only half the story.

If GM went down, their suppliers would go down and the ripple effect throughout the economy would have been devastating. There are between 1.5 and 2.0 million workers associated with the domestic auto industry. The taxpayer cost of unemployment benefits alone (at the 26 week average) would approach or possibly exceed the difference between the current value of taxpayer holdings and the breakeven level. When you add in the taxpayer cost of public health care services for all of those unemployed workers and their families, the taxpayer has already come out ahead even if the government's remaining stake is sold at its current price.

The reason GM was bailed out was to save jobs and keep an already moribund economy from getting worse, not to make money on owning GM. There was a very high taxpayer cost associated with not bailing out GM and when that context is considered, we as taxpayers are already ahead for having done that bailout.

Bill, I don't think that the government should sell out of the taxpayers' 33% ownership as soon as possible without disrupting the value for the private sector investors that invested at the IPO. We as taxpayers have already received the benefit of the bailout (see 12.5 above) and the government shouldn't be in the business of owning significant portions of private sector companies. My fingers are crossed that an improving economy will result in greater demand for automobiles in general and GM cars in particular which would result in further stock price appreciation. That said, I believe that the government getting out of its remaining ownership without negatively impacting the holdings of other investors constitutes success.

We as taxpayers have already received the benefit of the bailout (see 12.5 above) and the government shouldn't be in the business of owning significant portions of private sector companies.

Don't overlook the bankruptcy proceedings of old GM (Motor Liquidation Company) and the billions in claims for environmental cleanup, etc. There are 2 GMs at play here and one is doing quite well and the taxpayer may see some benefit. However, that other GM is going to cost a bundle of taxpayers money.

I doubt very much if there are $billions in environmental claims.Seems preposterous

$773 million in just this settlement. The money will come from more than $1 billion provided by the Treasury Department to wind down the “bad” assets of General Motors set aside in the bankruptcy.

GM Pollution cleanups The money set aside to clean up pollution at 120 sites a bankrupt General Motors left across the country may be enough to address the sites in only two states, accordng to court records.

Feel free to research this website for environmental claims that were not covered by the above agreements.

I have and the term billions is correct. That is not to slight the necessity of the bailout, as it was necessary. However, triumphantly declaring "mission accomplished" is very premature. Lets wait for the full tally. That may take a few years. They haven't even sold that church they own, in Bedford, IN.

Eventually, I believe, but exaggeration on your part clouds the issue.

Understating the issue serves the same purpose.

Eventually, I believe that it will be in the billions. I provided some links to that effect.

"Eventually you believe". Got any real data or evidence to the contrary?

Even GM originally estimated the cleanup costs at $1.9 billion. Another link

Why are you so persistent with your critizism of a success story for all concerned.

That's raising the "Mission Accomplished" banner pretty high imo. Yet I get this type response to my concerns....

If the future proves you right, I'll be the first to concede.

Now why don't you just wait until that mission is actually accomplished (future), then let me know so I can be the first to concede.

The "mission" has been accomplished hsquared. Two of America's largest manufacturing entities and all their suppliers remain in business with possibly millions of jobs saved, the only reason to do the bailout in the first place. Without a doubt, we will have more visibility on the total cost over time. You, hsquared, are actually calling into question whether or not the exercise was worthwhile. I suspect that this will be a matter of conjecture even when all the numbers are tallied.

All that said, I find myself in disagreement with your current line of argument. An entity known as GM would have wound up in bankruptcy whether the government stepped in or not, with all of the attendant issues around the disposition of property and environmental clean-up. In short, some combination of taxpayers at the local, state or national level would be stuck with bills associated with this whether there was a bailout or not.

An entity known as GM would have wound up in bankruptcy whether the government stepped in or not, with all of the attendant issues around the disposition

Exactly. I'll agree that a the government stepping in was appropriate, given the impact of a GM failure on the entire industry. However... to pretend that the door is closed and the new GM is a rousing success and/or that the taxpayers made money from this deal is very premature. It was a necessity. The taxpayer may claim mission accomplished, as per jobs saved, etc., but any assertion that GM has paid in full is completely false.

I should add that the fundamental difference between GM and Ford was Ford had procured a line of credit prior to fall of 2008. Had Ford not acquired that line of credit, Ford would have joined the bankruptcy party, imo. However, Ford did tough it out and deserves a double kudo for every GM accolade.

Toyota is experiencing the same problems you accuse GM of. They have shown over the past year that they are not bulletproof.