GM Halts Chevy Volt Production Because Sales Suck

[That Crazy Squirrel]

Why is it upon GM to run a dealer's business? Would it be nice for consumers, sure. Is it unethical to allow a retailer to sell their own purchased inventory at whatever price they choose, no.

Because the dealers aren't just independent businesses, they're franchises. The franchise organization exerts a lot of control over how a franchise can be operated.

GM is dumb for sharing money with the franchises then if they are required to run the damn thing.

You just sound like you are pissed because this might put a car you want out of your financial reach. Those cars with the premiums, guess what, they still sold. If they didn't, the price came back down. That's how it works.

Would you have been as okay with them setting prices had GM stepped in and told dealers they couldn't cut prices back in '08-'09 and forced all of the dealerships to go under? I mean, GM wouldn't want to devalue their product so as the franchiser they should have stepped in, right? I mean, it's their business to run, not the guy with the money invested and the guy with the employees, right?

I haven't owned a car in more than a decade T, and have no use for one, so let's call that part of your response null & void, shall we?

My only objection is, like Jim's, to price gouging.

What does he vehicle type have to do with anything?

Beats me. You're the one who came up with the idea I was pissed because I couldn't buy a car.

Jesus, Bernie, I said car, I meant any vehicle. You know that.

That's where a lot of what you are saying sounds like it is coming from, that's all. True or not, that's what it sounds like.

If you sold HAM radio equipment would you be okay with being told what you could sell it for?

If I was a franchised dealer and told I couldn't sell it for more than the MSRP? Yes, I'd be fine with that. Either there'd be enough profit margin built into the system to satisfy me or, if there wasn't, I'd get out of the franchise and sell something else.

See, in my opinion, the rules all change a bit when you sign that franchise agreement.

But their franchise agreement clearly doesn't say what you wish it said. Your argument is moot unless you can show me the max price clause in the franchisee's contract. You are talking about your preference, not the law as it pertains to the contracts between franchiser and franchisee in this particular case.

If that clause exists, party on.

T, I never said it did say that. What I said, and am still saying, is that if GM wanted to stop dealers from price gouging and charging premiums they could, easily, by having such a clause in the agreement.

 

[Zembonez]

If I was a franchised dealer and told I couldn't sell it for more than the MSRP? Yes, I'd be fine with that. Either there'd be enough profit margin built into the system to satisfy me or, if there wasn't, I'd get out of the franchise and sell something else.

See, in my opinion, the rules all change a bit when you sign that franchise agreement.

You are assuming that all dealers are under agreement to sell for Suggested Retail Prices. This simply is not the case. The only Automotive brand that I know of that dictates price that their vehicles should be sold by is Scion.

Chevrolet only provides Suggested Retail numbers to my buddy. He can sell for more or less as he sees fit. He's been a Chevrolet dealer since the 70s.

 

[daddy]

Why is it upon GM to run a dealer's business? Would it be nice for consumers, sure. Is it unethical to allow a retailer to sell their own purchased inventory at whatever price they choose, no.

Because the dealers aren't just independent businesses, they're franchises. The franchise organization exerts a lot of control over how a franchise can be operated.

GM is dumb for sharing money with the franchises then if they are required to run the damn thing.

You just sound like you are pissed because this might put a car you want out of your financial reach. Those cars with the premiums, guess what, they still sold. If they didn't, the price came back down. That's how it works.

Would you have been as okay with them setting prices had GM stepped in and told dealers they couldn't cut prices back in '08-'09 and forced all of the dealerships to go under? I mean, GM wouldn't want to devalue their product so as the franchiser they should have stepped in, right? I mean, it's their business to run, not the guy with the money invested and the guy with the employees, right?

I haven't owned a car in more than a decade T, and have no use for one, so let's call that part of your response null & void, shall we?

My only objection is, like Jim's, to price gouging.

What does he vehicle type have to do with anything?

Beats me. You're the one who came up with the idea I was pissed because I couldn't buy a car.

Jesus, Bernie, I said car, I meant any vehicle. You know that.

That's where a lot of what you are saying sounds like it is coming from, that's all. True or not, that's what it sounds like.

If you sold HAM radio equipment would you be okay with being told what you could sell it for?

If I was a franchised dealer and told I couldn't sell it for more than the MSRP? Yes, I'd be fine with that. Either there'd be enough profit margin built into the system to satisfy me or, if there wasn't, I'd get out of the franchise and sell something else.

See, in my opinion, the rules all change a bit when you sign that franchise agreement.

But their franchise agreement clearly doesn't say what you wish it said. Your argument is moot unless you can show me the max price clause in the franchisee's contract. You are talking about your preference, not the law as it pertains to the contracts between franchiser and franchisee in this particular case.

If that clause exists, party on.

T, I never said it did say that. What I said, and am still saying, is that if GM wanted to stop dealers from price gouging and charging premiums they could, easily, by having such a clause in the agreement.

They don't want that though, you do, that's my point. The manufacturer benefits from this, why would they want to stop it?

 

[Sodbuster]

Let's get back to the economics 101 lesson about dildos ....

Jim, proceed....

 

[Zembonez]

OK.

Let's say you has yerselfs three prize dildos for sale.

2 hunnerd HOs are fightin over who's gonna buy em.

Would you raise yer prices?

 

[Sodbuster]

OK.

Let's say you has yerselfs three prize dildos for sale.

2 hunnerd HOs are fightin over who's gonna buy em.

Would you raise yer prices?

I could tie this in with some economics vocabulary words and have my class use them in a sentence...such as...

Income....I just got in bed wit dee hoe and income my wife.

Fortify..... I axed the hoe how much? And she say fortify.

Foreclose..... If I pay alimony this month, I'll have no money foreclose.

 

[Zembonez]

Yep.


We're goin to hell.

 

[That Crazy Squirrel]

If I was a franchised dealer and told I couldn't sell it for more than the MSRP? Yes, I'd be fine with that. Either there'd be enough profit margin built into the system to satisfy me or, if there wasn't, I'd get out of the franchise and sell something else.

See, in my opinion, the rules all change a bit when you sign that franchise agreement.

You are assuming that all dealers are under agreement to sell for Suggested Retail Prices. This simply is not the case. The only Automotive brand that I know of that dictates price that their vehicles should be sold by is Scion.

Chevrolet only provides Suggested Retail numbers to my buddy. He can sell for more or less as he sees fit. He's been a Chevrolet dealer since the 70s.

No, I'm not assuming anything of the kind. What I'm saying is this:

If GM wanted to stop dealers from price gouging then all GM would have to do is to put a clause in the franchise agreement saying the dealer can't sell for more than MSRP, or list price if you prefer that term to MSRP.

I'm not saying that current franchise agreements have such a clause now.

Just that there is a way to stop it if GM wanted to. Franchises have to be renewed and renegotiated periodically.

 

[That Crazy Squirrel]

Why is it upon GM to run a dealer's business? Would it be nice for consumers, sure. Is it unethical to allow a retailer to sell their own purchased inventory at whatever price they choose, no.

Because the dealers aren't just independent businesses, they're franchises. The franchise organization exerts a lot of control over how a franchise can be operated.

GM is dumb for sharing money with the franchises then if they are required to run the damn thing.

You just sound like you are pissed because this might put a car you want out of your financial reach. Those cars with the premiums, guess what, they still sold. If they didn't, the price came back down. That's how it works.

Would you have been as okay with them setting prices had GM stepped in and told dealers they couldn't cut prices back in '08-'09 and forced all of the dealerships to go under? I mean, GM wouldn't want to devalue their product so as the franchiser they should have stepped in, right? I mean, it's their business to run, not the guy with the money invested and the guy with the employees, right?

I haven't owned a car in more than a decade T, and have no use for one, so let's call that part of your response null & void, shall we?

My only objection is, like Jim's, to price gouging.

What does he vehicle type have to do with anything?

Beats me. You're the one who came up with the idea I was pissed because I couldn't buy a car.

Jesus, Bernie, I said car, I meant any vehicle. You know that.

That's where a lot of what you are saying sounds like it is coming from, that's all. True or not, that's what it sounds like.

If you sold HAM radio equipment would you be okay with being told what you could sell it for?

If I was a franchised dealer and told I couldn't sell it for more than the MSRP? Yes, I'd be fine with that. Either there'd be enough profit margin built into the system to satisfy me or, if there wasn't, I'd get out of the franchise and sell something else.

See, in my opinion, the rules all change a bit when you sign that franchise agreement.

But their franchise agreement clearly doesn't say what you wish it said. Your argument is moot unless you can show me the max price clause in the franchisee's contract. You are talking about your preference, not the law as it pertains to the contracts between franchiser and franchisee in this particular case.

If that clause exists, party on.

T, I never said it did say that. What I said, and am still saying, is that if GM wanted to stop dealers from price gouging and charging premiums they could, easily, by having such a clause in the agreement.

They don't want that though, you do, that's my point. The manufacturer benefits from this, why would they want to stop it?

And you just made MY point, that GM has to share some of the blame for price gouging if they don't make any attempt to prevent it.

This is getting to be such a dumb argument that it's funny.

Hey T! Who's on first?

 

[daddy]

They don't have to accept anything, Bernie. No one is gouging, they are charging higher prices for a discretionary purchase. That's not gouging.