1st Imports Now This..............

[AFD256]

1st it was the story about GM importing from China which makes me sick. Now did you all see the way it told each dealership it closing it's affiliation with it?! Though a letter?!?! Have some class and respect for the people that MADE you. Some of these dealerships have been with GM for decades. So the government bailed out GM corp and they repay the American dealers by closing their business? How low can GM go? Wait!, make sure thay still get bonuses thought because they are doing a GREAT job running their end.

I hate to say it but I think this put the nail in the coffin for me as to probably not buy a GM product again. They obviously do not care about the American worker or business owner. How they treat the loyal GM dealers it is disgraceful

 

 

Oh yeah GM- It's great you are going to take AMERICAN tax payer money, our money,and send it to CHINA, a##holes

[ryan_hermanutz]

Yep it sucks but they are getting rid of the deadweight dealers. It's not GM's fault that some of these dealerships are not selling but a handful of cars each year. They are doing what they need to do to keep afloat. Sorry to hear that you won't be purchasing another GM product, but if them ending dealership contracts is the reason then so be it I guess, and hopefully your next vehicle is a quality vehicle as a GM is.

[VMax2007]

Yep it sucks but they are getting rid of the deadweight dealers. It's not GM's fault that some of these dealerships are not selling but a handful of cars each year. They are doing what they need to do to keep afloat. Sorry to hear that you won't be purchasing another GM product, but if them ending dealership contracts is the reason then so be it I guess, and hopefully your next vehicle is a quality vehicle as a GM is.

 

 

+1

 

And if you avoid an auto mfr due to them outsourcing to China, I suggest you start looking for a horse or invest in a nice pair of walking shoes.

[asilverblazer]

Good luck finding shoes made in america.

[Nick The Great]

I'm upset by all this news, but I'm not going to put the cart in front of the horse.

 

I don't really understand why GM (and Chrysler) are closing dealers down. Does GM have to pay a dealer? Do they have to supply materials, training, etc? Is that where the cost savings come in?

 

Leave it to the gov't to rescue a company by making it harder to purchase and service a vehicle.

 

I think it's time to purchase that 1970 Corvette, get a 1980 Silverado, and not buy another vehicle again!

[ryan_hermanutz]

I'm upset by all this news, but I'm not going to put the cart in front of the horse.

 

I don't really understand why GM (and Chrysler) are closing dealers down. Does GM have to pay a dealer? Do they have to supply materials, training, etc? Is that where the cost savings come in?

 

Leave it to the gov't to rescue a company by making it harder to purchase and service a vehicle.

 

I think it's time to purchase that 1970 Corvette, get a 1980 Silverado, and not buy another vehicle again!

 

The reason that the dealerships contracts are not being renewed, and please do understand that the contracts are not being renewed not the corporations actually telling them that they can no longer sell cars, is that the market is over saturated with dealers. For example I have 25 Chevrolet dealer, 12 combined GMC, Pontiac and Buick dealers, 9 GMC dealers, 1 Pontiac dealer, 1 Buick dealer, Cadillac dealers, and 3 Hummer dealers all within 25 miles.

[Nick The Great]

I'm upset by all this news, but I'm not going to put the cart in front of the horse.

 

I don't really understand why GM (and Chrysler) are closing dealers down. Does GM have to pay a dealer? Do they have to supply materials, training, etc? Is that where the cost savings come in?

 

Leave it to the gov't to rescue a company by making it harder to purchase and service a vehicle.

 

I think it's time to purchase that 1970 Corvette, get a 1980 Silverado, and not buy another vehicle again!

 

The reason that the dealerships contracts are not being renewed, and please do understand that the contracts are not being renewed not the corporations actually telling them that they can no longer sell cars, is that the market is over saturated with dealers. For example I have 25 Chevrolet dealer, 12 combined GMC, Pontiac and Buick dealers, 9 GMC dealers, 1 Pontiac dealer, 1 Buick dealer, Cadillac dealers, and 3 Hummer dealers all within 25 miles.

 

 

 

 

I see the point about oversaturation. But why would GM care if Des Moines would have 500 Chevy dealers within a 5 miles radius?

[ryan_hermanutz]

I'm upset by all this news, but I'm not going to put the cart in front of the horse.

 

I don't really understand why GM (and Chrysler) are closing dealers down. Does GM have to pay a dealer? Do they have to supply materials, training, etc? Is that where the cost savings come in?

 

Leave it to the gov't to rescue a company by making it harder to purchase and service a vehicle.

 

I think it's time to purchase that 1970 Corvette, get a 1980 Silverado, and not buy another vehicle again!

 

The reason that the dealerships contracts are not being renewed, and please do understand that the contracts are not being renewed not the corporations actually telling them that they can no longer sell cars, is that the market is over saturated with dealers. For example I have 25 Chevrolet dealer, 12 combined GMC, Pontiac and Buick dealers, 9 GMC dealers, 1 Pontiac dealer, 1 Buick dealer, Cadillac dealers, and 3 Hummer dealers all within 25 miles.

 

 

 

 

I see the point about oversaturation. But why would GM care if Des Moines would have 500 Chevy dealers within a 5 miles radius?

 

 

Because then it comes down to what dealership can sell the products for the cheapest price and not the selling price that GM has already come up with. Here is another example, I bought my truck in May 08, it is a 08 Silverado extended cab standard bed 4x4 LT1, not the most luxurious model, but we paid $21,500 and out the door with financing TTL, extra crap for $24,980 and the sticker price was $33k. Still to this day I have not been able to find a like model for the same price or cheaper, unless it’s a 2wd W/T. I won on this deal big time, but if there weren’t so many other dealers in the area they would not have been willing to go so low on the price.

[Nick The Great]

I'm upset by all this news, but I'm not going to put the cart in front of the horse.

 

I don't really understand why GM (and Chrysler) are closing dealers down. Does GM have to pay a dealer? Do they have to supply materials, training, etc? Is that where the cost savings come in?

 

Leave it to the gov't to rescue a company by making it harder to purchase and service a vehicle.

 

I think it's time to purchase that 1970 Corvette, get a 1980 Silverado, and not buy another vehicle again!

 

The reason that the dealerships contracts are not being renewed, and please do understand that the contracts are not being renewed not the corporations actually telling them that they can no longer sell cars, is that the market is over saturated with dealers. For example I have 25 Chevrolet dealer, 12 combined GMC, Pontiac and Buick dealers, 9 GMC dealers, 1 Pontiac dealer, 1 Buick dealer, Cadillac dealers, and 3 Hummer dealers all within 25 miles.

 

 

 

 

I see the point about oversaturation. But why would GM care if Des Moines would have 500 Chevy dealers within a 5 miles radius?

 

 

Because then it comes down to what dealership can sell the products for the cheapest price and not the selling price that GM has already come up with. Here is another example, I bought my truck in May 08, it is a 08 Silverado extended cab standard bed 4x4 LT1, not the most luxurious model, but we paid $21,500 and out the door with financing TTL, extra crap for $24,980 and the sticker price was $33k. Still to this day I have not been able to find a like model for the same price or cheaper, unless it's a 2wd W/T. I won on this deal big time, but if there weren't so many other dealers in the area they would not have been willing to go so low on the price.

 

 

 

 

I see. I always figured that GM sold the vehicles to the dealer at a certain cost. It was then up to the dealer to decide the price from the amount of profit he was willing to take.

 

Then it wouldn't matter to GM what price each dealer set, because they already had their $$. But that might be too much liability for them; they could get skunked if a dealer went belly up.

 

Thanks.

[ryan_hermanutz]

I'm upset by all this news, but I'm not going to put the cart in front of the horse.

 

I don't really understand why GM (and Chrysler) are closing dealers down. Does GM have to pay a dealer? Do they have to supply materials, training, etc? Is that where the cost savings come in?

 

Leave it to the gov't to rescue a company by making it harder to purchase and service a vehicle.

 

I think it's time to purchase that 1970 Corvette, get a 1980 Silverado, and not buy another vehicle again!

 

The reason that the dealerships contracts are not being renewed, and please do understand that the contracts are not being renewed not the corporations actually telling them that they can no longer sell cars, is that the market is over saturated with dealers. For example I have 25 Chevrolet dealer, 12 combined GMC, Pontiac and Buick dealers, 9 GMC dealers, 1 Pontiac dealer, 1 Buick dealer, Cadillac dealers, and 3 Hummer dealers all within 25 miles.

 

 

 

 

I see the point about oversaturation. But why would GM care if Des Moines would have 500 Chevy dealers within a 5 miles radius?

 

 

Because then it comes down to what dealership can sell the products for the cheapest price and not the selling price that GM has already come up with. Here is another example, I bought my truck in May 08, it is a 08 Silverado extended cab standard bed 4x4 LT1, not the most luxurious model, but we paid $21,500 and out the door with financing TTL, extra crap for $24,980 and the sticker price was $33k. Still to this day I have not been able to find a like model for the same price or cheaper, unless it's a 2wd W/T. I won on this deal big time, but if there weren't so many other dealers in the area they would not have been willing to go so low on the price.

 

 

 

 

I see. I always figured that GM sold the vehicles to the dealer at a certain cost. It was then up to the dealer to decide the price from the amount of profit he was willing to take.

 

Then it wouldn't matter to GM what price each dealer set, because they already had their $$. But that might be too much liability for them; they could get skunked if a dealer went belly up.

 

Thanks.

 

 

 

I'm not sure how that all works to be honest, but I would imagine that the dealer would make damn sure that any cut in price wouldn't affect them much if at all.

[bigdogxx]

TTAC’s Best and Brightest spent some time this weekend examining the question of whether or not Chrysler and GM needed to terminate nearly 2000 dealers between them, both pro and con. We didn’t look at WHICH dealers got the axe, for two reasons. First, despite receiving nearasdammit $20 billion in taxpayer money (so far), GM has steadfastly refused to release a list of the 1100 dealers emailed their walking papers. The Huffington Post blog (of all people) has a partial tally, but GM ain’t gonna spill. Which, if you think about it, protects car dealers at the expense of taxpayers, who might not know they’re buying a car from a dead dealer trading. Bastardos! That said, when GM’s Marketing Maven, Mark LeNeve, announced the cull, he claimed that the business brains who made the cut based their decisions largely (if not exclusively) on volume. Chrysler, in contrast, produced a list of the dispossessed—and it’s all over the show. Urban, suburban, large, small, medium; the logic underpinning their choices is an enigma wrapped in a “Dear John” email. Or is it? The internets are abuzz with the tin foil hat-wearing theory that the cuts were made based on partisan politics. Check it out . . .

 

 

After receiving a tip about the possibility of political considerations affecting, The Free Republic did a little test.

 

I took all dealer owners whose names appeared more than once in the list. And, of those who contributed to political campaigns, every single one had donated almost exclusively to GOP candidates. While this isn’t an exhaustive review, it does have some ominous implications if it can be verified . . .

 

Consider the partial list of Chrysler dealership owners, listed below. You’ll notice that all were opponents of Barack Obama, most through sponsorship of GOP candidates and organizations, but a handful through Barack’s Democrat rivals (Hillary Clinton and John Edwards in 2008, for example).

 

• Vernon G. Buchanan: $147,450 to GOP candidates and organizations

• Wallace D. Alley and Family: $4,500 to GOP.

• Robert Archer: $4,600 to GOP and conservative causes.

• Homer S. Higginbotham and Family: $2950 to GOP.

• James Auffenberg and Family: $28,000 to GOP; $6,000 to one Democrat candidate.

• Michael Maroone and Family: $60,000 to GOP; $8,500 to two Democrat candidates.

• Jerome Fader: $6,500 to Democrats; $2,500 to Independent Joe Lieberman.

• Stephen Fay and Family: $13,500 to GOP.

• William Numrich: $20,000 to GOP.

• Robert Carver: $10,000 to Democrats including $1,950 to Hillary Clinton, nothing to Barack Obama.

• Robert and Linda Rohrman: $24,000 to GOP.

• Frank Boucher, Jr. and Family: $18,000 to GOP, $1,000 to one Democrat candidate.

• Scott Bossier: $4,300 to GOP.

• Todd Reardon: $17,000 to GOP; $2,000 to one Democrat candidate.

• Russ Darrow and Family: $78,000 to GOP.

• Bradford Deery and Family: $24,700 to GOP.

• Charles Gabus and Family: $30,000 to GOP.

• Brian Smith: $15,500 to GOP.

• Michael Schlossman: $14,000 to GOP; $14,000 to three Democrats ($12,500 to Sen. Russ Feingold).

• Don Hill: $11,000 to GOP; $12,800 to conservative incumbent Rep. Heath Shuler.

 

Bottom line (or not):

 

I have thus far found only a single Obama donor (and a minor one at that: $200 from Jeffrey Hunter of Waco, Texas) on the closing list.

 

Even if this is a simple reflection of your average car dealer’s political leaning, there’s a lot of confusion out there amongst ex-Chrysler dealers as to why some got the chop and others didn’t. As you’d expect, as Automotive News reports, emotions are running high.

 

“I’m too stubborn to quit, and I’m too stupid to go away,” said the owner of Richard Chrysler-Jeep-Dodge in the western Chicago suburb of St. Charles. “I’m going to keep selling cars and fight this to the end.”

 

“We don’t fit the guidelines for closure,” Massarelli said. “We’re profitable, we’ve never missed a payment and we’ve done everything Chrysler has ever asked us to help them out.”

 

“Every time Chrysler said they needed us, we were there for them,” Massarelli said. “Now they won’t even return my calls.”

 

From a PR perspective, this is a channel stuffed with not good. Severed Chrysler dealers are making a fuss in Congress and federal bankruptcy court, where they’re trying to halt Judge Arthur Gonzalez’ approval (on Wednesday) of the asset sale which will create “new” Chrysler. Perhaps this is a disinformation campaign. Perhaps not. Either way, even if the fix (as in canine fertility) was in, it doesn’t look like they’re going to stop the train from leaving the station.

 

 

Just a little strange that about 99.9% of the dealers this guy has looked at so far are all non Obama supporters except for a single one donation for 200 bucks. Not exactly proof of anything, but disturbing IMO non the less with all the other news that's been going around! As the story says many are top selling dealers, even some that have spent millions at the request of Chrysler to update the facility's and then didn't even get a visit from a rep, just a letter saying sorry but your business is dead, and i believe that the dealers are still responsible for the inventory on their lot.

 

They had a guy on the radio this morning discussing this finding and the guy said just last year he completely updated his dealership to the tune of millions, and has always pulled in good numbers. He now has over 4 million of new car inventory on his lot with no rebates or incentives, no parts for warranty work and Chrysler expecting a payment from him in another month or two for that 4 million of worthless inventory.

 

It sucks but many dealers have done nothing wrong and are getting kicked to the curb without even a simple explanation of their closing.

[ryan_hermanutz]

TTAC's Best and Brightest spent some time this weekend examining the question of whether or not Chrysler and GM needed to terminate nearly 2000 dealers between them, both pro and con. We didn't look at WHICH dealers got the axe, for two reasons. First, despite receiving nearasdammit $20 billion in taxpayer money (so far), GM has steadfastly refused to release a list of the 1100 dealers emailed their walking papers. The Huffington Post blog (of all people) has a partial tally, but GM ain't gonna spill. Which, if you think about it, protects car dealers at the expense of taxpayers, who might not know they're buying a car from a dead dealer trading. Bastardos! That said, when GM's Marketing Maven, Mark LeNeve, announced the cull, he claimed that the business brains who made the cut based their decisions largely (if not exclusively) on volume. Chrysler, in contrast, produced a list of the dispossessed—and it's all over the show. Urban, suburban, large, small, medium; the logic underpinning their choices is an enigma wrapped in a "Dear John" email. Or is it? The internets are abuzz with the tin foil hat-wearing theory that the cuts were made based on partisan politics. Check it out . . .

 

 

After receiving a tip about the possibility of political considerations affecting, The Free Republic did a little test.

 

I took all dealer owners whose names appeared more than once in the list. And, of those who contributed to political campaigns, every single one had donated almost exclusively to GOP candidates. While this isn't an exhaustive review, it does have some ominous implications if it can be verified . . .

 

Consider the partial list of Chrysler dealership owners, listed below. You'll notice that all were opponents of Barack Obama, most through sponsorship of GOP candidates and organizations, but a handful through Barack's Democrat rivals (Hillary Clinton and John Edwards in 2008, for example).

 

• Vernon G. Buchanan: $147,450 to GOP candidates and organizations

• Wallace D. Alley and Family: $4,500 to GOP.

• Robert Archer: $4,600 to GOP and conservative causes.

• Homer S. Higginbotham and Family: $2950 to GOP.

• James Auffenberg and Family: $28,000 to GOP; $6,000 to one Democrat candidate.

• Michael Maroone and Family: $60,000 to GOP; $8,500 to two Democrat candidates.

• Jerome Fader: $6,500 to Democrats; $2,500 to Independent Joe Lieberman.

• Stephen Fay and Family: $13,500 to GOP.

• William Numrich: $20,000 to GOP.

• Robert Carver: $10,000 to Democrats including $1,950 to Hillary Clinton, nothing to Barack Obama.

• Robert and Linda Rohrman: $24,000 to GOP.

• Frank Boucher, Jr. and Family: $18,000 to GOP, $1,000 to one Democrat candidate.

• Scott Bossier: $4,300 to GOP.

• Todd Reardon: $17,000 to GOP; $2,000 to one Democrat candidate.

• Russ Darrow and Family: $78,000 to GOP.

• Bradford Deery and Family: $24,700 to GOP.

• Charles Gabus and Family: $30,000 to GOP.

• Brian Smith: $15,500 to GOP.

• Michael Schlossman: $14,000 to GOP; $14,000 to three Democrats ($12,500 to Sen. Russ Feingold).

• Don Hill: $11,000 to GOP; $12,800 to conservative incumbent Rep. Heath Shuler.

 

Bottom line (or not):

 

I have thus far found only a single Obama donor (and a minor one at that: $200 from Jeffrey Hunter of Waco, Texas) on the closing list.

 

Even if this is a simple reflection of your average car dealer's political leaning, there's a lot of confusion out there amongst ex-Chrysler dealers as to why some got the chop and others didn't. As you'd expect, as Automotive News reports, emotions are running high.

 

"I'm too stubborn to quit, and I'm too stupid to go away," said the owner of Richard Chrysler-Jeep-Dodge in the western Chicago suburb of St. Charles. "I'm going to keep selling cars and fight this to the end."

 

"We don't fit the guidelines for closure," Massarelli said. "We're profitable, we've never missed a payment and we've done everything Chrysler has ever asked us to help them out."

 

"Every time Chrysler said they needed us, we were there for them," Massarelli said. "Now they won't even return my calls."

 

From a PR perspective, this is a channel stuffed with not good. Severed Chrysler dealers are making a fuss in Congress and federal bankruptcy court, where they're trying to halt Judge Arthur Gonzalez' approval (on Wednesday) of the asset sale which will create "new" Chrysler. Perhaps this is a disinformation campaign. Perhaps not. Either way, even if the fix (as in canine fertility) was in, it doesn't look like they're going to stop the train from leaving the station.

 

 

Just a little strange that about 99.9% of the dealers this guy has looked at so far are all non Obama supporters except for a single one donation for 200 bucks. Not exactly proof of anything, but disturbing IMO non the less with all the other news that's been going around! As the story says many are top selling dealers, even some that have spent millions at the request of Chrysler to update the facility's and then didn't even get a visit from a rep, just a letter saying sorry but your business is dead, and i believe that the dealers are still responsible for the inventory on their lot.

 

They had a guy on the radio this morning discussing this finding and the guy said just last year he completely updated his dealership to the tune of millions, and has always pulled in good numbers. He now has over 4 million of new car inventory on his lot with no rebates or incentives, no parts for warranty work and Chrysler expecting a payment from him in another month or two for that 4 million of worthless inventory.

 

It sucks but many dealers have done nothing wrong and are getting kicked to the curb without even a simple explanation of their closing.

 

 

Are you fWOnking serious? This morning I heard on the radio that everyone who listens to that crap and believes it is going to get run over today by a 747 Jumbo Jet. Seriously take the damn aluminum foil hat off and get back to work, everyone is laughing at you now.

[bigdogxx]

TTAC's Best and Brightest spent some time this weekend examining the question of whether or not Chrysler and GM needed to terminate nearly 2000 dealers between them, both pro and con. We didn't look at WHICH dealers got the axe, for two reasons. First, despite receiving nearasdammit $20 billion in taxpayer money (so far), GM has steadfastly refused to release a list of the 1100 dealers emailed their walking papers. The Huffington Post blog (of all people) has a partial tally, but GM ain't gonna spill. Which, if you think about it, protects car dealers at the expense of taxpayers, who might not know they're buying a car from a dead dealer trading. Bastardos! That said, when GM's Marketing Maven, Mark LeNeve, announced the cull, he claimed that the business brains who made the cut based their decisions largely (if not exclusively) on volume. Chrysler, in contrast, produced a list of the dispossessed—and it's all over the show. Urban, suburban, large, small, medium; the logic underpinning their choices is an enigma wrapped in a "Dear John" email. Or is it? The internets are abuzz with the tin foil hat-wearing theory that the cuts were made based on partisan politics. Check it out . . .

 

 

After receiving a tip about the possibility of political considerations affecting, The Free Republic did a little test.

 

I took all dealer owners whose names appeared more than once in the list. And, of those who contributed to political campaigns, every single one had donated almost exclusively to GOP candidates. While this isn't an exhaustive review, it does have some ominous implications if it can be verified . . .

 

Consider the partial list of Chrysler dealership owners, listed below. You'll notice that all were opponents of Barack Obama, most through sponsorship of GOP candidates and organizations, but a handful through Barack's Democrat rivals (Hillary Clinton and John Edwards in 2008, for example).

 

• Vernon G. Buchanan: $147,450 to GOP candidates and organizations

• Wallace D. Alley and Family: $4,500 to GOP.

• Robert Archer: $4,600 to GOP and conservative causes.

• Homer S. Higginbotham and Family: $2950 to GOP.

• James Auffenberg and Family: $28,000 to GOP; $6,000 to one Democrat candidate.

• Michael Maroone and Family: $60,000 to GOP; $8,500 to two Democrat candidates.

• Jerome Fader: $6,500 to Democrats; $2,500 to Independent Joe Lieberman.

• Stephen Fay and Family: $13,500 to GOP.

• William Numrich: $20,000 to GOP.

• Robert Carver: $10,000 to Democrats including $1,950 to Hillary Clinton, nothing to Barack Obama.

• Robert and Linda Rohrman: $24,000 to GOP.

• Frank Boucher, Jr. and Family: $18,000 to GOP, $1,000 to one Democrat candidate.

• Scott Bossier: $4,300 to GOP.

• Todd Reardon: $17,000 to GOP; $2,000 to one Democrat candidate.

• Russ Darrow and Family: $78,000 to GOP.

• Bradford Deery and Family: $24,700 to GOP.

• Charles Gabus and Family: $30,000 to GOP.

• Brian Smith: $15,500 to GOP.

• Michael Schlossman: $14,000 to GOP; $14,000 to three Democrats ($12,500 to Sen. Russ Feingold).

• Don Hill: $11,000 to GOP; $12,800 to conservative incumbent Rep. Heath Shuler.

 

Bottom line (or not):

 

I have thus far found only a single Obama donor (and a minor one at that: $200 from Jeffrey Hunter of Waco, Texas) on the closing list.

 

Even if this is a simple reflection of your average car dealer's political leaning, there's a lot of confusion out there amongst ex-Chrysler dealers as to why some got the chop and others didn't. As you'd expect, as Automotive News reports, emotions are running high.

 

"I'm too stubborn to quit, and I'm too stupid to go away," said the owner of Richard Chrysler-Jeep-Dodge in the western Chicago suburb of St. Charles. "I'm going to keep selling cars and fight this to the end."

 

"We don't fit the guidelines for closure," Massarelli said. "We're profitable, we've never missed a payment and we've done everything Chrysler has ever asked us to help them out."

 

"Every time Chrysler said they needed us, we were there for them," Massarelli said. "Now they won't even return my calls."

 

From a PR perspective, this is a channel stuffed with not good. Severed Chrysler dealers are making a fuss in Congress and federal bankruptcy court, where they're trying to halt Judge Arthur Gonzalez' approval (on Wednesday) of the asset sale which will create "new" Chrysler. Perhaps this is a disinformation campaign. Perhaps not. Either way, even if the fix (as in canine fertility) was in, it doesn't look like they're going to stop the train from leaving the station.

 

 

Just a little strange that about 99.9% of the dealers this guy has looked at so far are all non Obama supporters except for a single one donation for 200 bucks. Not exactly proof of anything, but disturbing IMO non the less with all the other news that's been going around! As the story says many are top selling dealers, even some that have spent millions at the request of Chrysler to update the facility's and then didn't even get a visit from a rep, just a letter saying sorry but your business is dead, and i believe that the dealers are still responsible for the inventory on their lot.

 

They had a guy on the radio this morning discussing this finding and the guy said just last year he completely updated his dealership to the tune of millions, and has always pulled in good numbers. He now has over 4 million of new car inventory on his lot with no rebates or incentives, no parts for warranty work and Chrysler expecting a payment from him in another month or two for that 4 million of worthless inventory.

 

It sucks but many dealers have done nothing wrong and are getting kicked to the curb without even a simple explanation of their closing.

 

 

Are you fWOnking serious? This morning I heard on the radio that everyone who listens to that crap and believes it is going to get run over today by a 747 Jumbo Jet. Seriously take the damn aluminum foil hat off and get back to work, everyone is laughing at you now.

 

 

Christ can people at least read the post before jumping out with their rubbish comments, here let me highlight the part i guess your eyes choose to skip over!

[ryan_hermanutz]

TTAC's Best and Brightest spent some time this weekend examining the question of whether or not Chrysler and GM needed to terminate nearly 2000 dealers between them, both pro and con. We didn't look at WHICH dealers got the axe, for two reasons. First, despite receiving nearasdammit $20 billion in taxpayer money (so far), GM has steadfastly refused to release a list of the 1100 dealers emailed their walking papers. The Huffington Post blog (of all people) has a partial tally, but GM ain't gonna spill. Which, if you think about it, protects car dealers at the expense of taxpayers, who might not know they're buying a car from a dead dealer trading. Bastardos! That said, when GM's Marketing Maven, Mark LeNeve, announced the cull, he claimed that the business brains who made the cut based their decisions largely (if not exclusively) on volume. Chrysler, in contrast, produced a list of the dispossessed—and it's all over the show. Urban, suburban, large, small, medium; the logic underpinning their choices is an enigma wrapped in a "Dear John" email. Or is it? The internets are abuzz with the tin foil hat-wearing theory that the cuts were made based on partisan politics. Check it out . . .

 

 

After receiving a tip about the possibility of political considerations affecting, The Free Republic did a little test.

 

I took all dealer owners whose names appeared more than once in the list. And, of those who contributed to political campaigns, every single one had donated almost exclusively to GOP candidates. While this isn't an exhaustive review, it does have some ominous implications if it can be verified . . .

 

Consider the partial list of Chrysler dealership owners, listed below. You'll notice that all were opponents of Barack Obama, most through sponsorship of GOP candidates and organizations, but a handful through Barack's Democrat rivals (Hillary Clinton and John Edwards in 2008, for example).

 

• Vernon G. Buchanan: $147,450 to GOP candidates and organizations

• Wallace D. Alley and Family: $4,500 to GOP.

• Robert Archer: $4,600 to GOP and conservative causes.

• Homer S. Higginbotham and Family: $2950 to GOP.

• James Auffenberg and Family: $28,000 to GOP; $6,000 to one Democrat candidate.

• Michael Maroone and Family: $60,000 to GOP; $8,500 to two Democrat candidates.

• Jerome Fader: $6,500 to Democrats; $2,500 to Independent Joe Lieberman.

• Stephen Fay and Family: $13,500 to GOP.

• William Numrich: $20,000 to GOP.

• Robert Carver: $10,000 to Democrats including $1,950 to Hillary Clinton, nothing to Barack Obama.

• Robert and Linda Rohrman: $24,000 to GOP.

• Frank Boucher, Jr. and Family: $18,000 to GOP, $1,000 to one Democrat candidate.

• Scott Bossier: $4,300 to GOP.

• Todd Reardon: $17,000 to GOP; $2,000 to one Democrat candidate.

• Russ Darrow and Family: $78,000 to GOP.

• Bradford Deery and Family: $24,700 to GOP.

• Charles Gabus and Family: $30,000 to GOP.

• Brian Smith: $15,500 to GOP.

• Michael Schlossman: $14,000 to GOP; $14,000 to three Democrats ($12,500 to Sen. Russ Feingold).

• Don Hill: $11,000 to GOP; $12,800 to conservative incumbent Rep. Heath Shuler.

 

Bottom line (or not):

 

I have thus far found only a single Obama donor (and a minor one at that: $200 from Jeffrey Hunter of Waco, Texas) on the closing list.

 

Even if this is a simple reflection of your average car dealer's political leaning, there's a lot of confusion out there amongst ex-Chrysler dealers as to why some got the chop and others didn't. As you'd expect, as Automotive News reports, emotions are running high.

 

"I'm too stubborn to quit, and I'm too stupid to go away," said the owner of Richard Chrysler-Jeep-Dodge in the western Chicago suburb of St. Charles. "I'm going to keep selling cars and fight this to the end."

 

"We don't fit the guidelines for closure," Massarelli said. "We're profitable, we've never missed a payment and we've done everything Chrysler has ever asked us to help them out."

 

"Every time Chrysler said they needed us, we were there for them," Massarelli said. "Now they won't even return my calls."

 

From a PR perspective, this is a channel stuffed with not good. Severed Chrysler dealers are making a fuss in Congress and federal bankruptcy court, where they're trying to halt Judge Arthur Gonzalez' approval (on Wednesday) of the asset sale which will create "new" Chrysler. Perhaps this is a disinformation campaign. Perhaps not. Either way, even if the fix (as in canine fertility) was in, it doesn't look like they're going to stop the train from leaving the station.

 

 

Just a little strange that about 99.9% of the dealers this guy has looked at so far are all non Obama supporters except for a single one donation for 200 bucks. Not exactly proof of anything, but disturbing IMO non the less with all the other news that's been going around! As the story says many are top selling dealers, even some that have spent millions at the request of Chrysler to update the facility's and then didn't even get a visit from a rep, just a letter saying sorry but your business is dead, and i believe that the dealers are still responsible for the inventory on their lot.

 

They had a guy on the radio this morning discussing this finding and the guy said just last year he completely updated his dealership to the tune of millions, and has always pulled in good numbers. He now has over 4 million of new car inventory on his lot with no rebates or incentives, no parts for warranty work and Chrysler expecting a payment from him in another month or two for that 4 million of worthless inventory.

 

It sucks but many dealers have done nothing wrong and are getting kicked to the curb without even a simple explanation of their closing.

 

 

Are you fWOnking serious? This morning I heard on the radio that everyone who listens to that crap and believes it is going to get run over today by a 747 Jumbo Jet. Seriously take the damn aluminum foil hat off and get back to work, everyone is laughing at you now.

 

 

Christ can people at least read the post before jumping out with their rubbish comments, here let me highlight the part i guess your eyes choose to skip over!

 

 

Yes I did read that, and no it didn’t matter much that it was put in there. The fact is that you heard that on the radio, read it and still thought that it was new worthy enough to add to a posting about why certain dealerships are closing and why others are not. It is pure speculation that is complete and udder bull.

[P'cola Denali]

Well I really don't think GM will be here in 10 years. Obama will keep them from building SUVs/Trucks due to the green movement but as soon as gas is $2gal and the economy picks up, it will be the late 90's and early 2000's again. Everyone will start buying $60,000 SUVs again and GM will not be able to survive trying to sell eco boxes in a truck minded country. Americans like big, powerful cars. Always have, always will. We are free to have the large cars, we have plenty of room for them, so why wouldnt we buy them? Go to Europe in a Land Rover Freelander, they thinks its huge, a Range Rover is a semi to them, you cant get a Range Rover and a Mini by eachother on most roads with out running someone onto the side. A Range Rover is about the same size as TrailBlazer, the Freelander is about the same size as a Rav4 or a Escape.