Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-07-2008, 04:31 PM   #101
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 13,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by 73ss454 View Post
Congrat's Art, your one of the only people in the world that buys a car, trades it in after 6 months and makes money.

You are one smart guy.

In 35 years in the car biz I've never seen that happen.
My BIL did it ONCE... with a truck they really discounted a lot and it was a popular one that people wanted... I could not belive it either... I still think he got taken by the dealer...
__________________

__________________
Texas Proud is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 07-07-2008, 04:37 PM   #102
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
73ss454's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: LaLa Land
Posts: 4,378
Art, I spent the last 20 years of my career at a Ford store and we could get all the V8 mustang GT's we wanted. The only ones that were at a premium were the Shelby's, and specialty mustangs.

You are diff. than I as I wan't to pay cash for a car as you say you wan't to put no money down. You also say that this will bury you in the car. I don't get it but if it works for you, great.

As far as not buying a new car with 30 miles on it, I don't understand that either.
Many of our cars were swaps from other dealers with mileage on them. They were also test driven so most of them had miles on them. Old wives tale you picked up somewhere.
__________________

__________________
73ss454 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 04:38 PM   #103
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 13,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art G View Post
Well at least you've gone from saying you've never heard of it in 35 years to saying it's "nearly" impossible.
Again, I'm not suggesting buying new cars to flip, as an occupation. I'm just saying I've done it a few times. More often my goal was to merely get a new car without putting any money down and not burying myself. Of course, nowhere in my original post did I suggest doing it with a new car. I used to buy and sell old corvettes and mustangs and called them my savings accounts I could drive.
BTW, at one time the Jeep Grand Wagoneer was bringing over sticker and were sold in limited supply as "The Cowboy Cadillac" thus holding their value. And Ford has always kept a shortage on their V-8 Mustang GT's intentionally to hold up their value.
If you are saying they are USED... I can belive that... another BIL has bought some from someone that had to sell quickly... drove for a year or two and sold for what he paid.... so that is kind of like 'making a profit'...
__________________
Texas Proud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 04:57 PM   #104
Recycles dryer sheets
mike hall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art G View Post
I don't believe they had that option when working the line. I'm not saying he was cheated. However, people so cavalierly discuss taking away the benefits these people earned. These people earned their benefits. It's a shame to think they might lose them while they're still alive.


The pensions that many americans are losing, were part of their total compensation for the work they performed for years. In many cases they were part of legal binding labor contracts. Then a BK judge takes them away in a ruling that takes 1 minute. IMHO it's no different that if a BK judge allowed the Mega Corp. to take back 50% of a person's 401K. That money came from compensation too. It's easy for some folks to be "cavalier" until the shoe is suddenly on their foot. Don't ask for whom the bell tolls....
__________________
mike hall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 04:59 PM   #105
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by 73ss454 View Post
Art, I spent the last 20 years of my career at a Ford store and we could get all the V8 mustang GT's we wanted. The only ones that were at a premium were the Shelby's, and specialty mustangs.

You are diff. than I as I wan't to pay cash for a car as you say you wan't to put no money down. You also say that this will bury you in the car. I don't get it but if it works for you, great.

As far as not buying a new car with 30 miles on it, I don't understand that either.
Many of our cars were swaps from other dealers with mileage on them. They were also test driven so most of them had miles on them. Old wives tale you picked up somewhere.
Sheesh, this thread has gone the wrong direction.
When I was with a Ford store, we could never get V8 Mustangs (which at that time were all GT's. I had a friend who was Fleet Manager at a Ford store until very recently and always told me the same. They could get all the four or six cylinders they wanted.
As to the mileage on cars. Yes it's true that some are dealer traded or have been sitting on the lot getting test driven. However, when they come off the truck, if they have miles, they've been re-routed. I've watched them pull cars off the line while viewing many a manufacturing plant, and been told as much from line managers.
If you want to pay cash for a car then that's up to you. However, I'd rather my money be working in the market (well, most of the time I would). I can hopefully make a heck of a lot more than the 4 or 6% I'm going to pay on that car loan, especially when I have no intention of keeping it 'til the end.
__________________
Art G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 09:46 PM   #106
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike hall View Post
The pensions that many americans are losing, were part of their total compensation for the work they performed for years. In many cases they were part of legal binding labor contracts. Then a BK judge takes them away in a ruling that takes 1 minute. IMHO it's no different that if a BK judge allowed the Mega Corp. to take back 50% of a person's 401K. That money came from compensation too. It's easy for some folks to be "cavalier" until the shoe is suddenly on their foot. Don't ask for whom the bell tolls....

these people had laws passed that allowed them to walk off the job, with job security to "strike" for better pay and benefits. of course it never crossed their minds if the company would be able to afford these pensions.
__________________
al_bundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 09:58 PM   #107
Recycles dryer sheets
mike hall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy View Post
these people had laws passed that allowed them to walk off the job, with job security to "strike" for better pay and benefits. of course it never crossed their minds if the company would be able to afford these pensions.
what is different between that , and laws protecting or governing 401K's?? Not everone with a pension they earned through years of work had a right to strike.
__________________
mike hall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 10:21 PM   #108
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,543
in a 401k the employer makes a match and no more liability

in the case of GM and the Big 3, the UAW went on strike to demand the companies assume future liabilities that must be met from future sales.
__________________
al_bundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-2008, 10:55 PM   #109
Recycles dryer sheets
mike hall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 67
OK I get it you have something against the UAW. That's OK, but what about
pensions earned but then taken away from people who were not in any labor union? The employee (whoever, in whatever industry) provided services, and the pension was part of their compensation. It doesn't matter whether it is union or not, the result is the same. Other forms of retirement,
DC plans, 401K's whatever are governed by regulations and laws that in the future could meet the same fate.
__________________
mike hall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 07:59 AM   #110
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,543
where is the money going to come from to pay these pensions? that is the whole point.
__________________
al_bundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 08:17 AM   #111
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
HFWR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lawn chair in Texas
Posts: 12,964
Oops, sorry... You were overpaid, underworked, and, well, we were just kidding about that pension... You understand, don't you?
__________________
Have Funds, Will Retire

...not doing anything of true substance...
HFWR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 08:29 AM   #112
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike hall View Post
OK I get it you have something against the UAW. That's OK, but what about
pensions earned but then taken away from people who were not in any labor union? The employee (whoever, in whatever industry) provided services, and the pension was part of their compensation. It doesn't matter whether it is union or not, the result is the same. Other forms of retirement,
DC plans, 401K's whatever are governed by regulations and laws that in the future could meet the same fate.
I understand where you are going with this, but there's a big difference. When a company provides defined contribution benefits (such as a 401K match), its future liability is essentially over. They take the money off the books as an expense for good. When a company assumes liability for a defined benefit pension for another year of service, the impact is also on *future* liabilities -- and what's worth, that "future" amount is unknown. It was that uncertainty -- combined with sometimes poor return in pension funds and people retiring earlier and living longer -- that made DB pensions (and retiree health insurance) a very dangerous promise to make.

It's already repeating itself in state and local governments.

I don't like that a company can just screw its workers by declaring bankruptcy. But then, to *some* degree the UAW and others were insisting that the goose lay too many golden eggs, and the goose's squawking about it largely fell on deaf ears. So I wouldn't say the union is getting what it deserves, but merely that it's a reminder that no amount of sky-is-the-limit future promises is any good if they are bankrupting the business that pays for them.
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 08:59 AM   #113
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 57
I was a UAW member for 38 years before retiring. I was always concerned that they were bleeding the company, GM, for stupid things that would only slow the company down. Things such as legal benefits, extra personal paid days off, family care, elder care, womans league, minority league and on and on. It reminded me of being part of a liberal socialize government. The UAW didn't take basic economics into mind. They were worried about profit sharing without any care as to profitability. But just like the government they never listened to most of the rank and file members, who only wanted to come to work and make a living. Most members knew their futures were tied into the company making money. The union didn't.
__________________
glinka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:02 AM   #114
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
FinanceDude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 12,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art G View Post
As to the mileage on cars. Yes it's true that some are dealer traded or have been sitting on the lot getting test driven. However, when they come off the truck, if they have miles, they've been re-routed. I've watched them pull cars off the line while viewing many a manufacturing plant, and been told as much from line managers.
Once, I had a car come off the truck with 420 miles on it. Pontiac told me it was a "test track car". I called my zone rep, and he transferred it to another dealer. Having seen how "test track cars" are treated, I wanted no part of it.............
__________________
Consult with your own advisor or representative. My thoughts should not be construed as investment advice. Past performance is no guarantee of future results (love that one).......:)


This Thread is USELESS without pics.........:)
FinanceDude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:10 AM   #115
Full time employment: Posting here.
CitricAcid's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 546
To go along with the UAW discussion and to chime in with ziggy, the defined contributions such as 401k or 403b are being preferred over time by companies for this very reason. It gives much more clarity to their expenses and allows moer transparency in the costs of benefits they hand out, and once it has been given it is off the books, unlike pensions (/annuities) that are kind of loans taken against yourself in the future, putting yourself in a bind, but also allowing yourself enough leeway to save some present money and keep good workers. I am not saying pensions are bad, quite the contrary, it's just that many employers prefer the up-front no liability defined contributions that 401k offer.

Back to the issue, if the UAW or whomever was trying to force payments onto their constituency from Detroit's future sales, without understanding or compensating for future profitability or future sales, it seems reasonable that they might lose their pension. Either that or they loseit anyway when the car companies go belly-up.
__________________
CitricAcid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:10 AM   #116
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by glinka View Post
I was a UAW member for 38 years before retiring. I was always concerned that they were bleeding the company, GM, for stupid things that would only slow the company down. Things such as legal benefits, extra personal paid days off, family care, elder care, womans league, minority league and on and on. It reminded me of being part of a liberal socialize government. The UAW didn't take basic economics into mind. They were worried about profit sharing without any care as to profitability. But just like the government they never listened to most of the rank and file members, who only wanted to come to work and make a living. Most members knew their futures were tied into the company making money. The union didn't.
IMO, it's a classic example of when labor-management relationship is seen as adversarial instead of as a symbiotic relationship. I think both the UAW and the management contributed to that adversarial feel to the relationship. And in reality, the long term success of the UAW and its rank and file could only be assured if the company is financially solvent.

One problem is that sometimes the UAW seemed to insist on sharing in the "upside" (when profits rise, our compensation rises with it) with none of the downside (we want no wage or benefits cuts when GM loses money). In other words, all of the reward with none of the risk. In a marketplace where risk and reward are joined at the hip, that's pretty hard to maintain.

I don't want this to sound like union-bashing, since management certainly made some tactical blunders (not just in labor relations but also in marketing decisions)... but IMO the writing on the wall with respect to long-term unfeasibility of DB pension plans and retiree medical was there for all to see, and both sides needed to work out a way to preserve what was already earned while considerably changing "the deal" in a way that GM wasn't continuing to add on a large amount of future unknown liabilities moving forward.
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:11 AM   #117
Full time employment: Posting here.
CitricAcid's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 546
Quote:
Originally Posted by ziggy29 View Post
IMO, it's a classic example of when labor-management relationship is seen as adversarial instead of as a symbiotic relationship. I think both the UAW and the management contributed to that adversarial feel to the relationship. And in reality, the long term success of the UAW and its rank and file could only be assured if the company is financially solvent.

One problem is that sometimes the UAW seemed to insist on sharing in the "upside" (when profits rise, our compensation rises with it) with none of the downside (we want no wage or benefits cuts when GM loses money). In other words, all of the reward with none of the risk. In a marketplace where risk and reward are joined at the hip, that's pretty hard to maintain.

I don't want this to sound like union-bashing, since management certainly made some tactical blunders (not just in labor relations but also in marketing decisions)... but IMO the writing on the wall with respect to long-term unfeasibility of DB pension plans and retiree medical was there for all to see, and both sides needed to work out a way to preserve what was already earned while considerably changing "the deal" in a way that GM wasn't continuing to add on a large amount of future unknown liabilities moving forward.
... sounds like the Massachusetts teachers union...
__________________
CitricAcid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:16 AM   #118
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by ziggy29 View Post
IMO, it's a classic example of when labor-management relationship is seen as adversarial instead of as a symbiotic relationship. I think both the UAW and the management contributed to that adversarial feel to the relationship. And in reality, the long term success of the UAW and its rank and file could only be assured if the company is financially solvent.

One problem is that sometimes the UAW seemed to insist on sharing in the "upside" (when profits rise, our compensation rises with it) with none of the downside (we want no wage or benefits cuts when GM loses money). In other words, all of the reward with none of the risk. In a marketplace where risk and reward are joined at the hip, that's pretty hard to maintain.

I don't want this to sound like union-bashing, since management certainly made some tactical blunders (not just in labor relations but also in marketing decisions)... but IMO the writing on the wall with respect to long-term unfeasibility of DB pension plans and retiree medical was there for all to see, and both sides needed to work out a way to preserve what was already earned while considerably changing "the deal" in a way that GM wasn't continuing to add on a large amount of future unknown liabilities moving forward.
Sounds a lot like major league baseball.
__________________
Art G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:24 AM   #119
Full time employment: Posting here.
CitricAcid's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 546
... union workers are known to have much higher productivity in their contract years!
__________________
CitricAcid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2008, 09:43 AM   #120
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Midpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 11,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by glinka View Post
I was a UAW member for 38 years before retiring. I was always concerned that they were bleeding the company, GM, for stupid things that would only slow the company down. Things such as legal benefits, extra personal paid days off, family care, elder care, womans league, minority league and on and on. It reminded me of being part of a liberal socialize government. The UAW didn't take basic economics into mind. They were worried about profit sharing without any care as to profitability. But just like the government they never listened to most of the rank and file members, who only wanted to come to work and make a living. Most members knew their futures were tied into the company making money. The union didn't.
I have made a career of managing union employees in a manufacturing environment. I can't begin to tell you how many times a good, honest hard working union member came to me to ask me why I couldn't protect him/her from their elected union. They went to union meetings, but sat quietly frustrated for the most part. I am sure there are exceptions but from my experience, mature unions are led by amateurs making false promises and they protect the bad actors and ignore most of the rank and file that make their existence possible. Management is not blameless to be sure, but neither are the unions. I especially liked, as another poster pointed out, the unions insistence on sharing the upside and none of the downside, whether they had anything to do with it or not. We get what we deserve, all of us...
__________________

__________________
No one agrees with other people's opinions; they merely agree with their own opinions -- expressed by somebody else. Sydney Tremayne
Retired Jun 2011 at age 57

Target AA: 60% equity funds / 35% bond funds / 5% cash
Target WR: Approx 2.5% Approx 20% SI (secure income, SS only)
Midpack is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:13 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.