My opinion, which is not an uncommon one, that big 3 cars are in general of lower quality, is offered an a possible explanation for why sales are suffering. Others have different opinions and they're entitled to them - and to buy whatever vehicle they want. The free market is a beautiful thing.
My opinion is based on my personal experiences and those of many friends, and publications like Consumer Reports. I don't appreciate big 3 vehicles because they've cost me a lot of money fixing ridiculous things that I feel were poor engineering and often appeared to be "revenue generators" for the company. I know that there are some great examples of past and present big 3 products, including some that I've owned. But in general, they have really frustrated me and for all my former brand loyalty - betrayed me.
Consumer Reports is not perfect - no statistical study is. But I can't find a more scientifically done analysis of repair frequency and using the principles of statistical sampling and reporting. They are actually doing a fairly good job.
The topic of the tread is the "business model" and while quality is part of the equation, a full business analysis probably would reveal other factors like customer satisfaction, sales practises, financing, marketing strategy, industrial relations, etc. Overall, somehow the big 3 have been unsuccessful.
Failure it innovate, "if it ain't broke..." is probably a big part of the problem. The big 3 are happy to produce the same model of vehicle for 10 or 15 years with only minor improvements. They're known for this. The current round of redesigns and discontinued models have a lot to do with competitors' designs. As an example, Honda schedules redesigns of the award winning Accord every 5 years. Even when it was the top contender in a Car and Driver shoot out - by a long shot - Honda went back to the drawing board the next year and made it even better. They didn't need to, they were the best car in the class in quality, design and performance according to several respected sources - Car and Driver being one.
360 Degree Management and Total Quality Improvement are Japanese management terms that business students in North American universities now study.
The big 3 have been focused on selling some quick-buck low end junk that they make money on repairing, and big guzzlers that they make big profits on selling. The market has changed and quality, refinement seem to outweigh quantity in more and more purchases. The perception of quality allows premium price points on foreign cars and higher resale values. Higher price points mean profits for the business. Not only are big 3 cars facing more competition in the market, they are selling vehicles at lower prices. Yes, lots of sales, but profit?
The new Malibu and Fusion look like decent cars. Time will tell. But they carry the stigma of being produced by the same companies that made Cavaliers, Corsicas, Tempo's and Granada's. Interestingly, VW's actually have some quality problems. People who've owned them (myself included) will often tell you they aren't that good. Consumer Reports agrees. But new VW's sell at a premium and people keep buying them. The perception is that it's a great car. They sell - and sell at high prices.
The bailout is only a good idea in as much as without it the massive layoffs and huge negative macroeconomic effects would hurt the whole North American economy - probably by more that the cost of the bailout. Pragmatically, it makes sense. On a microeconomic level, it doesn't.
Hard economic times are when the weak get weeded out in a free market and in this case it's the big 3. They deserve to die. Probably one or more of them should be taken over by other companies, consolidated, and made more efficient. There's too many companies building too many models in too many factories, trying to sell too many cars to people who can't afford them.
