 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Japher
|
 |
Ook! Ook! Ack! Ack! Ack!
Jun 2002
time: 05:24
|
|
quote:
Here's an assignment to show you what would be helpful, more helpful than blanket insults: I made a comment earlier about GM's labor costs being $74/hour. Explain to us, using Communist financial theory (if such a thing exists), how that isn't enough and how you expect GM to continue paying it, while supporting new car development for an ever-changing market, increased debt carrying costs, and, of course, your basic COGS - after all, you need steel, iron, copper, electronics, upholstery, stamping dies, welding machines, thousands of miles of conveyor belts, and thousands and thousands of additional items in order to build a car, and all that stuff has to be paid for.
To give you an idea how how much material is needed to build cars, GM's COGS for their worldwide automotive divisions, less direct labor costs, was $138 billion ($161b in gross sales, COGS of $159.5, worldwide direct labor costs of $21.5).
|
$74/hour? That's some overhead... Didn't that sink United Airlines as well; paying more than anyone else instead of sticking with the times...?
I think American companies that don't adopt Japanesse statistical approach to manufacturing will suffer. Granted most car companies have gone the way of Lean manufacturing, appling Toyata type principles to their manufacturing lines (Kaizan, 5S, poke-a-yoke, etc.) they are decades behind their competition. They need to improve on these principles and not just follow. The followers will just continue to fall behind until they are so far gone, they end up in this type of predicament.
Also, IMO, I think many companies who apply Lean and Six Sigma to their manufacturing lines do so in error, or without a full sight on their process and can, inevitablly, lead to inefficiencies instead of improvements. I have heard people complain about these approaches saying that they create more paper work, or slow the process down, in those cases those who have implimented the system have failed.
In short; GM fail behind because they were unable to improve their manufacturing process to a level of their competition even though they did the same thing... Sometimes it is not IF you do something or even HOW you do it, but WHY you do it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kidicious
|
 |
Diety of Kidiverse
Mar 2003
time: 21:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JohnT
Here's an assignment to show you what would be helpful, more helpful than blanket insults: I made a comment earlier about GM's labor costs being $74/hour. Explain to us, using Communist financial theory (if such a thing exists), how that isn't enough and how you expect GM to continue paying it, while supporting new car development for an ever-changing market, increased debt carrying costs, and, of course, your basic COGS - after all, you need steel, iron, copper, electronics, upholstery, stamping dies, welding machines, thousands of miles of conveyor belts, and thousands and thousands of additional items in order to build a car, and all that stuff has to be paid for.
To give you an idea how how much material is needed to build cars, GM's COGS for their worldwide automotive divisions, less direct labor costs, was $138 billion ($161b in gross sales, COGS of $159.5, worldwide direct labor costs of $21.5).
Please, we're fascinated in how you'd fix this. |
Nationalize. Don't give the shareholders or creditors a dime for it.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24.
Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-05-2005 21:04
|