Foreign Oil / Gas Prices / Other Fun Political Topics

[RoostKing]

Originally Posted by seth

Probably get flamed, but I think you are all missing the point of the article. The fact is very few people can afford the current fuel costs that present themselves everyday. If I was running Chrysler I would have killed any halo car and establish myself as the provider of quality, design, fun and high mileage.

The fact is as I was once told by a very, very senior marketing executive at P&G, my customer is an avg family of 4 that makes 48k. That is the target audience for Chrysler as well. They need to sell cars that people can drive for high mileage that look good.

Whether you think a car company should build fuel efficient cars has nothing to do with your political leanings and it gets a little tiring of every time someone makes a suggestion that gee, maybe we shouldn't be building 13mpg cars when we lose 2b a year.

Now with that said, I am one of those lefty, don't think we should drill offshore, card carrying aclu members. I also own a srt-10 and have two chally's on order. Don't confuse smart business with anything else.

Ill Bite. How is it smart business to stay dependent on foreign oil when we have our own resources, but because you lefties refuse to use it, we continue to directy fund corrupt politicians the world over, including our own (Dem and Repub)

Why cant a company build both? Why does it have to be one or the other. Build what sells, that is smart business, not build what you think should sell.

And Im not even going to get into the ACLU thing, but your credibility is blown right there. Well that and the Hypocricy of your post.

*****Disclaimer: All points in the above post are of the author and in no way represent the views of management at ChallengerTalk.com.*****

Thank you for your patronage

[seth]

Actually, I do think the Viper past Gen 1 was a waste of r&d dollars. Chrysler has always been known as the best design shop, but one of the worst in quality. Keep in mind no one forecasted oil at its existing price.

The prius is not a halo car, but it gets people in the showroom. People are excited about the volt. What is Chrysler's plan?


Now in reference to your short sighted comments about foreigners. Can you name the country that we get the most oil from? Those damm Canadians. Darn donut eating, beer drinking bastards.

Before you run on about foreign oil, you need to become more familiar with how energy is produced. Just like oil sands don't make sense with oil below $50, off shore may actually require more energy to refine and ship then actually creates.

The problem is not production. The problem is refining. Production is at a 5 year high, refining is at a 30 year constant. The first US refinery just got approved in South Dakota in 30 YEARS. That has nothing to do with political views, but it takes 10 years at least to start to begin to get a ROI on a refinery. Thats a very long-term return that most businesses don't want to take on.

[3H4ME]

Originally Posted by seth

Now in reference to your short sighted comments about foreigners. Can you name the country that we get the most oil from? Those damm Canadians. Darn donut eating, beer drinking bastards.

Before you run on about foreign oil, you need to become more familiar with how energy is produced. Just like oil sands don't make sense with oil below $50, off shore may actually require more energy to refine and ship then actually creates.

Yeah, I'm one of those foreigners. We're certainly well known as beer drinkers, but the doughnuts?
I'm also in the middle of the Atlantic, pumping oil out of the ocean, and it seems to paying well.
I also have worked in the Oil Sands in 1980, when oil was well below $50. dollars, and a considerable profit was being made.
Roostking :As for the U.S. using their own resources, I think you'd find, that although it is somewhat being horded, there is not enough to be self sufficient, and the U.S. would be in serious trouble without foreign oil. ( BTW; IMO; I also believe the rest of the world would be in trouble without the U.S./ period !)
Seth : I think you need to wake up to the reality of the amount of oil being produced throughout the world from offshore sources, and consider the current state we are in, and where the entire world would be without this huge offshore supply (referencing your earlier post.) You seem to be very adept at telling other people what to consider without having thought it through yourself.
I do however appreciate the Canadian humour, because we & the U.S., are much closer than most countries, more like real good neighbours.

It's kind of fun that offshore oil is buying my car!!

[RoostKing]

I do agree that we will not be completely self-sufficient, but we should be doing something. Instead, we have people, even members of this board, who worry about owls and mice more than people in this country and its just sad.

i was talking to a guy I work with last night and he believes gas should be $10 a gallon. It didn't matter that this would harm the economy, hurt the working class, and assist in our country falling farther behind. It only mattered because it would "help the environment". This is how the left "thinks" from the ivory towers they live in.

[3H4ME]

Originally Posted by RoostKing

I do agree that we will not be completely self-sufficient, but we should be doing something. Instead, we have people, even members of this board, who worry about owls and mice more than people in this country and its just sad.

i was talking to a guy I work with last night and he believes gas should be $10 a gallon. It didn't matter that this would harm the economy, hurt the working class, and assist in our country falling farther behind. It only mattered because it would "help the environment". This is how the left "thinks" from the ivory towers they live in.

Exactly right !!

[seth]

Last time I checked the evangelical movement in the US wasn't exactly considered models of liberalism, yet, every single major church believes that saving the environment is god's work and vitally important.

Not against off-shore drilling, what I am is against people who don't know what they are talking about complaining about foreigners because they listen to other people talk instead of becoming informed themselves.

BTW--- I am also against recycling, wastes more then it saves.

Now back to the topic at hand. Why was the writer wrong for saying chrysler is introducing a great product at the wrong time? Reminds me of the last guy to build a buggy whip, make you a bet it was a hell of a whip.

[3H4ME]

Originally Posted by seth

Last time I checked the evangelical movement in the US wasn't exactly considered models of liberalism, yet, every single major church believes that saving the environment is god's work and vitally important.

Not against off-shore drilling, what I am is against people who don't know what they are talking about complaining about foreigners because they listen to other people talk instead of becoming informed themselves.

BTW--- I am also against recycling, wastes more then it saves.

Now back to the topic at hand. Why was the writer wrong for saying chrysler is introducing a great product at the wrong time? Reminds me of the last guy to build a buggy whip, make you a bet it was a hell of a whip.

Now those statements I agree with// especially recycling/ I think it's astronomical the wasted hot water (oil burned) to rinse out milk cartons, so they can be put in blue garbage bags (petr. prod.), so the recycle garbage trucks (gas?) can make a special trip to collect them // nevermind what the recycling procedure chews up .......... it could go on and on......
BTW, I didn't condem the writer of the original piece

[seth]

Don't forget the wast of building the plants. Sort of like a prius, costs more energy to produce then a h3 over its lifetime.

[Hfd79]

Originally Posted by seth

Probably get flamed, but I think you are all missing the point of the article. The fact is very few people can afford the current fuel costs that present themselves everyday. If I was running Chrysler I would have killed any halo car and establish myself as the provider of quality, design, fun and high mileage.

The fact is as I was once told by a very, very senior marketing executive at P&G, my customer is an avg family of 4 that makes 48k. That is the target audience for Chrysler as well. They need to sell cars that people can drive for high mileage that look good.

Whether you think a car company should build fuel efficient cars has nothing to do with your political leanings and it gets a little tiring of every time someone makes a suggestion that gee, maybe we shouldn't be building 13mpg cars when we lose 2b a year.

Now with that said, I am one of those lefty, don't think we should drill offshore, card carrying aclu members. I also own a srt-10 and have two chally's on order. Don't confuse smart business with anything else.

The only thing factual about this article is that Chrysler could not have foreseen the dramatic increase in gas prices. The author is engaging in pure speculation that "Nardelli and company" likely regret going forward with the Challenger. The decision to move from concept to production was based on very strong and positive consumer response. Early sales indicate that the interest is still high. No, Chrysler will not survive based solely on sales of the Challenger, but neither will Mercedes on sales of the SL55, S500 and S600 or BMW on sales of its 6 and 7 series. Nonetheless all of these cars are viewed as an important mix of their respective product lines.
Chrysler will make good money on the SRT, but will rely on the R/T and increasingly the SE for volume. I predict the full Challenger line will be one of the largest selling car lines Chrysler/Dodge has had in a long time. And, as one other poster said, the Challenger will undoubtedly increase customer traffic at dealerships where they can see cars that they had not previously considered, i.e. smart business.
The two next to last sentences in your post pretty much sum up the characteristics of the far left. They are hypocritical, arrogant and have the view that "we know what's best for all you common people." Hypocritical: We shouldn't drill additional offshore or ANWR oil reserves, thus insuring continuing high and increasing fuel prices, but it's OK if I own a SRT-10 and have two Chally's on order; Of course you think this is OK because obviously you can both afford the cars and the gas to go in them. But, heaven forbid if the U.S. does anything to cut fuel prices so a larger segment of the population can also enjoy these cars. Arrogant: the left knows what's best for all you people; there should be no additional drilling and gas prices should continue to increase so you will be forced into "green," non-descript, econo-boxes...of course the left is just looking out for all you unsophisticated commoners.
I agree that additional off-shore drilling and ANWR drilling will not end the dependence of the U.S. on foreign source oil, but it will reduce the dependency. As for the left's argument that "it will take ten years to realize any benefit from additional drilling," that's just silly. If you wait another year from now it will be eleven years, then fifteen, then twenty and ultimately never. That's smart, let's never use those oil reserves or wait until we find ourselves in a crisis.
In addition to my belief that the U.S. should engage in as much oil exploration and production as possible, I also believe that efforts to develop alternative energy sources such as solar, wind, hybrid, flex-fuel and bio-diesel should be accelerated.
With all of this said, I am right of center, believe the government should stop adopting policies that restrict the ability of all persons to make decisions for themselves, despise the ACLU and have a Challenger SRT on order.

[RoostKing]

The two next to last sentences in your post pretty much sum up the characteristics of the far left. They are hypocritical, arrogant and have the view that "we know what's best for all you common people." Hypocritical: We shouldn't drill additional offshore or ANWR oil reserves, thus insuring continuing high and increasing fuel prices, but it's OK if I own a SRT-10 and have two Chally's on order; Of course you think this is OK because obviously you can both afford the cars and the gas to go in them. But, heaven forbid if the U.S. does anything to cut fuel prices so a larger segment of the population can also enjoy these cars. Arrogant: the left knows what's best for all you people; there should be no additional drilling and gas prices should continue to increase so you will be forced into "green," non-descript, econo-boxes...of course the left is just looking out for all you unsophisticated commoners.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought his post reeked of arrogance and a "do as I say, not as I do" attitude.