Reply #76: Most of it is from memory, I could do better if I had the time to do the Research

[happyslug]

But Right now I am to lazy, and given this is a latest new thread NOT worth the effort, more details can be found on this subject from me and other people on longer terms threads on this site, including the Peak Oil Forum and Public Transportation Forum.

In the 1960s and 1970s they were people in the Automotive press advocating the break up of GM under anti-trust laws. They argued GM was TO BIG and could NOT adjust to any change in the market. It now appears that those writers were right, GM could NOT adjust and is not only taking GM down but also Chrysler do to the fact Chrysler (like Ford) tried to compete with GM in its dominate market. Ford is lucky that it is bigger overseas then GM and thus has greater access to small cars and how to design small cars, but Ford was NOT exempt from the affect of GM and its almost 60 % domination of the Domestic Car market after WWII. GM should have been broken up, if GM had been broken up you would be facing 2-3 smaller companies, each better able to adapt to the Changing Market place then could GM. We may see that situation yet, looks like GM will be broken into two companies, one a viable one built around Chevrolet selling Compact to Large Cars, and the other selling Buick, Saturn, Hummer Pontiac and other not as while known companies. Cadillac may end up as part of Chevrolet (And Buick may also be with Chevrolet). This would provide Chevrolet a luxury car to go with its smaller cars and trucks. We will have to see what happens.