Agreed - I felt that way when they were on the brink.

turning point? Towards what? I hear lutz is coming back to run opel.

BTW, hows that hummer sale going? Oh and all that cash that was going to come from saturn?

Finally. That small curze that was going to compete with the civics/corrolla's of the world?

Right, thats delayed too.

Anyone get to drive the volt yet in the extended mode. (outside of gm).

Karl, I couldn't agree more!

I have to side with opfreakx here.

I don't see much that GM has done to turn things around yet.

The biggest difference so far is the economy has stops falling and started a slow recovery.

Therefore auto sales have stopped falling and started a slow recovery.

The bailout may kept them alive but I don't really believe the creditors would have shut them down anyhow.

Karl,

Surprised by your bailout comment. The bailout was wrong on every single level.

1. Government has no business picking winners and losers. Weak companies should be allowed to die so newer, stronger, more innovative companies can thrive. There is only so much capital available and to squander it on failing companies (any failing company) is morally wrong.

2. Why are GM jobs (or any other auto jobs)a ticket to lifetime employment. If the GM bailout is "good," why stop there. Let's bailout Delco, auto dealers, oil lube places, parts stores, car washes, well, you get the idea. Is there a possible moral hazard to bailouts?

3. Secured creditors lost billions in the GM bailout. Teachers Unions, pensions and other secured creditors were not paid par for their investment because Obama deemed union jobs were more important than secured creditor's rights (as established by several hundred years of bankruptcy laws). Once again, do you see a moral hazard here?

4. GM has absolutely no hope of ever paying back the billions of dollars that were "loaned" to them by the US Government. They do not produce enough cars to ever make that possible, much less generate a profit. GM will be back for more money within five years. What would you say then? Do we give them more of our money?

5. The end never justifies the means. There is NEVER EVER any free lunch. Use whatever euphemism you like, but the bottom line is that GM should have died, deserved to die and eventually; will die anyway. So be it. That's right, fair, moral and just. We will have better cars available because of their death. That's a good thing, right?

6. I know you know all this. That is why I am surprised by your comment. As for GM turning the corner, let's see how they are doing in February or March, after the ALT-A mortgage market collapses, a Geo-political event happens (Iran/Pakistan/take your pick) and gas prices double and unemployment reaches 11%. Cash for Clunkers II anyone?

The other noteworthy reason that bailing out GM was a bad idea is that it has hurt - and is hurting - Ford. Ford has not taken bailout dollars, nor have they needed to; and they're even beginning to churn out some truly stellar products, such as the Taurus and the latest incarnation of the Mustang. Meanwhile, GM is buoyed by government dollars despite their poor business decisions. Decisions that, at a company with no lifeline, would've sent the company to its grave.

"The other noteworthy reason that bailing out GM was a bad idea is that it has hurt - and is hurting - Ford. Ford has not taken bailout dollars..."

Eidolways, are you freaking kidding me? Who asked Ford not to go for bailout money? I don't think it's true that GM's bailout is hurting Ford, but if it is, it's their own problem........

"Surprised by your bailout comment. The bailout was wrong on every single level."

It was right on every level! :-)

Karl, the only positive thing about the bailout was on keeping some jobs for the automakers. Other than that is easy to work with FREE money and clear of any debt.

How wonderful will be if somebody comes pays all my business debt and on top of that pays my home loan. At the end they tell me.... you have five years to pay back but since we know you can do it don't worry. In reality is never going to happen.

Is GM having a turning point? Yes, for the moment. But they can turn back to the old mess pretty quick.

GM is hardly in a turnaround. They're still losing market share. Any gains they are making are former Chrysler customers. There's still a huge backlash for taking taxpayer funds.

I'm on Flyer's side. Praising GM's actions is just plain wrong.

Those who critisize bailouts. Note that once industry is established it is almost impossible to create new companies in developed countries, because capital investments are measured in tens of billions and profits may be decade ahead with all the cost structure and regualtions. It is especially true for automotive industry which the most advanced and complicated industry. In other words if GM and Chrysler failed, FOrd would fail soon after and US would be left without the advanced car industry. Only new companies to fill the void would be from China. US already lost most of its industrial might. US won WWII because had most effective manufacturing system. If war happens again US most likely will loose the war because manufacturing systems in Asian contries are superior to US.

Letting Economic Darwinism rule is just too simplistic a solution. If GM and Chrysler were to disappear, the impact and domino effect would be enormous. You could pretty much write off Michigan as a place to live.