backtop


Print 108 comment(s) - last by jconan.. on Jun 17 at 9:38 PM

The Chinese plan to increase the brand's international presence

DailyTech reported yesterday on GM's announcement that it had found a buyer for the Hummer brand of heavy utility vehicles.  The mystery buyer promised to take on the brand and help expand its international presence.  In the process it saved a number of jobs at Hummer plants and helped GM complete a major step toward moving out of bankruptcy.

Now the identity of the mystery buyer has been revealed.  Sichuan Tengzhong Heavy Industrial Machinery Company Ltd., a Chinese industrial firm, will be purchasing the brand and attempting to revive it.

States Yang Yi, chief executive of Tengzhong, "We plan to ... allow Hummer to innovate and grow in exciting new ways under the leadership and continuity of its current management team."

He did, however, hint at changes stating that the deal "will allow Hummer to better meet demand for new products such as more fuel-efficient vehicles in the U.S."

The companies hope to have the deal finalized by September.  The deal does not concern the military Hummer technology owned by defense contractor AM General, which licensed the brand name to GM for civilian vehicle purposes.  AM General will now, in turn, license the name to Sichuan Tengzhong, which will continue the civilian Hummer development.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Sad.
By invidious on 6/3/2009 9:39:08 AM , Rating: 5
This is about the dumbest thing I have ever read. I would say that you should list some reason for your rediculous conclusion but I am sure they would be equally illogical.


RE: Sad.
By mcnabney on 6/3/2009 10:20:10 PM , Rating: 1
Actually anyone in business will tell you this.

Our companies have to compete against others that do not have to pay any health benefits. If the US follows the Canadian model and switches to single-payer all of the US companies will lose one of their biggest and most rapidly explanding costs.


RE: Sad.
By geekfool on 6/4/2009 5:40:05 AM , Rating: 2
I'd say that asserting that one '-ism' is better than another '-ism' is always foolish. There is no single paradigm that handles every possible case optimally, and a successful approach will blend ideas from multiple different philosophies as the situation warrants in order to reach the best possible result. Getting bogged down in the semantics of whether a certain approach should be labeled as "capitalism" or "socialism" or some other kind of thing or suggesting that it is necessary to switch completely to a new '-ism' may make for an interesting debate, but from a practical standpoint it's useless.

Just do whatever makes the most sense, and stop worrying about whether or not it should be labeled '-ism1' or '-ism2'. The label is just that, a label, and it really makes no difference in the real world.


RE: Sad.
By SleepyGreg on 6/4/2009 8:16:09 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly. Before too long the ownership of companies will be so globally interwoven that you won't be able to claim anything is of a specific country with any certainty anyway. I'd imagine Chinese Hummers is a hard one to swallow for the more patriotic amongst us though.


"This is from the DailyTech.com. It's a science website." -- Rush Limbaugh














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki