GM must get real about its future (good read) - General Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
GM must get real about its future (good read)
Saturday, March 26, 2005 1:16 PM
I found this to be a very interesting article. and in my opinion i think GM is playing spin doctor somewhere. i think the company is in very BIG trouble but is too proud and dumb to admit it. either way this article gives great advise i doubt highly GM will take....becuase IT MAKES SENSE!
but anyways it's a good read, i found it on MSN.


An auto industry consultant known for his candor says the best hope for the ailing General is to get smaller -- and get smarter. Here's his take on how to fix GM.

By Peter M. DeLorenzo

Peter M. DeLorenzo is founder and publisher of Autoextremist.com.

Watching GM's stock plunge last week to its largest single-day share loss since the stock market crash in 1987 sent chills through the Motor City, the industry and the financial community. The loss was triggered by GM's announcement that it expected a loss of almost $1 billion -- that's with a "b" -- over the last six months of the year, after suggesting less than three months earlier that things would be tough in 2005, but not in the dire category.

Well, folks, this is seriously dire, and Wall Street reacted accordingly, coming down hard on GM. Danny Hakim, reporting for The New York Times last Thursday morning, said that "The losses reflected an increasingly harsh reality: that General Motors (GM, news, msgs), which three years ago was thought to be the healthiest of the Big Three automakers in Detroit, is now considered the weakest, primarily because it is not selling enough cars at home. The losses also raised questions about the strategy of the company's chairman and chief executive, Rick Wagoner." That's as dire of an assessment as you're likely to hear from anyone about the situation, and now GM heads to the New York Auto Show under the gun and under the microscope.

The fact that GM is in such dire straits right now is shocking to many, but it's not surprising to me. GM has been playing Russian roulette with its incentive-driven marketing strategy for almost 3 1/2 years now. What was a good and patriotic campaign in the beginning to "Keep America Rolling" after the horrific events of 9/11 turned into an obsessive-compulsive addiction that crippled GM's ability to think rationally about the North American market. GM mistook a short-term marketing boost/gambit for a long-term marketing strategy, and they talked themselves into believing that they could actually take away market share from their competitors with it.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More from MSN Money Visit Autoextremist.com
GM may kill off Buick or Pontiac
GM's woes are just beginning
How GM may help deflate the housing bubble
GM's best offense may be defense
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It worked for a while, but it also began a debilitating scenario in which GM slowly but surely cheapened their brands across the board, creating a "fire sale" mentality with the public that they're now finding virtually impossible to overcome. Except for the few instances of hit new products, GM has conditioned consumers to consider its product portfolio only when they're in search of a deal. And now that GM is bringing vehicles to market that are actually worth owning on their own merits for a change, they're finding that a growing number of the American driving public couldn't care less.

In short, GM has put itself in a box -- and they're running out of time to put things right.

What was good for GM
You have to remember that GM was once the New York Yankees of the automobile business. They didn't just win a lot of championships -- they won the championship every year. At the peak of its powers, GM dominated the U.S. automobile industry, consistently capturing more than 40% of the market (think about that figure for a moment in context with today's market, with GM struggling mightily to even maintain a 25% share).

But the problem for GM is that it never moved on from reliving its glory days, and while they were reveling in their legacy, the automotive world irrevocably changed around them. GM's arrogant mindset blinded them to the rapidly changing realities of the North American automotive market.

GM was slow to understand the real impact of the Japanese inroads into this market until it was way too late -- and by then Chevrolet's position in the market as "America's Car" was totally eclipsed by Toyota. GM refused to admit that the luxury car market was fundamentally altered by the German manufacturers -- until its Cadillac division was on the ropes. And GM was painfully slow to realize that the quality/reliability component had become the basic price of entry in the new world order of the auto business.

How to right this sinking ship
After 5 1/2 years of documenting GM's problems in Autoextremist.com the time has come for me to delineate just what GM must do to survive in the future. And survive is the operative word here, because right now GM is in freefall in the U.S. market, and unless there's a dramatic restructuring of the organization -- GM will become a takeover target and will cease to exist as the company we know today.

Here are my key points for righting the listing GM ship:


> GM must learn to make money while controlling a 20% share of the market.
GM used to be the smug overdog back in the glory days when it controlled over 40% of the market. The problem is that they retained a large measure of their arrogance when their market share fell through the 30s and into the upper 20s. There was even quaint talk a few years ago of regaining the 30% plateau, with Rick Wagoner sporting a "30" lapel pin as a reminder to his troops of his stated goal. Now GM controls a very shaky 25% share of the North American market and that by no means is a solid number. Factor in fleet sales, and the "real" GM market share number is probably closer to 22.5%. And with the imports continuing to make inroads at a terrifying rate, it is not out of line to think that a more rational number for GM to target for its North American operations is a 20% share. If GM restructured its operations based on this assumption, it would be a dramatically different company, but it would have a much better chance of being a competitive factor again.


> At 20%, GM right now has too many models, too many divisions, too many nameplates and too many dealers.
GM is simply dreaming by continuing to prop up its hoary divisional structure and its bloated dealer body. GM cannot continue acting that the good times will return. Instead, GM must come to the stark realization that they must get smaller to regain their footing in this market, and they must understand that market share increases can slowly grow out of a leaner, meaner superstructure.

For the near term, GM gaining market share is highly unlikely, but a more attractive mix of fewer, more profitable, class-leading products would go along way toward stabilizing GM's fortunes. I am not going to get into specifying all of the models, nameplates and divisions that must be reduced, cut or altered, but just one small example of how GM could act can be demonstrated with the Buick LaCrosse. Some might never miss it. But for the short term, with GM needing to act and act fast with immediate model reductions, the LaCrosse could be reduced from three models to one. I would eliminate the base CX and the middle CXL models, and keep the top-level CXS. Then, I'd cut the price. A real-world price for the CXS shouldn't exceed $26,000 in its present configuration, and at that figure it would be a strong value contender in its segment. Now, take this approach while evaluating GM's entire current and future product programs, and you can just imagine the more focused portfolio you'd end up with.

But if GM is going to take an ax to its product portfolio, then its dealers have to get real about their prospects too. GM cannot conduct itself as an "all things to all people" company at the divisional level any longer. The days when one division could boast a full complement of offerings ended a long time ago, but unfortunately GM and its dealers didn't get that memo until just recently.

You only have to look at the fiasco masquerading as GM's latest minivan entry. How could one company take three years to develop a fourth-place minivan -- and then knowingly distribute it to four of its divisions? Isn't one mediocre minivan plenty? What's wrong with this picture? Did Pontiac dealers need a minivan? Confined within their own little myopic world and selling in a vacuum, yes, you could squint and say that on a good day and with the planets aligned just right, that Pontiac dealers needed a minivan.

But if you step back and take a good look at the competitive set of minivans in the market, and consider GM's hopelessly also-ran position in that particular segment of the market, and also take into account Pontiac's divisional brand identity (at least what's left of it anyway), there is no way in hell that Pontiac should be selling a minivan.

Dealers better ask themselves this basic question: Do they want to have fewer, class-leading products to sell, or do they want to continue to ride the incentive train to oblivion?


> Fewer models, fewer nameplates and the biggest automotive advertising budget in the world -- what's not to like?
Right now, GM is flailing around trying to adequately promote countless nameplates, while still hammering home the latest GM sales event message -- and that just isn't going to cut it in this market. Cutting GM's swollen product portfolio back would have the immediate benefit of increasing its media throw-weight against the nameplates it retains. More advertising and promotional money for fewer nameplates? Sounds deceptively simple, and remarkably, it is.


> Rick Wagoner is not the problem.
The people clamoring for CEO Rick Wagoner's head at this point are seriously misguided. The last thing GM needs in the midst of this burgeoning chaos is a regime change, because it would accomplish exactly zero. Make no mistake, Wagoner is a very bright guy, and he has some very capable hands on deck, but realistically, he's under the gun. His measured-paced plan to get GM back on the right track over the last four years has become instantly obsolete -- because they are out of time. The cuts and the restructuring have to come now, not 18 months from now or six months from now, and Wagoner and his team are seriously up against it.

On Tuesday, Wagoner stepped up and bought 50,000 shares of GM stock to the tune of $1.5 million. By doing that, his message is clear: He believes in himself and his team, and he's not going anywhere. Confidence is good in a CEO, but now Rick has to deliver GM from disaster, and the clock is ticking.


> It's the product, stupid. If there is one thing I have been consistent about since Day One of this Web site, it's that The Product is, was and always will be King. For a manufacturer to conduct itself with any less of an understanding of this fact is suicide, or at least a ticket to a very bad time, as GM is discovering right now.

For one thing, they're worrying about too many models, nameplates and divisions. They're still operating as if they control a huge chunk of the market and can get away with propping up their now obsolete divisional structure. But GM forgets that out in the real world, the customer doesn't care about GM's latest interpretation of the Sloan model (in which one moves up from a Chevy to a Pontiac to a Buick, etc.). They don't care about segment differentiation or GM's "ladder" view of their product portfolio. The customer just cares about being able to buy good cars and trucks with bulletproof quality and reliability, excellent value and a modicum of style.

GM's new products aren't flying off of the lots because they didn't go far enough with them. In some cases, they're too pricey, and in most cases they're simply just not good enough. With interiors that don't go far enough, engines that aren't feature competitive, and with details that aren't executed with finesse or a sense of style, GM is operating at an overall grade level of "C-" to "B" (excepting their few obvious "A+" examples) in a market that demands an "A" before any serious consideration begins.

I'll give you just one current example. The Chevrolet Equinox is, by any measure, one of GM's few new product hits. It is smartly styled, properly priced and executed very, very well. And miracle of miracles, customers are embracing it without having to be prodded by the Giant Rebate Stick.

Now, let's just imagine for a moment if Toyota had the Equinox: What would they do? They would pour over the Equinox with a fine-toothed comb. They'd improve the details, sweeten the mechanicals, refine the interior and make it better in every single way. Their approach revolves around the concept of gradually improving and refining a vehicle throughout its lifecycle to make it better in every respect and as a result, this is why Toyota is usually successful every time out -- in any segment they compete in. They build brand equity by delivering relentlessly honed products that never disappoint.

What does GM do with the Equinox? Instead of seizing the opportunity of potentially having a rare, long-term product hit (the kind that doesn't come around very often in GM's world), and nurturing it by polishing it to a sheen and solidifying its place in the market with a clever big-buck marketing push -- they do a few improvements to it and then give Pontiac dealers a version called the Torrent.

If there is one vehicle scenario in GM's rapidly dwindling empire that encapsulates everything that is wrong with this company in terms of product development philosophy, business approach and marketing planning, the Equinox/Torrent example is it. Now, multiply that scenario throughout the rest of the corporation, and it's no wonder GM's market share is in freefall.

Comeback: Detroit's idea of a happy ending
Yes, there are a ton of other problems that GM has to deal with. The crushing legacy costs, the nonsensical union contracts, the ridiculous medical care costs, the relentless competition, but in the end, the reason GM finds itself in this position is because of their ingrained recalcitrance and refusal to admit that what worked for the old, dominant, legendary version of GM makes no sense whatsoever in the cutthroat and globally chaotic automotive market that exists today.

Some people in this town cling to the belief that there's a rotation on the Detroit "roller coaster" that seems to follow this sequence -- Ford gets in to trouble, then starts its comeback. Chrysler gets into trouble, stabilizes, and starts its comeback. And now it's just GM's turn in the tank. The problem is that Detroit overall is running out of comebacks. With mounting competitive pressures emanating from the Far East and consumers refusing to give Detroit products the time of day (except for the obvious "hits"), the domestic car industry based here in the Motor City is facing the most serious crisis in its history.

As for GM, they can't continue to operate by just selling to their loyal buyers over and over again, because those buyers will slowly but surely dwindle each year. Until they convince people who don't already drive GM vehicles to seriously consider and actually buy their products, this scenario is not looking promising.

In short, there will be no comeback unless GM gets real about its place in the automotive world. It's no longer a matter of fixing things so that GM can regain its rightful place at the top -- it's a matter of survival, pure and simple.

Peter M. DeLorenzo's weekly analysis and stinging commentary at Autoextremist.com have become a must-read every Wednesday for auto enthusiasts and industry insiders. DeLorenzo spent more than two decades in auto advertising and marketing before launching his Web site and consulting business in 1999.



"Formerly known as Jammit - JBO member since 1998" JBOM | CSS.net


Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Saturday, March 26, 2005 1:27 PM
and i'd like to add it doesn't help GM at all that in this day and age of $3.00 a gallon gas, they've decided to delay car development and instead put all their chips into their next generation full sive truck and SUV models as told in Mr. Goodwrenches other post

GM halts future RWD pass cars (Zeta)

this company is completely fu*ked in the head, they're going to hell in a hand basket....and are totally clueless about it all.



"Formerly known as Jammit - JBO member since 1998" JBOM | CSS.net

Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Saturday, March 26, 2005 2:41 PM
people will always need trucks

not sports cars

very compelling article hopefully someone from gm takes the time to read and heed



Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Saturday, March 26, 2005 3:48 PM
recently on some nightly news show they did a story on how ironic it is that the big three compact pick-ups like Ranger and S10 were born in light of the oil crisis from the 80's. fact was people needed trucks but coudn't afford the cost to fuel them....so the big 3 created the smaller compact pick-ups.

the ironic part is, in light of years of low cost fuel those pick-ups are now mid-sizes and in some cases barely smaler than their full sized brothers, at a time when they need to be samll again.

LOL

it was a pretty funny, thing to see. i know everyone needs trucks still but GM needs to realize even Ford is doing better than them at maintaining 3 companies and selling cars and trucks. even Ford owned Volvo is doing better than GM owned Saab.



"Formerly known as Jammit - JBO member since 1998" JBOM | CSS.net

Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Saturday, March 26, 2005 3:51 PM
by the way i HATE my laptops little buttons.....everytime i type on it all my posts are misspelled awfully.

LOL

need to get used to those little chiclet like keys i guess



"Formerly known as Jammit - JBO member since 1998" JBOM | CSS.net

Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Saturday, March 26, 2005 6:37 PM
Jammit, good story there!

I personally would do so much restructuring.

-First, eliminate Hummer, Buick, Saturn and sell off Daewoo, Toyota and bring back Oldsmobile. I would try to partner up with Honda even more.
-I would bring over Opel's Corsa and Astra and rebadge them with Aveo and Cavalier for the small cars.
-I would bring the Ecotec's diesels here. I think Diesel has a good future here, if there were just more products out there. Especially with gas price going up.
-I would bring the RWD platform from Australia (Zeta) so law enforcement Taxi/ etc could once again buy in large quantitiy like they did they did with Caprice. Also RWD is in demand again.
-Corvette is going great.
-Cadillac I would bring the BLS and even offer it in diesel too.
-I would redesign the Chevrolet trucks so it once again can be #1 in engineering, like in 1999-2003. Since here is where GM makes the most profit.
-Pontiac will be the division that will have exclusive engines and tuned for performance with futuristic flair, I would use Subaru cars here as well.
-Oldsmobile, I would bring it and use Opel/Holden models here and would be the cutting edge line for the masses, like always. I would do varible here with Olds, I would offer sophistication but attractive enough for the the Baby Boomers, which will be a huge market in the next 20-30 years
-GMC would ONLY sell medium -heavy duty trucks, no more rebadge Chevys

That is just a few, I could go on forever, but I would bore you to death.






>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----

Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Saturday, March 26, 2005 7:26 PM
good readin







Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Saturday, March 26, 2005 7:34 PM
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:

Jammit, good story there!

I personally would do so much restructuring.

-First, eliminate Hummer, Buick, Saturn and sell off Daewoo, Toyota and bring back Oldsmobile. I would try to partner up with Honda even more.
-I would bring over Opel's Corsa and Astra and rebadge them with Aveo and Cavalier for the small cars.
-I would bring the Ecotec's diesels here. I think Diesel has a good future here, if there were just more products out there. Especially with gas price going up.
-I would bring the RWD platform from Australia (Zeta) so law enforcement Taxi/ etc could once again buy in large quantitiy like they did they did with Caprice. Also RWD is in demand again.
-Corvette is going great.
-Cadillac I would bring the BLS and even offer it in diesel too.
-I would redesign the Chevrolet trucks so it once again can be #1 in engineering, like in 1999-2003. Since here is where GM makes the most profit.
-Pontiac will be the division that will have exclusive engines and tuned for performance with futuristic flair, I would use Subaru cars here as well.
-Oldsmobile, I would bring it and use Opel/Holden models here and would be the cutting edge line for the masses, like always. I would do varible here with Olds, I would offer sophistication but attractive enough for the the Baby Boomers, which will be a huge market in the next 20-30 years
-GMC would ONLY sell medium -heavy duty trucks, no more rebadge Chevys

That is just a few, I could go on forever, but I would bore you to death.


got my vote



Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Saturday, March 26, 2005 9:03 PM
also....why do we really need GMC? all it is chevy trucks and SUV's. the very point of GMC is extremely wastful. i've been saying for 15 years....why do we need GMC?

if they honest to God NEED GMC, then i say stop making chevy trucks. period. and only market their trucks and mini-vans as GMC. at leat then the brand would have a purpose. Now that Saturn has fully intergrated into GM, and is no longer a semi-seperate entitiy...their product has gone to hell. and the new direction of Saturn is just the OLD direction of Oldsmobile. i say all GM needs is

>Chevrolet-cars: a direct carbon copy of Toyota's line-up

>Pontiac-performance CARS: No more trucks, vans, or SUV's, basically Pontiac would be like Ford's SVT. it would sell high output versions of GM's cars. kinda like a "greatest hits" kind of line up. or go more youth oriented like the GM version of Scion

>Buick-Euro/cutting edge style and performance: I'm still a firm believer that Buick was more worthless than Oldsmobile, but if we must keep it, have it follow where Olds was heading and Saturn is now going.

Cadillac-dead on: Cadillac is dead on, and really is the only brand that is working the right way. problem is, it's still caddy and will take a long while to put Lexus and BMW owners behind the wheel.

>Hummer-kill it now

>Saturn-give them a mercy killing...now give Cadilac the Sky (the Sky can be the SLK of Caddy) and the Aura to Buick and cut their losses while they can.

GMC-drop it, and stop selling the same truck in two places. time for GM to stop wasting money on this dumb idea. either stop selling chevy trucks, and sell them as GMC....or kill this waste of a brand. everything GMC does Chevy could just do themselves. i feel all GM trucks should be sold as GMC's as it would allow Chevrolet more freedom to focus on their cars.

Daewoo-give controling interest in this waste to Suzuki, who's done very well with the cars so far in North America. There is nothing really wrong with Daewoo, but GM has no clue how to market or sell them. so far Suzuki has not had a problem getting them off their lots....and with a 10 year / 100,000 mile warranty to boot.

Saab-keep them, but stop making them use GM cars as their base. give them the money they need and let them build Saab's. Do we really NEED a Saab Trailblazer?

Subaru? let them go. at this point they're doing just fine with out GM.

Suzuki? well GM only owns 20% of Zuki, NOT a controlling interest.....but they are unfortunately finacailly strapped. i worked there this past summer, they NEED GM, and GM's money sadly so. but with GM's money in a downward spiral, it's not healthy or neccesary to keep them dragging along. if they fail in the U.S. it will be because of their own troubles. GM can't afford to keep them alive any longer, time for Suzuki to learn to fly on it's own and leave the nest.

most important, they need to start actual corporate restructuring. GM's whole operation is hemmoraging with B.S. jobs. Example:

a guy thinks of a new dash light
tells his secretary to send someone to dash light research.
the secretary tells her secretaries, messenger the order.
the messenger tells a guy to type the memo.
a guy grabs the paper and hands it to a guy that hands it to the guy that loads the paper in the typewriter.
a guy types the letter.
another guy pulls the finished memo out of typewriter and hands to a guy to proof read it.
another guy hands it to the messenger that takes it to his secretary.
she gets it and has her assistaint take it to research.
she has HER assistaint take down
it gets to reseach.
and the whole process gets repeated until 10 years later the dash light is put on a car....by then its obsolete.

That's General Motors. they need to cut ALOT of corporate fat. and i mean ALOT. if that isn't done...it doesn't matter how good the product is the company will fail. and they also need to seriously, SERIOUSLY revamp their whole dealer and service network....especially the service area.



"Formerly known as Jammit - JBO member since 1998" JBOM | CSS.net

Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Saturday, March 26, 2005 9:45 PM
I can't agree with G.T on the Olds part- IT IS DEAD-and no one cares but the old people
Bringing it back would be a serious waste of time.


Regardless of gas prices, Trucks will still sell. I do believe that GM should push these,
and they better be good. and having ones that CAN get good MPGs will help too..
(like DOD)

Don't kill nameplates, the backlash from olds still hurts,> Its better to have a few good
models than less divisions.


It's time for Dealerships to DIE. No more chevy or Buick or Saab dealerships.All become GM dealerships, selling ALL the brands. And offer more internet options
(like a Interactive dealership online ) to new shoppers...

Put GM daewoo to work-bring better gas mising cars here-even offer a few dirt cheap
(so they can afford to keep that truck)

Sell Hummer, stakes in Suzuki, Izuzu

Keep making Saturn to new Opel...(you'll see)


Kill clashing models..the SV6, Sunfire, Torrent....less models in the division hopefully
will make better models...there are about 10-16 models that could get the ax...


Ok, like G.T. says, I don't want to bore you...



Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Saturday, March 26, 2005 9:45 PM
Switch to a 2 stoke diesel, stick that in everything then put giant wings on them.... and sprite machines in every car or atleast as an option




Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Saturday, March 26, 2005 10:23 PM
Hummer: Kill the H2, build H1s to the public by order or something.
Im sure the military is always going to need their Humvees.





How many steps to heaven, Doc?
...Ah, metaphysics.
Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Saturday, March 26, 2005 10:28 PM
Even Worse

This is going to be the final stroke in Chevy's coffin. To even think that the joke that they've made the Monte Carlo into, or a little 4 cylinder Cobalt can even be in the same LEAGUE as the new Mustang is ridiculous. I've been a Ford opposer all my life, but they got it right with the new Mustang. I've heard rants on here where people are saying that GM finally got it right with the Corvette, but comparing the two (especially the PRICE TAG) shows that GM did not, in fact, get it right.

Here are my personal problems with Chevy/GM:
-All of their vehicles are overpriced for what you get
-Most of their vehicles are only available as Automatic, even though Manuals get more fuel economy (and are more fun to drive )
-They have WAY too many vehicles
*Rather than producing 22 Vehicles with 6 more on the way for Chevy alone, they need to create a small handfull of vehicles that appeal to certain markets. What's the difference between an Aveo and a Cobalt to the average buyer? Why do they need 6 SUVs? Look at Chrysler, they have a solid formula down with Dodge:
-SRT-4 Neon for tuners
-Regular Neon for the fuel concious
-Full size Pickup
-Mid-size Pickup (available with a V8 mind you)
-Magnum for a car that can haul crap
-Durango for the soccer moms
-Stratus + Intrepid for the general masses
-Viper for the rich
-Brought back the charger to compete with the Mustang (HAHAHAHAHA)
10 Cars, and the SRT-4 is actually an upgrade for one of them, so its really more like 9. They have a car that appeals to most markets, without any excess.
-Chevy needs to go for quality over quantity: Ford and Chrysler have a car for most markets, whereas Chevy has too many cars that don't appeal to any markets.
-If Chevy wants the Monte Carlo to compete with the Mustang they need to offer it rear wheel drive, with a manual, and with more power.

There's more, but I'm working myself into a frenzy, I hate to see a formerly great company go down like this. Think of the contributions GM made to the world: Corvette, Camarro, Chevelle/Nova, the Ecotech engine... They just need to smarten up and, dare I say it: Copy the competition! At least untill they figure out what the hell they're doing.
Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Saturday, March 26, 2005 10:31 PM


Sorry, wouldn't let me link to the forum.
Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Saturday, March 26, 2005 10:56 PM
I just looked at the Vauxhall Astra (not the New Astra) on a website, and I swear to God, that vehicle looks like it would be a great next generation Cavalier, it looks like a Cavalier, which is the cool thing.. That was my first time seeing that vehicle (after getting curious from reading Mr. Goodwrench-G.T.'s post) I'm now thinking GM should have brought that over, instead of the Cobalt.

In any case...good article...I hope GM gets their heads on straight. It's kind funny when I think about a particular vehicle brand, then I realize it's actually own by GM. I agree that reduction could be their greatest asset at the moment and less rebadging.
Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Sunday, March 27, 2005 12:23 AM
guys that sucks sorry to hear...



Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Sunday, March 27, 2005 12:24 AM
wrong forum lol... sorry.



Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Sunday, March 27, 2005 10:16 AM
Wraith . wrote:

Even Worse

This is going to be the final stroke in Chevy's coffin. To even think that the joke that they've made the Monte Carlo into, or a little 4 cylinder Cobalt can even be in the same LEAGUE as the new Mustang is ridiculous. I've been a Ford opposer all my life, but they got it right with the new Mustang. I've heard rants on here where people are saying that GM finally got it right with the Corvette, but comparing the two (especially the PRICE TAG) shows that GM did not, in fact, get it right.

Here are my personal problems with Chevy/GM:
-All of their vehicles are overpriced for what you get
-Most of their vehicles are only available as Automatic, even though Manuals get more fuel economy (and are more fun to drive )
-They have WAY too many vehicles
*Rather than producing 22 Vehicles with 6 more on the way for Chevy alone, they need to create a small handfull of vehicles that appeal to certain markets. What's the difference between an Aveo and a Cobalt to the average buyer? Why do they need 6 SUVs? Look at Chrysler, they have a solid formula down with Dodge:
-SRT-4 Neon for tuners
-Regular Neon for the fuel concious
-Full size Pickup
-Mid-size Pickup (available with a V8 mind you)
-Magnum for a car that can haul crap
-Durango for the soccer moms
-Stratus + Intrepid for the general masses
-Viper for the rich
-Brought back the charger to compete with the Mustang (HAHAHAHAHA)
10 Cars, and the SRT-4 is actually an upgrade for one of them, so its really more like 9. They have a car that appeals to most markets, without any excess.
-Chevy needs to go for quality over quantity: Ford and Chrysler have a car for most markets, whereas Chevy has too many cars that don't appeal to any markets.
-If Chevy wants the Monte Carlo to compete with the Mustang they need to offer it rear wheel drive, with a manual, and with more power.

There's more, but I'm working myself into a frenzy, I hate to see a formerly great company go down like this. Think of the contributions GM made to the world: Corvette, Camarro, Chevelle/Nova, the Ecotech engine... They just need to smarten up and, dare I say it: Copy the competition! At least untill they figure out what the hell they're doing.


yes look at chrysler they are now a german owned company



Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Sunday, March 27, 2005 7:46 PM
I think main thing for gm is to cut down on so many different models and work on a lesser amount while refining every little detail. More and more these days it seems like gm models are kind of just thrown together i think. Almost cheaply put together for what you pay......
Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Sunday, March 27, 2005 8:34 PM
GM is up to something... They arn't going away anytime soon.


<img src="http://www.j-body.org/registry/americanred/deplysig.gif">
Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Sunday, March 27, 2005 8:49 PM
I agree with Jammit. A lday i know, her husband is some kind of high up supervisor at the Mansfield, GM. He watches movies and sleeps all day in his office and makes a S#$@Ton of money. Of course he loves there.

They really need to consolidate the model structure and get rid of dead weight




Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Monday, March 28, 2005 5:10 AM
A.15 wrote:

GM is up to something... They arn't going away anytime soon.


The problem is that this is exactly what THEY are thinking as well.

They need to really shake up the company and there's going to be a LOT of unhappy people when they do, but it's a necessity.

Unfortunately, they may actually have to drive themselves into bankrupsy before they can even do anything to save themselves. It's not like they can just abandon their union contracts or a lot of the other things that are hurting them. They really need a sort of fresh start.

And they have GOT to stop trying to make every product line cater to everyone!! As mentioned above... Pontiac does NOT need a minivan!!! And there are tons of ridiculous things like that going on.

Time will tell... but I suspect the company is going to have to collapse in on itself before it can bail itself out. Curiously, being taken over by Toyota would probably be the best thing that could possibly happen to them.






Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Monday, March 28, 2005 6:28 AM
After reading some of the suggestions made in this thread I think that everyone here needs to learn about the importance of Saturn to GM as a whole. Of course to understand why Saturn exists, you have to understand the Toyota/ GM partnership that occured years ago when Toyota was looking at building manufacturing plants in America based on their supply chain principle's overseas.

You all think changing the brands around will produce better results? That isn't even half the problem -- quality, high cost to manufacture, and design that lags behind Japan is why GM is taking a beating. I will personally never own another GM car -- my Cavalier was the last one.

Also -- those of you that are championing the idea of creating MORE large vehicles:

http://www.forbes.com/columnists/2005/03/25/cz_jf_0325flint.html?partner=yahoo&referrer=

From the article
"Right now--just when rising gasoline prices are starting to put a crimp in sales of big trucks--GM is worried about its next generation of trucks. And I'm hearing strange things about those T900 vehicles. For example, I hear that the new big SUVs coming next year don't have fold-flat rear seats. It's difficult to imagine any manufacturer building such vehicles today without fold-flat seats. Chrysler went through a hugely expensive emergency crash program to get them into its minivans in the middle of the model cycle. Fold-flat seats are what they call "the price of admission" today. "

Large cars are not the answer ppl, not at all, as the numbers below demonstrate:
http://yahoo.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/mar2005/nf20050317_3493_db016.htm

"What's more, amid rising gasoline prices, sales of large SUVs are slumping. As one of GM's strongest markets, that segment has been crucial for both sales and profits. Full-size SUV sales are off more than 20% this year, and GM's Chevrolet Tahoe sales are down 30%. Meanwhile, sales of the company's new passenger cars -- the Pontiac G6, Buick LaCrosse, and Chevrolet Cobalt -- are too sluggish to pick up the slack."

EOM.


~ 98 Cavalier
Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Monday, March 28, 2005 8:35 AM
Quote:

I will personally never own another GM car -- my Cavalier was the last one.


I second that. And i think their dealerships have to smarten up alot, because thats one of the things that pushing me away alot. They never fix the problem until u go there the 3rd - 4th - 5th time and then they fix it by that time my warrantee is over and im stuck paying for a problem that occured during my warrantee period. BS


~*Gilles*~



Re: GM must get real about its future (good read)
Monday, March 28, 2005 11:25 AM
2o3cavi wrote:

Quote:

I will personally never own another GM car -- my Cavalier was the last one.


I second that. And i think their dealerships have to smarten up alot, because thats one of the things that pushing me away alot. They never fix the problem until u go there the 3rd - 4th - 5th time and then they fix it by that time my warrantee is over and im stuck paying for a problem that occured during my warrantee period. BS


~*Gilles*~

if you took it to them and they didnt fix it im sure there is some kind of legal action you can take



Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search