Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
16716 messages, Last post on Dec 02, 2009 at 3:23 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
I'm tired of talking about who is at fault the GM fiasco. What should GM and the UAW do now? Let's discuss where we are now and what must be done to lay the groundwork for GM's recovery. EVERYONE would like to go back to the 90's - Let's figure out how to get there. But remember - to get there, we can't go back. We HAVE to go forward. Here's where we are: Car sales are miserable. It's true that people aren't buying Toyotas or Honda's either, but that doesn't help GM in itself. The question is - when people do start buying cars again, what are they going to buy? How can we get them to select GM cars over foreign competitors? Are we agreed that a lot of GM's sales over the past several years were based on being able and willing to offer better terms on loans and better deals than the Japanese were willing to offer? Those kinds of deals are probably going to be difficult for GM to provide for the next year or two. If that isn't possible, it's going to come down to product. Is the current product mix going to be what people want when credit loosens up? Some of that depends on gasoline prices.... $1.50 per gal = SUV's. $3.50 per gal = econobox. Odds say that gas prices go back up. What does GM have in the queue? What should they have? Are the current models good enough? Does GM have to have a whole line of gas-misers or electric cars? I don't think that the Volt (assuming it comes in on time and at the projected price point) is going to do much if anything for GM's bottom line. Toyota is apparently only making S100 or $200 per car on the Prius - even after several years of production. Will product be enough? For whatever reasons, GM's margins on cars aren't as high as their competitors. Where can costs be cut? In the supply chain? Will the UAw HAVE to make concessions? Must they be substanial? What about the dealers? Should dealers be bailed out? Is GM better off if 2,000 dealers fail? Enough about how we got here. What's the path forward?
|
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Dec 22, 2008 3:23 pm) And let's be completely realistic and remember that when the Taurus was the best-selling car, the Accord and Camry were smaller than the domestic offerings. Also remember that by the early 1990s Ford kept the Taurus in the number-one spot by offering hefty incentives and dumping a huge percentage of total production on fleet customers. Two practices that would eventually destroy the Taurus' brand equity. |
|
|
Replying to: lokki (Dec 23, 2008 6:32 am) GM's marketing has been terrible for years. GM has to stop selling the deal, and start selling the car. Granted, GM had to do this for years because the product just was not competitive. But with the new vehicles, it can focus more on the product itself. lokki: Is the current product mix going to be what people want when credit loosens up? Some of that depends on gasoline prices.... $1.50 per gal = SUV's. $3.50 per gal = econobox. Odds say that gas prices go back up. What does GM have in the queue? What should they have? Are the current models good enough? Does GM have to have a whole line of gas-misers or electric cars? GM needs to have a full lineup of vehicles, just like Toyota does right now. I don't see Toyota dumping the Tundra and Sequoia in response to higher gas prices. There is still a market for those vehicles. The full lineup of vehicles, however, does not mean a full lineup of brands. Accept that the general public under the age of 45 no longer views a Buick as more prestigious than a Pontiac or a Chevrolet. Pontiac's performance image has been dead for decades. Saturn is just another division of GM, not a different kind of car company. The differences between the Outlook, Traverse and Acadia are lost on most buyers (the Buick Enclave is distinctive and attractive). At a bare minimum, GM needs Chevrolet and Cadillac. There might be room for a combined Buick-GMC. But everything else needs to go. Please - no more Chevrolets rebadged as Pontiacs. The G5 and G3 are jokes. Make one vehicle, make it as good as possible, and then promote it as much as Toyota does the Camry, or Honda does the Accord. What GM also needs to do is stop treating smaller vehicles like the red-headed stepchildren. It needs to lavish as much care and attention to detail on the Aveo and Cobalt as it does on the CTS and Corvette. lokki: I don't think that the Volt (assuming it comes in on time and at the projected price point) is going to do much if anything for GM's bottom line. Toyota is apparently only making S100 or $200 per car on the Prius - even after several years of production.lokki: Will product be enough? For whatever reasons, GM's margins on cars aren't as high as their competitors. Where can costs be cut? In the supply chain? Will the UAw HAVE to make concessions? Must they be substanial? The UAW wages should not be cut. What needs to be cut are health care benefits, and retiree health care. The UAW also needs to accept work rules and staffing requirements that are competitive with the transplant operations. Discipline at the plants must also improve. Daily absentee rates among blue-collar workers are much higher at the domestic plants than they are at the transplant operations. This cannot continue. But leave the wages alone. lokki: What about the dealers? Should dealers be bailed out? Is GM better off if 2,000 dealers fail? No. GM needs to shrink its dealer base, and also get rid of Pontiac, Saab, Saturn and HUMMER. Those brands are going to go away, and there is nothing anyone can really do about it.
|
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Dec 23, 2008 7:40 am) Agreed, although I think that GM will have a hard time shedding dealerships, which enjoy strong protection under state laws, unless it goes bankrupt. IMO, this is one more reason why GM has no future unless it takes the bankruptcy route. |
|
|
Replying to: lokki (Dec 23, 2008 6:32 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Dec 23, 2008 7:40 am) -Rocky |
|
|
Replying to: snookered (Dec 23, 2008 8:02 am) -Rocky
|
|
|
Replying to: rockylee (Dec 23, 2008 8:13 am) Rick Wagoner and Mark LaNeve are not completely in charge of which brands live and die, as the events of the last year should make readily apparent. The customers decide this sort of thing. |
|
|
|
|
Spent 7yrs of my automotive career running a 100 employee UAW plt 16 miles south of Flint, Mi..supplying parts to the Big3..The Big3 lost the ability to run their business back when times were good for they gave away their wallet. The UAW got fat during the hayday times, so they are in for a haircut.. Got involved in the auto business in 1968 as a supplier, sales/marketing, and the last 15 yrs as a commisioned rep--one person organization.. Had a ball, it was a great industry, lots of fun and money. Left it all in 2002.. Back to the UAW, really more of a nuisance than any help, adversary was their game, however the small plants were not their cup of tea, it was natural by close proximity to their base operations to unionize everybody around, so to maintain peace and quiet, one becomes unionized, then proceed with making the company work. Otherwise, you spend too much time and effort trying to keep them out.. You run the business, not the UAW..If it works in their favor, close the door. We had a plant in Wisconsin back in the late 70's that was UAW, took a 90 day. strike, and after the 90 days we ended up with a open shop. you did not have to join the union..It was finally given back 9 yrs later, great bargaining tool..This plant was also 100% autorelated product line..Our main plant in Illinois was not unionized.. The Asian transplants in America have remained free of the UAW, whereas they use temp labor along with the main work force, bad times hit, out go the temps and according to the Toyota ethics, the full-time employees are not laid-off--lifetime employment. During lean times those employees can go through training or community service or they can take unpaid time-off.. Looks like the Asians have their own version of the UAW jobs bank program.. Let's look at the political side of the UAW, real-left hand, and their good old Michigan politicans, LEVIN, DINGELL,STRABENOW, and CONYERS have really screwed the UAW by helping impose the goofy auto emission and mileage std..They couldn't resist lining up with the environmental whackos which has screwed the Big3 to it's current status... The Volt car is doomed before it hits the streets, imagine a 4cyl engine that does not propel the car but acts as a generator to charge the lithium batteries only..That's really exciting???!!!!! I may go out and buy another UAW car, 09 CTS to add to my 09 Bullitt, and 06 Pontiac GPGT just to make sure I don't have to buy the future junk line imposed by our red-band controlled Congress.. Let's face it---it's all political and the outcome will not be pretty.......
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 22, 2008 5:51 pm) I just said what the actual question was and how the results should be read. No spinning at all. If you really think that the survey result say only 22% of the people would buy a GM or Chrysler and 78% will not buy then that alone shows it is suspect. December sales will show GM alone getting over 22% market share. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
