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 GM News, New Models and Market Share
8452 messages, Last post on Nov 25, 2009 at 11:27 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
- Who do we blame for the Fiat fiasco? - Or the failed launch of Cadillac in Europe? - Or the Saab 9-4 and 9-2x which were laughably off the mark when it came to expanding Saab? - Who was the idiots who completely missed the mark when you know gas prices are rising and yet you don't engineer a respectable car like the Corsa to meet US crash test standards, instead sticking us with a miserable POC Daewoo Aveo that itself doesn't even offer rear seat side airbags? - Who decided to move up the launch date of the GMT900's when the writing was on the wall that gas prices were on the rise? - Wasn't Hummer started under Wagoners reign? If that doesn't define "short-sighted thinking" I don't know what does... The punchline for that joke came a long time ago. - How much effort went in to the Zeta program? Only to see the project cancelled down the road and the only product we see out of it is a 30,000 unit Pontiac and a Retro muscle car that will probably last 2 years tops before the plug gets pulled. |
|
|
|
|
Nobody wants the economy to fail Buy a new gm car today and save your country 
|
|
|
Replying to: sixfive (Nov 11, 2008 11:24 am) I used to be an engineer who made materials for the Patriot missile. You move on. they axe the "man in charge", who may have been there about 2 weeks. Wagoner wasn't there just 2 weeks. I'm not earning several million $'s like he was, and surrounded by supposedly brilliant financial guys. Maybe he should have cut GM by 25%-50% of production jettisonning all the losing brands, when he took over. He did not make the correct decisions to get ahead of these issues, always reacting. Anyway the Captain or the President are responsible from Day 1. Take a look at that ship again and realize that I that it has the 50 megaton anchor of 50 years of bad decisions welded right to the bow. I can kind of agree. Wagoner may have taken over a ship that was doomed. He may not be responsible for the shape GM is in as it did take years of bad decisions and commitments to end up in this quandry. He voluntarily took the job, and since then he has been responsible - whether trying to plug the holes, or announcing "Abandon Ship". How is this years leadership going to turn that ship around in these times. I still don't understand why GM as a corporation - the corporate entity itself, not talking about the the plants and workers, has to survive. Why can't GM selloff the assets and divisions for whatever they get, to other corporations? Why can't these divisions then with new owners pick new suppliers if they wish, hire old union workers or new union workers, and hire new management with Toyota-like manufatcuring,and hire new designers and such? I wouldn't mind supporting a Chevy division owned and financed by GM, Buick might be owned by Microsoft, Pontiac could go to Boeing ... maybe each of these divisions is only worth a few million dollars. I'm sure a company like GE or Microsoft would gamble a few million to pickup the assets of a car company. Heck even people like Roger Penske or Bernie Ecclestein (or Stone?) from F1 would like a car company? GM or Ford should be allowed to fail, and someone can come in and setup an efficient operation. The alternative - to continue to overpay GM employees for their inefficent system, for mostly mediocre products, under the FALSE threat that this would drag down the economy, or Detroit is ridiculous. What you have is a bunch of people who make a lot of $ or have a lot invested in businesses, who will lose, lying to the public about the consequences. They have a lot to lose and are thus ttrying to make a case for us to continue their way of life. I'm sorry I don't live as good as they have or do, and do not feel like I need to support them and this wasteful system indefinitely, thru my taxes!  Any of you who think GM and Ford need saving, let us know how much stock you're buying; or better yet get some bankers to give them a loan. |
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Nov 11, 2008 8:09 am) Union says they won't give any more concessions. Wagoner says he doesn't know "what purpose it would serve" to change GM's upper management as part of a bail out. Perhaps we should just let these losers fail. |
|
|
Replying to: sixfive (Nov 11, 2008 11:24 am) Wagoner has been in charge in North America for FOURTEEN YEARS. See what I posed in another fourm: He presided over the SUV boom. The G6 was going to be a savior and was mediocre. The Cobalt was going to replace the tarnished Cavalier and was mediocre. Hummer was expanded. He didn't focus on high quality small cars; he kept expanding SUVs. There was no high-fuel-cost contingency plan. Lutz thought that hybrids were a joke until the Prius became wildly successful. GM could have led this technology with all of their profits in the late '90s and early 2000's. They decided to work on a retro HHR years after the PT Cruiser was successful. They decided to resurrect the Camaro years after the Mustang was successful. Meanwhile they pumped their dollars into inane advertising campaigns: "An American Revolution"; "Baseball, Hot Dogs, Apple Pie, and Chevrolet", "Born from Jets", "A Different Kind of Car Company". By the time they got religion the church bus was already arriving at the bingo parlor, and they weren't on it. Even with a bloated structure and way too many divisions, they dabbled in more car companies. They lost billions on Fiat. They decided to acquire Saab. When it was apparent that the emperor had no clothes (i.e., competitive product for a changing market) they started heavy marketing of nearly useless E85 capabilities and of a plug-in hybrid that was 4-5 years from production. All vaporware to cover up the lack of competitive products. They offered the whole country discount pricing which killed their own residuals. Rick did a fairly decent job on the cost/operations side, cutting costs, and he made some efforts to put out new good products, particularly the CTS and the Malibu. But the large, strategic decisions - no leadership or vision at all. Put Steve Jobs in charge and you would see some bold decision making. |
|
|
|
|
Good listen http://www.cnbc.com/id/27647852 |
|
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Nov 11, 2008 3:32 pm) 
|
|
|
Replying to: 62vetteefp (Nov 11, 2008 3:32 pm) Now, if GM closes it's doors, kiss that $68 Billion AND the jobs altogether. I can only imagine what Ford owes on top of this. |
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Nov 11, 2008 4:58 pm) They have to pay debts first. Figure out things would logically work and then do just the opposite. That's about how it works. If you think bankruptcy works to take care of the folks most invested in it you need only look to Kmart. They declared bankruptcy, turned all Kmart stock into toilet paper and then the moment they were out of Chapter 11 bought Sears.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views GM News, New Models and Market Share
