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 What if you were in charge of GM?
874 messages, Last post on Oct 28, 2009 at 10:20 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
I honestly think it is too late. Too much brand equity lost with too many consumers. Too much debt, too many excuses. Too many people don't even consider a GM car when they start to shop. Perhaps as importantly, the demographic of those who are not even considering you is a desirable one, i.e. educated, higher income, younger, etc. I guess if I were to give GM ANY long term chance, and I were the theoretical CEO, I would axe everything but Chevrolet and Cadillac, and focus on those two brands as soon as was feasible. This is pretty much how everyone else that you'd want to emulate does things...one lower scale brand and one upscale brand (Toyota/Lexus, VW/Audi, Honda/Acura, etc). The rest is a waste of resources. Focus is what is needed and the best way to achieve it is to have two core brands. I probably also would have pursued some kind of pre-structured bankruptcy. That's the only way to fundamentally restructure fast enough and cheap enough to matter. Yes, you'd lose some customers. But you would emerge with a viable business plan. As it is, you may lose a little less customers, but your business plan is a bottomless pit. Long term, I think the "bankruptcy-phoenix from the ashes" approach is more viable than the current Titanic school of thought (we can't sink/not enough lifeboats/into the fog/refuse to face harsh reality). In other words there are just too many problems with GM internally to fix at once no matter how dedicated or intelligent they are. Too many holes in the boat. They need a totally new, smaller boat. Customers will come back post-bankruptcy if they see that you have REALLY reinvented yourself. As it is now, most people just see this as more of the same old, same old, and hoary GM will continue to croak along only with continued taxpayer infusions of cash. |
|
|
Replying to: netranger4 (Jan 28, 2009 6:41 pm) In truth most car electronics are now realatively cheap to manufacture and install. I personally prefer Honda's packaging style for these things rather than having them a'la carte, I think in the end it makes the car cheaper on a feature by feature basis. But you are correct, in the sense that I am not sure how many people pay a lot for an econo car that has power leather seats, xenon headlights, 5.1 ss, etc... But Mazda seems to think so, hence for arround 24K the 3 can be outfitted like a Lexus or Caddy. |
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Jan 29, 2009 2:11 pm) Keep in mind that the 2003-2007-Accord to my knowledge never lost a comparrison test against the same generation family cars and even defeated the redesigned 2007 Camry in several tests. The one thing that Honda has always been very good at in the past is engineering its cars ahead of its competition. It is that engineering, along with the fit and finish which makes these cars have a higher resale value and worth the extra money. In a sense the 2008 is a disappointment, the car is still really good but the competition, has in many ways caught up, especially the Altima, the Malibu and the Mazda6 which are excellent products. The Aura is a good start and corrects many of the faults of the LS, it still is not there yet and the Mailbu appears to be a better application of the platform. In my opinion if GM took the funds expended for the G6 and Aura and poured them instead into the Malibu, the 'Bu would be the clear top of the class in the family sedan division, it is pretty close to the class leaders as is.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Jan 29, 2009 2:11 pm) Bought a Nissan Altima instead. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: TIMGT5 (Jan 30, 2009 1:32 am) What more could they have poured into the Malibu? I've driven all three and they all drive the same which is to be expected given the identical underpinnings. Out of all of them, the Aura had the best driving position and the interior was the least rental feeling. But none of them are anything sporty, except maybe the Aura with the bigger wheels and quicker steering that I was surprised about. They're all too big to be any fun though, same goes for the Accord and Camry btw. The only real blast to drive in the segment is the Mazda6 and maybe the Altima (this one you'll pay for in ride quality)
|
|
|
Replying to: anythngbutgm (Jan 30, 2009 5:05 am) They haven't put any money into the G6, other than its refresh for 09 models. Which I believe was a waste of money, when they should either get rid of the car or re-do the whole car. It needs a make over, not a new gaudy bumper and mixed matched interior radio and dash. The Aura has some major potential, if they had just took it a bit further, it could keep up with the rest. I seriously was impressed when I saw it first come out. But, that WOW factor didn't last long. Its sorta blah. But, with that said, the Accord is also sorta casual. But, it can hold its own. You can get a base model Accord or civic, and still feel the engineering. GM tries, they really do, but they put a car out, but its just half effort. If you are going to do it, then find out if you have the money to do it all the way. Its been said before, but if they downsized, get rid of the some of the duplicate SUV's, they could have some major money to really put some great quality in their new cars. After driving my 08 G6, I have a rare version of it, it has the 4cyl, leather, roof, sound. I actually love it. I can see why people buy them, or GM cars, because GM really does think about what the driver wants with all the features. But, I think all those features sugar coat it. Without them, the car wouldn't be much. A G6 in a base model would not compare to a base model Accord, or civic. Its not like the engine is anything to really get excited about with its crazy picky transmission. Certainly not like my 06 Accord or 08 Jetta I have had. The new 6spd transmission probably fixed alot. I have not driven that yet. I plan to though. Just to compare. So....lol... my relationship with GM is sorta like a love hate, I think I want to love them, because they have some major potential, but mad that I am supporting them now. I hope for us, that they do some major thinking, and show us what they have. |
|
|
Replying to: anythngbutgm (Jan 30, 2009 5:05 am) I find it odd that of the three epsilon cars the Malibu gets really good reviews and ranks highly in CR while the Aura and G6 are heavily critized. The platform has a lot of potential. I Believe that Chevy could do an "SS" type Mailbu with more aggressive throttle response, firmer suspension and 18 inch low profile tires, ground effects package, faux carbon fiber trim. This would be one for the TL/ BMW 3 Series wanabees. There should be a Malibu coupe as well, to replace the G6 and take one the Altima 2 door and Accord 2 door. I believe that in the next few years that personal semi-luxury sporty coupes will become popular again. The front drive Pontiacs are a waste of effort, all of the resources allocated for these cars should go to Chevrolet. In GM's lineup Chevy should be the Toyota/Honda/Ford/Nissan applinace fighter. If Pontiac survives its best use would be niche outfit, with high performance RWD sedans, coupes and roadsters. If not then Pontiac should be dropped altogether. What is the point of it selling inferior versions of Chevy products?
|
|
|
Replying to: TIMGT5 (Feb 01, 2009 4:02 am) The point is Buick/GMC dealers wanted "Chevys" to sell to their customers, but couldn't become a Chevy dealer, usually because there is already a Chevy dealer in close proximity.
|
|
|
Replying to: bpizzuti (Feb 01, 2009 6:33 am) I think there really should be only 2 applications of the Epsilon chasis, one should be a "Joe Six Pack" version, The Malibu, this would be GM's Accord/Camry fighter. and an upscale version (Buick possibly) to take on the ES 350/ Acura TL. Any badging beyond that is a waste of resources. Same thing with Lambda X-over, there is no need for 4 itenerations of this same car. Concentrate on 2, Drop the GMC and Saturn ( The brand is definately going anyway) Keep the Chevy version to go against the Pilot/Highlander/CX 9. An upscale version to go against the MDX/RX. No company should produce products that compete with itself. GM needs only one model for each purpose, and to target each specific demographic. Eliminating excess duplication cuts costs. If GM is to survive it must shrink to fit the times.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: TIMGT5 (Feb 03, 2009 1:52 am) Are you saying Toyo shouldn't market the Camry and the ES? They're essentially the same car. Honda shouldn't market the Civic and Accord with models parallel in the Acura line? Are you saying Marathon shouldn't market Speedway gasoline? SuperAmerica gas?
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views What if you were in charge of GM?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
