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
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Feb 23, 2009 9:57 am) A small thing: does the Buick even give you real wood in the car as Lexus does? |
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Feb 23, 2009 10:34 am)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Feb 23, 2009 4:28 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: bpizzuti (Feb 23, 2009 10:21 am)
|
|
|
Check out True Cost to Own. That'll take you out to 5 years and will figure depreciation and repair costs in the numbers.
|
|
|
"What if you were in charge of GM?" I'd have stepped down by now. Oldsmobile, now Saturn, Hummer, Pontiac, Saab; how much goodwill have you squandered with the American buying public. UAW and pension deals are a pain as well, I get it. But investing in, then killing, 5 car brands in just over 10 years is obscene. How much money was wasted developing Saturn or neutering Saab that could have been spent on a truly awesome Cobalt, Impala or perhaps a Electra/Roadmaster type car to rival the 300/5-series/E-class type rides? For owners, who's to think Buick and GMC aren't far behind (and maybe shouldn't be)? What's the young guy or girl with 40 e-z GMAC payments left on their Aura, H3 or G6 supposed to think? They're resale value is now spiraling down and their car of choice will soon become the brunt of late-night TV jokes. Why would they ever buy GM again? Or think the domestics are even an option? I'm a car guy and a die-hard domestic car fan. 3 Fords and a Chevy currently and I'd put their quality, reliability and cost of ownership up against a Honda, Nissan or Toyota any day. Not to mention VW or other euro makes. But GM and Chrysler leadership is pathetic and Ford's has only recently improved, just in time it appears. I hope the Big 3 make it, but sure am glad my cars are paid off!
|
|
|
#1 I would take a very serious look at the slush fund used to keep customers happy. Subaru - Toyota have a very good process and rep for fixing bad parts even when out of warrenty. American auto has a very good reputation of telling their customers where they can shove it oh and what the bill is to fix the bad part. #2 - Right away get rid of all the copies of the same model cars with some cheap ass plastic slapped on them its either a Chevy only model or other brand not both. You insult the intelegence of your customer offering multiple versions of the same damn car under different brands. Keep Saturn and only sell Opel euro designs etc in the US. #3 Stop building multiple cars for each country/region if its a top seller in Europe it sells in the US with no other offering in its segment etc. #4 get back to the basics - one or two 4drs - one small econo car - one SUV and one truck. Stop making a bazillion versions etc. #5 You can have a complete pile of junk and if your customer service is #1 people will buy your cars and think they are the best thing since sliced bread. The First saturns proved this. American Auto fails horribly bad 6ways to Sunday when it comes to customer service. Oh and it might be time to rebrand the Buick and the Catalac both are seen as big shi--ty american car Grandpa and Grandma just thought were the rage. Now its Lexus - Infinity and BMW with the occasional MB. Lincolin do they still make those? American Auto needs a fresh face and the old brands aren't going to cut it. Way - Way harder to change a brand image than an actual product. Easier to create an awesome product and a new brand and go from there.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: watkinst (Feb 23, 2009 10:06 pm) Now I read people posting about problems with their mass market Camry and Accords and the companies tell them that is the way they are supposed to be as far as seat comfort problems, VCM, etc. Something changed. Perhaps in Toyo's area it's the bottom line no longer has lots of profit built in. They are the GM now. Re #5 Cadillac and Buick. One of my points is that the US makers haven't spent large efforts on image. The media has done what they love to do and that is shape people's opinion, whether it's about politicians or products. They shape the opinion by using bias in their reporting and presentation. As one in charge of GM, I would have twisted arms of the expensive labor unions, UAW for one, and required them to help fund an expansive (and expensive) advertising blitz to overcome the image problem. If a media outlet was biased against US brand cars, they wouldn't be getting advertising dollars. This goes to the point that Cadillac and Buick have suffered from the image of being purchased by older, more sage, people. That has become a negative rather than a positive in that the older experienced people may have bought the cars with the cute this or fancy that but found they didn't last now they made wise decisions about dependable vehicles. An example of negative is the continual posting of negatives in Edmunds about them. One poster even described people shopping a Buick showroom as toothless. The product line at Buick has shifted and that was a mistake. The leSabre was a price point car and they lost lots of customers who didn't perceive a simpler Cadillac as a replacement. The laCrosse didn't replace leSabre as they had hoped. Some of this is financial in reason, so it's easy for me to critique after the fact. The Enclave is a luxury vehicle that is great, if you want an SUV, but it's ridiculed by some because it says Buick on it! Negatives never give up so that's why I would have had an all out image advertising program. Accord used that technique very well through the years. IN 1989 they showed their Accord driving past gas pumps because the image was that it was economical as an econobox; however I bought a 6 cyl car that got just as good gas mileage or better that was roomier and probably drove better and I know it rode better than the Accord I test drive. But Honda has been able to nurse that image to a willing American population who believes what they see if it's seen often enough.
|
|
|
Replying to: dave8697 (Feb 23, 2009 8:37 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: tjc78 (Feb 23, 2009 1:06 pm) I did think of that after also as a competitor to the Infiniti G37. When I went and looked at pricing the CTS AWD with the more powerful DI-engine was about $5K more base-price! And the Infiniti has 22 more hp and is lighter and sportier. I haven't been thru the standard and options list, but I think the price disparity becomes even worse for the CTS. Basically though I would say that for GM to succeed they can not just be close or equal to companies like Infiniti. They need to be 5-10% less at a minimum, to makeup for perceived prestige and legacy quality issues. The CTS AWD 3.6 DI should have a starting point of about $32K instead of its $41K del. base. |
|
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
