**ZETA IS BACK ON TRACK** (page 6)**
03-21-2005, 10:30 AM
#1
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
**ZETA IS BACK ON TRACK** (page 6)**
GM hoping to speed up introductions of next-gen, full-size trucks - - By RICK KRANZ | Automotive News - - Source: Autoweek
Posted Date: 3/21/05
General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner wants to accelerate the launch of the automaker's next-generation full-sized trucks, but analysts say there isn't much he can do.
At most, GM can accelerate the launch of its re-engineered pickups by two or three months, analysts say. And the SUVs are locked into their introduction schedule; GM might move up their launch by only a few weeks.
The 2007-model Chevrolet and GMC SUVs are expected to go on sale in January, with the 2007 Cadillac Escalade following a month or two later. GM's big pickups originally were scheduled to debut late in 2006.
"Given the state and the size of the (GM900) program and the number of plants involved, obviously it's a big challenge to move it up a lot," Wagoner said during a Wednesday, March 16, teleconference with analysts and journalists. "But we've been doing a lot of work on that. Our intention is to try to advance the date."
Big rebates
Wagoner's eagerness is easy to understand; big trucks have been GM's biggest moneymakers. GM has the oldest full-sized trucks on the market. The pickups debuted for the 1999 model year, and the SUVs went on sale in the 2000 model year. The company is offering rebates of up to $4,000 on the Chevrolet Tahoe.
The new full-sized trucks are the most critical vehicles GM will introduce this decade. But these vehicles are too close to their launch dates to allow major changes in production schedules, says Michael Robinet, vice president at CSM Worldwide, a research firm in Farmington Hills, Mich.
Robinet predicts GM could accelerate the launch of its SUVs by a few weeks, and its pickups by two or three months.
"You really are restricted because you start to run into supplier capacity problems," Robinet says. "Everybody has structured this business to change over at a certain time.
Volume is priority
While GM is attempting to advance its program for full-sized trucks, it might delay or even cancel some low-volume niche vehicles. In a March 16 interview with Automotive News, CFO John Devine said GM will rethink plans for low-volume vehicles.
Robinet says it is too late to delay new vehicles scheduled to be introduced this year, such as the Buick Lucerne, Chevrolet HHR, Pontiac Solstice and Pontiac G6 coupe.
He says GM has delayed some vehicles that had been scheduled for minor sheet-metal changes in the next several years. Robinet did not identify programs that had been delayed.
Consultant Jim Hall says GM also could postpone the North American launch of its rear-drive family of cars known as Zeta.
Insiders have said Buick, Chevrolet and Pontiac are expected to have Zeta vehicles, possibly as early as 2007. But suppliers have not tooled up for these programs. So GM could hold off its North American Zeta variants without a big penalty.
Those vehicles "are just getting out of styling," says Hall, the Southfield, Mich.-based vice president of the research firm AutoPacific Inc. "So those are candidates to delay."
Jason Stein contributed to this report
General Motors CEO Rick Wagoner wants to accelerate the launch of the automaker's next-generation full-sized trucks, but analysts say there isn't much he can do.
At most, GM can accelerate the launch of its re-engineered pickups by two or three months, analysts say. And the SUVs are locked into their introduction schedule; GM might move up their launch by only a few weeks.
The 2007-model Chevrolet and GMC SUVs are expected to go on sale in January, with the 2007 Cadillac Escalade following a month or two later. GM's big pickups originally were scheduled to debut late in 2006.
"Given the state and the size of the (GM900) program and the number of plants involved, obviously it's a big challenge to move it up a lot," Wagoner said during a Wednesday, March 16, teleconference with analysts and journalists. "But we've been doing a lot of work on that. Our intention is to try to advance the date."
Big rebates
Wagoner's eagerness is easy to understand; big trucks have been GM's biggest moneymakers. GM has the oldest full-sized trucks on the market. The pickups debuted for the 1999 model year, and the SUVs went on sale in the 2000 model year. The company is offering rebates of up to $4,000 on the Chevrolet Tahoe.
The new full-sized trucks are the most critical vehicles GM will introduce this decade. But these vehicles are too close to their launch dates to allow major changes in production schedules, says Michael Robinet, vice president at CSM Worldwide, a research firm in Farmington Hills, Mich.
Robinet predicts GM could accelerate the launch of its SUVs by a few weeks, and its pickups by two or three months.
"You really are restricted because you start to run into supplier capacity problems," Robinet says. "Everybody has structured this business to change over at a certain time.
Volume is priority
While GM is attempting to advance its program for full-sized trucks, it might delay or even cancel some low-volume niche vehicles. In a March 16 interview with Automotive News, CFO John Devine said GM will rethink plans for low-volume vehicles.
Robinet says it is too late to delay new vehicles scheduled to be introduced this year, such as the Buick Lucerne, Chevrolet HHR, Pontiac Solstice and Pontiac G6 coupe.
He says GM has delayed some vehicles that had been scheduled for minor sheet-metal changes in the next several years. Robinet did not identify programs that had been delayed.
Consultant Jim Hall says GM also could postpone the North American launch of its rear-drive family of cars known as Zeta.
Insiders have said Buick, Chevrolet and Pontiac are expected to have Zeta vehicles, possibly as early as 2007. But suppliers have not tooled up for these programs. So GM could hold off its North American Zeta variants without a big penalty.
Those vehicles "are just getting out of styling," says Hall, the Southfield, Mich.-based vice president of the research firm AutoPacific Inc. "So those are candidates to delay."
Jason Stein contributed to this report
03-21-2005, 10:33 AM
#2
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Obviously a desparate attempt to patch the bleeding on its truck market share after the statistics from Feb. 2004 (about the overall market). More evidence of 100% reactive mode status at GM! Totally and completely inept team this is. Out of control, chaos, nothing is proactive, no organization whatsover, zero anticipation of what the competition will do in order to attempt to get there before they do....nothing positive to say about this exec team. They all must go NOW! Including Lutz!
03-21-2005, 10:36 AM
#3
GM needs to suck it up, cut some of its money losing divisions, and then focus on quality products with real designs instead of the ugly looking cars in its current line-up. The Corvette is about the only vehicle in the GM car line-up worth the money at this point. The Cadillacs have been making a comeback, but the years of damage to the brands image aren't going to get fixed overnight.
03-21-2005, 10:38 AM
#4
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
I mean the numbers look real bad suddenly, and Wagoner NOW thinks that, hey maybe our trucks need a redo! Just because the investors have him UNDER THE GUN! Now he wants to show he is busy! Well, way too late now buddy. Others have eaten you up for lunch and only your 1 billion year old dominance in market share in the USA saves you from complete destruction. At this point United is ran better than GM is what I am thinking. Inluding before UAL entered Chapter 11. Pathetic!
03-21-2005, 10:44 AM
#5
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by CGTSX2004
GM needs to suck it up, cut some of its money losing divisions, and then focus on quality products with real designs instead of the ugly looking cars in its current line-up.
We all thought that was supposed to start happening when Lutz entered. You come out with the Lucerne and the La Cross and I am sorry, it's time to go. You cant do that job.
The "job" was not to come up with lightyears better cars than before. The JOB! was to win over the competition. The Lucerne should have been BETTER than the GS! Yes, that was the job. The La Cross was supposed to be better than the ES.
You cant do that? You're out.
This is no game. This is either you win or lose. And it's only getting clearer and clearer due to more intense competition.
I mean look at the Koreans! Look at Hyundai and Kia! The Sportage I hear, will completely "kill" the Escape after the first test drives happening. The Sedona is now the safest minivan in its class and it offers as much as the best in the class. The market does not know it yet but they will find out after they keep executing.
That's how GM should have reacted 5 years ago. You make a 3 series? I will make as good of a 3 series during the first generation-run of the CTS. The next gen. will clearly beat you. Almost like Infiniti did.
Forget it. GM's attempt was at best mediocre. FOr starters mgt has to go. Unless if mgt's hands are tight due to unions, but I doubt it. We need Chapter 11 and new mgt to have hopes of recovery. Otherwise the show will be repetitive. And that is, the show will keep showing Toyota keep crawling up and eating up Ford's and GM's share until GM and Ford are either one or bought by someone else. Who knows from there...
03-21-2005, 10:50 AM
#6
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
This is getting worse and worse!
GM pulls plug on '08 line of cars - - Product czar Bob Lutz wants to speed new trucks, SUVs to market faster. - - By Ed Garsten / The Detroit News - - Source: The Detroit News
DETROIT -- General Motors Corp. has killed plans for a new line of rear-wheel drive passenger cars slated to reach North American showrooms in 2008, in large part to free up resources to bring its next generation of large pickups and sport utility vehicles to market quicker.
The news comes after GM reassured investors, suppliers and Wall Street analysts last week that future car and truck programs would remain on schedule despite a new cost-cutting effort.
The automaker is under severe pressure to streamline after announcing last week its 2005 earnings would fall as much as 80 percent below previous estimates.
"While work on particular North American applications of our premium rear-wheel drive midsize vehicle architecture have indeed been stopped, we have begun to study new approaches to efficiently capitalize on future opportunities we see for future midsize rear-wheel drive applications," Marc Beckers, a spokesman for GM, said.
The rear-drive "global architecture" -- dubbed Zeta -- was to provide the basic underpinnings for an array of cars and crossover vehicles for markets around the world. It will continue to be the basis for products sold in regions outside North America.
GM's decision to kill the Zeta program puts the brakes on development of the next generation Pontiac GTO sports car, and new entries for Chevrolet, Buick and Pontiac. The current GTO is already being produced by GM's Holden unit in Australia.
Bob Lutz, GM's vice chairman for product development, canceled development of the premium rear-wheel models for North America, according to two people familiar with the situation.
It was Lutz who first championed the new rear-wheel drive platform. The renowned car expert announced the Zeta program in 2003 as the industry was turning its attention toward rear-wheel drive vehicles.
But he pulled the plug on the North America models after determining the vehicles could not be engineered and assembled to sell at prices competitive with the popular Chrysler 300C, Ford Mustang and other models, without sacrificing quality and content.
In addition, GM is anxious to free up resources to speed up the launch of its new line of full-size pickup trucks. They are not expected to arrive until 2006.
Many in the industry expected the Zeta architecture would mean the return of the Chevrolet Camaro and production versions of the Buick Velite concept car, which debuted at the 2004 New York auto show to rave reviews.
"This is scary. It puts GM behind the eight ball," said Joseph Phillippi of AutoTrends Consulting in Short Hills, N.J. "It makes you wonder why can't they get it right. Where does it seemingly go wrong?"
The retreat from Zeta could delay the introduction of GM's new rear-wheel drive passenger cars by at least a year, Phillippi said.
That's bad news for the automaker, which has seen only lukewarm early sales for several of its newly launched products, such as the Pontiac G6, Chevrolet Cobalt and Buick LaCrosse. The new Chevrolet Equinox, a small SUV, has been a strong seller.
Global Insight market analyst John Wolkonowicz said GM's decision to stop the development of Zeta-based vehicles for North America means a missed opportunity to compete.
"The Chrysler 300C is a watershed car like the 1986 Ford Taurus," said Wolkonowicz. "With Zeta, GM had an answer."
For sure, GM has not given up on rear-wheel drive vehicles. Two roadsters, the Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky, will be rear-wheel drive entries. Other rear-wheel drive GM cars include the Cadillac CTS and STS sedans, the Chevrolet Corvette and the Pontiac GTO.
GM Chairman Rick Wagoner last week said there would be no reduction in capital spending in light of the abrupt profit warning and signaled new product programs would be safe from the budget ax.
"Product remains the first and most important element of the strategy to get North America on track," he said.
Through February, GM sales are down 10 percent from last year and its market share has slipped to 24.9 percent, compared with 26.7 percent a year ago, according to Autodata Corp.
"When you have an automaker struggling from a market share or sales standpoint, the worst thing you can do is slow introduction of product," said Erich Merkle, an analyst with Grand Rapids consultants IRN Inc. "It may point to some issues GM is having internally, perhaps from a communication perspective between what the market wants and what GM can afford."
GM pulls plug on '08 line of cars - - Product czar Bob Lutz wants to speed new trucks, SUVs to market faster. - - By Ed Garsten / The Detroit News - - Source: The Detroit News
DETROIT -- General Motors Corp. has killed plans for a new line of rear-wheel drive passenger cars slated to reach North American showrooms in 2008, in large part to free up resources to bring its next generation of large pickups and sport utility vehicles to market quicker.
The news comes after GM reassured investors, suppliers and Wall Street analysts last week that future car and truck programs would remain on schedule despite a new cost-cutting effort.
The automaker is under severe pressure to streamline after announcing last week its 2005 earnings would fall as much as 80 percent below previous estimates.
"While work on particular North American applications of our premium rear-wheel drive midsize vehicle architecture have indeed been stopped, we have begun to study new approaches to efficiently capitalize on future opportunities we see for future midsize rear-wheel drive applications," Marc Beckers, a spokesman for GM, said.
The rear-drive "global architecture" -- dubbed Zeta -- was to provide the basic underpinnings for an array of cars and crossover vehicles for markets around the world. It will continue to be the basis for products sold in regions outside North America.
GM's decision to kill the Zeta program puts the brakes on development of the next generation Pontiac GTO sports car, and new entries for Chevrolet, Buick and Pontiac. The current GTO is already being produced by GM's Holden unit in Australia.
Bob Lutz, GM's vice chairman for product development, canceled development of the premium rear-wheel models for North America, according to two people familiar with the situation.
It was Lutz who first championed the new rear-wheel drive platform. The renowned car expert announced the Zeta program in 2003 as the industry was turning its attention toward rear-wheel drive vehicles.
But he pulled the plug on the North America models after determining the vehicles could not be engineered and assembled to sell at prices competitive with the popular Chrysler 300C, Ford Mustang and other models, without sacrificing quality and content.
In addition, GM is anxious to free up resources to speed up the launch of its new line of full-size pickup trucks. They are not expected to arrive until 2006.
Many in the industry expected the Zeta architecture would mean the return of the Chevrolet Camaro and production versions of the Buick Velite concept car, which debuted at the 2004 New York auto show to rave reviews.
"This is scary. It puts GM behind the eight ball," said Joseph Phillippi of AutoTrends Consulting in Short Hills, N.J. "It makes you wonder why can't they get it right. Where does it seemingly go wrong?"
The retreat from Zeta could delay the introduction of GM's new rear-wheel drive passenger cars by at least a year, Phillippi said.
That's bad news for the automaker, which has seen only lukewarm early sales for several of its newly launched products, such as the Pontiac G6, Chevrolet Cobalt and Buick LaCrosse. The new Chevrolet Equinox, a small SUV, has been a strong seller.
Global Insight market analyst John Wolkonowicz said GM's decision to stop the development of Zeta-based vehicles for North America means a missed opportunity to compete.
"The Chrysler 300C is a watershed car like the 1986 Ford Taurus," said Wolkonowicz. "With Zeta, GM had an answer."
For sure, GM has not given up on rear-wheel drive vehicles. Two roadsters, the Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky, will be rear-wheel drive entries. Other rear-wheel drive GM cars include the Cadillac CTS and STS sedans, the Chevrolet Corvette and the Pontiac GTO.
GM Chairman Rick Wagoner last week said there would be no reduction in capital spending in light of the abrupt profit warning and signaled new product programs would be safe from the budget ax.
"Product remains the first and most important element of the strategy to get North America on track," he said.
Through February, GM sales are down 10 percent from last year and its market share has slipped to 24.9 percent, compared with 26.7 percent a year ago, according to Autodata Corp.
"When you have an automaker struggling from a market share or sales standpoint, the worst thing you can do is slow introduction of product," said Erich Merkle, an analyst with Grand Rapids consultants IRN Inc. "It may point to some issues GM is having internally, perhaps from a communication perspective between what the market wants and what GM can afford."
03-21-2005, 10:53 AM
#7
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
They killed ZETA! For trucks! What the hell is going on! These are desparate times at GM, this is proof. I am speechless. I am just sitting back and watching the show because this is getting better and better by the minute.
Trending Topics
03-21-2005, 10:55 AM
#8
Originally Posted by gavriil
We all thought that was supposed to start happening when Lutz entered. You come out with the Lucerne and the La Cross and I am sorry, it's time to go. You cant do that job.
The "job" was not to come up with lightyears better cars than before. The JOB! was to win over the competition. The Lucerne should have been BETTER than the GS! Yes, that was the job. The La Cross was supposed to be better than the ES.
You cant do that? You're out.
This is no game. This is either you win or lose. And it's only getting clearer and clearer due to more intense competition.
I mean look at the Koreans! Look at Hyundai and Kia! The Sportage I hear, will completely "kill" the Escape after the first test drives happening. The Sedona is now the safest minivan in its class and it offers as much as the best in the class. The market does not know it yet but they will find out after they keep executing.
That's how GM should have reacted 5 years ago. You make a 3 series? I will make as good of a 3 series during the first generation-run of the CTS. The next gen. will clearly beat you. Almost like Infiniti did.
Forget it. GM's attempt was at best mediocre. FOr starters mgt has to go. Unless if mgt's hands are tight due to unions, but I doubt it. We need Chapter 11 and new mgt to have hopes of recovery. Otherwise the show will be repetitive. And that is, the show will keep showing Toyota keep crawling up and eating up Ford's and GM's share until GM and Ford are either one or bought by someone else. Who knows from there...
The "job" was not to come up with lightyears better cars than before. The JOB! was to win over the competition. The Lucerne should have been BETTER than the GS! Yes, that was the job. The La Cross was supposed to be better than the ES.
You cant do that? You're out.
This is no game. This is either you win or lose. And it's only getting clearer and clearer due to more intense competition.
I mean look at the Koreans! Look at Hyundai and Kia! The Sportage I hear, will completely "kill" the Escape after the first test drives happening. The Sedona is now the safest minivan in its class and it offers as much as the best in the class. The market does not know it yet but they will find out after they keep executing.
That's how GM should have reacted 5 years ago. You make a 3 series? I will make as good of a 3 series during the first generation-run of the CTS. The next gen. will clearly beat you. Almost like Infiniti did.
Forget it. GM's attempt was at best mediocre. FOr starters mgt has to go. Unless if mgt's hands are tight due to unions, but I doubt it. We need Chapter 11 and new mgt to have hopes of recovery. Otherwise the show will be repetitive. And that is, the show will keep showing Toyota keep crawling up and eating up Ford's and GM's share until GM and Ford are either one or bought by someone else. Who knows from there...
03-21-2005, 11:00 AM
#9
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Wait a minute because I am losing it here.
When they say trucks, they must mean body-on-frame type of vehicles. If that's the case what are they smoking? This type of vehicle is dying. It reached its peak in Jan of 2005 it look like. The future is unit-body vehicles. Crossovers like the Pilot and even ala Mercedes R Class, etc.
This article above shows that GM's mgt is at much deeper loss than we think they are in my opinion. They do not know what to do, how to react to the numbers. Both theirs and the market's numbers. I am now certain that, unless GM's investors and board are idiotic (which I doubt), they will force most of the exec team out very soon. Watch!
When they say trucks, they must mean body-on-frame type of vehicles. If that's the case what are they smoking? This type of vehicle is dying. It reached its peak in Jan of 2005 it look like. The future is unit-body vehicles. Crossovers like the Pilot and even ala Mercedes R Class, etc.
This article above shows that GM's mgt is at much deeper loss than we think they are in my opinion. They do not know what to do, how to react to the numbers. Both theirs and the market's numbers. I am now certain that, unless GM's investors and board are idiotic (which I doubt), they will force most of the exec team out very soon. Watch!
03-21-2005, 11:03 AM
#11
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Saddness and disappointment has reverted to laughing my ass off here. I mean look at the situation from a high level perspective here.
The numbers come out bad and GM's top mgt says: We will do two things:
1. Get rid of a bunch of white colar mgt
2. Revert our main strategy from cars to trucks.
LOL!
The numbers come out bad and GM's top mgt says: We will do two things:
1. Get rid of a bunch of white colar mgt
2. Revert our main strategy from cars to trucks.
LOL!
03-21-2005, 11:16 AM
#12
Team Owner
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Hellertown, Pa. USA
Age: 57
Posts: 20,014
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gavriil
DETROIT -- General Motors Corp. has killed plans for a new line of rear-wheel drive passenger cars slated to reach North American showrooms in 2008, in large part to free up resources to bring its next generation of large pickups and sport utility vehicles to market quicker.
03-21-2005, 11:56 AM
#13
Race Director
Originally Posted by gavriil
Wait a minute because I am losing it here.
When they say trucks, they must mean body-on-frame type of vehicles. If that's the case what are they smoking? This type of vehicle is dying. It reached its peak in Jan of 2005 it look like. The future is unit-body vehicles. Crossovers like the Pilot and even ala Mercedes R Class, etc.
This article above shows that GM's mgt is at much deeper loss than we think they are in my opinion. They do not know what to do, how to react to the numbers. Both theirs and the market's numbers. I am now certain that, unless GM's investors and board are idiotic (which I doubt), they will force most of the exec team out very soon. Watch!
When they say trucks, they must mean body-on-frame type of vehicles. If that's the case what are they smoking? This type of vehicle is dying. It reached its peak in Jan of 2005 it look like. The future is unit-body vehicles. Crossovers like the Pilot and even ala Mercedes R Class, etc.
This article above shows that GM's mgt is at much deeper loss than we think they are in my opinion. They do not know what to do, how to react to the numbers. Both theirs and the market's numbers. I am now certain that, unless GM's investors and board are idiotic (which I doubt), they will force most of the exec team out very soon. Watch!
BIker, who expects an anouncement like this from Ford also.
03-21-2005, 12:04 PM
#14
GEEZER
03-21-2005, 12:11 PM
#15
The sizzle in the Steak
More focus on trucks?!?!?! Are they insane?
GM is in big trouble.
Trucks are not going to save GM.....they will be their downfall.
GM is in big trouble.
Trucks are not going to save GM.....they will be their downfall.
03-21-2005, 12:20 PM
#17
Race Director
They need some non GM guy like Ghosn who hasn't been brainwashed. And focus away from trucks. It will be interesting to see what Motorweek will have to say about the Cobalt in next week's show. It's cars like that could bail them out - if they could only sell them at close to sticker.
03-21-2005, 12:36 PM
#18
Safety Car
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 4,411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gavriil
They killed ZETA! For trucks! What the hell is going on! These are desparate times at GM, this is proof. I am speechless. I am just sitting back and watching the show because this is getting better and better by the minute.
03-21-2005, 01:11 PM
#20
Certified Lurker
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: East Hanover NJ
Age: 40
Posts: 1,366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I realy do feel like chapter 11 and starting all over is GM's only hope. Otherwise, it looks like they are going to be going the way of Mitsubishi. Sad.
03-21-2005, 01:14 PM
#21
Senior Moderator
gavrill, do you work for GM? You sound very bitter.
03-21-2005, 02:17 PM
#23
Changin bulbs since '73
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Chi-town burbs
Age: 50
Posts: 8,111
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
4 Posts
We are witnessing the death of a dinosaur. My god. I can't believe it. The death of a company that used to be so great. TRUCKS!!!??? The market is slowing down. There is no more growth in the truck market. Why do you think other companies have started focusing on crossovers and their sedans again. Don't these people have any foresight or vision. My god. I wish I could explain how bad I feel. I don't know why but I always root for American companies and it kills me to see them to just make one stupid move after another. How can they be so clueless? How does that happen?
03-21-2005, 07:02 PM
#25
Boy Genius
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Secret Laboratory
Age: 49
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading this thread makes me sad. What I really don't understand is how allocating resources to move up the launch of the trucks by maybe three months at most delays the introduction of Zeta by more than a year??? How many resources have to be pulled off of Zeta to get new Tahoes and Suburbans on the road a few months earlier? My understanding would be that trucks and Zeta should be two totally separate undertakings and one should not affect the other. If they are, then GM might be in even worse shape than one realized. I think GM should have bit the bullet on this one and said to the investors and analysts that Zeta was a winning proposition and we either spend the money on it now or all go home.
03-21-2005, 07:07 PM
#26
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by titan
I could write a book on how enraged I am right now... basically, I agree with your posts. I will chime in on Zeta, however. I had extremely high hopes for Zeta, and the it's role in the future in Buick in paritcular, and the G8, etc. in general. Killing is Zeta is almost suicide, IMO. I understand the importance of trucks, but it's obvious that GM still doen't understand what the customer wants. Look at the 300's success! GM fails to realize that RWD does make a difference. For those who say the average customer doesn't care, that's bullshit IMHO. I talk to alot of "regular" people, and I find them to be much savier regarding these issues that I think is expected. One doesn't have to be an enthusiast to know which will handle better. And for those who love to bring up the issue of people in the snowbelt, there are plenty of Lexus', Caddy's, and Benz's to be found there also. As Gav said, this mgt is the worst ever; all have got to go. I also agree wholeheartidly about the Lucerne being better than the GS (which sadly, it's not), and the Lacrosse better than the ES (wish we all know is not). So, Lutz can get the pinkslip along with Wagoner and every fucking body else. The board should collectively offer Ghosn their first borns, or something, and get some real automotive/executive talent in there, lol. I thought, well atleast maybe the RWD flagship could be the start of a resurgence... but ofcourse, you put to much hope into GM and you're hopes will be crushed. This is simply, absolutely pitifall.
03-21-2005, 07:09 PM
#27
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by F-C
gavrill, do you work for GM? You sound very bitter.
03-21-2005, 07:09 PM
#28
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by Infamous425
beep beep, there goes toyota to #1
Hehe...
Could not have said it better myself. Short and to the point.
03-21-2005, 07:38 PM
#30
I feel the need...
GM Needs `Radical' Steps to End Decline, Leaders Say (Update1)
2005-03-21 08:14 (New York)
By Peter Robison
March 21 (Bloomberg) -- General Motors Corp., an icon of
American industrial might for 80 years, needs new products, labor
concessions and federal help containing health costs if Chief
Executive Officer Rick Wagoner is to halt the automaker's
decline, say corporate leaders in autos, steel and airlines.
``Without some radical surgery, it may be an irreversible
downward spiral,'' said Robert S. Miller Jr., 63, a former vice
chairman at Chrysler Corp. who is now chairman of Southfield,
Michigan-based auto-parts maker Federal-Mogul Corp.
``If they are resistant to change, then the change may be
ordered by bankruptcy instead of being settled at the bargaining
table,'' he added.
The world's largest automaker on March 16 forecast its
biggest quarterly loss since 1992 and said earnings this year may
be as little as one-fifth of its top estimate. GM's bonds may be
cut to junk status at Standard & Poor's.
After promising a turnaround for much of his five-year
tenure, Wagoner may need to take the opposite course, according
to current and former executives who have handled similar crises.
They said Wagoner, 52, must lay out the severity of GM's
predicament so he can get help cutting health-care and pension
costs that hamstring the Detroit-based company against Japanese
rivals.
``Unless General Motors changes, somehow gets rid of its
health-care obligations and its pension obligations, it cannot
continue,'' said Robert Crandall, 69, who turned AMR Corp.'s
American Airlines into the world's largest airline as CEO from
1985 to 1998. ``Maybe it will last another 10 years or 15 years,
but it ain't going to last forever.''
Buyouts
GM is offering buyouts and early-retirement packages to some
non-union, salaried workers in North America. The offers have
been sent this year in hopes of speeding the company's ``normal''
amount of attrition, Toni Simonetti, a GM spokeswoman, said in an
interview yesterday.
GM said in December it was planning to make such offers,
without providing job-cut goals. The Wall Street Journal, in a
story today, said the cuts may go as deep as 28 percent in
certain ``functions.'' Simonetti declined to confirm the figure.
The reductions ``will vary from department to department,'' she
said. GM has about 40,000 salaried workers in North America.
Three Strategies
Crandall, Miller and other industry figures, including
former American Motors Corp. CEO Gerald Meyers, outlined in
separate interviews three strategies to help the company recover:
pressure the U.S. government for legislation to reduce the
company's health-care obligations, persuade the United Auto
Workers union to accept deeper benefit cuts, and improve GM's
cars and trucks.
General Motors has a market value of $16.2 billion, a
fraction of the $100.4 billion in debt due from 2005 to 2007.
Like other U.S. automakers, GM may not be able to survive long-
term with its present cost structure, said David Cole, chairman
of the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
``GM could die the death of a thousand cuts,'' said Cole,
whose late father, Edward, was GM's president from 1967 to 1974.
``It's down, down, down and then, where do they go?''
General Motors discounted talk of its demise.
``We have a strong cash position,'' company spokesman Jerry
Dubrowski said. ``We have a strong balance sheet. At this point
in time, we are focused on improving the profitability of our
North American operations and further strengthening our product
portfolio.''
Liquidity
Including $23 billion in cash at its automotive unit, $23
billion in cash at the finance unit and other lines of credit, GM
had access to at least $60 billion at the end of 2004, Dubrowski
said. ``That's a fair amount of liquidity.''
GM's net income fell in 2004 to $3.69 billion from $3.82
billion in 2003. In each year since 2002, more profit has come
from the company's finance unit, General Motors Acceptance Corp.,
than from the automotive unit. Last year, GMAC earned $2.91
billion for GM.
To try to boost North American sales, Wagoner is spending at
least $2 billion to redesign a family of 11 vehicles, including
the Silverado full-size pickup truck and Tahoe sport-utility
vehicle. He also named a new sales chief for North America on
March 1.
Toyota's Inroads
In the middle of the last century, GM controlled more than
half the U.S. car market and was such an industrial symbol that
former CEO Charles Wilson told the U.S. Senate in 1953: ``What
was good for our country was good for General Motors, and vice
versa.'' Now, GM may finish the year with less than 25 percent of
the market. New models pushed by Wagoner and his top designer,
Robert Lutz, have failed to stop market-share gains by Japanese
rivals, particularly Toyota Motor Corp.
The biggest challenge for Wagoner is managing the legacy of
GM's dominance. With 1.1 million employees, retirees and
dependents, the company estimates it will spend $5.6 billion this
year on health care, adding $1,400 to the price of each car.
`There are so many external factors over which you don't have any
control,'' said Allan Gilmour, 70, who retired last month as vice
chairman of Ford Motor Co. after a 34-year career.
``All of us in the domestic auto industry are concerned
about health-care costs,'' he said, adding that fuel costs are a
concern as well.
GM shares have dropped 15 percent to $28.62 since the March
16 announcement, which also prompted their biggest one-day
decline since the 1987 market crash. The extra yield investors
demand over U.S. Treasuries to buy GM's 6.875 percent note
maturing in 2011 widened 64 basis points to 3.77 percentage
points last week, a sign of waning confidence in the automaker.
Government's Stake
If investors continue losing confidence, it could trigger
the same cycle that doomed steel and other old-line industries:
higher borrowing costs, reduced capital for investment and waning
competitiveness, said Miller, who led Bethlehem Steel Corp. when
it filed for bankruptcy in 2001. His current company, Federal-
Mogul, is also in bankruptcy, over asbestos liability.
The federal government has a stake in keeping General Motors
healthy. More than 40 U.S. steel companies and five major
airlines have sought protection from creditors this decade,
leaving the government to cover the pensions in many cases.
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.'s deficit more than
doubled to a record $23.3 billion in fiscal 2004, fueling concern
among lawmakers that the government will have to craft a rescue
package, as it did with U.S. savings and loans in the 1980S.
Benefits Owed
The Washington-based agency, which insures pensions for U.S.
workers, now owes benefits to 1 million people. GM was paying
benefits to 455,382 former employees and surviving spouses as of
March 1, 2004.
Crandall, AMR's former CEO, said a ``national policy'' for
critical industries, including transportation, communications and
education, may be needed to help U.S. companies compete against
overseas rivals.
Representative John Dingell, 78, a Michigan Democrat, backs
the concept of having the federal government establish a
reinsurance pool that would help businesses such as General
Motors reduce health-benefit costs.
GM, the largest private buyer of health care in the U.S.,
should lobby for reforms of medical malpractice laws and get the
government to assist with catastrophic health-care coverage, said
Cole, of the Center for Automotive Research.
``We need to do more on health care,'' GM's Dubrowski said.
``There are a lot of constituents that need to play a role here.
Government is one.''
Miller said he observed the power of making a catastrophic
case firsthand at Chrysler. A former Ford executive, Miller was
recruited by then Chrysler CEO Lee Iacocca in 1979 to help win
Congressional passage of a federal loan guarantee.
`Local' Politics
Tip O'Neill, then speaker of the U.S. House of
Representatives, reminded Iacocca of O'Neill's now-famous dictum
``All politics is local,'' Miller recalled. Chrysler then
produced charts for every member of the House showing how many
jobs they would lose at car factories, suppliers and dealerships
in their districts if the company went bust, he said.
In January 1980, President Jimmy Carter signed a law
authorizing $1.5 billion in federally guaranteed loans, which
Chrysler repaid in 1983.
``That's the reason Chrysler got saved: We turned it into a
local issue,'' Miller said. Chrysler finished repaying the loans
in 1983.
GM can make a similar case today: Each job in the car
industry supports 9.4 other U.S. jobs, a higher ratio than any
other industry except energy, tobacco and beverages, Cole said.
GM's Dubrowski said the company has no plans to seek
government money or guarantees.
Indirect Aid
In today's climate, any aid would likely be indirect, Miller
said. Congress has declined to provide loan guarantees to
airlines including UAL Corp.'s United Airlines, of which Miller
is a director. UAL sought bankruptcy protection in 2002 after
being denied $1.8 billion in U.S. backing for loans.
The next part of GM's strategy should be to get the unions
to make concessions on health care and benefits, Crandall said.
``The work rules, vacation schedules, et cetera, that
General Motors works under are non-competitive,'' said Crandall,
who also dealt with an aging workforce at American Airlines.
``The UAW has got to come to the party just the way the airline
unions have to come to the party.''
Two recent concessions by the UAW may bode well for GM,
according to Cole: One is a tiered wage structure at auto-parts
makers Visteon Corp., based in Van Buren, Michigan, and spun off
from Ford in 2000, and Delphi Corp., based in Troy, Michigan, and
spun off from GM in 1999. The union accepted lower pay and
benefits for new workers, breaking with a tradition of equal pay
for equal work, Cole said.
UAW Contracts
The second concession, he said, involves contracts last year
with heavy-equipment manufacturers including Moline, Illinois-
based Deere & Co. and Peoria, Illinois-based Caterpillar Inc. UAW
members agreed to share in more of the health-care costs in those
contracts, according to Cole.
Emphasizing the consequences of a GM bankruptcy could help
make the case to the unions, he said. In a bankruptcy, workers
might lose much of their existing benefits.
``If you give any employee a choice between gold and silver,
they will take gold,'' Cole said. ``But if your choice is between
lead and silver, silver looks pretty good.''
UAW spokesman Paul Krell declined to comment on whether the
union was discussing concessions with GM or other automakers. GM
isn't scheduled to formally negotiate new terms with the union
again until 2007.
`They're Dull'
Wagoner, GM's CEO since June 2000, hired Lutz in 2001 to
help improve the styling of GM's cars. While they've closed the
gap in quality and reliability with Japanese brands in recent
years, GM's vehicles still trail, said Meyers, who was CEO of
American Motors from 1978 to 1982.
``They're engineered and built right, but they have no
distinctive appeal; they're dull,'' Meyers said in a mobile-phone
interview from his Toyota-made Lexus E300.
Three months ago, he visited the Joe Panian Chevrolet
dealership on Telegraph Road in Southfield, Michigan, to see if
the new Malibu would make a good car for his wife.
``I wouldn't touch it,'' said Meyers, now a professor of
management at the University of Michigan. ``It doesn't look good.
It doesn't feel good.''
--With reporting by John Stebbins in Chicago, Jeff Green and Bill
Koenig in Southfield, Michigan, and Annette Arreola in
Washington. Editors: Horvitz, Henry, Versical.
Story illustration: To chart the rise in yield on GM's
benchmark bonds that mature in 2003 click:
{370442BT1 <Corp> GY <GO>}. For displays on General Motors' share
performance, see
{GM US <Equity> CNP11721750103 <GO>}. Press the space bar to
pause and the Go key to continue. To see a story on GM profit
forecast, click {NSN IDGXM91A1I4H <GO>}. For a story on GM North
American production cuts,
see {NSNICOTOP0UQVI9 <GO>}.
2005-03-21 08:14 (New York)
By Peter Robison
March 21 (Bloomberg) -- General Motors Corp., an icon of
American industrial might for 80 years, needs new products, labor
concessions and federal help containing health costs if Chief
Executive Officer Rick Wagoner is to halt the automaker's
decline, say corporate leaders in autos, steel and airlines.
``Without some radical surgery, it may be an irreversible
downward spiral,'' said Robert S. Miller Jr., 63, a former vice
chairman at Chrysler Corp. who is now chairman of Southfield,
Michigan-based auto-parts maker Federal-Mogul Corp.
``If they are resistant to change, then the change may be
ordered by bankruptcy instead of being settled at the bargaining
table,'' he added.
The world's largest automaker on March 16 forecast its
biggest quarterly loss since 1992 and said earnings this year may
be as little as one-fifth of its top estimate. GM's bonds may be
cut to junk status at Standard & Poor's.
After promising a turnaround for much of his five-year
tenure, Wagoner may need to take the opposite course, according
to current and former executives who have handled similar crises.
They said Wagoner, 52, must lay out the severity of GM's
predicament so he can get help cutting health-care and pension
costs that hamstring the Detroit-based company against Japanese
rivals.
``Unless General Motors changes, somehow gets rid of its
health-care obligations and its pension obligations, it cannot
continue,'' said Robert Crandall, 69, who turned AMR Corp.'s
American Airlines into the world's largest airline as CEO from
1985 to 1998. ``Maybe it will last another 10 years or 15 years,
but it ain't going to last forever.''
Buyouts
GM is offering buyouts and early-retirement packages to some
non-union, salaried workers in North America. The offers have
been sent this year in hopes of speeding the company's ``normal''
amount of attrition, Toni Simonetti, a GM spokeswoman, said in an
interview yesterday.
GM said in December it was planning to make such offers,
without providing job-cut goals. The Wall Street Journal, in a
story today, said the cuts may go as deep as 28 percent in
certain ``functions.'' Simonetti declined to confirm the figure.
The reductions ``will vary from department to department,'' she
said. GM has about 40,000 salaried workers in North America.
Three Strategies
Crandall, Miller and other industry figures, including
former American Motors Corp. CEO Gerald Meyers, outlined in
separate interviews three strategies to help the company recover:
pressure the U.S. government for legislation to reduce the
company's health-care obligations, persuade the United Auto
Workers union to accept deeper benefit cuts, and improve GM's
cars and trucks.
General Motors has a market value of $16.2 billion, a
fraction of the $100.4 billion in debt due from 2005 to 2007.
Like other U.S. automakers, GM may not be able to survive long-
term with its present cost structure, said David Cole, chairman
of the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
``GM could die the death of a thousand cuts,'' said Cole,
whose late father, Edward, was GM's president from 1967 to 1974.
``It's down, down, down and then, where do they go?''
General Motors discounted talk of its demise.
``We have a strong cash position,'' company spokesman Jerry
Dubrowski said. ``We have a strong balance sheet. At this point
in time, we are focused on improving the profitability of our
North American operations and further strengthening our product
portfolio.''
Liquidity
Including $23 billion in cash at its automotive unit, $23
billion in cash at the finance unit and other lines of credit, GM
had access to at least $60 billion at the end of 2004, Dubrowski
said. ``That's a fair amount of liquidity.''
GM's net income fell in 2004 to $3.69 billion from $3.82
billion in 2003. In each year since 2002, more profit has come
from the company's finance unit, General Motors Acceptance Corp.,
than from the automotive unit. Last year, GMAC earned $2.91
billion for GM.
To try to boost North American sales, Wagoner is spending at
least $2 billion to redesign a family of 11 vehicles, including
the Silverado full-size pickup truck and Tahoe sport-utility
vehicle. He also named a new sales chief for North America on
March 1.
Toyota's Inroads
In the middle of the last century, GM controlled more than
half the U.S. car market and was such an industrial symbol that
former CEO Charles Wilson told the U.S. Senate in 1953: ``What
was good for our country was good for General Motors, and vice
versa.'' Now, GM may finish the year with less than 25 percent of
the market. New models pushed by Wagoner and his top designer,
Robert Lutz, have failed to stop market-share gains by Japanese
rivals, particularly Toyota Motor Corp.
The biggest challenge for Wagoner is managing the legacy of
GM's dominance. With 1.1 million employees, retirees and
dependents, the company estimates it will spend $5.6 billion this
year on health care, adding $1,400 to the price of each car.
`There are so many external factors over which you don't have any
control,'' said Allan Gilmour, 70, who retired last month as vice
chairman of Ford Motor Co. after a 34-year career.
``All of us in the domestic auto industry are concerned
about health-care costs,'' he said, adding that fuel costs are a
concern as well.
GM shares have dropped 15 percent to $28.62 since the March
16 announcement, which also prompted their biggest one-day
decline since the 1987 market crash. The extra yield investors
demand over U.S. Treasuries to buy GM's 6.875 percent note
maturing in 2011 widened 64 basis points to 3.77 percentage
points last week, a sign of waning confidence in the automaker.
Government's Stake
If investors continue losing confidence, it could trigger
the same cycle that doomed steel and other old-line industries:
higher borrowing costs, reduced capital for investment and waning
competitiveness, said Miller, who led Bethlehem Steel Corp. when
it filed for bankruptcy in 2001. His current company, Federal-
Mogul, is also in bankruptcy, over asbestos liability.
The federal government has a stake in keeping General Motors
healthy. More than 40 U.S. steel companies and five major
airlines have sought protection from creditors this decade,
leaving the government to cover the pensions in many cases.
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.'s deficit more than
doubled to a record $23.3 billion in fiscal 2004, fueling concern
among lawmakers that the government will have to craft a rescue
package, as it did with U.S. savings and loans in the 1980S.
Benefits Owed
The Washington-based agency, which insures pensions for U.S.
workers, now owes benefits to 1 million people. GM was paying
benefits to 455,382 former employees and surviving spouses as of
March 1, 2004.
Crandall, AMR's former CEO, said a ``national policy'' for
critical industries, including transportation, communications and
education, may be needed to help U.S. companies compete against
overseas rivals.
Representative John Dingell, 78, a Michigan Democrat, backs
the concept of having the federal government establish a
reinsurance pool that would help businesses such as General
Motors reduce health-benefit costs.
GM, the largest private buyer of health care in the U.S.,
should lobby for reforms of medical malpractice laws and get the
government to assist with catastrophic health-care coverage, said
Cole, of the Center for Automotive Research.
``We need to do more on health care,'' GM's Dubrowski said.
``There are a lot of constituents that need to play a role here.
Government is one.''
Miller said he observed the power of making a catastrophic
case firsthand at Chrysler. A former Ford executive, Miller was
recruited by then Chrysler CEO Lee Iacocca in 1979 to help win
Congressional passage of a federal loan guarantee.
`Local' Politics
Tip O'Neill, then speaker of the U.S. House of
Representatives, reminded Iacocca of O'Neill's now-famous dictum
``All politics is local,'' Miller recalled. Chrysler then
produced charts for every member of the House showing how many
jobs they would lose at car factories, suppliers and dealerships
in their districts if the company went bust, he said.
In January 1980, President Jimmy Carter signed a law
authorizing $1.5 billion in federally guaranteed loans, which
Chrysler repaid in 1983.
``That's the reason Chrysler got saved: We turned it into a
local issue,'' Miller said. Chrysler finished repaying the loans
in 1983.
GM can make a similar case today: Each job in the car
industry supports 9.4 other U.S. jobs, a higher ratio than any
other industry except energy, tobacco and beverages, Cole said.
GM's Dubrowski said the company has no plans to seek
government money or guarantees.
Indirect Aid
In today's climate, any aid would likely be indirect, Miller
said. Congress has declined to provide loan guarantees to
airlines including UAL Corp.'s United Airlines, of which Miller
is a director. UAL sought bankruptcy protection in 2002 after
being denied $1.8 billion in U.S. backing for loans.
The next part of GM's strategy should be to get the unions
to make concessions on health care and benefits, Crandall said.
``The work rules, vacation schedules, et cetera, that
General Motors works under are non-competitive,'' said Crandall,
who also dealt with an aging workforce at American Airlines.
``The UAW has got to come to the party just the way the airline
unions have to come to the party.''
Two recent concessions by the UAW may bode well for GM,
according to Cole: One is a tiered wage structure at auto-parts
makers Visteon Corp., based in Van Buren, Michigan, and spun off
from Ford in 2000, and Delphi Corp., based in Troy, Michigan, and
spun off from GM in 1999. The union accepted lower pay and
benefits for new workers, breaking with a tradition of equal pay
for equal work, Cole said.
UAW Contracts
The second concession, he said, involves contracts last year
with heavy-equipment manufacturers including Moline, Illinois-
based Deere & Co. and Peoria, Illinois-based Caterpillar Inc. UAW
members agreed to share in more of the health-care costs in those
contracts, according to Cole.
Emphasizing the consequences of a GM bankruptcy could help
make the case to the unions, he said. In a bankruptcy, workers
might lose much of their existing benefits.
``If you give any employee a choice between gold and silver,
they will take gold,'' Cole said. ``But if your choice is between
lead and silver, silver looks pretty good.''
UAW spokesman Paul Krell declined to comment on whether the
union was discussing concessions with GM or other automakers. GM
isn't scheduled to formally negotiate new terms with the union
again until 2007.
`They're Dull'
Wagoner, GM's CEO since June 2000, hired Lutz in 2001 to
help improve the styling of GM's cars. While they've closed the
gap in quality and reliability with Japanese brands in recent
years, GM's vehicles still trail, said Meyers, who was CEO of
American Motors from 1978 to 1982.
``They're engineered and built right, but they have no
distinctive appeal; they're dull,'' Meyers said in a mobile-phone
interview from his Toyota-made Lexus E300.
Three months ago, he visited the Joe Panian Chevrolet
dealership on Telegraph Road in Southfield, Michigan, to see if
the new Malibu would make a good car for his wife.
``I wouldn't touch it,'' said Meyers, now a professor of
management at the University of Michigan. ``It doesn't look good.
It doesn't feel good.''
--With reporting by John Stebbins in Chicago, Jeff Green and Bill
Koenig in Southfield, Michigan, and Annette Arreola in
Washington. Editors: Horvitz, Henry, Versical.
Story illustration: To chart the rise in yield on GM's
benchmark bonds that mature in 2003 click:
{370442BT1 <Corp> GY <GO>}. For displays on General Motors' share
performance, see
{GM US <Equity> CNP11721750103 <GO>}. Press the space bar to
pause and the Go key to continue. To see a story on GM profit
forecast, click {NSN IDGXM91A1I4H <GO>}. For a story on GM North
American production cuts,
see {NSNICOTOP0UQVI9 <GO>}.
03-21-2005, 09:36 PM
#31
Suzuka Master
Originally Posted by PistonFan
.... While they've closed the
gap in quality and reliability with Japanese brands in recent
years, GM's vehicles still trail, said Meyers, who was CEO of
American Motors from 1978 to 1982.
``They're engineered and built right, but they have no
distinctive appeal; they're dull,'' Meyers said in a mobile-phone
interview from his Toyota-made Lexus E300.
Three months ago, he visited the Joe Panian Chevrolet
dealership on Telegraph Road in Southfield, Michigan, to see if
the new Malibu would make a good car for his wife.
``I wouldn't touch it,'' said Meyers, now a professor of
management at the University of Michigan. ``It doesn't look good.
It doesn't feel good.''
...
gap in quality and reliability with Japanese brands in recent
years, GM's vehicles still trail, said Meyers, who was CEO of
American Motors from 1978 to 1982.
``They're engineered and built right, but they have no
distinctive appeal; they're dull,'' Meyers said in a mobile-phone
interview from his Toyota-made Lexus E300.
Three months ago, he visited the Joe Panian Chevrolet
dealership on Telegraph Road in Southfield, Michigan, to see if
the new Malibu would make a good car for his wife.
``I wouldn't touch it,'' said Meyers, now a professor of
management at the University of Michigan. ``It doesn't look good.
It doesn't feel good.''
...
I'm afraid this may be the death knell for GM. Their small cars like the Malibu, Cobalt, and the Saturn Ion simply aren't competitive. Honestly i'm not so sure that their trucks are all that much better than a Ford F150, Toyota Tundra, Dodge Ram or Nissan Titan either. GM is between a rock and a hard place right now.
eneral Motors has a market value of $16.2 billion, a
fraction of the $100.4 billion in debt due from 2005 to 2007.
Like other U.S. automakers, GM may not be able to survive long-
term with its present cost structure, said David Cole, chairman
of the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
fraction of the $100.4 billion in debt due from 2005 to 2007.
Like other U.S. automakers, GM may not be able to survive long-
term with its present cost structure, said David Cole, chairman
of the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
03-21-2005, 09:40 PM
#32
I feel the need...
It's a shame really.
I'd love to buy a domestic product, but quite frankly - I've yet to find one that brings the complete package of features I desire, at the price point that I want.
Obviously, a lot of other consumers feel the same way.
I'd love to buy a domestic product, but quite frankly - I've yet to find one that brings the complete package of features I desire, at the price point that I want.
Obviously, a lot of other consumers feel the same way.
03-21-2005, 10:06 PM
#33
The sizzle in the Steak
Originally Posted by PistonFan
It's a shame really.
I'd love to buy a domestic product, but quite frankly - I've yet to find one that brings the complete package of features I desire, at the price point that I want.
Obviously, a lot of other consumers feel the same way.
I'd love to buy a domestic product, but quite frankly - I've yet to find one that brings the complete package of features I desire, at the price point that I want.
Obviously, a lot of other consumers feel the same way.
03-21-2005, 11:35 PM
#35
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2001
Age: 46
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I read another press release that the planned RWD cars are not being cancelled, just the Zeta platform. I suspect GM may find a way to adapt its existing Sigma RWD platform (CTS) to be used on these other cars. Why spend a ton of money on yet another platform if you don't want to. Economies of scale would be much higher and overall costs per unit lower if they could use a single platform rather than two.
03-21-2005, 11:51 PM
#36
Boy Genius
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Secret Laboratory
Age: 49
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SteVTEC
I read another press release that the planned RWD cars are not being cancelled, just the Zeta platform. I suspect GM may find a way to adapt its existing Sigma RWD platform (CTS) to be used on these other cars. Why spend a ton of money on yet another platform if you don't want to. Economies of scale would be much higher and overall costs per unit lower if they could use a single platform rather than two.
Why not just bring the Australian Holden RWD platform over to North America? (Pontiac GTO comes to mind, just bring the other models too.)
03-22-2005, 12:34 AM
#37
Boy Genius
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Secret Laboratory
Age: 49
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Update from Bob Lutz's blog: http://fastlane.gmblogs.com/archives...ot_the_en.html
03-22-2005, 01:56 AM
#38
Kabachitare!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 936
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is Lutz's last gamble. He's betting the house that by the time his new full size trucks and SUVs come out gas prices will come down again. As unlikely as that seems, if his gamble works he be hailed as a hero. If it flops this will be his and GM's Waterloo.
03-22-2005, 10:01 AM
#40
Moderator Alumnus
Originally Posted by lokman
Update from Bob Lutz's blog: http://fastlane.gmblogs.com/archives...ot_the_en.html
Interesting to read that blog, it shows how stupid some people are who respond to him. That guy who believes a new mustang costs 30-35k shows he has no clue what he's talking about.
However there is one good post in there, it's huge though.