Lutz: Volt to be tested with Malibu mules early '08

[Flybrian]

I e-mailed Mr. Lutz a few hours ago to covey our support and enthusiasm for his dedication to the Chevrolet Volt and to also ask him about mules and prototypes, specifically when will we see first evidence of the E-Flex system outside the lab and on the road (and when folks can drive them).

Part of the response is as follows:

"The early testing before production can legally only be done by GM people. What we will drive next spring will be crude mule vehicles consisting of cut-up last generation Malibus containing experimental battery packs. Nothing can be driven by the public before the end of 2010."

[enzl]

I e-mailed Mr. Lutz a few hours ago to covey our support and enthusiasm for his dedication to the Chevrolet Volt and to also ask him about mules and prototypes, specifically when will we see first evidence of the E-Flex system outside the lab and on the road (and when folks can drive them).

Part of the response is as follows:

"The early testing before production can legally only be done by GM people. What we will drive next spring will be crude mule vehicles consisting of cut-up last generation Malibus containing experimental battery packs. Nothing can be driven by the public before the end of 2010."

Meaning the earliest Volts will be '11 models--and likely '12 models, already backing away from the initial promise of '10 availability...only, what, 15 years or so after the first Prius was on the road in Japan?

[Flybrian]

2010 - like most years - comprises twelve months, from January to December. Never have I seen a specific target date within 2010 before. Nothing is being 'backed away' from.

[CARBIZ]

Not since Buickman have I heard such naysaying. It reminds me of Monty Python's Argument Clinic. Here, let me try an experiment.....GM builds quality vehicles, representing solid values in each of their target markets.........................

[pow]

2010 - like most years - comprises twelve months, from January to December. Never have I seen a specific target date within 2010 before. Nothing is being 'backed away' from.

"Nothing can be driven by the public before the end of 2010."

Yeah, but 2010 - like most years - end in a December. In other words, they mean 2011 at the earliest, although another source quoted Lutz saying "for sale by 2010."

To me it seems the Volt concept was cobbled together quickly to demands for a greener halo, and that actual engineering and development of it didn't start until after its reveal. I'm not doubting the Volt's production potential -- I believe GM is fully committed/obligated to making it after such positive public reaction -- and I applaud their efforts, but as far as actual, existing tech achievements, I don't believe there was much a lead at NAIAS '07. It was a styling concept with cool-sounding "E-flex" nomenclature. Could the concept even travel past 25 mph, or go 40 miles, for that matter?

I hope it's release date is closer to 2010 than 2012, because the fourth-gen Prius may switch to li-ion batteries by then.

[plane]

Promise low.

Deliver high.

I don't understand why it seems almost everything is taken at face value.

For all we know, the prototypes are on the road and the plant is tooling up right now.

I'm not saying that's the case,

but who really knows and is willing to honestly share with us

how far along GM is with the Volt?

[enzl]

Umm...here ya go....

Bob Lutz has been quoted saying late 2010 intro:

That is the production targeted by General Motors for the introductory year of the Chevrolet Volt, according to Bloomberg News. Bloomberg said the information came from a GM insider. GM’s Robert Lutz has predicted the Volt’s introduction by late 2010. At that production level, GM would be building four times as many Volts in the introductory year as Toyota did of the Prius in its first year on the market. Putting that into perspective, Chevrolet plans to produce as many Volts (...)

Bloomberg News a credible source?

Please, you may not like it, but GM is again (just like the Camaro) putting way too much emphasis on a product that doesn't exist, yet!

Here's the link to the same info, this time told to JD Power:

http://www.jdpower.com/articles/article.aspx?ID=430

CarBiz--a cardinal rule of business is to underpromise and overdeliver---GM has a habit of doing the opposite--and again are revealing that their management team does not know how to handle the present circumstances and, furthermore, do not have a solid vision for the future of GM.

I love cars. I love GM. I hate the way they do business, as it shortchanges all of their dedicated employees and fans, repeatedly.

Mark my words--the 2007 Volt promise will result in not 1, but 2 generations of Toyota Hybrid tech developed AND, more importantly, SOLD to actual, real live customers. Good Luck getting the lead you're spotting them back.

[Flybrian]

By your very example, you just showed that Lutz hasn't backed away from anything then. Its apparently always been late-'10.

[enzl]

By your very example, you just showed that Lutz hasn't backed away from anything then. Its apparently always been late-'10.

A late '10 INTRODUCTION is for '11 cars...you know this business....available to drive doesn't mean the car is for general consumption.

You can parse words all you want, GM more than implied this thing would be ready in '10---apparently, that's no ,onger the cae, mere months from the fanfare of its conceptual intro--leading me to believe even more delays will occur in the next few years---and I suspect, as someone mentioned above, that little was done before the Volt was displayed.

You said he NEVER said '10, I said (and backed up) that he did. Period.

Either you did not accurately descirbe his reply or you're wrong. Take your pick. This isn't a debating team, man, I'm just going by your representations.

Edited September 20, 2007 by enzl

[EMan]

I don't get the big deal, say that GM does push back the release of Volt to Jan of 2011; does it make it less of a milestone in the auto industry? The Volt will still be a great accomplishment for GM and a great innovation for the public. Do you remember the $100 dollar laptop? Even at a price close to $200 it will be a great help for educating children. Same thing with the Volt, it will start the revolution on getting us away from focusing on oil as a fuel (for our cars). New and improve technology will follow and eventually there will be no need for gas as a fuel.

[siegen]

...only, what, 15 years or so after the first Prius was on the road in Japan?

And only 5-6 years after the first fully EPA certified hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles became available to lease customers.

But if GM can get past the cost hurdle, and actually make an electric vehicle available for sale at a reasonable price, then that will be a huge accomplishment indeed!

Edited September 20, 2007 by siegen

[PurdueGuy]

A late '10 INTRODUCTION is for '11 cars...you know this business....available to drive doesn't mean the car is for general consumption.

You can parse words all you want, GM more than implied this thing would be ready in '10---apparently, that's no ,onger the cae, mere months from the fanfare of its conceptual intro--leading me to believe even more delays will occur in the next few years---and I suspect, as someone mentioned above, that little was done before the Volt was displayed.

Now you're mixing calendar & model years to support your argument. Stick to one, please. If it's for sale in '10, it's available in '10, even if labelled as an '11 car.

[PrimeGTP]

I think pretty much everyone knew when the Volt concept was revealed that it was just a plastic box with nothing inside it yet.

[Flybrian]

You said he NEVER said '10, I said (and backed up) that he did. Period.

Either you did not accurately descirbe his reply or you're wrong. Take your pick. This isn't a debating team, man, I'm just going by your representations.

Don't put words in my mouth. I said he never set a target date within the year of 2010. You just went ahead and proved me right; late-'10 is not a specific target date - March, June, October - that's a target date. Late 2010 is a timeframe., not a specific date. And even if you consider a vague three month window a 'target date,' then Lutz still never changed from his original target - late 2010.

You're the one parsing words, taking an informal e-mail exchange and extrapolating all these fictitious 'delays' and meanings from it. Right now, all you're doing is the exact same thing everyone accuses 'fanboys' of doing but from the opposite tack - lots of speculation and conjecture with little or no direct evidence to back it up. When GM pushes the Volt production unit intro to 2011, then you'll be right. Until then, no.

People love to rag on 'fanboys' for blindly believing everything GM says (and its clear we don't), but at least we have some hopes here. Some have gone beyond cautious optimism to malicious pessimism for what gain exactly? What if you're right, GM fails, the Volt is vaporware, and the Prius sweeps across America like the herpes infection it is? What's the benefit of all this negative banter? I swear its like arguing out a third-story window at some kid move out of the street else he'll get hit, watching him get plowed over by a bus, then feeling validated because you were right.

[Oracle of Delphi]

I never believe anything GM says, those bastards!

[CARBIZ]

Sounds to me that someone's mommy had a '83 Citation and they still haven't gotten over it yet.....

Frankly, if I had nothing to do in life, I suppose I could just haunt ToyotaNation and piss over everything everyone said there, but I admit I don't like Toyota and, therefore, can't be bothered even to listen to the mewling on that site. It would be too exhausting.

I don't care if the Volt is here in 1st quarter '10 or first quarter '11. Just build it and get it right the first time. The fact that Toyota is cranking up its PR machine against the Volt is good enough for me.

[Drew Dowdell]

The fact that Toyota is cranking up its PR machine against the Volt is good enough for me.

Just hope that it snaps a camshaft, throws a gear or sludges up before it can do too much damage.

[enzl]

Don't put words in my mouth. I said he never set a target date within the year of 2010. You just went ahead and proved me right; late-'10 is not a specific target date - March, June, October - that's a target date. Late 2010 is a timeframe., not a specific date. And even if you consider a vague three month window a 'target date,' then Lutz still never changed from his original target - late 2010.

You're the one parsing words, taking an informal e-mail exchange and extrapolating all these fictitious 'delays' and meanings from it. Right now, all you're doing is the exact same thing everyone accuses 'fanboys' of doing but from the opposite tack - lots of speculation and conjecture with little or no direct evidence to back it up. When GM pushes the Volt production unit intro to 2011, then you'll be right. Until then, no.

People love to rag on 'fanboys' for blindly believing everything GM says (and its clear we don't), but at least we have some hopes here. Some have gone beyond cautious optimism to malicious pessimism for what gain exactly? What if you're right, GM fails, the Volt is vaporware, and the Prius sweeps across America like the herpes infection it is? What's the benefit of all this negative banter? I swear its like arguing out a third-story window at some kid move out of the street else he'll get hit, watching him get plowed over by a bus, then feeling validated because you were right.

I get no joy from being right. '10 was the PR 'timeframe' (implying ready for sale) for the car. That's what GM was saying, more specifically, that's what Lutz was saying. I'm NOT saying it was delayed, I'm saying they lied....

Now we're at the end of '10---for the public to sit/drive in one. That means it's an '11, at minimum.

As for the personal attack: I'm not ragging on anything. My pessimism is easily defended by the gross incompetence of those running GM.

You want wine and roses? Fine. You want truth---just ask me.

People are running for the exits when it comes to GM. You think they're on the right track? You are deluding yourself---what worse, you're misinforming those that come here as casual fans of GM and cars in general.

The Volt is nothing more than a pretty show car and a theoretical bunch of ideas that NOONE on the planet has put into one vehicle for production---not the greenies in Cali, not Tesla, not China---Nobody.

I should accept, on faith, that GM will take a not-yet-ready for prime time tech, develop it, then mass produce it in 3 years time? Name one thing they've been ahead of the curve on in the last 20 years.....

Please. I take no joy---I suffer MORE than you for GM's utter failure on so many levels. My future, my livelihood and my mortgage payment depends on GM getting up off the mat...what will you lose--the ability to anonymously lord over a few zit-faced tweens as a moderator on a GM fansite? When you have as much as me at stake, I'll worry that you feel I'm over the top.

I don't believe that GM will have retired the 4 speed auto by 2011, nevermind building the automotive version of the moonshot.

Your misplaced and completely blind faith that GM's 'gonna make it happen' is twice as absurd as my parsing words or stating the obvious: Drastic Action needs to be taken--that sense of urgency is nowhere to be found in GM's planning.

Comparing my hyperbole with a kid getting hit by a bus just shows that you cannot be trusted to objectively look at this situation...nooone's kid is dying here--just the livelihoods of 100,000 people and a number of towns all over the US.

Edited September 20, 2007 by enzl

[PurdueGuy]

nevermind building the automotive version of the moonshot.

That's funny. Let's see... Volt = electric car + engine & generator

GM has experience building electric cars.

GM has experience building engines.

Attaching generators to engines isn't exactly rocket science.

I fail to see how this comes close to a "moon shot". They can, and plan to put the basic system together by spring (if they haven't already). From there it's detail work. I think 3 years is entirely reasonable to put out a pretty refined product.

You try to claim that you're not being a pessimist, but you're just as far over that edge as those yelling "THIS WILL REVOLUTIONIZE THE WORLD!" As usual, you can expect the truth to lie somewhere in the middle.

[Flybrian]

For a group of "zit-faced tweens," someone sure finds us appealing enough to hang around and post here.

My challenge to you, Enzl: What's your solution for the imminent Volt 'failure'? I look forward to hearing your response.

[Drew Dowdell]

not that I don't like the concept of the Volt, but Enzl, there is nothing revolutionary about any of the technology in it. It's all existing technology that is just being put together in a new way.

ICE, GM has been doing those for about 100 years.

Electric motor, GM has been doing those for probably 90 years.

connecting an electric motor to a generator to an ICE, GM has been doing that since 1922

GM did the electric car in the 1990s....

The only thing kind of new here is the battery technology. All GM is doing to work around the heat limitation of Lithium Ion batteries is expanding on the idea that the batteries should be cooled as Toyota introduced in the original Pruis.

Seriously, this isn't rocket science.... heck, it's barely even automotive science.

I really wish I could have been the guy paid to say, "I know! Lets liquid cool them!" and get paid $30,000 in consulting fees.

Given the riced out nature of the liquid cooled PC business, I'm surprised the Asians didn't "get it" first.

[CARBIZ]

So, GM has two choices: sit back and let Toyota take all the limelight for being lucky enough to have the (almost) right car at the right time. Let's face it: without Katrina and all the insurgents in Iraq, oil would still be at $50 a barrel and Toyota would look pretty stupid now.

Or, GM can come out swinging with a car they have commited to having to market in the next 2-3 years. It makes a certain degree of PR sense to build some momentum on this thing. I agree that GM has f$@d up a lot in the past, but things have definitely been on the mend since they brought Lutz on board.

I, for one, am willing to give him some benefit of the doubt. If GM has licked this lithium-ion thing, they sure as hell won't be telling you and I about it. If they haven't, then I am optmistic that they learned something from the EV-1 program and have an ace up their sleeve.

Getting all pissy about it accomplishes nothing. In two years, a lot can happen.

TWO YEARS AGO, MOST PUNDITS HAD WRITTEN GM OFF AS BANKRUPT.

[enzl]

I don't know where to begin, but I'll start with the topic and state this alone:

If the Volt's combined features were so easy to do, you would have heard that someone was developing such a vehicular system---it's not just stick a small generator motor to a batttery pack and hook both to an electric motor---it's obvious that the plug-in hardware, batteries, software and other components do not exist in a form that lends itself to throwing 'em together. And, if the architecture of the vehicle must support the changes in how these pieces fit, now you've got to be sure that it's compatible with future crash/safety standards....

Apparently, this is a multiple years away...we saw the concept in 07 and won't see the real thing until 11---and if changing the entire way cars are designed/built, quadrupling efficiency and mass producing said effort isn't a moonshot. we'll just have to agree to disagree (Man had rockets for 30+ years before we landed men on the moon, BTW, so technically, the means were there)

Now, Fly, since you've asked, here's what I'd do if I was the ruler at the Tubes:

1. Make sure each and every new product was as close to excellent as possible. If it can't run with the best in class, don't produce it until it does. The new 'bu, for example, will come to market on an aging chassis that GM knows it needs to update...as evidenced by the 09/10 Aura, which follows quickly to market....

2. Identify the best people in every facet of the industry. Then go out and hire them. If Jim Press could take a job with Chrysler, then anybody is a potential free agent signing.

3. Marketing & advertising must be completely revamped to meet 21st century customers. I find that from stock photos to TV spots, there's no less imaginative auto stuff out there than the Generals--apply #2 to the marketing & advertising industries, if necessary.

4. Use 'secret shoppers' rather than BS surveys, to determine the quality of dealers...go after the worst ones with a vengence and support the best with real assistance, not by throwing a few bucks at them so that they can put 3rd rate come-on ads in the papers & the GM can add an extension to his house.

5. MOST IMPORTANTLY: I'd restore accountability to the Management ranks at GM---who has overseen the cratering of sales, the largest loss in history, the continual drain of the corporate coffers to fund ill-advised acquisitions and partnerships---its time to fire some people.

If you or I performed on the job like these guys, we'd be fired. Point #2 applies here, perhaps even more strongly...there's talent out there. Mr. Bernhart as one example. Rick & his cronies don't know about best practices for modern companies because they're Lifers---its time for new blood.

That's off the top of my head...I'm no Buickman with some magical plan, I just can't believe that steps as obvious as the ones above haven't been taken. As for blaming the economy or gas prices, this crisis started years ago, on Rick's watch. Anyone with half a brain knew that one small Middle Eastern skirmish would catapult the price of oil---and since your lone profit center is big trucks, wouldn't it have been wise to at least have a plan B? There are lots of small cars in Europe---The price of gas has been obscene there for some time---Are you telling me noone imagined that developing small cars that could be quickly adapted to all markets could be a good idea? Or that GM-Daewoo's line-up didn't have small diesel development on the menu? Or that sickly Fiat might not be the best partnership to take a Put Option on?

While my words are harsh, my conscience is clear, as I'm neither avoiding the obvious nor allowing bias to creep into my judgement. I was in a new Camry yesterday---its not so great....How come GM still can't develop an effective, demonstrably superior product? They've only had 20 years to figure it out.

GM has always been great at promises. "Just wait until our next X is out. That'll drive the foreigners into the sea." They haven't even come close to that, yet.

Why should I put my faith some new promise. Like an abused spouse, you guys are always coming back for more. I want real change. You don't like my pessimism? Unfortunately, it's well-founded.

Is that an answer, Fly?

TBC....

Edited September 21, 2007 by enzl

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Yeah, but 2010 - like most years - end in a December. In other words, they mean 2011 at the earliest, although another source quoted Lutz saying "for sale by 2010."

To me it seems the Volt concept was cobbled together quickly to demands for a greener halo, and that actual engineering and development of it didn't start until after its reveal. I'm not doubting the Volt's production potential -- I believe GM is fully committed/obligated to making it after such positive public reaction -- and I applaud their efforts, but as far as actual, existing tech achievements, I don't believe there was much a lead at NAIAS '07. It was a styling concept with cool-sounding "E-flex" nomenclature. Could the concept even travel past 25 mph, or go 40 miles, for that matter?

I hope it's release date is closer to 2010 than 2012, because the fourth-gen Prius may switch to li-ion batteries by then.

I do believe E-Flex has been in development since the skateboard concepts. Might not have been called that, but most of the technology was there.

Meaning the earliest Volts will be '11 models--and likely '12 models, already backing away from the initial promise of '10 availability...only, what, 15 years or so after the first Prius was on the road in Japan?

And... Tell me again why we should give a crap when up until last year 60% of the new vehicle purchases in this country were TRUCKS?!?!

The hybrid bandwagon always fascinates me because 1) The first gen hybrids sold here were the butt of jokes from EVERYONE, especially the media, that your quirky star trek geek older neighbor drove. 2) the market never dictated the investment until a year or two ago (And from a business standpoint STILL DOESN'T) yet, had Detroit "wasted money" on this venture when Toyota began WASTING MONEY on this venture, Wall Street would've bitched nonstop until the companies lost so much stock value that they would've been in trouble way before now.

Edited September 21, 2007 by FUTURE_OF_GM

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Sounds to me that someone's mommy had a '83 Citation and they still haven't gotten over it yet.....

Frankly, if I had nothing to do in life, I suppose I could just haunt ToyotaNation and piss over everything everyone said there, but I admit I don't like Toyota and, therefore, can't be bothered even to listen to the mewling on that site. It would be too exhausting.

I don't care if the Volt is here in 1st quarter '10 or first quarter '11. Just build it and get it right the first time. The fact that Toyota is cranking up its PR machine against the Volt is good enough for me.

But that's the characteristics of being an import fan in general and especially a Toyota fan... You have to conquest new people into "thinking what is right" and if they don't, then they're just simpletons that are beneath you.

I run an anti-Prius group on Facebook and I actually had a Toyota person come on there and write me an email that was an entire page long "Demanding" that I do "what's right" and "remove my group"

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

People are running for the exits when it comes to GM. You think they're on the right track? You are deluding yourself---what worse, you're misinforming those that come here as casual fans of GM and cars in general.

How's that? because he runs a GM FAN SITE that is BIASED IN FAVOR OF GM? This isn't a news site, it's a GM SITE.

The Volt is nothing more than a pretty show car and a theoretical bunch of ideas that NOONE on the planet has put into one vehicle for production---not the greenies in Cali, not Tesla, not China---Nobody.

Gee, the same thing that every other concept to production car is, for the most part.

I should accept, on faith, that GM will take a not-yet-ready for prime time tech, develop it, then mass produce it in 3 years time? Name one thing they've been ahead of the curve on in the last 20 years.....

Are you kidding me?!?!? I can name 20 things in the TRUCK MARKET ALONE that GM has been ahead of the curve on. GM has the history of being possibly the most innovative company to ever exist. It doesn't matter that people don't perceive it that way because of a few pasty faced journalists and clueless buyers that bought bad GM cars in the 80's.

Please. I take no joy---I suffer MORE than you for GM's utter failure on so many levels. My future, my livelihood and my mortgage payment depends on GM getting up off the mat...what will you lose--the ability to anonymously lord over a few zit-faced tweens as a moderator on a GM fansite? When you have as much as me at stake, I'll worry that you feel I'm over the top.

I wouldn't take the participation of the fans here so lightly.

I don't believe that GM will have retired the 4 speed auto by 2011, nevermind building the automotive version of the moonshot.

Toyota created the Prius DESPITE continueing to use 4 speed automatics. And I'm willing to bet they'll still be using them in 2011 as well. The "How many gears does your auto have" pissing match was nothing more than hoopla started by the media to screw over GM and Ford. Notice you never read about it anymore (Since the invention of Scion) and since it's common knowledge that leading importers such as Subaru (Greenie lust target #2) still use 4 speeds in their volume models.

Comparing my hyperbole with a kid getting hit by a bus just shows that you cannot be trusted to objectively look at this situation...nooone's kid is dying here--just the livelihoods of 100,000 people and a number of towns all over the US.

Yet still america continues sucking up the MYTH of TOYOTA and Japan Inc. like Lewinsky in the oval office. You want to talk about an industry lost, blame who is responsible for it. And you're not helping by joining in on the "GM is always inferior" chant. (Especially in cases like this when they're not)

[enzl]

How's that? because he runs a GM FAN SITE that is BIASED IN FAVOR OF GM? This isn't a news site, it's a GM SITE.

Gee, the same thing that every other concept to production car is, for the most part.

Are you kidding me?!?!? I can name 20 things in the TRUCK MARKET ALONE that GM has been ahead of the curve on. GM has the history of being possibly the most innovative company to ever exist. It doesn't matter that people don't perceive it that way because of a few pasty faced journalists and clueless buyers that bought bad GM cars in the 80's.

I wouldn't take the participation of the fans here so lightly.

Toyota created the Prius DESPITE continueing to use 4 speed automatics. And I'm willing to bet they'll still be using them in 2011 as well. The "How many gears does your auto have" pissing match was nothing more than hoopla started by the media to screw over GM and Ford. Notice you never read about it anymore (Since the invention of Scion) and since it's common knowledge that leading importers such as Subaru (Greenie lust target #2) still use 4 speeds in their volume models.

Yet still america continues sucking up the MYTH of TOYOTA and Japan Inc. like Lewinsky in the oval office. You want to talk about an industry lost, blame who is responsible for it. And you're not helping by joining in on the "GM is always inferior" chant. (Especially in cases like this when they're not)

FOG- As usual, in your zeal to shout down a non-believer, you completely missed my point.

You have not answered the essential question posed: How can one believe in GM's promises when so many have been dashed?

I'm not saying the Volt cannot be done, nor that all hope is completely lost, rather, I'm critiquing a company for its legitimate failings. I'm not going to run down the inaccuracies of your statements, but I will tell you this: Until or Unless some real, elemental change happens, GM is just circling the bowl for an eventual flush---it will either become a foreign manufacturer of historical nameplates or will be sliced and diced into usable parts.

I'd like to avoid that. Apparently, some people here do not, either because they don't believe it can/will happen or they're willfully ignorant of the stakes. For instance---if the UAW strikes right now, GM is done. The situation, no matter how infantesimal the odds, should NEVER be allowed to happen. If the US is struck by terrorism again and the economy tanks, GM is done. How can one even put odds on that?

Meanwhile, BS Sales numbers and make-believe tech that was represented as feasible are what people here are hanging their hats on. Unbelieveable that as fans there's not more awareness or apparent concern that the end could be near!

[CARBIZ]

Okay, but what causes more damage: bad news or the prediction of bad news?

Look at the run on the banks in England right now. So, a few mortgages have defaulted. Those banks who were about to show a bad 3rd quarter are now on the brink becaue the MEDIA has fanned the flames into a conflagration. The sheeple cannot see past the BS in the media ( and the fact they they will distort or outright fabricate news to sell their damned papers) and are now lining up to take their cash out of those banks.

So GM was having a couple bad quarters back in 2005: how many people's buying decisions were altered toward Japan Inc. because so-called people in the know had written the General off?

I can't stand the media more than I distrust Japan Inc. They blow everything out of proportion and I've witnessed the outright lies that that they perpetuate.

So, you are saying that because Roger Smith and his cronies made some serious management and financial blunders in the '80s (that are still to some degree haunting Detroit's decisions to this day), GM should be written off because nothing they say can be trusted?

It's the Chicken Little Syndrome that is sinking American/Canadian business everywhere. If you want to head for the exits and treat it as 'every man for himself,' that is your perogative.

I am betting my mortgage that Wagoner & Lutz have a handle on things and despite having to put out several fires at once, are the right team at the right time.

The 'truck bubble' is over and I think Detroit 'gets it.' GM-DAT and the Fiat mis-step were two attempts at making amends for decisions in the late '90s that were put off.

I wonder, five years from now, which company will look more stupid: Toyota for spending a billion dollars in 2006 to open a truck plant just as the market tanked, or GM for letting Toyota test the waters (and fall on its face) with the early hybrids while GM waited in the wings getting the right product to market.

The Volt has me excited. I would buy one. The Prius is an eye sore, and I can't wait until their batteries start polluting land fill sites everywhere.

[PurdueGuy]

we saw the concept in 07 and won't see the real thing until 11

Unless you're assuming delays, you're mixing calendar and model years again to support your high levels of pessimism.

[z28luvr01]

FOG- As usual, in your zeal to shout down a non-believer, you completely missed my point.

You have not answered the essential question posed: How can one believe in GM's promises when so many have been dashed?

I'm not saying the Volt cannot be done, nor that all hope is completely lost, rather, I'm critiquing a company for its legitimate failings. I'm not going to run down the inaccuracies of your statements, but I will tell you this: Until or Unless some real, elemental change happens, GM is just circling the bowl for an eventual flush---it will either become a foreign manufacturer of historical nameplates or will be sliced and diced into usable parts.

I'd like to avoid that. Apparently, some people here do not, either because they don't believe it can/will happen or they're willfully ignorant of the stakes. For instance---if the UAW strikes right now, GM is done. The situation, no matter how infantesimal the odds, should NEVER be allowed to happen. If the US is struck by terrorism again and the economy tanks, GM is done. How can one even put odds on that?

Meanwhile, BS Sales numbers and make-believe tech that was represented as feasible are what people here are hanging their hats on. Unbelieveable that as fans there's not more awareness or apparent concern that the end could be near!

The current regime has delivered, with respect to the products that have been developed entirely under its watch. GMT900s, Lambdas, Aura, CTS, and Kappas are all at or near the top of their class. The new Malibu, from what's been said so far, has got the goods to go after Japan Inc.

Even ignoring specific products, what they've done would have been filed under "pipe dream" by any previous regime:

- Productivity, eficiency, and quality is way up

- Retail sales are climbing

- Unprofitable fleet sales are falling

- If I'm not mistaken, GMNA made a profit last year, and it's not out of the realm of possibility this year

- Global resources are being leveraged instead of being run as separate entities

- Excess fat in personnel and in production capacity is being trimmed

- Operations not core to the company's MO are gone

- The UAW has been forced to make concessions to reduce some overhead costs

Everyone involved, The Rick included, knows the gravity of GM's situation. Anyone can spin it any way they want to, but actions speak louder than words. The "meet our demands or you might not have a job in five years" stance with the UAW says it all. Still, you can't deny that the right guys are steering the ship at GM. They do have a track record so far as I think I've shown above, and I think it is reasonably safe to have faith that the Volt will be delivered as promised.

[enzl]

Okay, but what causes more damage: bad news or the prediction of bad news?

Look at the run on the banks in England right now. So, a few mortgages have defaulted. Those banks who were about to show a bad 3rd quarter are now on the brink becaue the MEDIA has fanned the flames into a conflagration. The sheeple cannot see past the BS in the media ( and the fact they they will distort or outright fabricate news to sell their damned papers) and are now lining up to take their cash out of those banks.

So GM was having a couple bad quarters back in 2005: how many people's buying decisions were altered toward Japan Inc. because so-called people in the know had written the General off?

I can't stand the media more than I distrust Japan Inc. They blow everything out of proportion and I've witnessed the outright lies that that they perpetuate.

So, you are saying that because Roger Smith and his cronies made some serious management and financial blunders in the '80s (that are still to some degree haunting Detroit's decisions to this day), GM should be written off because nothing they say can be trusted?

It's the Chicken Little Syndrome that is sinking American/Canadian business everywhere. If you want to head for the exits and treat it as 'every man for himself,' that is your perogative.

I am betting my mortgage that Wagoner & Lutz have a handle on things and despite having to put out several fires at once, are the right team at the right time.

The 'truck bubble' is over and I think Detroit 'gets it.' GM-DAT and the Fiat mis-step were two attempts at making amends for decisions in the late '90s that were put off.

I wonder, five years from now, which company will look more stupid: Toyota for spending a billion dollars in 2006 to open a truck plant just as the market tanked, or GM for letting Toyota test the waters (and fall on its face) with the early hybrids while GM waited in the wings getting the right product to market.

The Volt has me excited. I would buy one. The Prius is an eye sore, and I can't wait until their batteries start polluting land fill sites everywhere.

I thnk you misunderstand me. I believe that everyone involved with GM should stand-in and fight to the death...but I, unlike you, do not believe that Wagonner is the CEO for that job.

The GM-DAT deal is the one decision that looks right, in hindsight, however, I believe that the Fiat & Subaru deals were made under Rick's watch, not Roger Smith's. Here's the problem: Fiat was needed for small cars and small diesels---both things that GM needs right now---Billions were thrown down that sinkhole with little tangible results. Who got canned for that debacle? Noone!

GM still needs small diesels for 50%+ of the passenger car market in Europe. So nothing was accomplished. And the cost of 1-2 new car programs were burned doing it.

Subaru was allied with to do more than produce a Saabaru...yet, again, nothing was accomplished, millions in investment were lost and resources were squandered.

If you look at what happened after GM was involved, the story becomes even more damning, as Fiat has seen a renaissance of profitability and product. Ford slipped in with a cheaper, more sensible alliance and got cheap tech, factory and labor in Poland for the new Ka. Toyota of all companies is now using extra Subaru factory space to produce more Camries---they bought the offloaded Subaru stock for a song---and it sounds like they may re-enter the small sportscar market with help from Subaru---while GM is still planning Alpha and still developing the Camaro.

Additionally, GM has since had to offload 50%+ of GMAC, it's most profitable division, by far. Allison transmission was also jettisoned, even though transmission tech is one of the keys to future performance, economy and hybridization...but I digress.

Let's be honest---if the performance of the GM management, Bd. of Directors or product planners was YOUR workplace, would they have a job? The honest answer is NO. That's my bottm line.

Lutz can stay...Rick should go, as well as the rest of the people at the helm. If a Ford scion can step aside for an established outsider, why can't the Rick-ster? All I hear from GM is excuses for missing targets and slipping sales---at some point, someone has to step up, say the buck stops here, and get on with a new plan--I don't see the current powers doing that.

[FloydHendershot]

Now, Fly, since you've asked, here's what I'd do if I was the ruler at the Tubes:

1. Make sure each and every new product was as close to excellent as possible. If it can't run with the best in class, don't produce it until it does. The new 'bu, for example, will come to market on an aging chassis that GM knows it needs to update...as evidenced by the 09/10 Aura, which follows quickly to market....

2. Identify the best people in every facet of the industry. Then go out and hire them. If Jim Press could take a job with Chrysler, then anybody is a potential free agent signing.

3. Marketing & advertising must be completely revamped to meet 21st century customers. I find that from stock photos to TV spots, there's no less imaginative auto stuff out there than the Generals--apply #2 to the marketing & advertising industries, if necessary.

4. Use 'secret shoppers' rather than BS surveys, to determine the quality of dealers...go after the worst ones with a vengence and support the best with real assistance, not by throwing a few bucks at them so that they can put 3rd rate come-on ads in the papers & the GM can add an extension to his house.

5. MOST IMPORTANTLY: I'd restore accountability to the Management ranks at GM---who has overseen the cratering of sales, the largest loss in history, the continual drain of the corporate coffers to fund ill-advised acquisitions and partnerships---its time to fire some people.

If you or I performed on the job like these guys, we'd be fired. Point #2 applies here, perhaps even more strongly...there's talent out there. Mr. Bernhart as one example. Rick & his cronies don't know about best practices for modern companies because they're Lifers---its time for new blood.

That's off the top of my head...I'm no Buickman with some magical plan, I just can't believe that steps as obvious as the ones above haven't been taken. As for blaming the economy or gas prices, this crisis started years ago, on Rick's watch. Anyone with half a brain knew that one small Middle Eastern skirmish would catapult the price of oil---and since your lone profit center is big trucks, wouldn't it have been wise to at least have a plan B? There are lots of small cars in Europe---The price of gas has been obscene there for some time---Are you telling me noone imagined that developing small cars that could be quickly adapted to all markets could be a good idea? Or that GM-Daewoo's line-up didn't have small diesel development on the menu? Or that sickly Fiat might not be the best partnership to take a Put Option on?

While my words are harsh, my conscience is clear, as I'm neither avoiding the obvious nor allowing bias to creep into my judgement. I was in a new Camry yesterday---its not so great....How come GM still can't develop an effective, demonstrably superior product? They've only had 20 years to figure it out.

GM has always been great at promises. "Just wait until our next X is out. That'll drive the foreigners into the sea." They haven't even come close to that, yet.

Why should I put my faith some new promise. Like an abused spouse, you guys are always coming back for more. I want real change. You don't like my pessimism? Unfortunately, it's well-founded.

Is that an answer, Fly?

TBC....

Isn' that first talking point the very thing that got you going about the Volt in the first place?

What would you do during the down time while waiting for the "as close to excellent as possible" quality to arrive?

I do like your "secret shopper" idea tho. But I think I just like the word secret--makes it sound sexy.

[enzl]

The current regime has delivered, with respect to the products that have been developed entirely under its watch. GMT900s, Lambdas, Aura, CTS, and Kappas are all at or near the top of their class. The new Malibu, from what's been said so far, has got the goods to go after Japan Inc.

Even ignoring specific products, what they've done would have been filed under "pipe dream" by any previous regime:

- Productivity, eficiency, and quality is way up

- Retail sales are climbing

- Unprofitable fleet sales are falling

- If I'm not mistaken, GMNA made a profit last year, and it's not out of the realm of possibility this year

- Global resources are being leveraged instead of being run as separate entities

- Excess fat in personnel and in production capacity is being trimmed

- Operations not core to the company's MO are gone

- The UAW has been forced to make concessions to reduce some overhead costs

Everyone involved, The Rick included, knows the gravity of GM's situation. Anyone can spin it any way they want to, but actions speak louder than words. The "meet our demands or you might not have a job in five years" stance with the UAW says it all. Still, you can't deny that the right guys are steering the ship at GM. They do have a track record so far as I think I've shown above, and I think it is reasonably safe to have faith that the Volt will be delivered as promised.

Um, as to product, they're running at 50% I agree about the GMT-900's (although the timing is bad), and the Lambdas, but the Aura is not there, the CTS is a maybe & the Kappas are beautiful, but not really as good as they should be---nor are they truly profitable, nor can they be made in real volume. The Malibu is not out, but I'll give you that one. Now, I notice you've ignored the G-bodies (Lucerne/DTS), the W's, the Aveo, the Cobalt/G5, HHR, STS, XLR, All Saabs, GTO, at al....I'm assuming you know the reason as well as I do.

As for the non-product reasons cited:

I can 100% agree with quality (although the industry itself has also had the avg. quality raised & GM had room to improve) and the Global use of resources...

The rest are not as certain:

-Retail sales are NOT up. August sales were up IIRC for the 1st time this year, which included a 20%+ increase in fleet sales

-Fleet sales are down, but see above for last months...

-GMNA did not report a profit for last year, although they may have had a quarter that was profitable--the overseas regions were profitable

-Fat has not been completely trimmed, as the UAW contract will determine the fate of such drains as the Jobs Bank, nor have the UAW capitualated on the largest issues, yet. See today's Detroit News for details of the UAW's rejection of the biggest element, the VEBA.

I'm not sure which promises you're referring to as fulfilled, but I can tell you that the Rickster is a GM Lifer....meaning he's overseen or participated in most of the executive decisions that have brought GM to its knees. I can't give him a free pass for that reason alone. You don't become GM CEO overnight---so for at least a decade before his ascension, he MUST have been involved with the absurd decisionmaking over at the Tubes.

[deftonesfan867]

This just in: The world is flat!

[CARBIZ]

Well, I suppose in hindsight, the Captain of the Titanic should have been thrown off the ship before they left port, eh?

Every manager we have ever had has the same refrain: "Look at this f'ing mess!" Then he has to spend a year clearing out inventory that he is stuck with and never ordered while trying to figure out what BS statements he is being fed by the dealer principle, and then has to figure out which sales guys' asses he must kiss. He has to do all of this and pray that he can get it all done and get things going his way before the next market downturn; otherwise, he is toast and we get to train a new manager all over again.

Now multpily that by 1,000!

Would changing Wagoner & Co. be a smart move at this point? All eyes are on Mullaly to see if that could be true.

Yes, Wagoner has been around for a while, but Lutz has not. It would seem (at least publicly) that Lutz is responsible for getting a lot of things done at GM. We can debate the shortcomings of the Cobalt, but I was told that when Lutz saw the Cavalier replacement in 2002 he did not like it and so the Cavalier was 'refreshed' and hung out for another two years. The Cobalt may not live up to some people's expectations, but it was a rush job and has not exactly flopped on the market. More recent offerings (GMT-900s, etc.) have been even better, as they have been nurtured fullly under the gaze of Lutz & Co.

If Wagoner can get through this latest round of UAW talks without giving away the family China, then more resources and effort could be poured into the Volt to meet those 'promised' targets.

[enzl]

Well, I suppose in hindsight, the Captain of the Titanic should have been thrown off the ship before they left port, eh?

Every manager we have ever had has the same refrain: "Look at this f'ing mess!" Then he has to spend a year clearing out inventory that he is stuck with and never ordered while trying to figure out what BS statements he is being fed by the dealer principle, and then has to figure out which sales guys' asses he must kiss. He has to do all of this and pray that he can get it all done and get things going his way before the next market downturn; otherwise, he is toast and we get to train a new manager all over again.

Now multpily that by 1,000!

Would changing Wagoner & Co. be a smart move at this point? All eyes are on Mullaly to see if that could be true.

Yes, Wagoner has been around for a while, but Lutz has not. It would seem (at least publicly) that Lutz is responsible for getting a lot of things done at GM. We can debate the shortcomings of the Cobalt, but I was told that when Lutz saw the Cavalier replacement in 2002 he did not like it and so the Cavalier was 'refreshed' and hung out for another two years. The Cobalt may not live up to some people's expectations, but it was a rush job and has not exactly flopped on the market. More recent offerings (GMT-900s, etc.) have been even better, as they have been nurtured fullly under the gaze of Lutz & Co.

If Wagoner can get through this latest round of UAW talks without giving away the family China, then more resources and effort could be poured into the Volt to meet those 'promised' targets.

Uh-oh...be careful CB, you might be branded an Enzl sympathizer!

I blame Wagoner, not Lutz, because of his length of service and the fact that he's been knee-deep in decisionmaking, even before his appointment to CEO. While there's great merit to 'stay the course', I'd take your Titanic analogy one step further....The Rickster is like one of the guys who built the Titanic, claimed it was unsinkable, and then given a promotion the week after its maiden (& last) voyage.

GM has been troubled for years. Rick was there. He was in a position of authority and he blew a ton of calls as both CEO and before...I guarantee you that Wolfgand Berhard (as an example) could step in, provide real leadership, galvanize the troops, assure investors (in the Long Term) that everything will be fine. Then get on with the process of remaking an inefficient product development process, reform the risk-averse nature of actual approved product and, furthermore, make it look like someone at GM gives a rats ass about something more than next quarters #'s...

In the above example, you get a real car guy, someone who knows how others in the industry do it (for good/bad) and, since the long term nature of the car business means nothing is overnight, perhaps it gets enthusiasts and investors talking positively about GM, instead of seeing the same old moldy business practices that have been steering this ship in the wrong direction for so long.

Rick's tinkering while reinvention is needed. Those who fear change are only those with a vested interest in the status quo. If the margin for error is so small, why not bring someone in who can change the game, rather than hoping for the other shoe NOT to fall?

[CARBIZ]

But didn't Wagoner hire Lutz 6 years ago, long before GM was so obviously in peril? Doesn't that take a bit of courage and leadership?

[z28luvr01]

Um, as to product, they're running at 50% I agree about the GMT-900's (although the timing is bad), and the Lambdas, but the Aura is not there, the CTS is a maybe & the Kappas are beautiful, but not really as good as they should be---nor are they truly profitable, nor can they be made in real volume. The Malibu is not out, but I'll give you that one. Now, I notice you've ignored the G-bodies (Lucerne/DTS), the W's, the Aveo, the Cobalt/G5, HHR, STS, XLR, All Saabs, GTO, at al....I'm assuming you know the reason as well as I do.

=

As I wrote my last response, I was in the middle of an IM conversation with my friend, a Honda-for-lifer, saying how he'd love to jump into an Aura. The car is getting people to notice.

Haven't heard zilch about the CTS that's overly bad.

I didn't ignore the cars you mentioned for the reasons you think. Give or take a car, everything from Solstice forward is solely the responsibility, from idea to production, of the current regime, and that was the basis for my list. I won't give full blame for any of the cars you mentioned, just like I won't give them full credit for the first CTS, the C6, the GMT-800s, or any other success story pre-Solstice.

[siegen]

Given the riced out nature of the liquid cooled PC business, I'm surprised the Asians didn't "get it" first.

Water cooling is the 90's. Now we're submerging computers completely. Get with the program!

(btw, I am seriously considering doing this project for a build)

Hey!!! Why not submerge the batteries in mineral oil?? ;-]

Edited September 21, 2007 by siegen

[enzl]

As I wrote my last response, I was in the middle of an IM conversation with my friend, a Honda-for-lifer, saying how he'd love to jump into an Aura. The car is getting people to notice.

Haven't heard zilch about the CTS that's overly bad.

I didn't ignore the cars you mentioned for the reasons you think. Give or take a car, everything from Solstice forward is solely the responsibility, from idea to production, of the current regime, and that was the basis for my list. I won't give full blame for any of the cars you mentioned, just like I won't give them full credit for the first CTS, the C6, the GMT-800s, or any other success story pre-Solstice.

Mr. Lutz is the only real change in leadership, which was part of my point.

Mr. Wagonner has been there for 30 years, IIRC. He's a bean counter who has ONLY worked at GM during his adult life. He has ONLY worked for GM as they suffered the largest single loss of market share in their History. He has only experienced the slow, painful bleeding of almost all of the life out of what is left of the World's Largest Automaker-The World's Largest Company-The World's Most Valuable Comany--note that all of those titles are now historical footnotes.

How this gentleman has escaped blame for this disaster is beyond me. Roger Smith may have set the course, but I find it hard to detect how Mr. W doesn't share some of the discredit for the current state of affairs. Given the recent history, I cannot understand how the Board or Shareholders have granted this guy more rope with which to hang himself.

As for those other products I mentioned, all were created on Rick's watch. Mr. Lutz has done what he could to correct the product missteps, but he doesn't make the other decisions that have also contributed to GM's current state of affairs. They would have been better off throwing darts than actually making decisions like their recent misadventures with partnerships.

[Flybrian]

Is that an answer, Fly?

Yes. And quite honestly, I cannot disagree with about 3/4 of that, especially the management aspect in general. The sad truth is, this forum of pizza-faces could run any American car company arguably better than the current leadership is. We'd sure screw up the investor angle, but we'd produce some real good vehicles that people would actually purchase.

What disappoints me the most at General Motors is realizing that the company produced its best and most memorable vehicles when the enthusiasts faced off with the beancounters, the lifers as you put. Earl, Arkus-Duntov, Delorean, and even Lutz all rocked the boat to the chagrin of many. Heads butted and in a few memorable instances, the car guys won - and that victory trickled down to the rest of the lineup once the executives realized the successes. Pontiac itself was for all intents and purposes saved in the mid-50s because of 'radical' thinking. Design was brought to the forefront. Pet projects became legends. A grandmother's division became true excitement and outside-of-the-box symbolism. Every other marque has a similar story to tell.

Unfortunately, it seems today the beancounters win more often than not and by a wide margin. Lutz certainly shook things up, but it seems to be taking an awful long time to see the results. To rationalize my optimism, however, I will say not everyone emerged from the Great Depression at equal rates. There are success stories to be told within GM today as mentioned by Z and others, but much of the company is still stuck in this B-school brand management malaise that stifles the senses as to why it still exists. The fact is that many parts of the company 'get it'; the conjecture is whether a quiet revolution will ensure the whole organization gets it, too. I remain optimistic that something as great in history, resources, passion, and spirit as General Motors will not succumb to failure, that there are still too many car people occupying some ranking place at GM to let it happen.

I hope I am right.

[enzl]

Yes. And quite honestly, I cannot disagree with about 3/4 of that, especially the management aspect in general. The sad truth is, this forum of pizza-faces could run any American car company arguably better than the current leadership is. We'd sure screw up the investor angle, but we'd produce some real good vehicles that people would actually purchase.

What disappoints me the most at General Motors is realizing that the company produced its best and most memorable vehicles when the enthusiasts faced off with the beancounters, the lifers as you put. Earl, Arkus-Duntov, Delorean, and even Lutz all rocked the boat to the chagrin of many. Heads butted and in a few memorable instances, the car guys won - and that victory trickled down to the rest of the lineup once the executives realized the successes. Pontiac itself was for all intents and purposes saved in the mid-50s because of 'radical' thinking. Design was brought to the forefront. Pet projects became legends. A grandmother's division became true excitement and outside-of-the-box symbolism. Every other marque has a similar story to tell.

Unfortunately, it seems today the beancounters win more often than not and by a wide margin. Lutz certainly shook things up, but it seems to be taking an awful long time to see the results. To rationalize my optimism, however, I will say not everyone emerged from the Great Depression at equal rates. There are success stories to be told within GM today as mentioned by Z and others, but much of the company is still stuck in this B-school brand management malaise that stifles the senses as to why it still exists. The fact is that many parts of the company 'get it'; the conjecture is whether a quiet revolution will ensure the whole organization gets it, too. I remain optimistic that something as great in history, resources, passion, and spirit as General Motors will not succumb to failure, that there are still too many car people occupying some ranking place at GM to let it happen.

I hope I am right.

I genuinely hope you are right.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

The fault lies in the buyer as much as it does management.

You can't force people out of ignorance no matter how good you make the products.

[Camino LS6]

Don't hold your breath Fly, Enzl doesn't know how to be positive. :AH-HA_wink:

[enzl]

Don't hold your breath Fly, Enzl doesn't know how to be positive. :AH-HA_wink:

One man's pessimism is another man's reality.

If your favorite company's future is hanging by the proverbial thread, I would think that genuine concern would be the minimal response.

Ah, to be blissfully (or willfully) ignorant!

[CARBIZ]

One man's pessimism is another man's reality.

If your favorite company's future is hanging by the proverbial thread, I would think that genuine concern would be the minimal response.

Ah, to be blissfully (or willfully) ignorant!

But you direct all of your anger and venom at GM, as though all of their problems are directly a result of poor management. Undoubtedly, management has made some blunders, but the degree of 'piling on' by the media and the total ignorance of government is far more galling, IMO.

It isn't as though GM is the only grand American institution that is failing because of apathy or ignorance on the part of the media and government. Indeed, Western Civilization as we know it is showing some serious cracks in the foundation, and we may be witnessing the beginning of the end, for we have raised at least two generations of fat and lazy citizens who do not give a damn about anything but their own, tiny sphere in life.

I DO NOT FOR ONE MOMENT BELIEVE THAT I AM OVERSTATING THE CASE HERE.

GM's future may very well hang in the balance, but it cannot fight the battle alone. If we, as so-called GM 'enthusiasts' don't do our part EACH AND EVERY DAY in dispelling the misinformation and outright LIES that are out there, then we are to blame as well.

[Camino LS6]

But you direct all of your anger and venom at GM, as though all of their problems are directly a result of poor management. Undoubtedly, management has made some blunders, but the degree of 'piling on' by the media and the total ignorance of government is far more galling, IMO.

It isn't as though GM is the only grand American institution that is failing because of apathy or ignorance on the part of the media and government. Indeed, Western Civilization as we know it is showing some serious cracks in the foundation, and we may be witnessing the beginning of the end, for we have raised at least two generations of fat and lazy citizens who do not give a damn about anything but their own, tiny sphere in life.

I DO NOT FOR ONE MOMENT BELIEVE THAT I AM OVERSTATING THE CASE HERE.

GM's future may very well hang in the balance, but it cannot fight the battle alone. If we, as so-called GM 'enthusiasts' don't do our part EACH AND EVERY DAY in dispelling the misinformation and outright LIES that are out there, then we are to blame as well.

Exactly true.

BTW Enzl, I am not ignorant in the least. I see quite a few valid reasons for optimism and none for your brand of fatalism. Concern yes, but not wholesale negativism.