REPORT: General Motors in "intense" bankruptcy preparations

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

That is exactly GM will end up doing not only with GMC, but also with Holden, Opel, SAAB and others. Especially SAAB, they waited fracking 19 years to give any decent product, now when they decided for a 9-4X, updated 9-5, 9-3 and possibly a new 9-1 they are going to handover the entire pie to a buyer who already has readymade everything from good platforms to dealerships. Other than Hummer, no other brand is worth letting go considering the amount of investment.

I understand that GM has no money. But someone needs to tell the head honchos at GM how to play brinkmanship. Good God they are pathetic in any kind of negotiations.

And this was exactly my point in all of the P.A.G threads when I would say "another american company USED to pave the way for foreign entities to prosper." or "forced to selflessly save that which couldn't be saved unless it was as a parasite on a once healthy american horse."

It's likely that Saab will become MORE popular around the world now, and CERTAINLY with the press (As Jaguar has -- Once it's not american owned, it's suddenly !!!1!! FANTASTIC !!!111!!)

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Well, I can clearly see it's pointless to share an opinion here on the subject; however, two things stand out among all of this:

1) Nostalgia isn't part of the business dictionary. Change or die. In the case for GM, produce significant change or die.

2) All of the discussion that revolves around a declaration that GM will die if not for a plethora of brands to continue does not answer the question: "Why not?" GM has product for all markets with their three core marketable brands. ...since everyone has a different idea of what their core marketable brands are, I'll point out they are: Chevrolet, Cadillac and Buick. Why can they not survive with that? You can still produce the 'almighty' performance products through Chevrolet without watering down exclusivity with typical badge engineering. You can still develop product on shared platforms between three divisions that includes trucks and SUVs for their necessary markets. You can still conduct volume sales to provide necessary production flow. You can still save money by having less 'me-too' development between a mix of unnecessary brands.

Okay, I'll still share my opinion. Somehow I don't know how Buick even fits in here.

Because the multiple brands, albeit largely the same in some cases, provide the revenue for this to happen.

You don't just lop off half of the products an organization makes, and expect them to operate as if nothing ever happened... Wait and see... GM will die a long death if Chapter 11 is utilized.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Ford and Chrysler also have much less to worry about to fix themselves. 3 brands each (Ford is trying to offload Volvo, and doesn't wholly own Mazda). Fixing 3 is easier than fixing 5, especially when teh stakes are so high.

Why on Earth would Ford want to offload Volvo... unless they are that desperate for liquidity right now. They would be better served to keep Volvo if they can afford to.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Please, do tell how it is impossible for Buick to be a stand alone brand with a full lineup, which if this scenario plays it is what would end up happening. Buick would get a full lineup and BPG would become Buick.

Simple: GM lacks the resources, patience and the talent to correctly market the division to stand on it's own and prosper,

Want proof? Look to Oldsmobile and Saturn. (especially Olds -- this occured when GM was mighty and healthy)

Buick will get a "BRILLIANT" new line up of cars, the sales will FAIL to materialize and we'll be celebrating (since most of you like doing that with GM divisions now) it's death.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Well, the new LaCrosse you can't find anything like it anywhere.

LOL.. Not yet.. But the Saab 9-5 (upcoming) is VERY similar. Not to mention, the next Impala looks to be almost the same exact car.

The Enclave, you'll find it's platform maybes, but none of them look like it, are tuned like it, or as luxurious as it.

LOL, okay And the G6 looks and is tuned like the Malibu?!?!

The Lucerne you'll find at the Cadillac dealer, but they don't look at all alike.

Yeah... No identical interior or anything...

You're grasping at straws... The G6 looks nothing like any GM product, not to mention, it has variants that aren't found anywhere else in the GM empire. And the Vibe, Solstice and G8 are all 100% unique.

Meanwhile, at GMC, only the Terrain looks completely different from it's platform mate. The Sierra looks like the Silverado with a nicer front end, and the Acadia looks like the Outlook with a different front end. Also, the Sierra is the only one I would consider professional grade.

GMC is not an issue because it's profitable. (If GM is seriously considering phasing out GMC, then they deserve to die. Because that's common sense stuff)

At Pontiac, you have the G8, which could easily be rebadged as a Chevy,

So could the LaX or the Lucerne

the Solstice which is impractical

And that matters why?

Last time I checked, a Ferrari was impractical, but they sure do sell a $h!load of them. (relatively speaking)

and the G6 which is mediocre.

And the current Lax and Lucerne aren't?!?!

I guess the Toyota Vibe too.

Ohh.... A model made by the best auto company on the planet (to all the sheep) And that's a bad thing?

Now, Ideally what you could have is GMC be professional grade and sell only the Sierra and medium duty trucks (does GM still own that? I forget), Pontiac with one or two dedicated, sporty cars along the lines of the 370Z and maybe the G8 or a high performance Delta II, and Buick fill out the rest. But that means they actually have to get the products right for the brands...

NOW you're talkin'

This is true, but the less brands they have the less chances they have of screwing up each brand's mission, and the better chances they have of getting it right.

*cough* Cop out *cough*

Edited April 8, 2009 by FUTURE_OF_GM

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Why on Earth would Ford want to offload Volvo... unless they are that desperate for liquidity right now. They would be better served to keep Volvo if they can afford to.

Ignorance?

I don't see the logic behind it either.

[daves87rs]

New scenario, make Pontiac and GMC direct buy only. Order it online, and it gets delivered to your door once built.

Will NOT happen...government will shoot that down in a hurry....

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Is that why market share was a core component in the strategy submitted?

Focusing on market share is just stupid.

Would you rather have 55% of the market and make a profit of $1 or would you rather control 10% of the market and make $50 billion profit a year?

Sure your STRATEGY may be to rapidly gain in market share, however when your strategy has consistently not worked, its time to tweak it.

Edited April 9, 2009 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Robert Hall]

Focusing on market share is just stupid.

Would you rather have 55% of the market and make a profit of $1 or would you rather control 10% of the market and make $50 billion profit a year?

The reality for GM is more likely 10% market share and lose $50 billion/year.

[gm4life]

If it comes to three nameplates and I am not talking divisions or sales channels, here folks names. Then I would make it simple seriously... Cadillac- Luxury. Chevrolet- Volume/Mainstream. Pontiac- Sporty/Performance. If it is three divisions or sales channels I would make it Chevrolet, Cadillac, BPG. The reason I came up with the three I did is because GMC is just a Chevy rebadge on all products, give Chevy a high end line-up like Denali aka LTZ. Buick is affordable luxury but all that can be had in a Pontiac or Chevrolet, or have the customer step into a low end Cadillac so whats the point of Buick? This is if IT IS ONLY a three nameplate company. I still say file chapter 11 get rid of the union and bad buisness practice, start fresh with Chevrolet, Cadillac and BPG. That is just my thinking.

Edited April 9, 2009 by gm4life

[SAmadei]

New scenario, make Pontiac and GMC direct buy only. Order it online, and it gets delivered to your door once built.

I'd kill for that.

One of the things I hate about new car shopping, is that most people seem to have an idea what they want, but get pigeonholed into something completely different based on the persuasiveness of the salesman, the incentives and what happens to be on a given car lot. Then we wonder why people are not satisfied with the sales process or the car the settled for.

My experience is that dealers will swap out a car with another dealer (_IF_ its in a emissions compatible state), but special ordering a car nowadays is rare, because you have to pay top dollar and wait 6 months.

In a world where Just In Time techniques have made it possible for Dell to churn out 1500 unique computer setups a day, and Doritos can change the flavors being made on the fly, we seem to get cookie cutter cars, in ratios designed by an out of touch committee.

I want a G8 GXP in Stryker Blue with a 6 speed and no sunroof. I might as well be asking to find a unicorn. I haven't even seen a Black GXP 6 speed with no roof pop up yet (my second favorite color).

Edited April 9, 2009 by SAmadei

[ShadowDog]

Sharing an opinion is hardly pointless, but allow me to respond to your points.

1) Nostalgia isn't part of the equation, except perhaps for the naming of Buick as a core brand. It is only core in the sense of its historical value and quality ratings, certainly not its contribution to GMNA's bottom line.

I understand your point; however, mine was based on the idea that I tend to read a lot of replies here on why a brand should not get axed simply because of its history and the customers whom appreciate that history. As I see it, the only successful automobile companies are the ones with forward thinking and less clinging to historical values. What appears to be the problem is that so many customers whom are fans of a particular brand have this... need, for lack of a better word, to have a connection to a car company or brand purely based on its history. This customer-base shrinks rapidly over time. To cater to them almost exclusively is to design for failure. I don't suggest GMs brands all fall victim to this kind of thinking, but I do think Buick does.

2) What plethora? Three doesn't make a plethora. The three are Chevy, Cadillac, and BPG and all are required for GM to continue as a viable player in North America. I say this because there is no way that GM can retain a significant portion of the BPG sales with only the weakest link: Buick. Without those sales, GM has no chance of generating enough income to ever right this ship.

To me, it is considered a plethora of brands when badge-engineering fills voids in Pontiac that they require to sustain themselves. To me, having Pontiac and Buick alongside Chevy is like having a whole separate car company to support unnecessarily.

A GM composed of only Chevy, Cadillac, and Buick would be lucky to maintain a double digit marketshare. That's a one-way trip to nowhere when you have the sort of obligations GM has. In short, GM needs the volume currently provided by GMC and Pontiac to survive. That volume will not magically move to Chevy and Cadillac, and certainly not to a nearly invisible Buick.

Clearly understood... at current operations levels, which GM must drastically alter to fit an operational business model that lower volume can sustain. GM knows in simply cannot provide itself any increase in market share with the current level of brand-engineering. It can only hope for a turnaround... how many decades can one hope for something like this? No... change it all. It may not be classy, nor popular; however, in the short term, without dramatic changes that are sure to cause a storm in the eyes of consumers GM will fail. Don't mistake me for wishing to add to their doom. I want GM around and I want them to succeed. I'm merely willing to accept what can truly work, despite the thoughts and opinions to the contrary. They are disagreeable, but I'll accept that.

Could Buick be remade into a true player? Yes, of course it could - over time. In the meantime, It needs the showroom draw of GMC and Pontiac just to stay in the game. BPG has major potential as a unit, but each component needs the other two to make it work. And GM needs BPG to preserve an adequate customer base to build from.

I can get behind this, to a point. You see, I don't believe GM has anywhere near the time it would take to do, essentially, the same thing it's always been doing. What you say above does not have any significant role for altering the current state GM is in. I read that above as a measure to 'stay the course', for which the only thing left to change are model offerings or dropping badge-engineering in favor of each division putting more focus on a more narrow demographic. That will take a great deal of time to do.

Any way either of us, or anyone else here chooses to look at it, GMs changes will draw unpopular votes.

[Chicagoland]

Say whatever you wish, but the good old days of 4 brand selling the same cars and claiming their's is better or different are long opver. The whole "this brand is that" and all is pure advertising and PR psychology, nothing measurable. GM has to make cars that sell to retail buyers at profit, not to rentals and to keep plants going.

Chevrolet Motor Co. with subsidiary Cadillac Motors. Performance? Camaro and Corvette. The mid level brands only sell to old timers who are fading away. Buick name can be sold to Chinese.

Basically, get over it, 1965 is not coming back, the Govt is not banning imports, and GM will never be the big tuna with all the brands/models for car trivia nerds to try to memorize.

[GMTruckGuy74]

Well aren't you just a ray of sunshine

Say whatever you wish, but the good old days of 4 brand selling the same cars and claiming their's is better or different are long opver. The whole "this brand is that" and all is pure advertising and PR psychology, nothing measurable. GM has to make cars that sell to retail buyers at profit, not to rentals and to keep plants going.

Chevrolet Motor Co. with subsidiary Cadillac Motors. Performance? Camaro and Corvette. The mid level brands only sell to old timers who are fading away. Buick name can be sold to Chinese.

Basically, get over it, 1965 is not coming back, the Govt is not banning imports, and GM will never be the big tuna with all the brands/models for car trivia nerds to try to memorize.

[Camino LS6]

Say whatever you wish, but the good old days of 4 brand selling the same cars and claiming their's is better or different are long opver. The whole "this brand is that" and all is pure advertising and PR psychology, nothing measurable. GM has to make cars that sell to retail buyers at profit, not to rentals and to keep plants going.

Chevrolet Motor Co. with subsidiary Cadillac Motors. Performance? Camaro and Corvette. The mid level brands only sell to old timers who are fading away. Buick name can be sold to Chinese.

Basically, get over it, 1965 is not coming back, the Govt is not banning imports, and GM will never be the big tuna with all the brands/models for car trivia nerds to try to memorize.

This is an enthusiast site, get over that!

[Blake Noble]

Say whatever you wish, but the good old days of 4 brand selling the same cars and claiming their's is better or different are long opver. The whole "this brand is that" and all is pure advertising and PR psychology, nothing measurable. GM has to make cars that sell to retail buyers at profit, not to rentals and to keep plants going.

Chevrolet Motor Co. with subsidiary Cadillac Motors. Performance? Camaro and Corvette. The mid level brands only sell to old timers who are fading away. Buick name can be sold to Chinese.

Basically, get over it, 1965 is not coming back, the Govt is not banning imports, and GM will never be the big tuna with all the brands/models for car trivia nerds to try to memorize.

?

Edited April 11, 2009 by YellowJacket894

[Oracle of Delphi]

This is an enthusiast site, get over that!

Be nice Old Timer ...

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Do you just copy and paste this post in every topic or do you actually type it out every time?!?!?!

Say whatever you wish, but the good old days of 4 brand selling the same cars and claiming their's is better or different are long opver. The whole "this brand is that" and all is pure advertising and PR psychology, nothing measurable.

BULL$h!! To those of us who KNOW the history of the brands, it isn't (I guess you don't know the history too well)

GM has to make cars that sell to retail buyers at profit, not to rentals and to keep plants going.

So they're going to do this by selling through 1/4 of the brands to roughly 50% of the market? Wouldn't it be better to FINALLY right the brands (READ: not make the same damn model for every division) and target THE WHOLE market?

Chevrolet Motor Co. with subsidiary Cadillac Motors.

LAME...

Performance? Camaro and Corvette.

BULL$h!! Corvette is suspended indefinitely, Camaro will likely DIE when Zeta dies with NO replacement (DO you guys re4ally think Alpha will progress if GM goes through Ch. 11 or Ch. 7?)

The mid level brands only sell to old timers who are fading away. Buick name can be sold to Chinese.

GMC only sells to old timers? Pontiac, which until recently, (I'm not sure about currently) had the YOUNGEST average buyers age of any GM division only sells to old timers? Saturn only sold to OLD people?

Look around you... Most of the people on this board are sub 30 and the board has already expressed it's overwhelming preference (via Camino's poll) for the Pontiac division.

Basically, get over it, 1965 is not coming back

For the LAST time... No one WANTS 1965 to come back... No one ever ASKED for 1965 to come back.... And, as far as I know, NO ONE expected it..

the Govt is not banning imports,

No kidding?!?

and GM will never be the big tuna with all the brands/models for car trivia nerds to try to memorize.

Yes they will... GM's legacy will live on through people like me. (You know, YOUNG preservationists)

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Focusing on market share is just stupid.

Would you rather have 55% of the market and make a profit of $1 or would you rather control 10% of the market and make $50 billion profit a year?

Sure your STRATEGY may be to rapidly gain in market share, however when your strategy has consistently not worked, its time to tweak it.

Obviously, share isn't everything...

My point is; the company is SO weak and SO embattled in the eyes of the public that if it starts to just GIVE AWAY share, it'll NEVER return to good health. It'll instead, likely die a slow death. (I think this is one reason why Wagoner was always so cautious about quick change)

GM will NEVER be able to "do a 180" in the eyes of the public, no matter how few brands and how good the product is. Even if the public allowed that, the media would NEVER let it happen. If you cut some limbs off the tree, it'll likely grow. However, if you cut the roots out from under the tree, it quickly dies and falls taking everything around it down as well (suppliers, dealers, etc.)

Edited April 11, 2009 by FUTURE_OF_GM

[Intrepidation]

Market share isn't everything, but some people fail to realize this.

[Camino LS6]

Market share isn't everything, but some people fail to realize this.

And some people fail to realize that it does matter.

[Oracle of Delphi]

Obviously, share isn't everything...

My point is; the company is SO weak and SO embattled in the eyes of the public that if it starts to just GIVE AWAY share, it'll NEVER return to good health. It'll instead, likely die a slow death. (I think this is one reason why Wagoner was always so cautious about quick change)

GM will NEVER be able to "do a 180" in the eyes of the public, no matter how few brands and how good the product is. Even if the public allowed that, the media would NEVER let it happen. If you cut some limbs off the tree, it'll likely grow. However, if you cut the roots out from under the tree, it quickly dies and falls taking everything around it down as well (suppliers, dealers, etc.)

I think it's already to late for GM, when they went to the Federal government for aid, that put the last nail in the coffin in the eyes of the public. The public will avoid GM as if it has Aids ... They may build it, but they won't come ... I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am ...

[Camino LS6]

I think it's already to late for GM, when they went to the Federal government for aid, that put the last nail in the coffin in the eyes of the public. The public will avoid GM as if it has Aids ... They may build it, but they won't come ... I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am ...

I'm worried that this is true.

I do like the new assertiveness in their current ad campaign though, I just hope it isn't too late. The presentation is very strong.

[ZL-1]

What if Chevrolet, Buick, Opel/Vauxhall, GMC, Cadillac, Holden, and Daewoo regroup under some new holding company with the name General Motors disappearing? How do you all feel that would appear in the eye of the US consumer?

Edited April 11, 2009 by ZL-1

[Oracle of Delphi]

What if Chevrolet, Buick, Opel/Vauxhall, GMC, Cadillac, Holden, and Daewoo regroup under some new holding company with the name General Motors disappearing? How do you all feel that would appear in the eye of the US consumer?

I think it will carry the stigma, along with the new name ...

[Camino LS6]

What if Chevrolet, Buick, Opel/Vauxhall, GMC, Cadillac, Holden, and Daewoo regroup under some new holding company with the name General Motors disappearing? How do you all feel that would appear in the eye of the US consumer?

Not a plus.

As damaged as the name is, remaining GM would be better.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

I think it's already to late for GM, when they went to the Federal government for aid, that put the last nail in the coffin in the eyes of the public. The public will avoid GM as if it has Aids ... They may build it, but they won't come ... I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am ...

I agree... (sadly)

[Camino LS6]

Massive advertising of the sort they are doing now must be maintained.

This is public rehab for GM.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Not a plus.

As damaged as the name is, remaining GM would be better.

I agree...

Because people do still CARE about the company... They may not like it, but the fact that they hate it says that they at least CARE.

If GM we're to make a HUGE comeback, I think it might "rally the troops" some because americans do love a comeback story. I guess we'll see, but so far I'm not even convinced that the company has the resources or the leadership in place to even attempt a comeback.

[Camino LS6]

That's why their "Rally" ad campaign seems so vital to me.

I think those ads nail the emotion required to cheer for the underdog against tough odds.

They need to triple the ad budget.

Perception is everything afterall.

Especially for GM, and especially now.

[Camino LS6]

Anyone know who is creating the ads?

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

And some people fail to realize that it does matter.

Tell that to Apple in its rejuvenation.

[Camino LS6]

Tell that to Apple in its rejuvenation.

Apple isn't paying-off a toxic legacy.