So what is GM doing wrong?

[trinacriabob]

I love GM and their cars or I wouldn't be here. As well as they have treated me and my parents, I doubt I am going elsewhere. Needless to say, all of the bad press has left me in a funk, feeling a little perplexed...and analytical. So, one has to think of what may be going south at GM. I voted for QC but think it is both this and cost control. I read Consumer Reports. I look at how Toyota steals the show with an uninterrupted parade of "red dots" for the various systems in their cars over the years (Buyer's Guide, et al.). I then look at Cadillac and will see either a partial or a full black dot for some components...and in recent years, no less. That is what pisses people off. It's simply not acceptable...especially for the kind of money one shells out for a premium brand. GM isn't doing the math. If you have a car that is fantastic 10 years from when you bought it, you will buy another...and another. So, in 30 years, you will have bought 3 cars from GM. Now, if GM sells a car that, due to planned obsolence and mechanical mishaps, causes the buyer to dispose of it in 5 to 7 years, then, over 30 years, you will have sold them 1 car. It's not hard to figure out. I, myself, have landed on mostly "red dot" vehicles, like some mainline Buicks, so I am exempt from this. Other cars make for a poor showing. The other is cost control. GM is kind of a big elephant. It's not svelte in its maneuvers. It needs to avoid too much duplication and reel in costs (thank God Roger Smith is no longer around...that could be scary). They can work on this. In fact, this is probably an easier thing to turn around then the number 1 item I refer to in the preceding paragraph. It would be interesting to hear what others interpret to be GM's shortcomings that have led to its current situation.

[The O.C.]

First, I'd have to say product line-up is the biggest problem.

Too many models and divisions for the market share that GM looks to be trying to stabilize its business at.

AND....too many models that are simply not competitive enough with the other domestic and import competition.

Secondly, obviously IMO, would be the cost structure of the organization.

Thirdly, I'd say the negative perception of GM and the products they offer (which has alot to do with the product line-up issues in the first place.)

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Quality.

[97regalGS]

Quality.

[post="67081"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

i think they've fixed that with most of the new products in the past few years.

[ehaase]

I think that union legacy costs are one of the major problems. GM could more easily solve a lot of other problems if it weren't for the pension and health care costs.

[griswold44]

Quality has gotten better, but there is always room for more improvement. Their main problem is PRODUCT. Stop giving the public rehashed platforms with 4 speed autos, 3800s, and technology that dates back to 1982. <_<

[Newbiewar]

i think they've fixed that with most of the new products in the past few years.

[post="67108"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

and the perception of quality...

i think this is the major thing...

its one thing to say, JD powers says this...

but its another when the company says... LOOK FUTHER MUCKERS THIS IS THE BEST PRODUCT IN THE WORLD!

They advertise enough each month that everyone who isnt in the car market knows there is a red tag sale going, or a employee discount.... but with all that they still are on the edge about reliablity why not use the same advertising force on other promos rather then discounts...

Challenge the customers, dare them to test the product... "Because If you looked recenetly you dont know chevrolet"

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

i think they've fixed that with most of the new products in the past few years.

[post="67108"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

no i mean quality of materials used. that includes looks.

[griswold44]

Quality.

[post="67081"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

ricers-shaft-big3, is that you?

[Robert Hall]

I think the constant red tag sale /value price stuff has hurt them, image-wise... GM is now perceived as the Wal-Mart of automakers....not necessarily aspirational cars and trucks but attractive because they are cheap...

[Newbiewar]

I think the constant red tag sale /value price stuff has hurt them, image-wise...  GM is now perceived as the Wal-Mart of automakers....not necessarily aspirational cars and trucks but attractive because they are cheap...

[post="67227"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

who ever has that perception is about to get blown away...

[cmattson]

GM's legacy costs are killing their profit; but that isn't something they are really doing wrong per se. The top two things that I believe they are doing wrong (in order), are:

1) Engineering cars for current competition. Look no further than the G6, the Malibu, and the Impala: they were engineered to compete against the competition -- the competition back in 2000 -- when these models were first beginning to take form. Look at the new Camry, the new Accord, and the new Civic -- all have digital dashes. GM luxury models don't even get that appointment. GM needs to accurately envision what the competition will be like in 5 years from today and then engineer & build a vehicle to compete against and beat it -- and then get that vehicle to market on time for it to compete (& succeed!).

2) Marketing. To be succint: stop advertising the deal & start advertising the product. You want your cars to sell on their own? Start advertising the virtues of your cars. Of course, it helps when your cars are generally competitive in all areas: power, mileage, quality (percieved and real), and most of all: style.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

ricers-shaft-big3, is that you?

[post="67218"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

No im Open Minded the friendly post whore.

[Ghost Dog]

The First problem was Design. To much Boring, ugly, Or Awkward. I think thats Changing. Second Was platforms The Crossovers are coming along Theta-Lambda. Epsilon was a Big improvement but Lack of AWD option puts it Behind Fords Mid size platform. W Body got to long in the Tooth Even with updates. And Trails Both Fords and DCX's offerings. The Thought that they could live off trucks forever.

[bobo]

The refinement is still lacking. Vehicles need to feel more solid, not like you're settling for the budget buy. For instance, the electric power steering may give you a fraction of mpg in better fuel economy, but the steering feel will not be as good as hydraulic steering. The transmissions should be smoother. GM used to have the best transmissions, but they've fallen behind the better 5 and 6-speeds. Everything the driver touches should feel like high quality, not like sourced from the lowest bidder. Cloth seats should not feel like burlap. Turn signals should not make weird "bwop" sounds.

[Clownzilla]

I think that union legacy costs are one of the major problems.  GM could more easily solve a lot of other problems if it weren't for the pension and health care costs.

[post="67121"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Yes! I agree! I think that the product overlaping & the "everything Japanese is cool" virus are the two other problems. To tell you the truth, I think the quality is getting pretty good. Funny story, I knew someone that bought a Dodge Neon for their 16 year old son because their car salesperson (slick salesperson) told them that there were Japanese parts in it. This was at a dealership in Las Vegas (trend town) but still is a sad statement about American's thought process'.

[z28luvr01]

Lots of good thoughts here. I'll add a couple more: Too much hardware. The have way too many engines, transmissions, and platforms. Whle the consolidation of platforms (and transmissions, to a lesser extent) is happening across the globe, surrely GM could reduce the number of engines it has and still be competitive globally: Why have different block sizes for the same engine family? The imports (especially Nissan) handle this well: changing the top half of the engine to bring about various performance levels. While we're at it, GM should commit to buiding world class OHV engines or building world class OHC engines, but not both. I'm not gonna argue OHV or OHC here, but keeping one and throwing away the other simplifies tooling requirements and increases engine plant fleibility, which in turn reduces costs.ccc

[Guest Josh]

The legacy costs are GM's #1 issue. Without those, the company would have announced earnings the past two years. Other than that, the perception gap has got to be the second item GM has going against them. This is not something they can control however, until us GM owners get out there and brag about our success stories.

[Ghost Dog]

Just when I had gotten calmed down. Soooo how do "legacy Costs" result in poor sales and loss of market share? If they had Better sales, and maintained market share they would have"posted earnings" Of course Billions in unjustified Dividend Dollars would be nice to have on hand. Bumbling Wagoner cries and cries about the High Dollar.(2004) Lutz Makes off the Cuff remarks " If you want better Fuel economy, Make Gasoline Three dollars a gallon. (2004) Gm Decides to start Importing. Dollar Goes in the Tank. Imports have to sell at a premium. Gas goes to three dollars . And GM gets caught with thier SUV's down. Edited January 4, 2006 by Ghost Dog

[NOS2006]

One major thing is the magazines. GM can't buy a good review. Even on some of their good products. They're still nit-picked on every last detail. Another thing is the "efficiency" of the vehicles. By efficiency, I mean how much each buyer gets out of their buy.

[Guest Josh]

Ghost, you need to realize something. I'm GM through & through, but previous contracts have GM paying too much for previous failures which have to be looked after because well, we can't fix the past, we can only fix the here & now.

[razoredge]

GM's current problem is they lost ? 5 ? 7 ? billion at Fiat (we know its much higher because people were making the big bucks concentrating on this "deal" instead of keeping the eye on the ball) and gave Wagner millions in bonus's last year. The money squandered at Fiat, Saab, saturin and greasing exec's could have takin care of the multitude of problems mentioned.

Then we could go back to former management and find where they were not keeping the eye on the ball.

or..... we could just jump to the easiest and obvious current problems and blame it all on them when in reality they are the product of all I mentioned above.



Its impossible to vote on this because whats wrong is so far reaching. All the money squandering has been done and aint commin back nor the time lost so lets ignore that.......like everyone does anyhow :rolleyes:

Styling & design but is that the bean counters ? We have seen so much potential in "show" cars but they are just a tease
Engineering and Technology but is that the bean counters ? We have seen so much innovation that never came to light or failed when it did.
advertizing & promotion......ah.....let me think about that a minute :blink: they surely have been employing undercover Asian reps
quality and materials or is that the bean counters
bean counters while I believe wrong decisions have been made, where the extra investment would have paid off long term, you cant blame them for job banks and huge executive bonus's & perks (or can you?)
health insurance where is our government anyhow ? oh yea, I remember, taking care of business......elsewhere
pensions No!, that was part of their pay package and until your ready to take back the multi millions perhaps billions overpaid to executives over the past 30 years and their pensions you can not touch that with little more than your lips.

[Guest Josh]

Styling & design but is that the bean counters ? We have seen so much potential in "show" cars but they are just a tease
Engineering and Technology but is that the bean counters ? We have seen so much innovation that never came to light or failed when it did.
advertizing & promotion......ah.....let me think about that a minute  :blink: they surely have been employing undercover Asian reps
quality and materials or is that the bean counters
bean counters while I believe wrong decisions have been made, where the extra investment would have paid off long term, you cant blame them for job banks and huge executive bonus's & perks (or can you?)
health insurance where is our government anyhow ? oh yea, I remember, taking care of business......elsewhere
pensions No!, that was part of their pay package and until your ready to take back the multi millions perhaps billions overpaid to executives over the past 30 years and their pensions you can not touch that with little more than your lips.

[post="67313"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I'll just steal this entire paragraph and say......ditto.

[johnnyb]

Perception, good products with rather louzy designs and desirability, health costs, GM's inability to stop making 5 different versions of the same damn car. This all adds up. It can be fixed however. Exciting and desirable quality products takes perception right out (with time.) Health cost issues have to be worked out with the unions. GM can easily STOP badge engineering, but I doubt they'll do it. But PLEASE, at least do it right (major design differences, add brand personality, limit to 2 vehicles...)

[Flybrian]

GM can easily STOP badge engineering, but I doubt they'll do it. But PLEASE, at least do it right (major design differences, add brand personality, limit to 2 vehicles...)

[post="67352"][/post]

Agreed, in that...



...is done right and...



...is done wrong.

[Satty]

The quality is getting there, the interiors are getting there, still a generation or so behind the class leaders on both fronts, for the most part. No stupid SUVs for Pontiac, more than two cars and less than 3 SUVs/crossovers/vans for Buick, give Caddy another retractable hardtop or a coupe in the $40-50k range, keep hyping GMC, find a direction and stick with it for Saturn, give SAAB the goofy, outside the box cars like the MAXX (I think the MAXX Is a better SAAB than the SportCombi thing) and just keep on keepin on with Chevy. KISS, keep it simple, stupid. The money side of it, well just quit being dumb with it. No more huge UAW contracts, no more Fiat fiascos and in the long term GM should pull out just fine, better for the hardships.

[Clownzilla]

The quality is getting there, the interiors are getting there, still a generation or so behind the class leaders on both fronts, for the most part. 
No stupid SUVs for Pontiac, more than two cars and less than 3 SUVs/crossovers/vans for Buick, give Caddy another retractable hardtop or a coupe in the $40-50k range, keep hyping GMC, find a direction and stick with it for Saturn, give SAAB the goofy, outside the box cars like the MAXX (I think the MAXX Is a better SAAB than the SportCombi thing) and just keep on keepin on with Chevy.  KISS, keep it simple, stupid.

The money side of it, well just quit being dumb with it.  No more huge UAW contracts, no more Fiat fiascos and in the long term GM should pull out just fine, better for the hardships.

[post="67363"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I think that there needs to be more drastic changes. Pontiac-GMC-Buick-Saturn need to be combined into one franchise. Cadillac & SAAB needs to be combined. Opel, Holden, Voxhaul, Daewoo needs to be combined. Chevy can stand alone. Chevy can be the every persons vehicle for the USA. Pontiac-GMC-Buick-Saturn can be the trend setters for the USA (VW of the USA with a much larger lineup). Cadillac + SAAB can be the luxury line. The Non-USA brand can take care of everything international. I know, people will say that this will never work. I beleive this is the state of GM's situation though. They just can't sustain this size. Yes, many people will lose their jobs and/or be bought out, but the difficult process will be for the survival of the future of GM.The cost will the biggest GM undertakings ever. The contracts, the buy-outs, the massive changes involved in changing names, the product changes, etc. It must be done though.

Yeah, the Fiat ordeal was terrible. They got themselves stuck in a situation that they could of avoided. On the UAW deal, I think the New York transit strikes + the London Transit strikes are going to make GM negotiotains easier. Public support of unions is shrinking at a faster pace now.

[VenSeattle]

I have nothing positive to say in a topic about what's wrong with GM :P :lol:

[regfootball]

cheap plastic and bad interiors clueless management in many ways many unrefined and uncompetitive engines (mostly the v6's although it is starting to improve) w bodies and other old platforms bean counters stifle everything old dealers and practices crippling labor and benefit arrangements product cycles far too long still have some bad styling and interior packaging issues a general public that mostly can't think for themsleves Neils, jobs, Leinerts, etc. Edited January 4, 2006 by regfootball

[knightfan26917]

Crap. I think I "misvoted".

I plugged my vote for "Product line-up" (because they are not offering the Monte Carlo currently...and haven't since 1988), but quickly realized that it should be "other".

Why?

Because, along with the product line-up issues, they need to get the quality control up a bit more, too.

Course, it's easier to tell them what needs a fixin' ... than tell them how to fix it :(.


Cort, "Mr MC" / "Mr Road Trip", 32swm/pig valve/pacemaker
MC:family.IL.guide.future = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/
Models.HO = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/trainroom.html
"How much longer will they be around?" ... Don Williams ... 'Old Coyote Town'

[VenSeattle]

all right... I'll go ahead and post my rant:

[rant]

According to C&G members, GM has at least one problem with each of the following:

Chevrolet:
Avalanche, Aveo, Blazer, Cavalier, Cobalt, Colorado, Equinox, Express, HHR, Impala, Malibu, Monte Carlo, Silverado, Suburban, SSR, Tahoe, Trailblazer, Uplander
Pontiac:
G6, Grand Prix, GTO, Montana SV6, Solstice, Torrent, Vibe
Saturn:
Aura, Ion, Relay, Sky, VUE
Buick:
LaCrosse, Lucerne, Rainier, Rendezvous, Terraza
SAAB:
9-2x, 9-3, 9-5, 9-7x
GMC:
Canyon, Envoy, Savana, Sierra, Yukon, Yukon XL
HUMMER:
H1, H2, H3
Cadillac:
CTS, DTS, Escalade, SRX, STS, XLR

GM also has a problem with unions, management, healthcare costs, pensions costs, employees, the city of Detroit, the state of Michigan, America, the world, any and all platforms, reputation, reliability, dealerships, warranties, anything Daewoo related, transmissions, OHV engines, fuel efficiency, anything FWD, anything RWD, anything AWD, anything not AWD, DoD, VVT,  trunk space, interior space, overhangs, ride height, tires, tire size, wheels, paint colors, plastic, painted plastic, unpainted plastic, cloth interiors, leather interiors, vinyl interiors, protein leather interiors, seat design, steering wheel design, stereo controls, HVAC controls, plood, the lack of wood-aluminum-titanium-LEDs-HIDs-HUD-ABS-ESC-MRC on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on

According to C&G, the only good things GM might have going for it:

Corvette, Opel, Holden, & Oldsmobile.

Oldsmobile is dead, Opel & Holden are on other continents and actually sell outdated vehicles, oh... and the Corvette still has a cheap looking interior.

[/rant]

GM should just give up now. The loyal fans have turned against GM, and the rest of the world won't give them a chance.

We're talking about a company that has the highest domestic reliabilty and the top 3 plants in quality for NA.

As for reliability & quality control, compare the following two JD Power Vehicle Dependability charts (Long Term Reliability: 3-5 years) and it shows how far GM has come in just the last 5 years:





* Cadillac, SAAB, Buick, GMC, Pontiac, Saturn & Chevrolet are ALL more reliable than Toyota (or Honda) just 5 years ago!

* Cadillac & Buick have far less as many problems now than Toyota did 5 years ago and are more reliable than even Lexus 5 years ago.

* Hell, even Chevrolet is almost as reliable as Lexus was 5 years ago.

* Cadillac & Buick are more reliable than Toyota (and Honda) today.

* If you thought Toyotas and Hondas were bullet proof in 2000, then GM's vehicles today (especially their premium vehicles) should be considered "Built by the Gods".

GM no longer has a reliability problem.

Styling is subjective & perceived quality is too. If you don't want to like GM's styling then you won't. If you want to believe GM's hard plastic is brittle while a Honda or VW's hard plastic is premium, durable, and of high quality then you will... but I don't predict cracked and damaged Impala or Lucerne dashboards in the near future (or distant future for that matter.)

Perception isn't wrong, but it's not accurate either. It's an opinion.

Management, over-bearing union agreements/healthcare costs/pensions, the loss of confidence from the media & Wall Street... Those are GM's biggest problems. It's sad that GM is better than ever and the market is more resistant and hateful towards GM than ever before.

If GM can get its internal house in order, win back the media, and win back Wall Street then the public perception problem would take care of itself. Product is already improving at an exponential rate as it is.

[razoredge]

Why thanks Ven ! Most excellent, I fully appreaciate the effort !

[evok]

GM's biggest problem as a corporation that they can not seem to fix comes down to one historic problem: Lack of corporate communication. The product will take time to work out, the organization can be sorted through but for whatever reason GM can not explain why it does what it does or gets itself in the situations they get themselves into. GM lacks transparency, that is their biggest, f'ing problem. If they could explain to the world what the hell is going on, their stock would not be trading at under $20 a share. For a company that has app. 200 million in sales, they might have a market cap greater then Wholefoods Grocery Stores if they were able to communicate their story instead of leaving everyone to speculate what their issues are. GM's communications sux...... they leave it up to unautomotive educated pundits and Wall St. analysts to pick through their PRs to speculate on the corporate undertakings. That is the problem. Good product can not make up for that.

[prototype66]

I tend to agree with the faction that there are a plethera of different problems that must and are being addrest. HOWEVER. The MAIN concern of mine is the negitive press continuously emphesizing all of the smaller problems into much much bigger problems while completely ignoring the positives. GM absolutely has to get someone in there to defuse all the negitivity and put the necessary positive light on the ongoing progress gm is and will continue to accomplish in the days ahead. 2006 WILL in my opinion be the turning point at which GM will make great strides, in all said areas of improvement, to once again be the global leader in the automotive industry they once were. IMO ofcourse. B) my.02 Edited January 4, 2006 by prototype66

[evok]

I tend to agree with the faction that there are a plethera of different problems that must and are being addrest. HOWEVER. The MAIN concern of mine is the negitive press continuously emphesizing all of the smaller problems into much much bigger problems while completely ignoring the positives. GM absolutely has to get someone in there to defuse all the negitivity and put the necessary positive light on the ongoing progress gm is and will continue to accomplish in the days ahead. 2006 WILL in my opinion be the turning point at which GM will make great strides, in all said areas of improvement, to once again be the global leader in the automotive industry they once were. IMO ofcourse. B)  my.02

[post="67441"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Let me summarize - Poor corporate communications.

[evok]

Case in point. Based upon this analyst, his price estimates for GM stock would make the company worth app. 6 billion. All I have to say is hedge funds, have fun at GMs expense. GM shares fall after brokerage cuts target price Reuters Automotive News / January 3, 2006 - 12:00 pm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Advertisement -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DETROIT -- Shares of General Motors fell nearly 5 percent on Tuesday after Banc of America Securities cut its target price for the automaker's stock. The brokerage firm lowered the target price to $13 from $16, citing lower savings from GM's recent health-care agreement with the United Auto Workers union. That would represent a fall of an additional 33 percent this year for GM's stock, which was one of the worst performers in the Standard & Poor's 500 index in 2005, dropping almost 52 percent. The shares were down 74 cents, or 3.8 percent, at $18.68 in morning trade on the New York Stock Exchange after falling as low as $18.47 earlier in the session. GM's decline weighed on the blue-chip Down Jones industrial average. GM has said the health-care pact, endorsed by the union in October, will cut its health-care expenses by $3 billion annually before taxes, and reduce its hourly health-care liability by 25 percent, or by about $15 billion. "GM's estimate of a $15 billion reduction in the health-care liability, due to the agreement, assumes the agreement lasts in perpetuity," Banc of America analyst Ron Tadross said in a note to clients. "Apparently, the agreement ends in 2011," he said. The eventual savings from the deal will be only about $7 billion before taxes, he said. Calls to GM spokesmen were not immediately returned. GM shares have been under pressure as the company struggles with high health-care and commodities costs, loss of U.S. market share to foreign rivals, and sinking sales of SUVs, its long-time profit generators. The world's largest automaker lost nearly $4 billion through the first nine months of 2005. Moreover, the shares have been falling steadily since news of the sale of 12 million GM shares by billionaire Kirk Kerkorian's investment arm, Tracinda Corp., last month. Tracinda reduced its stake in the company to 7.8 percent from 9.9 percent, citing income tax savings. Banc of America also cut its target price for Ford Motor Co. shares to $7 from $8, but raised its target price for Toyota Motor Corp. to $113 from $110. Ford shares were off 4 cents at $7.68.

[mphmag]

Our Managing editor weighs in on GM's corporate look on the blog site.
http://www.mph-online.com/blogs/0090

He has a different take on the situation.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

GM's biggest problem as a corporation that they can not seem to fix comes down to one historic problem:

Lack of corporate communication.

The product will take time to work out, the organization can be sorted through but for whatever reason GM can not explain why it does what it does or gets itself in the situations they get themselves into.

GM lacks transparency, that is their biggest, f'ing problem.

If they could explain to the world what the hell is going on, their stock would not be trading at under $20 a share. For a company that has app. 200 million in sales, they might have a market cap greater then Wholefoods Grocery Stores if they were able to communicate their story instead of leaving everyone to speculate what their issues are.

GM's communications sux...... they leave it up to unautomotive educated pundits and Wall St. analysts to pick through their PRs to speculate on the corporate undertakings.

That is the problem.  Good product can not make up for that.

[post="67440"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

That is probably the best post I've read in a long time.


My take: (On the options listed)

Product line-up (overlaps, segmentation)

This is the single biggest problem at GM IMO... If they utilized ALL of their divisions in a correct way and built ALL of their offerings to the standards of those set in their enthusiasts cars, GM would probably be the best auto company in the world right now.

Product isn't a cure all... But it's a logical and huge first step... It can cure sales, it can cure perception and it can cure quality problems (If done right)

Quality control

This is the second biggest problem at GM... Sure, GM has come a long way and they DO NOT have a reliability problem anymore. But the issue lies in the perception of this fact. The consumer simply has not been informed well enough that it is safe to invest in a GM vehicle. Most consumers STILL think it's the 70's and the same old Detroit; an image perpetuated constantly by the media and analysts. (For personal gain)

GM will never recover unless it invest HEAVILY in informing the consumer where it stands on quality and value. I do not understand why this is so hard for GM, and Ford for that matter, to understand. They have a negative image of building crap and building that crap for 20 years. Product alone will not change this image and especially will not change it fast enough.

GM and Ford assume that they're on a level playing field... They think that Joe Q. Public is automatically going to look at J.D. Power and then pick which car (import or domestic) is right for them, when in reality they are NOT even remotely close to that level playing field. EVERY consumer has been conditioned to believe that either domestics are not reliable or that imports are better automatically... STRIKE 1.... Then the consumer reads a negative story on the vehicle or worse yet, the company or even worse still the "Big 3" lump in general...STRIKE 2... Then the consumer talks to friends; friends which know that it's not priority to buy a domestic and friends that have been influenced by the same negative rhetoric regarding domestics and...STRIKE 3. Gm isn't even considered anymore.

I'd be willing to bet that a large part of the population doesn't even register domestics on their radar screen.

GM (Or GM and Ford...Or the "Big 3"---since they're grouped that way, might as well use it as an advantage) needs to launch a massive campaign much like Kia did with it's 10 year/100,000 mile campaign.

Cost control - too fat

This is as much a problem as anything else.

Economy - they can't help it

This plays a large role too, but can't be controlled.

RE: The cut:

analyst Ron Tadross said

That's just Tadross for you

[evok]

Our Managing editor weighs in on GM's corporate look on the blog site.
http://www.mph-online.com/blogs/0090

He has a different take on the situation.

[post="67472"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

In many way you hit part of GM's structural issues right on the head. But that is one aspect of the organization that has been resolved and will take a few years until most of the old Pre-Lutz vehicles make there way out of the fleet.

The disjointed nature of the fleet can be mainly attributed to multitute of vehicle develoment organizations GM had in NA which have been consoldated.

How this relates to your article is that I could get into any GM vehicle and within seconds tell you where development took place. Meaning if the vehicle was a product of Pontiac, Lansing, CLCD Flint, Mid Lux Warren, Saturn Troy. This was based upon interior material selection, plastic graining, fit and finish, part design etc. Each organization had different specification. I am refering to vehicles and not brands. Well today, GM has 1 Development organization with consistent specification so all of their vehicles coming out now should have a more consistent feel and theme.

So to answer the points you bring up in your thread, GM will be more like VW and Audi across the board. Not just in NA but across the globe.

But I assure you it will take time. Get people within NA to agree on specifications takes time, getting people across the globe to agree will take even more time.

[Mule Bakersdozen LS]

Oh let's see....cheap, poorly done, not-roomy-enough interiors, rear window goes overhead of the rear seat on most Pontiac's (G6, Grand Prix), not enough standard equipment for the ghastly high prices on most models, formerly optional equipment no longer available on certain models, ABS being optional where it used to be standard (and shamefully unavailable on Aveo SVM-I feel sorry for those poor people), too-large exterior dimensions on Cobalt, W-Bodies (save for Impala), etc. Cloth and vinyl interiors still on full-size vans (the only way a 2006 vehicle should have any remote business with a cloth/vinyl interior is if you're a cargo van or a work-truck trim pickup or a cop car/taxi THAT'S IT!). Mediocre, watered-down (by the gallons) exterior styling/design from what was considered (i.e. G6) or from concept car potential (all Buicks among others), synthetic fake cloth (Saturn ION and VUE, Chevy Cobalt/Malibu/Maxx/Equinox/Uplander), all CSV's (everything about them all except for Uplander's grille), the useless as-is Pontiac Torrent (all the same features and styling except for an awful Pontiac grille-yet with a much higher ending price), 4-speed automatic transmissions, dated engines (3800 V-6, plus the High Value engines should never ever have been developed), the 3.2-liter and 3.6-liter DOHC High Feature V-6 engines are either MIA (3.2) or detuned and not used on more vehiclesa (3.6).

[prototype66]

Let me summarize - Poor corporate communications.

[post="67443"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

SORRY EVOK. diddn't see your post. i responded from page one. B)

[evok]

SORRY EVOK. diddn't see your post. i responded from page one. B)

[post="67634"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I must of miss something - ha ha

No problem to what ever I missed. I just wanted to summarize what I read into your post and thought you were elluding to as GM's poor communications skills. Edited January 4, 2006 by evok

[97regalGS]

In many way you hit part of GM's structural issues right on the head.  But that is one aspect of the organization that has been resolved and will take a few years until most of the old Pre-Lutz vehicles make there way out of the fleet.

The disjointed nature of the fleet can be mainly attributed to multitute of vehicle develoment organizations GM had in NA which have been consoldated.

How this relates to your article is that I could get into any GM vehicle and within seconds tell you where development took place.  Meaning if the vehicle was a product of Pontiac, Lansing, CLCD Flint, Mid Lux Warren, Saturn Troy.  This was based upon interior material selection, plastic graining, fit and finish, part design etc.  Each organization had different specification.  I am refering to vehicles and not brands.  Well today, GM has 1 Development organization with consistent specification so all of their vehicles coming out now should have a more consistent feel and theme.

So to answer the points you bring up in your thread, GM will be more like VW and Audi across the board.  Not just in NA but across the globe. 

But I assure you it will take time.  Get people within NA to agree on specifications takes time, getting people across the globe to agree will take even more time.

[post="67495"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

one post has not only cemented what was wrong with GM of the past but also gives hope for the future. depressing and enlightening at the same time!

[Matt276]

Now if GM can hear me: kill all the pushrod V-6 and replace them by the 3.6 all across the board. I don't want to hear about them anymore. You should keep only 3 engines for your cars, ecotec lineup ( I really love mine in my Cobalt), 3.6 and the 5.3. All mated to a 6 speed tranny. It would sell much better with less incentive. You remind me Kodak, who tried to sell film camera while every one else was selling digital ones. And they lost a lot of market share. Now about the 3.4, 3.5, 3.9, kill em all. I know Lutz would like to do it. And fire all the bean counters.

[trinacriabob]

Management, over-bearing union agreements/healthcare costs/pensions, the loss of confidence from the media & Wall Street... Those are GM's biggest problems. It's sad that GM is better than ever and the market is more resistant and hateful towards GM than ever before.

If GM can get its internal house in order, win back the media, and win back Wall Street then the public perception problem would take care of itself. Product is already improving at an exponential rate as it is.

[post="67414"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Perception is indeed a big issue. You live on the (North) West Coast. How many upwardly mobile Eastsiders excitedly run down to a GM dealership to pick out a new car (unless, maybe, it's an SUV)? Yes, GM is making strides, but these strides are not perceived to be in lockstep with those of foreign automakers. It will take a lot for certain demographic groups to accept that having a GM car, or truck, (or another domestic car) is acceptable. Look at the JD Power list. Japanese brands are at the top and eventually Buick shows up. Now, I don't want a Japanese car so I would opt for the Buick. However, most people wouldn't follow suit. Again, in my first post, I note the Consumer Reports rating system. I'd like to think those are accurate. If they are, then too many expensive brands in recent years still have bugs that haven't been worked out.

One relatively recent business concept is "benchmarking." GM, as well as the other domestic manufacturers, ought to do that more fervently, particularly in the QC department.

Sometimes the convictions of the people on C&G fall on deaf ears. Most of us are GM loyalists and will stick by The General. However, others, for whatever reason, are more apt to be swayed into foreign brands...like virtually ALL of my friends. They claim that "GM doesn't get it," most of them cite being burned in a domestic purchase and now rave about the dependability and excellent service obtained from their foreign vehicle.

The perception issue may be at the forefront of all this. But I think it is rooted in the horrendously negative experiences with the actual cars that some buyers had during the 80's and possibly even into the 90's.

[VenSeattle]

Look at the JD Power list. Japanese brands are at the top and eventually Buick shows up. Now, I don't want a Japanese car so I would opt for the Buick.

Trinacriabob, the only Japanese brand above Buick & Cadillac on the 2005 JDP list is Lexus. All other Japanese brands are beneath them.

Perception is important, but GM has little control over it at the moment. Most people today don't consider GM. It's not because of a bad experience... it's because of bad press and negative association by friends/relatives. It will take the Media & Wall Street promoting GM (an act of god) in order for perception to turn around. The avalanche of negative press has won. GM can't dig itself out on its own. GM needs help from Wall Street & the Media to turn around perception.

[turbo200]

How does JD Power measure extended reliability for a 2005 model ten years from now? The answer to me is not at all. That's why I don't buy into any of thier studies. They show durability over a period of 90 days, then they show reliability in the first year, and all is good, but I'd like to see reliability over ten years of ownership, or roughly 150-200k mileage. I don't think that is how JD is doing thier tests. Yes, GM's reliability has improved, but the imports have not stagnated, they have improved on thier already legendary reliability. GM will have to do better than just having reliable cars. Even Hyundai can build reliable cars, and have the confidence to back them for a long period of time.

[sciguy_0504]

I'd answer this at length but I'd just be throwing up what everyone else said. I think it's a combination of quality perception, somewhat lackluster design/engineering, too many cars/divisions, improper product pricing and legacy costs. GM's business model needs to reflect current and even future realities or else it will fail. Even with the plant closings coming up, I'm not sure if GM's business model is up to snuff. Currently, it seems GM knows what to do with Saturn and that's pretty much it. From giving GMC a crossover to rumors of a Kappa Chevy coupe to a somewhat lackluster new Escalade, STS, STS-v to throwing random cars at Buick to ignoring Pontiac, that's how it seems to me. Of course, my love affair with Saturn has been ramping up for months so that could cloud my vision. :wub:

[Mule Bakersdozen LS]

Agreed Sciguy-GMC last I checked was a TRUCK division, not a car division. Its a shame they're stooping to Jeep's historically low-level of offering car-based crossovers for GMC TRUCK. Switch Acadia to Chevy ASAP! And kill the Pontiac Torrent, unless you're going to Pontiacize it and give it a lowered sport suspension and Aztek-like fastback roofline, standard on all models. Otherwise send it to Buick, or kill it like the dog it is in unnecessary Pontiac form.

[knightfan26917]

*raises eyebrow*

Is it just me, or is anyone else sensing a feeling of dejavu with this topic?

What ever happened to those students/interns that posted about giving ideas to GM? Funny how we haven't heard from them in a while....


Cort, "Mr MC" / "Mr Road Trip", 32swm/pig valve/pacemaker
MC:family.IL.guide.future = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/
Models.HO = http://www.chevyasylum.com/cort/trainroom.html
"You've made a fool of everyone" ... Jet ... 'Look What You've Done'