See, This Is Why I Dislike Bob Lutz

[Shantanu]

http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=2501639

Detestable import fanboys having a field day over Bob Lutz's GM deprecating comments.

Back in 2002, Bob Lutz came out with that "apology" campaign in newspapers, wherein GM essentially said that its past products were $h! but consumers should give it a new look because the new GM is changed. So I actually bought into to that and convinced my family to get a CTS at the time.

4 years later, it looks like we've come back full circle. "Just wait until you see our new products just around the corner, they're nothing like the junk we peddled in the past." The spin is exactly the same: in the past we sucked, we admit that, but take a look at our new products! We've changed!

I mean, what am I supposed to think? Am I chump for believing them the first time, and now finding out the "New GM" was no good, but that if I should need another car I can look to the "New New GM"?

Pisses me off.

[Northstar]

Well, the future products are all Lutz products, so they are the "New GM." The old campaign was obviously just a PR ploy to get some people to keep their faith in GM, and not a whole lot more.

Just wait for the '07-2010 model years and you'll see that there is in fact a new GM.

[Shantanu]

Well, the future products are all Lutz products, so they are the "New GM." The old campaign was obviously just a PR ploy to get some people to keep their faith in GM, and not a whole lot more.

Just wait for the '07-2010 model years and you'll see that there is in fact a new GM.

Are you being sarcastic, or have you bought into this rubbish too?

What makes you think that 4 years from now they won't run another apology campaign, like they're doing today, and like they did 4 years ago?

[Sixty8panther]

So I take it you're less than pleased with your CTS?

[Northstar]

Look at the new product that has come out or debuted. GMT900s, Solstice, Sky, Aura, Enclave, HHR. Look at what the next ION was going to look like. If that doesn't portray a bright future, I don't know what does.

Edit: After the NY Auto Show, come back here and tell me the future for Saturn doesn't look very, very bright.

[enzl]

Are you being sarcastic, or have you bought into this rubbish too?  

What makes you think that 4 years from now they won't run another apology campaign, like they're doing today, and like they did 4 years ago?

Lots of posters here fall into that description...apologists, conspiracy theorists, etc...

I like Lutz because he isn't afraid to speak his mind, unlike the other rats running the General right now...unfortunately, that sometimes leads to contrary statements or faux pas....

Just wait for X years from now! The new X is 5x the car its replacing! I have to laugh each time I hear that one on this board....I've got news for everyone- the future IS now, because there may not be a next year or next product cycle.

I personally know 100's of employees that depend upon GM for their livelihood. What they've got coming in the next few years is because of people like Rick W. and his golden-parachute brigade. It's flat out negligent. If I presided over a company that performed as GM has in the past few years, I'd be collecting unemployment checks as of 6 months ago. Just crazy, IMHO.

Edited March 21, 2006 by enzl

[Shantanu]

So I take it you're less than pleased with your CTS?

No I think GM products are fine. I just don't like Bob Lutz making apologies for them, in a pitiful effort to try to attract import buyers.

[Shantanu]

Look at the new product that has come out or debuted. GMT900s, Solstice, Sky, Aura, Enclave, HHR. Look at what the next ION was going to look like. If that doesn't portray a bright future, I don't know what does.

Edit: After the NY Auto Show, come back here and tell me the future for Saturn doesn't look very, very bright.

Umm... Yeah, and the future was bright back in 2002 as well, with GM's sales jump after Sept 11, the Cadillac CTS coming out, the new SUVs, the Pontiac Vibe holding promise, etc. And back in those days GM was actually making money, and talking of growing their market share to 30%. Whatever happened to that? Or should we just believe Bob Lutz that GM cars back then were crap, but everyone should go out and buy one of the new GMs because they're better, even though that was exactly the line he was spinning at that time.

[CARBIZ]

I don't understand the point of this thread. How could Lutz be responsible for GM and what it did pre-2002? Hold him responsible for the products of NOW, not then.

And, yeah, he is a lot like Iaccoca, who also shot from the hip and I admire that.

GM dropped the ball on new cars, plain and simple. Look at the one year lag between the cancelled Cutlass and the 1998 Intrigue as but one example of the looming crisis that everyone ignored back then; however, at least someone somewhere had the foresight to hire someone like Lutz to put the designers back in charge.

I, personally, am very encouraged by what I see GM bringing out lately.

I just hope it isn't too little too late.

[Guest buickman]

Report Court

Jim Dollinger

Tuesday, February 21, 2006

"We believe there is, among all of us at GM, a renewed sense of urgency... Nineteen Ninety Nine is the year for GM to retake the lead."

1998 Annual Report

"True, our market share, in the all-important US market was flat last year. Of course, we are not pleased with that."

1999 Annual Report

"Overall US market share fell one percentage point to 27.8 percent, while GM's global market share declined half a point to 15.1 percent. Make no mistake; we do not accept GM's continued share decline..."

2000 Annual Report

"It would be wrong to say we're satisfied, we are not. Overall we were disappointed with our 2001 results... Our margins were well below our expectations and targets."

2001 Annual Report

"Despite our progress, we know there's plenty more to do. Too many potential customers don't consider buying our products..."

2002 Annual Report

"Here's What's new about GM's strategy this year: Nothing.

2003 was an encouraging year along that road. Not because our results fully met our expectations. They didn't."

2003 Annual Report

"But overall, it was a year in which we did not take the step forward we were aiming for."

2004 Annual Report

Bet you can't wait to see the 2005 Report.

"It's in the Bill of Sale."

Denny Crane

[Newbiewar]

the only thing lutz is trying to do is win back the trust of people like my father, that religiously purchase what they think is a quality car... and my dad had one chevette and no other GM vehicle and was so pissed off... never again will he purchase

[ellives]

Huh? You guys are just being naive. These comments are simply traditional sales guy talk. They all do it. They talk future products. Whether a "true" sales guy will talk at all about past product is debatable and in Lutz' case was probably not wise but at least he's honest about his thoughts.

Let's face the fact that car companies have become like most "consumer" type companies where they're all about new products. If you don't have them, you die. My company expects to sell product at the rate of 25% considered "new" products. Tough to do but it's necessary to survive.

the only thing lutz is trying to do is win back the trust of people like my father, that religiously purchase what they think is a quality car... and my dad had one chevette and no other GM vehicle and was so pissed off... never again will he purchase

[Intrepidation]

It's a lot of talk. They say the proof is in the product, so if the lastest vehicles are any indication, then they are far better than what's out now. I think Caddy is an exception, but even it still needs work as far as the interiors go, so that's probably what will be addressed in the future. Lutz waas probably summing up most of the cars as a whole, not all. Most GM cars in fact, have sucked, (Cavalier, LeSaber, Grand AM, etc.) The new Tahoe makes the old one look crude in comparison. So perhaps he simply means that the future cars will be better than the crap ones being replaced (Malibu) but also so good they'll be far superior than the good cars already out. Just a thought

[Mule Bakersdozen LS]

Look at the new product that has come out or debuted. GMT900s, Solstice, Sky, Aura, Enclave, HHR. Look at what the next ION was going to look like. If that doesn't portray a bright future, I don't know what does.

Edit: After the NY Auto Show, come back here and tell me the future for Saturn doesn't look very, very bright.

Yeah I've seen the GMT900's-they sucked-they haven't changed much. The others however you have a case for.

[Newbiewar]

Yeah I've seen the GMT900's-they sucked-they haven't changed much. The others however you have a case for.

umm... "they sucked"?

vrs

i'm not seeing your point...

vrs

also improved ride, handling... refined exterior thinner gaps between body pannels, less road noise... better fuel ecconomy better capablitys on and off road..

The new Tahoes are the best full size SUV on the market, excluding other GM vehicles.

Edited March 22, 2006 by Newbiewar

[Mule Bakersdozen LS]

The $50,000 Yukon SLT-2 I saw at the Auto Show a few weeks back was really disappointing and it looked really cheap in comparison to a Land Rover LR3 that was slightly less (smaller too, but wider, taller, far more luxurious looking inside-which of course, would be, but still...) I hate the ugly steering wheel-the only nice GM steering wheels are the Grand Prix's and the 3-spoke one used in the G6/Malibu SS, and the one from the SSR-all the others are really cheap and outdated looking, espcially with the cruise controls sticking out, adding to the cheapness. And the exterior styling is just bland-enough with the evolution already-we need something new!

[Cadillacfan]

http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=2501639

Detestable import fanboys having a field day over Bob Lutz's GM deprecating comments.

Back in 2002, Bob Lutz came out with that "apology" campaign in newspapers, wherein GM essentially said that its past products were $h! but consumers should give it a new look because the new GM is changed.  So I actually bought into to that and convinced my family to get a CTS at the time.

4 years later, it looks like we've come back full circle.  "Just wait until you see our new products just around the corner, they're nothing like the junk we peddled in the past."  The spin is exactly the same: in the past we sucked, we admit that, but take a look at our new products!  We've changed! 

I mean, what am I supposed to think?  Am I chump for believing them the first time, and now finding out the "New GM" was no good, but that if I should need another car I can look to the "New New GM"?      

Pisses me off.

Um.. the cars under his belt only started coming out in the past year or so and if you don't think that they are much more competitive and attractive then previous GM vehicles.. then I don't know what to tell you.

Most of the vehicles that are on the road now including: the Cobalt, the Malibu, and a lot of the Cadillacs (including the STS) were already being produced when Lutz came to GM. He made as many tweeks to the STS as he could without completely scrapping it.

Let's take at at what Lutz has accomplished: The Kappa platform (solstice, sky), the HHR, the GMT900s, Zeta (camaro, next GTO, full sized sedans), the new Lambdas, the new Lucerne, and much more.

These vehicles are slowly turning GM around. Sure, not all of them are here yet but you can thank the bean counters for this.

Lutz has been taking chances and he's been shaking up the design process at GM.

He's saying what millions of Americans already know, that GM produced some crappy vehicles in the past, so it's not like he's surprising people with this fact.

He should be entitled to say what he wants because he's doing so much for this company.