RENAULT-NISSAN BOSS PREDICTS RECOVERY FOR GM

[Guest Josh]

NEW YORK, April 12, 2006 (AFP) - Celebrated auto boss Carlos Ghosn, who knows something about resurrecting dying car companies, predicted Wednesday that troubled US giants General Motors and Ford would recover and prosper.

The Brazilian-born Frenchman, who rescued Japan's Nissan Motor from bankruptcy, dismissed speculation of GM's imminent demise as the world's biggest carmaker struggles to reverse huge losses and falling US sales.

"I don't think so," he told the CNBC network from the New York International Automobile Show when asked if GM could go bankrupt.

"I think there is a lot of potential and the car manufacturer can come (back) from any situation, as long as it establishes a good plan and understands the situation in which it is," he said.

"And frankly, I don't believe it and I said it many times, you know, Ford and GM have a lot of potential. And when they put it into action, we have to be very careful," Ghosn said.

Ghosn became Japan's pioneering foreign manager when he turned Nissan around from near-death in 1999 to being the world's most profitable car manufacturer in 2003.

A year ago, Ghosn took the post of chief executive at French automaker Renault, which owns a 44.4 percent stake in Nissan, while remaining president and chief executive of Nissan.

Earlier Wednesday, GM's chief of product development, Bob Lutz, denied that the company has ever thought about seeking bankruptcy protection to restructure its ailing operations.

"We always said it is totally out of the question," he told reporters at the New York auto show.

"We never talked about it, never contemplated it, it never came up in any of our internal conversations," he said.

Source: http://www.ttc.org/200604122142.k3clg7519927.htm

[daves87rs]

Yep. They may trip along the way, but things are going to get better...

[regfootball]

well the media and half the public wants them to go bankrupt.

[Newbiewar]

well the media and half the public wants them to go bankrupt.

i think the media is starting to lean...

a good review here or there and we've got our foot in the door...

tahoes... Z06s... solstice... lucurne... etc...

i say in 2 or 3 years GM will be praised for some of their actions... they have matched toyotas quality, if not passed it... they are just struggling with appeal, fuel ecconmy, and perception

[Polish_Kris]

well the media and half the public wants them to go bankrupt.

Ok this media bashing is getting old.

What is happening to GM is the result of their own actions.

[daves87rs]

Ok this media bashing is getting old.

What is happening to GM is the result of their own actions.

Yes and no.

The product has been getting better for years...yet, the still get kicked down...

and GM continues to get better as time goes along.

If the K/H family of cars in the 80s and 90s can get forgiveness...so can GM.

[enzl]

Yes and no.

The product has been getting better for years...yet, the still get kicked down...

and GM continues to get better as time goes along.

If the K/H family of cars in the 80s and 90s can get forgiveness...so can GM.

Why is it that good press is ignored here, while bad press gets highlighted?

It's cultivating a self-fulfilling prophecy to blame the media and then ignore good press.

GM & Ford get good press when they deserve it, plain and simple. The news media in general has a 'if it bleeds, it leads' mentality, so the potential downfall of two American Icons should get big press...it's not often you witness the implosion of such historic proportions...Look at history: Enron, US Steel, Arthur Anderson...I wish we'd stop the crying over it already.

[Mr.Krinkle]

its one of those things when you hear a song on the radio. and yourre like, wow i was just thinking of that song...and it could have been before, or yesterday or two weeks ago.

theres a term in pscy for it, the recency effect maybe. dont quote me on that one.

you just tend to remember certain things and apply them randomly.

but aside from that, the media bashing is somewhat real so dont kid yourself otherwise. maybe not all products are sparkling but most have a big ladder to climb, unfairly so i think. for instance the new tahoes. everbody liked them and praised the polishing up even though the previous version always sold well.

now they get two the thumbs up. they must have pulled the other from out there ass.

i just think about the response to the electric car gm put forth years and years ago. it was ugly as sin and laughed out of the realm of possiblility. it was hideous no doubt about it and the only people who did like it were the whale kissing tree hugging hippy groups.(not that theres anything wrong with them.)

fast forward a 10-15 years a new batch of ugly monstrosities that hits the world and everyone has fallen in love them, and their concern for the world. the fits, and insights and priuses are eyesores to me. but so what.

there will be a backlash at some time. people will get sick of this crappola.

--the other day i saw an for subaru from 1978. they were bashing toyota. standard features, power steering, fwd... and what not. oh well.

Edited April 14, 2006 by Mr.Krinkle

[Drew Dowdell]

Ok this media bashing is getting old.

What is happening to GM is the result of their own actions.

Yes and no.

While GM has no excuse for the CSVs <though they seem to be selling ok>. There is still the idea that every flippin car out there must out handle the 3-series.

"Well this new Lucerne rides ok, but the slolam numbers suck"*

"Well this new Aveo does it's job competently, but the 0-60 times suck"*

"Pushrods! meh."*

*obviously extreme fabricated examples

[sciguy_0504]

It is getting much better. Just look at the products now and compare to a few years ago, no more than a decade. Improvement is still needed in certain segments and some decisions, like no I4 or real manual in the Aura, make some of us scratch our heads. Interiors are still a sore point on must cars, too, IMO.

The media bias claims get old whenever a review comes in and people have to jump on it. Some will like the car and others will not. People jumped on Edmunds because the power steering failed in the Lucerne (which is now being recalled for it, though I have not seen anything in the media...gasp!) and they liked a higher-end model that they initially tested over the one they received for a long-term test.

[Petra]

It is getting much better.  Just look at the products now and compare to a few years ago, no more than a decade. 

Trouble is, the competitors haven't been asleep for the last decade, either. GM has just now started to get their act together, and they have a lot of catching up to do.

The lack of a Manual transmission in the Aura certainly makes me scratch my head, BTW.

[Camino LS6]

People love a train wreck - it's human nature. But when you discover Aunt Suzy crushed under the wheels, your attitude changes real quick. If you like your standard of living, you had better hope GM recovers.

[CARBIZ]

See the Toronto Star today for yet another example of media bias. They harp about a 1999 Century that has 75,000 miles on it that MAY have a leaking intake gasket. The headline is huge and the article is surrounded by a Toyota and a Honda ad. COINCIDENCE? I think not.

What burns my ass is that even IF the intake gasket is a problem for GM, a 1999 Toyota or Honda would have already required a new timing belt, which doesn't cost that much less to fix than an intake gasket on a Buick. However, Toyota and Honda consider that MAINTENANCE, thus avoiding the wrath of the media.

Toyota and Honda get away with murder (oil coking problems, exploding transmissions) and GM gets beaten up for things that aren't even its fault (gas tank sensors in sourthern Ontario 3 years ago.)

[enzl]

See the Toronto Star today for yet another example of media bias.  They harp about a 1999 Century that has 75,000 miles on it that MAY have a leaking intake gasket.  The headline is huge and the article is surrounded by a Toyota and a Honda ad.  COINCIDENCE?  I think not.

  What burns my ass is that even IF the intake gasket is a  problem for GM, a 1999 Toyota or Honda would have already required a new timing belt, which doesn't cost that much less to fix than an intake gasket on a Buick.  However, Toyota and Honda consider that MAINTENANCE, thus avoiding the wrath of the media.

  Toyota and Honda get away with murder (oil coking problems, exploding transmissions) and GM gets beaten up for things that aren't even its fault (gas tank sensors in sourthern Ontario 3 years ago.)

I know I run to the Toronto Star for the latest in Auto Info!

In all seriousness, this is media bias? C'mon. Unless you're trying to corner the market on used 99 Buick Centuries, who cares?

Look at the numbers, if recalls are any true indicator...GM has recalled more cars in the past few years than any of the above...Yes, Toyota and Honda aren't perfect, but you'll never get over this 'media bias' hang up by screaming 'they suck too' (That logic brings the conclusion that all of 'em suck, which really shouldn't be your point!)

[mustang84]

No, the media is not responsible for all of GM's problems, but the bias exists, just like the bias against American cars exists in the general American public. Has everyone forgotten about the Five Hundred review where the car got slammed badly and then a second writer from the same publication wrote up a piece about how his colleague was being pretty unfair because it was a Ford product? There was also the review recently about the Lucerne by a guy who wrote an import tuner book and had nothing better to say than Buick was still a gramps division...his review of the Lucerne was contrary to every review I had read about it. Then who can forget about that hack that loved her 1985 Corolla and quoted some "expert" that knew absolutely nothing about the auto industry, spewing more doom-and-gloom without highlighting anything positive going on at the Big 2.

However, I think GM will overcome perceptions. I agree with this article and believe General Motors will be going at full throttle in a few years, posting profits and market share gains. The bias and perceptions only serve to push GM harder at improving itself. You can kick a dog when he's down, but you better be running for home when he recovers his strength, because he's going to bite you in the ass.

Edited April 15, 2006 by mustang84

[The O.C.]

Yes and no.

The product has been getting better for years...yet, the still get kicked down...

and GM continues to get better as time goes along.

If the K/H family of cars in the 80s and 90s can get forgiveness...so can GM.

There's a big "BUT" here.....

Yes....the product has been getting better.....but with VERY few exceptions (C6, GMT-900s) the product, no matter how new, or how better, has been barely competitive.....and in no means segment-busting or segment-leading (AURA, G6, Cobalt, LaCrosse, Impala, STS, Lucerne....et al...)

THAT's why they keep getting "kicked down."

GM needs to start surpassing expectations (the consumers' and the media's.....)

What they are doing now is trying to meet expectations, only to find themselves coming up a bit short...which is not going to help GM overcome their perception-problem in the marketplace....

[The O.C.]

Yes and no.

While GM has no excuse for the CSVs <though they seem to be selling ok>. There is still the idea that every flippin car out there must out handle the 3-series.

"Well this new Lucerne rides ok, but the slolam numbers suck"*

"Well this new Aveo does it's job competently, but the 0-60 times suck"*

"Pushrods! meh."*

*obviously extreme fabricated examples

I see your point.....but I don't think everyone wants all GM vehicles to outhandle a BMW...(I realize you are being somewhat extreme....)

In your Lucerne example.....I think that car (the CXL in Edmunds for example) got bashed for its ride-and-handling because, YES, it does float and wallow.....it isn't as tied down or as responsive as it's peers (in this case.....300C, Toyota Avalon, Lexus ES....et al)

As far as the Aveo....it's not about the 0-60 times....but they DO bitch that, for an economy car, it's fuel economy is subpar for the overall performance of the car. If it ran like a hot-hatch, you could better support the lower fuel economy....etc...

Pushrods? Well, I don't think I need to go THERE.....(if the consumer sees it as inferior, you better not offer it to them.....etc....)

I'm not trying to pick apart your examples, just trying to show that the media's criticism of GM is far more focused than I think you are trying to show....you really can't say they are bashing-for-bashing's sake....

[The O.C.]

People love a train wreck - it's human nature.  But when you discover Aunt Suzy crushed under the wheels, your attitude changes real quick. If you like your standard of living, you had better hope GM recovers.

GM's success or decline will do absolutey NOTHING to change my standard of living....or my career success.....

....AND I am STILL in the automotive industry at that.....

[Newbiewar]

GM's success or decline will do absolutey NOTHING to change my standard of living....or my career success.....

....AND I am STILL in the automotive industry at that.....

i hate to burst your bubble... but without them... the united states economy will collapse, and our way of living except for the independantly wealthy will be gone...

without the big 3... we'll be in anohter great depression

[Croc]

GM's success or decline will do absolutey NOTHING to change my standard of living....or my career success.....

....AND I am STILL in the automotive industry at that.....

Bull&#036;h&#33;. I hope for your sake GM doesn't go under so you won't have to face the harsh reality.

[enzl]

The Media Bias is BS...how many pop culture items are popular, despite media negativity- from music, fashion, books, etc...you find plenty of intellectual cries that are inversely proportional to economic success...

Here's the real reason: Why should Joe American 6 Pack invest $20k or more on a risk?... when all logic, research and word-of-mouth indicates he/she can walk into a Toyota (Honda, Nissan, etc...) and get exactly what's paid for....Why hope GM is 'making better products now', when one can get a better product, no questions asked? Until someone here (and more importantly, GM) can provide a fool-proof, consistent argument to that conundrum, GM's market share will shrink. Great product from other sources (Koreans) have only accelerated the process.

[Robert Hall]

i hate to burst your bubble... but without them... the united states economy will collapse, and our way of living except for the independantly wealthy will be gone...

without the big 3... we'll be in anohter great depression

BS... there are a lot of other engines of the US economy than the auto industry..

[griff7774]

The Media Bias is BS...how many pop culture items are popular, despite media negativity- from music, fashion, books, etc...you find plenty of intellectual cries that are inversely proportional to economic success...

Here's the real reason: Why should Joe American 6 Pack invest $20k or more on a risk?... when all logic, research and word-of-mouth indicates he/she can walk into a Toyota (Honda, Nissan, etc...) and get exactly what's paid for....Why hope GM is 'making better products now', when one can get a better product, no questions asked? Until someone here (and more importantly, GM) can provide a fool-proof, consistent argument to that conundrum, GM's market share will shrink. Great product from other sources (Koreans) have only accelerated the process.

The Media is BIAS

The absence of evidence, is not the evidence of absence.

There are known knowns, and there are known unknowns, but there are unknown unknowns. Things that we don't know that we don't know.

Both of these are quotes from Secetary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld, talking about the Iraq invasion and their "evidence" for WMDs.

The Media in all forms is just advertisement. They report on what they "precieved" to be news.They want you to buy,not buy,like, dislike certain products.

You said"Why should Joe American 6 Pack invest $20k or more on a risk?... when all logic, research and word-of-mouth indicates he/she can walk into a Toyota (Honda, Nissan, etc...) and get exactly what's paid for....Why hope GM is 'making better products now', when one can get a better product, no questions asked? " My Questions to you is WHO's logic? Whom's Reearch? Who's Mouth? Who is saying that GM is not making better products now. Can really get what I want from Toyota.

We all have our "perception" what the media Biases(sp) are. Are you going to buy what they selling? That is the real question.

[enzl]

The Media is BIAS

Both of these are quotes from Secetary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld, talking about the Iraq invasion and their "evidence" for WMDs.

The Media in all forms is just advertisement. They report on what they "precieved" to be news.They want you to buy,not buy,like, dislike certain products.

You said"Why should Joe American 6 Pack invest $20k or more on a risk?... when all logic, research and word-of-mouth indicates he/she can walk into a Toyota (Honda, Nissan, etc...) and get exactly what's paid for....Why hope GM is 'making better products now', when one can get a better product, no questions asked? "  My Questions to you is WHO's logic?  Whom's Reearch?  Who's Mouth? Who is saying that GM is not making better products now. Can really get what I want from Toyota.

We all have our "perception" what the media Biases(sp) are. Are you going to buy what they selling? That is the real question.

You have cleverly avoided answering my riddle...If the blame falls on the media and its bias, how does one explain the subjective & objective dominance of non-Big 2.5 product? And even if every publication, every test, every research company is biased (which you haven't proven through evidence...or is the absence of evidence mean I'm correct, using your logic?), I'd like to know who's pulling those strings...Karl Rove?

What possible motivations would fuel the conspiracy of bias you'd like me to believe???As Ackham's Razor postulates, the most simple explanation is usually correct...i.e. the product isn't as good. Bob Lutz, a man who knows more than you or I has said as much publicly, so I find it hard to argue otherwise.

Go ahead and cheerlead mediocrity...that's how the General got here in the first place. Perhaps you can give me your 'spin' on this gem...

http://www.autoblog.com/2006/04/15/gm-to-h...ase-by-case-ba/

Edited April 16, 2006 by enzl

[Mr.Krinkle]

wow, someones been busy.

the bias stems from the this, most people when testing a car need or want the american brands to prove how good they are.

when testing other cars they need to be disproved.

at least thats the way i see it, thats how the writing ususally shows it up.

thats the bias, and its not a conspiracy theory or secret handshake bull&#036;h&#33; so dont try to minimilize it. a lot is paid advertisement, kicknacks, or response to consumer letters and phonecalls. they like to supply the auidience what they want to hear.

its a popuarity contest, not a quality issue.

and its so ingrained in most mindsets it never gets questioned.

a lot of people get burned by cars. mercedes, audi, bmw...terrible records with regards to reliability. however when these cars get stuck its rationalozed--oh well, theres so much electronic gizmos, im driving the best car in the world, ill just get it fixed. who wants to accept they flushed away 50, 60k + for gremlins??

if it happens with a japanese car, its befuddling. no one expects that. hmmm let me take it in...problem fixed, have an i pod and a great day. see you soon.

well....they get my vote.

i like to watch motorweek because they rarely have anything bad to say about

any car and when they do, you know its gotta mean something.

heres a quote from that same blog. its nice to keep an open mind.

[Mr.Krinkle]

no company that builds autombiles is without sin in regards to defective products. My 1989 Toyota (so pre-Tacoma) 6 cylinder blew a head gasket. I discovered that Toyota had a "case by case" extension of the warranty on the gasket to 100K miles and mine blew at 107,000. The dealer wanted to fix it for real money and I wanted Toyota to pay for it. After much back and forth Toyota paid for the repair but not the several hundred dollars it took me and the trunk home along with the rental while we argued over who would pay.

The engine was never quite the same and I've moved on to anything but Toyota and anywhere but that dealer. Any manufacturor, including GM, that knows they have a lethal problem with an engine should go out preemptively fix them. To do anything else is to lose customers for life.

[sciguy_0504]

My dad's 80's Toyota truck lasted well over 200,000 miles and the only reason he got rid of it was due to body rust. Everyone will have different experiences. Your truck lasted a long time and even post warranty Toyota paid for what happened, known engine problems or not. That is luck.

[Mr.Krinkle]

just to clarify-- that above post isnt about my truck. i dont have a toyota truck.

it came from the link about the engine problems...i do however currently have a 92 bonneville with 100k+, and yes its been leaking since it was booght used from the "little old lady who only drove it too church on sunday" no one can pinpoint where its coming from but it runs like a champ still today.

luck of the draw sometimes.

[Camino LS6]

GM's success or decline will do absolutey NOTHING to change my standard of living....or my career success.....

....AND I am STILL in the automotive industry at that.....

DEAD WRONG!

and part of the problem.

[The O.C.]

BS...  there are a lot of other engines of the US economy than the auto industry..

Absolutely.

Anyone that think the demise of GM will destroy our economy is living their lives in a bubble.

AND, the "U.S. auto industry" right now means alot more today than just the "Big Three." The transplants are thriving.....Nissan is about to get a major influx of employees FROM Detroit (at their new home in Nashville) for example....

Yes there will be a disruption in the economy....but it will be extremely localized....similar to when the steel industry went bust.

Consumers will never lose their need for automotive transportation....whether it's GM feeding their needs or any of the other multitude of manufacturers.

I read a report recently that California, for example, is the leading manufacturing state in the COUNTRY. BUT out of all the manufacturing (in many varied industries) that goes on in this state, only ONE facility (I believe only one) is automotive-related.....(Fremont, CA....NUMMI.)

My point is.....there are MANY more varied factors in our economy OTHER than the traditional "domestic" auto manufacturing that will dictate if our economy will "live or die."

[The O.C.]

DEAD WRONG!

and part of the problem.

You really need to step out of that bubble.....

Sure it's nice to think GM has that much impact these days....

But guess what bud....they don't. And they haven't for a LONG time.

It's real...and it's the truth. Sorry to BURST your bubble.

(that's not to say I don't want GM to be successful....I do....but that doesn't change the reality of the situation.)

[evok]

You really need to step out of that bubble.....

Sure it's nice to think GM has that much impact these days....

But guess what bud....they don't.  And they haven't for a LONG time.

It's real...and it's the truth.  Sorry to BURST your bubble.

(that's not to say I don't want GM to be successful....I do....but that doesn't change the reality of the situation.)

You are correct sir.

[The O.C.]

Bull&#036;h&#33;.  I hope for your sake GM doesn't go under so you won't have to face the harsh reality.

Let me throw another little discussion topic out there......

Where's the supposed drain on our economy due to GM losing more than half of their market share over the last few decades? Considering the cutbacks, the plant closings, the reduction in output due to a fall from over 50% of the market to, where is it now? 23%? 24%

I'd seriously like someone to JUSTIFY how they think a GM demise will seriously impact our overall economy?

EVOK has shown figures before absolutely to the CONTRARY of that.....but I haven't seen anyone on here provide a justifiable argument to how GM going under will provide me (or others) a "harsh reality?"

[evok]

Let me throw another little discussion topic out there......

Where's the supposed drain on our economy due to GM losing more than half of their market share over the last few decades?  Considering the cutbacks, the plant closings, the reduction in output due to a fall from over 50% of the market to, where is it now?  23%?  24%

I'd seriously like someone to JUSTIFY how they think a GM demise will seriously impact our overall economy?

EVOK has shown figures before absolutely to the CONTRARY of that.....but I haven't seen anyone on here provide a justifiable argument to how GM going under will provide me (or others) a "harsh reality?"

If GM goes Ch 11, the only significant drain on the US economy/government/tax payer will be for the PBGC bailout..

[ehaase]

Some believe that the U.S. economy may be better off if GM went away:

A lot of people out there can't imagine an America without GM. I certainly can, and I'm not sure it wouldn't be a better place. Business is a brutal ecosystem, where even the strongest of the old lions eventually flop over, never to roar again. It may be time for this long-weakened wheezer to finally fade away.

http://www.fool.com/news/mft/2006/mft06033...nce=y&bounce2=y

[enzl]

wow, someones been busy.

the bias stems from the this,  most people when testing a car need or want the american brands to prove how good they are.

when testing other cars they need to be disproved.

at least thats the way i see it,  thats how the writing ususally shows it up.

thats the bias, and its not a conspiracy theory or secret handshake bull&#036;h&#33; so dont try to minimilize it.  a lot is paid advertisement, kicknacks, or response to consumer letters and phonecalls.  they like to supply the auidience what they want to hear.

its a popuarity contest, not a quality issue. 

and its so ingrained in most mindsets it never gets questioned.

a lot of people get burned by cars.  mercedes, audi, bmw...terrible records with regards to reliability.  however when these cars get stuck its rationalozed--oh well, theres so much electronic gizmos,  im driving the best car in the world, ill just get it fixed.  who wants to accept they flushed away 50, 60k + for gremlins??

if it happens with a japanese car,  its befuddling.  no one expects that. hmmm let me take it in...problem fixed,  have an i pod and a great day. see you soon.

well....they get my vote.

i like to watch motorweek because they rarely have anything bad to say about

any car and when they do, you know its gotta mean something.

heres a quote from that same blog.  its nice to keep an open mind.

So, the media is justifying their pre-set opinions? At least come up with a credible explanation...other than accusing media types of accepting bribes...which, again, you've substantiated with nothing.

You tell me why a normal consumer (not an enthusiast w/insight and knowledge) should take a perceived risk with their hard earned money?

You can't. Solve that riddle and GM or Ford has a fat job waiting for you....

(BTW-just to show you how wrong you are, please reread any recent review of the GMT-900's or the Vette...both of which got excellent press, are selling well and MOST IMPORTANTLY- are world class, value-priced products. If GM could manage a couple more, they'd be just fine. Time will tell if 'wait until next year' is finally around the corner. Meanwhile, GM is having its clock cleaned...walk into the morgue that most local GM shops have become and ask them how sales are...

[The O.C.]

So, the media is justifying their pre-set opinions? At least come up with a credible explanation...other than accusing media types of accepting bribes...which, again, you've substantiated with nothing.

You tell me why a normal consumer (not an enthusiast w/insight and knowledge) should take a perceived risk with their hard earned money?

You can't. Solve that riddle and GM or Ford has a fat job waiting for you....

(BTW-just to show you how wrong you are, please reread any recent review of the GMT-900's or the Vette...both of which got excellent press, are selling well and MOST IMPORTANTLY- are world class, value-priced products. If GM could manage a couple more, they'd be just fine. Time will tell if 'wait until next year' is finally around the corner. Meanwhile, GM is having its clock cleaned...walk into the morgue that most local GM shops have become and ask them how sales are...

It's simple really......

If GM can execute a Cobalt, or G6, or AURA, or LaCrosse, or Lucerne as expertly as they have executed the C6 and GMT-900s......GM's problems will have gone a long way towards being over.

It's all in the execution folks....

[CaddyXLR-V]

It's simple really......

If GM can execute a Cobalt, or G6, or AURA, or LaCrosse, or Lucerne as expertly as they have executed the C6 and GMT-900s......GM's problems will have gone a long way towards being over.

It's all in the execution folks....

It seems simple, but...... the price of the C6 and 900s can cover it. It's the cars with thinner margins that are difficult for GM.

[Camino LS6]

OK, let's clarify what we are talking about here. Bankruptcy or complete failure and liquidation? Both will have far reaching effects and will touch every citizen of the US in a negative fashion. Even the lesser scenario of bankruptcy and re-organization would immediately throw Ford into a tailspin and its own bankruptcy. Could we all get past that and emerge stronger in the end? Maybe. But the agony during the transition would hold very high costs. A complete failure would be several orders of magnitude worse. The last time I saw some figures, about 900,000 people either directly or indirectly have a paycheck because of GM. Think about the effect of losing those jobs for a minute. That says nothing about such things as its effect on financial markets, other domestics, housing values,tax bases, pressures on gov't. supported social services,Gov't guaranteed pension and banking comissions,the US trade deficit...

You get the idea, this would not be a walk in the park or a blip in our economic reality. It would be nothing short of a paradigm shift for the nation as a whole.

[ehaase]

You get the idea, this would not be a walk in the park or a blip in our economic reality. It would be nothing short of a paradigm shift for the nation as a whole.

It would be a paradigm shift for Michigan and some of the other Great Lake states. The effect for the rest of the country is fairly minor.

[The O.C.]

It seems simple, but...... the price of the C6 and 900s can cover it. It's the cars with thinner margins that are difficult for GM.

I disagree.

I think that's a cop-out....

(not cop-out by you....but a cop-out by GM.)

I worked for GM for many years in product development for Buick in Flint.

They can do it if they want to.....it's all relative. Corporate beauracracy and bean-counters are the ones that kept US from doing what we really wanted to with Buick....

By your example above, a C6 shouldn't come in ANYWHERE near $45K. It's simply THE value standout in its segment.....and also one of GM's best-executed products as well. It's "cheap" AND "first class" AND dealers AND GM are making money on it.

Same thing for the GMT-900's. In this month's Motor Trend, a $66K Escalade just about TRUMPED a $90K Range Rover Supercharged.

Ford is in a similar cost-situation with GM.....but look at how much of a better car the far-older Focus is compared to Cobalt in terms of fit-and-finish, ride-and-handling, steering feel, and overall solidity.

It may be old, but the Focus was a VERY well-executed product by Ford from day one....and that's what has helped it stay competitive this late in the game.

[The O.C.]

It would be a paradigm shift for Michigan and some of the other Great Lake states.  The effect for the rest of the country is fairly minor.

That's absolutely true.....and Camino, sorry bud, but you really are way off base here....

Look at Evok's posts about this topic.....and he has an insider viewpoint not only on GM, but on national interests such as the economy as well....he's THAT well connected. He knows his stuff.

[Camino LS6]

It would be a paradigm shift for Michigan and some of the other Great Lake states.  The effect for the rest of the country is fairly minor.

No, it would mean depression in those and other areas of the country. And a systemic decline in the entire nation's economy. It would be the final knock-out punch to manufacturing in the US which will marginalize its position in the world at large. The paradigm shift from producer nation to consumer nation would be assured by the loss of the domestic auto industry - there would be no turning back. We are already in deep trouble on this front and our mortgaged to the hilt society leaves us all looking like UAW members facing the end of the national gravy train. Our levels of debt public and personal, and our lack of export vitality all point to our standard of living becoming unsupportable in a hurry. No, I don't believe that a GM failure would be the root cause of the disaster I'm laying out. But I do believe a failure of the domestic auto industry at any faster pace than 2-3 decades will push us past the point of no return.

Fortunately, I also believe that GM will not go bankrupt and that, albeit a bit late, we as a nation can and will head off the disaster.

[CaddyXLR-V]

I disagree.

I think that's a cop-out....

(not cop-out by you....but a cop-out by GM.)

I worked for GM for many years in product development for Buick in Flint. 

They can do it if they want to.....it's all relative.  Corporate beauracracy and bean-counters are the ones that kept US from doing what we really wanted to with Buick....

By your example above, a C6 shouldn't come in ANYWHERE near $45K.  It's simply THE value standout in its segment.....and also one of GM's best-executed products as well.  It's "cheap" AND "first class" AND dealers AND GM are making money on it.

Same thing for the GMT-900's.  In this month's Motor Trend, a $66K Escalade just about TRUMPED a $90K Range Rover Supercharged. 

Ford is in a similar cost-situation with GM.....but look at how much of a better car the far-older Focus is compared to Cobalt in terms of fit-and-finish, ride-and-handling, steering feel, and overall solidity. 

It may be old, but the Focus was a VERY well-executed product by Ford from day one....and that's what has helped it stay competitive this late in the game.

But I've seen articles stating GM makes $10,000 on each gmt-900 sold. There is room to spend more to improve the product. But on a $14,000 Cobalt, GM does not have that $10,000 margin. The Corvette is a lower volume sports car, that still has a pricetag of $45,000. Every car you mentioned is over $30,000. The Tahoes are selling at over $40,000. Even if GM put as much work into the Cobalt, it would still not sell at over $20,000 for non SS SC models. The Aura would still have a tough time selling for over $30,000. GM will never be able to truly fix those cars until the fixed costs are brought down.

I'm sure the Astra is just as good, if not better than the focus. But GM is stupid for not bringing that car here from the beginning.

[enzl]

It seems simple, but...... the price of the C6 and 900s can cover it. It's the cars with thinner margins that are difficult for GM.

Others do it repeatedly, and they do it well. Perhaps the best example is Nissan...their backs were up against the wall and they came out swinging with desireable products in many segments.

Margins are only thin when supply is greater than demand. Create products worth demanding and the margin issue sorts itself out. Mexico, Korea & China are sources of parts and entire vehicles which can be original, interesting, exciting and profitable.

[CaddyXLR-V]

Others do it repeatedly, and they do it well. Perhaps the best example is Nissan...their backs were up against the wall and they came out swinging with desireable products in many segments.

Margins are only thin when supply is greater than demand. Create products worth demanding and the margin issue sorts itself out. Mexico, Korea & China are sources of parts and entire vehicles which can be original, interesting, exciting and profitable.

Nissan doesn't have the same fixed costs as GM either. The market is price sensitive, GM cant just charge an extra $1500 to make up for their fixed costs.

[Petra]

IIRC, it is technically illegal for GM to sell vehicles at a loss. However, incentives might provide a loophole around this.

If selling cars at a loss is what it takes for GM to deliever a desirable product, so be it.

[enzl]

Nissan doesn't have the same fixed costs as GM either. The market is price sensitive, GM cant just charge an extra $1500 to make up for their fixed costs.

It's an excuse....you & I both know it....even if the $1,500 figure is accurate, the average incentive on a GM product is more than twice that number. If demand was there, that $1,500 wouldn't be an issue.

GM hasn't proven it can produce a mainstream car that is class leading. If they'd produce at least one, I would back off the criticism. They haven't and I won't. It costs the same to style a Camry or a Camaro, it costs the same to market it and it costs the same in raw material to produce a good 3,500lb. car as it does an also-ran...excuses are lame and an epidemic at the Tubes.

[CaddyXLR-V]

It's an excuse....you & I both know it....even if the $1,500 figure is accurate, the average incentive on a GM product is more than twice that number. If demand was there, that $1,500 wouldn't be an issue.

GM hasn't proven it can produce a  mainstream car that is class leading. If they'd produce at least one, I would back off the criticism. They haven't and I won't. It costs the same to style a Camry or a Camaro, it costs the same to market it and it costs the same in raw material to produce a good 3,500lb. car as it does an also-ran...excuses are lame and an epidemic at the Tubes.

But along with the incentive came MSRP increases. Either way, any competitor can put $1500 more content and still price the vehicle the same as GM. GM can never win like that.

[enzl]

But along with the incentive came MSRP increases. Either way, any competitor can put $1500 more content and still price the vehicle the same as GM. GM can never win like that.

If the product was right (see BMW), people would pay for a decontented product (BMW wasn't always a premium brand)...GM can't win if it doesn't put the best product on the market.

If your satisfied with GM producing the same vehicle as their competitors, than you're right. Why can't the product be demonstrably better? That's the question we should be asking. I don't want a Camry with a GM badge...I want a Chevy that's faster, safer, more fun and better looking, for around the same price....if you aim at a moving target, you shoot where its going, not where it's been. If you're satisfied with the 2009 Malibu being as good as an 05 Camry, than you're not thinking like a successsful business person.