evok

Before RFQs can go out, the suppliers need to know what they are dealing with. That is the first task.

I am not aware that it will be there or not. But if it is at the show, it is not an indication that the vehicle will be out soon. GM could do it if they want to. There is nothing stopping them. My suggestion to GM is not to show it. Wait until the 2008 show. The 2006 Camaro concept was a mistake because it created unresonable expectations as to when the vehicle may reach production. They should have waited until the 2007 show, when the whole zeta plan could have been finalized with a workable approved plan in place.

GM does not have any tricks up its sleaves. GM just lost 11 billion dollars in case anyone is paying attention. A release date for production versus a production vehicle at 07 NAIAS are irrelevant when it comes to timing and the length of time it takes to get a vehicle to market. There is not a direct correlation in real terms. Your timing is not possible. It cannot be done. Anyone that leads you to believe otherwise has: 1) Bad information or 2) Does not know how to interpret the information. As I have stated many times before there is a very long lead time prior to the clock starting on a program. We are in that long lead time, planning and organizing phase. Because as I last check the Camaro is not formally approved and is being worked on, does not mean that the program will be released faster in the process when or if the formal green light is given. That is the way the process works. Behind the scenes I have shared and validated my information on numerious occasions. We are all in agreement that much of the timing that is being reported online is wrong. Status of the program is wrong or taken out of context. I have information on the program that deals with the big picture of the program and at the stage that fit into the high level VDP. So your timing not only can not happen because VDP does not work that fast, it is not planned to happen and has never been. As much as I would love to admit I am wrong because a Camaro could be good for GM soon, it will not be here as soon as I would like. That is just the way things work at an OEM. Also and this is a passing thought - rwd for NA is a very expensive program and will require a substancial investment. 11 billion dollars is alot of money to loose in one year. In about a month, we will soon see how the first quarter has been.

There is misinformation out there as to how the VDP process works. He still thinks and posts that there really is an 18 month VDP in real time. That is taken out of context and spreads the misinformation. I do not need to go into that again. Please refer to CD/BP post.

Be my guest - I accept the challenge. I am anxious to find out what the corn has to say.

Believe and fact are two very different things. That has been and will continue to be the dispute on this thread until the moderators understand that. That is the root cause of this discussion and has been for months now. In the context of this discussion it is spam.

Flybrian/Camino; There is difference between speculation and what is really going on. As I have pointed out in an above post and countless times on this subject, and will reiterate - spamming threads with speculation does not get anyone closer to the truth especially in light that the speculation is not correct. And that is what is actually going on, spamming. The fact of the matter is, the spam has not ceased and has only continued. Opinion and fact are two very different things. The program in question will not be on the market for 07 MY and it will not be on the market for the 08 MY. I will say no more on the expected release date beyond what will not be. Sorry folks but it is not my opinion that it will not happen but it is a fact. These facts have been verified countless time.

So Josh will it still be here in 07 - Yea I shot that timing down over at cz28 when you posted it. Why, it is wrong. And another thing Josh - a reflection of ego is being able to admit when you are wrong. I think you and the BM should step back and look in the mirror. Admitting you are wrong is a trait you both lack. That is why your opinions are such easy targets for being dissected and torn apart. You do not learn from your mistakes. You do not learn period.

tell me who Jimmy is you pomous, child............ So I will say it - that is not the way it works. Go back to sifting -

Yea - my bad - who am I to talk - especially when some very talented and gifted people around here are sifting through certain peoples dried turds, counting the reconstituted corn kernels and learning the coded messages and hidden mysteries to these programs. I can't compete with that - especially when I can only pick up the phone and talk to real people. Yea - again - my bad. Sifting through crap is not my strong suit!

Still if but . . .

Lori Queen sounds like a 10 year old crying to her mom, "Why don't people like me". No one cares. Real people care what CR has to say. You either back up your claims with hard evidence and bring it forward for the public to review or you shut up and produce product real people want. If GM has the smoking gun like they did with Dateline and the Side Saddle fuel tank, schedule an interview with the press and make your case. Comments like this only makes GM and their management look pathetic and out of touch, if valid or not.

LOL - Your 2007 CY release date is pure BS. Keep believing in the fairy tales.

Sorry to tell the children there is no tooth fairy? Don't cry little boy. It will be OK.

I will conceed that.

huh - I don't think so.

Not entirely true - Holden was loosing money because sales for RWD were dropping and the plant was not at profitable capacity. Not true - GME Opel integration had complex political and structural issues prior to Lutz arriving at GM that has taken since about 1999 to resolve. Forester from BMW was brought in to fix the wrongs. and has been on paper for some time but there will not be a one for one product sharing across the board any time soon. Holden was always a little job shop picking up the hand me downs across from Opel. There has been no benefit YET?

I do not have a good feeling about the Big 2 regaining what they have lost. It will be good, but not good enough to change the perceptions of all the people that will no longer consider them. ie - IMO I think the Enclave is too little too late. On the other hand IMO Saturn will be a winner across the board. So, I have mixed feelings on GM and Ford. Chevy, Ford, Cadillac, Saturn, Mazda should look good in the market, the rest of the brands are irrelvant. Just look at how bad Mercury is doing with all the new product.

I think people should take the time to read this. Though the author is horrible, the book has many glaring errors, analysis is wrong or misguided, naive, over simplified she brings up one point that is carried through the book that is valid and adds to this thread --------------------- Ford and GM's are becoming irrelevant in the US. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/038550769...5Fencoding=UTF8

This has seemed to have missed any significance in the mainstream press. Boland was CFO for NA http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic.../602240397/1001 People on the move Autos Mark Newman , assistant treasurer for General Motors Corp., was named finance chief of the automaker's North American operations. He replaces Mary Boland , who left to take a financial post with a company outside of the auto industry.

Why is that sad? Daewoo was a steal for GM at app. 500 million USD. If it were not for GM-DAT there would be not Chevy Europe and GM would be short app 800k sales makeing Toyota the global #1.

Go back and calculate the average employee for all the bins. You might find some interesting things. Especially the 1000+ employee bin.

De Lorenzo is not an expert in the business. His back ground is in advertising, not finance, manufacturing, engineering or marketing with an OEM. His father 35 years ago was VP of GM’s communication. Just because he has a website where he shouts his “opinion” does not make anyone knowledgeable about this business. De Lorenzo does not support his “opinion” with data or facts or inside information. Just recently (for two weeks in a row) he has been touting that there is a Firebird on the way. That myth not only has been debunked by people on the boards but also by Lutz himself. Lutz went out of his way to say what he did. Where is the retraction this week in AE, or anything acknowledging the Firebird story was FALSE? That is they type of auto news he presents. His recent rant with regard to restructuring GM’s line up goes to show how inept his “opinion” is and has been. De Lorenzo I am sure can not even read a financial statement much less comprehend the root issues facing GM and the rest of the global industry. He is a talking head, attempting to make himself credible, but people involved in the industry directly see him as mere entertainment. With that said, his plan in the past weeks AE is as credible a pipe dream GM line up that are posted on message boards. They are not rooted in feasibility nor do they take into account the root issues that face the company. · GM is a global company and only half its business is located in the US. De Lorenzo does not take into account GM breadth of exposure and resources. · GM is limited in how they can consolidate dealers. GM’s hands are tied, they either buy out franchises out right which is not going to happen or they have to invest in product to compensate for the lost sales in the consolidated division. De Lorenzo over simplifies what GM can do when it comes to their dealer network. · De Lorenzo does not address GM giving up app. 2 million in sales. How will GM pay those UAW workers that will be transferred to the jobs bank? By my estimates that is another 30,000+ workers. · De Lorenzo does not address how the lost 2 million sales will factor in the legacy cost. · His plan will not reduce the overhead that needs to be address by GM. That GM’s approximate 200 billion in cash revenue currently is paying for a lot of the over head. This revenue is keeping the over head /vehicle sold down. They might not be making a profit now, but they certainly will not be making a profit by his plan. GM took approximately 3 billion out of VEBA last year. GM has to fully restructure their legacy cost, close more factories while making what remains more productive and flexible, reduce their head count probably by another 20k, renegotiate a viable contract with the UAW in 07, get rid of the jobs bank and ultimately produce desirable, class leading product. That is the secret to GM becoming profitable. GM can work with their current brands and control development by working globally. That is already in the works. But listening to what De Lorenzo has to say and GM acting on it is just naïve. It is just not in GM’s best interest to do as he says and frankly, they can’t. His plan is certain bankruptcy.

Let us work with the facts. http://stats.bls.gov/cew/ew04table4.pdf When you look at the data it becomes apparent where people are employed in direct relation to the size of the organization. Many people are misinformed as to the size and impact of small business on the economy. From the data I have provided courtesy of BLS, your argument is moot because based upon how the small Small Business Administration defines a small business (<499), it only amplifies the significance of those entities. As BLS bins the data in the above link with greater resolution than your aggragate argument, the significance or the typical Fortune 500 company is reduced as number of business that employ under 49 people is alot greater.

It has nothing to do with profit but cash flow. For a company like GM, they need as much revenue as possible to pay for their cost of health care, pensions, plants etc. If GM were to all of a sudden do what "The Pompous One" suggests, GM would be bankrupt in hours. What he suggested can't be done and for somone like him to suggest it is irresponsible journalism. Even though in reality he is not a journalist, an analsyt or an industry expert. Here is a simple example: Currently it is estimated that GM's pensions and health care cost 1500/vehicle at say 5 million sales in the US. That is a cost that for now is not going anywhere. If GM shrinks to 3 million in NA, that would drive that same cost to 2500/vehicle. GM could close as many plants in NA but that will not fix their legacy costs. Also what "The Pompous One" proposes requires dealers to be shut down and brands to be eliminated. That is not going to happen because of state franchise law that for the most part are unique to each state. For them at this point to do what the "The Pompous One" suggests would cost them billions in buying out dealers. That is why the B-P-GMC consolodation is very important. If GM ever decides to get ride of one of those brands, the cost should be neglegible. "The Pompous One" is selling his snake oil to anyone that will listen.