FUTURE_OF_GM

Dude, I sure as hell hope GM hasn't caved. Some give is okay I guess, but to just cave and be passive (like GM always does for the union) would be dumb. Funny that they (The CAW) are basing the future of the company on 2 minutes

If I were a betting man (Which I am) I would bet on a strike, in fact I would COUNT on a strike. The Unions are COMPLETELY drunk with power, they do not care about the predicament GM is in and they are too short sighted to see what a strike now could do to the future of this company AND their organization. But the REAL evidence that the union will strike is that they STILL do not believe that GM is in dire straights and even those who do feel that it isn't their problem to begin with. It's almost like a high stakes grudge match between the union and the CEO's and the sad part is, they'll fight blindly to the death... GM, Ford or Chrysler be damned.

I agree exactly. I'm sure he's bitching about something of worthless concern.

'Journalists' today are caught up in an incessant circle of comparisons they cannot seem to break free of. Cars are inevitably compared to one particular one in one particular area >>"The seats are not nearly as comfortable as those in Car X"<<, which only implies everything else is uncomfortable instead of primarily what it is: different. This sort of mindset only fosters homogenization and disdain for uniqueness. You need to read vintage automotive article (say: pre '70) and see what (for the most part) a balanced analysis of the individual vehicle is... rather that a subjective tour de force of groundless comparisons. Needless to say: the ego-centric attitiude and mandatory cliche' proliferation likewise adds to the indegestion of modern 'journalists'. (Clarkson, anyone?? ;)) [post="19389"][/post] As always, both classic and priceless balthazar!

I just like the look better personally. But, I have limits. I won't go bigger than 18's on cars and 20's on trucks. These cars/trucks running around with wheels that are so big they actually jack the vehicle up look dumb IMO.

Nice kick in the groin. We all worry. BUT, 1) You're at your best when you're determined and picking yourself up off the pavement (Like GM is) 2) Americans LOVE a comeback story 3) GM still has A LOT of equity in people's minds What GM needs now is consistency. They're beginning to introduce the hot products they've needed for years, NOW they need to follow through with that by continuing to introduce that same caliber of product as well as maintaining and gaining in efficiency and quality. If GM is consitent through about 1 product cycle and follows that up with another impressive lot of cars then I think we'll start to see Americans being less cautious and giving them a second chance. LOL, I share that same curse and I don't think it's a bad thing in a world of P.C. "yes" men.

Instead of buying into the media rhetoric that says otherwise, or reverting to a neanderthal like 70's flashback state that can't be founded in todays reality but is still PERCEIVED as truth. GO FORD!! OF COURSE. They always begin the fight with an advantage. Besides, we all know they're perfect anyway. No gas-guzzling SUVs/Trucks from Toyota, or a plant to build more of them. No commitment by Honda to build more gas-guzzling truck and SUV models. No "least efficient in their class" gas guzzlers from Nissan either. And no CAFE loophole exploitation by "Mr. Clean" Subaru for the car based SUVs.... Let's all buy into these lies shall we?

Get ready for the massive "My Toyota/Nissan is built in America and your Silverado/Sierra is not" campaign from the media to win over loyal American truck buyers. It's already started with the Colorado. "Misplaced Patriotism" they're calling it. (Which I didn't think was built in Mexico, but rather Louisiana) But according to Jamie Kittman it is built in Mexico. ( I know, he/she's [whatever the hell it is] is dumb and wrong---but the average American consumer doesn't know that and will believe what they're told.)

I think diesels would be great. In fact, I'd like to see GMNA actively expand it's diesel offerings throughout it's line up of cars as well.

My sentiments exactly. GM, bring in the scabs!!! GM, you cannot risk losing momentum on your volume vehicles for your volume division. If the CAW strikes, it'll kill the momentum of the Impala and the Equinox, both of which are huge props and growth for Chevrolet. Not to mention it'll pretty much halt production of the 1 Buick car left and kick off the Torrent and Monte Carlo in a negative way. There is simply too much to lose. GM better have a back-up plan or either we'll see another share drop like in 1998 and possibly the beginning of the end of another division like in 1998. (If you'll remember correctly, the Oldsmobile revitalization was gaining ground and doing well in 1998 with the introduction of the Intrigue. After the strike was over and initial interest had faded because of low inventory, Oldsmobile began it's real death spiral) So, pretty much, we're risking growth and health for Chevrolet and Buick's very life in NA. Or, GM could just let the CAW strike, lose momentum on a good chunk of it's volume vehicles and take a step closer to chapter 11. Then the CAW will be screwed anyway. Funny how, instead of being constructive, the union is, as usual throwing threats, causing panic and subsequently probably going to cause more devaluation of the company; their very source of survival which is already dieing by the minute... Typical union greed and stupidity. It's the typical "know-nothing" think of grouping the big three at it's best. People don't understand that what's good for DCX might not nessecerily be good for GM or Ford and likewise they don't realize the products coming from GM might not nessecerily be representative of products coming from DCX or Ford, it's a 2 way street that usually has negative effects both ways. I agree 100%

Well, there goes the Impala momentum. I say bring in the scabs... 1) GM cannot afford to lose the momentum of the Impala and the strong sales of Lacrosse. 2) GM need not agree to something that is going to bind the company up more than it already is. The equation DOES NOT balance, it's time for union concessions or it's time for the union to walk.

Welcome to America. You have the 40 years of biased press to thank for that.

I agree.... And I'm glad GM isn't taking indirect shots at Toyota either. I think GM should go at their throat with a big shiny knife and get the job done real good.

I think his comments were spot on. I love that GM is coming at Toyota swinging, and I think it helped to get Toyota's otherwise hidden number of recalls (which is a substantial number) more exposure.

And three paragraphs in this "journalist" reveals his REAL feelings. A BS statistic given the number of models GM sales with the same mechanicals and GM's sales numbers compared to Toyota in general... Of course, the way the author spins it, you'd never know that (Go figure-a biased journalist) Not to count GM's numbers are skewed because of the massive truck recall. You know, it's funny that I never READ anything about Toyota recalling almost 1 million vehicles this year..... That's funny.... I guess the press is still protecting that image for them. I think we all know the answer to that...... In fact, I haven't heard one thing about a new Toyota recall. No one cares unless it's a domestic recall.

SAY WHAT???? You're kidding right? Another VERY GOOD looking pic.

[QUOTE]not the solstice.[/QUOTE] No surprise there. This further cements the fact that no American car will ever be good enough fo the media. [QUOTE]But the biggest reason the Miata took this one is the simple fact that it's 10 billion times more fun to drive. It's more responsive.[/QUOTE] 10 billion...... Damn, that's a lot. (obvious sarcasm implied) [QUOTE]Come on guys.....you can't bitch when Solstice gets beaten in one comparo.....then cheer when it wins another....[/QUOTE] Sure I can, it's what being a FAN is all about. [QUOTE]It's when pigs fly the day that Edmunds will quit bashing GM.[/QUOTE] Agreed. [QUOTE]Great, it's about time GM's Screaming Chicken division had something to crow about.[/QUOTE] Nice "redneck" connotations with that line, right off the bat. What's wrong Edmunds, insecure about something? [QUOTE]As Michael Buffer likes to say, "Llllllet's get ready to rumbllllllllllllllllllllllle!"[/QUOTE] Pretty immature. [QUOTE]But this new Miata, or MX-5, or whatever Mazda is calling it, is really something. Its interior is better finished than the Pontiac's,[/QUOTE] WTF!!!!!! So GM can "NEVER" make a nice enough interior for the rags??????????? And to add insult, this wasn't even the TOP miata interior.. Just a bunch of losers using SUBJECTIVE measures to screw GM over. Hell, they just couldn't wait to discredit the Solstice in the last paragraph. They pretty much undermine it's existance. [QUOTE]a far superior top design.[/QUOTE] How so? Because you don't have to get your fat ass out of the car to work it? Jesus man, give me a break. [QUOTE]Well, in our world, these roadsters are supposed to be true sports cars.[/QUOTE] But not in the AVERAGE person's world. Jeez, the last paragraphs were nothing but a big smack in the face to GM (Surprise, surprise) They also loaded the review with cons for the Solstice. I agree about the gauges though... Being a tuner, I ALWAYS like to keep an eye on every aspect of my cars. [QUOTE]It also turned the same slalom speed as the Miata, an impressive 64 mph, and matched the Mazda's lap time around the racetrack.[/QUOTE] That says a lot given the Solstice's bigger dimensions and added weigh... It has excellent balance. [QUOTE]Push it hard and the Solstice has one cornering attitude, it understeers. Regardless of what the driver does, the Pontiac's huge 18-inch rear tires refuse to give up their grip of the road. This makes for quick slalom times, and it's the way you want your mom's car set up, but it quickly bores the advanced driver.[/QUOTE] Okay, so I guess tons of grip is a bad thing when it comes to domestics?!?!?!? [QUOTE]The Solstice stops from 60 mph in just 122 feet, just 5 feet more than the Miata's performance.[/QUOTE] Excellent given the added weight, but of course that doesn't matter to the reviewers. [QUOTE]the constant reflection of the interior trim in the rearview mirror,[/QUOTE] Give me a damn break.... Imagine that.. In a convertible car...... (SARCASM) This comment is almost as stupid as the "journalists" complaint of the XLR interior fingerprinting easily. Just more "Making excuses" in order to judge the cars "correctly" so that Detroit doesn't beat inferior asian/european offerings. Editorial Director Kevin Smith: [QUOTE]Okay, I was a little narrow-minded coming in.[/QUOTE] No kidding?!?!?! [QUOTE]I felt the Solstice had to feel as light and lively as a Miata or it was toast. But as I built up seat time in Pontiac's new roadster, I came to appreciate that the Solstice didn't have to feel exactly like Mazda's MX-5 to be a success. It could be a smidgeon less direct in its control feedback, a little less quick to react to inputs, and not quite so poised on tippy toes, eager to change direction. As long as the driving experience managed to fulfill the promise made by its sporty-roadster concept, it could be different and might still be okay. And that's how it turns out. The Solstice does not feel like a Miata. It feels instead like its own car, a bit bigger and softer in general, but still spirited and acceptably capable on a winding, sun-drenched canyon road. In fact, for sheer cornering grip, its limits seem higher and more easily accessible than the new MX-5's.[/QUOTE] Then why did it lose AND why the sarcastic musings? Seriously, if the limits are HIGHER and easier to reach then why didn't it win. Oh yeah, because it's a domestic AND a Pontiac. [QUOTE]For my personal tastes, a Miata/MX-5 still does the Dance of the Sporting Roadster better[/QUOTE] Of course, your a "journalist" (Which makes you an import slurper) Senior Editor Ed Hellwig: [QUOTE]I don't find their recipe for fun appealing, but there are plenty that do. For those people, I'd recommend the Miata.[/QUOTE] What a rehearsed line of "Import Rhetoric" GARBAGE. [QUOTE]On the racetrack it wasn't even close. The Miata attacked while the Solstice just hung on the best it could.[/QUOTE] According to your own stats in this very article the Solstice did more than "hang on" In fact in other articles it BESTS the MX-5.... Just more lies from a BIASED source [QUOTE]Then there's the properly finished interior[/QUOTE] What is "properly finished" exactly? First it was bad, then unrefined, now not "properly finished" The excuses are wearing thin and getting more dumb and subjective by the minute. [QUOTE]an upscale look[/QUOTE] Some would argue a "boyracer look" and since when does the Solstice interior not look "upscale" [QUOTE]and the world's best manually folding top.[/QUOTE] That's a tall claim in a world of european luxury convetibles. [QUOTE]When you're not going all out it suffers from excessive wind shear that makes your face numb after a few miles[/QUOTE] Detroit News said the exact OPPOSITE [QUOTE]Then there are the little things like the clunky looking top[/QUOTE] Of course subjective... And like EVERY convertible with a cloth top doesn't look somewhat odd or clunky? I've said it before and I'll say it again Edmunds SUCKS (literally) with a capital "S" EDIT: I have no idea why my quotes aren't working in this post.... Oh well.

I'm not really diggin' any of them.

EXCELLENT IDEA!!!! Chevy should run with this.

It's a nice welcome to the world of Social Psychology. (I'm going to major in it) How true do you view that statement though? Is that not what comes to mind when you read it? Heck, I'm a restorer and classic car lover and even I am not immune to the negative connotations brought forth by that statement.

[quote]G.M. is even considering ways to start marketing the fact that many of the vehicles can run on an ethanol blend instead of gasoline, a feature that many environmental advocates have criticized because it allows automakers to take advantage of a regulatory loophole.[/quote] What exactly is the big problem here????? Nothing to back that bold statement (jab against GM) up???? We get the soundbite that is supposed to sway our opinion negative, yet no proof of why it should sway our opinion? Typical. E85 is quite a bit cheaper than gasoline now and it'll ease our dependence on, as the liberal media puts it; "terorist funding oil" Just a bunch of greenies that need to get a job. [quote]bristling with chrome.[/quote] Nice subliminal way to tie into a negative stereotype. What do Americans, especially self loathing Americans think when they hear "chrome" or someone implying something is loaded with it???? They think WEIGHT, BULK, BIG AMERICANA, INEFFICIENT CARS OF YORE, OVERKILL.... Need I go on? [quote]While the government's fuel economy test significantly overstates the mileage people can get on the road, the Tahoe would be rated slightly higher than the current model, and exceed competitors like the Toyota Sequoia and Nissan Armada.[/quote] Wow! This "journalist" really is either a card carrying green party nader humper, or either an anti-Detroit loser. To bad nobody had the "Goodwill" to point the overinflated EPA numbers out when the "God's gift to the world" Prius was burning up the headlines. What a coincidence.... Yeah, right. ****NOTE: Remember what I said: the media will try to SEVERELY downplay these mileage gains to try and disuade the consumer from GM trucks and trucks in general. The Tahoe is too competitive, so they must flat out LIE to steer people away. Especially since most of them are pissed about the new CAFE regulations and it's hurt on the asian firms. Wait 'til Toyota comes out with similar mileage though, then not a damn thing will be said about EPA claims. [quote]"If you're really into saving fuel, and oil dependency, you can get an ethanol-based vehicle," Mr. LaNeve said. "If you drive 15,000 miles in an ethanol-based vehicle here, you're burning under 200 gallons of oil-based gas a year. That's less than a hybrid."[/quote] CLASSIC!!!! Promote it GM!!! I'm surprised this made the press. [quote]If G.M. now sees flex-fuel vehicles as a marketing opportunity, ethanol is a contentious topic. While E85 has been 40 to 50 cents a gallon cheaper than regular gasoline in recent weeks, one does not go as far on a gallon of E85 as on a gallon of gasoline, lessening the cost advantage. And E85 is also supported by subsidies for corn growers, while gasoline is taxed.[/quote] More self-agenda fulfilling from this "unbiased journalist" 1) Who cares and 2) Who cares in regard to those statements. [quote]At the same time, executives at G.M., which has lost $1.4 billion in the first half of the year, were stressing that they were no longer putting all their eggs in one basket. The company has been feverishly playing catch-up with Asian rivals by developing more lightweight S.U.V.'s, and is also trying to develop more credible passenger cars.[/quote] Hurry biased media or you'll miss your killshot!!!!! I can't wait until GM debuts the hybrid GMT900. Then I get to watch the media brush it off, discredit it and try to explain why justifying living in a cramped, slow, death trap Prius is "STILL BETTER 'CAUSE WE SAID SO" Bunch of pencil pushing yuppies.

I agree 100%

Typical vague and skeptical media garbage. "GM claims" and "GM claims" and "Even if that proves true" and "Bob Lutz says" Complete with the "GM is about to die (By our hands)" title and shading.

LMMFAO!!!! :lol:

[quote]an incremental improvement over competitors such as the Ford Expedition and Toyota Sequoia.[/quote] LOL And ALREADY the media is writing this fuel economy gain off. What a surprise.... It just doesn't fit well with their "GM is an evil oil loving company that funds terroists" story they've painted, so they'll write it off. [quote]"It can't hurt, but that segment is in a state of long-term decline," said David Healy, an analyst with Burnham Securities. "To me, GM is kind of whistling past the graveyard."[/quote] Okay, so after 2 years of "analysts" and "journalists" whinning about GM's offerings being old and screaming that the asians are coming, they're just going to brush these SUVs off and accuse GM of being dumb?!?!?!? These people are so blind it's pathetic... GM is doing a VERY smart thing by MAINTAINING it's share in the VERY profittable and still VERY big market. Again, the problem is M-A-R-G-I-N-S not numbers. If GM can sell an '07 Tahoe with a $1,000 rebate as opposed to an '06 with a $7,000 rebate then the balance sheets will start to look A LOT better and GM will have succeeded. Numbers and volume DO NOT matter so much now. It seems like a pretty easy concept to understand, but I guess when you're a "journalist" or an "analyst" then common sense or intelligence must not come too easy. What a bunch of dumbasses. [quote]But with gas prices fluctuating wildly in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, the industry will be hard-pressed to sell that many big SUVs this year.[/quote] Derrrr, well, I guess it's a good thing these SUVs aren't selling this year. AND gas prices have leveled out just fine here at around 2.70/gallon. Not to mention any effects from hurricanes LIKELY won't be felt by the time these trucks go on sale. [quote]"GM obviously didn't see $3-a-gallon gasoline when they made the decision to speed up the development of these vehicles," Healy said.[/quote] No shit sherlock? NO ONE thought gas would climb as fast as it did and NO ONE thought we'd see another "Storm of the Century" either. See the correlation??????? [quote]"We're realistic, and we don't expect the segment to grow," Lutz said. "But there are people who want and need the capabilities of a full-size SUV."[/quote] If Americans are throwing down 40-60K for an SUV then they can survive $3 a gallon gas. The spikes haven't slowed the economy any either. [quote]GM executives declined to discuss pricing for the new models, except to say that they expect better profit margins than in the current incentive-driven environment. The current Tahoe, GMC Yukon and Cadillac Escalade are priced from $35,000 to more than $51,000, but GM has had to offer generous discounts to lure buyers.[/quote] BINGO!!!! Which is why the "volume" spiel has no merit until we start seeing SERIOUS double-digit declines in the market. [quote]The challenge will be to build interest in each version of the SUV and to establish separate brand identities in the marketplace, something GM has struggled to accomplish with its passenger cars.[/quote] But not with it's trucks, chief. ******* I now see how the media is going to hinder this launch. Once again, since they can't do it on merits because the trucks are so competitive, they'll cry wolf with the gas prices and try to disuade consumers from even CONSIDERING, let alone looking at the trucks. If they succeed, which is likely, GM is history.*******