ellives

Sheesh - I actually read the whole thing before I realized. Duh!

Actually I found *most* of the book surreal and thank you for pointing it out to me by the way. It was particularly moving for me as you may recall, the initial plant surveys were done in two plants, one in Japan and one in Framingham, Mass in the US. Well my dad worked in that Framingham plant for the railroad delivering the output of that plant to the marketplace. He was part of the railroad union. I grew up in that area and knew a lot of GM people back in those days. I remember they all drove big GM wagons at the time like the Buick Estate wagon. I remember also thinking how affluent they were, working for GM. My how times have changed. As the book points out the Framingham plant was shuttered in 1989. This had been rumored for a long time before it actually happened. Of course Framingham survived and the plant is currently occupied by a used car auction house last I knew (I've been away from the area for many years.)

Exactly my point. And now that gas is close to 3 bucks a gallon, the market has turned away from these big vehicles. For those old timers here, isn't this scenario the EXACTLY the same thing that happened in 1973? Gas prices shot through the room which then turned all of the domestics buys of big automobiles over Toyotas and Datsuns because they had the best fuel economy? This is the sad aspect of GM and Ford's current situation. Something turned car buyers over to Honda and Toyota along the way. It started with gas prices... then turned to quality... now turns back to gas prices. It's tough to see what will motivate buyers to go back to GM and Ford other than innovative design. Chrysler clearly has the lead there and certainly GM and Ford have no past history of strength in this area.

And I *really* hope somebody at GM lost their job over that one. It reminds me of a an old joke that used to go around in the PC business a while back. The joke was a dialog between a not-so-bright customer and a technical support person on the phone. The dialog went back and forth for a long time with the support person getting more and more frustrated. Eventually he gave the customer very specific instructions: TSR: Do you still have the box the PC came in? Customer: Yes, it's right here. TSR: Please place the computer back in the original shipping container and ship it back to us. Customer: Is something wrong with it? TSR: No sir, you're too stupid to own a computer. Have a nice day.

This is a point I poorly tried to make to Hudson. GM pursued the big SUV's because the market wanted them. If the CAFE standards didn't exist, the market would not have been unnaturally slanted in the favor of SUV's, GM would then have been forced to be more competitive in the passengar car business. NOW because gas prices have floated up, people are moving away from SUV's and GM's money making market segment. You can certainly blame GM for putting all their eggs in one basket but I still feel the government should abandon CAFE and use gas tax to manage the problem. It's so much simpler to manage! KISS = "Keep It Simple Stupid"

I believe it was late 2004 as an '05 model?

OK - now I see your point. I don't it was conveyed clearly in the first post. Thanks.

I didn't get that one either. Who supposedly said it?

My point precisely.

I have it. Read 2/3 of it so far. I'll finish it tonight. It's an interesting read, particularly because it's 15 years old and some of the statements in there (most?) were predictions that have clearly come to pass. This said, YOUR comment was "Toyota's continuous improvement philosophy culture has won" and my point to you in my followup was that continuous improvement is not unique to Toyota. In fact this book is proof of my point. The "Toyota Production System" as mentioned in the book (and no for those wondering, the book isn't only about Toyota) is actually a "lean manufacturing" system and not a "continuous improvement" system at all. I'm honestly not sure what a "continuous improvement philosophy culture" is. Grammatically it doesn't make sense. Your statement underscores to me that you don't understand some key foundations of the discussion relative to GM's problems. Continuous improvement (kaizen) is in fact a philsophy of improving the process incrementally over time. I suspect it's safe to say every car manufacturer understands kaizen and in fact practices it. GM will not be saved by any kaizen strategy and this book actually states this fact in many ways. GM needs a completely different approach, as the book points out, the old "mass production" methods have been supplanted as the dominant manufacturing approach by "lean manufacturing." This in effect means the Company needs a RADICAL change in its approach to manufacturing which will never be accomplished by continuous improvement programs alone. Unfortunately, this kind of radical change would require top management changes. A bean counter like Wagoner isn't going to do it. They're historians. They explain what happened to the company in the last month/quarter/year. They are not visionaries. What else explains the body design and styling of the current Chevy Malibu? Sometimes institutions as large as GM *do* coast from enertia for a long time. There are those who would argue they've been coasting for a long time.

Let them strike. It will only be fitting they go down with the ship. They can always find better jobs elsewhere, right?

So if you feel this way, write to your congressmen and tell them you want the gas tax to go up. People will be buying fuel efficient cars in droves. Oh and by the way, this is WHY Europe buys 1.3 liter engines, etc. THEIR goverments tax the hell out of the fuel prices. Do some research and you'll find what I say is true.

Actually it's the politicians that have screwed the big SUV manufacturers over in the long run by having any CAFE standards at all. The idea of mandating this crap is pure folly and has been proven over and over as unsuccessful. The market, and the market alone will determine mileage numbers. The politicians just don't have the guts to tolerate the whining when the morons buying these big vehicles bitch and whine because it costs them a hundred bucks to fill the damn things up. When gas was under a buck a gallon nobody cared about mileage so they bought big vehicles. Now that it's $2.50, mileage is a problem. Cry me a river. Don't even get me STARTED on the "gas guzzler" tax. It's ridiculous I have to pay one on an STS that gets in the high 20's highway mileage when SUV owners don't pay it and get in the high teens. In fact the government already has the ultimate throttle on this stuff already - the gas tax. If they want people to conserve, they should just double the gas tax. The politicians are too busy kissing the asses of every special interest group out there so they don't, but it is the ultimate tool to control conservation. Think "Federal Reserve."

Umm - the Excursion was not killed. It was unavailable for one year I believe and then returned to the lineup. Check www.ford.com.

Chin up guys. For every door that closes, another opens. Most of us are rooting for GM to find its footing and get back on track. Let's hope this is the worst of it and things will only get better from here. Good luck!

I agree FOG. Cadillac needs to push the limit and not add too many variations. Cadillac should already be the "reach" car.

I just ordered it.

^This has got to be the most stupid statement in this thread. Do you actually think Toyota has a monopoly on continuous improvement? GM's automotive product is better than it has ever been (that's continuous improvement.) GM sold more automotive product last year than they ever have in the past (that's continuous improvement.) The fact is the consumer has been totally brainwashed. It's the only way to explain why the traditional Buick buyer is now turning to Toyota Avalon. Why? It's certainly not quality. Buick beat out Toyota in last year's IQS. It's just not fashionable to buy domestic. GM needs to find and hire a marketing team that knows what they are doing. Their message isn't getting across. You can sell dog $h! if you have good marketing. Land Rover is proof of that.

Agreed. This is the where conversations go when there's nothing intelligent to talk about any more.

Hi soozi2u -- I'm quite sure most here on this forum have compassion for GM's workers. Unfortunately, while things have improved under the stewardship of unions, today's economy is not your father's economy. In fact I'd dispute your statement that the US economy has thrived because of the unions. I encourage you to explain the basis for your statement. I agree with you argument regarding judging people based on their outwards appearance, particularly in Las Vegas. The original poster's comments are meaningless as almost anybody can put on the airs of affluence. I think your characterization of anyone comparing union workers to dirt is a little over the top. I'm sure this statement is based on some level of emotion. I think there's probably plenty of blame for the current situation at GM. Current and past management, the government stewards of the pension program, stockholders and even employees themselves all own some responsibility. In the end, as I said, today's economy is not your father's economy. You've seen other posters indicate being happy at non-union companies and this tells us all that the non-union model can work. I personally believe the internet has had a huge amount to do with the current rapid globalization of the economy. Some would argue the improvement in communication brought by the internet in many ways eliminates the need for unions because it makes the labor market more efficient than was ever possible in the past.

Well this point is a quandry. On the one hand people are concerned these jobs will be gone and not replaced. On the other hand I'm always thinking these former employees will take their skills and knowledge and go work for a competitor. I've seen this "employee buyout" arrangement used many times over the years in the high tech sector. Particularly I remember DEC back in the early 90's doing it and paying big money for these employees to leave. Unfortunately, the people who took the buyout were the brightest and smartest and knew they could easily find jobs elsewhere. The one's that did NOT take the buyout were the ones who couldn't find another job for various reasons, but mostly because they were low quality empoyees. This I believe led to the ultimate demise of the company. Hopefully the same scenario doesn't play out for GM.

I'm curious how old you are. I suspect probably in your mid-20's. I'm not a Bush fan either but it's not clear exactly what you'd have the government do to help GM. While Bush said the US is "addicted" to oil, I don't believe he said specifically the US automakers needs to be more efficient. He said they need to build cars that are "relevent." I'm sure this word was chosen by Mr. Rove to convey the message without specifying exactly what he means. 2008 can't come quickly enough for me. Luckily we won't have to make the choice again whether to put the Bush team back in office. I hope the citizenry can make a better choice the next time around. I'm quite sure this presidency will be seen in history as one of the worst. They've done nothing but lie and borrow us into bankrupcy. I think you're being naive when you talk about "taking the cuts until they're doing well again." The issues GM is facing are not temporary issues. They are facing fundamental changes in the nature of the car business that are forcing them to make tough changes. All this said, what Bush should have said was the UAW needs to find a way to be relevent.

Sources! Sources please! When you say "they admit it," where is this documented? WHERE are these supposed tax breaks documented? How does this episode of Twilight Zone relate?

Sorry but while I have compassion for your situation and the emotional aspects of it, the worldwide economy betrays the argument "buy American." This said, I do buy only GM products for the most part. Your anger (along with the other stackholders and stockholders of GM) should be directed squarely at the board of directors. In the end, they have accepted mediocrity which has failed everyone associated with GM. This is medicrity of the products they've built and mediocrity of the management team they have in place. After all this I'm sure they're no worse off financially. They should be forced to buy and own large quantities of GM stock so they're properly motivated. My 2 cents.

We tend to forget Buickman is, at his core, a sales guy. *Good* sales guys are very adept at the nuances of wording being careful to not to lie if they can avoid it but certainly to intend to spin things in one direction while the truth may not be so rosy. Remember there's the old joke "How do you know when a salesman is lying?" Answer: "His lips are moving." Keep this in mind when our friend Buickman posts. I'm not disagreeing by the way that his core argument that Wagoner should go. Like many here I've been shocked how accepting the board has been of poor performance. In *real* life, if you don't perform you're out. His compensation (both working and retired) should be directly tied to company performance.