ellives

Time will tell. I personally hadn't heard about them until the last couple of weeks. This is one of GM's many problems. They don't get the message out. They let the Toyota media blather on and don't respond. They should speak up loudly about their own positive news and voraciously attack Toyota's (in the ever-so-subtle way the media does it's dirty work) bad news and weak spots.

Here's the links: http://www.gm.com/company/onlygm/ http://www.autolinedetroit.tv/autoline/watch.php?stream=1008 (The Autoline Detroit link is a video stream and require IE6 and Realplayer.)

No offense intended. The intention is to simply vehemently disagree. Flowmotion is free to call me out if he feels I was out of line.

I don't see people being "slaves to the division" so much as we're trying to grapple with the reason for the multiple divisions to exist. If we as GM enthusiasts can't understand there's no chance the general buying public will. Even your statement "useless commercials" backs up this thinking. If you don't buy the "excitement division" then we REALLy need to ask why Pontiac exists.

I actually hope some of the non-major companies supply the fuel and people start buying it. This would take revenue away from the major oil companies, particularly ExxonMobil which I consider to be one of the most corrupt corporations in existance today. Having more choices will also help me personally since I don't do business with ExxonMobil and go out of my way to avoid giving them money. [* steps down from soap box *]

I think they were looking. They just weren't doing anything about it. It's not clear to me why they'd give one last "shot" at the divisional approach. It's clear the approach hasn't worked. This is the kind of thing I'm talking about. You can't keep tweaking knobs in the engine room of a sinking ship and expect to save the passengers. They should be making sweeping internal changes now. You'd think with the number of employees they have, they'd have analysts doing all kinds of calculations to determine the outcome of every potential scenario and pick the most palatable path. None of them will be exciting but it's clear big changes need to be made. Their current behavior is what I used to call the "Allah" approach before it became politically incorrect to say so. What I meant is along the lines of "if we can just eek by with this approach, eventually Allah will save us." This is a foolhardy approach of course. Any company needs to lay out a plan that focuses on a specific end result and execute it. If the results aren't what you expect, you fire and replace those responsible for the plan. Eventually you figure out the recipe and all is well.

I think you hit the nail on the head. There's no plan. In business "the plan" is everything and it can't be the "plan of the month" club. The thing that is totally amazing to me is the full knowledge both Ford and GM have been riding the big SUV gravy train when the only direction for gas prices was up. When this happens (happened) the market for their flagship stuff evaporated - thus the crisis. They should have been thinking about how to get themselves back into the small car market in a big way. (I'm not sure they were EVER in this market.) This lack of any strategy in this market segment and the thinking that they "had" to abandon the small car market because they couldn't make enough money in the segment has killed the company. Now they are going to continue the "death by 1000 cuts" approach to staying in business. They don't and won't have the courage to do the right thing and take aggressive action to fix things. At least this is my opinion and I hope I'm wrong but of course time will tell.

Bull$h!. Why would they and why should they? That game is over which is why they've capped the pensions..... finally. The idea of pensions has died. If, as you say, they end of the $30B+ of unfunded pensions, they should and would immediately file for bankrupcy and immediately shed any responsibility for pensions. GM is in business to make money. It's not there to fulfill some sort of nostaglic dream of the way things used to be. They need to survive somehow and if shedding financial obligations like the union contract and pensions will help them survive and should and would do it in a heartbeat.

Hybrid's have to be the stupidest vehicles and best example of herd mentality on the market today. There just is no justfication for the cost of them. You'll never get your money back on the extra cost. Why buy them? I have some land under a bridge I'd like to sell these idiots too.

I love this attitude. How the hell do you think these pensions and healthcare costs get paid? Who do you think the US government works for? If these people were smart enough and concerned enough they'd chase after their representatives in congress and get something done. (Not sure what they'd do but you have all the answers so can explain what to do.) Instead they sit back and say "woe is me" the big bad corporation is "stickin' it" to the little guy again. So yes, it certainly IS the retirees fault the US goverment "sold them out..." Oh and I'm sure "asset disolution" [sic] is going to solve a lot. Do you realize how many corporations have underfunded pensions? I'm sure closing them all down because they need to fund their pensions is an intelligent, viable strategy. Not.

Only half?

More rubbish. Cadillac was considered an "old main's car" for a number of reasons but certainly not because they were designed to be. I agree with your timing though which I mentioned in a recent post. Strange how soon people forget it wasn't long ago Cadillac was considered a dead division. It's all about the product.

Corvette's are not "cheap" cars. It is *probably* the "least expensive" product in it's class but it's not "cheap." Who cares what "many" have "for year" done? The point is still the same. Why does the Corvette not belong with Pontiac as the "excitement" division for example? Don't you just love the "because it's always been that way" argument?

I emailed them a nastygram. Probably won't have any effect but it made *me* feel better.

Don't kid yourself. I'm quite sure Toyota got quite a bit out of the deal. Quite a bit. On what basis do you disagree? The "overcapacity" argument is pure bull$h!. If and when they design and build themselves some "winners" that argument will be full of holes. Toyota isn't helping anybody out but themselves. If that plant was so historically bad, GM ought to take a page out of the Walmart rule book and shut the damn thing down.

If Wagoner has any balls he'll use the nuclear option. If GM survives that fiasco he should go after the next sacred cow. (We can debate on what that is later.)

Here's the original link: http://www.thestreet.com/_tscs/comment/inv...g/10270053.html Personally I dislike these kinds of articles, signed by "the staff." My local rag newspaper started doing it recently instead of having the editor's name on there. I suspect this is to deflect some of the feedback they were getting on her articles. To me it's another sign of cowardice on the part of the newspaper publishers.

What about Corvette? Doesn't seem like an economy class car to me.

Umm -- seems like the ought to have a say since they're going to be picking up the tab if things don't work out?

Hey - THAT's a reason most guys could relate to but then the wouldn't be thinking with the right head. Unfortunately it underscores the challenge GM has. Luckily I'm just making my way to the age where my car fits my age cuz I've been driving Cadillacs since I was a kid. And one more thing, I'm shooting for Cadillac to make a TV commercial with me in it like the one Toyota has running with buyers spouting off mileage numbers. My oldest STS has 120K miles on it and I'm quite sure will make it over 200K easily. It still smokes pretty much anything out there and the styling continues to be contemporary (unlike the 300C when it's... let me think - 10 years old.) Heck someone I work with asked me a month or so ago if I bought a new car. THERE's something to spout off about to potential buyers: 10 years old with 120K miles and still people are asking whether I bought a new car.

While not trying to defend Consumer Reports I think the gist of what they are saying is really a general indictment of ALL advertisers. They are, at their core, dishonest in some fashion. They leave information out, tell half-truths or otherwise twist the discussion in their favor. In GM's case with the price cutting, they are implying they've cut prices on ALL their products to which C/R is calling them out. Toyota does it with theirs by spouting statistics about their products but not actually comparing the numbers to any competitor, thereby leaving the impression the Toyota product is better when in fact it may not be or not enough better to be statistically significant. Toyota is especially galling because nobody ever calls them out on their methods which I find particularly deceitful. In the end, the US parts of Toyota are all really just sales and marketing people which we all know are just whores. They'll tell any story to anybody if it makes them a dollar.

Sorry but they're not in the same league. The interior particularly. In the end they're not after the same market so debate on this one is fruitless. The 300C is about size, and in your face size and with the V8 it's about pure horsepower. The STS is much more refined. This is one place GM really needs to respond and hard. Chrysler has a hit with a very large car with a big engine - this USED to be GM's domain and one where they were constantly beaten up. The public is kinda fickled. Ya think?

That's just ignorance but it's the perception some have about Cadillac. This is the challenge GM has to overcome. Hopefully he'll enjoy the slave labor he'll be doing when he's nearing retirement age. Oh and by the way he should study the demographics for the CTS. It's anything but an "old man's" car. Now the DeVille / DTS he might have an argument.

They're no different than any large organization with huge market share and tons of money running around. Corruption takes over and everybody grabs for their piece of the pie. The problem always becomes the fact that deals and expectations far outlast those who agreed to them and then eventually the trouble brews. In a lot of ways GM's situation could be paralleled with the US government. The country has been sold out over the years and now we're going to have to pay the price.

Have you noticed that Olds is gone? They don't make an Electra 225 any more either. I don't think there's anything particularly stylish about the Avalon but old fogies are buying them big time right now. I don't think you're quite right about your assessment below. The cost of anything GM does right now is high. They can't afford to NOT spend in the right places. They've got to sharpen the image of each division's mission and build cars to meet each.