CARBIZ

Turbo, funny thing is customers can be pretty unbiased when they are informed and motivated. Four years ago, I had a customer who drove the V-8 and V-6 Aurora two or three times each. Why? He was back to back comparing it to BMW and the Lincoln LS. He was an informed consumer who was not swayed by the bias in the magazines. In the end, he decided on the Aurora because he liked the history of theV-8, On Star and the ride/handling of the vehicle. Over the 3 years he drove it, he had a few minor electrical problems and one piece of trim that became loose. He now has a BMW5, along with a Silhouette and a new Malibu. He has had more problems with the BMW than his Aurora, but he has gone over to the dark side of the snob appeal of the BMW. His wife just didn't want to drive any more domestic vehicles. He persuaded her to let their son drive a Malibu for the safety and the price.

Although the stars are all so so beautiful, I am sick of all the teenage angst shows out there. "OH, boo hoo, I am rich and beautiful but my life sucks..." Smallville is another one..all the beautiful people with horrible relationships.

Part of the problem is that the MEDIA (and I am generalizing a great deal here) with their supposed superior knowledge of engine design, mechanicals, etc., will look down their nose at something that isn't the way THEY WOULD WANT TO BUY IT. If we are going to go back 20 years and bitch about everything GM has ever built, then let's make sure we are comparing apples to apples. Let's look at a '91 Cavalier and compare it to a '91 Corolla or Civic. First of all, how many would you still find on the road of each? DesRosier Marketing in Canada did just that study back in 2000 and was shocked that far more GMs were still on the road, as a percentage of what had been originally sold, than Toyotas or HOndas. I personally have had many customers still rattling around in their 12 year old Cavaliers and they love them. I am sure there are lots of 12 year old Civics, too. But just because the Civic has a DOHC engine and the 2.2 was a pushrod, does not mean that the car is necesssarily BETTER. The average consumer doesn't CARE, as long as the car is reliable beyond their payment period and beyond. For every horror story about the Crapalier, I can name two of people who won't part with them. But when the rags and papers keep on telling them that GM is crap, the average consumer gets nervous. Bashing my favorite rag once again, Mark Richardson of the Toronto Star tried to talk his own mother (very publicly in an article earlier this year) out of a new Cavalier purchase, even though he admitted that she had had no problems with it and it was a reliable car! She finally balked because the nearest Toyota store was too far for her. When these very public biases are blabbed in very public forums, such as the country's biggest newspaper, it makes me very angry. I can go and sell any product I want. I have been wooed by other product lines; however I CHOOSE to sell GM because I BELIEVE in their products and because I understand that every Japanese or German car sold is another nail in the coffin of the most important business in North America.

I agree that GM's Achille's heel is their interior design and on some vehicles the fit and finish may not be "world class," but that is only important to car critics. The average consumer doesn't run around with a dime to see if it fits between the door and the front fender! The average consumer doesn't give a damn if a transmission has 4 or 5 or 6 spds. as long as it works! Some of us you don't need to drive around in the competition. Our company owns two Toyota stores and I can assure you - Toyota has a lot of bodies buried in the back yard, they just bury them a little deeper. It is what the media considers avante garde and the flavor of the month that is shoved down the consumer's throats as "must haves." In many cases this only serves to confuse the consumer. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the current Malibu as a car. Even the 4 cylinder rides, handles and drives perfectly fine. It is decent on gas. It has done well in quality surveys. It is very well priced. Yet, the media assails it for "cheap" interiors, "light" steering and nitpicks on everything else. It is the same price as a Corolla, for Gawd's sake, but OMIGOD! - doesn't come in a 5 spd manual or have a 5 spd. automtic, so let's nitpick it to death so everyone buys the Camry because OF COURSE IT IS BETTER.

Insurance in this area is the highest in North America. I would say MIC is competitive, but doesn't always beat the competition. For insurance, even more than car buying, it pays to shop around. BTW, I've seen a 54 year old man charged $500/mo. for a Venture (no recent Canadian driving experience) and most people I've been in touch with are paying around $190/mo. for a Cobalt. That is Toronto for you where all the towers downtown are either banks or insurance companies - makes me wonder.

NObody said all the media is biased all the time, it is just that when you add up the press, they slam the Big Three far more and far more unjustly than Japan INc. The key to my point above was the admission from Laurence Yap, who loved anything from Asia, that they do have biases. Of course they do, they are human. I never said the Colorado or Freestar were class leading. In fact, the Freestar is a lump, but why would the Star deliberately seek out someone who had two Windstars and hated them both - what kind of balance would that be? The STar has nitpicked at GM for years. Frankly, if I was in charge of advertising, I would have yanked my ads a long time ago. Does anybody remember the so-called gas tank problem GM/Nissan/Ford experienced in southern Ontario back in 2003? Petro Canada later admitted that they had had a bad patch of gasoline go through the system. It contaminated the gas tank sensors in a lot of Malibus, Aleros and Cavaliers, but also effected Nissan and Ford, too. The problem was isolated to ONtario, not Illinois, not California, not Manitoba - ONTARIO. That alone should have informed the idiots at the STar that it wasn't GM's fault. The problem was largely over by the late summer of 2003. My own car was effected, but after a gas line cleaner was run through it, it was fine. Was the Star satisfied with that? No. In December 2003 they ran a front page 1/3 article of their Saturday paper (circulation of over 1 million) about some poor woman who ran out of gas on the 400 coming down from Barrie (I am from that area and what idiot would leave town with less than a 1/4 tank of gas anyway!?) in her Cavalier. A third page on the front page! And there is more... they ran another full page inside the A section about her plight, then the Business section talked about it, too. This was SIX months after the problem was over. Agenda? I'd say so.

Wait a minute, this is making less and less sense to me. Didn't I read somewhere else here that GM actually pays Delphi about $2billion more for parts that they could simply buy somewhere else? And if GM has had so much lead time with this bankruptcy/strike threat thing, why can't they just start sourcing said parts somewhere else - where they would be cheaper, too! Why is the UAW negotiating with GM, rather than Delphi? I hope this isn't another Fiat disaster in the making. What would the point of spinning off a company if the parent is still responsible for its costs?

But, Siegen, this is the point: these so-called experts hold themselves up to be above reproach, yet their biases are plain and clear. Case in point: the Toronto Star trashed the new Grand Prix when it came out a couple years back. Jim Kenzie was merciless, as was Laurence Yap. I guess Lutz was pissed because somebody called the Star and challenged them to a duel at the GM proving grounds. Kenzie showed up with a Maxima, both men drove it and the Grand Prix wiped the floor with the Maxima. Kenzie printed a long, drawn out apology. Yap later chimed in that "sometimes we automotive types have our own preconceptions." Yeah, right. Tell us something we don't know. Where was their balance? Or when they reviewed the "new" Freestar and took along a woman who had had two Windstars and hated them. Another unbalanced, biased piece of journalism. Or when the Matrix is said to be a little underpowered but, hey, it has a Toyota engine and gets great gas mileage, but the Colorado is just plain derided for only having a 5 cylinder, getting no credit for its gas mileage..... I could go on, but for the most part I just don't read any of the automotive publications any more. I do my own research, I get out and drive the competition and I learn from these type of sites where all sides get aired - even when I don't always agree with them.

You better look out, Toyota. GM is going to triple its production to 75,000 from 25,000! Wow, that will really help GM keep the lead in 2006. I will sleep better at night knowing this.

I'm with Fly on this one: Corvette Lucerne (not everybody wants to drive stiff suspensions!) full size pickups - oh, c'mon Ford - how many welds and bolts does it take to make a box floor anyway? full size SUVs - anybody actually drive an Expedition? Express/Savana - just knowing that Ford welds on 20" to the back of their "extended" would make me stay away I would add that the Impala, despite its aged architecture is going to prove the Camry and Accord wrong - despite no 20 spd tranny

In North AMerica that is true, but overseas it is another matter. There are a lot of cute cars in Europe and South AMerica put out by Fiat, Citroen and even GM over there. Maybe North AMeridans don't buy small cars because they are ugly and drive poorly. The Aveo is not a bad start - certainly far better than the old Metro, but could still be improved upon.

I'm with Dfelt on this one: marketing needs to be combined with products people want to buy. Another anology from the past can be drawn with the beta/BHS war of 20 years ago. Beta was by far the superior product: fewer moving parts, simpler load mechanism, superior picture. Sony invented beta. But Sony got greedy and wouldn't license anybody else for beta 1, the best picture quality. Along came Matsushita with their rival VHS format. They licensed it to everybody and marketed the crap out of it. The rest, as they say, is history. Sony got swamped with product and eventually was forced to sell VHS machines. Somewhere along the line, GM has lost its way. Not only are its products not "must haves" (thus forcing dealers to sell on price, not value), but its marketing does seem confused. I'll give one example, from sales point of view: the confusing array of credits, and programs (Grad Rebate, invoice credits, employee programs, supplier programs, lease cash, sunroof credits, DVD credits, lease pull aheads, and so on) from GMAC and GM create havoc with the sales department, resulting in rejected deals and pissed off customers. I've personally had to eat two $1,200 mistakes in the past couple months due to changing/evaporating programs. It seems that there are too many cooks in the kitchen. Does anybody at corporate actually work on the floor and see what we have to put up with every day? I mean WORK on the floor. How about anonymously to get people's honest opinions and reactions?

Here, here, Captain. My sentiments exactly. Turning GM around would be like trying to turn the Titanic on a dime. I doubt very much that Wagoner is at liberty to tell us all his plans..wouldn't that be stupid? The Burger King/McDonalds analogy is brilliant. I think GM is on the right track. Give us better products, better marketing and stop making stupid mistakes with respect to quality and we will have a winning formula.

Being a masochist, I do this all the time when I am walking my dog (I live in downtown Toronto). In any line of parked cars, the domestics account for no more than 30%. The Asians are by far the biggest grouping. In Rosedale, Toronto's richest neighborhood, domestics are even rarer, although the European marques are the most noticeable. GM is getting it from above and below: Toyota is the midde ground, Hyundai and Kia from the bottom and Audi/BMW from above. I am becoming more and more pessimistic with GM's chances of long term survival. The recent AJAC awards up here in the boonies have depressed the crap out of me. IMpala came in dead last for Best New Family Car (under $35k).

The Automotive Journalists Association of Canada (AJAC) just had their 10 Best of 2006 - only one domestic in the bunch (surprise!) Best New Economy Car Civic Best New Family Car (over $35K) Hyundai Azera Best New Multipurpose Family Vehicle: Mazda 5 Best new Modern Muscle Car: Dodge Magnum Best New Family Car (under $35K) Hyundai Sonata GLS Best New Sports Sedan: BMW 3 Best New Sport Car: CIVIC Si Best New Pickup Truck: Ridgeline Best New LUxury/Prestige: BMW 5 Best New SUV: Mercedes M-Class Special Award for Most Coveted Vehicle: Z06 Frankly, with all the awards from all the magazines or organizations going to the imports, it is AMAZING that GM is holding onto 28% market share. The AJAC voted the Pursuit dead last in the Economy car class, with the Yaris, Accent, Rio5, HHR and Pursuit in that order. The Sonata won over the Passat, Fusion, Jetta and (get ready for this) Impala.... I would continue, but my hands are shaking so badly as I write this that I may hurt myself..............

It does make you wonder, though.....

I am just throwing this out there because I have seen this happen before.... is it possible that the deal got badly screwed up at their end and they either can't get the car at all (allocation issues) or they are at or below cost? Stall tactics and smokescreens usually mean the deal has gone very sour. I once screwed up a deal by forgetting to put the freight back in the payment and we ended up selling a Cavalier for cost. I got in trouble but the dealer honored the contract. The sudden departure of the salesperson is strange. Was she new?

I know that one should know the enemy well, but I haven't read MT in about two years. I just became sick of seeing the HOnda/Toyota love fest.

Last night on one of the cable channels I watched a Canadian show called Car Business, sponsored by the Globe and Mail guys. They drove the Mazda 3, the PT and the Matrix. What I found the most interesting is that never once did they mention the Vibe, nor the Matrix's GM roots. They concluded that the Mazda 3 was an amazing vehicle and that the PT was the best "deal" - it got the lowest marks, naturally. The bias with all of these types of shows that I have seen is how easily they dismiss the anemic 1.8 litre engine in the Matrix by saying, oh, but it is a TOYOTA engine. I have never seen an article on any domestic vehicle that hasn't made many comparisons to a "better" import, yet when reviewing an import they rarely mention domestic competition. It is the predictablity of these shows/competitions that is becoming tedious.

I'm with sixtyeight: '59-'69 ran the gamut with some of the sleekest or meanest looking American cars of all time. My favorites: '59 anything '69 Chrysler 300 '65 T-bird '67 Pontiac Parisienne (Canada only, I think) '65 Ford Galaxy '61 Caddy

You guys south of the border are lucky you don't have to share the roads with the SmartCar. Many times I see this happy, middle aged woman getting on the expressway in the morning at the same time as me in her 3 toned SmartCar. I can't stop myself from laughing at her every time I see her. They are the most ridiculous looking cars, with barely room for a couple of coolers on the shelf behind her, and with all the SUVs and trucks on our overcrowded highways if she was ever in an accident...... And, truthfully, how much more efficient are they than, say, a 4 cylinder Malibu which is a cheaper car to buy, most likely cheaper to service and probably not much worse on gas.

Personally, from the whorehouses that I have seen many dealers become, I would like to see an end to pitting dealer against dealer. An entire generation of dealer principals are aging and will be retiring, leaving their spoiled offspring in charge - that will not bode well for GM in the future. Today's 100 million dollar dealerships need to be run by professionals with MBAs, not handed down like some kingdom. I know from personal experience what a mess franchise law is (in Ontario, there isn't any!), but if dealers aren't singing from the same hymn book there is a problem. I used to be involved in a major national franchise that had over 1,200 locations in North AMerica. The entire chain went bankrupt, largely because their franchises were fighting amongst themselves and nobody could agree on what should be done. They had a very tough franchise Agreement, modelled after McDonald's, yet they were unable to force dealers to participate in a major buy in on national TV for the hit show Dynasty. (OKay, I am going way back.) Product is the biggest challenge at GM, but the dealers themselves need a swift kick in the ass. As has been pointed out here by someone else, many salesmen are jaded, unable to adapt and don't even like the products they are selling. That is a problem. I have no doubt dealers are always screaming for more and better incentives. I can't speak for Red Tag, but the Ring and Win is a joke. Just yesterday I saw a full page ad in the Toronto Star for a few Chrysler dealers advertising the Caravan for $18,888. I rolled my eyes when I saw that and thought, "here we go!" The iceberg is coming and the captain is just rearranging the deck chairs.

I have driven the Astra and what a great little car that is! I have said this before and I will say it again: Oshawa needs to separate itself from Detroit and ally itself with Vauxhall/Opel. They sell left hand drive Astras in Brazil. The Brazilian real (their dollar) is nearly half that of the Canadian dollar. What would it take to export these fantastic vehicles to Canada? Our higher gas prices and "greener" image would make these fuel efficient, fun little vehicles a hit this side of the border. And, seriously - the Malibu is the same platform as these vehicles? That is just sad. If Detroit stopped treating North Americans as idiots, they may just start selling vehicles that people want to buy.

Frankly, I cringed when I heard they were dumping ABS on most cars (and the Venture) in 2003. It had been a major selling feature that we'd used, but I only ever encountered 2 customers who noticed. Once it was dropped as a significant "benefit," few people ask. Even today, ABS is an option on most entry level vehicles. A mistake, IMO, but that is the way the market is.

I am glad to see that Rick appears to be getting a handle on things. I doubt Washington will wake up, unless GM goes chapter 11 and Washington gets saddled with the pension costs. Then maybe they will wake up. To a certain extent I agree with OC about GM playing catch up in the design department. Over all, I believe most of GM's products are at least as good as what the competition has to offer. Perhaps part of the problem, however, is that GM needs more "home runs" to wake up the jaded media. The Impala, the HHR, the new Cobalt, the G6 - these are all very nice cars. Are they industry leaders? Probably not. They are all solid. They all have decent fit and finish, quality of materials, ride and handling, but with the possible exception of the Impala, none of them are hits out of the park. GM probably understands that 90% of the automotive buying public doesn't want or need to drive through winding mountain roads in a 24 spd transmission; however, the mouthy car critics seem to be chafing for this, so it would seem the smart thing to do is to provide such things whether warranted or not. MOST people haven't a clue what a 5 spd automatic does over a 4 spd, but if they are TOLD it is better then they will BELIEVE it is better and it becomes a must have item. It used to be that BMW and Mercedes were niche vehicles, but now it would seem that the media is trying to drag Cadillac into the performance forum, too. I will admit that Cadillac built some crap in the late '80s, but I don't understand why it has become uncool to build vehicles for the geriatric set, especially when they have the money! GM used to occupy the vast middle ground, but now the likes of Hyundai and Kia are nipping at GM's heels at the low end while Lexus and BMW are doing it at the high end. If people objectively look at what GM actually did in the 1960s, it built a lot of bland vehicles with a few stands outs, but the media was far more forgiving. If you look at MT articles from the period, battle cruisers like the Chrysler 300 and Grand Prix were gushed over - vehicles that would only get heaps of scorn and ridicule today. Perhaps the media was too forgiving 25 years ago, but today they won't give GM a break on anything. GENERAL Motors is going to have to reinvent itself if it is to displace Toyota from the vast middle ground.