enzl

I'm going to take a closer look at our inventory. Anything would be an improvement over the previous stuff. I spent a few weeks in a Compass---I love Jeeps and it was a heap of not good.

First, check the numbers...the FIT is capacity constrained...meaning, Honda could sell more, if they were available. The Aveo (and lesser degree Yaris) have more inventory because, quite simply, they aren't in the same league...please check your facts before posting nonsense like that--you're simply so wrong and it completely undermines any other point you care to make. The Malibu is hurt by the Impala sitting across the showroom floor as a better value to most Chevy customers. But the Malibu is a success, even if its not selling at Camry or Accord rates. The LaCrosse has been a well built but mediocre product from the get...20% go to fleet and its been outsold by the 'horrible' Avalon this year--both as retail sales and total sales. Again, the problem with this board is the blind enthusiasm that completely shields many here to the reality of the situation. It is dire--tragic, awful and potentially devastating. GM needs a dose of reality, not absurd platitudes that prevent the real work of rescuing GM from really starting. They should have hooked up with Ghosn before...Kirk was right...Now its up to a bunch of Ren Cen retards to try and make money when they couldn't do it in a booming US economy. What are the odds of success, given their track record?

+1 If GM is populated by employees that think like most of these guys, its no wonder things have gone so wrong.

Firstly, hindsight is always 20/20, so I'm simply not going to harp on the endless things that GM has done to itself to arrive at this crossroads. Suffice it to say that if you or I failed like the mgmt at GM, we wouldn't have jobs---which cuts right to the core of how F*ed up things are at GM that this has been allowed to continue. Simply put--Luck is preparation meeting opportunity. GM's lack of preparation for the economy faltering, the mortgage crisis, the gas price increases, the shift in consumer preference for cars, etc...(and the list is nearly endless) is why they're screwed. They weren't lucky like Honda because they weren't prepared! Period. No excuses are possible. The possible failure of what was once the World's Greatest Company---an almost inarguable #1 in many respects--is incredibly newsworthy---and the premature obits being written is simply the natural result of this negligence, arrogance & myopic culture that has succeeded in nearly destroying a historically unparallelled company. Sorry. This is simply chickens coming home to roost. Nothing more or less.

While this Yahoo "news" is stupid and clearly not somebody who knows the business, the threat to the very survival of all of the Detroit 3 is VERY real. The gloom and doom prognostications of every biz page are there for a reason, my friends. There is a genuine possibility that 1 or 2 of these 3 companies will not survive in a recognizable form. Much as the Enron implosion or Bear Stearns spectacle were front page news for weeks, an Icon such as GM (with its product front and center) will dominate with similar coverage--only multiplied 100X because there's a Chevy on every street corner--most Americans have no clue what Enron did or why they failed--but everyone's had a ride in a GM product. Blaming the media is the lamest excuse in the book. Negligently destroying the Worlds #1 Carmaker should be judged far more harshly. The people running GM, the UAW & the Trade policy of this country are completely to blame. There would be NO stories if these institutions were run competently, and everyone reading this site knows that, whether they care to admit it or not. Blaming somebody else for one's own problems has become an American obsession, which is killing this country. How about some personal and professional responsibility? Admitting it's my fault? In an organization with 500+ people, I never hear "I simply screwed up", only excuse after excuse. If you want to identify what's killing this country, its the lack of ANY personal responsibility. The MSM is simply the newest boogeyman.

Should I be flattered or insulted? I'm not getting it. I didn't think the article was overly negative, given the topic. The Challenger and Ram have gotten OK reviews, hell, even the Hybrids got a little positive press in the USA Today this week.

Zetas would have one thing going for them: Transaction prices that would enable GM to make a buck on cars, not relying on trucks to carry the load. Chrysler was fleeting 300's heavily (50%+), so that may factor into the #'s, as well as the death of the Magnum. Unique, upscale product is EXACTLY what GM needs right now. They'll never make money selling Cobalts to deadbeats.

With who? The Prius is about 100X more likely to be introduced, on time, into consumers hands--not a limited intro leasing scenario that is now being floated for the first 100s of Volts to trickle out. GM has again shown the PR skills of a amateur--Toyota will completely steal their thunder---and GM has noone to blame but themselves.

You've named at least 6 Ep's that are current or coming...and my point wasn't the exact # of derivatives, but the loss of focus that comes with developing this many products---when you seize on a detail of a greater point in order to undermine it, you look petty (and somewhat blind to GM's real problems.) There are more than 6 Ep variants, either here already or under development, period. Your 2nd paragraph echoes my thoughts on the matter, although I believe GM's public image is poor and getting worse. There may be no pulling out of the nose dive they're in...

The tyranny of the brands. It's a real pickle.

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2008/autos/...duct/index.html

Insignia is being 'extensively redesigned' before being badged as an Aura in the states. Toyota or Honda are immaterial...they KNOW how to make money with small and medium sized cars. GM simply does not have the resources to make 5, 6 or really any unnecessary versions. When they could of made a difference, they chose not to--now, they're screwed. Only the Avalon, Camry, ES and GS are here. The GS isn't on the same platform, nor does it really compete with the Avalon or Camry and its overlap with the ES is small. Apples and Oranges, my friend--but nice try. GM is playing catch-up with no room for error. What are the odds that this management team can pull that off?

My bad---you will have MORE than 6 variants by next year, this time...plus a couple in the hopper (draining precious resources). All have pricing points that intersect--that's simply crazy. Whether they are here or being developed---that's simply far too many products for a relatively narrow band of the marketplace--which other makers cover with 1,2 0r 3 products, generally under 1 0r 2 brands.

What do you think GM is doing with all of the 0% for 72 months sales? They're not borrowing that money for free! Have you seen the incentives on large trucks at Chevy GMC & Caddy stores? Or why they wrote of $1 billion + this quarter for loss of residual value on trucks? And remember, an Accord or Camry is worth alot more at the end of the lease...so the amount being subvented is relatively small---placing GM in another quandry about how to reverse its current path. That's the problem with going broke, all of your options become narrowed and the death spiral gets steeper. Honda and Toyota learned from the Big 3 how to throw an incentive laden party. They're just tightening the noose and keeping the factories humming at this point.

You misunderstand me. Forget culling brands--GM can't afford it. How about just putting the resources you have into the proper places? Traverse should have been the Outlook. Saturn has never had $40k product--why start w/Outlook. The Ep's (either current or future) are as follows: Malibu, 9-3, G6, Aura, Vectra (I), & Insignia, Aura, 9-3 (resized mid-project), 9-5, Invicta/LaCrosse (II) with multiple variants/bodystyles for almost all of those--and that's just today & the immediate future. That's crazy--they're mostly 4 dr., FWD sedans that will barely sell as well as the Camry. Simple economics yields your pricing problem: Too many seats, not enough asses. And GM's going to launch its comeback on the basis of its cars? Or smaller CUV's launched 5 yrs late? Please.

1. GM's own data, as vetted by Union negotiators. Why the concessions unless things were that dire? 2. Big 3 have admitted as much on many occassions, citing the legacy cost differential & Healthcare ($1200-2500/car) as the reason they couldn't produce and profit from a car built here. This argument has been used for years--and since the cost of raw materials is up, along with energy prices, there's no way they're building them cheaper. Nissan's margin of 8% profit on sales (the "8" in their old 180 turnaround plan) is the gold star for midmarket margins. On the low end, $1,200 is 10% of a $12k vehicle--or 5% on a $24k---GM simply couldn't be making money on a majority of cars they sell. 3. If you believe previous reports that big truck profits of $5-10k or more per unit were accurate, the following should share the sh!t out of you: GM's income fell 33% last quarter--almost all of it a result of 40% less trucks being sold. Honda makes money on small cars because they're well run. GM's current management has shown no ability to make a buck consistently when trucks were selling. They're simply incapable of doing it as presently constituted.

CTS hands down. Along with the 'vette, its the arguable best in class of its field. Third place isn't even close.

Right. So why rename product like GM does? Buick Park Ave, Regal, Century or LeSabre were perfectly fine. So was Pontiac's. So was Caddy's. LaNeve is 2nd to RW in the accountability sweepstakes over there.

You're making a huge assumption in all of this: GM is making money on cars. They've haven't recently. What makes you think they are right now? And one example of the tyranny of having 8 brands: How many Outlooks would have been sold thru Chevy dealerships? It's all academic if GM cannot find a way to stop the bleeding. This means making money. Along with that, it means convincing others (banks, investment community & customers(!)) that you have the goods. Having to develop 6+ Ep products at once simply makes no sense, especially if they're all going to compete with each other for mindshare (All current Eps overlap on price--with each other & other GM sedans as well)....you simply can't make 'the best' if that time, $ & energy is split 6 ways.

I'll find the Inventory levels for all cars in question, and quote you one astonishing fact: Buick sold less than 4 new vehicles per dealership last month. How much should that dealer be spending to advertise those Buicks? How much ad spending should GM co-op in order to sell those 4 vehicles? Or keeping parts available to service those 4 vehicles? Or printing sales broshures for each of Buick's 3 models? Or creating Ad Copy? It's simply Common Sense. As soon as I come across some neutral material, I'll get it to you...

Well, at least I know you're paying attention to my posts, huh? When Honda's in as bad a shape as GM, I'll be sure to offer them my suggestions. Until then, I think their overall performance in a rotten market speaks volumes for their abilities and product choices. The Civic is currently capacity constrained....as is the Fit and CRV, IIRC. Your feeble attempt to compare a 2 line company with GM's brand morass only highlights your complete ignorance of what dealer support, marketing and advertising truly costs. Get back to me when you educate yourself on this matter--it literally will blow your mind. Rebadges consume marketing resources, not necessarily development resources...but I'd say a dollar is still a dollar to GM right now. As for my criticism of RW and the Board...would you have a job if your performance was similar to theirs? I'm not the enemy, brother. The morons running a proud company into the ground should be the ones earning your ire. But I guess it's easier to pick on me? I'm just one of the guys on the front line trying to save this disaster from happening--what are you doing?

So, if divisions (as they were) are now a fiction, who cares what the cars are called, as long as they're good and make GM money. Pouring marketing resources into rebadges thus makes no sense, right?

Apples & Oranges--and I think you know it. If GM could make more money selling less brands, why are your panties in such a bunch? It's simply common sense. 8 Divisions and 35% market share would be fine. 8 Divisions and 15% simply makes no sense. When the ship is sinking, you cut weight. GM's situation is dire--not bad or rough--desperate times call for desperate measures--its simple math. They have nothing left to leverage, little to sell of value and a whole lot of liabilities that either get paid or they go Ch. 11. (And, BTW, the Civic is currently selling at a rate that is simply constrained by capacity, so perhaps you're right on that point.)

Anything but the same old song and dance....sell something off, mortgage more stuff and cut staffing hasn't done it when times were good, economically. Why try the same cure when the result has been unsuccessful? Mulally, IMO, has brought a sense of urgency severely lacking at GM. My question is why is RW still employed? What has he done to earn his keep? He's presided over the largest corporate disaster in US auto history and you think he should be believed now?

GM has been selling the corporate equivalent of the family silver, not 'non-core' companies. GMAC, Allison aren't exactly "non-core" when GMAC provided most profits for years and Allison was involved with Hybrid Trannies and Heavy trucks... You can't avoid the fact that without the profits from SUV/Pick-ups, GM hasn't made money in cars since the 60's...How is this management team (with record losses of market share) and hemoraging money left and right (Delphi $ hasn't stopped leaking, VEBA haven't been fully funded yet and tons of other suppliers are on the ropes --ie looking for a GM handout) going to stop if they don't know how to make money with cars? What car is going to replace Silverado profit? Which crossover is going to replace Tahoe profits? Where is the $ for developing the Volt from scratch going to come from?--other products NOT being developed! This management team needs to go. GM needs a Mullally -type that will take a real stab at changing GM. Cause I got news for ya...what they're doing isn't working. (And before you rail on about gas prices or the economy--keep two things in mind---if you depend upon Gas Guzzlers to make $--wouldn't you have a Plan B developed when War is raging in the Middle East? And...they owned RESCAP (only the largest mortgage co. in the US)--you think they might have had an idea that a meltdown was starting?)