enzl

You've got to give them the GMT900's as well. I just look at 2 of 3 'premium' brands (3 of 4 if you stretch to include Buick) and I don't see a product that I'm remotely interested in, Hummer is simply irrelevant to a broad swath of potential users & a pick-up H3T isn't much of a brand extender to me. Saab is as close to a joke as you'd like to venture when you have premium pretentions--the 9-3 is Ok, but expensive, the 9-5 is an antique & the 9-7 is a Trailblazer. Caddy has CTS as a saving grace--but the rest of the car line-up is mediocre & aging. The Escalade actually makes much more sense than the XLR & STS at this point. Ford & GM have not been astute in exploiting the upmarket growth--Lexus, BMW & now even Audi are eating their lunch from the top just as the Japanese have gutted their middle market. $5-15k in profits are more than possible with cars...but only the right ones.

Please. You sound like a petulant child...and just because some other sites or other individuals choose to act like morons--well, it shouldn't be an invitation to do so yourself. But go ahead--I'll take another sip of daquiri while I wait for another pearl of wisdom. And, regardless of source, there's nothing 'legitimate' about reveling in others' misfortune....you can rationalize all you want--I'd look forward to posts that are insightful, rather than gloating. That's why I come here. Think we might have more members, better discourse & (god forbid) a better site if the rhetoric was turned down a notch? I get shouted down here all the time--and its disheartening sometimes--but there's a difference between honest disagreement and a gleeful schadenfreude that borders on psychosis. Ever think that this type of behavior frustrates guys like FlyBrian who just disappear one day? To me, that's glaring evidence that a general attitude problem spills over into other aspects of the site and rots it from within.

Right. So, didn't your mother ever ask you about your friends jumping off bridges? I never even glance at Toyota Fan Sites---who cares what they say? It makes us look petty and bitter. You're taking it way too personally...and I don't know too many enthusiasts that are 'fans' of Toyota. You recommend Corollas to your grandmother...that's not where I think GM should be going if they want to survive.

The Tacoma just got a huge bump in rust-through warranty protection because of some serious customer complaints....I think they used to make a great small truck...now their's is probably the best through attrition and ineptitude by Ford, Dodge and Nissan & GM. (I owned an '81 Toyota P/U I bought with 145k on the clock years ago. Reliable and easy to maintain, it took my cross country many times.)

Toyota has better PR. Period. The truck debacle will get little play because, at the end of the day, they can make money without these products...and GM can't. Toyota will lose Billions and shrug it off--the glee with which the posters here attack them is astonishing, as you guys cry like babies everytime GM gets criticized, fairly or not. Just bear in mind that the same logic that Toyota used to get these factories build was used by GM's braintrust to 'pull ahead' the GMT900's. One difference: Toyota didn't sacrifice anything, GM basically threw out the Zetas--premium CARS that might have produced similar profits as the GMT900's that are currently nailed to dealer lots across the country. But don't worry, RF, BL & Fritz all got their well deserved raises for such advanced thinking!

Lambdas are the right CUV at the wrong time. The Sigma, other than current CTS, has been an underachiever ...the two roadsters are good looking--but crappy, and the Astra is the perfect execution of a middle of the road product. Even with all of your choices...that's 10% of GM's lineup. That's good? Here's some more heartwarming info on the Volt---battery delays: http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNews...334279820080313 Maybe Fritz, RW and Lutz will get further raises when they file for Bankruptcy protection? Oh, I forgot, their retirement packages are already guaranteed, regardless! It's BS and all posters know it--how about a few of you being brave enough to admit it?

Me too! Besides that, I'm secretly hoping somebody at GM monitors these boards and get an idea or two...

100% true. GMC insiders were furious.

I should have said 'most' have full line aspirations-- Buick has clearly taken the biggest whack--the China success insures their survival as a brand, even if US sees little product.

It's the obsession with having each of those brands be a full-lineup entity that hurts...8 focused channels could work (and many good ideas have been presented), but even as a dealer, I have to admit that need for multiple versions of the same product is simply not working. Not enough marketing or development $ to do it. I would rather sell 50 vehicles/month at or near MSRP than sell 100 vehicles and make money on only 1/2 of them. With dozens of GM showrooms within spitting distance of ours, that's exactly what happens.

Though they might be 'proof', I don't thnk they're 'poof' of anything. Let's see more than 5% of the portfolio undergo similar changes and I will reserve the right to change my opinion. Until then, a casual glance at the rest of the line-up tells me its business as usual down at the tubes. Corvette, Big Trucks, one decent Epsilon and a pile of crap...yes, that's a world-beating, company saving effort.

Both paragraphs exemplify my utter frusrtration with GM. The Volt is brilliant (if it can be made to work)--but the promises made were premature and irresponsible, IMO. The Camaro kills me, but the family of Zetas that have been sacrificed on the altar of a GMT900 pull-ahead and lame CAFE excuses is beyond reason. I sometimes feel like the Lambdas or the CTS are the exceptions to the general malaise over at GM, rather than a harbinger of better days.

And, why not give 'em (RW,BL, FH) raises and stock options while you're asking the factory labor to take it in the shorts?... http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1205360636...=googlenews_wsj Unbelievable. I couldn't make it up and have it be more offensive.

Yes. That's the unenviable position GM finds itself in...when people openly mock the choice of a Detroit 2.8 product...when the default choices are all Japanese...when your reputation takes a battering everyday in the press ("layoffs in the thousands", ""sinking stock price", "bankruptcy possible", "Strike closing 20+ Plants") you must come out swinging---a no holds barred barrage of brave, unique, well-designed and well-built product that is DEMONSTRABLY SUPERIOR to other available product. Otherwise, close up shop, sell off the US assets and move the rest of the company to China, where they don't know how bad you sucked for years. The guys in charge have proven, repeatedly, that they don't know how to do what is needed.

That's why they're in the position they're in. Beat Camry (not that hard). Beat Accord. Beat Altima. Then you'll.. conquer a tough market. The more GM goes mainstream and center of market, the worse they'll do. You need to give people a strong reason to swap allegiances. I'm afraid that the washer analogy is completely off base. GM's problem is people don't make their choice like a washer--no-one sees you cruising in your washer---but lots of people see you in your 'safe' choice, i.e. Camry, Accord--and consider it a wise one nowadays. DCX got fannies in the seat with design---GM needs to couple that creativity with underlying excellence, just to survive!

Apparently, some other top GM management disagree with Mr. Lutz: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/news-blog...launch-in-2010/ 10 Cities may get the Volt! Woo. That's underpromising...eh, too easy.

Excuses are like a$$holes, my friend, everyone's got one, most of 'em stink. Competition is nothing new. If your defense of GM centers around the idea that the competition overwhelmed them one day---that won't fly. GM left the door open for the competition. They just waltzed in and stole the family jewels while mgmt. was asleep. Period. I lived thru GM's 70's, 80's & 90's product. Toyota didn't force GM to build any of their misguided product. BMW didn't tell Caddy to build a fleet of FWD petro-wood mobiles. The USA is founded on the ideal that everyone has an opportunity to live the dream, be they 7th generation or fresh off the boat. GM is like the drunken offspring of the landed gentry--they've been clueless for so long, its been quite difficult to consider a proper response to the current competition. Now it may be too late. Does Washington or the American consumer share some blame? Yes. But this started with GM's arrogance and negligence--please don't paint them as victims--these wounds are deep, old, festering & self-inflicted for the most part.

Explain how GM will increase sales in NA? Trucks are tanking. The new products are selling, but they're not best sellers. Other than the market shrinking and GM treading water, I can't see a scenario where market share rises. Where is the product that will lead a renaissance? What will replace truck volume? Saab, Hummer, Saturn, Buick, Pontiac and Cadillac have all been on a downward trajectory--sh!t, Saturn can't even blame a lack of new product. Please, enlighten us! And, as for your above commentary on dealers: My employees are people with families too---it not just about the principals or their wealth-RW's Golden Parachute is just as relevant as my owner's RE holdings to this argument--If you're going to depend upon the geniuses in Detroit to move metal in Cali or Mass or AZ, you'll really see how deluded and provincial GM is!

Please explain the optimism I should feel about a company that holds MY future in its hands and has done little but fumble its responsibilities for the past 25+ years? Tell me how I will 'positively' explain to my staff of 275 people that GM is no longer in business---or unable to support their livelihoods? Put a spin on things however you like. The fact remains that those responsible for GM's possible demise should be held accountable--immediately. How bad do things need to get, exactly? NA operations will lose money for 4 years running--that's GM's optimistic projection, not mine. Me or you would lose our jobs for a similar performance---and should. That no-one in a position of power at GM could reasonably foresee the events of the past 5 years is not credible. I'm not pessimistic, I'm realistic---the problem is with those here that don't realize the true state of affairs. Cheerleading is fine--but that's all it is--we're down 10 runs in the bottom of the 8th inning. Care to bet the rest of the game's results on those that have put us in that position in the first place? I don't.

First- Pre-strike counts...so it's 30%+ as a fair starting point. If anything, the 10% loss of share due to the strike is also a managerial misstep, so it certainly is a legitimate point. As for the cut in fleeting, it was 100k units last year...not even close to explaining the lost sales here in the states---and the reason that there may be less Employee Discount cars sold is, simply, they have less workforce. GM's market share has been trending down for years...the slide appears endless---and it's currently propped up by 1 million+ fleet sales, IIRC---so the real retail % is probably less than Toyota's nationally. As for your PS-GM counted vehicles (originally) that were produced by companies they don't own a majority of (and thus shouldn't be counted)--the changed figures resulted in Toyota's #1 ranking, not Toyota's estimated figures. Bottom Line: GM's performance is simply indefensible. If you want to accuse people of arrongance or shadiness, make sure you apply the same rules to GM---or anyone else. The people on this board that get upset with the 'humpers' should really spend the time and energy upset with the absolute negligence that has brought one of the greatest companies ever to its knees.

While I agree with 90% of what you're talking about, it's the 10% that kills GM: As others have mentioned, part of the issue is trend following rather than trend leading--the GM10's exemplify how far behind GM let itself get...to take from your example--McDonald's has witnessed the Starbuck's revolution and now offers 'gourmet coffee'--IIRC, McDonald's, despite the public issue with health, has responded and excelled profitably by allowing itself to go in new directions. Now, while a cup of coffee is a far cry from a billion-dollar car architecture, the point is that GM never saw their 'Starbuck's' in the rearview--premium prices for the same cup of joe (family sedan) is exactly where they'd like to be. The idea that no-one at GM considered the $3-4.00 gallon of gas when war is raging in the Middle East (now 5+yrs...a product cycle) & China/India are soaking up greater portions of the world production of oil is absurd. That's where I take issue with the leadership of GM. The GM900 pull ahead nearly singlehandedly killed Zeta and delayed both Zeta & Alpha--for what, exactly? I'm afraid that the GM we know can no longer exist. Unfortunately, another round of vicious downsizing will probably result from an extended period of time at 20% or less of NA market share. All future product has to be the best--or at minimum a great execution--and even that (as we've seen with Aura, Outlook, Lucerne, SRX, et al.) may not be enough.

Buick's decline in volume has been so precipitous, I'm not sure that a recovery means much. Obviously, global sales of platforms like the Ep II will help with costs, but the bottom line is that the LaCrosse and Lucerne both have a year or more to go before they are replaced--so we may not have reached the bottom, yet. The second issue is one of relevance, as in, does Buick matter anymore? In the US, I would say no.

I only subscribe to AN---otherwise, I do pick up CAR religiously, the others occassionally, at newsstands. I think I may skip Automobile from now on, however.

I feel the same about having a magazine in hand, although I only keep CAR for a year or so and then sent backcopies to my nephews (they love them & use the pics). Everything else gets recycled. I guess I was more refering to the casual reader that used to pick up a newsstand copy--I think that, along with subs, are way down in that industry.

It's hard not to play "What could have been...", especially when you consider what GM has gone through in the last 20 years. I agree that Saturn has a future going forward. It is a brand that non-enthusiasts seem to have an affinity for...and one without the baggage of other GM brands. I can promise you that the current Saturn push has everything to do with psychographics and extensive marketing research. I"d love to be a fly on the wall for some of those meetings: Can you guys summarize the findings? '(insert GM division) sucks--would never consider' 'Saturn--might consider' OK. Let's work with Saturn, boys. Or something like that. I'm certainly paraphrasing, but I suspect that's not far off.