enzl

APX is a rolling example of Lotus' engineering ability to do high performance, low volume (rumored to be profitable at less than 50k/yr.) vehicles with modern crash safety and superior performance characteristics... ...supposedly, Lotus put it out in MPV form to raise awareness that the techniques are for sale, as Lotus has its hands full building and selling every car they make, as well as developing a new Espirit (due in less than 2 years). It's actually an interesting take on a mommy mobile... imo.

I was using the article to point out that no automaker is immune to recalls...their are plenty of positive pieces about GM out there, I notice noone here picks up on those either...I'm not sure how you'd spin a recall piece as anything but negative anyway.Regardless, if you'd made it your 'mission in life' to do anything, I have no interest in dissuading you, however, there are many posters here that perpetually spout half-truths and misleading info that are presented as fact. If Evok, myself and others disagree with those 'facts', we're the bad guys...I get it. As far as highjacking this thread, I understood the humor attempted, I just feel like the prevailing attitude amongst the diehards here is more about rooting for others' failure than trumpeting GM's successes...and that, IMO, is sad and not in the spirit of the site....if you'd like to lift yourself and your biz up by disparaging others, that's your call..Sales 101 regards that as amatuer, unimaginative and ineffective....but, hey, what do I know, I just manage a conglomerate of auto franchises of all stripes....

While I'm thrilled with Caddy's direction, it would be great to be able to assume greatness, like with BMW 5 series (which, despite the questionable design, is still quite a ride.) One of Lutz' true tests is his stewardship of Caddy's 2nd gen. of new cars since the renaissance.

It's not necessary. That's all. This site isn't for social commentary. I would think you could avoid it without ruining your good time (or anyone else's)

TaDah....right on time....http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=105624 No large automaker escapes the recall blues....The Toyota stories, while certainly not good news for them, are news because their product usually avoids these types of embarassing hiccups. I don't think those who live in glass houses should cast stones. BTW-pointing out others failings in no way indicates some sort of progress on GM's behalf...I might be beating a dead horse, but I find it exhausting that you guys choose to jump on every competitors' negative story while conveniently avoiding issues like the link above... I'm rooting for perfect GM launches and better product. If you're building a better mousetrap, the competitions' issues magically become immaterial...let's all hope for that one day, huh?

I 100% agree that the next gen of EVERYTHING GM does needs to be spectacular....although the desired product sounds suspiciously like the DCX LX's that will sell 300K this year!) More importantly...what is their current % in bringing these promises to fruition? I pray that their success rate rises in the near term or their won;t be a future.

Haters unite! Toyota isn't even #1 yet, and you're already giving up!(I thought all that new product --Lucerne, Impala, GMT900's, etc. were going to stop the slide!) Why so much venom for Toyota? They didn't sneak up on GM....This day has been coming for a long time and GM has snatched defeat from the jaws of victory...why not congratulate them, wish 'em well, and get on with the business of saving what's left of the empire. How about more "Fresh Ideas' and less 'mediocre complaints regurgitating other people's rants'??? I've got some ideas as starters: Less big trucks, more real cars More GM Europe, less GM Daewoo in the states More designers, less bean counters Less divisions, more inspired product How about that? These types of threads make this place look like a bunch of crybabies...In the real world, getting lknocked down isn't a tragedy, its not getting back up that is one....c'mon, GM, come out swinging!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1147230415...tml?mod=autos_1 More great news from General Motors--41% in the first Q!

evok has done a masterful job defending my statements, which I believe were reasonable and truthful.... But, if we're going into the semantics of my argument, I just want to state that the day GM has the same proportion of excellent product in its lineup as BMW, Toyota or Nissan, I promise I'll stop the criticism of GM completely. Do I desire excellence in every product?....Of course, I'm an enthusiast...Do other carmakers fail to produce excellence across the board? Absolutely. But we shouldn't be looking to other companies failures and hate, rather, we should be looking at the shining examples of single minded excellence in the industry (BMW & Honda come to mind first) and see what it is they are doing right... A little soul searching is in order as an organization and, in the balance, is the very survival of GM. If this doesn't cause discomfort amongst those that attack myself and evok for our difference of opinion, than perhaps we're wasting our time in providing our point of view. If I didn't care, I wouldn't waste my time...As I've said before, my personal stake is higher than almost everyone's here...If I don't have the right to respectfully disagree, than that's on you guys. If you'd like my opinion, great. If you disagree, that's fine too...but don't use semantics to difuse what was and is a fair and accurate portrayal of GM's current situation.

Those are catchwords of the investor; they don't interest me to a great degree. I am 'here' for product, not the annual report. 'Marketshare' is greatly overemphasized and almost without fail taken out of context. What do I mean? Only the investor would compare current marketshare to the modern historical peak instead of the historical average. Peak, by the way was 60.1%, tho no one bothers to find out when. I did; it was 1931, the first year GM was #1 in volume, not the late '60s as any 'journalist' will try and tell you. By '46 it was 37.5%- was there unending journalistic teeth-knashing & hair-pulling about the "death spiral" then like we're all enjoying now? Again since no one bothers to find out: no; there wasn't. Yes, marketshare has been declining for many years. Frankly I don't care up until the point it affects profits and curtails reinvestment/future planning. Yep, it's done that some years ago. But far too many believe the link is tangible and direct, ie: the worse marketshare is, the worse the vehicles must therefore be, yet the opposite is closer to the truth, yet many here prefer to ignore that. Which is where my objection comes in. No one who harps on marketshare and profit statements ever bothers to give credit to vastly improved quality & reliability, far outpacing the industry average there. Naysayers love to gloss over the turnaround of Cadillac, who has undoubtedly & soundly increased their marketshare of the luxury segment. 1996 entry-level Cadillac sales: 0. 2000 Catera sales: 17,290. Aren't recent CTS sales in the 50,000+ unit range? What has happened to the 3-series marketshare in the last 10 years- we never hear those numbers. Who would disagree that those figures would be MOST REFRESHING to learn? Cannot this possibly be considered one of many 'absolutely positives'? Or is it all just 'bla bla bla / wordsmithing'? Nevermind; already know the 'answer'; there is only The Big Picture That Is General Motors, Where Everything Is Absolutely f@#ked and Nothing Good Can Ever Shine Forth From The Blinding Darkness That Is Marketshare Now Shutup About The Individual Examples Of Progress And Goodness And Get Down With The Sickness. f@#kin' A, Manny. I don't think there's anyone here that would/could deny bright spots or reasons to hope...that being said, when 80+ models result in 4-8 clear cut 'successful' vehicles ---in the sense of PRODUCT excellence---there's ample reason for doubt and concern.Analogy- If I have Cancer, but my heart is strong, I still need to go to the doctor, since without proper care, the Cancer may kill me (and my strong heart.) GM hasn't addressed the Cancer and the heart may not be so strong either...until they can produce consistent, excellent product over their entire range (or some large portion) they will continue to be selling deals, not cars & trucks. That type of Cancer will eventually kill them, unfortunately.

I'm not going to pile on...suffice it to say that I do believe that GM can do better...I believe they have the talent to do it and, certainly, the motivation... I can imagine GMT900 effort to create an original, midsize platform...like what the epsilon should be....RWD/AWD with enough differentiation to be a great Chevy on the low end and a sophisticated Saab on the high end...imagine 1 million plus excellent cars! Just like their truck bretheren! ...but until that happens, its mediocrity and excuses. That ain't going to cut it in a World Market where only 80% of capacity is truly needed and the losers will no longer be independent entities within the decade. That's all that's at stake. That should be enough to inspire and rally the troops. I guess we'll see.

Spring Hill is rumored to be either a) killed off or b) not exclusively saturn after '07, depending on who you believe.At least the Opel will save a few jobs in europe, keeping the assembly lines humming in the Astra's 3/4/5 year of this gen's production....maybe this will encourage GM to look globally for more cars...

Excellent news. Only issue I have is that they're only planning on bringing in 40K, none of which will make GM a dime at $16,000.

The Japanese partnership between gov't and industry spans an enormous number of sectors. It partially explains the difficulty GM and Ford are having, but the situation did not have to be this way.At the end of the day, there has been a failure of imagination at the Big 2. An inability to recognize that the light at the end of the tunnel was an oncoming train. There are 100's of examples of this myopic behavior, and I suppose you feel that critics have been unfair in doling out their venom. While I will admit that the press can be ferocious, the issue at hand is, that at the end of the day, they smell blood---two icons blood---and that can be a powerful force that invades lots of stories. To me, this is about not giving them fodder to write the stories, but our domestic industry has been perpetually putting out mediocrity and also-rans...the Cobalt you speak of so highly is a nice car---but it replaced a Cavalier which, to be kind, was uncompetitive in 1992...how many people are going to hear it was replaced and run to a Chevy dealer---they all bought their perfectly adequate Corolla, Civic or whatever in 1993--were happy with it and have moved on to two generations of Accords, Camries or Siennas...the point being that they have NO reason to visit the local Chevy store anymore... That's but one of a thousand examples of how GM put automaking second to money making and, now, they've got to figure out how to make cars again, no that they are no longer the default choice. I'm actually optimistic they can do it, but time is short and severe action needs to be taken now! If my words on this board are a call to action for GM, great...if not, I'm OK with that too. (My livelihood is deeply effected by their progress, so I really have put my money where my mouth is. I have the right and reserve the right to speak my mind, even if others disagree.)

Ironically, these Alfas are based on the premium GM FWD architecture that Fiat got to use as part of the breakup of their fling. Brera, Spider, 159's and the Fiat Croma all share it, along with an italian tuned HF V6 that sounds like pure sex... So, technically, we would be driving a GM product, mostly! Could've been the basis of the new 9-3, 9-5 and who knows what else...

Retail market share, without inclusion of fleet numbers is around 20%. Simple math...At least 25% fleet sales and 25% market share means more than 5 points are wholesale rather than retail sales...(and both of those numbers are generously pro-GM, BTW) Evok knows his stuff. You may not like what he or OC or I have to say, but our information is generally solid and the facts, unfortunately, speak for themselves. I think alot of GM fans suffer from a Stockholm syndrome about their favorite company...GM has squandered alot of people's futures and deserve every bad word they get, IMO.

I can only speak for NE US consumers and what I see at our stores...your point regarding the unique vagaries of the Canadian market is valid, we just do not share those conditions......that being said, I think the economics are only a part of the equation when dealing with GM's fleet problem. I said it above...seeing my car available at enterprise would only piss me off...I think others share that opinion...I have no surveys or real proof, but it's my experience that seeing gov't plates or a rental bar code on your product says that real people won't buy it. While the media has teed off on GM, I think that much of their criticism is valid and deserved. I understand that a majority of the posters here are fans, but the core issues in the 'biased' articles are accurate and truthful. The language may be colorful or slanted, but its true.... Seeing your Impala as a taxi, gov't issue transport or rental only reinforces the stereotypes. Create high demand, interesting, competition topping models and the issue magically disappears. Costs the same to be daring & creative & bold as it does to copy the Japanese. That's the real issue here.

Over 40K new/old Camry's went out last month, according to ANews... (The build rate is over 8k/week, BTW, so you can imagine Toyota is expecting big things...)

If less than 10% of the line-up is an impressive accomplishment to you, you may want to look up the definition of the word 'positive' in this context.......It doesn't sicken you that the SAME issues haven't been resolved in two decades? GM's about to blow a 10 run lead in the 9th, and that's progress? C'mon. You did that at work, you wouldn't have a job.

Haters unite! Wow. Ads with hyperbole and bravado in them....the nerve! what's next guys, gonna point out that the alphabet begins with A and ends with Z?

Um. No. He was saying that Ms. Lam & the Chinese were blind to Toyota's flaws, via context and content of his statement.Fly-Why are you always defending the most moronic statements? Let the man/woman defend his/her self....or better yet, come to my defense every once and a while....

I don't pretend to know anything about the Canadian market....15% taxes is certainly a big first difference.You're missing my point: If US cars are equal to Japanese in quality, then the variable costs of ownership---maintenance, insurance, repairs, gas, etc...should be a wash...I'll give you that. If the average transaction price for a Japanese car is higher & it holds its value better (thru a higher residual), then the trade-in value will reflect that situation and the additional costs of financing that extra $ are nominal...for instance, if $5k in your example is actually about $4k US, then at 6%, that's $240/year or $20/ month. Over the 2 years I'm talking about, that $480 cost pales in comparison to the 10-15% difference in residual value on the $25k car....which, given your example, is between $2500 and $3750.... ...would I pay $480 to save $2500?...yes, I would. Note: This assumes that the Japanese product is equally reliable....if it turns out its more reliable or more efficient or less maintenance intensive, then the gap grows even farther. Most independent surveys say this is so... All of this does not account for the intangible benefit derived from my satisfaction with a superior product...if the Camry and Malibu were my choices, its an easy one...I'd make the argument we could find comparably priced Japanese models such as the Altima or Mazda 6 which would destroy any economic benefit for the 2.5'er.... One other thing...I've never heard of leases or loans that are truly 'no money down'.... The usual qualification for said programs requires that the consumer pay taxes and reg fees, etc...even if they are financing the full price of the vehicle. It's subvented financing or rebates...not both here in the US. In 'my' world, noone's paying cash for Lexi, but there are very few people truly driving out in a car with 0 down...and, if so many people up north are leasing...they don't own the vehicles and aren't trading them in! So, where's the tradein problem we have here? There shouldn't be one...

That could qualify for the most idiotic statement I've seen on this board yet. (And that's saying something.)Can you keep your ignorance to yourself, please!

I'm not testy, you're just stacking your argument with questionable assertions that are represented as fact....1st-Most people put money down, regardless of finance rate.. 2nd-I was talking about the vehicle's value, not the taxes or extras folded into the deal...Ex. you bought it for $17k before taxes and aftermarket...you traded it in for $8k 3rd-Those 'gimmicks' have cost the big 2 every cent of their profit for the foreseeable future...and the residual income from an interest bearing loan is completely eliminated...forever...on those deals. 4th-Those 'tools' are necessary because the product isn't worth a premium (like the hypothetical Honda or Toyota 5th- Most importantly-- and you make my point for me in your last paragraph---you're selling the deal, not the car or truck! Which makes my usual point: Selling an aspirational vehicle (see Lexus, see DCX LX's for Americana done right) eliminates the need for fleets, subvented deals, rebates, etc...all of which conspire to reduce the value of your vehicle both at sale and at trade... Ask any industry expert and they'll tell you you can't cut or fire sale your way to profit...It's product, product and product...since the product isn't lining people up at the doors, you have to pawn off these unwanted and overproduced vehicles to coupon clippers and fleets. To say that fleet sales are useful is true, to say they don't hurt US makers in the long term is just being an ostrich.

0% is a gimmick...a come-on...just another rebate in disguise....I was using real world examples from the 100's of deals I've seen that concern Lunchpail's transaction price for the vehicle,( not a laydown that finances taxes or buys extended warranties)...and the trade-in value for his 2.5'er.It's just common sense that if your vehicle is worth more at trade, assuming you've financed at a reasonable rate, your negative equity will be less.... ...if you're suggesting that the 0% or subvented interest rate offers will continue indefinitely, thus preserving a deal 'advantage' for domestics, I've got some news for you: They can't. GMAC is no longer just GM's captive finance arm and Ford's is also in danger... And, to be fair & honest, if you to buy a popular product with a domestic nameplate, those interest rates are also at 5.9% or more, since the incentives to sell generic rent-a-car aren't needed for those models! And, glory, the residuals are dramatically better as well! Oh, and BTW-5.9% isn't gouging..it's the going rate for money in general...Mortgage rates just went above 6%!