enzl

OH...the IIHS is biased!!!!!!!!...oops, wrong topic....

'Busting' the Union would be suicide...or bankruptcy.The only 'out' is a negotiated settlement, a multi-billion dollar buyout and a corporate restructuring which basically creates a manufacturing base in China and Korea to pay for the costs of the buyout and restructuring. Anything less will result in a delay of the inevitable, IMO.

Thanks for the compliment. I'd like to reiterate, for the sake of posters who are not familiar with me, that I have NO axe to grind, in fact, I'm an ardent suporter of the Big 2.5 (but not an enabler, as some people here are.) To answer the question--I believe the problem stems from a large organization in a constant state of flux, along with a culture of yes-men and diluted responsibility...the details you're commenting on are the key, because those are just the things you CAN see...Why spend .05 more on a part or suggest that possibility in a meeting when saying 'yes, that's as good as the competition's' will get you a promotion? or keep you from being fired? And when the car comes out, and the part isn't as good, there were 10 committees that passed that part through...so who do you blame? Everyone, which really means noone! One example that says everything: GM just started testing parts to failure, rather than a pre-set mileage or time! ( I believe this nugget came out in discussion of the G6 convertible delay, IIRC) In other words, if the part lasted for 80K (for example), then they stopped! Now, I don't know about you, but most people want more than a pre-set mileage out of a vehicle, or want the option of giving that car to their kids, knowing its OK. Would you feel OK about your kids testing components? I wouldn't. GM needs to leapfrog, instead it's playing catch-up. Until they get it in gear, they'll be the Costco of the Automotive world...special prices and bulk buyers....that's not setting an aspirational tone for your product. The encouraging thing is that this can all change...see the Caddy revivial, or Hyundai or Kia's success currently...they CAN do it. It'll be interesting to see if their coprporate culture allows it to happen.

Please disclose evidence supporting your claims...and why GM can't do the same thing...they advertise in the same places and GM spends MORE on advertising than Toyota, so how does their influence become LESS significant. I drive 100's of cars/year. Do you? I see 'em off the truck, I see 'em with 100K on the clock. I, unlike you, have personal experience with a wide range of product and, the bottom line is, GM, Ford, Chrysler, VW and assorted others DO NOT make product that is as flawless from the get-go, nor do they age as well as Toyotas or Hondas. That's just fact...can we find individual examples of vehicles that counter that trend- of course, but as a whole, the average product coming from T or H has been superior for years...and judging from GM's new stuff, they haven't advanced the standard one inch - possibly equalled, but clearly not exceeded in ANY area!

OK. Now it's no longer Media Bias, it's GM's floundering that results in the mess we;ve got. Now I feel better.

If the product was right (see BMW), people would pay for a decontented product (BMW wasn't always a premium brand)...GM can't win if it doesn't put the best product on the market. If your satisfied with GM producing the same vehicle as their competitors, than you're right. Why can't the product be demonstrably better? That's the question we should be asking. I don't want a Camry with a GM badge...I want a Chevy that's faster, safer, more fun and better looking, for around the same price....if you aim at a moving target, you shoot where its going, not where it's been. If you're satisfied with the 2009 Malibu being as good as an 05 Camry, than you're not thinking like a successsful business person.

It's an excuse....you & I both know it....even if the $1,500 figure is accurate, the average incentive on a GM product is more than twice that number. If demand was there, that $1,500 wouldn't be an issue.GM hasn't proven it can produce a mainstream car that is class leading. If they'd produce at least one, I would back off the criticism. They haven't and I won't. It costs the same to style a Camry or a Camaro, it costs the same to market it and it costs the same in raw material to produce a good 3,500lb. car as it does an also-ran...excuses are lame and an epidemic at the Tubes.

Others do it repeatedly, and they do it well. Perhaps the best example is Nissan...their backs were up against the wall and they came out swinging with desireable products in many segments.Margins are only thin when supply is greater than demand. Create products worth demanding and the margin issue sorts itself out. Mexico, Korea & China are sources of parts and entire vehicles which can be original, interesting, exciting and profitable.

So, the media is justifying their pre-set opinions? At least come up with a credible explanation...other than accusing media types of accepting bribes...which, again, you've substantiated with nothing.You tell me why a normal consumer (not an enthusiast w/insight and knowledge) should take a perceived risk with their hard earned money? You can't. Solve that riddle and GM or Ford has a fat job waiting for you.... (BTW-just to show you how wrong you are, please reread any recent review of the GMT-900's or the Vette...both of which got excellent press, are selling well and MOST IMPORTANTLY- are world class, value-priced products. If GM could manage a couple more, they'd be just fine. Time will tell if 'wait until next year' is finally around the corner. Meanwhile, GM is having its clock cleaned...walk into the morgue that most local GM shops have become and ask them how sales are...

You have cleverly avoided answering my riddle...If the blame falls on the media and its bias, how does one explain the subjective & objective dominance of non-Big 2.5 product? And even if every publication, every test, every research company is biased (which you haven't proven through evidence...or is the absence of evidence mean I'm correct, using your logic?), I'd like to know who's pulling those strings...Karl Rove?What possible motivations would fuel the conspiracy of bias you'd like me to believe???As Ackham's Razor postulates, the most simple explanation is usually correct...i.e. the product isn't as good. Bob Lutz, a man who knows more than you or I has said as much publicly, so I find it hard to argue otherwise. Go ahead and cheerlead mediocrity...that's how the General got here in the first place. Perhaps you can give me your 'spin' on this gem... http://www.autoblog.com/2006/04/15/gm-to-h...ase-by-case-ba/

The Media Bias is BS...how many pop culture items are popular, despite media negativity- from music, fashion, books, etc...you find plenty of intellectual cries that are inversely proportional to economic success... Here's the real reason: Why should Joe American 6 Pack invest $20k or more on a risk?... when all logic, research and word-of-mouth indicates he/she can walk into a Toyota (Honda, Nissan, etc...) and get exactly what's paid for....Why hope GM is 'making better products now', when one can get a better product, no questions asked? Until someone here (and more importantly, GM) can provide a fool-proof, consistent argument to that conundrum, GM's market share will shrink. Great product from other sources (Koreans) have only accelerated the process.

I know I run to the Toronto Star for the latest in Auto Info!In all seriousness, this is media bias? C'mon. Unless you're trying to corner the market on used 99 Buick Centuries, who cares? Look at the numbers, if recalls are any true indicator...GM has recalled more cars in the past few years than any of the above...Yes, Toyota and Honda aren't perfect, but you'll never get over this 'media bias' hang up by screaming 'they suck too' (That logic brings the conclusion that all of 'em suck, which really shouldn't be your point!)

I think you'll see a group of products that share platforms and could jump to another division, if necessary, between Saturn, Pontiac, Buick & (to some extent) GMC. The problem with the current LaCrosse is the W-bodies were engineered for 90's standards and now exist in a different safety climate (one where passenger space is sacrificed for 5 star ratings...) the actual space in a Malibu Maxx is about the same as the current LaCrosse. GM (even with Lutz' prodding) has proven again with its current round of intros that its afraid to hit a home run (think LX's), so it'll stick with doubles and singles...the corporate culture has to change. I'm sick of waiting until next year for a Aura that looks like the (award winning) show car, or a Caddy with a world class interior or a six speed automatic for its FWD offerings... GM has shown little capacity for change. I find it hard to believe that insiders are content with the status quo....when will we see evidence of a new attitude?

Great points. I'll go out on a limb and predict if the Aura comes in at 4 cyl. Camry/Accord pricing for the base model and the Outlook is Highlander 4cyl. levels, they'll be a huge success...otherwise, its Oldsmobile II for Saturn.

Why is it that good press is ignored here, while bad press gets highlighted? It's cultivating a self-fulfilling prophecy to blame the media and then ignore good press. GM & Ford get good press when they deserve it, plain and simple. The news media in general has a 'if it bleeds, it leads' mentality, so the potential downfall of two American Icons should get big press...it's not often you witness the implosion of such historic proportions...Look at history: Enron, US Steel, Arthur Anderson...I wish we'd stop the crying over it already.

100% agree. Can anyone confirm that the interior is VW good? Or is it great for GM good? I think VW good would be a great selling point.

Wow. So the 'news' here is that Toyota's base model (in its entire US line-up) is: a. not fun b. quirky looking c. efficient d. underpowered e. expensive in its top-level form That describes each of their Echoes, Tercels and Starlets for 25 years. And, who's arguing that this car's plastic quality is worth discussing? Is this what we're reduced to? Yes. The G6 plastics should be good enough that the model doesn't get compared with a lowly Toyota bottom breather. That it does on a GM-centric site is the tragedy here. The Yaris is a european oriented vehicle that does not fit in with the driving/ lifestyle needs of 90% of Americans. (Just like BOF SUV's, ironically enough.)

Where's the LOL ?C'mon, dude. The Fit is universally regarded as a top competitor in its segment, worldwide! (In its 5th year of production, BTW) The Aveo isn't even a real Chevy (designed & built entirely by Daewoo, pre-GM purchase). Let's assume it wasn't tested at all for two rreasons: '07 is much improved, current one isn't truly competitive (I should know, we sell 'em!)

Didi a little research...the vehicle pictured is NOT a police vehicle, but rather a standard Charger outfitted with all of the NYC Police gear for photo ops....delivery of the actual vehicles will be in short order, but the exact specs for the police duty vehicles will be slightly different (although I'm not sure what changes that may entail.) The full scale bids for a large fleet of these takes place next year.

Both sold about 2,000 last month, IIRC. The Miata was up about 100% over last years sales. I'm pretty sure that both are selling just fine!

I'm assuming that's some sort of put-down for city-dwellers. It's hard to take that too personally from an individual who doesn't know the difference between your and you're....perhaps the quality of schooling in your 'hood' is to blame?The cars are designed for occassional highway use (just like in Europe, Japan, etc...)...or from your home to the mall...the implication being that they may not be a good choice for a single vehicle family- sorry, I'll point out the obvious for your sake from now on.

Now we're comparing ethnic/racial bias to the 'media conspiracy' against GM...can we just stay away from absurd social commentary and stick to cars? C'mon.

...sounds like you don't use these vehicles as intended....short, city centered journeys...they sell these kinds of vehicles in Europe, they share the roads with plenty of Trucks and larger cars...The quality and quantity of choice amazed me when I read the article...

I hate to even say it, but with numbers like that, you wonder how close to the truth Lutz was when he referred to brands as damaged...perhaps Pontiac, as a nameplate, will be better served with a more sharply focused smaller line-up, because the status quo isn't pretty....

It's nothing personal, on my part anyway. Mine either. I enjoy the banter. I love cars, and losing GM, aside from the national and personal tragedy it would be, is not what I want. I'm a big fan of the business term 'agent of change'. It's something each co. needs, regardless of success, because it keeps everyone thinking. I'm very upset that GM has followed its current trajectory, and I've voiced it (to my detriment) to GM insiders and business press. (I almost didn't have a job as a result) I've offered myself as a resource and I stand by that offer. We may disagree (alot), but I think, in the end, we all want the same thing...(great product we're proud to buy, own, sell, etc.)