I agree with you 100%. There is also the factor of mandatory options. Take a $20,000 car and stuff a $7000 optional Engine package in it. INSTANT MUSCLE CAR. Now take the same car and force the buyer to also take leather seats, spoilers and crap tacked on all over the place, sunroof, mega-dollar huge stereo, and more cupholders than there are seats. What do you have? The huge mess that all of the "BIG THREE" have gotten themselves into. We have the means to order vehicles by computer and none of the automakers are using it. Their "Convenience Package's" are very convenient for them. Take a car people may want and make them buy a bunch of high profit crap. A convenient way to make extra money on slow moving large margin junk. Why do you think the old car hobby has gotten so big? Americans (Canadians too) dont want this junk shoved up our asses just so we can go fast! We don't want anybody telling us what we HAVE to buy to get what we WANT to buy. Until the fat cats get this through their big fat heads nothing is going to change. I want to go out and buy a good reliable dual purpose car that I don't have to justify to my wife. How about a nice rear drive Impala with a 7 liter engine to take to work every day and to the track on the weekends. The technology is there. We just need to make Detroit management aware enough to build this type of car for us.
my old man owns a GMC, pontiac, buick dealership here in town. \ number one: the vehicles they make that people want, they shut down production. I.E. the Acadia sold like hot cakes we had 15 of them sold them in the first month then they shut down production. New body style diesel trucks sell like stink and you cant get them from the factory. We have ten people a week come in looking for one and we cant get them. They dont build the things people want, yet they keep building more $39000 buick lucernes. We have 15 of them on the lot and i couldnt give one away. Bottom line is you have to build something that people want. Folks arent going to spend $55k on a new truck if they dont want one. But if they want it they will buy one.
I'm a Chevy guy,,but of the 5 new cars I've bought in the last 20 years 4 were Fords,,had NO quality issues, only PRICE! I drove one f150 till it had 380K miles,,my GMC Sierra had 220K when it was wrecked bought an 04 F150 4 door and have a custom Suburban,,the GM's were 10K more than the Fords. All you union guys can flame me,, but Allen Greenspan said in his last speach to Congress " that US companpies need to 're-evaluate' the pay scale for lots of US jobs if they want to remain competative in a global economy". The SINGLE biggest thing we can ALL do is to BUY AMERICAN!!! I'd ride a bike before I'd ever drive a foreign car other than and old Triumph or a Ferarri
Gm faithful for 50 years. This year..., Dodge Magnum. Damn right it's a station wagon, so what. Hauls people, hauls shit, hauls ass. 4 wheel independent suspension, 4 wheel disc brakes, 5 speeds and a Hemi. Oh yeah, there is no toyotafordsaturnnissanmercedescaddilaclexusaudi clone to confuse it with. It is what it is. For Gm to survive, it has to copy Chrysler - Hit bottom, shitcan everything, fire everyone but Lee Iacoca, and build cars people want.
Style, build something WE want. Quality, build something that isn't in the shop once a month. (slight exageration). Price, GM is wayy to high for me. I bought a comparable Dodge for $13,000. less than the GMC I wanted.
Per Alfred Sloane of Newsweek: <dir> [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]GM began its slide down the slippery slope in 1950, when it began picking up costs for medical insurance, pensions and retiree benefits. There was huge risk to GM in taking on these obligations – but that didn’t show up as a cost or balance-sheet liability. By 1973, the UAW says, GM was paying the entire health insurance bill for its employees, survivors and retirees, and had agreed to "30 and out" early retirement that granted workers full pensions after 30 years on the job, regardless of age. [/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]These problems began to surface about 15 years ago because regulators changed the accounting rules. In 1992, GM says, it took a $20 billion non-cash charge to recognize pension obligations. Evolving rules then put OPEB on the balance sheet. Now, these obligations – call it a combined $170 billion for U.S. operations – are fully visible. And out-of-pocket costs for health care are eating GM alive. [/FONT] </dir> If you think about it, 50 years ago many people would retire and not live long after that. These days if you make it 60, chances are you are going to be around for quite a bit longer. If you start when you are 21, retire when you are 51, that could mean 25 to 35 years of pension and health care that has to be paid for.
Maybe GM needs some new blood designing their cars. How about consulting with the Chip Fooses of the Hot Rod / kustom world? I know what I am doing though. Both my daughters are driving Chevys. It was a battle to keep them from the jap crap. I told them there is no reason not to buy an American car and I will not let those cars in my driveway. Well, a little help with the down payment made them see the error of their ways. Now they both are happy with their American cars. GM needs to attract the younger buyers and keep them. They need to continue building quality cars. Give them the Camaro or Chevelle of today. If they do that the buyer will come back again and again just as I have. If they don't they will loose the loyal buyers and nothing is going to bring them back.
GM needs more than better designed and built cars...their problems goes deeper than that. i seriously believe that it is just a matter of time before they are gone , nothing can be done to save them , just prolong the inevitable they are circling the bowl as we speak
David is right---stop all the unnecessary options. Ford's Model T and Volkswagon were successes because they were simple and inexpensive.
It's a two-step process: (1) Disolve every standing "committee" in charge of ANYTHING. (2) Appoint Bob Lutz in charge of making any decision about product.
I'm afraid you are right and even worse, GM represents whats happening to America. Our nation is cicrling the toilet. An awful lot of folks think its too late to fix whats wrong with our country. I think electing Ron Paul as President would be the right thing to start with.
NOT to slam hillbilly, but has anyone noticed how often people are on the internet forumson COMPANY TIME? This MUST impact American business' efficiency and profitability
I just bought an '04 GTO, yes it's fast, and to help GM -tell them to fix the problems with the damn front suspensions on these.
Bob Lutz already made my car..A Pontiac Solstice. He wanted to make that car for 20 years or so, but nobody wanted it. It has style. It looks expensive but its not. It handles like a slot car. It went from concept to running prototype in just 4 months. It stuck to the original prototype into production for the most part. I can almost afford it... Spike
The Answer to the General's ailments are 1) Soviet health care 2) Body on frame cars - solstice/sky have frames and the corvette too - the reason why caprice was axed was it was a money loser at the time , only selling as police cars and the SS , they needed the Arlington plant for massive profit producing SUV production , worked out well until the Chinese ran up the price of oil 3 ) TUNDRA is a 'better ' truck ? haha , the chevy is killing yoda in sales , and that OHC motor is snapping camshafts at toyota also the 4.4 in an sts v makes 469 hp or almost a hundred more that a new lexus the hhr is an econobox , and that ecotec runs pretty good , especialy with a turbo or blower , optional on solstice , sky , ss without gm , where would the innovation be ??
Interesting thoughts --and thought provoking to say the least. Sometimes I wonder if arm-chair management here is reality though. There is a book title The Toyota Way that HAMBer Wildfire put me onto that has/is changed/changing how I operate my business. Everyone should read this book because it will show you why we as a nation are sucking in many areas of our economy. "Efficiency" is probably the biggest reason why GM, Ford, or ANY business (large, medium-sized, or "Mom & Pop") is either successful or not. Just as a test, how do you think you do in Time Management of your everyday life's tasks? I think it is ironic that Toyota (who is the most profitable automaker in the US) does not have the very thing that many here say it will take to make GM successful again. Toyota does not build "musclecars" per se' do they? Toyota has the same multiple trim packages that are seemingly forced on their Buyer (i.e: you do not have an individual option list), --and they have some styling that really is not what I would call "head-turning". Yet through all of these perceived faults, they don't seem to have any trouble selling their vehicles or making money --so I question why this is a problem with GM then?? Some here have mentioned the parts from overseas but I am reading and seeing where Toyota requires it's suppliers to be located within a very tight radius of their factories here. That to me means they are using the very US citizen work-pool that other US car makers & suppliers are pulling from. So what is the difference? It appears the only difference is efficiency. Matter of fact, Toyota would not have let the Delphi scenario entered into their business plan because if you are to be a Toyota supplier, they teach you how to operate like them (profitable). Toyota (and their suppliers) also have very high employee satisfaction ratings too. Toyota thinks we are a very wasteful society when it comes to our everyday lives. We as a society pride ourselves on this mindset too. We as a society drive gas guzzling cars (hot rods), work with "slackers" on the jobsite, and live beyond our means financially. Naturally I am not speaking of us that are reading this but you get my drift. Toyota does not operate with this type of thinking nor do they allow it. THAT is what needs to change at GM in each and every department. Notice I said department and not Division. When I started looking at ways I could be more efficient here in my business, I immediately saw room for much improvement in everything we do as a shop. I think that some have addressed the problem with GM's debt and overhead but I think the cancer is probably too far advanced. Sad thing is a lot of our economy is plagued by the same type of this cancer!! While controversial, ...just like cancer in a leg, or a vital organ of our body, when it becomes sick we try to treat it so it will heal over time BUT if it is life-threatening to our overall health & well being we have no choice but to amputate or sever the offending problem. GM has some real decisions to make regarding the UAW and their Pension burden. As I see it, if they go under financially and close their doors, then it is a moot point because there will be no one to fulfill those payments. If they re-organize under a court plan, I think they will be forced to drop those heavy pension payments. Which is the lesser of the two evils?
I really could care less about Toyota, or the " Good Book" thats been written about them. I'm only saying what might make me, as a consumer, a possible buyer...
Well said. However, if GM defaults on their pensions liabilities - doesn't the pension guarantee trust take over (which is underfunded btw). That would translate to you and I and everybody else making those pension payments.
Yes, and especially when you compare the Toyota Tundra to the GM full size trucks, the Toyotas are ALREADY being recalled, do NOT have a 5-star frontal crash rating (how can you fuck up a frontal crash rating on a billboard-sized front end like those trucks?), and they had to CUT capacity for lack of demand. GM, at this point still retains 60% of all fullsize trucks sold. But this year, all fullsizes sold have been down (gas costs, economy, credit situations from people with unsure mortgage situations) One last detail on the media BS that has been favoring the Asian companies. Did you know that an independent group found that lifetime ownership of a Toyota Prius to be MORE expensive than a Hummer H3? The reason is that the battery in the hybrid, if ever in need of replacement, would effectively cost over $4000. They also create a disaster zone, and toxic wasteland in the immediate area where they manufacture them in Ontario, Canada. Check here, unless I have my sources wrong: http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=14304
What laws? Look at the Cobras and GT 40's coming in from South Africa. Without a drivetrain,it's just a body or a kit. Sure, you won't pay 35K now, but what if it were $8000?
It is part of that "lesser evils" scenario I was speaking of but not all of it. First off, the PBGC is only responsible for guaranteeing a portion of the monies due. This is actually an entity that uses insurance companies to underwrite it so on the surface it would not appear that tax dollars would be used to bail out a failing terminated plan. The other part of this may be that in a distress situation, the PBGC may have some loopholes to slip through to keep it from going down and placing other company's plans in jeopardy. That means they may not be of much benefit in a time of crisis. Now here is the flip-side; If GM files Chapter 13, then Chapter 7 and shuts the doors, the Pension Plan default is a moot point because now you have dealerships and suppliers that have employees (and stock holders) that are going to be out of jobs (or money). Now you and I are in a battle to keep them sustained (un-employment, etc.) before they lose their houses, pensions, etc. and etc. The trickle-down effect of this magnitude can cause a nation to go into a severe recession (or depression). No one wants to see this happen. The other side is if a holding company comes in and purchases the assets of GM, very likely that they would not be responsible for fulfilling all the debts GM has incurred. The proceeds of the sale will be under court order and probably be 20 cents (+/-) on each dollar for which really does not benefit anyone but it does wipe the car maker's financial slate clean. The biggest benefit to this scenario is that current employees and those of GM's suppliers/vendors would continue to draw a paycheck (providing they can withstand the bankruptsy). That allows GM as we know it to manufacture vehicles and produce them at a lower cost. Remember, people will buy anything if they perceive it as a value and they can afford it. That is what Toyota has proven. Either way you go, it is bad for former employees who are hoping for their entitlements but I think the handwriting is on the wall. Also, isn't it funny how hstory has proven itself over and over when people say "build me something that I like that might make me, as a consumer, a possible buyer... ". History has proven that those type of commitments rarely come to fruition. Instead, business has learned that Buyer Loyalty incentives have much more validity. Think of the companies that now do this (grocery stores, credit card, auto manufacturers, airlines, etc.).
Interesting comment... Can you prove that? My monthly Car budget goes somewhere, so somebody must be selling something I'm interested in. But it aint Chevy ( for the last 30 or so years ) and it certainly isn't Toyota...
Can it be proven. YES Will I prove it to you? NOPE I choose to refrain from engaging in foolish rhetoric because of content value. To briefly touch on your other comment "so somebody must be selling something I'm interested in.". That may be true but only YOU can know what you want from an automobile manufacturer and no where is it said that GM or Toyota has to be the ones that fill your desires. There is no law that mandates a company must build something that pleases you or your friends!! Back again, GM's Marketing Dept. generally polls target audiences and former buyers and then GM management looks at how those ideas and their feedback fit into what their capabilities are as far as what their financial and manufacturing abilities are. We need to remember that GM is limited by resources too. Just like many here would love to mass-produce cool cars and sell to the public, --and many would if they just had the funding and the resources to pull it off. The biggest problem with most of us here is that we don't have those abilities and resources to pull that off ....especially if we are "bucks down". Banks are real good about lending money when you don't really need it.
Thats a relieve... Botom line seems to me, that no consumer is obligated to part with his Cash, if he doesn't like the product...
Bullshit... really it is.... There are a number of manufacturers that have proven if you build what a segment of the market wants they will indeed buy it. Dodge and Ducati come to mind rigth off. Both bucked the trend and were succesful giving the consumer what they asked for. Because you're full of shit with your first statement..
thin out the the number of offerings. offer 100k mile warranties (36 month/ 36k is a joke.. tells me they do not build a decent car) change their service recommendations. (they currently recommend changing brake fuild at 30k miles as well as PS fuild).. build better looking cars and trucks. (the new trucks suck as.. in fact my 04 is pretty ugly also I think). improve fuel economy.... it can be done if they wanted to
The Jalopy Journal
