Re: GM's Dick Wagonwheel dont wanna rub butts in bed with french

Reply to
Picasso
Loading thread data ...

i dont think it fair to compare GM / FORD TOTAL sales to foreign car manufacturers, because they can not make a fullsize truck (or have not).

Reply to
Picasso

Corvette? How many of those do they sell a year, 50k? hahaa

Reply to
Picasso

They don't sell a lot of Corvettes. But people go in to see the Vette's, and Mustangs and those cute Toyotas, can come out with Chevy's, Fords and Toyotas.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff

Please delete alt.autos.subaru from this thread when posting, no relevence at all.

Jeff wrote:

Reply to
Jim Stewart

Your point exactly? vette is a lot of money, partly due to a low tech assembly methods I'd think. And the US labor is expensive. Do you expect GM to sell as many of them as Civics?

Reply to
Body Roll

Now that is something I would agree with to a point. I'm in full agreement that GM spent too long trying to force their way on America with a handful of issues that they should have had the corporate integrity to fix. Their method of dealing with it was to dismiss American consumers. The 60 degree engine gasket issue is the classic example. On the other hand, they have designed and built some absolutely great cars. I've owned several Buicks which I would stack up against any Lexus, Toyota or Honda, or most cars from Europe any day, and am confident that I'd have the better car. Likewise, despite some problems that I believe GM should have addressed long ago (gaskets, heater blowers, wheel bearings), I really love my current car ('03 Grand Am GT). It has plenty of power, has been getting 26-28mpg since local stations switched over to summer fuel (mostly local driving), and I'm not overly gentle with the gas pedal. So much to really like about GM cars, all spoiled by a bit of really bad management practice.

I agree. Corporate culture begins with the ethics of the executives.

Well, I do believe they have had competitive products and in fact, superior products in some cases. But I agree that the arrogance of GM management has caused the disgruntled customer base that is now showing its feelings by not buying new GM cars. Sometimes that's exactly what it takes to shake things up. GM has a long way to go before being down for the count and I for one would rather see the current leadership replaced than any alliances formed with the likes of Renault. Technology alliances are one thing, corporate governance alliances are something else altogether.

Reply to
Mike Marlow

Please delete alt.autos.subaru from addresses before replying.

Mike Marlow wrote:

Reply to
Jim Stewart

Reading your post made me realize what GM's real problem might be (?).

One has to agree that they've had some good cars and engines in the past and have showed themselves capable of producing superior automobiles.

So why is it that they seem not to care? It can't be just top management's bloated ego as I initially thought. These people, as you pointed out, are shrewd businessmen afterall.

Well, my suspicion is that they've gotten complacent because of the high degree of "monopoly" they enjoy in the pickup-truck business.

The fact is that small town and rural America has no choice but to buy domestic. There are no, or very few, import dealerships in places like rural Kansas, so to speak, and GM over the years has built up a vast empire like network of dealerships across the country.

Until recently there weren't even any larger import trucks, not to mention any rural import dealerships to support them.

My hypothesis is that the high degree of "monopoly" that GM enjoys in this very large and profitable market had to make them complacent and not care much about competition creeping up in urban areas and the passenger car segment.

I am no automobile industry specialist by no means but I suspect this may be _THE_ underlining core of GM's overall problems. Essentally reliance on a strenght (a substantial degree of monopoly/semi-monopoly in one market) that has lead them to care little about the rest of the business.

MN

Reply to
MN

Seen a Toyota Tundra lately? Looks like a good match for a Fork F-150 or a Chevy Silverado to me.

Reply to
William Dryden

I don't think so. I think they will bail them out if necessary like they did with Chrysler.

Reply to
William Dryden

"MN" wrote in message news:KxVsg.63662$ snipped-for-privacy@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...

management's

I think there is a lot of similarity between what AT&T experienced and what GM experienced - very close to what you are describing. AT&T really did enjoy much more of a monopoly than GM did so their corporate behavior might well have been more extreme than GM's but I think the similarities are there. And... it does come down to monoploy or maybe even the belief that America needs "us". AT&T used to tell consumers what they wanted. We were all the loyal subjects of AT&T. Then came divestiture and the changes that the telecommunications industry went through. AT&T spun off Lucent, but Lucent was just a smaller version of AT&T. Still the same attitude of we know best. Then Lucent spun off Avaya and at first it was just more propagation of the same attitude. Avaya faced a whole new world though. There was new competition, new ideas in the market place, new needs, new desires in the marketplace. Fortunately for Avaya, they did manage to change the corporate attitude some. They became more responsive to market trends and to what the competition was doing. In some cases that meant that they had to follow the market because new ideas were coming from other companies and they were coming faster than the 800 pound gorilla was used to moving. Avaya recognized that if they were going to maintain the market leadership position that they inherited from Lucent, they would have to do business the way companies like Cisco were doing business. Well - long story short, they did embrace that idea and they remain a leader in the telecommunications industry today, despite their AT&T legacy. Certainly - in part due to that legacy as well. But the point is that the 800 pound gorilla does have to wake up and realize that the "what's good for me is good for america" philosophy isn't enough to get you through anymore. There's new competition out there and their ideas have taken hold.

Agreed.

I agree completely with this. The thing that bothers me most about GM's management is that we are not hearing them acknowledge any shift in the marketplace that they need to catch up to. I don't want them to part the company out or to create strange bed fellows with any other company, but the appearance of head in the sand just smacks of an attitude that says "we know what's best" and is what got them into this mess in the first place.

Reply to
Mike Marlow

The Honda Ridgeline has pretty good reviews, too.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff

The Ridgeline can hardly be called a 'truck,' it is based on a FWD car chassis.

Reply to
Mike Hunter

Please stop top posting. It makes it very hard to follow the thread. I guess you are saying that what you have to say is not important. I agree.

Jeff

(...)

Reply to
Jeff

Does the number of > marks have any meaning for you? If you have trouble reading my posts, don't read them WBMA ;)

mike hunt

Reply to
Mike Hunter

IMHO the only way they could be competitive if they move the production overseas and trim the fat in the management. And my understanding is they can't move the production out of country due to a contract with UAW. So they'd either have to get rid of the low end and mid end divisions or go under because social engineering only gets you this far. They had 40 something years to put their act together after Japanese landed, but it looks like it's too late now.

Reply to
Body Roll

competitive

That's what they said about IBM when DEC was on a roll. Who survived that one? Prophets of doom are seldom right.

Reply to
Mike Marlow

Get real. Many of GM and Ford models, as well as Korean brands, have been higher rated by buyers in recent surveys than some of the so called superior Japanese brands. The fact remains GM and Ford outsell all of the import brands and they ALL, domestic and foreign, make some that are not up to snuff on occasion. That is why they all have a warranty, even Rolls Royce. The problem is too many buyers today expect the manufactures to fix their car forever, for free ;)

mike hunt

Reply to
Mike Hunter

Toyota is rpetty competitive. And they are moving production into the US.

So I disagree with this.

Even if you were correct, with the contracts GM has with the UAW, it would cost them a furtune to move production overseas. It costs almost as much to pay benefits for an unemployed worker compared to having the worker do actual work.

Actually, less than 40 years. The Japanese really started to take market share away in the late seventy's and eighty's.

But that is around 25 or 30 years.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.