• Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    Whistle-Blower To Have Cause The Departure Of Joel Ewanick

    William Maley

    William Maley

    Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

    August 8, 2012

    Last week, we reported on the departure of GM's global marketing chief, Joel Ewanick. The reason given out at the time was Ewanick not meeting up to expectations. A day after his departure, a report from Bloomberg said Ewanick's departure was due to a review of a recent sponsorship agreement that didn't meet company policy.

    A week later, a new report from Bloomberg sheds some more light on why Ewanick was kicked out.

    The recent sponsorship agreement in question was a partnership between Chevrolet and U.K. soccer team Manchester United. The agreement, lasting till 2021, would have GM shelling out $18.6 million for this and next year, rising to roughly $70 million in 2014, and increasing 2.1% after that. Total cost of the deal: $559 million.

    This would have been ok if Ewanick hadn't spread the cost out to other marketing budgets and disclosing a price that was much less than the $559 million.

    A source tells Bloomberg that a whistle-blower came forward questioning certain aspects of the agreement between GM and Manchester United. An internal investigation was launched and found that the total cost was much higher and hidden in other budgets. Ewanick denied he was hiding anything about the deal during the investigation, but that soon unraveled. Ewanick's resignation was announced on July 29th.

    Source: Bloomberg

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at william.maley@cheersandgears.com or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.


      Report Article
    Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    User Feedback

    There is always value in transparency, but many companies value results more. This was such a long term contract that Ewanick was sure to be gone before results came in on this program regardless if he resigned now or was fired 2 years from now for example.


    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think we also need to Question the value period for the contract full term length. This is such an outragous price for marketing that anyone with a reasonable head would have to question the cost.

    Sounds like GM did the right thing and I hope the next company that hires him will question if they want a man doing their marketing that will play this kind of games.

    As a stock holder, I would be exploding if mgmt was doing this. This is what old days GM would have done. Todays New GM needs to be better than this.


    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead


  • Popular Stories

  • Similar Content

    • By surreal1272
      Very good news for them here and abroad although there is still much that needs to be done in Europe. This is also a direct result of reducing their dependency on rental sales while increasing their retail sales.
    • By William Maley
      One of the groups that haven't been able to take any legal action against General Motors over the faulty ignition switch were those who bought the affected vehicles before the company announced bankruptcy in 2009. Last year, a bankruptcy judge said that New GM was shielded from liabiliites over the actions taken by Old GM.
      But today, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan reversed that decision. In the ruling, the court stated that New GM must face some of the claims from owners that arose from their actions before their bankruptcy.
      “We are reviewing the ruling and its impact. Even if some claims are ultimately allowed to proceed, the plaintiffs must still prove their cases," said GM spokesman Jim Cain in an email to the Wall Street Journal.
      This decision could expose GM to additional costs as it tries to move away from this mess. According to the ruling, the protection given to GM shielded them from up to $10 billion of liability claims.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required), Wall Street Journal (Subscription Required)
    • By dfelt
      This company in Florida is building FORD approved Replicas of their 1966 Mustang and are using GM V8 engines. :S



      WOW, they do offer a smaller FORD engine option, but the default motor is a GM V8. 



      So this begs the question to be asked, Why a GM V8 over Ford's own V8 options.
      What do you guys think?
    • By William Maley
      General Motors is planning to expand the use of start-stop systems across most of their range by 2020 in an effort to improve fleetwide fuel economy. The plan will see at one powertrain combination offered in a vehicle to have this system. Stop-start systems work by turning off the engine when the vehicle isn't moving. When the driver removes his/her foot from the brake, the engine will kick back on.
      This move comes as the EPA will start handing out credits towards compliance with corporate average fuel economy standards to automakers who use this system in their vehicles next year.
      "Everyone will end up adding start-stop. Now there's a benefit in the EPA cycle, which there wasn't a few years ago. GM's new nine- and 10-speed automatic transmissions have been engineered from the beginning to incorporate start-stop. That will make it much easier and much smoother. That's what's been the holdup. First it was a regulatory issue, then it was a hardware issue," said AutoPacific analyst Dave Sullivan.
      GM spokesman Tom Read tells Automotive News that vehicles equipped with the stop-start system will use absorbent glass mat batteries (AGM) and tandem solenoid starters to enable faster and smoother restarts.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)
    • By William Maley
      Despite the hoopla and endless praise for Tesla and their vehicles, there are a number of owners who aren't happy with the company. Go on to any Tesla forum and you're bound to fin endless posts from owners of the Model X listing issues from poor paint quality to doors not closing. The Model S is no stranger to problems with batteries failing and the infotainment system freezing.
      This is a big issue for Tesla as they have been burning cash for the past two years, with a good amount of this cash coming going to repairs and warranty costs. CEO Elon Musk has promised investors to slow down the burn and curtail costs retaining to repairs. With Tesla announcing their results later today, we'll see if that promise was kept.
      But how much is Tesla spending when it comes to repairs? Reuters did some analysis on Tesla's recent annual report by looking at the total vehicles sold and total spending from warranty repairs and accruals - money set aside for future warranty work. Their analysis showed Tesla spent $1,043 per vehicle on repairs and set aside $2,036 per vehicle for future warranty work. The good news is these numbers are 17 and 34 percent lower than 2014. But compared to the likes of General Motors, Ford, and Daimler, Tesla's numbers are quite high.
      General Motors: $400 per vehicle on repairs, $332 for future work Ford: $429 per vehicle on repairs, $308 for future work Daimler: $970 per vehicle on repairs, $1,294 for future work It should be noted that Tesla only sold 50,000 vehicles last year, while GM, Ford, and Diamler sold millions. Nevertheless, spending just over $150 million of the total $700 million burnt for repair work isn't a good sign. 
      Telsa in a statement to Reuters said it has reduced the cost of repair claims in the first year along with the amount it reserves for future repairs.
      Source: Reuters

      Click here to view the article
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)