Croc

I think urban sprawl is sexy.

Durango is ass, Aspen is sex. Go Chrysler!

91z4me: WORD. big facking WORD.

Reunion did decently ratings-wise until FOX took that month-long break for baseball. I agree that the first half of the pilot was clunky, and I almost turned it off too, but the last half was much better and I am glad I stuck with it. It has been fun watching Amanda Righetti grow as an actress these past three years.

If there are any Nielsen families or anyone who knows Nielsen families on this site...urge them to watch Reunion on FOX 9pm Thursday (following The O.C.) because this show needs a ratings uptick if it is to avoid cancellation (cancellation has been announced, but might be rescinded if ratings kick up). If anyone has been watching it, you know it's actually a pretty good show that is a casualty of a competitive timeslot and piss-poor marketing/scheduling on FOX's part (pre-empted by Pres. Bush for its third episode, delayed for a month by baseball...no wonder it didn't catch on). So yea...I love this show and don't want it off the air before the murder mystery is resolved. Did I mention the cast is very attractive?

Hotter than THIS?

Don't worry, I wasn't confused.

You wouldn't have called me out if there weren't a problem.

...I have to compliment you on one thing: you are good at making soundbytes on the fly. That's why you are a good car salesman. Unfortunately, your blanket statements regarding Toyota, Nissan and GM ads is laughably false. THEY ALL PROMOTE EACH OF THOSE! Bob Lutz as a Wagoner replacement? He'd drain GM financially. In two, maybe three years. See, there is a nice thing about having Lutz where he is and Wagoner where he is. Wagoner is in charge of running the company. Lutz is in charge of the product being designed. You put Lutz in charge of the company, and he will have a hard time saying "no" to budget overruns for the sake of better product. The two of them are very complimentary. They provide a sense of checks and balances. The bean-counters don't have too much power, yet neither do the designers and artists. You need that, though I am sure you will now try and tell me that companies don't need to be run, they just need a great 30-second spot that captures the lifestyles and passions of the consumers. :rolleyes:

I didn't call you a tool, I said only a tool would do X. By doing X, the logic is there that you, sir, may very well be a tool. That still doesn't make me guilty of calling you a tool, as I never explicitly did so. You can call me as immature as you'd like, but several members have said that I am pretty damn mature for any age, and yes that is on public record on this site. I might be cold and patronizing on occasion, but calling people on their attacks against this site and the members of this site is not demonstrating a lack of maturity, it is exposing hypocrisy. If that bothers you so much, then maybe you should just stick to posting at your Toyota forums.

Oh please. Marketing isn't anywhere near the top of GM's biggest problems. The product is. No amount of excellent marketing would ever get me in a Pontiac showroom to look at a G6, Grand Prix or SV6. The products aren't just subpar, but handily outclassed by almost anything else in their respective segments. That's got to be fixed before the marketing blitzes can begin. And to fix that, GM needs to get its structural costs in check so that development can get more money that is currently being spent on treating union workers better than foreign dignitaries.

I'm just curious as to how many of you have seen the Lucerne in person? It really looks great in person.

Good catch Balthazar. Only a tool would post this kind of stuff on a GM site. BTW, does anybody remember when we found out he posts stuff on this site only to go to his Toyota site and link to it here and make fun of us? Yea, he's only here because he is TED's friend. Funny thing...none of the Toyota site members made fun of us; they were very mature about it.

Here is a closeup on the wood in the new Escalade for those who want to castrate Wagoner:

OMG! That's really really good!

Agreed 100% BTW--I am glad about one thing: the GMT900s do NOT have that strange beltline kickup like the 800s had. That was one styling factor that I neither liked nor understood.

No, I quite clearly said that marketing isn't one of the BIG problems. GM has a lot of crap it needs to deal with, but some of the crap is more important than others. Marketing is not essential, but manufacturing is. Let's get the CORE of GM right then address the superficial i.e. marketing. FWIW, GM marketing has never been that great, even in its glory days. As for caddycruiser, what products are you bitter about? Last time I checked, the 2006 vehicles were the last ones to have Zarella influence. That means 2007 is when the Wagoner/Lutz team get judged. Are you not a fan at all of the GMT-900s? Those are some pretty sweet vehicles. Or did Wagoner f@ck those up too? Wagoner did what a good leader does: bring in outside help to mitigate his own shortcomings. That's where Lutz came in. I am not willing to judge Wagoner for things he hasn't had total responsibility for.

razoredge, you are right. those are all problems. but the marketing ISN'T one of the big problems! GM's manufacturing costs are the biggest problems because those costs are so exorbitant that they hinder GM's ability to make nice vehicles. Why do you think GM has to cut costs and cheap out on interior parts? GM might have three years of capital, but that assumes they make NO money in the next three years. Not gonna happen. Right now, GM needs more solid vehicles like the Buick Lucerne. From what we have heard, GM is getting them. I'm not calling for Wagoner's head yet, but I might change my mind upon seeing and judging the new vehicles. GM needs homeruns with the Lambdas, and from what we have heard they are excellent. Excellent vehicles sell themselves without fancy-shmancy (and expensive) marketing ruses. Because that is what they ultimately are, ruses to trick the customer into buying an inferior product.

Because it doesn't address the fundamental structural costs of the company. GM needs to get lean, not increase their marketing budget.

Yes, I read the quotes. No, I am not wrong about support. These ideas help marketing, not the structural problems within GM that prevent them from PRODUCING world-class cars. You have had your Return To Greatness sliced and diced by people on this site who actually work in the industry and are involved with the MANUFACTURING. You seem to have things backwards...marketing isn't the raison d'etre of a company, the product is. Stop capitalizing on people's fears of bankruptcy. It isn't gonna happen.

Heh. "The Catholic with a Protestant mentality" is your new slogan, Mr. A-Penny-Saved-Is-A-Penny-Earned.

Again, this Return to Greatness only addresses marketing of GM as a company. Marketing marketing marketing. There is more than just marketing to GM. GM manufactures. GM has labor relations. GM has advertising and marketing. GM has to worry about exchange rates. It is extremely silly to look at GM's problems as solely an issue of marketing. That is why no one takes this plan seriously, not GM, not GM's shareholders, and not the insiders on this board.

hahahahahahahahaha i love it i love it i love it [/Molly Shannon]

Ahhh...he's got you fooled! Wanna know why it sounds so good? Because it focuses on marketing the vehicles as if customer satisfaction is the ONLY priority and does not take into account manufacturing processes. It looks great on paper but like communism is very flawed on a very fundamental level.

But GM isn't at a bankruptcy risk. For a company to file for bankruptcy, they must first qualify for it. GM does not, and that is something any intelligent being knows who does more than listen to the talking heads on TV. :rolleyes: