enzl

MY point was that RF has been a GM lifer. GM has had international operations for, what, 60 years? And they're just waking up to the possibilities available to a company with a global footprint? You and I would not have jobs. Mr. Wagoner's Great-grandchildren are guaranteed millionaires. That's absurd and insulting.... I'm not arguing that badge-jobs are good or that great product isn't the key--but there's not enough of it and the timing may doom the company--well past the right time to get a real 21st century leader in place, IMO.

Dealerships aren't important to what GM is trying to do? They shouldn't be worried about what a successful franchisee thinks? If they have no $, there are no products, sir. Poor product cadence (which is certainly a shared concern?) is part of GM's problem and part of why they cannot recapture market share.

You don't get it. That's fine. GM has no further 08's coming...Trucks are not selling at projected rates...the Lucerne is an also-ran you're comparing to the Avalon (Toyota's worst product, arguably), the Escalade Hybrid will have miniscule availability (GMT900 SUV Hybrid production for 08 limited to 10k), the CT coupe is a '10, as is the BRX--meanwhile DTS & STS are not doing much, the G8 will still sell less than 1/2 volume of the GP, Impala's Jan 08 sales up 44% retail from a dismal Jan 07 (#'s can 'prove' anything), the Delta II + Aveo replacements are '10 (at best), the Camaro is already years late, the 'nox is dropping sales in a hot segment, the Volt is an '11 (at best) & the Impy replacement has barely been decided on (Zeta v. Ep II LWB) We are the largest GM volume dealer in our region. We have regularly been between 90% and 120% of target sales (for 5 yrs.). Out Chevy store is probably one of the most profitable in the US, so, NO, we won't be selling anytime soon. Thanks for the advice, though. Not boasting, just trying to make the case that I'm not a hater, I just speak as an officer in a highly successful GM franchise that sees what is wrong without holding back. --we have earned the right to criticize the mgmt of GM. Our 400+ employees deserve better. And so does everyone on this board that considers themselves a fan.

Yes. I am stating that Wagoner should be fired. So should Fritz---and the Board clearly needs fresh blood. If the 09 product is as good as recent intros, a new captain will do no harm, rather it will shake up the complacency that afflicts GM &, perhaps, give the rest of the world an indication that GM means business, not more of the same. Wolfgang B.'s unemployed, no? There's go to be others out there that can bring some new ideas....

Check the January 07 figures that they are comparing them to...Jan07 was awful for GM, therefore an improvement isn't the evidence one culd use to argue they've 'turned the corner'

While I agree the press is having it's way with old news, there's nothing in the sales reports which indicates that GM's new product will stem the tide. Truck losses will wipe out any success the Lambdas, Malibu or CTS will have. Where are the gains going to come from? Ep II is another year off, Delta II more than that, Volt is slated for '11 model year---the Aveo isn't going anywhere---Any Buick other than the Enclave isn't selling, Caddy is CTS+?, Pontiac has the g8 projected at half of the Grand Prix's sales--Saab is years from new product and Hummer is sinking like a stone with $3+ gas. Explain how you 'cut' to prosperity? Other than Malibu (which is eating Impy sales) & Traverse, what does Chevy have? Saturn is barely selling 6 models at a volume that historically they did with 2/3.;..I just don't get it. I'm staring at the same tired line-up with a few stars that everyone else is...

Ven- I'm not hoping for anything negative, I'm just giving a realistic view....you're spinning everything in a positive light---and that's not going to be the reality. GM isn't making much money anywhere. If you can predict the next 'bump in the road', that's great---but no-one can and thus being in a negative position during said occurance could mean curtains....that's just reality. You cite a number of things that just aren't relevant. China could be gone tomorrow---many companies are having 'best ever' years there...check the sales figures. Ford and Chrysler aren't just 'behind' GM, they are in real, huge trouble--GM's fleeting in the US is down 100,000 units from '06...that's less than 9k/mo. difference---the US market has had record sales the last 5 years (more than ever historically) & GM has lost money nearly all of those years---don't dismiss the new globalism religion at GM as a positive, they're way behind the times--Perception is a huge part of GM's problem, so how is closing factories, killing towns & 'for rent' signs going to help that PR issue?---and how is the Union going to react, come next contract time? Nobody knows that, but GM is already counting on those savings, which could be wiped out with one short strike or work action---and, finally, GM's profitability outside of the US is everything NOW, as 60%! of sales are outside this country...check out how GME is doing to get an idea of how well GM is doing in mature markets outside the US, which all 'emerging' markets become at some point... RW has presided over the largest failures in GM's history...if he wasn't CEO, he was at the top of upper management when the debacles that brought GM to their knees have been decided by his cohorts. He knew and participated in throwing away Billions for nothing-Fiat, Saab, Isuzu, Subaru, et al...I don't know about your workplace, but I'd be unemployed with that track record.

Hang on...am I supposed to congratulate the Rickster or "on The Fritz' for finally agreeing to the obvious? You seem to forget that Mr. W is a GM lifer? He grows a set when the company is cirling the toilet and I'm supposed to be impressed? GM has had a global footprint for years...now they wake up? I also take issue with a number of your assertions: -How profitable is GM outside the US?...judging by the facts, I'd say not too profitable...they booked an overall loss of $1.5B in the US and made 500 mill overall in cars...that's a 2 billion dollar profit on 60% of the 9.2 million vehicles produced. -Are they reducing Fleeting? They claim they are in the US---but that issue seems to disappear periodically in the monthies here---and noone has explained what they're doing abroad---are they shifting the fleeting there? I don't iknow (neither do you) and I don't trust these guys-at all. -They are still overdealered by about 30%...wanna guess what it's going to cost to get rid of them? Any idea what the cost from a PR perspective its going to be when old GM dealers sit empty with 'For Rent' signs all over the country? -Do you know what it will cost to 'retire' all current high-wage Union emplyees? The buyout is greater than $62k from the last offer---for 74k employees---that's at least $4billion. How about the cost of closing old manufacturing sites? Environmental costs are unknown....and GM is solely on the hook for those as well. -NA Union concessions will cost $, see above examples...and that contract isn't forever, in fact, it expires around the same time GM is claiming all the savings will kick in...what happens then? -Less labor= GM killing more dependant communities? How many GM cars are going to be sold when neighborhoods look like Flint, MI? -What new models? The Camaro has taken forever, the Impala future is up in the air---where is the product cadence you see at the import stores? The W is how old? C'mon...there is less product in the future, not more new product. -GM's quality is up. Way up. That's the only thing I can 100% agree with. When you finally give a rat's ass, it shows, huh? -Everyone is researching tech---GM R&D is nowhere near the best in the world. How many truly innovative techs have come out of GM recently? -Emerging markets, by definition, have dramatic effects on sales...GM's growth in China is impressive, but it's early and their gov't could shut the door at any time! You want to rely on a Commie Dictatorship for your future profit engine? -Global Company-congrats, they finally realized that...only Ford has been dumber on that front. -Wow--they're better off than Ford or Chrysler!---that's like being the Valedictorian on the 'Short Bus" --Is water wet? Or the sky blue, too? -They are treading water in a declining market, thus maintaining share...remember, they were wearing 30% pins over at the tubes a few years ago...What happened to that promise? 25% of the market with 8 brands---fantastic. -Bankruptcy is a distinct possibility-still. Ask any accountant. One terrorist attack, one 'Black Monday' on wall Street, Housing Market collapse (all possible) means goodbye GM. I don't expect immediate results, I just wonder how a continued failing management team has kept jobs. I'm sick of being afraid to chnage. Let Lutz be a car czar....and dump everyone else--- there is no evidence that the 'turnaround' is really working. Jan 08 figures are up--when compared to an atrocious Jan 07--look it up. I'm not anti-GM, I'm anti-RW, Fritz and the Board of Bystanders--all allowing the slow decline of one of the greatest modern industrial concerns with Golden Parachutes on their backs.

Automotive Operations: Sold $178BILLION of Autos Made $553 MILLION on that stuff! Return: .3% Fantastic. the 'Paper Loss' is an indicator of where things are going---there aren't overall profits expected for years---despite selling 60% overseas (exchange rate benefit), enormous growth in China & a supposed 'landmark deal' with the US Unions---Oh yea, the guys running GM should get a raise, right? You & I would be fired for that performance...unless you work for GM.

C'mon man. GM's already got a ton of people on payroll to apologize. They sold more cars & barely broke even operationally, not on paper. Sorry. That's not good. PS-That 'on paper' loss indicates their lack of confidence that they'll see profits of any magnitude for the foreseeable future---that's not good, either.

Unfortunately, the 'excitement' of a Saab 9-3 lies mostly in avoiding the repair shop---or trading it in after purchase--both are situations I'd avoid by choosing the TSX. I love Saabs. GM doesn't really build them anymore. The 9-3 is safe--and that's it. There's a reason that they're an also-ran in the quasi-entry lux class, and the 9-3 has much to do with it. Lease a Saab---and befriend the local dealer. Do not buy under any circumstance, IMHO.

SAAB is the weak sister of Euro-brands, period. They've been running in circles (w/same volume) since GM's acquisition, with nothing to show for it but big bills & mediocre product overall (9-7=Joke, 9-5=geezer, 9-3=World's Nicest Vectra). Don't believe me? Check the residuals on ANY of their products to gauge true demand in the real world... Saab is part of the reason that Caddy hasn't been internationalized. Saab is one of the reasons that GM's car lineup has holes in it. Saab is a distraction, for a company that can't afford more of them. Pair them with whomever you want, a dealer can't make it selling solely Saabs regardless...it's a mess, an expensive one that has cost Buick, Caddy & Pontiac dearly in attention and product.

The Vue used to sell that much by itself. The HHR is on the fade. GM needs a sub-Theta--or a Theta type that doesn't weight more than a T-blazer! The Vue/Captiva are outgunned at intro...not good.

GM has no choice, really. They bamboozled a bunch of dealers into building Hummer 'Quonset Huts' & face another loss of volume this year--Saab will sell less as well...why not give either of these a Cadillac pairing---although they don't have direct prodcuct overlap. they have pricing issues

I'm no expert, but I've read somewhere that the tech is not the same... http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/01/tesla-m...ery-technology/ http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070522/071101.shtml ...and if it is, apparently, it's for sale! Why waste anymore time or effort?

100 % yes. Abandoning B/small C sized SUV/CUV segment has hurt the General in many markets. Suzuki's SX4 could have been the basis---just as the Fiat Sedici in Europe shared, so could GM if they hadn't f'ed things up with both of those companies....

I can't argue the micro marketing...you are right, they serve somewhat separate audiences...but that's a perception issue, not a mechanical or practical issue.

Right, Except the Vue is 500 lbs overweight already. What is a Captiva clone going to weigh? 4400lbs.? That's a short term solution at best. You can't haul around that kind of weight with a 4 cylinder (unless you commit to DI & a 6 speed), as that's the way all CRV's & most RAV4's are equipped. I think we can both agree that a thorough redesign is in order, no? That's another platform, to go along with Delta, Ep variants, Gamma, Zeta & small trucks that all are currently getting or desperately needing serious revamps. That's simply a tall order, for the best of companies--I haven't even gotten into alt. fuels, diesel, hybrids & battery tech---all of which will require committed funding in the short term. They'er simply missing another golden opportunity to make $5k+/vehicle by jacking up $15k compacts into $22-28k CUVs. They can't afford that missed opportunity, IMO>

Yukon=Tahoe. Durango=Aspen. Period. Details aside, when the least astute observers note the similarities, your product is basically badge engineered. Quibble all you want, these are twins. Anyone who knows cars knows they are basically interchangeable, with little but equipment and trim levels that vary.

I have to agree with your assessment of the 'Nox. What makes things worse is that the Traverse is so big, it removes itself from consideration from alot of 5 pass CUV shoppers--It dwarfs the Tblazer it is essentially replacing. Lots of people (see CX7, Edge, et al.) have no interest in the +2 accomodations...my wife completely nixed the Lambdas based on the size--she simply feels that the excess yardage isn't needed. So, with the 'Nox deficiencies, Chevy (&GM) finds themselves on the wrong product cycle cadence for simply the hottest segment in the marketplace. Again.

I don't think the Tesla battery tech has bearing on the Volt. The Tesla basically has a series of laptop batteries strung in series (oversimplification, I know)--as far as I know, the Easter testing date for battery validation has been indefinitely delayed (remember Lutz' 'easter bunny' quote a few months back?) In any case, the Volt 'moon shot' effort will indefinitely tie up dwindling resources when GM desperately needs new product up and down the lineup---with all due respect to the CTS & 'bu, a correct balance of cadence and product is desperately needed---I'm not sure that Volt is the right direction to take, given that the new 2-mode system is, by all accounts, excellent. If the Volt ends up a Prius-type success, great---if it ends up not working, its an unmitigated disaster on many levels. Remember, Lutz himself was anti-hybrid as of a few years ago...there's a strong business/product reason for that.

You are making my point for me: 1. Tesla is NOT getting claimed range. Nooone has independently tested its claims, which have been revised downward. Volt battery tech is different anyway. 2. It's a bigger challenge than you think. the Volt will weigh more. 3. 2-mode hasn't even been given a chance 4. And? It's done? 5. 4-speeds should be addressed first. Which is one of the things the Volt development displaces on the menu.

Obviously, I struck a nerve, as most here are in denial that these 4 Lambdas have little separating them---are they Cobalt/G5 rebadges, of course not. But they are GREAT vehicles that will cannabilize each other. Playing Chevy dealers against Buick vs. Saturn vs. GMC means lower prices. Increased supply = Lower prices....that's not me, that's good old Adam Smith talking...trust me, my Chevy store won't let you get out of the showroom if you're going to walk across the street and buy an Acadia--we sell 5X their monthly sales--who's going to win that battle? Now he loses a sale, and I lose margin. Anyone here with real dealership experience knows exactly what I'm talking about---not to mention the inevitable loss of marketing $ to the Traverse launch, but that's another story. PS_Glad to see the W getting its due on these pages

You asked...I answered. You have every right to disagree. That doesn't change my doubts. And, BTW, the batteries haven't been proven, yet--as per your link. What happens if they don't? Bye-bye last shred of GM cred. As for 2-mode...it's another example of GM ADD. Parallel development when the Volt is supposedly some great advance? More $ flushed down the toilet, IMO.

My own intuition. The way insiders speak about its roll-out. (It's PR success caught GM partially off-guard.) The fact that the batteries Necessary for its success are not yet proven commodities with only two years to go unitl 2010 target date. The various contrary statements made by management about it. GM's rewriting of the product development plans after the CAFE changes. The fact that GM has a perfectly good--no, Excellent, two-mode hybrid system that would be perfectly adequate to spread across its product line. B.A.S., regardless of GM's hype, is not a Hybrid---check Europe's Stop-Start availability for detail on what BAS really is. And a few other things I'd rather keep to myself--- Ask yourself: If the Camaro took 4years from concept to production (& is just a regular, unibody car), how does the Volt stand a chance to appear in 3?