'Key wrote:
> "CardsFan" <me@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:i%Psj.3825$%x3.1673@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> "'Key" <Key@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:B_Wdnd0Xc4LY3y7anZ2dnUVZ_sGvnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> "CardsFan" <me@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> news:fov0uh$tpi$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> The current management team is better than they've had
>>>> in a while and will need more time to retune the company
>>>> toward profitability. GM is turning around. It is
>>>> (slowly) getting a handle on labor and health-care
>>>> costs, it's trying to reduce the number of models and
>>>> brands, it's designing better, sometimes award-winning,
>>>> cars and trucks. Some factors are outside its control,
>>>> like the overall economy. Yes, they should probably
>>>> have foreseen the move away from large SUVs and trucks
>>>> to more fuel-economical vehicles. With the US mortgage
>>>> meltdown, it has turned out to be serendipitous that
>>>> they sold off half of GMAC.
>>>>
>>>> The $38 billion figure trumpeted by "Uncle Vito" was
>>>> almost all a non-cash charge to write down the value of
>>>> deferred tax assets. One would suggest he learn to read
>>>> and understand financial statements. For the year, both
>>>> globally and in North America, the actual loss from
>>>> automotive operations was quite a bit smaller than an
>>>> year ago.
>>>>
>>>> One other thing - GM leads the Dow companies, with a 9%
>>>> increase in its stock price so far this year.
>>>>
>>>> AJM
>>>
>>> General Motors' Shreveport plant may lay off as many as
>>> 160 workers in the coming weeks, with the first 60
>>> expected to go Friday.
>>> http://tinyurl.com/ypq9yt
>>>
>>> my2¢
>> What two cents is that? The article is quite balanced.
>>
>> AJM
>
>
> I don't care what the article says.
> the 2¢ is that GM IS cutting back production.
> also, if you don't have something positive to respond ?
> just simply don't respond...
>
> more of my2¢
Hey key -- I see your 2-cents and raise you $ 4.75.
Shreveport article was an honest snapshot.
Grieving this loss isn't pleasant for GM, for
the workers or for the community but that's
where we are. We will see more and grieve more
before this is over.
Anyone know what the status is at St Catherine's?
Regarding the first article-- I saw it as a bit
amby-pamby -- It took a 'downward' view of GM
rather than a look 'at' the company. I'd guess
the writer was closer to Wall Street than to
automobiles. May not even drive to work
--perhaps doesn't drive at all.
1) The 'current economy' isn't something to
whine about --it's something to exploit. I
think Toyota saw this coming a couple of years
ago and they launched Scion. Chevy has the
models to do something similar but hides them in
the back lot or behind Trucks & SUV's (the
high-margin iron). The average Chevy
salesperson tends to look down at low-end
buyers. Striking a deal means an even view
between two persons and Chevy seems to have lost
that.
North American automobile folk seem to have
forgotten that production numbers, jobs and
profits spring from *full-priced unit sales of
new cars* -- anything else is rubbish! Sell
people something new and export the used SUVs to
Venezula or Mexico.
2) GM doesn't need a 're-tune' It needs (and
Waggoner may be quietly providing) an overhaul.
That should be much like IBM and GE received.
There was whining when GE made it's last table
model radio in Tennessee. There was whining
when IBM produced it's last notebook computer.
3) Maybe the GMAC unload wasn't all that
accidental -- while GM needed the cash, any
half-assed corporate economist should have seen
that the Mortgage market was weak on collateral
and short on ability to pay.
I don't agree with dropping either the Pontiac
or Buick marques. While history tells us that
tough times led to the demise of the Edsel,
DeSoto and Oldsmobile marques, there are many
product opportunities around the corner and GM
needs established brands and channels to launch
those products. To drop marques is to retrench
and turn market over to the competitors.
Keep Pontiac and Buick alive and respectable,
with temporary lipstick (like the Enclave) if
needed. While this costs money, those brands may
be the springboards for energy efficient or
other new platforms.
OK, here's the blasphemy part:
The Chevrolet brand is bloated with models and
is now more blurred than all of Toyota. If I
needed a new sedan or truck, I'd not go to a
cluttered Chevy showroom.
If it were mine, I'd clean out Chevy with a dose
of Castor Oil. Make this a leaner cash cow
operation with just enough agility to adapt to
near-term changes in the market. Move Corvette
elsewhere -- perhaps into the Pontiac showrooms
and make that excitement-land -- Hummer,
Solstice, Corvette et al.
Badging: Cloning the Solstice platform onto
both Pontiac and Saturn seemed dumb. Reviews of
those two cars mince small points and the
comparisons are blurry. While badging increases
platform exposure opportunity and visibility it
also tends to reduce resale value. A big factor
with buyers since Japan and Germany regularly
shove resale value up our ass. I'd continue
badging where the models could be clearly
distinguished but would make both platform and
brand managers plea, on bended knee, for badging.
Continue something like Buick as the
'graduation' car for the Boomers who don't want
to go the Caddy route or want something that's
$15K less expensive than an STS. Rest assured
that there will be ample Boomers with sufficient
aches and pains to buy those cars. Mercury is
no longer in that game and Chrysler is about to
leave a big hole there. If GM fails to do this,
Nissan (with a new model) and Toyota (current
Avalon) will takeover that niche 100%.
I like Caddy's marketing plan and I'd stay that
course for several years. This downturn isn't
going to impact on those sales.
Maybe buy Jeep before Ford does and stick that
inside the Pontiac or Saturn tent.
GM needs to address 'rice' directly. GM's lost
it in the 16-22 age group to Honda, Mitsubishi
and now Scion. Maybe that could go under the
Pontiac roof but I'd be tempted to exploit it in
the Saturn camp. The 'bean counters' don't see
any profit margin in the rice market but it does
establish branding and it re-establishes a
customer base that GM has lost. For twenty
years the light truck has been the entry vehicle
-- I think that's changing, particularly in
large population centers.
G.M. seems to understand emerging markets
overseas but it's blind to it's own back yard.
If GM is not to follow Chrysler it has to
recognize emerging opportunities within the U.S.
and exploit those. -- and stop whining about
market or regulatory conditions! Just build it
and sell it.
--
pj ... $ 4.75 (maybe worth less than a buck but
with the declining dollar, I raised the price.)
|
