Well stated. I enjoyed reading your post.
Vito
"pj" <pj4380@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:xdGtj.12488$H05.10902@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 'Key wrote:
>> "CardsFan" <me@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:i%Psj.3825$%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.)
>
|
