Bob Lutz Un-Retires to Join "New GM"

Frank Williams
by Frank Williams

TTAC’s Lutzies are safe. When Bob Lutz announced his retirement from GM at the end of this year, automotive journalists openly wept at the prospect of losing an never-ending supply of quotes and sound bites. But now we can rejoice. He’s back. Automotive News reports that Maximum Bob has decided to “extend his career as vice chairman in charge of all ‘creative elements of products and customer relationships.’” What that means isn’t exactly clear but he’s supposed to work with design chief Ed Welburn “to guide all creative aspects of design.” The chiefs of all of GM’s brands, plus all corporate mouthpieces will report to Lutz, who in turn will report directly to CEO-for-now Fritz Henderson.

Henderson was effuse in his praise of Lutz, stating “He has a proven track record of unleashing creativity in the design and development of GM cars and trucks. This new role allows him to take that passion a step further, applying it to other parts of GM that connect directly with customers.”

What no one is saying: why Lutz had the sudden change of heart re: retirement. The ex-Car Czar had previously stated that he’d stay if he was asked. Apparently Lutz’s reinstatement was at his own request. Anyone want to bet the change of heart was because he suddenly discovered his golden parachute retirement fund had been relegated to that scrap heap they’re calling “Bad GM?” Lest we forget: the man has a few hungry jets to feed.

Frank Williams
Frank Williams

More by Frank Williams

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 56 comments
  • King Bojack King Bojack on Jul 12, 2009

    They're still lost sales. I can go to the local Kia dealer and get a Rio hatch with rear disc brakes. I can go to a Ford dealer and get a rwd sports coupe. Ford sells the only pick up left that can be termed a compact. These are things Toyota is neglecting to compete in. Toyota is essentially lazy shits for this. They used to sell most of what I listed. 2bil in dev costs spread out over 200 k units is 10k per car. Not that much considering the new tech involved. You can also skip the Prius as well and get a Matrix and squeeze in one or two more vacations if you want to talk upfront transaction cost. Hopefully post bankruptcy GM will be making things at a profit. We need more time instead of hemming and hawing about how they NEED and entire upper management flush to succeed. I care that Toyota and Honda and others won't offer a simple 4 wheel disc brake set up for a subcompact. This is lazy shit design cost controlling and there's no real justification for not giving us the option to get them. This is not the only sticking point just something I thought up. The fact that certain car companies COULD be giving us much nicer crap to buy but are coping out. It helps lend credence to my idea that Toyonda aren't really good companies at their core and now they've got so much marketing on their side they'll start selling 75% products because people who only care about "The parts of the car that you actually live with have to be as nice as possible at that price point, it should get good fuel economy and the thing should move decently well when you step on the gas. If it holds together and is reliable" will show up to mindlessly buy their slop. But to get back on topic, Lutz was arguably the best thing to happen to GM in recent years despite sales records or Mr. Farago et al's opinion. No this isn't just me regurgitating autoexremist.com either.

  • U mad scientist U mad scientist on Jul 12, 2009
    I care that Toyota and Honda and others won't offer a simple 4 wheel disc brake set up for a subcompact. This is lazy shit design cost controlling and there's no real justification for not giving us the option to get them. Does this imply that rear discs are some kind of difficult new tech or something? It's not exact hard to figure out the few dollars they save for pointless rear discs is smarter than the few dollars GM saves on interior quality. You'd do better to stick to the somewhat valid complaint that toyota has an image problem in the younger demographic. They're slowly turning into the japanese buick, and Scion didn't really help much. -- GM really is dead unless they can bring about drastic changes very soon. As is they can't even admit to the sorry situation they're in now, much less figure out a way out of it. I'll repeat the hypothesis that the power that be have already run the numbers and figured it's a hopeless case so the cash we've giving them is nothing more than a money cushion to fall on to their grave.
  • KixStart KixStart on Jul 12, 2009

    King Bojack: "arguably" That's one part you got right. King Bojack: "2bil in dev costs spread out over 200 k units is 10k per car. Not that much considering the new tech involved." That's before GM makes the first dime. And $10K over cost of goods sold per car? GM isn't going to come close to that. King Bojack: "I care that Toyota and Honda and others won’t offer a simple 4 wheel disc brake set up for a subcompact. This is lazy shit design cost controlling and there’s no real justification for not giving us the option to get them." Are you buying the aforementioned Kia Rio, then? No? Why not? It has 4-wheel disks. The people that do buy those cars don't really care. They care that the car hangs together well, delivers good value and good fuel economy. They'll appreciate it if the car is quiet and the interior is nice. These are value buyers. You might as well criticize Toyota for not giving the car a V8 engine. There isn't any need for disks, either, as the Yaris is so light, you could practically open the door and drag your sneaker toe cap to stop the car. The fronts do most of the work, so value engineering puts disks in the front, where they are needed. Kia probably put disks on the car so that the salespeople could win a point against the Yaris and the Fit. "You know, they don't have rear disk brakes." Maybe they'll get an extra sale from the feature.

  • Pch101 Pch101 on Jul 12, 2009
    What exactly is the truth of the Volt that I cannot handle? That its odds of success are poor, given the track record and the fact that those who were architects of that track record are still employed by the company. You're expecting the C- student to become valedictorian, without any evidence whatsoever to support your expectation. This explains a lot of what has contributed to GM's failure -- there is at best some vague expectation that things will get better, while little to no effort is made to create measurable improvements. Improvements don't come from dumb luck, but from tangible efforts being made to fix what is broken, which is going to be tough if the leadership believes that there isn't much that needs fixing. If there was a management shakeup, you might have a point, but there hasn't been one. At least Fiat has made some moves in the right direction. So far, GM has given a lot of press conferences, but not much else.
Next