By on October 7, 2009

“I certainly don’t want to leave you with the feeling that, y’know, things are humming,” quips Frtiz. “Because they’re not.” Then what, pray, was the point of today’s “progress report” snowjob? But Fritz is just kidding, things really are ginger-peachy keen. As recent trips to the Harvard and Michigan business schools taught him…

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!


7 Comments on “Fritz Henderson’s Key To Success: Differentiating Our 34 North American Nameplates...”

  • avatar

    I think that Fritz is onto something. There are 2 ways to compete: Low cost producer and as a maker of higher end product that customers want rather tnan need (my words, not his).

    GM has never been a low-end company. The fact that in all but trucks it became one is one reason it has been foundering. Going back to the 20s, Chevrolet never competed head-on with Ford – Chevrolet was always a bit more money for more car. And where GM really excelled was the rest of the way up the price ladder, creating cars that people aspired to.

    So now that he understands the model, I wonder if he has any inkling of how to get there, because it will be a difficult slog. Cadillac and Buick both need to move significantly upmarket, and the only way to to it is wiht genuine upmarket product. I hope he can do it.

  • avatar

    “successes”? He didn’t say successes did he? WTF

  • avatar

    Our business schools are failing us.

  • avatar

    We’ve known that for awhile. Check out this post on Red Ink Rick from my former boss, who headed PR for Duke’s Fuqua School of Business:

    Dynamic88 :
    October 7th, 2009 at 5:10 pm

    Our business schools are failing us.

  • avatar

    Just put an end to this now! Let them go through a proper Chapter 11 filing with a possible liquidation. Please put an end to this business failure pornography!

  • avatar

    Our business schools are not failing us, GM is just not executing that principle correctly.
    Product differentiation – Apple is the best example. They discovered in the early 80’s that since IBM licensed out their technology allowing for clones, everyone would try and produce cheap PC’s. So Apple decided to move up the demand curve to a product that has a perception of better value even though the price is higher. They did this with the Mac, the iPod, and now the iPhone. Every Apple customer knows they can get a cheaper alternative, but most every Apple owner I know feels like they own something that is better.

    So how is GM going to do this while at the same time meeting the mandate from Whitacre of 20% market share? They won’t.

  • avatar
    allegro con moto-car

    This man should not be running a big corporation. He should not pass “GO” and collect $1 billion. If he wants to manage something, then he is marginally qualified to run a liquor store.

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • raaizin: Jack, really must you call the employee stupid. Doesnt say alot for you. Why dont you ask Amazon to see if...
  • Tim Healey: I had no chance to fill it and measure. If I do have a chance to observe fuel economy, it will be in the...
  • azmtbkr81: Unfortunately all of the major carriers have arbitrary tiers for shipping boxes, I found this out the hard...
  • Lou_BC: @SCE to AUX – one can argue that in the USA and Canada, we have not hit a fuel price threshold that...
  • blppt: “The smallest hill causes the 3.5 NA V6 to downshift where the 2.0 just pulls right up it. I could care...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote


  • Contributors

  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States