By on March 9, 2010

We reported yesterday that GM’s recent dealer cull flip-flop was motivated by Chariman/CEO Ed Whitacre’s desire for increased sales volume. Though that may have been the main reason GM took over 600 dealers back into the fold, there was clearly another, more sinister reason for the move: making an example of dissident, activist dealers. Automotive News [sub] reports that GM has contacted all 661 reinstated dealers, and believe it or not, none of the 7 dealer members of the Committee to Restore Dealer Rights have been contacted. Founding member Tammy Darvish tells AN [sub],

The only thing I’m confident of is that I’m sure it’s not a coincidence

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

12 Comments on “GM Dealer Activists Left Out Of Reinstatement...”


  • avatar
    JSF22

    I have some experience with Tammy Darvish. She isn’t just a loudmouth; she runs a group of lousy dealerships. Good for GM showing some fortitude, for they surely knew she wouldn’t take two rejections lying down.

  • avatar
    Steven02

    It might not be sinister at all, those 7 may have been the worst dealers GM had.

  • avatar
    Cashmoney

    It’ll be interesting to see how GM spins this.

    Do they claim it’s because the 7 are the sort of lousy dealerships the company is better without?

    Or do they cop to wanting troublemakers kept outside the tent trying to piss in?

    • 0 avatar
      Robert.Walter

      Or a pre-emptory move, that can be held-up in arbitration (“look at all the dealers we took back! If the remainder were any good, we’d have taken them back too!”), this being intended to game the process and keep the remainder of the culled-dealers out.

  • avatar
    bmoredlj

    I’m expecting Big Ed to announce he’ll soon be renaming the company “Volume Motors.”

  • avatar
    crash sled

    Well, there’s an old saying in politics: “punish your enemies”. I wouldn’t expect Government Motors to do anything other.

  • avatar
    PickupMan

    Quick Google search shows Darcars operates a Chrysler franchise, 2 Toyota, a Lexus and a Volvo franchise.

    Almost sounds like it’s more a fight for pure survival versus a fight for what’s fair.

  • avatar
    JimothyLite

    Ah, Government Motors bites. Ouch!

  • avatar
    ihatetrees

    Is Bill Heard in that picture?
    Or has volume mad Ed already brought him back into the dealer fold?

  • avatar
    gslippy

    There is little relationship between the number of dealers and volume. It’s not as though people don’t know where to buy a Chevy.

    If more dealers equaled more volume, then they ought to put one on every corner.

    I’d like to know where in the Constitution it says that a bankrupt company under government ownership has to hamstring its cash flow by keeping every dealer door open.

  • avatar
    Accazdatch

    Is it me.. or the underlying fact is still there..

    GM still has too many dealerships.. and putting these yahoos back only means more personal competition with itself.

    Yes I know, there are a dozen other issues underneath that, like how the dealers handled it, and how Generic Motors also handled this..

    But, isnt the same problem still there??
    Too many dealerships, competing with one-another?!?


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributing Writers

  • Jack Baruth, United States
  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Cameron Aubernon, United States
  • J Emerson, United States