Then they ditch the UAW, they ditch their retirement programs, and the ditch the dealer program which demands they build the same car or truck or SUV under 5 different name plates so all of the different dealer tracks have competitive (with each other) products.

I say that Saturn selling Opels (ditch the Saturn name please) is the division with the best potential future if GM could change their business model to generate some profit. No-haggle pricing, clever/interesting/frugal cars straight from European Opel, and an existing dealer network and the least number of rebadged vehicles in the company if you don’t count Opel to Saturn as rebadging.

They ought to expand the vehicles they sell in the USA under the Opel brand so that we get a more diverse range of vehicles – from the bigger Vue to the Zaphira and Astra, to the retractable hardtops down to the Corsa. Include the commercial versions too (delivery white vans and cars).

And then, offer the WHOLE lineup to all of the GM dealers. Eventually dealers would become GM dealers selling all the GM brands. I don’t go to a Sony store or a Nike store or a Schwinn bicycle store… I go to a store that sells many brands. The good dealers will prosper, the bad ones will fail. Good.

Lastly attempt to unify the safety and pollution standards with the other countries that their divisions operate in so that their other divisions’ products can be sold anywhere. I guess that will not likely work b/c they WANT us to buy big…

IE, the fact that Rick Wagoner is STILL in power is all that needs to be said!!!

If you think otherwise, I have a niiiiice Cobalt SS to sell you….for a paltry $22K!!! :D

kwanzaa
Sounds like a conspiracy theory. What facts support your theory vs Vega’s, that stupidity reins, not inteliignet destruction

Robert J Hanlon:

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

Rick Wagoner has Deliberately(!) destroyed GM.

Yes, unreal, unbelievable, unconscionable, and unfathomable…

…yet TRUE!!!

Rick is being paid million$ to destroy GM. We need to look at the facts, and well, we also need to look at who profit$ from all of this.

The “Board of Bystanders” know full well what is going on. They condone it, they endorse it, they support it!!

I mean, from 1977 to 2007 and all you have to show for your effort is the new Cobalt SS sedan? For a hefty 22-large?

Whatchu talking ’bout sista??? Is you crazy or what??

GM, brought to you by the same guys who brought you the Viet Nam War.

Actually, that was Ford.

Competance is not a commodity you can easily find in the current corporate landscape. Regardless of whether he or she is chosen from outside the company or promoted within the story is the same, they prove to be more show than go. If these guys were as good as their resumes why do they demand golden parachutes.

The way to fix a failing company is to reward the people in power based on the company's real profits. If they don't increase real profits they don't get paid. The problem is shareholders look for guys who slash costs and deliver profits but they realize too late that the guy they hired has no talent other than selling parts of the company to boost profits.

Lack of leadership and vision becomes obvious when there is nothing of worth to sell and the CEO actually has to lead. The suggestion to fire those earning more than $200k won't work either because in GM there is a culture of promoting yes men whose talent is to agree with the boss.

At every level from shop floor to the exec offices disagreeing with the boss even if he's wrong is not tolerated. This culture has stifled the inovative free thinking people GM desparately needs. When GM does hire from outside these people only stick around long enough to see that smooze trumps performance.

All of that is easier said than done. I think most of us are missing the point. If you really look at GMs recent history you will see that there have REAL attempts to do all of those things. The problem is to do successfully accomplish any of these GM will/ is coming up against some serious resistance from some powerful entities.

The UAW is not going away

The Buick, Pontiac, Saturn, SAAB dealers are not going away without a major fight and a shitload of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

The current crop of half-ass supppliers have contracts with GM that can not be voided overnight.

GM can’t simple shut down lines of production that are not meeting expectation because the brands and the dealers that are making sales require the products coming off of those line, just not in the numbers that they are.

The money making auto segements in America are the BORING segements so GM can’t simply make exciting products that no one will buy. They need to make better car that do compete directly with Accord and Camrys. Yet we Americans demand to pay less for them.

Folks love to beat up on Roger Smith but they refuse to acknowledge that he was actually trying to move GM into the 21 century in terms of production. If I understand it correctly one of his main goals was to automate and robotize as much Gm production as possible. This was also a move to limit the power of the UAW as well as lower the number of UAW employees on GMs books.
Needless to say he was NOT successful because the UAW was too powerful.

Any CEO at GM must deal with a diverse dealer network where each brand appears to be demanding a product line equal to Toyota. Remember it is the DEALERS that DEMAND badge engineered cars NOT GM upper management.
If one Pontiac dealer can sell 1000 G5 while the next Chevy dealer can only sell 200 Colbolts should GM not meet the first dealer demand?

I think it is important to remember that even Buicks still sell in relatively large numbers but it is the overall business model at GM that saps all profit out of the business.
Also remember that a small rural Buick dealer with only 10 sales a month can still be profitable while a large Buick dealer in a major metro area that is selling 70 cars a month is money loser. Now lets also consider that there still are many very profitbale large Buick dealers in the USA.

Rather than make wild claims as to what a CEO at GM can do why dont we call out the other parties.

Hey UAW why dont you void all existing contracts and end union repesentation at GM. Ask all UAW members to take a pay benefit package that is comparible to what Toyota offers in the USA.

Hey GM retirees, I know GM made you guys some big promises but times have changed. Go on medicare already!

Hey oboslete Dealer why dont you do GM a favor and just close up shop. Who care if you are still making a limited profit!

Very good point. It is damn hard to be in a business where you have almost no control over the manufacturing or the retail distribution of your product.

Once upon a time, there was a GM brand for every purse, from Chevrolet to Cadillac. But the brands had fewer cars, on fewer platforms, and no overlap. Could GM go back to that thought, and use their brands for specialty niche vehicles only?

Say that Chevrolet had the biggest and most completed line-up, from the korean imports up to Corvette. That means that GM could have Cadillac on top, Buick and Saab in between, Saturn as an import fighter, GMC and Hummer for the SUVs. And well, Pontiac, for what? Rebadged aussie-imports?

The point is, Buick doesn’t have to be a full car-maker. Think “Buick”. What springs to mind? 1948 Coupe. 1963 Riviera and ‘72 Boattail. Mid-50’s Roadmaster. Luxury Woodie Wagons. Coupes are not out-moded, the buyers just quit bying the domestic coupes. Nowaday, they buy BMW 3-series, Mercedes CLKs and Audi A5s. All nice-looking coupes. Buick could make a luxury coupe to fight the Mercedes crowd. The Enclave is the modern day luxury woodie. And a big sedan in between. All in black, as Buicks look the best in black. Scrap the rest.

The point is, all GM Brands doesn’t have to have individual retailers, they could share showroom floor. Buick could effectively be a one-car carmaker, as long as Buick was the only GM brand that sold that particular car in that particular segment. And no overlaps. All GM brands could be sold at the same place. Except for Cadillac, which would have to have their own.

Scrap the entire Pontiac line-up, and concentrate on the Pontiac core value. What is “Pontiac”? It is GMs sporting brand, wanna-be muscle car and BMW-fighter. Scrap the entire line-up, and concentrate on that. Make ONLY Pontiacs that could give some BMW:s a match. The rest is unimportant.

What is GMC? Does GMC have any virtues, that any other GM Brand can’t offer? If it haven’t any, scrap GMC. They are in fact just some tarted up Chevys. They could be sold as that, as Chevys luxury line of SUVs, at a Chevrolet dealer.

What is Saab? Saab is the practical mans Citroen. Or the thinking mans Mercury. Saab could have filled the role as GM:s experimental brand, always new with intelligent solutions. Hybrids, Haldex, and so on. Tested and tried, and then developed for the rest of GM. The point is, Saabs has always been favoured the most by intelligent and educated people. Well, concentrate on that, and give the Ivy League their own brand. Two cars, or even one, could be enough to fill that role, as long as they had intelligent solutions and semi-quirky traits.

Scrap the superflous dealers, scrap the superflous overlaps, scrap the “all cars for all brands” soultions. That’s not what GM is about. GM needs to have a line-up of brands, with unique line-ups of cars, suited to all tastes and purses. No overlaps. I may have to say this again: No overlaps. Unique offerings at every brand. No overlaps. No overlaps.

Best explain that to Toyota, Honda, etc., or how about Google and Microsoft (not engineer’s, but they are closer to engineer’s than accountants).

An engineer can learn enough about accounting to make business decisions. I do it all the time in my field of work.

An engineer can go to school following his BS and earn an MBA. The same can not be said of an accountant earning his MS.

You give engineer’s far too little credit.

Finance/Accounting guys should not be running manufacturing, engineering, or other technologically focused organizations. I don’t care if they went to HBS or University of Phoenix online. They can run a wall street firm or bank, that’s it.

And that’s coming from a finance guy.

- Build better products (obviously)
- Reduce layers of management (fire them I say)
- Cut Finance/Marketing Staff by 1/3 and work leaner
- Sell Saab
- Close Saturn

Rick and Bob will NEVER have the power to overcome the entrenched interest at GM. At the end of the day they have very little to no say over such matters as the dealer network and state franchise laws, the power that the UAW has with government and other national interest. The demands of too many brands that they CAN NOT make disappear without a major COSTLY fight.
Oh, there is also the matter of all of those shareholders, you and I included if you have a 401k.

Face facts GM simply has/had grown too large for it to function as an effective corporation anymore. The burrecratic structure is too large for clear decisions to be made and policy implemented.

GM CAN NOT create unique products for all of its brands nor can they make the unnecessary ones go away. The dealer network CAN NOT make money with so many overlapping dealers in the same geographical locations. The UAW considers itself a partner and will not work for less than a given amount.
The marketshare that GM is designed to support WILL NOT return yet GM is forced to maintain a production infrastructure that appears geared towards WWII levels of production.

In all fairness Rick, Bob, and GM are stuck in this situation until OUTSIDE forces come into play. As long as everyone involved in this mess needs to be paid; UAW, dealers, supplier, shareholders, etc, there will NOT be any major changes because the machine MUST keep running. It cant stop. If any one of these players were to decide to go “Postal” the game is over for all involved.

The Ford Escape debuted for the 2001 model year, and is still selling pretty well. It was a direct response to the Toyota RAV4 and Honda CR-V. So Detroit was late to the party, as you say, but Ford has fielded a response, and for several years it was the best-seller in its segment.

detroit1701: Take a further example: Yaris and Fit — GM had again to import that segment (Saturn Astra), and again, Ford has nothing.

The Chevrolet Aveo, imported from South Korea, is a more direct competitor to the Fit and Yaris. And while Ford currently has no entry in this segment, it plans on producing the just-released European Fiesta (a beautiful car) in Mexico and selling it here within the next two years.

In Europe, automakers tend to be on the same “wave” — i.e., in a fiercely competitive market they tend to deliver similar products in similar classes around the same time. There are defined segments in Europe, and everyone has a similar offering with similar performance / features. Take a few examples:

CUV: Ford Kuga, VW Tiguan, Opel Antara, Honda CRV, etc.

Urban: Ford Fiesta, Opel Corsa, VW Polo, Honda Jazz, etc.

In North America, since the Big 2.8 insisted on producing “North-American only” designs, they did not apply to lessons they learned elsewhere in the world. Now they are playing catchup in segments that they FAILED to define in the U.S.. Look at the Rav4 and CRV — the Big 2.8 failed to have an answer until the new Saturn Vue (an Opel btw). Ford still does not have an answer. Take a further example: Yaris and Fit — GM had again to import that segment (Saturn Astra), and again, Ford has nothing. Mid-sized sedans are the same case, the Altima, Accord, and Camry had no competitors — and look what GM and Ford did — GM had to re-engineer an Opel sedan platform for the Aura and Malibu. Ford had to refit a MAZDA platform for the Fusion.

The Japanese, facing rising fuel costs in North America, already had an arsenal of world cars in European-defined segments ready to go. In fact, they took a big RISK by putting out small unprofitable cars and the Prius before gas spiked.

It is not that GM or Ford have “failed” — because when they do (eventually) respond it is usually a very competitive product (Vue, Fusion, Malibu, Astra). Since the Japanese were using world platforms and existing vehicles, GM/Ford have been forced to do the same. They are late to the game and almost a generation behind.

“… There is no reason you can’t develope at least two disciplines over your career.”

Any reason this doesn’t apply to accountants?

However, there are some pockets of old school businesses that have yet to modernize their internal leadership development practices. These holdouts are in key industries that have been wildly successful due to market conditions, not from corporate competence.

For example, I worked intimately with several large oil companies during the seven years I lived in Houston. The demand for petroleum products has been so great over the last century that they have been profitable despite themselves. Their working conditions and benefits were way out of step with “normal” corporate America that is constantly tightening its belt and of necessity keeps a sharp eye on operating expenses. Sure, the industry got a bit of a wakeup when oil prices plummeted to untenable levels during the mid and late ‘90s. But at current levels of crude consumption the party’s back on.

Oil company executives ardently adhere to archaic corporate traditions and are terrified of making changes, even toward adopting technologies and business practices that have been proven in other industries.

The same is true of the domestic auto manufacturers. Demand for the automobile has been so strong that there has never been a need to clean house or keep pace with lean and competitive companies. The confounding thing is that as the Big Three have been in a pronounced and obvious death spiral, especially over the last twenty-five years, they haven’t taken any steps to radically change their corporate culture. Instead, the same old group of misfits are desperately trying to build better cars. As we are seeing, until their change their culture and business practices any successes they have will be sporadic and fleeting.

GM is not a car brand. That’s right! GM is not a car brand – it’s a corporation.

Wasn’t it GM that once said “we don’t make cars, we make money”? Funny, now they don’t make money.

John