The point of a capitalist system is that companies that fail to provide what the market wants are forced to either reinvent themselves or fail, making room for a company that will. This assumes, however, that customers will be looking for the best product at the best price. Insisting that certain makes are out of consideration for reasons unrelated to product suitability, quality, service or availability skews the whole system.

I drive Hondas. Why? Because they’ve been impeccably reliable, and my experience at dealerships (and more importantly – service facilities) has been great. The idea that “all modern cars are about the same” is just not true – and the corporate experiences are VASTLY different. (Granted, I’ve heard hellish stories about Toyota dealers as well as GM service departments.)

I started out with a new Ford, gifted to me as a go-to-college car. Starter motor failed at 15k, engine computer failed sometime later stranding me when I was headed home from college for Christmas. I’ve happily driven Hondas ever since, and I wouldn’t touch anything GM makes if they were paying me to take it.

To even have a chance at me (or people like me), whatever’s left of GM or Ford or Chrysler after the coming catastrophe will have to generate at least a 10-year track record of reliability, innovation and service that meets the standard set by Toyota and Honda. I frankly don’t see that happening – EVER.

10 worst GM cars:
1. Vega/Monza
2. Late 1970’s Oldsmobiles (Olds diesel was pathetic)
3. Xcar/Corsica/Beretta
4. Chevette/T1000 – defined cheap, as in low quality.
5. Original Lumina – actually took all the fun out of driving
6. Buick Reatta (overpriced)
7. Cadillac Allente (overpriced)
8. S10/Bravada (proved to me there is unintended acceleration)
9. Dust buster minivans (yeah I owned one). Terrible interior, poor steering and handling.
10. The last Cavalier model – a truly shitty car.

Some good GM cars:
1973 and earlier GM cars.
Most Buicks 1989 and later.
Full size GM trucks any time, including Suburban.

Current GM cars are now good, but looks like too late.

Cadillac Cimarron
Cadillac Catera
Cadillac 1981 Fleetwood V8-6-4
Cadillac 1978-85 Seville Diesel
Chevy Chevette
Chevy Vega
Chevy Citation
Chevy 1982 Camaro 4cyl “Iron Duke”
Olds 1997 Achieva
Pontiac 2000-04 Aztek

The Big 2.8 are looking for 25 to 50 billion in government bailout loans, and Congress will adjourn on September 26th. A loan will just postpone the day of reckoning.

Inevitably Sloan’s idea was DOA: when SUVs sold like hot cakes, ALL eight brands wanted a part of that action. Now that SUVs have fallen by the wayside, ALL eight (well seven at least) want a small car.

Meanwhile over at Toyota, one Yaris is all it takes.

But it will not tolerate, for lack of a better phrase, the same old shit in a different wrapper.

I bet at least 40% of the country will, come November.

FYI, Sloan also wasn’t an MBA. Sloan graduated from MIT with a degree in Electrical Engineering.

Sloan was hardly a perfect man, but GM’s branding problem began with absurd overlaps between the competing brands to the point that today they have no meaningful market segment distinction between themselves. You can buy similar sized, similar priced clone cars from Chevrolet, Pontiac, Buick and Saturn … so what exactly is the point of having all four of them? Sloan retired from GM in 1956 and they were the world’s largest AND most profitable company at that time. GM’s products set the standard not only for automobiles, but also for locomotives (Electro-Motive), passenger buses, heavy duty diesel engines (Detroit Diesel), and refrigerators (Frigidaire) !

The same plan that all of it’s overseas operations/subsideries do> (Opel,Vauxhall,Holden,GM South Africa)

As a side point, how would GM’s descent in NA affect these operations?

Mr. Farago, You’ve got a way with words. I can’t look at your hilarious use of “slouches” without laughing out loud. Talk about capturing the essence of a company in a single word!

This really is the best car site, bar none.

I agree with almost everyone at TTAC that GM needs to drop some brands. That’s a no-brainer. But it was GM’s mismanagement that made them obsolete in the first place! Sloan’s system was downright brilliant, but by the Eighties that system was gone. Not because the system had become archaic or nonfunctional, but because GM had thrown out the original idea of “a car for every purse and purpose.” By bringing Cadillac downmarket and stepping on Buick and Oldsmobile’s toes. By making top-of-the-line Chevrolets that competed with their upper-tier companions. By making Pontiacs without any performance aspect. I believe to truly recapture some of their former glory, GM needs desperately to reinstate Sloan’s original ideals (minus a few brands, if possible) and have little to no product overlap.

This is why I am so adamantly against the creation of the Cadillac BLS – it would push Cadillac FURTHER downmarket into a price bracket covered by others. Cadillac should equal luxury; anyone with $25,000 shouldn’t be able to buy one new. I believe Caddy should push upmarket ASAP, otherwise there’s no way it can regain a significant foothold in the luxury game again.

I know many are pressing for the GM of the future to consist of only Chevrolet and Cadillac. But I wonder sometimes: if Buick had been killed in 2000 rather than Oldsmobile, and Olds was allowed to continue its revival (started with the Aurora in ‘95), could a Chevrolet – Oldsmobile – Cadillac triumvirate arise from the ashes of Chapter 11? Maybe in a parallel universe…

Too late! General Motors Death Watch 85 confirmed GM’s entire Canadian operating unit, all plants and property, are included in the assets put on the table to secure credit.

In the unlikely event the Canadian government was silly enough to acquire the Oshawa plant, who would want it? Ford and Chrysler are closing plants. Ontario labor legislation gives current CAW employees successor rights to jobs on the site, meaning Toyota and Honda would run for the hills. Local reports say Fiat isn’t interested.

That pretty much leaves a start-up Red Chinese car manufacturer. They’re Communists, not crazy! Why would they pay CAW workers $50/hour and endure a Buzz Hargrove Mini-Me’s morale and profit sapping nonsense when their own workers are paid something in the order of $1/hour with few benefits?

I agree that GM needs to pare down to one (or two) brand(s) becaue they don’t have the money to deal with several.

However, I don’t agree that GM’s current situation is the result of adhering to Sloan’s strategy. In fact, one could argue that GM is in a world of shit because they abandoned Sloan’s strategy.

Today, a Buick doesn’t cost significantly more than a Chevy. It isn’t significantly more comfortable, or powerful, or bigger. There’s so much price overlap today that a high end Chevy can cost almost as much as a low end Caddy.

Sure, cars today can’t be differentiated merely on wheelbase or horsepower, nor on features, but there are other ways. The problem isn’t multiple brands per se, in fact just the opposite – there really aren’t 8 brands. There are, perhaps, 3. If that.

Aside from that, excellent article.

Let’s hope that GM’s 2nd hundred years works out better than it did for Studebaker.

The profits aren’t what matters to you or I. Why should we care where GM’s profits go, because, quite frankly, we’re not seeing a dime of it.

Au contraire. Corporate income taxes currently represent about 12% of federal revenues (individual income taxes are about 40%, the remainder of federal revenues are from tariffs and fees including mining/drilling). Foreign owned subsidiaries generally break even, shifting profits and taxes back to the home country. When GM (or Ford or Chrysler) turns a profit, that profit is taxed first as corporate income tax and then a second time when American shareholders declare dividend income. Very little of the profit Toyota makes selling cars in North America is taxed here.

If the Detroit mfgs fail, of course other businesses will step in to supply the market and they will build many of those cars here and employ many Americans. Do not, however, think that the net loss of tax revenues to foreign governments will not affect you. The money to operate the federal gov’t will come from somewhere and if corporate tax revenues go down, that means that individuals will bear a larger percentage of the tax burden.

I believe in free trade and allowing 100% foreign direct investment, but I also recognize that there are benefits to buying locally.

I have older relatives that keep buying GM products, but once they die, they’ll never be buying another GM product. I’ve got a friend that only buys Toyota products as a result of his dad buying GM products. His dad had a brand new ‘97 Lumina and the alternator failed multiple times in the first 2 years of owning it.

From the perspective of younger people, there’s no valid reason to buy a GM product. Resale sucks due to their nasty fleet sale habit, reliability is still questionable, build quality and durability is questionable, and fuel economy is still horrible across their model range. Incentives and older, loyal buyers are the only thing that’s moving vehicles for GM, and neither one can last forever.

Mikey, for the sake of discussion, let’s imagine a scenario which I hope doesn’t happen: Oshawa assembly is nationalized by Canada if GM goes down. What cars will be built there, and how will they be sold (dealer network)?

TTAC, don’t fail us. That is definitely worthy of an article or another contest. Hilarity would ensue.

Well, let’s get things rolling with a list of nominations, shall we?

Chevy Vega
X-cars
J-cars
Chevy Corvair
Saturn Ion
Pontiac Aztek
Opel Kadett

…more?

Shame that anyone who really needs to believe this so that things at GM can change, have their ears blocked with lies and damned lies of their own creation so that they can keep believing they are doing the right thing.

I know most people would like to help out (bailout) the Detroit 3 out of respect for all the workers’ lives a bankruptcy would ruin. A lot of people seem to think that it’s just one more business that needs to get bailed out during this financial crisis.

The reality is that GM as a business has been unhealthy for a long time and now that they can no longer continue to borrow against the future to pay for today they will go out of business.

Contrast that to the investment banks that got greedy and pushed the mortgage lending rules beyond the envelope. They’ve long since stopped the bad practices, however, there isn’t enough income to support all the banks holding the bad debts. So now those that need access to more cash to back up their assets, per regulatory requirements, can’t and are going under.

If GM had to do that, (back up their assets with additional liquidity), I submit to you that they’d have been out of business 4-5 years ago. Also, GM hasn’t stopped ANY of the bad practices that have driven it to bankruptcy.

Thus, they don’t deserve our help and all of us working in the auto industry will just have to suck it up and find work elsewhere. Things will be tough, much like for former Merrill Lynch employees, former Lehman Bros employees, former Bear Stearns employees, etc. But at least whatever emerges will be a viable business and has a shot at growth and survival.

My bringing up the Road to Redemption was making just that point…

The fact upper management pulled the campaign within several weeks of launch,

And that the GM team and ad agency that created and approved those ads were soundly spanked,

Means that those at the very top of the food chain don’t believe in the message that RtoR tried to convey.

They weren’t about to admit anything. Not even past quality or service sins. And Wagoner and team certainly weren’t aplogizing, either.

RtoR was to become GM’s “umbrella” campaign –plans were to flesh it out over time, showing proof of the company’s improvements and touting its sincerity and commitment to customer satisfaction were well in the works.

But it was killed. Quickly. Quietly. Secretly.

Poof. Gone.

Back to business as usual.

And you can see where that’s gotten Rick and friends.

People are voting with their wallets. Every month Frank Williams scores the latest round of voting. The results are there for all to see. You can see what’s fashionable. And what is not.

Well is Gm any different than any business that has gotten gubment help this week? NO.
I must have blinked. Who got gubment help this week? Lehman Bothers certainly did NOT. Merril Lynch did NOT. AIG is still holding onto the begging bowl, they DID get some help from the state of NY. So, yeah, go ahead Uncle Sam: Say NO to GM, too!

Has the management really tried to steer the boat away from the iceberg?
Care to explain that statement? As I see it management has been partying it up in the Captain’s Cabin, while purposefully ignoring “Iceberg Ahead!” calls from the bridge.

Are they just going to curl up in the fetal position and put a thumb in their mouths? Not at all.
You’re right about that. As the ship starts to go down, they’ll plunder any remaining silverware, before drifting off on golden parachutes.

I’m going to stick with the home team a bit longer. Like a standard blue chip stock, you stay in it for the long haul. Not the quick return…
Best of luck with that. No matter how I look at it, I don’t see a blue chip stock. Quite another color.

How appropriate you use the term “blue chip stock” in comparing your auto buying propensities with stock market investment strategy — when it comes to GM…

Seeing as GM was recently booted from the S&P 100 and risks being delisted from the DJIA.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/sp-500-drops-gm-dow-jones-next/

Just sayin.

P.S. I have two GM vehicles myself. I also cheer for the home team. But like all loyal fans, my “tickets” give me a right to boo them when they stink up the field.