Chevrolet Malibu Plant Idled

by Derek Kreindler

Published: December 17th, 2012

General Motors had idled its Fairfax, Kansas plant where the Chevrolet Malibu is built, as slow sales hamper the brand’s mid-size sedan.

A GM spokesman confirmed to Automotive News that GM “is taking idle time in December,” to “make sure we are aligning our production with demand.”

But a statement released by GM was evasive regarding the Malibu’s impact on the idling“We have strategically built Chevrolet Malibu stock levels based on scheduled downtime and a strengthening vehicle market…This idle time gives us an opportunity to conduct scheduled facility projects aimed at improving the plant’s future competitiveness.”

As of December 1st, GM had a 106-day supply of Malibus, higher than anticipated. The Malibu has endured a barrage of negative criticism since its introduction, and the car will get an early mid-cycle refresh after just 18 months on the market.

#Chevrolet #ChevroletMalibu #GM #Plant #Sales

Derek Kreindler

More by Derek Kreindler

Comments

Join the conversation

13 of 78 comments

Buickman on Dec 18, 2012

the rear seat room is a problem and the Eco only launch was a poor choice. granted the product is crucial. my point is that today most products in general are equivalent in terms of features and price. the biggest factor IMO is image and perception. in this area the marketing makes the difference. were GM able to overcome the Gov't Motors moniker and the negativity over BK while driving traffic into the showrooms, we would be adding shifts not cutting them. Return to Greatness is the answer.

Like Reply
- See 6 previous
- 28-Cars-Later on Dec 18, 2012
  
  Agreed but I won't be holding my breath.
  
  Like
- Sunridge place on Dec 18, 2012
  
  @28 You've read 'Return to Greatness' and think this is the solution? http://www.generalwatch.com/editorials/editorial.cfm?EdID=2 Looks like a big giant Cash on the Hood giveaway. Its Buickman's plan to sell more Buicks GM Employees and Retirees. GM Retiree gets: GM Employee Discount $1000 GM Loyalty Bonus $500 AARP Discount Free Maintenance Probably a few $100 from his referral Savings plan Oh yeah, this is after he's already reduced the price of the vehicle by $900 or so by eliminating the Destination Charge. But, hey...according to Buickman! it will increase market share and 'won't cost a penny'
  
  Like
- 28-Cars-Later on Dec 18, 2012
  
  @28-Cars-Later I missed his capitalization, I was referring to a "return to greatness" in a metaphorical sense as in "not sucking". However thank you for the link, I am perusing it now. I can't speak to the business particulars outlined here, but I'm not seeing any suggestions or descriptions of improving product or the direction to go with product. I personally as a consumer don't care much for marketing gimmicks such as Santa Claus or $500 off being in AARP, what I want is value for the money. This is not a Daewoo, this is not a sad Opel clone, and this is not an overly small and unnecessarily ugly F117 as my fake luxury car du jour. Its one thing to say we need smart entry level cars, and in truth I am impressed with Verano and ATS as entry level cars. But if I decide "I want the 'big Buick' or 'big Cadillac'" (in a metaphorical sense) Catera and Regal are meh and XTS/Lacrosse are laughable. So you go from decent entry level to "meh" as you go up the chain? GM may at heart be a truck company, but they need to not fire blanks at the car market as well. I think the last new GM I would have been interested in was the outgoing Malibu, but if had I been a buyer I would demand a V6 which is nearly impossible to get in Malibu as it was only offered in LTZ trim (something like 27K+ msrp). This is incomprehensible and it shows how GM is out of touch with its traditional customers (dyed in the wool Buick/Pontiac/Chevy people). Maybe I'm just delusional but I think GM has the resources to build a superior product, they could return to greatness. Just have to get their heads out of their asses first.
  
  Like
- Buickman on Dec 18, 2012
  
  sunridge you miss the whole idea. the first twenty steps released years ago were just for starters and applied at that time. RTG is more than you are aware. many industry experts who have seen the specifics agree it is exactly what is needed. so throw your stones but you really don't understand what you are talking about.
  
  Like
- Sunridge place on Dec 18, 2012
  
  @Buickman They'll be out of money by the time they get to Step 21.
  
  Like
- 28-Cars-Later on Dec 18, 2012
  
  @Buickman Most of your proposals related more to business/marketing to which I am not formally educated however I think this point in your proposal is worth its weight in gold: "STEP NINE: Day at the Dealer. Each month, every salary member of VSSM would be required to spend one day in a randomly selected dealership service department, preferably in write up. This activity would build tremendous goodwill, and give our employees valuable insight into the customer's needs and wants. Actually getting to know GM employees would give customers a sense that GM has a face. They would begin to see us as human beings, rather than an impersonal Corporation. The dealers would benefit by having additional support in their service lanes, and be able to offer quicker, more responsive service on those days when executives were there to assist. Customer satisfaction would increase, as would repeat and referral business." This is so simple yet ingenious. I work for a company owned and run by I/O Psychologicts, they make tens of millions of dollars annually selling these sorts of ideas as product, sometimes the best ideas are the most common sense ones.
  
  Like
- Buickman on Dec 18, 2012
  
  @Buickman thank you sir.
  
  Like
APaGttH on Dec 18, 2012

GM really, REALLY screwed up the Malibu refresh. It is a bit of a jolt given the Spark is doing better than anyone expected, the Sonic is darn good, and the Cruze has solid sales. All of these vehicle launches went well, and met the segment needs well. The Spark is top in A segment sales, the Sonic is second in B segment beyond the maligned but much cheaper Versa. The Cruze is class competitive. The Malibu is a wreck - the decision to go smaller was flat out bad. For whatever reason compared to the Cruze and Sonic in particular, the bean counters apparently got a lot to say about the Malibu. The refresh can't come fast enough - and screwing up the D-segment is a bad thing - it is crazy competitive between Accord, Camry, Fusion...

Like Reply
Sketch447 on Dec 18, 2012

The sad thing about GM is that it can never do right in some peoples' minds.... The Malibu is very competitive with its competition. But its competition is just too extraordinary. So why cast aspersions on GM for offering a conservative yet competent offering?? I don't hear people trashing the Corolla for being outdated, even though it is dorky looking, underpowered, has an ancient 4-speed tranny, and handles like a WonderBread truck. Toyota is piling discounts on it, yet no one mocks Toyota.....

Like Reply
- See 1 previous
- 28-Cars-Later on Dec 18, 2012
  
  In the case of Malibu my only thought it when your new model is essentially inferior to your outgoing one, something has gone wrong. Otherwise post-bailout GM has done rather well, people seem to love the trucks/SUVs despite their design age and Verano and ATS seem well done as far as new product goes. Personally I mock Toyota Motora Corp. daily but I concede your point... its usually the people who blow Toyonda that condemn GM and the like. Successful marketing can sell ice cubes to eskimos, or dated dorky looking junk to the lemmings...er masses.
  
  Like
- Rnc on Dec 19, 2012
  
  No GM can do things right, but when they do them wrong, they have this tendency to do them really, really wrong. The malibu is a bread and butter car (aka fusion, accord, camry) and they completely dropped the ball. The worst part is the fumble was from a 1970's or 80's GM game, build a decent product, push it out before its ready, every pissed of customer tells 20-30 people how crappy it is (while a happy one tells 5-7). It's just like every time GM tries to do something fancy regarding engines, the designs weren't flawed, they were just pushed out before the flaws were fixed to meet some deadline or save $10 (hell Range Rover was still using a GM designed early 60's OHC engine in the 90's). Aluminum blocks with silica coated sleeves, bomb. 8-6-4, bomb (and it could've been made to work, doing it mechanically was a bitch, but mercedes had mechanical direct injection in the 50's). The Quad-4, leave off one $10 part, bomb. Northstar was pushed out before the issues were taken car of (and the fixes were simple on that one, just didn't want to spend the money). Thats one of the reasons I think GM still hangs onto OHV, they've got taurus shock, if they build something new and special they are scared people will stay away because everytime they've done something special it was a disaster. And this is were the next problem comes in, if Ford can really get the next F150 down 700lbs and use EB 3L and 4L engines, they are going to eat GM's cash cow, while GM will do what with thier OHV's? (and they are great engines, problem is, no one else uses them, so the other makers, the improvments they make to thier 1.4's can be transferred to thier 6.2's and vice versa, GM can't). So GM needs to ditch the OHV, add 2 cyl. to thier (from my understanding) great 3.6 and move forward quickly. GM was given a lease on life (I don't see the urgency that Mulully or Ghosn incited and instilled), everyone braggs about the $9 or so billion they've made since exiting BK, most of that was interest payments not made on cancelled debt.
  
  Like
Charliej on Dec 18, 2012

In my personal life, I like Hondas and Acuras. I have owned a Honda or Acura from 1980 through 2011. I never had a major problem with any of them. For work, I have had Ford or Dodge trucks, and have mostly been pleased with them. I had to do one transmission rebuild on a F350 with a box body at 225,000 miles. I have no complaints about it. The Dodge Sprinter cab chassis with box body blew a transmission with less than 100,000 miles. Still no complaints. I paid for the Dodge with the reduced fuel bill. When I was running two Ford trucks, the fuel bill was nearly $3000 per month. The Sprinter used less than half the fuel of the Fords. My current personal car is a Chrysler, bought in 2005. It has had a water pump and timing belt replaced and that is all, except for tires and other wear items. I like Honda products, but I don't think that Detroit vehicles are terrible. I have had good luck with Ford trucks, my Chrysler is doing fine. My late father had a Malibu "Classic" that was not really bad. The actual reliability of all cars has improved so much over the past few years that I would not hesitate to buy any name brand vehicle. Being in Mexico, there a quite a few that I would not consider, Renault, Peugeot, Seat. I may, however, try a Chinese motorcycle to see how they hold up.

Like Reply