GM repays government loan...

[JaredPointer]

Enjoy driving your casket, then. I fail to see the stellar quality.

I completely disagree with you there. I've been in two wrecks in two different Tacomas (one a rollover at 55 MPH) and I walked away. I doubt the Colorado/Canyon would have fared as well as either of my Tacomas, but that's neither here nor there. I actually pulled some figures for a discussion not too long ago (I'm not sure if I posted it here or not), but from the NHTSA site (you can data mine) GM is by far and away both the leader in recalls and in fatal crashes (in cars since 1990-ish). #1 at something, I suppose... And lest you think I am stacking the numbers, Chevrolet is still #1 when you take out all the duplicate brands.

Examples, please? And by that, I mean examples of their new products and the products they're preparing for release. Not products that are remnants of the old GM that are now being phased out.

As mentioned earlier, the Colorado/Canyon is not even in the same league with the Tacoma or Frontier. You couldn't pay me enough to drive a Cadillac - the fastest depreciating domestic car on the road. The Cobalt is a rattletrap. Their offerings in comparison to the Civic/Corolla are not even in the same league.

Part of me would like to see GM reap what they've sown. They deserve it. But for the most part, I'd like for them to be a striving, world class company. I still don't see it, though, and now that they come out with some rustle-the-numbers-around crap and play it off like they paid off a "save us" loan is ridiculous. At some point, the hand outs have to stop and GM has to stand on its own two feet. Ford has turned it around in a very short time, so I have to wonder what's holding GM back. They trying to surprise us or something? Waiting on a special date? What's the hold up?

And as far as domestic offerings go, Ford has Chevy/GM beat in comparable cars and trucks. In every class. Maybe they should ask Ford for some help. You know, since they are so akin to getting help and the attitude of so many loyal GM people is that they deserve to be propped up.

 

[termigator]

One thing I've noticed in these "domestic vs. foreign" discussions is that a lot of the pro foreign auto guys are people who used to drive domestics and then got tired of being taken for ride, literally. They moved on to imports because they offered better overall quality and reliability.

The pro domestic people are usually people who have some kind of family tradition of buying only American cars and are staunchly against imports for the sole reason that they are not made by a domestic manufacturer. I can't even recall anyone of them claiming to have owned import vehicles only to return to domestics because of poor experiences with them. They have already made up their minds that domestic vehicles are superior and don't even want to give the imports a chance whatsoever and anyone who does not buy American is just hurting the economy and causing Americans to lose their jobs.

 

[C. Charles Hahn]

As mentioned earlier, the Colorado/Canyon is not even in the same league with the Tacoma or Frontier. You couldn't pay me enough to drive a Cadillac - the fastest depreciating domestic car on the road. The Cobalt is a rattletrap. Their offerings in comparison to the Civic/Corolla are not even in the same league.

Speaking of stellar, I see you did a stellar job of ignoring what I said: examples of products NOT dating back to the dark ages of old GM. Both the Cobalt and Colo/Canyon are exactly that, and are being phased out for newer and much improved offerings (Cruze, and an as-yet unknown GMT-700 platform mid size truck). Both of which are showing great promise to out do anything your beloved Toyota has to offer.

However, I think I'm going to give up on you now as I can see that you've been conditioned to believe that no matter what, GM will offer nothing but crap regardless of what it does.

I still don't see it, though, and now that they come out with some rustle-the-numbers-around crap and play it off like they paid off a "save us" loan is ridiculous. At some point, the hand outs have to stop and GM has to stand on its own two feet.

You do realize you just said that the entire accounting profession is ridiculous crap, right?

The hand-outs HAVE stopped, believe it or not. GM is working with the same pool of money it has had access to for quite some time now, it isn't like the government is going around granting them MORE money than they already had received.

If GM is ever going to stand on its own two feet, it needs people to give them a chance to do so by buying their products. What they don't need is exactly what you're doing. Sticking it to them for every past mistake they've made while they're trying to correct them on as truncated a time table as humanly possible. If they rush TOO much, the products that come to market will be no better than the ones they're replacing.

Ford has turned it around in a very short time, so I have to wonder what's holding GM back. They trying to surprise us or something? Waiting on a special date? What's the hold up?

It takes time to develop great cars from concept to production. GM only recently came under new management and so have been trying to play catch-up as best they can, which is about all we can expect from them in such a short period of time.

Ford has had Allan Mulally for several years now and have had enough time to develop the new products it is now bringing to market. Their timing just happened to be impeccable for having things market ready. If they were in a similar position to GM, people would be whining about Ford just the same as they are now about GM, unwilling to give them a fair chance.

And as far as domestic offerings go, Ford has Chevy/GM beat in comparable cars and trucks. In every class. Maybe they should ask Ford for some help. You know, since they are so akin to getting help and the attitude of so many loyal GM people is that they deserve to be propped up.

I have to disagree with you there. As much as I think Ford's products are vastly better than they have been in years, GM still has Ford beat especially when it comes to full size trucks and SUVs.




The real problem I'm seeing in general is that people have gotten entirely too used to the "information age" and how the internet makes it so easy for folks to get what they're looking for instantly or with minimal waiting. They expect the same should translate over to everything else in life and quickly grow impatient when they can't have it. Hence people's attitudes in this situation -- they think someone can sit down with a sketch pad today, design and engineer a great car, and then have it in your driveway the next day. That's just not how it works.

 

[termigator]

However, I think I'm going to give up on you now as I can see that you've been conditioned to believe that no matter what, GM will offer nothing but crap regardless of what it does.

By that same token, don't you think you've been conditioned to think that no matter what, GM will now be a model company (even though history is decidedly against you) and that Toyota "will offer nothing but crap regardless of what it does."?

 

[JaredPointer]

Speaking of stellar, I see you did a stellar job of ignoring what I said: examples of products NOT dating back to the dark ages of old GM. Both the Cobalt and Colo/Canyon are exactly that, and are being phased out for newer and much improved offerings (Cruze, and an as-yet unknown GMT-700 platform mid size truck). Both of which are showing great promise to out do anything your beloved Toyota has to offer.

So by this line of thinking, we're not supposed to judge GM by their current lineup of offerings - just by the things that aren't out yet and may (or may not) come to market? So the dark ages of GM are right now? As I mentioned every one of those vehicles are currently out on a dealer lot. For sale. Right now. Hey, we're GM. Trust us! Right?

However, I think I'm going to give up on you now as I can see that you've been conditioned to believe that no matter what, GM will offer nothing but crap regardless of what it does.

That's not true. I heavily considered a Silverado, but the service aspect wasn't there. Regardless of how defensive you want to be about GM, the dealership is an extension of the brand. It's typically the only face-to-face interaction the customer ever has with the company. And the dealerships here show the same elitist attitutde that got GM in a hole to begin with.

I'm not exactly sure what you're giving up on trying to do. I'll go on holding hands with my Toyotas and you can go on being a blind homer for GM.

You do realize you just said that the entire accounting profession is ridiculous crap, right?

Where did I say that at? Please point out the exact statement that I said that leads you to believe that I think the entire accounting profession is ridicuolous crap.

The hand-outs HAVE stopped, believe it or not. GM is working with the same pool of money it has had access to for quite some time now, it isn't like the government is going around granting them MORE money than they already had received.

If GM is ever going to stand on its own two feet, it needs people to give them a chance to do so by buying their products. What they don't need is exactly what you're doing. Sticking it to them for every past mistake they've made while they're trying to correct them on as truncated a time table as humanly possible. If they rush TOO much, the products that come to market will be no better than the ones they're replacing.

You say the handouts have stopped, but then you say people need to give GM a chance. It's not up to us (the buying public) to "give" GM a chance. They need to earn it by putting out top-rate products and service. We shouldn't automatically consider GM just to be nice to them. They need to earn our business. No, the hand-out attitude is still prevalent.

It takes time to develop great cars from concept to production. GM only recently came under new management and so have been trying to play catch-up as best they can, which is about all we can expect from them in such a short period of time.

Ford has had Allan Mulally for several years now and have had enough time to develop the new products it is now bringing to market. Their timing just happened to be impeccable for having things market ready. If they were in a similar position to GM, people would be whining about Ford just the same as they are now about GM, unwilling to give them a fair chance.



I have to disagree with you there. As much as I think Ford's products are vastly better than they have been in years, GM still has Ford beat especially when it comes to full size trucks and SUVs.

This is all really subjective. I think the Ford and Chevy GM truck are neck and neck. The nod on powertrain goes to the GM, but Ford definitely has them outdone on overall style, fit and finish. I looked at both closely, and I think the F-150 is probably the nicest big truck out there right now. They need an engine (which is supposedly coming) to be the best overall truck. But hey, that's my opinion. And regarding just the cars, Ford has the new Taurus and the Fusion (I think) and those are two very nice vehicles. I don't know that I'd take a Chevy/GM over either of those.



Regarding my beloved Toyotas (and yeah, I've got some problems with the way they go about things as well), the only reason I fell that they're a better vehicle is through persoanl experience. My family (grandfather on up) was die-hard Chevy folks. At one time, we all had Chevys. However, we got tired of being nickeled and dimed to death on buckets of replacement parts - not to mention just shabby design and poor customer service. So my grandad went out on a limb and bought a Toyota. Since then, my entire family has changed over to some other make. It's not like I didn't give them a chance. They lost my business, and it's on them to try and ever get it back. I don't owe them a freebie or a do-over. I gave them a fair shot this last time looking for a full size truck, and they squandered it. That's on them, and say what you want, the dealership is a reflection of GM. I can't go directly to Detroit and buy one, so I have to deal with the dealership. GM needs to fix that, one way or another.

 

[JaredPointer]

I actually pulled some figures for a discussion not too long ago (I'm not sure if I posted it here or not), but from the NHTSA site (you can data mine) GM is by far and away both the leader in recalls and in fatal crashes (in cars since 1990-ish). #1 at something, I suppose... And lest you think I am stacking the numbers, Chevrolet is still #1 when you take out all the duplicate brands.

Aforementioned empirical data, so as to show I'm not making all this from conjecture. Granted, you can make statistics show exactly what you want them to. All I did was go to the NHTSA site, and there is a link where you can data mine these figures. I had to set up a table and look up the manufacturer and tie it to the code number, but all that is provided by the site. I just had to put it into Excel and tie it all together. And I believe I went from 2000 and up because the data file was humongous when I tried to go back to 1990 & up. In any case - this is accidents with a fatality by vehicle manufacturer from 2000+. I would like to have been able to show it as a percentage of sales, but I'm not gonna get into all that kind of detail for every Mfg on this list. Specifically, in regards to "driving your Toyota casket," I figure GM sales and Toyota sales can't be that far apart over the last 10 years in correlation to the number of fatal accidents, but that's just an assumption on my part. So here you go - you can see Toyota Casket Company there at #4 or #5 depending on whether you lump GM or keep Chevy separate. Chevrolet alone is double the fatalities than Toyota, and I highly doubt that Chevrolet had double the sales numbers of Toyota over this time frame. Again, that's an assumption n my part.

I should also mention I hid semi-truck rigs (Kenworth, Peterbit, etc) and motorcycles (Ducati, etc) and the unknowns. Also, each incident means fatal crash, not total fatalities.

I have a similar data set somewhere for recalls, although I am having a tough time finding it. The results were similar on that listing, with some of the major players flip-flopped. And I must correct myself on my above quote, as Ford Motor Company was by far and away the most recalled manufacturer with GM in second place.

 

[Bunky]

This is the reason why product branding is so important. Once you lose a customer, it is often very difficult to get them back. It is not just the product itself but how you stand behind it (service, etc). GM is not going to instantly get back a lot of market share. It is a long term situation to compete for every sale.

GM may be producing competitive vehicles but the competition is not stagnant and never take your buyers for granted.

I do think a good GM is better than a failed GM. I just hope the management team and organized labor do not lose sight of this.

 

[Mr. Clean]

This is the reason why product branding is so important. Once you lose a customer, it is often very difficult to get them back. It is not just the product itself but how you stand behind it (service, etc). GM is not going to instantly get back a lot of market share. It is a long term situation to compete for every sale.

GM may be producing competitive vehicles but the competition is not stagnant and never take your buyers for granted.

I do think a good GM is better than a failed GM. I just hope the management team and organized labor do not lose sight of this.

Excellent point.

I think most believe this. We are after all stake holders, make that majority share holders. Problem 1 when you lie to your shareholders it undermines your credibility. A first step should be to immediately pull the current ad campaign about the the loan repayment and retract those statements. Make the public apology for attempts to mislead the public and vow to continue to make payments on schedule with the plan to payback the entire amount including interest on schedule.

IMO smaller entities are often more capable of reacting to market conditions, and can operate with greater efficiencies. I know there has been a lot of trimming of brands, but there is plenty of overlap that needs to go. What is the point of having the GMC and Chevy truck/SUV branding? Why build a Cadillac SUV at all? We should be demanding serious cutbacks to the point that GM is no longer "too big to fail". Build a significantly smaller subset of quality (zero initial defect - forget your planned obsolesence model) vehicles. Concentrate all available resources to bringing to market products that the market dictates.