GM may drop some brands and add small cars

General Motors Corp. may get rid of some brands, speed the introduction of small cars from other markets and make further white-collar job cuts as it tries to deal with a shrinking U.S. auto market.

[Believer]

Decades of visionless leadership further restrained by unions. Building big SUVs and pickup trucks instead of investing in the future. These guys are too big to go out but they deserve every bit of pain they feel. Whereas we should be leading the world in energy efficiency we sit back and let the Japanese show the way. Absolutely disgraceful.

[Dave Urbaniak]

Wow! The auto maker is considering all options! That's really great, considering how egotistical, unresponsive and creatively stifled that company has been for decads. GM - here's a dime - buy a clue - you could OWN A WHOLE NEW CATEGORY of drivers by putting your efforts behind hybrids, electric cars and small cars with great gas mileage. But no. You'd rather follow than lead, and you'd rather put your future behind things like huge SUVs instead of what people obviously want and need now. Oh, and please, BUILD A GOOD CAR.
Why is it we have virtually no share of the luxury car market? Its because we've been out-enginerred by the foreign auto makers, and we produce cars that are over priced and poorly marketed. Aside from that, bravo GM.

[Sir Digby Chicken Caesar]

Try closing the barn door before the horse has left for once.

[striker]

Dave Urbaniak wrote:

Wow! The auto maker is considering all options! That's really great, considering how egotistical, unresponsive and creatively stifled that company has been for decads. GM - here's a dime - buy a clue - you could OWN A WHOLE NEW CATEGORY of drivers by putting your efforts behind hybrids, electric cars and small cars with great gas mileage. But no. You'd rather follow than lead, and you'd rather put your future behind things like huge SUVs instead of what people obviously want and need now. Oh, and please, BUILD A GOOD CAR.
Why is it we have virtually no share of the luxury car market? Its because we've been out-enginerred by the foreign auto makers, and we produce cars that are over priced and poorly marketed. Aside from that, bravo GM.

cry,cry,cry I dont have a problem but it sounds like you do. I think gm was building vehicles the people wanted and were selling them just because gas is up didnt you think it was ever going to rise in price. I will stick with gm their vehicles have been great for me and I own many trucks and suburbans.

[Saluki Rod]

GM, call us....desperate.

[Josh]

The lazy union workers are to blame for the downfall of the Big 3. They'll soon have plenty of time to campaign for their failed liberal dimwits.

[Tim]

The SUVs were the cash cow for the Big 3 so you can't blame them for producing these autos. Back when gas was cheaper than bottled water, hardly anybody wanted to drive around in a little tin can.

[Jim]

I was a loyal Saturn owner.

Now they are just another car brand, rather than a different kind of car company.

I no longer buy Saturns.

It's interesting that there is no longer a Saturn dealership within the city limits of Chicago.

[Moonbat]

I think they need to drop the unions or at least have them start paying for some of their benefits. From what I’ve heard they don’t pay any of their health care premiums. What makes them so special? It adds around 1,400-1,700 per vehicle. Everyone else who works in the US and is offered insurance has to pay for theirs? I also heard that the union workers at the Toyota plants are getting paid almost half as much. Soo GM, Ford, and Chrysler are paying nearly twice as much for cars that, in most cases, are not built as well as Toyota’s. I can say this because my Eldorado, Firebird, S-10, Wrangler, and Blazer were some of the worst cars I’ve ever owned. I’ve had a Honda and am on my second Nissan and they’ve been fantastic.
You’d have to be blind to not see where the problem lies. GM sells an amazing amount of vehicles and is still not turning a profit? We all see it why don’t they? How long are they going to let this go on? It sounds very similar to the CTA…Lose the unions!!!

They need Moonbat as their leader!

[John]

Tim wrote:

The SUVs were the cash cow for the Big 3 so you can't blame them for producing these autos. Back when gas was cheaper than bottled water, hardly anybody wanted to drive around in a little tin can.

It didn't take a rocket scientist to predict that gas prices weren't going to stay cheap forever.
The job of leadership is to plan ahead, which they obviously did not do.

[NO Imports]

John wrote:

<quoted text>
It didn't take a rocket scientist to predict that gas prices weren't going to stay cheap forever.
The job of leadership is to plan ahead, which they obviously did not do.

Wondering.... who put the gun to the heads of those who stood in line for the SUV's that GM and Ford (and Chrysler to a lesser degree) built? They should have done what? Said "Nope.... we're not going to sell these to you and make profit. We're going to concentrate on 2008 and beyond even though this is only 1997".

[adam hartung]

Do not look for GM to survive this coming shakeout. Roger Smith in the early 1980s tried to get GM into tech and aircraft electonics (EDS and Hughes acquisitions) but he did not break the company Lock-in to automobiles. As demand for cars of all kinds declines, as Americans move from 2.2 cars/household closer to the world norm of 1, GM is the giant most likely to find itself unable to survive the dramatic changes required from the market shifts that have been emerging for a decade - and capped off by $140/barrel oil. I don't see GM existing, even as a 1 or 2 brand company, in 5 years (unless the government intervenes to save them.) Read more at http://www.ThePhoenixPrinciple.com

[CDOG]

This is the beginning of the end for US Auto production, by 2010 we'll only have 5-6 brands between the Big Three US Automakers!

[gentle]

Moonbat wrote:

I think they need to drop the unions or at least have them start paying for some of their benefits. From what I’ve heard they don’t pay any of their health care premiums. What makes them so special? It adds around 1,400-1,700 per vehicle. Everyone else who works in the US and is offered insurance has to pay for theirs? I also heard that the union workers at the Toyota plants are getting paid almost half as much. Soo GM, Ford, and Chrysler are paying nearly twice as much for cars that, in most cases, are not built as well as Toyota’s. I can say this because my Eldorado, Firebird, S-10, Wrangler, and Blazer were some of the worst cars I’ve ever owned. I’ve had a Honda and am on my second Nissan and they’ve been fantastic.
You’d have to be blind to not see where the problem lies. GM sells an amazing amount of vehicles and is still not turning a profit? We all see it why don’t they? How long are they going to let this go on? It sounds very similar to the CTA…Lose the unions!!!
They need Moonbat as their leader!

why all the finger pointing? As for benefits, most large,older companies are exposed to higher benefit and salary costs, as a product of having the same employee's for 20 to 30 years. Go ahead an blame the unions, but don't complain when your retail job still pays the minimum wage after you've worked there for 10 years, an you still don't have health insurance. Af or as the japanese companies paying half the pay, that's true, but they are also plants that are a few years old, an located in the rural south, where the costs of living is lower, an taxes are lower as well. This was the same advantage that gm had in it's early days. GM cars are as good as anyone's, it's the perception that's the problem.

[NO Imports]

Let's see... we've already lost most of our steel production, furniture, electronics, tires, and so much more. And now so many people don't seem concerned about losing auto production to foreign companies. Sad... very sad.

[Moonbat]

gentle wrote:

<quoted text>
why all the finger pointing? As for benefits, most large,older companies are exposed to higher benefit and salary costs, as a product of having the same employee's for 20 to 30 years. Go ahead an blame the unions, but don't complain when your retail job still pays the minimum wage after you've worked there for 10 years, an you still don't have health insurance. Af or as the japanese companies paying half the pay, that's true, but they are also plants that are a few years old, an located in the rural south, where the costs of living is lower, an taxes are lower as well. This was the same advantage that gm had in it's early days. GM cars are as good as anyone's, it's the perception that's the problem.

I’m “Finger Pointing” because I’ve worked in fleet leasing, insurance, and retail (Both the sales and accounting sides). I also have visibility to the group health insurance and worker’s comp. If the union employees want to keep their jobs they will compromise with SOME of the requests and not strike every other year. How many times do we have to hear about a community imploding because the plant that employed everybody closed? There is no give-and-take with unions. They’re awful. 50 years ago they had a place, now they need to go.
Most retail jobs should pay minimum wage. It keeps the item costs down. Why did I spend $60k+ on college if I could have stayed in my retail job and made the same salary? I SHOULD make multiples of the guy/girl who barely passed their GED test. I put the effort in to get an education and therefore I AM more valuable.
GM cars are NOT as good as what Toyota’s putting out. My parents drive GM vehicles. They rattle at 30k miles and are in the shop as soon as the warranty ends. My Nissan just turned the 69k mile mark and has no rattles and runs like new. I had to replace the evaporator because I got some bad gas at a Marathon station. There IS a difference. Still not convinced? Call an aftermarket auto warranty company and ask if there is a price difference between US and Import warranties. The difference is obnoxious.

Take your blinders off. Take the emotion out of it too.

[Marvis]

No matter what you say , G.M. will pull thru any crisis that comes around, even an oil crisis.

[Al Brock]

GM (Ford and Chrysler) should simply reduce the brand names to one each. There is no need for Chevrolet, Buick, GM, etc. all making the same basic car under a different brand name. Likewise Ford, Mercury and the various Chrysler divisions. The branding costs are huge and the benefit to consumers negligible.

[John]

NO Imports wrote:

<quoted text>
Wondering.... who put the gun to the heads of those who stood in line for the SUV's that GM and Ford (and Chrysler to a lesser degree) built? They should have done what? Said "Nope.... we're not going to sell these to you and make profit. We're going to concentrate on 2008 and beyond even though this is only 1997".

Like I said, its the CEO's job to plan ahead. They're supposed to be thinking 5,10,15 years down the future. BUT, the American CEO only thinks how to cash in so they can get 8 figure salaries.
PS.....Haven't bought an American car in 20 years, never will buy another.

[Saluki Rod]

Marvis wrote:

No matter what you say , G.M. will pull thru any crisis that comes around, even an oil crisis.

Maybe 15 years ago I'd have agreed with you. At this point in time though, they've proven continually that they are at least 2 years behind in innovation and market response.