More Evidence that GM Just Doesn't Get It
Thread Starter
Closet American
Joined: July 17, 2005
Posts: 5,851
Likes: 1
From: Vancouver, BC (Hollywood North)
The unrelenting denial in this company - even in its 11th hour - is truly stupifying:
"GM's head of global design, Ed Welburn, discussed future design trends for GM's brands in a wide-ranging interview with WardsAuto.com, ahead of the Philadelphia Auto Show.
Welburn says he has created a high-level design team, reporting directly to him, with the goal of sharply focusing the design philosophy for each brand as below:
- Cadillac - a bold statement, with a high level of sophistication, not bland or boring. The new CTS sedan will kick off the evolved Cadillac look.
- Saturn - a European theme tied to the Opel brand
- Buick - very sophisticated for its market segment. A premium American design, refined and well-appointed.
- Pontiac - sporty, youthful and agile design that says "seductive performance"
- GMC trucks - "industrial precision"
- Chevy trucks - a "heavy-duty" signature
- Saab - will get a strong jet aircraft identification
- Chevrolet - includes performance as a key element, but with designs regionalized to suit Chevy's global markets."
Hello? McFly? Fancy branding slogans aren't what's needed here! The ELIMINATION of several lines is what's needed. I mean, c'mon, GMC ("industrial precision") AND Chevy ("heavy-duty") trucks? Are these guys completely nuts...or smokin' crack?
I think Eric Peters said it best:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>HERE'S A FACT TO PONDER: In 1970, GM's Chevrolet division alone had more market share than the entire GM lineup has today. That's Buick, Pontiac, Cadillac, GMC, Saturn and Hummer -- combined. Yet each of these GM divisions (excepting Hummer and GMC, which are truck/SUV-specific) is still trying to market and sell a full line of vehicles -- as many as five or six different models per brand. There are six or seven GM minivans alone -- the Chevy Uplander and Venture, the Pontiac Montana and Torrent, the Buick Terraza and Rendezvous and the Saturn Relay.
This is madness.
Toyota, Honda, and Nissan each have exactly one minivan; they compete against each other -- and against GM. But GM's overlapping in-house divisions compete among themselves first (for engineering and development resources, then for marketing budgets, etc.) and then hair-split the ever-dwindling market between them -- before the outside competition even enters the picture.
Which business model makes more sense?
GM also makes half a dozen mid-sized sedans -- but can't make money selling them. Toyota has half the number of sedans in its lineup, but makes money hand over fist on them -- and is poised to become the world's largest automaker as a result.
GM has spent more than a decade trying to make a go of its small car spin-off, Saturn -- which now competes for resources and customers with emergent Chevy small cars like the Cobalt. The Cobalt is an excellent small car; the best such vehicle in GM's lineup, in fact. Its existence arguably renders Saturn -- which was conceived back in the late 1980s as a way to rehabilitate GM's reputation in the small car marketplace -- irrelevant. Why not quietly fold Saturn into Chevrolet -- or just retire the Saturn brand entirely? Because the dealer network and others GM is bound to contractually would squeal like stuck pigs -- not grasping (like the blunt-skulled unions) that if GM croaks as a result of being top-heavy and inefficient, their jobs are gone anyhow.
It's the same deal with once-great but now marginal GM divisions like Buick and Pontiac. Yes, there are some nice cars (Lucerne for Buick, Solstice for Pontiac). But each division also has less than 3 percent of the market (in the case of Buick, a lot less). Yet the Buick and Pontiac dealer network is about as large as it was in the salad days of the '60s and '70s, when some Buick and Pontiac models (individual vehicles) were selling in greater numbers than the entire model lineup does today.
SOMETHING MUST BE DONE. Morgan Stanley auto industry analyst Stephen Girsky says GM's declining market share "... doesn't support its size. They have too many plants, too many workers, too many models, too many dealers and their employee benefits are too high." It's obvious to even the causal observer -- but GM can't seem to make any headway. Its products are better than they have been in years -- but the bottom line is, the company's not making money selling them.
A truly radical restructuring is probably the automaker's only hope. That means the wholesale elimination of entire brands -- or at the very least, the consolidation of GM's currently unsustainable menagerie of makes and models into a more sensible lineup of "GM" brand vehicles -- with everything subsumed under that nameplate except, perhaps, a separate luxury line (Cadillac).
But the necessary changes won't come willingly because no one voluntarily puts his head (or his fiefdom) on the chopping block. Let someone else feel the pain; let someone else update his resume. Not me. But there's a weird unreality about it all -- sort of like the Titanic passenger who locks himself in his stateroom, climbs under the covers and pretends not to notice the growing list, the water rushing under the door.
But in the end, everyone goes down with the ship anyhow.[/b][/quote]
"GM's head of global design, Ed Welburn, discussed future design trends for GM's brands in a wide-ranging interview with WardsAuto.com, ahead of the Philadelphia Auto Show.
Welburn says he has created a high-level design team, reporting directly to him, with the goal of sharply focusing the design philosophy for each brand as below:
- Cadillac - a bold statement, with a high level of sophistication, not bland or boring. The new CTS sedan will kick off the evolved Cadillac look.
- Saturn - a European theme tied to the Opel brand
- Buick - very sophisticated for its market segment. A premium American design, refined and well-appointed.
- Pontiac - sporty, youthful and agile design that says "seductive performance"
- GMC trucks - "industrial precision"
- Chevy trucks - a "heavy-duty" signature
- Saab - will get a strong jet aircraft identification
- Chevrolet - includes performance as a key element, but with designs regionalized to suit Chevy's global markets."
Hello? McFly? Fancy branding slogans aren't what's needed here! The ELIMINATION of several lines is what's needed. I mean, c'mon, GMC ("industrial precision") AND Chevy ("heavy-duty") trucks? Are these guys completely nuts...or smokin' crack?
I think Eric Peters said it best:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>HERE'S A FACT TO PONDER: In 1970, GM's Chevrolet division alone had more market share than the entire GM lineup has today. That's Buick, Pontiac, Cadillac, GMC, Saturn and Hummer -- combined. Yet each of these GM divisions (excepting Hummer and GMC, which are truck/SUV-specific) is still trying to market and sell a full line of vehicles -- as many as five or six different models per brand. There are six or seven GM minivans alone -- the Chevy Uplander and Venture, the Pontiac Montana and Torrent, the Buick Terraza and Rendezvous and the Saturn Relay.
This is madness.
Toyota, Honda, and Nissan each have exactly one minivan; they compete against each other -- and against GM. But GM's overlapping in-house divisions compete among themselves first (for engineering and development resources, then for marketing budgets, etc.) and then hair-split the ever-dwindling market between them -- before the outside competition even enters the picture.
Which business model makes more sense?
GM also makes half a dozen mid-sized sedans -- but can't make money selling them. Toyota has half the number of sedans in its lineup, but makes money hand over fist on them -- and is poised to become the world's largest automaker as a result.
GM has spent more than a decade trying to make a go of its small car spin-off, Saturn -- which now competes for resources and customers with emergent Chevy small cars like the Cobalt. The Cobalt is an excellent small car; the best such vehicle in GM's lineup, in fact. Its existence arguably renders Saturn -- which was conceived back in the late 1980s as a way to rehabilitate GM's reputation in the small car marketplace -- irrelevant. Why not quietly fold Saturn into Chevrolet -- or just retire the Saturn brand entirely? Because the dealer network and others GM is bound to contractually would squeal like stuck pigs -- not grasping (like the blunt-skulled unions) that if GM croaks as a result of being top-heavy and inefficient, their jobs are gone anyhow.
It's the same deal with once-great but now marginal GM divisions like Buick and Pontiac. Yes, there are some nice cars (Lucerne for Buick, Solstice for Pontiac). But each division also has less than 3 percent of the market (in the case of Buick, a lot less). Yet the Buick and Pontiac dealer network is about as large as it was in the salad days of the '60s and '70s, when some Buick and Pontiac models (individual vehicles) were selling in greater numbers than the entire model lineup does today.
SOMETHING MUST BE DONE. Morgan Stanley auto industry analyst Stephen Girsky says GM's declining market share "... doesn't support its size. They have too many plants, too many workers, too many models, too many dealers and their employee benefits are too high." It's obvious to even the causal observer -- but GM can't seem to make any headway. Its products are better than they have been in years -- but the bottom line is, the company's not making money selling them.
A truly radical restructuring is probably the automaker's only hope. That means the wholesale elimination of entire brands -- or at the very least, the consolidation of GM's currently unsustainable menagerie of makes and models into a more sensible lineup of "GM" brand vehicles -- with everything subsumed under that nameplate except, perhaps, a separate luxury line (Cadillac).
But the necessary changes won't come willingly because no one voluntarily puts his head (or his fiefdom) on the chopping block. Let someone else feel the pain; let someone else update his resume. Not me. But there's a weird unreality about it all -- sort of like the Titanic passenger who locks himself in his stateroom, climbs under the covers and pretends not to notice the growing list, the water rushing under the door.
But in the end, everyone goes down with the ship anyhow.[/b][/quote]
Post *****
Joined: February 3, 2004
Posts: 14,160
Likes: 73
Regardless of what brands need to be eliminated the 'Trucks' (Chevy/GMC) should be one brand. I've never understood why they have two truck lines. Though a quick trip to google.com/GMC history would fill me in . . . should I ever be inclined to do so.
Team Mustang Source
Joined: December 12, 2004
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 3
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Evil_Capri @ February 18, 2006, 6:51 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Regardless of what brands need to be eliminated the 'Trucks' (Chevy/GMC) should be one brand.
[/b][/quote]
Then they would outsell the mighty F-Series... well, still not quite.
Regardless of what brands need to be eliminated the 'Trucks' (Chevy/GMC) should be one brand.
[/b][/quote]
Then they would outsell the mighty F-Series... well, still not quite.
TMS Post # 1,000,000
Serbian Steamer
Serbian Steamer
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 12,636
Likes: 0
From: Wisconsin / Serbia
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tiberius1701 @ February 18, 2006, 6:52 AM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Then they would outsell the mighty F-Series... well, still not quite.
[/b][/quote]
Sierra & Silverado did outsold F-Series in 2005, but main reason was because GM started to offer employees discounts before Ford.
Then they would outsell the mighty F-Series... well, still not quite.
[/b][/quote]
Sierra & Silverado did outsold F-Series in 2005, but main reason was because GM started to offer employees discounts before Ford.
Team Mustang Source
Joined: December 12, 2004
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 3
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Red Star @ February 18, 2006, 1:41 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Sierra & Silverado did outsold F-Series in 2005, but main reason was because GM started to offer employees discounts before Ford.
[/b][/quote]
I stand corrected-looking at bad info I guess..
Thanks Zoran!
Sierra & Silverado did outsold F-Series in 2005, but main reason was because GM started to offer employees discounts before Ford.
[/b][/quote]
I stand corrected-looking at bad info I guess..
Thanks Zoran!
TMS Post # 1,000,000
Serbian Steamer
Serbian Steamer
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 12,636
Likes: 0
From: Wisconsin / Serbia
No prob.
There is a guy at www.ford-trucks.com who posts Ford's and GM's sales numbers each month, so that's how I know.
There is a guy at www.ford-trucks.com who posts Ford's and GM's sales numbers each month, so that's how I know.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
